Catholic Bishop denies Holocaust

[Coggeh]

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=CsrPt-enplw

:glare:

[Holden Caulfield]

he says

"if anti-semitism is bad...."

[Invincible Summer]

It's just so irrational to say that the "vanishing" of 6 million Jews is a lie.

I can't understand it.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Wow! What a loser! There's evidence that the holocaust happened. The numbers wouldn't be over-eggerated either. Somebody Lying about something like that would have to have a sick mind.

[Sasha]

today in the news; anti-semite catholic bishop is without an problem reinstated by the ex-hitlerjugend pope.
tomorow; bears shit in the woods

[Wanted Man]

today in the news; anti-semite catholic bishop is without an problem reinstated by the ex-hitlerjugend pope.
tomorow; bears shit in the woods
:laugh: Where his holiness does his business, is his business!

While the church sometimes puts up a friendly face, this is really just another day at the office. Anti-semitism is part and parcel in the reactionary hierarchy, just like homophobia and sexism. From the deicide story, through the support for fascism worldwide, etc.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

What a ****.

[Rjevan]

So typical for the pope and the catholic church. Say that the church needs to be modernized and should be more open and you will be excommunicated (and you should be glad that the inquisition doesn't exist anymore). Say that there was probably no holocaust and nothing will happen.

[gorillafuck]

:laugh: Where his holiness does his business, is his business!

While the church sometimes puts up a friendly face, this is really just another day at the office. Anti-semitism is part and parcel in the reactionary hierarchy, just like homophobia and sexism. From the deicide story, through the support for fascism worldwide, etc.
What's that?

[Invincible Summer]

Did someone say... Deicide?

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=IJkMrl4AG8w

[hugsandmarxism]

Miserable fuck.

[StalinFanboy]

I wish deicide was cool :(

[Le Libérer]

Well seeing Hitler had Pope Pius XII in his back pocket, I dont find this surprising at all. Pope Pius XII made it possible for Hilter to achieve total power in Germany, he maintained total silence as the Nazi's destoyed millions of Jews. Had Pius XII spoken up and condemned Hitler, millions of lives would have been saved. So its not surprising a Catholic Bishop would apologize by saying it didnt happen.

[Wanted Man]

What's that?
The idea that the jews carry collective blame for the death of Jesus. That's where the slur "Christ-killer" comes from.

Especially after WWII, the church has repeatedly denounced "racial" anti-semitism formally. But there was still a lot of it on a "religious" level. Prayers for the "blind", "perfidious" jews, etc. A lot of this has only been abolished over the last 50 years, and is clearly still very present on an informal level.

[kam11]

Pope Pius XII made it possible for Hilter to achieve total power in Germany, he maintained total silence as the Nazi's destoyed millions of Jews. Had Pius XII spoken up and condemned Hitler, millions of lives would have been saved. So its not surprising a Catholic Bishop would apologize by saying it didnt happen.

[brigadista]

Having been forced to attend a convent school for 13years I learnt that one day the "truth" can be one thing and another day it can be completely different.

Priests would come to our school when we were 7 years of age and show us scary pictures of hell. We were told a saint had brought these pictures back from hell- they were real.

I find it hard to take these priests seriously to be honest, although unfortunately their influence and the length of their reach is frightening...

[Woland]

Of course this is despicable, but also sad. Even though the Vatican was central to Nazi Germany's success through the Reichskonkordat, a treaty (the first treaty of Nazi Germany with an another country) between the Catholic church and the state, which gave the country a certain degree of international acceptance, stopping possible intervention from the Allied countries when the Versailles peace treaty was repeatedly broken, one has to remember that many Catholic priests also died in the Holocaust, the bible researchers, for obvious reasons. The guy is a moron.

[Invader Zim]

Well seeing Hitler had Pope Pius XII in his back pocket, I dont find this surprising at all. Pope Pius XII made it possible for Hilter to achieve total power in Germany, he maintained total silence as the Nazi's destoyed millions of Jews. Had Pius XII spoken up and condemned Hitler, millions of lives would have been saved. So its not surprising a Catholic Bishop would apologize by saying it didnt happen.

The assumption here being that Pius was actually aware of the full scale of the holocaust; which is extremely unlikely as the full extent of the nazi attrocities were only discovered towards the end of, and after, the war. Secondly it is an assumption that if he had spoken out Nazi policy, to those within its reach, would have changed. It certainly didn't change after various politicians and clergy (including the Pope) publically denounced known attrocities. And finally, when the Nazis murdered 15,000 Poles in 1940, Pius publically stated: -

"The horror and inexcusable excesses committed on a helpless and a homeless people have been established by the unimpeachable testimony of eye-witnesses."

There are of course other examples one could draw upon. But really, while one can justifiably say that Pius could have, and should have, done more, the claim that he could have prevented the holocaust with a few choice words is nothing more than an assumption. It is also an assumption which flies in the face of the facts.

[TC]

The catholic church is one of the most reactionary organizations in the world...this isn't like a big thing compared to the fact that they're currently pursuing an indirect genocide in Africa by way of their defacto pro-HIV-transmission policy.

[Trystan]

WTF . . . an anti-Semite in the Catholic Church? What next?!:rolleyes:

They might have a YouTube account now, but they're basically the same as they've always been. Just less powerful.

[Rjevan]

According to the "Spiegel" Bishop Williamson says he won't revoke. He first has to "go through the historical evidence". If he finds evidence he will revoke, but "that will take time."
Is this guy really such an ignorant bastard or is he just pretending to be? :rolleyes:

[Le Libérer]

The assumption here being that Pius was actually aware of the full scale of the holocaust; which is extremely unlikely as the full extent of the nazi attrocities were only discovered towards the end of, and after, the war. Secondly it is an assumption that if he had spoken out Nazi policy, to those within its reach, would have changed. It certainly didn't change after various politicians and clergy (including the Pope) publically denounced known attrocities. And finally, when the Nazis murdered 15,000 Poles in 1940, Pius publically stated: -

"The horror and inexcusable excesses committed on a helpless and a homeless people have been established by the unimpeachable testimony of eye-witnesses."

There are of course other examples one could draw upon. But really, while one can justifiably say that Pius could have, and should have, done more, the claim that he could have prevented the holocaust with a few choice words is nothing more than an assumption. It is also an assumption which flies in the face of the facts. According to the Catholic Church biographer, James Cornwell, in his book, Constantine's Sword
"Eugenio Pacelli, then the Vatican's all-powerful secretary of state, made it possible for Adolf Hitler to achieve total power in Germany and, as Pope Pius XII, went on to appease him, maintaining inexplicable public silence as the Nazis destroyed and massacred millions of European Jews before and during World War II. In other words, the pro-Germany and "anti-Judaic" Pacelli-who had spent 13 years in Munich and Berlin as papal nuncio - bears, according to this most important book, awesome personal responsibility for the evil of Hitler ... and the Holocaust. Had Pius XII publicly condemned Hitler's acts - and even top Germany military commanders in Italy secretly urged him to do so toward the end of the war - many millions of lives might have been saved. The conclusions and revelations presented by John Cornwell in his meticulously researched Hitler's Pope, many of them based on materials from heretofore closed Vatican, Italians, German, British, and French archives and other unimpeachable sources, leave no doubt that Eugenio Pacelli was the Fuëhrer's best imaginable ally. So, the Pope knew more than he later admitted to knowing.
Quote taken from here (http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99oct/9910pope.htm).

[Sasha]

when i grew up (in jewish/ former resistance) family, my gran used to say; "always be nice and polite to catholics but never trust them one bit, because they will betray you to the germans in a instant" :rolleyes:

[Glenn Beck]

The catholic church is one of the most reactionary organizations in the world...this isn't like a big thing compared to the fact that they're currently pursuing an indirect genocide in Africa by way of their defacto pro-HIV-transmission policy.

For anyone who thinks this is an exaggeration what else would you call a campaign that hosts mass condom bonfires in public squares in countries where there aren't even enough condoms distributed for every adult male in the country to have sex three times in a year?

[Invader Zim]

According to the Catholic Church biographer, James Cornwell, in his book, Constantine's Sword The conclusions and revelations presented by John Cornwell in his meticulously researched Hitler's Pope, many of them based on materials from heretofore closed Vatican, Italians, German, British, and French archives and other unimpeachable sources, leave no doubt that Eugenio Pacelli was the Fuëhrer's best imaginable ally. So, the Pope knew more than he later admitted to knowing.
Quote taken from here (http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99oct/9910pope.htm).

Two points worth raising here, James Carroll (not Cornwell) is not a historian and many specialists think his work is poor, as do many of John Cornwell's work. Indeed, the latter has been the subject of considerable criticism because his work is extremely poorly researched and is littered with errors, misinterpretations and obvious bias to the point that the author even admitted, in retrospect, that in key areas he was mistaken (http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_PQSTTPS).

Secondly, to claim that a single individual holds, especially one outside of the Nazi upper echelons, responcibility for the holocaust is ludicrous. ("Pacelli ... bears awesome personal responsibility for the evil of Hitler ... and the Holocaust.") Put bluntly that is a load of individualistic bollocks of the worst variety; 'great man' history. That kind of drivel is not only inane and lazy, but worse it is intellectually bankrupt and has been considered so for at least half a century.

And to be honest, I don't want to here what two journalists employing shoddy arguments have to say, they aren't here answer my questions: I want to hear what you think. So, please, justify the assumption that had the Pope spoken out the Nazi's would have suddenly had a change of heart, despite the fact that many attrocities had already been widely reported.

[Le Libérer]

I did post what I thought in my original post in this thread.

Never did I say I thought the whole of the Nazi movements progress could have been stopped by one man, in this case the Pope.

I was using quotes to show there has been deep discussion on the popes involvement in the Nazi movement as a priest and its probable not an assumption on my part) had he not been involved and had taken a different stance, publically, lives could have been saved.

In your reference to Cromwell back tracking by referencing this article
As he admits, “Hitler's Pope” (1999), his biography of Pope Pius XII, lacked balance. “I would now argue,” he says, “in the light of the debates and evidence following ‘Hitler's Pope', that Pius XII had so little scope of action that it is impossible to judge the motives for his silence during the war, while Rome was under the heel of Mussolini and later occupied by the Germans.” … That quotes just proves what I have been saying. The Pope was incrediably silent at a time he shouldnt have been. I would argue he did so, for selfish reasons and to have spoken out instead could have had a major impact.

Edit: Also I would like to add, the above quote was taken from, The Economist, and the full article which can only be read by subscribers was about Johnny Paul 2, and actually gives praises to Cornwells writings.
In the article you quoted above, in an attempt to discredit him,
JOHN CORNWELL, author of a new life of Pope John Paul II, would have made a fine devil's advocate when the pope's name is one day advanced for sainthood. Unfortunately, he will not be chosen, for John Paul II himself, some two decades ago, scrapped the custom of having a devout Catholic question the virtues of a candidate for beatification or canonisation.In summary of that article it says.
Like John Paul II, members of the Curia, the Vatican bureaucracy, strive to “think in centuries”. They believe that the Catholic church will still be around when Communism and Nazism are footnotes in history books and when George Bush and Tariq Aziz and even John Paul II are forgotten. They accept reform, but usually only after thinking about it long and hard. Mr Cornwell's despair is premature.Fortunately I have access to the full articles on the Economist and am able to read the full articles in context.

[Invader Zim]

I did post what I thought in my original post in this thread.

Never did I say I thought the whole of the Nazi movements progress could have been stopped by one man, in this case the Pope.

I was quoting from Carroll and Cromwell to show there has been deep discussion on the popes involvement in the Nazi movement as a priest and its probable not an assumption )on my part) had he not been involved and had taken a different stance, publically, lives could have been saved.

What you said was that the Pope allowed Hitler to achive not only complete control over Germany and that if he had spoken out "millions of lives would have been saved". You have yet to justify that ubsurd piece of 'great man' history. All you have done is post the equally dubious claims of two journalists moon-lighting (poorly) as historians. And the extreme 'great man' history you were touting, that a single man's (outside of the Nazi heirarchy) words alone were the difference between life and death for millions, is what I am criticising here. I use the term 'were' because I see you also have had a significant, though unacknowledged, change of position; moving from the certainty of 'would' ("'would' have saved millions") to the far more sensible position of 'could' ("lives 'could' have been saved"), and the quanity has changed from 'millions' to simply 'lives'.

[Le Libérer]

What you said was that the Pope allowed Hitler to achive not only complete control over Germany and that if he had spoken out "millions of lives would have been saved". You have yet to justify that ubsurd piece of 'great man' history. All you have done is post the equally dubious claims of two journalists moon-lighting (poorly) as historians. And the extreme 'great man' history you were touting, that a single man's (outside of the Nazi heirarchy) words alone were the difference between life and death for millions, is what I am criticising here. I use the term 'were' because I see you also have had a significant, though unacknowledged, change of position; moving from the certainty of 'would' ("'would' have saved millions") to the far more sensible position of 'could' ("lives 'could' have been saved"), and the quanity has changed from 'millions' to simply 'lives'.
My position hasnt changed at all.
I have stated my beliefs on this matter, they speak for themselves. After re-reading the whole thread, you are the only one in this thread who has chosen to disagree with what I have written. Sorry you dont agree. But at this point, I suggest you agree to disagree and move on.

Oh and thanks for taking the above article out of context to prove your point. I had forgotten I had full access to the Economist. :)

[Invader Zim]

My position hasnt changed at all.

Then why the obvious change in language? Furthermore, why deny it when all one has to do is look at your post and see an obvious change of tack?

"millions of lives would have been saved"

to

"lives could have been saved"

That is a complete transformation of your position.


After re-reading the whole thread, you are the only one in this thread who has chosen to disagree with what I have written.Argumentum ad populum; and simply because a claim hasn't been contradicted doesn't make it true. And it is hardly a glowing reflection on a board of leftists that no-one opposes an obvious and extreme example of 'great man' history.


Oh and thanks for taking the above article out of context to prove your point.Well seeing as you, unlike me, subscribe to The Economist I will have to take your word for it. But as far as i can see from the relevent quote in the preview of the article, the author has accepted that his primary line of argument was in need of serious revision; and that speaks volumes of the quality of his work.

[Dharma]

Further proof that the church is an oppressing institution.

edit as of Feb 9th: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/10/holocaust-denial-bishop-sacked

He lost his job