
Holocaust. Tract #062 (HOLO). Art by Fred Carter - © 1984 Chick Publications
Holocaust - Tract #062 (HOLO)
Art by Fred Carter - © 1984 Chick Publications
First Published: March 16th, 2025
The Holocaust was a Roman Catholic Inquisition against the Jews. No true Christians would kill anyone in the name of Jesus. God commands us to love the Jewish people.
Introduction ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
This is one of two tracts that at least at first blush, is aimed at converting Jews. The other is Where's Rabbi Waxman? The premise here is rather bizarre, even by Jack Chick standards. No Protestants (which are the Only True Christians™), had anything to do with the Holocaust. This is demonstrably false, as we will endeavor to establish. But this somehow leads to, if the Protestants had nothing to do with the Holocaust, well then Jesus must be the Messiah, and Jews should therefore convert to Christianity. Needless to say, this does not follow.
I am a secular Jew, whose father liberated one of the Nazi concentration camps, and investigated war crimes after the war. So yeah, this one is personal. |
![]() |
Jack Chick has taken the opportunity over the years to place the blame for numerous adverse events and societal ills on completely non-sequitur offenders. The gays are responsible for AIDS, rock music is a doorway to Satanism, etc., etc. Here, we’re discussing perhaps one of the most heinous events in modern history, the Jewish Holocaust, and rather than take the opportunity to point out how the Church both looked the other way, as well as literally abetted the Nazis in carrying out this monstrous act, he decides to once again put everything onto the Catholics by saying “Oh no! It wasn't all of us good Christians who went along with this… just those other evil ones over there. Don't blame us!”
Strap in guys, this one's a doozy. |
![]() |
*humming a dirge, before suddenly pausing as I see you* Ah, my apologies, dear reader. It truly has been quite a while since I have been summoned to be engaged in a dissection of a tract, though the time away has not been a vacation by any means. But such discussions will have to be for another time…
I see that our particular tract is one tied to a very dark section of ‘’modern’ history surrounding the genocide of the Jewish people under the regime of Nazi Germany. Given my… abilities and the topic at hand, this is not going to be the most enjoyable endeavour for me. But I will do as best as I can to keep myself in control. Even though my reading of the tagline for this tract has me already thinking of how false the claims are going to be, especially if Chick’s most trusted source for all things Catholic is mentioned or indeed, present in the tract himself. And I have my doubts that the author of this tract is a “true Christian”, seeing as they may very well be bearing false witness against others. Which last I checked, is not something Christians are to do. Considering the other materials published by this same author, it is almost like the author of the tract has not read the Bible at all, let alone understood it, or is being a hypocrite. Possibly both. I leave that to you to decide, dear reader. *Sighs deeply* Let us commence… |
Cover / Page 1 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Can’t really fault the cover art (for a change). |
![]() |
I do agree with Boudreaux in this respect, though what I can possibly fault is less to do with the artistic skill presented and more what it is used on. For such imagery is truly wasted on a tract which essentially pins the actions of Hitler on a religion that both the author (Jack Chick) and his supposed source of information (Alberto Rivera) do not agree with and seem to despise, rather than it being an example of human cruelty and destruction without religious motivations. People are capable of such things, with or without the involvement of religion after all. |
![]() |
Carter doesn't always hit the mark with his art. But when he does, he certainly knocks it out of the ballpark. An emaciated concentration camp prisoner certainly does set the mood for a tract like this. Though, as Anna points out, it's a shame it just so happens to be this tract in particular. |
Page 2 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
At first glance, when I first saw this page I did not read that word as “kite”. Is it wrong that I wouldn't put Chick above using language like that?
You’d think that something like this would cause things to blow sky high, and perhaps back in the mid-80's they certainly would have. But these days? You turn on the news and you see pretty much the same sorts of stuff and it's all just treated as “business as usual”. |
![]() |
Right off the bat, we see that this tract uses Alberto Rivera as its primary reference. To call Alberto an unreliable source is an understatement. I recommend you peruse our biography of Alberto, as Anna mentioned in the Introduction. But to summarize, think QAnon, but the bad guys are all Catholics, primarily Jesuits.
Why are the Nazis protesting the Daughters of the American Revolution? American Nazis have wrapped themselves in the flag since the beginning. The JDL were pretty prominent when this tract was written, but have since faded into obscurity. And if this tract were updated, the guys in the truck would be more likely to be Proud Boys, or the Atomwaffen Division. |
![]() |
That and according to Rivera, the Jesuits function as the equivalent of the CIA (human rights violations included) under the command of a second Pope and their aspirations to take over the world. Of course, the seeming issue is that the more people involved in a conspiracy, the less likely it is to remain hidden. Especially for what seems to be the entirety of Jesuit/Catholic history and involving what might very well be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. I must admit, if it were actually true, then I would not mind acquiring some information of my own on pulling off such a large conspiracy. For example, if I wanted to start a giant conspiracy for world peace. |
Page 3 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
I have read quite a few statements by Holocaust survivors, and while some might harbor these sentiments, more likely their anger would be towards the Nazis in particular, and the German people (who stood by) in general. After all, there is the Righteous Among the Nations.
You pretty much never see American Nazis in this regalia any more. The guy on the right reminds me of Henry Gibson in this scene. |
![]() |
Very true. Neo-nazis don't frequently let the mask slip quite this much. Although, something gives me the feeling we're going to be seeing more of this type of full-throated enthusiasm in the months and years to come. |
![]() |
For the sake of argument, even if his sentiment is correct, I am going to point to this bit of information that seems quite suggestive that within Nazi Germany, the largest supporters of their actions were Protestant Christians, given that Martin Luther (the seminal figure of the Protestant Reformation) was widely lauded in Nazi Germany.
And to pre-empt the tract, considering that Rivera is cited as a primary source… the Pope actually condemned the Nazi practices, not supported them, including the Nazi ideologies regarding racism and antisemitism. And what is decreed by the Pope typically flows down to practice by most, if not all Catholics… |
![]() |
If you were a Holocaust survivor, why in the bloody blue hell would you come to a parade like this in the first place? Were they just out shopping and this happened to drive by? Do they just live in Savannah or something? |
Page 4 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Holocaust Denial is a real thing, and the deniers are often not outward Nazis (though they certainly fit the mold). Eisenhower foresaw this at the end of the war. As far as seeing it coming again, Mr. Weiss isn’t too far off. |
![]() |
They saw fit to reprint the tract, and all they felt the need to ditch here was the grawlix? Absolutely mind-boggling. |
![]() |
*sighs in exasperation, as whispers start to fill my mind from those who faced discrimination resulting in death. My emotions begin to take over, as I address the crowd in the panel* Yes, he is Jewish and a human. But I know what you lot are… you lot, and those in life who think like you are the swine, not him. And speaking of rearranging faces…
Perhaps you will ALL need to see yourselves for what you really are, so let me kindly give you a gift for your behaviour. I am positive you will greatly appreciate seeing your inner beauty: ahnae ohmmaeahn eeoooh deae-ra-fe eeoooh feoo-ra-ku ku-haooeay-de-luahm-fuahn neeoooh deahm nah-de-deah-pe ah-ra-de noo-fu fumah-kuneeoooh ah-kuk-haae-ra-lu ohae-see eeoooh deae-ra-de kuk-haeayahah-ku nah-de-fuae ah-kuk-haae-ra-lu oo-de kuk-haeaymeayae-fu haeay-ra-deeay-fe seeoon-fu teah-seeee-ku-haoo-lu kuk-haeayah-pe eeoooh haeay demee-kuahn mmeay-fe![]() Let us hope that gazing upon their inner beauty might start them on a journey of self-improvement. *giggles and smiles eerily* Else it would be quite bad if they do not… |
Page 5 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Here it comes, ‘inquisition’. Cue Alberto… |
![]() |
Nobody expects the Inquisition!
Okay, okay… this is totally neither the time nor the place for this. |
![]() |
*my anger at this tract grows, moved along by the growing whispers in my head and the swirling of barely perceptible spirits surrounding me and echoed by the lights beginning to flicker*
Whoever this individual is really needs to get his definitions straight. I understand Chick wrote this to use evocative language, but that is no excuse for misinformation and inaccuracy. So that we can all be singing the same music… Definition of ‘holocaust’: a very large amount of destruction, especially by fire or heat, or the killing of very large numbers of people. As to why I point out the definitions… first, specify that Mr Weiss was a survivor of ‘the Holocaust’, since that is the event you are referring to. Give the tragedy of the deaths of millions of people the respect it deserves, and do not simply call it ‘the holocaust’. Even if it is accurate by definitions, cheapening the event itself does not bode well. Comparing the Holocaust to an inquisition based on those definitions is one of those things which will result in at absolute minimum, someone striking you in the face for the comparison, especially if they were there themselves, or have parents and grandparents who were involved. Second, while the definition of ‘inquisition’ does mention a ‘period of asking questions in an unfriendly way’, do you notice a certain word is absent from the definitions I gave? The word ‘kill’. And before you try to say that “unfriendly ways” could mean murder, inquisitions ask questions for a purpose, such as in addressing apostasy, blasphemy, witchcraft and heresy. But one important note: “... the overwhelming majority of sentences consisted of penances, but convictions of unrepentant heresy were handed over to the secular courts for the application of local law, which generally resulted in execution or life imprisonment.” This would mean government law at the time was responsible for the executions, kind of like how US law in certain states has the death penalty for crimes like murder as set by the Government. Or in the case of California (where you company is based), you have formally suspended it, but still have it in your statutes. Just in case you want to unsuspend it so that you can start executing criminals. How curious… |
![]() |
Did somebody say “music”?
All right… I'll stop now. |
![]() |
And the various Inquisitions were based on ensuring religious orthodoxy. Hitler and the Nazis considered Jews to be a race completely separate from their faith. If your parents were Jews, who converted to Christianity before you were born, you were Jew under Nazi law. Even marrying a Jew made you a Jew. This was all quite legalistically spelled out, including the term mischling. Non-Aryans were untermenschen, and none more so than the Jews. |
Page 6 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Must I repeat my words from a prior dissection about Himmler and the SS and their role in the persecution of Catholics in Germany at the time? |
![]() |
We have accessed the book, Secret History of the Jesuits. The chapter referenced is likely typical of the whole book. The author will state a fact, then follow with an assertion with no evidence behind it. Basically it is nonsense.
And this “rumors in the camps” is complete fabricated nonsense. Nothing like that existed. Though some scholars did put God on trial. |
![]() |
To be honest, you kind of just described Chick's entire business model to a “T”. That is also pretty much the textbook definition of “Christian Apologist” as well. |
![]() |
As for the claim the Gestapo were Jesuits, this is batshit crazy. Of all the Nazi high command, none was less Christian than Himmler, who oversaw the SS and the Gestapo. While he started out as a devout Catholic, after he joined the party in the 20s, he rapidly leaned into Paganism. And he was no fan of Christianity.
In Peter Longerich’s book, Heinrich Himmler: A Life (pg 265) we read: “In his efforts to develop a Germanic myth for the SS, Himmler sought in particular to portray the pre-Christian world of the Germans as exemplary and their Christianization as a fatal error, even a crime. His aim was to demonstrate that the true heart of medieval German history was Germanic, obscured by the restrictive facade of Christianity. … In 1937 he (Himmler) wrote down the following thoughts: We are living in the era of the final confrontation with Christianity. It is up to the Schutzstaffel to install in the German people ideological principles of life other than Christian ones over the next fifty years.”He was deep into pseudohistory, overseeing the Ahnenerbe, which amongst other ‘research’, aimed at proving that the Germans descended from Atlantis. Even Hitler thought the guy was nutty. |
![]() |
Apparently not “nutty” enough, considering the fact that most if not all of the Nazi Party were actively engaged in the Kirchenkampf and held similar anti-Christian sentiments. |
![]() |
When your fellow Nazi’s are listening to your crazy ramblings and going “Hey, man. Why don't you cool it. You're sounding a little unhinged there.” you know you have to have crossed some kind of a line. |
Page 7 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Hitler was in no way a faithful Catholic. While he never disavowed his faith for political reasons, he was no Christian. His exact beliefs are a matter of debate, but Albert Speer, Reich architect and minister of armaments, knew Hitler as well as anyone.
The full article on Hitler’s religious views is here, but an assertion by Speer bears quoting here: “Hitler … viewed Christianity as the wrong religion for the "Germanic temperament": … Hitler would say: "You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the fatherland as the highest good? The Mohameddan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"And the assertion that the Catholics can somehow silence facts they don’t like, is certainly contradicted by the priestly child sex abuse scandal, which has had extensive news coverage. |
![]() |
Yeah, Hitler claimed to be a Catholic. But as you jackwagons are so keen to point out, just because you say you're a Christian it doesn't necessarily mean you are. Then again, you guys don’t consider Catholics to be Christians at all… so who can even say?
“For more information about what I'm saying, read this other thing, which I also wrote!” It's like you guys are all reading from the same playbook or something. |
![]() |
To further drive the nails in, if the Catholics could actually “silence” facts they did not like, why did they not immediately “silence” Alberto and Chick, once the first anti-Catholic material citing Rivera and published by Chick Publications? For how much power and influence you have said the Catholics have, they seem to do a terrible job when it comes to assassinations and exerting said power.
As for the Council of Trent, that is something I will delve into later, when Chick details which specific canons he has issue with. Diving into and reviewing every single canon from the Council of Trent, let alone other Councils would in of itself be a much larger and separate task to this dissection. |
Page 8 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
I know Weiss is supposed to be a Jew. But how could you be this riled up over Christians and not know what the Council of Trent was? |
![]() |
In fairness to Mr. Weiss, as someone who endured years of Saturday School, I can attest that this is a topic that never came up. Christian church history really got almost no coverage. Things like how the trial of Jesus in the Gospels would have violated numerous Jewish laws was more emphasized. I wasn't familiar with it myself until this dissection and I have studied Christianity a fair bit. |
![]() |
Interesting… you cite a random statement about how they “legally slaughtered heretics to cleanse the land”, but not cite where you pulled that exact quote from Pope John XXII from. It is almost like you made up that quotation, likely to push your twisted and false narrative. Suffice to say, the Second Vatican Council was actually aimed at addressing issues within the Catholic Church that had arisen because of the Council of Trent. In short, in the time period from the Council of Trent, to the Second Vatican Council (which was about 418 years), the Catholic Church had become quite insular. Indeed, one such change that was brought by the Second Vatican Council actually encouraged scriptural reading of the Bible rather than relying solely on devotional writings, booklets and the lives of the Saints, as decreed by both The Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council. |
![]() |
It's also pretty shady that they needed to reach all the way back to an encyclopedia written in 1979 to do it. That was bad enough in 1984 when the tract was first written. To have it survive the reprint is just inexcusable. |
Page 9 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
And many Protestants believe that other Protestants who don’t follow their sect’s version of Protestantism to be heretics. Hell is going to be awfully crowded. |
![]() |
So in this day (1971) of landlines and fax machines, we are expected to accept as realistic this level of precise coordination and planning, not to mention a highly efficient and completely secret organization, which the FBI had not managed to infiltrate. Speaking of the FBI, Chick actually wrote a letter to the FBI asking them to collaborate on this tract. It took them all of nine days to respond, no thanks. |
![]() |
My suspicion is that it is Chick attempting to establish a double standard. That he and people who believe his specific Protestant beliefs are allowed to do almost everything in the name of Jesus (except kill apparently, if the tagline is to be believed), but those who do not believe what they believe are not allowed to.
I will try to clarify the Council of Trent items as best as I can (and if you do happen to wonder how I am seemingly versed on theology, consider the events that I have lived through), so that you might see that the ‘paraphrasing’ is not as accurate as Chick and Rivera would want you to believe. The Council of Trent also was prompted by the Protestant Reformation, which is worth considering as to why their decrees are what they are. Or in other words, context matters:
|
Page 10 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Name the paper. Go on Jack, what paper and which edition? I'm not saying you made this quote up out of whole cloth, but if you're going to quote a thing, you have to cite the actual thing and not the fucking book you want to plug. |
![]() |
Chick seems to be the primary source for the quote in the right hand panel, which is not, to say it mildly, well regarded as to legitimacy.
The relationship between Popes Pius XI and XII and the Third Reich is hotly debated by historians. The Concordat basically said that the Church would stay out of politics, in exchange for Hitler leaving the Church alone. It should surprise no one that Hitler almost immediately violated it. As pointed out earlier, Pius XI responded with the Mit brennender Sorge, complaining about this treatment and rejecting aspects of the Nazi agenda as regards human rights. A reasonable summary is that the Catholic Church was somewhat constrained in how they could act, but also trusted Hitler more than they should have, and remained silent when to speak out might have had an impact. They performed some redemptive acts, like saving some Jews from execution. But on the other hand, a number of priests and bishops set up ratlines to help Nazis escape to South America. |
![]() |
Hey… if you can't trust a Nazi, who can you trust, amirite? |
![]() |
I am going to have to call into question the validity of the right panel and the quote that the author of “The Secret History of Jesuits” says was printed by the Spanish press about the death of Hitler. Aside from minor things (like specifying two dates in which said quote could have been printed, that being both 3 May 1945 and 21 July 1945), as well as a lack of ability to find this mysterious “Reforme” that he cites, much less any record of the Spanish Press at the time citing those words… there is also the overall cultural and political climate of Spain at that time as Boudreaux alluded to.
Under Francoist Spain, Roman Catholicism was the state religion (as part of what was called National Catholicism), and Franco himself was often depicted as a fervent Catholic. Which would have put him at odds with the attempts made by Hitler to manipulate Christianity at the time, and was one of the avenues which resulted in the "Mit brennender Sorge", as pointed out earlier. Indeed, Hitler’s views on religion were not in line with the teachings of Catholicism. You might have to forgive my misunderstanding of the politics of countries, or even dare I say, humanity in general, but when you persecute people for things like say religious belief, does it not mean that you despise them because of said belief? Or are you legitimately attempting to say that persecution of others is showing your love? I would recommend that you think about your answer very carefully. After all, to paraphrase Luke 6:31: “Treat others as you yourself wish to be treated”. |
Page 11 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Jeez, does anyone really believe that Hitler required church authority to do anything he wished? He wielded absolute power. And amazingly for Chick, the quote is accurate, but just political window dressing on Hitler’s part. |
![]() |
It's perfectly all right. I'm sure Mr. Hitler there claimed that he would only be a dictator on Day One. And how can you not trust a guy with such a cute little moustache? |
![]() |
*scowls, the lights dimming substantially in response to my mood. Soft whispers and barely visible outlines of screaming spirits are perceived* You mean this Concordat? The one that Hitler and the Nazi Party almost immediately violated after it was signed, resulting in the Nazi persecution of Catholics in Germany? How does this point to Hitler having Catholic backing for his actions when he was busy persecuting Catholics? |
Page 12 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
What is tragic is that this might be one of the only things in the entire tract that is accurate, that being a historical photograph. Though for whatever reason, Chick chose to cut out Councilor Klee (who was the Reich Interior Ministry and the German Embassy councilor at the time) from the very right of the photograph. As you can see in the full version of the photograph in question. |
![]() |
Mmmm… quite. That's some straight-up Stalinist-type behavior right there. |
![]() |
Even the text is reasonably accurate. A stopped clock is correct twice a day… |
Page 13 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
The Catholic Church is still enormous, and wields a ridiculous (and inexcusable) amount of power in this day and age. But the steam they had in their PR engine during days gone by has been significantly depleted over the last several decades. To still think they're something like the real-world equivalent of HYDRA is so ridiculous it doesn't even deserve rebuttal. |
![]() |
As far as ‘loving Jews’ goes, amongst fundamentalists, they only pretend to do so under their bizarre end times imaginings, where 144,000 Jews are required to serve as First Fruits. The rest of course can (literally) go to Hell. |
![]() |
Oh dear... you may have met with a terrible fate since you chose to make this particular claim. Now, my guess is that you are referring to this particular element as a way of criticising the Catholics for supposedly having an institution that you believe existed to ally itself with Nazi Germany (which was busy persecuting Catholics) so that they could exterminate Jewish people.
I checked your source and you are basing your entire premise on the fact that your source says that they had a name change to the “Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith” and that “the original functions have not substantially changed”. And while it does say that “as a tribunal, it judged heresy and all offenses leading to a suspicion of heresy”, I do not see where that says they were collaborating with Nazi Germany to exterminate the Jewish people in the source you provided. As for the Holy Office (or rather, The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith as they are called now), I am guessing you have twisted their intentions when it has been identified that their purpose is to promote and safeguard the doctrine on faith and morals, including investigations into what they consider ‘grave delicts’, such as crimes against the Eucharist and the sacrament of Penance (such as Item 3 and 4 on Page 9) as well as *smirks* crimes against the Sixth/Seventh Commandment committed by a member of the clergy against a person under the age of eighteen, as well as cases in which confessors either solicit or provoke sex from penitents. So if I understand this correctly… *scowls heavily, such that the growing darkness suffocates the lights until they are mere embers amidst the swallowing abyss, as whispers and screams can be heard surrounding you* you are upset that they have an institution of their church that tries to function as a sort of ‘Internal Investigations’, policing their own clergy for violations against church teaching and possible sexual abuse of believers? And you actually believe they are responsible for The Holocaust? Whether they are actually effective or not as an entity is a different matter (there have been numerous cases over the years), and even one of their declarations on Catholic doctrine (Dignitas Infinita) is not without controversies (case in point, some of the things it condemns include discrimination against migrants and homosexuals, but then also condemns things like gender theory, sex reassignment and abortion). As for why I mention it… you and others that think like you are condemning them for believing different to you, trying to present yourself as the morally superior ones, yet are failing at seeing your own hypocrisy. Remember that bit of strangeness from earlier? *smirks* You might actually want to address it... time is precious after all, and you are burning through it kind of quickly... |
Page 14 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
It is certainly amazing that with all that power and influence, the Church has only managed to place one Catholic American president (as of when this tract was written). And this all powerful organization somehow neglected to prevent the persecution of Catholics by the KKK. These global domination organizations sure are a bunch of fuck-ups. |
![]() |
Do not forget their supposed legions of Jesuit assassins that they have. |
![]() |
Hey, they somehow managed to take out Abraham Lincoln of all people (according to Chick, at least). |
![]() |
Maybe a side tangent, but I am reminded of a fable that I recall hearing in my years, that being “Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow”. While it can often be a fable about greed, I would like to think that it applies in a different sort of sense here. They are grasping at shadows of supposedly all-powerful organisations that are not doing very good jobs of showing how powerful they are, and in the process, losing the substance of their minds. |
Page 15 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
My limited understanding of US politics and media is that the US media does not seem to be very ‘pro-Catholic’, much less ‘pro-religious’. If anything, it seems very ‘political’ and ‘capitalistic’.
As for the revisions between editions (the left panel specifically), what exactly is surprising about a Catholic actor being praised for his acting by Catholics, particularly since he had several television shows and theatrical performances BEFORE he was cast as Archie Bunker? Or are you ignoring all of his past work because this one specific depiction seemingly hurt you that much? For this “Archie Bunker” character, I am once again reminded of words I had said in an earlier dissection. If the character is intended to be an angry male bigot and just happens to be a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant, then why does this bother you if it is untrue? Or is it perhaps one of those things, where you actually are upset that it is true and you felt insulted by it being true to life? |
![]() |
Yup. Archie Bunker is definitely a character everyone is meant to admire and emulate. |
![]() |
The media definitely is all over the molestation scandal in the US. An interesting tidbit is that All In the Family had a much wider appeal in the US than one might have expected. Quite a few people identified strongly with the Archie Bunker character, and thought that he was a great role model. In a way, he presaged the rise of Trump. |
![]() |
Thank you kindly for confirming that the US media had been covering that particular scandal, Boudreaux.
For the right panel… I was unable to find that exact quotation as written in the America Magazine. But interestingly enough, I found one particular short article in Volume 104, Issue 5 on page 134 in that magazine titled "New Anti-Catholic Drive" from October 1960. The article itself details that there were plans to mail in “tens of millions of pieces of anti-Catholic literature”, and that it was being driven by… *smirks* the National Association of Evangelicals, the Southern Baptist Convention and the Protestants and Other Americans United. And that the actions were being funded by “wealthy conservatives” via “tax-deductible contributions”. It was speculated that they wanted to keep a liberal away from being President. Two things stand out to me… One, for such a drive to occur in the first place would mean that Ewin’s quotation is either not true or if true, heavily taken out of context; seeing as there seems to be several Protestant organisations planing to mail in anti-Catholic literature for a presidential election. So I doubt the US has “virtually ceased to be Protestant”. And two, if you are getting that worked up over earthly politics, is that not a contradiction against Christ’s teachings, such as John 18:36? Or what about the one recounted in three separate gospels, that being Matthew 22:15 - 22, Mark 12:13 - 17 and Luke 20:20 - 26? One final thing to consider… you know that Second Vatican Council you seem to be attacking so fervently? Within that Council, they also made a decree titled Dignitatis humanae and one major element of it is that 'religious freedom is a civil right and should be recognised in constitutional law’. Now it might just be me, but if the supposed goal of the Catholics is to make the entire USA a Catholic state… why would they have a decree that promotes religious freedom? If anything, they would have said something like: “Religious freedom is not a civil right and should not be recognised in constitutional law.” |
![]() |
There absolutely were anti-Catholic attacks against Kennedy in 1960. I tend to doubt whether it was as large as America Magazine claims, and as of 1954, it could not legally be tax deductible. So there is some hyperbole. But the campaign certainly happened, and it undoubtedly cost Kennedy some votes. Here is an example of one of the fliers. By the time Biden ran in 2020, this was a non-issue. But this whole ‘pro-Catholic’ nonsense in the tract is Alberto-fueled hallucinations. |
Page 16 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
I could turn this whole page blue with the sheer amount of “CITATION fucking![]() So is America about to be turned into a Catholic dominated theocracy, or a Muslim-run Shiara Caliphate? Which is it, Jack? What shadowy cabal is about to overthrow our nation and install a sympathizing puppet government, exactly? |
![]() |
That, and we must all fear Hispanics, because they are mostly *gasp* Catholics! |
![]() |
I find it quite humorous that the left panel was updated from the original (you can see the differences via mouse-over) to specify that Bill Clinton was “indoctrinated at Jesuit Georgetown University”. So much for that supposed indoctrination, considering he was accused of violating the Sixth/Seventh Commandment.
As for the right panel… back in 1984, when the tract says it was copyrighted, the Notre Dame university was (funnily enough) debating about how Catholic they ought to be, along with other Catholic universities, such as Fordham and Georgetown. And this was following the Second Vatican Council, and its broader approach for relations with the world and other Christian branches. I see you removed the claim in the revised version, to which I would ask, why? You seem quite adamant on leaving in other things between versions that are arguably very serious accusations, but accusing Notre Dame University was apparently too dangerous to retain? |
Page 17 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
How you would secretly pass a law going “SURPRISE, CATHOLICISM IS THE ONLY VALID RELIGION NOW” is absolutely beyond me. |
![]() |
This just seems improbable. I was not aware that the US Government worked on a system of secretly passing laws, especially one that would immediately make the US engaged in Nationalistic Catholicism without issues in the respective levels of Government. This also does not even delve into what kind of response the US population would have if the freedom of religion as granted by the Constitution was imposed upon by the Government, considering how some people responded when the President at the time was defeated by his opponent in the polls back in 2021.
I learn something new every day it seems. |
![]() |
And there is certainly no impetus to conduct things in secret, when they are proud of their awfulness. |
![]() |
“What about our constitution?”
BAH-HAH-HAH-HAAAA! You remember when people actually used to ask questions like this? How positively quaint. |
Page 18 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Yeah. There's lunatics in the South that want to call a convention to secede from the Union. There's a minority of people who want all sorts of ridiculous things. Doesn't mean it's actually going to happen. |
![]() |
I do not consider myself well-versed in US politics, so take what I say with some salt (or so the expression goes).
I assume that Chick is referring to this practice, in which states can propose amendments to the Constitution as per Article V of the US Constitution. I did try to look into records to see if the US Government ever considered changes to the Constitution that would allow it to be changed without voting from the general public and somehow not violate the Constitution, but I was not able to find such a thing. So I am going to have to ask for a citation and source for this, including the supposed pro-Catholic Congress of the United States. |
![]() |
It is mostly bunk. Amendments to the Constitution have an extremely high bar, requiring two thirds approval in the House and Senate, and then three fourths of the States must approve it for it to be added to the Constitution. I can’t find a reference to such a Convention being called in the 1980s. But the way it would work is, two thirds of the states would need to call it, all the states would participate, and then three fourths of the states would need to approve the results. Such a situation was highly unlikely then, and unimaginable in today’s closely divided nation. |
Page 19 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
*the lights flicker again, the whispers returning in full force* So I see we are back to this are we? I shall call your attention to my earlier words from Page 5 and Page 13.
That said, I do admit confusion as to what the relevance of Canon Law has to do with your claim that the Catholic Church has to set up tribunals to record names of those under suspicion. Especially since the 1983 Code of Canon Law predominantly (as does earlier canon law) is intended to serve a set of ordinances and regulations made by church leadership for adherents of a church and its members, including penitents and clergy. But for the sake of argument, let us say it is actually a record of names that are under suspicion by the Catholic Church. Why would you make such a list publicly available? That seems quite asinine and contrary to that purpose, as what is to stop people reading it, checking if they are under suspicion and then altering their behaviour to deflect suspicion? |
Page 20 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. You're not going to win a lot of people over to your cause by calling them Whores. More flies with honey than vinegar, my guy. |
![]() |
Again, using Alberto as a reference here is akin to using David Icke as a reference on, pretty much anything. And Christians have been slaughtering other Christians, over religion, for at least 800 years if not longer. |
![]() |
In a tract focusing on the Holocaust and the suffering of the Jewish people, you bring this topic into it? I had thought it addressed briefly in an earlier dissection, but since you decide to repeat that particular notion in a tract discussing the Holocaust, I shall visit it at your insistence, and with more clarity.
For the Vatican being the Whore of Babylon, which according to you is detailed in Revelation 17 and 18, I shall address this as briefly as I can, but since I do not know whether you interpret the Bible literally or not and to what extent, I will do both. The easiest of the two to address first - if it is a strict literal reading, then I do not see the Catholic Church ever turn up in the supposedly non-corrupted KJV translation, much less in those Chapters, which is linked previously. The second of the two is next. Even if I give a concession that you are using the historical-grammatical method of biblical literalism (rather than based on the dictionary definition of literalism), then let us address some of these claims:
I would hope that you would remain civil and not resort to pointless accusations of witchcraft and other such things. But I have my doubts that you will remain civil. |
Page 21 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
Huh. To my understanding the reason most Jews don't consider Jesus to be the Messiah is because they don't think the stories about him are true and/or because he doesn't actually fit the messianic criteria in several rather important ways, but yeah I'd say “I'm not joining your fan club because other people in it tried to kill me several times” is pretty goddamn valid. |
![]() |
That is right. Chick and his ilk notwithstanding, Jesus did not fulfill the few passages in the Old Testament that actually refers to the messiah. Saying he will fulfil them in the Second Coming doesn’t quite cut it.
And this No True Scotsman crap is disgusting. Protestants have harmed people, including Jews, in Jesus’s name, as long as the religion has existed. The Nazi anti-semitism can be traced back to Martin Luther, who was a virulent anti-semite. But I guess he, and those who followed in his footsteps, weren’t True Christians(™). |
![]() |
And since we are on this topic… here are some examples of Christians killing people and their motivations. Or propagated messages of justifiable homicide which likely served to lead to an actual homicide.
I am wondering if you notice certain elements with these. Such as the fact that they all generally believed their own interpretations of the Bible and generally eschewed most governing structures (unlike the other major denominations). Something that is commonly done by some Protestant churches (like the Fundamentalists and Independent Baptists, which my sources say is what you are, Jack), though there are some among you who actually have a degree of governance that is sometimes compared to those of the other major denominations and have governance. So humor me, but what makes your belief set the ‘right’ set? I am quite positive that all of these people I mentioned in the first paragraph believed their interpretations were the ‘right’ one and believed they were within the ‘Grace of God’. And they all somehow knew via sheer human confidence that they were ‘saved’ from Hell, since that is part of the Protestant way that you decried the Catholics for opposing in the Council of Trent. |
Page 22 ⇑ ⇓
Conclusion ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
Back in the early days of the Internet, before the Web, I countered Holocaust deniers’ lies online. While Chick does not deny the Holocaust took place, nor its extent, he obscures the part that antisemitism played on how Protestant Christian churches treated the Jewish people, including being the majority support for the Nazi Party within Germany. By doing so, while not strictly a denier, he is a fellow traveler. In addition, the tract itself also portrays Jewish people (such as Mr Weiss) as simple-minded and easily hoodwinked.
Chick tries to make this a Protestants Good, Catholics Bad narrative, with respect to the Holocaust. All the Protestant Christian denominations, save one, tried to accommodate Naziism, to a greater or lesser degree. That one sect was the Jehovah’s Witnesses. While certainly the JWs can be criticized, they refused to compromise their faith. As a result, around a quarter of them were sent to concentration camps, and many of those died. Other protestant sects took a different approach, ranging from making concessions, to full on Nazi support, as with the Seventh Day Adventists and the German Church. The latter, definitely Protestant, was created by the Nazi party. After the Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is easy to determine which denomination suffered the most executions per capita due to their faith. And that was the Catholics. This fact alone should render Chick’s arguments demonstrably false. Surely if the Nazi party was run by Jesuits as Chick claims, they could have prevented the murders of thousands of priests and nuns. All in all, one of his more odious tracts, as it trivializes the Holocaust by turning it into an anti-Catholic screed. This might be one of the few tracts that manages to offend three faiths: Judaism, Catholicism and mainstream Protestantism. I would be surprised if a single Jew was prompted to convert by this tract. But then, they are not the target market for it. |
![]() |
Well this is just Fifty Shades of Gross, right here. This tract is both offensive and exhausting at the same time. Perhaps it's the realization how true to life some of its material hits today, even 40 years after it was first published. Trying to work through this is like trying to carry a 75 lbs. anvil with a huge swastika etched on one side and a big ‘ol cross etched on the other through an endless festering swamp. I'm personally more prone to allow this type of all-consuming despair to overtake me than many, but I think that given the general direction the world is currently heading, it's more important than ever to recognize how this sort of thinking can paralyze one from taking positive action that needs to be taken, and how that tendency is very intentional and can be exploited by those who seek to benefit from good people doing nothing to further their own power. All I can really say is that allowing yourself to sink into that kind of complacency and despair is really all it's going to take to let the bad guys win, and it's going to take you (yes, YOU) trying to do something about it to ultimately prevent that.
I promise y'all something better next time. Stay tuned. |
![]() |
*finishes humming a haunting and mournful lament, before addressing you* Lest there is any misunderstanding, I mourn not for what words I have said, nor the words said by the other commentators. My lamentations are for those who died in the Holocaust having the circumstances of their persecution at the hands of the Nazi Regime mutilated and perverted by someone like Chick to fill some delusion of grandeur that his beliefs are the victim of persecution by an entity significantly larger than them, to which he has chosen the Catholic Church as this ‘persecutor’.
Even if I were to accept that the Catholic Church is planning to enthrall the USA and turn it to a Catholic country, and that Protestants are seemingly being persecuted by them, it would be wise to not flatter yourself, Chick. Your specific set of Protestant beliefs (Independent Baptists last I checked) has significantly less adherents in number than the adherents of the other two major denominations (Catholicism and Orthodoxy), let alone the numbers of adherents in other Protestant denominations, such as the Anglicans. And yet, in some strange thought process, you and others like you decided this Tract would be a good idea to publish, that understating the suffrage of the Jewish people by Nazi Germany to push a false narrative of “Catholics want to rule the world” was acceptable. This tract is one of those that is close to Lisa in terms of blatant disregard and disrespect for people who have suffered such actions by other humans. And you wonder why I mourn, weep and lament, why I often seclude myself away from others. This is but one aspect - and you were given glimpses of another throughout both this dissection and in others I have been present for. But do not mistake my seclusion for inactivity; I am very much engaged in activities intending to address what I can in the world, even if it is not overtly visible. As Jessica alluded to, however, it often takes the inaction of good people to allow those with aspirations of furthering their own selfish interests to do so. To the people from much earlier in the dissection, I hope you were able to get a good look at the inner beauty of your personalities and how you look to others. Hopefully you have taken steps to address those personality elements and actually become better people for it. As should anyone else who might have similar personalities. And if you did not… then I shall be looking forward to welcoming some new residents to the lands around my abode. Life flourishes in many beautiful and mysterious ways after all. There is little more that I can add that I have not already said, nor that others have said, so I shall take my leave, dear readers. Until the next time, whenever that may be, may the roads of your lives be straight, with nary an adversity to trouble you. *begins to hum a sorrowful threnody, as I curtsey, before turning to leave*. |
Further Reading ⇑ ⇓
- Comments Section at Boolean Union
Other Reviews & Commentaries ⇑
- Space Battles (User: Slick146) (via Boolean Union) - https://boolean-union.com/dissections/spacebattles/SLK146.CHICK.HOLO.DISCT.html
Jessica
Anna
Boudreaux