Rabbi Schneerson and Noahide Laws

 

https://paulcraigroberts.org/the-noahide-laws/

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson was a leading figure of the Noahide Law movement, he is honored in Public Law 102-14, a law which claims that the Talmudic Noahide Laws are the "basis... upon which our great nation was founded". Besides being known as an ardent Noahide Law advocate, Schneerson is also a controversial figure due to statements he has made about non-Jews, such as claiming that non-Jewish souls come from "satanic spheres", while only Jewish souls are holy. Some Jews say that these quotes about non-Jews being “satanic” have been taken out of context.  We wanted to make sure we were not falsely accusing Rabbi Scheerson, the Rabbi honored in USA Public Law 102-14, of anti-Gentile bigotry. After doing some research, we came across the book “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel” written by secular Israeli activist Israel Shahak and American professor Norton Mezvinsky (free copy here). Fortunately, their research puts Rabbi Schneerson’s quotes about non-Jews being “satanic” into full contexts, and it is worse than we had previously noted.  The relevant passages are reproduced below, and when read in full (our emphasis added) it becomes very clear that the Rabbi meant exactly what he said, that non-Jews and Jews are of a different species and that non-Jews are indeed “satanic”.  However, the passage further reveals the depth of the Rabbi’s hatred for non-Jews.  According to Schneerson’s logic, a non-Jew who kills an embryo, whether the embryo is non-Jewish or Jewish, should be sentenced to death, but a Jew who kills even a Jewish embryo should not be killed.  Why is that you may ask?  According to the Rabbi’s hate filled logic, a non-Jew’s life is in vain and purposeless beyond his or her service to Jews, however, a Jew’s life has divine purpose and is the reason for creation.  An adult living Jew is considered to have greater value than a Jewish embryo which the Rabbi refers to as “subsidiary”, and so his or her life should not be forfeited for the sake of an unborn child.  However, the non-Jew’s soul is “satanic” anyway and only here to serve Jews, so it is nothing to take their lives for such “subsidiary” infractions.  Here we can see not only the anti-Gentile hatred of Noahide Law supporters like Rabbi Schneerson, but also the two-tiered system of Noahide Law where non-Jews live as second class citizens and are easier to convict and execute than Jews. Why would the United States pass a law which not only states the the Seven Noahide Laws should be promoted in our nation and globally, but also honors a Rabbi who obviously hates non-Jews?

Rabbi Schneerson Is Honored In USA Public Law 102-14

Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March 26, 1991; Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, `the rebbe’, this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of `education and giving’, the year in which we turn to education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws; – GOOGLE “Public Law 102-14″, Library of Congress

The Rabbi’s Anti-Gentile Bigotry In Context 

Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel by Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky

Israel Shahak (Hebrew: ישראל שחק‎; born Himmelstaub, April 28, 1933 – July 2, 2001) was a Polish-born Holocaust survivor and Israeli professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, known especially as a liberal[1] secular political thinker, author, and civil rights activist. Between 1970–1990, he was president of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights and was an outspoken critic of the Israeli government.

Norton Mezvinsky (born 1932) is an American historian, professor, and author. He is a Distinguished University Professor, Emeritus, Central Connecticut State University and is the president of the International Council for Middle East Studies, an academic think tank in Washington, D.C. He has written numerous published books, articles and book reviews that deal with various aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict and Zionism

THE NATIONAL RELIGIOUS PARTY 59 

Rebbe," Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who headed the Chabad movement and wielded great influence among many religious Jews in Israel as well as in the United States. Schneerson and his Lubovitch followers are Haredim; nevertheless, they involved themselves in Israel's political life and shared many concepts with Gush Emunim and the NRP. The ideas of Rabbi Schneerson that appear below are taken from a book of his recorded messages to followers in Israel, tided Gatherings of Conversations and published in the Holy Land in 1965. During the subsequent three decades of his life until his death, Rabbi Schneerson remained consistent; he did not change any of the opinions. What Rabbi Lubovitch, Hassidic belief.  

Scheerson taught either was or immediately became official, 
Regarding the non-Jew the Lubovitcher Rebbe's views were clear even if a bit disorderly: "In such a manner the Halacha, stipulated by the Talmud, showed that a non-Jew should be punished by death if he kills an embryo, even if the embryo is non- Jewish, while the Jew should not be, even if the embryo is Jewish. As we [the talmudic sages] learn from Exodus 22:21, beginning with the words 'and if any mischief will follow.'" This quoted verse is a part of a passage beginning in verse 21, describing what should be done "if men strive and hurt a woman with child," thus Lubovitcher Rebbe, says in full: "And if any mischief will follow, damaging the embryo. Verse 22, whose beginning is quoted by the the wording "life for life" instead of "soul for soul.") The above then you shall give soul for soul." (Some English translations use The Lubovitcher Rebbe continued: stated difference in the punishment of a Jew and a non-Jew for the same crime is common in the Talmud and Halacha. 

do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: "Let us differentiate." Thus, we on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of "let us differenti- ate" between totally different species. This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world... The Old Rabbi [a pseudonym for one of the holy Lubovitch rabbis] explained that the passage in Chapter 49 of Hatanya [the basic book of Chabad] : "And you have chosen us" [by God], because a choice is thus made between outwardly [the Jews] means specifically that the Jewish body was chosen similar things. The Jewish body "looks as if it were in substance similar to bodies of non-Jews," but the meaning ... is that the bodies only seem to be similar in material substance, outward look and superficial quality. The difference of the inner quality, 

60 JEWISH FUNDAMENTALISM IN ISRAEL  

however, is so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species. This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews]" "their bodies are in vain." ... An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.  

As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood. There is also a difference in bodies. The body of a Jewish embryo is on a higher level than is the body of a non-Jew. This is expressed in the phrase "let us differentiate" about the body of a non-Jew, which is a totally different kind. The same difference exists in the soul of a non-Jewish embryo. We therefore ask: Why should regard to the soul: the soul of a Jewish embryo is different than a non-Jew be punished if he kills even a non-Jewish embryo while a Jew should not be punished even if he kills a Jewish embryo? The answer can be understood by [considering] the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" [Genesis 1:1] means that [the heavens and the earth] were created for the sake of the Jews, who are called the "beginning." This means everything, all developments, all discoveries, the creation, including the "heavens and the earth - are vanity compared to the Jews. The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim."  

After some additional cabbalistic explanation the Lubovitcher Rebbe concluded: 
Following from what has already been said, it can be understood why a non-Jew should be punished by death if he kills an embryo between the embryo and a [baby that was] born is that the and why a Jew should not be punished by death. The difference either it is subsidiary to its mother or to the reality created after embryo is not a self-contained reality but rather is subsidiary; In its present state the purpose is still absent. A non-Jew's entire birth when the [divine] purpose of its creation is then fulfilled. reality is only vanity. It is written, "And the strangers shall stand and feed your flocks" [Isaiah 61:5]. The entire creation [of a non- Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews. Because of this a non-Jew  should be punished with death if he kills an embryo, while a Jew, whose existence is most important, should not be punished with death because of something subsidiary. We should not destroy an important thing for the sake of something subsidiary. It is true that there is a prohibition against [hurting] an embryo, because it is something that will be born in the future and in a hidden only when visible matters are affected; as previously noted, the form already exists. The death penalty should be implicated embryo is merely of subsidiary importance. 

Noahide Laws (2)

 COVENANT, BIBLICAL

In the Old Testament an agreement between God and Israel in which God promised protection to the Chosen People in return for exclusive loyalty. "If you obey my voice and hold fast to my covenant, you of all nations will be my very own" (Exodus 19:5). Moses presented Yahweh's offer to his people, who promptly "answered as one, 'All that Yahweh has said we will do.'" The compact was sealed (Exodus 19:8). Many years later Jeremiah prophesied that a new covenant would be offered. "Deep within them," Yahweh promised, "I will plant my law, writing it on their hearts" (Jeremiah 31:31-34). Ezekiel foresaw that God would "make a covenant of peace with the, an eternal covenant" (Ezekiel 37:26). Its universal character was foreshadowed by Isaiah, to whom it was revealed by Yahweh, "so that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth" (Isaiah 49:6). In the New Testament, when Paul was explaining to the Corinthians the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, he repeated Christ's words: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, Whenever you drink it, do this as a memorial of me" (I Corinthians 11:25). This master idea of the New Testament is reinforced in the Letter to the Hebrews: "It follows that it is a greater covenant for which Jesus has become our guarantee" (Hebrews 7:22). Christ himself is the new covenant between God and his people. (Etym. Latin convenire, to agree, to come together.) 

After leaving the ark Noah built an altar, and taking of all clean animals and birds, offered holocausts upon it. God accepted the sacrifice, and made a covenant with Noah, and through him with all mankind, that He would not waste the earth or destroy man by another deluge. The rainbow would for all times be a sign and a reminder of this covenant. He further renewed the blessing which He had pronounced on Adam (Genesis 1:28), and confirmed the dominion over animals which He had granted to man. In virtue of this dominion man may use animals for food, but the flesh may not be eaten with the blood (8:20-9:17).

Where in the Bible are the Noahide Laws listed?

They don't exist, saving the one where he is commanded not to eat the blood of meat or shed the blood of man but they are part of The Covenant with Noe, not Noahide Laws.

Genesis 8: And the Lord smelled a sweet savour, and said: I will no more curse the earth for the sake of man: for the imagination and thought of man's heart are prone to evil from his youth: therefore I will no more destroy every living soul as I have done. 

Genesis 9:

God blesseth Noe: forbiddeth blood, and promiseth never more to destroy the world by water. The blessing of Sem and Japheth.

Thus also said God to Noe, and to his sons with him, Behold I will establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you:   And with every living soul that is with you, as well in all birds as in cattle and beasts of the earth, that are come forth out of the ark, and in all the beasts of the earth.

  I will establish my covenant with you, and all flesh shall be no more destroyed with the waters of a flood, neither shall there be from henceforth a flood to waste the earth.  And God said: This is the sign of the covenant which I give between me and you, and to every living soul that is with you, for perpetual generations.  I will set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be the sign of a covenant between me, and between the earth.   And when I shall cover the sky with clouds, my bow shall appear in the clouds:   And I will remember my covenant with you, and with every living soul that beareth flesh: and there shall no more be waters of a flood to destroy all flesh.

 And the bow shall be in the clouds, and I shall see it, and shall remember the everlasting covenant, that was made between God and every living soul of all flesh which is upon the earth.  And God said to Noe: This shall be the sign of the covenant which I have established between me and all flesh upon the earth

 1 And God blessed Noe and his sons. And he said to them: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth.  And let the fear and dread of you be upon all the beasts of the earth, and upon all the fowls of the air, and all that move upon the earth: all the fishes of the sea are delivered into your hand.  And every thing that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you: even as the green herbs have I delivered them all to you:  Saving that flesh with blood you shall not eat.   For I will require the blood of your lives at the hand of every beast, and at the hand of man, at the hand of every man, and of his brother, will I require the life of man.

https://www.drbo.org/cgi-bin/s?q=noe&x=11&y=18&b=drb&t=0

"Noahide Laws" 

 https://free.messianicbible.com/feature/can-salvation-come-through-the-seven-noahide-laws/

Rabbi Schneerson is mentioned at that link. Who was he and what did he think of Catholics?

https://nesceinet.blogspot.com/2022/12/america-honors-jew-who-hates-christians.html

The modern authorities in the Catholic Church may no longer believe that The Catholic Church is the one true church that has authority and must strive to convert non-catholics but that does not mean the Jews are Indifferent to what they believe is their authority and their duty to convert Catholics and others to their faith.

https://stopnoahidelaw.blogspot.com/2017/04/us-jewish-law-groups-push-noahide-law.html

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2003Jul/pent5qui.htm

Readers might be interested in some background info on recent Popes and The so-called Noahide Laws

http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/search/label/noahide

Noahide Laws

 This web page has a photo of the lovable Rabbi Schneerson on its home page - Top Left

https://www.noahide.com/index.htm

and this is one of its teachings

Who Was Jesus?

The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this false prophet as a member of the Jewish people (v. 2, 7) who would tell true prophecies and would have the power of miracles. G-d Himself would give this false prophet the power to perform miracles and reveal prophecy, but the false prophet would try to seduce the people away from G-d's Law and towards strange gods unknown to Judaism. The purpose would be to test whether we are truly committed to living under the Law, or whether we will be dazzled and fall for the temptation to join a false path to salvation (v. 3-6, 7-8, 11). In this Biblical passage, G-d repeatedly commands the Jews to kill this false prophet, lest the evil spread and destroy many souls.

To be accepted by the people, the false prophet would sometimes pretend to be a righteous Jew who fulfills the Law, but at key moments he would turn against certain details of the Law in order to make the breach (v. 6, 7). This is the reason that verse 1 commands us not to add or subtract any details from the Law, and verse 5 warns us to remain steadfast with all the traditions of the Law.

In Deuteronomy 17, this false prophet is also described as someone who would rebel against the authority of the judges of the Jewish people, and who should be put to death for his rebelliousness (v. 8-13, esp. v. 12). Who are the judges? The highest court in Israel was the Sanhedrin, which was established by Moses (Exodus 18:13-26; Numbers 11:16-29), and which lasted more than 15 centuries. The members of the Sanhedrin were the rabbis known as "Pharisees" (Pirushim, "those with the explanation"). G-d gave permanent authority to these judges to interpret the Law and G-d's Word, and it is a commandment to follow their decisions without turning even slightly to the right or the left (Deut. 17:11). But the false prophet would challenge the authority of the Sanhedrin, thus revealing himself to be an evil man.

In the book of the prophet Daniel, this false prophet is described as a king (the eleventh horn on a terrible beast) who would wage war against the Jews (the "holy ones"; see Deut. 14:2 on this term) and would change the Law including the calendar and the holidays (Daniel 7:8, 20-25). Elsewhere, this false prophet is described as a king who would disregard the G-d of his fathers, exalting himself as a god and giving honor to this new god-head (Daniel 11:36-39).

The man known today as "Jesus" fulfilled all these prophecies. He became a "king" (over the Christian church) who changed the original Law, doing away with the Hebrew calendar and the Biblical holidays (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkos the Festival of Tabernacles, Passover, etc.). He disregarded the one, infinite G-d of the Hebrew Bible in favor of a new "trinity" that included himself. And he repeatedly broke the Law by committing terrible sins, while openly challenging the G-d-given authority of the rabbis of the Sanhedrin.

Naturally, Jesus did sometimes pretend to respect the Law, but whenever he thought he could get away with it, he turned right around and broke that same Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, he declared that he came to fulfill the Law, and in Matthew 23:1-3 he defended the authority of the rabbis. But the rest of the time, he rebelled against the Law—thus showing that his occasional words of piety were meant only to hide his evil agenda. The following sins of Jesus are recorded in the "New Testament":

1. Jesus repudiated the laws of kosher food (Mark 7:18-19). [Compare this to the prophet Daniel's strict adherence to kashrus, in Daniel chapter 1.]
2. He repudiated the laws of honoring one's parents, and called on his followers to hate their parents; he also dishonored his own mother (Matthew 10:34-36; Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 14:26).
3. He violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited his disciples to do the same (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-26).
4. 4) He again violated the Sabbath by healing a man's arm, which was not a matter of saving a life, and he openly defied the rabbis in his total repudiation of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-13; Mark 3:1-5). [Compare this to G-d's view of violating the Sabbath, in Numbers 15:32-36, Nehemiah 10:30-32, and dozens of other places throughout the Bible.]
5. Jesus brazenly defied and disobeyed the rabbis of the Sanhedrin, repudiating their authority (This is recorded in many places throughout the New Testament, but look especially at Matthew 23:13-39 and John 8:44-45).

The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of "Jesus the Nazarene":

1. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).
2. He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).
3. He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh—which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).

The false, rebellious message of Jesus has been thoroughly rejected by the vast majority of the Jewish people, as G-d commanded. Unfortunately, however, this same message has brought a terrible darkness upon the world; today, over 1.5 billion gentiles believe in Jesus. These lost souls mistakenly think they have found salvation in Jesus; tragically, they are in for a rude awakening. Truth and eternal life are found directly from G-d, through performing His Law. Any "mediator" only separates man from G-d:

1. "G-d is not a man, who can lie, nor the son of man, who relents... He has not beheld iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen perverseness in Israel" (Numbers 23:19).
2. Speaking prophetically of the Christian church, Moses declared, "For their 'rock' is not like our Rock... Where is their god, in whom they trusted?" (Deut. 32:31, 37).
3. "'See now that I, only I, am He, and there is no god with Me. I kill, and I bring to life; I wound, and I heal, and there is none who can rescue from My Hand...' Sing songs of joy, gentiles, with His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and will take vengeance on His enemies, and will forgive His land and His people" (Deut. 32:39, 43).
4. "I, only I am Hashem (the L-rd), and besides Me there is no savior" (Isaiah 43:11).
5. "I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god... Is there a god besides Me? There is no rock; I do not know any" (Isaiah 44:6).
6. "Israel is saved in Hashem with an eternal salvation... Assemble yourselves and come, come near together, you gentiles who have escaped [the judgment]. (They have no knowledge, those who carry wooden sculptures and who pray to a god that does not save.) Announce and bring near, even take counsel together: Who declared this from ancient times, and announced it from then? Is it not I, Hashem? And there are no other gods beside Me, nor any righteous and saving god other than Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all ends of the earth, for I am G-d and there is none else. By Myself I swore, a righteous word went out of my mouth and it will not be withdrawn, that to Me every knee will bow and every tongue will swear" (Isaiah 45:17, 20-23).

What is the true key to salvation? Those who return to the Law (the Seven Commandments for the Children of Noah, according to the eternal covenant made with Noah in Genesis 9) and who assist the Jewish people (Isaiah 60, 61, 66) will be saved and will participate in the miracles and revelations, including worshipping in the Third Temple, under the kingship of the Messiah. As described in many places, including Jeremiah 16:19-21 and Zechariah 8:20-23, all the old gentile religions of the world will disappear, and their followers will turn to the Jews for spiritual leadership. Until then, Christians are spiritually blinded, and cannot yet understand G-d's wisdom in the Bible.

Ours is the last generation of the era of sin and evil and the first of the Messianic Era. Indeed, for the first time in history, there is a growing consensus of leading rabbis willing to name the man most suited to be the Messiah, and they are agreeing that he is the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. The Rebbe is the spiritual leader of our generation, having boldly stirred up controversy over vital issues in which other leaders have remained tragically silent or have even caved in to the growing forces of darkness. He has upheld the Law perfectly and has worked mightily to strengthen the observance of the Law by Jews, as well as the observance of the Noachide Law by gentiles. Through his teaching of chasidus (Jewish mystical teachings, preserved from Moses and Mount Sinai), he has taught the world that G-d is One, the Infinite Who renews creation at every moment. The Rebbe is a direct descendant of King David and has received a true prophecy from G-d that we who are alive in this generation shall be the first in history to see the coming of the true messiah. Many Jews are eagerly anticipating the Rebbe's resurrection from the grave, ready to re-establish the Sanhedrin and anoint the king.

Our job is to finish preparing the way, by announcing the truth and bringing all of mankind back to the Law immediately. Through our divinely mandated efforts, we shall now clear the path for the return of the Garden of Eden and the establishment of the eternal sinless world promised by Isaiah and the other Biblical prophets.

https://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm

This is the evil Messias-Denier America honors.

No protestant baby has ever existed

  Page 127 "The Church of Christ,"

"...We hold it for certain that those baptized by heretics are separated from the Church and deprived of all of the blessings enjoyed by her members, if they have arrived at the age pf discretion and have adhered to the errors of their Sect.

Years ago, in "The Church of Christ" by E. Sylvester Berry, Std I learned  that all babies baptised are automatically members of the Catholic Church.

For the longest time I searched for the reference cited on page 127 of the book but the source could not be found because of an error in the footnote which reads Benedict XIV, "singular nos" Feb 9, 1749 and not Singulari Nobis.

Today, I found two sources.

Here are the sources;

https://exlaodicea.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/no-protestant-babies-pope-benedict-xv-to-king-henry-ix/

The second source is from the estimable Catholicism. org and the excellent Brother Andre Marie

Benedict XIV’s Brief, ‘Singulari Nobis,’ to Cardinal Henry, Duke of York, February 9, 1749

THIS DOCUMENT, WHICH I REPRODUCE WORD-FOR-WORD FROM THE FORTY-THIRD EDITION OF THE ENCHIRIDON SYMBOLORUM (DENZINGER-HÜNERMANN, OR DH), IS OF INTEREST TO OUR DOCTRINAL CRUSADE.

It is a Brief sent by Pope Benedict XIV (Prospero Lorenzo Lambertini) to Cardinal Henry, Duke of York(Henry Benedict Stuart, younger brother of Bonnie Prince Charlie), who, for obvious reasons, was interested in things that pertained to Catholics and Anglicans in the nations to whose thrones he was the rightful heir.

To the best of my ability, what follows below the line is, in every detail, verbatim from DH. This includes elisions, which are in the original. The emboldened numbers are the DH numbers, while the numbers appearing after the § symbol are the paragraph numbers of the Brief. Note: the convention in DH is that the numeration of footnotes resets with each individual numbered paragraph. Due to the limits of footnoting in the WordPress content management system, I have had to break that convention in my own footnote enumeration.

Among the things proven by Singulari Nobis is that there is no such thing as an Anglican (Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc.) baby. If they are validly baptized, they are Catholic.

---

Benedict XIV’s Brief, Singulari Nobis, to Cardinal Henry, Duke of York, February 9, 1749

Ed.: Benedict XIV, Bullarium (Mechelen), 7:24‒26 (old ed., vol. 3, no. 2).

Incorporation into the Church by Means of Baptism

2566  § 12. … When a heretic baptizes someone, provided he uses the legitimate form and matter, … the latter is marked with the baptismal character….

2567  § 13. Next, it was also found that someone who has received valid baptism from a heretic is made a member of the Catholic Church by virtue of that ⟨baptism⟩; for the personal error of the one baptizing cannot deprive him of this happiness, provided the baptizer confers the sacrament in the faith of the true Church and observes her provisions in what relates to the validity of baptism. Suárez affirms this admirably in his Fidei catholicae defensio contra errores sectae Anglicanae [Defense of the Catholic faith against the errors of the Anglican sect], book 1, chapter 24, where he proves that the person baptized becomes a member of the Catholic Church, also adding this, that if the heretic, as often happens, christens an infant unable to make an act of faith, this is no obstacle to his receiving the habit of faith at baptism. 1

2568  § 14. Lastly, We have established that, if they reach the age at which they can distinguish right from wrong for themselves and then adhere to the errors of the one who baptized them, persons who were baptized by heretics are rejected from the unity of the Church and are deprived of all those benefits that those remaining in the Church enjoy, but they are not freed from her authority and laws, as González wisely explains in the section “Sicut”, no. 12, concerning heretics. 2

2569  § 15. We see this in the case of fugitives and traitors, whom the civil laws completely exclude from the privileges of faithful subjects. Similarly, the laws of the Church do not grant clerical privileges to those clerics who disobey the commandments of the sacred canons. But nobody thinks that traitors or clerics who violate the canons are not subject to the authority of their princes or prelates.

2570  § 16. These examples, unless We are mistaken, are relevant to the question; for just like them, so too heretics are subject to the Church and are bound by ecclesiastical laws.

1. Francisco Suárez, Opera Omnia, ed. C. Berton, vol. 24 (Paris, 1859), 117. ↩
2. Emanuel González Téllez, Commentaria perpetua in singulos textus 5 librorum Decretalium Gregorii IX (Lyon, 1673, and later eds.), in 1. V, tit. 7, c. 8. ↩

One Nation under Demonic Domination

Ephesians 6:12

Finally, brethren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power.

 11 Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil.  12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.  13 Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect.  14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice,  15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:

[12] "In the high places": or heavenly places. That is to say, in the air, the lowest of the celestial regions; in which God permits these wicked spirits or fallen angels to wander.

I pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation under God, indivisible,
with Liberty and Justice for all.

The original Pledge of Allegiance was written by Francis Bellamy (1855 - 1931), a Baptist minister, in August 1892. The Pledge was published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine and the Reader's Digest of its day. In 1892, Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. As its chairman, he prepared the program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration for Columbus Day in 1892. 

One nation under God?

No, don't call Satan and his generals God.

America has established positive law in favor of the Four Sins Crying to Heaven for vengeance.

1 Corinth:  Know you not that the unjust shall 

not possess the kingdom of God? 

Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor 

adulterers,   Nor the effeminate, nor liers with 

mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor 

drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall 

possess the kingdom of God

There are four sins crying to heaven for vengeance.

Willful Murder (Abortion, Unjust Wars, Drones, Assassinations)

The Sin of Sodom (So-called Gay marriage, the acceptance of sodomy as not only permissible but praise worthy, Gay Pride parades)

Oppression of the Poor (Usury, which is state-sponsored theft of labor).

Defrauding Laborers of their Wages (Mass immigration which undermines the wage scale, closing manufacturing in America and relocating it overseas to be done by slaves).

Only an enemy of Jesus Christ and His Church would consider publicly blessing a sodomite intent on committing additional mortal sins of sodomy.

Would he publicly blessing an assassin after he had taken out a contract to kill a person but before he killed that person?

Would he publicly bless an abortionist who was just opening a new clinic?

Would he publicly bless a businessman who announced he would be closing his American factory and relocating it to China where the work would be done by slaves with the result  that his former employees would be put out of work?

Would he publicly bless a politician whose political campaign promised to end social security?

Would he publicly bless a politician who planned to beggar the poor and marginal by increasing the rate of inflation?

Would he publicly bless a slum lord who,  in the middle of winter,  planned to turn off the heat in  the apt of a handicapped widow and force her out because she couldn’t pay the sudden and dramatic rent increase?

Color me cynical but isn't it possible Francis can be both against and for sodomy by telling the world the Church can't bless sodomite unions while putting in a place of authority a man who intends to do just that?

Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández, is the new prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.

If the CDF does permit the blessings of sodomites he can just say "It is his responsibility as head of the CDF, who am I to judge?"

If Francis and Fernandez do permit blessings of sodomites, they will be culpable for those sins.

“Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them...” (CCC 1868)

A person is held accountable for the sins of another in the following ways:

 by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

The nine ways us Catholics can be accessory to the sins of others

By counsel

By command

By consent

By provocation

By praise or flattery

By concealment

By partaking

By silence

By defense of the evil done.

Can I as a Catholic justify voting for a member of either party, both of which have cooperated in creating legislation that is opposed to Natural Law and the teachings of the Catholic Church which Jesus purchased with His blood?

No, for to do so seems to me means I accept the basic structure, beliefs and laws of the American Government and what it promotes.

Father Chad Ripperger was recently interviewed by Tucker Carlson 

and in this excellent interview the good Father, who is an exorcist, explained how it is America exists as a country that is under Demonic Domination by

Satan Lucifer Beelzebub

The Anti Trinity in that order;

Satan is Anti God the Father, Lucifer is Anti 

God the Son and Beelzebub is Anti God the

 Holy Ghost 

There are Five Generals under Satan who rule

America as it now exists:

Baal demon of impurity via fornication

Asmodeus demon of male homosexuality

Leviathan demon of masculine lesbians

Lilith demon of feminine lesbians 

Baphomet demon of child sacrifice abortion 

As I now exists, America is an abomination and 

doomed to destruction.

Message Body

I thought you might lie to see my

Letter to editor of "Culture Wars"

1 Corinth:  Know you not that the unjust shall 

not possess the kingdom of God? 

Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor 

adulterers,   Nor the effeminate, nor liers with 

mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor 

drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall 

possess the kingdom of God

There are four sins crying to heaven for vengeance.

Willful Murder (Abortion, Unjust Wars, Drones, Assassinations)

The Sin of Sodom (So-called Gay marriage, the acceptance of sodomy as not only permissible but praise worthy)

Oppression of the Poor (Usury, which is state-sponsored theft of labor).

Defrauding Laborers of their Wages (Mass immigration which undermines the wage scale, closing manufacturing in America and relocating it overseas to be done by slaves).

Only an enemy of Jesus Christ and His Church would consider publicly blessing a sodomite intent on committing additional mortal sins of sodomy.

Would he publicly blessing an assassin after he had taken out a contract to kill a person but before he killed that person?

Would he publicly bless an abortionist who was just opening a new clinic?

Would he publicly bless a businessman who announced he would be closing his American factory and relocating it to China where the work would be done by slaves with the result  that his former employees would be put out of work?

Would he publicly bless a politician whose political campaign promised to end social security?

Would he publicly bless a politician who planned to beggar the poor and marginal by increasing the rate of inflation?

Would he publicly bless a slum lord who,  in the middle of winter,  planned to turn off the heat in  the apt of a handicapped widow and force her out because she couldn’t pay the sudden and dramatic rent increase?

Color me cynical but isn't it possible Francis can be both against and for sodomy by telling the world the Church can't bless sodomite unions while putting in a place of authority a man who intends to do just that?

Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández, is the new prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.

If the CDF does permit the blessings of sodomites he can just say "It is his responsibility as head of the CDF, who am I to judge?"

If Francis and Fernandez do permit blessings of sodomites, they will be culpable for those sins.

“Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them...” (CCC 1868)

A person is held accountable for the sins of another in the following ways:

 by participating directly and voluntarily in them;

by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;

by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;

The nine ways us Catholics can be accessory to the sins of others

By counsel

By command

By consent

By provocation

By praise or flattery

By concealment

By partaking

By silence

By defense of the evil done.

Pope Francis is the Vicar of Christ who has the duty to Teach, Rule and Sanctify but if he winks at this mortal sin, permits it to blessed and does not teach the truth- that those who engage in sodomy will go to Hell - he will be held accountable for his inaction and silence.

Larry Spencer

13435 Chelmsford St

Wellington, Fl 33414