The Papal Grave-Digger of Europe

By Michael Hoffman

The ideology of Neoplatonic Hermeticism gained firm purchase among members of the Catholic elite in Florence, Italy circa 1450; after that it entered the Vatican toward the end of the 15th century, and the papacy itself by 1515. It predates Hegel’s concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis by centuries. Among its most famous early Renaissance practitioners were Cosimo and Lorenzo Medici and Nicolo Machiavelli.

But what of the pope’s victory at Lepanto and the papal burning of the Talmud? Those events were akin to Pope Paul VI issuing Humane Vitae (his encyclical condemning artificial birth control) while suppressing the Tridentine Latin Mass. The thesis is visible but not the occult antithesis, and people are deceived.

The current thesis has Pope Francis announcing that a Muslim Mayor of London with connections to Sunni Wahhabist extremists, is good for Europe, while in the same interview he poses his antithesis: praising and offering support to the anti-Muslim Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

La Croix: "You received, on the past April 1st, Bp. Bernard Fellay, Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X. Is the reintegration of the Lefebvrists in the Church once again being considered?" 

Pope Francis: "In Buenos Aires, I always spoke with them. They saluted me, they asked for [my] blessing on their knees. They consider themselves Catholic. They love the Church. Bp. Fellay is a man with whom we can dialogue. It is not the case of other somewhat strange elements, such as Bp. Williamson, or others who have radicalized. I think, as I had expressed in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the path to full communion. During this Year of Mercy, it seemed that I should authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture...We dialogue well, we do a good work.” (End quote).

To  the Right wing of the Church he gives this approbation to the “traditional Catholic” SSPX. To the Left he lends his support to mass Sunni-Salafist migration to Europe. 

Pope Francis to La Croix:

"Coming back to the migrant issue, the worst form of welcome is to ‘ghettoize’them. On the contrary, it’s necessary to integrate them. In Brussels, the terrorists were Belgians, children of migrants, but they grew up in a ghetto…. I am thinking here of Pope Gregory the Great (pope from 590 – 604), who negotiated with the people known as barbarians, who were subsequently integrated. This integration is all the more necessary today since, as a result of a selfish search for well-being, Europe is experiencing the grave problem of a declining birth rate.” (End quote).

The terrorists congregate in a ghetto because their brand of Salafism demands a ghetto. It is not the fault of Europe. Some terrorists have been shown to have attended European universities often at the taxpayer’s expense, and yet still they return to their ghetto mentality and spew blood and fire upon the hand that fed them so generously.

Furthermore, Pope Gregory did not oversee the “integration” of barbarians into Europe in the sixth century. They were already there. They were mostly indigenous. Pope Gregory helped to organize the conversion of the barbarians. Only after they were converted  to Catholicism were they integrated, and not before. Don’t imagine that Francis is not familiar with these facts. He is playing a game. 

In the La Croix interview he purports to lament the declining birth rate of Europeans. This is a macabre jest. The pontiff has admonished Catholics for allegedly talking too much about abortion and contraception. He refused  to campaign against laws in Ireland and under his nose in Italy, conferring state recognition of marriage upon practicing homosexuals. He is on record referring disparagingly to Catholics with many children, saying they breed like rabbits. On May 19, on learning that pro-abortion politician Marco Pannella had died, the Papal spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi praised — in a written statement, not off the cuff —  the man who helped lead Italy in the 1970s to legalize abortion. [Rorate Caeli]

This writer will not be the only one to draw attention to the duplicity of Francis in these matters. But we will be mostly alone in raising the awareness that when the Pope issues these Janus-faced pronouncements and double-talk, he is doing so consonant with the 500-year-old tradition of Neoplatonic Hermeticism inside Rome. 

Because we have been sufficiently processed, the game is played now in the open, whereas in centuries past, of necessity it operated in a more clandestine context. In either case, the joke is on us.

Copyright©2016

Michael Hoffman's next book, “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome,” is due for publication this autumn.

____________

The Stone in the Synagogue's Shoe

By Michael Hoffman

www.revisionisthistory.org
(French translation follows below)

 Bishop Williamson

Below we reprint a report detailing the pleasure the World Jewish Congress has derived from news of the dismissal of Bishop Richard Williamson from the SSPX priest's fraternity.

Pope Benedict XVI does not dare to intervene in Talmudic affairs, such as, for example, to publicly chastize Shas "spiritual leader" Rabbi Ovadia Yosef for calling for the extermination of the Palestinians. The Vatican has surrendered to Orthodox Judaism and only maintains sufficient disagreement to bolster the facade that it represents the Church of Jesus Christ on earth.

Meanwhile, the Zionists have no compunction against shaping and influencing the Catholic Church through their power over the western media, and the chutzpah which fuels their conviction that they have the right to sanctimoniously lecture the gentiles.

As the following declaration makes clear, Bishop Fellay has done the will of the Talmudists in expelling Bishop Williamson.

True, Mr. Ronald Lauder, the billionaire scion of the Estee Lauder cosmetics firm, and Ronald Reagan's former US Ambassador to Austria, is not yet satisfied. It seems that the SSPX has not done enough. This is consonant with the rabbinic ideology concerning the goyim -- the incomplete nature of the soul of the gentile renders the actions of the gentile incomplete even when, with the best of intentions, they bow to the synagogue in abject submission.

The goyim, the pope and Bishop Fellay included, lack that special soul with which morally and racially superior Judaic persons are endowed. If you don't believe it, observe the fate of the thousands of sub-Saharan African immigrants in the Israeli state who are bound for indefinite detention in concentration camps in the Negev, precisely due to their alleged inferiority to the Holy People. No western nation on earth could get away with such draconian barbarity without earning international opprobrium and sanctions, yet the concentration camps for Blacks in "Israel" is not an issue in America, for Obama or Romney, or the media. This is in keeping with the Talmudic dictum: one law for the "Holy People" and another for everyone else.

Bishop Fellay may speak of Bishop Williamson's "disobedience" to Fellay, but philosophically that claim is bankrupt, since Fellay himself continues to defy the pope by refusing to submit to the jurisdiction of the local ordinaries in the dioceses where SSPX churches, schools and seminaries are located. Archbishop Lefebvre, the founder of the SSPX, taught that the salvation of souls, and not obedience to wayward authority, was the highest priority. Salvation of souls is Bishop Williamson's mandate. How then can Fellay, who is disobedient to the pope,  accuse Williamson of disobedience? The obedience issue is a smokescren which conceals a larger truth. This truth is most transparent in the German precincts of the SSPX.

Bishop Fellay is mirroring the idolatry and despotism of the German SSPX, which labors under Germany's  Muslim-like blasphemy laws, which protect the sacred relics of Holocaustianity from forensic examination, skepticism and ridicule. The means of this protection are Germany's dungeons, where heretics such as publisher Ernst Zundel, and erstwhile Max Planck chemist Germar Rudolf, have rotted for years. Consequently, the SSPX conforms to the demands of the false religion of Holocaustianity, and does not contest the holocaustolatry of its relics, id est, the “gas chambers." Consequently, Bishop Williamson, who blasphemed those relics, represented what Mafiosi term, "pietra di la scarpa," the stone in the shoe. The stone had to be removed from the synagogue's shoe.

Lauder: Williamson dismissal from Pius Brotherhood "too little too late" and not credible

24 October 2012

The head of the World Jewish Congress (WJC), Ronald S. Lauder, has welcomed the expulsion of Bishop Richard Williamson from the Catholic breakaway group Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) but said it should have been done years ago and “it does nothing to restore the credibility of this organization”.

Lauder declared: “It’s good that the hatemonger and Holocaust denier Williamson has finally been sent into the wilderness, but this is a decision the SSPX leadership should have taken years ago, when the cleric openly denied the existence of gas chambers. It is too little too late. The reasons now given for Williamson’s dismissal do not mention the damage this man has caused by spreading invective against Jews and others, be it from the pulpit, via his weekly newsletter and in his statements to the media.”

In a 1989 speech at Notre-Dame-de-Lourdes church in Sherbrooke, Canada, Williamson had claimed that “There was not one Jew killed in the gas chambers. It was all lies, lies, lies”. In an interview with Swedish television conducted in Germany in late 2008, he reaffirmed his view.

The WJC president said that although not all members of the SSPX were anti-Semites like Williamson, the group had yet to deal with the issue of anti-Semitism in its ranks and part ways with those “who continue to regard the Jews as the embodiment of the anti-Christ.” Lauder thanked Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal Kurt Koch, the Vatican official in charge of relations with the Jews, for their unequivocal condemnation of anti-Semitic tendencies in the church. “We know where the Vatican stands on this. What we don’t know is whether the SSPX leadership agrees with it. Until the Pius Brotherhood takes a clear stand they should not be readmitted into the fold of the Catholic Church,” Ronald Lauder pointed out.

The SSPX said in a statement issued on Wednesday: "Monseigneur Richard Williamson, having distanced himself from the leadership and the government of the Saint Pius X Society over a period of several years and refusing to show respect and obedience deserved by his legitimate superiors, has been declared excluded."

The fraternity of traditionalists who broke away from the Vatican more than two decades ago over its reforms said the decision had been reached on 4 October 2013. Williamson was one of four bishops who were consecrated by Bishop Marcel Lefebvre in Econe, Switzerland, in 1988 against the orders of Pope John Paul II, who later excommunicated them. In January 2009, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of the four.

“Thank Goodness the Williamson saga will soon be behind us, once the Regensburg court has decided on his conviction for Holocaust denial,” said Lauder.

For Further Research:

Oct. 23 column on the Expulsion of Bishop Williamson

Lu sur le site du révisionniste américain Michael Hoffman
(traduction TRES rapide):

La pierre dans la chaussure de la Synagogue

Ci-après on trouvera un article faisant état du plaisir éprouvé par le

Congrès juif mondial à l'annonce du renvoi de l'évêque Richard Williamson de

la Fraternité St Pie X [nous ne traduisons pas l'article en question: on le

trouvera sur le site indiqué ci-dessus]. 

   Le pape Benoît XVI n'ose pas intervenir dans les affaires talmudiques

comme, par exemple, réprimander publiquement le "chef spirituel" du Shass,

le rabbin Ovadia Yosef, quand ce dernier a appelé à l'extermination des

Palestiniens. Le Vatican a capitulé devant le judaïsme orthodoxe et

entretient juste ce qu'il faut de désaccord pour maintenir son apparence de

représentant de l'Eglise de Jésus-Christ sur la terre. 

   En revanche, les sionistes n'ont aucun scrupule à façonner et à

influencer l'Eglise catholique grâce au pouvoir qu'ils ont sur les médias

occidentaux et grâce à leur chutzpah [leur culot] qui fait d'eux des gens

persuadés d'avoir le droit de donner, mine de rien, des leçons aux gentils.

   Comme il appert dans les déclarations ci-dessous [voir le site], Mgr

Fellay a accompli la volonté des Talmudistes en excluant Mgr Williamson. 

   C'est vrai, Mr Ronald Lauder, rejeton milliardaire de la firme de

cosmétiques Estée Lauder et ancien ambassadeur américain de Ronald Reagan en Autriche, n'est pas encore satisfait. Il semble que la Fraternité n'en ait pas fait assez. C'est ce qui correspond à l'idéologie rabbinique relative

aux goyim : la nature incomplète de l'âme des gentils rend les actes de ces

gentils incomplets même si, avec les meilleures intentions du monde, ils

s'inclinent, dans une soumission abjecte, devant la synagogue. 

   Les goyim, le Pape et y compris Mgr Fellay sont dépourvus de cette âme

spéciale dont sont dotées les personnes juives moralement et racialement

supérieures. Si vous ne le croyez pas, voyez le sort des milliers d'immigrés

africains sub-sahariens qui, en Israël, sont condamnés à une détention sans

fin dans les camps de concentration du Negev, précisément du fait de leur

infériorité présumée par rapport au Peuple Saint. Face à une barbarie aussi

cruelle pas une nation occidentale sur terre ne pourrait s'en tirer sans

recueillir l'opprobre de toutes les nations et sans être l'objet de

sanctions, et pourtant ces camps de concentration pour Noirs en "Israël" ne

sont pas un problème en Amérique pour Obama ou pour Romney, ou pour les

médias, ce qui est en conformité avec le dicton talmudique: une loi pour le

"Peuple Saint" et une autre pour tous les autres. 

   Mgr Fellay peut bien parler de la "désobéissance" de Mgr Williamson,

mais philosophiquement cette allégation est nulle, puisque Fellay lui-même

continue à défier le Pape en refusant de se soumettre à la juridiction des

ordinaires locaux dans les diocèses où sont situés des églises, des écoles

et des séminaires de la Fraternité. Mgr Lefebvre, fondateur de la

Fraternité, a enseigné que la première des priorités était le salut des

âmes, et non pas l'obéissance à une autorité rebelle. Le salut des âmes, tel

est le mandat qu'a reçu Mgr Williamson. Mais alors comment Mgr Fellay, qui

désobéit au Pape, peut-il accuser Mgr Williamson de désobéissance? La

question de la désobéissance est un écran de fumée qui cache une vérité plus

grande. Cette vérité-là est plus que transparente dans les circonscriptions

allemandes de la Fraternité. 

   Mgr Fellay reflète l'idolâtrie et le despotisme de la Fraternité

allemande, qui oeuvre péniblement sous la férule des lois allemandes sur le

blasphème analogues aux lois musulmanes, qui protègent les reliques sacrées

de l'Holocaustianisme contre tout examen médico-légal, tout scepticisme et

toute dérision. Les moyens d'une telle protection, ce sont les cachots

allemands, où des hérétiques comme l'éditeur Ernst Zündel et le chimiste,

ancien du Max Planck Institute, Germar Rudolf ont moisi pendant des années. 

En conséquence, la Fraternité se conforme aux exigences de la fausse

religion de l'Holocaustianisme et ne conteste pas l'idolâtrie de ses

reliques, c'est-à-dire les "chambres à gaz". En conséquence encore, Mgr

Williamson, qui avait blasphémé ces reliques, représentait ce que les gens

de la Mafia appellent "la pietra della scarpa", la pierre de la chaussure.

Cette pierre, il fallait l'enlever de la chaussure de la synagogue.

+ + +

Pope puts Talmudic agent in charge of SSPX reconciliation

By Michael Hoffman • www.revisionisthistory.org

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) was founded by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in the 1970s as an international priestly fraternity dedicated to preserving the Catholic Church as it existed prior to the Second Vatican Council, including the official teaching on Judaism. Lefebvre was suspended by Pope Paul VI and later excommunicated, along with four of his bishops, by John Paul II. Lefebvre is deceased. Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of the four bishops but suspended one of them, Richard N. Williamson, until such time as he recants his publicly expressed doubts concerning the new Catholic "Shoah" theology of the the religion-of-Judaism-for-gentiles, i.e. Holocaustianity; Bishop Williamson has refused to recant. The prospect of the SSPX receiving canonical status within the post-Vatican II Church has led to a pressure campaign on the part of influential rabbis and Zionists (and their media toadies), to cause the pope to either cease and desist in the reconciliation, or to somehow neuter the SSPX witness concerning Judaism before the reconciliation occurs. 

Lately, the pope has enlisted a key ally, the SSPX Superior General, Bernard Fellay, in his crusade to end the independence of the SSPX (which some view as schismatic), and integrate them back into the Vatican sheepfold, supposedly with the right to fully engage in their traditional beliefs and practices without interference from the Vatican. For several years the SSPX under Fellay, despite obtuse media generalizations to the contrary, has softened the SSPX stand against Judaism. Rumors flew in the late spring to the effect that the pope and the SSPX under Fellay were about to forge a historic unity agreement. One suspects that the Israeli lobby ("Jewish circles internationally") went into overdrive at the prospect. The proposed unification is now in limbo. As a result, the thoroughly Talmudic, Bronx, NY-born Archbishop Di Noia has been assigned the job of shaping SSPX theology into one that will not too greatly offend the Holy People, so that the SSPX will agree to submit to the pope, and his continuation of Pope John Paul II's revolutionary doctrine on Judaism (and for that matter, on Islam, Voodoo and Hinduism, all of which the late pope radically altered in the name of ecumenism).

From the website of the Italian newspaper La Stampa:

A new chapter in the Society of St. Pius X saga

Archbishop Di Noia entrusted with role in forging path to reconciliation with Lefebvrians and warding off Catholic-Jewish misunderstandings

By Lisa Palmieri-Billig 

ROME • July 2, 2012 (Excerpt)

...The Archbishop is visibly pleased at the prospect of moving back to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as Vice Director of the Ecclesiae Dei Commission that handles relations Catholic traditionalist groups, including the controversial Fraternity of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). "I am happy to have been shown this level of trust by the Holy Father and to have this opportunity to offer some help in solving these concerns" he says. "My job will be a challenge. I am moved by the flurry of encouraging messages I have received from Vatican, Catholic, and Jewish circles internationally" he says.

What do you see as the major hurdle to overcome in the Church’s dialogue with the SSPX?

Di Noia: “Our difficulty with the SSPX is that they isolate passages of Vatican II documents from the context and main message of the Council.  In Jewish terms, the error is similar to trying to interpret a Biblical passage without referring to the centuries of oral and written rabbinical commentaries on its meaning.  The message becomes distorted and problematic.”

(Archbishop Di Noia is making the outrageous assertion that if one doesn't employ the Talmudic and post-Talmudic traditions to analyze Biblical passages, God's Word becomes "distorted and problematic." Jesus Christ and the Church Fathers taught precisely the opposite. -- Hoffman).

The SSPX is reported to have accused Jews of “deicide” and used anti-Semitic stereotypes such as the infamous canard of an international “Jewish conspiracy” on its multilingual sites and in statements by its leaders.  Such concepts are contrary to “Nostra Aetate” and all post-Vatican II Papal positions. The Holocaust-denying Bishop, Richard Williamson, may be the most flagrant example, but apparently he is not alone in espousing retrograde theology and ideology….How will you handle this?

Di Noia: “Regarding Williamson, Pope Benedicts XVIth took decisive actions against him because of his refusal to retract.  He was also disciplined by Bishop Fellay (leader of the SSPX), who dismissed him as Director of their Argentinian Seminary.

 “Anti-Judaism or anti-Semitism form no part of the official position of the SSPX. Clearly, if they manifest themselves in any Catholic Church, anywhere, this must be addressed. They were wrong a  thousand years ago and they are still wrong today.  If I discover such manifestations in the SSPX I will address them as being incompatible with Catholicism. After 3 years of dialogue we still need to understand what the SSPX position is on the Jewish Community and Judaism. 

“The Church’s deep commitment to reconciliation with the Jewish People is personified today by Benedict XVI. The Ecumenical Council wrought a fundamental change. Then John Paul II, above all others, brought home Paul’s message that Judaism and Jews have a unique place in salvation history. Nobody can deny that Karol Wojtyla’s Pontificate marked a major shift in the theological understanding of Judaism within the Catholic Church. Vatican II repudiated anti-Semitism and presented a positive picture of Judaism. John Paul II took us further in recognizing the significance of the Jewish People for Christianity itself. This is a new concept which we know the Traditionalists will not be able to accept immediately. Convincing them will take time, and in this respect we will have to be patient."

Your Excellence, The last sentence in the Note issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announcing your appointment as Vice President of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” states, “…the broad respect that Archbishop Di Noia enjoys in the Jewish community will help in addressing some issues that have arisen in the area of Catholic-Jewish relations as the journey towards the reconciliation of traditionalist communities has progressed.” I believe this denotes both Benedict XVIth’s sensitivity to the importance to both religions of our brotherly dialogue as well as his high consideration for your commitment to this area.  Can you tell us more about your background?

Di Noia: “Well, you know, I was brought up in the Bronx, in a neighborhood with many Jewish people. My older sister Rachel (note the Biblical name!) was actually the person who first inspired me to become familiar with Jewish religious customs, culture,  – and food!  I attended a private Catholic school whereas she went to a public high school and had many Jewish friends to whom she introduced me."

I am sure they appreciate the significance of your nomination.

Di Noia: "I believe so.”

If you would like to see the On the Contrary blog continue, please send a donation, or purchase an item from our revisionist history bookstore. Thank you.

_______________

Fatima Rabbi's Hate Cult: "Entire essence of the gentile is evil and impure"

Fatima Rabbi Mayer Schiller's Skver Sect Teaches its Children to Hate Non-'Jews': 

"Gentiles are wholly evil. They spiritually pollute the world"

Michael Hoffman's Note: Talmud teacher Mayer Schiller is one of Orthodox Judaism's most successful infiltrators of both the American right-wing, including American Renaissance, and the Roman Catholic Fatima movement led by Fr. Nicholas Gruner. Rabbi Schiller is a member and leading spokesman for the racist anti-goyimite Skver Hasidim of New York which, as the following documentation from the book Yalkut Shaiylos u’Teshuvos (endorsed by the Grand Rabbi of Skver) attests, adhere to the rabbinic dogma that all gentiles are irredeemably evil. Rabbi Schiller's virtuoso writing and speaking engagements in right wing circles are partly responsible for the widespread dissemination of the delusional notion that Talmudic Orthodox Judaism is a sincere ally of Christian conservatives and the pro-life "Family values" movement.

Catholic investigative reporter Maurice Pinay (http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/) writes as follows: 

From Failed Messiah we have a translation of a text of the Skver [also spelled "Skvere"] Hasidic sect. Rabbi Mayer Schiller who for decades has ingratiated himself with traditional Catholics and was even invited to speak at the SSPX seminary in Ridgefield Connecticut on numerous occasions, is a member and spokesperson for the Skver Hasidic sect. We have been warning against his cajolery for years to no notable effect. Mayer Schiller is featured in a Fatima video, "Heaven's Key to Peace" alongside traditional Catholicism's most respected pundits. 

Here are the master race teachings of hatred imparted to the youth of Rabbi Mayer Schiller's Skver Hasidic sect:

Exclusive: Hate All Non-Jews, Skvere Rabbis Say

A recently published book written by a Skvere hasidic rabbi and endorsed by the Skvere Rebbe himself tells Skvere hasidim and other Jews to hate all gentiles. Gentiles are wholly evil, the book says. They spiritually pollute the world, and even looking at their faces is harmful.

The book is called Yalkut Shaiylos u'Teshuvos. As the title indicates, it is a collection of questions and answers on halakhic (legal) topics. The questions were asked by young Skvere yeshiva students in New Square, New York. The answers are rabbinic.

The section translated below is titled, "Goyyim" and it explains the Skvere hasidic view of non-Jews, citing among other sources, the Skvere Rebbe himself.

The anti-gentile hatred is based on rabbinic sources. Those sources are heavily influenced by kabbalah and by hasidic thought.

A similar attitude toward non-Jews can be found in the Tanya, the so-called bible of Chabad hasidic thought written by the first rebbe of Chabad, Schneur Zalman of Liadi, and reprinted thousands of times by Chabad worldwide.

The translation was made by the noted filmmaker Menachem Daum, who sent it to me along with the scans of the book posted below and requested that I post it.

All remarks in square brackets [ ] are Daum's. All remarks in these brackets { } are Failed Messiah's. All text within normal parenthesis ( ) are the book's author's.

Question:  Is it appropriate to not love, or to hate, a gentile?

Answer:  A Jew is intrinsically good.  A Jew is a part of God above.  Even if at times he strays it is not because he has become evil.  It is only that there is evil within him that he has to cleanse.

However, to separate with a million degrees of separation, a gentile is an impure thing.  The entire essence of the gentile is evil and impure.  Even if he occasionally does good deeds he does not thereby become good.  As the Holy Light of Life {i.e., the author of the book Ohr HaHayyim] says regarding gentiles, even such a one who is very careful in his actions does not obtain any degree of holiness thereby.

As is also well known, even educated gentiles who guarded themselves because of their clear understanding of what is right, nonetheless failed when they were tested, because a gentile has no power for goodness within him.

On the contrary, the evil thoughts of gentiles contaminate the world’s atmosphere and create ordeals for Jewish children. As the Remnant for Pinchos {i.e., the author of the book Sheairit L’Pinchas} says, the thoughts of gentiles, even when they are dead, still linger in and contaminate the atmosphere.

He says that to be protected from this there is only one solution; to completely despise the thoughts of gentiles and to realize that all their thoughts are only evil. (Hate doesn’t mean wanting to do something to a gentile, but it means not being able to tolerate him, not being able to stand him, because of his great impurity, especially when one realizes how harmful this {impurity} is {to Jews and to the world}.) Understandably, loving a gentile is the exact opposite of this.

The Holy Light of Life {i.e., the author of the book Ohr HaHayyim} says that for a person to be totally protected from evil he must hate the thing that has caused him to sin. This is why God commanded to uproot the trees of Midian. Since the Midianites caused the Jews to sin with the Peor idol, so therefore Jews must hate everything connected to Midian. Consequently, gentiles, whose thoughts bring upon us ordeals, may be hated.

So also the Holy Light of Life {i.e., the author of the book Ohr HaHayyim} writes, in the portion of Vayigash {in his book entitled Oh HaHayyim}, that the nature of the righteous ones is to hate gentiles.

Speaking of gentiles it is worth mentioning two points. First, with respect to conversing with a gentile: a gentile is impure, as we have mentioned, and he defiles one who speaks to him and this brings evil upon a person. (Except when one is forced to do so because then, as is explained by the Enlightener of the Eyes {i.e., the author of the book Me’or Eynayim}, we thereby extract the little bit of good which has fallen into the gentile, since everything in the world is a mixture of evil and good.)

Especially if one converses with friendship, because the texts tell us that when two people speak with affection then a portion of each one’s soul becomes connected to the other and no one wants to become connected to a gentile, God forbid.  (Understandably, when one must converse one must do so like a human being.  However, in his heart one should not love him.  And it is worth knowing that “it is a well-known law that Esau [the gentile] hates Jacob [the Jew].” The gentile hates you.  It is only because of his ulterior motives that he is talking in a friendly manner, because it is in his best interests to do so at this moment, because of his job or for tens of others reasons. Even the righteous gentiles among the nations are often so because they hate inhumanity and murder but not because they love Jews.)

The second point is; one is not to concentrate on the face of a gentile. As the Willows of the Valley {the author of the book Arvei Nahal} writes on the Talmudic passage, “it is forbidden to look upon the face of an evildoer”, because the other side [the devil] {the sitra achra} cloaks himself in the guise of an evildoer and it is a danger to look at him. This passage refers to a Jew who has, God forbid, become an evildoer. Certainly, beyond any doubt, a gentile whose whole nature is essentially evil, looking at his appearance is defiling.

In the Abbreviated Set Table {Kitzur Shulkhan Arukh} it states that if one sees beautiful creatures, even a gentile, one makes a blessing. The Abbreviated Set Table {Kitzur Shulkhan Arukh}adds this is only if one caught a casual glimpse, however concentrating on a gentile is forbidden.

Once, in middle of the night, The Perfumed Bed {the author of the book Arugot Haboshem} sent a messenger to his son, the Jacob Speaks {i.e., the author of the book Vayagid Yaakov}, requesting he should immediately come over. He quickly came running and the Perfumed Bed {the author of the book Arugot Haboshem} looked upon him and told him he can now leave. He only called upon him since a gentile doctor was there earlier and he didn’t want that the last thing he sees before he sleeps to be a gentile, so he called him only to take a look at him.

Our Honorable Holy Teacher, Our Master, Our Guide, Our Rebbe [of Skver], may he live a long and good life, repeated in the name of the Maharal that gentiles are referred to as “wicked waters” while Jews are akin to fire. Naturally, when fire and water mix the water extinguishes the fire. However, when there is an iron barrier between them, for example, water in a pot, then on the contrary, the fire cooks and evaporates the water.  Similarly, if one has connections to a gentile the gentile can, God forbid, extinguish the fire in the soul. However, if one is separated in all matters then the Jewish soul will triumph.

The information in today’s ON THE CONTRARY is made possible by donations from readers and the sale of our books, newsletters and recordings.

***

What Can and Cannot be Discussed in the Catholic Church

Guest Op-Ed

by Maurice Pinay

St. Andrew's Day, Nov. 30, 2011

The Church Council Up for Discussion, Not "The Holocaust"

The Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, has given an 'interview' in his familiar style intended to dispel suspicions raised by his secretive negotiations with the suspicious characters in Rome where "there is no lack of indiscretions!" The 'interview' doesn't accomplish its goal.

The 'interview' is largely unremarkable: reassuring words, summary deflection of justified suspicion and criticism, summary dismissal of internet channels not under Fellay control, redirection of focus back onto an apparition claimed by 3 children in Portugal 100 years ago, reemploying the busywork of tens of millions of rosaries -- all very familiar and predictable. The 'interview' can be read here:

http://www.dici.org/en/news/interview-with-bishop-bernard-fellay-superior-general-of-the-society-of-st-pius-x-the-society-of-st-pius-x-and-the-doctrinal-preamble/

One item mentioned in the 'interview' is very relevant to us here. I quote: "... leeway has been allowed for a 'legitimate discussion' about certain points of the [Second Vatican] Council."

Note that the Novus Ordo Church allows 'discussion' of its own teaching. In this context, 'discussion' concerns doubts and outright denials. The SSPX denies that certain points contained within the authoritative documents of the Novus Ordo Church's Second Vatican Council can be reconciled with the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo has allowed the SSPX to present its case to this effect in doctrinal 'dialogues' over the past two years. The Novus Ordo is now negotiating an arrangement to bring the SSPX into 'full communion' while allowing discussion of doubts of its own authoritative teachings. 

This was also stated in a February 2009 statement from the Pope's Secretary of State: "... the Holy See will not fail, in ways judged opportune, to engage with the interested parties in examining outstanding questions, so as to attain a full and satisfactory resolution of the problems that caused this painful rupture."

Note, however, that this typically lenient allowance pertaining to the Novus Ordo's own teachings is immediately followed by a mandate in absolute terms virtually unseen in Rome in the past 100 years: 

"The positions of Bishop Williamson with regard to the Shoah are absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father ... In order to be admitted to function as a Bishop within the Church, Bishop Williamson must also distance himself in an absolutely unequivocal and public way from his positions regarding the Shoah ..."

Nota bene, it is not demanded that SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson absolutely and unequivocally publicly distance himself from his doubts regarding relativistic Novus Ordo teaching on religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism. These "outstanding questions" are open to "examination." No such questions or examination can be countenanced in the absolutist realm of "The Holocaust," however. Here we see the resurrection of the old ipse dixit and anathema that are otherwise entirely unheard of from Catholic prelates for nearly 100 years.

This is remarkable, is it not? In light of this, perhaps readers may understand where Rabbi Berenbaum is coming from when he says: “As I observe young people in relativistic societies seeking an absolute for morals and values, they now can view the Holocaust as the transcendental move away from the relativistic, and up into the absolute ..." (Source: Speech by Rabbi Berenbaum, Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust, January 26-28, 2000). 

How opportune for Rabbi Berenbaum and "The Holocaust" that the authorities of the Catholic Church hold "The Holocaust" to be absolute while Church teachings are ever increasingly relativised away.

Bishop Fellay certainly knows how to go with the relativist/absolutist flow of the Noahide Novus Ordo. Soon after the February 2009 statement from the Pope's Secretary of State was issued, Bp. Fellay was interviewed in the German magazine Der Speigel saying that he would cast Bp. Williamson out of the SSPX if he "denied" "The Holocaust" again:

SPIEGEL: So why don't you exclude Williamson from the society?

Fellay: That will happen if he denies the Holocaust again.

Bishop Fellay was just blending in with Pope Benedict who a month earlier had admonished Catholics not to "forget or deny" "The Holocaust." 

The dogma is propounded by Archbishop Reinhard Marx who proclaimed, “Every denial of the Holocaust must be punished harshly.” 

It is is also propagated by Cardinal Vingt-Trois who expounded, "Being a Catholic is radically incompatible with denying the Holocaust." 

Cardinal Kasper has announced, "No Holocaust denial can be allowed or permitted, It's absolutely clear that a Holocaust denier can't have a room, a space in the Catholic Church."

There may be space between the SSPX Superior and the Novus Ordo on religious liberty and a number of other matters, but not where "The Holocaust" is concerned, which Rabbi Ignaz Maybaum said "replaced Golgotha": 

"The Golgotha of modern mankind is Auschwitz. The cross, the Roman gallows, was replaced by the gas chambers...In Auschwitz, the Jewish people was the High Priest and the sacrificial lamb in one." - Rabbi Ignaz Maybaum, The Face of God After Auschwitz (1965), pp. 36 and 71.

Pope John Paul II affirmed that "The Holocaust" was "The Golgotha of the modern world."

On these points, Bishop Fellay and the Novus Ordo sing in perfect unison.

It seems to me a case of swallowing a very large camel while straining out gnats.

Maurice Pinay is the pen name of an Irish-American writer who blogs at http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com

-- ADVERTISEMENT —

Your assistance is solicited in distributing and publicizing two extraordinary books by Michael Hoffman: Judaism's Strange Gods (available for immediate shipment) and Judaism Discovered (the latter by special order only)

(A review of Judaism Discovered is online here. An e-book edition for the Amazon "Kindle" is for sale here).

Ask Ted Pike and Alex Jones to review, discuss or mention Judaism's Strange Gods, which was published this month.

_____________________________________________________________________________

To receive “On the Contrary" by e-mail, send an e-mail to hoffman[at]revisionisthistory.org with the subject: Subscribe Hoffman Wire. You will receive an invitation by return e-mail to which you must reply.

***

Rabbis Order the Pope to Condemn Bishop Williamson's Biblical Preaching

Editor's note: Bishop Richard Williamson's "Eleison Comments" column, grounded in Scripture and the position of the Catholic Church for one thousand nine hundred sixty-five years (until the Second Vatican Council), was published in On the Contrary on Oct. 14 ("How Can Pope Benedict Let Go of Ancient Truths?"). With the usual chutzpah, the Conference of European Rabbis is demanding today that the Catholic pope condemn a Catholic bishop for preaching Catholic truth.

When is the pope going to call on Judaics to condemn murderous, racist rabbis for preaching Talmudic lies?

 We support Bishop Williamson's right to publicly preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

_______________________

Pope called on to condemn bishop’s new anti-Semitic slur
October 19, 2011
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/10/19/3089896/controversial-catholic-bishop-makes-new-anti-semitic-remarks

Chief Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt

BERLIN (Jewish Telegraph Agency) -- A group of European rabbis has called on the pope to condemn the latest anti-Semitic remarks by a Holocaust-denying Catholic bishop.

The Brussels-based Conference of European Rabbis slammed comments by Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson in which he allegedly blamed Jews for deicide. Williamson, a member of the radical Catholic Pius Brotherhood sect, reportedly made the comments in the latest issue of his newsletter, “The Eleison Comments." He has  been living in London.

“Comments like these take us back decades to the dark days before there was a meaningful and mutually respectful dialogue between Jews and Roman Catholics,” conference President Chief Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt of Moscow said in a statement issued Wednesday.

Goldschmidt called for the Church to "suspend negotiations with extremist Catholic tendencies until it is clear that these groups show a clear commitment to tackling anti-Semitism within their ranks."

In his newsletter, Williamson wrote that “only the Jews were the primary agents of the deicide because Pontius Pilate would never have condemned Jesus if the Jews had not asked for blood.”

Williamson was found guilty of Holocaust denial in Germany in 2010 and fined about $14,000. He has previously denied the existence of gas chambers and the murder of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust.

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication against Williamson, but the Vatican also reportedly declared that "in order to be admitted to episcopal functions within the Church, (he) will have to take his distance, in an absolutely unequivocal and public fashion, from his position on the Shoah, which the Holy Father was not aware of when the excommunication was lifted."

During meetings with Pope Benedict in Berlin last month, German Jewish leader Dieter Graumann said that one of the issues that troubled Jewish-Catholic relations was the Church's refusal to condemn Williamson.

In his statement Wednesday, Goldschmidt said the pope "has shown a commitment to fostering a spirit of positive dialogue with Jews both before and during his papacy. But he must clearly show that there is no room in the Catholic Church for purveyors of hate."

________

Bishop Williamson's website:
http://www.dinoscopus.org
 ________

***

Bishop Richard Williamson goes on trial in Germany July 4

Michael Hoffman’s Note: Roman Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), who resides in London, England, is scheduled, on July 4, to have his appeal heard in Germany concerning his heresy trial. He is appealing the charge that he cast doubt on the modern West's most sacred relic, the alleged engine of destruction in Auschwitz. The following is from his weekly e-mail column. It appears below in English and in German and French translation.

Bishop Richard Williamson's Dinoscopus Column

ELEISON  COMMENTS  CCVI  (June 25, 2011):  CHOOSING  LAWYERS

These "Comments" do not usually tell of things personal, but on the eve of their writer's Appeal being heard in Germany (July 4), an UNTRUTH is circulating which needs to be set straight, amongst other things to allay unwarranted anxieties. The untruth is that I wish my defence against the German State's accusation of "racial incitement" to be based on the truth or falsehood of what actually happened in the most controversial episode of recent German history.

In fact from the moment I knew that I might be accused in Germany of "racial incitement" for remarks made in English to Swedish journalists in November of 2008, I also knew that if I repeated the remarks in front of a German law-court, I risked being immediately thrown into jail. Such is the present state of German law. However, I would rather not be decorated with chains, if I can help it.

So from the beginning I heeded the advice to defend myself on the basis that my remarks were self-evidently in no way intended for a German audience, and thus the German law did not apply to my situation. This much is clear from the last minute of the famous video-clip available on YouTube, which is the last several minutes of the one-hour interview with the Swedes. Moreover, immediately after those remarks, but off camera, I went up to the Swedes and earnestly asked them to be "discrete" in the use they would make of the last part of the interview. This much they would have to admit if they were to testify, but they cannot be forced to come to Germany, so they decline to do so.

As for my changing lawyers four times, the Society's Superior General originally entrusted my defence to the Society's lawyer, Maximilian Krah, who chose to engage Matthias Lossmann, a member of the, alas, anti-Catholic Green Party. He was conscientious but perhaps not too enthusiastic about the case. Through friends, I discovered a lawyer enthusiastic and highly successful in defending such delicate cases, Wolfram Nahrath, but Lossmann was unwilling to work with him. Seeking only the best legal counsel available to me in my quandary, I switched from Lossmann to Nahrath.

However, when the Superior General was informed by aides of Nahrath's political position, he ordered me to find someone else again, believing in good faith no doubt that any public association between the SSPX and "an extreme rightist" would be detrimental. He approved of the elderly and honorable Dr. Norbert Wingerter, a conservative Novus Ordo Catholic, but it appears that it could be Wingerter who is unwittingly the source of the untruth now in circulation. I do not know why, but he seems to be under the mistaken impression that I wanted to go, in front of the court, into the truth or untruth of that episode in German history. Fortunately the Superior General had already approved of yet another lawyer, who now understands correctly how I wish to be defended.

Dear readers, if you think that the interests of God are in any way at stake (not everybody thinks so), do say a prayer between now and July 4 for my latest lawyer who has been for several months working hard on the case, but who is liable to come under fierce pressure from anti-Catholic interests and their powerful servants.                                                  

Kyrie eleison.
+Richard Williamson

Dinoscopus is always sent free of charge, courtesy of True Restoration Press:
truerestoration@gmail.com

*******************************************************

ELEISON  KOMMENTARE  CCVI. (25. Juni 2011): ANWALTSWAHL    

Die Eleison Kommentare" berichten normalerweise nicht von persönlichen Dingen. Doch kurz vor dem Berufungsverfahren ihres Autors in Deutschland (am 4. Juli 2011) zirkuliert eine Unwahrheit, welche korrigiert werden muß, auch, um ungerechtfertigte Ängste zu zerstreuen. Diese Unwahrheit lautet, daß ich meine Verteidigung gegen den vom deutschen Staat erhobenen Vorwurf der ,,Volksverhetzung" darauf aufbauen möchte, was in der umstrittensten Zeit der jüngeren deutschen Geschichte tatsächlich oder nicht passiert ist.    

Von dem Moment an, da ich wußte, daß ich für meine englischsprachigen Bemerkungen gegenüber den schwedischen Journalisten im November 2008 vom deutschen Staat wegen ,,Volksverhetzung" angeklagt werden könnte, wußte ich tatsächlich auch, daß ich bei einer Wiederholung meiner Aussagen vor einem deutschen Gericht riskieren würde, sofort ins Gefängnis geworfen zu werden. Das ist der gegenwärtige Zustand des deutschen Rechts. Doch wenn ich es vermeiden kann, würde ich natürlich lieber nicht mit Leibketten geschmückt werden.     Deswegen wurde mir von Anfang an geraten, mich auf der Grundlage zu verteidigen, daß meine Aussagen selbstverständlich nicht für ein deutsches Publikum bestimmt waren und damit auch nicht vom deutschen Recht berührt werden. Soviel ist schon anhand der letzten Minute des bekannten Youtube-Videos offenkundig, welches die letzten paar Minuten meines einstündigen Interviews mit den Schweden zeigt. Darüber hinaus bat ich nach diesen Bemerkungen und bei abgeschalteter Kamera die Schweden ernstlich, diesen letzten Teil des Interviews nur auf, "diskrete" Weise zu verwenden.

Wenigstens das müßten sie zugeben, wenn sie aussagen würden - doch können sie nicht gezwungen werden, nach Deutschland zu kommen, und daher lehnen sie ein Erscheinen ab.

Über meine wechselnden Anwälte: Ursprünglich vertraute der Bruderschafts-Generalobere meine Verteidigung dem Bruderschafts-Anwalt Maximilian Krah an, welcher sich entschied, Matthias Loßmann zu engagieren. Dieser ist Mitglied der ( leider ) antikatholischen Partei,Die Grünen" und verrichtete die Arbeit zwar gewissenhaft, war aber vom Fall vielleicht nicht allzu sehr begeistert. Über Freunde entdeckte ich den Anwalt Wolfram Nahrath, welcher die Verteidigung solch heikler Fälle begeistert und sehr erfolgreich vornimmt. Doch Loßmann wollte mit Nahrath nicht zusammenarbeiten, und weil ich in meinem Dilemma nur die beste Rechtsverteidigung suchte, wechselte ich von Loßmann zu Nahrath.    

Als jedoch der Generalobere von seinen Beratern über Nahraths politische Stellung informiert wurde, befahl er mir, wieder jemand anderen zu finden - sicherlich im guten Glauben daran, daß jede öffentliche Verbindung zwischen der Priesterbruderschaft St. Pius X. und einem ,,extrem Rechten" abträglich wäre. Also billigte der Generalobere den älteren und ehrenvollen Dr. Norbert Wingerter, welcher ein konservativer ,,Novus Ordo"-Katholik ist. Doch anscheinend ist Wingerter unwissentlich die Quelle für die eingangs erwähnte, zirkulierende Unwahrheit. Ich weiß nicht warum, aber er scheint unter dem falschen Eindruck zu stehen, daß ich vor Gericht auf dem Wahrheits- oder Unwahrheitsgehalt der erwähnten Episode in der deutschen Geschichte beharren wollte. Gluecklicherweise hatte der Generalobere bereits einen weiteren Anwalt erlaubt, welcher nunmehr gut versteht, wie ich vor Gericht verteidigt werden will.

Liebe Leser, wenn Sie denken, daß bei dem Ganzen die Interessen Gottes in irgendeiner Weise auf dem Spiel stehen (nicht jeder denkt dies), so bitte ich für meinen neuen Anwalt um ein Gebet zwischen jetzt und den 4. Juli 2011. Dieser Anwalt hat seit vielen Monaten hart an diesem Fall gearbeitet, aber riskiert dabei, unter heftigen Druck zu geraten durch antikatholische Beteiligte und ihre mächtigen Knechte.                               

Kyrie eleison.
+Richard Williamson          
************************************************************

COMMENTAIRE  ELEISON  (25 juin, 2011):  UN  CHOIX  D'AVOCATS  

Ce « Commentaire » ne s'occupe pas normalement de questions propres à son auteur, mais à la veille de son Appel qui doit s'entendre en Allemagne le 4 juillet, une contre-vérité circule qui a besoin d'être corrigée pour entre autres choses apaiser des anxiétés sans fondement. La contre-vérité, c'est que pour me défendre contre l'accusation d' « incitation raciale » que me porte l'Etat allemand, je veux que le tribunal examine la vérité ou fausseté historique de ce qui s'est passé dans cet épisode le plus controversé de toute l'histoire récente de l'Allemagne.  

De fait, dès le moment où j'ai su que l'on pourrait m'accuser en Allemagne d'avoir commis, par certains propos que j'avais tenus aux journalistes suédois en novembre de 2008, cette  « incitation raciale », je me suis rendu compte aussi que si je tenais devant un tribunal allemand des propos pareils, je courrais le risque de me faire jeter séance tenante en prison. Tel est l'état actuel des lois allemandes et des tribunaux allemands. Or, je ne tiens pas spécialement à me faire orner de chaines, si je peux l'éviter.  

Alors dès le début de l'« affaire Williamson » j'ai suivi le conseil de me faire défendre en faisant valoir que ces propos ne visaient aucun auditoire allemand, et donc la loi en question ne s'appliquait pas à mon cas. Ceci est évident si l'on regarde la dernière minute de l'extrait du film de l'interview faite par les Suédois qui est devenu célèbre sur YouTube. De plus, tout de suite après que la caméra eut cessé de tourner, je les ai abordés directement pour leur demander très sérieusement d'être « discrets » dans l'usage qu'ils feraient de cette dernière partie de l'interview. S'ils venaient à témoigner en Allemagne ils devraient admettre tout cela. Dans la mesure où on ne peut pas les y forcer, ils refusent de se rendre en Allemagne.  

Et pourquoi ai-je changé si souvent d'avocat?  A l'origine le Supérieur Général de la Fraternité St Pie X a confié ma défense à l'avocat de la Maison Généralice, Me Maximilian Krah, qui a choisi à son tour un membre du parti anticatholique - hélas -- des « Verts » pour le remplacer, Me Lossmann. Celui-ci s'est acquitté de sa tâche consciencieusement mais peut-etre sans trop d'enthousiasme. Grâce à des amis, j'ai repéré un avocat enthousiaste et habitué à gagner des cas si délicats, Me Nahrath, mais Me Lossmann n'a pas voulu collaborer avec lui. Dans le besoin pressant d'un bon avocat, j'ai donné mandat à Me Nahrath. Mais dès que le Supérieur Général eut été renseigné par ses adjoints de la position politique de Me Nahrath, il m'a ordonné de trouver encore quelqu'un d'autre. Sans doute croyait-il de bonne foi que toute association publique avec un «extrémiste de droite» ferait du tort à la Fraternité. Il a approuvé l'avocat suivant, l'honorable Dr. Norbert Wingerter, catholique conservateur de l'Eglise officielle. Etant sous la fausse impression, je ne sais comment, que je voulais engager le tribunal dans la question de la vérité ou fausseté de ces événements controversés de l'histoire allemande, c'est le Dr. Wingerter qui serait à la source, sans s'en rendre compte, de la contre-vérité qui circule. Heureusement le Supérieur Général avait déjà approuvé un cinquième avocat qui comprenait bien comment je voulais me faire defendre.  

Chers lecteurs, si vous pensez que dans cet Appel il y va de quelque façon que ce soit des intérêts de Dieu - pas tous ne le pensent - dites d'ici le 4 juillet une prière pour mon avocat actuel qui travaille dur sur le cas depuis plusieurs mois, mais qui risque d'avoir à affronter une pression forte de la part de puissants eennemis de la Foi, et de leurs serviteurs.  

Kyrie eleison.
+Richard Williamson

*********************************************************