BISHOP WILLIAMSON CONFERENCES – conference n° 11
I was on the phone last night. Fr
Joe Pfeiffer from the United States rang me up, the one who gave a blockbusting
sermon that’s all over the internet, like Fr Chazal’s, and he said that Fr Laisney,
who is a Bishop Fellay man, was really trying to put the pressure on Fr Chazal,
and one of the things that Fr Laisney blurted out in the middle of his
pressure-putting was that after the General Chapter there will be a purge. I think he was quoting Fr Pfluger. Fr Pfluger is a real - how can I say? A strong man.
I wanted to use the word “thug” but I can’t use the word “thug”. It’s not quite correct. Fr Pfluger is not nearly as smart as Bishop
Fellay. Bishop Fellay is smart, but Fr
Pfluger is not smart but he is absolutely fanaticised. These people are now fanaticised, and they
are driving for their goal, and their goal is to take over the Society and to
get rid of the opposition. Fr Chazal
quoted Fr Pfluger, who said, “Wait until the General Chapter and then there
will be a big purge.” So they’re going
to get to the General Chapter, and they’re going to sail through the General
Chapter with a majority, as they hope. They
undoubtedly count on having a majority in their pocket, and then if they win
the vote then there will be a great purge.
Heads will roll afterwards.
Anybody who’s in opposition will be eliminated, crushed, smashed, driven
out.
God, in any case, surely wants the purification of the resistance to the
apostasy of the Church, which was set up by Archbishop Lefebvre 40 years ago
and which he carried forward for 20 years in heroic fashion, and it was carried
on for a while by his successors, but it’s normal that without him the Society should
not stay on track, just like Campos.
Once Bishop de Castro Mayer was gone, Campos didn’t take long before it
came off the rails, and the Society is now coming off the rails, one would
say. There is just a hope that at the
General Chapter the good guys will have enough possibility to lay out enough
good arguments to sway some voters at the General Chapter and to take the
majority away from Bishop Fellay.
There’s just a hope. If they do
that at the Chapter, I don't know how, they have got to get rid of Bishop
Fellay. It’s a hope. It’s a dream.
If there’s no agreement now and Bishop Fellay stays in power then heads
will roll more quietly then if he had the majority of the General Chapter, but
if he’s still the recognised head and has the authority he will make heads roll. He will get rid of Fr Morgan. He will get rid of Fr Cacqueray. He will put in his own men like he’s already
been putting in here and there, and then the next time the General Chapter is
held he will be sure of having a majority and he will rejoin Rome as he wants
and means to. So he’s got to be got rid
of. If there’s a crucial vote that goes
against him, he’s got to be got rid of.
Bishop Fellay is cunning. He’s very,
very cunning. The good guys will surely
force the issue, and there will have to be a discussion and there will have to
be a vote, I think. There are about 30
superiors of various kinds and ten veterans make up the 40 - the ten oldest
old-timers, the ten priests ordained furthest back in the history of the
Society. Of course, normally experience
is wiser, so those experienced ten, a number of whom knew the Archbishop and
knew what he was about, it’s to be hoped that there’ll be enough of them to
swing a vote.
It’s all in God’s hands. In any
case, God is going to purify His resistance.
He’s going to purify the followers of His cause, which is the resistance
to the apostasy of the modern world, and He’s going to clean it out. With or without the Society, He will clean
out the resistance, I’m sure. From a
human point of view Rome wins either way.
Rome has succeeded in dividing the Society, and Rome has smashed Humpty
Dumpty, and Humpty Dumpty won’t be put together again, I don’t think. If the good guys stay in charge then the bad
guys will have to take themselves off.
One can hope that they will take themselves off. If the bad guys stay in charge and take over
the Society, take over the mechanism, take over the structure, then I don’t
think what they do will survive. I don’t
think it can hang together. It cannot be
blessed of God, as I see it. I don’t see
how it can be blessed of God, even though some of them will be of
goodwill. Some of them will think that
rejoining Rome is the best thing, but then reality will catch up, and if St
Peter’s is anything to go by, there will be very few that jump ship and quit. Most of them, having once decided to go with
Rome, they will stay with the decision to go with Rome, and they will drift,
and then at best they will depart individually and set up on their own and have
an individual ministry like priests have been doing for the last 40 years, but
most of them will go along.
Eventually a number of them will, just like Bishop Rifan now, finish up
saying the New Mass. Having convinced
themselves that there’s nothing so wrong with Conciliar Rome, they will next
convince themselves there’s nothing so wrong with the Council. They will next convince themselves there’s
nothing so wrong with the New Mass, and they’ll be saying the New Mass before
they know where they are.
St Peter’s was founded on going with Conciliar Rome. Therefore going with Conciliar Rome is part
of its charter. Going with Conciliar
Rome is not the charter of the SSPX, and that’s why there are going to be
tensions inside. If the bad guys take
over there’s going to be such tensions as I don’t think it can thrive. I just don’t think it can possibly
thrive. I’m not sure it will positively
come apart but it will dilute and soften and then just disappear into the
Conciliar woodwork. That’s the
Devil.
I can remember back in 1977, the Devil was working over Econe big
time. There was a left-wing revolt in
1973. There was another left-wing revolt
in 1975 when a number of good, decent professors quit the Archbishop, and that’s
a favourite story of mine. I remember in
1975, the year before I was ordained, I was a seminarian, and the crisis, I
think, was in the summer. It was because
Rome had pretended to claim to dissolve the Society of St Pius X, and it was
another apparently just move on the part of the official Church, which took
away the legitimacy of these decent priests that came along to the seminary to
help the Archbishop. So a number of
these decent priests, I think there were at least four of them, having lost their
respectability, told the Archbishop they were quitting him and they went back,
so it looked like there would be a lack of professors for the following
year. They agreed to teach until the end
of the school year, the summer of 1975, but then they let the Archbishop know
that they would be going, so the seminarians knew they were going.
I went to see the Archbishop and I said, “What about it? We’re going to lose our professors.” I remember very quietly he said, “Well, if we
have no professors the seminarians will have to teach themselves.” Very quietly. “We’re not going to change path. They will do it with the manuals. They’ll have to look after themselves.” No question of changing track. That was him - no fuss, no noise, no brass
band, no shouting. Just - “Well, if we
don’t have professors the seminarians will have to look after themselves.” But he wouldn't abandon the seminarians, and
he wouldn't let them become Modernist. He
wouldn’t give them Modernist professors, so if there are no professors, better none
than Modernists. That was the
Archbishop. That was his style.
So St Peter’s have got in their charter to go with Conciliar Rome. What I might call the Bishop Fellay Society,
the Fellayite Society, let’s say that, the Fellayite Society, the Society which
Fellay has Fellay-ised has not got in its charter to go with the Conciliar
Church. That’s why there are going to be
serious internal tensions, and I don’t think it can hold together.
I remember in 1977, that was two years after the crisis I’ve just spoken
about in 1975, but there was one crisis after another at the seminary, and then
the next one, 1977, was on the right-wing, but that was when sedevacantism was
beginning, and so the Archbishop had to balance the other direction. He had to shift to the right, shift to the
right, shift to the right. This time he
had to shift a bit to the left. As a
donkey with a pack on its back, the pack slides off to the left, you have to
push it to the right, and then it slides off to the right, you have to push it
to the left, so to keep the pack on the middle of the donkey you have to keep
adjusting it. So the Archbishop was
adjusting the pack on the back of the donkey.
In 1977 he had to push to the right, because soon after the beginning of
the school year there was another batch of professors and seminarians that
went, including [inaudible 12:47] very regrettably, persuaded that if they went
off to France they could start a seminary of their own which would be approved
by the Church and which would not have all the faults of the Archbishop’s
operation. I think it was about 20
seminarians and another three or four professors, they went off again into the
leftfield, and that dissolved quite soon.
It really didn’t last very long, and some of the seminarians went into
official seminaries, approved seminaries and so on, but it didn’t last very
long. The Devil achieved what he
wanted. He had got 20 seminarians away
from Econe, and he got professors away from Econe, and the Archbishop had to
scratch around to fill the gaps with professors. That’s when they pulled me into Econe to
begin teaching. I was there for five
years, and Father Tissier, as he then was, became the rector of the seminary
and I became one of the teachers, and we were there for five years, so Bishop
Tissier and I have known one another for quite a long time. Then I was shipped to the United States and
so on. It’s all history.
Humanly speaking, the Devil wins either way because either way the
Society is severely diminished. At best
it’s diminished in numbers but at worst it’s just broken completely because the
structure falls into the hands of the Conciliarists and then the Society of the
Archbishop is virtually over, but his work is not over. His Society may be crippled but his work will
not be crippled because the resistance, I’m quite sure, will carry on. The resistance will reform, regroup and
continue. I think it will need to
continue in a different form but it will continue.
Interestingly, Fr Joe Pfeiffer was telling me last night that he had a
call from Fr Gruner, who many of you know of, from the United States, and Fr
Gruner was giving his take on the situation, and Fr Gruner was saying that he
sees the resistance continuing in a slightly different form - not a strict
congregation but a looser federation. If
the vote goes the wrong way in the General Chapter, which there’s a good chance
of it doing, maybe the Mother of God can prevent that, but if it goes the wrong
way then it will be vital to put together some safety net so that the priests
falling off the treacherous SSPX trapeze will have somewhere to go and that they
won’t feel that they’ve got nowhere to go.
The danger is that a number of good priests who don’t want to go with
the Conciliarists, because they’re not Conciliarists themselves and they don’t
want to be, the danger is that they will stay with the Conciliarised Society - I
think that’s the best way to put it - because they’ve got nowhere else to go,
but if they had somewhere else to go then I think a number will not just drift
along with the Conciliarised Society, which is otherwise a risk for them. If they quit the Conciliarised Society, and I
think there will be a good number of priests that will quit, I do think there
would be, if it came to a Conciliarised Society there are a number that would
quit, and if they quit then it’s back to garage Masses and scratching to get the
vestments, but there will be benefactors, I bet you any you like.
The point is that, humanly speaking, the Devil wins either way, but,
divinely speaking, God wins either way because if the Society continues,
having, by a miracle, got rid of Bishop Fellay and his gang, because I think it
will take a miracle, if a miracle is obtained then a number of the Conciliarist
priests will just on their own rejoin the mainstream Church. If they can’t carry the Society with them
they will rejoin the mainstream Church one by one. And it will be, quite honestly, good riddance
to bad rubbish, and the Society will be very much purified, which is what God
is after. I’m quite sure God is after
that, because with what’s coming, with globalism, with the ongoing collapse of
the mainstream Church, with the purge of the Society - the purge is necessary
to get the resistance in shape for a possible persecution, a very severe
persecution coming with the triumph of the globalists just before the
chastisement. I think the chastisement
is on its way. So the Lord God is purging. If the good guys hold on to the Society it
will be very much purged and cleansed until the next corruption. If the bad guys hold on to the Society then
the resistance will reform outside, and again God will win because the
resistance will attract, I am sure, many of the best priests, not all but many,
humanly judged, of the best priests. How
God judges is different, of course, and God knows.
So, humanly speaking, the Devil wins either way. Divinely speaking, God wins either way, so
it’s this tremendous battle between the Devil and God, which God allows for the
benefit of the elect. It’s mysterious,
but St Augustine says, “God allows bad men either in order that they convert or
in order that they put to the trial the good guys,” so again either way God
wins.
Given this dramarama going on right now, it may seem antiquated to be
going into these 19th-century documents, but they’re not out of
date, and notice we’ve already seen how often the Archbishop refers to them
because this was the Archbishop’s anchorage.
This is why the Archbishop didn’t shift, because he’d understood what
the popes think of the whole modern world.
He understood that the Council was the modern world penetrating into the
Church. He never had any doubts about
the wrongness and wretchedness of the Council.
Today the Devil will be after us, and we’ve got to have no doubts about
the wrongness of the Conciliarisation of the Archbishop’s Society, but this was
the Archbishop’s mental anchorage and not just a provisional anchorage for the
Archbishop. He saw this as a permanent
anchorage.
Let us go on with Quanta Cura. The family, parents’ rights, children’s
education all depend on the State, and the State moving in on the family - that,
of course, is what’s happening today. I
said in fairness that today the State is partly obliged to close in on the
family because the family is so destroyed.
Judeo-Masonry is the hyphenated name for that combination of all the
Jews working with the Freemasons, and all the Freemasons working with the Jews,
to bring on a complete New World Order, a complete godless New World Order to
bring on the Antichrist. Not all Jews
work with the Freemasons and for the New World Order. Not all Freemasons are consciously working
with the Jews for the New World Order, but the most important Masons and the
most important Jews are those that are working, unfortunately, for the New World
Order. In every government where Freemasonry
has an influence, they’ve been deliberately working to dissolve and break down
the family because the family comes from God.
The family of one man, one woman, the biological mother and the
biological father, until death do them part, of as many children as God sends,
without artificial means of birth control - that is an institution of God, and
so that’s got to be got rid of.
The abusers find a vulnerability, and that vulnerability is undoubtedly
a need of love, a need of something which Mum and Dad should have given
them. Single-parent homes, the father is
lacking or the mother is lacking - they haven’t got what they need. All of us need/needed from our Mum what Mum
could give, what a woman can give, and what a woman alone can give, and from Dad
what a man can give, what a man alone can give – biological Mum, biological Dad
until death do them part. That’s God’s
idea. It’s the right idea. That’s what Freemasonry took care to attack,
as we will see, also, in the Syllabus - Freemasonry heavily attacking the
family.
“Against The Church In Particular” - the Church under the State, the Church
in the temporal order and a straightjacket being put on the Church. “Other errors put the Church under the State,
and seek to deny to the Church any rights in the temporal order.” Temporal means worldly. It’s from the Latin tempus. Time as opposed to
eternity. Tempus means time, so temporal is opposed to eternal. The temporal order is in this world. The eternal order is in the next world. “Church laws bind only if they’re promulgated
by the State.” So the Church can’t make
laws for the Church without the State improving. The State is closing in on the Church and
controlling its laws. “Laws coming from
the Pope on Church and religion must be approved of by the State.” Again the State being put above the Church –
monstrous error. “The Church can condemn
no Freemasonry tolerated by the State.”
So you can see the Freemasons are behind all of these errors. Freemasonry is insisting on itself being given
rights by the State which the Church cannot then condemn.
“Popes and councils defending Church property have only an earthly
motive” – monstrous error. This is worth
thinking about because it’s on television all the time - the vile media are all
the time onto the churchmen want property, the churchmen are looking for money,
the churchmen want possessions, the churchmen want wealth. Hey, poor old human nature - obviously it is
true. In practice there are churchmen
who just want wealth, money, riches and comfort, but in principle there is
nothing wrong with the Church owning property.
In fact, the Church needs to own property in order to keep its
independence. Heaven knows, in the SSPX
in the last 40 years often when the laity control the property, the laity are
liable to try to tell the priests what to do because they own the property, and
they say to the priest, “If you don’t do what we want you to do then you won’t
be able to come here to say Mass.” So
the priest is up a creek without a paddle.
That’s if the property belongs to the laity. The property should belong to the
Church. The SSPX has needed to own its
own properties to ensure that it’s the priest who calls the shots, not because
the priest wants to be a dictator, God forbid, but because the Church, and
never forget this, the Church marches to a different drum from the world, and
the laity often have worldly ideas. God
bless them - that’s their business.
They’re in the world, they have worldly ideas, but the Church doesn’t
always operate like the world. In fact,
often it doesn’t, and therefore the laity cannot always understand why
churchmen operate as they do and why they make the decision they do. So the priests must be able to make their own
decisions.
The Pontifical States were a whole belt across the middle of Italy, a
substantial belt, which was politically controlled by the Vatican, and it was
not a bad thing that the Church did control politically properties like
that. It guaranteed the independence of
the Papacy. Otherwise if the Vatican
came under a State, the State could exert severe pressure upon the
Vatican. In 1870, a few years after Quanta Cura, actually you had the revolution in Italy and the Pontifical States
were taken over by the Italian State. The
Vatican was stripped of its political possessions, its political kingdom, and
the Pope was limited to the Vatican. In
God’s providence it was a very good pope, Pius IX, and he didn’t lose any of
his spiritual prestige and power. He
lost his temporal power. The State was
now right round the Vatican, but he didn’t give way to it. There was a final settlement, the Lateran
Agreement in 1929, when Mussolini set up the Vatican as a State of its own, and
that’s what we have still today. The
Vatican is a State. It’s only a tiny,
little enclave in Rome with not really very much property or territory at all,
but it is, strictly speaking, a State of its own. Therefore Mussolini was handing back a little
bit, just enough political independence and political property and political
statehood to ensure that it would not be too crowded by the Italian state. Mussolini was half in favour of the Catholic
Church. He was not the complete horrible
villain that our vile media present him to be, so don’t believe what you read
about Mussolini in the vile media. Go to
the Internet and then get both sides of the issue.
So it’s just not true that popes and councils defending Church property
have only an earthly motive. No, they
have a divine motive. They have an
unearthly motive because the Church must be able to be independent.
“The Church can bind no conscience in the temporal order.” The Church can tell people what to do and
tell them they’ll go to hell if they don’t do it in the eternal order, the
things of God, but not in the temporal order - always this separation of the
temporal order from the eternal order, the separation of this world from the
next. It’s the Devil’s divide and
rule. You divide the interests of this
world from the interests of the next world and that way you’re then controlling
the interests of this world, and by controlling the interests of this world you
cut off the interests of the next world.
By taking over politics you then surround, stifle and suffocate
religion. That’s exactly what we have
today. It’s a very important point. “The Church can bind no conscience in the
temporal order” – in other words, the Church is limited to Churchy things. It’s no religion outside of the sacristy and
the Church, no religion outside the limits of the Church. That’s the importance for the Catholic Church
of these processions in the streets of a city, where the Church is back out in
public and on the streets, where the manifestations of the politicians go. The Church belongs in the street as well as
in the church.
“The Church cannot temporarily punish anyone breaking her laws.” Again the Church can say, “Oh, you’ve got to
say a Rosary” and “No communion for a year” - that was the ancient Church. If in the primitive Church, in the very early
Church, you committed a grave sin, you were not allowed to come to Communion for
a year or something like that - so that kind of Churchy punishment, OK. Worldly punishment by the Church - not
OK. Once again the same separation - Church
is here and the world is here. It is a
separation of grace and nature, a separation of the supernatural and the
natural, in order to control the natural and by controlling the natural choke
off the supernatural, because, of course, the supernatural is meant to be
meshed like that together with the natural.
If the natural is completely skewed, the supernatural has got nowhere to
land. So you separate the two, you skew
the natural and then the supernatural just can’t get in any longer. That’s the idea.
Would the State normally impose the punishment on behalf of the Church?
If you’ve got union of State and Church, that’s the ideal. That’s when the State is Catholic, and the
State says to the Church, “OK, we don’t need you priests to tell us how to lay
the drains or how to fight the State next door which is threatening us. The Ministry of Defence is our business, the
soldiers, the guns, that’s our business, but please tell us how to look after
marriages, how to look after the family and how to look after the people’s
morals. If our people have got morals
they’re going to make much better soldiers than if they are all drugged to the
nines and so on.” So that’s the proper
union of Church and State. The State
looks after its own affairs. The Church
looks after its own affairs. Neither interferes
in what is the proper domain of each, but the State and the Church are united
so that the Church will help the State, and the State will help the
Church.
I’ll give you a classic example of that.
Take a village - the warring couple ring up the police, they’re killing
one another, and the policeman knows that it’s not his business. He rings up the priest, “Father, look, do you
mind if you get in contact with this family because they’re calling me and I know
I can’t do much but you can?” So this
priest says, “Yeah, sure, OK, officer, no problem.” The priest goes in. There’s a natural co-ordination possible
between the policeman and the priest, and that’s a small-scale image of the
co-operation that there can be and should be between the State and the Church. If, on the other hand, the priest has got
some troublemaker in his church on Sunday, the priest is not going to take off
his chasuble, go down there and punch him out.
It’s not exactly fitting, but he can ring up the policeman and say,
“Would you mind coming in and looking after this disordered person in the
congregation?” “Father, no problem,
gladly.” So the policeman does what he
does best, the priest does what he does best, and the two of them co-operate
for the salvation of all souls. That’s the
natural co-operation of the higher and the lower interests, of the eternal and
temporal interests.
The Church can punish temporarily.
For instance, the Church in the Middle Ages used to have prisons in
which to shut away priests who’d been naughty boys, and it’s better if the
priests did not appear in front of the civil courts because that’s beneath
their dignity, but you can only allow for the priests not coming in front of
the temporal courts if the Church has her own courts which really do work, really
do punish the priests that misbehave. If
the State can rely upon the Church to look after naughty priests then it’s best
if the State does so, because then in the State the priests don’t suffer the
public indignity of being thrown into a State prison with thugs and all the
rest of it. You can see there’s a
natural order there, and that’s how it used to be in the Middle Ages.
Is that one of the reasons Henry II tried to get rid of St Thomas à
Becket, because Henry II wanted to try a priest in the civil court and St
Thomas refused?
Very possible. Obviously Becket
was standing up to the King for the Church’s rights, and he was absolutely
right. I don't know the details. The King wanted to control, and in that time
there was enough faith amongst the people.
He killed Becket. He sent in the
four knights and Becket was killed, but there arose a tremendous devotion to
Becket as a result, because the English people had the Faith. It rebounded on Henry, just like on the
Continent with Emperor Henry IV having to go to Hildebrand, Gregory VII, and
beg for forgiveness, so it’s the same clash, basically.
“The State may lawfully take over any Church properties” – monstrous
error. “The Church is neither distinct
from nor independent of the State” – monstrous error. “The Church is merely a department of the
State” – horror. “Papal decisions need
not be heeded except on faith and morals.”
So it’s this separation of supernature and nature. It’s this separation of the temporal order
and the eternal order, of the natural order and the supernatural order, the
tearing apart of nature and supernature, and once nature is no longer
integrated with supernature, and protected by supernature, nature is much more
vulnerable. The bad guys come in and
twist nature by, for instance, saying that marriage is not a sacrament. Imagine a seam of 20 stitches, and in a seam
if you undo the first stitch all the other stitches come apart. If there’s any tension all of the other
stitches come apart. To hold the seam
together you need to do up that twentieth stitch, and the twentieth stitch
needs to be held. Then nothing comes
apart. Similarly, the sacramentality of
marriage is in the natural order. It’s
the twentieth stitch. The Masons
attacked in the 19th century the sacramentality of marriage, because
if they could undo that stitch they would arrive at divorce, contraception,
abortion, euthanasia, all the horrors that we’ve seen in our own day, and it’s
all because marriage has not been defended, because the Catholic sacramentality
of marriage has been undone and therefore the whole seam is coming apart, the family’s
coming apart, society’s coming apart, and that fight was fought between the
Freemasons and the Church in the 19th century. You might say the Freemasons won, and that’s
why we’ve got the mess we’ve got today.
“Papal decisions need not be heeded except on faith and morals” – same
difference. The Pope’s business is
eternity, the supernatural, the sacraments, all of that Churchy stuff, but the
world is absolutely not his business – nonsense. If the world is left to the Devil the Church
will have little to no material to work with.
The Church will be absolutely in difficulties, which is exactly what we
see today.
This next section is too important - “All of these errors contradict the
fullness of power given by Jesus Christ to His one Church.” Our Lord gave full powers to His Church,
meaning power not only in the supernatural order but also in the natural order
as much as is necessary to ensure that the supernatural order can work. It’s not that Our Lord wants his priests into
politics. On the contrary, He does not
want them getting into politics. Priests
have got something much more valuable and more important to do than to get into
politics, but the politicians do need to obey the eternal law and the natural
law, and they do need to be told by the priests what is the eternal law and the
natural law, and they do need to heed what the priests tell them of the eternal
law and the natural law. Therefore the
politicians must listen to the priests without the priests getting into
politics. That’s distinct but not
separate. Our Lord wants State and
Church distinct but He doesn’t want them separate. Distinct so that the priest will not get into
politics and so that the politics will not get into Church affairs. Each has to look after his own affairs, but
they must also look after one another, and they must not be separate.
The Masons work for not only distinction but also separation. Separation means once again that without the
protection of the Church they will be able to do what they like with
nature. They will bend it all out of
shape, and then the Church will have great difficulties, exactly like today,
working with souls that are worked over by the vile media, by pornography, by
abortion, by all of those horrors. The
Church will have huge difficulty in saving souls contaminated by all these
things.
END OF CONFERENCE