web analytics

On This Day…10.12

By ATWadmin On December 10th, 2006

1520 – Martin Luther publicly burns the Papal Bull which announces his excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church.

1868 – London’s first set of traffic lights are installed in Westminster – helping Members of Parliament reaching the House of Commons.

1898 – Signing of Treaty of Paris between United States of America and Spain ends the Spanish-American War. Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines are ceded to the United States for $20 million.

1948 – United Nations General Assembly adopts the Convention of Genocide and Human Rights.

1977 – The inaugural flight of the world’s first supersonic airliner – Concorde – from London to Singapore.

1990 – Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein refuses international calls for him to withdraw his troops from Kuwait.

105 Responses to “On This Day…10.12”

  1. Here’s to the 500th Anniversary in 2020!
    What odds a crumbly Blair issues an apology to Ireland and the Vatican!

  2. >>Martin Luther publicly burns the Papal Bull,<<

    ..setting into motion 500 years of Protestant bull.

  3. ‘500 years of Protestant bull.’?

    This, coming from an adherent of a faith that professes the mutually exclusive extremes of either perpetual pregnancy or perpetual viginity, is laughable.

    And we’ll include a ban on priests marrying, thus subjecting a plethora of little boys’ backsides to a good pounding when the bishop’s not looking.

  4. You’d rather things had stayed the way they were in the early 16th Century ? Indulgences and all that ?

  5. Andrew, I’ve never been pregnant, and a virgin only for a thankfully brief period.

    You’re going to go to Hell, I’m afraid.

    Luther was a bigoted boor, he was also a violent Jew-hater and misogynist. He encouraged the riff-raff that followed him to do some despicable things.

    "Wherever books are burned, there ultimately people will also be burned", Heinrich Heine wrote.
    1520 wasn’t the first, and certainly not the last time that happened.

  6. <Q>Luther was a bigoted boor, he was also a violent Jew-hater and misogynist.</Q>

    How come he wasn’t made Pope then ? 😉

  7. Burning a bull of excommunication, when you are the subject of it, is not the same thing as book burning per se. It’s on a par with burning old love letters.

    Luther had his faults but I think that he would have had to go quite a way to be as bad as some of his enemies, Henry and Thomas Moore for example.

  8. Even the Catholic Church ended up acknowledging that Luther was in the right.

  9. ‘You’re going to go to Hell…’

    Any proof to back up that statement?

    ‘and a virgin only for a thankfully brief period.’

    ‘Brief’ suggests you lost it in childhood. Father Jack or Father Seamus?

  10. >>is not the same thing as book burning per se. ..

    Luther had his faults but I think that he would have had to go quite a way to be as bad as some of his enemies, Henry and Thomas Moore for example.<<

    Aileen, Luther also burned books on that and many other occasions.

    Thomas Moore? I appreciate that the strains of "The Harp that once in Tara’s Halls.." may grate a bit on Unionist sensitivities, but still, its lyrics are hardly as bad as:

    “Whenever you see or think of a Jew, say to yourself `Look, that mouth that I see before me has every Saturday cursed, execrated, and spat upon my dear Lord Jesus Christ Who redeemed me with His precious blood, and has also invoked maledictions on my wife and child and all Christians that they might be murdered and perish miserably. He himself would gladly do it if he could, if only in order to get hold of our goods; maybe he has already today many times spat on the ground, as it is their custom to do when the name of Jesus is mentioned, so that his venomous spittle still hangs about his mouth and beard and leaves scarcely room to spit again.”

    Thus spake the great Reformer. And on many occasions in similar mode:
    “The Jews are malignant snakes and imps”. “Whoever would like to befriend them .., let him tell the Jews to use his mouth as a toilet, or else crawl into the Jew’s hind parts, and there worship the holy thing, so as afterwards to be able to boast of having been merciful, and of having helped the Devil and his progeny to blaspheme our dear Lord.”

    Luther goes on: “Therefore, do not doubt and never forget, beloved Christians, that apart from Satan himself, you possess no more deadly poisonous, and dreadful enemy than a real Jew. I know that. They poison wells, kidnap and maltreat children.”

    What to do about Jews?: “I for one would smack him on the jaw. Were I able, I would knock him down and stab him in my anger. It is lawful, according to both the human and the divine law, to kill a robber; then it is even more permissible to slay a blasphemer!” and “If I had to baptise a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words `I baptise thee in the name of Abraham’”

  11. Cunningham – what was the Vatican stance on Jews at the time ? You are being disingenuous here …. Nobody is suggesting that Luther was perfect – just that he was better than the Papacy which was also rabidly anti-semitic – and continued to be antisemitic for centuries

    "The most controversial pope of modern times was Pius XII, who took over in 1939 and was labelled "Hitler’s Pope" by those who accuse him of turning a blind eye to reports of the Holocaust. He did so, they claim, in the firm belief that it was better for the church to sup with a dictator who killed six million Jews than it was to condemn him and risk seeing him replaced by "godless" communists.

    Try as it might, the Vatican has still not managed to find a decent gloss to put on Pius’s actions, though, like his 19th-century predecessor Pius IX, who described Jews as "dogs who bark in the street", he is on the fast track to canonisation.

    Further back, there was Pope Leo XIII, who, in the closing years of the 19th century, dashed fledgling hopes of reconciliation between the Church of England and the Church of Rome by declaring that all Anglican ordinations were "null and void", a judgment which, incidentally, still stands. So however friendly the Pope is to the Archbishop of Canterbury when they occasionally meet, the official Catholic teaching is that Rowan Williams is an imposter who is only pretending to be a man of the cloth."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1875590,00.html

  12. >>he was better than the Papacy which was also rabidly anti-semitic.<<

    Are you serious? Care to tell us which Pope of the time exhorted his follows to murder their neighbours, and continued to exhort them even after they’d come back from their murderous forrays. Tell us which Pope said anything like :

    “We ought to take revenge on the Jews and kill them”

    On another occasion
    “(Let us) force them to work and treat them with every severity as Moses did in the desert when he slew 3,000 of them."

    On another: “It is our own fault that we have not avenged the sacred blood of our Saviour and the innocent blood of countless Christians and children, spoiled since the demolition of Jerusalem until now; it is our own fault that we have not annihilated the Jews but placidly let them stay where they are in spite of all their murders, their curses, (etc.).”

    What Pope ever incited the dumb masses to persecution and murder like this?

  13. "Aileen, Luther also burned books on that and many other occasions."

    Then why relate the quote to book burning to that as opposed to his excommunication bull?

    As to the rest of your post, how does it challamge

    my comment

    "Luther had his faults but I think that he would have had to go quite a way to be as bad as some of his enemies, Henry and Thomas Moore for example"

    which you have quoted as if what followed challanged it? You have jusr reinforced the had his faults bit.

  14. You MUST be kidding ? You should read some of the history of your Church.

    Mid 16th Century – by order of the Pope –

    <Q>All Jews were to be enclosed in ghettos, each community could have only one synagogue, all commercial and civil rights were taken away, and all Jews had to wear a contrassegno (identification). </Q>

    Does that sound familiar ? Commercial and civil rights stripped, forced into Ghettos and made to wear an insignia?

    Quote:

    In the 13th century the IV Lateran Council imposed sumptuary laws on all Jews, forcing them to wear at various times, a red mantle, a circle of yellow cloth or an orange cap. Only physicians attending the Popes were exempt.

    Carnival was a particularly dangerous time for Jews. In 1468 the practice of Carnival races began where Jews were sometimes dragged in barrels spiked with nails or forced to run through jeering crowds from the Piazza Navona to the Corso. The races continued for 200 years. They stopped when Pope Clement 1X accepted, as a tribute, money from the Jewish community instead.

    After the expulsion of Jews from Spain in 1492, Rome filled with Jews from all parts of Europe and Africa, more than doubling the size of the community. Five different scuola – or synagogues had to be created to accommodate the different languages and practices. The Piazza delle Cinque Scuola (the piazza of Five Synagogues ) reflects the cultural diversity that co-existed, not always peacefully, within the Jewish Community. The Scuola del Tiempio the oldest and therefore the most prestigious of the scuola, was made up of the descendants of the ancient Roman colony and the freed slaves that had been brought to Rome by Titus after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Scuola Nuova was for the Italian Jews who came to Rome later from other parts of Lazio. Sicily was part of Spain in the 15th century, and Sicilian Jews were expelled along with their Iberian cousins. They too, needed their own synagogue. And there were two scuola establish for the Spanish Jews, Scuola Catalana and Scuola Castigliana.

    But what changed the Jewish community of Rome from one of the freest and most protected in Italy, to one of the poorest and most wretched was the Counter Reformation. In the 16th century, when the Popes were responding to the threat of Protestantism by crackling down ferociously on all forms of heresy, Jewish life in Rome took a serious turn for the worse. In 1555 Pope Paul IV issued the Cum nimis absurdum bull which stated “it is absurd and inconvenient that the Jews, who through their own fault were condemned by God to eternal slavery, can …show such ingratitude towards Christians and affront them by asking for their mercy…. have become so bold as to not only live amongst Christians but near their churches without any distinctive clothing. ”

    The Pope went on to rescind all privileges enjoyed by the Jews and to establish a ghetto based on the ghettos in Venice and Prague.

    He decreed that Jews must live segregated in quarters with gates; they must sell all their property to Christians; they could only have one synagogue but no Jewish signs or symbols were allowed; they could not employ Christian servants; they had to wear a distinctive clothing and they could only trade in second hand goods. During the day they could venture into other parts of Rome but the Ghetto gates were closed from sun- up to sundown.

    “The pope chose one of the worst quarters in Rome, maybe the worst one.” says, Supino. “And he installed the gates which enclosed the streets. And the gates were built at the expense of the Jewish community. But, there was no wall surrounding the ghetto.” </Q>

    http://www.audiowalks.com/read-a-walk/rome_ghetto.htm

    And you are still avoiding the question – would you rather things had continued unchanged with indulgences and all the other nonsense ?

  15. Pope Julius III ordered Talmud burnings.
    1554 – Cornelio da Montalcino, a Franciscan Friar who converted to Judaism, is burned alive in Rome.

  16. >>he was better than the Papacy which was also rabidly anti-semitic.<<

    >>Commercial and civil rights stripped, forced into Ghettos and made to wear an insignia<<

    Basically what you are saying is that it’s better to exhort your followers to murder innocent people than to exhort them to put them into ghettos.

    I see.

  17. "Basically what you are saying is that it’s better to exhort your followers to murder innocent people than to exhort them to put them into ghettos.

    I see."

    So "Pope Julius III ordered Talmud burnings.
    1554 – Cornelio da Montalcino, a Franciscan Friar who converted to Judaism, is burned alive in Rome. "

    is merely "exhort them to put them into ghettos."

    I see

  18. Luther was a rabid anti-semite who advocated driving the Jews from Germany and burning down their synagogues.

    Popes at the time were equally anti-semitic.

    Interesting that leading German Protestant churchman, Bishop Martin Sasse published a compendium of Martin Luther’s antisemitic vitriol shortly after Kristallnacht.

    He applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day: ‘On November 10, 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.’ The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words ‘of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.’"

  19. Aileen, I think I’m beginning to understand your comments as little as you evidently understand mine.

    Emmmmm. do you think that what I quoted Luther as urging his followers to do with Jews (remembering that he continued with such exhortations after his followers had acted on them) is less evil than what the popes of the day said about Jews?

    As for Cornelio da Montalcino. I was talking, as I clearly said, about "innocent people", i.e. people who were to be killed just because they were Jewish.
    That Fransciscan monk was guilty of apostacy in the eyes of the church and suffered the standard penalty of the day. People were burnt all over Europe, and by all religions, at the time for that and similar offences. That is, however, irrelevant to the point I was talking about – Luther’s and the popes’ attitudes to normal innocent Jews.

  20. Cunningham

    I have not mentioned popes. I said that I thought that Luther had his faults but that he had a way to go to be as bad as some of his enemies, e,g, Henry VIII and Thiomas More.

    You appeared to be challangeing this view, but have only supported what was part of my contention that Luther had his faults.

    So being a jew is more innocent the fraciscian monk? Why? In both cases it is murdering people purely because of their religion.

    "People were burnt all over Europe, and by all religions,"

    Oh well that’s alright then!!!????

    When you say stuff like

    "Basically what you are saying is that it’s better to exhort your followers to murder innocent people than to exhort them to put them into ghettos.

    I see."

    Yu can’t expect to get away with claiming that the murder of religious dissenters is not relevant.

  21. "Emmmmm. do you think that what I quoted Luther as urging his followers to do with Jews (remembering that he continued with such exhortations after his followers had acted on them) is less evil than what the popes of the day said about Jews?"

    The Popes as I understand it has actual power so that takes us beyond what they said to what they did.

  22. >>In both cases it is murdering people purely because of their religion<<

    No, it isn’t.

    Do you really believe that?

    >>Yu can’t expect to get away with claiming that the murder of religious dissenters is not relevant.<<

    Yes, I can (expect), because it isn’t (relevant to the point).

  23. >>Oh well that’s alright then!!!????<<

    A stupid retort, by the way.

  24. Aileen, would it suprise you to learn that many Jews were murdered because of their religion at the time of Queen Elisabeth I ?

  25. ">>In both cases it is murdering people purely because of their religion<<

    No, it isn’t.

    Do you really believe that?"

    Of course I B****dy well do otherwiae I would not have said it. Have you anything more to offer than "no it isn’t" why is it not?

    It is relevant to the comment you made. You asked Mad

    "Basically what you are saying is that it’s better to exhort your followers to murder innocent people than to exhort them to put them into ghettos.

    I see. "

    when he had given and example of murdering a convert.

    ">>Oh well that’s alright then!!!????<<

    A stupid retort, by the way."

    It has a way to go to compete with what prompted it. i.e. that someone who converts and is murdered for it is not innocent and that the fact that ot was widespread somehow excuses it.

  26. Cunningham

    No it wouldn’t. And your point?

  27. "would it suprise you to learn that many Jews were murdered because of their religion at the time of Queen Elisabeth I ?"

    It would surprise me because I was not aware that there were any jews to be killed in England between Edward I’s expulsion edict in the 1290s and their readmittance by Cromwell several centuries later.

  28. Aileen,

    >>In both cases it is murdering people purely because of their religion<<

    Rubbish.
    The Franciscan was not, as you claim, murdered (he was executed) nor, more importantly, was it because of his religion. He was, as I said, executed for the crime of apostacy, a standard punishment for that "crime" across Europe at the time.

    There were thousands of Jews living in every city of Italy at the time. Were they murdered or executed "because of their religion"?
    No, but this individual was, and if you use a bit of common sense you will guess why:

    He was a Franciscan monk, i.e. had taken a solemn oath before the Chrisitan God to worship Him and obey his superiors etc. For such a man to convert to Judaism was a severe case of apostacy in the eyes of Europeans at the time. It was a known crime and the known penalty was death.

    It’s strange that you and MR seem to believe that executing a specific individual who broke the law (no matter how repugnant the law or punishment were) is no worse than arbitrary massacre of many innocent people just because of their religion.

    This opens my eyes.

  29. Cunningham

    nothing you have said in any way contradicts my assertion that he was murdered because of his religion. He was "guilty" of apostacy because he converted to judaism, i.e. because he made that his religion.

    "It’s strange that you and MR seem to believe that executing a specific individual who broke the law (no matter how repugnant the law or punishment were) is no worse than arbitrary massacre of many innocent people just because of their religion.

    This opens my eyes."

    It is no great suprise to me that you consider exhorting people to do things to others because of their religion is worse than actually ordering and authorising murder because of someone’s religion.

  30. Aileen,

    joining the priesthood – oath to the Christian God
    leaving the priesthood – breaking that oath
    leaving Christianity – apostacy
    breaking an oath to God and apostacy – capital crimes
    capital crimes – execution

    Now Montalcino was aware of and understood that, but which part do you not understand?

    Remember that, as a priest, he knew canon law, knew that breaking his oath and apostacy were capital crimes and were punishable, after a tribunal, by death.

    Whatever he did, he did not do it "innocently".

    But of course this is on a par with the fate of the entirely innocent and unsuspecting Jews citizens of Wittemberg, who did not know what befell them until Luther’s rabble smashed into thier hovels and ran their pitchforks into them.

  31. Andrew,

    >>Any proof to back up that statement?<<

    I always thought that, though politically insane, you are otherwise an intelligent man, so I presume you don’t believe in that stuff.

    But if you aren’t, let me apologise and assure you it was meant as a joke.

    >>’Brief’ suggests you lost it in childhood. Father Jack or Father Seamus?<<

    LOL. Not Father FitsPatrick or Father FitsMaurice ?

    I lost my virginity, alas, far too late for my comfort, but from the perspective of my advanced years now, the period of enforced virginity was still relatively brief.

  32. Cunnungham

    "Now Montalcino was aware of and understood that, but which part do you not understand?"

    I don’t not understand any of it. I don’t see why you expect me to consider that any of that is justification in any way whatseover. He changed his religion. He was nurdered because he did so.

    "Whatever he did, he did not do it "innocently""

    He was innocent of any wrong doing and that is the only point I give a monkey’s about. Ny your reasoning those Jews througout history, who continued to stick with their religion despite the penalties were not innocent either,

    Even if we accept your definintion of innocent what the hell has it got to do with the rights and wrings of what happened to them. .

  33. Ultimately we come down to the reality – RCs feel they can say what they like about protestants and protestantism, but God forbid anybody mention anything dodgy about their religion ….because in their arrogance they believe – and were taught, thet theirs is the only proper religion.

    So Luther’s anti semitism bad, Papal anti-semitism ?
    Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Didn’t happen.

    Garfie ? Mentions one Prod bigot – forgets to mention that the Nazi movement was RC …… Care to discuss the Utashe old chap and Ireland’s role in hiding a war criminal ?

    Christian anti-semitism predates Protestantism by many centuries. Protestant anti-semitism was a product of RC anti-semitism. That’s the reality.

  34. <Q>He was, as I said, executed for the crime of apostacy, a standard punishment for that "crime" across Europe at the time. </Q>

    You mean like anti-semitism was pretty standard at that time ?

    But where do you stand on the reasons Luther fell out with the Vatican – let’s not try and insinuate that he was excommunicated because of his anti-semitism …..

    Do you accept that he was in the right over the matters with which he differed with Rome ? After all Rome went on to reform itself to a great extent in line with his objections.

  35. Ross

    "It would surprise me because I was not aware that there were any jews to be killed in England between Edward I’s expulsion edict in the 1290s and their readmittance by Cromwell several centuries later."

    I remember that one of the Edwards pushed them out and that Cromwell had "welcomed" them back, but I wasn;t sure if there had been a few arround that had flown under the radar.

  36. Nazi Germany was Catholic? You’re excelling yourself madradin.

    Did you not know that German Protestants were more likely to vote and support the NSDAP than Catholics in Germany?

    May I recommend you read The Logic of Evil: The Social Origins of the Nazi Party, 1925-1933

    Come back to me when you have.

  37. <Q>Nazi Germany was Catholic? </Q>

    Not what I said Garfie ….

    <Q>the Nazi movement was RC </Q>

    Most of it’s leaders were RC …and it’s stronghold was in Bavaria …. the Most RC part of Germany….Where were the great Rallies held ? Nuremberg, Bavaria

    Not a cheep out of you about the Utashe and Ireland’s shame ?

    now trot off back into hiding bigot 🙂

  38. >>Nazi movement was RC<<

    LOL

    The Nazi movement was based on Lutheran Protestantism, mad.
    Blut und Boden, racy of the soil, subservience to the temporal order, distrust of international religious organisations, a national ideology for a nation state
    All traditional Protestant virtues
    Oh, and it built on and expanded Luther’s peasant anti-Semitism.

    Look at how the Nazi’s fared in Protestant Saxony, compared to the Catholic Rhineland (which Hitler referred to as the "Black (i.e. Catholic) Corner" in disgust. They won local elections in Thuringia, Franconia and Saxony (all strongly Protestant districts) well before they seized power.
    Until it was suppressed, the majority of Catholics supported the bourgeoisie and clerical "Zentrum" party.

    Sorry, own goal.

    (but as a consolation prize, you are partly right about Catholics anger as being criticised while all to eager to criticise Protestantism. At least this is probably true outside NI. In NI it is probably reversed.)

  39. Wrong Cunningham –

    in what religion was Hitler raised ?

    Whoopsie …..

    http://history1900s.about.com/library/holocaust/blhitler19.htm

    Fascism – the Child of Roman Catholicism – what religion was Spain ? Italy ? 😉

  40. >>’s stronghold was in Bavaria …. the Most RC part of Germany….Where were the great Rallies held ? Nuremberg, Bavaria<<

    Oooo, another bad own-goal, MR

    Nuremberg is the capital of Franconia, and is only part of Bavaria for administrative reasons. Nuremberg is overwhelmingly Protestant, as is the surrounding country.

  41. >>in what religion was Hitler raised ?<<

    Was is not you who said recently that converts are the most ferocious haters of their original tribe/creed?

    As a youth, Hitler famously spat in the church during Mass. See, the heart of a real Prod!

  42. Irrelevent Cunningham – it is part of Roman Catholic Bavaria – where the Nazis were based and where they came to power 🙂 Munich, Bavaria – Strongly RC – ring any bells ?

  43. When was Hitler excommunicated ?

    ( he wasn’t )

    Which protestant Church did he join ?

    He didn’t ….

    Which Church protected Nazi War criminals ?
    The Roman Catholic Church.

    Stepinac and the forced conversion issue? The Franciscans in Croatia during WWII ? Andrja Artukovic – Interior minister in the Utashe regime – introduced ‘racial purity’ laws whereupon Stepinac wrote and congratulated him and asked only that catholic non-aryans be treated with ‘respect’ ? Smuggled by the Church to Dublin after the war. After the War Stepinac was sentenced to 16 years – but rather than apologise for church actions or criticise Pius XII actually promoted the man to Cardinal. Irish catholic Children were made to pray for him as a ‘victim of communism’

  44. So Hitler was a Prod now???

    I don’t think so.

  45. Interestingly enough Aileen Pol Pot studied at a Catholic school 😉

  46. Pinochet’s dead. was he one of ours as well ;o)

    Of course Luther himself wasn’t one of ours either. He believed in transubsstanciation didn’t he?

  47. Not sure about Luther and Trans-whatsit!

    Other monsters educated by the RC Church – Adams, McGuinness, Kelly …..

  48. Actually he beleived in consubstantiantion as opposed to transubstantiation but in essence (so to speak) he stil advocated the Real Presence.

  49. Mad

    To be fair considering that Roman Catholicism is the biggest Christian sect, it is statistically likley to have provided us with the most monsters.

  50. Statistics ? 😉
    Pffft! The numbers tell their own story LOL

  51. Madradin,

    <Q>the Nazi movement was RC </Q>

    The Nazi movement got more support from the Protestant areas of Germany than the Catholic ones. That’s a fact.

    "Most of it’s leaders were RC …and it’s stronghold was in Bavaria …. the Most RC part of Germany….Where were the great Rallies held ? Nuremberg, Bavaria"

    You are now making a fool of yourself. Catholic Bavaria and Westphalia, along with working-class "Red Berlin," were always the Nazis’ weakest areas electorally.

    Check out your facts before talking about things you know nothing about.

  52. When was Hitler excommunicated Garfie ?

  53. I’ve got to defend me taig brothers! I think I read the Pope didn’t want to excomm Hitler b/c he feared reprisals against the clergy. Didn’t the Pope himself help spirit away jew via the Vatican?

    (That’s just a quick comment. Don’t want to insert myself into Irish fratricide!)

  54. LOL Charles!
    More RCs like you and the world would be a better place mate 🙂

  55. Ta, MR!

  56. Madradin,
    I take it by your silence that you are withdrawing your inaccuratae claim that Bavaria was the Nazi stronghold of Germany.

    It was the Protestant rural areas of Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg, Pommern and Ost-Preussen where Hitler did best.

    Was Hitler a Christian? Tell me more.

  57. Charles
    Prods and RCs and others aided Hitler and Prods and RCa and others fouhgt against him.

    This all started from Cunningham seeking to make Luther our as some sort of unique monster as some sort of score against the Prods on the forum.

    Although I don’t know that any of us are Lutherans.

  58. Garfie – Are you denying that, as with Mussolini and Franco, Hitler was born and raised RC ? That he wasn’t excommunicated ?

    Indeed Aileen. Cunningham threw a Hissy about Luther – although Rome eventually accepted the major criticisms he had presented.

  59. Come on Madradin,
    admit you were completely wrong about Bavaria and where Hitler got is support in Germany,namely rural Protestant ones. Is it that hard?

    Then I’ll move on to your next claims.

  60. Aileen, Cunningham could resist I suppose. The US Midwest has plenty of Lutherans from German immigration. They say in Kansas even the athiests are Lutheran b/c it’s a Lutheran God they Don’t believe in!

  61. Hitler was brought up as an RC but I though that the NAZIs were drawn to Paganism.

    I’m not sure where this fits in with the fact that people, including high ranking NAZIs were married and buried using what I presume were Christian cermonies in the main.

  62. Charles

    That reminds me of an old joke about a man who belonged to a very strict Protestant sect, which brought an organ into the church, much to his disgust. He announced his decision to join the Church of Ireland (Anglican). When quized on this, partiulcarly about the fact that the CoI had an church organ. He answered "I can cope with an organ in the Church of Ireland but not in Gods house!"

  63. Aye!

  64. Aileen,
    Nazis didn’t have Christian ceremonies and they had their own regulations for marriage.

    You could be asked for an Ehetauglichkeitszeugnis, for example, which was "certificate of fitness for marriage".

    You failed to get one if you had a contagious disease, or had a genetic disorder.

    SS Officers got married by means of the "Eheweihe" rather than a Church ceremony.

  65. Garfield

    It’s not something I knw a lot about so I’m not in a position to challange. I knw abiut he restrictions on marriage and the racial purity b*****x, but I do remember reading that the party didn’t act agaisnt the churches as they used them to gain respectility and that they would bide their time to establish their strange Paganesque churches.

  66. Aileen,
    of course you could. There was even a Reich Bishop!

    Hermann Göring married Emmy Sonnemann, a famous Opera star.

    Adolf Hitler was best man.

    The happy couple were married by Protestant Reichbishop Müller.

    His

  67. Garfield

    "Of course you could" Could what?

    Your last post is surely a cortradition to "Nazis didn’t have Christian ceremonies "

  68. >>This all started from Cunningham seeking to make Luther our as some sort of unique monster <<

    and ended with Alieen halucinating like this.

  69. *yawn*

  70. OT

    Anyone any idea when mahons is going to post his article?

  71. Aileen,
    Apologies for the lack of clarity.

    This Protestant Deutsche Kirche church was popular as was this Reichsbischoff Mueller presiding and not least because they banned non-Aryan ministers from continuing in their positions. So I don’t consider it Christian.

    You probably heard of another Evangelical Minister, who didn’t make the jump with the Deutsche Kirche group: Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

    As he once said:

    "If a drunk in a car mounts the pavement on the Kurfürstendamm (Berlin’s main street) and races down it, then the Minister’s job is not only to console the victims of the madness but also to drag the madman from the wheel."

    Naturally, the Nazis murdered him.

  72. "The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is hostile to religion is a lie."
    Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party (quoted in John Cornwell’s "Hitler’s Pope" )

    "When Hitler narrowly escaped assassination in Munich in November, 1939, he gave the credit to providence. ‘Now I am completely content,’ he exclaimed. ‘The fact that I left the Burgerbraukeller earlier than usual is a corroboration of Providence’s intention to let me reach my goal.’ Catholic newspapers throughout the Reich echoed this, declaring that it was a miraculous working of providence that had protected their Fuëhrer. One cardinal, Michael Faulhaber, sent a telegram instructing that a Te Deum be sung in the cathedral of Munich, ‘to thank Divine Providence in the name of the archdiocese for the Fuëhrer’s fortunate escape. ‘ The Pope also sent his special personal congratulations."

    20th Century fascists and dictators

    • Austria : Engelbert Dollfuss
    • Belgium : Leon Degrelle
    • Croatia : Ante Pavelic
    • Bohemia-Moravia : Emil Hacha
    • Germany : Adolf Hitler
    • Hungary : Miklos Horthy
    • Italy : Benito Mussolini
    • Portugal : Antonio Salazar
    • Ruthenia : Fr. Augustin Voloshin
    • Slovakia : Fr. Josef Tiso
    • Slovakia : Fr. Andrei Hlinka
    • Spain : Francisco Franco
    • Sudetenland : Konrad Henlein
    • Vichy-France : Pierre Laval
    • Vichy-France : Henry Petain
    • Yugoslavia : Fr. Anton Koroshec

    Guess what religion Garfie ?

    Nazi Monsters

    Hitler
    Himmler
    Von Papen
    Thyssen
    Heydrich
    Goebbels
    Hoess

    All RC

    Goering – mixed background.

  73. Garfield

    As I said. I presume that all the Christian churches were allowed to continue (As long as they obeyed the purity rules etc) and that would include the RC and the Protestant ones.

  74. Aileen – Hitler in the Reichstag 1939

    3. The National Socialist State has not closed a church, nor has it prevented the holding of a religious service, nor has it ever exercised any influence upon the form of a religious service. It has not exercised any pressure upon the doctrine nor on the profession of faith of any of the Confessions. In the National Socialist State anyone is free to seek his blessedness after his own fashion .
    There are ten thousands and ten thousands of priests of all the Christian Confessions who perform their ecclesiastical duties just as well as or probably better than the political agitators without ever coming into conflict with the laws of the State.
    But on one point it is well that there should be no uncertainty: the German priest as servant of God we shall protect, the priest as political enemy of the German State we shall destroy."
    Adolf Hitler, a speech in the Reichstag on 30 Jan., 1939

  75. MR, as Garfield said: "Check out your facts before talking about things you know nothing about."

    Those lists you present are full of mistakes again. Someone was obviously taking you for a fool (a UDA handout?).

    After those blunders about the Nazi movement being RC and that Bavaria and Nuremberg thing, I really think you’ve scored enough own-goals for one evening!

  76. Madradin,
    I’m still awaiting an admission that you were totally wrong with your assertions on Bavaria and where Hitler got his main support from. Well? You keep ignoring that one.

    Now you are giving me another piece of information. How can I be sure you know what you are talking about this time?

    Your attempts to ignore the role of all Christian churches in this, Protestants especially, is hilarious if it wasn’t so serious.

    Protestants joined the NSDAP in their droves. They voted for, supported and killed for the Nazis. But you blame the Catholics if you want.

    Have you ever even heard of the Deutsche Kirche? I doubt it.

    3,000 Protestant Pastors signed up to their:

    "Ein Volk! – Ein Gott! – Ein Reich! – Eine Kirche!"

    I assume you don’t need me to translate that for you.

    Both the Protestant and Catholic Churches in Germany were more than happy to leave Hitler to his own devices as long as he didn’t encroach on their patch. That’s the reality. The sooner you face up to that the better.

    P.S Did you know that Hitler came to power even though Catholics were prohibited from joining the Nazi Party.

    It was only when the Concordat was signed that they rowed back.

    PPS: Did you know that some the Evangelical Churches didn’t speak out until Hitler started forcing the race laws and his Deutsche Christen on them. Before that none of them said a word.

    PPS Was Hitler a Christian in your view?

  77. Garfield – Hitler wasn’t a Christian – but as he wasn’t excommunicated Hitler WAS a Roman Catholic.

    Cunningham – I’m still waiting for you to prove that Luther was excommunicated because of his antisemitism.

    Neither of you have commented on Stepinac – I wonder why?

    You two can wriggle all you like but the Nazi’s came from Roman Catholicism.

    Hitler himself acknowledged his debt to the Jesuits.

    "I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits…until now there has never been anything more grandiose on the earth than the hierarchical organization of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organization into my own party."
    Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Said To Me (1939), 266-267.

  78. >>Now you are giving me another piece of information. How can I be sure you know what you are talking about this time?<<

    Well, Garfield, you can only be sure that he doesn’t!

    MR uses the Net too much. It is full of guys trying to fool people like him. The Internet is no substitute for sound general knowledge.

  79. http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

    Well Cunningham ? Stepinac?

  80. See, just like I said at 9:43!

    There have been numerous and exhaustive studies carried out about Nazi electoral support, and they ALL agree that Hitler’s and the Nazis’ support was strongest among your co-religionists, I’m afraid….

    You’ll hardly be able to undermine those statistics with a few photographs!

    >>I’m still waiting for you to prove that Luther was excommunicated because of his antisemitism.<<

    LOL, you’ll wait a bit more then. I never claimed anything of the sort. Why should I prove it?
    If you claimed it then go and prove it yourself!

    Over and out – goodnight!

  81. <Q>LOL, you’ll wait a bit more then. I never claimed anything of the sort. Why should I prove it?</Q>

    Then what relevance has his anti-semitism ( normal enough in Catholicism as shown) got to do with the discussion?

    Stepinac?

  82. Madradin,
    I see you are still failing to admit you that you were completely inaccurate about Bavaria and Hitler’s support base.

    You have said the equivalent of "Connacht was a stronghold of unionism".

    I said a long time ago on this forum that your biggest problem is that you mighn’t be always right but you are never wrong.

    Someone who is never wrong never learns. You are an intelligent person but even you can’t afford that luxury.

    Re excommunication: I trust you understand what ipso facto means.

  83. "There have been numerous and exhaustive studies carried out about Nazi electoral support, and they ALL agree that Hitler’s and the Nazis’ support was strongest among your co-religionists, I’m afraid…"

    WOW I didnlt realise that studies had shown that Anglicans were particularly implicated in supporting Hitler!.

  84. Garfield – I’m right 🙂

    <Q> It is by no means paradoxical that Bavaria, the first stronghold of the Nazis, had also been the first and only German province to proclaim itself a “Soviet Republic” – as short-lived as its first President, Kurt Eisner, who was assassinated shortly after assuming office. Conditions and people alike provided fertile ground for an “extremism” that was utterly irrational as it was based merely on violent discontent without an inkling as to the real cause of the post-war distress.</Q>
    http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/archive/nazism(1943).pdf

    Unlike you I’m not hampered by having to blindly defend my co-religionists.

    Stepinac?

  85. Cunnningham

    You rightly condemn Luther for anti-semitism. But Luther was raised in the catholic tradition and was a catholic priest until he was excommunicated by the pope.

    So where did his undoubted anti-semitism come from, do you think?

  86. Of course you are Madradin,
    now you are quoting world socialism I have to believe you. It goes from the sublime to the ridiculous.

    I recommend you read something believable like this rather than that source. If it’s too complicated for you, just look at the graphics.

    http://www.colorado.edu/IBS/PEC/johno/pub/nazi_long/Pnazi_long.htm

    PS: All you had to say was that you meant the Nazis’ initial base was in Bavaria or something similar.

    Instead you try and hold an unsustainable argument by quoting communist websites, generally the clearest sign that you are desperate.

    PPS: Once you have read this and the other things it leads you on to, I will be a bit more wary about discussing this as then you will know what you are talking about.

  87. This is the first time that I remember a "On this day" thread taking off.

  88. Aileen – protestant bashing was too attractive for Garfield and Cunningham 🙂

    Lucky for Charles and Monica and troll – else we could have discussed the US Imperialism of the Spanish American war!

  89. Cunningham – you criticised Luther for book burning – yet were silent about the Papal order to burn the Talmud. Why?

  90. Mad

    I don’t think that Garfield has. but Cunningham’s

    ">>Martin Luther publicly burns the Papal Bull,<<

    ..setting into motion 500 years of Protestant bull"

    can’t really be taken any other way. Or is it another of his "jokes", like "Nobody except the owners of the Irish Independent and northern Unionists could take such a goon seriously!"

    It’s like having Parsifal back!

  91. Garfie – what I said at 5.10 PM

    <q>Garfie ? Mentions one Prod bigot – forgets to mention that the Nazi movement was RC …… Care to discuss the Utashe old chap and Ireland’s role in hiding a war criminal ?

    Christian anti-semitism predates Protestantism by many centuries. Protestant anti-semitism was a product of RC anti-semitism. That’s the reality.</q>

    Still waiting to hear from YOU about the Utashe 🙂

  92. "Lucky for Charles and Monica and troll – else we could have discussed the US Imperialism of the Spanish American war!"

    yuu might have but I know nothing about it ;o)

  93. Have you read it already Madradin?

  94. It’s amusing Aileen – for all the smoke Cunningham laid down about anti-semitism, Luther wasn’t expelled for anti-semitism – and the Catholic Church admitted he was right when they instituted their reforms. Book Burning ? seems like Talmud burning is OK in Cunningham’s eyes when a Pope orders it!

  95. "This is the first time that I remember a "On this day" thread taking off".

    When I saw the number of comments on this thread, I thought it would be a riveting discussion about the traffic lights anniverary.

  96. Garfie – still running from the Utashe ? The role of the Catholic Church there? Stepinac ? 16 years jail sentance for war crimes and what does the Pope do ? Promotes him!

    And guess what – John Paul II beatified him!

    http://www.balkanalysis.com/photos/CNNPopeandStepinac.jpg

  97. Madradin,
    in what way does Utashe have anything to do with Protestant and Catholic support for the Nazis in Germany.

    Or have you decided to move the goalposts somewhere else?

    Can I do that too?

  98. Garfie – It has everything to do with RC anti-semitism.

    <Q>The Role of the Catholic Church in Yugoslavia’s Holocaust</Q>

    http://www.holocaustrevealed.org/_domain/holocaustrevealed.org/Yugoslavia/Yugoslavia-Croatia.htm

    Stepinac was sentenced to 16 years in Jail for his war crimes – the then Pope Promoted him from ArchBishop to cardinal and John Paul II beatified him.

  99. Madradin,
    so you are back on rc anti-semitism. Give me a shout when you get back to the discussion we were having. I’ve better things to do than do a Madradin world tour.

  100. Oh, I see that you two, Aileen and Mad, are telling each other again those sweet lies that mean so much to you!

    Well, I’m back, and let me say first, Aileen, that your inaccuracy rate now almost rivals CCoB’s! If you didn’t see that "bull" comment as a joke, we’ll never make even a passive comedian out of you, and on the other hand that which you seem to think was a joke: "Nobody except the owners of the Irish Independent and northern Unionists could take such a goon seriously!" was actually said in real earnest!

    MR, It seems even the vilest anti-semitism and calls to murder innocents are ok in your eyes when said by a Prod! (oh, yes, that "smoke", and "nobody is suggesting that our Martin was perfect!")

    I didn’t mention the Papal burning of Talmud because on this threat I’m criticising Protestantism, and especially that cretin Martin Luther.
    (I’ve knocked the Catholic church often enough on other threads, as you well know. On this one it’s more fun to bait Protestantism)

    The way I see this thread is that 1) Andrew mentioned the anniversary, 2) you declared you’d be celebrating the Jew-hater extraordinaire, 3) I said that was a load of bull (joke Aileen) because he was a vile anti-semite, 4) you, in a classic bout of whataboutery, said the Popes were worse for anti-semitism. 5) I showed that Luther in his utterances was a much worse anti-Semite than the popes of the day were. (so far nobody has produced a papal quote to beat Luthers calls for annihilation)

    Basically I don’t like Luther. Not only was he a very ugly man in every sense, he was also involved in the Reformation, Now I dont mean it would have been a major advantage for the world if Luther had been strangled at birth. It would only have been a minor advantage, because he didn’t cause the Reformation, and some such movement would have occurred anyway,
    The Reformation was bad because it brought forth two evils – Protestantism and reformed Catholicism.

    Catholicism, as you said, took a lot from Luther, and it was accordingly much the worse for that. The counterreformation did give the world many nice Cathedrals, but it also gave us the Jesuits, and after it the church was much more intolerant, puritanical, paranoid and conservative than it was before.

    No-one knows what would have happened, of course, but I like to think that if some non-violent northern reform movement had come and run its course (before Petering out – Joke), the Catholic church would have collapsed on its own weight sooner or later, or maybe it would evem have evolved into something sensually mystical (or mystically sensual?) based on Christ and his teachings, maybe like some Asian religion, which would have been nice, and dropped the Old Testament nonsense, which would have been even nicer.

    Instead, we got the moral-vanity of Protestantism and the power-vanity of neo-Catholicism, and what a disaster the two of them were for the world, until the people in Europe finally started to get sense.

    Certainly nothing to celebrate in 2020.

  101. <Q>so you are back on rc anti-semitism.</Q>

    well, that was what spawned Luther’s anti-semitism which Cunningham raised to try and divert attention from the ills of the RC Church to which luther objected and for which he got excommunicated – so why not ?

  102. Cunningham

    "Oh, I see that you two, Aileen and Mad, are telling each other again those sweet lies that mean so much to you!

    Well, I’m back, and let me say first, Aileen, that your inaccuracy rate now almost rivals CCoB’s! If you didn’t see that "bull" comment as a joke, we’ll never make even a passive comedian out of you, and on the other hand that which you seem to think was a joke: "Nobody except the owners of the Irish Independent and northern Unionists could take such a goon seriously!" was actually said in real earnest!""

    Do you know what the word lie means? This is so typical of you. you make and accusation or an asserion with a quote that does not back it up. Where in what you have quoted is my "lie"?

    Actually don’t bother.

    It was all too obvious that your comment about CCoB was in ernest and it was typical of your bigotry which is why your bull comment wasn’t funny. It would have been amusing from someone like Kloot or Mahons.

  103. Aileen,

    >>Do you know what the word lie means?<<

    Well I should hope I do by now: it’s what the living saints don’t tell all the time when you ask them, isn’t it?

    >>This is so typical of you. you make and accusation or an asserion with a quote<<

    What quote? This is so typical of you, you interpret things that don’t exist.

    >>Where in what you have quoted is my "lie"?<<

    Again I dont understand you. What quote are you referring to? I did not quote you in the comment you mention. You see, another misunderstanding already.

    I only quoted myself and MR (a little bit)

    Aileen, your lie was in

    >>This all started from Cunningham seeking to make Luther our as some sort of unique monster as some sort of score against the Prods on the forum. <<

    Firstly, it did not start with that.

    Second, I did NOT seek to make Luther our as some sort of unique monster.
    Luther was no doubt a monster, as I showed, but he was certainly not unique and I never claimed he was.
    If you think I did, show me where.

    Third, I was not trying to "score against the Prods on the forum". Like a lot of the things you accuse me of, this is all in your head and only there.

    Otherwise, show your evidence that I was trying to score again, say, you.

    I was admittedly trying to score against MR – who is an Anglican, I hear – for his ridiculous position of celebrating and defending Luther. This was at first fun but soon got boring as he was scoring far too many own-goals himself.

  104. I can’t beleive that there is so much debate over the anniversary of the installation of the first traffic light.

  105. Cunningham

    I didn’t say that you had quoted me.

    I did not say that you claimed that he was unique. I said that you tried to make out that he was. Note your comments about the slaughter of people just because they change their religion on the basis that it was lawful, wasn’t as bad as Luther’s exhortations..

    I also never said that you were trying to score against us as individuals specifically.

    Mad only defended Luther in terms of his disagrrement with the RC church, not his antisemitism.

    "Like a lot of the things you accuse me of, this is all in your head and only there."

    Like you wishing SF well?