Making changes in tiny steps is more effective than a revolutionary change. Those who are willing to wait longer for the results of change know this. Those who are impatient and would like to immediately implement their ideas face strong resistance. This is the case with changes in education: extremist changes trigger protests. This is mostly what revolutionaries do, or all the ointments of post-communists. Their strategy besides has an alternate plan: if something extremist is not done, it tames a society that will more easy accept little extremist changes (half way) due to the fact that it will find that something has been saved. Let us not agree on half-pardon!
A tiny example of change is changes in teaching the Church. This strategy was outlined by the masonry already in the 18th century, assuming that subsequent generations of their members would proceed the work of demolition of the Catholic Church. The intent of these changes is to change the teaching of religion in specified a way that the Church strives to delight the "world."
The last episcopal letter of 12 March 2026 must be carefully analysed. The draft letter was prepared by the KEP Committee on dialog with Judaism. It was conducted in accordance with mostly accepted principles of the letter at the Polish Episcopal Conference and adopted by secret ballot. Fr Prof. W. Rakocy prepared opinions on the draft letter, which is devastating for its content (https://www.ekai.pl/ks-prof-racoci-dzids-require-chrystus-so-self-as-rest-humanity/) . Yet, the letter was published.
Changes in attitudes toward another religions began with John XXIII and cardinals. A. Bea, who, being a German Jesuit, someway wanted to compensate the Jews for the demolition of his people. And he did so at the expense of the doctrine of faith: to make amends for German crimes he changed the teaching of the Church.
John XXIII – following Jules Isaac's proposition – had already recommended cardinals in 1960. Bei developing a strategy for Jews. Consequently, it was the Secretariat for Promoting the Unity of Christians that was to address the issue of the Catholic Church's attitude towards the followers of Judaism. J. Isaak (among others in his book “Jesus and Israel”) accused the Gospel writers, in peculiar Matthew and John, of the false evidence of the Lord's Passion. He had a large influence (J. Isaak) due to the fact that his attack on the erstwhile Church perfectly matched the desires of progressive, liberal bishops who could usage his thesis as a tool for oppressing and disproving the defenders of Tradition (P. Lisicki – “The story of older brothers in faith”). It started with Nostra aetate (which reduced the differences between Christianity and another religions) to undermine the Church's erstwhile teaching, and where will these changes occur; or to challenge the Gospel?
Caiaphas asked the Savior directly: “I will curse you by the surviving God, that you may tell us, are you Christ, the boy of God?” (Mt 26:63). And the Savior’s answer left no doubt. Christ was condemned due to the fact that he confirmed his deity and fulfilled his prophecies. While Catechism states that we have all crucified Christ, St. Thomas explains the theological nuances of this truth: no uncertainty it was our sins that condemned the Savior to death, but this death was due to the incitement of the Jews, especially the advanced priests of the time. St. Thomas writes: “Let us know, however, that ignorance does not justify them, for it was any kind of deliberate unconsciousness. For they saw clear signs of Jesus' deity, but out of hatred for Christ and envy they misrepresented them, not wanting to believe his words erstwhile he said he was the boy of God. Intentional ignorance does not relieve guilt, but, it seems, alternatively increases it. For it proves that man so clings to sin that he wants to stay unconscious, that he does not break up with sin. The Jews so sinned not only as the perpetrators of the crucifixion of Christ the Man, but somewhat as the perpetrators of the crucifixion of God. As for the judaic crowds, they did not know the Scriptures and were deceived by their leaders. Their responsibility is so less.” Fr Marek Bąk clearly states who murdered Jesus:
The advanced Council (Sanhedryn) gathered in the morning (Great Friday) to approve the death conviction that had been filed earlier that night and to find a way to force Pilate to approve that sentence. The enemies of Christ show so much energy to destruct him. This should embarrass us, disciples of Christ. If we put as much effort as they did in spreading God’s Kingdom, the planet would look different. And after Pentecost and the Church's resurrection, the advanced priests and judaic leaders persecuted Christians, as we read in the fresh Testament. Can it be denied?
That is why the position of bishops - shepherds in matters of religion is so important. They should stay vigilant, especially where the false religion appears. If salt loses its taste, what good will it do – it is simply a informing to shepherds first. If shepherds sign a letter presenting false thesis, they exposure the faithful to falling distant from the faith. They cannot be afraid, they must be alert, and they must be incorrect in time and not in time. They must not be drawn into the political aspects of the situation, as R. Winnicki mentions:
Zb.
![MOPS nie potrzebuje akceptacji staruszka co do opiekunki. Inaczej jest w usługach sąsiedzkich [nowelizacja ustawy o pomocy społecznej]](https://webp-konwerter.incdn.pl/eyJmIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly9nLmluZm/9yLnBsL3AvX2ZpbGVzLzM4Mjg1/MDAwL3BhcmFncmFmLTIwMjQtMz/gyODQ4NTQuanBnIiwidyI6MTIwMH0.webp)
