Pope Benedict Welcomes Back Bishop Who Says '9/11 Was An Inside Job'
By Martin Hill
By Martin Hill
|ABOUT THIS SITE||MOST RECENT ARTICLES||RADIO INTERVIEWS||VIDEOS|
|ZIONISM||FREEMASONRY||FILMING COPS||FIGHTING TRAFFIC TICKETS|
|9/11= Inside Job||VACCINES= POISON||RED-LIGHT CAMERAS||EUGENICS=MURDER|
|NEW SECTION: CATHOLICISM||LibertyFight.com CLASSICS||HISTORICAL QUOTES||ALL WARS ARE BANKERS WARS!|
UPDATE 1/8/16 6:30PM Pacific Time: It turns out that Richard Williamson has been excommunicated once again, from the Catholic Church, so it is incorrect and inaccurate to refer to him as a Catholic Bishop or even a Catholic for that matter. This is very sad news for me. Here is some history on the matter. Please understand that Williamson's political opinions, and his stance on the holohoax, 9/11, the police state, etc., which I completely agree with, have nothing whatsoever to do with his excommunication from the Catholic church.
The reason that he was excommunicated in 2015 was that Williamson 'ordained' a bishop without the permission of the Pope, in March 2015, which incurs automatic excommunication for both of them. The interesting part is that in his weekly columns, Williamson always emphasizes that he respects the authority of the Pope and stresses that he is NOT a 'sedevacantist,' (which means "empty [Papal] seat". This is what Mel Gibson believes, that the church has been corrupted to the point that that there is no valid Pope. Williamson does not hold this view. He has written several columns on this specific issue.
Traditionalists such as Williamson, Gibson and others of their ilk are very unhappy with the changes in the church, the 'modernism' and 'liberalism' made as a result of Vatican II. (Which I should note occurred before I was born.) There are however many traditional Catholics who are still in union with the church. Some traditional type Catholics prefer attending Latin Mass, which the church approves of and has actually seen a resurgence in recent years. [See more at the LibertyFight.com Catholicism Archives here.]
On 1/25/2009 I wrote on Richard Williamson's status in the Catholic church: "Last month I sent out an email regarding Bishop Richard Williamson and the video that was circulating titled 'CATHOLIC CHURCH-911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB'. Williamson had made a very eloquent speech outlining how 9/11 was an inside job. I applauded his speech , and as much as I'd have loved to hear a Catholic Bishop to state the truth as Williamson did, I had to point out that Williamson had been excommunicated some years ago and was not in union with the Catholic church. This has now changed! Pope Benedict XVI has reinstated Bishop Richard Williamson as of yesterday and it is making news today primarily because of Williamson's comments regarding the number of Jews killed in gas chambers during WWII. Here is Pope Benedict XVI statement on this matter, issued on 3-10-09: LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE. Full text of that letter is here.]
However, Catholic News Agency reported on March 19, 2015: Automatic excommunication for bishop over illicit ordination
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Mar 19, 2015 / 02:24 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- After having his previous excommunication lifted in 2009, Bishop Richard Williamson has again incurred the canonical penalty upon illicitly ordaining another priest as bishop on March 19. Bishop Williamson was one of four priests who were consecrated bishops without pontifical mandate by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988; all five incurred a 'latae sententiae', or automatic, excommunication, which was removed by Benedict XVI in 2009. Archbishop Lefebvre was founder of the Society of St. Pius X, which he established in 1970 to form priests, as a response to what he described as errors that had crept into the Church following the Second Vatican Council. Even while remitting the excommunications of the Society's bishops, Benedict XVI noted that "doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry."
Bishop Williamson was expelled from the Society of St. Pius X in 2012, and the man he ordained, now-Bishop Jean-Michel Faure, was expelled in 2014, "because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities," the Society stated. Both men incur automatic excommunication as a result of the illicit consecration, which was performed at the Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, a city in Brazil's state of Rio de Janeiro.
Bishop Edney Gouvea Mattoso of Nova Friburgo, the local ordinary, stated that he learned of the consecration “with great sadness,” adding that the "unlawful episcopal ordination at issue is a disobedience to the Pope in a most grave matter, a topic of the utmost importance to the unity of the Church, the ordination of bishops, through which apostolic succession is perpetuated."
"An unlawful act such as this leads to a practical rejection of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, even constituting a schismatic act, with the penalty of automatic excommunication envisaged by the Code of Canon Law." According to canon 1382, both "A bishop who consecrates some one a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See." Bishop Gouvea continued his statement, saying that "as Bishop of Nova Friburgo, it befits me to exhort all the Catholic faithful to fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Pope in the unity of the Catholic Church, and to not support by any means the unlawful episcopal ordination and the consequences which will result."
Please pray for Richard Williamson, that he may repent and see the error of his ways, and rejoin the Catholic Church- in humble submission to the Holy See.
Note that towards the end of this interview, Williamson affirms that "the Catholic Church will last until the end of the world. Our Lord said so, so there's no doubt about that."
"What we're seeing is the end of Christianity. Vatican II was like the end of the Catholic Church. Now the Catholic Church will last until the end of the world. Our Lord said so, so there's no doubt about that, but the Catholic Church took a real heavy blow with Vatican II. And the result is the almost complete paralysis of the Catholic Church."
Also be sure to check out our archive on Fr. Charles Edward Coughlin, (October 25, 1891 - October 27, 1979). He was a brilliant and controversial Catholic priest who told the truth like no other during the time when he had one of the most popular radio shows in America during the 1920's and 30's. I feature a lot of his work in the Father Charles E. Coughlin Archives.
Last month I sent out an email regarding Bishop Richard Williamson and the video that was circulating titled 'CATHOLIC CHURCH-911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB'. . Williamson had made a very eloquent speech outlining how 9/11 was an inside job. I applauded his speech , and as much as I'd have loved to hear a Catholic Bishop to state the truth as Williamson did, I had to point out that Williamson had been excommunicated some years ago and was not in union with the Catholic church. This has now changed! Pope Benedict XVI has reinstated Bishop Richard Williamson as of yesterday and it is making news today primarily because of Williamson's comments regarding the number of Jews killed in gas chambers during WW2.
[Update 5/16/09: Here is Pope Benedict XVI statement on this matter, issued on 3-10-09: LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE. Full text of the letter is below.]
Here is some information on Society of Saint Pius X
Youtube, which coincidentally recently announced they are working the with ADL, has pulled numerous versions of this video. Upload it now, save it and spread it far and wide. Because this time, the title "CATHOLIC BISHOP: 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB" is actually the correct title! Also, search for and download various versions of this clip. the following one has Spanish subtitles. Below the video is one current news article circulating about Williams.
"LIES LIES LIES. THAT'S WHERE IT'S AT." -Bishop Richard Williamson
Transcript of Bishop Richard Williamson speech on 9/11:
"It's not ruling us today, it's not a party as brutal as the Stalinist was, it's not yet a police state imposing upon us to say that two and two are five, but the police state, as everyone of you certainly knows, is closing in both here and in the United States for sure and certain. The police state took a great leap forwards with 911, that's for certain and I hope that none of you believe that 911 is what it was presented to be, it was (of course the two towers came down) but it was absolutely for certain not two aeroplanes that brought down those two towers, they were professionally demolished by a series of demolition charges from top to the bottom of the towers. If you doubt that, look up on the internet 911mysteries.com.
I mention this in sermons. Why do I keep mentioning this in sermons? Because TRUTH is at stake. Because if the towers were pulled down by two aeroplanes, then the party is virtually in control. The party has got control of people's minds, the party can push through all kinds of lies in its media, and if the people swallow the lies, they will be enslaved. Our Lord said, 'The truth will make you free,' the corollary of which is 'Lies will enslave you.'
At the moment, the whole world is being told lies by these media, by the government, by the politicians, by the universities, by the teachers, and worst of all, alas, by the cardinals and the highest authorities in the Church. We are being enslaved by lies, and the most outstanding global lie of recent times to enslave the minds of all of us, or to deceive the minds of all of us, and thereby to enslave us by making us all believe that the police state is a good thing and a necessary thing. And that is why the police state has advanced in leaps and bounds as it has. The greatest example is 911. And that is a classic example of an enslaving lie."
Pope stirs up Jewish fury over bishop
The Vatican is reinstating a British priest who denies millions died at the hands of the Nazis Tension between the Vatican and Jewish groups looked set to explode yesterday after Pope Benedict XVI rehabilitated a British bishop who has claimed no Jews died in gas chambers during the second world war.
Benedict yesterday welcomed back into the Roman Catholic Church Richard Williamson and three other men who were excommunicated in 1988 after being ordained without Vatican permission. The three had been appointed by breakaway French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The Vatican decree issued yesterday spoke of overcoming the "scandal of divisiveness" and seeking reconciliation with Lefebvre's conservative order, the Society of Saint Pius X, which opposes the modernisation of Catholic doctrine.
But Jewish groups have warned the Pope that the decision could damage Catholic-Jewish relations after Williamson claimed in an interview, broadcast last week, that historical evidence "is hugely against six million having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler ... I believe there were no gas chambers". Shimon Samuels, of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Paris, said he understood the German-born pope's desire for Christian unity but said Benedict could have excluded Williamson, whose return to the church will "cost" the Vatican politically. In an interview taped last November and aired last Wednesday on Swedish television, Williamson said he agreed with the "most serious" revisionist historians of the second world war who had concluded that "between 200,000- 300,000 perished in Nazi concentration camps, but not one of them by gassing in a gas chamber". Williamson added he realised he could go to jail for Holocaust denial in Germany.
British Jewish groups condemned the decision and said they feared it could damage social cohesion. "The Council of Christians and Jews have said that in recent years there has been a considerable increase in antisemitism from some of the eastern European churches," said Mark Gardner, spokesman for the Community Security Trust which monitors attacks on Jewish people in the UK. Gardner said he hoped the Vatican would make it clear it abhors Williamson's comments about the gas chambers. "Jews will be extremely alarmed by the lifting of this excommunication on somebody who holds such extreme anti-Jewish views," Gardner said. "I hope the Vatican will speak out on this particular aspect of Williamson's ideology." Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants, warned last week the Vatican's actions would play into the hands of those seeking to stir up trouble. "For the Jewish people ... this development ... encourages hate-mongers everywhere," Steinberg said. Rome's chief rabbi Riccardo Di Segni said that revoking Williamson's excommunication would open "a deep wound". Senior Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi fought back yesterday, telling the Observer: "Williamson's statements are not agreed with and are open to criticism, and they have nothing to do with the lifting of the excommunication. One is not connected to the other. The Society of Saint Pius X has itself distanced itself from these statements." Relations between the Vatican and Jewish groups are already strained by the row over Pope Pius XII, who was pontiff during the second world war, and is being considered by the Vatican for beatification. He is accused by some historians and Jewish leaders of failing to speak out against the Holocaust. Israeli officials recently protested when a senior cardinal said Israel's offensive in Gaza had turned it into a "big concentration camp".
It is not the first controversy for Benedict. His decision to allow freer use of the old Latin mass, including a Good Friday prayer for the conversion of Jews, caused widespread anger. His reintroduction of the Latin mass earned him criticism from Jewish groups but brought him closer to the Swiss-based Society of Saint Pius X, which opposed many of the changes introduced in the 1960s by the Second Vatican Council, including holding mass in local languages. The society's leader, Lefebvre, was still at odds with Rome in 1988 when he ordained four new bishops, including Williamson, without permission from the Vatican, earning excommunication both for himself and all four bishops. Lefebvre died in 1991. Benedict has pushed to normalise relations with the society, meeting the current head, bishop Bernard Fellay, shortly after becoming pope in 2005. In its statement yesterday, the Vatican said Benedict was bringing the bishops back into the fold "with the hope that full conciliation and shared communion is achieved as soon as possible".
NOTE 12/22/15: Bishop Richard Williamson is NOT a sedevacantist like Mel Gibson and his father Hutton. Bishop Williamson writes about this topic often in his weekly column and explains why the sedevacantists (those who believe that the pope is not valid and that the chair of Peter (the papacy) is currently vacant, an 'empty seat,') are wrong. You can read Bishop Williamson's weekly column here: http://stmarcelinitiative.com/eleison-comments/
Subject: RE: CATHOLIC BISHOP SPEAKS OUT ON 9-11
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:24:51 -0800
RE: CATHOLIC BISHOP SPEAKS OUT ON 9-11
(Disclaimer: I'm not interested in bickering about religious denominations, protestant vs Catholicism, etc. This is just to point out a few things about Richard Williamson.)
Thanks a lot for the video link. While I FULLY agree with Richard Williamson about 9/11 and applaud him for speaking out, i must point out one issue that speaks to the core of credibility when referring to this noteworthy story. Non Catholics may not care about this either way, but as a Catholic I do, and everyone who passes on this info should at least be aware of the following point. (Just got back from Italy and visiting the Vatican, by the way, had a great time.)
''bishop'' Richard Williamson was officially excommunicated from the Catholic church years ago and is not a valid Catholic bishop; meaning that he is not affiliated in any way with the actual Roman Catholic church which is headed by the Pope. (See info below). This is very similar to the way that Mel Gibson, ironically often thought of as a devout Catholic, himself is whats called a 'sedevacantist'- basically they believe that because of corruption in the church, that the 'chair is vacant', that the Pope is not a valid Pope and that they dont have to follow Rome. Gibson is on record saying the vatican is a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'; and the 'church' that Gibson built in Malibu is not in any way associated with the Catholic church, according to to the Catholic church itself. I wrote an article outlining all this some years ago, with links, if anyone's interested ill dig it up. Basically Gibson and others like him, Williamson included, are hard core traditionalists, (i believe very sincere at heart), who think the modern church was so corrupted as a result of vatican II and the freemasons, etc. that it's no longer truly the Catholic church that Christ established. ( www.mostholyfamilymonastary.com, which advertises on alex jones show, and www.Novusordowatch.com are two more examples of schismatic and/or sedevacantist groups).
There are other traditionalist Catholics, though, for example those who dislike the changes after vatican II and prefer Latin Mass, etc. who do not go so far as to claim that the Pope is not valid.
There are traits among both types of traditionalists that i cant help but like and admire.. for example, Mel Gibsons dad Hutton, another sedevacantist, who talks about the zionists, masons, and 911 inside job, etc. They aren't afraid to study and face political corruption head on and speak out about it. They know evil is real, and are zealots about fighting it.
The Holy See
LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE
Dear Brothers in the Episcopal Ministry!
The remission of the excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without a mandate of the Holy See has for many reasons caused, both within and beyond the Catholic Church, a discussion more heated than any we have seen for a long time. Many Bishops felt perplexed by an event which came about unexpectedly and was difficult to view positively in the light of the issues and tasks facing the Church today. Even though many Bishops and members of the faithful were disposed in principle to take a positive view of the Pope’s concern for reconciliation, the question remained whether such a gesture was fitting in view of the genuinely urgent demands of the life of faith in our time. Some groups, on the other hand, openly accused the Pope of wanting to turn back the clock to before the Council: as a result, an avalanche of protests was unleashed, whose bitterness laid bare wounds deeper than those of the present moment. I therefore feel obliged to offer you, dear Brothers, a word of clarification, which ought to help you understand the concerns which led me and the competent offices of the Holy See to take this step. In this way I hope to contribute to peace in the Church.
An unforeseen mishap for me was the fact that the Williamson case came on top of the remission of the excommunication. The discreet gesture of mercy towards four Bishops ordained validly but not legitimately suddenly appeared as something completely different: as the repudiation of reconciliation between Christians and Jews, and thus as the reversal of what the Council had laid down in this regard to guide the Church’s path. A gesture of reconciliation with an ecclesial group engaged in a process of separation thus turned into its very antithesis: an apparent step backwards with regard to all the steps of reconciliation between Christians and Jews taken since the Council – steps which my own work as a theologian had sought from the beginning to take part in and support. That this overlapping of two opposed processes took place and momentarily upset peace between Christians and Jews, as well as peace within the Church, is something which I can only deeply deplore. I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news. I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility. Precisely for this reason I thank all the more our Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust which – as in the days of Pope John Paul II – has also existed throughout my pontificate and, thank God, continues to exist.
Another mistake, which I deeply regret, is the fact that the extent and limits of the provision of 21 January 2009 were not clearly and adequately explained at the moment of its publication. The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.
In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" – the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope – to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes. The collegial bodies with which the Congregation studies questions which arise (especially the ordinary Wednesday meeting of Cardinals and the annual or biennial Plenary Session) ensure the involvement of the Prefects of the different Roman Congregations and representatives from the world’s Bishops in the process of decision-making. The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.
I hope, dear Brothers, that this serves to clarify the positive significance and also the limits of the provision of 21 January 2009. But the question still remains: Was this measure needed? Was it really a priority? Aren’t other things perhaps more important? Of course there are more important and urgent matters. I believe that I set forth clearly the priorities of my pontificate in the addresses which I gave at its beginning. Everything that I said then continues unchanged as my plan of action. The first priority for the Successor of Peter was laid down by the Lord in the Upper Room in the clearest of terms: "You… strengthen your brothers" (Lk 22:32). Peter himself formulated this priority anew in his first Letter: "Always be prepared to make a defence to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3:15). In our days, when in vast areas of the world the faith is in danger of dying out like a flame which no longer has fuel, the overriding priority is to make God present in this world and to show men and women the way to God. Not just any god, but the God who spoke on Sinai; to that God whose face we recognize in a love which presses "to the end" (cf. Jn 13:1) – in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen. The real problem at this moment of our history is that God is disappearing from the human horizon, and, with the dimming of the light which comes from God, humanity is losing its bearings, with increasingly evident destructive effects.
Leading men and women to God, to the God who speaks in the Bible: this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the Successor of Peter at the present time. A logical consequence of this is that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity, their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith – ecumenism – is part of the supreme priority. Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light – this is interreligious dialogue. Whoever proclaims that God is Love "to the end" has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity – this is the social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the Encyclical Deus Caritas Est.
So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church’s real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who "has something against you" (cf. Mt 5:23ff.) and to seek reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents – to the extent possible – in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole. Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?
Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint.
Dear Brothers, during the days when I first had the idea of writing this letter, by chance, during a visit to the Roman Seminary, I had to interpret and comment on Galatians 5:13-15. I was surprised at the directness with which that passage speaks to us about the present moment: "Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another." I am always tempted to see these words as another of the rhetorical excesses which we occasionally find in Saint Paul. To some extent that may also be the case. But sad to say, this "biting and devouring" also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom. Should we be surprised that we too are no better than the Galatians? That at the very least we are threatened by the same temptations? That we must always learn anew the proper use of freedom? And that we must always learn anew the supreme priority, which is love? The day I spoke about this at the Major Seminary, the feast of Our Lady of Trust was being celebrated in Rome. And so it is: Mary teaches us trust. She leads us to her Son, in whom all of us can put our trust. He will be our guide – even in turbulent times. And so I would like to offer heartfelt thanks to all the many Bishops who have lately offered me touching tokens of trust and affection, and above all assured me of their prayers. My thanks also go to all the faithful who in these days have given me testimony of their constant fidelity to the Successor of Saint Peter. May the Lord protect all of us and guide our steps along the way of peace. This is the prayer that rises up instinctively from my heart at the beginning of this Lent, a liturgical season particularly suited to interior purification, one which invites all of us to look with renewed hope to the light which awaits us at Easter.
With a special Apostolic Blessing, I remain
Martin Hill is a Catholic paleoconservative and civil rights advocate. His work has been featured in the Los Angeles Daily News, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, The Orange County Register, KNBC4 TV Los Angeles, The Press Enterprise, LewRockwell.com, WhatReallyHappened.com, Infowars.com, PrisonPlanet.com, Economic Policy Journal, FreedomsPhoenix, Haaretz, TMZ, Veterans Today, Jonathan Turley blog, The Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show, National Motorists Association, AmericanFreePress.net, RomanCatholicReport.com, WorldNetDaily, OverdriveOnline.com, Educate-Yourself.org, TexeMarrs.com, Dr. Kevin Barrett's Truth Jihad radio show, Strike-The-Root.com, Pasadena Weekly, ActivistPost.com, Los Angeles Catholic Lay Mission Newspaper, KFI AM 640, IamtheWitness.com, Redlands Daily Facts, BlackBoxVoting, The Michael Badnarik Show, The Wayne Madsen Report, Devvy.com, Rense.com, The Contra Costa Times, Pasadena Star News, Silicon Valley Mercury News, Long Beach Press Telegram, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, L.A. Harbor Daily Breeze, CopBlock.org, DavidIcke.com, Whittier Daily News, KCLA FM Hollywood, The Fullerton Observer, Antiwar.com, From The Trenches World Report, and many others. Archives can be found at LibertyFight.com and DontWakeMeUp.Org.
DHS Calls Motorists' Employer to Tattle That They Won't Answer Questions At Warrantless Checkpoint (Article & 2 videos) 8/1/14
Motorist puts police in their place at suspicionless internal checkpoint December 2, 2012
[Must see video- Featured on PrisonPlanet.com].
Cop at Suspicionless Checkpoint Starts Barking Orders, But Then Flees from Camera [Featured on LewRockwell.com.]