[jscd3]

As noted previously, you are ignoring and not answering what you don't want to see. Did you read a single one of the very detailed and exhaustive listings in the replies above for anything other than a line to copy for your non-response responses? To you, naming an adequately long list of excommunications of people who had already rejected Catholocism (and were killing lots of Catholics by the way - wait, Pius didn't excommunicate the SS leaders despite the fact that they were ordering the killing of Priests; does that mean that Pius was anti-Catholic as well?) is more important than the risking of ones life saving Jews by the thousands. Oh, and I guess the Grand Rabbi of Rome just thought Eugenio was a cool name to change to. Oh that's right, you are not overwhelmed by this. My, what significance your opinion must carry in the world!

Any reasonable person reading these threads from beginning to end and reading the links provided to Pius's historical defenders (who, I'm sure, do not overwhelm you, since, after all, they are just leaders of countries, Orthodox Rabbis, nobody as well read as you) will peg you as a propogandist, bigot, or worse. The point is made, you have labled yourself, and no more time need be wasted. Good day sir.

[donh]

As noted previously, you are ignoring and not answering what you don't want to see. Did you read a single one of the very detailed and exhaustive listings in the replies above for anything other than a line to copy for your non-response responses?

Has anyone answered my original, rather specific as to detail, points? Has anyone denied that Pius signed the accords? That priests blessed with holy sacrament the butchers of the SS? That the church handed over records? That the church could have excommunicated participants in the holocaust, but chose not to? Is there some historian that denies any of this, or even thinks it's obscure?

Why am I obligated to wrestle with the usual piles of flack that are thrown up around Pius the XII, when no one feels obligated to wrestle with the essential issue: that, whatever the good works and motive of Pius XII, 1400 years of official doctrine prevented him from seeing that he could do just as well for the jews, as, say, for the converts, or the cripples, in hauntingly similar circumstances.

Boldly saving a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand, out of 6 million might impress you and the Rabbi of Rome, once the door's been open and the wolf let in, but it doesn't absolve you of helping to hold the door open for 1400 years previously. Or, being more specific, of being the current embodiment of that failure during xmas of 1942. The first time, loquacious intimations to the contrary offered here notwithstanding, that the Pope (the signer of the accords which first lent Hitler the legitimacy of sanction by another state, I'll remind you) was willing to seriously throw the formal weight of Jesus behind his condemnations of Hitler--long after the wolf had eaten most of the sheep.

I am, by the way, quite used to dealing with boatloads of flack on the subject of Pius doing good works for jews, when I try to bring this up. Pius was a good man, and he helped some jews. He was not calloused, cowardly or hypocritical or an anti-semite, but he was an accurate embodiment of his churches very long standing overt dotrinal inability, which I have detailed here, to see jews as worthy of the same moral regard as christians. Which is why, for whatever worthy acts he might have performed, he chose to be a firefighter, instead of a fire inspection warden to prevent the fires in the first place.