Posted on 01/30/2009 10:12:00 AM PST by NYer
Another member of the SSPX has decided to share his thoughts about the Holocaust with the world:
In the wake of a global furor triggered by Pope Benedict XVI’s decision to lift the excommunication of four traditionalist Catholic bishops, including one who cast doubt on the Holocaust, another leader in the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X has questioned whether the Nazis used gas chambers for anything other than “disinfection,” and said that people who hold revisionist views on the Holocaust are not anti-Semites.You can read more, and the full translation of his interview, at the NCR link.
Fr. Floriano Abrahamowicz, a pastor and spokesperson for the Society of St. Pius X in northeastern Italy, also referred to Jews as “a people of deicide,” referring to the death of Christ, and suggested that the Jewish Holocaust has been “exalted” over what he called “other genocides,” such as the Allied bombing of German cities and the Israeli occupation of the Gaza strip.
On the other hand, Abrahamowicz insisted that the traditionalist movement founded by the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre is not “anti-Semitic.” Among other things, Abrahamowicz said, he himself has Jewish roots on his father’s side.
The comments came in a Jan. 29 interview with the Italian newspaper La Tribuna di Treviso.
The many serious scholars who have investigated the events that took place in Nazi death camps have advanced plenty of very solid evidence, including but not limited to hundreds of living witnesses, to back their conclusions.
I will say that I personally accept that the holocaust numbers usually touted are likely somewhere in the ballpark of truth. The witnesses probably cannot attest directly to the numbers dead over the entire period of time involved, and so we are having to extrapolate the real figures from these and other sources. The problem is that this requires something more than simply finding the bottom tally on a sheet and accepting it. People have to consider a lot of data and come up with a likely range of people dead. Putting all of it together and weighing the different opinions of experts takes real study and consideration. I don't believe that the academic and scholarly environment today allows for this, which means that we either accpet a number that has been passed around for decades, or we are anti-semites.
I think most people would accept that years actually improve our ability to come to a better conclusion about real historical events. The numbers people would come up with right after the war would probably not be as reliable as those based on later studies. Hindsight and the lower emotional state of the researches that time allows will usually make for a more trustworthy figure. There are also documents which may be discovered as time goes on which can add to our knowledge. However, in this case that is impossible. Nobody can actually discuss these figures in anything close to good faith. 6 million is the normal figure, and if a world class historian were to say maybe it is more like four he would immediately cease to be a world class historian and instead become a world class bigot. It wouldn't matter whether he had reasons for his position, or had discovered or realized something new because his reasons and evidence would never be heard. He is an anti-semite, pure and simple, and there is never any other reason for thinking anything about anything touching on a Jew than anti-semitism.
Political correctness from any angle is evil. It stifles freedom, thought, learning, improvement and growth. It is bigotry. It is hate. It is anti-humanity. What is going on right now with these issues about the holocaust, Israel or anything else connected to Jews is the most perverse and absolute form of political correctness I have ever seen. And while it is likely that millions died in the death camps, it cannot be proved and no number can be reliable until such a stifling and hateful environment such as exists now is cleared away.
And this hostility to historical study and research also creates the very conditions which lead to people arguing that the gas chambers are not gas chambers. They are rebelling against the political correctness, and since nobody who has anything to lose will try to tackle the question, as they have way to much to lose, only less reputable people do so. The best minds won't go anywhere near it.
Perhaps your reading hasn't extended to St. John Chrysostom. Here are texts of his 8 sermons against the Jews in which he said things like:
But do not be surprised that I called the Jews pitiable. They really are pitiable and miserable. When so many blessings from heaven came into their hands, they thrust them aside and were at great pains to reject them. The morning Sun of Justice arose for them, but they thrust aside its rays and still sit in darkness. We, who were nurtured by darkness, drew the light to ourselves and were freed from the gloom of their error. They were the branches of that holy root, but those branches were broken. We had no share in the root, but we did reap the fruit of godliness. From their childhood they read the prophets, but they crucified him whom the prophets had foretold. We did not hear the divine prophecies but we did worship him of whom they prophesied. And so they are pitiful because they rejected the blessings which were sent to them, while others seized hold of these blessing and drew them to themselves. Although those Jews had been called to the adoption of sons, they fell to kinship with dogs; we who were dogs received the strength, through God's grace, to put aside the irrational nature which was ours and to rise to the honor of sons. How do I prove this? Christ said: "It is no fair to take the children's bread and to cast it to the dogs". Christ was speaking to the Canaanite woman when He called the Jews children and the Gentiles dogs.http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6.html(2) But see how thereafter the order was changed about: they became dogs, and we became the children. Paul said of the Jews: "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the mutilation. For we are the circumcision". Do you see how those who at first were children became dogs? Do you wish to find out how we, who at first were dogs, became children? "But to as many as received him, he gave the power of becoming sons of God".
Our credible experts in Polish affairs and the citizens of Poland itself who communicated with Us have informed Us that the number of Jews in that country has greatly increased. In fact, some cities and towns which had been predominantly Christian are now practically devoid of Christians.The Jews have so replaced the Christians that some parishes are about to lose their ministers because their revenue has dwindled so drastically. Because the Jews control businesses selling liquor and even wine, they are therefore allowed to supervise the collection of public revenues. They have also gained control of inns, bankrupt estates, villages and public land by means of which they have subjugated poor Christian farmers. The Jews are cruel taskmasters, not only working the farmers harshly and forcing them to carry excessive loads, but also whipping them for punishment. So it has come about that those poor farmers are the subjects of the Jews, submissive to their will and power. Furthermore, although the power to punish lies with the Christian official, he must comply with the commands of the Jews and inflict the punishments they desire. If he doesn't, he would lose his post. Therefore the tyrannical orders of the Jews have to be carried out.
That is not a dogmatic teaching, nor is it of patristic roots. He points out historical precedent, but it is not a de fide teaching for all times.
I haven't read those, I admit, but I read similar strong language from some gospel commentary and from the same era. The anger is toward the Pharisees entrapping Jesus, rejecting Him and engineering His execution.
Is there any sociopolitical advice in these? No dispute, the early Christians were not terribly forgiving to their earstwhile oppressors.
Perhaps your reading hasn't extended to St. John Chrysostom. Here are texts of his 8 sermons against the Jews in which he said things like:
Are you taking this to be anti-semitic? After reading this it doesn't sound at all anti-semitic to me. The Jews definitely don't accept Christ, and to any Christian that is basically atheism. They had all the blessings and then rejected them in the end. Shouldn't that lead to pity? If we didn't think it pitiable then I hardly would think we deserve to be called Christian.
If they are still "frocked" as opposed to de-frocked, the pope will have repercussions over this. It will start as grumbling, then a confrontation, and then a schism.....again.
I am not sure just how you are using "frocked" here, but in the Church one cannot cease to be a priest or a bishop. Ordination leaves an indelible and permanent mark on the soul. Once a person is a priest he cannot, by any declaration of any man, cease to be such. This means that he can confect the sacraments validly at any time. However, in the Church there is also a condition known as faculties. For a priest, or bishop, to act with the authority of his office he must have faculties. The SSPX clerics are certainly validly ordained. However, they do not have faculties. Their Masses are valid, but illicit. Their condition would be just like a priest who has been what is commonly called defrocked in the Church. Anything they do is not with the permission of the Holy Father or the Church.
We should also remember that these excommunications were conferred for an explicit act. They were just and legitimate. However, in mercy and in hopes of finding a way to bring many people back into the fold, the Holy Father has lifted them. That is not a restoration to the Church or a restoring of faculties. That may come later, but it isn't the case yet. Excommunications are very specific things and should not be confused with other things. They are juridical in nature and as such must be viewed very specifically.
Consider if a person were convicted of murder and rape. However, later evidence came to light that proved that he was not the murderer. The state would then lift the conviction from the murder. Now imagine all the people who would scream "How dare you lift convictions on that rapist!" But a rapist is still in prison serving time for that rape. Here we have people excommunicated for one thing, and that is lifted. It doesn't mean that anyone is condoning any opinions or statements, just as the state above wouldn't be condoning rape. The Holy Father has spoken about the apparent anti-semitism, and so has Bishop Fellay, and that should be considered for what it is. The excommunications have nothing to do with that, and should be considered for what they are.
It is dangerous to let these people back into the church if they preach heresy.
This seems to miss the truth in a couple of ways. First of all, as far as I know the Holy Father has not "let these people back into the church(sic)." Their condition in relation to the Church is unchanged. They are Catholic of course, at least in most senses, but their relationship to the Church is wounded. Their communion is anything from schismatic to imperfect, depending upon whom you ask. But, in no case have they been restored.
Secondly, I have seen no evidence that these people are "preach[ing] heresy." Saying that a different thing happened in Germany during WWII hardly seems like heresy. I am unaware of any revealed truth regarding those events. I doubt you could call the accepted history of the holocaust dogma. Sure, they may be wrong. They may even be hateful. However, that is not heretical. It is sinful, but not heresy.
It is plain from the reading of the TaNa"KH that Israel are the "good guys." Suddenly in the NT and traditional chr*stianity they become the exact opposite, the "bad guys." That's a very big problem.
Why would that be a problem? Did the Jews that died for their sins throughout the old testament remain "good guys?" When the Jews believed, then they were "good guys," however when they rejected the Son they refused to believe what God revealed. That is not continuing in belief, but disbelief. And when many of them acted to persecute the Church or believers those people did in fact become "bad guys." It doesn't make Jews evil, or Christ-killers, or any such thing, but it does change their relationship to God. It changes it just as worshipping a golden calf did. And it also changes how the Church will view them from one of brothers to one of enemies. You shouldn't be surprised when people in history speak from what they know and see.
There are several different levels of dogma. Any encyclical from the pope is a definitive teaching.
nor is it of patristic roots.
Pope Benedict XIV himself pointed out the many sources from which he drew, many statements by popes and saints. As far as patristic goes (a much overused word), refer to the following post with the 8 sermons by St. John Chrysostom. As you pointed out there, the sorts of things he says are not unique to him by any means.
He points out historical precedent, but it is not a de fide teaching for all times.
My point is that this has been the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church over the course of many, many centuries. And of course, as you have pointed out, it began in the Gospels and in the lives of the Apostles.
It cannot therefore be correct to say that such statements are "not orthodox."
I think your son would really enjoy my sister’s company.
The object of the homilies by St. John Chrystostom was to respond to an immediate need at the very time he was preaching, to dissuade Christian Judaizers from participating in Jewish ceremonies. For him this was an issue that was totally au courant, just as it was some 1,500 years later for Pope Benedict XIV, and just as it is for us, apparently, based on the reaction to Bishop Williamson's remarks.
I was old enough (7)to hear lots of adult discussions when WWII ended and by the time I was in fifth and sixth grades (public school)was exposed to information about the war in History and Current Events classes.
The Church and the Pope were lauded for the help they provided to mitigate suffering of innocent civilians which included Jews. Most of the specific thanks came from Jewish people,Golda Meir comes to mind but there were many,many others.
I was about twenty five when I heard the first accusations about the Church being less than helpful. It all started with a play by Rolf Hosthruth (?) called "The Deputy",he was a communist from east Germany. With that plethora of attacks on the Church flowed.
As I try to reconstruct and chronicle that period of time I realize that there has been a lot of undocumented charges that have been accepted as true. I seems we have taken a lot of anecdotal stories and developed a "history" that may not be quite as we now believe it to be.
So I do agree with what you said about not fearing the tests,I say that this should be applied to some of the information on the Holocaust. After all about three years ago they had to take down the sign that hung over Auschwitz and change it to reflect the actual numbers. The death count went from "4,000,000 people died here",to "1,500,000 died here". (I am not exactly sure of the numbers but I know it was at least 2,000,000 less) I have seen no change in the 6,000,00,so I do believe some further study is necessary. And while I am not defending this bishop I am not willing to condemn him either.
ping
Old plaque stated “four million people suffered and died here...” with new plaque: “ ...Nazis murdered about one and a half million...” - each is all in caps.
Its quite true the Russians pushed the higher fig until the Poles got in and did the research around 1989.
Bookmarked.
OK, you have a point with both your recent posts.
There is a necessary tension between the two faiths. Depending on the historical moment, it can heighten or lessen. Obviously, the homilies of St. Peter are not going away, and they are very condemning.
Now, are the remarks of bp. Williamson and the priests at the head of the thread today, and in SJackson's link reflective of such moment of greater tension?
I think, the real tension today is with the democratic social system that tends to neo-paganism. When these SSPX people insert an ethnic element, that is a false note. The exponents of carnality today are hardly the religious Jews of the same tradition that condemned Jesus. Sure there may be Jews among the "carnal" people, but also they may be cultural/ethnic Catholics. In the culture wars we have an ally in conservative religious Jews.
It is true the man could be giving the Mass in a garage in front of atheists and not sanctioned by the Church. The SSPX had their own buildings and were the honcho's of their own sect. Are they back in, or still out? I assumed they were back in the fold. Silly me.
If they can't influence the flock to error, then I'm perfectly OK.
“How deeply embedded is this false notion?”
Unfortunately it is as likely to be deeply embedded within the SSPX as it is among other Christians and people in general. The news media is making an effort to sniff out the wackos among the SSPXers this week. Next week it could just as easily be someone else. Anti-Semitism has, I believe, declined greatly among Christians during my lifetime; but it still has a long way to go.
Now, yer gettin' it...
But what if when the infant turns 21 he still poops in his pants...
Won't be that long and the kid will have kids of his own...And they will all poop in their pants...
Then we can know that hygiene was never in issue in the first place...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.