Serious Theologians Do Not Lean On Miracles To Prove A Point!

In EC Number CDXCII (492), Bishop Williamson, whether intentionally or not, by starting his article with Eucharistic miracles in the NOM, leads the reader to adopt a messy theology wherein part of the NOM is valuable to some people sometimes, but is not beneficial to people who are able to discern good from evil.


Therefore one should reason that since all Catholics are able to discern good from evil, all Catholics should avoid the NOM.
But the bishop does not state this conclusion. Instead, this EC uses Vatican II doublespeak to promote the NOM and to deny it at the same time. This is modernism.
A Traditional bishop should teach in a way that is clear, unambiguous and to the point. Compare this EC to Archbishop Lefebvre:

“The current problem of the Mass is an extremely serious problem for the Holy Church. I believe that if the dioceses and seminaries and works that are currently done are struck with sterility, it is because the recent deviations drew upon us the divine curse. All the efforts that are made to hang on to what is being lost, to reorganize, reconstruct, rebuild, all that is struck with sterility, because we no longer have the true source of holiness which is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Profaned as it is, it no longer gives grace, it no longer makes grace pass.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, August 1972, priestly retreat; can be found in A Bishop Speaks)


as translated at


The Archbishop made his point without leaning on miracles.

St John of the Cross taught: “Stay away from visions, apparitions and miracles as much as you can… Be careful of visions, even when they are authentic.” (Fr Hesse, New Conciliar Religion).


Serious theologians do not lean on miracles to prove a point!



Leave a Comment