OK leagel, let's hear how YOU would have done better as the head of a small principality that is the seat of a world-wide church, completely surrounded by the Nazi army, dependent totally on the surrounded occupied countryside even for your drinking water. By walking a tightrope, Pius saved the Church entrusted to him as well as tens of thousands of Italian Jews. As I said on the main G* thread, the Chief Rabbi of Rome converted to Catholicism after the war, out of amazement and gratitude at the efforts of the Church to save those who could be saved. Pius' efforts amazed and impressed his contemporaries, and no amount of historical revisionism can change that. George Washington remains a great man, too, even though we now seem to want to wallow in his imperfections.
While I realize no one will join me in opposing the crap that passes for received wisdom, such crap must be contended. Catholic-kicking is the only religious-baiting still smiled upon by polite society, with the possible exception of evangelical-baiting. Still, if one must kick a Catholic, why not pick on the Inquisition instead of ignorantly defaming a good man who did the best he could under impossible circumstances.
Again, I ask how you would have done better as head of the Church? Would you have lead the Swiss guards in an assault on Auchswitz in order to "make a statement", but resulting in the death of the church and of the tens of thousands of Jews that the Church saved instead? Who is this "audience" you refer to that could "do something"? The better natures of the Nazi party? FDR, Chamberlain, and other world leaders? Or are you referring to some massive armies at the direct control of the Pontif that I am ignorant of? When could words at certain times have been more powerful than bombers? Did Mao ever say that? All of your statements are empty assertions devoid of fact, as far as I can see. I can't see how he could have done better. Maybe you could teach me.
By the way, what are you doing here on the bankrupt stock board?
BlaineK |
