Bp. Williamson makes the N.O. Miracles a Condition of Holy Oils

[Stone]

Trump, Fellay, Williamson: Eroding Catholic Resistance

COMBAT☩ERROR - THE☩TRUMPET [Emphasis - The Catacombs] | November 14, 2024


The Catholic traditionalist movement is at a critical juncture. A̶s̶ C̶a̶t̶h̶o̶l̶i̶c̶s̶ d̶e̶d̶i̶c̶a̶t̶e̶d̶ t̶o̶ p̶r̶e̶s̶e̶r̶v̶i̶n̶g̶ t̶h̶e̶ f̶u̶l̶l̶n̶e̶s̶s̶ o̶f̶ t̶h̶e̶ F̶a̶i̶t̶h̶ As Catholics devoted to upholding the one true Faith as handed down by Christ and his apostles, we find ourselves facing not only external pressures but internal conflicts that threaten our unity. Within forums like CathInfo, discussions on modernism’s errors have devolved into personal attacks and factional disputes. These distractions only serve to obscure essential issues—such as Bishop Williamson’s insistence on recognizing the Novus Ordo Mass (NOM) “Eucharistic miracles” as a condition for receiving Holy Oils, as well as the infiltration of secular ideologies within the SSPX under Bishop Fellay. This article examines these issues with a view to highlighting the irreplaceable need for doctrinal clarity and a steadfast adherence to traditional Catholic principles.

In online forums like CathInfo, we often see Catholics debating each other rather than addressing profound issues undermining the Faith. One significant example is Bishop Williamson’s demand that acceptance of NOM “Eucharistic miracles” is necessary for Catholics. His stance has led to the denial of Holy Oils to priests like Father Hewko, who require these sacramentals to administer critical sacraments. Father Hewko’s plea illustrates the gravity of this decision:

“Your Excellency, all I’m requesting are the basic tools for saving souls! Baptisms and Extreme Unctions cannot be given without Holy Oils… Why would a differing opinion be an obstacle to receiving Holy Oils?”

This denial of Holy Oils raises serious concerns about Bishop Williamson’s priorities and responsibility. Even a heretical or excommunicated priest can validly administer Extreme Unction in an emergency. Here, however, Bishop Williamson’s own doctrinal stance appears to take precedence over the salvation of souls.

When a Cathinfo under the username Sean Johnson sought clarification on this matter, Bishop Williamson responded in a way that revealed much about his doctrinal stance. In an email to Johnson, he stated,

“It is clear and repeated denial of true scientific evidence which renders anyone guilty of one of the unforgivable sins against the Holy Ghost… Common sense says that precious gifts of God should hardly be handed out to people hardly able to appreciate reality.”

Bishop Williamson’s words imply that belief in NOM “Eucharistic miracles” is not only a condition for receiving sacramentals like Holy Oils but is essential to avoid sinning against the Holy Ghost itself.

For those committed to traditional Catholicism, this assertion is profoundly troubling. If Bishop Williamson believes NOM “miracles” are authentic, what purpose does the defense of the Tridentine Mass serve? Does this position not suggest a re-alignment with the very Church that promulgated the NOM and introduced confusion into Catholic worship? Bishop Williamson’s statements create an unprecedented “dogma” that requires adherence to an unorthodox belief, directly contradicting traditional Catholic teaching.


The Dialectic at Play

Amidst these controversies, a broader dialectical strategy appears to be influencing not only religious but secular circles. Just as there is a push to reconcile traditional Catholics with modernist practices, a similar tactic is being used in secular politics. Figures like Donald Trump are presented as conservative “saviors” despite positions that directly conflict with Catholic principles— pro-sodomy, pro-abortion. This controlled opposition distracts from the true Catholic mission: the reunification of Church and State under the Social Kingship of Christ.

A parallel trend has emerged within the SSPX under Bishop Fellay. Rather than openly addressing the Society’s compromises, there seems to be a push to integrate traditional, doctrinal Catholics with conservative Latin Mass attendees. This merging reflects Benedict XVI’s 2007 Motu Proprio, which blurred traditional distinctions by encouraging coexistence between the old and new rites. This strategy, often termed a “Hegelian dialectic,” serves to “gray the lines” between truth and error, creating a hybrid model that undermines true Catholic identity.


The Weight of Responsibility

Ultimately, Bishop Williamson’s insistence on belief in NOM “miracles” forces traditionalists to question the nature of the Novus Ordo Mass itself. His implication that the NOM can foster sanctification stands in direct contradiction to traditional Catholic teaching. In his Mahopac, NY talk, Williamson stated,

“Attending the New Mass can build your faith.”

“Not everyone needs to avoid the Novus Ordo Mass.”

“Attending the Novus Ordo may do more good than harm spiritually.”

He further asserted in a 2014 talk in St. Catharine’s, Ontario, “Not every priest needs to leave the Conciliar church or stop saying the Novus Ordo Mass.” Such statements would be unthinkable in light of traditional doctrine.

If Bishop Williamson sincerely believes these “miraculous fruits” stem from the NOM, he has a responsibility to clarify his position with the Church that promulgated it. The burden of proof lies on him, for he has declared that acceptance of NOM “miracles” is essential to be in “his Church” and to avoid sinning against the Holy Ghost. His statements demand not only personal accountability but a response from all traditional Catholics committed to preserving the Faith in its entirety.

In a world increasingly hostile to absolute truth, the traditionalist movement must remain vigilant against every form of compromise. We cannot afford to let personal opinions, political loyalties, or pragmatic alliances dilute our duty to Christ and His Church. The debate around NOM “miracles” is not a matter of private opinion; it concerns the preservation of authentic Catholic teachings that have endured through centuries of persecution. Compromising on this issue would betray the very mission that +Archbishop Lefebvre dedicated his life to defending. Faithful Catholics must remain united in rejecting any attempt to reinterpret or diminish the Catholic Faith. This is not merely about fidelity to tradition—it is about the salvation of souls.



...TheCatholicTrumpet therefore must ask the good Bishop: does denying belief in Novus Ordo “miracles” exclude one from the sacraments and the Catholic Church?



-The☩Trumpet