Posted on 08/10/2007 3:30:43 PM PDT by xzins
VATICAN CITY - The Vatican sought to calm Jewish anger yesterday over the pope's meeting with a prominent Polish priest accused of anti-Semitism, declaring the encounter did not imply any change in the Church's desire for good relations with Jews.
The Vatican issued the assurances after Pope Benedict XVI's brief meeting Sunday with the Rev. Tadeusz Rydzyk, which drew protests from worldwide Jewish organizations.
Photos showing the pope at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo with Rydzyk, along with two other Polish priests, were published in Polish newspapers on Tuesday.
Rydzyk, who runs a conservative media empire that includes the Catholic station Radio Maryja, was allegedly caught on tape suggesting that Jews are greedy, and that Polish President Lech Kaczynski is subservient to Jewish lobbyists.
"There should be no place in the Church for someone who spreads anti-Semitism, said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, following the pope's meeting with Rydzyk.
(Excerpt) Read more at haaretz.com ...
In July 1998, unknown perpetrators vandalized a plaque commemorating Rzeszow Jews killed in the Holocaust. The vandals spray-painted anti-Semitic and anti-German slogans below the plaque, which hangs on the wall of a Rzeszow synagogue. Rzeszow city officials reacted swiftly and cleaned up the plaque upon discovery of the vandalism. Vandals in that area previously had targeted Catholic churches and cemeteries as well as a statue of a World War II hero. Police continue to search for those responsible. In October 1998, vandals attacked and damaged 56 gravestones in the Jewish cemetery in Krakow. On several weekends in 1998, groups of skinheads gathered outside the Wroclaw synagogue for demonstrations, occasionally subjecting persons attending services to verbal abuse. Authorities moved to ensure the safety of the worshipers. The demonstrations ended shortly thereafter, and as of June 1999 none had taken place for several months.In January 1999, vandals damaged or destroyed 57 gravestones in the Jewish cemetery in Krakow. Vandals had attacked the same cemetery in October 1998. After the first incident police officers increased their patrols of the cemetery. Police promised additional, special protection after the second incident to prevent further attacks. In May 1999, the cemetery was vandalized again when unidentified perpetrators overturned 30 gravestones and set fire to the main door of the pre-burial house. However, the chairman of the local Jewish community called this an act of hooliganism, not anti-Semitism, since in the weeks preceding the attack vandals had smashed gravestones and otherwise damaged two nearby Catholic cemeteries. The chairman also noted the cooperation of the Krakow city police with the Jewish community to improve the security of the cemetery. In June the cemetery was attacked yet again when vandals painted crosses on several tombstones and on the pre-burial house. This incident appears to have been motivated by anti-Semitism, since members of the Jewish community received telephone calls linking the graffiti to the recent removal of crosses that were placed near the concentration camp at Auschwitz.
This pope, Joseph Ratzinger of Austria, should be especially sensitive. Apparently, he isn't.
Quote from the article:
“”There should be no place in the Church for someone who spreads anti-Semitism,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, following the pope’s meeting with Rydzyk.”
I wonder if the good rabbi has also denounced the treatment sometimes given to Christians by Israelis?
I wonder.
I’ve never read of huge Jewish cleansing of Christian neighborhoods. Have you?
You wrote:
“I’ve never read of huge Jewish cleansing of Christian neighborhoods. Have you?”
So is that what it would take before you would say Israelis persecute Christians? I guess then Saul’s rounding up of Christians would only rate a “small” rather than a “huge”, right?
**Warsaw and Auschwitz are still living symbols of anti-semitism in Poland, and those insensitive to them aren’t thinking clearly.**
Have you visited them in person? They are very much also a testament as to the goodness of man and woman, the Catholicity of martyrs, the home of John Paul II as bishop, (Krakow), the home of John Paul II as a child (Wadowice).
Once you visit these sites in person, I believe your attitude about this article would change drastically.
Look up the Warsaw ghetto. It was really something to behold— especially the picture of the lights that outlined where these Jewish people used to live. (Heart-wrenching.)
May God forever bless these displaced Jewish people.
There was Saul, but that was quite a bit back.
I was given a tour of a number of areas in Poland by a Polish Priest Chaplain (George Rz__) who was a friend. We went to his home town and spent the night in Walbcik (sp) in a hotel that had formerly been a palace for some count and that the Germans had used as a military HQ during their occupation.
We then went to his seminary in Wraclow (sp) where I was given a tour by George and his seminary friend. Surprisingly, they got permission for my wife to be a part. Afterwards they fed us in their dining area. We sat at the table that JPII had eaten at relatively recent to that time. That head chair had been kept in its place, but they no longer used it. (This was about 1999.)
This is not to say that I have visited Auschwitz, which I haven’t, but I do know that George would’ve been more sensitive in dealing with Jewish issues.
Aside to Vlad & Andy: Holocaust really doesn’t come to mind when thinking of Jews and Israel. It does come to mind when thinking of Jews and Poland.
I’m not trying to be difficult. The priest in question should’ve been much more circumspect. So should Benedict have been. Simon Wiesenthal is quick to jump on these things, but then again, that is their job.
It is not the Simon Wiesenthal’s center’s job to “jump” on the church. The priest is the problem, not Benedict. If Benedict wants to meet with one of his priests, then that is his right.
Wiesenthal’s job is to jump on whomever they wish that they think violates their standard. They are especially hard on important leaders.
In Benedict’s case, he comes under that heading, don’t you think?
You wrote:
“Wiesenthal’s job is to jump on whomever they wish that they think violates their standard. They are especially hard on important leaders.”
No, Wiesenthal’s job is to combat anti-semiticism. Benedict is not anti-semitic so no one should attack him on that score.
“In Benedict’s case, he comes under that heading, don’t you think?”
No, Benedict is NOT an important leader of anti-semiticism. He is in fact against anti-semiticism. The SWC, then, should not attack someone who is NOT anti-semitic.
You need to review the sentence structure of my post one more time.
It cannot be construed to mean “important leaders of anti-semitism.”
It says “important leaders” period. Wiesenthal’s job is to be especially hard on important leaders whom Wiesenthal thinks wander off the range.
Benedict is or he is not an important leader. I think he is.
You wrote:
“Wiesenthal’s job is to be especially hard on important leaders whom Wiesenthal thinks wander off the range.”
Benedict has NOT wandered off the range nor is Wiesenthal the judge of what the range is.
C’mon Vlad.
If you want to discuss, then discuss.
You wrote:
“If you want to discuss, then discuss.”
If you want to say something worthwhile, then say it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.