Author Topic: Posting wake photos disrespectful? (Read 8822 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #15 on:** February 26, 2025, 11:48:05 AM »

Yes, it does highlight the injustices done to the Bishop, both in life and in death.

One of the individuals in question said that those who hated Bp. Williamson rejoice thanks to these photos of his wake.

Sure, they are rejoicing that Bp. Williamson has been taken out of this world. But the wake photos really don't add much to that satanic "joy". We can't stop children of the demon from continuing on in their wickedness. If the children of the Wicked One rejoice that a servant of God is no longer on the battlefield, there's nothing we can do to stop them.

But reality is reality. What, by censoring and memory-holing the wake then Bp. Williamson isn't really dead? So we can all pretend he's still alive or something?

One cannot get more opposed to the mind of Bp. Williamson himself.

On a related note, the same individual doesn't believe CathInfo is legit either. In other words, he thinks any public forum that isn't preemptively moderated (every post must be approved by the moderator before it appears on the forum) is not consonant with Catholic morality. He holds the extreme and unique position that slander, etc. is such a grave thing that one can't even take the risk having it appear for minutes until the moderator gets to it. Basically every forum on the Internet is bad.

I hate to break it to him, but "pre-emptively moderated forums" just aren't a thing. You can't have discussions that way. It just doesn't work.

Oh, and Bp. Williamson explicitly gave his blessing to CathInfo. So there's that. And I haven't heard any complaints from any of the other Resistance bishops either. It's not like this is a new forum. It's been around for 19 years. And I can tell you this individual is the only Traditional Catholic (I can remember) to bring forward this curious argument.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #16 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:03:45 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on February 26, 2025, 11:48:05 AM

One of the individuals in question said that those who hated Bp. Williamson rejoice thanks to these photos of his wake.

Ah, so this confirms my speculation above as to why they want it taken down. Let the wicked rejoice ... they'll either have to repent or else will get theirs in the end.

Of course, Our Lord suffered the most ignominious of deaths also and had to be buried in someone else's tomb, so Bishop Williamson is just following Him in that regard. Similarly glorious will be his vindication ... analogous to Our Lord's glorification in the end.

I saw this little docuмentary about a grave they found believed to be that of the wicked Caiaphas. It was crumbling apart and there were literally homeless vagabonds keeping animals in there and letting them excrete in Caiaphas' tomb, as he's forgotten for all but the ignominy of having instigated the Deicide. Meanwhile, not far way we see the Church of the Holy Sepuchre, which 2000 years later still receives, what?, 100,000 visitors per year ... while sheep are taking dumps in Caiaphas's run-down tomb.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #17 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:10:19 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 26, 2025, 12:03:45 PM

Meanwhile, not far way we see the Church of the Holy Sepuchre, which 2000 years later still receives, what?, 100,000 visitors per year ... while sheep are taking dumps in Caiaphas's run-down tomb.

So just looked it up ... Church of the Holy Sepulchre gets over a million visitors per year ...

Giovanni Berto · « **Reply #18 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:11:02 PM »

Even Popes were buried on the catacombs. His Excellency is having a very modest wake and funeral because he did the right thing. It is a kind of honor to be persecuted even after death because you had the courage to say the truth.

This is actually a good thing for people to see. It is symbolic in a way of how courageous he was during his whole life. The contrast with Huonder's funeral makes it even more honorable and shows how wicked the SSPX leadership has become and that Bp. Williamson was right all along.

The Church has always been proud of the martyrs buried in the catacombs.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:13:35 PM »

oh, and here's the one for Annas ...

Meanwhile ...

Ladislaus · « **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:14:35 PM »

Quote from: Giovanni Berto on February 26, 2025, 12:11:02 PM

Even Popes were buried on the catacombs. His Excellency is having a very modest wake and funeral because he did the right thing. It is a kind of honor to be persecuted even after death because you had the courage to say the truth.

Of course. Our Lord received greater glory by far due to receiving the Crown of Thorns than He would have by receiving the most expensive gold crown adored with every manner of precious jewel.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #21 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:33:23 PM »

Quote

Meanwhile, for Huonder

The new-sspx mourns the loss of a quasi-material-V2-supporting heretic. They criticized +W and +Vigano openly. Their "Trad badge" is revoked.

Geremia · « **Reply #22 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:56:26 PM »

Memento mori.

OABrownson1876 · « **Reply #23 on:** February 26, 2025, 12:58:28 PM »

Huonder was consecrated by a Novus Ordo bishop in 2007; and bishop Grab (consecrator) was consecrated in 1987. There are so many red flags with Huonder everybody on Cathinfo should throw a red flag. Huonder is just confirmation of the fact that the SSPX has gone completely overboard on the New Sacraments bandwagon.

nonpossumus · « **Reply #24 on:** February 26, 2025, 01:23:05 PM »

This is still as timely as ever in comparison between Huonder and +Williamson:

BISHOPS DYING OUT ?
16 April, 2024respicestellam

ELEISON COMMENTS DCCCLXXIV (April 13, 2024) : BISHOPS DYING OUT ?
Last autumn I received the following letter, only slightly shortened below, from a former colleague, still a priest of the SSPX (perhaps because he may be more of a threat to them from outside than he is from inside the Newsociety, so long as he continues to respect their authority). May God be with Bishop Huonder, who died before the lines below were published. One may think he was less cunning than the villains who instrumentalised him.
The Priestly Society of St Pius X, from what it was for 21 years under Archbishop Lefebve (1970-1991) has become very liberal, and from the top downwards has in fact since 2012 abandoned the course that he set. To call it today the „Newsociety“ is to bring the name in line with the reality. Alas. And I think all the problems of this „Newsociety“ have for a moment come to a head with Bishop Huonder.
1. He was ordained priest and bishop with the new rites of Ordination and Consecration respectively. This fact is no longer seen as a problem in the Newsociety. An appeal that he should let himself be conditionally reordained and reconsecrated unfortunately had no effect. The Newsociety has abandoned the Church‘s classic principle of „tutiorism“, namely taking the certainly valid course whenever there is the least serious doubt as to the validity of sacraments being received, as there is with Newchurch bishops‘ Consecrations, if not also priests‘ Ordinations.
2. Bishop Huonder does criticise – half-heartedly – Pope Francis, Vatican II and the New Mass. And this is enough for a large proportion of our Newsociety layfolk to be calling him „Our man, our bishop“. But in fact he has never clearly condemned either Vatican II (Revolution in the Catholic Church) or the New Mass (the Luther Mass). Bishop Huonder told one person that he celebrates the New Mass with dignity, that he sees it as an altogether worthy form of Mass. This shows clearly how he means to reconcile the old Mass with the Newchurch, wholly in the spirit of Pope Benedict XVI, but in absolute contrast to the late Archbishop Lefebvre.
3. In his lectures Bishop Huonder openly admits that he still has the task of bringing the Newsociety under Rome. He is therefore an infiltrated agent of Pope Francis. Just as Pope Francis by legitimising Newsociety Confessions, then Marriages, then Ordinations, used salami tactics over three successive years (2015-2017) to draw the Newsociety into the Moloch Newchurch, so Bishop Huonder is setting himself exactly the same task. And just as the Newsociety Superiors at the official legitimising of their Confessions and Ordinations and Marriages cried out towards Rome, „Oh, Holy Father, we thank you!“, so too our Superiors are now being inspired by Bishop Huonder, and are rejoicing that a Newchurch bishop has found his way to the Newsociety, and by living in one of our houses is openly joining the Newsociety, like a submarine. How blind our Superiors have become.
4. Bishop Huonder wrote his Doctoral thesis on a Jєωιѕн problem of the Middle Ages. Bishop Huonder introduced into the Swiss Church a Day for Jews. Not one member of the Newsociety seems to have asked if the bishop‘s relationship to the Jews corresponds to the Catholic Church‘s traditional view of them.
5. A colleague wrote to me that if the new rite of bishops‘ Consecration turned out to be invalid, it would have dire consequences. From the beginning of the 1970‘s there would have been no more valid priests or bishops. That would mean that all Tradional-rite Congregations officially recognised within the Newchurch, like St Peter‘s or Christ the King, would have no valid priests either. That would mean that only in the Newsociety would the Church of Christ still be existing. Neither Pope Benedict XVI nor Archbishop Vigano would have been valid bishops. These conclusions, of a certain logic, must be taken into account.
The Newsociety Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, raised this question at his Conference in Econe on September 8 last year, but if the Newsociety absolutely wants to be loved and recognised by freemasonic and modernist Rome, then such a question simply cannot be raised. Which is why he took a clear position – the new-rite Consecrations are valid. Could such an immensely serious conclusion possibly be true ? We are constantly hearing that Bergoglio means to reform the New Mass, that in the reform of the reform there will be no more words of Consecration said over the bread or the wine, which would mean the complete extinction of the Mass. Moreover, in my opinion something like two out of every three New Masses are already invalid, because the priests no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ. But if the total extinction of the Mass is an eventual possibility, why not also the total extinction of bishops being truly Consecrated ?
Kyrie eleison.
Today, it seems, such points exaggerate ?
Tomorrow they might be looking out of date !

Miseremini · « **Reply #25 on:** February 26, 2025, 01:36:29 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 26, 2025, 11:43:40 AM

I'm sure that it's Bishop Williamson's attitude ... since that's the least thing from his mind ... but for those of us who respect him for what he did for Tradition, WE find it utterly disgraceful and will not put up with it. We can put up with indignities directed at ourselves, but do not put up with it when they're directed at others.

I think the attitude of the SSPX with regard to the death and funeral of His Excellency was deplorable and is going to come back and bite them.

On another note, is someone from KY going to try to take over the leadership of the resistance even more forcefully now?

Matthew · « **Reply #26 on:** February 26, 2025, 01:43:43 PM »

Quote from: Miseremini on February 26, 2025, 01:36:29 PM

On another note, is someone from KY going to try to take over the leadership of the resistance even more forcefully now?

Well, they have excommunicated everyone outside their "cult" -- which has its short-term worldly advantages for the cult, but on the flip side it DOES have a downside: A lack of influence or pull in the "Resistance at large". Unless you are at one of the local chapels served by Boston, KY, or one of their "priests", they really are a non-issue.

Most Trads don't think highly or poorly of Boston, KY. They don't think about them at all. That is the worst outcome, for them.

They have become invisible, irrelevant.

Just like if America withdrew into 100% isolationism. Sure, it would mostly be a good thing. BUT you can't say there wouldn't be a downside. We wouldn't have global dominance or influence any longer -- and that IS a thing. Something we would notice.

That's the problem with ANY excommunication -- including "cutting off contact with" one of your wayward children. Yes, the black sheep is out of your life, which saves you a lot of stress, anguish, temptations, etc. But now you can no longer influence him or her, not in the least. You get no further say, no chance to vote or comment on anything they do henceforward. They are out of your life, but you are out of their life as well.

I am not only an active member of the most popular Trad Catholic forum on the Internet, but I'm the owner and moderator of it. What I'm trying to say is: I'm not one of those isolated Trads that doesn't feel the need to socialize with other Trads and/or keep up to speed with news in the Trad world. AND YET -- sometimes months go by during which I forget Boston, KY even exists. I'm sure that's true for many others as well.

Matthew · « **Reply #27 on:** February 26, 2025, 01:54:25 PM »

Reminds me of a classic scene. "I forgot you were there. You may go now."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #28 on:** February 26, 2025, 03:21:37 PM »

Quote from: nonpossumus on February 26, 2025, 01:23:05 PM

This is still as timely as ever in comparison between Huonder and +Williamson:

BISHOPS DYING OUT ?
16 April, 2024respicestellam

An appeal that he should let himself be conditionally reordained and reconsecrated unfortunately had no effect.

But in fact he has never clearly condemned either Vatican II (Revolution in the Catholic Church) or the New Mass (the Luther Mass). Bishop Huonder told one person that he celebrates the New Mass with dignity, that he sees it as an altogether worthy form of Mass.

In his lectures Bishop Huonder openly admits that he still has the task of bringing the Newsociety under Rome.

He is therefore an infiltrated agent of Pope Francis.

I didn't see this one, but it's obvious that the man was an infiltrator agent of Bergoglio, and that his intent in refusing conditional Orders was precisely to one day inject and propagate doubtful Orders into the Traditionalist groups, making many doubt and even leave SSPX.

Huonder says that he received Bergoglio's blessing to live there with SSPX ... and we know that Beroglio despises Traditional Catholicism, so putting 2 + 2 together, they don't make 5. Huonder was there as a Bergoglian agent to do what he said, absorb the SSPX into the Conciliar Entity.

He had already injected doubtful Holy Oils into the Traditionalist groups, and was about to do it again, when God suddenly took him from that mission ... and I fully suspect that his next task in the early Summer would have been to "ordain" some priests.

So, this man, a "half-hearted" pseudo-Trad (no problems with V2 and the NOM) was buried with "full honors" alongside Archbishops Lefebvre, having merely spent a couple years in retirement there, likely on an infiltration mission, whereas a warrior for Tradition, +Lefebvre's right-hand bishop and the one chosen bishop, who battled for decades against Modernism ... he gets cast aside, with the funeral equivalent of the "hotel room" Masses we had for so long in the US, ending up in a pauper's grave.

LakeEnjoyer · « **Reply #29 on:** February 27, 2025, 02:26:58 AM »

Regarding his Lordship's grave, from the WM review:

https://www.wmreview.org/p/williamson-requiem

Quote

While we cannot disclose the actual location of this final resting place, we can say that Bishop Williamson wanted to be buried there, and that it has turned out (in our opinion) to be even better than Ecône, and even more fitting than beside Lefebvre.

This writer could barely believe it when he heard it.

Author Topic: Posting wake photos disrespectful? (Read 8822 times)

Matthew

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Ladislaus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Ladislaus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Giovanni Berto

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Ladislaus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Ladislaus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Pax Vobis

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Geremia

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

OABrownson1876

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

nonpossumus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Miseremini

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Matthew

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Matthew

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

Ladislaus

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?

LakeEnjoyer

Re: Posting wake photos disrespectful?