Author Topic: The Latest on Bishop Williamson (Read 4508 times)

SeanJohnson · « **on:** October 16, 2012, 08:00:24 PM »

http://truerestoration.blogspot.ca/2012/10...rom-london.html

It was very early this morning that I was able to speak with the Bishop. We don't always have intersecting schedules to chat so I decided to stay up very late on this side of the pond to make the call.

It is confirmed that Bishop Fellay has ordered Bishop Williamson to shut down dinoscopus.org, end Eleison Comments, make "public apology" for the harm he has caused to the SSPX and the Church by publishing Eleison Comments, and commit to making "reparation" for the remainder of his days. Failure to comply with these conditions (interestingly, there is no parsing of "required" and "desirable") in toto would result in his expulsion on or around one week from today's date: the 23rd of October, 2012.

I've said in a previous update about this issue that I've heard the wolf cry on this issue so many times that I have become numb. Many people don't know that there has been, for years, a battle over Eleison Comments. Various sacrifices have been made over the years in order to comply with whatever various wish was laid out at the time from Menzingen. In the very beginning, when I was in charge of publishing and editing it in blog form, Bishop Fellay objected to it being public on the Internet. He really meant that he didn't want it done at all, but when we complied with his wishes and made it into a private newsletter, he couldn't really object. He then had to come up with more objections. As I took up issue with "He who shall remain nameless" (here and here) my personal views became a liability to the project and I stepped down as editor to have Nicholas Wansbutter, a trusted friend and colleague, take over. Nicholas guided the project until last year, when we set up an infrastructure to allow the Bishop to essentially self-publish, and thereby remove any lay element. It also freed up both Nicholas and I to speak more freely in support of the Bishop which we could not do when we were so visibly tied to his work.

Why make such a big deal about the blog/newsletter/bulletin? Because it deviates from Bishop Fellay's personal need for absolute uniformity about who says what in the Society of St. Pius X. Nothing in the statutes of the Society (which Bishop Fellay changes whenever it interferes with his will) prohibits a priest - much less a bishop - from communicating with his flock. Indeed, given that Bishop Williamson has been prohibited from public ministry (for no good reason, I might add), other than the sermons he gives in London at the Masses he still celebrates, these weekly columns provide encouragement and nourishment for many.

I don't agree with everything the Bishop writes in Eleison Comments, but I do find it laughable that Bishop Fellay is so threatened by it that he has resorted, at long last, to expulsion over this singular matter. It is a failure of leadership to ignore reasonable objections from senior advisors (I here am of course referring to the famous intervention from the 3 bishops over the summer) and Eleison Comments is simply an ongoing form of dissent against a "sellout" which has additionally manifested itself in expulsions and vocal disagreement from clergy other than Bishop Williamson. Bishop Fellay touted "profound unity" at the Chapter, but speaking to SSPX priests and faithful who attend their chapels reveals anything but such unity.

If Bishop Fellay et al are so convinced they are right, why expel over such a matter? Perhaps this will blow warmth into the cooling ashes of a deal with Rome. A sign of good faith. The traditional Jєωιѕн tradition of the scapegoat...I speculate but I neither wish (nor care) to divine.

Ultimately, the battle is not just over Eleison Comments - that's the visible exterior. But it is really a battle of the liberal/anti-liberal factions within the SSPX. And while this split has been present in the SSPX since Day 1, we knew that it would be exacerbated as time passed since the Archbishop died. Bishop Fellay was not always a liberal. But leadership roles reveal true character, and the chair of the Superior General has revealed Bishop Fellay for the accommodating liberal that he really is. This is perhaps best seen when he refers to "a limited religious liberty" within Dignitatis Humanae. For anyone who has read that docuмent, such a phrasing is at best absurd, and reveals that Bishop Fellay is not now, and never has been, a serious theological voice in the SSPX (as an aside, for those interested in delving deeper into these heretical docuмents of a robber council, tune into Restoration Radio this weekend).

So, yes, I am confirming officially that as of right now, Bishop Williamson is set to be expelled. It has not "officially" happened yet, but it will. As His Excellency would quote from Hamlet, "If it be now, tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come" (V,ii: 222-224).

I welcome this news. It will free up Bishop Williamson to continue to do what he does so well - preach the Gospel and wake Catholics out of complacency. He will now do so outside of an organization deep in the depths of an identity crisis rooted in their double-minded ecclesiology. You will be hearing and seeing a lot more of Bishop Williamson in the months and years ahead. Stay tuned.

That's all for now. I will have more in a few weeks when I am with the Bishop in London to do his first public interview since 2010.

Since many have already asked, I have consented to accept donations for the Bishop for the United States and Canada (we will be able to accept donations from other countries at a later date). You may make out the checks to Bishop Richard Williamson and send them by mail to:

True Restoration Press
9300 W 87th Terrace
Overland Park KS 66212

100% of your donations will be used to support the bishop in his everyday expenses as well as his apostolate over the coming years.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #1 on:** October 16, 2012, 08:04:00 PM »

Heiner has stated the matter so well as to scarcely leave anything to be said.

Also relieved to see the formation of an account to make donations to Bishop Williamson.

I could use some guidance here:

If Bishop Williamson is going to start a new congregation from scratch with whatever loyal priests follow him, should I hang onto my money to finance his ministry here in my locale?

Or should I send it to him personally, as this account intends?

Stephen: can you help out with this?

Domitilla · « **Reply #2 on:** October 16, 2012, 08:39:33 PM »

Seraphim, you pose a good question. I am going to send my donations to +Williamson. I pray that he will pick up the pieces of the shattered SSPX and lead us on the way to salvation.

dedalus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 16, 2012, 10:14:09 PM »

(I'm reposting my same reply to your same question on an another forum. Hope it clears things up)

Seraphim

As we say here in America, this is "not my first rodeo."

Let me walk through three things:

1. Bishop Williamson has retained two accounts here in America since he left for Argentina in 2003. I know because I've been making deposits into them for the last decade.
2. I mentioned on the site that I can handle donations specifically from the United States and Canada. If you do not live in these countries, I am sure that other lay faithful might be able to speak to those particular circuмstances. I not only have the Bishop's permission to collect funds - I've actually done it over the years. I don't know that various laypeople around the world can be personally vouched for by the Bishop. I can be. As I said in my article - you will hear more soon and as other things come online (paypal accounts, other lay collectors for the bishop) I'll share it. But there is no new bank account being opened here. Just using the ones that have always been open.
3. Finally, as a pretty recalcitrant clericalist/monarchist, I have always, when with him, treated him according to his grace of state. The bishop doesn't carry his own baggage, get his own food, or open his own doors. I know that we think sending him checks is the "prudent" thing to do, but all you are creating for him is more work. It should not be on a bishop's daily list to "go to the bank," or "go to the post office." He has people to take care of those things for him. Something as simple as receiving a check, depositing it, and sending a thank-you note on his behalf - as I've done for almost 10 years now - is not something the Bishop *needs* to be doing. That being said, God love you, it's your money and do with it as you will. Just know that American checks sent to a British bank will not be cashed or will be cashed with a heavy surcharge. The British, a fairly socialist country, like taking money everywhere they can.

Hope that clears things up.

PS As an aside - the Bishop is likely to get an enormous level of donations - and on his behalf - because he's said it to me many times - he does *not* want your donations to come at the cost of your duties to your family.

PPS The bishop has several arrangements for where he will stay but they will not be given out as mailing addresses. In due time such things will be properly established.

PPPS Nothing in my article conveyed that the Bishop would be "starting a new congregation from scratch." Indeed, I find that to be very unlikely. These funds are simply for his personal upkeep and to take care of flights, etc. for his apostolate, which will re-activate now.

Incredulous · « **Reply #4 on:** October 16, 2012, 11:24:06 PM »

This is great!

Thaks for all the inputs

Viva Cristo Rey!

magdalena · « **Reply #5 on:** October 16, 2012, 11:57:43 PM »

I hope that this will make +Tissier de Mallerais and +de Galarreta stand up and think. May Our Dear Lord bless you and keep you, +Williamson.

Selkie · « **Reply #6 on:** October 17, 2012, 01:58:11 AM »

I fully agree with Bishop Williamson and Steven Heiner (except with regard to those matters pertaining to Steve's here-unacknowledged disagreements with His Excellency -- I'm sure I know what they are).

A cavil:

There is a sense in which the Bishops Three are responsible for the present situation; 1), they should have known better than to give the traitor bishop an unprecedented second term as Superior General, especially to do so on the basis that not "re-electing" Bishop Fellay might "disrupt the negotiations"; 2), there never was anything about which to cut a deal in the first place! that surely was clear when Archbishop Lefebvre observed that all popes since the vile (non) Council had been "anti-Christ" (quotation Lefebvre's); doubtless, one may reasonably extrapolate to conclude said condemnation embraces all future, ergo post-Council, popes (with the single exception of the pontiff who will one day do Our Lady's bidding).

No matter how long the spoon, one does not, ever, sup with the Devil.

Ethelred · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2012, 08:16:31 AM »

Quote from: magdalena

I hope that this will make +Tissier de Mallerais and +de Galarreta stand up and think.

I wouldn't bet on it.

(... and I think that these two are theologically good men.)

Ethelred · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2012, 08:18:18 AM »

Quote from: Stephen Heiner

I welcome this news. It will free up Bishop Williamson to continue to do what he does so well - preach the Gospel and wake Catholics out of complacency. He will now do so outside of an organization deep in the depths of an identity crisis rooted in their double-minded ecclesiology. You will be hearing and seeing a lot more of Bishop Williamson in the months and years ahead. Stay tuned.

Great!

Quote

That's all for now. I will have more in a few weeks when I am with the Bishop in London to do his first public interview since 2010.

Wonderful news.

Thank you Stephen for helping the good Bishop Williamson so much over the years.

God bless Bishop Williamson, the Lion of ... ~~Engl~~... Europe? ... The world? :-)

zviadist · « **Reply #9 on:** October 17, 2012, 08:41:39 AM »

Quote from: Selkie

I fully agree with Bishop Williamson and Steven Heiner (except with regard to those matters pertaining to Steve's here-unacknowledged disagreements with His Excellency -- I'm sure I know what they are).

A cavil:

There is a sense in which the Bishops Three are responsible for the present situation; 1), they should have known better than to give the traitor bishop an unprecedented second term as Superior General, especially to do so on the basis that not "re-electing" Bishop Fellay might "disrupt the negotiations"; 2), there never was anything about which to cut a deal in the first place! that surely was clear when Archbishop Lefebvre observed that all popes since the vile (non) Council had been "anti-Christ" (quotation Lefebvre's); doubtless, one may reasonably extrapolate to conclude said condemnation embraces all future, ergo post-Council, popes (with the single exception of the pontiff who will one day do Our Lady's bidding).

No matter how long the spoon, one does not, ever, sup with the Devil.

Excellent points indeed. One thing difficult to remember at times is that when it comes to these kinds of matters what we see is an intersection of spiritual issues and political struggles. While we trust our priests and bishop(s) to guide us with their superior training and experience on matters of the Faith, often they are quite inexperienced when it comes to the political struggle. This is likely due to the difficulty in extracting one from the other in many confusing situations. Political mistakes were made, as you point out. Had they not been made perhaps we would not be in this situation. Let us try to use our different talents to help where we can.

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2012, 10:40:53 AM »

Quote from: magdalena

I hope that this will make +Tissier de Mallerais and +de Galarreta stand up and think. May Our Dear Lord bless you and keep you, +Williamson.

I am afraid it might have made them think they better keep their heads down and their mouths shut. What a sad, ugly, un-Christlike business this mess is.

Incredulous · « **Reply #11 on:** October 17, 2012, 04:12:45 PM »

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: magdalena
I hope that this will make +Tissier de Mallerais and +de Galarreta stand up and think.

I wouldn't bet on it.

(... and I think that these two are theologically good men.)

This is similar to a comment Bp. Williamson made about Pope Leo XIII, essentially:

"His theological thinking was correct, but his pratical implementation was weak".

magdalena · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2012, 05:46:40 PM »

Just a reminder of who and what +Fellay is expelling: Clarity of Speech vs. Ambiguity. Which, may I ask, do you think saves souls?

Francisco · « **Reply #13 on:** October 19, 2012, 03:55:56 AM »

Quote from: dedalus

(I'm reposting my same reply to your same question on an another forum. Hope it clears things up)

Seraphim

As we say here in America, this is "not my first rodeo."

Let me walk through three things:

1. Bishop Williamson has retained two accounts here in America since he left for Argentina in 2003. I know because I've been making deposits into them for the last decade.
2. I mentioned on the site that I can handle donations specifically from the United States and Canada. If you do not live in these countries, I am sure that other lay faithful might be able to speak to those particular circuмstances. I not only have the Bishop's permission to collect funds - I've actually done it over the years. I don't know that various laypeople around the world can be personally vouched for by the Bishop. I can be. As I said in my article - you will hear more soon and as other things come online (paypal accounts, other lay collectors for the bishop) I'll share it. But there is no new bank account being opened here. Just using the ones that have always been open.
3. Finally, as a pretty recalcitrant clericalist/monarchist, I have always, when with him, treated him according to his grace of state. The bishop doesn't carry his own baggage, get his own food, or open his own doors. I know that we think sending him checks is the "prudent" thing to do, but all you are creating for him is more work. It should not be on a bishop's daily list to "go to the bank," or "go to the post office." He has people to take care of those things for him. Something as simple as receiving a check, depositing it, and sending a thank-you note on his behalf - as I've done for almost 10 years now - is not something the Bishop *needs* to be doing. That being said, God love you, it's your money and do with it as you will. Just know that American checks sent to a British bank will not be cashed or will be cashed with a heavy surcharge. The British, a fairly socialist country, like taking money everywhere they can.

Hope that clears things up.

PS As an aside - the Bishop is likely to get an enormous level of donations - and on his behalf - because he's said it to me many times - he does *not* want your donations to come at the cost of your duties to your family.

PPS The bishop has several arrangements for where he will stay but they will not be given out as mailing addresses. In due time such things will be properly established.

PPPS Nothing in my article conveyed that the Bishop would be "starting a new congregation from scratch." Indeed, I find that to be very unlikely. These funds are simply for his personal upkeep and to take care of flights, etc. for his apostolate, which will re-activate now.

Dear Stephen Heiner, It's good to know that you have been caretaking two of our good Bp Williamson's bank accounts in America for several years. I have expressed the need for GOOD MONEY MANAGEMENT by the Resistance on at least four occasions in different posts in this forum. Money issues may well bring down the Resistas in the future. On another forum I have read someone giving the SSPX-SO a year's lifespan.

I know what I'm talking about as I've been an observer of the goings on of the past few years in the Asia District of the SSPX. I hope OUR good bishop will keep his funds independent of others and will not be sucked in by sob-stories of any sort from other quarters.

From what I have seen of Bp Williamson, he is an astonishingly frank, open-hearted yet distinguished personality. We have to see that he is not taken advantage of now in any way.

Ethelred · « **Reply #14 on:** October 19, 2012, 07:20:02 AM »

Quote from: magdalena

Just a reminder of who and what +Fellay is expelling: Clarity of Speech vs. Ambiguity. Which, may I ask, do you think saves souls?

Ambigarity, of course, ambigarity.

"I would hope so..." (said Bishop Fellay, when asked if Vatican II itself belongs to Catholic tradition.)

No? Well, then maybe this?

Religious liberty is used in so many ways, and looking closer I really have the impression that not many know what really the council says about it. The council is presenting a religious liberty which in fact was a very, very limited one, very limited.

Still no? Then this, maybe?

The Pope says that the... he even said it recently, that the council must be put within this great tradition of the Church, must be understood within this, and in correlance with it. These are statements we fully agree with, totally, absolutely.

Absolutely, isn't it.