Bp. Williamson: Novus Ordo OK to "nourish your faith"

[Rube]

Fr Cedaka said,

Bishop Williamson is a very intelligent man and can speak very, very clearly when he wants to, but his complete response is a vintage example of his intentionally duplicitous style.

Father, do you really think that Bishop Williamson is being "intentionally dupicitous"?
Could it not be that he's just a bit airy-fairy.
(Airey-fairy is an old-fashioned term for having your head in the clouds.)

Personally, when I watched it, I thought he may have had a few drinks already, making the sudden uncomfortable question even more difficult.

[ialsop]

This is a really good video to listen to. 

"there are cases when attending the Novus Ordo Mass can build your faith instead of destroying it." 

But he also caveats it saying the NO is not all that good, and that the New Religion is very seductive.

Folks would be VERY wise to listen to the talk themselves and hear things more than just the soundbyte provided by the OP - there's about two minutes of talking by Bp Williamson between the asking of the question and the snippet OP provided as the "answer." 

I'd say Bp Williamson's answer is a bit more caveated than is implied by the post....

Bishop Williamson is a very intelligent man and can speak very, very clearly when he wants to, but his complete response is a vintage example of his intentionally duplicitous style. He feints, he parries, he runs down one verbal rabbit hole, he emerges blinking from another, he tells you what he's "NOT saying" when you draw a logical conclusion from one of his grandly enunciated principles, he interrupts himself to bounce off in another directions, etc., etc., etc. The method allows him to speak out of both sides of his mouth so that listeners who hold completely opposite and mutually exclusive opinions on a point (go to Novus Ordo/avoid Novus Ordo, new rite priests valid/invalid) can think, "Boy, he agrees with me!"

His letters from Ridgefield and his conferences there were full of this stuff, and the torrent has continued ever since.

But it's all a shtick, a manipulative performance. And he gets away with it in America because of the inferiority complex his self-assured, Masterpiece Theater accent induces. A former SSPX UK District Superior told me that while "the colonials" took Bp. Williamson seriously, most of his fellow Brits certainly never did.

And I speak, by the way, as one who knew him and dealt with him personally for several years.

I would agree with your analysis of his deceptive style. He is an arrogant man, really. Always talking about how he will lead the resistance, restoration, true SSPX, Traditional Remnant, remnant of the remnant, ect. Bishop Williamson has many good points, but his rebellion against the SSPX is based on political goals attained with psychologically manipulating maneuvers.

[FatherCekada]

What do you think is the endgame of his shtick, Father? To gain and keep his followers to do whatever he tells them?

When he was in SSPX, I think there were several endgames:

First, during the 80s when Abp. Lefebvre was doing his good Rome/bad Rome, seek approval/never compromise with anti-Christ routine, and no one knew what the Archbishop's endgame was, Fr. Williamson had to guess from month to month which way the wind would go, and try to prepare the seminarians and laity to go along with whatever would happen.

Best way to accomplish that: send out all sorts of contradictory signals. And anyway, as Fr. Williamson said, "Americans are like children. They need to be told what to think."

As former SSPX inmates, we knew exactly what was going on, and used to have great fun reading his monthly seminary newsletters aloud to watch him zig-zag from hardline to soft line to hardline and back, with intervals to talk about the weather when he wasn't sure.

Second, in his specific capacity as SSPX seminary rector, Bp. Williamson would throw out contradictory statements to see if any seminarian would pick up on them and point out the contradiction. This would show that the seminarian was capable of thinking on his own, and would mark him as an unsuitable for ordination in SSPX, where you are expected show loyalty to no principle beyond following the party line du jour. Check brains at door, please! 

Third, another endgame was simply to sow dissension, contradiction and discord. In an unguarded moment, Lefebvre himself told a group of us American priests that wherever the Abbe Williamson went, he seemed to cause infighting.

It's a hobby, I am convinced, that Bp. Williamson utterly delights in. When he was in Winona, for instance, he knew perfectly well what Carlos Urrutigoity and his buddies were up to. He had been warned and told, but he let everything go on as another little "test," to see who would dare to complain. And when the Urrutigoity affair inevitably blew up? All the better to pretend you knew nothing, and wave the banner for "loyalty to the Society."

So, to sum up, his all-over-the-board response at the conference was merely the continuation of a very old routine. Like Bergoglio, Bp. Williamson loves making a mess -- something that the "resistance" types may have already discovered for themselves.

[christulsa]

Couple points.

1.  I wonder if Williamson has softened his stance on attending the NO because hes finds himself in a new enlightened position, being contrarian to SSPX positions in general.  He sounds like he has come to question even the "old SSPX" under ABL.  Example: he said he has no authority to start an order, but ABL founded many trad orders without approval.

2. But I can relate to his comment on attending the NO.  We cant be sectarian and isolate ourselves from other Catholics.  It makes trads bitter at one another and anti-social.  It CAN nourish our faith to pray, mix w Catholics in the mainstream.

[ialsop]

Couple points.

1.  I wonder if Williamson has softened his stance on attending the NO because hes finds himself in a new enlightened position, being contrarian to SSPX positions in general.  He sounds like he has come to question even the "old SSPX" under ABL.  Example: he said he has no authority to start an order, but ABL founded many trad orders without approval.

2. But I can relate to his comment on attending the NO.  We cant be sectarian and isolate ourselves from other Catholics.  It makes trads bitter at one another and anti-social.  It CAN nourish our faith to pray, mix w Catholics in the mainstream.

YES!
Especially, if you cant find a TLM near you, I think finding the most reverent No and going to it is best.

[christulsa]

Couple points.

1.  I wonder if Williamson has softened his stance on attending the NO because hes finds himself in a new enlightened position, being contrarian to SSPX positions in general.  He sounds like he has come to question even the "old SSPX" under ABL.  Example: he said he has no authority to start an order, but ABL founded many trad orders without approval.

2. But I can relate to his comment on attending the NO.  We cant be sectarian and isolate ourselves from other Catholics.  It makes trads bitter at one another and anti-social.  It CAN nourish our faith to pray, mix w Catholics in the mainstream.

YES!
Especially, if you cant find a TLM near you, I think finding the most reverent No and going to it is best.

Do you go w ur parents to Mass?  No TLM in driving distance?

If u go to the Novus, you can bring a traditional missal and unite urself the sacrifice, stand, and kneel to be polite, but be otherwise discreetly silent and passive to the gestures and prayers. When ur an adult, youll be in a better situation to avoid it all together and find the true Catholic Mass. 

[Greg]

He very much reminds me of John Cleese in his accent and mannerisms.

What really damaged his credibility in Britain was first his unhinged misogynistic views and second his "holohoax" pontifications.

But he's never really been stationed here under the SSPX flag so most Brits haven't had much personal experience of the man.  He's spent most of his time in the new world.

Brits don't tend to do cult followings.  We're a cynical, doubtful and jaded lot in the most part.  Infomericals would never work here for example.

On the other hand, there are British Trads who are extremely fond of Bishop Williamson and are glad that he is now based in England.  There may be a certain, or even significant. disagreement with His Excellency's views.  But he is, among these Trads anyway, viewed with real affection.

There are two reasons for this.

Brits like eccentrics.

He's a great communicator and speaker and like them is a huge conspiracy theorist.  Most British Trads think he is a liability.  What makes +Williamson unique is that he speaks frequently and often.  If you are someone who needs the world and its problems explained to you all the time, then he's a winner.

American's ARE like children.  He is right.  Some Brits are too.  Some people appear incapable of thinking for themselves and have to be told what to think. 

[Baldrick]

He very much reminds me of John Cleese in his accent and mannerisms.

What really damaged his credibility in Britain was first his unhinged misogynistic views and second his "holohoax" pontifications.

But he's never really been stationed here under the SSPX flag so most Brits haven't had much personal experience of the man.  He's spent most of his time in the new world.

Brits don't tend to do cult followings.  We're a cynical, doubtful and jaded lot in the most part.  Infomericals would never work here for example.

On the other hand, there are British Trads who are extremely fond of Bishop Williamson and are glad that he is now based in England.  There may be a certain, or even significant. disagreement with His Excellency's views.  But he is, among these Trads anyway, viewed with real affection.

There are two reasons for this.

Brits like eccentrics.

He's a great communicator and speaker and like them is a huge conspiracy theorist.  Most British Trads think he is a liability.  What makes +Williamson unique is that he speaks frequently and often.  If you are someone who needs the world and its problems explained to you all the time, then he's a winner.

American's ARE like children.  He is right.  Some Brits are too.  Some people appear incapable of thinking for themselves and have to be told what to think.

Distinguishing between the child-like (which is a good thing) and childish (which is not and which incorporates the meaning of needing to be told what to think, etc.), I presume you mean the latter when you're referring to Americans?   

To say without qualification that "Americans ARE like children" is simply risible nonsense.   

Are there many Americans who are are childish?  Sure.  Are there many Brits?  Sure.

If you mean to say specifically that Americans are not independently-minded, and need to be "told what to think" - that's just false.  You either don't know that many Americans or you get your ideas about them from television.  As a general rule, we are this way almost to a fault. 

If you mean to say that the British are overall the sort of people who "think for themselves" and "do not need to be told what to think," I think this is highly questionable.  Most British I know - and have known - including many family members - are unbelievably deferential to authority, most especially in this respect. 

It's hilarious that your reason why some Brit trads like +Williamson is because they "like eccentrics."  lol.  Why not because they are "children and need to be told what to think?"  Perhaps Americans like him because he's "eccentric"? 

There is a perpetual note of self-flattery in many of your descriptions of the character and motives of the British.   

[Prayerful]

Bishop Williamson is an anti-semite and conspiracy theorist. His handling of a few pervert priests was very poor indeed. There is no doubting his ability, but these negative tendencies obscure his gifts.

[ialsop]

Couple points.

1.  I wonder if Williamson has softened his stance on attending the NO because hes finds himself in a new enlightened position, being contrarian to SSPX positions in general.  He sounds like he has come to question even the "old SSPX" under ABL.  Example: he said he has no authority to start an order, but ABL founded many trad orders without approval.

2. But I can relate to his comment on attending the NO.  We cant be sectarian and isolate ourselves from other Catholics.  It makes trads bitter at one another and anti-social.  It CAN nourish our faith to pray, mix w Catholics in the mainstream.

YES!
Especially, if you cant find a TLM near you, I think finding the most reverent No and going to it is best.

Do you go w ur parents to Mass?  No TLM in driving distance?

If u go to the Novus, you can bring a traditional missal and unite urself the sacrifice, stand, and kneel to be polite, but be otherwise discreetly silent and passive to the gestures and prayers. When ur an adult, youll be in a better situation to avoid it all together and find the true Catholic Mass.

Yep, that is my situation, and that is my way of dealing with it. I have a 1962 Missal that I use to "pray along" with the other TLMs in the world.

[Elizabeth]

..... His handling of a few pervert priests was very poor indeed. There is no doubting his ability, but these negative tendencies obscure his gifts.

Same as the N.O. bishops, many who had superior intellectual gifts, good looks, charisma even--yet for whatever reasons tolerated or enabled sexual predators.  Here we have the case of someone who is acutely aware of conspiracies to bring down the Church, somehow turning a blind eye to situations which absolutely guarantee ruin.

[QuaeriteDominum]

What do you think is the endgame of his shtick, Father? To gain and keep his followers to do whatever he tells them?

When he was in SSPX, I think there were several endgames:

First, during the 80s when Abp. Lefebvre was doing his good Rome/bad Rome, seek approval/never compromise with anti-Christ routine, and no one knew what the Archbishop's endgame was, Fr. Williamson had to guess from month to month which way the wind would go, and try to prepare the seminarians and laity to go along with whatever would happen.

Best way to accomplish that: send out all sorts of contradictory signals. And anyway, as Fr. Williamson said, "Americans are like children. They need to be told what to think."

As former SSPX inmates, we knew exactly what was going on, and used to have great fun reading his monthly seminary newsletters aloud to watch him zig-zag from hardline to soft line to hardline and back, with intervals to talk about the weather when he wasn't sure.

Second, in his specific capacity as SSPX seminary rector, Bp. Williamson would throw out contradictory statements to see if any seminarian would pick up on them and point out the contradiction. This would show that the seminarian was capable of thinking on his own, and would mark him as an unsuitable for ordination in SSPX, where you are expected show loyalty to no principle beyond following the party line du jour. Check brains at door, please! 

Third, another endgame was simply to sow dissension, contradiction and discord. In an unguarded moment, Lefebvre himself told a group of us American priests that wherever the Abbe Williamson went, he seemed to cause infighting.

It's a hobby, I am convinced, that Bp. Williamson utterly delights in. When he was in Winona, for instance, he knew perfectly well what Carlos Urrutigoity and his buddies were up to. He had been warned and told, but he let everything go on as another little "test," to see who would dare to complain. And when the Urrutigoity affair inevitably blew up? All the better to pretend you knew nothing, and wave the banner for "loyalty to the Society."

So, to sum up, his all-over-the-board response at the conference was merely the continuation of a very old routine. Like Bergoglio, Bp. Williamson loves making a mess -- something that the "resistance" types may have already discovered for themselves.

Great analysis, Father.  I know that another of the American 'resistance' priests poo-poo'd the allegations against C.U. as unbelievable. -a very gullible priest now at the heart of theAmerican resistance.

I don't intend to take this thread too off-topic but it does relate to Fr. Williamson. In that 'famous' dinner meeting between yourselves, +Lefebvre, and Fr. Williamson at Oyster Bay, what role do you think +Williamson played in +Lefebvre's decision concerning the dismissals of the rector and District Superior? Do you think he had much influence? He is certainly an opportunist and cannot stand to be out of the limelight.

[Elliott]

I don't think +Williamson is an anti Semite. He doesn't teach hatred for Semitic people.

[FatherCekada]

I don't intend to take this thread too off-topic but it does relate to Fr. Williamson. In that 'famous' dinner meeting between yourselves, +Lefebvre, and Fr. Williamson at Oyster Bay, what role do you think +Williamson played in +Lefebvre's decision concerning the dismissals of the rector and District Superior? Do you think he had much influence? He is certainly an opportunist and cannot stand to be out of the limelight.

Well, we never actually made it to dinner after our meeting!

At that point, though, I think we all were toast no matter what. Abp. Lefebvre had come over to the U.S. with a long-term plan to pick us off one by one: Fr. Sanborn to Ireland, Fr. Dolan to the Southwest District, and the NE District further reduced in size to isolate me and Fr. Kelly.

I don't think it was Fr. Williamson's idea. He was merely sent over to the seminary in September 1982 to do what he always did best: stir up division. Obviously, he would be the newly anointed Rector, but Abp. L. and Fr. Schmidberger were calling the shots.

But we had figured out what the Abp's strategy would be, so we decided to hang together rather than let him hang us separately! 

[Prayerful]

Elliot. He denied that gas chambers were used. That will generally tag someone as cranky or anti-semitic, even if that is not their intention. Unless he was presenting historical evidence to Swedish television, he should have had the wisdom to keep his mouth shut. Even if he had something to say and evidence to show, the time and place was very poorly chosen.

Bishop Williamson seems a bit of schemer, but at least he helped Ap Lefebvre in his mission to preserve the Mass. The 1962 Missal and perhaps the prior iteration on account of Fr Bugini's skewering of Holy Week, has flaws, but it is the nearest accessible thing to the Mass as revised by Pius V.