CathInfo.com

http://associacaosantoatanasio.blogspot.mx/2015/04/fotos-visita-episcopal-monsenhor-faure.html

In the above photos Bishop Faure does not impose his hands on them while anointing them with chrism, as is the correct way. He merely has his fingers extended alongside their heads without touching them while his thumb does the anointing.

How it should be done:
http://www.fsspx-sudamerica.org/imagenes4/3006.jpg
http://sspx.ca/sites/sspx/files/styles/news_big/public/events/confirmations.jpg?itok=qZVF8aEm
http://laportelatine.org/international/communic/presse/afrique/2013/confirmations_tissier_nigeria_130602/conf001.jpg

1) Why does Bishop Faure omit this important part of the rite?

2) Why does Bishop Williamson give the permission to priests to confirm?  How can he do this? Archbishop Lefebvre, even before he consecrated 4 auxiliary bishops, never did this.  

Per Fr. Chazal, in Austrailasia Report IV:
"His Lordship is delegating us the power to confirm, as done in mission territory or in time of persecution."
http://www.therecusant.com/apps/blog/show/42407882-fr-chazal-australasia-report-iv

And I recall that Bishop Williamson also gave Dom Tomas Aquino in Brazil the same "delegation" at one point.  

Why don't you write to Bishop Faure instead of whining to the entire Internet about it.

He hasn't been a bishop that long, you know. Maybe it was an honest mistake -- regardless of how serious.

Once I was at a baptism and heard the SSPX priest say, "Ego te baptismo" -- the correct words are "Ego te baptizo". This wasn't a young OR new priest. Quite a seasoned one, as a matter of fact. I assume it wouldn't affect the validity, since it's "close enough".

http://associacaosantoatanasio.blogspot.mx/2015/04/fotos-visita-episcopal-monsenhor-faure.html

In the above photos Bishop Faure does not impose his hands on them while anointing them with chrism, as is the correct way. He merely has his fingers extended alongside their heads without touching them while his thumb does the anointing.

You know, Green Scapular, you really take the cake.

People like you accuse the Resistance of "muck raking" on the SSPX -- digging up problems where there aren't any.

But you are doing *precisely that* in your fight against the Resistance.

I looked at the photos -- I didn't see the problem you describe. It seems that you're getting out your protractor and compass, to check the angle of the priest's hand as he does the anointing of the forehead with his thumb.

It looks fine to me. His hand is sufficiently over the person's head, considering his thumb has things to do. He hasn't done thousands of Confirmations yet, like the 4 +Lefebvre bishops have. Maybe he'll get a bit better at keeping his thumb pointed towards "7 o clock" so the fingers will be pointing straight up, over the person's head a bit better. It's not intuitive. Try it yourself. Take your thumb and pretend to anoint the air in front of you with Chrism. Your first attempt will be to do it naturally, with your thumb basically straight up and down -- watch where your fingers point.

I think +Faure was reading the Latin rubrics to do the Confirmation as best he could -- he probably didn't watch videos or talk with fellow bishops on "tips" on how to do the best possible job. Or maybe he did; who knows.

You're like one of those people who "does the math" when a young couple's first baby was born. Heaven help them if the baby is born early/premature!

So should resisters go by Matthew's "gut feeling" about what is good enough, or should they expect a traditional bishop to follow the ritual precisely and exactly?  

The question should be repeated: Have you made any effort to express this concern to the Bishop himself?

What purpose does it serve to discuss a new bishop's possible mistakes with us rather than simply passing the information on him?