I'm curious about what KINDS of things he edited out of the original.  Do they correlate to his later conversion to Fellayism?

This brings back great memories of some of the happiest times of my life.  Thank you for posting it.  I was there about 10-12 years before this video, but I can't imagine that the neo-SSPX seminarians after Bishop Williamson's departure had anything near he experience you and I had there at STAS.

One of my favorite scenes in "Braveheart" -- because it's SO true to reality, life, and human nature -- is the scene where Steven the Irishman joins the group.

Steven sneaks a knife past the guards, threatens one of William's men, and is a bit of a crazy rogue -- he turns out to be loyal TO THE END. He starts out by saving William's life that very night.
The other dude kneels before William and says "My sword is yours" and "Here is something my wife made for you" -- then he tries to murder William Wallace that very night.

Moral of the story: not everything is what it appears. Sometimes the most gaudy shows of loyalty have the shallowest roots. Kind of like "He doth protest too much."

I didn't take any selfies with the Bishop -- but look at me. I supported +W during the 2009 German interview (and silencing by +Fellay) as well as in the earliest days of the Resistance.

Meanwhile, Sestak makes this video with himself in it, has selfies with the Bishop -- and he betrayed him in 2012 (just look at the description he added to his video on Youtube. He clearly outright censured the bishop).

If you know human nature, you COULD HAVE ALMOST PREDICTED the outcome, at least 9 times out of 10.

I understand the context when his Excellency said that it is impossible to make someone understand when they haven't formed their thinking properly. Unfortunately I have heard  clergy express that same notion with essentially, " why bother".
When you signed up for the position you did realize you were in sales?

What are you trying to say?

Saying "why bother?" certainly doesn't sound good or flattering for any cleric to say. It reeks of laziness and lack of zeal.

What the Bishop was talking about was extremely wise and true. He's saying that if your target denies objective truth, for example, then nothing you say is going to convince him that the Catholic Faith (for example) is objectively true. The target will just conclude, "If that's how you FEEL", or "That sounds like your truth."

Once a person's brain literally doesn't work -- once it rejects BASIC PRINCIPLES -- it's actually hopeless for arguing. For example, if a person believes in contradictions. Normally, there's the Principle of Non-Contradiction: "A thing cannot be and not be in the same way at the same time." How else does arguing work?

Right ... there's no tone or sense of "why bother" there.

Wasn't the official line you would hear back in the day,  the priest wouldn't get involved in polemics?

I guess Catholics will have to discover the true or falsehood of many things on their own

Looks like Pablo the Mexican (aka: Paul Hernandez) standing at the center in frames at 6:56-6:57.

https://odysee.com/@CathInfo:a/A-Tribute-to-Bishop-Williamson:3

Sure looks like him!

Looks like Pablo the Mexican (aka: Paul Hernandez) standing at the center in frames at 6:56-6:57.

https://odysee.com/@CathInfo:a/A-Tribute-to-Bishop-Williamson:3

Funny you mention that, I thought so too, but thought: no way.