FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: SSPX bombshell: Williamson is out
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
(06-26-2012, 12:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]Good riddance to that sedevacantist-leaning nut.

"Sedevacantist-leaning" is just the latest version of "schismatic trajectory" non-sense, and this guy doesn't like Williamson's turn of phrase concerning "NewChurch."   Are you a partial communion nutbag as well?  Don't answer, I don't care. 

Go back to Catholic Answers forums where they don't think.  You belong there.

Popes can blather on and on about "renewal" and when you point out accurately to the NeoCatholics that they've got "renewal" and you call it "NewChurch" they get all nutso about it.  Hypocritical jackasses, all of them. 

(06-26-2012, 12:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]Good riddance to that sedevacantist-leaning nut.

Stupidest post ever. Someone apparently thinks they're above a Traditional Catholic Bishop.

I completely agree with the poster above me. Go back to Catholic Answers where you belong.
(06-26-2012, 12:45 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2012, 12:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]Good riddance to that sedevacantist-leaning nut.

"Sedevacantist-leaning" is just the latest version of "schismatic trajectory" non-sense, and this guy doesn't like Williamson's turn of phrase concerning "NewChurch."   Are you a partial communion nutbag as well?  Don't answer, I don't care. 

Go back to Catholic Answers forums where they don't think.  You belong there.

Popes can blather on and on about "renewal" and when you point out accurately to the NeoCatholics that they've got "renewal" and you call it "NewChurch" they get all nutso about it.  Hypocritical jackasses, all of them. 

Not to put too fine a point on it.. Touché!
(06-26-2012, 12:32 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2012, 12:15 PM)ggreg Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2012, 12:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]Good riddance to that sedevacantist-leaning nut.

So what names do you call all the apostate clergy in newChurch?

I don't acknowledge an ecclesial body called "newChurch." Nor do I consider many of the clergy to be apostates, since that would mean they'd rejected Christianity in its entirety.

So as long as they reject the less important doctrines that is OK?

Or are you using the June 2000 meaning of the word "entirety", which means kind-of-sorta the hermeneutic of maybe.
(06-25-2012, 09:48 PM)Dusty_Bottoms Wrote: [ -> ]the Superior General has deprived Bp. Williamson from the position of capitulary due to his stand calling to rebellion and for continually repeated disobedience.

:LOL: :LOL:

Yeah right and I am Pius X. The only reason he got axed is because the SSPX is now a tool of Apostate Rome and didn't want to offend a bunch of Matzo chompers.
I am wondering why an Archbishop gets to disobey a Pope because that Pope is a heretic (pretty good call as it turned out) and yet Bishop Williamson and the other two Bishops does not get to be disobedient for what look like very valid concerns.  Given where Rome is today and where it would need to be for a deal to work I'd say no deal is possible.

+Fellay has played this VERY poorly if his intentions are sincere and good.  Secret preambles, you are not invited to the party sulks.

Now he is pot-committed, if he does not do a deal with Rome he has lost the capacity to lead the SSPX as too many of the laity will forever distrust him and his zionist lawyer.  Trust takes a long time to build

Williamson has his quirks, 911, Sound of Music, Nazism, but he walks it like he talks it and people like that.

Roman politics has won.  Let's hope that Frodo and Sam are standing over the crack of doom and are ready to drop in the Ring.

Oh well, I'd rather go out with a bang than a fizzle.

(06-26-2012, 01:17 PM)ggreg Wrote: [ -> ]I am wondering why an Archbishop gets to disobey a Pope because that Pope is a heretic (pretty good call as it turned out) and yet Bishop Williamson and the other two Bishops does not get to be disobedient for what look like very valid concerns.  Given where Rome is today and where it would need to be for a deal to work I'd say no deal is possible.

+Fellay has played this VERY poorly if his intentions are sincere and good.  Secret preambles, you are not invited to the party sulks.

Now he is pot-committed, if he does not do a deal with Rome he has lost the capacity to lead the SSPX as too many of the laity will forever distrust him and his zionist lawyer.  Trust takes a long time to build

Williamson has his quirks, 911, Sound of Music, Nazism, but he walks it like he talks it and people like that.

Roman politics has won.  Let's hope that Frodo and Sam are standing over the crack of doom and are ready to drop in the Ring.

Oh well, I'd rather go out with a bang than a fizzle.

I am sure in a somewhat similar light the apostles were wondering this about Judas.
It all seems simple to me the Roman Apostates promised Fellay things and he like any other glory hunter fell for it. Now he is taking the whole society down just so he can schmooze with the Roman heretics.

If this BS is true I for one will never set foot in an SSPX Church again. There is a very Nice CMRI one here and an SSPV not too far away.
I find it difficult to have such a low opinion of Bishop Fellay.

My theory is that he saw the SSPX had all sorts of problems internally (which it does) and would break up sooner or later due to various camps.  He knows that the longer a reconcilliation is left the harder it is to do.

So he's taking a chance and going back earlier than he would like on the basis that he believes God will somehow make it right in the end.

I don't know why he cannot just meet the Pope over a glass of sherry and thrash it out mano-a-mano with him, say nothing until he is confident that B16 is not trying to shaft Traditionalists (who he's admitted he does not like) and then be honest with the laity and say, "yes it is a risk, but life is full of risks."

He's handled it dreadfully.  If he had outsourced it to Indian Project Managers they couldn't have screwed it up much worse.
(06-26-2012, 12:45 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2012, 12:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]Good riddance to that sedevacantist-leaning nut.

"Sedevacantist-leaning" is just the latest version of "schismatic trajectory" non-sense, and this guy doesn't like Williamson's turn of phrase concerning "NewChurch."   Are you a partial communion nutbag as well?  Don't answer, I don't care. 

I prefer the pre-Vatican II member terminology. It's much more concrete. You're either a member of God's Church, or you're outside of it.

That said, St. Augustine himself referred to heretics as being "in communion with" the Church on those things on which they agreed with the Church, and "not in communion" with the Church on those things with they they disagreed.

(06-26-2012, 12:45 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]Go back to Catholic Answers forums where they don't think.  You belong there.

The fact that I disagree with you means I don't think? I'm not really a fan of Catholic Answers, by the way. I find the posters here more interesting to read.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11