CathInfo.com

What is recorded on Non Possumus is the interview with Bishop Williamson. Father Ceriani uses everything the bishop says to attack him.
He is obsessed. Radio Cristiandad attack everything posted on Non Possumus because this blog defends the Bishop. They analize every single word to find something to attack His Lordship.
They attacked also the Father Raphael declaration. They attack everything, that's why non possumus is quoted on Radio Cristiandad very often.

Father Ceriani thinks he is the only one priest of the word who defends the true Catholic Faith.

Cristera, I am very sorry to see you are taking the wrong path of falsehood.  Your assertion about Fr. Ceriani thinking he is the only one priest defending the true faith is absolutely false and you know it.  You sure know Fr. Ceriani works with other priests and you probably know that he recommends the writings and advices of others priests as well.

Your zeal for defending Bp. Williamson shouldn't be stronger nor greater that the zeal for defending the Truth.

We must keep always in mind that the good fight is for God, not for any of His servants.

How many of us thought fifteen years ago that defending Bp. Fellay could have been wrong?  Could the same happen to us if we defend Bp. Williamson, or Fr. Ceriani or (put here any name)?  Of course it could.  We have witnessed how good persons change or how those who apparently were trustable persons show at some time they were not that trustable.

Cristera, you are accusing Radio Cristiandad of using anything Bp. Williamson says to attack him.  That is not true and you know it.  Radio Cristiandad has published many of the writings Bp. Williamson has published.

That does not mean they must always agree with His Excellency.  You should know that all this is not about attacking anybody, but about defending the Faith, defending the Church.  If you consider such a defense is unfair or that some arguments are false, then show the error, explain what is wrong, but not just injure those you disagree with.

Cristera, you have accused Fr. Ceriani of calumny.  That is a very serious accusation.  Could you prove it?  It would be good and certainly a charitable act showing why Fr. Ceriani is a priest one should not trust.  It would help more that one person, including myself.  But if your accusation has its origin in what Fr. Ceriani has written about Bp. Williamson, then you should examine the writings again and either discover Fr. Ceriani's mistakes or recognize Bp. Williamson's errors.

The truth is that Bp. Williamson has acted in a questionable manner more than once and that is something very serious to be ignored just because the bishop speaks and writes very well some other times.  Bp. Fellay has spoken and written very well in the past too.  And the same could be said of John Paul II or Paul VI.

I respect and admire Bp. Williamson firstly because he is a bishop and then because I recognize he is a very wise person (in the sense that his knowledge is very wide and deep in many topics), which unfortunately has not help him to prevent some grave errors.

I cannot agree with what Bp. Williamson says about BXVI, presenting him as a person who would like to reconcile the Tradition with the modernism because in his heart he keeps the traditional liturgy he saw during his childhood while his mind is modernist according to what he learned in the seminary.  That's exactly how Bp. Fellay describes BXVI: a person with a traditional heart but with a modernist head.  Dom Thomas disagrees on this respect too.  And so did Abp. Lefebvre.

I cannot agree with Bp. Williamson justifying himself for having signed the letter of thanks to BXVI, in which it is admitted that the excommunications were effective (valid) during 20 years until the lifting of the same.

I cannot agree with Bp. Williamson justifying the celebration of the motu propio Summorum pontificuм, because it brought some good to the Church.  Who could think that the fish should thank the fisherman for having used a nutritious and/or delicious bait?  Such a bait is even more dangerous precisely because it shows itself as something good.

I think it is unacceptable that Bp. Williamson recommends the reading of a book that is/was in the Index, that has been proved being heretic or at least to contain very suspicious ideas, a book that was impelled by then Fr. Augustine Bea...

I could continue the list, but I don't think this is necessary.

To concretize, I would say that we must not make idols of the persons, even if they apparent to be very trustable.  If we don't follow this advice, then what have we all learned of the lessons from the past?  We were shown that even the Pope can fail, and in what manner!  We have been shown that even a bishop, being the superior general of the SSPX can fail.  Are we going to build another idol?

Non Possumus defends Bishop Williamson against the calumnies of Father Ceriani. Father Ceriani, Meramo and others, accuse Bishop Williamson of being a traitor.

Everything that is posted on Non Possumus is for the defense of the Bishop.

Non Possumus posted an interview with His Excellency where he responds the accusations made against him by Ceriani and Co.

Dear Hollinsworth, please post a single thing posted on Non Possumus where the Bishop is attacked. Are you sure your spanish is so good to understand what is posted there?

Excuse my bad english.

Yes, I think that's the root problem.  Non possumus tries to defend Bp. Williamson, instead of defending the Truth.

I have never read a writing of Fr. Ceriani stating Bp. Williamson is a traitor.  Will you show at least one of them, a single one?  I read most of what Fr. Ceriani writes and I have not found attacks to the bishop.  However, I must say that Fr. Ceriani has written some articles warning the readers of dangerous ideas contained in different writings, some of them having Bp. Williamson as author.  That cannot, in any sense, be used as excuse to say Fr. Ceriani is attacking the bishop.

I have heard the interview posted by Non possumus and certainly I can tell that His Excellency recognizes in that interview some errors he made in the past.  Unfortunately, the interview was misguided towards a justification rather than to a clarification, which would have rendered more details and perhaps an entire retraction instead of an incomplete recognition of Bp. Williamson's errors...

What is undeniable is that such interview touched only two point signaled as fishy or wrong attitudes of Bp. Williamson.  Only two among many others.

Also, what is undeniable is that Non possumus has published and widely recommended a "Catechism for the crisis in the SSPX" which condemns Bp. Williamson's attitudes when condemning very similar or even equal attitudes in Bp. Fellay.

It is "The Poem of the Man God", by Maria Valtorta.

Thank you.