Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Posted on 03/21/2012 2:38:18 AM PDT by RaceBannon
In a special interview with Die Tagespost last week, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem Fouad Twal, named by Pope Benedict to represent the Vatican in the Jewish State, declared that “Israel’s existence as such has nothing to do with the Bible.” He then compared Christians’ condition in today’s Jerusalem with Jesus’ Passion: “We Christians never forget that even our Lord himself suffered and was mocked in Jerusalem.”
Twal's position on Israel and the Bible has been embraced at the highest levels in the Catholic Church. The Vatican synod in 2010 declared that Israel cannot use the Biblical concept of a promised land or a chosen people. “We Christians cannot speak about the Promised Land for the Jewish people”, the synod’s document said. “There is no longer a chosen people. The concept of the promised land cannot be used as a base for the justification of the return of Jews to Israel and the displacement of Palestinians.”
Why would you suggest we’re not already way ahead of you?
Surprise. Not all Christians are Supersessionists as Catholics are.
“The covenant of Moses is no longer operative. “
So the Jews (who are no longer Jews but Christians) were not “replaced” only God’s covenants were replaced ie “no longer operative.”
So what’s the deal? God did not know the future when he made the promises? God reneged on his word? God changed his mind? I can’t seem to get my head around this and the concept of God’s omnipotence.
Note that the Mosaic covenant in Exodus 19-24 says clearly
if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant,...-- the condition Christians hold was broken, hence the covenant's conditions were not fulfilled by the people He told to keep it. But this was fulfilled by Christ's sacrifice.
Christ's teaching was the fulfilment of the Mosaic Covenant -- Acts 13:38–39
38 “Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. 39 Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses.We are no longer bound to the sacrifices of doves etc. as we are under the salvic grace of Christ's sacrifice.
. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator," --> God has a plan of salvation -- and that is Christ's sacrifice.
" in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; " --> NOTE: this is AFTER Christians and Jews who are referred to in earlier chapters, all Christians of various stripes and Jews are much closer to each other than we are to hindus or muslims etc. Among those who are not in the Judeo-Christian tradition, you have Moslems, avowed monotheists. hence by the virtue of them acknowledging a one god, they are closer to Judeo-Christian tradition than polytheists or athiests
"these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, " --> they "profess", that doesn't say anything if they do or don't.
"and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”" --> They adore the one, merciful God, but they are flawed in that their worship is directed to Satan, Allah. They may adore God, but they do not realize they are not worshipping Him.
It is noteworthy that Pope Gregory doesn’t say that the one God that he and King Anzir both worship is the same God. All he says is that both he and Anzir worship one God; in other words, they’re both monotheists. Beyond that, nope, not the same
The same may be said of Jews, of course: they, along with Muslims, reject the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the divinity of Christ, and yet clearly we Christians and Jews worship the same God.
Why let pesky facts stand in the way of a good anti-Catholic rant?
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
Again,read Petronius's explanation of Church teaching on the post I pointed out in my last response to you.
See, days are coming when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors the day I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt. They broke my covenant, though I was their master. But this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days. I will place my law within them, and write it upon their hearts; I will be their God, and they shall be my people. They will no longer teach their friends and relatives, “Know the LORD!” Everyone, from least to greatest, shall know me for I will forgive their iniquity and no longer remember their sin.Our Lord himself indicated that a time would come when there would be no more worship at the Temple in Jerusalem, i.e. worship according the to covenant with Moses would end:
(Jeremiah 31:31-34)
The woman said to him, “Sir, I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain; but you people say that the place to worship is in Jerusalem.” Jesus said to her, “Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You people worship what you do not understand; we worship what we understand, because salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth; and indeed the Father seeks such people to worship him. God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth.”The relationship of the New Covenant in Jesus Christ to the former is shown in the Letter to the Hebrews:
(john 4:19-24)
Jesus has entered on our behalf as forerunner, becoming high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. This “Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of God Most High, met Abraham as he returned from his defeat of the kings” and “blessed him.” And Abraham apportioned to him “a tenth of everything.” His name first means righteous king, and he was also “king of Salem,” that is, king of peace. Without father, mother, or ancestry, without beginning of days or end of life, thus made to resemble the Son of God, he remains a priest forever. See how great he is to whom the patriarch “Abraham [indeed] gave a tenth” of his spoils. The descendants of Levi who receive the office of priesthood have a commandment according to the law to exact tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, although they also have come from the loins of Abraham. But he who was not of their ancestry received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had received the promises.The fact that the former covenant gives way the the new is clearly established by Scripture. It is also shown by God through history. The Temple was destroy one generation after the Resurrection. For two thousand years, and even today with the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, it has been impossible to worship according to the covenant with Moses.Unquestionably, a lesser person is blessed by a greater. In the one case, mortal men receive tithes; in the other, a man of whom it is testified that he lives on. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, was tithed through Abraham, for he was still in his father’s loins when Melchizedek met him. If, then, perfection came through the levitical priesthood, on the basis of which the people received the law, what need would there still have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not reckoned according to the order of Aaron?
When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well. Now he of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, of which no member ever officiated at the altar. It is clear that our Lord arose from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. It is even more obvious if another priest is raised up after the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become so, not by a law expressed in a commandment concerning physical descent but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed. For it is testified:
“You are a priest forever
according to the order of Melchizedek.”On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness, for the law brought nothing to perfection; on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God. And to the degree that this happened not without the taking of an oath—for others became priests without an oath, but he with an oath, through the one who said to him: “The Lord has sworn, and he will not repent:
‘You are a priest forever’”—
to that same degree has Jesus [also] become the guarantee of an [even] better covenant. Those priests were many because they were prevented by death from remaining in office, but he, because he remains forever, has a priesthood that does not pass away. Therefore, he is always able to save those who approach God through him, since he lives forever to make intercession for them.
It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heavens. He has no need, as did the high priests, to offer sacrifice day after day,*n first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did that once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints men subject to weakness to be high priests, but the word of the oath, which was taken after the law, appoints a son, who has been made perfect forever.
The main point of what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle that the Lord, not man, set up.
Now every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus the necessity for this one also to have something to offer. If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest, since there are those who offer gifts according to the law. They worship in a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, as Moses was warned when he was about to erect the tabernacle. For he says, “See that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” Now he has obtained so much more excellent a ministry as he is mediator of a better covenant, enacted on better promises.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. But he finds fault with them and says:
“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord,
when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.
It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers
the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt;
for they did not stand by my covenant
and I ignored them, says the Lord.
But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel
after those days, says the Lord:
I will put my laws in their minds
and I will write them upon their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen
and kinsman, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for all shall know me,
from least to greatest.
For I will forgive their evildoing
and remember their sins no more.”When he speaks of a “new” covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing.
(Hebrews 6:20-8:13)
Nor should we be tempted to think that God has abandoned the Jews or that he does not fulfill his promises to them. The promises are fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The Church is the true Israel where the division between Jews and Gentiles has been destroyed, as was foretold by the prophet Isaiah:
In days to come,
The mountain of the LORD’s house
shall be established as the highest mountain
and raised above the hills.
All nations shall stream toward it.
(Isaiah 2:2)And foreigners who join themselves to the LORD,
to minister to him,
To love the name of the LORD,
to become his servants—
All who keep the sabbath without profaning it
and hold fast to my covenant,
Them I will bring to my holy mountain
and make them joyful in my house of prayer;
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices
will be acceptable on my altar,
For my house shall be called
a house of prayer for all peoples.
(Isaiah 56:6-7)
I don't think I suggested that. It would be great if are.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Question: Do the Jews generally, or perhaps some significant number of Jews, distinguish between the modern state of Israel and the Biblical Land of Israel?
Funny. You made me laugh!
I think this excerpt and the underlying YNet article are meant to inflame, rather than inform. I want to make the following random, but related points.
1. There has been no such declaration “by a synod” (and I do follow these things closely).
2. The Patriarch’s opinions are not necessarily the Pope’s. In fact, judging by the Pope’s track record on this issue, I know they are not.
3. The Patriarch’s opinions may indeed be shared by some in the Vatican, but these do not necessarily shape policy.
4. There are indeed theological arguments questioning the “theological value” of the existence of the modern State of Israel. Many of these views emanate from so-called Ultra-Orthodox Jewish groups who believe that only the Messiah can restore Israel as a political entity. Leaders of this faction have been to Iran to hug A-jhad.
5. Nor is the modern State of Israel in isolation seen as “Israel” by the Church. Yes, the Jews in the State of Israel and beyond, and through the ages are “all of Israel” in the New Testament and Catholic theology.
6. Dispensationalism is a distorted interpretation of the Bible; we should put no credence on it.
7. The Catholic Church has pronounced herself in favor of the existence of the State of Israel. That’s why the Holy See has diplomatic relations with it. (D’uh).
8. The issue on how the modern State of Israel fulfills prophecy or possesses religious connotations impacting on Catholic theology remains AN OPEN ISSUE.
Hope that helps dispel the misinformation stated on this article.
+JMJ,
-Theo
Eh? I don’t recall any official Catholic teaching that ever said anything of the sort, especially the notion that the New Testament replaced the old rather than appended to it (and all Catholic official sources affirm and reaffirm the Jews’ status as God’s chosen people). And I was raised Catholic in a country that is over 88 percent Catholic. Readings of the Scripture in Church always included Old Testament in addition to New.
Catholic interpretation is different. New Testament replaced old one, Jews are no longer chosen people (Christ established church, term "chosen people" have more universal meaning, "followers of Christ")
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.