Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)  (Read 4261 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15060
  • Reputation: +10006/-3162
  • Gender: Male
Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
« Reply #45 on: October 01, 2023, 07:15:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, it was Bishop Williamson's own words.  See what he says about "common sense":

    Dear Sean,

    It is clear and repeated denial of true scientific evidence which renders anyone guilty of one of the unforgivable sins against the Holy Ghost. Let anybody in doubt look them up.

    Common sense says that precious gifts of God should hardly be handed out to people hardly able to appreciate reality.

    God bless, BpW.

    Except that:

    1) +Williamson gives holy oils to many priests who probably don't believe in various alleged Eucharistic miracles;

    2) Fr. Hewko is the only recipient of this judgmentt by +Williamson (which really means its really just an excuse not to give Fr. Hewko oils, for other well known reasons).
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2361
    • Reputation: +1528/-91
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #46 on: October 01, 2023, 09:09:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Remember that Bishop Williamson used to publicly teach that the New Mass is always illicit.


    Bishop Williamson still believes the New Mass is illicit, the debate that has been going is whether it is valid and if so, can one receive Grace from it. 


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46264
    • Reputation: +27221/-5037
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #47 on: October 01, 2023, 10:28:38 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yeah, that was more from Loudestmouth's magical world of make believe, where he tried to create yet another position for +Williamson.  Thoroughly refuted throughout (at least for anyone with any common sense).

    You've refuted nothing with your stream of personal insults and slurs.

    What Bishop Williamson is saying is very clear from his text.

    NOM is to be avoided only because of the danger it poses to faith, i.e. per accidens even though per se it's acceptable.  Most Traditional Catholics disagree.  At that point, there's no reason one can't assist at one of those "reverent" NOMs, such as I've seen that might be confused by the casual observer as a Tridentine Mass, where you have the Mass offered in Latin, accompanied by Traditional Gregorian chant, where people receive Holy Communion kneeling, everyone is modestly dressed, and the women wear veils.  Such implementations of the NOM pose no danger to the faith, especially if the priest is orthodox and gives Catholic sermons.

    This is similar to the old "occasion of sin" perspective.  If someone such as the woman who famously asked him at one of his conferences believes that it would strengthen and nourish her faith rather than undermine it, then there's no problem assisting at the NOM.  I could assist at the NOM because, despite what Matthew said, my faith is not impacted by the NOM, even if most implementations of it would turn my stomach.

    No, the NOM is intrinsically bad and displeasing to God.  It's a sacrilege and a blasphemy in and of itself, since it implements changes nearly identical to those of Cranmer, and would probably be acceptable to Luther.  It replaced the Catholic Offertory (which Luther despised with a passion) with a тαℓмυdic table prayer, which in and of itself is a sacrilege.

    NOM is also the expression of a false religion.  While Eastern Orthodox have Traditional Liturgies, one cannot attend those either (even if they pose danger to the faith), because they're the Mass of a false religion.

    So the NOM is all of these, a sacrilege in and of itself, an embracing of Protestantism, and the public worship of a false religion, the Conciliar religion.

    At that point, why can't I just go to daily Liturgy at an Eastern Orthodox church, since I would be nourished by the Sacraments, and there would be no danger to my faith.  Many of these in fact are conducted in foreign languages, so I wouldn't even be able to understand a bad sermon.  When I used to go to Ukrainian Catholic Liturgies, they were conducted in Ukrainian, so I had no idea what they were saying, and the same would be true of many Orthodox venues.  In fact, since evidently sacrilege isn't important, I could assist at a Black Mass.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46264
    • Reputation: +27221/-5037
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #48 on: October 01, 2023, 10:34:19 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Williamson:
    Quote
    All that the scientific evidence has done is to prove beyond all possible doubt that transubstantiation really did happen at the Mass where the miracle took place.

    Despite Johnson's allegation that the possibility of the devil simulating these miracles may have crossed +Williamson's mind at some point, with this statement he's ruling it out as a possibility, claiming that the purported "scientific evidence" along proves the validity of the NOM "beyond all possible doubt."

    In other words, he's saying that diabolical simulation is not "possible".  Based on what, Bishop Williamson?  Explain how the devil cannot simulate such phenomena.  Simple fact is that he CANNOT explain it and cannot rule it out, but ignores the possibility, and I doubt Johnson's gratuitous assertion that it even crossed his mind, much less that he thoughtfully considered the question.  But the bottom line is that with this latest proclamation, he declares that it's not possible.  Utter hogwash.

    Sloppy logic and sloppy reasoning.  And with statements like the above, there's no doubt that some will take that as a license to attend the NOM and receive the Sacraments in the false Conciliar religion ... if they have determined that it would not endanger their faith.

    Unfortunately, many R&R float from one artificial "rule of faith" to the next, with Stubborn here upholding Father Wathen as his rule of faith, others Archbishop Lefebvre (or, rather, their interpretation of what Archbishop Lefebvre said or believed, very often distorted and wrong), and now Bishop Williamson.  These men are not infallible and not to be upheld as rules of faith.  Bishop Williamson would be better served by some of his "followers" respectfully disagreeing with him and bringing to his attention that he should consider the possibility of diabolical intervention and should also ponder the question of whether the NOM is offensive to God and a sacrilege per se and not just per accidens due to harm it might do to faith.  NOM is a Protestantized bastardization of the Catholic Mass and if that's the case, as +Lefebvre affirmed, then it's a sacrilege.  We cannot assist at sacrilegious Masses even if they pose no danger to our faith.  Simply imagine assisting at a valid Black Mass to consider whether it's acceptable or pleasing to God.

    Marie Julie Jahenny, the one private revelation that Bishop Williamson has apparently rejected, reported that Our Lord referred to the NOM as "odious" to him and containing "words from the abyss."

    Valtorta, whom even Father Mitch Pacwa of EWTN rejects as a psychologically disturbed individual and whose work Rome denounced at one point as a "badly fictionalized account" of Our Lord's life, yes, but Marie Julie Jahenny, a completely Traditional stigmatist who was endorsed by numerous miraculous phenomena that were endorsed by "scientific evidence," nah.

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 797
    • Reputation: +238/-79
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #49 on: October 01, 2023, 10:53:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Williamson still believes the New Mass is illicit, the debate that has been going is whether it is valid and if so, can one receive Grace from it.

    Bishop Williamson does not believe that the New Mass is ALWAYS illicit.  As Ladislaus wrote, "NOM is to be avoided only because of the danger it poses to faith, i.e. per accidens even though per se it's acceptable."  This is what Bishop Williamson believes. 


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #50 on: October 01, 2023, 10:57:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You've refuted nothing with your stream of personal insults and slurs.

    What Bishop Williamson is saying is very clear from his text.

    NOM is to be avoided only because of the danger it poses to faith, i.e. per accidens even though per se it's acceptable.  Most Traditional Catholics disagree.  At that point, there's no reason one can't assist at one of those "reverent" NOMs, such as I've seen that might be confused by the casual observer as a Tridentine Mass, where you have the Mass offered in Latin, accompanied by Traditional Gregorian chant, where people receive Holy Communion kneeling, everyone is modestly dressed, and the women wear veils.  Such implementations of the NOM pose no danger to the faith, especially if the priest is orthodox and gives Catholic sermons.

    This is similar to the old "occasion of sin" perspective.  If someone such as the woman who famously asked him at one of his conferences believes that it would strengthen and nourish her faith rather than undermine it, then there's no problem assisting at the NOM.  I could assist at the NOM because, despite what Matthew said, my faith is not impacted by the NOM, even if most implementations of it would turn my stomach.

    No, the NOM is intrinsically bad and displeasing to God.  It's a sacrilege and a blasphemy in and of itself, since it implements changes nearly identical to those of Cranmer, and would probably be acceptable to Luther.  It replaced the Catholic Offertory (which Luther despised with a passion) with a тαℓмυdic table prayer, which in and of itself is a sacrilege.

    NOM is also the expression of a false religion.  While Eastern Orthodox have Traditional Liturgies, one cannot attend those either (even if they pose danger to the faith), because they're the Mass of a false religion.

    So the NOM is all of these, a sacrilege in and of itself, an embracing of Protestantism, and the public worship of a false religion, the Conciliar religion.

    At that point, why can't I just go to daily Liturgy at an Eastern Orthodox church, since I would be nourished by the Sacraments, and there would be no danger to my faith.  Many of these in fact are conducted in foreign languages, so I wouldn't even be able to understand a bad sermon.  When I used to go to Ukrainian Catholic Liturgies, they were conducted in Ukrainian, so I had no idea what they were saying, and the same would be true of many Orthodox venues.  In fact, since evidently sacrilege isn't important, I could assist at a Black Mass.

    Lots of words; nothing new; refuted above.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #51 on: October 01, 2023, 10:58:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Williamson:
    Despite Johnson's allegation that the possibility of the devil simulating these miracles may have crossed +Williamson's mind at some point, with this statement he's ruling it out as a possibility, claiming that the purported "scientific evidence" along proves the validity of the NOM "beyond all possible doubt."

    In other words, he's saying that diabolical simulation is not "possible".  Based on what, Bishop Williamson?  Explain how the devil cannot simulate such phenomena.  Simple fact is that he CANNOT explain it and cannot rule it out, but ignores the possibility, and I doubt Johnson's gratuitous assertion that it even crossed his mind, much less that he thoughtfully considered the question.  But the bottom line is that with this latest proclamation, he declares that it's not possible.  Utter hogwash.

    Sloppy logic and sloppy reasoning.  And with statements like the above, there's no doubt that some will take that as a license to attend the NOM and receive the Sacraments in the false Conciliar religion ... if they have determined that it would not endanger their faith.

    Unfortunately, many R&R float from one artificial "rule of faith" to the next, with Stubborn here upholding Father Wathen as his rule of faith, others Archbishop Lefebvre (or, rather, their interpretation of what Archbishop Lefebvre said or believed, very often distorted and wrong), and now Bishop Williamson.  These men are not infallible and not to be upheld as rules of faith.  Bishop Williamson would be better served by some of his "followers" respectfully disagreeing with him and bringing to his attention that he should consider the possibility of diabolical intervention and should also ponder the question of whether the NOM is offensive to God and a sacrilege per se and not just per accidens due to harm it might do to faith.  NOM is a Protestantized bastardization of the Catholic Mass and if that's the case, as +Lefebvre affirmed, then it's a sacrilege.  We cannot assist at sacrilegious Masses even if they pose no danger to our faith.  Simply imagine assisting at a valid Black Mass to consider whether it's acceptable or pleasing to God.

    Marie Julie Jahenny, the one private revelation that Bishop Williamson has apparently rejected, reported that Our Lord referred to the NOM as "odious" to him and containing "words from the abyss."

    Valtorta, whom even Father Mitch Pacwa of EWTN rejects as a psychologically disturbed individual and whose work Rome denounced at one point as a "badly fictionalized account" of Our Lord's life, yes, but Marie Julie Jahenny, a completely Traditional stigmatist who was endorsed by numerous miraculous phenomena that were endorsed by "scientific evidence," nah.

    A bunch more words; nothing new; still refuted above.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline St Giles

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1432
    • Reputation: +739/-158
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #52 on: October 01, 2023, 11:28:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • A bunch more words; nothing new; still refuted above.
    By that description I knew who you were talking about without looking.
    "Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect."
    "Seek first the kingdom of Heaven..."
    "Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account for it in the day of judgment"


    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9239
    • Reputation: +9076/-870
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #53 on: October 01, 2023, 11:48:57 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Show me where, Sean.  He's repeatedly stated that their authenticity is certain based on "scientific evidence", never once having mentioned that the devil could conceivably simulate the "evidence".

    HE, being a former Anglican, educated in English literature and music, has many talents.

    But lecturing on the authenticity of "science" is not one of them.

    In high school General Science 101, students are taught that scientific experimental results are considered valid if the conditions, equipment, methods and materials used are reproducible and provide similar results, by others anywhere in the world.

    For example, in the 1980's we saw masonic Brit scientists declare that carbon dating of the Holy Shroud of Turin proved the cloth originated from the middle ages. 

    After reviewing their rigged scientific methodology of carbon dating only the "repair threads" sewn by Catholic Nuns after a fire,  their methodology and test results were proven to be a fraud.

    So, how about getting the SSPX scientist/priest, Fr. Paul Robinson involved to run independent trad-lab tests on the Eucharistic Miracle?

    It could prove interesting and maybe he'd have enough material to write another book. 

    :popcorn:
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1158
    • Reputation: +489/-94
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #54 on: October 01, 2023, 12:00:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Marie Julie Jahenny, the one private revelation that Bishop Williamson has apparently rejected, reported that Our Lord referred to the NOM as "odious" to him and containing "words from the abyss."


    For the record:    


    Marie-Julie Jahenny on the Second (Novus Ordo) Mass

    Ecstasy July 21, 1881

    "The Church will suffer the most cruel persecutions which hell has never yet invented.

    "Soon, in large parts of this land of the dead, there will be no sanctuaries. The apostles will have fled. The holy souls weep over the ruins and abandonment; See how much they insult Me and how much they offend Me ... There will be a relentless hellish (attack) against the devotion to the Sacred Heart. "

    "There will be a book of the 'second celebration' by the infamous spirits who have crucified Me anew and who await the reign of a new Messiah to make them happy. Many holy priests will refuse this book sealed with the words of the abyss, but unfortunately there are who will accept it, and it will be used."

    "The Bishops betray. They will give their strength and their life to the fatal government."

    "Today, I, Creator, God, I lose all the authority of My Powers. Today, I am the most despised and regarded as the most incapable of men."

    "In a short time, on the threatened earth that is no longer strong, because the blasphemies that have shaken it, the iniquities and crimes have separated it piece by piece, in a short time on French soil, I will no longer be recognized; My adorable dignity will be desecrated. They will (do more to Me than on the day of My Passion); (then) they had given Me anything but a scarlet robe. Before the century is over, long before, they will have covered Me in all sorts of insults. The religion that I had established, the Gospel that I preached, all this, they will tear apart under an appalling form, to make trembling, and they will throw all these infamous things on My shoulders and all over My Adorable Body. They will change My sufferings and My plaints of My Passion, in writings that will shake the heart of the righteous and their peaks will crack pain, as the mountain, on the day of My Crucifixion. Before the year which bears a figure of consolation to My French people, before that epoch is sounded, the holy sacrifices of the altars will have taken an infernal form."

    "In the streets, in cities, in the countryside and in all villages, the infectious poison of those cursed books will spread with an immensity and with a rapidity hotter than the sun's path, from sunrise to sunset."



    Ecstasy date November 27, 1901. (NOTE: Other sources say this prophecy was given in 1902)

    Our Lord to Marie-Julie Jahenny:

    “I give you a warning even today. The disciples who are not of My Holy Gospel are now in a great work of the mind to form as the second facsimiles when they will make to their idea and under the influence of the enemy of souls, a Mass that contains words odious in My sight.

    When the fatal hour arrives when they will put to the test the Faith of My eternal priesthood, it is these sheets that they will give to celebrate in this last period. The first period, it is that of My priesthood which exists since (or after) Me. The second, is the period of persecution when the enemies of the Faith and of Holy Religion have formulated - and they are strongly enforced - these sheets as the book of the second celebration, these infamous spirits (or, infamous minds) are those who crucified Me and who are waiting for the reign of the new Messiah to make them happy."

    "Many of My holy priests will refuse this book sealed with the words of the abyss. Unfortunately, (they) will be the exception, it will be used."

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9239
    • Reputation: +9076/-870
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #55 on: October 01, 2023, 12:19:27 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • For the record:   


    Marie-Julie Jahenny on the Second (Novus Ordo) Mass

    Ecstasy July 21, 1881


    "The Bishops betray. They will give their strength and their life to the fatal government."

    Darn interesting  :cowboy: 
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46264
    • Reputation: +27221/-5037
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #56 on: October 01, 2023, 02:48:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Darn interesting  :cowboy:

    Yes, according to Jahenny, this new rite will be odious, infernal, sealed with words of the abyss, and put in place by the Jews.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46264
    • Reputation: +27221/-5037
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #57 on: October 01, 2023, 02:57:55 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, how about getting the SSPX scientist/priest, Fr. Paul Robinson involved to run independent trad-lab tests on the Eucharistic Miracle?

    And even this doesn't suffice, as the devil is easily capable of simulating such "miracles," transporting flesh and blood to the hosts, sustaining it and/or swapping it out on a regular basis, and/or rigging (tampering with) any test results.

    That's why the Church's #1 criterion for evaluating "miracles" is orthodoxy, and then, when it comes to seers at least, the personal virtue of the alleged seer.

    I don't believe for a second that God would work a genuine miracle that gives the false impression, and misleads souls into believing, that the NOM does not displease God and that it is acceptable to Him.  We see this play out right here with Bishop Williamson now defending the intrinsic acceptability of assisting at the NOM, and the extrinsic considerations of harming the faith comes almost exclusively from the accidents of how it's "offered".  If a priest uses Canon I (almost identical to the Tridentine), says the NOM in Latin, dresses it up with Gregorian chant and incense, has the faithful kneel to receive Holy Communion only on the tongue, has the people dress modestly and the women wear veils, restores the tabernacle to the center of the altar, offers the NOM ad orientem, and gives orthodox sermons, the harm is negligible.  In fact, there's zero reason then to not go to Motu Masses or even NOMs "performed" in this manner.  I've seen some of them on EWTN, and I knew one priest in Chicago and another in Cleveland who offered the NOM exactly as described.  After all, the faithful aren't exactly reading and acquainted with the General Instruction that butchers the definition of the Mass.  So we're fighting merely the "abuses" in celebrating the NOM?  Let's say another Ratzingerian "pope" comes around and orders the NOM to be celebrated in this manner.  Does that put an end to the Traditional movement?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46264
    • Reputation: +27221/-5037
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #58 on: October 01, 2023, 03:02:17 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Williamson does not believe that the New Mass is ALWAYS illicit.  As Ladislaus wrote, "NOM is to be avoided only because of the danger it poses to faith, i.e. per accidens even though per se it's acceptable."  This is what Bishop Williamson believes.

    That's clear from what he wrote, Sean's one- or two-word gratuitous dismissals notwithstanding.  "refuted above", "gαy", and "super gαy", along with a personal attack against me does not constitute a refutation.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - Bad Shepherds (no. 846)
    « Reply #59 on: October 01, 2023, 03:19:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Except that:

    1) +Williamson gives holy oils to many priests who probably don't believe in various alleged Eucharistic miracles;

    2) Fr. Hewko is the only recipient of this judgmentt by +Williamson (which really means its really just an excuse not to give Fr. Hewko oils, for other well known reasons).

    Lad requested this bump^^^
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."