30 January 2009

Apology Letter of Bishop Williamson

I have to say, he should have apologized, of course. But this is a wonderful and humble apology. Let the reconciliation continue.

From Rorate Caeli:

To His Eminence Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos

Your Eminence

Amidst this tremendous media storm stirred up by imprudent remarks of mine on Swedish television, I beg of you to accept, only as is properly respectful, my sincere regrets for having caused to yourself and to the Holy Father so much unnecessary distress and problems.

For me, all that matters is the Truth Incarnate, and the interests of His one true Church, through which alone we can save our souls and give eternal glory, in our little way, to Almighty God. So I have only one comment, from the prophet Jonas, I, 12:

"Take me up and throw me into the sea; then the sea will quiet down for you; for I know it is because of me that this great tempest has come upon you."

Please also accept, and convey to the Holy Father, my sincere personal thanks for the document signed last Wednesday and made public on Saturday. Most humbly I will offer a Mass for both of you.

Sincerely yours in Christ

+Richard Williamson

Written to Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos on January 28, 2009.


Baron Korf said...

Very classy.

thetimman said...

I actually think they are pursuing exactly the Jonas strategy.

Fr. Andrew said...

You really think they are throwing him overboard?

I'm glad this out because it shows goodwill and a desire for reconciliation with Peter on Bishop Williamson's part.

thetimman said...


Yes, in the sense that he will rightly be the only scapegoat for his own imprudent statements-- in other words, "that's him, not us."

No, if by overboard you mean kicked out of the SSPX.

Thanks again for your Mass remembrance for our niece.

HillGuy said...

It rings hollow to me. He doesn't apologize for what he said...only for causing the Holy Father distress.

He hasn't retracted or even apologized for his denial of the the holocaust.

Its not enough.

thetimman said...


He believes what he said-- how can he apologize for something he actually believes?

His apology is for all the things that he needs to apologize for. If he is factually incorrect about his factual statement, that's his problem.

StGuyFawkes said...

Tim and Hill Guy,

While it's true that Bishop Williamson cannot apologize for saying what he believes in, the fact remains that what Bishop Williamson believes will have to be dealt with somewhere down the line.

The Holy Father himself, in his Wednesday Audience, this week, in effect apologized for Williamson to the audience when he said that

“...the brutal massacre of millions of Jews, innocent victims of blind racial and religious hatred, ....should be a warning for everyone against forgetting, denying or diminishing its (The Holocaust's) significance.”

When Bishop Williamson is NOT apologizing for his beliefs but the Holy Father is forced to the next day there can only be one result: a reckoning between the two men.

Guess whose version of recent German history will prevail?

On a different topic. Tim I heartily disagree that Williamson's factual incorrectness is just his problem. It's going to be all of our problem if the Holy Father cannot visit Israel next year because of Bishop Williamson's remarks.

thetimman said...

St. Guy, first, for the record I do not agree with Bishop Williamson's remarks in that interview. I only say that because it is important that my next paragraph not be misunderstood.

Which brings me to the question, why does it matter to the Catholic faith if the Pope visits Israel or not? Or if any particular Rabbi (mistakenly and unhcaritably laying Williamson's comments at the Pope's feet) cuts contact with the Vatican?

StGuyFawkes said...


You wrote, "...why does it matter to the Catholic faith if the Pope visits Israel or not?"

My answer: The Holy Land and particularly Jerusalem is there. That's why it's important. Remember thousands of crusaders went to their death to keep us able to access the dust Jesus walked on. If we can't get in there because of Bp. Williamson's right to his eccentricities then Bp. Williamson needs to be given a desk job counting paper clips.

You went on to ask,

"...Or if any particular Rabbi (mistakenly and unhcaritably laying Williamson's comments at the Pope's feet) cuts contact with the Vatican?"

My answer: Probably not a lot. Except he's the closest thing the Jews have to a Pope. I'd rather the Holy Father have someone reasonable to talk with. Otherwise the Vatican has Abe Foxman to work it out with.

StGuyFawkes said...

The Jonah quote makes Bishop Williamson's letter probably the classiest way I've ever heard someone offer to resign.

Despite all the rancor I've poured on the man, I rush to say that at the very least this letter should be entered into an anthology of sorts where future statesmen, and cabinet officers, who find themselves in similar circumstances, can find a model for their own letters of apology.

Anonymous said...

If he is truly sorry, let him apologize to the Jewish people. His words pave the way again to Dacau and Auswitcz because he makes Jews liars adding insult to injury. Let him prayer for the souls of those who were tortured in the concentration camps - all 6 million of them. Let him walk do the stations of the cross in Auschwitz. I would believe his sincerity if he does that. Otherwise, I don’t believe a word he says.
How can someone like this be elevated to the office of bishop – the fullness of the priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ? He is nothing like the Lord; he would make the Lord look like a monster.
He does not need to be thrown into the sea. Just step down from his holy office, confess his wrongdoing & make up the damage that he has inflicted.

thetimman said...

Anon, he is already a bishop, he has not been elevated to one.

He can't resign from being a bishop, he is a bishop forever.

Thanks for your comment on the other matters and for your opinion.

Anonymous said...

StGuyFawkes, you need to either clean up your posts or stop posting. Your attacks are all personal and mostly irrelevant, your statements are all conclusory and you consistently make claims which are not in evidence. Stop stating as self evident what is not! Your posts are so sloppy it's too tedious to even contemplate responding to them. Your MO is much more reminiscent of an agent provocateur than a genuinely orthodox Catholic.

StGuyFawkes said...

To the Anonymous Attorney who posted at 10:04 1/31/09

I don't know that my attacks have been personal but in reviewing them I admit a certain "thumb in the eye" prose style which I think enlivens polemic. But it also pisses people off so I guess you are right. I'll try and moderate my tone.

As for the rest of your summary before the judge:

In your courtroom if I had to "put in evidence" reasons for thinking as I do I would have to start my own blog or submit to your interrogatores and depositions and this would sink Tim's blog in dull verbiage.

I agree that my posts are sloppy.

Also, I agree wholeheartedly that my MO is that of an agent provocateur. I wasn't aware that being one precludes being an Orthodox Catholic.

But then again neither was Guy Fawkes and he did end up in trouble didn't he? So you have given me much to think about.

I do think you have pointed out a lack of charity and good temper in my postings and I will try to be more civil, which is to say more charitable, which is to say, in sum, more Catholic.

Much thanks for pointing me in that direction.

One thing YOU might want to do with your posts is refrain from baggy locutions like "not in evidence" or "conclusionary".

It makes the evidence that you are an attorney "dispositve".

Best Wishes

Anonymous said...


In Germany, France, Austria and several other European countries it is a criminal offense to publicly deny or doubt the historicity of the Holocaust carried out by the Nazi's against the Jews and other

But in all those countries, it is 100% legal to publicly deny or doubt the historicity of the Death and Resurrection of Christ.


Yes, public denials of the fact of the Holocaust do greatly increase the danger of more Nazi-type Holocausts.

I support laws to criminalize public expression of such denials.

The Holocaust as depicted in movies like "Schlinder's List" really did occur, I am sure of that.

But public denials of the fact of the "Holocaust of Christ" (term used by St. Thomas Aquinas and other saints) creates an even greater danger: The eternal damnation of souls.

I know John Paul II, Rahner, and von Balthasar all wrote that Catholics are are justified in hoping on the Mercy of Christ that there are no souls in Hell and never will be.

But the weight of Catholic tradition is strongly against that viewpoint, as the late Cardinal Avery Dulles wrote a few years ago.

There's a secondary, temporary danger too: Social chaos and war results when societies loose faith in the Death and Resurrection of Christ.

No Nazis could have ever come to power in Germany if Germany's intellectual class and professional class--of both the Left and the Right--had not been mostly de-Christianized by the 1920s.

For most of the history of the Catholic Faith, public denials of the historicity of the Death and Resurrection of Christ WAS a crime in Catholic countries and in Protestant countries.

It was the crime of blasphemy. Even some U.S. states had blasphemy laws on the books until a hundred years or so ago.

Now, since the Vatican II declaration on religious liberty, the Catholic Church itself is against state criminalization of blasphemy, heresy, failure to attend church on Sunday, etc.

Isn't this anomaly mind-boggling?


P.S. Lots of bloggers are pointing out this anomaly.

Latinmassgirl said...


I did not see a copy of what Bishop Williamson said. All I saw on your post was a letter from him saying that he is not supposed to comment on non-church matters. Where can I get a copy of his contentious remarks? I want to see what everybody is referring to.

StGuyFawkes said...


Bishop Williamson's conversation on Swedish T.V. is available on YouTube.

Latinmassgirl said...

I listened to the first video, and I do NOT see any anti-semitism in his remarks. He is simply stating that he does not believe that 6 million Jews were gassed in gas chambers, as the gas is so lethal that it would have killed others outside, and the body removal would have been impossible.

He is not denying that Jews were killed in concentration camps, he just doesn't think it was 6 million. I see no problem with him speculating on these facts, and am shocked that he would be arrested in Germany for such words.

God Bless America for our freedoms!

thetimman said...


To many, to discount any fact about the holocaust equals anti-semitism. It is a very sensitive subject. Of course when one looks at it logically, it is neither more nor less than a statement of fact-- i.e., he is either right about the fact he asserts or he is wrong. According to the historical record as generally analyzed, he is wrong.

Of course, he should not, nor should anyone, be subject to imprisonment or fine for what one thinks. But the remarks were not smart, and also insensitive. There was no need to cover that ground at all to some media crew, regardless of what he thinks personally.

Latinmassgirl said...

They are putting blinders on to stop all investigations into the history of estimated deaths and the means by arresting people with conflicting theories. I do understand the fears, though. The other extreme is Russia.

Josef Stalin was responsible for many more deaths in the holocaust in Russia, some claiming as many as 30 million. The horrible Ukrainian Famine, standing out in my mind in which the lowest estimate of death is 3-5 million & highest 10 million.

I also think it is unconscionable that in Russia the government is currently confiscating hard drives by raiding human rights group's offices, removing evidence of people executed by Stalin, including photos and maps of mass graves.

They are filling classrooms with history books that hail Stalin as a misunderstood, efficient manager who had to resort to drastic measures to save the economy!

I'm sure that the propaganda campaign to diminish the holocaust in Russia is what people are afraid of if there is any dissenting opinion on facts about the holocaust perpetrated by Hitler.

History does tend to repeat itself. . .

michael santomauro said...

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD

Publisher's Note: This is a non-Revisionist title for Theses & Dissertations Press. It will be the first book on the Holocaust, in publishing history, that will not take a Traditionalist or a Revisionist point of view. When you purchase this book, one-third of the proceeds will go to Germar Rudolf and his family.


Founded in 2000 the publishing company Theses & Dissertations Press is at the center of a worldwide network of scholars and activists who are working -- often at great personal sacrifice -- to separate historical fact from propaganda fiction. The founder of Theses & Dissertations Press is Germar Rudolf. Who is currently serving prison time for his published works and will be released on July 4, 2009.

As the new director of Germar Rudolf's American publishing division, I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical revisionist investigation. Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize public doubting of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.


Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call: 917-974-6367