Talk:Centre Party (Germany)/Archive 1

message: It is nonsensical to use American english in the name and contents of an article on a European topic. Germany no more had a Center Party than Australia has a Labour Party. Similarly it would wrong to write about American theatre. The German party is generally translated by Germans into British English, not American English. FearÉIREANN 23:09, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm?  Germany had neither a Center Party nor a Centre Party, but a Zentrum.  Although I will admit that I've much more frequently seen "Centre Party" than "Center Party", and I'm not sure why I titled the article as I did. john 23:48, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Name in English

message: This is incorrect:The Zentrumspartei dissolved itself . This is repeated  under Adolf Hitler and Pope Pius XII , and  I believe its' inclusion as error reveals  concerted attempts over the intervening years to conceal Vatican  Appeasement . See  Hitler and Stalin -Parallel Lives by  Alan Bullock ( Lord Bullock),p.338, published by HarperCollins,1991, .Flamekeeper 08:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Undoubtedly you mean  that  Hitler eliminated the Catholic Centre Party in Czechoslovakia . 159.134.212.148 21:41, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Dissolved

message: I have merged and edited Flamekeeper's contributions. I am very much unhappy with how things have gone here. New users, non-native english speakers, and bulk content contributors are all to be treated kindly and delicately. This was not done. Perhaps some of this content would be better merged into another article, but deleting and reverting it was by no means acceptable. Next time put a clean-up or "article in need of attention" header on the article and move on, if you don't feel able to do the work yourself. Thankfully new users come to me with issues such as these, rather than simply leaving the wiki in disgust. Sam Spade  11:19, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I admit I only know about his end of things, and am essentially advocating for him, so I accept that you might well have a reasonable position and perspective. I would appreciate a dialogue regarding my merger if you have any concerns or objections. Cheers, Sam Spade  12:53, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. 
(18) see Rom 3,8 
This is the legal principle cited as the basis for the enciclical Humanae Vitae and is the basis for the entire teaching concerning human fertility .
I enquire of the Holy Father how soon will he choose institute a public enquiry of tribunal into the breaking of this law in direct intent by Pope Pius XI, Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli the future Pope Pius XII and Monsignor Ludwig Kaas Leader of the Catholic Centre Party in Germany, against the moral order of the Church and of all societies in general?
(says Flamekeeper)
Dear Flamekeeper, if the three people in question did break this law they are now out of reach for the jurisdiction of the pope. But I don't think they are guilty of that. It was the German people (and I speak as a German) that voted for Hitler (whose party nonetheless never attained a majority in free elections), not the Pius XI, not Pacelli, not Prelate Kaas. It was Germans like Hindenburg father & son, Papen etc that brough Hitler to power, not Pius XI, Pacelli or Kaas. Election statistics show that the two groups largely immune against NS were Catholics and SocialDemocrats/trade unionists. You might citicize Kaas' bargaining with the Hitler government, but what would you do if someone was about to take your car by force? Would you not try to sell it to him, if possible. That's what Kaas did, he traded in his (doomed) Centre party to get some guarantees. Or a you criticize the Concordate? It was a treaty between the Holy See and the German Republic, still under President Hindenburg. Before 1933 the Church would have loved to make a concordate, but there was no majority avaiable. Now, why should they blow this opportunity? If the Hitler government would be short lived, as many expected, why not use this opportunity? If however, Hitler were here to stay, so much more of a need to set up rules and to protect the Church under an upcoming tyranny. Or do you criticize Pius XI for issuing "Mit brennender Sorge"? Or Pius XII for protecting many Italian Jews? And what would you have done? Str1977 15:59, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The Breaking of the Law

message: I don't like the structure of the entry. We have a opening paragraph talking about the Kulturkampf and then Zentrum policy in general and the general remarks about Kaas. Then the index and after that we continue with "after the Kulturkampf". The first part looks like a left-over stub. I propose either, to include the this first part into the main article in their chronological place (that also means doing away with an introduction or severely restricting it) or to strip down the introdoction and include further details in their proper places. (Actually, the two alternatives boil down to one alternative.)
Any comments, views, proposals?
Str1977 14:07, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Entry structure

message: Thanks, John, for your improvements and corrections of my typos and oversights.
However, I have reverted your "constitutional party" to the previous "constitution party". The German was "Verfassungspartei", which literally translates as "constitution's party", not "verfassungsmäßige Partei", which would be "constitutional party". The name was not supposed to declare the Centre a party in line with the constitution, but the one party most vocal about defending the constitution (first the Prussian one, later the Weimar one).
Str1977 19:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Constitution party

message: Dear Sam,
what is the reason for including the "magnates" link into the Centre Party entry?
It might be relevant to Papen or to Hitler or to Hindenburg or to Schacht or to NSDAP but here?
Str1977 21:20, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: a fair enough question. I restored it because I couldn't think of any reason to keep it out, and it seemed to be something flamekeeper wanted. I admit I gave it very little thought. Perhaps others could ad their opinions?
Sam Spade 21:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Things off-topic to this entry but keep for further use

message: I have  posted a further appeal to the church authorities , who are presumably concerned to view, if not contribute, to the relevant page- that of Pope Pius XII , an appeal for legality of treatment of the persons of Franz von Papen and Ludwig Kaas , amongst other catholics . I could just as well post it  here to save time  but for the while I shall leave this as a  link . Famekeeper 12:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Nuremberg Trials