N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Sorry, I just assumed it was done in Sweden since the interview was for Swedish TV.
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
I agree 100% with your question. The other point that we Bishop Williamson had to take into account, but failed to do so is that he was working on reconciliation with Rome, with a German Pope, with a Pope who is very sympathetic toward the Holocaust, that it was going to be seen on European TV and would have a fall-out that would cause the Church some credibility problems as well as diplomatic problems and that it was unnecessary for him to say this, even if he believes it.
For God’s sake, the man is a bishop. I would assume that the Archbishop selected intelligent men to succeed him in his work. I can only conclude two things. Either Williamson is a radical who does not care what he says and how the affect the Church other others or the excommunication was very appropriate, because he is not intelligent enough to be a bishop. Therefore, let the Pope decide who should be bishops.
Williamson has also made some very disparaging remarks about the Vatican and the Catholic Church when the SSPX was given the opportunity in the summer of 2008 for reconciliation, while Fellay responded with like a gentleman. I remember Williamson in Canada preaching to the laity “We have them on the run. They want to shut us up, but we won’t.” How smart is that for a bishop to tell his flock?
It stands to reason that the excommunication has been lifted, but their irregular status remains the same, if the bishop is going to make these kinds of blunders. The first thing that has to be discussed with this man is how a bishop should speak in public and when he should remain quiet.
Fraternally,
JR
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Or a third possibility: maybe Williamson disagreed with Bishop Fellay on what concessions could be made to Rome, and wanted to sabotage the plans to bring SSPX back into the Church. How else can anyone explain the timing of the interview appearing on TV? Who else but the SSPX bishops knew what was coming?
After listening and reading some of Williamson’s speeches, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if he felt there was some conspiracy going on that he had to sabotage.
J
John_Tersidi
Guest
Very confusing! In my humble and simple mind excommunicating a person means sending the person to hell. Sorry, maybe I’m wrong.
I do not absolutely mean to be sarcastic on questioning where is the doctrine of Papal Infallibility? One said “yes” and the other said “no”. I was puzzled why Cardinal Levebre was excommunicated. I think he acted on “good intentions”. Other controversial issues follow? Very confusing indeed. I hope that we act on the commandments of GOD, not the commandments of men.I hope I do not sin in expressing my opinion. On the other hand, I admire the courage of Pope Benedict.
I do not absolutely mean to be sarcastic on questioning where is the doctrine of Papal Infallibility? One said “yes” and the other said “no”. I was puzzled why Cardinal Levebre was excommunicated. I think he acted on “good intentions”. Other controversial issues follow? Very confusing indeed. I hope that we act on the commandments of GOD, not the commandments of men.I hope I do not sin in expressing my opinion. On the other hand, I admire the courage of Pope Benedict.
L
Layman
Guest
“Very confusing! In my humble and simple mind excommunicating a person means sending the person to hell.”
No. It just means he is not ‘with us’ any more. He can’t receive our sacraments. It’s banishment, with the intention of bringing the sinner back into the fold as soon as he repents.
*
“Where is the doctrine of Papal Infallibility?”.*
It doesn’t apply here. Papal Infallibility only applies to formal, public pronouncements by the Pope on matters of doctrine. This issue is a bureaucratic one.
No. It just means he is not ‘with us’ any more. He can’t receive our sacraments. It’s banishment, with the intention of bringing the sinner back into the fold as soon as he repents.
*
“Where is the doctrine of Papal Infallibility?”.*
It doesn’t apply here. Papal Infallibility only applies to formal, public pronouncements by the Pope on matters of doctrine. This issue is a bureaucratic one.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
The timing was spot-on, but Bp. Williamson had nothing to do with it (with the timing, I mean). He gave this interview last November. The topic of the interview was nothing about this, and a member of the press team dropped it on him. ‘They’ then saved this very damaging piece of video until they would need it - which was two weeks ago.
I do actually believe that almost any prominent person - and that includes each and every Catholic bishop - has a group of enemies who, in the modern age, play this game. In 1992, just 5 weeks before the latest Abortion Referendum in Ireland, the news exploded that Bp Casey of Galway had fathered a child 20 years previously, and had been paying hush-money ever since. You must understand what a shock this was in Ireland, where people simply had never believed that a bishop would do such a thing. Coincidence? Only the very naive would believe that. I might add that the standing of the episcopate here never did quite recover from this revelation (& perhaps a dose of realism was not entirely a bad thing - e.g. the Irish were a constant headache to the ushers in Lourdes for leaving their valuables by their seat while they went up to Holy Communion. It never crossed their minds they might be robbed) … but the abortion referendum was thrown out anyway. At least they tried - using all the usual armoury of dirty tricks, including the carefully-timed leak.
As for Bp Williamson, having read his apology, I can hardly imagine what more he could do once the material had hit the fan - he even offered to be thrown overboard like Jonah, to calm the storm. That doesn’t sound like somebody who was deliberately stirring up trouble.
A
avflf
Guest
It is just that this episode brings back the middle ages cries of “recant, recant or be burnt at the stake”. Remember Galileo. And why can’t a person point out a poor decision the Holy Father may have taken? He is human after all and “to err is human”. Goodness, even God Himself listened to Moses and repented of His decision to kill all the Israelites and begin a whole new tribe with Moses.
P
pnewton
Guest
Interesting analogy, although no one has lit a bonfire. Still, I do not think when the Bible speaks of “God repenting” it is because of an error in judgement on the part of God.
A
avflf
Guest
The word “repent” in the Bible has the meaning of “turning around” thus taking a different path to the one that was first chosen. The word (naw-khan) is used in Scripture for both people and God, like when Job says (Job 42:6) “Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.”
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
Come off it, bobzills. Bp Williamson was imprudent, but he was obviously caught off guard - ambushed, in fact. He agreed to an interview on religious matters and a journalist (who apparently knew his views on the Holocaust) fired the question at him. Those with a personal grudge aganist him/the Holy Father/the Catholic Faith then saved the video clip for when they could use it to maximum effect - which they did. It’s now a very old trick.
Also, as regards the law, please see previous posting on the hierarchy of laws.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
(I’m still learning how to use the Search tools etc)
The posting on Hierarchy of Laws is #171
The posting on Hierarchy of Laws is #171
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
Also, all attributions of emotions & feelings to God are to be taken as analogical. See the intro. to S. Augustine’s ‘confessions’ e.g.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
Let’s not open the Galileo case. Actually, Rome acted pretty well correctly. See e.g. “The Sleepwalkers” by Koestler. Galileo has been found to have been correct in his assertions about the Earth and the sun, but it is a point of science that every one of the proofs he offered at the time was fallacious.
And he did not say “Eppur si muove - It still moves”.
C
cassini
Guest
Spot on numealinesimpet, read all about it in the protocols.
C
cassini
Guest
Spot on numealinesimpet, except you used ‘at that time’. How about ‘and not since’, nevertheless the perception is that the church was proven wrong. With your cop on you should see the greatest set up in history or are you going to stop with the little stuff like Bishop Willianson?
C
cassini
Guest
God will not be mocked. First we have Genesis 3:15 that tells us there is an ongoing WAR against the Catholic faith and the Devil is named as the ‘other side’. St Paul tells us of a battle of Principalities and Powers that is going on all around us and will not cease until the last day. The Jewish ‘elder brothers’ we Catholics had, ceased to exist with the new covenant, when the temple cloth was torn in two. Those who rejected Jesus were described by him as sons of the Devil. Throughout history Catholics prayed for their conversion. After Vatican II all that changed. Jesus’s own words were an embarrassment, not in line with Vatican II. The prayer for their conversion was dropped from the NO Mass. Concession after concession was granted. Salvation through their jewish faith was acknowledged or granted without conversion. When Rome removed the crucifixes to accommodate the Jews this was the ultimate blasphemy against He Who died on the Cross for our salvation. This pope restored the prayer and all hell broke loose literally. This pope had to be stopped. Now see Rome cower to the jews who hate tradition and will do what it takes to keep tradition out of Rome. I am ashamed to see a pope HAVING (under orders by the Jews) to threaten a bishop with expulsion because of an opinion of an historical event. The Catholic way is decided on canonical grounds and an unpopular opinion about a historical event, whether true or not should never be a criterion to purge a Catholic bishop.
Now God is punishing us just as He did with Arianism in the Church when He permitted Islam to punish us to this day.
Now God is punishing us just as He did with Arianism in the Church when He permitted Islam to punish us to this day.
N
numealinesimpet
Guest
Cassini, I’m not sure how far you are writing Tongue in cheek … The way that winds from either pole swing to the East would seem to prove the rotation of the Earth. If the stars truly revolve around the Earth, they must be travelling at huge multiples of the speed of Light. By Occam’s Razor, we are justified in accepting the Earth going round the sun.
C
cassini
Guest
numealinesimpet, a fifty year study has now been done on all the ‘proofs’ for heliocentricism. It is long established by physicists (like Mach and Einstein) that a rotation of the universe around the earth would account for every single phenomenon now claimed as proof for heliocentricism.
As for the supposed speed of the stars. Nothing is impossible to God. If anyone thinks God can be restricted to what human physicists say then think again. Pope Urban VIII told this to that heretic Galileo, a fornicator, hypocrite, coward, liar and
perjurer whose statue they intend to put up in the holy city of Rome. Maybe it is the firmament the stars exist in that God rotates, who knows but Him. Under no account dismiss the power of God.,
Try to tell anyone this and they will come down on you like they now come down on Bishop Williamson. Just remember the ridicule hoisted upon the Church these last few hundred years and you just might begin to cop on. Once you know how to judge something according to Genesis 3:15, the answers become clearer. If the Catholic Church - under the guidance of the Holy Ghost - is put to humiliation for getting a papal decree wrong, no matter how many within the Church agree that this humiliation is warranted (Gaudium et Sped No 36) - then you know it is the work of the devil and should be examined more carefully. Do this and God may grant those searching for the truth their wish. But those with no love of truth will be left blind.
God bless numealinesimpet;
J
JReducation
Guest
I think this is very well said and explains the issues around the lifting of the excommunication and those that have followed.
**4-February-2009 – Catholic News Agency
Cardinal: Bishop’s Holocaust Comments Show Need for Papal Oversight
Boston, Feb 3, 2009 (CNA).- In a Friday article on his blog, Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley commented on the controversy surrounding Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) Bishop Richard Williamson’s “terrible” statements which minimized Jewish suffering in the Holocaust. He argued the bishop’s comments prove the need to increase papal influence over the SSPX and its bishops, whose excommunications were recently lifted.
Expressing deep sorrow at the pain Jews have felt because of the bishop’s statements, he clarified that the removal of the excommunications does not regularize the breakaway “traditionalist” bishops but opens the way for further dialogue.
Recounting the history of the SSPX, which rejects some elements of the Second Vatican Council and adheres to the Tridentine Latin Mass, the cardinal mentioned that SSPX founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988 ordained the four bishops without the approval of the Pope. He thus incurred an automatic excommunication on himself and the four men he ordained.
Efforts to return the SSPX and its adherents, who may number as many as 1.5 million people, prompted the remittance of the excommunications, Cardinal O’Malley said.
However, a November 2008 Swedish public television interview with SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson revealed that the bishop denied that six million Jews were killed in the Nazi genocide and also denied the use gas chambers to execute the Jews. He claimed only two to three hundred thousand Jews were murdered.
The January revelation of his interview comments provoked a media firestorm and accusations of Holocaust denial.
Bishop Williamson apologized for causing “unnecessary distress” to the Pope and to Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, president of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” tasked with reconciling the SSPX to the Catholic Church. However, he made no mention of retracting his controversial comments.
Cardinal O’Malley said he was pleased with the news that Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications, adding it shows “the Holy Father’s concern for unity and reconciliation in the Church.”
But he was also critical of Bishop Williamson.
“It was tragic that one of the four bishops, Bishop Richard Williamson, had made outrageous statements about the Holocaust and about the September 11 attacks on the United States,” Cardinal O’Malley said. “It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has.”
“Additionally, as terrible as the comments were, it underscores the importance for the Holy Father to have increasing influence over those communities,” he commented.
“We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements,” the cardinal wrote.
He said statements from the Pope and Cardinal Walter Kasper, chairman of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, have been “very clear” to “dissociate” the Catholic Church from those sentiments.
“I was pleased that the head of the Society of St. Pius X, Bishop Bernard Fellay, also repudiated the statements of Bishop Williamson,” the cardinal said.
“It is very important for us to always remember the Holocaust so that such an atrocity could never take place again,” Cardinal O’Malley said.
He quoted remarks Pope Benedict made last week, which said “May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism, because violence against a single human being is violence against all.”
Cardinal O’Malley said the lifting of the SSPX bishops’ excommunications was a “first step” and does not “regularize” the bishops or the SSPX, but “it opens the way for a dialogue.”
The action was a response to a letter from the SSPX bishops which professed their desire for full participation in the life of the Church.
Pope Benedict’s “outreach” to those in SSPX communities, the cardinal said, manifests “his ardent desire to bring these people back into the fold.”
“We know that these are generally people who practice their faith and try to live a Christian life seriously but, unfortunately, I believe that they have been misled by their leadership.”**
ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=93541
Fraternally,
JR
**4-February-2009 – Catholic News Agency
Cardinal: Bishop’s Holocaust Comments Show Need for Papal Oversight
Boston, Feb 3, 2009 (CNA).- In a Friday article on his blog, Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley commented on the controversy surrounding Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) Bishop Richard Williamson’s “terrible” statements which minimized Jewish suffering in the Holocaust. He argued the bishop’s comments prove the need to increase papal influence over the SSPX and its bishops, whose excommunications were recently lifted.
Expressing deep sorrow at the pain Jews have felt because of the bishop’s statements, he clarified that the removal of the excommunications does not regularize the breakaway “traditionalist” bishops but opens the way for further dialogue.
Recounting the history of the SSPX, which rejects some elements of the Second Vatican Council and adheres to the Tridentine Latin Mass, the cardinal mentioned that SSPX founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988 ordained the four bishops without the approval of the Pope. He thus incurred an automatic excommunication on himself and the four men he ordained.
Efforts to return the SSPX and its adherents, who may number as many as 1.5 million people, prompted the remittance of the excommunications, Cardinal O’Malley said.
However, a November 2008 Swedish public television interview with SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson revealed that the bishop denied that six million Jews were killed in the Nazi genocide and also denied the use gas chambers to execute the Jews. He claimed only two to three hundred thousand Jews were murdered.
The January revelation of his interview comments provoked a media firestorm and accusations of Holocaust denial.
Bishop Williamson apologized for causing “unnecessary distress” to the Pope and to Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, president of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” tasked with reconciling the SSPX to the Catholic Church. However, he made no mention of retracting his controversial comments.
Cardinal O’Malley said he was pleased with the news that Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications, adding it shows “the Holy Father’s concern for unity and reconciliation in the Church.”
But he was also critical of Bishop Williamson.
“It was tragic that one of the four bishops, Bishop Richard Williamson, had made outrageous statements about the Holocaust and about the September 11 attacks on the United States,” Cardinal O’Malley said. “It certainly raises questions as to the caliber of the leadership that the Society has.”
“Additionally, as terrible as the comments were, it underscores the importance for the Holy Father to have increasing influence over those communities,” he commented.
“We are very sorry that the people in the Jewish community have been so pained and outraged by Bishop Williamson’s statements,” the cardinal wrote.
He said statements from the Pope and Cardinal Walter Kasper, chairman of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, have been “very clear” to “dissociate” the Catholic Church from those sentiments.
“I was pleased that the head of the Society of St. Pius X, Bishop Bernard Fellay, also repudiated the statements of Bishop Williamson,” the cardinal said.
“It is very important for us to always remember the Holocaust so that such an atrocity could never take place again,” Cardinal O’Malley said.
He quoted remarks Pope Benedict made last week, which said “May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism, because violence against a single human being is violence against all.”
Cardinal O’Malley said the lifting of the SSPX bishops’ excommunications was a “first step” and does not “regularize” the bishops or the SSPX, but “it opens the way for a dialogue.”
The action was a response to a letter from the SSPX bishops which professed their desire for full participation in the life of the Church.
Pope Benedict’s “outreach” to those in SSPX communities, the cardinal said, manifests “his ardent desire to bring these people back into the fold.”
“We know that these are generally people who practice their faith and try to live a Christian life seriously but, unfortunately, I believe that they have been misled by their leadership.”**
ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=93541
Fraternally,
JR
B
bobzills
Guest
I don;t think that this is true because Bishop Williamson was quoted on previous occasions as denying the holocaust, implying that that 9/11 was a conspiracy, and Bishop Williamson has quoted approvingly from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Further Bishop Williamson has committed the crime of holocaust denial in Germany and if prosecuted, he should be willing to stand trial for imprisonment in Germany and serve his jail time for breaking the laws of that country.
- Status