There is nothing about offering water to God in the Penteteuch on the feast of tabernacles. But, Catholicism’s apologetics against Protestants ultimately lead to this canonization of the Talmud by Pope Francis. Remember a traditional Catholic argument (in English speaking Catholicism at least in my lifetime) is that when Jesus said “Do whatever the Pharisees tell you, for they sit in Moses’ seat” that he was serious, and that is proves the papacy or the priesthood, one or the other or both, because regardless of whether the priesthood or papacy is right or wrong we must obey them as Jesus told those people back then to obey the Pharisess, for the priesthood or papacy sits in Peter’s seat the same as the Pharisees sat in Moses’ seat. Protestants usually say like “Bro, read the rest of the chapter; Jesus was CLEARLY being sarcastic. After all, the rest of the chapter is all about how anyone who follows the Pharisees is blind, and the Pharisees are blind, so it will be the blind leading the blind and they’ll all fall in a ditch.” Which is followed by the Catholic apologist basically pretending that the rest of the chapter doesn’t say what it obviously does, which shows he is either lying to make this thing work as an argument for the priesthood and/or papacy, or is literally a tonedeaf rube who can’t see the obvious sarcasm in Jesus telling people to obey the Pharisees who were commanding them to not believe in Christ! and threatning to put them out of the synagogues if they believed in Christ! This argument has been extended by several Catholic apologists into them arguing that what’s in the Talmud is literally inspired of God, and I’ve seen it, but I can’t remember if it was William Albrecht or Eric Ybarra, because to me they look very similar, but it was on of those yokels for sure. So its not surprising that Francis and/or his advisors in the Vatican have been led to the same dumb conclusion by this bad argument, that even a 5 year old Protestants can debunk in 20 seconds.
The Pharisees taught people correctly, but would seek out legalistic means to excuse themselves from doing what they taught others to do.
And as usual stupid Protestants don’t even read the Bible despite proclaiming to “luv it.”
Read the next line directly after, which you (deliberately) did not quote, from Matthew 23:2, and go further heretic! https://biblehub.com/matthew/23.htm
The entire chapter from beginning to end is Christ being deadly serious, as a warning to the corrupt religious whom He knew were listening, and prophecizes the martyrdoms to come. Especially note at the end where Christ says, “Truly, I tell you these things…” AKA NOT SARCASM.
The reference to “Moses’ Seat” refers also to unbroken Tradition, which Catholicism maintains by reference to Peter.
The present occupiers cast this off, making them even worse than the Pharisees.
The talmud (intentional lower case t) is a wicked, satanic book. It’s even worse than the koran and we all know how bad that thing is. The passages in the talmud about Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin are so vile, perverted and evil, I can’t bring myself to type them here.
No one should be shocked or scandalized that antipope Bergoglio would cite this satanic piece of trash.
He cannot be pope. The man is not remotely Catholic. The list of his heresies is so long, as is the list of his debunking or trashing Catholic faith and tradition. Why do so few Catholics care about this! Why do we ignore this reality. In what sense, is he Catholic. Does the pope have to be Catholic to be pope? Of course he does. At the first heresy he has forfeited his office, but we allow the corrupt men of the church, who assent to his vile teachings out of convenience and cowardice, to force us to go along. God gave us the remedy, it is not a theological test, we do not need to be theologians to know if he is pope or not.
Does he come preaching a different gospel. YES. Yes he does. There is very little that is recognizably Catholic in what Francis promotes. Was Jesus kidding us when He gave us this straightforward methodology to determine papal heretics? Did He say it and not really mean it. His intention, was it that we should all be theologians so we would all know whether or not to follow a dodgy pope? Then why tell us this, or why tell us the sheep know the voice of the true shepherd, or all the warnings about ravenous wolves. Why give us these warnings if the intention was we need only go along with the corrupted men that surround him, we have no choice. He gave us the way to know, but we push the evidence of our senses and history and scripture aside. We ignore the words of the Lord.
When it was realized, in 2013, that Bergoglio refused to kneel before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, something he routinely does, as he stands there and glares at God, this was when all should have known something was terribly amiss, and headed to the Vatican for redress. Part of this problem is Bergoglio and the evil and corrupted men around him, part of the problem is us.
I note that for all his faults (and of course sedes think he was a heretic) , JP2 always kneeled before the Blessed Sacrament, even rigid with disease and in excruciating pain, he had his assistants lower him. Bergoglio is an antipope, a heretic, and the false prophet. He’s pure evil.
The prayers which the Novus ordo substituted for the true Offertory Prayers of the Mass (ie, Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation…) are a Talmudic table blessing, so, the Talmud has been included in the worship service of Nuchurch for 55 years now.
Does anybody else notice that it’s also right underneath a citation of everyone’s favorite modern devotion, the “Divine Faustina Diary”?
Kudos to the contributor for paying close attention to references. It’s amazing what you might discover when you go sleuthing around the primary sources.
I have always been suspicious of the “Divine Mercy” devotion and of “Saint” Faustina. Even when I was in college and others were doing the chaplet, I was a little uncomfortable. There is something creepy and not right about the devotion, and that seems to be the sensus fidelium, no matter how much the devotion is pushed onto the faithful. The prayers in the chaplet are strange. For example, why would we want to ask God to have mercy “on the whole world”? Why shouldn’t we be praying for His justice to be unleashed against all the evil forces in the world.
Later I know why I felt that way. It appears to have been a freemasonic post WWI and proto-Vatican II type of attack on the Sacred Heart in order to replace it with something shallow and meaningless. The popes, including even Pope John XXIII, were savvy enough to know what was going on, and that is why it was condemned.
Also, the excuses they make for why the devotion was unequivocally condemned by the Vatican in 1959, claiming it was all the fault of the translation from Polish to Italian, sound very similar to the excuses that the professional Catholics give for Bergoglio.
Many would be aware of some of the arguments against the authenticity of the Polish Devotion (a.k.a. ‘Divine Mercy’), though, if I may be so bold, I list a few of the salient problems with it. It should be noted that the actual prayers that comprise the chaplet are completely orthodox; the chaplet is essentially a re-configuring of the ‘Holy Wounds’ Chaplet of the early 20th C. which, whilst there is some consternation over, seems in and of itself valid. The problems many have with the DM are elsewhere.
• Sr. Faustina’s diary indicates that our Lord told her (words to the effect) that He was ‘uniting Himself closer to her than any other creature.’ Our Lady is a creature and any consideration of her Sixth Dolor, the piercing of Jesus’ Side (cf. prophecy of the holy Simeon), and related analysis of the ‘oneness’ of the Sacred & Immaculate Hearts would immediately dispel such a horrid blasphemy. The Saints have spoken of this immeasurable closeness (e.g. St Alphonsus amongst many others) and such a claim is, simply, impossible.
• Predictions given in her writings, other than not having materialised – indeed, the opposite – contrast starkly with those given Berthe Petit, the contemporaneous Belgian mystic whose apostolate, as it happens, was to make known the closeness of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, with particular focus on the Sorrowful dimension of the Immaculate Heart. The prayer “Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, dwelling pure and holy…” was, amongst others, given Berthe Petit by our Lord.
• As the reader would know, the Enemy has oft times appeared to the greatest of Saints in order to deceive and, again as many are likely aware, on one such occasion did so to St. Teresa of Avila (in the guise of our Lord) to which the Saint, in the blink of an eye, bellowed “GET BEHIND ME SATAN!” To which, crest-fallen, the fiend enquired “How did you know it was me?” and who was admonished “Our Redeemer has Wounds, thou dost not.” The original image, which is the only one Sr. Faustina saw and, indeed, oversaw through-out its manufacture, has no Wounds. Perhaps a fleck of red on the left hand, though little more than a suggestion.
• The same image is oft characterised as ‘the Sacred Heart without the Heart’ and its proliferation has eclipsed representation of – and devotion to – the Sacred Heart in the vast majority of churches in these post-conciliar days. Some suggest it is of Masonic representation, viz. the beams being triangular in form and the finger serving as the loathsome eye atop the pyramid.
• Far from being exhaustive, though suggested finally, Sr. Lucia’s remarks in her last authentic interview (St. Stephen’s Day, 1957) regarding devotions given in this period of ‘last days’ merit consideration. She indicates (from memory) that God has given man two (2) last remedies: the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Holy Rosary and, importantly, at a time when the Polish Devotion was gaining popularity in Europe (and having been condemned by Ven. Pius XII), the Servant of God made the pointed stipulation ‘Two last devotions means there will be no others.’
Indeed, we see these “stand-alone” devotions, which do not seem to comport with the rest of Catholic prophecy. The so-called “Divine Will” from Luisa Picaretta has this problem as well: inventing massive novelties, not found anywhere else. So, I would certainly concur with Pope Pius XII regarding the devotions for our times.
The only other thing I’d add with the Divine Mercy business is that the Church in Poland has a track record of false mercy devotions, even enough to earn excommunication (from Pope St. Pius X in 1906). Finally, why in the world would we totally replace the Mass for the Sunday after Easter (Quasi Modo Sunday) on the strength of the testimony of ONE SOLITARY NUN FROM POLAND? We didn’t even do that for Fatima, Lourdes, or any other Marian apparition. By the way, we already had a “divine mercy” Sunday (the 2nd Sunday after Easter; see the Introit).
Let us say “no” to the Divine Faustina Mercy.
Joel…was that from the real Sr. Lucia or the replacement?
Gee, I thought the Talmud WAS official Magisterial teaching. Silly me!
That was the real one and, as I understand it, her last interview before her bishop hid her away and disallowed any further.
(Some speculate she died c. 1959 though I have no idea if there’s reason to believe such.)
You can find a good coverage of this discourse on 1 LUTHER 5 (an old article) and, reading ‘between the lines’ of what she says, and considering such in light of what has transpired since, the thrust of the Third Secret (regarding the Church at least) can, I think, be gleaned.
This interview was given in late 1957 upon expectation that the secret was to be revealed in 1960. Indeed, she remarks “… It’s still a secret.”
just wanted to let everyone know that Mark’s efforts are appreciated overseas as well. I am a young Hungarian Catholic who first started to think about whether Bergoglio is antipope in 2021, when Coffin interviewed Mazza in his podcast. I became convinced sometime early 2022. Before that, the thought that he might be an antipope never once crossed my mind, not even when he organized the Pachamama-worship. It was so unthinkable that someone in white who (almost) all the bishops and cardinals accept as pope might be such a fraudster.
It is really scary how much this entire issue is barely being discussed in non-English-language Catholic media. This goes to show that the mere existence of the Internet does not eliminate invincible ignorance. Most people don’t have a clue in my opinion.
On my website, christianfaith.info, I have written some articles on Benedict’s erroneous resignation and Bergoglio’s heresies.
So many are in the danger of losing the faith as long they hold this guy’s legitimacy is axiomatic. Eventually people are going to think the papacy is a lie. How can thinking someone who openly collaborate with new world order folks is perhaps not the Holy Father lead one to hell? If he were the pope you would have to get death jabbed because it is a moral teaching, requiring religious submission and respect.
Well, his nephew is a rabbi. It makes sense. And Conciliarists will jump for joy at the ecumenism.
Uh oh, will Dr. E Michael Jones flip now? Or will this be one of those things that can “safely” be ignored?
There is nothing about offering water to God in the Penteteuch on the feast of tabernacles. But, Catholicism’s apologetics against Protestants ultimately lead to this canonization of the Talmud by Pope Francis. Remember a traditional Catholic argument (in English speaking Catholicism at least in my lifetime) is that when Jesus said “Do whatever the Pharisees tell you, for they sit in Moses’ seat” that he was serious, and that is proves the papacy or the priesthood, one or the other or both, because regardless of whether the priesthood or papacy is right or wrong we must obey them as Jesus told those people back then to obey the Pharisess, for the priesthood or papacy sits in Peter’s seat the same as the Pharisees sat in Moses’ seat. Protestants usually say like “Bro, read the rest of the chapter; Jesus was CLEARLY being sarcastic. After all, the rest of the chapter is all about how anyone who follows the Pharisees is blind, and the Pharisees are blind, so it will be the blind leading the blind and they’ll all fall in a ditch.” Which is followed by the Catholic apologist basically pretending that the rest of the chapter doesn’t say what it obviously does, which shows he is either lying to make this thing work as an argument for the priesthood and/or papacy, or is literally a tonedeaf rube who can’t see the obvious sarcasm in Jesus telling people to obey the Pharisees who were commanding them to not believe in Christ! and threatning to put them out of the synagogues if they believed in Christ! This argument has been extended by several Catholic apologists into them arguing that what’s in the Talmud is literally inspired of God, and I’ve seen it, but I can’t remember if it was William Albrecht or Eric Ybarra, because to me they look very similar, but it was on of those yokels for sure. So its not surprising that Francis and/or his advisors in the Vatican have been led to the same dumb conclusion by this bad argument, that even a 5 year old Protestants can debunk in 20 seconds.
No stupid.
Jesus was pointing out the Pharisee’s hypocrisy.
The Pharisees taught people correctly, but would seek out legalistic means to excuse themselves from doing what they taught others to do.
And as usual stupid Protestants don’t even read the Bible despite proclaiming to “luv it.”
Read the next line directly after, which you (deliberately) did not quote, from Matthew 23:2, and go further heretic!
https://biblehub.com/matthew/23.htm
The entire chapter from beginning to end is Christ being deadly serious, as a warning to the corrupt religious whom He knew were listening, and prophecizes the martyrdoms to come. Especially note at the end where Christ says, “Truly, I tell you these things…” AKA NOT SARCASM.
The reference to “Moses’ Seat” refers also to unbroken Tradition, which Catholicism maintains by reference to Peter.
The present occupiers cast this off, making them even worse than the Pharisees.
The talmud (intentional lower case t) is a wicked, satanic book. It’s even worse than the koran and we all know how bad that thing is. The passages in the talmud about Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin are so vile, perverted and evil, I can’t bring myself to type them here.
No one should be shocked or scandalized that antipope Bergoglio would cite this satanic piece of trash.
He cannot be pope. The man is not remotely Catholic. The list of his heresies is so long, as is the list of his debunking or trashing Catholic faith and tradition. Why do so few Catholics care about this! Why do we ignore this reality. In what sense, is he Catholic. Does the pope have to be Catholic to be pope? Of course he does. At the first heresy he has forfeited his office, but we allow the corrupt men of the church, who assent to his vile teachings out of convenience and cowardice, to force us to go along. God gave us the remedy, it is not a theological test, we do not need to be theologians to know if he is pope or not.
Does he come preaching a different gospel. YES. Yes he does. There is very little that is recognizably Catholic in what Francis promotes. Was Jesus kidding us when He gave us this straightforward methodology to determine papal heretics? Did He say it and not really mean it. His intention, was it that we should all be theologians so we would all know whether or not to follow a dodgy pope? Then why tell us this, or why tell us the sheep know the voice of the true shepherd, or all the warnings about ravenous wolves. Why give us these warnings if the intention was we need only go along with the corrupted men that surround him, we have no choice. He gave us the way to know, but we push the evidence of our senses and history and scripture aside. We ignore the words of the Lord.
When it was realized, in 2013, that Bergoglio refused to kneel before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, something he routinely does, as he stands there and glares at God, this was when all should have known something was terribly amiss, and headed to the Vatican for redress. Part of this problem is Bergoglio and the evil and corrupted men around him, part of the problem is us.
I note that for all his faults (and of course sedes think he was a heretic) , JP2 always kneeled before the Blessed Sacrament, even rigid with disease and in excruciating pain, he had his assistants lower him. Bergoglio is an antipope, a heretic, and the false prophet. He’s pure evil.
The prayers which the Novus ordo substituted for the true Offertory Prayers of the Mass (ie, Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation…) are a Talmudic table blessing, so, the Talmud has been included in the worship service of Nuchurch for 55 years now.
Does anybody else notice that it’s also right underneath a citation of everyone’s favorite modern devotion, the “Divine Faustina Diary”?
Kudos to the contributor for paying close attention to references. It’s amazing what you might discover when you go sleuthing around the primary sources.
Yes I did.
O! Do not get me started on the Polish Devotion.
Chris,
I have always been suspicious of the “Divine Mercy” devotion and of “Saint” Faustina. Even when I was in college and others were doing the chaplet, I was a little uncomfortable. There is something creepy and not right about the devotion, and that seems to be the sensus fidelium, no matter how much the devotion is pushed onto the faithful. The prayers in the chaplet are strange. For example, why would we want to ask God to have mercy “on the whole world”? Why shouldn’t we be praying for His justice to be unleashed against all the evil forces in the world.
Later I know why I felt that way. It appears to have been a freemasonic post WWI and proto-Vatican II type of attack on the Sacred Heart in order to replace it with something shallow and meaningless. The popes, including even Pope John XXIII, were savvy enough to know what was going on, and that is why it was condemned.
Also, the excuses they make for why the devotion was unequivocally condemned by the Vatican in 1959, claiming it was all the fault of the translation from Polish to Italian, sound very similar to the excuses that the professional Catholics give for Bergoglio.
Ever since I was a kid, that image has always bugged me. It just felt kitschy, almost cartoonish.
It’s as reverent as a “Christian rock” ballad.
Please forgive this extended remark.
Many would be aware of some of the arguments against the authenticity of the Polish Devotion (a.k.a. ‘Divine Mercy’), though, if I may be so bold, I list a few of the salient problems with it. It should be noted that the actual prayers that comprise the chaplet are completely orthodox; the chaplet is essentially a re-configuring of the ‘Holy Wounds’ Chaplet of the early 20th C. which, whilst there is some consternation over, seems in and of itself valid. The problems many have with the DM are elsewhere.
• Sr. Faustina’s diary indicates that our Lord told her (words to the effect) that He was ‘uniting Himself closer to her than any other creature.’ Our Lady is a creature and any consideration of her Sixth Dolor, the piercing of Jesus’ Side (cf. prophecy of the holy Simeon), and related analysis of the ‘oneness’ of the Sacred & Immaculate Hearts would immediately dispel such a horrid blasphemy. The Saints have spoken of this immeasurable closeness (e.g. St Alphonsus amongst many others) and such a claim is, simply, impossible.
• Predictions given in her writings, other than not having materialised – indeed, the opposite – contrast starkly with those given Berthe Petit, the contemporaneous Belgian mystic whose apostolate, as it happens, was to make known the closeness of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, with particular focus on the Sorrowful dimension of the Immaculate Heart. The prayer “Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, dwelling pure and holy…” was, amongst others, given Berthe Petit by our Lord.
• As the reader would know, the Enemy has oft times appeared to the greatest of Saints in order to deceive and, again as many are likely aware, on one such occasion did so to St. Teresa of Avila (in the guise of our Lord) to which the Saint, in the blink of an eye, bellowed “GET BEHIND ME SATAN!” To which, crest-fallen, the fiend enquired “How did you know it was me?” and who was admonished “Our Redeemer has Wounds, thou dost not.” The original image, which is the only one Sr. Faustina saw and, indeed, oversaw through-out its manufacture, has no Wounds. Perhaps a fleck of red on the left hand, though little more than a suggestion.
• The same image is oft characterised as ‘the Sacred Heart without the Heart’ and its proliferation has eclipsed representation of – and devotion to – the Sacred Heart in the vast majority of churches in these post-conciliar days. Some suggest it is of Masonic representation, viz. the beams being triangular in form and the finger serving as the loathsome eye atop the pyramid.
• Far from being exhaustive, though suggested finally, Sr. Lucia’s remarks in her last authentic interview (St. Stephen’s Day, 1957) regarding devotions given in this period of ‘last days’ merit consideration. She indicates (from memory) that God has given man two (2) last remedies: the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Holy Rosary and, importantly, at a time when the Polish Devotion was gaining popularity in Europe (and having been condemned by Ven. Pius XII), the Servant of God made the pointed stipulation ‘Two last devotions means there will be no others.’
Great comments (J.R., Joel, and others).
Indeed, we see these “stand-alone” devotions, which do not seem to comport with the rest of Catholic prophecy. The so-called “Divine Will” from Luisa Picaretta has this problem as well: inventing massive novelties, not found anywhere else. So, I would certainly concur with Pope Pius XII regarding the devotions for our times.
The only other thing I’d add with the Divine Mercy business is that the Church in Poland has a track record of false mercy devotions, even enough to earn excommunication (from Pope St. Pius X in 1906). Finally, why in the world would we totally replace the Mass for the Sunday after Easter (Quasi Modo Sunday) on the strength of the testimony of ONE SOLITARY NUN FROM POLAND? We didn’t even do that for Fatima, Lourdes, or any other Marian apparition. By the way, we already had a “divine mercy” Sunday (the 2nd Sunday after Easter; see the Introit).
Let us say “no” to the Divine Faustina Mercy.
Joel…was that from the real Sr. Lucia or the replacement?
Gee, I thought the Talmud WAS official Magisterial teaching. Silly me!
@ SUSAN : RE Sr. Lucia,
That was the real one and, as I understand it, her last interview before her bishop hid her away and disallowed any further.
(Some speculate she died c. 1959 though I have no idea if there’s reason to believe such.)
You can find a good coverage of this discourse on 1 LUTHER 5 (an old article) and, reading ‘between the lines’ of what she says, and considering such in light of what has transpired since, the thrust of the Third Secret (regarding the Church at least) can, I think, be gleaned.
This interview was given in late 1957 upon expectation that the secret was to be revealed in 1960. Indeed, she remarks “… It’s still a secret.”
Hi everyone,
just wanted to let everyone know that Mark’s efforts are appreciated overseas as well. I am a young Hungarian Catholic who first started to think about whether Bergoglio is antipope in 2021, when Coffin interviewed Mazza in his podcast. I became convinced sometime early 2022. Before that, the thought that he might be an antipope never once crossed my mind, not even when he organized the Pachamama-worship. It was so unthinkable that someone in white who (almost) all the bishops and cardinals accept as pope might be such a fraudster.
It is really scary how much this entire issue is barely being discussed in non-English-language Catholic media. This goes to show that the mere existence of the Internet does not eliminate invincible ignorance. Most people don’t have a clue in my opinion.
On my website, christianfaith.info, I have written some articles on Benedict’s erroneous resignation and Bergoglio’s heresies.
May God bless you and your work!
So many are in the danger of losing the faith as long they hold this guy’s legitimacy is axiomatic. Eventually people are going to think the papacy is a lie. How can thinking someone who openly collaborate with new world order folks is perhaps not the Holy Father lead one to hell? If he were the pope you would have to get death jabbed because it is a moral teaching, requiring religious submission and respect.
That man is the anti-pope, The Church, (Inc., LLC) is gone, fork time, it’s over…
How long, O Lord, must i hear “Pope Francis’ teaching” on local Catholic radio. After all he has said and done. How long.