Find Us Online

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Response to an aggressive strategy

On 17 October an anonymous commentor asked why
we had published on our blog an article
about the mother of Father Cohen:
"Can you explain
WHAT is your point of favouring Jews at the moment?
At least have the decency
to be true to yourselves and spit it out:

You are NOT followers of Christ,

but Anti-Christ Jews."


Now I understand that perhaps the comentator thought
that I was making a veiled reference
to Bishop Williamson's recent blog post.

No. I didn't know of the post at that time.

This is not the Gospel
but a strategy under cover of Gospel.

But now, having come to know about the article
and knowing that other traditional Catholics
expect to hear from us about it,
I make the following personal response;
my own take on the matter:

I was very sorry to read the article.
We are all further hurt or tarnished or tarred by it:
The Jewish people are hurt,
the Church in general is tarnished,
and traditional Catholics
and most of the SSPX faithful
are tarred.

The Williamson article is political.
It is an aggressive strategy.
Its objective is to sow trouble
between the SSPX and the Church, and
between the Church and the Jewish people.
It works well.

Williamson can cause great trouble
only because he is a bishop;
even though
he is an illegitimate bishop
who will not submit himself to legitimate authority.

The SSPX leadership would probably like to expel him
but fear that he would begin his own group here in the UK
and beyond.

SSPX clergy do not speak out publicly against Bishop Williamson
nor against the Menzingen Authorities
for doing nothing that will effectively stop him.

The situation is extraordinary.
The SSPX cannot control their man
who is harming the Church and their own group.

Now is the time
when the helpless SSPX Superior General
who lacks jurisdiction,
and knows he lacks the necessary jurisdiction over his equal,
should ask the Holy Father to defrock the illegitimate bishop;
in the kindest possible way.

Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R.

25 comments:

Jane said...

Surely something will have to be done about the man. The negotiations are sensitive enough without his obviously ill-intentioned interference. As for the nasty comment, words fail.

With the assurance of prayers for your Community,
J

Richard Collins said...

Good appraisal Father, thank you.

Tom Esteban said...

I only just read the piece by Bp.Williamson and thought to myself - hmmm, wonder if Fr.Michael Mary has posted anything about this. An lo! A great post. It's terribly sad. In the midst of something massive for the Church and for Traditionalist groups; Bp.Williamson is causing great harm. We can only offer our prayers for him and for the SSPX.

Praying as always for the F.Ss.R,

Tom

John Q. Public said...

What rubbish.

Those harming the Church and the Society are those denying the Faith, promoting Jewish fables, and allowing the greatest enemies of Jesus Christ to command and subvert the Church.

Br. Anthony, T.O.S.F. said...

God bless Bishop Williamson!

anointedruins said...

JQP,

The Church has many enemies, and they are not all on the far Left. Some of her enemies are on the far Right. These latter imagine themselves to be the sole support of Mother Church as she suffers at the hands of her enemies on the Left -- and they spare no effort to convince many sincere Catholics to share in their delusion. The existence of such enemies on the Left as you mention does nothing to change the fact that Williamson harms the Church in his own way. Make no mistake, any Catholic who separates himself from the Vicar of Christ and persuades others to do the same is a terrible enemy of the Church and brings tears to our Immaculate Mother's eyes.

David

Anonymous said...

If Bp. Williamson is an "illegitimate bishop," what does that make of the other three SSPX bishops who were ordained by the same archbishop whom once you recognized and followed? Is Bp. Fellay and "illegitimate bishop," as well? And if so, why should it be of any concern to us whether the work of SSPX is hurt by Bp. W's statements?

Jack said...

The point of the story about Fr. Cohen (which surname means he came from a Jewish priestly family) and his mother is clear: The religion that Judaism has become is NOT salvific.

ANY of us are saved only by Christ's mercy and grace. So through the prayers of the Theotokos, such mercy and grace was extended to this Jewish woman on the point of death, and she accepted it.

ALL lovers of Christ should rejoice in this.

However, we must remember that Bp. Fellay and the other bishops of SSPX received the episcopate just as illegitimately as did Bp. Williamson. The latter cannot be deposed unless the former are willing for this to be done to themselves as well.

(And I speak as one who is in irregular orders himself. But I rest in and wait for the Church's judgement.)

Most holy Theotokos, save us.

Anonymous said...

In view of your own "ambiguous" position vis a vis the official Church I think you are unwise to attack Bishop Williamson at this stage. If the SSPX fail to do a deal with Rome, and this looks more than likely, you may find yourself having to crawl back to SSPX as Rome will probably disown you. You never can tell who your true friends are. In a world where things can change very suddenly your safest bet is to be silent on these controversies. If you feel able to publish this, so much the better!

Transalpine Redemptorists said...

To last Anonymous

In 2008 we reconciled with the Holy See and submitted to Peter. We were judged by many a critic as making a "practical agreement with Rome." Nothing of the sort was the truth. We made our reconciliation based on conscience and the rock solid doctrine "Thou art Peter...".

Our reconciliation was not based on a political motive that would depend on an SSPX political "deal with Rome" in 2011 or any other date.

But it seems to me that the only essential doctrine which the SSPX really needed to discuss closely with Rome was the same one that we ourselves seriously accepted as the cornerstone of the Church Militant: Thou art Peter ...

"Thou art Peter whatever about the likes of us, you will bind you will loose for us, in persona Christi."

"We don't do 'crawl-backs', 'practicals' or 'politicals'": we're strictly doctrinal whatever the consequences may be for the likes of us.

Cruise the Groove. said...

"why should it be of any concern to us whether the work of SSPX is hurt by Bp. W's statements?"

Because th Holy Father wants the reconciliation of the SSPX.

Anonymous said...

You see where your sell out to Rome has got you. You are a traitor to Tradition.

anointedruins said...

There are worse things than Assisi. Separating oneself from Peter and persuading others to do the same is worse.

"Thou art Peter ..."

It really does come down to that, doesn't it? To submit to Peter despite Assisi, that is the test of the true Catholic. Foolishness in the eyes of the world (and some worldlings wear black cassocks), wisdom in the eyes of God.

"Traitor to Tradition", say these traitors against Peter and thus against Christ. They fashion "Tradition" into a golden idol.

David

Tom Esteban said...

Traitor to Tradition? Rather a traitor to some false notions of Tradition (as if submitting to Peter is un-traditional!) than a traitor to the Mystical Body of Christ.

Tradition is not an end in itself. Christ is the end. It's a shame that some misunderstand such a simple point and - when the point is made - accuse you of being a modernist liberal. As Traditionalist Catholics then, who do we choose to please? Anonymous or God? My 'Traditionalist' ideas are rooted in theology, philosophy and an admittedly poor grasp of the crisis in the Church - but these are not abstract ideas trying to serve some kind of "Traditionalist" deity. No; these ideas are a means to an end. To sanctify the Church Militant and to get as many souls into heaven as possible.

One could write books on such a thing, and I am sure Fr. Michael Mary and others can elucidate and explain far clearer than I have.

Athanasius said...

That Bishop Williamson has lost his focus on things eternal, seeking rather to identify individual governments and racial groups, than a general absence of the grace of God, for the woes of the world, is indeed tragic. Our Lord said “Be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.” His Excellency seems to have lost sight of that divine counsel, as well as of the principle duty of a Bishop to be a Shepherd of immortal souls and not a stirrer of earthly controversies.

Still, I wonder who is the greater enemy of souls; Bishop Williamson with his very worldly conspiracy fixations, or those Bishops who undermine the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, give Catholic churches over for use by Buddhists, Hindus, Protestants, etc., permit dissenting and heretical priests to write weekly columns in Catholic newspapers without challenge, etc., and who embrace all religions and none in the name of human dignity and earthly peace?

If, as Fr. Michael Mary’s lead comment suggests, Bishop Williamson is worthy of being “defrocked” for airing repugnant personal views on tragic historical events, then how much more Archbishop Neidereur of San Francisco who gave Holy Communion into the hands of two transvestites dressed as nuns? And this is but one example of many Episcopal acts of treachery I could recite with documented evidence.

It says something of the state of the faith today that Catholics uniformly rend their garments over Bishop Williamson’s fantasies, yet dub as “The Great” a Pope who reverently kissed the Koran and convened those infamous syncretist gatherings at Assisi, and was beatified for it.

Also, Reading today on Zenit of Pope Benedict’s “cordial greeting” to Hindus on their feast of “Deepavali,” and confirming to them the commitment of the Holy See to (condemned!) religious freedom for the sake of “Human dignity” and a “peaceful world,” I think puts the Bishop Williamson affair into proper perspective.

My personal view is that the SSPX will have to exclude Bishop Williamson very soon, for he is no longer acting as a Bishop should. Until that happens, I would suggest his accusers take a good look at themselves to see if perhaps their compromise with error in the name of fidelity and obedience does not equate to pointing to the speck in their brother’s eye while ignoring the beam in their own!

Bishop Williamson, be what he may politically, would certainly not receive modern Bishops into his presence without pointing out to them the harm they are doing to the Church and to souls by their false ecumenism and their undermining of the Real Presence. So who, I wonder, really wounds the Heart of Our Lord more?

Jack said...

Amen, Br. Anthony.

God bless Bp. Williamson and his fellows, and bring them all into full regular and visible unity with the Catholic Church.

David O'Neill said...

Dear Fr Michael Mary
Since you explained your situation vis-a-vis the return of (the majority) of your community to obedience to the Holy Father I am fully behind you & your bretheren. Regarding Bishop Williamson, I believe that the Holy Father lifted his excommunication along with the other 3 bishops consecrated by Mgr Lefebvre. I don't think this males him a 'legitimate' bishop - canon lawyers can best answer that - but I do feel that he has thrown this gesture of goodwill back in the Holy Father's face. With the wonders of hindsight perhaps he should never have been (illegitimately) consecrated in the first place but he is a 'loose cannon' who could certainly damage the prayed for rapprochement of the SSPX with Rome.
Our best hope is prayer that soon the "Church will be One" as Christ and the Father are One.

Dan said...

Dear Father Michael Mary:

I am a bit perplexed here. Are you referring to the recent column by Williamson, the one that details the historical Church's attitude towards the Jewish religion? Or some other column I am not familiar with?

If it is the former all I can tell you is that I have read it and I find nothing in it that deviates from the thinking of the true Church for the past 2,000 years. The Bishop is merely repeating what the Church has always taught (and something that the modernists have been trying to sweep under the carpet for the past 50 years or so). Similar comments will easily be found in the writings of Aquinas, Augustine, Bellarmine, Chrysostum, etc., not to mention the New Testament. Indeed even Padre Pio hard harsh words for those Jews who are undermining the Faith. If you want to castigate Bishop Williamson for some other reason go right ahead, but don't castigate him for this article. To do so would be to legitimize the impudent hatreds of the likes of Abe Foxman and would strike a blow against the very teachings of Our Lord.

The one and only thing I found unhelpful in BW's column was his saying that "how can Pope Benedeict..." It would have been more politic to say "how can the Church today...." That would have been less confrontational.

But, again, the body of his column is quite unexceptionable.

A final thought: the greatest act of Charity which a Catholic can perform for a Jew is to tell him he is on the wrong road and will not see God if he dies in that state. Souls are at stake here, Rev. Father. We cannot rely on God continually performing last minute miracles to bring Jews to die holy deaths. They must convert to Catholicism, they must be Baptized, they must strive to live Catholic lives. To leave a Jew in his state of unbelief is a terrible crime against him and the Faith.

Priests and laity are called to do more than just say Mass and attend Mass. We have to do our bit to save souls. Whatever Bishop Williamson's shortcomings and lack of prudence his column may have helped some Jews to realize that they are tragically wrong. Just maybe his words will make some of them take a serious look at the Church.

Sometimes, tough love is the better course to take.

Transalpine Redemptorists said...

@ Dan

The point of the bishop's post was sinply, political: To cause trouble.

Bishop Williamson is not in a position to talk of conversion to the Jewish people: he has disqualified himself for life from that domain by his insensitive statements clearly given out over a long time.

You are wrong to conclude that Bp. Williamson's words translate as "tough love"; they need no translation anyway! Nobody is confused.
Fr. MM

Matthew said...

You are calling for Bishop Williamson - one of the last speakers of the Truth even when it hurts - to be defrocked??? You have lost my prayerful and economic support.

Anonymous said...

Having watched the comments on this post today quite a few thoughts have run through my mind. The idea that somehow Bishop Williamson is a victim in this affair is false.
He is a very intelligent grown man, he knows exactly what he is saying, he is saying it to get a reaction. If he gets one fair enough. On the contrary those who suffered the holocaust were victims, they are to be pitied. I see named Abraham Foxman. If you read this poor gentlemans life, and understand what he went through as a child, saved from the ghetto, baptised by his nanny, reclaimed by his returned parents, 14 members of his family killed - how on earth do you expect somebody like that to be indifferent to what is said about Jewish people? Do the commentors ever think of what human beings go through - its great to live arm chair ideology, its great to be a keyboard warrior. The day they arrive on motorbikes - as the Nazi's did throughout Romania, Ukraine, Belorussia, and western Russia, to shoot you into pits while they drank vodka and ate sausage and pulled out your teeth for gold and stole your money and violated you - and do that to your family - that will be the day that you wake up and realise - like Pope Benedict XVI who saw Hungarian Jews being rounded up with his own eyes - then you will realise what it is to be really a victim.
Then perhaps you will learn Our Lord's own Compassion.
Then you will learn to truly go after the lost sheep.
Bishop Williamson can look after himself. He is a victim of his own making. God save him!
Cyril

Matthew said...

The SSPX have supplied jurisdiction.

Transalpine Redemptorists said...

@ Matthew:
Supplied jurisdiction should not be assumed so easily.

I am reminded of a story I heard when we first came to these islands:
"When it comes to leaving Orkney for Confession," said the old man, "with the winter winds and the possibility of drowning in stormy seas, all in these islands are agreed:
It's toooo dangerous for a Mortal sin,
and naa worth it for a venial!"

It is a quip but it is applicable to the presumption of supplied jurisdiction where in reality it just isn't supplied:
For our immortal souls this route is too dangerous for the absolution of mortal sins and it isn't worth it for venials.

Our Lord holds us to the reality of Jurisdiction; it comes through concrete channels. The Pope to the Bishops in Communion and subjected to him: from there to the priest with faculties.

Transalpine Redemptorists said...

@ All:

Thank you for your comments on a difficult matter that concerns all traditional Catholics.

The comments on this post are now closed while charity is still preserved among us.

Fr. Michael Mary
_______________________________
Incline unto my aid O God.
O Lord make haste to help me.

Anonymous said...

Eh bien! Il est beau l'amour chrétien!

Que comptent faire certains? Mettre les Juifs sur un bûcher? C'est désolant.

Bravo pour votre article.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP  

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...