Author Topic: Letter from Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson (Read 76174 times)

Caminus · « **Reply #160 on:** October 26, 2011, 08:24:09 PM »

This has got to be the best joke I've seen in a long time. Pinay hides his source and now you hide your "accident" source. What? Cat gotch'ya tongue? I thought your circle just luuuuuuvvvss to post anything that might in anyway paint Bishop Fellay in a bad light. Put up or shut up, buddy. Same goes for that pseudo-trad punk "Pinay".

Thank God Almighty this group of yours, inspired by the demons, who would gleefully see the SSPX divided and conquered, is confined to a small number of anonymous internet gossips.

John Grace · « **Reply #161 on:** October 27, 2011, 10:54:23 AM »

http://www.sspx.org/news/traditio_or_traditor-tradition_or_traitor-10-26-2011.htm

Quote

Traditio or Traditor
(tradition or traitor)?
10-26-2011
SSPX.org commentary

A website ill-named Traditio has repeatedly spread sedevacantist rumors undermining the SSPX’s activities and sowing seeds of discords around the virtual globe. Recently (on October 11) they published some comments, which would not have been worth reporting if they had not been blatant lies.

Then it turned out that at the meeting of Neo-SSPX superiors in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011, not only was the Society's senior bishop, Richard Williamson, absent, but also absent was the Society's second-senior bishop, Tissier de Mallerais, having been banished by Fellay to Kansas City, Missouri, in the United States, to preside over another one of those incessant Neo-SSPX "conferences," which are designed to keep the Neo-SSPXers in line with Fellay's policy dictates. At the meeting Fellay was attacked by several Lefebvrite superiors who told Fellay point blank that they would not "engage in compromise with the false principles of the Second Vatican Council" with the New Order sect that the Society's Archbishop-Founder condemned as "uncatholic."

It is just a little too convenient that Fellay engineered the absence of the two most senior bishops from his own "Sellout Conference" in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011. Does this mean that Fellay's two senior bishops are now in disagreement with his sellout programme to Newrome? Even though Tissier had been scheduled for the Kansas City "conference" several months in advance, he could have flown to Italy anyway -- Albano was too important to miss and to allow Fellay to propagate his Novus Ordo propaganda.
Before clarifying these statements we must take note of their recent disappearance from Traditio’s website. They were quietly expunged, but without any apology or clarification offered either to Bishop Fellay or the SSPX for their gross inaccuracy¾especially as the true facts were always available.

The first “clarification” is the group photograph of the general chapter members who were present at the Albano meeting on October 7. It was taken in front of the SSPX’s Albano priory on October 7th and published on October 10th as part of DICI’s online press release. Traditio merely had to look at the photograph to see Bishop Tissier clearly present in the picture!

If Traditio believes that the SSPX faked this picture¾published before their comments(!)¾to disprove their accusations, we would gladly provide them chapter and verse of His Excellency’s flight schedule from Rome all the way to Kansas City on Saturday, October 8th, which allowed him to participate in the tail end of the Angelus Press Conference. Mind you, we kept him busy, having to go through a Pontifical Mass, and two conferences back-to-back under jet lag conditions. To be a traditional bishop is no picnic!

Traditio seems to know a lot about the secret meeting of Albano, particularly the crunchy news of the indignation of priests adverse to Bishop Fellay and his sellout to modernist Rome. This is to be contrasted with the placid official report of Bishop Fellay who simply mentioned the unanimous front of the Society superiors at the meeting. Again, we need to ask who of the two is right? Is Traditio giving us a scoop or another lie?

This obvious flaw is just one of a long “tradition” of false rumors. In the course of the last 10 years, it has persistently predicted that the SSPX was going to give in to the Modernists. The prophet has been fooled all along! But, now it pretends that the SSPX has not given in yet thanks to the sane warning of Traditio.

This website is feeding on rumors and writers, unworthy of the publicity given them. Unfortunately, whoever goes to visit them adds his support (indirectly at least) to the "trustworthy" sedevacantist rumor mill.

The absolute liberty of the virtual press leads to many contradictory statements. But it is not quite incidental that the web surfers are all too prone to check the latest, tastiest, wickedest, piece of news, sure bate to curious readers.

“Lie, lie; something will eventually stick!” This was the motto of Voltaire who endeavored to “crush the infamous one”, the Church! Rather than let ourselves be led by the itching ears of the tale bearers, it is high time that traditional readers use their judgment. The multiplication of random information does not bring about the truth any more than one thousand idiots make one intelligent man. Erudition is nothing without wisdom.

By and large, it may not be untrue to say that the broader the media, the more superficial the message. Something to think about!

I'm not a fan of Traditio nor am I a sede but can sedevacantists really be blamed. Didn't the Society expunge material from their own websites?

The SSPX.org commentary does acknowledge that Bishop Fellay and Fr Pfluger met with resistance in Albano.Blaming 'Traditio' ain't going to work, Bishop Fellay.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #162 on:** October 27, 2011, 03:34:22 PM »

Quote

Thank God Almighty this group of yours, inspired by the demons, who would gleefully see the SSPX divided and conquered, is confined to a small number of anonymous internet gossips.

Please get ahold of yourself, young man. Take a break from the computer and go out for a walk.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #163 on:** October 27, 2011, 03:36:38 PM »

The demonic influence is seen in the sickening pride and arrogance of Bishop Fellay's cabal, and in the hysterical abusiveness of its defenders.

Diego · « **Reply #164 on:** October 27, 2011, 04:01:06 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

Put up or shut up, buddy. Same goes for that pseudo-trad punk "Pinay".

A comment at Letter from SSPX Superior General Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson linked to the report of the 'mistake' statement directly from Bp. Wiliamson to Dr. Thomas Drolesky:

Quote

October 14 Afternoon Update

Although I am working on a new article for the "vast" readership of this site, which should be posted by tomorrow morning, I did want to take a brief moment to provide you with a bit of news.

A letter that was sent to Bishop Richard Williamson by Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, has appeared at mauricepinay.blogspot.com. Although His Excellency Bishop Williamson is indeed quite aware of my own position concerning the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal, he has always been unfailingly kind to me whenever I have communicated with him. This was the case today as I sought to ascertain the authenticity of the letter.

[This corrects an earlier posting that was based upon my own misreading of His Excellency's words]: Bishop Williamson noted that the letter that has been posted is genuine. That letter, however, was sent to him by mistake, he has been told by a district superior who attended the meeting with Bishop Fellay in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011. It was at that meeting that Bishop Fellay said that the letter that Bishop Williamson received was sent by mistake, that a second letter, which does not contain the threat of expulsion from the Society of Saint Pius X, was meant to have been sent. Bishop Williamson reports that he has not received this second letter and that he has not been informed by Bishop Fellay that a "mistake" had been made.

One would presume that the that the threat of expulsion has been withdrawn as result of the information given Bishop Fellay from the district superior who attended last week's meeting. As Bishop Fellay has not communicated with Bishop Williamson directly about that he said at the district superiors' meeting last week was a "mistake," this is, obviously, just a presumption for the moment. Time will tell.

What is indisputable, it appears, is that Bishop Williamson is still under "orders" to remain "silent" and not to publish his Eleison newsletter.

Bishop Williamson also related what is publicly known: that the district superiors of the Society of Saint Pius X expressed their opposition to the proposed "doctrinal preamble" when they met with Bishop Fellay in Albano, Italy, on October 7, 2011. His Excellency was very grateful for the firmness of the district superiors....

Disclaimer: This is not a "look over here" post. Caminus asked for the source of the "accident" report. Bishop Williamson is the source. Dr. Drolesky (sede vacantist or not) is the reporter. If Bp. Wiliamson can talk to Dr. Drolesky is such detail, do not lynch me.