Monthly Archive for May, 2010

Clearing the road of disinformation

Many of you may have heard of Gary Krupp, a Jew from New York who has been knighted (whatever that means) by the Vatican and who has unprecedented access to the pope and documentation there. He leads the Pave the Way Foundation, whose role is ostensibly to clear the memory of WWII’s pope, Pius XII. Toward that end, they are making vast numbers of documents of the Nazi era period available online. They also consistently mislead the layman as to what these documents mean, always seemingly finding new evidence to show that the pope was a great friend of the Jews, that he tirelessly worked to save them behind the scenes (supposedly to avoid making things worse for them), and generally that he saved more Jews than anyone else.

I and many of the world’s foremost historians reject all this. We are not persuaded by his arguments, and think that this only serves the purpose of the Church to canonize Pope Pius, and thus pursue their hope to whitewash history. Recently, Mr. Krupp published an article on the Australian web site “Galus Australis” which allowed comments, so I responded to Mr. Krupp. This quickly became a full fledged epic debate. They brought in another Pave the Way researcher, and another pope apologist historian, Ronald Rychlak. If you would like to follow the discussion, and I would encourage you to do so, arm yourself with some courage and some patience :) , and dive in here:

http://galusaustralis.com/2010/05/3008/jewish-knight-defends-pius-xii

Bookmark and Share

It’s the Jews, again

It’s not the first time a priest tries to elude responsibility and blame the Jews for the sexual abuse scandal engulfing the Church. Giacomo Babini, the emeritus bishop of Grosseto, said (and later denied he had said it) that he believed a “Zionist attack” was behind the criticism, considering how “powerful and refined” the criticism was. The center-left daily newspaper La Republica wrote, without attribution, that certain Catholic circles believed the criticism of the church stemmed from a New York ‘Jewish Lobby.’ In this last volley, Rev. Vytautas Volertas, a Catholic priest from Queens, accused the Jews of controlling the media (again!) and magnifying the importance of little things like pedophilia cases totally out of proportion for their own evil Jewish purposes.

Of course Vytautas was then forced to retract by his bishop, but the damage is done. Members of the clergy repeated this sort of statement ad nauseam for centuries. The faithful never questioned this sort of statement. No, the faithful have faith in their priests, who are mouthpieces of god. The faithful uncritically believe authority figures like priests. This sort of statement is at the heart of the hatred toward Jews that eventually led to the Holocaust not too long ago, and continues to stir strong anti-Jewish emotions on the younger generations who go on into the same vicious circle as their forbears, and then go on to repeat the same canards as this priest is now doing.

Bookmark and Share

It’s not just about semantics

It’s not just about semantics. It’s about not recognizing things for what they are. When Pope Benedict publicly apologizes and admits to church wrongdoings, but he says things like “The greatest persecution of the church doesn’t come from enemies on the outside but is born from the sin within the church” he is trying to change the subject. There is no “persecution” of the church. Sure, the prosecution of petty criminals, rapists, murderers, etc. is a “persecution” of crime. Calling the outrage expressed by the world regarding the multiple cases of pedophilia in the church and the subsequent cover up a “persecution,” implying a certain level of victimhood, is unconscionable. The church is not a victim of persecution. Justice is finally catching up with it.

Bookmark and Share

Are we remembering?

An article on Jewish Review, titled “Conference explores Catholic teachings from Holocaust” discusses the declaration “We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah”. The Catholic Church issued his important document at the behest of Pope Paul in 1998.

The declaration was good intentioned but self-exculpatory. It said things like, “The Shoah was the work of a thoroughly modern neo-pagan regime. Its anti-Semitism had its roots outside of Christianity” and “Sentiments of anti-Judaism in some Christian quarters and the gap which existed between the Church and the Jewish people led to a generalized discrimination . . .” and “[Jews] were looked upon with a certain suspicion and mistrust. In times of crisis such as famine, war, pestilence or social tensions, the Jewish minority was sometimes taken as a scapegoat and became the victim of violence, looting, even massacres”. Pope John Paul II himself said “In the Christian world—I do not say on the part of the Church as such—erroneous and unjust interpretations of the New Testament regarding the Jewish people and their alleged culpability have circulated for too long.” Both the declaration and what the pope said are misleading, because even though I can agree that Nazism was neo-pagan, it was standing on a Christian foundation. Despite the regime’s strongest efforts, the vast majority of the population remained church-going Christians. It’s also simply untrue that the antisemitism of the Nazis had its roots outside Christianity. Nazi antisemitism was secular and racial, but its roots were deeply entrenched in Christian teachings. Also, discrimination against Jews in Christendom did not come from “Sentiments of anti-Judaism” in “some” Christian quarters. It came from official, systematic disparagement from the popes down to parish priests, from Church Fathers to theologians. And it didn’t affect “some” Christians. The hatred was pervasive and generalized. It was the norm, not the exception. When John Paul talked about “the Christian world” but not “the Church as such” he was misleading because he was suggesting the problem was a bunch of rotten apples, and thus exculpated the church and most Catholics. But the reality was the other way around. Some Christians argue that these “rotten apples” were not true Christians, not representative of the general population. This is not correct. If we were to call “Christian” only those who conform to an idealized, Jesus-like individual, then there would be very few Christians in the world.

The “he was not a Christian” type of argument is not restricted to Christianity. The post-WWII Germans said “We didn’t know”, “It wasn’t us” or “It was just a few thousand SS, not the German people”. Well, it’s true that thousands of Germans perpetrated the Holocaust, in the sense of throwing poison gas into a gas chamber or mowing hundreds of people down into a mass grave, but this people did not spontaneously come from nowhere. The perpetrators were able to do what they did because millions of bystanders thought it was the right thing to do.

At the Conference on History 1933-1948 at the University of Portland Rev. John Pawlikowski discussed the role of Catholic theology in  the Holocaust. (You can read Rev. Pawlikowski’s endorsement of Six Million Crucifixions here.) As he said, scholars agree that “The Holocaust succeeded in a climate impacted by Christians for centuries. … [Christianity] provided a seedbed—at least for acquiescence during the attacks on Jews.” He quoted various Catholic leaders who recognized this background, including “We Remember”. But unfortunately Pope Benedict is moving away from the courage shown by other Catholic leaders, like the French bishops who issued the “Declaration of Repentance” in 1997, certainly a more forthright mea culpa than We Remember:

“It is important to admit the primary role, if not direct, then indirect, played by the constantly repeated anti-Jewish stereotypes wrongly perpetuated among Christians in the historical process that led to the Holocaust. . . .

According to theologians it is a well-attested fact that a tradition of anti-Judaism affected Christian doctrine and teachings, theology and apologetics, preaching and liturgy in various degrees and prevailed among Christians throughout the centuries until Vatican Council II. This soil nurtured the poisonous plant of contempt for Jews with its legacy of serious consequences, which until our century, have been difficult to remove. Wounds resulting from this contempt are still open and unhealed.

To the extent that the priests and leaders of the Church for so long allowed the teaching of contempt to develop and fostered in Christian communities a collective religious culture which permanently affected and deformed mentalities, they bear a serious responsibility. One can conclude that even though they condemned the pagan roots of antisemitic theories, they failed to challenge these secular thoughts and attitudes by not clarifying understandings as they should have.

As a result consciences were often lethargic, their capacity considerably weakened in face of the sudden appearance of national socialist antisemitism’s criminal violence, a diabolic and extreme form of contempt for Jews based in categories of race and blood, openly directed at the physical elimination of the Jewish people.”

Bookmark and Share

Finally, a moral cardinal

Cardinal Schoenborn’s accusation is a welcome sign. It was about time some Catholics in the Catholic Church showed not only guts, but more importantly, that they took their vows seriously and showed some semblance of moral authority. Even with the numerous cases of pedophilia coming to light, what we are seeing is surely just the tip of the iceberg. The amount of sexual debauchery in the church over time was widespread. Think of what priests did to children recently, at a time of decreased church power and control, with mass media, with a 24/7 news cycle, and with open opponents to the church looking for vulnerabilities. Now go back a few centuries to a time of absolute church control and power, no media, no one to complain to, no one to restrain them, no one to defend you, abject ignorance and poverty everywhere, and with the Inquisition on their side to top it off. Think about what priests, nuns, monks, bishops, you name it, did back then. I hope this is the first of many courageous clerics who will speak up, and the beginning of the end of a corrupt organization who—unbelievably—claims to be the self-avowed protector of morals.

Bookmark and Share