evil plots and new religions

Not surprisingly the Vatican was unimpressed by Richard Williamson's non-apology for his rampant antisemitism (Holocaust denial is only the beginning).

On a related note, Williamson apparently approached David Irving for advice in how to present his conspiracy theories to the public in a manner that would not cause such an uproar. Irving suggested that he admit the extermination of Jews in three camps (without mentioning any numbers, because those "need to be checked"), but went on to say that Williamson was the target of a Jewish plot designed to distract from the attacks on Gaza:

Israel set off this storm against the church, led by a German pope, to distract the world from the massacre in Gaza.

To round out the insanity, upon his arrival in London, Williamson was met by Michele Renouf. Renouf had previously supported Irving during his trial for Holocaust-denial in Austria. Renouf claimed that Williamson was the victim of an unreasonable persecution by the adherents of a new religion: "Holocaustianity".

blindness

The Catholic, Holocaust-denying bishop, Richard Williamson, apologized again for the consequences of his remarks on the Holocaust.

Not surprisingly, there is nothing in the remarks to suggest that Williamson has changed his mind. What is more troubling is that Rome does not seem to have been troubled by his views enough to start with, nor has the Vatican reacted to any of the other whacko conspiracy theories to which Williamson subscribes, nor have they asked him to apologize for his rather blatant misogyny.


Peter Bruegel the Elder, "The Parable of the Blind Leading the Blind" (1568) [Tempura]

The most troubling aspects of this sordid mess have little to do with Williamson. Williamson is exactly what we thought he was; he is exactly what the Vatican ought to have known he was. And there is nothing to suggest that, despite the recent attempts of the SSPX to distance themselves from him, that he does not represent that already fringe breakaway from Catholicism. After all, they made him a bishop and up until last week had him in charge of one of their seminaries, directing the intellectual and spiritual formation of the young men there.

What is most disturbing is the failure of the Vatican to pursue these other matters suggesting that they see Williamson primarily as a PR problem in their attempt to reconcile with the SSPX movement and strengthen traditionalists within the Catholic communion at whatever cost. They do not see Williamson or his group for what it is. This means that either the Vatican is so obsessed with reconciling with the lover that jilted them that they cannot see how grossly deformed the SSPX is (the antisemitism is, as I have said, only the beginning) or, they actually do not find the spiritual deformations of the movement problematic. Either is frightening.

-LoA

things the pope wishes he had said a lot earlier

In a meeting with Jewish leaders today, the Pope called the Holocaust a crime against God and humanity and said any denial of its reality or magnitude was untenable. This was an attempt to mend fences after the whole debacle surrounding the Pope lifting the excommunications of four SSPX bishops, including the Holocaust-denying Richard Williamson.

white washing

The SSPX has fired Bp. Richard Williamson from his post as head of a seminary in Argentina because of his Holocaust denial. The Pope had demanded that Williamson recant his views if he wished to continue his service to the Church. The SSPX, a fringe group by any measure, has tried to distance themselves from Williamson on the Holocaust, saying that his opinions were private beliefs and did not represent the organization as whole. Unfortunately, other opinions of Williamson -- misogyny, Islamophobia, some conspiracy involving Oklahoma City bombing, etc., etc. -- do apparently represent the SSPX, though they are doing their best to hide it by scrubbing their website of his writings.

They haven't finished scrubbing yet. A picture of Williamson can be found on the top right of the page, here.

theater of the absurd

The Pope now claims that he did not know about the views of Bp Richard Williamson on the Holocaust at the time he lifted the excommunications against the bishops associated with the fringe Catholic group, the SSPX. It is hard to know whether such a statement is absurd or absurd. It is absurd if he really didn't know. Ratzinger-turned-Benny16 has a long history with the SSPX, first as JP2's point in the negotiations around their excommunication in the 1980s, and now, again taking it upon himself to begin normalizing relations with that same group. But it is likewise absurd to believe that he did not know, when they turned out to be exactly who everyone knew they were. How is it credible to say that you didn't know, when only a passing familiarity with the SSPX makes it obvious.

Meanwhile, in Austria, the Pope has decided to appoint a man to the post of bishop, that thinks Harry Potter promotes Satanism and that God had it in for New Orleans because of the loose sexual morals promoted by the city. Needless to say, Austrians seem unimpressed, and it is just another case where one wonders what B16's priorities are and who he is taking advice from, if anyone.

Across the border in Germany Angela Merkel has said that the Pope's decisions regarding Bp Richard Williamson "cannot pass without consequences". At the same time, a German theologian has suggested that it might be best if the Pope resign.

American Archbishop and Cardinal Sean O'Malley, tried to offer a bit of a defense for the Pope's actions with regard to SSPX, arguing that it was beneficial to have this group back under the control of the Papacy instead of letting them run free while speaking for Catholicism. But the American Conference of Catholic Bishops, headed by Cardinal George, spoke as a whole today, issuing a statement that condemned Richard Williamson's claims concerning the Holocaust.

In any case, the Papacy of Benedict XVI has severely damaged its own credibility and its voice in the international sphere.

the deeper hole

Catholic bishop, Richard Williamson, apologizes for making his Holocaust-denying-views known to the media and the embarrassment it has caused the Church, but does not repudiate those views or apologize for holding them. See the NYTimes story here.

waking up in the bed you made

The Vatican's Holocaust-Denying-Bishop PR nightmare that just won't end.

rebuilding the bridges you burned

The Pope tries to normalize the Vatican's relationship with Judaism after last weeks fiasco. I am not sure the words are going to offset the action quite so easily.

at the fringes of catholicism

In the process of trying to recuperate a fringe conservative group that broke away from the Catholic Church in 1988, the Vatican has landed itself in an even bigger mess. In the process of bringing the SSPX into the fold, the Papacy has also reinstated a Holocaust denier as a bishop. The leaders of the Jewish community in Israel have reacted in precisely the manner one would expect.

the state of religion

"Religious liberty is a fundamental expression of human liberty and that the active presence of religion in society is a source of progress and enrichment for all. This assumes, of course, that religions do not seek to exercise direct political power, as that is not their province, and it also assumes that they utterly refuse to sanction recourse to violence as a legitimate expression of religion."
-Pope Benedict XVI


It is odd to see the Vatican waving the flag for liberalism. It was not all that long ago that Rome was fairly sure that political liberalism was the death of Christendom, a mark of the decline and decadence of Christian society and a sure path to immorality. Even as recently as the Second Vatican Council, when the Church threw open its doors to the world, its statements on religious freedom and politics were ambiguous, as many of the Bishops took advantage of the illness of the American Jesuit theologian John Courtney Murray to tone down the strongest of Murray's proposals which he had outlined in the initial drafts. Many still felt the Church should not surrender the idea of the Catholic state and completely capitulate to liberalism.

Now under Ratzinger-turned-Pope (and this tendency was already present in Ratzinger before he became Benedict XVI) liberalism is itself the legacy of Christendom: to be European, to be Christian, and to be politically liberal go hand in hand. This was a mistake John Paul II never made: as much as he fought against Communism, the social teachings of JP2 remained critical of the Euro-American capitalism-liberalism political organization. Benedict XVI on the other hand, who seems to have forgotten that he is a political figure and not simply a religious one (I understand the Vatican is small, so maybe he just forgot it was a state, even if he is in charge of it), now instructs Muslims on religious freedom, reminding them that religion and politics are two different spheres. Maybe he is considering giving up the Vatican's seat at the U.N., though I seriously doubt it. So, not only is it hypocrisy, but it is hard to find justification for such a position in contemporary Catholic thought which insists so strongly that humanity finds itself, always and everywhere, in a relation with God, finds itself graced. One does not cease to be religious just because one has entered into political action. This is not to say that religious freedom has no place in Catholic thought. Ideally it always has (though let us be honest and admit that Islam did a much better job of tolerating religious diversity during its time in Europe than did their Christian contemporaries and immediate successors). But the separation of faith from politics is a dead faith and a blind politics. Politics will always be religious insofar as it attempts to ask 'what is the Good?'; and when politics ceases to be able to ask that question it becomes the enemy of the human soul.

-LoA