Ladislaus, ElwinRansom1970, Pax Vobis,

here's Williamson about the poison of liberalism, an unbelievable disease, capable of rotting out the best hearts and minds. He gives a brief definition, and he calls it a "poison" that threatens "every one of us":

ELEISON COMMENTS CLXXXV (Jan. 29, 2011) : *TRADITIONAL INFECTION*

Liberalism is an unbelievable disease, capable of rotting out the best
hearts and minds. If we define it, most briefly, as the liberation of man
from God, it is as old as the hills, but never has it been so deep or
widespread or seemingly normal, as it is today. Now religious liberty is at
the heart of liberalism -- what use is it to be free from everything else
and everybody else if I am not free from God ? So if Benedict XVI lamented
three weeks ago that "religious freedom is threatened all over the world",
he is certainly infected. Nor let even followers of Catholic Tradition be
confident that they have immunity from the disease. Here is an e-mail I
received a few days ago from a layman in Continental Europe:--

"For the longest time, about 20 years, I was moulded by liberalism. It is
through the grace of God that I underwent a conversion with the Society of
St Pius X. To my shock I have found liberal behaviour even in the ranks of
Tradition. People are still saying that one should not exaggerate how bad
things are at present. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ is hardly mentioned as being an enemy of
the Church, because to do so might damage one's personal interests, so
people go on reacting as though, overall, the world is still in good shape.

"Some Traditionalists even recommend psycho-drugs to deal with the stress
that goes with being a Traditional Catholic, and if you are looking for
happiness, they say, you should go to a medical doctor to make life easier.

"The consequence of such behaviour is an indifferentism which is the
seed-bed of liberalism. All of a sudden it is no longer so bad to attend the
Novus Ordo Mass, to make common cause with modernists, to change one's
principles from one day to the next, to give up showing one's faith in
public, to study at a State university, to trust the State, and to act on
the assumption that everybody does after all mean well.

"Our Lord has harsh words for this sort of indifferentism : the lukewarm he
will "begin to spit out of his mouth" (Rev. III, 16). It may sound
paradoxical, but the greatest enemies of the Church are liberal Catholics.
There is even a liberal Traditionalism !!!" (end of layman's quote).

What then is the antidote for this poison that threatens every one of us ?
Sanctifying grace, no doubt (Rom.VII, 25), which can clear the mind of
confusion, and strengthen the will to do what the mind sees to be right. And
how do I make sure of sanctifying grace ? That is a little like asking, how
can I guarantee my final perseverance ? The Church teaches that one cannot
guarantee it, because it is a gift - or the gift -- of God. But what I can
always do is pray the Holy Rosary, an average of five Mysteries a day -
better, if reasonably possible, fifteen. Whosoever does that is doing what
the Mother of God asks all of us to do, and she has a virtually unlimited
maternal power over her Son, Our Lord and God, Jesus
Christ.

Kyrie eleison.

Modernism = liberalism.  

No, Liberalism is an offspring of Humanism and Protestantism, and Englishman John Locke (17th century) is generally acknowledged as the "Father of Liberalism".

Modernism is a bunch of heretical concepts coming up from a bottomless pit within the Church at the end of the 19th century. Frenchman Alfred Loisy is generally credited as the "Father of Modernism".


I haven't ever heard Williamson confusing these well known terms, well known to informed Catholics.

No, it's not.  It cannot be reduced to specific heretical concepts.  It's an entire system ... applying rationalism and subjectivism (Descartes and Kantian phenomenology) to doctrine.  So the specific propositions that can proceed from it are myriad.  We have all be infected to some extent with rationalism and subjectivism, aka Modernism.

St. Pius X defined it right there toward the beginning of Pascendi which I cited.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.

You should learn to read. Your quote from Pascendi just says that "Modernists place the foundation of religious philosophy in that doctrine which is usually called Agnosticism". That's no reason to confound Modernism with Liberalism.

And there is no reason to now additionally come up with Rationalism and Subjectivism. Are you just trying to jumble all terminology?

Here my question: Is it the confusion in your head or has it been Williamson personally saying that he, Williamson, is "infected with Modernism" or equivalent?

If you insist, I will ask Sean Johnson to write to Williamson for confirmation.

And St. Pope Pius X called modernism, “... the synthesis of all heresies”.

So what? Given the statement "Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies", do we have to conclude that Modernism = Liberalism = Rationalism = Subjectivism?

No! BS! Liberalism is not "the synthesis of all heresies", Rationalism is not "the synthesis of all heresies", and Subjectivism is not "the synthesis of all heresies".

Modernism is Liberalism within the Church.

Did you make up this formula from scratch on the fly out of thin air, just to deviate from the question what Williamson said, or do you refer to some authority?

We have two people here who listened to Bishop Williamson speak on a regular basis over a long course of time who have told you that he said this vs. you blustering over and over again in your ignorance misdefining Modernism as a set of propositions rather than a system.

Just stop wasting our time with your nonsense.

What about my question? Has it been Williamson personally saying that he, Williamson, is "infected with Modernism" or equivalent?

Do you answer the question with a "yes" or a "no"?

If you don't, I'll take all your deviating answers as a "no" and as an implicit retraction of replies #26 and #35.

If you say "yes", I'll ask Sean Johnson, as I said above.

If you say "no", then you retract your reply #26 and reply #35 and I'll thank you.

The promised second part is out "Crisis Series #32 w/ Fr. Robinson: Can Non-Catholics Go to Heaven? The Church vs. Fr. Feeney"


To be honest, quite disappointing. I also found in this topic quite interesting videos of Fr. Albert: and . Very different and super precise.

Looks like there is a 3rd state, limbo and in order to go to heaven, i.e. receive a gift of beatific vision, the baptism is necessary.