Posted on 03/15/2008 10:17:55 AM PDT by big'ol_freeper
More than once during these talks I referred to Luther and what always occurred to me as his destructive influence. I pointed out that even in such an admirable book as Rohan Butler's “The Roots of National Socialism” the spiritual origins of Nazism and Luther's influence had not been given the necessary importance. Then I was asked if I would be prepared to elaborate to them—about a dozen of the very senior boys, that is—my own views on Luther and Lutheranism. I agreed—with the proviso that they would be my own views and nothing else. Admittedly, I had read more on Luther and about Luther than on most other subjects. But I wanted to make it quite clear that I would not speak to them with the voice of a great authority, but would merely give them my own interpretation. I told them, moreover, that I should try to prove how dangerous it is to accept legends; and that the picture I had of Luther and his influence was thoroughly contradictory of the customary Luther of the legend.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicapologetics.info ...
Read the book instead of just googling a few pages. You’re missing the best parts.
“However, if you do believe it’s up to God, but still based upon, in part, prayers of the living on behalf of those who are dead, then the prayers of Catholics should indeed be able to help persuade God to let Hitler into Heaven, even if he dies in apostasy. This is something Protestants do not believe.”
You know, this is such baloney. Like there are just tons of Catholics out there who want to pray to get Hitler out of Purgatory, even though any religious person who believes in Heaven and Hell knows where Hitler currently resides, and it ain’t Purgatory. Gee, I’ll make sure to pray every night now that Hitler gets let out of Purgatory, because, why, that’s what Catholics believe, that they have that power, and that God is going to listen to them and take Hitler in out of the rain (or fire). Geez, these theological threads get so absolutist in the blink of an eye. My religion or hit the road Jack.
“It was a very unsettled time. Not even our own times can compare. A tide of red and black revolutions sweeping the globe. Bomb throwers in all major countries blowing up officials, etc.”
Funny (not really), what goes around comes around. Now we have bomb wearers in all major countries blowing up officials and innocents too. Maybe it’s gotten worse with time.
“...nothing about the bishop in Rome affects Bible-believing “Christians other than to set us apart...”
“Gee, I wonder what all those readings are from every Sunday at Catholic mass. I think they are from the Bible. The book you think it’s fine to remove several books from.
Why don’t you read a Physicians Desk Reference and proclaim yourself a Doctor?
Or, do you already do that?”
ROFLMAO! Ah, you’ve hung Eckleberg on his own pitard. Love it, and boy does he deserve it. You swatted him down like a fly. Bravo!
typo: Eckleberg = Eckleburg above
You wrote:
“Read the book instead of just googling a few pages. You’re missing the best parts.”
Just like I thought - you’re going to refuse to answer the questions because they undercut what you earlier asserted.
I didn’t google the book. I simply checked it out of the library.
Let me answer the more important questions for you since you are refusing to do so:
Page 208:
The Grand Rabbi Herzog came in person to the Pope Pius to “officially thank the Holy Father and the Holy See for the manifold acts of charity on behalf of the Jews”
Maurice Edelman, head of the Anglo-Jewish Association said Pius was responsible for saving “the lives of tens of thousands of Jews.”
On page 209:
The book says the Church sheltered and fed nearly 200,000 refuugees.
It also says that “another 400,000 Jews were saved from certain death by the Holy See.”
And the quote from Pinchas Lapide - who you probably wish would just go away:
“The Catholic Church saved more Jewish lives during the war than all other churches, religious institutions and rescue organizations put together. Its record stands in startling contrast to the achievements of the International Red Cross and the Western Democracies.”
It does not surprise me that you wouldn’t answer the questions - they completely refute what you were saying much earlier in the thread.
If you’re going to bring up a book, at least have the courage to actually answer questions about it.
A case about the picture of the priests sieg heiling? It kinda speaks for itself, doesn’t it? I believe because of Hitler’s occult practices that satan had a spirit of deception throughout all of Germany. He was charismatic and deceptive. That’s the only way that the German people would be blinded to what was really going on, especially in the death camps. Their hatred for Jews was also evident, no matter what church they belonged to. IMHO.
You wrote:
“A case about the picture of the priests sieg heiling? It kinda speaks for itself, doesn’t it?”
No, how does it?
“I believe because of Hitler’s occult practices that satan had a spirit of deception throughout all of Germany.”
Okay, that’s what you believe. And what does that have to do with Luther?
“He was charismatic and deceptive. That’s the only way that the German people would be blinded to what was really going on, especially in the death camps.”
Actually geography was more responsible than Hitler there. All of the death camps were in Poland. All of them. Yes, there were concentration camps in Germany, but the deaths became obvious there probably only at the end of the war when the whole system broke down and tens of thousands starved and died of disease as well as their horrible treatment at the hands of the Nazis. Most Germans knew nothing of the death camps simply because they were in Poland and the Nazi controlled press wasn’t reporting their existence of course. Without the modern (and free) media would you know about death camps in Mexico if they existed? Probably not.
“Their hatred for Jews was also evident, no matter what church they belonged to. IMHO.”
Nazis certainly hated the Jews and too few Germans did anything to stand against it.
But what case were you trying to make with the photo? Be brave. Try.
If you are a ‘good’ Catholic, you must consider Hitler is in Purgatory and pray for him. You if are not Catholic, you can simply give up on the concept of Purgatory and let the whole issue rest.
It's Catholics who create this after-death mess and believe praying for the dead is justifiable and good.
You wrote:
“If you are a ‘good’ Catholic, you must consider Hitler is in Purgatory and pray for him.”
Completely incorrect. Again, let me teach you what you clearly DO NOT WANT TO UNDERSTAND. Purgatory is for some of those going to heaven. If you do not have a reasonable expectation that someone was striving with God’s grace to live a holy life, then there is no reason at all to believe they are in purgatory since there is no reason at all to believe they are going to heaven. This is so easy to understand that I am surprised that I have had to explain this more than once in this thread.
“You if are not Catholic, you can simply give up on the concept of Purgatory and let the whole issue rest.”
Or you could just get the concept of purgatory right and stop trying to create straw man version of it that you repeatedly try to foist on Catholics who know better than to fall for it.
“It’s Catholics who create this after-death mess and believe praying for the dead is justifiable and good.”
God created purgatory. Take it up with Him.
Hey Dr. Eckleburg,
You’ve posted 8 messages since I posted to you. Why not respond to my post? It isn’t because I posted the exact evidence you wanted to avoid seeing is it? After all, the very book you’ve been touting the last couple of days said your were wrong. Could that be why you are so diligently avoiding responding to my post?
Thanks Sandyeggo! I think Marysecretary and Dr. Eckelburg are afraid to actually respond. Typical.
So there's not a billion Catholics worldwide?
The few Jews he "saved" were Italian Jews, most of whom had converted to Catholicism.
European Jews were left to fend for themselves. And six million of them didn't do so great.
The interesting parts of "La Popessa" were not the same old empty defenses of Pacelli's complicity in WWII, but in its depiction of the very bizarre relationship he had with his German "secretary" and housekeeper of over 50 years.
Read the book yourself and see if you think it is a postive assessment of the man and his life. Or if it instead, inadvertently no doubt, asks more questions about his character, his intenions and his actions (and lack of action.)
After all, most of us Republicans are questioning Hillary's close relationship with her "assistant," a possible Saudi Arabian, muslim spy. It's a fair question to ask of Pacelli, too, given the circumstances and the outcome.
You wrote:
“So there’s not a billion Catholics worldwide?”
Why ask me? Seriously, I ask you questions and you claim to have mis-spoken. Why should I bother answering any questions from you when you won’t answer mine?
“God created purgatory. Take it up with Him.”
Please be so kind, oh great vlad, to so me the evidence of God’s hand in this mythological fable.
I’ve read the standard RCC defense of this fable (one version can be found here - http://www.catholic.com/library/Purgatory.asp ) and it appears to be nothing but conjecture based on that which is not said. Works tested, saved but suffering loss by fire refer to the judgment where at all men’s works are judged and those who do not have their names in the Lamb’s Book of Life will be cast in to the Lake of Fire for eternity. Deeds of the flesh, including suffering for sin, cannot earn God’s favor or pay for entrance to heaven.
You wrote:
“And for the third time I’ll respond to you by saying “La Popessa” offers a lot of the same old defenses for Pacelli’s inactions during WWII. I read those with the same ton of salt I read any book which foolishly contends it would have been worse for the Jews if Pacelli had spoken out.”
No, you asked this earlier: “So which is it? A great book that vindicates Pacelli or another book that slanders him and his “secretary.”” (#736)
Then in response, in #768, I wrote: “But does the book say what the reviwer I quote said it says? Does it? I have no idea. Why don’t you tell us?”
And then you started refusing to answer questions.
In post #844 I tried again: “I am asking you to look up something in the book YOU CLAIM TO HAVE. Why is that strange when you were offering to send me a snapshot of yourself with the book? Do you have the book or not? Can you actually open it and read it or not?”
“What does it say about Pius XII saving numerous lives? That’s what I am asking about.”
You still refused to answer: [post #862 ] “What is fascinating about the book is not the same old empty chestnuts that Pacelli actually saved Jews by not speaking out and that his hands were tied and that he really really wanted to help.”
In the meantime I went to the library and checked out the book. Lo! and Behold! The book vindicates Pius XII - and that’s exactly why Dr. Eckleburg refused to answer my simple questions. I asked very specific questions - remember Dr. E. claims to have the book - and Dr. E. refused to answer a single one of them even when I provided the page numbers!!!
And now we get these notable erroneous statements:
“The few Jews he “saved” were Italian Jews, most of whom had converted to Catholicism.”
Wrong. He saved - according to the book you’re now studiously ignoring after touting it for two days - 400,000 Jews, while other books (written by Jews in many cases) say that the number was 800,000 Jews. No matter if the number was 400,000 or 800,000 those were not all Italian Jews. After all, according to Italian scholar Risa Sodi there were only 40,000 Jews in all of Italy in August 1943 about when the Nazis took control of the country. Thus, somewhere between 360,000 and 760,000 of the Jews Pius saved were not Italian. You can find Sodi’s article in the Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 1999 13(2):272-282.
“European Jews were left to fend for themselves. And six million of them didn’t do so great.”
Italy is part of Europe in case you didn’t know. And remember, your favorite book says he saved 400,000 Jews.
“The interesting parts of “La Popessa” were not the same old empty defenses of Pacelli’s complicity in WWII, but in its depiction of the very bizarre relationship he had with his German “secretary” and housekeeper of over 50 years.”
To you. It seems, however, that that is merely your predilection. In a thread that devolved into accusations over anti-semitism the most important part of La Popessa - a book you touted for a day or two - was exactly that which contradicted your earlier claims and which you refused to discuss for exactly that reason. Your claim that the relationship between Pius and Sr. Pascalina was the more interesting part seems dishonest at best given that that relationship often showed itself most clearly when dealing with aiding Jews, refugees and others in the war.
“Read the book yourself and see if you think it is a postive assessment of the man and his life.”
The book says Pius XII saved 400,000 Jews. That is a positive assessment of the man and his life. What these modern authors think about him otherwise would clearly be immaterial. His actions and beliefs matter, not his life long friendship with a nun.
“Or if it instead, inadvertently no doubt, asks more questions about his character, his intenions and his actions (and lack of action.)”
Saving 400,000 Jews is action. It is also a positive expression of good character. Can that be doubted when the man saved at least 400,000 Jews according to the very book you tout?
“After all, most of us Republicans are questioning Hillary’s close relationship with her “assistant,” a possible Saudi Arabian, muslim spy.”
Uh, actually most Republicans are NOT questioning that relationship. Most Republicans do not assume she is a Muslim spy. And the almost overwhelming silence over that relationship even in the Republican media means even most die-hard Republicans doubt there is a lesbian romance going on there. If Republicans believed there was something there of any real import then it would be like Spitzer all over again.
“It’s a fair question to ask of Pacelli, too, given the circumstances and the outcome.”
No, actually it isn’t. And the outcome seems to be that Pius XII saved 400,000 Jewish lives according to your own touted book selection.
You are still sticking with this lie? Pius XII saved hundereds of thousands, as testified to by ... Jews. To put this number in perspective, please tell us how many Jews were saved by the leaders of your particular denomination.
most of whom had converted to Catholicism.
A blatant lie with no supporting evidence.
European Jews were left to fend for themselves.
How convenient to ignore what was done to help them, even if it was not enough.
very bizarre relationship he had with his German "secretary" and housekeeper of over 50 years.
Innuendo is a sin. She was his secretary and that is a fact whether you put quotes around it or not. Just because she was German does not mean she was evil. Bizarre is what all these unfounded accusations are. Have you read her autobiography or just tales written by those with an axe to grind?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.