Albert Einstein, for one, didn't share this opinion. I would be very wary of such attacks upon the wartime Church. John Cornwell wrote a stinking pile of calumny on this subject in his book 'Hitler's Pope'. In 'The Myth of Hitler's Pope', rabbi David G. Dalin trenchantly refutes these accusations. There are no Nazis about now. Nobody, either the speaker or the innocently hostaged, is under physical threat. Most of what is at stake are careers and the opinion of peers. Yet, many members of the Church did resist the terrible threat of Hitler and arguably their more concealed methods were far more practically successful than the courageous and morally successful one exercised by the saintly Bonhoeffer.
In the time of St Athanasius it was his brave voice and the faith in the hearts of the laity that by God’s grace restored the faith. Perhaps that is the roadmap —speak out! Charitably but firmly. Keep speaking Padraig to the errors and heresies. We must. We wouldn’t let someone drink poison when we knew the cup was tainted. We can’t let fellow Catholics drink poison. What we must not do is directly attack the Pope as bad or evil. We cannot judge him. We can call out the acts but never the hidden heart of a man who is Pope. Only God can do that. I do believe we are about to see the whole rotten edifice come down. The satanic infiltration, the perversions and the unspeakable things done to children. I think this diplomat expelled and arrested is only the beginning. I could be wrong but that is my strong sense. The 100 years up. This is satan’s End game but the Blessed Mother is about to crush his head. Perhaps she is crushing it now and what we are seeing is the wild thrashing g of his tail. And God bless and preserve Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider et al.
It's not an , 'Attack', if it's the truth. The fact that a truth makes us uncomfortable doesn't make it untrue. Not only the Catholic Church but the Protestant Sects in Germany stayed quiet . There were a few brave souls who were quickly martyred, but on the whole the Church in Germany fell either silent or actively supported the Reich. The same thing in Austria were the Catholic Primate at the time actively supported Anschluss the union of Austria with Nazi Germany as did the overwhelming majority of the Austrian population who were themselves overwhelmingly Catholic. The big mistake the Vatican and the CHurch made was to think they could make a deal with the devil. That the lion they did the deal with would not eventually turn round and eat them. Which it did.
The comments of Albert Einstein, a persecuted Jew, were very praiseworthy of the Catholic Church as being the only institution that did not stay silent. The support of Anschluss was not necessarily to support Nazism. It was also a support for pan-German nationalism. One might well have supported such a union while being opposed to Nazism per se.
I think that Abp Ganswein knows a lot more about the surrounding circumstances and pressures that forced that "moment" of "resignation".
Only two Catholic Bishops in Germany spoke out. The Bishop of Berlin and the Bishop of Munster. Generally speaking the lower down the hierarchy you get the more people speak out, for the less they have to loose. It was the same thing during the Protestant so called Reformation in England when only one Bishop spoke out St Cardinal John Fisher. Union with Germany was Union with Nazi Germany. No Austrian could have had doubt of this. Vienna was bedecked with Nazi flags and at the orders of the Church authorities every Church bell in Austria rang in celebration.
We know though that when the Bishop spoke publicly that it began the arrests of those Jews who had converted....like Edith Stein and her sister. Prior to that they had left those particular "types" of Jews alone....to placate the Church and its influence. Whatever one thinks that is a lot of responsibility placed upon the shoulders of the shepherds over their people...esp. not wishing to cause further despair. If one did what one could, joining Faith to Reason, as instructed by JPII, then God only knows. Right now how many Bishops have been prepared for any sudden massive type of persecution of the faithful? Seems no one is prepared and the sheep will be scattered....to a large extent.
Looks like all those excuses for all the "wreck-ovations" of our churches were for naught. There are universal laws that keep us connected to the Spirit and real beauty is one of them: (Beauty is Truth and Truth is Beauty) What Causes Young People to Convert? Beautiful Churches and Cathedrals, Says Study According to a recently released study, visiting beautiful churches and cathedrals are one of the top reasons that influences the youth across the globe in deciding to convert to Christianity. “The way of beauty, is a privileged and fascinating way to approach the Mystery of God. What is beauty, if not the reflection of the splendor of the Eternal Word made flesh?” – Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI According to the study, commissioned by a British evangelization research group, thirteen percent of teenagers who decided to convert to Christianity did so because of their experience visiting and seeing the design of traditional churches and cathedrals. Encounters with beautiful architecture beat out the most common evangelization effort today – youth groups, along with attending weddings and speaking to other Christians about the Faith. https://www.ucatholic.com/news/what...to-convert-beautiful-churches-and-cathedrals/
It is the poorest of the poor, the lowest of the low, the Faithful Remnant, who stick with Christ to the death. The powerful, the rich, the higher clergy who take to the hills. Thus it was, thus it is , thus it shall ever be. The same deal is going on at the minute in the Church. The Vatican Establishment selling the ordinary folk down the river. Like the poor Catholics of China. It was the Temple Authorities who killed Christ, this was no accident.
Praetorian, Your welcome. I think because I also read the 2 comments on Edward Pentin's article I feel more like Dolours has stated, "Hard to tell the motives of our hierarchy these days." Maybe we should comment on the only two comments which Mr. Pentin allowed (?) on his article, Posted by Tom T on Saturday, Apr, 7, 2018 11:03 AM (EDT): He closed with words of Gratian in his Decretals, the 12th century canonical text, which stated: “Let no mortal being have the audacity to reprimand a Pope on account of his faults, for he whose duty it is to judge all other men cannot be judged by anybody, unless he should be called to task for having deviated from the faith.” ...In other words, would YOU (the rebellious clergy) apply the SAME STANDARDS UPON THE LAITY OF *YOUR* PARISH, as you would upon YOUR OWN OBEDIENCE towards the pope? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Posted by justsayin' on Saturday, Apr, 7, 2018 11:01 AM (EDT): So, in other words, we only have to obey Popes when what they say agrees with our interpretation of Tradition and scripture. Which is what liberals have been saying for decades. It just took a while for conservatives to catch up because the Church had a string of conservative Popes. Of course, we are all bound to follow our consciences, including Cardinal Burke. Following his conscience, though, may just help lead the Church into schism. 23. “The faith of the whole Church should be one, according to the precept (1 Cor. 1:10): “Let all speak the same thing, and let there be no schisms among you”; and this cannot be observed save on condition that questions which arise touching faith should be determined by him who presides over the whole Church, whose sentence must consequently be accepted without wavering. And hence to the sole authority of the supreme Pontiff does it pertain to publish a new revision of the symbol, as also to decree all other matters that concern the universal Church.”[26] 24. In defining the limits of the obedience owed to the pastors of souls, but most of all to the authority of the Roman Pontiff, it must not be supposed that it is only to be yielded in relation to dogmas of which the obstinate denial cannot be disjoined from the crime of heresy. Nay, further, it is not enough sincerely and firmly to assent to doctrines which, though not defined by any solemn pronouncement of the Church, are by her proposed to belief, as divinely revealed, in her common and universal teaching, and which the Vatican Council declared are to be believed “with Catholic and divine faith.”[27] But this likewise must be reckoned amongst the duties of Christians, that they allow themselves to be ruled and directed by the authority and leadership of bishops, and, above all, of the apostolic see.” Sapientiae Christianae On Christians as Citizens Pope Leo XIII - 1890
Pope Pius XIIth received criticism for not speaking out enough. The Dutch bishops did speak out and the result was a Nazi retaliation in the form of greatly increasing the roundup of Dutch Jews. The power relations that existed at the time have to be taken into account. The Church achieved far more than any other country or institution in terms of rescuing Jews by quietly working behind the scenes, taking great risks in the process. It is estimated, and Dalin, for one, provides many figures with documentary support in his very well referenced book, that the Church saved about one million Jews. The nation that rescued the most, Franco's Spain, is estimated to have saved about 47,000 Jews from the clutches of Hitler. This provides a good measure of the enormity of the Church's achievement, in the face of a terrible, totalitarian enemy. The Soviets instigated a huge campaign of propaganda, subsequently, in order to question and tarnish the achievements of the Church. This has been exposed by the likes of Dalin and many other honourable Jews. In fact, the early Israeli state expressed tremendous gratitude to the Church in the immediate post-establishment period. Many of its early citizens owed their continued existence to a Church that surreptitiously rescued them from under the noses of a murderous regime. Sometimes discretion, not speaking out, is the prudent course. That might not be the case now, although opinion is divided. Cardinals Muller and Bourke have chosen to speak out, for example, while Cardinal Sarah has chosen silence. Both methods may not be wrong. At this time of trial in the Church, we must be wary of those, who might, behind a mask of benevolence, direct yet another kick at Her while she's down. I'm not implying this to be the case with this writer, but I certainly think the accusations deserve a robust defense. There is absolutely no comparison between the conditions undergone by the bishops under the Nazis with those that pertain for current bishops, whose only risk might be losing the use of a nice 'palace'.
It's true that there was a lot of defamation of the Church but there was also a lot of truth in criticisms too. I notice reading the lives of two Catholic Saints , for instance during the Spanish Civil War who refused all their lives to uncritically support, 'Franco' who was supposed t have supported the Church. Clearly the Church authorities had a lot to answer for in supporting the rich and powerful there. The same in places like Germany and Italy Basically I would say the ordinary Catholics did well but the higher you get up the ladder the worst the guilt. Having treaties with Fascists was a bad move. Humanly speaking it looked smart but it was depraved.
Carol, in paragraph 24, Pope Leo rightly pronounces that Catholics should obey the Pope in matters small as well as large. This good Pope may not have countenanced a situation in which it is a pope himself who is fiddling with a dogma "of which the obstinate denial cannot be disjoined from the crime of heresy". He surely cannot have meant us to obey rulings which effectively contradict the words of Jesus Christ?
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one, but I'll conclude by saying that the two Popes Pius didn't have our benefit of hindsight.
Jesus as well as John before him exposed the authorities from the very beginning of their ministries.
A video of the late Cardinal Carlo Caffarra opens the Rome conference, "Catholic Church: Where Are You Heading?," April 7, 2018. (Edward Pentin photo) Blogs | Apr. 7, 2018 http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edwa...-brandmueller-tackle-crisis-of-confusion-in-t Cardinal Brandmüller, Bishop Schneider Tackle Crisis of Confusion in the Church Bishop Athansius Schneider defines the qualities required of the Petrine Office and warns against silence in the face of ignorance of the truth, and attacks on the truth. Cardinal Walter Brandmüller says holiness is a requirement for the important participation of the laity on matters of doctrine. Edward Pentin The limits of papal authority and what exactly is the sensus fidei fidelium (sense of the faith of the faithful) when it comes to matters of doctrine were the focus of part of the discussion at a Rome conference Saturday afternoon aimed at analysing a crisis of confusion in the contemporary Church. The conference, titled Catholic Church: Where are you heading? Only a blind man can deny that there is great confusion in the Church, was organized by Friends of Cardinal Carlo Caffarra. The event was one of the last wishes of the cardinal, the archbishop emeritus of Bologna, who died last September. Along with increasing numbers of lay faithful and clergy, he had become deeply dismayed by confusion over doctrine and discipline in recent years, causing what some believe is one of the greatest crises in the Church’s history. Bishop Schneider In a talk rich with quotations from authoritative Church sources, Bishop Athansius Schneider underlined the importance of the Petrine Office, drawing on dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus of the First Vatican Council which underlined how the Roman Pontiff is to exercise his exalted office “for the salvation of all.” The Successor of Peter is to ensure the “entire flock of Christ, taken from the poisonous pastures of error, might be nourished with the food of heavenly doctrine and that, after having eliminated what leads to schism, the entire Church might remain one and, supported on its foundation, might stand firm against the gates of hell.” The auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, who in the face of prevailing confusion led an initiative professing the truth of sacramental marriage in January, stressed that the “charism of truth is entrusted by God first to St. Peter and to his successors,” and that because of this, popes “must continually be aware that they are not the owners of the cathedra of truth, but its servants and vicars.” He recalled the oath that popes made for more than a millennium, which stated “I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition,” to keep “whatever has been revealed through Christ and His Successors,” and will keep the “discipline and the rite of the Church” — taken from the Liber Diurnus Romanorum Pontificum that was used until the 11th century. In modern times, Bishop Schneider referred to the duty of popes to “defend the truth and to protect the Church from errors and heresies” and highlighted the problems of remaining silent. Quoting from the encyclical Sapientiae Christianae, Pope Leo XIII said that to “recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe.” He added: “Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good” and that “want of vigor” is “so much more blameworthy” as often little is needed to “bring to naught false charges” and to “refute erroneous opinions.” Christians, Leo said, are “born for combat” and to overcome the world with the Lord’s help, what is needed is to profess “openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power.” Bishop Schneider also quoted St. John XXIII, who said all evils which poison men and nations come from “ignorance of the truth” and at times a “contempt for truth and a reckless rejection of it.” He also said anyone who wantonly attacks known truth “engages in an altogether despicable business.” Those who do not do so willfully, he added, “act as though God has given us intellects for some purpose other than the pursuit and attainment of truth.” Such an attitude, John XXIII continued, leads to syncretism between religions, something Pope Leo said is “directed to the destruction of all religions, but particularly the Catholic faith.” Bishop Schneider said that throughout history, Satan has continually attacked the Church, and “especially the cathedra of truth, which is the Chair of Peter.” In rare cases, he said in an allusion to the current crisis, this has led to a “temporary and limited eclipse of the Papal Magisterium, when some Roman Pontiffs have made ambiguous doctrinal statements, thereby causing a temporary situation of doctrinal confusion in the life of the Church.” He said such a possibility was prophesied by Pope Leo in 1884 when he had a famous vision of Satan appearing before God, asking him for permission to destroy the Church in a hundred years — permission that was granted. Immediately afterwards, Pope Leo XIII composed the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel. continued...
continued from above... Cardinal Brandmüller In his intervention, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, president emeritus of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, emphasized the laity’s role in matters of doctrine, and sought to distinguish what is a true sensus fidei (sense of the faith) of believers and what is not. Drawing on Blessed Cardinal John Henry Newman’s famous 1859 essay On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine, Cardinal Brandmüller said he wished to analyze this question “amid the crisis of faith that today is shaking the Church to its depths.” The Church historian drew on several examples from history when the laity gave important witness to the faith. During the Arian crisis of the fourth century, when the divinity of Jesus was debated, “the bishops failed in abundance,” Cardinal Brandmüller said, and the “divine tradition” was maintained “far more by the faithful than by the episcopate.” Moving to more recent times, he said the laity’s witness can be found in the context of the Marian dogmas of 1954 and 1950. “It is therefore the sensus, the consensus fidei, by virtue of which the witness of the faithful has its own weight in the preservation, deepening and proclamation of the truth of revealed faith,” he said. The German cardinal reminded those present that when Newman spoke of “consulting” the faithful, it did not mean the Church is democratic. As the faithful are united in one body, forming a supernatural organism, the laws are different and what emerges is “the reality of grace.” Cardinal Brandmüller added that theological virtue of faith becomes efficacious partly through the sensus fidei of the faithful, and that it can act as a “sort of spiritual immune system” that can “instinctively” “recognize and reject any error.” The certainty that the Church in her totality can never slip into heresy “also rests therefore on this sensus fidei,” he said. He gave some examples including the Pataria movement in Northern Italy which rose up against the simony and priestly concubinage in the 12th century, and the faithful who had Pope Boniface VIII establish the Holy Year to articulate the doctrine on indulgences in the 1300s. But he also noted, giving examples, that the “truth is not necessarily found with the majority.” “Therefore, when Catholics en masse consider it legitimate to remarry after divorce, to use contraception or other similar things, this is not a mass witness to the faith, but a mass departure from it,” he said. Quoting from the International Theological Commission in 2014, he said “It is clear that there can be no simple identification between the sensus fidei and public or majority opinion. These are by no means the same thing.” It added: “In the history of the people of God, it has often been not the majority but rather a minority which has truly lived and witnessed to the faith...It is therefore particularly important to discern and listen to the voices of the ‘little ones who believe.’” Cardinal Brandmüller added that what follows “is extraordinary”: “The experience of the Church shows that sometimes the truth of the faith has been conserved not by the efforts of theologians or the teaching of the majority of bishops but in the hearts of believers.” As well as during the Arian crisis, the cardinal said the same could be seen today in dioceses, parishes and other councils of the post-conciliar period. But he stressed that discernment becomes “even more essential” and a list of criteria is required to distinguish organic development of doctrine from error. “Here it suffices to recall the indispensable lack of contradiction with regard to authentic tradition,” the cardinal said — obliquely referencing seemingly contradictory teachings during this pontificate. Drawing on the theological commission document, he stressed that “authentic participation in the sensus fidei requires holiness” and to be holy “fundamentally means” to be “baptized and to live the faith in the power of the Holy Spirit.” “This defines a very high requirement then,” Cardinal Brandmüller added. Consequently, he expressed doubts about how much questionnaires used in recent synods give a true sense of the sensus fidei as they are generally influenced by “individual associations” and the formulation of the questions has “made it easy to manipulate the results.” The sensus fidei fidelium (sense of the faith of the faithful) is expressed “much more authentically through spontaneous declarations,” Cardinal Brandmüller said, and gave as an example the recent Manif pour tous pro-life marches in France, or the one million Catholics who petitioned the Holy Father for clarity on Church doctrine. “These are the forms in which the sensus fidei, the instinct of faith of believing people, is manifested today,” Cardinal Brandmüller said. “It is time that the Magisterium paid due attention to this witness of faith.” And as an aside at the end of his talk, he added that Newman writes in his 1859 essay that he did not expect “such times as the Arian will ever come again.” In view of some who believe today’s crisis bears close similarities with the Arian crisis, Cardinal Brandmüller said: “Today we would all be better off if he were right.” See complete English translations of Bishop Schneider's speech on LifeSite News here, and Cardinal Brandmüller's here. At the end of the conference, participants and lay faithful signed a declaration of faith upholding key areas of Church teaching.
I believe Benedict (Joseph Ratzinger) still has a very significant role to play. Imho he is the 'Bishop in white' of Fatima. Pope St. Pius X apparently had a vision (stated below) where he speaks of a successor of the same name. This saintly pope's first name was Guiseppe which is Joseph in Italian. Pope Pius X (1903-14): In 1909, in the midst of an audience with members of the Franciscan order, he seemed to fall into a trance. Moments passed, then his eyes sprung open and he jumped to his feet. "What I have seen is terrifying!” he cried out. “Will I be the one, or will it be a successor? What is certain is that the Pope will leave Rome and, in leaving the Vatican, he will have to pass over the dead bodies of his priests!" Later, shortly before his death, another vision came to him: "I have seen one of my successors, of the same name, who was fleeing over the bodies of his brethren. He will take refuge in some hiding place; but after a brief respite, he will die a cruel death. Respect for God has disappeared from human hearts. They wish to efface even God's memory. This perversity is nothing less than the beginning of the last days of the world." http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=436842&language=en
Cardinal Brandmüller added that what follows “is extraordinary”: “The experience of the Church shows that sometimes the truth of the faith has been conserved not by the efforts of theologians or the teaching of the majority of bishops but in the hearts of believers.” We should write this in letters of gold on all our hearts
