It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pope welcome Holocaust denier back into the fold

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:49 PM

Pope welcome Holocaust denier back into the fold

Pope Benedict has outraged Jewish leaders by welcoming back into the Catholic fold a previously excommunicated bishop who is said to be a holocaust denier. Richard Williamson was automaticatically excommunicated in 1988 when he was consecrated a bishop by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (1905-1991) without papal approval.
n a recent television interview (watch here or here), Bishop Williamson denies that six million Jews were killed in the holocaust, and claims that no Jews were killed at all in gas chambers. In fact, he says, there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:49 PM
The Pope has cancelled the excommunication of four traditionalist Catholic bishops and the flocks including one who believes the Holocaust never happened and the gas chambers were a myth.

Is Ratzinger behaving like a Nazi? I thought his name was bad enough.....

This is giving him back 600 000 catholics to contribute money to the coffers,
The head Rabbi in Jerusalem has now cut off all contact with the vatican, so I think money and numbers was more important than political niceties.

Is he setting a precedence that its OK for Catholics to be Holocaust deniers?
Mel Gibson and his old man will be doing cartwheels!
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:52 PM
I am an ex-catholic.
Clearly, I made the right decision.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by spinkyboo]

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:10 PM
Can you imagine if this was the US President or the UN Sceretary General who appointed someone who denied the Holocaust? There would be a massive uproar.

I wonder why this isn't getting more attention?

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:31 PM
Maybe because the story's not newsworthy?

The Pope reversed the excommunication of four bishops consecrated by an archbishop who didn't have the papal O.K. to consecrate them in the first place. It's about internal church politics, not the personal views of one of the four bishops.

The blog this story comes from also has this update from the 26th:

Pope Benedict has expressed his solidarity with Jewish people, whom he called "out brothers of the first covenant", and said that the Holocaust "should be a warning for everyone against forgetting, denying or diminishing its significance".


By the way, OP, I'm wondering what the reference to Pope Benedict XVI's surname (Ratzinger) meant. Do you think that a German name is evidence of Nazism?

[edit on 1/29/09 by americandingbat]

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:37 PM
The Pope was in the Hitler Youth, so seeing the title of this thread, and hearing of this, is not surprising to me. Maybe it's nothing...

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:40 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

I was being sarcastic, sad when I have to point that out.
As for internal politics, that's rubbish.

The fundamental beliefs of Christianity are so at odds with what happened in the Holocaust, and to deny it happened is more than politics. You have no reason to deny it unless you find umbridge against Jewish people. Hatred of Jewish people and calling them lyers, goes very much against Catholic teachings, you know love they neighbour and blah blah blah,
If you go back to the sayings of the original bishop who started all this he was scathing against Jews, not just denying the Holocaust.

Finally, they are BISHOPS, not just members of a congregation, they are responsible for teaching and guiding people on doctrine. This anti semitism is is anti catholic and as there are so many millions of Catholics, this is very newsworthy.

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:52 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

BTW here are more articles on this than just that blog, I read it in the times, I saw it on 3 TV stations as a top 3 story so it is newsworthy.
As for the pope saying that quote trying to make up for what he did. I can pick my nose, but then just tell you it was itching and I was scratching it., butit doesnt change the fact that I was really being a dirty pig.
He should have stood up to these men.

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:57 PM
reply to post by zazzafrazz

I'm afraid I still don't see the sarcasm in "Is Ratzinger behaving like a Nazi? I thought his name was bad enough..... " in the context of a thread clearly accusing him of antisemitism.

My point was that the reversal of the automatic excommunication of four bishops in 1988 was a matter of internal Church politics.

It has to do with Benedict trying to woo back radically conservative factions of Catholicism.

He didn't make this guy a bishop, he just decided to un-excommunicate the four bishops in question, who were automatically excommunicated when they were consecrated bishops by Cardinal Lefebvre in 1988.

He then made clear – and even the anti-Catholic blog that you use as a "news" source printed this as an update – that he believes the Holocaust was real, and should not be forgotten or denied.

The news is not breaking (it is well over the time limit for posting to this forum), it is not news (the source is a blog), nor is the story newsworthy unless you follow Catholic politics, or have a thing for pope-bashing.

EDIT: adding reply to the next post.

If you have more sources, great. Maybe you should throw them up there then.

And what do you mean, "Stand up to those men"? What men? Cardinal Lefebvre who I believe is dead? The now-unexcommunicated bishops? The people who made him join the Hitler Youth as a small child?

[edit on 1/30/09 by americandingbat]

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:08 AM
reply to post by americandingbat

I have stated that he lifted the excommunication. Im not sure why you are saying I havent?

I also believe that by doing this, whether the pope says he believes in the Holocaust or not is a disgrace as these men (being the 4 bishops) beliefs are so anti catholic they should never have been appointed bishops in the first place, and the excommunication should stand till they rescind.

As for the blog, I apologise I glanced and saw and should have checked the source better, but after just seeing it on the news, I looked it up quickly, bu now Im not going to cut and paste more sources, google it yourself, there are more than just 1 blog on this. And seeings Jewish people are outraged also, and the Head Rabbi in Jersualem himself has condemned this action, Im not sure why this would be considered un newsworthy.

[edit on 30-1-2009 by zazzafrazz]

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:17 AM
reply to post by americandingbat

seeings you asked quieten you down

more than 1 blog, which I regret putting up, but anyway here you go....

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:28 AM
reply to post by zazzafrazz

People (even newsworthy people) often make a big deal out of non-newsworthy topics. so I'm not surprised that this is being condemned by portions of the Jewish community.

I never said that you didn't say he lifted the excommunication – I was just pointing out that lifting an excommunication is not the same as making them bishop. He didn't elevate them, he just brought them back into the Church.

I think denying the Holocaust is both intellectually absurd and morally offensive. But it's not an excommunicable offense. I hope that Pope Benedict will place restrictions on the man's pastoral responsibilities, and as an outsider I question the entire project of wooing back the Pius X folk.

But to take it as evidence of antisemitism on the part of the Pope or the Church seems to me to show a lack of understanding of the political reality.

It would not have been possible for him to lift the ban on the other three bishops without lifting it on this one as well (there would be no reason in canon law to do so). And he wants the Society of St. Pius X back in the fold.

Link to Catholic News story on the lifting of the excommunication

Editing in the good news: Bishop Williamson's superior has apologized for his remarks and has forbidden him from making any public comment about political or historical matters:

It?s with great sadness that we recognize the extent to which the violation of this mandate has done damage to our mission. The affirmations of Bishop Williamson do not reflect in any sense the position of our Fraternity. For this reason I have prohibited him, pending any new orders, from taking any public positions on political or historical questions.

We ask the forgiveness of the Supreme Pontiff, and of all people of good will, for the dramatic consequences of this act. Because we recognize how ill-advised these declarations were, we can only look with sadness at the way in which they have directly struck our Fraternity, discrediting its mission.

[edit on 1/30/09 by americandingbat]

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:42 AM
Im a 'recovering catholic' their politics usually wash over me, but in this instance let me dot point why I don't like this and see it as worthy to comment on.

-The original Arch Bishop appointed them without approval from JP2, I remember the story well.

-JP2 excommunicated him for doing this, that is what has been up for debate. At the time he had the backing of the church (including Ratzinger)

-The 4 Bishops were appointed for having the SAME beliefs as the original archbishop

-Their anti semetic beliefs are not in line with Catholic belief. And this is another reason they should not have been appointed.

-This is really whether JP2 was right to not approve their appointment for not being approved intitally , or whether Ratzinger is right in thinking you can believe what you want about Jewish history as this doesn't interfere with Catholic doctrine. I dont see how he can seperate the beliefs one has regarding fellow humans to Christian thought on fellow human beings.

-3 have since rescinded, fine I should have mentioned that.

-The final one is PREACHING to and leading a community and if I still worshipped at church I would take offence to him being placed on a pulpit as a example of understanding Christian thought.

-This bringing them into the fold is for 1 reason only, and this is the main point of my post. This was to bring up the dwindling numbers of church members, Benedict has started a campaign of conversion and this is his number 1 priority during his time as pope. His numbers are falling, and that's a lot of people. It's about money and power again....

I know what you are saying, but I wanted to illumate its not really about politics and cannon law, Its a really numbers game.

[edit on 30-1-2009 by zazzafrazz]

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 04:59 AM
reply to post by zazzafrazz

a) you don't think numbers games are political? Of course it's a numbers game, and an image game. The Pope wants to gather the strayed flock back into the Church. Why? well, it's somewhere between 200,000 (the number according to the church) and 600,000 (the number alleged by some) people who belong to the Society of St. Pius X – that's a lot of souls, a lot of money, and a lot of votes. Plus, it's part of the image and direction that Benedict XVI has clearly been taking the church in – distinctly traditionalist, strong, and unified.

b) Williamson has, as I posted in my last post, been ordered by his superior not to say anything more in public concerning his views political or historical. So he is no longer preaching antisemitism.

c) Lefebvre and the four bishops were excommunicated not for their beliefs with regard to the Holocaust or to Jews or Judaism. They were excommunicated for "schismatic" action taken when Lefebvre consecrated the bishops despite the warning that he and they would be excommunicated if they did so.

Yes, this is about whether JPII was right or wrong in excommunicating them. But that's not an antisemitism issue so much as an anti-Vatican II issue. To spin it as a story about the Pope "welcoming a Holocaust denier back into the fold" is misleading.

Had you posted a thread about how Benedict seems to be overturning the decisions of his forerunner in order to build the Church's numbers, I would have had no objection

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 05:09 AM

Originally posted by americandingbat
It's about internal church politics, not the personal views of one of the four bishops.

Yep. This has nothing to do with believing or not believing in the Holocost.

The Bishop was on the outs because he was part of the Pope Pius X breakaway bunch. That gets excommuncation from the Vatican. Personal beliefs don't.

The guy is an idiot for not believing in the Holocost.

But it's not an 'excommuncation' offense

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 05:14 AM
Side note - I have read the church documents and I have been to the St. Pius X Mass. The St. Pius X group has valid points about the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo Mass. Some of the things they say I agree with completely. Other things they say are just plain wrong.

Their mass is better then the Novus Ordo Mass. The prayers are more reverent and they follow the order of St. Pius V about 'never change the mass'. When Pope Paul IV said that the Novus Ordo was the same as the Pre-Vatican II mass ... HE LIED. However, they reject any pope after ~1960 and say that the Chair of Peter has been empty since that time. That's not true. The Church has just had some not-so-good popes. It happens from time to time.

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:11 AM
reply to post by americandingbat

... this is about whether JPII was right or wrong in excommunicating them. But that's not an antisemitism issue so much as an anti-Vatican II issue. To spin it as a story about the Pope "welcoming a Holocaust denier back into the fold" is misleading.

Although what you say is quite reasonable, there may be more to this.

Consider that states often signal one another, and the rest of the world at large when they make moves like this. Bearing in mind the fact that these bishops had been in a state of excommunication for more than 20-years, one might justifiably ask, "why now?"

In view of the Turkish PM Erdogan's recent dramatic withdrawal from the Devos Conference, arguably his own way of signalling his strong condemnation of recent Israeli aggressions in Gaza, maybe the Pope of Rome chose to signal that the Church as well strongly disapproves of said recent Israeli aggressions against civilians.

One test of this theory is to see if more states decide to jump onto the Israeli Slam-Fest bandwagon. Let's see what develops.

I for one won't be at all suprised to see it, after all, using white phosphorus munitions on civilian men, women and children is really about as bad as it gets ...

Offered only as a possibility, of course, but one I did not see presented so far in this thread.

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:49 AM
So Tell me What would Jesus do? ( and I do not mean that sarcastically) It Christianity about forgiveness, turning the other cheek, etc etc..

I'm not saying its the case here, but shouldn't it be? If John Paul took him back , would there be as much as an outrage.

In a side not He is one CREEPY looking pope lol... But that's another story

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 02:52 AM
reply to post by ShiftTrio

Jesus would have said... "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" or maybe "do not judge, or you too will be judged"

I think it is rediculous that someone could lose their position or credibility in the 20th century for freedom of speech. History is supposed to be revised and disputed so that the other side of the story can be seen and people can make an informed decision of their beliefs or opinions.

There are 2 sides to every coin.

The Jewish Rabbi's justified occupying Palestine with Holocaust sympathy. So Catholic Bishops should be able to justify the Holocaust with Palestinian sympathy.... The only difference is, one ended while the other continues.

P.S. You're right. He looks kind of like a little Gremlin.

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 04:35 AM
they're prolly old war buddies from their days serving the fuhrer...christainity is a effin joke.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in