Nazi Hunters and Their Catholic Proxy Warriors - Part II
/Part I of this article appeared in the April 2020 issue of Culture Wars Magazine.
Sister Harriet (L) Bishop Kevin Rhoades (R)
Bishop Rhoades was inspired to write his statement after attending a “Violins of Hope” inter-faith prayer service at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church in Fort Wayne, Indiana, celebrating the arrival of “violins that were played by Jewish prisoners at concentration camps during the Holocaust.” Listening to those violins brought tears “of both sadness and joy” to Bishop Rhoades’ eyes. He felt “joy at the love we share as brothers and sisters, drawn together by a common spiritual patrimony” but sadness at the “rise in recent years of anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic rhetoric in our society,” as well as “incidents of violence incited by hateful speech about Jews.”[15]
At this point, Rhoades left the world of Catholic theology and disappeared into the realm of Holocaust causality, which takes categories of reality and associates them with confected categories of the mind which attribute violence against Jews to “hateful speech” and not Jewish behavior, a conclusion that needs to be demonstrated rather than assumed as already proven. Was it rhetoric that caused Blacks to attack Jews in Brooklyn and Jersey City? Or was it the behavior of Jewish landlords?
Similar questions could be raised about the Holocaust itself. Was the cause “hateful speech”? Or was it Jewish behavior, specifically the perception among Germans and Catholic observers like Eugenio Pacelli, then nuncio to Germany and later Pope Pius XII, that Jewish participation in the Communist takeover of cities like Berlin and Munich in the aftermath of Germany’s defeat in World War I posed a threat to Germany’s existence as a nation? I was relieved to learn that “Language that incites animosity is harmful.” But did that claim apply equally to Jews and Christians? If so, why didn’t the bishop mention Hunters, which was nothing but hours-long incitement to animosity and physical violence against Catholics if they happened to be perceived as white or anti-Semitic?
Bishop Kevin Rhoades
Rhoades’ novel use of the term “anti-Judaism” similarly raised more questions than it answered. The Church has always condemned forms of racial discrimination like anti-Semitism, which Pius XI explicitly condemned in Mit Brennender Sorge, but she could not condemn anti-Judaism without condemning the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, and the writings of the Church Fathers, because all of the seminal writings of the Catholic Church are firm in their opposition to what was calling itself Judaism at that time. After making the claim that “Jews are not our enemies,” Rhoades says:
We are bound together with them in friendship as brothers and sisters in the family of God. In the synagogue of Rome in 2016, Pope Francis spoke of the spiritual bond between Jews and Christians and the importance of fostering an authentic friendship. He said: “In interreligious dialogue it is fundamental that we encounter each other as brothers and sisters before our Creator and that we praise him: and that we respect and appreciate each other and try to cooperate.” This is especially important as the Church and the Jewish communities continue to address religious and ethical questions that both face in a world intent upon challenging religious freedom. Jews and Christians can impact society profoundly when they stand together on key issues such as the sanctity of human life, immigration reform, health care, human trafficking and world peace.[16]
Little Sisters of the Poor
This passage brought a wry smile to my face because I was in the same room with Bishop Rhoades when he tried to float the idea of shared commitment to religious freedom to the Jewish Federation of St. Joseph County. When, I am tempted to ask, did Jews and Christians ever “stand together on key issues such as the sanctity of human life, immigration reform, health care, human trafficking and world peace”? Not on that day, for sure. After the Obama Administration was refusing religious exemption to the demand that the Little Sisters of the Poor provide contraceptives to their employees and Bishop Rhoades addressed the Jewish Federation of St. Joseph County asking for their support, not one Jewish organization would support religious freedom if that meant impeding access to abortion or government-mandated funding of abortion. The only reason that the Church is no longer faced with this issue is the election of Donald Trump. In the 50-some years since the promulgation of Nostra Aetate, Jewish organizations have been at the forefront of promoting abortion, gay marriage, and other social pathologies. Catholic convert Bernard Nathanson, one of two Jews responsible for overturning the law banning abortion in New York State before his conversion, felt that the Catholic Church missed an opportunity to stop abortion by not portraying it as the anti-American “spawn of a cadre of wild-eye Jewish radicals in New York City.”[17] Nathanson failed to understand that the bishops’ misreading of Nostra Aetate and commitment to Catholic-Jewish dialogue prohibited mentioning Jewish responsibility for anything bad.
During the post-conciliar period, actions spoke louder than words. In spite of all the dialogue, there was no collaboration in the area of religious freedom and freedom of conscience when it came to Obamacare and the concerns it raised for Catholics. Beyond that, the intent behind Jewish support of the homosexual agenda became crystal clear: use “tolerance” to create a homosexual fifth column within the Catholic Church, one which, because of the disordered nature of its sexual activities, can be used to create a whole new series of lawsuits. With Elder Brothers like this, who needs enemies?
In keeping with the Vatican’s statement on 50 years of Catholic-Jewish dialogue and its call for “joint engagement throughout the world for justice, peace, conservation of creation, and reconciliation,” the American Catholic bishops issued an appeal “to religious allies and all people of good will who want to work together toward a culture of purity that upholds the dignity of every person and the sacredness of human sexuality” in their recent pastoral letter on pornography.[18] The Jews would seem to be the ideal co-belligerents in this fight because, as a Jewish magazine recently put it, “Everyone knows that the Porn Industry is run by the Jews.”[19] This is clearly a false statement. What the author should have said is that “Everyone but Catholic bishops knows that the Porn Industry is run by the Jews.”
Diocese of Harrisburg
Three days before the release of Hunters on Amazon Prime, Amazon informed me that the Fidelity Press e-book on “The Jewish Question” violated their hate speech standards and that it was being removed from their list of e-books. The Jewish Question was the translation into English of a three-part series on that topic which had appeared in Civiltà Cattolica, the official magazine of the Vatican, over the fall of 1890. Amazon was now in the business of determining what was and was not authentically Catholic, and there was no court of appeal.
The Civiltà Cattolica articles came at the end of a long line of pronouncements by Church officials which would not be considered anti-Semitic. In 1569, Saint Pius V, issued the Bull Hebraeorum gens ("The Jewish Race") which expelled Jews from some of the Papal states, and began with these words:
The Jewish people fell from the heights because of their faithlessness and condemned their Redeemer to a shameful death. Their godlessness has assumed such forms that, for the salvation of our own people, it becomes necessary to prevent their disease. Besides usury, through which Jews everywhere have sucked dry the property of impoverished Christians, they are accomplices of thieves and robbers; and the most damaging aspect of the matter is that they allure the unsuspecting through magical incantations, superstition, and witchcraft to the Synagogue of Satan and boast of being able to predict the future. We have carefully investigated how this revolting sect abuses the name of Christ and how harmful they are to those whose life is threatened by their deceit. On account of these and other serious matters, and because of the gravity of their crimes which increase day to day more and more, We order that, within 90 days, all Jews in our entire earthly realm of justice – in all towns, districts, and places – must depart these regions.
Either the Popes statement is anti-Semitic or the policy which emanated from Vatican II claiming that Jews are our friends is misguided. Non datur tertium There is no third option.
On virtually the same day in which Bishop Rhoades announced that Jews are not our enemies, the diocese of Harrisburg, Rhoades’ former diocese, filed for bankruptcy after succumbing to a slew of lawsuits inspired by Pennsylvania's Jewish attorney general, who published the dossiers and pictures of 300 priests who were accused of sexual abuse, but handed down only one indictment. As I said before, with friends like this Catholics need no enemies.
Jesus Christ said that we should love our enemies; he never said that the Catholic Church would have no enemies, or, worse still, that the Church should pretend that she had no enemies. In spite of the fact that he describes the Jews as “the chosen people” and “still loved by God,” St. Paul called them “enemies of God only with regard to the Good News, and enemies only for your sake” (Romans, 11:28). In a gloss on this passage, Robert Sungenis writes:
Dealing with the first view, Paul says the Jews are enemies with respect to the Gospel. Why? Obviously because the Jews oppose the Christian Gospel. They reject Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior of the world. They believe he was a false prophet, an imposter, a charlatan who tried to make himself something he wasn’t and as a result he deserved the death he suffered on the cross. With few exceptions, this was the attitude of the Jews in Paul’s day, and it continues throughout the Middle Ages and right up to the present time. For the Gentiles, the Jews’ rejection of Christ and Christianity turned out (i.e., “on your account”) to be beneficial since it allowed the Gentiles to receive the Gospel and become saved.[20]
In keeping with the idea that Jews are our friends, Bishop Rhoades attempted to exonerate them from responsibility for the death of Christ when he wrote: “Very importantly, the Second Vatican Council rejected the accusation that Jews were ‘Christ-killers,’ a charge that through the centuries resulted in anti-Jewish hatred and persecution.” Rhoades then cites this passage from Nostra Aetate to back up his assertion:
“Even though the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ (cf. John 19:6), neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his passion” (NA 4).
So unless I am missing something here, The Second Vatican Council said that “Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ.” If we put Jewish leaders together with Jewish followers, we come up with a group known as the Jewish people, and this is the group which claimed formal responsibility for the death of Christ when they cried, “His blood be on us and our children” (Matt: 27:26).
But does telling Jews that they killed Christ lead to “anti-Jewish hatred and persecution”? If we read the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles, it seems to bring about the opposite effect. When Peter emerged from hiding after Pentecost, the Holy Spirit inspired him to address the Jews he previously feared:
Men of Israel, listen to what I am going to say. Jesus the Nazarene was a man commended to you by God by the miracles and portents and signs that God worked through him when he was among you, as you all know. This man, who was put into your power by the deliberate intention and foreknowledge of God, you took and had crucified by men outside the Law. You killed him . . .
So it turns out that Jews are Christ-killers after all. “But God raised Him to life. . . . For this reason the Whole House of Israel can be certain that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ.” When the Jews heard this “they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the Apostles, “What must we do, brothers” and Peter answered, “You must repent and every one of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.”
If Peter had not told the Jews that they had killed Christ, they would not have been “cut to the heart,” and if they had not been cut to the heart, they would not have sought baptism, and if they had not been baptized, they could not have been saved. And so if the successor of Peter goes to Jerusalem but does not tell the Jews that they killed Christ, he is collaborating in their damnation.
So the Jews are “Christ-killers” after all. Does that mean that every Jew in Jerusalem at the time of the Passion called for Christ’s death? Well, no. The Blessed Mother never shouted “Crucify him.” Nor did St. John, who also stood at the foot of the Cross. So if we put these pieces together, it turns out that the Jews who rejected Christ were responsible for his death, and the Jews who accepted him as the Messiah, otherwise known as the Catholic Church or the New Israel, were not.
Having exonerated the Jews, Rhoades goes on to make “sinners” responsible for Christ’s death. Citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Rhoades writes: “In her Magisterial teaching of the faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that ‘sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured’” (NA 4). This is, of course, true, but it doesn’t exonerate the Jews unless His Excellency is willing to claim that no Jew is a sinner. Bishop Rhoades concludes his statement by saying:
In this age of social media, people read or listen to all kinds of opinions expressed about Judaism and the Jewish people on internet blogs, websites, and the like. Some are filled with false and hateful rhetoric, opposed to the very spirit of Christianity. As Catholics, we must reject any that express, or can lead to, contempt for Jews. It is important that Catholics embrace and follow the message of Nostra Aetate, the authoritative, Conciliar teaching of the Church.
Just to set the record straight, I do accept Nostra Aetate as “the authoritative, Conciliar teaching of the Church,” because Nostra Aetate said “the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ” not because it said the opposite.
My name did not appear in Bishop Rhoades’s statement. In a Catholic News Service article published on February 26, 2020, we read that “Bishop Rhoades did not mention specific incidents or personalities,” but that didn’t deter Dexter Van Zile from claiming the opposite. On the same day in which Bishop Rhoades’ statement appeared in Today’s Catholic, Van Zile’s article taking credit for the statement began circulating through Jewish/Israeli outlets like Israelhayom, “a newspaper published by far-right billionaire Sheldon Adelson,”[21] which quoted Van Zile as saying Rhoades’ statement was a “thoroughgoing rebuke to the Jew-hatred promoted by E. Michael Jones, who lives in the diocese Bishop Rhoades serves.”[22]
El Converso Van Zile
Dexter Van Zile
Van Zile works for the Israeli propaganda outlet called The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), a “vocal and well-funded” organ of the Israel Lobby, whose “employees harangue journalists and human rights defenders in the name of ‘promoting accurate and balanced coverage of Israel and the Middle East.’”[23]
Van Zile began his journalistic career by subjecting the president of the university he attended in the 1980s to “undeserved . . . calumny” while writing for the campus newspaper. He then graduated to being a “fishing reporter,”[24] but his ties to the Gatestone Institute, a “far-right think tank” which specializes in “publishing false or inaccurate articles” about Muslims, and his association with people like John Bolton and Daniel Pipes at Gatestone is more relevant to his work at CAMERA than whatever he wrote about fish, and closely connected to the habit of calumny he developed as an undergraduate, when it comes to people like me.[25]
Van Zile’s calumny campaign had been going on for some time before the release of Hunters, but it was part of the same Jewish-led campaign that brought violins from Auschwitz to Fort Wayne and tried to get me banned from social media platforms like YouTube by the ADL. In August of 2019, Dexter Van Zile wrote a letter demanding that Bishop Rhoades denounce me. Rhoades ignored his letter, leading Van Zile to post it as an open letter on the Internet. When Rhoades ignored the on-line version of his letter as well, Van Zile’s attack on me got picked up by Jewish converts like Rachel Bratton Weiss, who posted links to Van Zile’s letter and attacks of their own like “Know Your Dogwhistles! Recognizing Anti-Semitism Is the First Step,”[26] which appeared on January 20, 2020. In that piece, Weiss wrote:
I have written before about how there is an antisemitism problem among Catholics of the far right. Whether it’s alt-right media personality Patrick Coffin giving a platform to overt antisemites such as E. Michael Jones, or Center for Family and Human Rights president Austin Ruse praising the Proud Boys, or white nationalist John Zmirak defending the phrase “you will not replace us – whether it’s tabloid media groups such as the Remnant publishing anti-semitic material – whether it’s ongoing and concerted online attacks on Catholics of Jewish ethnicity, by shadowy accounts juxtaposing religious iconography with Pepe the Frog and other alt-right images – well, it’s clear we have a problem.[27]
Yes, we have a problem. Over the past 15 years a number of Jews have converted to the Catholic Faith without any attempt to reform the bad habits they acquired during their former lives as Jews. Foremost among these faults is a reckless willingness to attack fellow Catholics as anti-Semites whenever they disagree with the ADL party line. When Bratten Weiss’s fellow convert from Judaism Dawn Goldstein attacked me as an anti-Semite on Twitter, I tried to reach out to her by tweeting “Accusing fellow Catholics of anti-Semitism is a sin against charity.” My effort got me blocked from her Twitter account, where she continued her Jihad against me.
Calumny is a sin. Falsely accusing fellow Catholics of Anti-Semitism is a sin against charity. Bearing false witness is a sin.
— E. Michael Jones (@EMichaelJones1) January 16, 2020
Criticizing Jews is not a sin. Critiquing Jewish behavior is not a sin. Calling for the conversion of the "perfidious Jews" is not a sin, it's charity! https://t.co/j7WYQQr6S4
The one thing these attacks by Jewish converts have in common is a refusal to define the term anti-Semitism combined with an even firmer refusal to quote anything I have actually written or said. Instead of citing something I’ve written, Bratten Weiss accuses me of using a “dogwhistle,” which is:
a seemingly harmless phrase that is intended to convey racial prejudice to others “in the know.” This is how racists and anti-semites manage to communicate with one another in plain sight. This is also how they manage to recruit the naive – or, at least, get the naive to defend them. Especially if the dogwhistles are connected with noble-sounding language about honor or family or community, it looks as though we Jews are just getting hysterical over nothing, attacking decent people. Because that’s another way racists and anti-semites function to achieve influence: by being “nice people.”
I’m perfectly willing to admit that I’m not a nice person, but in the course of her article she should at least have quoted one thing I actually wrote, or even my ADL profile, which asserts that I am not a racist. Instead, she cited Van Zile’s already mentioned hit piece, which then circulated among websites frequented by Jewish converts, who contributed to the pressure which Van Zile, who was calling the chancery office every other day, put on Bishop Rhoades to condemn me.
Is there a pattern emerging here? I think there is. We are now in the midst of what might be termed a neoconverso crisis, which began in earnest around 15 years ago with the publication of Roy Shoeman’s book Salvation is from the Jews, which I reviewed favorably in these pages. My contact with it goes back farther than that. I met David Moss, head of the Association of Hebrew Catholics, the center of neoconversoism, in what must have been the mid-1980s at Chauncey Stillman’s country estate in the Catskills. Moss had founded the Association of Hebrew Catholics based on the writings of Elias Friedman, who wanted to establish a Hebrew Catholic Rite. Jewish converts I knew at the time like Father Arthur Klyber and Mark Drogin, of the St. Martin de Porres Community in New Hope, Kentucky found the idea of a separate and Jewish identity within the Church repugnant, but after Father Klyber’s death Drogin eventually became a supporter of Moss’s idea of Jewish identity within the Catholic Church. When theologian Ray Kevane, the man Moss had asked to be his group’s theological advisor, objected to their bad theology and ethnocentrism, they ignored him, forcing him to publish his objections as an open letter in Culture Wars.
Johannes Pfefferkorn
In one of his earliest writings, Der Juden Spiegel (Mirror of the Jews) published in Cologne in 1507, Josef Pfefferkorn, a Moravian Jew who converted to Christianity three years earlier, gives a candid description of his conversion and, by implication, the life he lived before that event. “I was born in the Jewish faith and am now, by the grace of God, a Christian.”[28] He goes on to indicate that he lived by usury before his conversion but that he gave it up when he became a Christian because usury, which he rails against in extenso in other works, is immoral. “If I continued to associate with Jews,” he continued, “and continued to take usury, what would you say other than that I was in serious sin and that I never really became a Christian, and everyone would condemn me by saying that the blood and suffering of Christ had been lost on me. What help would the holy sacrament of baptism have been to me?”[29]
So it’s possible for a Jew to convert and yet not become fully Christian. Pfefferkorn lists two disqualifying conditions:
continued practice of usury and
continued association with Jews. This continued association with Jews and, more importantly, bad Jewish ideas brought Kevane to the point where he had to condemn the organization Moss had asked him to advise.
The straw that broke the camel’s back came when Moss announced on EWTN in March 2005 that he rejected the idea that the Church was the New Israel and had replaced the old covenant. Making matters worse, Moss went on to say that the Church had taught the erroneous theology of supercessionism for 2,000 years. “No Catholic can say that the Church has taught an erroneous theology for 2,000 years and remain a Catholic,” said Kevane. The AHC studiously ignored what Kevane said and turned instead to then Bishop Raymond Burke, who endorsed the AHC in a video they made in lieu of responding to Kevane. The door was now opened to Jewish converts bringing their previous religious identity and bad habits into the Church with them. The main idea that bound the Jewish converts which Van Zile mobilized against me together was their belief that the Church was riddled with anti-Semites.
Van Zile would probably still be calling the chancery office demanding a statement if I hadn’t published the picture of Bishop Rhoades, my wife and me, taken after the Mass at St. Matthew’s Cathedral in South Bend celebrating our 50th wedding anniversary. I published the picture at the end of my article on “Sam Francis and the Triple Melting Pot,” which appeared in the February issue of Culture Wars not as proof that Bishop Rhoades endorsed my ideas, but rather as proof that Catholics, unlike white nationalists, had an objective ethnic identity based on religion and, therefore, protection against what I was calling “identity theft”:
unlike “Conservatism” or “whiteness” or any other confected identity, Catholicism confers an identity through baptism which cannot be taken away from its members by the self-appointed popes who, as recipients of oligarchic money, police the precincts of identity politics. Sam Francis was excommunicated from the synagogue known as conservatism by William F. Buckley, who with the help of Jewish money, had had himself named pope of that sect. The fact that the same thing didn’t happen to me at the hands of Dexter van Zile is proof of my contention that the Catholic faith is a category which exists in the mind of God. As such, it cannot be contradicted by men. It guarantees protection from the predations of Satan and his synagogue on earth that no other identity can provide.[30]
The situation changed not so much because of what I said in the Sam Francis article, but because I published a picture of Bishop Rhoades standing between me and my wife which was taken at the diocesan celebration of our 50th wedding anniversary. Seeing his opportunity, Van Zile redoubled his efforts by contacting the network of Jewish converts that formed a de facto fifth column within the Church. Fearing guilt by association, Rhoades caved into Van Zile’s pressure. This is not the way this is supposed to happen. Jesus tells us “If your brother does something wrong, go and have it out with him alone, between your two selves. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you: the evidence of two or three witnesses is required to sustain any charge. But if he refuses to listen to these, report it to the community; and if he refuses to listen to the community, treat him like a pagan or tax collector” (Matt 18:15-17).
Kate Mulvany as Sister Harriet
Is Criticism a Sin?
The Bible gives clear instructions about fraternal correction, but the bishop didn’t follow them. If the bishop had mentioned me by name, he would have had to cite something that I had actually said or written. Instead, what could have been a fruitful dialogue disappeared into a fatal conflation of manners and morals, in which Catholics are harangued for not accepting “human regulations,” i.e., Jewish taboos against hate speech, as if they were the word of God. In the Second Vatican Council’s document on the Church, we read “the faithful, for their part, are obliged to submit to their bishops’ decision, made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a ready and respectful allegiance of mind.”31 As I said, I accept the documents of Vatican II as part of the ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church. I also accept the authority of the local bishop. Admitting that, what am I to make of the claim that “the Catholic Church offers no shelter to anti-Jewish bias, regardless of its content or expression. This applies to racist statements against Jews, to anti-Semitism, or to any religious opinion that denigrates Jews or Judaism”? What exactly does Bishop Rhoades mean when he refers to “anti-Jewish bias, regardless of its content or expression”? Is he talking about manners or morals here? If he’s talking about morals then I have to submit to his judgment, but I can’t submit to something that I don’t understand, and so I have to ask, is it a sin to criticize Jews? If it is a sin, point out which commandment I have broken. If it is a matter of bad manners, that does not rise to the level of comment much less condemnation in a Church document.
To be more precise, an anti-Semite, as the term is now used, refers to someone who criticizes Jews. Acquiescence to this usage would mean, of course, that the Church in condemning “all . . . displays of antisemitism” has denied Catholics the right to criticize Jews, under pain of being deemed an anti-Semite. So let’s raise the theological bar here. If anti-Semitism is sinful, is it anti-Semitic to say that Jews support gay marriage? Is it anti-Semitic to criticize Jews? If so, Moses was an anti-Semite. Is it anti-Semitic to refer to Jews as children of Satan? If so, Jesus was an anti-Semite. And if anti-Semitism is a sin, Jesus committed a sin, which means he was not perfect, which means he was not God. Are the Catholic dialoguers willing to accept this chain of reasoning? If not, they will have to define the term “anti-Semitism.” Because, as things stand now, anti-Semitism means criticism of Jews. As of now, Jews may not be criticized, no matter what they do, whether it is killing innocent Palestinian women or children with their air strikes or promoting moral subversion under the guise of “marriage equality” or “reproductive rights.”
I can understand why “racist statements against Jews” are wrong. Anti-Semitism is wrong because it is based on a false racial understanding of the Jewish identity, but what about “any opinion that denigrates Jews or Judaism”? Doesn’t Jesus Christ denigrate Jews when he tells them “the devil is your father” (John 8:44)? Doesn’t Jesus call Jews liars? Isn’t the whole Gospel of St. John one long denigration of Jews and Judaism? The Jews certainly think so. In March 1989 Micha Brumlik got to the heart of the Catholic-Jewish dialogue issue when he said that the “irreducible Kernel” of the Gospel of St. John is “intrinsically anti-Jewish” and “an embassy of hate.” If the Gospel of St. John is normative for Christianity, according to Brumlik’s reasoning, then Christianity is a religion of hate and there is no point in engaging in dialogue with its adherents. Brumlik does engage in the dialogue but only to denounce the fundamental writings of Christianity as hate speech, because, according to Brumlik, “there is no other scripture in which the marginalization of Jews, and by that I mean Judaism is achieved in such a sharp, irreconcilable and unbridgeable manner as in the Gospel according to John.”[32] The Jews, as St. John and Micha Brumlik use the term, aren’t Judeans or Pharisees or other groups opposing the followers of Jesus; they are, in Brumlik’s view, the Jewish people. The fact that the “Divine Word” of the Christians was a Jew doesn’t change the fundamentally anti-Jewish nature of the Gospel. Brumlik concludes by claiming that dialogue between Christians and Jews is impossible if either takes the Gospel of St. John as its starting point. There is no possible meeting point because Jesus is the essence of Christianity, according to the Gospel, and that essence is “precisely what Jews, insofar as they want to remain Jews, must reject.”[33]
[…]
This is just an excerpt from Culture Wars Magazine, not the full article. To read the entire article, purchase the April and May 2020 editions of Culture Wars Magazine.
Featured Articles:
Culture of Death Watch
Life and Death Under Lockdown - Sean Naughton
Features
The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Cunning of Reason - E. Michael Jones
Reviews
Nazi Hunters and Their Catholic Proxy Warriors, Part II - E. Michael Jones
Footnotes:
14.https://todayscatholic.org/friendship-with-our-jewish-brothers-and-sisters/
15.https://todayscatholic.org/friendship-with-our-jewish-brothers-and-sisters/
16.https://todayscatholic.org/friendship-with-our-jewish-brothers-and-sisters/
17.Jones, JRS, p. 921.
18.http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/pornography/upload/Create-in-Me-a-Clean-Heart-Statement-on-Pornography.pdf
19.http://www.frumsatire.net/2013/03/17/orthodox-jews-keeping-the-porn-magazine-business-alive/
20.Unpublished ms. On (“Friendship with Our Jewish Brothers and Sisters,” Statement by Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, February 19, 2020).
21.https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/sugar-mama-anti-muslim-hate/
22.https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/02/23/catholic-bishop-declares-jews-are-not-our-enemies/
23.https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ben-white/how-fishing-reporter-became-leading-figure-islamophobia-industry
24.https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ben-white/how-fishing-reporter-became-leading-figure-islamophobia-industry
25.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute
26.https://www.patheos.com/blogs/suspendedinherjar/2020/01/know-your-dogwhistle-how-to-recognize-covert-antisemitism/
27.https://www.patheos.com/blogs/suspendedinherjar/2020/01/know-your-dogwhistle-how-to-recognize-covert-antisemitism/
28.Hans-Martin Kirn, Das Bild vom Juden im Deutschland des fruehen 16. Jahrhunderts: dargestellt and den Schriften Johannes Pfefferkorns (Tuebigen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1989), p. 221. “1ch byn jm judschen glawben geboren vnd nun aus der gnad gots Cristen.” All subsequent translations in this chapter are my own.
29.Ibid. (. . . .wan ich mit den iuden tzohielte vnd woicher neme? was wolt yr anderst sagen, dan das ich in groisseren sunden were, dan wer ich nie Cristen worden, vnd yederman wurde mich vertaylen (verurteilen) das blut vnd leyden Cristi gantz an mir verloren syn, was hullf myr dan das sacrament der heyliger tawff?”
30.“Sam Francis and the Triple Melting Pot: Race vs. Religion,” Culture Wars, December 2019, p. 14.
31.Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents, ed. Austin Flannery, O.P. (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1975), p. 379
32.Micha Brumlik, “Johannes, das Judenfeindliche Evangelium,” in Teufelskinder oder Heilsbringer, (all translations are mine), p. 2-7.
33.Brumlik, Teufelskinder, p. 9.
34.“John Paul II Speeches 1980 November, The Holy See – The Vatican, https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1980/november.index.2.html
35.“Reflections on Covenant and Mission,” Consultation of the National Council of Synagogues and delegates of the Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, August 12, 2002, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/jewish/catholic-jewish-documents-and-news-releases.cfm
36.United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “A Note on Ambiguities Contained in Reflections on Covenant and Mission,” Committee on Doctrine and Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, June 18, 2009; revised October 13, 2009.
37.Tom Heneghan, “Pius XII biographer raps rabbi for recalling Holocaust role,” Reuters, October 7, 2008, http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/10/07/pius-xii-biographer-raps-rabbi-for-recalling-holocaust-role/
38.Patrick J. Buchanan, Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2011), p. 111.
39.Buchanan, Suicide, p. 111.
40.Brian Schrauger, “Israel is losing the PR war so badly that even evangelical support is eroding,” The Jerusalem Post, June 15, 2009, https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/Israel-is-losing-the-PR-war-so-badly-that-even-evangelical-support-is-eroding
41.Vicomte Leon de Poncins, Judaism and the Vatican: An Attempt at Spiritual Subversion (London: Briton’s Publishing Company, 1967), pp. 18-19.
42.Yona Metzger, “Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow,” America, October 24, 2005), pp. 13-14.
43.Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, A Moral Reckoning: the Role of the Catholic Church in the Holocaust and its Unfulfilled Duty of Repair (New York: Vintage, 2003), p. 37.
44.Flannery, op cit, p. 572.
