25 February 2009

Crucifixion of Bishop Williamson to Begin in Earnest?

Ruth Gledhill of the Times Online has a story that details some private correspondence of Bishop Williamson; how she obtained these letters I do not know.  

There was apparently some speculation that the Bishop might be met at Heathrow on his return from Argentina with an arrest warrant.  However, I have not read anything this morning that confirms this rumor.  In any event, Germany is considering prosecuting this man for the "crime" of Holocaust denial.  

This is an outrage.  Free speech is dead in the West.  And any reader who just shakes his head and figures Williamson has it coming for being a crackpot or racist or any other reason, real or imagined, should look in the mirror and ask himself what he may expect when his view on some other issue of the day is considered a crime and they come for him.  

Oppose "gay marriage"?  Oppose cloning and killing babies in the name of the god "Science"? 

Tick, tock...  Calvary beckons.

The day has arrived when questions like those in the following comment, taken from the Gledhill post, must be asked:

"The thing that I find so mindboggling, especially coming from many people who were born and raised in the Western Tradition, like Ms.Gledhill and many of the posters on this forum, is their selective abandonment of this tradition where the holocaust is concerned. I find it incredible, truly scary, that people get imprisoned and persecuted for not agreeing on some subject. I always thought that was a persons right, in the Western World, anyway."


Anonymous said...

You are absolutely right. One must realize that historically speaking, when someone is arrested for free speech it is usually because what they are saying is the truth, not false. This always happens in communist countries.

No one is arrested for speaking out against Christianity, or for abortion rights, or for gay marriage! This makes me think hard about why are they trying to silence the Bishop? Why are they threatened by what he says if it is false? Who cares if he is just a crack pot?

Anonymous said...

It is better to have one man die than for a "nation" to perish?

Anonymous said...

One can never tell anything about a man by who is friends are, but one can tell a great deal about a man by the enemies he makes.
As a former cleric (minor-order) of the SSPX and a recipient of the wisdom of +Williamson when he was in Winona, it is hopeful to read your support of this prelate. While his words are inconvenient to the subjective minds of today, we should all as Catholics recognize the scent of pitch and sulfur in the air and pray for the Pope, and the 4 Episcopal sons of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre--and especially for him who is being so viciously attacked!

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Mr. Timman. Although I no longer attend an SSPX chapel, I have always liked Bishop Williamson. I am more appalled at the way he is being treated and written about (especially by those who believe themselves to be traditional) than anything else.

Anonymous 9:34, you wrote exactly that I was going to "It is expedient that one man die...".

Anonymous said...


When an English
Man doth speak
Opinions on "their" Shoah

They'll never turn the
Other cheek
But debase him like "their" Noah!

thetimman said...

Thanks for the comments. To me, it is absolutely a matter of simple justice and free speech on a non-faith-based matter.

I was on the record early as thinking that Williamson's remarks were very naive and foolish because of the potential they had to derail the SSPX/Rome understanding for no reason important to the faith. In fact, I wondered at first if he intended to try to sabotage the thing. I don't think so anymore.

The thing I think is that although his views on the Holocaust would have been opposed in any event, the voracity of the attacks on him are primarily because he is Catholic, and moreover, a traditional Catholic.

I am so sad for him; certainly, he made a huge error, but the "punishment" has far exceeded the "crime".

It has hurt the cause of tradition because the Church's enemies can paint with a broad brush. Of course it is unfair they do so, but there it is.

The more the Church is attacked, the more I want to defend her. It was Chesterton, I think, who said something to the effect that he did not know how much he loved the Church until her enemies sought to destroy her. Perhaps someone can get the exact quote.

I am not an SSPX chapel attendee, so I don't know enough facts I suppose, but whenever I hear either the Holy Father, or Bishop Fellay, directly and without intermediaries interpreting them, I feel very confident in a sensible solution to the whole thing. It is neither of them that is the problem.

Anonymous said...

There's no business like Shoah business!

Anonymous said...

Um, excuse me, but the bishop had been excommunicated because of his opposition to Vatican II. Pope Benedict lifted that excommunication, apparently not knowing about Williamson's recent views on the Holocaust. The Pope, a German who lived through Nazi rule, unfortunately turned the searchlight of publicity on a crackpot racist bigot, one who somehow had been ordained and elevated to the rank of bishop. Germany and Austria decades ago outlawed the denying of the Holocaust; "free speech" has nothing to do with the reaction to Williamson, nor does "anti-Catholicism." Williamson's critics are not opposed to Catholicism as a religion but to Catholicism as a bumbling bureaucracy that was backing the wrong horse.

thetimman said...


Wrong. The declaration of excommunication latae sententiae against Bishop Williamson and the other three current SSPX bishops was for accepting episcopal consecration from Abp. Lefebvre and Bishop Castro Mayer without papal permission in 1988. The two consecrating bishops were also subjects of the declaration.

The decree did not excommunicate him for "his opposition to Vatican II". Although, the SSPX's adherence to the traditional Mass and sacramental forms, and its position of opposition to some of the docrinally ambiguous formulations of certain Vatican II documents certainly gave motivation to their opponents in Rome.

I have a lot of sympathy for their substantive positions. I even understand the subjective motivations Lefebvre had in doing what he did. But in the end, a Catholic must conform to the directive of the Holy Father if he is not commanding him to sin. In the case of the consecrations, I myself don't think that there was a sufficient reason to disobey the Holy Father and consecrate bishops without his permission. I realize that many people of good faith would disagree.

I don't want to turn this post into that discussion. As the excommunications have been withdrawn, I think it is best in charity to move on. God will judge the rectitude of their actions at the time, and as the Holy Father is willing to erase this issue, I am all for doing so, too.

As for calling Williamson a "crackpot racist bigot", he may or may not be any of those things. But based upon the evidence you give, he wouldn't be convicted for any of them. Your statement that he "somehow had been ordained and elevated to the rank of bishop" makes it perfectly clear you don't know any of the history of the matter, and thus your opinions are formed through ignorance. In charity, I think it is best that you do some research and then come back for a reasoned and polite discussion, which I am happy to engage in.

Anonymous said...


Bishop Williamson (SSPX) is now on the verge of facing a Europe-wide arrest warrant for denying the generally recognized extent of the Nazi persecution of the Jews. He never said that murdering Jews was a good thing.

Meanwhile, Pelosi denies the intrinsic evil of all acts of abortion, and she is free to receive Holy Communion in all or most dioceses in America. Pelosi says plainly that murdering unborn children is a fine thing, if that's what the mom want to do.

Heavenly Father, in the name of Jesus, I pray for a world-wide arrest warrant for Nancy Pelosi.