Michael J. Matt | Editor
New From Remnant TV...
In this episode of The Editor’s Desk, Michael J. Matt discusses the Equality Act and its ramifications for the coming persecution of Christianity in America.
Is it possible for conservative, patriotic Catholics and Protestants to make a defensive stand together, or will they let 500-year-old squabbles over “statue worship” and the “idolatry of Mary” stand in the way?
A grandfather, and a friend of RTV in Ireland, writes a beautiful song, recalling life before the COVID lockdowns in Ireland.
New from RTV. . .
In this Edition of The Editor's Desk, Michael J. Matt Covers the Following:
- The Death of Rush Limbaugh: Was Rush a racist?
- Cow Farts Kill: Bill Gates to eradicate beef
- How many vaccination shots per year? Bill Gates breaks it down
- COVID Ash Wednesday: Smudging vs. Sprinkling
- $3 Billion: The price for closing Catholic churches
- Vaxinatican: Team Francis mandates vaccination
- Masking the Truth: How long will the world be masked up?
- Ranking the Covid pandemic ? Klaus Schwab's reality check
- Climate Change: Pope Francis' new religion
We beat the COVID lockdown and all the odds in 2020, with a packed-out event that brought hope and encouragement to hundreds of attendees and thousands of livestream viewers.
Now the Catholic Identity Conference is happy to announce its official dates for 2021: October 1-3
With the situation in the world going from bad to worse, and the situation in the Vatican worse still, there has never been a more urgent time to unite the clans. And come October, we're going to do just that.
Hope you'll join us. Visit CatholicIdentityConference.org for details.
Sign up to be the first to know when Early-bird Registration opens.
As in past years, yours truly will return to emcee the event. The speaker lineup includes Bishop Athanasius Schneider, pro-life warrior Abby Johnson, Vatican journalist Diane Montagna, The Remnant's Christopher Ferrara and many more to be announced in the coming months.
Editor's Note: I have been asked by Father Niklaus Pfluger, SSPX, to publish the following retraction of comments he’d made here some months ago regarding the Erica Kauffman case.
As I indicate in my reply to Fr. Pfluger (see below), I fear his attempt at clarification may raise more questions than answers but, as he has asked me to proceed, I am obliged to honor his request.
I hope this unfortunate exchange—which could now be accurately described as an exercise in futility—will shed some light on my long-established editorial policy against getting involved in abuse cases at all, but especially not when I have little or no direct knowledge of the parties involved or the facts of the case.
I'm a newspaper publisher, not a private investigator. And as I see it, when such cases are tried in the press rather than a law court, they invariably wind up in a cul-de-sac of “he said/she said” which tends to do more harm than good. This case is no exception, though my initial hope in publishing Miss Kauffman's story was not necessarily to gain a conviction of anyone but rather a fair and open hearing of the facts of the case.
Regrettably, this is not going to happen, and so I can only leave it up to our readers to judge for themselves whether or not Father Pfluger's explantion of the facts of this case is satisfying.
The best advice I can offer our readers by way of avoiding this kind of hellish ordeal--regardless of where you go to Mass--is to make sure to take care of your own. Protect yourselves and your good priests by putting a healthy and wholesome degree of separation between them and your family. Priests are not our pals, nor was it ever intended that they should be.
Throughout our 25 years of married life, this is something my wife and I have lived by with respect to our many long and cherished friendships with priests. We homeschool our children for the same reason, by the way, and there is nothing on God’s green earth that could convince me to have it any other way. For those who understand what I’m getting at here, no further explanation is necessary. For those who do not, no explanation is possible.
What follows, then, is my aforementioned exchange with Father Pfluger. I have elected not to publish his final personal response to me, which is just his request that I proceed with the publication of his retraction despite my stated concerns (see below).
In charity, I can only presume that Father Pfluger is trying to do the right thing, even if those of us on the outside looking in are still left scratching our heads. Clearly, there are no winners here. MJM
Dear Father Pfluger:
Thank you for your letter. Are you quite certain that you wish me to make it public that, after impregnating a woman in his own flock, this priest was asked by Bishop Fellay to merely take a year off before returning to ministry?
Critics of the Society are going to have a field day with this. Think of what you're saying: Bishop Fellay slapped the wrist of priest who was sleeping with members of his flock, and then "sent him to Europe" where the priest was "restricted".
Restricted? In what sense? Did he have access to European women as well?
You do know, of course, that there are allegations that this priest did in fact have sexual relations with other women besides Miss Kauffman. It seems to me that Bishop Fellay can now be accused of having allowed this terrible thing to happen to other women.
How is my printing of your letter NOT going to do even more damage to the Society?
I would beg you to rethink this course of action, and instead ask Bishop Fellay to personally address this issue in the public forum.
In Christo Rege,
January 27th, 2021
Dear Mr. Michael Matt,
In a December 29th article, you chose to make public a private letter that I wrote to Miss Erica Kauffman, in which I expressed my deep compassion for her, as well as my shame for the past facts that she had revealed. It was difficult for me not to recognize her as the victim of an odious abuse, and not to respond to her call for help.
In doing so, as you noted in your introduction, I corroborated her version of the story and questioned, with her, the management of this case by the SSPX.
However – and it is now a serious duty for me to point this out to you – I made a regrettable mistake at the time. And it is in the hope of repairing it that I am writing to you today, taking advantage on a personal basis of the invitation you have extended to the SSPX authorities.
As the file never passed through my hands, I happened to be unaware, when writing to Miss Kauffman, of a number of details that I have since learned and which today force me to admit in good conscience that I contributed to convey a distorted image of what really happened.
Indeed, having been able to consult the archives of the SSPX, I realized that Bishop Fellay, then Superior General, had indeed treated the case with all possible care.
At the end of his investigation, and after having heard all the parties, he came to the conclusion that it was not a case of rape, but of a reciprocal sentimental relationship. A very sad and serious story, moreover, since such a thing is directly contrary to the sanctity of the priesthood.
I also learned that other people had noticed at the time the existence of a disordered friendship between the two persons.
This sinful affair credibly explains how several meetings could have taken place in the same place – in the apartment of Miss Kauffman, of which this priest had a copy of the key – under always similar circumstances, over a period of several months.
Bishop Fellay had then taken severe disciplinary measures to supervise the priest, who had to spend a year in penance in a monastery before being sent to Europe to exercise his ministry there, with restrictions during about ten years, which were applied and respected.
Whatever one's opinion may be in this story, it is impossible for me today not to recognize that Miss Kauffman is mistaken when she believes that Fr. Arzuaga was never restricted, or that the SSPX ignored her complaint. The opposite took place.
Contrary to what she states in her December 30th post, this priest has never been in charge of a school, nor has he ever been allowed to travel freely, out of the control of his superiors.
Nevertheless, I deeply deplore what happened, and I sympathize wholeheartedly with the distress in which Miss Kauffman finds herself today.
Renewing my compassion and assuring her of my prayers for all her intentions, I express my regret for having contributed to spread a false judgment on this sad story.
Fr. Niklaus Pfluger
P. Niklaus Pfluger | FSSPX
New from RTV...
This powerful RTV Short makes several poignant observations about the situation in which we all find ourselves, in this our post-Christian civilization.
Our cities burn, our children die, God is dead and who's to blame for it all? Who will history hold accountable for the Christ-less chaos of this insane new order?
Remnant TV is going solo. Nope, not on Bitchute. Not Rumble, either.
We've developed a completely independent and privately-funded platform called Remnant-TV.com
If conservatives stay dependent on leftist Big Tech in order to speak, conservatism will be imprisoned in leftist prisons from now on.
We need to compete with the fascists, not be dependent on them!
With RTV leading the charge to online independence, Michael J. Matt asks you to join him in liberating the Christian counterrevolution from Big Tech censorship.
Sign up at: https://remnant-tv.com/
Let Michael Matt contact you whenever he uploads new content.
His Remnant E-Letter is free: https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/subscribe-today/free-remnant-updates
From the DailyWire: Legislation introduced in the South Dakota House of Representatives seeks to give the state’s attorney general the authority to review executive orders from President Joe Biden and potentially nullify any order deemed unconstitutional.
State Rep. Aaron Aylward (R-Harrisburg) introduced HB 1194, which is described as an act “to authorize the review of certain executive orders issued by the President of the United States.”
The process to potentially nullify an executive order, which by nature bypasses congressional approval, “begins with a review by the Executive Council of the Legislative Research Board, followed by a referral from the Council to the attorney general and the governor,” South Dakota news station KELO-TV reported last week. “Once the referral has been made, the attorney general may examine the order to determine whether the state can seek an exemption or declare it unconstitutional.”
The bill specifies that Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg could exempt South Dakota from any law or order “that restricts a person’s rights or that is determined … to be unconstitutional” if the law or order relates to the following:
- A pandemic or other public health emergency
- The regulation of natural resources
- The regulation of the agricultural industry
- The regulation of land use
- The regulation of the financial sector through the imposition of environmental, social, or governance standards, or
- The regulation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms
Aylward told KELO-TV that the proposed legislation is not specific to Biden.
“This isn’t just a President Biden issue but rather an overall executive overreach issue that we’ve been experiencing for a long time,” Aylward said. “The U.S. Congress has abdicated their duty for a long time in different areas. This bill is simply setting up a process to nullify acts that would be unconstitutional. When looking at the U.S. Constitution, the President only has the powers that are laid out in Article II.”
REMNANT COMMENT: Think this is nothing to be concerned about? Think again! Already, the Biden Administration is signaling a coming crackdown on the freedom of Red State governors to call their own shots, so to speak, where vaccinations mandates and COVID restrictions are concerned.
Remember when Donald Trump left those restrictions up to the governors? Well, don't count on old Uncle Joe to do anything quite so reasonable. Fellow "Catholic" and Transportation Secretary, Pete Buttigieg, says the Biden administration is already considering a mandatory negative COVID-19 test result for domestic air travel.
The policy can be summed up like this:
"You vill comply wis zee vill of zee Fuhrer or you vill suffer zee consequences. Vee vill keep you safe, vesser you like dis or not!"
Looks like the regime is going to "keep Florida safe" first, by the way:
New from Remnant TV...
RTV launches a new program, "The Follow-up," in which Michael J. Matt expands on just one point from his most recent Editor's Desk.
In this episode, Michael takes a closer look at the underlying racism that is inherent in many of the COVID lockdown policies across America.
New from Remnant TV...
Michael J. Matt first takes a look at the far-Left's fascist attempt to silence political opposition.
Protecting the Kids from the My Pillow Guy: You might hate his pillow, but do you really think Mike Lindell presents a clear and present danger to the common good? Who's next, the ShamWOW guy?