How do I navigate a Traditional relationship?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hannah75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Regarding getting married. Can we be married just the two of us get married (no big ceremony) if we just go see a priest? Neither of us wants a big ceremony. Neither of us wants the pomp and circumstance of a wedding. His non-ex-wife treated him badly, and that’s part of the reason for his hesitation in getting involved in that way. I would love to have a big wedding with a dress and cake and family, he just isn’t into that. In so far as I’m concerned, marraige is an affirmation of love under God. I don’t think the ideas of marraige in some most fundamental ways are all that different between a Catholic and a Jew. The ceremonies are different, the words may be different. But the idea of loving someone til death (and not even stopping then) sounds right to me.

Again, I don’t want to cross his religion and I guess part of this is trying to figure out where those lines lie. I don’t want to hurt him. I want to love him as best as I can.

Thanks
Hannah:o
You do sound like a good woman Hannah - you are asking a lot of good and intelligent questions.

You can be married by a priest HOWEVER - he must be given permission from his Bishop to marry you because you are not a baptized Christian. If you were to marry without this permission, outside the Church, it would not be a valid marriage. If you are granted permission it would be what is considered a “good and natural marriage”, it would not however be sacramental.

You need to talk to a priest about this, and it does not need to be his. I would suggest calling his Diocese and asking to speak to someone who is familiar with Cannon Law in the area of Marriage (not all parish priests know enough to really answer your questions accurately). You can educate yourself so you can make some good decisions, and educate your friend as well.

No one ever has to have a big wedding. You can be married at the foot of the altar with only you two, the priest, and a couple of witnesses.

A book that may help you understand Catholic marriage - although it is about Annulment, would answer many of your questions: Annulment: The Wedding that Was by Michael Smith Foster

~Liza
 
One of his best buddies (whom he’s hanging out with today) is an Apologist. (There’s all this terminology in Catholocism, like “Apologist,” that I’m just getting used to.) I suppose if he wanted to ask, he would ask his friend. My friend really wants to remain close to me.

To be absolutely frank, about all we do physically (cover your eyes!) is a kiss on the lips and maybe a hug or two. He is not only low on the libido side, he is taking medication that kills it altogether. There is no drive to be unchaste, as it were. I forget who said it, but yes, we are in those years where there are many years of closeness to come. I have had bad experiences with men and am not in any hurry to go through anything like that again (I was assaulted a couple of times—luckily nothing issued from them).

I had to go to the hospital yesterday to have a test performed. He didn’t want to come as his mother recently died in a hospital—she’d been in and out many times and he has rather bad associations with hospitals. But he came. And he was grumpy about it. When we came home—he apologized. That’s what I mean—he comes with me and helps me deal with the difficulties of life. When he can’t take it and makes me uncomfortable, he knows and apologizes.

As a Jew, I would be sad not to be married in a Temple by a Rabbi. But to me, the institution of marraige goes beyond who married to you to the seriousness in which you take your vows to one another under God… I do believe that, though I might be Jewish, as all of you have said about Catholicism coming from Judiasm (well, some of you 🙂 ) we are all with the same God though we may perceive him and his actions differently.

All these books will take me an eon to get through 😃 I will just have to plug along. He and I do need some affirmation of our relationship now. This weekend, he goes to be with his children. I’ll know a lot when he returns.

Thanks Again,
Hannah
 
To be absolutely frank, about all we do physically (cover your eyes!) is a kiss on the lips and maybe a hug or two. He is not only low on the libido side, he is taking medication that kills it altogether. There is no drive to be unchaste, as it were.
This is indeed a very sensitive and personal area to be discussing with strangers - I commend your honesty and openness in trying to obtain answers to help you.

In order to be married validly you must be able to consummate the marriage. If you have never thought to “go there” or had the drive, this may be an issue. Again - not a topic for an internet forum beyond knowing it is something to consider, but a topic for a priest who can properly counsel you in your relationship. We do not need to know if you have already consummated your relationship - that is none of our business. 😉 If this is the case your friend already knows he needs to go to confession - no need to make a big deal about it.

Christ was a Jew. We believe He is your Messiah, and my husband and I personally (as well as many Catholics around the world) pray that one day you will accept this as a Truth. We can’t force it - we can only pray. I say this not in any sense of animosity or separation or condemnation - only in a desire that, if nothing else, you and your friend could truly be one in the amazing sacrament of marriage that my own husband and I share. And that you can both help each other mutually meet in heaven.

It sounds like you have a wonderful and amazing relationship with this man, but that he is truly struggling with what he knows to be right and just according to his own Faith beliefs. Mixed marriages can happen and they can be successful, but they can also be extremely stressful. Before I met my husband I was engaged to a Protestant man whom I loved beyond all understanding. Six months before the wedding he broke our engagement and I was devastated. Then I met my husband. 🙂 What we share together in our Faith is unparalleled to anything I felt with my ex-fiance. To practice my Faith with him and live it daily, is something I never would have had with my ex. Hindsight is 20-20, so they say. I can honestly say that God had a plan for me to learn how to appreciate what I have by taking away what I thought I wanted. 😉

Anyway - I’m not saying all this to make you think you need to end your relationship - only to show you that there are inherent difficulties in mixed marriages, and even mixed relationships, that in the long run you might not be realizing right now.

So my suggestion to you is to keep learning, keep asking questions, and take your time. I don’t think you need to make any decisions tomorrow, or even the day he returns from being with his children. Take time, talk it over, and learn as much as you can. From there you can make educated decisions about how to proceed.

God bless -
~Liza
 
Actually, I never said whether or not he is struggling. He’s going out to visit his kids and when he does, he’ll teach them their catechism. Then he’ll come back—to me.

I don’t know what’s in his head. I have posted here because I’m trying to understand him. I’m wondering what’s going on. I have no idea what he thinks. And that I have no idea is why I’ve come to his religion, the one thing that does divide us in a certain way. But he is devoted to me.

I’m trying to do what’s best for him. I don’t know if he’s doing what’s best for me. If what you say is true—he would have broken up with me already because he knows what would be “right” for him. But he hasn’t and therefore is either in confusion (he doesn’t sound like it from talking to him) or has resigned himself to the complexities of this situation. Or, I simply find it much more complex than he does. If he wanted to make my life easier, he would have left me already. If he wanted to adhere to his faith completely, he would have left me. If he were unsure about the example he was setting for his children, he would have left me. I want to know why he hasn’t, and what his decisions mean for me. I want to be the best partner possible for him. If I have to leave him, it will be because of my reasons, not because I am trying to fulfill his.

Just so ya know.

H.
 
Wait. Did I miss something big here? What is a “non-ex-wife?” Was he married to her and hasn’t divorced? If he is divorced but the marriage is not annulled, he isn’t even supposed to date since he is married. He certainly can’t marry again, in any kind of ceremony–civil, Jewish, or Catholic. Maybe I missed something in an earlier post that explains it… Either he had a wife or he didn’t, but if she isn’t his wife anymore how can she not be an ex?
 
I don’t know what’s in his head. I have posted here because I’m trying to understand him.
Without sounding snippy - why are you asking us then? Why don’t you ask him? We have no idea what’s in his head, how he feels about his faith, and how he feels about you. You are asking us how to navigate a relationship in waters you are not familiar with - yet you are not having this conversation with the man in question. How is that fair to him?

Yes - educate yourself about his faith if THAT is what you want to learn about. But if you want to learn about what’s in his head and what he’s thinking, I’m afriad we can’t help you with that, you need to go to the source.
Wait. Did I miss something big here?
Read the thread - please do not expect people to repost info that is already here. :rolleyes:

~Liza
 
you missed something.
i said earlier that the marraige had been annulled. she can’t be his “ex-wife” if they were never married, so i labled her as a “not-ex-wife”

h, wiping the sweat from her forehead
 
Hi,

I’m Jewish and my boyfriend of 2.5 years is a Traditional Catholic. I am faithful in my religion, and he is definitely faithful in his. He goes to Mass on Sundays (I’ve never been—should I go?). We both had the choice to be with one another. Of course, he could have found a Traditional Catholic woman to be with, and I, of course, could have found another Jew to be with, but life did not work out that way.

He knows a lot about Judiasm, but I know very little of Catholicism. I’m finding that our relationship now is having a difficulty because I don’t know what is expected of a Catholic woman. I thought I knew what was expected of me from my past relationships, but this one is just so different. We are moving to a more serious and deeper level, and I’d like to meet him on some of his own ground as he has met me so many times on my own. I’d like to share with him the way I pray and the way I read the Tanakh (I am currently reading: I Samuel) and about mitzvot. However, right now, I feel I must learn something of where he’s coming from. I don’t understand.

I read a little on Communion today. I hope to read something every day to deepen my knowledge of Catholic beliefs because of my interest, because of my honest feelings about faith and inter-faith relationships, and because I love him.

We are both decently on in our years and have had previous relationships, so it is not like this is “puppy-love” or about to disappear. I love him. And he loves me. We spend so much time together and do not argue so I feel this relationship is special and wonderful.

He has helped me in many ways. Being with him has made me a stronger and more generous person, and I hope that I have helped him by listening to him and caring for him in a deep way as well as helping him to do the things he needs to do to get through the dailyness of life (like buying pants or eating properly).

I guess my question is: how can I sustain this relationship? Would learning more about Catholicism help me? Would my new knowledge help him?

Thank You
Hannah:confused:
I just wanted to say I can feel the love you have for your husband. Wow =).

As for the topic, I do not know. I am not a Traditionalist Catholic, but all the things you mentioned in love is what I would look for a in Catholic wife =). As for the issue of marriage, I did not read every post. If he has an annulment from his previous marriage(s) and you wish to marry him at minimum you would need yourself, him, a priest, and two witnesses. Unless I missed something or do not understand what a Traditional Catholic is, you two should marry to continue a full husband and wife relationship including the sexual and unitive aspects.

As an aside and with no intention to evangelist I just want to link this Journey Home segment about a Husband that is Jewish and a Wife that is Catholic. (The wife is a convert Catholic from humanist atheism and the husband a revert Jew and later a convert Catholic). They have a beautiful love story as well.

ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/seriessearchprog.asp?seriesID=-6892289&T1=journey+home
The sixth item down called Daughter of Conversion on August 3, 2009.
 
Liza,
Sorry about that, I didn’t mean to come off that way.
Everyone has been very helpful so far and that has been very wonderful. I have learned a lot that I don’t know where else I would learn this information. I hope I do not seem ungrateful for it.
I guess this whole thing is confusing to me. Which is part of the reason I came here looking for answers. I do want to try and navigate this relationship as best I can. If I do move out to be with his family, I need to be able to be a help and not in the way.

I do apologize for what I said.
Hannah:(
 
More on the “non-ex-wife” issue…which can be confusing, even to Catholics.

Even when a marriage is annulled, the woman is still referred to as the ex-wife, the husband as the “ex-husband”, and the children are considered as just as “legitimate” as if a decree of nullity had either been denied or never asked for. It is assumed that the marriage was attempted in good faith by at least one of the spouses…and of course the kids had no say in it.

On that note: The whole concept of “legitimate” was from the days when the Church had a hand in deciding who was in line for heriditary titles and lands, as opposed to children concieved out of wedlock who had no standing…this was serious stuff, since wars could start over this kind thing. Now, it is considered repugnant to refer to an innocent human being as “illegitimate”. Although some people still insensitively use those terms, the Church doesn’t even go there any more. In any case, though, my understanding is that children of a marriage that was later annulled would still have been considered legitimate heirs, because a marriage was attempted (usually with the blessing of the Church), rather than circumvented.
 
Liza,
Sorry about that, I didn’t mean to come off that way.
Hannah - I was the one trying to not be snippy!! 😉 You have not been the least bit snippy at all.
More on the “non-ex-wife” issue…which can be confusing, even to Catholics.

Even when a marriage is annulled, the woman is still referred to as the ex-wife, the husband as the “ex-husband”, …
Perhaps by some - but not by all. Please do not make this statement for everyone when you have not sampled the entire population of divorced Catholics.

I do not refer to my ex as my ex-husband. More often than I not I refer to him as someone I dated and lived with for 11 years, which is what we did. We did not have children (I am not able to conceive), and I’m sure I’m not alone in the world of women who would prefer to not grant him the title of “husband” when he never was one. Not a bad man at all, he was my high school sweetheart and a very good friend - but he was NEVER a husband. This is not bitterness - this is accuracy. Words mean things, titles are important and denote certain things. I prefer precision.

~Liza
 
liza,

i am not able to conceive either. sometimes it sounds good, and other times, it’s just very hard to deal with. The bf went out to visit his kids over the weekend and the mother of his children (who likes me btw) said sure, she’d love it if i came out. i could be the nanny (of sorts) to the kids. it would be my pleasure.

now a big couple of questions that i have been wondering about:

These might seem controversial, but I mean them to be helpful, perhaps very uneducated, but helpful and hopeful. I admit I am uneducated, but there are four children at Passover and I think these childrens mindsets apply to us all at different times. One who thinks he knows all, one who is simple and understands simple things, one who is book smart, and one who asks and listens. I am trying to be the one who asks and listens.

Two very big questions (at least to me):

From what I understand, Catholicism sees the Church (THE Church—I’m still not sure what that means) as the body of Christ. Does that mean that the Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope (and Priests and Fathers, etc.,) are all sacred parts of that body? Do the lay people become part of that body in Communion with it? (Thereby rendering themselves part of the Church and of Christ?)

OK,way back when. Before AD, when Christ was still alive. Well, first of all, were there any foretellings of the coming of Christ?

And I understand that “Messiah” also means “King”—could this be why he was killed? Because he was representing a way of looking at God (as the human “representation”—I don’t know how else to put it), he thereby threatened old Jewish traditions, and threatened Roman Rule because he might gather up the people of Israel and become the “King” and bring a “new life” to the people of the land—a way that the Romans were against.

Jews have had long lines of Kings, and when that line ended (not broken, just ended), there was chaos among the Jews and Christ promised a better life.

God understood that people—everyone, including non-believers, especially perhaps non-believers—needed to see God and by coming in human form as Christ, he brought back that Kingship, or brought the Messiah, rather? The Messiah would show himself to the world, sacrifice himself making a New Covanent with his people (thereby perhaps repeating the sacrifice of Isaac when the initial Covenant was made even before Judiasm, but as Isaac was never really killed—God cannot be killed). So, though Jesus “died for our sins,” he did not really die, but led to a period of contemplation of one’s own sins (I’m thinking Lent) before he rose from the dead (Easter) and walked among us, reminding all perhaps that God always has walked among us. Making the point that God never dies, never leaves us, is always there to take away our sins in order that we might learn the ways of God and be Godly people.

So, perhaps, Christians take this “dying” quite literally whereas Jews take it “figuratively,” and that those Jews who did not become Christians did not see the changes in the world that they thought the Messiah would bring and therefore could not take on Jesus for who he was??? Is Christ a reiteration of the peoples’ belief in God? (I know for Christians, Christ is God, so this is confusing to write)…

For me, I always believed that the Messiah would come at the end of time. There would be no Apocalypse, there would be a beautific Kingdom of Glory led by the King, the Messiah, God. Humans (or beings of God) would live lives’ without sin, and truly become Godly creatures.

Am I totally crazy? Is this anywhere close to reality or is it bunk? I feel kind of crazy saying this, but I believe the foundation of Christianity to be a reiteration of one’s belief in God that many people did not see in Judiasm at the time? The Jews would then have said something like, what are you people thinking? We do not need a representation and sacrifice to believe in God. When we sin, we are both punished here on earth and after our death. Huh?? I am soooooo confused.

Hannah is deeply confused… sigh. I hope maybe someone can straighten me out. We, my boyfriend and I, have discussed this, but we have never really understood it even near onto the same plane. I believe, as Jews do, that Jesus was a significant prophet who reminded us of God’s power, and brought people into a new, different, age. And that without him, many believers would have remained oppressed instead, they became free. So Jews remain oppressed and Christians are free because Christians believe that God/Christ walks above them, and that Catholics in particular, believe in the regular person as being part of the body of God/Christ in life.

ACK!

Isaiah
ISA 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

ISA 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

ISA 9:8 The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it hath lighted upon Israel.

ISA 9:9 And all the people shall know, even Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria, that say in the pride and stoutness of heart,

I have had a migraine all day. Although my landlord is cutting granite (LOUD) beneath my window (why he is putting granite in is beyonf my comprehension) and that contributes to the migraine, I believe it is God making me rest. When things get too stressful, you must rest.
I am reading Isaiah and found these quotes and thought them interesting.

God’s Love to you All. It is a Happy New Year in Judiasm-land. May you all have peace and many blessings.

Hannah.🙂
 
Part of my questions stem from the fact that I want to be a good friend to his children as well. His children are part of him, so if I am to stay with him, I must be good with his children. Though I cannot conceive, I have always thought that maybe it is for the best as I wouldn’t have much time between migraines to help and hold them. I am hoping to get better.

I *am Jewish, but I want to help the children with learning about their Catholic lives’. I believe this can be done. They can ask as many questions as they want. So I want to feel like a welcome visitor in the Catholic Church. He thinks it’s interesting that I come here. I, in way, would rather ask you all these questions because I am sure not to get an unbiased answer from him—he would try to dissuade me from all this information because I think he is trying to protect me.

He tell me about Vatican II and I would like to learn about that and why there was so much chaos in the church at that time. It is not at all like the Jewish way of doing things—think of the Talmud and the way discussion takes place over centuries. Jews are really into the “Book” (Hence "People of the Book) and like to discuss/argue things…

My bf believes in many conspiracies. Are there many conspiracies in the Church? Even so far back as the Last Supper?

H again:D
 
Hello Hannah - I will respond to all of this later this evening, if someone else does not beat me to it. 😉

~Liza
 
LOL Liza…

I must amend what I said about Vatican II and the Talmud. They are nothing at all alike. The Talmud is for teaching and it is a text commented on by other texts because it is not the Bible (Tanakh)…

My thing is that I feel God. I just want to bring God closer in our relationship. (my bf and myself)…

thanks again
 
Ok - you asked a lot of questions - so here is a lot to read! 😃
From what I understand, Catholicism sees the Church (THE Church—I’m still not sure what that means) as the body of Christ. Does that mean that the Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope (and Priests and Fathers, etc.,) are all sacred parts of that body?
Priests (Bishops, pope, etc.) are part of the body and they have a particular responsibility and vocation within the Church.
Do the lay people become part of that body in Communion with it? (Thereby rendering themselves part of the Church and of Christ?)
The laypeople are also part of the body and also have responsibilites according to their situation in life - married, deacon, nun, mother, father, etc. Just an eye sees and a hand manipulates, so do different members of the body have different functionalties, just as parts of the body. All work together to make the body function. Saint Paul in Corinthians talks about a related issue where “there are many gifts but one spirit.”
OK,way back when. Before AD, when Christ was still alive. Well, first of all, were there any foretelling of the coming of Christ?
Many!! catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/1o.htm

This article is specifically written for Catholics to use for arguing that Jesus is the Messiah. So keep this context in mind when reading.
And I understand that “Messiah” also means “King”
Actually - Messiah means “anointed one”. However, the Messiah is priest, profit and king - of the Davidic line.
—could this be why he was killed? Because he was representing a way of looking at God (as the human “representation”—I don’t know how else to put it), he thereby threatened old Jewish traditions, and threatened Roman Rule because he might gather up the people of Israel and become the “King” and bring a “new life” to the
people of the land—a way that the Romans were against.
Yes - that is one of the reasons he was crucified,
Jews have had long lines of Kings, and when that line ended (not broken, just ended), there was chaos among the Jews and Christ promised a better life.
God understood that people—everyone, including non-believers, especially perhaps non-believers—needed to see God and by coming in human form as Christ, he brought back that Kingship, or brought the Messiah, rather?
That is ONE thing that he did - however it is not the most important thing he did, which was come to save us from sin. But yes, he is the eternal King. He is God, and he is of the Davidic line [thus fulfilling God’s promise that David’s line will never end]
The Messiah would show himself to the world, sacrifice himself making a New Covenant with his people (thereby perhaps repeating the sacrifice of Isaac when the initial Covenant was made even before Judaism, but as Isaac was never really killed—God cannot be killed). So, though Jesus “died for our sins,” he did not really die, but led to a period of contemplation of one’s own sins (I’m thinking Lent) before he rose from the dead (Easter) and walked among us, reminding all perhaps that God always has walked among us. Making the point that God never dies, never leaves us, is always there to take away our sins in order that we might learn the ways of God and be Godly people.
Not exactly. There are two events - the crucifixion and resurrection.

Crucifixion is the shedding blood (killing) for sins, as in the old covenant. Jesus’ death buys us infinite merit because He is God. This merit can be applied to our sins by participating in that sacrifice. We participate by the sacraments, most especially the Eucharist. God’s rule is that some “thing” must die for sin, hence the old testament sacrifice. Jesus Christ dies in our place. God does die.

The Resurrection is the means by which heaven is opened to us. This is a complex issue - for now, concentrate on the crucifixion. The Resurrection is a foreshadowing of the resurrection of the body and goes into very deep questions.
So, perhaps, Christians take this “dying” quite literally whereas Jews take it “figuratively,” and that those Jews who did not become Christians did not see the changes in the world that they thought the Messiah would bring and therefore could not take on Jesus for who he was??? Is Christ a reiteration of the peoples’ belief in
God? (I know for Christians, Christ is God, so this is confusing to write)…
Christians take it literally, Jews fundamentally refuse that Jesus is the Messiah. It really is no more complicated than that. Some Jews believe He died, some Jews don’t believe he existed, some believe he didn’t die on the cross. NO non-Christian believes he is the Messiah - obviously, otherwise they would be Christian. 😉

Christ is not anything other than Himself - He is not a symbol, He is not an idea, He is not a concept, He is God.

Jesus Christ is a real historical physical person who is exactly what the Catholic Church claims He is.

…Cont…
 
…Cont…
For me, I always believed that the Messiah would come at the end of time. There would be no Apocalypse, there would be a beautific Kingdom of Glory led by the King, the Messiah, God. Humans (or beings of God) would live lives’ without sin, and truly become Godly creatures. Am I totally crazy? Is this anywhere close to reality or is it bunk? I feel kind of crazy saying this, but I believe the foundation of Christianity to be a reiteration of one’s belief in God that many people did not see in Judaism at the time? The Jews would then have said something like, what are you people thinking? We do not need a representation and sacrifice to believe in God. When we sin, we are both punished here on earth and after our death. Huh?? I am soooooo confused.
Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. When Christ came He changed the rules forever. To worship the one true God was previously Judaism, after that the only authentic worship of God is Christian. Why? God created Judaism to bring salvation to the world. But pre-Christian Judaism does not save. The salvation that Judaism brings is Jesus. God’s plan was always to bring salvation to the whole world in the person of Jesus Christ, who comes OUT OF Judaism. Because of their status as the chosen people, and promises made to Abraham, the gospel of salvation is brought to the Jews first. This gospel of salvation is Christianity. Some Jews (Peter, Paul, etc.) accepted that message and were charged with bringing the message of salvation to the whole world - THIS is the mission of the Church.
Hannah is deeply confused… sigh.
I can absolutely understand!!! This is indeed a lot to digest. 😉
I believe, as Jews do, that Jesus was a significant prophet who reminded us of God’s power, and brought people into a new, different, age. And that without him, many believers would have remained oppressed instead, they became free. So Jews remain oppressed and Christians are free because Christians believe that God/Christ walks
above them, and that Catholics in particular, believe in the regular person as being part of the body of God/Christ in life.
There are two possibilities:

One - Jesus is God
Two - Jesus is not God

No other option is possible.

If Jesus is not God then every Christian is an idolater. He worships something other than God. That is a serious sin.

If Jesus is God the Jews are ignoring their own God.

Therefore - we (Jews and Christians) can not be right, one of us has to be wrong.

The Jews operated under the Mosaic Covenant. This covenant required sacrifices in the Temple, by the Levitican priesthood. Titus and the Tenth Legion destroyed the Temple and destroyed the priesthood in 70AD. No sacrifice has been offered for over 19 centuries. There is no more Mosaic Covenant. The only way of interacting with God (which God created and fully approves of) is the New Covenant forged in the blood of Jesus Christ.

When Julian the Apostate attempted to rebuild the Temple there were earthquakes, fire and brimstone, and other supernatural events which prevented the building. The reasonable conclusion to draw from the destruction of the Temple and the failure to rebuild over 19 centuries is that the Mosaic Covenant is dead and gone.
Isaiah SA 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

ISA 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
 ISA 9:8 The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it hath lighted upon Israel.

ISA 9:9 And all the people shall know, even Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria, that say in the pride and stoutness of heart,
Yes! This is one of the Messianic statements which ties in with everything about Jesus. It says that He is God, it says He is of the Davidic line, it says His kingdom will be forever. It says He is from the Jews (Jacob and Isreal) but that His truth “all the people shall know”. THAT is Christianity. THAT is what we claim. THAT is our God.
God’s Love to you All. It is a Happy New Year in Judiasm-land. May you all have peace and many blessings.
God bless you as well Hannah - I hope these responses help. I would like to say that my dear husband helped me

greatly with these responses. He wrote the web pages I referenced in the link above. (Credit where credit is due 😉 )

Looking forward to more good discussion!

~Liza
 
Thanks Liza! and your Husband!!
I shall have to read this many times before I get it.
🙂 coming soon with more questions
H:D
 
hi hannah

i hope your boyfriend appreciates your effort in making such a fair attempt at understanding his faith. he is a very lucky man to have you.

i just wanted to add that dr scott hahn is a scholar on the covenants and has some great reading material out there if you wanted to really delve into it.

he points out how God made many covenants with His chosen people throughout history and there is a growing progression.
  1. adam and eve (marriage)
  2. noah (household family)
  3. abraham (tribe)
  4. moses (12 tribes)
  5. david (kingdom)
  6. Christ (international kingdom, extends to entire human race)
    He doesn’t destroy the old ones, but completes them and a new covenant is made.
  7. we are still waiting on this one

(i think seven means perfection according to Hebrew tradition) the 7th one will be after the second coming and all the judgments have taken place. from the cc 1040 …We shall know the ultimate meaning of the whole work of creation and of the entire economy of salvation and understand the marvelous ways by which his Providence led everything towards its final end. the Last Judgment will reveal that God’s justice triumphs over all the injustices committed by his creatures and that God’s love is stronger than death.

also i have a question i’ve been curious about for a ling time now, but have never asked any of my Jewish friends in fear of offending them or it just coming across as stupid, but here goes:

can you please explain theologically why orthodox Jews do not have to
follow the hard laws of the past anymore? … like stoning and such…
thanks. :o
 
also i have a question i’ve been curious about for a ling time now, but have never asked any of my Jewish friends in fear of offending them or it just coming across as stupid, but here goes:

can you please explain theologically why orthodox Jews do not have to
follow the hard laws of the past anymore? … like stoning and such…
thanks. :o
Jen - this is off topic from her thread. Please do not hijack her conversation with your own questions. You can always ask in the non-Catholic forum, I’m sure many there would be happy to help you. 😉

~Liza
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top