Sixty years ago, on October 28, 1965, the Second Vatican Council adopted, and Pope Paul VI promulgated, the Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, known by the first words in the official Latin text as Nostra Aetate (In Our Age). I chart Nostra Aetate’s sometimes rocky passage through Vatican II in To Sanctify the World: The Vital Legacy of Vatican II.
Suffice it to note here that the obstinate refusal of some Arab states to concede the reality and permanence of Israel as a Jewish state injected itself into the Council’s discussion, creating difficulties. Nonetheless, and in no small part because of the indefatigable work of Pope Pius XII’s former confessor, the German biblical scholar Cardinal Augustin Bea, SJ, Nostra Aetate made it across the conciliar finish line—and thank God it did, given the resurgence of the cultural cancer of antisemitism today.
At Charlie Kirk’s memorial service, Tucker Carlson continued his pell-mell descent down the slippery slope of vileness by attributing Jesus’ death to the “hummus-eaters.” So it is well that we have the Catholic Church’s solemn declaration, in Nostra Aetate, that “neither all Jews indiscriminately” at the time of Christ, “nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during [Christ’s] passion”—and the unambiguous affirmation that the Church “deplores all hatreds, persecutions, [and] displays of antisemitism leveled at any time or from any source against the Jews.”
Just as importantly, we have the Council’s acknowledgment of the religious debt that Catholicism owes to Judaism:
The Church of Christ acknowledges that … the beginnings of her faith and her election are found already among the Patriarchs, Moses and the prophets. She professes that all who believe in Christ — Abraham’s sons according to faith (cf. Galatians 3:7) — are included in the same Patriarch’s call, and likewise that the salvation of the Church is mysteriously foreshadowed by the chosen people’s exodus from the land of bondage. The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom God in his inexpressible mercy concluded the Ancient Covenant. Nor can she forget that she draws sustenance from the root of that well-cultivated olive tree onto which have been grafted the wild shoots, the Gentiles. (cf. Romans 11:17-24). …
The Church keeps ever in mind the words of the Apostle about his kinsmen: “theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises …” (Romans 9:4-5) … She also recalls that the Apostles, the Church’s main-stay and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ’s Gospel to the world, sprang from the Jewish people. …
In company with the Prophets and [St. Paul], the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice…
As I said in a lecture last month at the University of Colorado Boulder, antisemitism is a betrayal of Christianity, for Jew-hatred is Christ-hatred.
Why? Because Jesus of Nazareth makes no sense without understanding him as he understood himself: as a son of God’s covenant with the Jewish people who, from the Cross, evoked Psalm 22 and its triumphant claim that “dominion belongs to the Lord” who “rules over the nations” and to whom “all the proud of the earth bow down.”
Moreover, Christianity makes no sense without its Jewish parent, as the Christian New Testament makes no sense without the Hebrew Bible. Absent its foundation in, and tether to, Judaism, Christianity would have been another short-lived mystery cult from the ancient world, with Jesus of Nazareth as the miracle-working Galilean version of the first-century miracle-working Neopythagorean, Apollonius of Tyana. Early Christians understood this. So even in its childhood, historically speaking, Catholicism decisively rejected the heresy of Marcionism, which scorned the Old Testament and created a repugnant caricature of the God of the Hebrew Bible.
Antisemitism is a malignancy in society. Throughout modern political history, rising antisemitism has been an unmistakable marker of cultural decay. And as politics is downstream from culture, the public effects of that cultural decay can be draconian, as history teaches us—from the passions unleashed during the Dreyfus Affair in the French Third Republic, through the cultural meltdown of Weimar Germany and its genocidal political outcome, to the maniacal barbarism of Hamas on October 7, 2023.
If we imagine the 21st-century Western world immune to those political passions, we are fooling ourselves—and not paying attention.
So let us mark the diamond anniversary of Nostra Aetate by slamming down, and then nailing shut, the widening Overton Window on antisemitism.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Respect for Jews and the Jewish religion should never be conflated to mean an endorsement of everything the State of Israel does. The Neoncons want you to believe they’re synonymous; they are not.
Do you mean the military action that have been necessitated by the incessant wars that have been waged against Israel since its founding? Do you believe it is a policy of the government to cause destruction rather than to survive? Do you believe the nation of Israel has a right to exist? Do you believe that if Israel did not exist that Judaism would still exist and be flourishing elsewhere?
Thomas; Yes Israel has a right to exist, but so do the Palestinians. Revenge must be proportional, and Israel has gone way beyond justified military action and must stop and let the International community monitor the situation. The Palestinian people have a right to a homeland and self rule. Hamas must be eliminated and a new government set up. Israel has no right to this land and must allow them free access to trade and the sea. The West Bank is a very complicated area and should also be allowed autonomy. I personally don’t know how they can be united in a free country as a State divided by Israel. As to Jerusalem I think the solution once proposed of a free City State monitored by the International community might work. Open and free access for all. Complicated but possible. As to the Jews existing outside of the State of Israel: they proved that already with an amazing Over 1500 year track record. Perhaps a world record.
These are more NPR talking points, par for the course for your tiresome posts. Review the atrocities the Palestinians committed on October 7th. That will subvert the lie you embrace that Israel’s response is not proportional to the crimes that took place. The IDF hasn’t raped and murdered elderly Palestinian women. And they haven’t slaughtered young people and sent pictures to the deceased’s parents using their cellphones. Your antisemitism is shameful.
I don’t think the Judea & Samaria’s Arabs being divided is as much a worry as Israel being surrounded by people indoctrinated & paid to destroy them.
We know what a “2 state solution” brought about on Oct. 7th.
“Palestinians” as a whole do not desire a homeland and self rule so much as the complete elimination of Israel and the extermination of every Jew living in Israel.
The people of Gaza could have long been living in a fabulously prosperous tourist destination, and the money generated would made everyone well off. They don’t want that, not just Hamas, but the people of Gaza. Nothing is satisfactory to them except taking over the present sovereign nation of Israel and displacing the Jewish people. No sane society, military or government would start a war, in the most savage way conceivable, that they could not conceivably win, and refuse to surrender even in the face of inevitable civilian casualties. But the people of Gaza *want* to have civilian casualties. The more the better. They know they will never win militarily but they believe they can make Israel a pariah and have every nation on earth turn against them. It has very nearly worked and it is not over yet. They certainly have your vote.
Thomas Ryder: If you’re responding to me, do so by name. Presuming you are, I simply said that not supporting some action taken by the State of Israel should never be interpreted as Anti-Semitism. Nowhere is there evidence that the State of Israel is perfect in all ways.
I was replying to DigenesRedux. Is that you? What would you have done differently if you were Israel? In the past two years? The past 20? in 1948? In 1967? in 1973? During the first infitada? the second?
We don’t have to endorse everything Israel does politically. Few Israelis even agree about that. But Jews deserve to live peaceably in the homeland given to them by God.
There’s no other place on the planet where they can flourish in the same way.
With the exception of Iran & it’s paid mercenaries, Israel’s neighbors want peace. Not because they love Israel but because they know peace brings prosperity.
In a like manner treated the State of Israel as an entity that is always in the wrong doesn’t help either.
Both extremes are bad.
Paleocons need to know that too.
Cheers friend.
Peace be with you.
While Nostra Aetate was in the oven, Pope Paul VI made a visit to both Israel and Jordan and—to avoid possible misunderstandings—it was then proposed to balance the opening toward the Jews with an opening toward Moslems. What would Moslems think about a visit to Jerusalem when they—the Moslems—“find it hard to distinguish between the temporal and the spiritual, the political and the religious orders” (Fr. Farhat at Vatican Radio)?
Three months later (May 19, 1964) came a Secretariat for Non-Christians. The Declaration not only addresses Judaism but also Islam and then adds mention of the other natural religions of India, China and Japan (adopted Oct. 28, 1965 by a Council vote of 2221 to 88).
INSIGHT: So, about the fundamental aversion within Islam of making distinctions(!), one wonders what a more seasoned Declaration might have said if it had been able to consider a basic insight voiced by a perceptive Muslim in 1956, but broadly published only in 1965:
“It all comes down to knowing whether one should hold strictly to the fundamental religious values which were those of Abraham and Moses, on pain of falling into blasphemy [against the ahistorical umma?] —as the Muslims believe; or whether God has called men to approach him more closely, revealing to them little by little their fundamental condition as sinful men, and the forgiveness that transforms them and prepares them for the [historicity and everlasting] beatific vision—as Christian dogma teaches.” (al Akkad in 1956, as cited by Jean Guitton, “The Great Heresies and Church Councils,” 1965).
QUESTION: Is the meaningful contact point between Christianity and Islam NOT of parallel “religions,” but of Christian ‘faith’ in the eternal person of Jesus Christ—and Islamic ‘belief’ in the “uncreated” and polyglot Qur’an?
That is, not even between the two scriptures (the Bible and the Qur’an) side-by-side. The truly symmetrical and coherent comparison to be pursued between concrete persons—the “witnesses to Christ (Logos)” and the “followers of (heterogeneous) Islam”? The “[Self-disclosing] Word made flesh” and “the [Islamic and anti-Triune] word made book.”
Peter: perhaps the contact should be viewed as between persons, not faiths.
That’s the point…but there still are obstacles. Because not between “faiths”…but rather between faith and religions.
To the Jew first, and the Greek (gentile) as well . (Rom. 1:16)
Oy vey. Mr. Weigel, there is no such thing as “Christianity.” As Hilaire Belloc was so right to point out in Europe and the Faith, that is an ahistorical term.
Weigel’s gratuitous attack on Tucker Carlson – he does not have have courage to attack Kirk, who is his real target – is an outright lie. Carlson’s reference to “hummus eaters” was clearly an attack on the liberals who wanted Kirk to shut up about Christian values, the kind of fascist intellectuals on our college campuses who want everyone with a different opinion to shut up. (The entire speech is easily found on Youtube.) I do not endorse Carlson’s views on many issues, but the “vileness’ here is clearly Weigel’s willingness to lie.
Tucker Carlson has a knack for implicature and plausible deniability.
If he did not mean to imply Jews he should have phrased his words differently.
But he didn’t.
Just saying…
In other words, everybody needs to check their prose for any reference that might be interpreted, by anybody, no matter how insincere, mentally incontinent or opportunistic as an aspersion against Jews.
Just like we can’t say anything about homosexuals, “transgenders”, Muslims, “people of color” (unless the color is alabaster, ecru or taupe) or women
Just remember how oppressed these groups are and if you don’t, we’ll crush you. Now check your white male privilege and stop mansplaining.
Nope!
If I went on a date with a woman and I was asked if I enjoyed it & I responded “Well I enjoyed the movie.” it would rightly be concluded I did not enjoy the date with her.
If the women heard that I said that & got mad at me and I responded “Hey I didn’t say anything bad about you! I just expressed how much I liked the film we saw” that would come off as disingenuous at worst. At best naive and foolish.
Scripture is rather clear about not giving scandal. Apparently, some people think we are absolved of this duty in order to fight political correctness?
We are not sir. Tucker was being provocative & vicious toward Jews IMHO or at best very very foolish.
Yep…
Amen. I have joined you in my own comment.
What a horrific and manipulative lie George Weigel has written in this essay.
Rotten…
Hummus eaters could refer to anyone who appreciates Middle Eastern food. Perhaps Mr. Carlson could explain which group of hummus eaters he was referring to.
My wife makes her own hummus.
What a blessing!
I make my own, too. Deacon Edward.
🙂
Cubans use black beans. I prefer it, along with the Cuban spices over chickpeas and garlic.
Southerners use boiled peanuts.
🙂
Sorry, but Weigel is right: Carlson has progressively aligned himself with notorious figures, including his Putin promotion.
On the same token, this unquestioned support of Ukraine is going to cause the Russians to use a nuclear weapon. Can’t happen? Wait and see. Then, I want all the unquestioning Ukraine supporters – men and women – to sign up to fight. And don’t think that China won’t be dragged into that war – beginning with their invasion of Taiwan. Will George Weigel be first in line to sign up for combat duty? Hardly. Weigel is pi$$ed with Carlson because Carlson does not support going to war with Russia over Ukraine. Whoever floated that stupid idea about Ukraine joining NATO should be brought up on charges.
“Whoever floated that stupid idea about Ukraine joining NATO should be brought up on charges.”
On March 15, 2022 Harris “tweeted”
“When I was in Poland, I met with U.S. and Polish service members, thanking them for standing with our NATO allies for freedom, peace, and security, The United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people and in defense of the NATO alliance.”
She implied Ukraine already was a NATO member.
Whether Carlson has “aligned himself” with notorious figures or not, the issue here is what he said and did not say at the Kirk memorial service. When he made the “hummus eaters” remark, he was not referring to the death of Christ, but to the death of Kirk, and he was not referring to Jews, but to the media establishment and academics. The context of his remark was clear. If one has a valid objection to another’s views, it should not be necessary to lie about him.
I can’t know what Mr Carlson meant unless he shares that but I’ve never heard media and academia described as ” hummus eaters”.
So… it must then be a reference to Jews? How does that follow? Have you ever heard any reference to Jews as “hummus eaters?” I have not. However, being in academia, and I HAVE heard references to professors and intellectuals as “the hummus eating crowd.”
No, I’ve actually never heard anyone referred to as a “hummus eater.” That’s why it seems so strange.
A consequence of freebasing Hannity and O’Reilly?
Tim, you’re stridently casting aspersions at Weigel and anyone else who dare to challenge your ex cathedra assessment of what Tucker said the Kirk memorial service. That you’re trying to claim Tucker was talking about the media when he dropped his infamous “eating hummus” line is so laughable. Below is a quote in full. You can take your ball and go home now:
“So it’s about 2,000 years ago in Jerusalem, and Jesus shows up and he starts talking about the people in power, and he starts doing the worst thing that you can do, which is telling the truth about people, and they hate it and they just go bonkers. They hate it, and they become obsessed with making him stop. This guy’s got to stop talking. We’ve got to shut this guy up. And I can just sort of picture the scene in a lamplit room with a bunch of guys sitting around and eating hummus, thinking about what do we do about this guy telling the truth about us. We must make him stop talking. And there’s always one guy with the bright idea, and I can hear him say, “I’ve got an idea, why don’t we just kill him? That’ll shut him up. That’ll fix the problem.” It doesn’t work that way. It doesn’t work that way. Everything is inverted.”
Oh be real, everybody knows traditional Jewish cuisine is bagels, chicken soup, corned beef, gefilte fish, latkes, lox, matzoh, rye bread.
But they are best known for hummus!
I used my secret decoder ring.
T = H
U = I
C = T
K = L
E = E
R = R
I knew Tucker was nefarious code.
Levin has been commenting on him quite a bit lately; and he is not a happy camper.
BTW, a young man walked up to me after a mass a couple weeks ago while I was finishing ushering, appearing a bit anxious, and asked how he could see the priest. I replied, well, he’s “unvesting” in the back room so you could go back and wait for him there, although many times he annoints the sick up front here. Was “unvesting” an acceptable term? (I actually thought of your previous post regarding this before I replied)
Let’s assume for a minute that Putin is a uniquely evil individual and one takes the position that it is his hold on power and things such as the use of Polonium affirm that position.
However, then if one is principled, one must take a dim view of Zelensky, the penile piano player. He is a dictator and no matter how one views the authenticity of Russian elections, to date, none have been cancelled as they were in Ukraine.
Billions have been poured into a genocidal war that was precipitated by things like Biden, Inc.s involvement in Burisma, “War Pig” Victoria Nuland’s “color revolution” and the creator of “how to rise to great heights on your knees and your back” Kamala Harris’ announcement that Ukraine would be part of NATO in violation of the Minsk agreements.
I don’t have to like either side to understand that continuing to fuel a futile war in pursuit some abstract goals that can produce only a pyrrhic victory of reduced borders and survival only through diaspora is morally abhorrent.
Even Blackrock’s vultures have cancelled their involvement.
There is nothing ‘gratuitous’, Tim, about highlighting Tucker’s increasingly playing footsie with antisemitism. Or are you pretending that Tucker didn’t just do a fawning interview with notorious antisemite and Holocaust denier, Nick Fuentes? Apologies for the inconvenient truths.
Interesting. One of the first or the first time Fuentes received the label “antisemite” because he questioned Daily unfailing support of Israel. The response, a red herring that posited divided loyalties of “a Jew” (the question was about the Daily Wire, not Ben Shapiro, another Jewish Person, or Jewish people). Apparently, the response implicitly allows accusations of divided loyalties among non-Jews.
As a Pennsylvanian, I find that interesting and ironic, since another Shapiro is “our” governor-one who as Attorney misused the grand jury process to defame the Church (I’m not defending the abusers or the “musical parishes”, but grand juries are convened to indict for crimes, not to reveal non-adjudicated allegations against the dead). And to be explicit, yes I think a hard core leftist would miss no opportunity to engage in detraction.
Recently, the Governor had to address the issue of his enlistment in the IDF, and attempted to pass it off as a service project.
Let me restate. Josh Shapiro used his military age youth to enlist not in the U.S. military, but one of a foreign nation. Not on an exchange, not as a liaison. As such,. his CoC was Israel’s Prime Minister, not the POTUS.
He was willing to die for Israel, but not the United States (unlike the littlest chickenhawk, Ben Shapiro whose affinity knows the limit of self-preservation).
So yes, I question Josh Shapiro’s primary national allegiance. I would question the primary allegiance of any U.S. citizen who enrolled in a foreign military or militia. If that makes me an antisemite, I don’t care. Six year old’s can be coerced with name-calling, I’m not six years old.
Or it could be the time Fuentes questioned the number of people killed in the Holocaust? Which is usually how it starts….
Add to that time he walked up to Ben Shapiros in public who was with his wife & Kids and started to harass them?
Then there was the time he denounced Ben Shapiro for calling Our Lord a failed Rebel against the Romans. Which is odd to be upset about as Orthodox Jews don’t believe in Jesus so what does he expect? Shapiro to break out rapping the Nicaea Creed?
Yet Nick Fuentes claims to be Catholic, but HE BLASPHEMES the Virgin Mary by comparing his own sick creepy desire for 16 year old girls as potential brides(he is 30) to the Holy Spirit choosing Mary at age 13 to be Our Lord’s Mother because presumably the Holy Spirit like him want a woman who is “freash and submissive”.
What the….!!!
Also, he goes on Tucker saying correctly pornography is bad and ruins marriages yet on his live stream he calls a super chatter who advocated sex with kids “Based!”.
Compared to that I don’t have a problem with Josh Shapiro joining the IDF nor Ben Shapiro being pro-Israel.
Nick is a sick person and a bad example for Catholics and other Christians.
He is not MAGA. He is clearly a Nazi….
Pius XI warned us about this back in the day!
I think Mr. Shapiro would be a brave man whether he served in the IDF or the US Army. Catholics used to have their allegiance questioned also. Israel’s not our enemy & quite a few Israelis hold dual citizenships.
From what I remember, many Americans served in the RAF before the US joined in WWII. There were even special squadrons created for US volunteers. I don’t see the problem in helping our allies.
George Weigel has outright lied against Tucker Carlson to smear him as anti-semitic.
Timothy Williams has already pointed this out, and having watched Carlson’s short 6 minute tribute to Charlie Kirk, I can only amplify what an outrageous lie Mr. Weigel has just told here at CWR.
And George Weigel’s lying smear against Carlson, who knew and admired Charlie Kirk, affords us all the opportunity to recall what George Weigel did when Charlie Kirk was assassinated, and he had a chance to praise the heroism if Charlie Kirk – Mr. Weigel wrote instead at that moment to CONTEMPTUOUSLY IGNORE THE MURDER OF CHARLIE KIRK, and suggest that we should all be focused instead on the “real American hero” Cal Ripkin.
In closing, I have 3 things to note:
1. Charlie Kirk was a heroic young Christian man who deserved to be praised, and was ignored by George Weigel.
2. Tucker Carlson has at times gone off the rails on some topics, most especially with his recent (and I am currently inclined to think, and certainly hope it is the case) and seemingly ignorant attacks on Winston Churchill as the villain of WW2), but I am withholding judgment on that, as I think Tucker Carlson may simply be ignorant out of over-reactionary mistrust of the western establishment. We shall see.
3. But Mr. Weigel with this essay seems to have tipped his hand that he is willing to lie to his readers to manipulate them, and my conclusion will remain unchanged regarding his apparent deceitfulness, until what time, if ever, that he apologizes for this lie smearing Mr. Carlson, and withdraws his essay above.
What a horrible thing to do Mr. Weigel.
Horrible.
Chris –
Stop being a MAGA snowflake. Let me puncture some holes in your silo for a moment. If Tucker is such a faithful friend of Charlie Kirk, why did he just platform a guy (Nick Fuentes) on his podcast who has a long track record for attacking & smearing Charlie Kirk over the years.
But, yes, George Weigel is DEFINITELY the bad actor here…
Behold:
It is Vince…Sheriff-of-All-Truth.
Re-surfacing for air…
Additionally VINCE-OF-ALL-TRUTH:
It’s probably a safe bet that the reason Erika Kirk invited Tucker Carlson to speak at her husband’s memorial is that they were good friends.
As to interviewing Nick F on his podcast, there is a range of possible reasons, from good to neutral to bad and even sinister.
And if bad/sinister, well that certainly would reflect poorly on Tucker Carlson, wouldn’t it Vince-Of-All-Truth?
But no matter what trajectory Mr. Carlson ends up taking, we were all offered a lesson by Mr. Weigel, when he showed utter contempt for Charlie Kirk, by deliberately penning and posting his “Baseball-Hero” essay, immediately after the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
In closing, I appreciate being afforded another opportunity to “dialogue” with you, Vince-of-All-Truth.
Very amusing to see you and your fellow traveler Tim desperately trying to pivot in your defense of Tucker after he beclowns your guys with his fawning interview with Fuentes.
Thoughts and prayers as you navigate this difficult twist.
I am not sure why this supposedly Catholic journal affords unlimited opportunities for a character such as you to openly defame others and attribute to them whatever malevolent motives you wish to fabricate. I did not defend any particular view of Tucker Carlson and I have never heard of this Fuentes. I have merely pointed out that Weigel is lying in this article, which is undeniable. Anyone who wants to can listen to what Carlson actually said. You should try “pivoting” yourself, toward the truth, if that matters to you.
Vince-of-All-Truth:
Don’t let frustration have it’s way with you.
Until next time…
And Vince-of-All-Truth:
As interim fair-thee-well, when offering prayers and trying your hand at insults, don’t let frustration get the best of you.
Happy hunting…
“t’s probably a safe bet that the reason Erika Kirk invited Tucker Carlson to speak at her husband’s memorial is that they were good friends.”
Yes, I wonder what Mrs. Kirk thinks of Tucker doing a slobberfest interview with a guy (Fuentes) who frequently trashed Charlie over the years. There’s a clip making the rounds right now of Fuentes raging at a tweet by Charlie denouncing “Jew hatred” and Fuentes responding “I f—ed TPUSA! I impregnated your organization!”
Also, Tucker rages against Christian Zionists – which Charlie most definitely was – in his interview with Fuentes, accusing them of heresy. [Sidenote: the notion of a lapsed episcopalian accusing anyone of heresy is inherently comical.]
Sheesh, with ‘friends’ like these…
Vince-of-all-Truth:
It’s probably a safe bet that Erika Kirk, and her husband Charlie, would oppose any assertion, no matter who made it, that Jewish people weren’t exterminated by the millions by Jew-hating sociopaths in WW2.
So on that account, you probably needn’t wonder.
As to the trajectory of Tucker Carlson, if he does in fact hate Jewish people, then he should be held to account for that by men, and surely, he will be held to account Christ the Judge.
As to Nick Fuentes, of whom I’ve heard about, but have not listened to myself, the same goes, and if he has done as you assert, then he apparently is a hot-headed and toxic man, and very unlike Charlie and Erika Kirk, on top of being apparently a man who hates Jewish people. Which would explain why he might lash out against Charlie Kirk.
And now, returning to the original topic, of whether George Weigel lied about what Tucker Carlson said, and whether George Weigel showed contempt for Charlie Kirk with his “Sports-Hero” essay in response to the murder of Charlie Kirk, yes, he did lie, and yes, he was showed contempt for Charlie Kirk. That’s a seems very clear, based on what GW has written, in both cases.
Happy hunting…
Vince, there’s been a treatment developed for severe and chronic TDS; please take the cure.
Diogenes –
You lack Fr. Mankowski’s wit to be sporting this handle. Also, you apparently lack his reading comprehension skills, as I haven’t mentioned Trump once in these comments. Stop being a sensitive snowflake – yet another thing the late Fr. Mankowski wasn’t.
Vince: Aren’t these your exact words: “Stop being a MAGA snowflake.”? If this isn’t an example of your TDS illness, nothing is.
You, like all of your ilk, excel in hateful remarks. Hate only takes you so far in politics. Try Christianity; it works.
Wait, ‘MAGA’ only means ‘Trump’, JV-Diogenes??? I guess it really is a personality cult then. Also, that doesn’t seem to bode well for the longevity of the movement if it lives and dies with DJT.
Just stop. If you can’t add anything to the discussion other than your TDS, please find something else to do. Stop trolling this site.
Tucker is interviewing Nick Fuentes a notorious anti-Semite and bigot!
Not only does Fuentes deny the holocaust. He even blasphemed the Virgin Mary comparing his own perverse desire for a 16 yr old bride (he is 30)to the Holy Spirit selecting Mary to be Mother of God because she is “Pliant and fresh”.
I cannot even…..
Sorry but Tucker is clearly a vicious Jew hater.
He promotes Jew hate and he is dividing the Republican Party.
He is not he good guy. At least not anymore.
Sad really.
I was once a big fan…
I had a visit with a priest a while back who follows a Holocaust denying personality. It’s very distressing to hear those narratives but he’s my brother in Christ. If Tucker Carlson says he’s a Christian, then he is also.
We have a duty to inform each other when we hear error. If possible, correct each other in charity. But I don’t think publicly attacking each other is the answer. Whatever division’s going on in our culture & in the Body of Christ it’s not coming from God.
The root of the word diabolical means to split apart.
“Antisemitism is a malignancy in society. Throughout modern political history, rising antisemitism has been an unmistakable marker of cultural decay. ”
********
Exactly. The canary in the coal mine.
“Antisemitism is a malignancy in society. Throughout modern political history, rising antisemitism has been an unmistakable marker of cultural decay. ”
Antisemitism is one of those “wrong-think” charges like “homophobe”, “racist”, “Islamophobe”, “Transphobe”.
If you want to apply it to the clods that won’t let Jewish students walk across campuses unmolested, I agree. However, you aren’t defining antisemitism, so how can you measure it’s frequency or severity.
But when the label gets applied to people who question Israeli military policy or whether our “representatives” are biased when they declare their concern for Israel ala Ted Cruz or whether AIPAC should be registered under FARA, then you are just parroting.
if only Catholics were as concerned with anti-Catholicism or anti-Christianity as they are “antisemitism”. There’s no movies on Netflix or books on Amazon bashing Abraham or Moses, but Christ and his Mother, fair game.
I don’t watch Netflix but you can find plenty of antisemitism on YouTube. Holocaust deniers, Replacement Theory advocates-you name it.
You know there was a time that you were a sensible commenter, but of late you seem to have immersed yourself in a preoccupation with Israel and mandatory Philosemitism. Lay off the apostate Hannity.
I note in the past few years, the tranny wind-up toys targeted Catholic and Christian schools, and assassinated Charlie Kirk. Thankfully, there’s been no similar attempts against Jews or their schools. Nor any other group.
The reality is Christophobia is to use your analogy, the real metastatic process.
AS for the replacement theory, it’s not a theory. It’s a fact. There is simply no other way to explain the dissolution of so manner national borders to allow mass invasion.
Moreover, even if you are incapable of pattern recognition, I suggest you search for the following:
“Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?”
It is a two-decade old UN document. Note, when they are citing the problem of “aging populations”, what they are really citing is the organized Malthusian antinatalism of the West, which has been enacted in various ways and one member of the House of Lords (Brook) recently said the quiet part out loud, where he celebrated the reduction in population caused by the growth of homosexuality. This is an old problem. Long before Disney was a font of perversion, it was doing population control propaganda. Also on video sites.
A funny thing happened on the way to the Malthusian utopia. Islam never bothered to read the memorandum.
If you expect me to be happy about all the veils in Costco I’ll see tomorrow, whipping out EBT cards (maybe not with the shutdown), I’m not.
There was a time when if you saw a woman in veil, she was likely a nun. No more.
If you can’t see ethnic cleansing in action, I pity you.
George: I wonder if Tucker Carlson makes a distinction between the Jews as a nation (Israel) and as an ethnic and religious group? Perhaps there is more than one rabbit hole!
Those rabbit holes all lead to the same place.
Only in your head.
Somewhere along the line, the post WW II generation adopted the notion that anything that criticized Israel or took any issue with Judaism was the first fence post in the next Auschwitz. It’s not.
A similar thing has taken hold with Japan. Somehow, Hiroshima and Nagasaki made everybody afraid to discuss Unit 731, the Rape of Nanking, the Bataan Death March and other Imperial barbarities.
Rabbit holes do only exist in people’s minds its true, but they can lead to very dark places.
The problem is you worry about rabbit holes and ignore the sink holes.
The Jews and the Palestinians have an equal right to a homeland. God gave the Jews theirs, we have the ancient documentation to prove it. The Palestinians, on the other hand, since the 1972 Olympics, have freely chosen a path of cowardly terrorism and murder to show themselves to the entire world, who and what they are.
Liberals, in our present day, ooze with affection and sympathy towards the poor, abused Palestinians. To many, the Palestinian massacre of Jews on Oct 7th is a fallacy not to he believed.
Unless and until the Palestinian people choose a concrete and substantive path toward peaceful coexistence with Israel, the Palestinians won’t have a homeland.
In other words, they have to demonstrate that they are mature enough to manage a state. A Palestinian State cannot be merely awarded. They have to earn it.
I agree with denouncement of antisemitism and racism in all forms but it seems lately that with these denouncements we lose sight of the main function of the Church which is to preach Christ and the salvation of all souls. I once did a Catholic bible study and learned it was a teaching of the Church that one of the conditions of Christ’s return is the conversion of the all Jews. Is that still true? I never hear the Church speak of that.
It has been prophesied by many Catholic visionaries, none of whose visions have been approved by the Church, that shortly after the upcoming WWIII has commenced, Jesus Himself will provide what is referred to as a global Illumination of Conscience.
During this Illumination, all peoples alive at that time will suddenly see themselves standing before Jesus and He will show each individual the state of their soul were they to be judged at that instant.
Muslims will see that muhammed was a fool for rejecting Jesus as the Son of God, similarly with the Jewish peoples. Peoples of pagan religions will realize their folly as well.
This Illumination will result in countless converts to Catholicism.
Yet, not all will convert. Many souls, hardened in sin, will be in denial and declare this event to be a fantasy or illusion. Such individuals will remain intrenched in sin and freely reject the opportunity God has given them to convert.
Then, the antichrist is supposed to present himself to the world, convincing many that he has the answers to all of their and society’s problems.
On a point of history:
– Pliny the Younger 62-114 AD corresponds with Emperor Trajan about 110 AD
– Sixtus 1st Bishop of Rome 116 AD
– Tacitus 55-120 AD (writes major Latin works about 116 AD)
– ‘Gloria in Excelsis Deo’ used from about 128 AD
– Second Jewish War about 132-136 AD
– Jerusalem sacked again 135 AD
– Judaea re-named ‘Syria Palaestina’ about 137 AD
[Jews banned from Jerusalem on pain of death].
– Marcion’s (heretical) Canon about 150 AD
– Justin Martyr ‘First Apology’ about 155 AD
– Eleutherius Bishop of Rome 174-189 AD
We might ask who first authenticated ‘palestinians’ over ‘jews’ and how legitimate was and is that . . . ?
Who can most strongly claim original’homeland’ rights . . ?
We might recall that not only our LORD Jesus Christ but also Our Most Blessed Mother Mary, Saint Joseph, John the Baptizer, Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James bar Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon of Cana, Paul, Timothy, Titus, and so many others were raised in a serious Jewish faith, steeped in the land and its history. To them, we Catholics & all Christians, are deeply & eternally indebted.
We might note that Australian Jews & Australian Palestinians together formed a prize-winning football team. Not a scrap of hostility was evident!
Where then does the hostility in the Mid-East come from?
Much evidence showed it is repeatedly stirred up by fanatical religious leaders who have majored on obscure, minor verses from their highly militant founder. These are of the same cut as those currently massacreing innocent Christian villagers in North and Central and West Africa.
Their’s is not real religion – it is a bluff by those hungry for power.
The only people allowed to re-establish in Gaza & so on by the International Peacekeepers should be required to sign a solemn promise, before their god, to abjure violence and racial hatred and to live peacefully with Jews and Christians & all others.
Failing that, it seems perfectly obvious – peace & democracy will only come once Israel has full governance over Gaza and both East & West banks.
Why are so many ignoring the obvious and so paralysed in action . . ?
Is not this procrastination a root cause of the ghastly loss of human live?
Why is the world allowing this? Could it be fear of oil-rich Arab nations.
Maybe fear of Iranian balistic missiles . . ?
Weren’t we Divinely instructed: “Fear is useless . . ?”
Dr. Rice: thanks
The Pope continues to be silent about the persecution of Christians. Please publicize this latest horror instance from Egypt. These are some excerpts from the report. See link to complete report by historian R. Ibrahim below:
“As first reported here, following Friday prayers on Oct. 24, 2025, a large Muslim mob rose against and “collectively punished” the Coptic Christians of the village of Nazlet Gelf in Minya, Egypt. This latest uprising was born of rumors that an 18-year-old Christian man and a Muslim girl were involved in a relationship. (On the logic that men are the natural leaders in relationships with women, sharia bans non-Muslim men from being involved with Muslim women, though Muslim men can be involved with non-Muslim women.)
Due to this infraction, stones shattered windows, doors were battered, and Christian homes and properties were set ablaze by Muslims shouting threats and vowing to burn churches and expel all Christians. Viral footage captured the terror—including a frightened Coptic girl begging her mother for protection. As usual, security forces arrived and restored order only after the mob had sated its thirst for “vengeance.”
Then, instead of prosecuting the Muslim assailants—and as predicted—local authorities convened a so-called “reconciliation session” (جلسة عرفية) attended by village elders, officials, representatives of both families, and hundreds of villagers. The session’s decisions were, as expected, coercive, extralegal, and contrary to Egypt’s constitution. They included:
• A fine of EGP 1 million on the young man’s grandfather, Napoleon.
• A requirement for the young man’s father, Samih Ishaq, to sell his home and leave the village with his entire family.
• Continued legal prosecution of the young man.
• A ban on posting about the incident on social media.
• A penalty clause of EGP 2 million if the agreement is violated.
• Oversight of the agreement assigned to the village mayor.
The pronouncement—especially the expulsion of the Christian family—was greeted with triumphant applause, “Allahu Akbar” chants, and ululations from the Muslim majority. Coptic witnesses reported that the family accepted the terms only under extreme fear; their homes had already been attacked, and the extended family had fled to avoid casualties.
Meanwhile, the young man has been detained, pending further investigations by the public prosecutor on the “crime” he committed.
Quite telling in this “incident” is the deafening silence by Egypt’s political leaders, all the way to president El-Sisi regarding the imposed deportation of the Coptic families from the village, even though such an act is strictly prohibited by the Constitution, Art. 63, which states: “All forms of arbitrary forced displacement of citizens are forbidden. Violations of such are a crime without a statute of limitations.” Wouldn’t this explain that such assaults on the Copts are part of an institutionalized state policy?
Nazlet Gelf is far from an anomaly; this same exact pattern has played out repeatedly across Egypt. For example, in April of 2024, in al-Kom al-Ahmar, a Muslim mob attacked Christian homes after the minority received a permit to construct a church. Rather than pursue justice, authorities organized another of these closed-door “reconciliation sessions,” during which Christians were again pressured to forego charges in exchange for vague assurances that their church permit would remain intact (assurances that typically prove worthless).
Five years prior, on April 30, 2019, in the village of Nagib, reconciliation sessions similarly nullified protections under Egypt’s Church Construction Law, allowing attackers to escape accountability while Copts were forced to acquiesce to Muslim sensibilities.
The structure of these sessions follows a “good cop/bad cop” routine. Authorities, acting as the “good cops,” urge Christian leaders to accept further concessions to appease the rioting Muslims mob—the “bad cops”—lest things get even worse, with little that they, the authorities, can do about it. Christians are told to close churches temporarily, attend services in neighboring towns, and leave their homes and villages (as in the present case)—in short, comply with the mob’s arbitrary demands.
Copts are further “reminded” that any attempt to seek legal redress above and beyond the reconciliation session will only invite further retaliation. Christian youths who defend their homes or churches are often arrested, detained for hours or days, and threatened with charges—unless, of course, the Christian leaders agree to the humiliating terms of the sessions.”
https://www.raymondibrahim.com/10/30/2025/articles-of-the-day
Allah is no god.
“The Pope continues to be silent about the persecution of Christians.”
Sad, but true. He seems to be too busy meeting with James Martin and lecturing everyone about immigration policies to address the weightier matters.
I believe the problematic line in Nostra Aetate is,”The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God…” The key phrase there is THE one God, indicating that it is the same as the Christian God. But, the Moslem god has very different characteristics from the Christian God.
There were probably early pagans who worshiped only Zeus, but we would not say that they worshiped the one God, as Zeus had very different attributes.
Muslims adore the God of Abraham just as we do but they reject the Trinity. As do Jews.
We’re all children of Abraham but in different ways: by blood, by adoption, or by another mother. And we understand God in differing ways, also.
The god of Islam is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Allah is no more God than Zeus is.
mrscracker: I hold you in profound regard. However, when you aver that the God of Catholics is the same God as “adored” by Muslims, I’d encourage you to test out your assertion. I’d suggest that you ask 100 Muslims if their God is the same God as the Christian God. And, just because the Pope or an ecumenical Council declares that they are the same doesn’t make it so in the minds of its adherents.
Deacon Edward, I believe Muslims pray to the same God but I don’t believe they have the same understanding of Him.
There is only one God. I have a Mormon friend who prays for me. Muslim inmates in a correctional center prayed for my grandson when he was quite ill & his TLM attending mother appreciated that. My Jewish friend in Chabad prays for my family & I pray for her. I believe God hears us all.
I don’t believe in religious indifference but I believe God knows our hearts & intentions when we pray sincerely with whatever amount of understanding we have.
I have a Mormon friend who prays for me.
To who?
mrscracker: all I was interested in knowing is whether Muslims themselves agree with the Catholic Church that we all pray to the same God. But, thanks for taking the time to consider my question.
Mrscracker, I always read your comments. But is this case, just because the Muslims say they adore the God of Abraham sees not make it so. Their god not only does not have the properties of our God, but has properties very opposed to our God. Their god advocates suicide bombers who kill innocents, provides these killers with 72 virgins in paradise, advocates lying if it advances their agenda, and on and on.
And, this cannot be written off as just some radical Muslims. As president Erdogan of Turkey has said, there is not radical Islam, only Islam.
A commenter in a previous article, I believe in CWR, used the phrase “pagan monotheism.”
As a Catholic I believe in the Trinity & in Christ but I also believe the children of Abraham worship the same God. With different understandings of Him.
Abraham’s children have taken divergent paths & some of those can lead to strange beliefs & heresies. Christianity itself has splintered into all sorts of differing sects & denominations. Christians haven’t always covered themselves in glory either.
Islam looks different per culture & per branch. It’s not one size fits all.
I’m not naive about Muslim extremists but at the same time I think we could try to find ways to come together as people of faith to effect good. As in the Muslim & Christian families in Maryland who protested mandatory sex ed. in their schools. Or the same groups who united together for that cause in the UK.
https://bigmodernism.substack.com/p/the-synodal-seance-when-truth-becomes?publication_id=4940692&utm_campaign=email-post-title&r=4d8ftt&utm_medium=email
https://www.lifesitenews.com/episodes/breaking-pagan-rituals-at-vatican-nostra-aetates-60th-sparks-outrage/?utm_source=digest-catholic-2025-10-29&utm_medium=email
Scanning the articles for an interesting topic I ended up here, at once aware of the Hummus Wars. A conflict not too distant from the Milagro Bean Wars [the chickpea is a bean] in New Mexico. Hummus Eaters, a terminology used by Tucker Carlson in apparent allusion to Jews and Christ’s crucifixion.
Others assert Hummus Eaters refers to liberal academics [rough US truck drivers don’t eat hummus, mainly the fare of the elite]. From the perspective of history Arabs claim to be the originators of this chickpeas specialty called hummus. That this traditional food was stolen from them by Jews, hummus a very popular Israeli dish as well. As is the Arab fried chickpeas dumpling called the falafel. When in Israel and Jordan enjoyed falafels.
Now down to the fact of the matter. After deliberation it became evident that it would have been wisdom for Carlson to have chosen the term falafel eaters because the humble falafel has become wildly popular across the Middle East, Europe, and gaining in the US. That would have left the falafel eater [truck drivers love them] a more ubiquitous terminology difficult to assign to any one ethnic group ending all this groundfire. Ending wars is a Christian duty.
Carlson could have covered a multitude of sinners if he just made reference to the “Pork Aversionists.”
Yes DiogenesRedux! Why didn’t I think of that? It would have included anti-Zionists, anti-semites, Zionists, Semites, truck drivers, academics, the effete, the rough and tough. Brilliant.
Hummus has been around for hundreds to thousands of years. It’s indigenous to the Middle East & Egypt. No one “stole” it.
This article’s constant slippage from antisemitism to anti-Zionism is intellectually dishonest and morally dangerous. Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism—this is not semantic hair-splitting; it is the ethical distinction that underpins any honest discussion of Israel’s crimes. Zionism is a political ideology advocating settler-colonial expansion, apartheid, and the dispossession of Palestinians. Criticizing that ideology, or Israel’s policies, is a political act, not a religious or ethnic attack on Jewish people. Conflating the two is akin to saying opposition to apartheid South Africa’s policies was inherently racist toward all white South Africans—absurd, and strategically silencing.
The invocation of Nostra Aetate and the moral authority of the Church cannot obscure this fundamental error. Recognizing Jesus’ Jewish roots or denouncing historical antisemitism does not immunize a modern state or its ideology from ethical scrutiny. Israel’s ongoing occupation, genocide in Gaza and the West Bank, and institutionalized apartheid are political realities, not metaphysical betrayals of Judaism. Attempting to cloak anti-Zionism in the language of antisemitism weaponizes history to suppress dissent, creating moral paralysis in U.S. culture, academia, media, and even the military.
Many Jewish scholars, religious authorities, and communities openly reject Zionism as antithetical to Jewish ethics. To insist that any critique of Israel is automatically antisemitic erases these voices, distorts public discourse, and shields systemic crimes from accountability. Recognizing this distinction is crucial: it allows society to condemn antisemitism and Israel’s crimes without collapsing moral reasoning into a false equivalence. Anti-Zionism is a political stance rooted in justice; antisemitism is a hatred rooted in identity. Conflating them is intellectually lazy, ethically corrosive, and historically irresponsible.
Anti-zionism is exactly and clearly antisemitism. You are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.
Yes, thank you Athanasius.
Anti zionism is just the current manifestation of anti Semitism.
Yes. It’s a ruse progressives use to hide and justify their hatred of the Jewish people and national.
I’m not sure everyone on the Left or Right is aware of that Athanasius. Or that they personally hate Jews. But yes, they are in fact perpetuating very ugly & dishonest narratives.
If we believe in depriving the Jews of their tiny homeland, the only place they can feel reasonably safe from persecution & bigotry, what are we saying? And if we say that while we identify as Bible believing Christians?
Sadly dear ‘Deacon Dom’, this latest diatribe of yours obscures the ghastly reality of life among mono-manic Moslems for all others, including Jews, Christians, AND also their own pacifist islamic denominations.
The jihadist moslems relentlessly make life hell for all but their own. They are persistently cruel, murderous, and arch-manipulators of world opinion. Hatred and gross injustice is the life-blood of their faith practice. They are like a covid virus plague among world religions.
No true Christian would willfully blind themselves to this awful reality.
That does not apply to many Moslems, such as the Sufis who are charismatic peace-lovers, who consider God to be ‘al-wadud’ The Loving One, and ‘al-rahman’ The Merciful One. Then there are Ahmadi Moslems who firmly advocate love as the answer to hate. They teach: “If anyone attacks us we must never attack back but treat them with love and kindness.”
In regard to Islam we MUST distinguish the lambs from the hyenas. Rome must stop its slack habit of taking all Moslems as the same.
Re-applying your own grandiose words: we might hope you can see this latest comment of yours is intellectually lazy, ethically biased, and historically & sociologically grossly mis-informed.
“Time to repent and believe The Good News, dear brother!”
Ever seeking to hear & follow King Jesus Christ; love & blessing from marty
“You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place.”
Jonathan Swift
With all due respects Mrs Cracker (and Jonathan Swift) the following, incredibly moving testimony by a Muslim who died in a traffic accident, met Jesus Christ, and came back to life 20 minutes later, shows how Christ can reason a person out of their deep indoctrination by false religion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH-ukkvEHnA
This video also exposes the difference between Islam & true Christianity.
I was crying all the way through, remembering Abdul Rahim, a Moslem who – after 3 hours of our prayerful witnessing – gave his life to Jesus Christ and was physically transformed right before our eyes. Something really nasty left as the beauty of the LORD filled Abdul’s soul. Glory be to GOD!!!
Christ’s Call to all faithful Catholics today:
“Get out there & WITNESS the Truth! In season & out of season; just do it!
Why don’t we settle this matter once and for all. The USA ought to cede its territories of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba to the Jews. And, to the Muslim Palestinians, we can cede our territory in Greenland. That should make everyone happy. The Muslims can raise sheep in Greenland and the Jews can make our territories to the North flow with milk and honey.
Forgive me if I am wrong but the inference is that the Jews did not kill Christ, that the testimony given at his trial was true and that the high priest and the Leaders where out to get rid of Jesus. I say this as a Catholic who sees himself as a Jew, and recognizes all the beauty and holiness of the Hebrew faith.
Correct, the Jews did not kill Christ.
New Revised Standard Version
“No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from My Father.”
GOD has always known how He would redeem His children; the prophets were given the revelation; Jesus voluntarily fulfilled those prophesies.
Hopefully more & more among us are able to grasp the theological compatibility of GOD’s perfect, eternal plan, with human free choices.
As at the the King’s feast, there are predetermined places at the table; yet those who take those places are not the proud ‘obvious candidates’ but the humble ‘nobodies’ who prioritize loving obedience to GOD.
There is a Divine plan and, then, there is the free choice by the humble to, most gratefully, be in it!
Our job is to announce this truth everywhere, without fear or favor.
They just wanted the Romans to do it for them, right mrscracker?
The Romans were in charge, yes. But Christ died for them also.