Author Topic: Anticipating Bp. Williamson (Read 5490 times)

Wessex · « **on:** December 15, 2015, 07:42:26 AM »

We have enough clues to know where the bishop is going with his ideas about the conciliar church and how far traditionalists should distance themselves from her. We know how he likes to package history neatly and his nihilistic view of the future as a conclusion to two millennia of doomed European history. (No-one seems to have much regard to the great land mass and population existing outside the distracting geographic and demographic limitation of the Middle Eastern and European spheres of influence. How much is Christianity merely a Judaic-European construct?).

One gets the feeling that the bishop has decided to stay on the Titanic and go down with the ship. He has looked at the alternative and, rather than encourage the remnant to save themselves to fight another day, he feels there is no new Noah's Ark to rescue the faithful and we are in life all hopelessly culpable in turning our backs on the Church We are all agents of our own destruction and merely pay lip service to ideas of purity and innocence that we imagine existed in former times. Consequently, whether we like it or not, we have to continue to live among the fallen throng and hope that the Almighty will not be too hard on us when he decides to pull the plug.

So, with regard to the conciliar church, he suggests:

1) accepting her as the only mechanism whereby the apostolic succession in guaranteed regardless of her use as the home of competing ideologies, old and new

2) accepting that not all conciliar practices are bad if conducted in the right spirit and in line with traditional interpretation regardless of intentional ambiguity

3) not turning one's back on other Catholics/Christians because they have the potential to please God regardless of the flawed institution to which they belong.

In so doing, the bishop likes to present himself as a moderate traditionalist. (Always a useful tactic to position oneself between two extremes and appear reasonable!). He probably considers himself the best living exponent of ABL's R & R policy; one that prolongs the agony of permanent opposition to a line of succession in a church you are afraid to cut all ties with because of the absence of a precedent. His future letters must dwell heavily on delivering and maintaining this position, otherwise they will demonstrate his whole career was a lie.

JPaul · « **Reply #1 on:** December 15, 2015, 09:03:01 AM »

In essence an indultist mindset. It seems that he is heading to the same destination as his estranged confrere. One is on the express train, the other taking the slower garden path.

The European continent, its people, and its culture were the fertile ground in which the Christian religion grew, flourished, and conquered the known world. They and it are being systematically destroyed and enslaved by thee most anti God forces yet arrayed in history. Satan has chosen his targets well, attacking the blood and soil that were so inclined to love and follow the God/Man his adversary. I believe that what has been betrayed, must be restored.
Visions and imaginings are of little use in such a noble and necessary goal for God's Glory and the restoration of His Church.

Alone we remain, until God raises a man of fortitude, constancy and will, whose light will lead His people back to Him.

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #2 on:** December 15, 2015, 09:35:42 AM »

People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

BJ5 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 15, 2015, 09:39:58 AM »

I expect that, Continents aside, +H.E. believes that the promised triumph of Her Immaculate Heart will happen via/through "the Pope". I have heard Fr. Pfeiffer say this plainly in his sermons and he was formed by +Williamson. So assuming the Pope of restoration will succeed from the line of Popes, of which Francis is the current selectee, then it would stand to reason that the Titanic would be saved before the last inch of the stern rail is submerged, hence +Williamson's determination to not leap off. If this is a flaw, it was most certainly inherited from his mentor.

JPaul · « **Reply #4 on:** December 15, 2015, 12:38:41 PM »

Quote from: Gerard from FE

People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

Which only goes to show that many people were drawn into the R&R illusion and were blinded to the realities around them for many years.

If he has always held this position then he has been compromised from the beginning.

Nevertheless, appealing to the default sedevacantist boogeyman as SSPX folks wont to do has no actual meaning. It is just smoke to keep the contradictory proposition alive.

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #5 on:** December 15, 2015, 01:30:02 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Which only goes to show that many people were drawn into the R&R illusion and were blinded to the realities around them for many years.

If he has always held this position then he has been compromised from the beginning.

Nevertheless, appealing to the default sedevacantist boogeyman as SSPX folks wont to do has no actual meaning. It is just smoke to keep the contradictory proposition alive.

There is no "if" he has always held this position. He has. And it can be just as easily argued that people are being drawn into the sedevacantist illusion and going blind to the realities around them. It's not really a boogeyman either, the disparate factions of sedevacantism and the constant redrawing of lines based on bad thinking is a reality. Siri thesis or not? Fr. Cekada's claim that it's a sin to go to any TLM that mentions the Pope even if it's valid. (He never did answer my question as to whether the Angels present were sinning at the same mass.)

Papering over the problems in the Church with a blanket condemnation doesn't' make for a good argument. It makes for dozens of bad arguments.

wallflower · « **Reply #6 on:** December 15, 2015, 01:43:15 PM »

As an aside, Gerard, I appreciate your presence here. I don't know why you haven't been here much over the years or what has prompted you to be more active lately but I am happy for the change.

JPaul · « **Reply #7 on:** December 15, 2015, 02:20:24 PM »

Quote from: Gerard from FE

Quote from: J.Paul
Which only goes to show that many people were drawn into the R&R illusion and were blinded to the realities around them for many years.

If he has always held this position then he has been compromised from the beginning.

Nevertheless, appealing to the default sedevacantist boogeyman as SSPX folks wont to do has no actual meaning. It is just smoke to keep the contradictory proposition alive.

There is no "if" he has always held this position. He has. And it can be just as easily argued that people are being drawn into the sedevacantist illusion and going blind to the realities around them. It's not really a boogeyman either, the disparate factions of sedevacantism and the constant redrawing of lines based on bad thinking is a reality. Siri thesis or not? Fr. Cekada's claim that it's a sin to go to any TLM that mentions the Pope even if it's valid. (He never did answer my question as to whether the Angels present were sinning at the same mass.)

Papering over the problems in the Church with a blanket condemnation doesn't' make for a good argument. It makes for dozens of bad arguments.

You just can't do without those sedes can you. It fills in for the need to stay on point.

Papering over problems? The cellulose industry could double overnight with all of the papering over of the Novus Ordo and Paul VI that is going on here.

By way of context, are you a believer in the Hermenutic of Continuity?

2Vermont · « **Reply #8 on:** December 15, 2015, 03:51:48 PM »

Quote from: Gerard from FE

People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

I hear this a lot here. Could you provide support for this from years ago? For example, could you provide support for where Bishop Williamson has given the green light to attend the Novus Ordo in the past before...for any reason other than a funeral or a marriage? Could you provide support for his past belief that Eucharistic miracles happen at the Novus Ordo?

Perhaps this is true. Perhaps he has always said things like this before, but whenever someone says this they base it on their recollection over the years and they never provide support for it.

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #9 on:** December 15, 2015, 04:59:31 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Gerard from FE
People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

I hear this a lot here. Could you provide support for this from years ago? For example, could you provide support for where Bishop Williamson has given the green light to attend the Novus Ordo in the past before...for any reason other than a funeral or a marriage? Could you provide support for his past belief that Eucharistic miracles happen at the Novus Ordo?

Perhaps this is true. Perhaps he has always said things like this before, but whenever someone says this they base it on their recollection over the years and they never provide support for it.

Here's two examples I recently posted elsewhere: "His recorded interviews consisting of the series "The Faith in Crisis" with Bernard Janzen from the 1980s up to and including the papacy of Pope Francis bear this out.

Then -Fr. Williamson in the mid 1980s said in the Interview, "Why the Old Mass." the statement, "Of course be it said that there are many honorable...in my little opinion there are many honorable priest within the Novus Ordo Church or what we might call the Novus Ordo or Conciliar Church,, who are doing their very best to celebrate the Novus Ordo Missae with all possible dignity and decorum. You know, let's not pretend or exaggerate that all Novus Ordo Masses, all New Masses are celebrated unworthily or without any dignity. That's not true." He then points out how change is built into the Novus Ordo while stability is built into the TLM. And a Novus Ordo that follows as close to the TLM as much as possible gains stability.

Years later, His interview title "The Age of Unbelief" in Canada from his time stationed in Argentina in 2003, He is recorded saying about the faithful and Churcmen in Latin America , "Not all of them have lost their faith and not all of them are losing their faith."

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #10 on:** December 15, 2015, 06:16:11 PM »

Quote from: wallflower

As an aside, Gerard, I appreciate your presence here. I don't know why you haven't been here much over the years or what has prompted you to be more active lately but I am happy for the change.

Thank you. That's very kind of you.

Pilar · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2015, 08:44:06 PM »

Quote from: Gerard from FE

People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

Thank you, excellent and true, Gerard! After reading the first two posts, I began to think that this idea of dual earths was true after all, and that there is somewhere another +Richard Williamson who speaks and thinks somewhat like our own.

He has been saying exactly the same things for the over 30 years that I have known him and no doubt much longer. These people not only do not understand him, they do not seem to have a grasp on Catholicism in general. And not only that, they don't understand Archbishop Lefebvre either, because he said these same things.

Pilar · « **Reply #12 on:** December 15, 2015, 09:03:25 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Gerard from FE
People are ticked off at him because he's not a sedevacantist. Of course, he hasn't been on and speaks about it in exactly the same way he did decades ago.

People are ticked off because he points out that the Catholic Church is still Catholic with a lot of corruption in it. Of course that is exactly the same thing he has always been preaching.

People are ticked off because he isn't a hypocrite and after explaining again and again the SSPX was not a "Wildcat" seminary, they are shocked that he doesn't want to pretend to have authority and set up a "Wildcat" seminary.

The accusations are out there against him, the SSPXers and NeoCatholics call him a practical sedevacantist.

The sedevacantists and the irrational elements in the resistance call him a compromiser and that he's "giving in."

But the test is in the docuмentation. He's been saying and writing the same things for decades. People who claim to understand him either and think he's the one who has changed have either drifted into irrational hardline positions or they really do not understand him.

I hear this a lot here. Could you provide support for this from years ago? For example, could you provide support for where Bishop Williamson has given the green light to attend the Novus Ordo in the past before...for any reason other than a funeral or a marriage? Could you provide support for his past belief that Eucharistic miracles happen at the Novus Ordo?

Perhaps this is true. Perhaps he has always said things like this before, but whenever someone says this they base it on their recollection over the years and they never provide support for it.

For years we received his letters from the seminary and this was all covered. I am pretty sure that he would be able to provide copies for you. The seminary might be able to do it, if they were willing. Some of us who have been around for a long time remember quite well what the various SSPX personages have said, it is only our recent memory that might suffer, not the long term. All of this information was vitally important to us and we paid close attention. Besides his letters, he has given countless retreats which many of us have attended. Do not discount what people remember they were told. That's how the Faith was passed down.

Regarding the lady who +Williamson advised regarding the N.O attendance. Don't you realize that he was trying to advise someone who was not well-grounded and stable? Surely it is better for someone who is on the edge to get comfort from the N.O. than to stay home and go over the edge? Who knows what her situation is. But she sounded quite upset. And by the fact that she was at that conference, she is obviously attuned to the fact that there is a problem with the N.O. and she will be careful. We need to pray more for the gift of understanding. Too many are not getting it and knees are jerking all over the place.

Matthew · « **Reply #13 on:** December 15, 2015, 09:32:44 PM »

I was at the infamous conference (Mahopac NY a.k.a. "Connecticut") where Bishop Williamson advised the novus ordo woman. Speaking with the Resistance parishioners there afterwards, I learned that the lady in question is *not* a regular at their chapel, not by a long shot. Many were suspicious, thought she was a plant/agent provocateur, etc.

Gerard from FE · « **Reply #14 on:** December 15, 2015, 10:37:03 PM »

To understand the infamous woman from the conference Q&A, you simply have to have listened to the Faith in Crisis interviews to know that nothing is unusual.

In one of his later interviews with Bernard Janzen, Bp. W. talked about how a pastor of souls doesn't handle a shriveled soul by coming off blasting them with fire and brimstone. His analogy was, "You don't give a starving man roast beef. You give them a little bit of warm milk at first."

He then proceeded to describe a basic prescription for helping people. It might be instructing them at the start to just say one "Ave" a day. To get a little oxygen into the soul. Get prayers going first, move onto basic instruction for sacraments, and then prayers, sacraments, mass and continued study.

Bishop W. is very good at pulling people out of the gutter and fixing them up.