CathInfo.com

I already had a great respect for Fr. Pfeiffer, but having heard the way he dealt with the 3 Novus Ordo protesters, it is even higher now.

It sounds like the neotrads sent a braying modernist to pester him during his talk.

As though it's "nitpicking" to speak against the Vicar of Christ abasing himself and his office before infidels by washing their feet!

Could very well be, Tele. Frankly, that whiny heckler with his phony "selective" outrage against Fr. Pfeiffer's impeccable doctrinal stand was getting on my nerves. It was clear to me that he came to the conference with his mind already made up, marked by that smug "Yes, but . . . " contentiousness so typical of a liberal drone or mouthpiece.

Fr. Pfeiffer handled the situation like a true Pastor and teacher, being charitable to the guy but standing firm on his principles and backing them up point-by-point without getting disagreeable or defensive.

When one has the truth on his side, one need not get all bent out of shape, huffing and puffing, and then threatening to somehow confiscate all recording devices in the room. Why the thuggery and heavy-handedness if it's only the truth?

I already had a great respect for Fr. Pfeiffer, but having heard the way he dealt with the 3 Novus Ordo protesters, it is even higher now.

This is the new school of hard knocks.  Fr. Pfeiffer has a long history of
building up parishes and seeing other parishes built up by other priests, and
then watching them being taken away by power grabs.  He saw the veritable
empire that Fr. Bolduc acquired snatched away by the interlopers of Menzingen.
He saw St. Isidore's whacked off like it was just another tree in the way of
"progress."  

That all these labors are not able to prevent him from continuing is a most
edifying thing.  Anyone who can keep his spirits up, under such oppression
has a resource greater than natural man's, and answering these pestering
questions without being overly reactionary is a fruit of his experience in the
front lines of battle.

I am working my way through the conference.  Many thanks again to whose sharing these necessary videos.

This one is more than a one-session playback.  An hour and 56 minutes.  Take
a 4-minute break in the middle and it's two hours.  

It has some of the best material so far on the AFD, the Response to the 9-11
Preamble, the Doctrinal Declaration.  I appreciate his description of what it is
and what it came from and how it's not what they would lead you to believe
that it is.  Starting at minute 35.

Minute 40 begins the explanation of B16's 'hermeneutic of continuity' -

What I found most remarkable is how Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer here describes a
conversation he had with his own brother (min. 50), in which Fr. Timothy
Pfeiffer was not willing to clearly answer his own brother's question:  

"You say this new protocol is the minimum of what we can minimally accept.
So let me ask you this question, Fr. Tim:  Do you accept that the Newmass
is valid and legitimate?"  

Answer:  "Well, it's not a good docuмent; it has trouble in design, and the
Pope didn't accept it."

"So I asked him a second time:  Do You -- Accept -- That The Newmass -- Is
VA-LID And LE-GI-TI-MATE? -- Which Is What It Says in this April Fifteenth
Docuмent [AFD] signed by Bishop Fellay?"

Answer:  "Well, you know, look:  It didn't have to be retracted."  

"He didn't say 'No'. He didn't say 'Yes'.  Staunch anti-Modernist all his life.

"But now, the Superior has written docuмent which is published in his March
Cor Unum of 2013 -- he has written a docuмent in which it says that the
Newmass is 'legitimate'.  Can we accept that?  NO.  Why?  Because it's wrong.  
Fr. Hannifin, our old pastor, had a better view of it. He said what's wrong with
the Newmass is, that 'It's causing souls to go to hell.  That's what's wrong
with it. Stop saying it!' That's what our old Irish priest said -- I heard him
say that so many times, and he was never happy when he said it.  And the old,
other priests  -- 'Father, why do I have to stop saying the Newmass, what's
wrong with the Newmass??'  What's wrong with the Newmass? WHAT DO
YOU MEAN WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT?  It's causing souls to go to HELL,
that's what's wrong with it!  STOP SAYING IT!! And they would cry
-- many of them would cry. But they did not disagree."


Do you see what's going on here?  Fr. Pfeiffer is speaking in allegory here.  He
is a poet and he is giving us what we need to know but it's up to us to see it.

The other priests cried when they realized the news, that the Newmass was
causing souls to go to hell, so they had to stop saying it.  How many of them
were like the rich young man in Scripture who could not sell all that he had
to come and follow Our Lord, and went away sad?  And what is happening now?
Who else was there seeing those old priests cry when the boy Joseph Pfeiffer
saw them, if not his own brother Tim?  And now, his own brother is making
excuses for the Apostasy of Bishop Fellay (ABF), "THIS MOST GRAVE HERESY."  

Only, this time, who is the one who cries?  Who is afraid he is losing his brother?
Both Joe and Tim as young boys saw those old priests cry but they "did not
disagree."  Now, Fr. Joe sees his own brother not cry but he DOES disagree!

Fr. Joe saw the empire of Fr. Bolduc stolen in plain sight, and it made him sad.
But he did not cry.  He saw the magnificent parish of St. Isidore that he built
up with his own hands taken away from him and stolen in plain sight, but he
did not cry.  Now he sees his own brother with whom he grew up being taken
away from him.  Does he cry?  

You tell me!

What would you do?!
 

God bless Fr. Joe Pfeiffer.