Stripped from the Second Terrace:
Why is it necessary for nutcases to deny the Holocaust? Is there some benefit (material or psychic) that is realized? Moreover, how is it possible for a denier to become a bishop? I hear today that the Vatican is demanding a complete renunciation of these views (which the media have labeled, of course, "ultraconservative"). I guess if he says the right things and spins around three times and clicks his heels he'll be hunky dory for the mitre. But "renunciation" means "repentance," and "repentance" means (everywhere except fantasy island) never asking, never expecting, never demanding rights, privilege or position. Williamson should be happy to come back into the Church as a layman. Never as clergy. And God forbid, never as a bishop. Is that not the meaning of repentance learned by the Prodigal Son?
I too was flabbergasted at the thought of a man who denies the full scale of the Holocaust being readmitted to the Roman Catholic Church as a bishop. In the RCC, this type of thing has to come from the very top, since there is a very top in the RCC, and it's mind-binding to think that Benedikt would have gone through with it in the first place. First of all, Benedikt is German. Secondly, he's the Pope, and the most heavily scrutinized Christian of them all. What's more, he went through with it and then didn't even stick to his guns. I mean, when I first heard about it, of course it was branded a scandal in and out. But lately I don't give news sources much credit for giving Christians much credit. So I thought to myself, "Maybe this is being blown out of proportion; maybe he had his reasons; maybe the newly redeemed bishop has been misconstrued." Of course, I had no clue, but I guess I gave the Pope the benefit of the doubt. Surely he wouldn't have done so stupid a thing as the anchors actually described.
But he didn't stick to his guns. After less than a week of public outcry, Benedikt joined in with the chorus: Rescind your odious beliefs, good sir! At this point I realized the Pope had been completely out of line in the first place. What good could come of this guy being reinstated as a bishop -- the shepherd of thousands of Christians?
In a way, I guess I still hold out for the possibility that something was going on here that the news sources aren't picking up on... Or maybe they just don't care. The reprobate beliefs of this particular guy were juicy enough to fit the headlines. Not that the reprobate would be in any way vindicated were this the case. Filth is filth no matter how you couch it or who's against you.
Still, what prompted me to respond to Fr. Gregory comments in the first place was his mention of this faux-bishop's views as "ultraconservative." What in hell makes a man who believes the Holocaust never took place in any way, shape or form conservative? How is this choice of word anything but a blatant attempt to demonize conservatives and demonstrate just how crazy they can go? I don't even identify as a conservative, but this term, ultraconservative, is ultrabogus, and a good deal disrespectful to any of the respectful conservatives out there. The same can (and should) be said for jokers who like who call things "hyper-leftist" or "ultraliberal." Our news sources need not partake in polemics or intimidation.
