Skip to main content

How far does the Apple fall from the Tree? Fr. Pfeiffer as the Apple and Bishop Williamson as the Tree. - The Sequel

+
JMJ

Earlier I had commented on an article on the Four Marks that allegedly reflected Fr. Pfeiffer's thoughts and opinions on the Four Marks of the Church.

I had concluded that his opinions were inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

A friend of mine has taken the time to review one of the source "youtube" videos upon which the Recusant article was based.   As background here's the Church Teaching on the Four Marks.

My friend's core observations were that:
  1. Father Pfeiffer fails to teach the true meaning of the Marks, and adds other elements giving the impression that they are truly parts of the Marks of the Church. 
  2. He briefly mentions, sotta voce, that Apostolicity includes the Church going back to the apostles,  then states that the other half is that "the Church want's to spread to the whole world." 

I've already noticed that 'resistors', such as Tony La Rosa (example) of the Toronto 'resistance', when faced with a doctrinal deviation (ie heresy) of the 'resistance' won't answer the challenge. The problem is that resistors appear to have given up rational thought in defense of their opinions (see cognitive dissonance and the End of the World Again).  As such when confronted with a real deviation of a serious matter, instead of answering the challenge directly - they ignore it and offer up some excuse (usually lame).

Here's some clear thinking: 
  • If Fr. Pfeiffer really said these things (thanks to YouTube we know he did), we can safely conclude that he believes them.
  • The beliefs contained in the words are objectively contrary to or obfuscate Church Teaching on the Four Marks.  Both of these are degrees of heresy
  • Conclusions:
    • Fr. Pfeiffer cannot be trusted as a guardian of the Catholic Faith as he is following Luther in re-imagining it to suit his own perception of reality.
    • By extension the 'resistance' associates (priests, bishops) adhere to an erroneous notion of the nature of the Church and Church Teaching.  This is supported by the writings of other 'resistance' leaders.
    • The 'resistance' is following its own path, not the one laid out by Archbishop Lefebvre
    • The 'resistance' is not working for the restoration of the Church, they are working for themselves. They have no obedience.
After that here's a thought for the resistance:
Matthew 7:5. Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
What is the Beam in the eyes of the 'resistance'?

Simply this: The abandonment of Catholic Dogma, Doctrine and Principles.  They've abandoned them and are blinded without them. They have become what they abhor, Traditionalist Modernists.

Once they embrace all of Catholic Teaching, not just the bits they like, they will then realize that the 'resistance' is nothing more than sede-vacantists with a paper Pope.

Then they will face a harder decision, what to do next.

I pray they make the right decision.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R