Prof. Em. Dr. Sándor Balogh: Judeo-Christianity

The author is Dr. Sándor Balogh, emeritus professor of political science living in the United States of America. From the seminary in Veszprém in 1952, when the Grand Seminary and theology were disbanded state-sponsored due to the Mindszenty commemoration published on the home bulletin board, he and several fellow priests were brought to justice and then to prison, together with the spiritual dr. Kálmán Major.

In 1998, Ferenc Garzo, a reporter from MTI Rome, wrote a report under the title "INTROSPECTION IN THE VATICAN".

According to the article, "Anti-Jewishness is an insult to God and the Church. This is the main idea expressed in the final communication summarizing the work of the three-day conference held at the Vatican last month. The conferences, entitled "The roots of anti-Jewish sentiment in the Christian environment", were attended by 60 Christian scholars, theologians and ecclesiastical personalities. Their lectures were compiled to be the theoretical basis for the great papal apology: on the occasion of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, the Head of the Church will solemnly stone the Jews for the sins committed by Christians.

Since the meeting was held behind closed doors, only a few important ideas of what was said there reached the public. Some of these were in line with the principles announced at the Second Vatican Council in the early 1960s, as well as the Nosta Aetate declaration, which was published in 1965, which abolished the term "murderer of God" in relation to the Jewish people. At this conference, the roots of anti-Semitism have been analyzed more thoroughly than ever before.

Most of the speakers examined the anti-Jewish theorems contained in certain texts of the New Testament. In other words, they were dissecting whether there was a "gene defect" in scripture that might have led many to see as evidence of anti-Judaism. (American-Canadian Hungarian Life, XXXX, Nr. 3, Feb. 1, 1998)

So let's see what Nostra Aetate says? The essence of the document is another subject, but the important thing here is that it is a strongly pro-Jewish document that forbids all discrimination, it not only classifies jews as innocent in relation to crucifixion, but continues to treat them as a chosen people. One of the most serious theological errors of the Declaration is that it does not trace the beginning of the Church or the history of salvation back to Adam or the primordial revelation: "For the Church of Christ recognizes that the beginnings of her faith and selection, in accordance with the saving mystery of God, can already be found in the patriarchs, Moses, and prophets." Thus, ordinary Christians are those who lead themselves back to Adam, while judeo-Christians are those who lead themselves from Abraham. This caused a degenerate schism in Christianity.

The final adoption of the Declaration is due to two related factors (whoever thanks you). One of them, John Österreicher, an ordained priest and theology professor who joined the Church in the early 20th century, was a member of a group of young Jewish phenomenologists who entered the Church in the early 20th century to reform it.

The other factor was a poorly worded and executed "scientific" sociological study that led the Council Fathers to believe that the Church's teaching on crucifixion was the main cause of anti-Semitism. The guilt thus created played an important role in the work of the Council. According to the leaders of the American ADL (a Jewish organization), the study was "critical" in adopting the principle laid down in Nostra Aetate. (see Rodney Stark, SOCIETY TODAY, Second Edition, CRM Books, Del Mar, California, 1973, p. 32). The preliminary results of the study were received by all bishops attending the councils.

Rodney Stark, a well-known sociologist, describes the study in his popular sociological university textbook in nine pages, in which "the causes of anti-Semitism are investigated", as a role model for scientific research work. He describes how on Christmas Day 1959, Young Germans painted a swastika on the wall of a synagogue. Without knowing or researching the religious affiliation of young people, that is, without any documented basis, this case encouraged the sophomore Stark and his professor Glock to "prove" (not just examine!) that Christianity influences anti-Semitism because it blames the Jews for their role in the crucifixion of Jesus." This preliminary assumption was the basis of the research. So, admittedly, their initials were no longer neutral or scientific. They had a prejudice that they wanted to prove. And that's what they sold as scientific research!

The result clearly proves that religiosity (what Stark calls religious dogmatism) has an obvious connection to anti-Semitism, and this conclusion was sent to the Council fathers in this way: "The fact is that most of your members , your most active members, still blame the Jews for the murder of Christ and believe that all Jews are doomed to hell. Many also believe that Jews cheat, steal and lie. If that's not what you want the faithful to believe, you have a serious problem wherever you have learned these beliefs."

Projecting this result, it was found that approximately 17.5 million people in america exhibit anti-Jewish symptoms because of their religious beliefs. This number was also sent to the Council fathers.

However, neither crucifixion nor going to hell was among the questions! The only question with a religious character, stark said, "Since Jews are not bound by Christian morality, they also do things that Christians do not normally do." Thus, if they give an affirmative, i.e. negative response from the point of view of Judaism, then this is interpreted by the study as the Christian churches teaching their adherents hatred of Jews. Yet the question on which they built their conclusion was a provocative question, it was not the interviewees who said that the behavior of the Jews was a problem, but that the question was thus formulated. They contrasted Christian morals and jewish behavior, and the essence was not individual religiosity, but the alleged difference between Jewish and Christian moral principles and norms.

This seems to show that the organizers of the study themselves suspected that the real cause of anti-Semitism was the behavior of some Jews, so they asked such a question, hoping that this would provoke an anti-Jewish response that they needed in order to mislead the Council Fathers!

Inspired by the successful influence of the Council, Glock and Stark spent two years traveling around America, giving speeches and seminars to church leaders, journalists, and editors. Their work was successful, because as a result of their work, many religious education textbooks and other publications had to be rewritten, and re-education campaigns were needed at all levels. Thus "Judeo-Christianity", where this fraud or deception led, is shown by the three-day Vatican conference quoted above, where "some people dissected whether there was some "gene defect" in scripture that might have led many to see as a justification for anti-Jewish sentiment." No one thought to examine the original study, on the basis of which the Nostra Aetate Declaration was adopted. Rather, they sought a "gene error" in the New Testament Scriptures, and some tried to hold anti-Semitism responsible for it as the provocative principles and behaviors of the Jews. Thank God, Pope John Paul II stopped this accusation.

Here, too, I am inconsolvently reminded of Mazeh, the Chief Rabbi of Moscow, who allegedly remarked, referring to the Jewish Trotsky, whose real name was Bronstein, that "The Trotskys make the revolution, and the Bronsteins pay for it." It seems that the tragedy of the Jewish question is that innocent Jews pay for the crimes of the provocative, radical, "non-Jewish Jews". This was also the case with the Holocaust. And even the Scriptures are being blamed by some. It is not in the Jews, but in the Scriptures that there is a "gene error!" And the reaction to the possible provocation, vatican experts say, is "an insult to God and the Church."

The infiltration of the Jewish phenomenalists and the misrepresentation of the Council Fathers not only pushed the Church into a defensive position, but also had a terrible destructive effect both inside and outside the Church, since, on the basis of religion, they generalized the accusation of anti-Semitism and made it almost impossible to defend against it.

Source:
Private letter (Author's translation draft from Hungarian original)
Bazsó-Dombi Attila
The Original text in Hungarian language:
Dr. Balogh Sándor: A judeo-kereszténység