In these days we remember a real h0Ɩ0cαųst, the bombing of Dresden. On this topic the book by David Irving is recommended or a recent film docuмentary by Lady Michele Renouf. The film outlines why Britain should apologise to Germany. Both the book and film are recommended.

I mention this as truth was mentioned. I was surprised some SSPX laity stated Bishop Williamson was 'imprudent' for telling the truth in an interview. In the interview, the Bishop speaks about something being bad if it goes against truth.

It's not necessary to discuss at length the myth of the existence gas chambers and there never was a plan by Germany to kill Jєωs. This is all historical facts.

To say the Bishop was 'imprudent' goes against truth. The Bishop told the truth yet some laity could disregard truth and brand him 'imprudent'.

The great wisdom from Bishop Williamson should command our respect for him. His wisdom has brought many back to their Catholicism. Several have converted to Catholicism by the grace of God and because of the Bishop's defence of truth.

He is deserving to be called a true spiritual son of Archbishop Lefebvre. Two of the Bishops caved in. Bishop Tissier seems torn which way to act.

His interview was very good for those that seek and defend truth.

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote

Fr. Pfeiffer explained in a recent conference that +W thought the seminarians in KY are "losers," but Fr. defended them with something like this:

 So what's new about that?  We've all been losers.  Nobody is worthy to become a priest;  that much is a given.

 Another man present in the audience added, "You have to start somewhere."  -Meaning that the Resistance is just getting started, so you shouldn't expect perfection from square one, or something like that.

A few thoughts on these comments,

Father Pfieffer's comments while they are indeed charitable, are a misdirection from whether or not the candidates are actually suitable for the Catholic priesthood,  a subject upon which Bishop Williamson is much more qualified to make such a judgment.

The good Father does not address the qualities or qualifications of said applicants.

As to the lay comment, it is true that any endeavor must begin somewhere, but one such as a seminary for the priesthood should be considered only when at least a minimum standard of accommodation and physical ability by which to properly train and educate the candidates is present.

Simply finding a location and enlisting the first warm bodies who apply is neither prudent or adequate for such an enterprise.

This is also an illustration of why the Bishop does not want to lead such a group. He would have no actual control over its members as it has been shown from the beginning that they will not favor his advice or his dictates when they conflict with what they want to do and when they want to do it.

Candidates should definitely be tested and those who do not measure up should be let go.  But don't forget St. Joseph of Cupertino who was as dumb as a rock.  God gave him miraculous graces in order to pass the test and become a priest despite being an idiot.  Deo gratias!  He is a saint!

I had the same thought but I have to say that st. Joseph of Cupertino wasn't "an idiot" except in appearance. His continual ecstasies unfitted him for work and studies and we know he only passed his exams by Divine intervention. Like a book, these seminarians should not be judged by their cover. If they think they have a vocation, the worse that can happen is that they don't and be dismissed. How many young men has the SSPX pushed to the seminaries to try a vocation until proven otherwise. Just among my friends I know a great number of ex-seminarians.

Sounds like the "no true Scotsman" fallacy to me where you get to define, church, SSPX and "true faith".

Under those circuмstances it will never fail, of course, because YOU will always have it.

How could it be otherwise?

Wrong. I can define SSPX, Church and true Faith as an assembly of Micky Mouses who worship Hale-Bopp comet, but that would not make it the case. Even if I believed in such nonsense, that would not make it truly SSPX.  Even if only a remnant of SSPX stayed true to its founding (essentially Church's / Faith's preservation) by Archbishop Lefebvre, which by its very essence is truly Catholic, hence, truly the Church and Faith, and does not get swallowed up by modernists/heretics who "regularize" them, then the objective reality is they are still truly Catholic and part of the Mystical Body of Christ, regardless of whether I adhere to it or not. This truth defines itself, not any person attempting to define it. If nobody believed it, that would not make it untrue. It's still true even if nobody believed it.