FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Bp. Williamson's Oct. 19, '12, open letter to Bp. Fellay, "On an 'Exclusion'"
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 12 13
Bishop Williamson Wrote:So if he does seem for years to have been separating himself from the Society, the truth is that he has been distancing himself from the conciliatory Society, and not from that of the Archbishop.

Bishop Williamson's argument is a straw man fallacy.  There was no agreement with Rome, therefore there is no such thing as the "conciliatory Society."  And Archbishop Lefebvre met with Vatican authorities, just like Bishop Fellay has done.  So Bishop Williamson's justification for disobedience is based on his own imagination, rather than REALITY. 
(10-26-2012, 03:01 PM)Parmandur Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-26-2012, 02:39 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-26-2012, 01:53 PM)Parmandur Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-26-2012, 01:47 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]Virtually every religious society or order goes through a time after the death of their founder in which differing understandings of the founding vision compete with each other.  That is what is happening to the SSPX now.  There are two competing visions for the Society.  There are two understandings of the relationship with Rome. Bishop Williamson is the representative of one side and Bishop Fellay is the representative of the other.  Their conflict is inevitable.

If Bishop Williamson had never made public comments about the Holocaust, there is every reason to believe that we would be seeing the exact same situation as we do now.  This issue is a red herring.

Indeed.  His support of sketchy pseudo-mystics, his flagrant disobedience of his superior, and other issues matter way more than the video kerfluffle.

From what I've heard, he brings many strengths to being a bishop and has helped many people.  I do not think it is necessary to portray him as a bad guy in this situation.

Well, people seem quite eager to paint him as some sort of martyr, when he has simply reaped what he has sown.

I find it understandable that those who share his vision for the Society would see him as a hero. 
One can find his approval of the Indexed work more objectionable than "I do believe there were no gas chambers," but he has certainly suffered a great deal more because of the latter, and not the former.
(10-26-2012, 03:07 PM)PeterII Wrote: [ -> ]
Bishop Williamson Wrote:So if he does seem for years to have been separating himself from the Society, the truth is that he has been distancing himself from the conciliatory Society, and not from that of the Archbishop.

Bishop Williamson's argument is a straw man fallacy.  There was no agreement with Rome, therefore there is no such thing as the "conciliatory Society."  And Archbishop Lefebvre met with Vatican authorities, just like Bishop Fellay has done.  So Bishop Williamson's justification for disobedience is based on his own imagination, rather than REALITY. 

Don't you know, NewSociety has become corrupted by hanging out with NewChurch. Fortunately Richard Williamson and the last 7 or 8 remaining Roman Catholics on the planet are keeping the faith. More insightful commentary about New-thisthatandtheotherthing and about the 'myth of the gas chamber' (wow - if only Alfie Rosenberg had this guy on his team at Nuremberg!)... coming soon from a cabin in Montana.

How long before he dons a tracksuit and becomes Pope?
(10-26-2012, 03:39 PM)Phillipus Iacobus Wrote: [ -> ]One can find his approval of the Indexed work more objectionable than "I do believe there were no gas chambers," but he has certainly suffered a great deal more because of the latter, and not the former.

Whatever the historical facts of the Holocaust, it is now a political tool.  That is why denying it carries such unreasonable, disproportionate penalties.  However, neither the past history nor the current politics have much to do with the Church's mission.  There is an absurd amount of attention being given to a minor matter, while serious issues are virtually ignored.
I've been very disturbed by this split in the society and have felt both sympathy for and anger towards Williamson’s actions and have looked for a voice to guide me in how I should view this whole affair. I have a great deal of respect for Fr. Schmidberger and I trust his views, so it helped me greatly to read his letter.
I found the following translation on Ignis Ardens. http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens...opic=11220

Dear friends and benefactors,

the exclusion of Bishop Williamson from the Society of St. Pius X. may be surprising and perhaps even incomprehensible for outsiders; for people who are familiar with the situation, it is the painful endpoint in a development, which lasts for years now and which became dramatically worse in recent months.

His aversion to the Superior General and his Council became rejection, rejection became resistance and resistance became open rebellion.

He missed no opportunity to alienate the administration of the Society from himself, he revealed confidential documents and at last demanded unashamedly the resignation of the Superior General.

Before the General chapter in July of the current year, he said in a filmed interview verbally:

“If the Society succeds by a miracle, to get rid of Bishop Fellay and his gang, than this will be a very big purification.” – “There is just a hope, not more than a hope, that at the General Chapter the good elements may take the majority away from Bishop Fellay. If they do that, they will have succeded to get rid of Bishop Fellay. It’s a hope. It’s a dream.”

As every candidate for ordination, Bishop Williamson has promised at his priestly ordination on June 29, 1976 obedience and reverence to Archbishop Lefebvre and his successors.

Before the Bishops consecration our founder beseeched in a letter the four candidates for the episcopacy to remain united among themselves, in submission to the particular Superior General. Which message would we send outwards and inwards, if a bishop demands obedience and reverence form the candidates at the priestly ordination to the Superior General, while he takes the liberty for himself to insult him.

Our Lord says in the Gospel of St. Luke: “No kingdom can be at war with itself without being brought to desolation, one house falling upon another.”

As Bishop Williamson despite many counsels, fraternal exhortations and warning words was unwilling to change his position, after all, only the separation remained.

We have thus lost in our fraternity a bishop. Personally this exclusion hits me all the more, as Bishop Williamson was as a seminarian at Ecône with me in the same course and after his ordination he was 1976 in Weissbad for one year my coworker in the formation of the young Levites in the German-speaking part.

Please pray for the afflicted Superior General and pray also for the excluded one, that he may realize his wrong track and return back in the father's house.


Stuttgart, October 26, 2012
Father Franz Schmidberger, District Superior
(10-26-2012, 10:24 AM)IrishCowboy Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-26-2012, 03:09 AM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I guess Williamson was disobedient when he didn't go to Argentina, when he didn't leave Argentina, when he didn't go back to England, when he didn't curtail his activities and consign himself to only writing his blog column which he took off publicly and only mailed out directly. 
This is where Bishop Williamson and Gerard aren't being intellectually honest.  He left Argentina because his visa was revoked.

No, it's not intellectual dishonesty at all.  I made a mistake about the being expelled from Argentina, I meant to refer to his relinquishing of his being director of the Seminary.  And the going back to England referred to him being under near house arrest because of Fellay. 

And let's not forget the slurs and insults that Fellay launched during this time (coward) And the various press set ups with hostile interviews that Fellay approved of. (This was when Krah first started to become yet another suspicious character in this skullduggery.) 

Quote:   He returned to England because he's an English citizen and that was the only place he could go that would guarantee he wouldn't be extradited to Germany to face the (ridiculous, of course) charges against him for his holocaust remarks. 

Strange how Fellay never has addressed the injustice of that law.  I guess Rome told him not to. 

Quote:  He curtailed his activities (at least all international and publicly visible ones) while the appeals process was played out.  Eventually the charges were dismissed and, lo and behold, he made a trip to South America. 

He could've settled the whole thing sooner if he weren't hectored by his own superior who insisted on lying (i.e.. pleading guilty) and interfering in his efforts to defend himself.

Quote:
(10-26-2012, 03:09 AM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]Fellay was on a witch-hunt to drum him out from years gone by,  coincidentally the Holy Father wanted Williamson dealt with separately so, Fellay set about to abuse his authority just as the Popes have been abusing their for the last few decades. 

Fellay and the Popes are disobedient to the Truth on a more than frequent basis and you think that calls for absolute obedience and connivance on the part of Catholics regardless of following a well-formed conscience? 

You've got Catholicism confused with Islam.

Gerard, you've been slandering Bishop Fellay a lot lately, and you really need to knock it off. 

I haven't been slandering or detracting.  The actions and words of Bishop Fellay are available for all to see to demonstrate his traitorous attitude.  If anything I'm going to ramp it up. 


Quote: It doesn't help your arguments when all you do is trash him with speculations (at best) and untruths (at worst). 


The speculations are based on his objective track record, their are no untruths in what I've stated. 

Quote: There is no evidence that Bishop Fellay was going to sell out the SSPX. 

The axe blow is only effectivley parried  before it lands.  His intention was apparent in his actions and words. 

The 'evidence' of such is not avaiable (at this point) because we believe the sell out was avoided by the pressure we mounted. 

The only evidence you'd accept it seems would be a done deal when it's too late to stop it. 

Quote:  You and others speculate that he would have if the General Chapter hadn't gotten in the way.  You're arguing un-disprovable positions because they have to do with someone else's intentions, which, by the way aren't yours so it's not fair for you to act like you know what they are.

It's about trustworthiness.  Bp. Fellay in the last few years has displayed contradictory behavior and spoken contradictory statements.  What his intention is, as stated is different from his intentions displayed by the contradictions.  He threw Williamson under the bus as soon as media pressure started to mount against him for not condemning him according to the media's standards.  After that , he was the slave to the media with the insults, the "anti-semite" label is worse than "schismatic" nonsense. 

Quote: It's completely false to assert that Bishop Fellay has been "disobedient to the Truth on a more than frequent basis."  Where do you get such an idea?  He may not be as "hard-line" as you'd like, but what has he done that's been disobedient to the Truth? 

You can't one day say that a bishop is entitled to think what he wants about secular history and then hobble his ministry and condemn him for not accepting a secular narrative. 

Quote: He's appointed his pals at high positions, or so you claim, but what leader doesn't appoint advisers who share his views?  That's not contrary to the Truth.

It's the manner in which it was done and the manipulation of people in order to prepare the lay faithful to accept whatever the Superior General wanted.  The sudden import of certain priests that started to fiddle with the liturgical actions of the faithful which created huge problems at some chapels. 

Quote: Catholics can, and should, follow their well-formed consciences.  So why is it necessary for some to take everything Bishop Williamson says as gospel?  He's very intelligent and very logical, to be sure.  I have tremendous respect for him and always will.  But everyone knows he's always had a bit of an issue with letting prudence and/or discretion guide the things he says in public sometimes (even on national TV).  A bishop ought to know better.


I don't think he did a bad thing at all.  He could've fought the battle in the media and they would have caved.  They caught on early that he had charisma and stopped playing video of him instead just a distorted photo. 

Quote: When I read this letter, I was immediately struck by the arrogance of it.  Mind you, I'm judging the letter on its own merit, to say nothing of the dispositions of its author, per se. 

You perceive arrogance, I see it as gutsy and no less appropriate than the scene of St. Thomas More clearing the air at the end of "A Man for All Seasons." 

Quote:  It's all about "you're wrong, I'm right" and is not the least bit humble. 

Well???  What is it that disturbs you about someone stating clearly what they believe is the truth.  A man can't fight for his good name or to preserve the work he has done and prevent damage by his enemy? 

Quote:  The final paragraph where he refuses to allow himself to be expelled and calls on Bishop Fellay to resign "for the good of his own soul and everybody else" is tremendously arrogant. 

Why?? Why not tell a traitor to leave?  Why not make his abusive behavior as costly as possible?  Someone beats you up and you let them, they will not think twice about doing it again or picking a second victim.  Someone beats you up and gets the tar beat out of them trying to do it when you resist and you make it so costly they might back down or recant their attitude. 

Quote:  I understand it's necessary to rebuke even your superiors when you think they're wrong, but that's not something that should be done with an "open letter."  This was nothing more than a "who's with me?".

Christ spoke openly and called the religious leaders vipers and serpents and a whole host of other names.  People didn't know He was God Himself but he did it anyway and therefore He gave example of what is morally permissible. 

(10-26-2012, 10:35 AM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]Said document duly leaked on time. Utterly unexpected.
It wasn't a leak; it was on open letter.
(10-26-2012, 03:07 PM)PeterII Wrote: [ -> ]
Bishop Williamson Wrote:So if he does seem for years to have been separating himself from the Society, the truth is that he has been distancing himself from the conciliatory Society, and not from that of the Archbishop.

Bishop Williamson's argument is a straw man fallacy.  There was no agreement with Rome, therefore there is no such thing as the "conciliatory Society."  And Archbishop Lefebvre met with Vatican authorities, just like Bishop Fellay has done.  So Bishop Williamson's justification for disobedience is based on his own imagination, rather than REALITY. 

Nonsense, the SSPX went into a "cleansing" mode as soon as the excomms were "lifted."  Articles offensive to some liberal anti-Catholic Jews were removed from the website (a stupid move making it look as if the SSPX was guilty of something when they were not.)  The ruthless tossing out of priests for not agreeing with secular authorities views on the "holocaust." 

The interviews by Fellay and his toadies never stopping to rake Bishop W over the coals, to spread rumors that he was dying, the persecution of him no matter what he did, to always find another phoney complaint.  Heiner's the problem, Wansbutter is the problem, the column is too public, the column itself needs to be closed. 

Nonsense.  It was a witch hunt based on nothing more than the cold water that Williamson splashed on Fellay regarding the insanity of capitulating to the loonies of the secular world and the Novus Ordo part of the Church. 

(10-26-2012, 03:47 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-26-2012, 03:07 PM)PeterII Wrote: [ -> ]
Bishop Williamson Wrote:So if he does seem for years to have been separating himself from the Society, the truth is that he has been distancing himself from the conciliatory Society, and not from that of the Archbishop.

Bishop Williamson's argument is a straw man fallacy.  There was no agreement with Rome, therefore there is no such thing as the "conciliatory Society."  And Archbishop Lefebvre met with Vatican authorities, just like Bishop Fellay has done.  So Bishop Williamson's justification for disobedience is based on his own imagination, rather than REALITY. 

Don't you know, NewSociety has become corrupted by hanging out with NewChurch. Fortunately Richard Williamson and the last 7 or 8 remaining Roman Catholics on the planet are keeping the faith. More insightful commentary about New-thisthatandtheotherthing and about the 'myth of the gas chamber' (wow - if only Alfie Rosenberg had this guy on his team at Nuremberg!)... coming soon from a cabin in Montana.

How long before he dons a tracksuit and becomes Pope?

FYI, this post has been reported.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13