Posted April 20, 200520 yr From the conservative Jerusalem Post... Ratzinger a Nazi? Don't believe it Sam Ser, THE JERUSALEM POST Apr. 18, 2005 London's Sunday Times would have us believe that one of the leading contenders for the papacy is a closet Nazi. In if-only-they-knew tones, the newspaper informs readers that German-born Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was a member of the Hitler Youth during World War II and suggests that, because of this, the "panzer cardinal" would be quite a contrast to his predecessor, John Paul II. The article also classifies Ratzinger as a "theological anti-Semite" for believing in Jesus so strongly that – gasp! – he thinks that everyone, even Jews, should accept him as the messiah. To all this we should say, "This is news?!" As the Sunday Times article admits, Ratzinger's membership in the Hitler Youth was not voluntary but compulsory; also admitted are the facts that the cardinal – only a teenager during the period in question – was the son of an anti-Nazi policeman, that he was given a dispensation from Hitler Youth activities because of his religious studies, and that he deserted the German army. Ratzinger has several times gone on record on his supposedly "problematic" past. In the 1997 book Salt of the Earth, Ratzinger is asked whether he was ever in the Hitler Youth. "At first we weren't," he says, speaking of himself and his older brother, "but when the compulsory Hitler Youth was introduced in 1941, my brother was obliged to join. I was still too young, but later as a seminarian, I was registered in the Hitler Youth. As soon as I was out of the seminary, I never went back. And that was difficult because the tuition reduction, which I really needed, was tied to proof of attendance at the Hitler Youth. "Thank goodness there was a very understanding mathematics professor. He himself was a Nazi, but an honest man, and said to me, 'Just go once to get the document so we have it...' When he saw that I simply didn't want to, he said, 'I understand, I'll take care of it' and so I was able to stay free of it." Ratzinger says this again in his own memoirs, printed in 1998. In his 2002 biography of the cardinal, John Allen, Jr. of the National Catholic Reporter wrote in detail about those events. The only significant complaint that the Times makes against Ratzinger's wartime conduct is that he resisted quietly and passively, rather than having done something drastic enough to earn him a trip to a concentration camp. Of course, whenever it is said that a German failed the exceptional-resistance-to-the-Nazis test, it would behoove us all to recognize that too many Jews failed it, as well. If he were truly a Nazi sympathizer, then it would undoubtedly have become evident during the past 60 years. Yet throughout his service in the church, Ratzinger has distinguished himself in the field of Jewish-Catholic relations. As prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger played an instrumental role in the Vatican's revolutionary reconciliation with the Jews under John Paul II. He personally prepared Memory and Reconciliation, the 2000 document outlining the church's historical "errors" in its treatment of Jews. And as president of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ratzinger oversaw the preparation of The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, a milestone theological explanation for the Jews' rejection of Jesus. If that's theological anti-Semitism, then we should only be so lucky to "suffer" more of the same. As for the Hitler Youth issue, not even Yad Vashem has considered it worthy of further investigation. Why should we? http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pag...d=1113704370906
April 20, 200520 yr From dailykos: Today has seen the third papal election in my lifetime. There are many reasons to criticize the election of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI, like his stances on women and gays in the church, social issues, his work in crushing liberation theology, his comments in regards to the priest sexual abuse scandals, and his generally conservative views. Calling him a Nazi, however, is unfounded and unfair, and only serves to demean us. The man is 78 years old. He was 18 when the war ended. He is of the right age group where you were required by law to join the Hilter Youth. Membership in the Hitler Youth by no means made you grow up to be a confirmed Nazi, although that was certainly the intent. Belonging to a Luftwaffe AA battery is also not a sign that he was a Nazi; had he been a fanatical Nazi, not only would he have volunteered for the Waffen SS, but he wouldn't have deserted in 1944. That desertion in itself is not an unremarkable act. They still shot deserters at that time. Being in the German Army does not mean that you were a Nazi. There are plenty of reasons to criticize this pope and the policies he's likely to enact. Unfounded accusations are unfair, and will only serve to give the wingers more ammunition. Call him conservative, call him reactionary, call him old, call him surly, call him the wrong choice. Just don't call him a Nazi. http://www.dailykos.com/
April 20, 200520 yr It doesn't make a difference to me that he was in Hitler Youth...all young men were forced into that organization in Nazi Germany. There is plenty of clear evidence that he was not a Nazi sympathizer.
April 20, 200520 yr Ratzinger was not a Nazi. There are plenty of other reasons why I'm still unhappy with his election.
April 20, 200520 yr He was forced into the Nazi army. he deserted before the end of war. He says he never killed a Jew, hard to beleive, he was a Nazi.
April 20, 200520 yr He was forced into the Nazi army. he deserted before the end of war. He says he never killed a Jew, hard to beleive, he was a Nazi. 749113[/snapback] What do you really mean? Please pick one: A) ...hard to beleive, hewas a Nazi. B) ....hard to beleive he was a Nazi. Are you saying it is hard to beleive he never killed a Jew or are you saying it is hard to beleive he was a Nazi? That comma in the sentence is making it confusing.
April 20, 200520 yr He was forced into the Nazi army. he deserted before the end of war. He says he never killed a Jew, hard to beleive, he was a Nazi. 749113[/snapback] What do you really mean? Please pick one: A) ...hard to beleive, hewas a Nazi. B) ....hard to beleive he was a Nazi. Are you saying it is hard to beleive he never killed a Jew or are you saying it is hard to beleive he was a Nazi? That comma in the sentence is making it confusing. 749157[/snapback] He's not the brightest crayon in the box, just disregard what he says.
April 20, 200520 yr It's spelled "believe". I before E except after C. 749208[/snapback] What about "weird"? :mischief
April 21, 200520 yr It's spelled "believe". I before E except after C. 749208[/snapback] What about "weird"? :mischief 749402[/snapback] Weird is well, a weird word. OMG I made a joke lol lol
April 21, 200520 yr HELP! SOMEONE HELP! SOMEONE'S HIJACKED MY THREAD! 749850[/snapback] Oh yeah, well you're hogging all the ugly.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.