Like Ann Coulter, All Faithful Christians Believe "Jews Need to be Perfected"

  • Thread starter Thread starter bones_IV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I saw Coulter’s interview with Deutsch where she made the comments that sparked this thread and I am utterly baffled as to what the hysteria is about. If her phrase was theologically inelegant, so what? Is there any real doubt about what she was saying - that she’d like to see all people, Jews included, become Christians? Wasn’t it pretty obvious that she considers Christianity an outgrowth of, that is, the perfection of, Judaism?

I’m at a loss. Are there people we don’t want to see come to Christ? Are we not called to perfection in Christ: *“825 … all the faithful, whatever their condition or state - though each in his own way - are called by the Lord to that perfection of sanctity by which the Father himself is perfect.” *

Frankly I am astonished that such a tempest can be brewed up in such a tiny teapot. This howling about Ann Coulter is a lot like the braying that went on about Rush Limbaugh. It’s amazing how easy it is to whip some people into a frenzy over absolutely nothing at all.

Ender
 
maybe some Jews are offended by Ann’s wish that they find Christ…but is God offended?
 
At the present moment in this process of renewal, the subjects of covenant and mission have come to the forefront. Nostra Aetate initiated this thinking by citing Romans 11:28-29 and describing the Jewish people as “very dear to God, for the sake of the patriarchs, since God does not take back the gifts he bestowed or the choice he made.” John Paul II has explicitly taught that Jews are “the people of God of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God,” “the present-day people of the covenant concluded with Moses,” and “partners in a covenant of eternal love which was never revoked.”
Click to expand...
(from Reflections on Covenant and Mission)

The Church has been very clear, especially in the last few decades, that the Jewish people are still treasured by God. The apostles were specifically told to go first to the Jews, and only later to the Gentiles. Jesus was clear that the Gospel belonged first and foremost to the Jewish people, who had been faithful to God for so long… but He never said the Jews don’t need to be baptized. In fact, Jesus preached ONLY to Jews and, last I checked, He told them to be baptized. The early Christians were at great pains to explain to their Jewish families and neighbors that Christianity was (and is) NOT a new religion, it is the fulfillment of God’s promises to the Jewish people that he would send the Messiah through them. Who are we to tell Jesus (and the apostles) that He’s wrong?

Although, as the Church said in Dominus Iesus, all religions may carry pieces of truth in them, our relationship with Judaism will always be unique. Reductio ad absurdam arguments like, “Well, is a converted Muslim or Buddhist a ‘fulfilled’ Muslim or Buddhist?” miss the point of that unique tie. Uncomfortable as it may make some Christians, the truth is that Judaism and Christianity were not meant to co-exist long term. Once the Messiah has come, Judaism was supposed to transform into post-Messianic Judaism, i.e. Christianity. (there are still a few followers of John the Baptist left, too; apparently, they missed his clear indication that Jesus was the Messiah he had been preparing Israel for.)

The problem with a lot of the commentary that’s been running in the editorial pages (and some of this thread) is there is this odd assumption that Christians hate Jews. Now, there have certainly been problems in the past (pogroms in Russia, the expulsion of Jews from Spain, the abuse of Jewish bankers by the monarchs of Europe, etc.), but is this going on today? Not in Christian countries.

Personally, I find the testimonies of converted Jews particularly enlightening. It is wonderful to hear how they saw all kinds of parallels between the synagogue services they had known and the Catholic mass. I think it adds a great deal of depth, history, and insight to have these people in our Church to remind us that Christianity is not 2,000 years old; its roots go back much farther. Too often, we forget this.

But I’m not going to avoid telling Jews the Good News just so I can continue to observe Judaism “as is”; I’d much rather these people come into the Church and energize ALL OF US to appreciate how God has been preparing for our salvation from the beginning of time.
 
Seems as though Jews are factionalized like many Christians and Muslims. Makes you wonder if those that attack Ann Coulter believe that a Messiah has been promised.

Unfortunately, the secular faction is the one with the loud voice.

If Ann had said, “Jews are perfected and need no additional blessing…” She would get flap for that as well.

Seems as though ADL is always on the lookout to slime a Christian notable that promotes Christ ( Mel Gibson). This is a form of oppression.

Ann spoke in charity.
 
ltravis said:
I am surprised that Ann’s response to the criticism hasn’t been brought up here yet. Check this out if you haven’t already:

newsmax.com/insidecover/Coulter_Jewish_reply/2007/10/17/41664.html

Ann may not be Catholic, but she clearly has done her homework regarding Catholic doctine and communicates Catholic concerns in her explanations, to the point of quoting the old Roman missal regarding our prayers for Jew’s salvation.

-Larry
Click to expand...
Thank you for posting this.

It should be required reading for all Catholics.

It constantly amazes me that non-Catholics such as Coulter know and understand the Catholic faith better than the majority of Catholics.

[sigh]
 
Ender said:
I saw Coulter’s interview with Deutsch where she made the comments that sparked this thread and I am utterly baffled as to what the hysteria is about. If her phrase was theologically inelegant, so what? Is there any real doubt about what she was saying - that she’d like to see all people, Jews included, become Christians? Wasn’t it pretty obvious that she considers Christianity an outgrowth of, that is, the perfection of, Judaism?

I’m at a loss. Are there people we don’t want to see come to Christ? Are we not called to perfection in Christ: *“825 … all the faithful, whatever their condition or state - though each in his own way - are called by the Lord to that perfection of sanctity by which the Father himself is perfect.” *

Frankly I am astonished that such a tempest can be brewed up in such a tiny teapot. This howling about Ann Coulter is a lot like the braying that went on about Rush Limbaugh. It’s amazing how easy it is to whip some people into a frenzy over absolutely nothing at all.

Ender
Click to expand...
What are you astonished about? She is known to behave in very unChristian ways in public. This is her persona or act if you prefer. She is unscholarly, unkind, rude and confrontational. If this had been a one-time incident, sure, fine. I could understand your reaction. But she does this regularly. Creating strife is not what I would call fruitful.

I object to your use of certain words like braying. This woman has appeared on the cover of TIME magazine. She is not an average person.

God bless,
Ed
 
God Bless All,

I saw this segment and do not understand what she said was wrong.

Teaching the faith is diffulcult and controversial. I think I read some where “brother aganist brother”

Her response was respective and well meaning and that is to lead souls to Jesus. the Son of the Father.

Please pray that all come to Christ so they may receive the Holy Spirit and do not be shy when spreading the faith
 
edwest2 said:
What are you astonished about? She is known to behave in very unChristian ways in public. This is her persona or act if you prefer. She is unscholarly, unkind, rude and confrontational. If this had been a one-time incident, sure, fine. I could understand your reaction. But she does this regularly. Creating strife is not what I would call fruitful.

I object to your use of certain words like braying. This woman has appeared on the cover of TIME magazine. She is not an average person.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
When you use the word “behave”, what … precisely … what BEHAVIOR … are you referring to?

When you use the word “unscholarly”, what … precisely … are you referring to? [Her books have nearly a thousand endnotes each. Very scholarly, I would think.]

Have you actually read what she has written … see her Web site at www.anncoulter.com
 
Speaking as a professional writer, and having read Godless by Miss Coulter, I have come to the conclusion that her job is instigator, not illuminator. Provocateur, not cooperative.

She knew what she was saying and she knew the outcome would be more publicity for her. This was a classic publicity stunt.

God bless,
Ed
 
But she is very thin and needs to sell books so she can buy food.
 
So it was a waste of prayers praying for the Jews during Mass for so many years?

We are all on a journey to perfection. Why is it bad to pray for this? Why is it bad to pray for unity with the Protestants and/or Jews?
 
Al_Masetti said:
It constantly amazes me that non-Catholics such as Coulter know and understand the Catholic faith better than the majority of Catholics.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that such a blanket statement can be sustained. It is inconceivable that Coulter is more familiar with our doctrines and dogma than the majority of Catholics (there are a lot of Catholics in the U.S. alone - some 24 million) - more familiar some Catholics? Sure. But no more than that.
 
edwest2 said:
I have come to the conclusion that her job is instigator, not illuminator. Provocateur, not cooperative.
Click to expand...
Calling her an instigator and provocateur - even if true - does not justify the attacks she has received for her comments in this instance. I found nothing provocative in them. This reminds me of the attacks on JPII’s reiteration that the Church of Christ “subsists in the Catholic Church.” I think what people object to is having someone (be it JPII or Ann Coulter) make a definitive statement that X is right and Y is wrong.
She knew what she was saying and she knew the outcome would be more publicity for her. This was a classic publicity stunt.
Click to expand...
You ignore something fundamental here: was what she said true or untrue? From a layman’s perspective (and let’s not hold her to theological precision), what was wrong with what she said? And beyond that, if she misspoke, what is there in the intent of her comments that deserves the condemnation she has received?

Ender
 
Ender said:
Calling her an instigator and provocateur - even if true - does not justify the attacks she has received for her comments in this instance. I found nothing provocative in them. This reminds me of the attacks on JPII’s reiteration that the Church of Christ “subsists in the Catholic Church.” I think what people object to is having someone (be it JPII or Ann Coulter) make a definitive statement that X is right and Y is wrong.

You ignore something fundamental here: was what she said true or untrue? From a layman’s perspective (and let’s not hold her to theological precision), what was wrong with what she said? And beyond that, if she misspoke, what is there in the intent of her comments that deserves the condemnation she has received?

Ender
Click to expand...
👍
 
Ender said:
From a layman’s perspective (and let’s not hold her to theological precision), what was wrong with what she said?
Click to expand...
But, we must hold such persons to theological precision. There isn’t anything else. If she or some other non-Catholic were to say that Catholics believe that the Eucharist symbolizes Jesus Christ, they’d be not just theologically imprecise, but entirely wrong and there’d be no glossing over that. We believe that Chist is present, Body and Blood, Spirit and Divinity in the Eucharist and nothing less. So, even she can’t get a pass on being wrong about Catholic doctrine.
 
“…theological precision…”? Ann Coulter’s reference to Christianity as being the way to perfection is renounced for its lack of “theological precision?”

I think we’ve gotten off-track here somehow.
 
Ender said:
Calling her an instigator and provocateur - even if true - does not justify the attacks she has received for her comments in this instance. I found nothing provocative in them. This reminds me of the attacks on JPII’s reiteration that the Church of Christ “subsists in the Catholic Church.” I think what people object to is having someone (be it JPII or Ann Coulter) make a definitive statement that X is right and Y is wrong.

You ignore something fundamental here: was what she said true or untrue? From a layman’s perspective (and let’s not hold her to theological precision), what was wrong with what she said? And beyond that, if she misspoke, what is there in the intent of her comments that deserves the condemnation she has received?

Ender
Click to expand...
It was a remark designed to get the reaction it received: free publicity. Read the TIME magazine article about her. The Bible clearly teaches how the right thing said at the right time yields a good response. Her remark was designed to light a fuse.

As I wrote, if this was a one-time event by someone not used to speaking in public, I might have thought differently, but she has been doing things like this for years.

God bless,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top