I have refrained from writing about Pope Benedict XVI’s recent lifting of the excommunication of leaders of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), the spiritual children of French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, because it was connected with their repentance for non-canonical episcopal consecrations, a fairly esoteric, intra-Catholic issue.
Since the Pope’s action was announced, it has come out that one of the SSPX bishops, Richard Williamson, is a Holocaust denier. That’s bad, but it isn’t an excommunicable offense (while I think anti-Semitism is, Holocaust denial, technically speaking, isn’t anti-Semitic per se, though it may be a sign of mental illness as well as historical illiteracy, and in fact most Holocaust deniers are anti-Semites).
But the more I’ve read about SSPX, the more I think that the Pope made a big mistake by seeking to reconcile this radical traditionalist schismatic sect to Rome. I’ve taken a look at their Web site, and been disturbed by some of what I’ve seen (I’m not suggesting that all members, or leaders, of the Society are anti-Semites, by the way). For instance, there’s the article entitled “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History,” which jumps from the rejection of Jesus by most Jews to extremist views of Jewish-Christian relations and Judaism specifically:
Judaism is inimical to all nations in general, and in a special manner to Christian nations. It plays the part of Ishmael who persecuted Isaac, of Esau who sought to kill Jacob, and of Cain who put Abel to death….
Christendom and Jewry are destined inevitably to meet everywhere without reconciliation or mixing. It represents in history the eternal struggle of Lucifer against God, of darkness against the Light, of the flesh against the spirit….
If the Gentile people now considers this genuine greatness of the medieval age as gloomy or obscurantist, and wishes to be great with the material greatness of Babylon, then it can have it: but only as a servant of Judaism. In the domain of the material, it is the Jewish people who have the superiority. History tells us (Werner Sombart) that the renowned greatness of English and American Capitalism is only a Judaic creation. While Capitalism fulfills its promises and is unquestionably of incomparable material greatness, it compromises the work of millions of Christians for the benefit of a much smaller number of the Jewish people….
The relations of Christians and Jews cannot be governed by the common law of Christians, but only by an exceptional legislation which takes count of the theological status of the Jewish people. The Catholic Church’s teaching is that they should neither be eliminated from among us (as antisemitism seeks) nor given equality of rights, which leads to their superiority (as is advocated by liberalism or philosemitism).
In an article with the title, “Are the Jews Guilty of Deicide?”, from a 2004 edition of the SSPX magazine Angelus, the response is given:
The Jews were consequently directly responsible for the crucifixion. Deicide is the name given to the crime of killing the person who is God, namely the Son of God in His human nature. It is those persons who brought about the crucifixion who are guilty of deicide, namely the Jews.
Apparently Pilate, who had Jesus executed despite thinking Him innocent, had no responsibility for his actions.
There’s more, but the point is that there are real questions that can be about a strain of thinking (or non-thinking) in the Society of St. Pius X that makes the Vatican’s efforts to reconcile with it a questionable policy, not simply from the standpoint of relations with Jews, but as a matter of theological and moral integrity.
UPDATE: Williamson “apologized” to the Pope today in a letter to Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos–not for Holocaust denial, but for bringing it up when he did, and for the grief that has caused Benedict and Cardinal Hoyos:
Amidst this tremendous media storm stirred up by imprudent remarks of mine on Swedish television, I beg of you to accept, only as is properly respectful, my sincere regrets for having caused to yourself and to the Holy Father so much unnecessary distress and problems.
I hope it isn’t uncharitable of me to say that, as apologies go, that’s pretty pathetic.
January 30, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Thats a lot of dead people to deny. It must be symptomatic of something, prejudice, living in alternate reality, something. I can see the part about the Jews being responsible for the crucification. It was a Jew that was the guest of honor, so to speak.
January 31, 2009 at 2:45 am
Contra the claims of the addlepated blubberpot who wrote “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History,” I’m pretty certain the “Catholic Church’s teaching” of this era recognizes equality of civil and human rights for Jews and non-Jews alike.
January 31, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Thank you for posting this David. I agree with all of your points. I don’t understand why the Pope has allowed this to be. I can’t believe he is ignorant of the issues.
January 31, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Did you read the article, “In Defense of the Inquisition”? http://www.sspx.org/against_the_sound_bites/defense_of_the_inquisition.htm. The Pope should have left these folks to themselves.
For instance, “Nevertheless, the most serious historical studies have henceforth recognized that the Inquisition was an honest tribunal, which sought to convert heretics more than to punish them, which condemned relatively few people to the flames, and which only employed torture in exceptional cases.”
So exceptional cases should be subjected to torture?
January 31, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Only when they might be Protestants.
January 31, 2009 at 5:34 pm
This does help one understand Mel Gibson a bit better.
January 31, 2009 at 7:35 pm
“So exceptional cases should be subjected to torture?”
George W Bush sure thought so.
January 31, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I can not believe that site about the inquisition is real, it looks real, but Heavenly Host! They are excusing the Inquisition??????
the Cathars were bad??
Jodie, no excuse for torture, but We are talking the Inquisition! makes gitmo look like day care, and i am NOT a Gitmo fan.
January 31, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Tangential to your main point, but I think it’s important to recognize that Holocaust denial is inherently anti-Semitic. Holocaust deniers are positing that Jews devised and pulled off a world-spanning fraud, making up a false story of their own genocide in order extract reparations money / elicit world sympathy / obtain the state of Israel. Holocaust deniers also usually attribute the worldwide acceptance off Holocaust history to an alleged Jewish influence over the media and governments. Holocaust denial hits all the classic anti-Semitic stereotypes, but it tries to mask itself as objective historical analysis.
January 31, 2009 at 9:17 pm
willohroots,
Once you cross the line, you cross the line.
January 31, 2009 at 10:01 pm
I wonder how long it will take someone in the media to make the connection between the Pope’s membership in the Hitler Youth and his actions here…. (Not that he probably had a choice about joining).
February 1, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Is the issue in this post anti-Semitism or papal reconciliation?
February 1, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Both, actually. My point is that the Pope should not have sought reconciliation with SSPX until it was thoroughly investigated and its anti-Semitic elements purged. Both the kerfuffle surrounding Williamson and the contents of the Society’s Web site make me wonder if that investigation was done as thoroughly as it needed to be.
February 8, 2009 at 8:27 pm
This is a late contribution, but this decision has caused a huge controversy in Germany. A lot of Germans are upset that the first German Pope in 450 years or so has inadvertently (and I think it was inadvertent) rehabilitated a Holocaust denier.
February 27, 2009 at 2:00 pm
The bad deeds of one individual should not be sufficient evidence to judge an entire organization… The actions of Judas did not accurately portray the beliefs of the rest of the apostles; recent sexual scandals involving Novus Ordo Catholic priests do not accurately portray the behavior of all Modern Catholic priests. Why judge SSPX by the actions of so few? The Pope is correct in his efforts to reunify the Catholic Church. Who are you to say otherwise? Are you his equal?
February 27, 2009 at 2:15 pm
If you’d read the post, you would know that Williamson isn’t the only questionable apple in this barrel. The quotes above weren’t just from isolated individuals; they were from the Society’s Web site, and thus can be presumed to have its approval. The Pope is free to be reconciled with the people of the Society, of course, and I hope that in the course of that reconciliation they repudiate theology that has been condemned by Vatican II and popes ever since that council.
February 28, 2009 at 10:10 am
“The Pope is correct in his efforts to reunify the Catholic Church. Who are you to say otherwise? Are you his equal?”
Actually, according to the Protestant doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers, the answer to your question would be a resounding yes. Christ alone is head of the Church and we utterly reject the authority of the Pope.
February 28, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Actually, according to the perverted doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers, the answer to your question would be a resounding yes. Christ alone is head of the Church and we utterly reject the authority of the Pope.
…Your lack of humility is obvious in your statement.
Jesus said to St. Peter (the first Pope) “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” This right was only given to the church founded by God – the Catholic Church.
Lucifer felt he was equal to his Creator and said “I will not obey.” His lack of humility and obedience resulted in the creation of an eternal home for all who believe they can perceive truth based on how they personally interpret it. Those who refuse to humble themselves and obey the rules established by God will not enter the kingdom of Heaven “For many are called but few are chosen”.
The Protestant Episcopal Church was formed because of the personal opinions of the men who broke away from the Catholic Church to found it (England 1527-1563a.d.). The Presbyterian Church (11 different bodies) was founded by a man named John Knox (Scotland 1560a.d.). The protestant religion was founded by men who felt their perceptions were equal to or greater than the teachings of The Church of God and chose to say, ‘I will not obey.’ These men created a church that is a perversion of the religion founded by Jesus Christ (The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ in 33a.d). The Pope wants the thousands of Catholics involved in the SSPX to be recognized as members of the Catholic (Universal) Church. The prodigal son returns, so to speak. I’m sure the Pope doesn’t want the rest of the world thinking there are different bodies of the Catholic Church.
Dissention is so… protestant.
I pray you look to the example shown by Jesus when He humbly picked up the cross of our sins and died for our salvation. Please humble yourself enough to follow the rules of God and not follow the way of men. Jesus said, “Unless you eat of My Flesh and drink of My Blood there shall not be life in you” – The Catholic Church is the only church that is able to provide this. Jesus will be with His Church until the end of the world; at that time all those who deny His teachings and the Church’s authority will find out how righteous they truly are.
February 28, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Clearly, Jack, the Protestant Church disagrees with you. It’s not an issue of a lack of humility, it is an issue of submitting to Christ and his word, and not men. That was and continues to be at the heart of the Reformation. Only time will tell if I have eternal life…but believe me when I say I am not concerned about my eternal destiny. Are you?
February 28, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Meh. I figure when the time comes, I’ll just give a little money to the Catholic Church to buy my way into Heaven. Just in case. The economy the way it is, I assume that, like housing prices, the cost of a good indulgence ought to be bargain basement. Good thing the Pope just brought back indulgences … great money maker in otherwise dim financial times. Heh … Is that what people mean when they complain about “cheap grace”? (And what is the going exchange rate between $US and $God, anyway?)
Sure I’m a Calvinist and believe in the doctrine of election, but, well … Let’s just call it the belt and suspenders approach to eternal life.
Nothing’s more fun that re-fighting the entire Reformation in a blog comment thread. And particularly amusing given this current pope’s previous gig. Let me know when folks break out the torches and pitchforks, eh?
February 28, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Alan, I know we’ve traded our barbs, but that was a hilarious post. And I agree, who wants to fight the whole Reformation right here? Jake, read Luther’s statement at Worms, especially about our consciences being captive to the Scriptures and not contradicting popes. That about sums it up. I’ll pray for you too. Maybe we will both make it to glory.
February 28, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Thank you, thank you very much. I’ll be here all week. Try the fish, and don’t forget to tip your waitress.
February 28, 2009 at 9:37 pm
A whole bunch of people on Stand Firm were trying to convince me that the RC church doesn’t teach that they are the only Christians. Obviously this teaching hasn’t reached its way to the laity….
March 1, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Indeed. Benedict is trying to roll back Vatican 2 on this point. Not that it matters.
March 1, 2009 at 8:01 pm
I’m writing again because I remembered the vows I took as a young man when I received the Sacrament of Confirmation (to become a soldier of Christ).
I will try to answer a few of you in this email. I’m prone to ignore “the jester,” but out of charity I will continue.
When I first came across the article above I assumed it was a Catholic site. After reading the article I realized it was written for the sake of gossip by Protestants. I replied in hopes that I could influence people to not judge the Pope so harshly.
In time I began to wonder though… Catholics write about Catholics – why do Protestants care what the Pope is doing with Catholic sects? What provokes them (this site) to become focused on Catholic matters? The limited empty responses that followed my statements left little to debate, because there were no facts to counter my objections. Sure, Protestants “protest” – but why?
…What “word” are you talking about? St. John said, “The Word of God was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us.” Where did the Bible come from? If you believe the Bible, a copulation of Catholic tradition and Catholic writings that were put into text some 400 years after Jesus died (by the Catholic Church), then you believe in the Word of the Catholic Church. Depending on the sect of Protestant you are, some books were removed from your Bible, text was changed, (or rewritten altogether) because it was politically incorrect for the “reformer.”
…Cost of indulgences? I wouldn’t say “buying” indulgences is out of the question, considering what happened to the “good thief” who was crucified along with Jesus. It’s all in the intention.
Catholics believe in sacrifice (“sacrifice” comes from two Latin words that mean “to make holy”). In the early Church, when people would sacrifice their time and efforts for God by contributing to the building of His Church, they earned indulgences (they went above and beyond their obligation). If some were unable to work, they would sacrifice the use of their money for The Church (this could also gain an indulgence). Indulgences are given only to repentant sinners (those who do not regret their sin(s) are not absolved).
Catholics believe (as did St. Paul) that the benefit of Our Lord’s sacrifice is obtained through what we sacrifice here on Earth. God wants us to cooperate in the work of our salvation. Just look to Sacred Scripture for the importance of Charity.
The Sacrament of Penance is also important to Catholics (Confession and reparation). It’s humbling to admit your worst faults. During Confession, Catholics repent of all their sins by telling them to the priest (and through genuine contrition); by doing this, they sacrifice their pride for redemption. Why should we be forgiven without sacrifice? Some of you may have children; for those that do, I ask: Do you ever have to punish them for the things they do wrong? How effective would their (the children’s) punishments be if they were in charge of them? Also, if you had cancer, I’m sure you would go to the doctor; you wouldn’t base your treatment on what you felt was best, you would look for proven results. If your body has a serious wound, you should look for a doctor – if your soul has a serious wound, you should look for a priest.
…Stand Firm?:
No. Not everyone who simply believes will be saved. If you don’t believe me, try to grow a garden on faith alone. A garden will grow only when someone tends to it daily, you must sacrifice time and energy to prepare the soil, plants, pull weeds…etc; the same can be said of your faith. Our Lord Himself said, “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus Himself sacrificed His Will to that of His Father His whole life long. Why should we be any different if we say we are “like Christ” (Christians). No one who rides the fence (afraid to pick a side) will find favor with the Lord. Look to the Apocalypse (or “Revelation,” as you call it), Chapter 3, 15: “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold, nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot. 16. But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold,
nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth.”
Not a politically correct statement, is it?
Questions:
“When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, But, when I became a man, I put away the things of a child” (I Cor. Xiii. 11).
As a child I whole-heartedly believed Santa brought me toys. Did my whole-hearted belief change the truth?
Also, If each protestant can directly converse with the Almighty as the Apostles did – Where are the modern day Acts of the Apostles? Aren’t any of the conversations written down? Shouldn’t we be seeing “Modern Day Talks with The Creator – First Epistle of Presbyterian Sally, or Bob, or whoever”?
Come on, you’ve had over 500 years. Where are your saints and their documented miracles? Where is the proven track record for healing souls and making it to Heaven?
To put it simply, people in hell strongly “protest.”
March 1, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Jake: I have no problem with you or with your Church, but there are a couple of things that I must respond to in your latest comment.
I would ask that you not presume to judge my motives. This site has nothing to do with “gossip.” I comment on the doings of a variety of Christian denominations out of concern for the gospel and the welfare and mission of the Body of Christ. In this instance, I question neither the Pope’s integrity nor his motives. Reconciling with the members of the Society is a good and worthy thing. Reconciling with the Society itself, as an entity, is a matter of prudential if not political judgment, and in that regard the decisions and actions of the Pope are as open to question, even by Catholics, as by any other brother or sister in Christ. I would hope that, if he were to ever take notice of my poor ministry, that he would feel equally called upon to question my judgment when he believed it had gone awry.
I care because I care about the Body of Christ in all its manifestations. No further reason should be necessary.
(By the way, Catholics do write about Protestants–check out First Things and you’ll see what I mean,)
March 1, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Thank you for your prompt reply. I really appreciate you explaining your intentions. I would have liked, however, someone to respond to the direct questions I submitted. I felt this site was making a joke of the current situation affecting the Catholic Church, and I am not one who will sit and watch my Mother be mocked.
March 2, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Jake, it is curious to me that you act all indignant over the affronts to “Mother Church” when your first remark to me was to misquote me and call the doctrine of the Priesthood of all Believers as “perverse.”
Protestants don’t just protest as you assert, because we have nothing better to do. We reject the authority of the pope, we resent the RCC’s assertion that is THE Catholic church. In fact, we believe that since the Council of Trent that the RCC ceased to be a true church of Jesus Christ and is, in fact, apostate. That is not to say that there are not genuine believers in the RCC, but the church is institutionally apostate, having abandoned the gospel of Christ. At least that is how we see it.
Clearly there is a very large gulf between us and it is much larger than a brief blog post can bridge. I would suggest reading Calvin or one of the other Reformers to see why we reject what we do.
I think you have put your finger on an important point however. To the RCC the Church is the highest authority. To us the Scriptures are. That has always been the sine qua non of the disagreement between Protestants and Catholics. That is where dialog needs to begin.
But please don’t swoop in self-righteously demanding respect but being unwilling to offer it in return.