Always Coming to the Rescue
by Thomas A. Droleskey
We can always count on the conciliar revolutionaries to come to the rescue when conflicts break out amongst Catholics who recognize that they, the conciliar revolutionaries, are apostates who do not hold ecclesiastical office in the Catholic Church legitimately. Credit the conciliar "Archbishop" Emeritus of Galveston-Houston, Joseph Fiorenza, with coming to our rescue at this time as the tragic events at Saint Gertrude the Great Church in West Chester, Ohio, have unfolded in public view.
"Archbishop" Fiorenza, a personal protege of the doctrinally and morally corrupt Joseph "Cardinal" Bernardin, who served as the conciliar "archbishop" of Chicago from July 8, 1982, until the time of his death on November 14, 1996, is once again propagating conciliar apostasies concerning the Jews that played a large role in the decision undertaken by Father Stephen P. Zigrang in 1983 to leave the conciliar structures, ultimately associating with the Society of Saint Pius X. This is what Father Zigrang noted to me in an interview that was published on this site in 2005:
Some time before I had to leave St. Andrew’s parish, I had made a very long list of why I could no longer accept the Novus Ordo as the true Catholic faith. I don’t know where that list is now, but I do remember some of the main reasons. When the American bishops wrote a document in 2002 to forbid kneeling to receive Holy Communion (remember this came at the height of the pedophile crisis), I remember telling my bishop: “You guys need to fire your PR man.” Another biggy was the new position on the Jews and their supposedly viable covenant.
Father Zigrang (we pray for you daily, Father!) was not exaggerating "Archbishop" Fiorenza's commitment to the "new position on the Jews and their supposedly viable covenant." Consider Fiorenza's own words in this regard in the letter, dated July 2, 2004, that "suspended" Father Zigrang as a priest in the then-named Diocese of Galveston-Houston:
Dear Father Zigrang:
With great sadness I inform you that, effective immediately, you are suspended from the celebration of all sacraments, the exercise of governance and all rights attached to the office of pastor (Canon 1333.1, nn 1-2-3).
This action is taken after appropriate canonical warnings (canon 1347) and failure to obey my specific directive that you cease the affiliation with the schismatic Society of St. Pius X and accept an assignment to serve as a priest of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston (Canon 1371.2).
I want to repeat what I have said to you in person and in the written canonical warnings, that I prayerfully urge you to not break communion with the Holy Father and cease to be associated with the schism which rejects the liciety of the Novus Ordo Mass, often affirmed by Pope John Paul II. This schism also calls into question the teachings of the Second Vatican Council regarding ecumenism and the enduring validity of the Old Testament covenant God established with the people of Israel.
Your return to full union with the Church and to the acceptance of an assignment to priestly ministry in the Diocese of Galveston-Houston will be joyfully received as an answer to prayer. May the Holy Spirit lead and guide you to renew the promise of obedience you made on the day of your ordination.
Fraternally in Christ,
Most Reverend Joseph A. Fiorenza
Bishop of Galveston-Houston
Reverend Monsignor Frank H. Rossi
Chancellor cc: His Eminence, Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Commissio Ecclesia Dei
Joseph Fiorenza is a committed apostate concerning what he calls "the enduring validity of the Old Testament covenant God established with the people of Israel." Here is an article, dated October 28, 2009, that reiterates his false, heretical belief that Jews are saved by the Mosaic Covenant that was indeed superseded and thus canceled out as a result of the New and Eternal Testament that was instituted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday:
One of the treasured moments in my life was to be present in St. Peter’s Basilica 44 years ago today, when the Second Vatican Council promulgated Nostra Aetate, the Declaration on Relations of the Church to non-Christian religions. It was a special moment in the 2000 year history of the Catholic Church, because it reversed centuries of Christian presuppositions and teaching about Jews. It is truly a revolutionary document because it began a reform of Christian-Jewish relations, which 44 years later is still in the beginning of a dialogue of collaboration for the betterment of our world based on mutual respect and friendship. The past 44 years have seen sincere efforts of interfaith dialogue delving into the inspiring transformation of our relationship, the continuing fruit of Nostra Aetate. It has not been without some tensions and misunderstandings, but it has always been sincere and mutually respectful.
Why is Nostra Aetate, (In Our Age), a revolutionary document and why does it promise a future full of hope? One only has to recall the prevailing attitude among Christians before 1965.
As early as the 3rd century, the theologian Origen said that the great calamities which for a long time had befallen the Jews because of the most impious crime of all when they conspired against the Savior of mankind. Therefore that city where Jesus suffered these indignities had to be utterly destroyed. The Jewish nation had to be overthrown and God’s invitation to blessedness transferred to others. Origen was one of many who through the centuries held the collective blaming of “the Jews for the death of Jesus.
As recently as 1938, Pope Pius XI commissioned the preparation of an encyclical letter that was intended to condemn racism in the wake of Hitler's policies in Germany. While rebuking the denying to Jewish people elementary rights and privileges of citizens, the draft claimed the Jewish nation bore a collective responsibility for the crucifixion of Jesus and were doomed “to perpetually wander over the face of the earth. This proposed letter was never published because of the death of the Pope, and it is not known if he was aware of the works of the draft or approved them, but it indicates a common “teaching of contempt that perdured in Christian teaching and writing.
As a child, I remember being taught that Jesus died because of my sins. I was far more responsible for his death that the Jews of his time. Nonetheless, the charge deicide was also in our consciousness.
Such was the Christian theological mindset before Pope John XXIII and the Second Vatican Council. Two months after his election, Pope John announced a great council would be called for the “aggiornameto,” updating of the Church. The next year he greeted a delegation of American Jews with the biblical words, “I am Joseph your brother,” of greater importance he directed Cardinal Bea, to prepare a draft declaration for the coming council on the relations between the Church and the Jewish people. In view of the long sad and tragic ‘teaching of contempt,’ this was truly an inspiration from God.
What led Pope John to such a miraculous decision? When he was the papal ambassador to Turkey and Greece, he met Jewish refugees fleeing Poland in September 1940 and helped them reach Palestine, then a British colony. He wrote in his diary, “Poor children of Israel. Daily I hear their groans around me. They are relatives and fellow countrymen of Jesus. May the Divine Savior come to their aid.”
When the German ambassador to Turkey suggested to him that he ask Pope Pius XII to support Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union, Roncalli responded, “And shall I tell him about the thousand of Jews who died in Germany and Poland at the hands of your countryman?”
Obviously, when he became Pope, John XXIII was waiting for the moment to change the Church’s relations with Jews. However, bringing Nostra Aetate to birth was a long and difficult labor. There was opposition to it both inside and outside the Council. Some bishops were reluctant to change longstanding teachings; other bishops feared for Christians in Arab countries; Middle Eastern countries campaigned against any attempt to absolve “the Jews” for the crime of deicide. At one point, Pope Paul VI intervened to overcome any attempt to scuttle the document. Finally, on October 28, 1965, the declaration passed: 2221 bishops voted for and 88 against. Considering all the difficulties it faced and the long tragic “teaching of contempt,” Nostra Aetate was a triumph of righteousness and grace over maliciousness and sin.
Nostra Aetate repudiated the change of deicide declaring that “Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed.” It deplored “all hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism directed to the Jews at any time or from any source.” It also stressed that in religious education, “all must take care lest in catechizing or preaching the word of God, they teach anything which is not in accord with the truth of the Gospel message or the spirit of Christ.” Later documents referred to this hermeneutical principle of Nostra Aetate to avoid absolutely any actualization of certain texts of the New Testament which could provoke or reinforce unfavorable attitudes towards the Jewish people. All are reminded that, according to the New Testament, the Jews remain “beloved” of God, since the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable. (Rom 11, 28-29)
Nostra Aetate implicitly acknowledged that Israel remains in a covenant with God, and later Pope John Paul II made it explicit that Jews are the people of God of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God.” While Nostra Aetate did not mention Christian anti-Semitism or the Holocaust, Pope John Paul was explicit in saying that the horrors of the Shoah must lead Christians to repentance: “For Christians, the heavy burden of guilt for the murder of Jewish people in the Shoah must be an enduring call to repentance.”
Sometimes beneath the surface of interfaith dialogue, there is the fear that it will lead to a “watering down” of faith in order to achieve harmony, and the result is a form of syncretism which is unfaithful to authentic Judaism or authentic Christianity. True, interfaith dialogue must be based on fidelity to the different faith traditions, which will avoid any assimilation or melting the different traditions. True, faithful dialogue will lead to a greater understanding of each other’s faith beliefs and respectful acknowledgment of the differences.
Interfaith dialogue and cooperation has led to important collaboration on common societal problems such as homelessness, reform of the criminal justice, immigration reform and accessible health care for all. In the process of these joint efforts, we have come to a better understanding of our own traditions and to better insights into each other’s beliefs and manner of governance.
Nostra Aetate called for Catholics and Jews to collaborate in “biblical and theological inquiry and friendly discussions.” The past 44 years of dialogue and joint activities that Nostra Aetate envisioned has shown that our two communities can come together with different interest, concerns and misconceptions of the past to address common needs and challenges in today’s society. Fortunately, the past 44 years have demonstrated that interfaith dialogue actually leads participants to a deeper understanding of their own tradition and as a result of being asked new questions or viewing their own tradition from the other’s perspective, the participants are not the same Christians or Jews before experiencing dialogue, but they understand themselves to be more committed and discerning Christian or Jews. Sometimes the dialogue does not result so happily. Disagreements surfaced about the document on Covenant and Mission issued in August 2002 by a joint effort of Jewish and Catholic scholars. This document was issued by a Committee of our Bishops’ Conference but it was not an official statement of our Conference, nor was it submitted to the usual process for an official document.
After its publication, some Catholic theologians thought there was a significant ambiguity in the document, namely about the Church’s mission and evangelization with regard to Jewish people. While the Church recognizes the special relationship God had with Israel prior to Jesus Christ, and that Judaism is a religion which springs from divine revelation, she also knows that the Christian Church draws sustenance from the root of a well-cultivated olive tree on which have been grafted the wild shoots, the Gentiles. For Catholics, Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, fulfills both in history and at the end of time, the special relationship that God has established with Israel. In Catholic belief, Jesus Christ, in Himself, fulfills God’s revelation begun with Abraham, and proclaiming this good news is at the heart of the Church’s mission. The document in question did not make this proclamation a core element of the Church’s mission and implies that Catholics should not do anything which might lead Jews to conversion. This reasoning could lead some to conclude that Jews have an obligation not to become Christian and that the Church has an obligation not to baptize Jews.
Some Jewish scholars have expressed serious disappointment with the official clarification of the document, Covenant and Mission. As I understand it, they fear there is some effort to consider Nostra Aetate only a pastoral statement without doctrinal authority. Or that it was only a contextual product of European Christians guilt over the Shoah and not truly relevant. There is also the fear that there will be a proselytization to convert Jews despite the official Church statements which repudiates any effort to seek Jewish converts. I can truly say there are no plans or desire to seek Jewish conversion. The Church has always kept a distance from such organizations as Jews for Jesus. Nonetheless, in respecting human freedom, the Church will accept Jews who on their own volitions and with a conscientious decision before God, ask to be received into the Church.
Nonetheless, I understand how this issue is still a bone of theological contention with some Jews.
Since Nostra Aetate, there is a new reality in Christian-Jewish relations. One powerful sign of the reality occurred during Pope John Paul’s visit in 2000 to Holy Land when he placed his prayer in the Western Wall asking God’s forgiveness for the sins of Christians against Jews down the ages. Using the metaphor of a garden, Rabbi David Rosen said Christian-Jewish relations for the 44 years following Nostra Aetate, is like a garden surrounded by high walls. This garden of history was an ugly place overrun with branches and weeds and lurking with danger. In the last 44 years, the garden was wonderfully transformed into an attractive garden. It is not yet the Garden of Eden and there are still rocky terrains, but generally, it is a good garden. Many Israelites walking outside the garden are unaware of the transformation that has taken place. They think it might still be dangerous and unpleasant. The papal visit to Israel opened the garden gates and revealed to many who had not known or believed in the new reality, a pleasant garden of Christian-Jewish relations in which the head of the Catholic Church was in fact a sincere friend of the Jewish people who sought its welfare and mutual respect.
Christian-Jewish relations must continue with all good will, frankness, friendship and mutual respect, because as Pope John Paul said: “Christians and Jews, as children of Abraham are called to be a blessing to the world. In order to be such, we must be first of all a blessing to one another.” http://www.archgh.org/newsevents-RSS-110409-NostraAetate.htm)
Joseph Fiorenza's column asserts the "Second" Vatican Council's Nostra Aetate " implicitly acknowledged that Israel remains in a covenant with God, and later Pope John Paul II made it explicit that Jews are the people of God of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God. " For this to be correct, of course, the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. This incredible piece of apostasy is a denial of the fact that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ came to convert everyone, including Jews, to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order. It is blasphemy against Our Lord. It is blasphemy against our first Pope, Saint Peter, who preached the following discourse to the Jews in Jerusalem on the first Pentecost Sunday following the descent of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, upon him and other other Apostles and Our Lady in the same Upper Room where Our Lord had instituted the Holy Priesthood and the Eucharist at the Last Supper fifty-three days before:
Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you, and with your ears receive my words. For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day:
But this is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel: And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord,) I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. And upon my servants indeed, and upon my handmaids will I pour out in those days of my spirit, and they shall prophesy. And I will shew wonders in the heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath: blood and fire, and vapour of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and manifest day of the Lord come.
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved. Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know: This same being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. For David saith concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before my face: because he is at my right hand, that I may not be moved.
For this my heart hath been glad, and any tongue hath rejoiced: moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope. Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Ye men, brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David; that he died, and was buried; and his sepulchre is with us to this present day. Whereas therefore he was a prophet, and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne.
Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy enemies thy footstool.
Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.
They therefore that received his word, were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls. And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: many wonders also and signs were done by the apostles in Jerusalem, and there was great fear in all. And all they that believed, were together, and had all things common. Their possessions and goods they sold, and divided them to all, according as every one had need. (Acts 2: 14-41.)
Joseph Fiorenza's praise of Nostra Aetate is based in a repudiation of the efforts of Saint Peter to convert his own people to the true Faith. It is a repudiation of the work of such great Catholic missionaries as Saint Vincent Ferrer, who converted thousands of Jews and Mohammedans in the Iberian Peninsula and southern France to Catholicism at the end of the Fourteenth and the beginning of the Fifteenth Centuries. It is a repudiation of the work of Father Alphonse Ratisbonne, who was converted by the Mother of God herself by her appearance to him in the Church of San Andrea delle Fratte on January 20, 1842, as he sought the conversion of the Jews in Palestine. And Joint Reflections on Covenant and Mission of the binding nature of the following dogmatic pronouncement made at the Council of Florence on on February 4, 1442:
It [the Holy Roman Catholic Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.
There are one of two possibilities here. Either God the Holy Ghost failed to guide the Fathers of the Council of Florence or He has changed His Mind. Both possibilities are impossible. They are blasphemous. The teaching of the Catholic Church is immutable as God Himself is immutable. Joseph Fiorenza is quite correct to call Nostra Aetate a "revolutionary" document. Unfortunately for the conciliar revolutionary named Joseph Fiorenza, anything that is revolutionary is from the devil, not from the God the Holy Ghost and the Catholic Church He guides infallibly without any shadow of change or ambiguity or imperfection. No teaching of the Catholic Church is ever "overturned" or becomes obsolete.
Saint John Chrysostom gave us a brilliant explication of Catholic teaching concerning the fact that Jewish religion has been superseded by the Catholic Faith and is no longer pleasing to God:
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)
Joseph Fiorenza also plainly means to repudiate Pope Saint Pius X's earnest and thoroughly Catholic efforts to seek the conversion of the founder of International Zionism, Theodore Herzl, to the true Faith in an audience His Holiness granted Herzl on January 25, 1904, meaning that a canonized pope got it wrong about the invalidity of the Mosaic Covenant.
HERZL: Yesterday I was with the Pope [Pius X]. . . . I arrived ten minutes ahead of time, and without having to wait I was conducted through a number of small reception rooms to the Pope. He received me standing and held out his hand, which I did not kiss. Lippay had told me I had to do it, but I didn’t. I believe this spoiled my chances with him, for everyone who visits him kneels and at least kisses his hand. This hand kiss had worried me a great deal and I was glad when it was out of the way.
He seated himself in an armchair, a throne for minor affairs, and invited me to sit by his side. He smiled in kindly anticipation. I began:
HERZL: I thank Your Holiness for the favor of granting me this audience. [I begged him to excuse my miserable Italian, but he said:
POPE: No, Signor Commander, you speak very well.
HERZL: [He is an honest, rough-hewn village priest, to whom Christianity has remained a living thing even in the Vatican. I briefly laid my request before him. But annoyed perhaps by my refusal to kiss his hand, he answered in a stern categorical manner.
POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?
POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.
HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].
POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.
HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]
POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.
HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.
POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?
HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.
POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.
[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.
HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?
POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you.
HERZL: [At this point Conte Lippay had himself announced. The Pope bade him be admitted. The Conte kneeled, kissed his hand, and joined in the conversation by telling of our “miraculous” meeting in the Bauer beerhall at Venice. The miracle was that he had originally intended to stay overnight in Padua, and instead, it turned out that he was given to hear me express the wish to kiss the Holy Father’s foot. At this the Pope made no movement, for I hadn’t even kissed his hand. Lippay proceeded to tell how I had expiated on the noble qualities of Jesus Christ. The Pope listened, and now and then took a pinch of snuff and sneezed into a big red cotton handkerchief. It is these peasant touches which I like about him best and which most of all compel my respect. Lippay, it would appear, wanted to account for his introducing me, and perhaps ward off a word of reproach. But the Pope said:
POPE: On the contrary, I am glad you brought me the Signor Commendatore.
HERZL: [As to the real business, he repeated what he had told me, until he dismissed us:]
POPE: Not possible!
HERZL: [Lippay stayed on his knees for an unconscionable time and never seemed to tire of kissing his hand. It was apparent that this was what the Pope liked. But on taking leave, I contented myself with shaking his hand warmly and bowing deeply. The audience lasted about twenty-five minutes. While spending the last hour in the Raphael gallery, I saw a picture of an Emperor kneeling before a seated Pope and receiving the crown from his hands. That’s how Rome wants it.] (Marvin Lowenthal, Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 427- 430.)
Far from being an "isolated" statement made by some "renegade" retired conciliar "bishop," Joseph Fiorenza's recent comments are a very good reflection of the apostate sentiments expressed by conciliar figures in Rome, including Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI himself:
If Jews one day come (as Paul hopes) to a more positive judgment of Jesus, this must occur through an inner process, as the end of a search of their own (something that in part is occurring). We Christians cannot be the ones who seek to convert them. We have lost the right to do so by the way in which this was done in the past. First the wounds must be healed through dialogue and reconciliation. (Father Raniero Cantalamessa, O.F.M., Cap., Zenit, September 30, 2005. Father Cantalamessa is the "preacher" to the "papal" household.)
The reformulated text no longer speaks about the conversion of the Jews as some Jewish critics wrongly affirm. The text is a prayer inspired by Saint Paul's letter to the Romans, chapter 11, which is the very text that speaks also of the unbroken covenant. It takes up Paul's eschatological hope that in the end of time all Israel will be saved. As a prayer the text lays all in the hands of God and not in ours. It says nothing about the how and when. Therefore there is nothing about missionary activities by which we may take Israel's salvation in our hands.
I cannot see why this prayer should present any reason to interrupt our dialogue. On the contrary, it is an opportunity and a challenge to continue the dialogue on what we have in common and what differentiates us in our Messianic hope.
I am happy that after some perplexities we now hear more and more voices from the Jewish world seeing things in a realistic way, and I do hope that this letter can be a contribution to overcome the misunderstandings and grievances. (Walter "Cardinal" Kasper's Letter to Rabbi Rosen)
In its work, the Biblical Commission could not ignore the contemporary context, where the shock of the Shoah has put the whole question under a new light. Two main problems are posed: Can Christians, after all that has happened, still claim in good conscience to be the legitimate heirs of Israel's Bible? Have they the right to propose a Christian interpretation of this Bible, or should they not instead, respectfully and humbly, renounce any claim that, in the light of what has happened, must look like a usurpation? The second question follows from the first: In its presentation of the Jews and the Jewish people, has not the New Testament itself contributed to creating a hostility towards the Jewish people that provided a support for the ideology of those who wished to destroy Israel? The Commission set about addressing those two questions. It is clear that a Christian rejection of the Old Testament would not only put an end to Christianity itself as indicated above, but, in addition, would prevent the fostering of positive relations between Christians and Jews, precisely because they would lack common ground. In the light of what has happened, what ought to emerge now is a new respect for the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament. On this subject, the Document says two things. First it declares that “the Jewish reading of the Bible is a possible one, in continuity with the Jewish Scriptures of the Second Temple period, a reading analogous to the Christian reading, which developed in parallel fashion” (no. 22). It adds that Christians can learn a great deal from a Jewish exegesis practised for more than 2000 years; in return, Christians may hope that Jews can profit from Christian exegetical research (ibid.). I think this analysis will prove useful for the pursuit of Judeo-Christian dialogue, as well as for the interior formation of Christian consciousness. (Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible.)
It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking on this truth and a new and vital relationship with it; it is also clear that new words can only develop if they come from an informed understanding of the truth expressed, and on the other hand, that a reflection on faith also requires that this faith be lived. In this regard, the programme that Pope John XXIII proposed was extremely demanding, indeed, just as the synthesis of fidelity and dynamic is demanding.. . .
Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance - a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005)
"Archbishop" Joseph Fiorenza thus believes while it is acceptable for Catholics to seek the conversion of Jews, there is no absolute need for any particular adherent of Talmudic Judaism to convert as they have "valid" means of salvation by virtue of the "never superseded" Mosaic Covenant. This is heretical. Jews are not saved by the Mosaic Covenant. Judaism is not a valid religion. It is a false religion, and the Catholic Church teaches that is an excommunicable offense to walk into a synagogue to join in "prayer" with Jews, thus giving credence to a false religion that is hated by God, Who hates all false religions, including the "religion of peace," Mohammedanism (which will be the subject of the next article on this site):
The spirit of Christ, which dictated the Holy Scriptures, and the spirit which animates and guides the Church of Christ, and teaches her all truth, is the same; and therefore in all ages her conduct on this point has been uniformly the same as what the Holy Scripture teaches. She has constantly forbidden her children to hold any communication, in religious matters, with those who are separated from her communion; and this she has sometimes done under the most severe penalties. In the apostolical canons, which are of very ancient standing, and for the most part handed down from the apostolical age, it is thus decreed: "If any bishop, or priest, or deacon, shall join in prayers with heretics, let him be suspended from Communion". (Can. 44)
Also, "If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion". (Can. 63) (Bishop George Hay, (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)
None of this means anything to the likes of "Archbishop" Joseph Fiorenza. No, the "revolutionary" Nostra Aetate changed everything, he believes. Nostra Aetate has only changed "everything" in the minds of revolutionaries such as Joseph Fiorenza and their counterfeit church of conciliarism. It has changed nothing taught by the Catholic Church at all. No one is saved in or through the structures and beliefs of any false religion, and those who contend otherwise about Judaism have expelled themselves from the bosom of the Catholic Church. We can always count on the conciliar revolutionaries to come to the rescue, so to speak, to provide Catholics with a little "reality check" as to why the counterfeit church of conciliarism is NOT the Catholic Church.
The Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph in the end. The conciliarists and their apostasies will be consigned to the dustbin of history. We must, however, in the meantime remember that, despite the problems that surface now and again in this time of apostasy and betrayal, we must remember the false religion of conciliarism for what it is, making sure, first and foremost, to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit.
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.
Saint Andrew Avellino, pray for us.
Tryphon, Respicius, and Nympha, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints