You are here

E. Michael Jones on “Catholics and the Jew Taboo”

When E. Michael Jones published this book, “all hell broke loose.”

Listen HERE.

E. Michael Jones, editor of Culture Wars, joins the Truth Jihad for some spirited interfaith dialogue around his forthcoming article “Catholics and the Jew Taboo.” In that article, whose title references Charles Bausman’s “It’s Time to Drop the Jew Taboo,” Jones  argues that Catholics and Jews have been fighting “culture wars” over such issues as gay marriage, but that Catholics have been handicapped by the taboo against naming their opponents.

It seems to me that E. Michael Jones has a point. Why is it OK to say “the Catholics have been fighting against gay marriage” but not “the Jews have been fighting for gay marriage” ? After all, as Jones points out, it’s apparently OK to credit Jews for gay marriage if you’re in favor, but taboo to blame Jews for gay marriage if you’re against. For example, Amy Dean writes in Tikkun:

“National Jewish social justice organizations such as the National Council of Jewish Women, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and Bend the Arc (on whose board I currently serve as co-chair) helped to galvanize the American Jewish community to support pro-marriage equality bills in the states. In fact, Jews can claim a fair share of the credit for bringing Americans to a tipping point of accepting marriage equality.”

Is there a double standard here? E. Michael Jones thinks so. He writes: “In her Tikkun article, Amy Dean clearly defined the enemy as the Manhattan Declaration, Robbie George, and the Catholic Church in ascending order of importance. Catholics like (Archbishop) Chaput lost the gay marriage battle because they identified the enemy as ‘secularizing activists’ and not as Jews.”

Is E. Michael Jones articulating what should be a legitimate, mainstream Catholic position? I don’t know; that’s up to Catholics to decide. But since he argues his position in a clear, reasonable, erudite, well-sourced way, I am strongly opposed to those who are trying to silence him. Whatever the merits of his positions—and I forthrightly disagree with some of them in this interview—E. Michael Jones is an important Catholic voice. Anyone who wishes to refute his arguments is welcome to contact me by way of (or the comments section here) and I will offer you airtime to respond.

6 Thoughts to “E. Michael Jones on “Catholics and the Jew Taboo””

  1. RoZ

    Two very educated people talk about „Judenfrage”, Christian and Muslim, and both seem to ignore fundamentals of the Jewish ideology. Let me play a role of „advocatus diaboli”.


    „Double standards”, different rules for Jews or Israelites, different for other nations, have roots in the Holy Bible. Let’s start from the Covenant (Exodus 19:3-6,

    3 And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;
    4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself.
    5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
    6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

    What happened in Egypt? The last stage of Egyptian plagues was cruel and sophisticated genocide of Egyptians. The Lord in Egypt was not a universal incarnation of Love, Truth and Mercy (what Christians or Muslims may claim) but was engaged in promoting interest of Israel to the detriment of other peoples – Egyptians.

    These „double standards” are confirmed many times even in Torah. Here on usury (Deuteronomy 23:19-20,

    19 Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury:
    20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

    Why does Michael Jones complain of double standards? Jews are „peculiar treasure” and this is special status confirmed by the Christian “holy book” is a source of „double standards”.


    The Bible does not have a status of „holy book” in Judaism. This is just an ancient national literature. They have a „holy book”, Talmud, an interpretation of the Bible. I haven’t found a fragment in the Talmud, I quote a book written by rabbi Michael Higger, “The Jewish Utopia” (1932), a picture of ideal times to come in Talmud and Talmudic literature:

    The nations will consequently change their attitude toward Israel. Instead of despising Israel, they will pay their due respect to the ideal people. This will be in accordance with the prophecy of Isaiah: ” Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, his Holy One, to him who is abhorred of nations, to a servant of rulers: Kings shall see and arise, princes and they shall prostrate themselves.” (49:7). For the first time in the history of Israel, since their dispersion, they will secure their real liberty and freedom, and will fear no nation or individual. (, page 42, last paragraph).

    Rabbi Higger says any criticism of righteous, ideal people will simply be impossible. This claim is backed by the prophecy of Isaiah. We are approaching this messianic era – this is the reason that talking about „the rightous” is a thought-crime (still possible but persecuted).


    Well – the answer is simple. First – let me remind you that Christian interpretation of the Bible is based on misunderstanding. The Lord ordered „ideal people” to stone any false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1-11,

    1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
    2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
    3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
    4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
    5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
    6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
    7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
    8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
    9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
    10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
    11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

    This fragment is regarded as justification for the death of Jesus. Jesus wanted to change the Law, to attract „righteous ideal people” to other gods (Matthew 5,

    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

    21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
    22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

    38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
    39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

    Jesus wanted „ideal people” to follow other gods. Saint Saul, a man who invented Christianity, was involved in stoning of the first Christian martyr, saint Stephen. Stoning of saint Stephen was also based on Deuteronomy 13:1-11. In Jerusalem Sanhedrin was not entitled to punish Jesus to death – this was the only reason why Jesus was crucified not stoned.

    Going back to the question: who gave them the right to do this? – let me come back to the Covenant (Exodus 19:5-6,

    5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
    6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

    “The Lord”, an ethnic Jewish god declares: “all the earth is mine”. All people who recognise “the Lord” as their god should accept the racial hierarchy.


    The above interpretation seems to be „a Jewish one”. This interpretation is also the simplest one. We should accept the simplest explanation of any problem – this rule was introduced to Christian epistemology by father William of Occam (Occam’s razor is the problem-solving principle that, when presented with competing hypothetical answers to a problem, one should select the one that makes the fewest assumptions,

    Complains of Michael Jones are completely unjustified.

    1. Kevin Barrett

      I agree. I have great respect and affection for my friend Mike, but obviously I don’t share his Catholic approach to the OT. Laurent Guyenot’s From Yahweh to Zion suggests a more plausible interpretation, from a Christian historian who lets go of church dogma and lets the text speak for itself.

    2. RoZ

      Michael Jones believes that Jesus was a rejected incarnation of Logos. Well, from dogmatic perspective he was another false prophet (demonstrated above). Judaism is NOT about Logos, Judaism is a rule of hidden autocratic elite and absolute obedience of tribesmen (vide: Abraham and Isaac).

      Michael Jones believes that the story was initiated ~2000 years ago. Douglas Reed in “Controversy of Zion” started ~2600 years ago. Russians say that Egyptian king Akhenaten living ~3300 years ago was very important (

      Russians say that Judaism simply is a political program. The goal is world domination. Sheikh Hosein says that “Pax Americana” is being replaced by “Pax Judaica”. Good observation. Please look at Isaiah 60-61. This is about Pax Judaica, paradise in the times to come.

      One sentence from Isaiah 60:12 ( //For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.//

      Isn’t it a summary of colonialism, history of last five hundred years in condensed pill? Isn’t it about millions of Redskins, Niggers, Abos, etc? Isn’t is a political declaration?

      As a (former?) Christian I must admit that Christianity is a false religion.

      1. Kevin Barrett

        Ego and ethnocentrism have a way of creeping into all religions and ideologies. That doesn’t mean the religions themselves are “false.”

      2. RoZ

        Jews are not a nation in traditional sense. Judaism is an ideology. Jewish ideology supports this ego and ethnocentrism. This ethnocentrism, worshiping their group (tribe?) makes up probably more than 50% of Judaism.

        What does it mean „true” or „false” religion? Any religion is just an interpretation of metaphysical order. Roman Catholic bureaucracy had simply betrayed the sheeple. This betrayal makes Roman Catholicism a false religion.

  2. P. Alfonso

    We often assume that history recorded by Jews is factual. Of course we know they lie.
    Don’t you find odd that the plagues and first born death of thousands is recorded by Jews but not by the Egyptians?
    “What happened in Egypt? The last stage of Egyptian plagues was cruel and sophisticated genocide of Egyptians. The Lord in Egypt was not a universal incarnation of Love, Truth and Mercy (what Christians or Muslims may claim) but was engaged in promoting interest of Israel to the detriment of other peoples – Egyptians. “

Leave a Comment