The Vatican's Role in the Rise of Modern Anti-Semitism
by David Kertzer
Posted on 11/10/2010 5:23:33 PM PST by Gamecock
Posted to refute the hogwash posted by FRoman Catholics accusing Prods of abusing Jews.
It would help though, if you could provide the link to the thread where “FRoman Catholics” accuse “Prods” of abusing Jews.
Jews were oppressed and killed in all parts of Christian Europe, by Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox.
Posted to remind you that the KKK/Democrat party was an equal opportunity lyncher of Jews, Catholics, Blacks and Republicans.
How Pius XII Protected Jews
Snip...
The twentieth century was marked by genocides on an monstrous scale. One of the most terrible was the Holocaust wrought by Nazi Germany, which killed an estimated six million European Jews and almost as many other victims.
During this dark time, the Catholic Church was shepherded by Pope Pius XII, who proved himself an untiring foe of the Nazis, determined to save as many Jewish lives as he could. Yet today Pius XII gets almost no credit for his actions before or during the war.
...
Early in 1940, Hitler made an attempt to prevent the new Pope from maintaining the anti-Nazi stance he had taken before his election. He sent his underling, Joachim von Ribbentrop, to try to dissuade Pius XII from following his predecessor’s policies. “Von Ribbentrop, granted a formal audience on March 11, 1940, 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 Führer. Pius XII heard von Ribbentrop out politely and impassively. Then he opened an enormous ledger on his desk and, in his 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 each crime. The audience was terminated; the Pope’s position was clearly unshakable.”
...
http://www.catholic.com/library/HOW_Pius_XII_PROTECTED_JEWS.asp
"On the Jews and their lies"
A precursor to Nazism
by Jim Walker
Originated: 07 Aug. 1996 Additions: 20 Nov. 2005 EXCERPT: Protestant Christians so admire Martin Luther that he stands as a respected "Patron Saint" to their beliefs and morals. Christians often quote him, theologians write books on him, and many name their children after him (Martin Luther King Jr., for example).
Although Luther did not invent anti-Jewishness, he promoted it to a level never before seen in Europe. Luther bore the influence of his upbringing and from anti-Jewish theologians such as Lyra, Burgensis, (and John Chrysostom, before them).
But Luther's 1543 book, "On the Jews and their lies" took Jewish hatred to a new level when he proposed to set fire to their synagogues and schools, to take away their homes, forbad them to pray or teach, or even to utter God's name.
Luther wanted to "be rid of them" and requested that the government and ministers deal with the problem. He requested pastors and preachers to follow his example of issuing warnings against the Jews.
He goes so far as to claim that "We are at fault in not slaying them" for avenging the death of Jesus Christ. Hitler's Nazi government in the 1930s and 40s fit Luther's desires to a tee.
So vehemently did Luther speak against the Jews, and the fact that Luther represented an honorable and admired Christian to Protestants, that his written words carried the "memetic" seeds of anti-Jewishness up until the 20th century and into the Third Reich. Luther's Jewish eliminationist rhetoric virtually matches the beliefs held by Hitler and much of the German populace in the 1930s.
Luther unconsciously set the stage for the future of German nationalistic fanaticism. William L. Shirer in his "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," puts it succinctly:
"Through his sermons and his magnificent translations of the Bible, Luther created the modern German language, aroused in the people not only a new Protestant vision of Christianity by a fervent German nationalism and taught them, at least in religion, the supremacy of the individual conscience.
But tragically for them, Luther's siding with the princes in the peasant rising, which he had largely inspired, and his passion for political autocracy ensured a mindless and provincial political absolutism which reduced the vast majority of the German people to poverty, to a horrible torpor and a demeaning subservience.
Even worse perhaps, it helped to perpetuate and indeed to sharpen the hopeless divisions not only between classes but also between the various dynastic and political groupings of the German people. It doomed for centuries the possibility of the unification of Germany."
In Mein Kampf, Hitler listed Martin Luther as one of the greatest reformers. And similar to Luther in the 1500s, Hitler spoke against the Jews. The Nazi plan to create a German Reich Church laid its bases on the "Spirit of Dr. Martin Luther."
The first physical violence against the Jews came on November 9-10 on Kristallnacht (Crystal Night) where the Nazis killed Jews, shattered glass windows, and destroyed hundreds of synagogues, just as Luther had proposed.
In Daniel Johah Goldhagen's book, Hitler's Willing Executioners, he writes: "One leading Protestant churchman, Bishop Martin Sasse published a compendium of Martin Luther's antisemitic vitriol shortly after Kristallnacht's orgy of anti-Jewish violence. In the foreword to the volume, he applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day: 'On November 10, 1938, on Luther's birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.' The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words 'of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.'"
Luther's, "On the Jews and Their Lies" can be found here: Luther
Gamecock, Gamecock, Gamecock,....
Don’t you see? That isn’t what all those documents REALLY meant.
You have to go through the official, RCC, Vatican translator and be told what was REALLY meant by those statements.
Time for reeducation for you until you can stop thinking for yourself and deciding what what someone says is what they REALLY mean.
Bigot:
“A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern American English refers to persons hostile to those of differing race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, various mental disorders, or religion.”
No translation needed for your post, now is there?
Christians were hiding in the upper room from Jews; lots of people did lots of things at lots of different times.
Of course not. Because that’s modern use which means what it says ABOUT the Catholic church, unlike what is said BY the Catholic church.
It’s only the stuff said BY the Catholic church that makes them look bad that needs reinterpreting, by them, of course.
Yea, no bigotry there.
You’re good to go.
Luther, as an ex-Augustinian, was no doubt heavily swayed by teachings such as this.
Yup, and all those Bulls were absolutely appropriate for the time periods in which they were issued.
Thank you for posting this. I'm just finishing up on a thread where Born Again Christians are being called "insane" by a RC FReeper because we say unless you believe The Gospel you are lost. Political correctness to try and gloss over your true beliefs gets tiring.
Gotcha. Anything bad Protestants do or say is the Catholics' fault.
I guess Calvinist "utter depravity" is really a code phrase for "it's the Catholics' fault, not ours!". Why don't you just change the "U" in TULIP to read "utter Catholic depravity; utter Protestant innocence"? That would seem to be more consistent with your approach.
Gee, from reading Catholic posts here on FR, it seems the Catholics blame Prods for everything from Roman Catholic priests raping children to global warming.
Just by reading the Bible it is easy to see that it was not the Jews who Killed Christ but the power of the Jewish religious leaders.
It is also easy to see that the persecution of the Jews was not done by the Christians, but by the power of the Christian religious leaders.
That does not hold the other Jews and the other Christians blameless but we do need to see that it all came from religion and secularism, power and authority.
When people start accusing the Jews of Killing Jesus they should remember that the Jews were the first Christians, if not for the Jews we would have no Gospel, wasn,t Jesus a Jew? we have the Gospel, but it is mixed with religion that is contrary to the Gospel.
The very same thing that Jesus came to set us free from.
The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem, and then the early roman church changed or tried to change the Gospel, changing the Sabbath, collecting tithes that they have no authority to do.
In my opinion the Jews have no reason to trust the Roman church and not all of the churches that has branched off from her.
The Jews should remember that it was one of their own brethren who brought the Gospel to them and the rest of us
and they need to also see that people who love Christ could not possibly hate Jews.
The gospel was first preached to the Jews and it was preached by Jews, (Jews just being a nick name) Jews should not let the Christian hierarchy of the past hold them back from excepting Jesus and the Gospel.
Of course they do.
They are taught very early on their church is the means of their salvation. It's so ingrained in them that defense of their church is the same as defending their faith. If error is pointed out you will be immediately attacked because you have attacked their faith.
In the end it's why you can never have a serious theological discussion with them because their perception is entirely different than ours. I think it's also why you get so much double speak. They will do anything to put their church in a good light.
If we were to get into the historic animus between Jews and Christians we would need to examine eschatological views as well as covenant theology. How in the world are you going to do that with RC's. They either don't know the position of their church in these issues, or will misrepresent them so as to not put their church in a bad light. It's much easier for Dispensationalists to discuss these issues with the Reformed and even then it gets pretty heated.
IOW, it's a waste of time to try and get into these things with the RC's.
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.