On the even of his trial (which appears likely to be held in abstentia) for Holocaust denial in Germany various sources are reporting that Bishop Richard Williamson of the Roman Catholic traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has been silenced by his order. According to his attorney and other sources, Williamson, well known for espousing antisemitic beliefs and expressing highly controversial opinions on any number of other subjects, has been ordered to refrain from internet postings and discussions, granting interviews, or opining aloud or in print on any subject other than matters of the Catholic faith and the latter only after receiving direct approval from the Superior of the SSPX. Williamson created a firestorm of controversy on the eve of the lifting of the excommunications of the SSPX by Pope +Benedict XVI when he denied substantial parts of the Nazi genocide of the Jews in a television interview. This caused enormous embarrassment to both the SSPX and the Holy See. There are some who fear that in the event of a rapprochement between Rome and the SSPX that Williamson might bolt and found his own group.
An afterthought: The SSPX I think has acted correctly. Through his words and actions Williamson has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that he is a racist anti-Semite and a fool. He is manifestly unfit for orders of any kind much less the purple cassock. Given that such in the minds of Roman Catholics can not be undone however, this is probably the next best thing. My substantial differences with the Society (which go far beyond the usual Orthodox-Catholic disputes) notwithstanding, I applaud them for this overdue discipline. One might perhaps dare to hope that this portends of an intention on the part of the SSPX to do a little internal house cleaning. Williamson is by no means the only one holding such views in the Society.
All of that said I have to express some concern about the court case. As odious as Williamson's views are, I am deeply reluctant to criminalize them. Is Williamson a knave and a fool? Without doubt. But should foolish or even deeply offensive opinions be put under the ban of the law? This is a slippery slope. I think it is better to simply expose them for what they are and hold people like Williamson up for public ridicule.
Are there exceptions? Yes. When opinions translate into actions that can endanger society or the public/national safety then that's a different matter. But those exceptions are very rare.
To Whom Can I Be a Neighbor?
7 hours ago
