Thursday, July 19, 2012

"Too much Catholicism is detrimental to a nation's fiscal health"

Before the ubiquitous one-man inquisition pounces upon His Grace with allegations of 'bigotry', this article is reproduced in its entirety from the BBC website. It takes a theme long-advanced by this blog - that the EU 'project' is far deeper than mere politics and economics. It is good that some in the mainstream media are finally catching up:


Discussion among eurozone leaders about the future of their single currency has become an increasingly divisive affair. On the surface, religion has nothing to do with it - but could Protestant and Catholic leaders have deep-seated instincts that lead them to pull the eurozone in different directions, until it breaks?

Following the last European summit in Brussels there was much talk of defeat for Chancellor Merkel by what was described as a "new Latin Alliance" of Italy and Spain backed by France.

Many Germans protested that too much had been conceded by their government - and it might not be too far-fetched to see this as just the latest Protestant criticism of the Latin approach to matters monetary, which has deep roots in German culture, shaped by religious belief.

Churchgoing has been in decline in Germany as elsewhere as secularisation has spread, but religious ideas still shape the way Germans talk and think about money. The German word for debt - schuld - is the same as the word for "guilt" or "sin".

Talk of thrift and responsible budgeting comes instinctively to Angela Merkel, daughter of a Protestant pastor.

Merkel's frequent assertion that "there is no alternative" to austerity policies (while reminiscent to Britons of Margaret Thatcher) has been likened to the famous stubborn statement by German Reformation leader Martin Luther: "Here I stand. I can do no other".

The new German president, Joachim Gauck, who might play an important role in constitutional arguments about the single currency, is also from the Protestant fold - he is a former Lutheran pastor.

The country's population is fairly evenly divided between Protestants and Catholics - as well as those of other faiths, or none - and Merkel's and Gauck's ascent symbolises changes in Germany since reunification in 1990.

Both lived in East Germany, a historically Protestant territory, while West Germany had several influential Catholic political leaders, who, in earlier post-war decades, had joined in broad Catholic enthusiasm for European integration.

Former West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, a Rhineland Catholic highly distrustful of Protestant Prussian traditions to the German east, led West Germany into the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957.

This created the European Economic Community, forerunner of today's EU. And there was a clear geographical fit between the six countries which signed and the territory of Charlemagne's Holy Roman Empire.

Charlemagne, claimed by modern European unifiers as a kind of patron saint, had created a new currency for his territories - the livre carolienne.

Helmut Kohl, who took Germany into economic and monetary union in the 1990s, was another Catholic Rhinelander constantly visiting cathedrals and speaking of the ancient spiritual roots of a united Europe.

There was much talk of the Germans sacrificing their beloved Deutsche Mark currency "on the altar of European unity".

But German reunification at that time also meant the capital moving back to Berlin, away from closer Catholic connections felt in the west and south of the country.

And the eurozone crisis has intensified a deep-rooted debate about whether Germans, shaped by Protestantism, are fundamentally different from Catholic "Latin" countries and their allies.
German banking has, from medieval times, been more cautious than that in Italy and Spain. And sceptical Germans looking at the history of previous currency union troubles point to the 19th Century Latin Currency Union.

Germany, unifying under Prussian leadership through its own customs union, did not join. The Latin Union struggled to survive after a number of countries, notably the Papal States, minted and printed more money than they were meant to.

Politicians or states undermining money have diabolical overtones for angst-filled Germans.


In Goethe's Faust, one of the most famous works in German culture, Mephistopheles persuades the Holy Roman Emperor to issue a new paper currency - despite one of his advisers warning that this is the counsel of Satan.

Order duly breaks down as the Emperors' subjects go on a binge bearing no relation to their real wealth.

Weimar Republic hyperinflation in the early 1920s - when "money went mad" and all moral as well as economic order was seen as collapsing - seemed a diabolical vision made real.

Some in Germany suggest today's eurozone would be better dividing, with some kind of Latin Union on one side, and on the other a German-led group of like-minded countries including perhaps the (Calvinist) Dutch and the (Lutheran) Finns.

The former head of the German industry association, Hans-Olaf Henkel, has said that "the euro is dividing Europe".

He wants the Germans, Dutch and Finns to "seize the initiative and leave the euro", creating a separate northern euro.

A new split along ancient lines? The government in Berlin has begun to plan for what it sees as a hugely significant anniversary in 2017 - 500 years since Luther began The Reformation.

He was protesting against indulgences, a controversial attempt by the Papacy to solve its fiscal problems by persuading Europeans to buy absolution from their sins.

One German commentator, Stephan Richter, has suggested mischievously that the eurozone's problems would have been prevented if only Luther had been one of the negotiators of the Maastricht treaty, deciding which countries could join the euro.

"'Read my lips: No unreformed Catholic countries,' he would have chanted. The euro, as a result, would have been far more cohesive," says Richter.

Richter is himself a Catholic, but an admirer of thrifty economics. "Too much Catholicism" he suggests, "is detrimental to a nation's fiscal health, even today in the 21st Century".

But he believes some historically Catholic countries, such as Austria and Poland, may have come under more Germanic influence due to their geographical proximity. They are "Catholics perhaps, but with a healthy dose of fiscal Protestantism," he reasons.

Commemorations in 2017 will doubtless try to stress that Reformation divisions between Protestants and other reformers and Catholicism were not too great.

But the usually thrifty government under Chancellor Merkel has already promised 35 million euros to mark this birth of Protestantism.

And where will the eurozone be in 2017?

Still intact? Or coming to terms with a new historic divide between the Latins and the preachers of Protestant thrift?

151 Comments:

Blogger Tom Paine said...

The divisions of the Reformation return? Interesting take on the subject. And on a similar tack, what after all is carbon trading but the selling of indulgences?

19 July 2012 at 09:12  
Blogger Tom Paine said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

19 July 2012 at 09:14  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Before the ubiquitous one-man inquisition pounces upon His Grace with allegations of 'bigotry'

I say Dodo, one does believe he means you !

Train to catch chaps, until later...

19 July 2012 at 10:17  
Blogger Albert said...

"Too much Catholicism" he suggests, "is detrimental to a nation's fiscal health, even today in the 21st Century".

I think the Venetians might have something to say about that! But the counter evidence is present in the article: Southern Germany Austria etc - these have to be crow-barred into being honorary Protestants. What about Northern Italy, which has a quite different economic culture from the South.

But this is the best bit:

German banking has, from medieval times, been more cautious than that in Italy and Spain.

Now if one follows the link to the original article, we find the following:

Viewed from the opposite perspective, look at the countries that never managed to overcome the Catholic Church's cancerous practice at the time of demanding indulgences (money donated to the church in exchange for forgiveness of one's sins).

Except that these abusive practices were far more prevalent in the Germanic North (where there was more banking caution) than in the South like Italy and Spain.

The whole theory fails when judged historically.

19 July 2012 at 10:26  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

Years ago, I heard Bernard Connolly, a former EU monetary specialist and author of "The Rotten Heart of Europe", berating an audience of British Conservatives for thinking that they were the same as continental Christian Democrats. "The difference" he said "is Vatican social teaching" and he added "I'm a Roman Catholic".

Now, of course, the German Christian Democrats with their overwhelmingly Catholic Bavarian allies of the Christian Social Union accommodate both traditions. Before the party imploded, the Christian Democrats of Italy were Roman Catholic and, in origin, a thinly galvanised group of former fascists, made respectable by the papal agent, Alcide de Gasperi, so that democracy of a sort could appear to emerge after the war.
Adenauer appointed many people to his administration "with a brown past - even a dark brown past " as he put it - that is, former Nazis.

So it is small wonder that the inherited continental attitudes to fiscal and monetary matters are complicated, tangled and sometimes contradictory. It would be unwise however to underestimate the sheer "Will to Power" of the EU hierarchy both in the Brussels Commission and the governments of member states. I think the euro will be defended to the very last - even to the bunker.

19 July 2012 at 10:31  
Blogger Albert said...

It's interesting reading Edward's post. The two ex-Nazis "dark brown past" were both Protestants. From Edward's post I would have assumed they were both Catholics.

Christian Democrats of Italy were Roman Catholic and, in origin, a thinly galvanised group of former fascists

So here we have a Catholic re-branding of fascists. Except that the party was suppressed by the fascists and when it was resurrected, comprised people of all political hues. At the time, it was probably pretty hard to avoid having ex-fascists at some level. Look at how the Americans messed up in Iraq by refusing to work with anyone from the old regime. Contrast Mountbatten's use of Japanese soldiers after the war to maintain order as there was no one else.

It would be unwise however to underestimate the sheer "Will to Power" of the EU hierarchy

So to conclude: Catholicism is responsible for the fascism, the Nazism (even when it was Protestant Nazism and the atheistic Nietzschean ideology inherent in the EU.

19 July 2012 at 10:50  
Blogger Demetrius said...

Amen, I refer you to the 1891 Rerum Novarum (Wikipedia).

19 July 2012 at 11:26  
Blogger bluedog said...

His Grace asks, 'Or coming to terms with a new historic divide between the Latins and the preachers of Protestant thrift?'

Taken to its logical conclusion, this question offers a recipe for the partition of Germany along sectarian lines.

Which begs a further question.

How long will the second Thirty Years War last?

The reincarnation of Cardinal Richelieu has yet to be sighted, but the French would not complain if once again there were two, or even three or four, Germanies.

19 July 2012 at 11:53  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

I read this on the BBC last night.

Sheer bloody nonsense. Geography - or even climate - presents a far more compelling reason for economic disparity, and has the advantage of being backed up by actual research.

By this logic, one might well observe that the countries where secularism and atheism are highest are also the most economically prosperous. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to claim just that.

Problem is: simply observing a correspondence between one factor and a trend is not the same as establishing causality.

This is typical of the BBC: the graph in particular is an old favourite of theirs to dress up shoddy or non-existent research with the fishnet-stockings of "science". From them, I would expect just such a half-baked serving of GCSE Sociology.

I'll just assume that His Grace has done one of his usual "ironic" posts wherein we are being invited to critique the crassness of what is being opined.

19 July 2012 at 12:32  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

The current article has the traditional Protestant hatred of Catholicism. It has always amazed me that even those who agree with Catholicism on issues of divorce, abortion, in vitrio fertilization etc still revert to the old discriminations and prefer to associate with denominations which espouse heretical doctrines such as pre-destination or divorce and remarriage.

When we look back at 500 years of Protestantism we see historically that much more cruelty and discrimination was perpetrated by Protestants against Catholics than vice versa. Yes, there were faults on both sides but usually we hear about the inquisition but no mention of Oliver Cromwell’s attempt at genocide or the terror under Henry VIII or Elizabeth I which all began because Henry wanted to change the meaning of Christian marriage. We seem to have similar problems in current Protestant times. Looking at the comments about the Euro one would think that Catholics are all in favour of the Euro and Protestants against. As is usual with this types of article we get no evidence and a smattering of inaccurate history but false statement dressed up as fact. As far as I understand it the current fractional banking practices where a bank is allowed to loan 10 times the value of what it holds in gold was legitimized under Protestant administrations and so the scourge of inflation is a Protestant invention. I think a discussion about banking practices and what would have been allowed if the Reformation had never happened would be worth having. I suspect that the usury we see in the current day would not have arisen.

19 July 2012 at 13:07  
Blogger Galant said...

Wickedness is wickedness is wickedness. It always amazes me how nations or regions are broken down into Roman Catholic vs. Protestant and then talk about which is the more violent. As far as I'm aware, despite significant differences, the same Jesus Christ would have despised the violence of either side. I have no right to throw any stones, but the truth of the matter is the violence done in the name of Christ is wrong. Always has been, always will be. There is no such thing as a Catholic, Christian, or Protestant nation. It cannot exist because faith is a matter of the individual and cannot be created or enforced by law. If people wish to talk of values for governing economics, it would be far more productive that they do just that.

19 July 2012 at 13:23  
Blogger Albert said...

Galant, you are absolutely right about pointing the finger of violence. The trouble is, when the finger of violence has been pointed from one side to the other, as if to say Catholics are responsible for all sorts of ills, how else can a Catholic respond but point out that this cannot be the case, because Protestants are responsible for a similar range of ills also.

The way in which articles like this one and some of the comments here intend to make Catholicism responsible for so many things that are wrong (has anyone noticed that the biggest debt country - Greece - is vehemently anti-Catholic) reminds me of the way in which, in the past, Jews were blamed for everything.

It says a great deal about Cranmer that he was prepared to reproduce such a shoddy piece of historical "scholarship". (I suspect he only did it to get a response.)

19 July 2012 at 13:50  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Mr Cranmer said ...

"Before the ubiquitous one-man inquisition pounces upon His Grace with allegations of 'bigotry', this article is reproduced in its entirety from the BBC website."

Is this the same BBC you hold in such high regard? The fount of all knowledge and understanding? The source of wisdom and impartiality?

"Bigotry" is not the word I'd choose for posting this article.

Catholicism has a different set of social teachings to Protestantism based on different interpretations of the Gospel. It sees economic relationships differently too. As for high level fiscal policies go, apart from agreeing one must live within one means and, given the scarcity of resources, a nation must prioritise expenditure, I'm not sure it has a position.

I think the kindest comment about the article has been made by Albert:

"It says a great deal about Cranmer that he was prepared to reproduce such a shoddy piece of historical "scholarship"."

Now we just need to wait on the usual troupe who see the EU as a deliberate satanic plot of the Vatican's put in place in readiness to welcome the antichrist. Now that is bigotry.

19 July 2012 at 14:26  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Your Grace

"Before the ubiquitous one-man inquisition pounces upon His Grace with allegations of 'bigotry', this article is reproduced in its entirety from the BBC website."..

Should this have read;

"Too much Catholicism is detrimental to an extinct bird's mental health"

See above!

E S Blofeld

ps

You will not have too long to wait as he gets his alter persona's comments off his chest first, before clumsily rushing in...Ooh too late as he charges into the thread squeaking and squawking, feathers flying everywhere.

19 July 2012 at 14:29  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

19 July 2012 at 14:46  
Blogger Albert said...

Dodo,

Is this the same BBC you hold in such high regard? The fount of all knowledge and understanding? The source of wisdom and impartiality?

Well said. Why didn't Cranmer just post this article from the BBC. It seems rather more fairly to express the position of American Anglicans. What's not to like?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18792315

19 July 2012 at 14:47  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

"Before the ubiquitous one-man inquisition pounces upon His Grace with allegations of 'bigotry', "

Yes where is Dodo today?

19 July 2012 at 14:47  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Shacklefree,

Inflation is nothing to do with Protestantism, it is simply basic economic theory that too much currency circulating and being pumped into an economy reduces the purchasing power of that currency and with roughly the same amount of goods and commodities being produced, will cause those goods to rise in price.

Also research what happened to Europe during the 16th Century, when Spain began shipping over Gold and Silver from the Americas - a thing called inflation!

One final thought is that any government of any political or religious outlook had to borrow to pay for the various wars fought from the 1500s to the 1800s. Catholic France is a good example of this, as much as Protestant Britain.

19 July 2012 at 14:56  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Whilst the article is simplistic in its analysis and relies too heavily on one central theme,I personally cannot see why this article is bigoted against Catholics- can anyone explain?

19 July 2012 at 15:09  
Blogger Albert said...

Paul,

Well let's begin with the fact that it says "Too much Catholicism is detrimental to a nation's fiscal health". What is the basis of this comment? As you say it is

simplistic in its analysis

Do you need more? Then look at how terrible the argument actually is:

Viewed from the opposite perspective, look at the countries that never managed to overcome the Catholic Church's cancerous practice at the time of demanding indulgences (money donated to the church in exchange for forgiveness of one's sins). Too much Catholicism, or so it seems, is detrimental to a nation's fiscal health, even today in the 21st century. Indulgences then — and an inability to properly manage public finances now.

Seriously? The idea is that somehow there is a cause and effect between a country's policy on indulgences and modern economic outlook.

Apart from all the counter examples, the fact is, the selling of indulgences was always a bigger problem in Germany than in the South. Therefore, if the argument is to be made that there is a causal connection between indulgences and modern economic policy, it would be that the widespread selling of indulgences is good for modern economic policy. An argument which is so bad that it exposes the argument itself is at fault - as well as the evidence.

How can intelligent people fall for such stupid reasoning? Does that answer the question?

19 July 2012 at 15:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Mr Twigg

So good to have you back! Perhaps before asking where I am you should read the preceeding posts. Always helps to know other opinions before posting your own, what?

And, in a spirit of generosity, I merely commented:

""Bigotry" is not the word I'd choose for posting this article."

As for the article itself, you've said its simplistic and Albert has shown it to be inaccurate.

One final observation, is the plan to spend £35m in Germany on the 500th anniversary of Luther's 'protest' something he'd agree with himself in these dire times? Seems an awful amount of money to me.

19 July 2012 at 16:28  
Blogger John Magee said...

His Grace forgets the Hanseatic League which dominated trade along the coast of Northern Europe from the 1100's thru the 1600's. Other than he Orthodox Christian city of Novogorod located in Russia,the faith of the other Hanseatic cities during most of that era was Roman Catholic. These wealthy Catholic Hansa cities; Bruges, Lubeck, Danzig, Visby, and others built beautiful cities and filled them with magnificent cathedrals and churches filled with art, sculpture, and stained glass windows. For over four hundred years the Hanseatic League cities literally reeked of prosperity in their appearance. Sadly most of them fell to the Reformation and then declined in wealth and influence. Today in 2012 let's not forget the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg which is 90% Roman Catholic is also the richest country in the EU. It's fair to take swipes at southern Europe's economic woes today but we all must be greatful for the "lazy" Latin's who gave us our cultural backbone since the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans. We are using the Latin alphabet to post our messages here and not runic inscriptions. Sixty percent or more of the words in the English language are based on Latin or Greek roots... St Paul's Cathedral in London is a smaller copy of St Peter's in Rome.

19 July 2012 at 17:19  
Blogger Galant said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

19 July 2012 at 17:25  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

19 July 2012 at 17:32  
Blogger Galant said...

'Retail-Therapy'. With an economy based on 'invisi-money' and a general population who believe that government spending all comes from a magic money tree, the truth is that the majority don't care about such spending. It doesn't matter that they, or their governments, spend money they don't have, on things they don't need, to put them deeper into a hole out of which they may never be able to climb - just so long as they feel they got 'value for money'.

More and more, I believe leaders, as well as nations, see the invisible debt as immaterial - perhaps a natural result of having built an immaterial economy. As they all press onward to their glorious European, and eventual world, unification, I truly wonder if they don't just think that all debt will eventually disappear a la Star Trek. After all, if cash can be printed freely and money brought into existence out of nothing, surely debt - as long as no-one cares about it - doesn't really exist. Invisible Boy anyone?

19 July 2012 at 17:32  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Dodo,

Is the EU really a plot by the Pope to unite all of Europe to the Catholic Church and run the continent like it did before the reformation?

I did read that some Christians think that the EU is the Second Roman Empire as foretold in the Books of Daniel and Revelation -the EU's founding treaty was that of Rome?!. I'm not sure how this fits into the bit about the Pope though?

Why do Inspector and Paul Twigg think your the "ubiquitous one-man inquisition "? It's funny how you Catholics all seem to think alike.

19 July 2012 at 17:34  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"It's funny how you Catholics all seem to think alike". You don't say.
He He He :-)

A Non RC Persona.

19 July 2012 at 17:40  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Whatever else is going on, we who love freedom should keep a close eye on what the Roman Catholic Church is up to. It's essentially like a dodgy corporation trying to control the market and mislead consumers for its own self-interest.

19 July 2012 at 17:47  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

@ Paul Twigg:

Whilst I'd probably stray away from bigoted, the article does evince and reinforce a fairly standard prejudice which is prevalent both in academia and the media.

It's essentially the old form of history that conflates enlightenment with Protestantism, and backward "medieval" culture with Catholicism. It's not the product of a plot by anti-Catholics (though it's origins are definitely in the anti-Catholic propaganda of the past), but it is a widespread and lazy base assumption that gets unthinkingly regurgitated in a great many places.

The fact that the basic premise is actually pretty shaky, both in economic and historical terms, doesn't seem to detract from its pervasiveness.

In that sense, it's not outright bigotry - but it is part and parcel of a general cultural bias against Catholicism in the UK. The BBC tends to engage in it in the same unthinking way it promotes Palestine, or thinks the world is generally only appreciable with a liberal outlook. There are probably a few who do so consciously, but for most its just more of the ideological background noise that permeates the BBC.

Cranmer is usually very quick to pick up on it - especially when it is targeted at the CofE. Which is why it is somewhat surprising that he chose to repeat this particular instance of ignorance here, apparently in a fashion that commends it to us (though I hold out for the possibility of supreme irony).

19 July 2012 at 17:52  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Anna,

For the record I am NOT a Roman Catholic.

19 July 2012 at 17:53  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

@Belfast, ah good some of the old crowd are coming back now. I was fearing it was just Dodo.

Yes, that seems like a convincing argument to me. His Grace is sometimes ironic when he posts- perhaps he was getting us all to think about it?

@ Albert, thanks for your reply as well. I agree it is a poorly written essay (if one can call it that), it was more of the 'smoking gun', perhaps I was looking for, a sort of a catholic equivalent of the 'elders of Zion' text, rather than the subtle small print.

19 July 2012 at 17:59  
Blogger Neil Addison said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

19 July 2012 at 18:14  
Blogger Neil Addison said...

Since the Latin Monetary Union began in 1865 and the Papal States ceased to exist in 1870 I fail to see why Cranmer accuses the Papacy of destroying the Union by printing money since there were no Papal States and no Papal Currency after 1870.

In addition the Union existed from 1865 until 1925 and its demise had rather more to do with the First World War than Catholicism versus Protestantism

19 July 2012 at 18:15  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Paul,

Sorry! What is your religion then? If not Catholic, perhaps Christian Orthodox?

19 July 2012 at 18:23  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Paul Twig said "nflation is nothing to do with Protestantism".

The point I was making is that inflation is connected to fractional lending where banks lend 10 times what they hold in gold. So long as there is not a run on the banks we can get away with it but if everybody wants their money on the same day the banks can't pay. As far as I am aware and correct me if I am wrong it was William or Orange who allowed bankers to print extra money so long as they lent him money to finance his wars against France. The deal apparently was that the bankers would print money they didn't have and lend it out and then destroy the printed money after a year but keep the interest they had accrued. Of course William of Orange also had to pay back what he owed so the British had to pay for his wars as well. I'd be grateful if a historian could indicate if I have got my facts right. If so then the modern economic travail definitely has its roots in Protestantism. Prior to that inflation did not exist in Catholic Europe.

19 July 2012 at 18:49  
Blogger len said...

The Catholics seem to know a thing or two about raising money .The selling of indulgences for example (no comebacks! )
Note Albert was pointing the finger at Protestants being Nazis?, quite a well known fact that Hitler was and remained a Catholic and was never excommunicated.I won`t even mention the Vatican 'rat lines'that helped Nazi war criminals escape to South America.

The Bible tells us to be 'good stewards'and to deal with finances wisely and not to get into unnecessary debt perhaps this should be our ideal?.

19 July 2012 at 19:04  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Pinchas Lapide who is a Jew wrote a book the last three popes and the Jews in which he mentions that there is a forest in Israel of 400,000 trees. Each tree represents a Jew who was known to have been saved by the underground organization set up by the Vatican to help Jews escape from Hitler. Ever see the movie @The Scarlet and the Black' Len. Together they both expose your one sidedness. As for Hitler remaining a Catholic - do us all a favour and do a bit of legitimate research.

19 July 2012 at 19:23  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

Len, whilst I believe that certain practices of the Catholic church are more than a little bit theologically suspect, to claim that Hitler was a practicing Catholic is as ridiculous as to assume that 70% of the UK population are practicing Christians!
That said, if he was not excommunicated it certainly points to questionable ethics at the time on the part of The Vatican.

19 July 2012 at 19:31  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Shacklefree,

I do apologize and bow to your superior knowledge of economics and history and I do see now, of course, the error of my post. I do see that if the Catholic Church ran the world it would be a better place and we wouldn't have banks or inflation or war or poverty or anything bad at all.

19 July 2012 at 19:44  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

len

You do yourself a disservice by conflating Catholicism with Nazism. There were a good many Catholics who not only stood up to Nazism but did so at the cost of their lives. It is no more worthy a claim than taking the German Christian movement as evidence of the fundamental facism of Protestantism.

Hitler's own views on Catholicism are probably best summed up by noting that just about the only thing he shared in common with Catholic doctrine was an appreciation of the value of spectacle (though to my mind, on a purely aesthetic basis Rome wins by a mile - ymmv). His putative "Catholicism" was little more than the shell of spectacle and cultural inheritance filled with his own pernicious bile of Gleichschaltung.

More a "Christian" in the Anders Breivik sense of the term than, say, Maximilian Kolbe.

19 July 2012 at 20:20  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Shacklefree:

Not... quite.

Inflation may not have existed as a formal economic measurement, just as usury may not have existed formally, but phenomena identical to both existed in all large-scale economies pretty much from the 14th Century.

There were actually several statutes instituted in England to prevent "inflation" by setting prices for labour and goods - not that they were particularly effective. The concept of rising prices as a result of monetary factors was not unknown to either merchants or governments. To give one little example: when merchants exchanged bonds of money from Venice to London, the calculation not only involved the rate of currency exchange, and the administrative costs, but also the prospective change in the value of money that would occur by the time the bond reached its destination (around 3-4 weeks usually).

Usury was also officially prohibited - with the well-known exception of Jewish moneylenders. However, the Church itself issued the equivalent of bonds in exchange for a higher rate of return. They were never officially called loans, nor was the increased rate ever officially recognised as being usurious (well, except by a lot of agitating friars and preachers), but they effectively fulfilled the same function.

19 July 2012 at 20:33  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

"...the terror under Henry VIII or Elizabeth I which all began because Henry wanted to change the meaning of Christian marriage."
Henry hated Protestantism.
Henry wanted an annulment, which the Pope was unable or unwilling to provide, probably for political reasons. He was ruthless in pursuing his objective - to obtain a legitimate male heir, but redefining marriage was not his intention.
Persecution under Elizabeth started when the Pope excommunicated her and absolved her subjects from loyalty to the Crown, rendering Roman Catholics technically traitors. Even so, the zeal of the persecutors was concentrated mainly on priests from abroad and those who concealed them. Otherwise, even after 1570, most RCs were able to find a modus vivendi. (Mary, in her short reign, was much more productive of martyrs, who were executed for their beliefs, not for treason.)

19 July 2012 at 20:44  
Blogger Albert said...

Len,

Note Albert was pointing the finger at Protestants being Nazis?

Read the thread. Someone wrote:

Adenauer appointed many people to his administration "with a brown past - even a dark brown past " as he put it - that is, former Nazis.

The context made it seem as if they were Catholics. I merely pointed out that they were Protestants.

quite a well known fact that Hitler was and remained a Catholic and was never excommunicated.

Did you not know that Hitler was a liar? The first half of your comment has already been answered, the second half is answered by the fact that excommunicating people like Hitler is usually fruitless and dangerous.

Fruitless because Hitler was not in fact a practising Catholic - so it would have made no difference. Dangerous because excommunicating tyrants has always had a bad effect on the ordinary people living under them. The most extreme example was when Elizabeth I was excommunicated. The result was terrible persecution of Catholics in this country.

I won`t even mention the Vatican 'rat lines'that helped Nazi war criminals escape to South America.

Well so was the Red Cross, I believe. That raises the question of why. I don't know. Clearly, the Rat Lines were either just or they were unjust. If they were unjust then they were wicked, if they were just then no one can complain.

19 July 2012 at 21:03  
Blogger Albert said...

Sambo,

Henry hated Protestantism.

While your comment about marriage is well taken, this idea of Henry hating Protestantism is overly simplistic. Firstly, it assumes a Protestant understanding of the word "catholic". For any (Roman) Catholic, the idea that a head of state could make himself head of the Church and leave the communion of Rome would be decidedly Protestant. It was Protestants who gave him the idea.

Secondly, Henry's religious policy regarding the CofE was very confused (surprise surprise!). He martyred a number of Catholics - including St John Fisher, who was the lawful bishop of Rochester (thereby undermining any Anglican claim to be the catholic church of England). He suppressed the monasteries, left Thomas Cromwell in charge (are these not Protestant policies?), and destroyed the sacred shrines of Our Lady of Walsingham and St Thomas of Canterbury.

19 July 2012 at 21:23  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Thanks Anonymous, I bow to your greater knowledge about inflation being present before the Reformation. I do wonder however if the current speculative banking would have been allowed if Europe was Catholic. I am not making any definitive claims however especially when we consider the wishy washy leadership we are getting today with homosexual masses and the lack of reverence in the Vatican II mass.

Little Black Sambo, I agree that political ineptitude and arrogance were behind the absolving of Catholics from loyalty to the crown. It certainly made the lives of Catholics much worse. Popes down the ages have made mistakes and pretty disastrous mistakes in some cases but they all have to answer on the day of judgement as we all do. Nevertheless the persecution and brutality was on a ferocious scale and was not confined to the question of loyalty but became an attempt to exterminate Catholicism with Oliver Cromwell eventually killing one quarter of the adult male population of Ireland. Regarding excommunication, I think that Henry and Elizabeth excommunicated themselves.

Events eventually take on a life of their own and this is what happened to the Reformation which started with the abuses within Catholicism but lost the guidance of the Holy Spirit which we can see clearly with its continual disunity and the doctrine of Pre-destination which makes God to be arbitrarily vindictive. Now everything is up for grabs in Protestantism; divorce, homosexuality, women priests etc. all of which emanate from a desire to make God’s laws subject to the approval of men. With 500 years of the gradual exaltation of man’s authority to re-write God’s laws, we should be asking serious questions about where Protestantism has taken us and whether it would have been better under Catholicism.

19 July 2012 at 21:40  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. Those familiar with the Inspector's postings knows that he delights in rules of thumb. Indeed, such is his belief in ‘certain matters’ that he has Carl often running about the place like a jackrabbit. Highly amusing when it happens; sure you’ll agree. So, you can imagine the Inspector’s intrigue that there may be something in it...

One can safely assume that the further north you go in Europe, the more inclement the weather, give or take, so one can expect the Nordic peoples to be more industrious in their desires to survive. This added activity in the brain may well account for some of the popularity of Protestantism. You see, they took umbrage at the easy going faith of Catholicism, and projected their desires for improvement of their lot to their religion. Interestingly, the one place that theory falls down is England. At one time the country was considered among the most devout in Christendom. Had henry VIII had the heir he wanted from Catherine, then he would not have done what he did do, and England would surely be a Catholic nation today. As we have found in earlier threads, the country enjoyed a fairly sophisticated welfare system run by the religious orders and of course education of the population, albeit at the time, limited to the sons of the well to do.

So, it looks like we do have a rule of thumb of sorts. Absolutely spiffing, what ! Big time industrialisation and the resulting finance interests are a north European thing, reasons as above. With regard to religion, whether a country is predominantly Catholic or protestant is really here nor there, as would be the percentage of ginger haired people in the population. The latter being greater in the north, one would hazard a guess.

Toodle pip !

19 July 2012 at 22:20  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

My Dad thought "fiscal health" was very important and for this reason promoted heresy and error.

19 July 2012 at 22:53  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Catholic Guys,

Some of you Catholics here are quite astounding in your arrogance- having done what John Magee suggested I have done some research on this and Catholics during the 16th Century also did terrible things to Protestants and to Jews, but it was 500 years ago and some of you act as if it were yesterday, but you only look at one side and claim a victim status that just isn't deserved, especially when the lot of you are as cocky as hell when it comes to spouting off Catholic doctrine and dogma.

The other thing I've noticed is that some of you catholic boys think it is OK for Catholics to be racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic etc , but as soon as anyone says anything about your beloved Church, Catholics start crying bigotry, hatred, sectarian, Henry VIII, Cromwell and whatever other dirt you can think of, gang up on that individual, but you don't want to acknowledge your own defects and past and would rather throw toys out of your prams rather than trying to foster the goodwill which your g-d tells you to.

19 July 2012 at 23:06  
Blogger bluedog said...

Anna @ 23.06. Not far short of the truth.

19 July 2012 at 23:20  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Anna. One notes a change in your name, combined with the Jewish refusal to name God directly. Have we witnessed a change in religious adherence ?

19 July 2012 at 23:25  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna asked ...
"Is the EU really a plot by the Pope to unite all of Europe to the Catholic Church and run the continent like it did before the reformation?"

Of course not but the lunatic fringe believe so. I'n sure len will give you a full briefing if you ask him nicely unless he has switched his prophets! Ezekiel appears to be his flavourof the month (Russia leading an attack on Israel) rather than Daniel (the Catholic Church as the Whore of Babylon with the Pope as antichrist rebuilding the Holy Roman Empire and forging an alliance with Islam).

I know, a sane person couldn't make this nonsense up!

"Why do Inspector and Paul Twigg think your the "ubiquitous one-man inquisition "?"

I've no idea! You'll need to ask them. The 'Bish and I have "issues".

"It's funny how you Catholics all seem to think alike."

I know, isn't a shared faith and theological clarity and unity a wonderful thing.

len
Do carry on with your ignorant anti-Catholic posts. It's so good seeing you make yourself look so foolish.

DanJ0
The Catholic Church is up front about its intentions. Don't worry, there are no plans to make you a martyr for the single 'cause' you promote.

By the way, how did work go today?

19 July 2012 at 23:27  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

@Shacklefree:

If Catholic Doctrine were followed, it would indeed be difficult to have the kinds of speculative and usurious practices that have caused the present financial crisis. But then, if strict adherence to Lutheran doctrine was also followed, the same would be true.

They're not identical - especially when it comes to the role of the State in finance, but they are very close on matters of individual ethics in the marketplace. I guess the essential point is that if individuals applied basic Christian ethics to the way they manage their finances, and the way they pursue economic jobs, we would have a situation where, at the very least, greed and venality would not reign supreme.

19 July 2012 at 23:41  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna

I wondered when you'd get around to restating your negative views about Catholics. As I recall, months ago you ran off in a sulk when the "Catholic Guys" came back at you and your sister had to cover for you.

Whilst Catholics share a common faith and theology, we don't all agree on the politics of particular situations. You should have noticed this if you're paying attention.

And no Catholic I know claims "victim status". We leave that for others. We do however have a different historical awareness that challenges some of the more commonly accepted versions.

" ... the lot of you are as cocky as hell when it comes to spouting off Catholic doctrine and dogma."

My, my, what a silly comment!

" ... some of you catholic boys think it is OK for Catholics to be racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic etc"

Another silly comment.

" ... as soon as anyone says anything about your beloved Church, Catholics start crying bigotry, hatred, sectarian, Henry VIII, Cromwell and whatever other dirt you can think of, gang up on that individual, but you don't want to acknowledge your own defects and past and would rather throw toys out of your prams rather than trying to foster the goodwill which your g-d tells you to."

That's God - upper case, I take it?
I challenge you to point to evidence on this thread for any of this critique.

I'm sure all the 'Protestant Guys' you've been so chirpy with of late will rally around to defend you but really .....

19 July 2012 at 23:43  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

St John Ogilvie died for the Faith.

My miseryguts father died in his bed.

19 July 2012 at 23:43  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Anna,

Sorry I didn't read all of your earlier posts to me. It is because when Dodo first came onto this blog he lashed out at His Grace (and others) that he was 'anti-Catholic' and chirped away in his usual elegant fashion to the point of almost being deleted from his Grace's sphere of erudite and intelligent super highway spirituality .

19 July 2012 at 23:43  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Anna,

One other thing, what makes you think I have a faith at all ? Do you think looking at the antics of some of the people here who claim faith that having it (faith) makes you a better person?

19 July 2012 at 23:46  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

Luther was a mad anti-semite.

Not as mad as my Dad though.

19 July 2012 at 23:46  
Blogger John Knox's lovechild said...

My Dad tought he was saved by faith alone.

Was he a better person? Better than his Queen?

19 July 2012 at 23:48  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo,

Please stop this, your making me laugh too much, I am struggling to write following your reply to Anna Albion.

Irony must escape you. Your reply, in manner, tone and substance to Anna ... PROVES her point perhaps ?

I think it is time for an Ernsty type "gwaf" at your expense.

19 July 2012 at 23:53  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo. We all know that the Archbishop is Catholic suspicious. It’s suits his plan to have the essence of Catholicism personified, and he has chosen you. Now, you should appreciate this as a reward for your efforts on this site. So, chin up, walk proud, and bear your badge with honour.

Len. Your squalid portrayal of Christianity is so shameful that there are few on this site who support you. Those that do, and they know who they are, are themselves sanctimonious bible bashers who lack the spirit in which Jesus came to us with. Furthermore, you have successfully convinced this man that born againism is nothing but a psychiatric condition that sets you apart from your fellow man, such is the contempt you hold them in. But do carry on posting !

19 July 2012 at 23:57  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul
To be fair, I don't think the 'Bish so much minded being called "anti-Catholic". Afterall, he is!

It's a broad term. It ranges from discrimination, hostility or prejudice directed against the Catholic Church, its clergy and its members. It also applies to the religious persecution of Catholics. Or to a religious orientation opposed to Catholicism.

I see no harm in holding a religious orientation opposed to Catholicism. I see Catholicism as the Truth and, on this basis, by definition, am opposed theologically to other religions and faith systems.

No, the 'Bish objected to my over use and misuse of the term "bigot".

I have learned to distinguish between different forms of "anti-Catholicism".

20 July 2012 at 00:07  
Blogger Ivan said...

Hitler was a gross mimic and a psychopath, he had the diabolical talent to be all things to all men (excepting the Jews). In his time he was able to fool any number of the best and brightest. The prophet len would have been a prime candidate for his charms. There is clear evidence that Hitler ceased being a Catholic from his teens, but truth is of little use against the know-nothings who don't seem to realise that Hitler had more support among the Protestants than Catholics in all the fateful Weimar elections. As Cardinal Faulhaber affirmed for Catholics (and indeed for all Christians) Jesus Christ is the Fuhrer.

Ivan

20 July 2012 at 00:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

You laugh on.

This young lady rarely does 'irony'. It requires a degree of intelligence, something her posts to date patently lack.

20 July 2012 at 00:13  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo,

I was being non-verbose.

To coin a phrase , which you might use in a different context,I think that there is scope for legitimate criticism of the state of the Vatican and its Roman Catholic policies, but criticism of a state does not of course make one Anti-Catholic .

20 July 2012 at 00:14  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo,

So your post to her was ironic then, hmmm, I will have to go back and look at it again.

20 July 2012 at 00:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

I entirely agree with you. There is also room for a genuine discussion about Catholic theology.

And why allude to it? I feel exactly the same about the State of Israel and also Pharisaical Judaism.

20 July 2012 at 00:21  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

No I was not being ironic to Anna or to you. I stand by every word. Her post was juvenile and silly.

20 July 2012 at 00:25  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo,

Well, I think you were rather unkind to Anna and I think she is a star- urbane and intelligent, with lots of interesting things to say- cooking, religion, Israel, nuclear physics. So there!

20 July 2012 at 00:30  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

Yes, yes, I expect no less from you. There have been times I have felt protective towards her too. I'm sure you believe she has all the qualities you describe.

As for being "unkind", I just respond to what she writes without intending to be "kind" or "unkind".

20 July 2012 at 00:49  
Blogger Naomi King said...

A very interesting book which throws much further light on Nationalism and the Church in Europe (and many other worthwhile subjects as well) is David Goldman's "How Civilisations Die" published last year.

David Goldman is "Spengler" of the Asia Times Online which draws a million readers a month. He headed global bond research for Bank of America as well as other Wall Street research groups. He lives in New York City and was trained in music theory as well as economics. He has written extensively on music, mathematics, religion and cultural heritage.

He is a former Forbes columnist and editor at First Things and a frequent television commentator on politics and economics. He was also elected to the Institutional Investors All America Fixed Income Research Team.

See Chapter 11 under Theopolitics - How Christianity Died in Europe.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Civilizations-Die-Islam-Dying/dp/159698273X

20 July 2012 at 06:07  
Blogger Naomi King said...

And here is the details about his book of essays which I haven't yet read (unlike How Civilisations Die which I have) "It's Not the End of the World, It's Just the End of You: The Great Extinction of the Nations" which was also published last year.

http://www.amazon.com/Its-Not-End-World-Just/dp/1614122024

Why do cultures commit suicide? Why are we witnessing a new great extinction of peoples? Why is the economic crisis really a spiritual crisis? Probing the inner workings of civilization in a tour d'horizon of cultural decline, Spengler argues that Europe's postnational, secular dystopia is a death trap, that the onslaught of modernity has plunged Islam into an even greater crisis, and that the destiny of nations is decided in the human heart, by religion.

Christian America, in spite of its follies and gullibility, has the spiritual strength to restore the faith of the West.

This book presents, in one comprehensive volume, the wide scope of Spengler's theories on Christianity, Islam, America, the financial crisis, horror movies, modern art, Israel, Tolkien's Middle Earth and tribalism. The global balance of power, demography, and sex in the twenty-first century.

These highly original essays may provoke you, even frighten you-but never bore you. "In the more than twenty years I've known David Goldman, he's always had an original take on the big picture and frequently has spotted key turning points well in advance of the herd. He's an indispensable voice on financial television and a must-read observer of politics and economics.” -Lawrence Kudlow CNBC Television

"Ask anyone in the intelligence business to name the world's most brilliant intelligence service, and we'll all give the same answer: Spengler. David P. Goldman's 'Spengler' columns provide more insight than the CIA, MI6, and the Mossad combined.” -Herbert E. Meyer Meyer served during the Reagan Administration as Special Assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence and as Vice Chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Council.

Very few analysts have the breadth, depth and real-world experience of David P. Goldman aka Spengler. Spengler gives you deep analysis, meta-analysis that is extremely hard to come by on all sides of the political spectrum. He delivers this analysis in a compelling sui generis style, laced with his unique sense of humour. Spengler knows his history, economics (he is a trained economist), foreign cultures (he speaks some half dozen languages fluently), religion and theology (he did a stint as an editor of the prestigious religous journal First Things), not to mention philosophy (he is no fan)--he is a true polymath in our brave new world increasingly dominated by pols and pundits who are soi-dissant experts, the definition of which, by the way, is one who knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing.

20 July 2012 at 06:25  
Blogger Naomi King said...

"Europe's postnational, secular dystopia is a death trap. The destiny of nations is decided in the human heart, by religion. Christian America, in spite of its follies and gullibility, has the spiritual strength to restore the faith of the West." David Goldman - New York Jew

20 July 2012 at 07:32  
Blogger Naomi King said...

But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. Greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. God is love.

Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; All unrighteousness is sin: This is the true God, and eternal life.

20 July 2012 at 08:11  
Blogger Albert said...

Anna,

you catholic boys think it is OK for Catholics to be racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic etc , but as soon as anyone says anything about your beloved Church, Catholics start crying bigotry, hatred, sectarian, Henry VIII, Cromwell and whatever other dirt you can think of, gang up on that individual, but you don't want to acknowledge your own defects and past and would rather throw toys out of your prams rather than trying to foster the goodwill which your g-d tells you to.

On the contrary Anna. I don't mind people being anti-Catholic, provided their facts are correct. No one should defend what is immoral, and when members of my Church are immoral Catholicism itself tells us we should stand up to them.

On the other hand, I think that it is simply unacceptable to be racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic even if the facts are correct.

20 July 2012 at 08:23  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Paul Twigg said

I think that there is scope for legitimate criticism of the state of the Vatican and its Roman Catholic policies, but criticism of a state does not of course make one Anti-Catholic.


It being clearly understood that criticism of Israel makes one a vicious anti-Semite.

20 July 2012 at 10:21  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Corrigan1:

All depends on what the criticism is, and whether one can take what one can dish out (or in the case of Israel: whether one applies the same stringent morality used to haul the Israelis up to account to the Palestinians).

The key word with most of these debates is consistency. If I find that a person's criticism is only ever applied to Israel, or to Catholicism, generally I assume that the consistency lies not in the ethics of the situtation, but the selection of a target. Whether or not this constitutes anti-Semitism or racism or sectarianism or whatever, others will have to argue.

20 July 2012 at 10:54  
Blogger John Chater said...

The BBC is entirely right, we left footers have been planning it for the past 500 years – the gentle subversion of Protestant Europe through our reckless and barmy monetary policies…

See sense dear people, the idea that the average monetarist politician or banker would know the Vulgate if it landed on his head is laughable, as is the daft idea that the bosh are tight-fisted because they are protestants.

Germany's principle concern is the protection of its own very lucrative southern European market – where else will they sell all of the those Mercs and Cayennes – which is why they will endlessly bail out the same countries, knowing that they themselves will be the net beneficiary of any improvement in the European economy. It is a master servant mentality – feed the serf and he can work for you.

God forbid anyone should accuse the BBC of stirring things up on the religious front, but even by their standards blaming the chaos and incompetence of the current Euro-cock up on deep seated Catholic tendencies is a first. What on earth next – getting a humanist on the Today programme to prattle on about the woes of circumcision; surely that could never happen.

20 July 2012 at 11:02  
Blogger John Magee said...

LEN ... German playright Rolf Hochhuth's 1963 play "The Deputy" which criticized Pius for being silent and portrayed his silence as cold indifference was fiction. Of course this play was twisted and added to and soon made "fact" by the Christophobes of the time and they are still attacking Pius XII today in spite of the enormous historical evidence to the contrary. After Germany went to war against it's former ally Italy in 1943 Pope Pius XII asked all Italian Catholics and all monasteries and convents in Italy to help or hide Jews. They were even taken in by the Vatican and fed and housed there. Pope Pius's service to the Jews of Italy so impressed the Chief Rabbi of Rome, devout Orthodox Jew Israel Zolli, to convert to Catholicism. Pope Pius XII was given numerous honors after WW II for all he did for the Jews and when he died in 1958 Golda Meier, Israel's UN Ambassador at the time, and other Jews around the world praised his life and what he did for Jews during WW II:

After Pius XII's death on 9 October 1958 many Jewish organizations and newspapers around the world paid tribute to his legacy. At the United Nations, Golda Meir, Israel's Foreign Minister, said, "When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out on the great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict." The Jewish Chronicle (London) stated on 10 October that "Adherents of all creeds and parties will recall how Pius XII faced the responsibilities of his exalted office with courage and devotion. Before, during, and after the Second World War, he constantly preached the message of peace. Confronted by the monstrous cruelties of Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, he repeatedly proclaimed the virtues of humanity and compassion". In the Canadian Jewish Chronicle (17 October), Rabbi J. Stern stated that Pius XII "made it possible for thousands of Jewish victims of Nazism and Fascism to be hidden away..." In the 6 November edition of the Jewish Post in Winnipeg, William Zukerman, the former American Hebrew columnist, wrote that no other leader "did more to help the Jews in their hour of greatest tragedy, during the Nazi occupation of Europe, than the late Pope". Other prominent Jewish figures, such as Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett and Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog expressed their public gratitude to Pius XII.

For the record. The Archbishop of Canterbury, The President of the USA, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and General Secretary of the CP of the USSR Joseph Stalin did little or nothing to save the Jews of Europe before the liberation of the death camps in 1945.

20 July 2012 at 17:04  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Dodo

Hey, I don't think I'm that negative about Catholicism, it is some of the people here who claim to follow that creed I have a difficulty with.

When I first came onto this blog I have to admit I was a bit spiritually naive, meaning I wasn't ready for the reactions of some people here, who are more like daily mail/christian voice esq, social conservatives than the kindly thoughtful christian.

This blog has contributed to my spiritual faith and I have a sense of where I want to be with that.

I am silly and unintelligent? Oh, I hope I haven't made anyone think that.

re in the quest for evidence- last time I spent time doing that you ignored it, so I'm not bothering this time.

Have a nice day Mr Dodo!

20 July 2012 at 17:36  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Paul Twigg,

Shalom to you- and thanks for being so kind about me too!(:

20 July 2012 at 17:37  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Anna,

Shabbat shalom to you as well.

20 July 2012 at 17:53  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Anna Albion,
Your assertion of arrogance is an important one to debate. Do you think Len or Danjo are being arrogant when they put across their points of view? Some might say so but if we deny the right we deny free speech. I suspect your complaint at root is about the Catholic claim to be the One, True Church. Muslims of course make the same claim about Islam and that is manifestly arrogant because of the violence they perpetrate in the name of Allah but most other religions don’t seem to have the confidence to make that claim. Why not? Don’t they believe there is only one God? If so there can only be One True Church instituted by him. When he instituted Judaism he provided authority by means of miracles and prophesies. When he instituted Catholicism 2000 years ago he did so with miracles and prophecy. There were no prophesies about the coming of John Calvin or Martin Luther or Henry VIII and none of them performed any miracles. In the modern day we have had miracles and prophesies confirming the authenticity of Catholicism as the One, True faith. Read up about the miracle of Fatima in 1917 or the stigmata of Padre Pio. Almighty God sends us the signs He chooses. If we don’t like them, that’s our choice but the time will come when we have to answer for that choice after which we won’t have any choice at all.

20 July 2012 at 19:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Albert. On the other hand, I think that it is simply unacceptable to be racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic even if the facts are correct.

Oh dear, the PC people have successfully neutered you then...

racist – merely the appreciation of the common behaviour as displayed by the different races

sexist – merely the appreciation that the sexes excel in different areas

Anti-Jew – merely the criticism of the chosen ones when necessary. These days nearly always in relation to Israel

Homophobic – merely the criticism of a peculiarity that affects a tiny proportion of the population, whom if they had any sense would keep it to themselves and not burden the rest of us with their angst.

Stalin’s favourite English saying “To make an omelette, you need to break a few eggs”. Rather appropriate don’t you think ?

20 July 2012 at 19:24  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

Hi Shacklfree,

freedom of speech- I never said you or anyone else Shouldn't be allowed to express your views,now did I?.

And yes the rest of your assertions can come across as an arrogance and sums up what I was trying to pin down in my post.

At least Catholics like Albert and Mr Belfast- whom I can at least respect in that regard- attempt to engage with thoughts and ideas and links, rather than telling me to look this that and the other up, which is another way of saying "I can't be bothered to engage in this discussion". That is such a poor way to debate something.

Anyway, I have to go as I've got a few things left to do in the next hour and twenty minutes (like getting some matches).

20 July 2012 at 19:52  
Blogger Anna Albion said...

oh no- 1 hour, did it really take me 20 mins to write all of the above!

Better go!

20 July 2012 at 19:53  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Anna,
I was asking for your opinion about arrogance and how you define it. Religion if it means anything must define God as One and therefore that there can only be one true religion. Do you disagree with that statement? If we can agree on that perhaps we can move on to discuss which is the true religion. If you prefer to avoid the question then your accusations about my arrogance have to be placed side by side with your unwillingness to stand up and define what you believe.

20 July 2012 at 20:06  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

I could go into detail about Fatima. I have mentioned it before on this blog. It is quite involved but basically in 1917 the date of a miracle was predicted in advance by three children aged 10, 8 and 7. They prophesied the end of WW1, that Russia would spread her errors through the world and that WW2 would occur if people did not stop offending Almighty God. For a blog that's the best I can do. Google the miracle of the sun and you will see.

20 July 2012 at 20:10  
Blogger len said...

Shacklefree..... Signs and wonders do not' prove' the Catholic Church (in these last days) rather the opposite!.

Mat 16:4b (NIV) "A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign."

2Th 2:9 (TCN) For at the coming of the Lord there will be great activity on the part of Satan, in the form of all kinds of deceptive miracles, signs, and marvels, as well as of wicked attempts to delude.
2Th 2:9 (NKJ) The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders.

Mt 24:24 (NIV) "For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible."
Given the specific and unqualified warning of Jesus, the principal meaning of 2Th 2:9, then, should be interpreted:
...that the strategic aim of the miracles done is to deceive, to lie.

All Truth was revealed through and in Jesus Christ why should we look elsewhere?.

20 July 2012 at 20:38  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I must congratulate A in Belfast for his measured, intelligent insightful and unbiased posts. He is often mistaken for a Catholic because he does not harbour anti Catholic sentiment and presents an ideal of Catholicism which eludes most of the Catholics on this site.

I also originally thought he was a Catholic and was doing an Albert impersonation but it became obvious when he displayed a sense of humour at my calling him an intransigent obdurate nong that he could not possibly have been Albert.I do apologise profusely to him for this accusation as he is neither intransigent nor obdurate.

I hope I have not caused him a disservice by singing his praises as no doubt now he will be subjected to another of Anna no longer Anglican's grovelling performances and blows from the thuggery contingent.Sorry Belfast:)

20 July 2012 at 21:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Why Hiya Anna
(Anglican or Jewish, I know not)

Well, sorry for being beastly and after all the effort you must have put into researching Catholicism
too.

Perhaps, in future, you should address comments to specific people rather than 'Hi Catholic Guys'.

After throwing a whole series of unsubstantiated and generalised accusations about, you conclude:

" ... the lot of you are as cocky as hell when it comes to spouting off Catholic doctrine and dogma."

I guess after the vagueness and diversity of protestantism a clear presentation of Christianity must seem strange.

20 July 2012 at 21:54  
Blogger Albert said...

Inspector,

Oh dear, the PC people have successfully neutered you then...

Don't be daft. All those things are opposed by Catholic teaching. We should not judge people on the basis of what is pre-moral. Only behaviours can be evaluated morally.

20 July 2012 at 23:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Anna
An after thought - should one refer to you as Hannah Halakha from henceforth?

20 July 2012 at 23:07  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

I just checked this Fatima stuff and is Shack really an undercover Prod covert? The Fatima prophecies are the subject of controversy even in the Catholic Church and meat for Len's grinder when it comes to conspiracy theories.

20 July 2012 at 23:08  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo,

You are doing wonders for the state of my mental health and the amusing nature of your posts :

"After throwing a whole series of unsubstantiated and generalised accusations "

Pot and Kettle?

20 July 2012 at 23:10  
Blogger Albert said...

Len,

Signs and wonders do not' prove' the Catholic Church (in these last days) rather the opposite!.

You really are a terrible cherry-picker:

Jesus said, If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin; but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.

Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves.

You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues;

And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it.


Do I need to continue?

20 July 2012 at 23:11  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

That was quick! I've been checking this "Fatima stuff" for over 20 years and all the controversy associated with it.

Despite differences within the Church about how the Vatican may have handled the 'Secrets' and whether the Church complied with a specific instruction from Heaven, the apparition of Our Lady and her message is accepted as "worthy of belief" by the Church. However, it is left entirely to individual Catholics to decide for themselves. Interpretng the meaning is what triggers disagreement.

Notwitstanding all this, the Message of Fatima surely has modern relevance?

20 July 2012 at 23:19  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

20 July 2012 at 23:21  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo- just nipping out to have a cigarette and after that I shall reply to you.

20 July 2012 at 23:24  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

20 July 2012 at 23:37  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

20 July 2012 at 23:39  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

THIRD TIME LUCKY!

Actually Dodo, I had written a great piece in reply to you, but it got lost somehow. If you do google it as Shack said, you get the Wikipedia version, then after that lots of web pages about the end of the Catholic Church and Vatican covers ups/conspiracy theories. The point I'm making is why use that particular issue to convince them of the authority of the Catholic Church?

20 July 2012 at 23:44  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

I have to say, Cressida seems a bit hostile to Anna. What's the story there?

20 July 2012 at 23:55  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

The Church never uses personal revelation as the basis of its authority.

Fatima has divided the Church, in the minds of some, because of the theological struggle between so called 'traditionalists' and 'modernisers' post-Vatican II. Too complicated ....

I have always pondered on the reasons why so many Marian apparitions are made to innocent Catholic children who are given such profound messages. Also, why so many modern Miracles, scupulously verified by the Vatican, attributed to Catholics.

It does require serious thought by any thinking Christian. How to understand this:

- A series of delusions, unproven but genuinely believed?

- A series of delusions used by the Church to further its own ends?

- Indications the Church is under demonic and satanic influence as a portent of 'end times'?

- The Church truly is the Mystical Body of Christ and these visitations, messages and personal revelations demonstrate the Power, Mercy and Love of God and also Our Blessed Lady's Motherly Love for mankind and the special place she has in Heaven.

As a Catholic, you'll know the decision I made many years ago.

21 July 2012 at 00:16  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

21 July 2012 at 00:26  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

And a lucky guess would be the last of your opinions?

21 July 2012 at 00:32  
Blogger Paul Twigg said...

Dodo

All illuminating exposition. One point- it was not me who suggested personal revelation was the basis of your Church, it was your fellow Catholic Shack. Below is his transcript :

"When he instituted Catholicism 2000 years ago he did so with miracles and prophecy. There were no prophesies about the coming of John Calvin or Martin Luther or Henry VIII and none of them performed any miracles. In the modern day we have had miracles and prophesies confirming the authenticity of Catholicism as the One, True faith. Read up about the miracle of Fatima in 1917 or the stigmata of Padre Pio. Almighty God sends us the signs He chooses. If we don’t like them, that’s our choice but the time will come when we have to answer for that choice after which we won’t have any choice at all."

21 July 2012 at 00:35  
Blogger John Magee said...

Dodo Isn't it interesting that Our Lady picked a small village in Portugal named Fatima to appear to three children in May 1917 and warn them about the coming October Russian Revolution months before those events happened in Russia? You are aware of course that Fatima was a daughter of Mohammed. That name and other Islamic names are a legacy in Portugal and Spain of the 700 year occupation of the Iberian Peninsula by Islam before 1492. I've often wondered if the 3rd secret of Fatima isn't about the present Islamization of Europe obvious to everyone as a punishment for Europe abandoning it's Christian faith. For those who doubt the October miracle of the spinning sun at Fatima they should read what was written after the event by eyewittness non Catholic and in many cases agnostic or atheistic reporters. The "miracle of the sun" at Fatima in October 1917 was seen as far as 25 miles away. A spectacular "fraud" considering it took place during the afternoon and after a rain storm. No one has yet come up with any theories as to how the Church could have hired pilots of primitive aircraft in 1917 or even baloonists to come up with this amazing event seen by hundreds of thousands for many miles beyond the small village of Fatima.

21 July 2012 at 00:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Paul

I understood that and hope I have explained why I have an understanding of Shacklefree's comment and why I am in agreement with him. This is a personal position.

The Catholic Church itself claims its authority direct from Christ and does not base this on the authenticity or otherwise of these events. In that respect, I think the comment of Shacklefree is open to misunderstanding.

21 July 2012 at 00:51  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Shacklefree

Personally, I don't think it wise to attempt to interpret the Third Secret of Fatima. Best to leave that to the private contemplation of our Pope and his advisers. The Vatican is vast storehouse of personal revelation and prophecy and, wisely, they are extremely cautious about authenticating, releasing and interpreting this.

I believe following Our Lady's request to individuals and the wonderful promise she made if we do, is more important for us 'lesser mortals'.

21 July 2012 at 01:00  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Mr Magee

Apologies to both you and Shacklefree for not noticing who had posted.

21 July 2012 at 01:07  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Cressida is quite right, I am not a member of the Roman Catholic Church, though I don't regard being referred to one as an insult :)

Anna

Whilst I don't think you're stupid (I believe you work in science? That's beyond me for starters), and would reserve the right for all human beings to be silly from time-to-time (not least myself), extended debate with anyone who holds contrary views to your own on matters theological or political is not going to be aided by the mindset evinced by comments like this:

"When I first came onto this blog I have to admit I was a bit spiritually naive, meaning I wasn't ready for the reactions of some people here, who are more like daily mail/christian voice esq, social conservatives than the kindly thoughtful christian."

Unless this was intended to be read with a hefty dose of irony (in which case, apologies), it would seem virtually impossible for anyone to provide orthodox or socially-conservative views without you receiving their argument as "arrogance", genuine lapses (or absences) in politeness notwithstanding.

Dodo and I have had our share of disagreements, but he is both consistent and clear in what he believes and why he believes it, in accordance with the doctrine of the RC Church. I rather like this quote from Richard Neuhaus on the problems of orthodoxy interacting with liberalism:

""Where orthodoxy is optional, orthodoxy will sooner or later be proscribed. Orthodoxy suggests that there is a right and a wrong, a true and a false, about things. When orthodoxy is optional, it is admitted under a rule of liberal tolerance that cannot help but be intolerant of talk about right and wrong, true and false. It is therefore a conditional admission, depending upon orthodoxy’s good behavior."

21 July 2012 at 02:34  
Blogger John Magee said...

Inspector For all the real and imiginary faults of the Roman Catholic Latin countries in this article concerning thrift and economics (the great 15th century Medici banking family of Florence, Italy was not mentioned)let's remember what the English Catholic write Hillaire Belloc once wrote:

"Wherever the Cathoic sun doth shine. There's always laughter and good red wine. At least I've always found it so. Benedicamus Domino"

Belloc also wrote about the rise of Islam in his book "The Great Christian heresies". here is a quote he wrote in 1936:

"Millions of modern people of the white civilization-that is, the civilization of Europe and America- have forgotten all about Islam. They never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the past."

21 July 2012 at 02:54  
Blogger John Magee said...

The correct title of Hillaire Belloc's book is: "The Great Heresies" I apologize for any all of my typos. May I use my age as an excuse?

21 July 2012 at 03:04  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Len signs and wonders do prove authenticity if they are true wonders and not counterfeit. We are agreed about satan and clearly his activity is producing much success in our present faithless times. To take the biblical quotation about fire coming down from heaven that could conceivably occur today now that we have satellites in space. I don’t think there is much doubt that we are currently in the ‘End Times’ so we can expect counterfeit miracles to deceive even the elect. 2 Thessalonians is an accurate description about this generation being deceived and verse 3 indicates that before the second coming, the anti-christ and the great revolt have to occur. We can already see the great revolt and I suspect the anti-christ is currently on the world stage. Jesus also gives an indication of the signs of the times by mentioning the disastrous abomination set up in the holy place. There are only two possible locations –Jerusalem or Rome. The Al Aqsa Mosque is on the site in Jerusalem but the Jewish sacrifice was abolished 2000 years ago and has never been renewed so I don’t think it refers to that. We know from statements of converted communists that Freemasonry and communism did commission traitors to enter the Catholic priesthood and so in the ‘End Times’ we might expect a traitor to sit on the throne of Peter – the disastrous abomination. Where you get it wrong is to claim that the anti-christ has sat on the throne of Peter for pretty much the whole of the Christian period. As I said before, that comes close to being a sin against the spirit and I would ask you to reconsider. Remember we have a precedent – Jesus told the Jews that the Scribes and Pharisees were whitewashed sepulchres but he still told the people to follow what they teach because they occupied the chair of Moses.

21 July 2012 at 05:06  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

Albert,

There were far more than two Nazis in the Adenauer administration at high levels. For a start, the key Foreign Office team was exempted from de-nazification. Dozens of democratic Germany's post war ambassadors were former Nazis. They did a fair amount of juggling to keep them away from their pre war and war time postings.

The Cold War ensured that many Nazi necks evaded the hangman's attention. Dr. Hallstein, who was State Secretary at the Foreign Office and later the first President of the EEC Commission was not a Nazi party member but had belonged to six Nazi organisations and completed a Nazi leadership training course. He established the "Hallstein doctrine" which withheld diplomatic recognition from those states which recognised communist East Germany, thus preventing the extradition of war criminals to Eastern Europe where most atrocities took place.

For full details of this I suggest Tom Bower's "Blind Eye to Murder".
I recently followed the post war career of a Professor-Doktor Heinrich Hunke, who was a great advocate of a "European Economic Community" (the Nazis used the title) in the Thirties and Forties. He went on to become influential in the politics and administration of Lower Saxony. Although he had been a Nazi party member from the Twenties and worked directly for Goebbels, the denazification court classified him only as a "Mitlaeufer" (Fellow Traveller/Hanger-On).
I have reason to believe that in 1957 he was instrumental in finding immediate employment for former Reichsminister Funk (Minister of the Economy, President of the Reichsbank and Minister for Post War Planning) in the Education Ministry of Lower Saxony, after Funk's release from Spandau on health grounds.

21 July 2012 at 07:20  
Blogger Albert said...

Edward,

There were far more than two Nazis in the Adenauer administration at high levels.

I don't deny any of that. I just wonder how it is supposed to answer my reply to your original post. The two Nazis were not, as your post implied, Catholics, but Protestants.

21 July 2012 at 09:20  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

cressida
I notice you've withdrawn the accusation that AIB is "intransigent" and "obdurate" but not that he is a "nong".

21 July 2012 at 10:04  
Blogger len said...

John Magee,

(20 July 2012 17:04)

Thank you for your comment.

The' ratlines' are a well documented fact.That these ratlines were run by Catholics is a documented fact(Information is freely available on the web)
Of course' others'may well have been involved because these prominent Nazis were taking substantial amounts of' loot'(mainly gold) out of the country with them.
The two prominent Priests that organised and ran the system of machinery that enabled the Nazis to escape through Austria & Italy were the Croatian Roman Catholic priest Krunoslav Draganovic & the Austrian Bishop Alois Hudal.
The' Ratlines' began with diplomatic pressure applied by Pius XII to allow his personal representatives to visit prisonerof-war camps "to minister religiously to Catholics." The real purpose was to identify and smuggle out Nazi war criminals. It can hardly be a coincidence that the man Pius XII chose to head this outrageous obstruction of international justice was his close adviser, Bishop Hudal, whom almost all of Rome knew was a fanatical anti-Semite and pro-Nazi. As Hudal himself later frankly admitted:
I thank God that He [allowed me] to visit ... prisons and concentration camps and [to help prisoners] escape with false identity papers.... I felt duty bound after 1945 to devote my whole charitable work mainly to former National Socialists [Nazis] and Fascists, especially to so called "war criminals."
What an admission! Do not forget that Hudal was a Roman Catholic bishop, close friend, and confidant of more than one pope. He dedicated his life to serving Holy Mother Church in obedience to its spiritual leader, whom he believed to be the vicar of Christ. He would not have done anything that was contrary to the dictates of the one whom he called Holy Father. And he was rewarded with position and titles for that faithful service.
Dede Wijaya: Bab 21 The Vatican Ratlines
(dedewijaya.blogspot.co.uk)

21 July 2012 at 13:24  
Blogger Albert said...

Len,

Please substantiate the following:

The' Ratlines' began with diplomatic pressure applied by Pius XII to allow his personal representatives to visit prisonerof-war camps "to minister religiously to Catholics." The real purpose was to identify and smuggle out Nazi war criminals.

As far as I can see, Hudal was frozen out of the Vatican, not least because his pro-Nazi position conflicted with the anti-Nazi teaching of the Church, as set forth in the Encyclical Mit brennender Sorge.

21 July 2012 at 14:10  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

len

You obviously get off on maligning the Church. Why is that?

Do you know Pope Pius XII is recognised by the Jewish community and commemorated by them for his efforts in saving Jews from the extermination?

There is also various memorials dedicated to Catholic Priests for their efforts too. The Nazis extermined millions of Catholics in Poland.

What a pitiful excuse for history this article is from the very worst of 'christian' fundamentalists.

21 July 2012 at 14:15  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Albert

It's just another 'copy and paste' job. He cannot substantiate this nonsense because the original article gave no evidence.

21 July 2012 at 14:18  
Blogger Albert said...

Dodo,

It's particularly odd, that Len seeks to score points about a couple of Catholic rat runners. Protestants in Nazi Germany even had their own Nazified church: the Reichskirche complete with its own Reichsbischof. If wikipedia is to be believed:

In 1939 with the approval of 75% of the German Protestant churches the Eisenacher "Institute for Research and the Elimination of Jewish influence on German Church Life" was founded

75%! But we should be very cautious about drawing conclusions about Protestants from this because of the importance of the Confessing Christians, and people like Bonhoffer.

But that 75% figure sticks in the throat. Len is talking about a couple of Catholic clergy. Doubtless there were others doing terrible things, but the point is surely clear.

21 July 2012 at 15:23  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Dodo:

Cressida is quite prudently awaiting evidence to the contrary that I am not in fact a nong.

Nonging on,

AIB

21 July 2012 at 16:23  
Blogger Albert said...

No Belfast. She made the claim, the burden of proof rests with her.

21 July 2012 at 16:37  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Doddles, stop stirring the pot otherwise I will arrange for Xena Warrior Princess to squeeze you:)

21 July 2012 at 16:38  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

cressida

Who knows, I might enjoy the experience. I have always had a thing for Warrior Princesss! However, could it possibly be a Brigitte Bardot lookalike?

21 July 2012 at 17:05  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Xena Warrior Princess is an attractive Amazonian lesbian ..cult tv movie of the 90s.

21 July 2012 at 17:45  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ah .... in which case I shall behave impeccably from here on in.

I think I may have encountered said woman and her tribe of servile subjects recently. I was deeply traumatised and still have nightmares from this encounter.

21 July 2012 at 19:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

len

Regards your claim that Hitler was a Catholic and the Church Nazi sympathisers, consider this.

In 1543 Luther wrote a pamphlet entitled “Concerning The Jews and Their Lies.”

He called Jews:

“A miserable and accursed people”
“Stupid fools”
“Miserable, blind and senseless”
“Thieves and robbers”
“The great vermin of humanity”
“ Lazy rogues”
“ Blind and venomous”


He proposed:

Their synagogues and schools should be burned.
Their houses should be destroyed.
Their Talmudic writings should be confiscated.
Their Rabbis should be forbidden to teach.
Their money should be taken from them.
They should be compelled into forced labor.

In his book, Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler referred to Martin Luther as " ... a great warrior, a true statesmen, and a great reformer."

In 1924 at a Christian (not Catholic) gathering in Berlin, Hitler spoke to thousands and received a standing ovation when he made the following proclamation:

"I believe that today I am acting in accordance with the will of Almighty God as I announce the most important work that Christians could undertake - and that is to be against the Jews and get rid of them once and for all."

He then proceeded to talk about the influence of Luther on his life:

"Martin Luther has been the greatest encouragement of my life. Luther was a great man. He was a giant. With one blow he heralded the coming of the new dawn and the new age. He saw clearly that the Jews need to be destroyed, and we’re only beginning to see that we need to carry this work on."

At the Nuremberg trials after World War II, the Nazi leader, Julius Streicher, defended himself by saying:

"I have never said anything that Martin Luther did not say."

21 July 2012 at 20:23  
Blogger len said...

Dodo...if you bothered to read my posts properly you will find i condemn luthers anti semitism

21 July 2012 at 23:57  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Albert. We should not judge people on the basis of what is pre-moral.

Those words of contention - racist, sexist, anti-Jew, homophobic – are STOP words designed either to close down debate, restrict it, or to give the user the opportunity to rally and regain the initiative during debate.Are you really an egg shell walker ? Incidentally, jolly good try, slipping in that none word ‘pre-moral’ whatever that is, to attempt to regain control of this one :->

22 July 2012 at 00:08  
Blogger len said...

Were do you suppose luther got his anti semitic doctrines from......the catholic church!.

22 July 2012 at 00:08  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

len

Oh dear, same old, same old. A misunderstanding of the nature of Catholicism, more like. Luther thought the Jews would convert when given the option of Christianity without Rome. When they didn't, he turned his full wrath on them.

Anyway, the point is that Luther, regarded as a heretic and enemy of Christ by the Catholic Church then, appears to have profoundly influenced Hitler and was a role model. Another view is that Hitler simply used Luther to trigger the
underlying hatred of Jews at the time amongst German Christians.

He was not a Catholic!

22 July 2012 at 00:43  
Blogger Albert said...

Len,

I notice you haven't responded to that 75% figure I cited earlier:

In 1939 with the approval of 75% of the German Protestant churches the Eisenacher "Institute for Research and the Elimination of Jewish influence on German Church Life" was founded

Instead you are seeking to put the blame for Martin Luther on the Catholic Church! Even if we concede that Luther was a Catholic, what about that 75% of 20th C Protestants? Is their belief to be blamed on Catholicism too?

The point surely, is that there has been anti-Semitism in both traditions. Both traditions provide examples of people who colluded with paganism/Nazism. Therefore, there is no moral argument to be made by either side about pointing the finger at either tradition. People failed. If we seek to judge the other tradition by that, we will condemn out own.

22 July 2012 at 09:52  
Blogger Hannah Albion- Halakha said...

Hi Cressida ,

I would be your warrior princess, if only you were lesbian and single.

22 July 2012 at 13:48  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I can understand that Hannah since
almost all of the so called men on this site are minus two circular appendages which define them as sauch.

22 July 2012 at 14:34  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

such
although sauch is a good neologism
to describe them as well.

22 July 2012 at 14:37  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cressida. What the hell !

The Inspector can inform you he is an uncompromising man, he’ll have you know, madam !

If he disappoints in that area, he would be annoyed...

{SNORTS LOUDLY}

22 July 2012 at 15:38  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

There is a Protestant work ethic. But there is at least as much a Catholic one, forming and defining half of the Germans, more than half of the West Germans during their post-War economic miracle, half of the Swiss, half of the Dutch, and great tracts of the working classes of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand during those countries’ industrial heydays.

The richest German Land is profoundly Catholic Bavaria, the seat of the Jacobite claimants to the Thrones of the Three Kingdoms, and the homeland both of the present Pope and of BMW, Siemens, Audi, Allianz, Puma and Adidas, to name but a few. Bavaria is proportionately the second most Catholic Land, beaten only by Saarland with its coal mines, steel works, car plants and ceramics factories.

To cite only Britain among many possible examples, who do people think actually did much of the work in the West of Scotland, the North of England, the Midlands or (if, perhaps, less so) South Wales? And what do they think that the inhabitants of Northern Italy are? Protestants?

22 July 2012 at 15:52  
Blogger John Magee said...

Lindsay Well said. You did forget to mention that Luxembourg, which is over 90% Roman Catholic, happens to be the richest nation in the EU in terms of GDP. Wealthy Switzerland is almost 50% Roman Catholic. Then there is beautiful, prosperous, and culturally rich Austria a land that is overwhelmingly RC.

22 July 2012 at 19:23  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

I was in Austria at a very Catholic academic conference in recent weeks, and you are absolutely right. A most impressively run country. And still a profoundly Catholic one.

22 July 2012 at 20:20  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

Albert,
It was you who specified two Nazis.
I had thousands in mind (from both Protestant and Catholic backgrounds) when I wrote and I wasn't particularly into the Catholic v Protestant thing.

If you look at Hitler's formation in the politics of the old Austrian Empire, there were three main political strands in the German-speaking community-
The Church & Crown Clericals who supported the multiracial Habsburg Empire,
The Socialists who could also co-operate across racial communities,
and the Pan- Germans to which Hitler attached himself, who wanted to separate themselves and join the Berlin-led Reich. He was particularly influenced by a man called Schoenerer who styled himself "Fuehrer" of his party and promoted "Heil" as the German greeting instead of the polite Austrian, Christian "Gruess Gott" .
There was a "Los von Rom" (free from Rome) movement which took two main forms - one of which was a "pure" pagan German religion and the other an attempt to convert Catholic Austrians into Lutherans, so that they would get on with the Prussians.

The Nazis, of course, intended to destroy all Christianity but had a slight preference for Luther as a German who had protested against the ripping off of the German people.

Funnily enough he later became quite acceptable to the Communists of East Germany for similar reasons. So Angela Merkel's Dad made the unusual West to East transit as a Lutheran Pastor and became a highly placed a trusty of the regime.

22 July 2012 at 23:49  
Blogger Albert said...

Okay Edward, but the context did not seem to imply Protestants and Catholics, it implied Catholics - see the original post and your first two paragraphs. Also the two individuals to whom Adenauer referred as "dark brown" were both Protestants: Waldamar Kraft & Theodor Oberländer.

As you can probably see from this thread, a great deal that is posted here is unjustly anti-Catholic - your post (now clarified helpfully - thank you) seemed to fit that mould. Sometimes it seems that no amount of evidence will shift anti-Catholicism.

That the Nazis were happier with Protestantism than Catholicism seems uncontroversial. Although there were bad people on both sides, the structure of the Catholic Church, together with it teaching authority (vs "private judgement" of Protestantism), makes it harder to manipulate.

23 July 2012 at 10:42  
Blogger len said...

Ot course the real culprit
(Or at least one of them) is.'replacement theology'whereby the church replaced israel in Gods plans.This gave those who gave credence to this false idea a'divine right' to persecute the jews.

23 July 2012 at 13:44  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

len

Do you just ignore posts on earlier threads?

'Replacement Theology', more properly termed, 'Supersessionism'.
is the traditional Christian belief that the covenant between God and the People of Israel, established through the mediation of Moses at Sinai, has been superseded by the 'New Covenant' of Jesus Christ.

This signifies that the Mosaic covenant, with its ritual and dietary requirements, Sabbath observance, etc., is no longer valid for the Jewish people since God’s revealed will is for Jews, as well as Gentiles, to enter into this New Covenant by baptism and faith in Jesus as the promised Messiah.

The Catholic Church teaches that the Mosaic covenant was fulfilled and replaced by this New Covenant in Christ. It does not teach that the Jewish people themselves are irrelevant in terms of eschatology and Biblical prophecy. For the Catholic Church, the Jewish people are a reminder that the "gifts and calling of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29).

Where and how does this sanction a 'Divine Right' to persecute the Jews?

Catholics recognise an ongoing and unique relationship between the Jewish people, God and the Church. Additionally, the Church teaches that there is an integral continuity between the covenants rather than a rupture.

In 'Lumen Gentium' (1964), the Church states that God "chose the race of Israel as a people" and "set up a covenant” with them, instructing them and making them holy." However, "all these things . . . were done by way of preparation and as a figure of that new and perfect covenant" instituted by and ratified in Christ. In 'Notes on the Correct Way to Present the Jews and Judaism' (1985), the Church stated that the "Church and Judaism cannot then be seen as two parallel ways of salvation and the Church must witness to Christ as the Redeemer of all."

In 'Dominus Iesus' (2000), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states, "There is only one salvific economy" and "God has willed that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity. . . . The certainty of the universal salvific will of God does not diminish, but rather increases the duty and urgency of the proclamation of salvation and of conversion to the Lord Jesus Christ"

If you genuinely want to understand this subject and the Catholic position, you really ought to read:

'THE JEWISH PEOPLE
AND THEIR SACRED SCRIPTURES
IN THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE'.

It was published by the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 2002 after years of study by several theologians. It gives scripural references to the ambiguities and tensions found in the New Testament towards the place of Judaism.

23 July 2012 at 17:26  
Blogger len said...

Dodo,
What Happens When' the Church'Replaces Israel?

The Church becomes arrogant and self-centred.
It boasts against the Jews and Israel.
It devalues the role of Israel or has no role for Israel at all.
These attitudes result in anti-Semitism in word and deed.
) Without a place for Israel and the Jewish people today, you cannot explain the Bible prophecies, especially the very specific ones being fulfilled in Israel today.
Many New Testament passages do not make sense when the Jewish people are replaced by 'the Church'.
You can lose the significance of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Old Testament, for today. Many Christians boast of being a New Testament (NT) Christian or a NT Church as in the Book of Acts. However, the Bible of the early Church was not the New Testament, which did not get codified until the 4th century, but rather the Hebrew Scriptures.
You can lose the Hebraic/Judaic contextualization of the New Testament, which teaches us more about Yeshua and how to become better disciples.
The Church loses out on the opportunity to participate in God's plan and prophecy for the Church, Israel and the world today.

The end-time prophecies, which speak of the return of the House of Jacob to their land (Israel) and its restoration, have overwhelmingly been fulfilled in Israel and the Jewish people in the past 120 years. (See, Isa. 11:11-12; Eze. 37:1-14; Eze. 36; Eze. 35:1, Isa. 43:5,6; Jer. 16:14-16; Isa. 60:9-11; Isa. 49:22-23, etc.)

And if you are still in doubt;
Gentiles are grafted INTO 'the olive tree'(Israel) they have not replaced it!.

24 July 2012 at 23:25  
Blogger len said...

Dodo,

I see there is an amount of truth in Catholicism but the amount of error counterbalances the truth rendering it unreliable.It can be likened to having a glass of crystal clear water with an amount of poison in it.'Would you drink it?'.

I can say the same about Protestant theology which has different errors in it..but still errors .
The only Sure Guide is the still small voice of the Holy Spirit guiding one into all truth and I will rely on Him.

24 July 2012 at 23:33  
Blogger Albert said...

The only Sure Guide is the still small voice of the Holy Spirit guiding one into all truth and I will rely on Him.

Are you a Quaker, Len?

25 July 2012 at 19:04  
Blogger len said...

No Albert, I am but an honest seeker of the truth(sorry if this comes across as a bit confrontational at times)
This may sound a bit pompous or a bit presumptuous but truth is what I am genuinely seeking.
I am interested(at the moment ) in the Eastern Orthodox Church and am gathering a few facts about the same.
This does not mean that I will embrace the Eastern Orthodox Church only that I am looking at it.

I see the faults within the Catholic and the Protestant denominations and IMO no church has 'got it right'.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth and hopefully He will lead me on the straight and narrow path to the truth(I have had a few slips and stumbles on the way but the Holy Spirit has always given me a 'nudge' in the right direction.

25 July 2012 at 20:53  
Blogger Albert said...

Thank you Len, for your honest answer. I've never doubted you are an honest seeker after truth (although in the course of argument, I do sometimes think you stick to positions long after they have ceased to be tenable).

Yes, Eastern Orthodoxy is wonderful. I am sure that whatever your approach to it results in, it will deepen your understanding of Christ, and for that, thanks be to God. Presumably, you are reading books by Timothy (Kallistos) Ware?

25 July 2012 at 21:35  
Blogger len said...

Not heard of him Albert but will certainly look him up.

26 July 2012 at 19:21  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older