Otto von Habsburg Remembered as a Great Defender of Christian Values

Not knowing the history of the successive Reiche makes one look ridiculous, actually.

The First Reich was the Holy Roman Empire, founded when the Pope crowned Charlemagne in AD 800. Not sure why you have an issue with that.

Were you aware that we were fighting the Second Reich during WWI?

The Second Reich was the Wilhelmine Empire, which lasted from 1870 to 1918, so that statement is correct.

Why would the leader of Germany from 1933-45 lay claim to the orb, scepter and sword of the aforementioned Reich?

The orb, scepter, and sword in the picture you previously posted belonged to the Austrian Empire, not the German Reich. As to why Hitler "laid claim" to the Austrian crown jewels ... since he considered himself to be the chief of state of Germany, considered Austria to a German province, and everyone agreed that the Austrian crown jewels were state property, I'd say the answer to your question is self-evident.

why has the Reichskonkordat remained unbroken till this day

The Reichskonkordat is more than just "broken," it's a dead letter, since one of the signatory states ceased to exist in May, 1945.

Doesn't take long to assemble this puzzle.

What puzzle are you assembling again, and why are you hijacking a thread about the death of a great man based on his comment that the the Holy Roman Empire was the model for the EU?

Incidentally, Otto von Habsburg, far from being a Nazi, spent most of the war running for his life from the Gestapo, which quite clearly wanted to put him in a KZ or kill him outright. He was also instrumental in the fall of the Iron Curtain.

The First Reich was the Holy Roman Empire, founded when the Pope crowned Charlemagne in AD 800. Not sure why you have an issue with that

WADR, I suppose that conversion by the sword is OK with you? As bad as Muhammad was on that score, he didn't originate it. Enough sources point out Charlemagne's "wad(ing) through a sea of blood" in that respect.

The orb, scepter, and sword in the picture you previously posted belonged to the Austrian Empire, not the German Reich. As to why Hitler "laid claim" to the Austrian crown jewels ... since he considered himself to be the chief of state of Germany, considered Austria to a German province, and everyone agreed that the Austrian crown jewels were state property, I'd say the answer to your question is self-evident

Those crown jewels are the descendants of the regalia of the Holy Roman Empire indeed. And of course, Hitler himself was Austrian.

What puzzle are you assembling again, and why are you hijacking a thread about the death of a great man based on his comment that the the Holy Roman Empire was the model for the EU?

Because that comment should have been a warning. And the intent was not to hijack. I don't even think H.I.H. understood the implications of a restoration of a Reich; his having been abandoned by even the Vatican during WWII should have warned him against being a proponent of a united Europe in any form.

I suppose that conversion by the sword is OK with you

You're complaining that other people don't know history while you're retrojecting modern ideas of freedom of religion back into the 9th Century?

Charlemagne didn't originate conversion by the sword, either. Read your Bible.

Because that comment should have been a warning.

A warning of what?

against being a proponent of a united Europe in any form.

A disunited Europe led directly to the deaths of about 70 million people in the last century (and that's not counting those murdered by the Bolsheviks in Russia). Maybe it's time to try a united Europe.

You're complaining that other people don't know history while you're retrojecting modern ideas of freedom of religion back into the 9^th Century?

"Modern ideas of freedom of religion"? Where did you pull that one out of? Freedom of religion is not "modern" at all.

Charlemagne didn't originate conversion by the sword, either. Read your Bible

Read the Bible for what? No Jews nor Christians converted people to their religion by the sword, so I don't know what you're trying to get at here. And I said nothing about who or where such a tactic was originated either.

A disunited Europe led directly to the deaths of about 70 million people in the last century (and that's not counting those murdered by the Bolsheviks in Russia). Maybe it's time to try a united Europe

I don't know what position you're coming from at all. Especially since it was never the case that a disunited Europe was the cause of the "70 million deaths" you refer to.

So you're OK with the "united" Europe being undemocratic (the union thereof not of the will of its people but instead of its elites), its "supranational" government based on that of the Soviet Union and controlled by Germany's government, never mind it having the word "Reich" in any capacity associated with it? This "union" has abolished habeas corpus, forced a 48-hour workweek on those who might want to work overtime, is intending to establish a Tobin tax, have several detention centers that keep people stuck inside for 1½ years with no rights or representation, they keep preaching "austerity" to the "smaller" members while the spending at the top keeps increasing . . . lots more.

Sorry to those that are genuinely concerned about thread hijack, but since people continue to solicit me on this matter, it does bear answering. I won't speak to whether or not this was the manner of union that his imperial highness intended to see (I'd like to think not), but what he spoke of certainly has emboldened some unsavory elements in the regime's control.

Freedom of religion is not "modern" at all.

Freedom of religion in the modern sense was made in America by Roger Williams and the Maryland Catholics. There were antecedents, but there are those for anything.

No Jews nor Christians converted people to their religion by the sword

You haven't read the Old Testament very carefully. Like the part about the punishment for idolatry under the Law (that would be ... death), or the warfare of Israel against Amalek, or the warfare of Assyria against Israel. (The Assyrians didn't stop at conversion by the sword, they went the whole nine yards to erasing ethnic identity by forced intermarriage, exile, and assimilation.)

Especially since it was never the case that a disunited Europe was the cause of the "70 million deaths" you refer to.

I don't think unity was the cause of two World Wars, do you?

I think the traditional enmity between Germany and France, going back to the Thirty Years War and before, had a lot to do with it.

So you're OK with the "united" Europe being undemocratic

Save your breath. I never said anything like that, so stop putting words in my mouth.

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.