Yes, Fr. Pfeiffer is every bit as important as the homeless bag lady on the corner. Concedo.

Every soul was bought with a great price, and therefore precious in the sight of God. That should go without saying on a Traditional Catholic forum.

The loss of each soul is a tragedy -- nevertheless, God can and will condemn souls to hell all day long if necessary. That should be a sobering thought for each one of us. No matter how much good we have done, if we STOP being good and fall from grace, or try to play by our own rules even when they contradict God's rules, we can't turn to God and say, "Hey, you NEED me!" because God doesn't NEED any one of us, any more than He needed the Jєωιѕн people to accept the Messiah en-masse. Yes, He loves them and hates to see them perish, but how many of them have in fact gone to Hell over the centuries? Meanwhile, He gave His grace to the Gentiles and they (broadly speaking) became the ones who did God's will. Our Lord spoke about this in His parables.

My point (above) was that Fr. Pfeiffer is not important relative to other people. In movie terms, he's not one of the stars; he's one of the "extras" in the worldwide battle of Good vs Evil taking place today.

I'm rather ignorant on this controversy, so please don't be angry at me if I'm totally wrong, but I get the impression these people don't have any other priests besides Fr. Pfeiffer. I noticed they wrote "we now pray at home". I understand there may be problems with Fr. Pfeiffer, but is it really better to be a "home aloner"? Couldn't they just attend the Masses and not contribute to offerings?

Also, you've probably heard this many times before, so again I apologise, but isn't this what you would call "Donatism"?--you don't attend a chapel, when none other are available, because of the bad moral character/heretical opinions of the priest?

No bad will intended, I know you strongly oppose Fr. Pfeiffer. I don't know enough to have an opinion, these are just questions I have. God bless.

I'm glad you admit you don't know enough to have an opinion.

Here is the definition of Donatism:

By denying the intrinsic efficacy of the sacraments the Donatists claimed the sacraments could be celebrated validly only by those in the state of grace. They required the re-baptism of any Catholic who came over to their sect.

Donatists had the outward forms of Catholicism, including bishops, priests, and deacons, Mass, and the veneration of the relics of martyrs. The heresy of Donatism lay not primarily in the denial of particular Catholic doctrines but in the assertion that only "sinless" men could administer the sacraments validly. The schism was effected by the rejection of the lawful authority of validly-elected Catholic bishops and culminated in illicit but valid ordinations of schismatic bishops, priests, and deacons.

No one that I know of is saying that Fr. Pfeiffer's Masses are invalid. The problem is that we are human beings, and subject to be affected by things like propaganda, errors, etc.

We are not saying "avoid Fr. Pfeiffer's Masses because he's a sinner" we're saying avoid his Masses because he holds various errors, teaches distortions and propaganda in lieu of doctrine (according as it suits his cause), and is a scandal with his behavior towards other priests and bishops, which might actually cause YOU to sin by doing and saying things against these priests. So he is literally a cause of scandal or a stumbling-block. Not to mention his close association with a man like Pablo who takes scandal to a whole new level. It is not worth immersing oneself in such a milieu, not even for the Mass. The ends don't justify the means.

Say you were travelling, and couldn't find a Tridentine Mass to attend on Sunday. What if a prostitute offered to tell you where you could find a valid Tridentine Mass, if you used her services once? (Let's assume you know psychological tricks and can tell by her eyes, body language, etc. that she's telling the truth that she knows where a Tridentine Mass can be found.) Would the ends (attending Mass) be enough to justify fornication with a prostitute? I think not.

That makes sense to me.

A follow up question is: are Catholics therefore supposed to abstain from attending Masses of scandal-causing/heretical priests?

At some point, a decision must be made whether the graces of the Mass are worth the bad example (scandals) to one's children, for example. We're not talking about everyone being a flawed human being. We're not talking about nit picking. I'm very much for giving each priest every benefit of the doubt -- making excuses for every behavior whenever possible, casting everything he does in the best positive light.

But there is a limit to that. As the famous saying goes, "Your rights end where your neighbor's nose begins." A priest loses his "right" to be flawed when he starts attacking another priest -- who has a right to his good name and reputation. In such a case, you must necessarily take sides or you are approving of the injustice. There is only one choice for a Catholic: defending/supporting the priest who is "in the right". That is why I abstain from the conciliar Church and cleave to Tradition. That is why I left the SSPX and currently associate with the Resistance. That is why I started publicly criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer even though I supported him early on.

When there is a clear T in the road, it behooves one to choose the RIGHT path, which is sometimes narrow. Not necessarily the easier path, which is usually quite broad and well-traveled...

I'm rather ignorant on this controversy, so please don't be angry at me if I'm totally wrong, but I get the impression these people don't have any other priests besides Fr. Pfeiffer. I noticed they wrote "we now pray at home". I understand there may be problems with Fr. Pfeiffer, but is it really better to be a "home aloner"? Couldn't they just attend the Masses and not contribute to offerings?

Almost all of the people in this situation have the SSPX as an option. If they wish to attend Mass strictly for the sacraments, there would be less danger in an average SSPX chapel than with Fr. Pfeiffer. If they wish to stay away from the SSPX due to the dangers is poses against the Faith, all the more they should stay away from Fr. Pfeiffer.
.
(Fr. Hewko is more of a question mark. I haven't listened to enough of his public sermons to make a sure assessment.)

So is it alright for me to continue going to the Institute of Christ the King mass? I only disagree with the priests on a few things. They even celebrate a (mostly) pre-1955 liturgy!

I don't know much about Christ the King.  Is the priest involved in public scandal?  Does your attendance turn you or your children to the Faith or from Her?  Does the thought of Mass at that place cause great anxiety or panic attacks?  Do you experience extreme mental/emotional distress after attending Mass?  Are you, your wife, or children afraid to go to Mass because of the priest or any regular attendee?  Is anyone in danger or feel him/herself in danger, If so, and the only other option is the novus ordo, stay at home and read your missal.