Jewish Catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ryt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ryt said:
I am an orthodox Jew. I am considering Catholicism or Orthodoxy. I read there are Hebrew Catholics that still keep Jewish law and also go to mass. Is that something that can be done? I dont want to give up keeping kosher Shabbos, Holidays according to Jewish law.
Click to expand...
Yes you can, as long as you acknowledge that you are going above and beyond what is required. Perhaps you should contact someone from hebrewcatholic.net to answer some questions.
I know in church men dont cover their head, would it be a problem if I went in to a mass wearing my yarmulke?
Click to expand...
I think the answer to your yarmulke question is: “you should not wear one.”

In the Catholic Church, all clergy are entitled to wear a black zucchetto (looks like a yarmulke), but typically only bishops, cardinals and the Pope wear them (Bishops wear a amaranth one, Cardinals a scarlet red one, & the Pope a white one).

When clergy wear them, there are very specific times when they must remove them. In other words, there are very specific times when males must NOT be covering their heads.

Therefore, laymen do not wear them so they are not accidently covering their heads when they must not be.

BTW - the reason for the Catholic head covering & Jewish head coverings are TOTALLY DIFFERENT. Catholic clergy would cover their heads simply to keep them warm. There are no theological reasons for Catholic clergy to wear them, HOWEVER, there are theological reasons to remove them during specific parts of the Mass.

I pray this helps.

God bless
 
Last edited:
Ryt said:
would it be a problem if I went in to a mass wearing my yarmulke?
Click to expand...
Shabbat Shalom!

To answer your query in your OP, no, I would think that you would be loved and welcomed into the One True Church, and maybe inspiring others on top of it!
 
I guess you mean mostly Saul/Paul. That’s an old atheist argument, too. Nietzsche uses it in Der Antichrist. It only makes any kind of sense if there was no actual Resurrection. Although the conversion of Saul would then be inexplicable; but none of that would matter without an empty tomb and risen Lord.
 
Last edited:
Well, you can’t be half one religion, half another.

Besides, I would like to say that once you understand the New Covenant Sacraments and Catechism, you will notice the old rituals and ways are present, yet perfected, in the Catholic Church. The parallels are amazing.

Finally, conversions to the Church are most welcome. I will pray for yours.
 
It does not make sense to me that G-d would give commandments then cancel them.
 
RaisedCatholic said:
The Masoretic text was a later Jewish work during the church age which just so happen to be synonymous with the pre-Christian Hebrew Bible in terms of the books it contained.
Click to expand...
This is not accurate.

The Masoretic Text refers to a state of the Hebrew Bible which is written out with vowels, crystallized indeed between the 6th and 9th century, but strictly based on what is called the Protomasoretic Text (consonants only, presenting the same particularities as what will be found later in the MT). The PT was imposed as the authoritative version throughout the Hebrew-speaking Jewish community, Samaritans excepted, over the 1st century. It is actually older that that, the 1st century is simply the date when it became the only authorized text for synagogue readings. Textual witnesses of the PT have been found, for example, among the Dead Sea scrolls.

The MT was actually established as a way of preserving the PT of corruption, by removing the possibility of ascribing different meanings to a text only written out in consonants.
RaisedCatholic said:
Jesus did in deed except only the books from the Hebrew Bible
Click to expand...
If by this you mean Jesus knew the Protomasoretic Text, well, indeed he would have, since this is probably – not certainly, since he lived early in the 1st century – what was read in synagogues in his time. I fail to see how this would be synonymous with an authoritative Jesus-given canon, which you said in your first post :
RaisedCatholic said:
Jesus limited their OT canon to only those books.
Click to expand...
In fact, texts evolved. Canons evolved. Jesus lived his earthly life precisely at a time of such evolution, where the linguistic tradition of Judaism he was born into was closing its canon, while another, the Hellenistic diaspora, had widened theirs two or three centuries earlier.

If we were to accept as canon only the texts Jesus quoted, we might as well take the whole New Testament to the nearest bin.
RaisedCatholic said:
the Old Testament Canon, which Jesus referred to as Moses and the prophets.
Click to expand...
Maybe one could read it like this, but the “canon of the Pharisees”, as you call it, was actually tripartite : Moses, the Prophets, the Writings (TaNaKh is an acronym for Torah, Neviim, Ketuvim – Law, Prophets, Writings).
 
The Mosaic commandments were specifically for the Jews, and not the gentiles. The church decided this in the Council of Jerusalem (the first council).
 
It seems more like a both/and.

In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says that he came to fulfill the Law, not abolish it. What does that mean? Theologians are still wondering exactly what. In the very next verse he says “not one jot, not one stroke” of the law will disappear until “heaven and earth pass away” and “everything is accomplished.”

Also the fact that Jews continue to exist today and obey the law is a testament to its endurance and the will of God. Even after some nations have repeatedly tried to exterminate them.
 
Last edited:
This is very informative.

BTW, your English is perfect! I would never have guessed that English is not your first language.
 
Thank you !

I used to teach beginner-level textual criticism, albeit in New Testament, back in the day. I still have an interest in it, although I’m far from as up to date as I once was, and have forgotten a lot of essential facts over the years 😉 This kind of thread helps me refresh my memory !
 
An orthodox priest gave me all these proofs that the Torah is no longer relevant.
 
Well I honestly don’t know what he could mean other than that gentiles do not need to follow the ceremonial and judicial precepts of the Mosaic law. Of course it is still at least relevant as inerrant scripture and salvation history.
 
Ryt said:
It does not make sense to me that G-d would give commandments then cancel them.
Click to expand...
I don’t see God changing His mind either. But the response is that some commandments were given only to the Jews. But a further question then is why would God give commandments only to the Jews and not to the Chinese?
Neithan said:
That is quite fascinating, considering that we still believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation.
Click to expand...
Jews do not accept the divinity of Jesus. I don’t think that has changed. Also, I don’t think that a Jew can accept Jesus as an authentic Jewish Messiah. AFAIK, once a Jew does accept Jesus, he is no longer considered to be a Jew, but is now a Christian?
 
AlNg said:
AFAIK, once a Jew does accept Jesus, he is no longer considered to be a Jew, but is now a Christian?
Click to expand...
The Apostles remained Jewish, as did many in the early centuries of the church. There is no logical contradiction, but Christianity adds the requirement of faith in Christ as Messiah, with the dogmas of the Incarnation and Trinity. The Council of Jerusalem decided that the gentiles did not need to become Jews. My historical understanding is amateur but it seems clear that at least in the medieval Western church there was no room made for Jews to continue to follow the ceremonial precepts of the Mosaic law.

Aquinas taught that was tantamount to denying the salvific efficacy of Christ and a mortal sin. He is a doctor of the church but of course his opinion is not dogmatic. Some nuance has since been introduced, and though it would be gravely sinful to treat the ceremonial precepts as necessary for salvation, it is not a grave sin to follow them per se.

There may have been greater respect for the Mosaic ceremonial precepts in the Antiochene and Syriac rites, with some liturgical influence, but I have only seen some cursory information and don’t know much about it.
 
Last edited:
Jews are G-ds chosen nation that is why they have commandments that gentiles don’t.
 
The Divine Commandments were never cancelled. On the contrary, they are mandatory.

In fact, only human laws determined by Moses, David etc. were revoked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top