Chaos Organized, The Plan of Bp. Williamson

John, you are not addressing the topic (nor the others you started).  The topic is Chaos Organized created and maintained by Bishop Williamson.  Sitting on his laurels is figurative and is one of its accidental effects discussing his obstinace to lead like a bishop in and out of season.  We are fair and faithful to him by quoting his own words with NO interpretation.

You offer a devotion to the bishop, but devotion means nothing before God without the substance of the faith.  Do you read all of his Epistles and sermons pre and post 2012?  If so, you would see and understand a coherent and deliberate change he professes...constantly.  You or anyone else cannot change his course; but himself.   Trying as you do to avoid this reality always wanting to recall his Dino years is a discredit to his post-2012 will and intention.   Please read for yourself – we have been providing his own words to you but you are displacing them as difficult to accept.   Which I can understand.

Whether the bishop makes efforts, you call heroic, to travel the “world” for sacraments is basic and fundamental for a bishop to do. The part you are not addressing is the Bishing he is commanded to do by God -- which is missing since 2012.  Even many of his followers recognized this…to their stated dismay.   So it is not all “us”, is it?

Taking another moment to address your claims, hoping you will address ours specifically at some time, the bishop may be 78 to your mind in excuse to his mental and physical ailment, but he does not mentioned any such thing for his spiritual ailment; which is the topic at hand.  He never said he is retired or is retiring.  With his attitude, we wish he had, but he loves to carry the baton without running the race (St. Paul)

I’m afraid when I read your comments they are more to embellish the bishop with platitudes than to compare what the duties of a catholic bishop are to his actions than wanting a Shakespeare bishop.

When the bishop returns to the Catholic mission to promote the Catholic faith than all the time he spends promoting alternatives, because, the sky is going to fall so forget about organizing; forget structure; forget seminaries…  The only reason there is some structure and seminaries in some quarters was NOT because of him; it is in SPITE of him to do so.  His efforts have been to discourage and tear down!  That is an Eleison Comment admitted fact.

So please, let’s place his epistles where he wants, on the couch of compromise. In effect, sitting on his laurels as a bishop.  Do you see the figurative imagery?

And BTW, thanks for the reminder to provide his mind is always in the boogy-man (jews and other...behind the unknown door), he remains hiding only to provide his secret sacraments no one knows about unless your on the "good" list.

As Tobias reminds us John, can you not see the ecumenical mulit-sided gem in the post-2012 bishop where he desires to please everyone; including, to say what each wants to hear (sedes, novus ordoites, neo-trads, new-sspxers…) even though there is a contradiction?  For him, he draws a commonality as an indult mentality so everyone can feel comfortable, as you do, with good feelings about him.  So when you want doctrine like ABL, he offers, you want to live judging the pope, he complies, you want practical idols in the novus ordo, you can go to it..., you want neo-tradition, be happy.  But remember, "it is dangerous" so says the "principled Dino".

After consuming that stuff John, then what?  When can we have a conversation about what Catholicism is? What our Lord’s mission is in the Church?  What a Catholic bishop is for and what they do, and suppose to do?

Do you really think, like him, “not to be too concerned to bring souls towards us because people just don't understand today.”?  To be silent in the harvest?  To punish faithful who have the charity and decency to help him not to lose his soul in apathy and omit his duty to provide vocations and seminaries for the Church?  Where did he ever once promote vocations in his sermons and Eleison comments post-2012?  Not once; ever!  Where is his future?  Where is ours in a dismissive attitude of a bishop?

You can make an eulogy and un-official biography of Bishop Williamson as you wish, but remember, his own words contradict, plainly and specifically, your attempts to paint the picture otherwise.

Let’s not play gander when the goose is loud and clear.

“Put away your toys!; “The resistance isn’t going anywhere”;  "I am not going to lead”. (Bishop Williamson Conference Q&A November 5, 2014 St. Catharines ON, Canada).

Probably this needs to be another wake up call.  There's no question Bp. Williamson changed course from the catholic teaching of Archbishop Lefebvre.  He said so.  He repeatedly declared he wants independence and people can be free to do what they want.  But his followers behave like they don't even notice trying to portray the bishop as nothing had changed.

Even the The Remnant newspaper was honest they notice the changes in the SSPX when its followers don't.
This can be applied to the false resistance too  -Pretending like they don't even notice bp. Williamson had changed is like something right out of The Twilight Zone.

John (or really Samuel?), trying to re-narrate the bishop pitting himself against himself, and calling it catholic, is a poor attempt to serve the Church.

You begin by introducing a non sequitur. Either you wish we marvel at your attempts to smear Catholic Genome or have us believe you are really so disingenuous and insulting to the bishop as to us not to read ALL of his own words provided to you many times? You manifest exactly what we have been saying – Bishop Williamson says one thing one day and the opposite on the next. He is an absolute duplicititist!! He tries to please every erroneous branch of trad-ecumenism at the SAME time you find favor with. Are you not honest to admit this?

Why do you act like those in the novus ordo doing the same for pope Francis. Constantly silent to the errors of what the pope says one day only to cherry pick when he says something orthodox the next. Are you telling us you accept this thus promoting modernism?

Do you deny the truth, like peter, to please self-satisfactions?

You again set the bishop against the bishop.

Bishop Williamson’s own words proves he is an ambiguous modernist contrary to your ill-attempts to paint him otherwise.

[In response to your four titles:]


1 - The chaos is created and maintained by Bishop Williamson.

Chaos? See for yourself. The bad fruits drop under its rotted tree. The chaos is listed with his own words cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/quotes-of-bp-williamson-supporting-the-new-religion-and-conciliarism.4457/
Created and maintained? See for yourself, the evidence of deceit is clear for all to see. "Resistant" Bishops Create New Congregation for Political Reasons

It is further discovered Bishop Faure illegally created that congregation with powers he does not have – they maintain a true vagabond church. See here, thecatacombs.org/thread/217/sajm-approved-congregation-illegally-erected


2 - Bishop Williamson is not against ecumenism (that is your title, and I agree, he is NOT AGAINST ecumenism, he is all for it).

I’m surprised you are treating Bishop Williamson like a little boy in your selected quotes. All catholics say those things. It is what else he says that is not catholic; already pointed out to you. Trying to white wash the bishop as you did here thecatacombs.org/thread/624/bp-williamson-outside-church-salvation doesn’t help the Catholic State. There is plenty of his manifest and pertinacious trad-ecumenism , see here, cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/quotes-of-bp-williamson-supporting-the-new-religion-and-conciliarism.4457/


3 - Bishop Williamson doesn't promote vocations in his sermons.

A). Thanks for your exaggeration and admittance you had to seek out under the bushel to find something even proximate to Bishop Williamson promoting vocations –in the French language. You admit by it in the English speaking world there is not one iota to promote vocations by him, nor in any other language, since he left the SSPX. Of course, because he didn’t want to hear or “herd cats”.

B). How is that generalized un-linked quote you provided anything proximate to promote vocations? It is hoped he as a bishop and you as a follower of him can produce some real promotion and consistency for vocations for the Church’s needs instead of stalling and dragging his feet? One generalization does not make a house.

Hopefully by our Catholic pressure over these 6 years is caving him in so he will one day really start promoting vocations as a Catholic bishop should – 24/7.

BTW, your comment he said such, without a link, in a sermon for the other trad-ecumenist Fr. Pivert who supports, like Bishop Faure, sedevacantist seminarians and non una cum priests to say mass on their altars is not very creditable when it is for trad-ecumenism – is it? See here, cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/bishop-faure-sajj-seminary-accepts-%E2%80%9Cnon-una-cum%E2%80%9D-seminarians-to-be-ordained.4493/


4 - Bishop Williamson doesn't care about souls.

Once again John you wish to cherry pick the bishop still presenting another square peg round hole. Of course he cares about souls. The question is, how does he care about them?

Brushing off as you do in these posts already providing you with his own disparaging words does not change the facts you wish to be otherwise. His words are self-evident:

John, Bishop Fellay “cares” about souls too. So doesn’t pope Francis. So what’s your point? Because they say something orthodox every once and a while as throwing a bone to keep their docile followers happy? How is that catholic?

How is it catholic to consecrate other bishops “for us” anything to do with Catholicism when it is set in a vagabond frame and only for a New Williamson Line? Sedevacantists consecrate bishops too for their own perverse ends. So doesn’t the false resistance. Not interested but for true Catholicism our Lord gave to us.

BTW, Fr. Pfeiffer is not the end all as you wish he to be. Your rude statements to undercut the work of Archbishop Lefebvre manifested in those priests WHO NEVER LEFT THE SSPX, unlike those cheap priests and bishops who have and are deceivers to say otherwise, continue to do the work they were ordained in Statue to do.

I do not know if you are a convert to Catholicism: #1, A bishop is not needed for salvation; never has.  #2, A bishop and the magisterium is only an accidental to the faith. They are not the rule to the faith; as you surmise. Bishops are only present to UPHOLD the integrity for the faith, an authority to guide, and to sanctify souls entrusted to them: to Teach, Govern, and Sanctify.

It is the rule of faith we follow as baptized Catholics; not false authority nor a false obedience you wish to implant. Bishop Williamson has no jurisdiction; neither does his other three bishops. Thus, they are not “our” bishops.

As far as a bishop, we all have bishops entrusted to us by the Church in our own Diocese. Whether they are bad bishops means nothing. Please go and convert them back...to see our Lord they were consecrated for; as we try to do with Bishop Williamson.

What remains for you and us john, is why is Bishop Williamson duplicit? The answer is simple when you see he wants to be a “conservative” and see things conservatively while putting up a camouflage of “tradition”. He sees the novus ordo as something legitimate and only “bad and dangerous” when it is applied liberally; but when sought for its conservative ends, he supports it. This is undeniable with his many statements drawn out here, Bishop Williamson: traditionalism or "conservatism"? If you want to understand his nexus why he does this, see here in his own words --“he puts a ‘subjective excuse in the foreground is to put the objective in the background’”. cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/bishop-williamson-dislodged-bishop-williamson.5725/

The fact we are having this conversation and you having to spend so much time trying to find a grain of something catholic from him proves the point we are making. Your trying to “patch up” a bishop instead of describing a wholesome bishop doing his duty as a Catholic bishop is the battle ground. Doing less seems to be the normalization of deviation for the false resistance so adamantly opposed to the Catholic faith.

So john, you seem to be comfortable to have duplicit statements from a Catholic Bishop as ok and normal like Huge Akins only wanting to look at the “bad and dangerous” comments without addressing the encouraging and promoting of error present in the SAME sentence.
Of course you already know this.  You also accept the same duplicity from Fr. Chazal expressing himself in one transparent email as a sede-privationist to one audience and in a different non-transparent email to another as remote.  Doesn't say much for these false resistance priests too does it?  As another person pointed out, they are going to start losing a lot of credibility.

Like the authors and implementers of the conciliar reform, Bishop Williamson knows well how to manipulate words and human emotions to suit his own agenda. On this occasion he directs the attention to a barrage of mixed comments to familiarize his followers to accept a double standard, according to his mind, without context or objectivity.

So BW proves he orates different things, to different people, and different audiences. Just like Bishop Fellay is doing. See the conflict?  It is Chaos Organized!

So this dogging and propping up these false bishops in tradition does not serve the living God and His Church within this crisis. Instead, it adds more to the crisis. One cannot keep popping your head in and out like a jack in the box to quibble in dark glasses…when you like and don’t like to see the reality these bishops and priests in the Church are persecution Her by their novel independence trying to build a neo-tradition. Is this what you want?

As another said, to say Bishop Williamson has not changed and pretending like you don't even notice when he told the world he has, repeatedly, is eerie.

Are you kidding?  That sermon was pointed to some existing seminarians.  One receiving the habit and two receiving minor orders.  

Talk about a far stretch of the imagination saying B.Williamson is calling for a revival of vocations outside that venue by the one statement.  It was melancholic at best.  As usual!

John what part of B.Williamson's statements have you not understood is a clear contradiction?  Do you actually agree what he is saying?