in danger, infant licitly baptized against the will of parents

[Kaninchen]

i.e., because the state within which that one thing happened one time (150 years ago), an absolute papal monarchy wherein the laws were known to all, has since been destroyed. Care to try again?

I cannot imagine what extremes of paranoia and spite would drive one to react with rage against an act of love directed toward one’s own child, however misguided one may think such an act is.

Hm, ‘extremes of paranoia and spite’, 'react with ‘rage’? I merely suggested that the sensible thing might be to keep children away from Catholics and that the idea made people shudder.

The Mortara affair was notable for who did the kidnapping and it became famous because of the political situation at the time, it was far from unique.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

Okay.
I agree with those who condemn the forcible taking of Mortara from his parents.
Never should do that, not ever. Wrong thing to do. They weren’t abusing him, they weren’t beating him, they weren’t molesting him. He was a minor, and parents have authority over their minor children, even if their children join another religion, their parents still have the right to have their children in THEIR home. PERIOD.

As for bringing up the antisemitism that Catholics did do at times,
I don’t condone it, but people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

If we want to talk about Catholics mistreating Jews,
we can also talk about how many Catholics were killed by the Roman Empire during the first three centuries of the church with the help, many times, of Jewish community leaders who, regarding the church as a Heresy, turned Christians (especially from jewish backgrounds) over to the authorities. I read about this many times, many years ago.
They did it because they regarded the Church as a heresy, just as the Church regarded post-Christic judaism, in the middle ages, as a heresy of sorts. Both did it for religious reasons, both were wrong.

If I were a Jewish person today, I wouldn’t be worried about the Catholic church.
I would be more worried about “liberal” Jewish “theologians” who claim things like that
Moses, Aaron, Joshua, etc., never really acted on the direct orders of God, etc.
The scriptural “Thus saith the LORD” stuff is really all just pious rabbinical myth,etc. Feh.
WHY? Why worry about that? Because the ancient Israelites exterminated many races of people, collectively called Canaanites, men, women, and children, putting them to the sword, in order to occupy the land of Canaan, which we now call ISRAEL.
If these liberal theologians (jews and non-jewish liberal theologians too) are RIGHT, then those ancient Israelites were just land-grabbing, genocidal maniacs who acted in this murderous fashion all on their own desire for a land-grab and God never gave them any promises or any land or any orders to go up and take the land, and wipe out it’s pagan people, by force, which they did. If the Liberal scholars are RIGHT about the scriptures, then the ancient Israelites were no better than the modern antisemites that they condemn.
I, of course, am not a Liberal, do NOT share these liberal views, and DEFINITELY BELIEVE that the Israelites occupied and seized Canaan on the direct orders of God Almighty, just as scripture says they did, and that they were not self-willed, genocidal maniacs. So…we all need to be more worried about theological and biblical liberalism these days, because THIS has grave implications. Liberalism’s assertions inevitably, followed to their LOGICAL conclusions, mean that our common patrimony, namely Moses, Joshua, and the holy prophets, were really just murderers who never spoke to God at all and God never spoke to, or commanded, THEM , to do a darned thing, and the whole thing is a racist lie. And I certainly DON’T agree with THAT.
Peace upon Israel,
and Peace upon the Holy Church.
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

 

[Kaninchen]

As for bringing up the antisemitism that Catholics did do at times,

Actually, I’ve not mentioned ‘antisemitism’ (it was ‘antijudaism’ rather than ‘antisemitism’ anyway) and have pointed out that Catholics were victims of the same kind of mentality from others. What I’ve been talking about is doing things to other people’s children just because you can, I mentioned Jewish parents because, well, I’m Jewish - imagine the results if it became known that the children of Muslim parents were in danger of being baptized on the quiet, wouldn’t want to be a Catholic doctor or nurse in a country with a large number of Muslims if that were the case.

As to the Romans, by the way, I think you’d find that we had a much rougher time than you did!

 

[Bezant]

What I’ve been talking about is doing things to other people’s children just because you can…

Good point, best by far.

 

[grandfather]

Hm, ‘extremes of paranoia and spite’, 'react with ‘rage’? I merely suggested that the sensible thing might be to keep children away from Catholics and that the idea made people shudder.

The Mortara affair was notable for who did the kidnapping and it became famous because of the political situation at the time, it was far from unique.

If it was not unique, or rare even, can you provide historical references to support your claim?

The personal history given by Mortara himself is interesting. He not only embraced Christianity as an adult, which could be attributed to being brainwashed as a child, but as a child he immediately clung to his supposed kidnappers and rejected his family who surely did love him. I personally have seen children who were greatly abused and neglected by parents, become hysterical over being separated from them by courts. The whole story is very strange.

Nevertheless, the claim that Jewish children were kidnapped and baptized commonly is another matter. Is there any historical record to support this assertion? The only other history remotely similar that I know of is Jewish children being furnished with baptismal certificates by priests to escape the Nazis.

History has a strange way of being colored, depending on who has the crayons.

 

[chosen_people]

A Jewish perspective:

While it is easier for a Gentile than for a Jew to get into the world to come as they have only to follow the seven Noahide commandments, any Jew who breaks his/her eternal covenant between God and the Jewish people, and adopts your beliefs, is caught off forever from God and the Jewish people and loses his/her portion in the world to come.

That is not to say that there is any efficacy to the act. No amount of water and no Gentile prayers can break the eternal bond between God and the Jewish people. It has no meaning whatsoever outside of the minds of the Gentile believers.

For centuries upon centuries Catholics mobs would rampage through Jewish neighborhoods screaming “convert or die”. Jews invariably chose death rather than to denounce God.

In this regard, it should be noted that the first Holocaust occurred not in the 20th Century but during the Crusades where Crusaders murdered between one quarter and one half of European Jewry. These horrific acts have been recorded. We see how these Jews, men, women and children, went to their deaths, holding steadfast in their faith in God. It is perhaps unremarkable that every discussion that seeks to discover how it is that Jews win Nobel Prizes at 115 times their proportion in the population or their massive disproportionate contributions in so many numerous fields, invariably take as their starting point this small surviving group of Jews who showed such bravery and such trust in God.

On the other hand, we have an excellent example of what happens when Jews through fear or through lack of faith, decide to follow other gods. Beginning on March 15th, 1391 in Spain, Catholic mobs began the first of a series of Catholic pogroms against Jews shouting “convert or die”. Over the course of the year, thousands of Jews would be murdered. However, in the aftermath of these riots and mass murders, tens of thousands of Jews, instead of remaining steadfast to God, decided to convert to Christianity. Divine punishment came to the Jews, as it always does, and as always, poetically meted out by those same Gentiles whose beliefs these Jews had adopted. In the end, every single Jew on the Iberian peninsula will have been murdered, expelled or converted, the 1000 year old Jewish community totally destroyed.

The last massive forced conversion of Jews was perpetrated on those Jewish children rescued by the worthy efforts of the Catholic Church during the Shoah. Rather than allowing the reunification of these children with their surviving Jewish families, many of these children were baptized and the Church did everything in its power to prevent reunification. Some sources refer to a 1946 directive by Pope Pius XII. The most famous case, which thankfully ended with two brothers being reunited with their Jewish families, is the Finaly affair. For details of this affair see: isurvived.org/2Postings/Finaly-affair.html

 

[johnnykins]

There’s a history to all this that makes Jewish parents shudder - at one time, when somebody did this to a Jewish child (even in the street, yes, seriously), the child would be taken from the parents because a (now, supposedly) ‘Christian’ baby/child could not be raised by Jews.

So, while the action may well be done with the best intentions by the baptizer, to us their intention is meaningless, while the action is religiously and historically offensive.

The story of Edgardo Mortara is not a proud one for Catholics - and this canon clearly could be problematic however well intentioned. Luckily the Church does not have civil authority anymore except in a very small area around the Vatican and a few buildings in or near Rome. I would be shocked if any “Catholic” countries have civil laws currently requiring the removal of the child.

Today, as a practical matter, it may have few if any civil consequences, but with the history of it, the affront to non-Catholics even today is both understandable and reasonable. (By reasonable - I mean it is reasonable to be affronted)

 

[Cristiano]

The story of Edgardo Mortara is not a proud one for Catholics - and this canon clearly could be problematic however well intentioned. Luckily the Church does not have civil authority anymore except in a very small area around the Vatican and a few buildings in or near Rome. I would be shocked if any “Catholic” countries have civil laws currently requiring the removal of the child.

Today, as a practical matter, it may have few if any civil consequences, but with the history of it, the affront to non-Catholics even today is both understandable and reasonable. (By reasonable - I mean it is reasonable to be affronted)

Secular countries reserve the right to take the children away from the parents and forbid the parents to have access to them. The only difference is that now the secular government defines what is morally good for the welfare of the child.

The Moratra family did wrong (illegal) in hiring a Catholic and the young Catholic girl did wrong (illegal) by accepting employment and also made a mistake making decisions on her own, at the point the Church had to intervene and stick to her laws for the welfare of the child. Today in the civilized UK if you are a foster parent and the government discovers that you are a Christian and you think that homosexual behaviors are aberrant then the government takes the child away, read the news and you will see that happens and it is legal. My question for Catholics is which should be the highest concern for the well being of a human being?

 

[johnnykins]

Secular countries reserve the right to take the children away from the parents and forbid the parents to have access to them. The only difference is that now the secular government defines what is morally good for the welfare of the child.

The Moratra family did wrong (illegal) in hiring a Catholic and the young Catholic girl did wrong (illegal) by accepting employment and also made a mistake making decisions on her own, at the point the Church had to intervene and stick to her laws for the welfare of the child. Today in the civilized UK if you are a foster parent and the government discovers that you are a Christian and you think that homosexual behaviors are aberrant then the government takes the child away, read the news and you will see that happens and it is legal. My question for Catholics is which should be the highest concern for the well being of a human being?

Frankly I’m stunned that you would blame the Mortaras. But, perhaps not so much as I would hope to be stunned. There are many who populate this board that hold positions that are stunning.

 

[Cristiano]

Frankly I’m stunned that you would blame the Mortaras. But, perhaps not so much as I would hope to be stunned. There are many who populate this board that hold positions that are stunning.

So you are saying that even if we do something illegal and we encourage someone else to do something illegal we should not be held accountable at all for the unintended consequences of our actions? The law was clear at the time, it was no secret. I am stunned that in this forum someone claims that it is fine to break the law and when things go south it is just the authorities fault.

Look at what the government has done recently with some members of the LDS, the people allegedly broke the law because of polygamy and child protective services took their children away without having any evidence of abuse.

I see more examples today where Christian including Catholics vote for officials that show clear anti-Christian behaviors and the they act surprised when such individuals say that it is fine to infringe on the first amendment. We break the moral law with our vote thus we are accountable for the consequences even if unintended.

 

[grandfather]

A Jewish perspective:

isurvived.org/2Postings/Finaly-affair.html

History has a strange way of being colored depending on who holds the crayons. Claims made on Youtube are hardly reliable historic record. It is interesting how perspective changes.

At the end of WWII many famous Jews thanked the pope for all he did to help. Many prominent Jews, Albert Einstein, Golda Meir and others were full of praise for the Church. The chief rabbi of Rome and his family converted to Christianity as a result of witnessing the efforts of the pope and the Church on behalf of the Jews as well as a divine revelation to the family. Einstein said the only voice in Europe denouncing the Nazis was from the Catholic Church. The universities, great newspapers, secular politicians were all silent. There were no recriminations from Jews against the Church at all. As decades went by this changed. It started with a fictional play written by a Jew who claimed the pope looked the other way and even assisted the Nazis.

Now the enemies of Israel and the Jews once again are calling for the annihilation of Israel and Jewry. The secular governments of Europe look the other way. The adminsitration in the U.S. clearly seems to favor the Muslims. What voice remains defending the Jews? It that of is the hated Christians. This is not history that can be rewritten and biased by lies. It is current events.

The ex-mayor Koch of NYC, just recently called for his fellow Jews to recognize their real friend, the Catholic Church, in this time of peril for his people. They may or they may not hear him. Whether they do or not is immaterial. If they manage to survive this latest crisis as time goes by the libel will reappear as it always does.

 

[johnnykins]

So you are saying that even if we do something illegal and we encourage someone else to do something illegal we should not be held accountable at all for the unintended consequences of our actions? The law was clear at the time, it was no secret. I am stunned that in this forum someone claims that it is fine to break the law and when things go south it is just the authorities fault.

Look at what the government has done recently with some members of the LDS, the people allegedly broke the law because of polygamy and child protective services took their children away without having any evidence of abuse.

I see more examples today where Christian including Catholics vote for officials that show clear anti-Christian behaviors and the they act surprised when such individuals say that it is fine to infringe on the first amendment. We break the moral law with our vote thus we are accountable for the consequences even if unintended.

You’re from Texas, I’m from Alabama, yes, laws need to be broken and/or remedies can be unjust. Southern history is replete with that lesson. The Motara case is a travesty and an embarrassment to the Church.