Author Topic: Vatican ѕуηαgσgυє agreement of 1965 (Read 1798 times)

Matthew · « **on:** June 22, 2012, 12:52:39 PM »

The Vatican-ѕуηαgσgυє Agreement
Vatican II & Rome’s Secret Accord with Jєωιѕн Leaders
by John Vennari

During the early days of the Second Vatican Council, a secret meeting took place between the Holy See and a group of Jєωs. It was a kind of “Vatican-Moscow” agreement applied to the ѕуηαgσgυє. The Vatican-Moscow agreement was a secret pact between Vatican and the Kremlin made in 1962 wherein in exchange for Russian Orthodox observers to be present at the Council, John XXIII guaranteed that Vatican II would contain no condemnation of Communism. [1]
News of the pact between Moscow and the Vatican is now widely publicized. The Vatican’s secret accord with Jєωιѕн leaders is not so well known.
The meeting concerning the Jєωs took place around 1962-63, and was recounted by the Jєωιѕн writer Lazare Landau in the French journal Tribune Juive (number 903), dated January 17-23, 1986. Pope John XXIII had entrusted these negotiations to Cardinal Bea, who at the time was the Pope’s point man for ecuмenism and interreligious dialogue.
Landau writes of Bea: “He sent secret emissaries to the Jєωιѕн communities to find out what they wanted. Thus, the Jєωs of Strasbourg received the Reverend Father Congar, OP, who came, shrouded in mystery, to the ѕуηαgσgυє, where he listened for two hours as the community leaders explained their grievances.”
This was the origin of the “new perspective” that would be imposed on Catholic doctrine, which was, as Jean Madiran notes, that “we must no longer speak of the infidelity of Israel but of its fidelity.”
Lazare Landau went into much more detail about this meeting in number 1001 of Tribune Juive, dated December 25-31, 1987. Landau reveals:

“On a misty, freezing winter’s evening in 1962-1963, I went to the Centre communautaire de le Paix [Peace Community Center] at Strasbourg in response to an extraordinary invitation. The Jєωιѕн leaders were holding a secret meeting in the basement with the envoy of the Pope. At the conclusion of the Sabbath, a dozen of us were there to welcome a white-robed Dominican, the Reverend Yves Congar, whom Cardinal Bea, in the name of John XXIII had charged with asking us, on the eve of the Council, what we expected from the Church...
“The Jєωs, kept apart from Christian society for nearly twenty centuries, and often treated as underdogs, enemies and deicides, asked to be completely rehabilitated. As descendants in the direct lineage from the monotheistic stock of Abraham, where Christianity arose, they asked to be considered as brothers, partners equal in dignity, of the Christian Church…
“The white messenger, divested of any symbol or adornment, returned to Rome taking with him innumerable petitions in harmony with our own. After difficult debate … the Council granted our wishes.
“Homilies and catechisms changed in a few short years. In France, the flower of this renewed doctrine was presented by the Editions du Centurion under the name: The Faith of Catholics. The French episcopate, in the person of L.A. Elchinger, Bishop of Strasbourg, played a decisive part in the presenting of the contemporary ‘Jєωιѕн Question’ at the Council. The clergy readily adopted the conciliar decisions. This attitude found powerful backing in the ‘Pastoral Orientations’ of the Episcopal committee for relations with Judaism, published by the French Episcopal Conference on April 16, 1973.
“In the Vatican itself, this current of thought received endorsement from a most eminent quarter. On October 4, 1983, in front of Pope John Paul II and the World Synod of Bishops, Cardinal Etchegaray, the minister of the Holy See, made a ringing declaration that resolved all the Jєωιѕн ‘problems’ in two points:
1. A total definitive reconciliation with Judaism and the Jєωs;
2. Repentance and pardon to be sought for the wrongs committed in the past.
“Since the secret visit from Father Congar in a concealed part of the ѕуηαgσgυє, on a cold winter’s night,the Church’s doctrine has indeed undergone a total change.” [2]

Jean Madiran noted that Father Congar would never confirm or deny that this meeting took place. What is most important, however, is that we see the consequences of Landau’s report unfolding from the time of the Council to the present.

go to: http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page35/vatican_ѕуηαgσgυє_agreement.html

Elizabeth · « **Reply #1 on:** June 22, 2012, 01:33:42 PM »

Wow!

I would be very curious as to the exact date and time of this nefarious meeting, for a number of reasons. I notice Mr. Landau omits the date.

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #2 on:** June 22, 2012, 09:49:08 PM »

This further substantiates the allegations that it was a coterie of Jєωιѕн internationalists who were pushing for what later would be dubbed as "Vatican II."

In his book, Sede Vacante: "Paulo VI no es legítimo Papa" (México, DF: Editores Asociados, S. de R. L., 1973), Rev. Father Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga wrote the following:

Here is a rough English translation:

Quote

The Key to the Enigma: The Pastoral Vatican II Council
[/size]

The world believes that John XXIII, the good Pope, was the one who convoked the Pastoral Vatican II Council. The truth is, as León de Poincins has told us in his book "Judaism in the Vatican," that numerous Jєωιѕн organizations and personalities have for a long time sought to introduce into the Church the reforms proposed and realized in that Council, with the intention of modifying its attitude and its teaching regarding Judaism. It was these Jєωs who, from without and within the Church, compelled the incredible reforms, proposed and realized in that lamentable Council, and who, with satanic and non-dissimulated satisfaction, now make merry of having been the ones who planned, and convoked, and directed Vatican II. In particular, the French Jєω Jules Isaac, representative of international Judaism, was the one who, by his writings and by his secret audiences at the Vatican, patronized by his blood brother and active member of the conspiracy, the lamentably celebrated Cardinal Augustine Bea, S.J., compelled the weak and compromised Pope Roncalli to that reformist adventure, which has efficaciously brought about the "auto-demolition" of the Church of Christ.

I. Three Jєωιѕн Attempts to Destroy Christendom

Judaism, a religion, sect and activist movement of permanent intrigue, has been fighting constantly against Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, the promised Messias; but, not to be doubted, it is now five centuries since their infiltration, their attacks, and their successes have been for them more spectacular, more audacious, and, for us, more bitter, more nefarious and more lamentable. The Jєωιѕн writer and historian Joshua Jehouda, in his book "L'ANTISEMITISME, MIROIR DE MONDE" ("Antisemitism: The Mirror of the World"), boasts unabashedly that in the last centuries Judaism had made three powerful attempts to "rectify Christendom;" three attempts "aimed at purging the Christian conscience;" three attempts to "correct, suffocate and paralyze the effects of Christian theology;" and three have been the breaches that have been made against the stronghold of the Church. They are three important victories, obtained in the fight against Christendom by its mortal enemies, the Jєωs.

1) The Renaissance (faith and science against the faith); 2) the Reformation (fifty years after the Renaissance; the revolt against the Church); 3) the revolution of 1789 (which the Communist Jєωs continue to our own days). To those attempts, there is to be added another three: 4) Modernism, propagated throughout the Church by the infiltrations of the marranos; 5) false philosophies such as those of Marx, Nietzsche, Voltaire, Freud, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin; 6) Vatican II, the Great Jєωιѕн Conspiracy, directed by the Jєωιѕн infiltrator Giovanni B. Montini.

Jehouda admists that Judaism, the kabbala and the тαℓмυd, are the root of all the attacks suffered by the Catholic Church, within the stronghold of Christendom. And he concludes: "The reform signals the revolution against the Catholic Church, which is in turn a revolution against the religion of Israel."

Lord Seiff, vice president of the Jєωιѕн World Congress, in his article "The Meaning of Survival" writes: "It is not an accident that it has been the Jєωs who have been the precursors and directors of many revolutions of thought and of spirit."

One hundred years ago, the Jєωιѕн infiltrators attempted to alter the traditional doctrine in the Catholic Church, during the Vatican I Council (1870). During that Council, the "marranos" renewed their ancient attempts to compel the Church to exonerate the Jєωs from the crime of deicide and then accept amicable ʝʊdɛօ-Christian relations. In a clever move they attempted to influence the congregated Fathers so that they would sign "a proposition in favor of the Jєωs." There was first talk of a requirement to convert the Israelites, but later there were added affirmations that were in open contradiction with the doctrines that Holy Church has taught regarding these matters.[/size]

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #3 on:** June 22, 2012, 10:11:45 PM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

Wow!

I would be very curious as to the exact date and time of this nefarious meeting, for a number of reasons. I notice Mr. Landau omits the date.

Quote from: Matthew

The Vatican-ѕуηαgσgυє Agreement
Vatican II & Rome’s Secret Accord with Jєωιѕн Leaders
by John Vennari

During the early days of the Second Vatican Council, a secret meeting took place between the Holy See and a group of Jєωs.
...
The meeting concerning the Jєωs took place around 1962-63,
...
“On a misty, freezing winter’s evening in 1962-1963, I went to the Centre communautaire de le Paix [Peace Community Center] at Strasbourg

...
At the conclusion of the Sabbath,

...
on the eve of the Council,

...
“Since the secret visit from Father Congar in a concealed part of the ѕуηαgσgυє, on a cold winter’s night, the Church’s doctrine has indeed undergone a total change.” [2]

...
we see the consequences of Landau’s report unfolding from the time of the Council to the present.

go to: http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page35/vatican_ѕуηαgσgυє_agreement.html

"During the early days of the Council" could refer to days prior to its start, for
many months of preparations were being made in advance of the arrival of
all the bishops in October of 1962.

It appears, by the foregoing clues, that the "cold winter's night," "on the eve of
the Council," would have to have been prior to October 11th, 1962, which was the
first day of the Council, probably 6 months before, in March, for it to be still in
"winter," and it was on a weekend, probably Saturday, "at the conclusion of the Sabbath."

alaric · « **Reply #4 on:** June 24, 2012, 03:16:56 PM »

"
" Jehouda admits that Judaism, the kabbala and the тαℓмυd, are the root of all the attacks suffered by the Catholic Church, within the stronghold of Christendom."

Boy have I ben saying this for years and now it comes right from the horse's mouth.

The Jєω knows the Church is his most formidable enemy.

MauricePinay · « **Reply #5 on:** June 25, 2012, 11:11:22 AM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

Wow!

I would be very curious as to the exact date and time of this nefarious meeting, for a number of reasons. I notice Mr. Landau omits the date.

I also noticed that there's no evidence at all to support this highly circulated story, as likely as it may seem.

However, it is very well docuмented fact that Cardinal Bea himself met with American Jєωιѕн Committee rabbis Marc Tanenbaum and Abraham Heschel at the AJC office in NYC and in Boston at Cardinal Cushing's chancery to discuss what they would like Nostra Aetate to say. There are dates, locations, docuмents, and photographs which have been available for years which I attempted to present to a largely indifferent traditionalist community more than a year ago.

Still, Mr. Landau's undocuмented story is passed along while the photos and docuмents proving a real meeting are suppressed. So, a year later, again I must ask, why is this?

The hour is late, people.

See:

Why traffic in storybook depictions?

MauricePinay · « **Reply #6 on:** June 25, 2012, 11:18:59 AM »

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #7 on:** June 26, 2012, 12:35:39 PM »

Quote from: MauricePinay

Quote from: Elizabeth
Wow!

I would be very curious as to the exact date and time of this nefarious meeting, for a number of reasons. I notice Mr. Landau omits the date.

I also noticed that there's no evidence at all to support this highly circulated story, as likely as it may seem.

However, it is very well docuмented fact that Cardinal Bea himself met with American Jєωιѕн Committee rabbis Marc Tanenbaum and Abraham Heschel at the AJC office in NYC and in Boston at Cardinal Cushing's chancery to discuss what they would like Nostra Aetate to say. There are dates, locations, docuмents, and photographs which have been available for years which I attempted to present to a largely indifferent traditionalist community more than a year ago.

Still, Mr. Landau's undocuмented story is passed along while the photos and docuмents proving a real meeting are suppressed. So, a year later, again I must ask, why is this?

The hour is late, people.

See:

Why traffic in storybook depictions?

*******************************
I appreciate your comment, MP, and I appreciate your blog post:

Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Why traffic in storybook depictions?

On March 27, 1963 Cardinal Bea HIMSELF met with Rabbis Marc Tanenbaum and Abraham Heschel, representatives of the 'American' 'Jєωιѕн' Committee, in Boston in Cardinal Cushing's chancery, and discussed what "The Jєωs" wanted to happen at the Vatican II council. This is very well docuмented, easily accessed information (e.g. Spiritual Radical, Edward Kaplan). Cardinal Bea then went to the AJC headquarters in New York on March 31, 1963 to further discuss what "The Jєωs" wanted to happen at the council with President of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Rabbi Albert G. Minda, Heschel and Tanenbaum (see docuмent and image below). Further, Rabbi Heschel met with Pope Paul VI on the opening day of the third session of the council, Sept 14, 1964, to discuss what "The Jєωs" wanted to happen at the council. The Pope changed the originally scheduled day to accommodate the rabbi's religion (it was 'the Jєωιѕн Sabbath'). This is easily sourced, widely available information.

Cardinal Bea and the Pope himself met with Rabbi Heschel who confided to an Israeli reporter that his motive for making outrageous statements about 'going to Auschwitz rather than convert' was that he wanted to attack Christian souls. This is a well docuмented fact. And they made concessions to this hostile figure and the hostile organizations he represented in a Vatican II Council docuмent. There are photographs of Heshel meeting Pope Paul VI in 1971 AFTER Heschel had made this admission of hostile intent which was well known in Rome.

There are photographs of Cardinal Shehan meeting with Zachariah Shuster (of the AJC and one of Malachi Martin's handlers) to discuss Vatican II; photos of Cardinal Spellman meeting with AJC directors. This barely scratches the surface of well-docuмented meetings that took place between Judaic organizations and their rabbis and cardinals and even the Pope leading up to Vatican II. There were many, many such meetings and they continue to this day, seemingly on a daily, or at least weekly basis.

Why do 'traditionalists' prefer the Malachi Martinesque, storybook version of history about 'a cold winter night sometime between 1962-63 when Cardinal Bea may have sent a representative to a mysterious meeting in a ѕуηαgσgυє basement somewhere in Strasbourg which he neither confirmed or denied took place'? Why is this so much more alluring than the docuмented facts?

I believe what I've been told is true: there is an insufficient love for truth among these people.

Fr. Stephen Schmidt, S. J.; President of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Rabbi Albert G. Minda; Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel; AJC Director of Interreligious Affairs, Rabbi Marc Tanenbaum with Cardinal Augustin Bea, March 31, 1963, AJC building, 165 E. 56th St., New York City

****************************
I followed your link to the CFN webpage, and found it starts with this paragraph:

Common Mission
and “Significant Silence”
Pope Benedict’s latest statements on Jєωs and Conversion

By John Vennari

“Church Should Not Pursue Conversion of Jєωs, Pope Says”. This was the headline of a recent National Catholic Reporter story on the Pope’s new book, Jesus of Nazareth Part II: Holy Week. [1]

The Pope’s latest tome, which is the sequel to his earlier work Jesus of Nazareth Part I, has been hailed by the Vatican’s Cardinal Marc Ouellet as “an extraordinarily ecuмenical book” [2] This is not surprising, as Pope Benedict is primarily an ecuмenical theologian whose thought regarding members of non-Catholic religions is structured according to the new orientation of Vatican II.

Pope Benedict’s latest statements concerning the Jєωs are consistent with what appears in his books over the years, four of which we will spotlight, wherein he claims that today’s Jєωs and Christians share a “common mission” to bring God to the world.

His comments are consistent with his acts as Pope, such as changing the Old Liturgy’s Good Friday Prayer for the conversion of the Jєωs because it is “offensive to them”, and in his visiting three ѕуηαgσgυєs in the past six years.

His statements are consistent with what Thomistic theologian Father Edward Hanahoe warned was an inherent weakness in ecuмenical theologians. In 1962, Father Hanahoe explained that the writings of ecuмenical theologians often suffer from “significant silence” on key points of Catholic doctrine that interfere with their ecuмenical designs. [3]

Benedict’s statements are consistent with what is implicit in the new teachings of Vatican II, made explicit by Pope John Paul II, and promoted in a 1985 Vatican docuмent about the Jєωs.

Benedict’s words are also in line with the outcome of a little-known secret meeting between Jєωs and Vatican envoy Father Yves Congar during Vatican II, in which the Jєωs asked to be “completely rehabilitated” and “considered as brothers, partners in equal dignity,” even though Jєωs would maintain their rejection of Christ. As a result of this meeting, says Jєωιѕн writer Lazare Landau, “the Council granted our wishes.”

All of these points will be explained as we proceed...

**************************
To answer your question, I would have to ask John Vennari. Have you asked him?

He's a reasonable man, and I suspect he would reply if you give him a chance.