Sungenis Back at Jewish Stuff Again

  • Thread starter Thread starter Augustine22
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MrS

“I hope that someday someone will have reason to express your honest thoughts about me.” was just enigmatic enough and I’m just curious enough to ask you what you meant by that.

Donna
I think the comment was a compliment - an honest compliment. Perhaps someday someone will be as complimentary to me - if I deserve it.

It was honest, and Sungenis deserves an honest compliment, and not the tripe he is getting - again - from the OP.

I probably know as much as he forgets in a day, And I certainly know that the only way to the Father is through Jesus Christ. So I am fortunate enough to be Catholic only if I live as one… including calling to account error where I see it - even in two sons who are Baptist.:mad:

Thank you for asking me what I meant… and not assuming the worst or whatever for one comment among nearly 4,000posts of mine
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_3_11.gif

.

smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb095&pp=ZN
 
But, Ghosty:

That is Sungenis point “(he actually argues that the Catholic Church IS the Covenant of Israel in its complete form, not seperate, and not replacing).”

Read: Hebrews 10:8-9 says: “…these are offered according to the law, then he added, ‘Lo, I have come to do thy will.’ He abolishes the first in order to establish the second.” The word “abolish” is from the Greek “anaireo,” which also means “to abrogate,” or even “to kill.”

That’s the rub. The New Covenant is exactly that a New Covenant. The Old Covenant is passed away, gone, kaput and is REPLACED.

Donna
I’m afraid your understanding requires some scriptural adjustment. Read Romans 11, the whole chapter. Most especially take note of verse 29.

God did not make a new tree, he grafted branches into the old one after taking down natural branches. God does not revoke His call or gifts.

Sungenis’ complaint against the book was that it advocated the theory of “Two Covenants”, which is utterly false, and this is apparent from even a cursory examination of the book. There is one Covenant, one Israel, and it is the Catholic Church.

Peace and God bless!
 
God did not make a new tree, he grafted branches into the old one after taking down natural branches. God does not revoke His call or gifts.

Peace and God bless!
The branches require the tree for survival (salvation), not the other way aroung or both ways. The New Covenant fulfills the OT, yes. But if a misunderstanding occurs and one is led to believe that one can be fulfilled by remaining in the OT, then we have a problem. It is true that a gift of God is a gift… but our cooperation is required… under His terms.

.
 
The problem is that Schoeman doesn’t believe what Sungenis whacks him for. He doesn’t believe that Jews have their own covenant, that there are two different ones. Thats already been reasonably proven. Sungenis didn’t even check with him until a long time after he had publcily called him a nefarious heretic, hyper-Judiazer.

When did he finally try to check with Schoeman? After www.sungenisandthejews.com came out.

But his articles and q-a’s attacking Schoeman are still there. No changes.

He’s awfully sensitive (and so are some of the people here) when he’s criticized. But he’s not so worried about anyone else.

catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/church/schoeman-moss.htm

catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/judaizers.htm

catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/church/schoeman-moss.htm

catholicintl.com/qa/2006/qa-mar-06.htm#Question%2018 (Question 18)

catholicintl.com/catholicissues/b16convert.htm
 
I’m not sure I understand what the fuss is about over Robert Sungenis’ articles as they relate to the Jewish people…I’ll have to read through some. At a glance, I thought his opposition had to do more with Zionism than with the Jewish people per se. …Will someone tell me what’s at issue here? I’ve been following the 911 Truth Movement and seriously considering (for the first time in my life, thanks to my children’s openess to ‘hearing the other side of the story’) the Arab’s complaints against Israel’s and the United States’ policies in the Middle East.
jmt
I think the passage above, especially where bolded, shows how scary certain groups in this country are and where certain types of ideology lead.

The idea that someone can read quotes like Sungenis’ and come away with the idea that he only has a problem with Zionism shows a fundamental disconnect from reality

Furthermore that someone isn’t embarassed to believe 911 conspiracy theories AND SHOWING SYMPATHY for Arab treatment of Israel and entertaining the Arab excuse for their behavior because of Israeli and US policies is foul to the extreme.

For the sake of clarity;

It is never okay to target civilians for the sake of targetting civilians. Not even if your enemy targets civilians as a matter of policy. If this were in fact the policy of the state of Israel, there wouldn’t be an arab left in that region. The bottom line is the muslim countries surrounding Israel collectively feel jews are relatives of pigs and monkeys (just listen to Friday sermon translated into english, its a statement that is often repeated).

Furthermore, if we took the absolute worst the Israelis were ever accused of doing by these muslims at face value (which only nazis and other antisemites do), they pale in comparison to what Muslims do to themselves and other people. Hafez Asad wipes an entire city off the map killing over 10,000 people, not a peep from the same muslims appealing to anti-semites for sympathy at their “plight”. Suhartos death toll is over 100k. Dafur. The Kurds (killed by the Turks, Syrians, Iranians and Iraqis). The Shiites and Sunis killing themselves by the 10s of thousands in Iraq today. The list goes on. But what is amazing is the violence committed by muslims to others does not evoke the same collective hatred of a country or condemnation at a national ideology (zionism) that far LESS worse treatment evokes against the Jews of Israel. Nor does mass murder by muslims against other muslims, which PALES BY FAR in comparison to the worst characterizatins of Israeli “atrocities” against muslims, create anything approaching the level of outcry directed towards Israel.

There is a reason people call that anti-semitism, and it is plain as the antisemitism of Hitler to those not blinded by their sympathy towards jew-hatred. Its antisemitism because only the Jews of Israel face the swift and seemingly universal condemnation that is far more deserving of their so called victims around the world.

It is a reflexive, hypocritical bias that cannot be explained any other way. Unless of course you can come up with another explanation more logical as to why one would find sympathy for Israel’s “victims” and even hint that muslim war crimes might be justified or “understandable” due to US and Israeli policy.

Sick
 
The branches require the tree for survival (salvation), not the other way aroung or both ways. The New Covenant fulfills the OT, yes. But if a misunderstanding occurs and one is led to believe that one can be fulfilled by remaining in the OT, then we have a problem. It is true that a gift of God is a gift… but our cooperation is required… under His terms.

.
Nobody that Sungenis has attacked is claiming this, however. Especially not Schoeman, who has explicitely said that there is one Covenant, and it’s the Catholic Faith. He didn’t say anything about keeping the halakah or any such nonsense.

His real argument? Every Jew should become Catholic because only in the Catholic Faith is Judaism truly fulfilled, and only through the Mass can any Jew be truly satisfied. That’s the exact opposite of what he’s being accused of saying.

Peace and God bless!
 
Ghosty,

What did you think of what Sungenis had to say here? Honestly.

Sungenis: “Suffice it to say, Mr. Schoeman is on a mission…This is not about “ethnic” acceptance of Jews, but about Schoeman’s attempt to revise Catholic theology for the sake of the Jews.”

here?

Sungenis: “Then, by a strange twist on predictive prophecy never before seen, Schoeman posits that the “abomination” spoken of by Daniel occurs when these cultic sacrifices are interrupted by the Antichrist. In other words, because the re-institution of Temple worship, as it was practiced in the Old Testament, is, according to Schoeman, from divine favor upon the Jews, anyone who would attempt to stop it is of the Antichrist! Suffice it to say, this is the ultimate Judaizing of the Catholic Church – Temple worship under the auspices of Catholicism.”

here?

Sungenis: “That these Temple sacrifices necessitate the formal return of Judaism (or perhaps some type of Judaistic-Catholic hybrid) as the pinnacle of divine favor doesn’t seem to bother Schoeman in the least.”

and here?

Sungenis: “In reality, Schoeman’s attempt to resurrect Old Covenant sacrifices and theocratic worship is one of the most audacious pieces of private interpretation ever seen in the history of Christianity.”

They are answered at

sungenisandthejews.com/Converts_and_Conclusion.html

But Id like to know what you think. Was Sungenis telling the truth about what Schoeman writes or not? Is it a fair criticism in your opinion or not?
 
Sungenis: “Suffice it to say, Mr. Schoeman is on a mission…This is not about “ethnic” acceptance of Jews, but about Schoeman’s attempt to revise Catholic theology for the sake of the Jews.”
I certainly never got this impression from Schoeman’s book at all. In fact all he really says is that Catholicism is post-Messianic Judaism, and that the Jewish people as a bloodline, in particular the ones outside of it, will experience some kind of mass conversion soon before “the End” after the fullness of Gentiles come in, and that they have a unique place in Catholic history.

The first part is not at all new, but is pretty standard within Catholic theology going way back, that the Church is the New Israel. The second part is a bit of recent speculation, but not particularily controversial. Then-Cardinal Ratzinger actually put forward the same basic view in some of his writings, also refering to Romans 11.
Sungenis: “Then, by a strange twist on predictive prophecy never before seen, Schoeman posits that the “abomination” spoken of by Daniel occurs when these cultic sacrifices are interrupted by the Antichrist. In other words, because the re-institution of Temple worship, as it was practiced in the Old Testament, is, according to Schoeman, from divine favor upon the Jews, anyone who would attempt to stop it is of the Antichrist! Suffice it to say, this is the ultimate Judaizing of the Catholic Church – Temple worship under the auspices of Catholicism.”
I honestly don’t recall what Sungenis is talking about here. Unfortunately I don’t have the book in front of me, but this contradicts one of Schoeman’s main details from the book, and one of the most powerful, namely the “Miracle of the Scarlett Thread” recorded in the Talmud. In brief, every year at Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement for all the people, a red thread was tied around a curtain in the Temple. If the thread turned white after the Atonement Sacrifice was performed by the High Priest, then the people knew their sins had been forgiven. If it did not, then they knew they had not. It happened intermittenly from the time of its institution, some years not working, some years working, but the Talmud records the unprecedented fact that for 40 years straight before the destruction of the Temple it never changed color. The interesting point for Catholics is that the Temple was destroyed circa 70 A.D., 40 years after the death of Christ. Schoeman extrapolates from this that the thread stopped changing because the Temple Sacrifice was no longer effective, and had lost its “sacramental” character once the True Sacrifice had been made. Since the Temple sacrifice was designed to point to Christ, after Christ it had no mystical function and the miracles ceased.

Such an interpretation of events would seem to preclude what Sungenis is putting forward here, but since I don’t have the book with me any longer (I gave it to a Jewish friend wants to become Catholic) I can’t check it precisely. I’ll see if I can find someone at my parish with a copy and I’ll check on this point.
Sungenis: “That these Temple sacrifices necessitate the formal return of Judaism (or perhaps some type of Judaistic-Catholic hybrid) as the pinnacle of divine favor doesn’t seem to bother Schoeman in the least.”
Here I believe Sungenis is confusing Schoeman’s own view with the view of Orthodox Jews, who DO look forward to the return of the Temple as part of the Messianic promise. It’s possible that this is also the case with the previous point, as Schoeman frequently reports the Jewish understandings of matters in his book to compare and contrast them with the Catholic ones.
Sungenis: “In reality, Schoeman’s attempt to resurrect Old Covenant sacrifices and theocratic worship is one of the most audacious pieces of private interpretation ever seen in the history of Christianity.”
This is just a hack job, IMO, as I seem to recall that Schoeman is actually not among those who favor even cultural Jewish practices within a Catholic context. He’s not opposed to them per se, just that he feels that the Catholic Church itself is fulfilment of the Jewish Faith and culture, and that beyond personal cultural ties there’s not really a big place for things like “Catholic Seders” and such. His view is that the Catholic Church is the most Jewish thing in the world today, precisely because it is the fruit of God’s Messianic work that centered in the Jewish people and grew out of the Faith He gave to them.

I recommend salvationisfromthejews.com/ to get an understanding of his real perspective on the matter, and I’ll try to find a copy of the book.

Peace and God bless!
 
One last thing I would point out is that it was largely the Jewish Catholic community that railed against the “Covenant and Mission” statement by the USCCB, and pushed to have it removed or at least clarified. Many felt that it was doing exactly what Sungenis complains of, and they were determined that such a move was anti-Christian and anti-Jewish. Anti-Christian for obvious reasons, but anti-Jewish because it advocated keeping Jews out of their own “destiny” inherited from Abraham, namely the Catholic Church and Jesus the Messiah. The idea that there are “two functional Covenants” is actually extremely unpopular among Christian Jews, Catholic and not, because it calls into question their own devotion, and puts a lie to the very evangelical mission of the Apostles and the Church.

Peace and God bless!
 
For anyone interested, on Roy Schoeman’s website where he gives links to recordings of his talks, there is a talk about “The Role of the Jews in Salvation” (it’s the third talk listed in the second section called Talks/Teachings) in which Roy Schoeman discusses some of the things brought up here, and also unequivocally calls the “Dual-Covenant Theory” a heresy. He also mentions how he wrote his book largely in response to such non-sense. I recommend people check out that talk, and the others linked on the page.

I also want to add that I’m not particularily interested in Sungenis beyond this issue, and even then only as it relates to Jewish Catholics who are being maligned and misrepresented, such as Moss and Schoeman. Sungenis was always a side-line figure for me, my only exposure to him being the geocentrism debate, and had it not been for his attacks of the work of Schoeman that I discovered only because I was looking for reviews of the book, I wouldn’t even be pursuing this conversation. I’m not interested in the wider issue of Sungenis’ views on Jews; that is between him and God. I realize many people have been helped by Sungenis, and he deserves credit for that. I can only speak about what I know of him, which is related to this topic only, and I don’t presume to judge him beyond his behavior in this issue.

Peace and God bless!
 
Thanks, Ghosty. I came across a couple of things that really hit me from Schoeman, too–

Schoeman – “The Jews brought Christ to the Gentiles. Isn’t it time to return the favor?” “No Christian can afford to allow the Holocaust to stand in the way of evangelizing the Jews.”

Schoeman– “One can ask, why did God choose the Jews? …God always seems to choose the weakest and most unworthy for His special graces, precisely so that the whole world knows that what’s happening is coming from God and doesn’t belong to the people themselves. There are lots of examples of this. For example, there is St. Bernadette, a virtually illiterate peasant girl, receiving the apparition of Our Lady of Lourdes. And there was Jesus’ response to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, chosen to receive the Sacred Heart apparitions. When Jesus revealed Himself, she asked Him, “Why me, why did you choose me?” He replied was, “Oh that’s very simple, if I could have found anyone else smaller and more worthless than you, I would have chosen her instead.”
In fact, God makes it explicit in the Old Testament that this is why He chose the Jews. In Ezekiel 16, we read:
“Thus says the Lord God to Jerusalem, your origin and your birth are of the land of the Canaanites, your father was an Amorite, your mother a Hittite. On the day you were born, your naval string was not cut, nor were you washed with water to cleanse you nor rubbed with salt nor swathed with bands. … And when I passed you by, and saw you weltering in your blood, I said to you in your blood, live! … Then I bathed you with water and washed off your blood, and anointed you with oil. I clothed you with embroidered cloth and shod you with leather. I swathed you with fine linen and covered you with silk … And your renown went forth among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect thru the splendor which I had bestowed upon you, says the Lord God.”
Here God Himself explicitly says that He chose the Jewish people precisely because they were the most insignificant and worthless, comparing them to an infant who is cast aside at birth without even the blood of the afterbirth being washed off.”

But Sungenis rips him as a nefarious/pernicious heretic, a hyperjudiazer whose more worried about Jews than his Catholic faith.

I think Jacob Michaels was right. To Sungenis, you can’t trust a Jewish person, even if hes Catholic.

This looks pretty hard to swallow when you remember the things that Sungenis has written in the past about the Pope. Even Sungenis admits he was way out of line—at least NOW, anyway. But he was so sure he was right back then when he kept doing it, wasn’t he, going after people who disagreed with him?

And he started attacking Schoeman before he even read is book and said he wasn’t being honest.

There’s a good part at Robert Sungenis and the Jews about Jewish-Catholics I want to quote–

Forest–"“It seems to me that Schoeman and Moss remain humbly open to thoughtful discussion and criticism and have continually, explicitly expressed their docile obedience to the teaching of the Church and the hierarchy. These are not subversive radicals or conspirators by any stretch of the imagination and I see no legitimate reason to treat them as such. In contrast to certain critics, neither of these men has publicly exhibited what might reasonably be interpreted as a spirit of rebellion against the hierarchy or the Pope.
In all candor, I can understand both Schoeman’s and Moss’s reluctance (or anyone else’s for that matter) to openly engage individuals in debate or discussion who so readily and regularly display such a lack of charity and fairness. This is unfortunate, really, because when approached in a spirit of authentic charity, such endeavors may well serve the cause of truth.”
 
I found Mr. Shoeman’s book today and I’m looking forward to reading it. At this point I only read the preface and already he has been clear that Judaism is wrong, but he said it in a nice way. 🙂

And I like what he said here “The Jews brought Christ to the Gentiles isn’t it time to return the favor?” That’s really great! 👍

Maybe I’ll give this to my Jewish friends. Please say a prayer for them. We’ve talked about Jesus and the Church before but I’ve never gone so far as to give them a book.

But I think they would be okay with that.

Pray for my courage, too, please!

:o
 
Brenda–

I will definately pray for you and for your friends. Don’t be to worried, if their good friends then they’ll probably be just fine. 🙂 Let me know how you do.

Our Jewish friends have come to Mass with us, believe it or not. They were very respectful and thought the Mass was beautiful. I hope to have them come with us this Christmas.

I’ve gone to their house for passover and it was really interesting. I’ve got to say that I don’t like gefilte fish though. What IS that stuff? Ha! We even got to talking about the meaning of the passover for Catholics and seeing in it the Mass. No one freaked out at all.

I don’t think I’d just blurt that out to a Jewish person I didn’t know very well of course but it wasn’t very hard for us because we care about eachother and know each other.

That’s a very big part of why this stuff with Sungenis bothers me so much. These are my friends, not JEWS to me and my family, like their aliens or something. Their real. And it really burns to see how many people don’t get it and think theres no problem saying this stuff. Its like they don’t care. Maybe they don’t have any Jewish friends-- I don’t know. But I feel those shots like their fired straight at me, too because their at my friends.

I’m probably rambling, so good luck to you, Brenda!
 
Thank you to all who participated in this discussion.
This thread is now closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top