Archive for the ‘Double Mind’ Category

The World’s Most Powerful Victims

October 13, 2007

Jewish power dominates at ‘Vanity Fair’

NATHAN BURSTEIN

Jerusalem Post, Oct 11, 2007 23:40

It’s a list of “the world’s most powerful people,” 100 of the bankers and media moguls, publishers and image makers who shape the lives of billions. It’s an exclusive, insular club, one whose influence stretches around the globe but is concentrated strategically in the highest corridors of power.

More than half its members, at least by one count, are Jewish.

It’s a list, in other words, that would have made earlier generations of Jews jump out of their skins, calling attention, as it does, to their disproportionate influence in finance and the media. Making matters worse, in the eyes of many, would no doubt be the identity of the group behind the list – not a pack of fringe anti-Semites but one of the most mainstream, glamorous publications on the newsstands.

Yet the list doesn’t appear to have generated concern so far, instead drawing expressions of satisfaction and pride from the lone Jewish commentator who’s responded in writing.

Published between ads for Chanel and Prada, Dior and Yves Saint Laurent, it’s the 2007 version of “The Vanity Fair 100,” the glossy American magazine’s annual October ranking of the planet’s most important people. Populated by a Cohen and a Rothschild, a Bloomberg and a Perelman, the list would seem to conform to all the traditional stereotypes about areas of Jewish overrepresentation.

Joseph Aaron, the editor of The Chicago Jewish News, thinks it’s a list his readers should “feel very, very good about” …

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1191257286817

Jewish Groups Secure Major Funding From Department Of Homeland Security

Beth Young,
JTA Wire Service

OCTOBER 09, 2007
Washington

Jewish institutions will receive the majority of U.S. federal funds designated this year to help secure non-profit organizations. Of the 308 grants awarded through the Urban Areas Security Initiative Non-Profit Security Grant Program, 251 are being allocated to Jewish groups totaling $19.6 million …

http://www.jewishtimes.com/News/7042.stm

Cardinal George Induces the Double Mind

October 9, 2007

Cardinal George of Chicago Diocese was recently interviewed by kosher-Catholic commentator John L. Allen, Jr. The prayer for the conversion of the Jews from the Good Friday liturgy of the 1962 missal naturally came up. George’s response was a remarkable piece of double-speak. Most will likely be struck by the Cardinal’s “tough talk” against rabbinic texts which mockingly call Jesus Christ a bastard. But let’s take a look at how he prefaces that comment. Here is the statement in context with my comments interspersed:

Of course [the prayer for the conversion of the Jews from the Good Friday liturgy in the 1962 missal can be changed], and I suspect it probably will be, because the intention is to be sure that our prayers are not offensive to the Jewish people who are our ancestors in the faith.

So then, the people who Cardinal George is about to say mocks our Lord, calling Him a bastard, are here identified as our “ancestors in the faith.” This is patent nonsense. Our ancestors in the faith are the Old Testament prophets. The “ancestors in the faith” that George speaks of here are spiritually descended of the Pharisees who persecuted our spiritual ancestors and our Lord, Jesus Christ. Benedict XVI said as much himself HERE. And Benedict’s favorite rabbi, Jacob Neusner has made the same fact amply clear HERE.

Not content to let that whopper stand alone, George continues:

We can’t possibly insult them in our liturgy.

And what, exactly, from the Church canon does George draw this foolish notion from? Is he familiar with the Old Testament’s myriad of harsh chastisements of the true Israelites for their constant falls into idolatry? Is he aware of Christ’s chastisements of the true Judeans throughout the Gospel? Is he aware of St. Stephen’s litany of chastisements, and those of the Apostles, the Church Fathers, Church Doctors, Saints and popes for over 1900 years? Of course he is, but he must think that you and I are not. And it seems to me that if the true Jews weren’t above reproach from Christ and the Apostles, these fake “Jews” that George speaks of are certainly not above reproach either.

But this is putting aside the fact that a Christian prayer for the conversion of a non-believer is not an insult in any way. Only in the twisted minds of self-worshiping Talmudists who believe they’re saved by their Khazar ethnicity and in the minds of their philo-Judaic dupes is a prayer perceived to be an insult.

And it’s not just the Good Friday prayer that they perceive to be insulting. The Gospel is insulting to them, the prophet Isaiah is insulting to them, the writings of the Church Fathers, the saints and popes and Church councils are insulting to them as well. Is it also true that “we can’t possibly insult the ‘Jews'” with our Scripture and the rest of our Church canon and Church tradition in addition to our liturgy? Why would the line be drawn only at the liturgy? Indeed, many of these things have been changed already and the 2008 synod has it’s sights set on Scripture and scriptural exegesis.

Cardinal George is often credited for his intellect, so I will assume that he is well aware of the logical end to his reasoning. George continues:

Not that any group has a veto on anybody’s prayers …

But it seems that “Jewish” organizations do, in fact, have veto power over Catholic prayers. What is all of this controversy about in the first place? It wasn’t due to an outcry among Catholics.

… because you can go through Jewish texts and find material that is offensive to us.

You’re telling me? Where have you been?

But if we’re interested in keeping the dialogue strong, and we have to be …

What is this ridiculous notion based upon? Where in the Catholic canon does it state that strong dialog must be maintained between Catholic prelates and Judaic power organizations?

… we should be very cautious about any prayer that they find insulting.

Yes. We should be VERY cautious because they seek to eradicate everything that insults them and they’re insulted by our religion in it’s totality. I promise anyone who seeks to accommodate “the Jews” by changing everything that insults them, your work will never end.

‘They,’ however, is a big tent. What my Jewish rabbi friend down the block finds insulting is different from what Abraham Foxman [national director of the Anti-Defamation League] finds insulting.

There’s the dialectic again. Just because Foxman is a lunatic doesn’t make the rabbis reasonable. Show me an Orthodox rabbi who says he thinks Christians should be left alone and I’ll show you a liar.

Also, it does work both ways. Maybe this is an opening to say, ‘Would you care to look at some of the Talmudic literature’s description of Jesus as a bastard, and so on, and maybe make a few changes in some of that?’

What a joke! Haven’t we seen that charade already? The rabbis will change their Christ mocking tradition at the request of “the goyim”? You think that a tradition based upon opposition to Christ will stop mocking Christ? 800 years of forced censorship and self-censorship hasn’t dampened Judaism’s extreme hatred for Jesus Christ in the slightest. They might even censor the texts for show but the tradition remains. Get out of here with that idiocy.

And again, this is beside the fact that there is no parity whatsoever between Christians praying for the salvation of the souls of the “Jews” and the Judaic texts that mock the Savior of Christianity calling Him a bastard, pervert, magician, idolator who led Israel astray, who deserved to be executed and is suffering eternal punishment in boiling excrement for chastising the Pharisees. To suggest that there is some equivalence between the two is lower than a card trick or shell game.

Who buys this trash?

http://ncrcafe.org/node/1361/

The Vatican has recently entered a new stage of double-mind inducement in which it openly states that rabbinic Judaism is descended from the Pharisees who were Christ’s enemies and persecutors but that those who uphold rabbinic Judaism are our “elder brothers in the faith”; where it openly states that the rabbis blaspheme and mock our Lord but that they are our “ancestors in the faith” and we mustn’t “insult” them by praying for them. Who would buy into this besides hypnotics and the mentally retarded?

Also see:

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2007/10/catholic-cardinal-exposes-anti-christ.html#links

Cardinal George Induces the Double Mind

October 9, 2007

Cardinal George of Chicago Diocese was recently interviewed by kosher-Catholic commentator John L. Allen, Jr. The prayer for the conversion of the Jews from the Good Friday liturgy of the 1962 missal naturally came up. George’s response was a remarkable piece of double-speak. Most will likely be struck by the Cardinal’s “tough talk” against rabbinic texts which mockingly call Jesus Christ a bastard. But let’s take a look at how he prefaces that comment. Here is the statement in context with my comments interspersed:

Of course [the prayer for the conversion of the Jews from the Good Friday liturgy in the 1962 missal can be changed], and I suspect it probably will be, because the intention is to be sure that our prayers are not offensive to the Jewish people who are our ancestors in the faith.

So then, the people who Cardinal George is about to say mocks our Lord, calling Him a bastard, are here identified as our “ancestors in the faith.” This is patent nonsense. Our ancestors in the faith are the Old Testament prophets. The “ancestors in the faith” that George speaks of here are spiritually descended of the Pharisees who persecuted our spiritual ancestors and our Lord, Jesus Christ. Benedict XVI said as much himself HERE. And Benedict’s favorite rabbi, Jacob Neusner has made the same fact amply clear HERE.

Not content to let that whopper stand alone, George continues:

We can’t possibly insult them in our liturgy.

And what, exactly, from the Church canon does George draw this foolish notion from? Is he familiar with the Old Testament’s myriad of harsh chastisements of the true Israelites for their constant falls into idolatry? Is he aware of Christ’s chastisements of the true Judeans throughout the Gospel? Is he aware of St. Stephen’s litany of chastisements, and those of the Apostles, the Church Fathers, Church Doctors, Saints and popes for over 1900 years? Of course he is, but he must think that you and I are not. And it seems to me that if the true Jews weren’t above reproach from Christ and the Apostles, these fake “Jews” that George speaks of are certainly not above reproach either.

But this is putting aside the fact that a Christian prayer for the conversion of a non-believer is not an insult in any way. Only in the twisted minds of self-worshiping Talmudists who believe they’re saved by their Khazar ethnicity and in the minds of their philo-Judaic dupes is a prayer perceived to be an insult.

And it’s not just the Good Friday prayer that they perceive to be insulting. The Gospel is insulting to them, the prophet Isaiah is insulting to them, the writings of the Church Fathers, the saints and popes and Church councils are insulting to them as well. Is it also true that “we can’t possibly insult the ‘Jews'” with our Scripture and the rest of our Church canon and Church tradition in addition to our liturgy? Why would the line be drawn only at the liturgy? Indeed, many of these things have been changed already and the 2008 synod has it’s sights set on Scripture and scriptural exegesis.

Cardinal George is often credited for his intellect, so I will assume that he is well aware of the logical end to his reasoning. George continues:

Not that any group has a veto on anybody’s prayers …

But it seems that “Jewish” organizations do, in fact, have veto power over Catholic prayers. What is all of this controversy about in the first place? It wasn’t due to an outcry among Catholics.

… because you can go through Jewish texts and find material that is offensive to us.

You’re telling me? Where have you been?

But if we’re interested in keeping the dialogue strong, and we have to be …

What is this ridiculous notion based upon? Where in the Catholic canon does it state that strong dialog must be maintained between Catholic prelates and Judaic power organizations?

… we should be very cautious about any prayer that they find insulting.

Yes. We should be VERY cautious because they seek to eradicate everything that insults them and they’re insulted by our religion in it’s totality. I promise anyone who seeks to accommodate “the Jews” by changing everything that insults them, your work will never end.

‘They,’ however, is a big tent. What my Jewish rabbi friend down the block finds insulting is different from what Abraham Foxman [national director of the Anti-Defamation League] finds insulting.

There’s the dialectic again. Just because Foxman is a lunatic doesn’t make the rabbis reasonable. Show me an Orthodox rabbi who says he thinks Christians should be left alone and I’ll show you a liar.

Also, it does work both ways. Maybe this is an opening to say, ‘Would you care to look at some of the Talmudic literature’s description of Jesus as a bastard, and so on, and maybe make a few changes in some of that?’

What a joke! Haven’t we seen that charade already? The rabbis will change their Christ mocking tradition at the request of “the goyim”? You think that a tradition based upon opposition to Christ will stop mocking Christ? 800 years of forced censorship and self-censorship hasn’t dampened Judaism’s extreme hatred for Jesus Christ in the slightest. They might even censor the texts for show but the tradition remains. Get out of here with that idiocy.

And again, this is beside the fact that there is no parity whatsoever between Christians praying for the salvation of the souls of the “Jews” and the Judaic texts that mock the Savior of Christianity calling Him a bastard, pervert, magician, idolator who led Israel astray, who deserved to be executed and is suffering eternal punishment in boiling excrement for chastising the Pharisees. To suggest that there is some equivalence between the two is lower than a card trick or shell game.

Who buys this trash?

http://ncrcafe.org/node/1361/

The Vatican has recently entered a new stage of double-mind inducement in which it openly states that rabbinic Judaism is descended from the Pharisees who were Christ’s enemies and persecutors but that those who uphold rabbinic Judaism are our “elder brothers in the faith”; where it openly states that the rabbis blaspheme and mock our Lord but that they are our “ancestors in the faith” and we mustn’t “insult” them by praying for them. Who would buy into this besides hypnotics and the mentally retarded?

Also see:

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2007/10/catholic-cardinal-exposes-anti-christ.html#links

Benedict Praises St. Cyril of Alexandria

October 5, 2007

Continuing with Benedict’s series of talks on the Church Fathers, the latest talk addressing Church Doctor, St. Cyril of Alexandria:

Today, continuing our journey in the footsteps of the Fathers of the Church, we meet a great figure: St. Cyril of Alexandria. Linked to the Christological controversy that led to the Council of Ephesus in 431, and the last noteworthy representative of the Alexandrian tradition, Cyril was later defined in the East as the “custodian of accuracy” — in other words, a guardian of the true faith — and even the “seal of all the Fathers.”

These ancient expressions manifest something that is, in fact, characteristic of Cyril, that is, the constant references the bishop of Alexandria makes to preceding ecclesiastical authorities — including, above all, Athanasius — with the goal of showing the continuity of his own theology with tradition.

Cyril took care to ensure that his theology was firmly situated within the tradition of the Church, by which he sees the guarantee of continuity with the Apostles and with Christ himself …

http://www.zenit.org/article-20662?l=english

If only the same could be said for Benedict. Instead we hear praises for St. Cyril’s orthodoxy out of one side of Benedict’s mouth and the most heterodox theological speculations imaginable out of the other. Let us consider St. Cyril’s approach to religious relations with the “Jews” in contrast to that of Benedict XVI:

[St. Cyril] drove out of Alexandria the Jews, who had formed a flourishing community there since Alexander the Great. But they had caused tumults and had massacred the Christians, to defend whom Cyril himself assembled a mob. This may have been the only possible defence, since the Prefect of Egypt, Orestes, who was very angry at the expulsion of the Jews was also jealous of the power of Cyril, which certainly rivaled his own. Five hundred monks came down from Nitria to defend the patriarch. In a disturbance which arose, Orestes was wounded in the head by a stone thrown by a monk named Ammonius. The prefect had Ammonius tortured to death, and the young and fiery patriarch honoured his remains for a time as those of a martyr. The Alexandians were always riotous as we learn from Socrates (VII, vii) and from St. Cyril himself (Hom. for Easter, 419). (Catholic Encyclopedia, St. Cyril of Alexandria)

http://www.zenit.org/article-20662?l=english

It should also be mentioned that St. Cyril of Alexandria lived during the time that the emperor Julian made a project of rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem in an attempt to overturn Christianity. The plan ended in failure and various historians from that period record that this was due to supernatural intervention. Needless to say, St. Cyril was no supporter of this early Zionist movement.

Benedict Praises St. Cyril of Alexandria

October 5, 2007

Continuing with Benedict’s series of talks on the Church Fathers, the latest talk addressing Church Doctor, St. Cyril of Alexandria:

Today, continuing our journey in the footsteps of the Fathers of the Church, we meet a great figure: St. Cyril of Alexandria. Linked to the Christological controversy that led to the Council of Ephesus in 431, and the last noteworthy representative of the Alexandrian tradition, Cyril was later defined in the East as the “custodian of accuracy” — in other words, a guardian of the true faith — and even the “seal of all the Fathers.”

These ancient expressions manifest something that is, in fact, characteristic of Cyril, that is, the constant references the bishop of Alexandria makes to preceding ecclesiastical authorities — including, above all, Athanasius — with the goal of showing the continuity of his own theology with tradition.

Cyril took care to ensure that his theology was firmly situated within the tradition of the Church, by which he sees the guarantee of continuity with the Apostles and with Christ himself …

http://www.zenit.org/article-20662?l=english

If only the same could be said for Benedict. Instead we hear praises for St. Cyril’s orthodoxy out of one side of Benedict’s mouth and the most heterodox theological speculations imaginable out of the other. Let us consider St. Cyril’s approach to religious relations with the “Jews” in contrast to that of Benedict XVI:

[St. Cyril] drove out of Alexandria the Jews, who had formed a flourishing community there since Alexander the Great. But they had caused tumults and had massacred the Christians, to defend whom Cyril himself assembled a mob. This may have been the only possible defence, since the Prefect of Egypt, Orestes, who was very angry at the expulsion of the Jews was also jealous of the power of Cyril, which certainly rivaled his own. Five hundred monks came down from Nitria to defend the patriarch. In a disturbance which arose, Orestes was wounded in the head by a stone thrown by a monk named Ammonius. The prefect had Ammonius tortured to death, and the young and fiery patriarch honoured his remains for a time as those of a martyr. The Alexandians were always riotous as we learn from Socrates (VII, vii) and from St. Cyril himself (Hom. for Easter, 419). (Catholic Encyclopedia, St. Cyril of Alexandria)

http://www.zenit.org/article-20662?l=english

It should also be mentioned that St. Cyril of Alexandria lived during the time that the emperor Julian made a project of rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem in an attempt to overturn Christianity. The plan ended in failure and various historians from that period record that this was due to supernatural intervention. Needless to say, St. Cyril was no supporter of this early Zionist movement.

Hopeless

September 26, 2007

More confused “traditional Catholic” journalism related to Orthodox Judaic rabbis; relativizing traditional Catholic prayers for conversion of Judaic souls with Judaic racist, “prayers” of self-glorification and derision of non-“Jews”; getting played by the dialectic between foaming-at-the-mouth Foxman and “reasonable” Rabbi Neusner …

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2007-0831-ecumenical_dialogue.htm

Rabbi Neusner posits a “fair” comparison between a Catholic prayer for the souls of Judaics and a racist, self-worshipping Judaic “prayer” of derision against non-“Jews” and a “traditional Catholic” journalist parrots that sophistry to his readers. And just as Rabbi Neusner, that “traditional Catholic,” out of ignorance or otherwise, God knows, makes no mention of the curse which Orthodox Judaics utter against Christians, birkat ha minim, three times daily as part of the shmoneh esre, or any of the mandatory Orthodox Judaic curses on Christian churches and graveyards.

There is a debate shaping up on this matter which is due to a great deal of sacrifice on the part of people other than “trads” like Alessio. That debate will not be won by sloppyness, half-measures and double-mindedness from “balanced” “traditional Catholics.”

Hopeless

September 26, 2007

More confused “traditional Catholic” journalism related to Orthodox Judaic rabbis; relativizing traditional Catholic prayers for conversion of Judaic souls with Judaic racist, “prayers” of self-glorification and derision of non-“Jews”; getting played by the dialectic between foaming-at-the-mouth Foxman and “reasonable” Rabbi Neusner …

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2007-0831-ecumenical_dialogue.htm

Rabbi Neusner posits a “fair” comparison between a Catholic prayer for the souls of Judaics and a racist, self-worshipping Judaic “prayer” of derision against non-“Jews” and a “traditional Catholic” journalist parrots that sophistry to his readers. And just as Rabbi Neusner, that “traditional Catholic,” out of ignorance or otherwise, God knows, makes no mention of the curse which Orthodox Judaics utter against Christians, birkat ha minim, three times daily as part of the shmoneh esre, or any of the mandatory Orthodox Judaic curses on Christian churches and graveyards.

There is a debate shaping up on this matter which is due to a great deal of sacrifice on the part of people other than “trads” like Alessio. That debate will not be won by sloppyness, half-measures and double-mindedness from “balanced” “traditional Catholics.”

Ferrara’s Rabbi Sponsor

July 26, 2007

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.

Ferrara’s Rabbi Sponsor

July 26, 2007

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.

The Vatican Instills the Double Mind; The Judaic Hermaphrodite god

June 26, 2007

Here is an example of how the Vatican incapacitates it’s followers by instilling within them a double-minded psychosis. The Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and The Pontifical Council for Culture produced a document in 2004 titied, “Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life (A Christian Relfection on the New Age)” which can be accessed at the Vatican’s website:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html

Within the document is the following insight into a belief held by many New Agers.

“The New Age which is dawning will be peopled by perfect, androgynous beings who are totally in command of the cosmic laws of nature. In this scenario, Christianity has to be eliminated and give way to a global religion and a new world order.”

This will be recognized as being correct by anyone who has studied the occult at any level of depth. The New Age teaches that man can return nature to paradise, it’s pre-fall state before there was male and female (conjunction of opposites, restoration of balance), and that man is obligated to work towards this end. But the Vatican leaves critical information out of it’s tome on the New Age. The stream of transmission for this occult belief within the Christian West is rabbinic Judaism, the religion of the hermaphrodite god who created the first man in it’s own image–as a hemaphrodite.

And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. (Genesis 1;27)

The rabbis interpret Genesis 1:27 to mean that Adam was created as a hermaphrodite (Er. 18a; Gen. R. 8:1; cf. also Jub. 2:14; 3:8). (Encyclopedia Judaica, “Adam”)

“Transmitted and developed through dualistic Gnosticism in the East, the notion of an androgynous creation was adopted by the (rabbinic) Haggadists in order to reconcile the apparently conflicting statements of the Bible. In Gen. ii. 7 and 18 et seq., the separate creations of man and of woman are described, while in chap. i. 27, “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them,” their creation is described as coincident.

“In connection with the latter verse the Midrash states (Gen. R. viii.): “Jeremiah, son of Eleazar, says: God created Adam androgynous, but Samuel, son of Naḥman, says, He created him ‘double-faced,’ then cutting him in twain and forming two backs, one to the one and the other to the second” (see Bacher, “Ag. Pal. Amor.” i. 547, iii. 585). The same statement is given in Moses ha-Darshan’s Bereshit Rabbati (“Pugio Fidei,” p. 446, Paris, 1651).

“The difference in the interpretation is that, according to Jeremiah’s opinion, Adam had both sexes, and was thus a real hermaphrodite in the old mythical sense, identical with that conception of Hermes in which he is understood to be the ‘logos alethinos,’ the son of Maya, the bisexual primeval man of the East … Nevertheless the view of R. Jeremiah is quoted by the Christian Fathers, who were at pains to refute this ‘Jewish fable.’ Augustine, in his commentary De Genesi ad Litteram 3:22, refers to it, and Strabo declared it to be ‘one of the damnable fables of the Jews.’
” (Jewish Encyclopedia, “Androgynos”)

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1508&letter=A

Rabbi Yeremiah, the son of Elazar, said, “When the Holy One—blessed be He!—created Adam, He created him an androgyne, for it is written (Gen. v. 2), ‘Male and female created He them.'” Rabbi Sh’muel bar Nachman said, “When the Holy One—blessed be He!—created Adam, He created him with two faces; then He sawed him asunder, and split him (in two), making one back to the one-half, and another to the other.” (Midrash Rabbah, chapter 8)

The Judaic work of redemption, Tikkun Olam, or repair of the world, which is the Judaic’s duty to bring about by his own devices according to the Kabbalistic view of the rabbis, involves restoring man to his pre-fall hermaphroditic state, and also the reunion of the dumb, impotent male aspect of the Judaic god, the En Soph, with it’s female counterpart, the Shekinah.

Redemption is no more than the external manifestation of the inner state of tikkun (“restitution”) which depends on the deeds of Israel and a realization of the way of life which the Kabbalah preaches. The fact of tikkun is not something which depends on a miracle, but rather on human action … [the Messiah’s] coming is conditional upon the accomplishment of the task of Israel in the “tikkun of the world.” According to this latter view, there is a human and historical preparation for redemption and the Messiah will come automatically if this preparation is completed. This belief is widespread among the disciples of Isaac Luria, and it follows logically from the basic assumptions of Lurianic Kabbalah. (Encyclopedia Judaica, “Redemption”)

The main concern of Lurianic Kabbalah, as has been mentioned, is with the details of the process of tikkun … certain concluding actions have been reserved for man. These are the ultimate aim of creation, and the completion of tikkun, which is synonymous with the redemption, depends on man’s performing them. Herein lies the close connection between the doctrine of tikkun and the religious and contemplative activity of man, which must struggle with and overcome not only the historic exile of the Jewish people but also the mystic exile of the Shekhinah …” (Encyclopedia Judaica, “Kabbalah”)

Walter Kasper’s mentor, Martin Buber relays the Kabbalistic myth of tikkun as it relates to the Judaic hermaphrodite god:

“If you direct the undiminished power of your fervor to God’s world-destiny… you will bring about the union between God and Shekhinah …” (Tales of the Hasidim; the Early Masters 1947).

So, from the Vatican we receive a condemnation of the occult hermaphrodite doctrine, but the rabbis who profess the very same doctrine are identified as our “elder brothers in the faith” with whom we have a “shared spiritual heritage.”

This is the double-mind par excellence.

Benedict XVI and his elder brother, Rabbi Marvin Heir of the Orwellian Simon Wiesenthal outfit engaged in a double-mind inducing ritual at the Vatican in November of 2005. In the presence of Benedict and with his endorsement the rabbi exhorted Christians to put the Kabbalistic doctrine of Tikkun Olam and restoration of balance into practice:

“We must do everything in our power to unite those tents of the righteous and the just to do our share of ‘Tikun Olam,’ so that we can restore the balance and return to our Creator, the magnificent world he intended.” (“Jewish-Catholic Ties Advancing Says Benedict XVI,” Zenit Nov. 14, 2005)

http://www.zenit.org/article-14540?l=english