by Jimmie Moglia for The Saker Blog
The nature of the subject requires an introduction. A detective story does not require a murder, nor the events of a thriller need be fictional. Most detective stories include a murder because the gravity of the deed instills a sense of vicarious fear, triggers the pleasure of the riddle, and makes plausible the concealment that prompts curiosity.
Ever since the Bible and the Greek dramatists, riddle has been a compelling literary device, and the discovery of who-is-who and who-did-what has been the mainspring of great narratives.
In ancient stories, however, a single physical fact, or an object, sufficed to disclose the identity of the perpetrator and lead to closure. Sophocles’ Oedipus and the biblical Joseph are examples.
But in modern stories, real or fictional, plots are more complicated. There are more suspects, objects, documents, pointers, tips, traces and clues. Clues are examined for what they imply and studied as signs of past actions and dark purposes. Therefore the search for a history in things is more obscure, and possibly controversial. For, in the end, it reflects how and what our civilization thinks of law, evidence, intent, motives and knowledge.
The trend towards more complex stories began in the XIX Century, with Walter Scott, Balzac and others. It was a time when Illuminist Rationalism met with the Romantic Movement. Rationalism had made reason a Goddess. Romanticism claimed the rights of an irrational soul, from a reason that was only rational. And detection is the romance of reason.
Now to our murder-less story, where its religious-ecclesiastical background calls for careful threading, though no issues of faith or belief are involved. I am referring to the Second Vatican Council, (1961-1964), some of its deliberations, the shadowy maneuvers that brought them about, and the implications and consequences for the brethren and the world at large. The Council implemented profound changes, of which many faithful are probably not fully aware, and from which the Catholic Church has perhaps not yet recovered.
But first some background. The late 1950s were a time of critical ideological tension. In Italy, Communist governments, provincial and local, ran and administered large swaths of the country. There was a chance that in the next political elections the Communists could win the majority.
Understandably, America was concerned and had disturbing contingency plans should the enemy win. In this, I think, they misunderstood Italy’s collective psychology. For one, many had already perceived the utopian nature of Marxist egalitarianism, and sensed that a Communist state would resemble a convent or a prison. But they also knew that, if the Italian Communists won, they would quickly convert the convent into a brothel and the prison into a discotheque. That is, a change in name but not in substance.
Still, Pope Pius XII, who died in 1958, came from a noble family with a long history of service to the Church. Now policy and the political wind called for a Pope with a different background, a “populist” we would say today – one whose humble origins would implicitly raise favor among the discontent, hope in the disenfranchised and sympathy in the downtrodden.
Pope John XXIII filled the bill, for he was the fourth among thirteen children in a family of sharecroppers. And soon he acquired the byname of “good.” From then on the masses knew him as “the Good Pope.”
Logic is never a friend of mass psychology, for ‘good’ is a relative term. Good compared to whom? In fact, according to a meaningful section of past and current Catholic thinkers, John XXIII was a disaster.
For example, setting aside theological issues and speaking as a skeptic, I think that removing Latin as the language of ritual was a mistake. For some of the eminence of the ancients may be justly ascribed to the graces of their language, and translations into current tongues sound contrite, contrived and barbarous.
Latin is the language of the Cathedrals. To exchange it for a modern language is to cheapen that whose majesty rests in its mystery. Like exchanging a Gregorian chant with rap music, or lowering Heaven to the level of earth, instead of lifting the minds of men from earth to Heaven.
In a Gothic cathedral even an atheist feels the spell of mysticism. He is prompted to meditate on metaphysics, on the Great Unknown and on the undiscovered country, from whose gates no traveller returns. A certainty that, from time immemorial, has puzzled the will and made us rather bear the ills we have, than fly to others that we know not of.
But I digress. Prior to Vatican II, one the Good Friday’s rituals of the Catholic Church features(d) the reciting of a prayer originated in the fourth century AD. That prayer included the words, “Oremus et pro perfidis Judaeis,” meaning “Let us also pray for (the conversion of) the faithless Jews.”
During his last years, Pope Pius XII had received a visit from Jules Marx Isaac, a prominent Frenchman who was a Mason, a Marxist and a Jew. Isaac asked the Pope to remove “perfidis” from the prayer. Pius XII declined because – he explained – “perfidis” does not mean ”perfidious” but “faithless.” For the Jews do not recognize the divinity of Christ and consequently ‘have no faith.’ Therefore, ‘faithless’ was not an insult but a statement of fact.
In the turbulent currents of our world, these historic, semi-theological preoccupations seem quaint. For today an obscene comedienne can claim, on American prime-time TV, that she is glad that the Jews killed Christ. Adding, “If I could, I’d do it again, I’d f…ing” do it again.” And both Catholic and Protestant divines have met such externations (and worse), with a stony yet meaningful silence.
But in the 1950s the Zeitgeist was different. The USSR had moved away from advocating a Trotskyite, Bolshevik, world-permanent revolution to a Stalinist program of “Communism-in-one-Country.” Besides, she had set herself up as a protector and ally of the Arab world.
The echo of Israel’s invasion of Palestine had not yet died. In 1956, Israel, along with England and France had occupied the Sinai and taken over the Suez Canal. In a move today inconceivable, Eisenhower had ordered the invaders to withdraw “or else.”
The Encyclopedia Judaica of 1954 printed that “several hundred-thousand” Jews had died in concentration camps, due to terrible conditions, famine and disease. The Holocaust idea, and its ensuing immeasurable political, judicial and economic power, was still a decade and a half away. In other words, a warming of relations between Jews and the Catholic Church made political sense.
The first signal occurred during the Good Friday rituals of 1959, and we owe this information to Cardinal Bea, right hand of John XXIII. John XXIII reversed the ruling of his predecessor, Pius XII, and ordered the adjective “perfidis” removed from the prayer recited since 400 AD.
Earlier on, in 1937, Pope Pius XI had issued another Encyclical, unusually written in German, and titled “Mit Brennenden Sorge”, (With Burning Concern). In which Pope Pius XI also dealt with the thorny issue of collective Jewish responsibility for the death of Christ. He wrote, “God (the Word) became flesh among a people that one day would crucify him.” In 1959 John XXIII suppressed that sentence from the record of Pius XI’s Encyclical. Nor Internauts will find it by reading the Encyclical online.
There were other meaningful suppressions, for example, in the ritual for the baptism of adults wishing to become Catholics. In the old ritual the priest asked the applicant whether “he held in horror Judean perfidy and superstition.” To which the expected answer from the soon-to-be-Catholic was ‘yes’. That question-and-answer exchange was removed from the ritual.
Pope John XXIII, like the current Pope, chose gestures over words to express his thought. The hierarchy, the subordinates and Catholics at large were to derive, from his gestures, their meaning and implications, as well as the Pope’s objectives and intentions.
On a Saturday in March, 1962 (the Council had began the previous October), John XXIII made a well-publicized stop, with his car and caravan, in front of the Synagogue of Rome. The stop was timed to occur at the end of a Shabbat, when the Jews came out of the building. And when, from his car, the Pope blessed them.
More meaningful gestures were to come. Ariel Toaff, a Jewish professor at a Tel Aviv University, has written an interesting book, in French, titled “La Paque des Juifs” (Easter of the Jews). Toaff examined the records of various trials, through the ages, of Jews accused of killing Christian children – murdered to use their blood in some Jewish Easter’s ceremonies. That book was promptly removed from circulation a few days after publishing, due to Jewish reaction and furious pressure. There was, however, a second edition, where the author added statements of sufficient impact as to reduce the ire of his co-religionists.
Among youngsters allegedly killed for the “Paque des Juifs” were Simonino from Trent (Italy), Andrea from Rinn (Austria), Lorenzino from Marostica (Italy) and Dominguito del Val (Spain). They had all been declared ‘Blessed,’ their embalmed bodies had been enclosed in glass tombs, under a main altar or in a chapel dedicated to them.
By the way, the difference between a Blessed (Beatus) and a Saint (Sanctus) has to do with the number of miracles performed and their timing.
In May 1961, John XXIII wrote a secret letter to the religious authorities of the Churches or Abbeys involved, ordering to remove the tombs and all records, works of art, ex-voto, paintings and statues of the quoted Blessed from their respective Churches, and to suppress immediately all related celebrations, festivities and processions.
Andrea from Rinn was born in 1459 and beatified in 1751. At the Abbey of Wilten, in Austria, his chapel was renamed, his paintings and statues removed, and his sarcophagus relegated in a dark corner against a wall. An inscription on the stone masking the sarcophagus asked forgiveness of the Jews, for the veneration of that Blessed had been a cause of anti-Semitism. Finally, in 1985, the Archbishop of Innsbruck had the body removed from the church to a common cemetery – “for his veneration (Andrea-from-Rinn’s) is not substantiated by reliable historical documentation.” Which, in itself, is a remarkable statement, as the proclamation of a ‘Blessed’ follows a lengthy process and trial of canonization.
In fact, after the death of Pope John Paul II, the Vatican PR machinery created the slogan, “Subito Santo” (A Saint Immediately). Where ‘immediately’ infers a break from the traditional years, decades, and at times centuries, required before sanctification. Furthermore, the Blessed cannot be unblessed, depending on the political air of the times, though the Archbishop of Innsbruck clearly thought otherwise.
In Marostica, the glass tomb was removed from Lorenzino’s chapel, and repositioned against a wall – a metal cover hiding the sarcophagus from view. I mentioned Marostica, a medieval town near Venice, as it is known worldwide for the annual chess-match, where the chess-pieces are human. In fact the pavement of the town square consists of a colorful, permanent, gigantic and brightly decorated chess board.
Back to the Council, where – as per the biography of Cardinal Bea – an important character comes to the stage. He is Nahum Goldmann (1885-1982), a Polish Jew, President of the World Jewish Congress (1951-1978) and editor of the “Encyclopedia Judaica,” in Berlin, from 1932 to 1934. Later he was the Representative of the Judean Nation at the United Nations from 1935 to 1940, in Geneva and the US.
From 1939 to 1945 he was the director of the Jewish Spying Service, at a time when the Israeli state didn’t yet exist, though the Organization was recognized by the US Administration – evidence that the US already considered the state of Israel a fait accompli’.
In his autobiography, Goldmann writes of having been the first, in 1942, to launch the idea of the Nuremberg Trials.
And he is also associated with the notorious Morgenthau Plan.
Henry Morgenthau was the Jewish Secretary of the Economy in the Roosevelt Administration. The Morgenthau Plan, though bitterly opposed by other members of the Administration, was seriously discussed, debated and almost adopted. What turned the scale against it was the fear that the Soviet Union would use the Morgenthau Plan as a propaganda tool to convert the whole of Germany into a Communist state. It should also be noted that, after WW2, the Jews lost much of their earlier influence, presence and power in the Soviet directorate.
The Morgenthau Plan called for the dismantling of all German industrial concerns, mass transfer of all remaining machinery and industrial tools to England as war reparations, prohibition of any industrial activity, the reduction of Germany to the level of a pre-industrial, medieval agricultural society, and the forced sterilization of all German men and women.
Those who read this for the first time may hardly believe it. But extensive and detailed records are held and consultable in the archives of the American Congress. And Thomas Dewey, who opposed Roosevelt in the presidential campaign of 1944 said that, “The publishing of this (Morgenthau) plan, was as good as ten fresh German divisions.” Goebbels used the content of the plan as a tool to animate the decimated but still resisting German army.
To understand the mentality, the attitude, and the psyche of creatures like Morgenthau and Goldmann, the reader may consult Theodore Kaufman’s book “Germany Must Perish,” on which the Morgenthau Plan was based.
I quote but one statement from the book,
“Even if such a huge undertaking (the reeducation of the younger generation) were feasible, life itself would not have it so. As war begets more, suppression begets rebellion. Undreamed of horrors would unfold.
Thus we find that there is no middle course; no act of mediation, no compromise to be compounded, no political or economic sharing to be considered. There is, in fine, no other solution except one: that Germany must perish forever from this earth! And fortunately, as we shall now come to see, this is no longer impossible of accomplishment…”
In his memoirs, Goldmann writes that the Second Vatican Council would not have occurred, but for three events,
— the Shoa
— the Nuremberg Trials
— the foundation of the state of Israel.
Nathan Ben Horin, Israel’s Ambassador to the Vatican, writes in his memoirs, that on February 27, 1962 the draft of the Encyclical “Nostra Aetate” – Our Age – produced by the International Judaic Congress, was delivered to Cardinal Bea, for transmittal to John XXIII.
In 1960, John XXIII through his right hand Cardinal Bea, had invited Nathum Goldmann for a meeting with the Pope. In the meeting (so Goldmann writes), John XXIII said he wanted to propose, at the forthcoming Council, a revision of the relations between Jewry and Catholicism. To do so – according to Goldmann’s memoirs – the Pope needed for the Jewish Congress to send him a formal request for the reconsideration of Jewish-Catholic relations.
That is, John XXIII wanted a change, but he needed the Jewish Congress to ask for it.
Then, with another important step, John XXIII excluded the Holy Office from making any input on such an important matter as the relationship between the Catholic Church and other religions – which was the essence of the “Nostra Aetate” Encyclical.
This raised a bitter internal feud, for the Holy Office had been for centuries the official organ of analysis and deliberations regarding dogmas and general matters of faith. To the complaining Cardinal Ottaviani, head of the Holy Office, John XXIII simply ordered to shut up.
John XXIII had several meetings with another influential Rabbi, Abraham Heschel, who also contributed to the writing of the Encyclical – so writes the secretary of Cardinal Bea.
And finally, in an issue of the French Jewish weekly “Tribune Juive,” Lazare Landau, a Jewish historian, writes,
“In a glacial night of the winter 62-63, I was invited to an extraordinary meeting of the “Communitarian Center for Peace,” held at the Synagogue of Strasbourg. At the end of the Shabbat, the Directors received in secret, in a cellar of the building, an envoy of John XXIII, Yves Congar, [note: a Dominican friar who had a critical influence on the ‘progressive’ measures taken by the Council as a whole.]
There were ten of us. Congar, in name of John XXIII, asked us what we expected from the Catholic Church, as regards the millenarian “Jewish Question.” We said that we wanted the complete re-habilitation of the Jews, as regards the death of Christ. ‘Nostra Aetate’ was a total revolution, as Congar later said to me, in the doctrine of the Church, as regards the Jews.”
In fact – so I am told by current practicing Catholics who attend Masses and functions in their Churches – some priests praise the greatness of Hebraism, assert that Abraham is our common ancestor and that the Jews are our ‘elder brothers’ of the Bible. Forgetting the polygamy of the patriarchs, the gallantries of David, the seraglio of Solomon, the incest in the Leviticus, and a general Old Testament undertone of malevolence, venom, hatred, grudge, enmity and revenge.
The same priests sermonize on the rights of Jews to the ancestral land of Israel. On the wars in the Middle East, fought for Israel, and on the slaughter of Palestinians, the word is mum. Though various Popes have at times deplored, and generally lamented that war causes death and suffering, which almost equates to saying that a great cause of the night is lack of the sun.
In summary, there is sufficient evidence as to who took the initiative and who were the authors of the Encyclical ‘Nostra Aetate’.
Nevertheless, the debates at the Council on the issue of the Jews’ involvement in the death of Christ were contentious and combative. After all, according to the Gospels, the Jews had asked for the blood of Christ to fall “on their head and that of their children.” The Gospel of St. John made this clear, and St. Paul had declared that adopting alternative Gospels would be anathema.
The bishops of the Arab world, in particular, objected to the appeasement of the Jews. For it appeared an indirect Catholic endorsement of the rape of Palestine. A de-facto endorsement occurred in 1965, though formal recognition and exchange of embassies had to wait for John Paul II, in 1993.
In the end there was a compromise. The Encyclical “Nostra Aetate” would state that only “some,” but not “all” Jews were responsible for the death of Christ.
This did not prevent the Catholic University of Notre Dame, in Indiana, from freeing all Jews of any responsibility related to the issue.
Furthermore – as I hear from Professor E. Michael-Jones – the University hired a Jewish psychologist to teach a seminar on ‘togetherness,’ or similar, to priests and nuns. With the foreseeable consequence that a number of priests left the ministry and nuns the convent…. to get married. If there is life after death, Boccaccio will laugh his head off.
To conclude, the Second Vatican Council has puzzled many Catholics. Perhaps John XXIII saw which way the stream of time did run, and was forced away from the ancient paths by the rough torrent of occasion.
But some Catholics ask where is the Vatican headed. For, when a revolutionary change of religious belief is imposed from above, strength of conviction is weakened and judgment confounded. Resistance shrinks from revolution of beliefs, even if the prime mover of the insurgency keeps wearing the robes of the Prime Minister of God.
I will let the non-denominational reader draw his own conclusions, because, in the end, there is no verdict of history other than the private opinion of the individual.
Furthermore, at times, the truth may appear grey but isn’t, it is black and white in patches. And even the blackness and the whiteness of the patches are often debated and debatable. For nothing is black or white, but thinking makes it so.
Latin was not the language of the church of Jesus, because He did not speak it , neither did the apostles.
He spoke Aramaic ( may be Hebrew or Koine Greek ),
Latin was the language of the Roman empire, that was not christian, but pagan . The romans became Christian in the IV century, some 300 years after Jesus.
The earliest versions of the Gospels that we have were written in Greek ( not latin ).
The tradition of the Church made latin important in its liturgy because this was the language spoken by the people.
My conclusion is that latin does not have any special “religious” meaning in Christianity, at least not a meaning linking it “directly” to Jesus , so that to have a special role .
If we think the sound is important ( like with the mantras ) then it is logical to think that the Aramaic should be used being it the original language used by Jesus .
Wrong, He spoke no less than three languages. He was a Greek, hence he spoke Greek, He was also a Roman, hence he spoke also Latin, he also spoke Aramaic just like the people he tried to convert.
Just so you do not jump up and down after my statement, here is an explanation.
In short the Jews could not drag him through their own courts, because He was a Roman, hence above their courts. Hence the Jews went to the head of Roman authority and claimed that He was conspiring against Roman Emperor, thus presenting Roman authorities with no choice but to convict him to death.
Also, to make it clear, this was an Eastern Roman Empire, which was a Greek part of Roman Empire.
Oh yes, never mind the usual propaganda.
Language is for communicating period. There is no greater example of this than what occurred at Pentecost. Remember the story about the Glossolia wherein St. Peter and others were given the ability to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave utterance and why? Well, Jerusalem wasn’t a one-language city; it was filled with so many different languages that it must have been a confusing mess for many of its citizens. Also, its location made it a thoroughfare between the Mediterranean and Near East, which meant it was constantly filled with travellers and tourists of all kinds, every one of them in pursuit of getting a glimpse of the great Temple of God which stood in its midst. From God’s perspective, therefore, the best way to set about this new work of His Spirit was to have these Galileans speak to the peoples and cultures in their own languages.
To everyone standing around, it would have been a most astounding sight, proving to them that this was truly an act of Almighty God. Can you imagine an Englishman speaking Chinese under the power of God and an English-speaking Chinese person communicating right back? This is what was going on here.
Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?” (Acts 2:5–12)
Talk about an interesting way to communicate and educate people: have them quote the Bible using their own languages. Do you see God’s intelligence at work here? If this was any other city, God would never have gone about trying to communicate in this way. Rather, He would have employed some other means. For many are God’s gifts, as St. Paul said to the Corinthian church:
There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work. (1 Corinthians 12:4–6)
Roman Catholicism has always been about art, I guess that is the Italian way and so they reduced language and the liturgy to an art form. Great. I doubt very much St. Peter would have been impressed or St. Paul for that matter. Furthermore, to think after they entered the America’s they wanted to push this art form upon the indigenous peoples even going so far as to destroy their own GOD GIVEN Language!!!!! Great again? Too many times I have wondered and prayed to Christ how wonderful it would have been if those catholic missionaries to the Native Indians had been given the gift of Glossolia the history would have been very different. Can you imagine a truly possessed by His Holy Spirit speaking to these people in their own native tongue. Now that would have been life changing! But O no they had to have latin? I doubt very much God is too impressed.
As for our Savior He one would think had every language at his disposal if need be. He created them all!
Roman church has been about art? Are you for real? wake up bud. The only art came from Greeks. Look at Italy today, and you see their Greek ancestral heritage.
Oh I forgot, how about the Cardinals and Popes walking around and chopping the genitalia off of ancient Greek monuments and covering the damaged areas with fig leaves?
O good grief! I guess art is in the eye of the beholder. I mean really? Catholic Church has always been a patron of the arts. They used Michaeanglo gifts to no end didn’t they and others? But getting back to language look if the Jewish people had instead of hating and castigating our Savior had instead accepted Him, recognized Him and so on and so forth does anyone think that the Synagogue would have chosen Latin for their ceremonies and rituals? Hebrew would have been it period and unfortunately probably like the Catholics the Rabbi’s would have made it the supreme language of God throughout the entire world? lol
Yes, Catholic churches are always such bare, spartan places.
The passage of Acts 2:5 should be read differently.
“And there were Jews dwelling at Jerusalem, [and] devout men out of every nation under heaven, [whose] multitude came together when they heard the noise, confused (bewildered) because each one heard them [the Apostles] speaking his own language…about the wonderful works of God”.
They were the Gentiles. The Holy Ghost speaks to everyone, Jews and Gentiles, in the same breath, so to speak.
Jesus being Roman citizen of Greek background? Contrary to the Gospels, which unambiguously state that he was Jew. His trial by Romans can be easily explained by death penalty being off limits of Sanhedrin judical authority under Roman administration of Judea
There was no Eastern Roman Empire at the time of Christ. The division happened approximately 300 years after that time period.
However, the dominant language on that part of the world was Greek, and that lasted for several centuries .
Anon, I know, but it was easier to understand the subject when presented that way, or so I thought. Thanks anyway.
“He spoke no less than three languages.”
Wow, I am so fortunate as to share a blog comment section with someone who was alive in the time of the Christ and has first hand knowledge of which languages he spoke and which he did not.
BTW, since when was Jesus of Nazareth a Greek? That’s a new one. I thought he was the son of Mary and Joeseph who were required by the Roman beauracrats to go to their hometown of Nazareth to register for taxes or something like that. Nazareth was in Greece? Maybe it had some sort of sister-city program set up by the mayor for PR purposes and a sign at the city limits, or something like that?
And, we all know how it works when an empire conquers an area. Most of the people keep speaking the language they spoke before the conquerers arrived. Some, the upper classes and the officials who need to deal with the Roman government would learn Latin. But its no guarantee at all that the a carpenter would be speaking the language of the Romans. Possibly, but its not certain. Unless maybe you mean Jesus knew how to curse in Latin. That’s more believeable of a carpenter for those occaisions when the hammer met the thumb of the son of God.
And do we know that Jesus only spoke three languages. Perhaps as a carpenter he frequented a brothel and met an Egyptian lass who taught him to talk like an Egyptian.
As an individual I would say the following: Why is any Jew of any persuasion, such as Levite, Judahite, Benjamite, asking the Council of the Churches of God for anything? The true Church of God would be a better interlocutor for Jewry so-called. But this pre-supposes that the truth of the Bible can be left aside. While I do not in any way endorse Dr. Ernest L. Martin he has a point which clarifies much of the foundation for any discussion.
Individually-speaking this debate is ‘off the planet’.
I was a senior in Catholic high school when the changes ordered by John XXIII came into practice. It felt like a world was turned upside down. The joke put forward by my Jesuit headmaster was “If you want to go to a Catholic Church, go to St. Paul’s Episcopal.”
Within a year, Christmas Eve midnight mass was the only church service I and my family attended after that.
At the Jesuit college I went to the next year, the required theology classes became chaotic. “Christ was a communist.” became an oft-used phrase, used even by a couple of priests. After my sophomore year, theology classes were no longer required.
What was the point of being a Catholic anymore? What was a “Catholic”?
In 1968, when the army asked me what religion should be imprinted onto my dog tags, I told them “Christian”. The records clerk said he needed something more, so they would know which religious chaplain should visit me in hospital, or visit my parents if it should come to that. I adamantly refused to be labeled “Roman Catholic”. So he settled on “Christian No-Denomination”.
I felt that the Church had left me, and not the other way around. Jimmie’s recounting of Vatican II has given me a clearer understanding of why it happened. I thank him for it.
Ariel Toaff published his book in Italian “Pasque di sangue: Ebrei d’Europa e omicidi rituali” in Italy in 2007. An important detail is that besides being a Professor at the University of Tel-Aviv, he was the son of Elio Toaff, the Chief Rabbi of Rome from 1951 to 2002. He served as a rabbi in Venice from 1947, and in 1951 became the Chief Rabbi of Rome. He started his career as appointed chief rabbi of the community of Ancona, a position he maintained until 1943. In one of his first acts, on his arrival, he managed to persuade a local Jewish family not to convert to Christianity: he argued that such a move was ‘cowardly, useless and undignified’ in the circumstances.
Coincidentally Giuseppe Roncalli aka Pope John XXIII, was appointed Patriarch of Venice in 1953. Elio Toaff was the one to whom Giuseppe Roncalli, aka Pope John XXIII (‘il fratello vostro’), bowed at the Synagogue of Rome. On 13 April 1986, the same Toaff was greeted by, and prayed with, Pope John Paul II during a visit to the Great Synagogue of Rome, the first by a reigning pope to a Jewish house of worship. Rather than extending his hand for a formal handshake, Toaff embraced the Pope. On April 7, 1994, Toaff co-officiated at the Papal Concert to Commemorate the Shoah at the Sala Nervi in Vatican City, along with Pope John Paul II, and the President of Italy Oscar Luigi Scalfaro.
The first requests to remove the ‘perfidis’ from the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews, was the ‘Opus sacerdotale Amici Israel’ or the ‘Clerical Association of Friends of Israel’, a short-lived international organization of Roman Catholic priests founded in Rome in February 1926 by a with the declared purpose to pray for the conversion of the Jews and to promote a favorable attitude towards them within the Roman Catholic Church. Its membership included 18 cardinals, 200 bishops and about 2,000 priests. When the association was dissolved by the Holy Office on 28 March 1928, its membership included 19 cardinals, more than 300 bishops and archbishops and about 3,000 priests. Pope Pius XI favored the proposal, but it was overturned by the Holy Office and the Pope “reluctantly” it is said, had to dissolve the Association, not without advising that the announcement that the Amici was being dissolved be handled with ‘great care’ (i.e. not to give grist to the mill of ‘antisemitism’). A central point of the Amici was to absolve Jews from the accusations of ‘ritual-murder’ and of ‘deicide’ (the ‘source’ of the accusations: ‘his blood upon us…” is not from the Gospel of St. John, but of St.Matthew).
So, we may understand better the ‘scandal’ that led to the termination of Ariel Toaff career. The rot in the Catholic Church was nevertheless older. All the the theologians of the ‘Nouvelle Theology’, behind Vatican II were ‘Judaizers’.
The Catholic Church had always to deal with sexual misbehavior of priests. But they did it in a more discreet way. Now the international lawyer Mafia has discovered to make money , decapitate the church by putting able leaders into jail and wasting church money for endless Court proceedings and lifelong psychiatric treatment
Hugo,
The problem you are talking about can not only be applied to Catholic Church. Generally the problem is called “Abuse of Power”. All people in the position of power have to deal with these types of temptations.
Sexual abuse in Hollywood is an excellent example, or workplaces for that matter.
On the other hand, some people subjected to this type of behavior may think that by giving in to the priest they’ll get an easy pass through the “Pearly Gate” and all their sins will be forgiven, since he is considered “God’s Representative”. Just a thought.
The Catholic Church was always a political institution first and a religious institution second. It is not the oldest Christian Church, that honor going to the Orthodox Church. The Schism of 1054 created the Catholic Church and much of the conflicts between East and West. When the Roman Empire fell, the Bishop of Rome assumed the title of Pope, or new Caesar, one of the reasons which led to the Schism of 1054. The Orthodox Church then, as now, would not consent to religious (imperial) rule from Rome, and rightly so. How many times was Russia invaded ? Each time the invaders had the backing of the Vatican, the exception being the Mongol invasions.
The Vatican today is part of globalist strategy. It’s been under masonic control for years, a well known fact. Last year the Pope openly warned Catholics not to support populist political parties. Why ?
When it comes to Russia and the Orthodox Church, the Vatican has demanded that the Orthodox Church submit to Vatican control, which also created the Unionist Orthodox Church, which permitted Orthodox practices but demanded submission to the Pope. In the process the Vatican is working hand in hand with NATO and the EU in their drives towards Russia.
The West in Ukraine is trying to create the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which would be independent from the Moscow Patriarch, and in the process placing all Russian Orthodox churches and monasteries under Ukrainian control. It’s not going too smoothly, as witnessed recently by the huge procession which the Russian Orthodox Church organized in Kiev.
No matter what it’s traditional interests have been, the Vatican is losing influence in Western Europe. Many believers are leaving the Church, as witnessed in Germany. On the other hand, the power of the Russian Orthodox Church is on the rise. At this rate a day will come when it will assume the role which the Vatican once had, at least as far as Europe goes.
Re:translations into current tongues sound contrite, contrived and barbarous.”
For “contrite,” I imagine you must have meant “trite” or “trivial”?
The Occidental Observer has several articles on Vatican II and Jewry:
‘The role of Jewish converts to Catholicism in changing traditional Catholic teachings on Jews’, HERE
‘Léon de Poncins: The Problem with the Jews at the Council’
Part I
Part II
Part III
What about the orthodox church?
What do they say about them?
Did they keep the same prayer from before the scism?
Why don’t they call a saint war?
Like we used to say in Brazil, pepper in other people’s eyes is refreshing.
Many Orthodox Churches changed stealthily the ‘offending’ parts from the Antiphones and Stichera chanted at the Great and Holy Friday Orthros and from the ‘Lamentations’ sung at the Great and Holy Saturday Orthros.
The relics of child martyrs, ritually slaughtered by rabbinical pharisees, are still honoured in Russia; and offices are still performed in their memory. There is a list of them in Michael Hoffman’s “Judaism Discovered”.
Is it any surprise that the most strident hate campaigns of the Empire are against Russia?
(Of course, there’s a 5th column inside the Russian Orthodox Church, but it still looks weak and poorly organized. I’ve seen sneaky individuals clearly carrying out a pharisee agenda in France, as well as priests from Russia dissenting from the patriarchate in a more chaotic way.)
It’s a simple question!
The player is said to be from 4 century, way before the scism.
Do the orthodox church keep the prayer or not?
If not, I’ll dare to say the orthodox church is…
Complete the sentence yourself!
Mr. Moglia ,again, it was a pure pleasure reading your material. Altought , I am truthfully frighten by the light shed ot the absurd events in the Catholic Church.
I am having a feeling you are making gargantuan effort to find and preserve real knowledge of our History. For that I am thankfull.
The Vatican. Another Jewish Mafia asset. Used generously for purposes of money laundering and human trafficking, as intel hub and perfect scapegoat – just to name a few of the Mafia’s classic by-way-of-deception stunts. Nothing to see, in other words, move on!
An orthodox remnant of the Catholic Church still exists, which rejects the liberal reforms introduced at the Second Vatican Council. The main body of this underground part of the Church is the Society of Saint Pius X which keeps not merely the traditional Latin Mass, but also the perennial Catholic doctrines as well as a vigilant guard against Modernism which has invaded the Catholic Church hierarchy of today.
I agree there are strange things happening at the Vatican regarding saints, and I noticed this with the recent canonisation of the Mother Theresa. incidentally, it was Pope John XXIII who was the first to give her his “peace prize” which paved the way for her international recognition.
Mother Teresa was an Albanian Roman Catholic missionary who was born in Skopje, present day capital of Macedonia/FYROM. Note: Albanians consist of two major ethnic groups, Muslims and Roman Catholics who have very different cultural, linguistic and religious customs.
What caught my attention at the canonisation is that the Vatican chose a muslim Albanian pop star from Kosovo, (better known for her provocative photo ops than her singing talents) called Rita Ora. They even chose the muslim Kosovo philharmonic orchestra to play, who a Christmas Carol (“What Child is this?”) for her canonisation! (Btw, why are they playing Christmas Carols for this event? https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/rita-ora-gives-powerful-performance-8768904)
The Kosovo Muslims Albanians do not actually hold Mother Theresa in such great esteem: They refused to erect a monument for Mother Teresa in Pec, Kosovo, and there were many complaints about the Roman Catholic Cathedral erected in her honour in Pristina, as they considered its size disproportionate for the non-existant Catholic community in Kosovo.
A statue of Mother Teresa mysteriously “collapsed” in Mitrovica, Kosovo. http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/kosovo-investigates-mysterious-fall-of-mother-teresa-monument
It seems the Vatican has gone to great lengths to unite the Albanian muslim and Albanian Catholics for the canonisation of Mother Teresa. One wonders about the political motives behind this..
if you check a map, the effect of reuniting these two tribes, would recreate the “Kosovo Vilayet”- an administrative region of the Ottoman empire- that splits up the Orthodox countries in the Balkans, deny them common borders, notably the common border between Serbia and Montenegro.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Kosovo_Vilayet,_Ottoman_Empire_(1900).jpg
Re: “incidentally, it was Pope John XXIII who was the first to give her his “peace prize” which paved the way for her international recognition.”
Yes, not a very good sign regarding her. She has been termed “a perfect heretic,” which is probably why the proponents of Vataican II love her. It’s all about “aggiornamento.” [http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/post/pope_mason.html]
Great work by Jimmie Moglia again. He has erudition and he has the artistry to weave his tapestries in a pleasant English of times past.
Strange to hear from the poster of the first comment [named “sea”] that, in his words “Latin does not have any special religious meaning in Christianity”. Well, maybe it does not for him. As far as I know, the Great Fathers of the Church, all 8 of them, used it. It was the language of Christian theology from its beginning, it was the language of all 21 ecumenical councils, from Nicea to Vatican II, it was the language of dogmatic proclamations, of liturgical rites (including not only those of the Roman church, but those of Anglicans, Methodists, Lutherans…) the language of glorious Gregorian chant, which you can reasonably consider in many ways as the origin of all harmony in all current western music… Really difficult to imagine Christianity from the year 300 or so, without Latin as its main language. In fact, totally impossible for me to imagine it.
In any case, many thanks to Jimmie Moglia for this very informative piece. I agree with him that the suppression of Latin from he mass after Vatican II was, at best, a monumental mistake, but more likely part of a discreet controlled demolition, and the beginning of the end of so many things. I remember mass in Latin as a child and altar boy aged 8-9, having memorized all the replies in Latin without understanding more than perhaps a third of what I was uttering, I remember the singing of responsories by priests during burials, all the extremely dignified and impressive solemnity of the rites, even (or perhaps especially) in a modest small village church. In retrospect it is amazing to see how quickly and ruthlessly everything was dismantled since then, at least in Western Europe. Within a few short years of Latin being thrown out of church rites, it was also thrown out of public educations (am speaking about Spain) where it had been compulsory since the beginning of public education. The churches emptied out. The sad spectacle of thousands of magnificent churches going to ruin or sold to commercial interests or converted into all kinds of things, or simply demolished and razed. It sinks the heart in shadow.
Perhaps one day scholars and psychologists will enlighten us as to where the solemnity of a language comes from. There is no doubt in my mind that Latin in church was responsible for a very significant part of the solemnity of the rites.
There is a CD that gives an excellent taste of how Latin sounded in Church before it was ousted.
In 1959 someone had the excellent idea to record the Mass of the Dead (Missa Defunctorum) at a monastery in Spain that has been running since the year 929, according to the list of Abbots given here: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Abades_de_Santo_Domingo_de_Silos
This is the track list of the Missa Defunctorum recorded there in 1959
https://musicbrainz.org/release/62268461-208e-4fc9-a314-d568846824ef
And here, as a sample, is track 11, the Preface of (for) the Dead or Praefatio Defunctorum)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE-tZC2me9k
The Preface of the Dead proper starts at 0:45 with the words: “Vere dignum et justum est…”
You can read the Latin here near the top of page 15: “Vere dignum et justum est…etc”
https://www.sanctamissa.org/en/resources/requiem/requiem-mass-daily-mass-for-the-dead.pdf
The English translation is below the Latin, in italics. Imagine a priest trying to intone the translation, instead of the original, and you will see what I mean.
Nobody would deny the majesty of the Latin language and ‘Gregorian chant’ tremendous importance for the Latin ‘West’ and beyond, but let’s not jump over the horse. Latin was not the language of Christian theology from its beginning. Christianity was not Latin from its beginning.
All Christian Scriptures and were written in Greek, therefore ‘the language of Christian theology from its beginning’ was Greek. The language of liturgical rites was Greek.The language of the Seven Oecumenical Councils was Greek, the language of their dogmatic definitions (‘horoi’) was Greek, the language of the Greatest Fathers of the Church was Greek, the language of Liturgy at Rome was initially Greek and its replacement by Latin was a slow process (and to use a modern trope ‘politically motivated’). The Scriptures were translated (defectively) from Greek. Gregorian chant is an adaptation of the Byzantine chant. Iconography was Byzantine up to the Renaissance. The Romanesque architecture is an adaptation of the Roman-Byzantine architecture.
Vatican II completed a long process of eliminating whatever traces of sacrality were still surviving in the Latin liturgy by adopting the vernaculars, replacing the sacred arts with the caricatures of modern art. But it is not this move that is the cause of the debasement of Christian theology, but its effect (translations of Greek Scriptures and rituals have been done from the beginning – Aramaic, Slavonic). The Latin liturgy itself was from the beginning a departure from the Christian sacrality preserved unaltered in the “Greek” Orthodox Church. The standard Scripture of the Latins is the ‘Vulgata,’ the translation of the Scriptures directly from the supposed Hebraic originals replacing the Greek Septuagint and the first Latin translation from it (Vetus Latina) was the first step in Judaization of the Church. Vatican II is the final act and the death warrant of the ‘Roman’ Church. The gesture of Pope John XXIII at the Rome Synagogue was in fact symbolically (and practically) asking the Jews to bless Vatican II. All the Popes that followed repeated formally this act of submission, fulfilling the prophecy of the ‘Sefer Zerubbabel’ (the Apocalypse of Zerubbabel which announce the definitive destruction of the ‘Armilus’, the anti-messiah who resides in Rome, very much the same as the Dajjal of the Muslims).
So, although a return to the pre-Vatican II practices preached by the SSPX could be a start for a return to the traditional Christianity, it is insufficient unless it renounces the errors of the Tridentine Mass.
The original original-original-original language of Christianity was the one in which the Master addressed his Disciples and other people, namely Armaic. No record of their conversations in this language has reached us, though there is some theory that a previous but lost New Testament in Armaic existed before the Greek version “came out”. But in any case the Greek version is supposed to have been written by anonymous individuals at a time when all eyewitnesses were gone.
However this may be (and we must keep in mind that every single thing about these matters is disputed by someone at some point), there is no doubt that the first important and relatively universal language of Christianity was Greek. There is no disputing that. My contention is that when you take all the history of Christianity, the language that has by far the most weigh in that long enormous endeavor, is Latin. Constantine’s conversion was a watershed moment, and the body of theological, pedagogical, catechistic, liturgical and dogmatic work in Latin after that must certainly surpass by a large difference what was produced in other languages.
Of course, if you consider that Western Christianity ceased to be part of Christianity after the Great Schism, then Latin is no longer anywhere near so important, but even then it would still be huge.
I do not consider the Scriptures as theology, though they are certainly an important part of what theology deals with. Christian theology is that which was written by Christian theologians, and its central task is to inquire into the nature of the Deity. The Scriptures, to the extent they were supposed to be directly or indirectly inspired by the Deity, are not theology proper. The Deity is not a theologian, he would be bored by theology. Even Aquinas at the very end, after his ecstatic episode during mass, said, “I’ve had such visions that all I’ve written seems of no importance to me now.” And didn’t write any more, to the great dismay of his colleagues who wanted him to finish the Work, for of him it was said that “intelligence issued from his body like heat from a stove”…
I have to support Anon: the original—–original language was always Greek. Live with it. Latin was used in the West after the split.
Check the net and you might find the info that the mosaics in the oldest Christian Church found in modern Israel were, surprise, surprise, I can’t believe it: Greek. All the ones who bought the “Rome is Latin” were shocked, but not publicly. Rome (the City) became really Latin after the German Barbaric Hordes took over it.
Many Roman Emperors (in Rome) were Greek, let me name only two: Nero and Hadrian.
@I do not consider the Scriptures as theology
But only Scriptures are properly ‘theology’. The primary Greek sense (and don’t lose from sight that it is a Greek term) of ‘theologia’ (θεολογία) is ‘Words of God’ (Τheos-Θεός, meaning “God”, and -logia -λογία. Precisely “utterances, sayings, or oracles”, meaning “word, discourse of God. The ‘modern’ meaning of ‘discourse on god’ is derivative. It is properly a ‘branch’ of ‘theoretical philosophy’, as it was understood by the Greeks, the strive of the human mind to know things as they are, the knowledge of things divine and human, and to expose them in a discourse. Aristotle divided ‘philosophy’ into ‘mathematike, physike and theologike’. Theoria actually means ‘vision of the Theos’, ‘contemplatio’).
In the West the last meaning prevailed. Boethius, the ‘Father of the School – the medieval ‘scholastics’, writing in the early 6th century, used ‘theologia’ with this sense of “subdivision of philosophy as a subject of academic study, dealing with the motionless, incorporeal reality (as opposed to physica, which deals with corporeal, moving realities. Boethius’ definition influenced medieval Latin usage. This king of ‘theology’ was a propedeutic for true ‘theologia’.
But in the Greek East, ‘theologia’ kept its initial meaning. A Theologos, was one who speaks the words of God (logoi toy theoy). There are only three ‘theologoi’ in the Orthodox Church, and none was an ‘academic’, but inspired speakers, -men of prayer (by the definition of Evagrius Ponticus ” “If you are a theologian, you will pray truly. And if you pray truly, you are a theologian”), St John the Theologian, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Saint Symon the New Theologian.
The ‘Deity’ is not a ‘theologian’. The true ‘Theologos’ is the ‘Theos’, the Logos of God, the “God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob — not of the philosophers and scholars”, as Pascal said. This is how we should interpret the words of Aquinas “I’ve had such visions that all I’ve written seems of no importance to me now.” He had reached ‘Theoria’, ‘Contemplatio’ (the fourth stage of ‘Lectio Divina’ – read; meditate; pray; contemplate -, the traditional Benedictine practice of scriptural reading, meditation and prayer intended to promote communion with God and to increase the knowledge of God’s Word. It does not treat Scripture as texts to be studied, but as the Living Word. Con-templatio is derived from ‘templum’ which was in Roman times the piece of ground consecrated for the taking of auspices, where oracles, revelations, happened, where one sees God ‘face to face’ and no more like in the mirror of academic ‘theology’. It means ‘to be in the temple’. Aquinas had his ‘contemplatio’ during Mass, in Church. Protestants giving away Mass would never attain ‘theologia’. They are condemned to babble about God’s ‘dim reflection like in a darkened mirror’.
Your contention that after the conversion of Constantine “the body of theological, pedagogical, catechistic, liturgical and dogmatic work in Latin after that must certainly surpass by a large difference what was produced in other languages” is hazardous and certainly disproved comprehensively by the body of the works produced in other languages (including the Aramaic, supposedly the language of Jesus – is it not interesting that two of the first called Apostles have Greek names, Andrew, Philip, and Jesus changed the name of Simon to an ambivalent Aramaic/Greek one – Cephas/Petros?).
.
Re: “For some of the eminence of the ancients may be justly ascribed to the graces of their language [agreed!], and translations into current tongues sound contrite, contrived and barbarous.” [I think you must have meant trite or trivial, rather than “contrite”?]
——————
BTW, I found this to be a fascinating essay on the subject of liturgies:
“On The Margin of Liturgical Improvisations”
https://bit.ly/2wrTIAd
‘I will let the non-denominational reader draw his own conclusions, because, in the end, there is no verdict of history other than the private opinion of the individual.’
Wow, first off thank you very much for this incredible piece of history. Much to reflect upon and learn.
As for the opinion of the private individual and the verdict may I just point out that there is one opinion that we all need to take to heart. It is infact the only word that counts in the end God’s own!
“On that day, I will banish the names of the idols from the land, and they will be remembered no more,” declares the Lord Almighty. “I will remove both the prophets and the spirit of impurity from the land. And if anyone still prophesies, their father and mother, to whom they were born, will say to them, ‘You must die, because you have told lies in the Lord’s name.’ Then their own parents will stab the one who prophesies.” (Zechariah 13:2–3)
It is a terrible thing that it is against the law to speak about Christ Jesus in Jerusalem and all Israel, with the Lord banned from His own city and even cursed! So imagine, if you will, one having spent a good portion of one’s life rejecting and even cursing the true Messiah only to turn around and see Him with your own eyes! The pain of this will be excruciating, the people’s remorse so severe that, as Zechariah teaches, even ones own parents will be doing the punishing!
additionally, just how very serious Vatican 2 is going to be will ultimately reveal itself when the Abomination of Desolation occurs. If Rome and its leadership capitulate to a coming king, the false Messiah, and welcome him and help rebuild a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem well then the cat will be out of the bag so to speak. I find it interesting though to hear some in Rome saying that what is occurring now in the Middle East is the coming of Armageddon? Interesting days.
One should not be puzzled by ‘where is the Vatican headed’, when you make the ‘private opinions of the individual’ instead of the Truth the judge of history.
Zacharias speaks about the ‘false prophets’ (ψευδοπροφήτας). In the passage of Zacharias (13:2-3) it is the ‘Lord of Hosts’ (Κύριος Σαβαώθ) who speaks. The Lord of Hosts (of the heavenly hosts) is Jesus:
“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.”
“I am, said Jesus, “and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
The false prophets, those who ‘have spoken lies in the name of the Lord’ are the “false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders that would deceive even the elect, if that were possible” (Mathew 24:23-24).
I am not Catholic, but I did study for my junior and senior years in a Catholic high school, having only previously had experience with various Protestant faiths when attending church. The high school was on monastic ground and once a month we all attended a morning service in church, also having instruction each school morning for an hour. This was before the changes of Vatican II. During this time I was also studying Latin, my third and fourth year with that classical language.
I have to say that most of the monthly service was unintelligible to me. My familiarity with Latin was not at a level even then that would assist me in a meaningful experience of the mass.
I was heartened when coming in later years to Orthodoxy to discover that this aspect of Christianity had always purposed for its liturgical message to be understandable for those who were participating in services – in our church, because there were people of different national origin, we intermingled translation in the various languages of our members, which were Russian, Greek, but mainly English speakers.
I don’t believe that Jesus was a Roman citizen, though Rome occupied Jerusalem during his lifetime. His native language was Aramaic, but Rome was using Greek in all the areas just as it is often English that is used for trade and relations between different countries today. Paul it was who relied on his Roman citizenship when taken in custody, and so was brought to Rome to be tried.
I was a young adult when Pope John was in office. He was a lovely person, and I think his changes with respect to the Jews were appropriate and genuinely Christian. Christ prayed on the cross ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’ If He could do that, at that moment, so should we.
This is different from being against the metamorphosis of religious texts into documents of state and the persecution of the rightful dwellers in Palestine for the purpose of that abrogation. That is indeed to be condemned and hopefully will be set to rights in a peaceful manner.
I very much admire Putin’s attitude towards the other faiths which are part of Russia’s heritage. No one ought to be thought less of because of the faith that they have chosen, or that has chosen them.
Solzhenitsyn puts his finger on the stupid and even criminal sickly sentimentalism and radically false “Christian charity” of our day. Sentimentalism permeates modern culture and is responsible for countless evils”
“When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.” – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago:
TMWNS Reply to juliania on August 29, 2018 · at 9:23 pm EST/EDT /quo-vadis-vatican/#comment-553324
Specifically : « … the persecution of the rightful dwellers in Palestine for the purpose of that abrogation. That is indeed to be condemned and hopefully will be set to rights in a peaceful manner». Voeu pieux. Wishful thinking. When Isa, alias Jesus, expelled the Mammonites from the Temple, he smote them with direct action and appropriately worded sentiments. As I and many others have done when we uprooted GM crops to help purify the food chain. I have witnessed what these devil and money worshippers inflict daily on the non-jewish populations of Hebron لخليل (Al-Khalil), and Jerusalem القدس (al Quds). Sadly I was forbidden access to Gaza.
Specifically : «I was a young adult when Pope John was in office. He was a lovely person, and I think his changes with respect to the Jews were appropriate and genuinely Christian. Christ prayed on the cross ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’ If He could do that, at that moment, so should we …».
Christ was never politically correct and I don’t think he would frown upon the right of self-defence. Indeed légitime défense is something which Vladimir Putin is attempting to enact while combating the heinous «Clash of Civilisations» philosphy of Bernard Lewis and Samuel P Huntington. The cleansing of the Temple narrative bespeaks of expelling merchants and money changers from the Temple, and occurs in all four canonical gospels of the New Testament. Pope John XXIII and his associates betrayed Christendom and common humanity. As, I believe, Jimmie Moglia makes clear in his article, we’re dealing here with deicides and sociocides.
Maybe you need to familarise yourself with the admirable scholarship of Laurent Guyénot who has written for The Saker (Cf. infra) and Gilad Atzmon, who needs no introduction. I would also advise you to tune into what Dr Swee Ang reports after her recent encounter with the IDF on the high seas :
Eyewitness Testimony of UK-backed Israeli Forces attacking the Freedom Flotilla https://youtu.be/X33iK1X_nlM Published on Aug 8, 2018 Dr. Swee Ang, who has just returned to safety after sailing with the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, tells us about her fight for justice in Palestine. httpgoingunderground RT
Contrary to a common held belief Talmudic or Rabbinical Judaism is not a form of monotheism. Yahvism, a Deuteronomist ideology is – as Laurent Guyénot explains – a monolatry. It is a very sophisticated form of materialism ie with no belief in an afterlife and a dismissal of and contempt for all non-Jewish life forms. It is also a messianic creed, intent on world domination (globalism) as Thierry Meyssan has kindly recorded for us and posterity here :
L’axe de la guerre des civilisations : Sommet historique pour sceller l’Alliance des guerriers de Dieu 19 octobre 2003 http://www.voltairenet.org/article10834.html.
One of the instruments of this is Noachism (Cf. infra). In the following article which I have translated into English, the author, Pierre Hillard, misses, in the first paragraph, the one essential, seminal point. The first Law of Noachism forbids idolatry and reduces the Christian faith and belief in the Holy Trinity to idolatry :
Connaissez-vous le noachisme ? Pierre Hillard 10 mars 2010 http://www.bvoltaire.fr/connaissez-vous-le-noachisme/. Translation :
«Our article devoted to the modifications of the ordination rite of 1968 (” Pontificalis Romani “) showed – from official texts that should make us think – the probable extinction of the apostolic succession. Nature abhors a vacuum. It must be replaced by another form of spirituality called noachism or universal religion (Noah’s Law), going hand in hand with a universal political agenda. Derived directly from Talmudic Judaism, Noachism applies only to Gentiles (non-Jews). This universal religion is subdivided into seven commandments : the first (1) prescribes the obligation to have magistrates (to enforce the laws) while the other laws prohibit : (2) sacrilege ; (3) polytheism ; (4) incest ; (5) homicide and (6) the use of a member of a living animal. While the Gentiles are supervised by this religion, the Jewish people, governed by Mosaism (the law of Moses), is considered the priestly caste. This Israelite priesthood, constituting the heart of humanity, is the intermediary between the Gentiles and the one God (monotheism). In this way of thinking, Catholicism is considered polytheism because of the concept of the Holy Trinity (idolatry or tritheism according to the Talmudic rabbis). In order to correspond to the Noachist schema, the Catholic religion must proceed to undergo a complete overhaul of itself, rejecting the Holy Trinity and the divinity of Christ. This mutation is to bring about the “Catholicism of Israel” according to the book of Rabbi Elie Benamozegh (“Israel and humanity”), enumerating the Talmudic belief system. As the author makes clear: “Whoever abjures idolatry is a true Jew. Anyone who rejects polytheism professes the whole law”.
As an extension of this ideal, Talmudic Judaism reconstructs the unity of the human family in order to lead it into a new Garden of Eden – the seach for (Jewish) perfection being the be-all-and-end-all of life – while awaiting the arrival of the Messiah. Logically, Rabbi Benamozegh states: “Hence this beautiful theory of the Kabbalah makes the union and concord of the spirits here below into a means to achieve the descent and the establishment of the deity on earth”. This hope of purely terrestrial happiness based on the idea of “Progress”, which we find in various forms in Marxism and liberalism, is in complete contradiction with Catholicism.
The Trinitarian religion, which considers the passage on earth as a series of trials and as a springboard, has heavenly hope as its inspiration. These two universalisms are incompatible. This did not prevent the authorities of the Church, since Vatican II, to affirm in a work «The Pontifical Biblical Commission : The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible» (Cf. infra), that “the Messianic Jewish expectation is not in vain” (Chapter II, A5). From a Catholic point of view, this statement is a heresy because Christ is Himself the Messiah, who lived 2000 years ago. This flagrant contradiction did not prevent this book, published in 2001, from being prefaced by … Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. This noachism is becoming an increasingly important element in our cognitive structure.
Thus, on March 26, 1991, the United States Congress adopted, as part of the “Education Day”, the recognition of Noahide laws as the basis of American society. It seems that things are accelerating. Indeed, on September 23, 2012, all the Jewish communities of the world called, by a short prayer, the arrival of the Messiah (Mashia’h). For Catholics, this is equivalent to calling up the antichrist. Given the decay of the Church since Vatican II, this prayer is like a call for a profound change. It is true that globalism is messianism in a hurry». Do you know noachism ? http://www.bvoltaire.fr/connaissez-vous-le-noachisme/ .
Laurent Guyénot /tag/laurent-guyenot/.
Commission Pontifical Biblique Le Peuple Juif et Ses Saintes Écritures dans La Bible Chrétienne Préface par le Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Libreria Editrice Vaticana omnia sibi vindicat iura. Sine eiusdem licentia scripto data nemo liceat hunc Textum denuo imprimere. ! Copyright 2001 – Libreria Editrice Vaticana 00120 Città del Vaticano http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_fr.html. Version anglaise here :
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_en.html.
Sept 23, SIMULTANEOUS WORLDWIDE Jewish Prayer for MASHIACH https://youtu.be/O50fLtr0yqI Published on Sep 8, 2012 SUNDAY SEPTEMBER 23 2012, Tishrei 7,SIMULTANEOUS Worldwide Jewish Prayer for Peace, through the coming of Mashiach, announced in our tradition. Based on Israel Time 17:00, New York 11:00, Los Angeles 8:00, Paris 17:00, Sydney 1:00 Sept 24 … ALL JEWS AS ONE : This unique event in Jewish history has been impulsed by motivated Jewish people with help and blessings of rabbis around the world of all affiliations (Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Chassidim) with a strong desire that all Jews will be united at the same instant, observant or not, whatever beliefs, affiliation, age, nationality to end all suffering and to welcome the revelation of Hashem’s (G-d) Name. With blessings of great tsaddik Rabbi Kaniewsky from Israel too. Time is of essence. Please, pass it on now ! AllJewsAsOne The preview video (400 views) …
The 2012 recognition of the Seven Noachide Laws as the basis of US society https://www.congress.gov/bill/102nd-congress/house-joint-resolution/104/text.
“Live by the sword, die by the sword” is a proverb, which can be traced back to the ancient Greek dramatist Aeschylus in 458 BC. It is ascribed by the Latin Bible in the Gospel, according to Matthew, (Chapter 26,Verse 52) to the Galilean in the Garden of Gethsemane, and which if he expressed himself in Latin would have been “Omnes enim, qui acceperint gladium, gladio peribunt”. Two other equally worthy proverbs are : “Si vis pacem, para bellum” – If you seek peace, prepare yourself for war – and – Once bitten, twice shy. With foes as deadly as the Judeo-Protestants and Anglo-Zionists and with varying degrees of success, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Lebanon, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, China, North Korea and others, too numerous to mention, are supposedly learning their lesson the hard way.
While we can never afford to neglect the need for diplomacy, negotiation is a word that doesn’t appear to feature in the vocabulary of Israel, its sayanim and vassal states in Europe and America. In the light of what I have asserted and communicated above, angelism does not seem to be a viable option …
Thanks for a thoroughly researched and informative article.
One thing I’d like to point out is that Ariel Toaff did not spontaneously write a bowdlerized second edition of his book. He caved in to multiple pressures from the ADL and probably some thuggish secular arm, had to order unsold copies of the book to be destroyed and give the proceeds of sales already performed to the ADL. It is also worth mentioning that the Tel-Aviv University supported him against the ADL and various other Jewish pressure groups. But obviously, these had the means to apply irresistible pressure. The politically correct second edition was part of the deal too.
On another topic, it’s important not to mix up (1) the issue of rabbinical phariseeism representing a betrayal of ancient judaism and a failure to acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth as Israel’s Messiah and (2) the issue of sinfulness in the Old Testament. The latter is complex but doesn’t amount to a change of theology between Old and New Testament. A useful reading to clear many issues on the topic is “Is God a Moral Monster?” by Paul Copan. Artificially pitting Christianity against biblical Judaism entertains a confusion between phariseeism and judaism, which of course benefits Pharisees. That was the axis of Voltaire’s antichristian message: the ancient Jews are contemptible (and so the whole biblical message is morally inferior), but Christians are the persecutors of innocent modern Jews. See also the books on judaism by Michael A. Hoffman, recently interviewed by the Saker, which show clearly that contemporary “judaism” is not a biblical religion.
You cannot get out of the conundrum ‘Christianity’ vs ‘Judaism’ as long as you talk of Jesus Christ as the ‘Jewish’ Messiah, the Messiah for ‘Jews only’.
Jesus was the “the Lord Jesus Christ (the anointed of God), the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, who came down from Heaven for us men and for our salvation”, not the King of Israel, who Jews and the Vatican sect still await. He was the son of God, not of David Melech Yisrael. The ‘sin’ from which Jesus saves us is not such or such ‘moral transgression’ of a ‘biblical’ code of behaviour, or what ‘atheists’ imagine what such a transgression should be (generally of rules set by themselves, like ‘should a father smack his unruly child’?). The Christ did not came down from heavens just to flog the usurers or to pardon whores and adulterers.
Last I checked the Italians were very capable at creating brothels and discotheques on their own, almost legendary at each, but the communists tend to shut down such establishments when they take power and find more meaningful employment for the women that being a whore or a dancer. Not saying that there’s never been a brothel in a communist city. Human nature says that is unlikely. But they do tend to close such establishments during the surge when they take over.