Rorate Caeli

News agencies:
SSPX expels Father Abrahamowicz
Updated: a disturbing homily

After repeated ambiguous declarations in the last few weeks about the Holocaust and other issues, several Italian sources report that the Italian District of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX) has announced the expulsion of Father Floriano Abrahamowicz, the priest responsible for Northeast Italy.

News agency Apcom reports the text of the note, still not available at the official website of the Italian District:

[Portion of the SSPX NOTE, according to several Italian news agencies:] "The action is in effect from Friday, February 6, and was taken for grave reasons of discipline. Father Floriano Abrahamowicz had expressed for some time positions distinct from the official ones of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X. The decision of the expulsion, though painful, was made necessary to avoid that the image of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X be distorted and, with it, that its work in the service of the Church be damaged."
Update: Since some, for no good reason, doubt the first report (ours was the first in English), there are other primary sources, including ASCA and Andrea Tornielli.

Update II (Feb. 7, 1000 GMT): A transcript of the homily pronounced by Father Abrahamowicz in the SSPX mass centers in Treviso and Trent on the Sunday following the removal of the excommunications (Jan. 25) already showed signs of clear Sedevacantism and of disrespect for his superiors, who had welcomed the Decree of removal of excommunications on the preceding day:

In fact, who ordered the injurious decree of "removal" was Joseph Ratzinger, who is still stuck in the Modernist ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council, ... , incurring in the excommunication reserved to the Modernists. An excommunicate revokes a non-existing censure!

...
A Traditionalist Catholic CANNOT [sic] neither request nor welcome such a decree, even less embrace and kiss its authors, making believe that this act is a gift of Our Lady.

We pray for Joseph Ratzinger so that he may abjure Modernism and embrace the Catholic faith, and for the Fraternity of Saint Pius X so that it may remain faithful to the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.
Source: Circolo Culturale Christus Rex, which welcomed the words of Father Abrahamowicz; permanent link.

88 comments:

Wm. Christopher Hoag said...

And what of +W?

Anonymous said...

And anyone whosever denieth the holocaust, let him be anathema!

Anonymous said...

Laudatur Iesus Christus!
This means that the Holy See and the Society are still on track. Let us continue to pray brothers.

Anonymous said...

Incredible! I just read the NCR interview of Fr. Abrahamowicz. I don't see anything wrong with what he says. His final comment is this:

Question: Do you want to offer a message to the Jewish community?

One message: As a Catholic Christian, adding that (a) little Jewish blood that runs in my veins, I express the hope that the Jews will embrace Our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

This is really disturbing.

M.A.

Anonymous said...

So now begins the process of cleaning house before admission to Rome. This might prepare the way for the expulsion of Williamson.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

This is an outrage! Who is next in line?

NCTradCatholic said...

I'm utterly disgusted. I never thought I'd say this about the SSPX.

bakerstreetrider said...

From the sounds of the statement given here, it seems as if Fr. Abrahamowicz has been saying things contrary to the SSPX's position on previous occasions, not just this one. Note that it says "Father Floriano Abrahamowicz had expressed FOR SOME TIME positions distinct from the official ones...." Since this issue is a recent development, it sounds as if there are several things that have contributed to this.
Also, if I remember correctly he gave the interview contrary to orders from his superiors.

Anonymous said...

This is too bad. I thought his comments were rather reasonable ... if horribly timed and imprudent.

Anonymous said...

What next? A demand that Pope Benedict XIV be dug up and expelled: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/B14AQUO.HTM

He denied the diaspora!

Rick said...

I thank God for allowing me to see how bad things really have gotten, I never saw such injustice before.

I read the interview of this priest and to besmirch him as an "anti-Semite" is an obscenity.

We are witnessing a profound deprivation of basic rights under justice to freedom of conscience and intellectual freedom to examine historical questions.

This is appalling.

It is quite clear that the Shoah is a de facto, if not yet a de jure, dogma of some strange adaptation of faith which is being hammered out by pragmatists convinced that such a dogma is somehow sure to lead to a wonderful restoration of Catholic tradition.

How can anyone possibly be so blindly deceived?

Anonymous said...

...and they have already removed ALL articles on their website concerning Judaism. Is the Gospel of St. John next?

Anonymous said...

Fr. Abrahamowicz has probably been making similar comments for decades. Certainly Bishop Williamson has been. Why were they never disciplined before? Why now?

If the matter warrants expulsion, then over the years these clerics should have been receiving public warning and discipline. If they have not been receiving such discipline, then for several years Bishop Fellay has exhibited a lack of moral justice and prudence.

If the matter did not warrant expulsion before, then Bishop Fellay looks like an opportunist who is selling out to public opinion to get a deal.

Anonymous said...

I've attended an SSPX chapel for 20 years. If this is indeed the start of a "cleansing," and Bishop Williamson is expelled from the Society, I am finished with them. This poor priest in Italy said nothing wrong -- read the full interview!

I am shocked at the politically correct attitude being adopted by the SSPX leadership...and I am absolutely certain Archbishop Lefebvre would not approve!

Anonymous said...

The old Mass alone, when separated from ancient Christian truth (which is now outlawed by means of the "antisemitism" canard), becomes a form of High Church Anglicanism, in which one emasculated wing of the Hegelian synthesis is allowed to participate in the synthesis for considerations of aesthetics and enhancing organizational discipline. This is not Scriptural. The prayer of the Church is a mere totem if it is immersed in a milieu which overthrows the belief of the Gospel. There must be union between lex orandi and lex credendi, otherwise a fraud is afoot.

Anonymous said...

His recent comments to the press, despite knowing the press was out to paint the entire SSPX as Anti-semetic, were imprudent and directly opposed to Bishop Fellay's clear statement that the SSPX has no authority to speak on political and historical matters.

This was just the final straw... as the statement says, it has been going on "for some time": "Father Floriano Abrahamowicz had expressed for some time positions distinct from the official ones of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X".

Anonymous said...

One day we are going to wake up and find that we no longer have anything that used to be the core of the SSPX, we are going to find ourselves in a new FSSP, with the mouth shut and the brain washed. We are going to realize we have been swallowed, little by little, and turned another side chapel of the big besilica. That day, unfortunately, it will be very late for so many of us, and we will realize that everything continues the same but ourselves.
I don't want that to hapen ro me, so I must be alert and act before is too late...
E.S.

Anonymous said...

I have just seen evidence of revolts against Bsp. Fellay, one from Fr. Cériani, in the Antilles, and another from St. Nicolas du Chardonnet in Paris.

This is inevitable. Any union of the Society with Rome will mean a split in the Society. Bsp. Fellay has worked hard to prevent such a split in the past but it was inevitable that it would come if there is to be any regularisation during this pontificate, the last one, or the next one.

The only question is how large a rupture this will be. If Fellay manages to control the bulk of the Society, he will take the property with him and the rebels will be forced out, to worship in broomclosets and callboxes.

This also puts pressure on Rome to make a fair offer to the Society. If they can keep mention of Vatican II out of the document to be signed, the rebellion will be very small; otherwise, it could overwhelm Fellay and he might have to pull back and keep the Society unregularised.

What we are seeing here is pressure put on the Pope from two sides. The bishops say, Make them laud Vatican II or they can forget it! The hardliners in the Society say, Do that and we shall divide the Society in two!

This is getting interesting. But it's also sad.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

The articles on Judaism on the SSPX website were pathetic, and had nothing to do with the traditional Catholic faith. They were right to go. Conspiracy mongering is not a dogma of the Catholic faith.

As for the Italian priest in question, none of us know the circumstances of his tenure. If he was ordered not to give the interview; he disobeyed and caused tremendous damage by doing so; especially by mentioning "disinfectant gas chambers", thereby ensuring that the entire SSPX could be painted as anti-Semitic and Holocaust-deniers. Given the uncertainties, there's no need to think the sky is falling.

Anonymous said...

ON E.S.'s last comments:

I think that you have a point but need to consider the weakening of the other side. The episcopate of 2009 does not have the resolve it had in 1975. Things are changing on both sides. The complete failure of NewCouncil, NewChurch, NewFaith, and NewMass is now too enormous to be ignored.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

This is at least flushing out the fever swamp traditionalists who give all the rest of us a bad name.

Anonymous said...

This is wrong. Who has designated this as "dogma"? (the "holocaust", which is a seriously misapplied term) We are all entitled to think freely and speak freely or have I missed something. The evidence does not support the claim. As Norman Finkelstein stated, it's an industry.

Anonymous said...

WHile empathetic to the outrage over the apparent making of opinions on secular history a cause for anathema, I believe reasonable people must consider that Fr A, on the very day that the uproar over Bp W started, expressed his own similar personal opinions once again - publicly - just as his religious superior Bp Fellay was trying to clean up the mess.

Let's face it. You may be faithful enough to be a priest, and you may have passed seminary exams, but you need to be prudent enough to lead and to know when to keep your mouth shut.

Let someone tell me if St Dominic and St Francis told their followers ANY differently! Or the Rule of St Benedict on brethren who break the code of silence for that matter. This is very Catholic in the most traditional sense of the word.

When it comes to matters of grave scandal, particularly where there is potentially grave harm to the Church or one's order, silence is indeed a virtue, the lack of which might and in some cases ought to warrant expulsion.

ONe hopes that Fr A will demonstrate contrition for his lack of obedience and silence on matters that gravely injure his order and the entire Church. And perhaps in time he can find it in his heart to talk to fellow members of his bloodline who do not yet have the faith to lead them charitably towards the God who shares their blood.

In JMJ, Canuckistan

Anonymous said...

It seems to me just that they would try to expel Fr. Abrahamowicz.

The reasons why could be cited from the Italian newspaper article (I am not certain which one) reported by Catholic culture.

Father Floriano Abrahamowicz, spokesman for the Society of St. Pius X in northeastern Italy, called the Jews “the people of deicide.” Hopefully this is not the official SSPX position and I can see why they would wish to throw him out for implying that it is.

He also defended Bishop Williamson's statements about the Holocaust which the Pope and also the Society had already condemned.

IT seems that he has little charity for not only the Jews but for the Superior Bishop Fellay and for Pope Benedict.

Rick said...

To PTKP:

With respect I must disagree. There is no pressure involving Vatican II in this, at least not yet.

There is pressure regarding flushing down the memory hole all mention of the Shoah which does not comport with the new Shoah Dogma.

There is pressure regarding demands for the "recantation" of OPINIONS on subjects utterly unrelated to the Faith, but obviously of central importance to the "f"aith, the precise dogmatic expression of which "f"aith involves a Shoah Dogma now obviously past the negotiation and into the implementation stage.

Shocking.

Dan Hunter said...

"What we are seeing here is pressure put on the Pope from two sides. The bishops say, Make them laud Vatican II or they can forget it! The hardliners in the Society say, Do that and we shall divide the Society in two."

Rubbish!
The Pope can do whatever he wants.
And what he wants is right and orthodox.

No one is holding a 44 magnum to the Holy Fathers head, and even if they were, he would die a martyr rather than fold to human respect.

Everyone here should calm down about this one incident until all of the details and facts are in.

Anonymous said...

Could the reason be this?: That Father was told to stop making remarks to the press, and he refused to do stop doing so?

In other words, a discipline issue, rather than an issue about the content of his statements? In contrast, I haven't heard anything from +Bishop Williamson lately.

Certainly, this is a time for strict discipline amongst all priests.



- Keith

Jordanes said...

“Denying the Diaspora” is a wildly inaccurate characterization of Pope Benedict XIV’s A Quo Primum, which addressed the problem of non-Christian Jews in Poland rising to prominence and power over Christians, reaffirming the prior legislation in that matter while reminding the Polish episcopate that hatred, persecution, pogroms and deadly violence against the Jews are contrary to the Faith.

Rick said: I never saw such injustice before.

You’re probably not aware of all the relevant facts, so you cannot conclude that this is an injustice.

It is quite clear that the Shoah is a de facto, if not yet a de jure, dogma of some strange adaptation of faith which is being hammered out by pragmatists convinced that such a dogma is somehow sure to lead to a wonderful restoration of Catholic tradition.

I don’t think that’s clear at all.

Someone said: and they have already removed ALL articles on their website concerning Judaism. Is the Gospel of St. John next?

SSPX articles are not equivalent to Sacred Scripture.

Anonymous said...

O.K. If this interview was granted by Fr. Abrahamowicz in a spirit of rebellion, then I say, "Begone, and quickly."

M.A.

sspx said...

The most sensible post:

As for the Italian priest in question, none of us know the circumstances of his tenure. If he was ordered not to give the interview; he disobeyed and caused tremendous damage by doing so; especially by mentioning "disinfectant gas chambers", thereby ensuring that the entire SSPX could be painted as anti-Semitic and Holocaust-deniers. Given the uncertainties, there's no need to think the sky is falling.

pclaudel said...

Please, Moderators, please figure out a way to better identify the numerous anonymous posters here. "Anonymous_247A," for example, would do nicely. As matters now stand, it's impossible to tell whom to embrace and whom to bicker with (in fraternal charity, of course).

One Mr. or Ms. Anonymous wrote, "This is at least flushing out the fever swamp traditionalists who give all the rest of us a bad name." To him/her I say, "That's what you think! What you call a fever swamp, we call a spa." To an earlier Anonymous—the one who wrote, "The old Mass alone, when separated from ancient Christian truth (which is now outlawed by means of the "antisemitism" canard), becomes a form of High Church Anglicanism," and so on—I say, "God bless you for expressing the plain truth of the matter. I second every word of your post."

New Catholic said...

"Could the reason be this?: That Father was told to stop making remarks to the press, and he refused to do stop doing so?"

Yes, Keith, I believe that this may have been a major reason. Father Abrahamowicz also had unnecessarily brutal words about the last Council, and matters related to European events in the 1933-1945 period, even though the District Superior in Italy had repeatedly said that declarations should be expected only from the SSPX headquarters in Switzerland or from the SSPX news agency (DICI), in Paris.

New Catholic said...

Pclaudel,

We cannot edit comments; we cannot edit how people choose to call themselves. We can only reject or erase whole comments.

Anonymous said...

"spiritually we are semites",
POPE PIUS X1. The church is right to go after anti-semites.

Anonymous said...

Look Obedience is the very bond that unites any Institute of public life in the church.

You can get kicked out if you violate a direct command contrary to your communities Constitutions or Rule.

The virtue of obedience is the hallmark of a vocation.

A man with this virtue, who disagrees with the criticism against Bishop Williamson, would nevertheless keep his mouth shut when requested too, even though he remains free in conscience to hold differing opinions on the facts of history.

Charge and countercharge, reaction and counter reaction.

We men of God ought to be above these things.

As St. John of the Cross says, even if the mountains were failling into the sea, the servant of God should not loose his peace of soul.

Let superiors do their duty, and let subjects obey and show discretion.

Anonymous said...

The articles on Judaism on the SSPX website were pathetic, and had nothing to do with the traditional Catholic faith. They were right to go. Conspiracy mongering is not a dogma of the Catholic faith

The articles were not pathetic, rather they, for the most part, reflected the traditional Church teaching regarding the Jews and Judaism.

The SSPX did not obviously regard them as pathetic or they would not have placed them on the website in the first place where they remained for years.

Why are they being removed now then? Because they fear the worldly power of the Jews. Once they start doing this, it will be very hard to stop because they want a lot more things removed from the repository of traditional Catholic teaching as well, and they can become a lot nastier than what we have seen in the last couple of weeks too.

Just ask the Palestinians...

Anonymous said...

Someone wrote:

"Someone said: and they have already removed ALL articles on their website concerning Judaism. Is the Gospel of St. John next?"

Jordanes answered:

"S.S.P.X articles are not equivalent to Sacred Scripture."

Quite so. The real question, though, is whether or not a sanitisation programme has begun, to prepare the Society for regularisation.

My feeling is that either (a) this should have been done long ago or (b) it should not be done at all. It worries me that it is all happening in reaction to the Williamson remarks. If those statements were up for so long, they must reflect a consensus in the Society; hence, removing them could lead to more divison in the Society.

I suppose that we are about to see just how large is the support in the Society for Bishop Williamson and other hardliner leaders. I have no idea how great it is. I'm wondering if Fellay does.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

I must echo the words of a previous poster and say that a split in the SSPX is inevitable. Why? Because some are looking for an excuse not to regularize their situation. If not this episode, it will be something else that, in their minds, will be too much to bear. Bp. Fellay will regularize the situation for himself and those who will follow him. The rest will enter into schism.

Anonymous said...

something is going on here, I THINK the good father was in deep du du before this Bishop W, got into this mess. Bishop W was a loose canon. He told us to throw out our TV sets, WELL whatS he doing talking to a tv REPORTER...

Anonymous said...

Judging by the comments here it looks like Rome has finally found the way to crack the SSPX foundation....I pray the cleansing/ruptures are not true!

Anonymous said...

SSPX expels Father Abrahamowicz who is half jew by race..mmm...SSPX is anti-semitic!

Anonymous said...

"Obedience is the bond that unites...". Yeah! Tell that to the rest of the conciliar church.

Since 1992 I've gone to the SSPX. I'm through.

Anonymous said...

Anon, 06 February, 2009 21:08:

Yes, but your understanding of the virtue of charity is false.

John (Ad Orientem) said...

I can't comment on the priest in question since I am not familiar with the details of the case. That said the Roman Church has long held that it has the right to make prudential judgments about the suitability of persons for Holy Orders. Persons who are in a state of denial about one of the most well documented crimes in history and who espouse anti-Semitic clap trap like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion would certainly be individuals about whom I would question their suitability for the clerical state. There are way too many idiots who seem to think the only qualification for being a priest (or bishop) is a command of Latin and acceptance of the defined doctrines of the church.

On a separate note I concur with an earlier poster about the confusion created by all of the anonymous posts. Although I do not prohibit anonymous comments on my own blog I strongly encourage people to sign at least their first name. It does not lend weight to one's point if you are afraid to have your name attached to it.

Jeff Culbreath said...

Yes - please, anonymous commenters, pick a name, any name, and stick with it. Simple courtesy.

Anonymous said...

Rick Said: "We are witnessing a profound deprivation of basic rights under justice to freedom of conscience and intellectual freedom to examine historical questions."

Did the following ever occur to any of you defending this priest?Just as much as it is not a dogma to except the historical account of the holocaust, it is also not dogma to believe that it never occurred?

This is a very sensitve period right now for the SSPX and the Pope. Was it that important for Fr. A to make any statments relating to B. Williamson's comments or anything else to do with the holocaust right now?

And if Fr. A was aware of these sensitivies yet still made these comments, then what do you think he is saying at other times?

The bottom line is that this was a matter of prudence. Any Traditinal Catholic knows just how political our church has been throughout history. This was not the right time or the right place.

The SSPX's goal is to help lead souls to heaven. What does free speech rights related to denying historical accounts of the holocaust have to do with obtaining salvation?

PJL

Confiteor said...

I must echo the words of a previous poster and say that a split in the SSPX is inevitable. Why? Because some are looking for an excuse not to regularize their situation. If not this episode, it will be something else that, in their minds, will be too much to bear. Bp. Fellay will regularize the situation for himself and those who will follow him. The rest will enter into schism.

Very true. Just as certain Bishops' Conferences will enter into schism. The wheat is being separated from the chaff.

Anonymous said...

I do not believe that he was 'expelled' for the 'holocaust' thing but for calling Vatican II WORSE than HERESY just yesterday....

Abp. Lefebvre must have been an idiot then to put his name to documents that are worse than heresy.

http://www.ilmessaggero.it/articolo.php?id=45346&sez=HOME_NELMONDO

I hope he was NOT expelled from the SSPX (what is he going to do or go?) but simply Removed from his POSITION as head or Northern Italy... I hope.

Anonymous said...

Confitior: "Just as certain Bishops' Conferences will enter into schism. The wheat is being separated from the chaff."

Chaff will be flying right and left!

This are truly extraordinary times!

M.A.

New Catholic said...

"I do not believe that he was 'expelled' for the 'holocaust' thing but for calling Vatican II WORSE than HERESY just yesterday."

If he was expelled or suspended, it was probably related to his public declarations after having been told not to speak. You are correct, he "had unnecessarily brutal words about the last Council", as I had mentioned earlier.

Anonymous said...

"I have just seen evidence of revolts against Bsp. Fellay, one from Fr. Cériani, in the Antilles, and another from St. Nicolas du Chardonnet in Paris."

What has happened at St. Nicholas du Chardonnet?

Anonymous said...

P.K.T.P.
Yes, I agree, thank you for your remarks,
Personally, I am ready with my luggage to depart if necessary. I am against of sell out, and this smells really badly. Whatever happens, we must see.
By the way, some of us, pure and simply lay people who attend to SSPX chapels, are having low voice talks among ourselves to think together. We need to be ready.
E.S.

Confiteor said...

For the sake of unity, some people are going have to be willing to sacrifice their own super-dogmas, e.g., the idea that there is a hook-nosed Jew behind every ambiguous Conciliar formulation.

Can we just debate Dignitatis Humanae on its theological merits (or lack thereof) and leave the Protocols out of it?

antonio said...

Be wise men and not stupid , that the jew among you does not mock you...
Dante canto V

I can see it all happening...
You are all playing into the hands of the enemy of tradition; squabbling for no reason, while the our enemies are really having a laugh. Divide and conquer! And you all have fallen to their game.
Pray the Rosary, and wake up.

HallnOates said...

You people who think the SSPX are in for a sell out are really lacking in discernment.

planetis plicatis said...

It is like a McCarthy witchunt but all so predictable.

The SSPX has seen such behaviour before, twenty five years ago. As a poster so accurately described the situation is a divide and conquer strategy.

What a shame. So much good intention, even if misdirected, will now be lost.

okie said...

"...in which one emasculated wing of the Hegelian synthesis is allowed to participate in the synthesis for considerations of aesthetics and enhancing organizational discipline."

-This is pure ranting. Do you even know what you mean, or did you just want to throw Hegel in there for good effect? You are really saying that the "modernist" Vatican "conspiracy" has Hegel in one hand all while making this decision, in order to make a synthesis...of what? I'm not even sure what you think the synthesis will be?

This is an easy matter to decipher. A subordinate defied the command of his spiritual master. If getting the number of the murdered correctly in a bygone war is somehow a matter of conscience to you, to the point where you will defy the command of a spiritual superior, then you have an outrageously misformed conscience, and are not fit, at least for the time being, to care for other souls.

I know of nothing more "modernist" than this strange elevation of a historical event to a level of importance that no positivist would claim, all to serve the purpose of rebellion. If numerous Saints can obey their spiritual masters in the face of cruelty, knowing full well that the truth would shine forth in the end due to the Providence of God, then a Priest can shut up for a few months about the Holocaust.

Making this something much more menacing than it is just means we are playing into the hands of the secular world. Those who would split over this issue either A) wanted a pretext for not joining Rome anyway, or B) ironically, will be the ones who raise the issue of the Holocaust to a Dogma of Faith. Both reasons are ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

New Catholic:

Whatever Fr. A. had to say about the Council, he was also denying an aspect of the Holocaust mythos. This is not a coincidence.

I think that Fellay is trying to maintain control by silencing potential critics, both on the matter of the Council and the other matter.

In the case of the Council, remember that various bishops' conferences are now demanding that the Society agree to Vatican II, something that faithful are not required to do, althought those exercising ministry might be required to do, since it is 'authentic' teaching.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Canuckistan's statements. These are matters of the VIRTUE of prudence.

What we are seeing here is a clearning of house. What I am wondering is how firm will be the support for Williamson and his statements. Nevertheless, there is also the matter of accepting the Council, and this will also likely garner division in the Society.

The Pope needs to take some action and support Fellay. But I will continue to remind everyone that we are NOT required to accept any superdogma of the Holocaust Industry. What must be kept separate here are private beliefs and the need for prudence when those in authority make public statements.

P.K.T.P.

Melchior Cano said...

Recently, I was having a conversation with a Society priest (I attend a society chapel) and he was bringing up the reality that, unfortunately, in this country (the U.S.) many Catholics are able to become traditional, because they are infected with the heresy of Americanism. Its "easy" for those of us infected by the Americanist virus (all of us American Catholics today are infected to some extent or another) to become traditionalist because the rejection of authority and the reliance on self is easy for us. At some unfortunate level, all of us in the modern world are radical individualists.

This combox has been filled with many "little Peters," each his own Pope Pius XIII. The utter stupidity, and whats worse blindness, of many of the commenters here is becoming ridiculous. Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops against the will of the Holy Father in order to safeguard tradition, precisely because of his love for the authority of the Church. Many (hopefully most) of us who attend chapels staffed by the Society of Saint Pius X do so because of our love for that same authority, not because we judge this dogma or that creed to be right, but because it corresponds to the external reality of what the Church has always taught.

This has been the precise road on which the Society has traveled. So, unless you can prove that somehow the Society is selling out on matters of Faith, then you ought to shut your mouth before it imperil your soul. The grace of state is not given to you to negotiate these things. If Fr. Abrahamowicz was disobedient to his superiors in a matter that they (the competent authority) judged severe then they have the right to expel him without the sideline governance of puffed up lay traditionalists.

On a side note, I hope some of you realize how very silly you sound talking about hushed conversations amongst the faithful outside of Mass, deciding what we will do. If this is the extent of your understanding of authority, then I can only hope that you leave the Society's ministry lest your stupidity diminish the Society's reputation.

Joe B said...

Firing a priest over Jewish comments, removing Jewish Q&A from the website, rebuking Bishop Williamson, giving orders that nobody should speak on the issue but HQ - seems to me Bishop Fellay is simply and prudently taking the issue of Jews off the table within the SSPX in order to keep that fringe issue from interfering with the important issue - the talks.

Actually, if the Holy Father showed this resolve and leadership, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Good job, SSPX. This is a serious and unnecessary distraction. Deal with it at another time.

Royce said...

Mr. Hunter,

In response to your comment:

"The Pope can do whatever he wants.
And what he wants is right and orthodox."

I hope and trust that your intended meaning is not that the Holy Father's desires are right and orthodox simply by means of them being his desires. Of course, the alternative (that you know the mind of the Holy Father) isn't that much more comforting.

Athelstane said...

"Everyone here should calm down about this one incident until all of the details and facts are in."

Sound advice.

I'd like to know more before I say more. Especially from the SSPX itself.

Melchior Cano said...

I think perhaps I did a poor job of drawing together my first and second paragraphs in the last post. The intention, of course, was to point out that all of this decision making amongst the angered laity here (thus the Pius XIII comment) is not traditional Catholicism in any form, but rather a thinly veiled Americanism.

Anonymous said...

"If numerous Saints can obey their spiritual masters in the face of cruelty, knowing full well that the truth would shine forth in the end due to the Providence of God"

This is exactly the kind of evil and nonsensical behaviour of spiritual directors (and others) that helped get the church into the present-day situation.

Stop trying to justify it! Have you learnt nothing over the years??

YOur false piety is one of the problems that will be dealt with, in due course.

Oh, and most religious orders, at least the older ones, in their constitutions give their members very precisely enumerated and strictly enforceable rights. So, if a spiritual director was abusing his authority, the religious would be legally entitled to resist.

What danger the exaggerations of counter-reformation spirituality present!

Paul Haley said...

Another example of shooting oneself in the foot disease apparently infecting certain SSPX members. For the life of me I cannot figure out why such remarks are being made at such a delicate time. On the other hand certain members of the hierarchy appear to have caught that same disease.

All this business about the holocaust, it seems to me, detracts from the reconciliation discussions, if such discussions are really taking place, which I doubt very much. Since when did the number of victims of the holocaust become an article of Faith? It boggles the mind.

David A. Werling said...

So... let me get this straight.

Some of you want to chuck the SSPX because Bishop Fellay no longer wants his priests to engage in revisionism?

Are you people sane?

Bishop Fellay is the superior general. It's his priests, his responsibility, and certianly not yours. Get over it.

Confiteor said...

No one is being asked to accept the general historical consensus on the nature and extent of the Shoah as an article of Catholic Faith. That is a ridiculous strawman, which hardly merits further response.

Imagine if a prominent bishop was in the habit of proclaiming that the clerical pedophilia scandal is an invention of the "alleged" victims. That is not a question of doctrine, yet you can be certain that the Pope would say that such remarks are absolutely unacceptable and that the bishop should shut his trap if he wished to continue his ecclesial functions.

Anonymous said...

So far, the only person in this affair that I believe has been 100 % honest has been Bishop Williamson. He fights for the Faith. Prophets are always rejected by their own. God will not be happy with the treatment he has undergone.

Braadwijk said...

I won't comment too much on the Fr. A's expulsion because I don't know all the details of the situation or his character personally. A few observations, though:

The general impression some of you give is that concentration camps are tourist trap horror theme parks built by Jews to make "real" Catholics feel guilty. You people disgust me.

There is a big problem with paranoia-fueled anti-Semitism in the SSPX (particularly in the Americas), and both Fellay and Benedict know this. Both are separating out the wheat and the chaff, and I'm enjoying people starting to show where they really stand and why they're on the side of "Tradition". Isn't it fun to watch what happens to the SSPX when people finally start paying attention to them!? I agree that the Society will split over this. Those who do not go back to Rome really will leave the Church. Nobody's forcing you out this time around. Good riddance if you wish to do it yourself.

This pontificate is a golden opportunity to right the wrongs against us (I am not with the SSPX, btw) by the leftist factions of the Church. I'm sorry it wasn't the glorious counter-Revolution led by the legions of angels you were all hoping for, but it is still your golden opportunity none the less. It is not a divide and conquer, it is not selling out, and it is not a plot by the Jews to destroy Catholicism. Don't blow what may be your last chance.

Btw, did anybody think that perhaps the cleansing out of the anti-Semites in the SSPX is perhaps a good gesture by the Society that is committed to healing past hurts with Rome, not least because the Pope is German?

And if you're going to post nonsensical ranting, use big words to sound intelligent, or lambast the Jews, don't hide behind the anonymous tag and have some guts to do it publicly.

Isabelle said...

Melchior Cano said "The grace of state is not given to you to negotiate these things."

Melchior Cano, thank you for your sanity in a sea of confusion! Your comments have helped me a great deal today, as I wrestle with my feelings.

St. Rafael said...

Extraordinary times indeed!

The Church is in such a meltdown that there is only this one truth at the moment:

Every man for himself!

The Chaff is flying all around and it is getting thick.

Fr. Steve said...

"It is quite clear that the Shoah is a de facto, if not yet a de jure, dogma of some strange adaptation of faith which is being hammered out by pragmatists convinced that such a dogma is somehow sure to lead to a wonderful restoration of Catholic tradition."

Agreed.
What is a dogma however, is CHARITY. The truth must be proclaimed in charity. If it is not, it is only harming the spread of Christ's Kingdom and playing into the hands of the Devil who seeks to divide and conqure. Traditionalism and Anti-Semitism don't mix. I don't care what the details are in this case. If he is anti-Semetic, then he lacks charity and if he lacks charity then he lacks the Spirit of Christ. To be an angry Traditionalist is to cast your pearls before swine. If the members of the Society really want to help the Church reform in accord with Tradition. Then, now is our chance. Ubi Caritas et Amore, Deus ibi est.

Steven said...

"News" about Bp. Williamson:

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,606088,00.html (in German)

beng said...

In the case of the Council, remember that various bishops' conferences are now demanding that the Society agree to Vatican II, something that faithful are not required to do, althought those exercising ministry might be required to do, since it is 'authentic' teaching.

P.K.T.P.


Where do you get that the faithful are not required to agree with V2?

Vat II is so ambigious that I can be a Sede and give my agreement.

Felipe Coelho said...

Dear NewCatholic,

Thank you for including the link to the good Father'a interview. It makes our lives a lot easier not having to search for the source, as in case of Mr Heiner's information that Bishop Williamson is not ill, whose author it took me quite a while to find on Angelqueen.

That said, perhaps it would have been noteworthy to point out to the fact that the core of Father Floriano's "offensive" words are
a quote of Msgr Lefebvre's?

Anyway, thank you for always being ahead in your coverage of these decisive events for the near future of Holy Mother Church.

Yours in JMJ, Felipe

antonio said...

There is the possibility that all this situation has been carefully mastered in order to split the major traditionalist group, the SSPX, through igniting the prospective of 'integration' and 'full communion'with the Church. Although this is in every traditionalist's heart, it can (according to some)only be achieved by accepting certain conditions..Now, what the reaction of all this has determined is the beggining of a crack among the ranks of tradition, which could possibly lead to the 'creation' of one or more little fragments (Good Sheperd, FSSP,Christ the King, which have already their animosities against each other)in order to continue to add on the map another spot similar to the leopard's skin, meaning to continue to fragment the unity of tradition. Divide and conquer!
The views of SSPX have always been known, but created no commotion or havoc untill now. Why? Another point: Does anyone really beleive that discussions to be held between the two parties will take place through media ramblings, insinuations, false statements? which are ony dangerously inflaming the minds, and leading to loose sight of the real issue.
Prudence prayers and unity in tradition should prevail.

Paul Haley said...

Confiteor said...

"No one is being asked to accept the general historical consensus on the nature and extent of the Shoah as an article of Catholic Faith. That is a ridiculous strawman, which hardly merits further response."

"Imagine if a prominent bishop was in the habit of proclaiming that the clerical pedophilia scandal is an invention of the "alleged" victims. That is not a question of doctrine, yet you can be certain that the Pope would say that such remarks are absolutely unacceptable and that the bishop should shut his trap if he wished to continue his ecclesial functions."

Talk about a ridiculous strawman! No one that I know of is rejecting the fact that the holocaust is a historical reality. Some question the figures and that is their right but to make acceptance of certain interpretations as being required for "ecclesial functions" is a non sequitur beyond all non seqiturs.

Anyone who knows Bishop Williamson knows that at times he uses an interpretation that makes people think about what he is saying and, admittedly, in this case, he showed a lack of prudence in questioning the existence of the gas chambers used to kill victims in the death camps. He apologized but still he is being lambasted for revealing his views in the first place. Maybe it is some others who should "shut their trap" on such matters. It boggles the mind.

Aloysius said...

This is not a purge of those who do not submit with religious faith to the official story of WWII. This is about obedience in important issues. (Which, of course, is fundamental in any religious order or priestly fraternity.) It is also about sedevacantism vs the position of the FSSPX. Given the present situation, it is also a matter of not giving the enemy more ammo.

Luiz said...

It's not a crack yet. ONE priest was expelled because of his sedevacantist views.

Felipe said...

Dear Luiz, Ave Maria Puríssima!

Actually, I don't think it's accurate to claim that Fr Floriano is a sedevacantist based only in his homily. (I'm a SV myself, so I should know!)

He does call Castrillón Hoyos a Cardinal, for instance.

I believe NewCatholic's inference is based on the good Father's mentioning Benedict only as "Joseph Ratzinger," but that might easily be explained as a refusal to use titles of deference with regard to someone he considers a heretic.

Let's wait and see.

In JMJ, Felipe

totustuusmaria said...

I'm hearing a pretty appalling attitude of fracture in a lot of these comments. Ought we not to trust that those people who actually know the situation are the best ones to make the decision? Don't cause a fracture in the SSPX when it isn't necessary by having a suspicious and malignant attitude.

New Catholic said...

Felipe,

I did not claim that he was a Sedevacantist, which would demand a more direct statement, but that his sermon included "signs of clear Sedevacantism".

NC

totustuusmaria said...

[Father Ambrahamowicz also "referred to Jews as 'a people of deicide'"

"for, as our sins consigned Christ the Lord to the death of the cross, most certainly those who wallow in sin and iniquity crucify to themselves again the Son of God, as far as in them lies, and make a mockery of Him. This guilt seems more enormous in us than in the Jews, since according to the testimony of the same Apostle: If they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory; while we, on the contrary, professing to know Him, yet denying Him by our actions, seem in some sort to lay violent hands on him." - The Catechism of the Council of Trent.

Personally, I'm much more concerned about Father's statements on the Pope, and the attitude he took toward the Pope in that homily, than his statements on the Jews, which I don't know much about, but I would say that questioning whether Jews were gassed to death and calling them a people of Deicide certainly constitutes 'the image of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X' being distorted 'and, with it, ... its work in the service of the Church' being damaged. How can the Church even minister if she's defined by people who engage in useless offensive statements?

dcs said...

I believe NewCatholic's inference is based on the good Father's mentioning Benedict only as "Joseph Ratzinger," but that might easily be explained as a refusal to use titles of deference with regard to someone he considers a heretic.

He also calls the Holy Father an "excommunicate" - the logical conclusion of this is sedevacantism since one who is not a member of the Church cannot be Her visible head. Maybe Fr. A. had not considered the import of his words.

Ricky Martin said...

He doesn't even recognize Benedict XVI as the true Pope. He doesn't even recognize His Holiness as a true Bishop.

And people here think this is normal conduct by a Catholic priest?

Outrageous.

Confiteor said...

Paul Haley,

What proof do you have that Bishop Williamson accepts that the Holocaust is a historical reality? What has he said in public that makes you think so? Please provide a quote, I'm more than willing to be persuaded.

BTW, I'm happy to see now that Bishop Williamson is showing the humility to reconsider the evidence. I'm not a "Williamson-hater", as some of you unfairly seem to think. True, I'm repulsed by Bishop Williamson's expressed opinions concerning the Holocaust and 9/11, yet otherwise I think that he is a true defender of the Faith. I want to see him as a bishop in the Church, doing what bishops are supposed to do.

Stanislas Wojtiech, Stanislawów, Ukraine (formerly Polish Kresy) said...

I think this expulsion of Rev. Fr. Floriano Abrahamowicz, famous Roman Catholic chaplain of the Youth League for Venice and Veneto of the separatist Italian party Lega Nord and a good youth worker, is mainly about Abrahamowicz' crypto-sedevacantist opinion.

I must admit that I agree with him, that Benedict XVI (Joseph Alois Ratzinger) was a neo-modernist theologian who doubted or dismissed the Real Presence in his 1966 book "Zur Begründung christlicher Existenz", calling it unilluminated that people would go and kneel before the tabernacle because "God is omnipresent". Also the theologian Ratzinger made disturbing comments in many other books and in "Katholische Prinzipienlehre" (Principles of Catholic Theology, Ignatius Press, 1987, pp. 389-90) he already says that he thinks one must oppose the new "integralists" (Mons. Lefebvre et alii) with all powers, and Ratzinger also said he thinks the "integralists" (traditionalists) are a "sectarian zealotry" "obsessed" with validity etc.

These kinds of words from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger in the past decades before his election, are disturbing.

I think Mons. Fellay wanted to remove Fr. A. for this.

Fr. Abrahamowicz is the grandson of Israël Abrahamowicz, a Romanian Haredi Rabbi (also worked in Czernowitz in Austria-Hungary, now part of Ukraine), and the son of the Lutheran-convert Jewish Protestant pastor Abrahamowicz from Vienna. His mother is a Catholic Italian, and Florian (not Floriano in fact) was raised a Catholic. His brother is the (sadly ecumenist and liberal) abbot of the Abbey of Saint Paul Outside the Walls in Rome, abbot Giovanni Paulo Abrahamowicz. They are brothers.

I hugely sympathize with Fr. Floriano Abrahamowicz, with his doubts, but he should not have attacked Bp. Fellay in a sermon.

I think we ought to be more tolerant towards sedevacantists and demand from the occupants of the Vatican bureaucracies that they PROVE that they uphold the same Faith as Pope Pius XII did in 1958 at his death. And not some modern concoction.

Fr. Floriano suffers much for the fate of the Church.

And he is politically incorrect. Juridically correctly, he stated that the Geneva Conventions during World War II allowed that for one soldier killed by civilian terrorists, thirty civilians be executed by the army in retaliation. This principle was applied by the legalist Wehrmacht during the Fosse Ardeatine massacres in Italy. Fr. Abrahamowicz, whose own grandparents had to hide and whose father survived the Shoah era, stated on Italian television, that Erich Priebke (the demonized German officer who was a subofficial during the mass executions) "acted with a heavy heart, and now repented his acts", but that Priebke could not be held a war criminal.

Of course Marxists and U.S. and British liberals did not approve and understand. But Abrahamowicz was right. If the Allies could execute 100 German civilians in Bavarian villages for one soldier from the US Army killed by the Wehrwolf activities stay behind network of Nazi Hitler youths, then the Germans could apply the same, not?

It is not like WW2 history was entirely fair. Abrahamowicz could have made a living from styling himself as a Jewish "child of survivors of the Holocaust", but he preferred to serve Christ. Only Christ's sacrifice on the Cross redeems humanity from the sin of Cain, of murder.

There is no difference between the Shoah and the Armenian Genocide to Fr. A. Nor is there to me.

Who of the ADL Jews is commemorating the Holodomor against Ukrainians, Cossacks and kulaks, the genocide of more than 10 million in total by starvation, GULAGS and mass executions, during the Soviet Union? Few if any? Why? Maybe, because like Germans now, they'd have to admit, that it was Jewish Bolsheviks like Lazar Moysesevich Kaganovich, Henrik Yagoda and prior to 1928 Leon Trotsky, who committed these crimes against humanity.

Some victims are more equal than others? I have a Jewish great grandmother. From the Rabbinical view, I am a full Jew. My mother a Jewess, my grandmother too. But my grandmother and great grandmother (the latter a convert from Talmudic Judaism and its obscurantism to the enlightenment called Catholicism) were pious Catholics. They did not approve of all of their fellow countrymen, neither of Jews, nor of gentiles. We are all humans.

Let us commemorate the Shoah ánd the Holodomor dead. And respect Fr. Abrahamowicz.