Pope Pius XII and Bishop Williamson vs. Elie Wiesel and the Holocaust Fundamentalists: Whom Do You Believe?

I am writing to make a few comments about the sad and depressing article appearing in your edition of February 5, 2009 entitled Bishop’s Remarks on Holocaust Repudiated. Your report offers useful documentation on the current state of the Abusive Relationship that exists between the bishops of the Catholic Church and the Holocaust Fundamentalists who run the world’s principal Jewish organizations.

It also documents how, due to this Abusive Relationship, the legacy of the Beloved Pontiff, Pius XII, is being betrayed by church leaders.

The Abusive Relationship

The origins of this Abusive Relationship date back to the years just after Vatican II when well-intentioned bishops dispatched experts to dialogue in their name. But as this dialogue with the Jewish organizations continued, through intermediaries like Eugene Fisher and now his successor, these individuals steadily brought shame upon both the church and themselves. Catholics in the pew, like myself, now observe from afar the sorry spectacle of the princes of the church, from the Bishop of Rome on down, groveling at the feet of the Holocaust Fundamentalists who lead the principal Jewish organizations. Meanwhile, in the background, those who control the Zionist media turn the desired level of pressure up or down, as needed.

Yes, the dialogue that began some forty years ago, has now degenerated into a monologue in which the Jewish abuser heaps insult, scorn, and ridicule on the willing Catholic victims. We have here a classic example of an abuse scenario: the perpetrator, with his quick temper, is bossy and possessive. He pressures the victim to do things that bring dishonor upon him and to say things that are simply not true. Of course, the worst feature of this paradigm is that the abused party, once having grown accustomed to this treatment, no longer even thinks about ending the degrading situation in which he is trapped. That is where we are today and your article offered a clear portrayal of it.

Why Is Pope Pius XII, the Beloved Pontiff

If I refer to Pope Pius XII as the Beloved Pontiff, it is not for reasons of exaggerated piety, but simply because he was the most beloved man on the planet from the outbreak of war on the western front in 1940 until 1947. His concern for all the victims of Nazism, both Jews and non-Jews, was universally recognized, even by the NYT – repeatedly. The situation changed, starting in 1947, when the leaders of the Jewish organizations began to conclude that, beneath his begrudging acceptance of the creation of a Zionist state in Palestine, there lay actual opposition to the creation of such a state. Of course, they were right. Pius XII was opposed to the creation of a Jewish, race-based state in Palestine for the simple reason that he had seen what racial superiority doctrines had done to Europe during the war years. Just because it was now Jewish racists and extremists who were preaching the benefits of a racially pure state did not make what they wanted just or legal. Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of countless Jewish intellectuals and notables, including Albert Einstein, Israel was brought into being. The creation of racist Israel in someone else’s country was a catastrophic mistake. In retrospect, Pius XII’s concerns about Israel have proved to be abundantly justified, for the Beloved Pontiff was able to foresee, even then, that it would degenerate into a morally debased apartheid state.

Is it any wonder then that the Holocaust Fundamentalists hate him so much?

Bishop Williamson Supports the Canonization of Pius XII

In your article, Archbishop Gregory seems to accuse Bishop Williamson of anti-Semitism when he states that there is no place in the church for anti-Semitism or racism. None. Absolutely none. I could not agree more heartily with you, Archbishop Gregory. The problem, however, is that there is no anti-Semitism in Bishop Williamson’s remarks, for he was simply telling the truth about a historical matter one on which the Zionist media monopolists will allow no discussion. In the context of the ongoing Abusive Relationship described above, my guess is that his remarks were a breath of fresh air for tens of millions of Catholics worldwide. Andrew Nelson, your reporter, goes to the heart of the abuse problem when he writes that Bishop Williamson has claimed that reports about the Holocaust were exaggerated and that no Jews died in Nazi gas chambers. Rabbi Gary Greenebaum is then quoted as saying that Williamson’s disgraceful remarks are proof of what he calls Holocaust denial. Abuser Greenebaum then puts the cherry on the cake when he states: Doubtless this will contribute to the deterioration of the excellent relations between Jews and the Catholic Church. Here is a textbook case of an abuser at work: in a threatening, bossy, and possessive manner, he is pushing you, Archbishop Gregory, to criticize a fellow bishop for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with Catholic belief and practice. Of course, the excellent relations to which he refers are excellent for the Jewish side because they have total control, while the Catholic side is afraid to even make a demand!

But one almost demand does come to mind. In 2007, Cardinal George of Chicago stated that the Catholic side was, some day, going to get up the courage to ask the Jewish side to retract its foul and literally hateful – depiction of Christ in the Talmud. He is condemned therein as a non-Jew who was actually the illegitimate son of a prostitute and a Roman soldier, and is depicted as boiling in hell in a vat of excrement. The Holocaust Fundamentalists you refer to as your friends must have had a good laugh over Cardinal George’s almost demand, for they know that it is a question that the thoroughly abused Catholic side will never formally ask. And even if the Catholic side did so, the issue would never appear on the front page of the NYT or the WP, or make headlines at CNN! Only Jewish demands get that kind of coverage. In a word, the Jewish side knows that there is no dialogue here, only domination.

Another demand that needs to be made of the Jewish side is for the Yad Vashem Museum authorities in Israel to remove the picture of Pius XII that is accompanied by the statement that in December 1942 he abstained from signing the Allied declaration condemning the extermination of the Jews, and maintained his neutral position throughout the war. The reason why the Beloved Pontiff refused to sign this document was because it was nothing more than an exercise in Allied propaganda. To put it bluntly, he did not believe then or at any time later in his life that a program of extermination of the Jews ever existed. There will be more on this key subject below.

Like Williamson, Pope Pius XII Did Not Believe in the Gas Chambers

Ironically, Bishop Williamson’s position is exactly the one held by the Beloved Pontiff, Pius XII, for he, like Williamson, never believed in either the gas chambers or the Holocaust, (called genocide in the days before Elie Wiesel and the NYT rebranded it after the 1967 Israeli war of aggression). It is also obvious that Williamson’s remarks were designed to advance the cause for canonization of Pius XII. Archbishop Gregory, you must understand that this is a fundamental aspect of the issue at hand. Williamson’s commitment to the cause of the Beloved Pontiff remains of course unstated in the Zionist media. That is to be expected from enemies of the church. They want to confuse people. But why is this fact not factored into the equation in your own newspaper? Why must the Georgia Bulletin repeat, like trained puppies, the slanted version of this story that they find in the Zionist press? Even worse, Bishop Williamson’s assertions are demonstrably true. However, since words like Williamson’s are forbidden by the powerful Holocaust Fundamentalists, their various media outlets went into action to create a controversy. Their goal was to use their power in the Abusive Relationship to force the bishops, yourself included, to do their dirty work for them. I am sad to say that they achieved their mission in just a matter of days!

Holocaust Fundamentalism is a Form of Political Extremism

Holocaust Fundamentalism, which is an offshoot of the main Judaic trunk, is a form of political extremism. Its claim that the sacrifice of the six million, mostly in gas chambers, and primarily at Auschwitz, is the world’s principal form of Zionist propaganda. This claim is dangerous, especially for Catholics. Why? Because it is the enabling narrative for the ongoing Zionist propaganda campaign that seeks to discredit the Papacy in particular and the Catholic Church in general. It also has a number of other uses, of which the most important is to provide a smoke screen for the abominable crimes that have been committed in the name of Zionism for more than half a century, and about which the controlled media never speak in direct terms. But all Catholics, whether they realize it or not, are targeted by the purveyors of the Holocaust, and it is not an accident that Pius XII has now been granted top billing in the Jewish holocaust narrative, alongside Hitler himself. The recently published book, entitled Pius XII, The Hound of Hitler, offers tangible proof that the Holocaust Fundamentalists campaign against Pius XII is still very much in high gear.

Holocaust Fundamentalism Now Taught in Archdiocesan Schools

With the Holocaust now firmly established as our state religion, with AIPAC solidly in control of the U. S. Congress, and with Elie Wiesel serving as the widely acknowledged Holocaust High Priest, many public school children undergo indoctrination in the Holocaust. Unfortunately, as you know, the U. S. bishops have not only mandated similar indoctrination classes in Catholic schools, but have also outsourced these brainwashing programs about the Holocaust to the ADL! Thus, our children, even in Catholic schools, are indoctrinated in Holocaust Fundamentalism. This means that the basis of our Catholic belief in

1. the sacrifice of Christ,
2. on the cross,
3. atop Mt. Calvary,
4. for the spiritual redemption of all mankind,

must now compete right inside Catholic classrooms with

1. the existential and absurdist sacrifice of the "six million"
2. in gas chambers,
3. mostly at Auschwitz,
4. for the rebirth of the Jewish people in Occupied Palestine.

I cringe when I try to imagine the fate that awaits the Catholic youngster who dares to tell his Catholic schoolteacher that he does not believe the holocaust propaganda that is being spoon fed to him. Nowadays, instead of Catholic teachers and students making pilgrimages to Catholic holy sites in Europe, they are shipped off to ADL-sponsored brainwashing programs in Germany and Poland. They are then supposed to return and tell their lugubrious stories of horrible suffering endured decades ago by Jewish victims while Pius XII, who supposedly knew all about these alleged events, looked the other way.

When I think of the harm that the Catholic bishops of the U. S. are doing to these children, I cannot help but think of the words of Christ: It would be better for that person to be thrown into the sea with a large mill stone hung around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to lose his faith.

Yes, according to Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust is the new religious paradigm of the 21st century. It has replaced Catholicism which, as Wiesel stated as early as 1981, died at Auschwitz. Why is this so? Because Pius XII allegedly helped Hitler to carry out the Holocaust. Thus, Catholicism is collectively guilty for the Holocaust, and must now proclaim its guilt publicly and ad nauseam, until the Holocaust Fundamentalists are satisfied. Unfortunately, however, no amount of self-abasement will ever be enough for these people.

The Jewish Ordeal of World War II vs. the Holocaust

The Holocaust Fundamentalists, who represent in fact only a fraction of the U. S. Jewish Community, and whose principal spokesman is Elie Wiesel, speak and write as if the Holocaust were one, sole, unitary, established historical fact that cannot be doubted (or even discussed) in any way. In this respect, Islamic Fundamentalism and Holocaust Fundamentalism are alike: in each case, there can be no discussion of the mystical basis of their fanatical faith. Just as Islamic Fundamentalists do not represent all Muslims, Holocaust Fundamentalists do not represent or speak for all Jews. The Holocaust Fundamentalists speak this way precisely because the Holocaust edifice is in fact so shaky, for it consists of an intricate network of true lies, exaggerations and half-truths held together by self-interest and emotion. It is important to understand that both the master narrative of the Jewish holocaust story, referred to above, and the individual narratives that are part of it, are infected in the same way. Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust High Priest, serves as the ultimate poster boy for all these true lies. The Holocaustian edifice, which has been slowly crumbling for many years now, and to which the social elites pay lip service out of fear, is now more vulnerable to collapse than ever before. That is why someone like Bishop Williamson, who dares to discuss the subject outside of the limits imposed by the Zionist media, has been subjected to such unusually harsh media demonization.

It is important to distinguish between what I call the Jewish Ordeal of World War II (JOW) and the Holocaust. I do so because this was an important distinction that Pius XII himself made. Pope Pius XII clearly believed in the JOW, but not in what the Zionist media call today the Holocaust. He was aware that Jews were having their civil rights violated, undergoing deportation, and being forced to live in unsanitary conditions and work for slave wages. However, he never believed, either during the war or for the last thirteen years of his life, which ended in 1958, that they were being subjected to mass murder on an industrial scale.

Pope Pius XII defined the JOW quite well in his famous Christmas message of 1942. At that time, he spoke of "the hundreds of thousands who, through no fault of their own, and solely because of their nation or race, have been condemned to death or progressive extinction." While he did not mention the Jews specifically by name, the NYT proclaimed the next day that he had spoken of the Jews. They apparently had no problem understanding his message! At the same time, and perhaps even more importantly, the Nazis had a completely different take on his message. They proclaimed: "The Pope has repudiated the National Socialist New European Order. His speech is one long attack on everything we stand for. God, he says, regards all peoples and races as worthy of the same consideration. Here he is clearly speaking on behalf of the Jews and makes himself the mouthpiece of the Jewish war criminals. Thus, to Pius XII, there was a real persecution of Jews taking place, and it resulted in death for many thousands of Jewish people. That was the Jewish Ordeal of World War II. It happened, and Pius XII believed it happened. I believe it happened. But there is a long leap from the JOW to the Holocaust, with its insistence upon mass murder carried out by industrial methods according to a state plan based on an order from Hitler. The Beloved Pontiff, rightly, never believed in any such thing, and rejected all such claims as manifestations of Allied propaganda.

One easy way to prove that the Pontiff was correct about the exaggerations contained in the Holocaust, is to simply take a close look at the eye-witness claims of Holocaust High Priest Elie Wiesel. In Night, his supposed autobiography, but which is in reality a novel, he does not mention having seen gas chambers at Auschwitz! How could this be? If 20,000 to 40,000 people per day were being killed in these alleged industrial death machines, as the Zionist propaganda line stipulated in the mid-1950s, and if Wiesel was standing right there, how could he not have noticed? Is he a denier? Instead, Wiesel makes the absurd claim that he saw truckloads of Jewish babies burned alive in huge open trenches at Auschwitz in the spring and summer of 1944. There were also other huge trenches, he claimed, but they were reserved for adults. He has also stated that the smoke and fire from these pits could be seen for miles around.

When he wrote this nonsense in Night, he did not realize that the Allies, from the spring to the fall of 1944, had taken hundreds of aerial photos of the Auschwitz camp complex. These photos of Auschwitz were then suppressed by the U. S. prosecution team at Nuremberg. Why? Suppression of evidence is a crime. In a court of law, it constitutes a cover-up. But these photos were suppressed because they showed that there were no signs on the ground of what would have had to be a massive industrial undertaking: the death and disposal of 20,000 or more bodies per day in a very small space. Adjacent to the small building where the gas chambers were supposed to have been located, and where Wiesels imagined flaming trenches were allegedly located, there was revealed to be a soccer field (Fussballplatz or Sportplatz) where inmates played games on Sundays. And adjacent to that was a hospital complex. In other words, there is no trace whatsoever that Auschwitz was a death camp. I have walked the ground at Auschwitz and done research or attempted to at least in the archives there. Believe me, it is a very small space, and what is said to have transpired there could not have happened – if only for a lack of space.

If the Allies had released these photographs during the Nuremberg trial, they would have completely demolished their own case against the Germans. So they suppressed these pictures and probably expected that they would stay hidden forever. I might also add that with respect to Elie Wiesels wild imaginings, these pictures do not support his true lies with regard to the trenches belching fire or smoke that he supposedly saw.

The aerial photography of Auschwitz remained hidden from view until 1979, at which time two CIA analysts were given permission to declassify and publish some of them. Overnight, the skepticism of Pius XII about the Holocaust, (but never about the JOW) was vindicated, while the claims made by the Holocaust Fundamentalists, who have made the Holocaust into our national religion, were demolished. The rotting corpse of exaggerated claims about the Holocaust has been lying there is plain view for three decades, with its stench serving as a constant reminder that free inquiry with regard to the Holocaust is not permitted in either academe or the media. Such inquiry is tolerated for the time being, however, on the uncensored internet, but the ADL is working tirelessly to curtail that freedom. Our media overlords, strongly committed to Holocaust Fundamentalism, and who control what can be said about the Holocaust, will not allow these pictures, or any other aspect of the Holocaust, to be freely discussed.

Hollywood’s Fear of Portraying the Imaginary Gas Chambers

Since the Holocaust had died in 1979, Steven Spielberg, in his 1993 holocaust propaganda movie, Schindler’s List, did not dare show the gas chambers as death machines that actually functioned. Knowing full well that they are purely symbolic (shambolic) in nature, and that they play a role akin to that of fire-belching dragons in certain medieval narratives, he took the safe way out and portrayed their alleged existence, correctly I might add, as a rumor. Thus, the scene in the gas chamber was portrayed, correctly, as simply a visit to a shower room.

Conversely, Hollywood’s Jewish moguls have never dared to make a movie version of Wiesel’s supposed autobiography, Night. But why? The problem is that the wild imaginings of the number one eye-witness to the Holocaust are so outrageous that a film version of the book would only compromise what little credibility remains in the badly tattered official version of the Holocaust. Spielberg’s blooper on the gas chambers was bad enough!

In a word, the skepticism of Pius XII about the Holocaust has been vindicated by the CIA’s own aerial photography, and the burden of proof for the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz is now on the Holocaust Fundamentalists who defame him.

The Beloved Pontiff’s Skepticism about Cooked U. S. Intelligence

Eugenio Pacelli’s skepticism about the Holocaust was based on his awareness of the existence and functioning of the Allied propaganda machine. For instance, Harold Tittman, Roosevelt’s envoy to the Vatican, met with the Pontiff on December 30, 1942, just five days after the latter’s annual Christmas message, mentioned above. He then filed a four page strictly confidential memo about his experience. According to the NYT, in documents that are easily found on Google, we read: "The Pope stated that he feared there was foundation for the atrocity reports, Mr. Tittmann said, but he led me to believe that he felt there had been some exaggeration for purposes of propaganda." Yes, Pius XII was a diplomat, but he was still able to convey to Tittman that there was a difference between the easily documented Jewish Ordeal of World War II and the ridiculous exaggerations contained in the Holocaust. Tittman then went on to comment on his discussion of the Pope’s Christmas message, which had supposedly disappointed some Jews because it had not specifically designated the Jews as victims. He wrote ''He said that he thought that it was plain to everyone he was referring to the Poles, Jews and hostages when he declared that hundreds of thousands of persons had been killed or tortured through no fault of their own, sometimes only because of their race and nationality. He explained that when talking of atrocities he could not name the Nazis without mentioning at the same time the Bolsheviks, and this, he thought, might not be wholly pleasing to the Allies.”

In other words, Pius XII, was not only truly neutral, he was also no fool. He was aware, as he spoke to Tittman, that if the Jewish editors of the NYT, only a few days earlier, had understood his message, others in the U. S. Jewish community had also understood. He thus refused to be manipulated by Tittman. What courage!

The distinguished Jesuit historian Pierre Blet, S. J., who is also involved in the cause of beatification of the Beloved Pontiff, also makes it clear throughout his recent biography of Pacelli, that the Pontiff never believed that he ever received compelling evidence of mass murder of the Jews by the Nazis. Blet notes in the beginning of his book that the multi-volume work published by the Vatican in reaction to the Holocaust Fundamentalist campaign of defamation that had been launched with The Deputy, entitled Actes et Documents du Saint-Siege relatifs la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, (1965-1981) was ignored by the Jews and their allies, the very people to whom it had been addressed. With regard to Auschwitz, the multi-volume Actes et Documents showed that the Pope had received reports about problems for Jews and others like the ever-present threat of typhus and shortages of winter clothing, but never about the threat of mass murder. Blet thus felt justified to take a slap at Holocaust Fundamentalist adversaries in this media-driven controversy about Pius XII. He writes in the introduction to his book: But experience over the last fifteen years since the publication of the last volume [of Actes et Documents] has shown that the content of those volumes, indeed, their very existence, have not been able to attract the attention of many of those who speak and write about the Holy See during the war. That is why we have decided to provide an idea of their content in one volume, which will hopefully be more manageable. In this sentence, Fr. Blet is very charitable to the enemies of the beleaguered Pontiff, but they have been able to ignore Actes et Documents for the simple reason that they have the media, academe and government behind them.

Fr. Blet also documents that when Pius XII did not believe atrocity claims made by Roosevelt’s special envoy, Myron Taylor, he told him so. He writes, for instance, that when the Pope refused to take a course of action requested by the Allies on the basis of intelligence that they had cooked up, he did not hide from the American charge affaires [Myron Taylor] that he had in mind the exaggerated claims made by the Allied propaganda machine.

Pius XII Was Not Alone in His Skepticism about the Holocaust

The Beloved Pontiff was not alone in being silent and skeptical about the Holocaust. Eisenhower, in his 559 page book, entitled Crusade in Europe, is guilty of the same silence. The six volumes of Churchills’s recollections of the war years, entitled Second World War, and which total 4,448 pages, are also mute about this issue. Finally, De Gaulle’s three-volume work, Memoires de Guerre, which total 2,054 pages, reflect the same silence with regard to what we call today the Holocaust.

Pius XII, like Christ, Has Been Betrayed by His Followers

The cause for the canonization of Pius XII is reinforced by the fact that many of those individuals within the church who oppose it are so closely allied to the Holocaust Fundamentalists who defame him so unjustly. Like Christ, the Beloved Pontiff has been betrayed by many people from within his flock. Instead of receiving thirty pieces of silver, the payment might take the form of receiving glowing praise in the Zionist media for their "courage" in speaking out, or of seeing their names mentioned favorably in the NYT. Day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year, we observe as the Zionist media carries out a modern-day re-enactment of the accusations made 2,000 years ago against Christ by the Pharisees. Now, however, Pius XII, whom I imagine head bowed and in chains, plays the role of Christ, while Holocaust Fundamentalists like Elie Wiesel and Abe teach tolerance Foxman play the roles of the Pharisees. It is an especially sad spectacle to behold, especially since the Jewish side, benefiting from one-sided media coverage, does not even have to offer proof for their charges.

In summary, if 20,000 or more people a day were being killed at Auschwitz, Pius XII, with his contacts there, would have known about it. In other words, if, in addition to the Jewish Ordeal of World War II, the Holocaust actually happened, and he said nothing about it, then he deserves our condemnation. However, if the reverse is true, that is, that there was no Holocaust, as the Allied aerial photography clears indicates, then it is the Holocaust Fundamentalist accusers of the Beloved Pontiff who deserve our scorn.

Is that why our media barons, wholly committed to one side of this controversy, will not allow any unauthorized discussion of the subject?

Resistance to Holocaust Fundamentalism Is Ultimately a Civil Rights Issue

The lifeblood of Holocaust Fundamentalism is the suppression of free speech. This ideology is a form of intellectual terror that has more to do with Stalinism than with our American tradition that honors the individual’s right to speak his mind. Unfortunately, if people do express publicly their skepticism about the dogmas of the gas chambers or the Holocaust, they are liable to an assortment of punishments depending upon the context in which their disbelief is expressed. It can range anywhere, as in the case of Bishop Williamson, from public ridicule in the Zionist media to loss of one’s job and livelihood. Yet, the dogmatic claims made about the gas chambers, and the Holocaust are fabrications that have no basis in historical fact. As I mentioned above, they are like allusions to fire-breathing dragons in certain medieval narratives. That is precisely why the Holocaust Fundamentalists have built a fence around these subjects and forbid any free discussion of them.

The denial of free speech on this issue is compounded by the problem of holocaust brainwashing. Here in the Archdiocese of Atlanta, students in a number of local Catholic schools must submit to the indignity of undergoing holocaust brainwashing – and the zombification process that goes along with it. Slogans are spoon fed to them, and they quickly learn that they must never, ever express the slightest bit of skepticism about either the brainwashing process itself or the dogmas dispensed therein. If they were to do so, the penalties would be severe. Yet, if these same young people were to stand up in class and express disbelief in the Virgin Birth, the Divinity of Christ or the Real Presence in the Eucharist, there would be no penalties incurred.

Archbishop Gregory, there is something terribly wrong here, and for that reason I respectfully request that you immediately curtail these indoctrination programs in the schools for which you are responsible. Such an action would indicate that you are aware of the existence of the Abusive Relationship and that you are taking steps toward ending it.

Order this Book for Euros 14,00 at our bookshop, category revisionism

In the Georgia Bulletin article that I mentioned at the beginning of this letter, you are quoted as stating that you will be taking part in an interfaith panel at the Temple on Peachtree Street in March. I thus would like to respectfully request that when you make that appearance, you remind our friends, that there are many Catholics who are fed up with the ongoing Abusive Relationship that exists between the U. S. bishops and the Holocaust Fundamentalists with whom they dialogue. You could also tell them that there are many Catholics who are irritated by the one-sided, distorted and prejudiced portrayal of the Beloved Pontiff that the Zionist media present to them. I also entreat you to put these friends on notice that unless they withdraw and renounce their despicable Talmudic teachings about Christ you, personally, will cease to meet with them. Finally, I request that you make it clear that, as an Archbishop of the Church of Rome, you are deeply concerned about the historically indefensible depiction of the Beloved Pontiff in their state museum in Israel. For this reason, you will tell them that if it is not dismantled within a reasonable timeframe, you will recommend to your colleagues in the USCCB that they cease any and all cooperation with Israel and its representatives until the requested change is made.

Finally, I urge you to begin, as an Archbishop, to speak out in favor of and to campaign for the canonization of Pope Pius XII. It is your First Amendment right to do so. Instead of forever apologizing to the Holocaust Fundamentalists for the supposed evil behavior of this great man, who did everything in his power to help Jews and other victims of the Nazi regime, our church leaders must show courage in defending his memory. This will involve speaking truth to power, which is not easy. But if we are to get beyond the stereotypical view of that great man that the Holocaust Fundamentalists impose on us, it will take a man like you, using his high office, to proclaim the truth. If you were to do that, Archbishop Gregory, you would be writing a new and glorious chapter in the history of Atlanta as a true civil rights capital.

Sincerely yours, in Christo, 
David O’Connell
Decatur, GA