Deft? Daft Is More Like It

Part Three

by Thomas A. Droleskey

One of the "stars" of yesterday's installment in what has become, unexpectedly, a three part series, was "Archbishop" Joseph Augustine Di Noia, O.P., whose comments in an interview with the National Catholic Register revealed his deep and abiding commitment to the whole false nature of the conciliar approach to dogmatic truth, a concept that is both philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned, that makes it possible for the conciliar revolutionaries to dispense with dogmatic statements and papal "orientations" of the past that are said to become "obsolete in the particulars they contain." This is nothing other than a relabeling of the concept of the "evolution of dogma" whose condemnations have been recounted numerous times on this site, including in part two of this series yesterday.

It is nevertheless important to point out yet again that it is by this false notion of dogmatic truth that conciliar revolutionaries such as Joseph Augustine Di Noia can dispense with the entire teaching of the Catholic Church concerning Judaism. As so many have pointed out over the years, many in the Talmudic world are more committed to the the "teachings" of the "Second" Vatican Council and of the conciliar "popes," especially, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul III and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, than are some "conservative" Catholics in the conciliar structures because they, the Talmudists, recognize the the conciliar church's "teaching" about them is new and does constitute a complete rupture with the true Catholic doctrine that they hate so much and to seek to eradicate even at this time by smearing of those of us who are adhere to it as "anti-Semitic.."

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI specifically employed his "hermeneutic of continuity" to justify a "new" understanding of what he thinks is the Catholic Church's relationship to what he termed "the faith of Israel" when he addressed the members of the organized crime conspiracy against souls known as his curia on December 22, 2005:

Secondly, it was necessary to give a new definition to the relationship between the Church and the modern State that would make room impartially for citizens of various religions and ideologies, merely assuming responsibility for an orderly and tolerant coexistence among them and for the freedom to practise their own religion.

Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance - a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel.

These are all subjects of great importance - they were the great themes of the second part of the Council - on which it is impossible to reflect more broadly in this context. It is clear that in all these sectors, which all together form a single problem, some kind of discontinuity might emerge. Indeed, a discontinuity had been revealed but in which, after the various distinctions between concrete historical situations and their requirements had been made, the continuity of principles proved not to have been abandoned. It is easy to miss this fact at a first glance.

It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within. On the other hand, not so permanent are the practical forms that depend on the historical situation and are therefore subject to change.

It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking on this truth and a new and vital relationship with it; it is also clear that new words can only develop if they come from an informed understanding of the truth expressed, and on the other hand, that a reflection on faith also requires that this faith be lived. In this regard, the programme that Pope John XXIII proposed was extremely demanding, indeed, just as the synthesis of fidelity and dynamic is demanding.. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005)

 

For Ratzinger/Benedict to be correct, of course, God the Holy Ghost not only hid this "knowledge" that had to be "learned" but He permitted a solemn dogmatic council, the [First] Vatican Council, to declare the whole concept of viewing dogmatic statements in light of the historical circumstances in which they written. This means that, ipso facto, the Catholic Church has no infallibility whatsoever and that God the Holy Ghost misdirected the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council and that the true popes who reiterated the condemnation were themselves mistaken.

What this apostasy? Why this blasphemy against God the Holy Ghost?

To please the Talmudists. That is why.

To wit, "Archbishop" Di Noia made it clear in an interview with Vatican Insider (boy, these conciliarists like to gab, don't they?) that it was one of his duties in his new role as the vice president of "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei to seek the "conversion" of the Society of Saint Pius X on the "Jewish question:"

Vatican Insider: SSPX is reported to have accused Jews of “deicide” and used anti-Semitic stereotypes such as the infamous canard of an international “Jewish conspiracy” on its multilingual sites and in statements by its leaders.  Such concepts are contrary to “Nostra Aetate” and all post-Vatican II Papal positions. The Holocaust-denying Bishop, Richard Williamson, may be the most flagrant example, but apparently he is not alone in espousing retrograde theology and ideology….How will you handle this?

"Archbishop" Di Noia: “Regarding Williamson, Pope Benedict XVIth took decisive actions against him because of his refusal to retract.  He was also disciplined by Bishop Fellay (leader of the SSPX), who dismissed him as Director of their Argentinian Seminary.

“Anti-Judaism or anti-Semitism form no part of the official position of the SSPX. Clearly, if they manifest themselves in any Catholic Church, anywhere, this must be addressed. They were wrong a  thousand years ago and they are still wrong today.  If I discover such manifestations in the SSPX I will address them as being incompatible with Catholicism. After 3 years of dialogue we still need to understand what the SSPX position is on the Jewish Community and Judaism. 

“The Church’s deep commitment to reconciliation with the Jewish People is personified today by Benedict XVI. The Ecumenical Council wrought a fundamental change. Then John Paul II, above all others, brought home Paul’s message that Judaism and Jews have a unique place in salvation history. Nobody can deny that Karol Wojtyla’s Pontificate marked a major shift in the theological understanding of Judaism within the Catholic Church. Vatican II repudiated anti-Semitism and presented a positive picture of Judaism. John Paul II took us further in recognizing the significance of the Jewish People for Christianity itself. This is a new concept which we know the Traditionalists will not be able to accept immediately. Convincing them will take time, and in this respect we will have to be patient." (A new chapter in the Society of St. Pius X saga.)

"Archbishop" Di Noia, the Catholic Church is and must be opposed to all false religions, including Judaism. It is specifically for love of the immortal souls of those who adhere to the Talmud that the Catholic Church must pray for the conversion of the Jews as her children seek to use whatever contacts they make in their daily lives with Jewish people to ask God the Holy Ghost to guide them to accept the true Faith and thus save their immortal souls.

To contend that those who desire to seek the conversion of the Jews and who oppose the promotion of Talmudism as pleasing to God are "anti-Semitic" is to engage in a despicable, base appeal to ignorance and emotions that have nothing to do with the very words of the Divine Redeemer Himself and the example set by Saint Peter himself when he preached to the Biblical Jews (as opposed to the modern Talmudists) on Pentecost Sunday to seek and to win the conversion of over three thousand of them who had gathered in Jerusalem from many different parts of the Mediterranean.

Is it "anti-Semitic," "Archbishop" Di Noia, to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of those who adhere to the Talmud to the Catholic Faith?

Is it "anti-Semitic" to reiterate the perennial Catholic doctrine that the Old Covenant has been superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant that was instituted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ at the Last Supper on Holy 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?

Was Pope Pius XII guilty of "anti-Semitism" when he wrote the following right during the midst of World War II, "Archbishop" Di Noia?

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.)

 

Was Pope Saint Pius X guilty of "anti-Semitism" when he, the Vicar of Christ, reiterated this exact teaching to the founder of international Zionism on January 25, 1904, "Archbishop" Di Noia?

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. (Marvin Lowenthal, Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 427- 430.)

Were Pope Eugene IV and the Fathers of the Council of Florence guilty of "anti-Semitism" when they issued Cantate Domino on February 4, 1442?

It [the Holy Roman Catholic Church] 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. (Cantate Domino, February 4, 1442.)

Does all of this just kind of "go away" a wink and a nod by the invocation of the dogmatically condemned Modernist notion of the "evolution of dogma" that you boys are selling these days as the "hermeneutic of continuity, "Archbishop" Di Noia.

You and your false "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, are the real anti-Semites in the world as you show yourselves to be the enemies of the souls of those steeped in the ways of the blasphemous Talmud by refusing to seek with urgency their conversion to the true Faith, reaffirming them in a dead, superseded religion that has no power to save or to sanctify human souls and is displeasing in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, Who hates, that is correct, loathes, each and every false religion, including Talmudism.

Father Denis Fahey made all of the proper distinctions between anti-Judaism, which must characterize the life of a faithful Catholic, and anti-Semitism, which is the hatred of people of Semitic origin. Writing in The Struggle of the Jewish Nation against the Messias, the great Irish apostle of the Social Reign of Christ the King, Father Denis Fahey, wrote that Catholics must never be intimidated by the slogan of anti-Semitism. Consider once again these telling words:

Yet all the propaganda about that display of Anti-Semitism should not have made Catholics forget the existence of age-long Jewish Naturalism or Anti-Supernaturalism. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish Naturalistic opposition to Christ the King is keeping Catholics blind to the danger that is arising from the clever extension of the term “Anti-Semitism,” with all its war-connotation in the minds of the unthinking, to include any form of opposition to the Jewish Nation’s naturalistic aims. For the leaders of the Jewish Nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is logically to be “anti-Semitic.”

These words of wisdom apply to the cultural and political legal warfare that has been waged in this country by Judeo-Masonry. Indeed, as Father Fahey quotes from Pope Pius XI:

“Comprehending and merciful charity towards the erring,” he writes, “and even towards the contemptuous, does not mean and can not mean that you renounce in any way the proclaiming of, the insisting on, and the courageous defence of the truth and its free and unhindered application to the realities about you. The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.” (Pope Pius XII, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 14, 1937)

Anti-Semitism--or simple fidelity to this mission that the God-Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, gave to the Eleven before He Ascended to the Father's right hand in glory on Ascension Thursday, "Archbishop" Di Noia?

And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing them they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Mt. 28: 16-20)

 

Was Father Maria-Alphonse Ratisbonne, who was converted to the Faith after Our Lady appeared to him in the Church of San Andrea delle Fratte, in Rome Italy, on January 20, 1842, as she appeared on the Miraculous Medal, and his brother, Father Theodore Ratisbonne, "anti-Semitic" to seek the conversion of their fellow Jews of the Talmud? They "targeted" Jews for conversion, something that Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the "preacher" to the "papal" household of both John Paul II and Benedict XVI said in 2005 must not be done:

If Jews one day come (as Paul hopes) to a more positive judgment of Jesus, this must occur through an inner process, as the end of a search of their own (something that in part is occurring). We Christians cannot be the ones who seek to convert them. We have lost the right to do so by the way in which this was done in the past. First the wounds must be healed through dialogue and reconciliation. (Zenit, September 30, 2005.)

Catholics hate no one. We hate our sins. We hate the promotion of sin in the world and its protection under the cover of the civil law. We hate the devil and his minions who inspire us to the commission of various sins. It is no hatred of anyone to seek their conversion to the true Faith, the Catholic Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order, and to denounce the efforts of those who hate Our Lord and His true Church to promote evil under cover of the civil law. Shame on you "Archbishop" Di Noia, for your shameless use of the phrase "anti-Semitic" to refer to those who simply adhere, despite their own sins and failings, to the immutable teaching that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from which you and your "pope" and your fellow "bishops" defect so completely and make war against so ceaselessly and relentlessly.

This could go on ad infinitum, ad nauseam. There is no need.

Conciliarism is not Catholicism. They are two opposing religions. This is not a matter of "diabolical disorientation." This is a matter of apostasy, and apostates cannot hold office in the Catholic Church legitimately.

Well, it is indeed looking as though I will be a "monkey's uncle" after all as Joseph Augustine Di Noia may think he is helping Bishop Bernard Fellay win over members of the Society of Saint Pius X to a "reconciliation" with the conciliar authorities; he is actually just reinforcing the vocal opposition within the Society of Saint Pius X to Bishop Fellay's long-planned merger with the One World Church of Ecumenism, a place where belief in apostasy is the price of admission.

Enough, except to note that we must continue to pray that the members of the Society of Saint Pius X come to recognize the simple fact that took many of us far, far too long to recognize and accept: that the conciliar church is ape of the Catholic Church and that its officials are no more members of her than are the pro-abortion Talmudic rabbis who have been "knighted" and/or awarded various medals by the conciliar "popes" and "bishops."

Keep praying your Rosaries. Entrust all to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Pray fervently to Saint Joseph, the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the Faithful.

Cheer up. Worse is yet to come, both civilly and ecclesiastically. We must bear the cross of these times with joy and gratitude. It is a privilege to live in these times with such crosses. Each cross is our path to Heaven. Embrace it well and give all to Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Viva Cristo Rey

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

 

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

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.

All the Holy Roman Pontiffs, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints