While this analogy isn’t perfect, it does roughly illustrate the situation. And if this seems a stretch, consider that excommunication has been called a spiritual death sentence. It is the harshest penalty the Church imposes and, like capital punishment, is only applied for specific transgressions. It is not imposed simply for making outrageous or offensive comments; if it were, it’s staggering to think how many Catholics might suffer this fate.
Thus, excommunication exists for a particular reason, one that has nothing to do with augmenting the wider society’s scorn and ostracism. And besides the fact that it would be disproportionate to that purpose, Church law isn’t there to do the secular world’s bidding.
It might also be pointed out that the secular world could lead by example. If it really believes that something beyond scorn is warranted as a consequence for Williamson, it could advocate criminal penalties. This is what they do in Germany, after all, where historian David Irving did a stretch in prison for Holocaust revisionism.
Oh, but we don’t want to stifle freedom of speech by imposing our harsher punishments on those with errant tongues? Well, perhaps it’s now easier to understand why the Church may not impose its harshest penalty for such a thing.
At the end of the day, however, this issue boils down to one simple fact: Williamson’s excommunication had nothing to do with his views on the Holocaust, and the remission of it had nothing to do with them. It is ridiculous to conflate the two.
It’s also important to understand that the rehabilitation of the four bishops is part of a much larger process, an attempt to heal divisions in the Church and bring the SSPX back into the fold. Insofar as this goes, it’s much like when a government offers to pardon a rebel group if its members will lay down their arms.
Under such an agreement, it certainly isn’t customary to say that you will exclude this or that member because he made a highly outrageous statement. No, he comes with the organization - it’s a package deal.
Really, though, one has to wonder why this story still has legs. The Vatican has repudiated Williamson’s comments, and the Pope has stated on numerous occasions that denial of the Holocaust’s horrors is gravely wrong. Moreover, as Rabbi David Dalin has said, and contrary to leftist spin, the Church has long been a friend of the Jews - since at least the 13th century.
Article comments
1 - Baronius
Great article. Some real insights in it.
One quibble: Williamson and the others were and are bishops. They became bishops in the same act that made them excommunicated. They had all the power of a bishop, but were never licit (able to exercise those powers in good standing). That's what makes them such an issue: they can ordain priests.
2 - bliffle
It's just those daffy catholics again with their goofy antics.
3 - Bill
No, Williamson was never a Bishop who had any standing in the Catholic Church. No one in the Society of Saint Pius X does because the Archbishop who ordained them never had the authority under the Pope to do so. These were members of a schismatic group, the SSPX, not Catholic Church clergy. They were all excommunnicated.
I see what the aithor means about people not having an understanding of the issue.
4 - Bill
And any priests Williamson ordained have no standing as Catholic clergy, either. Even the lifting of the excommunication doesn't allow them any Liturgical of Office rights. It only allows them to partake of the Sacraments, like all Catholics.
5 - Jordan Richardson
I see what the aithor means about people not having an understanding of the issue.
Right, because Catholic politics are so cut and dry.
6 - robert
This is simply more tired excuses for abuses from the vatican. it is really getting tiring and old. These critisism's like are pointed directly at church policy. As where the crtisisms of their handling of the child molestation scandle. Not against catholics as a whole or anything like that. how much longer can the vatican simply dismiss all critisim as being anti-catholic? When are they going to show some leadership? If they cant or wont show leadership then why dont they simply resign and make way for a generation that can.