Sungenis and Jones Can’t Seem to Get Their Slanders of Bishop Rhoades Straight
[Note: while we fully intended to ignore Bob's continued nonsense regarding the Jewish people and Bishop Kevin Rhoades, unfortunately, The Remnant decided to give Bob a forum by which to level and spread more slanderous falsehoods to a wider audience. As we are in a position to correct some of these falsehoods, it seems appropriate to do so and to warn people - yet again - that neither Sungenis nor his friend and mentor, E. Michael Jones, can be trusted on these issues.]
A) Sungenis vs. E. Michael Jones on why the Vatican chose Bishop Rhoades to succeed Bishop Darcy at the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend:
Sungenis is convinced it’s all about him. The fantasy he’s peddling to whomever will listen is that the Vatican essentially rebuked Bishop Rhoades - they “shipped Rhoades off to South Bend and put another bishop in Harrisburg” - for having wrongly opposed Sungenis’ supposedly brilliant treatment of Jewish issues. Sungenis wants people to believe that he was “vindicated" (click here and here).
But Jones is convinced it’s really all about him, instead. The polar opposite fairytale he's telling everyone is that the Vatican was so pleased with Bishop Rhoades' performance as their pro-Jewish pit-bull in taking Sungenis down that they sent His Excellency to Fort Wayne-South Bend to “silence” Jones and even “burn him at the stake”! (no joke - those are his exact claims: click here). One might have hoped that Mike Jones would at least give Bishop Rhoades credit for planning to do something so authentically traditional as burning him at the stake. However, Jones does deserve kudos for not missing the opportunity to use his paranoid and frightening fairytale about Jews and Bishop Rhoades to scare up donations from his faithful, like-minded followers (click here).
As such, the only thing Sungenis and Jones completely agree upon here is that Jews are at the center of the reason Bishop Rhoades became the new shepherd of Fort Wayne-South Bend. For those familiar with these two friends and associates, this is no surprise. Although, both of their stories do have one other thing in common – an incredibly inflated view of their own importance. It’s all about them. Again, for those familiar with these two, this is no surprise, either.
While it should be obvious that only those involved in the actual decision-making process know for certain all of the reasons why Bishop Rhoades was elevated to the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend to succeed Bishop Darcy, anyone who reads the news can easily discern one of the most prominent reasons – aside from the fact that Bishop Rhoades is a good and faithful Catholic shepherd. Bishop Rhoades was one of the first bishops to publicly support Bishop Darcy and oppose Fr. Jenkins’ decision to honor pro-abortion President Obama at Notre Dame (Fr. Jenkins is the president of ND) – a decision that made international news and certainly got the attention of the Vatican. It's noteworthy that both in South Bend and at his Fort Wayne installation ceremony, Bishop Rhoades sent a clear message about what happened between Notre Dame and Barack Obama. The Papal Nuncio also sent his own message at the installation on that issue as well:
However, Bob Sungenis wants everyone to believe the fantasy that he was the focal point in the Vatican’s deliberations and that the Vatican essentially sided with him against Bishop Rhoades to the point of "shipping off" His Excellency to Fort Wayne from Harrisburg in some sort of imagined disgrace.
No doubt, even Mike Jones finds Bob's interpretation of events to be ridiculously self-aggrandizing and delusional, because according to Jones, the Vatican actually sent Bishop Rhoades to Fort Wayne-South Bend to get him.
B) Sungenis and E. Michael Jones can't get their story straight about who it was at Bob's July 2007 meeting at the Diocese of Harrisburg that allegedly dared make a specific, negative statement about "supersessionism" - a term coined by an Anglican that appears in exactly zero Catholic magisterial documents but that Bob nonetheless wields as though it were a defined, Catholic dogma. (Click here, here and here for a discussion of "supersessionism" and Bob's continuing, completely inappropriate use of this term.)
Bob and Mike have gone back and forth as to who the allegedly evil, heretical culprit was four times now:
Sungenis in January 2008:
"During the meeting, the vicar general, Fr. William King, JCD, made a remark to the effect that, as Catholics, 'we don't believe in supersessionism any longer.'" (Click here)
Sungenis in October 2008:
"Or, we might have expected an apology from Fr. James Massa, executive director of the USCCB Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs who, in his meeting with me and Tom Herron in July 2007, stated that 'no one was a supersessionist any more.'" (Click here)
Sungenis in September 2009:
"In our meeting of July 29, 2007, at the bishop's office in Harrisburg, the vicar general, Fr. William King, said to me and Mr. Herron: 'we don't believe in supersessionism any longer.'" (Click here)
Mike Jones in January 2010:
"During their meeting with Bishop Rhoades' representatives, Bob Sungenis and the late Tom Herron listened as Father Massa, the bishops' Catholic-Jewish dialogue guy, explained, 'no one believes in supercessionism anymore.'" (Click here)
Sungenis in October 2010:
"During the meeting with Fr. King, I discovered that both he and Bishop Rhoades held to the heresy of antisupersessionism - the view that the Jews still retained legal possession of the Mosaic covenant." (Click here)
The following closely related pieces are also worth reading:
The Real Reason Sungenis turned on Bishop Rhoades (from a note written by Sungenis himself)
On the Relationship Between the Jewish People and God (read the last comment under the article by Forrest and Palm as well)