Quote:Let's not make it a battle of interpretations. [Referring to the firestorm of opinions being bandied about in trying to either defend the Bishop or take him plainly at his word. - The Catacombs]

I sent +Williamson the following email, and if he responds, I will post his reply:

Greetings Your Lordship-

Last week, Fr. Hewko published an email correspondence between him and yourself which contained the following passage:

“Reverend,

When you deny the genuinely scientific evidence in favor of miracles taking place at Novus Ordo Masses said by Novus Ordo priests consecrated by Novus Ordo bishops, such as happened in Sokolka, Poland, in 2008, you are not living in the same world or Church as I am.

Please resort to any bishop who shares your own attitude towards reality. Please do not ask me again for Oils for as long as you are defying reality.”

Some online commentators are construing Your Lordship’s words as requiring belief in Novus Ordo miracles as a prerequisite for the reception of holy oils, while others are saying this is simply Your Lordship’s way of telling Fr. Hewko to buzz off (not just because of disagreement on this issue, but 10 others over the years as well), by requiring a condition Your Lordship knows he won’t accept.

In this matter, the Hewkonians have found an ally in the sedevacantists, since both consider Novus Ordo miracles impossible (the sedes, because they allege the Mass is per se invalid; the Hewkonians because they think it would mean God is endorsing the new Mass).

A second issue of complaint stemming from Your Lordship’s words to Fr. Hewko is that Your Lordship is morally obligated to give oils to him (or any other renegade priest on the planet, regardless of his positions, for the good of their faithful), or it is tantamount to “weaponizing” the sacraments.

May I request an additional comment from Your Lordship to clarify your thoughts on:

-Whether belief in Novus Ordo miracles is required in order to receive holy oils;
-A response to those who say Your Lordship is required to give oils to anyone who requests them

Semper Idem,
Sean Johnson



+Williamson responds:

Dear Sean,

It is clear and repeated denial of true scientific evidence which renders anyone guilty of one of the unforgivable sins against the Holy Ghost. Let anybody in doubt look them up.

Common sense says that precious gifts of God should hardly be handed out to people hardly able to appreciate reality.


God bless, BpW.

Quote:I like Bishop Williamson very much.

But I think he's going off the rails here, as others have said; he's even doubling down by holding the rejection of NO "Eucharistic miracles" to be tantamount (loosely speaking I hope) to a sin against the Holy Ghost.  Never has the Catholic Church required belief in private miracles and private revelations.  I could see some other reasons for Bishop Williamson not wanting to cooperate with Father Hewko, but this?

+Williamson's statement was actually even a bit more broad, stating that the rejection of scientific evidence might constitute such a sin against the Holy Spirit, so it could just be a matter of time before he says that rejecting the "scientific evidence" for a Globe Earth would be a sin also.

And that speaks to "scientific evidence", much of which is very subject to interpretation and often falsification.  Bishop Williamson's only window into the scientific evidence is from links on the internet (which we all know are all true).  Also, there's the very simple problem that the devil can easily simulate such "miracles".

Quote:The abolition of the Apostolic Mass by Paul VI in order to replace it with a counterfeit written by heretics was an abuse, and the nullification of Summorum Pontificum by Bergoglio was also an abuse. It is no coincidence that they are both part of a “conciliar church” broken off from the Catholic Church; a self-referential “church” that has separated from Sacred Tradition, with its own “saints,” its own rites, its own doctrine and morality, all in stark contrast to the Saints, Rites, Doctrine and Morality of the Church of Christ.

Quote:Archbishop Lefebvre:

And we have the precise conviction that this new Rite of Mass expresses a new Faith, a Faith which is not ours, a Faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith.

For if the most holy Church has wished to guard throughout the centuries this precious treasure which She has given us of the rite of Holy Mass which was canonised by Saint Pius V, it has not been without purpose. It is because this Mass contains our whole faith, the whole Catholic Faith: faith in the Most Holy Trinity, faith in the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ which flowed for the redemption of our sins, faith in supernatural grace, which comes to us from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which comes to us from the Cross, which comes to us through all the Sacraments.

This is what we believe. This is what we believe in celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of all time. It is a lesson of faith and at the same time a source of our faith, indispensable for us in this age when our faith is attacked from all sides. We have need of this true Mass, of this Mass of all time. of this Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ really to fill our souls with the Holy Ghost and with the strength of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion. It is no longer the priest who offers the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, it is the assembly. Now this is an entire program-an entire program. Henceforth it is the assembly also that replaces authority in the Church. It is the assembly of bishops that replaces the power of (individual) bishops. It is the priests' council that replaces the power of the bishop in the diocese. It is numbers that command from now on in the Holy Church. And this is expressed in the Mass precisely because the assembly replaces the priest, to such a point that now many priests no longer want to celebrate Holy Mass when there is no assembly. Slowly but surely the Protestant notion of the Mass is being introduced into the Holy Church.

And this is consistent with the mentality of modern man- absolutely consistent. For it is the democratic ideal which is the fundamental idea of modern man, that is to say, that the power lies with the assembly, that authority is in the people, in the masses, and not in God. And this is most grave. Because we believe that God is all-powerful; we believe that God has all authority; we believe that all authority comes from God. "Omnis potestas a Deo." All authority comes from God. We do not believe that authority comes from below. Now that is the mentality of modern man.

And the New Mass is not less than the expression of this idea that authority is at the base, and no longer in God. This Mass is no longer a hierarchical Mass; it is a democratic Mass. And this is most grave. It is the expression of a whole new ideology. The ideology of modern man has been brought into our most sacred rites.

• “It is the new Mass in itself. It is not the priest who is saying it. It is not because he says it piously or anything that the new rite changes. It doesn’t change anything in the rite of the Mass. It is obvious that this new rite is a rite that has been made only to draw us closer to the Protestants. That is clear! (April 11, 1990)
  
  
• “This Mass is poisoned, it is bad and it leads to the loss of faith little by little. We are clearly obliged to reject it.” (The Mass of All Times, p. 353)
  
  
• “It must be understood immediately that we do not hold to the absurd idea that if the New Mass is valid, we are free to assist at it. The Church has always forbidden the faithful to assist at the Masses of heretics and schismatics even when they are valid. It is clear that no one can assist at sacrilegious Masses or at Masses which endanger our faith.…All these innovations are authorized. One can fairly say without exaggeration that most of these [new] Masses are sacrilegious acts which pervert the Faith by diminishing it. The de-sacralization is such that these Masses risk the loss of their supernatural character, their mysterium fidei; they would then be no more than acts of natural religion. These New Masses are not only incapable of fulfilling our Sunday obligation, but are such that we must apply to them the canonical rules which the Church customarily applies to communicatio in sacris with Orthodox Churches and Protestant sects.” (The New Mass and the Pope, November, 8, 1979)
  
  
• “… this [new] rite is bad! Is bad, is bad. And the reason why this rite is bad in itself, is because it is poisoned. It is a poisoned rite! Mr. Salleron says it very well, here: "It is not a choice between two rites that could be good. It is a choice between a Catholic Rite and a rite that is practically a neighbor to Protestantism”.
  
  
• and thus, which attacks our Faith, the Catholic Faith! So, it is out of the question to encourage people to go to Mass in the new rite, because slowly, even without realizing it, they end up ecumenist! It’s strange, but it's like that. It is a fact. Then, ask them questions on ecumenism, on what they think of the relations with other religions and you will see! They are all ecumenist. For the priest himself, the fact of saying this mass and celebrating it in a constant manner, even without thinking about anything, about its origin, or why it was made, turns him and the people who assist at it ecumenist.” (Conference, April 11, 1990)
  "This union which liberal Catholics want between the Church and the Revolution is an adulterous union — adulterous. This adulterous union can only beget bastards. Where are these bastards? They are [the new] rites. The [new] rite of Mass is a bastard rite. The sacraments are bastard sacraments. We no longer know whether they are sacraments that give grace. We no longer know if this Mass gives us the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. ... The priests emerging from the seminaries are bastard priests." (Homily preached at Lille, August29, 1976)
  

Quote:Archbishop Lefebvre, for good reason, questioned this third "power to sanctify" in the Novus Ordo Church.  In his historic homily of June 30, 1988, he declared that he will proceeded to this consecration of the four bishops precisely because one can not have a guarantee of the validity of ordinations (and sacraments) in the Novus Ordo due to overt alterations of the "liturgical reform" that followed Vatican II, by which the form ("Spiritus principalis") has been tampered with; and, much like for the reform of Cranmer (and his successors), almost all the annexes that him have it was modified as for not to express clearly the intention of the Church, but in an ambiguous way, Protestant.

Trump, Fellay, Williamson: Eroding Catholic Resistance