Can Anyone Spell A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y?
by Thomas A. Droleskey
Yes, I had every intention on working on other projects this week after I complete work on the next major article dealing with the undermining of the Faith by ethos of Americanism. Well, leave it to the conciliar revolutionaries to delay those projects. As the subject of this article has been dealt with many times before, efforts will be made not to detain you too long on your stop in cyberspace here.
One of the major defections from the Catholic Faith concerns the teaching of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and its "popes" and "bishops" about the false religion of Talmudic Judaism. This defection from the Faith is s visible to all who are possessed of a modicum of the sensus Catholicus and who have not surrendered their intellectual honesty for the sake of human respect or the comforts of believing that contraries can be true concerns
Please consider the following brief review of how Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has defected from the Faith about the Jews throughout the course of his priestly life:
Joseph Ratzinger's Repeated Blasphemies About Divine Revelation and the Jews
“It is of course possible to
read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does
not point quite unequivocally to Christ. And if Jews cannot see the
promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their
part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the
tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of
Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who
first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the
Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he
said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is
what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.” (Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, God and the World, p. 209.)
In its work, the Biblical Commission could not
ignore the contemporary context, where the shock of the Shoah has put
the whole question under a new light. Two main problems are posed: Can
Christians, after all that has happened, still claim in good conscience
to be the legitimate heirs of Israel's Bible? Have they the right to
propose a Christian interpretation of this Bible, or should they not
instead, respectfully and humbly, renounce any claim that, in the light
of what has happened, must look like a usurpation? The second question
follows from the first: In its presentation of the Jews and the Jewish
people, has not the New Testament itself contributed to creating a
hostility towards the Jewish people that provided a support for the
ideology of those who wished to destroy Israel? The Commission set about
addressing those two questions. It is clear that a Christian rejection
of the Old Testament would not only put an end to Christianity itself as
indicated above, but, in addition, would prevent the fostering of
positive relations between Christians and Jews, precisely because they
would lack common ground. In the light of what has happened,
what ought to emerge now is a new respect for the Jewish interpretation
of the Old Testament. On this subject, the Document says two things.
First it declares that “the Jewish reading of the Bible is a possible
one, in continuity with the Jewish Scriptures of the Second Temple
period, a reading analogous to the Christian reading, which developed in
parallel fashion” (no. 22). It adds that Christians can learn a great
deal from a Jewish exegesis practised for more than 2000 years; in
return, Christians may hope that Jews can profit from Christian
exegetical research (ibid.). I think this analysis will prove useful for
the pursuit of Judeo-Christian dialogue, as well as for the interior
formation of Christian consciousness. (Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, Preface to The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible.)
“It
is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not
directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.
And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is
not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity
of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and
the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet
it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and
significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for
denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that
is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.” (Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, God and the World, p. 209.)
To the religious leaders present this afternoon, I
wish to say that the particular contribution of religions to the quest
for peace lies primarily in the wholehearted, united search for God.
Ours is the task of proclaiming and witnessing that the Almighty is
present and knowable even when he seems hidden from our sight, that he
acts in our world for our good, and that a society’s future is marked
with hope when it resonates in harmony with his divine order. It is
God’s dynamic presence that draws hearts together and ensures unity. In
fact, the ultimate foundation of unity among persons lies in the
perfect oneness and universality of God, who created man and woman in
his image and likeness in order to draw us into his own divine life so
that all may be one. ("Pope" Benedict XVI, Courtesy visit to the President of the State of Israel at the presidential palace in Jerusalem, May 11, 2009.)
9. Christians and Jews share to a great extent a common spiritual
patrimony, they pray to the same Lord, they have the same roots, and yet
they often remain unknown to each other. It is our duty, in response
to God’s call, to strive to keep open the space for dialogue, for
reciprocal respect, for growth in friendship, for a common witness in
the face of the challenges of our time, which invite us to cooperate for
the good of humanity in this world created by God, the Omnipotent and
Merciful. (Ratzinger/Benedict at Rome synagogue: ‘May these wounds be healed forever!’ )
Why should we be surprised, therefore, about the latest apostasy that has been published in the false pontiff's behalf by Kurt "Cardinal' Koch, the President of the "Pontifical" Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the head of
Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, in response to Talmudic objections the presence of the Cross of the Divine Redeemer at the upcoming "Assisi III" love-in that is scheduled to take place a little over two months from now?
ROME, August 5, 2011 – The controversy has gone mostly
unnoticed, but has brought into grave doubt the presence of the Jews at
the "Day of reflection, dialogue, and prayer for peace and justice in
the world" convened by Benedict XVI for next October 27 in Assisi.
The
spark was an article by Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the pontifical
council for Christian unity, in "L'Osservatore Romano" on July 7,
illustrating the meaning of the Day.
In the final part of his
article, Cardinal Koch called the cross of Jesus "the permanent and
universal Yom Kippur," and identified in it "the decisive way that Jews
and Christians above all [...] should accept in a profound interior
reconciliation."
"The permanent and universal Yom Kippur"? This has never been the language of the Catholic Church. No true pope has ever taught such a thing. And this is not even to mention that the whole concept of "Yom Kippur" has no Scriptural foundation whatsoever in the Old Testament. It is an invention of the blasphemous Talmud. Yet it is that the conciliar apostates have chosen to use this Talmudic language to apply it to the very symbol of our Catholic Faith, the Holy Cross, thereby demonstrating that they are always ready, willing and able to adopt the false language of a false, blasphemous religion to demonstrate their "respect" for those who have the integrity of their false beliefs to hate the Holy Cross and to make war upon all mention of the Holy Name of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who was hung upon It to redeem us sinful men.
It gets worse:
More precisely, this is what the cardinal wrote in his article:
"According
to the Christian faith, peace, for which the men of today so greatly
yearn, comes from God, who has revealed in Jesus Christ his original
plan, or the fact of having 'called [us] to peace' (1 Corinthians 7:15).
About this peace, the letter to the Colossians says that it is given to
us through Christ, 'by the blood of his cross' (1:20). Because the
cross of Jesus eliminates any desire for revenge and calls all to
reconciliation, it rises above us as the permanent and universal Yom
Kippur, which knows no other 'revenge' but the cross of Jesus, as
Benedict XVI has affirmed in very profound words, on September 10, 2006
in Munich: 'His "vengeance" is the Cross: a "No" to violence and a "love
to the end".'
"As Christians, we certainly do not fall short of
the respect due to the other religions, but on the contrary we cement it
if, above all in the world of today in which violence and terror are
used in the name of religion, we profess that God who has placed in
front of violence his suffering, and conquered on the cross not with
violence, but with love. Thus the cross of Jesus is not an obstacle to
interreligious dialogue; rather, it shows the decisive way that Jews and
Christians above all [...] should accept in a profound interior
reconciliation, thus becoming a ferment of peace and justice in the
world."
More apostasy. Respect for all religions? Check out the teaching of the Catholic Church:
Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of
belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits
and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only
with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the
sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal
tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the
maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to
reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)
The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which
they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies
and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an
equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether
these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But
Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie
in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in
the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices
in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their
intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material
well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our
neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of
the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the
point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ
Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.
Indeed, we have the human experience of
pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common
interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the
passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is
no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of
God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all
men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly
happiness.
By separating fraternity from Christian charity thus understood, Democracy, far from being a progress, would mean a disastrous step backwards for civilization. If,
as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well
being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity
or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united
in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts
in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is
attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic charity
alone can lead the people in the march of progress towards the ideal
civilization. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge, Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
Respect for all religions? Such is the talk of apostasy.
As noted earlier, Talmudists such as Riccardo Di Segni, the "chief rabbi of Rome," do not have such "respect" for Catholicism. They hate the true Faith, and they hate us, agreeing only to tolerate us as long a we remain quiet about their support for abortion and perversity and the further coarsening of our culture, if we do not mention the role of the Zionist lobby in controlling American foreign policy and much of American monetary and commercial policies, if the conciliar authorities bend to their every wishes concerning prayers and symbols and actions that offend their tender Christophobic sensibilities.
Obviously, the Talmudists are very happy to have their fellow "elder brethren" "knighted" by conciliar "popes" despite supporting chemical and surgical baby-killing and perversity and quite despite participating in lawsuits aimed at limiting the display of Christian symbols in public. They are very happy receive marks of "respect" from the conciliar officials, and just delightfully more than happy to repay this respect by singing hymns in the presence of the putative "pope" testifying to their false belief that the Messias has not come as of yet. These things make them very, very happy. Tickled pink, to tell the truth.
Ah, the Talmudists do display their anger now and again when a particular revised Good Friday prayer for the Jews is not to their liking. They also tend to get a little under under the collar when efforts are made to "beatify" a true pope whose actions to save the Jewry of Europe during World War II they have sought to deny in order to manufacture a myth of an "evil" Pope Pius XII who could have prevent the Nazi atrocities against the Jews. We are supposed to accept the exact nature and extent of those atrocities without daring to put any of them into question. Indeed, we are supposed to accept the Talmudists' "remembrance" of them so that them can of exact terms of surrender from the conciliar authorities to dictate the proper "boundaries" in which their corrupted, Modernist version of Catholicism can live out its apostate life in a ghetto of their approval. And those who don't toe the Talmudic party line will find themselves in a place that is hard to find in the conciliar church: disfavor and scorn (see Williamson, Bishop Richard: (see Those Who Deny The Holocaust, Recognize and Capitulate, As We Forgive Not Those Who Trespass Against Us, Yes, Sir, Master Scribe, Disciples of Caiphas, Under The Bus, Nothing New Under the Conciliar Sun, and, among others,"And They That Passed By Blasphemed Him".)
Dare to propose that a Talmudist even go near the Cross of the Divine Redeemer? Total warfare must then be launched:
These last lines in particular provoked the reaction of
the chief rabbi of Rome, Riccardo Di Segni (in the photo), who already
on other occasions has shown himself less easygoing than his
predecessor, Elio Toaff, in relations with the Catholic Church.
To such an extent as to conclude in this way a reply published in "L'Osservatore Romano" on July 29:
"If
the terms of the discussion are those of pointing Jews to the way of
the cross, it is not clear why there should be dialogue and why there
should be Assisi."
In his reply to Cardinal Koch, Rabbi
Di Segni insists on the fact that Yom Kippur, the day of expiation, is
the most important liturgical feast of the Jewish year. It is the day on
which the remission of sins is granted, the only one on which the high
priest entered the "sancta sanctorum" of the temple and called upon God
by name. It is preceded by days of penance and is celebrated in the
synagogues with great attendance by the people. It is dominated by the
reading of the book of Jonah, a grandiose representation of the divine
mercy. There is total fasting, no eating or drinking for 25 hours.
Di
Segni had explained the meaning of this feast before, on the front page
of "L'Osservatore Romano" on October 8, 2008. And he had emphasized
back then that Yom Kippur manifests the "irreconcilable differences
between the two worlds," the world of the Jews and that of the
Christians, because "a Christian, on the basis of his faith, no longer
needs Kippur, just as a Jew who has Kippur does not need the salvation
from sin proposed by the Christian faith."?
In confirmation of this
distance, Di Segni points out that the Church has included in its
liturgy the Jewish feasts of Passover and Pentecost, but not that of
Kippur. And this decision is understandable – he writes – because "the
Christian believer can certainly think that the Cross replaces the day
of Kippur in a permanent and universal way."
But then – Di Segni
adds – the Christian "must not propose to the Jew his own beliefs and
interpretations as indications of the 'decisive way', because this truly
threatens to reintroduce the theology of substitution, and the Cross
becomes an obstacle."(To Each His Own Kippur: The Protest of the Synagogue of Rome (Espresso).)
"A Christian must not proposed to the Jew his own beliefs and interpretations as indications of the 'decisive way', because this truly threatens to reintroduce the theology of substitution, and the Cross becomes an obstacle." Let's consult Acts of the Apostles and our first pope, Saint Peter, about this one, Riccardo di Segni:
For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole
world, and suffer the loss of his soul? Or what shall a man give in
exchange for his soul? For he that shall be ashamed of me, and
of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation: the Son of man
also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his
Father with the holy angels. (Mark 8: 36-28)
And calling in the apostles, after they had scourged them, they charged them that they should not speak at all in the name of Jesus; and they dismissed them.
And they indeed went from the presence of
the council, rejoicing that they were accounted worthy to suffer
reproach for the name of Jesus. And every day they ceased not in the temple, and from house to house, to teach and preach Christ Jesus. (Acts 5: 40-42.)
If any man speak, let him speak, as the words of God. If any man minister, let him do it, as of the power, which
God administereth: that in all things God may be honoured through Jesus
Christ: to whom is glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.
Dearly beloved, think not strange the burning heat which is to try you,
as if some new thing happened to you; But if you partake of the
sufferings of Christ, rejoice that when his glory shall be revealed, you
may also be glad with exceeding joy. If you be reproached for
the name of Christ, you shall be blessed: for that which is of the
honour, glory, and power of God, and that which is his Spirit, resteth
upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a railer, or a coveter of other men's things.
But if as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name.
For the time is, that judgment should begin at the house of God. And if
first at us, what shall be the end of them that believe not the gospel
of God? And if the just man shall scarcely be saved, where shall the
ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them also that suffer
according to the will of God, commend their souls in good deeds to the
faithful Creator. (1 Peter 4: 11-19)
With that settled, Riccardo, let's explain to the readers who, claiming to represent the Catholic Church, got rid of that "theology of the substitution"? Yes, it has come to me. None other than "Blessed" John Paul II:
2. John Paul II's brand of "spiritual ecumenism," whose basic premises were categorically condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos,
January 6, 1928, permitted him to enter freely into places of false
worship and to be treated as an inferior by his hosts. He used numerous
occasions to proclaim abject apostasies, including when he visited a
Jewish synagogue in Mainz, Germany, in 1980:
“The first dimension of this dialogue, that
is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant, never revoked
by God, and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time a dialogue
within our Church, that is to say, between the first and second part of
her Bible ... Jews and Christians, as children of Abraham, are
called to be a blessing to the world. By committing themselves together
for peace and justice among all men and peoples." Cited by John Vennari in Secret of John Paul II's Success.
The full text is available on the Vatican website in Italian and
German. Here are is the relevant passages in these two languages,
including a paragraph not cited by Mr. Vennari:
Non si tratta soltanto della correzione
di una falsa visuale religiosa del popolo ebraico, che nel corso della
storia fu in parte concausa di misconoscimenti e persecuzioni, ma prima
di tutto del dialogo tra le due religioni, che - con l’islam - poterono
donare al mondo la fede nel Dio unico e ineffabile che ci parla, e lo
vogliono servire a nome di tutto ii mondo.
La prima dimensione di questo
dialogo, cioè l’incontro tra il popolo di Dio del Vecchio Testamento, da
Dio mai denunziato (cf. Rm 11,29), e quello del Nuovo Testamento, è
allo stesso tempo un dialogo all’interno della nostra Chiesa, per così
dire tra la prima e la seconda parte della sua Bibbia. In proposito
dicono le direttive per l’applicazione della dichiarazione conciliare
“Nostra Aetate”: “Ci si sforzerà di comprendere meglio tutto
ciò che nell’Antico Testamento conserva un valore proprio e perpetuo...,
poiché questo valore non è stato obliterato dall’ulteriore
interpretazione del Nuovo Testamento, la quale al contrario ha dato
all’Antico il suo significato più compiuto, cosicché reciprocamente il
Nuovo riceve dall’Antico luce e spiegazione” (Nostra Aetate, II) (Meeting with the representatives of the Hebrew community, Mainz, Germany, 17 November 1980, Italian)
Here is a Google translation of this passage:
The first dimension of this dialogue, namely the encounter between the people of God of the Old Testament, never denounced by God (cf. Rom 11:29), and that of the New Testament, is at the same time a dialogue within our Church, so to speak between the first and the second part of his Bible. In this respect, say the guidelines for the application of the Conciliar Declaration "Nostra Aetate": "We will strive to better understand everything in the Old Testament retains its value forever ... and, since this value has not been obliterated by 'further interpretation of the New Testament, which unlike the Old gave its most accomplished, so that each receives the New light from Ancient and explanation.
Perhaps it would be good, at this point, Riccardo di Segni, to turn to two true popes to counter conciliarism's denial of the replacement of the Old Covenant by the New and Eternal Covenant that was instituted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday. The first reference is to the reproaches made by Pope Saint Pius X to the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, when the latter met with him in the Apostolic Palace on January 25, 1904; the second is to Pope Pius XII's Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943:
POPE: We are unable to
favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going
to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if
it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus
Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
HERZL: [The conflict
between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us,
was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I
said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was
not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?
POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our
Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the
Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.
HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].
POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await
the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are
denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they
will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at
all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own,
but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot
admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been
the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.
HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every
family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:]
Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting
the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]
POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no
one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he
attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The
Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity
without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have
not done it yet.
HERZL: But, Holy
Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your
Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land
for these harried people.
POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?
HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.
POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.
[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement
theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church.
Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his
meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis
that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews.
However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that
which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman
Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further,
if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very
same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and
launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.
HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?
POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always
been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews
were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion:
social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not
refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that
their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the
feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on
the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you. (Marvin Lowenthal, The Diaries of Theodore Herzl.)
28.That He completed His work on the gibbet of the
Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the
Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve,
mother of all the living. [28]
"And it is now," says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced
side of Christ, "that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is
now that is .... molded, it is now that it is created . . . Now it is
that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood." [29] One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.
29.And first of all, by the death of our
Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been
abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries,
enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole
world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine
Savior was preaching in a restricted area -- He was not sent but to the
sheep that were lost of the house of Israel [30] -the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of his death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees, [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. [34]
"To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the
Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the
Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from many sacrifices to one
Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the
innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently
from top to bottom." [35]
30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37]
and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family
in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that
our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head in His Church.
"For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching
of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over
the gentiles"; [38]
by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces,
which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His
mortal members it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger
was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual
graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the
fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above
all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into
possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical
Body; for they would not have been united to this Mystical Body. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
Riccardo di Segni, my good and few readers (although the site has, for whatever reason, climbed once again, now ranking at 289,665 in the United States, up considerably in recent weeks), has a better grasp of the true Catholic teaching concerning his false religion than do the conciliar revolutionaries, who are so confused by the compromises they have made that they want to be seen as reaffirming the "uniqueness" of the Holy Cross of the Divine Redeemer while at the same time not be seen by the Talmudists as threatening their beliefs in the "uniqueness" of their false religion. Riccardo di Segni will have none of this confusion. He wants no part of sending such "mixed signals" to the adherents of his false religion or of Kurt "Cardinal" Koch's wanting to have it both ways by showing respect for Talmudism while proposing that Talmudists gather around it:
And he continues:
"One's own
difference cannot be proposed to the other as the model to follow. This
crosses a boundary in Jewish-Christian relations that can be blurred,
but must remain inviolate At the least it is not a way of dialogue
that could be of interest to the Jews."
Beside the reply from Rabbi Di Segni, the July 29 issue of "L'Osservatore Romano" also published Cardinal Koch's counterreply:
"We
absolutely maintain that the Jews should look at the cross as we
Christians do, in order to set out on the road to Assisi together. [...] So the intention is not to replace the Jewish Yom Kippur with the cross
of Christ, even if Christians see in the cross 'the permanent and
universal Yom Kippur.' It is here that the fundamental and very delicate
point of Jewish-Christian dialogue is touched upon, or the question of
how to reconcile the conviction, binding for Christians as well, that
God's covenant with the people of Israel has permanent validity with the
Christian faith in universal redemption in Jesus Christ, in such a way
that, on the one side, the Jews should not get the impression that their
religion is seen by Christians as obsolete, and on the other that
Christians should not renounce any aspect of their faith. Without a
doubt, this fundamental question will continue to occupy
Jewish-Christian dialogue for a long time to come." (To Each His Own Kippur: The Protest of the Synagogue of Rome (Espresso).)
Permanent validity? Jews should not get the impression that their religion is seen by Christians as obsolete, and on the other that Christians should not renounce any aspect of their faith"? Can anyone spell A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y?
The author of the article in which these quotes are found, Sandro Magister, a well-regarded Vaticanologist who is an apologist for Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, concluded his account of this remarkable exchange between a faithful adherent of the blasphemous Talmud and a representative of an apostate religion, conciliarism, by calling to mind that the false "pontiff" himself has said that his revised Good Friday prayer for the Jews can be understood by placing it in the context of the "liturgy of the Jewish feast of expiation, Yom Kippur." Kurt Koch, much like Walter "Cardinal" Kasper before him (see Forever Prowling the World Seeking the Ruin of Souls, part 1, Forever Prowling the World Seeking The Ruin of Souls, part 2 and Kasper's Brag), is speaking with the full support and back of the false "pontiff" himself:
Koch
was called personally by Benedict XVI to head the pontifical council
for Christian unity, and to deal with the dialogue with Judaism in
particular. And he is one of the cardinals of the curia most in harmony
with the pope's vision.
To understand this, it is enough to open
the second volume of the book "Jesus of Nazareth" to the fourth chapter,
where Benedict XVI analyzes the "priestly prayer" of Jesus on the eve
of his passion, which occupies chapter 17 of the Gospel of John.
"This
prayer," the pope writes, "is understandable only against the
background of the liturgy of the Jewish feast of expiation, Yom Kippur.
The ritual of the feast with its rich theological content is realized in
the prayer of Jesus, realized in the literal sense: the rite is
translated into the reality that it signifies. [...] The prayer of Jesus
manifests him as the high priest of the great day of expiation. His
cross and his being lifted up constitute the day of expiation of the
world, on which the entire history of the world, against all human sin
and destruction, finds its meaning. [...] The priestly prayer of Jesus
[...] is so to speak the always accessible feast of the reconciliation
of God with men."
It is no coincidence that the prophet
Jonah, the prophet who is read on the Jewish feast of Kippur, appears at
the center of the frescoes of the Sistine Chapel, between the creation
of the world and the last judgment.
In a mysterious remark, Jesus
attributed to himself the "sign of Jonah" (Luke 11:29-32). And indeed,
he added: "There is something greater than Jonah here."
That sign
of contradiction which Jesus was for the Jews of his time still remains
between Christians and Jews, and is manifested in Yom Kippur.
The Jews will celebrate the feast of expiation on October 10, a few days before the Day in Assisi.
(To Each His Own Kippur: The Protest of the Synagogue of Rome (Espresso).)
For a consideration of how "Papa" Ratzinger has distorted Catholic doctrine in his Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection, please see Coloring Everything He Says and Does, part one and Coloring Everything He Says and Does, part two.
Although it is uncertain whether the conciliar officials will make some kind of accommodation to appease Riccardo di Segni, there is precedent in the history of conciliarism for a "pope" removing the Sign of the Cross from public view to appease the Jews.
Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II removed his pectoral cross (remember, he was a true
bishop) on April 7, 1994, at the Paul VI Audience Hall as he hosted a
concert in honor of the Talmudic victims of the Nazi regime. He did more
than that, however: he removed a crucifix from the Paul VI Audience
Hall. This has nothing to do with fidelity to the Christ King, who won
our salvation for us on the wood of the Holy Cross. He also removed his pectoral cross.
That concert was
"the first time the Chief Rabbi of Rome was invited
to co-officiate at a public function in the Vatican, the first time a
Jewish cantor sang at the Vatican, and the first time the Vatican choir
sang a Hebrew text in performance" (The Vatican, the Holocaust, and the Jews: 1945-2000, a Talmudic source for this; see also: CHRONICLE - The New York Times and YOM HASHOAH, another Talmudic source for the "concert".)
True popes and true cardinals of the Catholic Church do not say or do the things that are said and done by the conciliar revolutionaries. They are apostates, men who have removed
Conciliarism's attempt to appease those in the false religion of Talmudic Judaism continues in spite of the simple fact that Talmudists will never be satisfied until the conciliar authorities have entirely ceased any efforts to convince them to "dialogue" about their differences as they, the Talmudists, see "dialogue" as means to convince the conciliar officials to just be quiet about the Holy Name of Jesus altogether.
Opposition is what we are going to receive from adherents of the Talmud and from the world-at-large that is so very much in their control (see Appendix C below). Saint Paul the Apostle told us why this must be so:
[21] For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world, by wisdom, knew not
God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of our preaching, to save them
that believe. [22] For both the Jews require signs, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: [23] But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness: [24] But unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. [25] For the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1 Cor. 1: 21-25.)
Those who go to synagogues to engage adherents of the Talmudists in "prayer" and those who invite them to "interreligious prayer services" of their own expel themselves from the bosom of Holy Mother Church:
The spirit of Christ, which dictated the Holy
Scriptures, and the spirit which animates and guides the Church of
Christ, and teaches her all truth, is the same; and therefore in all
ages her conduct on this point has been uniformly the same as what the
Holy Scripture teaches. She has constantly forbidden her
children to hold any communication, in religious matters, with those who
are separated from her communion; and this she has sometimes done under
the most severe penalties. In the apostolical canons, which are of very
ancient standing, and for the most part handed down from the
apostolical age, it is thus decreed: "If any bishop, or priest, or
deacon, shall join in prayers with heretics, let him be suspended from
Communion". (Can. 44)
Also, "If any clergyman or laic shall go
into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in
prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion". (Can. 63) (Bishop George Hay, (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)
None of this matters to Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who can give a "papal" shrug of the shoulders to any teaching or law of the Church he does not "like," dismissing it with his Hegelian sleight of hand that he calls the "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity."
Remember, Ratzinger/Benedict is the "pope" who speaks of the Cross of the Divine Redeemer in terms of the Talmudic Yom Kippur observances and who has not as of yet, fully eight hundred fifty days after the fact, uttered a word of "papal" reproof to "Archbishop" Robert Zollitsch of the Archdiocese of Freising and Breisgau, Germany, who denied on April 11, 2009, that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins.
Perhaps these words of Pope Saint Leo the Great will rebuke the consciences of those Catholics who believe that the Catholic Church can be in any way responsible for such unprecedented apostasies, inspiring them--and each one of us--to oppose conciliarism's false
accommodation to the spirit of Modernity and to the "goodness" of false
religions lest we condemn ourselves by refusing to do so with holy
fervor:
But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they
do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can
listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59 )
May all of the warring factions in what constitutes the insane asylum called the "traditional movement" come to recognize that our differences are not going to go away overnight whilst we lack a true chief shepherd on earth, meaning that we should stop firing on each other endlessly and concentrate on the man who is at the heart of the current A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y:
That fellow, the one pictured above, is the problem. Enough of the turf battles and seeking to lord over the scattered remnant flock by making it harder and harder for true priests to administer the Sacraments because of a failure to accept the will of God as it is made manifest within the splendor of His Holy Providence.
This will all end in God's good time. We must seek to persevere until the end of our own lives by begging Our Lady to send us all the graces necessary not only to save our immortal souls but to have the aspiration for the greatest degree of sanctity possible.
A reader, Mr. Michael Creighton, whose masterful compilation of the errors of the Society of Saint Pius X has been used in fifteen articles on this site (e.g., Piracy, Conciliar Style), sent me a link to the following prophecy that is attributed to Blessed Tomasuccio de Foligno, who lived in the Fourteenth Century:
"One from beyond the mountains shall become the Vicar Of God. Religious and clerics shall take part in this change. Outside the true path, there will be only disreputable men; I shrug my shoulders when the Bark of Peter is in danger and there is no one to lend it help...The schismatic shall fall into the scorn of the Italian faithful..."
By about twelve years shall the millennium have passed [2012 A.D.] when the resplendent mantle of legitimate power shall emerge from the shadows where it was being kept by the schism. And beyond harm from the one [the usurper antipope] who is blocking the door of salvation, for his deceitful schism shall have come to an end. And the mass of the faithful shall attach itself to the worthy Shepherd, who shall extricate each one from error and restore to the Church its beauty. He shall renew it." (Prophecy of Blessed Tomasuccio de Foligno, Profezie, 14th Century; information this beatus, provided by Mr. Creighton, who provided the translation of this text from the Italian original, can be found in Appendix D.)
Blessed Anna Maria Taigi, to whom we are very devoted in the Droleskey household, prophesied in the Nineteenth Century that Saints Peter and Paul would choose a cardinal to be the next pope. How will this happen? I don't know. I pray for a miracle of this sort every day. I am a simpleton. It would be wonderful if such an unmerited relief from the A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y that has held sway now for five decades takes place. I keep praying for this miracle. As my dear wife says, "I just hope that Blessed Tomasuccio de Foligno is not referred to the year 3012!" Indeed. We must remain on our knees in fervent prayer.
As we await the miracle of the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that will usher in a period of peace and restore Holy Mother Church, we must cleave to the Catholic Church, not to the counterfeit church of conciliarism, as we attempt to plant the seeds for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as we seek to live more and more penitentially, making reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our own many sins and for those of the whole word., praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits. No matter the problems in the Catholic catacombs, and they are problems aplenty, one can never
May we always have the love for Our Lady and for our dear Wonder Worker, Saint Philomena, that was possessed by Saint John Mary Vianney.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint John Mary Vianney, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
Appendix A
Saint John Chrysostom Contra the Jews (and the Judaizer, Ratzinger/Benedict)
Let that be your judgment about the
synagogue, too. For they brought the books of Moses and the prophets
along with them into the synagogue, not to honor them but to outrage
them with dishonor. When they say that Moses and the prophets knew not
Christ and said nothing about his coming, what greater outrage could
they do to those holy men than to accuse them of failing to recognize
their Master, than to say that those saintly prophets are partners of
their impiety? And so it is that we must hate both them and
their synagogue all the more because of their offensive treatment of
those holy men." (Saint John Chrysostom, Fourth Century, A.D., Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews.)
Many, I know, respect the Jews and think
that their present way of life is a venerable one. This is why I hasten
to uproot and tear out this deadly opinion. I said that the synagogue is
no better than a theater and I bring forward a prophet as my witness.
Surely the Jews are not more deserving of belief than their prophets.
"You had a harlot's brow; you became shameless before all". Where a
harlot has set herself up, that place is a brothel. But the synagogue is
not only a brothel and a theater; it also is a den of robbers and a
lodging for wild beasts. Jeremiah said: "Your house has become
for me the den of a hyena". He does not simply say "of wild beast", but
"of a filthy wild beast", and again: "I have abandoned my house, I have
cast off my inheritance". But when God forsakes a people, what
hope of salvation is left? When God forsakes a place, that place becomes
the dwelling of demons.
(2) But at any rate the Jews say that they,
too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who says
so? The Son of God says so. For he said: "If you were to know my
Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know
my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of
God?
(3) If, then, the Jews fail to know the Father, if
they crucified the Son, if they thrust off the help of the Spirit, who
should not make bold to declare plainly that the synagogue is a dwelling
of demons? God is not worshipped there. Heaven forbid! From now
on it remains a place of idolatry. But still some people pay it honor
as a holy place. (Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews)
Appendix B
Cantate Domino, February 4, 1442
It [the Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of
the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites,
sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify
something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship
at that time, after our Lord's coming had been signified by them,
ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever,
even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and
submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in
Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet
it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the
promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were
believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the
promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed
without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who
after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other
requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and
not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday
they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in
the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to
cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope
in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal
salvation. Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which
can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another
remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are
snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of
God, it advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or
eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people,
but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently, but
so ,that, when danger of death is imminent, they be baptized in the form
of the Church, early without delay, even by a layman or woman, if a
priest should be lacking, just as is contained more fully in the decree
of the Armenians. . . .
It firmly believes, professes, and
proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only
pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become
participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire
which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless
before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that
the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those
remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for
salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and
exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one,
whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the
name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and
unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.)
Appendix C
Father Denis Fahey's Exhortation to Defend the Social Kingship of Christ the King Against the Talmudists
On
the one hand, the Church condemns race hatred in general and hatred of
the Redeemer’s race in particular. On the other hand, the Church
insists, as we have seen, on the duty of combating naturalism in public
and private life and approves of love of native land and extols true
supernatural patriotism. We have the right and the duty to
defend our country and our nation against the unjust aggression of
another nation. This duty is still more strongly urged upon us when it
is a question of our country’s fidelity to Christ the King. We must,
therefore, combat naturalism in general always and everywhere, and we
must be vigilant in regard to the naturalism of the Jewish nation in
particular. The tireless energy with which His own nation pursues the
elimination of the influence of the supernatural life is doubly painful
to our Lord’s Sacred Heart. The combat against naturalism in general
and, therefore, against the organised naturalism of the Jewish nation,
is urged upon us, for example, by Pope Leo XIII (Tametsi, 1900) and Pope Pius XI (Quas Primas, 1925, and Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). . . .
Given
the naturalistic messianic ambition of the Jewish nation to impose its
rule on the other nations, anti-semitism for the Jews logically means
whatever is in opposition to that ambition. The situation since the
Second World War is being cleverly exploited to prevent anyone from
opposing Jewish aims, through fear of being dubbed an “anti-Semite.” I n
my book, The Mystical Body of Christ and the Reorganisation of Society,
I pointed out that the disordered National Socialist action against the
corroding influence of Jewish naturalism on German national life led
not only to measures of repression against the Jews, with regrettable
violations of their personal rights, but also to persecution of the
Catholic Church. Comparatively little information concerning the
anti-Catholic measures ever reached the great newspaper-reading,
cinema-going public, while hardly anyone could fail to be aware of what
was done to the Jews. The term “anti-semitism,” with all its war
connotation of Nazi cruelty, is now having its comprehension widened to
include every form of opposition to the Jewish nation’s naturalistic
programme. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish naturalism is keeping
Catholics blind to the consequences of accepting the term with its
Jewish comprehension. According to the leaders of the Jewish nation, to
stand for the rights of Christ the King is to be an anti-Semite. (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)
