USCCB again tilting at the antisemitism windmill

1,940 Views | 40 Replies | Last: 4 days ago by Quo Vadis?
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Coming out with a GIGANTIC tome to make sure you cross examine everything we say so it isn't incidentally anti-Semitic.

Things that are anti-Semitic according to this new production:

1. Saying Jews aren't God's chosen people
2. Saying a "Jewish lobby" exists…..what is AIPAC?
3. Pepe the Frog
4. Mentioning the Rothschilds
5. Mentioning George Soros

Seriously, a 63 page glossary with steps towards fighting anti-semitism in the community reads like something out of the fever dream of whatever the Jewish equivalent of BLM is.

If you're a fellow Catholic, please join me in mailing and calling the USCCB and begging them to stop focusing on the virtue signaling nonsense, and fix the very real problems happening in our churches right now.

We've got gay couples giving homilies at masses, and queer interpretative liturgical dance, while TLM's are being closed all over the place, and the USCCB is chastising you for knowing Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were Jewish.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/261017/us-bishops-jewish-advocacy-group-release-catholic-guide-to-combating-antisemitism
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The USCCB overall is still tone-deaf. Perhaps there's some evidence that they are waking from this stupor with the them trying to address the need for an awakening of the faithful and the Eucharistic Congress, but in many ways it fell flat. Big productions over initiatives that could be felt or seen in our local parishes. For example, no official attempts to restore reverent postures at the reception of Holy Communion (likely due to fearing being accused of going against "The Council").

And of course we see one of the most prominent members actively working against said postures because supposed efficiency and alleged pharisaicalism.

https://www.chicagocatholic.com/cardinal-blase-j.-cupich/-/article/2024/12/11/-as-we-pray-

Contra Cardinal Cupich:


EDIT: In my own life I've seen the gradual disappearance of tabernacle and chalice veils. Altar servers no longer hold a paten in case a host is dropped. In the 80s, my home parish had all of this. I served on the altar and knew how to use the paten. All these things that point to and highlight the holiest of Holies being lost and we wonder why no one believes anymore. Try to bring it back and watch the demonic howls ensue.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Perhaps if they just refocus on reacquainting their flocks with the King of the Jews...
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
747Ag said:

Perhaps if they just refocus on reacquainting their flocks with the King of the Jews...


What a Christmas miracle that would be
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Barn burner...

https://bishopjosephstrickland.substack.com/p/building-a-staircase
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
747Ag said:

Barn burner...

https://bishopjosephstrickland.substack.com/p/building-a-staircase


Wow, it appears as if the Good Bishop realizes he is likely about to get the Abp. Vigano treatment and decided to give both barrels. Which is a shame, because of the great humility that Bishop Strickland has compared to Abp Vigano. Bishop Strickland is all about Christ, and fears for the loss of souls that are being jeopardized by the current praxis of the "conciliar church".

However, I can't help but be hopeful that we may have acquired a new licitly consecrated Bishop for the Society. I can't help but see this article as a tentative overture. I was very sad at the recent loss of BP. Tissier de Mallerais, leaving us with only two shepherds. It seems much as the miracle of Mana in the desert, God may have provided once again for the nourishment of his people.

I will pray very much that God's will be done in whatever the fallout from this article is.
The Marksman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It is sad, indeed, to see those who are supposed to shepherd the Church not focusing on what they should be, but God will not allow them to prevail against His Church.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You can't see how claims about an insidious Jewish lobby (AIPAC is the 199th biggest spending lobby in 2024) is antisemitic based on centuries-old conspiracy theories that helped drive violence against Jews? You can't see how the Pepe meme and the associated Groypers are antisemitic? Or the history behind claiming the Rothschilds or Soros are behind everything amd how that links to antisemitic conspiracy theories?

If you want to argue the group should focus on something else, okay, fine, I guess. Looking over the document, it's pretty straightforward and the kind of thing you would expect a subcommittee of a few people to publish. I don't see how it interferes with anything else being done. But yes, everything listed is often used for antisemitic purposes.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Won't speak as to whether or not this is a good or bad document, or whether or not it is needed. I will simply add the fact that over 95% of American Catholics view Jews with a neutral to very positive disposition. 4.3% of American Catholics have a negative view.

https://www.thebostonpilot.com/AMP/amp_article.php?ID=194540
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

You can't see how claims about an insidious Jewish lobby (AIPAC is the 199th biggest spending lobby in 2024) is antisemitic based on centuries-old conspiracy theories that helped drive violence against Jews? You can't see how the Pepe meme and the associated Groypers are antisemitic? Or the history behind claiming the Rothschilds or Soros are behind everything amd how that links to antisemitic conspiracy theories?

If you want to argue the group should focus on something else, okay, fine, I guess. Looking over the document, it's pretty straightforward and the kind of thing you would expect a subcommittee of a few people to publish. I don't see how it interferes with anything else being done. But yes, everything listed is often used for antisemitic purposes.

If there's violence against Jews it's not coming from Catholics. The groypers should all have their phones taken away and be beaten with rubber hoses before being forcefully remanded to Mount Athos for life. (sorry Orthobros it's the only island monastery I know of), but they're not committing violence against jews. That's mainly a muslim or muslim sympathizer thing; and mostly due to Israel; not Judaism itself.

Is it okay if I don't like AIPAC? They may not spend a ton, but they definitely have several congressmen on the payroll, and punch WELL out of their weight class with regards to the pressure they exert.

And no, I don't see how the Pepe meme is anti-semetic It's a cartoon frog.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Banned said:

Won't speak as to whether or not this is a good or bad document, or whether or not it is needed. I will simply add the fact that over 95% of American Catholics view Jews with a neutral to very positive disposition. 4.3% of American Catholics have a negative view.

https://www.thebostonpilot.com/AMP/amp_article.php?ID=194540

Jews tend to have pretty poor feelings towards Christians in general (preferring Atheists to every christian major denomination), but strangely none moreso than Evangelical Christians. They have a whopping -40 feeling toward evangelicals, despite the evangelicals +39 feeling toward jews.

Catholics have a +29 toward judaism with Judaism having a +4 towards Catholics.



Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.


*the gates of Toledo have entered the chat*
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.


*the gates of Toledo have entered the chat*



Okay, you've got one claim that may or may not be true. Now how many attacks on innocent Jews in Spain alone would you like to go through? We can start with the attacks of the Catholic Visigoths who ruled Toledo before 711 on their Jewish population.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That Jewish opinion of evangelicals is interesting because the evangelicals are the biggest supporters of Jews.
You fly into Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport and the walls of the jetways display messages of evangelical support for Israel.
“If you’re going to have crime it should at least be organized crime”
-Havelock Vetinari
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.


*the gates of Toledo have entered the chat*



Okay, you've got one claim that may or may not be true. Now how many attacks on innocent Jews in Spain alone would you like to go through? We can start with the attacks of the Catholic Visigoths who ruled Toledo before 711 on their Jewish population.


Yeah, Catholics were upset about the whole "killing Jesus" thing as well as centuries of persecution at the hands of the Romans and Jews. Unfortunately for the Jews; they backed the wrong horse.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.


*the gates of Toledo have entered the chat*



Okay, you've got one claim that may or may not be true. Now how many attacks on innocent Jews in Spain alone would you like to go through? We can start with the attacks of the Catholic Visigoths who ruled Toledo before 711 on their Jewish population.


Yeah, Catholics were upset about the whole "killing Jesus" thing as well as centuries of persecution at the hands of the Romans and Jews. Unfortunately for the Jews; they backed the wrong horse.



So you believe every Jew is responsible for the death of Jesus? You're literally spouting the deicide charge that was used to massacre millions of Jews over centuries. And are you claiming that Jews allied with the Romans? Because I some news about Jewish-Roman relations.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

That Jewish opinion of evangelicals is interesting because the evangelicals are the biggest supporters of Jews.
You fly into Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport and the walls of the jetways display messages of evangelical support for Israel.


A number of evangelicals support Israel because of their interpretation of Revelation and their belief that Jews will convert en masse. It's not something that Jews in general are particularly comfortable with. Even outside of that, evangelical beliefs and conversion efforts don't lend themselves to deep trust or support.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Buddy, the history and power dynamics mean that Jews are often extremely reticent to trust Christians.


*the gates of Toledo have entered the chat*



Okay, you've got one claim that may or may not be true. Now how many attacks on innocent Jews in Spain alone would you like to go through? We can start with the attacks of the Catholic Visigoths who ruled Toledo before 711 on their Jewish population.


Yeah, Catholics were upset about the whole "killing Jesus" thing as well as centuries of persecution at the hands of the Romans and Jews. Unfortunately for the Jews; they backed the wrong horse.



So you believe every Jew is responsible for the death of Jesus? You're literally spouting the deicide charge that was used to massacre millions of Jews over centuries. And are you claiming that Jews allied with the Romans? Because I some news about Jewish-Roman relations.


No, I don't believe that, but I don't blame the early Christian's for thinking so. Especially those that had suffered under Jewish and Roman persecution. The idea of communal guilt or inherited guilt is not unknown in Judaism or christianity. All of mankind bears the mark of the fall due to the sin of Adam and Eve, after all.

Let's look at Herod Agrippa in particular; how was his relationship with the Romans? In particular Claudius and Drusius? What shenanigans did he get into with James the Just and Peter? How was his untimely death received by his people?
BonfireNerd04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Or the history behind claiming the Rothschilds or Soros are behind everything amd how that links to antisemitic conspiracy theories?


Context does matter a lot. There's a huge difference between dislike of Soros as an individual, and dislike of Soros as a tool to put "them" in power.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What does Herod Agrippa have to do with the Jewish people and the traditions and norms of antisemitism? Tension between Jews and Romans was sky-high during his life and after and he certainly didn't speak on behalf of all Jews, though there was hope he could provide a measure of independence for Judea.

And Judaism doesn't have a notion of generational punishment. There's no original sin in Judaism. It's about the choices made by individuals to continue or not continue along bad paths.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

What does Herod Agrippa have to do with the Jewish people and the traditions and norms of antisemitism? Tension between Jews and Romans was sky-high during his life and after and he certainly didn't speak on behalf of all Jews, though there was hope he could provide a measure of independence for Judea.

And Judaism doesn't have a notion of generational punishment. There's no original sin in Judaism. It's about the choices made by individuals to continue or not continue along bad paths.



Judaism doesn't have a notion of generational punishment? The people who were sentenced to wander for 40 years in the desert? Whose God sent plague after plague against the Egyptian people?
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No, it doesn't. The 40 years was a punishment for that generation and that generation alone. The plagues were for that group Egyptians and those who benefited from the slave society, etc…
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

No, it doesn't. The 40 years was a punishment for that generation and that generation alone. The plagues were for that group Egyptians and those who benefited from the slave society, etc…


No it wasn't, Joshua 5 references the children born during the
exodus weren't circumcised, they wouldn't have been in the generation guilty of disobedience to God. Similarly, the first born children of the Egyptians would have been innocent of any wrongdoings of their parents, yet were the target of a plague. That's the definition of generational punishment.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

No, it doesn't. The 40 years was a punishment for that generation and that generation alone. The plagues were for that group Egyptians and those who benefited from the slave society, etc…


No it wasn't, Joshua 5 references the children born during the
exodus weren't circumcised, they wouldn't have been in the generation guilty of disobedience to God. Similarly, the first born children of the Egyptians would have been innocent of any wrongdoings of their parents, yet were the target of a plague. That's the definition of generational punishment.



The 40 years was to remove those guilty of the golden calf. The first born was a plague on everyone in the land of Egypt at that moment. It didn't transfer down the ages to multiple generations. If you want to get into the moral depravity present in the Bible, happy to, but this isn't generational punishment ongoing because of the past sins of another. It's punishment in that moment on all who are around.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

No, it doesn't. The 40 years was a punishment for that generation and that generation alone. The plagues were for that group Egyptians and those who benefited from the slave society, etc…


No it wasn't, Joshua 5 references the children born during the
exodus weren't circumcised, they wouldn't have been in the generation guilty of disobedience to God. Similarly, the first born children of the Egyptians would have been innocent of any wrongdoings of their parents, yet were the target of a plague. That's the definition of generational punishment.



The 40 years was to remove those guilty of the golden calf. The first born was a plague on everyone in the land of Egypt at that moment. It didn't transfer down the ages to multiple generations. If you want to get into the moral depravity present in the Bible, happy to, but this isn't generational punishment ongoing because of the past sins of another. It's punishment in that moment on all who are around.
Connect the dots, counselor. This is about the sin of those who didn't commit the crime paying for the consequences of the crime. The children born during the exodus hadn't disobeyed or had lack of faith in God. The Egyptian first borns had nothing to do with the plague that was called down, and humanity is born not having sinned yet with the taint of original sin. This ties all back in to my initial point; this is what early Catholics would have thought regarding the guilt of jews for the crucifixion of Christ; especially given the wording, if not the intent, of Matthew 27.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deuteronomy is pretty explicit that children are not to be put to death for the sins of the father and visa versa. Is that not in the Catholic Bible?
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Deuteronomy is pretty explicit that children are not to be put to death for the sins of the father and visa versa. Is that not in the Catholic Bible?


Deuteronomy is all over the place, it also says that the sins of the parent are laid upon their children, even so far as the 3rd and 4th generation, contextually it's a warning against disobedience and an incentive towards obedience, but it still prompts a rebuke from Ezekiel in 18:20.

PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes it is and we (RCC) do not ascribe to the belief that sins of the father pass down to the children.
“Falsehood flies and the truth comes limping after it” -Jonathan Swift, 1710
BluHorseShu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quo Vadis? said:

Coming out with a GIGANTIC tome to make sure you cross examine everything we say so it isn't incidentally anti-Semitic.

Things that are anti-Semitic according to this new production:

1. Saying Jews aren't God's chosen people
2. Saying a "Jewish lobby" exists…..what is AIPAC?
3. Pepe the Frog
4. Mentioning the Rothschilds
5. Mentioning George Soros

Seriously, a 63 page glossary with steps towards fighting anti-semitism in the community reads like something out of the fever dream of whatever the Jewish equivalent of BLM is.

If you're a fellow Catholic, please join me in mailing and calling the USCCB and begging them to stop focusing on the virtue signaling nonsense, and fix the very real problems happening in our churches right now.

We've got gay couples giving homilies at masses, and queer interpretative liturgical dance, while TLM's are being closed all over the place, and the USCCB is chastising you for knowing Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were Jewish.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/261017/us-bishops-jewish-advocacy-group-release-catholic-guide-to-combating-antisemitism
I wouldn't call some of those 'anti semitic' on their face. The Pepe the Frog stuff is just not Christian. I think some of this is more about looking at the context in which people use it. I've absolutely heard people use Soros name as proof the "the Jews are in control"...and that is anti-semitic.

The problem is believing all of these are anti-semitic OR that none of them are. Because in the former case, no one likes to be made to feel guilty for something they shouldn't and in the latter case, there are a number of people who use that idea to sidle up with the mainstream to justify their extremist views.

My other thought is, why even broach these topics listed in every day conversations? The money spent by billionaires to buy politicians and elections is rampant every where. Any time spent on these things seems wasted in comparison to all the other things Christ calls us to do....which first and foremost is to love.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Deuteronomy is pretty explicit that children are not to be put to death for the sins of the father and visa versa. Is that not in the Catholic Bible?


Deuteronomy is all over the place, it also says that the sins of the parent are laid upon their children, even so far as the 3rd and 4th generation, contextually it's a warning against disobedience and an incentive towards obedience, but it still prompts a rebuke from Ezekiel in 18:20.




You're thinking of Exodus. And the Jewish belief is that behavior is often transmitted by parents resulting in a continuance of the sin, but the sin itself that is not continued. It is a new sin of the individual.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Sapper Redux said:

Deuteronomy is pretty explicit that children are not to be put to death for the sins of the father and visa versa. Is that not in the Catholic Bible?


Deuteronomy is all over the place, it also says that the sins of the parent are laid upon their children, even so far as the 3rd and 4th generation, contextually it's a warning against disobedience and an incentive towards obedience, but it still prompts a rebuke from Ezekiel in 18:20.




You're thinking of Exodus. And the Jewish belief is that behavior is often transmitted by parents resulting in a continuance of the sin, but the sin itself that is not continued. It is a new sin of the individual.


No I'm thinking of deuteronomy, 5:9.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Okay. Its the same argument.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'd suggest that Matthew 27 is quite a bit subtler than that. The blood of atonement cleanses and purifies. I think there's some dramatic irony there by the hand of St Matthew.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Zobel said:

I'd suggest that Matthew 27 is quite a bit subtler than that. The blood of atonement cleanses and purifies. I think there's some dramatic irony there by the hand of St Matthew.


Yes that's what I meant by "if not the intent". It's very misunderstood.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.