Expanding his liberal teachings from Mass and Holy Communion, to the Sacrament of Confession, Bishop Williamson now tells his followers to go to confession to any priest who believes in sin. Here are his words:

[G]et regularly to Confession with any priest still willing to hear Confessions and who does not tell you that a sin is not a sin.1

There are eight reasons Bishop Williamson’s advice is evil:

  1. Informed and faithful Catholics do not go to confession to a priest belonging to the conciliar church, because it is a different (and false) religion. Bishop Williamson advises going to confession to any priest who believes in sin, including even those priests who are (objectively) outside the true Catholic religion.

    The Summa confirms the truth that an informed Catholic already knows: viz., don’t confess to a priest outside the true Catholic Religion, even if he believes in sin. Here is what the Summa says (following St. Augustine), in an article entitled: “Whether those who are schismatics, heretics, excommunicated, suspended or degraded have the use of the keys?”:

    Augustine says (Tract. cxxi in Joan.) that the “charity of the Church forgives sins.” Now it is the charity of the Church which unites its members. Since therefore the above [viz., the schismatics, heretics, etc.] are disunited from the Church, it seems that they have not the use of the keys in remitting sins.

    Further, no man is absolved from sin by sinning. Now it is a sin for anyone to seek absolution of his sins from the above [viz., schismatics, heretics, etc.],2 for he disobeys the Church in so doing [because the Church warns us to stay away from false religions]. Therefore, he cannot be absolved by them: and so the same conclusion follows.3

  2. Bishop Williamson’s advice includes approval to go to the (so-called) “Sacrament of Reconciliation” in the conciliar church, even face-to-face, and engage in other such conciliar experimentation, as long as the priest believes in sin. In the days of the “old” SSPX, people would not have believed such evil advice could come from Bishop Williamson. But then also, neither would they have believed he would advise (as he now does) attending the new mass, whenever (according to Bishop Williamson) a person feels it helps him.4
  3. Before Bishop Williamson’s militant liberalism, he and the other SSPX bishops conditionally ordained very many conciliar (so-called) “priests” because their “ordinations” were doubtful. Now, the “new” Bishop Williamson does not even caution his followers that conciliar “priests” might not even be real priests (and so they would require ordination before they could validly hear confessions). Instead, Bishop Williamson carelessly advises his followers that they should confess to any such “priests” who believe in sin, ignoring the fact that they might really be only laymen.
  4. Bishop Williamson does not warn his followers about the great danger they are in because these “confessors” lead souls astray! The fact that such “confessors” are in the objectively wrong place (such as the conciliar church), doing the objectively wrong thing (such as following conciliar directives) shows the great danger into which Bishop Williamson advises his followers to enter. A priest is the judge in the tribunal of confession. There are many ways for him to be a terrible, soul-destroying judge, even if he believes in sin.
  5. Bishop Williamson’s advice includes going to sedevacantist priests for confession (if they believe in sin), even though they are objectively in schism from the Catholic Church.5 In the days of the “old” SSPX, people would not have believed that such evil advice would come from Bishop Williamson, but neither would they have believed that he would advise attending the sedevacantists’ masses.6
  6. Bishop Williamson’s advice includes going to Feeneyite priests for confession (if they believe in sin), even though they are objectively in material heresy, just as Bishop Williamson also approves attending their masses.7
  7. Bishop Williamson’s advice is expansive enough to include going to confession to various other schismatics and heretics: e.g., the Old Roman Catholics, the Greek Orthodox and other Orthodox, since Bishop Williamson said “any priest” believing in sin and he has scandalously approved going to the objectively schismatic sedevacantists and the objectively heretical Feeneyites. He also promotes the heresy that valid sacraments give grace outside the Catholic Church.8
  8. Lastly, Church law and Sacramental theology show us that Bishop Williamson’s advice is internally inconsistent. This is because a confession is invalid unless the priest has jurisdiction over the penitent. Confession is a court of justice; the priest is the judge; the penitent is the defendant (and prosecutor).

    As is true of all courts (even secular courts), the court’s verdict is invalid if the judge does not have jurisdiction over the defendant. Thus, a confession is invalid unless the priest has jurisdiction over the penitent.9

    There are two alternative, mutually-exclusive types of jurisdiction for a valid confession:

    1. normal, regular jurisdiction given to a priest through the Church hierarchy; or
    2. in abnormal, emergency times, the Church supplies jurisdiction which does not come through the regular channels of the hierarchy. This supplied jurisdiction is necessary for the good of souls and so the Church supplies it when—but only when—necessary because of the unavailability of a priest with ordinary, regular jurisdiction to hear the confession of the penitent.10

    Again, this second type of jurisdiction is only present when there is an emergency (i.e., necessity) arising because there are no available priests with regular jurisdiction (i.e., the first type).

    Bishop Williamson’s advice is internally inconsistent because he advises us to confess to any priest who believes in sin, whether he has regular jurisdiction or not.

    But these types of jurisdiction are mutually exclusive at any given time and place. If we have a priest available to whom we can (in conscience) confess, who has regular jurisdiction, then we can’t validly confess to any priest without regular jurisdiction, because the Church would not supply emergency jurisdiction for our confession, at the time and place in which there is no emergency.

    Thus, Bishop Williamson’s advice to go to any priest who believes in sin, is inconsistent with itself and is evil advice.11

Let us pray for Bishop Williamson and his blind followers who with him fall into the pit.12

  1. Eleison Comments #505 (emphasis added).
  2. This is one of countless places where the Doctors, Fathers and teachers of the Catholic Church prove Bishop Williamson’s teaching is a heretical novelty, viz., that all valid sacraments give grace, even in false religions. Read his words, cited back to his own source. The Catholic truth (which Bishop Williamson used to know) is that there is nothing good in any false religion, including in the new conciliar religion.
  3. Quoted from: Summa, Suppl., Q.19, a.6, sed contra (bracketed words added for clarity).
  4. Read Bishop Williamson’s words, cited back to his own source.
  5. Read this article showing that sedevacantism is schism.
  6. Read Bishop Williamson’s words, cited back to his own source.
  7. Hear Bishop Williamson’s words, when he, Fr. Zendejas and their followers were in Fr. Bitzer’s Feeneyite chapel in Louisville.
  8. For an analysis of this false and liberal idea, see
  9. Summa Sppl. Q.19, a.6.
  10. Read these excellent explanations (first, second) given by the “old” SSPX for the supplied jurisdiction of traditional Catholic priests.
  11. Bishop Williamson’s advice pertains to a young man’s habitual choice of confessors, not a death bed confession. Thus, our analysis of his advice does not treat such death bed confessions either.
  12. St. Matthew 15:14: Let them alone: they are blind, and leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit.