Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 4:17:06 GMT
In another unfortunate disclosure, Bishop Williamson refused, again, to give what he is commanded by the Catholic Church to give freely for the salvation of souls -- the Treasures and graces of Christ's redemption. Not doing so makes Christ blood and sacrifice in vain.
The SSPX-mc priests (Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko) wrote another letter (sent via confirmed email) this past May 2018 to Bishop Williamson, as they do every year, requesting Holy oils, Confirmations, and elevations to priesthood for the Traditional Catholic seminarians present serving the Church. Bishop Williamson again refused! But what really is his obstinate refusal to: Catholic seminarians?, priests of the SSPX-mc continuing?, the Catholic Church herself needing priests in this crisis?, souls suffering in want of God's graces needing priests Bishop Williamson refuses to give? (sic)
Understanding Bishop Williamson and the other three bishops Faure, Aquinas, Zendejas have been refusing the SAME, from these many repeated annual requests, the fathers asked for His Excellency to give them a courteous return by June 9, 2018 even if it is a no. He didn't. Yet, as much as the Church is battered by Her own negligent bishops and priests, there are conversions that still come. The SSPX-mc apostolate is growing widely in spite of the negligence of these bishops acting selfishly from the needs of the Church.
After all Bishop Williamson did say on Nov. 3, 2012 within his new venture forced unjustly to leave the sspx, quote: What does that mean but to help grow the Church (doesn't it ?) so he wanted us to believe. Here these priests asked time and again only to receive a blunt neglect especially when it was Bishop Williamson who told these priest to START the OLMC seminary in 2013. Was that a trick to immediately abandon them to look like fools? The only fool said our Lord is when one of his apostles stray from his Church to do their own thing. Since then +Williamson has been just as progressive and hardened like Bishop Fellay doing what he wants.
Adding too, and with good news, OLMC had received over the past months an excellent ex-FSSP priest, Fr. Poisson, thirsty for everything Archbishop Lefebvre in the fight for Catholic Tradition reading book after book and attending many classroom studies in the OLMC seminary (incredible story). Being well prepared and already a practiced priest for the Church, he asked Bishop Williamson (via this last letter) for his acceptance and conditional ordination. Bishop Williamson refused!
When asked by another faithful for this important need, BW did responded to him, saying in a most flagrant manner: "I have not heard of this priest. Sorry. Mgr W." With no other inquiry! (I have a copy of the email.)
Haven't we heard that before, a multiple request denied in disregard for the needs of the Church? Yes, many times from Him. He said also to another priest in a letter requesting an ordination: The many requests for the graces of the Church are made to him in the spirit of the Church and in the name of Jesus Christ, Bishop Williamson walks away...again, and again, and again. I know, I was read the many letters in sorrow each year over the phone.
I did ask the fathers for their permission to publish those many letters for the faithful to see the crisis for what it is. They said they will consider it being more of a yes answer. The responsibility of this crisis said the Mother of God is at the feet of the Bishops (La Salette) held in strict account more than the priests; of course.
Thus this responsibility too is at the feet of Bishop Williamson and the other three bishops refusing to grow the Church but only on their terms. How sad...while people are dying in want of graces.
Here again in July 2018 when Bishop Williamson has time to go to parties as he did this past weekend in NY and celebrate his 30 year consecration of a bishop when Archbishop Lefebvre laid hands on him to be generous for the Church...and he parties while souls suffer. How is that being faithful? How is that in commission to his consecration?
He was consecrated Archbishop Lefebvre said, to protect and spread the faith. Yet BW sits back and whines he can't do anything...while collecting checks for BRN Associates.
I write these lines of myself, a Catholic praying for the Heart of our Lord to have mercy on these prelates. What a grave act these bishops do rejecting the Church. Can they not hear he voice of our Lord anymore; their Master? Why do they run from the Cross as their predecessors did BEFORE the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them? Do these bishops have the same excuse as they? No!
God will provide even though these bishops wish to act more like men than angels.
|
|
|
Post by Fidelis on Jul 15, 2018 11:40:40 GMT
Shouldn't BW recant first his heresies regarding the New Mass and openness to the Sedevacantist before one receives the Sacraments from him or it doesn't matter considering the dire circumstances? If that is the case then what is the problem of going to the Orthodox Bishop or NovusOrdo for the ordination? The way I see it and please clarify, the False resistance must be treated with caution like the NeoSspx until they convert back to the stance of combat for the Faith!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 13:49:19 GMT
Maybe he should recant his double life. +Williamson acts in public lowly and humble woe is ME and in private as a grueling tyrant everything is about ME.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2018 5:04:15 GMT
Shouldn't BW recant first his heresies regarding the New Mass and openness to the Sedevacantist before one receives the Sacraments from him or it doesn't matter considering the dire circumstances? If that is the case then what is the problem of going to the Orthodox Bishop or NovusOrdo for the ordination? The way I see it and please clarify, the False resistance must be treated with caution like the NeoSspx until they convert back to the stance of combat for the Faith!
These are good questions in a time when doctrine is flagrated and held as a commodity. Alas is the important questions what to do in a State of necessity when bishops are few or hirelings. The answer resides in the mission of the Church. The mission of the Church is the Glory of the Most Holy Trinity and the salvation of souls. In that order. So the question really is saying we have a State of necessity and how do we choose a bishop for the service of the Church in a time when there are no solid bishops or hirelings about us. The question of State of Necessity has already been addressed here thecatacombs.org/thread/631/crisis-state-emergency-supplied-jurisdiction , adding too, there is an order prescribed how to choose when seeking the faith and her sacraments from Catholic Bishops or priests without compromise to the faith given in Church Theology and her laws when in necessity. In order:
1. * Validity - Means the Apostolicity of any Catholic Bishop consecrated in the will of the Church to facilitate her graces of redemption for the Salvation of souls regardless of the ministers personal beliefs. It is the church in Her Form-Matter-Intention that effects the sacraments and the service of the Church to the souls in need not the person of the Bishop. A bishop can be in mortal sin while consecrating the host, give a sacrament, or consecrate another bishop and still effect the act doing what the Church intends regardless of the personal sanctity of the bishop.
2. * Doctrine - Means the bishop is One with the Church in her doctrinal purity and necessary for the preaching of the faith, without which, is not pleasing to God (Hebrews 11). It is also the measure of the Bishop's personal belief and position what he represents.
3. Political – Means the bishop is Universal with the Church in her mission bringing all creation under the mantle of Christ the King. This too is imperative. The bishop MUST convert nations in the command of our Lord: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matthew 28).
4. Social - Means the Unity of Catholic order serving God in the Oneness of Doctrinal purity. A bishop should build the social and structural order being the fishnet of the Church. Providing for this order gives God’s justice and subsequent peace.
5. Moral – Means providing the Holiness in manner and stature keeping the Commandments of God. A bishop should be an example of moral virtue and commitment in his life for others leading souls selflessly to Christ.
Let’s make some examples.
There are no bishops faithful to the church we are familiar with and only those we are not familiar with. In a crisis one must seek God and not ourselves as the culture and measure of understanding. Let’s say there is a choice between:
(A)- Bishop faithful Catholic and Bishop non-faithful catholic; (B)- Bishop catholic and Bishop non-catholic; (C)- Bishop non-faithful catholic and Bishop faithful non-catholic; (D)- Bishop catholic and Bishop catholic sedevacantist; (E)- Bishop unfaithful catholic and Bishop unfaithful catholic sedevacantist; (F)- Bishop catholic and Bishop Orthodox; (G)- Bishop catholic sedevacantist and Bishop Orthodox. And so on…
Taking the above Five prescriptions in order which is an order in closeness to the nature and mission of the Catholic Church, it allows a help when there are choices. Mind you, these examples are in a State of necessity outside of the normal means of the church (i.e. jurisdiction).
(A)- Both have validity. It is obviously to a Bishop faithful catholic having all four marks of the Church providing for the faith and Her salvation giving Glory to God to souls. The four marks of the Church are: One-Holy-Catholic (universal)-Apostolate.
(B)- Is obviously Bishop Catholic having all five prescriptions doing what the Church does.
(C)- Again, Bishop unfaithful Catholic for the same reasons, though the infidelity may be one or all of two to five prescription is some degree, the Bishop unfaithful Catholic still has validly consecrated in Apostolicity giving the graces of the Church [1].
(D)- Though both are equal in validity (Apostolicity), Bishop Catholic has all the other Marks of the Church where the Bishop Catholic sedevacantist does not: no Oneness by personally removing the Visible Head of Christ; no Universality destroying the political and social order dividing the Church; no Holiness for reason there is no likeness to Christ in his other marks for a moral sanctification.
(E)- Being equal in validity would be to Bishop unfaithful catholic for reason this bishop keeps Christ’s head as his visible Church in primacy within his public and private masses in stead of the people providing the four ends of the Mass in the whole intention of the Church over the sedevacantist bishop who does not. Thus the Bishop unfaithful catholic is closer to the Church in the Doctrine, Political, social, and moral order than the other.
(F)- Both may have apostolicity, it is obviously Bishop Catholic for the other marks of the Church.
(G)- Though both are valid, they both are in depravity and defect to Christ and his supremacy. However, Bishop Catholic sedevacantist is closer to the Church from lesser degree of depravity and defect.
And so on…
This is only to represent there are circumstances of prudence seeking what is of the Church. The faith in no way can be compromised and the Glory of God is in sacrifice. The denominator present is the validity being the most necessary to even consider anything else. Doctrine is the act of faith that pleases God and must be present in the sacrament. The rest is for the necessary Catholic family order and the continuance of sacramental grace to be freely acquired.
We are in a grave crisis even Bishop Williamson's progressive pertinacity as a choice is getting thin. What is worse, he is actively destroying the Church saying no to raise priests to the altar in time of need. He may have validity he squanders playing ABL as a mascot, but for sure he is in open attack against the Catholic Church in doctrine, creating political/social disorder dividing and casting underfoot the Church's organization and structure, and fostering a moral depravity.
So the answer for a bishop is found in the mission of the Church to find the will of God. We found this purity of mission in Archbishop Lefebvre and he too had to go through this same grueling process in 1988 how to make and present a new choice to his flock when he did the Consecrations.
God have mercy on those other errant churchmen acting selfish holding hostage the sacraments as weapons for their own ends while souls suffer (La Salette).
________________________________ [1] Whether graces are conveyed to the recipient is based on Baptism and disposition of the individual soul in sanctifying grace as with the Legal rite of the Church or not discussed here thecatacombs.org/thread/695/grace-new-mass
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2018 14:18:14 GMT
What about bishop unfaithful williamson vs bishop unfaithful aquinas or faure or zendejas? And each of those verses each other.
|
|
|
Post by Fidelis on Jul 16, 2018 20:43:59 GMT
Bishop Aquinas vs Bishop Faurer? I pray God will inspire +Aquinas to take charge but then again, as man proposes, God disposes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 7:07:53 GMT
"Bishop unfaithful williamson vs bishop unfaithful aquinas or faure or zendejas" is an interesting question.
There are documented facts from each of their own writings and conferences demonstrating error and defect from the Church. But who is closer to the Church and who is more distant when all four are but unfaithful?
Validity and Doctrine are the two most important factors of objectivity as it represents the nature of the Church where the other three are for the government of men and their personal sanctification. Just like the Decalogue. The first three of the Ten commandments are the most important relating to the nature of God and the other seven are in relation to men.
So where are those four bishops today?
* Validity - They all have it. However, each in their own way they lord over us the fact it is in lineage of Archbishop Lefebvre as some worship to bow to them. It means nothing ABL rightly would say. It is the lineage of Christ and His integral life they must emulate that means anything. So for the sake of understanding throw out for the moment the bias of that lineage sufficing to say all four are valid regardless where it came from.
* Doctrine - Shown in the above documented facts, we know Bishop Williamson is the worse offender of the four against the Church sowing direct error contradicting Christ Himself; in which the other three bishops are more or less SILENT to his errors giving political stature to him as a buttress so not to lose face. (sic) Nonetheless, each of the other bishops also have grave error in the same regard we reach out to help them see for the sake of their souls and unity in the Church. Here is a list of each of their [unfortunate] errors we are aware of when the Archbishop said "Catholics have a strict right to know the doctrine of your bishops and priests". cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/where-is-the-false-resistance-now.5068/
Taking note this OP had to bring attention to the again and recent direct negligence of Bishop Williamson and the other bishops by their refusal due to another multiple request of these SSPX-mc priests and faithful regularly and annually asking for service of the Church to grow Her mission for the Glory of God...and they adamantly refuse. Who does it hurt? Only God and his Church. Which is why it is a very serious grave mortal sin upon their heads neglecting and omitting their first duty before God to provide for the needs of the Church. Priesthood and generosity is one and the same meaning. They both are sacrificial. As said earlier, for Bishop Williamson to go out to parties in the last weeks celebrating his 30 year anniversary for his consecration as a bishop, we remind him it was done in the State of necessity to provide for souls in need, not to abandon them while pillaging the Church as a sanctuary-stealer like the modernists do each in their own self formed way.
To answer if their was an answer, which of the other bishops then is objectively closer to the Church in his posture, at least publicly though unfaithful by his own unique erroneous Doctrinal statements and omissions not defending the purity of the Church, would be Bishop Zendejas. Yes, the one who said " we will CRUSH Fr. Pfeiffer and the OLMC seminary". Which is a grave moral problem.
Social - hereto Bishop Williamson actively destroys the fishnet of the Church forcing families and priests to be loose pockets eroding the virtue of religion and bond of order and peace. The other bishops give appearance of order but equally remove the social fabric of the Church bowing to Bishop Williamson's will not to unite as one body of mind-will-and soul of the Church. There is no better of one than the other; each degrade and negate this order in the missions.
Moral - provides for Holiness. When the other Marks of the Church are gone, there can me no Holiness when grave sin is present defecting and neglecting the needs of the Church.
So what does this represent? Is there really one of the four better when all of the [false resistance] bishops like the three neo-sspx bishops essentially serve themselves while the Church suffers and souls die for no selfless bishop to help them.
To repeat, the answer begins by the first two (Validity and Doctrine) being the most important seeking the mission of the Church. All four of those bishops however fail in degrees the Doctrine of the Church and are actively compromising souls to a path of dysfunction and hell.
Adding too, When I asked the fathers about Bishop Aquinas (who I had more hope in a year ago for the service of the Church) they said Bishop Aquinas explicitly said to them and in writing, do NOT visit him, call him, or contact him. How sic. Isn't a bishop one who is a shepherd to reach out always to be a father? To seek and find "lost" sheep? It is disgusting to know such a bishop is hard and stiff-necked before God to serve him. But that is the crisis isn't it?
Remember what Bishop Aquinas said to Fr. Cardozo: He said that just prior to being consecrated a bishop by Bishop Williamson. Coincidence?
We are reminded in our Catechism that when one begins to lose one of the Marks of the Church, the other three Marks start falling away one by one. In this case of the false resistance, as the same in the neo-sspx, the Mark of Apostolic in their effort and desire for missions to sanctify souls is gone. They speak and act self serving. In the words of then Fr. (bishop) Zendejas in 2014 saying to a group of Catholics he was trying to solicit: "You take care of me and I will take care of you". Such is the man-centered spirit taking over in the minds and hearts of those who do not watch, said our Lord.
God have mercy...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 17, 2018 12:08:34 GMT
[...] We are reminded in our Catechism that when one begins to lose one of the Marks of the Church, the other three Marks start falling away one by one. In this case of the false resistance, as the same in the neo-sspx, the Mark of Apostolic in their effort and desire for missions to sanctify souls is gone. They speak and act self serving.
I think many of us are handicapped into still trusting in the SSPX bishops to come through at the end, that they have lost their way temporarily but will come back to the truth eventually.
But to hold out this hope despite years of evidence to the contrary may have the effect that we will not look at God's ability to provide for our needs and wants outside of the SSPX, that help will only come from within the SSPX structure.
But we know God does not work this way. Moses was raised by pagan Egyptians but became one of the mightiest and holiest prophets of the Old Testament. God will provide. It is essential that we trust in Him and not the SSPX for our salvation.The SSPX appears to have become like the priests of the Old Testament at the times of the Machabees, serving the false gods of Antiochus Epiphanes rather than the true God - similarly the SSPX more and more serves the false new religion of Vatican II rather than the true Faith. And like the Jewish priests of the Old Testament, they too know better but still betray the true Faith. 'There is nothing new under the sun.' It is the Faith that matters, not the persons.
I have thought for a while now that these ever-worsening tactics and machinations of Pope Francis will perhaps push some novus ordo bishop to truly convert to the true Faith. We know God can raise up whomever He wishes to accomplish His holy will. We just have to hold fast to the Truth and wait for God's Providence to provide.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 17:51:07 GMT
[...] We are reminded in our Catechism that when one begins to lose one of the Marks of the Church, the other three Marks start falling away one by one. In this case of the false resistance, as the same in the neo-sspx, the Mark of Apostolic in their effort and desire for missions to sanctify souls is gone. They speak and act self serving.
I think many of us are handicapped into still trusting in the SSPX bishops to come through at the end, that they have lost their way temporarily but will come back to the truth eventually.
But to hold out this hope despite years of evidence to the contrary may have the effect that we will not look at God's ability to provide for our needs and wants outside of the SSPX, that help will only come from within the SSPX structure.
But we know God does not work this way. Moses was raised by pagan Egyptians but became one of the mightiest and holiest prophets of the Old Testament. God will provide. It is essential that we trust in Him and not the SSPX for our salvation.The SSPX appears to have become like the priests of the Old Testament at the times of the Machabees, serving the false gods of Antiochus Epiphanes rather than the true God - similarly the SSPX more and more serves the false new religion of Vatican II rather than the true Faith. And like the Jewish priests of the Old Testament, they too know better but still betray the true Faith. 'There is nothing new under the sun.' It is the Faith that matters, not the persons.
I have thought for a while now that these ever-worsening tactics and machinations of Pope Francis will perhaps push some novus ordo bishop to truly convert to the true Faith. We know God can raise up whomever He wishes to accomplish His holy will. We just have to hold fast to the Truth and wait for God's Providence to provide.
What an irony. A novus ordo bishop converting would be a slap in the face to these betrayer traditional bishops seeking to join the new religion.
The sspx denies their past to join a false religion. A novus ordo bishop denies their past in the false religion to join the true religion the sspx no longer wants parts of. Reminds me of the renaissance. Catholics left and God converted mexico in their place.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 18, 2018 2:04:22 GMT
What about bishop ambrose vs bishop williamson?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 4:59:53 GMT
What about bishop ambrose vs bishop williamson?
Same answer. Which of the bishops is closer to the nature of the Church.
It was already noted what is Bishop Williamson's position. What of Bishop Ambrose?
Validity - They both are valid bishops and have apostolicity. BW in the Roman rite and BA in the Catholic Ukraine rite. ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
Doctrine - Present 2018, Bishop Williamson is in the Roman rite where Bishop Ambrose is bi-ritual both Catholic Ukraine rite and Roman rite. Bishop Williamson professed the true religion and now mixes the evil new religion. Bishop Ambrose professed the true religion through the Ukraine rite and roman rite [1]. Bishop Ambrose was baptized Catholic, received his priesthood in the Catholic faith, and at some point left the Catholic faith to the Orthodox religion promoted through ecumenism of the new church he was in. Placing more than a defect but an apostation to the Catholic faith, he later rejected Orthodoxy and converted back to Catholicism. We know he made a confession during that time, and publicly made a Catholic profession of faith with other norms provided in the Church before others and us years ago. Bishop Williamson states he is traditional while acting against the Church destroying her order and structure. Bishop Ambrose states he is now traditional through the books of Archbishop Lefebvre and coming to know the old sspx, and for what we know, acts in desire to build the Church.
Political - We know Bishop Williamson rejects the mission to convert nations [2]. Bishop Ambrose was willing to work more to do so but was attacked by socialist Catholics not to. (The socialist catholics i.e. the false resistance.)
Social - in the same manner. BW seeks to destroy the social family structure and its order to replace it with the religion of man [3]. Bishop Ambrose sought to help build that order in our dilemma, but again was attacked by the Catholic left.
Moral - BW cannot pursue Holiness with the grave sin upon him rejecting to serve the Church and her needs in this crisis. Bishop Ambrose I do not know enough of him in this area other than wishing to keep the Four Marks of the Church facilitating his service to build the Church.
What does it mean? At this point in 2018, Bishop Williamson and his three other bishops maintain doctrinal error and compliance to BW obstinance to draw closer to the nature of the Church. In comparison where Bishop Ambrose having both validity and doctrine is closer in its degree.
_____________________________________________
[1] Though with one dimension and difficult to understand for the west roman rite, the Ukraine rite accepts married priests which Bishop Ambrose being a part of also accepts.
[3] Idem.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 18, 2018 5:17:09 GMT
So why did ambrose leave?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 6:53:57 GMT
So why did ambrose leave? For several reasons. I see it as a relation of providence, mixed with the culture of the sspx mentality, mixed with the culture of man mentality.
Providence
1. - If I have my dates correct, Before God and the world Bishop Williamson made his line in the sand in July 2015 by his obstinate promotion of the new religion and his pertinacity not to retract his statments throughout time following. His other bishops followed suit with letters and conferences promoting also the new religion.
2. - Out of the blue, a bishop named Bishop Ambrose contacted the SSPX-mc priests around that time. Said he has been reading books of Archbishop Lefebvre and heard many sermons of these sspx-mc priests he somehow found on youtube. Made contact and offered his help and service as a bishop.
3. - Cordiality and charity were expressed during a meeting and then some months past. Not knowing what providence was doing while we all were still in shock to BW's progressiveness, we all kept trying to convert BW back to a catholic axis; though he kept refusing and kept himself distant from all of us; while supporting his followers to start a guerilla leftist war against the SSPX-mc priests.
4. - While contacts were in efforts by the SSPX-mc priests with the other two then three bishops, the SSPX-mc priests asked Bishop Williamson to look into Bishop Ambrose with an ecclesiastical investigation. BW refused!
5. - So the SSPX-mc priests had to do so themselves with some help of others.
6. - It was confirmed over many months, if not a year, there is surety Bishop Ambrose is legitimate - both being valid (Apostolic) and Doctrinally Catholic. A website was created to provide this including many photographic evidence proving this. ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
A mixed culture of sspx mentality
1. - A "turf war" began from those wanting BW only regardless of his doctrinal errors being comfortable, if not set, in a lineage of Archbishop Lefebvre to the rejection there is a Catholic Church and a providence beyond their understanding and irascibles.
2. - Knowing this and not knowing what was ahead, the SSPX-mc priests asked and tried to get help from the other two bishops at the time to look into Bishop Ambrose. Meetings were requested and Bishop Ambrose sent letters and inquiries himself. All three at the time bishops refused! For the sake and hope of the bishops to return and help the Church, the sspx-mc priests kept those scandals quiet...until their pertinacity prevailed then they started to speak about it to others.
3. - Many in the world of the roman rite tradition do not know, or know little, about the Catholic Ukraine rite. Thus between the open war the bishops waged and ignorance of the Ukraine rite, a cloud set in with attacks against the person of Bishop Ambrose going out of control to prop the trad-ecumenist Bishop Williamson. Was providence on the threshold and men rejected the grace or time was not ready in an environment of complacency?
A mixed culture of man mentality
1. - The struggle of sin as normal and God as overbearing blinds thought and understanding. So it is in this crisis man tries to remove the rights of God, and so it is in this crisis that God removes the rights of man. Man's soul struggles in the dark it wants, while God acts outside that darkness. We live in a 60 year culture making religion as a personal thing and God as an accessory. Judgments and bickering are virtues and slander a resume. Bishop Ambrose was shaken by the attacks though hardened against the insults through his many years of missions in the communist countries. I recall there was a pause trying to repair relations with the every eroding Bishop Williamson and company. To this day, there is no avail with Bishop Williamson. He refuses to help and give service of the Church he was consecrated for in this State of necessity. Together those four bishops REFUSE to grow the Church beyond the parameters in their own head.
Where is Bishop Ambrose today? I have no idea. I remember there were five particular things converging which made a stand back during that time.
A)- The malicious hate of the socialist catholic left (i.e. false resistance) trying to narrate a disgusting picture that confused even our own people it was better for the Catholic political and social good to rethink where is the providence.
B)- When Bishop Ambrose was talking about a particular jurisdiction given to him when he was in the underground Catholic Church in the communist countries to build the Church, something of which I know little about, and it is with him still, had confused many people not knowing what this is provided from the Church. However, in the roman rite and the crisis we are in, we are not used to it and our fight is something different. Frankly not wanting to get entangled in that misunderstanding especially when the modernists use that as a tool trying to destroy us as a parallel church; which we are not. We are in a State of necessity not needing any particular jurisdiction when the faith and Church already provides for us are needs. C)- Bishop Ambrose was truly offering the service of the Church and wanted to build further as a bishop when we only needed the service; not a bishop as a head.
D)- There was some forbearance with the accepted Catholic Ukraine rite regarding married priests possibly mixing with the roman rite.
E)- We put a lot of emphasis and hope for the sake of the people to endure Bishop Williamson's persecution and waited.
But what is providence today in this overall crisis? I have no idea except that this crisis like all the others is meant to squash man's pride and cast down its idols so the rights of God becomes man's object again and life of salvation instead of a can of tuna or a braid of pearls only a pig would find interesting. Where is God in men's minds?
I take the words of Archbishop Lefebvre for my own: "Always seek providence but do not go ahead of it."
Is providence preparing another bishop waiting somewhere in the world to grow his Church with ordinations, confirmation, and Holy oils necessary for baptism and the dying? How will the Church survive if there are no more ordinates to the priesthood the four [false] bishops refuse to provide unless it is for their own Williamson line?
God is in charge not petty men. Will there be an old valid bishop from the novus ordo to help? Will the pope convert? Will a sede bishop convert? They are still bishops regardless of the anti-culture sweeping in the cult of neo-tradition. God knows.
All's I know is it is a mathematical answer. It takes six years to form a priest. So that means there are two years left. So there will be a bishop as God desires to bless his priests after his Son's Heart. We learn in Holy Scripture God will not be denied by men's grave sins of negligence.
The bottom line. The Catholic Church is in a State of emergency from Her human members in sin running amuck. She needs her bishops to cast off the idols to serve the Lamb unblemished once again or die the death. So it is objective. We do not have a bishop other than our own diocesan bishop. To say someone else is our bishop is nonsense. If our Diocesan bishop is unable to give the service of the Church in cause of professing the religion of man, then on the interim God knows, Catholic Tradition only needs a bishop with the two basic criteria: Validity and Doctrine (the faith) to give us the service and sacraments we need in this crisis.
|
|
|
Post by Jmj on Jul 18, 2018 12:29:19 GMT
Moran is in Ohio with a family, supported by OLMC donations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 16:14:51 GMT
Moran is in Ohio with a family, supported by OLMC donations.
I have no idea and whether if true or not is nothing wrong with helping your neighbor in need for whatever reason it may be. Not having context gives a fodder for enemies who care not of slandering innocent charity.
|
|