Monday, February 9, 2009

One Holocaust bad, the other good?

Now, the German Chancellor is apparently arguing (as is the rest of Liberaldom) that the Pope shouldn't even allow Bishop Williamson to be a regular Catholic. "No membership for deniers!!!" seems to be their credo.

Personally, I don't care what Bishop Williamson's opinions are with regard to (secular) historical events. The precedent that we seem to be setting here is that membership in the Church now must be approved by the Liberal World, and that anyone who disagrees with the Liberal World View must be stricken from consideration.

Again, the irony is lost on the liberals - they object to someone who denies or minimizes the Holocaust of 60-some years ago, yet those who actively support and facilitate the ongoing holocaust of babies, well, those people are just fine.


Anonymous said...

Excellent insight, sir! Thank you!

Vox Cantoris said...


Anita Moore said...

Apt. Terribly, cruelly apt! And dead-on, too!

As I maintain in my own little space, the Williamson furor-mongers could care less about the victims of the Holocaust, except to the extent said victims serve their purpose -- which is to villify the Catholic Church. Period.

Paul Nichols said...

That's all they're interested in, Anita. I wonder when the Vatican will finally understand that the "World" hates Her and will never be Her "friend".

The Prince of Darkness rules this world, and no matter how "friendly" you are with it, it will always hate the Church.

Vatican II opened the "windows" to the world - it's high time someone shut that doggone things.

Anonymous said...

Ever heard about Donatism? It was a heresy that said that the Church should shut itself off from the world and essentially become one large monastic community. St. Augustine was the first to condemn this error and state that the Church's overall role was to be a leaven to the world. You, and many so-called "traditionalists," seem to be advocating that she abandon this role and once again take up Donatism.

Furthermore, why wouldn't you care what Catholic bishops think about history, secular or otherwise? The Holocaust is not a theory, but an indisputable fact; Williamson's denial means that at the very best, he is an idiot, and at the worst, he is a Nazi sympathizer. Either way, he us unfit to be a Catholic bishop.

Finally, I'm sure you know that he has not yet been reinstated. He is not yet a normal Catholic or a normal bishop. He, along with all of the priests and bishops of the SSPX, remains suspended from his priestly faculties. This means that his Masses are illicit, and his confessions and marriages invalid.

Anonymous said...

And the Holy Father and his delegates have made it clear that no bishop or priest of the SSPX will be reinstated until he fully accepts the Magesterium of the Church, which, though this may be disappointing to you, includes Vatican II. And, in Williamson's case, the Vatican has specifically demanded that he recant his statements about the Holocaust (it sort of goes against the whole "give offense to no one" thing that we heard in the Epistle this past Sunday). In your opinion, is Pope Benedict a member of "Liberaldom" or the "Liberal World"?

Paul Nichols said...

The Pope a member of Liberaldom? No, I don't think so. I think he's trying to steer a VERY large ship back into calmer waters of Tradition. A difficult job, to be sure.

But no, in answer to your question, I don't endorse Donatism. I'm not saying to "withdraw" from the World, I'm saying we should stop trying to "appease" the world.

What is ironic in Bp. Williamson's case is that there are so many stating that anyone who thinks what he thinks should not be allowed to be a Bishop (or Abp., or Cardinal, I'm supposing).

On the other hand, we have full-fledged clergy who opening deny doctrines of the Faith, and yet nobody calls for their ouster. Nobody calls them on their scandal. Now, to me, it would seem what a clergyman thinks on FAITH issues would carry more weight than what one thinks on non-Church issues.

As for accepting Vatican II, I tend to look at Vatican II and all the idiocy that has happened since then as two different things. Not that their not related, but rejecting the idiocy of the last 40 years can be done without tossing out Vatican II. I don't think you need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, if you know what I mean.

Anonymous said...

The Holocaust is not an article of faith. Therefore, denying it is in no way heresy or theological error, but a debatable fact of history.

Abortion however is most certainly infallibly condemned as mortal sin and murder. Therefore supporting it is a mortal sin.

Vatican II binds no one Mickey. It is full of what is at best theological error and at worst heresy. If the SSPX accepts Vatican II and its "magisterium," then the SSPX will basically be selling their souls even further.

Anita Moore said...

Kenneth, a fact by definition is not debatable. And there can be no serious debate about the Holocaust outside the fever swamps to which Bishop Williamson has consigned himself.

As for Vatican II being full of heresy and error, you have either not read the documents or you have read them with a jaundiced eye. Vatican II was the excuse for a lot of people to embrace all sorts of heresies, but it is not itself heretical.

Anonymous said...

My point on the Holocaust is simply this. It's not an article of faith, it's history. Therefore denying/minimizing it is not an impediment to membership in the church, even if what one believes on the death toll is completely incorrect and unfactual.

catholic2007 said...

Hi Paul....

Not a bad cartoon...the holocaust thing has certainly got more than a few people in a right ol' stew!

I have posted it on my latest blog re the Holocaust. So many thanks for your humourous slant on the controversy...

Khadejah said...

Williamson has been charged with Holocaust denial. He has denied the existence of gas chambers and has claimed that not six million but 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps.

By voicing his views on the Holocaust in an interview with Swedish Television recorded in November 2008 and transmitted on 21 January 2009 (the day the excommunication was lifted), Williamson stirred up widespread protests and risks prosecution in Germany, where the interview was conducted and where Holocaust denial is illegal and punishable by imprisonment of up to five years. On 4 February 2009, German prosecutors announced the launch of a criminal investigation into the statements.

"I believe there were no gas chambers ... I think that two to three hundred thousand Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps ... but none of them by gas chambers."

After the Church demanded that Williamson renounce his Holocaust denial, Williamson said he would do so only after looking at the historical evidence for himself. A reporter for "Der Spiegel" (Hamburg's weekly magazine) recommended that he personally visit Auschwitz, but Williamson refused. Deborah Lipstadt, a historian who defeated Holocaust Revisionist David Irving in a libel action brought by Irving, wrote an email to Williamson giving him sources of information that should lead him to the conclusion that the Holocaust indeed did occur.

The government of Argentina on 19 February 2009, after a request from the local Jewish community, gave him 10 days to leave the country.

voluntarily after which his expulsion would be ordered, because he had failed to correctly declare his true job as priest and director of a seminary when he immigrated in 2003. Interior minister Florencio Randazzo said that the irregular presence in the country of someone who had "deeply offended Argentine society and humanity with antisemitic statements" was "intolerable". On 24 February 2009 Williamson flew from Argentina to London where a supporter, fellow Holocaust Revisionist Michele Renouf, accompanied by a team of lawyers, said she wanted to represent and support him in getting his views across to the public.
On 26 February, he formally apologized for the offense that had been caused by his comments, but did not indicate that he had changed his views. The Vatican rejected his apology, stating that he needed to "unequivocally and publicly" withdraw his comments. Some Jewish groups have expressed disappointment at the ambiguity of his apology, because he failed to address the factuality of the Holocaust. In an interview published on 2 March 2009 in the German magazine "Der Spiegel", SSPX Superior General Fellay said that, if Williamson again denies the Holocaust, he will be excluded from the Society. He also said that the reason he had not responded sooner to Williamson's "crude theses" was that he had not taken the situation seriously enough.

I am appalled to see that a view of Williamson should be taken to such a great extent. The Holocaust is still a debateable subject and no one should get furious about it.

No one is denying the terrible loss of lives Jews encountered during WW II. The point is why the loss of Jews’ life is so important while the loss of lives of many others non Jews is meaningless? They (non Jews) were just as much humans. Why so much emphasis is paid to the Jewish loss. Non - Jews' holocaust was fifty times more than the Jewish loss of life. In other words, it was "The Holocaust" of non-Jews rather than of the Jews. This article is intended to prove this fact.

Why Zionists have to create the myth of Their holocaust when in fact there was no such thing? The reason is very obvious. Jewish loss was magnified by the Zionists for only one reason i.e. to create a Zionist State ( Israel ), to accommodate a mythology that Zionists Jews had conspired in order to secure a “homeland”. The mythology was created more than three millennium ago. According to that mythology a "Promised Home land " existed somewhere in the Middle East. Just like the holocaust, the existence of that “mythical homeland” is also debatable. That homeland is a self claimed Zionists' mythology that has never been scientifically proven so far.

I do believe this matter of Jewish holocaust should be reopened, debated and brought to the attention of the world realistically so that the Zionists’ agenda could be exposed.

It is estimated through various statiscal means that there were probably not more than 6 to 8 million Jews in whole Europe that time. Three million escaped to USA , Britain and other countries before the war. Post World War II; there were still remaining 2 million Jews in Europe . Moreover, still a million Jews were in Russia and about the same number in the Middle East . Therefore, the figures of six million Jews losing their life in Hitler’s concentration camps seem preposterous. A realistic statistical estimate calculated by many statisticians is not more than 200,000 - 300,00, (a generous estimate).

There are many discrepancies in illustrating the following points by the holocaust survivers, therefore, it is not prudent to accept those anecdotal evidence without considering it in its proper perspective. Following are the few statements which have been documented lately and have proven to be true.:

1. The Nazis had no official policy or intention of exterminating Jews.

2. Nazis did not use gas chambers to mass murder Jews.

3. The figure of 5 to 7 million Jewish deaths is a gross exaggeration, and the actual number is an order of magnitude is considerably lower as mentioned above.

4. Stories of the Holocaust were a myth initially created by the Allies of World War II (Britain, USSR and USA) to demonize Germans. Zionists spread this myth as part of a grander plot intended to enable the creation of a Zionists' mythical homeland in Palestine, and now to garner continuing support for the state of Israel.

5. Documentary evidence of the Holocaust, from photographs to the Diary of Anne Frank, is fabricated.

6. Survivor testimonies are filled with errors and inconsistencies, and are thus unreliable.

7.Nazi confessions of war crimes were extracted through torture.

8. The Nazi treatment of Jews was no different from what the Allies (USA, USSR and Britain) did to their enemies in World War II.

9. All of the Holocaust Revisionists (portrayed as Holocaust deniers By the Zionists) questions the truth of Holocaust.

10. Harrassment, threats on life, persecution and prosecution of Holocaust Revisionist by the Zionists is a strong indication and proof of a distorted motivation of the Zionists to create the myth of Holocaust; a scenario to facilitate an agenda and gain sympathies from the prozionists countries. A due process that ultimately precipited the creation of a Zionist country, Israel.

11. The fact that all Holocaust Revisionists are erroneously labelled as "Holocaust Deniers" simply indicates that there is a consipiracy in the Western world to distort facts, magnify false accusatioins to promote Zionists agenda of hidind the facts. Or there is a fear that the real truth might come out through the recent movement of such Revisionism.

Why blame Williamson for telling the truth?

Kuroyanagi Ryou said...

I can agree on one statement,that not all killed in the Holocauset are Jews,,but I can say even if these are Catholics, if they are Jew.. kapow!!!! bye bye!!

or was it you mean that included were the lost???

I think Kardejah has got to read the life of St. Edith Stein, a Jewish woman, but still a Catholic.... she died via GAS CHAMBER.

Um, Kardejah, if you were the Jew, then you lost your homeland... what would you do???

This situaton is even experienced more by third world countries... it's tribal people living on far lands shooed of because of banana plantations.

You can or will get the point.

Anonymous said...

Ever wonder why the events in Nazism is called the "holocaust?"
After all, the word means "burnt offerings." Burnt sacrificial offerings was not a Nazi invention--it is an ancient occult ritual for power and money.

Would genocide [of German Jewish nationals]not be a more accurate word?

And now....we capitalize the word holocaust [see dictionary]what is going on???????????