Why is this Nativity scene blasphemous?
This is a long overdue post on the kippah or yarmulke, a skullcap worn by Talmudic Jews. In the Nativity photo above, St. Joseph is portrayed as an Orthodox Jew. Interestingly, this photo was included on a blog post at Les Femmes — The Truth, Photo of Vatican Crib Scene Rejected by Facebook!, which complained (rightfully so) about the Vatican’s frightful and macabre Nativity in St. Peter’s Square this year and then says, (bold is ours for emphasis)
“Rather than end on a negative note, I will once again mention my grandchildren's play, The Promise. Isaiah tells us that at the height of man's wickedness, God sent a Savior. And he was beautiful and the scene surrounding his birth was filled with glory and singing and joy. So ignore the ugly and horrifying Nativity presented by the usurpers in Vatican City and put the image below [CMJ note: It’s the photo above in our post] in your mind this Christmas Season.”
We will explain why this image isn’t wholesome but is in fact blasphemous and heretical.
Firstly, the kippah is an entirely different animal than the Catholic zucchetto (also referred to as a pileolus, berettino, calotte, subbiretum, submitrale, or solideo). In the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) under the entry ZUCCHETTO one reads,
It cannot be said positively when the zucchetto became customary, but it was probably not before the thirteenth century. It appears on the cardinals in the fresco, "St. Francis before Honorius III", painted about 1290 in the upper church of St. Francis at Assisi. It is seen also under the tiara in the effigy on the tomb of Clement VI (d. 1352) at La Chaise-Dieu. The figures on the several tombs of bishops of the fifteenth century in the Roman churches show the zucchetto under the mitre. In the "Ordo" of Jacobus Gajetanus (about 1311) the zucchetto is mentioned in connection with the hat of the cardinals (cap. cxviii), and with the mitre in the "Ordo" of Petrus Amelii (cap. cxliv.), which appeared about 1400. It is shown in the pictures and sculpture of the late Middle Ages sometimes as a round skullcap, sometimes as a cap that covers the back of the head and the ears. In this shape it was called camauro; this designation was given especially to the red velvet cap of this kind bordered with ermine that was peculiar to the pope. There was great confusion as to the proper use of the zucchetto and hence the Sacred Congregation of Rites has delivered several decisions on the Subject ("Decr. auth. Congr. SS. Rit.", V, Rome 1901, 382).
A sketch of Pope Pius XII wearing a white zucchetto.
We now move onto the kippah, its origin, and reasons for wearing it. Modern day Jews often lament that in times past the followers of the Talmud were often made to wear some type of identification (a badge, coat, or cap) in Christian countries which identified them as a Jew. They promote this as a form of religious persecution and believe that this eternal victim status gives them carte blanche to commit offenses in the modern world. What if we were to tell you that one of the reasons for the wearing of the kippah served the same purpose, identification (albeit with a huge loophole). Along these lines a kippah identifies the wearer of it as one who follows the Talmud and the dictates of the rabbis including denying Jesus as the Christ. Not only is it used for identification but also as an act of defiance towards assimilation into the Christian country. Don’t believe us, then read what the rabbis and scholars have to say...
• Don’t imitate Christians who pray bareheaded and are lightminded heathens •
“The opinion of David Halevy of Ostrog (17th century) is an exception. He declared that since Christians generally pray bareheaded, the Jewish prohibition to do so was based on the biblical injunction not to imitate the heathen custom (*ḥukkat hagoi; Magen David to OḤ 8:2). Traditional Jewry came to equate bareheadedness with unseemly lightmindedness and frivolity (kallut rosh), and therefore forbids it (Maim. Yad, De'ot 5:6).”
• Goyim (Christians) pray with uncovered heads and prayers don’t count if the head is uncovered •
“The Taz says even though mi’ikkur hadin, it’s not a chiyuv to wear a kippa, this is “bechokoseyhem lo teilecho” since the goyim take off their headcovering, we should not do the same. To be bareheaded is an issue of “bechukoseyhem lo teilecho”.
But Rav Moshe does admit that there is one case that the Taz does apply, and that is by davening. This is because when Christians are in Church they have to take off their headcovering. So if one davens without a headcovering, one did not fulfill his chiyuv. If your tallis falls in the middle of shemonei esreh, maybe you don’t have to go get it, but if your kippa falls off you have to.”
• Wearing a kippah isn’t Biblical, it’s Talmudic & a sign to identify one as a Jew •
• The rabbis created the law that Jews were to wear kippot so not as to be confused with the cursed (Christian) nations among whom they lived •
• The Catholic faith is false worship and not to be imitated in any manner •
“Maimonides decreed: "The Yid should be distinguished from the Christians and distinct in his dress and his actions, just as he is different from them in his knowledge and understanding." The basic halacha is that any of the practices that Christians use in their false worship (avodah zara) is forbidden to be done by Judaics (Yiddin) even if Judaics used these practices prior to Christianity. In other words, even if the Bible—or the Talmud— sanctions a certain practice, Judaics are forbidden by the rabbis from continuing to do so if this practice was subsequently adopted by Christians.”
source: Judaism Discovered, From Its Own Texts: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit, p. 591.
• Praying with an uncovered head is an impious act and identifies one as a Christian •
“With the passage of time, the custom of covering the head during worship increasingly became mandatory. As the persecutions by the Church increased, the Jewish aversion to everything Christian deepened. The uncovering of the head became associated with Church etiquette and therefore became repugnant. To worship or even to go about with an uncovered head was regarded as imitation of the Christians and an act of irreverence to God. Conversely, the covering of one’s head became an act of Jewish piety. For convenience the skullcap, or yarmulke, was adopted.”
Jews wearing kippot as not to be identified as with the cursed nations (Catholics).
• Don’t be bareheaded like a gentile •
“Taz famously wrote that nowadays since gentiles specifically walk with their heads uncovered, a Jew who walks around with his head uncovered is in violation of the Torah prohibition against following the ways of the gentiles.”
• Don’t be like a gentile •
“As Prof. Zimmer speculates, the symbolic differentiation created by kippot helped distinguish the Jews from their gentile neighbors. A couple of 15th-century German sources, for example, indicate that leaving one's head uncovered inappropriately imitates gentile habits and leads to assimilation. Similarly, in the 17th century, Rabbi David Halevi Segal ostracized those Jews who, like their non-Jewish neighbors, remove their hats when sitting down (Taz OC 8:3).”
source: Failed Messiah, Why Rabbi Akiva, Rebbe, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua All Went Bareheaded
• Jews cannot imitate Christians in any manner when it comes to practicing Talmudism •