Fr. Z sees red and does black deeds against Bishop Williamson
#11
(12-16-2009, 05:15 AM)Dust Wrote: Someday I'm gonna find dirt on you and hang you out to dry... WATCH YOURSELF!!!

... that's basically what you just said.  Or am I reading this wrong?  I don't know what you've got against this priest, but you're making this awfully personal, not to mention uncharitable in a huge way. 

If you consider a misquote "dirt" then yes.  If a misquote is not "dirt" then, no.  I'm simply applying Fr. Z's standard against Bishop Williamson to Fr. Z.  "For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again."

There's nothing personal about it at all.  I'm simply pointing out Fr. Z's attacks on Bishop Williamson and commenting on his comments and what they contain or lack.  I don't know what Fr. Z has against Bishop W. but he takes awfully personal swipes at the man and is hugely uncharitable and finally, after a few years of this and taking it directly to him, he's dishonest about the man, his words and the truth of them.  He's a propaganda machine under the guise of an amalgam of a traditional priest and a modern priest.  He's also an internet bully and I have no patience for people who try to bully good people.

But I can only go so far.  I don't claim to have the right to engage in calumny like Fr. Z.   I didn't accuse Fr. Z of sounding like a heretic and misrepresent both the heresy and the priest.  That doesn't stop Fr. Z from doing the same to Bishop W.  

Fr. Z is not stupid, ( he lacks wisdom) and he loses opportunities to really engage the bishop in discussion and argument, but he avoids it when the Bishop is correct and instead of simply ignoring the whole letter because of pride, he attempts to discredit the Bishop personally rather than concede a single point to the Bishop.  So whatever his job is supposed to be, truth is not at the top of the list.  His deck-stacking technique against Bishop W. is proof of that.

I asked Fr. Z on his blog on numerous occasions when he would write nasty things about Bishop W.  to pick up the phone and call him.   To my knowledge he has never done this.  Anyone who knows Bishop W. knows that he would be available to talk to him.  

Reply
#12
(12-16-2009, 02:04 AM)anthony Wrote: Well, with what Bishop Williamson writes sometimes, its hard not to swipe..  :pazzo:

Taking swipes is a lot easier than admitting the craziness of the current situation in the world.  It doesn't invalidate the truth of what the Bishop writes.
Reply
#13
(12-16-2009, 01:48 AM)Servus_Maria Wrote: I also feel a little uncomfortable when he posts pictures of expensive three course dinners and wine constantly. I don't particularly think it's appropriate for a priest to dine like that regularly let alone publicize the fact.

He did that in Lent once! There's people trying to fast and he's showing this massive meal to them!

I get bored of his food anyway and I get bored with his birds too so I don't read him anymore.
Reply
#14
(12-16-2009, 10:07 AM)AlanF Wrote:
(12-16-2009, 01:48 AM)Servus_Maria Wrote: I also feel a little uncomfortable when he posts pictures of expensive three course dinners and wine constantly. I don't particularly think it's appropriate for a priest to dine like that regularly let alone publicize the fact.

He did that in Lent once! There's people trying to fast and he's showing this massive meal to them!

I get bored of his food anyway and I get bored with his birds too so I don't read him anymore.

He is like an 80 year old woman. Spending all of his time cooking and watching birds...odd man.
Reply
#15
(12-16-2009, 10:13 AM)BrevisVir55 Wrote:
(12-16-2009, 10:07 AM)AlanF Wrote:
(12-16-2009, 01:48 AM)Servus_Maria Wrote: I also feel a little uncomfortable when he posts pictures of expensive three course dinners and wine constantly. I don't particularly think it's appropriate for a priest to dine like that regularly let alone publicize the fact.

He did that in Lent once! There's people trying to fast and he's showing this massive meal to them!

I get bored of his food anyway and I get bored with his birds too so I don't read him anymore.

He is like an 80 year old woman. Spending all of his time cooking and watching birds...odd man.

Too true. He also has his "Z-Cam" pointed at the bird feeder because he think we all want to watch his birds all day too.  ???
Very old ladily..
Reply
#16
(12-16-2009, 09:26 AM)BrevisVir55 Wrote: Every time I would take a gander at his site there would be all these bloody birds! I don't care about birds! I just stopped after a while. Although I did get the impression he did not like the SSPX.

That's not really fair.  He has always spoken well of the SSPX priests he knows and is often complimentary of Bishop Fellay, and he has said many times how good the SSPX could be for the Church.  He just doesn't think that the illicit consecrations were justified, nor does he believe in the "emergency powers" argument that the SSPX uses to justify its position.  Aside from that, his problem is with Bishop Williamson, mainly on the grounds that the bishop is doing more harm than good by what he says.
Reply
#17
(12-16-2009, 10:17 AM)AlanF Wrote: Too true. He also has his "Z-Cam" pointed at the bird feeder because he think we all want to watch his birds all day too.  ???
Very old ladily..

Bishop Williamson damages people's faith with his writings about Poetry, Literature, Painting, Theater, Opera and Instrumental Music.  And worse, he ties all of these cultural things into contexts that include and point towards God.  

I'm sure there is some religious lesson there for the birds, probably just too deep for simple folk like me.

Reply
#18
(12-16-2009, 10:52 AM)cgraye Wrote: That's not really fair.  He has always spoken well of the SSPX priests he knows and is often complimentary of Bishop Fellay,

That's in the effort to create the perception of a rift in the SSPX.  Prior to the lifting of the invalid excommunications, Bishop Fellay was treated somewhat fairly but Williamson always had the preface "Excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson." 

Quote: and he has said many times how good the SSPX could be for the Church. 

His opinion is they might be good for the Church but they're not right about the Church. 

Quote:  He just doesn't think that the illicit consecrations were justified, nor does he believe in the "emergency powers" argument that the SSPX uses to justify its position. 

He doesn't believe in the crisis in the Church.  He also tried to ludicrously pass off the idea that JPII "laid the groundwork" for Pope Benedicts'  "Marshall Plan"  C'mon.  Pope Benedict still hasn't publicly acknowledged the true cause of the crisis and Fr.  Z tries to provide cover for the negligent Popes. 

Quote:  Aside from that, his problem is with Bishop Williamson, mainly on the grounds that the bishop is doing more harm than good by what he says.

And Fr. Z is willing to bend the truth, hide the facts and distort the words in order to stop bishop W. from "doing more harm" to Vatican II. 
Reply
#19
I find Fr. Z. to be rather spiteful when talking about the SSPX actually. Especially when he reds up one of Bishop +Fellay's letters to friends and benefactors. He'll always say "note the title" and I've even seen the phrase "you get the feeling he's taling to the money here" after a perfectly fine statement about the current state of the Church
Reply
#20
(12-16-2009, 11:08 AM)Gerard Wrote: That's in the effort to create the perception of a rift in the SSPX.

There's no need to create a "perception" about it.

Quote:Prior to the lifting of the invalid excommunications, Bishop Fellay was treated somewhat fairly but Williamson always had the preface "Excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson."

So?  That is perfectly true and relevant.

Quote:His opinion is they might be good for the Church but they're not right about the Church.

That's true, but that's not the point.  You can be wrong about something and still have many good qualities and something important to contribute.  You call tell that Fr. Z admires the zeal and the directness of the SSPX priests and believes that that is what the Church needs.  And it's not even that he thinks they are wrong about the Church so much as that they are wrong about how they are handling it.

Quote:He doesn't believe in the crisis in the Church.

He believes there are serious problems in the Church.  Probably not exactly the way the SSPX does, though, that is true.

Quote:He also tried to ludicrously pass off the idea that JPII "laid the groundwork" for Pope Benedicts'  "Marshall Plan"   C'mon.  Pope Benedict still hasn't publicly acknowledged the true cause of the crisis and Fr.  Z tries to provide cover for the negligent Popes.

He does have a soft spot for John Paul II, who was apparently an important figure in his earlier life and and who ordained him, but what he says isn't totally off the mark.  But John Paul II could have easily forbidden the traditional Mass completely, never allowed the SSPX to be formed in the first place, and done dozens of other things to hinder the traditionalist cause.  He did not.  I think Fr. Z gives JPII about as much unfair slack as trads give him unfair lack of it.

Quote:And Fr. Z is willing to bend the truth, hide the facts and distort the words in order to stop bishop W. from "doing more harm" to Vatican II. 

I don't think you can point me to any specific examples of deliberate falsification.  You can argue with his interpretations of things, but that's really it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Fr. Z apologist, and there are plenty of things he says and does that I don't agree with, but I do object to painting him as hostile to the SSPX in general, because that is clearly untrue.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)