Vatican orders bishop who denied Holocaust to recant if he is to take office as a prelate

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JReducation;4799964:
There are severa layers of issues here.
  1. Germany is a sovereign nation. Whether we agree with their law or not, it is not a law that causes moral harm to its citizens or to the world. There is no justifiable reason for the bishop to violate their law.
.

Fratk ernally,

JR 🙂
The interview took place in Germany.

JR 🙂
 
My question to you is this: is Williamson required to do objective research, to examine the evidence, to read the Nuremberg Trials, to read the interviews of survivors, to examine the population archives in Berlin, etc. to come to the truth?

Obedience to one’s vows is one thing. But harboring lies and sins in one’s soul is something else. Does a man like Williamson really belong to an institution like the Church which is so focused on the truth?

Thank you again for your detailed explanation.
The Vatican was not aware of the interview or his views. When the Vatican found out they instructed Williamson that he could not get a job in the Church without renouncing the views.

So the answer to your last question is no.

But realize that believing in the Shoah is not a dogmatic belief in the Catholic Church. You can be a Catholic without having any opinion on the Shoah, you just can’t have a job in the Church.
 
JR, thank you so much for your detailed description of how the Church views obedience and authority. I had to read it twice to absorb what you were saying.

I have been deeply troubled by Williamson’s position on the Holocaust. We all know that he is not alone in his opinion of history, to include his anti-semitic views.

That said, you made it very clear in your post that a religious is required to obey and submit to their superiors, regardless of personal views. So the question here is not Williamson’s opinion but his reluctance to submit to his vow of obedience.

My question to you is this: is Williamson required to do objective research, to examine the evidence, to read the Nuremberg Trials, to read the interviews of survivors, to examine the population archives in Berlin, etc. to come to the truth?

Obedience to one’s vows is one thing. But harboring lies and sins in one’s soul is something else. Does a man like Williamson really belong to an institution like the Church which is so focused on the truth?

Thank you again for your detailed explanation.
Your statement has two parts.

Part I:

What does the bishop have to do now?

The answer to that question lies with the two legislative bodies: The Congregation for the Bishops and the Ecclesia Dei Commision. They both enter the picture, because he is a bishop and because Ecclesia Dei is the commision in charge of working with the SSPX bishops. My guess is that the Ecclesia Dei Commision will focus on the issues of the SSPX bishops and the Congregation for the Bishops will work with Bishop Williamson on his public statements regarding 9/11 and the holocaust. Both have been detrimental to the bishop himself. Even if the Ecclesia Dei Commision can reach some theological and pastoral agreements with the SSPX bishops that the Holy Father approves of, the Congregation for the Bishops can decide to deny Bishop Williamson an Epsicopal See and faculties. In that case he cannot celebrate the sacraments. If he does they will be ilicit and some will be invalid, such as confession and marriage. They are not likely to make him take a crash course on WWII history. That is not the way that religious superiors operate. They operate through sanctions and disciplinary actions.

It is the solemn vow that is the tricky part. A solemn vow overrules certain sacraments. That means that those sacraments are not validly available to the person in solemn vows without permission from the Holy See, one of those is the priesthood. A man in solemn vows cannot exercise the priestly ministry without the permission of either a religious superior or the Holy See.

Part II:

Does he belong in the Church?

The cow is out of the barn. Once a man is ordained to the diaconate or makes vows as a friar, monk or mendicant, his status cannot be changed, even by the Church. He can be suspended and silenced. But he remains what he is, a monk, friar, mendicant or a cleric. Bishop Williamson was ordained a deacon. Therefore, he is a Catholic cleric for life. But the Church does not have to allow him to function as such. He can be reduced to a suspended cleric as are the priests of the Society. If you are suspended and you celebrate the sacraments, you do so outside the Church. This of course can be grounds for excommunication again. That is up to the Congregation for Bishops or to the Holy Father. Both have the power to excommunicate a bishop.

Williamson is not a monk, friar or mendicant. Therefore, he can be suspended by a Roman Congregation. The Pope does not need to intervene. Many people do not know this. All the Pope has to do for the excommunication or suspension to be valid is to remain sient. Silence is consent in the Catholic Church.

Should a Catholic have such attitudes and opinions? I don’t think so. Should a Catholic make them public, if he has them? I don’t think so. St. Augustine told his friars that they could think what they wanted to think, but they could only say what their superiors allowed them to say. St. Teresa of Avila had the same rule for the Carmelites. This style of religioius authority has existed with the Church’s blessing for more than 1000 years. Think it, but don’t say it. Deal with your thoughts in the confessional or with your spiritual director.

That’s why you have to be very careful whom you allow to become a bishop or a monastic religious. Because once they are in, you cannot take away their state. It is permanent.

Now I think it’s clearer why John Paul II and canon law is were so stern about ordaining bishops without the Pope’s approval. That approval minimizes these compromising situations. It does not do away with them completely, but it helps.

Unfortunately for the SSPX, His Excellency has proven John Paul II right. He has stirred up a hornet’s nest for the Church. I say unfortunately, because the people who love the SSPX do not deserve to be caught in the middle of this nest. They are good people who just want a deeper spiritual life. It’s the same as if the bishop of your local diocese made a statement about the President because he’s Black. That puts the entire diocese in the middle of an embarrassing and compromising situation.

As our holy father Francis told our early brothers and sisters. We have to pray for the clergy that they may always represent the Church well and lead by example of obedience.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
 
The Vatican was not aware of the interview or his views. When the Vatican found out they instructed Williamson that he could not get a job in the Church without renouncing the views.

So the answer to your last question is no.

But realize that believing in the Shoah is not a dogmatic belief in the Catholic Church. You can be a Catholic without having any opinion on the Shoah, you just can’t have a job in the Church.
It’s a little more serious than not having a job. A bishop is supposed to have a local Church that he leads. It is contrary to the state of the episcopacy not to have an episcopal see.

Even auxiliary bishops and bishops who work in Church offices and commisions have an episcopal see. That is one of the rights of being a bishop and a duty of being a bishop.

His Excellency forfeits his rights, unless he complies with his duty to obey the Pope and the Congregation of Bishops.

It’s like being a citizen of the United States, but being a felon. You are still a citizen, but you cannot vote, have a passport or hold public office and many other rights that other citizens have.

Bascially, Benedict XVI has condemned him as a felon, not a heretic. The Shoah is not a dogma. Therefore, he’s not a heretic. But he is a felon, if he does not comply with the orders of both the Pope and his General Superior, Bishop Fellay. He has a vow to obey both.

There was an interesting interview of one of the other bishops. I believe he’s French. He tried to distance himself from Williamson as much as possible. He told the press that Bishop Williamson was not his problem and Bishop Williamson’s problems were not his business. Even his SSPX conferes are puting distance between them and him. They want to be regularized.

What can happen to him is that he can be ordered to enter an enclosed monastery to live out the rest of his life in silence. This has been done in the past. Or he can be stripped of his license to teach Catholic theology and to preach it. This was the case with Father Kuhn and Father Curren. They did not lose their faculties, but they lost their licenses. With a bishop or a major religious superior the Church tends to take harsher measures, because these men have Ordinary powers, that priests and religious do not have.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
 
I’ve heard it said that the Holocaust has replaced Christ’s passion.

We’re all expected to shed tears of blood over the Holocaust, but public blasphemy and mockery of the Son of God is perfectly fine. People react today to holocaust denial the same way people of the middle ages reacted to blasphemy.

(Don’t get me wrong, the holocaust was terrible, but I think there is a point to this argument.)
Let’s be perfectly clear, though:

The only acceptable way of reacting to the Holocaust is the way people are expected to today. The only acceptable way of reacting to blasphemy is the way people in the Middle Ages did.

I absolutely agree that it is horrifying and totally unjustifiable for public blasphemy and mockery of Our Lord to be accepted and even lauded today while we ‘‘are expected to shed tears of blood’’ over the Holocaust.

But it in no way follows from that that we should not shed tears of blood over the Holocaust. We should.

In any case, God bless the Holy Father. I’m happy to see that he’s taking Holocaust denial as seriously as it should be taken. Although, of course, I would expect nothing less from him. 🙂

Thank God this crazy bishop won’t be able to take up episcopal duties unless he publicly discards his insane views.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top