Archive for December, 2011

Deepening the Judeo-Supremacist/’Noahide’ Servant Relationship

December 28, 2011
U.K. Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks:


“[The Chabad Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Schneerson] told me exactly what he wanted me to do … he gave me a whole set of instructions which have directed my life from that day to this. Almost everything I’ve done, I’ve done because he asked me to.”

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Radio/News.aspx/3232#.Tvtkvb9QT-Y


Using his platform at the BBC, [Rabbi Sacks] took up the [Lubavitcher] Rebbe’s campaign and began reaching out to non-Jews, teaching the Seven Noahide Laws.


http://lubavitch.com/news/article/2033559/Walking-the-Walk-of-the-Chabad-Emissary.html

Also see Rabbi Sacks eulogize Chabad’s dead Messiah, Menachem Schneerson (who came and went in his own name), at the International Conference of Chabad Shluchim (agents; apostles) on November 27, 2011 (Rabbi Sacks was the keynote speaker at this event):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MunlCt9_Nl0#!

The article below prefaces an audio interview with Rabbi Sacks in which virtually every word he speaks to his non-Judaic listeners is a lie. That is all the analysis this fraud from this smooth-tongued Lubavitch evangelist deserves. This comes in conjunction with Sacks’ well-timed economic deceptions.

The Pope and the Rabbi: deepening the relationship

2011-12-12 Vatican Radio

Lord Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregation of the Commonwealth, met with Pope Benedict on Monday to discuss interfaith relations and their common concern for the decline of spiritual values within European culture.
Rabbi Sacks, who has been spiritual leader of the mainstream Orthodox Jewish communities in the UK, Australia and Hong Kong since 1991, said faith, in the modern world, has no political power but it does have a great deal of influence – especially among those who question the kind of value system they want for their children. Asked about a rise in anti-Semitism in Europe, the Rabbi stressed that Jews cannot fight anti-semitism alone, “the victim cannot cure the crime, the hated cannot cure the hate.” He said he will fight for the right of Christians anywhere in the world to live their faith without fear, “but I need them to fight for the right of my people to live their faith without fear.”

Asked if the current political stalemate in between Israelis and Palestinians could be behind this resurgent anti-Semitism, Sachs said “we must not allow ourselves to import a message of conflict from the Middle East to Europe.

http://www.news.va/en/news/the-pope-and-the-rabbi-deepening-the-relationship

Rabbi Sacks played a supporting role in a November 22, 2011 BBC piece intended to create nostalgia for Victorian-era Rothschild economic predation as an alternative to the predation of our times:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b017nf4k

Also see:

“For a Jew like Rothschild, as the Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks explained to me, what for a Christian is charity, was rather stricter. Philanthropy is duty. You have to do it. It’s ten per cent [of your earnings] and we’re not saying it would be a nice idea; we’re saying you do that – and if you don’t, we ostracise you.”

So they weren’t driven by profit? “I think they probably were, but what they did was to create a public position for banking in which it was deemed that you are meant to be responsible, philanthropic and honest rather than, it’s the Wild West boys, Big Bang time, fill your boots. That wouldn’t have been acceptable. Nat Rothschild refused to bank with the Russians because of their attitude to the Jews. There was ethical banking going on.

“But philanthropy is good for you. If you’re from the very wealthiest, to be seen giving away large portions of your wealth is good politics.”

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2011-11-22/ian-hislop-philanthropy-is-to-be-encouraged

Pharisaic ‘Christmas’

December 19, 2011
Pictured is Bishop Oscar Cantu, of the Opus Pharisaei line of succession [he was consecrated by Opus ‘Dei’ Bishop José Horacio Gómez who we documented also lighting a menorah with Rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg HERE]. Rabbi Scheinberg expects this kind of slavish ‘Noahidism’ from his ‘Christian’ subordinates. Rabbi Scheinberg is ‘Noahide’ fanatic, John Hagee’s handler.

We recently looked at the Pharisaic musings of the Opus ‘Dei’ prelate, Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz, who SSPX Superior Bp. Fellay’s representatives have been ‘dialoging’ with for the past two years on the Vatican II documents HERE. In a news article published on the SSPX website it is reported that the rabbi-concocted Vatican II document, Nostra Aetate, was not even on the table in the two years of this ‘dialogue.’

Bp. Fellay seems to favor a ‘personal prelature,’ the kind of arrangement Opus ‘Dei’ has.

Rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg (center, with beard) and Bishop Oscar Cantu (left) light a menorah Thursday, Dec. 15, 2011 at the San Fernando Hall during a Catholic and Jewish celibration of Hanukkah.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/religion/article/Catholics-Jews-bond-over-Hanukkah-lighting-2406054.php

From the San Fernando Cathedral bulletin:

SAN FERNANDO CATHEDRAL SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS JUNE 13, 2010

“Everyone is welcome to attend the Mass on Saturday, June 26 at 10:00 am, honoring St. Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, founder of Opus Dei.”

The Mass will be celebrated by Bishop Oscar Cantú and concelebrated by Very Rev. Eduardo Castillo.

Following a profound spiritual retreat, Fr. Josemaría Escrivá founded Opus Dei in Madrid on 2 October 1928, opening a new way for the faithful to sanctify themselves in the midst of the world through their work and fulfillment of their personal, family and social duties. Fr. Josemaría Es- crivá de Balaguer helped numerous people discern vocations to the priesthood and religious life, both active and contemplative. In 1943, he founded the Priestly Society of the Holy Cross, an association inseparably united to Opus Dei, to which belong thousands of diocesan priests around the world.

Pope John Paul II proclaimed Josemaría Escrivá a saint on October 6, 2002. He told those present at the canonization, “ the founder of Opus Dei, Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, was chosen by the Lord to proclaim the universal call to holiness and to indicate that everyday life, its customary activities, are a path towards holiness. … in the case of Opus Dei, to spread through every sector of society a deep awareness of the universal call to sanctity and apostolate, and more specifically of the sanctifying value of ordinary work.”

Sodomopolis

December 18, 2011
A report from the Netherlands:

What Rorate Caeli does not mention [in its blog posting titled, “The Church that led the Vatican II ‘Rhine reforms’ was rotten,”] are two facts that have been reported on Friday, December 16, 2011, at the frontpage of the the Dutch ‘quality newspaper’ NRC Handelsblad (with Lux et Libertas in it’s logo) and that you will find, with video presentations in Dutch, on

http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/12/16/deetman-kerk-wist-van-misbruik/?show_feedback_form=1

‘De onderzoekscommissie deed nauwgezet onderzoek en concludeert dat Simonis als bisschop van Rotterdam en later als aartsbisschop van Utrecht niet altijd zorgvuldig handelde. Zo drukte hij de wijding door van priesters ‘die ongeschikt bleken en zich aan misbruik overgaven’. Ook bezorgde hij ontspoorde en soms veroordeelde priesters nieuwe aanstellingen. Dat deed ook de opvolger van Simonis in Rotterdam, monseigneur Bär, die volgens de commissie ‘opmerkelijk veel’ homoseksuele jongemannen tot priesters wijdde.”

TRANSLATED:

“The investigation committee… concludes that Simonis as bishop of Rotterdam and later as archbishop of Utrecht did not always act carefully. For instance, he exercised pressure so that priests were ordained ‘who turned out to be unfit and indulged in abuses.’ This was also done by Simonis’s sucessor in Rotterdam, Mgr. Bär, who, according to the committee, ‘ordained remarkably many gay boys.'”

This looks like a concerted action of the type mentioned by Randy Engels in The Rite of Sodomy. If this be true, it might show that the ties between the Sons of Darkness and the Dutch RC Church are tight and long existing. Many of the sex scandals date from the time before Vatican II, so they cannot be all attributed to the false Conciliar Church.

But it might be possible that seed has been sown by the enemy before Vatican II to make sure that the people would one day hate the Church with more hate than ever. Anyway, a Catholic who loves his Saviour and looks forward to Heaven in my opinion should not have problems with the 6th and 9th commandments, or any of the others.

Simonis is spending his old age a few miles from where I live, in the former Mariencroon Cistercian Monastery (http://focolare.netone.nl/marienkroon.nl/paters/). It was a very fruitful monastery, the biggest of the Cistercians, until, some 40 years ago, a new abbot was installed, who disliked dogma and made most Fathers leave. This abbot has handed a nearly empty monastery to the false oecumenistic Focolare movement, that has turned the monastery into a Mariapoli. It is in this milieu that Simonis feels most at ease, presumably.

Mgr. Bär started as a monk of the Chevetogne monastery, (http://www.monasterechevetogne.com/index.php?taalkeuze=3), a breeding place of false oecumenism in the hands of Dom Beaudoin, friend of Roncalli’s: “At the news of the death of Pius XII, the old Dom Lambert Beauduin, a friend of Roncalli’s (the future John XXIII) confided to Father Bouyer: “If they elect Roncalli, everything would be saved; he would be capable of calling a council and of consecrating ecumenism.” (http://www.tldm.org/news6/VaticanII-2.htm)

In 1993 Mgr. Bär and the pseudo-conservative Limburg Mgr. Gijssen stepped down after rumours of scandals involving the two (separately), the first thought to have a gay lover, the second thought to have watched his seminarians in quite personal circumstances.

I hate to stir all this mud but it is important to know what kind of people we are dealing with.

God help us – and them.

Yours sincerely,

P. V. I.
Netherlands

Opus Pharisaei

December 6, 2011
Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz, the Vicar General of Opus “Dei” (Opus Pharisaei, in truth) is one of Pope Benedict’s representatives in the theological discussions that took place between the SSPX and Rome from 2009-2011. The day after we commented on Bp. Fellay’s recent ‘interview’ and pointed to the discrepancy in Rome’s allowance for discussion of Vatican II teachings while anathematizing discussion of ‘The Holocaust,’ a work of artifice from Msgr. Fernando Ocáriz was published in the Pope’s journal, L’Osservatore Romano HERE.

This document contains a formula which amounts to relativistic tyranny:

The [Second Vatican] Council’s [innovative] doctrinal teachings require of the faithful a degree of assent called “religious submission of will and intellect”. Precisely because it is “religious” assent, such assent is not based purely on rational motives. This kind of adherence does not take the form of an act of faith. Rather, it is an act of obedience that is not merely disciplinary, but is well-rooted in our confidence in the divine assistance given to the Magisterium, and therefore “within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith” …

… A number of innovations of a doctrinal nature are to be found in the documents of the Second Vatican Council … These innovations in matters concerning faith or morals, not proposed with a definitive act, still require religious submission of intellect and will …

I take this as an answer to Proud Pharisee David Rosen’s self-interested insistence that Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium be considered “fundamental doctrines of the Church,” and that it be impossible to question them “without challenging the authority of the church.”

Those who know the religion of Judaism know what’s going on here. The rabbis “don’t listen to heavenly voices.” They say, “the Torah is not in heaven.” Their god says, “my sons have defeated me.” Their god is mutable; nothing more than a totem the possession of which gives them absolute, tyrannical authority which they use to innovate and enforce doctrines as needed, or to destroy and blot out problematic doctrines.

Expect much more of this kind of relativisation of perennial Church teaching enforced by absolute authority (at the service of the rabbis) as long as religious relations with the rabbis continue. And play close attention to how that authority is selectively enforced.

Also see:

Benedict’s “Hermeneutic of Continuity” and the Rabbinic “Genius”