The oman atholic bserver

More Catholic News

Latenew1: Revised 07/04/2000

The Pope's Apology

On March 12, 2000, Pope John Paul II issued an 'apology' for the 'sins of the past.' Some (mostly liberal Roman Catholics) hail this as a watershed event, and see in it a real effort of the Pope to face his church's history of oppression, repression, anti-Semitism, property confiscation, imprisonment, torture and murder of those who disagreed with Rome.

The Pope's 'apology' is based on the document, Memory and Reconciliation: the Church and the faults of the Past. You can click this link to read it for yourself. This document was published with the approval of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the (Catholic) Faith (which is the successor organization to the Office of the Inquisition-responsible for so many atrocities in the past). I downloaded this document and edited it to remove the graphics and HMTL codes. The result was thirty-one (31) pages of single-spaced text! Thus it is too large to post here. Anyhow, it's always good to go straight to the source, right?

I believe it to be a most self-serving document at best. Never once, does the Pope accept responsibility, on behalf of the official Roman Catholic Church, for past atrocities. Rather does he attribute those sins to "her children." This deflection of responsibility occurs twenty (20) times in this document! Meanwhile, much of the document is devoted to promoting the idea that the Roman Catholic Church is really a "holy" organization, and therefore must be assumed to be incapable of such atrocities, such doctrinal and dogmatic errors. Indeed, to do so would mean that the RCC is not the infallible, Holy Spirit-led organization it claims to be!

Thus, this document is no apology at all, but rather an obfuscation, and a 31-page misdirection of attention from the real culprit. Whenever I see so large a document purporting to be a simple apology, I immediately smell a rat. A real apology can be given in very clear and simple language, and should include plans to make reparations, insofar as that is possible. Sadly, neither the Pope nor this document outlines the Roman Catholic Church's plans to make such reparation.

Yet Another False Apology from John Paul II

Please study the following "apology" made by Pope John Paul II upon visiting the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum:

"As Bishop of Rome and Successor of the Apostle Peter, I assure the Jewish people that the Catholic Church, motivated by the Gospel law of truth and love and by no political considerations, is deeply saddened by the hatred, acts of persecution and displays of anti-Semitism directed against the Jews by Christians at any time and in any place. The Church rejects racism in any form as a denial of the image of the Creator inherent in every human being(cf. Gen 1:26).

In this place of solemn remembrance, I fervently pray that our sorrow for the tragedy which the Jewish people suffered in the twentieth century will lead to a new relationship between Christians and Jews. Let us build a new future in which there will be no more anti-Jewish feeling among Christians or anti-Christian feeling among Jews, but rather the mutual respect required of those who adore the one Creator and Lord, and look to Abraham as our common father in faith (cf. We Remember, V)." [Pope John Paul II, March 23, 2000 address at the Yad Vashem (Holocaust) Museum in Israel. Source: Vatican web site at www.vatican.va.]

Notice how "his holiness" places the blame for anti-Semitism upon "Christians" as a whole, and not upon the Roman Catholic Church (where it truly occurred)? The history of Roman Catholic anti-Semitism is quite clear and well documented. But can you point out where Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Pentecostals, and so forth were guilty of anti-Jewish atrocities? Yet they are Christians, are they not? Why blame them when they had nothing to do with it?!

While the Pope's choice of terms is cunning, it is at least consistent with his overall strategy of blaming anyone and everyone except the really guilty party . . . the Roman Catholic Church! His "apology" is thus an "apology" for those Christians who had nothing whatever to do with the atrocities at all! I suggest that the Roman Catholic Church can never make a real apology because that would require the admission that a number of Rome's "infallible" pronouncements, doctrinal and dogmatic statements, papal decrees, and canons were in error. This she can never do; her pride forbids it.

What Would a Real Apology Look Like?

A friend recently asked, "So what would you have the Pope say by way of an apology?" It's a good question. Herewith my answer - a suggested apology for the Pope to make.

A Suggested Apology for Pope John Paul II to Make

The Roman Catholic Church, a Corporation Sole, God's only organization on earth, published many laws, edicts, encyclicals and bulls, that ordered or permitted the torture and murder of anyone who refused to submit to the Church, or to believe what the Church teaches. As the Vicar of Christ on earth, I, and all popes before me are accountable for the slaughter of millions. In the matter of the Jewish Holocaust, we are also responsible for millions of deaths because of our silence, our refusal to address the problem, and our complicity with the Nazi regime, even to the point of declaring Hitler a "defender of the Catholic Faith." I confess to these sins, and admit that the Catholic church was mistaken and in doctrinal and theological error in such matters. Infallible council proclamations encouraging such slaughter were and remain in error; they must be done away with.

To demonstrate sincerity in this apology, I hereby announce the immediate nullification of all existing Canon Laws, edicts, encyclicals, bulls, and so forth, that grant us 'divinely-given' authority to force the Roman Catholic faith upon others under pain of censure, political pressure, imprisonment, confiscation of property, torture and death. Since the canons of the Council of Trent exemplify our corporate errors by its numerous curses upon those who disagree with us, I hereby announce the abolition of all related canons from that Church Council now and forever.

To further demonstrate our sincerity, I hereby pledge to make reparation of money, personal property and lands wherever possible to the descendants of those we abused and ripped-off. To that end, I have ordered the sale of one billion dollars⁽¹⁾ worth of church treasures, with said monies to be placed in trust for later distribution. Where individual families or groups cannot be found, portions of these monies will be used to guarantee the free education and medical care of the indigent, the poor, the homeless.

Finally, as an appropriate gesture of good faith, I hereby abandon the papal tiara, that triple crown that signifies that I, as Pope, am the absolute ruler over all religion, over all kings and rulers, and over all nations of the earth. While I remain the ruler of the Roman Catholic Religion and those who choose it, I renounce all claims to any temporal authority. Indeed, such claims gave rise to atrocities in the first place. To prove my sincerity, I further announce that, from this day forward, the Roman Catholic Church is no longer to be considered as a political entity; I recall all Vatican ambassadors to other nations, and close all Vatican embassies in all nations of the world. If I am to truly emulate Christ, I cannot do otherwise.

(Signed)

John Paul II

Vicar of Christ on Earth; the Holy Father; Holder of the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven;
Former Wearer of the tiara; Bishop of Rome; Successor of Peter, etc.

US News Evaluation of Pope's Apology

Lest you think this is just sour grapes from a former Roman Catholic, consider what US NEWS & WORLD REPORT has to say about John Paul's "apology." [Link to original report is below.]

"Once again, a Catholic expression of regret relies too heavily on the passive voice, always a sign that we are about to swerve away from candor. We read about 'the suffering endured by the people of Israel' rather than the Christians who helped the Nazis impose all the suffering."

"Some of the misty abstractions (in the Pope's apology) are baffling. 'Purification of memory,' fails to register at all in English.' . . . Can't we just have more plain talk?"

"The document says the Holocaust 'was certainly the result of the pagan ideology of Nazism.' The Vatican has to stop inserting this line into its expressions of sorrow to the Jews. It's a way of discounting Christian antisemitism as a major factor in the extermination of Europe's Jews. Apart from the scale of the killings, there was nothing in the Nazi program for the Jews that hadn't been pioneered by centuries of Christian practice;"

To read the whole report from US NEWS, click on this Penitent Pope link.

Note: One surfer, tony P., went so far as to reprint the above article, substituting the term Catholic(s) in place of the term Christian. It does read more accurately that way!

What Do You Think?

I have spoken with some Roman Catholic folks who have seen through the obfuscation, the obscurantism of John Paul II's "apologies," and recognize them for what they are - a poor attempt at getting Evangelical Protestants and Jews to believe he has true repentance - and just one more step in the direction of the ecumenical movement aimed at bringing other religions under the control of Rome. These folks are mostly from the liberal wing of the American Catholic Church - those known to think for themselves . . . folks who are adverse to blind belief and spoon-feeding of religious belief.

I have also spoken with some Roman Catholic folks who view the John Paul II's "apologies" as a wonderful expression of Rome's humility. These folks, mainly from the traditional wing of the Catholic Church, can't seem to bring themselves to a critical analysis of the source documentation. To them, any such evaluation is dismissed as "sour grapes" from anti-catholic fanatics, and is viewed as bordering on the heretical. "Question the Pope? How dare you?!" Thus far, it appears that such folks prefer to attack the source of uncomplimentary reports without addressing the contents. They prefer to dismiss the content out-of-hand as being "unworthy" of a reply. A typical response, I think, when one is nonplused (flabbergasted, dumbfounded, disconcerted, befuddled, confounded, without reasonable arguments, etc.) .

QUESTION: What does it signify when the Pope assigns the blame for past atrocities to "her children" or to all "Christians" in general, and not to the organizational church and her popes? Your answer?

QUESTION: What kind of apology is it that is primarily devoted to proving how 'holy' the Roman Catholic Church is, and therefore how incapable of moral, theological and doctrinal error? Your answer?

QUESTION: After reading the full text of the "apology" documentation, do you consider the Pope's "apology" a true apology for the transgressions of the official Roman Catholic Church and her Popes? Yes No

QUESTION: If your answer is "Yes," can you supply the evidence from the source documents to prove it? Yes No

QUESTION: Do you think it reasonable for the Pope to make a real apology, that he make the removal and denial of all previous encyclical, bulls, canons, etc., that permit the use of force to make people believe and accept the Roman Catholic Faith? Yes No

QUESTION: do you think it reasonable for the Pope to make a real apology, that he set aside a portion of the Roman Catholic Church's vast wealth to make amends in the best possible manner? Yes No

Catholic Apologist Calls for Book Burning!

Well-known Roman Catholic apologist Karl Keating has done it again. He has sent a copy of a new Chick tract to his mailing list - with instructions to destroy it! Kind of make one recall the Roman Catholic orgy of book-burnings in days gone by, doesn't it! That part of the Roman Catholic mindset never really changes, does it? If something (or someone) disagrees with Rome, the solution is to get rid of it (or them). Its a good thing for us that torture and murder are now crimes . . . because as far as I know, Rome has never rescinded her laws and encyclicals permitting same. If any of you Roman Catholic surfers are aware of Rome's having rescinded such laws, encyclicals, etc., please, please, please give me the details and I shall immediately change this paragraph.

I can't say that I've heard any Protestant calling for the destruction of Keatings' books. Hmm. Maybe we should do that . . . try to even up the "destroy-that-evil-book!" score? No, on second thought, that would only make us like Keating.

Keatings' latest book-burning call arrived in my mail on Thursday, May 4, 2000. It was conveniently un-dated and un-postmarked. Inside was a copy of Chick Publications' latest tract entitled "The Death Cookie. In a four-page appeal for money, Keating referred to the tract as "lies and distortions," "offensive," and "nonsense" among other similar terms. As with his previous mailing of another Chick tract, Keating does not devote a single sentence to refuting the content of the track. That seems to be his style. . . knock it, declare it full of lies . . . but never once address the content, the message in the tract.

I noticed that Keating has moved off the dime a bit, however. Last time he instructed his audience to destroy the previous tract without reading it. This time he instructs them to read it and then destroy it. Hmm. . . wonder if Karl visited my site and read the poem I wrote especially for him? Good move, Karl. Its nice of you to support Chick Publications by buying a large volume of tracts (you did pay for them I presume), and sending them to your list of Roman Catholic subscribers. I shall pray that your audience will not just read the tract, but will, like good Bereans, check its message against the Word of God (Acts 17:10-12).

And no, Karl, I won't be one to call for the destruction of your books. No, not at all. The wheat and the tares are supposed to be allowed to grow together . . . until the harvest (Matthew 13:24-30). Besides, I do not share your seemingly paranoid fear of the opposition's material. And thank you, Karl, for making Chick's expression of the Word of God on this matter available to your readers.

To read The Death Cookie, you can surf over to Chick Publications and read the tract for yourself. Just select "English Tracts" when you arrive, and cursor-down to "The Death Cookie." I think you'll enjoy the other tracts you find there too.

New Catholic Talisman

It arrived in the mail bearing a return address for the St. Jude Shrine in Baltimore, Maryland. Our fell a genuine U.S. of A. penny - with a cross neatly punched in its center. (I am not sure here, but isn't it illegal to deliberately deface United States currency?). The accompanying letter made the purpose of the punched penny quite clear:

CATHOLIC PROTECTION AMULET- DON'T LEAVE HOME WITHOUT ONE! "Dear Friend,

Just in case you do some traveling this summer, I wanted to be sure you carried a little extra protection with you. Even if you don't venture out very far, at least you'll have one more way to keep the Lord close to you."

There you have it. The cross-punched penny is offered as protection for you. Protection from what? The letter doesn't say, but presumably it is protection while you are traveling - maybe in a car, plane, boat or train, or maybe even on your bike, motorcycle or moped. As to what kind of protection, I guess its up to you to fill in the blanks.

Where the good old chained rabbit's foot (pity the poor rabbit) promises good luck, and the brown scapular promises salvation, this latest talisman promises a generic sort of protection. It also promises to "keep the Lord close to you." Hmm. Sounds kinda like a God magnet. Jesus must be keeping channels open to all those cross-punched pennies so he'll know who to give that extra protection to.

Am I being too harsh by using the term talisman? Here's the definition:

talisman (t²l"¹s-mn, -¹z-) n., pl. talismans. 1. An object marked with magic signs and believed to confer on its bearer supernatural powers or protection. [American Heritage Dictionary]

Is the St. Jude Shrine's penny an object marked with a magic sign? Yes, it is marked with a punched-out cross. Is it believed to confer on its bearer supernatural protection? Yes, is says so quite clearly in the letter. That puts this penny in the same category as rabbit's feet, medicine bags, brown scapulars, miraculous medals, eagle's claws, bear's teeth and shrunken heads.

The letter goes on to inform you that you can get this great extra protection from Jesus for an offering of only $7. to $10. US currency. Ever notice how so many Catholic talismans seem to have a price tag? I wonder if they'll accept a roll or two of quarters punched for use with a key ring or chain? If they used cross-punched dimes, would you get ten times the protection? Just wondering.

Comments? Questions?

Click this box to view or sign our Message Board. See what others have to say! Enter your own comments about this site, or the information you find here. If your comments are of general interest, they may be included in an update to this site.

1. Which is approximately 1/40th the estimated net worth of the Catholic Church in America alone.

Join The Roman Catholic Observer mailing list! Enter your email address below, then click the 'Join List' button. We will send you a notice each time The Roman Catholic Observer is updated!

Subscribe Unsubscribe
Powered by ListBot

QUESTION: What does it signify when the Pope assigns the blame for past atrocities to "her children" or to all "Christians" in general, and not to the organizational church and her popes?	Your answer?
QUESTION: What kind of apology is it that is primarily devoted to proving how 'holy' the Roman Catholic Church is, and therefore how incapable of moral, theological and doctrinal error?	Your answer?
QUESTION: After reading the full text of the "apology" documentation, do you consider the Pope's "apology" a true apology for the transgressions of the official Roman Catholic Church and her Popes?	Yes	No
QUESTION: If your answer is "Yes," can you supply the evidence from the source documents to prove it?	Yes	No
QUESTION: Do you think it reasonable for the Pope to make a real apology, that he make the removal and denial of all previous encyclical, bulls, canons, etc., that permit the use of force to make people believe and accept the Roman Catholic Faith?	Yes	No
QUESTION: do you think it reasonable for the Pope to make a real apology, that he set aside a portion of the Roman Catholic Church's vast wealth to make amends in the best possible manner?	Yes	No