Why Jews don't need to be saved

[Walking_Home]

I guess some of us could read this and hash it out:

bc.edu/bc_org/research/cjl/news/Kasper_visit_report.htm

Just a Cardinal talking…

---

This is the Church talking.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

1. The Church’s constant missionary proclamation is endangered today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle). As a consequence, it is held that certain truths have been superseded; for example, the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability …
2. As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ. In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6), the full revelation of divine truth is given: “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him” (Mt 11:27); “No one has ever seen God; God the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has revealed him” (Jn 1:18); “For in Christ the whole fullness of divinity dwells in bodily form” (Col 2:9-10).

 

[Damascus]

Great.

If you are going to act like a Protestant and approach documents like they approach the Bible by looking at it as a butcher approaches a pig, chopping things to suit your needs to butress your position then claim this is the “Church” talking on the specific issue of the JEWS, well good luck.

You have not convinced me of anything since I am very suspect of those who have Protestant ways.

 

[Walking_Home]

Great.

If you are going to act like a Protestant and approach documents like they approach the Bible by looking at it as a butcher approaches a pig, chopping things to suit your needs to butress your position then claim this is the “Church” talking on the specific issue of the JEWS, well good luck.

You have not convinced me of anything since I am very suspect of those who have Protestant ways.

---

Protestant—hardly. The ones that I usually see come up with the protestant argument ----are the ones who have made up their minds on an issue----and no matter what documents are produced —they disregard them.

Read the whole document----Dominus Jesus. It trumps any statement by the cardinal.

 

[Hegesippus]

Great.

If you are going to act like a Protestant and approach documents like they approach the Bible by looking at it as a butcher approaches a pig, chopping things to suit your needs to butress your position then claim this is the “Church” talking on the specific issue of the JEWS, well good luck.

You have not convinced me of anything since I am very suspect of those who have Protestant ways.

Show us the proof, where it says Jews do not need Christ for salvation, in official Church teaching. Not to long ago a Cardinal came out and said that contraceptives were ok, so you agree with that Cardinal. They are not infallible. It is Church teaching however that Christ is necessary for salvation, until you show us otherwise, from official Church teaching, which you will not, I am unconvinced that Jews have another way into heaven besides our Lord. If you read the scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, the Catechism, the Councils, and the constant teaching of the Magisterium you will find that there is no other way into heaven except through Christ.

 

[bigdawg]

Show us the proof, where it says Jews do not need Christ for salvation, in official Church teaching. Not to long ago a Cardinal came out and said that contraceptives were ok, so you agree with that Cardinal. They are not infallible. It is Church teaching however that Christ is necessary for salvation, until you show us otherwise, from official Church teaching, which you will not, I am unconvinced that Jews have another way into heaven besides our Lord. If you read the scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, the Catechism, the Councils, and the constant teaching of the Magisterium you will find that there is no other way into heaven except through Christ.

I don’t think there is any evidence from tradition that the Church taught the Jews could be saved by the old covenant.

To the best of my knowledge this is a recent develpment…a novelty.

It’s interesting that Damascus accused me or those who stick with tradition of being Protestant when it is him who has left orthodoxy behind.

 

[Damascus]

I don’t think there is any evidence from tradition that the Church taught the Jews could be saved by the old covenant.

To the best of my knowledge this is a recent develpment…a novelty.

It’s interesting that Damascus accused me or those who stick with tradition of being Protestant when it is him who has left orthodoxy behind.

That is a serious statement and indictment to boot.

Did you read ALL of my posts? Did I not say this is confusing to Catholics?

You can not cite evidence from tradition on this just as you would have to admit that the Church has made innovations.

I don’t make the rules, nor do I cast judgement on the brother I know.

I never accused YOU personally of being a protestant.

I made it clear that chopping up documents is quite like what Protestants do and have done, namely the Bible.

I forgive you.

 

[Damascus]

Name the Tradition in the Church for the Protestant movement of Charismatics?
See. Told ya.

 

[Damascus]

Show us the proof, where it says Jews do not need Christ for salvation, in official Church teaching. Not to long ago a Cardinal came out and said that contraceptives were ok, so you agree with that Cardinal. They are not infallible. It is Church teaching however that Christ is necessary for salvation, until you show us otherwise, from official Church teaching, which you will not, I am unconvinced that Jews have another way into heaven besides our Lord. If you read the scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, the Catechism, the Councils, and the constant teaching of the Magisterium you will find that there is no other way into heaven except through Christ.

this sounds a lot like “show me where it says Trinity in the Bible” stuff.
C’mon.
It is a whipy way out of the whole issue.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I could be wrong, but I don’t think Damascus is saying that Christ is not necessary. I know I’m not claming this either.

In my own view, however, a view which has been expressed within some Catholic documents I’ve read, it seems that there are situations where Christ may be able to baptize in ways not fully known to us.

And even if Judaic covenants do in some way retro-actively connect the ancient Israelites with the salvific action of Christ’s future sacrifice on the cross, it is still Christ doing the work-- not people.

 

[Hegesippus]

this sounds a lot like “show me where it says Trinity in the Bible” stuff.
C’mon.
It is a whipy way out of the whole issue.

I can show you in Church teaching where it says that if one is saved, it is through Christ, even if one does not embrace Christ fully in this life. Christ’s cross is the only salvation, no other covenant is salvific. And in no way is like “show me in the bible” because we know what the Church teaches and in no way hides the truth. So when you claim the Church says Christ is not necessary for salvation, the burden lies on you because we can show you the Church’s teachings to back up our stance.

 

[Hegesippus]

I could be wrong, but I don’t think Damascus is saying that Christ is not necessary. I know I’m not claming this either.

In my own view, however, a view which has been expressed within some Catholic documents I’ve read, it seems that there are situations where Christ may be able to baptize in ways not fully known to us.

And even if Judaic covenants do in some way retro-actively connect the ancient Israelites with the salvific action of Christ’s future sacrifice on the cross, it is still Christ doing the work-- not people.

Maybe and on several occasions I have asked him to clarify his beliefs and has not. Christ is necessary for salvation, even explicitely or implicetly.

 

[tequilamac]

I’m sorry. What a sad premise. Why Jews don’t need to be saved. What a thought. Everyone wants and needs to be saved, for heaven’s sake. Of course Jews need to be saved just as everyone needs to be saved. Why would Jews be an exception to the rule?

 

[tequilamac]

ok. I’ll correct you. The establishment of the state of Israel is not viewed by the vast majority of Orthodox as a breaking of the Covenant. Even the small minority that say it should not have been done, and they are a very small minority, do not say that it constitutes a breaking of the Covenant.

Where is the correction? You give me majorities and minorities like God is a democracy. So what if it is a minority claiming to be true Torah Jews, their thinking is rational. There are also an increasing number of catholics who lack a sense of sin, as well as Muslims, any other Christian groups and Jews. The smallness of the Orthodox group that denounces Zionism does not indicate they are incorrect, any more than the vast amount of people who could care less in any religion indicates correctness by majority.
You have not yet provided a correction, merely an observation. So let;s return to the original suggestion that Jews do not need to be saved. Why in the world would they not need to be saved?

 

[bigdawg]

That is a serious statement and indictment to boot.

Did you read ALL of my posts? Did I not say this is confusing to Catholics?

You can not cite evidence from tradition on this just as you would have to admit that the Church has made innovations.

I don’t make the rules, nor do I cast judgement on the brother I know.

I never accused YOU personally of being a protestant.

I made it clear that chopping up documents is quite like what Protestants do and have done, namely the Bible.

I forgive you.

Unless I have missed something you still have not addressed much of anything I posted.

Now it appears that you think that tradition is on your side, and it isn’t. If it is, please show us where, before the 20th century, the Church taught that we shouldn’t evangelize the Jews or that they Jews had their own path to heaven. There are statements to the contrary about the Jews and their supposed salvific covenant…such as the Council of Florence:

Council of Florence
It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also* JEWS** and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels”.*

Now we know that those who no fault of their own are outside the Church may (ie. might) be saved, it seems that the Council is using very strong words for the Jews if they have the Jews have their own salfvific covenant.

In another place in the Council of Flrorence we find:
“*There are seven sacraments of the new Law: namely, baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony, which differ a great deal from the sacraments of the Old Law. For those of the Old Law did not effect grace, but only pronounced that it should be given through the passion of Christ; these sacraments of ours contain grace, and confer it upon those who receive them worthily.” *

Old Covenant did not effect grace but it is salvific? Doesn’t make sense to me.

Let’s go to a Pope such as Pius XII:
Pius XII: Mystici Corporis, 29: *"And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ…but on the Gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. “To such an extent, then,” says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.” *

If the new covenant took the place of the old law (covenant), what do the Jews now cling to… an obsolete covenant at best or a covenant that never was salvific in the first place?

 

[rbarcia]

There is a misconception among many people that Judaism teaches that we are redeemed by obeying the commandments – through our deeds and acts. But this is not the case.

We were redeemed at Mt. Sinai when God gave us the Torah. Our obeying the mitzvot/commandments through accepting Torah is our RESPONSE to the redemption. It is how we express our relationship with God.
…

So have you obeyed God’s Commandments? Have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen? Have you ever used the name of the Lord in vein?

Why does God have you atone for you sin constantly with a sacrifice?
*

Exodus 29

36And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.
*

Have you read though what King David said?
Psalm 51

12Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.

13Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee.

14Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.

15O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.

16For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.

17The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

18Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem.

19Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.
If you have broken the law, you are guilty. You have to face a Holy and perfect God on judgement day, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Will you be able to face Him.

God loves you so much, He made a way for you to be forgiven. He became man and died on the cross once and for all, to pay the debt for the law of Moses which you have broke.

**

Isaiah 53

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Romans 5:8

8But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

**

Christ is the Lamb of God, whose blood was shed on the cross so that death could “Passover” you.

If you Repent (confess and forsake your sins, as God has pleaded with the House of Jacob time and time again) and trust in Jesus (not just an intellectual acknowledgement, but clothe yourself with Christ), you will pass from death to life. He will send you His Holy Spirit, that will give you new desires to live for Him.

Then read your Bible and obey it.

You are not damned because you do not believe in Jesus, you are damned because you broke the law of Moses. If you jump from a plane without a parachute, it is not the lack of a parachute that killed you, it is the fact that you broke the law of gravity. But the parachute can save you from the fall to come. Put on the parachute.

I am not saying you have to join any religion, nor am I catholic, just believe in the almighty God of Israel and His Son Jesus Christ.

Do not jump without Christ. The Bible says:

**

Rev 21

8But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

1 Corinthians 6:9

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,

**

God considers hatred to be murder and looking with lust to be adultery, He sees you inward parts.

**
Mat 5

21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

…

27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

**

 

[bigdawg]

Damascus,

Cardinal Dulles is not in favor of the idea that the Jews have their own covenant.

Since he is a cardinal he must be correct so I expect you to recant your position.

See americamagazine.org/gettext.cfm?textID=2550&articleTypeID=1&issueID=408

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

If the new covenant took the place of the old law (covenant), what do the Jews now cling to… an obsolete covenant at best or a covenant that never was salvific in the first place?

I understand what you’re saying bigdawg. And I think you have extremely valid points too. I won’t try to deny them-- especially from our Catholic perspective.

But stop and mediate on these thoughts for a moment.

Has the church done anything wrong in the past to anyone that might turn them away from Christianity?

I’m not talking about doctrine here. Our catholic doctrine is, as far as God has revealed the fullness of his will through the church, quite flawless. I’ve yet to hear any sound arguements which discredit our Godly catholic teachings in any way, shape or form. So, quite frankly, we’ve never ever harmed anyone by clearly presenting Catholic dogma via the Spirit out of love.

No. I’m talking more about our behaviour and attitudes towards the Jews and even other cultures over the last 2,000 years.

In other words, while our doctine is perfect, our behavior isn’t always the same-- which is exactly why we have the sacraments God provided to our preisthood for reconciling man to God.

Has it ever been a sin to admit that we as Catholics have sinned?

It seems to me that it is not.

In fact, it seems to me reasonable that if we’ve misbehaved in any way, and if our misbehavior leads others away from the faith, then it remains quite possible that some of those who have rejected the splendor of the Catholic Church may have done so through no fault of their own.

Rather, in some cases anyway, it seems more possible that our own sins may have more of an impact on people rejecting catholicism than our doctrine ever did.

I admit this certainly isn’t always the case. But more often than not, at least in the testimonials that I’ve read regarding those who have left the church, most people leave the faith because of something that someone did wrong to them-- and then they start to doubt the doctrines that they once cherished because they were let down by those they trusted to live out God’s word…

Consider what is written in Romans 2:24…

God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.

In other words, at least to the extent that we’ve failed other cultures in the past, when some people blashpheme God, it is not specifically because of their failure to believe.

Rather, at least according to the Scriptures, some portion of this blame heads toward those who have failed to properly instruct and display this love.

Consider John Paul II the Great’s placing a prayer of atonement into a crack in Jerusalem’s wailing wall for example.

Does anyone know what was written on that prayer?

Although it’s certainly possible that the first Pope prayed there before the Temple was razed, to our direct knowledge Pope John Paul II was the first pope to pray at the wall.

Likewise, although I’m sure that our first Pope went to synagogue in his own time, it is also a history making event for Pope John Paul II to have stepped within a synagogue and apologize for centuries of Catholic persecution of Jews, even referring to them as the Catholics’ elder brothers.

Clearly, as far as I can tell, something very unique seems to be happening in world history right now. And, as far as I am concerned, I will be very much looking forward to more dialogue between Catholics and Jews in the future.

Again I ask:

Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery?

Not at all!

Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.

But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!

 

[Damascus]

bigdawg,

You don’t understand me and I am sorry I don’t have the time to delve into this with the passion you expect of me here.

I would love to, but I am spending some time on another section of this forum and trying my best without a lot of help to defend Rome.

PS - I NEVER said I have tradition on my side here.

I am not taking a side. The Church has made in recent times a lot of mixed messages regarding this confusing issue (remember how many times I said confusing!)

Not unlike how Vat II had created confusion. many new changes take time to grasp and evaluate and it is not an easy process.

I will be happy to address this again or via PM at another time. This is a worthy topic and one that deserves a charitable discussion at length on.

Lets all pray that we can see the merits of the issues here and lets consider this with an open heart and mind. John Paul II is my guide here and we all loved him dearly. Did you know that in his will only 2 people were named in it- and I believe one was a Jew.

Let’s get past all the bickering and try to understand this better together.
I am not trenchant and not taking a side.

 

[bigdawg]

bigdawg,

You don’t understand me and I am sorry I don’t have the time to delve into this with the passion you expect of me here.

I would love to, but I am spending some time on another section of this forum and trying my best without a lot of help to defend Rome.

PS - I NEVER said I have tradition on my side here.

I am not taking a side. The Church has made in recent times a lot of mixed messages regarding this confusing issue (remember how many times I said confusing!)

Not unlike how Vat II had created confusion. many new changes take time to grasp and evaluate and it is not an easy process.

I will be happy to address this again or via PM at another time. This is a worthy topic and one that deserves a charitable discussion at length on.

Lets all pray that we can see the merits of the issues here and lets consider this with an open heart and mind. John Paul II is my guide here and we all loved him dearly. Did you know that in his will only 2 people were named in it- and I believe one was a Jew.

Let’s get past all the bickering and try to understand this better together.
I am not trenchant and not taking a side.

Fair enough.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Well, first, you are still subject to the justice of the Court’s obviously. The Jewish perspective on the afterlife varies greatly and, on the whole, we are more concerned and place more emphasis on our actions in the hear and now. Generally, we believe we will be judged on our acts in the hereafter and treated accordingly. But we don’t really believe in an either/or solution, as in you either are good enough for heaven or you are bad enough for hell.

Given the lack of a priesthood, Temple & sacrificial system, how are the religious requirements and needs which they met when they existed now taken care of ? To put it another way - did the Temple have any religious or social function that the synagogue & personal piety could not take care of ?​