+Fellay Pegs It -- and is +Williamson to be Taken to "The Woodshed"?
#1
Believe it or not, the JTA, the Global News Service for the Jewish People, are talking about Bishop Fellay in this piece. And it is he, to whom the headline refers.

Posted online on the Vigil of the Ascension. 

Society of St. Pius bishop blames Jews for antagonism
Quote:May 16, 2012

(JTA) -- A bishop for a traditionalist Catholic breakaway group said the relationship between Jews and Christians is a fundamentally antagonistic one.

Jews "see in Christianity the cause of their situation today," Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Society of St. Pius X's superior general, told the Catholic News Service this week.

"If you think of what happened to them during World War II, they claim that the fault or the cause is Christianity, which we claim is wrong," Finlay said.

He said that while Jews blame Catholics for the antagonism, he believes Jews are at fault.

The bishop said that he did not attribute such an attitude to "every Jew, as people," but to "the religion, Judaism, which is something different."


The Vatican, meanwhile, is continuing reconciliation talks with the society, which has  not accepted the 1965 declarations that changed the Catholic Church's relationship with Judaism.

It is unclear whether the society's attitude is in line with Nostra Aetate, the 1965 Vatican II declaration that Jews are not responsible for the death of Jesus and said that Jews "should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God."

In early May, according to CNS, journalists visiting the society's international seminary in Econe, Switzerland, saw copies of a French edition of "The Jew in the Mystery of History" on display near the book shop. The book describes the Jews as historic "enemies of the Gospel," moved by a "satanic hatred" of Christians.

Bishop Bernard Williamson, another of the society's four bishops, has denied the Holocaust and made anti-Semitic statements.

Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said Wednesday that Williams' statements would require discussions separate from those of reconciliation with the society as a whole, CNS reported.

Pope Benedict XVI last week told a Jewish delegation that Nostra Aetate continued "to be the basis and the guide for our efforts towards promoting greater understanding, respect and cooperation between our communities."

I think it is just terrible that the Society would have such a book in its Seminary. "What further proof do we need?".

Pope Benedict's remarks are very crafty. He seems to be telling the elder brethren what they want to hear. But, I sense diplomacy and avoiding an argument while he coddles them. "There, there, Little Babies, suck on this nu-nu".

Like I've been saying, I firmly belive much of Vatican II and its documents had to do with protecting the Church from taking the blame for the Holocaust. What happened in it's wake, the whole so-called "Spirit of" is an entirely different tragedy. I look at this as a positive development.

Reply
#2
I'm confused!  Who's Finlay, Williams and this Bishop Bernard Williamson?  That's some top notch reporting... NOT!
Reply
#3
Quote:Bishop Bernard Williamson, another of the society's four bishops, has denied the Holocaust and made anti-Semitic statements.

LOL
Reply
#4
(05-18-2012, 01:32 AM)Hawaii Five-0 Wrote: I'm confused!  Who's Finlay, Williams and this Bishop Bernard Williamson?  That's some top notch reporting... NOT!

Maybe they meant Bishop William Richardson?  :shrug:
Reply
#5
(05-18-2012, 01:32 AM)Hawaii Five-0 Wrote: I'm confused!  Who's Finlay, Williams and this Bishop Bernard Williamson?  That's some top notch reporting... NOT!

The writer must have gotten all excited after they heard about the book at the seminary.

Or perhaps the proverbial fly got trapped in the ointment.

"It's Tuttle not Buttle!"
Reply
#6
Romans 11:
...

25 For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, (lest you should be wise in your own conceits), that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should come in.

26 And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.

27 And this is to them my covenant: when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, indeed, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as you also in times past did not believe God, but now have obtained mercy, through their unbelief; 31 So these also now have not believed, for your mercy, that they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded all in unbelief, that he may have mercy on all.

33 O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God! How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways! 34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counsellor? 35 Or who hath first given to him, and recompense shall be made him? 36 For of him, and by him, and in him, are all things: to him be glory for ever. Amen.
-Douay-Rheims
----------

Um, Scripture says they are enemies for our sake concerning the Gospel. This is inarguable. So, woopity doo that the SSPX has a book that cites Romans 11, a chapter that, in context, should actually been seen as an extended hand to the Jews-- but they refuse to reach out themselves. This, combined with historical events, and the very insular nature of the more devout Jews, has led to a sort of victim mentality to a degree- particularly as includes secular events. The blaming of the Catholic Church for the Holocaust and their targeting was not even a point of discussion until the 60's/70's, and took full force in the 80's leading to some needless apologies. Pope Pius XII, and the efforts of the Church at large saved more Jews than all the other relief agencies, including religiously affiliated, combined. Poland was a friggin' nightmare for the Catholic Church, so was Germany. All of Europe was instantly seeing the possibility of being carted off to a camp. Many died defending whatever cause or patronage they pursued against the Nazis, even if that meant keeping their mouth shut about the Nazis publicly so as to have a greater chance of helping. Many individual Catholics did cave to anti-Catholic pursuits. That'd be no different than a muslim who eats bacon daily, by choice, washes it down with a bunch of beer, and amuses himself by drawing cartoons of mohammed in compromising situations. He's a de facto apostate.

Condemnation of anti-Jewish extremes is nothing new. SSPX's official position, based on the video of Bp. Fellay, is being misunderstood as hatred when in reality its a message of love lifted straight from Scripture. The message just ain't getting through thanks to revisionist history becoming a scapegoat for continuing to exist in cultural ignorance at the fact that they can enjoy the immediate assured protection of God, have their sins expunged, return to the method of the High Priest Melchizedek, through the actual Moshiach, Christ, who has, oh my goodness, gifted us with this awesome system that basically mirrors the OT system in the way God intended; and we can be assured that the sacrifice of these human priests, as alter Christus, is sound, reminiscent of Jewish Levitical history, and they give this sacrifice daily. Golly gee. It's like all the prophecies and types wrapped up into a neat little package and wrapped in a bow, and there's still even a surprise inside to act as both a toy, in its abstract ability to be debated about, and the mystery of what it will all actually be like. The knowledge that you will never be persecuted again, and this time the Gentiles, those damned goyim, get to go through it with you. Well punch me sideways, that sounds like a real AWESOME DEAL.

The message will get through when a bunch of rabbis sit down with a couple of really good and traditional theologians and other scholars and just argue the whole thing out Apostle style. This beating around the bush crap has got to stop if these people don't want to experience every single OT enemy's progeny coming down on them like Hitler was a friggin' joke.

And frankly, if that happens, I don't foresee things being all unicorn farts and pixie dust for any serious Catholic either.
Reply
#7
Here's a much more professional report.


SSPX-JEWS May-15-2012 (1,100 words) With photos. xxxi

Traditionalists and Rome strike contrasting notes on Jews


By Francis X. Rocca
Catholic News Service

[Image: 20120515nw1204web.jpg]
Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the Society of St. Pius X, is pictured near an image of St. Pius X at the society's headquarters in Menzingen, Switzerland. (CNS/Paul Haring)

MENZINGEN, Switzerland (CNS) -- Of all the controversies associated with the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, no topic provokes stronger reactions inside or outside the church than the question of the society's attitude toward Jews.

In 2009, after Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of all four of the society's bishops, there was widespread outrage at revelations that one of the four, Bishop Richard Williamson, had denied the gassing of Jews in Nazi concentration camps and endorsed the notorious anti-Semitic forgery, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

The society's superior general, Bishop Bernard Fellay, repudiated those statements at the time, saying that "anti-Semitism has no place in our ranks" and that the "position of Bishop Williamson is clearly not the position of our society."

More than three years later, the society, a breakaway group that rejects the modernizing changes that followed the Second Vatican Council of 1962-65, may now be on the verge of reconciliation with Rome under the leadership of Bishop Fellay and over the objections of other members, including Bishop Williamson.

A prerequisite for such reconciliation is the society's assent to certain church teachings stipulated by the Vatican in a "doctrinal preamble," which has not yet been published but which presumably includes elements of the teaching of Vatican II. In April, the director of the Vatican press office described the society's recent response to the preamble as a "step forward" in the process.

Yet it remains unclear whether the society's attitude toward Jews is fully in harmony with that adopted by the church at Vatican II, specifically in the 1965 declaration "Nostra Aetate," which said the Jewish people could not be blamed for the death of Jesus Christ and taught that they "should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God."

"'Nostra Aetate' remains the charter and guide in our efforts to promote greater understanding, respect and cooperation between our two communities," Pope Benedict told a delegation from the Latin American Jewish Congress at the Vatican May 10.

[Image: 12hp0259.jpg]
Copies in French of "The Jews in the Mystery of History," by the late Father Julio Meinvielle, are pictured among other titles in the bookshop of the Society of St. Pius X seminary in Econe, Switzerland. The book, which describes Jews as "enemies of the Gospel," who seek the "corruption and ruin" of Christians, does not reflect mainstream thinking in the SSPX, said the group's superior general, Bishop Bernard Fellay. (CNS/Paul Haring)

"The declaration not only took up an unambiguous position against every form of anti-Semitism, it also laid the groundwork for a theological reassessment of the church's relationship with Judaism and it expressed confidence that an appreciation of the spiritual heritage shared by Jews and Christians would lead to ever greater mutual understanding and esteem," the pope said.

Interviewed by Catholic News Service the following day, Bishop Fellay said the Society of St. Pius X can accept "some points" of "Nostra Aetate."

To say that "all the Jews today are responsible for the death of our Lord is not the teaching of the church, and so this is wrong," Bishop Fellay said. "But to say that people who agree (with the crucifixion), who say, 'No, they were right to do so,' there they join themselves with those who were responsible."

The bishop added that the society teaches that "we Catholics, with our sins, we are more responsible for the death of our Lord than the Jews."

But in contrast with the pope's remarks, Bishop Fellay's description of the relationship between Catholics and Jews today hardly emphasizes cooperation or friendship.

Jews "have a special place in history," Bishop Fellay said. "Unfortunately, by their refusing of the Messiah, of Christ, that does not change that they have a special role, but for the time being this role in comparison with Catholicism is an unpleasant role."

The relationship between Jews and Christians is a fundamentally antagonistic one, he said.

Jews "see in Christianity the cause of their situation today," the bishop said. "If you think of what happened to them during World War II, they claim that the fault or the cause is Christianity, which we claim is wrong."

"When you see all the comments on the Jewish side about Catholicism, you see this antagonism which does not come first from the Catholics," he said. "I think it comes more from their side than ours."

The bishop said that he did not attribute such an attitude to "every Jew, as people," but to "the religion, Judaism, which is something different."

"Not all Jews follow Judaism," he said.

Bishop Fellay said that, despite popular perceptions fed by controversies such as the Williamson case, Judaism is not a preoccupation of members of the society.

"I don't think that in any talk or sermon, I ever talked about the Jewish question," he said. "It's not an issue for us."

Yet other SSPX members have a history of statements and publications expressing hostility and suspicion toward Jews.

The group's founder, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, named "the Jews, the Communists and the Freemasons" as "declared enemies of the church" in a 1985 letter to Blessed John Paul II. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, who also opposes Bishop Fellay's efforts at reconciliation with Rome, said in 1997 that "the Jews are the most active artisans for the coming of Antichrist."

And in 2009, shortly after the outbreak of the Williamson controversy, the society's U.S. website (www.sspx.org) removed articles arguing that the "Jewish race brought upon themselves the curse that followed the crime of deicide," and that the "Jewish people, if it has not converted to Christianity, will, even if it does not wish to, seek to ruin Christianity."

The society may still be exposing its members and supporters to such ideas today.

In early May, journalists visiting the society's international seminary in Econe, Switzerland, the burial place of Archbishop Lefebvre, saw copies of a French edition of "The Jew in the Mystery of History" on display near the entrance to a small bookshop attached to the chapel, where members of the local community also attend Sunday Mass.

The book, by Father Julio Meinvielle, an Argentine priest who died in 1973, describes the Jews as historic "enemies of the Gospel," moved by a "satanic hatred" of Christians, whom they have systematically killed and robbed over the centuries, and whose "corruption and ruin" they continue to seek through their "domination" of world economics, politics and culture.

Justifying the "discipline of the ghetto," which the church imposed on Jews until the "de-Christianized" modern age, the book calls for a kind of apartheid between the religions to permit the restoration of Christian civilization.

Does the book express mainstream views in the society today? CNS asked Bishop Fellay.

"Not that I would know," he replied.

Would he endorse such views himself?

"Not like that, no," he said.

"The topic (of the Jews) is very, very delicate, very delicate, and should be handled with the greatest care," the bishop added. "We don't want at all to provoke and to make unnecessary turmoil in the world."

----

Editors: This week's Vatican Report on video features the first part of an interview with Bishop Fellay.

END

Edit: Add link to original  -  http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...201985.htm
Reply
#8
Quote:Yet it remains unclear whether the society's attitude toward Jews is fully in harmony with that adopted by the church at Vatican II, specifically in the 1965 declaration "Nostra Aetate," which said the Jewish people could not be blamed for the death of Jesus Christ and taught that they "should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God."

Does the SSPX believe that the Jews are responsible for the death of Christ, or do they just believe that the Jews (along with all other non-Roman Catholics) are rejected by God?
Reply
#9
(05-18-2012, 05:43 AM)MichaelNZ Wrote:
Quote:Yet it remains unclear whether the society's attitude toward Jews is fully in harmony with that adopted by the church at Vatican II, specifically in the 1965 declaration "Nostra Aetate," which said the Jewish people could not be blamed for the death of Jesus Christ and taught that they "should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God."

Does the SSPX believe that the Jews are responsible for the death of Christ, or do they just believe that the Jews (along with all other non-Roman Catholics) are rejected by God?

Quote:A CATHOLIC FAQs ARTICLE
Can it truly be said that the Jewish race is guilty of the sin of deicide, and that it is consequently cursed by God, as depicted in Gibson’s movie on the Passion?

Featured in the Q&A section of the March 2004 issue of The Angelus,
this answer was long enough to warrant itself as an article
 

The teaching of Sacred Scripture on this question is quite explicit. St. John explains that if Pilate sentenced Jesus Christ to death, it was only on account of the insistence of the Jews:

Quote:"When the chief priests, therefore, and the servants, had seen him, they cried out, saying: Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith to them: Take him you, and crucify him: for I find no cause in him. The Jews answered him: We have a law; and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God." (Jn 19:6, 7)

The Synoptic Evangelists state the same thing, e.g., Lk 23:22-24:

Quote:"Why, what evil hath this man done? I find no cause of death in him. I will chastise him therefore, and let him go. But they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified; and their voices prevailed. And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required."

The Jews were consequently directly responsible for the crucifixion. Deicide is the name given to the crime of killing the person who is God, namely the Son of God in His human nature. It is those persons who brought about the crucifixion who are guilty of deicide, namely the Jews.

St. Matthew’s Gospel states very clearly, not only that Pilate considered Jesus innocent of the accusations made against him, but also that the whole people of the Jews took the responsibility of his murder upon their own heads. Indeed, to Pilate’s statement: "I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it," the response is immediate: "And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and upon our children." (Mt 27:24, 25) The Gospel teaches us, therefore, that the Jewish race brought upon themselves the curse that followed the crime of deicide.

However, in what does that curse consist. Surely it cannot be that there is a collective guilt of the Jewish race for the sin of deicide. For only those individuals are responsible for the sin who knowingly and willingly brought it about. Jews of today are manifestly not responsible for that sin. The curse is of a different nature, and corresponds to the greatness of the vocation of the Jewish people as a preparation for the Messias, to the superiority of their election, which makes them first in the order of grace. Just as the true Israelites, who accept the Messias, are the first to receive "glory, honor and peace to every one that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek" (Rm 2:10), so also are the first to receive the punishment of their refusal of the Messias: "Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek" (Rm 2:9). The curse is then the punishment for the hardhearted rebelliousness of a people that has refused the time of its visitation, that has refused to convert and to live a moral, spiritual life, directed towards heaven. This curse is the punishment of blindness to the things of God and eternity, of deafness to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life, of spiritual paralysis, of total preoccupation with an earthly kingdom. It is this that sets them as a people in entire opposition with the Catholic Church and its supernatural plan for the salvation of souls. Father Denis Fahey in The Kingship of Christ and Organized Naturalism explains this radical opposition. He describes "the Naturalism of the Jewish Nation" and the "age-long struggle of the Jewish Nation against the supernatural life of the Mystical Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ" (p. 42) He goes on to explain that "we must distinguish accurately between opposition to the domination of Jewish Naturalism in society and hostility to the Jews as a race" which latter form of opposition "is what is designated by the term, ‘Antisemitism,’ and has been more than once condemned by the Church. The former opposition is incumbent on every Catholic and on every true lover of his native land." (ibid. p. 43) [READ FR. FAHEY'S COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE]
Father Fahey develops his explanation of the nature of this naturalism of the Jewish nation, detailing the two essential truths of the supernatural order that they refused in the time of Christ Our Lord, and continue to refuse to this day:

Quote:They refused, firstly, to accept that the Supernatural life of His Messianic Kingdom was "higher than their national life and, secondly, they utterly rejected the idea of the Gentile Nations being admitted to enter the Messianic Kingdom on the same level as themselves. Thus they put their national life above the supernatural life of Grace and set racial descent from Abraham according to the flesh on a higher plane than spiritual descent from Abraham by faith. Having put their race and nation in the place of God, having in fact deified them, they rejected the supernatural Messias and elaborated a program of preparation for the natural Messias to come." (ibid. pp. 43, 44)

It is indeed very sad that the post-Conciliar Church has forgotten the elementary distinction described by Father Fahey, namely between opposition to Jewish Naturalism and hostility to the race. The door was opened to this, and to the subsequent acceptation of Judaism as a legitimate religion in the Vatican II Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate. After correctly pointing out that the Jewish authorities pressed for the death of Christ, and that neither all Jews at that time, nor today "can be charged with the crimes committed during his Passion," it then continues with the outrageous statement, so contrary to Sacred Scripture, that "the Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture." (§4) It is consequently considered that since the Church reproves every form of persecution, then we must respect their false national religion, regardless of the fact that its very existence is the sign of the curse of the national naturalism that has fallen upon them.

The January 2002 statement of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, entitled The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, likewise refuses to make the same elementary distinction. It apologizes, for example, that certain New Testament passages that criticize the Pharisees had been used to justify anti-Semitism. This has never been the case in the Catholic Church, but that certainly do inspire us to stand against the hypocritical naturalism of those who refuse to convert. Our Lord is very explicit about the curse that the Scribes and Pharisees have brought upon themselves, repeating the curse "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees" no less than eight times in 17 verses in St. Matthew’s Gospel (23:13-29): "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter…" The Jewish refusal of the supernatural order, as of the Messias, has made their religion, true until the time of Our Lord, now a false one. Hence the malediction, and our opposition to their refusal of the supernatural order, which is not anti-Semitism.

From this follows the essential thesis of the above-mentioned document, namely that the Jewish concept of a future Messias does not conflict with the Christian belief in Jesus, for, it states, "The Jewish Messianic expectation is not vain." How could such an expectation be not vain, given that they refuse Christ, the only Messias, who has already come? This means, if taken to its logical conclusion, that the refusal of the mystery of the Incarnation, of the birth of our Divine Savior in the flesh, is no longer a sin of infidelity, that is a grave sin against the Faith. If this were the case, how could it still be true for Our Lord to say: "I am the way, and the truth and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by me" (Jn 14:6)?


http://web.archive.org/web/2007022813303...eicide.htm
Reply
#10
It's always about the Jews. How tiresome.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)