Bishop Williamson: “Get Rid of Bishop Fellay”
Tancred
The Eponymous Flower
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2012/07/bishop-williamson-get-rid-of-bishop.html
Bishop Williamson spoke just briefly before the General Chapter in a video that appeared on youtube between the 10th and the 19th on youtube.
Comments like this make +Williamson appear as a wild ideologue intent on burying his religious superior. Asking the General Chapter to “get rid of” someone is beneath his dignity. It seems obvious that the General Chapter has no intention of following his advice. The real question is what will +Williamson do now? Will he lead another “empty Chair” movement outside the Society? The Modernists must be beside themselves with glee over this internal fratricide in the Fraternity.
” A wild ideologue” incredible…Bp Fellay is a traitor..he was a probably a mole fm day ONE..It’s a fact that the ArchBp didn’t want to consecrate him as he had no pastoral experience to speak of..but was induced to by Fellay’s wealthy benefactors who were pushing him…Bernie the rat and his Jewish/ardent Zionist investment partner Max Krah have got to go! Immeditely….I don’t even think the SSPX should keep Bernie the Rat as a priest…He should be exiled to the FSSP..
Quite the list of accusations and calumny there Bill.
I hope you like it hot because there’s a nice spot waiting for you in purgatory if you don’t expiate in this life.
Yeah right, he’s expelling good priests and throwing Bp williamson under the bus ( and over the bus, in front of the bus ) just to curry favor w/modernist Rome and that agent of the Synagogue of Satan-Max Krah…and I’m in trouble for pointing out that Emperor Fellay has no clothes..not a stitch!
Bill you are positively unhinged. Ask God for forgiveness for your words; they are unbecoming of anyone, let alone someone who calls himself a traditional catholic. Charity above all sir.
I expect he will not be his S.G. for much longer. I doubt that +Williamson desires to become a latter-day Thuc but I can see other disaffected clergy and laity being attracted to him. He is so eccentric that his following will primarily be the extreme conspiritists, government-controlling-the-weather types. Both modernists and sedes will enjoy this.
It is sad for many of us, myself included, whose children were Confirmed by Bishop Williamson. I have always been a big fan of this man who supplied a solid traditional orthodoxy as the church was going into freefall. Weening myself from his fan club is something I have been begrudgingly doing for the last year or so, as the signs of his trajectory have become clearer.
I am certain there are many priests who have been formed by Bp Williamson who are also pained by this whole mess. Lets keep him in our prayers as I’m sure he will continue to keep the Society in his.
May it please God that Williamson is censored by the SSPX. He is a loose canon and I do not think for one minute that he is totally sane.
He has followers I know. Well, I guess they can start their own church; they would not be the first to do it.
He is a terrible liability.
“A loose cannon?!”" And Fellay is a sell-out and a traitor that the Archbp didn’t ( and shouldn’t have ) want to consecrate in the first place…This is incredible…The Rat with the Jewish investment partner who is expelling 3 dozen priests and attacking the other 3 bishops is supposedly deserving of our total loyalty bc of his position.. It was a scandal when he maneuvered a second 12-year term and the events of the last several mos prove what a rat Fellay is….And at least put a real name to your comments! There are some real cowards here…
Right Bill,
Are you full name and address are?
At least I use a real name….everyone at SSPXMT Holly know who I am….I’ll tell Arstand, Fellay’s local “yes man ” what I sd here…
Rostand right? I’m the only ” Bill” at St Anthony of Padua, Mt Holly…I’ve spoken nothing untrue..In the words of Our Lord, ” If I’ve spoken no evil why do you strike me.?”
wrong – Andrew at SSPX, Winnipeg.
Although probably futile:
Bill, do you believe that Benedict XVI is the Vicar of Christ?
For some reason, in the video Bishop Williamson seems to be speaking with his eyes closed. In any case, I consider many of his comments to be somewhat sensational, crude and not well thought out. Bishop Fellay is his superior and it seems a bit out of place for Bp. Williamson to imply that the good guys are those who oppose Bishop Fellay. There are many ways to make an intelligent argument that it would not be prudent for SSPX to join in full communion with Rome at this time. I would not agree with those arguments, but still, it is something that could be discussed in a reasonable and calm manner, laying out your position objectively and in scholarly detail as to why you would disagree with a reconciliation right now. But Bp. Williamson has chosen a low, unmannerly, crude and rather shallow method of argument with this idea to get rid of Bishop Fellay, and with his talk of the good guys.
The 4 bishops need to meet and work out their differences and present a united front against the forces of modernism. They all have valid viewpoints.
The THREE bishops need to sit down…Bernie the Rat has to go!
Well Bill,
A source within the Pfeiffer association has indicated that +Williamson is ok with the situation within the SSPX.
I wonder if it is true, so much FUD being spread around right now.
I don’t see it happening. If Bishop Fellay were to have been cast out. it would have had to happen at the Extraordinary Chapter this month. Perhaps Bishop Kelly of SSPV will welcome Bishop Williamson. Bishop Kelly doesn’t recognize the Thuc consecrations and a little birdie (not my Bilba Birdie!) tells me he isn’t going to be cottoning up to Benedict XVI anytime soon. In any case, I don’t think anyone wants to see yet another spinoff group starting up. But whaddu I know? (Man, I miss those emoticons!)
Your make a very good point. How long will it be before Bp Williamson and who knows who else decide to consecrate more bishops? What will become of that? How far can it go and still remain Catholic?
I continue to be disappointed. I hope there is some possible explanation for his behavior that may be revealed in the future, like maybe he is suffering from an illness that has affected his thought process.
Having no dog in this barnyard tussle, I will opine that Tim – and not for the first time – has made a particularly salient argument.
There are serious questions at issue. Abp. LeFebvre made it clear that no bishop was ever to become SG, and yet. ( One can appreciate why, now. )
There are legitimate questions about the “shunning” of Bp. Williamson and excluding him, as a bishop of the Catholic Church ( one may inquire of His Holiness ), from the single most important conference in SSPX history over the past 24 years – with everything the Society is supposed to stand for on the line. If Vatican II could include wildly leftist ideologues like Seunens, Congar, Woljtyla, Ratzinger, et al in the same council with Abp. LeFebvre, Cd. Bacci, Bp. Luigi Carlo, et al, how is it that the SSPX inner sanctum found itself so uncomfortable with the notion that the most outspoken and ellesiologically consistent bishop consecrated by the Archbishop himself, in 1988,
( off the wall theories and cracks about non-Church issues aside ) might put in a one man, one vote appearance? Bp. Fellay’s tactics assured him, and his inner circle, of complete victory long before the first cassock came throught the doorway. Just what in the world troubled them so much that this one bishop had to be kept away at all costs?
I think Bp. Williamson is one of the most refreshing, at times inspiring, preachers to have taken to the pulpit in my lifetime. There is, I realize, a great deal I do not know about everything he has ever said or done But I know one. thing, the man thinks and he expresses himself with a remarkable facility that makes those who would prefer the insipid, murky, contingent, hesitant gobbledygook of diplo-speak cringe.
And well it ought! VERY well it ought!
If nothing else at all, Richard the Lion Hearted’s absence said more about the SSPX and what it has become than all the “communiques”, adresses and web postings from Econe ever will.
One is reminded of the closing scenes from “Patton”.
With regards to the closing scense of “Patton” are you referring to the fish-hooks being used to immobilize General Patton’s head due to a broken neck?
Things have gone to far for there to be a reconcilliation between the 4 bishops. Bishop Williamson has gotten to out of hand and is not controllable. Sooner or later, he will part ways – likely sooner.
There have been rumors as far back as 1992, that indicate that Bishop Williamson has trouble with authority, no matter who is in authority. Whether the rumors were true then, I do not know. However, based on his behaviors today, it certainly looks like those rumors are true.
Bishop Williamson has also been surrounded with rumors of sede views since 1992 or earlier. Again, true or not, he is the one who gives credence to those rumors. He likes to keep company with known sedes and he himself uses a sede to run his blog. On more than one occassion, he has made veiled comments which hint at leaning toward or becoming a sede. If that is out of the question for him, then he should set the record straight but he doesn’t do that.
With at least of 2 of the priests who have spoken out in a rebellious manner over the past 2 months, it seems that Bishop Williamson was the direct trigger. Perhaps the timing was just coincidence, but Bishop Williamson had spent a number of days in their district directly prior to their speaking out. Trying to organize a rebellion is unexcusable behavior and Bishop Fellay cannot be expected to look the other way.
Bishop Fellay has thus far dealt fairly easy with Bishop Williamson, but it is unlikely he can continue to do so. Especially since Bishop Williamson is continuing with his blog and each week almost seems to challenge Bishop Fellay.
To make matters worse, on another message forum, a small but very vocal group of supporters who I know are in direct contact with Bishop Williamson (or one of the priests who have been giving surmons against Bishop Fellay), are calling for a split and the ordination of more bishops. They seem to be testing the waters, and looking for support. If this is not something Bishop Williamson wants, he should distance himself from this idea. Let’s see if he does.
I don’t think this is very likely, as neither Bishop Fellay nor Williamson seems given to the practice of subterfuge, but am I the only one who’s had a passing thought that it just might be possible that Bp. Williamson is carrying out a “performance” to give Bp. Fellay the “political cover” to expel him from the Society so as to ease its acceptance by the Vatican without having to compromise on doctrinal issues? Is Bp. Williamson willingly falling on his sword for the greater good of the SSPX?
I know it sounds unlikely, but we all know the uproar that will (not might) ensue upon the welcoming by the Vatican of any group that includes someone who is hated by the Professional Jews. Most of us also know that they’ll throw a hissyfit even if Bp. Williamson is not included, but a visible separation may at least give Pope Benedict the courage to accept them without a muzzle.
Yep, I could give a whole list of arguments against this theory, too — as I said, it’s just a passing thought, not something I really believe, just throwing it out there to let anyone else who may have had similar crazy thoughts know that they’re not alone.
Glornt, the thought has gone through my mind as well. I guess we are all looking for an excuse for Bishop Williamson’s behavior.
Silver tongued egotism?
Oh boy! Where do I start… No naming name (because that will take too long) but all of those who think that His Holiness Bishop Williamson will band together with a Sed must be sorely mistaken, not only has he never given the opinion that he takes that quite incorrect view but he all those who are in agreement with him, and have thus spoken out, have expressly shown their repulsion to such a view! So please no more talk of he any any others speaking against an agreement with Rome as taking a Sede view, it doesn’t make sense and is clear it doesn’t enter into their psyche.
Now what can I pick on next…
The yet still and continually spoken of topic of “a break off group” caused by this fractious ordeal. Mmm, what do I say. I must say that, those who have been outspoken of late with this topic, who I have seen and listened to, are, as one above mentioned, “single-intendre [okay don't know what the previous word means but I can see what he's getting at] Lefebvrite”‘s and as such will, as I have heard them say (just ask if you want quotes), will stay members of The Society until their dying breath, and wish not to be “kicked-out” and will not leave on their own account, and will continue to serve the faithful entrusted to them as they remain in the SSPX.
Getting tired of this post/reply… maybe later I’ll come on and finish my exploded view analysis. But don’t expect it. Not that I figure the majority of you will want it.
One last note, please read at least this. I am not one to immediately just on the latest conspiracy theory and don’t hold any sure position for the more prevalent ones today. But I do encourage people to read and research the very theories that the likes of Bishop Williamson among others put some level of credence to. And I encourage reading on one particular topic to clarify the underlying theme behind the theories. This topic is Zionist/Rabbinic Jewish** Freemasonry (which communism and the French “revolution” find their origin and primary cause), if you know a little about the preceding topic you will see that there are some in the world who could and will perform such atrocities in order to get what they want and to get want they want to happen.
ps, seemed off topic but I now conclude that it was essential to point out, I just hope someone reads and benefits from this. I have been on here way too long!
**Here I am not talking about the Messianic Jews around in Our Lord’s time but the “Rabbinic Judaism [that] came to existence in the end of the first century after Christ”
!!!!!OOPPSS!!!!!
For all those who realised (I only did when I was about on my way to the shower) my mistake a in the first line and took offense, I profusely apologize. Bishop Williamson’s respectful title is His Excellency not what I used.
Thought occurred to me about another former poster saying they are sad that it was HE Bishop Williamson who Confirmed their children. The fact is that if now as opposed to then, as I’m sure some assert, HE+W is teaching some sort of error, be assured of one thing with regards to the Confirmation, only be sorry if you find out all this time that he has not intended to ‘do as the Church does’ or something else that may invalidate the Sacrament. For no other reason should we be sorry about who Baptized, Confirmed, absolved or ‘married’ us, just in the same way I am not sorry I was baptized by a NO priest (not traditional at the time), I know the Sacrament is valid, I do, when I remember, pray for that priest and others I have been connected with in that form.
I can’t believe what I’m seeing here. Is he FOR REAL?
His Excellency is like many (not all, but many) protestant converts.
By this I mean they frequently become very fervent Catholics, often to the point of overkill, but fail to adopt a true Catholic state of being and often can’t get past vestiges of their former religion. Their sensus Catholicus is just off somehow. They don’t, or can’t, “get it.”
For example, you’ll see many becoming “bible Catholics” constantly quoting scripture chapter and verse in lieu of catechesis or at times taking to idiosyncratic interpretations of scripture. Scott Hahn comes to mind. Sometimes they’ll become “expert” professor know-it-all type Catholics, or at times turning into the “turbo” Catholics that we often run into on the web and elsewhere.
In Bishop Williamson’s case, his former protestantism seems to manifest in that he just can’t resist rebelling against any and all authority – no matter where it lies. As per him and his followers, (the few who will remain and manage to tolerate his perpetual crap) HIS mind, HIS heart and HIS soul is the very center of our Catholic faith. He has it right, nearly all others have it wrong. Somewhat like sola scriptura, it’s “sola magisteria” – if that can be considered a term.
Forget sedevacantism, as a former Anglican, it seem H.E. would be perfectly suited to branch off a new modern Anglican movement. The first began in King Henry VIII’s crotch, why not one that begins in Bishop Williamson’s mind? They’ll be no unpleasant ecclesiastic authorities to deal with whatsoever. Just hit reset and start over.
For him to be allow himself to be caught on film in this manner is an absolute OUTRAGE of the highest magnitude. Leaving all Catholic implications aside, it’s highly unprofessional and in extremely poor taste. Not to mention the fact that – as usual – his timing could not possibly have been worse.
Your Excellency, you REALLY do not get it – DO YOU.
Whoever is making these videos deliberately isolated the most inflammatory comments, with an obvious agenda.
When I listen to Bishop W’s, or read his writings, I hear and see dire FEAR. I disagree with you, Servitium, that he acts from self-centered motives… it is simply FEAR. (That can happen to anyone who spends a lot of time following conspiracy theories and impending doom prophets, even if the theories and prophets are true.)
I completely disagree with the fact that over the past year or more Bishop W has gone public with his concerns rather than keeping them internal to the SSPX. He is way out of line to publicly call for an ouster of Bsp Fellay like that, although he would have the right to try to get his concerns across and convince the other voting members of the SSPX General Council. If he had stuck to campaigning internally, and avoided speaking to the laity about this, then I believe that his opinions would have been respected more and he would never have been excluded from the GC.
But the way he went about it! It made his “side” so distasteful that you don’t even want to hear what is correct in his message. For example, that it is too soon to trust Rome.
Servitium, if you can manage, wade through the entire 3 hour talk of Bishop W’s conference. It is all on YouTube. I think you will see it is Fear, not Pride so much.
Hi, I am downloading the complete conference by HE +W it is over 9 hours long. To use a 37 second clip is somewhat disingenuous.
God Save Bishop Williamson.
disingenuous: Only if the ‘clips’ do distort the meaning of the speaker. At third viewing there appears to be sufficient context to establish the meaning/intent.
As it would take well over 40hrs for me to download, I look forward to your comments as to whether or not the remaining context alters the meaning/intent of the words posted in the short clips.
Well, to characterize an over 9 hour talk as “Bishop Williamson spoke just briefly before the General Chapter” is certainly misleading at best.
I’m still a bit puzzled at all the friction over a “sell-out” that never happened, though. Maybe Bishop Williamson could be trying to get himself kicked out in order to ease Vatican recognition, after all. Look, we know that even though absolutely nothing was asked, much less demanded, of the Jews for watering down a part of our liturgy, it’s pretty clear that they will require some “face-saving” concession from the SSPX in order to make their acceptance a little less difficult for Pope Benedict (although the “progressives” will still throw their little Hitler-fits over it), and expelling Bp. Williamson may be enough for the Pope to consider it worth the heat he’s going to take (just like with the Good Friday prayer, which to no one’s surprise — at least among observant folks — wasn’t good enough for the Jews, anyway). Plus, I’d like to hold onto my hope that he hasn’t gone looney tunes (but still not as bad as Conciliarism).
I don’t think Bishop Williamson is prideful or self-centered in the least.
Servitium, My apologies for misunderstanding you. It was this sentence from you that gave me that impression: “As per him and his followers, (the few who will remain and manage to tolerate his perpetual crap) HIS mind, HIS heart and HIS soul is the very center of our Catholic faith.”
Thanks for clarifying.
I went to a Bishop Williamson confirmation ceremony a few years back. None of my family were involved in the confirmations. As he was visiting, I wanted to see him, having read some of his writings, and having a favorable disposition towards his views. At sermon time during the Mass he delivered a sermon on the state of the church, which was very interesting, but what concerned me thinking about it afterwards, was the lack of attention in that sermon as to why he was here in the first place, to confer the Sacrament of confirmation to/on those children. I would have thought that he would have said something about the Sacrament, about the Holy Ghost, perhaps a word or two to the children being confirmed, it did not have to be the whole theme of his sermon. I believe he was so carried away with his thoughts and opinions on the state of the church and conveying these ideas to us, that the reason for his being there got swept away. Anyway although ready and willing to approve him, I was disappointed. Perhaps he met with the children afterwards, I do not know. It seems to me that HE Bishop W is an obsessive type, too strong in his own opinions. Means well but a little more reflection and humility would go a long way.
As for this:
“And it is his candor that makes him magnificent. E.g., “If a woman likes you she will believe anything you say. If a man likes you he will consider what you have to say.”
I am afraid HE Bishop W got that wrong.
This particular clip leaves me with that rather awkward and slightly disgusted feeling one has when you’ve accidentally opened a bathroom door on another adult using the toilet.
This business should have been a private, internal affair. Preferably between +Williamson and God.
Disobedience leads to more disobedience. Sin upon sin, at least looking at it from the outside. I think, if only +Williamson would have remained silent when asked not to speak. Even if it were an injustice (I will leave that possibility open) – God would provide. Now there is all this sin mixed up in it. It is a real scandal. This will cause damage to souls.
I have just watched the entire series of conferences on SSPX, Archbishop Lefebvre & Rome given by HE bishop Williamson over the weekend of 22,23,24 June this year.
The particular clip was recorded on the Sunday morning and comes at the beginning of the conference when one of the audience talks about a sermon by Father Chazal, + Williamson then talks about internal SSPX problems including purging of SSPX priests by + Fellay.
The statement did not appear to be out of context indeed, wholly in keeping with the previous 7 hours of excellent History of the struggle against Modernism and the fight to keep Tradition alive by Archbishop Lefebvre and SSPX, by the good bishop Williamson.
There is a long struggle ahead and some of our own could be against us.
God Bless bishop Williamson
“statement did not appear to be out of context ”
Hi Chris, McDee,
Would you mind reading the article angelqueen.org/2012/07/25/the-vatican-and-sspx-an-organizational-culture-perspective/ and provide comments.
I’m very interested in reading your thoughts on it.
Bishop Williamson has been called eccentric. I don’t think that’s fair. He doesn’t seem eccentric to me. He seems well centered in his orbit.
Bishop Williamson has said in interviews that he doesn’t care much about science. That disappointed me because if he understood properly the significance of the Foucault pendulum hoaxem at the Judeo-Masonic UN, and that Einstein was an idiot, he could do a lot more damage to modernism and scientific materialism than he’s already doing.
The first edition of the liberal and heretical trash that is Isaac Newton’s
“Principia” was published in 1687 and interestingly the “Glorious Revolution” followed in 1688 and the Bank of Engalnd in 1694. Without that sequence there wouldn’t be the Foucault pendulum hoaxem at the UN and so much widespread social confusion and destruction attending the regnant “scientific” materialism and Marxist Hegelianism of today.
It may seem like i don’t have a point, except to say that +Williamson’s 21st century survey’s could improve if he was trained in how to attack and take down a Foucault pendulum … like the one at the Judeo-Masonic UN.
So on and so forth, alwaysthemore, nevertheless … long live Robert the Bruce and keep Scotland out of the UN!
God bless the SSPX and Bishop Fellay as well.
21st century surveys
A purchasing agent, a young rookie from the Judeo-Masonic UN, called Shipley’s Shipping and requested 500 lbs. of gravity to be delivered next Tuesday and asked for the cost. The floor manager at Shipley’s Shipping asked, “500 lbs. of gravity in what … in quale quid?”
The purchasing agent delayed his order a moment, and said, “what kind of stupid question is that? Are you some kind of retarded theologian? Speaking Latin … you must be an idiot! If you can’t get the gravity when we have the money, we’ll take our business elsewhere. Do you get the message?”
The floor manager answered, “hold on a minute. Let me write this down. 500 lbs. of gravity next Tuesday. In what?”
“In what? Don’t you worry about that. We have a lot. We have big numbers. The really big numbers. Are we clear?”
“Okaaaay”, said the floor manager. “To what address?”
“1st Avenue & E 44th Street, New York, NY. This is the UN at the 40th parallel, and get it here on time by 3:00 pm.”
“Okay, that’ll be 10,000 Ben Bernanke dollars”, said the floor manager, “and you’ll get your 500 lbs. of gravity when we get there.”