01-06-2023, 02:50 PM
This bit:
...strikes me as particularly insincere. Isn't this the same man who has been telling us in sermons and conferences that the SSPX was a good thing for Archbishop Lefebvre to have done in the 70s and 80s, but not a good thing for us to do today..? Isn't this the man who has been telling people that the time for structures is over? That the era of the seminary is over, God doesn't want it any more? That there are no longer going to be new priests because we have no longer got "the straw to make the bricks" (meaning, there aren't any young men left who are capable of being made into priests)..?
Some of us will recall some not-so-ancient history. This same Bishop Wiliamson encouraged Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko to start a seminary, no small undertaking. They managed it, with occasional help from other priests and a lot of good people put a lot of time, effort and money into helping. This very same delinquent bishop then refused to do anything, even to give tonsures to the seminarians. He didn't do a single tonsure. Even during 2013 and 2014 when he was still pretending to support it, when he would turn up to do confirmations and preach a sermon in the seminary chapel, he was trying desperately to undermine it behind the scenes. And in the meantime his minions and bootlickers spread a constant stream of gossip online, the gist of which was that the seminary wasn't good enough. And yet now, the order of the day seems to be ordaining young men who have had no seminary formation, who lived in Fr. Ballini's house and taught themselves using textbooks.
The truth is, we've tried very hard to keep seminaries a viable option for the future of the Church, but we've been consistently denied the services of a bishop, from day one. The Fake Resistance, by contrast, have plenty of bishops to go around, but no interest at all in seminaries.
Quote:Therefore as in 1988, or even more today, for the survival of Catholic Tradition, the necessity arises for the consecration of bishops without Roman Authority, so to speak, to maintain the Archbishop’s defence of the Faith above all.
...strikes me as particularly insincere. Isn't this the same man who has been telling us in sermons and conferences that the SSPX was a good thing for Archbishop Lefebvre to have done in the 70s and 80s, but not a good thing for us to do today..? Isn't this the man who has been telling people that the time for structures is over? That the era of the seminary is over, God doesn't want it any more? That there are no longer going to be new priests because we have no longer got "the straw to make the bricks" (meaning, there aren't any young men left who are capable of being made into priests)..?
Some of us will recall some not-so-ancient history. This same Bishop Wiliamson encouraged Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko to start a seminary, no small undertaking. They managed it, with occasional help from other priests and a lot of good people put a lot of time, effort and money into helping. This very same delinquent bishop then refused to do anything, even to give tonsures to the seminarians. He didn't do a single tonsure. Even during 2013 and 2014 when he was still pretending to support it, when he would turn up to do confirmations and preach a sermon in the seminary chapel, he was trying desperately to undermine it behind the scenes. And in the meantime his minions and bootlickers spread a constant stream of gossip online, the gist of which was that the seminary wasn't good enough. And yet now, the order of the day seems to be ordaining young men who have had no seminary formation, who lived in Fr. Ballini's house and taught themselves using textbooks.
The truth is, we've tried very hard to keep seminaries a viable option for the future of the Church, but we've been consistently denied the services of a bishop, from day one. The Fake Resistance, by contrast, have plenty of bishops to go around, but no interest at all in seminaries.
*** FIND ALL BACK ISSUES OF THE RECUSANT NEWSLETTER HERE: https://www.stmaryskssspxmc.com/?page_id=46 ***