Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us

March 3, 2011


Impressed With His Own Originality

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is an apostate. He is a betrayer of Christ the King and the Catholic Faith. He is a mortal enemy of the souls redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. How any Catholic can at this late date consider this man a member of the Catholic Church who is faithful to the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord has entrusted exclusively to His Mystical Bride without any shadow of change or obscurity is a great mystery.

Yes, I have used this exact paragraph in several other articles on this little-read, much-castigated website. It is appropriate to use verbatim once again.

Why? Well, as always, I am so very glad that you asked. I will try to be very brief.

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has now published what he termed over four months ago as a "risky" book, part two of his Modernist ruminations entitled blasphemously as Jesus of Narazreth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem to the Resurrection, which is making headlines at the present time for the false "pontiff"s passages concerning the lack of responsibility that the Jews of the Sanhedrin bear for the Passion and Death of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday. Although there will be plenty of "papal" apologists who will say that the quotations have been taken out of context or that they are not "official," merely "personal" reflections of the "pope" writing as as a "private" theologian, that we need not be concerned about the apostasy contained within the new book because of its "unofficial" status, the truth is that Ratzinger/Benedict is attempting to rewrite Catholic doctrine and history. This is what Modernists are compelled to do. Who says so? Well, let's try Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

Then the philosopher must come in again to enjoin upon the historian the obligation of following in all his studies the precepts and laws of evolution. It is next for the historian to scrutinize his documents once more, to examine carefully the circumstances and conditions affecting the Church during the different periods, the conserving force she has put forth, the needs both internal and external that have stimulated her to progress, the obstacles she has had to encounter, in a word, everything that helps to determine the manner in which the laws of evolution have been fulfilled in her. This done, he finishes his work by drawing up a history of the development in its broad lines. The critic follows and fits in the rest of the documents. He sets himself to write. The history is finished. Now We ask here: Who is the author of this history? The historian? The critic? Assuredly neither of these but the philosopher. From beginning to end everything in it is a priori, and an apriorism that reeks of heresy. These men are certainly to be pitied, of whom the Apostle might well say: "They became vain in their thoughts...professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.''18 At the same time, they excite resentment when they accuse the Church of arranging and confusing the texts after her own fashion, and for the needs of her cause. In this they are accusing the Church of something for which their own conscience plainly reproaches them.

34. The result of this dismembering of the records, and this partition of them throughout the centuries is naturally that the Scriptures can no longer be attributed to the authors whose names they bear. The Modernists have no hesitation in affirming generally that these books, and especially the Pentateuch and the first three Gospels, have been gradually formed from a primitive brief narration, by additions, by interpolations of theological or allegorical interpretations, or parts introduced only for the purpose of joining different passages together. This means, to put it briefly and clearly, that in the Sacred Books we must admit a vital evolution, springing from and corresponding with the evolution of faith. The traces of this evolution, they tell us, are so visible in the books that one might almost write a history of it. Indeed, this history they actually do write, and with such an easy assurance that one might believe them to have seen with their own eyes the writers at work through the ages amplifying the Sacred Books. To aid them in this they call to their assistance that branch of criticism which they call textual, and labor to show that such a fact or such a phrase is not in its right place, adducing other arguments of the same kind. They seem, in fact, to have constructed for themselves certain types of narration and discourses, upon which they base their assured verdict as to whether a thing is or is not out of place. Let him who can judge how far they are qualified in this way to make such distinctions. To hear them descant of their works on the Sacred Books, in which they have been able to discover so much that is defective, one would imagine that before them nobody ever even turned over the pages of Scripture. The truth is that a whole multitude of Doctors, far superior to them in genius, in erudition, in sanctity, have sifted the Sacred Books in every way, and so far from finding in them anything blameworthy have thanked God more and more heartily the more deeply they have gone into them, for His divine bounty in having vouchsafed to speak thus to men. Unfortunately. these great Doctors did not enjoy the same aids to study that are possessed by the Modernists for they did not have for their rule and guide a philosophy borrowed from the negation of God, and a criterion which consists of themselves. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)


This is a precise, exact dissection of the method used by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI in his self-styled "risky book," part two of Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem to the Resurrection. The false "pontiff" feels free to wipe out almost the entirety of the Catholic past with a mere wave of "papal" hand as he wraps himself in what he thinks is a "bullet proof" shield by saying anyone is free to criticize his theological ruminations in his "unofficial" works. What this "unofficial" work demonstrates, however, is the grip that Modernism and its offspring, the "New Theology," have on his mind. The man believes that he is free to reinterpret Sacred Scripture in the manner of a Protestant. He believes that he is free to ignore the solemn teachings of the Fathers and the Doctors of Holy Mother Church. He believes that everything about the Faith is open to re-examination and re-interpretation.

Here is a news story about the the "pope's" new book's passages concerning the Crucifixion and Death of Our Lord:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- In his latest volume of "Jesus of Nazareth," Pope Benedict XVI says the condemnation of Christ had complex political and religious causes and cannot be blamed on the Jewish people as a whole.

The pope also said it was a mistake to interpret the words reported in the Gospel, "His blood be on us and on our children," as a blood curse against the Jews.

Those words, spoken by the mob that demanded Jesus' death, need to be read in the light of faith, the pope wrote. They do not cry out for vengeance, but for reconciliation, he said.

"It means that we all stand in need of the purifying power of love which is his blood. These words are not a curse, but rather redemption, salvation," he said.

The pope's treatment of the events of the Passion form the core of his new book, "Jesus of Nazareth. Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem to the Resurrection." It was to be officially presented at the Vatican March 10, but excerpts from three chapters were released March 2.

The work is an extensive reflection on the Gospel texts and on the arguments of Scripture scholars, in effect offering Pope Benedict's version of "The Passion of the Christ."

In Chapter 7, the pope examines the trial of Jesus before Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor in Judea. The pope said Pilate is presented realistically in the Gospels as a man who knew that Jesus posed no real threat to the Roman order, but who had to deal with political realities -- including pressure from Jesus' accusers.

"Now we must ask: Who exactly were Jesus' accusers? Who insisted that he be condemned to death?" the pope wrote. He noted that the Gospel of St. John says simply it was "the Jews."

"But John's use of this expression does not in any way indicate -- as the modern reader might suppose -- the people of Israel in general, even less is it 'racist' in character. After all, John himself was ethnically a Jew, as were Jesus and all his followers," he said.

What St. John was referring to with the term "the Jews," the pope said, was the "temple aristocracy," the dominant priestly circle that had instigated Jesus' death.

In St. Mark's Gospel, the pope said, this circle of accusers is broadened to include the masses or mob of people. But he said it also would be a mistake to see this, too, as referring to the Jewish people as a whole; more specifically, they were the followers of the imprisoned rebel, Barabbas, who were mobilized when Pilate asked the crowd to choose amnesty for one of the accused: Jesus or Barabbas.
(In book, pope says Jesus' death cannot be blamed on Jewish people .)


This is really pretty par for the conciliar course. Although some "conservative" Catholics are "shocked" at the passages that have been leaked in advance of the formal release of the book on the Thursday after Ash Wednesday, March 10, 2011, one must remember that it was the old friend of The Sillon that was condemned by Pope Saint Pius X, Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, who first "absolved" the Jews of any the guilt of the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It was Roncalli/John XXIII who, in an edict issued on March 21, 1959, ordered the removal of the word "perfidious" from the Prayer for the Jews in the Good Friday liturgy. And Ratzinger/Benedict's rejection of the guilt of the Jews for the death of Our Lord and that they, the Jews, are an accursed race is straight from the "Second" Vatican Council's Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965:

True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ. (Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965.)


Ratzinger/Benedict is merely reiterating the false "teaching" contained in Nostra Aetate. It just happens to be that this false "teaching" requires us to believe that the following Fathers and Doctors of Holy Mother Church were wrong, that she herself was misled until the "truth" dawned during the age of conciliarism at the beginning of the reign of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, who set the stage for its blossoming in Nostra Aetate:

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)

Do not add to your sins by saying that the Covenant is both theirs and ours. Yes, it is ours, but they lost it forever. (St. Barnabas)

So clearly was the transition then made from the Synagogue to the Church that, when the Lord gave up His soul, the veil of the Temple was rent in two. (Pope St. Leo the Great)

Since His spouse, the Synagogue, refused to receive Him, Christ answered: "This is a harlot!" and gave her a bill of divorce. (St. Vincent Ferrer)

Ungrateful for favors and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness. They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future grow insolent, but that they always suffer publicly the shame of their sin in servile fear. (Pope Gregory IX)

Crucifiers of Christ ought to be held in continual subjection. (Pope Innocent III)

It would be licit, according to custom, to hold Jews in perpetual servitude because of their crime. (St. Thomas Aquinas)

Let the Gospel be preached to them and, if they remain obstinate, let them be expelled. (Pope Leo VII)

The Jews wander over the entire earth, their backs bent over and their eyes cast downward, forever calling to our minds the curse they carry with them. (St. Augustine)

As wanderers, they must remain upon the earth until their faces are filled with shame and they seek the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Pope Innocent III)

One who dies a Jew will be damned. (St. Vincent Ferrer)

Those of the seed of Abraham who live according to the Law of Moses and who do not believe in Christ before death shall not be saved; especially they who curse this very Christ in the synagogues; who curse everything by which they might obtain salvation and escape the vengeance of fire. (St. Justin the Martyr)

Judaism, since Christ, is a corruption; indeed, Judas is the image of the Jewish people: their understanding of Scripture is carnal; they bear the guilt for the death of the Savior, for through their fathers they have killed Christ. The Jews held Him; the Jews insulted Him; the Jews bound Him; they crowned Him with thorns; they scourged Him; they hanged Him upon a tree. (St. Augustine)

Jews are slayers of the Lord, murderers of the prophets, enemies and haters of God, adversaries of grace, enemies of their fathers' faith, advocates of the devil, a brood of vipers, slanderers, scoffers, men of darkened minds, the leaven of Pharisees, a congregation of demons, sinners, wicked men, haters of goodness! (St. Gregory of Nyssa)  

And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit the blood-guilt of their fathers; for they cried out: "His blood be on us and on our children" (Mt. 27:25). (St. Basil the Great)

Poor Jews! You invoked a dreadful curse upon your own heads; and that curse, miserable race, you carry upon you to this day, and to the End of Time you shall endure the chastisement of that innocent blood! (St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori) [Each of the quotes cited after those of Saint John Chrysostom were provided by a hard-working defender of the Catholic Faith and a very good friend, Mr. Mark Stabinksi, who found them in The Book of Faith, Book III, Chapter 4: THE ONCE-CHOSEN PEOPLE - NOW An Accursed Race, which itself is drawn from the Apostolic Digest and found on the Catholic Apologetics Info site; see also The same god that Benedict XVI worships with the Jews.)


That's a whole lot of mistakes that went uncorrected by the authority of the Catholic Church until October 28, 1965, which was, not so coincidentally, the seventh anniversary of the "election" of Angelo Roncalli as the bogus "successor" of Pope Pius XII, who died on October 9, 1958. That's a whole lot of mistakes.

Additionally, of course, the following dogmatic statements concerning the Jews and the invalidity of the Old Covenant had to have been "mistaken" or have had to become "obsolete" for Ratzinger/Benedict's consistent misrepresentation of Catholic teaching to be correct: 



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.)

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.)

Not to be overlooked, of course, is the fact that Pope Saint Pius X, having in mind only the conversion of the soul of the founder of international Zionism, Theodore Herzl, must have been quite mistaken to state the following to Herzl on January 25, 1904, for Ratzinger/Benedict to be correct:

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.


The Jews of Our Lord's time knew what they were doing. They did not care. Their descendants have not cared as they persecuted the Church in her infancy, willingly pointing out Catholics who were hiding in various places from the Roman authorities in order to curry favor with those authorities after they had been dispersed from the Holy Land in 70 A.D. Over thirteen million Catholics were killed by Roman authorities and their minions in their occupied lands between 67 A.D. and 313 A.D., and Jews played a role in seeking to kill the true Faith and those who adhered to it once and for all during this period of the Church's infancy.

Indeed, it was the Judeo-Masonic warfare against the Catholic Faith and the Social Reign of Christ the King in the centuries following the Protestant Revolt and the rise of naturalistic philosophies and ideologies that made possible the rise of anti-Theistic regimes such as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Nazi Germany, both of which were founded in an belief that the spread of their respective statist ideologies could improve the world. The Jewish warfare against the Faith was, therefore, in very large measure responsible for the letting loose of demonic forces that resulted in the crimes committed by agents of Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. It was the Judeo-Masonic effort to kill off Christ the King once and for all that brought out the crimes of the Twentieth Century, which are as of yet ongoing in the Twenty-first Century as innocent babies are put to deaths in their mothers' wombs around the world, both by surgical and chemical means, under cover of the civil law to this very day.

To insist, as Ratzinger/Benedict does, that the Jews were calling upon the Precious Blood of Christ the King to redeem them when they were actually calling down upon them and their children His curse is to insist that a lie is the truth, to insist that one can state something as being true and then expect us to accept it as such, which is the very essence of positivism. There is no other way to read the following passage from the Gospel According to Saint Matthew than the way it has been understood by Holy Mother Church from her infancy as Saint Peter, the first pope, preached on Pentecost Sunday to seek the conversion of the Jews assembled in Jerusalem shortly after the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, descended upon Him and the other Apostles and Our Lady and the rest who were gathered in the Upper Room:

And the governor answering, said to them: Whether will you of the two to be released unto you? But they said, Barabbas. Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They say all: Let him be crucified. The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children. (Matthew 27: 21-25.)


Anyone who insists that the Jews did not know what they doing or saying on Good Friday is either intellectually dishonest or just contemptuous of the consistent, perennial teaching of the Catholic Church, which does, after all, describe the approach to doctrinal truth and history represented by Ratzinger/Benedict's philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity."


Also, it must be remembered that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has written extensively on how the Old Testament does not point unequivocally to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as the Messiah, that the Talmudic interpretation is valid:

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 Ratzinger, God and the World, p. 209.)


His Excellency Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas wrote the following about Ratzinger's view of Sacred Scripture in the passage quoted above:


What blasphemy! According to Ratzinger, divine revelation is obscure and there are perfectly good reasons for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ! What he is saying in reality is that God has failed inasmuch as the divinely inspired prophecies aren't sufficiently clear enough. This is the reason that Pope St. Pius X, knowing this evil tenet of modernism, explicitly stated in the Oath Against Modernism that miracles and prophecies are the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion, and that they are well adapted to all eras and all men. (His Excellency Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, Adsum, December, 2007.)


"Pope" Benedict XVI has entered into four Talmudic synagogues,  content to be treated as an inferior as he has listened patiently to blasphemous "hymns" denying the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (see, among others, Saint Peter and Anti-Peter and  Wear Your Catholic Stripes Well) And it was as "Cardinal" Ratzinger that he wrote the following in the preface The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible, May 24, 2001:

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 Ratzinger, Preface to The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible, May 24, 2001.)


Why is it necessary to repeat all of this yet again? Because truth needs to be defended:

But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: "Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers."(12) To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: "Have confidence; I have overcome the world."(13) Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)


That's why, my friends. That's why.

Pope Saint Pius X's description of the methodology employed by Modernists applies entirely to Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI:

Further, none is more skillful, none more astute than they, in the employment of a thousand noxious devices; for they play the double part of rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error; and as audacity is their chief characteristic, there is no conclusion of any kind from which they shrink or which they do not thrust forward with pertinacity and assurance. To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they possess, as a rule, a reputation for irreproachable morality. Finally, there is the fact which is all hut fatal to the hope of cure that their very doctrines have given such a bent to their minds, that they disdain all authority and brook no restraint; and relying upon a false conscience, they attempt to ascribe to a love of truth that which is in reality the result of pride and obstinacy. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)


Oh, by the way, did I tell you that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is an apostate, that he is a betrayer of Christ the King and the Catholic Faith, that he is a mortal enemy of the souls redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? Have I told you that lately?

Catholics are never impressed with "originality." They are informed by Tradition. Such is the difference between conciliarism's love of "novelty" and "originality" and Catholicism's unshakable defense of God's immutable truths.

This is, of course, a chastisement for our sins, for our own infidelities, for our own lukewarmness, for our own lack of steadfastness in prayer, especially to the Mother of God. We need to pray many Rosaries of reparation now that these additional offenses have been given to God by the false "pontiff." whose "unofficial" words deceive Catholics and non-Catholics alike just as much as his "official" words and deed, We need, therefore, to make much reparation for these sins as we seek always to make reparation for our own sins as we entrust to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary the needs of the present moment, especially as we approach Ash Wednesday in but six days from now.

We must, of course, continue to remember that this is the time that God has appointed from all eternity for us to be alive. He has work for us to do. Let us do this work with courage and valor as we never count the cost of being humiliated for the sake of defending the integrity of Faith, as we never cease our prayers for the conversion of all people, including those who adhere to the Talmud and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his fellow conciliarists, to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!

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.

See also: A Litany of Saints

© Copyright 2011, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.