Archbishop’s Sense – II - Bishop Richard Williamson

[Michael]

Archbishop’s Sense – II

Towards Rome a great Archbishop, yes, did push.

But what can be done when Romans’ minds are mush?

Twelve weeks ago (Oct. 5) “Eleison Comments” presented a first series of extracts from the last public interview of Archbishop Lefebvre, given to Fideliter magazine in early 1991. Here follows a second and last series of extracts, slightly edited but only for the sake of brevity and clarity:—

Q: What conclusions can we draw from the Society of St Pius X after 20 years of its existence?

A: The Good Lord wanted Catholic Tradition. I am deeply convinced that the Society is the means that God wanted to keep and maintain the Faith, the truth of the Church. We must continue faithfully to keep the treasures of the Church, hoping that one day they may resume the place which they should never have lost in Rome.

Q: You often say that, more than the liturgy, it is now the Faith which opposes us to modern Rome.

A: Certainly the question of the liturgy and the sacraments is very important, but the most important is the question of the Faith. This is not a question for us. We have the Faith of all time, of the Council of Trent, of the Catechism of St. Pius X, of all the Councils and all the Popes before Vatican II. For years they have tried in Rome to show that everything in the Council was fully consistent with this Tradition. Now they are showing their true colours by saying there is no longer any Tradition or Deposit to be transmitted. Tradition in the Church is whatever the Pope is saying today. You must submit to what the Pope and the bishops say today. Here is their famous ‘Living Tradition,’ which was the only basis for our condemnation in 1988.

Now they have given up trying to prove that what they say is consistent with what Pius IX wrote or with what the Council of Trent promulgated. No, all of that is over; it’s outdated, as Cardinal Ratzinger said. It is clear, and they might have said so earlier. There was no point in our talking, in our discussing with them. Now we suffer from the tyranny of authority, because there are no longer any rules from the past.

They are showing more and more that we are right. We are dealing with people who have a different philosophy from ours, a different way of seeing, who are influenced by all modern subjectivist philosophers. For them there is no fixed truth, there is no dogma. Everything is evolving. This is really the Masonic destruction of the Faith. Fortunately, we have Tradition to lean on!

Q: You have emphasized that you are sure that the Society is blessed by God, because at several points it could have disappeared.

A: Indeed. It has kept coming under very difficult attacks. That is very painful, but we must nonetheless believe that the line of Faith and Tradition that we are following, is imperishable, because God cannot allow his Church to perish.

Q; What can you say to those of the faithful who still hope in the possibility of an agreement with Rome?

A: Our true faithful, those who have understood the problem and who have precisely helped us to continue along the straight and firm path of Tradition and the Faith, told me that the approaches I was making towards Rome were dangerous and that I was wasting my time. Yet I hoped until the last minute that in Rome we would witness a little bit of loyalty, so I cannot be blamed for not having done the maximum. So now too, to those who say to me, “You’ve got to reach an agreement with Rome,” I think I can say that I then went even further than I should have.

Kyrie eleison.

Archbishop’s Sense – II - Bishop Richard Williamson

[Dawn Marie]

The contrast between ABL and what he believed and the way the SSPX is now going is stark.  It is defined most clearly by Bp, Fellay in his recent sermon at the ordinations ceremony in La Reja on December 20th 2014:

He (+BPF) recalled that at the meeting on August 29, 2005, Benedict XVI recriminated him saying: “You behave as vagus priests relying on a subjective state of necessity” and “you don’t realize the canonical irregularity that you represent.  In order to be recognized as Catholics it is necessary to solve the problems or at least try to solve them". Bishop Fellay said he responded:"…Holy Father, You're Right"

Then, to explain the state of necessity, he made the comparison to a natural disaster and blocked firefighters and justified the actions of the priests with the norms of canon law:  “if an orthodox, an excommunicated, a suspended or a schismatic can give sacraments to the dying, why not a Society priest?"

"The SSPX has supplied jurisdiction. We shouldn’t be vagus clergy”. The problem of the jurisdiction demonstrates the importance of being canonically recognized. It is not possible to say that it is not important to have the Catholics' seal. It is necessary to have the seal!"

“Hence, our interest of being always in touch with the Roman authorities to obtain this seal, as the Founder always did. We never wanted to cut with Rome and thus we always maintained contacts".

"The official church is the visible one, it is the Catholic Church, period!"

[David Kaftal]

"The official church is the visible one, it is the Catholic Church, period!"

Yes, it is the Catholic Church, the same as a drooling man with brain damage and with his arms and legs amputated is still that man.

[Dawn Marie]

Sermon Archbishop Lefebvre:  (A VERY STARK CONTRAST to what Bp. Fellay is now saying...Kyrie Eleison+)

"We are told that it was necessary that the tradition enter into the visible Church.
"I think a very, very serious mistake is committed here.
"Where is the visible church? The visible church is recognized by the features that have always given to visibility: one, holy, catholic and apostolic.
"I ask: Where are the true marks of the Church? Are they more in the official Church (this is not the visible Church, but the official church) or in us, in what we represent, what we are?
"Clearly we are who preserve the Unity of the faith, which disappeared from the official Church."

[David Kaftal]

Well, this is very difficult. If the official Church is not the Catholic Church, and if the titular head of the official Church spews nonCatholic nonsense, which he does, then it becomes pretty much impossible to avoid the sedevacantist conclusion. But if the Society possesses the true marks of the Church, then is Bishop Fellay the true head of the Church? Well, no, that's not very likely. So maybe it's the Resistance? Ah, well, which branch? Is Fr. Pfeiffer the True Head of the True Catholic Church? Bp. Williamson? Or maybe it's Pablo the Mexican? Dawn Marie? Bishop Sanborn? Nancy Pelosi?

The official Church is one, is Catholic in the literal sense of universal, is holy to an extent, anyway, containing elements of holiness and individuals who are holy, and unquestionably represents apostolic succession.

I once saw a Venn diagram that purported to show the True Church. There was a circle that included everyone in the official Church, another comprising everyone in the Society, another all the independents, etc. There was a section where all the circles overlapped, and that was where the Church was, according to this model. Seems like a possibility.

I like Bishop Williamson's description of the Church as a half-rotten apple. Our Lord promised it would be indefectible, so it can't be all rotten, but half-rotten's not out of the question.  The part that's rotten is, well, rotten, but part of it is still good.

This is not a question that lends itself to pat answers.

[Dawn Marie]

I agree, it is without a doubt a very difficult time smothered in confusion....with no pat answers.

Bp. Fellay's idea of the conciliar church being the Catholic Church does not wash though with ABL's thoughts. BPF wishes to reconcile with that which is half rotten.  He has said it, Bp. DeG has said it.  Bp. T just takes the attitude of going along to get along even if he does not agree.

While the SSPX must never become a parallel church and must continue to look for the moment of going back to Rome, they must remember that the moment of going back to Rome is the moment Rome comes back to God i.e. Rome's conversion. 

It is this last key element which has led to the culmination of division.

BpF says that it is not necessary to wait for Rome's conversion, that there is nothing wrong with seeking to reconcile with Rome as they are at the moment.  BpDeG has said exactly the same thing, saying that waiting for Rome's conversion is no longer necessary, that now there is a new direction we must take. 

Fr. Pfluger even uttered as much in 2012 saying that "we can not wait for some "miracle" from the Mother of God to convert Rome, we must do it ourselves".

Yikes..

[David Kaftal]

Yes, it is definitely madness to think that any group of trads cans reconcile with modern Rome and not be swallowed up. The notion of "converting from within" is wishful thinking at best.

[Alley]

It is a good thing that the true church resides in people who are living their Holy Catholic Faith. 

[Lily Paladin]

If they (the Conciliar Church) has to convert, they are not Catholic.  By that fact alone, Bishop Fellay should not try to approach them with any propositions, or listen to them in anything.  They have lost the Faith already.

[Dawn Marie]

I am no theologian nor do I know for sure but isn't it possible that Rome needing to convert does not necessarily mean they are not Catholic?

If a Catholic sins, a mortal sin, it does not mean he is no longer Catholic but rather that he has cut himself off from God, at least until he confesses his sin and converts back to God.

There are so many different types of people in Rome and in the Church at large who are at one level or another.  Some are just lost, some are well intended perhaps thinking they are doing right in following VatII due to bad formations etc, some are flat out enemies of the Church, some infiltrators and so forth.  The main thing is either the pope converts back to God or we get a good and holy pope who will lead the Church out of this remarkable darkness, either way nothing will begin to come back to light and peace until the Church does as Jesus and Mary asked concerning Russia's consecration.  That is one of the most important things which must happen for our day.

Lily Paladin said:

If they (the Conciliar Church) has to convert, they are not Catholic.  By that fact alone, Bishop Fellay should not try to approach them with any propositions, or listen to them in anything.  They have lost the Faith already.

[Lily Paladin]

Just agreeing with ABL:

Certainly the question of the liturgy and the sacraments is very important, but the most important is the question of the Faith.

There was no point in our talking, in our discussing with them. Now we suffer from the tyranny of authority, because there are no longer any rules from the past.

We are dealing with people who have a different philosophy from ours, a different way of seeing, who are influenced by all modern subjectivist philosophers. For them there is no fixed truth, there is no dogma. Everything is evolving. This is really the Masonic destruction of the Faith. 

Our true faithful, those who have understood the problem and who have precisely helped us to continue along the straight and firm path of Tradition and the Faith, told me that the approaches I was making towards Rome were dangerous and that I was wasting my time.

Pretty much just saying Bishop Fellay should not have anything to do with them and is wasting his time since they no longer have the Faith. In my book, no longer Catholic.

[Dawn Marie]

I said I was no theologian....what you wrote proves it lol.

Lily Paladin said:

Just agreeing with ABL:

Certainly the question of the liturgy and the sacraments is very important, but the most important is the question of the Faith.

There was no point in our talking, in our discussing with them. Now we suffer from the tyranny of authority, because there are no longer any rules from the past.

We are dealing with people who have a different philosophy from ours, a different way of seeing, who are influenced by all modern subjectivist philosophers. For them there is no fixed truth, there is no dogma. Everything is evolving. This is really the Masonic destruction of the Faith. 

Our true faithful, those who have understood the problem and who have precisely helped us to continue along the straight and firm path of Tradition and the Faith, told me that the approaches I was making towards Rome were dangerous and that I was wasting my time.

Pretty much just saying Bishop Fellay should not have anything to do with them and is wasting his time since they no longer have the Faith. In my book, no longer Catholic.