Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« Happy St. Ignatius of Loyola Day! | Main | Babylon 5: The Lost Tales »

August 01, 2007

Comments

LJ

This is an amazing phenomenon, particularly with respect to the young people. Benedict XVI knows the future Church will someday be populated by those young people and from them will come the priesthood and episcopate, and he is doing what he can now to continue where John paul II left off with World Youth Day and so on. The Motu Proprio is just one piece of that puzzle.
The genius in what he has done is in the choice. The only question is how long will it take for the "extraordinary" to become ordinary.

How ironic is it that this would not be happening if the Novus Ordo had been celebrated consistently in a proper and reverent manner, making use of the great traditions and treasury of the Church in music and form.

It is really the abuse of the Novus Ordo that has generated this demand in such large measure. There were always proponents of the Tridentine rite but this appears to be a large pressure valve releasing. So those who gave us the liturgical abuse in the first place must share in the responsibility for this growing backlash.

That sound you hear is the gnashing of teeth from the modernist, minimalist liturgists.

Thomas

Not to be picky but it was the Washington TIMES, not the Post, though it's a miracle when anybody in the secular media has such a positive (or even accurate) piece. Here's the full article: http://tinyurl.com/29f4dr

AnnonyMouse

"It is really the abuse of the Novus Ordo that has generated this demand in such large measure"

You may be on to something. That is one reason the mass has appeal to us and the reverence of course. You can teach your children, easier in my opinion, the awesome wonder of our mass better if you don't have people talking, running up and down the aisles, etc.

Plus, I know some priest are worried that parishes will actually open. Money talks.

Christian

"the priest always leads the parishioners in facing east"

Yes, when the church is 'oriented' to the east. For example, I believe St. Peter's faces west.

Truefaith

I suspect that alot of the excitement regarding the recent MP and it's impact on the average Catholic has been blown way out of proportion. Good grief folks! If you've been reading ALOT of the statements coming out of ALOT of the dioceses, one easily discerns the subtle hostility towards the TLM. In areas where the the local bishop is friendly towards the MP--AND the clergy are eager to celebrate it, AND the laity petition for it, you probably will see an increase in TLMs. In other areas, for a variety of reasons, it just won't happen.

Kevin Cary

"The only question is how long will it take for the "extraordinary" to become ordinary."
I imagine that this probably won't happen (and I hope it doesn't). Instead, it would be a very good thing if the ordinary form of the Roman rite was celebrated with more latin, ad orientum, gregorian chant, etc. I think that the desire is really, as LJ aluded to, for more beautiful liturgies in general, and not so specifically for the mass of Blessed John XXIII. The desire to celebrate mass according to the 1962 missal was motivated because abuses were never tolerated with that mass and thus were never introduced in the first place.

Richard

There are time during the old Mass when, according to the rubrics, the priest MUST face the people, and it is at these times when, in light of the rubrics of the old Mass as a whole, they afford even more meaning I think than priest constantly facing the people as in the new Mass.

During most of the Mass, the priest and the people are united in facing east, symbolizing the common journey toward God in eternity. This is interrupted, however, at times when the priest tells the people, with extended arms, "Dominus vobiscum" (the Lord be with you) this happens about four times throughout the Mass. Besides the times mentioned by Jimmy, he also must face the people when administering the final blessing - "Benedicat vos omnipotens Deus - Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus" (there's an indescribable ring to it in Latin). It is at these times that his facing the people have more significance and bear more visible meaning.

Therese Z

"the priest always leads the parishioners in facing east"

Yes, when the church is 'oriented' to the east. For example, I believe St. Peter's faces west.

-----------------

That's why there is such a term as "liturgical east." Facing the altar and tabernacle by definition is liturgical east.

Linda

"the priest always leads the parishioners in facing east"

What if he's standing at the north pole? Can he face south then?

Esau

What if he's standing at the north pole? Can he face south then?


East is where your heart is.

Follow your heart; it knows!


(sorry...just wanted to prepare for whatever Gnostic Gnonsense coming)

Michael

What if he's standing at the north pole? Can he face south then?

Since Russia is apparently laying claim to the North Pole, if a church is established there it will probably be Russian Orthodox and the Patriarch of Moscow will have that determination.

Who knows, the South Pole is still up for grabs.

horatio

Thomas,

You raise an important point. The article is from the Washington TIMES, not the Post.

So, referencing it as part of the "secular media" isn't entirely accurate. The TIMES is owned by Sun Myung Moon who when not running the Unification Church and the Times, is marrying Catholic Archbishops to Korean acupuncturists (I'm sure there is a joke there, but I cannot think of any.).

So, as accurate an article as it may be from aMSM (sic) source, I prefer to get my news from other sources.

Jim

Someone mentioned earlier that St Peter's faces west. In fact it faces due east.

Some Day

I prefer to get my news from the halls of the Vatican.

With two thousand years running, the CIA has nothing on it.

"Someone mentioned earlier that St Peter's faces west. In fact it faces due east."

But we are not pagans who worship the sun, or islams who face toward Mecca!

Paul Madrid

"Someone mentioned earlier that St Peter's faces west. In fact it faces due east."

I think there's a perspective error here. Let's take a quick look at how St. Peters is oriented on Google Maps.

As we can see, those coming out of St. Peters into the square face east. However, those inside St. Peters looking at the main altar face due west. I think the point of the previous poster was that, when saying a Tridentine rite mass in St. Peters, the priest would face west during the consecration.

Some Day

St. Peter's faces East.

We face West.

horatio

Jimmy,

I hope you stop taking your news references from the Washington Times. I'm sure other sources have commented on this issue and clearly your audience is educated in the orientation of St. Peter's.

I don't want any cues coming from Sun Myung Moon coming from this site. Or his boy, Archbishop Milingo.

Jarnor23

Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day. :)

Breier

The Washington Times is a conservative good paper, and is independent of the views of its owner. It's not run by Moonies, horatio.

Breier

I might add that United Press International (UPI) is also owned by Moon's organization. Would you prefer Reuters?

Michael

The Washington Times is a Moonie paper. Just because its own sycophancy is oriented towards the Republican establishment does not make it conservative or good. Occasionally good stories or editorials pop up in different MSM outlets. They cannot keep them all out.

horatio

Sun Myung Moon is the owner of the Times. He brings mockery and scandal to our Church through his associations with Archbishop Milingo's Married Priests Now movement (a movement that took off after he married Milingo to Maria Sung).

And yet people defend supporting the organizations he owns, advertise his site and possible purchasing his paper? This puts money in his pockets.

The editorial board may be independent; the flow of money is not. Supporting the Times puts money in the hands of someone who would destroy our Church.

John

It was posted:

"Sun Myung Moon is the owner of the Times. He brings mockery and scandal to our Church through his associations with Archbishop Milingo's Married Priests Now movement (a movement that took off after he married Milingo to Maria Sung)".

So, you think the NYT, Post, or any other newspaper and media outlets are pro catholic or owned by Catholics or even protestants for that matter? Disney, Chanel 2, 7 WABC on down the line are owned by non Christians who have no love for the Catholic faith or religion for that matter at all, except possibly their own

The secular media is just that and is to be avoided, and I am suprised that this was even in any paper as all the papers and reports have labeled the mass anti semitic, but I guess they love the Novus Ordo mass so that tells you something right there about the New Mass as it stands for nothing as it was meant to appease the modern world

Christ shook the world and true liturgy should be true to his word and not conform to the modern secular world which the New Mass has basically done

Maureen

We are Christians, and we pray (liturgically) toward the East: in the direction that Our Lord is said to have ascended, the direction from which the Psalms prophesy that He will come again. We are buried facing in that direction, so that we will see Him when we rise. We look for the Bridegroom, just as the earliest Christians did -- just as they say they did in their literature and teaching. From the Irish monks in their tiny stone chapels with their tiny eastern window spaces, to the oldest chapels in Asia and the Middle East and Rome, there is every sign that Christians always prayed toward the east. Sometimes weird sites prompted adaptation, but they still prayed toward the east -- even if it meant turning their back on the altar at certain bits.

This is entirely logical, as Jews prayed and pray towards Jerusalem and the Temple; the Muslims copied them, initially praying toward Jerusalem and then, in pique, turning toward Mecca. But we pray toward the risen Jesus, in readiness to see Him when He comes.

So "People, look east" and "When I fall on my knees with my face to the rising sun" are not just random hymn filler lines. They are outposts of ancient doctrine. If Christians have forgotten this, that's easily remedied by reminding them.

horatio

John,

I'm not suggesting the NYTimes, the WaPost, LATimes, or any MSM news source is better than the Washington Times in editorial or news coverage. And this site, as it should, makes many points about how bad those newspapers are whenever an article is cited here.

I'm only stating that the Washington Times should not be excluded from this list of anti-Catholic news organizations MSM newspapers simply because it appeals to the politically conservative leanings on many orthodox or adherent Catholics.

Other conservative leaning papers (the few that are around) are better sources than the Times, which is funded by Moon and his anti-Catholic fervor.

Unforunately, as I mentioned, few regional or urban newspapers can be considered conservative anymore. It was a shame to see the Chicago Tribune move left (though it remains better than most). The Rocky Mountain News in Denver also provides some counterbalance to the liberal Denver Post.

Etal

Would it be too much to ask that this restored mass replace the prayer (even the sanitized modern version that doesn't use the adjective "perfidious") calling for conversion of the Jews with a prayer asking God's forgiveness for Catholic atrocities against the Jews over the centuries?

You know, the same crimes JPII apologized for.

Esau

...with a prayer asking God's forgiveness for Catholic atrocities against the Jews over the centuries?

You know, the same crimes JPII apologized for.

Oh, that's right --

It's those darn Catholics who have been solely responsible for atrocities committed against the Jews and noone else.

Like the Protestants and other non-Catholics are so blameless and holy in this regard.

Please!

If you're going to present such an accusation, at least do so with some level of fairness.

While any wrong done against a certain people is wrong, your purposely misrepresenting the facts in order to paint Catholics as a bunch of Hitlers in order to provoke hatred and ill feelings against Catholics is equally atrocious!

"Would it be too much to ask that this restored mass replace the prayer (even the sanitized modern version that doesn't use the adjective "perfidious") calling for conversion of the Jews with a prayer asking God's forgiveness for Catholic atrocities against the Jews over the centuries?"

Why not both?

It is the prayer of the Church that ALL people come to the True Faith, but we Catholics share a special, organic relationship with the Jewish faith more than any other, as the Lord we profess is not only the Savior of the whole world, but is their promised Messiah.

The Jews have been called our "elder brothers" in faith. We SHOULD hope that they especially will come to know the Son of God. It is not any kind of put-down.

Esau

"...the Lord we profess is not only the Savior of the whole world, but is their promised Messiah.

The Jews have been called our "elder brothers" in faith. We SHOULD hope that they especially will come to know the Son of God. It is not any kind of put-down."


A-MEN!

Etal

Esau, where did I say or even imply that only Catholics were committing these crimes? In case you haven't noticed, the subject of the discussion is the CATHOLIC mass. Not the Protestant mass, not the Orthodox mass.

I suggest you improve your reading comprehension.

horatio

The Mass is about us being penitent before God. Distracting the Mass from the central sacrafice of Jesus with language apologize for past persecution of the Jews distracts from the central meaning of it.

We should certainly ask for forgiveness of our sins and those of our Christian brothers before us, even with an emphasis on those sins committed against our Jewish brothers and sisters. But that should not be part of the liturgy. The liturgy must remain entirely focused on Christ and our relation to him.

Esau

Do you deny that in this context: "a prayer asking God's forgiveness for Catholic atrocities against the Jews over the centuries. You know, the same crimes JPII apologized for."

you paint Catholics with such prejudice as to portray them as tyrants who throughout the centuries seemed to have devoted themselves in committing crimes against the Jews?

It's precisely your choice of terms that convicts you.

It might not be a bad idea to express some particular repentence for specific wrongs to remind us not to do the same thing again. Even we Catholics, who sometimes read the Scriptures, know the epistles are full of lists of particular sins. The persecution of people, Jews, Muslims, Protestants, etc. for following their conscience is a particularly evil sin, or so the Pope teaches, at last!

Esau

Please!

There's a big difference between apologizing for actions of the Church and apologizing for certain actions of members of the Church.

You make it appear as if the Catholic Church was guilty of purposely committing such heinous acts against the Jews throughout its history when in fact it was the actions of certain individual members of the Church (and NOT the Church itself) who were the ones actually guilty of such things.

The Pope was merely apologizing for the behaviour and action of a certain of its members.

It would be like Peter apologizing on behalf of the Apostles for the behaviour and action of one of its members, namely, Judas!

Michael

Esau, where did I say or even imply that only Catholics were committing these crimes?

I find it odd that you used this grammatical construction rather than something like 'had committed those crimes'. Perhaps by your suggestion that all Catholics everywhere ask for forgiveness every year you meant to imply that all Catholics, everywhere are anti-semites and so have to keep apologizing for the same sin.

You might also, in the same spirit, suggest that all Jews include in their Paschal celebration a prayer for forgiveness their role in the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazereth. But you would be right to point out that the Catholic Church denies the doctrine of collective guilt, not just for the sin of deicide by the Jews, but for all sins including those committed by individual Catholics against Jews.

Etal, your suggestion makes no sense theologically as the prayer you would have individual Catholics say means nothing. Further, praying that Jews come out of their darkness and recognize their Messiah is not an act of anti-semitism, it is an act of fraternal love for those with whom we hope to share salvation. This is something that does need to be continually prayed for as its consummation is still a devout hope.

Esau

Michael,

Thank-you.

John

Esau posted:

"There's a big difference between apologizing for actions of the Church and apologizing for certain actions of members of the Church."

Esau I agree with you totally, it is the so called groups who claim discrimination who they themselves like to paint what seems like the only so called unprotected groups left in the world the white male and Catholics as bad, evil, imperialistic in one felt swoop

When one even insinuates likewise against any of the so called minorities or protected groups, you better have a good lawyer!

Sad this is what the world has come to where you have rabbis claiming a Catholic mass is antisemitic because we pray for their conversion

horatio

ESAU - "You make it appear as if the Catholic Church was guilty of purposely committing such heinous acts against the Jews throughout its history when in fact it was the actions of certain individual members of the Church (and NOT the Church itself) who were the ones actually guilty of such things."

Yes, it is always individuals, whether or not they are acting collectively.

It is not fundamentalist Islam that commits heinous crimes, but merely individuals who flew planes into buildings in New York.

It is not Communism in China that persecutes Christians, but merely individuals who happen to keep them from professing their faith.

For a period, our Church acknowledged and condoned heinous acts. To dismiss it as "individuals" acting in their own charge is ignorant of history. The Church as a societal body has committed wrongs. We should not shy away from that in an effort to define ourselves as pure.

And that does NOT mean that apologizing to all that we have wronged should be part of the liturgy. Our liturgy is about our devoted love of Christ and the salvation from our sins that we will find in Him.

But we should not turn a blind eye or convenient reinterpretation of history to justify our righteousness. That will only come from our penetant and self-surrendering love of God.

kaneohe

If there is to be any discussion or complaints regarding the prayer for the Jews during the Great Intercessions on Good Friday can we all at the very least look at what the actual prayer says?

It is my understanding that the MP allows the use of the Roman Missal promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962. Now I could be wrong, but the phrase “perfidius Jews” is not used or found in the 1962 Missal, but that it was removed by John XXIII in 1959.

My 1962 Missal has the following prayer for the Jews( part of the Good Friday Great Intercessions.)

Oremus et pro Judaeis:
ut Deus et Dominus noster auferat velamen
de cordibus eorum; ut et ipsi agnoscant
Jesum Chrisum Dominum nostrum.

Oremus.
Flectamus genua.
Levate.

Omnipotents sempiterne Deus, qui etiam
Judaeos a tua misericordia non repellis:
exaudi preces nostras, quas pro illus
populi obcaecatione deferimus ut,
agnita veritatis tuae luce, quae Christus est,
a suis tenebris eruantur. Per eumdem…Amen.

This is the English translation:

Let us pray also for the Jews;
that out God and Lord would remove
the veil from their hearts:
that they may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ

Let us pray.
Let us kneel down.
Arise.

Almighty and everlasting God,
Who drivest not away from Thy mercy even the Jews:
hear our prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people;
that acknowledging the light of thy truth,
which is Christ,
they may be rescued from their darkness.
Through Christ our Lord . Amen.

While I don’t find the prayer to be anti-Semitic I can nevertheless see why faithful Jews are offended being called blind and of having Catholics pray for their conversion. Of course, there are also a few Jewish prayers, and rules regarding Christian or peoples of other faiths that aren’t flattering either, the "shelo asani goy" in the morning davening, the "shehaym mishtachavim l'hevel v'rik" in the aleynu, the ruling that pikuach nefesh doesn't apply to gentiles for purposes of violating the Sabbath, and various other laws pertaining to interactions with gentiles.

Don’t Jews and Christian have different concepts and ideas on conversion? Christians see it as a duty to bring the Gospel message to all the world and the Jews have a similar idea that Israel is to be the "light unto the nations" that will reveal God's will to the world.

Etal

We SHOULD hope that they especially will come to know the Son of God. It is not any kind of put-down."

Yes Esau, it IS a serious put down to the Jews (you should understand the Yiddish phrase that roughly translates into English as "It didn't crawl and it didn't fly"). And since they are the agrieved party, we should be sensitive to their feelings.

Given Jewish history, and the pain and suffering inflicted on Jews over the millenia mostly at the hands of Catholics (yes Protestants abused Jews as well and Martin Luther was a rabid anti-semite, but that came much later after the Reformation), the Jews have every right to be sensitive - even overly sensitive - to an hint of the old hatred, whether in the Tridentine mass or a Mel Gibson movie. Until I was schooled by Jewish friends and colleagues I had no idea how deep the scars were, thankfully my initial ignorance was vincible and not invincible. Which is why I find the prayer for Jews in the Tridentine Mass (even the nice, watered down version used in today's missal which at least no longer calls the Jews "perfidious") to be both embarassing and offensive, and this Catholic will have no part in it.

Esau, from your hysterical over-reaction to my post you appear to have a thin skinned defensiveness in abundance. But as Horatio rightly pointed out, the sins were those of the Church and sanctioned by the Church, not just the independent actions of a few bad apples. As historian Will Durant commented "For that one death on a cross, how many crucifixtions!" Anyway, its a pity that you (and people like you) can't extend that hyper sensitivity into empathy for the Jews and how they might feel.

John

Etal posted:

"Esau, from your hysterical over-reaction to my post you appear to have a thin skinned defensiveness in abundance"

Etal, wow that is an understatement, though I agree with Esau here, try skimming some of the other threads and see how he responds to my posts and the names,accusations and posting of my personal e-mail address which is agains FCC regulations in his responses to me, as I am a proclaimed Traditionalist

Just a wonder why Mr Akin has yet to issue him a warning as I had thought such was a violation of Da Rulz, but?

Etal

Let us pray also for the Jews;
that our God and Lord would remove
the veil from their hearts:
that they may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ

kaneohe, do you have the slightest clue as to how hateful and insulting these words are to a devout Jew?

Despite the nice phrasing, it is teling them that they are foolish and blind for not abandoning the ancient faith of their fathers. It tells them that being a Jew is wrong in the most condescending and patronizing way possible.

John

Etal

Have you ever taken a look at your sacred Talmud?

Do you know how hurtful it is to read and hear that those brought up in the Catholic faith are following Jesus deemed a "sorcerer" and that we all Catholics are basically stupid for folling a false messiah?

Take a look in the mirror before throwing a stone

Etal

John,

The Jesus (Yeshu) of the Talmud as described in sanhedrin 43a as follows:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! — Ulla retorted: 'Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defence could be made? Was he not a Mesith [enticer], concerning whom Scripture says, Neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him?36 With Yeshu however it was different, for he was connected with the government [or royalty, i.e., influential].'
Our Rabbis taught: Yeshu had five disciples, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah.

It goes on to describe how his five disciples were also executed.

Sorry John, but this isn't the Jesus of the Gospels. The descriptions don't match up at all.

Yeshu (we would say Joshua, the Romans would say Jesus) was a very common name. Almost as common were the number of wandering rabbis and holy men who claimed to be the messiah.

Esau

Etal, wow that is an understatement, though I agree with Esau here, try skimming some of the other threads and see how he responds to my posts and the names,accusations and posting of my personal e-mail address which is agains FCC regulations in his responses to me, as I am a proclaimed Traditionalist

Oh please, John.

Anybody could review the entire record of all your past posts and see in them a history of malicious deceit and calumny against not only myself but those who have voiced similar opinions about you and the utter nonsense and lies you spout.

It's no wonder you often side with Anti-Catholics such as Realist, Jeb Protestant and Etal!

Michael

Etal,

Considering how opposed the Catholic and Jewish understandings of salvation history are, conflict has been inevitable if regrettable. It has never been one-sided if your Jewish friends have misled you in that regard. If you believe that to salve the hurt feelings of our Jewish brethren that Catholics must deny Christ or more specifically stop believing that he is the promised Jewish Messiah than you go too far. If you are indeed Catholic as you claim, you should not wish to deny the grace of salvation provided by Jesus, the Christ, from the Jews by not praying for God to remove the veil from their hearts that keeps them from seeing the truth.

Esau

Etal:

Anyway, its a pity that you (and people like you) can't extend that hyper sensitivity into empathy for the Jews and how they might feel.

You have some nerve to assume that I don't have empathy for the Jews and that Catholics who pray the Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews are awful bigots who actually profess anti-semitism just because they would care enough about their Jewish elders as to pray for their conversion!

Esau

If you are indeed Catholic as you claim, you should not wish to deny the grace of salvation provided by Jesus, the Christ, from the Jews by not praying for God to remove the veil from their hearts that keeps them from seeing the truth.

Indeed!

Is not Jesus Christ the Messiah Promised to the Jews?

If Etal doesn't believe that Jesus Christ is actually the Messiah, he shouldn't even be Catholic (that is, if he even is) or Christian for that matter.

Also, if he really cared for his Jewish friends, he would actually pray for their conversion as we would anyone of any religious faith!

It has nothing to do with this falsely levelled accusation of hatred for other faiths, but has everything to do for caring for the Salvation of Souls!

Etal

If you believe that to salve the hurt feelings of our Jewish brethren that Catholics must deny Christ or more specifically stop believing that he is the promised Jewish Messiah than you go too far.

Who said anyting about denying Jesus was our Savior?

If you are indeed Catholic as you claim, you should not wish to deny the grace of salvation provided by Jesus, the Christ, from the Jews by not praying for God to remove the veil from their hearts that keeps them from seeing the truth.

It was such tender, loving feelings towards Jews and heartfelt concern for their souls that led the Inquisition to burn them alive...

bill912

The Inquisition had authority *only* over Catholics; not Jews, not Muslims.

Rob F.

When standing in the nave of St. Peter's basilica facing the altar, you are looking west. IIRC, it was for that reason that St. Peter's was one of the few places in the world where a priest offered mass facing the people in the old usage. In most all other churches, regardless of orientation, the celebrant stood with the people on the nave side of the altar.

Etal

It has nothing to do with this falsely levelled accusation of hatred for other faiths, but has everything to do for caring for the Salvation of Souls!

So like Jack Chick you believe that Jews burn in hell for all of eternity simply for being Jews? That's kind of ironic, since Jack Chick believes we Catholics are going to hell simply for being Catholics.

I'm pretty sure Jesus would disagree with both you and Jack. As Jesus noted, the Roman centurion (whose servant He cured from a distance) had more faith than He had ever seen in all of Israel. That centurion was a pagan who by law had to worship an make sacrifices to his divine emperor. Jesus wasn't interested in his religious affiliation, that's not what He meant by "faith".

Maybe, just maybe, Jesus' sacrifice made salvation possible for everyone - Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, pagan, as well as Christians and Catholics - all those "sheep you know not of".

An infinite, loving God could do no less.

Etal

Bill, the conversos that were burned at the stake would fid that a legal technicality divorced from their actual experience.

Esau

So like Jack Chick you believe that Jews burn in hell for all of eternity simply for being Jews?

WoW!

Yet, another falsely levelled accusation against me!

So, first, I have no empathy for the Jews and now I believe they're all going to Hell?

Etal, I'm quite impressed how in order to seemingly win an argument you, just like John, resort to such baseless, malicious accusations against those whom you argue!

bill912

Conversos were Catholics.

Etal

Bill, no they weren't, which is why they were executed.

Etal

Well Esau, if you don't believe that Jews are going to hell why are you so concerned for their souls?

bill912

Conversos were converts to Catholicism; hence the term "Conversos".

Esau

Well Esau, if you don't believe that Jews are going to hell why are you so concerned for their souls?

Gee, you mean to say being concerned for another's soul is an evil thing?

Are you even Christian?

Even when St. Paul converted the Gentiles to Christianity, he was even then concerned for their souls!

bill912

Let's just ignore him, Esau, and just correct his erroneous statements. That should keep us plenty busy!

Esau

bill912,

He doesn't get it, and it may very well be he's not even Catholic.

Caring for one's soul and the souls of others is a pivotal point in Catholicism.

Even his conception of (what he thinks) conversion is egregiously erroneous.

Fr. Groeschel himself prays for his own conversion.

I, myself, pray for not only my conversion but for the conversion of others -- including Catholics!

bill912

Well, Esau, that would make you a converso. So, obviously, you are not a Catholic!

Mary Kay

Etal, it's true that Jews experience deep scars. However, that seems to be the only accurate statement in your posts.

If you are Catholic (and I don't see anywhere that you've said so), you are poorly informed, not only about your own faith, but others as well.

What led me to that impression was your comment about "the Orthodox mass and the Protestant mass." I'm not at all convinced that you know what "crimes" Pope John II made the apology for. Your comment that it was mostly the Catholic Church being violent against Jews sounds very much like repeating others' views without knowing the facts yourself. You show that when you say "well, yes Protestants did some also" but totally gloss over the Orthodox and big one, Muslims.

It's been said above that the deep scars are not reason for Catholics to change liturgical prayer.

It is axiomatic that all healing comes from Jesus. His Crucifixion allows that healing. Where I was going with that just melted in the heat, but I'll pick it up later. Basically, I'd say that you could stand to be better informed about Catholicism.

Etal

Caring for one's soul and the souls of others is a pivotal point in Catholicism

dis·in·gen·u·ous (dsn-jny-s) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating.
Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naïf.


That's nice Esau, so why near exlusive focus on the Jews? Why not a prayer for Buddhists in the Tridentine mass?

C'mon, who do you think you are kidding?

John

Etal posted:

"Well Esau, if you don't believe that Jews are going to hell why are you so concerned for their souls?"

Etal, please correct me but Jews do not believe in Hell to begin with so what do you care what Catholics believe? I think that you had better things to worry about Catholics as we have no problems with those who are Jewish whatsoever. What happened 1000 years ago and in the middle ages for that matter can be looked at in many ways, as the Inquisition has a Catholic side to it as well, not just what we are taught in our secular history classes, just like the French Revolution

bill912

We pray "for those who do not know God"; that group includes Buddhists.

Esau

That's nice Esau, so why near exlusive focus on the Jews?

Gee, perhaps it might have something to do with the fact that Jesus is actually their Promised Messiah and that the Jews are our elders in the Faith?

Mmmmm... I wonder why our bible is exclusively focussed on Jewish things as well?

Doesn't it even have (gasp!) the Old Testament?

Esau

Read the bible, Etal!

Acts 7
44 The tabernacle of the testimony was with our fathers in the desert, as God ordained for them, speaking to Moses, that he should make it according to the form which he had seen.
45 Which also our fathers receiving, brought in with Jesus, into the possession of the Gentiles:

Esau

That's nice Esau, so why near exlusive focus on the Jews? Why not a prayer for Buddhists in the Tridentine mass?

Somebody help me out here -- isn't the God that Christians worship the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob?

Mary Kay

Etal, I'll grant you that Esau is very passionate in his posts, but he is not disingenuous.

The Church prays for the whole world on Good Friday. I looked up the prayers for the 1962 Missal which are for: the unity of the Church (save the heretics and schismatics from their errors), the conversion of Jews, for the conversion of pagans (take away iniquity of their hearts).

John

Esau

Just be careful, Etal may be Abe Foxman in disguise waiting for you to say something not PC and then have JA blog shut down!!

The TLM really bothers so many other faiths, I guess the secular world hates to see Catholics worship in reverence

Esau

Etal, I'll grant you that Esau is very passionate in his posts, but he is not disingenuous.

The Church prays for the whole world on Good Friday. I looked up the prayers for the 1962 Missal which are for: the unity of the Church (save the heretics and schismatics from their errors), the conversion of Jews, for the conversion of pagans (take away iniquity of their hearts).


Thank-you, Mary Kay.

As usual, your kind heart sees things through.

Etal

It's been said above that the deep scars are not reason for Catholics to change liturgical prayer.

They are compelling and forceful reasons since the scars were left by Catholic anti-semitism over the centuries (what JPII apologized for in "We Remember").

Etal

John, I'm being careful that Esau and you aren't Bill Donohue or Mel Gibson in disguise (or Mel's old man).

BTW, you ever get around to actuallly reading the Talmud?

bill912

"They are compelling and forceful reasons..."

Mary Kay, as usual, was right.

What we are seeing from Etal is a classic example of throwing mud on the wall in hopes that some will stick.

Mary Kay

Etal, did you even read my posts? Or did you just look for phrase on which to reiterate your argument?

You're doing what non-Catholics when they say the Church is wrong. They take a single sentence out of context and hang on to it as tenaciously as a dog with a bone. But in not seeing the whole picture, they lose the Truth.

If you are Catholic - and that's a simple yes or no, which would make it much easier to discuss this topic with you - anyway, if you are Catholic, I wish you'd give your own faith as much of the benefit of the doubt as you do a faith different than your own.

You give the impression of not fully understanding what Good Friday is about. Many saints heard Jesus instruct them to meditate on his passion and crucifixion. It would be beneficial for you also to consider that. Not to proselytize your friends. But so you can come from a place that is truly healing for them.

Any deeper discussion will have to wait. Once more it's 90 here with a higher heat index and I don't have AC, so anything else requiring thought will have to wait.

Mary Kay

Bill and Esau, thankee, :)

Esau

Once more it's 90 here with a higher heat index and I don't have AC, so anything else requiring thought will have to wait.

Take it easy, Mary Kay -- especially since you're without an AC!

Although, at home, I try to survive with fans, I do, at least, have the option of using the AC (though it's so old and crusty) when the temps hit their highs and I can no longer tolerate the heat.

God Bless and a Good Weekend to You and bill912!

Alan

horatio, Etal, et al. (heh):

The distinction is that fundamentalist Islam condones terrorism, and Communism condones the persecution of Christians. The persecution of Jews was never condoned by the Church as an institution. On the contrary, from as early as the days of Pope St. Gregory the Great, Rome constantly had to intervene to protect the Jews of Europe from the sporadic persecution they suffered at the hands of the state, or of various individuals or groups. Granted that the state and the individuals/groups were usually composed of Christians, the Church Herself still never condoned this sort of antisemitic violence.

I am unaware of a single document from Rome which supports or condones the persecution of the Jews. Unless you can cite one (and if you can, please do), I'm afraid that the whole guilt-of-the-whole-Church argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.

I think that perhaps the best assessment is that of Shlomo Simonsohn in his magisterial, 6-volume history "The Apostolic See and the Jews" (covering the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period). Since I don't have a copy of it in front of me right now, I quote the following from a review by Mary Stroll in the academic journal "Speculum":

"In their own In all probability if the Apostolic See had had its way in the Middle Ages, the Jewish presence in most Western European countries would have continued. Only the papacy's relative political weakness allowed the secular rulers to prevail."

John

Etal posted:

"John, I'm being careful that Esau and you aren't Bill Donohue or Mel Gibson in disguise (or Mel's old man).

BTW, you ever get around to actuallly reading the Talmud?"

Etal-the Talmud the Babylonian as I recall there are two versions is something like 60 or so books and no I have not read them all

But I have read translations written by Catholic priests from the late 1800's who have shown them to be clearly anti Christian and anti Jesus

The Talmud was written over 4 or 5 centuries starting in the 1st or 2nd so of course they dont come out and say "Catholics" because Catholics did not even call themselves that at that time, but they did refer to them as Christians

It was the Jews who performed the first "excommunication" by not allowing the so called "Jesus Jews" to worship with the Jews in the temple as in the 1st century and after the death of Jesus, the early church did not want to separate but it was because of the hatred of the Jews upon them and the turning over of the "jesus jews" to the Romans for crucifixion (unlike St Stephen whom the Jews stoned to death outside the walls of Jeruselem becoming the first martyr)and this continued on for centuries under Roman rule where Jews who were Roman citizens for the most part turning over Christians to the Romans

The Talmud clearly teaches that the "Goim" are to be avoided and promise heaven to those who kill Goim, which in many ways makes Orthodox Judaism no different than that of Islam yet you sit here and complain of anti semitism in a traditional mass. They clearly refer to Jesus in the Talmud as he is described as the son of the carpenter and then blapheme Our Lady saying Jesus was conceived during menstruation and illegitimate

I could go on but the Talmud is hate filled and I am tired of Catholics especially JPII who basically had no backbone apologize to anyone for anything as it has been the Christians even today with Turkey with no Christians left after being the cradle of Christianity, Lebanon down to 25% from 75% and Israel where Christians are not protected and the Isreali government playing games with the Vatican over taxes and other things for that matter

So stop complaining about the mass and hopefully yes, you will see the light

With respect to other faiths, in the Traditional Catholic church's today we pray every first Friday the Benediction whose prayer, unaltered by John XXIII reads,as we pray for Gods mercy on the heart of those who are Jews, unlike the talmud which seeks revenge:

Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus

Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thine altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but to be more surely united with Thee, behold, each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy most Sacred Heart.

Many indeed have never known Thee; many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy Sacred Heart.

Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to their Father's house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.

Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinion, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and the unity of faith, so that soon there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.

Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolotry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them all into the light and kingdom of God.

Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of that race, once Thy chosen people. Of old, they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may It now descend upon them as a laver of redemption and of life.

Grant , O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: Praise be to the Divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to It be glory and honor forever. Amen.


Inocencio

John,

The Talmud was written over 4 or 5 centuries starting in the 1st or 2nd so of course they dont come out and say "Catholics" because Catholics did not even call themselves that at that time, but they did refer to them as Christians

The first documented use of the term Catholic is by St. Ignatius of Antioch (A.D. 35-107) in his letter to the Smyrneans, 8, 2 (A.D. 107) but it is believed to have been used even before that.

It was the Jews who performed the first "excommunication" by not allowing the so called "Jesus Jews" to worship with the Jews in the temple as in the 1st century and after the death of Jesus, the early church did not want to separate

By your definition does this make the early Church apostate because you admit they worshipped with the Jews and in the Jewish temple?

I look forward to your response.

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

John

Inocencio posted (In a lame attempt to somehow related todays Vatican II popes worshipping in Temples with Rabbis, not to mention with Hindus and Buddhists):

"By your definition does this make the early Church apostate because you admit they worshipped with the Jews and in the Jewish temple?"

Inocencio-If you know anything about the early church you would know the early apostles never had any intention of denouncing their Jewish roots, and it was only their own "excommunication" by the Jewish elders that actually forced them to start a new church and religion

I usually try to refrain from laughing at a post but yours is so lame and rediculous in your support of ecumenism to somehow correlate JPII the "least" and his borderline heresy in worshipping with so many false faiths to the first century "Jesus Jews" and early Christians that I had to chuckle

You clearly just showed your lack of knowledge and how you would go at any lengths to destroy the One True Church

Inocencio

John,

it was only their own "excommunication" by the Jewish elders that actually forced them to start a new church and religion

Christ built His Church upon the Apostles.

You clearly just showed your lack of knowledge and how you would go at any lengths to destroy the One True Church

The One True Church that you claim the apostles were forced to start by the Jews? And I am the one who lacks knowledge? Ok. I am sorry I interrupted your noisy broken gonging. Please continue...

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

Michael

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. 37 Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38 But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. 40 And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.

41 They therefore that received his word, were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls. ...

46 And continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness and simplicity of heart; 47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord increased daily together such as should be saved.

Later, the Christians were banned from the Temple and the synagogues.

Later still, the Temple was destroyed.

After that, Temple Judaism was transformed into a Rabbinical Judaim without priest or sacrifice, still awaiting a Messiah who would be a political and military ruler.

Michael

There was no question among the Jewish people of his time that Jesus was a Jew from the family of David, from the tribe of Judah, from the people of Abraham. There was no question that his first disciples were all Jewish and that the 3,000 baptized on Pentecost were Jews who had come to celebrate that Jewish feast and ended up receiving salvation through the One they had come to believe was the Messiah of Israel.

You would have been hard pressed, in our Lord’s day, to find anyone—Jew or Gentile—who did not look upon Christians as Jews who had formed a new sect within Judaism. Christianity was Jewish. Its followers were not converts; they were Jews who had done what Jews had been waiting to do for 2,000 years: welcome their Messiah, the long-expected hope of Israel.

Is the Christianity proclaimed in the first century as the fulfillment of Israel’s hope anything different now, twenty centuries later? What has happened? What has caused a Jewish religion, with a message that has extended to the whole world, to be seen as a Gentile religion not meant for Jews at all? Why should some Christians, in a pernicious form of anti-Semitism masquerading as ecumenism, tell the Jewish people that the Messiah who came through them is not for them?

Rosalind Moss, Roy Schoeman - Salvation is from the Jews, This Rock Magazine

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0501fea3.asp

John

Michael

Thank you-Inocencio was somehow trying to draw a parallel with John Paul II worshipping in Temple with Jews for their messiah to come with the early apostles who until they were forced out worshipped in Temple

What the ecumenical One World Religion supporters such as Esau and JPII for that matter will stop at anything in their attempt to justify such heresy!

Inocencio

Michael,

I agree with the quotations you posted. As your quotations imply the Church's roots are Jewish. Do you agree with John that it was the "'excommunication' by the Jewish elders that actually forced them to start a new church and religion" or that the Church was divinely planned and instituted? Did Christ come to found the Catholic Church or not?

3:9. And to enlighten all men, that they may see what is the dispensation of the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God who created all things:

3:10. That the manifold wisdom of God may be made known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places through the church,

3:11. According to the eternal purpose which he made in Christ Jesus our Lord:

And

The Catechism of Trent

ARTICLE IX : "I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH; THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS"

The Importance Of This Article
With what great diligence pastors ought to explain to the faithful the truth of this ninth Article will be easily seen, if we attend chiefly to two considerations.

First, as St. Augustine observes, the Prophets spoke more plainly and openly of the Church than of Christ, foreseeing that on this a much greater number may err and be deceived than on the mystery of the Incarnation. For in after ages there would not be wanting wicked men who, like the ape that would fain pass for a man, would claim that they alone were Catholics, and with no less impiety than effrontery assert that with them alone is the Catholic Church.

Now does that in any way state that the church was not Divinely planned and instituted? Or do you still believe that the Jews forced the Apostles to start a new church and new religion?

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J


Inocencio

John,

If you truly believe that the Apostles were forced out then you should be happy to see a pope re-enter a Jewish temple. Think about it.

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

Inocencio

John,

Two more points:

Please read the quotation from the Catechism of Trent s..l..o..w..l..y.

Unless Esau comments directly why not leave him out of the discussion. Is that possible for you?

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

J.R. Stoodley

Here's my take.

I think to a significant degree this most recent exchange has been a battling between two sides of the truth.

Christianity is the continuation and fulfillment of ancient Judaism. During the first century the wheat was separated from the chaff among the Jews (in general, not judging any individual person). That minority who were faithful and open to the truth accepted the Messiah. Those who were hard hearted refused and apostasized.

Earliest Christianity indeed did not see itself, and was not seen by others, as a religion distince from Judaism. This in part was because the Church was and is in fact the legitimate fulfillment of the nation of Israel, but also because the Holy Spirit it seems had not yet revieled that certain things like temple worship and the Mosaic law were now obsolete.

When the non-Christian Jewish establishment pushed Christians out of the Temple and the synogogues they did not so much expel Christians from Judaism but themselves. It does not matter that they and not the Christians retained the Temple, Levitical priesthood, synogogues, and kept practicing circumcision and the Mosaic law after Christians had abandoned that. All those things were preparations and prefigurements of Christ and the life of the Church. What matters is faithfulness to God.

Those Jews who remained faithful within a few generations were merged with the Gentile population or else their decendants apostasized and joined the non-Christian Jews. Thus we have the situation that has existed for most of Christian history, with this difficult to interperate anti-Christian Jewish people and a Church made up almost entirely of gentiles. It is tempting then to interpret the non-Christian Jews as the faithful remnant of the pre-Christian Israelites and thus on a virtually equal footing with Christians, but this rosy picture (and I'm sure Inocencio doesn't go that far) is not right.

Let us not forget though that these Jews are still decendants of Abraham, and traditional end-times belief is that they will as a whole accept Christ before the end. Of course one could claim that this already happened, when in the late Imperial period and early middle ages almost all the Jews in the Roman Empire converted, leaving the biggest population of non-Christian Jews remaining in Mesopotamia, from which they later reentered Europe.

J.R. Stoodley

The spiritual blindness and hardness of heart of the original non-Christian Jews (or at least their leaders) was self-inflicted. However today it is more culturally passed down. Jews are taught to intpret the scriptures in historically simple, unspirtual, anti-Christian ways. They are taught from childhood that the New Testament misquotes the Hebrew Scriptures, and that Jesus did not fulfill the basic prophasies about the Messiah. Furthermore they are taught that Christianity is completely opposed to Judaism and one can not be a Christian Jew any more than one can be a Buddhist Christian. This distinctly non and anti-Christian definition of being a Jew combined with such pride in being Jewish is very destructive. With this mindset and closed attitude to the Holy Spirit it is very hard for a Jew to see the truth, though of course there have still been conversions throughout history to today.

History is another problem. There have been real injustices done on both sides. Today Christians are inclined, rightly, to apologize for such injustices and crimes as our spiritual forbears commited against the Jews. Unfortuately, most Jews seem to take a "'bout time, it's not enough" attitude to such apologies and to refuse to acknowledge their own past misdeeds and justify their current ones (like in Palestine). They often go further to call the New Testament anti-semitic (the Gospel of Matthew in particular I have heard them call the "Gospel of terror for the Jews" and to oppose such things as the movie The Passion of the Christ. They even malign one of their great historical allies, Pope Pius XII, because they are so quick to believe that any Pope, especially pre-Vatican II, would have been evil. Furthermore of course they now are calling the TLM and any prayer for their conversion anti-semitic.

This attiude is often even worse in Israel. I was told a story by a fairly Christian-friendly

Now, all this in understandible. It makes sense that after so hard a history and especially the Holocaust they would have a huge, deep-seated persecution complex. However it is still not right and we need to recognize that lest we bow to unreasonable demands and loose our identity and principles in the process.

J.R. Stoodley

Oops, I see I forgot to continue my story of something that happened in Israel. I was told by a fairly Catholic-friendly Israeli Rabbi that the Franciscan in charge of the Franciscans in the Holy Land was on a bus once and asked a teenaged Jewish boy sitting next to him what he knew about Christianity. The boy anwered, "Three things: expulsions, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust." He said that was fairly typical of Jewish perception of Christianity in Israel.

Another story comes to mind too. A Jewish convert priest was on the show The Journey Home on EWTN and described how when he went up to give his first homily ever he got a sudden, irrational jult of fear that the whole congregation was going to rush up and lynch him for being a Jew. This is years after he had converted to Catholicism. That may be an extreme case but it shows how deep-rooted this persecution complex can be.

I should point out however that any description of a whole people is going to be incomplete. There are always going to be lots of exceptions, for better and for worse. Talking about the Jews as a whole is like talking about Catholics as a whole, you can make some generally true statements but it will always be a gross simplification.

Modern Judaism, inasmuch as it is opposed to the truth and the Church, is evil and opposed to God. The Talmud is pretty clearly anti-Christian, though its representation of Christ and Christianity is so innacurate that it is open to other interpretations. Traditional Rabbinical teachings are similarly anti-Christian, but not all Jews believe such teachings and some Rabbis teach other things. In any evil religion (this is true of Islam too) there will be good-hearted people who will interpret their texts and traditions in new, if illogical, ways to fit their own kind spirit.

And we should not forget that Judaism contains more truth than error, and therefore perhaps more good than evil.

Michael

Do you agree with John that it was the "'excommunication' by the Jewish elders that actually forced them to start a new church and religion" or that the Church was divinely planned and instituted? Did Christ come to found the Catholic Church or not?

Innocencio,
Here is where things become undiplomatic. As J.R. Stoodley explained above, Catholicism is the fulfillment of Judaism which was an incomplete faith awaiting the Messiah. Universal Judaism, which is Catholicism, is not race specific. The only gentiles are unbelievers.

Succinctly, modern Judaism is a branch that has separated itself from the vine. It still contains some truth and there are good hearted Jews waiting for the Messiah who truly do not realize he has already come but all salvation is through the Christ Jesus, crucified. So no I do not agree that the "excommunication" forced the Christians to start a new church (as no new church was ever created) and I do not believe that is what John meant by his statement.

Mary

After that, Temple Judaism was transformed into a Rabbinical Judaim without priest or sacrifice, still awaiting a Messiah who would be a political and military ruler.

Interestingly enough, they agree with us that the era of public revelation is over: there will be no more prophets, and there will be no more scripture written.

Why they hold this, I don't know. Since they can't believe that the death of John the Apostle ended public revelation.

Michael

Interestingly enough, they agree with us that the era of public revelation is over: there will be no more prophets, and there will be no more scripture written.

Even more interestingly, all but the Orthodox believe that the dietary and ritualistic laws are no longer in force though not for the same reasons we do.

Mary

Actually, does anyone know whether there are any Jews making a concerted effort to rebuild the Temple? I've met a good number who've told me that the fall of the Temple and the dispersion meant that God clearly wanted to replace the sacrifices at that time. . .

With which, of course, we Christians heartily agree.

Michael

There is an effort to reestablish the Sanhedrin and rebuild the Temple. Last I read it is considered a fringe movement within Israel though it is enthusiatically embraced by many Christian-Zionists in the U.S.

Inocencio

Michael,

"Succinctly, modern Judaism is a branch that has separated itself from the vine. It still contains some truth and there are good hearted Jews waiting for the Messiah who truly do not realize he has already come but all salvation is through the Christ Jesus, crucified."

I am in total agreement with your 1:23:22 comment except that I disagree you can reconcile your explanation with John's comments:

It was the Jews who performed the first "excommunication" by not allowing the so called "Jesus Jews" to worship with the Jews in the temple as in the 1st century and after the death of Jesus, the early church did not want to separate but it was because of the hatred of the Jews upon them and the turning over of the "jesus jews" to the Romans for crucifixion (unlike St Stephen whom the Jews stoned to death outside the walls of Jeruselem becoming the first martyr)and this continued on for centuries under Roman rule where Jews who were Roman citizens for the most part turning over Christians to the Romans

And

If you know anything about the early church you would know the early apostles never had any intention of denouncing their Jewish roots, and it was only their own "excommunication" by the Jewish elders that actually forced them to start a new church and religion

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

Inocencio

J.R. Stoodley,

Nice to hear from you, I hope all is well. Your comment is exactly the point I was heading towards:

"When the non-Christian Jewish establishment pushed Christians out of the Temple and the synogogues they did not so much expel Christians from Judaism but themselves."

And you are correct that I would not go so far as to say that the Jews are on "virtually equal footing with Christians" and was not saying that.

I enjoyed reading your comments as always I only hope John will actually read them.

Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31