In any case, as I've repeatedly stated, I cannot definitively judge who's right.  I opine that +Williamson is wrong on this matter.  Ultimately only the Church can decide the matter, with the degree of authority required to impose the decision on consciences.  That's the bottom line, and Bishop Williamson agrees with ME on that point, not with YOU.  He clearly state that there was no reason to withhold conditional ordination precisely because many intelligent, sincere, and  orthodox Catholics have come to the opposite conclusion.

But we don't have to prove that we're right, as the threshold for our position is very low ... merely to explain who there's something we can point to (positive) that can cause doubt.  You can hop up and down all day lot in your "skirt" claiming the contrary ... and repost the same things over and over again, but none of that can meet the standard of proof, which is moral certainty to the point or exclusing all positive or even prudent doubt.

With all due respect to his Lordship, as a bishop of the Catholic Church, Bishop Williamson's job was not to pander to the fears of the faithful, but to uphold the teachings and policies of the Church. The Church is not a democracy. Without doubt,His Lordship was an incredibly gifted and intelligent man, but, judging by this, as an example, he never quite lost his Protestant outlook: each and everyone can reach their own conclusions on the matter - what he called "The Golden Rule" if you remember. Now, I fully understand the fears that some fellow Catholics have - I shared them myself at one point - and while I challenge some of what you write - especially your unfounded attacks on the SSPX in this area, I am not mocking the doubts you have; Vatican II caused an avalanche of hurt and confusion that knocked the best of us side-ways. However, I will say that my doubts quickly dissolved once I began to educate myself and re-look at the subject objectively. I'm a broad strokes thinker - not so ready with dates and figures - but usually quick to get the gist and sense of a position as a whole. This was my starting point: Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, His Kingdom that rests upon the Papacy. For me, the promise is clear: no matter how hard the masonic infiltrators try, their attempts to destroy the Church will be thwarted by the hand of God who is always in control. The dogmatic belief that the Church disappeared (no more real bishops, priests or sacraments) in 1958 or 1965 flys in the face of that promise. The SSPX - the first traditional movement - is not the Church. But is a rudder and a constant reminder, maintained by Christ through Archbishop Lefebvre, of the Church's former glory. You query my horse in the race, well this is it.

Just put it on our youtube.

You have as much talent, as do I or anyone, as Gibson.

BS, everyone has different talent capacities in different avenues they may pursue, however, hard work, determination and dilligence can make a difference. 

Make no mistake, although some are given more help and oppourtunites than others, these guys work hard at their craft.

CONTEXT:  https://www.magisterium.com/ Magisterium AI is the Novus Ordo religion's attempt to get on board the AI train.


Unsurprisingly, they are baking the Modernism into their AI. Because, God forbid, someone might find out about the contradictions between Vatican II and the teachings of the Church.

The priest in this clip (below) is the priest who is responsible for a lot of the decisions in making this AI. 

AI is trained on sources. He admits that they favor Modernist sources over Catholic ones. 

I think it is worthwhile posting this so that we all now have some direct proof of them admitting having done this to their AI, rather than messing around with it to find out indirectly (what we already knew, as trads, would be the case anyway).


Here it is: 

https://x.com/FlatTrads/status/1954123082777395325