Williamson to consecrate a bishop??
#21
Perhaps Bishop Williamson will consecrate Fr. Cekada as a bishop.  The good father possesses a certain je ne sais quoi that one rarely sees in the episcopacy nowadays.  I'm not sure what it is, but it's definitely je ne sais quoi. 
Reply
#22
(01-14-2013, 12:25 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: I was not commenting so much on Williamson and who he decides to consecrate as a bishop, as I was on the future potential for some questionable consecrations in the future by the new bishop. When you look at the lineages of various episcopi vagantes, the quality of the new bishops always seems to get worse over time.

When you look at the lineage of various occupied episcopacies you'll see the same thing.  Even more so.  Excepting the Palmarians and a few other nuts, the wandering bishops are at least saying the latin mass and trying to preserve Catholic Tradition.  On the other hand, every single bishop within the canonically regular church said the NO earlier today and advertises false religious liberty through their local church bulletins.
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#23
(01-14-2013, 12:32 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(01-14-2013, 12:25 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: I was not commenting so much on Williamson and who he decides to consecrate as a bishop, as I was on the future potential for some questionable consecrations in the future by the new bishop. When you look at the lineages of various episcopi vagantes, the quality of the new bishops always seems to get worse over time.

When you look at the lineage of various occupied episcopacies you'll see the same thing.  Even more so.  Excepting the Palmarians and a few other nuts, the wandering bishops are at least saying the latin mass and trying to preserve Catholic Tradition.  On the other hand, every single bishop within the canonically regular church said the NO earlier today and advertises false religious liberty through their local church bulletins.

Perhaps we can agree that the quality of the episcopate in general has been in a state of great decline. There are plenty of canonical bishops who teach a false understanding of the faith, and more than a few questionable characters.  However, apostolic succession and a bishop's powers should be carefully guarded and I believe that if +Williamson starts a new line of Bishops, there exists some potential for craziness down the road.
Reply
#24
(01-14-2013, 12:07 AM)Azurestone Wrote: What is required for a new Catholic bishop?

What is your opinion of three or more Catholic bishops consecrating a bishop without the Pope, as was done prior to the 1917 Code of Canon Law?

One can be a valid bishop without being Catholic. Thus, the Orthodox have valid bishops. 

The Catholicity of Bishop Williamson is irrelevant. 
Reply
#25
Still waiting for his good Lordship Williamson to join the good bishops Kelly & Santay . . .  :tiphat:
Reply
#26
(01-14-2013, 12:20 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(01-14-2013, 12:04 AM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-14-2013, 12:02 AM)DoktorDespot Wrote: We already talk about Thuc line bishops, perhaps some day we will speak of Williamson line ones as well.

No one denies Bishop WIlliamson is a valid bishop and has the ability to validity to consecrate valid bishops. 

I don't think any denied Thuc was a valid bishop, they denied that he was mentally capable of consecrating bishops.  I could see people saying similar things about Wililamson, taking the Holocaust denial angle.  It would take some work, though. 

Even Williamson's strongest detractors would have a hard time arguing that he is so crazy that he doesn't have the mental capacity to understand what he is doing.  Plus, this consecration doesn't appear as if it will be done in secret. I would strongly bet it will be filmed.  
Reply
#27
(01-14-2013, 12:58 AM)Virgil the Roman Wrote: Still waiting for his good Lordship Williamson to join the good bishops Kelly & Santay [i.e., join the SSPV and the like] . . .  :tiphat:

Williamson hates the SSPV. It will never happen. 
Reply
#28
While a consecration is valid with a single consecrating Bishop, the rite of consecration and the perennial tradition of the Church calls for 2 (ideally 3) co-consecrating Bishops. Who would these assistant Bishops be, I wonder? ...

Regardless, this isn't a good thing.
Reply
#29
(01-14-2013, 01:20 AM)Joshua Wrote: While a consecration is valid with a single consecrating Bishop, the rite of consecration and the perennial tradition of the Church calls for 2 (ideally 3) co-consecrating Bishops. Who would these assistant Bishops be, I wonder? ...

Regardless, this isn't a good thing.

I doubt that there will be any assisting Bishops. At Williamson's own consecration by Archbishop Lefebvre there was only one co-consecrator, but I am sure that Lefebvre would have gone ahead with the consecrations by himself if Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer hadn't made the trip from Brazil.
Reply
#30
(01-14-2013, 12:31 AM)DrBombay Wrote: Perhaps Bishop Williamson will consecrate Fr. Cekada as a bishop.  The good father possesses a certain je ne sais quoi that one rarely sees in the episcopacy nowadays.  I'm not sure what it is, but it's definitely je ne sais quoi. 

Perhaps the high point of this thread.

:LOL:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)