I certainly don't mind listening to rational and documented criticism of the Catholic Church, but it's hard to carry on any sort of discussion with somebody who just keeps asserting information without documentation. It's nice that you finally came through with at least a quote, Mike. That makes at least a start. This page gives a long list of quotes from Hitler that seem favorable to Christianity, so I guess it's fair to say he claimed to be a Catholic. Still, Mike, your implication was that Hitler did what he did because he was Catholic; and that one cannot expect justice from the Catholic Church because it once had a member named Adolf Hitler. You still have failed to show a causal relationship, a logical connection. "Guilt by association" is not generally considered to be a valid logical argument.

I haven't seen evidence that would indicate that the Catholic Church actively promoted Fascism and National Socialism to any great extent, although there were ultra-nationalist Catholic groups in Croatia and other places that certainly did. The Catholic policy at the time was to attempt to coexist with national governments, and that included carrying on diplomatic relations with dictators - and made for the Catholic Church having some strange bedfellows at times. I don't buy claims that Pope Pius XII supported the Nazis - but he certainly was a disappointment in his failure to oppose them strongly. He was a career diplomat, and it appeared he tried to deal with the Nazis and Fascists with diplomacy. The world needed a hero at the time, and it's clear that Pius XII was no hero. That's why I oppose the proposal that Pius XII be named a saint. I don't think he was a bad man - but the Church and the world needed more than mediocrity at the time.

There is one thing I can say in defense of the Catholic Church and Pius XII with regard to its relationship with Hitler - In 1937, Pope Pius XI published an encyclical letter, Mit brennender Sorge (with burning sorrow), addressed to the German people. A letter may not sound like much, but it's about the most powerful weapon Popes have nowadays. This letter, which was apparently written by Vatican Secretary of Eugenio Pachelli (later Pius XII) (click), expressed strong opposition to Hitler and his policies. In 1937, the United States had a far more cordial relationship with Hitler than the Vatican had, so I think it's a big stretch to accuse the Catholic Church of supporting Hitler or of responsibility for the Holocaust. Certainly, the Catholic Church and all of Europe and America should have done more to oppose Hitler and the Holcaust - but failure to oppose is quite different from active support.

John Paul II is not one of my favorite popes, but I have to admire his courage in opposing the Marcos regime in the Philippines and later the Communists of Eastern Europe. If Pius XII had shown that sort of moral strength, the Holocaust might never have happened. Maybe John Paul learned his lesson in World War II.

I consider pacifism to be part of my Catholic faith, although I acknowledge that most Catholics are not pacifists. I have to say, though, that Hitler and the Holocaust shake my faith in pacifism. The British and the Catholics tried appeasement, and failed miserably. What finally defeated the Nazis, was warfare - much as I hate to admit that. I suppose that was the essential failure of Pope Pius XII: for all intents and purposes, he was a pacifist - and his pacifist approach failed to stop the Nazis and the Holocaust. All of us who claim to be pacifists, need to examine that failure and learn from it. John Paul II apparently did. So did Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela, and Martin Luther King.

Windsor Knot, Islam has recently replaced Catholicism as the largest faith, and I'd venture a guess that Buddism may well garner more respect than any other. I've gone to Mass at least once a week all my life (and I'm at church half a dozen times a week), but I have more respect for the Dalai Lama than I have had for any pope since John XXIII.

-Joe-