The 'Synagogue of Satan' (Are Traditionalist Catholics an anti-Semitic threat?

SPL Center ^ | Winter 2007 | Mark Potok

[NYer]

check out the links at the above web site

[sageb1]

Julian Bond
First Center president and member of the board

http://www.splcenter.org/center/history/bond.jsp

[Antoninus]

An article from the Southern Poverly Law Center? It should be pointed out that these people are communists. They despise the Catholic Church, so it's not surprising to me that they'd lash out at traditional Catholics in this way, attempting to brand them all as "anti-Semites."

Granted, some of the wackier "trads" definitely manifest some definite anti-Semitic characteristics, but to try to paint the entire movement as anti-Semitic is simply slanderous. The anti-Semites are generally fringies.

[murphE]

I can't believe you would even post this crap, let alone ping me to it.

Remove me from your ping list please.

[Wings-n-Wind]

Julian Bond
First Center president and member of the board

This almost explains everything...

I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle becasue of these guys... Fringe effects at best...IMHO

Blessings

[Claud]

No question there are certain anti-Semitic tendencies within traditionalism. I think that "gathering near the Philadelphia airport" may be the Catholic Family News conference which I once attended. I was REALLY put off by some of the comments of the speakers, and in particular, the fact that the table next to ours was proudly selling "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", that piece of crap fakery that keeps rearing its ugly head despite the fact that it is a known and proven fraud.

And the Remnant....well, IMHO that paper is closing in on itself and its owns self-delusions.

But I have to stick up for Ferrara here, in that I've never heard such nonsense from him--and I think the author of this piece is trying to tag him with guilt by association.

[livius]

This article is inflammatory distortion. There have always been wackos in any religion, but in the Church they usually end up getting excommunicated or silenced (ala Fr. Coughlin, Fr. Feeney, etc.).

"Traditionalists" is a pretty broad category, and the author is making some real leaps in assigning guilt by association. Furthermore, some of the groups he is talking about are not even part of the Catholic Church, having gone their own way long ago.

His purpose is clearly to defame orthodox ("traditionalist") Catholics in general and also to imply that the pro-life movement is a hotbed of anti-Semitism and racism. Nothing could be further from the truth, but truth matters little to leftists like the Southern Poverty Law Center.

[NYer]

Know your enemies ;-)

[xzins]

I was going to post this earlier, but I knew it would be misperceived if a protestant did so.

So, if I understand this correctly, these guys are to the right of David Duke.

Too bad catholicism isn't premillennial. It would end a lot of this nonsense.

[smpb]

I have a question, which I do not ask rhetorically, since I really don't know the answer. Does the "mainstream" of the traditionalist movement openly and clearly condemn antisemitism? For example, have the bishops of the SSPX issued statements or pastoral letters plainly condemning antisemitism? And have they taken steps to purge whatever antisemites may be in leadership positions? have they attacked the "Jews and freemasons" talk that is popular at tha radical fringe?

We often make the point that Muslims, if they are sincere about Islam being a "religion of peace", should be louder in denouncing jihadism and Islamofascism. By the same token, the traditionalists should take the lead in denouncing antisemitism.

[Claud]

Too bad catholicism isn't premillennial. It would end a lot of this nonsense.

Ummm, I think we'll stick with the Divine Comedy over the Left Behind series, but thanks for the offer. ;)

[marshmallow]

For example, have the bishops of the SSPX issued statements or pastoral letters plainly condemning antisemitism?

On the contrary, they're often in the vanguard of those stoking these fires. Take for instance this quote from Bishop Richard Williamson of the SSPX:

"God puts in men's hands the "Protocols of the Sages of Sion" and the "Rakovsky Interview", if men want to know the truth, but few do."

Taken from Bishop Williamson's Letter Archive, May 2000

It's clear that this SSPX bishop considers the Protocols to be an excellent and reliable text. It's also seems quite likely that he has promoted this view, at least to some extent, within the Society.

[xzins]

Left Behind isn't exactly theology.

Whasisname LaHay had much more interest in dollars than in accuracy.

[Claud]

Whasisname LaHay had much more interest in dollars than in accuracy.

Gotcha. Lot of that going around in Christianity, unfortunately.

[Claud]

Marshmallow's right...unfortunately some of the bishops in the SSPX haven't exactly been encouraging in this area. My wife almost walked out of a Williamson homily once for just this reason.

That having been said, I'd say that the way things are shaping up, the "mainstream" of traditionalism is fast becoming indults rather than the SSPX. So it behooves us "indult" traditionalists (and even SSPXers) to speak out a bit more against the wackos so that we're not all painted with the same brush.

I've got no beef with honest folks who differ with certain aspects of Jewish-Catholic relations. I know Ferrara for one is very critical of the Association of Hebrew Catholics. But it's way beyond that in some circles. When you start seeing the Protocols bandied about, you know you're in trouble.

[mockingbyrd]

I post a little quiz (which I stole from another blog) on my blog not too long ago called Guess Who Said It: SSPX or Al Queda. It was pretty disturbing, especially after seeing Fellay being taken so seriously by so many. I also quoted Williamson's letter after 9/11 saying that Muslims have a great respect for human life than Americans. Family memebers of mine who have followed the society and are priests and nuns in the society are the only antisemetic persons I know. Not all society persons I know are antisemetic, but the majority I know are. This is what happens when you separate yourself from the truth and protection of the Holy Spirit.

[livius]

I don't see why the SSPX would have to - these other people, such as Gruner, etc. aren't members of it. To my knowledge, some of them aren't even "traditionalists" in the sense that this word is used in the Catholic Church, usually to refer to liturgical traditionalists. The claim of "antisemitism," based on the words of verious individuals, is being used as a very wide brush to tar a group that is hated by the leftists in (and outside of) the Church.

I'd be equally interested in seeing some of the pro-Palestinian leftist clergy in the ME apologize for some of the anti-Semitic remarks that occasionally make it into the press, but they'll never do that. Furthermore, you'll never hear the left (which is anti-Semitic itself) asking them to do so.

[neb52]

I think the anti Semites strain in Traditionalist or SSPXers has more to do with their society than their Catholicism. Most SSPXers are in France and tend to be the hard core of that society or Traditionalist that have no other outlets. Its either SSPX or a Church that hardly resembles anything Catholic or even Christian. I believe SSPX numbers at most 1.5 million. Nothing really to sneeze at. What SSPX did for Orthodox Catholics was preserve some pre '60s traditions. You will find that FSSP is a more numerous and better representation of traditional Catholicism.

[marsh_of_mists]

Most traditionalist Catholics are not anti-Semitic, although left-wing Catholics and non-Catholic would like you to believe that. It's just that the fringier, crankier ones often stand out more (such as it is with everything). All "traditionalist" means is a Catholic who prefers the pre-Vatican II rites and practices and would like to see them revived. What's wrong with that? Most traditionalists are not sedevacantists, SSPV, or even SSPX; they attend indults, FSSP, ICKSP, etc. This is all typical misrepresentation from the Left, no different from saying that all pro-border-control people are racists. Are there pro-border-control people who are racist? Yes. Do most racists tend to be pro-border-control? Well, probably. But these fringe elements betoken nothing about the general movement. We should, of course, loudly reject, although it will not stop the stereotypes and insinuations from the other side.