Novak: No anti-Semitism in Gibson's 'Passion'

Chicago Sun Times ^ | 11-03-03

[presidio9]

uh huh. The "modern" christian interpretation. Meaning the fluffy bunny coverup we've all agreed to in the aftermath of WWII. So as soon as WWII is a sufficiently distant memory we will go back to reading what it plainly says in Matthew?

Sssshhh. He's on to us.

He's on to the fact that all Catholics hate Jews and blame them for Jesus' death. Encouraging him to continue this conversation will only increase the chances that he learns more about the gigantic Church cover-up.

[presidio9]

The rules of this website make a distinction between religeous affiliation and race-&-ethnicity.

Fair enough. If Jews can change their vantage point on every discussion from one of enthnicity to one of religion as it suits the argument, I hereby declare that all Catholics are also subject to the Holy See, which is, in fact, a nation. Therefore any attack on Catholicism is also an attack on the Catholic "race" as it were. Wait, I have a better idea, why don't we just treat race and ethnicity as equals the way good liberals say the Constitution intended? It is much less complicated and confusing.

Your reliance on events that happend hundreds of years ago as an indication of the policies of the Catholic Church are no better than your insistence that there is Anti-Catholic sentiment in the Gospel. Even if things were interpreted that way at one time, they aren't none now, so why waste the energy?

[presidio9]

Like most popes, he was a kindly disposed person, and the jewish problem vexed him to tears, and into saving a handful here and there--but not enough to persuade him, for example, to condemn the holocaust until it was too late. Note, once again, that he bravely exercised his official moral duty toward the infirm, and stopped their murder--but apparently, I guess, had no such equivalent moral duty toward the jews in the same predicement.

I guess you were unaware that the Catholic Church condemned the Nazis in Holland the result was Catholics being added to the Holocaust. The Catholic Church has not had the military means to protect itself or enforce its opinions in centuries. Whenever I hear people criticizing Pious's supposed inaction, I have to laugh. Exactly what do you think he could have done differently?

[donh]

I have already noted that you have not responded intelligently to any information posted by anyone else.

BS

You ignore or dimiss as irrelevant any and all evidence presented by individuals with superior theological and historical credentials to any you have presented.

I, quite properly, ignore defenses of a position I am not attacking. I have concurred repeatedly that PIUS was a good man in a hard place. All the "superior theological and historical credentials" in the world don't butter no parsnips if you use them to try to ignore, rather than address the point.

In particular, your inability to register the fact that Jewish leaders that actually lived through the Holocoust publicly thanked Pius and expressed enormous gratitude for his aid loudly, publicly, and often, indicates an unwillingness to deal with history that varies from your point of view that borders on disorder.

PIUS XII was responding in distress to the disorder his own churches endemically anti-jewish policies, including some carried out by him regarding the accords, and the dismissal of the previous popes encyclical on the subject, for example, exacerbated. Find the Churches "we remember" document and read it, before you jam your foot into your mouth any harder.

Apparently, you are fixated on some notion of what you would have done if you were Pope; any child can engage in the game of "if I were king...". Given the circumstance of the day, which were a apparently a lot more complex in the real world then in yours, Pius did what was considered quite admirable by the people that he saved. That's not my opinion, that's the opinion of the founders of Isreal, who stated as much many times in public, in private, on the public record, and in their own notes and letters. Got a problem with that? Take it up with Golda..

All the testimonial dinner speeches in the world do not change history, and do not answer the charges being weighed here by me. If you want to address questions of fact, it is a sharper practice to do so with facts, not heresay evidence by avid witnesses that are not relevant to the charges being laid.

You simply repeat the same attack without condidering the weight of what the folks who lived through the Holocoust said.

Yes, that is correct, a blizzard of bulbeous heresay testimony does not outrank the actual evidence before the court.

Apparently you believe that your opinion is simply more important than theirs;

That is correct--my opinion is that we should look at the behaviors and beliefs of our institutes in setting policy over the loud clanging of gongs in the turbulent aftermath of that policy. PIUS did a good job of trying to fix the mess he and his predecessors helped create. The fact that he did a righteous job of trying to fix the mess does not absolve him of helping to create it in the first place.

if the historical record and the opinions of major players that actually lived through the awful events of the day differ from yours, well, they're, wrong you're right, that's that. Hey, it's a free country - you can have any opinion that you want, but that attitude of yours borders on foolishness. Hense the term shrill. Do you prefer adolecent?

That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. In my opinion, you have not answered the charges, and you continue not to answer the charges, in ever more shrill language.

Finally, I don't care how long you have been posting..

Than I suggest you not bring it up again.

Please do not bother responding...OK? Life's too short

Having told everyone off soundly, we retire in a fluster of self-righteous hissy.

[donh]

I guess you were unaware that the Catholic Church condemned the Nazis in Holland the result was Catholics being added to the Holocaust.

And that is supposed to deter the Voice of Jesus?

The Catholic Church has not had the military means to protect itself or enforce its opinions in centuries.

Utterly irrelevant.

Whenever I hear people criticizing Pious's supposed inaction, I have to laugh. Exactly what do you think he could have done differently?

So, are you just paying no attention? He could have honored the previous Pope's interrupted encyclical against church expressions of anti-jewish sentiment. He could have deep-sixed the Accords, and spoken out with the official voice of jesus against the ovens, any time between 1939 and xmas, 1942. He could have ex-communicated anyone working on the "jewish problem". He could have ordered the churches birth and marriage records sent off to an Abbey in Timbucktoo, rather than neatly collated and turned over to the SS. He could have refused the german army his priests. He could have excommunicated the Slovokian church heirarchy...and the list goes on and on and on.

it is, in my humble opinion, not the Pope's job to work in secret for good, and that is the defense being offered here, and it is a shabby one. He is the Vicar of Christ and Voice of Jesus, whether He occupies the Holy See or an Abbey in Timbuctoo. The defense that he was a prisoner of the Reich is pitiful. The defense that his sheep were prisoners of the Reich is pitiful in the face of interventions for other groups. Practically any other group but the jews, apparently.

[presidio9]

So...you find one lapsed catholic and you think to suggest the catholic church is off the hook in this matter? Fat chance. The catholic church is perfectly capable of condemning classes of people due to their actions through excommunication. Hence the popes capacity to excommunicate all communists.

No he asked you to provide a list of all of the Catholic death commanders, and he warned you not to include Hoess, because the man renounced Catholicism (note: a "lapsed Catholic" is one who stops going to Mass, not one who denies the religion and embraces evil). Your failure to do so speaks volumes for your ability to do anymore to google radical Anti-Catholic websites and state as fact the garbage you find there.

[donh]

Fair enough. If Jews can change their vantage point on every discussion from one of enthnicity to one of religion as it suits the argument,

Kindly indicate where I have done so.

I hereby declare that all Catholics are also subject to the Holy See, which is, in fact, a nation. Therefore any attack on Catholicism is also an attack on the Catholic "race" as it were.

Well, interesting, but no cigar. Nationhood does not automatically endow you with ethnicity, even if you hold your breath until you turn blue.

Your reliance on events that happend hundreds of years ago as an indication of the policies of the Catholic Church

Rabid Anti-jewish policies, including the kidnapping of the children of forced converts to christianity went on until almost the end of the 1800s. Virulent anti-jewish tracts were still being produced by the Holy See's official publication newspapers well into the 20th century. Several of the most virulent encyclicals against jews had not been repudiated until well into the 20th century--well past the Holocaust, in fact. The "We Remember" document was not published until the end of the 20th century.

are no better than your insistence that there is Anti-Catholic sentiment in the Gospel.

Mine, and every reputable historians, including those of the Catholic church, and anyone who can read what is written, of course.

Even if things were interpreted that way at one time,

umm...so, is it or isn't it?

they aren't none now, so why waste the energy?

uh...because what happened once can happen again?

[presidio9]

And that is supposed to deter the Voice of Jesus?

You keep using that term. Can you cite Catholic dogma calling the Vatican the "Voice of Jesus?"

Utterly irrelevant.

Completely relevant. Unless you can tell us what the Church could have done to change the course of the Holocaust (aside, of course, from the millions of lives that were save through direct action by the Chruch that is) there is absolutely no point in us having this conversation (unless this is about some special need you have for making your self look ignorant and bigotted).

So, are you just paying no attention? He could have honored the previous Pope's interrupted encyclical against church expressions of anti-jewish sentiment. He could have deep-sixed the Accords, and spoken out with the official voice of jesus against the ovens, any time between 1939 and xmas, 1942. He could have ex-communicated anyone working on the "jewish problem". He could have ordered the churches birth and marriage records sent off to an Abbey in Timbucktoo, rather than neatly collated and turned over to the SS. He could have refused the german army his priests. He could have excommunicated the Slovokian church heirarchy...and the list goes on and on and on.

The Nazis renounced Catholicism and even persecuted it where it wanted to. None of these actions would have made one bit of difference.

[presidio9]

Kindly indicate where I have done so.

Your whole argument is predicated on the idea that it is ok to challenge the Church because it is not a nation. If I criticize the behavior of Isreal am I not attacking your religion? Did not God ordain a Jewish Nation? Well, interesting, but no cigar. Nationhood does not automatically endow you with ethnicity, even if you hold your breath until you turn blue.

False. I know black Jews and white jews. I know Jews with blond hair and blue eyes and Jews that look like Osama bin Ladin. Ethnicity is a liberal construct.

Rabid Anti-jewish policies, including the kidnapping of the children of forced converts to christianity went on until almost the end of the 1800s.

LOL. And these activities were sanctioned by the Catholic Church right? Please cite your source for this nonsense.

[donh]

No he asked you to provide a list of all of the Catholic death commanders, and he warned you not to include Hoess, because the man renounced Catholicism (note: a "lapsed Catholic" is one who stops going to Mass, not one who denies the religion and embraces evil). Your failure to do so speaks volumes for your ability to do anymore to google radical Anti-Catholic websites and state as fact the garbage you find there.

Anti-catholic web sites, eh? You mean like the vatican? Who do you think published the "we remember" document? Since you asked, Let's start the documentation: Let's begin with the church handing birth and death records over: here's Edith Stein, a catholic saint, on the subject:

http://www.anti-racism.supanet.com/rac/stein.htm

An answer to your question:

http://www.angelraybooks.com/books/schiff/0011sc.htm

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/pohl/indict4.htm

http://lastexpression.northwestern.edu/essays/friedland.pdf

speeches by Hitler envoking christian sentiment in support of the jewish solution:

http://jews-for-allah.org/messianic-jews/christianhistorywithjews/speeches.htm

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_hitler.html

Referring to a point about excommunication:

from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Excommunication Latæ Sententiæ:


This doesn't mean what you think it means. Joining a group that has a blanket excommunication against all it's members is an example of Excommunication Latæ Sententiæ. Here is a fragment of an article on excommunication in the Catholic Encyclopedia: 

(b) Excommunications Simply Reserved to the Pope 

Before enumerating those it intends to retain, the Constitution "Apostolicæ Sedis" pronounces a first excommunication of this kind against "those who presume to absolve, without the requisite faculties and under any pretext whatsoever, from excommunications that are specially reserved". This article is directed against those who dare to absolve in bad faith or rashly; a well-founded doubt, however, and even gross ignorance may be pleaded as excuses. Then follow seventeen excommunications simply reserved, declared against the following persons: 

(1) "Those who either publicly or privately teach or defend propositions condemned by the Holy See under pain of excommunication latæ sententiæ; likewise those who teach or maintain as lawful the practice of asking the penitent the name of his or her accomplice, a practice condemned by Benedict XIV in his Constitutions 'Suprema' (7 July, 1745), 'Ubi primum' (2 July, 1746), and 'Ad eradicandam' (28 Sept., 1746)." This article contains two distinct parts. In the first it is not question of all propositions condemned by popes or councils in terms less condemnatory (e.g. rash, offensive, etc.) than the specific stigma heretical (to defend heretical propositions being heresy itself and already declared a chief cause of excommunication, see above), but only those which the popes have specifically forbidden to be maintained under pain of excommunication latæ sententiæ. These propositions are: 
(a) the forty-one errors of Luther condemned by Leo X, 16 May, 1520; 
(b) the seventy-nine theses of Michael Baius condemned 1 Oct., 1567, 29 Jan., 1579, and 16 March, 1641; 


... 

(1) and finally the sixty-five Modernistic propositions condemned by decree of the Holy Office, 3 July, 1907, according to the Motu Proprio of Pius X, 19 November, 1907.

a brief history: http://www.yad-vashem.org.il/download/education/units/crystal_1.pdf

a current update: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/02/Gellately.html

Let's just take a small stroll through the archives ourselves and see what we think of the theory that the genocide of 6 million jews was deeply hidden from view:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4038/pic50.htm

http://www.bxscience.edu/organizations/holocaust/center/posters/poster01.jpg

http://www.bxscience.edu/organizations/holocaust/center/posters/poster03.jpg

http://www.bxscience.edu/organizations/holocaust/center/posters/poster08.jpg

http://www.bxscience.edu/organizations/holocaust/center/posters/poster13.jpg

http://www.bxscience.edu/organizations/holocaust/center/posters/poster14.jpg

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg00/pg5/pg00531.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg00/pg5/pg00524.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg00/pg5/pg00506.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg04/pg3/pg04336.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg41/pg8/pg41856.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg17/pg8/pg17840.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg02/pg0/pg02019.html

http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/gallery/pg33/pg1/pg33166.html

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?ModuleId=10005680
http://www.adl.org/children_holocaust/about_nazi_law.asp

http://www.iht.com/articles/95911.html

http://www.kdhs.org.uk/history/a/as_unit6/goebbels.htm

If you'd like to aquaint yourself with the shear mass of anti-jewish sentiment enshrined in overt nazi policy, this reading list might help:

http://www.chgs.umn.edu/Educational_Resources/Curriculum/Broken_Threads/Resources/resources.html

[donh]

You keep using that term. Can you cite Catholic dogma calling the Vatican the "Voice of Jesus?"

This comes up quite a lot in birth control discussions, and evolution discussions. When the Pope produces a serious document, like an encyclical, or a Bull of Excommunication, he is speaking with the Voice of Jesus, and establishing church policy. When he speaks ex cathedra, he is not. See the Catholic Encyclopedia if you need more details.

[presidio9]

LOL, I asked you to cite your sources for your ridiculous allegations of "kidnapping of the children of forced
converts to christianity went on until almost the end of the 1800s"
by the Catholic Church and you gave me a list of Anti-Christian websites. I checked out the first one out of vauge interest (Check my profile dude, I have
but ONE link -have had it for years).

Your link comes from a website called Christianity The Christian Jew and Religious Discrimination
(secretly it burns you up when one of yours sees the Light. That's what this is all about, isn't it. The website proports that Saint Edith Stein, my favorite saints
BTW, may have been sent to the concentration camps because the church collaborated with the Nazis and named
all members of the Clergy who were of Jewish descent. The site's reasoning? Stein was no longer a member of the Jewish community, so how could the
Nazis have known?

Are you that stupid that you take garbage like this on face value? Hello? Stein? The woman had a Jewish last name and she was public about her conversion.
Most converts in the clergy are very public about their former lives and their conversion. Saint Edith Stein was a very public figure who lectured and
published extensively. She was very outspoken about the Nazis (and for good reason). If you knew anything about the Catholic Church you might know this.

Instead you choose to embrace radicals who are filled with hate. Good for you I guess.

[donh]

LOL. And these activities were sanctioned by the Catholic Church right? Please cite your source for this nonsense.

The Jewish Bulletin News or most any other newpaper, or detailed catholic chruch history book, or the "We Remember" document issued by the Catholic Church. Or you can google up several hundred references in a matter of seconds--it's a well-established part of history.

[presidio9]

This comes up quite a lot in birth control discussions, and evolution discussions. When the Pope produces a serious document, like an encyclical, or a Bull of Excommunication, he is speaking with the Voice of Jesus, and establishing church policy. When he speaks ex cathedra, he is not. See the Catholic Encyclopedia if you need more details.

This is a lie. In fact the Church never speaks the "Voice of Jesus" and does not claim to do so. You fail to provide the requested proof because you realize that you are full of sh-t.

[presidio9]

The Jewish Bulletin News

Sure, there's an ambiguous unbiased source if I ever saw one. Were you too lazy that you could not do the suggested Google search yourself and avoid looking ridiculous?

[donh]

This is a lie. In fact the Church never speaks the "Voice of Jesus" and does not claim to do so. You fail to provide the requested proof because you realize that you are full of sh-t.

Boy, you are really getting desperate to stopper up those ears, aren't you?

"Voice of Jesus" is just a commonly used shorthand for the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Here are the first three theological discussions I found that employ the phrase, you can find hundreds such, including especially in catholic sources, in five seconds on Google.

http://www.catholicherald.com/gospel/97gc/gc970626.htm
http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/popeexam.htm
http://www.circleofprayer.com/catholicism8.html

[donh]

Sure, there's an ambiguous unbiased source if I ever saw one.

http://www.randomhouse.ca/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=0679768173&view=rg Or do you have another theory about the canadian conspiracy to slander the Pope?

Were you too lazy that you could not do the suggested Google search yourself and avoid looking ridiculous?

Actually, I just grabbed the first reference from the google search, which had a couple of hundred hits, which you would expect of a fairly public controversy about the canonization of a Pope who called jews "dogs" and saw nothing untoward about kidnapped jewish children.

[donh]

Your link comes from a website called Christianity The Christian Jew and Religious Discrimination (secretly it burns you up when one of yours sees the Light.

I'm not jewish, and I fail to see what is so disreputable about this reference. Do think it untoward to be christian, or untoward to be opposed to religeous discrimination?

[presidio9]

"Voice of Jesus" is just a commonly used shorthand for the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Here are the first three theological discussions I found that employ the phrase, you can find hundreds such, including especially in catholic sources, in five seconds on Google.

Nope, none of those three links gives the official position of the Catholic Church. You published the opinions of lay Catholics, not the Church. There's a big difference. If I start posting Jews for Jesus links does it follow that Judism holds Christ as the Son Of God? Of course not.

The reason I am contending this minor point is because the Church is quite clear on the fact that the only Voice of Jesus is in the Gospel. So the fact that you are so adamant serves to highlight your ignorance on matters of Catholicism.

Others have debunked your theories about the Pope Pious, including Jews who were there and who were much smarter than you are. I am only continuing this thread to point out what an ass you are. Rather than just admit you are wrong and let it go (we Catholics are big on forgivness BTW -it's our strong suit) you continue to try to fight your way out of this paper bag with your hands tied behind your back. Popes don't speak for God. He speaks for himself. To all of us.

[donh]

The Nazis renounced Catholicism and even persecuted it where it wanted to.

Of course they did nothing of the sort, has the Hitler speeches I have quoted to you make perfectly clear. Hitler was born Catholic, and died catholic. He did not at any point renounce the church, nor the church him.

None of these actions would have made one bit of difference.

That is, of course, obviously not true.