Vatican takes on tense question of salvation for the Jewish people

[SAVINGRACE]

So, let’s say that a Jewish person, (such as Rosalind Moss) should approach a priest asking to join RCIA and be received into the Church at its conclusion. What should the priest say?

a) Sorry, you cannot do that, you are still bound by the old covenant which remains valid for you, and which you must follow.

b) Yes, you can join the RCIA and become Catholic but after you are Baptized you must continue to follow all the precepts of Jewish law.

c) Yes, you are welcome to join RCIA and become Catholic, being baptized at its conclusion. You need not continue to follow the Jewish law.

If you read the document it addresses this point. If a Jewish person were to come to the Church seeking admission or asking questions they will not be turned away.

Hebrew Catholics are allowed by the Church to follow Jewish religious traditions. That means they believe all the doctrines and practice all the Sacraments of the Church. At the same time they are allowed to celebrate Passover, Channukah etc. They are in full communion with Rome.

Their liturgical calendar might differ from the liturgical calendar used by Latin Catholics in their retention of certain Jewish holidays. Hebrew Catholics may celebrate Passover, Rosh Hashana, Shavuot, etc. and even wear traditional ritual wear like kippot, tallitot, tefillin, use mezuzot and keep many mitsvot (commandments) in the Torah as a sign of their heritage.

Where these Jewish holidays and practices do not conflict with Catholic doctrine, they are kept for ethnic reasons, much as Irish Americans might celebrate Saint Patrick’s Day.

Saint Paul the Apostle observed Jewish religious holidays after his conversion, this is mentioned in passing in The Acts of the Apostles (Acts 18:21; Acts 20:6; Acts 20:16; and in I Corinthians 16:8). The movement is not a sectarian group within the Catholic Church, nor is it a schismatic movement outside it.

**PLEASE NOTE: Only Hebrew Catholics are allowed to do this. Muslims who convert to Catholicism would not be allowed to practice any muslim religious traditions nor a Buddhist convert their religious traditions or other non-Catholics who decided to convert to Catholicism for that matter.

The Church sees no conflict/contradiction with this as the Jews are our elder brother in the faith. The Church does not view this as syncretism.**

There is a delicate balancing act required for the Vatican in Israel as the majority of Catholics are Arabs or Arab speaking from the Palestinian Territories or within Israel. The Vatican has kept a low-key attitude towards this congregation, in order not to antagonize the Arabic-speaking Catholic community, which may not favor Catholics with pro-Jewish sentiments.

The number of Israeli Catholics of non-Arab origin increased during the 1990s, due primarily to immigration from the former Soviet Union. As a result, the Vatican changed its policies in 2003, for the first time ordaining Jean-Baptiste Gourion as Auxiliary Bishop to overlook the Hebrew Catholic community in Israel.

 

[meltzerboy]

So, let’s say that a Jewish person, (such as Rosalind Moss) should approach a priest asking to join RCIA and be received into the Church at its conclusion. What should the priest say?

a) Sorry, you cannot do that, you are still bound by the old covenant which remains valid for you, and which you must follow.

b) Yes, you can join the RCIA and become Catholic but after you are Baptized you must continue to follow all the precepts of Jewish law.

c) Yes, you are welcome to join RCIA and become Catholic, being baptized at its conclusion. You need not continue to follow the Jewish law.

I would say that (c) is the best of the three choices for a priest to say. But I wonder whether there is an even more valid fourth choice according to Catholic teaching, that is, (d) You are welcome to join RCIA and become Catholic, being baptized at its conclusion. You MUST not continue to follow the Jewish law in those areas in which it contradicts Canon law since that would be Judaizing.

 

[meltzerboy]

If you read the document it addresses this point. If a Jewish person were to come to the Church seeking admission or asking questions they will not be turned away.

Hebrew Catholics are allowed by the Church to follow Jewish religious traditions. That means they believe all the doctrines and practice all the Sacraments of the Church. At the same time they are allowed to celebrate Passover, Channukah etc. They are in full communion with Rome.

Their liturgical calendar might differ from the liturgical calendar used by Latin Catholics in their retention of certain Jewish holidays. Hebrew Catholics may celebrate Passover, Rosh Hashana, Shavuot, etc. and even wear traditional ritual wear like kippot, tallitot, tefillin, use mezuzot and keep many mitsvot (commandments) in the Torah as a sign of their heritage.

Where these Jewish holidays and practices do not conflict with Catholic doctrine, they are kept for ethnic reasons, much as Irish Americans might celebrate Saint Patrick’s Day.

Saint Paul the Apostle observed Jewish religious holidays after his conversion, this is mentioned in passing in The Acts of the Apostles (Acts 18:21; Acts 20:6; Acts 20:16; and in I Corinthians 16:8). The movement is not a sectarian group within the Catholic Church, nor is it a schismatic movement outside it.

**PLEASE NOTE: Only Hebrew Catholics are allowed to do this. Muslims who convert to Catholicism would not be allowed to practice any muslim religious traditions nor a Buddhist convert their religious traditions or other non-Catholics who decided to convert to Catholicism for that matter.

The Church sees no conflict/contradiction with this as the Jews are our elder brother in the faith. The Church does not view this as syncretism.**

There is a delicate balancing act required for the Vatican in Israel as the majority of Catholics are Arabs or Arab speaking from the Palestinian Territories or within Israel. The Vatican has kept a low-key attitude towards this congregation, in order not to antagonize the Arabic-speaking Catholic community, which may not favor Catholics with pro-Jewish sentiments.

The number of Israeli Catholics of non-Arab origin increased during the 1990s, due primarily to immigration from the former Soviet Union. As a result, the Vatican changed its policies in 2003, for the first time ordaining Jean-Baptiste Gourion as Auxiliary Bishop to overlook the Hebrew Catholic community in Israel.

Are all the particulars of Passover permitted, including the hope of the Coming of the Messiah as Jews perceive Him? It seems to me that some of the elements of Passover are contradictory to Catholic dogma or doctrine.

 

[Brendan_64]

Are all the particulars of Passover permitted, including the hope of the Coming of the Messiah as Jews perceive Him? It seems to me that some of the elements of Passover are contradictory to Catholic dogma or doctrine.

Very true.

There seems to be some sort of confusion that Jewish religious beliefs and Catholic religious beliefs do not contradict each other. Would it be appropriate for a Catholic family whose parents are of Jewish origin to leave a spare place at the table for Elijah? Or should such parents have their male Catholic children circumcised?

Such ceremonies are not simply cultural rituals that remember one’s ancestors, but actual religious rituals with religious significance. To think that they can be continued by Catholics, even when the beliefs inherent in them conflict with Catholic teaching just does not make sense.
Lex orandi, lex credendi.

 

[Robbinson]

Very true.

There seems to be some sort of confusion that Jewish religious beliefs and Catholic religious beliefs do not contradict each other. Would it be appropriate for a Catholic family whose parents are of Jewish origin to leave a spare place at the table for Elijah? Or should such parents have their male Catholic children circumcised?

Such ceremonies are not simply cultural rituals that remember one’s ancestors, but actual religious rituals with religious significance. To think that they can be continued by Catholics, even when the beliefs inherent in them conflict with Catholic teaching just does not make sense.
Lex orandi, lex credendi.

Its a fair point (both yours, and Meltzerboy’s) - We (and many other Catholic/Christians) of a Jewish heritage, choose (act of liberty, not a sense of obligation) to celebrate the passover and other Jewish holidays, but through the lens of faith in Yeshua which does impart a different meaning to some, if not many, of the liturgical aspects of the celebrations. As to the chair for Elijah - it is an opportunity to explain to our Jewish guests (many of whom do not believe Yeshua was the Messiah) what we believe and why.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[Brendan_64]

As to the chair for Elijah - it is an opportunity to explain to our Jewish guests (many of whom do not believe Yeshua was the Messiah) what we believe and why.

So by that do you mean that you don not leave a spare place, and when your Jewish guests notice and ask where Elijah’s place is you explain what you believe regarding it?

When your Jewish guests celebrate Passover with you presumably they are viewing the ritual through the lens of having rejected Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God?

To me the whole thing seems very odd. A bit like a Protestant convert to Catholicism going back to the Baptist church, joining in with a Baptist service and participating in it through the lens of Catholic beliefs.

The whole, “don’t evangelise the Jews, because they have their own path to Salvation” thing doesn’t seem to stack up. Protestants on the other hand, who are actually validly baptised Christians, we can evangelise away to our heart’s content. It doesn’t seem to stack up.

Or is that another bombshell that is in the pipeline to be dropped on us, “Don’t evangelise Protestants because they are already baptised Christians”?

 

[commenter]

There is a movement to subtly discourage evangelism. I have read of Christians saying it is not their job to encourage Muslims to become Christians, but rather to learn their own spiritual riches in Islam. Missionaries to India have apparently advised Hindus to “bloom where you are planted”, that God can teach people through other means besides Christianity. And so on, even with Agnostics who also believe in morality, as we do; some say they don’t “need” conversion, either.

Within Catholic and some Protestant churches there is a movement to limit “evangelism” to strictly hospitality only. In my old parish the Evangelism Committee was also named the Coffee Committee; the only people they wanted to “reach” were those who feel lonely, a “conversion” means they feel accepted. They weren’t against anything, other than dogmas.

I am not blaming this document for the anti-evangelism movement, though judging by the way the media manipulates its coverage, it is evident many (not on the Commission) would like to use this, or anything to undermine evangelism, or conversion.

Historically, if the Church presents Catholic dogma to 10,000 people in the general public in a gentle way, some will inquire further, and some of those inquirers will become Catholic. If Jews are among those who hear the message, some of them historically have become Catholic. There are many Jewish persons who seem more moral and wiser than many Christians, but even so, there is no Jewish individual who would not benefit from an encounter with Christ.

 

[JimG]

There is a movement to subtly discourage evangelism. I have read of Christians saying it is not their job to encourage Muslims to become Christians, but rather to learn their own spiritual riches in Islam. Missionaries to India have apparently advised Hindus to “bloom where you are planted”, that God can teach people through other means besides Christianity. And so on, even with Agnostics who also believe in morality, as we do; some say they don’t “need” conversion, either.

Within Catholic and some Protestant churches there is a movement to limit “evangelism” to strictly hospitality only. In my old parish the Evangelism Committee was also named the Coffee Committee; the only people they wanted to “reach” were those who feel lonely, a “conversion” means they feel accepted. They weren’t against anything, other than dogmas.

I am not blaming this document for the anti-evangelism movement, though judging by the way the media manipulates its coverage, it is evident many (not on the Commission) would like to use this, or anything to undermine evangelism, or conversion.

Historically, if the Church presents Catholic dogma to 10,000 people in the general public in a gentle way, some will inquire further, and some of those inquirers will become Catholic. If Jews are among those who hear the message, some of them historically have become Catholic. There are many Jewish persons who seem more moral and wiser than many Christians, but even so, there is no Jewish individual who would not benefit from an encounter with Christ.

Interesting. Perhaps we are getting to the point where the Great Commission will be restated as “Go therefore, and provide coffee and doughnuts to every nation, ensuring that everyone feels accepted.” We will be advised to particularly avoid evangelizing Jews, and Protestants who have been baptized.

 

[Robbinson]

So by that do you mean that you don not leave a spare place, and when your Jewish guests notice and ask where Elijah’s place is you explain what you believe regarding it?

Actually - I have a seat for Elijah and then explain (whether its just a sedar for Jewish believers in Yeshua or a sedar involving jewish non believers) that we believe Elijah came in the form of John the Baptist, but was not received as such, and that it is a symbol now of the “return” of the Messiah - it is a great opportunity to share the gospel with Jewish non-believers or at least an opportunity to explain why we believe that Jesus is the Messiah.

When your Jewish guests celebrate Passover with you presumably they are viewing the ritual through the lens of having rejected Christ as the Messiah, the Son of God?

While they might, as non-believers in Jesus, we share our belief in how Jesus is our pascal sacrifice - In any event, with Passover (which is a remembrance of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt) there is actually nothing about the sedar that is inconsistent with our Christian faith.

To me the whole thing seems very odd. A bit like a Protestant convert to Catholicism going back to the Baptist church, joining in with a Baptist service and participating in it through the lens of Catholic beliefs.

I respect that - and yet, in the early Church years, the Jewish believers continued to worship in the synagogue and celebrate these festivals, at least until the destruction of the second temple - yet it didn’t affect their faith in Jesus. In fact, Jesus celebrated these festivals (including the last supper, which was a Passover meal). I acknowledge the prohibition against judaizing (Galatians) and the dangers of putting new wine in old wine skins (as noted in the gospels and alluded to in Hebrews), but that does not preclude us (jewish believers) from celebrating our heritage with a proper understanding of our faith and recognizing it is not done out of obligation, sanctification of the law or relevant to justification or sanctification. It is similar, I would submit, the the many non-Roman Catholic rites within the church where cultural history is respected and accepted, so long as it is consistent with the faith of the Church.

The whole, “don’t evangelize the Jews, because they have their own path to Salvation” thing doesn’t seem to stack up. Protestants on the other hand, who are actually validly baptized Christians, we can evangelize away to our heart’s content. It doesn’t seem to stack up.

I agree with this statement, but that is not actually my reading of the Church’s recent non-magisterial teaching. It stated no institutional efforts to convert Jews but then explicitly noted our responsibility to individually share our faith. Perhaps a position to encourage dialogue and make our individual efforts to share the gospel more effective?

Or is that another bombshell that is in the pipeline to be dropped on us, “Don’t evangelise Protestants because they are already baptized Christians”?

See my note above.

Blessings,

Brian

 

[Brendan_64]

There is a movement to subtly discourage evangelism.

… In my old parish the Evangelism Committee was also named the Coffee Committee; the only people they wanted to “reach” were those who feel lonely, a “conversion” means they feel accepted. They weren’t against anything, other than dogmas.

Indeed, I have had a similar experience regarding a parish’s ‘evangelisation’ approach where “reaching out to the marginalised” seemed to focus on those who feel lonely and the aim was to make them feel part of the community, with a big emphasis on the social side of things. While there is nothing wrong with this in itself, and is indeed a charitable thing to do, the issue of conversion was not emphasised at all. “Reaching out” was seen as matter of ‘fellowship and friendship’ rather than an issue of ‘faith and conversion’. the aim seemed (to me) to be to create one big, happy, social club.

At the same time (independent from the parish) I was involved in a street evangelisation group (which I’m still involved in) that was concerned with faith and conversion which I tried to get supported by the parish, but to no real avail.

 

[Bookcat]

Jimmy Akin: ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/new-vatican-document-on-jews-salvation-and-evangelization

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Are all the particulars of Passover permitted, including the hope of the Coming of the Messiah as Jews perceive Him? It seems to me that some of the elements of Passover are contradictory to Catholic dogma or doctrine.

I don’t know the answer to that question. Hopefully someone here can answer it. I don’t know much about this congregation apart from what I posted. I’ve never met a Hebrew Catholic or read a post from one on here, mind you I’m not a regular, holidays has brought me back.

I watch the show Journey Home and heard a Jewish convert discussing this group and it was the first time I had heard about them. Apparently there are about 10,000 mostly in Israel who do continue to practice Jewish traditions. There is no requirement that Jewish converts continue to celebrate Jewish liturgical feasts once they have been baptized but some prefer to and the Church has provided for this.

I suppose much depends on a person’s family history and cultural heritage. In all cases, the one thing to be avoided is falling into the problem of “syncretism,” that is, creating an amalgam which is neither truly Jewish nor truly Catholic.They do have Priests and a Bishop to ensure that it doesn’t occur.

Apparently there is talk of even establishing their own Rite.

I browsed the website below. You could contact them directly.

hebrewcatholic.net/about-the-ahc/

 

[irenaeus1]

Yes. The Covenant of Moses cannot save but it is well within Catholic orthodoxy to regard it as still binding upon unbaptized children of the Old Covenant, pointing the way to Christ as it was designed to do (Galatians 3:22-26). It is well within Catholic orthodoxy to believe that the Law and the Prophets continue to do their job: pointing to Christ who alone can help the child of the Old Covenant to transcend (not revoke) the Law through Christ and enter into the new and everlasting covenant. For he came to fulfill, not abolish, the Law.

Saint Pope John Paul II said the Old covenant has in fact "never been revoked by God.” (Address to Representatives of the Jewish Community in Mainz, West Germany). In this, he follows Nostra Aetate which declares that “God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes or of the calls He issues” and cites Romans 11:28-29:

As regards election the Jewish people are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.

The problem here is that JPII was not clear whether he was referring to the Abrhamic covenant or the Mosaic covenant. And how do we interpret this in light of the scripture passages that seem to say that the old covenant was replaced, obsolete, abolished, etc.?