Carmelite Convent Auschwitz Berger

The Continuing Agony: From the Carmelite Convent to the Crosses at Auschwitz, by Alan Berger. 2002

An Extensive Collection of Judeocentric Essays on the Carmelite Convent and Cross Controversy

Those readers who want a large set of published opinions on the matter at hand can find this volume useful. Having read and reviewed several books on this immediate subject, I was disappointed by the nearly total lack of originality in the opinions presented.

HOLOCAUST SUPREMACISM BEHIND THE CONTROVERSY

One common theme of this volume is the supposedly self-evidently special nature of the Nazi genocide of Jews. A corollary of this is the suggestion, by some, that the Holocaust is an epochal event whose significance is yet to be appreciated fully. These premises would make perfect sense had the Jews been the world’s only victims of genocide and state-sponsored mass murder.

In this work, Polish suffering is briefly mentioned–and then the conversation rushes back to Jewish suffering. In addition, Polish suffering is presented as something that hinders Poles from appreciating Jewish suffering, and not as something truly significant in its own right.

WHO PERSECUTED WHOM? NO VALID MORAL HIGH GROUND

Another common, even incessant, premise in this work is that Christians have no right to have crosses at Auschwitz because Christians had persecuted Jews. However, this overlooks the fact that Jews also had relative freedom, and even privilege, in many Christian-majority nations. In addition, the emphasis on persecution seems to fit with the lachrymose Jewish view of their history–one that emphasizes (or over-emphasizes) Jews as victims, and makes this a major component of Jewish self-identity.

Repeatedly, we hear in this volume that Jews find the cross painful and offensive because of past Christian persecutions of Jews. However, considering the fact that virtually all religions (including Judaism) had, at one time or other, persecuted other religions, isn’t this attitude a bit chauvinistic?

Finally, in view of the fact Jewish merchants never had any problem with beholding and handling Christian religious objects while freely selling them, isn’t the “painful and offensive” consideration a bit phony?

BLAMING CHRISTIANITY FOR THE HOLOCAUST NO MATTER THE FACTS

In common with much Holocaust material, this work commits the genetic fallacy in logic [(A) preceded (B), therefore (A) caused (B)] as it endorses the blaming of past Christian teachings about Jews for the Holocaust. Using the same logic, we should conclude that the anti-Catholic teachings of Protestants eventually caused the Nazi persecution of devout Catholics, and that the anti-Protestant teachings of Catholicism eventually caused the Nazi persecution of devout Protestants. Nazism was a secularist philosophy that had nothing to do with Christianity, and there is no evidence that Nazi attitudes and conduct against Jews were in any way dependent upon past Christian attitudes towards Jews.

Let us consider the blame-Christianity-for Holocaust considerations from another angle. Jacob Neusner (p. 52) makes the amazing statement that, “While not the source of racist antisemitism, Christianity made its massive contribution to the racist antisemitism that formed the policy of mass murder of men, women, and children…” (p. 52). What???

Neusner’s statement typifies the superficiality and strong Judeocentric tendentiousness that characterizes this entire volume. The reader must realize that variously racist, quasi-racist, and essentialist views of Jews were once widely held, including by Jews themselves. Please click on, and read, the Peczkis review of Social Science and the Politics of Modern Jewish Identity (Stanford Studies in Jewish History and Culture).

COMMON JEWISH CARICATURES OF CHRISTIANITY

This work features rather superficial attempts to differentiate Jewish and Christian conceptions of God, prayer, and the attitude to this world. For instance, the Christian view of prayer is described as a petitioning of God, whereas the Judaic concept of prayer is characterized as a wrestling with God. In actuality, both approaches to prayer occur in both the Old and New Testaments.

The Carmelite nuns are faulted for their otherworldly mindset. This seems to be a rehash of the misrepresentation of Christians as caring only about the afterlife, and having no earthly good. This is egregious. In fact, Christianity, and the implications of Christianity, have led to vast improvements in THIS life. Such was the course of Western Civilization.

In any case, any Jewish dislike of the real or imagined “otherworldliness” of the Carmelite nuns is hardly a valid reason for banning them from Auschwitz.

CONCLUSION

The arguments adduced for excluding Poles and Christians from Auschwitz are so lame that it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they are anything more than smokescreens. So what is the real reason? Could it be Jewish selfishness, and even a hint of racism? [In fact, some Poles made a satire of the Jewish position, suggesting that Jews scrape off the ash-laded soil of
Auschwitz, and take it with themselves to Israel.]

UPDATE

In time, Polish and Catholic authorities, whether motivated by goodwill or intimidation, unilaterally bowed to Jewish pressure, and removed the Carmelite Convent from the grounds of Auschwitz.

So what happened? There now is a new set of Jewish accusations against, and demands from, Poland.