Author Topic: His Excellency Bishop Williamson (Read 4877 times)

Francisco · « **Reply #15 on:** February 26, 2013, 09:43:59 PM »

Quote from: Catechist99

Quote from: Francisco
Catechist99, how did the Bishop seem?. In the photo you have posted his eyes look "tired". Is he generally in good health but just tired?

I would say that His Excellency may have been a bit travel weary (I would be too) but his drooping eyes are an anatomical feature rather than caused by fatigue. He was gracious to all and mixed well with everyone present. I was touched when I saw him quietly giving counsel to an young woman off away from the crowd.

He has a great dry sense of humor. I found him charming but dignified. His great stature was overwhelming to my youngest son who burst out in tears upon meeting HE.

Here is a photo I took of The Bish signing Confirmation certificates surrounded by many babies. Faces are blurred for privacy.

Good to know he's fine!. Thank you for replying.

Francisco · « **Reply #16 on:** February 26, 2013, 09:49:20 PM »

Quote from: Ethelred

Francisco, I'm pretty sure Bishop Williamson is just tired from the travel strain.

Because in the beginning of this month the good bishop was in excellent shape.
See for yourself in the following video in two parts. It shows a home fixture of the English Lion. One great hour of lecture at the London Forum :

Main part:
Extra Min:

Around the 6th minute (+/-) he gets so angry with one of the few liberals in the audience that he nearly gets into a fistfight!
What a bishop!
(Most listeners are not yet Catholic, it seems, but for sure they invite the good bishop to learn something from him, so they're open for the truth and willing to think about it! Whilst 90+ % of the so called traditional Catholics betray this good bishop.)

"Liberals are rats!"

... direct quote from the bishop during Q&A at the London Forum. Doesn't sound very tired... :-)

Thanks for this Ethelred!

Ethelred · « **Reply #17 on:** February 27, 2013, 02:36:08 AM »

Quote from: CWA

Quote from: CWA
...
~ 23:
"Do you want to go on the counter-attack?"

“yes” said by voices in audience

“Go back to almighty God! Go back to His Catholic Church!”

~40:24
“My dear friends, … proposition of common sense and faith: if you want to restore order, go back to God. Think about it; think hard and long.”

~1:02 "...that’s the lesson He’s trying to teach all of us in our rotten modern world by allowing it to get more & more & more rotten... He is saying, My dear friends, My dear children, My dear creatures …you are not going to find answers with yet another revolution; revolutions are not the way; you’ve got to come back to Me.”

compare to:

Quote
03:06 The ideal state

Just in itself the best situation is when you have the whole society which is going the same way. It also helps to unity, to peace, to everything. And of course religion is a major part in the human heart and if you are one in the religion, it helps to have this peace and I may say, well, that’s the commandment of our Lord to his Church: We have to go to all nations and teach them what our Lord said. Now, when you are in a situation which is a mixed situation, which is, let say, the reality, I would say, well, that's not the ideal but that's the situation which you are. And that's, let's say, where you have to do your job, your duty as a Christian. So you have to give this witness to the others, you must try to help them. We want everybody to have that wonderful happiness of heaven and trying to bring them to this knowledge.

Needless to ask, which one gives a clearer understanding of how to fix the terrible sickness of our poor modern world?

Yes, indeed!

Ah, well, uh, I think that I know who, I don't know which word to use there, but uh, definitely yes, and I may say, I know who you're quoting in the 2nd quote...

Clear mind, clear words.
Mishmash mind, mishmash words.

See Vatican II, see Card. Ratzinger's books, see the last SSPX general chapter, and so on.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #18 on:** February 27, 2013, 02:49:50 AM »

Quote from: Wessex

An interesting similarity developing here with regard to the validity of confirmations.

The Society would enter mainstream dioceses because conciliar confirmations were flawed.

The bishop is continuing with this practice independently of the Society because he now regards confirmations conducted by the other three bishops questionable in view of their adherence to a new liberal agenda.

I'm not doubting you, Wessex, but I'd like to know: when did you hear him
explain this judgment? I would like to have the answer without any fuzziness,
because I need to be prepared since I know the people to whom I speak are
going to demand it of me: "Where did you get that?" And I would have to
reply honestly, that I read it on the Internet. And their rejoinder would no
doubt be: "Well there you go -- more Internet rumors!" I hope you know
what I'm saying here.

I know that's what they'll say, because they have said it on numerous
occasions over the past year. I don't want to alienate them, and they seem to
not want to alienate me. When I come prepared with good and reliable
information that I can back up with sources, not just "the Internet," then they
are willing to listen.

I believe that the question of "invalid Confirmations" is going to get their
attention in a heartbeat, because it is the kind of thing they would NEVER have
thought of on their own. I have been thinking about it, on MY own, but I have
not seen it mentioned yet, until I read this post of yours!

The problem is, Form, Matter and Intention. So to be invalid, the "other 3"
would have to be introducing a defect in one of those areas. It wouldn't be
Form, for they are validly consecrated bishops, using the proper words. It
wouldn't be Matter, because they are using the proper Holy Chrism and
giving it the proper application on the forehead. So that leaves Intention.

In the case of Baptism, NovusOrdo or even Protestant Baptism's validity
rests on the point of the minister intending to do what the Church teaches.
So, is this where the defect would be - that "their adherence to a new, liberal
agenda" makes their intention questionable? And if so, how then is the
Sacrament of Confirmation subject to more rigorous proofs than is the
Sacrament of Baptism? Is it that Baptism is essential for salvation -- but
Confirmation is not, so then it becomes more easily invalidated?

Specifically, when did +W tell someone that "he now regards confirmations
conducted by the other three bishops questionable in view of their adherence
to a new liberal agenda"?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #19 on:** February 27, 2013, 03:20:50 AM »

I just have one comment here:

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: CWA
Quote from: CWA
...
~ 23:
"Do you want to go on the counter-attack?"

“yes” said by voices in audience

“Go back to almighty God! Go back to His Catholic Church!”

~40:24
“My dear friends, … proposition of common sense and faith: if you want to restore order, go back to God. Think about it; think hard and long.”

~1:02 "...that’s the lesson He’s trying to teach all of us in our rotten modern world by allowing it to get more & more & more rotten... He is saying, My dear friends, My dear children, My dear creatures …you are not going to find answers with yet another revolution; revolutions are not the way; you’ve got to come back to Me.”

compare to:

Quote
03:06 The ideal state

Just in itself the best situation is when you have the whole society which is going the same way. It also helps to unity, to peace, to everything. And of course religion is a major part in the human heart and if you are one in the religion, it helps to have this peace and I may say, well, that’s the commandment of our Lord to his Church: We have to go to all nations and teach them what our Lord said. Now, when you are in a situation which is a mixed situation, which is, let say, the reality, I would say, well, that's not the ideal but that's the situation which you are. And that's, let's say, where you have to do your job, your duty as a Christian. So you have to give this witness to the others, you must try to help them. We want everybody to have that wonderful happiness of heaven and trying to bring them to this knowledge.

Needless to ask, which one gives a clearer understanding of how to fix the terrible sickness of our poor modern world?

Yes, indeed!

Ah, well, uh, I think that I know who, I don't know which word to use there, but uh, definitely yes, and I may say, I know who you're quoting in the 2nd quote...

Clear mind, clear words.
Mishmash mind, mishmash words.

See Vatican II, see Card. Ratzinger's books, see the last SSPX general chapter, and so on.

Why go and spoil a good thing by introducing The ideal state: the nonsense of +Fellay
into the mix? I know, I know: Clear mind, clear words. -- Mishmash mind,
mishmash words. -- See Vatican II, see Card. Ratzinger's books, see the last
SSPX general chapter, and so on. I guess we should have this stuff on hand to
explain it. I just wish the Church could get back to normal so we don't have to
keep wallowing in the mire with the swine who dwell there.

Corn cob, anyone? It's 'roughage'!

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #20 on:** February 27, 2013, 06:34:41 AM »

Quote from: Wessex

An interesting similarity developing here with regard to the validity of confirmations. The Society would enter mainstream dioceses because conciliar confirmations were flawed. The bishop is continuing with this practice independently of the Society because he now regards confirmations conducted by the other three bishops questionable in view of their adherence to a new liberal agenda.

But what does that have to do with proper form, matter, and intent?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #21 on:** February 27, 2013, 11:31:43 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Quote from: Wessex
An interesting similarity developing here with regard to the validity of confirmations. The Society would enter mainstream dioceses because conciliar confirmations were flawed. The bishop is continuing with this practice independently of the Society because he now regards confirmations conducted by the other three bishops questionable in view of their adherence to a new liberal agenda.

But what does that have to do with proper form, matter, and intent?

Apparently Wessex was coming from the , where, at minute
14:00 H.E. explains that the problem has shifted. It is not now a question of validity
alone, but rather that the sacrament is being given by the other 3 in the context of
the Society making improper accommodations with false religion, since there is far
too much evidence of that recently in what has been going on. And +W is coming
to provide the sacrament in the proper context because the Faithful have requested
his help.

I might go so far as to take it one step further, and that is, IMHO, +W is showing
the Society that he's 'not just whistling Dixie', he's prepared to provide Confirmation
or whatever else a bishop does in the event the the Menzingen-denizens keep up
their campaign of subterfuge, for it is their doing to depart from the principles that
have been handed down to us from ABL, and it will have to be their doing to return to
the Faith by reversing this pernicious course of conciliarism. IOW, a 'shot across the
bow' saying, it is your choice, it is your doing, so don't complain to me.

Fix your own problem (as it were) and I'll be here when you come around (he may say).

Frances · « **Reply #22 on:** March 13, 2013, 12:25:28 AM »

In 2005 H. E. took the trouble of speaking wth me, a fallen away Catholic for 36 years. A week later I returned to the Faith. Bishop Williamson is a holy man of God who truly cares for souls.