Jerusalem Posts debunks cries of NAZI re Benedict

You have to register for it, but it’s worth reading.

A few excerpts:

London’s Sunday Times would have us believe that one of the leading contenders for the papacy is a closet Nazi. In if-only-they-knew tones, the newspaper informs readers that German-born Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was a member of the Hitler Youth during World War II and suggests that, because of this, the “panzer cardinal” would be quite a contrast to his predecessor, John Paul II.

The article also classifies Ratzinger as a “theological anti-Semite” for believing in Jesus so strongly that – gasp! – he thinks that everyone, even Jews, should accept him as the messiah.

To all this we should say, “This is news?!”


Ratzinger has several times gone on record on his supposedly “problematic” past. In the 1997 book Salt of the Earth, Ratzinger is asked whether he was ever in the Hitler Youth.

“At first we weren’t,” he says, speaking of himself and his older brother, “but when the compulsory Hitler Youth was introduced in 1941, my brother was obliged to join. I was still too young, but later as a seminarian, I was registered in the Hitler Youth. As soon as I was out of the seminary, I never went back. And that was difficult because the tuition reduction, which I really needed, was tied to proof of attendance at the Hitler Youth.

“Thank goodness there was a very understanding mathematics professor. He himself was a Nazi, but an honest man, and said to me, ‘Just go once to get the document so we have it…’ When he saw that I simply didn’t want to, he said, ‘I understand, I’ll take care of it’ and so I was able to stay free of it.”

The only significant complaint that the Times makes against Ratzinger’s wartime conduct is that he resisted quietly and passively, rather than having done something drastic enough to earn him a trip to a concentration camp. Of course, whenever it is said that a German failed the exceptional-resistance-to-the-Nazis test, it would behoove us all to recognize that too many Jews failed it, as well.


As prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger played an instrumental role in the Vatican’s revolutionary reconciliation with the Jews under John Paul II. He personally prepared Memory and Reconciliation, the 2000 document outlining the church’s historical “errors” in its treatment of Jews. And as president of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ratzinger oversaw the preparation of The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, a milestone theological explanation for the Jews’ rejection of Jesus.

If that’s theological anti-Semitism, then we should only be so lucky to “suffer” more of the same.

UPDATE: thanks to reader Bonnie, a story on how the new pope risked his life to get out of Hitler’s army.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • http://ohhowilovejesus Jeanette

    Anchoress, to those who believe no explanation is necessary. To those who do not believe no explanation will suffice. Don’t dignify them by trying to defend him. I’m sure God will do that for him. By his works we shall know him.

  • MaxedOutMama

    You know, I was overwhelmingly struck by the irony that the London Times wants to rebuke a man for believing in his religion and being an anti-Semite ESPECIALLY considering all the anti-Semitic stuff I’m reading about in England, while the Jerusalem Post can give him a fair break.

  • peggy

    I consider the JPost’s opinion much more than I consider the Times’.

    Editorially, The JPost goes from conservative to hardline. If this new Pope has the endorsement of at least one of their columnists, that really means something. These guys aren’t going to be easily impressed. If they defend him, there is no reason to doubt him.

  • Pingback: hubs and spokes