Boy, talk about a tall order
I guess the biggest examples in my mind right now are from Tractate Yoma of the Babylonian Talmud, since that’s what I’ve been reading. In it are two concepts that are deeply rooted in Catholicism: the idea of blood-atonement, and the concept of “infallible” decisions on the part of the “Church”.
The blood-atonement is obvious, and has actually been brought up again recently when SSV linked to an older thread on the subject. Since the Temple practices have been on a 2000 year hiatus, it’s easy to forget how central the practice of sacrifice was to Judaism. Not in the sense that blood was the only part of worship, quite the contrary, just that it was integral to the practice of personal and corporate atonement. This connection is so critical that it’s actually one of the prime Catholic “indentifiers”, the Crucifix. It’s why we call Jesus the “Lamb of God”, in reference to the Passover Lamb who gives its blood so that death will pass over the faithful. The idea that the spilling of blood is intimately tied to the cleansing of sins and impurities, and is a sacred act commissioned by God, is at the center of our faith, and it comes straight from Judaism. Also important is the individual’s feeling and contrition in participating in the blood-sacrifice, making it not a mechanical trade of blood for forgiveness, but a spiritual growth and letting go of evil. This is why we don’t believe the Blood of Christ cleans us regardless of ourselves, but rather works with us intimately to purify us as we ourselves work towards that profound sanctification.
Many times as Catholics I think we forget that this intimate encounter and Sacrifice is not simply a “Christian” thing, but the manifestation of a very Jewish thing. While Orthodox Jews obviously don’t practice this ritual right now, I know many who look forward with deep spiritual longing to the day when they can resume that part of their faith. It’s as if they’ve been waiting for 2,000 years to have Mass again. Think about that.
The other point from Tractate Yoma is the use of Urim and Thurrim, the “Divine Lots”. They were objects of some sort (it’s up for a bit of debate on precisely what they were, but their use is agreed upon) that were used by the High Priest to determine, in pressing matters, an infallible “yes or no” answer from God. They were not for common use, and they were generally reserved for decisions that required absolute assurance. Following their advice led to resounding success, not following them led to failure, and asking poorly formed questions led to inconclusive answers. That is very similar to our Catholic concept of the infallibility of the Magisterium when it comes to Faith and Morals. We have very explicit limitations on when such matters are decided, what kind of matters are decided, and how they are expressed, but when they are they are considered irrevokable and infallibly guided by God Himself. God’s Divine protection will not allow the Pope to err in proclaiming Faith and Morals, just as God did not allow Urim and Thurrim to err in guiding Israel via the High Priest. Furthermore, it was not a power of the High Priest, not a mystical insight, but rather an infallible “attachment” to his office, quite literally as the Urim and Thurrim were a part of his sacred clothing. When the High Priest drew on Urim and Thurrim, his counsel came from God, not from man, just as the Pope, when speaking as the leader of all the faithful on matters of Faith and Morals, simply relates the irrevokable judgement of God, not his own personal view.
There are many more, including the how the purifying mikvehs relate to the Catholic Sacrament of Baptism (and how Baptism relates to circumcision), and many more. Those two immediately sprung fresh in my mind, however.
Peace and God bless!
