Showing posts with label Babylonian Talmud nullifies the Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Babylonian Talmud nullifies the Law. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

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.
_______________

Thursday, February 16, 2012

The Real Sin of Sodom (According to the Talmud) 

Source: New Jersey Jewish News, Feb. 15, 2012

Rabbi David Greenstein of Congregation Shomrei Emunah, a Conservative congregation in Montclair, New Jersey, compared opponents of gay marriage to inhabitants of Sodom. "The real sin of Sodom," he said, citing the Talmud, is "to be opposed to someone deriving a benefit where their derivation of benefit causes no harm. People opposed to this bill are the true Sodomites." 
 
For further reference:
"NJ Senate Judiciary says 'I do' to marriage equality"
By Thomas M. Basgil Jr. 
Out in New Jersey  
(Trenton, New Jersey), 24 January 2012 (Updated 29 January 2012 at 18:23) 

For more on Judaism's real teaching on homosexuality, see Judaism's Strange Gods, pp. 358-361; and Judaism Discovered, pp. 672-684

_________________

Turn the Tables on the Deceivers with documented, startling facts researched by Michael Hoffman 
The #1 Truth-about-the-Talmud author, speaker and researcher in the English-speaking world


***

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

The rabbinic fakers who composed the Babylonian Talmud fabricated this scurrilous hallucination about Moses and his grandson in the Talmud tractate Bava Batra, which reveals something of the fiduciary psychology of Judaism:

Bava Batra tells of spies from the tribe of Dan who encountered the grandson of Moses serving as the priest for an idol. "What are you doing here?" the spies asked. "How could you be serving an idol?"  Moses' grandson responded that he was there for the money. "I have a tradition from my grandfather," he stated, "that it is better for one to work in the service of an idol (avodah zarah) than to rely on other people to support him."

Compounding the interest of self-deceit:

A few months ago, FXCM, a foreign currency exchange (forex) business based on usury, began to solicit investments from Orthodox Judaics and their Orthodox rabbis. As part of their promotional campaign, they approached Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Stern for a heter iska, a halachic (legal) document that nullifies the Bible's prohibition on interest by creating a loophole based on the fantasy that profits derived from FXCM's usury accruing to Judaic investors in a Judaic-owned business are not interest, but are "shared profits from a return on an investment." Upon receiving the heter iska from Rabbi Stern, stories were published in Orthodox Judaic newspapers praising FXCM and using Rabbi Stern's name and his association with Rabbi Vosner's Beit Din (rabbinic court) for promoting FXCM's business.

"Avodah Zarah Sarah" will do anything for her Khazar idol - anything

Sarah Palin with O'Reilly on Fox News, Jan. 13: "What I would like to see the the Obama administration do though is convince Americans that they would be willing to do anything -- anything -- that needs to be done to protect America and her ally -- to protect Israel."

***

Monday, June 22, 2009

Attention conservatives, strict constructionists and all those opposed to judicial "activism" and who want to see the Constitution restored as the law of the land: the Talmudic Tradition embodies a wide range of principles that permit judicial deviation from Constitutional law

"Judicial Discretion in Talmudic Times and the Modern Era"
by A. David Pardo (Law offices of Foley Hoag LLP)


In this Article, I explore judicial discretion under Halakhic law, Anglo-American law, and Israeli law. In Part I, I compare the differences in treatment of judicial discretion between the Palestinian Talmud and the
Babylonian (Bavli) Talmud. In Part II, I explore judicial discretion in the modern era. In Part III, I argue that the Babylonian Talmudic conception of judicial discretion is forthright about the existence and need for discretion, thus avoiding the doctrinal problems that inhere in the Palestinian Talmud. Moreover, I argue that the Bavli should serve as a model approach for coming to terms with the discretion that inheres in our Anglo-American judicial system, which is indispensable for the administration of justice.

The notion of discretion in the exercise of governmental powers is one that vexes scholars and the public alike. Is the mere existence of discretion the first stop on the road to judicial tyranny? Or is it an indispensable element in the pursuit of justice?

Some consider discretion to be “the law of tyrants: It is always unknown: It is different in different men: It is casual, and depends upon constitution, temper, passion. In the best it is oftentimes caprice: In the worst it is every vice, folly, and passion, to which human nature is liable.” This view is codified in an oft-cited provision of the Massachusetts Constitution.

It is also reflected in an engraving on the side of the United States Department of Justice building, in Washington, D.C., summarized by five words: “Where law ends tyranny begins.” Yet, in our system of government, where law ends tyranny need not begin. Where law ends, discretion begins, and the exercise of discretion may mean either beneficence or tyranny, either justice or injustice, either reasonableness or arbitrariness . . . . No government has ever been a government of all laws and not of men . . . . Every government has always been a government of law and of men.

The study of discretion in the judicial process has generated countless treatises and jurisprudential theories. These studies, naturally, analyze this concept from a contemporary perspective that is rooted in modern Anglo-American law.
Judicial discretion, however, is not a new concept or one that is unique to democratic societies. Indeed, it is an issue that has divided post-biblical societies in Ancient Israel. Furthermore, the methods developed by rabbis in the Talmudic era are as relevant now as they were then, in understanding and accepting judicial discretion in our democratic society.

(Emphasis supplied)

Hoffman's note: if anyone has a complete copy of Mr. Pardo's article I would like to have it.

For further reading



***