Holocaust & Holodomor
The Bishop’s statements contradict the de Fide Catholic teaching that the old covenant was superseded by Christ's coming on earth and his establishment of the Catholic Church. Furthermore, the good Bishop is well aware the Talmud, which is the work that contains the doctrines, laws and commentaries on Judaism made by the most prestigious rabbis throughout history, contains such teachings as: •“Whoever loves a Christian would hate his own creator;
•“Those who deny the teaching of Israel, particularly the followers of the
Nazarene, should be killed;
•“It is always a good work to execute them; if this is not possible, we should try
to cause their deaths.
•“It is prohibited for the Jews to praise the learning or virtue of a Christian,” etc.
It would always be nice if they can give some sources for these statements...
Zero concern for the salvation of souls
Furthermore, the preceding statements by conciliar Church authorities reveal an extremely callous disregard for the eternal welfare of the souls of Jews because the statements encourage Jews to deny the divinity of Christ and to not convert to the Catholic Church outside of which there is no salvation. [/color]
The statements are just one more example of the many conciliar Church teachings and actions which contradict the fundamental measure for evaluating all teachings and actions of Catholic Church authorities. The measure is the degree to which a teaching or action fulfills Christ’s purpose for establishing the Catholic Church, which is to give honor and glory to God and the salvation of souls. .
Maybe St. Bernard also did not care about the salvation of souls, then:Esto, de Judaeis excusat te tempus: habent terminum suum qui praeveniri [al., praeteriri] non poterit. Plenitudinem gentium praeire oportet. Sed de ipsis gentibus quid respondes? Imo quid tua consideratio respondet tibi percunctanti sic? Quid visum est patribus ponere metam Evangelio, verbum suspendere fidei, donec infidelitas durat? Qua ratione, putamus, substitit velociter currens sermo? (Psal. CXLVII, 15.) quis primus inhibuit hunc salutarem cursum? Et illis causa forte quam nescimus, aut necessitas potuit obstitisse.
Nobis quae dissimulandi ratio est? Qua fiducia, qua conscientia Christum non vel offerimus eis qui non habent? An veritatem Dei in injustitia detinemus? Et quidem quandoque perveniat gentium plenitudo necesse est.
(Consideratione, III/I, 2sq)
Maybe we should more ask ourselves, what the Doctor Mellifluus expounds just after the quoted passage: Are we waiting for the faith to fall from heaven upon them? Who ever believed by accident? How shall they believe without a preacher?
Besides that, the Holy Chair has made the general obligation of the Church very clear:
"the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men" (CCC 848)
further the declaration Dominus Jesu:
“solutions that propose a salvific action of God beyond the unique mediation of Christ would be contrary to Christian and Catholic faith." (AAS 92, p. 742)
Further the lesser known Declaratio circa catholicam doctrinam de Ecclesia contra nonnullos errores hodiernos tuendam
"One is the Church, which after His Resurrection our Savior handed over to Peter as Shepherd (cf. Jn 21:17), commissioning him and the other apostles to propagate and govern her (cf. Mt 18:18ff.) (and which) He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth" (cf. 1 Tm 3:15). And this Church of Christ, "constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the Successor of Peter and the bishops in union with that Successor."(3) This declaration of the Second Vatican Council is illustrated by the same Council's statement that "it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the general means of salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained,"(4) and that same Catholic Church "has been endowed with all divinely revealed truth and with all the means of grace"(5) with which Christ wished to enhance His messianic community..." (AAS 65  396-408)
or John Paul II.:
"[It is said] that Christians renounce guiding non-Christians to the way of the Gospel, refrain from proposing or encouraging conversion, and exclude the prospect of Baptism. Thus the way of salvation followed by each according to his own education and religious background would be respected (cf. RM 4).
But such a concept appears incompatible with Christ's mandate to the apostles (cf. Mt 28:19-20; Mk 16:15) handed down to the Church, and with the authentic ecclesiology to which the Second Vatican Council referred in order to show the obvious need for missionary activity. It is a question of several basic truths. God desires salvation for all. Jesus Christ is the "only Mediator," the one who "gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:5), since "neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4:12). "All must be converted to him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into him by baptism and into the Church which is his body. For Christ himself by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church" (AG 7).... The Church's traditional teaching illustrates the inconsistency and superficiality of a relativist and irenic attitude regarding the way of salvation in a religion different from that based on faith in Christ.....one cannot, in the name of these ways, slow down or abandon missionary activity.... missionary activity today as always retains its power and necessity" (AG 7)." (General Audience, May 10, 1995)
further John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, AAS 83 (1991), 293 or Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi, AAS 69 (1976)