First I do not believe that he betrayed his faith or his Lord but that he was legally required to join and did so,but if you believe he should have refused let me ask you: Does his joining and if you believe it is such, does this constitute a betrayal or denial of his faith in Christ?
2006-08-06 12:04:07 · 19 answers · asked by Debra M. Wishing Peace To All 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
What about Peter, He denied Christ twice and saved his own life. Does this too make him unworthy to be Pope?
2006-08-06 12:08:07 · update #1
What hate? I am only asking and defending my Pope. I do not feel hate for anyone nor have I represented hate here.
2006-08-06 12:11:15 · update #2
Please note I am not against Pope Benedict, he is my Pope and I feel he is exactly where Christ wanted him.This is in defense of Him.
2006-08-06 12:12:35 · update #3
No dear Moonbeamlight I am posting this in defense of my dear Pope.
2006-08-06 12:32:35 · update #4
The Pope is not and never has been a Nazi. He unfortunately was born and grew up in a country ruled by the Nazi party.
Do you think that every draftee in the Nazi German Army was a Nazi? If you do then you are very naive.
Just hope and pray that you do not have to make a decision to be executed or live and fight for a government in which you do not believe.
You and I live in a very different world that the Pope did in 1940s Germany. I suggest you do not be so quick to judge others.
With love in Christ.
2006-08-06 15:10:59 · answer #1 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 6⤊ 3⤋
First Peter denied Christ three times, then Christ gave Peter three chances to tell Jesus that he loved Him. No one is outside God's grace. By rededicating himself to the religion and renouncing the Nazi party the Pope is in fact able to be the pope. I'm not Catholic, I'm a Christian but this is my belief on the subject. God forgives us of much and makes good things come from the bad.
2006-08-06 19:11:38 · answer #2 · answered by KiKi Jo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe this to be so.
Christ only did good deeds, helped the sick and ailing, never anything that would hurt anyone or put anyone in jepardy,and advocated love and tolerance, regardless of differences in people's beliefs, abilities or lifestyles.
Can you imagine Christ joining a party that advocated torture, enslavment and genocide of a particular race or religion or perhaps people who were physically or mentally challenged, or who had a different sexual preference? Would he be the same revered figure today had he accepted membership in such a party?
Although there was pressure to conform and join the Nazi youth party, no one was forced to join. To align oneself with a party of hate is to accept the hate and bigotry in your heart yourself. I could personally never follow someone so flawed, and the fact that you are asking this question shows that you have your doubts about it, too.
2006-08-06 19:24:10 · answer #3 · answered by moonbeamlight1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christianity has a long history of being apart of groups that support war and the deaths of those outside of their faith. I don't see this as anything contrary to the history of Christianity. Now the real question should be: is this is inline with what Jesus may have wanted 2,000 years ago? I'm going to guess probably not. One must also recall that Christianity got its start in not going along with the government. (Christians disobeyed Roman government by not participating in festivals and such.)
2006-08-06 19:10:54 · answer #4 · answered by Mrs. Pears 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
...The exact same way California could elect a GOVERNOR, who'se father was a member of the adult Nazi Party.
Apathy...and an underlying distaste of Jews.
I personally have done extensive research for Graduate level papers about members of the Nazi party. Many members such as Schindler (Schind;er's list) or even Dr. Kritzinger at the Wannsee conference, had no choice but to join the party otherwise they would be accused of not being patriotic and charged with sedition - or otherwise politicaly destroyed...
...much like liberalist journalists who opposse the Bush Administration (History repeats itself).
I would never vote for or endorse someone who joined a party like that just to save their own hides because it proves they have no integrity. Integrity is the ability to stand up to all oppossion that goes against one's principles.
In the pope's case, being a member of the Nazi party does not neccessarily mean he supported anti-semitism but naturally we know he was subjected to nazi idealogy.
Like most of the rest of Germany, believed it was their duty to God's German people to exterminate Jews, it is possible the current Pope believed this idealogy back then by mistake of association- however, we don't know what his own philosophy or inner demons are so I'd have to say, bringing uo his past is erroneus.
BTW - a number of pope's have endorsed anti-semitism, such as Pope Pius IX.
In one address, he is said to have called Jews “dogs of which there are too many present in Rome, howling and disturbing us everywhere”. In 1848 Pius IX forced the Jews of Rome back into the old ghetto to which they had been confined for centuries, and in the following year, he enacted racial laws against them. Jews were banned from public hospitals, prevented from giving evidence against Christians in papal courts and excluded from all institutes of secondary and higher education. Israeli historians say that these laws were the forerunners of fascist dictator Benito Mussolini's race policies.
Even if the current Pope was an anti-semite, what make's him different than the one who did nothing to Help the Jews during WW2?
2006-08-06 19:08:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know that Jesus called on a tax collector (Matthew) to be one of his Apostles. At that time, tax collectors were the most hated because they betrayed their own people and they took a big cut of the taxes for themselves.
In his case, Matthew was an adult when he became a tax collector.
The Pope was a juvenile when he was expected to join the Nazi youth party, there were no exceptions.
He later got out of it and was called to the Priesthood.
Quite a turnaround if you ask me.
2006-08-06 19:43:55 · answer #6 · answered by mr_mister1983 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither - wasn't Saul converted on the road to Damscus, where he went to persecute the Christians? And renamed Paul?
I think the Pope did something that he was required to do at the time, and is now working hard for Catholics all over the world.
2006-08-06 19:10:53 · answer #7 · answered by merigold00 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sadly, so many people feel they know what is right. They have no right to say what the pope should, or should not have done. That is for The LORD to decide, And you'd save yourself countless hours by not bothering with these people.
But, as so many of us, we wish to defend our religion, and you are in your place to do so.
The LORD has told us, that we should do what our leaders tell us to, aslong as it does not controdict The LORD's word.
Surely, that is all the pope was trying to do.
2006-08-07 01:39:44 · answer #8 · answered by Ashton Kage 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well Debra, Catholics do not elect the Pope. The Holy Spirit does.
H
2006-08-06 19:09:36 · answer #9 · answered by H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the pope had faith in god, he would have had the guts to refuse... he had lack in faith and did not trust god (but maybe he had other things in mind i dont know) but this shows he was probably was afriad to die. If he had faith he would have trust god.
I would rather die then to do something sinful.
I am a Muslim
2006-08-06 19:12:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋