No need to revise the Good Friday prayer for the Jews, says leading traditionalist

[ComplineSanFran]

Right, but I still don’t get why the 2008 revision occurred. What was the reason for/point of it?

The prayer went through many revisions over the years. a will admit that the 1980 is a huge improvement over the old Latin Prayer for the Jews, which calls them perfidious - faithless, obstinate, etc. But compare it to the 1970 version, which acknowledges their own covenant with God, the covenant that was in place even before Christians came along. And then the backwards movement of the 1980 edition, which denies that the Jews have their own covenant and need to be saved through the Christian plan of salvation.

Old Latin GFPJ
Let us pray also for the faithless Jews {perfidis Judaeis}: that Almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord.
Almighty and eternal God, who dost not exclude from thy mercy even Jewish faithlessness {Judaicam perfidiam}: hear our prayers, which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy Truth, which is Christ, they may be delivered from their darkness. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.

1955 GFPJ (same text but with kneeling introduced)
Here, the same introduction and prayer are said, but kneeling was added so that the prayer conformed to the other surrounding prayers.

1960 GFPJ (same prayer, but deletes “perfidis” and “perfidiam”)
Let us pray also for the {perfidis} Jews: that almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord. Let us pray. Let us kneel. Arise.
Almighty and eternal God, who dost also not exclude from thy mercy the Jews {Judaicam perfidiam}, hear our prayers, which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy Truth, which is Christ, they may be delivered from their darkness. Through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.

1970 GFPJ (revised to exclude “perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness”)
Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. (Prayer in silence. Then the priest says
Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

2008 Supplement GFJP for those using the 1962 Latin Rites (like 1970 Novus Ordo, revised to exclude “perfidy, veiled hearts, and blindness”)
Let us also pray for the Jews: That our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men. (Let us pray. Kneel. Rise.)
Almighty and eternal God, who want that all men be saved and come to the recognition of the truth, propitiously grant that even as the fullness of the peoples enters Thy Church, all Israel be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

 

[Justin_Swanton]

It’s a group of bishops who asked that a change be made. Are they now acting on “media morality”? To whose “selective indignation” are you referring?

See here. In particular:“While we appreciate that the text avoids any derogatory language toward Jews, it’s regretful that the prayer explicitly calls for Jews to accept Christianity,” said Rabbi David Rosen, the director of inter-religious affairs for the American Jewish Committee. He said that he had hoped for a more explicit Catholic recognition of “the value of the Torah as the vehicle of salvation for the Jewish people.”
And:In Italy, the Rabbinical Assembly announced that the Pope’s gesture was “an abandonment of the very conditions for dialogue” and announced a pause in talks with the Catholic Church.
And from the Anti-Defamation League:Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, in Rome for meetings with Vatican officials, issued the following statement:

We are extremely disappointed and deeply offended that nearly 40 years after the Vatican rightly removed insulting anti-Jewish language from the Good Friday liturgy, that it would now permit Catholics to utter such hurtful and insulting words by praying for Jews to be converted. This is a theological setback in the religious life of Catholics and a body blow to Catholic-Jewish relations. It is the wrong decision at the wrong time.

It appears the Vatican has chosen to satisfy a right-wing faction in the Church that rejects change and reconciliation.
And more recently from the ADL:
In Italy, the Rabbinical Assembly announced that the Pope’s gesture was “an abandonment of the very conditions for dialogue” and announced a pause in talks with the Catholic Church. In the US, Abraham Foxman, the outspoken director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that his group was “deeply troubled and disappointed” by the prayer for conversion, and said the changes made by Pope Benedict were merely “cosmetic revisions.”
The bishops have merely jumped on the bandwagon.

 

[Genesis315]

I see no one has showed where NA contradicts the prayer

How can one read the New Testament and not think it a charitable thing to pray for a person to know Jesus? If we really believe He is the source of inestimable blessings and goodness, to me it seems antisemitic and discriminatory to pray for the conversion and salvation of everyone but the Jews and to share the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ with everyone but the Jews. We should not persecute or coerce–but we shouldn’t do that to anyone, Jews included. But the truth is not for us to “possess” and hide from others like bad fundamentalists. Exclusion is bad–we’re supposed to be inclusive, right? Indifferentism is not charitable.

 

[SWolf]

That’s what I was thinking too.

I guess we should say “Thanks for the publicity.”

Curiosity goes a long way and is a good start.

Heh. I like the way you think.

 

[gracepoole]

See here. In particular:“While we appreciate that the text avoids any derogatory language toward Jews, it’s regretful that the prayer explicitly calls for Jews to accept Christianity,” said Rabbi David Rosen, the director of inter-religious affairs for the American Jewish Committee. He said that he had hoped for a more explicit Catholic recognition of “the value of the Torah as the vehicle of salvation for the Jewish people.”
And:In Italy, the Rabbinical Assembly announced that the Pope’s gesture was “an abandonment of the very conditions for dialogue” and announced a pause in talks with the Catholic Church.
And from the Anti-Defamation League:Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, in Rome for meetings with Vatican officials, issued the following statement:

We are extremely disappointed and deeply offended that nearly 40 years after the Vatican rightly removed insulting anti-Jewish language from the Good Friday liturgy, that it would now permit Catholics to utter such hurtful and insulting words by praying for Jews to be converted. This is a theological setback in the religious life of Catholics and a body blow to Catholic-Jewish relations. It is the wrong decision at the wrong time.

It appears the Vatican has chosen to satisfy a right-wing faction in the Church that rejects change and reconciliation.
And more recently from the ADL:
In Italy, the Rabbinical Assembly announced that the Pope’s gesture was “an abandonment of the very conditions for dialogue” and announced a pause in talks with the Catholic Church. In the US, Abraham Foxman, the outspoken director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that his group was “deeply troubled and disappointed” by the prayer for conversion, and said the changes made by Pope Benedict were merely “cosmetic revisions.”
The bishops have merely jumped on the bandwagon.

These are bishops working closely with and/or responding to the Church’s Committee for Catholic-Jewish Relations. Are you claiming that these men are being duped by Jewish entities? Why is this more likely than their response being born of their close work with the aforementioned committee?

And why, exactly, is the language of this prayer superior to the one being used in the OF (which is more amenable to Jewish groups)?

 

[gracepoole]

I see no one has showed where NA contradicts the prayer

How can one read the New Testament and not think it a charitable thing to pray for a person to know Jesus? If we really believe He is the source of inestimable blessings and goodness, to me it seems antisemitic and discriminatory to pray for the conversion and salvation of everyone but the Jews and to share the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ with everyone but the Jews. We should not persecute or coerce–but we shouldn’t do that to anyone, Jews included. But the truth is not for us to “possess” and hide from others like bad fundamentalists. Exclusion is bad–we’re supposed to be inclusive, right? Indifferentism is not charitable.

I think the real question is why the prayer was changed to what’s included in the OF and then changed again for the EF in 2008. No one here (and certainly no one in the Church) is denying the purpose of the prayer – that’s a red herring. At issue is the language used in it. What makes one version’s language superior and/or preferable to another?

 

[Brendan_64]

It really does seem bizarre that we ought to consider praying for the conversion of any group of people to Christ as being something offensive. Christianity would not exist if people hadn’t specifically tried to call the Jews to convert to Christianity. We are called to make disciples of all nations, and that also includes the Jews. There is nothing offensive about that, or about admitting it. And if we actually wish to call other peoples to convert, and to pray for this, then surely we ought to be open and honest about this in the language we use?

 

[TCEL]

Roy Schoeman has a pretty remarkable conversion story, and I don’t think he would agree that Christians shouldn’t try to reach out to Jews, or share our faith with them. He felt pretty strongly about it; as strongly as the Jews in my class didn’t want to be reached out to. He’s sensitive to the tensions between the two, as well. That still doesn’t mean he thinks we shouldn’t try.

 

[JimG]

It really does seem bizarre that we ought to consider praying for the conversion of any group of people to Christ as being something offensive. Christianity would not exist if people hadn’t specifically tried to call the Jews to convert to Christianity. We are called to make disciples of all nations, and that also includes the Jews. There is nothing offensive about that, or about admitting it. And if we actually wish to call other peoples to convert, and to pray for this, then surely we ought to be open and honest about this in the language we use?

I agree. Jesus said “I am the way, and the truth, and the life,” and he preached almost exclusively to Jews. Are we now to exclude Jews from evangelization?

 

[gracepoole]

It really does seem bizarre that we ought to consider praying for the conversion of any group of people to Christ as being something offensive. Christianity would not exist if people hadn’t specifically tried to call the Jews to convert to Christianity. We are called to make disciples of all nations, and that also includes the Jews. There is nothing offensive about that, or about admitting it. And if we actually wish to call other peoples to convert, and to pray for this, then surely we ought to be open and honest about this in the language we use?

“Let us also pray for the Jews: that our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Saviour of all men.”

“Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.”

Please explain why one version is inferior to the other and why the latter version is evidence that Christians are ashamed to desire conversion for non-Christians.

 

[Brendan_64]

“Let us also pray for the Jews: that our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Saviour of all men.”

“Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.”

Please explain why one version is inferior to the other and why the latter version is evidence that Christians are ashamed to desire conversion for non-Christians.

Only one version actually calls for the conversion of the Jews to follow Christ as their saviour.

 

[gracepoole]

“Let us also pray for the Jews: that our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Saviour of all men.”

“Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant.”

Please explain why one version is inferior to the other and why the latter version is evidence that Christians are ashamed to desire conversion for non-Christians.

Only one version actually calls for the conversion of the Jews to follow Christ as their saviour.

So the change in language was a mistake, then? Should the pre-1955 prayer (which included the word “faithless”) have been kept instead? Are those attending the OF and using the updated version somehow offended by conversion, then? Why would the Church permit such language if this is the outcome?

“‘The 1970 prayer which is now used throughout the Church is basically a prayer that the Jewish people would continue to grow in the love of God’s name and in faithfulness of his Covenant, a Covenant which – as St John Paul II made clear in 1980 – has not been revoked.’”

The Church does not deny the option and preference for conversion by acknowledging that the covenant between the Jews and God has not been abrogated. The older versions of this prayer lent themselves to supersessionist thinking, which has had some extremely dangerous practical consequences. Acknowledging the special relationship between God and the Jewish people seems a far better and more appropriate option.

 

[StGerardMajella]

There are many books on the history of Catholics and Jews, and I don’t want to recount them all. But, for the Jews, they have a long memory. Too many deaths at the hand of the Church.

Good works and hospitals don’t even the score, I’m afraid. This is a black mark and it needs healing.

Again, both houses are not without sin. You simply cannot make these negative accusations against the Church and simply ignore the innumerable positive attributes of the Church utilized to the benefit of all mankind, including our Jewish brethren.

This, in the form of prayers, serving the poor, homeless, and hungry, and spreading of the Gospel to all corners of the Earth, among countless others. Prison ministries, refugee settlements, educating the downtrodden, feeding the hungry, etc.

We could spend hours talking about all of the good the Church has done for many centuries.

You can make equally false and negative accusations against any organization, including any group of people, faith, or ethnicity. Engaging in selective bias is not a persuasive argument. It would be considered cruel and indecent to create a similar litany of offenses by our Jewish brethren over the centuries.

Insofar as our Jewish brethren are concerned regarding this particular prayer, I am sure the Church would be happy to remove the prayer if the rabbis would be so kind as to remove their daily prayers calling Christians slanderous heretics that should be “smashed, cast down, and downtrodden”:

“And for slanderers, let there be no hope; and may all wickedness perish in an instant; and may all Your enemies be cut down speedily. May You speedily uproot, smash, cast down and humble the wanton sinners (i.e., Christians) – speedily in our days. Blessed are You, Lord, Who breaks enemies and humbles wanton sinners.” (Shemonei Esrei prayer, “Against Heretics”, Art Scroll Siddur translation)

This prayer noted above is said every single day by devout Orthodox Jews.

Our Jewish brethren can also start to show good faith by removing the many passages in their prayer books labeling Christians as the branch of Red Esau, idolaters, and the like.

The can remove the prayer passages that condemn our Catholic monasteries when they housed Jewish children to protect the children from the Nazis during WW II.

They can stop the rampant suggestions that Christians should be beheaded for engaging in idolatry (in the form of Christ worship) for failing to follow the “Noahide Laws”.

I could continue, but you get the picture.

The virulent anti-Christian sentiment within certain strains of Judaism are quite evident. As I stated earlier, if you are going to accuse Holy Mother Church of an odious prayer - said by a tiny minority of traditional Catholics only once a year, we need some level-setting on the other side of the coin for comparison. Our accusers are hardly innocent under similar investigation of their prayers on the other side of the fence.

 

[gracepoole]

Again, both houses are not without sin. You simply cannot make these negative accusations against the Church and simply ignore the innumerable positive attributes of the Church utilized to the benefit of all mankind, including our Jewish brethren.

This, in the form of prayers, serving the poor, homeless, and hungry, and spreading of the Gospel to all corners of the Earth, among countless others. Prison ministries, refugee settlements, educating the downtrodden, feeding the hungry, etc.

We could spend hours talking about all of the good the Church has done for many centuries.

You can make equally false and negative accusations against any organization, including any group of people, faith, or ethnicity. Engaging in selective bias is not a persuasive argument. It would be considered cruel and indecent to create a similar litany of offenses by our Jewish brethren over the centuries.

Insofar as our Jewish brethren are concerned regarding this particular prayer, I am sure the Church would be happy to remove the prayer if the rabbis would be so kind as to remove their daily prayers calling Christians slanderous heretics that should be “smashed, cast down, and downtrodden”:

“And for slanderers, let there be no hope; and may all wickedness perish in an instant; and may all Your enemies be cut down speedily. May You speedily uproot, smash, cast down and humble the wanton sinners (i.e., Christians) – speedily in our days. Blessed are You, Lord, Who breaks enemies and humbles wanton sinners.” (Shemonei Esrei prayer, “Against Heretics”, Art Scroll Siddur translation)

This prayer noted above is said every single day by devout Orthodox Jews.

Our Jewish brethren can also start to show good faith by removing the many passages in their prayer books labeling Christians as the branch of Red Esau, idolaters, and the like.

The can remove the prayer passages that condemn our Catholic monasteries when they housed Jewish children to protect the children from the Nazis during WW II.

They can stop the rampant suggestions that Christians should be beheaded for engaging in idolatry (in the form of Christ worship) for failing to follow the “Noahide Laws”.

I could continue, but you get the picture.

The virulent anti-Christian sentiment within certain strains of Judaism are quite evident. As I stated earlier, if you are going to accuse Holy Mother Church of an odious prayer - said by a tiny minority of traditional Catholics only once a year, we need some level-setting on the other side of the coin for comparison. Our accusers are hardly innocent under similar investigation of their prayers on the other side of the fence.

This all seems like a lengthy tu quoque argument.

 

[StGerardMajella]

This all seems like a lengthy tu quoque argument.

It takes a lot of chutzpah to arrogantly defame the prayers of the Church without looking in the mirror.

The Good Friday prayer accusation is nothing short of patently ridiculous, let alone the height of arrogance and hypocrisy.

While Christians are being beheaded in the Middle East, this is the least relevant topic for discussion. Satan is having a field day attacking the Church.

 

[Corki]

So the change in language was a mistake, then? Should the pre-1955 prayer (which included the word “faithless”) have been kept instead? Are those attending the OF and using the updated version somehow offended by conversion, then? Why would the Church permit such language if this is the outcome?

“‘The 1970 prayer which is now used throughout the Church is basically a prayer that the Jewish people would continue to grow in the love of God’s name and in faithfulness of his Covenant, a Covenant which – as St John Paul II made clear in 1980 – has not been revoked.’”

The Church does not deny the option and preference for conversion by acknowledging that the covenant between the Jews and God has not been abrogated. The older versions of this prayer lent themselves to supersessionist thinking, which has had some extremely dangerous practical consequences. Acknowledging the special relationship between God and the Jewish people seems a far better and more appropriate option.

The 1970 prayer was the prayer in the Roman Missal for the “new” form of the Mass (OF). Prior to that, the 1960 version was used in the “old” Mass:

“Let us pray also for the Jews: that almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord.”

There was no new missal published for the EF after 1970 until Summorum Pontificum.

After the Motu Propio in 2007, the prayer was revised in the EF to what we have now, changing the wording about “veil” to the more positive “illuminate”.

 

[gracepoole]

The 1970 prayer was the prayer in the Roman Missal for the “new” form of the Mass (OF). Prior to that, the 1960 version was used in the “old” Mass:

“Let us pray also for the Jews: that almighty God may remove the veil from their hearts; so that they too may acknowledge Jesus Christ our Lord.”

There was no new missal published for the EF after 1970 until Summorum Pontificum.

After the Motu Propio in 2007, the prayer was revised in the EF to what we have now, changing the wording about “veil” to the more positive “illuminate”.

Yes…? I’m sorry if it seemed that I contradicted any of this in some way, which was not my intention. All of this is accurate. It does not, however, explain why one version’s language is acceptable in the OF but it is not acceptable in the EF. It does not explain why some find the OF version’s language inferior.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Again, both houses are not without sin. You simply cannot make these negative accusations against the Church and simply ignore the innumerable positive attributes of the Church utilized to the benefit of all mankind, including our Jewish brethren.
.

No one is trying to make judgements on the entire Church based on one aspect of their history with the Jews. We are looking specifically at one prayer which is causing problems between the two faith communities. It exemplifies the reason for some of the strife between the two communities.

What the Church has done to the Jewish community needs healing. N.A. has helped immensely but it took a long time in the making. This one prayer sets things back and Rabbis are expressing that reality.

Also, since the Roman Catholic Church has been the perpetrator in the majority of these horrendous acts against the Jews, I think it behooves the Church to be a bit penitential here.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Yes…? I’m sorry if it seemed that I contradicted any of this in some way, which was not my intention. All of this is accurate. It does not, however, explain why one version’s language is acceptable in the OF but it is not acceptable in the EF. It does not explain why some find the OF version’s language inferior.

Gracepoole, it is a good question (the first one about OF vs EF) and I don’t have a clue what the answer is. It might be good to find some people on the Committee and ask.

 

[StGerardMajella]

Also, since the Roman Catholic Church has been the perpetrator in the majority of these horrendous acts against the Jews, I think it behooves the Church to be a bit penitential here.

Are you suggesting somehow that there have not been any “horrendous” acts in the other direction against Catholicism? I surely hope you jest.

Because certainly we could recite not a few crimes, abominations, and “horrendous acts” perpetrated against the Church by its enemies, whether those enemies were Jewish or any other faith, creed, or political stripe.

As I noted earlier, it would be ignoble to run down a litany of “horrendous acts” against any religious faith, whether it be Jewish, Catholic, or any other. In a Catholic forum, no less, we need not be disdainful of our past. The Church has brought enormous benefits to all of mankind.

To somehow suggest that the Church is somehow villainous in its struggles with one particular faith is patently absurd. For every ignoble “horrendous” act you could possibly recite throughout Church history, we could name thousands upon thousands of positive contributions the Church has brought to the table as a counter-argument.

We are looking specifically at one prayer which is causing problems between the two faith communities. It exemplifies the reason for some of the strife between the two communities.

Why would we change one single prayer said annually by a small minority of Catholics in the Extraordinary form of the Mass, when daily the traditional Orthodox Jewish faith prays that Christians should be cut down, smashed, and obliterated? Do tell. Because the hypocrisy, arrogance, and hubris of such an accusation is beyond the pale.

Have you read what the Jewish Sage, the revered Maimonides, had to say about Catholicism? Maimonides will give you a good idea as to what the leading Jewish leaders have historically thought about us Catholics. Certainly, one Sage does not speak for all - Understood. But why is such a hateful speech so revered, even today?

Also, since the Roman Catholic Church has been the perpetrator in the majority of these horrendous acts against the Jews, I think it behooves the Church to be a bit penitential here.

Good grief. No bias there. Be wise as serpents, my friend.

The only reason why the enemies of the Church want this prayer removed is that they don’t believe that Jesus is the Christ. For this reason, they hate the Church, and will seek any mechanism available to attack and destroy it. If they were truly interested in better relations, they would start with removing their own prayers that defame the Church.

And, the prayer is hardly offensive. It asks for conversion. That sounds a lot better than smashing and obliterating Christians prayed daily by our counterparts.