Error on the innocence of the jews 
and the culpability of christians 
in the passion and death of Jesus crucified


AS God is pure love for humanity, a love that is infinite in its designs and all powerful in its methods, He devotes Himself – from the beginning of Creation to the consummation of history – to the task of helping the sons of Adam, pardoning their faults and, finally, saving them all in His Paradise ! In fact, to read the CCC, the whole history of mankind, beginning with Adam and passing through Noah, develops happily and peacefully with no question of the divine Wrath or terrible chastisements, except for those that are merely episodic and quickly forgotten (55-59).

With Abraham there begins a new stage, that of the election of Israel, this people for whom Yahweh multiplies wonders and blessings for their earthly prosperity and their moral progress. According to the CCC, everything about this is exemplary:

The First Covenant

60. The people descended from Abraham will be the trustees of the promise made to the patriarchs, the chosen people, called to prepare for that day when God will gather all His children into the unity of the Church. This people will be the root on to which the Gentiles will be grafted, once they become believers.

63. Israel is the priestly People of God, a people who “ bear the name of the Lord ” (Dt 28.10). They are the people “ to whom God spoke first ”, the people of “ elder brethren ” in the faith of Abraham.

But now comes Jesus who, we are told by the CCC, “ united Himself in some fashion with every man through His Incarnation ” (521). So, everything will get even better !

Everything converges on Christ

522. The coming of the Son of God to earth is an event of such immensity that God wished to prepare for it over the centuries. He makes everything converge on Christ: all the rituals and sacrifices, figures and symbols of the “ First Covenant ” (Heb 9.15). He announces Him through the mouths of the prophets who succeed one another in Israel. And in the hearts of the pagans too He arouses an obscure expectation of this coming.

Thus Jesus of Nazareth fits very well into both Jewish history and world history, each of which are apparently blessed by God, albeit in different degrees. In fact:

528. … The pagans can only discover and adore Jesus as Son of God and Saviour of the world by turning towards the Jews and by receiving from them the messianic promise as contained in the Old Testament. The Epiphany shows that “ the full number of the nations ” now takes its “ place in the family of the patriarchs ” (St. Leo the Great) and acquires the Israelitica dignitas. (cf. Easter Vigil)

For Jesus is Jewish and will remain so:

527. The circumcision of Jesus on the eighth day after His birth is the sign of His incorporation into Abraham’s descendants, into the people of the Covenant. It is the sign of His submission to the law and His deputation to Israel’s worship, in which He will take part throughout His life. This sign prefigures the “ circumcision of Christ ”, which is what Baptism is. (cf. Col 2.11-13)

I am amazed at such a clever choice of Scriptural quotations to express the prejudices and passions of the Author of the CCC ! Thus Christianity is presented on every page as a Jewish sect whose ideas and rites are but the by-products of the glorious Mosaic institutions. Thus our baptism is the equivalent of the Jewish circumcision. It reminds one of a benevolent but chauvinistic rabbi telling the story of the minim (the Christians or literally “ the heretics ”) to Jewish children in the synagogue’s “ beth ha-midrash ”. And the rest of the account is of the same inspiration. For example:

530. The flight into Egypt and the massacre of the innocents manifest the opposition between the darkness and the light: “ He came to His own home, and His own [my emphasis] received Him not. ” (Jn 1.11) The whole of Christ’s life will be lived under the sign of persecution. His own share it with Him (Jn 15.20). His ascent from Egypt recalls the Exodus and presents Jesus as the definitive liberator.

In John 1.11 “ His own ” are His persecutors, but in John 15.20 they are His brethren who are persecuted with Him. So who exactly are they ? Our rabbi calls them the children of light in one place and the children of darkness in another place. Useless to search any further: the trick continues...

The mysteries of the life at Nazareth

A cursory review of the hidden life of Jesus at Nazareth gives the impression that those thirty years passed without any notable event, without any stir or trouble from anyone. Jesus then was just an ordinary Jew, a fervent adherent of His religion... The least that can be said is that He was not lionised.

The mysteries of the public life

The mysteries of the public life are abridged to such an extent as to give the impression of a life exempt from any difficulty. The events recalled are all happy ones: the Baptism of Our Lord and the Temptation in the desert, the preaching of the Good News, the signs of the Kingdom, St. Peter’s confession at Caesarea, the Transfiguration and the Palm procession: six pages in all (sections 535-560).

Jesus preaches in parables:

546. … For those who remain “ outside ” (Mk 4.11), everything remains enigmatic.

Jesus multiplies “ miracles, signs and wonders ”:

548. … They are invitations to believe in Him… But they can also be occasions for “ offence ” (Mt 11.6)… Despite His obvious miracles, certain people reject Jesus; they even accuse Him of acting through demons.

Who are these “ certain people ” ? The rabbi does not say. It cannot be very important.

In fine, Jesus is given a sociological presentation. He has the typical profile and popularity image of religious founders or reformers. Some are for Him and some against. The number of the former grows in accordance with the classical Gauss curve. Then the latter oppose and restrain the movement, which staggers, then collapses, until all is covered in silence, after or even before the death of the person concerned.

Thus, the ascent to Jerusalem is presented as the peak of Jesus’ media success, His Capitol, which He knows is only too close to the Tarpeian Rock:

560. His entry into Jerusalem manifests the Coming of the Kingdom that the Messiah-King is going to accomplish by the Passover of His Death and Resurrection…

569. Jesus went up to Jerusalem voluntarily, knowing well that there He would die a violent death because of the opposition of sinners. (cf. Heb 12.3)

The entire modernist deception lies in the skilful choice of its quotations; it uses events and texts that carry weight and make a strong impression. But the deception also lies in the total omission of anything that would contradict its thesis and reveal all too cruelly the facts in all their truth and the truth in all its unavoidable reality. In this, the CCC is a work that is powerfully modernist, grim, and proud, in fact pharisaical. It has already sifted, distorted and mutilated four fifths of the Old Testament, in its desire to praise the chosen People unconditionally and also to grant a wide and indulgent amnesty to the pagans. Are they not all innocent and pardoned in advance ? Are they not all “ united to Jesus Christ ” and consequently saved ?

The lies of omission and falsification of the Holy Scriptures surpass themselves here by cynically passing over the plot of the Pharisees, whose hatred for Jesus becomes a homicidal obsession. We are on the eve of Our Lord’s Passion, and nothing has yet been said of the tragedy related by the four Evangelists, the Acts of the Apostles, and their Epistles.

All the same, Jesus died by crucifixion. A minimum of explanation will have to be given. It is for the Jews to justify themselves – that much is admitted ! But it is for the Christians to prove the innocence of their Lord and Master and defend His reputation, His honour, His virtue, His truth, His Messianic divine power and His glory as Son of God ! Now, who was it that wielded the pen during these seven pages (p.125-131) – the talmudic rabbi, the strongly westernised Pharisee or a modern renegade Judas – to establish that the Jews are innocent of this death on the Cross, that the Condemned is obviously to blame, and that the Christians are the ones chiefly responsible ? Who dared to utter such blasphemy ? And what Church, what Synagogue of Satan passed this sentence in the name of the Catholic Church in this universal catechism ?

It was he who wrote this:

598. … The Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus…

If any man, since the infamous Judas, and Caiaphas, the worst man to have walked the earth till yesterday, ever deserves to bring down on his head the malediction of Almighty God, Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of the divine Virgin Mary, it is in truth – in Truth ! – the Author of this antichrist indictment and the promoter of its world dissemination. I have brought my complaint against X principally on account of this deicide, the second and much more serious deicide.


The Author presents his accursed intentions

This Judas, like the other one, begins his deicide with a pledge of fidelity to his Master, a kiss:

572. The Church remains faithful to “ the interpretation of all the Scriptures ” that Jesus Himself gave both before and after His Passover: “ Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into His glory ? ” (Lk 24.26-27, 44-45) The sufferings of Jesus took their concrete historical form from the fact that He was “ rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes ” (Mk 8.31) who “ handed Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged and crucified ”. (Mt.20.19)

Thus the Author recognises the brutal fact of Jesus’ excommunication by the Jewish authorities – where the Pharisees are remarkable for their absence, mark you – and of His being handed over to the Gentiles to be maltreated and crucified. But the only significance of this event is that which it has received, and still receives, after two thousand years of reflection. The single important thing for the faithful of the Catholic Church is that which the Church faithfully retains of Jesus’ words both before and after the drama: it is the fulfilment of the Scriptures, it was the Father’s will that Jesus should endure this suffering and so save the world and enter into His glory.

That is how the devil and the Pharisees, his friends of yesterday and today, get out of the difficulty. Jesus suffered because He had to ! It was written ! He Himself willed it. So, if He willed it... why try to find the culprits ?

This learned historian presents his sources

573. Faith can therefore try to examine the circumstances of Jesus’ death, faithfully transmitted by the Gospels and illuminated by other historical sources, the better to understand the meaning of the Redemption.

What does this Judas mean ? He give us three justifications for the work of treason he must accomplish:

1. There are many obscure points in the various Christian accounts of the Passion and death of Jesus, not affecting the essential which has just been described, but only the circumstances. Learned Christians do not sin therefore against their faith in trying to establish by means of their science the most exact possible reconstruction of the events themselves. Here, our author justifies taking things back to square one.

2. Of course, the Gospels are our principal source and they are faithfully guarded and transmitted by the Church. Here, our Judas remembers what this Catechism recalled earlier, following the doctrinal teaching of the Council:

Inspiration and truth of Sacred Scripture

103. … the Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures as she venerates the Lord’s Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the Bread of Life taken from the Table of God’s Word and of Christ’s Body.

An excellent definition of the Church’s sacred duty, which the very next chapter we are about to read in this Catechism is preparing to violate with a new deicide, an attack on the divine Word, a fresh murder of the Lord’s Body...

104. The Church perennially finds her food and her strength in Sacred Scripture, for in it she not only receives a human word but what it is in reality: the Word of God. “ In the Sacred Books, in fact, the Father who is in Heaven comes lovingly to meet His children and speaks with them. ”

How then can this same Church in the next moment put this divine Word, this pure nectar, aside, preferring the venom of purely human words pronounced by some treacherous antichrists ! Ah ! there it is, the kiss of Judas !

I lay great stress on the crime about to be committed.

105. God is the author of Sacred Scripture. “ The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. ” “ Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, holds that the books of both the Old and New Testament in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself. ”

106. God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. “ To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while He employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though He acted in them and by them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things that conformed to His desire. ”

That is the teaching of their sacrosanct Second Vatican Council in the Constitution Dei Verbum, the Word of God.

Well, despite this teaching, our Judas aspires to ally his Christian faith with the poison of external information and to associate the Truth of the divine Scriptures with the lying words which have been handed down through the centuries by the enemies of the Christian name, the sons of those who condemned and put to death Jesus, His prophets, and His apostles !

So what are the lacunae and the obscure points in the Gospels ? There are none, there can be none and there never will be any. It is the Word of God in which “ the sacred authors consigned to writing everything and only those things that conformed to His desire ”. It is the Council that said it. It is your Catechism that teaches it, as we have just recalled. So what need have we of these “ other historical sources ” ? Are they supposed to be more accurate, more penetrating, and more certain than the wonderful divinely inspired accounts of our Apostles and martyrs ? To suggest this is in itself a crime !

But what then are these “ other historical sources ” ? Am I the first to ask this ? Am I the only one to know nothing of what everyone else knows ? Are these sources so well known that it would be superfluous to mention them ? Not at all. Everyone pretends therefore, from the Pope down to the masses, who can neither deceive nor be deceived, to know what, quite plainly, they do not know. Or else they are accomplices of this Judas ! For these “ other historical sources ” do not exist. All scholars, specialists or not, know one thing, which is that there are no “ other historical sources ” concerning the life of Jesus apart from our New Testament.

So I put this crucial question, the only one in this Book of accusation, to His Holiness John Paul II:

I adjure you, in the Name of Jesus, Son of God, crucified for our salvation, to tell us what are these “ other historical sources ”, which will end up reducing the Truth of the Gospels to a scientific error and the immemorial faith of the Church to infamy, rehabilitating the Jewish people represented by their “ religious elite ” of the time, “ the Pharisees ” (575), and a fortiori the people who applauded the action of the Pharisees, and their heirs who have been faithful to their traditions ever since.

Most Holy Father, tell us what these unnamed “ historical sources ” are. Are they supposed to be unmentionable ? In which case this Catechism should be thrown on the fire because, under cover of a shameful secret, it would have spread the ignominy among the whole Christian people.

Most Holy Father, please answer.

3. The question is crucial because the Judas who has decided to pursue this criminal justice investigation further does not hide from us that his conclusions are revolutionary: “ the meaning of the Redemption ” will be “ better understood ” as a result – a calculated euphemism and moderation to prepare for an even more amazing triumph. Millions of Catholics will receive it like a sharp arrow, a dagger in the heart, and that is easy to foresee. Banking on these documents – which are quite unknown to us, never perhaps published, and certainly shattering – we shall discover that the Redemption wrought by Jesus did not involve the malediction of the Jewish people – decreed by the Church to be “ perfidious ” and “ deicide ” – nor the salvation of the “ Gentiles ” become the heirs and legitimate possessors of the “ Dignitas israelitica ” (Easter Vigil) ! On the contrary, it involved the shame and confusion of the Christian people, the rehabilitation of the chosen people, the re-establishment of their immortal glory, and the disqualification of Jesus as a false prophet !

So, it is easy ! These “ other historical sources ” are those that Talmudic Judaism has kept in its hidden treasury and has never ceased to comment on from age to age. They are the “ tôledôt Jéshu ” which the Church formerly banned and had burned out of respect for Christ and His Holy Mother. I have them here in front of me, from our library, published in French for the first time ten years ago. It is a book whose title, author or editor I shall not quote. For the precise reason that its contents are atrociously insulting to GOD, to our LORD JESUS CHRIST and to our SOVEREIGN MOTHER, THE IMMACULATE VIRGIN MARY. But also to save you wasting a hundred francs on nothing but a collection of vulgar fabrications, tales of a pathetic mental level, unworthy of the mind of any cultivated person and vile enough to sully the heart of any true Christian.

So are these your sources ?! Yes, indeed. But this barrel of nonsense merely serves as a screen to conceal a whole flood of traditional rabbinical writings, in which our supposed Catholic Catechism finds the wherewithal to remodel – without contributing a single new fact or a single interesting – our immortal and divine Gospels. So this is the state we have got ourselves into ! And if anyone has to pay with his blood for the flood of truths needed to free the Church from this Antichrist Gospel, from this Bad News of Satan, then I am willing do so out of love for Jesus and Mary (certainly !), through devotion to the Holy Church, my Mother, and for the salvation of souls as well; but even more straightforwardly, out of disgust for the sheer human vulgarity and stupidity imposed by Rome on so many admirable peoples of Christendom, whom she thus seeks to pervert.

Here is the painful recall of this antichrist pamphlet.

There are seven pages of it. Ten or a hundred times more pages would be necessary to point out all its malice, all its errors, falsifications and shameless lies. I cannot bring myself to do it, so unbearable do I find it to read under the heading of “ Catechism of the Catholic Church ” the worst fabrications that the enemies of Christ have brought against Him and His true and holy saving religion. Anyway, here are these criminal texts interspersed with a few brief comments.


Five pages show us an idyllic picture of the Jerusalem of the time with its glorious sect of Pharisees. For this “ religious elite ”, Jesus was “ a sign of contradiction ”, in other words, a problem, a difficult case !

574. From the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry, certain Pharisees and partisans of Herod together with priests and scribes agreed together to destroy Him. Because of certain acts of His – casting out devils, forgiving sins, healing on the Sabbath, His original interpretation of the precepts of the Law regarding purity, and His familiarity with publicans and public sinners – some ill-intentioned persons suspected Jesus of demonic possession. He is accused of blasphemy and false prophecy, religious crimes which the Law punished with death by stoning.

576. In the eyes of many in Israel, Jesus seems to act against the essential institutions of the Chosen People: – submission to the Law in all its written precepts and, for the Pharisees, in the interpretation of the oral tradition; – the central character of the Temple of Jerusalem as the holy place where God dwells in a privileged manner; – faith in the one God whose glory no man can share.

All this is cunningly and learnedly presented by an expert pen and sworn enemy of the Divine Name, I mean JESUS ! It ends in this conclusion:

594. Jesus performed acts, such as forgiving sins, that showed Him to be the Saviour God Himself. Certain Jews, not recognising the God made man, saw in Him “ a man who made himself God ” (Jn 10.33) and judged Him to be a blasphemer.

That then was a reason for the death sentence, and it remains so in the Law of Moses. Certain Jews of the time, of the following centuries, and even of today, think likewise. They “ judge ” Jesus and the Christians “ to be blasphemers ”, worthy of death. It is normal; it is their faith, their right and their duty. Acting with sincerity, it is thus that they are pleasing to God.

It all had to happen through the will of the Father and the obedience of the Son. In this drama, each played his role honestly. Each did his best... So that no one can say that everyone, Jesus Himself included, did not behave perfectly !


It was a “ TRAGIC MISUNDERSTANDING ” ! If only Jesus had not asked His compatriots for more than they were capable of ... if only Jesus had explained Himself better... if only Jesus had prepared their minds more intelligently… Then this “ religious elite ” would not have refused him their faith, nor would they have become hardened in their incredulity. The situation reached a stalemate because of the demands made by Jesus. It was Jesus’ fault, and it still is to this day, for light has not yet been shed on those events amongst the Christian people, despite fifty years of Judaeo-Christian friendship, the Council and present day ecumenism. With this Catechism, the excesses of Jesus are at last going to be repaired !


In two pages of incredible perfidy (Christian this time ! and not Jewish), the greatest crime of all time is explained, trivialised and amnestied insofar as it relates to those who yesterday stood accused, whilst responsibility for it is laid on those who had never been suspected of it before, the Christian people itself, in its totality. I abandon my analysis of these two pages, which are a monument of bad faith, heresy, schism and scandal, for there is nothing to discuss. They must simply be brought before the supreme tribunal of the Roman Church to be anathematised.

It is on this basis that I reproduce in full the three parts of this triptych:

Divisions among the Jewish authorities concerning Jesus

596. The religious authorities of Jerusalem were not unanimous about what stance to take towards Jesus. The Pharisees threatened with excommunication anyone who should follow Him. To those who feared that “ everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and destroy our Holy Place and our nation ” (Jn 11.48), the high priest Caiaphas proposed prophetically: “ It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish ” (Jn 11.49-50). The Sanhedrin, having declared that Jesus “ deserves to die ” (Mt 26.66) for blasphemy, but having lost the right to carry out the death sentence, handed Jesus over to the Romans, accusing Him of political rebellion, a charge that puts Him in the same category as Barabbas who had been accused of “ sedition ” (Lk 23.19). The high priests also use political threats with Pilate to get him to condemn Jesus.

It is a meagre consolation, but you will note that in the margin where Caiaphas justifies putting Jesus to death, there is a reference to a section that will doubtless shed light on this decision. Let us look it up:

1753. … The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation…

The allusion is clear, and the marginal reference “ 596 ” indeed refers to the trial of Jesus. So, these good people, all terribly perplexed and mixed up, condemned Jesus to death and, in order to secure the execution of their sentence, they lied to Pilate. It was a pious lie, for lying to a pagan is no lie. And so they wrested from him the necessary decree of crucifixion.

The Jews are not collectively responsible for Jesus’ death

597. Considering the historical complexity of the trial of Jesus as manifested in the Gospel accounts – whatever may be the personal sin of the protagonists of the trial (Judas, the Sanhedrin [well, well, CAIAPHAS HAS BEEN FORGOTTEN !], and Pilate) which only God knows – we cannot attribute responsibility to the Jews of Jerusalem as a whole, despite the shouts of a manipulated crowd and the global reproaches contained in the calls to conversion after Pentecost. Jesus Himself, in pardoning from the Cross, and Peter following suit, both make allowance for “ the ignorance ” (Acts 3.17) of the Jews of Jerusalem and even of their leaders. Still less can we argue from the cry of the people: “ May his blood be upon us and upon our children ” (Mt 27.25) – simply a formula of ratification – and extend responsibility to other Jews of different times and places. As the Church declared at the Second Vatican Council: “ What happened in His Passion cannot be indiscriminately blamed upon all the Jews then living, nor upon the Jews of today... The Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God, as if such views followed from the Holy Scriptures. ”

One is dumbfounded by this torrent of shameless lies, concluded by an incredible declaration of the disastrous Second Vatican Council. Surely we must have reached the end of the nightmare, but no ! We have not drained the cup to the lees yet. Here is the bitterness of this venom, without the slightest drop of consolation:

Every sinner was the author of Christ’s Passion

598. In the Magisterium of her faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that “ sinners themselves were the authors and, as it were, the instruments of all the pains suffered by the divine Redeemer ”. Taking into account the fact that our sins affect Christ Himself, the Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus, a responsibility with which they have all too often burdened the Jews alone.

We should regard as guilty of this horrible sin those who continue to relapse into their sins. Since it is our crimes that have caused Our Lord Jesus Christ to suffer the torments of the Cross, those who plunge into disorder and evil by their sins certainly crucify the Son of God anew in their hearts, inasmuch as He is in them, and cover Him with shame (Heb 6.6). And it has to be admitted that our crime in this case is far greater than that of the Jews. For, as the Apostle testifies, “ had they recognised the King of glory, they would not have crucified Him ” (1 Cor 2.8). We, on the contrary, we profess to know Him. And when we deny Him by our deeds, in some way we lay our murderous hands on Him. (Roman Catechism)


Nor is it the demons who crucified Him; it is you who have crucified Him and crucify Him still, when you take delight in your vices and sins. (St. Francis)

What a find are these two texts ! More brilliant in its way than finding two needles in a haystack ! And in the final words we can see the signature of Him who thinks he has won this last great battle, the devil ! Ah, what a triumph for him: the Pope of Rome, the entire Church proclaims his acquittal ! His rehabilitation will soon follow:

“ Nor is it the demons who crucified Him. ” Congratulate yourselves, you powers of hell, on your forthcoming liberation !


If anyone claims to be the author, the responsible party, or the admirer of this supposed Catechism of the Catholic Church, let him be anathema and constrained, by public force if necessary, to hand over this apostate book, so that it may be thrown into the flames of an autodafé !