Southern Poverty Law Center on SSPX

[Ottaviani]

The two are not mutually incompatible, unfortunately. Furthermore, people do sometimes disagree with their fathers. Is it true that Lefebvre “lamented” the Allied liberation of France, and supported the Vichy regime? This should be verifiable or falsifiable. Perhaps someone should email the SPLC and ask for their documentation of this, instead of jumping to the conclusion that they are committing libel.

I can see a bunch of ways in which the story might be a lot more nuanced than they are suggesting. And it’s possible that their claims are simply false. I’d welcome further information on the subject. But so far all I’m hearing is “this can’t be true because his father died in a concentration camp and the family were monarchists.” These are non sequiturs.

Clearly the SPLC has gotten the ecclesiastical situation wrong on several counts. But the bulk of their charge concerns anti-Semitism and support for the Vichy regime. I’d like to see these charges either supported or refuted.

Edwin

You know the old saying “two wrongs don’t make a right” well, since you agree they are wrong on the ecclesiastical situation, I don’t see that as solid ground for believing their false charges of anti-semitism.

My own experiences going to SSPX chapels never in any way led me to think that they are anti-semitic. That’s a charge that gets passed around like and email forward anymore.

But then again, many will hold (quite wrongly) that praying for the conversion of the Jews on Good Friday is anti-semitism. which his how much of this mess got started when Summorum Pontificum was released. Matters only got worse when Bishop Williamson went on record not denying the holocaust, but questioning the numbers -I don’t agree with what he said, and NOTICE he was reprimanded quite severely.

That all became cannon fodder for people itching to blast traditional catholics with “anti-semitism” cannons. Funny they don’t see traditional Catholics as the minority that they most CERTAINLY ARE. Guess we aren’t cool enough

 

[Mattapoisett64]

I have seen way too much garbage from them to even trust them on simple matters. They are extremely prejudiced and deserve no special protection.

Agreed. My understanding is that the SPLC developed most of the material – including the abortion-opponents-as-radicals-and-likely-terrorists line of thinking – that was included in this week’s infamous Homeland Security report on “Right-wing Radicals.”

 

[RedGecko]

My own experiences going to SSPX chapels never in any way led me to think that they are anti-semitic.

And yet, as I mentioned in earlier posts, they have (or had) anti-semitic articles on their websites in multiple countries.

 

[RedGecko]

My understanding is that the SPLC developed most of the material – including the abortion-opponents-as-radicals-and-likely-terrorists line of thinking – that was included in this week’s infamous Homeland Security report on “Right-wing Radicals.”

Really? In reading the DNS report, it seems they were sourced only once. What evidence do you have for saying the SPLC developed most of the material?

 

[JaMc]

Wait a minute. You are claiming that the article is “inaccurate,” but you can’t actually give any examples beyond a speculative “I highly doubt.” You need to do better than that.

What specifically do they say that you know to be false?

Edwin

See Post #5 - I go through the inaccuracies I see in the article.

 

[larousser]

Actually, there was question of the validity of the episcopal ordinations; in the moto proprio excommunicating them, they are referred to exclusively as presbyters - priests - and not as bishops. I’ve seen no documents from HH John Paul II that refers to the four as Bishops. I’ve seen plenty from HH Benedict XVI that do refer to them as bishops…

It is a fair inference then that they did not agree on the validity of those ordinations.

This is not correct. Episcopal consecration is conferred ex opere operato. It is valid so long as matter form and intention are followed. Nobody disputes the validity of these consecrations (“unlawful episcopal ordination” as Ecclesia Dei called them), only their liceity. The schismatic Orthodox Churches still ordain their bishops validly, though illictly.

Furthermore Ecclesia Dei did not actually excommunicate the bishops, it merely announced their excommunication. Ordaining bishops without a papal mandate excommunicates the conferrer latae sententiae.

 

[Aramis]

Accepting ordination is a latae sentencae excommunication, making them invalid matter prior to the consecration. Show me where HH JP II ever acknowledged them as bishops…

That said, the SPLC didn’t even do a 30 second web search to find the vatican sources online that prove their article badly flawed.

 

[joshhackerspmdo]

Now its bad enough ,as anyone connected with SSPX knows, that the Jews are guilty of deicide, eternally cursed for rejecting Jesus, going to burn in Hell and are the anti-Christ undermining Christianity and Christians at every opportunity. However, there is not much point in suing them or any of their liberal anti-Christian organizations for libel because as everyone knows that with all the Jew lawyers and all the Jew Judges and the Jew ACLU and their control of the media and the Congress there’s about as much a chance of winning that case as there is that a Jew will get to heaven.

And you know that racism is heresy.

 

[larousser]

Accepting ordination is a latae sentencae excommunication, making them invalid matter prior to the consecration. Show me where HH JP II ever acknowledged them as bishops…

Well John Paul II canonically established the Fraternity of St Peter which has through his reign regularized priests ordained by these 4 bishops without having them reordained. If they hadn’t been validly ordained bishops, they would have been sacramentally impotent to ordain priests.

And if they hadn’t been ordained bishops they wouldn’t be excommunicated. Accepting ordination does not ipso facto result in latae sententiae excommunication. Only episcopal consecration is so specified (and that only for the Latin Church). That is shown by the letters sent by Rome to Mgr Lefebvre warning him if that if he proceeded to ordain the bishops they would incur excommunication.

 

[Ottaviani]

And yet, as I mentioned in earlier posts, they have (or had) anti-semitic articles on their websites in multiple countries.

Please cite the articles.

I should mention too that an article explaining why Jews do not have the fullness of the faith is NOT anti-semitism.

 

[Contarini]

You know the old saying “two wrongs don’t make a right” well, since you agree they are wrong on the ecclesiastical situation, I don’t see that as solid ground for believing their false charges of anti-semitism.

No offense, but outsiders find it hard to keep Catholic ecclesiastical polity straight.

But then again, many will hold (quite wrongly) that praying for the conversion of the Jews on Good Friday is anti-semitism. which his how much of this mess got started when Summorum Pontificum was released. Matters only got worse when Bishop Williamson went on record not denying the holocaust, but questioning the numbers -I don’t agree with what he said, and NOTICE he was reprimanded quite severely.

NPR interviewed a priest who studied under Williamson in seminary and said that Williamson routinely made anti-Semitic jokes, threatening a student with a Jewish name with the “gas chamber,” and so on. Unless this guy is lying, this is pretty disturbing and is clearly anti-Semitic.

I agree that praying for the conversion of the Jews is not anti-Semitic.

I remain interested in further information on Bishop Lefebvre’s stance toward the Vichy government. Not that of his parents, but his own stated views.

Edwin

 

[Extempore]

NPR interviewed a priest who studied under Williamson in seminary and said that Williamson routinely made anti-Semitic jokes, threatening a student with a Jewish name with the “gas chamber,” and so on. Unless this guy is lying, this is pretty disturbing and is clearly anti-Semitic.

I agree that praying for the conversion of the Jews is not anti-Semitic.

I remain interested in further information on Bishop Lefebvre’s stance toward the Vichy government. Not that of his parents, but his own stated views.

Edwin

Imputing Bishop Williamson’s opinions on the Jews to the whole of the SSPX is about as convincing as imputing Cardinal Mahoney’s views on Liturgical dance to the Vatican.

I think what people are looking for is an example of approved material published by the SSPX that is allegedly anti-semitic, not the personal opinions of Bishop Williamson.

 

[Ottaviani]

No offense, but outsiders find it hard to keep Catholic ecclesiastical polity straight.

NPR interviewed a priest who studied under Williamson in seminary and said that Williamson routinely made anti-Semitic jokes, threatening a student with a Jewish name with the “gas chamber,” and so on. Unless this guy is lying, this is pretty disturbing and is clearly anti-Semitic.

I agree that praying for the conversion of the Jews is not anti-Semitic.

I remain interested in further information on Bishop Lefebvre’s stance toward the Vichy government. Not that of his parents, but his own stated views.

Edwin

You obviously didn’t read my earlier post in re: Williamson. Extempore covers this matter quite clearly as well.

 

[RedGecko]

Please cite the articles.

Unfortunately, the news article at:
cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=11886
doesn’t mention the title of the articles.

The news article at:
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=2D6AFB07-1438-5036-4F1C9D841C32199D
cited the SSPX article titled The Mystery of the Jews. I just checked the link and SSPX has removed it, but it was there at the time that the America piece was published.

I should mention too that an article explaining why Jews do not have the fullness of the faith is NOT anti-semitism.

I’m not talking about such a thing. I’m talking about writings which included such statements as:

“It is public knowledge that the Jewish sector, relatively small compared to the Gentile sector which devotes itself to the creation of wealth, controls especially the financial power that is exercised through banks.”

“Judaism is inimical to all nations in general, and in a special manner to Christian nations.”

“Catholics are not to enter into commercial, social, nor political relations which are bound hypocritically to seek the ruin of Christendom. Jews must not live together with Christians because this is what their own Jewish laws ordain and also because their errors and material superiority have virulent consequences among other peoples.”

(Jews are) “the enemy of man, whose secret weapon is the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy.”

“Jews have come closer and closer to fulfilling their substitute Messianic drive towards world dominion.”

(The) “heads of Jewry have for centuries conspired methodically and out of an undying hatred against the Catholic name.”

 

[TMC]

wow, you’re just not getting it. The report was false and inflammatory, the report was LIBELOUS.

If you feel that falsity should be protected, you live in an upside down world.

I think that the vast majority of what is up on the SLPC site is factual. A few arguably inaccurate comments do not amount to libel. And even if there were some provably false statements that might be libelous, any suit would be a disaster for SSPX because the truth of the rest of the statements would come out and destroy their damages case. For example, how damaging can technically misstating the status of the priests be, once it is proven that they printed and distributed the Protocols?

 

[pnewton]

Unfortunately, the news article at:
cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=11886
doesn’t mention the title of the articles.

This article cites one source only: The European Jewish Press, who in turn cites zero sources and evidence in its article.

ejpress.org/article/34838

The news article at:
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=2D6AFB07-1438-5036-4F1C9D841C32199D
cited the SSPX article titled The Mystery of the Jews. I just checked the link and SSPX has removed it, but it was there at the time that the America piece was published.

Dead links and Jewish indignation are not evidence. I am no fan of the SSPX (just ask the traditional forum) but it is unjust to smear them for their beliefs based on hearsay and what others say of them. I have a news flash for everyone, blogs can lie, media can slant and the SPLC is driven more to oppose any that disagrees with their politics more than document legitimater threats. They are about as fair and balanced as Rush Limbaugh.

 

[RedGecko]

Dead links and Jewish indignation are not evidence.

Fr. Martin, who authored the America article, stated that he read the anti-Semitic article on the US SSPX website and at the time of his article’s publication the link was active. Are you saying he is lying? Certainly the SSPX would remove offensive articles when publicity finally brings them to shame.

 

[elts1956]

Good to hear from you. Even if sometimes it is hard emotionally to support a particular stance of these groups (for instance the Skokie case where the ACLU supported a neo Nazi march in an neighborhood populated mainly by Jewish holocaust survivors) they provide an important service to everyone. Even if you disagree with them it is important in a democracy to allow them to function. If you search you will find cases by the ACLU that I am sure you would support whole heartedly just as there are many cases where you would disagree with their side. As a Catholic you may want to consider that if two thousand years ago groups like the ACLU and SPLC existed, the way the trial of one Yehoshua Bar Yosef was conducted may have been very different.

Hello friend. I am sure what you say is correct, but opionated person that I am, I dislike more of what the ACLU does than what I would like to see it do. Yes, they need to function, but they certainly do have some squirrley ideas at times. I am going to have to really think about the ACLU and APLC and that trial of Yehoshua Bar Yosef.

The other day on a post I read someonsaid, more, or less, that although it was a bad action for Pilate to desert Christ, great good came from his inaction. Then we are taught one cannot perform an evil in order for good to come from it. A paradox? Got me…

Peace.

 

[elts1956]

Good to hear from you. Even if sometimes it is hard emotionally to support a particular stance of these groups (for instance the Skokie case where the ACLU supported a neo Nazi march in an neighborhood populated mainly by Jewish holocaust survivors) they provide an important service to everyone. Even if you disagree with them it is important in a democracy to allow them to function. If you search you will find cases by the ACLU that I am sure you would support whole heartedly just as there are many cases where you would disagree with their side. As a Catholic you may want to consider that if two thousand years ago groups like the ACLU and SPLC existed, the way the trial of one Yehoshua Bar Yosef was conducted may have been very different.

Fr. Martin, who authored the America article, stated that he read the anti-Semitic article on the US SSPX website and at the time of his article’s publication the link was active. Are you saying he is lying? Certainly the SSPX would remove offensive articles when publicity finally brings them to shame.

I think there are several websites who claim to be SSPX, but when reading them all I find is their spouting statements such as there have been no legal Popes since before Vatican II. Don’t know if they include Pope John XXIII in this group, or not.

Mainly I ignore the sites, but in many ways I do admire the SSPX for sticking to tradition.

 

[Ottaviani]

Unfortunately, the news article at:
cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=11886
doesn’t mention the title of the articles.

The news article at:
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=2D6AFB07-1438-5036-4F1C9D841C32199D
cited the SSPX article titled The Mystery of the Jews. I just checked the link and SSPX has removed it, but it was there at the time that the America piece was published.

I’m not talking about such a thing. I’m talking about writings which included such statements as:

“It is public knowledge that the Jewish sector, relatively small compared to the Gentile sector which devotes itself to the creation of wealth, controls especially the financial power that is exercised through banks.”

“Judaism is inimical to all nations in general, and in a special manner to Christian nations.”

“Catholics are not to enter into commercial, social, nor political relations which are bound hypocritically to seek the ruin of Christendom. Jews must not live together with Christians because this is what their own Jewish laws ordain and also because their errors and material superiority have virulent consequences among other peoples.”

(Jews are) “the enemy of man, whose secret weapon is the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy.”

“Jews have come closer and closer to fulfilling their substitute Messianic drive towards world dominion.”

(The) “heads of Jewry have for centuries conspired methodically and out of an undying hatred against the Catholic name.”

I’ll give your argument credit when you give me evidence. There’s no cite, only hearsay from websites with an anti-SSPX agenda.