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.
Man, you are playing with fire...
Your Catholic church may view the Jews as enemies but God warns you against this...
The only reason you have been allowed the opportunity to become a Christian is to make the Jews jealous...
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
Since the Resurrection the Jews have not rejected Jesus on their own...
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Be ye not ignorant...
God is keeping the Jews away from Jesus...Calling the Jew your enemy is about the stupidest thing a Christian can do...
Are you waxing autobiographical?
Of course, if you want to try to hijack this into a general attack on the Catholic Church, I ain't playing.
I would add that there are apostolic constitutions forbidding priests to pray in non-Christian houses of worship, and other similar measures aimed at liturgical separation, and generally syncretism is a heresy.
The recent popes were criticized by traditionalists for appearing at synagogues and mosque(s), although it is doubtful that canon laws were broken, as there was no prayers in common.
That, of course, is internal church matter and not a matter of social teaching.
I've never encountered a traditionalist who was a big believer in this supposed apparition. On the contrary, this one seems to attract the "charismatics."
I would also note that the article at the top of this thread is from a heretical anti-Catholic publication.
There is no question that in some pockets of the SSPX, one can find some who hold odd opinions.
But this is hardly unique to the SSPX. In your average happy-clappy parish, one can often find those who believe no end of odd, and even, heretical opinions like acceptance of abortion and homosexuality as moral, ordination of women, disbelief in the Real Presence, etc., etc.
>>I’ve never encountered a traditionalist who was a big believer in this supposed apparition. On the contrary, this one seems to attract the “charismatics.”<<
You haven’t been in my parish. Tons of them. And we are so traditional that we kneel for communion and have a TLM as one of our eight Holy Masses.
I just read where one of the men will give Mass for the pope and I was silly enough to believe it would be in a church sanctioned by the Church under approval of the man that just let him back in.
Nobody let anyone "back in." That term is not really applicable here, as it is too fuzzy. The Church views anyone of faith in Christ as "in" in some way. The communion one person may have with the Church can be almost nonexistant or full, and anywhere in between. The SSPX are Catholic, most certainly, but their relationship to the Church is not complete. It can be described as anything from schismatic to imperfect, and you will get various responses depending upon whom you ask and what you have in mind. But, they are certainly not regularized. Their relationship to the Church is most certainly not full communion, and their Masses are absolutely illicit. Their priests are acting without faculties from Rome.
As to the Mass offered for the Pope, I am quite confident that the Holy Father accepts such with humility. Consider that Protestants are not "in" the Church in the way you seem to be implying, and yet if such were to offer prayers for any Catholic I am sure that person would welcome that. Who would reject prayers from Christians?
It is true the man could be giving the Mass in a garage in front of atheists and not sanctioned by the Church.
Yes, he could, but he isn't. People in SSPX chapels and churches are hardly atheists, and the chapels themselves are certainly not "garages." But, neither are they "sanctioned."
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.
Yes, silly you. Why do people think they can read a report about an internal and very specific juridical action by the Pope and while not having any real idea at all or working knowledge of any kind about what is going on they assume that they can still speak with authority about the subject? If you are ignorant regarding what excommunications are, why they are issued, and how they are lifted, and what all of it means regarding other issues, then you should hardly be surprised that you don't know what affect it has on the people involved. The SSPX bishops were excommunicated, and they were separated from full communion with the Church. One of those has changed. The other has not.
If they can't influence the flock to error, then I'm perfectly OK.
I can't see why you would care. What you call error is surely a great deal of what we call revealed truth. However, accepting that, I would think that the SSPX are as capable of influencing people into errors as any other group out there. That is why the excommunications have been lifted. Right now the SSPX must be dialogued with like many other groups, such as Jews or Protestants. If the organization will eventually submit to Rome and return to the fold fully then the Pope will again be able to exercise his authority directly with them and that means he would be able to discipline such silliness as has been happening lately. Right now he can do nothing really, since they only accept him nominally. They were already exommunicated after all, and that didn't stop them from being morons, but they were still drawing tradition loving Catholics from the fold. They need to return to a proper relationship with Rome, and they would not consider that until the exommunications were lifted. It is simple, and this is step one to fixing things.
The only reason you have been allowed the opportunity to become a Christian is to make the Jews jealous...
Gross over simplification and bad prooftexting. And you have also missed the entire point of that chapter in which Paul uses himself as an example of how God has remained faithful to the Jews. But, Paul of course is a Christian, and that is just what he is saying. God has kept a remnant "according to the election of grace" and Paul is one of them. And they are comparable to those who "who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal."
God is keeping the Jews away from Jesus...
Man, are you playing with fire...
Believe me, "philo-Semitic Biblicist chr*stian" is a compliment.
Tell that to the SSPXers and Feeneyites who say things like "the chosen people is now the accursed race."
The Pharisees were the good guys. They were the ones who defended the Oral Tradition that taught such things as the afterlife, angels, and the resurrection of the dead. It is indeed ironic that in in attacking the Pharisees Catholic and Orthodox chr*stians paved the way for Protestants to attack the church fathers.
Assigning Israel the role of the "enemies of G-d" is to essentially make of Israel what 'Edom/`Alaleq had always been in Judaism. It simply reeks of "let's come up with an excuse to start a new religion."
To assume the claims of chr*stianity from the outset rather than to read G-d's Word chronologically and evaluate the claims of chr*stianity in the light of previous (universally acknowledged) revelation is the great blindness of all chr*stians of all persuasions (though Fundamentalist Protestants are much more willing to "start reading from the front").
Really??? Well I'll check again...
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Nope...You're wrong...Jesus blinded the eyes and minds of Israel til the fullness of the Gentiles takes place...
Jesus will turn away ungodliness from Israel and all Israel will be saved...
Just unbelievable...
Bizzare group of priests! Wonder what kind of weird stuff they are into.
As a Catholic, this is appalling!
It was a finding of the Nicene Council 325 CE !
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach AdonaiLuke 17:3 "..... If your brother sins, rebuke him;If he does not repent; rebuke him again.
and if he repents, forgive him"
Nope...You're wrong...Jesus blinded the eyes and minds of Israel til the fullness of the Gentiles takes place...
I have always despised the art of prooftexting and lifting one word over and against the next. It is ugly.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Just where do we see God making people blind here? Are you reading some other text that I am? Blindness "is happened" to part of Israel. (Some still see, and Paul is evidence of this as he has accepted Christ.) Even a cursory reading will show that this blindness is not celebrated, excused or approved, and neither is it suggested that God has made them so. It is only said that only after the Gospel is spread over the entire globe will Israel finally repent. You take the description of what is happening and somehow twist it to mean that the Lord himself has made it so. Ridiculous. Blindness is a sin and blaming God for sin is to just add blasphemy to it.
Assigning Israel the role of the "enemies of G-d" is to essentially make of Israel what 'Edom/`Alaleq had always been in Judaism. It simply reeks of "let's come up with an excuse to start a new religion."
No, it is to follow the words of scripture. Let us look at the texts you have been trying to twist into supporting that God is making people sin.
As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
The blind Jews, not being in the remnant that have accepted the Church, are enemies. They are enemies towards the Church, which is Christ. But, they are beloved as regards God's promises to their fathers. Of course God keeps his promises, even though they don't. However, he will not save those who are obstinate in their rejection of him, regardless of who their fathers are. This we know from the same texts.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again...
If they abide not still in unbelief then, and only then, shall they be grafted in. God is able to do this, as we know, but it depends on their belief. And notice that it doesn't say that God makes them not believe. He is severe to them that fell, and they did fall. They were not thrown over by God.
Blindness "is happened" to part of Israel. (Some still see, and Paul is evidence of this as he has accepted Christ.)
Typical bible perverter...You don't like what it says so you change a word here or a phrase there to suit your theology...Try expounding on the verse as it's written...
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
The verse DOES NOT SAY, blindness happened to part of Israel...
You know what's uglier??? Someone taking a word here and a word there to prove something that ain't so and completely destroying the understanding the scripture...
Even a cursory reading will show that this blindness is not celebrated, excused or approved, and neither is it suggested that God has made them so.
You take the description of what is happening and somehow twist it to mean that the Lord himself has made it so. Ridiculous. Blindness is a sin and blaming God for sin is to just add blasphemy to it.
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
There you go...And in other scriptures, God talks about blinding others as well...
It is only said that only after the Gospel is spread over the entire globe will Israel finally repent.
Are you just making this stuff up??? Have you ever read Romans 11???
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
When it says they were all in unbelief, it means they were ALL in unbelief...
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
Well I can't help but chime in here as well...Do you have any clue as to why Israel is called the enemy (only concerning the gospel) FOR YOUR SAKES???
They are enemies of the gospel for our sakes...They are not you enemies, nor enemies of the church...
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
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.