Quote from: John McFarland

All that seems a long time ago, as I read you praising him to the skies for being exactly what Bp. Fellay accused him of being.  He, the old adversary of Fr. Cekada, is now just as contemptuous of the Society as his old adversary.  He, the old adversary of Bishop Rifan, is nearly as much of an angler as that old adversary.  He, the great adversary of liberalism, is now the apostle of doing what he pleases when, where and as he pleases, all the time insisting that it was exactly what Abp. Lefebvre always counseled and would have done if he were here.  One inevitably recalls Martin Luther and sola scriptura.

So you compare the most recent crisis in the SSPX with both the 1983 "split" of the nine and the the Protestant revolt. The latter really needs no comment, while with the former, a strained comparison is about all that can be made.

It seems that as it is more likely Bp. Williamson may be headed out of the SSPX, criticism of him by the "virtuous" now becomes virtuous.

Incredulous,

I am not the tool of that cheese-eating surrender monkey with the funny accent, Little Judas Rostand.  He and I haven't spoken since I chatted amiably at Winona a few years back with him and Other Little Judas Le Roux; nor has he deputized any of the Littler Judases of the Society to give me my marching orders, although they have suggested that I tone it down a bit, and even cut it out.  

Furthermore, I am not ag(e)ing.  I am aged.

Nonetheless, I seem still to have enough on my fastball that you'd sooner fire insults than reasoned refutations my way.

Quote from: parentsfortruth

This thread is a perfect example of why Archbishop Lefevbre did not want a bishop being the Superior General of the society.

Definitely the hand of Satan can be seen in it:  Four bishops consecrated by +ABL to continue his work--confirming and ordaining--not one having more authority than the other.  Flash forward, and what do you see?  +ABL would not be pleased.