Traditional Catholics and the defeat of fascism – a pictorial

[ivanm]

"It organized the Germans as the alleged aryan race supplants the chosen people.  The chosen people must die, in nazi theology, in order for the so-called master race to live."

For some reason I am having troubled with the meaning of the second sentence above. Have you left out a comma or some little connective word?

Is the chosen people the Jewish people, for which Hitler had a hatred?  In several books of history on the Third Reich and the Nazis I don't remember seeing a sole major reason why Hitler  had such a hatred of the Jews.  It could be that he needed a scapegoat to sell the people as the reason for their economic hardship they were enduring.  He and his minister of propadanda, Goebels, devoted a lot of time and effort to propagandizing the unsuspecting people.

Perhaps some of the populace was just as crazy as Hitler was but I think that many simply went along to get along, to survive the ordeal. All too many German men perished because of that fruitcake.

It seems that some Jews were involved in setting up a communist state in the s.w. part of Germany, and Hitler seized upon this as an opportunity to  persecute them.  Communism was not uncommon in Germany at the time, and I think they even had candidates in the national election. I am all for taking the commies to task but to single out the Jews like he did was really over the top.

Speaking of Nazi theology, it seemed to be a cult like thing that the Nazis used to justify their hideous policies.  I think the chicken farmer had a lot to do with establishing a special school on Nazi "religion" in an old monastery or something like that.  What was his name, Himmler?

[johnhp]

"It organized the Germans as the alleged aryan race supplants the chosen people.  The chosen people must die, in nazi theology, in order for the so-called master race to live."

For some reason I am having troubled with the meaning of the second sentence above. Have you left out a comma or some little connective word?

Is the chosen people the Jewish people, for which Hitler had a hatred?  In several books of history on the Third Reich and the Nazis I don't remember seeing a sole major reason why Hitler  had such a hatred of the Jews.  It could be that he needed a scapegoat to sell the people as the reason for their economic hardship they were enduring.  He and his minister of propadanda, Goebels, devoted a lot of time and effort to propagandizing the unsuspecting people.

Perhaps some of the populace was just as crazy as Hitler was but I think that many simply went along to get along, to survive the ordeal. All too many German men perished because of that fruitcake.

It seems that some Jews were involved in setting up a communist state in the s.w. part of Germany, and Hitler seized upon this as an opportunity to  persecute them.  Communism was not uncommon in Germany at the time, and I think they even had candidates in the national election. I am all for taking the commies to task but to single out the Jews like he did was really over the top.

Speaking of Nazi theology, it seemed to be a cult like thing that the Nazis used to justify their hideous policies.  I think the chicken farmer had a lot to do with establishing a special school on Nazi "religion" in an old monastery or something like that.  What was his name, Himmler?

The nazis were involved in odd ideas.  One of these ideas was their idea of the "master race".  They thought they had to kill Jews to make their master race possible.  The other side of it is that there were people like you and holly and many traditionalist Catholics, you know antisemites, in Germany and this helped unite those morons behind the nazis.

[ivanm]

The nazis were involved in odd ideas.  One of these ideas was their idea of the "master race".  They thought they had to kill Jews to make their master race possible.  The other side of it is that there were people like you and holly and many traditionalist Catholics, you know antisemites, in Germany and this helped unite those morons behind the nazis.

The Nazis didn't  take to communists either so you would have been shit out of luck in Germany in those years.  Maybe you could have been Goering's "boy".

[johnhp]

The Nazis didn't  take to communists either so you would have been shit out of luck in Germany in those years.  Maybe you could have been Goering's "boy".

i am not sure what your point is here.  You asked about antisemitism, i gave an example mentioning at least two antisemites from this board, yourself and holly, in order to explain how nazis were able to mobilize the masses.  They appealed to the worst in human behavior.

Your retort that political enemies were murdered while your prejudices took center stage is just a nasty and ugly celebration of murder.

[ivanm]

i am not sure what your point is here.  You asked about antisemitism, i gave an example mentioning at least two antisemites from this board, yourself and holly, in order to explain how nazis were able to mobilize the masses.  They appealed to the worst in human behavior.

Your retort that political enemies were murdered while your prejudices took center stage is just a nasty and ugly celebration of murder.

We had a nice civil conversation going, but no that was not good enough.  As usual you had to fuck it up with your innuendo and snide remarks about my character.
You don't deserve conversastion of any kind with anyone.
 
Wow, I bet the courses you teach, or do you, are real popular with those that need a nap during class hours. Are you sure you don't teach a course in cartoons and are the model?  How 'bout Wacky Duck, I bet you are a good one on that scene?

[johnhp]

We had a nice civil conversation going, but no that was not good enough.  As usual you had to fuck it up with your innuendo and snide remarks about my character.
You don't deserve conversastion of any kind with anyone.

i stated no innuendo.  i stated directly that you are an antisemite, much like the many people who joined in with the nazis.  If you want to understand what cemented the Germans around the issue, think only of your own behavior.  Perhaps one day you will take responsibility for your own words.

Wow, I bet the courses you teach, or do you, are real popular with those that need a nap during class hours. Are you sure you don't teach a course in cartoons and are the model?  How 'bout Wacky Duck, I bet you are a good one on that scene?

Look, this is not about me.  You should take responsibility for your remarks.  These lame attacks are ridiculous and meaningless.

[ivanm]

i stated no innuendo.  i stated directly that you are an antisemite, much like the many people who joined in with the nazis.  If you want to understand what cemented the Germans around the issue, think only of your own behavior.  Perhaps one day you will take responsibility for your own words.



Look, this is not about me.  You should take responsibility for your remarks.  These lame attacks are ridiculous and meaningless.

I don't support Israeli aggression against the innocent Palestinian women and kids.  I don't approve of the fucking hogs bulldozing Palestinian homes.  So I am anti semite?

That is better than being a lily livered anti-American freak like you are.   You need to hire a thweety houseboy to calm your nerves and improve your outlook.

[johnhp]

I don't support Israeli aggression against the innocent Palestinian women and kids.  I don't approve of the fucking hogs bulldozing Palestinian homes.  So I am anti semite?

Not for those reasons.  You are an antisemite because you post common antisemitic bullshit.

That is better than being a lily livered anti-American freak like you are.   You need to hire a thweety houseboy to calm your nerves and improve your outlook.

i understand that you haven't the stones to stand by your posts, so you need to make a snide comment about my sexuality.  If you were in the right, you would not need that bullshit.  And, i will be honest with you, if your old man had not most likely caught you and beat you while you were being molested by another man (unless it was your father who was fucking you), you would not be such a homophobe.  So why not just drop that bullshit and take responsibility for your ugly remarks?

[Mornac]

That question came to mind. When did this traditionalist movement come to be?

--There is no such thing as a traditionalist Catholic or a traditionalist movement.  A person is either a Catholic or not. The only differences among Catholics are the rites which they practice. There are more than 20 Catholic rites which were recognized by the Council of Trent in the 16th century. Most of these are small and are associated with particular cultures mostly in the east. The vast majority of Catholics are of the Roman rite and their missal (ritual book) was codified and promulgated for all time by that same Council. After the Second Vatican Council in the 1960’s a committee headed up by an Italian bishop (who was later discovered to be a Freemason and exiled to Iran) concocted a new rite known as the Novus ordo. The perpetrators of that rite, through various forms of treachery, went about imposing it on those who practiced the Roman rite by insisting that it was to replace the traditional Roman rite which was in fact was protected by Papal decree.

Or was every Catholic a traditionalist until the schism happened?

--Although it may seem that way ivan, the Novus ordo isn’t exactly a schism. The answer to your question though is yes, before the Novus ordo rite was introduced in 1969, every Roman Catholic practiced the traditional Roman rite from time immemorial.

I assume the traditionalist movement is the one that Mornac associates with.

--There was and is no “traditionalist movement”. There are only those who ignored the treacherous machinations of the Novus ordo perpetrators to impose their rite on them and simply continued to practice the regular Roman rite which was protected by a Papal bull for all time.  The term “Traditionalist” is a fabrication that the Novus ordo uses to imply that Catholics who continue to practice the canonically protected Roman rite of all time are somehow doing something out of the ordinary. A few short years ago, Pope Benedict XVI had to put these people in their place by issuing yet another formal Papal letter telling them that the regular Roman rite has never been abrogated and that it continues today as it always has and that Novus Ordo bishops must both understand and respect that and cease interfering with its practice.

In other matters, official Church teaching concerns itself with political or economic systems only tangentially. The first Catholics were part of an autocratic empire. Since that time there have been Catholics who lived under monarchies, tribal systems, castes, oligarchies, communes, democratic republics, fascist dictatorships, communist dictatorships, they’ve even been members of experimental governments. The Church teaches how individual Catholics are to live their own lives in relation to God and their fellow man. Whatever governments they form or are born into is not a matter of Church teaching. Sometimes Catholic clerics get themselves involved personally, such as the Maryknoll gang who aid and abet the Novus ordo schismatic organization of Catholics which is overseen by the Communist government of China. Sometimes Popes will opine about certain economic systems such as Pope Pius XI who said that “no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.” And of course Bishops sometimes have to reign in politicians when they act contrary to Catholic teaching such as when Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, having already warned that pro-abortion Catholic politicians should not approach Communion, said that “If they don’t believe what the Church teaches, they’re not really Catholic.”

All of that said, how Catholics choose to govern their communities or what forms of government they choose to (or are forced to) participate in has absolutely no bearing on their spiritual lives unless or when elements of it cause them to contravene Catholic teaching.

And let’s be clear, the traditional Roman rite of the Catholic Church belongs to each and every one of the more than 1 billion Roman Catholics. They are all free to practice it regardless of what belligerent Novus Ordo bishops do or say to try and stop them.

[johnhp]

After the Second Vatican Council in the 1960’s a committee headed up by an Italian bishop (who was later discovered to be a Freemason and exiled to Iran) concocted a new rite known as the Novus ordo.

Two things:

1.  This claim about Bugnini has been crafted by traditionalists.  There is no actual evidence for this at all.  Mornac knows this and cannot defend it with any evidence other than hearsay.


2.  The Rite Practiced by the vast majority of Catholics is not a new Rite, it is the Roman Rite.  Mornac is calling the pope a liar by making this claim.  Here is what the pope wrote:

Art 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the 'Lex orandi' (Law of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same 'Lex orandi,' and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church's Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church's 'Lex credendi' (Law of belief). They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite.

Not a new rite, "sunt enim duo usus unici ritus romani."  The two missals are two uses of ONE Roman rite.

The perpetrators of that rite, through various forms of treachery, went about imposing it on those who practiced the Roman rite by insisting that it was to replace the traditional Roman rite which was in fact was protected by Papal decree.

Untrue.

The term “Traditionalist” is a fabrication that the Novus ordo uses to imply that Catholics who continue to practice the canonically protected Roman rite of all time are somehow doing something out of the ordinary.

It is?  You see a fellow named Mornac offered the the following definition when asked what Traditionalists mean by Traditionalist

I would think that the obvious answer is “one who practices the regular historical rite of the western Roman Church.”

Is that not concise?

http://www.catholicforum.com/forums/showthread.php?4823-What-Traditionalists-mean-by-quot-Traditionalist-quot&s=46dbac94363e02432fa853197fa6aa89

Nothing about what most Catholics have used to define this small minority but an affirmative definition that he seems willingly to apply to himself.