Murdering Saints

There are Nazis who are justly condemned for their part in murdering thousands, but a man who worked with the Nazis, who not only worked with them but signed a treaty of cooperation with them, a man who stood by while the Nazis shipped Jews of his city off to concentration camps to die, is going to be made a Saint.

How can this be, you might ask? The truth is, it’s not as uncommon as you might think. In fact, there is plentiful precedent for it.

The myth is that people murdered Saints. The truth is that by and large, it was the Saints who were busy murdering people.

The deeds of many of these men is little different than giving Lt. William Calley the Medal of Honor for his part in directing the atrocities at My Lai. Others are worse, on an order of some magnitude.

You can look up the name of just about any mass murderer in Christian history (Catholic and Orthodox both) and it will turn out the fellow is a Saint. All you have to do is murder the right people – the constructed “Other.” In some cases – many of them – the targets were Pagans – followers of ethnic religions. In others, as in the recent controversy surrounding the wartime head of the Catholic Church, Pope Pius XII – the victims were Jews.

You see, Pope Benedict XII is pushing for Pius – the Pope who palled around with Hitler – to become a Saint. He just got a step closer because it turns out the beatification process evaluated the “Christian life” of Pius, who reigned from 1939 to 1958, and not “the historical impact of all his operative decisions.”

Apparently, say, for example, ordering the slaughter of tens of thousands of Pagan Saxons, the destruction of entire cultures, is part of a Saintly Christian life – those actions the Pope orders IN history are as trivial as so much paper shuffling or licking stamps.

Acquiescing in – some might say enabling – the deaths of millions of Jews, apparently is not a violation of a Saintly Christian life. Licking stamps; killing Jews.

It’s like the Middle Ages all over again.

And not a shred of personal responsibility.

Benedict confirmed the “heroic virtues” of Pius — along with those of John Paul II — on Saturday, opening the door to beatification once a miracle is attributed to each. A second miracle would be required for sainthood.

Any common criminal can exhibit the requisite miracles even after his death, according to Catholic belief, as the example of the “Innocentes” of Milan demonstrates. These were minor officials executed by Christian emperor Valentinian for corruption who later (from the grave) performed graveside miracles.[1]

What, exactly, are “heroic virtues” for a pope who murders or acquiesces in the murder of the “Other”? Is this a medal for licking stamps?

The Catholic Church, which pretends to represent a religion of history, shows remarkably little interest in the historical record, except to the extent it can be ignored or bent to the Church’s will. Pius XII is a case in record.

Jewish groups wanted Benedict to hold off on the beatification process for Pius XII until the Vatican archives relating to his papacy were opened to scholarly scrutiny. Oh those pesky facts! Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi said that the Vatican “understood” the request to open the archives, and that the copious number of documents from Pius’s papacy were expected to take several more years to process.

So let me get this straight here…Pope Pius XII has been dead since 1958, and you don’t have his records processed yet? I thought the DMV here was slow.

And Pope Benedict XVI has been pope since 2005. This means he has had four years to decide whether or not to make Pius a saint. He could have ordered the archive processed at any point. One gets the distinct impression that the records are being deliberately ignored.

The only obvious conclusion to draw from this is that the Catholic Church has no interest in historical facts. They’ve already made it clear they’re irrelevant in any case. All that’s necessary to be a Saint is some sort of nebulous quality called “Christian life.”

The Jews, I would say, have just cause for complaint. So do Pagans. After all, modern Pagans were among those the Nazis rounded up and threw into concentration camps.

Some things never change, do they?

It’s galling, as a Pagan myself, to be subjected to this white-washing of history on a regular basis. You can consult the Catholic Encyclopedia or Wikipedia and see time and again how the criminal activities of a Saint are completely ignored. The mass murder of Pagans is glossed over with euphemisms like “converted” or “spread the gospel.” Vandalism is left to the Vandals, who are often described as a “savage Pagan tribe” but who were, at the time they committed the deeds that put their name into history – Christians.

Let’s look at a few examples. Up first: Pope Gregory “the Great.” This mass murderer is not only a “Pope” but is known as the “Great” Not many criminals earn this appellation! In Wikipedia we find the following:

Gregory is credited with re-energizing the Church’s missionary work among the barbarian peoples of northern Europe. He is most famous for sending a mission, often called the Gregorian mission, under Augustine of Canterbury, prior of Saint Andrew’s, where he had perhaps succeeded Gregory, to evangelize the pagan Anglo-Saxons of England. The mission was successful, and it was from England that missionaries later set out for the Netherlands and Germany. The preaching of the true Catholic faith and the elimination of all deviations from it was a key element in Gregory’s worldview, and it constituted one of the major continuing policies of his pontificate.

Evangelizing…there is a nice euphemism for genocide. And Gregory “re-energized” genocide. Even better. No wonder he’s “the Great.”

Gregory was known for his “pastoralism.” His pastoralism did not include freeing slaves. When he found English boys for sale in a slave market in Christian Rome (the point must be emphasized) he did not order them freed. He did not order them all purchased and then freed. He instead ordered the purchase only of 17 and 18-year-olds – boys who could be put to use – probably as missionaries. They had their religion stolen from them, just as they had had their freedom – by Christians.

This does not sound particularly saintly to me.

Nor is it often that criminal behavior – however much it benefits the criminal’s activities – earns praise, but Gregory’s does:

The idol temples of that race should by no means be destroyed, but only the idols in them. Take holy water and sprinkle it in these shrines, build altars and place relics in them…When this people see that their shrines are not destroyed they will be able to banish error from their hearts and be more ready to come to the places they are familiar with, but now recognizing and worshipping the true God. And because they are in the habit of slaughtering much cattle as sacrifices to devils, some solemnity ought to be given them in exchange for this. So on the day of dedication or the festivals of the holy martyrs, whose relics are deposited here, let them make themselves huts from the branches of trees around the churches which have been converted out of shrines, and let them celebrate the solemnity with religious feasts. Do not let them sacrifice animals to the devil, but let them slaughter animals for their own food to the praise of God, and let them give thanks to the Giver of all things for His bountiful provision.

Another murderer, this one beatified (the third of four steps on the way to Saint-hood) – maybe he didn’t kill enough? –  Is Urban II, the fellow who called for the Crusades. Here’s what he said – a speech that changed history and killed hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions in the centuries to come:

On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion!

You won’t find this speech in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Instead, you will find these hateful exhortations to murder referred to thusly: “he raised his eloquent voice on behalf of the Crusades.” Hitler was eloquent too, when he raised them on behalf of his cause and exhorted a new generation of Christians to kill the other.

Pope John VIII at least isn’t a saint, but you’ll be hard pressed to find his indulgence for killing Heathen’s mentioned on the Catholic Encylopedia or on Wikipedia. You can find it here, however:

John VIII to the bishops in the realm of Louis II [the Stammerer].

You have modestly expressed a desire to know whether those who have recently died in war, fighting in defence of the church of God and for the preservation of the Christian religion and of the state, or those who may in ‘he future fall in the same cause, may obtain indulgence for their sins. We confidently reply that those who, out of love to the Christian religion, shall die in battle fighting bravely against pagans or unbelievers, shall receive eternal life. For the Lord has said through his prophet: “In whatever hour a sinner shall be converted, I will remember his sins no longer.” By the intercession of St. Peter, who has the power of binding and loosing in heaven and on the earth, we absolve, as far as is permissible, all such and commend them by our prayers to the Lord.[2]

Kill “the other” and go to heaven, sins erased! Quite a deal if you can get it! It would be less offensive if these crimes were at least admitted, and it was explained – somehow – that these men were honored despite the horrific deeds they perpetrated.

Another example  is that of Rabbula/Rabbulas. If you look into the Catholic Encyclopedia you will find none of this…you will find it only in Wikipedia because I have properly edited the entry for historical accuracy with the following:

It has been argued by scholars that this positive picture of Rabbula is not altogether accurate. Jan Willem Drijvers observes that “It appears…that Rabbula was not the model bishop as presented by the Vita Rabbulae, but a fanatical Christian who persecuted all those who had other ideas, such as diophysites and other heretics, as well as Jews.” Indeed, according to the Life of Rabbula, immediately before becoming bishop of Edessa, Rabbula, in consort with another monk, Eusebius, the future bishop of Tella, went to Baalbek (Heliopolis) in Lebanon (Phoenicia Libanensis), one of the last refuges of Paganism in order to seek martyrdom by attacking the Pagan cult images there. Rather than being killed, he was severely beaten. The Life argues that Rabbula was preserved from death on account of his destiny to hold the episcopate.^[1] Scholar Michael Geddis notes at this point that this is exactly the sort of suicidal behavior condemned by Austustine. Happily, for the citizens of Baalbek (if not for Rabbula), they were able to retain the customs and traditions of their ancestors well into the sixth century.^[2]

Finally, we have Shenoute, who as Saint Abba Shenouda (Shenoute) the Archimandrite (348-466 A.D.) is a saint of the Orthodox Church. Shenoute was the abbot of the White Monastery of Atribe in the desert of Thebes, Egypt. Shenoute was a common criminal, a bandit (lesteia), a brutal thug who plundered the estate of a wealthy Pagan landowner in Egypt and when justly accused claimed, “There is no crime for those who have Christ.”[3] Shenoute claimed that the Pagan had brought it upon himself by being a Pagan.

Slavery, theft, vandalism, physical and cultural genocide – the road to Sainthood.

It is no mere accident of omission that these unsavory details are left out of pious histories of the eras in question. It is a deliberate attempt to re-write the historical record. In completely contradiction of the historical record Roman emperors continue to be accused of persecuting Christians, while deeds we actually have evidence for, committed by Christians, are ignored altogether – erased from history.

These are the sort of men upon whom Christian success is built. It’s not a pretty picture – and it’s difficult to make their deeds sound like an accomplishment. The behavior of men like Rabbula and Shenoute was not at all uncommon (see Libanius Oration 30; Ambrose Ep. 41).

In the United States in particular, the religious violence is strongly condemned – when that violence is coming out of Islam. Of Christianity’s own violent history and tendencies we hear nothing. It seems hypocritical to condemn the one without admitting to the other. The trend seems to be rather that “our own” violent tendencies be written out of history, or that the historical record be made more friendly; i.e. the Crusades were “defensive” wars, or the Inquisition wasn’t really so bad after all.

Another tact  taken by some modern Christians to separate themselves from the deeds of their ancestors by claiming that those men were not really Christian at all – often as they themselves spout eerily similar hate and intolerance.

And it needs to be mentioned that both groups, ironically – Jews and Christians – venerate the memory of Joshua, the author of (if the Bible is to be taken literally) the first recorded genocide in history – that of the Canaanite inhabitants of Palestine. Both groups adhere to the idea of a genocide to come, at the end of time, when everyone who is of the wrong religion gets the divine axe, so to speak.

With this appeal to violence to come, and the at best ambivalent feelings about the violence that made Christianity a dominant religion, it is difficult to take seriously Christian claims about being a superior religion, a religion further along on the road of evolution. It seems today, as it seemed in days of old, a primitive, violent religion, given to extremes of thought and deed. Christianity needs to be honest about its past if it’s going to move forward into tomorrow. Until then, it will be trudging along that treadmill, just down the street from the 13^th century while the twenty-first century beckons from afar.

[2] In Migne, Patrologia Latina, 126: 816 trans. Oliver J. Thatcher, and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source Book for Medieval History, (New York: Scribners, 1905), 512

[3] Gaddis (2005), 1.