Please find below a YouTube link to Part 1 of an interview I conducted in St. Mary's, KS with His Excellency Bishop Richard Williamson on November 13.(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s)
The YouTube video contains time-stamps for various subjects discussed.
You are free to pass this around or repost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s)
Semper Idem,
Sean Johnson
Poor +Williamson looks like he’s exhausted at the beginning of the interview, probably jet lagged! I hope he got to kick back in that recliner for a snooze! 😴 💤 :incense:Not only the jet lag, but it was after two Masses, breakfast and a conference.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s)
In viewing the first video, what seems to be an overall theme is the problem of Truth being separated from authority, with and after the Vll council. +W also outlines why +ABL sought a bishop through Rome, until he realized that Rome was not going to give him a bishop. It's important to note and to be reminded of the fact that +ABL did not pursue any kind of reconciliation with Rome after he and the four new bishops were excommunicated.
There's an interesting article posted on the Resistance' Non-Possumus blog today. It features a video of Bishop Schneider claiming that the SSPX and +ABL always wanted to be under the control of the Holy See, but that's just not true. Where does +Schneider get this idea from? Probably the SSPX themselves, but who knows. Here the article:
Non Possumus (nonpossumus--vcr-blogspot-com.translate.goog)
(https://nonpossumus--vcr-blogspot-com.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en)+Schneider says at about the 5:43 minute mark:
"They all desire, so much, and Archbishop Lefebvre the first desired deeply to be fully recognized by the holy See. This was the only desire and this desire continues and this matters. Because of the presence of this desire to be fully under the control of the Holy See, which they always had, Archbishop Lefebvre and I assume the superiors of the Society today."
I gather from the two thumbs down I received from my last post that few on this forum want Sean to confront +Williamson with SSPX priestly scandals. Just stick with "doctrine" and "truth." Is that it?
I gather from the two thumbs down I received from my last post that few on this forum want Sean to confront +Williamson with SSPX priestly scandals. Just stick with "doctrine" and "truth." Is that it?Sedevacantist chiming in here.
M. Hollingsworth, I did not give you a down thumb (my account is not able to give anyone down thumbs, it seems), but it looks like there is more video to come, so perhaps they will address your issue.Yes, I hope that they address the issue. I agree that "doctrine" is very, very important. But one of the main bodies of Catholic doctrine is the 10 Commandments. The 7th Commandment forbids adultery. Under that major category, I think we can include all other forms sɛҳuąƖ crimes. So +Williamson, with his particular focus on sound doctrine, should address the breach of sound doctrine by the SSPX.
Yes, I hope that they address the issue. I agree that "doctrine" is very, very important. But one of the main bodies of Catholic doctrine is the 10 Commandments. The 7th Commandment forbids adultery. Under that major category, I think we can include all other forms sɛҳuąƖ crimes. So +Williamson, with his particular focus on sound doctrine, should address the breach of sound doctrine by the SSPX.Sinning against a Commandment and teaching something against it are two separate things.
Sinning against a Commandment and teaching something against it are two separate things.
Yes, I hope that they address the issue. I agree that "doctrine" is very, very important. But one of the main bodies of Catholic doctrine is the 10 Commandments. The 7th Commandment forbids adultery. Under that major category, I think we can include all other forms sɛҳuąƖ crimes. So +Williamson, with his particular focus on sound doctrine, should address the breach of sound doctrine by the SSPX.
The 7th Commandment forbids adultery..
No it doesn't, not in the Catholic religion. Only in protestantism. What religion do you belong to, Hollingsworth?Here you go again. Let's pivot away from the topic, and make it an issue of perceived Protestant sympathies exhibited by Hollingsworth.
Here you go again. Let's pivot away from the topic, and make it an issue of perceived Protestant sympathies exhibited by Hollingsworth.
Can you guys take it to another thread?Can we take what to another thread???:confused: BTW, where's part 2 of the interview?
Can we take what to another thread???:confused: BTW, where's part 2 of the interview?Part 2 of the interview was posted by Matthew in Reply #5.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s)
+Williamson at minute 44, said people like Fr. Schmidberger, Laisney, etc never really understood +Lefebvre. Now I think that's the same thing that people like Fr. Cekada (RIP) and the sedevacantists would accuse +Williamson of not understanding +Lefebvre.
When a seminarian who would later become a majo superior within the Fraternity refuses to attend the 1988 episcopal consecrations, I think its safe to say (minimally) that they have not understood their founder!
+Williamson at minute 44, said people like Fr. Schmidberger, Laisney, etc never really understood +Lefebvre. Now I think that's the same thing that people like Fr. Cekada (RIP) and the sedevacantists would accuse +Williamson of not understanding +Lefebvre.Good contrast of viewpoints.
When a seminarian who would later become a majo superior within the Fraternity refuses to attend the 1988 episcopal consecrations, I think its safe to say (minimally) that they have not understood their founder!
Well, alas, there's something to be said that their founder didn't understand himself. That's why you have this tug-o-war. "WE are the true children/follower of +Lefebvre. No, WE are." And both sides can produce +Lefebvre quotes to back up their position. In the early 1980s, you find material from +Lefebvre where he was pursuing an agreement with Rome where he was extremely sympathetic to Rome. That's when he ousted The Nine. Then by 1986, around the time of Assisi, he was saying that he believed he might have to go sedevacantist and that he and Bishop de Castro Mayer had been closet sedevacantists for 20 years but "preferred to wait".
Well, alas, there's something to be said that their founder didn't understand himself. That's why you have this tug-o-war. "WE are the true children/follower of +Lefebvre. No, WE are." And both sides can produce +Lefebvre quotes to back up their position. In the early 1980s, you find material from +Lefebvre where he was pursuing an agreement with Rome where he was extremely sympathetic to Rome. That's when he ousted The Nine. Then by 1986, around the time of Assisi, he was saying that he believed he might have to go sedevacantist and that he and Bishop de Castro Mayer had been closet sedevacantists for 20 years but "preferred to wait".
I'm sorry, but who is that seminarian?
There are two problems with this analysis:
1) It is contradicted by Rome (e.g., That Rome understood Msgr. Lefebvre as having the "no practical accord before a doctrinal resolution" as his principle of action since La Pointet is proven by the quote in Part 1 of the interview with the quote from conciliar GREC/Roman priest Fr. Michel Lelong ), who certainly understood Msgr. Lefebvre of having this principle since 1988. So it would be odd that both Rome and Msgr. de Galarreta (in his Reflections paper at Albano) would think such a principle to exist when it does not, and Msgr. Fellay himself admitting the existence of the principle in the Cor Unum of March 2012, when he hallucinated that "the new situation in Rome demands a new response from us," and announced he was moving away from it.
2) The "wavering Lefebvre" argument sees only the external manifestation of the operative principle, without taking that operative principle itself into account: As Msgr. Williamson again explains in Part 1-2, Msgr. Lefebvre wanted to help Rome back to Tradition, and his willingness or unwillingness to negotiate always depended upon his perception of Rome's willingness to come back. So when it looked like Rome was open to Tradition, he inclined towards them. And when it looked like they were falling into the abyss, he backed away from them. When he lost faith in the intentions of Rome in 1988, that was it. His principles never changed, only extrinsic conditions did. It was for this reason that the starting point for GREC in 1997 was to reestablish trust.
The Romans understand Lefebvre far better than his progeny (or the sedevacantists).
We've watched 4 parts of the interview at this point. There is, we understand, a 5th part of around 10 minutes. Thus far, nothing has been discussed about the scandals. For me, of course, that is disappointing.
- Whether or not His Excellency should have been asked about "sex scandals", but as only three of five parts are posted that may be premature speculation.
We've watched 4 parts of the interview at this point. There is, we understand, a 5th part of around 10 minutes. Thus far, nothing has been discussed about the scandals. For me, of course, that is disappointing.
Nevertheless, the interviews reveal some interesting history. +W doubles down on the Jєωs, which I couldn't welcome more. You'll never hear the present leaders of the Society excoriating the Jєωs like +W does. Why? Because, as I believe, the Jєωs basically own the fallen SSPX. IMO, You don't build a 40 million dollar monastery in VA with simple contributions from the SSPX faithful. No, that's Jєω money!
But the failure to even mention the present sex scandals is a disgrace, IMO. These incidents priestly predations are not one-offs. They reveal a clear pattern of sɛҳuąƖ misconduct and cover ups, going back probably to the 70s, long before the Archbishop met his Maker. At least, say something. At least, make some attempt to explain.
We've watched 4 parts of the interview at this point. There is, we understand, a 5th part of around 10 minutes. Thus far, nothing has been discussed about the scandals. For me, of course, that is disappointing.
Nevertheless, the interviews reveal some interesting history. +W doubles down on the Jєωs, which I couldn't welcome more. You'll never hear the present leaders of the Society excoriating the Jєωs like +W does. Why? Because, as I believe, the Jєωs basically own the fallen SSPX. IMO, You don't build a 40 million dollar monastery in VA with simple contributions from the SSPX faithful. No, that's Jєω money!
But the failure to even mention the present sex scandals is a disgrace, IMO. These incidents priestly predations are not one-offs. They reveal a clear pattern of sɛҳuąƖ misconduct and cover ups, going back probably to the 70s, long before the Archbishop met his Maker. At least, say something. At least, make some attempt to explain.
Do you go to Chinese restaurants looking for pizza?
Good point. Where is all this money coming from? There is no way the simple faithful can afford such monuments.
But if you think about it, $50,000,000 would be sufficient to buy homes for 200 Catholic families. I'm sure there are many couples with 8-10 children struggling to make ends meet, and many faithful assisting at Mass in dumpy little quasi-chapels, wondering whether the $50,000,000 could have been better spent. They could have spent about $1,000,000 tops to expand Winona with an extra wing, modernize the HVAC system, etc. and it would have been perfectly fine. Or I'm sure they could have built an adequate facility for about $10,000,000 from scratch. So this is an incredible extravagence.
Long story short, the SSPX was, and should be, in the "mission chapel" or "lifeboat" business. Not building parish CHURCHES, monuments, or anything like that. They should be all about building infrastructure for priests to travel around, stay here or there, say Mass here or there (some chapels larger, some smaller) and serving as many Faithful in the United States as possible. You know, saving souls and keeping the Faith alive. Transmitting the Faith to the next generation via Traditional doctrine, Mass, and sacraments. The only goal of +ABL.
This is the same nonsense we see when people attack +Vigano. He could write a letter about the New Mass and Bergolgio's attempt to suppress it, and the haters come out of the woodwork condemning him for not attacking Donald Trump, even though there wasn't a word about politics in the entire thing.
I don’t see +W giving much input on the sex scandals, since they’ve popped-up over the years even from his early Winona seminary days.
Quote from: Jr1991 on Today at 01:57:14 PM (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/sean-johnson-interviews-bp-williamson-in-kansas-nov-2022/msg856834/#msg856834)Not sure I understand. You mean that the SSPX does not presently have outright ownership of the "monument?" Does some other party hold a fifty year mortgage, or some kind of promissory note?QuoteGood point. Where is all this money coming from? There is no way the simple faithful can afford such monuments.
They extract it from the various SSPX chapels' collections, from selling chapels, etc. They probably have a 30- to 50- year plan to pay for it.
As I've said before, this attitude suggests a complete change in mindset about the crisis, from believing this to be an aberration, a temporary (even if prolonnged) abnormality that will be "fixed" by God, at which point all of the churches and seminaries and buildings currently appropriated by the Concliarists will be restored to Catholic use. In each city in the US you'll find one or two, and in the larger ones dozens of churches, many of which cannot be reproduced today for any price. There's no need for a $50,000,000 "national" seminary when each diocese already has a fine seminary building or even campus, some of which put this new SSPX complex to shame. This speaks to the fact that the SSPX view this aberrant situation in the Church as the "new normal", where you would have the Tridentine Mass as the "extraordinary rite" alongside the Novus Ordo.
My point about the homes, by the way, was not that SSPX should be doing that, just by way of comparison to the resources that would be drained from the faithful for these absurd projects. These are about people's egos, and we might as well name the seminary St. Bernard's Seminary in anticipation of the eventual canonization.
It would be nice if others would upload these videos onto other platforms, before the Google police delete the whole series.Yay! Sean is back!
There's no way Part 4 survives (and will probably sink the rest).
Building $50 million monuments does NOT meet that goal. That suggests a radically different goal (impressing The World, impressing the Modernists in Rome, etc.)This is why I think the product of that $50mil greatly failed to meet expectations. I think it is a sort of message or reward for wrong intentions.
I'm fine with that. I think a 5 year limit is prudent these days, and I think it is best to not buy something until you can afford it. 5 years just helps you afford it more easily.
My understanding is that the national SSPX gives these local chapels a mortgage of about five years. Forget a 30-year mortgage you get from a banker; they (the national SSPX) want their money back quickly. This was said at an SSPX fundraiser that I attended years ago. I don't know if it's true; maybe others have better information.
As great is it would be for the SSPX to get into the charity business, and start giving brand-new homes to poor people, a similar argument could be made that even if they stuck to building and maintaining CHAPELS, the money could be better spent.
I know that one of those $250,000 family homes you quote could buy PLENTY of chapel for many places. Our "chapel" here is a metal warehouse building 1,200 square feet, 12 foot roof. Even when you include assembly, putting in electrical/plumbing, air conditioning, and misc. "finishing", you could get a lot of chapel space for $100,000.
Long story short, the SSPX was, and should be, in the "mission chapel" or "lifeboat" business. Not building parish CHURCHES, monuments, or anything like that. They should be all about building infrastructure for priests to travel around, stay here or there, say Mass here or there (some chapels larger, some smaller) and serving as many Faithful in the United States as possible. You know, saving souls and keeping the Faith alive. Transmitting the Faith to the next generation via Traditional doctrine, Mass, and sacraments. The only goal of +ABL.
Building $50 million monuments does NOT meet that goal. That suggests a radically different goal (impressing The World, impressing the Modernists in Rome, etc.)
Solving the Crisis in the Church was only ever a nice "extra". If the SSPX could have a hand in it, then great. But all THEY have to do (all WE have to do) is do our duty, keep the Faith, maintain hope, and save our souls. Solving the Crisis is in God's hands alone. He MIGHT make use of us -- but let's put it this way: He can best make use of us if we are faithful to HIM FIRST and put our TRUST IN HIM, not in man, not in marketing corporations, not in numbers, not in money.
Our "chapel" here is a metal warehouse building 1,200 square feet, 12 foot roof.The CMRI mission that I attend in South Carolina is similar to that, only even smaller. It's a small steel building that was originally used as a barn/shed (even has a garage door that comes in handy for quickly moving furniture out when we have chapel cleanup days), and it can seat about 25 people. Before acquiring the steel building, a tent was used as a makeshift chapel on the property. Yet we make do with the building because we're ultimately there for the holy sacrifice of the Mass, and it is sufficient for that.
So true!
I too would like to see more infrastructure for priests to travel around, though it's not an easy life for a priest, but I would support that sort of effort with what little money that I have - so that the faithful can have access to the sacraments, especially in my area where there's no TLM. That's what is so important today. Not fancy buildings, though I love beautiful Catholic churches as much as anyone. This type of model more resembles the SSPX of old - not the new SSPX corporate model of course - though there are still some SSPX mission chapels that are quite small and humble.
It doesn't have to be the SSPX that does this, though. I would like to see more Resistance priests (or any other group of validly ordained traditional priests), who could travel around to offer the sacraments - though I understand that there are very few (almost none) Resistance priests in the U.S.
Looking for part 5 but not seeing it. Am I missing it somehow?
During the course of these comments, His Excellency goes into recommending Garabandal.
I reply that I am not a big "private revelation guy," and therefore do not have all the details about Garabandal, but note that I am aware it is controversial. I mention that one of the main objections to its authenticity is the strange phenomenon of the seers walking backwards, doing the spider walk, etc.
To this, His Excellency replied that in all that strange walking, not for a second is there any immodesty, and there certainly should have been, given the positions/postures the seers were in, which His Excellency took as a protection from immodesty from heaven, and evidence of authenticity.
This is why I think the product of that $50mil greatly failed to meet expectations. I think it is a sort of message or reward for wrong intentions.
There really are so many traditional catholics struggling financially. Maybe that is what will make them saints, but how many will be lost through neglect and no affordable means of transportation to the sacraments?
I'm fine with that. I think a 5 year limit is prudent these days, and I think it is best to not buy something until you can afford it. 5 years just helps you afford it more easily.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FbpiTrgLtIRg%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=54549aa8d8cd01a470f4a9d52c0121520565a155f82fe220769e7099038239f5&ipo=images)
"Brother Giles, you need a finance man like me to teach you the esoteric arts of usury."
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FbpiTrgLtIRg%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=54549aa8d8cd01a470f4a9d52c0121520565a155f82fe220769e7099038239f5&ipo=images)I said nothing about charging interest.
"Brother Giles, you need a finance man like me to teach you the esoteric arts of usury."
The 5th installment is brief, about 8 minutes, but it may be a while before I can get it uploaded (i.e., I borrowed a camcorder for the interview, and neglected to download this final segment to my computer along with the rest, so I will need to get ahold of it again).
The contents are basically His Excellency's final comments and advice to viewers.
During the course of these comments, His Excellency goes into recommending Garabandal.
I reply that I am not a big "private revelation guy," and therefore do not have all the details about Garabandal, but note that I am aware it is controversial. I mention that one of the main objections to its authenticity is the strange phenomenon of the seers walking backwards, doing the spider walk, etc.
To this, His Excellency replied that in all that strange walking, not for a second is there any immodesty, and there certainly should have been, given the positions/postures the seers were in, which His Excellency took as a protection from immodesty from heaven, and evidence of authenticity.
He then advises 15 decades o the Rosary/day, and the interview concludes.
It may be another week before I can upload this segment.
I said nothing about charging interest.
As you probably know, old Maxie brokered a deal with a wealthy Marrano family to give a $100 million "gift" to the SSPX, around the time Bp. Williamson was making his exit from the Society.Was part of that money used to build the VA boondoggle, i.e. Fellay's spacious residence
Was part of that money used to build the VA boondoggle, i.e. Fellay's spacious residence
There are two problems with this analysis:
1) It is contradicted by Rome (e.g., That Rome understood Msgr. Lefebvre as having the "no practical accord before a doctrinal resolution" as his principle of action since La Pointet is proven by the quote in Part 1 of the interview with the quote from conciliar GREC/Roman priest Fr. Michel Lelong ), who certainly understood Msgr. Lefebvre of having this principle since 1988. So it would be odd that both Rome and Msgr. de Galarreta (in his Reflections paper at Albano) would think such a principle to exist when it does not, and Msgr. Fellay himself admitting the existence of the principle in the Cor Unum of March 2012, when he hallucinated that "the new situation in Rome demands a new response from us," and announced he was moving away from it.
2) The "wavering Lefebvre" argument sees only the external manifestation of the operative principle, without taking that operative principle itself into account: As Msgr. Williamson again explains in Part 1-2, Msgr. Lefebvre wanted to help Rome back to Tradition, and his willingness or unwillingness to negotiate always depended upon his perception of Rome's willingness to come back. So when it looked like Rome was open to Tradition, he inclined towards them. And when it looked like they were falling into the abyss, he backed away from them. When he lost faith in the intentions of Rome in 1988, that was it. His principles never changed, only extrinsic conditions did. It was for this reason that the starting point for GREC in 1997 was to reestablish trust.
The Romans understand Lefebvre far better than his progeny (or the sedevacantists).
Wrong. Archbishop Lefebvre clearly wavered on principle. It's very well docuмented, which is why neo-SSPX can lay claim to him, and why Father Cekada could release the video "Archbishop Lefebvre Sedevacantist."
This is revisionism ... from yet another one playing tug-o-war with the Archbishop. Now, it's clear the he concluded his life with the mindeset that is most akin to the Resistance, beginning from the time leadiing up to Assisi, then the consecrations, but he was still trying to cut a deal with Rome weeks and months before he finally went ahead with the consecrations.
Whatever protects your narrative.
I have no narrative. It's you who have the narrative rooted in wishful thinking. In fact, at the end of the day, I don't care. Archbishop Lefebvre was a great man, but he was no infallible divine oracle. I agree with him on some things, and disagree with him on others.
This entire "WE are the true heirs of Archibshop Lefebvre." vs. "No, WE are." is childish. I have no dog in this race, since I don't feel the need to agree with him on everything, and I'm looking at it objectively.
In addition to the things I have considered diabolical about Garabadal, there are a couple of failed prophecies.
Show Lefebvre wavering after 1988.
You did not overcome my rebuttal, but merely insist upon the same argument I refuted the first time (i.e., you added nothing new; you are just repeating yourself with stronger language. Will the next response be stronger language still?).
In order to do so, you must explain
1) Why Rome and the SSPX understood Msgr. Lefebvre as having the principle you deny.
2) Show Lefebvre wavering after 1988.
I'll be here waiting.
Now, it's clear the he concluded his life with the mindset that is most akin to the Resistance, beginning from the time leading up to Assisi, then the consecrations ...
Sorry but Purtin's a Jєω and he's off course about Putin. Putin's "Orthodox" faith is a joke and false indeed. He's close to Wagner Group that likes to make snuff films for political statements, e.g. Putin's sledgehammer. Putin's body count is extensive. He was a Stasi Major besides KGB (((insider))).
You are asking me to detract publicly? Shame on you. There are a few here who know my identity, and they know I do not lie (for the same reason I do not detract). His identity (and the story I have recounted) are quite well known in Fraternity clerical circles.De Lugo, I am surprised by this reply.
Noblesse oblige!
:facepalm: ... this is nothing pure speculation, including some amazing discernment of the internal forum, yet arrogantly presented as fact.
Also, Parts 1-4 are now archived on archive.is
https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/international-news/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/An appeal to the Third Rome
The world crisis with which the dissolution of traditional society is being prepared has also involved the Catholic Church, whose hierarchy is held hostage by apostates who are courtiers of power… Perhaps Providence has ordained that Moscow, the Third Rome, will today in the sight of the world take on the role of κατέχον [Katechon] (2 Thess 2:6-7), of eschatological obstacle to the Antichrist.13 (https://www.tfp.org/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/#easy-footnote-bottom-13-72242) If the errors of communism were spread by the Soviet Union, even to the point of imposing themselves within the Church, Russia and Ukraine can today have an epochal role in the restoration of Christian Civilization, contributing to bringing the world a period of peace from which the Church too will rise again purified and renewed in her Ministers.14 (https://www.tfp.org/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/#easy-footnote-bottom-14-72242)
I would also want to ask Bishop Williamson about this issue:
Devotion to the Heart of Mary Will Save the World (https://www.tfp.org/devotion-heart-mary-will-save-world/)In her Fatima message (https://www.tfp.org/fatima-a-message-more-urgent-than-ever/), Our Lady said that Russia would convert to the Catholic Church. Archbishop Viganò seems to think the opposite, that the West and the Catholic Church herself will convert to the Third Rome, in other words, to schism and heresy.That is absurd. It is shocking to see it being suggested by a Catholic bishop. Here are Archbishop Viganò’s words in full:https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/international-news/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/
Would this be considered blasphemy, heresy or apostasy?
Firstly, saying "Russia will convert to the Catholic Church" is NOT the opposite of saying "the West and the Catholic Church herself will convert to the Third Rome."
The opposite would be "Russia will NOT convert to the Catholic Church."
Moreover, the West and the Catholic Church Herself converting to the Third Rome does not preclude Russia converting to the Catholic Church.
But pretending Msgr. Vigano really was contradicting Fatima, where did you ever get the idea that opposing a private revelation was "blasphemy, heresy, or apostasy?"
Your mind is too erratic (evinced by chaotic font/formatting of your posts) to judge rightly.
You need to relax.
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't see where he says that Russia will convert to the Catholic Church. ??
Here is the quote again:
An appeal to the Third Rome
The world crisis with which the dissolution of traditional society is being prepared has also involved the Catholic Church, whose hierarchy is held hostage by apostates who are courtiers of power… Perhaps Providence has ordained that Moscow, the Third Rome, will today in the sight of the world take on the role of κατέχον [Katechon] (2 Thess 2:6-7), of eschatological obstacle to the Antichrist.13 (https://www.tfp.org/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/#easy-footnote-bottom-13-72242) If the errors of communism were spread by the Soviet Union, even to the point of imposing themselves within the Church, Russia and Ukraine can today have an epochal role in the restoration of Christian Civilization, contributing to bringing the world a period of peace from which the Church too will rise again purified and renewed in her Ministers.14 (https://www.tfp.org/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/#easy-footnote-bottom-14-72242)
Instead he says that "Moscow, the Third Rome" will take on the role of the Katechon.
I'm sorry, but isn't it the role of the Catholic Church to protect us from the Antichrist?
Also, does the Catholic Church officially recognize Moscow as the Third Rome?
This is from the same article:
"Indeed, the former apostolic nuncio seems to place his trust in the schismatic and heretical Russian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, which he accepts as the “Third Rome.”
Russian schismatics consider Moscow the Third Rome and the Russian Church the true Church of Christ. According to them, the First Rome was the capital of the Roman Empire, the Holy See of Saint Peter, and the center of the Catholic Church. They claim that Catholic Rome fell into heresy and thereby lost its primacy, which passed to Byzantium, capital of the Roman Empire of the East, later Constantinople, which, they say, became the Second Rome. When this city fell to the Turks in 1453, the primacy passed to Moscow, the last and Third Rome, the center of the Russian Church, “which should inherit the prerogatives of the first and the second.”12 (https://www.tfp.org/archbishop-viganos-attempt-to-justify-putins-war-on-ukraine-runs-counter-the-fatima-message/#easy-footnote-bottom-12-72242)"
Is the recognition of Moscow as the Third Rome a blasphemous heresy?
Is stating that this Third Rome heretical sect in Moscow could be the Katechon a heresy?
So the "blasphemy, heresy or apostasy" are not about contradicting private revelation as you say,
but about viewing a heretical sect as the Third Rome and seeing that sect as the protection against the Anti-christ which will save the Catholic Church.
Like the writer of the article I believe these are reasonable questions to ask.
As for the formatting, you may not know this but I have a disease which makes me dizzy and it's quite difficult to read and write at times. That is why I parse out phrases and highlight them.
I do my best to format things so they are easy to read but cutting and pasting articles can be difficult with the various fonts and sizes. I'm sorry they are a bother for you. I appreciate your patience and thank you for your concern about my health.
Firstly, apologies on the font/formatting comment. I did not know it was caused by a physical malady.Of course. No worries. I'm sorry my formatting is such an eye-sore!
Secondly, yes, Russia is clearly the Katechon (or do you think it is Francis?). and that term refers not to protecting us from Antichrist, but to holding back his advent.
Etymology[edit]
Borrowed from Ancient Greek κατέχον (katékhon, “that which withholds”) or Ancient Greek κατέχων (katékhōn, “the one who withholds”).
(theology) Someone or something (of disputed identity) whose removal is necessary before the Antichrist can be fully manifested, according to 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 in the Bible.
Thirdly, you said, "In her Fatima message (https://www.tfp.org/fatima-a-message-more-urgent-than-ever/), Our Lady said that Russia would convert to the Catholic Church. Archbishop Viganò seems to think the opposite, that the West and the Catholic Church herself will convert to the Third Rome, in other words, to schism and heresy." My comment to this was that:
A) The two things you contrast are not opposites, and
B) Pretending Msgr. Vigano opposed Fatima (a ridiculous claim), it would be neither blasphemy, heresy, or apostasy to reject a private revelation.
Fatima is not a private revelation..
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/respectful-correction/
Secondly, yes, Russia is clearly the Katechon (or do you think it is Francis?). and that term refers not to protecting us from Antichrist, but to holding back his advent.:laugh1: What grand insight we have here on CathInfo! You can make a better case that the neo-Soviet Empire will be the seat of Antichrist, not what holds him back. Does brutal and Antichristian Communist China make up a part of the Katechon as Russia's ally? Hilarity!
How ++Williamson entered USA without a jab?
While our US-Israeli State Department would prefer HE to be triple-vaxed, he could have fanegled an exception, per below:I'm guessing the above as the most likely one. As for medical contraindications one site lists them as the following:
The only way unvaccinated travelers can visit the U.S. is to meet one of the exceptions. You can find all the details about exceptions on the C.D.C website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/proof-of-vaccination.html).
Exceptions:
- Persons with docuмented medical contraindications to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine
God bless him!
Statement at Part 4 at 7min mark:
"He's (Trump) highly defective because the good man obviously doesn't know about the problem with the Jєωs."
His Excellency is a great advocate for the truth and must not be aware of a few things.
Sean would you be able to inform him of the following:
This is Trump's Rabbi and Kabbalah instructor:
Part 4
At the 16 minute mark, His Excellency states:
"What I have seen over several years is one speech after another of reasonableness and common sense from Putin. A true statesman defending his own country, but by defending his own country defending the interests of the entire world."
Sean would please share this interview with Putin with His Excellency?
And because His Excellency is a strong advocate for free speech and setting the record straight about what happened in WWII, would you please share this:
Putin’s Memory Laws Set the Stage for His War in Ukraine
But to Lads, such speculation about Putin’s crypto-Jєωness is calumny.
We, have to get a truth clearance from ex-SSPX seminarian experts, like Ladislaus?
I also think people need to stop assuming that changing one's position shows weakness or lack of resolution. To me, it actually shows some refreshing honesty and humility, that someone isn't so wedded to a particular theological position that he's not willing to reconsider it based on new information or new insights. Who would not be confused by this crisis in the Church? I've changed my mind about some things a few times, and I remain open to changing my mind again. I don't know of any Traditional bishop or priest who hasn't changed at least a little bit here or there ... other than those who didn't think much, i.e. those who just were about the Mass, the smells and bells, and didn't think that the ideas or the theology mattered, since they don't make a practical difference.
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
Yet another thread you've spammed up wih this garbage.I'm sure Bishop Williamson would be alarmed to learn that some of his statements regarding WWII would get him fined or arrested in Putin's Russia.
I'm sure Bishop Williamson would be alarmed to learn that some of his statements regarding WWII would get him fined or arrested in Putin's Russia.
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/sean-johnson-interviews-bp-williamson-in-kansas-nov-2022/msg857065/#msg857065
Well, good thing that +W has never said that he has any interest in going to Russia.
Yes, that's why it's so strange he sees Putin as
"defending the interests of the whole world".
You are asking me to detract publicly? Shame on you. There are a few here who know my identity, and they know I do not lie (for the same reason I do not detract). His identity (and the story I have recounted) are quite well known in Fraternity clerical circles.🤔
Noblesse oblige!
🤔.
.Perhaps not, but outside of any "French words", his style in the other thread absolutely resembled Sean's. And he has yet to deny that he is SJ. I do hope he's not since that would be highly hypocritical of him since he was so busy telling MOTS what a liar he was.
Luke's style sure doesn't look like Sean's to me, for what it's worth. Sean definitely doesn't go throwing French words all over the place, for one thing. I see little resemblance between the two of them, in fact.
Yes, this should be required as this board is overrun by a bunch of moronic halfwits like yourself.
You're actually one of the worst slanderers on this board.
Did +W provide reasons why he said that?
Yes, this should be required as this board is overrun by a bunch of moronic halfwits like yourself.
You're actually one of the worst slanderers on this board.
Lads, If you were thinking correctly, you'd dismiss yourself from the forum.
You've morphed from a know-it-all ex-seminarian... to an overbearing bore.
I did not listen to the interview, but i had seen the video of +S that you mention. I believe that he is referring to this because ABL always loved the church and did not want to have to take the steps he did, but did so because he felt it was necessary to preserve the TLM and True faith. That's where i think he's coming from with that quote.
There's an interesting article posted on the Resistance' Non-Possumus blog today. It features a video of Bishop Schneider claiming that the SSPX and +ABL always wanted to be under the control of the Holy See, but that's just not true. Where does +Schneider get this idea from? Probably the SSPX themselves, but who knows. Here the article:
Non Possumus (nonpossumus--vcr-blogspot-com.translate.goog)
(https://nonpossumus--vcr-blogspot-com.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en)+Schneider says at about the 5:43 minute mark:
"They all desire, so much, and Archbishop Lefebvre the first desired deeply to be fully recognized by the holy See. This was the only desire and this desire continues and this matters. Because of the presence of this desire to be fully under the control of the Holy See, which they always had, Archbishop Lefebvre and I assume the superiors of the Society today."
Russian Iskander Hashim & Daryl B. Smith:
"Putin & Medvedev are Jєωs pretending to be Christians."
| "Slam Bollyn Every Way You Can" - Daryl B. Smith December 9, 2007 Understanding the Purpose and Methods of Defamation Daryl Bradford Smith Reveals Himself as an Agent and Threatens to Kill Eric Hufschmid By Christopher Bollyn (http://www.rumormillnews.com/pix4/Darylcrop.jpg) Daryl Bradford Smith, the agent, a.k.a. Daryl B. Setters Daryl B. Setters has a string of narcotics violations involving possession of needles and syringes in Rhode Island, including a felony conviction. After more than a decade, Setters' (a.k.a. Smith) court charges were paid off by an unknown party on January 7, 2005 - exactly the month he became engaged in the 9-11 discussion as a radio host. Who paid off Smith's court costs and fines? Who does he really work for? He had repeatedly invited us and was quite adamant that we come, although it was not at all convenient. I had been at the Axis for Peace conference in Brussels, and Daryl and Eric Hufschmid wanted me to visit Smith in central France. I decided that it was too expensive and told them that the connections were non-existent. Hufschmid then wired me the funds to make the trip because he was also very adamant that I meet Smith. The French trains were going on strike and the only possible way to get to the village in rural France where Smith lives was to drive. We traveled south across Germany and Switzerland and I rented a car in Geneva in order to drive west across the mountains and through Moulins to get to his remote rural location. After meeting Smith, I repeatedly warned Hufschmid that this person clearly could not be trusted. It was obvious. Shortly after that Thanksgiving 2005 visit, Smith was already spreading malicious slander about me to somebody in Canada. It was very clear that Smith had an agenda from the beginning -- to defame me and attack my credibility. I had no idea who he was working for, but he definitely was not a truth seeker and was clearly working against me. During the summer of 2007, Smith completely revealed himself as an agent and articulated that his mission was to defame me and destroy my credibility in any way he could. After he went on his vicious attack, he tried to get Eric Hufschmid to support him and join the defamation campaign against me. Hufschmid resisted. Eric recorded several of the phone calls in which Smith demanded that Hufschmid attack me. Smith made several clear threats on the life of Hufschmid and was evidently unaware that he was being recorded. Hufschmid has written about this and posted links to Smith's criminal record – and the mysterious pay off that was made to clear Smith's record in January 2005: See: "Why don't I work with Smith any longer?" Eric Hufschmid, 21 Oct 2007 http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-Hufschmid-Bollyn.html (http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-Hufschmid-Bollyn.html) Daryl B. Smith, a.k.a. Daryl B. Setters, arrest record http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-arrest-record.html (http://www.erichufschmid.net/Smith-arrest-record.html) Note of Warning: The complete transcripts have been posted on a website of unknown authorship called "Take Our World Back." The entire recorded conversations have been transcribed, but this website is clearly a broker of defamation, much of it coming from Michael Collins Piper -- which I will deal with shortly. Be forewarned that this is not a known source and that Daryl B. Smith uses extremely foul and violent language a great deal. With this warning given, the online transcripts can be read at: http://www.takeourworldback.com/dbs/darylgatetapes.htm (http://www.takeourworldback.com/dbs/darylgatetapes.htm) By reading these transcripts the public can get an idea of how orders are given to these lower-level disinformation agents and how they are given. Their orders are usually forcefully given and are accompanied by threats of extreme violence. I am now aware of three of these agents, and all three are drug addicts or have histories of hard drug abuse, and we are not talking about smoking marijuana. It appears that the agencies use these people and exploit their weaknesses to force them to comply. Smith reveals in these calls to Hufschmid that he has a criminal record and that he is ready to kill Eric if he does not do as he is told. Such threats certainly leave an impression. Hufschmid had undoubtedly been affected by such repeated threats against his life. What have I done to deserve such defamation? Smith's attack against me gives the public some idea what kind of directives have been given from the top on how to defame and discredit me. There is a method to this madness, and Smith reveals some of these methods: attack my child, say that I am a lunatic and a child abuser, etc. I am posting this very unpleasant material because, in the coming days and weeks, I will be addressing the defamation campaign and exposing the people behind the vicious defamation I have been subjected to. Defamation reveals more about those who are behind it than it does about the person being defamed, in this case me. The following are a few excerpts from the transcripts. DBS is Daryl Smith, a.k.a. Daryl Setters; EH is Eric Hufschmid. I have cleaned up the language, which is spelled out in the complete transcript: "SLAM BOLLYN EVERY WAY YOU CAN" DBS: Well, here's a deal. And this is between you and me, because we've been doing this a long time together. You have to come out and, and slam Bollyn every way you can, in my, in support of me. Every way you can. No compromise. If you don't, I want parting from our, from our relationship. EH: But what do you mean, slam him? DBS: I, whatever the f--k you need to do to make this son-of-a--- be crippled by the s--t he's doing. I'm talking about a full court press on this guy. I'm talking about whatever it is you know about him, whatever it is you can say about him, whatever it is you can do about him, you need to do now. And if you can't do that, Eric, we gotta go. I gotta go. …..snip…. "YOU START TELLING THE WORLD…" EH: But wait a minute... DBS: No wait a minute. I'm telling you. It's not a wait a minute. There's no wait a minute. I'm not waiting for you to answer, you, you son-of-a----. Listen to me. This is a one-way conversation. One way. I don't wanna hear what you got to say. You fight for me, or get the f--k outta my life. EH: Well how do I fight for you? I don't understand. DBS: You start telling the world that this guy's got a sick f--k--g kid, that he stayed in your house as a weirdo, that this prick was all f---d up, that I called you and said what I said. Start supporting me. I'm getting f---g hammered out there. EH: Where? I don't even....snip…. "SAY HIS SON IS SICK...HE'S A WEIRDO" EH: But how do I respond? What has he done? He only just put a picture up. DBS: He's lied about every g-d d--n thing. This f--king guy, I want you to come out and say his son's sick. You were in your house. He's a weirdo. EH: I can't... DBS: Like Bollyn is mentally f--king ill. EH: What? What am I...? DBS: G-d d--n it, Smith is right, f--king Eric. That's what I want, f--ker. Wake up, wake the f--k up. It's me here, and if you f--k me, I know where you live, you prick. You understand me? …snip…. "THIS IS FULL-SCALE WAR" DBS: Yeah, I'm not yelling, you dude. You are, you have to hear this. So just listen, please. EH: Alright. DBS: Unless and until we can get this straightened out, Eric, this battle is not bullshit here. We got a f--king war going on, and I need either your full support, or none. And either you're gonna do what we need to get done here, or you need to relinquish what, what control you have of the website. And that's the bottom line. The fight is here, this is it. And Bollyn has been f--king me, and there's more than that going on right now. The simple truth of the matter is that this is full-scale war, and unless and until we do more about it, we're lost. Now, you can, you can say that you, you know, you didn't or you couldn't or what, doesn't matter. The fact is, let's put your prognostications on the side, and say what we need to do. The fact is, we're not doing shit about anything, and nobody's supporting me, and nobody's fighting for me, and you haven't put a single article up in my support, and I need that. You haven't put a single docuмent up, you haven't said that Bollyn's kid was a f--king lunatic. This, look, I didn't go as far as saying that in my house, Bollyn's kid was hearing voices, and there were ghosts he thought that were in my room and that they were talking to him. I didn't say that because I have some comportment about children. But this man, doesn't give a f--k about kids so much, that he will drag that f--king kid from hotel room to hotel room, and tell him the ghosts are in his head, and not get him help. And you better not do anything to support him. Not a f--king word. D'you understand me, Eric? EH: Well yeah... DBS: Understand what I'm coming from? EH: Yeah, but I don't know about the kids and the ghosts, I... DBS: I'm telling you, this kid is f--ked up, and I'm... EH: Yeah but, but let's say I say something. How does that help you if I say that his kid has problems? I don't understand, how does it...? DBS: It's a hundred percent support for your partner, dude. EH: But to say something about his kid, I, I never saw... DBS: No. It doesn't matter about the kid. That's one element. There's a million elements in there. How 'bout the size of the car? How 'bout the fact that, that, that... EH: But I never saw the car, I cannot, what am I supposed to say...? DBS: It's in the picture, Eric. EH: But what do I say, what do I say, you want me to say something? DBS: Yes. That the car was bizarre because he, see he's coming out on his website, saying that it's a small car, but the fact is it's a full size car in France. EH: Alright, shall I say that, now...? DBS: Yeah, d'you want me to baby-sit you through this or what? EH: But, but, you're see, but I mean like, to me, I don't, you're saying that you want me to say this? DBS: I don't want you ever to speak to that c--ks--ker again. EH: He doesn't, hasn't called for, oh, months... DBS: Yeah, but you know what, Eric...? EH: How do you know that...? DBS: That you got emails the other day, you got emails yesterday. EH: That's right, I sent him an email to see if he'd respond, and he did respond. DBS: Yeah, well here's a response: 'F--k you, you c--ks--king lying son-of-a-b--ch motherf--ker.' And how about a response to this guy Phillips' bullshit? ….snip…. "CHECK MY F--KING CRIMINAL RECORD. I'LL GRAB YOU BY THE NECK." DBS: You don't say that. I'm 'just some voice on the phone', Eric. EH: Well, yeah, but if you tell me what not to say, well... DBS: Don't say that, ya dope. And anything like that. Because you're not that stupid. That's a f--king slander, man. EH: You're on your own show. DBS: That is a slander. EH: It is not. DBS: I'm 'just some voice on the goddamn phone'. You say something like that again man, and I'm gonna tell you something. I will fly to America, and I'll show up at your front door. EH: Oh, come on. DBS: You won't f--king like it. I'll shake you around like a rag doll. [Eric laughs.] You don't even know me man. You know something? Check my f--king criminal record. I'll grab you by the neck, Eric. You f--k me like this again and you're in trouble with me. You understand me? EH: That isn't hurting you.... DBS: This isn't a threat. This is a promise to you, ya prick. EH: I said it, I said it to Bollyn. Who heard it? ….snip…. "I am your worst f--king nightmare" DBS: And I'm telling ya something else man. EH: What? DBS: You f--k me, I will show up at your front door and I am your worst f--king nightmare. Don't you f--k me. ….snip…. "I'M TALKING ABOUT DECAPITATING YOU" DBS: Eric, don't start that shit. You're my partner you f--king moron. You ever pull something like this again, I swear to God... EH: You said you don't even... DBS: ...I swear to my father, on my father's soul, I will show up at your door and I will wring your f--king neck. EH: On your... DBS: And I'm talking about, I'm talking about decapitating you, ya prick. EH: On your own show, though... ….snip…. "I WILL KILL YOU" DBS: Yeah, you don't, you f--king don't. You've left me hanging out here, and you're telling Bollyn shit. EH: You're... DBS: I will f--k you up man, and him. EH: You're fighting with him 'cos you want to, I'm not... DBS: Look Eric, I don't give a f--k about prison. You have to understand something you little bastard, I don't give a f--k about f--king blowing your brains out. And you better get your head outta your ass, and I know where the f--k you are. And you'd better pull your f--king head outta your ass, because if you piss me off I will show up at your front door and kill your f--king ass. You understand me? This ain't a f--king threat, this is a promise to you, ya prick. 'Cos I'll spend the rest of my life in jail, I got no problem with that. You f--k me like this again, I will kill you. D'you understand me. And I'm telling you that straight to your f--king head. Send those codes to my f--king in box, and get the f--k off my back. D'you understand? EH: All right. Sure. ….snip… Daryl was ordering Eric to do what he, in turn, had been told to do, i.e. to "slam Bollyn every way you can." Smith clearly spells it out what Eric had to do: "You start telling the world that this guy's got a sick f--k--g kid, that he stayed in your house as a weirdo, that this prick was all f---d up…" This is exactly what Smith tried to do when he aired his vicious and slanderous rant about my visit to his house on Thanksgiving 2005. I responded to Smith's slander in an article entitled Bollyn Responds to Final Message of Daryl B. Smith on September 7, 2007. I will be addressing a similar defamation rant originating from Michael Collins Piper of American Free Press, a.k.a. Michael Bernard Piper, in the coming days. |
Russian Iskander Hashim & Daryl B. Smith:
"Putin & Medvedev are Jєωs pretending to be Christians."
Hey Charity, I realize this might not bother you, but your giant text walls are still really hard to read on mobile. I'm sure I am not the only one affected. You could at least use the quote tags if you feel compelled to post the entire page to aid in scrolling through it and the rest of the CathInfo page.Au contraire! It's my ignorance that bothers me. I have a little flip which I never use for the Internet so unfortunately I was actually somewhat oblivious to the very legitimate concern you have pointed out. I will do my best never to use this big print any more. Again, thanks for pointing this out to me
Christopher Bollyn, married to a Jєωess, is another planted Eurasian agent - see:You are absolutely wrong. Bollyn (who may have been "disappeared" due to his hard hitting exposes of 9-11 and much more than that -- in particular regarding matters concerning the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan and their useful idiots) is not married to a Jewess. That is one more smear against him and he was not and is not (if he is still alive) "another planted Eurasian agent."
https://fitzinfo.net/2020/06/29/christopher-bollyn-gatekeeping-9-11-truth-on-behalf-of-moscow/
http://www.takeourworldback.com/short/bollyn.htm
And why are you focussing solely on the Daryl Bradford Smith interview, when that is only a component of the verification that Putin is a crypto-Jєω. Do you deny that Putin is a Jєω?
As far as Putin goes, it is fairly obvious that the Synogogue of Satan wants to completely smear and discredit Putin by claiming he is one of their own. In doing this they want him to lose the support of those Christians who are disgusted with the degenerate West and are hoping that there is a greater sense of Christian decency and sanity being preserved in Holy Mother Russia.No more Holy Mother Church; now it's "Holy Mother Russia."
Holy Mother Russia.
No more Holy Mother Church; now it's "Holy Mother Russia."It's simply a very old time honored phrase. And no, people who use it are not necessarily trying to "deify the State," least of all myself.
"Mother Russia" would at least make sense if someone is Russian, though not so much to a foreigner. Yet Holy? When did Catholics deify the State, and hostile schismatic (at best) ones at that?
This is just pure Russian propaganda. It should never be coming from someone professing to be a Catholic.I'm sorry that you see fit to simply dismiss this phrase as "pure Russian propaganda" and to even go so far as to say, "It should never be coming from someone professing to be a Catholic." (I'm a Catholic who would like to see the masonic Statue of Liberty immediately replaced with a glorious statue of goodness, truth, and beauty -- one of the Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin Mary.)
Charity,
You have wasted a lot of disk space showing off your propagandized mind. As Marius pointed out, "Mother Russia" is what you might rightly refer to as a common ethnic expression. "Holy Russia" or "Holy Mother Russia" might have referred to "White" or "Bright" originally, but after the Fall of Constantinople took on religious connotations with the idea of Moscow as the Third Rome.
So no, it is not an innocent pro-Russian phrase, but one that has been explicitly formed to deny the orthodoxy of Rome and the supremacy of the Roman Pontiff. A Catholic has no business using the language of Russian Orthodox schismatics. If you are ignorant of this fact, I encourage you to educate yourself and retract, but otherwise it shows how badly you are attempting to deceive others by pretending at its innocence.
I disagree with you in trying to turn the phrase "Holy Mother Russia" into an all 100% black or white issue.I think you are still missing that it is a phrase laden with a particular theological meaning. Perhaps you would like to rehabilitate it, but currently it means something very different from what you desire from it. You might as well be saying "Roman Catholicism is false" every time you write it. You posted some images, so here's one for you to consider:
It's simply a very old time honored phrase. And no, people who use it are not necessarily trying to "deify the State," least of all myself.From a secular dictionary: Holy (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
holyHoliness being one of the four marks of the Church, to ascribe it to a false sect is to implicitly deny the claim of the Catholic Church being the True Church of Christ. I do not believe you are doing so intentionally, but its usage has religious connotations. The Tsars controlled the Schismatic sects and thus had a further interest in propagating the phrase in support of their own power, in contrast to Catholic monarchs who derived their Crowns from the Pope's Divine authority until Napoleon inverted the process 1000 years after Charlemange. So the Holy Roman Empire was not setting up a claim in opposition to the Church's, but deriving its professed Holiness from it, in contrast to the Photians and Tsars.
adjective (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adjective)
ho·ly ˈhō-lē (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=h&file=holy0001)
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=h&file=holy0001)
holier; holiest
1
: exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
2
: divine (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divine)
for the Lord our God is holy
Psalms 99:9 (King James Version) (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
3
: devoted entirely to the deity or the work of the deity
a holy temple (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
holy prophets (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
4
a
: having a divine quality
holy love (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
b
: venerated as or as if sacred
holy scripture (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
a holy relic (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
5
—used as an intensive
this is a holy messhe was a holy terror when he drank
Thomas Wolfe (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy)
—often used in combination as a mild oath
holy smoke
One day, Russia -- like a good holy mother might just carry out God's holy will to carry out a holy and just chastising of the West and perhaps the whole world. Of course, if that is ever done it would be an extreme case of its own self-inflicted and holy and righteous chastisement as well!It is important to keep in mind the instruments of Divine Providence used for chastisement are by no means required or even often Holy or Righteous. The French Revolution was a chastisement, but I doubt anyone would dare call it Holy, to say nothing of the OT replete with examples of God using very unholy and evil instruments to chastise the ancient Israelites.
I disagree with you in trying to turn the phrase "Holy Mother Russia" into an all 100% black or white issue. It's not quite as simple as that. A holy mother (other than the Blessed Virgin Mary) can still carry a lot of defects in her. Who among us individually or as a nation is perfect?
One day, Russia -- like a good holy mother might just carry out God's holy will to carry out a holy and just chastising of the West and perhaps the whole world. Of course, if that is ever done it would be an extreme case of its own self-inflicted and holy and righteous chastisement as well!
BTW, "God bless America" when said in the right way doesn't seek God's blessing of what is evil in America, although what Americans should be saying a lot more of is, "America bless God!"
... at least it can be said that the Russians weren't destroyed by communism, and that's saying something. Those who still practice Eastern Orthodoxy do seem to have a devotion to Our lady.You are stubborn in your adherence to this belief, but the numbers don't add up to support it. Russians were and are absolutely destroyed (morally) by Communism. Until it starting declining (officially) ten years ago, Russia had more than double the abortion rate of the Western countries, but even this improvement is still higher than most other countries in the world. Vice in Russia has been at unusual levels since the time of the Bolsheviks in Russia when all morality was cast aside and freedom to sin was enshrined into law. The Russian peoples have been laid low and should receive your prayers for regeneration, not your admiration for their errors.
God help us if the communists (or rather kabbalist freemasons) completely take over. I'm not sure that this country will survive it.They will succeed. If nothing changes drastically and God does not intervene, the course is set. Conservatives are blinded and useless between Trump/Q-Anon and self-hating support of Russia/China. Republicans are aiding the Democrats. The Democrats are pretending to help Ukraine, but pocketing the cash and sending it to their Marxist allies. The anti-Western forces are building up for the attack. Etc.
You are stubborn in your adherence to this belief, but the numbers don't add up to support it. Russians were and are absolutely destroyed (morally) by Communism. Until it starting declining (officially) ten years ago, Russia had more than double the abortion rate of the Western countries, but even this improvement is still higher than most other countries in the world. Vice in Russia has been at unusual levels since the time of the Bolsheviks in Russia when all morality was cast aside and freedom to sin was enshrined into law. The Russian peoples have been laid low and should receive your prayers for regeneration, not your admiration for their errors.
They will succeed. If nothing changes drastically and God does not intervene, the course is set. Conservatives are blinded and useless between Trump/Q-Anon and self-hating support of Russia/China. Republicans are aiding the Democrats. The Democrats are pretending to help Ukraine, but pocketing the cash and sending it to their Marxist allies. The anti-Western forces are building up for the attack. Putin's recent public statements (no MAD for nuclear doctrine) show only a continued escalation to World War III.
Even if TPTB fail to fully establish global governance with World War III, the world will be left in ruins and likely billions will have died. Their goal to finish off the West will succeed, if only temporarily. If this is not the time of Antichrist, it will be an opportunity for great saints to appear in order to re-establish Europe.
I never said I have admiration for the Russians.You probably don't realize it yourself.
That's your big mistake. It's all or nothing for you.This isn't true and the pro-Russian opinion on CathInfo has been far less forgiving---in my opinion---than those promoting Perestroika Deception. There are people supporting the Postwar West mistakenly believing that Biden is representing American interests. There are also conservatives that mistakenly believe that Russia and Putin are actually causing setbacks to global governance. Both sides have people who mean well, but who are ultimately missing the big picture.
I seriously doubt that you would ever pray for Russia or Russians, since to you seem to believe that they are evil beyond compare.This borders ("doubt") on calumny, but I can confidently tell you that I pray for Ukraine and Russia every night. I also pray for Ladislaus here on the forum after our long argumentation. This is a bad argument for you to attempt on anyone, not just me. The Russian peoples' government is captured---like us in the West---by evil forces that seek to bend the world to an Antichristian system.
Perhaps you should spend more time in reality, rather than on the internet, which isn't real life.You first. Check out your own Profile statistics sometime.
You probably don't realize it yourself.
This isn't true and the pro-Russian opinion on CathInfo has been far less forgiving---in my opinion---than those promoting Perestroika Deception. There are people supporting the Postwar West mistakenly believing that Biden is representing American interests. There are also conservatives that mistakenly believe that Russia and Putin are actually causing setbacks to global governance. Both sides have people who mean well, but who are ultimately missing the big picture.
This borders ("doubt") on calumny, but I can confidently tell you that I pray for Ukraine and Russia every night. I also pray for Ladislaus here on the forum after our long argumentation. This is a bad argument for you to attempt on anyone, not just me. The Russian peoples' government is captured---like us in the West---by evil forces that seek to bend the world to an Antichristian system.
You first. Check out your own Profile statistics sometime.
But it's not the U.S. that you are concerned about. Only Russia. Why is that? There must be a reason why you focus almost solely on Russia.It should be obvious that it is less necessary to write about Biden and friends, since we all know the truth about it. Contrary to your post, I often do post about it anyway, but it is more necessary to post about Perestroika Deception and you likely see those the most. This post of yours relies on a bad argument often used by those on the pro-Russian side when backed in a corner. Try something else.
It's obvious. Everyone on the forum knows about Biden and friends, but I have written about corruption in the West. This is just a bad argument often used by those on the pro-Russian side when backed in a corner. Try something else.
Actually, you have hardly ever said anything about the U.S.; just Russia and Putin, for the most part. Why is that?Are you the resident dxcat expert? I even made a recent post which most people decided to ignore or ridicule:
Are you American? Or rather, American born? I think it's a fair question. Perhaps you don't understand how Americans think.If you consider this to be part of your rock-solid analytical abilities, I am sorry to inform you that you are way off of the mark. You should reconsider being an Internet detective. By the way, I answered this question already. I know you are allergic to search engines, but try using one sometime. They work with CathInfo remarkably well!
Are you the resident dxcat expert? I even made a recent post which most people decided to ignore or ridicule:
https://www.cathinfo.com/politics-and-world-leaders/elon-musk-twitter-and-the-hunter-biden-story/
I think it's more likely that you are sensitive to the issue of Russia. Talking about Perestroika Deception requires some discussion of the Postwar West. Search for Postwar West in my posts and that should be a helpful marker.
If you consider this to be part of your rock-solid analytical abilities, I am sorry to inform you that you are way off of the mark. You should reconsider being an Internet detective. By the way, I answered this question already. I know you are allergic to search engines, but try using one sometime. They work with CathInfo remarkably well!
:laugh2:
Wow! Shocking conclusions proceeding from Meg. A normal person might be embarrassed to show off such genius. Just stop posting, Meg.
Charity says:Have a nice day Simon Peter, expert on all things Russian. At least I know how to spell willfully.
"As far as Putin goes, it is fairly obvious that the Synogogue of Satan wants to completely smear and discredit Putin by claiming he is one of their own. In doing this they want him to lose the support of those Christians who are disgusted with the degenerate West and are hoping that there is a greater sense of Christian decency and sanity being preserved in Holy Mother Russia."
No point arguing with someone so either wilfully blind or a planted propagandist.
All a big script - Biden and Trump are CHABAD crypto-Jєωs also.
You are absolutely wrong. Bollyn (who may have been "disappeared" due to his hard hitting exposes of 9-11 and much more than that -- in particular regarding matters concerning the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan and their useful idiots) is not married to a Jєωess. That is one more smear against him and he was not and is not (if he is still alive) "another planted Eurasian agent."
I am fully aware of the fitzinfo site supposedly run by one Timothy Fitzpatrick which you reference. For whatever reason this site wishes to smear Bollyn big time. However, one merely needs to look to all of the work Bollyn has provided in the past to make a true assessment of this smear article. People who know better realize that Bollyn has done extremely good work in exposing so much of the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan actors and their nefarious work.
I was present at the show trial of Bollyn in the U.S. ruled over by a Jєω Zionist judge and I was present when Bollyn had to flee to Europe or else face imprisonment and very possibly being "ѕυιcιdєd" in that same prison. I was a regular attendee at Our Lady Immaculate (SSPX parish) in Oak Park, Illinois when Father Michael Goldade was the pastor.
Bollyn was actually attending the Sunday Masses at said chapel with his wife and children on a regular basis for a few months immediately before his flight to Europe to escape an unjust and life threatening prison sentence. I know for a fact that Bollyn and his wife, although neither of them were Catholic had a personal one on one meeting with Father Michael Goldade at said chapel. I know because I was present on the day of the meeting which I had helped arrange. I also know for a fact that Bollyn had started to purchase Catholic literature from the book store at Our Lady Immaculate Chapel.
Now, I ask you who exactly is this individual who goes by the name of Timothy Fitzpatrick? What do we really know about him? What is his actual background? We know a lot about Bollyn and his real background, but what exactly do we actually know about this character who goes by the name Fitzpatrick.
As far as Putin goes, it is fairly obvious that the Synogogue of Satan wants to completely smear and discredit Putin by claiming he is one of their own. In doing this they want him to lose the support of those Christians who are disgusted with the degenerate West and are hoping that there is a greater sense of Christian decency and sanity being preserved in Holy Mother Russia.
We will go on to show that Biden and Trump are CHABAD crypto-Jєωs in the next days.
Perhaps part of their plan is fostering or encouraging the leaking of suggestions (even from some who are on to them, who suggest it in good faith) that their enemies are their agents in disguise. Us stupid Goyim will be so befuddled that we think their enemies their friends so their enemies don't get too much Goy support.This dumb theory has been floated on CathInfo before, but it's wrong for a simple reason: No one believed the Soviet defectors who warned about the false democratization. Russia and China had their militaries rebuilt by Western finance, while the U.S. military has been allowed to languish, and especially in the case of its nuclear armaments. Granted, Russia has bungled in Ukraine, but that doesn't change the fact that the U.S. military has been weakened to the point where a military alliance of the Eurasian Bloc could deal the death blow to Pax Americana. The global government comes after could be based in Brussels, Moscow, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, but that system of global governance is what practically every country in the world are working together to build.
I have no idea but since they're so clever . . . this can go on and on endlessly.
*****Of course, Charity already suggested that. Speaking of stupide Goyim . . . moi.
Perhaps part of their plan is fostering or encouraging the leaking of suggestions (even from some who are on to them, who suggest it in good faith) that their enemies are their agents in disguise. Us stupid Goyim will be so befuddled that we think their enemies their friends so their enemies don't get too much Goy support.
I have no idea but since they're so clever . . . this can go on and on endlessly.
*****Of course, Charity already suggested that. Speaking of stupide Goyim . . . moi.
And they want us to trust absolutely no one, except them. That includes the Resistance bishops and clergy, because they are in on it, supposedly.It's sad that you received an upvote for a false and unproven statement. All emotion, no reason. If you disagree with the idea of the Perestroika Deception strategy, then restate it and outline why it is incorrect. You can't do that, but you can certainly emote and make false accusations.
Your personal beliefs and feelings about Putin can do nothing to change that history. It's all wishful thinking.
I responded by pointing out that there is no real proof for this. All of these people believe in and implement their respective brand of Marxism. The United States is a Marxist country. Russia is a Marxist country. China is a Marxist country. Any great power in the world today is cooperating with the goals of Agenda 2030 or the Great Reset. Where this might have a basis in reality is placing blame on the Right using characters such as Trump and Putin.
If they were really clever, they'd suggest that their enemies were their agents. They'd have nothing to lose in doing so, but they could gain thereby.
Interview of Bp. Williamson supposedly (according to the first minute of the interview) recorded on 12-15-2022
https://gloria.tv/post/Rs1scsYYvdwK3mMPaGcKedJJK (https://gloria.tv/post/Rs1scsYYvdwK3mMPaGcKedJJK)
Incred, what is your position on the crisis these days? You seem to veering away from R&R?
If you listen to Bp. Williamson, he makes some very contradictory statements.
Firstly, HE admits, newChurch is a “schism.”
And in hindsight, we can trace the hijacking and foundations of the schism, to Pope Pius XII, going forward.
This “false throne” as Pope Leo XIII providentially warned us about, has Jєωιѕн fingerprints all over it.
Yet, most traditional groups, such as the SSPX, SSPX-resistance, FSSP and ICK (Recognize & Resist) carry on the charade that the ʝʊdɛօ-masons running Rome and the schism can be reformed to true Catholicism?!?
And each trad group claims to hold the secret license or formula to get the Church back on the right footing.
And in their mantras, they denounce any other traditional Catholic perspective as sede-vacantist and schismatic.
Next, Bp. Williamson cites +ABL’s desire not to be judged by Our Lord, for helping to demolish His Church, yet HE seems to ignore that being an Apostolic disciple of +ABL, he has the same duties?
Obviously to ordain men and preserve the validity of the traditional Catholic priesthood.
And as of late, HE tells us Archbishop Vigano is taking over for +ABL, not him and his three Resistance Bishops?
Incred, what is your position on the crisis these days? You seem to veering away from R&R?
Interesting indeed Incread.
2Vermont,
Thanks for asking.
My perspective is that the papacy has not recovered from it's devastating 1958 coup d'etat. We've been under a great schism ever since.
My impression is that mainstream trad groups who still adhere to R&R, function as the schism's controlled opposition.
Their concern is to support and defend the schism narrative.
And to keep the schism narrative alive, Marrano media personalities have sprung up out of nowhere to interpret and direct us.
None of them dare utter the name Opus Dei, the brains of the schism, for fear of the Jєωs.
While a natural Catholic TLM resistance exists, it has been purposely abandoned in hopes it will die. The remnant will be deprived of the Sacraments.
One example of what brought me to this conclusion was Father Luigi Villa's expose on the life of JPII.
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1164/7336/products/CV004-EN_large.jpg?v=1459257930)
In it, one can see Karol Wojtyla's life as that of groomed infiltration agent, as explained by Bella Dodd, who recruited them.
He was a professionally trained, Jєωιѕн actor who played an Oscar winning role as Pope. His Revolutionary mission was to systematically judaize the Church.
Finally, the Church approved warning of the papacy's coup d'etat can be found in an excerpt from Pope Leo XIII's original St. Michael's prayer.
Original Prayer to St Michael the Archangel
These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the Spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.
Pope Leo XIII, 1888
It was originally published in the Roman Raccolta of July 23, 1898, and a supplement approved July 31, 1902.
Raccolta 1933 (Partial Indulgence)
Interesting indeed Incread.
Question?
Where do we go from here?
The so called Resistance has four Bishops.
It seems each bishop is concerned with his own sphere.
The same as the so called Resistance priests.
Good as ‘zero’ communication 24/7(365). :facepalm::facepalm:
Where do ‘we’ go from here???
Very interesting indeed Incred. Thank you for your response!
2Vermont,
Thanks for asking.
My perspective is that the papacy has not recovered from it's devastating 1958 coup d'etat. We've been under a great schism ever since.
My impression is that mainstream trad groups who still adhere to R&R, function as the schism's controlled opposition.
Their concern is to support and defend the schism narrative.
And to keep the schism narrative alive, Marrano media personalities have sprung up out of nowhere to interpret and direct us.
None of them dare utter the name Opus Dei, the brains of the schism, for fear of the Jєωs.
While a natural Catholic TLM resistance exists, it has been purposely abandoned in hopes it will die. The remnant will be deprived of the Sacraments.
One example of what brought me to this conclusion was Father Luigi Villa's expose on the life of JPII.
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1164/7336/products/CV004-EN_large.jpg?v=1459257930)
In it, one can see Karol Wojtyla's life as that of groomed infiltration agent, as explained by Bella Dodd, who recruited them.
He was a professionally trained, Jєωιѕн actor who played an Oscar winning role as Pope. His Revolutionary mission was to systematically judaize the Church.
Finally, the Church approved warning of the papacy's coup d'etat can be found in an excerpt from Pope Leo XIII's original St. Michael's prayer.
Original Prayer to St Michael the Archangel
These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the Spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.
Pope Leo XIII, 1888
It was originally published in the Roman Raccolta of July 23, 1898, and a supplement approved July 31, 1902.
Raccolta 1933 (Partial Indulgence)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvbi97lHV3s)
Just FYI, I received notice from YouTube that they deleted Part 3 and Part 4 of this 5-part interview.
The stated reason was "hate speech:"
Of course, and you know full well that the Youtube monitors didn't watch all the material, and Bishop Williamson was "ratted out" by someone, most likely an anti-Williamson Trad.