christianity / archives / news / bookstore


April 20, 2005

Pope Benedict and Judaism

by Michael A. Hoffman II

Copyright 2005 by

I am world-weary today. The words "stale and unprofitable" come to mind. I know I am supposed to compose a column warning against acceptance of the image of the new pope, Joseph Ratzinger, concocted in the cryptosphere. Yet I find myself filled only with contempt for those who are fooled repeatedly and with ease. In the past several months the planetary poltergeist has painted turncoat Ronald Reagan as one of the finest champions of the West in the history of our civilization. John Paul II garnered similar encomiums. George W. Bush is not in their league (not yet, anyway), but he too is sold to the goyim as a staunch Christian who stands tall against the enemies of the West, blah blah blah.

In each case one wants to scream, "Turn off the TV! Res ipsa loquitur!" But no such luck. Ratzinger, the sidekick of John Paul II, one of the most spectacular rabbinic servants to ever occupy the papacy, suddenly has developed "a troubling Nazi background" and "Jewish groups are protesting."

This is just too ridiculous. Earlier this month John Paul was praised as the greatest friend Judaics ever had in the Vatican--and they extended this laurel knowing that the pope's chief theological "enforcer" and confidant had a "troubling Nazi background"?

Does anyone know what leverage is, or how one goes about obtaining it in ever greater degrees? Has anyone ever played poker, or sought advantage through intimidation and deceit?

The Judaics are seeking greater leverage and advantage by putting the new Pope on the defensive from the first day of his papacy. In this way, Benedict XVI must concede even more to them than he did as cardinal; in fact, given the zeitgeist, he may not have to be very cryptic about his rabbinic role, and may grovel and betray to an even more obsequious and public degree than did his predecessor, which is to say that the papacy and the rabbinate are becoming indistinguishable.

Ratzinger, we are told, is a "hardliner" on "homosexuals and abortion." Hey, kiddies, that is George W. Bush's image too; that is also the image of Orthodox rabbis, even though the Talmud sanctions sodomy with little boys ("under the age of nine"), and early abortion. But as the Gipper was accustomed to say, "Image prevails over reality."

Since Jesus' confrontation with the Pharisees is at the core of the Gospel, the first question that should be asked is, where does Pope Benedict stand on Judaism? When one studies the documentary record a smile comes to the lips at the chutzpah, for Ratzinger is a salivating Judaizer who has flushed the Gospel teaching, but now, through the magic of the media, he is transformed into a suspect Nazi! What a gorgeous pointillist masterpiece of alchemy, on par with indicted war criminal Ariel Sharon's transformation into an intrepid Middle East peace activist.

How does one argue against a reality based on consensus rather than fact? In response, one experiences a Menckenesque sense of "To hell with 'em. Let 'em believe whatever they will." But my obligation is to inform, on the supposition that one out of ten have eyes to see. Here then is a peek at the file on Joseph Ratzinger:

Quote: "Jewish messianic expectation is not in vain. It can become for us Christians a powerful stimulant to keep alive the eschatological dimension of our faith.Like them, we too live in expectation. The difference is that for us the One who is to come will have the traits of the Jesus who has already come and is already present and active among us."

Source: "The Jewish People And Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible," Pontifical Biblical Commission. (Ratzinger wrote the preface and signed off on this). 2001, Vatican Translation.

Note: Ratzinger's commission states that the Messiah, the "One who is to come" will not be Jesus, but rather will have "the traits" of Jesus. If I have your traits, I am not you.This is a denial that the Messiah who will come will actually be Jesus. The rabbinic rejection of the true Messiah and their wait for a false one becomes for Christians "a powerful stimulant to keep alive...our faith." These are weasel words; Orwellian doublespeak uttered to curry favor with powerful modern Pharisees.

Quote: "After Auschwitz the mission of reconciliation and acceptance permits no deferral. Even if we know that Auschwitz is the gruesome expression of an ideology that not only wanted to destroy Judaism but also hated and sought to eradicate from Christianity its Jewish heritage, the question remains: What could be the reason for so much historical hostility between those who actually must belong together because of their faith in the one God and commitment to his will?"

Source: "Many Religions--One Covenant: Israel, the Church and the World," by Joseph Ratzinger (San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 1999, p. 22).

Note: Judaism is the religion of the Pharisees who killed Jesus Christ (I Thess. 2:14-16). It is not the religion of the Old Testament. To the Torah-true principles of Jesus Christ, the Pharisees countered with the Talmud-True lies of men. Christianity's "heritage" is in the Old Testament, which Judaism nullifies. To conflate the evil of a concentration camp with the good of overcoming Judaism, is a diabolical deception.

Quote: "Thus the question remains: Can Christian faith, retaining its inner power and dignity, not only tolerate Judaism but accept it in its historic mission?"

Source: Ibid., p. 24.

Note: The historic mission of Judaism is to destroy Christians and the Christian faith (cf. for example, Moses Maimonides, "Letter to Yemen"). As Adam Clarke observed concerning the New Testament account: "Thessalonica is the place where Judaic opposition finally revealed how obdurate, unscrupulous and obtrusive it could be. There was no reason whatever behind that wandering committee of self-appointed opponents going into every town where Paul preached and stirring up hatred and persecution against the Church. Having failed in their persecutions both in Judea and upon the mission field, at Thessalonica they enlisted the Gentiles, their magistrates and leaders, and turned them against Paul and the Gospel."

What in Judaism has changed since the first century A.D.? Is it now less obdurate and unscrupulous? If Christians are to "tolerate Judaism" and "accept...its mission" why did Christ bother to incarnate on earth and preach to the leaders of the Jews, condemning them for betraying Israel's divine mission? (Matthew 23:15). How dare Ratzinger preach any other gospel? (Galatians 1:8).

In the parable of the treacherous tenants (Matthew 21:33-46), the response of the landowner to the murder of his servants and son is to put these evil ones to a miserable death and to lease the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at harvest time. The leaders of the Jews were the treacherous tenants who murdered God's son and the servants of God. The nation of Israel ("vineyard") was taken from them and given to the gentiles ("other tenants") with the expectation that the Christian gentiles would convert the world ( "produce a harvest"). What harvest is Ratzinger producing when he urges toleration and acceptance of the treacherous tenants? Missionary zeal for the souls of contemporary, self-described "Jews" has been canceled by Ratzinger, along with Christ's ideological and spiritual contest with Judaism, which has been ruled obsolete, "after Auschwitz."

Apparently, "after Calvary" is insufficient to any longer motivate the Church Militant, which is called to be militant mainly with regard to Islam. In a front page article in yesterday's edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Zionist paper suggests the need for a new Catholic crusade against Muslims. In celebrating the defeat of Muslims in Spain, the Journal omitted all mention of the fact that in 1492, "when Christian armies drove the last Muslim rulers out of ...Granada" they also drove out all those who practiced Judaism. But the 21st century "Crusade" is kashrut (kosher), "Judeo-Christian" and intended to have a selective target. Crusading itself is wrong with regard to Judaism and right with regard to Islam. The double-mind that can embrace that tortured construct has nothing in common with He who said, "I would you were hot or cold" (Revelation 3:16).

If John Paul II betrayed Christ to the rabbis by forbidding opposition to Judaism--such a betrayal being the function of Judas--then Ratzinger, architect of the thinking behind the scenes, stands in the role of the Sanhedrin who sent Judas.We seem to have gone from Pope Judas to Pope Caiaphas, or in more homely American terms, Pope Benedict Arnold.

Additional research provided by Craig Heimbichner

THE HOFFMAN WIRE is available by e-mail free of charge as a public service

Subscribe to the Hoffman Wire (unsubscribe at any time)

christianity / archives / news / bookstore

Copyright© 2005 by Michael A. Hoffman II