CathInfo.com

Quote from: Machabees

Quote from: Novus Weirdo

Quote from: Zeitun

And I'd like to also add that the premise stated here that Bishop Williamson isn't doing his duty as a bishop is based on the ASSUMPTION of those posting that they have all the facts and the TRUTH.  I do not have any of the facts, I don't know all the truth, and +W knows much more than he is telling.  

I'm sticking with Fr. Pfeiffer.  The rest of you can start your own Resistance and elect a better leader, someone more agressive and more to your matinee-idol liking.

Excellent point.
These people want +Williamson, Fr Pfeiffer, or others to be their marionette.  When that doesn't happen, the petulance begins.  Someone reminds them that they are not in charge of Resistance priests and they regurgitate half-baked rejoinders masquerading as intelligent put-downs that sound like they come from a C-list screenwriter channeling John Hughes.

Hate to break it to 'em, but George C. Scott is dead.  There will be no new Patton, no new Churchill, no new MacArthur - "They shall not return."  And as for starting their own Resistance?  Forget about it!  They will cannibalize themselves in the process.

You are making it sound like the Holiness of the Catholic Church is dead, and God cannot lead His own Church in trying to solicit the HELP of His own consecrated BISHOP.

In the Old and New Testaments, it shows this human drama that men have free will...so too God's Bishops.

If you are trying to describe a Church in crisis without a Bishop leading it, independence is starting to set in, please be careful.

No, I was referring to this irrational cry for a Mitre'd Patton - not later, not on God's terms, but on their terms right NOW.

People are wrapped up in the romanticized  or the whooped-up version of the man and wishing that Resistance leadership took a page from the playbook.  Zeitun referenced it well with the comment of 'matinee-idol,' because many were referring to either a)the cinematic interpretation or b) a very flawed individual.

Here's a few facts about General Patton; you decide if you want + Williamson to possess a few of those particular qualities:
* GP was a fervent believer in reincarnation.  
* GP was a fatalist (no heroic virtue there).
* GP considered the Koran/Quran/whatever to be "a good book."  So you want +Williamson to go the "every religion is beautiful" route?  We have Popes for that.
* GP gave a good speech but that was only because he had difficulty reading.  Do you want a leader who cannot properly read/interpret doctrine or scripture?
* GP liked to use profanity in his speeches because the underlings liked it, but it did dismay others (such as Gen Bradley, certainly no slouch) who thought it 'unbecoming conduct'.  
* GP may have had his admirers for his courage, but he had a great many detractors for his impetuousness and his inability to function in a situation requiring judgement or skill.

So, let's review this.  A leader is wanted who can rally the troops per se but projects an uncouth, unprofessional public image with a questionable belief system.  Yeah, that has success written all over it...

Can anyone explain how that will help the Resistance?

Quote from: Machabees

BISHOPS in the Catholic Church lead.  That is what they were consecrated for.

Bishop Williamson is a BISHOP.

Therefore, Bishop Williamson must lead.  It is God's order of Holy Orders and the Episcopacy.  Not ours.

It is that simple.  Anything less is NOT Catholic -period.

And that is all true.  BUT that was not the consensus earlier in this thread.  The overwhelming opinion was that +Williamson was somehow lax in his duties because he was not 'leading' or 'fighting' according to the personal whims, demands, and/or desires of the LA-Z-Boy Regiment of the Resistance.

Has the SSPX youth
 group in Ireland outlined why it snubbed Bishop Williamson?.They arranged an outing to West Cork instead.Terrible lack of respect for the cleric chosen by God and the Archbishop.

You couldn't depend on that youth group after doing this.