Mormon baptism Denied by Catholic Church (2 views) Subscribe   
  From:  David (DavidABrown)    8/2/2001 8:03 pm  
To:  ALL   (1 of 27)  
 
  168.1  
 
Source: http://www.mcjonline.com/news/01b/20010725d.shtml      

August 2, 2001 

Mormon Baptism Denied 
By Roman Catholic Church 
(CHARISMA) -- The Mormon Church's attempts to identify itself as a Christian denomination has suffered a setback as the Roman Catholic Church ruled that Latter-day Saints who convert to Catholicism must be rebaptized. Last week, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith decided that the Mormon view on the nature of God was "too different," the Associated Press (AP) reported. 

The Vatican group rejected the Mormon belief that "God the father had a wife, the Celestial Mother, with whom he procreated Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit." The body decided that Mormon baptism "is not the Baptism that Christ instituted." It was the second year in a row that a major Christian church had ruled that Mormon converts must be rebaptized, "The Los Angeles Times" reported. Last year, the United Methodist Church, the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination, made a similar stand. 

Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit theologian and Congregation spokesman, acknowledged the ruling marks "a change from the past practice" of the Catholic Church, which typically recognizes the baptisms of most denominations, the AP reported. The Congregation reviewed the issue after receiving a request to look into the validity of Mormon baptisms in conversion. 

Mormon spokesman Michael Otterson said the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which requires converts to be rebaptized, was "neither concerned nor offended" by the Vatican's decision, the "Times" reported. The 11-million-member Latter-day Saints Church has tried hard to characterize itself as a legitimate Christian church in this country and in developing countries where its missionaries are winning converts. In February, the church announced it was dropping the terms "LDS Church" and "LDS" as shorthand names. 

 2001 charismanews.com 
 2001 Maranatha Christian News Service 

(Post date: July 25, 2001) 

     
August 2, 2001 

Mormon Baptism Denied 
By Roman Catholic Church 
(CHARISMA) -- The Mormon Church's attempts to identify itself as a Christian denomination has suffered a setback as the Roman Catholic Church ruled that Latter-day Saints who convert to Catholicism must be rebaptized. Last week, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith decided that the Mormon view on the nature of God was "too different," the Associated Press (AP) reported. 

The Vatican group rejected the Mormon belief that "God the father had a wife, the Celestial Mother, with whom he procreated Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit." The body decided that Mormon baptism "is not the Baptism that Christ instituted." It was the second year in a row that a major Christian church had ruled that Mormon converts must be rebaptized, "The Los Angeles Times" reported. Last year, the United Methodist Church, the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination, made a similar stand. 

Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit theologian and Congregation spokesman, acknowledged the ruling marks "a change from the past practice" of the Catholic Church, which typically recognizes the baptisms of most denominations, the AP reported. The Congregation reviewed the issue after receiving a request to look into the validity of Mormon baptisms in conversion. 

Mormon spokesman Michael Otterson said the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which requires converts to be rebaptized, was "neither concerned nor offended" by the Vatican's decision, the "Times" reported. The 11-million-member Latter-day Saints Church has tried hard to characterize itself as a legitimate Christian church in this country and in developing countries where its missionaries are winning converts. In February, the church announced it was dropping the terms "LDS Church" and "LDS" as shorthand names. 

 2001 charismanews.com 
 2001 Maranatha Christian News Service 

(Post date: July 25, 2001) 

 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/2/2001 9:34 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (2 of 27)  
 
  168.2 in reply to 168.1  
 
I shall now establish what is called a chain of contradiction: 
According to your post, the Church of Rome doesn't accept Mormon baptism as valid. However in the past, the sources you pulled these articles from have condemned the Catholics as Non-Christian for their worship of the Virgin Mary and their strict codes of conduct regarding prayer/mass. If one believes Catholics to be misguided as your sources have noted in the past, then how can you legitimately use one of their conclusions to strengthen your own argument? Not everyone can be completely "wrong" or "right" in situations such as this, but how can one use the words of those called "Non-Christian" to uphold a Christian view? 

In short, how can you support Catholics one minute and condemn them the next? 



-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   8/2/2001 9:38 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (3 of 27)  
 
  168.3 in reply to 168.1  
 
  Doesn't mean anything, really.  We don't look to the Catholic Church, or the Methodist Church, or any other church as any source of authority on how our own church should be run, or what doctrines we should teach.  There's no reason why we should.

  It has always been our position that for a baptism to be valid, it must be performed by one who holds the true Priesthood, and the authority associated therewith, and that this Priesthood and authority is found only in our church.  Anyone who converts to Mormonism needs to be baptized and confirmed by holders of our Priesthood.  We don't recognize as valid, and never have, baptisms performed without this authority.

  Apparently, the Methodists, and now the Catholics, have decided that they don't recognize us as having the proper authority to perform baptisms.  And to be honest, I don't see why they should, any more than I see why we should recognize any such authority by them.

  The mention of a Mormon belief that God the father had a wife, the Celestial Mother, with whom he procreated Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit is is not an accurate description of LDS teaching or doctrine.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email address.  To email me, remove the string HatesSpam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

BobHatesSpam@blaylock.to  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    8/3/2001 7:47 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (4 of 27)  
 
  168.4 in reply to 168.3  
 
Well Said!!

 

Mormons do not look to other Christian organizations because Mormons are Non-Christian.

 

This is not a New development Mormonism has Never been accepted as Christian.

 

With the Current Mormon Propaganda of referring to themselves as Christian now Christian Churches feel the need to put into writing that Mormons are Not Christians.

 

And that Mormon practices like Baptism are unacceptable to Christianity.





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   8/3/2001 8:11 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (5 of 27)  
 
  168.5 in reply to 168.4  
 
David (DAVIDABROWN) wrote:
Mormons do not look to other Christian organizations because Mormons are Non-Christian.
  That simply doesn't follow.  We believe that we are the one true Christian Church, the only church that has the fullness of the Gospel as revealed by God  that other Christian churches have only parts of the true Gospel, mingled with erroneous man-made doctrines.  It simply doesn't make sense to suppose that a church which believes itself to be in sole possession of the full and true Gospel would look to other churches for doctrinal authority.

  You accept the Catholic church as Christian, don't you?  Do you think the Catholic church looks to, say, the Methodist church or the Lutheran church for doctrinal authority?



And that Mormon practices like Baptism are unacceptable to Christianity.
  I suspect that you meant here something other than what you said.  Do you mean to say that baptism is a Mormon practice, and that baptism is not an acceptable practice to Christians?  I don't think that's what you believe, but that's how your statement reads. 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email address.  To email me, remove the string HatesSpam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

BobHatesSpam@blaylock.to  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/3/2001 11:28 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (6 of 27)  
 
  168.6 in reply to 168.4  
 
<<<Mormons do not look to other Christian organizations because Mormons are Non-Christian.>>> 
The Orthodox have never looked to other sects of Christianity for approval, however they are very much Christian. I believe this could also be said about the Baptists and many other "non traditional" Christian churches. 

The problem with the Catholic church is that the big men at the top consider themselves to be the only ones who are correct. Its always been either their way or the highway. Hence why they've spent the last 1500 years figuring out who is "wrong" rather then figuring out what docterines are actually "right".


-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   8/3/2001 11:40 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (7 of 27)  
 
  168.7 in reply to 168.6  
 
  It's interesting to note, I think, that in all of Christianity, only the Catholic church, the Mormon church, and possibly one of the Orthodox churches (or perhaps all of the Orthodox churches collectively) are in a position to be able, logically, to claim to be the only true church, and that all other churches are false.

  The Catholics claim to this position is based on an unbroken line of succession leading back to Jesus Christ himself.  The Catholics have a basis on which to claim that they are the very same church that was founded by Christ and his followers.  I imagine the Orthodox churches might be able to lay similar claims on a similar basis, for the split between them and Catholicism occurred right at the start.

  The Mormon position, of course, is based on the claim that Christianity [both in the Catholic and Orthodox forms] became corrupted in the first few centuries, and that the true Gospel was thus lost, along with the Priesthoods; and that it was necessary for God to send messengers to restore his Gospel and his Priesthoods to the world.  We [Mormons] claim to be the product of this restoration.

  All of the Protestant sects exist based upon the belief that, at some point in history, Christianity, as it existed in the Catholic church, had become corrupted.  All of the Protestant sects are offshoots of the Catholic church, having broken off after their founders believed Catholicism to have become corrupted.  All are forever cut off from God's Priesthoods, for if the Catholic church had the Priesthood, the Protestants were cut off from it when they broke off from that source; and the Protestants have no connection to the other two possible credible sources of Priesthood authority, which would be the Mormon and Orthodox sects.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email address.  To email me, remove the string HatesSpam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

BobHatesSpam@blaylock.to  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    8/4/2001 8:18 am  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (8 of 27)  
 
  168.8 in reply to 168.7  
 
Mr. Mormon,

 

As usual your lack of Knowledge about Christianity is so limited that you are not even capable of posting a credible post.

 

For starters the Priesthood does Not belong to men it Belongs to Jesus (God). Since the Priesthood does not belong to people, people (organizations) do not pass it along. 

 

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to ALL The Flock, over the which the HOLY SPIRIT (GHOST) hath Made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He (Jesus) hath purchased with His own Blood.

 

Salvation is in Jesus Not in people nor in Organizations and certainly not in Foolish Cults like the Mormons. People do not pass along the Holy Spirit (Baptism of the Holy Spirit / the Gifts of the Holy Spirit) Only the Holy Spirit gives the Holy Sprit. And the Holy Spirit is given to those Who Acknowledge Jesus the Only Begotten Son of God, not the Mormon Myth they call jesus.

 

Being a Mormon and a False Witness of Jesus the Holy spirit is something that you know nothing about. You cannot receive the Holy Spirit via Joseph Smith or the Pope the Holy Spirit is available only from the Holy Spirit

 

1 Corinthians 2:12-14 Now we (Christians) have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might Know the things that are Freely Given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing Spiritual things with Spiritual. But the natural man (Mormon) receiveth Not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they (Mormons) are Spiritually discerned (lacking).

 

You cannot have a relationship with God by belonging to a group of people. A relationship with God comes from Acknowledging God and having a relationship with God via the Holy Spirit.

 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   8/4/2001 10:53 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (9 of 27)  
 
  168.9 in reply to 168.8  
 
David (DAVIDABROWN) wrote:
For starters the Priesthood does Not belong to men it Belongs to Jesus (God). Since the Priesthood does not belong to people, people (organizations) do not pass it along. 
Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to ALL The Flock, over the which the HOLY SPIRIT (GHOST) hath Made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He (Jesus) hath purchased with His own Blood.
Salvation is in Jesus Not in people nor in Organizations and certainly not in Foolish Cults like the Mormons. People do not pass along the Holy Spirit (Baptism of the Holy Spirit / the Gifts of the Holy Spirit) Only the Holy Spirit gives the Holy Sprit. And the Holy Spirit is given to those Who Acknowledge Jesus the Only Begotten Son of God, not the Mormon Myth they call jesus.

Being a Mormon and a False Witness of Jesus the Holy spirit is something that you know nothing about. You cannot receive the Holy Spirit via Joseph Smith or the Pope the Holy Spirit is available only from the Holy Spirit
1 Corinthians 2:12-14 Now we (Christians) have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might Know the things that are Freely Given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing Spiritual things with Spiritual. But the natural man (Mormon) receiveth Not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they (Mormons) are Spiritually discerned (lacking).
You cannot have a relationship with God by belonging to a group of people. A relationship with God comes from Acknowledging God and having a relationship with God via the Holy Spirit.
  I must give you this, David:  You have a very impressive talent for quoting scripture out of context, and twisting it into meanings never imagined by its original writers.  This is truly an impressive skill, though I would question whether this is a skill which ought to be used by any Christian, or any person interested in truth.  I shall leave it as an exercise for the discerning reader to look these scriptures up for himself, and to see what they say in context.

  From the Time of Moses, it has always been so that God has ordained an organization to guide men in his ways, and a Priesthood to perform certain vital functions.  This remained true in the New Testament as well, and the New Testament repeatedly speaks of the need for the Priesthood.

  As a Protestant, you are compelled to deny the Priesthood, not because there is any logical basis on which to conclude that it is no longer necessary, but because you don't have it, and it is not available to you!  In breaking away from the Catholic church, the Protestant founders cut themselves and their followers off from any credible source of Priesthood (a rather moot point, really, since I think it must be agreed between Mormons and Protestants that by this time, the Catholic church had become corrupted, and had thus lost any true Priesthood authority anyway).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email address.  To email me, remove the string HatesSpam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

BobHatesSpam@blaylock.to  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/4/2001 6:21 pm  
To:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   (10 of 27)  
 
  168.10 in reply to 168.7  
 
I've never seen the Mormons (as a group) outright say that they're the only "right" church. In fact, the only churches I've ever seen that claim this title are the Bible-belt Southern Baptist and the traditional, die-hard Catholics. 
The Orthodox never said that they were "right", only that they were more right then the Catholics. Mostly for not worshiping a man named the Pope or the Virgin Mary. If you've ever had the Pope come to your city to hold a public mass, you'd soon note that most Catholics are more interested in only seeing the Pope then attending the service. 



-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bob Blaylock (Bob_Blaylock)   8/5/2001 12:02 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (11 of 27)  
 
  168.11 in reply to 168.10  
 
DR_SHOCK wrote:
I've never seen the Mormons (as a group) outright say that they're the only "right" church.
  Perhaps because most Mormons are too timid to make such a bold claim.  It's a rather difficult claim to make while trying to maintain any semblance of tact and diplomacy.  But its truly our position, as a church, to believe and to claim that we, and we alone, have the complete and true Gospel of Jesus Christ; that we are the only true church, and that all other churches, while they may contain parts of the Gospel, are also missing vital parts thereof, and contain much falsehood mingled with their portions of truth.



In fact, the only churches I've ever seen that claim this title are the Bible-belt Southern Baptist and the traditional, die-hard Catholics.
  Aside from us, only the Catholics, and possibly the Orthodox, are in a logical position to be able to make this claim.  Protestantism cannot logically make such a claim.  Allow me to relate a story, told by Orson Whitney:
[Orson F. Whitney told of this conversation with a Catholic scholar:]

I bear in mind another noted visitor, a great scholar, who came here many years after the advent of the railroad. I became well acquainted with him, and we had more than one conversation together. I admired his vast erudition. He seemed to know all about law, literature, science, philosophy, and had a dozen languages at his tongue's end. He said to me one day: You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don't even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other position tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Roman Catholic Church. The issue is between Mormonism and Catholicism. If you are right, we are wrong. If we are right, you are wrong. And that's all there is to it. These Protestant sects haven't a leg to stand on; for if we are right, we cut them off long ago as apostates; and if we are wrong, they are wrong with us, for they were part of us and came out of us. If we have the apostolic succession from St. Peter as we claim, there was no need of Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary and Mormonism's position is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the gospel in latter days.
  The Catholic scholar is never named, I'm afraid, but the logic expressed herein is quiet sound.

  Protestantism is based on the assumption that the Catholic church had become corrupt, and that the Gospel was lost.  If this is true, then this corruption and loss had already occurred by the time any of the protestant churches broke off from the Catholic church.  The logical problem with trying to reconstruct truth from corruption should be obvious, and I think that it stands to reason that if the true Gospel were ever to be lost to Mankind, that the only way it could ever be restored is by direct revelation from God  something which, so far as I know, has not been credibly claimed to have occurred in the founding of any Protestant sect.  Of course, if the Catholic church was not corrupted, and if it did have the true Gospel, then all the Protestant sects are still wrong, for having apostated from that.

  Either way, there is no logical basis on which to conclude that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ is to be found in any Protestant sect.  If this Gospel is still found on Earth, then it is either in the Catholic church, which has had it all along, or else it is in the Mormon church, where it was restored by revelation from God.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email address.  To email me, remove the string HatesSpam from the email address which appears below.  DO NOT send me any form of advertising, chain letters, or other such garbage.  Spammers will be dealt with very harshly!

BobHatesSpam@blaylock.to  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/5/2001 6:50 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (12 of 27)  
 
  168.12 in reply to 168.6  
 
Dear Dr Shock, 
Come on. You should understand why the majestarium ruled on the matter. Not because they think that they are right but because it is the office of being first amonst equals. Anyway the Mormon tradition is Western and not Eastern thus it is under Rome and not the East. The Pope is only trying to do what he is supose to do in that allowing Mormon baptism would incourage the claims of multi-gods. To accept their baptism in essence would be to accept their idea of people becoming Gods of their own worlds. Here is the reason why they are not excepted. One must believe in the trinity and must go through the correct formula at baptism in order to be considered Christian. It really doesn't effect Mormon relations with the Vatican because the Mormons do not except anyones baptism. 

Pax 
John
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/5/2001 6:56 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (13 of 27)  
 
  168.13 in reply to 168.10  
 
Dear Dr Shock, 
Where do you get that the Catholics worship (I assume as in adoration) the Blessed Virgin Mary? I would not have expected this charge from an Orthodox who have simular traditions as Catholics. I also believe that your partiarch has simular authority in that you are bound to obey your patriarch. I wouldn't ever claim that Orthodox worship a man that is their Patriarch. 

Pax 
John
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/6/2001 3:10 am  
To:  Corkybob   (14 of 27)  
 
  168.14 in reply to 168.13  
 
DISCLAIMER: 
I'm writing this after suffering a mild heart attack at the hands of a bad medication interaction. Therefore, I'm going to warn you that this might not be the easiest read in the world since I'm a little bit out of it at the moment. Aaaaaaaaah... There's nothing quite like watching your own heart monitor suddenly flatline... (No joke!) 

<<<Come on. You should understand why the majestarium ruled on the matter. Not because they think that they are right but because it is the office of being first amonst equals.>>> 

Perhaps true, but since when did the Catholics have the divine right to stick their noses into everyone elses' business? If the Majestraium was really a round table it would be made up of more then just Catholics. If only Catholics make the decisions, then its not too equal, now is it? 

<<<Where do you get that the Catholics worship (I assume as in adoration) the Blessed Virgin Mary?>>> 

Go to any Catholic church in a large city (ie. Denver) and all you'll ever see religious statue-wise is a large cross and a statue of the Virgin. Most Catholics even pray to the Virgin for her to pray to Jesus for them. Half the mass is based around the Virgin rather then Jesus or God. 

<<<I would not have expected this charge from an Orthodox who have simular traditions as Catholics. I also believe that your partiarch has simular authority in that you are bound to obey your patriarch. I wouldn't ever claim that Orthodox worship a man that is their Patriarch.>>> 

The Orthodox mass is a lot different from the Catholics'. For example, becoming Catholic is really quite easy. However, if you want to become Russian Orthodox not being born into the religion, you first have to spend 3-7 years as a Catacuman (sp?) before you're even baptized. 

As for the "must obey the patriarch" rule, this is also very flexable in the Orthodox church. Going back to the Catacuman thing, some individual churches baptize their Catacumans before their years of training while others wait until afterwards. Sort of like the way the US Government works leaving individual power to the states, the Orthodox church has a set of rules which can be altered to varying degrees based on the circumstances. I've seen a fist fight between two drunken Russian Orthodox holy men before, a priest and a bishop, over a trivial matter regarding St. Saava's Day. Oddly enough, the results of the fight matched the end results of the St. Saava's Day celebration for that year despite the rank issue between the two participants. (The priest, Father Hearsch, won, by the way.) =) 

Orthodox are an odd lot. Half of their services are adapted from old Pagan rituals while the other half are a hoge-podge of Catholic and Eastern practices. If I was still Christian, I'd still be Russian Orthodox.


-The Mad Dr. Shock 
Heart Monitor: Bleep, Bleep, Bleep, BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! 
Shock's would-have-been last words: "Wow, did I ever pick a good time to be in the ER!"
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/6/2001 6:37 am  
To:  Dr_Shock   (15 of 27)  
 
  168.15 in reply to 168.14  
 
Dear Dr, 
The Catholic Church only sticks its knose into others business when it has to. For instance, then the Anglican Church started to ordain female priests. The Pope told the Bishop of Westminster that such a move would make it extremely difficult for the churches to reunite. In the 80'sthe Ukranian Patriarch died in the Ukrane and Pope JPII appointed the Patriarch because the Ukranian Church could not meet because fo the Communist. I believe it was the Orthodox Church that He appointed while the Ukranian Church could not appoint one. 

That is proposterious. DO you have devotions to St Basil, or St John Damascene, St Nicholas, St John Chrysostom, or any other great Eastern Saint? If you are Orthodox you do, or at least should. Are these devotions adorations? I do not think so. As far as the mass goes, it isn't much differant than your litergy content wise. We honor the early saints by repeating their names in the Litergy, including the Blessed VIrgin Mary, but we do not ask to recieve Mary Bodily into ours, which is the center of worship for both of our traditions (recieving the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ.) 

Actually it isn't as easy as becoming a Protestant. One must take the Catachism and one must be ready. If the person doesn't feel ready or the Priest does not think that they are ready, they will not be baptised into the Church. 

There lies the weakness of the Orthodox Church. After throughing out the Pope in 1054 they have wandered. The Orthodox claim unity but they are not. I spoke with an Antiochean Orthodox Priest and asked if the Orthodox Church taught that The Blessed Virgin Mary was sinless. He said that that was the first time he had heard it. I then got to hear about the orthodox theology on Original sin by another Antiochean parishiner. I asked a Greek Orthodox the same question and he said Yes. This plus the fact that there has been no ecuminical council for the Orthodox since 1054 tells me that there is no one in charge as there should be. Another example is that in 1999 or 2000 the Pope had set up a meeting with the Greek Patriarch. He wanted to visit the Russian Patriarch also. The Russian Patriarch would not come because the Greek Patriarch was there. The Greek Patriarch then cancilled because the Russian Patriarch wouldn't show. The Pope is trying to get dialog started between the Patriarchs of the respective Churches and the East will not show because of power plays. 

I can not comment on the Russian Litergy, but what I will say is that with all of their faults, I find it extremely hard to phantom any orthodox, Schismatic or Heredical, that would incorperate Pagan Practices. If so, this is another reason for the Catholci Church to stick its knose into the Orthodox's business. 

Pax 
John 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/6/2001 12:23 pm  
To:  Corkybob   (16 of 27)  
 
  168.16 in reply to 168.15  
 
<<<The Catholic Church only sticks its knose into others business when it has to. For instance, then the Anglican Church started to ordain female priests. The Pope told the Bishop of Westminster that such a move would make it extremely difficult for the churches to reunite.>>> 
"The Catholic Church only sticks its 'knose' in others business when it has to"? I believe the Yugoslavians would love to hear that in reference to the Pope siding with Hitler in WWII (which any historian will tell you he officially did). The modern Serbian ethnic cleansing of the Croats (Catholics) is seen as justice for this by many modern Yugoslavians. You see, the Pope agreed to be on Hitler's side only if he did something about the "Slavic plague" (actual quote) in Central Europe. The acts of modern Serbs are not morally justified by any means, however there is historical basis for blaming the Catholic Church for the modern problem. The modern Croats even blame the Church of Rome for the civil unrest, hence why the church disowned them and, while still Catholic in religion, aren't officially part of the Roman Church anymore. If they were, the Pope would have agreed to appoint a Vatican representative on the UN War Crimes Tribunal. (Something which the Pope refused to do both now and during the Nuremberg Trials.) 

The only reason the Pope wants everyone together is to maintain power. The Roman Church came from a tyrannical empire, continued as an oppressive force and continues to be one today. Why do you think the Vatican receives several million in gold bullion each day from Switzerland for absolutely no good reason? 

<<<In the 80'sthe Ukranian Patriarch died in the Ukrane and Pope JPII appointed the Patriarch because the Ukranian Church could not meet because fo the Communist. I believe it was the Orthodox Church that He appointed while the Ukranian Church could not appoint one.>>> 

The Ukrainian Patriarch died right after the Ukraine's split with the former USSR because they no longer wanted any part of Russia. Their severed ties with the government also separated them from the church for a short time as they were too busy trying to form their own government. The man who took over was a Bishop from St. Basil's sent by the Orthodox hierarchy in an act of goodwill. But lets face it, the Orthodox Church also did it to keep their influence in a former Russian provence. 

<<<That is proposterious. DO you have devotions to St Basil, or St John Damascene, St Nicholas, St John Chrysostom, or any other great Eastern Saint? If you are Orthodox you do, or at least should. Are these devotions adorations?>>> 

Most major saints have feast days but are not actually recognized in liturgy. No Virgin, no saints, just God. Liturgy itself is just worship and should, therefore, only include God. There are no Orthodox prayers to Saints or the Virgin (not that I've ever seen over 20 years, anyway). However, the Catholics have prayers like this in mass quantities. 

<<<There lies the weakness of the Orthodox Church. After throughing out the Pope in 1054 they have wandered. The Orthodox claim unity but they are not. I spoke with an Antiochean Orthodox Priest and asked if the Orthodox Church taught that The Blessed Virgin Mary was sinless. He said that that was the first time he had heard it. I then got to hear about the orthodox theology on Original sin by another Antiochean parishiner. I asked a Greek Orthodox the same question and he said Yes.>>> 

Did you ask them what context they answered the question in? Technically, she's sinless now but wasn't when she was alive just because she was human. With this question, timing is everything. Orthodox, in general, don't talk about saints or the Virgin much in a "religious" manner. The only time you'll hear the Virgin or the saints mentioned is during sermon. 

<<<This plus the fact that there has been no ecuminical council for the Orthodox since 1054 tells me that there is no one in charge as there should be.>>> 

In other words, you believe that religion should be lead by the doctrines of men rather then by the doctrine of God (as seen in the Catholic Church)? 

<<<Another example is that in 1999 or 2000 the Pope had set up a meeting with the Greek Patriarch. He wanted to visit the Russian Patriarch also. The Russian Patriarch would not come because the Greek Patriarch was there. The Greek Patriarch then cancilled because the Russian Patriarch wouldn't show. The Pope is trying to get dialog started between the Patriarchs of the respective Churches and the East will not show because of power plays.>>> 

This meeting occurred not more then three months ago and was all over the news. If you look at transcripts, all that happened was the Pope tried to convince the Orthodox that they needed a strong leader... Then suggested himself and the rest of the Catholic Church. Why didn't the Pope just understand that they're all under God, anyway? 

If you want to talk power plays, then perhaps I should bring up the history of how most Popes come into power. Linus I became Pope because he was one of the most anti-Gnostic Christian leaders in Greece at the time, which was needed because of the heavy Gnostic influence around the Mediterranean. Innocent II became Pope because he strived for Catholic supremacy throughout Europe and the Middle East (hence the Crusades). Our current Pope gained his position because the Jews were complaining about Catholic oppression of their religion at the time. Having a Catholic holy man who helped the Jews during the Holocaust become Pope was a political move more then much else since, really, John Paul wasn't nearly as qualified for the job as many others at the time. Ask any historian. 

<<<I can not comment on the Russian Litergy, but what I will say is that with all of their faults, I find it extremely hard to phantom any orthodox, Schismatic or Heredical, that would incorperate Pagan Practices. If so, this is another reason for the Catholci Church to stick its knose into the Orthodox's business.>>> 

Do you have a Christmas tree during Christmas? Most Churches also have a communal tree during Christmas time. The Christmas tree is originally part of a mid winter Pagan tradition. Icons and lighting candles in remembrance of people and events are also Northern European Pagan in origin. Modern Christianity is full of old Pagan references. Because one can't change history, the old simply becomes incorporated into the new. The assimilation of peoples of various cultures into a foreign concept often creates a highbred concept that is neither traditional nor true to the original. This is especially true with the Mexican Catholics' Lady of Guadalupe, who is both a saint and a ancient mythological figure. The story of the lady can be traced back over a thousand years through many Central American mythologies in one form or another. 



-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/6/2001 3:15 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (17 of 27)  
 
  168.17 in reply to 168.16  
 
Dear Dr, 
???? The Church never sided with Hitler. Their were members that did but they did not repusent the Church proper. Have your heared of Maximillion Mary Kolby? What of Edith Stien? These are 2 of millions of Cathoics that died in concentrations camps. 13 million people died in the concentraation camps. Only 6 million were Jews. The Vast majority of the others were Catholic. As far as your theory of the Pope helping Hitler as long as the "Slovic" problem was "taken care of " is rediculas." Tito was a Croat. Read Pope Pius's XII Christmas address of 1943. Read the Dutch Bishops message in 1941 given to the Nazi's which was used as an excuse to persecute the Jews. Read how Pius XII ordered all of the siminaries and Convents opened for all of those people fleeing Nazi persecution. Read how Pope Pius ordered 500,000 blank baptismal certificatessent to Hungray because Hungry was the only place where the Nazi's had no records at that time of the Jews in Hungary (hosrtly after the Nazi's started to round up Jews in Holland.) On the contray, the only Jews complaining about Pop Pius were the Jews that were not in the Holocost. Those that were consider him a hero. So much so that the Jewish head Robbi of Rome, Rabbi Zoelli, joined the Catholic Church in 1946. 

Roman Cathoics make up 1/6th of the Population. Christianity makes up 1/3rd of the Population, the majority of those are Protestants. The other 1 billion are made up of Protestant, Orthodox, and "Greek" Catholic. The Pope wants Christianity to be united because Jesus wants Christianity to be united (Jn 10, there will be one flock and one shepard.) 

Thanks to the talents of an American Piest who was a economics mjor in College, the Vatican has for the last 5 years or so been in the black. Before then it was operating in the red for a very long time. Point is that it's operation does not net millions. These last 5 years it when it was in the black netted no more than 100,000 american dollars. The majority of the Churches wealth is not in liquid assets, but in property such as Churches, Schools, Convents and monestaies. Others included art that was donated to the Church. In acuallity for the size of the Church, it is very poor. Millions in 
gold isn't from Switzerland can only be called in charity, a rumor. What I do think is that what it inactuallity is is a deceptive lie. It could have been a mistake, the person mixing up a suppose claim that the Church took millions in gold and sumgled it into Switzerland. There is no basis for either claims. 

As far as prayers to the Saints in liturgy, the idea of litergy is that when it is said we are in communion with all of the angels and saints, both dead and living, all in adoration to God in the form of bread and wine. That is the idea of litergy. That is why it is a sin not to go to liturgy atleast once a week for then it would be seen as not wanting to particapate in the liturgy with the entire church, both living and dead, and most of all, to be in communion with Jesus. 

Christian outlook is such that sinfull man cannot recieve God. Jesus died on the cross so that our sins could be forgiven and we be able to recieve God, thus be saved. The theological question is how could Mary concieve by the power of the Hoy Spirit if she was in sin. The Greek for Gabreals greeting is kecharitomene. It is perfect past parciple for the action of "overflowing with graces." If one is overflowing with graces in a pertfect past parciple way, then the meaning is tha this person is overflowing with graces from the time of their exsistence to the time that the Archangel would have been talking. Catholics have always taught that life begins at conception, so the Blessed Virgin was overflowing with graces from the time of her conception, thus the Immaculate Conception. I have always been taught that the Orthodox taught that Mary became sinless at a time just before her birth. This appearently is not thecase anymore. When I asked I explained the Catholic view and what I was told the Orthodox view was. If they indeed read my question they would have understood it as being at the time of life. 

Pax 
John
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/6/2001 6:09 pm  
To:  Corkybob   (18 of 27)  
 
  168.18 in reply to 168.17  
 
<<<The Church never sided with Hitler.>>> 
Its not a theory. Its historical FACT. If you believe everything the Church publicly fed to everyone then you're in for a big surprise when you read the truth behind the matter. The Catholic Church is the Church of Rome. Rome is part of Italy and Italy was an Axis power. The Pope wasn't about to upset both Hitler and Mussolini. Pius XII is often called "Hitler's Pope". In fact, there was a very famous book which was featured on Dateline NBC called "Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII" by John Cornwell. You can see a brief review and overview of the book at: **** 

<<<These are 2 of millions of Cathoics that died in concentrations camps. 13 million people died in the concentraation camps. Only 6 million were Jews. The Vast majority of the others were Catholic.>>> 

Two million Catholics! Wow, that statistic is off. In fact, I've never heard, in school, on a web page or anywhere of major Catholic persecution during the Second World War. Take a look at, http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/people/victims.htm for a teacher's resource on the topic. They mention a lot of people, but don't mention anything about Catholics except this: "In 1933, the Roman Catholic Church signed a concordat or agreement with the new Nazi government, recognizing the legitimacy of the Third Reich." 

<<<Roman Cathoics make up 1/6th of the Population. Christianity makes up 1/3rd of the Population, the majority of those are Protestants. The other 1 billion are made up of Protestant, Orthodox, and "Greek" Catholic.>>> 

Most of what you'd call Christian isn't the same "Christian" they talk about in statistics. Most of the World's Christianity is Catholic and Protestant, but a good chuck comes from the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, etc. To say that all these completely different religions are united under the same God is a bit of a stretch. For more details, see: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html 

<<<These last 5 years it when it was in the black netted no more than 100,000 american dollars.>>> 

I don't buy it. There are individual Catholic Churches who net much more then that each year. If the church is so poor then why can they easily afford a large fleet of custom made Bowing jets for its Pope and Cardinals? Do you have any idea of how much Nazi gold they held for fascist Croats and the Nazis? See: http://www.flamemag.dircon.co.uk/the_vatican.htm 

<<<The majority of the Churches wealth is not in liquid assets, but in property such as Churches, Schools, Convents and monestaies. Others included art that was donated to the Church. In acuallity for the size of the Church, it is very poor. Millions in gold isn't from Switzerland can only be called in charity, a rumor. What I do think is that what it inactuallity is is a deceptive lie. It could have been a mistake, the person mixing up a suppose claim that the Church took millions in gold and smugled it into Switzerland. There is no basis for either claims.>>> 

Go to the Vatican City for a visit. Wait around until noon. At noon you'll see a large convoy full of gold bullion carted into the city. They're very verbal about this. In fact, its on most tour broachers because the Swiss Guard do it in such a ceremonial fashion. 



-The Mad Dr. Shock



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 8/7/01 11:33:29 PM ET by DAVIDABROWN 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/6/2001 6:36 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (19 of 27)  
 
  168.19 in reply to 168.16  
 
Dear Dr, 
(cont.) 
I believe if God says that He will appoint a man to rule the Church (by giving him the keys) and the power to loose and bind (power given to all the bishops), then I will believe that God gave 1 man power over the Church, as He has and is clear in scripture in which he has. 

You have not looked at the transript because there was no transcript. Whether the pope had that on his agenda, which is highly doubtful, since he has dedicated his pontificant on the reunion of the Church and that would be the fruthest on anyones mind if they wanted unification. The reason there is no trascripts is because there was no meeting. What is the real reson is power strugle between the Patriarch of Russia (Largest Orthodox church) and the Greek Patriarchy, the highest in esteme of the Orthodox. It really had nothing to do with the Pope. What did was the Russian Orthodox's refusal to meet with the Pope when he went to the Ukrain. The precept was to drop claims on churches which were Catholic befor 1917 and were given to the Russian Orthodox after 1917. Strange in that the Russian Patriarch seems to think that the Pope gets involved in all disputes. He must not realize that the Easten Cathoic Church has partial atonimy. Partical, because like a boss of a very large company, you do not want the boss to find out your name because that means touble. For the Pope to get involved in Eastern Catholic affairs means that their is grave problems. The asking for the property of the rightfull owners is a rightfull claim. Another claim that the Russian ORthodox claims are that the Catholics are persecuting the Orthodox? Very strange in which a country that is predominately Orthodox is being bullied around by a minority religion. What else is suspect, is that the Vatican said gives the names and we will deal with it. No names came out. 

Facts are wrong, but the idea is sound. Yes, sometimes a Pope was elected because of his stance, other times it wasn't. I belive that Pope John Paul II was elected because of 2 things. 

#1 His conservative stance. He is the primary author to Humani Vita. 
#2 He is Polish. Since Poland was in the Communist block, this would presure Russia into giving it's satelite countries more religious freedoms. In essence it brought down communism in Russia. His election brought about the union movement in Poland, which brought about unrest in the other satelite countries. Once they broke, it broke Russia economicly because it was dependent on the Eastern block for materials. This all came about by the intercession of the Blessed Virgin as she prophetsized at Fatima. 

Have you heard of Natural Religion? Plato and Socraties were a prime example. Socrates was put to death for athieism and corupting youths. Definition, Socrates taught tha there was but 1 God, althoough Socrates did not not could he understand who this one God was. This concept was foreign to the Greeks, and this one God was not known to the Greeks so he was charged with Athiesm. Th Point is that all men, whether pagan or Christian have truths on what God is. There are only so many symbols in the World, However I do not recall any symbol of the CHristmas tree being a symbol. The yule tie log is. It was cut down and burned to release all of the spirits in the tree. This was Arian in natue and somewhat celtic. I would not bother myself with such nonsense unless they incorperate it into the services. If they burn it and say We are releasing th spirits, then I would give pause to reflect. The truth is that if you are married the ring on your finger was a pagan symbol, but it's symbolization is true in that it is, or is very close to that of the Christian knowledge of that truth. As you can see, not all pagan symbols should be shuned. Only those that teach things contrary to that of christian revelation. 

Pax 
John
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  Corkybob   8/7/2001 8:12 am  
To:  Dr_Shock   (20 of 27)  
 
  168.20 in reply to 168.18  
 
Dear Dr, 
Hitler buzzed the Vatican every night with an observation plan. Twice he had bombs thrown from the Observation plane like they did in WWI in order to try to get the Pope out of Rome. It was Hitler who was scared of the Pope. Remember that half of Germany's population is Catholic. Hitler set up his own Catholic Church by appointing his own Bishops and baring any communication from Rome. The reason is simple, he could doup those German Cathoics by calling for nationalism, but if he was to kill or imprison the Pope, there would be no Catholic in all of Germany that would follow Hitler and would probably even lead to civil war. This Hitler did not want. 

Some achedemic questions. 

#1 Why were these "facts" hidden until 1960? I would think that one would want to confront the Pope. 

#2 Why wasn't Simon Wisenthall(?) on the Cathoic Churches case? 

#3 Why did Golda Myar(?) favorable towards the Catholic Church over its war record? 

You will find that the claims of those who try to associate the Catholic Church with war crimes, or with cowardessness do not have facts to back it up. The facts speak the other way. 

NO, 1 Billion Catholics. 2 Billion Christians. Did I leave the B out and placed an M instead? Sorry. 

Poles, Slavs, Byelorussians, and Ukrainians. Of these groups, Catholicism is the majority in the Poles, Slavs, Byelorussians, and a minority in the Ukrainians, however there is a majority in Western Ukraina. The west is where most of the fighting took place so in fact the majority of those put to death by the Nazi's were Cathoic. As far as reconizing a government as the duly elected government, there was no conflict of intrest here because the German people overwelminly elected Hitler. The signing of the document did not in any way say that it was a moral government. Eugene Pacelli was the Pope Nuncio to Germany. He knew who Hitler was and the potential for his evil. He became the secratary to Pope Pius XI and warned many in the Church including Mon. Fulton Scheen. After Pope Pius XI died in 1939 Pacelli became Pope Pius XII. 

We are speaking in terms of Catholic and Orthodox. Not all Christians are saved in that they will go to heaven. You can loose your savation by going against the Church. As fast as the JW's and Mormons are growing, they are not a good chunk but a small chunk. All together there are only about 3-10% being called Christian that are not infact Christian. It is a stretch of the imagination to say that their are over 50,000,000 mormons in the World. Dated but still somewhat accurate I have the statistics on membership of Churches for 1973. 

Jehovah WItnesses 416,789 
Latter Day Saints (Mormons) LDS 2,133,072 
RLDS 154,072 

Of course these are in the US but the majority of the population for these Denominations are US Based. There has been a lot of gain in these churches. Lets quadrople them. With the rise in population and converts. This would still be less than 10 million in a population of about 236 million or less than 1/2% in the US. World wide lets add 6% and that would be a generous 7%. Out of 2 Billion that gives us less than 70 million individuals. This is a very generious sum because the LDS and RLDS together would make up the largest group. World Wide I truely do not expect more than 20 Million and the Jehova Witnesses not more than 10 million. I may be wrong, but I do not think so, In a nut shell, not more than 40 million belong to fringe groups of Christians. Guess thast what I get for not reading the links. My final annalysis is correct, not mor than 40 million total being fringe. Where I got wrong is the JWs, the Seventh Day Aventist, and the LDS's. 

They Don't. Their is only 1 Jet for the Pope, not for the Bishops also. Their is the Pope mobile. Thats it that I know of. Harboring Nazi gold is a serious charge. Why haven't people been called on it? These people who make the charges would be famous because they would be the ones that uncovered the coverup, yet no tangable evidence has come up. Just because something is on the Internet does not make it correct. Any Tom, Dick, or Harry can post a web site to expouse their beliefs no matter how correct or incorrect they are. Franciscans? Have you heard of the rule of St Francis? Franciscans can not own any property. I will have to admit it looks authentic, but then this is the litmus test isn't it. Will they find anything, I doubt it. As usuall though it is biased in its reporting. They will not go any fruther than what appears to be in their intrest. For instance, what Papal blessing. This is highly unregular, no matter who the person is. What is more is that they are mixing up personal conduct with that of the Vatican. The same can be leveled against every Christian denomination and even the Jews themselves. They all had those that colaborated with the Nazi's, does this mean then that they are were in favor of the Nazi's? If we continue with this type of reasoning we can distort it into saying that the Nazi's were really nice guys that were only misunderstood. 

Get real. Have you seen it? Why would the Jewish organization have to seek a law suit, and why now if it was in the open for all of these years. If it was true, a church that hide this injustice for so long suddenly openly carts gold into Vatican city? At least give us credit for discression(?). 

Pax 
John 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  M_DAuvergne   8/7/2001 2:43 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (21 of 27)  
 
  168.21 in reply to 168.1  
 
You were wanting a reaction from this? It doesn't surprise me at all that the Catholic Church doesn't accept Mormon baptism. I went to Catholic school for about five years (Irish family), and they didn't let the Baptists in my class to participate in church. Of course, I wasn't (and still isn't) bapstised, so I had to sit in the back with them. Your post said, to me anyways, that the Catholic Church is very open-minded. And of course, on that note, you are correct. Your post doesn't invalidate Mormons at all. Also, on the post above this one, he said that 10-15% of "christians" weren't "christian". I tend to disagree. True christians are kind people. They have humility. They love others using the teachings of Christ their lord. I'd only say that about 20% of christians are true christians. 
You, David, are no christian. Stop boasting yourself as such.

Je te remercie! 

~M. D'Auvergne
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/7/2001 4:43 pm  
To:  Corkybob   (22 of 27)  
 
  168.22 in reply to 168.20  
 
Look at the links I gave you. I can find a thousand more on the same accusitions towards the Catholic Church and the Pope for its (their) actions during WWII. 
People have known about it for years. The UN has been after the Pope since the 70's over the subject and, in fact, had several cases going on in their Human Rights division since the 1950's. You can't deny history. 

Look at the facts.


-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/7/2001 8:17 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (23 of 27)  
 
  168.23 in reply to 168.22  
 
Dear Doc, 
I can also find comic books that say the same thing, that doesn't maake them any more reliable. There is no documentation in these links, only alligations. 

I have been around since 55. I have been aware since 60. I went to Catholic school in 61. If such a thing exsisted then at least you would expect that there would be an official denial. There have been nothing. The first time that anything negitive came about the Catholic Church and WWII was a play in 1960 in which it protrayed the Pope as being passive to the plight of the Jews. Any idiot can clearly see that this just isn't so by the addresses that Pope Pius XII gave. Hitler would rant and rave over these. On Hitlers birthday each concentration camp would exicute 1 Catholic Priest for Adolf. Is this a sign of colaberation? Maximillion Mary Kolby was a Fransican Polish Prist wh had the largest religious settlement in the world named Marystown. It published a paper called "The Knights of the Immaculata." It was shut down and the priests were sent to Auswitz. Kolby died their. Is this the actions of partners? There was a Luthern Priest who said "When they came for the unionist and communist, I did nothing because I was not a unionist. When they came for the Gypsies, I did nothing for I was not a Gypsy. When they came for the Jews I did nothing for I was not a Jew. When they came for the Catholics I did nothing for I was not a Catholic. And when they came for me, I looked around and their was no one to help me." this clearly shows the route of persecution that the Nazi's took. Kolby was taken to Auswitz in 1941. It is cear from everything that the Pope states that he was not in favor, nor was he in coherts with Hitler. Those that say he was are using conjecture and twisting the facts. 

Pax 
John 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 8/7/01 11:33:07 PM ET by CORKYBOB 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dr_Shock   8/8/2001 3:57 pm  
To:  Corkybob   (24 of 27)  
 
  168.24 in reply to 168.23  
 
The documentation is there. So many books have been written about it that its sick, most of which are text books. Its common knowledge taught in the history classes of schools and colleges. One week of a class at my university called "War in the Western World" was dedicated to the negative aspects of Papal involvement in European warfare, past and present. Its been on the news, its been on news shows (like Dateline NBC) and its been in Time, Newsweek and USA Today. Why do you think John Paul apologized to the Jews not less then a year ago? 
Run a quick WWW search on Papal involvement during the second World War. All the links say the same thing. Only hindsight is 20/20.


-The Mad Dr. Shock
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Corkybob   8/8/2001 8:39 pm  
To:  Dr_Shock   (25 of 27)  
 
  168.25 in reply to 168.24  
 
Dear Dr, 
The Appology was for those Catholics who either went against the church in a purposefull way, or those who went against the church in a ignorant way, in persecting the Jews, or for those injustices, or precieved injustices, that occoured to the Jews by the hands of Catholics. Remember that this same Pope who is appologising to the Jews is the same Pope who is pushing for the canonization of Pope Pius XII. 

As far as what is taught now in the Universities, I went to a university about 30 years ago and I went to a Universty not more than 1 year ago. You should know that what is taught now in the university reflects more of the teaches views than does actually the reality of things. As you have stated is a prime example of poor scientific methodology. Read Pope Pius XI "Mit Brennender Serge" (1937). Read Pope Pius XII "Mystic Corpus Christi" (1943), look particularly in the section called rulers. 

I still contend that the research of these books and articles are not well done. What research is done is misrepusented. The ultimate proofs are that the European Jew is still around. Those stories that you heard of monestaries, or convents taking in Jews, why do you think they were taking in Jews? 

Yesterday, Aug 8, 2001 I heard of a report that a group of Jewish and non-Jewish historians wanted and got access to the Vatican archieves. They wanted documents retaining to the war years. Those archieves were not gotten to because they have not been cataloged yet, but 12 volumes of papers from 1928 were handed over to the group. Some of the group stormed off latter stating that it was a whitewash because they were not allowed to see the war year papers, even though they were informed that they probablly would not be able to since they had not been cataloged yet. Even the group leader appologized for that group and admitted that those people had an agenda to fulfill. 

The Latter half of the 20th and 21st centuries we are in a dark age, not because of the inability to get information, but the idea that we are the history experts and when it evidence doesn't match up with our idea, we atomatically assume that the evidence is wrong and we still are right. Common sense has gone away and been replaced with the idea tha we are right and everyone else is wrong. I must admit at times I fall into this also. The facts remain though, the Church was, as the 1945 New York Times declared, the only institution , and the Pope the only leader, to oppose Hitler during the war. Those Jews who were in the Holocost have never blamed the Catholic Church. The head of the Holocost museum in Isreal was agast when he heard of the charges that were leveled at the Church and Pop Pius XII. As I have stated before Golda Myer praised the Church for its war record. 

Pax 
John
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    8/8/2001 11:11 pm  
To:  Corkybob   (26 of 27)  
 
  168.26 in reply to 168.25  
 
Hi,

CorkyBob

 

While the Catholics wavered the Protestants outright aided and abided Hitler and his crew. It is the Liberal Protestant teachings that so devalued Human life that entire nations could engage in the mass killings of the Holocaust.

 

My opinion about the Catholic Church has been that they dropped the ball in regards to Nazi Collaboration especially with regards to exit visas for known Nazi war criminals. I am glad that you are reminding us that there are many Catholics that behaved Heroically during that period.

 

WWII is now getting to be long ago and far away. The Lessons of WWII were never learned! Immediately after the war there was the famous Jewish quote that the only thing the world learned from the Holocaust was that a country could do it and could get away with doing it.

 

Even though WWII is long ago, we have a similar Holocaust going on right now in America, the Holocaust of Abortion. This Modern Holocaust is everything and more than the Nazi Holocaust of the 40s. And again the Main Church to take a stand for the many Innocent Lives is the Catholic Church. It seems that the Catholic Church is continuing in a tradition of defending the lives of innocent people.

 

Thanks Again for all of your posting it really helps to get a perspective that is not biased against the people it is reporting on.

 

 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  Corkybob   8/9/2001 8:52 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (27 of 27)  
 
  168.27 in reply to 168.26  
 
Dear David, 
Supporting a regeme and giving out export visa's are 2 differnt things. However you will find that even this the Pope knew nothing about. The problem is definition I think. The Church can mean the members, including the majestarium, but it is also the laws tha govern them. When a Catholic says that the Church cannot error, he is refering to the Church laws and in some cases (dealing with matters of faith and morals) the Pope. If indeed the "Church" did smuggle gold into Switzerland as many have alledged, then it is those members that smuggled it in that are at fault. The Church has strick laws against taking pocession of ill got gains, even if these ill got gains were given to them by another individual. 

If you look at the papacy it is scattered with Holy Popes, WIcked Popes, and your regular garden variety Popes. We know this because of history, Catholic History. When it's members have errored in their judgement the Catholic Church goes to great lengths to rectify the situation. It may opt to try to keep it from being in the forfront of the news, but it will go to no lengths to make it better if not correct it. An example is with the few Catholic Priests that molested children. The Church did not want it known, but they did offer psycological counciling to those children that were effected. There would have been a trial (same as an inquesition) over the priest. If he was found to be a preditor and in error, he would be "defrocked" and this would open up him for civil charges to be filed and posable prison time. If he was a victum,(I know of a case in which a person came out and said he suduced 2 priests 7 times) the Priest would be sent to someplace where he would be away from the public in general. The last case is when the Priest has been exhonerated, or evidence is not enough to support the claims. He will be under the thumb of the Bishop and will be watched very closely, with provisions attached. 

Now a Church that holds the truth as dear as the Catholic Church does, one that has its own justice system within itself, one that realizes what happens when one denies a truth and is found out, this same church is now accused of aiding and abbetting the Nazi regeme. If it had it would have come out and said it would. On the contray, no evidence of its complicity is in the offereing, only speculation and looseness of the facts. Nothing will be found in the Archieves about complicity, nor will they show a laz a fare attitude, nor will it show illegal dealing with the criminal element. 

What it will show is a church that has strict guidelines on getting involved with other countries affairs, but one that will give the conconcious of Christ. It started by the bishop of Holland giving the Nazi's a stern warning not to mistreat the Jews. Thereaction of Hitler was to start the round up of the Jews (tis is the one in which Anne Frank was rounded up.) Once this happened the Vatican knew exactly who they were dealing with. A person who would make any excuse to fulfill his aims. After this the Catholic Church looked over the continant of Europe to see where the Nazi's had not a list of the Jews. The place tha they found was Hungary. Immediately the Vatican ordered 550,000 blank birth certifacates to be sent to the parishes in Hungary with the order that if a Jew wanted protection, he would be issued a birth certificate and the Priest would fill in the appropiate name and made up date. THis should not come as a surprise because in the early 30's Hitler decided to kill all mentally handicaped and ill. He was stoped by a Catholic Bishop in Germany. 

During the war all Siminaries, Convants, and rectories were ordered to take in the Jews if they asked for aid. 

With all of this, this does not meet the requirements fo being heroic? In an institution that wants sinners to repent, This isn't good enough? For an institution that did give a warning and was meet with spite and disregaurd, it should of stood up and said to Hitler "Your going to hell?" With all that is said and done, what good is it if the Pope had openly critizied Hitler with every word to him, and the Jews be wiped from the face of Europe? It was a cat and mouse game in which the Pope would bring enough pressure on Hitler that he would be concious of the Church at all times, but not to much in order to have Hitler use it as an excuse to rid Europe of all Jews and suspected Jews. This is why those Jews of the holocost did not, nor do they blame the Catholic Church for not acting in their behalf enough. They realized that the Catholic Church did all it could to a man that would not listen to the Catholic Church. 

Pax 
John 

P.s. I did apprieciate the kindness in your response. 

Edited 8/9/2001 11:53:44 AM ET by CORKYBOB 

Edited 8/9/2001 11:54:38 AM ET by CORKYBOB 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 8/10/01 1:27:02 PM ET by CORKYBOB 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
