The Case of +Williamson, Vatican II and Judaism

Don Curzio Nitoglia's article below is a too much, at the moment, for me to attempt to put into better English from the electronic translation.



If anyone who understands Italian quite well could do the job it would be greatly appreciated. The original link here:


http://draft.blogger.com/goog_1235854786750


Electronic translation here:


http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl...AISMO%26hl%3Den




1) Benedict XVI (January 21 2009) has lifted the excommunication of 1 July 1988, which was imposed on the four bishops consecrated FSSPX of June 30, '88, Mgr. Marcel Lefebvre and Mgr. Antonio de Castro Mayer.






2) Immediately the 'media' have orchestrated a campaign of lynching against the pope Ratzinger and FSSPX, specifically in the person of Mgr. Williamson, guilty of having exposed (in Canada, twenty years ago) an opinion on his argument that historians have revisited the 'Shoah' (the Hebrew word, which translated in Italian means "disaster" and "holocaust" as you would have understood) and what has been called to meet again in October 2008 by Swedish TV in Germany.






3) The rabbi has asked the world and the pope to re-excommunicate Williamson, and FSSPX to say clearly whether it accepts the whole of the Vatican II, especially "Nostra Aetate" and teaching of post-sull'ebraismo council. Unfortunately, this request was endorsed in full, by Benedict XVI in the 'Note of the Secretary of State' (4 February 2009).






4) The chief rabbi of Rome has said that the central problem is not so much a review of the vulgar 'shoah' (raised by the 'average' about Msgr. Williamson) as that of non-acceptance of the changed attitude toward theological Judaism, begun by John XXIII with the Vatican II and continued by Paul VI and especially John Paul II. When Ratzinger issued a motu proprio on the Tridentine Mass was lawful (not must) hope, without pretending that you would eliminate, gradually, the disaster caused by liturgico Paul VI with NOM (1970), nothing more, but still something. Still believe now, after his latest statement, which should review and correct the Vatican II, would "challenge the truth known."






5) Who is really Ratzinger? What is his current position on Vatican II and Judaism? One could hope that the rubble of the post-council had been taught at least in part, especially on the liturgy. But the case Williamson has discovered what really boiling in the pot. Ratzinger wants the full and complete implementation of the council and especially the inter especially with religious Judaism. If the answer to Ratzinger, August 2007, the book rabbi Jacob Neusner, Imaginary Dispute between a rabbi and teacher follow Which Jesus? (Casale Monferrato, Piemme, 1996) had given us some hope, the positions today ce were totally removed. Alfred Lapple, former professor of Ratzinger, at the seminary of Freising, he told all Future (February 4, 2009, p. 32) that the originator of the intellectual formation of Benedict XVI, there are more than de Lubac and von Balthasar, even Martin Buber, who has trivialization made "mass" culture-chassidica Jewish mystical and esoteric. The Israeli professor Israel Shahak (who lost their parents in the work of nationalist-socialist Bergen Belsen, where he was imprisoned) Buber wrote that it was "one of the greatest hoaxer (...), in his numerous works in which exalts chassidico the entire movement, is not a single line on the real doctrines chassidiche concerning non-Jews (...). Buber's works were translated into Hebrew and became a formidable educational tool in schools in Israel, increasing the power of the leaders chassidici, literally 'blood thirsty', in promoting the Israeli chauvinism and 'hatred towards all non-Jews (... ). I am convinced that no one has left a legacy of its most malevolent of [Buber] "(Jewish History and Judaism, Verrua Savoy, CLS, 1997, pp. 57-58). Maurizio Crippa also on The Sheet (4 February 2009, p. 3) writes that Benedict XVI "is the theologian who has dug more in the Jewish background of Christianity [...]. In the early seventies Ratzinger enters into relationship with 'The Catholic Community Integration', which from the first post-war had begun a thorough review of the theological and spiritual Catholicism German [...]. "God can have two wives [Synagogue and the Church]? Is not this split between the synagogue and 'ecclesia', so full of evil, the reason the deepest of all the divisions that followed in the history of the Church? … Is not that the Church should be rooted nell'ebraismo, in order to be fully Catholic, that is universal? ". The report estimated between Ratzinger and this community (it will be him, Archbishop of Monaco, to approve the statutes in 1978) has never stopped ( [1] ) And it shows.






6) Father Federico Lombardi, said that "those who deny the 'Shoah' denies the Cross of Christ"! “Tenebrae factae sunt”! "This is your time and power of darkness."






7) What really happens? I think we must distinguish.






a) First, we must not delude ourselves: Benedict XVI is not Saint Pius X, had a neo-modernist training, is influenced intellectually, still strongly dall'hegelismo and modernism. If in 2007 you could hope for "contra spem" no illusion, no more. If you have sold out of weakness or if everything was a table, only God knows for sure. We can have only conjectures or opinions. We must recognize that he suffered considerable pressures on the part of Judaism ad extra and dell'episcopato ad intra. But if it is human to be afraid of the lion that wants Sbrana 'Colosseum', non licet "change faith" for fear of the lions.






b) In light of the success you might think (it's a very likely, not a certainty, at least for me) that the maneuver by the "motu proprio" of 7 July 2007 until the lifting of the excommunication (21 January 2009) was a "trap" aimed, clearly, those who had not yet yielded to the "new" post-conciliar and conciliar, including the theology of the "Judeo-Christianity", which began with "Nostra Aetate" (1965), continued with the "Ancient covenant never revoked" (1981) and "elder brothers in faith" (1986), and then completed his Benedict XVI at Auschwitz May 28 2006, when he exclaimed, turning to God: "Awake! Do not forget mankind, your creature!", Thus taking the 'theology of the silence of God', dear to Hans Jonas and GB Metz, who deny the goodness, omnipotence, and providence of God even doubt its existence, have remained silent in the face of the 'Shoah'. Soon ask the rabbis to excommunicate Ratzinger even God could think that Ratzinger assimilated the "catastrophe" of the Holocaust the Jewish people of Christ, today, 4 February 2009, it has the certainty in the face of the "Note of Secretary of State", dictated by Ratzinger himself, which states that "the views of Mgr. Williamson are totally unacceptable and strongly rejected by the Holy Father ", who last January 28 "has reiterated its full and unquestionable solidarity with our brothers recipients of the First Alliance", to the "Bishop Williamson, for admission to an office in the Episcopal Church, must also be absolutely clear and publicly distanced themselves from his positions on the Shoah." We are not speaking about Ancient or Old Covenant, which succeeded the New and Eternal, but first, there were almost parallel two Covenants, one (the First) for the Jews and the other (the second) for the Gentiles to convertitesi Christ ( [2] ). Moreover, to my knowledge, the 'Shoah' is not a dogma of the Faith revealed and defined in order to be part of the Church need to profess their "faith" in the 'Shoah'. This is evidence of proven heterogeneous evolution of the "dogma" to reconcile and post-conciliar, of the 'hermeneutic' of the discontinuity or 'break' between the council and dell'inconciliabilità and Tradition.






8) What are the points in question, for us, indispensable?






a) The Deicide: For Catholics, Jesus is true God and true man, his murder, therefore, is a true 'Dei-cidio'. Judaism does not believe in his divinity, but can not require Christians to deny or not to profess in public (see Bishop. Brunero Gherardini, La vexata quaestio of Deicide, Vatican City, in Divinitas, No. 2 / 2008, pp. 215-223. Id, On Jews: thus, serenely, Frigento, in Fides Catholic, No. 1 / 2009, pp. 245-278). For all the Gospels and the Fathers of the Church by St. Ignatius of Antioch (+ 107) to St. Augustine (+ 430), and therefore infallibly, rabbinic Judaism religion or post-biblical is responsible for the death of Jesus San Thomas Aquinas, the Common Doctor of the Church, teaches that "the Jews sinned, not only killing Christ as a man, but as of God crucified him" (S. Th., III, q. 47, a. 5). It for the dogma of the hypostatic, the human nature of Christ subsists in the divine Person, so what is done against Christ man is made against Christ God, so there is real "Deicide", even if it is not dead but only the gods the humanity of Jesus, subsisting in the Person of the Father Son and Holy Spirit.






b) The sentence on the "elder brothers in the Faith" issued by Pope John Paul II, April 13 1986 to the synagogue in Rome for the Catholic Faith is false, not only ambiguous, as the Jews after Christ is faithful to the Talmud and not to Moses, and finally is divinely revealed (St. Paul 1 Thes., II, 15-16) that "The Jews killed the Lord. Do not like God, are enemies of all mankind, because we are not preaching to the Gentiles to be saved." So with the post-biblical Jews have nothing in common with regard to religion, can not be our elder brothers (in the ontological sense of "beloved", as stated then GP II and not in chronological order as they are born before us), they are an obstacle to the salvation of men, because the enemies are still the Gospel of Christ which is the only means of salvation. The Jewish religion after Christ is not a living reality, but 'dead and deadly'. The Jews who lived before Christ and were faithful to Abraham and to the Old Testament are our elder brothers (only chronologically, in fact ontologically or as to the value, are in a state objectively lower since the Old Covenant is imperfect compared to the New and eternal, so Christianity is superior to the objective value, all'ebraismo of the Old Testament). Jesus himself, when the unbelieving Jews profess to have the father Abraham replied that it is carnal, but not spiritually or as to the Faith because Abraham believed in Christ to come while they disbelieve, and then have to father the devil (John, VIII, 42). If they were "our elder brothers in the faith" as (GP II, 13 April 1986), we also have "for father the devil." I hope not!






c) The Old Covenant has been replaced by the New and Eternal, in the Blood of Christ, to the Church founded by Jesus is the new and true Israel. St. Paul, divinely inspired, taught, "said New Covenant, Christ said the first old-fashioned, now what is old and aging, it is next to disappear" (Ebr., VIII, 13). It is the Faith revealed.






d) If Christ is God, the post-biblical Judaism that denies his divinity is a false religion. For the principle of non-contradiction: "the same thing [Christ] is not [God] and not [God] at the same time and under the same ratio" (Aristotle). Jesus is God or is God or not, "tertium non datur". If God is the true Christianity and Judaism False if God is not vice versa. It is absolutely certain.






e) The 'shoah' is not a purely historical-political (as has been criticized for Msgr. Williamson), but it claims to be the new 'religion immanent' dell'ebraismo "collective messiah, master and lord of this world (see "Williamson's case" and "Jonah: A man for our time" on this "Site"). All this, for the Catholic Faith, is unacceptable. In addition, the story is done with the evidence of documents, archives, artefacts of war and not by dint of threats of imprisonment and excommunications secular and ecclesiastical. It is also a matter of "truth", ie the compliance of our intellect and to view reality. Can not be expected to adhere to error (discrepancy between opinion and fact), in the true respect for the dignity of human nature, made to adhere to truth and goodness. We need the historical evidence, chemical and physical to join the vulgar holocausts. Jesus taught us "the truth shall make you free", the error, however, makes slaves of the father of lies.






Conclusion: an appeal to the inner truth






a) Unfortunately, some priests' traditionalists' have not shown a lot of dignity, firmness and love and have lynched, threw or "thrown overboard" fiercely and publicly, without possibility of appeal Mgr. Williamson (as he himself acknowledged, comparing him to Jonah), in a court of "Nuremberg-bis," which has left more than perplexed, but clearly disgusted, many faithful "traditionalists" and not. The profession, implicitly, of "faith" nell'olocausto Jewish, even by a slice of the world "traditionalist" is amazing and makes us feel just how widespread and deep is the crisis of Faith in a Catholic environment. St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that "Christ preached publicly to the Jews they hated truth, without fear of urtarli" (S. Th., III, q. 42, a. 2). So it is the duty of the bishop as to any Christians profess the truth not only of faith but also connected with the Faith. Now, today is the fact of the Holocaust is a Jewish truth of "faith" Talmudic, [s] - associated with the Catholic Church. I object that is at times a need for caution so as not to scandalize the pusilla. San Gregorio Magno replied that: "If the scandal comes from the truth, we must endure the scandal rather than abandon the truth" (Homil., VII in Hezekiah.) As a prudent Christian supernatural virtues. Now the question of historical 'shoah', like all others, must be addressed according to the criteria of "conformity to reality" (truth) and not in the wake of emotion or fear. So it is not reasonable to ask Msgr. Williamson a withdrawal, dictated by the prudence of the flesh "that is" different from the reality of the facts" (false).






b) Sorry to say, but objectively, the press release of Msgr. Fellay on 'Williamson case' was not good, especially to a senior bishop, who was in a seminar Econe our teacher of philosophy and theology, and taught us to reason with his logical rigor. “Errare humanum est”. However it would be ungenerous to blame Mgr. Fellay, even he can make mistakes, especially in a situation of "pressure" or "lobbyng" like this that we are living. The current duty is the unity in the truth and avoid any internal division, and counterattack the enemy outside.






c) Vatican II is dear all'ebraismo. It is a fact that especially in these days we have heard, read and seen, and the fact that is not the issue. But St. Paul (I Thes., II, 15-16) suggests, divinely inspired, that "The Jews killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and apostles persecute us, not like son of God and enemies of all people [non-Jews , nd]. Forbid us to evangelize the Gentiles for their salvation." To the extent that the Jews still current and those who refused to continue Christ, crucified him and persecuted the Twelve Apostles, they do not like God. If you do not like God, can not be dear to us even if dear son to the Vatican II, means that it does not have the same spirit of God also Judaism denies the SS. Trinity and the divinity of Christ, which are the two main mysteries of the Catholic Faith. So ol'ebraismo is crazy and contradicts itself, but it is not, or Vatican II is in conflict with Catholicism and may not please those who want to remain Christian, for those willing hates Christ and Christianity. The fact that the rabbis will accept the order of Vatican II 'sounds wrong' and should reflect "all men of good doctrine." Again St. Paul (Titus, I, 10-14) reveals that: "There are many spirits mestatori, Parolai and misleading, especially those that come from the circumcision [Jews]: they need to close the mouth (...). So riprendili hard to be strong in faith and not turn to Jewish fables." The Apostle says not to retract or apologize, but to "close the mouth" to them (not a Bishop. Williamson) and "not believe Jewish fables."






d) It is historically established that the "Nostra Aetate" was prepared by Jules Isaac, jew atheist pro-communist, with the help of Good Berìth (Freemasonry Jewish) of which was a member (as stated on 16 November 1991, at the Award of the card. Decourtray, Marc Aron, president of the "BB" in French) and the card. Augustine Bea assisted by Fr Paul Démann, jew "converted" and Fr. Jean de Menasci (ditto). The agreement between Jules Isaac and Pope Roncalli was organized by "BB" from some politicians and social-communists (J. Madiran, "Itineraires" III, September 1990, p. 3, footnote 2). Another maker of "Nostra Aetate" was Nahum Goldman, president of the World Jewish Congress, which prepared the draft "Dignitatis humanae" on religious freedom. The documents were presented by Goldman with Label Katz (he of the "BB") on behalf of the World Conference of Jewish Organizations. So "Nostra Aetate" and "Dignitatis humanae"were prepared, physically, from the Jewish Freemasonry. Dulcis in fundo, Rabbi Abraham Heschel, worked intensely with Bea and companions to the drafting of "Nostra Aetate". All this was revealed dall'israelita Lazare Landau ("Tribune Juive", No. 903, January 1986 en ° 1001, December 1987), who writes: "in the winter of 1962, executives received Jews in secret, in the subsoil synagogue in Strasbourg, Fr Yves Congar, instructed by Bea and Roncalli to ask ourselves what we expected from the Church on the eve of the council (...). Our comprehensive rehabilitation, was the answer" (J. Madiran, "Itineraires", autumn 1990, III, pp.1-2).






The right interpretation of Vatican II is the one given in these days of Benedict XVI, it makes a Tuttuno with Judaism, yet dear to God, who has no need of Christ as it has its "holocaust". If you want to remain Christians can not accept the Vatican II. Should now be clear that any discussion on its interpretation in the light of Tradition would be equivalent to "talk with the devil", which is very dangerous.






e) Want to deal with Vatican II and anti-modernismo, without wanting to know (historically and theologically) the Jewish problem (see the de PONCINS, The problem of the Jews in the Council, Rome, 1962) means making a hole in the water and get trick by the "brothers worst." I spoke with a great theologian of the old school, who told me that Msgr. Antonio Piolanti, he thought that within a few years, "Nostra Aetate" was completely forgotten, so had no foundations scritturari, patristic and theological (the only document of Vatican II, which does not contain even a mention of the Holy Scriptures, the Fathers of Doctors and the Magisterium). Instead it has become the battle horse of the pontificate of Paul II ( "elder brothers in faith"). Thus, the theologian concluded that, to address the "problem of the council" from a theological point of view, you need to know the "problem Hebrew", which is theological, historical, political and socio-economic indicators. Unfortunately, many "traditionalists" from Mass of St. Pius V et non plus ultra, (but FSSPX is not the 'Ecclesia Dei afflicta, it was founded by Mgr. Lefebvre to combat the errors of Vatican II and the preservation of the Catholic Mass, but not all its members seem to be aware of), shout "all' antisemita!" if you deal with the Jewish problem even from a theological point of view. wish you could speak only Blondel, the "Pascendi"and "Humani generis". It would be like if (for example) in a hypothetical war between France and Italy, dichiarataci by Sarkozy, tell us to leave but only to shoot against De Gaulle, which lies under the ground and not to aim at Sarkozy! The war would be lost from the start. The enemy of today (January 2009) is not Blondel (1893) and children, but the international Judaism. This explains the uncertainty of the reaction to the Vatican II in a "traditional Mass from St. Pius V et non plus ultra" and also by some members of FSSPX, why you shoot against Msgr. Williamson and ask pardon "to all people of good will", including brothers worst. Instead it should be a counter-attack, because "the devil is a lion if you do formica, but if you show the lion, he becomes an ant" (St. Leo the Great). After the first moment of loss, we need to hear their voices, united in truth, making use of print media that is available including those of counter-information "on line". It would be a mistake split, expel Bishop Williamson and "revere" the 'synagogue of Satan', which not only does not forgive those who gave, but doubles his anger. The FSSPX threatens to split into two or into a thousand pieces, to be absorbed by the "conciliar church" (as the name of the card. Benelli), which today has clearly shown his diktat and has stopped talking with ambiguity, so there One can no longer delude ourselves to talk to her - "rebus sic stantibus" - it calls for unconditional surrender to the news of the Vatican II apostasy would accept it. If there has been uncertainty or even an initial failure, we can raise as St. Peter ( "error humanum est"), you must put a stone over the past misunderstandings and re-joined without ambiguity, the battle of ideas.






f) It is impressive to see how deeply "the Synagogue of Satan" (Rev., II, 9) has infiltrated the Vatican. What disturbs is not what the rabbi calls (does his job), but the fact that the Pope give in to it (is not his duty, but unfortunately for fifty years we have become accustomed). But what most astonished leaves is that a part of "traditionalism" Catholic has no objection, it is ready to honor the Jewish holocaust (implicitly alongside that of Jesus).






g) The Chief Rabbi of Rome Riccardo Di Segni on 5 February 2009 he wrote that if Catholics want the inter-religious dialogue with Judaism continues, "1 as was done for the denial, it must be clear that (...) not there is room not only for anti-Semitism but also for the anti-[theological] (...), 2 °, there must be consistency between the documents and conduct, avoiding accidents (...)." Moreover, he concludes, the basic problem remains ever, even if you delete the denial, anti el'antigiudaismo, because you should not talk on by conversion to Christ, as did Benedict XVI during the Angelus on Sunday 25 January 2009, feast of the Conversion of St. Paul. Now, under the circumstances, it is no longer just a matter of prudence supernatural or not speak of the uniqueness of the persecution against the Jews between 1942-45, of anti-Jewish theology, the need of the Savior of all mankind, Jesus Christ, but it is a matter of faith and, if Jesus has allowed us to 'escape from a city if they want martyred', no we can not proclaim the Faith when we interviewed, even if it means losing his life. The early Christians are not well behaved, even Jesus, but rose to Jerusalem to be crucified, and he has made, upon application by the High Priest, his divinity. San Paolo ha scritto: “Guai a me se non predicassi il Vangelo!”, St. Paul wrote: "Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel," St. Peter responded to the priest who called not to preach that Jesus "could not preach" and that "it is better to obey God than men" also the same Incarnate Word in the Gospel has taught us to "fear not those who can kill the body but the one who kills the soul and then throws in hell." Now, if today we are silent or agree with them, you lose the soul, but if it is preached clearly it is possible to lose everything (houses, churches and even their lives) but it saves us for eternity.






2009 started badly and finished even worse, but it is what we deserve, as we had warned the Virgin at Fatima in 1917, "if the world does not convert ..." but Jesus has promised us that "the gates of hell shall not prevail." Now it's up to us to be united in truth, without ambiguity or discounts. Benedict XVI is no longer ambiguous, the FSSPX should find the internal unity in truth, and say "bread and bread and wine to wine," or as Jesus said "your talk is yes yes no no, what is more comes from the Evil One." Only thus will maintain its identity, which is that of its founder and its unity. "All is lost with the war [internal], everything can be saved with peace" (Pius XII).






Don Curzio Nitoglia


20th February 2009

Prayers and Support for Bishop Williamson

A Guildsman's Interpretation of History

Arthur J. Penty


Author of The Restoration of the Guild System, Old Worlds for New, Guilds and the Social Crisis, &c.
http://www.openlibrary.org/details/guildsmanhistory00pentuoft

Let us not forget Palestine.

Church Godless

http://dinoscopus.blogspot.com/2009/02/church-godless.html

An interesting portrait of the pre-Conciliar Catholic Church is drawn in a recent film, called “Doubt”. The film contains no nudity, bad language or violence, except verbal in a few heated conversations, and it earned for the famous lead actress, Meryl Streep, a prestigious award for her playing of the part of Mother Superior of a Brooklyn convent in the New York of 1964.


The film centers round the clash between herself and the local parish priest. Both are directly concerned in the running of the parish school, where Mother Superior discovers that Father may be molesting one of the boys. She sets out to track him down, and arrives at the conviction that he is guilty. However, the result of her inquest is merely that the priest is promoted by his bishop to a rather better parish in the diocese. The film ends with the woman of iron breaking down in tears. At first sight the clash is between a nun of the old Church and a priest of the Conciliar Church. She is shown as a strict disciplinarian with an old-fashioned knowledge of human nature and of children, using a time-honored bag of methods and tricks to keep them under control, and to keep the priest in line.


He on the contrary is shown doubting the old certainties – hence the film’s title – and treating the children and Sisters with a much more modern emphasis on love, spelt luv! Now for sure and certain the priest in trouble and the hierarchy that promotes him out of trouble belong to the Conciliar Church, and foreshadow a scene all too familiar. But when we see Mother Superior in tears because he has been promoted, we have to ask ourselves, why is she crumbling? - she is not shown then pulling herself together. Does she believe in God or in her bishop? If she believed in God, how could she let herself be so shaken?


If she is so shaken, she must have believed all too humanly in the human hierarchy, which sure enough has let her down. Thus while the merely human drama is between two people, the real drama for Catholics with eyes to see is a whole Church collapsing for lack of God. Mother clings humanly to a decent discipline, but nothing in Meryl Streep’s performance suggests that it is anchored in God. Still less anchored in God is the priest floating human love on doubt. The Church of 1964, as here portrayed to the life, was doomed. Kyrie eleison.

SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,606323,00.html

Bishop Richard Williamson's denial of the Holocaust has done serious damage to the Catholic Church. In an e-mail and fax exchange with SPIEGEL, the ultra-conservative bishop says that he is willing to "review the historical evidence."

SPIEGEL: The Vatican is demanding that you retract your denial of the Holocaust, and it is threatening to not allow you to resume your activities as a bishop. How will you react?

Williamson: Throughout my life, I have always sought the truth. That is why I converted to Catholicism and became a priest. And now I can only say something, the truth of which I am convinced. Because I realize that there are many honest and intelligent people who think differently, I must now review the historical evidence once again. I said the same thing in my interview with Swedish television: Historical evidence is at issue, not emotions. And if I find this evidence, I will correct myself. But that will take time.

SPIEGEL: How can an educated Catholic deny the Holocaust?

Williamson: I addressed the subject in the 1980s. I had read various writings at the time. I cited the Leuchter report (eds. note: a debunked theory produced in the 1980s claiming erroneously that the Nazi gas chambers were technically impractical) in the interview, and it seemed plausible to me. Now I am told that it has been scientifically refuted. I plan now to look into it.

SPIEGEL: You could travel to Auschwitz yourself.

.

Williamson: No, I will not travel to Auschwitz. I've ordered the book by Jean-Claude Pressac. It's called "Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers." A printout is now being sent to me, and I will read it and study it.

SPIEGEL: The Society of Saint Pius X has set an ultimatum for the end of February. Are you not risking a break with the group?

Williamson: In the Old Testament, the Prophet Jonah tells the sailors when their ship is in distress: " Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm unto you: for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you." The Society has a religious mission that is suffering because of me. I will now examine the historic evidence. If I do not find it convincing, I will do everything in my power to avoid inflicting any further harm on the Church and the Society.

SPIEGEL: What does the repeal of the excommunication by Pope Benedict XVI mean to you?

Williamson: We just want to be Catholic, nothing else. We have not developed our own teachings, but are merely preserving the things that the Church has always taught and practiced. And in the sixties and seventies, when everything was changed in the name of this Council (eds. note: the Second Vatican Council), it was suddenly a scandal. As a result, we were forced to the margins of the church, and now that empty churches and an aging clergy make it clear that these changes were a failure, we are returning to the center. That's the way it is for us conservatives: we are proved right, as long as we wait long enough.

SPIEGEL: People at the Vatican claimed that they didn't know you. Is that true?

Williamson: Most contacts pass through Bishop Fellay and the General Council, of which I am not a member. But three of us four bishops attended a private dinner with Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos in 2000. It was more about getting to know each other, but we certainly talked about theological issues and even a bit of philosophy. The cardinal was very friendly.

SPIEGEL: The Second Vatican Council counts as one of the great achievements of the Catholic Church. Why do you not fully recognize it?

Williamson: It is absolutely unclear what we are supposed to recognize. An important document is called "Gaudium et spes," or Joy and Hope. In it, the writers rhapsodize about the ability of mass tourism to bring people together. But one can hardly expect a conservative society to embrace package tours. It discusses fears and hardships. And then a nuclear war between the superpowers is mentioned. You see, much of this is already outdated. These Council documents are always ambiguous. Because no one knew what exactly this was supposed to mean, everyone started doing as he wished shortly after the Council. This has resulted in this theological chaos we have today. What are we supposed to recognize, the ambiguity or the chaos?

SPIEGEL: Are you actually aware that you are dividing the Church with your extreme views?

Williamson: Only violation of the dogmas, that is, the infallible principles, destroys faith. The Second Vatican Council declared that it would proclaim no new dogmas. Today the liberal bishops act as though it were some sort of all-encompassing super-dogma, and they use it as justification for a dictatorship of relativism. This contradicts the texts of the Council.

SPIEGEL: Your position on Judaism is consistently anti-Semitic.

Williamson: St. Paul put it this way: The Jews are beloved for the sake of Our Father, but our enemies for the sake of the gospel.

SPIEGEL: Do you seriously intend to use Catholic tradition and the Bible to justify your anti-Semitism?
Williamson: Anti-Semitism means many things today, for instance, when one criticizes the Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip. The Church has always understood the definition of anti-Semitism to be the rejection of Jews because of their Jewish roots. This is condemned by the Church. Incidentally, this is self-evident in a religion whose founders and all important individuals in its early history were Jews. But it was also clear, because of the large number of Jewish Christians in early Christianity, that all men need Christ for their salvation -- all men, including the Jews.

SPIEGEL: The pope will travel to Israel soon, where he plans to visit the Holocaust Memorial. Are you also opposed to this?

Williamson: Making a pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a great joy for Christians. I wish the Holy Father all the best on his journey. What troubles me about Yad Vashem is that Pope Pius XII is attacked there, even though no one saved more Jews during the Nazi period than he did. For instance, he had baptismal certificates issued for persecuted Jews to protect them against arrest. These facts have been distorted to mean exactly the opposite. Otherwise, I hope that the pope will also have an eye and a heart for the women and children who were injured in the Gaza Strip, and that he will speak out in support of the Christian population in Bethlehem, which is now walled in.

SPIEGEL: Your statements have caused great injury and outrage in the Jewish world. Why don't you apologize?

Williamson: If I realize that I have made an error, I will apologize. I ask every human being to believe me when I say that I did not deliberately say anything untrue. I was convinced that my comments were accurate, based on my research in the 1980s. Now I must review everything again and look at the evidence.

SPIEGEL: Do you at least recognize universal human rights?

Williamson:

  When human rights were declared in France, hundreds of thousands were killed throughout France. Where human rights are considered an objective order for the state to implement, there are constantly anti-Christian policies. When it comes to preserving the individual's freedom of conscience against the democratic state, then human rights perform an important function. The individual needs these rights against a country that behaves like a Leviathan. But the Christian concept of the state is a different one, so that the Christian theories of human rights emphasize that freedom is not an end in itself. The point is not freedom from something, but freedom for something. For good. 

 

SPIEGEL: Your statements and the lifting of your excommunication have triggered protests worldwide. Can you understand this?

Williamson: A single interview on Swedish television has dominated the news for weeks in Germany. Yes, it does surprise me. Is this the case with all violations of the law in Germany? Hardly. No, I am only the tool here, so that action can be taken against the SSPX and the pope. Apparently Germany's leftist Catholicism has not yet forgiven Ratzinger for becoming pope.