Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: John Grace on July 14, 2012, 06:26:11 AM
-
Patricia Mc Keever supports the expulsion of His Lordship
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
The news of the exclusion of Bishop Williamson by the SSPX Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, “due to his stand calling to rebellion and for continually repeated disobedience,” was first confirmed by another leaked letter sent by the General Secretary of the SSPX, Father Thouvenot, on June 25, 2012, which was leaked in the same usual forums on the very same day it was received. The ruling was questioned by Williamson himself, who appealed to the Chapter, whose members subsequently voted, in a secret ballot, to uphold the measure adopted by the Superior General.
The decision seems to show that the Superior General has kept his authority within the SSPX in these decisive months of discussions and decisions regarding the Society and the Holy See. Read more
What changes, if any, face the Society after the General Chapter this weekend? The expulsion of Bishop Williamson seems certain, and perhaps others. What, in your view, lies ahead for the Society?
Seems a tad optimistic to think that the expulsion of Bishop Williamson will make any immediate difference to the prospects of the Society’s relationship with Rome, given the two recent shocking appointments in the Vatican discussed elsewhere on this blog.
Tell us your thoughts…
Then amazingly she expects people to attend a rosary rally she is involved in.
-
She has been spoken to before about various matters but seems to be continuing an attack on the Bishop.
She had the cheek to suggest those who sent a letter to Bishop Fellay had added names without permission.
Obviously the Scottish version of Dorothy Banks. Fr Morgan needs to take firm action against Mc Keever. He should denounce her from the pulpit and deny her the sacraments in SSPX chapels.
-
It's amazing how she is shocked by the recent appointments in the Vatican yet would be delighted if the Bishop is expelled.
-
Fr Morgan needs to take firm action against Mc Keever.
...such as permanently separating her from her well-worn McKee-board.
-
A question I have for her is does she still expect SSPX supporters to give money to support her 'Catholic Truth' publication. Last year she shared a platform with Society priests in Ireland down in Cork. Given her attack on the Bishop and allowing the Catholic Truth blog to be used to attack him, I do hope the priests distance themselves from her.
-
She even has a poll on the Catholic Truth blog asking should the Bishop be expelled.Bishop Williamson has remained faithful to the mission of Archbishop Lefebvre so what is this nonsense about 'rebellion'?
-
'Marinaio' writes
I hope I am not reading into your comments your desire to see a unity of the SSPX that includes Richard Williamson and his partisans and proteges. No, +Williamson needs to go — the sooner the better — and take the Fathers Pfeiffer, Chazal, Hewko, and others who publicly flaunted disobedience toward their superiors. This will be the truly unifying act: to wish Richard Willilamson and his cohorts “Godspeed” and farewell — in charity hopefully, but with finality, for sure!
-
Whilst some had not heard of the letter but would of signed it, I have great admiration for those that did sign the "impertinent letter".
-
She has been spoken to before about various matters but seems to be continuing an attack on the Bishop.
She had the cheek to suggest those who sent a letter to Bishop Fellay had added names without permission.
Obviously the Scottish version of Dorothy Banks. Fr Morgan needs to take firm action against Mc Keever. He should denounce her from the pulpit and deny her the sacraments in SSPX chapels.
I was far too harsh to suggest denying her the sacraments but my admiration is for those that did sign the "impertinent" letter. I would have more regard for them than I would for Mc Keever. Let her criticise His Lordship all she likes.
And no, he is not beyond criticism but she herself is shocked by the Vatican appointments.What else does she expect?
-
She is strange though as she associates with Fr Gruner and Fr Kramer, whom many in the Novus Ordo world regard as discredited and the 'lunatic fringe' yet opposes a Bishop who has always upheld doctrine and never strayed from the mission of the Archbishop.
Many already regard her publication as a 'rag' and 'lunatic fringe' so it makes no sense for her to attack the Bishop and allow the blog to be a platform to attack him.Yes, it allows discussion and 'opinion' but its editorial is clearly anti-Bishop Williamson.
It can't be because of his position regarding the Jews as 'Catholic Truth' defended Robert Sungenis in the past.
-
Calls from Scotland to expel Bishop Williamson
The title is sensationalistic. It actually should read call from a nobody layperson from Scotland, to expel Bishop Williamson.
This person is the equivalent of a bed bug in Bishop Williamson house.
-
Nobody is disputing there is differing opinions. For example in Ireland, one lady who teaches SSPX children often wears trousers. Some ladies obviously disagree with the Bishop in relation to wearing trousers
I guess they feel more liberated wearing trousers or when they take a university degree. I mean here women in general.
People laughed at him when he told the truth about 9/11. Mossad were behind it but the 'conspiracy theory' culture has turned it to a joke.
He was "imprudent" when he told the truth about the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst' and the myth of the gas chambers.
I don't doubt for a moment SSPX attendee's laughed. "Crazy Williamson".
The trouble for those who laugh and smirk is can they point out where he opposed doctrine or preached falsehood or lies?
-
+Williamson needs to go — the sooner the better — and take the Fathers Pfeiffer, Chazal, Hewko, and others who publicly flaunted disobedience toward their superiors.
Does this sort of comment not smack of pure hypocrisy when, for 40 years or so, the SSPX has "publicly flaunted disobedience" toward the very persons whom it has held to be in possession of supreme ecclesiastical authority on earth?
-
This woman should shut her yap. She embarrasses herself with her ignorant statements.
-
It would be wrong of me not to suggest to pray the rosary with her. Whilst I did disagree with Ashmolean, I would still join him on a picket at an abortuary.
He was correct to seek facts. I never disputed this. I assumed people would and not take things at face value.
On this point regarding Patricia Mc Keever, she has got it wrong. She admits herself the Vatican appointments are shocking.
These discussions with Rome have been the "dialogue of the deaf"
Whilst a deal seems dead hopefully the General Chapter bears positive fruit.
-
This woman should shut her yap. She embarrasses herself with her ignorant statements.
Nobody disputes the Bishop has his critics and enemies even within the SSPX but can these critics outline where he has preached or taught false doctrine.
I was in the company of the Bishop on the morning that 'news broke' of a threat to expel him but also news that Benedict XVI said it was ok to use condoms. A disgusting statement. Bishop Williamson, read the piece from the Daily Telegraph and stated clearly to the gathering this is not church teaching.
Instead of telling Patricia Mc Kever to shut up, could she outline where the Bishop is at odds with church teaching, and can she outline the errors he propagates.
More recently when he visited Ireland, he was warmly received with many travelling for hours to greet the Bishop and hear him preach.
It was fantastic given how so many of "his own" threw him to the wolves in 2009.
-
She isn't representative of other Scots who have great regard for the Bishop.
Flower Of Scotland
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeOR_sNSPbg
-
Dear John,
I have a question: Are you having a conversation with yourself on this thread?
Because it seems to me that there are a lot of people who don't mind hearing
that +Williamson is being sanctioned, and I would like to know why they don't
mind. What is it about him or what he has done that make them accepting of
having him banished or whatever?
One person I know who thinks he should be "silenced" also thinks that it's okay for
Germany to have laws against "h0Ɩ0cαųst denial." Is that the issue? Or, is it
something else that turn people off to +Williamson?
-
+Williamson needs to go — the sooner the better — and take the Fathers Pfeiffer, Chazal, Hewko, and others who publicly flaunted disobedience toward their superiors.
Does this sort of comment not smack of pure hypocrisy when, for 40 years or so, the SSPX has "publicly flaunted disobedience" toward the very persons whom it has held to be in possession of supreme ecclesiastical authority on earth?
Very good. It's always a joyfull event for me to see the obvious pointed out to me. It reminds me once again that the more you learn the more you realize that you know nothing. This is what forums like Cathinfo are all about.
-
I've got a question about this:
+Williamson needs to go — the sooner the better — and take the Fathers Pfeiffer, Chazal, Hewko, and others who publicly flaunted disobedience toward their superiors.
Does this sort of comment not smack of pure hypocrisy when, for 40 years or so, the SSPX has "publicly flaunted disobedience" toward the very persons whom it has held to be in possession of supreme ecclesiastical authority on earth?
Very good. It's always a joyfull event for me to see the obvious pointed out to me. It reminds me once again that the more you learn the more you realize that you know nothing. This is what forums like Cathinfo are all about.
When +ABL was respectfully disobedient to JPII in 1988 with the necessary
consecrations, it is presumed that JPII had legitimate jurisdiction. But now,
+Williamson is accused of having been publicly "flaunting disobedience" when
+Fellay has no jurisdiction. Since when does a Superior General of a Society
command bishops of the Society to do or not do this or that when those things
have nothing to do with the faith, and when the Superior General has no
legitimate jurisdiction in the first place????
Dear John,
I have a question: Are you having a conversation with yourself on this thread?
I still have no answer to this.
Because it seems to me that there are a lot of people who don't mind hearing
that +Williamson is being sanctioned, and I would like to know why they don't
mind. What is it about him or what he has done that make them accepting of
having him banished or whatever?
One person I know who thinks he should be "silenced" also thinks that it's okay for
Germany to have laws against "h0Ɩ0cαųst denial." Is that the issue? Or, is it
something else that turn people off to +Williamson?
What has +Williamson done?
Is his questioning of the 6 million fiction the problem, or the gas chamber
executions that have no physical evidence: is that the problem?
Is his questioning the party lie -- I mean, line -- on 911 the problem?
I know a medical doctor who is terrified of questioning the party lie on 911.
When I ask him how building 7 came down without being hit with any plane, he
has no answer and he changes the subject. But he's a doctor. A DOCTOR.
Are doctors supposed to be able to think? Or, are they supposed to just do what
they're told to do and think what they're told to think, so that they can have a job?
So is this why people are ready to torch +Williamson?
Fr. Pfeiffer's sermon on July 8th talks about this, the Jews, 5 thousand, who did
not "eat sufficiently" and had 12 baskets left over, displeased Our Lord. These are
the ones who went home, nearby, and then the next day in John cap. 6, heard
Him say "Eat my body, drink my blood..." and they were scandalized and left him,
all 5 thousand of them.
These were the same who hailed him King one day in Jerusalem and then shouted
"Crucify him!" the next day in Jerusalem.
They were prone to switch sides capriciously because they were too carnal, too
comfortable, too much attached to their 5 senses; their 5 thousand number was a
figure of their attachment to their 5 senses. They sat on the grass, which is a
figure of their physical comfort, and their attachment to same.
-
Based on the following, I would like to clarify a few points.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
Note that NOWHERE in the blog article have I “called for the expulsion of Bishop Williamson”. I have merely asked if, given his exclusion from the General Chapter, the leaks etc. that he is perhaps likely to be expelled. Here, are my exact words:
“What changes, if any, face the Society after the General Chapter this weekend? The expulsion of Bishop Williamson seems certain, and perhaps others. What, in your view, lies ahead for the Society?”
“Seems certain” (that the Bishop will be expelled) given the fact that he has persistently disobeyed the Superior General and did his level best, apparently, to scupper any regularisation of the Society (this before the scandalous appointments of Bishop Muller and Archbishop di Noia). That’s not “calling for his expulsion”. I then go on to acknowlege that even if he IS expelled, that does not mean life will be rosy thereafter: again, here are my exact words:
“Seems a tad optimistic to think that the expulsion of Bishop Williamson will make any immediate difference to the prospects of the Society’s relationship with Rome, given the two recent shocking appointments in the Vatican discussed elsewhere on this blog.”
The kind reader who alerted me to this nasty blog, alerted me, too, to the identity of the John Grace who is posting comments calling for the Society priests to denounce me from the pulpit and refuse me the Sacraments. I will approach for Holy Communion tomorrow in some fear and trepidation – that’s if I’m allowed into Mass in the first place.
It seems that John Grace is really the man who runs Carmel Books. Given that we support Carmel Books, linking to them on our website, it is rather sad to read John Grace’s description of our publication as a “rag” and “lunatic fringe”. We’ll have to give some thought to this so won’t comment further at the moment, except to say that this is all very unsavoury. Again.
I did state I was wrong to call for the sacraments to be denied to her.She ignores this in this post.It is full of error.She has misinterpreted my post. I have no connection to Carmel Books.
-
to scupper any regularisation of the Society
Very much the language of Rorate Caeli and the superficial world associated with followers of Summorum Pontificuм.
A positive though is this is usually a stepping stone to Tradition. The introduction is often the Latin Mass Society but then overtime a person finds Catholic Tradition.
This nonsense of the Pope's hands being tied or he is a friend of Tradition is rubbish.You get well intentioned people including priests who believe it.
-
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
It seems that John Grace is really the man who runs Carmel Books. Given that we support Carmel Books, linking to them on our website, it is rather sad to read John Grace’s description of our publication as a “rag” and “lunatic fringe”. We’ll have to give some thought to this so won’t comment further at the moment, except to say that this is all very unsavoury. Again.
:laugh1:
Is this the same woman who was scandalized because Patricius from Ignis Ardens has a photo of +BF as his avatar, with the words "Evil Trad" underneath?
-
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
Perhaps John Grace is a close friend of a certain person from Carmel Books?
This is all getting silly now. I'm not connected to Carmel Books nor am I a close friend of anybody from Carmel Books. I have no idea why they now attempt to attack a Catholic book supplier. Strange.
Is this what you expect to happen when you defend the Bishop? I did retract my comment about Mc Keever regarding the sacraments.I do hope these Catholic Truth bloggers retract their false statements.
I have no connection to Carmel Books and am sorry to see this book supplier now being attacked. Patricia Mc Keever has made a mistake.
-
To be honest, I wouldn't give Catholic Truth any money given their criticism of the "impertinent letter" and an attack on Bishop Williamson.I can fully understand why a long term reader and financial supporter has stopped supporting them.
Why should pro-agreement types get our money? I would encourage money to go to anti-agreement SSPX priests and religious communities.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
I notice that, both on the IA blog and now on CathInfo, there is a focus on our fund-raising, with the hope expressed that SSPX readers will refuse to contribute to the work of this newsletter. Already one longterm reader and financial supporter has asked to be removed from our mailing list. So the IA and CathInfo bloggers can take comfort in the fact that their campaign against Catholic Truth is enjoying some measure of success.
However, this is not a source of concern to us. I’ve always said that if the money stops coming in, the newsletter stops going out. That is one way in which God can make clear to us that He does or does not want us to continue our work. Please, let nobody think that I – or any of my team – are worried about the loss of funds. I’ve been blessed with a succession of Treasurers (four including current) who have been faith-filled in this regard. God’s Providence, they continually point out to me, has not been found wanting in the thirteen years of our publication. Sometimes we’ve scraped the funds together for an edition, sometimes we’ve had enough in the coffers to let us expand our work, both in the newsletter itself and online – and sometimes we’ve even had sufficient to organise a meeting/conference or two. So, worrying about money is not something we DO at Catholic Truth.
We were once asked by a seminarian in Glasgow what we would do if the newsletter no longer existed, for whatever reason: my reply was immediate – I’d go back to enjoying a peaceful, carefree life! And I can safely say that I speak for the rest of the CT team on this matter! We’re engaged in this work out of a sense of duty – it’s not a hobby and we’d like nothing more than to be able to shut up shop. Believe me.
-
McKeever spent considerable time and resources in an attempt to discredit the 'British District' letter to +Fellay. As people researched her claims of petition-packing, it became apparent that her familiarity with Truth was rather on the casual side.
-
I had not heard of this Patricia McKeever before and I'm rather glad that I had not come into contact with her. Knowing Mgr Williamson personally, and knowing the calibre of His Lordship, I can say that anyone who is against him, or calls for his resignation, or criticises him, will automatically anthema to me. I do not mean I will hate or dispise that person, just that I will be happy not to have to deal personally with that person. I shall pray that they be enlightened so that before they do make such idiotic statements, they will first take the trouble to know the person they are talking about. I am at a loss to know why this P. McKeever is so against Mgr Williamson? He, at least, has always been honest as to his thoughts, which is not the case with Mgr Fellay as has been proved over these past few months, and this has been a sad revelation for me. :cry:
-
I wouldn't take them seriously. They seem to think I was involved in the now dissolved International Third Position.There is no such thing as the ITP.
I'm far too young to have been a founder of the ITP. So sorry to disappoint the usual suspects who love discussing the ITP and 'radicals' in the chapels etc etc.The usual suspects of Sean Romer, J Christopher Pryor,Ruth Sestak, Patti Petersen,Jeanette Pryor, Matt Anger, Chris Blosser, Peadar Laighleis. etc etc.
This is a classic. Even on Catholic Truth, Martin Blackshaw has been told several times that laity are not under obedience of Bishop Fellay. It's pointless discussing with him.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
editor
Having read the commentary on Cathinfo my advice is to ignore it. Bishop Fellay is the man in charge and he’ll do what is necessary to preserve the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre in the SSPX.
Catholic Truth and AngelQueen have shown their loyalty to the Superior General during the recent rebellion, that’s all that matters. It’s those who have shown open dissent who must now fear the consequences of their actions.
-
'spiritustempore' has ignored how I did state I was wrong to state sacraments should be denied. He also ignores the fact I am not connected to Carmel Books or IHS Press.
I just spoke to Fr Clifton at St. George's House and have no problem with Fr Morgan contacting me. I supplied a phone number.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2012/07/sspx-general-chapter-major-changes-ahead/#comments
Hello ‘John Grace’
As I’d hate to see the spirit of Cathinfo spread to this site, I will also confine myself to this last comment.
On Cathinfo yesterday, you stated “Whilst I did disagree with Ashmolean, I would still join him on a picket at an abortuary”.
The ID concerned in the disagreement with Ashmolean is well known….as is the person who uses it.
You will forgive me if I do not change my opinion as to who and what you are.
I am well aware that money spent with IHS or Carmel is money spent with political extremists with backgrounds which include the BNP, National Front, ITP and a distortion of Distributism.
I will, therefore, not make any purchases from either organisations and would encourage any other prospective customer who shares my concern about extremist influence upon the SSPX to consider doing likewise.
I was also extremely concerned to see you publicly issue threats to have Society priests withhold the Sacraments from faithful, with no good reason. Should I see further threats of this nature, I will have no hesitation in picking up the phone to Fr Morgan and forwarding him a rather thick file of posts made by you on various boards.
End of comment.
-
When is Mckeever woman going to publically demand the expulsion of the many pedophiles, perverts, theives, liars etc that are within the novu ordo?
and she and many remain silent and accomplice to sin.
It is a sin against God to persecute his good and Holy priests and people.
-
May God bless and protect Bishop Williamson.
Trust me. I know first hand what it is like to be ousted, cops called on us, ostracized. Because I was telling the people about the truth about church closings, the priest cussed me out using f word and he called cops on me and told me to not come back. *LOL* Yes, I know what it's like to be ousted and humiliated. The truth is the truth. God is truth.
I have been verbally and mentally abuse by novus ordo too. I was even suckered punch at a "catholic" function while the novus ordo condoned and encouraged it...(actually the punch was meant for my friend but I ws in the way minding my own business..)
I'm glad I'm a traditional catholic. All that mess is in the past. So, I thought..
-
When is Mckeever woman going to publically demand the expulsion of the many pedophiles, perverts, theives, liars etc that are within the novu ordo?
and she and many remain silent and accomplice to sin.
It is a sin against God to persecute his good and Holy priests and people.
To be fair she and the publication had been doing good work in Scotland. All I ask of her is to outline where Bishop Williamson has denied any doctrine or preached error?
She seemed to be a feisty fighter for all that is true but it can't be ignored how she has attempted to discredit an excellent letter signed by hundreds of people in the British District. Very strange.
-
Patricia Mckeever should be calling for the expulsion of pedophiles,pervert etc novus ordo priests.
-
It is truly a sin against God to persecute Bishop Williamson. May God bless and Protect Bishop Williamson and others who will face persecution in the future.
-
We give all love honor and obedience to God (not man)
-
When is Mckeever woman going to publically demand the expulsion of the many pedophiles, perverts, theives, liars etc that are within the novu ordo?
and she and many remain silent and accomplice to sin.
It is a sin against God to persecute his good and Holy priests and people.
To be fair she and the publication had been doing good work in Scotland. All I ask of her is to outline where Bishop Williamson has denied any doctrine or preached error?
She seemed to be a feisty fighter for all that is true but it can't be ignored how she has attempted to discredit an excellent letter signed by hundreds of people in the British District. Very strange.
that seem fair enough..