My views on Judaism
#21
Adam Wayne Wrote:I seem to detect a desire on your part to think in terms of descendents, bloodlines and ancestery which is gone with the wind. IMHO. Since Christ, the Jews are entirely irrelevant to Salvation..


I wouldn't say they're totally irrelevant. First, the term “Israel” can be meant physically, as in a nation of Israelis, or it can be a metaphor for the Church. Those who belong to Christ are The People of God, from the old and new covenants. God told Abraham he would become the father of many nations and this was fulfilled when Christ came and established his Church universal.   

However, IF you interpret what St. Paul taught in Romans 11, and what the Church Fathers and the Church teaches in the catechism, that at the end times the Jews will enter the Church, then I have to ask you what “Jews” are they talking about if the Jews, as you say, are entirely irrelevant to salvation? I'm not talking about the religion of Judaism, mind you, but the people who identify themselves as Jews. We haven't yet reached the final chapter in the history of salvation.

I know Nic and others have a different explanation for Romans 11, but theirs is not the more traditional, historical explanation that the Church Fathers and other theologians have maintained.
Reply
#22
(01-22-2012, 01:00 PM)JayneK Wrote: Judaism is not a saving religion.  Jews, like anyone else, must accept Christ as Lord and Saviour in order to be saved.  Salvation is through faith in Christ, being in the Catholic Church.

I have in other posts described my strong objections to the Good Friday prayer for the Jews used in the Novus Ordo.  It makes it sound like it is not necessary to pray for the conversion of Jews.  I believe that praying for the conversion of Jews is very important.

I think that the Jews before Christ were God's people.  Since Christ, those who accept Him are their spiritual descendents.  People who reject Christ are the spiritual descendents of the Jews who rejected Christ.  I do not think that Jewish bloodlines are especially relevant anymore, only faith in Christ.

I believe that conversions of individual Jews are rare in the current situation (but nevertheless should be prayed for) but, in the end times, they will be brought to Christ as a people.

Sounds good to me.
Reply
#23
Strict Catholic Girl, you bring up good points. I will have to think on some of these awhile.

But, let me just bring up a couple for you to think about.

1) The Church is the New Israel and the New Jerusalem. The earthly realm of the Heaveny Jerusalem.

2) It was born through the Crucifixion.

3) The Old Covenant is called Old because it has been replaced by the New Testament. That's why it was called the Last Supper. That is why the words of Consecration are " For this is the chalice of My blood, of the new and everlasting testament, the mystery of faith, which for you and many shall be shed unto the remission of sins."

4) We can certainly see that St. Paul, by studying much of the material in his Epistles was under the impression that the Second Coming of Christ would be soon. In that sense it would make perfect sense that the Jews, which is to say, those who rejected Christ would be converted. But, St. Paul, appears to be incorrect in that assumption based on how humans experience time. How this fits into God's plans, who am I? But, even that Apostle said, he only knows Christ crucified. That is what he preached. He was quite humble about it, as I'm sure you realize.

I'm going to post lessons 1 thru 6 of Matins from today's Office. I think you will find them interesting. The opening of St. Pauls Epistle to the Galatians and St. Augustine's analysis. You will notice that when St. Paul writes "Let them be anathema". He is excommunicating. I will put these in a separate post as my browser does not like me to write at length.

Reply
#24
(01-22-2012, 06:12 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Strict Catholic Girl, you bring up good points. I will have to think on some of these awhile.

But, let me just bring up a couple for you to think about.

1) The Church is the New Israel and the New Jerusalem. The earthly realm of the Heaveny Jerusalem.

2) It was born through the Crucifixion.

3) The Old Covenant is called Old because it has been replaced by the New Testament. That's why it was called the Last Supper. That is why the words of Consecration are " For this is the chalice of My blood, of the new and everlasting testament, the mystery of faith, which for you and many shall be shed unto the remission of sins."

4) We can certainly see that St. Paul, by studying much of the material in his Epistles was under the impression that the Second Coming of Christ would be soon. In that sense it would make perfect sense that the Jews, which is to say, those who rejected Christ would be converted. But, St. Paul, appears to be incorrect in that assumption based on how humans experience time. How this fits into God's plans, who am I? But, even that Apostle said, he only knows Christ crucified. That is what he preached. He was quite humble about it, as I'm sure you realize.

I'm going to post lessons 1 thru 6 of Matins from today's Office. I think you will find them interesting. The opening of St. Pauls Epistle to the Galatians and St. Augustine's analysis. You will notice that when St. Paul writes "Let them be anathema". He is excommunicating. I will put these in a separate post as my browser does not like me to write at length.

As I was making my way through yet another one of your trenchant posts, I was thinking just this. I am looking forward to your further replies.
Reply
#25
Readings 1 thru 3

Lesson from the letter of St Paul the Apostle to the Galatians
Gal 1:1-5

1 Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead,
2 And all the brethren who are with me, to the churches of Galatia.
3 Grace be to you, and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present wicked world, according to the will of God and our Father:
5 To whom is glory for ever and ever. Amen.

6 I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel.
7 Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.
9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

11 For I give you to understand, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
12 For neither did I receive it of man, nor did I learn it; but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
13 For you have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion: how that, beyond measure, I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.
14 And I made progress in the Jews' religion above many of my equals in my own nation, being more abundantly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.

Readings 4 thru 6

Reading 4
From the Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians by St Austin, Bishop of Hippo.
Preface, Bk. iv.

The reason of the Apostle's writing to the Galatians was this that they might understand that the grace of God had worked in them that they were no longer under the law. For when the grace of the Gospel was preached to them, there had not been wanting to them some of them of the circumcision, Christians indeed in name, but who had not yet apprehended that great benefit of grace, and desiring still to be bound with burdens of the law burdens which the Lord God had laid, not upon such as serve righteousness, but upon such as serve sin, laying, that is to say, upon the unrighteous a righteous law, whereby their unrighteousness was made manifest, not taken away. For there is not anything which taketh away sin, save only the grace of faith which worketh by love.

The men of the circumcision would have the Galatians, who were under grace, to be under the burdens of the law, persuading them that the Gospel profited them nothing, unless they should be circumcised, and take on them the other outward observances of the Jews' religion. Whence the Galatians began to have doubts of the Apostle Paul, by whom the Gospel had been preached to them, as one that held not the doctrine of the other Apostles, who compelled the Gentiles to come under the law.

The same question is discussed in the Epistle to the Romans, but with this difference in that case the Apostle putteth an end to the discussion, and stilleth the strife which had arisen between the Jewish and the Gentile converts, in consequence of the Jews holding that they had earned the knowledge of the Gospel as a reward for their observance of the law, and grudging the same knowledge to the uncircumcised, as to men who had done nothing to deserve it; and the Gentiles, on the contrary, maintaining that they were superior to the Jews, in that they were not the murderers of the Lord. Now, in this Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle addresseth himself to those who were troubled by the authority claimed by them who were of the circumcision, and sought to bring into subjection to the law them who were of the uncircumcision.

Reply
#26
(01-22-2012, 04:02 PM)voxxpopulisuxx Wrote: I confess to using the term Jew York city. But cant we be snarky and clever without being antisemitic? I use the term as a geopolitical joke and satire. Because it is quite frankly true about New York. And is it fair to say that people who Identify themselves  as Jews but pretend to being objective when discussing Israel, or APAC, or the Middle east are being at best disingenuous? There is no reverse terms for Jews who are bigotted against non jews is there.

Jews routinely make bigoted statements about Christians without regarding them as bigoted. They just think they're being incisive and satirical.

I was talking politics with my Jewish boss some years ago. I'm a libertarian. I said I believe the State preserves far more disorder than it prevents. It cannot be otherwise, insofar as the State has a license to steal and extort. It calls its extortion taxation. It assures us it requires taxing authority to promote the common good, but if the rest of were to assume that authority, we'd rightly see it as an attack on the common good. Universality, I said, is the hallmark of morality. If it's not good for us to steal and extort, it's not good for the State to do it.

My boss said he believed basically the same thing. He said his dad used to tell him that if somebody were to drop an atomic bomb on Washington, D.C., it would set things back in the country for a month or so. Then things would get much better. Without missing a beat, my boss proceeded to toss out this pearl of wisdom: "My dad used to say the same thing about the Catholic Church."

I have an Italian surname. He knew I was at least culturally Catholic. I had a picture of my first grade daughter in her Catholic schoolgirl uniform on my desk. None of this gave him pause. He delivered this virulently anti-Catholic statement in a most matter-of-fact manner. As if I'm the one who has something to apologize for.

I almost parried, "Yeah, my dad used to say the same things about the Jews. He's a Holocaust denier." But I thought better of it.


Reply
#27
Adam Wayne, I agree with all four of your points. I might only add, though, that even though the Church is the New Israel, it doesn't mean God is done with the “Old Israel.” I agree that the current one does not resemble the Israel that Jesus lived in. Neither does the Talmudic/Rabbinical Judaism of today resemble the Judaism that Jesus knew. Christ is the temple and the Catholic Church has the sacrifice and the priesthood. Of course you'll get no argument from me there.

I know that St. Paul was under the impression that he was living in the end times. But when the first century ended, and the last apostle died, and it became apparent that the Second Coming might not be imminent, the Church Fathers began to elaborate on those passages concerning the “blindness of Israel and the fullness of the Gentiles.” One of the signs of the “end times” was the conversion of the Jews – whenever that “end” is (it's obviously not the first century). The Catholic Encyclopedia says in its article on the General Judgment:

Quote: "Conversion of the Jews: According to the interpretation of the Fathers, the mass conversion of the Jews towards the end of the world is foretold by St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans (11:25-26): 'For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, . . . that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles should come in. And so all Israel should be saved as it is written: There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.'"

This can't be referring to Christ's first coming. The fullness of Gentiles (Europeans, Africans, Asians, etc) was nowhere near being fulfilled at that time. Further, the Jews as a whole rejected Christ, the ultimate high treason. So, as St. Paul says, there is “ungodliness in Jacob” until the deliverer comes. St. Paul had the duty to give anathemas. Yet the children of Israel turned their back on God many times in history.. and God brought them to repentance. So, with that in mind, along with Romans 11, there's nothing un-Catholic in taking the position that God will again “save all of Israel” by bringing them into the Church at the end of time. 
Reply
#28
(01-22-2012, 06:12 PM)Adam Wayne Wrote: Strict Catholic Girl, you bring up good points. I will have to think on some of these awhile.

But, let me just bring up a couple for you to think about.

1) The Church is the New Israel and the New Jerusalem. The earthly realm of the Heaveny Jerusalem.

2) It was born through the Crucifixion.

3) The Old Covenant is called Old because it has been replaced by the New Testament. That's why it was called the Last Supper. That is why the words of Consecration are " For this is the chalice of My blood, of the new and everlasting testament, the mystery of faith, which for you and many shall be shed unto the remission of sins."

4) We can certainly see that St. Paul, by studying much of the material in his Epistles was under the impression that the Second Coming of Christ would be soon. In that sense it would make perfect sense that the Jews, which is to say, those who rejected Christ would be converted. But, St. Paul, appears to be incorrect in that assumption based on how humans experience time. How this fits into God's plans, who am I? But, even that Apostle said, he only knows Christ crucified. That is what he preached. He was quite humble about it, as I'm sure you realize.

I'm going to post lessons 1 thru 6 of Matins from today's Office. I think you will find them interesting. The opening of St. Pauls Epistle to the Galatians and St. Augustine's analysis. You will notice that when St. Paul writes "Let them be anathema". He is excommunicating. I will put these in a separate post as my browser does not like me to write at length.
Good points. Very informative.
Reply
#29
So, seeing how people have responded, I don't think my ideas about Judaism are especially different from other traditional Catholics.  I suspect that, because of my background, my feelings are different though.    I have actually been Jewish and in need of Christ, so I may feel more strongly about that than a person who just knows it as intellectual knowledge.
Reply
#30
I think as Catholics we must be very careful regarding the remnant of Jews, for everything St. Paul has said.  We are grafted on to the tree which is Israel, we are not separate. We are in the time for the gentiles to come in, and when that number is full, then things will change. Scripture tells us in future they will accept Yeshua ha  Meshiach*, and our fear of God should keep us on our tip toes concerning them and that time and that God chose them first, knowing all. I'm not saying there are two paths or anything like that, what I am saying is though they rejected their Covenant, God Almighty is not through, yet.

tim
* my spelling could be off but I'm trying for Jesus is the Messiah in Hebrew
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)