Monday, January 19, 2009

How to Pray

In the silent darkness our hidden God speaks to us in ways beyond concepts as Fr Dubay says.  Our souls are nourished even in this dark night of longing and thrist for God.

Fred

How to Pray

"Yet everything depends on this ability to stand still and to be present with full inner awareness."

"The basic meaning of the word 'collected' is to be gathered together, united.
A glance at our life will show how much we lack this aptitude. We should have a fixed centre which, like the hub of a wheel, governs our movements and from which all our actions go out and to which they return; a standard, also, or a code by which we distinguish the important from the unimportant, the end from the means and which puts actions and experiences into their proper order; something stable, unaffected by change and yet capable of development, which makes it clear to us who we are and how matters stand with us. We lack this; we, the men of today, lack it more than did those who lived in earlier ages.

"This becomes evident in our attempts to pray. Spiritual teachers speak of 'distraction' as that state in which man lacks poise and unity, that state in which thoughts flit from object to object, in which feelings are vague and unfocused and the will ineffective. Man in this state is not really a person who speaks or who can be spoken to, but merely an unco-ordinated bundle of thoughts, feelings and sensations.

"Collectedness means that he who prays gathers himself together, directs his attention on to what he is doing, draws in all thought—a painstaking task—so as to dedicate himself to prayer as a unified whole. This is the state in which he may, when the call comes to him, answer in the words of Moses, 'Here am I (Exod. 3:4).[page 19]

"In it awakens not only the religious consciousness but a new and higher consciousness, which we might call the spiritual heart of the child of God.

"On this holy ground the reality of God becomes manifest. It may happen that man experiences it suddenly and is overcome by its grandeur and flooded by its proximity. If this happens, he knows that he is receiving the great and intimate mystery of prayer. He must receive it with reverence and guard it well. But such an event is rare indeed and more often than not nothing happens. The God of whom the worshipper had said, 'He is here,' remains silent and hidden. Then the prayer, supported by faith alone, must go out into this silent darkness and maintain itself there.

"In collectedness the worshipper says, 'God is here and here also am I.'" [Page 23]

[Romano Guardini, Prayer in Practice, Page 18, 23]

Sunday, November 2, 2008

O'Brien: Obama "[U]shering in the Time of Great Trial for the Church"

-I also believe that he is a carrier of a deadly moral virus, indeed a kind of anti-apostle spreading concepts and agendas that are not only anti-Christ but anti-human as well. In this sense he is of the spirit of Antichrist (perhaps without knowing it), and probably is one of several key figures in the world who (knowingly or unknowingly) will be instrumental in ushering in the time of great trial for the Church under its last and worst persecution, amidst the numerous other tribulations prophesied in the books of Daniel and Revelation, and letters of St Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.

StudiObrien newsletter, The U.S. ElectionSaturday, November 1, 2008 1:20 PM
From: "studiObrien" Add sender to Contacts To: undisclosed-recipients

All Saints Day, 1 November 2008

Dear Friends,

From just north of the border, we Canadians, like other people throughout the world, are observing and praying for the coming federal election in the United States of America. I would prefer to keep private my counsel about political choices, because it is not my country. However, I am receiving letters from American subscribers and visitors to my studio website asking me some rather surprising questions about Barack Obama, related to one of my novels.

During the past year I have read a number of his pronouncements, and saw the smoke and mirrors beneath the rhetoric, but couldn't understand why everyone south of the border (the other south of the border, the 49th parallel) was getting so excited about him, both pro and con. Then a few weeks ago a German friend called me immediately after Obama's speech in Berlin, to say that the presidential candidate had mesmerized the crowds, and that a commentator on German television had said: "We have just heard the next President of the United States...and the future President of the World." My friend felt that Obama bore an uncanny resemblance to the fictional character of the President in my novel Father Elijah. I have received several other letters saying the same thing and asking what I thought about it.

From my own reading of Obama's declarations and stated positions, I knew he was an ultra-liberal, a social revolutionary with visionary pretensions. But the Antichrist? No, not possible, I thought. I felt that he was too shallow a man to be the Son of Perdition, the Man of Sin, the Beast of the Book of Revelation. And I still think so. Obama is a crowd-pleaser with just the right ethos of idealistic crusader. That the crusade and the banners under which it marches are evil does not automatically prove that he is the Antichrist.

But now that I have seen the video of the Berlin speech I think there is more here than meets the eye. He is indeed a powerful manipulator of crowds, even as he appears ever so humble and wholesomely charming. I doubt that he is the long-prophesied ruler of the world, but I also believe that he is a carrier of a deadly moral virus, indeed a kind of anti-apostle spreading concepts and agendas that are not only anti-Christ but anti-human as well. In this sense he is of the spirit of Antichrist (perhaps without knowing it), and probably is one of several key figures in the world who (knowingly or unknowingly) will be instrumental in ushering in the time of great trial for the Church under its last and worst persecution, amidst the numerous other tribulations prophesied in the books of Daniel and Revelation, and letters of St Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.

Of course the mystique that has grown up around him is endlessly reinforced by the liberal media, which presents him to us as a high-minded humanist, a kind of secular messiah (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 675). Yet when all the rhetoric is boiled down to its substance, the man is advocating unlimited state-sanctioned murder, and compounds it by indulging in habitual falsehood. He is well accustomed to playing loose with the truth whenever it is expedient for him to do so; or else he is the victim of the largest memory lapses in recorded history; or perhaps he is just not careful about how he expresses things—a blurring or selectivity regarding facts for the purpose of aggrandizing his public image. There is a controversy currently raging in the (admittedly unreliable) forum of the internet, prompted by an African-American talk show host in Los Angeles who listed 39 significant details that Barack Obama claimed were facts about himself, but on fu! rther investigation were proved to be simply untrue. There has been some wild-fire debunking of the debunking, and then more counter-debunking, but it remains obvious that forthrightness and clarity are not major concerns in the Obama camp.

What are we to make of a man who has appeared out of semi-obscurity and become, nearly overnight, so very much an idol of the popular imagination? That he intends to become the most effective advocate of murder of the unborn ever seen in America should give us pause. Murder and lies are as old as the lands east of Eden, of course, but when they are charmingly packaged, proposed as reasonable and just policies (with a smile, a resonant voice, and an appealing flash of the eyes), one begins to wonder just what is afoot in the modern age. It brings to mind a passage from the first Act of Shakespeare's Hamlet:

“That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain...”

The line is from a scene where prince Hamlet has just encountered the ghost of his father, who informs his son that he was poisoned by his own brother Claudius (the "smiling, damned villain"), who after murdering him, seized the king's crown and his queen.

Barack Obama is an image-maker, creating his own myth as he goes along. This would be a sad defect in any human being, but it takes on ominous proportions in a person who may become, after November 4th, one of the most powerful figures in the world. How is it possible that such a tragic turn of events may come about, if indeed a majority of Americans choose to believe the smile and the myth? Why is it that so many people have come to believe that a mirage is reality, even destiny? Do pro-Obama voters hanker for a world figure who would heal old divisions between races and religions, thus heralding a new age for mankind? During this time of near intolerable tensions, does he appear to be the one who can reconcile Islam and Christianity, Africa and America, occident and orient, black and white, rich and poor? Do they see his racial origins as a symbolic victory over the history of racial oppression? Do they see in him the good-hearted "under-dog", the gutsy street fi! ghter who agitates for the rights of the "little guy," whose meteoric rise to a position of maximum influence represents themselves enthroned at last in the high seat of power? Is this why they ignore his every grave fault and hungrily consume his vague idealist platitudes as if these were a kind of new gospel for the third millennium? Our hero. Our visionary. Our Great Friend and spokesman in the forum of the world?

Clearly, contemporary man needs heroes. But why not choose a genuine one, why not look a little deeper and work a little harder to find a man of courage and principle, and if it helps in the historical healing process, why not a very different kind of black man, say a person like Alan Keyes, a scholar, former ambassador, experienced in different levels of government, and (it might be added) an African-American married to a woman from India. Moreover, he is a devout Catholic who believes in moral absolutes and has amply proved that he will stand firm to defend them regardless of the cost to his own career. He knows that kings and presidents cannot usurp the natural law, the moral order of the universe, without bringing down judgment upon their nations. But it need not be Keyes. It might be any number of other men and women of clear thought and clear principle. Surely there are "Ten Just Men" still out there somewhere in America. So why Obama? And why does he ! rise and rise as his mouth smiles and smiles, exuding sincerity as he speaks lies and death?

And why, most horribly, most shamefully, are so many Christians of malformed or unformed conscience supporting him? Is it because they have never been clearly instructed in the truth, never understood the foundation upon which the moral cosmos is built? Is morality for them merely another system of abstract "values" in a crowded playing field of such systems, from which one may pick and choose? In the case of Catholics, for example, have they been blinded by a diet of theological nuances and deadly little loopholes offered to them by the committees of national episcopal conferences — committees that have absolutely no authority over Catholics, yet which are widely revered as a kind of alternative Magisterium? Have they been deadened by a habitual dismissing or dissembling of the solid teaching given to them by the universal Church under Peter? Have they grown accustomed to listening to opinion shapers who tell them that certain excellent apostolic Bishops in ! America who teach the truth without compromise are merely hidebound reactionaries, moralistic extremists, contemporary manifestations of those old boogymen who still haunt the American psyche — the Chillingworths and Dimmesdales and the judges in The Scarlet Letter? And so it goes, this over-reaction to Puritanism played out over centuries, an over-reaction that breeds tragedies a thousand times worse than Salem’s. Lies compounding on lies, and it all floats on an ocean of spilled innocent blood. And who can gaze at that ocean (or be splashed by it) without coming to a radical choice: One either turns away into a deeper state of denial, or one turns heart and mind toward the splendor of Truth, and changes one's life accordingly.

Is this why many of our Catholic people have become impulse-driven impressionists? Of course, the blindness is not due to the failure of pastors alone. The Ministry of Disinformation (by which I mean most modern media) has played a major role. There is also the erosion of truth in the education systems, combined with the gradual confusion and weakening of conscience through our addiction to the "soma" drugs supplied by the entertainment industry. Other factors may be the war in Iraq, or Republican economics, or the Bush administration, or the structure of Capitalism itself, or any number of prudential questions in the sociopolitical order, all of which are presently tangled nests of moral dilemma. But why do they not see that these questions are secondary to the fundamental issue of life itself? Why would they replace one reigning oligarchy with another kind of oligarchy — moreover, one that would kill vast numbers of its own citizens?

"I call on heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life or death, blessing or curse. Choose life, then, so that you and your descendants may live...." (Deuteronomy 30:19)

May God bless and guide you,
in Jesus our Saviour,

with prayers and fasting,

Michael O'Brien

PS: For those interested in a concise examination of the moral parameters of voting in the forthcoming election, I urge you to read an excellent article by Dr. Mark Miravalle, professor of Theology at Franciscan University, Steubenville, available at the following link:

http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1531

Monday, October 27, 2008

Pro-Life Group: Devastating Abortion Consequences if Obama Beats McCain

Pro-Life Group: Devastating Abortion Consequences if Obama Beats McCain

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 26, 2008

Email RSS Printer

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group that works within the Republican Party to keep it pro-life says there are monumental pro-life reasons that have nothing to do with partisanship that make it imperative for the pro-life movement to make sure John McCain becomes the next president instead of Barack Obama.

The Republican National Coalition for Life sent LifeNews.com a statement over the weekend supporting McCain and highlighting the ways in which abortion would be promoted endlessly under an Obama administration.

"Any hope for a U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade will be lost," if Obama wins, the group said. "The Freedom of Choice Act will be signed into law eliminating 35 years of laws that have restricted and regulated the practice of abortion."

The ability to render the Supreme Court pro-abortion for decades is exacerbated by abortion advocates controlling Congress in addition to potentially running the White House.

"If the Democrats retain control of the U.S. Senate, a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court will no doubt be filled by a liberal who passes Obama’s pro-abortion litmus test. In addition, we can expect the same criteria to apply to every vacant federal bench throughout his term, which could number in the hundreds," the pro-life group explained.

The RNC for Life group said Obama would start on day one of his presidency advocating abortion by making taxpayers fund abortions both in the United States and abroad.

"He would very likely offer legislation to eliminate the Hyde Amendment which protects taxpaying citizens from being forced to pay for abortions through Medicaid," the pro-life group said of Obama's plans. "Abortion will be covered in his proposed national health care plan. The Mexico City Policy, which bars taxpayer funding of organizations that perform or promote abortions in foreign countries, would be eliminated."

Under an Obama administration, the RNC for Life group says taxpayer funding of the UNFPA would be restored even though the group is involved in promoting the China family planning policy that prohibits more than one child and involves forced abortions and sterilizations.

The pro-life group also challenged pro-life advocates who support third party candidates to switch their allegiance to McCain, saying he and pro-life running mate Sarah Palin are the only ones to have any real shot at stopping Obama.

"Regardless of the fact that other presidential candidates are on the ballot in various states, only John McCain and Sarah Palin or Barack Obama and Joe Biden have a chance of winning the election," the pro-life organization told LifeNews.com.

"When you cast your precious vote, please consider the consequences to the pro-life cause," it concluded.


Buzz up!


Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Is Easter a Historical Fact?

Is Easter a Historical Fact?
Did Jesus Christ Rise from the Dead?

Briefly, therefore, the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by more than 500 eyewitnesses, whose experience, simplicity, and uprightness of life rendered them incapable of inventing such a fable, who lived at a time when any attempt to deceive could have been easily discovered, who had nothing in this life to gain, but everything to lose by their testimony, whose moral courage exhibited in their apostolic life can be explained only by their intimate conviction of the objective truth of their message.

Again the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by the eloquent silence of the Synagogue which had done everything to prevent deception, which could have easily discovered deception, if there had been any, which opposed only sleeping witnesses to the testimony of the Apostles, which did not punish the alleged carelessness of the official guard, and which could not answer the testimony of the Apostles except by threatening them "that they speak no more in this name to any man" (Acts 4:17).

Finally the thousands and millions, both Jews and Gentiles, who believed the testimony of the Apostles in spite of all the disadvantages following from such a belief, in short the origin of the Church, requires for its explanation the reality of Christ's Resurrection, fot the rise of the Church without the Resurrection would have been a greater miracle than the Resurrection itself.
[http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:Rn9XpTPv0u0J:www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htm+resurrection+historical+fact+catholic&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]


Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Resurrection is the rising again from the dead, the resumption of life. In this article, we shall treat only of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. (The General Resurrection of the Body will be covered in another article.) The fact of Christ's Resurrection, the theories opposed to this fact, its characteristics, and the reasons for its importance must be considered in distinct paragraphs.

I. THE FACT OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION
The main sources which directly attest the fact of Christ's Resurrection are the Four Gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul. Easter morning is so rich in incident, and so crowded with interested persons, that its complete history presents a rather complicated tableau. It is not surprising, therefore, that the partial accounts contained in each of the Four Gospels appear at first sight hard to harmonize. But whatever exegetic view as to the visit to the sepulchre by the pious women and the appearance of the angels we may defend, we cannot deny the Evangelists' agreement as to the fact that the risen Christ appeared to one or more persons. According to St. Matthew, He appeared to the holy women, and again on a mountain in Galilee; according to St. Mark, He was seen by Mary Magdalen, by the two disciples at Emmaus, and the Eleven before his Ascension into heaven; according to St. Luke, He walked with the disciples to Emmaus, appeared to Peter and to the assembled disciples in Jerusalem; according to St. John, Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalen, to the ten Apostles on Easter Sunday, to the Eleven a week later, and to the seven disciples at the Sea of Tiberias. St. Paul (1 Corinthians 15:3-8) enumerates another series of apparitions of Jesus after His Resurrection; he was seen by Cephas, by the Eleven, by more than 500 brethren, many of whom were still alive at the time of the Apostle's writing, by James, by all the Apostles, and lastly by Paul himself.

Here is an outline of a possible harmony of the Evangelists' account concerning the principal events of Easter Sunday:

The holy women carrying the spices previously prepared start out for the sepulchre before dawn, and reach it after sunrise; they are anxious about the heavy stone, but know nothing of the official guard of the sepulchre (Matthew 28:1-3; Mark 16:1-3; Luke 24:1; John 20:1).
The angel frightened the guards by his brightness, put them to flight, rolled away the stone, and seated himself not upon (ep autou), but above (epano autou) the stone (Matthew 28:2-4).
Mary Magdalen, Mary the Mother of James, and Salome approach the sepulchre, and see the stone rolled back, whereupon Mary Magdalen immediately returns to inform the Apostles (Mark 16:4; Luke 24:2; John 20:1-2).
The other two holy women enter the sepulchre, find an angel seated in the vestibule, who shows them the empty sepulchre, announces the Resurrection, and commissions them to tell the disciples and Peter that they shall see Jesus in Galilee (Matthew 28:5-7; Mark 16:5-7).
A second group of holy women, consisting of Joanna and her companions, arrive at the sepulchre, where they have probably agreed to meet the first group, enter the empty interior, and are admonished by two angels that Jesus has risen according to His prediction (Luke 24:10).
Not long after, Peter and John, who were notified by Mary Magdalen, arrive at the sepulchre and find the linen cloth in such a position as to exclude the supposition that the body was stolen; for they lay simply flat on the ground, showing that the sacred body had vanished out of them without touching them. When John notices this he believes (John 20:3-10).
Mary Magdalen returns to the sepulchre, sees first two angels within, and then Jesus Himself (John 20:11-l6; Mark 16:9).
The two groups of pious women, who probably met on their return to the city, are favored with the sight of Christ arisen, who commissions them to tell His brethren that they will see him in Galilee (Matthew 28:8-10; Mark 16:8).
The holy women relate their experiences to the Apostles, but find no belief (Mark 16:10-11; Luke 24:9-11).
Jesus appears to the disciples, at Emmaus, and they return to Jerusalem; the Apostles appear to waver between doubt and belief (Mark 16:12-13; Luke 24:13-35).
Christ appears to Peter, and therefore Peter and John firmly believe in the Resurrection (Luke 24:34; John 20:8).
After the return of the disciples from Emmaus, Jesus appears to all the Apostles excepting Thomas (Mark 16:14; Luke 24:36-43; John 20:19-25).
The harmony of the other apparitions of Christ after His Resurrection presents no special difficulties.
Briefly, therefore, the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by more than 500 eyewitnesses, whose experience, simplicity, and uprightness of life rendered them incapable of inventing such a fable, who lived at a time when any attempt to deceive could have been easily discovered, who had nothing in this life to gain, but everything to lose by their testimony, whose moral courage exhibited in their apostolic life can be explained only by their intimate conviction of the objective truth of their message. Again the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by the eloquent silence of the Synagogue which had done everything to prevent deception, which could have easily discovered deception, if there had been any, which opposed only sleeping witnesses to the testimony of the Apostles, which did not punish the alleged carelessness of the official guard, and which could not answer the testimony of the Apostles except by threatening them "that they speak no more in this name to any man" (Acts 4:17). Finally the thousands and millions, both Jews and Gentiles, who believed the testimony of the Apostles in spite of all the disadvantages following from such a belief, in short the origin of the Church, requires for its explanation the reality of Christ's Resurrection, fot the rise of the Church without the Resurrection would have been a greater miracle than the Resurrection itself.

II. OPPOSING THEORIES
By what means can the evidence for Christ's Resurrection by overthrown? Three theories of explanation have been advanced, though the first two have hardly any adherents in our day.

(1)The Swoon Theory
There is the theory of those who assert that Christ did not really die upon the cross, that His supposed death was only a temporary swoon, and that His Resurrection was simply a return to consciousness. This was advocated by Paulus ("Exegetisches Handbuch", 1842, II, p. 929) and in a modified form by Hase ("Gesch. Jesu", n. 112), but it does not agree with the data furnished by the Gospels. The scourging and the crown of thorns, the carrying of the cross and the crucifixion, the three hours on the cross and the piercing of the Sufferer's side cannot have brought on a mere swoon. His real death is attested by the centurion and the soldiers, by the friends of Jesus and by his most bitter enemies. His stay in a sealed sepulchre for thirty-six hours, in an atmosphere poisoned by the exhalations of a hundred pounds of spices, which would have of itself sufficed to cause death. Moreover, if Jesus had merely returned from a swoon, the feelings of Easter morning would have been those of sympathy rather than those of joy and triumph, the Apostles would have been roused to the duties of a sick chamber rather than to apostolic work, the life of the powerful wonderworker would have ended in ignoble solitude and inglorious obscurity, and His vaunted sinlessness would have changed into His silent approval of a lie as the foundation stone of His Church. No wonder that later critics of the Resurrection, like Strauss, have heaped contempt on the old theory of a swoon.

(2) The Imposition Theory
The disciples, it is said, stole the body of Jesus from the grave, and then proclaimed to men that their Lord had risen. This theory was anticipated by the Jews who "gave a great sum of money to the soldiers, saying: Say you, His disciples came by night, and stole him away when we were asleep" (Matthew 28:12 sq.). The same was urged by Celsus (Orig., "Contra Cels.", II, 56) with some difference of detail. But to assume that the Apostles with a burden of this kind upon their consciences could have preached a kingdom of truth and righteousness as the one great effort of their lives, and that for the sake of that kingdom they could have suffered even unto death, is to assume one of those moral impossibilities which may pass for a moment in the heat of controversy, but must be dismissed without delay in the hour of good reflection.

(3) The Vision Theory
This theory as generally understood by its advocates does not allow visions caused by a Divine intervention, but only such as are the product of human agencies. For if a Divine intervention be admitted, we may as well believe, as far as principles are concerned, that God raised Jesus from the dead. But where in the present instance are the human agencies which might cause these visions? The idea of a resurrection from the grave was familiar to the disciples from their Jewish faith; they had also vague intimations in the prophecies of the Old Testament; finally, Jesus Himself had always associated His Resurrection with the predictions of his death. On the other hand, the disciples' state of mind was one of great excitement; they treasured the memory of Christ with a fondness which made it almost impossible for them to believe that He was gone. In short, their whole mental condition was such as needed only the application of a spark to kindle the flame. The spark was applied by Mary Magdalen, and the flame at once spread with the rapidity and force of a conflagration. What she believed that she had seen, others immediately believed that they must see. Their expectations were fulfilled, and the conviction seized the members of the early Church that the Lord had really risen from the dead.

Such is the vision theory commonly defended by recent critics of the Resurrection. But however ingeniously it may be devised, it is quite impossible from an historical point of view.

It is incompatible with the state of mind of the Apostles; the theory presupposes faith and expectancy on the part of the Apostles, while in point of fact the disciples' faith and expectancy followed their vision of the risen Christ.
It is inconsistent with the nature of Christ's manifestations; they ought to have been connected with heavenly glory, or they should have continued the former intimate relations of Jesus with His disciples, while actually and consistently they presented quite a new phase that could not have been expected.
It does not agree with the conditions of the early Christian community; after the first excitement of Easter Sunday, the disciples as a body are noted for their cool deliberation rather than the exalted enthusiasm of a community of visionaries.
It is incompatible with the length of time during which the apparitions lasted; visions such as the critics suppose have never been known to last long, while some of Christ's manifestations lasted a considerable period.
It is not consistent with the fact that the manifestations were made to numbers at the same instant.
It does not agree with the place where most of the manifestations were made: visionary appearances would have been expected in Galilee, while most apparitions of Jesus occurred in Judea.
It is inconsistent with the fact that the visions came to a sudden end on the day of Ascension.
Keim admits that enthusiasm, nervousness, and mental excitement on the part of the disciples do not supply a rational explanation of the facts as related in the Gospels. According to him, the visions were directly granted by God and the glorified Christ; they may even include a "corporeal appearance" for those who fear that without this they would lose all. But Keim's theory satisfies neither the Church, since it abandons all the proofs of a bodily Resurrection of Jesus, nor the enemies of the Church, since it admits many of the Church's dogmas; nor again is it consistent with itself, since it grants God's special intervention in proof of the Church's faith, though it starts with the denial of the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, which is one of the principal objects of that faith.

(4) Modernist View
The Holy Office describes and condemns in the thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh propositions of the Decree "Lamentabili", the views advocated by a fourth class of opponents of the Resurrection. The former of these propositions reads: "The Resurrection of our Saviour is not properly a fact of the historical order, but a fact of the purely supernatural order neither proved nor provable, which Christian consciousness has little by little inferred from other facts." This statement agrees with, and is further explained by the words of Loisy ("Autour d'un petit livre", p. viii, 120-121, 169; "L'Evangile et l'Eglise", pp. 74-78; 120-121; 171). According to Loisy, firstly, the entrance into life immortal of one risen from the dead is not subject to observation; it is a supernatural, hyper-historical fact, not capable of historical proof. The proofs alleged for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ are inadequate; the empty sepulchre is only an indirect argument, while the apparitions of the risen Christ are open to suspicion on a priori grounds, being sensible impressions of a supernatural reality; and they are doubtful evidence from a critical point of view, on account of the discrepancies in the various Scriptural narratives and the mixed character of the detail connected with the apparitions. Secondly, if one prescinds from the faith of the Apostles, the testimony of the New Testament does not furnish a certain argument for the fact of the Resurrection. This faith of the Apostles is concerned not so much with the Resurrection of Jesus Christ as with His immortal life; being based on the apparitions, which are unsatisfactory evidence from an historical point of view, its force is appreciated only by faith itself; being a development of the idea of an immortal Messias, it is an evolution of Christian consciousness, though it is at the same time a corrective of the scandal of the Cross. The Holy Office rejects this view of the Resurrection when it condemns the thirty-seventh proposition in the Decree "Lamentabili": "The faith in the Resurrection of Christ pointed at the beginning no so much to the fact of the Resurrection, as to the immortal life of Christ with God."

Besides the authoritative rejection of the foregoing view, we may submit the following three considerations which render it untenable: First, the contention that the Resurrection of Christ cannot be proved historically is not in accord with science. Science does not know enough about the limitations and the properties of a body raised from the dead to immortal life to warrant the assertion that such a body cannot be perceived by the senses; again in the case of Christ, the empty sepulchre with all its concrete circumstances cannot be explained except by a miraculous Divine intervention as supernatural in its character as the Resurrection of Jesus. Secondly, history does not allow us to regard the belief in the Resurrection as the result of a gradual evolution in Christian consciousness. The apparitions were not a mere projection of the disciples' Messianic hope and expectation; their Messianic hope and expectations had to be revived by the apparitions. Again, the Apostles did not begin with preaching the immortal life of Christ with God, but they preached Christ's Resurrection from the very beginning, they insisted on it as a fundamental fact and they described even some of the details connected with this fact: Acts, ii, 24, 31; iii, 15,26; iv, 10; v, 30; x, 39-40; xiii, 30, 37; xvii, 31-2; Rom., i,4; iv, 25; vi, 4,9; viii, 11, 34; x, 7; xiv, 9; I Cor., xv, 4, 13 sqq.; etc. Thirdly, the denial of the historical certainty of Christ's Resurrection involves several historical blunders: it questions the objective reality of the apparitions without any historical grounds for such a doubt; it denies the fact of the empty sepulchre in spite of solid historical evidence to the contrary; it questions even the fact of Christ's burial in Joseph's sepulchre, though this fact is based on the clear and simply unimpeachable testimony of history.

III. CHARACTER OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION
The Resurrection of Christ has much in common with the general resurrection; even the transformation of His body and of His bodily life is of the same kind as that which awaits the blessed in their resurrection. But the following peculiarities must be noted:

Christ's Resurrection is necessarily a glorious one; it implies not merely the reunion of body and soul, but also the glorification of the body.
Christ's body was to know no corruption, but rose again soon after death, when sufficient time had elapsed to leave no doubt as to the reality of His death.
Christ was the first to rise unto life immortal; those raised before Him died again (Colossians 1:18; 1 Corinthians 15:20).
As the Divine power which raised Christ from the grave was His own power, He rose from the dead by His own power (John 2:19; 10:17-18).
Since the Resurrection had been promised as the main proof of Christ's Divine mission, it has a greater dogmatic importance than any other fact. "If Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain" (1 Corinthians 15:14).
IV. IMPORTANCE OF THE RESURRECTION
Besides being the fundamental argument for our Christian belief, the Resurrection is important for the following reasons:

It shows the justice of God who exalted Christ to a life of glory, as Christ had humbled Himself unto death (Phil., ii, 8-9).
The Resurrection completed the mystery of our salvation and redemption; by His death Christ freed us from sin, and by His Resurrection He restored to us the most important privileges lost by sin (Romans 4:25).
By His Resurrection we acknowledge Christ as the immortal God, the efficient and exemplary cause of our own resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:21; Philippians 3:20-21), and as the model and the support of our new life of grace (Romans 6:4-6; 9-11).
Publication information
Written by A.J. Maas. Transcribed by Donald J. Boon. Dedicated to Bishop Andre Cimichella of Montreal, and to Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XII. Published 1911. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

Copyright © 2007 by Kevin Knight (EMAIL). Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
[http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:Rn9XpTPv0u0J:www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htm+resurrection+historical+fact+catholic&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]

Saturday, January 26, 2008

"The Strategy of Showing People Photos of the Gruesome Reality of Abortion is Working"

Regarding the following:

Besides Frances Kissling being Catholic, Kate Michelman, past president of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) was a Catholic, but left the church.
Amazing, two women who had much to do with women having their children killed -- both raised Catholic.

Respect God's Rights,

Frank Joseph MD

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abortion Leaders Admit that Pro-Life Arguments are Convincing

Express concern about pictures of abortion shown to public

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

LOS ANGELES, January 24, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Two of the nation's most influential pro-abortion leaders have admitted publicly that the pro-life movement has convincing arguments that pro-abortion forces have no response to.

In an opinion piece published by the Los Angeles Times on January 22nd, Frances Kissling and Kate Michelman write that the phrase "culture of life", coined by Pope John Paul II, has had a significant impact.

"To some people, pro-choice values seem to have been unaffected by the desire to save the whales and the trees, to respect animal life and to end violence at all levels," they write.

"Pope John Paul II got that, and coined the term 'culture of life.' President Bush adopted it, and the slogan, as much as it pains us to admit it, moved some hearts and minds. Supporting abortion is tough to fit into this package."

The authors' also admit that the pro-life movement's focus on the unborn child and its attempts to limit access to abortion have worked, both politically and socially. They lament that "Twenty years ago, being pro-life was déclassé. Now it is a respectable point of view."

Significantly, they acknowledge that the strategy of showing people photos of the gruesome reality of abortion is working, despite the fact that it has been a matter of controversy among some pro-lifers. "In recent years, the antiabortion movement successfully put the nitty-gritty details of abortion procedures on public display, increasing the belief that abortion is serious business and that some societal involvement is appropriate. Those who are pro-choice have not convinced America that we support a public discussion of the moral dimensions of abortion," the authors write.

Such frank admissions of the power of pro-life arguments are significant, coming from two of the most important figures in the pro-abortion movement. Kate Michelman was the president of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), the original and most influential pro-abortion organization in the United States, with the possible exception of Planned Parenthood.

Frances Kissiling was for many years the leader of "Catholics for a Free Choice," an organization repudiated by the Catholic Church, that promotes abortion, sodomy, and fornication, and fights to eliminate the Vatican's observer status at the United Nations.



_______________________________________________


To respond to this email, subscribe, or unsubscribe, please contact Dr. Frank:

drfrank@abortiontruths.net

Thank you.

Wednesday, October 3, 2007

"If Germany’s several million “gays” were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers."

http://caosblog.com/5803

Historical records suggest Germany had perhaps 700,000 Jews versus 2-3 million “registered” homosexuals, according to Himmler. Whether there were 1 and a half million (Hirschfeld) or 2 to 3 million (Himmler), at most 10,000 German homosexuals were sent to work camps, 6,000 died and 4,000 were released. The 6,000 homosexual deaths are a minimum of Germans who would have been “fems,” despised by the homosexual powered elite as well as collections of homosexuals who were also Jewish, Italian, Asian, Black, Communist, Marxist and the like. This still leaves estimates of 20,000 male prostitutes unaccounted for with the under 1% of homosexuals largely interned in “work camps,” not, the authors note, the “death” camps for Jews and other outcasts. Lively and Abrams point to the nearly 100% extermination effort by the Nazis toward all captured Jews of all nationalities, gassed or interned in death camps. The especial concern of Hitler that all good Germans reproduce in order to create an Aryan nation must not be forgotten. Aryan Germans were expected to breed and it is well known that German breeding farms were established for that purpose. Non-German homosexuals appear to have been of no interest to the Nazis, for there is no record of any attempts to hunt, arrest or harm foreign homosexuals, for any reason.

The evidence strongly suggests these selected German homosexuals were killed for political reasons, versus 566,000 of roughly 700,000 German Jews (85%), 23.5% of all gypsies, 10% of Poles, 12% of Ukrainians, 13.5% of Belorussians. The German military plot to kill Hitler resulted in the murder of the few men responsible, as well as 7,000 of their family members. The authors raise some interesting questions, such as where is the record of retaliation for those who hid, hired, nursed and fed persecuted homosexuals? The author’s discussions of the “butch” versus “fems” battle raging between German homosexuals and the effect of this internal war on alleged “book burning: and the like, answer many critical questions.

In the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer said Hitler welcomed “Murderers, pimps homosexual perverts, drug addicts or just plain rowdies.” In fact, even Shirer sidestepped the brazenly homosexual nature of Nazi party pioneers–a critical body of knowledge for any society contending for a civil existence. The authors cite several million “Butch” type Rohm homosexual Nazis who worked as guards and directors of women’s and men’s death camps and work camps. Elie Weisel, the world famous Holocaust survivor, reported witnessing homosexual guards and administrators who “kept” and raped young Jewish boys at will, “there was a considerable traffic in children among homosexuals here, I learned later.”

Lively and Abrams report that basic mathematics refute the idea that homosexuals were killed for being homosexual. For were homosexuals treated like Jews, 2-3 million out of 2-3 million German homosexuals should have lost their businesses, their jobs, their property, their possessions and most should have lost their lives. Homosexuals would have been forced to wear pink triangles on their clothing in the streets, they would have had their passports stamped with an “H,” barred from travel, work, shopping, public appearances without their armbands, and we would have thousands of pictures of pink triangle graffiti saying “kill the faggots,” and the like. If German homosexuals were not Nazis, these 2-3 million men would have been homeless, walled into ghettos, worked as a mass labor pool, then gassed and their abuse recorded in graphic detail, as were millions of Jews. And, if Germany’s several million “gays” were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers.


The Pink Swastika- by Judith Reisman

This is published here at CB with Dr. Reisman’s written permission.

THE PINK SWASTIKA AND HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST HISTORY
by
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
The Institute For Media Education1

The greatest sacrilege to the millions of innocent infant and aged Nazi victims, would be allow these dead to be exploited as political fodder to re-arm the same ideologues who ushered in Germany’s “final solution”. The Pink Swastika challenges the historical meaning of The Pink Triangle and in doing so, brings light to one of the darkest pages of human history.

Are the Victimizers Co-Opting the Holocaust?

Under the banner of The Pink Triangle (a Nazi symbol for incarcerated homosexuals), a mass media campaign by the major broadcasters and press, has been awarding Nazi victim status to homosexuals. Claiming to have been victimized by the Nazis just like the Jews, pink triangles are sweeping the land, embossed on fancy stationary, upscale check books, flags, posters, stickers, shirts, pins, and the like. After losing nearly all of my (Jewish) family in the gas chambers during World War II, I was deeply disconcerted when Holocaust museums world wide advertised new exhibits alleging the Nazi mass murder of homosexuals. One of the complaints of those curating these exhibits has been the dearth of evidence with which to document museum assertions of a Nazi aminus toward homosexuals. Now, here come the authors of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, to document why evidence of a fatal form of Nazi “homophobia” has been uniformly lacking.

Instead of evidence finding Nazism in conflict with homosexuality, Lively and Abrams report the strategies of the German homosexual movement to ensconce National Socialism (the Nazi party) and Adolf Hitler, triggering a holocaust which engulfed all of Europe. Writing of those days in The Mass Psychology of Fascism, radical German sexologist and Hitler contemporary, Wilhelm Reich, warned that Nazi leadership was both ideologically and actually homosexual.2 Almost as an aside, Reich noted Nazi leaders such as “Bluher, Röhm…. Rosenberg” represented Hitler’s fascism, which was, Reich said, “a male state organized on a homosexual basis.” 3

But, the primary confirmation of The Pink Swastika and Reich, are the formal writings of Adolf Hitler himself, in the bible of the Nazi movement, Mein Kampf [My Struggle]. Here the reader meets up with page after page of Hitler’s outspoken hatred of Jews, Marxists, Negroes, Chinese, Arabs, women, and all Eastern Europeans along with his overwhelming worship of power and disdain for Judeo-Christian morality alongside his strategy for world domination. In his introduction to Mein Kampf, Konrad Heiden reconfirms Hitler’s hatred for Christianity, as he viewed the “belief in human equality” to be a Jewish plot, made popular due to “Christian churches”. (Emphasis mine)

Hitler is documented as classifying who he and Germany should hate. He hid nothing. Jews and the like were subhuman, they were “parasites” “vampires,” “liars” “cowards,” “traitors,” among other adjectives. But, search the Nazi manifesto for any animosity, contempt, much less hatred of homosexuals. To do so is to search in vain. In point of fact, as Reich knew personally, Hitler eulogized and venerated the archetypal super macho Aryan male, for whom women were seen to serve the role of breeders for the race of supermen. The Fuhrer’s contempt for women is made vivid by the abnormal way in which he used his niece and the few other women close to him, including Eva Braun.

Hitler outlined in Mein Kampf who would live and who would die: He stated who would be slave and who would be master. The Pink Swastika opens his fascist bible to the prototypical Nazi macho homosexual male best expressed today in the widely popular “Tom of Finland” fantasy drawings sold in all homosexual book stores, magazines, as well as in general advertisements for “gay” films and phone sex. Common are the blond, square jawed muscle men wearing Luftwaffe caps, skin tight black pants, high black polished boots, sporting a black leather strap going from the shoulder diagonally across a hairless, bare, Aryan chest, a whip swishing alongside the hero’s slim hips.

The authors recall the 1920s post WW1 Weimar Republic, the near starvation and wild currency fluctuations in Germany against the backdrop of the sex and drug “Cabaret” scene of Europe and Gay Berlin. They point to Berlin’s world famous coterie of Bohemian artists, sadosexual transvestites, lesbians and homosexual nightclubs and baths, as well as the rampant control of Berlin by pornographers, organized crime and drug dealers. In this milieu, reports Elson in Time-Life Books, Prelude to War, thousands of prostitutes walked Berlin’s city streets half nude, dressed as “dominatrixes” and school girls, while transvestites and “powdered and rouged young men” everywhere sold their wares to financiers and military men alike.

The famous German Jewish homosexual sex “scientist,” Magnus Hirshfeld, reported that roughly 20,000 boys and youths were prostituted to Germany’s flourishing “gay” population. (The British, qua-American homosexual icon, Christopher Isherwood blissfully said of Berlin’s 1920’s boy brothels, “Berlin is for boys…The German Boy….the Blond”).

In the midst of such pansexual revelry it could be argued that were Hitler a shy, retiring sort of bookworm, he might not notice the dominating homosexual sensibility and the erotic mix of sexes. However, Lively and Abrams conclude that as a young aspiring Viennese artist, Hitler would be especially familiar with the artistic homosexual fraternity for Vienna was the hub of Bohemian culture. Hitler claims to have been destitute, and in the midst of the Cabaret era, he was reduced to living in a men’s hostel for down-and outers. Both male and female prostitution were rife, the younger the better. Such a poor young artist would have met many “different” and adventurous people whose celebrity. like today, was gilded by an intimacy with homosexuality. The authors present a reasonable body of evidence to the jury of public opinion, including the possibility that Hitler earned extra cash as a youthful Viennese prostitute, serving a male clientele.

In a fascinating read of 204 well documented pages, the authors of The Pink Swastika track down the facts behind the homosexual movement’s current claims for Nazi-victim status. Divided into seven parts, the story opens as the new Nazi party is founded in the smoky din of the Bratwurstglockl, “a tavern frequented by homosexual roughnecks and bully-boys….a gay bar,” favored by Hitler’s closest comrade, Captain Ernst Röhm. Almost every biography of Hitler reports that Rohm was a flagrant homosexual and the only man Hitler called by the familiar “du.”

Hitler’s beloved Storm Trooper Chief and founder of the Brown Shirts, the authors note, had a “taste for young boys.” Almost as close to Hitler as Röhm was Rudolph Hess, known for his dress-up attire as “‘Black Bertha’” in the gay bars of pre-war Berlin” In fact, Mein Kampf was dedicated to Hess while Hitler was in prison. The Pink Swastika reports that Hitler was given power by a homosexual gang, a gang says Dr. Carroll Quigley, President bill Clinton’s college teacher and mentor, that subverted Germany’s free elections by underhanded and brutal strategies.

According to Quigley in Tragedy and Hope (1966) Hitler’s intimate friend, Captain Röhm and his trusted homosexual cadre of Storm Troopers staged the famed burning of the Reichstag, along with other bully-boy tactics, to frighten people into supporting the Nazi party and Hitler. For our purposes here it is useful to see what Quigley says about homosexual Nazi Storm Troopers:

Accordingly….a plot was worked out to burn the Reichstag building and blame the Communists. Most of the plotters were homosexuals and were able to persuade a degenerate moron from Holland named Van der Lubbe to go with them. After the building was set on fire, Van der Lubbe was left wandering about in it and was arrested.

This is especially interesting. The Pink Swastika addresses the many myths surrounding “The Night of the Long Knives” or the “blood purge” when supposedly only homosexuals such as Röhm were murdered by Hitler. Quigley offers another interesting insight, saying that “Most of the plotters were homosexual”. He adds that many of those who knew the truth were murdered in March and April while ”Most of the Nazis who were in on the plot were murdered by Goring during the “blood purge” of June 30, 1934” (emphasis added).

Also, as Lively and Abrams report, it was under Röhm and his Storm Troopers that the records and books of “the Sex Research Institute,” were burned. The authors reveal that Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, the Jewish “feminine” homosexual director of the Institute, maintained detailed records of his many court-referred sex offenders, including important Nazi rapists, and homosexual child offenders, pederasts. Quigley confirmed that Röhm and other key Nazis who knew too much about Hitler’s criminal activities were killed for allegedly plotting against Hitler.

Lively and Abrams track the role of Röhm in recruiting and training a total of roughly 2.5 to 4.5 million Storm Troopers (SA) and Gestapo (SS) compared to about 100,000 men in the regular German army. Once the SA was disbanded after the June 1934 blood purge, most of these experienced SA homosexual leaders moved into other power positions in the German military.

The authors raise many questions in The Pink Swastika. If he feared homosexual influence on boys, why did Hitler chose known homosexuals to serve as key youth leaders? Karl Fischer, a homosexual teacher, began the Wandervogel (a German version of the boy Scouts), which became “The Hitler Youth” in 1933, under a well known pederast, Hans Blueher, who wrote of man-boy “love.” Gerhard Rossbach, homosexual Nazi leader of the Freikorps gave over leadership of the Schill Youth to Edmund Heines, a convicted Nazi pederast, and murderer, all under the watchful eye of Adolf Hitler.

The Pink Swastika reports that while Hitler and his Gestapo chief, Heinrich Himmler methodologically annihilated all German and European Jews via mass deportations to death camps, beyond political homophobic rhetoric after the Röhm murders, and a demand that men produce children for the Aryan race, Hitler refused to attack “homosexuals.”

Adolf Brand, a pederast-child pornographer was one of many prominent “butch” advocate homosexuals who continued to live, write and entertain in Germany, untouched by the Nazis. Other homosexual and bisexual leaders cited by these and other authors included Bladur von Schirach, Hitler Youth Leader; Hans Frank, Hitler’s Minister of Justice; Wilhelm Bruckner, Hitler’s adjutant; Walther Funk, Hitler’s Minister of Economics; friend and advisor Hermann Göring, Hitler’s second in command (who dressed “in drag and wore camp make-up”), Hans Kahnert, who founded Germany’s largest “Gay rights organization (Society for Human Rights) which counted “SA Chief Ernst Rohm among its members,” Edmund Heines, a pederast sadist, Dr. Karl Gunther Heimsoth, a homosexual Nazi who coined the term “homophile,” and Julius Streicher, an infamous pornographer and pederast who was very close to Hitler.



Most interesting was Emil Maurice, Hitler’s close personal secretary and chauffeur. One of the Röhm purge assassins, apparently Maurice had secured a blackmail strategy that preserved his life until the war’s end. For Lively and Abrams cite Maurice as homosexual, while Mollo, in his history of the SS, portrays Maurice also as Jewish described in a famous photograph:



Hitler and four of his first SS men (a fifth has been erased). L to R: Schaubk, Schreck, Hitler, Maurer and Schneider. The fifth man was Emil Maurice who was thrown out of the SS in 1935 when found to be a Jew, but later allowed to retain his appointment and privileges, and wear [sic] SS uniform.

A look at another photograph of Hitler finds him voluntarily posing enthusiastically before a massive statue of two nude, muscular men holding hands. This suggests we ask if Hitler had a sexual relationship with his handsome young chauffeur (a not uncommon arrangement as identified in reports of the time), . Maurice is identified as the man erased in the SS photograph, his two shoes still quite visible in the picture. Elsewhere, pictures of Maurice reveal a dark-haired, rather Semitic looking young man. Could Maurice have been Hitler’s Jewish, SS lover? What a fascinating research question. The captions read:

[Picture #1] “Hitler in prison with Maurice, Kriebel, Hess and Dr. Fredrich.” [Picture #2] “Common room of Nazi prisoners at Landsberg. Behind Hitler, Emil Maurice, early companion and chauffeur.”

Most histories of World War II (see especially Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) report Hitler’s ties to the “notorious” homosexual, Ernst Röhm and other males within his coterie. The Pink Swastika notes, if anything, that sex laws under Hitler’s Reich Minister of the Interior Henrich Himmler were largely tolerant toward the “2 million” Germans Himmler said were registered in homosexual organizations in 1933, for “only repeat offenders can be incarcerated.” “Repeat offenders” meant a fourth public sex offense, or someone who had already served six months in jail for repeated offenses. In 1940, Himmler reiterated that only “multiple offenders” (largely engaged in sex in a public forum) might be jailed. However, wrote Himmler, “artists and actors” might escape any penalty, despite how often they were found in compromising situations.

During the Hitler era, of roughly 70 million Germans , “less than 1%” “hardly one hundredth of all the country’s inhabitants” were Jewish, said Hitler. Morris Ernst, in his book on Kinsey, discussed Hirschfeld’s findings:

Germany….with a population of 62,000,000, there were nearly a million and a half men and women [said Hirschfeld] “whose constitutional predisposition is largely or completely homosexual” Just how big a proportion of his estimated million and a half German homosexuals found their way into Nazi uniforms is not known, of course. But a good many of them were attracted by the Nazi principles and the society of their fellows in a bond which excluded all women (p. 169-170).

Historical records suggest Germany had perhaps 700,000 Jews versus 2-3 million “registered” homosexuals, according to Himmler. Whether there were 1 and a half million (Hirschfeld) or 2 to 3 million (Himmler), at most 10,000 German homosexuals were sent to work camps, 6,000 died and 4,000 were released. The 6,000 homosexual deaths are a minimum of Germans who would have been “fems,” despised by the homosexual powered elite as well as collections of homosexuals who were also Jewish, Italian, Asian, Black, Communist, Marxist and the like. This still leaves estimates of 20,000 male prostitutes unaccounted for with the under 1% of homosexuals largely interned in “work camps,” not, the authors note, the “death” camps for Jews and other outcasts. Lively and Abrams point to the nearly 100% extermination effort by the Nazis toward all captured Jews of all nationalities, gassed or interned in death camps. The especial concern of Hitler that all good Germans reproduce in order to create an Aryan nation must not be forgotten. Aryan Germans were expected to breed and it is well known that German breeding farms were established for that purpose. Non-German homosexuals appear to have been of no interest to the Nazis, for there is no record of any attempts to hunt, arrest or harm foreign homosexuals, for any reason.

The evidence strongly suggests these selected German homosexuals were killed for political reasons, versus 566,000 of roughly 700,000 German Jews (85%), 23.5% of all gypsies, 10% of Poles, 12% of Ukrainians, 13.5% of Belorussians. The German military plot to kill Hitler resulted in the murder of the few men responsible, as well as 7,000 of their family members. The authors raise some interesting questions, such as where is the record of retaliation for those who hid, hired, nursed and fed persecuted homosexuals? The author’s discussions of the “butch” versus “fems” battle raging between German homosexuals and the effect of this internal war on alleged “book burning: and the like, answer many critical questions.

In the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer said Hitler welcomed “Murderers, pimps homosexual perverts, drug addicts or just plain rowdies.” In fact, even Shirer sidestepped the brazenly homosexual nature of Nazi party pioneers–a critical body of knowledge for any society contending for a civil existence. The authors cite several million “Butch” type Rohm homosexual Nazis who worked as guards and directors of women’s and men’s death camps and work camps. Elie Weisel, the world famous Holocaust survivor, reported witnessing homosexual guards and administrators who “kept” and raped young Jewish boys at will, “there was a considerable traffic in children among homosexuals here, I learned later.”

Lively and Abrams report that basic mathematics refute the idea that homosexuals were killed for being homosexual. For were homosexuals treated like Jews, 2-3 million out of 2-3 million German homosexuals should have lost their businesses, their jobs, their property, their possessions and most should have lost their lives. Homosexuals would have been forced to wear pink triangles on their clothing in the streets, they would have had their passports stamped with an “H,” barred from travel, work, shopping, public appearances without their armbands, and we would have thousands of pictures of pink triangle graffiti saying “kill the faggots,” and the like. If German homosexuals were not Nazis, these 2-3 million men would have been homeless, walled into ghettos, worked as a mass labor pool, then gassed and their abuse recorded in graphic detail, as were millions of Jews. And, if Germany’s several million “gays” were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers.

Interviewing SS General Jurgen Stroop and a German policeman, Moczarski, Kazimiers reports on the continued presence of homosexuals in the Nazi hierarchy.

A policeman well acquainted “with Germany’s homosexual element [spoke up and said they] kept files on all known and potential pederasts. He remarked that very few homosexuals in the NSDAP were as “indelicately” treated as was Rohm…”So maybe a few of the fags in the party did get knocked off. There were plenty of others who made out just fine. They remained active party members…..got promotions…..[and were] protected by the top NSDAP brass.”

The Storm Troopers and the Gestapo were schooled in what the authors call the “Hellenistic” Greek ideal of man-youth-pedagogy. Concerned about the man-boy aspect of homosexuality, The Pink Swastika connects-the-dots for readers from the homosexual power structure in Germany to the current social debate in the United States. The naked, copulatory San Francisco “gay rights” parades, the violent homosexual burning of buildings when Governor Pete Wilson originally refused gay minority rights, the bullying attacks on Cardinal O’Conner and former HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan and scores of others, note the authors, are a replay of the homoerotic Nazis.

Our own research on Heterosexual v. Homosexual Partner Solicitation Language (The Advocate v. The Washingtonian), as noted earlier, regularly finds men and boys pictured in naked Fascist chic, strutting the black Luftwaffe cap, boots, whips and black leather–Fascist sadism. While Lively and Abrams cite at least 160 ex-gay organizations nationwide which identify sex abuse, neglect and authoritarian trauma as triggering homosexual conduct, on the evidence, a post-World War II Fascist model is afoot in American schools under the protective cover of “AIDS Prevention” and “gay youth” protection, controlled largely by adult homosexual activists.

Parallel with these subversive activities is the effort to divorce children from their parents, by painting the fatal and lonely life of homosexuality with a patina of heroism and martyrdom, via mass media, institutional education and law (the privilege of marriage being a recent assault) undermining America’s survival as the international standard barer of a Judeo-Christian moral order. Lively and Abrams are concerned, and I would conceded properly so, that idealistic “gay youth” groups are being formed and staffed in classrooms nationwide by recruiters too similar to those who formed the original “Hitler youth”. The Pink Swastika authors draw our attention to the need to forcefully reverse the flood of “gay rights” legislation or face a massive increase in children dedicated to the exploitive and heartbreaking “gay life” with all that implies for the child and society.

The Pink Swastika finds that serious “Judeo-Christians” are the likely targets of this resurgent homosexual movement. In 1934, all German school children were receiving textual, verbal and cinematic classroom indoctrination into Fascism. By 1936, sexuality advocate, Wilheim Reich warned that the wide availability and juvenile use of pornography was creating heterophobic German children–boys and girls who feared and distrusted the opposite sex. The homosexual fight for Nazi victim status comes directly on the heels of our exposé of forty years of corrupt and cynical manipulation of the fraudulent “10%” of homosexuality data established by Dr. Alfred Kinsey and Co. (Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Reisman and Eichel). Recently, Newsweek challenged the fraudulent Kinsey data, asking, “How Many Gays Are There?” while the Wall Street Journal faced up to “Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy.”

Recent admissions by Dr. John Bancroft, the new Kinsey Institute Director of Kinsey’s reliance and use of a homosexual pederast[s] to obtain Kinsey’s child sex data raises the specter that a homosexual/pederast biased male research base has become the foundation of current sexual attitudes, education, conduct, law and public policy. As no other sex researcher has ever reported his or her laboratory experiments on children to determine their sexual capacity, Kinsey remains the citation for all such scientific claims. To that end, H.R. 2749, “The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act of 1995” was introduced by Congressman Steve Stockman, December 1995, to begin to investigate that possibility. The price we now are paying for decades of Kinsey’s claims of infant and child sexuality and his 10% homosexuality data, can never be calculated.

Now the homosexual press regularly reports that scores of “closet” lesbians and homosexuals are in place to resurrect homosexuality, reshaping the nation’s ideals of child, marriage, justice, research, law, health, sexuality, crime and public policy from the old bi/homosexual sensibility. If it is true that institutional Judaism capitulated to homosexual pressure in Holocaust museums worldwide, awarding Nazi victim status to the macho male ideology which launched the Holocaust, what does growing homosexual power mean to their memory, and to the way homosexual power will exert itself in the future?

The Pink Swastika is both an excellent course in Nazi history, and an excellent warning for the future of our nation. Historical research like this should be pouring out from our institutions of higher learning. That universities are captured by “politically correct” homosexual/feminism only proves how dangerous fraud in science has been and continues to be for our nation. Lively and Abrams have done a yeoman’s job in bringing this controversial and important information to the public forum. The book should be purchased in quantity and distributed as widely as possible, for woe unto our nation should we ignore the warning of James Madison in 1832: “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both.” The Pink Swastika is critically needed popular information in the current Culture War, lest America become a Farce or a Tragedy or perhaps both.

ENDNOTES
Wilhelm Reich (1970), The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Penguin: New York, pp. 123, 127.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (1992) Houghton Mifflin.
The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia. (1991), Columbia University Press.
Robert Elson (1976), Prelude to War. Time-Life Books, New York, pp. 70-83.
Havelock Ellis (1934), Psychology of Sex, Ray Long & Richard R. Smith, Inc., New York, p. 221-222, Ellis cites Magnus Hirschfeld’s research on boy prostitution.
Christopher Isherwood (1953), Christopher And His Kind, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, New York, pp. 4-5.
The Washington Blade, August 11, 1985, p. 47 (a homosexual press).
Carroll Quigley (1966) Tragedy and Hope, Macmillan Company, New York, p. 437.
Ibid.
Andrew Mollo, A Pictorial History of the SS, 1923-1945. Stein and Day, New York, p. 19.
John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York. Ballantine books, p.131.
See: Eldon R. James, Ed., “The Statutory Criminal Law of Germany,” Washington, The Library of Congress, 1947, pp. 114-115, and Timothy Kearley “Charles Szladits’ Guide to Foreign Legal Materials: German,” published by the Baker School of Foreign and Comparative Law, Columbia University, 1990.
Morris Ernst, American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report, The Greystone Press, NY, NY, 1948.
Mein Kampf translated by Ralph Manheim, Boston: Sentry Edition: Houghton Mifflin, 1962. Also see Ingo Muller, Hitler’s Justice: Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: The Courts of the Third Reich, 1991, where Muller writes “Accounts of the power and invluence wielded by Jews in the Weimar Republic have usually been grossly misleading. In actual fact the percentage of Jews in the population of Germany declined steadily from the late nineteenth century onward, shrinking from 1.2 percent in 1871 to 0.76 percent in 1930….0.16 percent of all government employees. p. 59.
The People’s Chronology, Henry Holt and Company, Inc. 1992.
Katz, Steven. (1989). “Genocide in the 20th Century”: Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Vol 4, No 2. Great Britain: Pergamnom Press, pp. 127-148.
William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, New York,
Elie Wisel (1982) Night, New York, Bantam Books, p. 46.
Moczarski, Kazimiers (1977). Conversations With An Executioner. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. pp. 38-
Reich, supra, pp. 123, 127.
The Washington Post, December 8, 1995, p. B1, and December 28, 1995 Letter to the Editor.
John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York. Ballantine books, p.131.
Letter from James Madison to W.T. Barry (August 4, 1832), reprinted in The Complete Madison, S. Padower, ed. 1953, p. 337.

Please note: The citations aren’t perfect, but I’m getting ready to go on a trip and I DO THINK they’re all there.
[http://caosblog.com/5803]

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party

“As a Jewish scholar who lost hundreds of her family in the Holocaust, I welcome The Pink Swastika as courageous and timely . . . Lively and Abrams reveal the reigning “gay history” as revisionist and expose the supermale German homosexuals for what they were - Nazi brutes, not Nazi victims.”
- Dr. Judith Reisman, Institute for Media Education

[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html]
Homosexuality and the Nazi Party
by Scott Lively

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Lively is co-author of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuals and the Nazi Party (Keizer, Oregon: Founders Publishing Company, 1995). The Pink Swastika is not available through Leadership U., but is available by calling Jeremiah Films at 1-800-828-2290.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The pink triangle, symbol of the "gay rights" movement, is familiar to many Americans. As the badge used by the Nazis to designate homosexuals in the concentration camps, the pink triangle perfectly expresses the message of "gay rights." That message is that homosexuals are currently and historically victims of irrational prejudice and that those who oppose homosexuality are hateful bigots. This all-important victim status engenders sympathy for the homosexual "cause" among well-meaning heterosexuals. Thus, millions of otherwise rational Americans support a movement whose sole unifying characteristic is a sexual lifestyle they personally find repugnant.

When homosexuals display the pink triangle, they are equating all opposition to homosexuality with Nazism and themselves with the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. As pro-homosexual Rabbi Bernard Mehlman puts it, "Homophobia and Anti-Semitism are part of the same disease." This quote appeared in an advertisement in a homosexual newspaper. It announced the dedication ceremony of the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston last year. An accompanying article reported that New England homosexuals had pledged $1 million to help build the memorial, including $50,000 for an initial monument consisting of six steel and glass towers. Alongside the monument is an inscription honoring homosexual victims of the Nazis. Another Holocaust memorial being prepared in New York City is expected to similarly honor homosexuals. Washington, D.C. is home to the official U.S. Holocaust Museum which not only maintains a pro-homosexual display, but also employs noted homosexual activist Klaus Mueller as a staff researcher. Other Holocaust related projects, such as the Anne Frank Exhibit now touring the United States, incorporate a similar message in their programs.

While some homosexuals were interned in Nazi work camps, the role of homosexuals in Nazi history cannot be accurately represented solely by a pink triangle. Our review of more than 200 history texts written since the 1930s suggests that a pink swastika is equally representative, if not more so. For, ironically, while many homosexuals were persecuted by the Nazi party, there is no doubt that the Nazi party itself had many homosexuals within its own ranks, even among its highest leadership.


The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party
The "gay rights" movement often portrays itself as an American phenomenon which arose from the civil rights movement of the 1950s. It is not uncommon to hear homosexualists (those both "gay" and "straight" who promote the legitimization of homosexuality) characterize "gay rights" as the natural third wave of civil rights activism (following blacks and women). In reality, however, Germany was the birthplace of "gay rights," and its legacy in that nation is truly alarming.
The "grandfather of gay rights" was a homosexual German lawyer named Karl Heinrich Ulrichs. Ulrichs had been molested at age 14 by his male riding instructor. Instead of attributing his adult homosexuality to the molestation, however, Ulrich devised in the 1860s what became known as the "third sex" theory of homosexuality. Ulrichs' model holds that male homosexuals are actually female souls trapped within male bodies. The reverse phenomenon supposedly explains lesbianism. Since homosexuality was an innate condition, reasoned Ulrichs, homosexual behavior should be decriminalized. An early follower of Ulrichs coined the term "homosexual" in an open letter to the Prussian Minister of Justice in 1869.

By the time Ulrichs died in 1895, the "gay rights" movement in Germany had gained considerable strength. Frederich Engels noted this in a letter to Karl Marx regarding Ulrich's efforts: "The pederasts start counting their numbers and discover they are a powerful group in our state. The only thing missing is an organization, but it seems to exist already, but it is hidden." After Ulrichs' death, the movement split into two separate and opposed factions. One faction followed Ulrichs' successor, Magnus Hirschfeld, who formed the Scientific Humanitarian Committee in 1897 and later opened the Institute for Sex Research in Berlin. The other faction was organized by Adolf Brand, publisher of the first homosexual magazine, Der Eigene (The Special). Brand, Benedict Friedlander and Wilhelm Janzen formed the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen (The Community of the Special) in 1902. What divided these groups was their concepts of masculinity. Ulrichs' theory embraced a feminine identity. His, and later Hirschfeld's, followers literally believed they were women trapped in men's bodies.

The followers of Brand, however, were deeply insulted by Ulrichs' theory. They perceived themselves not merely as masculine, but as a breed of men superior in masculine qualities even to heterosexuals. The Community of the Special (CS) asserted that male homosexuality was the foundation of all nation-states and that male homosexuals represented an elite strata of human society. The CS fashioned itself as a modern incarnation of the warrior cults of ancient Greece. Modeling themselves after the military heroes of Sparta, Thebes and Crete, the members of the CS were ultra-masculine, male-supremacist and pederastic (devoted to man/boy sex). Brand said in Der Eigene that he wanted men who "thirst for a revival of Greek times and Hellenic standards of beauty after centuries of Christian barbarism."

One of the keys to understanding both the rise of Nazism and the later persecution of some homosexuals by the Nazis is found in this early history of the German "gay rights" movement. For it was the CS which created and shaped what would become the Nazi persona, and it was the loathing which these "Butches" held for effeminate homosexuals ("Femmes") which led to the internment of some of the latter in slave labor camps in the Third Reich.


From Boy Scouts to Brownshirts
The "Butch" homosexuals of the CS transformed Germany. Their primary vehicle was the German youth movement, known as the Wandervogel (Rovers or Wandering Youth). "In Central Europe," writes homosexual historian Parker Rossman, "there was another effort to revive the Greek ideal of pedagogic pederasty in the movement of 'Wandering Youth'... Ultimately, Hitler used and transformed the movement...expanding and building upon its romanticism as a basis for the Nazi Party" (Rossman:103).
Rising spontaneously in the 1890s as an informal hiking and camping society, the Wandervogel became an official organization at the turn of the century, similar to the Boy Scouts. From early on, however, the Wandervogel was dominated and controlled by the pederasts of the CS. CS co-founder Wilhelm Janzen was its chief benefactor, and its leadership was rife with homosexuality. In 1912, CS theorist Hans Blueher wrote The German Wandervogel Movement as an Erotic Phenomenon which told how the organization was used to recruit young boys into homosexuality.

Wandervogel youths were indoctrinated with Greek paganism and taught to reject the Christian values of their parents (mostly Catholics and Lutherans). The CS belief in a homosexual elite took shape within the Wandervogel in the concept of "der Fuehrer" (The Leader). E.Y. Hartshorne, in German Youth and the Nazi Dream of Victory, records the recollections of a former Wandervogel member in this regard: "We little suspected then what power we had in our hands. We played with the fire that had set a world in flames, and it made our hearts hot...It was in our ranks that the word Fuehrer originated, with its meaning of blind obedience and devotion...And I shall never forget how in those early days we pronounced the word Gemeinschaft ["community"] with a trembling throaty note of excitement, as though it hid a deep secret" (Hartshorne:12). Louis Snyder notes in the Encyclopedia of the Third Reich that, "The Fuehrer Principle became identical with the elite principle. The Fuehrer elite were regarded as independent of the will of the masses" (Snyder:104). Snyder was not writing about the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen or of the Wandervogel, but of the upper ranks of the Nazi party some thirty years later. Another Nazi custom from the Wandervogel was the "Seig Heil" salute, which was an early form of greeting popular among the wandering youth. During World War I, the greatest hero of the German youth movement was Gerhard Rossbach. Described by historian Robert G. L. Waite as a "sadist, murderer and homosexual," Rossbach was "the most important single contributor of the pre-Hitler youth movement" (Waite,1969:210). More importantly, Rossbach was the bridge between the Wandervogel and the Nazi Party.

In the turbulent days following Germany's defeat in World War I, Gerhard Rossbach was one of many former army officers placed in command of Freikorps (Free Corps) units. These unofficial auxilary military units were designed to circumvent limitations imposed on German troop strength by the Allies. Rossbach organized a Freikorps called Rossbach's Sturmabteilung (Rossbach's Storm Troopers). Rossbach also built the largest post-war youth organization in Germany, named the Schilljugend (Schill Youth) in honor of a famous Prussian soldier. In The Black Corps, historian Robert Lewis Koehl notes that both Rossbach's Storm Troopers and the Schilljugend "were notorious for wearing brown shirts which had been prepared for German colonial troops, acquired from the old Imperial army stores" (Koehl:19). These Storm Troopers would soon become known as Nazi Brownshirts. Konrad Heiden, a contemporary of Hitler and a leading authority on Nazi history, wrote that the Freikorps "were breeding places of perversion" and that "Rossbach's troop...was especially proud" of being homosexual (Heiden:295). Rossbach's adjutant was Edmund Heines, noted for his ability to procure boys for sexual orgies. Ernst Roehm, recruited by Rossbach into homosexuality, later commanded the Storm Troopers for the Nazis, where they were more commonly known as the SA (an acronym for Sturmabteilung).


The Power Behind the Throne
While Adolf Hitler is today recognized as the central figure of Nazism, he was a less important player when the Nazi machine was first assembled. Its first leader was Ernst Roehm. Homosexual historian Frank Rector writes that "Hitler was, to a substantial extent, Roehm's protegé" (Rector:80). Roehm had been a captain in the German army. Hitler had been a mere corporal. After World War I, Roehm was highly placed in the underground nationalist movement that plotted to overthrow the Weimar government and worked to subvert it through assassinations and terrorism. In The Order of the Death's Head, author Heinz Hohne writes that Roehm met Hitler at a meeting of a socialist terrorist group called the Iron Fist and "saw in Hitler the demagogue he required to mobilize mass support for his secret army" (Hohne:20). Roehm, who had joined the German Worker's Party before Hitler, worked with him to take over the fledgling organization. With Roehm's backing, Hitler became the first president of the party in 1921 (ibid.:21) and changed its name to the National Socialist German Worker's Party. Soon after, Rossbach's Storm Troopers, the SA, became its military arm. In his classic Nazi history, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, author William Shirer describes Roehm as "a stocky, bull-necked, piggish-eyed, scar- faced professional soldier...[and] like so many of the early Nazis, a homosexual" (Shirer:64). Rector writes:

Was not the most outstanding, most notorious, of all homosexuals the celebrated Nazi leader Ernst Ro[e]hm, the virile and manly chief of the SA, the du buddy of Adolf Hitler from the beginning of his political career? Hitler's rise had in fact depended upon Ro[e]hm and everyone knew it. Ro[e]hm's gay fun and games were certainly no secret; his amorous forays to gay bars and gay Turkish baths were riotous. Whatever anti-homosexual sentiments may have been expressed by straight Nazis were more than offset by the reality of highly visible, spectacular, gay-loving Ro[e]hm. If there were occasional ominous rumblings and grumblings about "all those queers" in the SA and Movement, and some anti-gay flare-ups, homosexual Nazis felt more-or-less secure in the lap of the Party. After all, the National Socialist Party member who wielded the greatest power aside from Hitler was Ro[e]hm (Rector:50f).
Betraying his roots in the "Butch" faction of the German "gay rights" movement, Roehm viewed homosexuality as the basis for a new society. Louis Snyder writes that Roehm "projected a social order in which homosexuality would be regarded as a human behavior pattern of high repute...he flaunted his homosexuality in public and insisted that his cronies do the same. What was needed, Roehm believed, was a proud and arrogant lot who could brawl, carouse, smash windows, kill and slaughter for the hell of it. Straights, in his eyes, were not as adept in such behavior as practicing homosexuals" (Snyder:55). "The principle function of this army-like organization," writes historian Thomas Fuchs, "was beating up anyone who opposed the Nazis, and Hitler believed this was a job best undertaken by homosexuals" (Fuchs:48f).
The favorite meeting place of the SA was a "gay" bar in Munich called the Bratwurstglockl where Roehm kept a reserved table (Hohne:82). This was the same tavern where some of the earliest formative meetings of the Nazi Party had been held (Rector:69). At the Bratwurstglockl, Roehm and associates-Edmund Heines, Karl Ernst, Ernst's partner Captain Rohrbein, Captain Petersdorf, Count Ernst Helldorf and the rest-would meet to plan and strategize. These were the men who orchestrated the Nazi campaign of intimidation and terror. All of them were homosexual (Heiden:371).

Indeed, homosexuality was all that qualified many of these men for their positions in the SA. Heinrich Himmler would later complain of this: "Does it not constitute a danger to the Nazi movement if it can be said that Nazi leaders are chosen for sexual reasons?" (Gallo:57). Himmler was not so much opposed to homosexuality itself as to the fact that non- qualified people were given high rank based on their homosexual relations with Roehm and others. For example, SA Obergruppenfuhrer (Lieutenant General) Karl Ernst, a militant homosexual, had been a hotel doorman and a waiter before joining the SA. "Karl Ernst is not yet 35," writes Gallo, "he commands 250,000 men...he is simply a sadist, a common thug, transformed into a responsible official" (ibid.:50f).

This strange brand of nepotism was a hallmark of the SA. By 1933 the SA had grown far larger than the German army, yet the Vikingkorps (Officers' Corps) remained almost exclusively homosexual. "Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops," writes historian H.R. Knickerbocker, "had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuhrer or Obergruppenfuhrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement" (Knickerbocker:55).

In the SA, the Community of the Special's Hellenic ideal of masculine homosexual supremacy and militarism was fully realized. "Theirs was a very masculine brand of homosexuality," writes homosexualist historian Alfred Rowse, "they lived in a male world, without women, a world of camps and marching, rallies and sports. They had their own relaxations, and the Munich SA became notorious on account of them" (Rowse:214). The similarity of the SA to Freidlander and Brand's dream of Hellenic revival is not coincidental. In Gay American History, Jonathan Katz writes that Roehm was a prominent member of the Society for Human Rights (SHR), an offshoot of the CS (J.Katz:632).

The "relaxations" to which Rowse refers were, of course, the homosexual activities (many of them pederastic) for which the SA and the CS were both famous. Hohne writes that Roehm "used the SA for ends other than the purely political...Peter Granninger, who had been one of Roehm's partners...and was now given cover in the SA Intelligence Section. For a monthly salary of 200 marks he kept Roehm supplied with new friends, his main hunting ground being Geisela High School Munich; from this school he recruited no fewer than eleven boys, whom he first tried out and then took to Roehm" (Hohne:82).


Hitler's "Gay" Roots
In 1945 a Jewish historian by the name of Samuel Igra published Germany's National Vice, which called homosexuality the "poisoned stream" that ran through the heart of Nazism. (In the 1920s and 30s, homosexuality was known as "the German vice" across Europe because of the debaucheries of the Weimar period.) Igra, who escaped Germany in 1939, claims that Hitler "had been a male prostitute in Vienna at the time of his sojourn there, from 1907 to 1912, and that he practiced the same calling in Munich from 1912 to 1914" (Igra:67). Desmond Seward, in Napoleon and Hitler, says Hitler is listed as a homosexual in Viennese police records (Seward:299). Lending credence to this is the fact, noted by Walter Langer, that during several of those years Hitler "chose to live in a Vienna flophouse known to be inhabited by many homosexuals" (Langer:192). Rector writes that, as a young man, Hitler was often called "der Schoen Adolf" (the handsome Adolf) and that later his looks "were also to some extent helpful in gaining big-money support from Ernst Ro[e]hm's circle of wealthy gay friends" (Rector:52).
Langer, a psychiatrist, was commissioned by the Allies in 1943 to prepare a thorough psychological study of Hitler. His report, kept under wraps for 29 years, was published in book form in 1972 as The Mind of Adolf Hitler. Langer writes that Hitler was certainly a coprophile (a person who is sexually aroused by human excrement) and may have practiced homosexuality as an adult. He cites the testimony of Hermann Rauschning, a former Hitler confidante who "reports that he has met two boys who claimed that they were Hitler's homosexual partners, but their testimony can hardly be taken at face value. More condemning," adds Langer, "would be the remarks dropped by [Albert] Foerster, the Danzig gauleiter, in conversation with Rauschning. Even here, however, the remarks deal only with Hitler's impotence as far as heterosexual relationships go, without actually implying that he indulges in homosexuality. It is probably true that Hitler calls Foerster 'Bubi,' which is a common nickname employed by homosexuals in addressing their partners. This alone is not adequate proof that he has actually indulged in homosexual practices with Foerster, who is known to be a homosexual" (Langer:178). However, writes Langer, "Even today, Hitler derives sexual pleasure from looking at men's bodies and associating with homosexuals" (Langer:179). Too, Hitler's greatest hero was Frederick the Great, a well-known homosexual (Garde:44).

Like Langer, Waite also hesitates to label Hitler a homosexual but cites substantial circumstantial evidence that he was.


It is true that Hitler was closely associated with Ernst Ro[e]hm and Rudolf Hess, two homosexuals who were among the very few people with whom he used the familiar du. But one cannot conclude that he therefore shared his friend's sexual tastes. Still, during the months he was with Hess in Landsberg, their relationship must have become very close. When Hitler left the prison he fretted about his friend who languished there, and spoke of him tenderly, using Austrian diminutives: 'Ach mein Rudy, mein Hesserl, isn't it appalling to think that he's still there.' One of Hitler's valets, Schneider, made no explicit statement about the relationship, but he did find it strange that whenever Hitler got a present he liked or drew an architectural sketch that particularly pleased him, he would run to Hess- who was known in homosexual circles as "Fraulein Anna"-as a little boy would run to his mother to show his prize to her...Finally there is the nonconclusive but interesting fact that one of Hitler's prized possessions was a handwritten love letter which King Ludwig II had written to a manservant" (Waite, 1977:283f).
Hitler, if homosexual, was certainly not exclusively so. There are at least four women, including his own niece, with whom Hitler had sexual relationships, although these relationships were not normal. Both Waite and Langer suggest that his sexual encounters with women included expressions of his coprophilic perversion as well as other extremely degrading forms of masochism. It is interesting to note that all four women attempted suicide after becoming sexually involved with Hitler. Two succeeded (Langer:175f).

The Homoerotic Brotherhood
Whether or not Hitler was personally involved in homosexual relationships, the evidence is clear that he knowingly and intentionally surrounded himself with practicing homosexuals from his youth. Like Roehm, Hitler seemed to prefer homosexual companions and co-workers. In addition to Roehm and Hess, two of his closest friends, Hitler filled key positions with known or suspected homosexuals. Rector, himself a "gay Holocaust" revisionist, attempts to dismiss sources that attribute homosexuality to leading Nazis, but nevertheless writes that...

Reportedly, Hitler Youth leader, Baldur von Schirach was bisexual; Hitler's private attorney, Reich Legal Director, Minister of Justice, butcher Governor- General of Poland, and public gay-hater Hans Frank was said to be a homosexual; Hitler's adjutant Wilhelm Bruckner was said to be bisexual;...Walter Funk, Reich Minister of Economics [and Hitler's personal financial advisor] has frequently been called a "notorious" homosexual ...or as a jealous predecessor in Funk's post, Hjalmar Schacht, contemptuously claimed, Funk was a "harmless homosexual and alcoholic;" ...[Hitler's second in command] Hermann Goering liked to dress up in drag and wear campy make-up; and so on and so forth (Rector:57).
Igra, who confidently asserts that the above men were homosexuals, cites still other Hitler aides and close friends who were known homosexuals as well. He states that Hitler's chauffeur and one-time personal secretary, Emile Maurice, for example, was homosexual, as well as the pornographer Julius Streicher, who "was originally a school teacher, but was dismissed by the Nuremberg School Authorities, following numerous charges of pederasty brought against him" (Igra:72f). SS Chief Heinrich Himmler's "pederastic proclivities [were] captured on film" by Nazi filmmaker Walter Frenz (Washington City Paper, April 4, 1995). Reinhard Heydrich, mastermind of the first pogrom, Kristallnacht, and of the death camps, was homosexual (Calic:64). In The Twelve Year Reich, Richard Grunberger tells of a party given by Nazi propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, which degenerated into a homosexual orgy (Grunberger:70). A recent biography of Albert Speer by Gitta Sereny speaks of a "homo-erotic (not sexual) relationship" between Speer and Hitler (Newsweek, Oct. 30, 1995). Langer notes that Hitler's personal bodyguards were "almost always 100 percent homosexuals" (Langer:179). Hitler's later public pronouncements against homosexuality never quite fit with the lifelong intimacy-sexual or otherwise-which he maintained with men he knew and accepted as homosexuals.
In light of the above it is not surprising that many of those whose ideas influenced Hitler were also homo-sexual. Chief among those were occultists Jorg Lanz Von Liebenfels and Guido von List. In 1958, Austrian psychologist Wilhelm Daim published Der Mann der Hitler die Ideen gab ("The Man Who Gave Hitler His Ideas") in which he called Lanz the true "father" of National Socialism. Lanz was a former Cistercian monk who had been excommunicated for homosexuality (Sklar:19). After being expelled from the monastery, Lanz formed an occultic order called the Ordo Novi Templi or The Order of the New Temple (ONT). The ONT was an offshoot of the Ordo Templi Orientis which practiced tantric sex rituals (Howard:91).

On Christmas day, 1907, many years before it would become the symbol of the Third Reich, Lanz and other members of the ONT raised the swastika flag over the castle which Lanz had purchased to house the order (Goodrick-Clarke:109). Lanz chose the swastika, he said, because it was the ancient pagan symbol of Wotan, the god of storms (Cavendish:1983). (Wotan, the inspiration for "Storm Troopers," was the Teutonic equivalent of Baal in the Old Testament and Zeus in Greek culture). Waite notes that it was through Lanz that Hitler would learn that most of his heroes of history were also "practicing homosexuals" (Waite, 1977:94f).


Refuting "Gay Holocaust" Revisionism
"Gay Holocaust" revisionists assert that Hitler's ascension to the Chancellorship marked the beginning of a homosexual Holocaust in Germany. For example, in The Pink Triangle, Richard Plant writes, "After years of frustration...Hitler's storm troopers now had the opportunity to smash their enemies: the lame, the mute, the feebleminded, the epileptic, the homosexual, the Jew, the Gypsy, the communist. These were the scapegoats singled out for persecution. These were the 'contragenics' who were to be ruthlessly eliminated to ensure the purity of the 'Aryan race.'" (Plant:51). Rector, another revisionist, makes a similar statement: "Hitler's homophobia did not surface until 1933-1934, when gays had come to affect adversely his New Order designs-out of which grew the simple solution of murdering them en masse" (Rector:24). The fact is that homosexuals were never murdered "en masse" or "ruthlessly eliminated" by the Nazis. Yet many homosexuals were persecuted and some did die in Nazi work camps. What is the truth about Nazi persecution of homosexuals? There are several incidents in Nazi history which are most often cited as evidence of a "gay Holocaust." This list includes a series of increasingly harsh public pronouncements and policies against homosexuality by Hitler and Himmler, the sacking of the Sex Research Institute of Berlin, "the Roehm Purge" (also known as "the Night of the Long Knives"), and the internment of homosexuals in work camps.
The law against homosexual conduct had existed in Germany for many years prior to the Nazi regime as Paragraph 175 of the Reich Criminal Code, to wit: "A male who indulges in criminally indecent activity with another male, or who allows himself to participate in such activity, will be punished with imprisonment" (Burleigh and Wipperman:188). When Hitler came to power he used this law as a means of tracking down and punishing those homosexuals who, in the words of one victim, "had defended the Weimar Republic, and who had tried to forestall the Nazi threat" (ibid.:183). Later he expanded the law and used it as a convenient tool to detain other enemies of the regime.

In February of 1933, Hitler banned pornography, ho-mosexual bars and bath-houses, and groups which promoted "gay rights" (Plant:50). Ostensibly, this decree was a blanket condemnation of all homosexual activity in Germany, but in practice it served as just another means to find and destroy anti-Nazi groups and individuals. "Hitler," admit Oosterhuis and Kennedy, "employed the charge of homosexuality primarily as a means to eliminate political opponents, both inside his party and out" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy: 248).

The masculine homosexuals in the Nazi leadership selectively enforced this policy only against their enemies and not against all homosexuals. Even Rector lends credence to this perspective, citing the fact that the decree "was not enforced in all cases" (Rector:66). Another indication is that the pro-Nazi Society for Human Rights (SHR) continued to participate in German society for several years after the decree. In The Racial State, Michael Burleigh and Wolfgang Wippermann remind us that Roehm was a leading member of the SHR; and we know from Anthony Read and David Fisher that the SHR was still active in Germany as late as 1940 (Read and Fisher:245). Furthermore, Oosterhuis and Kennedy write that "although he was well known as a gay-activist, [Adolf] Brand was not arrested by the Nazis" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:7). Some of Brand's files were confiscated by the Nazis in their attempt to gather all potentially self-incriminating evidence.

In 1935, Paragraph 175 was amended with Paragraph 175a which criminalized any type of behavior that could be construed as indicating a homosexual inclination or desire (Burleigh and Wipperman: 190). (Interestingly, the new criminal code addressing homosexuality deleted the word "unnatural" from the definition-Reisman, 1994:3.) This new law provided the Nazis with an especially potent legal weapon against their enemies. It will never be known how many non-homosexuals were charged under this law, but it is indisputable that the Nazis used false accusations of homosexuality to justify the detainment and imprisonment of many of their opponents. "The law was so loosely formulated," writes Steakley, "that it could be, and was, applied against heterosexuals that the Nazis wanted to eliminate...the law was also used repeatedly against Catholic clergymen" (Steakley:111). Kogon writes that "The Gestapo readily had recourse to the charge of homosexuality if it was unable to find any pretext for proceeding against Catholic priests or irksome critics" (Kogon:44).

The charge of homosexuality was convenient for the Nazis to use against their political enemies because it was so difficult to defend against and so easy to justify to the populace. Since long before the Nazis, homosexuals had generally lived clandestine lives, so it was not unusual for revelations of their conduct to come as a surprise to their communities when it became a police matter. This is not to say that actual homosexuals were not prosecuted under the law. Many were. But the law was used selectively against the "Femmes." And even when they were threatened, many effeminate homosexuals, especially those in the arts community, were given protection by certain Nazi leaders (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:248). Plant writes:


The most famous example is that of the actor Gustaf Grundgens...Despite the fact that his homosexual affairs were as notorious as those of Roehm's, Goering appointed him director of the State Theater...[And] On October 29, 1937 ...Himmler advised that actors and other artists could be arrested for offenses against paragraph 175 only with his personal consent, unless the police caught them in flagrante (Plant:116).
There is one additional reason why the Nazis arrested homosexuals and raided even the homes of their supporters. They were looking for incriminating evidence against themselves (the Nazi leaders). Blackmail of homosexuals by estranged partners and prostitutes was a simple fact of life in Germany. "[H]omosexuals were particularly vulnerable to blackmailers, known as Chanteure on the homosexual scene," write Burleigh and Wippermann. "Blackmail, and the threat of public exposure, resulted in frequent suicides or suicide attempts" (Burleigh and Wipperman:184). The Nazi leaders were quite familiar with this phenomenon. Igra reports that Heinrich Hoffman, the official Nazi photographer, gained his position by using information about Hitler's perverse abuse of his (Hoffman's) daughter to blackmail the future Fuehrer (Igra:74). Heiden relates another story in which Hitler bought an entire collection of rare political writings to regain possession of a letter to his niece in which he openly revealed his "masochistic- coprophil inclinations" (Heiden:385). Once he was in power he had other ways to solve these kinds of problems.

Targeting "Femmes"
The Nazis' hunt for incriminating evidence, as well as the selectivity of the Nazi violence, was obvious in the attack on Magnus Hirschfeld's Sex Research Institute, May 6th, 1933. As noted previously, the Sex Research Institute of Berlin had been founded by Hirschfeld (in 1919) as a center for "study" of homosexuality and other sexual dysfunctions. For all intents and purposes, it served as the headquarters for the effeminate branch of the German "gay-rights" movement. For this reason alone, the "Butch" homosexuals of the Nazi Party might have destroyed the Institute. Indeed, throughout the preceding years the Nazis had increasingly harassed Hirschfeld personally. Victor Robinson, Hirschfeld's biographer, wrote in 1936:

Although the Nazis themselves derived great profit from Hirschfeld's theories (and called on him personally for help), they continued his persecution relentlessly; they terrorized his meetings and closed his lecture halls, so that for the safety of his audiences and himself, Hirschfeld was no longer able to make public appearances (Haeberle:368).
Homosexualist James Steakley acknowledges the "Butch/Femme" aspect of the incident, saying that some German homosexuals "could conceivably have approved of the measure, particularly if they were Nazi sympathizers or male supremacists" (Steakley:105).
However, the attack against the Institute was not motivated solely by the Nazi enmity against effeminate homosexuals. It was an attempt to cover up the truth about rampant homosexuality and other perversions in the Nazi Party. Sklar writes that, "Hitler attempted to bury all his earlier influences and his origins, and he spent a great deal of energy hiding them...[In this campaign to erase his past] Hitler ordered the murder of Reinhold Hanish, a friend who had shared his down-and-out days in Vienna" (where Hitler is suspected of having been a homosexual prostitute) (Sklar:21). Hitler also knew that Hirschfeld's facility had extensive records that could be damaging to himself and his inner circle. This was the reason for the raid, according to Ludwig L. Lenz, the assistant director of the Sex Research Institute, who was in charge on the day of the raid. A part of the following quote was cited earlier:


...our Institute was used by all classes of the population and members of every political party...We thus had a great many Nazis under treatment at the Institute. Why was it then, since we were completely non-party, that our purely scientific Institute was the first victim which fell to the new regime? The answer to this is simple...We knew too much. It would be against medical principles to provide a list of the Nazi leaders and their perversions [but]...not ten percent of the men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal...Many of these personages were known to us directly through consultations; we heard about others from their comrades in the party...and of others we saw the tragic results....Our knowledge of such intimate secrets regarding members of the Nazi Party and other documentary material-we possessed about forty thousand confessions and biographical letters-was the cause of the complete and utter destruction of the Institute of Sexology (Haberle:369).
Burleigh and Wipperman report that the ransackers had "lists" of materials they were looking for (Burleigh and Wipperman:189) and that they carted away two truckloads of books and files. The materials taken from the Institute were burned in a public ceremony, captured on film, on May 10th. The spectacular and oft replayed newsreel footage of this event has caused the burning of books to become synonymous with Nazism. What information went up in smoke on that day will never be known, but we can infer that the pile of burning paper contained many Nazi secrets. According to homosexual sources at the time, the Nazis destroyed twelve thousand books and thirty-five thousand photographs. The building itself was confiscated from the SHC and turned over to the Nazi Association of Jurists and Lawyers (Steakley:105).

The Roehm Purge
The event in history most frequently cited as evidence of Nazi persecution of homosexuals is known variously as the Blood Purge, the Night of the Long Knives, and the Roehm Purge. Steakley writes that "the indisputable beginning of Nazi terror against homosexuals was marked by the murder of Ernst Ro[e]hm on June 28, 1934, 'The Night of the Long Knives'" (Steakley:108). It was on that night (actually over an entire weekend) that Adolf Hitler's closest aides orchestrated the assassinations of hundreds of his political enemies in one bloody sweep. Among the victims of this purge were Roehm and several of the top officers of the SA.
We have emphasized that the leadership of the SA was mostly, if not entirely, homosexual. The fact that SA leaders were the primary targets in the massacre could therefore be construed as a sort of "moral cleansing" of the Nazi ranks, which, in fact, Hitler claimed it was. But Hitler lied. The Roehm Purge was driven by political, not moral concerns. Hitler feigned disgust and outrage about the homosexuality of the murdered SA leaders to justify himself to the German people; it was a tactic he had used previously to allay public suspicions about the sexual deviancy of his inner circle. The importance of this fact is asserted in many leading works by both mainstream and homosexualist historians. The following are excerpts from four different historians who have examined the issue:


Hitler eliminated his closest friend Roehm and certain SA leaders as potential rivals. The strictly political motivation of this ruthless power play was initially too obvious to be entirely denied, but later it was conveniently obscured by charges of homosexual depravity (Haberle:369f).
The formal accusations against Roehm and those arrested with him centered on their homosexual activities, which Hitler had of course known about for fifteen years and shrugged off, it being alleged that these activities disgraced the party. For those victims without any homosexual background, "the Great Blood Purge" continued all over Germany, as Nazi leaders got rid of all their most hated enemies, as well as the inevitable "mistakes" (Garde:726f).
Ernst Roehm wasn't shot because the Nazi Party felt outraged by the abrupt discovery that he was "having" his storm troopers-that had been known for ages; but because his sway over the SA had become a menace to Hitler. In the Hitler Youth the "dear love of comrades" was evilly turned into a political end. And if the Nazi hierarchy was well larded with homosexuals, so was Wilhelm II's court and so was the Weimar Republic (Davidson:152).
Hitler himself, of course, had been well aware of Roehm's sexual orientation from the earliest days of their long association....So strong was Roehm that the Wehrmacht [German Army High Command] was concerned that he might seize control of the army. In 1934, Hitler became fearful that the Wehrmacht was plotting a coup against him to prevent such a takeover. To forestall this danger, Hitler had Roehm and about one thousand other men murdered one weekend in June 1934, the famous "Night of the Long Knives" (Crompton:79f).
Igra provides us with a long and detailed account of the power struggle which led to the purge, beginning with a refutation of the idea that it represented a policy of extermination of homosexuals by Hitler:

We shall find that, far from eliminating the sex perverts from his party, Hitler retained most of them, and that he moved against those whom he did eliminate only with the greatest reluctance and after he had been relentlessly pushed by outside forces and circumstances. On June 14 and 15 Hitler was in Venice to see Mussolini. It soon became common knowledge that the German Dictator and his entourage had made an unfavorable impression upon the Italians... Mussolini was never a stickler for puritan morality, to say the least, but there was one vice which the Italians particularly loathe; they call it il visio tedesco, the German vice. The conduct of some members in Hitler's entourage at Venice disgusted the Italians. Mussolini protested against the moral character and political unreliability of the leading personnel in the Nazi Storm Troops and warned Hitler that he would have to sacrifice his favorite colleagues if he wished to save his own personal prestige and that of his regime. Among those colleagues, Roehm, Heines and Karl Ernst were mentioned (Igra:77f).
The Roehm Purge, then, was not a "moral cleansing" of the Nazi ranks, but a re-alignment of power behind the German government which was primarily forced upon Hitler by powerful political elements whose support he needed to maintain control. Igra goes on to point out that not only did the majority of the SA homosexuals survive the purge, but that the massacre was largely implemented by homosexuals. He cites Strasser's statement that "the Chief Killers of Munich [were] Wagner, Esser, Maurice, Weber and Buch." These men "were all known to be sex perverts or sexual maniacs of one type or another," concludes Igra (ibid.:80). Plant records that the larger campaign of assassinations across Germany was orchestrated by Reinhard Heydrich, also a well-known homosexual (Plant:56). Igra addresses Hitler's justification for the purge:

In his defense before the Reichstag a week later Hitler talked of "traitors." That was his alibi...In his speech to the Reichstag he admitted that one of the motives for ordering the massacre was to get rid of the moral perverts in his party and that they were traitors because they practiced homosexualism. But under the dictatorship it was not possible for anyone to put Hitler at question. Nobody asked him to explain how it was that, if his purpose was to get rid of homosexuals, he really didn't rid himself of them but used them as the instruments of his own murder lust and still retained most of them as members of his personal entourage, as well as in key positions of the party organization and the government. Otto Strasser, in his book, The German St. Bartholemew's Night (which has not been published in English), mentions sixteen of these highly placed homosexualist officials who survived the massacres of June 30 and retained their posts (Igra:82).
In the Camps
Although homosexuals were never targeted for extermination, some were interned in Nazi work camps. The actual number of pink-triangle prisoners, estimated at 5,000-15,000 by Joan Ringelheim of the US Holocaust museum (Rose:40), was a tiny fraction of the total camp population. Of these, an undetermined percentage were heterosexuals falsely labeled as homosexuals. Homosexuals who died in the camps (mostly of disease and starvation) were "a small fraction of less than 1 percent" of homosexuals in Germany (S. Katz:146), compared to more than 85 percent of European Jewry exterminated in the gas chambers. More significantly, many of the guards and administrators responsible for the infamous concentration camp atrocities were homosexuals themselves, which negates the proposition that homosexuals in general were being persecuted and interned.
While any prisoner could be chosen as a Kapo (a slave overseer), none of the other interned groups except homosexuals had counterparts among the Nazi guards and administrators. Examples of the homosexuality of the concentration camp guards can be found in many of the personal accounts of Holocaust survivors. Elie Wiesel, sent to the Buna factory camp in the Auschwitz complex, for example, acknowledges this in his book Night:


The head of our tent was a German. An assassin's face, fleshy lips, hands like wolf's paws. He was so fat he could hardly move. Like the leader of the camp he loved children...(Actually this was not a disinterested affection: there was a considerable traffic in young children among homosexuals here, I learned later) (Wiesel:59).
In Treblinka, the narrative account of the Treblinka uprising, Steiner records the story of another Nazi administrator, taken from interviews with survivors:

Max Bielas had a harem of little Jewish boys. He liked them young, no older than seventeen. He had a kind of parody of the shepherds of Arcadia, their role was to take care of the camp flock of geese. They were dressed like little princes...Bielas had a little barracks built for them that looked like a doll's house...Bielas sought in Treblinka only the satisfaction of his homosexual instincts (Steiner:117f).
The enduring "Butch/Femme" conflict among German homosexuals clearly had a substantial bearing on the treatment of pink-triangle prisoners. Plant writes of one survivor who reported that "the guards lashed out with special fury against those who showed 'effeminate traits'" (Plant:172). And Rector records an interview with a former Pink Triangle named Wolf (a pseudonym) in which the issue of effeminacy was raised. "The ones who were soft, shall I say, were the ones who suffered terribly," said Wolf. Rudolf Hoess, the infamous commandant of Auschwitz, who may himself have been a "Butch" homosexual, defined "genuine homosexuals... [by their] soft and girlish affectations and fastidiousness, their sickly sweet manner of speech, and their altogether too affectionate deportment toward their fellows" (Hoess in Rector:137f). These "genuine homosexuals" were considered incorrigible and held in special barracks, while many non-effeminate homosexuals were released (ibid.:137). Hoess, incidentally, had at one time been a close friend of Edmund Heines (Snyder:301), the procurer of boys for Roehm's pederastic orgies.
Toward the end of World War II, many homosexuals were released from the concentration camps and drafted into the German army (Shaul:688). Steven Katz cites records that "indicate that 13 percent of all homosexual camp inmates were reprieved and released" (S. Katz:146). This was happening at the same time as the Nazis' frantic push to increase their "production" in the death camps, in an effort to exterminate every last Jew in Europe before the Allies could liberate the camps.


The American Connection
While the Nazi Party was crushed as a political force in 1945, remnants of Nazism survive around the world. As in Germany, many of these fascist groups are dominated by male homosexuals.
The most famous incident in the history of the American Nazi Party resulted from its 1977 demand to stage a march through the largely Jewish neighborhood of Skokie, Illinois, a Chicago suburb and the home of many Holocaust survivors. This plan was devised by Frank Collin, who often appeared with his followers "in full Nazi regalia: brown shirts, black boots, and armbands..." Civil authorities effectively blocked the march at first, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) rose to Collin's aid and forced the City of Chicago to allow it. The subsequent event drew international media attention. Homosexualists Johansson and Percy in Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence have finally revealed, more than 15 years later, that Collin was a homosexual pederast. In 1979 Collin was arrested "for taking indecent liberties with boys between ages 10 and 14" and was sentenced to seven years in prison (Johansson and Percy, 1994:130).

Meanwhile, back in Germany, the alarming increase of neo-Nazi skinheads is also linked to homosexuality. Elmay Kraushaar, a journalist for Der Spiegel, Germany's equivalent to TIME, is quoted in The Advocate:


There is a gay skinhead movement in Berlin. They go to cruising areas with leaflets that say, "We don't want foreigners." A major leader of the neo-Nazis in Germany, Michael Kuhnen was an openly gay man who died of AIDS two years ago. He wrote a paper on the links between homosexuality and fascism, saying fascism is based on the love of comrades, that having sex with your comrades strengthens this bond (Anderson:54).
Learning from History
Sadly, the homosexual dimension of Nazi history is overlooked by many historians. As Duberman, Vicinus and Chauncey have stated with the title to their "gay studies" text, the role of homosexuals and pederasts has been Hidden from History. They, of course, imagine the influence of homosexuality to be positive. From the Judeo-Christian cultural context, however, the rise of homosexuality necessarily represents the diminution of Biblical morality as a restraint on human passions. Consequently, where Judeo-Christian ideals decrease, violence and depravity increase.
It was the pederasts of the Community of the Special who sponsored the revival of Hellenic pagan ideals in German society. These men were viciously anti-Jew and anti-Christian because of the injunctions against homosexuality inherent in the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. Homosexualist Warren Johansson notes that Hans Blueher, one of the leading theoreticians of the Community of the Special, "maintained that Judaism had suppressed the homosexual aspect of its culture, with concomitant hypertrophy [enlargement] of the family" (Johansson:816). Benedict Friedlander, in an essay for Der Eigene titled "Seven Propositions," chose as his first proposition an attack on Christianity. "The white race is becoming ever sicker under the curse of Christianity, which is foreign to it and mostly harmful," writes Friedlander. "That is the genuinely bad 'Jewish influence,' an opinion that has proven true, especially through the conditions in North America" (Friedlander in Oosterhuis and Kennedy:219). For his part, Adolf Brand called Christianity "barbarism" and "expressed his desire to fight 'beyond good and evil,' not for the sake of the masses, since the happiness of 'the weak' would result in a 'slave mentality,' but for the human being who proclaimed himself a god and was not to be subdued by human laws and ethics" (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:183). We should not forget Nietzsche, who called Christianity "the lie of millennia" (Macintyre: 188).

Much has been made of the reported silence, and in some cases complicity, of the supposed Christian churches during the Third Reich. But few have noted the long period of "Biblical deconstruction" that preceded the rise of Nazism, and fewer still have chronicled the diabolical perversion of German religious culture by the Nazis themselves. While the neo-pagans were busy attacking from without, liberal theologians undermined Biblical authority from within the Christian church. The school of so-called "higher criticism," which began in Germany in the late 1800s, portrayed the miracles of God as myths; by implication making true believers (Jew and Christian alike) into fools. And since the Bible was no longer accepted as God's divine and inerrant guide, it could be ignored or reinterpreted. By the time the Nazis came to power, "Bible-believing" Christians, (the Confessing Church) were a small minority. As Grunberger asserts, Nazism itself was a "pseudo-religion" (ibid.:79) that competed, in a sense, with Christianity and Judaism.

The schools were heavily targeted in order to de-Christianize the young. Mandatory prayer in schools was stopped in 1935, and from 1941 onward, religious instruction was completely eliminated for all students over 14 years old (ibid.:494f). The Nazi Teachers Association actively discouraged its members from taking religious instruction, while at the same time many teachers of religious studies (who were all required to be licensed by the state) "inculcated neo-paganism into their pupils during periods of religious instruction." Later, teachers were outright prohibited from attending voluntary religion classes organized by the Catholic church (ibid.:495).

From the early years, leading Nazis openly attacked Christianity. Joseph Goebbels declared that "Christianity has infused our erotic attitudes with dishonesty" (Taylor:20). It is in this campaign against Judeo- Christian morality that we find the reason for the German people's acceptance of Nazism's most extreme atrocities. Their religious foundations had been systematically eroded over a period of decades by powerful social forces. By the time the Nazis came to power, German culture was spiritually bankrupt. Too often, historians have largely ignored the spiritual element of Nazi history; but if we look closely at Hitler's campaign of extermination of the Jews, it becomes clear that his ostensive racial motive obscures a deeper and more primal hatred of the Jews as the "People of God."

The probable reason for Hitler's attack on Christianity was his perception that it alone had the moral authority to stop the Nazi movement. But Christians stumbled before the flood of evil. As Poliakov notes, "[W]hen moral barriers collapsed under the impact of Nazi preaching...the same anti-Semitic movement that led to the slaughter of the Jews gave scope and license to an obscene revolt against God and the moral law. An open and implacable war was declared on the Christian tradition...[which unleashed] a frenzied and unavowed hatred of Christ and the Ten Commandments" (Poliakov:300).

There is no question that homosexuality figures prominently in the history of the Holocaust. As we have noted, the ideas for disposing of the Jews originated with Lanz von Leibenfels. The first years of terrorism against the Jews were carried out by the homosexuals of the SA. The first concentration camp, as well as the system for training its brutal guards, was the work of Ernst Roehm. The first pogrom, Kristallnacht, was orchestrated in 1938 by the homosexual Reinhard Heydrich. And it was the transvestite Goering who started the "evolution of the Final Solution...[with an] order to Heydrich (Jan. 24, 1939) concerning the solution of the Jewish question by 'emigration' and 'evacuation'" (Robinson:25). Still, despite their disproportionate role, homosexuals did not cause the Holocaust. They, along with so many others who had lost their moral bearings, were merely instruments in its enactment. The Holocaust must be blamed on the one whom the Bible compares to "a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour" (NKJ:I Peter 5:8).

Yet, while we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism. To the myth of the "pink triangle"-the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted-we must respond with the reality of the "pink swastika."

[This article, excerpts from The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams (Founders Publishing Company, 1995), first appeared in Culture Wars (April 1996), edited by Dr. E. Michael Jones. The excerpt was prepared for Culture Wars by Scott Lively. Culture Wars, 206 Marquette Avenue, South Bend, IN 46617, phone (219) 289-9786.]


Bibliography
Agonito, Rosemary. History of Ideas on Women: A Source Book. New York, G.P. Putnam & Sons, 1977.
Alyson Almanac. Boston, Alyson Publications Inc., 1990.

Anderson, Shelly. "Youth." The Advocate. January 26, 1993.

Bleuel, Hans Peter. Sex and Society in Nazi Germany. New York, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1973.

Burleigh, Michael, and Wipperman, Wolfgang. The Racial State:Germany 1933-1945. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Calic, Edouard. Reinhard Heydrich: The Chilling Story of the Man Who Masterminded the Nazi Death Camps. Military Heritage Press, William Morrow and Company, 1982.

Cavendish, Richard. Man, Myth & Magic: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Supernatural. New York, Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 1970.

Costello, John. Mask of Treachery: Spies, Lies, Buggery and Betrayal. New York, William Morrow and Company, 1988.

Crompton, Louis. "Gay Genocide: from Leviticus to Hitler." The Gay Academic. Palm Springs, California, ETC Publications, 1978.

Davidson, Michael. The World, the Flesh, and Myself. London, Arthur Baker Ltd., 1962.

Dynes, Wayne. The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. New York, Garland Publishing, 1990.

Fest, Joachim C. Hitler. New York, Vintage Books, 1975.

Friedlander, Benedict. "Memoirs for the Friends and Contributors of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee in the Name of the Succession of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee." Journal of Homosexuality, January-February 1991.

Fuchs, Thomas. The Hitler Fact Book. New York, Fountain Books, 1990.

Gallo, Max. The Night of the Long Knives. New York, Warner Books, 1973.

Garde, Noel I. Jonathan to Gide: The Homosexual in History. New York, Vantage Press, 1969.

Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and their Influence on Nazi Ideology. New York, New York University Press, 1992.

Graber, G.S. The History of the SS: A Chilling Look at the Most Terrifying Arm of the Nazi War Machine. New York, Charter Books, 1978.

Greenburg, David F. The Construction of Homosexuality. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1988.

Grunberger, Richard. The 12-Year Reich: A Social History of Nazi Germany 1933-1945. New York, Ballantine Books, 1971.

Haeberle, Irwin J. "Swastika, Pink Triangle, and Yellow Star: The Destruction of Sexology and the Persecution of Homosexuals in Nazi Germany." Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay andLesbian Past. Duberman, Martin, Vicinus, Martha, and Chauncey, George Jr. (Eds.). United States, Meridian, 1989.

Hartshorne, E.Y. German Youth and the Nazi Dream of Victory. New York, Farrar and Reinhart, Inc, 1941.

Heiden, Konrad. Der Fuehrer: Hitler's Rise to Power. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1944.

Heritage and S.W. Jewish Press, September 16, 1983

Hohne, Heinz. The Order of the Death's Head: The Story of Hitler's SS. New York, Ballantine Books, 1971.

Howard, Michael. The Occult Conspiracy. Rochester, Vermont, Destiny Books, 1989.

Igra, Samuel. Germany's National Vice. London, Quality Press Ltd., 1945.

Johansson, Warren, "Pink Triangles." In Dynes, Wayne (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. New York: Garland Publishing, 1990.

Johansson, Warren, and Percy, William A.. "Homosexuals in Nazi Germany." In Henry Friedlander (Ed.). Simon Wiesenthal Center Annual: Volume 7. New York, Allied Books, Ltd., 1990.

Johansson, Warren, and Percy, William A. Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence. New York, Harrington Park Press, 1994.

Jones, J. Sydney. Hitler in Vienna 1907-1913. New York, Stein and Day, 1983.

Jones, Nigel H. Hitler's Heralds: The Story of the Freikorps 1918- 1923. London, John Murray, 1987.

Katz, Jonathan. Gay American History. New York, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1976.

Katz, Steven T. "Quantity and Interpretation-Issues in the Comparative Historical Analysis of the Holocaust." In Holocaust and Genocide Studies: Volume 4, Number 2, 1989. New York, Pergamon Press, 1989.

Kennedy, Hubert. "Man/Boy Love in the Writings of Karl Heinrich Ulrichs." In Pascal, Mark (Ed.). Varieties of Man/Boy Love. New York, Wallace Hamilton Press, 1992.

Knickerbocker, H.R. Is Tomorrow Hitler's? New York, Reynal and Hitchcock, 1941.

Koehl, Robert Lewis. The Black Corps: The Structure and Power Struggles of the Nazi SS. Madison Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Press, 1983.

Kogon, Eugen. The Theory and Practice of Hell. New York, Berkley Publishing Company, 1950.

Langer, Walter C. The Mind of Adolf Hitler. New York, Signet Books, 1972.

Lauritsen, John, and Thorstad, David. The Early Homosexual Rights Movement:1864-1935. New York, Times Change Press, 1974.

Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz. New York, Macmillan Publishing Coompany, 1961.

Linsert, Richard. Kabale und Liebe: Uber Politik und Geschlechtsleben. Berlin, Man, 1931.

Lombardi, Michael A.. "Research on Homosexuality in Nineteenth Century Germany" (Parts I and II). Los Angeles, Urania Manuscripts, 1977.

MacDonald, Callum. The Killing of SS Obergruppenfuhrer Reinhard Heydrich. New York, The Free Press, 1989.

Macintyre, Ben. Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche. New York, Farrar Straus Giroux, 1992.

Miles, David H. "Stefan, George." Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc., 1992.

Miller, Neil. Out of the Past: Gay and Lesbian History from 1869 to the Present. New York, Vintage Books, 1995.

Mills, Richard. "The German Youth Movement." In Leyland, Winston (Ed.). Gay Roots: Twenty Yearsof Gay Sunshine: An Anthology of Gay History, Sex, Politics, and Culture. San Francisco, Gay Sunshine Press, 1989.

Mosse, George L. Nationalism and Sexuality: Respectability and Abnormal Sexuality in Modern Europe. New York, Howard Fertig, 1985.

Nethercot, Arthur H. The First Five Lives of Annie Besant. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1960.

Newton, Michael. Raising Hell: An Encyclopedia of Devil Worship and Satanic Crime. New York, Avon, 1993.

Newton, Michael, and Newton, Judy Ann. The Ku Klux Klan: An Encyclopedia. New York, Garland Publishing, 1991.

Oosterhuis, Harry, and Kennedy, Hubert (Eds.). Homosexuality and Male Bonding in Pre-Nazi Germany: the youth movement, the gay movement and male bonding before Hitler's rise: original transcripts from Der Eigene, the first gay journal in the world. New York, Harrington Park Press, 1991.

Pawelczynska, Anna. Values and Violence in Auschwitz. Berkley, California, University of California Press, 1979.

Peters, H.F. Zarathustra's Sister: The Case of Elisabeth and Frederich Nietzsche. Crown Publishers, New York, 1977.

Plant, Richard. The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals. New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1986.

Poliakov, Leon. Harvest of Hate: The Nazi Program for the Destruction of the Jews of Europe. New York, Walden Press, 1979.

Read, Anthony, and Fisher, David. Kristallnacht: The Nazi Night of Terror. New York, Times Books,1989.

Rector, Frank. The Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals. New York, Stein and Day, 1981.

Reisman, Dr. Judith A. "A Content Analysis of Two Decades of The Advocate, the Gay and Lesbian National News Magazine." Work in Progress.

Reisman, Dr. Judith A., and Eichel, Edward W. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana, Huntington House, 1990.

Reiter, Joseph A. "Death in Venice." Grolier Electronic Publishing, Inc., 1992.

Robinson, Jacob. "The History of the Holocaust." Holocaust. Jerusalem, Keter Publishing House, 1974.

Rose, Rick. "Museum of Pain." The Advocate, October 19, 1993.

Rossman, Parker. Sexual Experience Between Men and Boys. New York, Association Press, 1976.

Rowse, A.L. Homosexuals in History: Ambivalence in Society, Literature and the Arts. New York,Macmillan Publishing Company, 1977.

Schwarzwaller, Wulf. The Unknown Hitler: His Private Life and Fortune. National Press, Inc., and Star Agency, 1989.

Seward, Desmond. Napolean and Hitler: A Comparative Biography. New York, Simon & Schuster.

Shaul, Elisheva. "Homosexuality in the Third Reich." In Gutman, Israel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. Tel Aviv, Sifria Poalim Publishing House, 198?.

Shirer, William. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. New York, Fawcett Crest, 1960.

Sklar, D. The Nazis and the Occult. New York, Dorset Press, 1989.

Skousen, W. Cleon. The Naked Communist. Salt Lake City, Utah, Ensign Publishing Co., 1958.

Snyder, Dr. Louis L. Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. New York, Paragon House, 1989.

Steakley, James D. The Homosexual Emancipation Movement in Germany. New York, Arno Press, 1975.

Steiner, Jean-Francois. Treblinka. New York, Simon and Schuster, 1979.

Strasser, Otto. Hitler and I. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1940.

Strasser, Otto, and Stern, Michael. Flight From Terror. New York, Robert M. McBride & Company, 1943.

Taylor, Fred. The Goebbels Diaries: 1939-1941. New York, G.P. Putmans' Sons, 1983.

Ulrichs, Karl Heinrich. Forschugen uner das Ratsel der Mannmanlichen Liebe. Leipzig, Max Spohr Verlag, 1989.

Waite, Robert G.L. Vanguard of Nazism: The Free Corps Movement in Postwar Germany 1918-1923. New York, W.W. Norton and Company, 1969.

Waite, Robert G.L. The Psychopathic God Adolf Hitler. New York, Signet Books, 1977.

Wiesel, Elie. Night. New York, Avon Books, 1969.

Wistrich, Robert. Who's Who in Nazi Germany. New York: Bonanza Books, 1984.


[ Table of Contents | ]

Email this to a friend

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
copyright © 1995-2007 Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 13 July 2002

[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html]