| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dave Lister" |
| Date: |
11 Nov 2004 10:10:25 PM |
| Object: |
Catholics and the holocaust |
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
13 Nov 2004 07:42:13 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
If that means tens of millions go to the wall. Well, sometimes we have
to make difficult choices, don't we?
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: www.Video2CD.com. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
Market Your DVD to The World For Almost Nothing: www.instantdvd.tv
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fear Rua" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
15 Nov 2004 05:43:33 PM |
|
|
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
If that means tens of millions go to the wall. Well, sometimes we have
to make difficult choices, don't we?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Lister" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
15 Nov 2004 07:06:43 PM |
|
|
(Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
16 Nov 2004 07:38:02 PM |
|
|
Dave Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns95A2AE124E329retsildivad33hotmail@68.6.19.6>...
fearrua@yahoo.com (Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
Another assertion, swept away by a few simple facts.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/heroes.htm
Some of the relevant details from that link included below-
By mid-July 1942, the Nazis were impatient at their lack of progress.
They scheduled a round-up of the Jews remaining in Paris for July 16.
The French police and city officials warned the Jews. Still, the
Germans rounded up 22,000, including 4,000 children. The French were
horrified; ad hoc resistance and organized Resistance were
strengthened.
Archbishop Saliege of Toulouse, Bishop Theas of Montauban and Cardinal
Gerlier of Lyons, the Primate of France, protested vehemently. Bishop
Theas was imprisoned. Saliege's pastoral letter was banned by the
Prefect of Toulouse, but still read in some 400 churches. It became
known as the "Bombe Saliege." The Vichy government warned the Nuncio's
deputy that if Jews were hidden in churches or monasteries they would
be dragged out.
One night in September 1942, six stateless Jewish families were
arrested in Lyons. The French agents gave them the choice of bringing
their children along or leaving them behind; they had an hour to
decide. They woke up Cardinal Gerlier, who accepted the nine children.
Four days later the Prefect of Lyons was ordered to Gerlier's
residence by Eichmann to pick up the children. They were gone. When
the Prefect demanded their address, Gerlier replied: "Monsieur le
Prefet, I would not consider myself worthy to be the Archbishop of
Lyons if I complied with your request. Good day."33
Cardinal Gerlier's aide, Fr. Elder Chaillet, SJ, was arrested shortly
thereafter and charged with hiding eighty Jewish children. "Actually,"
Lapide writes, "he had hidden over two hundred, in various public
institutions and religious homes, with the active assistance of his
Cardinal, who spirited them away as Chaillet went to jail."34
Chaillet's friends and the Cardinal's took over his work. Chaillet was
later released; by the end of the war he had hidden 1,800 Jews in
monasteries and farms.
Also in September 1942, the military commander of Lyons, General de
St. Vincent, refused to obey an order for mass arrests of Jews; he was
dismissed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Lister" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
16 Nov 2004 09:32:18 PM |
|
|
(David) wrote in
news:3b0a6dae.0411161738.564808f9@posting.google.com:
Dave Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns95A2AE124E329retsildivad33hotmail@68.6.19.6>...
fearrua@yahoo.com (Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France
and happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
Another assertion, swept away by a few simple facts.
It was Fear Rua who made the assertion.
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fear Rua" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 08:57:49 AM |
|
|
(David) wrote in message news:<3b0a6dae.0411161738.564808f9@posting.google.com>...
Dave Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns95A2AE124E329retsildivad33hotmail@68.6.19.6>...
fearrua@yahoo.com (Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
Another assertion, swept away by a few simple facts.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/heroes.htm
Some of the relevant details from that link included below-
These are great examples Dave, but I'm referring specifically to the
official policies of a government, particularly one that had actual
authority and what they did despite the courageous acts by good
Catholic citizens under them.
After the eruption of Nazi violence on Kristallnacht in November
1938), the British permitted 10,000 German, Austrian, and Czech Jewish
children to seek safety in their country. The French would not open
their borders to the children.
France is unique among all the countries, which experienced the
Holocaust. France was the only defeated Allied country whose
government signed an armistice with the Nazis and actively assisted
them. Under the terms of that armistice, the Vichy Government had to
cooperate with the Germans. The Nazis had inserted a "surrender on
demand clause" in Article 5 of the Franco German Armistice of 1940.
The police and Vichy authorities actively assisted the Nazis. After
the French surrender. The Vichy authorities actively assisted the
Nazis track down and deport Jews. [Eizenstat]
The most shameful single act was Vichy assistance in rounding up over
80,000 foreign and French Jews as part of the Holocaust so they could
be shipped to the death camps in Poland. Vichy even ran camps in
France with appalling death rates.
Many French people besides the Vichy authorities cooperated with the
Nazis. There were rewards for informing on Jews and French people
hiding Jews. Conditions were very difficult under German occupations.
Not uncommonly French collaborators informed in Jews for the most
seemingly inconsequential rewards.
After the War some Vichy officials were executed and the Gaullists
nurtured a myth that the great majority of the French people bravely
resisted the Germans.
"Delving into the behavior of the French administration -- police,
judges, bureaucrats -- during the occupation was a longstanding taboo
in the postwar years, when General Charles de Gaulle, intent on
strengthening a weakened nation, perpetuated the myth that France had
been heroically united against the German occupiers."
---LEE YANOWITCH, from Jewish Telegraphic Agency
By mid-July 1942, the Nazis were impatient at their lack of progress.
They scheduled a round-up of the Jews remaining in Paris for July 16.
The French police and city officials warned the Jews. Still, the
Germans rounded up 22,000, including 4,000 children. The French were
horrified; ad hoc resistance and organized Resistance were
strengthened.
Archbishop Saliege of Toulouse, Bishop Theas of Montauban and Cardinal
Gerlier of Lyons, the Primate of France, protested vehemently. Bishop
Theas was imprisoned. Saliege's pastoral letter was banned by the
Prefect of Toulouse, but still read in some 400 churches. It became
known as the "Bombe Saliege." The Vichy government warned the Nuncio's
deputy that if Jews were hidden in churches or monasteries they would
be dragged out.
One night in September 1942, six stateless Jewish families were
arrested in Lyons. The French agents gave them the choice of bringing
their children along or leaving them behind; they had an hour to
decide. They woke up Cardinal Gerlier, who accepted the nine children.
Four days later the Prefect of Lyons was ordered to Gerlier's
residence by Eichmann to pick up the children. They were gone. When
the Prefect demanded their address, Gerlier replied: "Monsieur le
Prefet, I would not consider myself worthy to be the Archbishop of
Lyons if I complied with your request. Good day."33
Cardinal Gerlier's aide, Fr. Elder Chaillet, SJ, was arrested shortly
thereafter and charged with hiding eighty Jewish children. "Actually,"
Lapide writes, "he had hidden over two hundred, in various public
institutions and religious homes, with the active assistance of his
Cardinal, who spirited them away as Chaillet went to jail."34
Chaillet's friends and the Cardinal's took over his work. Chaillet was
later released; by the end of the war he had hidden 1,800 Jews in
monasteries and farms.
Also in September 1942, the military commander of Lyons, General de
St. Vincent, refused to obey an order for mass arrests of Jews; he was
dismissed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fear Rua" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 08:21:33 AM |
|
|
Dave Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns95A2AE124E329retsildivad33hotmail@68.6.19.6>...
fearrua@yahoo.com (Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
So you believe France and other European countries of the time were theocracies?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Lister" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 07:49:20 PM |
|
|
(Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411170621.2d93ece4@posting.google.com:
Dave Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns95A2AE124E329retsildivad33hotmail@68.6.19.6>...
(Fear Rua) wrote in
news:ac7e9861.0411151543.574181ff@posting.google.com:
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France
and happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks! Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
How many Jews were in the Vatican? 0?
Their catholic masses were certainly turning Jews over in all of the
Catholic countries - like France.
So you believe France and other European countries of the time were
theocracies?
No, just majority Catholic in population.
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
16 Nov 2004 02:22:59 PM |
|
|
On 15 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, (Fear Rua) wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks!
Instead they just stood by and watched, even though they demonstrated
in other cases that they had quite a bit of influence in Germany.
Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 11:12:10 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:22:59 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On 15 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, (Fear Rua) wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks!
Instead they just stood by and watched, even though they demonstrated
in other cases that they had quite a bit of influence in Germany.
As well as actively moving Nazis out of Germany as the war was ending,
and afterward.
Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 04:13:03 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:lh1np01ng0q256fuotbdk3q0ukn87nvifh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:22:59 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On 15 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, (Fear Rua) wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of
the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks!
Instead they just stood by and watched, even though they demonstrated
in other cases that they had quite a bit of influence in Germany.
As well as actively moving Nazis out of Germany as the war was ending,
and afterward.
Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis, the Holocaust or
history in general.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Lister" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 08:15:17 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:H0Qmd.24881$WC6.457@bignews3.bellsouth.net:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:lh1np01ng0q256fuotbdk3q0ukn87nvifh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:22:59 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On 15 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, (Fear Rua) wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the
truth of the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC
done anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the
Holocaust, this would have made life considerably worse for the
Jews than would otherwise have been the case. Though what could be
worse than Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable
of discussion, IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC
may have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case.
Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself
as the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may
not have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily
predicated on the premise - that the survival of the Church was
the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks!
Instead they just stood by and watched, even though they demonstrated
in other cases that they had quite a bit of influence in Germany.
As well as actively moving Nazis out of Germany as the war was
ending, and afterward.
Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis, the Holocaust
or history in general.
Good comeback, BAM. Not. It is you who are ignorant.
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Oswald Ving" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
17 Nov 2004 09:51:48 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in news:H0Qmd.24881$WC6.457
@bignews3.bellsouth.net:
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis, the Holocaust or
history in general.
Indeed?
Show us how much you know, then. Particularly about the Catholic clergy in
Yugoslavia, what positions of power they held during WWII, their actions
while there, and what happened to them after the war.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
18 Nov 2004 10:02:06 AM |
|
|
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Show us how much you know, then. Particularly about the Catholic clergy in
Yugoslavia, what positions of power they held during WWII, their actions
while there, and what happened to them after the war.
Why narrow it to a snapshot in history? You draw a small circle around a
point in history, know nothing of the causes or history of the Balkan
peoples. Try starting with the Battle of Kosovo Pole (the defining moment of
Serb history), the Balkan wars, (leading to wholesale slaughter of
Macedonians by the Serbs) the Black Hand and the Serbian terrorists who
assasinated the Archduke Ferdinand, leading to WWI; later, the
Serbo-Bolshevik threat to Croatia.....
Not an easy read.
But we were talking about Germany?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Oswald Ving" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
19 Nov 2004 09:57:49 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:5x4nd.26412$jE2.26216@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Show us how much you know, then. Particularly about the Catholic
clergy in Yugoslavia, what positions of power they held during WWII,
their actions while there, and what happened to them after the war.
Why narrow it to a snapshot in history?
Why so defensive?
Is it because you are ignorant of the subject and hate being caught lying,
or is it because you are not, and must now attempt a desperate Red Herring
because you've been caught?
<mercy snip>
The Red Herring won't work, btw - you'll just look foolish attempting it.
But we were talking about Germany?
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
BTW, for readers who may not know much about the subject, this should be
all you need for Google - "Ustashi."
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
19 Nov 2004 10:39:13 PM |
|
|
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95A6DF6F5A31leeovingyahoocom@63.223.5.246...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:5x4nd.26412$jE2.26216@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Show us how much you know, then. Particularly about the Catholic
clergy in Yugoslavia, what positions of power they held during WWII,
their actions while there, and what happened to them after the war.
Why narrow it to a snapshot in history?
Why so defensive?
Is it because you are ignorant of the subject and hate being caught lying,
or is it because you are not, and must now attempt a desperate Red Herring
because you've been caught?
That's not a "defensive" comment. You're on the wrong track.
<mercy snip>
The Red Herring won't work, btw - you'll just look foolish attempting it.
Truth snipper.
But we were talking about Germany?
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
Of which you know nothing.
BTW, for readers who may not know much about the subject, this should be
all you need for Google - "Ustashi."
Yup - if it's on a website it must be true! You know nothing.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Oswald Ving" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
19 Nov 2004 10:57:03 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:2Uznd.33124$jE2.16323@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95A6DF6F5A31leeovingyahoocom@63.223.5.246...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:5x4nd.26412$jE2.26216@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Show us how much you know, then. Particularly about the Catholic
clergy in Yugoslavia, what positions of power they held during
WWII, their actions while there, and what happened to them after
the war.
Why narrow it to a snapshot in history?
Why so defensive?
Is it because you are ignorant of the subject and hate being caught
lying, or is it because you are not, and must now attempt a desperate
Red Herring because you've been caught?
That's not a "defensive" comment. You're on the wrong track.
I note you answered exactly nothing.
Which is it - are you ignorant or lying?
< yet another mercy snip>
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
Of which you know nothing.
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
<yet another mercy snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
20 Nov 2004 08:53:34 AM |
|
|
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
You know nothing about the history of the Balkan states.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Lister" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
20 Nov 2004 11:10:18 AM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in news:STInd.38288$IQ.24255
@bignews6.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
You know nothing about the history of the Balkan states.
Bam-bam is getting tired of even trying to make sense.
--
Bush is not my President.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
23 Nov 2004 01:50:19 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in news:STInd.38288$IQ.24255
@bignews6.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
You know nothing about the history of the Balkan states.
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
Now, I do know where Ante Pavelic was in 1946.
Do you, "BAM?"
And why couldn't you reply to the rest of my message?
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
23 Nov 2004 09:27:10 PM |
|
|
"Eric Gill" <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95AA8CCD5FA6Bericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in news:STInd.38288$IQ.24255
@bignews6.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
You know nothing about the history of the Balkan states.
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
Now, I do know where Ante Pavelic was in 1946.
Do you, "BAM?"
And why couldn't you reply to the rest of my message?
Do you know where George Washington was in 1751?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
25 Nov 2004 06:31:31 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:C9Tod.99589$Tq1.45037@bignews1.bellsouth.net:
"Eric Gill" <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95AA8CCD5FA6Bericvgillyahoocom@63.223.5.254...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in
news:STInd.38288$IQ.24255 @bignews6.bellsouth.net:
"Lee Oswald Ving" <leeoving@yahoo.com> wrote
Where was Ante Pavelic in 1946, "bam?"
I know.
Do you?
You know nothing about the history of the Balkan states.
We were speaking of the Catholic Church in WWII, the actions of it's
clergy, and post-WWII.
Now, I do know where Ante Pavelic was in 1946.
Do you, "BAM?"
And why couldn't you reply to the rest of my message?
Well, "Bam"? Why not?
Do you know where George Washington was in 1751?
In the Spring, surveying Frederick County, Virginia. Traveled to Barbados
with his brother later in the year, had a bout with smallpox.
This, of course, has nothing to do with the Catholic Church in WWII, the
actions of it's clergy, and post-WWII.
As opposed to Ante Pavelic, who was being hidden in a monastery by the
Vatican in 1946.
Now:
Can you tell us WHY Ante Pavelic was being hidden in a monastery by the
Vatican in 1946?
Or are you ready to admit you are lying about the role of the Catholic
Church in WWII?
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
26 Nov 2004 12:57:14 AM |
|
|
"Eric Gill" <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote
In the Spring, surveying Frederick County, Virginia. Traveled to Barbados
with his brother later in the year, had a bout with smallpox.
References?
Can you tell us WHY Ante Pavelic was being hidden in a monastery by the
Vatican in 1946?
He was in danger??
It probably had something to do with the Croatian Fransiscans.
And this has *what* to do with the Catholic Church?
And who are you to decide who the Church should and shouldn't turn into
civilian authorities?
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
18 Nov 2004 03:30:04 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:13:03 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:lh1np01ng0q256fuotbdk3q0ukn87nvifh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:22:59 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On 15 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, (Fear Rua) wrote:
Therion Ware <autodelete@city-of-dis.com> wrote in message
news:<k6vbp0hjkeht1hb8u9n79eco71alb3gcd7@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:10:25 GMT in alt.atheism, Dave Lister (Dave
Lister <retsildivad33@hotmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of
the
church and their response to the holocaust comes up?
Well, opinion differs.
The official RCC view, as I understand it, is that had the RCC done
anything more explicit than it did as regards opposing the Holocaust,
this would have made life considerably worse for the Jews than would
otherwise have been the case. Though what could be worse than
Bergan-Belsen, and the rest remains a question capable of discussion,
IMO.
But while that may be the case, at least as regards what the RCC may
have thought, it is at the very least, an arguable case. Bigtime.
My personal feeling on this matter is that the RCC regards itself as
the *sole* means of - well shall we say - "the sole and only
legitimate means of communication of the message of salvation".
And that means that the RCC, **must** be preserved *no matter the
human price* which is to say that I think what the RCC may or may not
have done with respect to the Holocaust was primarily predicated on
the premise - that the survival of the Church was the main thing.
Maybe the Vatican should have imitated the heroic acts of France and
happily turn over every Jew to the Nazis in order to save their
precious art and landmarks!
Instead they just stood by and watched, even though they demonstrated
in other cases that they had quite a bit of influence in Germany.
As well as actively moving Nazis out of Germany as the war was ending,
and afterward.
Then we wouldn't be talking about it
today.
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis, the Holocaust or
history in general.
Lying sack of ignorant christian dogshit.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
18 Nov 2004 01:16:05 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:13:03 -0500, "bam"
<mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:lh1np01ng0q256fuotbdk3q0ukn87nvifh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:22:59 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
snip
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis, the Holocaust or
history in general.
That's right. The Catholic Church never did anything to persecute
Jews. They never taught that Jews were guilty of killing Christ. The
Pope, right from the beginning of the Nazi regime, spoke out against
the persecution of the Jews in Germany; as did the hierarchy in
Germany. Of course all of that happened in an alternate universe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JCarew" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
18 Nov 2004 07:58:28 AM |
|
|
JMJ
"thomas p" wrote in message news
"bam" wrote:
snip
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis,
the Holocaust or history in general.
That's right. The Catholic Church never did anything to persecute
Jews. They never taught that Jews were guilty of killing Christ. The
Pope, right from the beginning of the Nazi regime, spoke out against
the persecution of the Jews in Germany; as did the hierarchy in
Germany. Of course all of that happened in an alternate universe.
see below:
Excerpt from Catholic Answer's "This Rock", February 1997,
pp. 12-17,
How Pius XII Protected the Jews, by James Akin:
Before he was elected Pope, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli [the future Pope Pius
XII] was the Vatican Secretary of State. On 28 April 1935, Cardinal
Pacelli gave a speech to an audience of 250,000 pilgrims at Lourdes, France
stating that the Nazis are in reality only miserable plagiarists who dress
up old errors with new tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they
flock to the banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a
false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are possessed by
the superstition of a race and blood cult.
It was speeches like this, in addition to private remarks and numerous
notes of protest that Pacelli sent to Berlin in his capacity as Vatican
Secretary of State that earned him a reputation as an enemy of the Nazi
party. The Germans were likewise displeased with the reigning pontiff,
Pius XI, who showed himself to be an unrelenting opponent of the new German
"ideals", even writing an entire encyclical "Mit Brennender Sorge" (1937)
to condemn them. When Pius XI died in 1939, the Nazis abhorred the prospect
that Pacelli might be elected successor. This encyclical is the only one up
to then, that had not been titled in Latin, precisely to get the Germans'
attention.
Dr Joseph Lichten, a Polish Jew who served as a diplomat and later an
official of B'nai B'rith, writes:
Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist
governments of both Italy and Germany spoke vigorously against the
possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in 1939, though the Cardinal
had served as papal nuncio to Germany from 1917 to 1929. The day after his
election, the "Berlin Morgenpost" said 'The election of Cardinal Pacelli is
not accepted with favor in Germany because he has always opposed Nazism
and practically determined the policies of the Vatican under his
predecessor.
Former Israeli diplomat and now Orthodox Jewish Rabbi Pinchas Lapide
states that Pius XI had:
.. . . good reason to make Pacelli the architect of his anti-Nazi policy.
Off the forty-four speeches which the nuncio Pacelli had made on German soil
between 1917 and 1929, at least forty contained attacks on called it
'neo-Paganism'.
A few weeks after Pacelli was elected Pope, the German Reich's Chief
Security Service issued a then-secret report on the Pope. Rabbi Lapide
provides an excerpt:
Pacelli has already made himself prominent by his attacks on National
Socialism during his tenure as Cardinal Secretary of State, a fact which
earned him the hearty approval of the Democratic States during the Papal
elections... How much Pacelli is celebrated as an ally of the Democracies
is especially emphasized in the French press.
War came to Europe on 1 Sep 1939, when German troops invaded Poland,
and Britain and France declared war on Germany. Early in 1940, Hitler made
an attempt to prevent the new Pope from maintaining the anti-Nazi stance
he had taken before his election. Hitler sent his underling, Joachim von
Ribbentrop to try to dissuade Pius XII from following his predecessor's
policies. Von Ribbentrop, granted a formal papal audience, went into a
lengthy harangue on the invincibility of the Third Reich, the inevitability
of a Nazi victory, and the futility of papal alignment with the enemies
of the Fuhrer. Pius XII heard von Ribbentrop out politely and impassively.
Then he opened an enormous ledger on his desk, and in perfect German, began
to recite a catalogue of the persecutions inflicted by the Third Reich
in Poland, listing the date, place and precise details of every crime.
The audience was terminated; the Pope's position was clearly unshakable.
Jim Carew sfo
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
18 Nov 2004 05:11:18 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:58:28 GMT, "JCarew" <othmer@prodigy.net> wrote:
JMJ
"thomas p" wrote in message news
"bam" wrote:
snip
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis,
the Holocaust or history in general.
That's right. The Catholic Church never did anything to persecute
Jews. They never taught that Jews were guilty of killing Christ. The
Pope, right from the beginning of the Nazi regime, spoke out against
the persecution of the Jews in Germany; as did the hierarchy in
Germany. Of course all of that happened in an alternate universe.
see below:
Excerpt from Catholic Answer's "This Rock", February 1997,
pp. 12-17,
How Pius XII Protected the Jews, by James Akin:
Before he was elected Pope, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli [the future Pope Pius
XII] was the Vatican Secretary of State. On 28 April 1935, Cardinal
Pacelli gave a speech to an audience of 250,000 pilgrims at Lourdes, France
stating that the Nazis are in reality only miserable plagiarists who dress
up old errors with new tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they
flock to the banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a
false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are possessed by
the superstition of a race and blood cult.
It was speeches like this, in addition to private remarks and numerous
notes of protest that Pacelli sent to Berlin in his capacity as Vatican
Secretary of State that earned him a reputation as an enemy of the Nazi
party. The Germans were likewise displeased with the reigning pontiff,
Pius XI, who showed himself to be an unrelenting opponent of the new German
"ideals", even writing an entire encyclical "Mit Brennender Sorge" (1937)
to condemn them. When Pius XI died in 1939, the Nazis abhorred the prospect
that Pacelli might be elected successor. This encyclical is the only one up
to then, that had not been titled in Latin, precisely to get the Germans'
attention.
Dr Joseph Lichten, a Polish Jew who served as a diplomat and later an
official of B'nai B'rith, writes:
Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist
governments of both Italy and Germany spoke vigorously against the
possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in 1939, though the Cardinal
had served as papal nuncio to Germany from 1917 to 1929. The day after his
election, the "Berlin Morgenpost" said 'The election of Cardinal Pacelli is
not accepted with favor in Germany because he has always opposed Nazism
and practically determined the policies of the Vatican under his
predecessor.
Former Israeli diplomat and now Orthodox Jewish Rabbi Pinchas Lapide
states that Pius XI had:
. . . good reason to make Pacelli the architect of his anti-Nazi policy.
Off the forty-four speeches which the nuncio Pacelli had made on German soil
between 1917 and 1929, at least forty contained attacks on called it
'neo-Paganism'.
A few weeks after Pacelli was elected Pope, the German Reich's Chief
Security Service issued a then-secret report on the Pope. Rabbi Lapide
provides an excerpt:
Pacelli has already made himself prominent by his attacks on National
Socialism during his tenure as Cardinal Secretary of State, a fact which
earned him the hearty approval of the Democratic States during the Papal
elections... How much Pacelli is celebrated as an ally of the Democracies
is especially emphasized in the French press.
War came to Europe on 1 Sep 1939, when German troops invaded Poland,
and Britain and France declared war on Germany. Early in 1940, Hitler made
an attempt to prevent the new Pope from maintaining the anti-Nazi stance
he had taken before his election. Hitler sent his underling, Joachim von
Ribbentrop to try to dissuade Pius XII from following his predecessor's
policies. Von Ribbentrop, granted a formal papal audience, went into a
lengthy harangue on the invincibility of the Third Reich, the inevitability
of a Nazi victory, and the futility of papal alignment with the enemies
of the Fuhrer. Pius XII heard von Ribbentrop out politely and impassively.
Then he opened an enormous ledger on his desk, and in perfect German, began
to recite a catalogue of the persecutions inflicted by the Third Reich
in Poland, listing the date, place and precise details of every crime.
The audience was terminated; the Pope's position was clearly unshakable.
Jim Carew sfo
Please provide documentation that he condemned the Nuremberg Laws, or
that he rejected the teaching that the Jews were a cursed people. It
would be very strange if he had rejected that teaching, since I
attended Catholic schools during his time as Pope; and it was taught
to me and to others all over the world.
I read an encyclical that he wrote for Pius XI. In it he complained
that the Nazis were not living up to their agreement to allow the
Church to run its own schools and other similar problems the Vatican
was having with the Nazi government, but there was no mention of the
Jews. The German hierarchy condemned from the pulpit the Nazis
euthanasia program and got it stopped, but there was no mention of the
Jews. Individual German priests, at the cost of their lives, did
protest the persecution of Jews, but they were never backed up by
their superiors.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JCarew" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
19 Nov 2004 12:16:45 AM |
|
|
JMJ
"thomas p" wrote in message news:
"JCarew" wrote:
"thomas p" wrote in message news
"bam" wrote:
snip
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis,
the Holocaust or history in general.
That's right. The Catholic Church never did anything to persecute
Jews. They never taught that Jews were guilty of killing Christ. The
Pope, right from the beginning of the Nazi regime, spoke out against
the persecution of the Jews in Germany; as did the hierarchy in
Germany. Of course all of that happened in an alternate universe.
see below:
Excerpt from Catholic Answer's "This Rock", February 1997,
pp. 12-17,
How Pius XII Protected the Jews, by James Akin:
Before he was elected Pope, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli [the future
Pope Pius XII] was the Vatican Secretary of State. On 28 April
1935, Cardinal Pacelli gave a speech to an audience of 250,000
pilgrims at Lourdes, France stating that the Nazis are in reality
only miserable plagiarists who dress up old errors with new
tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they flock to the
banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a
false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are
possessed by the superstition of a race and blood cult.
It was speeches like this, in addition to private remarks and numerous
notes of protest that Pacelli sent to Berlin in his capacity as Vatican
Secretary of State that earned him a reputation as an enemy of the Nazi
party. The Germans were likewise displeased with the reigning pontiff,
Pius XI, who showed himself to be an unrelenting opponent of the new
German "ideals", even writing an entire encyclical "Mit Brennender
Sorge" (1937) to condemn them. When Pius XI died in 1939, the
Nazis abhorred the prospect that Pacelli might be elected successor.
This encyclical is the only one up to then, that had not been titled
in Latin, precisely to get the Germans' attention.
Dr Joseph Lichten, a Polish Jew who served as a diplomat and
later an official of B'nai B'rith, writes:
Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist
governments of both Italy and Germany spoke vigorously against the
possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in 1939, though the
Cardinal had served as papal nuncio to Germany from 1917 to
1929. The day after his election, the "Berlin Morgenpost" said
'The election of Cardinal Pacelli is not accepted with favor in
Germany because he has always opposed Nazism and practically
determined the policies of the Vatican under his predecessor.
Former Israeli diplomat and now Orthodox Jewish Rabbi
Pinchas Lapide states that Pius XI had:
. . . good reason to make Pacelli the architect of his anti-Nazi policy.
Off the forty-four speeches which the nuncio Pacelli had made
on German soil between 1917 and 1929, at least forty contained
attacks on called it 'neo-Paganism'.
A few weeks after Pacelli was elected Pope, the German Reich's Chief
Security Service issued a then-secret report on the Pope. Rabbi Lapide
provides an excerpt:
Pacelli has already made himself prominent by his attacks on National
Socialism during his tenure as Cardinal Secretary of State, a fact which
earned him the hearty approval of the Democratic States during the Papal
elections... How much Pacelli is celebrated as an ally of the Democracies
is especially emphasized in the French press.
War came to Europe on 1 Sep 1939, when German troops invaded
Poland, and Britain and France declared war on Germany. Early in
1940, Hitler made an attempt to prevent the new Pope from
maintaining the anti-Nazi stance he had taken before his election.
Hitler sent his underling, Joachim von Ribbentrop to try to dissuade
Pius XII from following his predecessor's policies. Von Ribbentrop,
granted a formal papal audience, went into a lengthy harangue on the
invincibility of the Third Reich, the inevitability of a Nazi victory,
and the futility of papal alignment with the enemies
of the Fuhrer. Pius XII heard von Ribbentrop out politely and
impassively. Then he opened an enormous ledger on his desk, and
in perfect German, began to recite a catalogue of the persecutions
inflicted by the Third Reich in Poland, listing the date, place and
precise details of every crime. The audience was terminated; the
Pope's position was clearly unshakable.
unquote
Please provide documentation that he condemned the Nuremberg Laws, or
that he rejected the teaching that the Jews were a cursed people. It
would be very strange if he had rejected that teaching, since I
attended Catholic schools during his time as Pope; and it was taught
to me and to others all over the world.
I read an encyclical that he wrote for Pius XI. In it he complained
that the Nazis were not living up to their agreement to allow the
Church to run its own schools and other similar problems the Vatican
was having with the Nazi government, but there was no mention of the
Jews. The German hierarchy condemned from the pulpit the Nazis
euthanasia program and got it stopped, but there was no mention of the
Jews. Individual German priests, at the cost of their lives, did
protest the persecution of Jews, but they were never backed up by
their superiors.
See below
Expert from "The Real Story of Pius XII and the Jews"
By James Bogle
{Barrister of the Middle Temple, and former Cavalry officer)
From: Catalyst, Vol. 23, No. 10, December 1996}
snip<
Rev Fr Jean Charles-Roux, now a Rosininian priest living in London and
whose father was French Ambassador to the Holy See in the 30s, lived with
his family in Rome during the fateful pre-war period. He recalls that the
Pope told his father as early as 1935 that the new regime in Germany was
'diabolical'. The Ambassador frequently warned his government but the
general reaction in France seems to have been that it was good to see the
back of the Prussian militarist and that it was no bad thing that an
Austrian-Czech house painter was now Chancellor.
The reaction in the USA and Britain was scarcely different at that
time; and even later when they must have begun to know about the camps.
The US government accepted a total of 10-15,000 Jewish refugees throughout
the whole war -a truly scandalous statistic. Britain was little better
and before the war the government had been full of 'appeasers', the Duke
of Windsor visited Hitler and Lloyd George even went so far as to call
him 'the greatest living German'! Ambassador Charles-Roux's own government
in Paris (and the British government) were deaf to the pleas of the Vatican
to assist the German internal resistance to the Nazi government.
From the very beginning Pius XII tried to persuade the Allied governments
to support the German opposition to Hitler, but since they would not listen
to men like the Anglican Bishop Bell of Chichester or to the few Jews who
had escaped from Germany to Britain and America, they would not and did
not listen to a Pope. Men like Adam von Trott zu Sulz (he had been a Rhodes
Scholar at Balliol), Peter Yorek von Wartenburg and many other leading
Germans who later formed the Kreisau circle, made continuous, repeated,
energetic and ultimately futile attempts to reach and persuade the British
government to back, or even talk with, the German resistance to Hitler.
They were all killed in the 20th July plot to assassinate Hitler,
the last in a long line of foiled attempts to get rid of the dictator,
which was triggered by the Roman Catholic officer, Count Claus Schenk von
Stauffenberg. Stauffenberg was shot out of hand. Other conspirators were
not so lucky. They were tried by the infamous 'People's Court' and hanged
by piano wire from butchers' hooks at Ploetzensce prison. This was filmed
on Hitler's orders so that he could watch it himself later
Pius XII was a highly active, energetic and zealous opponent of
totalitarianism and oppression. Pope Pius XI issued the encyclical letter
"Mit Brennender Sorge" in 1937 because he was then the ruling Pope; but it
was Cardinal Pacelli, later Pius XII, who wrote it. The German Roman
Catholic hierarchy thanked Pope Pius XI for the letter, which condemned
racism and anti-semitism roundly, and the Pope pointed to Cardinal Pacelli
saying it was he had been responsible for it. Pius XII's first encyclical
in 1939, "Summi Pontificatus", repeated the theme and the Gestapo were
immediately given orders by the Nazi leadership to prevent its
distribution.
Thereafter, Pius XII adopted his policy of not naming the Jews explicitly.
This was partly because of his experience of the diplomatic "deafness"
of the Allied governments and partly because of his knowledge and experience
of the increased persecution of Jews which followed the condemnatory
statements made in the two mentioned encyclicals. He devoted himself
instead to the covert rescue operation which resulted in the saving
of approx 800,000 Jewish lives during WW II.
snip<
unquote
Jim Carew sfo
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Catholics and the holocaust |
20 Nov 2004 09:48:54 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:16:45 GMT, "JCarew" <othmer@prodigy.net> wrote:
JMJ
"thomas p" wrote in message news:
"JCarew" wrote:
"thomas p" wrote in message news
"bam" wrote:
snip
The Church's passivity would still be an issue.
Passivity hell! They were active players.
You know nothing about the Catholic Church, the Nazis,
the Holocaust or history in general.
That's right. The Catholic Church never did anything to persecute
Jews. They never taught that Jews were guilty of killing Christ. The
Pope, right from the beginning of the Nazi regime, spoke out against
the persecution of the Jews in Germany; as did the hierarchy in
Germany. Of course all of that happened in an alternate universe.
see below:
Excerpt from Catholic Answer's "This Rock", February 1997,
pp. 12-17,
How Pius XII Protected the Jews, by James Akin:
Before he was elected Pope, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli [the future
Pope Pius XII] was the Vatican Secretary of State. On 28 April
1935, Cardinal Pacelli gave a speech to an audience of 250,000
pilgrims at Lourdes, France stating that the Nazis are in reality
only miserable plagiarists who dress up old errors with new
tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they flock to the
banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a
false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are
possessed by the superstition of a race and blood cult.
It was speeches like this, in addition to private remarks and numerous
notes of protest that Pacelli sent to Berlin in his capacity as Vatican
Secretary of State that earned him a reputation as an enemy of the Nazi
party. The Germans were likewise displeased with the reigning pontiff,
Pius XI, who showed himself to be an unrelenting opponent of the new
German "ideals", even writing an entire encyclical "Mit Brennender
Sorge" (1937) to condemn them. When Pius XI died in 1939, the
Nazis abhorred the prospect that Pacelli might be elected successor.
This encyclical is the only one up to then, that had not been titled
in Latin, precisely to get the Germans' attention.
Dr Joseph Lichten, a Polish Jew who served as a diplomat and
later an official of B'nai B'rith, writes:
Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist
governments of both Italy and Germany spoke vigorously against the
possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in 1939, though the
Cardinal had served as papal nuncio to Germany from 1917 to
1929. The day after his election, the "Berlin Morgenpost" said
'The election of Cardinal Pacelli is not accepted with favor in
Germany because he has always opposed Nazism and practically
determined the policies of the Vatican under his predecessor.
Former Israeli diplomat and now Orthodox Jewish Rabbi
Pinchas Lapide states that Pius XI had:
. . . good reason to make Pacelli the architect of his anti-Nazi policy.
Off the forty-four speeches which the nuncio Pacelli had made
on German soil between 1917 and 1929, at least forty contained
attacks on called it 'neo-Paganism'.
A few weeks after Pacelli was elected Pope, the German Reich's Chief
Security Service issued a then-secret report on the Pope. Rabbi Lapide
provides an excerpt:
Pacelli has already made himself prominent by his attacks on National
Socialism during his tenure as Cardinal Secretary of State, a fact which
earned him the hearty approval of the Democratic States during the Papal
elections... How much Pacelli is celebrated as an ally of the Democracies
is especially emphasized in the French press.
War came to Europe on 1 Sep 1939, when German troops invaded
Poland, and Britain and France declared war on Germany. Early in
1940, Hitler made an attempt to prevent the new Pope from
maintaining the anti-Nazi stance he had taken before his election.
Hitler sent his underling, Joachim von Ribbentrop to try to dissuade
Pius XII from following his predecessor's policies. Von Ribbentrop,
granted a formal papal audience, went into a lengthy harangue on the
invincibility of the Third Reich, the inevitability of a Nazi victory,
and the futility of papal alignment with the enemies
of the Fuhrer. Pius XII heard von Ribbentrop out politely and
impassively. Then he opened an enormous ledger on his desk, and
in perfect German, began to recite a catalogue of the persecutions
inflicted by the Third Reich in Poland, listing the date, place and
precise details of every crime. The audience was terminated; the
Pope's position was clearly unshakable.
unquote
Please provide documentation that he condemned the Nuremberg Laws, or
that he rejected the teaching that the Jews were a cursed people. It
would be very strange if he had rejected that teaching, since I
attended Catholic schools during his time as Pope; and it was taught
to me and to others all over the world.
I read an encyclical that he wrote for Pius XI. In it he complained
that the Nazis were not living up to their agreement to allow the
Church to run its own schools and other similar problems the Vatican
was having with the Nazi government, but there was no mention of the
Jews. The German hierarchy condemned from the pulpit the Nazis
euthanasia program and got it stopped, but there was no mention of the
Jews. Individual German priests, at the cost of their lives, did
protest the persecution of Jews, but they were never backed up by
their superiors.
See below
Expert from "The Real Story of Pius XII and the Jews"
By James Bogle
{Barrister of the Middle Temple, and former Cavalry officer)
From: Catalyst, Vol. 23, No. 10, December 1996}
snip<
Rev Fr Jean Charles-Roux, now a Rosininian priest living in London and
whose father was French Ambassador to the Holy See in the 30s, lived with
his family in Rome during the fateful pre-war period. He recalls that the
Pope told his father as early as 1935 that the new regime in Germany was
'diabolical'. The Ambassador frequently warned his government but the
general reaction in France seems to have been that it was good to see the
back of the Prussian militarist and that it was no bad thing that an
Austrian-Czech house painter was now Chancellor.
The reaction in the USA and Britain was scarcely different at that
time; and even later when they must have begun to know about the camps.
The US government accepted a total of 10-15,000 Jewish refugees throughout
the whole war -a truly scandalous statistic. Britain was little better
and before the war the government had been full of 'appeasers', the Duke
of Windsor visited Hitler and Lloyd George even went so far as to call
him 'the greatest living German'! Ambassador Charles-Roux's own government
in Paris (and the British government) were deaf to the pleas of the Vatican
to assist the German internal resistance to the Nazi government.
From the very beginning Pius XII tried to persuade the Allied governments
to support the German opposition to Hitler, but since they would not listen
to men like the Anglican Bishop Bell of Chichester or to the few Jews who
had escaped from Germany to Britain and America, they would not and did
not listen to a Pope. Men like Adam von Trott zu Sulz (he had been a Rhodes
Scholar at Balliol), Peter Yorek von Wartenburg and many other leading
Germans who later formed the Kreisau circle, made continuous, repeated,
energetic and ultimately futile attempts to reach and persuade the British
government to back, or even talk with, the German resistance to Hitler.
They were all killed in the 20th July plot to assassinate Hitler,
the last in a long line of foiled attempts to get rid of the dictator,
which was triggered by the Roman Catholic officer, Count Claus Schenk von
Stauffenberg. Stauffenberg was shot out of hand. Other conspirators were
not so lucky. They were tried by the infamous 'People's Court' and hanged
by piano wire from butchers' hooks at Ploetzensce prison. This was filmed
on Hitler's orders so that he could watch it himself later
Pius XII was a highly active, energetic and zealous opponent of
totalitarianism and oppression. Pope Pius XI issued the encyclical letter
"Mit Brennender Sorge" in 1937 because he was then the ruling Pope; but it
was Cardinal Pacelli, later Pius XII, who wrote it. The German Roman
Catholic hierarchy thanked Pope Pius XI for the letter, which condemned
racism and anti-semitism roundly, and the Pope pointed to Cardinal Pacelli
saying it was he had been responsible for it. Pius XII's first encyclical
in 1939, "Summi Pontificatus", repeated the theme and the Gestapo were
immediately given orders by the Nazi leadership to prevent its
distribution.
Thereafter, Pius XII adopted his policy of not naming the Jews explicitly.
This was partly because of his experience of the diplomatic "deafness"
of the Allied governments and partly because of his knowledge and experience
of the increased persecution of Jews which followed the condemnatory
statements made in the two mentioned encyclicals. He devoted himself
instead to the covert rescue operation which resulted in the saving
of approx 800,000 Jewish lives during WW II.
I see. He said nothing because the allied governments would not
listen. That is a unique justification. It also ignores the fact
that there was no effort by the Church in Germany in the 30's, to
publicly condemn the persecution of the Jews. The Church had quite a
bit of power at that time. It, after all, managed to force the end of
the Nazi's euthanasia program during that period. One wonders what
would have happened if as much indignation was expressed in oppostion
to the loss of all civil rights of the Jews in Germany. We will never
know, because, apparently, the Church could not be bothered.
.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |