Printer friendly version

January 10, 2005

Shaking Off the Unspeakable

Paul Spiegel, president of the Central Council of Jews, called Friday for [Cologne Cardinal Joachim] Meisner to take back his words.

"I expect that the cardinal will quickly and unequivocally distance himself from this unspeakable and offensive comparison," Spiegel said.

As the Jerusalem Post reports, the unspeakable comparison that the Roman Catholic leader made was as follows:

First, Herod, who had the children of Bethlehem killed; then, among others, Hitler and Stalin who had millions of people wiped out; and today in our times, unborn children are being killed a million times over.

Meisner apparently also declared that abortion puts "all previous crimes of humanity in the shadows." Ostensibly, that means every other group that has ever experienced grievous harm can now insist, as Spiegel has, that "Meisner has completely lost his authority as a bishop." Somehow, I think Catholics might beg to differ.

Actually, some Catholics have differed most significantly on whether it was right that Meisner's apology was expediently issued. On Jeff Miller's blog, Tom of Disputations suggested:

The bishop was correct in his homily, and he was right to apologize. His job isn't simply to state the truth, but by God's grace to give the truth to others, and if he speaks the truth in terms that cause others to reject it, he should look for other terms.

Jeff subsequently agreed that there "are many ways to proclaim the truth and not all of them are fruitful," but I think the important question has too easily been assumed answered: Did the apology serve the truth? The politic statement from Meisner's office before he decided to apologize for having said something (as Deutsche Welle paraphrased) "open to misinterpretation" would seem to suggest otherwise. From the Jerusalem Post:

Meisner's office Friday declined to withdraw his comment. It was not a comparison to genocides, but to the "euthanasia" killings of those deemed mentally or physically handicapped under the Hitler and Stalin regimes, spokesman Menfred Becker-Huberti said.

I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem as if misinterpretation is necessary to hear a reference to genocide in the phrase "millions of people wiped out." Does it advance the cause of truth to attribute post hoc meaning to a comparison — no matter how unspeakable and offensive others might claim it to be? And even if Meisner did not intend to evoke the images that are most associated with Hitler and Stalin (which would be nigh inconceivable), does it serve the truth to reinforce the claim that a true statement cost the prelate "his authority as a bishop"?

Jeff cites a line from Corinthians that, I'd say, is only indirectly applicable. For my part, the incident in Germany seems almost of literally direct relation to Matthew 10:14-18:

Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words--go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet. Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

"Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves. But beware of people, for they will hand you over to courts and scourge you in their synagogues, and you will be led before governors and kings for my sake as a witness before them and the pagans.

Was Cardinal Meisner serpent-shrewd, or did he tuck his dust-covered feet under his robe? I suppose some of the answer will come when we find out if Spiegel follows through with his threatened lawsuit.

Posted by Justin Katz at January 10, 2005 4:49 PM
Abortion
Comments

Meisner should stick to his guns. There have been tens of millions of babies destroyed by the abortion holocaust. If there are Jews anxious to retain the title of World's Pre-Eminent Victims who can't cope with the numbers involved, I'd say they have emotional problems that should be addressed by professionals.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at January 10, 2005 5:18 PM

While I generally agree with your suggestion, Francis, I don't think it too soft to take into consideration that we're talking Jews in Germany, here. I'd also suggest that the numbers aren't the point of contention, but rather the humanity of the victims is.

The challenge — a daunting one, to be sure — is to put this denial of another human being's humanity in the historically correct light. Being aware of others' sensibilities (whether they're rightly or wrongly honed) will further that cause. We agree, though, that reinforcing them will not.

Posted by: Justin Katz at January 10, 2005 5:25 PM

The Nazis killing people is not the same as a mother making the choice to end her own pregnancy. Sometimes there are valid reasons for abortion. There are never valid reasons for rogue soldiers to annihilate an entire race of people.

Posted by: Pimme at January 11, 2005 9:40 AM

Pimme,

You're comparing an individual, mitigated act with a sweeping collection of acts. Sometimes there are valid reasons to kill an individual (as in self defense). There are never valid reasons for selfish libertines to annihilate huge chunks of entire generations.

Posted by: Justin Katz at January 11, 2005 9:55 AM

The Nazis killing people is not the same as a mother making the choice to end her own pregnancy.

This is true in the sense that the termination of a pregnancy as a forseeable but unintended consequence of trying to save the life of the mother is not the same as Nazis killing people. But the way you phrase it - a mother choosing to end her own pregnancy (and consequently, the life of her own child) in some sense, is even worse than the Nazi. One would expect that a mother would have a natural affinity for her child and strive to protect it, not kill it.

Posted by: c matt at January 12, 2005 3:05 PM