https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/williamson-requiem/msg971527/#msg971527AI Translation from the French video :
Quotation marks are flexible, because of the spoken style of the conference.
Welcome friends from Belgium and non-Belgium, and those who
are behind the screen:
Here we go!
So today I chose to talk of course about Msgr Williamson and then
about his... what was his legacy?
Someone asked: 'Well... what was, what is Msgr Williamson's true
legacy? So I told him that first, it’s the bishops, the main thing,
it’s the essence he has left us... the Church rests on the bishops, and
he has left us 6 bishops, there you go, and perhaps with
Msgr. Vigano it’s a seventh? So we had reported that he was
consecrated conditionally -
and 'a priori' I can tell you that well, he was. There you go.
So the legacy of the bishops and of course the spiritual legacy
of Msgr Williamson - it is enormous! it is colossal! We had to deal
with an exceptional character. Recently, and I also speak for the French,
we had the death of Jean-Marie LePen, so, caution, it’s an analogy...
it’s worth what it’s worth: I think that Jean-Marie LePen marked the
landscape of French politics, there you go, concerning politics; and
we can say, I think, without exaggeration, that Msgr Williamson has
marked the landscape of the Church - after the death of Msgr Lefebvre.
He is an unavoidable figure, whether one likes him or not,
(I will even quote a few comments from people who don't like
him... there are many of those too!...) and Pope Francis, to start
with, Msgr. Fellay, of course, Pope Benedict XVI, and then of
course, all the mainstream newspapers, what do they call it?
that really see him as the man to take down. So, an
unavoidable figure, one could say that the history of the
Second Vatican Council was marked, of course, by Msgr.
Lefebvre. He experienced the Council, he lived through the
post-Council period, he founded the Society of Saint Pius X,
and then he primarily consecrated bishops and four bishops.
But he died in 1991, so it has been quite a few years now.
And one might wonder who ultimately took over in a very [ that’s it…]
this is the text by Sean Johnson. Yes! I have it. Here it is.
One could say that he has been, without exaggeration, I think, and I
know that this will upset some people who will say no, it’s (...) We
will see why I believe he has been the rightful heir to Msgr.
Lefebvre. You have an article that was written by Sean Johnson. If
you can read it, it was translated and is in English, and it has been
translated. It effectively retraces the history of what happened
between modernist Rome and Msgr. Lefebvre. So I will read a little
bit to you because I think it’s interesting:
''The faithful do not know that in the years leading up to
1988, while Msgr. Lefebvre was still negotiating with
modernist Rome, the name and dossier of Father Richard
Williamson were proposed to Cardinal Ratzinger as his
preferred choice for episcopal consecration. ...''
And this, as we now know, is proven - the private secretary of Msgr
Williamson has confirmed it to us... it’s not an invention. There you go! That’
s what came from those who say ... 'there you go again!... no.' It's a reality.
... ''Msgr. Lefebvre had a preference for (...) Msgr. Williamson.
It is this man and no other that Msgr. Lefebvre chose to perpetuate
and safeguard the Traditional Catholic priesthood and all that pertains to it.''
It's interesting, I think we have the story of Msgr.
Williamson, it's there.
'’...And this is why his society was created, the Society of Saint Pius
X was established in order to train priests, in order to train
bishops. Therefore, 'in fine', the most important aspect of Msgr.
Lefebvre's work is the bishops, not the Society of Saint Pius X...''
And so, of course, it was the episcopate of Msgr. Williamson.
‘’This is why his Society’’ wrote Rome, ‘’understood that such a
man, Msgr. Williamson, could not obtain episcopal consecration
because his candidacy represented a continuation of Lefebvrism.
The great danger in consecrating Msgr. Williamson is that it
would perpetuate Tradition’’ - for Rome, it was a catastrophe.
We could not negotiate with him.’’
So let’s examine why.
‘’They needed someone else who, over time, could separate from the
views of the founder of the Fraternity so that the Fraternity could
be redirected towards conciliarism and that the traditionalist
resistance could be eliminated. Therefore, they found their man in
the person of Msgr. Fellay, who, upon attaining the highest rank of
Superior General of the Society in 1994, at the instigation of Abbé
Schmidberger, directly violated the founder’s order that a bishop
would never become Superior General. But he who raises...'' the
justifications…’’
So here we have the struggle, the Catholic tradition; in fact, we may
not have seen it clearly, but it has occurred at this level, at the level of the
bishops, the struggle of the bishops, and we can see that Catholic
Liberalism has been taking place for almost two centuries now.
This happens mainly through liberal bishops who
progressively drive out a liberal pope and expel the tradition.
This is what we witnessed with the Second Vatican Council.
And this is what happened within the Society of Saint Pius X.
''...In Msgr. Fellay, Rome found a man to work with - as they stated.
[So here I read to you for example Pope Francis] :
'Bishop Fellay is a man with whom one can dialogue...'[with
whom one can have a dialogue]. ‘’That is not the case with
other elements'' with others,’’ who are a little strange...’’ [My
English, excuse me, which is a bit strange,] such as Bishop
Williamson. .. ‘’
There you go. ‘’Others who have been radicalized. I say
radicalized with others who are radicalized.’’ So, we can
discuss with Msgr. Fellay, there you go, but not with Msgr.
Williamson... very interesting.
So that was, I don't know the date of the citation question. It
comes from the book of the little biography, you can find it called
The Trumpet ? of the (...) with Msgr Fellay, so we found a man to
work with, a man ready to diverge from the principle of action of
Msgr Lefebvre from 1988 on which there would be no practical
agreement with modernist Rome until Rome returns to tradition.
The line of Msgr. Lefebvre is actually a very simple, very clear line,
namely that we cannot return to the fold of Rome as long as Rome
has not converted, as long as the Pope has not converted, as long as
we do not have a Catholic pope. It’s obvious.
And so the idea was to
introduce into the Society of Saint Pius X an element that would
allow them this reverse movement. In doing so, M. Fellay was
introducing division within the Society of Saint Pius X and
a quiet power struggle was beginning between those on the
side of Mgr. Fellay, who therefore wanted a practical
agreement with Rome, modernist Rome, and those behind
Msgr. Williamson and Msgr. Lefebvre who refused any
negotiation. Submitting their congregation to conciliar
re-education under a modernist and hostile authority.
So what is going to happen? This is the story we all know.
Msgr Fellay was elected in 1994. And there we saw Msgr
Williamson progressively being sidelined from all influential
positions within the Society of Saint Pius X. Msgr Fellay, as the
superior general, held all the cards and after initiating secret
negotiations with Rome through the GREC,"
which stands for the reconciliation group among Catholics,
a discreet and secret group,
or however you want to put it, somewhat para-Masonic. Yes, an
ecuмenical group, with an ecuмenical aim, but above all
discreetly. For instance, they were the ones who organized the
famous jubilee of the year 2000. With all the...
'which officially existed, this GREC between 1997 and 2000,
it was agreed with Cardinal Hoyos to proceed step by step
towards canonical recognition. He knew that Msgr. Williamson
had to be involved.
Thus, in 1999, Msgr Fellay sought to exclude.
(Why yes, in '99, he was excluded from the American
seminary, but attention, the latter refused until 2003. There he
held this important position as the director of the seminary in
Winona. There, you start to understand, you now see the things) t
he date on which he agreed to be transferred to Argentina,
thus a smaller, less influential seminary.’’
So in a way, Msgr., there, the liberals could best distance him
and especially, especially, I knew him, I saw him live, slandered in
France, in
Belgium, in Germany, you see that's why we, as priests, young
priests at the time, I was ordained in 2001, Msgr. Williamson
was someone venerable, but a bit far away, you know who knows...
when he came to France, it was truly exceptional.
So yes, 2000 [ welcomed him discreetly
already, there was already from 2001, there was already a
willingness to... so, ] "the date that will be an important step
against Mgr Williamson, but it was not enough. And in 2009, the
famous interview on the 0Iocaust served as a pretext to remove
Mgr Williamson from active ministry by sequestering him in an
attic in Wimbledon for four years, while Msgr. Fellay threatened,
maneuvered to vilify his name, [ so I experienced a variety of
slanders live about his health, about his mental health, about his
balance, all kinds of slanders, there you go, and that’s why when
there was the rallying in 2012, when it came to exclude him from
the Fraternity, there was hardly any reaction, if you will. There
you go! So here is the history of the Church. You see, it’s the
struggle between the liberals and the anti-liberals. This story that
you find already in the 19th century. The liberals arrange to
sideline the anti-liberals from influence. So “his name and
reputation until 2012, the date on which, upon revising the
constitutions of the Society of Saint Pius X, with a view to his
reintegration into the conciliar Church during the July Chapter, he
expelled the most loyal confidants of Msgr. Lefebvre, faithful
confidant, in October 2012.”
And that's why at the Chapter, there were about forty members,
and it was only when Msgr Fellay proposed the exclusion of Mgr
Williamson from the chapter that only a few, a handful of priests, I
don't really know who, there were 5, 6, 7, 8, I can't remember exactly,
opposed this out of 40, so that was the end of it.
‘’The Fraternity of St. Pius X, now silenced, is increasingly drawing
closer to another indult community, the Priestly Fraternity of
Saint Peter. Mgr. Williamson would become the moral leader of the
resistance movement, which includes all the priests of the Fraternity
or allies, namely the allied communities, expelled or cut off for
having resisted the betrayal of modernist Rome. Therefore, he
was conducting consecrations and starting from 2015, he
performed ordinations and consecrations in 2021. I have no
further details about whether he would ultimately consecrate
seven bishops for the various factions of the resistance and
conditionally consecrate another bishop, a refugee from the
conciliar Church.’’ Here, he is referring to Msgr. Vigano. But just as
divisions emerged within the larger Church, and also within the
Fraternity of St. Pius X, they would also arise within the
resistance, and the final outcome would be that at the time of the
sad news about the hemorrhage of Mgr. Williamson's death, this
great man was gradually dying in much the same way as our Lord
Jesus Christ.’’
Well, he exaggerates a little. So this is Sean Johnson. Sean
Johnson, who was a seminarian in Winona, so he met Msgr
Lefebvre - Msgr Williamson, whom he definitely knew. So, yes, a
question. Oh yes, you wanted to know, my English with English
is just English and I have three voices. So, I have roughly
outlined what interests us, which is the fight of Msgr.. The
liberal versus anti-liberal struggle. I can show you where Msgr
Williamson stands in this fight; it's very important because this
is, I would say, the life of the Church. It's not that today people
want to become knights to fight against who knows what.
Today, the Church's struggle is a fight against liberalism... there
you go, against modernism. It's a spiritual battle and Msgr
Williamson has been at the forefront of this spiritual battle. So
that's what I wanted to emphasize.
So now, if I want to quickly catch up on the life of Mgr
Williamson. He passed away, for those who don't know, on
January 29 (2025.) at 11:23 PM, which is the feast day of Saint Francis
de Sales. Some say he had his
hemorrhage on the feast day of the conversion of Saint Paul,
which is a bit shocking; and he died on the day of Francis de Sales. I
think this nicely summarizes his death, in fact, it summarizes his
life. That's a bit of it. The conversion, the conversion from
Anglicanism, was brutal, rapid, and then we could truly say it
reflected the apostolic spirit of Saint Francis de Sales, and the
gentleness of Saint Francis de Sales, because you see, when you
read or look at biographies or anything on Wikipedia or any kind
of website, in the official media, you get the impression of
someone who is terrifying, dark, terrible, evil; not at all. It's like
Lefebvre, who was painted in a dreadful light. Mgr Williamson
was the embodiment of gentleness. That's why I think that the fact
he died on the feast day of Saint Francis de Sales is significant. This
doesn’t mean he had a strong language, but I think everyone can
testify. I don't believe I'm exaggerating in this sense.
And so he spent these last days in a peaceful state, surrounded
by a few members of the clergy, the faithful, continually pleading
with the Holy Mother to whom he had been so devoted during his
life and to whom he credited the merit of leading him to the Holy
Catholic Faith at the age of 20 on March 8, 1940. He was of
Anglican origin. Indeed, he was born on March 8, the feast day of
Saint John of God in London. And so Richard Nelson Williamson
was the second of three sons of John and Helen Williamson. An
unpracticing Anglican middle-class family, an intelligent child, it
shows on his face when we see the little baby there, we can see t
hat there is energy in his gaze, in his intelligence. He receives a
scholarship to study at Winchester College, where he receives a
classic humanities education, someone who was truly steeped in
the humanities, capable of quoting Cicero in sermon, the Beatles as
well. I remember that. Before entering the University of
Cambridge, he studied English literature. There you go.
so maybe that's where he developed a taste for Shakespeare.
‘After graduating, Richard Williamson spent two years
teaching at a school in Ghana [, so he was in Africa, teaching
young Africans. I think it must have had a good impact] before
obtaining a position at Saint Paul’s School in London during t
he tumultuous years of the 1960s. There he experienced the
revolution of the 1960s. During those years in London, he
began to question history, culture, and meaning more and
more.’ He became passionate about Beethoven, Shakespeare,
and many other classics of Western culture that would
accompany him throughout his life. In fact, that's why he
always took an interest in classical humanities. He says it will
be an opportunity for young people to open their minds to the
truth. It makes you reflect. I once spent some time many years ago, I
had studied a bit of Greek and the Greek authors like Aristotle;
we didn’t have Aristotle, we had Sophocles. We studied poems,
you see, I was a little boy, I remember. We ask a lot of
questions, and that makes us think - and that’s very, very
important, and I think that’s what gradually led him to
question the spiritual dimension of man. Chance encounters
with the writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint
Augustine, as well as an interest in the major Marian
apparitions of modern times, particularly Garabandal, really
prompted him to reflect.’ Fatima, of course, came afterward.
“... led him to explore the Catholic religion and in 1971, he was
received into the Catholic Church by Abbé John Flanagan. ''
I believe that in discussions he had with students when he
was teaching, one day, there was a student who told him : ‘’
But Mr. Williamson, you are teaching us... it feels like you are
telling us the Catholic religion... ‘’ he spoke like a Catholic, if
you will.
So it intrigued him a lot because he spoke like a Catholic
without actually being one, if you will. Eventually, he received
this from the Catholic Church through Father Flanagan.
Question: Did he do something like an abjuration? Oh yes,
certainly. Yes, yes, he is abjured from the Anglican religion,
yes, certainly, that's it.
So, we are in the midst of neo-modernist agitation and he is
seeking; he has the vocation, he feels called. Obviously, he will be
rejected by the Durham?) diocese and by the Brompton Oratory
in London. With encouragement from Father Flanagan, Mr.
Williamson, well Richard, is then accepted into the seminary of the
Fraternity, where he arrives in 1972.
Well, that doesn't make you feel younger. I wasn’t even born yet;
I was born in 73. Well, thanks
to his solid training in classical letters, Msgr. Williamson was part
of the first group of seminarians ordained in the hot summer of '76.
So he only spent four years in the seminary instead of the usual six
years. I think... As a natural educator, he will then remain in the
seminary, first as a teacher in Weisbat in Switzerland, then in
Ecône until '82. He becomes the confidant and lieutenant of Msgr.
Lefebvre.
For example, a little anecdote: when the French television crews
came to visit the seminary in the 1970s, it was seminarian Williamson
who was tasked with accompanying and
being interviewed by them.
Here it is. And then, when there are going to be negotiations
between Msgr Lefebvre and Cardinal Ratzinger in the 1980s, it is
Father Williamson whom Msgr Lefebvre chose. So later, in 1988, it
will be different; it will be Father Tissier and Laroche. But in any case,
in the 1980s, it will be Father Williamson. This is therefore the great
period; the longest period of his clerical career was spent as
rector of the seminary, thus of Saint Pius X, first in Rigdefield in
the United States, from 1982 to 1988 and from 1988 to 2003. So he
was director of the seminary for nearly 20 years, from 1982 , to
almost 21 years, until 2003. And it was in 1988 that he would be
consecrated as a bishop at the same time as Fathers Fellay,
Galaretta, and de Mallerais. This consecration operation would be
called 'Operation Survival' by Msgr. Lefebvre, aimed at preserving
the survival of traditional sacraments, while the crisis of the
Church continued. Later, Msgr. would fulfill this mission as a
co-consecrator, consecrating another bishop, let me recall, in 1991,
Msgr. Luciano Rangel. And after the death of Msgr. Castro Mayer.
While he was a professor at the seminary in La Reja, after 2003,
Msgr. Williamson expressed opinions that disagreed with the
sacred narrative of the secular regime and the conciliar Church
regarding the supposed genocide of the J*ws during the Second
World War in an interview given in 2008 to a Swedish television
channel. In fact, he was trapped; he expressed his thoughts.
Except that it was in Germany. So he was gently trapped there.
These comments were then used to trigger a huge media storm in
2009, when Pope Benedict XVI claimed to lift, mind you, the
supposed excommunications of the bishops of the Society of Saint
Pius X that had followed the consecrations.
Again in 2009, in January 2009, I don't know if you recall,
there was the 'lifting' which was not an annulment. That was
the serious part. They had sung a Magnificat, I don't remember
what, to thank the HolyFather for his kindness. However,
in reality, it meant clearly that
the sanctions had indeed been imposed and that, in his immense
kindness, the pope lifted the sanction. Whereas, in fact, these
sanctions had always been considered null. And a few days later,
there was the media storm re: Williamson, the interview
became public. At that time, the pope declared, saying: '
Yes, we lifted the excommunication, but they are not yet in
perfect communion as long as they do not adhere to all the
conciliar ideas. In a way, I would say this unfortunate event,
but in fact providential, helped to show that the problem of the
Second Vatican Council was also a problem related to Juda1sm.
It allowed for dialogue to be resumed. So he will be confined to
London by the Society of Saint Pius X. We will ask him to really
be almost cloistered for four years. In London, Msgr Williamson
will strongly criticize the attempt at rapprochement with Rome.
This is seen as a deviation from the essential principle of
Archbishop Msgr Lefebvre.
Yes. Question: ‘You seem to be saying that the lifting of the
excommunications which never took place, while the
excommunication,,, ‘?
I agree, never actually occurred itself. That's a
different subject. No, what I meant to say is that the lifting of the
excommunication was somewhat of a show to make it seem like it
'really' happened. How can you lift something that never existed?
It's like saying Saint Joan of Arc was condemned; in fact, to them,
they say yes, yes, yes! They say 'we lift, we lift,' and this is a
declaration from Pope Benedict XVI; that's indeed the term used.
It's not about annulment; what we recognize is that there is nullity,
that there is no excommunication at all. They lifted or removed,
however you want to say it, a sentence that was passed. So Msgr
Williamson?, therefore, he will not revisit the criticisms he made
regarding this rapprochement between the Society of Saint Pius X
and Rome. He will thus be expelled in 2012; it was in October 2012,
I don't know if you remember, and he will then settle in Broadstairs...
it's there in the famous house by the sea where Saint Augustine of
Canterbury landed to bring the Gospel to the Anglo-Saxons.
It's a little anecdote in passing.
And so he has not given up at all because we can now
say excluded from the Fraternity of St. Pius X, there seemed
to be nothing left, quite the opposite.
‘’ He will be very energetic in his apostolic endeavors until the end
of his life. He will establish a network that will simultaneously
support a network of independent resistance pockets. The famous
strongholds mentioned by Father Calmel, which he now has all
over the world, are connected by their common faith, some charity,
and mutual support...’’ gathered around the Mass. ‘’
This is the case here, see, in Belgium in Namur, what unites us
is faith, it is charity, of course, around the holy sacrifice of the
Mass. Without structure, of false obedience, such as that which
served to sink the dominant Church in the 1960s and which is
currently sinking the Fraternity of St. Pius X. He has often traveled
around the world. So there, I believe I was told recently, a few
months ago, he was in Austria. Two weeks ago, he was still in Austria.
Even then, he already had extraordinary health. And a will. Thus, he
became a prominent episcopal voice on the Internet. It's true that
from the start, he knew how to use the Internet through which he
spread his conferences,
through his Eleison comments, through everything he did. The
Eleison comments. I don't know, so we would need to calculate
because he is at about 936. Oh pardon, 913, so knowing there
is one per week,[ I’ll let you do the math and at the end you’ll
give me the result. haha] He was very regular, that's it, you see, he
is very regular in the publication of his Eleison comments, in five
languages each time. So he revised the comments - he had them
translated. Then, he revised the translation in five languages every week
and it ispublished. So it's a colossal job and especially what is admirable is
his regularity.
Question: ‘You know, was that the pretext to exclude him?’
So it was indeed what Msgr Fellay asked him at the time of October
2012, it was to say: ‘You can stay in the Fraternity, but you
will not publish anything anymore.’ Which is completely
absurd when you think about it, because telling a bishop to be
silent goes against his very essence! A bishop is made to
preach. That is his primary mission. So they say: ‘No, no, he is
simply made to give the sacraments, communion, well,
confirmation and all that.’ No, no, no, no, no.
With the primary mission of the apostles, descending from the
apostles who are the bishops, it is to preach... and a bishop who
does not preach, I'm sorry, is no longer a bishop.
And even the sacraments, they may not even give them, they can
delegate. Read what Father Emmanuel says about this.
Abbe? Saint-Loup on the ‘Treatise on Ecclesiastical Ministry’. So, he
will visit them and consequently become very popular; they
will contribute to attracting a new generation of young people,
not just the young, but also helping the faithful of the
Fraternity to see clearly, already the elders, and to continue in
the good fight and uphold the tradition. And of course, as I
mentioned earlier, his most enduring legacy, which was the
question I was asked, what is his legacy? It is of course the
bishops he consecrated in 2015 by Msgr. Faure, Dom Thomas in 2016,
and Mgr Zendejas in 2017. In doing so, the late bishop acted to
ensure the transmission of traditional sacraments with certainty of
validity. Therefore, now diocesan priests, priests who join us
and wish to be validly re-ordained, have doubts. They turn to
the Fraternity and say: 'No, no, there is no problem.' So, they
now turn to the bishops of the resistance.
‘With the pseudo-pandemic of Covid 2020-2022 and the
resulting government tyranny, an additional motivation was to
ensure traditional sacraments for the faithful around the
world given the prospect of travel restrictions and persecutions,’
He actually sensed this danger.
‘Thus, Msgr Williamson privately consecrated Mgr Ballini in
2021 for Ireland, as he could no longer travel there. Bishop
Michal Stobniki in 2022 and Mgr Morgan in 2022 as well.‘ And
one can say that Msgr Morgan was the closest because he knew
little Paul Morgan, who was a family friend, so to speak, close
to Msgr Williamson, having regularly interacted with him over
there in London. And he is currently the one who is organizing,
who will organize the burial ceremony, the location... which has
not yet been defined because the English are often a bit complicated.
[I take this opportunity to tease
them], not only with their bizarre driving on the left (or their political Left )
but also for administrative matters; the burial will not take place for
another week or two, or even three weeks. It can be very long,
between one and four weeks. And so it is M Morgan who has
been tasked by Msgr Williamson himself to ensure his burial.
Question: Was….. Msgr Morgan there, with Msgr Williamson?
Unfortunately not, Mr. Morgan was present here, and thus he
assisted by phone. They were able to recite the prayers for the
dying. Msgr Morgan, although he could not be present, he
cannot be. However, he is already there now in England. So
there it is in brief, I would say, I painted a quick large picture
of Msgr's life.
And what could we now highlight as an aspect notable in spirituality ,
Msgr . Williamson?
I will begin by summarizing in one word the mission of this
bishop. What strikes you the most when you listen to or read what
he writes?
What stands out the most about Msgr. Lefebvre is that
he can be described as the Doctor of Christ the King. Our Lord, the
King of nations, is the defender of the royalty of Christ over the
world and human societies. Msgr. Lefebvre was greatly fascinated
by God as the being who dominates, who is independent, who is
above all and who rules over everything, who is the King of kings.
And Our Lord is the King of kings. Furthermore, Msgr. Lefebvre
was very captivated by God as the being who dominates, who is
independent, above all beings: He is ‘es a se’. We are indeed
completely dependent on God, on Christ,: es ab alio; whereas God is
the Being 'a se'; who lives by Himself. This could be said to
encapsulate the overall spirituality of Msgr. Lefebvre.
What can we say about the overall spirituality of Msgr.
Williamson? I think in one word, we could say that he is the
Doctor of the Truth of God. The truth. Deus ut Veritas. God as
Truth, the truth. Faith is the truth. Faith is the truth of God that
has been taught to us. The true God, the God who teaches the truth.
God as the primary truth. He sees the being of God, viewing it as a
true being that communicates itself intelligibly to man to reveal itself -
especially through faith, and also through creation, the natural order,
the truth of natural creation.
So why do we see that he marks our time? Because just as
Msgr Lefebvre defended Christ in an era where Christ was being
hunted, the Second Vatican Council, now what characterizes
our time is the lie. We live in a society of lies. Everything is
false. We are in hypocrisy, in appearance, in falsehood. And listening
to Msgr (Williamson?), we see that the devil is the father of lies, and that's it;
he really drove Christ away. First as King, and then also at the level of
intelligence, destroying the intelligence of men. And so God's response today is
that he is the truth. There is a truth, and this truth is knowable, that God
is the primary truth, that He exists, that one can know Him in existence,
that He is knowable. So, Msgr. Williamson, to make his summary,
I would say, is the doctor of Truth. That is why, by the way, in his spiritual j
ourney, we saw that he had this reflection through the teaching of letters,
classical culture, and he was then fascinated by Saint Thomas Aquinas.
And Saint Thomas Aquinas, what
does he truly define? It is the Truth, trying to explain faith and
all these aspects, all the human consequences in social life, in
individual life. And so there you go, Msgr. Williamson was
someone, a (disciple?), after the death of Msgr. Tissier, Msgr.
Williamson, the two great intellectual bishops of the Fraternity
have died. I think it's true, Msgr. Tissier was a contemplative
man, and Msgr. Williamson, energetic, but also a
contemplative. And he was a professor of metaphysics. We
see, by the way, we see videos of him, we see him striking or
hitting the table, saying the truth, and that it is the truth, and
he fought, therefore, against all forms of subjectivism,
Kantism, all this form of knowledge that makes man a god and
completely isolates him from truth, from reality.
And it requires, by the way, that you listen to his sermon. I
believe there is a significant sermon, a master sermon in his
episcopal life, it was the sermon of 2007 at Ecône, a one-hour
sermon! And there was - I know, I was present - he preached on
Pascendi. You see, on the encyclical of Saint Pius X to explain that he
condemned modernism, preaching for an hour on that topic, can you
imagine a sermon? If I were to preach for an hour on that,
everyone would be asleep. There's no problem... even after five
minutes. Him, no, you couldn't hear a fly buzzing, not even the
children. It's there that he also mentioned the Beatles in
passing. And also, (Louis Kispur?) I believe it was in that
sermon... There you go, I think it’s one of the great sermons of
Msgr Williamson. There it is, 'Strawberry Fields Forever.'.
So, in that memory, Doctor the truth, through his
Eleison Comments,. Thus, he published some bold comments
in Eleison. For example, I quote you the comment 591 where
he praises Faurisson. Why did he admire Faurisson, who was a
revisionist denying the existence of g as charnbers? Because he
indeed said that the g as charnbers did not exist, there is
scientific evidence to support that. And so he admired
Faurisson because he was a truly honest man who died—you
know, he was beat up, he was assaulted simply because he said,
'I am a plumber, I am obliged to acknowledge that the g as
channbers did n0t exist. It is a myth.' So, take that up. You also
have other Eleison comments, the 645 that I extracted which is
called ‘’World Sliding ‘ where he explains a bit that the
world is sinking into lies. A very beautiful Eleison comment.
He states: '...It is the Council of the 1960s that unleashed this
spirit of confusion of the 1970s. Since then, this mentality has
had a good half-century to spread.' There you go, spreading this
spirit of intellectual degeneration. Well, he is quite severe. He
says: 'It is not only the Society of Saint Pius X that is drifting; it i
s the entire world that is drifting in the soul of modern man.
One cannot make ‘a silk purse from sows ears', nor ‘make bricks
without straw'. Similarly, it is useless to believe that
the institutions of yesterday will not be emptied of their
substance by the men of today, for can deflated balloons
remain well inflated?'
He has a violent realism, which is quite... which can lead us to
pessimism; however, that was not the case. He discerned the
lie well, but he had the virtue of hope.
There you go. In the pilgrimage also in Pulley-en-Valet, from
the resistance in 2018, it was desired that the theme of this
pilgrimage be the Urgency of Truth. We bear witness to a man
who... Now this truth, it was not just clouds in the sun, clouds
like that, a bit. No, it was incarnated, very much incarnated;
Msgr Williamson was not an out-of-touch academic, in his Chair, like the
out-of-touch culture, not at all. Therefore, he was very
interested in truths, even of a natural order. This is where we
see that he was indeed embodied; the mysteries of incarnation
applied at all levels. In the family order, in particular, he was
very interested in all the advice for parents regarding
children's education, the role of women in society, the question
of whether women should pursue higher education or attend
university. He also spoke about clothing; he said a Catholic is
recognized in the street, you see. (everyone notices
Father’s soutane, haha)
Work—what is the work?
Where should one live—out in the countryside or not? You see?
Very concrete. Also regarding modern events, he warned
against a possible financial collapse, so one had to prepare to
be industrious, face difficulties, austere. You see these things. Thus, in
the natural order, and of course, he encouraged many capable
young people to pursue the humanities, especially men,
particularly boys. He himself spoke five languages fluently, but
with all their subtleties: French, of course, English, Italian,
Spanish, German, Latin—I believe he spoke Latin, and Greek, I
don't know. But well, there you go... he had great ease.
Video 43 minutes
And then, of course, in the natural order, there is music.
He was an artist, a great artist. He was capable of playing
Beethoven directly on the piano and analyzing, in detail, you
see?, the musical harmony to provide you with a precise
analysis of the pieces. He was a musician, and he had a
historical general knowledge that was truly unparalleled. In t
he natural order as well, and he was also interested in it and he
responds to (Soral?), who is telling you: ‘ we are pagans, we are
saviors’. Well, he showed that the Catholic was quite capable of
responding in a Catholic manner to modern problems, issues of
finance; he was interested in finance - for example, the
question of the dollar, the question of the Federal Reserve. He
was very interested in state relations, Russia's place in what is
currently happening, and of course, Israel's place. The situation
of the J*ws, he made special pieces on the Prot.ls of the
EIders of Zi0n. A topic that is beyond.... And of course, he was
one of the great champions in the fight against Kovidism, the
Kovidian deception, the lie of globalism. He was one of the only
bishops, almost, alongside Msgr. Vigano. I believe there were
only two. I don't know if you are aware of others who
denounced it in a very structured, profound way; elsewhere in
praise from Msgr. Vigano, he emphasizes this. ...He highlights that
Msgr. Williamson was one of the great ones who attacked very,
very, very violently the 'Deep State', meaning all this s
ubversive maneuver and those who were behind it. So he
defended the states that also align with this natural order. For
example, he defended Putin's Russia. Some will say, ah yes, but
it is under the influence of a certain Dugin.
I saw a moment when a journalist asked him questions: 'Do you
know Dugin? Do you know Guénon?' No... Msgr. Williamson
was interested in geopolitics; he was interested in Russia,
in the sense that he saw this process of Russia returning to
natural law, even if indeed the
causes might be, for example, the Lubavitchs, causes that are
irrelevant, but in any case, they clearly saw that Russia was
emerging from its socialism socio-communism and that, on the
contrary, the West was diving into it. And he was happy about that;
it does not mean he was under the illusion of saying that Russia
had become Catholic, not at all. That's why he publicly supported
Putin when he went to consecrate Msgr. Stobnicki. Rightly so, that
was quite courageous - very well done.
Question: ‘In his very last sermon 15 days ago (?), he makes
a similar analysis with Trump; not to be under any illusion,
but he brings back certain ...’
Here, I think he had a balanced judgment. It is clear that one
should not be under the illusion by saying that these are not people
who have become Catholic again, but well, it goes in a direction
that is still not bad in itself. Yes! Allthewhile preserving ourselves
from the illusion.
Regarding history as well, of course, he
will mainly dismantle the lies, the great historical lies such as the
nnyth of the 0locaust. And he also tackled the myth of September
11, the famous official version, that was very interesting. He was
one of the first bishops to show that -- he had a sense of flair for
everything that smelled bad, everything that was of more or less
Zi0nist or American-Zi0nist origin. So that is in the natural order.
Then if we move on, Msgr (Williamson?) he was a theologian, and
of course a great theologian. He may be one of the greatest theologians.
And precisely because he had a vision, I would say very exact and
logical, he is not someone who sees things like that from afar, up
high like I mentioned earlier, like a university scholar who does
not see well...things in concrete. For example, he understood that in the
current economy of salvation, the Holy Virgin had a particular
place. And he understood in the message of Fatima, that's why
he always comes back to the rosary, reciting the rosary, it was
one of his last wishes, in fact, even there he recited the rosary
while agonizing. Well, the place of the Holy Virgin in this
economy of salvation, you see, and that's why he said a Catholic
today might have difficulty attending the traditional Mass, it’s
difficult, we don’t have it every day. On the other hand, the
rosary, you see, say your rosary every day. Pray... not everyone
can say the full Rosary, but he encouraged the faithful to the
recitation and meditation of the rosary precisely to receive
graces. Well, I would say perhaps they come from the holy
Mass because everything comes from the sacrifice of Our Lord,
which is then distributed by Our Lady. The Virgin will draw the
graces from the holy sacrifice of the Mass to pour them out on
us. This is also why he was very attached to the apparitions of
the Virgin Mary. It's very important.
And so this theological vision, this theological faith too, he clearly
saw, he defended, he defended the apparitions, but he also defended
the authority of Rome through the magisterium. That's why he
explained to you encyclicals, accounts of encyclicals, of popes before
the Council
to show you that all his teaching as a bishop did not rest on the
apparitions of Garabandal or Fatima, but first and foremost on
the magisterium of the Church, on the teaching of the Church.
So I will also return to the question of apparitions because
certain doctors, whose names I will not mention, have reproached
him for being an apparitionist bishop, interested in all the dubious
apparitions, etc. He had a saying, a phrase that somewhat summed
up his theological thought, which goes: 'God, the Holy Virgin, have
the right to speak to men today’. Yes! God has the right to speak. So
of course, afterwards we must discern between true and false
apparitions. But be careful, be careful not to despise the
apparitions. This is very important. We can make very serious
prudential errors by rejecting apparitions or mystical writings,
particularly those of Maria Valtorta. So there you have it, aah! He
spoke about it... Read Maria Valtorta because if you only read
Saint Thomas Aquinas, he didn't explain both or the Catechism,
well, that will dry you up. There you see, we see a theologian like
Saint Paul who goes to the seventh heaven and comes back to the
most concrete things of everyday life. You see him even when he
was here with us, he addressed all the long-standing topics of daily
life while being a great theologian. So really supernatural in this
regard, supernatural also in his balance. I think he has a sense of
the Church. He understood that we are living in a revolutionary
period, an absolutely incredible period. What do we do when we
are in such an incredible period? We go back to the essentials, you
know - we go back to the essentials, we focus on what is most
important. And what is the most important thing in the Church? It
is faith, of course, and the legitimate hierarchy, that is, the bishops.
Faith, the sacraments, and that's it. After that, you see when we tol
d hmmm: 'Yes, but we need to create structures, yes, but we need
congregations.' No, no, he returned to what the primitive Church
was. What was the primitive Church? There were no Benedictines,
there were no Jesuits, there were no Dominicans, there were no
SAJMs, there was none of that. There were Apostles teaching the
faith, there were deacons taking care of things, and there was a
Christian community and the sacraments. So we return to the
essentials. That’s why Msgr Williamson, I would say that we need t
o be a bit practical. He said thus the Holy Mass, unity in faith, but
be careful with the structures. That doesn't mean we don't have the
right to form small associations, but he said
Attention to the large structures that want to oversee
everything. So, there is the essence of the Church.
And then no, I won't dwell too much on that, but I think he also
had a vision of modern man, the man who reflects a bit of fallen nature,
damaged nature. He understood that modern man is
particularly damaged. And that's why he always emphasized
that, of course, the solution is to restore the natural order, but
to rely on the Holy Virgin Mary.
Comment from audience: ‘When he was in South Africa, after his
ordination, it was at the time when Rhodesia had just gained its
independence. So, obviously, all the Protestants from all
possible sects were coming to take their place. This annoyed quite a
few white Rhodesians over there. That's right. And then one
day, someone called the others saying, I have another one
arriving. And this one, he comes from South Africa to prepare
your old potatoes, your tomatoes, your rotten eggs, etc., to use
during his conference. And then Msgr. arrived, so it was
Father Williamson arriving by plane, etc., and then he was
received fairly coolly. He gave his conference and the next day,
everyone still had their basket full. But there was the priory
that was established there at that moment the next day. Ah, it's
him! And the priorate of the Society of Saint Pius X, of course.
So he had the ability to turn things around while everyone
was negative. Transformed into positive.’
Here it is, and this is what we find in Monsignor; he rose
above conflicts, above petty human disputes. He knew how to
calm things down immediately. This was another aspect of
his personality.
Now, this is... I am moving more into the private, personal
realm. So I have highlighted a few points, and I don't know if
we can consider what you have read a bit. What we could note
is that I think, without being mistaken, that he had a selfless
kindness. He was a good person. He wanted to give. Of course,
he wanted to give first his teaching. But also, even on a material
level, he is someone who lived very simply, in poverty. He had a spirit of
poverty; he really was... he was not someone who was
interested in money at all! For example, when there were
collections here or during his later years, he did not live
comfortably. What he said was, "this is the money from the
collection; this is for the little ones," meaning for the school, for
Catholic works, etc. There you go.
Comment: Father, doesn't this disinterest make him uncorruptible?
I think this was one of the aspects of his strength, that he was
above material concerns; he was very disinterested materially.
Thus, uncorruptible, he was not someone you could easily corrupt.
If he were attached to material things...then yes. He was ready
to lose everything.
This was evident because
when he was expelled from Broadstairs, he had no priory,
nothing left; he even sewed his cassock himself, even resewed
the buttons because they had little visible buttons, his cassock
in his old age.
So, well, there you go, he was ready for that, and
he was very interested; he was good in the sense that when he
arrived at a priory or at a house in a small bastion of
resistance, one of the questions was, "Are you eating well? Do
you have enough money to live?" He would ask, yes, we were
the ones who didn't ask him; it was he who asked us! If we had
what we needed for basic living… and completely basic things, and
of course, afterwards, he
was interested, as a bishop, in the pastoral aspects of the
priory, you know, those very things, and in a very
disinterested way—it was never for him. So we also see a great
frankness in him. Well, obviously, there's the concern for truth,
so don't hesitate to even show me... to manifest flaws, small
flaws, or forgetfulness, which were quite frank, very frank,
very direct. So also it's his strength. I think what sets him apart
a bit in his character is a somewhat extraordinary strength, a
physical strength, yes; he had iron health. I believe that at the
seminary, when, you know, we did mountain climbing, the
seminarians often went climbing, they called him 'the
locomotive Williamson.' It was, you can see well, it's someone
who was capable of handling time slots, journeys in all
directions with an incredible strength that most men, the
common man, would not have been able to endure. That
doesn't mean he didn’t have fatigue at times, but he did things
that were truly very, very, very powerful. So this strength is not
just physical; it is also moral, and I would say there was a
psychic strength that was out of the ordinary. Because to
endure what he endured throughout his life, to have faced
slanders, all that, even everything that some said about him,
claiming he was a Rosicrucian,... all of that, vile slanders, things
that circulated on the Internet about him or about his supposed
networks, I don't know what he might have been part of, all
that. Well, he generally didn’t even acknowledge it, but it must
have touched him somehow.
So, in my opinion, this strength
was not merely of natural origin but also supernatural, which I
think was drawn from his Marian devotion. Because he had a
great sensitivity; let's be honest, he was an artist; he was a
musician. He felt—he actually had a contact with children—I
don’t know; I published a little video; we see him.
He also sees: there are the children who kiss his ring, he
sees each child, looking at them with a distinctly marked little
smile. So there is a sensitivity, but it was very mastered. He had
control over his sensitivity and emotions. And contrary to what
one might think, he held no grudges, absolutely none. He was
capable of forgetting the worst insult from an enemy from half
an hour ago, it could become something forgiven as long as, of
course, there was something—an extreme willingness to
reconcile. Not that he was liberal, not at all; he knew how to pass
the sponge – forget . I think this is characteristic of great
anti-liberals—when you read about their lives, these are
people who are very firm on principles but very conciliatory
on opinions and human
relations. And that’s why he was someone excessively pleasant
to be around. You see, he mingled with people who were
absolutely not on his side, but everyone appreciated him
humanely. There you have the extreme conciliation.
And then
as we said earlier, he really was someone who was a 'great
lord'. We can see this in his demeanor; even if sometimes he
wore slightly worn-out cassocks or work cassocks, he walked
around a bit, but this was not noticeable because he had a
manner of speaking, a presence, and he also knew how to
maintain a distance with the laity. There was both mutual
respect and a natural distance that didn’t impose—it de
manded respect without being imposing, which made him very
approachable. And why was that? Because in my opinion, he
was someone very aware of his responsibilities, the greatness
of his mission, of his burdens, but who leaned on, aware of his
weaknesses, and of course on the Holy Virgin Mary.
So, I hope I’
ve painted a portrait for you. Well, it's a bit—how should I say—
I am not a biographer; I was not the closest to him. I hope there
will be someone soon to write a biography on Msgr
Williamson; I appeal to the listeners. If someone wants to
embark on a biography of Msgr
Williamson, like Mgr Tissier did for Mgr Lefebvre, I think it
would be good for one day to have someone close to him;
perhaps Mgr Morgan might take on that task; I hope he’s
listening. He will start to say: ‘That’s it! The abbé has given me
work, darn.’ But there you go, I really think it would be a great
thing. So, what is hoped for, in addition to that, is that his
Eleison comments be published in book form. I know there are
projects, but I won’t tell you who... These are projects because I
think that would be very interesting especially if it were in
form, with an analytical table, a table with all the themes
addressed that actually respond to all the issues we face today:
globalism, health—he was a bishop who really tackled all the
issues. The vacantism site too. The Mass. There you go. Yes, a
small question to conclude.
Question: So I don’t know; I haven’t, yes, no, I
don’t know. His brother, in any case, was present for his last
jubilee. But his parents have passed away. As for his brother, I
don't know... No one is a prophet in their own country.
Anyway, in general, here we are. Stay nonetheless closer t
o the Catholic religion. So I think yes, and the Anglicans of the
High Church, that's the most conservative Anglican part.
Indeed, they are quite close in terms of ideas with the Catholic
Church, so maybe that's also something more than that really,
one could say that the conversion of Msgr Williamson is truly
something supernatural. Even if there can indeed be some
elements. In the life of Msgr Williamson, I think there is a
primarily natural preparation, really deep natural virtues,
solid general culture, a profound psychic balance, and then
1970, the conversion and then the vocation and the ordination.
I think he was prepared in his youth, regardless of his
origin. He was prepared for his mission and he carried out his
mission to the end and faithfully so. He was found faithful.
“ UT FIDELIS INVENIAMUR -’ He truly corresponded to grace until the end.
So what to say next
about his fellow bishops from the Society of Saint Pius X, it's
sad, it hurts because Msgr Tissier, yes, his soul R.I.P., but there
remains Msgr of Galaretta, I don't know what horizon he navigates,
and of course, Mgr Fellay, who has the heavy responsibility of
having betrayed.
Question: ‘And what will remain in the history of these last days,…?’
There is a video of the Fr Chazal. Ah yes, so it's to do penance.
You can listen to the video in English
from Abbe Chazal to improve your English (haha). But I'm sorry. There
you go, you will go Mgr., you will translate it. You will do very
well.
So what I invite you to do now is to read, to listen to Msgr
Williamson, and then to imitate him, to follow him in the good
fight of faith.
Question: ‘ Is it necessary to say that he really illustrates the
adage, supernature presupposes nature?’
Yes, I think we can say that supernature needs nature, it cannot
dispense with nature. He embodied, throughout his life, a nature,
a good nature, if
you will, with which grace will have its effect. And he observed
that the modern world was destroyed in the nature. And especially
at the level of intelligence, the functioning of intelligence is
destroyed for him, that is what was the most serious in
restoring common sense first. Common sense and restoring the
family in which nature evidently flourishes, the Catholic
family. The family in short. This is what I recently explained to
the faithful with the book that must be read and you must all
have it, the “L’Esprit Familial” of Msgr. Delassus. We need to
build strong families, families that last, families; today
everything I would say association, stuff, whatever one wants,
we need to rebuild strong families, a nation, a country is
rebuilt around families. This is how the Church is rebuilding around
families. It's not the schools, it's not the associations. Sorry, around
exams?. No, no, we need to rebuild families - solid families. And
there we see it, Msgr Williamson was an illustration of great
families, not just one family, but in any case a solid life. And that’s
why in this commentary and his lectures. Ah always, it was his
leitmotif and especially the role of the father of the family.
Question: ‘The role of the father returning to families?’
It's a bit like the snake biting its tail, but I think that where God
has placed us, where we have a little something, we should not
always leave with the idea that we
are going to do immense things, but already do well where God
has placed us, respecting the little everyday things in the education
of children, in directing, and that’s what he did himself. In the
daily discipline of family life, the little things, there are little things
that make the family restore itself. Today we must not the
preliminary battle, if we take the example of Jean de Vacquier, the
preliminary battle is in the little things. Fidelity to the little things.
When we haven't received, it’s obviously unfortunate, but we
must have the humility to say well yes, I have the humility to say I
am not perfect, but I will try to strive for perfection to do my best.
Listen to people. Look at what is done well. Msgr Williamson used
to say look at this mother of a family, observe her, or this
grandmother. Look at the example she left you. “No, no, I know
how to do everything, I don’t need an example. “Look at the
example of your elders. There is a gentleman I know in Angers,
who is a gentleman from Maillard, who writes works called: “
Listen to your elders.” There you go, listen to them, look at them,
see what they have done. Don't be pretentious. Be humble. Today,
we have young cocks, all proud, I am a father of a family, I am
this, I know everything. No, look at the elders. Listen to your
elders. There you go. We will stop there for today. A question is
whether there will be other bishops.
Well, obviously there will be other bishops, but there are six
for now and there may be more in the future. It's obvious, the
Church is not going to stop in 2025. It will continue; there will
be other bishops. Only God knows. But it is certain that now
the mission of the six bishops is to forge their successors, to
forge the successors. A bishop must think about his succession.
That's all. Ah, maybe, I think there is a movement of
sympathy, at least within the Society of Saint Pius X. I know there
are priests; there was a lot of esteem. Except for one exception,
I believe there is a priest in Belgium who has publicly
defamed him, to not name him because it is defamatory; he
publicly said that we should pray for this bishop who was
outside the Church. So I grant you the liberty to correct this priest.
There you go, from Brussels, lamentable, while others among
his peers would never dare to say such things, even the
Communiqué from the Society of Saint Pius X is not too bad. It is
kind, it is respectful; it is not roughly: “... our paths have
separated.” No, you did send him away! But they did pray after
all.
Whereas I see in other congregational sites where there is
no word, nothing at all about Msgr Williamson, which is not
very correct, so no, there are priests in the Society of Saint Pius
X; I think they have a great esteem, who have been ordained by
Msgr Williamson, ah yes, we have seen how some can be
ungrateful. Some have great esteem, and I tell you, he has been
so defamed within the Society of Saint Pius X that it will be
difficult for many to turn back and understand that they
actually had a saint in front of them.
I conclude there, I think, I won't canonize him before the time,
but for me, I believe we are dealing with a holy man – a holy bishop.
who will truly remain in the annals of the history of the Church.
So, too bad for those who spat on him and caused him so much
misery. Moreover, I think that from high in heaven, if he is there
now, Msgr. will help us.
Ah! Yes, an important thing, let us pray
well for him. Of course, we never know the fate of a soul. But I
believe that by praying to him, we will receive particular graces
from him. He will help us. Because the path we have to follow
today is the path he has marked for us. So we must pray him.
There. Well, we will recite an Ave Maria to conclude in gratitude
to Msgr. and for the repose of his soul.
Abbé Salenave, 2025
Topic: +Williamson requiem? (Read 15971 times)