The following is a Google Translation of the article which Bp. Williamson has hyperlinked in his E.C.:
CHESS IN THREE MOVES
Shoah, Council, Williamson: check in three moves
by
Francesco Lamendola December 25th 2017
Article published on the Accademia Nuova Italia (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=http://www.accademianuovaitalia.it/index.php/cultura-e-filosofia/la-contro-chiesa/3650-scacco-in-tre-mosse&xid=17259,15700021,15700105,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhhby7oIbgA8bOpwS8pBcLTMz24Oyg) website
the bold ones are in the original (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://apostatisidiventa.blogspot.it/2017/05/si-direbbe-che-non-voglia-fare.html&xid=17259,15700021,15700105,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhj_KkQj8OOeKS6JGfgLQ1s7O113VA)
(http://www.unavox.it/NuoveImmagini/Mons_Williamson/ebrei_williamson_art_Lamendola.jpg)
To understand what is happening today in the Catholic Church, its modernist drift, its craving for self-scrapping at all levels, beginning with the doctrinal one, it is not possible to limit itself to considering the events in question as a matter that involves only the Catholic world and Catholic faith. There is a red thread that unites the current phase, in which the (false) pope Bergoglio is literally tearing apart what remains of the Bride of Christ , validly helped by his apostate and unfaithful janissaries, the Paglia, the Galantino, the Sosa , etc., to the previous strategies of dismantling the Catholic faith, begun under the pontificate of Roncalli and continued in a constant crescendo, even if comparatively less conspicuous than the facts of which we are witnessing now, practically every day.
The line of continuity with the internal crisis of the Church is recognizable in the modernist tendencies that, vigorously fought (but not completely cut off) by St. Pius X, have re-emerged, when the circuмstances presented themselves favorable, starting from 1958, that is after the death of Pius XII , the last great and true pope in the history of the Catholic Church.
But modernism, which today is triumphant in the Church, is not simply modernism of the early 1900s, that of Tyrrell, Loisy, Buonaiuti, etc., and is also reviewed and corrected in a version more in keeping with the times, that is, with less Darwin and more Freud, less Renan and more Kasper. No: there is a new element , which has been grafted onto the old one and which gives current neomodernism its most characteristic value; and this new element is not of internal origin, but external to the Church. In short, it is about тαℓмυdic Judaism .
Whatever may be the proponents of the inter-religious dialogue, the conciliar fathers who wrote the Nostra Aetate , in which it is claimed that the old alliance is still valid, and Pope Wojtyla, who wanted to give them the solemn tribute of call them "our elder brothers", the truth is that Judaism - not everything, but its most fierce and combative faction - has always despised Christ and Christians and has always considered as an essential part of his program the objective of "taming" the Catholic Church, to bend it to its strategy and to empty it, from within, of what is essential to it and which constitutes its strength, on the natural and above all on the supernatural level: the divinity of Jesus Christ .
Once this element is removed, explicitly or implicitly, Catholicism is reduced to an empty shell, to a form without substance, and, if one is able enough to lead millions and millions of Catholics up to this point, without them if they are fully taken into account, then it is possible to manipulate them one hundred percent, on any terrain, as now, in fact, it is happening, when they are made to believe that being against the invasion of Italy by millions of Muslims is equivalent to not to be good Catholics.
We had always wondered what lies behind the incredible fury that has been exercised, with the active deployment of the entire world media establishment , against Monsignor Richard Williamson , first within the Catholic Church, then even within the Fraternity Priestly St. Pius X, from which he was expelled on October 4, 2012, and then founded, two years later, the Union Priestly Marcel Lefebvre. We had a clue considering the famous interview with Monsignor Williamson of Swedish television, which also spoke about the h0Ɩ0cαųst, which was recorded on November 1, 2008 but which was aired only on January 21, 2009. How come with almost three months of delay, a "gem" like that?
Things were clear when it appeared that it was not at all a delay, but a clockwork mechanism, shone with perfect timing: just on 21 January 2009, at the request of the Lefebvrist bishop Bernard Fellay, the remission of excommunication had been announced burned down against the Lefebvian bishops, including Williamson (see our previous article: The "Williamson case" was a conspiracy to discredit Benedict XVI (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.ariannaeditrice.it/articolo.php%3Fid_articolo%3D51643&xid=17259,15700021,15700105,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjK-5vR3inx6N-59bZdrmuidO3gNw) , published in Il Corriere delle Regioni and immediately on the site of Arianna Editrice, 29 / 07/2015).
So, there were forces so powerful as to have the competition of the whole world information system and to be able to dictate the law to any sovereign State: as was seen when, precisely as a consequence of that scandal, the president of Argentina, Cristina Kirchner declared the denial claims of Monsignor Williamson, who was then director of La Reja's seminar (but was expelled on 9 February), "disgusting", and gave him ten days' time, starting from 19 February 2009, to leave the country. And what those forces were seen, even more clearly, when the court of Ratisbon opened a criminal case against him, again because of his alleged anti-Semitic statements, which ended with the sentence to pay a fine of 2,000 euros, on April 16, 2010, which was followed by a conviction, on July 11, for "incitement to racial hatred"; sentence then overturned by the Court of Appeals of Nuremberg on 22 February 2012, which annulled the decision of the regional court of Regensburg and condemned the State of Bavaria to pay court costs.
But the "Catholics" of Regensburg have ill-digested this absolution, given that the bishop's curia issued a statement - not too merciful, it seems to us, according to the parameters of the neochiesa - in which he claimed that the places of worship of the diocese were forbidden to Monsignor Williamson, because of his negationist positions. The bishop in question was that Gerhard Ludwig Müller, whom he talked about lately, after his torpedo from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, relating it to the fact that he had hoped, at the time, a response from the pope to the dubia of the four cardinals, concerning the eighth chapter of Amoris laetitia .
We wondered why so much fury , on the part of everyone, against a single bishop, also already ousted by the Catholic Church, and suspended a divinis, and then expelled from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. Without a doubt Monsignor Wiliamson is a head of 'order and a proud man, an indomitable shepherd: those who listened to his lectures and his lectures, even only through Youtube , could get an idea. And yet, is it possible that this brilliant and nonconformist intelligence, and this pastoral rectitude, were, in themselves, sufficient to attract such tenacious and universal persecution against an individual?
After all, there are relatively few people who have taken the trouble to read or listen to what he has to say; and, if he has become a character of international fame, this is due above all to the persecution itself, which has painted it in the worst possible terms, as an incorrigible αnтι-ѕємιтє and, perhaps, a sympathizer of the Hitler regime. Without a doubt, he had been chosen to strike someone else or something else higher than him; but who, or what?
The ßacerdotal Fraternity of Saint Pius X , who, in fact, had rushed to expel him, officially for "disciplinary" reasons, but in reality to give satisfaction to Israel and to the very powerful American Jєωιѕн lobby? But, if it had been so, Bernard Fellay had parried the blow, albeit with a good dose of cynicism, by hunting Williamson, on October 4, 2012, for lack of obedience to his superiors.
The other possible objective, Pope Ratzinger , had made an effort with a similar strategy, even if, obviously, he had not been able to renew the excommunication just revoked. On the other hand, and under the formidable pressure of Chancellor Angela Merkel, on 18 February 2009 Cardinal Camillo Ruini, vicar emeritus of the pope for the diocese of Rome, had declared, in an interview with TG1 (because bishops, cardinals and popes, by now , they want to say what they have to say in interviews with newspapers and television stations and not in the appropriate offices of the teaching Church) that those who deny the h0Ɩ0cαųst can not be a Catholic bishop . And it was precisely this latter fact that gave us a further, valuable clue to our questions.
The last step was the reading of an article by Fr Curzio Nitoglia, available on the Inter multiplices una vox website , entitled: The indivisible link between the Shoah and Vatican II. (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=http://www.unavox.it/ArtDiversi/DIV1833_Nitoglia_Legame_Shoah_Vaticano-II.html&xid=17259,15700021,15700105,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjGVoVjubms21pdFht3U2d4uAG_dQ) From the "Williamson case" (2009) to the h0Ɩ0cαųstic / modernist agreement (2017) (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=http://www.unavox.it/ArtDiversi/DIV1833_Nitoglia_Legame_Shoah_Vaticano-II.html&xid=17259,15700021,15700105,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700173,15700186,15700201&usg=ALkJrhjGVoVjubms21pdFht3U2d4uAG_dQ) . It traces the ideal line that joins the Shoah - not the Shoah itself, of course, but its political and ideological exploitation by the world Jєωιѕн lobby - the Nuremberg trial (1945-46) and the foundation of the State of Israel, soon recognized by the UN (1948-49), the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), especially with the declaration Nostra Aetate , of October 28th, 1965, which affirms that the first covenant of God is still valid with the Jєωιѕн people, then the non-uniqueness of Christian salvation and the non-indispensability of the redemption of Jesus Christ; and finally, the agreement signed on 17 January 2017 by Monsignor Fellay and the (false) pope Bergoglio, in Rome, at the Santa Marta house, in which the Lefebvrists, after having expelled Williamson for his positions on Judaism, which are those of the pre-conciliar Church, definitively accept to recognize as fully legitimate and operative the Second Vatican Council, in all its deliberations, therefore also for what concerns the Nostra Aetate .
Things, at this point, are starting to become clear. The Catholic Church has always maintained that the redemption of Christ is the necessary and indispensable means for salvation, so that there is no other truth and other salvation outside of those brought by Jesus Christ . In the Catechism of St. Pius X it was taught, as we continued to teach up to the Second Vatican Council, that the Jєωs, having rejected Jesus Christ, placed themselves, outside themselves, outside the Communion of Saints, that is, outside of the Church, and therefore outside of salvation. Well, these were precisely the positions from which the Catholic Church was to be moved, by means of the Council, focusing on the trauma of the Shoah and by suggesting that the Catholic Church was, to some extent, co-responsible for the genocide, having practiced too long a a form of anti-Judaism which then offered the nαzιs the favorable ground for their "final solution". Even the pretext, and poisonous, campaign on the so-called "silences" of Pius XII starts from here: from the will to exercise a moral blackmail on the Catholic Church, so as to force it to provide a fair compensation against Judaism. And the compensation has come, in the form of an explicit affirmation that God's first covenant with the people of Israel is always valid: which, of course, nullifies the meaning of the universal Redemption effected by Jesus Christ.
The Catholics, however, or the great majority of them, have not noticed; just as they have not grasped the devastating scope of Wojtyla's definition of the Jєωs as "our elder brothers" . Now, if they are the older brothers, it means that they are rooted in the truth of God, better and more than Catholics. But this is false: it is equivalent to taking away from Christianity all its foundation, all its value. If the first alliance is still valid; if it has not been substituted by the second one, represented by the Cross of Jesus Christ, then it is worthwhile to become Jєωs , rather than Christians, to access the truth and achieve eternal salvation. But then, what did Jesus Christ come to do on earth? And why did he suffer, why did he die, why did he rise? He could spare himself the trouble ... But what does the Shaoh have to do with Judaism?
Remember the statement by Cardinal Ruini: one who denies the h0Ɩ0cαųst can not be a Catholic bishop . Therefore, to have the "right" to be Catholic, one must not accept the Nicene Creed, but one must accept the historical fact (which is controversial in many aspects, starting with the numbers) of the Shoah, which with Christianity does not exist. nothing comes in. It's strange, it's disturbing . But this becomes clearer if we bear in mind that, for тαℓмυdic Judaism, the Shoah is not simply a historical fact, but a theological fact; as stated by the director of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith , Abraham B. Foxman: The h0Ɩ0cαųst is not simply an example of genocide, but an almost successful attack on the lives of God's chosen sons, and therefore at God himself.
Here then, because we can not "deny", that is, reduce the scope of the h0Ɩ0cαųst, both in numbers and in its claim of absolute uniqueness; and this is why it is not lawful to call it "genocide", which is a purely historical term, but we must call it the theological term "h0Ɩ0cαųst" : because it corresponds to the new religion that we want to impose on the world level and to which all the others religions, evidently false, or in any case subordinate, must bow voluntarily, beginning with the Catholic one. And that is why so much fury against a man like Monsignor Williamson: because, having understood what the game is, and what the real stakes, his resistance must be bent at any cost, and his story must be turned into a permanent warning .
It should be noted that his misadventures with the Jєωιѕн lobbies began a lot, but long before the famous "accident" of February 2009: the Canadian police conducted an investigation of him since 1989, due to a conference held in Sherbrooke, Québec , with the hypothesis of a crime of denialism, then archived. In any case, the objectives of тαℓмυdic Judaism have been largely achieved: forcing Benedict XVI, with a series of declarations, to accept the h0Ɩ0cαųst as the premise to be able to say Catholics, in fact the circle opened in 1965 with la Nostra aetate : the "elder brothers" have become the unquestionable guardians of the Church of Christ ...
It is time, perhaps, to reprint the words of the SSPX Superior General from his interview with a French Catholic weekly on January 31, 2009. He was responding to accusations of antisemitism hurled at the Society after the infamous interview on Swedish TV. It should be obvious, even to the most obtuse and slavish of the current SSPX faithful, that there is a major difference between Bps Williamson and Fellay: One is an honest broker of the truth. The other is, well, a shameless, goveling weasel
Read (or reread) these words spoken eight or nine years ago by the then Superior General of SSPX, who today, only God knows why, still occupies that position.
"We evidently condemn every act of murder of the innocent. It is a crime that cries to heaven! Even more so when it is related to a people. We reject every accusation of Antisemitism. Completely and absolutely. We reject every form of approval of what happened under Hitler. This is something abominable. Christianity places Charity at a supreme level. Saint Paul, speaking of the Jєωs, proclaims, 'I wished myself to be an anathema [from Christ], for my brethren!" (Rom. 9, 3). The Jєωs are "our elder brothers" in the sense that we have something in common, that is, the old Covenant. It is true that the acknowledgment of the coming of the Messiah separates us..."
and...
"It is very interesting to notice that the Church did not await for the Council to prescribe courses of action regarding the Jєωs. Since the 30s, even during the war, several texts of Rome provide a very just position: the abominations of the Hitlerist regime must be condemned! 'Spiritually, we all Semites', Pope Pius XI had said. It is a truth which comes from Sacred Scripture itself, 'we are sons of Abraham,' Saint Paul also affirms."