Skip to main content

Bishop Williamson's Grand Delusion

+
JMJ

I was surprise to read that Triumph Communications had resumed its interviewing of Bishop Williamson.

Looking at the advertisement, I'm surprised that Bishop Williamson 'tackled' the hot questions since the answers are for the most part either within the reach of most rational people or probably require him to rely upon knowledge that Bishop Williamson gathered when he was still a member of the SSPX.

Now back in the action, Bishop Williamson tackles the following hot questions with his typical candor and eloquence:
  • Under present circumstances, could an agreement between the Society of St. Pius X and Rome work? What is the critical factor which would make it difficult for an agreement to work? [Tradical: This is hardly rocket science. All that is required is a Pope that will be able to withstand the pressures that would result in providing the SSPX with a no-compromise regularization that meets the six conditions.]
  • What were the circumstances and results of the leak of a private exchange of letters between Bishop Fellay and his two assistants, and bishops Williamson, de Galarreta, and Tissier de Mallerais?[Tradical: This would be interesting. However, I understand that a. the letters were leaked from the UK and b. that the Priest who did the leaking remains within the SSPX.  As far as the 'results of the leak', I would assume that Bishop Williamson will put forth the opinion that it prevented the acceptance of a compromised regularization.  Which is his opinion but no less valid than that of Bishop Fellay's.]
  • In the end, why did negotiations between the Society of St. Pius X and Rome break down?[Tradical: I don't know Bishop Williamson's opinion, but I do know the fact: Bishop Fellay would not compromise and refused to 'sign'.  Next question ...]
  • What were the results of the doctrinal discussions between the Society of S. Pius X and Rome? What do the results of these discussions tell us about today's churchmen in the Vatican?[Tradical: This is a leading question as it makes the assumption that the results of the discussions reflect the 'group' of churchmen in the Vatican as a whole. This is a part to whole fallacy and plays to Bishop Williamson's message that you can't obey the hierarchy because they're all modernists / masons / russians / etc.  ]
  • What is the fatal weakness of the modern Church?[Tradical: I wonder if the 'modern Church' is equated with the Catholic Church?]
  • Is the current leadership of the Society of St. Pius X doing a good job of carrying on Archbishop Lefebvre's prophetic role of condemning the errors of Vatican II and modern churchmen?[Tradical: This is absolutely the strangest question to have in this kind of 'interview'.  I have seen no change in Bishop Williamson's opinions concerning either doctrine or the leadership of the SSPX.  In short the words he wrote in reply to his expulsion from the SSPX,  I believe from Bishop Williamson's point of view , are as applicable today as they were in 2012.]
  • Is the traditional movement going soft? What is an underlying dynamic present in modern civilization that is weakening the resolve of many traditional Catholics?[Tradical: That's an interesting question given the theological errors of the 'resistance' that continue to abound daily.  If being enthralled with conspiracy theories (read: Tradcat Knight) or deviating from Church Teaching (read: heresies of the resistance) is what it takes to be 'strong' - then Houston - we have a problem.]
Bishop Williamson concludes these interviews with a heartfelt message to the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X. Listening to The Grand Illusion Delusion is a key to understanding what is going on in the traditional 'resistance' movement.
Based on my discussions with a number of 'resistors' the 'resistance' is not a 'Traditional Catholic' movement because it has deviated from Catholic Doctrine on two key points:


Maybe I am being too harsh on Bishop Williamson.

Perhaps he is simply suffering from a delusion when he makes the claim that he has not been 'unfaithful' to the heritage of Archbishop Lefebvre ( in response to his expulsion ...). Perhaps, it is just natural that the people who are aligned with his worldview will follow him because he presents a simple black and white view of the crisis of the Church.

However, in their fear the 'resistance' does a great injustice to Archbishop Lefebvre when they use his words to discard like heretics various doctrines of the Church. Of course, this method is not new, the sedevacantists have been doing it for decades.

Pray, I fear it's not going to get any easier and only those with clear heads and a strong spiritual life will be left standing.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

America Magazine: Why liturgy is not a space for self-expression

 + JMJ Introduction I subscribed to Jesuit Review America Magazine in order to improve my perspective on the crisis of the Church. At first, I found that I had a hard time reading through the articles that caught my attention.  Actually, at best, I didn't get further than a few sentences.  Mostly due to demands on what time I have left on this Good Earth. Then a title caught my eye in a latest article ... someone is saying that the Liturgy is not a space for self-expression.  Then there's the Performative Piety?  What does this mean? What is Performative Piety? I had a sense that "Performative Piety" is the practice of making external acts of piety to be seen by others and Matthew 6:1 (link) confirms this thought. Let's break down the Knox translation: Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men ,  for them to watch ;  if you do that,  you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. If you stopped after the first ph...

SSPXasia Timeline

+ JMJ The SSPXasia website has an excellent compilation of documents.  One day I may try to fuse it with my own chronicle project. P^3 https://sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/ (1987) June 29: Ordination Sermon of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre July 8: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger July 28: Letter of Cardinal Ratzinger to Archbishop Lefebvre October 1: Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger October ...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

 +  JMJ  I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article.  Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law.  As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey.  I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it.  The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...