Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson  (Read 162899 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 11970
  • Reputation: +7517/-2254
  • Gender: Male
Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2025, 09:55:31 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Let's be real. The SSPX is trying to memory-hole the good Bishop. They are all about "the good of the SSPX" as an organization, and other considerations (the good of souls, God's will, charity) come in a DISTANT second.
    Yep.  The new-sspx acts like a soulless corporation more and more.  And +Fellay is the perfect CEO - a double-speaking, PR-loving, master politician.  Ever since the new-sspx “fired” +Williamson, they’ve treated him like a former employee - disposable, replaceable and forgettable. 

    In the long, long, LONG list of reprehensible things done by the new-sspx since +ABL’s death, their shameful treatment of +W ranks quite high. 

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #16 on: January 29, 2025, 10:05:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I would give it a few hours. It's not yet 3 in the morning in Menzingen, and it His Excellency's passing hasn't been announced on any of the 'official' resistance websites (so far only the facebook group and the telegram).

    No.  His Excellency has been DYING for nearly 4 days, and not a peep out of them, and his condition has been very well publicized.  They needn't have waited til he passed away to request prayers and offer a tribute of gratitude toward him.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #17 on: January 29, 2025, 10:05:49 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • You are right, they will surely make an official announcement.

    However, given Bishop Williamson's importance to the Society and the Church, there ought to have been an official SSPX announcement of his sudden life-threatening illness and a request for Masses and prayers. More than five days passed...

    They've had 4 days since Bishop Williamson's prognosis was given as just a matter of time.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #18 on: January 29, 2025, 10:35:08 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • This.

    Some individual priests might be "good", and there are valid Masses and graces there. but the SSPX as an organization, in the abstract, is dung.

    Yes, of these individual priests, I imagine some had been ordained by Bishop Williamson and others have Resistance and anti-agreement inclinations.

    So, the bottom line that I hinted at earlier is that there are in fact many priests in SSPX that are sympathetic to Resistance.  There are of course also those who are brainwashed cradle-Trads having grown up in the +Fellay neo-SSPX and it's clear that only +Fellay yes-men get ordained, much less promoted to positions of leadership.  So apart from those types, the old-school priests stick around, alas, for one reason.  And it's a sad one.  They stay around because the SSPX gives them security ... financial security, a guaranteed ministry/apostolates, medical insurance, etc.  Sadly, that is the bottom line.  So they'll convince themselves that, well, as long as SSPX are not "red light", i.e. don't go open Modernist or open heresy, then they talk themselves into believing it's OK to stay.  So while they try to edge themselves toward the periphery of the cauldron, they're also getting the frog-boiling treatment as they become more and more desensitized to the growing Modernism in SSPX.

    So, I'm not just speculating here either.  I've talked to a few of the old school priests that I went to seminary with.  They're sympathetic with Resistance but very clearly are just too afraid to leave, where they wouldn't know what to do and feel they'd just end up homeless.

    Sadly, I'm convinced that it's also the reason for Bishop Tissier's about-face and ultimate compromise.

    It's very likely that it's only on account of these types that +Fellay / Bergoglio haven't already created an official, formal, public deal ... YET.  It's because such a deal might create the red light that would finally get these types to leave.  So they're waiting until those moves that would have been red lights 10 years ago, by a process of gradual acclimatization (frog boiling) are now only yellow-light.  AND most of those priests are getting up there in years, close to retirement age ... so what would happen to them?

    That's one of the major reasons I do wish His Excellency Bishop Williamson, God rest his soul, would in fact have created a formal organization, since it perhaps could have given a sense of stability to some of those priests who were fearful of leaving for those reasons.  But they would likely have taken decades to build up to the size of the SSPX organization, given they were rivals, and given the influx of cash from Krah et al. ... they could never compete with the organization building 50-million-dollar seminaries and 25-million-dollar churches.

    And between the Fellay-brainwashed-yes-men among the newly ordained priests, the old school ones getting older, dying off, or just too afraid to leave, and the mass influx of Motarians after Bergoglio shut down most of the Motu Masses, SSPX will have gone full Modernist within about 10 years or so as this trends continue.



    I kept wondering why Bergoglio shut down the Motu Masses because some percentage of them would go to SSPX rather than go back to the Conciliar Church, but he shrewdly realized that these lay people would actually change the "culture" at SSPX chapels to being liberal, Modernist, and even to the Left of FSSP churches from everything I'm seeing.  Then, because SSPX have buried themselves in debt over their eyeballs with these absurdly-imprudent building projects, they can't afford to drive away any of these ex-Motarians, which means that they can't be hard anti-Modernist and anti-Bergoglio, since that would scare them off to find such a "schismatic mentality" there.

    It's been masterfully worked out by Bergoglio and +Fellay.  Bergoglio (or at least his handlers) are not nearly as stupid as Bergoglio seems (well, as he actually is).  So Bergoglio allowed the SSPX to remain un-condemned, to continue to have jurisdiction for Confessions, etc. so that the Motarians could be convince that it's not a terribly bad thing to go SSPX, and when they get there they feel right at home with non-condemnations of Bergoglio and the Conciliar Church.  This way Bergoglio doesn't have to give approval to Tradition, which he hates, and if he did so after shutting down Motus, everybody would realize he's full of crap and that he's up to something.  At the same time he wants to give them enough to make Motarians comfortable enough to go there and wreck the climate at those chapels until they might as well just go Conciliar.

    Probably within 10 years it'll be as St. Jerome said about Arianism, to paraphrase, "the SSPX will awaken with a groan and find themselves Conciliar Modernists".

    Between this sinister plot, their allowing the obvious infiltrator that was obvious, Huonder in there "consecrating" holy oils, and probably ... had God not intervened ... "ordaining" priests, and then +Fellay's inexplicable coverups of some admittted and proven perverts and child rapists ... I'm convinced that he's either a total infiltrator or that he's been compromised --- could it be by the same vices he himself is covering up (I find his smile to be very creepy).  There's no other rational explanation for what he's been doing.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #19 on: January 29, 2025, 10:56:21 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Still nothing from SSPX official sources that I can find.

    I've checked all the news types of sites and Twitter/X.  Nothing.

    Yet, strangely, I've seen moving tributes from even Lifesite News, Michael Matt, and many other Conciliars.  Taylor Marshall reposted a picture that Archbishop Vigano had posted of himself with Bishop Williamson, but that's as far as I'm guessing the grifter will go, a repost, as he's undoubtedly terrified of being labeled a supporter of an "AntiSemite".  But zilch from SSPX, who are trying to pretend that His Excellency never existed.  It's getting so disgusting that it's literally emetic.

    Meanwhile, having looked at the fsspx.news website I find this on top of the main page ... a blatant lie.


    So, for those who don't read Latin, the Semper Idem means "Always the Same", so 1974-2024 Always the Same.  What Hogwash.  And in fact, it's a deliberate slap at the Resistance, whose very raison d'etre is because they've CHANGED and most certainly not always the same.

    Then on sspx.org we see this curious picture at the top ...


    Very strange not only because they show Bishop Tissier's back for some reason, but also because +Tissier died THREE MONTHS AGO now.

    Finally, nothing on their Twitter either.

    Now, on the contrary, when Huonder died, it was announced immediately, that day, and there was a post on SSPX.org about it.  I don't know the time of day he died, but certainly that day.  Also within a few days of his having been hospitalized, SSPX had stuff on fsspx.news and Twitter requesting prayers for the hospitalized Huonder, even though Honder was conscious, "lucid" in their terms, cheeful, and being brought Holy Communion daily by SSPX priests.  There was no prognosis of death at the time.
    https://x.com/SSPXEN/status/1775606117516603808

    No such prayers were ever requested for Bishop Williamson.

    SSPX are clearly trying to pretend that His Excellency Bishop Wiliamson never existed.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #20 on: January 29, 2025, 11:08:31 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Archbishop Vigano posted this picture, and it's the first time I think it's been seen.  I did a Google image search/lookup (uploading it) and the only thing that comes up is +Vigano's X post.  I suspect this is a cryptic way of hinting at the conditional consecration.  It's a picture that evidently only +Vigano has and given how both bishops are dressed, it suggests both of them participating in some liturgical action.


    Offline Seraphina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3772
    • Reputation: +2761/-245
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #21 on: January 29, 2025, 11:10:56 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • An SSPX priest ordained by +Bp. Williamson has sent me his own sermons on audio for the last three years. Last Sunday he made an announcement from the pulpit to request prayer for him.  Fr. followed by a short talk of maybe five minutes. He was positive, never mentioning SSPX politics. 


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #22 on: January 29, 2025, 11:31:14 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So, checking up on Huonder a bit, i found this tidbit.  So, Huonder's (Opus Dei) successor as "Bishop" of Chur, said this about attending Huonder's funeral at SSPX.
    https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/swiss-bishop-defends-attending-predecessors
    Quote
    “The Society of St. Pius X has an irregular status in the Catholic Church,” Bonnemain said. “For this reason, I will not actively participate in the liturgical celebration.”

    But then here is just a couple years earlier:
    https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247068/catholic-bishop-defends-giving-communion-to-protestant-representatives-at-installation-mass
    Quote
    A Catholic bishop in Switzerland has defended giving Holy Communion to two Protestant church representatives and a Protestant politician at his installation Mass.

    So he can't actively participate in the "irregular" SSPX, but then gave "Communion" to some Prots, and defended it later.

    That speaks volumes, eh?  Communicatio in Sacris with Traditional Catholics, negative.  Communicatio in Sacris with Prots, affirmative.


    Offline andy

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 352
    • Reputation: +94/-51
    • Gender: Male

    Offline Seraphina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3772
    • Reputation: +2761/-245
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #24 on: January 30, 2025, 04:00:38 AM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • https://fsspx.news/en/news/communique-general-house-50222
    Thank you, andy!  
    :incense: Now we let’s pray for the repose of His Excellency’s soul. I recommend a complete Rosary of 15 decades because the good bishop promoted this practice. 

    Offline Plenus Venter

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1509
    • Reputation: +1234/-97
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #25 on: January 30, 2025, 04:36:48 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • https://fsspx.news/en/news/communique-general-house-50222
    "before retiring to England."
    How's that for a blatant lie in the SSPX obituary?
    I think the way Bishop Williamson described it was that he was "left to moulder in an attic in Wimbledon" by Bishop Fellay of course.
    Why? Because the SSPX leadership, led by Fr Pfluger, set him up with journalists who were supposedly friends of the SSPX to trap him in that infamous h0Ɩ0cαųst interview so that he could be conveniently exiled from the SSPX.
    Bishop Fellay preferred his modernist friends in Rome to his Traditional brother bishop.
    The lies follow him to the grave.


    Offline Seraphina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3772
    • Reputation: +2761/-245
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #26 on: January 30, 2025, 05:02:14 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, he did eventually “retire to England” when he purchased the house in Broadstairs, but before then, he stayed in temporary accommodations. 
    Someone at the SSPX should have been clever enough to change the word “to” to “in.” It would have disguised the time exiled to the attic. 
    Read second paragraph with a tone of sarcasm.

    Offline Plenus Venter

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1509
    • Reputation: +1234/-97
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #27 on: January 30, 2025, 05:10:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, he did eventually “retire to England” when he purchased the house in Broadstairs, but before then, he stayed in temporary accommodations.
    Someone at the SSPX should have been clever enough to change the word “to” to “in.” It would have disguised the time exiled to the attic.
    Read second paragraph with a tone of sarcasm.
    He was "retired", virtually "imprisoned", actively taken out of circulation in order to eliminate his Catholic resistance to their subversive plans which were even then contrary to their mission to which they were canonically obliged by the General Chapter of 2006.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46216
    • Reputation: +27189/-5030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #28 on: January 30, 2025, 06:07:03 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, having been shamed into at least acknowledging his death, they produce so short an account of his life, with an extremely cold tone, that it's more insulting than had they said nothing.

    Born.  Taught in these 3 places, then Rector, Vice Rector.  Retired (because he was too full old? of his own volition?)

    Sadly he and SSPX parted ways (so it was a mutual decision not an expulsion?)

    Well, hope he doesn't go to Hell for betraying +Lefebvre.

    That's literally it.

    And this post is now as long as their blurb.

    I bet the massive outpouring of love and support for Bishop Williamson are getting under their skin.


    Offline Everlast22

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 772
    • Reputation: +676/-190
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX Response to Bishop Williamson
    « Reply #29 on: January 30, 2025, 06:10:04 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I bet the massive outpouring of love and support for Bishop Williamson are getting under their skin.
    Good.