Wednesday, December 26, 2012

SSPX Wins Libel Case Against Bavarian Newspaper

Edit: this is from the SSPX District page, which is a kind of Christmas present from the German government:

The era of slander against the Society of St. Pius X is coming slowly to an end.

Often there are and have been journalists, who in the newspapers or other media disseminate downright  tall tales about the Society.

The most recent case was on the 25th of October in the Mittelbayerischen Zeitung.  There an author by the name of Fritz Winter presumed to make hair raising assertions about the Society.

The Society went with these articles to the Court of Appeals in Nurenburg and received justice.

Conclusions of the Court of Appeals in Nurenburg from 21 December 20012 [Excerpt]

I.  As far as the appeal  by the applicant the conclusion of the Regensburg court of the 23rd of November has been amended.

II.  The adverse party will be condemned in the manner of an injunction, immediately in the first part of the "Mittelbayrischen Zeitung" with the same font as the editorial:

"The evil brothers" is printed on October 25th, 2012 without insertions and deletions reprints the following reply:


In the commentary "the Evil Brothers"  by Fritz Winter on the 25th of October, 2012, there were several untrue assertions of fact:

1. "The Society of St. Pius X is ... in its heart, an organization hostile to the Constitution."

It's true that the Government upon the proposal of the Representative Volker Beck among other things, had directed (Bundestag Printed Paper 17/3334): "According to the Constitution of the Government there is in relation to the Society of St. Piux X  no ... evidence for a constitutionally hostile activity."

2.  "They [The Society]  Promotes a "Catholic Theocracy".

It's true, that the Society does not promote a "Catholic Theocracy".

3. "They [The Society] oppress the rights of women."

It's true, that the Society neither oppresses women, nor their rights.

4.  "A serious distancing of all members [The Society] from Williamson and from anti-Semitic inclinations is not evident."

It's true, that the entire Society, represented by a majority through their General Superior and German District Superior as through the Rectors of the Priestly Seminary in Zaitzkofen, repeatedly and clearly has distanced itself from Bishop Williamson, whereby his  henceforth consequent expulsion goes beyond a mere distancing.  Similarly the Society has distanced itself from every form of anti-Semitism.

[The damages ordered and their justification follow here.]



Judge to the Court of Appeals

This court decision of the Higher Regional Court, Nuremberg is a major victory for the Catholic tradition, because he slanders against the SSPX by anti-clerical circles put a stop.>


Anonymous said...

Is Germany on an circuitous route to its own demise? One Semites finally do away with the other Semites? After all the one is far more numerous than the other.

Anonymous said...

You see what I,m saying. Alas Catholics are winning nothing. You Know what's happened to Germany post ww11. They were defeated and their defeat continues. Why have they gone to the umpteenth degree to make ammends?

Anonymous said...

Although at least, recently in the courts there have been a handful of reversals concerning "dare not question Semitism." I wonder if maybe they,ve finally had enough?

Tancred said...

I think the enduring presence of Muslims may bend this aspect of political correctness to the breaking point.

Imams regularly use language far more inflammatory against the Jews in Europe on a daily basis than the Catholic Church ever has.

Anonymous said...

Yes,definitely true.

Catholic Mission said...

Doctrinally the SSPX is in agreement with Vatican Council II without the false premise: if they don’t genuflect before the Chief Rabbi is another issue
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) must continue to reject the Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II which uses the dead man walking premise.

The ADL-approved Vatican Council II is modernist, irrational and non traditional.

It’s built upon the straw man logic of implicit salvation being visible to us as ‘seeds of the word’, ‘invincible ignorance’, a good conscience’, ‘imperfect communion with the church’, ‘elements of sanctification’, ‘good and holy’ non Catholics who are saved etc.

The leftist version of Vatican Council II assumes that these are personally known cases in the present times (2013).So for the left they become exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They are for the Left, exceptions to the traditional teaching of the Church, on other religions.

The SSPX today, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, correctly rejected this false, irrational and non traditional version of Vatican Council II.

Without the false premise, on which the leftist version of the Council depends, Vatican Council II is doctrinally in agreement with the SSPX position on other religions. It is this rational version of Vatican Council II which the SSPX could accept.

With the support of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, and the military and political support of Israel and its allies, leftist rabbis, ADL and leaders of Jewish organisations, who are opposed by conservative Jews, are threatening the Vatican and telling Catholics what they should believe and what they should reject.

On March 10, 2009, concerning his remission of the excommunication of the four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, Pope Benedict XVI said : "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."

Judging from media reports, the pope is referring to the Jewish Left version of Vatican Council II which the SSPX must accept and which contains the false premise of being able to see the dead saved in invincible ignorance etc.

Without the false premise which creates a new version of Vatican Council, the Council is traditional and in accord with the SSPX values on other religions, ecumenism and religious liberty.
-Lionel Andrades