BBC Reports on the Papacy's strongest yet condemnation of Holocaust denial: "revoke: or never be readministered to ministery" (Paraphrase): Pope to Williamson

(Insider Confessions Analysis; c.f. BBC World News (Secular; British; Government; a source we find professional) 04 / 02 / 2009 (4th Feb 2009 16:51 GMT + 2); VIS: Vatican Information Service: 04 / 02 / 2009; Rorate Caeli ("Catholic"; Traditionalist; independent; not endorsed by us) February Archives: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html)

Article by Marc Aupiais

While the Vatican has issued another strong Statement against Williamson's holocaust denial: BBC World News: Reports that the Vatican will not allow SSPX Bishop Williamson (anointed against the wishes of the Vatican, during the pontificate of Pope John Paul the Second) to return to duty: until he recants his views: essentially preventing him, as he and his fellow SSPX bishops and priests: currently already are prevented: from exercising legitimately: authority as a bishop (or as a priest). Essentially: this signs another possible impasse between the Society and the Church: which could prevent any visible and real Unification from occurring(the society is still not permitted to exist or operate by the church).

Vatican Information Service Reports:

"POPE'S CONDEMNATION OF HOLOCAUST DENIAL IS CLEAR

VATICAN CITY, 4 FEB 2009 (VIS) - Holy See Press Office Director Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J. made the following declaration yesterday afternoon:

"With reference to the latest requests for clarification concerning the position of the Pope and the Catholic Church on the subject of the Holocaust, it should be borne in mind that the Pope's ideas on this matter were very clearly expressed at the synagogue of Cologne, Germany, on 19 August 2005, at the concentration camp of Auschwitz-Birkenau on 28 May 2006, in the general audience of 31 May 2006 and, more recently, at the end of his general audience of 28 January this year, with unambiguous words of which we highlight the following: 'As I once again affectionately express my full and indisputable solidarity with our Brothers and Sisters who received the First Covenant, I trust that the memory of the Shoah will induce humankind to reflect upon the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the heart of man. May the Shoah be for everyone an admonition against oblivion, negation and reductionism...

"The condemnation of Holocaust denial could not have been clearer, and from the context it is obvious that this also referred to the views of Msgr. Williamson and to all similar views. On the same occasion the Pope also clearly explained the purpose of the remission of the excommunication, which has nothing to do with legitimising Holocaust denial - something that, as we have explained, he clearly condemns".
OP/POPE HOLOCAUST/LOMBARDI VIS 090204 (260)"

(Online Version: VIS: Vatican Information Service: 04 / 02 / 2009)

BBC world news, which has been commended on professional handling of the Williamson issue: has reported that the Papacy has stated that they will not readmit English SSPX Schismatic: Bishop Williamson into the Roman Catholic Church's ministry: unless he recants his views on the holocaust. Williamson, as with all members of the "Priestly Fraternity" of the irregular grouping known as the SSPX, are still suspended, and not permitted to act as priests or as bishops. Their lifting of excommunication allows them to confess, but not give confession, they are essentially being treated as normal members of the Catholic church: and not as bishops as yet.

Williamson's grave penalty of latae sententiae excommunication, occurred as he accepted SSPX founder: Marcel Lefebvre's anointing as bishop: against the wishes of the Vatican.

While lifting this specific excommunication: in order to pass an impasse with the society: in which they were demanding both this: and wide availability of the Latin Mass: in the regular church: before negotiations continued: the Vatican did not lift the suspensions of either the SSPX Bishops, or of their priests,and the status of the society remains the same: with Catholics deterred from attending their masses: if at all viable.

According to BBC:

"A statement said Bishop Richard Williamson must "unequivocally" distance himself from his statements to serve in the Roman Catholic Church."

(BBC World News (Secular; British; Government; a source we find professional) 04 / 02 / 2009 (4th Feb 2009 16:51 GMT + 2))

Meanwhile: traditionalist blog: Rorate Caeli: claims that the whole situation: was somehow orchestrated to make the papacy look bad. According to them:

Fiammetta Venner, who they name a "lesbian" activist, along with her"partner", informed the Swiss press of the infamous (up to "300 000" Jews Gassed- claims by Williamson) interview: actually based, according to them: on a Canadian interview, which the SSPX Bishop was asked about. Rorate Caeli , quotes a document sent them, which claims that it, along with other events; were considered (according to a document sent them) too well timed: and they seem to claim that there likely is a Vatican document: alleging a plot, involving someone inside the Vatican.

While the actual post does not have a permanent link, which we can find: their comments window, with 55 comments, has the option to view the original post: this is the link to such:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=19978542&postID=6685582117221088431

Rorate Caeli , were one of, if not, the first source to air on the lifting of the excommunications: before this publicly was noted, and are highly regarded by many sources: they have been quoted on both SSPX and mainstream internet sources. Rorate Caeli: claims to have been informed of such, before several Italian Journalists aired the possibility of forces within the Vatican, or a force: working to disrupt the Image of Benedict XVI. They claimed, that they had believed that these claims should not have been aired by them, as Rorate Caeli : before being noted elsewhere: which has occurred. We cannot verify the Rorate Caeli: claims, or that of those they note to have also released such. They are, however interesting, and certainly warrant investigation. French Secular paper: Liberation, itself, sees the blunder of the Vatican, as odd: considering the manner in which Benedict XVI has dealt with the Jewish communities in the past.

According to the BBC, the papacy had no knowledge of the comments/situation of Bishop Williamson, in this they quote:"Cardinal Walter Kasper, who is in charge of relations between the Roman Catholic Church and Jewish leaders," who "admitted different parts of the Vatican administration had not talked enough to each other, and failed to check where problems could arise." (Both quotations in this paragraph: BBC World News (Secular; British; Government; a source we find professional) 04 / 02 / 2009 (4th Feb 2009 16:51 GMT + 2)).

Whether or not there was a plot: one can almost be assured: that the Vatican's press, and / or public relations related functions: need to investigate: how it was possible that the Papacy was not given the information needed to predict what occurred, or to be able to release a press statement with the excommunications' lifting: which would have clarified what they have now had to say.

While the SSPX's top brass are no longer under the harshest punishment of the church: their members still operate without license of the church, and their bishops are still suspended, as with their priests. Except in necessity, Catholics are warned to avoid their masses. Except where their is chance of death: their Sacrament of Confession must not be asked of them.

Before the SSPX can be readmitted to the Catholic church: acceptance of the authority of Vatican II, is likely a non-negotiable. The so-called "Society of Saint Pope Pius X" (SSPX), was formed to reject certain reforms occurring because of the council, even though the Late Marcel Lefebvre's signature, is clearly recorded on the council: and despite the direct affirmation by the papacy, speaking outside of the council: during the council's duration (Ecclesiam Suam point number #6), via an encyclical: as an "Ecumenical" council.

Vatican I, defines the code by which Vatican II, is to be universally accepted as free from doctrinal and moral error, as the church: by the faithful within Holy Mother Church.

Views about Judaism, and the holocaust within the society itself, may differ, especially when dealing with parishioners: which are not officially defined: as to whether or not en masse they are in schism (some are, some are apparently not): our news source monitors several traditionalist, and SSPX sources online, and we also have personal contact points within the irregular grouping: at different levels: via which we are able to gain a gauge of their activities and perceptions. Tough negotiations lie ahead of Vatican and society, and many obsticles: before the Society can once again rejoin the church.

Two well read traditionalist sources: Rorarti Caeli, and Fr Z, the first of which we monitor, the second of which we know of: but where the information was come accross, while browsing the internet for sources, and information: both seem to affirm: that Catholics are to treat the society in the same manner.

Rorati Caeli covers the their analysis of the current status of SSPX here, quoting what they say is a article in an edition of: L'Osservatore Romano:

"NOTE OF THE SECRETARIAT OF STATE


Following the reactions caused by the recent Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, with which the excommunication of the four Prelates of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X was remitted, and regarding the negationist or reductionist declarations on the Shoah from Bishop Williamson, of the same Fraternity, it is considered convenient to clarify a few aspects of past events.

1. Remission of the excommunication.

As already published previously, the Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, dated January 21, 2009, was an act by which the Holy Father graciously responded to the reiterated requests by the Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X.

His Holiness desired to remove an obstacle which prevented the opening of a door to dialogue. He now expects that an equal disposition will be expressed by the four Bishops in complete adherence to the doctrine and the discipline of the Church.

The extremely grave censure of latae sententiae excommunication, in which the aforementioned Bishops had incurred on June 30, 1988, then formally declared on July 1 of the same year, was a consequence of their illegitimate ordinarion by Mons. Marcel Lefebvre.

The removal of the excommunication released the four Bishops from an extremely grave canonical censure, but has not changed the juridical position of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X which, at the current moment, does not enjoy any canonical recognition by the Catholic Church. Not even the four Bishops, though released from the excommunication, have a canonical function in the Church and they do not exercise licitly a ministry in it.

2. Tradition, doctrine, and the Second Vatican Council.

For a future recognition of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, the full recognition of the Second Vatican Council and of the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and of the same Benedict XVI is an indispensable condition

As it was already affirmed in the Decree of January 21, 2009, the Holy See will not avoid, in ways deemed appropriate, discussing with the interested [party] the still open questions, so as to be able to reach a full and satisfactory resolution of the problems which originated this painful division.

3. Declarations on the Shoah

The positions of Mons. Williamson on the Shoah are absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father, as he himself remarked on the past January 28, when, referring to that brutal genocide, reaffirmed his full and unquestionable solidarity with our Brethren receivers of the First Covenant, and affirmed that the memory of that terrible genocide must lead "mankind to reflect on the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the heart of man", adding that the Shoah remains "for all a warning against forgetfulness, against denial or reductionism, because the violence against a single human being is violence against all".

Bishop Williamson, for an admission to episcopal functions in the Church, will also have to declare, in an absolutely unequivocal and public manner, distance from his positions regarding the Shoah, unknown to the Holy Father in the moment of the remission of the excommunication.

The Holy Father asks to be joined by the prayers of all the faithful, so that the Lord may enlighten the path of the Church. May the effort of the Pastors and of all the faithful increase in support of the delicate and burdensome mission of the Successor of Apostle Peter as "custodian of the unity" in the Church.

From the Vatican, February 4, 2009.

[Translation according to original version,
published in L'Osservatore Romano, February 5, 2009 - PDF file]
____________________________

NOTA DELLA SEGRETERIA DI STATO

A seguito delle reazioni suscitate dal recente Decreto della Congregazione per i Vescovi, con cui si rimette la scomunica ai quattro Presuli della Fraternità San Pio X, e in relazione alle dichiarazioni negazioniste o riduzioniste della Shoah da parte del Vescovo Williamson della medesima Fraternità, si ritiene opportuno chiarire alcuni aspetti della vicenda.

1. Remissione della scomunica.

Come già pubblicato in precedenza, il Decreto della Congregazione per i Vescovi, datato 21 gennaio 2009, è stato un atto con cui il Santo Padre veniva benignamente incontro a reiterate richieste da parte del Superiore Generale della Fraternità San Pio X.

Sua Santità ha voluto togliere un impedimento che pregiudicava l’apertura di una porta al dialogo. Egli ora si attende che uguale disponibilità venga espressa dai quattro Vescovi in totale adesione alla dottrina e alla disciplina della Chiesa.

La gravissima pena della scomunica latae sententiae, in cui detti Vescovi erano incorsi il 30 giugno 1988, dichiarata poi formalmente il 1° luglio dello stesso anno, era una conseguenza della loro ordinazione illegittima da parte di Mons. Marcel Lefebvre.

Lo scioglimento dalla scomunica ha liberato i quattro Vescovi da una pena canonica gravissima, ma non ha cambiato la situazione giuridica della Fraternità San Pio X, che, al momento attuale, non gode di alcun riconoscimento canonico nella Chiesa Cattolica. Anche i quattro Vescovi, benché sciolti dalla scomunica, non hanno una funzione canonica nella Chiesa e non esercitano lecitamente un ministero in essa.

2. Tradizione, dottrina e Concilio Vaticano II.

Per un futuro riconoscimento della Fraternità San Pio X è condizione indispensabile il pieno riconoscimento del Concilio Vaticano II e del Magistero dei Papi Giovanni XXIII, Paolo VI, Giovanni Paolo I, Giovanni Paolo II e dello stesso Benedetto XVI.

Come è già stato affermato nel Decreto del 21 gennaio 2009, la Santa Sede non mancherà, nei modi giudicati opportuni, di approfondire con gli interessati le questioni ancora aperte, così da poter giungere ad una piena e soddisfacente soluzione dei problemi che hanno dato origine a questa dolorosa frattura.

3. Dichiarazioni sulla Shoah.

Le posizioni di Mons. Williamson sulla Shoah sono assolutamente inaccettabili e fermamente rifiutate dal Santo Padre, come Egli stesso ha rimarcato il 28 gennaio scorso quando, riferendosi a quell’efferato genocidio, ha ribadito la Sua piena e indiscutibile solidarietà con i nostri Fratelli destinatari della Prima Alleanza, e ha affermato che la memoria di quel terribile genocidio deve indurre "l’umanità a riflettere sulla imprevedibile potenza del male quando conquista il cuore dell’uomo", aggiungendo che la Shoah resta "per tutti monito contro l’oblio, contro la negazione o il riduzionismo, perché la violenza fatta contro un solo essere umano è violenza contro tutti".

Il Vescovo Williamson, per una ammissione a funzioni episcopali nella Chiesa dovrà anche prendere in modo assolutamente inequivocabile e pubblico le distanze dalle sue posizioni riguardanti la Shoah, non conosciute dal Santo Padre nel momento della remissione della scomunica.

Il Santo Padre chiede l’accompagnamento della preghiera di tutti i fedeli, affinché il Signore illumini il cammino della Chiesa. Cresca l’impegno dei Pastori e di tutti i fedeli a sostegno della delicata e gravosa missione del Successore dell’Apostolo Pietro quale "custode dell’unità" nella Chiesa.

Dal Vaticano, 4 febbraio 2009
posted by New Catholic at 1:29 PM 27 comments"

(Rorate Caeli ("Catholic"; Traditionalist; independent; not endorsed by us) February Archives: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html)
According to them, this was posted to their site: "WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 04, 2009"

Again, we must link to a comments page, for both the quotation, and the date:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=19978542&postID=8274620641400657286

SSPX Bishops re-"communicated"

(Tridentine South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

In a seemingly politically motivated move: Benedict XVI; has lifted automatic excommunications, incurred under canon law: by four SSPX bishops, who: on being consecrated, committed what was then termed and largely perceived to be: an act of schism. While the excommunications no longer carry weight: this probably is not a precident for reintroducing others who incur the excommunication: rather: it seems to be a pre-condition for begining dialogue for the complete reunification of the Society, and the Catholic Church. It does not seem that all issues have been resolved overnight. This may be a start, but many things are still vague and unclear.

It was not because of the excommunications alone: that Catholics have been discoraged from attending society masses, and whether or not the SSPX priests will now be allowed by the Vatican to perform mass ligitimately, or if their actions are still considered illigitimate, is not something we can comment on. This is not the end of the issue, but the beginning of it.

We have asked for ecclesiastical assistence in covering this issue, so as to give a fuller view: whether by direct statements being quoted, or by indirectly quoting sources: so as to give an inside perspective. We hope to gain such.

As for the mean-time: it is still important that the valid tridentine mass be pursued in the mainstream church, within diocesan structures. Many SSPX priests' sermons might still carry certain bias, as with parishioners there.

Doubt still hangs over the organization, and until talks are entered into, in a meaningful manner, and a comprehensive clarification, and negotiation take place: there will still be a cloud over the society. When comprehensive regulations for this situation come to be meted out: perhaps, a clear answer can be made.

Pursuing the unquestionably valid Summorum Pontificum instituted Tridentine (Latin) Mass, within normal church hierarchical structures, remains not ony the clear, and legally sure way to proceed, but also means enjoyment of something special, within, without risking accepting some controversial, if not radical views, and without taking a political stand.

Until the situation becomes less vague: the isolation of the "Society" in the mainstream will likely continue. Negotiations have not happened adequately yet; so as to actually physically and properly reincorperate the controversial Swiss based "Society "of" Pius X", in a proper, and civilized, complete manner: nor is it clear that this shall ever occur, nor if the society will ever manage to regain credibility, and fulfill a beneficial function in the mainstream of the church. So far, ecumenism with SSPX has been at great cost to Catholic-Judaic relations, and the controversial views of the organization, and a particular member of it: could cause further issues.

For now: the best thing to do: is stop, and wait.

It is very dangerous to see this in more than its ecumenical (political) light so far, and it is still advisable to avoid SSPX masses, for those in the mainstream: until such time as more information is given; and it is likely important to wait for negotiations, and meetings: before determining if any headway has been made between the Vatican, and their biggest "irregular" canonical apponent. Whether this is the Vatican calling an SSPX bluff, or if it is genuinely the offering of a palm leaf: it certainly is political. Benedict XVI, is famed for his "Ecumenical" abilities. Hopefully, it may someday yield the fruit of curing the chasm between SSPX and mainstream laity and pastors, and others.

The meaning and ramifications of this ecclesiastical move are unclear. Benedict XVI's representation, seems clear that this has nothing to do with SSPX views on the world. The SSPX bishops were excommunicated for being consecrated, not for their views. The lifting of such excommunication: therefore says nothing of the validity of their views.

It is a political (Ecumenical) move: it is still unclear what status the SSPX churches have in this situation: and whether or not this will mean the lifting of the censure on the SSPX priests: which bans them from "ligitimately" offering the mass.

SSPX Masses have been considered Valid (The priests are considered to truly perform the Eucharistic Sacrifice, in the sense normal priests do), but illegitimate (illegal), it is not immediately clear if warnings against attending their masses, will be lifted, now that the first real move to dialogue has been made.

The Ball is in the SSPX's court. We hopefully may follow this story further.

Tridentine South Africa- the mysterious impact of the harder path

(Tridentine South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

When scaling a mountain- or simply walking on the streets- a relatively steep slope is easier to mount than a cliff-face, and once one has been walking on this- it slowly become the norm.

The opposite occurs when one is walking slowly along, and suddenly comes across impassable terrain. Here, the untrained wisely refrain, and the trained take joy in their training.

Now, the mass trains us through rituals in intuition- so as to gain the right path to God. When the meaning of the signs is altered, so as to have no basis- not only is this "Superstition", a mortal sin, but it also takes away from any effect of the Divine Liturgy. When we make mass easier for the sake of ease, we sow in shallow ground, and the seeds here quickly find root, but also quickly die. The parishioners who are treated too softly, by church and self- often wither to dust, when faced with the cliff-face of morality. Those who enter faith knowing the cost- see the cliff-face and continue as they had- slowly mounting the impossible. Jesus himself says that conversion is impossible- before adding that this is not impossible with God.

This is why we subscribe as Orthodox Roman Catholics- to the firm belief that softening the path beyond meaning is dangerous- because we lose grace- and then what is possible to God- truly is impossible.

An argument for the Latin Liturgy, is not complete without stating that Vatican II desired and stated this was to be the norm. What we argue for here- is not simply reintroducing a wider use of the Latin mass, but also that one not fear losing persons by not watering down the faith- rather- if we water it down- they only believe they are Catholic, but never truly take root. If we enforce every rule and regulation with utmost detailed power- at least we are building a foundation- even if our beliefs are rejected.

Now, as to the Latin- firstly, it is asked of the church in Vatican II that this be the norm, and secondly- it is not a sin of the laity- should the bishops in their area, or their pope forbid this practice. Quite simply- that sin rests squarely, and only on the competent authority. This is where one must realize the errors of those who reject the Ecclesiastical authority. The actual degree is as follows, as quoted from Vatican II:

"CONSTITUTION
ON THE SACRED LITURGY
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY
HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON DECEMBER 4, 1963"
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html


"36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

4. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above."
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

Now, when the venacular is to be used- it is to be of benefit to the people- this is why the ecclesiam has allowed it largely- but where it has been caused as the only form- bishops have in fact condemned thousands to hades- in the leaving of these people from the flock, and also in many abuses, and problems with liturgy. In other words- the venacular is allowed by God where it creates fruit- but the manner in which it has been abused, and has been overused- has in fact done the opposite- it has encouraged laxity- taken away from some of the mystery- set us further apart from our Greek brothers, and further has caused a different balance in the mass, and therefore in the spirituality of Catholics- whereby vast majorities of faithful in many countries, especially in South Africa- actually fall under the excommunication, anathema, or condemnation of the church.

Now, when we allow a less defined liturgy- we allow less defined morality- and when we allow shallower public worship, we allow shallower spirituality.

When one takes effort to worship God as in the Tridentine rite- one realizes the purpose of the mass- and more than this of life- that we are worshiping and praying to God.

How we judge excathedra statements and Ecumenical Councils

(Journey in a broken world)

Article by Marc Aupiais

When the Fathers met at Nice- perhaps a third or even nearly half of the bishops of the council were condemned as heretical, the same happens in many councils of mother church- right up to and including Trent. Vatican Two is different- Vatican II, has what we call a pastoral effect. Now Vatican II was Ecumenical (Pope Paul VI, April 6th 1964, Ecclesiam Suam VI), but it was not at a time of crisis. When we talk of it- we see some bishops possibly in small schism, but no open apostasy- as with previous councils, as with the schism EWTN claims that over 100 bishops currently are in.

Now- when we look at the meaning of a council- we cannot look at either side's intent- the heretics would always front their views, the Orthodox theirs on any subject- and the council would vote. We only have the exact words. Now there is a pope declared a heretic by his replacement because he did not condemn Pelagius, so we know that when the church is silent- it does not mean this is God's intention, and should a council not mention something- or a pope not make a required Excathedra statement- this does not mean that God does not believe it needed. What comes from Excathedra statements is free from doctrinal or moral error, that does not mean it is exhaustive.

Now the pope is only infallible when he speaks as pope on issues of morals and doctrine- he can speak of doctrines and morals without being infallible- when he speaks infallibly the right procedures are adhered to.

When we speak of Vatican II, it does not replace, nor contradict any previous council or doctrine before it. It is simply another in the long line, another small piece in the jigsaw- replacing the ghost place where its unborn self rested before.

Excathedra statements therefore do not depend on the intentions of those who make them, even as these are of use when they seem unclear. They simply are free from doctrinal and moral error, with God's imprimatur, and often are utterly inspired.

Therefore there is only one spirit of Vatican II, and of any council- not the ideas of the bishops in attendance- but the very letter of what is written down- the exact words ratified by God himself. Of course, there is also the Holy Spirit, but he is not wishy washy- he is God and God is exacting.

There are councils which are not ecumenical- these often are called conferences or synods- these can include people from everywhere- but ecumenical councils are councils where all true bishops are invited to a council in union with the pope, and as one decide on issues needed- whereby their statements are confirmed by papal infallibility, and where they speak of doctrines and morals.

When the church is silent, or provides an exception that is exactly what it is, no more or less- there is no additional meaning- except what our conscience tells us, out of what was known in the very beginning- or out of what correlates with it.