Church should not pursue conversion of Jews, pope says

  • Thread starter Thread starter TomD123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TomD123

Guest
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/church-should-not-pursue-conversion-jews-pope-says

This is confusing to me? Does the Pope mean the Jews as a whole? Or does he mean individuals? This seems to make no sense, I thought we should always try to bring all people to Christ because no one can be saved outside of the Church. Yes, I know that this does not exclude every Jew from heaven but still, the idea is that they can only be saved if they are invincibly ignorant (which is not a sin in itself yet it is still not a good thing) AND love God above all things, which is significantly harder outside of the Catholic Church.
 
How do you define invincible ignorance? I pray and ardently hope for the salvation of all people of good will despite their varying degrees of knowledge. I believe that the church does as well.
 
How do you define invincible ignorance?
Invincible ignorance is ignorance that cannot be overcome by study.

St. Thomas: “I answer that, Ignorance differs from nescience, in that nescience denotes mere absence of knowledge; wherefore whoever lacks knowledge about anything, can be said to be nescient about it: in which sense Dionysius puts nescience in the angels (Coel. Hier. vii). **On the other hand, ignorance denotes privation of knowledge, i.e. lack of knowledge of those things that one has a natural aptitude to know. Some of these we are under an obligation to know, those, to wit, without the knowledge of which we are unable to accomplish a due act rightly. Wherefore all are bound in common to know the articles of faith, and the universal principles of right, and each individual is bound to know matters regarding his duty or state. Meanwhile there are other things which a man may have a natural aptitude to know, yet he is not bound to know them, such as the geometrical theorems, and contingent particulars, except in some individual case. Now it is evident that whoever neglects to have or do what he ought to have or do, commits a sin of omission. Wherefore through negligence, ignorance of what one is bound to know, is a sin; whereas it is not imputed as a sin to man, if he fails to know what he is unable to know. Consequently ignorance of such like things is called “invincible,” because it cannot be overcome by study. **For this reason such like ignorance, not being voluntary, since it is not in our power to be rid of it, is not a sin: wherefore it is evident that no invincible ignorance is a sin. On the other hand, vincible ignorance is a sin, if it be about matters one is bound to know; but not, if it be about things one is not bound to know” . newadvent.org/summa/2076.htm

Saying the Church should not seek to convert the Jews is heresy. It is contrary to the clear words of the Bible, and to what the Church has always taught.
 
I will wait and read the Pope’s words, in context and in full, and not worry about ‘quoted’ out of context remarks from a publication which has had more than a few stumbles and misinterpretions of authentic Catholic teaching.

I’ll stick to the Register!
 
If it is true that Benedict XVI doesn’t believe in converting jews to Catholicism, then that is appalling.

I myself urge all jews reading this post to convert to the one true Holy Catholic Church.
 
has it occured to anyone to go to a reliable news source, such as the Vatican news service to see what the Pope actually said, rather than rely on distortions and notoriously dissenting sites?
 
I read most of the article and to me it seemed like the Pope was trying to discourage the common movement especially among protestants that aims to fulfill prophecy on their own, using political power to push for their interpretation of Biblical prophecies to come true, and in this case the mass conversion of Israel to Christianity. Many within this movement want to rebuild the Temple as well which would of course mean the dome of the rock must come down…gee that sounds lovely…

So I suppose the Pope was trying to discourage people from thinking they have the power to fulfill Biblical prophecy and hasten the second coming by specifically targeting Jews for this express purpose. That is what I took out of it.
 
Catholics should be concerned about “this Jew” and “this Moslem” and “this non-believer” and “this Protestant.” Jesus said to the Jews, “If you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins.” The Pope has no authority to change the Church’s mandate from Christ “to teach all nations” and “preach the gospel to every creature.” Is not one Jewish convert of inestimable worth? RIGHT NOW!? In this present time? I think that Alphonse Ratisbone and Edith Stein and Ven Joseph Libermann would beg to differ with this uncaring attitude. It almost seems to say “Leave the Jews alone, let God take care of them, en masse, in His own time.” This is wrong. What about “in the meantime?”
 
The Church has always taught, and defined as a dogma at the Council of Florence, that all Jews who die without entering the Catholic Church will “descend immediatly into hell to be punished with the devil and his angles”. What could be more anti-Semetic than saying we should not seek to convert the Jews? Do we want them to be lost for all eternity?

And btw, invincible ignorance of Jesus Christ will not save anyone (ans who today can claim to be invincibly ignorance of Jesus?). We are all born separated from God and in need of sanctifying grace; and without supernatural faith we cannot possess grace. This is the constant teaching of the Church.

Invincible ignorance simply excuses from the particular sin, but it does not wash away original sin and infuse grace into the soul. And if a person dies without grace in thier soul, they are certainly lost.

Let us show that we possesses true charity and pray for the conversion of every last Jew to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.
 
The Church has always taught, and defined as a dogma at the Council of Florence, that all Jews who die without entering the Catholic Church will “descend immediatly into hell to be punished with the devil and his angles”. What could be more anti-Semetic than saying we should not seek to convert the Jews? Do we want them to be lost for all eternity?
.
Come on now, it is really that much of a mystery as to why modern day Catholics don’t choose that plate in the cafe (just like any other plate they don’t like), and just go about their lives following their conscience and just ignoring some things the Church teaches?
It’s really not a mystery for me to understand why…
 
Are you sure this is not a mistranslation?
or a misinterpretation of the Pope’s words, including little nunances that could get lost in translation?

I am pretty sure that Pope Benedict does call for the conversion of the jews, just like he calls for the conversion of the muslims, the pagans (Asia and Africa, at the moment, at we’re making good ground there :)), and the athiests.

Everyone needs Jesus, even the Jews, remember that he came to them first, and most of them rejected him. The ones that accepted him became the early christians, the rest remained Jews.

I am confident that Benedict does call for the conversion of the Jews.
 
I am pretty sure that Pope Benedict does call for the conversion of the jews, just like he calls for the conversion of the muslims, the pagans (Asia and Africa, at the moment, at we’re making good ground there :)), and the athiests.

Everyone needs Jesus, even the Jews, remember that he came to them first, and most of them rejected him. The ones that accepted him became the early christians, the rest remained Jews.

I am confident that Benedict does call for the conversion of the Jews.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of that. Good luck with that :whistle:
 
So the great evangilization of all peoples, which has brought to Christ the souls of Animists, Shintoists, Polytheists, Pagans, Druids, Moslems, Hindus, etc…, now suddenly stops at the Jews. Why? What new revelation has entered the Church to bring this change about? I am confused.

Respectfully, I ask for clarification regarding this subject.
 
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/church-should-not-pursue-conversion-jews-pope-says

This is confusing to me? Does the Pope mean the Jews as a whole? Or does he mean individuals? This seems to make no sense, I thought we should always try to bring all people to Christ because no one can be saved outside of the Church. Yes, I know that this does not exclude every Jew from heaven but still, the idea is that they can only be saved if they are invincibly ignorant (which is not a sin in itself yet it is still not a good thing) AND love God above all things, which is significantly harder outside of the Catholic Church.
I believe he means individuals. Some people (not all, but enough) really are hard on the Jews. They blame them for the death of Christ, when any Catholic worth her/his weight in salt knows that WE (everyone who sins) all killed Christ, and that the steps of his death were guided by the Father and were in accordance to His Will. People have persecuted Jews throughout history for being Jewish. Yes, I know, the Jews persecuted the early Christians, but then the tables were turned and Catholics tried to exterminate any Jew or any non-compliant Catholic, and forget about leaving the Church to follow one’s own conscience because that wasn’t allowed. The Catholic leaders of nations would burn “heretics” at the stake, draw and quarter them, boil them in water alive, etc. And heaven forbid one was suspected of being Jewish or a Jewish revert. All in the name of God. So really, the bad behavior was done on both Jews and Catholics.

There is a difference between evangalizing and forcing Catholicism on others. I believe the Pope wants us to continue evangalizing but not to be so overly concerned about it as to relentlessly bombard them. Look at some of the negative comments on this forum about the Jews and I completely understand what the Pope is trying to say. The fact that some Jews have no desire whatsoever to be unfaithful to their religion is not a factor for some people, and throughout history and even today it causes bad blood. It just doesn’t occur to certain individuals that devout Jews feel the same way about their religion as some devout Catholic feel about their religion. We can argue until our faces turn blue, but the fact that we believe our religion to be the only True religion is irrelevent to someone who is devout to another faith.

Jesus said to us directly:
Matthew 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet.
That was a direct command from the lips of Jesus Himself. And that means to spead the Word of the Gospels. That doesn’t mean to force your point. He says to leave and move on. He follows up with:
Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Which means, God will take care of it, not YOU (not you OP in particular, but YOU everyone who has a teaching opportunity).

So I wouldn’t read this article and think it automatically means we reject teaching opportunities, even if the recipient is Jewish. But I believe it means to respect the other’s right to freedom of religion if they have rejected our message. God will iron it all out in the end, even if He decides to reward a Jew, Muslim, or Lutheran for their faith and fidelity. That’s His call, not ours.

So all those people who were responsible for the needless deaths of “heretics” and “protestants” and Jews, were SINNING against direct commands from Christ Himself. It doesn’t matter what their motives were because you can’t do bad to do good. Evil is evil. It doesn’t get an exception because the motive was “good”.
 
This is probably not going to be a popular perspective. But it is IMOHO that the Catholic Church needs to clean house first before it goes and cleans other peoples’ houses. In other words, IMOHO, the Catholic Church needs to concentrate first and foremost on unifying Catholics, and obtaining fidelity from Catholics, and getting Catholics to believe, obey and value the rules of the Church before it can go out and “preach to the nations” because if they can’t get compliance from their own, how can they get compliance from others? IMOHO, they need to spend a lot more energy bringing Catholic education to Catholics first before they go telling other people that their religion is wrong, and that they are being misled.

The Catholic Church is fragmented throughout the world. There is a big division among Catholics regarding taking communion in the hand vs. communion on the tongue. There is a big diffence between pre and post Vatican II Cathlics. There is a big division over Latin vs. English Masses. There is a big division over whether or not, and what kind, of public reprimand should be given to Catholic politicians who dare to oppose Catholic rules and laws in favor of respecting other religions and other cultures. And you know, some of them are reminiscent of the Inquisitions 😦 There is a big division over the role of women in the Church. There is a big division over headcoverings inside as well as outside of Church, or the choice to not wear them at all. Let me tell you, it’s quite refreshing to meet people who “do their thing” as their calling, but afford others another calling without bias, indignation or reprimand.

Let’s be honest here, whether Catholics are traditional or liberal, we’re all Cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose what to believe. Whether you reject the “communion in the hand is allowed” plate, or you reject “NFP is the only form of birth control a Catholic can use”, they’re both rejecting rules of the Church that are quite plainly available in black and white. The “interpretation” of canons, CCC ,and scripture varies across the board, even among clergy. There’s always a different perspective and exceptions to the rules, depending on with whom you speak.

The Church, however, is pretty clear on many issues. I mean, come on, we have a 1500+ page rule and regulation book. But why isn’t it getting to the everyday Catholics? And why so many interpretations of the same quotes? For example, I went to Catholic grammar school, Catholic, high school and Catholic university…but in all that time I never cracked the CCC book once, didn’t even know it existed, never knew about NFP, I never knew why the Church forbids IVF, why the Church forbids artificial birth control. And I know many Catholics who participate in IVF and are on artificial birth control. In fact, I don’t know one person outside this forum (Catholic or not) who is even familiar with it, yet it’s supposed to be taught at pre-canna classes. My brother attended a seminarian preparatory high school (before falling away from the Church over whatever the heck went on over there) and had never even heard of an encyclical until he and I discussed one last month.

There is a very big disparity in Catholic education across the board. And I think the Church would be wise to step up and bring Catholicism to Catholics first before trying to convert the world. No offense guys but CAF shouldn’t be the go-to reference for Catholics. Thankfully I found it (or not 😛 ) or I wouldn’t know the things I learned from here. However, it should come from the Vatican. Why doesn’t the Vatican have a CAF run by authoritative sources? Or do they, and I missed it? Let me know if they do…

Do I think they have the duty to evangelize? Of course I do. But not to the expense of neglecting the education of Catholics. Someone should be available AND approachable in every diocese to answer questions and help people work their way through issues. You shouldn’t have to figure out how to contact the diocese, wait on hold 15 minutes, leave a message and wait a few days for someone to get back to you. Information is passed a heck of a lot more quickly now with our current technology…and IMOHO the Church (all of it as a whole) is neglecting their duty to evangelize Catholics first.

So…about evangalization…Whether some like it or not, you can’t force people to be Catholic, or to follow Catholic rules and laws — even those who were Baptised Catholic. And the Church does support freedom of religion. This quote from the Council of Florence damning everyone to Hell who is not Catholic was said at a time when there was no freedom of religion, and when Catholic leaders of nations were killing Jews for the simple fact that they were Jews, and killing people who tried to break away from the Church. It needs to be read for what it is: the thoughts of a Pope who lived at a time where there was only Catholicism, Judiasm and the Muslim religion, and who was trying to hold it all together. That same Pope would have said something different if there were the 100s of Christian denominations representative that there are today. And a present day Pope did exactly that. Since we believe that the Pope cannot err, we can safely deduce that the JPII spoke with additonal information available, which wasn’t available at the Council of Florence.

The Church says this about “Outside the Church there is no salvation”
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
 
The Church, being that it dwells upon the earth, is stained, but Christ is without blemish, from the beginning to the end, and any and all, who by grace know this to the core of their very being, are charged with sharing this good news. This is the essence of true Christian evangilization. Christ must be brought to all of the people of this world, including the Jews.

The sins of the Church, or those who act (or have acted) as Her representatives, do not change the fact that Jesus Christ came for the salvation of all God’s children, Jews included, and that this essential truth has been commanded forward through the power of the Holy Spirit, at one with The Father and the Son, Jesus Christ, until His glorious return.

Jesus Christ is the salvation of all of the world, and this fact must be revealed through evangilization. In my view the Jews should be evangilized more strongly than all others, in light of their relevance to salvation theology. The conversion of the Jews to Christ is something which should be prayed for by all who long for the Throne of God, and the coming of the" New Jerusalem".

If the Church “should not pursue conversion of the Jews”, then does this signal a new reality which has come into our faith? If so, what is this new reality, and what is its source?
 
The Church, being that it dwells upon the earth, is stained, but Christ is without blemish, from the beginning to the end, and any and all, who by grace know this to the core of their very being, are charged with sharing this good news. This is the essence of true Christian evangilization. Christ must be brought to all of the people of this world, including the Jews.

The sins of the Church, or those who act (or have acted) as Her representatives, do not change the fact that Jesus Christ came for the salvation of all God’s children, Jews included, and that this essential truth has been commanded forward through the power of the Holy Spirit, at one with The Father and the Son, Jesus Christ, until His glorious return.

Jesus Christ is the salvation of all of the world, and this fact must be revealed through evangilization. In my view the Jews should be evangilized more strongly than all others, in light of their relevance to salvation theology. The conversion of the Jews to Christ is something which should be prayed for by all who long for the Throne of God, and the coming of the" New Jerusalem".

If the Church “should not pursue conversion of the Jews”, then does this signal a new reality which has come into our faith? If so, what is this new reality, and what is its source?
There is no new reality which has come into our faith about not pursuing the conversion of Jews. The Pope did not make an infallible statement, and the article didn’t cite one statement that started out with, “We declare…” or another suitable statement that would imply that this is a teaching on faith and morals. What hte article did quote Benidict as saying is:
Although Benedict XVI stipulated in the first volume of his book that he writes as a private theologian rather than authoritatively as head of the Catholic church, his comments inevitably carry weight as indications of the way Benedict is likely to approach these questions as pope.
Which means that this was the opinion of a private theologian, despite the fact that he became Pope later, and was not given with any authority as speaking for the Church. Benedict has not answered these questions or given these opinions or directives as Pope, and until we does, we cannot say that he is leading anyone astray or deviating from the teachings of the Church. I hope that helps…?

It would really be beneficial to anyone who is upset by this article to actually read the book in its entirety to get the correct context, rather than bits and pieces put together by an article written to confuse people. Just MOHO…
 
Let’s be honest here, whether Catholics are traditional or liberal, we’re all Cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose what to believe. Whether you reject the “communion in the hand is allowed” plate, or you reject “NFP is the only form of birth control a Catholic can use”, they’re both rejecting rules of the Church that are quite plainly available in black and white. The “interpretation” of canons, CCC ,and scripture varies across the board, even among clergy. There’s always a different perspective and exceptions to the rules, depending on with whom you speak.
Cafeteria Catholics are those who don’t believe in all that the Church says we must believe. I certainly would like to think of myself as someone who isn’t a cafeteria catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top