Author Topic: The Saga of Fr. Richard Voigt (Read 30465 times)

Nobody · « **Reply #10 on:** October 01, 2015, 01:11:21 AM »

Quote from: Croixalist

Well, nobody still associates Pfeiffer with the Resistance and no one should...

'no one should' you said ? Based on what ? Coffee grinds ? The stock market ? Waggling tongues ?

Since when has the Church become a democracy, where our clergy are put on a public trial ? Where each and every court jester can do his part in throwing some rotten fruit at the accused ? And when enough wolves start howling then the accused 'must be' guilty and lynched on the spot. Fools !

Last time I checked my catechism, it talked about the Church being a hierarchy, about fraternal correction, about avoiding scandal, about slander/defamation/detraction being a sin. About taking your grievances 'to the Church'.

And no, we're not talking about public heresy which can and must be publicly corrected, we're talking about private matters, which must not and can not be judged by the mob, no matter how many skilled agitators you can summon.

Nobody · « **Reply #11 on:** October 01, 2015, 01:15:03 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

I'm going to play "Fr. Pfeiffer advocate" for a minute here on this issue.

It isn't a stretch to think that Father Pfeiffer works "paycheck to paycheck" as they say. One reason Fr. Hewko publicly stated for not announcing Masses ahead of time is that they never know if they'll have the funds to purchase the airline tickets. Now, while I think this is poor management on their part not to build up at least some reserve, there's nothing inherently wrong with spending your funds as fast as you get them.

So, presuming he has no other sources of funds, he borrows $40,000 from Fr. Voigt, his mother, and the woman in CA. Presumably, he spends it all as that is how he operates. Now, the stock check comes in and is only $25,000 as the woman in CA kept the $6,000 she had forwarded to Father. So, you're basically broke, you owe $34,000 to two people and you have a $25,000 check in hand. What do you do?

If it were me, at this point I'd probably start making payments to each of them while still keeping my operation afloat. Or, I've seen others who will go to another person and borrow what they owe to the first just to keep things moving and everyone happy.

Clearly, Father Pfeiffer didn't make the right choice in this one, as this might have been the proverbial back-breaking straw. However, this seems to me to be overall poor money management (being unrealistic about how much you can afford to borrow) rather than outright theft, especially as this all transpired over a period of months and not years. Hopefully he still intends to repay Fr. Voigt. A good-faith payment on the amount borrowed and we probably wouldn't be talking about this now.

This is indeed what goes on in a fair trial, no matter how 'unlikeable' the accused .

Good on you for daring to speak against the mob !

MaterDominici · « **Reply #12 on:** October 01, 2015, 01:18:18 AM »

Nobody,

What do you see as within Bp Williamson's ability, that would resolve this situation if this had all been presented to him rather than "the mob".*

We already know that he won't go to Boston, KY and it wouldn't be a stretch to believe that he gave them his reasons and time to correct the issues before taking that stand.

What else should he do?

*I do believe all of this has made it to Bp Williamson's ear one way or another, but that is only a guess.

Croixalist · « **Reply #13 on:** October 01, 2015, 01:21:01 AM »

Quote from: Nobody

Quote from: Croixalist
Well, nobody still associates Pfeiffer with the Resistance and no one should...

'no one should' you said ? Based on what ? Coffee grinds ? The stock market ? Waggling tongues ?

Since when has the Church become a democracy, where our clergy are put on a public trial ? Where each and every court jester can do his part in throwing some rotten fruit at the accused ? And when enough wolves start howling then the accused 'must be' guilty and lynched on the spot. Fools !

Last time I checked my catechism, it talked about the Church being a hierarchy, about fraternal correction, about avoiding scandal, about slander/defamation/detraction being a sin. About taking your grievances 'to the Church'.

And no, we're not talking about public heresy which can and must be publicly corrected, we're talking about private matters, which must not and can not be judged by the mob, no matter how many skilled agitators you can summon.

Nah, only based off eyewitness accounts. From my own observation of his public actions both in person as he flubs the Mass and on youtube as he slanders every resistance priest not under his ever-expanding cassock.

Pfeiffer's had it coming for a long time. But then again, nobody cares right?

Nobody · « **Reply #14 on:** October 01, 2015, 01:45:44 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Nobody,

What do you see as within Bp Williamson's ability, that would resolve this situation if this had all been presented to him rather than "the mob".*

We already know that he won't go to Boston, KY and it wouldn't be a stretch to believe that he gave them his reasons and time to correct the issues before taking that stand.

What else should he do?

*I do believe all of this has made it to Bp Williamson's ear one way or another, but that is only a guess.

H.E. is honest, experienced, has the courage to speak unpopular words, has moral authority and he is our bishop.

If he were to gather and judge the evidence and publicly pronounce his findings, many (including I) will consider it as God's will and avoid the accused, if found guilty. At the least, confusion and scandal will be limited.

I believe this is how the Church has always proceeded in these matters and how the Saints have always submitted their own judgement to the Church. Padre Pio is one example that comes to mind.

I Timothy 5:8
"But if any man have not care of his own and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel."