Posted on 01/28/2009 11:11:13 AM PST by forkinsocket
It just seems so silly that people from one religion would tell people of another religion how they should run their religion.
They have a right to their opinion, of course. I guess that’s why we have so many different religions. It still seems odd - sort of like the Catholics telling the Episcopalians that they shouldn’t have women ministers. Actually more like telling the Episcopalians that they should all believe Henry VIII was a murderer. Why would the Catholics care what the Episcopalians believe about Henry?
Amen Amen!
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
“Rosen said that the Pope had a history of improper preparation, leading to large-scale blunders. He cited a speech made in Regensburg, Germany, in which he quoted a medieval emperor who called Islam “evil and inhuman,” comments that sparked a wave of Islamic-led violence against Catholic churches around the world.”
Oops, just lost all respect for Rosen.
It is time for Jews to stop fighting the last war and fight the current one - Islam.
I am more concerned about this -—
The Pope’s justice minister, Cardinal Renato Martino, has sharply criticised Israel’s actions and likened the Gaza Strip to a “big concentration camp”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7817019.stm
LJ, I'm defending the right of the Rabbinate to run their own religion. I posted in response to those who wanted to tell them how they should conduct their relations with the Vatican. This is an inter-religious issue, not just an internal one to Catholicism.
All I did was explain why this issue is so important to the Rabbinate and express my own opinion how this little diplomatic crisis could have been averted and how it could be handled even now. I did so in response to Catholics here on FR who were attacking the rabbis. I don't expect the Pope to read FR, see my post, and say, "By golly, I have to do everything this weird Messianic fellow tells me to." He can make his own decision about whether to embrace the Jews or embrace those who deny the Holocaust, whether to support Israel or to undermine her.
And the rabbis will make their decisions as how best, or even whether, to formally associate with the Vatican in response to Pope Benedict XVI's decision. Fair's fair.
Shalom.
Then they are wrong, and misinterpreting what the Church is. The Church on earth is full of sinners, with very few saints. The church exists to bring men the means of salvation -- not to validate their already-saved status. One is joined to the Church through baptism and belief, not behavior.
If the Rabbinate or others want to know what excommunication is and is not, they need to consult those who impose it and lift it. If they consult only themselves, they should keep their conclusions to themselves.
No one -- not even the Pope -- is responsible for the distortion of his words and deeds by others. The Church is in the truth business, not the appearances business.
That's irrelevant, whether or not it's true. This is politics (religious politics, but politics nevertheless), and in politics you cannot simply dismiss the messages you send by your actions, however unintended, as simply "wrong."
The fact is that the Vatican has not been exactly been on the best of terms with the Jewish people for the last two millennia, nor has it been on the best of terms with Israel for most of the last sixty. Remember, Pope John Paul II only recognized Israel in December 1993. So let's look at this from the perspective of the Rabbinate:
1) The Vatican refuses to acknowledge Israel's existence for the first 45 years, and has only acknowledged her for the last 15.And that's just the last sixty years. Jews have very long memories, and we haven't forgotten how we've been treated by Christians and Muslims for the last centuries. As a result, the rabbis are a bit sensitive to any hint that Christian leaders are (once again) turning on us. You might argue that it's over-sensitivity, but if you have any clue about the history of Jewish-Christian relations, you can't deny that the Rabbinate has a very real basis for its concern, especially given how narrow Israel's margin for survival is right now.2) Even having formally recognized Israel, the Vatican has tried to position itself as a "neutral" arbiter over Jerusalem's holy sites, including the Temple Mount, rather than recognizing full Israeli sovereignty.
3) As a result of the above, the Vatican has repeatedly been, shall we say, less-than-wholeheartedly-supportive of Israel when she has taken steps to defend herself.
4) At the same time that Israel's enemies are saying that the Holocaust is a Jewish lie (though they think having one would be a wonderful idea), the Vatican welcomes back into the Catholic fold a very vocal Holocaust denier.
Given how sensitive the Catholics on this forum are to Protestant criticism, I'd think you'd understand.
One is joined to the Church through baptism and belief, not behavior.
And this is why the rabbis rightly point out that Christianity is the religion of the creed, while Judaism is the religion of the deed. As Jacob (James), the Lord's brother, pointed out and as Catholics are quick to quote when in debates with Protestants over sola gracia, "Faith without works is dead."
If the Rabbinate or others want to know what excommunication is and is not, they need to consult those who impose it and lift it. If they consult only themselves, they should keep their conclusions to themselves.
So . . . you're saying that the Rabbinate has no right to decide whom to maintain formal relations with?
No one -- not even the Pope -- is responsible for the distortion of his words and deeds by others.
So you're basically saying that nobody has any right to interpret the Pope's actions in anything but the most rosy way possible--but that you're free to dismiss the rabbis actions as ill-informed at best, deliberately distorting the Pontiff's position at worst. Got it.
Say, is that a beam in your eye?
The Church is in the truth business . . .
Then purge the false witnesses from your midst, and stop complaining about others pointing out when you're embracing them instead.
Shalom.
What a drama queen.
By "the Vatican" let's assume you mean the See of Peter. Yes, there has been tension -- though historically speaking, popes have tended to be be more Jew-friendly than other bishops, monarchs, and Catholics in general. Moreover, there has been plenty of bad behavior on the Jewish side. Not to play tu quoque, but haven't many Jews over the years said and even prayed unfriendly things about Christians? Doesn't the Talmud contain contemptuous and gratuitously obscene passages alluding to Jesus and his mother? In some Orthodox communities doesn't there survive to this day a sentiment of loathing and disgust for Christians? Let's not play into black and white victimhood categories, OK?
nor has it been on the best of terms with Israel for most of the last sixty.
The Church had good reasons to be slow in recognising the state of Israel -- whose conception was not exactly without original sin. There were and are questions of justice to Gentiles that have been overlooked or neglected. Nor has Israel been in a hurry to maintain good relations with the Holy See (has that Fundamental Agreement been postponed again? One loses count how many times).
Yes, the Holy See has been slow to ratify Israel's conquest of lands outside the borders drawn by the UN. If this is how anti-semitism is to be defined, it will lose all meaning.
Yes, the Holy See has declined to issue Israel a moral blank check for any and all decisions it makes in pursuit of its interests. I'm sure we all feel "special" in our own way, but even the Lord's own people according to the flesh aren't that special.
The Church welcomes a great many oddballs and sinners into her fold. It's for their sanctification and salvation. I have already pointed out that that's not validation. Get over it, please.
Long Jewish memories seem mostly to fail when it comes to the heroic life-saving achievements of Pius XII.
Judaism is the religion of the deed.
I understood it to be a religion of the circumcised. Surely a bad or unobservant Jew doesn't cease to be Jewish. Bad Catholics don't cease to be Catholics unless they consciously apostatise.
you're saying that the Rabbinate has no right to decide whom to maintain formal relations with?
Of course not. I'm saying they shouldn't presume to instruct the Pope how to correct his errant sheep.
So you're basically saying that nobody has any right to interpret the Pope's actions in anything but the most rosy way possible
Please don't be tiresome. I'm saying that the Rabbinate have no right to expect the Roman pontiff to manage his affairs to suit their agenda.
Then purge the false witnesses from your midst, and stop complaining about others pointing out when you're embracing them instead.
Conversion is a life-long calling for every Christian. None of us is perfect, and none of us should be scandalised to discover that fact. The Church does not save sinners by driving them away.
Certainly. But it's been eighteen or nineteen centuries since Jewish rhetoric had much in the way of power to cause harm to Christians, unlike the reverse.
Doesn't the Talmud contain contemptuous and gratuitously obscene passages alluding to Jesus and his mother?
There are passages that may or may not have originally referred to Yeshua. However, when they provide any historical context, they don't match up with the right dates. My own belief is that passages and legends that originally referred to other heretics were later reinterpreted to refer to Yeshua and His mother.
However, most modern Talmuds expunge the offending passages, and while there are still ultra-Orthodox who use "Yeshu" as a curse, the majority view in modern Judaism is to regard Yeshua as a Torah-observant Jew, most likely a pharisee (read: Orthodox Jew), whose later followers distorted his teachings. Indeed, most modern rabbis who have read the Gospel accounts are very complimentary towards Yeshua's insight, though they are not yet ready to accept the Messianic claims.
Btw, many of the Church fathers, including Justin Martyr and John Chrysostom, had some rather slanderous things that they said about the Jewish community as well. Have you expunged them from the ECF the way most rabbis have expunged the anti-Yeshua references from the Talmud?
In some Orthodox communities doesn't there survive to this day a sentiment of loathing and disgust for Christians?
Yes, but most likely not for the reasons you imagine. The disgust is that Christianity has for two millennia forced conversion and assimilation among Jews, cursed the Jews, slandered the Jews, and killed the Jews.
This is starting to change today because evangelicals have been wholehearted in their love and support for Israel and the Jewish people and because there are a growing number of Jews who, while professing Yeshua to be Messiah and Son of God, are steadfastly refusing to become Christians--that is to say, who remain in the Jewish community, keeping not only the Torah but the traditions of our fathers, just as Yeshua Himself and His first-generation followers did (cf. Mat. 23:2, Acts 21:20ff).
And because of this, Messianic Jews (who are born Jews; proselytes like myself will be an issue for years to come) are receiving increasing acceptance in Israel: See this news report from Israel. There is still a lot of tension, especially with some of the ultra-Orthodox, but I have been in contact with a very major rabbi and an anti-missionary teacher, both in Jerusalem, who are favorable to accepting Messianic Jews as fully Jewish.
Let's not play into black and white victimhood categories, OK?
I'm not. I'm explaining the Jewish perspective on the Rabbinate's decisions to a group of Catholics who frankly don't understand why such a dramatic gesture was needed. To you, sixteen centuries of Christian persecution of Jews is just an unfortunate historical footnote; to Jews, its both a personal wound and a precedent for the future. We are used to Christians going through waves of friendliness towards the Jewish people, only for the goodwill to dry up when the conversions don't roll in. The RCC receiving a Holocaust denier back into the fold looks to the Rabbinate like a beginning step in yet another about face.
So don't decry "black-and-white victimhood" even while you engage in it. The Pope is not a victim of the Rabbinate; he made a decision that has far-reaching implications that threaten Israel's very survival, and they reacted in a way that, in their view, is perfectly appropriate. Hopefully, it will get his attention in a way that a simple protest would not, and a workable compromise will be reached.
The Church had good reasons to be slow in recognising the state of Israel -- whose conception was not exactly without original sin.
We disagree, and in any case you undermine your own protests against the Rabbinate: You claim that the Vatican had the right to withhold formal recognition of Israel because of her perceived "original sin"--yet you can't acknowledge the right of the Rabbinate to break formal ties with the Vatican over a perceived current sin.
As usual, you are trying to have it both ways.
Yes, the Holy See has been slow to ratify Israel's conquest of lands outside the borders drawn by the UN. If this is how anti-semitism is to be defined, it will lose all meaning.
I never mentioned anti-semitism--but one wonders why you don't think Israel should keep territory that she conquered fighting defensive wars. Should the United States return the Thirteen Colonies to the British? And that was a rebellion, not a defensive war against a foreign power.
Yes, the Holy See has declined to issue Israel a moral blank check for any and all decisions it makes in pursuit of its interests.
So why exactly should we give the Roman Catholic Church a blank check on any and all decisions that it makes in pursuit of its interests?
I understood it to be a religion of the circumcised.
It is the religion of the covenant people, yes. But being God's covenant people has responsibilities to live up to--something that the NT agrees on.
Surely a bad or unobservant Jew doesn't cease to be Jewish.
In an ethnic sense, no. But the rabbis do teach that a Jew who does not keep God's commandments--with a far greater emphasis on the moral commandments than the ceremonial ones, btw--is not worthy of the name and should be treated like a pagan until he repents. The Apostles agreed.
I'm saying they shouldn't presume to instruct the Pope how to correct his errant sheep.
Nor should you presume to instruct the rabbis on how to conduct their diplomatic relationships. Nor do you have the right to expect the Rabbinate to conduct their affairs to suit your preferences.
The Church does not save sinners by driving them away.
Neither does it do them any favor by coddling them in their sins, particularly sins that affect the physical well-being of others.
Throughout your post, you've demonstrated an amazing double-standard, refusing to accord to the Rabbinate and Israel the respect, assumption of good intent, and right to decide how to conduct their affairs without criticism that you demand that we accord Roman Catholicism's leadership. All I've done is try to point that out and explain the other point of view to you. Since there is no way to conduct an open discussion with a person who holds himself so above the rules he holds everyone else to, I, like the Rabbinate, am going to terminate this discussion here.
Shalom.
Errr...the Jewish Chief Rabbinate doesn't see it that way. The Protestants don't see it that way. Perhaps the problem isn't the fault of the Jews or Protestants.
Let's see. . . 1600 years of Pope-sponsored burnings of the Talmud, Pope-sponsored herding us into ghettos (the first ghetto was in Rome itself), Pope-sponsored torture and murder of Jews he didn't like, Pope-sponsored kidnapping of Jewish children baptized against their will, Papal-tolerance for Crusaders who slaughter entire communities, etc. . .
And you think the scales are equal because some Jews have said some naughty things about Christians? Not bloody likely.
Now obviously, the Vatican can do whatever it wants. But so can the Rabbinate. If the Vatican says you can be a good Catholic, in full communion with the Church, while denying the Holocaust and hating Jews . . . . then the Rabbinate can respond by saying this isn't the kind of religion we want to talk to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.