Skip to main content

When is a rebuttal not a rebuttal?

+
JMJ

When is a rebuttal not a rebuttal?

When it doesn't directly address the point of contention.



In this case we have Bishop Williamson's defense of his actions in 2009.
(Quoting Fr. Wegner) It is brought to my attention that in Queen of Angels, Texas, parish of the SSPX, you said recently that when in November of 2008 I spoke to a Swedish TV interviewer about the "Holocaust", I was perfectly well aware of what harm my remarks would do to the SSPX, and I made the remarks anyway, as though I positively wanted to harm the SSPX.
 Key elements:
  • When Bishop Williamson uttered his opinion in Germany he was definitely aware that he was breaking a civil law of that country.
  • He would have to be a fool to not foresee the effects that such actions would have on his own person as well as the apostolate of the SSPX in Europe.  Especially since he was banned from entering Canada for a number of years for similar comments.
  • Assuming that Bishop Williamson reasonably could foresee the effects of his words and still made them anyway, the inference made by Fr. Wegner is not out of the bounds of rationality.
(Bishop Williamson continues) I will assume that this report of your words is substantially accurate, because it is a widely shared version of my intentions at that moment.
Here is the truth, with which you must do as you see fit, but you will have been told it.
When I called in question the Six Million and the Gas-chambers, for good or ill the thought of the SSPX was absolutely not in my mind. I had in mind one thing and one thing alone -- to tell what I understood to be the truth on a very important question of modern history and religion, because the "Holocaust" has been made into the most widely spread and influential substitute religion of modern times.
I expect no apology. I might be grateful if you ceased to tell counter-truths about my intention in uttering those famous words. Over to you.
With good wishes in Christ, +Richard Williamson." 
So, Bishop Williamson claims that the "SSPX was absolutely not in my mind" ... well it should have been.

He should have had the SSPX forefront in his mind as he brashly proclaimed the 'truth' about a place he has never visited nor a time he has never experienced.

Truly, it is Bishop Williamson who has made a religion, his religion, out of the Holocaust (shoah).

Pray that he realizes his error before he makes his final journey.

P^3


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

 + JMJ  A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment )  Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...