Not surprisingly, the rumour has been accompanied by widespread attention to the public statements of Bishop Williamson in which he has repeatedly denied the holocaust. Ruth Gledhill of the Times has an article on this with a video clip of an interview given by Bishop Williamson to Swedish TV. (See: Traditionalist bishop: 'There were no gas chambers' and the article Church of England clergy host Holocaust denial Bishop)Gledhill also has another post Church of England clergy host Holocaust denial Bishop and an article in the paper Pope could welcome Holocaust denier back into the fold which apply the full spin to the news. In the enthusiasm to wreck the good news of the possible reconciliation of the SSPX, there is a little error of fact. Gledhill says that the Bishop "gave an interview to Swedish TV this week". No - it was given on 1 November last year. It has been splashed all over the internet this week.
First off, let's deal with Bishop Williamson's assertions. In the interview he relies on the report by Fred Leuchter who supposedly provided "scientific" evidence that there were no gas chambers.
Leuchter came to fame at the trial of Ernst Zundel in 1988. Zundel was a German-Canadian neo-Nazi accused under a Canadian law of publishing hate propaganda. He had Leuchter testify that there were no gas chambers at the concentration camps of Auschwitz, Birkenau, or Majdanek. His evidence was dismissed because he did not have the credentials to prove any relevant expertise. In fact, although Leuchter presented himself as an engineer, he did not have any qualifications in the field but had graduated with a BA in history. He later blamed the opprobrium which surrounded him on an international Jewish conspiracy. For information on the chemistry involved in gas chambers which refutes the claims of Leuchter and other peddlers of counterknowledge, see Richard Green's article on The Chemistry of Auschwitz.
At the end of the interview, which took place in Bavaria, Bishop Williamson acknowledges that what he has said is illegal in Germany and concludes:
"You could have me thrown into prison before I leave Germany. I hope that's not your intention."A report in the German section of Vatican Radio confirms that in fact the Regensburg prosecutor may indeed be intending to throw him in jail. (Original text - English translation by Cathcon.) Incidentally, Cathcon has a post with a roundup of links on the affair as well as a translation of the article in Der Spiegel attacking the SSPX on the basis of Bishop Williamson's remarks.
The Remnant has published a copy of the letter that Bishop Fellay has written to the Swedish TV station. Damian Thompson has a robust article in which he points up the inadequacy of Bishop Fellay's letter. (See: Head of SSPX 'refuses to condemn Bishop Williamson for Holocaust denial') Although Damian charitably raises the possibility that the letter is not genuine, I doubt whether the Remnant would publish it unless they were quite sure of its provenance.
Rather better is the response of Fr Schmidberger reported in the Remnant. He said:
"Our Lord Jesus Christ is in His human nature a Jew, His Holy Mother is a Jewess and all the Apostles are Jews. Therefore, no true Christian can be an Anti-semite."and further:
"We do not know the interview done by Bishop Williamson with Swedish television. As soon as we get it, we will submit it to scrutiny and get the advice of lawyers. It is clear that the only one responsible for the statements made by the Bishop, is the Bishop himself as well as that the statements do not reflect the views held by the Society of St. Pius X. In addition, Pope Pius XI in his encyclical ”Mit Brennender Sorge” warned about the godless Nazi regime and its crimes."Still this is not enough. Even if the Swedish TV station did raise the question in order to rubbish the SSPX, and even if Der Spiegel wanted to stir up trouble, surely the point is that the SSPX should by now have faced up to the question of Bishop Williamson's execrable public statements denying the holocaust and the immense damage that they have done. If it is true that the excommunications are to be lifted in the next few days, Pope Benedict will have brought off another master-stroke of understated genius by associating it with the Octave of prayer for Christian Unity. It is infuriating that the press have been given such a golden opportunity to call the whole thing into question.
Personally, I hope with all my heart that the rumour of the lifting of the excommunications is true. I would love to see all these people in full, regular, non "state of necessity" jurisdictional regularity. I was reflecting today that the Battle for Helm's Deep could be a metaphor for the spiritual battle that we are facing in the West with the real possibility that the USA could be falling to secularism. The arrival of the SSPX in the ranks would be like the elves arriving to boost the defences, recalling the days of long ago when elves and men fought side by side.
For a better perspective on the SSPX than the Williamson interview, see this story of a good and kindly 83 year old priest killed in South Africa by a young man whom he had helped: Priest’s ‘killer’ knew him. for more about Fr Leslie, see: Father Leslie ‘was dedicated to the old ways’.
22 comments:
Thank you for this excellent post. I was shocked and saddened to hear of the murder of Father Leslie. I got to know Father Eldred Leslie quite well when he worked with the SSPX here in England in the early 80s. He was a good, holy and humble priest, who loved the True Mass and his people (his Church welcomed all races under the ancien regime in SA, which sometimes caused him problems with both the civil and ecclesiastical authorities). I will say a Mass for him next week. May he rest in peace.
The news about Bishop Williamson was also sad and shocking. Of course he is mad and bad; but it must be faced that Archbishop Lefebvre was madder and worse to have promoted such an obvious wack job to the episcopacy. Do any of your readers recall Williamson's mad rant in the fields of Econe just after his consecration? Or the sight of Archbishop Lefebvre grinning and smiling at what he had done? I certainly do! Watching on TV I had a very strong sense of witnessing evil in a very pure form - the sin of schism, stemming from pride and dishonesty and deceit.
Vatican diplomats have, by definition, got to be diplomatic. But those of us, Tim, who have known the Society well and for some years, and who have had the grace to preserve their Catholic Faith, are never in doubt about their nature. They have their own hierarchy; their own sacramental jurisdiction; their own churches and their own versions of religious orders; their own understanding of tradition and authority. The list goes on and on. If they are not schismatic, then no one is, and the word means nothing.
I hope that Eldred Leslie will be adding his prayers for the return of his former confreres to the Catholic Church.
Well, Father Tim, I probably trust your judgment more than that of anyone else in this matter. Yet I can't bring myself to welcome the idea of a largely unreformed SSPX coming back into the fold. Something feels wrong here, and its not just the madness of one man: Fellay himself is so contemptuous of ordinary Novus Ordo priests and laity, and he moves in an often unpleasant milieu without any public remonstrance. Anti-Semitism is *not* confined to the fringe in French Lefebvrist circles. The SSPX already gives traditionalists a bad name, and it will give them an even worse name if people are left with the impression that the extremist views of so many members are not a problem for the Pope. I worry, above all, about Benedict XVI. If this goes wrong, his legacy could be lost in the next pontificate.
I have to say my reading of Fr. Fellay's letter was rather different. He made it quite clear that Fr. Williamson was speaking in a personal capacity and not as either a clergyman or as a member of the SSPX. In other words - and yes, he may have done this in such a terribly subtle, Fracophone sort of a way that dear Damian and others didn't quite pick up on it - his boss has distanced himself from Williamson's remarks.
I write this in all charity, but there is a certain poetic beauty to the thought of the other three drinking champagne with the Pope whilst Fr. Williamson, in broken German, blithers on about Fred Leuchtner and cyanide gas in a Bavarian courtroom.
For the good of the Church I think it would be prudent to avoid making comments about Williamson for the time being.
The secular media will look to the blogs for inspiration when this is made public.
The other Bishops have distanced themselves from Williamson and he has for sometime been talking about retirement.
Whatever Williamson did or did not say in an interview, the most serious accusastion has been made. the holy see should ask him to refute he holds these odiuous opinions and if he does hold them, that , in itself , should prevent the lifting of his excommunication. I have received in the post a list of Anglelus Press some get close to anti-semitism and it is interesting to to see the close correlation between the ultra right and the liberal-left establishment siding against Israel. The excellent Christendom-awake website removed a link to an American traditionalist RC website when I pointed out its blatant anti-semitism. There are elements within the breakaway trad movements who are anti semitic and this link goes back a long way: Action Francais in France and Third Position in the UK. These racists are outside the RC church and there they should remain. Most SSPX people possibly do not ho;ld these views but caution should be applied. Possibly, individfula conversions should be the order of the day as is the case with Anglican Converts.
I too hope with all my heart that the rumuour concerning the lifting of the excommunications is true. I have been praying for this intention for quite a while now.
Another thing that comes to mind is that if any action is to be taken against Bishop Williamson by the Church, wouldn't it be easier if the excommunications are lifted? Maybe some can clarify that point for me.
One thing that I think we must remember is the parables. First we should think of the Incarnational theology of the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd came down from Heaven leaving the 99 to go after the one who went astray. The Reconciliation of the SSPX would be our chief Shepherd leaving the 99 in order to carry back the one who went astray, that is actually the theological symbolism of the Pallium. The Archbishop takes upon His shoulder the lamb and carries it back to the flock but in order to avoid a violent reaction from the lamb he breaks it legs (maybe a good smacking of Williamson would do a lot of good for the whole Church). This Pope knows he is going to be crucified by the media for doing this. But, once again that is the true theology of the Good Shepherd, He came down from Heaven, took flesh, Searched out the lost from the flock, and carried them upon his back to be crucified with Him in order that they may gain salvation through that Sacrifice.
The second Scriptural image is the Prodigal Son. When one is willing to come back we should feast and celebrate. The Christian paradox of forgiveness and redemptive justice has never been accepted by the world and we are seeing that again clearly here. Christian's condemn the sin, not the sinner. To lift the excommunications and bring about reconciliation to those who have done wrong is exactly what Christ himself did. The "stiff necked people" as the psalms refer to them were then and are still now unable to accept that. They fail to forgive and forget. "If only they had hearts of flesh instead of stone." The witness that Benedict is offering us is incredible and if we could only look upon his actions as Christ would have us we would see the great beauty in the Christian message he is trying to communicate. Political Correctness has no place in the act of reconciling someone to God. The act of reconciling the lost children must supersede the way it may look with eyes that only see things through the gaze of the world.
Fr. Morgan, SSPX district superior and head of their apostolate in Scandinavia, has issued a response here:
http://www.sspx.co.uk/page5.htm
Anyway, today is a day of rejoicing:
http://www.dici.org/dl/fichiers/Letter_Sup_Gen.pdf
Well Fr. according to Damian Thompson, the excommunications have now been lifted.
JARay
Thanks for that.
Father George bloggingLOURDES
On my blog I have a video of Bishop Williamson telling his congregation that 9/11 was not Islam Terrorsit but the US Government. OK he is a maverick in the St Pius X but this is because of the lack of a central authority to deal with him. Rome will deal with him if he becomes one of their bishops. On the other hand based on my experience of Rome am I just being a little bit crazy.
Yes, the excommunications have been lifted, Deo gratias. Is it too much to ask that all of us who want a restoration or Catholic Tradition, liturgically, doctrinally and morally, can start, just ever so slightly, to work TOGETHER? The business about Bp. Williamson and the holocaust is the work of the devil, but not in the way many might claim. At this moment of rebirth for orthodoxy in the Church, what better tactic than for Satan to turn traddie against traddie. Pray and pray hard for charity. It is greater than Faith and Hope (says St. Paul) and it's what we, the Church and the world need now.
Whilst Bishop Williamson's comments have received widespread report, the documentary itself (which, in Swedish, can be seen at SVT's website)has even more allegations of SSPX far right connections in Sweden. These include local SSPX contact people being involved with nationalist and neo-nazi groups and certain other anti-semitic books being distributed at services in Sweden. If these allegations are true, then the problem is more than one person.
Many thanks for all those thoughtful comments.
Martin - it is most helpful to know that Fr Leslie welcomed all races to his Church during apartheid in SA. I'll give that some prominence.
Damian - thank you for commenting. I agree with you that this is something of a tightrope act by Pope Benedict. Your post today is an excellent summary of reasonable reservations and I'll flag it up.
Andrew - the secular media had already picked up on the Williamson business before my post and we can be fairly sure that he will feature in most secular news coverage of today's announcement. I think it is important that they hear a clear message from traditionalists repudiating his views - and indeed answering his "historical" assertions. I am glad to hear that the bishops are considered within the SSPX to be distancing themselves from him.
Writing some more now about today's announcement...
Of course he is mad and bad; but it must be faced that Archbishop Lefebvre was madder and worse to have promoted such an obvious wack job to the episcopacy. Do any of your readers recall Williamson's mad rant in the fields of Econe just after his consecration? Or the sight of Archbishop Lefebvre grinning and smiling at what he had done? I certainly do! Watching on TV I had a very strong sense of witnessing evil in a very pure form - the sin of schism, stemming from pride and dishonesty and deceit.
Then perhaps you might do well to read the biography of Archbishop Lefebrve by Tisser de Mallerais. Just because the Archbishop was grinning before the cameras means absolute jack. The Archbishop had surveyed the situation of the church at large (especially France) and concluded in good conscience that they were in a state of emergency. Added on this that JP II was more interested in convening indifferentist prayer meetings like Assisi 1986 than sorting out his own house. The Archbishop thought that he had no alternative but to consecrate bishops in order to preserve the traditional faith and sacraments. Also remember that the treatment that Lefebrve received from Paul VI and Rome in 1970s was less than honourable and probably helped frame his mindset that the authorities in Rome were indeed dishonest.
Now - I am not saying that the Archbishop was right in all circumstances. He could have gone ahead with the protocol he signed with the-then Cardinal Ratzinger in May 1988. But in no pretext whatsoever can he be accused of trying to set up a parallel hierarchy to Rome. Archbishop Lefebrve always wanted to be united in faith to the Pope (and probably was more than half of all the prelates that are in Eccleston Square). Pope Benedict has even hinted at how there has been some need for repentance on the side of Rome when dealing with traditionalists in the 70s and 80s in his accompanying letter to the motu proprio:
"Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden."
As I have said before - it is all very well for so-called "conservative" Catholics to accuse traditionalists of being "more Catholic" or "knowing more" than the Pope. However it is quite funny (if not sad) to see the very same people telling the Pope what to do with the SSPX. The anaology between this and the story of the Prodigal son is quite striking:
"And he answering, said to his father: Behold, for so many years do I serve thee, and I have never transgressed thy commandment, and yet thou hast never given me a kid to make merry with my friends: But as soon as this thy son is come, who hath devoured his substance with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf."
Think long and very hard...
Well said, Ottaviani, well said.
I repeat, although slightly modified, what I have said recently elsewhere:
1) Bishop Williamson may deny the Shoah or at least significant aspects of it, and this indeed would be unfortunate or worse, but a historical judgment of this type is not important for whether one moves from a canonically irregular situation to a canonically regular one in Holy Mother Church. It may mean that he should be enjoined to silence, not necessarily to recant his view; whether he would obey is another matter, but his view, a matter not of the teaching of the Church, of itself, does not mean that there should not be canonical regularity for him or those who associate with him.
2) With regard to doctrine, there may be some problems, and if so, they need to be corrected, but to note, not to justify, there are at least 100s of Catholic bishops currently who exercise jurisdiction who hold or have held, without repudiating their former views, publically positions that are either heretical or proximate to heresy or temerarious and dangers to the Faith etc. They may be far worse than any Bishop Williamson in regard to the salvation of souls.
Rather in the manner of Waffen-SS officers continuing to fight long after war was lost, it is sad to see the likes of "Martin" still fulminating darkly about "the sin of schism" and "evil in its purest form". (If he hasn't seen Time Bandits then maybe he should!)
The rest of us, on the other hand, have probably all seen the "schismatic" ceremony on YouTube. Yes, the Archbishop comes across as a bit of a smug wotsit, but then so do most senior clergymen.
Now, once and for all, THE WAR IS OVER! There is no schism. There never was any schism. JPII thought that if he refused permission for the Society to have bishops then that would be the end of them. He was wrong about that, clearly. Instead what happened was twenty years of embarrassment and confusion - culminating in Williamson completely losing it (and on Swedish television of all things!).
One thing that has to be said for the present Holy Father is that he is apart from anything else a pragmatist. The lifting of the restrictions on the old Mass and the lifting of the excommunications are both good, but at a time when the Church is haemorrhaging members they are also sensible.
We can only hope now that the likes of Martin are not too sore and bitter in their hour of ignominious defeat.
My comment on this post comes rather late, I am afraid, but I would like to thank Fr. Tim for publicising the news of the terrible murder of Fr. Eldred Leslie.
I echo the comment by Fr. Martin. I remember Fr. Leslie as a very kind man and a true priest. May God rest his soul.
I went and looked up some of the other views of Msgr. Williamson, and the list is not pretty. He seems rather intent on being a nutjob. He denies the Holocaust, but he also believes in a global flood, possibly young earth theory, and denies evolution. To be honest, I'm not sure if he IS crazy in a mentally disordered sort of way, if he is being willfully ignorant, or whether he's ignorant for no fault of his own. He should never have been ordained, it seems.
J.M.J
Reverend and Dear Father,
Greetings once again to you in the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts
I would like to express my thanks to you for the post on the terrible murder of Fr. Leslie. I unfortunatly had no contact with him, yet, as it is well understood he was renowned here in South Africa as being one of the very few Priests who did not stand to see the bride of Christ brought almost to wrack and ruin.
Unfortunatly, this horrific event serves only to highlight the current state of things here in South Africa, where the devide between rich and poor is ever increasing.
I ask you Father to remeber this poor Priest in your prayers, I ask you and all those who read this to remember those others (Religious and Lay )who have met their untimely end in this crime ridden country of ours.
The Society of St.Pius the X is at current, in discussions with Archdiocese of Durban so as to accomodate the funeral arrangements, it is a shared hope that he is obliging in this matter.
I remain, dear Father, yours sincerly in Christ and our Good Mother Mary
Calvin James Montgomery
President
Summorum Pontificum Johannesburg
"The news about Bishop Williamson was also sad and shocking. Of course he is mad and bad".
"Whatever Williamson did or did not say in an interview, the most serious accusastion has been made. the holy see should ask him to refute he holds these odiuous opinions and if he does hold them, that , in itself , should prevent the lifting of his excommunication."
-----------------------------------
I know Bishop Williamson and i will defend him.Who are you to accuse,when you dont know the man,or even have been to his Traditional Latin Mass,and heard his sermons.Maybe you people have a weak grasp of Catholicsm.For the record he gave me a rosary ring,which i treasure,and his sermon at St Joseph's & St Padarn in Holloway North London,about the
Ordinariate,which i witnessed was spot on.Father Finigan would have been impressed.Unless you have something nice to say about him,i would mind your own business.
From Gerald - Sspx of Strict Observance Member.
Bishop Williamson supporters club.
Vive Christus Rex
Vive Archbishop Lefebvre.
Post a Comment