K
katy
Guest
I believe that sound is significant.Sound of crickets chirping in response to my challenge…
- Status
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
Sometimes conclusions, reached through logic, soak in very slowly for some people. For others, not at all.Sound of crickets chirping in response to my challenge…
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
K
Kaninchen
Guest
The answer: 1) rather depends on what one’s assumptions are about how the Reich would have responded; and 2) is something of a case of “you can’t get there from here” (in other words the real damage was ‘historical’ - ie long prior to Pius XII - as was acknowledged by John Paul II).
In many ways the regime was a much weaker dictatorship than it made itself out to be (in the sense that it really was rather afraid of public opinion) - quite how it would have reacted to more of a challenge is by no means certain at all.
In many ways the regime was a much weaker dictatorship than it made itself out to be (in the sense that it really was rather afraid of public opinion) - quite how it would have reacted to more of a challenge is by no means certain at all.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
Tell that to the millions who were killed in the concentration camps and the other millions who were freed only after the fall of the 1000 year Reich.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I’m from a German Jewish family, slogans are wasted on me.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
K
Kaninchen
Guest
They are slogans when they conceal as much as they reveal - where, for example, they explain all actions and inactions and excuse from any kind of ‘guilt’ all those not directly involved.
Everybody knows about the camps - extermination and concentration - so it’s obvious that opposition was impossible.
Or was it? How about the protests of people like Bishop Galen bringing about the end of the T-4 program (the killing of the mentally ill)? How about what happened in Rosenstraße Berlin in March 1943?
There’s, actually, quite a list. The individual was obviously at risk (although, for example, there’s no evidence of any German soldiers being punished for refusing to take part in killings of Jews, Gypsies etc) but groups were another matter.
The Reich leadership was obsessed with public opinion - the SD (Sicherdienst - secret service/police) were tasked with continual reports of the public mood (particularly since the NSDAP was convinced that the only reason that Germany had lost the First World War was because of the ‘November Revolution’ of 1918).
So, in short, waving the ‘camps’ at me as an explanation why there was never any kind of alternative to certain actions and inactions, is just ‘slogan’ history.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
I can see where with your Jewish background you may think this. That however does not make it so. Whether you admit it or not, 100’s of thousands were saved because of the Vatican and what the Catholic church did. To deny this, is to have blinders of resentment cloud your judgment of historical facts which are real, true and factual. Not slogans. I do not try to change your mind, just as you will not change mine. At this juncture, I would respectfully suggest we agree to disagree.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
K
Kaninchen
Guest
You’re using the wrong argument with the wrong poster - nowhere have I condemned Pius or the Church during the Nazi period in my whole time on CAF - I’ve even raised Bishop Galen and John Paul II approvingly in this thread.
That doesn’t mean that assumptions that people make about the history of the Reich should not be challenged - the blinders, “Prayers & blessings Deacon Ed B” are not on me.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
I give them to you freely and ask the same from you.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I was talking about the ‘blinders’, the ‘Prayers & blessings’ are a matter all of your own.
C
chosen_people
Guest
The beatification or non beatification of Pius XII is not the issue.
The holocaust was indeed a unique horror. Loyal citizens of a country making great contributions to that society and to the world were declared enemies of the state and systematically murdered for the crime of “being Jewish”. With German military expansion it was extended to the eradication of all of European Jewry.
The mass murder of one third of world Jewry in such a short period of time was only possible because of the co-operation of the entire Christian Western world. It required countries like the United States, Canada and England to hermetically seal their borders to all Jews. It required the allied powers who were systematically bombing any and all targets, military or civilian, to refuse a single bomb or a single mission to put Auschwitz and its rail lines out of commission and it required World leaders, like Pius XII to keep silent.
The indisputable fact is that Pius XII despite ample opportunities did not once make the simple clear declaration that the persecution and murder of the Jews was to be condemned. In fact he did not in any of his speeches specifically and directly refer to the Jews and the acts against them. That silence was an immoral act.It cannot be justified by self interest or cowardice. It can not be justified by arguing the saving of such and such a number of Jews when had vocal condemnation been given by Pius and others it may have led to the saving of many more.
Indeed the beatification of Pius XII is an internal Catholic issue. Were I a Catholic and had Pius XII been my moral guide post I would have expected then and expected now so much more.
The holocaust was indeed a unique horror. Loyal citizens of a country making great contributions to that society and to the world were declared enemies of the state and systematically murdered for the crime of “being Jewish”. With German military expansion it was extended to the eradication of all of European Jewry.
The mass murder of one third of world Jewry in such a short period of time was only possible because of the co-operation of the entire Christian Western world. It required countries like the United States, Canada and England to hermetically seal their borders to all Jews. It required the allied powers who were systematically bombing any and all targets, military or civilian, to refuse a single bomb or a single mission to put Auschwitz and its rail lines out of commission and it required World leaders, like Pius XII to keep silent.
The indisputable fact is that Pius XII despite ample opportunities did not once make the simple clear declaration that the persecution and murder of the Jews was to be condemned. In fact he did not in any of his speeches specifically and directly refer to the Jews and the acts against them. That silence was an immoral act.It cannot be justified by self interest or cowardice. It can not be justified by arguing the saving of such and such a number of Jews when had vocal condemnation been given by Pius and others it may have led to the saving of many more.
Indeed the beatification of Pius XII is an internal Catholic issue. Were I a Catholic and had Pius XII been my moral guide post I would have expected then and expected now so much more.
A
AlanF
Guest
It was also catholics being sent to the death camps.
You’re calling world war “co-operation”?
If you study your history you’ll find the Allies were not bombing “any and all targets, military or civilian” and “refusing to put a single bomb …] to put Auschwitz and its rail lines out of commission”, they were targeting cities, because that’s were the industry is, and military stations, airfields, dock etc. to harm the erman military. They were not co-operating with Nazi Germany in any way, shape or form, and protecting the sovereignty of their own nations and those of their allies were a lot more important at the time than looking for some concentration camps that may or may not exist (because if you study some more history, you’ll find they only discovered these camps after their invasion of Germany in 1945).
The allies also did not “hermetically seal their borders to all Jews”. Before the war 90,000 jews were allowed to come to Britain and 10,000 children were saved through the Kindertransport. This was before the war and before they knew of the holocaust
Did he need to?
What use would it have neeb to write a speech to tell the world that killing millions of innocent people is wrong as if they didn’t already know that?
Can we really believe that just because the Pope had told Hitler he was being a very naughty boy, he would have stopped the genocide and let all the Jews be on their way?
From the article I posted earlier (and wil post again at the end of this post:
Besides, just look at the examples of the Archbishop of Utrecht in 1942, Pope Pius XII speaking loudly against Hitler would have done a lot of harm and no good at all.
Inthat case you disagree with the WWII Chief Rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, who converted to Catholicism after the war and took “Eugenio” (as in Euginio Pacelli / Pius XII) as his baptismal name.
Read this and this.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
The vast majority being killed because they were Polish.
As I’ve said in an earlier response, I’ve never been one to comment on Pius one way or the other but we’ll never know what would have happened - what might have happened had there been an equivalent of ‘Mit brennender Sorge’ about the treatment of German Jews, for example, during the time he was Secretary of State?
Did Pius XI, in 1937 (when Pius XII was Secretary of State) believe that he would stop Stalin because just because he’d issued the encyclical ‘Divini Redemptoris’ telling him he was a very naughty boy?
There’s a lot of assumptions there that you’d have to spell out with more detail so that they could be examined.
Which probably reflected his immense relief to have found somebody who could stand him.
C
chosen_people
Guest
Catholics were not sent to death camps for the crime of being Catholic. The 500 priests and nuns who were converts to Catholicism and were killed by the Nazi’s were killed because they were “Jewish”.Virtually no Catholics who died in the death camps were killed because they were Catholic but rather despite the fact that they were Catholic. There were no Nuremberg laws against Catholics and no “final solution” for Catholics. Your argument that Catholics were also being sent to the death camps is even more specious because presumably you are now arguing and justifying Pius XII being silent about Nazi persecutions of Catholics.
Of course the whole argument that it may be better to be silent about persecution and murder, especially by a religious leader, is a specious argument. No doubt those who justify Pius XII are also trying to keep things silent today about Darfur in order not to make the “situation worse”.
Indeed one need only to look at the fire bombing of Dresden to learn that only military targets were bombed by the allies. The death camps were well known and documented as was the discussion concerning whether to bomb Auschwitz. It would appear having Hitler busy transporting and killing Jews was a worth while trade off. So too are the decisions to close the borders to Jews. You may want to start your reading with “while six million died” (out of print but no doubt at your public library) and go on to “Hitler’s willing executioners”. You may want to google the ship the St. Louis or Canadian policy toward Jews in the Mackenzie King government or the British White Paper in Palestine.
The man who would become Pope John XXIII did indeed work to save Jews. When asked about Vatican policy about saving Jews he is reported to have replied “what policy”?
G
Genesis315
Guest
And also for the beatification of Pius IX by JPII.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Well, you do have to understand that kidnapping isn’t something approved of in Judaism.
A
AlanF
Guest
Try looking from the Pope’s point of view, the Archbishop of Munich gets attacked by Nazi mobs every now and then for having spoken against the Nazis, and many Jews and non-arian catholics were seized and sent to the camps immediatly after the Archbishop of Utrecht spoke against them.
What would you have done and why?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Perhaps you could point out the paragraph of the Wansee Protocol that excluded Christians of Jewish origin from “Die Endlösung”? The very few who lived in monastries and convents might have survived, after all they were unlikely to breed, but the rest would have been transported just like everybody else.
Meanwhile, why did the Reich Government go to such lengths to hide the fate of the Jewish people from the majority of even its own population? Despite the endemic antisemitism of German society? Despite the common belief that there should be some kind of ‘solution’ to the ‘Jewish problem’?
L
Lion_of_Narnia
Guest
chosen people;4316698...The indisputable fact is that Pius XII despite ample opportunities did not once make the simple clear declaration that the persecution and murder of the Jews was to be condemned. In fact he did not in any of his speeches specifically and directly refer to the Jews and the acts against them. That silence was an immoral act.It cannot be justified by self interest or cowardice. It can not be justified by arguing the saving of such and such a number of Jews when had vocal condemnation been given by Pius and others it may have led to the saving of many more.:
- Status