Marcelo Gonzalez is the Argentinian blogger who was the source for Rorate Caeli’s report on the status of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass in Beunos Aires under Cardinal Bergoglio. Dawn Eden pointed, from one of Gonzalez’s articles that he is a Holocaust denier and also called his report on the status of EF under Cardinal Bergoglio a “smear.” A controversy has ensued.

Rorate Caeli has defended the accuracy of Gozalez’s report and seems to be correct that Cardinal Bergoglio provided only one priest for the EF, who celebrated only a “hybrid mass.” Apparently, this was unacceptable to the Latin Mass community and so poorly attended that it was discontinued. But the report of Gozalez, as reproduced by Rorate Caeli, begins thus:

Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and moral seem to have been irrelevant to him.

A sworn enemy of the Traditional Mass, he has only allowed imitations of it in the hands of declared enemies of the ancient liturgy. He has persecuted every single priest who made an effort to wear a cassock, preach with firmness, or that was simply interested in Summorum Pontificum.

Famous for his inconsistency (at times, for the unintelligibility of his addresses and homilies), accustomed to the use of coarse, demagogical, and ambiguous expressions, it cannot be said that his magisterium is heterodox, but rather non-existent for how confusing it is.

So regardless of the accuracy of Gonzalez’s report in respect the status of the EF in Buenos Aires, it seems to be completely understandable why Dawn Eden, and others, including myself, consider this article to be a smear. In typical fashion the blogger at Rorate Caeli, New Catholic, refuses to take responsibility for the smear and appends his disclaimer to Gonzalez’s report: ”

The above is a personal assessment by the author and does not indicate any opinion of this blog or its contributors.

It is remarkable that, while RC will take no responsibility for what it has printed, it continues to consider Gonzalez a reliable witness, defending the post repeatedly. And beside the fact, that in the comment section, over which New Catholic reigns with an iron fist, we see that the new Pope is called a “modernist” numerous times, Rorate Caeli has been reporting unsubstantiated trash about the Holy Father since the morning after his election.

Beyond this, while RC lectures everyone else on charity, that is a sword that seems to cut only one way. Now that RC is in somewhat of a fix because of their recent postings, New Catholic has chosen to deal in conspiratorial innuendo, claiming that the “attacks” are personal due to a lack of sacerdotal charity. Even more stunningly, New Catholic suggests that recent opposition has cropped-up suddenly, “like magic,” after RC posted a report on homosexuality within the priesthood and that they are being persecuted by a gay cabal. There is no consideration at all that RC may be experiencing problems because of the content and method of their bloggers, though there is plenty of evidence for it. No, conspiracy is so much simpler. There is no evidence needed. Innuendo is sufficient.

I am reproducing here a sequence of comments from my recent post: “Six Million Jews Killed by Mistake.” It is a conversation between Marcelo Gonzalez and other commenters, including myself, that occurred last night. It clarifies the position of Gonzalez in respect to the Holocaust and perhaps sheds some light on his unmitigated hostility toward Pope Francis, who has shown himself quite friendly to the Jews. The sequence in question in context begins here.

Gonzalez claims that Dawn Eden did not understand the “subtleties” of his Spanish language article due the deficiencies of the Google translation that she used. He later appended an English translation to his original Spanish and this is what he refers to in the thread below.

Gonzalez claims that the point of his article is that no opinion concerning the Holocaust is a matter of Catholic Doctrine and that no one can be called a heretic for either accepting it or denying it. But this is not what Dawn Eden criticized, not is it the only point Gonzalez makes in his article. Since the controversy erupted Gonzalez has clarified that he does not dispute that six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, but has not clearly admitted that he believes the Holocaust was a planned and systematic program of extermination on the part of Nazis. In fact, he implies otherwise in his original article, and when questioned about below numerous times, he refuses to answer. Nor will answer the question, posed by another commenter, as to whether he accepts the teaching ofNostra Aetate that

“…what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. …. the Church … decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone.”

I have maintained that antisemetism and paranoid conspiracy theory are significant problems within the traditionalist movement for some time. This whole episode is another illustration of the phenomenon. Unfortunately, paranoia and bigotry are resistant to self criticism and keep the echo chamber sealed and secure within a perimeter of fear.

Here is the excerpted thread from last night’s conversation with Marcelo Gonzalez:

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 4:00 pm said:

In case someone wants to read the English version that Ms. Eden DID NOT understand can do it following this link. [deleted: see next comment below]

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 4:16 pm said:

Marcelo,

I deleted the link because, I don’t want anyone to think that it was not provided by Dawn Eden and me.

The link is above [see original post] in Dawn’s quote with the words: “appended an English translation to his original article.”

So you do not dispute the numbers, but you do have some question as to what extent the Holocaust was a planned and systematic extermination of the Jews.

So what did Dawn misunderstand?

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 4:26 pm said:

Can’t people read the text for themselves and come to their own conclusions? I thougth America was the land of liberty and of opinion…

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 4:29 pm said:

They most certainly can and it most certainly is, though I currently reside in the UK. The link is right above, and I will give it here again.

Like I said, I just did not want your comment to be taken as evidence that we had not already provided the link.

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 4:41 pm said:

Well, thank you. And, please, try and be a bit more subtle when reading Holocaust and Holonarrative. You don’t really get the point..

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 4:54 pm said:

You are welcome.

And we are all eyes. What point am I not getting?

Frankly, I never heard anyone suggest that Holocaust denial or minimization was a heresy. It’s news to me that this is a significant misconception.

But when it comes to the essential point that the Holocaust was the planned and systematic extermination of six million Jews, what exactly needs to be left up to academics, as if this were not already indisputably established?

As I said, we are all eyes.

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 5:14 pm said:

The point of the article is that Holocaust is not an article of Faith. In either way you may look at it. It’s a historical fact. This is the core that many have skipped.

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 5:17 pm said:

I still don’t see how you have been misunderstood. You didn’t answer my question.

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 5:52 pm said:

Well, then. You think that denying Holocaust is not a heresy. Have I understood you?

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 6:02 pm said:

No one ever suggested that it was. That has never been the dispute here and you know it. You still have not answered my question. It’s not that hard, Marcelo.

kirthigdon on April 11, 2013 at 6:06 pm said:

While the Nazis did systematically plan and attempt to exterminate all Jews over whom they had power, some fraction of the Jews killed in WWII were simply the victims of war and wartime conditions. But since the Nazis started the war and their exceptional ferocity was largely responsible for the conditions, they are morally accountable for these as well.

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 6:12 pm said:

Well, it’s not that hard, is it? I mean, to say plainly that denying Holocaust is not a heresy, May be stupid, prejudicial, ignorant, whatever. Not a heresy. Do you agree?

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 6:19 pm said:

That is not the issue Marcelo. No it is not a heresy. No one said it is. Don’t suggest that Dawn or I ever said it was. Don’t deflect, Marcelo.

But you still can’t answer my question, because Dawn understood exactly what you were saying.

craig on April 11, 2013 at 6:32 pm said:

I would not call Holocaust denial or minimization a heresy. That is not the correct term. But it has a strong correlation with rejection of certain other teachings of the Church.

For an analogy, consider someone who denies the Fatima apparitions. The Church has declared that these are worthy of belief. She has also declared that they are private revelations and not part of the deposit of faith, so denial of Fatima would not constitute heresy per se. But the contemporaneous testimonies, subsequent fruits, etc., argue strongly in favor of its historical fact. So if someone Catholic claims that the Blessed Virgin Mary did not appear at Fatima, Lourdes, etc., despite the Church’s recognition of these, they had better produce a good explanation for that claim or else it is only natural to suspect that they likely do so out of a general disbelief in the communion of saints. At least there is a strong correlation (cf. Reformed Protestantism) between disbelief in the communion of saints and disbelief in private revelations.

Completing the thought: There are Church declarations that certain private revelations are worthy of belief. But those are decidedly not of higher authority than the ecumenical council’s declaration which said:

“…what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. …. the Church … decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone.”

So, Mr. Gonzalez, do you reject that excerpted statement?

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 6:40 pm said:

Now we come to an understanding. It’s not a heresy, you can deny Holocaust without going against any article of Faith. Well, that’s the point of may article. I used both words, Holocaust and Holonarrative, because they are the words that use the two parts in the discussion. And I have said I’m sick of hearing those (there are many, no matter you have never heard about it) who try to invent a new dogma, as well as those who affirm that you cannot be a Catholic if you accept the fact that millions (number, circunstances, intentions are in the field of academic research) were killed because they were jews. Even emphasising the crude fact that it was race and not even religion the cause of persecution. Because many Catholic jews were ruthlessly killed, like St. Edith Stein. I even compared how US acted in the case of Japanese people in America distinguishing what could be a true reason of State and a fierce persecution caused by hatred. I hope my English is clear enough to take this discussion to the point and stop nonsense. frangelo on

April 11, 2013 at 6:48 pm said:

No, Marcelo, we have no understanding. You are just digging yourself deeper. Dawn understood exactly what you were saying, and you just confirmed it. It really isn’t that complicated, Marcelo. I gave you multiple chances to answer a simple question, and you couldn’t do it.

Marcelo González on April 11, 2013 at 7:07 pm said:

I don’t know how Ms. Eden could understand a text plenty of subtleties wihout knowing Spanish just with the help of Google translation. What you ask is already answered in the article, and in the clarification that I published yesterday due to this turmoil. There I have made distinctions on the historical matter that is not necessary to repeat here, because the reader can find them by himself. May this considerations be wrong? Maybe. In such a case, my mistakes concern historical facts and are not matter of Faith. Isn’t that enough?

Are you so scared of media pressure so as to renounce to your own reason? I hope not. I’m not. Just worried about confusion. I think I have done all I could to clarify my position.

By the way, wasn’t the subjet that triggered all this fuss my criticism on the way Card. Bergoglio managed the TLM question? Go back to Ms. Eden’s first article and see how she tortured things to discredit me.

Thank you for your kindness.

Marcelo González

frangelo on April 11, 2013 at 7:31 pm said:

I wouldn’t say you have clarified anything, only that you cannot clearly say that the Holocaust was a planned and systematic extermination of six million Jews. And that simply is a confirmation that Dawn was right. It is not a subtle matter.

craig on April 11, 2013 at 8:41 pm said:

For the sake of charity in argument, let us accept that translation is impeding this discussion. I notice you did not answer my earlier question, so I’ll repeat it, this time using the same excerpt in Spanish:

“… lo que en su Pasión se hizo, no puede ser imputado ni indistintamente a todos los judíos que entonces vivían, ni a los judíos de hoy. Y, si bien la Iglesia es el nuevo Pueblo de Dios, no se ha de señalar a los judíos como reprobados de Dios ni malditos, como si esto se dedujera de las Sagradas Escrituras. …la Iglesia … deplora los odios, persecuciones y manifestaciones de antisemitismo de cualquier tiempo y persona contra los judíos.”

Do you reject the Church’s statement here, yes or no?

Marie on April 11, 2013 at 8:53 pm said:

DECLARATION ON THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS NOSTRA AETATE PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON OCTOBER 28, 1965

5. We cannot truly call on God, the Father of all, if we refuse to treat in a brotherly way any man, created as he is in the image of God. Man’s relation to God the Father and his relation to men his brothers are so linked together that Scripture says: “He who does not love does not know God” (1 John 4:8).

No foundation therefore remains for any theory or practice that leads to discrimination between man and man or people and people, so far as their human dignity and the rights flowing from it are concerned.

The Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against men or harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion. On the contrary, following in the footsteps of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, this sacred synod ardently implores the Christian faithful to “maintain good fellowship among the nations” (1 Peter 2:12), and, if possible, to live for their part in peace with all men,(14) so that they may truly be sons of the Father who is in heaven.(15)

frangelo on April 12, 2013 at 5:16 am said:

Re Marcelo’s response to my question and that of craig @ April 11, 2013 at 8:41 pm:

Crickets.