This is one of the most enlightening interviews I have heard of late.

DR. E. MICHAEL JONES AND BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON - FRIENDS OF AQUINAS PODCAST (bitchute.com)

Here's the extended two-hour version:



BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON & DR. E. MICHAEL JONES - FRIENDS OF AQUINAS PODCAST - YouTube

I find this ironic considering that E. Michael Jones is anti SSPX last I checked

Thank you.  I did not know there was a 2-hour version.

Very interesting how Dr. Jones observes that at Vatican II, the Catholic Church condemned all forms of l'antisémitisme (Nostra Aetate), without ever defining what that term means. Then he observes that in the wake of overturning Roe v Wade, the Jєωs object, saying it suppresses their religious freedom (i.e., abortion is a part of the Jєωιѕн religion).  And finally, how therefore, the Church must endorse abortion, or be accused of being antisemitic.

Quite a corner the Church has backed itself into (I.e., Jєωιѕн checkmate)!

Another interesting point made by Dr. Jones is that not all Jєωs practice the religion of Moses.  There was another Jєωιѕн religion which sacrificed babies to Moloch, and it is this one which is alive today and insists anti-abortion laws are a violation of "Judaism," but it is not the religoin of Moses.

Jones also lays the blame squarely at the feet of Benedict XVI, saying that he had an audience of 2 million in Cologne shortly after his election, in which he could have challenged the Holocause narrative, but instead shose to address Islam.

Also interesting how, towards the last 8 minutes, Msgr. Williamson tries to inform Dr. Jones that the SSPX has changed, and is taking sides with the occupied Church, but Jones seems to not want to go in that direction, and changes the cubject.

Jones interviewing Williamson

It is very interesting what Msgr. Williamson says regarding the ambiguity in the new rite of episcopal consecration (at 1:16:24 - 1:18:01), and the sedevacantist accusation of invalidity.

He notes the principle significatio ex adjunctis (or as Msgr. Williamson states it, determinatio ex adjunctis), which basically says in sacramental theology "an ambiguity is settled by immediate context."  Meaning, it is conceded that "spiritus principalem" is ambiguous.  Nevertheless, the immediate context removes the ambiguity where the word bishop (episcopus) closely follows.  The conclusion therefore, is that, as the ambiguity does not survive, the form is valid.

Explaining this principle, he cites Michael Davies' book The Order of Melchisedech, which in turn cites Fr. Francis Clark in Appendix I:

"The sacramental signification of an ordination rite is not necessarily limited to one phrase or formula, but can be clearly conveyed from many parts of the rite.  These other parts could thus contribute, either individually or in combination, to determining the sacramental meaning of the operative formula in an unambiguous sense.  Thus the wording of an ordination form, even if not specifically determinate in itself, can be given the required determination from its setting (ex adjunctis) that is, from the other prayers and actions of the rite, or even from the connotation of the ceremony as a whole in the religious context of the age." 
-The Catholic Church and Anglican Orders, F. Clark, S.J.  (CTS, 1962), p.21.