Preface: 
My source and idea for the material about the views of Popes throughout history in regards to the hardheaded Jews, who have continually refused to acknowledge that Christ is the Messiah they have waited on for thousands of years, is an email subscription this site receives from Larry Silverstein.

Per Mr. Silverstein's review of this article, he rightfully acknowledging HERE that we have deviated greatly from the theme of his offering to this site.  In fact, in the same response, he offers up even more proof of his proposition on the Popes, which is worthy of reading in its entirety.

Indeed, Mr. Silverstein is correct: the views of the Pope can stand as dogma on its own right.

Why would we want to make these Papal views, controversial enough in our current contemporary world, even more controversial by tying them to the similarly held beliefs of Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany or a priest who was defrocked for unrelated activities?

Everyone knows that Hitler was "ANTI-SEMITIC".  

Why even talk about it?

Why sully the esteemed names of the Popes with this "VILE" association to Hitler and Mussolini?  -- These Popes were the  undisputed moral leaders of all of Western Christianity for a thousand years!!!!

Indeed, the knee-jerk reaction of modern society is to either defend the Catholic religion by somehow saying that -- perhaps -- the speeches were taken out of context, or held by only a few Popes, or instead -- to just politely not mention the fact that they were made at all and to only talk about and to quote more politically correct speeches Popes have made in the past.

The reason this site spends so much time preparing for the real meat of Larry Silverstein's revelations of the Popes being "ANTI-SEMITIC" is to show how closely views toward Jews in Hitler's day would not have raised an eyebrow at any other time in Christian history.

The message this site is trying to present is exposing the complete brainwashing modern society has been subjected to

•  Where mention of Islam's variance with Christianity is an acceptable topic in polite society;

•  Where mention of Christian hypocrisy and variance to the teachings of Christ is an acceptable topic in the same polite society; however,

•  Where any mention of Jewish variance to Christianity is a taboo topic and instantly denounced as "ANTI-SEMITISM" without a single thought being given to the idea presented.

The questions we present are:

Or in reverse,

Given Mr. Silverstein's concerns as the author of the original content,
and with our apologies to Mr. Silverstein,
we will now begin this article...

---

There is nothing new under the sun

---

The Fascist laws of Mussolini and Hitler were very pro-Christian and not at all out of line with the moral teachings of centuries of Roman Catholic Papal decrees. The fact that our society was so shocked and outraged by the Fascist laws shows how much Jews dominate political and religious thought in our modern life.


Actions against Jews that we consider "Fascist" today were long held Church doctrine.

These "Fascist" doctrines of Mussolini's Italy have been the official suggestions of Popes in Italy for a thousand years...

•  All Jewish literature is forbidden
•  No book by a foreign Jew can be translated into Italian
•  No play by a foreign Jew can be produced
•  No Jew is allowed to broadcast over the radio.
  
•  Jewish professors are barred from Italian universities
•  Jewish textbooks of 114 Jewish writers have been withdrawn from the schools.
  
•  Jews have been expelled from all administrative posts.
  
•  Marriage is again illegal between Jews and Christians.
  
•  A third anti-Semitic newspaper, Giornalissimo, has joined forces with the already existing anti-Jewish Regime Fascista and Il Tevere.

Well, if radio and television had been invented 2,000 years ago instead of just 100 years ago, the Popes would certainly not condone the Jews monopolizing these forms of mass media to the point where they have gained a monopoly share of information transmission to Christians as they have been allowed to do in modern times by our "beloved" secular governments.


Our thanks and gratitude goes out to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) website for keeping a list of Nazi laws against Jews, so that we can see the same concept of the desire for Christian nations to have Christians ruling Christian lands goes as well for "Fascist" laws under Hitler.

Say what you will about how much you hate Hitler and how evil and vile you believe him to be, but none of these Nazi laws would have shocked, offended or even have been morally objectionable to previous Popes.

Indeed, previous Popes held even more stringent rules on Jews than these of Nazi Germany.

While the ADL chooses to characterize the Nuremberg Laws as anti-Jewish,
I see no reason to believe that they are anything but pro-Christian.

•   April 7, 1933 - Only Christians allowed to hold office in a Christian country
  
•   April 7, 1933 - Judgment of Christians only by a Christian-morals-based judge
  
•   April 25, 1933 - An Affirmative Action program for Christians
•   September 15, 1935 - Baptized Christian children to have Christian parents
•   September 15, 1935 - Like Jews, Germans are citizens by blood or allegiance
  
•   November 14, 1935 - Again, like Jews, German citizenship is by blood
  
•   August 17, 1938 - Anti-Fraud statute disallowing German-sounding names by non-Germans
  

Nazi Anti-Jewish Laws Shortly after Hitler's appointment as Reich Chancellor on January 30, 1933, the Reichstag (German parliament) began to institute a series of anti-Jewish decrees. Sections of these laws are quoted below: April 7, 1933 Laws for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service "Civil servants who are not of Aryan (non-Jewish) descent are to be retired." April 7, 1933 Law Regarding Admission to the Bar "Persons who, according to the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service of April 7, 1933, are of non-Aryan descent may be denied admission to the bar." April 25, 1933 Law Against the Crowding of German Schools and Institutions of Higher Learning "In new admissions, care is to be taken that the number of Reich Germans who, according to the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service of April 7, 1933, are of non-Aryan descent, out of the total attending each school and each faculty, does not exceed the proportion of non-Aryans within the Reich German population." Nuremberg Laws With the passage of the Nuremberg Laws by the Reichstag on September 15, 1935, the first direct attack on individual Jews was launched. These laws mark a sharp progression toward an irreversible anti-Semitic policy. In the future, no Jew would be able to escape intensified persecution. September 15, 1935 Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor "Marriages between Jews and subjects of German or kindred blood are forbidden...Extramarital intercourse forbidden between Jews and subjects of German or kindred blood...Jews are forbidden to fly the Reich and national flag and to display Reich colors...They are, on the other hand, allowed to display the Jewish colors...Whoever violates the prohibition...will be punished by penal servitude." September 15, 1935 Reich Citizenship Law "A Reich citizen is only that subject of German or kindred blood who proves by his conduct that he is willing and suited loyally to serve the German people and the Reich." November 14, 1935 First Decree to the Reich Citizenship Law "A Jew cannot be a Reich citizen. He is not entitled to the right to vote on political matters; he cannot hold public office...A Jew is anyone descended from at least three grandparents who are fully Jewish as regards race...Also deemed a Jew is a Jewish Mischlung subject who is descended from two fully Jewish grandparents and...who belonged to the Jewish religious community...who was married to a Jew...who is the offspring of a marriage concluded by a Jew...who is an offspring of extramarital intercourse with a Jew..." August 17, 1938 Second Decree for the Implementation of the Law Regarding Changes of Family Names "Jews may be given only such given names as are listed in the Guidelines on the Use of Given Names issued by the Reich Minister of the Interior... Insofar as Jews have other given names than those which may be given to Jews...they are obligated, beginning January 1, 1939, to assume an additional given name, namely the given name Israel in the case of males and the given name Sarah in the case of females." -- ADL website

Around the time that Jews were conspiring to unleash Communist hell on half of the Christian world, Father Pranaitis was the Pat Buchanan of his age.

Sadly, Father Pranaitis was one of those "liquidated" by the Cheka during the Bolshevist revolution in Russia. (Talmud Unmasked, Editor's note)

The Cheka was of course ran by Jewish Commissars, so they were very effective at making Christian leaders disappear, especially ones like Father Pranaitis.

To read this article, you must first decide if you trust the credibility of Lithuanian Roman Catholic priest I. B. Pranaitis - Russian Master of Theology and Professor of the  Hebrew Language at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy of the Roman Catholic Church in Saint Petersburb, Russia.

Or, do you trust the sources in Wikipedia to state that he has no credibility?

If you cannot trust a Roman Catholic priest who was a Master of Theology and Professor of the Hebrew Language at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy of the Roman Catholic Church in Saint Petersburg in Russia, after reading my defense of him, then save yourself time and don't bother to read what he wrote which will be presented after my quick defense of Father Pranaitis' credibility. Quit reading, because you cannot be reasoned with.



Often when I read statements in places like Wikipedia and the Judeo-MSM which purport to support a claim of anti-Semitism or some other charge leveled against a Christian by a Jew, I do a little research of my own. After doing this basic research and thinking through the logic of the charges against the Christian, I often come away with the exact opposite feelings, and this fraudulent case against Father Pranaitis is no exception.

Basically, Father Pranaitis was "discredited" as an expert witness on topics of the Talmud he was keenly interested in knowing about as a Christian, simply because he did not know other parts of the Talmud of which he had no interest in or need of knowing.

•  Obviously, Father Pranaitis was well versed in Christian thought, as he was a Roman Catholic trained priest.

•  Obviously Father Pranaitis was not well versed in all aspects of the Talmud, as he was not a Jewish Rabbi. 

The defense got away with establishing that ONLY a Jewish rabbi can testify about the contents of the Talmud as only a Jewish Rabbi can be an expert on the Talmud!

Problem is that a highly trained Rabbi, being presented with a case of blood ritual using the foul ingredients of the blood of slain Christian children would hardly be counted on to incriminate his own religion.

Henceforth, there could likely be no expert witness alive acceptable to any Jews.

The trial then was both a farce and a mockery.

The relevance in the trial of not knowing random irrelevant Hebrew names and meanings without access to the Talmud, does not imply one could not read and understand particular sections of the Talmud which would have been of interest to a Christian.

This would be like asking a Rabbi to relate the names of random New Testament figures, given in Latin to him at trial, without a Bible in his hands for reference, all done from memory, and then decreeing that his failure to pass this "test" would henceforth disqualify this Rabbi from expert witness credentials of discussing the Biblical quote of "Let his blood be upon our hands".

So really???  Give me a break!!!

We are led to believe Father Pranaitis was disqualified to testify that the Talmud condones killing Christian children and further prescribes the use of their blood in sacrifice, simply because he did not know the meaning of the Hebrew words Erubin, Yebamot, Hullin and Baba Batra?

I suppose, to have credibility to discuss Islam's blood vengeance on Christians, I have to first understand the Islamic concept of jinn (genie) and be able to recite the names of all of Mohammad's wives;  otherwise, the presumption stands, as given by all Muslim Imans, that Islam is "The Religion of Peace"?  Nonsense!!!

[Father Justinas Pranaitis'] credibility rapidly evaporated, however, when the defense demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin, to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by [Beilis'] lawyer". Rebekah Marks Costin's account in Robert Garber's Jews on Trial quotes the key exchange of the trial which served to destroy Pranaitis' credibility:

Q: What is the meaning of the word Hullin [animals permissible as food]?
A: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Erubin [Sabbath walking limits]?
A: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Yebamot [family relationships]?
A: I don't know.
Q: When did Baba Batra live and what was her activity?
A: I don't know.

The last question "was fatal once it was tactfully explained to the jury. Baba Batra is a tractate of the Talmud, quite well known to scholars, students, and many Jewish laymen."

Now, with quotes for every Papal quote, Priest Pranaitis informs us of what Popes throughout the ages have had to say about Jesus-denying Jews.

Pope Innocent III (8 January 1198 ; Pope of the 4th Crusade) decreed as follows:

Pope Innocent III

circa 1198 AD

"As Cain was a wanderer and an outcast, not to be killed by anyone but marked with the sign of fear on his forehead, so the Jews . . . against whom the voice of the blood of Christ cries out . . . although they are not to be killed they must always be dispersed as wanderers upon the face of the earth."(1)

(1) Migne, Patrologia, CCXV, 1291.

"Although Christian piety tolerates the Jews . . . whose own fault commits them to perpetual slavery . . . and allows them to continue with us (even though the Moors will not tolerate them), they must not be allowed to remain ungrateful to us in such a way as to repay us with contumely for favors and contempt for our familiarity. They are admitted to our familiarity only through our mercy; but they are to us dangerous as the insect in the apple, as the serpent in the breast * * * Since, therefore, they have already begun to gnaw like the rat, and to stink like the serpent, it is to our shame that the fire in our breast which is being eaten into by them, does not consume them * * * As they are reprobate slaves of the Lord, in whose death they evilly conspired (at least by the effect of the deed), let them acknowledge themselves as slaves of those whom the death of Christ has made free."(2)

(2) Ibid., p.694.

Under this same pope, Innocent III, the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215, adopted canons Nos. 67-70, decreeing the Roman Catholic attitude towards the Jews:(3)

(3) cf. Binius, Concilia Generalia, Vol. II, Tom. 3, p.695.

The first is financial, containing protective measures for Christians against the rapacity of Jews as userers. Only Jews were permitted to lend money at interest.

The second decrees that all Jews be distinguished for all time from Christians by color of dress and distinctive badge.

The third forbids Jews to have Christians as nurses, tutors, and domestic servants and forbids Christians to cohabit with Jews and Jewesses. Legal marriage with them was impossible.

The fourth forbids the acceptance of legal testimony of Jews against Christians and orders preference for the testimony of a Christian against a Jew. An order is also added that all in authority in Church and State must watch continually lest converted and baptized Jews continue to practice the rites of their former faith.

A few years later Pope Innocent III reiterates and confirms these edicts of the Lateran Council as follows:

"TO THE KING OF FRANCE THAT HE MUST CRUSH THE INSOLENCE OF THE JEWS RESIDING IN HIS KINGDOM,

Pope Innocent III

"Although it be not displeasing to the Lord, but rather acceptable to Him, that the Jewish Dispersion should live and serve under Christian princes * * * they greatly offend in the sight of God's Divine Majesty who prefer the offspring of the Crucifiers before those who are the heirs of Christ. * * *

It has come to our knowledge that in the kingdom of France Jews have so much liberty that, under a species of usury—by which they not only extort interest, but interest from interest—they obtain control of the goods of the churches and the possessions of the Christians. * * *

Furthermore, although it was decreed in the Lateran Council that Jews be not permitted to have Christian servants in their homes, either as tutors for their children or for domestic service, or for any reason whatsoever, they still persist in having Christians as servants and nurses, with whom they commit abominations of a kind which it rather becomes you to punish than us to explain.

And again, although the same Council laid it down that the testimony of Christians against Jews is to be admitted, even when the former use Jewish witnesses against Christians, and decreed that in a case of this kind anyone who would prefer Jews before Christians is to be condemned as anathema, yet up to the present time things are so carried on in the kingdom of France, that the testimony of Christians against Jews is not believed, whereas Jews are admitted as witnesses against Christians.

And at times, when they to whom Jews have loaned money with usury produce Christian witnesses about the facts of payment, THE DEED WHICH THE CHRISTIAN DEBTOR THROUGH NEGLIGENCE INDISCREETLY LEFT WITH THEM IS BELIEVED RATHER THAN THE WITNESSES WHOM THEY BRING FORWARD.

On Good Friday also, contrary to the law of old, they walk through the streets and public squares, and meeting Christians who everywhere according to custom go to adore the Crucifix, they deride them and strive to prevent them from this duty of adoration.

We warn and exhort Your Serene Majesty in the Lord (adding the remission of your sins) that you force the Jews from their presumption * * * and see to it that due punishment be meted out to all such blasphemers, and that an easy pardon be not given to delinquents!"(4)

(4) Migne, op.cit., CCXV, 501.

In 1567, Pope Pius V revoked the small concession, granted to Jews by Pius IV, enabling them to possess immovable property up to the value of 1,500 gold ducats. He ordered the Jews to sell all their properties to Christians. Two years later he ordered all Jews expelled from the States of the Church:

Pope Pius V

Circa 1567

"By authority of these present Letters, We order that each and every Jew of both sexes in Our Temporal Dominions, and in all the cities, lands, places and baronies subject to them, shall depart completely out of the confines thereof within the space of three months after the present Letters shall have been made public. They shall be despoiled of all their goods, and be prosecuted according to the due process of law. They shall become bondsmen of the Roman Church, and shall be subjected to perpetual servitude. And the said Church shall claim the same right over them as other dominions over their slaves and bondsmen."(5)

(5) Bull. Rom. Pont., VII, 741.

In 1244, Pope Innocent IV also ordered the burning of Jewish books. He exhorted the King of France as follows:

Pope Innocent IV

Circa 1244

"Our dear Son, the Chancellor of Paris, and the Doctors, before the clergy and people, publicly burned by fire the aforesaid books (The Talmud) with all their appendices.

We beg and beseech your Celestial Majesty in the Lord Jesus, that, having begun laudably and piously to prosecute those who perpetuate these detestable excesses, that you continue with due severity. And that you command throughout your whole kingdom that the aforesaid books with all their glossaries, already condemned by the Doctors, be committed to the flames. Firmly prohibiting Jews from having Christians as servants and nurses. * * *(6)

(6) Bull. Rom. Pont., IV, 509.

Pope Gregory IX sent the following to the archbishops of Germany:

Pope Gregory IX

"The Jews, who are admitted to our acquaintance only through our mercy, should never forget their yoke of perpetual slavery, which they bear through their own fault.

In the Council of Toledo it was decreed that Jews of both sexes, and for all time, should be distinguished from others by their mode of dress.

We therefore command that each and every one of you to have all the excesses of the Jews completely repressed, lest they should presume to raise their necks from the yoke of servitude in contumely of the Redeemer; forbidding them to discuss in any way concerning their faith or rites with Christians. In this matter calling to your aid the help of the civil power, inflicting upon Christians, who offer opposition, due ecclesiastical punishment ***"(7)

(7) Bull. Rom. Pont., III, 497.

Pope Eugenius IV, in 1442, issued the following decree:

Pope Eugenius IV

Circa 1442 AD

"We decree and order that from now on, and for all time, Christians shall not eat or drink with Jews; nor admit them to feasts, nor cohabit with them, nor bathe with them.

Christians shall not allow Jews to hold civil honors over Christians, or to exercise public offices in the State.

Jews cannot be merchants, Tax Collectors, or agents in the buying and selling of the produce and goods of Christians, nor their Procurators, Computers or Lawyers in matrimonial matters, nor Obstetricians; nor can they have association or partnership with Christians.

No Christian can leave or bequeath anything in his last Will and Testament to Jews or their congregations. Jews are prohibited from erecting new synagogues.

They are obliged to pay annually a tenth part of their goods and holdings.

Against them Christians can testify, but the testimony of Jews against Christians in no case is of any value.

All and every single Jew, of whatever sex and age, must everywhere wear the distinct dress and known marks by which they can be evidently distinguished from Christians.

They cannot live among Christians, but in a certain street, separated and segregated from Christians, and outside which they cannot under any pretext have houses * * *"(8)

(8) Bull. Rom. Pont., V, 67.

In 1555, Pope Paul IV reiterated these restrictions against the Jews and added some new ones. He ordered Jews to pay an annual amount for every synagogue, "even those that have been demolished," and said: "Jews can only engage themselves in the work of street sweepers and rag pickers, and cannot be produce merchants or in things necessary for human use."(9) For contravening these regulations Jews are to be punished "as rebels and criminals laesae majestatis rei (high treason), held as outlaws by all Christian people, by the judgment of our Vicars, Deputies and Magistrates * * *"

(9) Bull. Rom. Pont., VI, 499.

The present attitude of the Roman Catholic Church toward the Jew, as well as that of Mussolini, is of much interest for the latter has revived the age old disabilities of the Church against the Jews. All Jewish literature is forbidden and no book by a foreign Jew can be translated into Italian. No play by a foreign Jew can be produced. No Jew is allowed to broadcast over the radio. Jewish professors are barred from Italian universities and textbooks of 114 Jewish writers have been withdrawn from the schools. Jews have been expelled from all administrative posts. Marriage is again illegal between Jews and Christians. A third anti-Semitic newspaper, Giornalissimo, has joined forces with the already existing anti-Jewish Regime Fascista and Il Tevere.

The Vatican's semiofficial organ, L'Osservatore Romano, of August 13, 1938, in an article headed "The Jews and the Vatican Council" (1870) speaks of the Catholic Church's PROTECTIVE measures for Jews, and then goes on to say:

"The Jews and the Vatican Council"

"But—in order to set things straight—by this it was not intended that Jews should be allowed to abuse the hospitality of Christian countries.

Along with these protective ordinances, there existed restrictive and precautionary decrees with regard to them.

The civil power was in accord with the Church in this, since, as Delassus says, 'they both had the same interest in preventing the nations from being invaded by the Jewish element and thereby losing control of society.'

But if Christians were forbidden to force Jews to embrace the Catholic religion, to disturb their synagogues, their Sabbath and their festivals, the Jews, on the other hand, were forbidden to hold public office, civil or military; and this prohibition extended even to the children of converted Jews.

The precautionary decrees concerned the professions, education, and business positions."(10)

(10) cf. Il Messagero, Rome, August 17, 1938; La Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno, Bari, August 18, 1938; Corriere della Sera and others. All have the same caption: "How the Popes Treated the Jews."

---

How the Popes Treated the Jews
The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit

Wikipedia: Justinas Pranaitis

ADL