The present pronunciation of "Jew" in English is a new pronunciation acquired after the 18th century. An Israelite was one who had descended from Jacob. In Jesus' time individual Jews may or may not have descended from Jacob, but they all recognized Pharisaism and not the Law of Moses. A Jew is properly a Judean. The point is that one who is called a "Jew" in the Bible is not necessarily a chosen man of God, a follower of Moses and the prophets, a member of the tribe of Judah, an Israelite, or even a Semite, but one who is a resident of Judea. A Judean.

In the situation prevailing then the church had to be prepared to suffer , not to be diplomatic . The question is not : was he evil , but "was he a saint" ? [ comments taken from : the holocaust and the Christian world ] Should he receive sainthood because he did not forbid Catholic institutions to hide Jews ? And even if during the war he had an "excuse" for NOT openly condemnig the nazi policies , why did he stay silent after the war ? Why did he helped nazi criminals to escape to south america . Some Jews have praised his "actions" , yes . But they did'nt know what we know yet or had to use "diplomatic" language . And one of those who praised him , a "rabbi" later converted to catholicism .

Can it be be proven that the Pope was secretly helping Jew? No evidence for either.

are you now a follower of shepherd pakeed's flock? if so, we await your return from the weirdness back to the sane world. you have our prayers.

why is the vatican in such a hurry to beatify pius xii, before opening the archives on his wartime activities? is it possible that something in the archives would negate their claims that he "tried to save jews"? because perhaps he only tried to "save" them by involuntary conversions - the vatican still refuses to release the records of jewish children that were hidden by the church, lest they rediscover that they are jewish, and choose to leave. "stealing souls" is not exactly the work of a "saint".

very much.You don´t hide your respect and ohh for them.Well,you are a Charles after all... But my problem by now is that I gently posed you a question in the article about beasts,and I don´t see your answer as of now. I am waiting.... I gite Shabbes ,in case we can not talk today.But who knows...I stilll have time.

have ever protected Jews?

that is encharged with matters related to Inquisition,a House that is still alive nowadys and part of Orthodox Catholicism. He believes in Inquisition.Inquisition is part of their religious ,teological structure. What ever theis pope says is a farse and a lie.

"They take it in (anti Semitism) with thier mother's milk." He was referring to Poland. The same can be said for the Catholic Church. Read "Forged in Fury" by Michael Elkins if you think my sentiments are out of place.

I asked this already more than once . Answer and i will tell you my TRUE Yiddish name

So then you can tell us your yiddish name because I don't have that thing you are asking me,that thing that goyim perfom for their faith. My Jewish name is Keren-Keren Ohr-,besides another latin name ,also with an Hebrew root.And,as I told you before,there is no one in my family who is non Jew,for both sides,and I don’t know other think that Judaism. You obssession in affirm the opposite borders a severe mental illness from your part. Your mind,Karl, is the mind of an arab,or Erev Rav,it's more accurate. You slander,you shout,but you are unable to deal with the truth.Your arm is your brutality,not your intellect,as is the case of Jews. Jews use brains;arabs in general use brutality and slandering to achieve their goals.You are exactly like that.I,more and more, start doubting your Jewishness,sincerely.You do not behave nor feel nor reason like a Jew. Your behavior has also more similitute to a German very primitive personality,and I will not enter in details about such characteristics ,but in my opinion,they include primitive brutality,even worse than arabs ,some how.But that’s my personal feeling... It is puzzling also your obssession about me and about few others.It is anormal;it is primitive,it is irrational,it is very ill. As I told you before,my understanding is,when I affirm you are an Erev Rav soul,is that your goal is to put Jews astray from Judaism,and it bothers you enormously my endeavours towards the goal of approuching us Jews more and more to our roots.You act in a primitive manner,following a blind,guttural hate for Jews.There is no other explanation for your insane behavior. You will not succed Kart.I am loosing my time a bit with you in order to desconstruct you because you are pure evil,pure poison, that must be destroyed,in my understanding,but I will always keep on my way towards doing good for my people ,what means to myself too. How you have been pretending to be a Jew up to now is indeed puzzling.And I am being sincere and I am not intending to slander you as you do to me.I am just mulling about...I ,more and more ,do not believe you are a Jew.Frankly. So,what’s your jewish name?Why the town hall refused such name? There is no shame for a Jew to be called by his/her Jewish name.It is a Mitzvah. So,what's your Jewish name.Or do you prefer to keep being called by the name of an Inquisitor?

In "the Holocaust" Martin Gilbert on page 623 : By order of the pope the vatican clergy had opened the vatican to "non Aryans" in need for shelter . 477 Jews found it there . But at the same time the pope remained silent while around a thousand Jews were rounded up in Rome , under his windows , and send to their death . Yad Vashem named tens of Christian Clergy as Righteous amongst the Nations . Nobody can deny that Catholic clergy and Catholics in occupied saved Jews . Remember Zegota in Poland . But at the same time , a catholic priest had become prime minister of Slovakia and followed nazi policies regarding the Jews . This without the pope condemning him , nor excommuniate him . And don't forget the croation catholic church that was behind the ustachi criminals who murdered more than 30,000 Jews and half a million Serbs . The vatican remained silent , while the Bulgarian Orthodox church OPPOSED the deportation of Bulgarian Jews . With succes , no Bulgarian Jew was deported . And Bulgaria was an ally of nazi germany ..... A comment i have read : the question is not "was the pope evil" but was he a saint ? my answer : he was maybe not evil , but certainly NOT a saint .

I've got a few of Martin Gilbert's books. One of them, "Israel, A History," is a pretty good history of the modern state of Israel. Clearly Gilbert is on the hard left politically. His dislike for Menachem Begin and other Irgun fighters, during the Mandate period, is palpable. Gilbert admits to having friends in Israel on the far left who helped in the editing and the completion of his book. The fact that Gilbert is an apologist for Eugenio Pacelli, later Pope Pius XII, is unsurprising. That Pacelli did things to help the Jews out of basic charity, few will deny. There is a great deal of fine scholarship on this "silent" pope; many of them Jewish authors, scholars and historians. Pope Puis XII, formerly Secretary of State for the Vatican, was especially suited as a negotiating partner for Adolf Hitler. Eugenio Pacelli negotiated a concordat with the Third Reich which served to destroy political Catholicism in Germany; a powerful political movement (the Catholic Center Party) that might have fought the Nazis but for Pacelli's machinations. Hitler artfully exploited a feeble Secretary of State Pacelli to ultimately accomplish his Final Solution for the Jewish Question. Pius will forever be remembered as the silent Pope; the man who refused to speak out and condemn Nazi atrocities and Hitler by name. Gilbert does no service to himself or his reputation trying to defend the indefensible. Nor do you by referencing Gilbert on this most terrible of popes.

Based on the information you've provided here, I agree. He is not a saint. I don't understand why they are pushing to make him a saint now, anyway. What's the rush? (I admit to knowing next to nothing about this man. I bet many Catholics don't know many facts either.)

A new proof you are a Shikse . You told us that your parents had converted , that's why i ask your baptism name , but you , in the same way as this paqid can't and don't want to answer . Both of you , FAKE Jews , but full of HATRED and by this way , a reason why there is antisemitism . Telling you why they did'nt accept a Yiddish name at the town hall is the same as throwing "pearl to porcs" , but i will do it . They did NOT accept names that were NOT on the list of names they had . This list was , i think , composed by the names of the catholic saints . This to avoid people giving stupid names to their offspring . Now it has changed , if you want to give a Hebrew or Yiddish name , you bring an attest of the Jewish community that this name is indeed a Hebrew or Yiddish name , and then it's OK . Did you understand this "alte goyete" ? I can give you a Yiddish name , make your choice : Mordechai , avrom , Yankele , Chaim , Shaul ....and so on . A little bit different than this question i asked to your church friend . If he answers , it can be verified , where can you check my name ? The last time i used him was when i , as the grandfather , had an Alyah Latorah on the Bar mitzwa day of three of my grandsons [ no error :THREE ]

...but if Lau and like tell the Pope, whichever Pope to stay out of Israel's business, they should stay out of his.

was Gilbert's affirmation that pius XII ordered the vatican doors to be opened to "non Aryans" contradicted somewhere ? I have read the same in another book too , without the numbers given by Gilbert . Has someone denied it ? As i'm objective , i will ad that in the "encyclopedia of the Holocaust" edited by Yad vashem , there is NO mention of this . Why ? i don't know . I have asked it at Yad vashem , no answer till today . Maybe that Gilbert has leftist sympathies , is this relevant ? i don't think it , certainly not in this case , as leftist will generally NOT give a "nice image" of an anti left body as the church is .

Not only that many catholics don't know him , but many of those "talking" here know it neither . I don't pretend to know , but i have books , related to the Shoa too , and i can give the references on what i write . If those authors are wrong , i'm wrong too . Maybe it's because that i was hiden by a priest [ untill i was arrested ] for two months that i'm more objective ? or at least trying to be ?

the case of the 477 Jews hiden at the Vatican ? Tell it me , with references if possible . You attack my reputation on this , on this ONLY . But did you read the rest of my TB ? Where did i "defend the indefendable" ? By telling that he remained silent ? by telling that he did NOT condemn the slovak priest nor the ustrachi ?

in this case ? You say it by yourself : That pacelli did things to help Jews .......few will deny . What is Gilbert Saying that is different ? Why is it unsurprising that Gilbert is an apologist for Pacelli ? give the reasons you wrote it . Your last sentence , where you attack me . Read your OWN writing , that i have mentioned above . You say the same as Gilbert . But i , contrary to you , give other facts , against pius XII .

To my dismay, I have followed Sir Martin Gilbert's defense of this horrible man over these several years. More often than not, it has not gone unnoticed, people on the "far" left as well as the "far" right have this tendency to defend evil-doers; as well as to justify their evil deeds. Gilbert has friends on the far left, in my opinion. I've got his book. I have read his Acknowledgments. You wrote above, "The question is not was he (Pope Pius XII) evil..." This is precisely the question. His actions, words, etc., as well his lack of action, his inability to utter a candid word about the Holocaust and Nazi atrocities was (were) indeed evil. How can you separate the man (Pacelli) from his behavior which was consistently evil before and after the war? John Cornwell may be ranked (by the Church) amongst the most despised and vilified authors on Pope Pius XII. Cornwell wrote, "From a variety of evidence, it is clear that Pacelli believed that the Jews had brought misfortune on their own heads." And then Cornwell charitably added: "This did not prevent him from issuing instructions to alleviate their (the Jews') plight at the level of basic charity." This is indeed a charitable statement! But scholars will ask Cornwell, "What instructions?" This precisely the reason scholars and historians are requesting the Vatican open up the archives. Till now their requests have been in vain. The point is, there is no proof that there were "instructions" from either Pius or the Vatican to convents, monasteries, andChurch schools and hospitals to hide the Jews, nor was it necessary (according to Susan Zuccotti, author of, "Under His Very Windows"). "The Catholic Church had a longstanding tradition of sheltering those in need. Hospitality was requested and granted spontaneously. There was no time for papal directive prompted by the roundup" on the part of the Nazis in Rome. Charles, I have several fine authors on this wicked man, including Michael Phayer, Guenther Lewy, Susan Zuccotti, Saul Friedlander, and others. There is no justifiable defense for this man. Stop trying to defend this evil doer.

100 % . This pope's behaviour during the Shoa is very "discutable" , the least we can say . He did'nt once condemn the nazi politics against the Jews , he condemned "racism" but not anti Jewish laws [ when asked about the Vichy "Jewish laws" ] Read my other tb's , and see by yourself why we , Jews , are fully concerned .

You wrote that he did things ....no one will deny it . Your words . I say that being a leftist is NOT related to this discussion . I'm NOT defending him , but not only attacking him as you do in your latest tb. I'm tryinhg to be objective . Did he ordered the vatican doors to be opened , yes or not ? has someone denied this ? has someone denied that more than 4000 Jews were hiden in different Catholic places in Rome ? Has someone denied that he did not forbid Catholic institutions in Europe to shelter Jews ? Regarding this : the question is not "was he evil" , the question is was he a saint . He was "evil" for you because he did'nt intervene . And what about the non intervention of all free countries ? what about the rejection of the "st Louis" passengers ? what about the closing of entry to Jews in then called Palestine . Were all those countries evil for you too ? No , i don't think that you can call him only evil , but certainly not call him a saint .

In my rush to put something in writing earlier, I wrote something I now regret. Paraphrasing one of Pius' biggest critics, I wrote: "That Pacelli did things to help the Jews out of basic charity, FEW (emphasis mine) will deny." Actually author, John Cornwell wrote: "From a variety of evidence, it is clear that Pacelli believed that the Jews had brought misfortune on their own heads." And then Cornwell charitably added: "This did not prevent him from issuing instructions to alleviate their (the Jews') plight at the level of basic charity." Your point is well-taken. I have no evidence to back up this statement ("few will deny" Pius did things to help the Jews) and I regret making it. And this is the reason scholars are requesting the Vatican open its archives. There is ample reason to believe Pius was worse than callous about the fate of Europe's Jews. You say you are trying to be objective. Would you try to be objective when it comes to Adolf Hitler? Come on Charles. With evil men how can you claim objectivity? Pius was evil because he was silent in the face of evil. This is evil. Pius made a moral equivalency between Nazi atrocities and the Allied defense. Michael Phayer ("The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930 - 1965") wrote: "In 1942 the Holy See, or the spokesmen for the pope in the office of secretary of state, said that rumors about mass murder could not be verified. Later, when the Holocaust could no longer be denied, Vatican personnel said that the crimes of one World War II combatant could not be condemned without the condemning the crimes of another." (page 43) This moral equivalency is confirmed by other scholarly authors and historians. How can you not call this evil? How can you be objective about this? British Ambassador to the Vatican, Francis D'Arcy Osborne wrote in his diary: "His Holiness is clinging at all costs to what he considers a policy of neutrality, even in the face of the worst outrages against God and man, because he hopes he will be able to play a part in restoring peace. He does not see this silence is highly damaging to the Holy See and is highly destructive of any prospects of his being listened to." These are the words of a diplomat Charles! FDR's turning away the SS St Louis and the closing of the gates of "Palestine" by the Mandatory British authorities were both evil, but we are presently discussing the "Vicar of Christ" (God's viceroy) on earth.

How can you compare them ? This is completely INSANE even to think at such a comparison . And even with hitler you can be objective : there is nothing positive to say about him . Antisemites will maybe find something good , but they are NOT objective then . Yes , even we are discussing the silence of the pope , we can't ignore the other countries who did'nt do anything , or also much less they could do . It's not an excuse that because of the "allied" did nothing the pope had'nt to intervene . Regretting what you wrote ? why regretting that you wrote something TRUE ? Do you deny that the pope did some good things ?

good acts too . What you wrote and will write about pius XII and the Holocaust , i know it . But you see only one side , the bad one . I see the good side too , even if it is very small . In a evil person you can't find ANY good side . I'm returning to your comparison , can you find a positive point in hitler ?

Hitler loved his half nice, "Geli" Raubal. He loved her to death. In Mein Kampf, Hitler indicated that he understood hunger, even as a young man. It was 5 A.M., Hitler had awakened and, as he says was his custom, was reclining on his cot in the barracks of the 2nd Infantry Regiment watching the mice nibble at the bread crumbs which he invariably scattered on the floor the night before. "I had know so much poverty in my life," he muses, "that I was well able to imagine the hunger and hence also the pleasure of these little creatures." "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," by William Shirer (page 36-37) The positive point in Hitler? He felt compassion for hungry mice. I feel the same way. I love animals. I hate animal cruelty in all its forms. Starving Jews? Hitler felt no similar compassion for these "sub-humans;" for these "bacilli;" for these vermin. Neither did Pope Pius XII.

That means that MANY will acknowledge for me . Have you seen , in all your books , someone denying the fact that the pope gave order to open the doors of the vatican in 1943 ? That 477 Jews were given shelter there and 4000+ in other vatican places ? You regret to have written the TRUTH ? How is this possible ? How can i accept to discuss with someone as you ? Another thing , your comparison . You know maybe that murderers can be loving fathers , but they stay murderers . Comparing loving a niece to saving people , insane . So , contrary to me , you are NOT objective at all , you see only the bad side in a person , and only take one sentence in my first TV to attack me . Unworthy to talk to me , sorry , steve

Muderers loved their mothers , but they were murderers ! The SS guards at the death camps loved their children . But murdered Jewish children . And you call this "positive" points too maybe ? SICK guy . I can't discuss with a sick person , with an dishonest , with someone who sees only one sentence in a tb to condemn the whole . Wasted enough time with you . No need for an answer from you .

I've enjoyed the various TBs you've posted with information from your personal experience/observation in addition to the texts you cite. I find it very hard to obtain, what I consider, an objective picture of that pope and what other Catholics or Christians were doing during that period to help or harm Jews. Regarding this pope I generally see people either demonize this man or make him a saint. I appreciate input from people, like yourself, where you cite books that have been written or personal experience. I think the examples you gave were very good and I agree with your conclusion that this pope was not a saint or a devil during this period of time. Thanks for your objective input -- hopefully the comments from those who don't agree won't dissuade you from speaking up.