Truly wonderful news and not surprising at all - Bishop Williamson has been the model of obedience.
Thank God. May the Bishop have extra Catholic virtue during thistime of trial (in and out of the courts).
The fact that he had to be forced to do so under threat of expulsion from FSSPX doesn't bode well.
How long before this man creates another needless firestorm and inflicts more damage on the reputation of the Church and, more specifically, traditional Catholics.
I am glad to hear this because it is objectively the right thing to do.That said, part of me wishes this could have provided the two parties an opportunity to part ways. Who on this board would be satisfied if a Bishop hired a known homosexual advocate as a lawyer, then dropped him under pressure from the Vatican? This will not go away just because he dropped this lawyer under pressure, and now his unbelievable imprudence will continue to provide fodder to the anti-Catholic media. Can't he be locked in a monastery somewhere?Hieronymus
Anyone know why Mons W. hired the 'neo-Nazi lawyer' (I have no knowledge myself of the man or his reputation) to begin with?
The commenters on this thread don't know three things:1. Whether or not the Bishop had already agreed to this before the press release came out.2. Why he selected the lawyer in the first place.3. Who in Germany would represent him.Until someone can definitively answer those 3 questions, the naysayers should tend to their rosaries.
"the model of obedience"? a bishop ordained without the pontifical mandate?
This news is not "wonderful" at all. It creates a problem, a serious problem. Fellay should have removed Williamson pronto when he hired this fascist bastard to represent him.Now that Williamson has 'backed down', Bishop Fellay will have to keep him. This is good for W. and bad for Fellay and for the Pope. It tarnishes the S.S.P.X because it is now connected with Viking Youth and other such riff-raff. So Bishop Fellay and the Pope will suffer a setback from this.But Williamson comes out of it as he would wish. He managed to assert his unfortunate tolerance of (if not liking for) fascism, and his trial will bring attention to tendencies in the S.S.P.X that are unfortunate. Most of the men in the Society are entirely sound. But unfortunately, W. is not the only one there who has worrisome leanings. Bishop Fellay may have to clean house. He has others on his team who don't belong. I'm referring to you especially, Fr. A.The best men are monarchists, royalists. We shall have to tolerate republicans from that nation to the south of me. But Catholics may not tolerate fascists, Nazis, or racists. The only thing worse than a fascist is a communist; the only thing worse than a Nazi is a Marxist-Leninists; the only thng worse than a blackshirt is a Trotskyite. Let all such trash be ejected from the S.S.P.X.P.K.T.P.
I have lost all sympathy for Williamson. He has every right to reject in public the number of six million, which is a legitimate historical question that everyone has a right to deny. He has absolutely no right to align himself with Nazis and fascists. Does he think that this is a game? Yes, I know that one's lawyer needn't have one's own views. That is true. But this choice of a lawyer was an obvious provocation, and what does it gain for anyone? It now appears that the Pope not only lifted an excommunication on a merely controversial figure but also on someone who might be a secret blackshirt. I do not find this to be amusing. A lot of people fought and died to put down Naziism, including several of my own relatives. This is not cute and it is not a joke.P.K.T.P.
Dear Marc Puckett,If anybody does, he hasn't said so, leading me to believe that no one other than HE and his intimates do know.But presumably either he became dissatisfied with his original lawyer, or was convinced by someone that Herr Nahrath would do a better job. On a previous string, someone said that the rightist National Democratic Party, of which Herr N is a member, is in cahoots with a branch of German military intelligence that sounds like the equivalent of the CIA. If true, this suggests that Bishop Williamson was sandbagged: that he was convinced to turn his case over to people who would then be denounced as neo-Nazis, and perhaps sabotage his case for good measure.Bishop Williamson's decision is no surprise. If he wanted to leave the Society, he could have orchestrated a much better departure long ago.As regards those who have been calling for his dismissal right along, I would argue as follows.If the Holocaust is a controversial historical matter with nasty legal implications in which HE should have avoided involving himself, then it is a historical matter as to which his personal opinion should not be grounds for dismissing him.It looks to me as if, so far at least, this is the way that the Society is thinking.
@Marc PuckettIf I were falsely accused--for example of involvement with organized crime--I would definitely prefer an attorney with experience successfully defending people similarly accused (falsely or otherwise) representing me at trial, regardless of his reputation as an "organized crime lawyer." Does anyone know anything about the lawyers involved in this case? Could this have been the basis for Bp. Williamson's decision? Does he deserve the benefit of the doubt?
If you're interested in the guy's reputation, he's a neo-Nazi.
Ah, but will he drop the case entirely and pay the fine? That is the essential point.
Marc Puckett rather oddly asked why Williamson would have found a neo-Nazi lawyer . . . Williamson spent a generation terrorizing SSPX seminarians with his crackpot theories on a range of subjects, with his anti-Jewish obsession front and center; he is a Nazi apologist himself of long standing.
Post a Comment