Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Israel/Zionism
See other Israel/Zionism Articles

Title: Should Germans remove medieval hate sculpture?
Source: The JC
URL Source: http://www.thejc.com/news/world-new ... remove-medieval-hate-sculpture
Published: Oct 21, 2016
Author: Daniel Sugarman
Post Date: 2016-10-25 02:51:36 by X-15
Ping List: *The hook-nosed Jew*     Subscribe to *The hook-nosed Jew*
Keywords: church
Views: 649
Comments: 6

Campaigners in Germany are calling for the removal of an antisemitic sculpture ahead of the 500th anniversary of the Christian Reformation next year.

The Judensau, or “Jewish pig”, is on the façade of Wittenburg’s main church.

It shows Jews suckling at the teats of a sow, while another lifts the tail of the animal to look up its backside.

Sister Joela Krüger, a member of the Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary, a Lutheran group, is leading the campaign for the removal of the sculpture. She told website Christianity Today: “The Judensau grieves people because our Lord is blasphemed. And also the Jews and Israel are blasphemed by showing such a sculpture.

“We don’t want to distance ourselves from Luther’s wrongs, but to identify, grieve, and ask for forgiveness.” Wittenburg was the birthplace of the Protestant Reformation, which was initiated in 1517 by Martin Luther, an inhabitant of the town.

The Judensau was installed in 1305, but Luther discusses it in one of his antisemitic works, Vom Schem Hamphoras, in which he suggests that Jews sourced their holiest name for God — their “Shem Hamphoras” — from the backside of a pig.

The words “Rabini Schem Hamephoras” were added above the sculpture after Luther’s death.

However, Max Privorozki, a local German-Jewish leader, told Christianity Today that the sculpture should not be removed, saying it “represents a testimony of medieval thinking and Christian architectural tradition.

“There is no doubt that the Judensau sculpture is unseemly, obscene, insulting, offensive, libelous, a portrayal of hate speech and antisemitism and that it defames Jewish people and their faith. However, it should be seen within the context of the time period in which it was made.”

A plaque was added beneath the sculpture in 1988, quoting the beginning of psalm 130 in Hebrew (“From the Depths I cry to You”), as well as the following inscription:

“The true name of God, the maligned Schem Hamphoras, which Jews long before Christianity regarded as almost unutterably holy, died with six million Jews under the sign of the cross.”

Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, Chief Rabbi of Moscow and President of the Conference of European Rabbis, said: “Removing statues can be, on the one hand, symbolic. On the other hand, it might not be enough.

“The question is, to what extent the Protestant churches have gone through their history, liturgy, statements and religious texts to distance themselves from teachings which have elements of antisemitism.” (1 image)

Subscribe to *The hook-nosed Jew*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: X-15 (#0)

One should ask why the people of that era (and every era) found it necessary to expose Jews and ultimately expel Jews. The only other groups to be so exposed and expelled have been Jesuits and Masonics ... however, the group that should be exposed, expelled or shot dead on sight are the international bankers regardless of their ethnicity.

noone222  posted on  2016-10-25   6:49:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: X-15 (#0)

It is a part of history. It is like in the US of A we take down all things that offend people.

Darkwing  posted on  2016-10-25   10:00:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: noone222, Darkwing (#1)

It's just the jews getting back at Martin Luther, and Christians, for his great sin of putting down on script his thoughts concerning jews. The jews never forget being called out in public (Cicero, Martin Luther, Adolf Hitler, et al).

 photo 001g.gif
“With the exception of Whites, the rule among the peoples of the world, whether residing in their homelands or settled in Western democracies, is ethnocentrism and moral particularism: they stick together and good means what is good for their ethnic group."
-Alex Kurtagic

X-15  posted on  2016-10-25   12:09:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: All, *The hook-nosed Jew* (#3)

I'll just add this instead of starting another thread, it's related:

www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2016/11/6/protestants-get-ready-to-grovel

Protestants Get Ready to Grovel

November 07, 2016 Gilad Atzmon

This week we learned that Jewish institutions insist upon the Protestant Church apologising for its founder’s views of the Jews. The Jewish Algemeiner writes that “the 500th anniversary of the Reformation would be the ‘perfect time’ for Protestant leaders to recognise and apologise for the ‘horrific antisemitism’ of their movement’s founder, Martin Luther.”

The truth of the matter is that Martin Luther didn’t know about Zionism, Israeli criminality, Alan Dershowitz, Bernie Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein, or Sir Philip Green but he still had a serious problem with the Jews. Back in 1543 he wrote On The Jews and their Lies, a book notorious for its opposition to Jews and their religion.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper — associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre - wants the protestants to disown the founding father of their church or at least to “directly address the issue (of antisemitism) in the overall context of what they’re celebrating in terms of this anniversary,”

David Michaels of B’nai B’rith insists that the Church reject some of its founder’s teachings. “This reality requires committed Lutherans and other Christians to ensure that there is fitting recognition and rejection of Luther’s hateful beliefs about Jews, wherever these persist.”

The Protestant world is clearly being subjected to an institutionalized assault Judaism. But there is one thing the Jewish Algemeiner fails to do. It fails to brief us about Luther’s argument against the Jews. The truth of the matter is that Luther’s animus towards Jewry wasn’t at all racially driven. His arguments against Jews were purely theological rather than biological. Thus, using the term ‘antisemitism’ in reference to Luther is misleading. It leaves one wondering whether Bnei B’rith and the Simon Wiesenthal Centre are lying consciously when they refer to Luther as an ‘antisemite’? If they do, we may actually need to seek the assistance of Luther’s book in order to grasp Rabbi Cooper and Michaels’ conduct.

 photo 001g.gif
“With the exception of Whites, the rule among the peoples of the world, whether residing in their homelands or settled in Western democracies, is ethnocentrism and moral particularism: they stick together and good means what is good for their ethnic group."
-Alex Kurtagic

X-15  posted on  2016-11-07   15:41:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: X-15 (#4)

Luther was talking about Khazars, not ME Semites, right?

Tatarewicz  posted on  2016-11-07   23:29:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Tatarewicz (#5)

Yes.

 photo 001g.gif
“With the exception of Whites, the rule among the peoples of the world, whether residing in their homelands or settled in Western democracies, is ethnocentrism and moral particularism: they stick together and good means what is good for their ethnic group."
-Alex Kurtagic

X-15  posted on  2016-11-07   23:36:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest