English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

36 answers

I'm going to go with something low like a 1 or 2. I don't really see any relation between the two, but since you seem to see some connection I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt with a 2.

2007-12-02 11:32:51 · answer #1 · answered by moonman 6 · 7 8

I don't know too much about the Catholic Church during the Holocaust, but there were many possible factors.

The German citizens, the European countries that participated in the appeasement of Munich, and all forms of Anti-Semitism can be said to have some level of responsibility, aside from the Nazi party and SS guards.

If the Church deliberately ignored the deaths of the Holocaust, then they would be responsible as well. I would suggest a low number, unless they directly participated in the destruction of the Jewish people (or in hoarding their goods in the Vatican Vault). If that was the case, then I'd raise it to a five.

2007-12-02 11:42:47 · answer #2 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 1 1

1

2007-12-02 11:35:36 · answer #3 · answered by caulk2005 6 · 1 5

Germany was and is complex in its history as regards the Jews. Martin Luther was clearly anti-Jew, reflecting the medieval tendency to blame Jews for the death of Christ. But that's only part of the picture. Germans in general barely tolerated Jews, and Hitler took advantage of widely held opinions to exterminate Jews. The Catholic Church, along with the Lutheran and other Churches, should have recognized the menace, and should have actively preached against it. But...it all happened very quickly, perhaps too quickly for the response we, 75 years later, might wish. Too simple a question!

2007-12-02 11:50:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

10, ten, TEN!

1. Over hundreds and hundreds of years, historically speaking, it laid the anti-Semitic cognitive training and groundwork that consequently all Nazis and most Germans used to justify the belief that Jews were sub-human.
2. As a corporation the CEO did NOTHING to save Jews from Nazi sadism and or murder - there was a very small minority of Catholic clerics who saved Jews.
.

2007-12-02 19:32:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

5

2007-12-02 11:33:08 · answer #6 · answered by PD 6 · 3 4

The Catholic Church had zero responsibility for the Holocaust. In fact, Pope Pius XII and heroic individual Catholics did heroic work in defense of Jews and other Holocaust victims.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/heroes.htm

A Jewish view:
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/dalin.html

And: http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Issues/pius12.html

Hitler never believed in Catholicism and hated Christianity. Though he used some religious words in his propaganda, he revealed his actual convictions in Hitler’s Table Talk:

"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. . . . Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. . . . Christianity is an invention of sick brains. . . . I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie."

The Holocaust was the full, poisonous flower of Nazi hate. Unfortunately, the best efforts of the Church is not enough to stem a vicious hate movement that gains political and military power.

Cheers,
Bruce

2007-12-02 12:43:55 · answer #7 · answered by Bruce 7 · 1 2

7 - Partly for their lack of action at the time, but mostly because of the prior history of hatred and persecution of the Jews by the Catholic Church. Without that past history and continuing lingering hatred, killing the Jews would have been a lot less likely. However, the Nazis could have probably found another group to blame and exterminate instead, and they did kill a lot of gays, Gypsies, and others.

2007-12-02 11:40:23 · answer #8 · answered by Alan S 6 · 4 2

Um.

Better Question: on a scale of 1 to 10, how much responsibility does the _Nazi Party_ bear for the Holocaust?

Hel-lo - o - o?


----------------------------

Another user (below) mentions Father Coughlin, the renegade anti-Semitic priest. As is usual, when someone has an axe to grind, and wants to score a point without having to be fair and honest by telling the whole story, they tell only the part of the story that proves "their" point.

So, here is the rest, from the same Wikipedia article: "Boyea (1995) shows that the Catholic Church did not approve of Coughlin. The Vatican, the Apostolic Delegation in Washington, D.C., the archbishop of Cincinnati, and the chairman of the National Catholic Welfare Conference (NCWC) all wanted the priest silenced. They recognized that only Coughlin's superior, Detroit Bishop Michael Gallagher, had the canonical authority to curb him; and Gallagher supported the "Radio Priest." Therefore, due to Gallagher's autonomy and the prospect of Coughlin leading a schism, the Catholic leadership was impotent, a clear example of the limits of ecclesiastical power."

2007-12-02 11:34:41 · answer #9 · answered by Catherine V. 3 · 12 5

About a 9. Maybe if the Vatican controlled German Catholic Center Party hadn't voted to give Hitler dictatorial powers history would have been much different. Maybe if the church had not attacked Jews, Hitler's attacks wouldn't have found such popularity. Maybe if the church had not turned over names of Jews to the NAZIs some of the Jews could have been saved.

2007-12-02 11:42:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

Perhaps a 3.

Charles Edward Coughlin (October 25, 1891 – October 27, 1979) was a Canadian-born Roman Catholic priest at Royal Oak, Michigan's National Shrine of the Little Flower Church. He was one of the first political leaders to use radio to reach a mass audience, as more than forty million tuned to his weekly broadcasts during the 1930s. This radio program included praises of Hitler and Mussolini[1] and has been called "a variation of the Fascist agenda applied to American culture."[2] His chief topics were political and economic rather than religious, with his slogan being "Social Justice," first with, then against, the New Deal. At the height of his broadcast fame he attacked many prominent Jews, some felt Antisemitism permeated his radio broadcasts.

2007-12-02 11:35:57 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

fedest.com, questions and answers