Traditions

[JimG]

So you’re asking why we aren’t all still Jewish?

Well, that was one of the first controversies in the Church. Do gentile believers in Jesus have to observe the Jewish traditions or not? It was decided not. And helped along by the fact that Christians were eventually not allowed to worship anymore in Jewish synagogues.

You might want to read something by or about a Jewish convert to Catholicism, such as Rosalind Moss.

 

[Lillith]

elle:

Ah, contrare! First Christians were JEWISH!! Out celebrating Shavout when Holy Spirit came.

Acts 10, I believe, specifically points to a Jewish custom called Havdalah, that they were definitely out keeping. Its a ceremony to mark the end of Sabbath.

But Elle…Theolossians is a letter written by Paul…who was not there at the time that the apostles…(who were merely hiding out of fear)…received the holy spirit…Remember Paul…the persecuter of Christians?

Besides…Jesus came to Fulfill Judaism. Jesus was foretold in the Old testament and I am A Catholic Jew!

 

[elle]

JimG:

So you’re asking why we aren’t all still Jewish?

Well, that was one of the first controviersies in the Church. Do gentile believers in Jesus have to observe the Jewish traditions or not? It was decided not.

Well, now are you sure about that,Jim? I believe that the word says to abstain from a few big NO-NOs, like eating things sacrificed to idols for starters. But, the admonition finishes up by stating something to the effect that we gentiles could learn the rest along the way, because after all, the Torah,or the Law, is taught in synogogue every Sabbath.

But, no, I’m actually not asking anything. I’m saying, "JESUS DID NOT COME TO DO AWAY WITH THE JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID AWAY WITH JEWISH TRADITIONS. EARLY BELIEVERS, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, HELD JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MADE UP THEIR OWN TRADITIONS, WHICH THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IMPOSES THOSE TRADITIONS ON ITS FOLLOWERS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE MODERN DAY PHARISEES BY ADVOCATING TRADITIONS THAT WERE NOT ESTABLISHED BY GOD. "

So, no, I have no question about that. No question, just an invite from Ryan to discuss. do you have a question?

 

[Ann_Cheryl]

elle:

Jesus could not have performed a confirmation.

…well, I say that. But, I mean, by definition, a sacrament given to those who are baptized, and have received the Holy Spirit. Well, the Holy Spirit was given AFTER He left.

…so along those lines of reasoning, He would not have done this. May be faulty reasoning, I know.

John
Chapter 20

22 15 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

 

[Lillith]

elle:

Well, now are you sure about that,Jim? I believe that the word says to abstain from a few big NO-NOs, like eating things sacrificed to idols for starters. But, the admonition finishes up by stating something to the effect that we gentiles could learn the rest along the way, because after all, the Torah,or the Law, is taught in synogogue every Sabbath.

But, no, I’m actually not asking anything. I’m saying, "JESUS DID NOT COME TO DO AWAY WITH THE JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID AWAY WITH JEWISH TRADITIONS. EARLY BELIEVERS, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, HELD JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MADE UP THEIR OWN TRADITIONS, WHICH THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IMPOSES THOSE TRADITIONS ON ITS FOLLOWERS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE MODERN DAY PHARISEES BY ADVOCATING TRADITIONS THAT WERE NOT ESTABLISHED BY GOD. "

So, no, I have no question about that. No question, just an invite from Ryan to discuss. do you have a question?

Gosh…where the heck is Ryan?

 

[TeriGator]

elle:

I don’t have any questions about the traditions Paul spoke of. How about, observing the feasts, shabbat, mikveh, havdeleh.

Since Christ made all things anew, there was no longer need to observe the ancient rituals. Those were for the Old Covenant, the sacraments and feasts of the Church pertain to the New Covenant.

I’m not saying that Christ came to totally abrogate the old law. He himself said that is not the case. What he did was to transform the old into the new. You do not put new wine into old wineskins, after all.

 

[Ann_Cheryl]

But, no, I’m actually not asking anything. I’m saying, "JESUS DID NOT COME TO DO AWAY WITH THE JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID AWAY WITH JEWISH TRADITIONS. EARLY BELIEVERS, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, HELD JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MADE UP THEIR OWN TRADITIONS, WHICH THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IMPOSES THOSE TRADITIONS ON ITS FOLLOWERS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE MODERN DAY PHARISEES BY ADVOCATING TRADITIONS THAT WERE NOT ESTABLISHED BY GOD. "

What traditions are you referring to? Be specific.

 

[Ann_Cheryl]

So, why not celebrate Passover every year? Instead of changing it up.

Who do you believe changed it? We follow what Jesus said to do.

Then He took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my Body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of Me.”

 

[MistyF]

Christians were not required to follow Jewish tradition after Christ. Because many Christians were Jews many of them followed Jewish cultural tradition. There was nothing wrong with that. But it wasn’t required.

Why do you believe in the bible? How do you know that the books in the bible are all inspired? How do you know there aren’t other books that are supposed to be in there?

After you answer those questions for yourself, it may be that you’ll realize that people believe the bible is inspired the way it is, because of oral tradition.

But, the next question is - who put the books of the bible together to form the bible?

 

[rwoehmke]

elle:

Where’s that?

Mary is called the New Eve because when Jesus was hanging on the cross the following event took place."[John 19:26-27] When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. it has long been a Catholic Tradition that in doing this Jesus gave Mary to all the human race as their mother, hence the title the “New Eve”. Jesus didn’t just tell the disciple, "hey bud, take care of Mom for me. He said from now on she is your mother. Capeche? Incidently all of the Gospels and much of the Old Testament are part of the oral tradition that was written down and then defined at about 370 AD by the Catholic Bishops in Council as constituting the “Bible.” This action was reconfirmed several times down through the centuries. I think the last time at the Council of Trent held at Trento in Norteastern Italy

By the way I notice a lot of discussion here on the seven sacraments. Did you know that in the Catholic Faith we believe that in each sacrament we have a personal encounter with the living resurrected Christ who welcomes us into a deepening of our sharing in the intimate love relationship that the persons of the trinity have for each other. The outward signs bread, wine, water, oil etc. are used to make this spiritual event also a physical one obvious to our feeble human senses.

 

[Lillith]

Elle…I’m Glad you’re here, and nice to meet you. I wonder…have you ever been to a Jewish Temple, or a Catholic Mass? The similarities are Very striking indeed.

Anyway…I got to go to bed…children wake up at the crack of dawn…they haven’t learned the benefit of sleep yet…

Please Browse around the catholic answers board…they can answer your questions better than Me for sure!

God Bless and good night
Lilly

 

[rwoehmke]

elle:

Well, now are you sure about that,Jim? I believe that the word says to abstain from a few big NO-NOs, like eating things sacrificed to idols for starters. But, the admonition finishes up by stating something to the effect that we gentiles could learn the rest along the way, because after all, the Torah,or the Law, is taught in synogogue every Sabbath.

But, no, I’m actually not asking anything. I’m saying, "JESUS DID NOT COME TO DO AWAY WITH THE JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID AWAY WITH JEWISH TRADITIONS. EARLY BELIEVERS, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, HELD JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MADE UP THEIR OWN TRADITIONS, WHICH THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IMPOSES THOSE TRADITIONS ON ITS FOLLOWERS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE MODERN DAY PHARISEES BY ADVOCATING TRADITIONS THAT WERE NOT ESTABLISHED BY GOD. "

So, no, I have no question about that. No question, just an invite from Ryan to discuss. do you have a question?

Read the Acts of the Apostles and Pauls letters. Do you believe they are the inspired word of God? Paul was inaction by about 40 AD and was certainly one of the early Christians. As a matter of fact it was Paul who decided that the old Jewish dietary and temple laws did not apply to the gentile converts to Christianity. Paul being a pharisee believed initially that one was saved by following the Law of Moses. After his conversion he was convinced that salvation was in only Jesus Christ and therefore the Law was no longer necessary. He met in Jerusalem to discuss this with Peter and James and came away with their agreement that he was correct in his thinking. The Jewish converts continued for a time to follow the law, but the new gentile converts did not. So I suppose if you accept Paul, James, and Peter as constituting the church then the church did do away with the law. Parts of the law, like the ten commandments, moral/ethical issues, were retained. Elle if you are a bible Christian me thinks you protest too much.

 

[JimG]

Yes, I do believe that the question of whether followers of Jesus are bound to observe the Laws of the Old Testament was resolved quite a long time ago–nearly 2000 years ago, in the very early history of the Church. There’s not much need to rehash it all again.

St. Paul, who made the earliest converts from the Gentiles, seems to spend a lot of time in his letters explaining to his followers that the works of the Law were no longer required. (An admonishment which many protestants confuse with good works in general.) Still, he had been raised as a strict Pharisee, so his word seemed to carry some weight.

So yes, this controversy was settled long ago. It’s a done deal. If you want to follow the Jewish feasts strictly, you always have the option to become an Orthodox Jew.

 

[Patchunky]

elle:

Technically, it was Shavout.The anniversary of the giving of the law. They were all out being baptized, mikvehed, immersed, if you will. Yeah, out celebrating a JEWISH holiday. How come WE don’t keep this holiday anymore.

Actually, we do…

Pentecost means 50th day in Greek.

We celebrate Easter and 50 days later we celebrate Pentecost.

Shavout is the celebration of the reception of the Torah. Pentecost is celebration of the gifts of the Holy Spirit… SAME DEAL…

In the Eastern Church, green is the color used for Pentecost because green represents new life and also knowledge.

 

[thessalonian]

Actually your question raises an interesting point about tradition. Did Jesus start new tradition? Well not really in a sense. You see most everything he did was forshadowed in the Old Testament. He gave new and deeper meaning to all that was already in the Jewish faith. For instance the passover sacrifice was a forshadowing of the sacrifice on the Cross which he tied intimately to the Last Supper and ultimately the Lord’s Supper, i.e. Eucharist. Now before Jesus came noone would have had a clue, what the Lord’s Supper was. What he did was to flesh out and give meaning to the types, allegories, and prophecies of the Old Covenant. In other words he gave new and deeper meaning to what the scriptures. Tradition is primarily about the CORRECT meaning of scripture. Who would have had a clue that the three days that Jonah spent in the belly of a whale had a deeper meaning, yet Jesus uses it as a forshadowing of the three days he would spend in the “belly of the earth”. This new and deeper meaning is very important. Very important to have correct!

John 4
24: God is spirit, and those who worship him MUST worship in spirit and truth."

Interesting question that I think is worth much more reflection.

 

[thessalonian]

By the way, in our protestantized understanding of the Bible (i.e. Tradition bad, Bible good) we overlook one tradition that Jesus started. The bible is a tradition.

2 Thes 2:15
15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the** traditions** which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

 

[RyanL]

elle:

So, no, I have no question about that. No question, just an invite from Ryan to discuss. do you have a question?

elle,
Sorry I’m late - pregnant wife wanted to get some sleep…NOW! I’m sure you understand…

elle:

Well, now are you sure about that,Jim? I believe that the word says to abstain from a few big NO-NOs, like eating things sacrificed to idols for starters.

I believe you take the words of St. Paul as truth:

Romans 14:14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself.
1 Corinthians 10:25-27
Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.”
If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience.

1 Cor 8:4-8
4So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one…8food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

So as long as you’re claiming St. Paul was Catholic, I agree, the Catholic Church did away with Jewish food laws…

elle:

But, no, I’m actually not asking anything. I’m saying, "JESUS DID NOT COME TO DO AWAY WITH THE JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DID AWAY WITH JEWISH TRADITIONS. EARLY BELIEVERS, CLEARLY, CLEARLY, HELD JEWISH TRADITIONS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MADE UP THEIR OWN TRADITIONS, WHICH THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IMPOSES THOSE TRADITIONS ON ITS FOLLOWERS. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE MODERN DAY PHARISEES BY ADVOCATING TRADITIONS THAT WERE NOT ESTABLISHED BY GOD. "

Your contention is that you would be more comfortable in the 1st/2nd century Church than we would. Great. Prove it. Find me ONE person in the early Church who didn’t believe that the Eucharist was JESUS HIMSELF. It has to be from the first couple of centuries. Well…how about the first millenium. That should be enough time to find ONE quote, right? After all, if this is what the early christians believed, we should be able to find it written down somewhere within the hundreds of thousands of surviving documents…right?

So your challenge is that: find someone from the early Church who believed what you believe about the Eucharist. Also, you completely ignored my posts earlier. As for what Jesus made new that we didn’t have before Him - Salvation! The Holy Spirit! Redemption! Justification! An open pathway to Heaven!

Finally, your assertion that sacrifice was never made for INTENTIONAL sins is bunk. You see, I have a bible, too:

Deuteronomy 5: 17 “If a person sins and does what is forbidden in any of the LORD’s commands, even though he does not know it, he is guilty and will be held responsible. 18 He is to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for him for the wrong he has committed unintentionally, and he will be forgiven. 19 It is a guilt offering; he has been guilty of wrongdoing against the LORD.”

Now, I invite you to stop preaching and discuss with us. That means a two way flow of information. You question. We question. We provide answers. You provide answers.

I am overjoyed, by the way, that you are still here!
RyanL

 

[mercygate]

elle:

Holy Orders, now even Catholic Encyclopedia says it wasn’t something NEW. In fact, it mentions the priestly line of the OLD dispensation.

So, come on people, something NEW. New, new, new.

Or, was everything Jesus did, simply Jewish in nature?

Haven’t followed this thread all the way down yet, but why are you looking for something new? Jesus came to fulfill the law – he embodies all divine revelation that went before. In doing so he “makes all things new.” The bread of Passover becomes the Passover of the Resurrection . . . Baptism becomes not just the “Baptism of John” but entry into the death and risen life of Christ.

The Sacraments are the touchpoint by which we maintain the relationship with the Father which Christ restored by his Incarnation.

 

[Thal59]

I have no difficulty. I do not seperate old from new. You do. Yeah, I keep Sabbath. You? Keep Passover. You?<<

Elle, you just posted the PERFECT Protestant reply. I have pointed out that the there is NO separation from OT and NT traditions; that the new traditions are not new, but are the old traditions in a fullfilled form. YOU are the one who is vehemently insisting that the Catholic sacraments are NEW traditions. You are separating the old from the new. But your post is, as I said, the perfect Protestant reply in that it accuses me of doing the opposite of what I have said and done, while you give yourself credit for supporting a position that is opposite of what you are complaining about. Only a truly screwed-up Protestant mind could do that. But don’t feel alone, I got this MANY times on Protestant websites.

If the followers were out being mikvehed on Shavout, Pentecost, then obviously it would have been something they had done more than once. I’m cool with once, just saying, if you want to do it more than once, whatever floats your boat.<

I have no idea as to what you are trying to say here. Let me try a different approach. Mikvah is a ritual washing that is often repeated. It does NOT confer grace. It is a preparatory action before participation in another more sacred rite. Baptism confers grace and is the sacred rite that opens the door, once and for all, to a holy Christian life.

I agree! I celebrate Passover! It would take me 20 pages to explain! But, yeah, I don’t think He did away with it.<<

I never said He did away with passover, I said He fulfilled it and the “Todah” sacrifice. Your desire to be contrary to every point made is causing you to interpret my words out of context. (Taking words out of context, unfortunately, is something the Protestant churches are expert at.)

Agreed on everything you said on marriage,although YIKES, I would not want to any precepts of Deut. or any other book of the bible as errant. But, if you want to say that, be my guest.<<

Surely you know that Deuteronomy is a self retiring covenant? God did not instruct Moses to issue the Deuteronomical precepts, Moses issued them as a sort of compromise among a stiff-necked people. Precepts such as divorce, or marrying foreigners was not a part of God’s covenant at Sinai. God, in essence, allowed the people what they wanted so they could fail by it and then see that God’s way was best. Deuteronomy was never established as a permanent covenant.

As for circumcision, 8 days, a procedure for health reasons, and Bar Mitzvah, for 13 year old men, no I don’t see the connection. Nor do I see the connection between Baptism and Confirmation.<<

Health reasons??? What about the reason of… The Covenant of Abraham? You don’t see the connection? Let me spell it out for you. Circumcision initiated the infant, without his consent, into the covenant God established through Abraham. Baptism initiates the infant, without his consent, into the new covenant God established through Jesus. Bar-Mitzvah is the ritual by which the initiated freely enters into a holy union with God with his own consent. Confirmation… ditto.

Saw a lot of priests in the Old Testament, but they were pretty blind and stuck in their traditions in the NT. So, yeah, I can draw a catholic connection there, no stretch.<<

If all you derived from scripture regarding the priesthood is the above statement, you are wasting your time, and my time.

I went through a spiritual crisis last year, elle. But I also learned something very important. Although I knew that every person, myself included, has inner biases and prejudices regarding such issues as religion or politics, I had believed that most people could come to a rational conclusion if they were given the facts. I felt that a person’s ability to weigh facts and debate with reason would overcome their biases and allow them to come to some sort of mutual agreement on an issue.

What I learned last year is that once a person’s biases and prejudices kick-in, they completely trump a person’s intelligence and reason. Even the most easily demonstrable truth will escape such a person. Your last statement, a clear jab at the Catholic church and priesthood, simply confirms that you have no intention of seeking truth… you merely wish to argue.

In this state of mind, you are not capable of discerning truth. This is why I said you are wasting your time and mine. And this is why I will not continue with this thread further.

When your desire to seek the absolute truth, whether it acquits or convicts you, becomes stronger than your inner biases and prejudices, you will then be capable of discerning truth.

Good Luck.

Thal59

 

[st_julie]

Mark Shaes’ book By What Authority is an excellent one for understanding what the Catholic Church means by Sacred Tradition.

st julie