Archive for the ‘Latin Mass’ Category

Bishop Slattery Takes Place of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos at D.C. Pontifical Latin Mass

April 22, 2010

Bishop Slattery, like Pope Benedict XVI, is hailed by neotraditionalists as a champion of tradition because he says the Novus Ordo Mass ad orientem. Can they be unaware of Bishop Slattery’s Judaizing liturgical alchemy? Or is it that they don’t care?

“There’s nothing in Catholic teaching or law that would prevent a group from having a seder meal to teach the faithful the origins of our own Mass, which comes from the seder.” (Bishop Edward J. Slattery)

In fact, the Haggadah, the liturgy used at seders, began to be formulated in the Talmudic Era, centuries after Christ’s Last Supper. The Haggadah as it exists today–as it is now celebrated in Catholic parishes around the world–dates only to the 13th century A.D. The traditional Mass does not “come from the seder,” although it is accurate to say that parts of the Novus Ordo Mass of 1969 do. I doubt that Bishop Slattery wants this distinction to be known. As we have seen from other modern prelates of high position, including the Pope, they want Catholics to believe that rabbinic tradition is an authentic continuation of the religion of the faithful Israelites of the Bible and for Catholics to involve themselves in these traditions. There could be no worse deception than this, as Pope Innocent IV observed, through the rabbis’ traditions, they render souls utterly alien from the law and the prophets, a fact which was later documented so thoroughly by Johannes Eisenmenger in his masterwork, Entdecktes Judenthum that no defense, other than censorship and ad hominem, has even been attempted against it.

For this rabbi enabler to be offering a traditional Latin Mass in the place of the sex predator enabler, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, is no less a scandal. Protect your children, body and soul, from these treacherous men.

Advertisements

Pius XII, Bishop Williamson Media Controversies are Theatre for Peasants, No Impediment to ‘Dialogue’

January 22, 2010

For all his insight, the author will not acknowledge that the rabbis bluff when they threaten to withdraw from ‘dialogue’–the vehicle by which their nefarious goals against the Church are advanced–or that the rabbis’ helpers in the establishment press have interests other than selling newspapers.

Exaggerations for Dubious Ends

Edward Pentin – NCR

Friday, January 22, 2010

After a week in which Pope Benedict XVI visited the Great Synagogue of Rome and the Vatican and the Rabbinate of Israel held their regular annual meeting, Catholic-Jewish relations are looking considerably healthy – much more so than it might appear in some of the mass media.

As mentioned in an earlier post, whatever the controversies affecting the dialogue, relations usually continue much as they did before, largely thanks – as the Holy Father noted in his synagogue address – to advances in dialogue emanating from the Second Vatican Council’s declaration Nostra Aetate.

Rabbi David Rosen, director of the American Jewish Committee’s Department for Interreligious Affairs, called the Pope’s visit to Rome’s synagogue “a genuine milestone, putting many fears and suspicions to rest and reinvigorating the historic transformation of this relationship in our times.” He noted what he called a warm, impressive and festive atmosphere which he said was a “public expression of already well established friendships between Catholic and Jewish leadership present.”

Of course, the well trodden controversies over Pius XII, Richard Williamson and the Good Friday prayer of the Traditional Latin Mass have, rightly or wrongly, been of real concern to many Jews. Yet their real impact on dialogue is actually minor. During this week’s bilateral commission between the Vatican and Rabbinate of Israel – a meeting that included a number of very senior Judaic and Church leaders – the dispute over Pius was never raised. More important were the areas the two faiths hold in common.

“These controversies are important for the mass media, but not for our dialogue,” said Father Norbert Hoffman, the Secretary of the Vatican Commission on Religious Relations with Judaism. ”We didn’t talk about the Pius matter at all during this [commission] meeting. Of course this issue exists but it doesn’t exist in the sense that the media think it would be on the table.” He added the final assessment of the delegation of the Chief Rabbinate was that the Pope’s visit to the synagogue was “very successful.”

Earlier this week, the [Judaic advocate of dungeon sentences for non-believers of “Holocaust” dogmas who is located in France], Bernard-Henri Lévy, denounced what he said were media caricatures of Benedict XVI and Pius XII in their dealings with Jews, saying their words and deeds belied their media portrayals.

All of which further points to what many have long suspected: that certain individuals and groups, not only within the mass media but elsewhere, are sadly exaggerating and exploiting Catholic-Jewish differences to suit their own ends, whether it be to sell newspapers or, more seriously, for a variety of nefarious goals directed against the Church.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/exaggerations_for_dubious_ends/

A Point of Interest for Latin Mass Community in Sungenis/Catechism Controversy

September 23, 2008

For those who are unaware, this controversy is outlined in depth in the PDF from Robert Sungenis linked below, which I would comment on briefly only to say that this analysis is better than usual from Mr. Sungenis. I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment that the USCCB’s adoption of a scriptural passage as a replacement for the previous heretical statement is a clever cover for the same idea. Benedict used the same technique in his Latin prayer for “the Jews” which I commented on back in February of this year HERE. These guys love to run amok within St. Paul’s very difficult letter to the Romans. They’d throw the rest of the New Testament out and keep only that if they could, it seems.

I still challenge Robert Sungenis, or anyone else for that matter, to either present proof that Abe Foxman and company are genetic descendants of Jacob or cease referring to them as “Jews.”

Now, what should interest the Latin Mass community is the fact that the Fr. James Massa who Robert Sungenis refers to throughout the PDF linked to above was assigned by a bishop in the NY diocese to a longstanding Latin Mass community shortly before he was promoted to his present position as executive director of the USCCB Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs. He continues to offer the Latin Mass at the same location to this day. With that in mind, I recommend reading:

More Confusion on Page 131 of the USCCB Catechism, Robert A. Sungenis

and then read:

Tridentine Judaism

and:

Cardinal Jean-Pierre Ricard of Ecclesia Dei Commission Studying Talmud at NY Yeshiva

A Point of Interest for Latin Mass Community in Sungenis/Catechism Controversy

September 23, 2008

For those who are unaware, this controversy is outlined in depth in the PDF from Robert Sungenis linked below, which I would comment on briefly only to say that this analysis is better than usual from Mr. Sungenis. I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment that the USCCB’s adoption of a scriptural passage as a replacement for the previous heretical statement is a clever cover for the same idea. Benedict used the same technique in his Latin prayer for “the Jews” which I commented on back in February of this year HERE. These guys love to run amok within St. Paul’s very difficult letter to the Romans. They’d throw the rest of the New Testament out and keep only that if they could, it seems.

I still challenge Robert Sungenis, or anyone else for that matter, to either present proof that Abe Foxman and company are genetic descendants of Jacob or cease referring to them as “Jews.”

Now, what should interest the Latin Mass community is the fact that the Fr. James Massa who Robert Sungenis refers to throughout the PDF linked to above was assigned by a bishop in the NY diocese to a longstanding Latin Mass community shortly before he was promoted to his present position as executive director of the USCCB Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs. He continues to offer the Latin Mass at the same location to this day. With that in mind, I recommend reading:

More Confusion on Page 131 of the USCCB Catechism, Robert A. Sungenis

and then read:

Tridentine Judaism

and:

Cardinal Jean-Pierre Ricard of Ecclesia Dei Commission Studying Talmud at NY Yeshiva

A Response to Comments on Tridentine Judaism

February 25, 2008

Concerning the last blog posting, Tridentine Judaism, a reader has commented:

If you search Newadvent.org the term shekinah does come up in a few searches. Could this be the result of an ignorance of the origin of Shekinah or is the author of this blog jumping to conclusions?

The 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia makes reference to the rabbinic texts in numerous instances. There is certainly a familiarity with the rabbinic texts there. Whether the writers/editors of the Catholic Encyclopedia knew of the rabbinic origin of “Shekinah” I cannot say. I can tell you with great certainty that the “Shekinah” is a non-biblical, post-Temple rabbinic invention. Its source is the Targum Onkelos which scholars date between 100-400 A.D. It is very likely a rabbinic reinvention/preservation of the pagan goddess that the apostate Israelites worshiped (Jeremias 7;18, Jeremias 44;17).

Am I overreacting? As I see it, Fr. Finigan, at least figuratively, perhaps unwittingly, is putting Asherah back in the Temple with his use of the term “Shekinah” in reference to the sanctuary. This is an abomination.

I would add that the logic behind the comment seems to be that the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, which predates Vatican II by several decades, is a solid test of orthodoxy by that fact. I’m sorry to say that if this is the thinking behind the comment, it is flawed. The errors that we’re dealing with here go back centuries before Vatican II to the medieval and renaissance “Christian” Cabalists (Johannes Reuchlin, Pico della Mirandola, et al) who believed that post-Temple rabbinic texts, mysticism, gematria and other rabbinic exegetical methods could be incorporated into Christianity. This movement was largely pushed underground by the Council of Trent but was never fully stamped out. Today, this thinking has the endorsement of the Vatican and Benedict himself as documented here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/05/vatican-christians-can-learn-much-from.html

The Vatican recommends that Christians learn from post-Temple rabbinic texts which they say are of great value for interpreting both the Old and New Testaments. So, Fr. Finigan is really only acting as the Vatican encourages all Catholics to do when he incorporates post-Temple rabbinic concepts into Catholic tradition. The title of his blog, “The Hermeneutic of Continuity” is really quite telling in this regard. I anticipate more of this kind of diabolical Tridentine Judaism to come from the priests whose concept of obedience is more akin to that of Masonry or the Mafia than the Gospel, or who don’t know the difference between Catholic and rabbinic tradition to begin with.

A Response to Comments on Tridentine Judaism

February 25, 2008

Concerning the last blog posting, Tridentine Judaism, a reader has commented:

If you search Newadvent.org the term shekinah does come up in a few searches. Could this be the result of an ignorance of the origin of Shekinah or is the author of this blog jumping to conclusions?

The 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia makes reference to the rabbinic texts in numerous instances. There is certainly a familiarity with the rabbinic texts there. Whether the writers/editors of the Catholic Encyclopedia knew of the rabbinic origin of “Shekinah” I cannot say. I can tell you with great certainty that the “Shekinah” is a non-biblical, post-Temple rabbinic invention. Its source is the Targum Onkelos which scholars date between 100-400 A.D. It is very likely a rabbinic reinvention/preservation of the pagan goddess that the apostate Israelites worshiped (Jeremias 7;18, Jeremias 44;17).

Am I overreacting? As I see it, Fr. Finigan, at least figuratively, perhaps unwittingly, is putting Asherah back in the Temple with his use of the term “Shekinah” in reference to the sanctuary. This is an abomination.

I would add that the logic behind the comment seems to be that the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, which predates Vatican II by several decades, is a solid test of orthodoxy by that fact. I’m sorry to say that if this is the thinking behind the comment, it is flawed. The errors that we’re dealing with here go back centuries before Vatican II to the medieval and renaissance “Christian” Cabalists (Johannes Reuchlin, Pico della Mirandola, et al) who believed that post-Temple rabbinic texts, mysticism, gematria and other rabbinic exegetical methods could be incorporated into Christianity. This movement was largely pushed underground by the Council of Trent but was never fully stamped out. Today, this thinking has the endorsement of the Vatican and Benedict himself as documented here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/05/vatican-christians-can-learn-much-from.html

The Vatican recommends that Christians learn from post-Temple rabbinic texts which they say are of great value for interpreting both the Old and New Testaments. So, Fr. Finigan is really only acting as the Vatican encourages all Catholics to do when he incorporates post-Temple rabbinic concepts into Catholic tradition. The title of his blog, “The Hermeneutic of Continuity” is really quite telling in this regard. I anticipate more of this kind of diabolical Tridentine Judaism to come from the priests whose concept of obedience is more akin to that of Masonry or the Mafia than the Gospel, or who don’t know the difference between Catholic and rabbinic tradition to begin with.

Tridentine Judaism

February 25, 2008

The blog titled The Hermeneutic of Continuity authored by a Fr. Tim Finigan utilizes curious terminology which I have recently witnessed in use by other nominally Catholic authors. Fr. Finigan publishes a lovely image of a traditional Latin High Mass with incense wafting through the sanctuary with the following caption:

“… The first [image] is of the sanctuary during the Canon of the Mass. The incense is a fitting symbol of the shekinah, the cloud of the presence and the glory of God.”

http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2007/05/press-photos-from-birmingham-oratory.html

One wonders where Fr. Finigan picked up the feminine noun “Shekinah” and the association of this feminine noun with God. I do know that he has not found it in the Bible, New Testament or Old. I also know he has not found it anywhere in the traditional Church canon. I can offer a few suggestions as to where the use of that rabbi-fabricated feminine noun may have been picked up–the rabbinic texts; Midrash, Talmud, Zohar, etc., perhaps some Masonic handbook, or perhaps it was some silly Judaizing pop-culture source such as The Da Vinci Code. In any case, it is sad, but not surprising to see this ridiculous rabbinic concept in use by a traditionalist priest.

The “Shekinah” is the female aspect of the dualistic male/female god of Judaism and Masonry:

Shekhinah is feminine, and She is a part of Masonry whether we want to admit it or not, if for no other reason than she represents LIGHT. In Hebrew tradition, Shekhinah is the Feminine face/aspect of god. She was the ancient Hebrew Goddess of wisdom and joy, the feminine part of Yahweh, and the light that dwelt within everything. She lived at the root of the Tree of Life, residing within the acacia, the tree that produces gum arabic, the glue that holds the world together. Her foundations can be traced back to the early Goddess imagery of Asherah and Astarte.

http://www.americanmason.com/articlemain.ihtml?ID=152

More on the rabbi-fabricated “Shekinah” here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/02/vatican-lesson-on-shekinah.html

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/06/vatican-instills-double-mind.html

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/06/777.html

Tridentine Judaism

February 25, 2008

The blog titled The Hermeneutic of Continuity authored by a Fr. Tim Finigan utilizes curious terminology which I have recently witnessed in use by other nominally Catholic authors. Fr. Finigan publishes a lovely image of a traditional Latin High Mass with incense wafting through the sanctuary with the following caption:

“… The first [image] is of the sanctuary during the Canon of the Mass. The incense is a fitting symbol of the shekinah, the cloud of the presence and the glory of God.”

http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2007/05/press-photos-from-birmingham-oratory.html

One wonders where Fr. Finigan picked up the feminine noun “Shekinah” and the association of this feminine noun with God. I do know that he has not found it in the Bible, New Testament or Old. I also know he has not found it anywhere in the traditional Church canon. I can offer a few suggestions as to where the use of that rabbi-fabricated feminine noun may have been picked up–the rabbinic texts; Midrash, Talmud, Zohar, etc., perhaps some Masonic handbook, or perhaps it was some silly Judaizing pop-culture source such as The Da Vinci Code. In any case, it is sad, but not surprising to see this ridiculous rabbinic concept in use by a traditionalist priest.

The “Shekinah” is the female aspect of the dualistic male/female god of Judaism and Masonry:

Shekhinah is feminine, and She is a part of Masonry whether we want to admit it or not, if for no other reason than she represents LIGHT. In Hebrew tradition, Shekhinah is the Feminine face/aspect of god. She was the ancient Hebrew Goddess of wisdom and joy, the feminine part of Yahweh, and the light that dwelt within everything. She lived at the root of the Tree of Life, residing within the acacia, the tree that produces gum arabic, the glue that holds the world together. Her foundations can be traced back to the early Goddess imagery of Asherah and Astarte.

http://www.americanmason.com/articlemain.ihtml?ID=152

More on the rabbi-fabricated “Shekinah” here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/02/vatican-lesson-on-shekinah.html

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/06/vatican-instills-double-mind.html

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/06/777.html

Rabbi Rosen of AJC Reassures "World Jewry" on Vatican Compliance

July 15, 2007

Jul. 14, 2007 22:56 | Updated Jul. 15, 2007 9:04

Mix realism with humility

By DAVID ROSEN

The directive issued this week by Pope Benedict XVI concerning the use of the traditional Catholic Latin (Tridentine) Mass has led to some extreme reactions. As a result there have been suggestions, echoed uncritically in the media, that there is some kind of new Catholic initiative for the conversion of Jews, and that Jewish-Catholic relations are regressing.

This is completely incorrect.

To begin with, the pope has reiterated time and again his commitment to close, respectful relations with Judaism and the Jewish people, which he has reemphasized as unique for the church, as Judaism and the Jewish people are its very foundations. He has already received numerous Jewish leadership groups, and began to do so even before receiving Protestant groups, let alone delegations from other religions.

The Catholic Church has rejected proselytism and since the second Vatican Ecumenical Council in the sixties has abandoned any institutional “mission to the Jews.”

The church has not changed its position on these matters …

We [at the American Jewish Committee] received reassurances in the course of the past months from the Vatican, and in the Pope’s guidelines there is in fact a restriction on the use of the Latin Mass during the days preceding Easter, which is when the prayer for the conversion of the Jews was recited. Yet it is not clear how extensive this limitation is, and we have accordingly asked the Vatican to issue a clarification that we hope will confirm that there is no official warrant whatsoever for reciting that text

THE CATHOLIC Church has a commission to promote relations with World Jewry. Its primary partner is the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations, which I chair. It also has a Bilateral Commission with the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, which meets regularly and has further strengthened ties between Israel and the Vatican. Next year’s Synod of Bishops will focus on the way Scripture should be taught and preached in order to avoid any anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic prejudices.

All this shows that we have made enormous strides in these bilateral relations … (Rabbi David Rosen, International Director of Interreligious Affairs of the American Jewish Committee, Jerusalem Post July 14, 2007)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1184168563451&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Rabbi Rosen of AJC Reassures "World Jewry" on Vatican Compliance

July 15, 2007

Jul. 14, 2007 22:56 | Updated Jul. 15, 2007 9:04

Mix realism with humility

By DAVID ROSEN

The directive issued this week by Pope Benedict XVI concerning the use of the traditional Catholic Latin (Tridentine) Mass has led to some extreme reactions. As a result there have been suggestions, echoed uncritically in the media, that there is some kind of new Catholic initiative for the conversion of Jews, and that Jewish-Catholic relations are regressing.

This is completely incorrect.

To begin with, the pope has reiterated time and again his commitment to close, respectful relations with Judaism and the Jewish people, which he has reemphasized as unique for the church, as Judaism and the Jewish people are its very foundations. He has already received numerous Jewish leadership groups, and began to do so even before receiving Protestant groups, let alone delegations from other religions.

The Catholic Church has rejected proselytism and since the second Vatican Ecumenical Council in the sixties has abandoned any institutional “mission to the Jews.”

The church has not changed its position on these matters …

We [at the American Jewish Committee] received reassurances in the course of the past months from the Vatican, and in the Pope’s guidelines there is in fact a restriction on the use of the Latin Mass during the days preceding Easter, which is when the prayer for the conversion of the Jews was recited. Yet it is not clear how extensive this limitation is, and we have accordingly asked the Vatican to issue a clarification that we hope will confirm that there is no official warrant whatsoever for reciting that text

THE CATHOLIC Church has a commission to promote relations with World Jewry. Its primary partner is the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations, which I chair. It also has a Bilateral Commission with the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, which meets regularly and has further strengthened ties between Israel and the Vatican. Next year’s Synod of Bishops will focus on the way Scripture should be taught and preached in order to avoid any anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic prejudices.

All this shows that we have made enormous strides in these bilateral relations … (Rabbi David Rosen, International Director of Interreligious Affairs of the American Jewish Committee, Jerusalem Post July 14, 2007)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1184168563451&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull