Toronto, Ontario

--- Upon resuming on Monday, May 11, 1998

    at 10:10 a.m.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning.  Mr. Freiman, are you still leading?

         MR. FREIMAN:  I am, sir.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  I would like to place something on the record, if I may.

         I just want to place on record my client's position that we are proceeding under protest.  We are of the view that this Tribunal, like the Tribunal in the Bell Canada case is tainted with a reasonable apprehension of bias for the same reasons as given by Madam Justice McGillis in the Bell case.  We are only appearing under protest to protect my client's position in the event that her decision does not stand on appeal.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Christie.  Mr. Freiman, please.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Since we are putting things on the record, the record may wish to show that the Panel may take notice of the fact that the Federal Court last week handed down a decision dismissing Mr. Christie's motion to stay this Tribunal pending the resolution of the Bell matter or in light of the  Bell matter.

         Just to make things easier, I have a set of documents which, as with previous Commission witnesses, will assist the Tribunal in following the evidence of the witness.  I intend to introduce the documents through the next witness.  Prior to calling him and so as to minimize disruption, I propose to distribute the documents.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  Just for the record, I don't recall receiving any notice of any of these documents, with the exception of the curriculum vitae of Dr. Schweitzer.

         MR. FREIMAN:  We might as well talk about it now.  All that we have here is Professor Schweitzer's curriculum vitae and a summary of the proposed evidence that he will be giving today by way of an aide-memoir.  Attached to it is a number of documents that he will be referring to, including a table that he prepared, and a number of excerpts from HR-2, the book of Zundelsite documents to which Professor Schweitzer will be making reference.  It is simply easier to have them all in one place.

         The documents that Mr. Christie is worried about are the curriculum vitae of Professor Schweitzer which he has had for some four months, the aide-memoir, which is merely an expanded version of the lengthy disclosure that was provided to Mr. Christie in December, and attached to it are simply documents to which Professor Schweitzer will be referring.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I assume you will justify these documents as the evidence proceeds.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Yes.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  When my friend refers to a lengthy aide-memoir, I think he is referring to a précis of Memorandum on Lethal Antisemitism, Old and New, which is four pages long, and the curriculum vitae.  Is that what my friend is referring to as lengthy disclosure?

         MR. FREIMAN:  Yes.  We have now triple-spaced and expanded.  That was a précis, and this is the memorandum.  We have now expanded it and triple-spaced the 17 pages from its original form, which means we have probably added a page and a half of text.

         With that introduction, I would call Professor Frederick Schweitzer.

         THE REGISTRAR:  Mr. Freiman, would you like this book of documents filed now or individually?

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I suggest we hold it for now.

SWORN:  FREDERICK M. SCHWEITZER

        5500 Fieldston Road, Apt. 9GG

        Bronx, New York, 10471

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF RE QUALIFICATIONS

         MR. FREIMAN:

         Q.   Professor Schweitzer, the documents that I have given to the Tribunal correspond to a book that is entitled "The Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer" which we prepared last night.  I wonder if you could open it at tab 1.

         Professor Schweitzer, is this your curriculum vitae?

         A.   It is.

         MR. FREIMAN:  In anticipation of the Tribunal's ruling, I won't ask for the material to be marked until I ask for the entire document to be put in, or we can refer to tab 1 and simply have it marked as Exhibit 1, at the Chair's discretion.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I will take it that each document goes in, or does not go in, depending on whether there is any objection.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Shall we give it a number now?

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

         MR. FREIMAN:  May that be the next exhibit for the Commission?  It is the curriculum vitae of Frederick M. Schweitzer, appearing as tab 1 of the document entitled "Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer."

         THE REGISTRAR:  The document as described by Mr. Freiman will be filed as Commission Exhibit HR-15.

EXHIBIT NO. HR-15:  Curriculum vitae of Frederick M. Schweitzer, found at tab 1 of Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer

         MR. FREIMAN:

         Q.   With reference to Exhibit HR-15, tab 1, Professor Schweitzer, can you tell me what is your present occupation?

         A.   I am a Professor of History at Manhattan College.

         Q.   Where is Manhattan College?

         A.   It is in the Riverdale section of the Bronx.

         Q.   How long have you been a professor at Manhattan College?

         A.   I have been a member of the History Department since 1960.  I began in 1958 part-time.

         Q.   What position do you now hold?

         A.   I am Professor of History.

         Q.   In the past, have you held other positions at Manhattan College and in the History Department?

         A.   Yes, I had the various ranks:  lecturer/instructor; assistant professor; associate professor; and since 1983 I have been a full professor.  I was the Chair of the Department for 10 years, from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s.

         Q.   What are the areas of your current research interest, sir?

         A.   Christian Catholic-Jewish relations; antisemitism; Jewish history.

Q.  Have you had any training in those fields?

         A.   Yes.  At Lehigh I was a history major.  Several of the courses had a segment on Jewish history, particularly one on ancient history where I read, perhaps not in its entirety, much of Josephus' "The Jewish War," a history of the Revolt against Rome.

         I also had the great boon of taking a course in Comparative Religion with Professor Roy Eckardt who just died; I was sad to read his obituary two days ago.  He was the author of 18 books.  He was a Methodist minister and a pioneer in Christian-Jewish relations when it was not particularly the mode.  I think his teaching, his knowledge, his moral courage and his books all had a tremendous impact on me.

         Q.   Have you published in the areas of Jewish history, antisemitism and Jewish-Christian relations?

         A.   Yes, I have.  You will notice in my CV that I published "A History of the Jews since the First Century A.D."

         Q.   How did that publication come about?

         A.   This was in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council's Proclamation Nostra Aetate, the first document in the whole history of the church to speak positively, affirmatively of Jews and Judaism.  It resulted from a joint effort by the Archdiocesan Education Office and Monsignor Rigney and the Anti-Defamation League to publish a history which would help to implement Nostra Aetate which called for Catholic-Jewish dialogue and for setting the historical record straight, for filling in the long blank page that sufficed for Christian Catholic understanding of Jewish history.  It was from the crucifixion until World War II and Israel reborn.

         Q.   What has been the history of that publication?  Was it well received or badly received?

         A.   It was very well received and reviewed.  It was widely used.  It was addressed to high school and college students, essentially Catholic Christian students.  It went through a couple of reprintings.  It is now out of print and out of stock, and one of the projects I have in the future is a second edition, updating it and so forth, which comes to me, I might say, at the invitation of the publisher.

         Q.   Have you published anything else in the areas of Jewish history, antisemitism or Jewish-Christian relationship?

         A.   Yes, the work that I co-edited with Marvin Perry, "Jewish-Christian Encounters over the Centuries:  Symbiosis, Prejudice, Holocaust, Dialogue."  That grew out of a conference that he and I arranged, which was jointly sponsored by my college, Manhattan, and his, Baruch of the City University System.  We had 20-some authorities, theologians, historians and so forth.  It covered the whole span of Jewish history and Jewish-Christian relations from the biblical period, the Dead Sea scrolls, to the last one which was my protegé's presentation, Eugene Fisher, on the attempt to remedy and rectify Catholic-Jewish relations since 1965.  I am the author of one of the essays in that collection on Mediaeval Perceptions of Jews and Judaism.  The essay itself is cited.

         Q.   I note that you are currently engaged in a work in progress.  What is that?

         A.   It is myths about Jews.  My friend and frequent collaborator, Marvin Perry, and I will be co-authors.  Some of the myths we are dealing with are the Satanization, the Shylock image myth of the Jews, Holocaust denial, and so on.

         Q.   I note under "Articles" a large number of articles.  I don't propose to go through them.  Could you tell me whether any of those articles deal with the subjects of Jewish history, antisemitism, and Jewish-Christian relations.

         A.   Yes, the bulk of them.  The one enumerated at the bottom of the first page is an essay in historiography.  Mainly, what struck me was that the Jews were referred to not at all or in such an abbreviated, telegraphic way that you could not make sense of Jewish life of a particular age, the Renaissance and so forth.  So it was silence, as it were.  The message was that these people did not have a history and, if they didn't have a history, they didn't exist and they were of no importance.

         That is what I am getting at by  "Distortion by Omission and Simplification" which is the abbreviated tag that refers to Jews as little Jews or as nothing more than usurers, as though there was nothing else to tell about the Jews in that period of 1,000 years.

         A similar essay, "Christian Antisemitism and Interpretation of the Holocaust," is an argument with Professor Rosen who wanted to teach the Holocaust simply by pitching in with the question of racism of the last couple of generations before.  My argument is that you cannot make sense of the Holocaust unless you understand the religious antisemitism that goes back to the Middle Ages.  It is a plain historiographical fact that the Holocaust could not have happened without two millennia of Christian preaching and precedent in word and deed denigrating the Jews, the teaching of contempt, and so forth -- not that Christian authorities, the church or anyone else initiated the Holocaust, but the moral justification and rationalization and the dehumanization of the Jews, the ushering them out of the human race so that one would shrug their shoulders on hearing of their fate.  That is the subject of that essay.

         It is a theme that runs in antisemitism as Hydra.  Hydra, of course, is the Greek mythical monster; if you cut off one head, seven appear.  Sometimes I get discouraged in combatting antisemitism, and that is the metaphor that comes to mind.  Then I remember my great hero, Father James Parkes who said sometime in the 1930s, "How long will it take to remove the antisemitaires from Christian teaching and ritual?  Three hundred years, and we are only a good stretch of the way."

         The piece on Julius Streicher, who was one of the principal Nazis in Hitler's circle, is germane to our proceedings today because it makes the connection with mediaeval antisemitism.  He is, in my judgment, much more a mediaeval anti-Semite than a modern racial kind.

         The book reviews, as you can see by the title, deal with the theme of the Holocaust.  They are published in the AHR, the American Historical Review, which is the premier journal of history, certainly in the United States.

         Q.   Are the books and the articles and the reviews self-published, or are they what we call reviewed?

         A.   They are refereed.  They are published by reputable publishers -- Macmillan, St. Martin's Press, et cetera -- and they have been reviewed by my professional peers.

         Q.   Have you had any function at all or any role in setting of curricula on the teaching of Jewish history or antisemitism?

         A.   Yes.  If you turn over two pages, I have done that in a number of categories.

         Once Nostra Aetate was published in 1965, a year later there came out directives for its implementation, one by the Vatican itself and the other by the Archdiocese of New York.  For 10 years or more I was travelling all over the place in the United States,  going, at the invitation of the Archdiocesan education authorities, to speak on the significance of Nostra Aetate and to suggest ways that it should be implemented in the curricula already operative in these institutions.  Sometimes it would be along the lines of what would be called lesson plans, not only how to do it but "here is how I do it."

         Most of that was at the high school level, but I did go to five or six Catholic colleges.  I went to Carlow College, memorably, in Pittsburgh; to Iona, which is just up the pike in Westchester County; New Rochelle College.  I worked at that level as well.

         Q.   Has that work been recognized at all by any individuals or organizations?

         A.   Yes.  I have received letters of thanks and acknowledgement and copies of curricula changes, additions, revisions and so forth.  Yes, I have a stack of that.

         That chapter is closed.  In a sense, the initiation of grafting onto actual practice pedagogical and curriculum the Nostra Aetate imperatives to set the historical record straight and cleanse the theological tablets has been launched.  It has momentum.  It doesn't need me any more.  There are others.  It just carries on like the proverbial pebble in the lake, in wider and wider circles.

         Where I have most satisfaction in this category is the work I did with Eugene Fisher.  We drew up a revised curriculum; in fact, it was a model curriculum for the Catholic seminaries in the United States.  The seminary is a strategic place.  It is the training place for the priests.  The priests and clergy are, in some measure, the church, with their teaching function and their capacity to give sermons and instruct the faithful and flock in the appreciation, the gratitude, that the Pope and the hierarchy in the church wish us to feel and express for our Jewish brethren and to be knowledgeable, not just to have good intentions but to be knowledgeable about their history, their triumphs, their great achievements as well as their suffering.

         At each diocese or each archdiocese which has a seminary -- not all of them do -- it is a local option to adopt curriculum.  As I understand from Eugene, it is widely adopted all over the United States.

         Q.   Turning to Europe, Professor Schweitzer, what is the Heppenheim conference?

         A.   The Heppenheim conference is an annual meeting of scholars, historians, professors of literature, theologians, educators, with a good sprinkling of high school teachers.  It meets annually.  It is under the auspices of a number of organizations and institutions.  The principal one is the Conference of -- I forget the exact title -- Christians and Jews.  The Martin Buber House often hosts it and sponsors it.

         Martin Niemoeller, who was a fascinating person, a U-boat captain in World War I and who spent 10 years of the Nazi period in jail, afterward made it his business to teach and preach what he thought the lesson of the Holocaust should be. 

         It is dedicated to furthering Christian-Catholic, but not exclusively Catholic -- Christian-Jewish understanding through dialogue, through knowledge and so forth. 

         That was for me a great honour in that the persons who are invited don't come because they want to, but at invitation.  They are outstanding scholars in their fields.  I was asked to give the keynote address, setting the tone for the proceedings which go on for four or five days on why Jewish history should be incorporated into the junior curriculum, in the history of western civilization, in the history of Europe, in the history of England, Belgium, or whatever it may be, and how that might be done and what the proportions are and what its links are to the more general history in that particular course or sphere and then some of the standard works that they might go on.

         Q.   As a result of your keynote address in 1985 and following it, were any of your recommendations accepted as part of the curriculum in Europe?

         A.   Yes.  Somewhat as with Eugene Fisher, several curriculum models were prepared and carried home by those who participated, but conveyed to a much wider public by the CCJ.  I have not followed that closely, but I understand that they are adopted and implemented more and more widely as the process goes on.

         Q.   Do you have any role with the Holocaust Resource Center at Manhattan College?

         A.   Yes.  I am its Director.  That was launched a year ago in April.  Manhattan is a Catholic college, and we want to convey to our own student body some of the things that I referred to earlier.

         We have one grand day each semester, so twice a year, and we began with Franklin Littell who spoke as a Christian minister on the Holocaust as a watershed in Christian history and explained to our audience -- students, faculty and many people from the Riverdale community -- why it should be remembered, why the story has to be told and transmitted to the young so that they may know and learn its lessons as much as possible.

         Beyond that, a theme that I have been concerned with consistently -- he emphasizes preaching and I emphasize teaching, both the teaching and preaching of the New Testament, the Christian gospels, and so forth.

         Q.   As a result of your work in these various fields, have you received any honours, recognitions or awards?

         A.   Yes.  As I mentioned, when my book was published, Cardinal Cook honoured me with a reception.  When I went hopping around the country, from Portland, Oregon to Portland, Maine, the bishop would receive me and often would embarrass me with praise. 

         What tickled me most of all was that recently the Mayor of New York City, who is a former student of mine, when one of the temples in Riverdale honoured me -- I think the occasion was the Holocaust Resource Center's inaugural, to honour me for that and more for my many years devoted to Christian-Jewish understanding and combatting antisemitism.  To my surprise and pleasure, the one who presided and the one who delivered a eulogy on me, remembering our days in the Vatican together in the 1960s, was none other than Rudi Guiliani.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Members of the Panel, I propose that you accept Professor Schweitzer as an expert in Jewish history, antisemitism and Christian-Jewish relations.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Do any counsel in the same interest wish to ask questions?  Mr. Christie, please.

CROSS-EXAMINATION RE QUALIFICATIONS

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Your reference to the Manhattan College Holocaust Resource Center -- is it located in a room in Manhattan College?

         A.   Yes, it has an office about one-third the size of this space.

         Q.   Is it open to the public?

         A.   Oh, yes.

         Q.   Is it locked?

         A.   It is locked as other offices are, yes, at the end of the day and so forth.

         Q.   During the day?

         A.   No.

         Q.   It is open to the public during the day?

         A.   Yes.  It is just a plain office with files, with some posters.  That's about it.

         Q.   Is there someone in attendance there all the time?

         A.   No.  It is run on a shoe string.  I get no stipend for that.  I get no reduced teaching level, nor do my two colleagues, Brother Peter Drake and Rose Santos-Cunningham.  We do it out of devotion to the cause of Christian-Catholic-Jewish understanding.

         Q.   So this is Room 437, is it?

         A.   434.  There is a conference room which is about the size of this which we share with the Peace and Justice Program and with the Institute for Ethics.

         Q.   What does the Manhattan College Holocaust Resource Center consist of?

         A.   Could you clarify that?  Do you mean what do we do?

         Q.   What does it consist of?  If I go to this room, what is there?

         A.   You will find a desk, a computer, a printer, files.  You will find a number of books that have been given to us, some standard works on the Holocaust, and that sort of thing.

         Q.   How many books?

         A.   As of now, I would say 30 or 40.  We have a collection on the Holocaust in the library to which, of course, we have access.

         Q.   You said files.

         A.   Yes, files, letters --

         Q.   How many files?  What kinds of files are there?

         A.   They are ordinary office files, business files.  One of the things we have is what is called the Holocaust Survivors Speakers Bureau, who are survivors who are able and willing to speak on their experiences to students in schools in the Bronx, Yonkers, Riverdale area and northern Manhattan.  These requests for a Holocaust speaker come to us, and we make an arrangement for a Holocaust speaker or sometimes two Holocaust speakers to go to that school and speak for an hour to their students.

         Q.   Do you have a set of Nuremberg trial documents?

         A.   Yes, I do.  I have them on one little disk this size, all 42 volumes.

         Q.   That is in the Holocaust Resource Center?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   And you allow that to be seen by the public?

         A.   Nobody has requested it.  If someone did, I would not have any objection to it.

         Q.   Do you have any books on the Holocaust there?

         A.   Yes, a number.

         Q.   Any revisionist books on the Holocaust?

         A.   No.

         Q.   Have you read any revisionist books?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What have you read?

         A.   I have read the Butz book.

         Q.   What book is that?

         A.   "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century."

         Q.   You have read that.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Anything else?

         A.   No, I haven't read so-called revisionists.  I don't accept that term.  I don't accept that as an accurate designation of what you are referring to.

         Q.   Whatever you might use to describe it, have you read any books that are of a different persuasion than your own on the subject of the Holocaust?

         A.   I have a persuasion, but other historians of the Holocaust, whom I accept on the subject, have somewhat different persuasions.  There is not a rigid, strict, orthodox interpretation of the Holocaust.

         I might mention that I reviewed the Goldhagen book, "Hitler's Willing Executioners," which I panned as a historiographical disaster.

         Q.   Are you a student of the Holocaust?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   How much have you studied in that region?

         A.   How much have I studied?  In what sense are you asking the question?  How many books I have read?

         Q.   What have you done in the study of the Holocaust?

         A.   It is a segment of my 1971 book.  I teach it.  I teach a course on genocide, and the Holocaust is 50 to 60 per cent of the course.

         Q.   What do you rely on for your source material in your teaching?

         A.   Hilberg.

         Q.   Raul Hilberg?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Are you aware of changes in his position over his three-volume work and his latest work?

         A.   Not in specific detail.  The three-volume work I find to be consistent with the original one-volume work.  It is expanded, of course.

         Q.   But is it consistent with regard to the existence of a Hitler order for the extermination of European Jews?

         A.   That question is left open.  There is no Hitler order --

         Q.   In the first book there is.

         A.   That is a question of Holocaust study, interpretation and so forth.  I must tell you that I am not here for that.

         Q.   Do you consider yourself a Holocaust scholar?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You are?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What, then, do you know about the existence or non-existence of a Hitler order?

         A.   Such an order has not been found.  There was a report in January, sometime earlier this year, in the archives that have become opened in the former Soviet Union, of a record, a diary jotting or something of that sort, on Himmler's part that is within a few days of Pearl Harbour, December 7, 1941, in which he indicates that he has come from a  Führer conference and the order, the decision, to annihilate the Jews has been given.  The interpretation of that is not absolutely clear and precise, but it is plausible.  It depends on further research to confirm and to clarify.

         Q.   Does your reliance on Hilberg indicate a knowledge of a Hitler order in the first book or not?

         A.   No.  He says that the murder of the Jews, the decision to annihilate, simply emerged in the course of a process that began step by step, almost innocuously, and built up momentum, and in the crisis of the war went to the last stage of annihilation.  He argues that you get to a stage where you don't need orders.  He talks about the railway men for example.  You interview a railway man and you ask him, "Why did you do this?"  "Orders."  "May I see the orders?"  "Well, there were no orders.  It was understood.  It was expected of me."  That is the system of expectation and understanding that certainly prevailed in the railways, and I would hazard the generalization of that across the regime.

         Q.   I suggest to you that Hilberg in his first book indicated the date of the Hitler order.  Do you deny that or do you affirm that?

         A.   I don't recall that precisely.  However, these works are not dogmatic and doctrinaire.  That book came out in 1961 or 1963.  A lot of work has been done since; a lot of documents have turned up.  Inevitably, in the historical process -- we are still studying the French Revolution, understanding it better, and revising our interpretation and conclusions about it.  That is going on with the Holocaust and undoubtedly will continue to go on.

         Q.   Is there such a thing as a Catholic theologian?

         A.   Yes, I would say Father John Pawlikowski is a Catholic theologian.

         Q.   Are you?

         A.   No, I am a historian.

         Q.   Are you a Christian?

         A.   Yes, I am of Christian heritage.  I am not particularly religious.  I believe in God, that there is a force outside of ourselves and the world that makes for goodness, but that is about as far as I go.

         Q.   Have you been paid by the B'nai Brith to write any books?

         A.   Yes, that first one I was paid $1,000 or something like that.

         Q.   Do you get any percentage from the copyright?

         A.   No.

         Q.   You wrote a book for the B'nai Brith in which they hold copyright?

         A.   No, no, no.  I wrote a book commissioned jointly by the Archdiocesan Education Office -- the one I worked most closely with was Monsignor Rigney who, I am sorry to say, died a few years ago.  It was a collaborative effort.  B'nai Brith made available to me materials and books.  Our library at that time was pretty naked when it came to Jewish history.

         Q.   Did you write a book called "A History of the Jews since the First Century A.D.?"

         A.   That is it.

         Q.   That is it?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Does the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith hold the copyright?

         A.   It does.

         Q.   If you are the author, how did they get the copyright?

         A.   Because they paid me a stipend and they underwrote the costs of production, the typing and all of that.  It was through their good offices -- and I don't know if that entailed expense -- there was an agent that went around to publishers and signed an agreement with Macmillan.

         Q.   So they actually secured the publisher for the book?

         A.   Yes.  I was very young and green in that day and age.  I didn't know my way around in those channels.

         Q.   So they prepared the book by virtue of typing it and --

         A.   No, no, no.  The secretaries at Manhattan College typed the book.  They were paid extra.

         Q.   Did you pay them?

         A.   Yes, I paid them with money that came to me from the Anti-Defamation League, from that stipend.

         Q.   Surely they didn't type a book for $1,000.  There must have been more to it than that.

         A.   No, it was less than that.

         Q.   What was less than that?

         A.   The fees that I paid the secretaries.

         Q.   But you didn't pay their fees out of your $1,000.  B'nai Brith paid you extra for that, did they?

         A.   No.  I had a $1,000 fee.  This was the late 1960s.  This project began in 1968.

         Q.   Have you published any other book?

         A.   Yes, I have published a book co-edited with an essay of mine that was referred to earlier, "Jewish-Christian Encounters over the Centuries: Symbiosis, Prejudice, Holocaust, Dialogue."

         Q.   That is a book of essays of other people, is it?

         A.   I have one there.

         Q.   You have one.  It is basically put together from Donald Gray, Lawrence Schiffman, Lawrence Frizzell, Asher Finkel, Norman Beck, Robert Michael, yourself, Scarlett Freund and Teofilo Ruiz, Eric Gritsch, Susannah Heschel, Marvin Perry,  Celia Heller, John Pawlikowski, Henry Feingold, Ruth Zerner, Alan Davies, Edward Flannery, Michael McGarry and Eugene Fisher.  Is that right?

         A.   Correct.

         Q.   Basically, you edited this book with Marvin Perry.  Is that correct?

         A.   Correct.  It grew out of a conference which we organized together.

         Q.   You edited the conference papers and published them in a book.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Have you published any other book?

         A.   No.  I have published essays that have been published in books, like the essay on Toynbee, "Toynbee and Jewish History."

         Q.   Just to understand your present position, intellectually or morally or spiritually, is it your position that Christianity is preposterous?

         A.   Heavens, no!

         Q.   Did you write this: 

"The Jews' present-day importance, celebrity, and discomfort all derive from the historic fact that they have involuntarily begotten two Judaic world religions whose millions of adherents make the preposterous but redoubtable claim to have superseded the Jews, by the Jewish god Yahweh's dispensation, in the role of being this One True God's `Chosen People'?"

         A.   No, that is Arnold Toynbee.

         Q.   You are quoting him, are you?

         A.   I am quoting him to deal with him, to knock him one in the eye.

         Q.   Oh, I see.  Looking at your book, it doesn't indicate any quotes at all.  In looking at the context, it doesn't seem to indicate that you are implying that is his view.

         A.   What book is that?

         Q.   "Toynbee: Reappraisals."  It's your essay.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Perhaps Mr. Christie would do --

         MR. CHRISTIE:  I can do exactly what I was intending to do, if you wish, and that is to give him a copy.

         MR. FREIMAN:  That would be a very good thing.

         THE WITNESS:  My view is that Christianity can purge itself of its anti-Semitaires and be a great world religion with a true mission of humanity.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   So, at the present time it is not.  Is that your position?

         A.   It's working on it.  A revolution has occurred since 1965.  Nostra Aetate, the 1985 Notes for the correct interpretation and preaching about Jews and Judaism in Christian and Catholic scripture

-- I am paraphrasing.  You will notice Footnote 102.  It is a citation to the text of Toynbee.  I am not agreeing with that.  I am showing how extreme and aberrant he is.

         Q.   So your position is that Toynbee was anti-Christian and anti-Muslim?

         A.   No.  Toynbee --

         Q.   That is certainly --

         MR. FREIMAN:  Let him explain.

         THE WITNESS:  What do I care what Toynbee's personal religiosity was?  He called himself an ex-Christian.  One of my points in this essay is that he never escaped from the intellectual trammels of his Christianity which reprobated the Jews; that Judaism has served its great historic purpose and mission by giving birth to the Saviour and providing the base on which Christianity was born and took shape and that, having done that, Judaism has no further purpose and is replaced.  This is the theology of replacement.

         That is what Toynbee remained a prisoner of even in secular guise.

         Q.   Surely you can't say that Toynbee suggests that the assertion that Christianity supersedes Judaism is preposterous.  He doesn't say that.

         A.   It is the assumption.  It is implied.  You have to read him with great care and to be fair to him, or try to be fair to him.

         Q.   I suggest that it is you who referred to it as a preposterous position.

         A.   Don't put words in my mouth, please.

         Q.   They are your words; they are right there.  You tell me what they mean if it doesn't mean exactly what it says.

         A.   I am paraphrasing Toynbee to deal with a position that Christians tend often, unconsciously, to carry with them and to speak from and to act from, and that is what this revolution in Catholic-Jewish relations is trying to dispose of once and for all.

         Q.   So you are saying those are Toynbee's words or are they your words?

         A.   These are Toynbee's thoughts.  I am paraphrasing Arnold Joseph Toynbee.

         Q.   When were you first asked to prepare your opinion in regard to aspects of the Zundelsite?

         A.   I think last November.  I am not absolutely sure, but sometime in the late fall or early winter.

         Q.   Were you told what it was that the Commission was looking for?

         A.   I was told that my purpose would be to establish the continuity, the replication, of antisemitism as it appears on the Zundelsite with previous antisemitism, classic antisemitism, going back to the antisemitism in the Middle Ages, the early modern period, the reformation, the 19th century with its hypernationalism and its racial consciousness of a people's identity, through into the 20th century and the Hitlerite Nazi version of antisemitism.

         Q.   How was this communicated to you?

         A.   On the telephone.

         Q.   Was there any correspondence?

         A.   No.

         Q.   There was never any correspondence between you and anyone indicating --

         A.   The only correspondence was when I sent this CV.

         Q.   Who did you talk to on the telephone?

         A.   I spoke to Mr. Mark Freiman and I spoke to Danielle Miller, his assistant.

         MR. FREIMAN:  I rise now because I am beginning to get uncomfortable as to the propriety of any more questions that might tend to violate the litigation privilege.  I don't think it is proper to now proceed to probe what was discussed between myself and members of my office and Professor Schweitzer.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  It is appropriate for counsel to ask about the instructions he was given.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Absolutely.

         THE WITNESS:  I was told what I have indicated --

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Dr. Schweitzer, just wait for your next question and we will see how far Mr. Christie wants to go.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   What else were you told?

         A.   That this was not a question of the Holocaust, whether it was or was not; that I was not to come and fortify myself with the historical facts and arguments on that issue.

         Q.   To try and understand the extent of your expertise, you have already given us your views about Julius Streicher.  Have you done any study of his life?

         A.   Julius Streicher?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What have you studied?

         A.   The essay does have a biographical segment.

         Q.   A biographical segment?

         A.   Yes.  Of Julius Streicher?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   Yes.  He was born in 1885 in a Bavarian family, very Catholic, very traditional.

         Q.   Rather than give me your opinion, maybe you could answer my question.

         MR. FREIMAN:  He did.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  He did not.

         Q.   My question was:  What did you study in regard to Julius Streicher, not what you believe with regard to Julius Streicher.

         A.   The sources I used?

         Q.   Yes, that's right.

         A.   The IMT, principally, and there are a great many studies --

         Q.   The IMT?

         A.   The International Military Tribunal.

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   And there are a great many -- if I had my collected works, I could indicate to you the other works that I consulted on Julius Streicher, including Der Stürmer.  I didn't go through -- I get sick doing that.  Der Stürmer was his prurient, weekly, antisemitic rag with horrible cartoons and all of that.  I went through quite a number of those.

         I used standard scholarly works.  I used the book of Edward M. Peterson, "The Limits of Hitler's Power," Princeton University Press.  William L. Shirer's "Berlin Diary."  He was a journalist in Berlin and reported until the outbreak of war with the United States in 1941.  Ludecke's "I Knew Hitler."  They were close friends for quite some time, until Ludecke fled.  "Das politische Testament on Julius Streicher" edited by Jay W. Baird in Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 1978.  Ian Kershaw's "Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich, the Catholic Church and Nazi Germany.  Stephen Roberts' "The House that Hitler Built," a book that was published in 1938.  He was an Australian specialist in German history and made annual trips to Germany and reports year by year his impression of the house that Hitler built; the last edition was in 1938.

         Then a book by Dennis Showalter, "Little Man, What now?"  It's a study of Der Stürmer in the Weimar Republic.  A book by Bytwerk who is a contemporary scholar.  William P. Varga's "Julius Streicher."  This was a dissertation done at Ohio State University in the 1970s.  Robert E. Conot's "Justice at Nuremberg."  It's a study of the trials.  "Hitler's Secret Conversations" where he refers a few times favourably to "Herman Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction".  He was a contemporary and an eye witness to not so much events but conversations with Hitler.  Robin Lenman, an essay on Julius Streicher and the press in "German Democracy and the Triumph of Hitler."  Joseph E. Persico's "Nuremberg," a study of the trials.  Telford Taylor's "The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials", and so on.

         So I used the IMT, but I used in equal volume a number of secondary sources, biographies and studies of him.

         Q.   Of those, which would you consider primary sources?

         A.   The IMT and, of course, Der Stürmer which was his deterministic work.  He was the editor and the owner of Der Stürmer all those years.

         Q.   What segments were you provided from the Zundelsite?

         A.   What is here.

         Q.   Did you get those over the telephone, too?

         A.   No, they were sent to me --

         Q.   When?

         A.   This is not a letter.  You asked me about correspondence.  This doesn't fit that category.

         Q.   Whatever you might call it, when was it sent to you and how?

         A.   It was sent to me overnight by what we call Federal Express in the States or something comparable.  It was sent in a hurry because I was given to understand that I would be called -- I expected to be testifying in December.

         Q.   When was it sent to you?

         A.   I don't know the precise date, but I would say around Thanksgiving.

         Q.   Was there a letter accompanying it?

         A.   There was a letter from Danielle Miller that said, "Per our telephone conversation, this is the material."

         Q.   Is that all it said?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Could you show that to the Tribunal?

         A.   The letter?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   The letter is in my office.  I can bring it in tomorrow.  It is in my hotel room.  It's a brief thing.

         Q.   Were you given the selection that is in this bound volume?

         A.   Yes.

         MR. FREIMAN:  It might assist the Tribunal to know that Professor Schweitzer is referring to

HR-2.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Was this bound volume a selection made by someone else for you, or have you ever seen the Zundelsite?

         A.   I have seen it browsing around on the Internet in my office.

         Q.   How much of the site do the documents that you have been given comprise, in percentage terms?

         A.   I have no idea.  I am not an Internet person.  I am just getting my legs in that, so I have no idea.  I can't answer that.

         Q.   In terms of Christian-Jewish relations, not being a theologian, do you feel competent to assess the moral value of the Christian position prior to 1965?

         A.   The moral value?  Yes.  By their fruits shall we know them.

         Q.   Do you speak in that regard for yourself or as an expert in theology, or how do you speak?

         A.   No, I am not an expert in theology, but I am familiar enough with the duty for the Christian-Catholic theology of Judaism down to 1965 and the Second Vatican Council and to see what I take to be its results:  the ghettos, the badge, the degradation that Jews have suffered under papal Christian auspices in the Middle Ages, the judgment papally and economically sanctioned that the Talmud is a heretical body of work -- that sort of thing.  I follow the historical track in events, in deeds, in suffering, in expulsions, in mediaeval preaching which I understand stems from the Catholic Christian theology of Judaism.

         Q.   So you have read the papal pronouncements declaring the Talmud to be a heretical work?

         A.   Mediaeval, yes.

         Q.   And subsequently?  What is the most recent one?

         A.   Of papal pronouncements on the Talmud?  I couldn't tell you offhand.  For example, in the Notes of 1985 it is strongly suggested there that the person who is going to teach Sunday School and so on should steep himself or herself in a great body of sources: the Christian sources obviously -- the New Testament, the Gospels; the Roman sources; the Greek sources; and the Jewish sources.  There is mention of the Mishneh which happened to be the authoritative work of biblical commentary that prevailed in Jesus' lifetime, a couple of centuries B.C. and a couple of centuries A.D., and the Talmud.  "Take a plunge in the Talmud and get acquainted with this body of commentary and interpretation of the Bible."

         I can assume from that the Talmud is not terra incognita, it is not terra prohibitiva, and in fact that Christian students and teachers are encouraged strongly to know something about it.

         Q.   Do you remember my question?

         A.   I answered your question, that I cannot tell you the last papal pronouncement on the Talmud and what the Catholic or church position on it would be.

         Q.   Your position is that the church was wrong before 1965.

         A.   Yes, the church was wrong.  The church is attempting now to correct that.  After all, the most recent document we remember calls upon Christians, Catholics, for repentance.

         Q.   So you feel that the church should repent for its attitude about the Talmud?

         A.   No, the Talmud among other things.  The Talmud was burned.  The Talmud was declared a heretical book.  It was sentenced, the way you sentence a heretic, and burned at the stake.  St. Louis IX, 13th century.  Carloads of the Talmud were burned at the stake, the way you would burn a criminal at the stake.

         Q.   You are a Talmud scholar, are you?

         A.   No.  I wish I were.

         Q.   Are you familiar with the Talmud?

         A.   Somewhat.  I have dipped around into it.  There are 20 volumes.  There are two Talmuds, the Babylonian and the Palestinian.

         Q.   From what you know, would you agree with the value of it?

         A.   I find some things inspiring.  Some things mystify me.  It is not a book.  It is like the Bible.  It is an enormous work.  It's a library.

         Q.   And there is nothing anti-Christian in it?

         A.   There might be.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were.  The Talmud was censored by Christian censors, and there was self-censorship out of fear.  After all, the Talmud dates from as early as 500 B.C. and perhaps earlier and carries down to 1000.  It is an enormously complex body of material and documents and reflects different attitudes and values.  As I say, at one point, the Bible once sanctioned, and in some places it is still thought to sanction, polygamy, but that is in abeyance, and so are portions of the Talmud.

         I know that Christians have read through the Talmud to dredge up passages which they say, like Eisenmenger around 1700 in his two-volume work, "Judaism Revealed," where he finds that Jews, as a religious obligation are to commit crimes, to cheat, to malign, to poison -- doctors poisoned their patients, and so forth.  That is all manufactured.

         Q.   It is all manufactured?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You are prepared to say that.  You are an expert to say that, are you?

         A.   I don't believe it.  I don't believe it because of the censorship that I referred to, both by Christian authorities and by the self-censorship by Jews out of fear.  Don't forget that very, very few mediaeval copies of the Talmud survived because the Inquisition was successful in rounding them up and burning them at the stake.

         Q.   What I am interested in finding out is the boundaries of your expertise in relation to your personal beliefs.  You seem inclined to take the view that, if you believe it, you can say it, which of course you can in any other context.  I would like to know if you think you are an expert in the Talmud to make those opinions.

         A.   I am expert enough in the denigrations of the Talmud and the use that was made of it by Christian authorities, religious and secular, to convict Jews and find Jews guilty and to punish them by expulsion or what have you and, of course, to deprive them of the Talmud.

         Q.   You say you are expert enough to do what, to determine if there was condemnations from the Talmud?  I don't quite understand what you are saying.

         A.   The Christian interpretation of the Talmud was used as justification for ill-treating Jews and for burning the Talmud.

         Q.   In order to know whether or not that itself was justified, wouldn't you have to know something about the Talmud, be an expert in some sense?

         A.   No, I can't know everything.  No historian knows everything about everything.  No matter how narrowly he defines the subject, he can't know everything about it.

         Pope Gregory IX said that, if what is said about the Jews -- and he is speaking about the Talmud -- is true, no punishment is too severe or too extreme to be meted out to them.

         Q.   Is it true, what was said about the Talmud?

         A.   What is believed to be true by popes and authorities is real in the sense that it directs action.  It may be a complete myth, but what is believed to be real is real in its effects.

         Q.   When we speak of the Talmud, don't we speak of something that is real?

         A.   I am not speaking of that.  I am speaking of the interpretation, the judgment made by Pope Gregory IX.

         Q.   In order to know whether there is justification for that judgment, don't you need to be an expert in the Talmud, to know what it says and know what it means?

         A.   No, I wouldn't think so.  I am, again, tracking what happened to Jews and to Talmuds because of the Christian interpretation of what the Talmud was.  It was thought to be, in another category, a great arsenal of weapons that the Jews used secretly and publicly against us, of magic weapons, heaven knows what.  It was supposedly full of formulas and incantations.

         Q.   Is it?

         A.   It isn't, no.

         Q.   How do you know?

         A.   I know because this is what Franciscan inquisitors in the 13th and 14th centuries said of it.

         Q.   So it must be false?

         A.   That is not the point.  The point is that they said this.  This was their position, and they acted on it.

         Q.   What is the truth, though, if we are concerned about truth?

         A.   Truth in history?

         Q.   Truth about the Talmud.  We are not going to find that from you, are we?

         A.   That is not the point.  That is not at issue.

         Q.   It is not at issue.  So you are prepared to tell us what the Christians were doing wrong in condemning the Talmud without knowing yourself, as any kind of expert, or being able to tell us what the Talmud actually says.

         A.   I can only repeat, Mr. Christie, what I have already said.  The Christians only began to study the Talmud in the 12th century, in the age of the universities and so on.  They looked upon the Jews with suspicion --

         Q.   Did you hear my question?

         A.   -- as the agents of Satan, and they understood the Talmud to be a source of danger to Christian souls and to Christianity.

         Q.   I just want to understand the extent of your expertise.  You are prepared to tell the Tribunal what the Christians did wrong in respect of the Talmud without knowing what the Talmud actually says.

         A.   Yes.  I respectfully submit that one does not have to know the Talmud, from Volume 1 to Volume 20.

         Q.   That is not what I suggested.  I was suggesting that you might have to know something about it to know whether what was said about it was true.

         A.   I know something about the Talmud.  I have a sense of its flavour and character.

         Q.   Anything beyond that?

         A.   No.  The study of the Talmud is a lifetime affair.

         Q.   Who told you that?

         A.   Talmudists at the Jewish Theological Seminar, saying to a biblical scholar, "You have it easy."  It is a 20-volume work.

         Q.   So you are not even sure whether it has any anti-Christian remarks in it at all.  You are not sure about that.

         A.   I am sure it did.  I do know that prior to the age of the universities, in the 12th century --the persecution of Jews was in the later centuries, from the Crusades onward.  Earlier there was a very lively polemical literature by Jews about Christians and Christianity and by Christians about Jews and Judaism.  It is polemical.  It is crude.  It is mutual misunderstanding and mutual condemnation.

         Q.   And you are familiar with that body of literature, then?

         A.   Yes, I have read around it just to get the sense and flavour of a collection of rabbinical sermons that date from the 10th, 11th and into the 12th century.  There are precious few from the 10th that have survived.

         Q.   And you have read the early church fathers?

         A.   Some.  St. John Chrysostom and St. Augustine.

         Q.   Anything else?

         A.   "City of God."

         Q.   You have read the "City of God?"

         A.   Yes, as an undergraduate.  We all read it.  St. John Chrysostom says in "Ten Orations Against the Jews" that the Jews are like an old plough horse ready for slaughter and that Judaism is obsolete or replaced by the resurrection, ready for slaughter like an old plough horse.

         Q.   You have those quotes, do you?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You can tell us that you have read their context and you know their meaning and you are familiar with them.

         A.   I am.  It was a situation when the boundaries between Judaism and Christianity were not clear.  In his congregation, his members would go to synagogue on Friday or Saturday and come to church on Sunday, and he resented that.  He called that "Judaizing" or whatever.  He talked about drawing the line, the equator:  "You are you, and we are we, and ne'er the twain shall meet."

         In the course of that, the polemic gets out of hand and he has no mercy.  St. John Chrysostom was not the saint for all seasons.  He was the complete anti-Semite, if there is such a thing.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  He is a mystic, isn't he?

         THE WITNESS:  Yes, a mystic.  A mystic will make anything out of anything.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Do you claim to have read any other church fathers?

         A.   St. Augustine.  I have read some of Ambrose on questions of commerce, usury, trade and so forth, and Pope St. Gregory the Great.

         Q.   And they are all anti-Semites, are they?

         A.   No.  Pope St. Gregory the Great, for example, upbraided a bishop who had permitted a synagogue to be appropriated by the local zealous Christian community and turned into their church.  He restored it to the Jewish community.

         Another example of Gregory's evenhandedness, even though he said some crude polemical things -- I suppose that was the language of the era.  A number of Jews were forcibly baptized, and he invoked Roman law which still prevailed in his time to some degree, at least in the city of Rome, and permitted them to be restored to the Jewish community and the Jewish religion.

         Q.   Are you familiar with the writings of St. Pius X?

         A.   No.

         Q.   Did he write anything about Jews and Judaism?

         A.   I am not clear.  When did he write?

         Q.   In the 19th century.

         A.   No.

         Q.   You are not familiar with it?

         A.   No.

         Q.   So you are a selective reader of what you find useful to the theories you have about Jews and Judaism.  Isn't that right?

         A.   That is the way all historians proceed.  They do their research as well as they can, as broadly as they can.  They cannot do everything.  They have to be selective in their sources and then in what they say in their book.  They select and include this and they exclude that.  It can't be helped.  That is a human limitation.

         Q.   And your limitation is that you are preoccupied with the subject of the guilt of the Christian church --

         A.   I am not preoccupied.  I am not a psychological case.  I am interested, profoundly interested, intellectually interested.  I would love to see amity and understanding and regard between these two great faiths and peoples.

         Q.   You don't see any inconsistency in their fundamental theology, do you?

         A.   I can't guess what you mean.

         Q.   You can't guess what I mean?

         A.   What are you getting at?  Inconsistency?

         Q.   Yes.  Incompatibility between Judaism and Christianity?  You can't see any incompatibility?

         A.   No.  I see Jesus as the Christian, the Gentile's path to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  The Jews don't need that path.

         Q.   When it says in the Bible, "No one comes to the Father but through me," it doesn't apply to Jews.  Right?  Is that the position of the Catholic church?

         A.   Mr. Christie, we have to have a prolonged -- if you give me two days or two hours, we can go into the biblical scholarship that begins with Reimarus in the 18th century and is carried forward by many more scholars, with Pope Pius XII's encyclical Divino Afflante in 1943 which gave scholars intellectual freedom to approach the gospels as historical texts dealing with historical figures and historical events and to shed at least temporarily their theological presuppositions. 

         What does that reveal?  As in Rudolph Bultman, for example, you cannot establish any statement of Jesus as authentically his beyond all doubt.  Words built into Jesus' mouth reflect the fact that the redaction of the gospels is after the event.  The oldest is probably the Gospel of Mark which dates from 65-70.  The Crucifixion was 30-33.  The fourth. the Gospel of St. John, dates from, at the earliest, 120 and down to 150, a full century after the event.

         What do they say?  That the gospels are not based on eye witness accounts; that it is an oral tradition which changes with the telling and the retelling and the situation, whether it is in Rome, Italy or in Syria.  It is like studying World War II.  The first document you have after the event in 1945 would be something around 1980.  That is the difficulty in reconstructing the events of Jesus' life and the words, the teaching.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Could we pause there for the next question.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   What you are saying now is your opinion and has absolutely --

         A.   It is not my opinion.

         Q.   It is not the position of the Catholic Church, is it?

         A.   It is.  Look at the Notes for the correct teaching and interpretation of 1985.

         Q.   So your position that Jews don't need Jesus Christ for salvation, that is the position of the Catholic Church.  Is that right?

         A.   I can't say with theological hair-splitting that is the case.  I hope it is not.

         Q.   You call that hair-splitting?

         A.   That kind of precision, that either you are saved or you are not.  That seems to me to be hair-splitting.

         Q.   And whether Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation is also hair-splitting?

         A.   No.  The teaching of the church is that -- Nostra Aetate has several sections.  One, the most extensive, the 15 lines of Latin view of the Jews; there is another one on Buddhism, and a couple of others.  They are all legitimate religious teachings and offer legitimate ways of knowing the will of God and earning salvation.

         Q.   Is this your position as an expert, a Catholic theologian, or what is it?

         A.   This is my position as a private individual.

         Q.   So it is a basis of your other opinions, isn't it?

         A.   Undoubtedly; I would assume so.  I am not a hypocrite who says one thing in one category and another in another.

         Q.   So you approach your opinion from the point of view of your personal prejudices, which are--

         A.   No, I close my mind after I have read, thought and reflected and come to a conclusion.  You can call it prejudice; that is an opprobrious word.

         Q.   Your position, your belief and your opinions are based on the understanding that all religions are equal.  Isn't that right?

         A.   No.  That statement seems to me to be absolutely beside the point in establishing my attitudes and views.

         Q.   Your attitudes and views expressed earlier were that Jesus Christ is not necessary for Jews, and that is the Christian position.

         A.   No, he isn't.

         Q.   Is that position taken by the Catholic Church about Jews and Judaism?

         A.   Ask the Pope.  I don't pronounce that.

         Q.   I just need to know whether your views on Jewish-Christian relations bear any comparison to traditional Christianity or not.  I take it that you will agree that they do not.

                                    Toronto, Ontario

--- Upon resuming on Monday, May 11, 1998

    at 10:10 a.m.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning.  Mr. Freiman, are you still leading?

         MR. FREIMAN:  I am, sir.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  I would like to place something on the record, if I may.

         I just want to place on record my client's position that we are proceeding under protest.  We are of the view that this Tribunal, like the Tribunal in the Bell Canada case is tainted with a reasonable apprehension of bias for the same reasons as given by Madam Justice McGillis in the Bell case.  We are only appearing under protest to protect my client's position in the event that her decision does not stand on appeal.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Christie.  Mr. Freiman, please.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Since we are putting things on the record, the record may wish to show that the Panel may take notice of the fact that the Federal Court last week handed down a decision dismissing Mr. Christie's motion to stay this Tribunal pending the resolution of the Bell matter or in light of the  Bell matter.

         Just to make things easier, I have a set of documents which, as with previous Commission witnesses, will assist the Tribunal in following the evidence of the witness.  I intend to introduce the documents through the next witness.  Prior to calling him and so as to minimize disruption, I propose to distribute the documents.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  Just for the record, I don't recall receiving any notice of any of these documents, with the exception of the curriculum vitae of Dr. Schweitzer.

         MR. FREIMAN:  We might as well talk about it now.  All that we have here is Professor Schweitzer's curriculum vitae and a summary of the proposed evidence that he will be giving today by way of an aide-memoir.  Attached to it is a number of documents that he will be referring to, including a table that he prepared, and a number of excerpts from HR-2, the book of Zundelsite documents to which Professor Schweitzer will be making reference.  It is simply easier to have them all in one place.

         The documents that Mr. Christie is worried about are the curriculum vitae of Professor Schweitzer which he has had for some four months, the aide-memoir, which is merely an expanded version of the lengthy disclosure that was provided to Mr. Christie in December, and attached to it are simply documents to which Professor Schweitzer will be referring.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I assume you will justify these documents as the evidence proceeds.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Yes.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  When my friend refers to a lengthy aide-memoir, I think he is referring to a précis of Memorandum on Lethal Antisemitism, Old and New, which is four pages long, and the curriculum vitae.  Is that what my friend is referring to as lengthy disclosure?

         MR. FREIMAN:  Yes.  We have now triple-spaced and expanded.  That was a précis, and this is the memorandum.  We have now expanded it and triple-spaced the 17 pages from its original form, which means we have probably added a page and a half of text.

         With that introduction, I would call Professor Frederick Schweitzer.

         THE REGISTRAR:  Mr. Freiman, would you like this book of documents filed now or individually?

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I suggest we hold it for now.

SWORN:  FREDERICK M. SCHWEITZER

        5500 Fieldston Road, Apt. 9GG

        Bronx, New York, 10471

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF RE QUALIFICATIONS

         MR. FREIMAN:

         Q.   Professor Schweitzer, the documents that I have given to the Tribunal correspond to a book that is entitled "The Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer" which we prepared last night.  I wonder if you could open it at tab 1.

         Professor Schweitzer, is this your curriculum vitae?

         A.   It is.

         MR. FREIMAN:  In anticipation of the Tribunal's ruling, I won't ask for the material to be marked until I ask for the entire document to be put in, or we can refer to tab 1 and simply have it marked as Exhibit 1, at the Chair's discretion.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  I will take it that each document goes in, or does not go in, depending on whether there is any objection.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Shall we give it a number now?

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

         MR. FREIMAN:  May that be the next exhibit for the Commission?  It is the curriculum vitae of Frederick M. Schweitzer, appearing as tab 1 of the document entitled "Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer."

         THE REGISTRAR:  The document as described by Mr. Freiman will be filed as Commission Exhibit HR-15.

EXHIBIT NO. HR-15:  Curriculum vitae of Frederick M. Schweitzer, found at tab 1 of Commission's Brief of Materials for Dr. Frederick Schweitzer

         MR. FREIMAN:

         Q.   With reference to Exhibit HR-15, tab 1, Professor Schweitzer, can you tell me what is your present occupation?

         A.   I am a Professor of History at Manhattan College.

         Q.   Where is Manhattan College?

         A.   It is in the Riverdale section of the Bronx.

         Q.   How long have you been a professor at Manhattan College?

         A.   I have been a member of the History Department since 1960.  I began in 1958 part-time.

         Q.   What position do you now hold?

         A.   I am Professor of History.

         Q.   In the past, have you held other positions at Manhattan College and in the History Department?

         A.   Yes, I had the various ranks:  lecturer/instructor; assistant professor; associate professor; and since 1983 I have been a full professor.  I was the Chair of the Department for 10 years, from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s.

         Q.   What are the areas of your current research interest, sir?

         A.   Christian Catholic-Jewish relations; antisemitism; Jewish history.

Q.  Have you had any training in those fields?

         A.   Yes.  At Lehigh I was a history major.  Several of the courses had a segment on Jewish history, particularly one on ancient history where I read, perhaps not in its entirety, much of Josephus' "The Jewish War," a history of the Revolt against Rome.

         I also had the great boon of taking a course in Comparative Religion with Professor Roy Eckardt who just died; I was sad to read his obituary two days ago.  He was the author of 18 books.  He was a Methodist minister and a pioneer in Christian-Jewish relations when it was not particularly the mode.  I think his teaching, his knowledge, his moral courage and his books all had a tremendous impact on me.

         Q.   Have you published in the areas of Jewish history, antisemitism and Jewish-Christian relations?

         A.   Yes, I have.  You will notice in my CV that I published "A History of the Jews since the First Century A.D."

         Q.   How did that publication come about?

         A.   This was in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council's Proclamation Nostra Aetate, the first document in the whole history of the church to speak positively, affirmatively of Jews and Judaism.  It resulted from a joint effort by the Archdiocesan Education Office and Monsignor Rigney and the Anti-Defamation League to publish a history which would help to implement Nostra Aetate which called for Catholic-Jewish dialogue and for setting the historical record straight, for filling in the long blank page that sufficed for Christian Catholic understanding of Jewish history.  It was from the crucifixion until World War II and Israel reborn.

         Q.   What has been the history of that publication?  Was it well received or badly received?

         A.   It was very well received and reviewed.  It was widely used.  It was addressed to high school and college students, essentially Catholic Christian students.  It went through a couple of reprintings.  It is now out of print and out of stock, and one of the projects I have in the future is a second edition, updating it and so forth, which comes to me, I might say, at the invitation of the publisher.

         Q.   Have you published anything else in the areas of Jewish history, antisemitism or Jewish-Christian relationship?

         A.   Yes, the work that I co-edited with Marvin Perry, "Jewish-Christian Encounters over the Centuries:  Symbiosis, Prejudice, Holocaust, Dialogue."  That grew out of a conference that he and I arranged, which was jointly sponsored by my college, Manhattan, and his, Baruch of the City University System.  We had 20-some authorities, theologians, historians and so forth.  It covered the whole span of Jewish history and Jewish-Christian relations from the biblical period, the Dead Sea scrolls, to the last one which was my protegé's presentation, Eugene Fisher, on the attempt to remedy and rectify Catholic-Jewish relations since 1965.  I am the author of one of the essays in that collection on Mediaeval Perceptions of Jews and Judaism.  The essay itself is cited.

         Q.   I note that you are currently engaged in a work in progress.  What is that?

         A.   It is myths about Jews.  My friend and frequent collaborator, Marvin Perry, and I will be co-authors.  Some of the myths we are dealing with are the Satanization, the Shylock image myth of the Jews, Holocaust denial, and so on.

         Q.   I note under "Articles" a large number of articles.  I don't propose to go through them.  Could you tell me whether any of those articles deal with the subjects of Jewish history, antisemitism, and Jewish-Christian relations.

         A.   Yes, the bulk of them.  The one enumerated at the bottom of the first page is an essay in historiography.  Mainly, what struck me was that the Jews were referred to not at all or in such an abbreviated, telegraphic way that you could not make sense of Jewish life of a particular age, the Renaissance and so forth.  So it was silence, as it were.  The message was that these people did not have a history and, if they didn't have a history, they didn't exist and they were of no importance.

         That is what I am getting at by  "Distortion by Omission and Simplification" which is the abbreviated tag that refers to Jews as little Jews or as nothing more than usurers, as though there was nothing else to tell about the Jews in that period of 1,000 years.

         A similar essay, "Christian Antisemitism and Interpretation of the Holocaust," is an argument with Professor Rosen who wanted to teach the Holocaust simply by pitching in with the question of racism of the last couple of generations before.  My argument is that you cannot make sense of the Holocaust unless you understand the religious antisemitism that goes back to the Middle Ages.  It is a plain historiographical fact that the Holocaust could not have happened without two millennia of Christian preaching and precedent in word and deed denigrating the Jews, the teaching of contempt, and so forth -- not that Christian authorities, the church or anyone else initiated the Holocaust, but the moral justification and rationalization and the dehumanization of the Jews, the ushering them out of the human race so that one would shrug their shoulders on hearing of their fate.  That is the subject of that essay.

         It is a theme that runs in antisemitism as Hydra.  Hydra, of course, is the Greek mythical monster; if you cut off one head, seven appear.  Sometimes I get discouraged in combatting antisemitism, and that is the metaphor that comes to mind.  Then I remember my great hero, Father James Parkes who said sometime in the 1930s, "How long will it take to remove the antisemitaires from Christian teaching and ritual?  Three hundred years, and we are only a good stretch of the way."

         The piece on Julius Streicher, who was one of the principal Nazis in Hitler's circle, is germane to our proceedings today because it makes the connection with mediaeval antisemitism.  He is, in my judgment, much more a mediaeval anti-Semite than a modern racial kind.

         The book reviews, as you can see by the title, deal with the theme of the Holocaust.  They are published in the AHR, the American Historical Review, which is the premier journal of history, certainly in the United States.

         Q.   Are the books and the articles and the reviews self-published, or are they what we call reviewed?

         A.   They are refereed.  They are published by reputable publishers -- Macmillan, St. Martin's Press, et cetera -- and they have been reviewed by my professional peers.

         Q.   Have you had any function at all or any role in setting of curricula on the teaching of Jewish history or antisemitism?

         A.   Yes.  If you turn over two pages, I have done that in a number of categories.

         Once Nostra Aetate was published in 1965, a year later there came out directives for its implementation, one by the Vatican itself and the other by the Archdiocese of New York.  For 10 years or more I was travelling all over the place in the United States,  going, at the invitation of the Archdiocesan education authorities, to speak on the significance of Nostra Aetate and to suggest ways that it should be implemented in the curricula already operative in these institutions.  Sometimes it would be along the lines of what would be called lesson plans, not only how to do it but "here is how I do it."

         Most of that was at the high school level, but I did go to five or six Catholic colleges.  I went to Carlow College, memorably, in Pittsburgh; to Iona, which is just up the pike in Westchester County; New Rochelle College.  I worked at that level as well.

         Q.   Has that work been recognized at all by any individuals or organizations?

         A.   Yes.  I have received letters of thanks and acknowledgement and copies of curricula changes, additions, revisions and so forth.  Yes, I have a stack of that.

         That chapter is closed.  In a sense, the initiation of grafting onto actual practice pedagogical and curriculum the Nostra Aetate imperatives to set the historical record straight and cleanse the theological tablets has been launched.  It has momentum.  It doesn't need me any more.  There are others.  It just carries on like the proverbial pebble in the lake, in wider and wider circles.

         Where I have most satisfaction in this category is the work I did with Eugene Fisher.  We drew up a revised curriculum; in fact, it was a model curriculum for the Catholic seminaries in the United States.  The seminary is a strategic place.  It is the training place for the priests.  The priests and clergy are, in some measure, the church, with their teaching function and their capacity to give sermons and instruct the faithful and flock in the appreciation, the gratitude, that the Pope and the hierarchy in the church wish us to feel and express for our Jewish brethren and to be knowledgeable, not just to have good intentions but to be knowledgeable about their history, their triumphs, their great achievements as well as their suffering.

         At each diocese or each archdiocese which has a seminary -- not all of them do -- it is a local option to adopt curriculum.  As I understand from Eugene, it is widely adopted all over the United States.

         Q.   Turning to Europe, Professor Schweitzer, what is the Heppenheim conference?

         A.   The Heppenheim conference is an annual meeting of scholars, historians, professors of literature, theologians, educators, with a good sprinkling of high school teachers.  It meets annually.  It is under the auspices of a number of organizations and institutions.  The principal one is the Conference of -- I forget the exact title -- Christians and Jews.  The Martin Buber House often hosts it and sponsors it.

         Martin Niemoeller, who was a fascinating person, a U-boat captain in World War I and who spent 10 years of the Nazi period in jail, afterward made it his business to teach and preach what he thought the lesson of the Holocaust should be. 

         It is dedicated to furthering Christian-Catholic, but not exclusively Catholic -- Christian-Jewish understanding through dialogue, through knowledge and so forth. 

         That was for me a great honour in that the persons who are invited don't come because they want to, but at invitation.  They are outstanding scholars in their fields.  I was asked to give the keynote address, setting the tone for the proceedings which go on for four or five days on why Jewish history should be incorporated into the junior curriculum, in the history of western civilization, in the history of Europe, in the history of England, Belgium, or whatever it may be, and how that might be done and what the proportions are and what its links are to the more general history in that particular course or sphere and then some of the standard works that they might go on.

         Q.   As a result of your keynote address in 1985 and following it, were any of your recommendations accepted as part of the curriculum in Europe?

         A.   Yes.  Somewhat as with Eugene Fisher, several curriculum models were prepared and carried home by those who participated, but conveyed to a much wider public by the CCJ.  I have not followed that closely, but I understand that they are adopted and implemented more and more widely as the process goes on.

         Q.   Do you have any role with the Holocaust Resource Center at Manhattan College?

         A.   Yes.  I am its Director.  That was launched a year ago in April.  Manhattan is a Catholic college, and we want to convey to our own student body some of the things that I referred to earlier.

         We have one grand day each semester, so twice a year, and we began with Franklin Littell who spoke as a Christian minister on the Holocaust as a watershed in Christian history and explained to our audience -- students, faculty and many people from the Riverdale community -- why it should be remembered, why the story has to be told and transmitted to the young so that they may know and learn its lessons as much as possible.

         Beyond that, a theme that I have been concerned with consistently -- he emphasizes preaching and I emphasize teaching, both the teaching and preaching of the New Testament, the Christian gospels, and so forth.

         Q.   As a result of your work in these various fields, have you received any honours, recognitions or awards?

         A.   Yes.  As I mentioned, when my book was published, Cardinal Cook honoured me with a reception.  When I went hopping around the country, from Portland, Oregon to Portland, Maine, the bishop would receive me and often would embarrass me with praise. 

         What tickled me most of all was that recently the Mayor of New York City, who is a former student of mine, when one of the temples in Riverdale honoured me -- I think the occasion was the Holocaust Resource Center's inaugural, to honour me for that and more for my many years devoted to Christian-Jewish understanding and combatting antisemitism.  To my surprise and pleasure, the one who presided and the one who delivered a eulogy on me, remembering our days in the Vatican together in the 1960s, was none other than Rudi Guiliani.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Members of the Panel, I propose that you accept Professor Schweitzer as an expert in Jewish history, antisemitism and Christian-Jewish relations.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Do any counsel in the same interest wish to ask questions?  Mr. Christie, please.

CROSS-EXAMINATION RE QUALIFICATIONS

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Your reference to the Manhattan College Holocaust Resource Center -- is it located in a room in Manhattan College?

         A.   Yes, it has an office about one-third the size of this space.

         Q.   Is it open to the public?

         A.   Oh, yes.

         Q.   Is it locked?

         A.   It is locked as other offices are, yes, at the end of the day and so forth.

         Q.   During the day?

         A.   No.

         Q.   It is open to the public during the day?

         A.   Yes.  It is just a plain office with files, with some posters.  That's about it.

         Q.   Is there someone in attendance there all the time?

         A.   No.  It is run on a shoe string.  I get no stipend for that.  I get no reduced teaching level, nor do my two colleagues, Brother Peter Drake and Rose Santos-Cunningham.  We do it out of devotion to the cause of Christian-Catholic-Jewish understanding.

         Q.   So this is Room 437, is it?

         A.   434.  There is a conference room which is about the size of this which we share with the Peace and Justice Program and with the Institute for Ethics.

         Q.   What does the Manhattan College Holocaust Resource Center consist of?

         A.   Could you clarify that?  Do you mean what do we do?

         Q.   What does it consist of?  If I go to this room, what is there?

         A.   You will find a desk, a computer, a printer, files.  You will find a number of books that have been given to us, some standard works on the Holocaust, and that sort of thing.

         Q.   How many books?

         A.   As of now, I would say 30 or 40.  We have a collection on the Holocaust in the library to which, of course, we have access.

         Q.   You said files.

         A.   Yes, files, letters --

         Q.   How many files?  What kinds of files are there?

         A.   They are ordinary office files, business files.  One of the things we have is what is called the Holocaust Survivors Speakers Bureau, who are survivors who are able and willing to speak on their experiences to students in schools in the Bronx, Yonkers, Riverdale area and northern Manhattan.  These requests for a Holocaust speaker come to us, and we make an arrangement for a Holocaust speaker or sometimes two Holocaust speakers to go to that school and speak for an hour to their students.

         Q.   Do you have a set of Nuremberg trial documents?

         A.   Yes, I do.  I have them on one little disk this size, all 42 volumes.

         Q.   That is in the Holocaust Resource Center?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   And you allow that to be seen by the public?

         A.   Nobody has requested it.  If someone did, I would not have any objection to it.

         Q.   Do you have any books on the Holocaust there?

         A.   Yes, a number.

         Q.   Any revisionist books on the Holocaust?

         A.   No.

         Q.   Have you read any revisionist books?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What have you read?

         A.   I have read the Butz book.

         Q.   What book is that?

         A.   "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century."

         Q.   You have read that.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Anything else?

         A.   No, I haven't read so-called revisionists.  I don't accept that term.  I don't accept that as an accurate designation of what you are referring to.

         Q.   Whatever you might use to describe it, have you read any books that are of a different persuasion than your own on the subject of the Holocaust?

         A.   I have a persuasion, but other historians of the Holocaust, whom I accept on the subject, have somewhat different persuasions.  There is not a rigid, strict, orthodox interpretation of the Holocaust.

         I might mention that I reviewed the Goldhagen book, "Hitler's Willing Executioners," which I panned as a historiographical disaster.

         Q.   Are you a student of the Holocaust?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   How much have you studied in that region?

         A.   How much have I studied?  In what sense are you asking the question?  How many books I have read?

         Q.   What have you done in the study of the Holocaust?

         A.   It is a segment of my 1971 book.  I teach it.  I teach a course on genocide, and the Holocaust is 50 to 60 per cent of the course.

         Q.   What do you rely on for your source material in your teaching?

         A.   Hilberg.

         Q.   Raul Hilberg?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Are you aware of changes in his position over his three-volume work and his latest work?

         A.   Not in specific detail.  The three-volume work I find to be consistent with the original one-volume work.  It is expanded, of course.

         Q.   But is it consistent with regard to the existence of a Hitler order for the extermination of European Jews?

         A.   That question is left open.  There is no Hitler order --

         Q.   In the first book there is.

         A.   That is a question of Holocaust study, interpretation and so forth.  I must tell you that I am not here for that.

         Q.   Do you consider yourself a Holocaust scholar?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You are?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What, then, do you know about the existence or non-existence of a Hitler order?

         A.   Such an order has not been found.  There was a report in January, sometime earlier this year, in the archives that have become opened in the former Soviet Union, of a record, a diary jotting or something of that sort, on Himmler's part that is within a few days of Pearl Harbour, December 7, 1941, in which he indicates that he has come from a  Führer conference and the order, the decision, to annihilate the Jews has been given.  The interpretation of that is not absolutely clear and precise, but it is plausible.  It depends on further research to confirm and to clarify.

         Q.   Does your reliance on Hilberg indicate a knowledge of a Hitler order in the first book or not?

         A.   No.  He says that the murder of the Jews, the decision to annihilate, simply emerged in the course of a process that began step by step, almost innocuously, and built up momentum, and in the crisis of the war went to the last stage of annihilation.  He argues that you get to a stage where you don't need orders.  He talks about the railway men for example.  You interview a railway man and you ask him, "Why did you do this?"  "Orders."  "May I see the orders?"  "Well, there were no orders.  It was understood.  It was expected of me."  That is the system of expectation and understanding that certainly prevailed in the railways, and I would hazard the generalization of that across the regime.

         Q.   I suggest to you that Hilberg in his first book indicated the date of the Hitler order.  Do you deny that or do you affirm that?

         A.   I don't recall that precisely.  However, these works are not dogmatic and doctrinaire.  That book came out in 1961 or 1963.  A lot of work has been done since; a lot of documents have turned up.  Inevitably, in the historical process -- we are still studying the French Revolution, understanding it better, and revising our interpretation and conclusions about it.  That is going on with the Holocaust and undoubtedly will continue to go on.

         Q.   Is there such a thing as a Catholic theologian?

         A.   Yes, I would say Father John Pawlikowski is a Catholic theologian.

         Q.   Are you?

         A.   No, I am a historian.

         Q.   Are you a Christian?

         A.   Yes, I am of Christian heritage.  I am not particularly religious.  I believe in God, that there is a force outside of ourselves and the world that makes for goodness, but that is about as far as I go.

         Q.   Have you been paid by the B'nai Brith to write any books?

         A.   Yes, that first one I was paid $1,000 or something like that.

         Q.   Do you get any percentage from the copyright?

         A.   No.

         Q.   You wrote a book for the B'nai Brith in which they hold copyright?

         A.   No, no, no.  I wrote a book commissioned jointly by the Archdiocesan Education Office -- the one I worked most closely with was Monsignor Rigney who, I am sorry to say, died a few years ago.  It was a collaborative effort.  B'nai Brith made available to me materials and books.  Our library at that time was pretty naked when it came to Jewish history.

         Q.   Did you write a book called "A History of the Jews since the First Century A.D.?"

         A.   That is it.

         Q.   That is it?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Does the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith hold the copyright?

         A.   It does.

         Q.   If you are the author, how did they get the copyright?

         A.   Because they paid me a stipend and they underwrote the costs of production, the typing and all of that.  It was through their good offices -- and I don't know if that entailed expense -- there was an agent that went around to publishers and signed an agreement with Macmillan.

         Q.   So they actually secured the publisher for the book?

         A.   Yes.  I was very young and green in that day and age.  I didn't know my way around in those channels.

         Q.   So they prepared the book by virtue of typing it and --

         A.   No, no, no.  The secretaries at Manhattan College typed the book.  They were paid extra.

         Q.   Did you pay them?

         A.   Yes, I paid them with money that came to me from the Anti-Defamation League, from that stipend.

         Q.   Surely they didn't type a book for $1,000.  There must have been more to it than that.

         A.   No, it was less than that.

         Q.   What was less than that?

         A.   The fees that I paid the secretaries.

         Q.   But you didn't pay their fees out of your $1,000.  B'nai Brith paid you extra for that, did they?

         A.   No.  I had a $1,000 fee.  This was the late 1960s.  This project began in 1968.

         Q.   Have you published any other book?

         A.   Yes, I have published a book co-edited with an essay of mine that was referred to earlier, "Jewish-Christian Encounters over the Centuries: Symbiosis, Prejudice, Holocaust, Dialogue."

         Q.   That is a book of essays of other people, is it?

         A.   I have one there.

         Q.   You have one.  It is basically put together from Donald Gray, Lawrence Schiffman, Lawrence Frizzell, Asher Finkel, Norman Beck, Robert Michael, yourself, Scarlett Freund and Teofilo Ruiz, Eric Gritsch, Susannah Heschel, Marvin Perry,  Celia Heller, John Pawlikowski, Henry Feingold, Ruth Zerner, Alan Davies, Edward Flannery, Michael McGarry and Eugene Fisher.  Is that right?

         A.   Correct.

         Q.   Basically, you edited this book with Marvin Perry.  Is that correct?

         A.   Correct.  It grew out of a conference which we organized together.

         Q.   You edited the conference papers and published them in a book.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Have you published any other book?

         A.   No.  I have published essays that have been published in books, like the essay on Toynbee, "Toynbee and Jewish History."

         Q.   Just to understand your present position, intellectually or morally or spiritually, is it your position that Christianity is preposterous?

         A.   Heavens, no!

         Q.   Did you write this: 

"The Jews' present-day importance, celebrity, and discomfort all derive from the historic fact that they have involuntarily begotten two Judaic world religions whose millions of adherents make the preposterous but redoubtable claim to have superseded the Jews, by the Jewish god Yahweh's dispensation, in the role of being this One True God's `Chosen People'?"

         A.   No, that is Arnold Toynbee.

         Q.   You are quoting him, are you?

         A.   I am quoting him to deal with him, to knock him one in the eye.

         Q.   Oh, I see.  Looking at your book, it doesn't indicate any quotes at all.  In looking at the context, it doesn't seem to indicate that you are implying that is his view.

         A.   What book is that?

         Q.   "Toynbee: Reappraisals."  It's your essay.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Perhaps Mr. Christie would do --

         MR. CHRISTIE:  I can do exactly what I was intending to do, if you wish, and that is to give him a copy.

         MR. FREIMAN:  That would be a very good thing.

         THE WITNESS:  My view is that Christianity can purge itself of its anti-Semitaires and be a great world religion with a true mission of humanity.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   So, at the present time it is not.  Is that your position?

         A.   It's working on it.  A revolution has occurred since 1965.  Nostra Aetate, the 1985 Notes for the correct interpretation and preaching about Jews and Judaism in Christian and Catholic scripture

-- I am paraphrasing.  You will notice Footnote 102.  It is a citation to the text of Toynbee.  I am not agreeing with that.  I am showing how extreme and aberrant he is.

         Q.   So your position is that Toynbee was anti-Christian and anti-Muslim?

         A.   No.  Toynbee --

         Q.   That is certainly --

         MR. FREIMAN:  Let him explain.

         THE WITNESS:  What do I care what Toynbee's personal religiosity was?  He called himself an ex-Christian.  One of my points in this essay is that he never escaped from the intellectual trammels of his Christianity which reprobated the Jews; that Judaism has served its great historic purpose and mission by giving birth to the Saviour and providing the base on which Christianity was born and took shape and that, having done that, Judaism has no further purpose and is replaced.  This is the theology of replacement.

         That is what Toynbee remained a prisoner of even in secular guise.

         Q.   Surely you can't say that Toynbee suggests that the assertion that Christianity supersedes Judaism is preposterous.  He doesn't say that.

         A.   It is the assumption.  It is implied.  You have to read him with great care and to be fair to him, or try to be fair to him.

         Q.   I suggest that it is you who referred to it as a preposterous position.

         A.   Don't put words in my mouth, please.

         Q.   They are your words; they are right there.  You tell me what they mean if it doesn't mean exactly what it says.

         A.   I am paraphrasing Toynbee to deal with a position that Christians tend often, unconsciously, to carry with them and to speak from and to act from, and that is what this revolution in Catholic-Jewish relations is trying to dispose of once and for all.

         Q.   So you are saying those are Toynbee's words or are they your words?

         A.   These are Toynbee's thoughts.  I am paraphrasing Arnold Joseph Toynbee.

         Q.   When were you first asked to prepare your opinion in regard to aspects of the Zundelsite?

         A.   I think last November.  I am not absolutely sure, but sometime in the late fall or early winter.

         Q.   Were you told what it was that the Commission was looking for?

         A.   I was told that my purpose would be to establish the continuity, the replication, of antisemitism as it appears on the Zundelsite with previous antisemitism, classic antisemitism, going back to the antisemitism in the Middle Ages, the early modern period, the reformation, the 19th century with its hypernationalism and its racial consciousness of a people's identity, through into the 20th century and the Hitlerite Nazi version of antisemitism.

         Q.   How was this communicated to you?

         A.   On the telephone.

         Q.   Was there any correspondence?

         A.   No.

         Q.   There was never any correspondence between you and anyone indicating --

         A.   The only correspondence was when I sent this CV.

         Q.   Who did you talk to on the telephone?

         A.   I spoke to Mr. Mark Freiman and I spoke to Danielle Miller, his assistant.

         MR. FREIMAN:  I rise now because I am beginning to get uncomfortable as to the propriety of any more questions that might tend to violate the litigation privilege.  I don't think it is proper to now proceed to probe what was discussed between myself and members of my office and Professor Schweitzer.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  It is appropriate for counsel to ask about the instructions he was given.

         MR. FREIMAN:  Absolutely.

         THE WITNESS:  I was told what I have indicated --

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Dr. Schweitzer, just wait for your next question and we will see how far Mr. Christie wants to go.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   What else were you told?

         A.   That this was not a question of the Holocaust, whether it was or was not; that I was not to come and fortify myself with the historical facts and arguments on that issue.

         Q.   To try and understand the extent of your expertise, you have already given us your views about Julius Streicher.  Have you done any study of his life?

         A.   Julius Streicher?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   What have you studied?

         A.   The essay does have a biographical segment.

         Q.   A biographical segment?

         A.   Yes.  Of Julius Streicher?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   Yes.  He was born in 1885 in a Bavarian family, very Catholic, very traditional.

         Q.   Rather than give me your opinion, maybe you could answer my question.

         MR. FREIMAN:  He did.

         MR. CHRISTIE:  He did not.

         Q.   My question was:  What did you study in regard to Julius Streicher, not what you believe with regard to Julius Streicher.

         A.   The sources I used?

         Q.   Yes, that's right.

         A.   The IMT, principally, and there are a great many studies --

         Q.   The IMT?

         A.   The International Military Tribunal.

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   And there are a great many -- if I had my collected works, I could indicate to you the other works that I consulted on Julius Streicher, including Der Stürmer.  I didn't go through -- I get sick doing that.  Der Stürmer was his prurient, weekly, antisemitic rag with horrible cartoons and all of that.  I went through quite a number of those.

         I used standard scholarly works.  I used the book of Edward M. Peterson, "The Limits of Hitler's Power," Princeton University Press.  William L. Shirer's "Berlin Diary."  He was a journalist in Berlin and reported until the outbreak of war with the United States in 1941.  Ludecke's "I Knew Hitler."  They were close friends for quite some time, until Ludecke fled.  "Das politische Testament on Julius Streicher" edited by Jay W. Baird in Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 1978.  Ian Kershaw's "Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich, the Catholic Church and Nazi Germany.  Stephen Roberts' "The House that Hitler Built," a book that was published in 1938.  He was an Australian specialist in German history and made annual trips to Germany and reports year by year his impression of the house that Hitler built; the last edition was in 1938.

         Then a book by Dennis Showalter, "Little Man, What now?"  It's a study of Der Stürmer in the Weimar Republic.  A book by Bytwerk who is a contemporary scholar.  William P. Varga's "Julius Streicher."  This was a dissertation done at Ohio State University in the 1970s.  Robert E. Conot's "Justice at Nuremberg."  It's a study of the trials.  "Hitler's Secret Conversations" where he refers a few times favourably to "Herman Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction".  He was a contemporary and an eye witness to not so much events but conversations with Hitler.  Robin Lenman, an essay on Julius Streicher and the press in "German Democracy and the Triumph of Hitler."  Joseph E. Persico's "Nuremberg," a study of the trials.  Telford Taylor's "The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials", and so on.

         So I used the IMT, but I used in equal volume a number of secondary sources, biographies and studies of him.

         Q.   Of those, which would you consider primary sources?

         A.   The IMT and, of course, Der Stürmer which was his deterministic work.  He was the editor and the owner of Der Stürmer all those years.

         Q.   What segments were you provided from the Zundelsite?

         A.   What is here.

         Q.   Did you get those over the telephone, too?

         A.   No, they were sent to me --

         Q.   When?

         A.   This is not a letter.  You asked me about correspondence.  This doesn't fit that category.

         Q.   Whatever you might call it, when was it sent to you and how?

         A.   It was sent to me overnight by what we call Federal Express in the States or something comparable.  It was sent in a hurry because I was given to understand that I would be called -- I expected to be testifying in December.

         Q.   When was it sent to you?

         A.   I don't know the precise date, but I would say around Thanksgiving.

         Q.   Was there a letter accompanying it?

         A.   There was a letter from Danielle Miller that said, "Per our telephone conversation, this is the material."

         Q.   Is that all it said?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   Could you show that to the Tribunal?

         A.   The letter?

         Q.   Yes.

         A.   The letter is in my office.  I can bring it in tomorrow.  It is in my hotel room.  It's a brief thing.

         Q.   Were you given the selection that is in this bound volume?

         A.   Yes.

         MR. FREIMAN:  It might assist the Tribunal to know that Professor Schweitzer is referring to

HR-2.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Was this bound volume a selection made by someone else for you, or have you ever seen the Zundelsite?

         A.   I have seen it browsing around on the Internet in my office.

         Q.   How much of the site do the documents that you have been given comprise, in percentage terms?

         A.   I have no idea.  I am not an Internet person.  I am just getting my legs in that, so I have no idea.  I can't answer that.

         Q.   In terms of Christian-Jewish relations, not being a theologian, do you feel competent to assess the moral value of the Christian position prior to 1965?

         A.   The moral value?  Yes.  By their fruits shall we know them.

         Q.   Do you speak in that regard for yourself or as an expert in theology, or how do you speak?

         A.   No, I am not an expert in theology, but I am familiar enough with the duty for the Christian-Catholic theology of Judaism down to 1965 and the Second Vatican Council and to see what I take to be its results:  the ghettos, the badge, the degradation that Jews have suffered under papal Christian auspices in the Middle Ages, the judgment papally and economically sanctioned that the Talmud is a heretical body of work -- that sort of thing.  I follow the historical track in events, in deeds, in suffering, in expulsions, in mediaeval preaching which I understand stems from the Catholic Christian theology of Judaism.

         Q.   So you have read the papal pronouncements declaring the Talmud to be a heretical work?

         A.   Mediaeval, yes.

         Q.   And subsequently?  What is the most recent one?

         A.   Of papal pronouncements on the Talmud?  I couldn't tell you offhand.  For example, in the Notes of 1985 it is strongly suggested there that the person who is going to teach Sunday School and so on should steep himself or herself in a great body of sources: the Christian sources obviously -- the New Testament, the Gospels; the Roman sources; the Greek sources; and the Jewish sources.  There is mention of the Mishneh which happened to be the authoritative work of biblical commentary that prevailed in Jesus' lifetime, a couple of centuries B.C. and a couple of centuries A.D., and the Talmud.  "Take a plunge in the Talmud and get acquainted with this body of commentary and interpretation of the Bible."

         I can assume from that the Talmud is not terra incognita, it is not terra prohibitiva, and in fact that Christian students and teachers are encouraged strongly to know something about it.

         Q.   Do you remember my question?

         A.   I answered your question, that I cannot tell you the last papal pronouncement on the Talmud and what the Catholic or church position on it would be.

         Q.   Your position is that the church was wrong before 1965.

         A.   Yes, the church was wrong.  The church is attempting now to correct that.  After all, the most recent document we remember calls upon Christians, Catholics, for repentance.

         Q.   So you feel that the church should repent for its attitude about the Talmud?

         A.   No, the Talmud among other things.  The Talmud was burned.  The Talmud was declared a heretical book.  It was sentenced, the way you sentence a heretic, and burned at the stake.  St. Louis IX, 13th century.  Carloads of the Talmud were burned at the stake, the way you would burn a criminal at the stake.

         Q.   You are a Talmud scholar, are you?

         A.   No.  I wish I were.

         Q.   Are you familiar with the Talmud?

         A.   Somewhat.  I have dipped around into it.  There are 20 volumes.  There are two Talmuds, the Babylonian and the Palestinian.

         Q.   From what you know, would you agree with the value of it?

         A.   I find some things inspiring.  Some things mystify me.  It is not a book.  It is like the Bible.  It is an enormous work.  It's a library.

         Q.   And there is nothing anti-Christian in it?

         A.   There might be.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were.  The Talmud was censored by Christian censors, and there was self-censorship out of fear.  After all, the Talmud dates from as early as 500 B.C. and perhaps earlier and carries down to 1000.  It is an enormously complex body of material and documents and reflects different attitudes and values.  As I say, at one point, the Bible once sanctioned, and in some places it is still thought to sanction, polygamy, but that is in abeyance, and so are portions of the Talmud.

         I know that Christians have read through the Talmud to dredge up passages which they say, like Eisenmenger around 1700 in his two-volume work, "Judaism Revealed," where he finds that Jews, as a religious obligation are to commit crimes, to cheat, to malign, to poison -- doctors poisoned their patients, and so forth.  That is all manufactured.

         Q.   It is all manufactured?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You are prepared to say that.  You are an expert to say that, are you?

         A.   I don't believe it.  I don't believe it because of the censorship that I referred to, both by Christian authorities and by the self-censorship by Jews out of fear.  Don't forget that very, very few mediaeval copies of the Talmud survived because the Inquisition was successful in rounding them up and burning them at the stake.

         Q.   What I am interested in finding out is the boundaries of your expertise in relation to your personal beliefs.  You seem inclined to take the view that, if you believe it, you can say it, which of course you can in any other context.  I would like to know if you think you are an expert in the Talmud to make those opinions.

         A.   I am expert enough in the denigrations of the Talmud and the use that was made of it by Christian authorities, religious and secular, to convict Jews and find Jews guilty and to punish them by expulsion or what have you and, of course, to deprive them of the Talmud.

         Q.   You say you are expert enough to do what, to determine if there was condemnations from the Talmud?  I don't quite understand what you are saying.

         A.   The Christian interpretation of the Talmud was used as justification for ill-treating Jews and for burning the Talmud.

         Q.   In order to know whether or not that itself was justified, wouldn't you have to know something about the Talmud, be an expert in some sense?

         A.   No, I can't know everything.  No historian knows everything about everything.  No matter how narrowly he defines the subject, he can't know everything about it.

         Pope Gregory IX said that, if what is said about the Jews -- and he is speaking about the Talmud -- is true, no punishment is too severe or too extreme to be meted out to them.

         Q.   Is it true, what was said about the Talmud?

         A.   What is believed to be true by popes and authorities is real in the sense that it directs action.  It may be a complete myth, but what is believed to be real is real in its effects.

         Q.   When we speak of the Talmud, don't we speak of something that is real?

         A.   I am not speaking of that.  I am speaking of the interpretation, the judgment made by Pope Gregory IX.

         Q.   In order to know whether there is justification for that judgment, don't you need to be an expert in the Talmud, to know what it says and know what it means?

         A.   No, I wouldn't think so.  I am, again, tracking what happened to Jews and to Talmuds because of the Christian interpretation of what the Talmud was.  It was thought to be, in another category, a great arsenal of weapons that the Jews used secretly and publicly against us, of magic weapons, heaven knows what.  It was supposedly full of formulas and incantations.

         Q.   Is it?

         A.   It isn't, no.

         Q.   How do you know?

         A.   I know because this is what Franciscan inquisitors in the 13th and 14th centuries said of it.

         Q.   So it must be false?

         A.   That is not the point.  The point is that they said this.  This was their position, and they acted on it.

         Q.   What is the truth, though, if we are concerned about truth?

         A.   Truth in history?

         Q.   Truth about the Talmud.  We are not going to find that from you, are we?

         A.   That is not the point.  That is not at issue.

         Q.   It is not at issue.  So you are prepared to tell us what the Christians were doing wrong in condemning the Talmud without knowing yourself, as any kind of expert, or being able to tell us what the Talmud actually says.

         A.   I can only repeat, Mr. Christie, what I have already said.  The Christians only began to study the Talmud in the 12th century, in the age of the universities and so on.  They looked upon the Jews with suspicion --

         Q.   Did you hear my question?

         A.   -- as the agents of Satan, and they understood the Talmud to be a source of danger to Christian souls and to Christianity.

         Q.   I just want to understand the extent of your expertise.  You are prepared to tell the Tribunal what the Christians did wrong in respect of the Talmud without knowing what the Talmud actually says.

         A.   Yes.  I respectfully submit that one does not have to know the Talmud, from Volume 1 to Volume 20.

         Q.   That is not what I suggested.  I was suggesting that you might have to know something about it to know whether what was said about it was true.

         A.   I know something about the Talmud.  I have a sense of its flavour and character.

         Q.   Anything beyond that?

         A.   No.  The study of the Talmud is a lifetime affair.

         Q.   Who told you that?

         A.   Talmudists at the Jewish Theological Seminar, saying to a biblical scholar, "You have it easy."  It is a 20-volume work.

         Q.   So you are not even sure whether it has any anti-Christian remarks in it at all.  You are not sure about that.

         A.   I am sure it did.  I do know that prior to the age of the universities, in the 12th century --the persecution of Jews was in the later centuries, from the Crusades onward.  Earlier there was a very lively polemical literature by Jews about Christians and Christianity and by Christians about Jews and Judaism.  It is polemical.  It is crude.  It is mutual misunderstanding and mutual condemnation.

         Q.   And you are familiar with that body of literature, then?

         A.   Yes, I have read around it just to get the sense and flavour of a collection of rabbinical sermons that date from the 10th, 11th and into the 12th century.  There are precious few from the 10th that have survived.

         Q.   And you have read the early church fathers?

         A.   Some.  St. John Chrysostom and St. Augustine.

         Q.   Anything else?

         A.   "City of God."

         Q.   You have read the "City of God?"

         A.   Yes, as an undergraduate.  We all read it.  St. John Chrysostom says in "Ten Orations Against the Jews" that the Jews are like an old plough horse ready for slaughter and that Judaism is obsolete or replaced by the resurrection, ready for slaughter like an old plough horse.

         Q.   You have those quotes, do you?

         A.   Yes.

         Q.   You can tell us that you have read their context and you know their meaning and you are familiar with them.

         A.   I am.  It was a situation when the boundaries between Judaism and Christianity were not clear.  In his congregation, his members would go to synagogue on Friday or Saturday and come to church on Sunday, and he resented that.  He called that "Judaizing" or whatever.  He talked about drawing the line, the equator:  "You are you, and we are we, and ne'er the twain shall meet."

         In the course of that, the polemic gets out of hand and he has no mercy.  St. John Chrysostom was not the saint for all seasons.  He was the complete anti-Semite, if there is such a thing.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  He is a mystic, isn't he?

         THE WITNESS:  Yes, a mystic.  A mystic will make anything out of anything.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   Do you claim to have read any other church fathers?

         A.   St. Augustine.  I have read some of Ambrose on questions of commerce, usury, trade and so forth, and Pope St. Gregory the Great.

         Q.   And they are all anti-Semites, are they?

         A.   No.  Pope St. Gregory the Great, for example, upbraided a bishop who had permitted a synagogue to be appropriated by the local zealous Christian community and turned into their church.  He restored it to the Jewish community.

         Another example of Gregory's evenhandedness, even though he said some crude polemical things -- I suppose that was the language of the era.  A number of Jews were forcibly baptized, and he invoked Roman law which still prevailed in his time to some degree, at least in the city of Rome, and permitted them to be restored to the Jewish community and the Jewish religion.

         Q.   Are you familiar with the writings of St. Pius X?

         A.   No.

         Q.   Did he write anything about Jews and Judaism?

         A.   I am not clear.  When did he write?

         Q.   In the 19th century.

         A.   No.

         Q.   You are not familiar with it?

         A.   No.

         Q.   So you are a selective reader of what you find useful to the theories you have about Jews and Judaism.  Isn't that right?

         A.   That is the way all historians proceed.  They do their research as well as they can, as broadly as they can.  They cannot do everything.  They have to be selective in their sources and then in what they say in their book.  They select and include this and they exclude that.  It can't be helped.  That is a human limitation.

         Q.   And your limitation is that you are preoccupied with the subject of the guilt of the Christian church --

         A.   I am not preoccupied.  I am not a psychological case.  I am interested, profoundly interested, intellectually interested.  I would love to see amity and understanding and regard between these two great faiths and peoples.

         Q.   You don't see any inconsistency in their fundamental theology, do you?

         A.   I can't guess what you mean.

         Q.   You can't guess what I mean?

         A.   What are you getting at?  Inconsistency?

         Q.   Yes.  Incompatibility between Judaism and Christianity?  You can't see any incompatibility?

         A.   No.  I see Jesus as the Christian, the Gentile's path to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  The Jews don't need that path.

         Q.   When it says in the Bible, "No one comes to the Father but through me," it doesn't apply to Jews.  Right?  Is that the position of the Catholic church?

         A.   Mr. Christie, we have to have a prolonged -- if you give me two days or two hours, we can go into the biblical scholarship that begins with Reimarus in the 18th century and is carried forward by many more scholars, with Pope Pius XII's encyclical Divino Afflante in 1943 which gave scholars intellectual freedom to approach the gospels as historical texts dealing with historical figures and historical events and to shed at least temporarily their theological presuppositions. 

         What does that reveal?  As in Rudolph Bultman, for example, you cannot establish any statement of Jesus as authentically his beyond all doubt.  Words built into Jesus' mouth reflect the fact that the redaction of the gospels is after the event.  The oldest is probably the Gospel of Mark which dates from 65-70.  The Crucifixion was 30-33.  The fourth. the Gospel of St. John, dates from, at the earliest, 120 and down to 150, a full century after the event.

         What do they say?  That the gospels are not based on eye witness accounts; that it is an oral tradition which changes with the telling and the retelling and the situation, whether it is in Rome, Italy or in Syria.  It is like studying World War II.  The first document you have after the event in 1945 would be something around 1980.  That is the difficulty in reconstructing the events of Jesus' life and the words, the teaching.

         THE CHAIRPERSON:  Could we pause there for the next question.

         MR. CHRISTIE:

         Q.   What you are saying now is your opinion and has absolutely --

         A.   It is not my opinion.

         Q.   It is not the position of the Catholic Church, is it?

         A.   It is.  Look at the Notes for the correct teaching and interpretation of 1985.

         Q.   So your position that Jews don't need Jesus Christ for salvation, that is the position of the Catholic Church.  Is that right?

         A.   I can't say with theological hair-splitting that is the case.  I hope it is not.

         Q.   You call that hair-splitting?

         A.   That kind of precision, that either you are saved or you are not.  That seems to me to be hair-splitting.

         Q.   And whether Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation is also hair-splitting?

         A.   No.  The teaching of the church is that -- Nostra Aetate has several sections.  One, the most extensive, the 15 lines of Latin view of the Jews; there is another one on Buddhism, and a couple of others.  They are all legitimate religious teachings and offer legitimate ways of knowing the will of God and earning salvation.

         Q.   Is this your position as an expert, a Catholic theologian, or what is it?

         A.   This is my position as a private individual.

         Q.   So it is a basis of your other opinions, isn't it?

         A.   Undoubtedly; I would assume so.  I am not a hypocrite who says one thing in one category and another in another.

         Q.   So you approach your opinion from the point of view of your personal prejudices, which are--

         A.   No, I close my mind after I have read, thought and reflected and come to a conclusion.  You can call it prejudice; that is an opprobrious word.

         Q.   Your position, your belief and your opinions are based on the understanding that all religions are equal.  Isn't that right?

         A.   No.  That statement seems to me to be absolutely beside the point in establishing my attitudes and views.

         Q.   Your attitudes and views expressed earlier were that Jesus Christ is not necessary for Jews, and that is the Christian position.

         A.   No, he isn't.

         Q.   Is that position taken by the Catholic Church about Jews and Judaism?

         A.   Ask the Pope.  I don't pronounce that.

         Q.   I just need to know whether your views on Jewish-Christian relations bear any comparison to traditional Christianity or not.  I take it that you will agree that they do not.</