Skip to main content

Bishop Williamson denounces resistance to be sedevacantist - Part 2

Image
By
+
JMJ

Now we know that Bishop Williamson already noted that Sedevacantists hold that the documents of V2 need to be tossed into the bin.

What other aspects did he note about the moderate or extreme Sedevacantists (note the full article can be found here)?

How about this:
(1) Pope John-Paul II is so far from being Catholic that one may seriously doubt whether he is Pope at all.
... and perhaps this ...
(2) The official Church and its leaders have gone so far in their false “renewal” that they may be ignored by Catholics.
... and of course this ...
(3) Present Church superiors have so betrayed the Faith that they can in no way be considered the real churchmen.
I admit that the 'resistance', while it has some core common beliefs, also has a flair for diversity and sedevacantism.



Here's a couple posts that I found on 'resistance' websites:
 Is Francis I a valid pope?
According to Catholic News Service, Pope Francis was “ordained” a priest on December 13, 1969.  Because the conciliar ordination rite was promulgated almost 18 months before that, it seems certain that Pope Francis received a conciliar ordination.  Since we hold that there is serious reason to doubt the validity of all conciliar ordinations, a person might wrongly argue that "Francis I cannot be pope, since he might not even be a valid priest".
This errant supposition stems from the failure to understand the difference between the pope’s juridical power and authority, in contrast to his power to confect the sacraments, through his priestly ordination and Episcopal consecration.  In fact, “any male Catholic who has come to the age of reason – even a layman … may be chosen to fill the office of Pope ….  it would be legally possible to elect even a married man. ….   It would be possible … that a person might be elected Pope who is not … a bishop ….  When a candidate is found to have the necessary number of votes and has manifested his willingness to accept the office, he is thereby pope.  He needs no ceremony of consecration to elevate him to the papacy. … He would become Pope as soon as he was lawfully chosen, and could then perform all the duties of the Papacy which pertain to jurisdiction; but he could not ordain or consecrate until he himself had been [validly] raised to the episcopate by other [valid] bishops.”  The Externals of the Catholic Church, by Fr. John F. Sullivan, Kennedy & Sons, 1917, pp. 6-8.
Thus, Pope Francis is the legitimate pope with full jurisdiction, even though his ordination to the priesthood, and consecration as a bishop, are inherently doubtful.
This 'acceptance' of Pope Francis as a legitimate Pope who isn't a priest/bishop a smoke screen for sedevacantism.  Because as noted by the same author:
It would be possible, though far from probable, that a person might be elected Pope who is not already a Bishop. He would become Pope as soon as he was lawfully chosen, and could then perform all the duties of the Papacy which pertain to jurisdiction; but he could not ordain or consecrate until he himself had been raised to the episcopate by other Bishops.
If the rite of ordination is invalid (read: contravenes indefectibility) how is a non-prelate Pope going to be elevated to the episcopate for other non-Bishops. The author is alleging that, in principle, there is doubt about all the Latin-Rite Bishops of the Church since they were practically all ordained after the cited changes.

What did Archbishop Lefebvre think?
The ‘matter’ of the sacrament has been preserved in the laying on of hands which takes place next, and likewise the ‘form,’ namely, the words of ordination” (ibid., p.51). 
What are the three components of a sacrament?  Matter, Form and Intention.  If Form is present, then the Intention is assumed.

Obviously, this is just another deviation from the path of Archbishop Lefebvre - which unsurpisingly is sedevacantism.

Casting about on the 'resistance' internet we find the following:
Although I recognize that The Office of Pope is by election, and I recognize his ‘Authority’, Pope Francis deserves my disobedience in view of his Apostasy from The Holy Roman Catholic Faith of Tradition = TRUTH. He is destroying what is left after the rubber stamp of Vatican II set up by infiltrators: freemasons and other demonic groups.

Again we have an opinion that Bishop Williamson, at least before he changed, would have classified as 'sedevacantist' (see quote #2 and #3).

So who has changed?  The SSPX - - - I don't think so!

P^3



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

By
 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...
Post a Comment
Read more

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

By
 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

By
 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...
Post a Comment
Read more