Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309  (Read 14546 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline s2srea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Reputation: +3823/-26
  • Gender: Male
Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
« on: June 14, 2013, 08:59:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Issue CCCIX - 309
    ASIAN JOURNEY

    A number of readers complained at the “Eleison Comments” of two weeks ago on authority being crippled. From its argument that on this side of the “imminent Chastisement” no further Catholic Congregation can be founded on a normal Catholic basis, they concluded that I believe there is nothing more for a bishop to do than to wait for God to intervene. But in that case why did I just spend two weeks in Asia, and why am I now in Ireland ? Likewise they conclude that I will never consecrate another bishop. I say – God willing – just wait.

    In fact there is a great deal for a bishop to do to visit and encourage souls striving to keep the Faith when Headquarters of the Society of St Pius X is obviously still intent upon taking it into the arms of Conciliar Rome. On June 17 Bishop Fellay wrote to Benedict XVI, “I do intend to continue to make every effort to pursue this path (of reconciliation with Rome) in order to arrive at the necessary clarifications”. And in the same vein, “Unfortunately, in the present situation of the Society” Rome’s counter-proposal of June 13 to his Doctrinal Declaration of mid-April “will not be accepted.” Then it would have been fortunate if the Society had accepted Rome’s terms ?

    Against this written evidence (made public by Headquarters) of Bishop Fellay’s on-going determination to sell out the Archbishop’s Society, we have quotes of his to the French District Superior that the “unfortunately” he only wrote “for the sake of the Pope”, and to the Carmelite Mother Superior in Belgium that he “never intended to pursue a practical agreement with Rome.” Alas, Bishop Fellay has such a track-record for adapting his words to his audience that quotes like these by no means disprove his intention to sell out the Archbishop’s Society. His astonishing ability to move the mental furniture around in his mind deserves an “Eleison Comments” all on its own, but in the meantime is it any wonder if what is coming to be called the “Resistance” is rising spontaneously all over the world ?

    Between May 24 and June 6 I visited with Fr Chazal a good part of his flock of some 400 souls, and I gave over 50 Confirmations in South Korea, the Philippines and Singapore. Fr Chazal is a character. He has brilliant insights and is very funny into the bargain. If ever you meet him, ask him to do his imitation of an Indian politician ( he says the Indians are tough, and “can take it”).

    In South Korea the Society’s change of direction caused a harsh split, with the result that the donor of the original chapel merely donated another. I had the pleasure of performing the marriage of the donor’s daughter. In the Philippines, just as I arrived, an older priest who fled the Newchurch years ago to work with the Society was fleeing the Newsociety to work with the Resistance. He looks like being entrusted with the beginnings of a seminary which Fr Chazal wants to launch, and he will in addition have his work cut out for him in centres throughout the central Philippines. In Singapore, a show-case in the East of Western-style materialism, still a good Chinese family with their friends have a firm grip on the change from the Society to the Newsociety. Truth will undermine this ExSPX, as Fr Chazal calls it, just as truth is undermining the Newchurch of the Novus Ordo.

    Here are many souls to sustain on their way to Heaven. Do I have any candidates offering themselves for consecration as bishops ?

    Kyrie eleison.

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5020
    • Reputation: +3823/-26
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #1 on: June 14, 2013, 09:03:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • All this to say....


    Bravo Bishop Williamson!!! :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:


    Offline Militia Jesu

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 216
    • Reputation: +0/-1
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #2 on: June 14, 2013, 09:19:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  I'm glad I wasn't the only one scared at the “Eleison Comments of two weeks ago on authority being crippled".

    Thank you, Your Excellency!

    Thanks also to Fr. Chazal!


    Offline AJNC

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 989
    • Reputation: +560/-41
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #3 on: June 14, 2013, 10:31:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Between May 24 and June 6 I visited with Fr Chazal a good part of his flock of some 400 souls, and I gave over 50 Confirmations in South Korea, the Philippines and Singapore. Fr Chazal is a character. He has brilliant insights and is very funny into the bargain. If ever you meet him, ask him to do his imitation of an Indian politician ( he says the Indians are tough, and “can take it”).


    ( he says the Indians are tough, and “can take it”). :sad:

    Offline Skunkwurxsspx

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 184
    • Reputation: +391/-0
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #4 on: June 14, 2013, 10:48:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ". . . Alas, Bishop Fellay has such a track-record for adapting his words to his audience that quotes like these by no means disprove his intention to sell out the Archbishop’s Society. His astonishing ability to move the mental furniture around in his mind deserves an “Eleison Comments” all on its own, . . ."

    --Bishop Williamson


    Indeed, truer words have never been spoken!

    What came to mind immediately was Fr. Daniel Themann's rather pitiful/laughable "defense" of Part III, Paragraph 7 of Bishop Fellay's April 15, 2012 doctrinal declaration that reads:

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II." (Source: The Recusant; my emphasis added)

    Any reasonable person would take the statement for what it plainly says: that the SSPX recognizes the legitimacy of the New Mass.

    Well, not according to Fr. Themann, apparently. He counters . . .

    "The accusation is that the SSPX has accepted that the New Mass is a 'legitimate form of Mass.' But in the context in which this document was issued (i.e., the constant insistence that we will never accept the New Mass and the goal of correcting the misconception that we do not really recognize the authority of popes since Vatican II), this statement merely means that the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself." (Source: Regina Coeli Report, The SSPX Falsely Accused: Resistance to What?, p. 8, "Critique #3"; my emphasis added)  

    Really?

    Why, I don't even know where to begin!!!

    So, if I'm reading this right, the following statements have a dynamic equivalence if understood under the "proper context"?

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments . . . according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II."

    . . . equals . . .

    " . . . the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself"

    This is a clear, disturbing example of the serial "mental gymnastics" that Bishop Fellay and his frantic puppets engage in at an institutional level to somehow "explain away" their clear betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre, the Society, the faithful, . . . but above all God!

    The wise words of Bishop Williamson above speak to this sad, disgusting practice.

    Why not just come out and say it right in the first place . . . that the SSPX was merely trying to recognize that Popes Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites?

    In parentheses, Fr. Themann states that it's because:

    1. We don't want to be branded as folks who "will never accept the New Mass"; and because . . .

    2. We want to correct the "misconception" that we don't "really recognize the authority of the popes since Vatican II."

    My response:

    1. So we are planning on accepting the New Mass at some point down the line?

    2. Modernist/Masonic Rome already knows precisely what we believe in. But, they nevertheless hurl the false accusations at us to put us on the defensive so that gullible fools just might fall for this age-old rhetorical trick, soften up their position, and finally fall into its palms begging for forgiveness! It's all rather simple: the perpetrator (Rome) hurls accusations at the victim (SSPX), the victim eventually buys into the repeated attacks and returns to the perpetrator begging for forgiveness. This dynamic is as sick as it is true with where Menzingen is taking the SSPX!

    By the way, I can see Fr. Themann and his puppet masters care more about image and "diplomacy" RATHER THAN THE TRUTH!!!

    My friends, this crisis is deep indeed.


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17679
    • Reputation: +8120/-609
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #5 on: June 14, 2013, 11:14:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    The list of Fr. Chazal vocabulary is growing.  


    Indultery Mass  --  the Indult that likes to step outside the confines of fidelity.

    AFD  --  the April Fifteenth Declaration a.k.a. the (Dialectical) Doctrinal Declaration.

    ExSPX  --  the neo-SSPX, a.k.a. Newsociety of St. Pius X, replaces SSPX.

    There are no doubt others that I've missed!




    When H.E. reports that Fr. Chazal says the Indians "are tough, they can
    take it," it seems to me he means that they don't mind Fr. Chazal making
    a joke of their politicians, because they're not too 'sensitive' so as to be
    'offended' at the truth of their own situation -- which implies that Liberals,
    such as those in America or England, are very much offended when their
    deplorable liberalism is joked about because they ARE thin-skinned, and
    they ARE NOT tough, because they're EFFEMINATE.



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17679
    • Reputation: +8120/-609
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #6 on: June 14, 2013, 11:22:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Militia Jesu
    I'm glad I wasn't the only one scared at the “Eleison Comments of two weeks ago on authority being crippled".

    Thank you, Your Excellency!

    Thanks also to Fr. Chazal!



    So he shook you up a little bit -- and didn't lose you!  

    So it worked.  That's good news!  



    I know others who came away saying, "It sounds like he's giving up!"  

    And it worked on them, too, because they had been rather critical of
    +W before that, but seeing the possibility that he might be bowing out
    of the scuffle actually scared them..  That's good!  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17679
    • Reputation: +8120/-609
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #7 on: June 14, 2013, 11:58:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Skunkwurxsspx
    ". . . Alas, Bishop Fellay has such a track-record for adapting his words to his audience that quotes like these by no means disprove his intention to sell out the Archbishop’s Society. His astonishing ability to move the mental furniture around in his mind deserves an “Eleison Comments” all on its own, . . ."

    --Bishop Williamson


    Indeed, truer words have never been spoken!

    What came to mind immediately was Fr. Daniel Themann's rather pitiful/laughable "defense" of Part III, Paragraph 7 of Bishop Fellay's April 15, 2012 doctrinal declaration that reads:

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II." (Source: The Recusant; my emphasis added)

    Any reasonable person would take the statement for what it plainly says: that the SSPX recognizes the legitimacy of the New Mass.




    AND that the SSPX recognizes that the Newmass was promulgated ----
    but it wasn't.  The Newmass was never promulgated nor could it have been,
    and the promoters knew that, but they lied and ACTED as IF it had been
    promulgated, with the question of legitimacy a foregone conclusion, even
    while it was an ERRONEOUS conclusion.  



    Quote
    Well, not according to Fr. Themann, apparently. He counters . . .

    "The accusation is that the SSPX has accepted that the New Mass is a 'legitimate form of Mass.' But in the context in which this document was issued (i.e., the constant insistence that we will never accept the New Mass and the goal of correcting the misconception that we do not really recognize the authority of popes since Vatican II), this statement merely means that the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself." (Source: Regina Coeli Report, The SSPX Falsely Accused: Resistance to What?, p. 8, "Critique #3"; my emphasis added)  




    "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."




    Quote
    Really?

    Why, I don't even know where to begin!!!

    So, if I'm reading this right, the following statements have a dynamic equivalence if understood under the "proper context"?

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments . . . according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II."

    . . . equals . . .

    " . . . the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself"




    Aaaaah!  The false distinction sneaks right in under the radar!  

    Yes, the popes have the right to promulgate LEGITIMATE liturgical rites,
    that is, those that have GROWN ORGANICALLY out of the RECEIVED AND
    APPROVED rites of Apostolic Tradition --- but they do NOT have ANY right
    to promulgate liturgical rites (like the NovusOrdo is) that have been
    entirely MADE UP by a bunch of heretics, apostates and even pagans,
    without regard to what has been received and approved by traditional
    praxis and observation, from what has been handed down to us from our
    forebearers in the Faith.



    Quote
    This is a clear, disturbing example of the serial "mental gymnastics" that Bishop Fellay and his frantic puppets engage in at an institutional level to somehow "explain away" their clear betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre, the Society, the faithful, . . . but above all God!

    The wise words of Bishop Williamson above speak to this sad, disgusting practice.

    Why not just come out and say it right in the first place . . . that the SSPX was merely trying to recognize that Popes Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites?

    In parentheses, Fr. Themann states that it's because:

    1. We don't want to be branded as folks who "will never accept the New Mass"; and because . . .

    2. We want to correct the "misconception" that we don't "really recognize the authority of the popes since Vatican II."

    My response:

    1. So we are planning on accepting the New Mass at some point down the line?




    Good!



    Quote
    2. Modernist/Masonic Rome already knows precisely what we believe in. But, they nevertheless hurl the false accusations at us to put us on the defensive so that gullible fools just might fall for this age-old rhetorical trick, soften up their position, and finally fall into its palms begging for forgiveness! It's all rather simple: the perpetrator (Rome) hurls accusations at the victim (SSPX), the victim eventually buys into the repeated attacks and returns to the perpetrator begging for forgiveness. This dynamic is as sick as it is true with where Menzingen is taking the SSPX!




    Okay, but you're missing the point of #2, and it's weakness.  Catholics
    recognize the authority of the popes since Vat.II (at least the non-sedes
    do)  ---  BUT, we should not erroneously allow them authority to do that
    for which they have no legitimate authority to do -- namely, to promulgate
    illegitimate liturgical rites,  OR,  to even so much as (like Paul VI did)
    act AS IF they are promulgating an illegitimate liturgical rite.  

    We're stuck on whether the so-called promulgation was legitimate or not,
    and then whether the Newmass is licit or not -- BOTH OF WHICH ARE A
    WASTE OF TIME, MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING!  

    The REAL issue is that the Newmass is an ILLEGITIMATE LITURGICAL RITE
    in the first place, REGARDLESS OF HOW it's promoted.  AND, as such, it is
    no more the STUFF of legitimate promulgation than a WOMAN is the stuff
    of a legitimate ordination!!



    That is to say, the NovusOrdo liturgy is NOT VALID

    MATTER for papal promulgation of a liturgical rite!!!!





    Quote
    By the way, I can see Fr. Themann and his puppet masters care more about image and "diplomacy" RATHER THAN THE TRUTH!!!

    My friends, this crisis is deep indeed.




    The crisis is deep, but once you see through the fog of their obfuscation,
    the depth becomes rather shallow indeed.  

    Just imagine how shallow it will be once the real Third Secret is released!
    It will suddenly turn into no more than a tiny puddle on the sidewalk.
    -- Which is precisely why the Modernists refuse to let it out of its prison cell.

    But they can't keep it there forever.  The truth will come out.



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline parentsfortruth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3820
    • Reputation: +2658/-2
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #8 on: June 15, 2013, 10:21:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Skunkwurxsspx
    ". . . Alas, Bishop Fellay has such a track-record for adapting his words to his audience that quotes like these by no means disprove his intention to sell out the Archbishop’s Society. His astonishing ability to move the mental furniture around in his mind deserves an “Eleison Comments” all on its own, . . ."

    --Bishop Williamson


    Indeed, truer words have never been spoken!

    What came to mind immediately was Fr. Daniel Themann's rather pitiful/laughable "defense" of Part III, Paragraph 7 of Bishop Fellay's April 15, 2012 doctrinal declaration that reads:

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II." (Source: The Recusant; my emphasis added)

    Any reasonable person would take the statement for what it plainly says: that the SSPX recognizes the legitimacy of the New Mass.

    Well, not according to Fr. Themann, apparently. He counters . . .

    "The accusation is that the SSPX has accepted that the New Mass is a 'legitimate form of Mass.' But in the context in which this document was issued (i.e., the constant insistence that we will never accept the New Mass and the goal of correcting the misconception that we do not really recognize the authority of popes since Vatican II), this statement merely means that the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself." (Source: Regina Coeli Report, The SSPX Falsely Accused: Resistance to What?, p. 8, "Critique #3"; my emphasis added)  

    Really?

    Why, I don't even know where to begin!!!

    So, if I'm reading this right, the following statements have a dynamic equivalence if understood under the "proper context"?

    "We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments . . . according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II."

    . . . equals . . .

    " . . . the Society recognizes that Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites. Hence, it is not a judgment on the Novus Ordo itself"

    This is a clear, disturbing example of the serial "mental gymnastics" that Bishop Fellay and his frantic puppets engage in at an institutional level to somehow "explain away" their clear betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre, the Society, the faithful, . . . but above all God!

    The wise words of Bishop Williamson above speak to this sad, disgusting practice.

    Why not just come out and say it right in the first place . . . that the SSPX was merely trying to recognize that Popes Paul VI and John Paul II had the right to promulgate liturgical rites?

    In parentheses, Fr. Themann states that it's because:

    1. We don't want to be branded as folks who "will never accept the New Mass"; and because . . .

    2. We want to correct the "misconception" that we don't "really recognize the authority of the popes since Vatican II."

    My response:

    1. So we are planning on accepting the New Mass at some point down the line?

    2. Modernist/Masonic Rome already knows precisely what we believe in. But, they nevertheless hurl the false accusations at us to put us on the defensive so that gullible fools just might fall for this age-old rhetorical trick, soften up their position, and finally fall into its palms begging for forgiveness! It's all rather simple: the perpetrator (Rome) hurls accusations at the victim (SSPX), the victim eventually buys into the repeated attacks and returns to the perpetrator begging for forgiveness. This dynamic is as sick as it is true with where Menzingen is taking the SSPX!

    By the way, I can see Fr. Themann and his puppet masters care more about image and "diplomacy" RATHER THAN THE TRUTH!!!

    My friends, this crisis is deep indeed.


    This made me dizzy when I heard it yesterday from a friend of mine that talked to Fr. Themann at our church for 3 hours. It makes me even sicker now.

    This is absurd, and entirely dishonest for him to say that "Oh this is what he -really- meant, when clearly, by the language, that statement MEANT NOTHING OF THE SORT!"
    Matthew 5:37

    But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil.

    My Avatar is Fr. Hector Bolduc. He was a faithful parish priest in De Pere, WI,

    Offline magdalena

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2047
    • Reputation: +1805/-36
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #9 on: June 15, 2013, 12:07:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No offence intended, but Bishop Williamson reminds me of a gambler.

    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/embed/Jj4nJ1YEAp4[/youtube]

    :cowboy:
    But one thing is necessary. Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her.
    Luke 10:42

    Offline magdalena

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2047
    • Reputation: +1805/-36
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #10 on: June 15, 2013, 01:12:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Check out Sean's thread on Bishop Williamson's Impromptu Conference of June 5, 2013.  It's worth listening to and hopefully clarifies the good Bishop's thoughts.  

    :incense:
    But one thing is necessary. Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her.
    Luke 10:42


    Offline magdalena

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2047
    • Reputation: +1805/-36
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #11 on: June 15, 2013, 02:02:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, maybe I shouldn't have compared +Williamson (in his Eleison Comments) to a gambler.  I was basing it on the post below.  But you have to admit that there is a game afoot in the SSPX; otherwise, why the confusion?

    Quote from: Neil Obstat
    Quote from: Militia Jesu
    I'm glad I wasn't the only one scared at the “Eleison Comments of two weeks ago on authority being crippled".

    Thank you, Your Excellency!

    Thanks also to Fr. Chazal!



    So he shook you up a little bit -- and didn't lose you!  

    So it worked.  That's good news!  

    I know others who came away saying, "It sounds like he's giving up!"  

    And it worked on them, too, because they had been rather critical of
    +W before that, but seeing the possibility that he might be bowing out
    of the scuffle actually scared them..  That's good!  
    But one thing is necessary. Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her.
    Luke 10:42

    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5516
    • Reputation: +120/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #12 on: June 15, 2013, 02:23:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • With an image of Our Lady and the pure Saint, Fr Denis Fahey to the foreground, Bishop Williamson gave two conferences today in Ireland.

    Close to a hundred people attended to welcome and hear the Bishop.What a privilege  it was to again kneel to kiss the episcopal ring of the priest chosen by God and Archbishop Lefebvre.

    Offline PatrickG

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 135
    • Reputation: +165/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #13 on: June 15, 2013, 02:32:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good, no excellent! Any hope of a video?
    Old-fashioned is good, modern is suicidal.
    - Bishop Richard N. Williamson.

    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2239/-1
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison Comments" by Mgr. Williamson - Asian Journey - 309
    « Reply #14 on: June 15, 2013, 02:34:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To the two unidentified thumbs-down folk re: My comment on EC.  I told you so!
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16