Catholics are Morally Obligated to Take Responsibility for the Horrible Council they Provide

If John McCain is elected president in November and a few years from now we find ourselves looking back to the “pro life” Bush-Cheney era of death, oppression, destruction and treachery as the good old days, which would most definitely be the case, will Pat Buchanan and Christopher Ferrara be held responsible for their recent terrible counsel? Will they accept responsibility themselves? If the past is a reliable indicator of the future, the answer to both questions is no. It will get flushed down the memory hole, but their voices will still be hearkened to and the supporters of the counterfeit which many call the “conservative movement” will continue on their deathmarch into oblivion.

Read:

Ferrara Contra Ferrara

Landscapers are held to higher standards than these “leaders.” What a sick world this is.

PALIN MEETS WITH AIPAC

September 02, 2008

by Mark Murray – MSNBC

MINNEAPOLIS — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin today met with the board of directors of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, NBC/NJ has confirmed.

The meeting took place inside Palin’s hotel, sources said.

A campaign official would not say who asked for the meeting, but said it was geared towards putting the American Jewish community at ease over her understanding of US-Middle East relations.

“That’s obviously going to be an issue,” the aide said. “It’s not like being the senator from New York, obviously. But these aren’t issues that are off her radar.”

Palin, joined by Sen. Joe Lieberman, expressed her “heartfelt support for Israel” and spoke of the threats it faces from Iran and others, the campaign official said.

“We had a good productive discussion on the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and we were pleased that Gov. Palin expressed her deep, personal, and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel,” AIPAC spokesman Josh Block said. “Like Sen. McCain, the vice presidential nominee understands and believes in the special friendship between the two democracies and would work to expand and deepen the strategic partnership in a McCain/Palin Administration.”

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/02/1327325.aspx

Catholics are Morally Obligated to Take Responsibility for the Horrible Council they Provide

If John McCain is elected president in November and a few years from now we find ourselves looking back to the “pro life” Bush-Cheney era of death, oppression, destruction and treachery as the good old days, which would most definitely be the case, will Pat Buchanan and Christopher Ferrara be held responsible for their recent terrible counsel? Will they accept responsibility themselves? If the past is a reliable indicator of the future, the answer to both questions is no. It will get flushed down the memory hole, but their voices will still be hearkened to and the supporters of the counterfeit which many call the “conservative movement” will continue on their deathmarch into oblivion.

Read:

Ferrara Contra Ferrara

Landscapers are held to higher standards than these “leaders.” What a sick world this is.

PALIN MEETS WITH AIPAC

September 02, 2008

by Mark Murray – MSNBC

MINNEAPOLIS — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin today met with the board of directors of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, NBC/NJ has confirmed.

The meeting took place inside Palin’s hotel, sources said.

A campaign official would not say who asked for the meeting, but said it was geared towards putting the American Jewish community at ease over her understanding of US-Middle East relations.

“That’s obviously going to be an issue,” the aide said. “It’s not like being the senator from New York, obviously. But these aren’t issues that are off her radar.”

Palin, joined by Sen. Joe Lieberman, expressed her “heartfelt support for Israel” and spoke of the threats it faces from Iran and others, the campaign official said.

“We had a good productive discussion on the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and we were pleased that Gov. Palin expressed her deep, personal, and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel,” AIPAC spokesman Josh Block said. “Like Sen. McCain, the vice presidential nominee understands and believes in the special friendship between the two democracies and would work to expand and deepen the strategic partnership in a McCain/Palin Administration.”

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/02/1327325.aspx

Lawyerly Apologetics Meant to Cover Up Disaster

Those who make a serious study of the rabbinic tradition of Judaism come to understand very deeply that Judaism is a lawyerly “religion.” It’s a “religion” not of the law (aside from using the law as a totem), but a religion which finds ways around the law. I was once told by a lawyer that being a good lawyer entails not just knowing what the law says, but more importantly, what it doesn’t say. In other words, it’s about finding loopholes, clever maneuvering and the like. The lawyer’s profession in the U.S. today is rotten with this kind of end-justifies-the-means thinking. It’s not about justice, but about “winning.”

Serious problems arise when this mentality is applied to things of the Church, such as we see in Ferrara’s shameful apologia for Benedict and the prayer he rewrote in response to wailing from the Chief Rabbinate of “Israel,” the AJC and ADL of B’nai B’rith. Ferrara revels in what he views to be a clever counter-ploy by Benedict, as if there were virtue in intrigue and cheap courtroom gambits. Ferrara’s view has found much support on “trad” message boards. This is a clear sign of the level of Talmudization of the thinking of many so-called “traditional Catholics.” Such lawyerly behavior is seen as admirable. Their traditionalism is a sham.

Nothing “gained” through disreputable means is truly a gain. The reality is that Benedict’s “masterstroke” is a huge loss. There is now a precedent of public pressure from Judaic organizations bringing about a snappy response from the Vatican. For a true traditionalist this is unthinkable–end of discussion. But further, the removal of language which was deemed “offensive” and “demeaning” by Judaic groups, is a tacit admission that there was a problem that needed to be fixed. This is a disaster for tradition.

For 50 years now we have been hearing about Catholic “teaching of contempt” which “paved the road to The Holocaust.” This insane idea has been seriously considered by Vatican prelates and it’s been the impetus for many anti-tradition developments in theology and the Novus Ordo liturgy. Removal of language from the traditional Latin liturgy deemed to be “offensive” and “demeaning” to “Jews” plays into the “teaching of contempt” zeitgeist. It serves as confirmation of the charge that Catholic tradition is “anti-semitic” and constitutes precedent for further change. Pharisees exploit precedent to the utmost.

Now, Catholic tradition is open to examination and revision according to the whims of the Pharisees, not in reference to truth, clarity and purity of doctrine, but the post-“Holocaust” benchmark: is it good for the ‘Jews’? And this doesn’t happen behind close doors as it did in the past. It happens in broad daylight, with lawyerly “trads” trumpeting their support. Outrage is non-existent.

Today these same “trads” are swooning over Benedict in his Roman vestments at Ash Wednesday service. Have they ever heard of the concept of damage control? Benedict has just sold out Catholic tradition to the Pharisees in a spectacular, public display. Of course he needs to build up his “conservative” image before and after such an unspeakably treacherous act. Didn’t Ferrara say that Benedict tears down tradition as he creates the appearance of building it up back in 2005? Oh, but that’s when he was the prosecutor. Now he’s with the defense. It’s all about “winning,” then, I guess. I tell you, such lawyerly strategizing is a recipe for failure.

Perhaps these “trads” need to learn of a true masterstroke by a true safeguard of tradition. They would do well to learn that St. Pius X handled Judaic lobbying by telling the interlocutors, essentially, to get lost and that he would send missionaries to convert them. How far from Christianity the Vatican has fallen in the past 100 years …

Lawyerly Apologetics Meant to Cover Up Disaster

Those who make a serious study of the rabbinic tradition of Judaism come to understand very deeply that Judaism is a lawyerly “religion.” It’s a “religion” not of the law (aside from using the law as a totem), but a religion which finds ways around the law. I was once told by a lawyer that being a good lawyer entails not just knowing what the law says, but more importantly, what it doesn’t say. In other words, it’s about finding loopholes, clever maneuvering and the like. The lawyer’s profession in the U.S. today is rotten with this kind of end-justifies-the-means thinking. It’s not about justice, but about “winning.”

Serious problems arise when this mentality is applied to things of the Church, such as we see in Ferrara’s shameful apologia for Benedict and the prayer he rewrote in response to wailing from the Chief Rabbinate of “Israel,” the AJC and ADL of B’nai B’rith. Ferrara revels in what he views to be a clever counter-ploy by Benedict, as if there were virtue in intrigue and cheap courtroom gambits. Ferrara’s view has found much support on “trad” message boards. This is a clear sign of the level of Talmudization of the thinking of many so-called “traditional Catholics.” Such lawyerly behavior is seen as admirable. Their traditionalism is a sham.

Nothing “gained” through disreputable means is truly a gain. The reality is that Benedict’s “masterstroke” is a huge loss. There is now a precedent of public pressure from Judaic organizations bringing about a snappy response from the Vatican. For a true traditionalist this is unthinkable–end of discussion. But further, the removal of language which was deemed “offensive” and “demeaning” by Judaic groups, is a tacit admission that there was a problem that needed to be fixed. This is a disaster for tradition.

For 50 years now we have been hearing about Catholic “teaching of contempt” which “paved the road to The Holocaust.” This insane idea has been seriously considered by Vatican prelates and it’s been the impetus for many anti-tradition developments in theology and the Novus Ordo liturgy. Removal of language from the traditional Latin liturgy deemed to be “offensive” and “demeaning” to “Jews” plays into the “teaching of contempt” zeitgeist. It serves as confirmation of the charge that Catholic tradition is “anti-semitic” and constitutes precedent for further change. Pharisees exploit precedent to the utmost.

Now, Catholic tradition is open to examination and revision according to the whims of the Pharisees, not in reference to truth, clarity and purity of doctrine, but the post-“Holocaust” benchmark: is it good for the ‘Jews’? And this doesn’t happen behind close doors as it did in the past. It happens in broad daylight, with lawyerly “trads” trumpeting their support. Outrage is non-existent.

Today these same “trads” are swooning over Benedict in his Roman vestments at Ash Wednesday service. Have they ever heard of the concept of damage control? Benedict has just sold out Catholic tradition to the Pharisees in a spectacular, public display. Of course he needs to build up his “conservative” image before and after such an unspeakably treacherous act. Didn’t Ferrara say that Benedict tears down tradition as he creates the appearance of building it up back in 2005? Oh, but that’s when he was the prosecutor. Now he’s with the defense. It’s all about “winning,” then, I guess. I tell you, such lawyerly strategizing is a recipe for failure.

Perhaps these “trads” need to learn of a true masterstroke by a true safeguard of tradition. They would do well to learn that St. Pius X handled Judaic lobbying by telling the interlocutors, essentially, to get lost and that he would send missionaries to convert them. How far from Christianity the Vatican has fallen in the past 100 years …

Ferrara Contra Ferrara

From Christopher Ferrara, writing of Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, February 2005, as published on The Remnant website:

Yes, “our only friend in the Vatican” has struck again. More and more it becomes apparent that this man is perhaps the most industrious ecclesial termite of the post-conciliar epoch, tearing down even as he makes busy with the appearance of building up. The longer Ratzinger “guards” Catholic doctrine, the more porous the barriers that protect it become.

Indeed, as I have pointed out more than once on these pages, it was Ratzinger who wrote in 1987 (in the second edition of his Principles of Catholic Theology) that the “demolition of bastions” in the Church is “a long-overdue task.” The Church, he declared, “must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for her and that she has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust solely the shield of faith.” Now it seems that with the bastions all but demolished, even the shield of faith is about to clatter to the ground. (Christopher A. Ferrara, “Ratzinger Personally Consecrates Neo-Modernist Bishop,” The Remnant, February, 2005)

Ratzinger Personally Consecrates Neo-Modernist Bishop

That is amazing insight into the methods of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI–that he tears down even as he creates the appearance of building up. What has changed since 2005 when Christopher Ferrara wrote those words and now? Ratzinger’s phony conservatism? Hell no.

But something has changed in Ferrara’s thinking. Witness the amazing transmutation–as Ferrara is transformed from the prosecuting lawyer in 2005 to the defense lawyer in 2008, watch how the image of the same Joseph Ratzinger is transformed accordingly. Compare the above with Ferrara’s commentary on the new Good Friday prayer for the Jews delivered by the Vatican at the request of the Chief Rabbinate of “Israel” at the following link:

A Papal Masterstroke

Who is served by such double-mindedness? Is traditional Catholicism served, or harmed by such lawyerly shysterism? Is the argument that Abe Foxman says it’s bad so it must be good something to be considered by thinking people, or fools?

Judging by the fact that this guy has a following, there must be a lot of “trad” fools.

Ferrara Contra Ferrara

From Christopher Ferrara, writing of Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, February 2005, as published on The Remnant website:

Yes, “our only friend in the Vatican” has struck again. More and more it becomes apparent that this man is perhaps the most industrious ecclesial termite of the post-conciliar epoch, tearing down even as he makes busy with the appearance of building up. The longer Ratzinger “guards” Catholic doctrine, the more porous the barriers that protect it become.

Indeed, as I have pointed out more than once on these pages, it was Ratzinger who wrote in 1987 (in the second edition of his Principles of Catholic Theology) that the “demolition of bastions” in the Church is “a long-overdue task.” The Church, he declared, “must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for her and that she has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust solely the shield of faith.” Now it seems that with the bastions all but demolished, even the shield of faith is about to clatter to the ground. (Christopher A. Ferrara, “Ratzinger Personally Consecrates Neo-Modernist Bishop,” The Remnant, February, 2005)

Ratzinger Personally Consecrates Neo-Modernist Bishop

That is amazing insight into the methods of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI–that he tears down even as he creates the appearance of building up. What has changed since 2005 when Christopher Ferrara wrote those words and now? Ratzinger’s phony conservatism? Certainly not.

But something has changed in Ferrara’s thinking. Witness the amazing transmutation–as Ferrara is transformed from the prosecuting lawyer in 2005 to the defense lawyer in 2008, watch how the image of the same Joseph Ratzinger is transformed accordingly. Compare the above with Ferrara’s commentary on the new Good Friday prayer for the Jews delivered by the Vatican at the request of the Chief Rabbinate of “Israel” at the following link:

A Papal Masterstroke

Who is served by such double-mindedness? Is traditional Catholicism served, or harmed by such lawyerly shysterism? Is the argument that Abe Foxman says it’s bad so it must be good something to be considered by thinking people, or fools?

Judging by the fact that this guy has a following, there must be a lot of “trad” fools.

Ferrara’s Rabbi Sponsor

What a pathetic sight to see a Catholic lawyer outsource to a rabbi for his defense.

“… This is ridiculous! False accusations of “anti-Semitism” are a dime a dozen these days, but true anti-Semitism — hatred of the Jewish people — is a sin that I [Christopher Ferrara], Michael [Matt] and Robert [Sungenis] utterly reject as believing Catholics.

“I conclude with these words from Rabbi Mayer Schiller: ‘I have known Chris Ferrara and Michael Matt for many years. The notion that they hate Jews is so absurd as to be beneath contempt’.”

http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2007/07/26/opinion/letters/01letter0726.txt

Apparently, Ferrara believes the word of a traditional Catholic holds little value in the court of public opinion. That’s the message implicit in his letter. Need to settle a difficult controversy? Solicit a rabbi of the Talmud to be the final arbiter.

And don’t forget what precipitated this event–the SPLC report on traditional Catholics, of course.

Can’t they see the dialectic at work here? The SPLC attack on traditional Catholics (Thesis), set the stage for Rabbi Mayer Schiller to sponsor embattled traditional Catholics (Antithesis), which synthesizes rabbinic prestige and inroads into Christian territory.

Thanks, Ferrara, for building up the prestige of the rabbis and further degrading the image and standing of traditional Catholics.

Lord, grant them the sight to identify the dialectic and the wisdom to stop participating in it.

Ferrara’s Rabbi Sponsor

What a pathetic sight to see a Catholic lawyer outsource to a rabbi for his defense.

“… This is ridiculous! False accusations of “anti-Semitism” are a dime a dozen these days, but true anti-Semitism — hatred of the Jewish people — is a sin that I [Christopher Ferrara], Michael [Matt] and Robert [Sungenis] utterly reject as believing Catholics.

“I conclude with these words from Rabbi Mayer Schiller: ‘I have known Chris Ferrara and Michael Matt for many years. The notion that they hate Jews is so absurd as to be beneath contempt’.”

http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2007/07/26/opinion/letters/01letter0726.txt

Apparently, Christopher Ferrara believes the word of a traditional Catholic holds little value in the court of public opinion. That’s the message implicit in his letter. Need to settle a difficult controversy? Solicit a rabbi of the Talmud to be the final arbiter.

And don’t forget what precipitated this event–the SPLC report on traditional Catholics, of course.

Can’t they see the dialectic at work here? The SPLC attack on traditional Catholics (Thesis), set the stage for Rabbi Mayer Schiller to sponsor embattled traditional Catholics (Antithesis), which synthesizes rabbinic prestige and inroads into Christian territory.

Chabad Lubavitch Rabbi to Congress: "Congress Convenes to Fulfill Noahide Commandment"

See video of Chabad Lubavitch rabbi Shea Harlig preaching to U.S. House representatives that “Congress convenes to fulfill one of the seven Noahide commandments.”

What are the Noahide Laws?

NOACHIDE LAWS, the seven laws considered by rabbinic tradition as the minimal moral duties enjoined by the Bible on all men (Sanh. 56–60; Yad, Melakhim, 8:10, 10:12) …

The seven Noachide laws as traditionally enumerated are: the prohibitions of idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, sexual sins, theft, and eating from a living animal, as well as the injunction to establish a legal system (Tosef., Av. Zar. 8:4; Sanh. 56a). Except for the last, all are negative, and the last itself is usually interpreted as commanding the enforcement of the others (Maim. Yad, Melakhim, 9:1). (Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

Who is an idolator according to the codifier of Judaism, Moses Maimonides?

“The Christians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday…” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avoda Zorah 9;4)

How does the Judaic “justice” system of double standards handle those accused of disobeying Noahide law (ie. Christian “idolaters”)?

A non-Jew is put to death on the basis of a decision given by one judge [no jury], and on the basis of testimony given by a single witness, and even if he was not given a proper warning prior to the commission of his offense. He is put to death on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a man but not on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a woman, and the man who testified or decided against him can even be a relative.

A Jew can only be put to death by a court of twenty-three judges, and on the basis of the testimony of two male witnesses who are not disqualified from testifying on account of kinship, and after being properly warned against committing the transgression. But none of these rules apply in the case of a non-Jew. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b, Steinsaltz edition, vol.18, page 110)

What happens to those found guilty of disobeying Noahide law in a Judaic kangaroo court?

… violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noachide to capital punishment by decapitation (Sanh. 57a).(Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

Now, what was that Ferrara was saying about those nice rabbis?

Chabad Lubavitch Rabbi to Congress: "Congress Convenes to Fulfill Noahide Commandment"

See video of Chabad Lubavitch rabbi Shea Harlig preaching to U.S. House representatives that “Congress convenes to fulfill one of the seven Noahide commandments.”

What are the Noahide Laws?

NOACHIDE LAWS, the seven laws considered by rabbinic tradition as the minimal moral duties enjoined by the Bible on all men (Sanh. 56–60; Yad, Melakhim, 8:10, 10:12) …

The seven Noachide laws as traditionally enumerated are: the prohibitions of idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, sexual sins, theft, and eating from a living animal, as well as the injunction to establish a legal system (Tosef., Av. Zar. 8:4; Sanh. 56a). Except for the last, all are negative, and the last itself is usually interpreted as commanding the enforcement of the others (Maim. Yad, Melakhim, 9:1). (Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

Who is an idolator according to the codifier of Judaism, Moses Maimonides?

“The Christians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday…” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avoda Zorah 9;4)

How does the Judaic “justice” system of double standards handle those accused of disobeying Noahide law (ie. Christian “idolaters”)?

A non-Jew is put to death on the basis of a decision given by one judge [no jury], and on the basis of testimony given by a single witness, and even if he was not given a proper warning prior to the commission of his offense. He is put to death on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a man but not on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a woman, and the man who testified or decided against him can even be a relative.

A Jew can only be put to death by a court of twenty-three judges, and on the basis of the testimony of two male witnesses who are not disqualified from testifying on account of kinship, and after being properly warned against committing the transgression. But none of these rules apply in the case of a non-Jew. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b, Steinsaltz edition, vol.18, page 110)

What happens to those found guilty of disobeying Noahide law in a Judaic kangaroo court?

… violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noachide to capital punishment by decapitation (Sanh. 57a).(Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

Now, what was that Ferrara was saying about those nice rabbis?