There really needs to be a sub-forum for this topic, because bits and pieces
are all over the place.
Here is a Hoffman article from two years ago that nails it before it came to the
point of +W's "exclusion" even from the GC two years later!!
Does Hoffman have a crystal ball or what??????????
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[Who knows if these two posts are from different persons, or the same person?]
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
...
Anonymous said...
What if Bishop Williamson's fellow superiors simply don't share his views? Are they obligated to share his views? He's not obligated to share theirs, after all. I think Bishop Williamson's trial is replacing Calvary as the central event in human history. Perhaps we need revisionists for the revisionists. Where can I get my Traditional Aramaic Mass?
5:53 PM
Anonymous said...
You will get YOUR Traditional Aramaic Mass after all your pedophile priests are behind bars and have all the time in the world to learn Aramaic. Then you can go to jail and attend their TAM.
9:24 PM
______________________________
That looks to me like a Zionist plant doing damage control! What is he commenting
about? Actually, that comment came later on the page below this next one and
Hoffman's reply which follows:
______________________________
[It's a different "Anonymous" apparently]
Anonymous said...
"But now the SSPX is melding into the Vatican's Newchurch Shoah theology. Actions speak louder than words. The leadership has shunned and marginalized Bishop Williamson."
Oh come off it, they're not "melding" into anything. What's it going to take for you to realize that they utterly abhor this "shoah" theology? Will it take a book? A weekly announcement?
And you can maliciously interpret "actions" if you please, but their actions have been explained several times now. Bishop Williamson was literally kicked out of a country. They all understood this to be most unjust and fanatical, but what were they supposed to do? Engage resources in long legal fights? The entire Society was suffering all manner of ramifications, e.g. property being refused to them because of so-called "anti-semitism."
Do you want the good work of the Society to be suppressed at the hands of fanatics who are in worldly power over an historical question? Can you possibly accept this was a matter of prudential judgment in view of the common good of the Society at large? It is you and you alone who re-interprets an action while covering it over in your favorite sensational rhetoric. It makes for a good poem, but bears no resemblance to reality. There's no evil motive. There's no doctrinal abberations. There's no agreement with falsehood. Yet you feel the need to verbally trample over them thereby sinning against justice with your lurid accusations.
Bitter zeal, sins against charity and justice will cause your eternal damnation just the same as those members of the ѕуηαgσgυє of satan who despise Christ. Wouldn't that be ironic if you suffered the same fate as a тαℓмυdist?
10:24 AM
...
Michael Hoffman said...
To ANONYMOUS 1024 a.m.
Yours is a surfeit of rhetoric that ignores the substantive issues we raised: a gag order imposed on Bishop Williamson, exile, public insults by Bishop Fellay, a refusal to offer public prayers for Bishop Williamson's welfare, and the suspension of the functions of his episcopal office.
You spout the usual malarkey about how the SSPX has built up too much to risk working to protect Calvary from being supplanted by Auschwitz. Yeah, there's a lot more important things than that! What a pity the early Christians offered themselves to the coliseum lions. Think of the infrastructure they could have built had they accommodated Caesar.
The staggering silence of the SSPX hierarchy in the face of three papal abominations in three ѕуηαgσgυєs, along with the ascendance of the theology of h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, which the pope has endorsed, is testimony that the SSPX is accommodating modernist heresy.
There is absolutely no justification for the vicious persecution of Bishop Williamson by Bishop Fellay! It is downright disgusting that you use casuistry to attempt to justify it.
Let's cut the BS. If, under the pontificate of Pius XII, a bishop of the Roman Catholic Church had publicly stated about the alleged execution gas chambers and the six million figure, what Bishop Williamson has stated, that bishop might possibly have been privately admonished to be more prudent and diplomatic in the future; that would have been the full extent of his discipline.
No Catholic on earth has to go to Confession to say, "Bless me Father for I have sinned, I doubted the Holy People's Holy Hoax."
Bishop Williamson has committed no sin, except against political correctness; for that reason he is being tormented at age 70. It is a shame and a disgrace that he has been offered up to the rabbis as a form of cowardly and degenerate tribute by his own brothers.
I pray that Bishop Fellay will repent and reform, otherwise he will rue the day that he allied the SSPX with newchurch against one of Archbishop Lefebvre's own bishops, for the sake of trying to cut a deal with the six-pointed Sanhedrin that rules both in Tiberias and Rome.
3:59 PM
____________________________________
I'm not reading any dates on the Comments so with only a time stamp it's
impossible to tell how many days, months or years later a given comment is
posted after a previous one. The article itself is dated Apr. 20th, 2010, but
the two comments above are at least 3 days later, and perhaps many months
later --- who knows?
But here is the article itself, which appears at the top of the linked web page:
____________________________________
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.ie/2010/04/some-questions-for-hierarchy-of-society.html
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Some Questions for the Hierarchy of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX)
Is the Derogation of Calvary and the Ascendance of Auschwitz "your fight"?
by Michael Hoffman
If you have been privy to the reasons Bishop Richard Williamson's Catholic SSPX order has dismissed him as seminary rector, exiled him to London, placed him under a gag order and refused to offer public prayers for his welfare, then you know they have been saying it is because the "h0Ɩ0cαųst is not our fight."
Even if that were the case, Bishop Williamson's views on history could never justify his persecution by his own order. If the hierarchy of the SSPX had wanted to distance themselves from Bishop Williamson's views on matters of secular history having no bearing on faith and morals, they could have done so, while at the same time pointing out that judging debates about world history does not come under the authority or competence of clerics or Catholic fraternal societies, in which case Bishop Williamson would still be rector of a seminary, free to have an opinion and exercise his office as bishop.
Had Bishop Williamson denied the Israeli h0Ɩ0cαųst against the Palestinians he would have faced no repression of any kind from the Vatican or Bishop Bernard Fellay, the head of his order. If Palestinians had insisted that the Church silence and suspend Bishop Williamson on the grounds that he denied the h0Ɩ0cαųst in Palestine, the Vatican and the SSPX would have surely refused, rightly stating that it is not their duty to pass judgment one way or another on controversies in secular history.
Instead, we witness the tragic politicization of the Church, whereby the history of the alleged German gas chamber "h0Ɩ0cαųst" against Judaic persons has a much higher claim on Catholic belief than does the Israeli h0Ɩ0cαųst against the Palestinians. Most Catholics would pour scorn on the idea that a bishop must be suppressed to placate Arabs because he cast doubt on the Israeli h0Ɩ0cαųst in Palestine. But "The h0Ɩ0cαųst," as the suffering of Judaic persons during World War II has come to be known as a result of the imposition of a type of Newspeak, has in fact entered the Catholic Church and assumed a position as a de facto sacred dogma.
We must no longer run from the fact that the religion-of-Judaism-for-gentiles which this writer terms "h0Ɩ0cαųstianity" derogates the Passion of Our Lord in favor of the notion that the supreme suffering of all history was experienced at Auschwitz by Judaics. This is the stated position of Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley and of many other bishops and cardinals of the modern Catholic Church.
The SSPX, said to be a priestly fraternity that wishes to defend the Church as it existed prior to Vatican Council II, would appear to be complicit in cooperating with the modernist infiltration of the rabbinic Shoah theology into the Church, and priests and laity of the SSPX are told that this modernist infiltration is not their fight. Indeed, by their silence and inaction they are party to this subversion.
I have a question for the hierarchy of the SSPX: If the derogation of Calvary in favor of Auschwitz as the supreme martyrdom in world history is not your fight, what is?
I have witnessed the SSPX hierarchy expending a significant amount of time and energy kowtowing to h0Ɩ0cαųstianity. I have seen them do nothing noteworthy, however, about the rapidly increasing use of the name of Jesus Christ in Hollywood movies as a swear word.
I have not the seen the SSPX expend any energy whatsoever on James Cameron's campaign to convince the world that Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead. Mr. Cameron, one of the wealthiest and most powerful directors in Hollywood, produced a docuмentary movie for the Discovery television channel entitled, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus." This sophisticated movie, broadcast to millions, endeavors to show that the decomposing bones of Jesus were once held inside a tomb located by Cameron's team of Resurrection-deniers.
Last I knew the Apostle Paul had nothing to say about gas chamber denial, but he did solemnly warn about the consequences of Resurrection-denial: "If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain." (I Cor. 15:14). There is no Church and no Faith if Christ did not rise from the dead. It would seem that Hollywood Resurrection-deniers such as James Cameron are striking at the very heart of what it means to be Catholic, yet resistance to this diabolism has been neutralized. How has this neutralization come to pass?
Against James Cameron's campaign of Resurrection-denial, the SSPX have had nothing to say. Cameron's most recent New Age science fiction movie "Avatar" is the highest grossing movie of all time. No Catholic boycott was launched against it.
What the SSPX forgets, whether willfully or not, is that h0Ɩ0cαųstianity is akin to the "smoke of Satan" which afflicted another and earlier pontificate of unhappy memory. By embracing the Vatican's acceptance of the revolutionary, modernist Shoah theology which has as its goal the ascent of Auschwitz to the ontological position of the greatest and most egregious suffering in all of human history -- ahead of Christ -- the SSPX is breathing an infectious smoke which in many other respects perverts its judgment and skews its priorities. It has certainly perverted the judgment of Pope Benedict, who has entered three ѕуηαgσgυєs in less than five years, wherein he encouraged the assembled Pharisees to continue in their traditions. This papal abomination in the ѕуηαgσgυєs is a symptom of a profound spiritual malaise, undoubtedly emanating from the grave disorder that inclusion of Shoah theology in the Church has sown.
About this horror, the SSPX is oblivious. In fact, in so far as the evidence indicates, the SSPX has become a party to it. I draw the reader's attention to an article published in the December, 2009 issue of The Angelus, the official organ of the SSPX in the United States, entitled "Saint of the Sanhedrin" containing grotesque praise for the wicked Pharisee Hillel, elementary errors in the history of the тαℓмυd, and a flattering fantasy about the Pharisee Gamaliel. The editor of The Angelus has refused to retract this misleading and deceptive article which would have been suitable for publication in the bulletin of the B'nai B'rith or the journal of the Scottish Rite of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. Meanwhile in Ireland the SSPX has issued a statement affirming the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" that reads like a press release from the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
No reasonable person expects the SSPX to join the ranks of World War II revisionists and debate the forensic chemistry of Zyklon B in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Rather, we are calling on them to resist the modernist heresy of h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, which the Vatican, with unprecedented lawlessness, has made a litmus test for holding ecclesiastical office.
To the SSPX we say, since Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre founded your order, resistance to modernism has been "your fight." Since there is no more pernicious manifestation of modernism in our time than h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, why then have you fled the field of combat under cover of anemic alibis and whining subservience to the new Vatican theology which has substituted Auschwitz for Calvary?
Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press. He is the author of seven books including The Great h0Ɩ0cαųst Trial (1985); Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare (2001) and Judaism Discovered (2008). Hoffman edits Revisionist History Newsletter and the RevisionistHistory.org website. He first met Mgr. Lefebvre in 1979 in Oyster Bay, New York.
Any one of us who has the opportunity
to ask +Fellay a question in a public
forum should ask this question:
Do you support the derogation of
Calvary in favor of the replacement
figure of Auschwitz as the supreme
martyrdom in the history of the world?
It should be re-worded in many ways to make him think that
it's not any kind of rhetoric that is chasing him, but rather it's
the truth that is coming back to haunt him. And it will most
certainly haunt him for a very long time, if not forever!!
Which one is more important to you, your Excellency, the
h0Ɩ0cαųst of World War II as in Auschwitz, [be sure to pause
for a split second, but not long enough to let him interrupt
you] or the Crucifixion at Calvary?
How do you compare these two historical events, your
Excellency: The Passion of Our Lord and His Crucifixion,
compared to the so-called h0Ɩ0cαųst of the nαzιs?
Do you consider the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" to be a dogma of the Faith?
What about the Resurrection of Our Lord, is that a dogma?
Which one of these is historically true, your Excellency:
The persecution of the Palestinians by the state of Israel,
or the persecution of the Jєωs in Germany by the nαzιs?
Is it a sin, your Excellency to deny the Crucifixion of Our
Lord at Calvary? [Pause] Is it a sin, your Excellency, to
deny the so-called h0Ɩ0cαųst of the Jєωs at Auschwitz?
He needs to hear these questions everywhere he goes.
Day in, day out, like a plague that will not leave him in his
subjective fantasy in peace. He should have no peace.