Catholic Priests Burn Books In Poland

SMS z NIEBA/Facebook

Catholic priests in northern Poland have shown this week that ignorance and intolerance is the not sole domain of any religion or region. The priests showed children how to burn books that they declared as sacrilegious, including Harry Potter novels. Given the Pope’s recent speeches against hate and wall building, he might want to take a closer look at his Polish priests who participated or supported this disgraceful event to take place.

An evangelical group called the SMS from Heaven Foundation posted the images from Koszalin, Poland as part of a religious cleansing of books on magic and other prohibited subjects.

The Facebook page also shows the burning of what looks like an African mask.

The site quotes from Acts: “many of those who had practiced magic collected their books and burned them in front of everyone. So they calculated their value and found it to be fifty thousand pieces of silver”.

It is disgraceful display exhibited in front of children who are being taught that book burning is a moral obligation rather than an abomination.

72 thoughts on “Catholic Priests Burn Books In Poland”

  1. Destroying books is a sin. I quite liked the Harry Potter series.

    Frankly, book burning is the least of Pope Francis’ problems. He has interfered with bishops taking action to stop pedophile priests, and claimed that criticizing the entire scandal is Satan’s work to distract them from their purpose.

    The only way that pedophilia and orgies could persist, globally, at that scale, constantly protecting the perpetrators, is if the administration is infested. This may go up to the Holy See. The Church resisted reform before, and congregations had no say, so the Church splintered. If it refuses to reform with this much at stake, it will continue to weaken. It is rare to see a priest who is not elderly. I believe the Church is wrong to insist priests be celibate and never marry, and that only men can be priests. Jesus choosing male disciples is not sufficient. God was so explicit that He had ten basic rules carved in stone. If he never wanted a woman priest He would have said so.

      1. Maybe his mother or 2nd cousin twice removed would want them.

        I have never read McBain, but what I find trash could be someone else’s treasure. Even screeds like Mein Kampf have academic value. How else would we know that the far Left is favoring many positions once promoted in that propaganda?

  2. this incident may cause fear in those who have long memories and are not Catholics themselves. from the Israeli newspaper:

    https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-1242-all-talmuds-in-paris-are-burned-1.5281064

    “June 17, 1242, is the day that, at the orders of both the pope and the French king, all the known existing copies of the Talmud in Paris were burned.

    The process that led to the setting of the bonfire, in which it is said that 24 wagons piled with copies of the multi-volume work of Hebrew law and lore, took place over several years.

    The whole thing began with accusations against the religious work by an apostate Jew, called Nicholas Donin, of La Rochelle, France.

    Donin had been excommunicated by his Jewish community around the year 1229 for his heretical views. In 1236, he traveled to Rome and presented Pope Gregory IX with a list of complaints about the Talmud.

    Forfeiting the Church’s protection

    Among Jews, the Talmud – which is comprised of the Mishna, the 3rd-century C.E. compendium of law, as interpreted by the Rabbis; and the Gemara, the 6th-century work of commentary on the Mishna and other subjects – is also referred to as the Oral Law. And indeed, it is understood to be no less divinely inspired – or binding – than the Torah, the Five Books of Moses.

    According to the historian Jeremy Cohen, Nicholas Donin’s principal concern was that the Talmud had begun to supersede the Bible for the Jews. If so, however, it constituted a theological problem for Christians.

    According to Augustine of Hippo (also known as Saint Augustine, who died in the year 430), the Jews bear the responsibility of upholding the “Old Testament” so as to provide living proof of the truth of the New Testament offered by Jesus. If the Jews were to give precedence to the Oral Law, and allow themselves to reinterpret the Bible, they were no longer fulfilling their historic role, and were no longer candidates for conversion – and hence no longer warranted the protection of the Church.

    In 1239, Pope Gregory I sent to other church leaders, and to the kings of Spain, England and Portugal, a list of 35 arguments against the Talmud compiled by Donin.

    The charges made against the Talmud included the claim that it blasphemed Jesus and Mary, and attacked non-Jews, among other things.

    The missive concluded with an order to confiscate the book on the first Sabbath in Lent, in this case March 3, 1240, while the Jews were at prayer.

    Donin himself traveled back to Paris with the pope’s letter, which also ordered that “those books in which you find errors of this sort you shall cause to be burned at the stake.”

    Talmud on trial

    The next stage in the process, at least in France, was a “trial” for the Talmud, ordered by King Louis IX, in what turned out to be the first so-called disputation between Jews and Christians, which was held in Vincennes in May and June of 1240.

    Again, it was Donin who argued the case against the holy book; speaking on its behalf were four distinguished rabbis, led by Rabbi Yechiel ben Joseph of Paris.

    Not surprisingly, the Talmud was found to be blasphemous, and the consequence was its public burning two years later, on this date. One estimate is that the 24 wagonloads included up to 10,000 volumes of Hebrew manuscripts, a startling number when one considers that the printing press did not yet exist, so that all copies of a work had to be written out by hand.

    Subsequently, Pope Innocent IV, who became pontiff in 1243, ruled that the Talmud should be corrected, rather than outright banned, making it possible to censor offensive passages while Jews were able to continue studying the work.

    Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, the Maharam, is said to have witnessed the Paris burning, which took place at the Place de Greve. In a lamentation he wrote, he described how “My tears formed a river that reached to the Sinai desert and to the graves of Moshe and Aharon. Is there another Torah to replace the Torah which you have taken from us?”

    #######################

    what they don’t say in the article is that actually yes it does defame Jesus and Mary. Bin Patera, boiling in excrement, etc. I don’t say this to excite antisemitism, I understand they believe Jesus was a blasphemer. And even if Muslims respect Jesus as a prophet they do not believe he was Incarnate and certainly regard our rituals as idolatrous. So, it’s in the nature of confessional monotheistic religions that they negative and deny each other. Intolerance is baked into all three Abrahamic religions.

    Intolerance is not necessarily always bad. Perhaps some tolerance is good but too much tolerance of something like poison will get you dead. right now there is a lot of intolerance of intolerance going around in the West, from the hate hater crowd, for example, those guys who want your donations like ousted former founder of the SPLC Morris Dees, who went around suing kluckers but apparently was not very nice to his own employees. Anyhow, just maybe we should amplify some of our own intolerance to protect our own sense of truth.

    Finally a word about the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church about Jews. Many believe they were persecutors. Well in the modern sense perhaps. But in the medieval world actually the Church were often protectors. There was a doctrine called Sicut Iudaios Non which meant don’t touch the Jews. That is, they must not be physically harmed. While the Church did bring about such things as the “Badge” it also condemned the occasional act of mass violence against jews, ie, the pogroms.

    I feel like historians are rather unfair about the RCC. In the 30s the encyclical Mit Brendenner Sorge was published condemning the idolatry of National socialist racial materialism. The Gestapo suppressed the publication and raided Catholic churches. And yet today PIus XII is called an antisemite himself.

  3. IS ARTICLE A PRETEXT FOR TURLEY..

    TO CRITICIZE POPE REGARDING TRUMP’S WALL?

    Let’s be honest, the Catholic church is an institution in serious decline. And that decay does not bode well for the western world. If our biggest church is becoming a sad joke, the western world may suffer a corresponding decline.

    Personally I think western governments should legislate that no church can require celibacy or deny women the priesthood. And no church shall deny the priesthood to either married men or women. These simple rules, if adopted by every major western government would force the Catholic church to make crucial changes that would bring that institution into the 21st Century. In the process the Catholic church could emerge as stronger and more relevant force which would be good for western societies.

    Regarding the above, a church-sponsored book-burning, there will always be religious leaders in provincial towns promoting ultra conservative doctrines. That is true as well in the United States. There are so-called ‘Christian Conservatives’ throughout America’s Midwest and South preaching fundamentalism. Many of these churches are supportive of Donald Trump because of Trump’s presumed opposition to abortion. Never mind that Trump was a notorious playboy for 40 years! Never mind that Trump was never considered even remotely religious. His willingness to ban abortion makes him heroic to ‘Christian Conservatives’.

    But Professor Turley would have us believe Pope Francis was totally out of line for suggesting that walls are bad policy. Like Pope Francis should really concern himself with Poland instead. Poland, one should note, has been drifting right politically. In fact, Eastern Europe has been trending towards right-wing authoritarian governments. Turley fails to mention that however. There is only the suggestion that Pope Francis is out of line and that the Catholic Church might be racist because priests in Poland are burning African masks along with Harry Potter books.

    1. “Personally I think western governments should legislate that no church can require celibacy or deny women the priesthood. And no church shall deny the priesthood to either married men or women. These simple rules, if adopted by every major western government would force the Catholic church to make crucial changes that would bring that institution into the 21st Century. In the process the Catholic church could emerge as stronger and more relevant force which would be good for western societies.”

      So you Peter are clearly not a follower of the First Amendment dcotrine of the Separation of Church and State, for the record. We will keep that in mind.

      I am, but if this is thrown overboard, I too have some religious legislation of my own if we go that route and it would include explicitly banning Salafist Muslims of every degree from migration. Will you join me in that?

      1. Kurtz, are Salafist Muslims a major trend in immigration patterns? How many have been granted citizenship?

        No one believes the First Amendment should supersede common sense laws. Religious freedom, for instance, is no excuse for sex with minors. Religious freedom does not allow the use of illegal drugs or disregard for fire and safety codes. And currently religious freedom is under attack regarding vaccinations.

        So Kurtz, your presumed respect for religious freedom only goes so far.

        1. I agree there is a line to be drawn

          I do believe we have too many salafist muslims coming here. A handful is too many by my standards. That Wapo editorial writer the Saudis sliced up in the embassy in Turkey should never have had more than a tourist visa in the first place, for example. Another radical scheming camel riding cutthroat who should have only pitched his tent in the desert in the first place. I would exclude the whole lot of them.

          Which reminds me, why would Trump green light the transfer of nuclear power tech to the Saudis. Even as Aramco is revealing its mind boggling profits. This was a mistake. Neither the Saudis nor the Iranians should get too close to the stuff would be my preference. Although one suspects if the Saudis wanted a bomb they could probably buy one from the Paks anytime. So I don’t know but I am skeptical of the wisdom of this choice by the otherwise Highly Respected POTUS.

    2. Personally I think western governments should legislate that no church can require celibacy or deny women the priesthood. A

      You’re not doing much thinking are you, Peter?

      Correct-the-Record is not getting their best.

      1. Tabby, if you’re arguing that the Catholic Church should be allowed to rot like an undiagnosed cancer until every church is closed from lack of parishioners, I totally disagree. The epidemic of sex scandals regarding Catholic priests has been raging for decades. Surely the public has a right to say “enough is enough”!

        The Catholic church is one of the most prominent landowners in America. Catholic universities and hospitals are a vital presence in every state. To suggest the church has a God-given right to totally self-destruct is ridiculous.

        Furthermore, no corporation or government agency is allowed to discriminate based on gender, marriage or sexual practice. The same policies should apply to churches and non-profits. Again, the public has no interest in allowing one of our biggest churches to rot until it has no relevance whatsoever.

        1. I would blame the lack of parishioners on the decline of the American family due to your progressive views indoctrinated to our kids through the public school system. I don’t believe one word from you that you are at all concerned with the church. You are a sheep in wolves cloth and I think you know it.

          1. Jim, I wasn’t raised a Catholic, but most of my friends were Catholic. What’s more, my father worked for a Catholic-owned company and and I once lived across the street from a Catholic cathedral.

            The point is, whether one is Catholic or not, the church is a huge presence all over the western world. We all have an interest is seeing the Catholic church update to this century.

            1. We all have an interest is seeing the Catholic church update to this century.

              Why? And what’s so great about ‘this century’?

            2. You’re not Catholic. this is like telling Jews what to do and believe. Are you Jewish? Would you tell Jews who their leaders must be? How about do you think you can tell Muslims who is an imam?

              Oh, of course not. But you feel free to tell Catholics what to do.

              1. Kurtz, get real. Most Catholics aren’t even Catholic anymore! That is, ‘the number of Catholics who totally subscribe to church doctrine and attend mass on a regular basis is lower than at any time in history’.

                Are you arguing that the vast number of Catholics want their priests celibate???? I want to see a source on that. You won’t find it, I’m sure.

                My sense is that most Catholics want a church where priests can be totally respected. That won’t happen until meaningful reforms take place. And why can’t women be priests??? Who says Catholics want only male priests??? That’s just something you made up!

                Kurtz, your problem here is related to right-wing media. In right-wing media so-called journalists are always trying to ‘bust’ liberals for supposedly ‘incorrect’ stances. And you imagine you’ve ‘busted me’ for an incorrect position. Nonsense! That’s just right-wing media dumbing you down.

                My main concern in this matter is the vast treasures of art in Catholic churches. Every Catholic church is an art depository that I want preserved. The church buildings themselves are beautiful works of art.
                I don’t want them closing for lack of congregations. And that is actually happening all over the western world.

                Again, religious freedom is no justification for policies that lead to abuse and discrimination. This rot has to stop!

                1. First off, it’s not a democracy. Thank God! If you want that go to a Protestant church. Let the Catholics do their own thing! How’s that for some freedom and diversity?

                  Second of all, lack of attendance and celibacy are unrelated phenomenon. There was a big attendance in the past when priests were celibate all the way back to when it was instituted in the west by Pope Gregory like a thousand years ago. Lack of attendance has other reasons. You don’t care really so don’t worry. But the issue is overall secularism in the West from which Catholics are not immune. It has little to do with any sex matters whatsoever. That includes the supposed issues of abortion and contraception for which people just do what pleases them anyhow.

                  Now you didn’t answer me Peter. Are you Jewish? I doubt it. Peter is not a well liked name with Jews. Nor Protestants, really. But maybe from a family of “Catholic ethnics” which is how you got that name. Just speculating here, you have a strong opinion why not share? We’re all anonymous here pretty much. Sort of. LOL.

                  I’m a Catholic convert. My ancestors were all Protestants or Orthodox Christians going back however far to the schisms, far as I know. In my case I like the authoritarian hierarchical patriarchal whatever nature of the Church and it’s a pity the Church today doesn’t live up to what its detractors accuse it of.

                  If I don’t go to Mass it’s because I am in mortal sin over my own messes and not willing to fake compliance. Unlike most weak Catholics in there faking it, and I count the priests along with the laity, I prefer to be honest about my sins. Maybe one day that will sort itself out. Or maybe I’ll become an Orthodox. Their priests get married but not the bishops in case you didn’t know.

                  As for right wing media you are again imagining things. I don’t need to justify to you my sources but my sources on Catholic matter primarily come from a lot of direct experience and personal knowledge, not what the stupid newspapers say one way or another. And i Hardly ever watch tv. But I did watch 2 hours of MMA on saturday.

        2. It’s not ridiculous and if God has ordained it, then it will not self destruct, regardless of whether the state is for it or against it.

          I guess the jury is out on that.

          And by the way. A title VII sex discrimination case against a church will not be judged by the courts if the defendant pleads as a “pastoral purpose.” for example. in theory it might apply to national or racial discrimination too. Hence a synagogue need not employ a gentile in a position that requires a Jewish employee so long as they allege “pastoral purpose,” then case will be dismissed on summary judgment. Or vice versa. A Catholic church school can require a Catholic to be the boss, and a suit by a Protestant who claims employment discrim will not be judged, it will be dismissed.

          Look it up if you like, or take my word for it. That’s the law and a lot of liberals don’t like it. You can feel free to lobby to change the First Amendment if you like.

        3. Tabby, if you’re arguing that the Catholic Church should be allowed to rot like an undiagnosed cancer until every church is closed from lack of parishioners, I totally disagree. The epidemic of sex scandals regarding Catholic priests has been raging for decades. Surely the public has a right to say “enough is enough”!

          I’m sure you fancied this a coherent thought when you typed it out.

          The Catholic church is one of the most prominent landowners in America. Catholic universities and hospitals are a vital presence in every state. To suggest the church has a God-given right to totally self-destruct is ridiculous.

          Again, there is absolutely nothing in this remark the least bit relevant to our exchange above.

          ==

          Now for some truth.

          There are about 19,000 Catholic parishes in the United States. Each might own an acre or two of land. That’ll give you an area of about 60 sq miles in toto. The two municipalities in which I spent my youth have an area that sums to… 60 sq. miles. Church land isn’t an income producing asset and there are considerable legacy costs involved in maintaining the buildings.

          There are about a dozen foundationally Catholic research universities in the United States. Not one maintains an educational mission which is seriously Catholic and only 1 has the sort of corporate architecture which would allow such a mission to be revived therein. There are about 200 foundationally Catholic teaching institutions, but the situation is much the same there. You don’t have 20 in which a committed Catholic would take much of an interest and even some of them have internal lobbies attempting to ruin their distinct character. (Controversies at both the University of Dallas and Franciscan University of Steubenville are salient here).

          As for “Catholic hospitals’, there’s some trumpery, a few seats on the board, maybe an executive here or there, that’s it.

          There is no ‘epidemic of sex scandals’. There have been lawsuits at irregular intervals and there was a bloc collation of accusations in 2002. Accusations contra priests usually concern fondling and usually concern male adolescents. The vast majority of accusations concern conduct which happened 10, 20, or 30 years in the past and there’s no ready way to make a satisfactory evaluation of them. Bishops commonly do a bad job with the easy cases, in large measure (it must be assumed) the Church’s day-to-day busyness interests them and ordinary people don’t. Accusations against priests were quite infrequent prior to 1981 or thereabouts. There was a period extending from about 1981 to about 1993 in most dioceses where the response of bishops was ‘treat-and-transfer’. This had been done before, but not as a general policy. Around about 1993, lawsuits to date persuaded bishops that the liability exposure from doing this was daunting and took to taking accused priests out of circulation. Most priests under the interdict at that time had only a single accusation on file against them (commonly uncorroborated). Restricted ministries might mean administrative jobs, nursing home chaplaincies, prison chaplaincies, &c. Some recidivists were dismissed from the priesthood. Very few of these cases were worth reporting to law enforcement because prosecution would have been time-barred or because there simply was insufficient evidence. Some of the convictions obtained over the years have been via inverted jury nullification.

          The Church had an escalating problem with pederasty (though there were some paedophiles in the mix as well). The point of origin appears to have been around 1930, but it really began to escalate around 1950. Beginning in the 1980s, parishioners began to file complaints and (sometimes) go to law enforcement). Around 1985, the problem began to subside when potential perpetrators realized there were consequences. There’s been little such activity documented over the last 25 years. All the ’70 priests accused’ headlines you’ve read typically refer to incidents which are supposed to have happened decades earlier.

          Now, the way to deal with pederasty is to screen out potential pederasts and expel known pederasts who made it through. That’s the last thing a government ‘civil rights’ bureaucracy would prescribe or even allow. And, of course, having a public agency dictate ordination standards and formation practices is an inane idea, but not out of character for you for s’ that.

          Furthermore, no corporation or government agency is allowed to discriminate based on gender, marriage or sexual practice. The same policies should apply to churches and non-profits. Again, the public has no interest in allowing one of our biggest churches to rot until it has no relevance whatsoever.

          IOW, no one should be able to associate except on terms acceptable to some West Hollywood prat, or to maintain and advance moral understandings not fashionable among that set. I suppose self-absorption can go further than you’ve taken it. But I wouldn’t want to encounter it in meatspace.

          1. As usual, Tabby, your comments are less than clear

            You seem to acknowledge the church has a problem. But you think the church should be allowed to go its ‘merry way’. ..But are they really merry..?

            I think the old saying ‘misery loves company’ best explains the Catholic church today. Older priests know that celibacy has been a drag on their lives. ‘But if they had to stay celibate, than new priests should as well’. That’s misery loves company in practice. And it’s no excuse for mindlessly stupid policies that lead to the sexual abuse of children.

            With regards to West Hollywood, I have no idea what you’re implying. Again, Tabby, your comments always suffer from lack of clarity. It’s because your main focus is usually crafting dismissive putdowns. In that pursuit you sacrifice clarity for what you imagine is sharp wit. Such is the life of an Alexander Woollcott wannabe.

            1. As usual, Tabby, your comments are less than clear

              I can explain something to you. I cannot comprehend it for you.

            2. Older priests know that celibacy has been a drag on their lives.

              See the social research done by Andrew Greeley at the time. Priests who objected to the celibacy regime were released from their vows between 1965 and 1978. They amounted to about 20% of the priest corps. See Fr. Rob Johansen on seminarians as he knew them ca. 1995. The celibacy rule is not an issue with them and they understand it’s implications.

              1. I know some older priests who didn’t let it drag them down, lol. Maybe those women they were always with were just companions? At least we knew they weren’t gay!

                Another one I see about once a month at the local casino tables plopping down $100 a hand. No names, thank you!

                A lot of people think priests are saints. Generally, not even close. If you expect that you’ll be disappointed. Most times I find them very helpful and decent chaps. And I have known quite a few. The ones I really liked were not famous. The most dangerous sin for a priest is not lust nor greed, it is pride.

                  1. As the said

                    ” I am unaware of any such activity or operations sir and if i were aware I would be undisposed to talk about them”

                    here is a big Catholic guy giving that line

            3. Again, Tabby, your comments always suffer from lack of clarity.

              That’s like saying the Optician’s eye chart suffers from lack of clarity. DSS is as always clear, yes he is sharp-witted and most importantly, whenever I lack clarity, then I have a responsibility to seek it. What has been clear since you arrived on scene here is you are an (bad) information diode. It’s not that you lack clarity or even comprehension; you lack the humility to admit when you’re wrong.

            4. Celibacy is not a cause of pederasty. Mostly pederasts are the cause of pederasty, as their spread their despicable practice from generation to generation.

              You want to attack sexual abusers then good attack sexual abusers. I am with you on that. But attacking the Church per se, is liking burning down a village to save it.

              I observe other religions have notions of chastity and even celibacy as well. Such as Buddhism. You are attacking an ancient religious practice like fasting.

              But you are a typical representative of modernism, that’s for sure.

          2. Catholic hospitals are plenty important and plenty Catholic.

            Around the midwest you’re more likely to see the trappings of Catholicism in a hospital than a socalled Catholic university unless the development shills are trotting out the Catholic stuff fishing for donations from the faithful.

    3. “But Professor Turley would have us believe Pope Francis was totally out of line for suggesting that walls are bad policy. Like Pope Francis should really concern himself with Poland instead. Poland, one should note, has been drifting right politically. In fact, Eastern Europe has been trending towards right-wing authoritarian governments. ”

      The Vatican State has its own big wall behind with the High Priest of Rome in hisBig Chair in his Pointy Hat sits cloaked with sovereign safety.

      When that guy from Argentina tears down his own wall then he can talk. until then he should concern himself with other critical problems like pederasts, of which his is a known “colluder.”

      As for Poland and Hungary, I applaud the democratic ambitions of their people to protect their own patrimony!

      1. Kurtz, Poland and Hungary are basically on the road to right-wing dictatorships. Surely you aren’t arguing that that’s a positive trend?

        1. You are wrong. They are democracies. I am not Polish nor Hungarian so whether I “like” that or not doesn’t really matter.
          I like Trump. He is a populist but not even close to a dictator. Whether Trump or Organ is left wing or right wing in your estimation is not a question that I feel is meaningful to address. the right left continuum is usually an oversimplification bandied about by irresponsible journalists.

          Most liberals fail to realize how popular many if not most alleged “right wing dictatorships” have been the past century. Mussolini was very popular. Juan Peron was very popular. Were they both dictators? Mussolini was. Peron, not as much. Were they right wing? Well, both implemented legal regimes which had as explicit norms social justice and worker’s rights. So, is that right wing? Again, the characterization is often useless.

          Why do liberals underestimate the popularity of socalled fascist regimes? Mostly for the reasons that Communists in earlier generations well understood, in the broad scope of history, liberal regimes arose to advance the bourgeoisie, and they control the liberal regimes to this day. They are subtle and use the electoral process to fool the workers into thinking they have a say. Oh, the say is real, but it is really small. mostly. The commies understood that just like I understand my 20 shares of GM stock allow me a say in who gets elected as CEO just not much of one. But today, Marx is just for academics, and figures like Che are for tshirts. But communists in earlier generations understood that capitalist plutocrats control liberal democratic regimes by bribing and paying off the leadership of the moderate left and center.

          What you get with people like Orban, are strong minded politicians who can’t be bribed and actually represent the people, and do so with inspired imagination.

          This is understood by a very small number of political theorists like Roger Griffin of Oxford Brooks U in England. His many works describe how fascist leadership incorporates social welfare into their programs and public communication thus enlisting the support of the people. I recommend him to your study.

          1. You’re off on a tangent. Peter is a standard-issue partisan Democrat. They do not have procedural values. There’s no such thing as a duly-enacted law that irritates them. So, a government doing this systematically and thumbing its nose at the Brussels apparat is a ‘right-wing’ dictatorship. Since NPR reporters are as addled as Peter, you get a lot of ‘news’ stories with this bizarre framing.

        2. Kurtz, Poland and Hungary are basically on the road to right-wing dictatorships.

          IOW, their elected assemblies adopted policies George Soros doesn’t like.

  4. Given the Pope’s recent speeches against hate and wall building,

    The Pope has uttered not one serious word since he was elected, and is an enemy of the Catholic faithful except as a source of donations. He’s also promoted corruption of every kind at the very apex and center of the Church. (See his dealings with Cdl. McCarrick for one example). In certain respects, this may be the most corrupt papacy in 1,000 years.

  5. Professor, people dispose of books as a matter of course. They’re very seldom precious. Libraries cull their collections every year. As for what’s left, the wag who referred to libraries as great cemeteries of mediocre literature knew what he was talking about. Before online content replaced so much hard copy, I was privy to a statistical study of the collections of one particular academic library. Fully 30% of books purchased over the years running from 1992 to 1997 could not be shown to have left the shelf during that time period. The library in question collected statistics on in-house use and on check-outs, btw.

    1. DSS,
      I do not understand the point you are trying to make. Libraries culling their shelves of tattered, boring, poorly-written, faddish, or long-unread books is a far cry from what these guys are doing with their firepit and matches.

      1. For personal reasons, I’m chuckling.

        The American Library Association likes to pretend those trained in ‘collection development’ are making ‘professional’ decisions which must not be questioned by ‘non-professionals’. People tell themselves a certain number of lies in order to buck up, and hardly anyone pricks the bubble.

        It’s paper, Prairie. Books were few and precious at one time. Not in our time.

        Some old-school Catholic priests make a particular point of warning the young away from the occult. That’s not bad in and of itself. Here they’re making it graphic. Not sure the priests I’ve known would bother with Harry Potter (an example critics may have cherry-picked).

        1. Books were few and precious at one time. Not in our time.

          How progressive of you. In your time. Unless of course you believe everyone should merely accept your prognosis because…

          What’s next on your agenda, gun control?

          1. I have no agenda whatsoever, Olly. I’m amused that the professor is agitated that someone burned books. The books aren’t sacred. They’re bound paper. No one has said the bound paper was stolen.

        2. I am just barely more of a believer than the average Darwinian biological materialist. But yes the occult involves serious unknown powers and people who play with them, often,

          Just End Up Worse Off Than Before.

    2. Academic libraries have as one of their functions maintaining collections of often obscure information of use to researchers.

      Good

      1. It actually is of very little use to researchers. The valid defense of the library would be that the opportunity cost of maintaining it isn’t contextually severe and it’s challenging to determine ex ante how useful something will be over it’s life-cycle. You can do that with serial publications (not that librarians care to do that), but not with monographs.

    3. They’re very seldom precious. Libraries cull their collections every year.

      A library scrubbing their inventory due to non-use is a far cry from burning books due to some perceived forbidden content. Who gets to decide what books are precious enough to keep and by what standard?

      1. Who gets to decide what books are precious enough to keep and by what standard?

        Apparatchiks with MLS degrees.

  6. Which late night comedian will turn this into a whole new round of Polish jokes? Nominations? By the way, is this worse than progressive school systems banning To Kill a Mockingbird or Huckleberry Finn?

    1. Yes, I would think public school is worse. The public school is govt. The Church is private which you are not having your property forced from you and given to. also, public school indoctrination reaches greater numbers.

      1. Catholic schools today are typically generic private schools with some trumpery added. In certain respects, they tend to be worse than secular schools. For the most part, home-schooling and home-school co-operatives are the only way to go for the committed Catholic parent. The economy of Catholic schools was crucially dependent on the religious orders. The Church has had problems with recruitment to the secular clergy, but this mostly involves containing and allocating fixed costs. Ordinations to the priesthood and the permanent diaconate have roughly tracked mass attendance. The religious orders are another thing: they’ve evaporated. We’re talking declines in annual professions on the order of 95% in many congregations. We’re talking orders so corrupt they should disappear (of which the Society of Jesus is an example). If you don’t have an ample supply of religious and regular clergy, you don’t have viable Catholic schools.

        1. at the primary level they are still pretty good but at high school level, they sometimes can’t compete. This is due to the cheapness of the bishops who refuse to pay a decent and competitive wage to teachers even as they go around in their golden vestments blathering about social justice. They talk a lot about “Family” this and that but they they are too cheap to compete with public schools. Sad!

          I was a product of a fine Catholic education and thank God and the people who gave it to me, for this. I have many fond memories. But for my kids I had to pull them out. The quality was behind what I had by a considerable margin.

          1. This is due to the cheapness of the bishops who refuse to pay a decent and competitive wage to teachers even as they go around in their golden vestments blathering about social justice.

            Again, the schools run on donations, tuition, and endowment income. Decisions on compensation face more severe market-discipline than they do in re the public schools. Even so, the need to hire lay teachers with families to support has put the Catholic schools out of reach for most.

            The regular clergy and religious live communally, receive small stipends, and do not have families to support. This was crucial to the economy of Catholic education.

            1. you are correct TIA however people do not realize that not all religious take vows of poverty. Some orders do like the Holy Cross.

              from the Franciscan website:

              “One of the most common misconceptions about the Catholic priesthood is that all priests take a vow of poverty. In fact, most do not. Diocesan priests do not even make vows, they make “promises” of obedience to their bishop: chastity and to pray the Liturgy of the Hours. Vows, on the other hand, are typically made by members of religious orders, such as Franciscans, Benedictines, Dominicans, et. al. These vows typically include poverty, obedience, and chastity.

              So where does the concept of the “Vow of Poverty” come from? Some religious orders in the Church are known as “Mendicant Orders”. Mendicants, from the Latin word “mendicans”, meaning begging, are members of those religious orders which by vow of poverty renounce all proprietorship not only individually but also (and in this differing from the monks) in common, relying for support on their own work and on the charity of the faithful. The first order commonly known as a mendicant order was the Franciscans, founded by Saint Francis of Assisi, a man born into wealth and luxury, who gave away all his worldly possessions.”

              ###############
              what they do not say of course is that a lot of these orders are super rich and their “works” consist of such things like Franciscan hospitals that have massive budgets and employ overly paid admins as well as worthy health care providers.

              The same thing is especially true of “Catholic universities” that often put a religious figurehead atop a board crammed with lay people who call the tune.

              Those figureheads oftentimes are the worst jet setters of all flying around gladhanding the rich and famous and eating fancy food and enjoying their private things just like any other pompous azz. While the Catholic laity of another generation are again deceived into emptying their pockets.

              I gave what I gave, out of mostly cynical reasons at the time, glorified bribery special to my circumstances, so I am not really bitter, even though I sound that way.

              1. what they do not say of course is that a lot of these orders are super rich and their “works” consist of such things like Franciscan hospitals that have massive budgets and employ overly paid admins as well as worthy health care providers.

                They may have legacy properties which will be secularized eventually. They’re not ‘rich’ in any other way.

                The various Franciscan orders had ca. 2002 about 60 seminarians. No clue what the data would be today, but the effects of two additional waves of scandal and the election of a bad pope likely haven’t helped. The number professing their vows each year is such that you might expect the population of Franciscans to settle at 200 Friars Minor working a regular schedule and about 60 old Franciscans on light duty. That means a set of apostolates of limited dimension, and likely no acute care hospitals.

    2. RSA exactly! But they don’t see it that way. See the Polish are not very subtle like Americans and Western European apparatchiks are.

      There is a Polish joke in there somewhere but I am not very clever to think it up. Really, there is a lot to love about the Polish.

  7. The kids are reading the books on their electronic gizmos. Most of the books in public libraries, if they are still there at all, are covered in cobwebs.

    1. Libraries where I live are very busy, little kids still like big picture books, and some adults still like a physical book. I check out digital books from our library, so I understand the convenience of that technology and like it, but…..

    2. Sam,
      I can understand your cynicism to a degree. However, my little library is a hopping place. They are looking to expand.

      I personally prefer reading from a real book.

  8. “Das war ein Vorspiel nur, dort wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.” Heinrich Heine

    1. “Raping” what it sowed. That is all those dorks do is rape– children first, then males of all ages, sometimes a female human, dogs, cats, and dead bodies.
      (music–)
      And everyone was a Cat O lLick!
      Wouldn’t be a Willy or a Fred!

  9. For every action this is an equal yet opposite reaction. Works for Newton in the secular world; works for the religious in the divine world. I think it was Hobbes who postulated that since everything is made of moving atoms — including people — that everything is in motion and subject to the laws of physics. Let’s not forget the Catholics are reacting to secular and Muslim forces that have them in the crosshairs. Not the right reaction, mind you, but keeping in the laws physics it was entirely predictable.

  10. I agree that burning books is not the best way to make their points to the children. Removal from their parish library would have been okay, if they gave the children good reasons. Articles I have read in the past indicate the author of Harry Potter, when researching her first book, actually went to the Wicka religion and located old books of spells. It has been estimated that 30 to 50% of the spells in the Harry Potter books are actual, word for word spells, from her research. This can be alarming to faithful Catholics who believe that evil can find an opening into ones life through oujia boards and such, by the innocent. Many will think this is crazy but faith is what it is, faith. If one can understand this point which was not included in the article, then it may seem more understandable they want to remove the books.

    1. I have many faithful Catholic friends and they were horrified.

      Magic isn’t real. The Harry Pitter books are imaginative fiction.

      There are plenty of real avenues for evil to express itself in people’s lives. This act of ‘faith’ without reason is walking that line.

  11. I am going outside to the rear yard to the bar b que grill and I am going to burn a Cat O Lic Bible. I will photograph it in flames and post the photo on the Holy website in Pole Lock Land. Religion is the opiate of the people.

    1. And we need to burn pedophile priests at the stake. Or. Hang em from a cross and set em on fire while they are still alive. Let the kids watch.

Leave a Reply