Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Open Letter to Bishop Bernard Fellay ON AN "expulsion" BY BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON BE
Open letter to HE Bishop Fellay on an "expulsion"
When we close this issue (October 24) we learn that Bishop Williamson has just been officially expelled from the SSPX by Bishop Fellay. Return to this event in our next issue. Meanwhile, the press published the General House announcing the expulsion from the SSPX and the British prelate, exclusively for Rivarol, the open letter that Bishop Williamson has directed the Superior General of the Society on 19 October, and which was his willingness to appear in our weekly. Subtitles are drafting. JB.
London, October 19, 2012.
Thank you for your letter of October 4 wherein you informed me from you, the General Council and the General Chapter, the "finding", "declaration" and "decision" that I am no longer a member of the Society of Saint Pius X. The reasons you give for its decision to expel your server would be: the continued publication of its "Eleison Comments" has attacked the authorities of the fraternity has made a separate ministry, he has caused confusion among the faithful, he has supported the rebel priests, he has disobeyed formally, stubborn and "stubborn", he has separated from the fraternity he does not submit to any authority. Do all these reasons can not be summarized in disobedience? Certainly, in the course of the last twelve years, yours truly had words and actions that have been, before God, inappropriate and excessive, but I think it would be enough to point out in particular the excuse to, in truth and justice. But surely we agree that the main problem lies not in the details, which are summarized in one word: disobedience.
Then notice how many orders of principle more or less unpleasant Superior General, your server has obeyed without fail.
In 2003, he left an important ministry in the United States to go to Argentina. In 2009, he left his post as director of the seminary and left Argentina to rust in a garret in London, without word or episcopal ministry, because it was forbidden. He had no more than virtually ministry "Eleison Comments" whose refusal to suspend most of this is "disobedience" that is criticized. And since 2009, the Superior of the Brotherhood have been allowed to discredit him and revile him as much as they wanted, and around the world have encouraged every member of the fraternity who wished to do so also.
Your server has reacted very little, preferring silence to outrageous confrontations. We could also say that stubbornly refused to disobey. But let us, because the real problem is not there.
So, the real problem lies where? To answer, that the accused be allowed to do a quick look at the history of the fraternity which want to separate you.
Indeed, the central problem is long.
CATHOLICISM AND LIBERALISM
From the French Revolution of the late eighteenth century, many of the above-Christians, began to establish a new world order, conceived by the enemies of the Church to expel God from his creation. It began replacing the old regime, or holding the Altar Throne, the separation of church and state. It turned out a structure of society that is radically new and difficult for the Church, because the state, thereafter atheist, eventually oppose with all their might to the religion of God.
Indeed, the Masons want to replace the true worship of God by the worship of freedom which the neutral state religion is nothing more than a tool.
So begins in modern times a relentless war between the religion of God, defended by the Catholic Church, and the new religion of man, freed from God and liberal. These two religions are so irreconcilable as God and the devil.
We must choose between Catholicism and liberalism.
But man does not want to have to choose between the moon and the stars. Want to have both. In the wake of the Revolution, we find that invented Felicite de Lamennais liberal Catholicism, and from that moment, reconciling the irreconcilable becomes commonplace within the Church.
For 120 years, the mercy of God gave His Church a number of popes, Gregory XVI, Pius XII, who mostly were clear and remained firm, but a growing number of faithful always leaned toward independence from God and the material pleasures that liberal Catholicism greatly facilitates access them. A progressive corruption became bishops and priests, and then God will eventually allow them to choose the kind of potatoes that they preferred, namely those that appear to be Catholics but they really are liberals, who talk to the right but left acting , then characterized by contradiction, ambiguity, the Hegelian dialectic, and soon, the lie.
This is the Neo-Vatican II Church.
It could not be otherwise.
It is but a dream that can reconcile the realities that are irreconcilable.
But word of God, St. Augustine does not abandon the souls who do not want to leave it, and then He comes to the aid of the small remnant of Catholic souls who are tired of the Vatican II apostasy flabby. The raises an archbishop who resist the treachery of the conciliar prelates. Respecting the reality, not seeking to reconcile the irreconcilable, refusing to dream, this archbishop speaks with clarity, consistency and truth that makes the sheep recognize the voice of the Divine Master. The Priestly Fraternity founded to the true Catholic priests began on a small scale, but resolutely refusing conciliar errors and its foundation in the liberal Catholicism, attracts true Catholics worldwide and it is the backbone of a movement in the Church call it traditionalism.
But this movement is unbearable to the men of the Church who want neo-Catholicism replaced by liberal Catholicism.
Aided by the media and governments, they did everything to discredit, dishonor and banishing the courageous archbishop. In 1976, Paul VI suspended Divinis, in 1988, John Paul II as "excommunicated". This exasperated Archbishop sovereignly conciliar popes, because his voice really effectively ruining his pack of lies and betrayal threatening. And under his persecution, and also his "excommunication", he remains firm and with him many of the priests of the Fraternity.
This fidelity to the truth of God to get the Fraternity twelve years of inner peace and outer prosperity. In 1991, the great Archbishop died, but still for nine years, his work continues in faithfulness to the illiberal principles on which he built.
So what will the Roman council to overcome this resistance? They will change the stick for the carrot.
Since 2000, the fraternity has moved.
In 2000, a great pilgrimage of the Society for the Year of Jubilee, shown in the basilicas and the streets of Rome, mercy and power of the Fraternity. The Romans are impressed in spite of them. A cardinal bishops invited to a sumptuous breakfast at home, invitation accepted by three of them. Immediately after this breakfast apparently fraternal contacts with Rome and the fraternity that had cooled enough after twelve years, were taken up and with them the powerful seduction begins by scarlet buttons, so to speak, and the marble floors.
The contacts are turned so quickly that by the end of the year many priests and faithful of Tradition clamored for a reconciliation between the Catholic tradition and the liberal Council. This conciliation is not successful by Momente, but the language of the Headquarters of the Fraternity in Menzingen cambier starts, and in the twelve years to come will show increasingly more hostile to Rome and welcoming towards conciliar Church authorities, towards the media and his world.
And, as the reconciliation of the irreconcilable is prepared on the head of the fraternity in his body of priests and laity attitude gradually becomes more benign towards conciliar popes and the Church, to all that is worldly and liberal . After all, the modern world around us, is it as bad as they are trying to make us believe?
This advance of liberalism within the Fraternity, perceived by a minority of priests and faithful but apparently imperceptible to the vast majority, are found many in the spring of this year when, after the failure of the doctrinal discussions in the spring of 2011, the Catholic policy of "no to practical deal without doctrinal agreement" became, overnight, the liberal policy of "No to doctrinal agreement, then, practical agreement." And in mid-April, the Superior General in Rome offered as the basis of a practical agreement, an ambiguous text, openly supports this "hermeneutic of continuity" that is the recipe beloved Benedict falling precisely the Council with Tradition! "We need new thinking" tell the Superior General in mid-May to the district of Austria priests of the Fraternity. In other words, the head of the fraternity founded in 1970 to resist the new Council, the Council proposes to reconcile.
Today, she is conciliatory.
Tomorrow should be fully reconciled!
He can hardly believe that the foundation of Monsignor Lefebvre was conducted to bracket the principles on which he founded it, but that's the power of seduction of the fantasies of our world without God, modernist and liberal.
However, the reality does not let fantasies fold, and is part of the reality that you can not undo the principles of a founder without undoing its founding. A special thank founder has none of his successors have. As Padre Pio wrote to his superiors when the congregation began to "renew" as the new thought of the Council just completed:
"What are you the Boss?". The Superior General, the General Council and the General Chapter of the SSPX have wanted to retain as pet Monsignor Lefebvre, however they have a new thought passing aside the gravest reasons why he founded the Fraternity. They bring her to ruin by a betrayal least objectively, completely parallel to Vatican II. But let's be fair and not exaggerate. From the beginning of the slow decline of the fraternity, there were always priests and faithful who were clear and did what they could to resist. In the spring of this year, this resistance took some consistency and breadth, so that the General Chapter of July put at least an obstacle to the path of ralliement. But this obstacle will? You can not fear. In front of about forty priests of the Priestly Fraternity gathered in Ecône retired in September, the Superior General, referring to the Roman policy confessed: "I was wrong" Whose fault is that? "The Romans tricked me." Similarly, this spring crisis, was "a great mistrust of the fraternity," he said, which would have to "fix the facts and not just with words", but Quen is the fault? So far, his actions since September, realizing this letter of October 4, indicate that decision against the priests and lay people who have no confidence in him, his boss. After the Chapter, as before, it seems it does not support any opposition to his policy of conciliation and reconciliation.
Catholic tradition and Vatican II are irreconcilable.
And here is the reason why the Superior General to repeatedly given formal order to close the "Eleison Comments". Indeed, this "comment" has repeatedly criticized the conciliatory policy towards Roma by authorities of the fraternity, and that comment has attacked implicitly. But if in this review and these attacks have been breaches of standard of respect for their profession or their people, I ask forgiveness gladly who need it, but I think that's enough through the numbers concerning the "Comments" to verify that the criticism and attacks have been usually impersonal, because it goes far beyond just people.
As for the big problem that far exceeds people, consider the confusion that currently reigns in the Church and in the world and threatening the eternal salvation of countless souls. Is not it the duty of a bishop to identify the real roots of this confusion and to denounce them in public?
How many bishops worldwide are clear as Archbishop Lefebvre did, and get an education that corresponds to this clarity? How many of them still teach Catholic doctrine as is?
Are not they too few? So is this the time to seek to silence a bishop who does, as evidenced by the number of souls who receive the "Comment" as a lifeline? And how other bishop in particular may want to close them, he admitted that before his priests on the same big questions are left duped, and that for many years?
Similarly, if the bishop has been refractory in effect for the first time in nearly four years, an independent ministry, how can you blame accepting an invitation, independent of the fraternity, to confirm and to preach the word of truth? Is not it the role of a bishop? His word in Brazil were not "confusion" but for those who still recognized the error and evoked above.
And if it seems that after years of the Fraternity is separated, it is fair, but is separated from the fraternity that conciliatory and not founded by Archbishop Lefebvre. And if it looks like all rebellious shown exercise of authority on the part of the leaders of the Brotherhood, is also right, but only for orders going to meet the objectives for which it was founded. In fact, what other orders outside of closing the "Comments" the State has been guilty of disobedience "formal, stubborn and obstinate"? Is there any other? Archbishop Lefebvre's disobedience, it was not for the acts of authority of the Church leaders who were able to destroy the Church, his disobedience was more apparent than real. Similarly, the "disobedience" of him who has not wanted to close the "Comments" is more apparent than real.
Because history repeats itself, and the devil always comes back to the load. Just like yesterday when the Council reconcile the Catholic Church to the modern world, and today it seems that Benedict and want Superior General, the two reconciled to the Catholic tradition with the council, so tomorrow, if God does not intervene between now and then, the leaders of the Resistance seek to reconcile with Catholic Tradition and reconcile.
Bishop Fellay IS WHO SHOULD RESIGN!
In short, Lord Superior generates, you can now proceed to expel me, because my arguments certainly not persuaded, but this expulsion is more apparent than real. I am a member of the Fraternity of Monsignor Lefebvre by my commitment in perpetuity. I am one of his priests for 36 years. I am one of his bishops, like you, after almost a quarter century. This can not be crossed out by a pen stroke, and therefore, I'm a member of the fraternity, waiting.
If you had been true to its heritage and I have been remarkably unfaithful, I recognize your right to expel me happy.
Things being what they are, I hope no disrespect to his office if I suggest that for the glory of God, for the salvation of souls, the inner peace of the fraternity, and his own eternal salvation, you would do better giving as Superior General expelling me. May God's grace, the light and the strength to meet such famous act of humility and devotion to the common good of all.
As I have often done the letters I've run for years,
+ Richard Williamson.
Posted by Non Possumus at 19:20