NEWS: January 13, 2025
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Bird’s Eye View of the News
THE EMPTY & MALICIOUS ACCUSATIONS OF BISHOP WILLIAMSON - PART I
On December 29, 2024, I received a message from a friend in Brazil with an audio-video posted a few days before of Bishop Richard Williamson making a diatribe against Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira. Since it was my great honor to have Prof. Plinio as my mentor for 31 years and I consider him to be the greatest lay Catholic leader of the 20th century, I am responding to the Bishop.
/bev301_Vid.jpg)
It is curious that the date of the original recording is January 4, 1999, but I had never heard about this attack in the 26 years I have been living in the U.S. Is this simply my lack of info or has the video only been disseminated now? I do not have an answer. Had I known of it before, I would have refuted it; since this is the first time I have learned of it, I will refute it now.
The audio is a transcription of a talk Williamson gave while he was rector of the SSPX Winona seminary before he was separated from SSPX and, therefore, reflects not only his personal thinking but the teaching of this organization to their seminarians and priests.
I will put the recurring accusations in order so that I can answer them straightforwardly. At the end of each accusation I will evaluate its intellectual and moral merit.
1. Plinio founded the TFP to be away from the clergy
Bishop Williamson affirmed: "Plinio made an organization saying 'we don't need the clergy.'"
I answer: The TFP was founded in July 1960 (not in the ‘40s or ‘50s as Bishop Williamson stated) as a civil society in accordance with Brazilian legislation. In Brazil as in many other modern countries, the State is separated from the Church. So, although TFP members were Catholics, the organization as such was independent of the Church authorities. Since the main fight of the TFP was in the field of civil legislation – against Communism, agrarian reform, urban reform, constitution reform, divorce, socialist laws etc. – nothing could be more fitting.
To accuse the founder of making the TFP a civil society as a factor of rebellion against the orientation of the clergy is, intellectually, an exaggeration; morally it is, at the least, a biased statement.
2. TFP prevented its members from going to the seminary
There is a wrong presupposition at the base of this accusation. SSPX has the narrow and false idea that there are only two possible Catholic states of life approved by the Church: priesthood/religious life and married life. So, any organization of laymen whose members would be single would be stealing potential vocations from the priesthood.
/bev301_VWil.jpg)
This is a deliberate simplification that had become current in some sectors of the Church since the beginning of the 20th century with the intention of filling the seminaries and novitiates.
Actually, there are three states of life approved by the Church: single laymen, married laymen and priests/religious men.
A. Lay celibates – Doctrine
Among many I will present two texts – one of a Pope and one of a Council – and two statements by Saints to confirm the validity of the lay single vocation.
Pope Pius XII: “And while this perfect chastity is the subject of one of the three vows that constitute the religious state, and is also required by the Latin Church of clerics in major orders and demanded from members of Secular Institutes, it also flourishes among many who are lay people in the full sense: Men and women who are not constituted in a public state of perfection and yet by private promise or vow completely abstain from marriage and sexual pleasures in order to serve their neighbor more freely and to be united with God more easily and more closely.” (Sacra virginitas n.6)
Catechism of Trent – Commenting on God's first command to Adam and Eve, "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen 1:28), the Catechism of Trent states: “When He said, ‘Increase and multiply,’ Our Lord wanted to indicate the end for which He had instituted Matrimony, but not to impose upon each individual the obligation of contracting it. With the present day propagation of the human race, not only is there no law obligating marriage, but, on the contrary, the state of virginity is highly recommended, which Sacred Scriptures present to all as superior to the matrimonial state, as a state of greater perfection and holiness.
“For Our Lord and Savior taught as follows: ‘He that can take it, let him take it’ (Mt 19:12); and the Apostle says: ‘Concerning virgins I have no commandment from the Lord; but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy from the Lord, to be faithful [to that state]’ (1 Cor 7:25).” (Catechism of Trent, Part II, VIII, q. 4, 1b; pp. 211-212)
/bev301_Pau.jpg)
St. Jerome – St. Jerome teaching Eustachia, a young lay daughter of Paula, affirmed: “Someone will say, ‘Do you dare to disparage marriage, which is a state blessed by God?’ I do not disparage marriage when I set virginity before it. ... Marriage is honored when it is placed next, after virginity.
“’Increase,’ the Lord says, ‘and multiply and replenish the earth.’ He who desires to replenish the earth may increase and multiply if he will. But the flock [of virgins] to which you belong is not on earth, but in Heaven. … Let them marry who eat their bread in the sweat of their brow, whose land brings forth thistle and thorns (Gen. 3:18-19) and whose crops are chocked with briars. My seed shall produce fruit a hundredfold – the reward of virginity is hundredfold; of widowhood, sixtyfold, and of married life, thirtyfold. ‘All cannot receive the Word of God but only they to whom it is given.’” (Mt 19:11) (St. Jerome, Letter XXII to Eustachia)
Our Lord speaking to St. Brigit compares the life of the knight – a layman – with the life of the monk only to show that the life of the former demands more austerity and sacrifices than that of the latter. (Revelations of St. Brigit, book III, chap 27)
B. Lay celibates – Examples
In History the number of laymen and laywomen celibate is countless. Some examples include Dom Sebastian, King of Portugal, St. Casimir V, Prince of Poland, King St. Wenceslas of Bohemia, St. Erlembald Duke of Milan, St. Cizy of Besançon, St. Catherina of Siena, St. Rosa of Lima, St. Joan of Arc and many others, as can be read here and here.
So, the conclusion is that there is a state of life which is that of the lay single man and which has the full right of existence in the Catholic Church.
C. TFP, SSPX & the single vocation
However, Bishop Williamson does not accept the state of life of lay single men. He believes, as Msgr. Lefebvre did as well as all of the SSPX priests, that there are only two states of life – priesthood/religious men and married laymen.
/bev301_Lef.jpg)
Although this issue had been addressed many times by Prof Plinio and his followers with Msgr. Lefebvre and his followers, the latter are entrenched in their wrong position and do not admit this long established practice of the Church. The good will of Prof. Plinio went so far as to invite Msgr. Lefebvre in August 1974 to speak to the TFP youth in auditoriums in São Paulo and Rio so that he might invite them to enter his seminary.
The Prelate in fact spoke about his work and invited those present to enter the priestly life. Only one TFP member entered his seminary. Instead of accepting the fact that those young men have a lay single vocation, Msgr. Lefebvre and his followers, such as Bishop Williamson in this video, concluded that the TFP was a sect “always paralyzing vocations” from entering their seminaries.
My conclusion on this accusation is that Bishop Williamson revealed himself to be intellectually wrong and morally obsessed over his error.
As a side note, I would say that if SSPX directors would not try to shuffle every non-married single young man they find into their seminaries, perhaps they would have much less crisis among their priests. It is a crisis that unfortunately places SSPX as one of the religious institutions that has more cases of moral misconduct in the Church today. (Here, here, here, here, here and here)
Continued
On December 29, 2024, I received a message from a friend in Brazil with an audio-video posted a few days before of Bishop Richard Williamson making a diatribe against Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira. Since it was my great honor to have Prof. Plinio as my mentor for 31 years and I consider him to be the greatest lay Catholic leader of the 20th century, I am responding to the Bishop.
The Great Problem of TFP ! - Bishop Williamson attacks Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira & TFP
The audio is a transcription of a talk Williamson gave while he was rector of the SSPX Winona seminary before he was separated from SSPX and, therefore, reflects not only his personal thinking but the teaching of this organization to their seminarians and priests.
I will put the recurring accusations in order so that I can answer them straightforwardly. At the end of each accusation I will evaluate its intellectual and moral merit.
1. Plinio founded the TFP to be away from the clergy
Bishop Williamson affirmed: "Plinio made an organization saying 'we don't need the clergy.'"
I answer: The TFP was founded in July 1960 (not in the ‘40s or ‘50s as Bishop Williamson stated) as a civil society in accordance with Brazilian legislation. In Brazil as in many other modern countries, the State is separated from the Church. So, although TFP members were Catholics, the organization as such was independent of the Church authorities. Since the main fight of the TFP was in the field of civil legislation – against Communism, agrarian reform, urban reform, constitution reform, divorce, socialist laws etc. – nothing could be more fitting.
To accuse the founder of making the TFP a civil society as a factor of rebellion against the orientation of the clergy is, intellectually, an exaggeration; morally it is, at the least, a biased statement.
2. TFP prevented its members from going to the seminary
There is a wrong presupposition at the base of this accusation. SSPX has the narrow and false idea that there are only two possible Catholic states of life approved by the Church: priesthood/religious life and married life. So, any organization of laymen whose members would be single would be stealing potential vocations from the priesthood.
A rancorous Williamson refuses to accept the doctrine of the Church on lay celibacy
Actually, there are three states of life approved by the Church: single laymen, married laymen and priests/religious men.
A. Lay celibates – Doctrine
Among many I will present two texts – one of a Pope and one of a Council – and two statements by Saints to confirm the validity of the lay single vocation.
Pope Pius XII: “And while this perfect chastity is the subject of one of the three vows that constitute the religious state, and is also required by the Latin Church of clerics in major orders and demanded from members of Secular Institutes, it also flourishes among many who are lay people in the full sense: Men and women who are not constituted in a public state of perfection and yet by private promise or vow completely abstain from marriage and sexual pleasures in order to serve their neighbor more freely and to be united with God more easily and more closely.” (Sacra virginitas n.6)
Catechism of Trent – Commenting on God's first command to Adam and Eve, "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen 1:28), the Catechism of Trent states: “When He said, ‘Increase and multiply,’ Our Lord wanted to indicate the end for which He had instituted Matrimony, but not to impose upon each individual the obligation of contracting it. With the present day propagation of the human race, not only is there no law obligating marriage, but, on the contrary, the state of virginity is highly recommended, which Sacred Scriptures present to all as superior to the matrimonial state, as a state of greater perfection and holiness.
“For Our Lord and Savior taught as follows: ‘He that can take it, let him take it’ (Mt 19:12); and the Apostle says: ‘Concerning virgins I have no commandment from the Lord; but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy from the Lord, to be faithful [to that state]’ (1 Cor 7:25).” (Catechism of Trent, Part II, VIII, q. 4, 1b; pp. 211-212)
St. Jerome, St. Paula & St. Eustachia
“’Increase,’ the Lord says, ‘and multiply and replenish the earth.’ He who desires to replenish the earth may increase and multiply if he will. But the flock [of virgins] to which you belong is not on earth, but in Heaven. … Let them marry who eat their bread in the sweat of their brow, whose land brings forth thistle and thorns (Gen. 3:18-19) and whose crops are chocked with briars. My seed shall produce fruit a hundredfold – the reward of virginity is hundredfold; of widowhood, sixtyfold, and of married life, thirtyfold. ‘All cannot receive the Word of God but only they to whom it is given.’” (Mt 19:11) (St. Jerome, Letter XXII to Eustachia)
Our Lord speaking to St. Brigit compares the life of the knight – a layman – with the life of the monk only to show that the life of the former demands more austerity and sacrifices than that of the latter. (Revelations of St. Brigit, book III, chap 27)
B. Lay celibates – Examples
In History the number of laymen and laywomen celibate is countless. Some examples include Dom Sebastian, King of Portugal, St. Casimir V, Prince of Poland, King St. Wenceslas of Bohemia, St. Erlembald Duke of Milan, St. Cizy of Besançon, St. Catherina of Siena, St. Rosa of Lima, St. Joan of Arc and many others, as can be read here and here.
So, the conclusion is that there is a state of life which is that of the lay single man and which has the full right of existence in the Catholic Church.
C. TFP, SSPX & the single vocation
However, Bishop Williamson does not accept the state of life of lay single men. He believes, as Msgr. Lefebvre did as well as all of the SSPX priests, that there are only two states of life – priesthood/religious men and married laymen.
Msgr. Lefebvre between Bishop Mayer & Prof. Plinio speaking at a TFP auditorium in 1974
The Prelate in fact spoke about his work and invited those present to enter the priestly life. Only one TFP member entered his seminary. Instead of accepting the fact that those young men have a lay single vocation, Msgr. Lefebvre and his followers, such as Bishop Williamson in this video, concluded that the TFP was a sect “always paralyzing vocations” from entering their seminaries.
My conclusion on this accusation is that Bishop Williamson revealed himself to be intellectually wrong and morally obsessed over his error.
As a side note, I would say that if SSPX directors would not try to shuffle every non-married single young man they find into their seminaries, perhaps they would have much less crisis among their priests. It is a crisis that unfortunately places SSPX as one of the religious institutions that has more cases of moral misconduct in the Church today. (Here, here, here, here, here and here)
Continued
______________________
______________________
 Volume I |
 Volume II |
 Volume III |
 Volume IV |
 Volume V |
 Volume VI |
 Volume VII |
 Volume VIII |
 Volume IX |
 Volume X |
 Volume XI |
 Special Edition |