A CASE AGAINST CHRISTIANITY 2

He did nothing significant in declaring any outrage where the people and governments around the world would have heard him, especially where the atrocities were taking place (Hitler would never have stood up against the railings of the general populace. In 1934 Hitler was elected Fuhrer (by 95.7% of German voters); where was the Pope? He never knew of Mein Kamp? Where was the vision of the man who walks in the shoes of Peter? He said nothing, and later, when the time came, and Pius knew about the atrocities (the roundups and deportations were taking place right there in Rome), again he virtually said nothing and did nothing.

His own justification for silence was in December 1942 when he said, "The Pope cannot speak; if he spoke, things would be worse" ... December 1942? How could things have been worse then? In 1933 (June 3) an earlier pope, Pius XI, issued an encyclical "On Oppression of the Church in Spain" ... but never a word against the growing oppression of the Jews in Europe. Interesting to note that on April 2, 1965, Rolf Hochhuth's play "The Deputy" ... blaming Pope Pius XII for war crimes, was banned in Italy.

Another pious Pius was Pope Pius IX who headed the church from 1846 to 1878, and who was recently hailed by Pope John Paul II as "a simple priest" who "never failed to be indulgent toward his enemies." Yet for the Jewish population in Rome, he was someone who maintained severe restrictions on them, forcing them to live in a ghetto, and referring to them as "dogs." Most notoriously, he approved the infamous seizure by church officials of a Jewish boy who had been secretly baptized by a Catholic maid and who later entered the priesthood under the pope's patronage. He then publicly warned the Jewish leaders who protested the kidnapping to cease and desist or he would force them "back into their holes." Coincidently, it was during his pontifical reign, on July 18, 1870, that pontifical infallibility was proclaimed. Who was now going to contradict the pope?

And speaking of Rome, the eternal city ... in the middle of Rome stands the Arch of Titus (like the Arch d'Triumph in Paris, or Washington's Arch right here in NYC). On this arch is in sculptured relief an engraving showing the looting of Jerusalem and the Hebrews being led out as slaves. This arch celebrates the Roman army under Titus and how they occupied and plundered Jerusalem in the year 70 (ce).

Regarding "the herding of Jews" ... something sickening throughout history, Rabbi Joshua Hammerman in "Seeking G-d in Cyberspace" speaks of the death of "The Shepherd" saying he's abandoned the metaphor except at funerals. He says: "As a Jew, I cannot imagine myself in the role of sheep, especially when six million of my fellow Jews were led like sheep to the slaughter. Although many resisted and more were heroic even in passive resistance, the image of sheep-to-the-slaughter remains the pervasive nightmare of the Jewish people. Sheep are passive, plump, and witless sweaters-in-waiting. The idea of being sheep sickens me."

Back to Oberammerau, the village may have been famously pious, but some important Nazis set up headquarters there, even the man who designed and built the crematoriums at Auschwitz. Hitler himself was famously fond of the play, which he saw twice. And the villagers returned his affection, even if, in later years, they have steadily pleaded innocent on questions of Nazi guilt. In the 1950 and 1960 productions of the play, the village assigned the role of Jesus to someone who had been convicted, after the war, of having been a Nazi. In the 1970 production, the ex-Nazi went on to become the artistic director.

Still, eventually the village did begin to notice that not everyone was in love with its play. The American Jewish organizations began making a fuss over the play in 1966, and they pushed some of the Jewish intellectuals into mounting a protest, and the point was made. The American Jewish organizations kept at it,, as they do all anti-Semitism. But the real pressure on the village came from the highest ranks of the Catholic Church. It was because in 1965, during the Second Vatican Council, the church officially abandoned its ancient doctrines about the collective guilt of the Jewish people and the eternal divine curse upon Jewish blood. In one fateful stroke, because of the new theological interpretations, the play fell outside of correct doctrine. And the good Catholics of Oberammergau suddenly had to rethink.

Another aside ... I know the wheels of the Vatican move very slowly, but just think of the pain and untold bloodshed that surly would have been avoided, certainly reduced, had the Vatican opened its mouth to declare its many lies during its history as just that, lies. How long did it take for it to finally agree and admit that the earth was round and that the earth is not in the center of the universe? A brief journey into the tragic life (made tragic by the Catholic church) of Galileo Galilei:

He was an Italian astronomer, mathematician, and physicist, who in 1632 published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, a work that upheld the Copernican system rather than the Ptolemaic system and marked a turning point in scientific and philosophical thought. He was hounded by Inquisition, As early as 1612 he began to encounter serious opposition to his theory of the motion of the earth that he taught after Copernicus (theories that the sun was the center of our universe). In 1614, Father Tommaso Caccini denounced the opinions of Galileo on the motion of the Earth from the pulpit of Santa Maria Novella, judging them to be erroneous, requiring Galileo to travel to Rome and defend himself against charges that had been made against him.

In 1616, he was admonished by Cardinal Bellarmino and told that he could not defend Copernican astronomy because it went against the doctrine of the Church. In 1633 he was brought before the Inquisition in Rome, he was made to renounce all his beliefs and writings supporting the Copernican theory). Note that it wasn't until 1992 that the Roman Catholic Church "rehabilitated" (that's the word they used, meaning "un-condemned") this great scientist; that was after 359 years. Galileo was tortured and imprisoned by the Holy Office (aka The Inquisition) and was forced to recant his heretical views that the earth and planets revolved around Sun. He was sent to exile in Siena. He spent his last years almost totally blind and poor, and died January 8, 1642, at age 77 in Italy. The Church was never too kind to their real scholars.

When Copernicus published his work, he was contradicting what the Church taught and thus was a heretic. Since Copernicus died before anything could be done to him, the worst punishment was that his book was placed on the Index (list of “naughty” books) in 1616 and wasn’t removed until 1835. However, people who came later suffered by way of the Catholic Church, in particular Bruno and Galileo who were both called before the Inquisition and charged with being heretics.

Any opposing views by scholars was not accepted by the Church; it wasn't until 1985 that an accord was made between Italy and the Vatican ending Roman Catholicism's position as "sole religion of the Italian state." Take another case, the medieval scholar, Giordano Bruno (1548-1600), an ordained priest, who attracted attention by the originality of his views and by his outspoken criticism of accepted theological doctrine. His unbending integrity and lack of compromise resulted in his being hounded throughout Europe by the Church, and he lived a life on the road as wandering scholar, writer, and teacher. Eventually they caught up with him, placed him into prison for eight years, and ordered him to recant the heretical passages of his works. He would not cooperate or change his views. They tortured him; still he would not recant. Finally, on February 17th, 1600, he was taken out into the Campo dei Fiori in Rome, and burned alive at the stake as an unrepentant heretic.

The ignorance of the Church never ceases to amaze me. However, my thoughts on that ignorance are of no consequence when you compare the harm this ignorance has done throughout the centuries. The NY Times magazine, November 19, 2004 writes that, "The idea that witches lay waste to crops was once conventional wisdom." In a papal bull of 1484, Pope Innocent VIII wrote, "It has indeed lately come to Our ears, many persons of both sexes, have blasted the produce of the earth, the grapes of the vine, the fruits of the trees." How is that for setting up the slaughter of innocent (pun intended) people throughout the centuries for what was called "witchraft." The Church set the tone, and in Salem, Massachusetts (and towns all over the world), the ignorant public set the flames.

The Papacy always found it very convenient as a teaching tool to have an inquisition now and then. They weren't only for the Jews, though Jews were always throughout history, a popular and convenient target. In 1542 Pope Paul III launched an inquisition against Protestants (anyone who failed to see the Vatican's point of view). Need I remind my non-Jewish readers *and* Jewish readers what the inquisitions were all about? I'll spare your senses. Except one point: Christianity was persecuted for a short period until 313 when it became adopted by the Roman Empire. From that moment on the boot was on the other foot. Christianity was spread by violent conquest and was a fellow traveler of economic and social imperialism centuries before Coca Cola was invented.

What about Oberammergau? (Lest I be criticized for having too many asides). Seems these villagers have been caught up in one fight after another ever since the Second Vatican Council, in their effort to fend off the American Jews and the Catholic hierarchy. Reforming the play is not so easily done. Some of the most hair-raising anti-Semitic lines can be removed from the script, and the play's Jews can be relieved of their customary horns, and Jesus can be portrayed as a Hebrew-speaking Jew, which is what he was (also a practicing Jew, btw, observing all the biblical laws of Judaism) ... but the demonic nature of the Jews lies at the heart of the drama. The triumph of virtuous Christians over satanic Judaism supplies the cathartic emotion at the end. Not much can be done about that.

To speak of the "demonic nature of the Jews" is to belie and ignore the background of constant study in ... Jewish Ethics ... and ... Torah Thinking ... and its application that is an integral part of the Jew's fabric. Do some stray from this fabric? Absolutely. Is it the norm? Look to society's criminal statistics for that answer.

What's the bottom line to all this? You ask: "What does it all mean?" It means there is no point in trying to pretend that ancient anti-Semitic fantasies have entirely disappeared from modern life. Anti-Semitic, anti-Black, anti-Gay, Southerner, Northerner, anti-Asian, anti-Anti ... it's all the same thing, it's an open invitation to trouble. What does it mean when Pope Paul (year 2000) wants to make a saint out of Pius II (also known as "Hitler's Pope")? The only thing is to try to be lucid about those fantasies, to bring them into the open air and let people see them for what they are.

Whether they be Richard Wagner's operas, T.S. Eliot's poems, Christian theology, Louis Farrakhan's idiosyncratic Muslim theology, Marxist political theory, or the Vatican's silence in World War II ... they are all examples of fantasies misplaced, or untimely silence. So today we have to examine those fantasies, and be more outspoken, and as I said above, let people see the issues for what they are.

As we have seen, the Vatican wasn't always silent partners to the most horrendous crimes of the 20th century. Sometimes they spoke out, but not against it. There were times when the Church even gave its religious sanction to the economic and cultural expulsion of the Jews. Here's an example in Polish life where in his pastoral letter (1936), the primate of Poland, August Hlond, advised all Catholics: "It is also true that the Jews are committing frauds, practicing usury, and dealing in white slavery ... one does well to prefer his own kind in commercial dealings, and to avoid Jewish stores and stalls in the markets."

Ironically at the same time, while supporting an economic boycott of Jewish businesses, Cardinal Hlond pointed to the "very many Jews who are believers, honest, just, kind, and philanthropic... who are ethically outstanding, noble and upright." Go figure, but remember, all a villain has to hear is one diatribe against any happless victim to unleash his venom against that victim; I'm sure Cardinal Hlond knew that. In 1927, in the aftermath of war, Pius XII made him a cardinal and on October 25, 1998, Cardinal Glemp, then primate of Poland, conducted the first commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of Cardinal Hlond's death with a solemn celebration in Poznan Cathedral.

What's the truth? All scholars disagree on this very delicate subject: The Role of the Church in the Holocaust. I am least capable of any final word but I do think it calls for research and honesty on both sides. I hope someday the public knows the truth and the matter is put to rest. I know one thing: it is very easy for some people to combine artful deceit with a respectable exterior, and one can wear the robes of a cleric (rabbi included) and still be a devil. One can be blinded by a person's pretense of righteousness and and not see into his wickedness; it's happened to me too many times.

I should add here that only recently, during this bicentennial year, for the holocaust memorial in the city of Vienna, Austria, a placard was installed at the Judenplatz by the city's archbishop, Cristoph Cardinal Sch�nborn acknowledging the church's "culpability in the persecution of the Jews" both during the Nazi years and before. Finally, FINALLY, the truth is told. A blessing upon the head of Cristoph Cardinal Sch�nborn, a real saint of the Church.

It is no secret now that in Vienna more than 65,000 Austrian Jews were killed by the Nazis. And here in this square, where a memorial is now (year 2,000) going up, where Mozart lived when he wrote "Cosi Fan Tutte" with his librettist, Lorenzo da Ponte, the son of a Jewish craftsman, here is where in 1421, during a pogrom, several hundred Jews burned themselves inside the synagogue rather than submit to baptism or execution. A 16th century plaque with an image of the baptism of Jesus still hangs in the square, a Latin inscription on it commemorated death of the "Hebrew dogs." Say it like it is, Cardinal Sch�nborn, you have my respect. Clark Williamson (theologian) writes:

Of the many difficulties in writing about the treatment of Jews by Christians, not least is the problem of believability. That some things could have occurred seems scarcely credible. Yet they did. . . . we have seen the collusion of Christianity with pogrom and Holocaust. . . . What is the goodness of this world . . . when millions are killed by those baptized in the name of the Redeemer? . . . The immensity of human suffering and death inflicted on Jews for 1,500 years by some who called themselves Christian, and the apparent worthlessness to Christians of the lives of those who did not convert to Christianity, fundamentally question Christian claims about the value of human life. . . . Christians have lost forever the credibility of their claim to a superior religion and a superior ethic.

Where's the truth? It lies hidden under levels of deception that have to be methodically and carefully peeled away until what remains is the truth; even if it might be most uncomfortable to view. We might be looking into our very souls. But not to view it is totally unacceptable. And what are these levels of deception that occupy us (with the full support of government)? That's a big topic in itself, but they might include all the cultural and entertainment institutions that we have come to love so much. It seems that we are given everything to prevent the mind from looking at itself. Our mission should be to say "no thank you".

To finally summarize (and the topic is much greater than we can ever imagine), we have to bring into our discussions a solid familiarity with the folklore of the medieval and post-medieval age ... a bygone era that is not exactly bygone.

It only occurred to me recently that some or th errors of dominant Christian sects (the Vatican, for example) is a relative disrespect for the present, for the material. Maybe it is convenient for them to tell the parishioners that the present doesn't count. Whereas Jews, for example, consider the present important in at least preparation for eternity, and furthermore, that they have the obligation to give to material world a spiritual component, so G-d can feel comfortable in this world and in each one of us. An interesting comment found in Welcome to Everything is the following:

"A common perception among dominant Christian sects is that the body and the soul are distinct elements; the body is a temporary vessel holding the more valuable soul. It has led to a pervasive theme in Western thought, earth/body/present, have little value, while heaven/soul/infinity exist on some higher plane. The soul may eventually get to heaven, but at any rate, it is immortal.

An unfortunate result in this belief is that some Christians, not content with saving their own souls, seek to save others from eternal damnation. What's a little corporeal torture if it leads the unfaithful to infinite heavenly bliss? Western history is littered with the burned and quartered carcasses of people whose spiritual lives were "improved" by the good intentions of respectable Christians."