Pope Benedict Under Attack – Part III:
Homolka’s Outrages
by Christopher A. Ferrara
In my last column on the revised Good Friday prayer controversy I reported
on complaints against the prayer by Walter Homolka, a representative
of the World Union for Progressive Judaism in Germany, which
has 1.6 million members in 46 countries and is the world's largest
Jewish religious organization. With the subtlety of a bulldozer,
Homolka suggested back in February that the Pope’s revised
prayer, which repeats the Church’s perennial request to
God that He enlighten the hearts of the Jewish people so that
they may acknowledge Christ, should be viewed in the context
of Nazism.
Not content with this outrageous suggestion, Homolka has upped the ante in
an interview with the German daily Der Spiegel, published
online — appropriately enough — on Good Friday (March 21,
2008).
Providing Homolka with a forward pass, Spiegel comments that “In
contrast to his predecessor Pope John Paul II, who was feted for his
efforts to build bridges with other religions, Benedict has succeeded
in alienating members of other faiths on several occasions since he took
office in 2005. He offended Muslims with a 2006 speech at the University
of Regensburg in which he quoted a Byzantine emperor who described Islam
as violent. Many Jews were disappointed with Benedict’s 2006 visit
to Auschwitz, having hoped for a stronger message on the Church's role
in the Holocaust. More recently, Jewish groups criticized Benedict’s
meeting with a notoriously anti-Semitic Polish priest in August 2007.
The latest incident is likely to further jeopardize efforts to promote
Catholic-Jewish dialogue.”
Get it? John Paul II good. Benedict bad. Taking the ball and running
with it, Homolka complains that Pope Benedict
“has lost his sensitivity. It is insulting to Jews that
the Catholic
Church, in the context of Good Friday of
all things, is once again praying
for the illumination of
the Jews, so that we can acknowledge Jesus as
the
savior. Such statements are made in a historical
context which is
closely connected with
discrimination, persecution and death.
Given the
weight of responsibility that the Catholic Church has
acquired
in its history with Judaism, most recently
during the Third Reich,
this is completely inappropriate
and must be rejected to the utmost degree.”
Read those words carefully: The representative of the world’s
largest Jewish religious organization, advancing beyond his more
tentative suggestion in February, is now explicitly declaring that Pope
Benedict’s action in revising the Good Friday prayer further adds
to what he claims is the Catholic Church’s responsibility for
the Third Reich.
It is hard to imagine a more despicable form of demagoguery. Homolka is simply
shameless. But wait: it gets worse — much worse.
Commenting further on the new prayer, Homolka protests that its text “indicates
that he [Pope Benedict] believes that the path to salvation, even for
Jews, can only go through Jesus, the savior.” In other words,
Homolka attacks the Pope for believing in the infallibly defined
dogma of the Catholic faith that no one can be saved except by Jesus
Christ.
Homolka then takes it up another notch: “The Internet is already full
of comments by conservative, right-wing Catholics [including this columnist,
perhaps?] who say: ‘Wonderful, now we finally have the signal to
convert the Jews.’ This kind of signal has an extremely provocative
effect on anti-Semitic groups. The Catholic Church does not have
its anti-Semitic tendencies under control.”
So, Pope Benedict is not only adding to the burden of the Church’s (imaginary)
complicity in the Third Reich, but is also unleashing the Church’s “anti-Semitic
tendencies” — those being defined as the belief of Catholics
in the Church’s traditional teaching on the conversion of the Jews.
When asked point blank: “So Benedict is encouraging anti-Semitic tendencies?”,
Homolka replied: “He is accepting them, at the very least.”
At the very least! In other words, the Pope is not only encouraging “anti-Semitic
tendencies,” but may also have those tendencies himself.
Is that really what Homolka means to suggest? There is no question about it.
When asked whether the new prayer is not an improvement — from
the Jewish perspective — over the old one, he replied:
“I consider Benedict’s version, too, to be more than unfortunately
worded. He is making, on a central liturgical occasion, namely the Good
Friday liturgy, a theological statement that Jews cannot help but perceive
as aggressive and crass. Throughout history, Jews have repeatedly
been subjected to persecution and death on Good Friday. Christians
have often translated the message of Good Friday into the question: ‘Where
are the murderers of Christ?’”
So, according to Homolka, by revising the prayer the Pope is sending a “message” that
calls for a return of the mythical Catholic practice of persecuting and
murdering Jews on Good Friday!
But surely not even Homolka is contending that there could be any such danger
to Jews today. On the contrary, that is exactly what this shameless demagogue
is suggesting. When asked “But wasn’t this danger [what danger?]
eliminated long ago?”, he replied:
“any approach to the possibility of a mission by the
Church to convert
Jews is essentially a hostile act — a
continuation, on a different
level, of Hitler’s crimes
against the Jews.”
Yes, incredibly enough, Homolka dares to assert that Pope Benedict’s
revision of the Good Friday prayer is an act akin to Hitler’s treatment
of the Jews! This would be hilarious if Homolka were not so deadly
serious. He clearly means to incite worldwide fear and
loathing of the Pope among Jews.
When asked if he was not exaggerating just a bit — after all, only a
few Catholics will be using the revised Latin prayer — Homolka
answered: “The issue is not where this extraordinary form of the
prayer will be used. The pope, by choosing the wording himself, has made
an important, precedent-setting change and has given it his personal
seal of approval.” That is, the Pope has personally given
his seal of approval to “the anti-Semitic tendencies” of
the Church. Read: Pope Benedict XVI is an “anti-Semite.”
Homolka would rather the Pope had mandated that Latin Mass-attending Catholics
use the vapid and utterly ambiguous 1970 version of the prayer employed
in the New Mass of Paul VI, which states: “Let us pray for the
Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue
to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant” — whatever
that means.
By personally devising instead a revised traditional prayer that retains the
call for the divine illumination of the Jewish people, says Homolka,
the Pope “deprives the acceptable 1970 form of the prayer of its
credibility.” Ah, so the Pope should have used the prayer Homolka deems “acceptable” instead
of providing a revision that smacks of Hitler and the Third Reich.
Is there no limit to this man’s arrogance? No, there isn’t. For
it gets still worse.
Asked this question: “Christianity is a missionary religion. Isn’t
it logical that it would also seek to convert Jews?”, Homolka gives
this answer:
“No, because the controversial Good Friday Prayer completely ignores
the unique status of the Jews as God’s chosen people. God called
us Jews to be a ‘light for the nations,’ so we certainly
do not require illumination by the Catholic Church. The younger sister
has clearly struck the wrong chord here.”
So, as Homolka would have it, the Catholic Church’s prayers must acknowledge
her theological inferiority to “the light of the nations,” including “progressive” rabbis
like Homolka, who condone abortion, contraception and divorce.
Pressing further, Homolka’s interviewer points out, quite reasonably,
that “Jesus himself was of course a Jew and he proselytized among
the Jews.” This prompts Homolka’s next outrage:
“Jesus put forward his arguments within the context of an internal Jewish
dialogue. What the Church turned this into was something completely different. It
made Jesus the rabbi into a deity. On top of that, it claims that
the crucifixion of this rabbi is relevant to my personal salvation. Such
teachings would have been news to Jesus.”
Simply incredible. The self-proclaimed representative of the “light
for the nations” assures us that Christ would be surprised to
learn of the Catholic teaching that He is God Incarnate, as opposed to
a rabbi who debated with other rabbis.
There we have it: This is why Homolka loathes the new Good Friday
prayer. He loathes it because he rejects the divinity of Christ
and considers it “anti-Semitic” for the Church to preach
the divinity of a mere rabbi who lived and died 2,000 years ago. He loathes
the Good Friday prayer because he loathes the Catholic Church that makes
of this mere rabbi a divinity. As he asks his interviewer contemptuously: “What
is the value of a church that could not assert God’s fundamental
teachings during the Third Reich?”
It takes a lot of malice to utter a lie like this. Jewish spokesman after
Jewish spokesman following World War II, including Albert Einstein and
Golda Meir, praised Pius XII for his courageous actions to defend and
protect Jews during Hitler’s persecution. No less than the
chief rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, was so inspired by Pius XII’s
example of heroic Christian charity that he converted to Catholicism,
taking Eugenio — the Pope’s given name at birth — as
his own baptismal name in honor of Pius.
Quite simply, Homolka is a hater and a bigot whose interview with Spiegel is
hate speech. And the Pope’s actions have flushed him out. Hence,
whether or not Catholics would have preferred to remain with the old
prayer — and I understand their misgivings — the Pope’s
revision of it is a providential development in the sense that it has
revealed for all to see the burning enmity toward the Catholic Church
that people like Homolka have always harbored in their breasts throughout
decades of Catholic-Jewish “dialogue.”
In a way, we owe Homolka thanks. For he has provided the proof that, when
all is said and done, it is Catholic teaching itself that his
ilk views as “anti-Semitic” and wants to see repealed forever,
and that “dialogue” is the way they thought they could prevent
the Church from reaffirming what she believes on the authority of God
speaking.
Indeed, Homolka seems to think the Church’s teaching on Jewish conversion was repealed
at Vatican II, only to learn from the Pope’s action that the Church
does not and cannot repeal revealed truth, does not and cannot repudiate
the divinity of her own Founder, does not and cannot deny that He is
the Saviour of all men.
Homolka concludes his interview by expressing his contempt precisely for what
he sees as Benedict’s attempt to end the post-Vatican II drift
of the Church and steer a course back toward Tradition:
“What we have here is a captain on the bridge of his supertanker. A
new course was set with the Second Vatican Council. Now the captain
wants to turn around and set another new course within a short period
of time. And one or two explosive devices are needed to get the
ship into its new position. For the pope, the Church of the Second
Vatican Council has lost too much of its power to retain the faithful,
and university theology has become too feeble. This is why we are seeing
these massive changes in the Catholic Church.”
What could be more revealing of the true intentions of “dialogue partners” like
Homolka? For them, “dialogue” was the means by which the
illusory “Church of the Second Vatican Council,” the Church
that “lost too much of its power to retain the faithful,” would
be kept in this condition of weakness. “Dialogue” was
a weapon deployed against the Church by her worst foes.
Homolka’s last words include these:
“Good Friday this year will be a black day in relations between Jews
and Catholics…. Four Jewish speakers have already cancelled their
participation in the German Catholic Convention. Nerves are raw on the
Jewish side. A few months ago, (Jewish intellectual) Micha Brumlik warned
of an ‘ice age’ and now it has arrived…..”
And all of this, mind you, because of a prayer that merely repeats the Church’s
traditional petition to God for the conversion of the Jewish people,
along with all the other peoples of the earth — a prayer that is
an act of supernatural love.
That this kind of hate-mongering, juvenile pouting and quasi-hysteria is the
end result of some forty years of Catholic-Jewish “dialogue” is
but another indication of why the dialogue must cease. For “dialogue” clearly
has not served the cause of the Gospel, but rather the cause of the Church’s
enemies, whose hatred and contempt for her is coming to the surface now
that they suspect that “dialogue” might no longer serve
their aims.
Our Lady of Fatima, protect the Pope!
|