World Leader of Christians Rehabilitates Nazi Supporter

[Napoleon Ier]

Just ask the leading Jewish organizations, which have all condemned his action.

Well then, they can mind their own fucking business and keep their noses out of internal Church affairs that have nothing to do with Judaism.

[Snorri1234]

I'd be interested to hear the OP defend in what way quibbling over exactly how the Nazis went about killing people constitutes support for their agenda?

Outright saying that the holocaust didn't happen is a little different from quibbling over details.

[Napoleon Ier]

I'd be interested to hear the OP defend in what way quibbling over exactly how the Nazis went about killing people constitutes support for their agenda?

Outright saying that the holocaust didn't happen is a little different from quibbling over details.

1/That's not what Williamson did.
2/It still doesn't make you a Nazi.

[OnlyAmbrose]

I'm not fond of Williamson, but getting pissed off at the Pope over this is ridiculous for three reasons:

1) Denying the holocaust is NOT an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

2) The excommunications had nothing to do with holocaust denial.

3) Lifting the excommunications therefore must have necessarily have nothing to do with holocaust denial. Whether or not Williamson is a holocaust denier is irrelevant to his status in the church for the two reasons mentioned above.

Personally, I think this whole incident shows incredible courage on the part of the Holy Father. He HAD to know this media firestorm was coming, but he did the right thing anyways without giving heed to the inevitable allegations of anti-semitism which were going to follow.

[Snorri1234]

I'd be interested to hear the OP defend in what way quibbling over exactly how the Nazis went about killing people constitutes support for their agenda?

Outright saying that the holocaust didn't happen is a little different from quibbling over details.

1/That's not what Williamson did.
2/It still doesn't make you a Nazi.

1. There is little difference between saying only 200 or 300.000 people died and that there were no gas-chambers and denying the holocaust.

2. It does make you a despicable human being who tries to act like the nazis weren't that bad.

1) Denying the holocaust is NOT an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

2) The excommunications had nothing to do with holocaust denial.

3) Lifting the excommunications therefore must have necessarily had nothing to do with holocaust denial. Whether or not Williamson is a holocaust denier is irrelevant to his status in the church for the two reasons mentioned above.

Sure, but that's not the problem. In fact, the entire problem is that holocaust-denial is not an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

I think catholics should be a little less concerned about rules and a little more concerned about what is right.

[OnlyAmbrose]

Sure, but that's not the problem. In fact, the entire problem is that holocaust-denial is not an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

I think catholics should be a little less concerned about rules and a little more concerned about what is right.

You have ZERO understanding of the Catholic Church.

You can't be excommunicated just for committing a sin. You can't be excommunicated for murder, for instance, nor for rape, adultery, etc. You don't get kicked out of the Church for being a bad person (we're all sinners), you get kicked out of the Church for schism, etc. You CERTAINLY don't get kicked out of the Church for holding a ridiculous historical opinion.

It's not about rules - it's about the simple fact that sinners need the Church most, and excommunication isn't a tool for use against sinners or whackjobs, it's the natural result of schism.

[Snorri1234]

Sure, but that's not the problem. In fact, the entire problem is that holocaust-denial is not an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

I think catholics should be a little less concerned about rules and a little more concerned about what is right.

You have ZERO understanding of the Catholic Church.

You can't be excommunicated just for committing a sin. You can't be excommunicated for murder, for instance, nor for rape, adultery, etc. You don't get kicked out of the Church for being a bad person (we're all sinners), you get kicked out of the Church for schism, etc. You CERTAINLY don't get kicked out of the Church for holding a ridiculous historical opinion.

I know that. I just think it's ridiculous.

It's not about rules - it's about the simple fact that sinners need the Church most, and excommunication isn't a tool for use against sinners or whackjobs, it's the natural result of schism.

While perhaps sinners need the church most, the problem is that these sinners hold an influential position.

[Napoleon Ier]

Denying the holocaust isn't a sin. Wanting to go about enacting a new one may very well be, but holding an opinion about the progression of a sequence of events isn't.

[Snorri1234]

Denying the holocaust isn't a sin. Wanting to go about enacting a new one may very well be, but holding an opinion about the progression of a sequence of events isn't.

I know it isn't a sin. The point is not about sins, because there is plenty the church considers a sin that I don't. I wouldn't say the the church should distance itself from someone who preaches for safe sex in Africa, even though that would be sinfull according to your books, but rather that they embrace him and his progressive view.

[Napoleon Ier]

Well, actually the "point" you ubiquitously refer to is in this case very much centered around the question of Williamson and the lifting of bans of Excommunication on the SSPX, and only in the most peripheral and tortuous way related to Africa and safe sex.

[Snorri1234]

Well, actually the "point" you ubiquitously refer to is in this case very much centered around the question of Williamson and the lifting of bans of Excommunication on the SSPX, and only in the most peripheral and tortuous way related to Africa and safe sex.

Well that is the point the OP made.

But what JohnyRockets pointed out and what I was going along with is something different. I don't care much about appointing some dude with ridiculous views except for serving as an example to my point.

[Napoleon Ier]

He wasn't appointed to anything.

[PLAYER57832]

I'm not fond of Williamson, but getting pissed off at the Pope over this is ridiculous for three reasons:

1) Denying the holocaust is NOT an offense for which you can be excommunicated.

2) The excommunications had nothing to do with holocaust denial.

3) Lifting the excommunications therefore must have necessarily have nothing to do with holocaust denial. Whether or not Williamson is a holocaust denier is irrelevant to his status in the church for the two reasons mentioned above.

Personally, I think this whole incident shows incredible courage on the part of the Holy Father. He HAD to know this media firestorm was coming, but he did the right thing anyways without giving heed to the inevitable allegations of anti-semitism which were going to follow.

Okay, for the record, my family, though not Jewish, FAUGHT the Nazis, has absolutely NO tolerance for Nazis thinking.

However, if, as you say this had nothing to do with his Haulocaust position, and if Williamson did indeed meet the standards for once again becoming a church member, able to take communion, etc... then, Pope Benedict did act with courage.

What is disturbing to us all, I think, though is that denying the Haulocaust would not be considered a serious sin and an offense against the church. To bear false witness is one of the basic commandments. As a Christian, I, of course, believe in forgiveness.. yes, even for child molesters and any other heineous criminal. However, there is a differance between being absolved of a sin you no longer commit and being absolved of a sin you continue to put forward and even brag about.

To a large extent, this is a differance between Protestant and Roman Catholic Theology. Roman Catholics are taught that the Pope and each level of Priest is fully capable, is needed to pass forgiveness onto people (I realize there are technicalities here, but that is close enough to be generally true) and that once the pennance is served, forgiveness betowed, the sin never occured in God's eyes. Protestants, well... to quote someone I won't name. "you cannot put a bullet back into a gun or make a spoken word unspoken".

For the church to continue to not just say "ok, you are a sinner, but we are not going to push you out of the church", but "you may resume a position of leadership, even if only symbolic" .. THAT is quite a differance in the eyes of most of us.

Add in the many other actions of Pope Benedict, restoring antisemetic language for example to some specific masses, making other statements and comments. What Pope Benedict may or may not have done when young in Germany, during a time of war is something QUITE differant from what he has done as an adult, particularly as a cardinal and now as Pope.

[OnlyAmbrose]

What is disturbing to us all, I think, though is that denying the Haulocaust would not be considered a serious sin and an offense against the church.

Oh come on. Do you really expect the Church to write down in the Catechism: "It is a sin to deny the holocaust."

I'm not going to judge whether or not Williamson has sinned. If he denies the holocaust because he hates Jews, then yes, that is a sin. If he denies it because he has a sincere (albeit ridiculous) historical belief, then no he has not sinned.

But really, WHO CARES? All this discussion may or may not prove is that Williamson is a nut. And I wouldn't disagree. But it's irrelevant to the lifting of the SSPX excommunications.

Regardless, Williamson's views on the holocaust in no way reflect on the Pope. The Pope lifted an excommunication on the bishop that involved SCHISM.

[mpjh]

It is a "sin" in your christian terminology to deny the holocaust when you know that encourages further hatred of Jews, and you do it with that purpose in mind. Even Benedict doesn't deny the holocaust, he knows better.

The issue here is not excommunication. Benedict could have let the Nazi back in, but clamped a tight vise on his lips, something the church does often when the church official is preaching something wrong, hateful, and sinful. Benedict's silence on this matter of the speeches given by the Nazi is the problem.

You could be damn sure that any Bishop preaching that abortion is OK, or gay marriage is OK, or female priests are OK, or contraception is OK, or that liberation theology is OK as a revolutionary basis, or any number of hot button issues would get severe reprimand, orders not to preach, prohibitions on saying the mass, and a whole range of others actions designed to stop the preaching. In this case, Benedict simply takes his similar thinking Nazi into the fold without admonition, and the guy goes on preaching the lie that creates more hate.

[OnlyAmbrose]

It is a "sin" in your christian terminology to deny the holocaust when you know that encourages further hatred of Jews, and you do it with that purpose in mind. Even Benedict doesn't deny the holocaust, he knows better.

The issue here is not excommunication. Benedict could have let the Nazi back in, but clamped a tight vise on his lips, something the church does often when the church official is preaching something wrong, hateful, and sinful. Benedict's silence on this matter of the speeches given by the Nazi is the problem.

You could be damn sure that any Bishop preaching that abortion is OK, or gay marriage is OK, or female priests are OK, or contraception is OK, or that liberation theology is OK as a revolutionary basis, or any number of hot button issues would get severe reprimand, orders not to preach, prohibitions on saying the mass, and a whole range of others actions designed to stop the preaching. In this case, Benedict simply takes his similar thinking Nazi into the fold without admonition, and the guy goes on preaching the lie that creates more hate.

Holocaust denial is not contrary to Catholic theology. It's historically absurd and politically suicidal. The Pope is neither a historian nor a politician. It's not his responsibility to comment on such things. He HAS commented that the Holocaust is a moral tragedy. That is his job, to talk about morals. Of course he'd speak out against contraception &c, that's his responsibility.

[mpjh]

It is also his responsibility to state clearly that the Holocaust was itself amoral and a great sin against humanity. It is his responsibility to purge the church of all vestiges of support for the ideology of hatred that allowed the Holocaust. It is his responsibility to do whatever is necessary to make sure that there is no church support for genocide of any kind. That is the minimum he must do, and has failed to do miserably with this latest action.

He must stand against the holocaust and genocide as strongly, and with the same resources as he stands against abortion, contraception, gay marriage, and female priests (at a minimum).

[OnlyAmbrose]

It is also his responsibility to state clearly that the Holocaust was itself amoral and a great sin against humanity.

As I wrote above, he did.

[mpjh]

What about the rest? Geez, you guys sure like to apologize for anything a christian leader does, no matter how wrong it is.

[OnlyAmbrose]

What about the rest? Geez, you guys sure like to apologize for anything a christian leader does, no matter how wrong it is.

What "rest"? I already answered you - the Pope has and continues to speak out against genocide and specifically the holocaust.

Apologize for anything a Christian leader does? Hardly. Williamson is clearly a kook and/or sorely historically inept. You will not hear and apology for him from me. But the Pope has done nothing wrong and has, in fact, shown incredible courage and fortitude in doing what is right in spite of inevitable (though unjustified) criticism.

[mpjh]

You cannot see the horror of what the pope has done. That is the problem. Your religion makes no demand on you, it is what you use to placate yourself, to assure yourself that you are "good." If you were to look honestly at what religious leaders actually do, you would see the amassing o wealth, the supporting of those amassing wealth, the kow-towing to power, the central role in justifying otherwise unjustifiable wars even to the rehabilitation of those that participated in the most egregiously way in the war that was one of the most evil ever.

[Zeppflyer]

It is a "sin" in your christian terminology to deny the holocaust when you know that encourages further hatred of Jews, and you do it with that purpose in mind. Even Benedict doesn't deny the holocaust, he knows better.

The issue here is not excommunication. Benedict could have let the Nazi back in, but clamped a tight vise on his lips, something the church does often when the church official is preaching something wrong, hateful, and sinful. Benedict's silence on this matter of the speeches given by the Nazi is the problem.

You could be damn sure that any Bishop preaching that abortion is OK, or gay marriage is OK, or female priests are OK, or contraception is OK, or that liberation theology is OK as a revolutionary basis, or any number of hot button issues would get severe reprimand, orders not to preach, prohibitions on saying the mass, and a whole range of others actions designed to stop the preaching. In this case, Benedict simply takes his similar thinking Nazi into the fold without admonition, and the guy goes on preaching the lie that creates more hate.

And as was already pointed out, he has.

I hate to reference Al Jazeera, but it was the first article to come up and it certainly gets the point across. (Not to mention that if they, not exactly Benny's biggest fans, are pointing this out...)

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europ ... 19134.html

In a statement released on Wednesday, the Vatican also said the traditionalist movement Richard Williamson belongs to must accept all teachings of the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council, which urged respect for Judaism and other religions, as well as all the teachings of the popes since 1958.

"Williamson ... must in an absolutely unequivocal and public way distance himself from his positions regarding the Shoah," a statement said, using the Hebrew word for Holocaust.

His views on the Holocaust were "absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father [Pope Benedict XVI]," it added.

I'd say that wraps it up.

[mpjh]

Yeah, yeah, but the world knows that you go by what he does and not what he says. What he does is support a Nazi sympathizer in his ranks of clergy.

[Napoleon Ier]

Yeah, yeah, but the world knows that you go by what he does and not what he says. What he does is support a Nazi sympathizer in his ranks of clergy.

Actually, the Pope has no theoretical control over who gets ordained or doesn't: if the Sacrament is illicit, it isn't necessarily invalid, as occurred in 1988 in the case of the SSPX's ordaining.

So, no, it isn't "his" clergy.

Furthermore, he hasn't "supported" him, he's disowned his views, and on top of that not allowed him to perform any official function as a Bishop.

All he's done is re-admit him to Communion.

Oh, and as I've already said: he's not a Nazi supporter.

[Snorri1234]

I'm too lazy to find an article but I read in the paper today that the Vatican told Williamson to revoke his statements on the holocaust publicly if he ever wants to hold any function within the church.


At least the church is saying that none of the four dudes can hold a function or be a bishop if they don't stop being anti-semitists.


So I guess I don't really see a problem with this anymore. The only thing that has changed is that these guys are catholic again or whatever.