Has the church rejected supersessionism?

[rien]

As in the NT convenant supercedes the OT conenant?

Or can Jews still be saved w/in the old covenant? As in they do not have to come to Christ…

I ask as Rosalind Moss apparently won’t clarify her position on this and famous Jewish convert Roy Schoeman, a favorite of orthodox Catholics, says in his book, ‘Salvation is From the Jews’ - page 352 - that supersessionism has been “definitivewly rejected by the Chruch”. He then references Vatican II’s ‘Nosrra Aetate’.

I think he is wrong.

I find it troubling he is showcased on EWTN - but I find EWTN quite troubling - and among orthodox circles.

But maybe I am wrong here. Has the church rejected supersessionism or not?

Shoeman is either right or wrong in his claims. If he is wrong, then he is writing heresy.

 

[jcrichton]

As in the NT convenant supercedes the OT conenant?

Or can Jews still be saved w/in the old covenant? As in they do not have to come to Christ…

I ask as Rosalind Moss apparently won’t clarify her position on this and famous Jewish convert Roy Schoeman, a favorite of orthodox Catholics, says in his book, ‘Salvation is From the Jews’ - page 352 - that supersessionism has been “definitivewly rejected by the Chruch”. He then references Vatican II’s ‘Nosrra Aetate’.

I think he is wrong.

I find it troubling he is showcased on EWTN - but I find EWTN quite troubling - and among orthodox circles.

But maybe I am wrong here. Has the church rejected supersessionism or not?

Shoeman is either right or wrong in his claims. If he is wrong, then he is writing heresy.

***Hi, rien!

…perhaps I shouldn’t be the one responding (didn’t read the book)… but if you really are interested in the Salvation of the Jews note Paul’s admonishions against holding on to the practices of the Mosiac Law and requesting that the Gentiles be circumcised (several passages in his letters). Then read Romans 9:1 through 11:32–he does an all-out-account of Salvation.

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[Catholic_Dude]

As in the NT convenant supercedes the OT conenant?

Or can Jews still be saved w/in the old covenant? As in they do not have to come to Christ…

I ask as Rosalind Moss apparently won’t clarify her position on this and famous Jewish convert Roy Schoeman, a favorite of orthodox Catholics, says in his book, ‘Salvation is From the Jews’ - page 352 - that supersessionism has been “definitivewly rejected by the Chruch”. He then references Vatican II’s ‘Nosrra Aetate’.

I think he is wrong.

I find it troubling he is showcased on EWTN - but I find EWTN quite troubling - and among orthodox circles.

But maybe I am wrong here. Has the church rejected supersessionism or not?

Shoeman is either right or wrong in his claims. If he is wrong, then he is writing heresy.

The OT is officially fulfilled in Christ, so no the Mosaic Law no longer exists.

MORE importantly though the Mosaic Law was never intended to be the path for salvation. That is why Paul shows that Abraham was justified before and apart from circumcision and the Mosaic Law.

 

[TheMese]

Not only have I read Schoeman’s book I wrote my 10,000 word Master’s degree dissertation on this question.

Schoeman asserts that some of the more extreme positions regarding the Church entirely replacing Israel in God’s plan are false. Much of the book is spent refuting the notion that Catholics are the enemies of the Jews. He does a good job of exposing the real contemporary anti-semitism: from leftist liberals and radical Muslims.

Despite his delicate language and nuances Schoeman would definitely be considered a ‘supercessionist’ by Jews. He does assert salvation is through Christ alone. No Schoeman is not writing heresy, he is being misquoted and misrepresented.

Why don’t you just read 352 & 353 of Schoeman’s book. I’m sorry Mr Schoeman but I think your Third Alternative is just a version of supercessionism. I do completely agree with the correctness of this position, but you’re certainly a ‘supercessionist!’ As was St. Paul!

 

[rwoehmke]

Wouldn’t some of the writings of the Popes of the 20th and 21st centuries which state very plainly that no one is saved except through Jesus Christ and his Church, including non-Christians and separated brethren an answer to this question? No one was ever saved through the Mosiac Law even before Jesus. Those righteous ones who died before Jesus ended up in the “Bosom of Abraham” until Jesus Christ redeemed them by his suffering and death.

 

[vern_humphrey]

As in the NT convenant supercedes the OT conenant?

Another name for this is “Marcionism.” Marcion declared the Old Testament null and void, and he was declared a heretic and driven out of the Church.

 

[jcrichton]

Quote:
As in the NT convenant supercedes the OT conenant

Another name for this is “Marcionism.” Marcion declared the Old Testament null and void, and he was declared a heretic and driven out of the Church.

***Hi, vern humphrey!

…forgive me for I am not familiar with historical accounts… are you saying that by stating that the New Testament’s Covenant (Jesus) supercedes the Old Testament’s Covenant (Mosaic Law) that the Church equates that to heresy?

I am totally ignorant of Marcion, but how can you equate his position (“Old Testament is null and void”) to Salvation in Christ Jesus removes the yolk of the Mosaic Law from God’s people?

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[vern_humphrey]

***Hi, vern humphrey!

…forgive me for I am not familiar with historical accounts… are you saying that by stating that the New Testament’s Covenant (Jesus) supercedes the Old Testament’s Covenant (Mosaic Law) that the Church equates that to heresy?

I am totally ignorant of Marcion, but how can you equate his position (“Old Testament is null and void”) to Salvation in Christ Jesus removes the yolk of the Mosaic Law from God’s people?

Maran atha!

Angel***

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Marcionites
Heretical sect founded in A.D. 144 at Rome by Marcion and continuing in the West for 300 years, but in the East some centuries longer, especially outside the Byzantine Empire. They rejected the writings of the Old Testament and taught that Christ was not the Son of the God of the Jews, but the Son of the good God, who was different from the God of the Ancient Covenant. They anticipated the more consistent dualism of Manichaeism and were finally absorbed by it. As they arose in the very infancy of Christianity and adopted from the beginning a strong ecclesiastical organization, parallel to that of the Catholic Church, they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known.

 

[rwoehmke]

Wouldn’t some of the writings of the Popes of the 20th and 21st centuries which state very plainly that no one is saved except through Jesus Christ and his Church, including non-Christians and separated brethren an answer to this question? No one was ever saved through the Mosiac Law even before Jesus. Those righteous ones who died before Jesus ended up in the “Bosom of Abraham” until Jesus Christ redeemed them by his suffering and death.

Sorry I may have misunderstood the question. The books of the Old Testament (also called Covenant) are still valid. The Covenant made with the Jews in the Old Testament times has been replaced by its fulfillment in Jesus Christ. The books of the New Testament do not make the older books obsolete, but there is a New Covenant in place through which we are saved. It could be confusing because the Biblical books tell the stories of the Covenants made between God and man and hence are sometimes properly called the Old and New Covenants.

 

[rien]

Sorry I may have misunderstood the question. The books of the Old Testament (also called Covenant) are still valid. The Covenant made with the Jews in the Old Testament times has been replaced by its fulfillment in Jesus Christ. The books of the New Testament do not make the older books obsolete, but there is a New Covenant in place through which we are saved. It could be confusing because the Biblical books tell the stories of the Covenants made between God and man and hence are sometimes properly called the Old and New Covenants.

But Schoeman says the OT is also still in effect. Moss has not given an open reply to this.

He is either totally mis-informed or playing fast and lose with the facts to state as he does that the Catholic Church has recently rejected supersessionism.

If he gets that wrong, what else does he get wrong.

I know Jewish converts to evangelical Chritianity who have a problem with Shoeman and those Jews who convert to Catholicsim instead of evangelicalism. The catholic church gives them room for believing the OT covenant is still a way to salvation.

Evangelicals seem more Biblical on this in insisting it is only Christ.

 

[jcrichton]

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Quote:
Marcionites

Heretical sect founded in A.D. 144 at Rome by Marcion and continuing in the West for 300 years, but in the East some centuries longer, especially outside the Byzantine Empire. They rejected the writings of the Old Testament and taught that Christ was not the Son of the God of the Jews, but the Son of the good God, who was different from the God of the Ancient Covenant. They anticipated the more consistent dualism of Manichaeism and were finally absorbed by it. As they arose in the very infancy of Christianity and adopted from the beginning a strong ecclesiastical organization, parallel to that of the Catholic Church, they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known.

***Hi, vern humphrey!

I think that we are reading two very distinct excerpts…

…either that or you are obviously omitting much of the pertinent text:

They rejected the writings of the Old Testament and taught that Christ was not the Son of the God of the Jews, but the Son of the good God, who was different from the God of the Ancient Covenant. ***

It is not that they placed Jesus as predominant over the posterior Covenant that cause the Church to denounce them as heretics.

What they did was divorce Yahweh of the Old Testament from Yahweh of the New Testament; in essence they created a new form of religion: one in which God does change–this, I believe I do not have to explain it to you, is geometrically opposed to Yahweh’s revelation that He is the I Am: the Beginning and the End: that there is no change in Him!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I know Jewish converts to evangelical Chritianity who have a problem with Shoeman and those Jews who convert to Catholicsim instead of evangelicalism. The catholic church gives them room for believing the OT covenant is still a way to salvation.

Evangelicals seem more Biblical on this in insisting it is only Christ.

***Hi, rien!

I’ve never heard that Teaching… could you refer the source to me–I do not refute your statement, I just simply do not have great familiarity with any text that says that the Catholic Church Teaches Salvation through any other means but Christ.

Maran atha!

Angel***

 

[Yerusalyim]

The Catholic Church teaches that Judaism is a response to the Call of God. The Mosaic law was not meant to save, it was a covenant between God and His chosen.

The OT is officially fulfilled in Christ, so no the Mosaic Law no longer exists.

Completely INCORRECT. The Law does not pass away. It is fulfilled in Christ, but still binding upon the Jews. Observe that Paul remained faithful to the Mosaic Law his entire life even though he taught that it was NOT binding upon GENTILES.

 

[reggieM]

Within Catholicism there is no racial component. There is “neither Jew nor Greek”. Christ does not teach one thing for people of a certain racial characteristic and another thing for another race.

Race and bloodlines are not a factor in holiness or the call of God or the responsibility for salvation. That, as I see it, is one major problem with the idea that “Jews” (whoever they are supposed to be) must be faithful to the law of Moses. This would mean that people of Hebrew descent would not be able to embrace Christianity since that would violate the Mosaic law in some ways.

[Schoemann] is either totally mis-informed or playing fast and lose with the facts to state as he does that the Catholic Church has recently rejected supersessionism.

He strikes me as a good man and a sincere Catholic believer. At the same time, he’s a fairly recent convert and he is trying to hold two contradictory ideas in his belief. Perhaps he doesn’t like the word “supersessionism”. But the fact is, as a Catholic, he accepts that the Chosen People have received the Messiah of God. They cannot still be waiting for him.

Christ is King of Israel – the Catholic Church is His Kingdom on earth. He is King of eternity and heaven as well.

Christ is the fulfillment of Judiasm. He is the Messiah that the Prophets taught about.

Again, I think the recent Jewish converts are confused and/or blinded by some desire to remain Jewish in some way. They’re still of the Hebrew race and that is something to be proud of – like Irish or African or Polish people are proud of their nationality or “race”. So Catholicism does not require that they renounce their “Jewishness” if we’re talking about their racial heritage.

 

[jcrichton]

Completely INCORRECT. The Law does not pass away. It is fulfilled in Christ, but still binding upon the Jews. Observe that Paul remained faithful to the Mosaic Law his entire life even though he taught that it was NOT binding upon GENTILES.

***Hi, Yerusalyim! (Is that a different spelling for Jerusalem?)

…but Paul never says that the Mosaic Law is binding on Jews but not on the Gentiles; rather, he says that we, Christians (of whom he is one), are not bound by the Law:

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace. 15 What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid! ***(Romans 6:14-15–DRV)

11 But that in the law no man is justified with God, it is manifest: because the just man liveth by faith. (Gal 3:11)

23 But before the faith came, we were kept under the law shut up, unto that faith which was to be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our pedagogue in Christ: that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after the faith is come, we are no longer under a pedagogue. 26 For you are all the children of God, by faith in Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:23-26)

11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the scandal of the cross made void. (Gal 5:11)

18 But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. (Gal 5:18–DRV)

(You should read all of Galatians 3:1 through 6:18)

It is true that the Apostles did not abandoned their Jewish customs nor did they stopped observing the Law all at once… yet, as the Holy Spirit lead the infant Church changes arose and the observance of the Mosaic Law ceased.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[rien]

***Hi, Yerusalyim! (Is that a different spelling for Jerusalem?)

…but Paul never says that the Mosaic Law is binding on Jews but not on the Gentiles; rather, he says that we, Christians (of whom he is one), are not bound by the Law:

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace. 15 What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid! ***(Romans 6:14-15–DRV)

11 But that in the law no man is justified with God, it is manifest: because the just man liveth by faith. (Gal 3:11)

23 But before the faith came, we were kept under the law shut up, unto that faith which was to be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our pedagogue in Christ: that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after the faith is come, we are no longer under a pedagogue. 26 For you are all the children of God, by faith in Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:23-26)

11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the scandal of the cross made void. (Gal 5:11)

18 But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. (Gal 5:18–DRV)

(You should read all of Galatians 3:1 through 6:18)

It is true that the Apostles did not abandoned their Jewish customs nor did they stopped observing the Law all at once… yet, as the Holy Spirit lead the infant Church changes arose and the observance of the Mosaic Law ceased.

Maran atha!

Angel

Exactly. There are not 2 laws according to Paul.

Schoeman and the AHC seem to be championing the dual convenant theory. They have their supporters high in the Catholic Church. Cardinal Kasper is one I believe who is open to this. He stated that “the old theory of substitution is gone since the Second vatican Council”. That is scary stuff if one is orthodox. But the church seems to be moving that way.

Any wonder the vast majority of Jewish converts embrace evangelicalism. My guess is they want the real thing so to speak.

It like with Chritian Scientists and Jews. A large number of converts to CS are Jewish cause they really don’t have to really give up much belief-wise.

But it seems a total denial of the Gospel of Christ.

 

[jcrichton]

Exactly. There are not 2 laws according to Paul.

Schoeman and the AHC seem to be championing the dual convenant theory. They have their supporters high in the Catholic Church. Cardinal Kasper is one I believe who is open to this. He stated that “the old theory of substitution is gone since the Second vatican Council”. That is scary stuff if one is orthodox. But the church seems to be moving that way.

Any wonder the vast majority of Jewish converts embrace evangelicalism. My guess is they want the real thing so to speak.

It like with Chritian Scientists and Jews. A large number of converts to CS are Jewish cause they really don’t have to really give up much belief-wise.

But it seems a total denial of the Gospel of Christ.

***Hi, rien!

…much is attributed to the Second Vatican Council–it is as though Catholics, wanting to have as much “liberty” as non-Catholics Christians, have been given a new doctrine that accomodates any thought as contrary to Church and Bible Doctrine as it may be… such as that group of nuns that claimed that one of their members was the reincarnation of Mary, Jesus’ Mom; this controversy should have been quenched three seconds after its emergence… however, contrary to the “davinci’s codists” the Vatican does not have a special forces team that is prepped and en route seconds after the outbreak/s.

These “Catholics,” which sometimes are well-meaning, cannot be simply removed from office and excommunicated… it takes a judicial process (Church Law) to present charges and allow the defendant to either voluntarily give up the heresy or obstinately remain a heretic… all the while confusion and erosion is suffered by both the Faith and the faithful.

Perhaps if Catholics were more actively involved with the Church such abuses and usurpations would not be as common or as long-reaching in their devastation of the Body of Christ.

Maran atha!

Angel***