Thanks to the French site "Un Eveque s'est leve," a clear example of duplicity is demonstrated in the affair of Bishop Williamson's exclusion.
The Italian District of the SSPX also had to do some of its own damage-control following Erikh Priebke's funeral. On the district web-page is published an interview given by the District Superior, Fr Pier-paolo Petrucci, to a certain Marco Bongi.
The probing interviewer did not hesitate (at D9.) to establish a link between the attitude of the present SSPX and that of Bishop Williamson (and also with that of Fr Florian Abrahamowicz, who left the SSPX some years before).
http://www.sanpiox.it/public/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1097:funerali-priebke-intervista-a-don-pierpaolo-petrucci&catid=53&Itemid=50Fr Petrucci replies : "I'd like to make it clear that both Bishop Williamson and Fr Abrahamowicz were excluded from our Society
PRECISELY BECAUSE OF (proprio per via di)
certain of their positions being incompatible with the vocation of the Society..."
Which is news to regular readers of the site since barely a year before the same District Superior had said in an official statement, concerning the exclusion : "the Italian District reiterates that
this was justified by PURELY DISCIPLINARY motives, which had been ongoing for several years."
http://www.sanpiox.it/public/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=772:comunicato-del-distretto-ditalia-della-fraternita-san-pio-x&catid=53:attualita&Itemid=50This at least concurs with the statement issued by Menzingen, via DICI : "Bishop Richard Williamson,
having distanced himself from the management and the government of the SSPX for several years, and
refusing to show due respect and obedience to his lawful superiors, was declared excluded from the SSPX by decision of the Superior General and its Council, on October 4th, 2012."
(Communique, Menzingen, October 24 2012)
So which is it, then ? PURELY disciplinary or PRECISELY ideological?Fr Petrucci reproaches other journalists in his interview for making unfair "amalgams" of people with "buzz-word" ideas, creating "shock-horror" scenarios to destroy reputations and to make false accusations.
It seems, however, that at least in this matter, he is no more objective than them and just as capable of the same "spin" for opportunistic gain. He is not alone in the SSPX, alas!