Catholic Nazis?

[jjwilkman]

urquhart:

There are some disturbing pictures in that gallery, all right! It looks to me as if some of the clergy in Germany tried to get along with the Nazis, especially in the beginning, when it may not have been clear where they were going with it. Perhaps some of them supported Hitler all the way to the end. This does not mean that the Church “supported Nazis”. In fact, many Christians, including Catholic clergy, were being sent to the concentration camps right along with the Jews. To express public opposition meant arrest. The only safe way to work to help the Jews and others who were being persecuted was from behind the scenes. I can’t speak for God, but it would seem sacreligious to suggest He would condone the Nazi agenda.

i looked at the site. the first thought that comes to mind is that the catholic clergy were not doing it voluntarily. look at the faces. they obviously would rather be some place else. whe the clergy give the nazi salute, not that it is half hearted. the arms are not flung straight out in enthusiasm. rather the elbowa are bent, tho me indicating compulsion. remember, if you didn’t play ball with der fuhrer, you were toast, to use a modernism. no way am i going to believe that catholics suppoeted that nutburger.

 

[Liberian]

CatholicPatriot:

Hello, I’m new here and joined in absolute need of a Catholic rebuttle to a webpage I came across.

I ask you not to visit this website if you are not ready for a shock
nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

Meh, I’ve been a Catholic for just a few months now and I have no doubt that I’m where God wants me to be,( Baptized in the Roman Church but seperated from God when my mother married a Methodist who enrolled me in a Baptist school but came back when Pope John Paul II died ) but, quite unreadily, I stumbled across the webpage posted above. Well, my questions are

1. If the Church supported the Nazis, did God? ( NO!, I am not a racist. I’m not even white and I utterly hate racism.)
2. Were/are some Catholic leaders Nazis?
   3.Did the Church support Nazis in the 1st place?

I hope I can read some answers that’ll put my soul to rest.

CatholicPatriot,

I haven’t read what everybody else has been saying to you, but an excellent source (authoritative, even!) is the encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge, in which the Church discusses its relations with the Nazis. In it the Pope clearly (although not explicitly) identifies the Nazis as agents of the Devil.

The Church had tried to negotiate a “concordat” with the Nazi government, a sort of arrangement spelling out the conditions under which the Church could continue to minister to the German Catholics. After all, the German Catholics were still Catholic, and it would not have been proper simply to write them off wholesale.

As an aside, if I may take note of a comment in your post, white people are not the only ones who can practice racism. And not all white people are racists–probably no higher a fraction than people of other races.

• Liberian

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

The Nazis had alot of power yet the Pope had instructed the clergy to hide Jews,they are trying to create scandal.What were the Priests supposed to do?The Nazis killed Religious too.They walked a fine line to survive and if it wasn’t to survive for themselves what about the Faithful?They did the best they could under the horrible circumstances:nope:

 

[stillsearching]

Here is an even better link to discuss the Catholic Church’s response to Hitler:
carmelnet.org/titus/titus.htm

 

[Eden]

Here are some excerpts from another article that I just found when looking up martyrs for another thread:

**Catholic Resistance to Hitler Revealed

New findings of over 300 German martyrs **

[The release of the first volume of a German “Martyrologium” reveals that 300 Germans were martyred for their faith and in fighting Hitler’s evil regime.** Proof is provided that both clergy and laity fought to help German Jews just as Pope Pius XII did for so many Jewish people in Germany, Poland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Lithuania and Russia.]**

**In this century alone, Germany has had 700 martyrs, including priests, religious and laity, which proves, as Cardinal Meisner stated when presenting the first volume, that “the Catholic Church does not have to be ashamed of its role during the course of this century.”

The 700 martyrs are divided into four categories. Those who died under Stalinism, women who were raped, missionaries, and the victims of Nazism (1933-1945), the latter being the largest group. Of the more than 300 martyrs of Nazism, 123 were laymen who went to their death for their faith, in opposition to the dictatorship. **
**In an interview with the Italian newspaper “Avvenire,” Bishop Moll stated that “No one would ever have expected such a large number, no one especially would have thought that so many laymen gave their life as a witness of faith against Nazism.” Moll was proud to announce that there is not a single diocese in Germany that did not contribute a martyr.

“The Church and Catholics did not understand immediately the negative extent of the Nazi ideology. But it was not long before they did. As soon as Fritz Michael Gerlich of Stettin, director of the newspaper ‘Der Gerade Weg’ [The Narrow Way], was arrested and died in Dachau in July 1934, people realized that the Hitler regime was in open conflict with the Catholic world,” the Bishop said.

“Our research revealed how a good part of the laity and clergy carried out an important and convincing battle against the Nazi ideology,” he added. **
More: geocities.com/orthopapism/ahn1.html**

 

[AnAtheist]

mom 07:

Hitler was a narcissistic neo-pagan.

No, he wasn’t a neo-pagan. Himmler was (sort of, as that term did not exist back then), that is often confused.

He “admired” the Catholic Church? For what? He may have envied the structure, longevity and faithfulness of Catholics

Yes, exactly that. And that the Church sticked to its dogmas for 200 years no matter what scientific evidence or how much ration spoke against them.

but he certainly was NOT a Eucharist adoring Catholic as some with agendas would like to depict him.

That’s right, he wasn’t that either.

Re his baptism, afaik Hitler was baptised as a child like everybody else coming from a Catholic family, but I can’t prove it right now.

 

[AnAtheist]

bones_IV:

Liar!

Whow, wait a minute. What lie?
The Church did sign a treaty in 1933, which was the basis of its cooperation with the German government, and that is still valid today. If you call that a lie, better read some history books.

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

AnAtheist:

Yes, exactly that. And that the Church sticked to its dogmas for 200 years no matter what scientific evidence or how much ration spoke against them.

And yet when an athiest is asked to explain miracles, apparitions like Fatima, or possession they always say that the burden of proof is on us. I have never once recieved a satisfactory answer from ANY athiest as to why God doesn’t exist. The only thing anyone was EVER said to me is “it’s not rational” and has left it at that. As if I should simply take their word for it and trust their logic as the absolute truth.

Why are you even on this site? It’s obvious you don’t care about learnind about the Church, since you are desperately clinging to your lies and misconceptions about the Holocaust. Are you on here simply to insult us and attempt to prove us wrong?

 

[AnAtheist]

Rand Al'Thor:

since you are desperately clinging to your lies

Again, what lie? Oh wait, I made a typo, it should read 2000 years.

and misconceptions about the Holocaust.

I haven’t said anything yet about the holocaust.

 

[LSK]

I do not think it is an attack against the Holy Mother Church to admit we have sinners as members. I also know, as a faithful daughter of the Church, that science and the Church are not incompatible. Science and people often clash, but God is the author of ALL TRUTH. Therefore, if there are statements made by Church officials that later prove to clash with scientific truths those statements are obviously wrong. And if there are scientific theories that later prove to be wrong, then the people who promulgated them are simply that - wrong. No big deal. We all learn. We all advance.

We cannot judge actions taken 400 years ago by today’s standards of ethics and values. That just creates revisionist history which is useless as a teaching tool.

There were treaties signed by the Vatican with the fascists and the nazis. There is ample proof that the Holy Father did so in order to allow the Vatican to exist during that horrific time. Because the Vatican existed, thousands of people were saved. A very heroic Irish priest, among others, risked his life to save people. I wish I could remember his name. He would stand in St. Peter’s Square each night to silently signal that those fleeing persecution to run to him for help. He perpetuated the facade of a drunken, dissolate priest at cocktail parties in Rome held by high ranking officials in order to throw them off the track.

Have those serving as religious in the Church made immoral choices? Yes. Has the Church pronounced scientific discoveries as heresy that later turned out to be solid? Yes. Have scientist aided the Church in proving the existence of miracles? Yes.

Let’s not dwell morbidly on the wrongs done by the Church. Let’s learn from them, ask for the Wisdom of the Holy Spirit to help us prevent these wrongs from happening again, and pray for the souls of those who made those wrong choices.

Just a thought…

 

[Jedi_Master]

LSK:

Has the Church pronounced scientific discoveries as heresy that later turned out to be solid? Yes.

like what?

 

[gus]

Can you name one?

 

[mom_07]

I am sort of new to this forum. Below Zarove’s name it says “banned”. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Terri

 

[Psalm45_9]

mom 07:

I am sort of new to this forum. Below Zarove’s name it says “banned”. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Terri

It means he is not allowed on the forums anymore. He’s only been here for a week, that’s an accomplishment!!!

 

[David_Paul]

LSK:

I also know, as a faithful daughter of the Church, that science and the Church are not incompatible. Science and people often clash, but God is the author of ALL TRUTH.

Some, not many, of my fellow Protestants were the ones who attempted to make science bend to their theology. But Catholics, to this day, get the blame while it has always been Catholic doctrine that faith and science are not and cannot be incompatable.

Cistercian monks were the hi-tech gurus of the 13th century. They laid the groundwork for the industrial revolution. A monk uncovered the laws of genetics. A priest originated the Big Bang Theory of the creation of the Universe (Einstein and others dismissed Lemaître’s work. “Of course he believes in a moment of creation,” many said, “he’s Catholic, what do you expect? He is putting his theology above science.”)

The Church opposed all the “isms” of the 19th century which caused such carnage in the 20th century. And now those who seek to apologize for the misery their secular philosophies created blame the church for the atrocities.

Simply amazing.

 

[LSK]

gus:

Can you name one?

Well, I may have used the wrong terminology but I was thinking in terms of the theories advanced by Gallileo (spelling? and here I am, a nice Italian girl!) that later turned out to be true…the earth does revolve around the sun and not the other way around. And yet, we still say things like “look, the sun is setting” we don’t say “o look we are rotating around the sun so that now it’s going to be night time”.

The gist of what I was writing is that there is room for knowledge that will expand our understanding of the material world and it does not conflict with the teachings of the Church. That’s why we have a magisterium. If there seems to be error, it is because we have not correctly interpreted information not because the Scripture is in error. I believe this because God is the Author of ALL TRUTH - including anything a scientist discovers. And that’s why we need to remember that, as Catholics, we read Scripture in a literal sense and not a literalist sense.

Anyway - if I used the wrong terminology by refering to Galileo’s theory that the earth revolved around the sun, I apologize. I didnot mean to offend anyone.

 

[mom_07]

Psalm45:9:

It means he is not allowed on the forums anymore. He’s only been here for a week, that’s an accomplishment!!!

Wow, a record, cool. Seriously now; what can get you banned?

Terri

 

[Church_Militant]

If you want the truth about Catholics and nazis. ask St. Maximillian Kolbe and Edith Stein.

 

[Eden]

LSK:

Well, I may have used the wrong terminology but I was thinking in terms of the theories advanced by Gallileo (spelling? and here I am, a nice Italian girl!) that later turned out to be true…the earth does revolve around the sun and not the other way around. And yet, we still say things like “look, the sun is setting” we don’t say “o look we are rotating around the sun so that now it’s going to be night time”.

The gist of what I was writing is that there is room for knowledge that will expand our understanding of the material world and it does not conflict with the teachings of the Church. That’s why we have a magisterium. If there seems to be error, it is because we have not correctly interpreted information not because the Scripture is in error. I believe this because God is the Author of ALL TRUTH - including anything a scientist discovers. And that’s why we need to remember that, as Catholics, we read Scripture in a literal sense and not a literalist sense.

Anyway - if I used the wrong terminology by refering to Galileo’s theory that the earth revolved around the sun, I apologize. I didnot mean to offend anyone.

Just to clear up a common misconception about Galileo:

catholic.com/library/galileo_controversy.asp

 

[mlchance]

LSK:

Well, I may have used the wrong terminology but I was thinking in terms of the theories advanced by Gallileo (spelling? and here I am, a nice Italian girl!) that later turned out to be true…the earth does revolve around the sun and not the other way around…

That wasn’t Galileo’s theory. It was Copernicus’s, who, incidentally, never really had any problems with the Church to speak of. Actual empirical confirmation of heliocentrism didn’t come until the 19th century. Between Copernicus and then, the Church did not oppose heliocentrism. Most of the opposition against heliocentrism in Galileo’s day came from the universities where scholars were busy defending the entrenched Ptolemaic cosmology against Copernicus’s “upstart theory.”

– Mark L. Chance.