Wednesday, November 30, 2011

What Can and Cannot be Discussed in the Catholic Church


Guest Op-Ed

by Maurice Pinay

St. Andrew's Day, Nov. 30, 2011

The Church Council Up for Discussion, Not "The Holocaust"

The Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, has given an 'interview' in his familiar style intended to dispel suspicions raised by his secretive negotiations with the suspicious characters in Rome where "there is no lack of indiscretions!" The 'interview' doesn't accomplish its goal.

The 'interview' is largely unremarkable: reassuring words, summary deflection of justified suspicion and criticism, summary dismissal of internet channels not under Fellay control, redirection of focus back onto an apparition claimed by 3 children in Portugal 100 years ago, reemploying the busywork of tens of millions of rosaries -- all very familiar and predictable. The 'interview' can be read here:


One item mentioned in the 'interview' is very relevant to us here. I quote: "... leeway has been allowed for a 'legitimate discussion' about certain points of the [Second Vatican] Council."

Note that the Novus Ordo Church allows 'discussion' of its own teaching. In this context, 'discussion' concerns doubts and outright denials. The SSPX denies that certain points contained within the authoritative documents of the Novus Ordo Church's Second Vatican Council can be reconciled with the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo has allowed the SSPX to present its case to this effect in doctrinal 'dialogues' over the past two years. The Novus Ordo is now negotiating an arrangement to bring the SSPX into 'full communion' while allowing discussion of doubts of its own authoritative teachings. 

This was also stated in a February 2009 statement from the Pope's Secretary of State: "... the Holy See will not fail, in ways judged opportune, to engage with the interested parties in examining outstanding questions, so as to attain a full and satisfactory resolution of the problems that caused this painful rupture."

Note, however, that this typically lenient allowance pertaining to the Novus Ordo's own teachings is immediately followed by a mandate in absolute terms virtually unseen in Rome in the past 100 years: 

"The positions of Bishop Williamson with regard to the Shoah are absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father ... In order to be admitted to function as a Bishop within the Church, Bishop Williamson must also distance himself in an absolutely unequivocal and public way from his positions regarding the Shoah ..."

Nota beneit is not demanded that SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson absolutely and unequivocally publicly distance himself from his doubts regarding relativistic Novus Ordo teaching on religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism. These "outstanding questions" are open to "examination." No such questions or examination can be countenanced in the absolutist realm of "The Holocaust," however. Here we see the resurrection of the old ipse dixit and anathema that are otherwise entirely unheard of from Catholic prelates for nearly 100 years.

This is remarkable, is it not? In light of this, perhaps readers may understand where Rabbi Berenbaum is coming from when he says: “As I observe young people in relativistic societies seeking an absolute for morals and values, they now can view the Holocaust as the transcendental move away from the relativistic, and up into the absolute ..." (Source: Speech by Rabbi Berenbaum, Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust, January 26-28, 2000). 

How opportune for Rabbi Berenbaum and "The Holocaust" that the authorities of the Catholic Church hold "The Holocaust" to be absolute while Church teachings are ever increasingly relativised away.

Bishop Fellay certainly knows how to go with the relativist/absolutist flow of the Noahide Novus Ordo. Soon after the February 2009 statement from the Pope's Secretary of State was issued, Bp. Fellay was interviewed in the German magazine Der Speigel saying that he would cast Bp. Williamson out of the SSPX if he "denied" "The Holocaust" again:

SPIEGEL: So why don't you exclude Williamson from the society?

Fellay: That will happen if he denies the Holocaust again.





There may be space between the SSPX Superior and the Novus Ordo on religious liberty and a number of other matters, but not where "The Holocaust" is concerned, which Rabbi Ignaz Maybaum said "replaced Golgotha": 

"The Golgotha of modern mankind is Auschwitz. The cross, the Roman gallows, was replaced by the gas chambers...In Auschwitz, the Jewish people was the High Priest and the sacrificial lamb in one." - Rabbi Ignaz Maybaum, The Face of God After Auschwitz (1965), pp. 36 and 71.


On these points, Bishop Fellay and the Novus Ordo sing in perfect unison.

It seems to me a case of swallowing a very large camel while straining out gnats.

Maurice Pinay is the pen name of an Irish-American writer who blogs at http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com


-- ADVERTISEMENT —
Your assistance is solicited in distributing and publicizing two extraordinary books by Michael Hoffman: Judaism's Strange Gods (available for immediate shipment) and Judaism Discovered (the latter by special order only)

(A review of Judaism Discovered is online here. An e-book edition for the Amazon "Kindle" is for sale here).

Ask Ted Pike and Alex Jones to review, discuss or mention Judaism's Strange Gods, which was published this month.
_____________________________________________________________________________

To receive “On the Contrary" by e-mail, send an e-mail to hoffman[at]revisionisthistory.org with the subject: Subscribe Hoffman Wire. You will receive an invitation by return e-mail to which you must reply.

***

No comments: