Moe,

"You are the worst kind of convert we could get."

Your loving post is received as you intended it to be received. I will pray for you.

Curly

Axios:

Or, to be more "orthodox," go the Roman Way!

(And immersed yourself in Latin aphorisms.)


Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam! (See?)

Dear Dan,

Well, I like you!

And you have a Rite to your opinion on everything.

I was going to greet the Papal Delegation at the Martyrs' Shrine during the papal visit.

They had a folk Mass for a U.S. pilgrim tour.

I made every effort to stay for it. The guitars I was used to. But when they all started to clap their hands etc. I just got this queazy feeling in my stomach.

It was bigger than me, I couldn't control it and had to leave.

I felt bad about that, but what could I do?

Anyway, on a totally unrelated topic, what is the significance of May 24th for Methodism, the day of the conversion of Wesley?

Alex

Alex,

The Roman Rite has given up most of its power and beauty, at least in most of the masses I've attended. St. John Cantius is one notable exception. I did write about the rite a bit hyperbolically. That aint right (but don't tell Moe I said so;-). The Eucharist is valid. That does make it better.

May 24th I think is Aldersgate Sunday. It is the day in which Wesley felt "his heart strangely warmed and knew he was a son of God". Believe it or not he attended a reading of the preface to Luther's commentary on Romans. John's brother Charles had been moved the night before and told John all about it. May 24th is when John went and said this gave him an assurance to press on. This wasn't the first or last time he experienced something like this but it seems to be the most significant. I've read over that preface. I still don't quite understand what was so moving about it. I guess one would have had to have been there.

Dan Lauffer

Jesus gave us one simple thing to do and that is "Go therefore and baptise ALL nations in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit". Jesus did not say go and baptise everyone except Jews, Muslims, Fundies, etc... ALL NATIONS that includes Israel! If the Church does not agree with this teaching then it is NOT a church from Christ.

This is what a priest from EWTN has to say,




There is HOPE in the Church! Father Echert is one of those priest that gives me hope.

[ 08-15-2002: Message edited by: aChristian@Work ]

I expect that the statement will be subject to some review and revision, both at the level of the NCCB and at the CDF level.

I've had the opportunity to read the whole statement, and to be honest its suggestion that there is a sort of co-equal mission in the world shared between contemporary Judaism and the Church seems very novel, and rather incompatible with the way that the Church has viewed contemporary (that is post-Christ) Judaism both in the NT canon, as well as in the Holy Fathers. If one felt the understandable need to say that the Church no longer supports any kind of forced conversion (from anyone) and certainly not from Jews, that should have been said. To suggest that contemporary Judaism provides a common witness in the world to the truth, alongside the Church, seems incompatible with Christianity, as reflected in the NT and the Holy Fathers.

Similarly disturbing was the outright endorsement of using rabbinical sources to guide interpretation of the OT. The Holy Fathers teach us that the OT can only really be understood through the lens of the NT -- what rabbinical scholars have to say about it is therefore very much beside the point, and of very limited relevance.

Finally, there is a strikingly odd remark in the paper to the effect that the very continued existence of Israel and Judaism bespeaks some sort of divine approbation for the current form and witness of contemporary Judaism. This strikes me as a particularly dangerous way of thinking, for Islam, Buddhism, and, perhaps even more so, Hinduism have all persisted for quite some time ... does this also indicate divine approbation of these "faith groups"? By contrast, Christ tells us to go forth and baptize all nations in the name of the Trinity -- it's pretty unambiguous, and before we make claims (like this paper does) that this command does not apply to Jews, we ought to remember that the vast majority of the folks who were being baptized at the time of Christ and in the early church were, of course, Jews!

Brendan

Ex-Roman Catholic @ Work,

Why do you choose to embrace the media story of the moment and assume that the worst is true rather than researching and finding definitive answers before coming to any conclusions?

At the start of this thread you posted an excerpt of a secular news item quoting an excerpt of a document of a subcommittee of the USCCB. You did not ask for an explanation of this document but rather chose to assume that the bishops have “all of sudden change[d] 2,000 years of Christian teaching”. Why did you choose to accuse them of this before you even began even the most basic steps to find out what the document actually stated or what the Church teaches? From my perspective this comes awful close to false witness and this is a form of internet flaming.

I think your time would be better spent in prayer, sacrifice and service in whatever new denomination you have chosen since leaving Catholicism instead of looking for problems in the Catholic Church. Since the Church is the people of God, every one of us is flawed and sinful. Your search for a perfect Church can only end in total disillusionment. It is appropriate to expect our leaders, - bishops and priests – to provide a good Christian witness. It is not appropriate to make the fact that some do not provide a good Christian witness the center of your life.

Administrator

Dear Ray,

One problem here is that one can oversimplify matters in terms of conversion.

A true Christian conversion occurs when one comes to know Christ as Saviour, repents and accepts Him, and lives the Life in Christ through His Church.

Salvation is always MEDIATED. The message of Christ is always mediated as well.

I can be born into an Orthodox Jewish family, for example.

I can be as convinced of Judaism as Christians are of Christianity.

The questions put to me by Christians could ring hollow. They are not questions regarding the Messiah that a Jew would want answered.

Christ NEVER commanded us to convert the world. Only God can do that.

What Christ commanded his followers to do is to preach the Gospel throughout the world.

We are to make disciples, but that is only after God has entered people's hearts and called them to Him.

This is a difficult topic to address, to be sure.

Let me tell you about my experience.

I have friends who are Jewish, Muslim, Protestant and what have you.

They all know what my religious commitment is about.

I wouldn't try to tell them that their current religious commitments fail because they don't correspond to mine.

I appreciate their religious values and traditions, as I know they do mine.

If they want more info on anything regarding Christ or His Church, they know who to get it from.

I love them all dearly and do what I can to be there for them in their times of need and pain.

When I tell them I pray for them, they know Who I am praying to for them.

Christian witness for me is an ongoing thing. I like to think that everything we do is about reflecting Christ to others.

We reflect Christ even when we don't speak of Him directly, or so we would hope.

We must respect other religions as I believe Christ would have us do. These religions would not be able to exist without God's permission.

And I think that Christ is ALREADY among the faithful members of other religions.

I believe they already know Him, without knowing His Name or His plan for them.

And when they follow their good conscience in response to the lights that God gives them, within the particular communities and historically conditioned contexts in which we ALL live, then God is their God in both life and death.

Those who sincerely follow their own religious traditions and paths into which they were born and raised and seek God through prayer, fasting and good works will see Christ in the afterlife.

And when they see Him, they will know Him.

My agnostic Jewish uncle was impressed greatly by the example of the Pope and the youth of World Youth Day.

He even told me, and I was pleasantly surprised and not a little shocked at this, that "I have no faith, but I was impressed with them because they have faith and live their faith."

I guess I could have told him that he needed to convert to Christ etc.

But instead I just told him that there were Jews, Muslims and Buddhists who attended the WYD services as well.

He was so fascinated by that and said, "Then could I have gone?"

I said, "Yes, you could have."

We'll see where we go from here.

Alex

[ 08-15-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

Dear Brendan,

I personally find nothing offensive to the uniqueness of Christianity in what the bishops said regarding Judaism.

Does not Jesus love the Jews even when they don't believe in Him?

Does not He use them and others for His purposes as well?

As for what the Fathers have said, again, I believe that interpretation of their writings can grow and develop under the light of the Spirit.

The limitations of historical context in which they lived are not part of the inspiration of the Spirit and there is always more that we can learn about the faith of and life in Christ in the ongoing dynamic relationship we have with the Holy Trinity.

Again, you didn't answer my earlier question about your personal witness to Jews.

How would you, as an Orthodox Christian, and an extremely well-read and deeply committed one at that, witness to a colleague who is a Jew without offending him or her, AND that is entirely in keeping with what you have yourself said is in keeping with the teachings of the Fathers in this regard?

I think the Catholic bishops have made a real achievement here that goes beyond the narrow parameters of former, outmoded interpretations of historically conditioned Church praxis with regard other religions.

The bishops have not said that all religions are equal in the eyes of God. That is your interpretation of what they have said.

That the Covenant of the Jews is still valid with God, that God still loves His Chosen people and that He is still with them, especially in their current suffering in Israel etc. - sorry, but I'll defend all this until the cows come home.

So unless you can show how practically to implement your interpretation of the binding teachings of the Fathers with respect to conversion, what you've said provides an instance of major dissonance for me and for my two Jewish friends who are converts to Christianity and who are standing by my computer reading this thread.

Alex

Hey, I just quoted from a priest who knows more about this than I do. My first comment about preaching to all nations was not directly correlated with the document from the US Catholic Bishops. I believe you are assuming too much into what I post. I made it VERY CLEAR that I wanted opinions on this document from the Church before I MADE up my mind on how I think. I still have not made up my mind on what I think of this document. Further, any comments I said specifically Biblical references are not up for discussion because they are the words of God. Who are we including the Church to say other wise?

To make myself clearer I never stated that I believe the Church's official doctrine conflicts with what the Bible says. I realize this was document was not an official church document on faith and morals because of that I have not made up my mind on how I perceive this document.

God Bless!

Brendan raises some excellent points for discussion.

I can understand a conclusion that might suggest that Jews have a common witness in the world to the truth alongside the Church but I don’t think that we can make a definite conclusion on this. I think it is more likely a poor attempt to state that Christians have roots in Judaism and that working together for things we hold common regarding societal issues serves us better than not working together.

I do understand the reference to using rabbinical sources, not as a definitive source of interpretation but rather as a worthy historical perspective. Everything must be understood in light of the New Testament. This, however, does not mean that the historical perspective of the Old Testament is worthless as a help in understanding the New Testament. In my personal study I am always amazed at the new life given to the New Testament whenever I read the Old Testament. Very often I will read something in Isaiah that will give light to one of the Gospel passages. Maybe the document really means no more than this?

I do agree that this document is wrong if it really makes claims that Jews do not need to accept Christ. The calling of all people to follow Christ and be baptized in the Name of the Trinity is the very center of our faith! I will be curious how the bishops will treat this proposed document.

Again, we need to keep in mind that this document is very much a working document of a subcommittee. It may reflect the position of its authors but should not be understood as official Church teaching. It is fair to raise questions both for understanding and to encourage those writing this document to be faithful to Church teaching as well as clear in what they are trying to communicate. To assume the worst before asking explanation is, in my opinion, wrong.

Dear Administrator,

As always, you put things in perspective.

I've tried to respond to this thread thoughtfully and with not a little soul-searching.

I still have no idea how a true Christian today can be friends with Jews and others in the workplace and socially and accept them as they are without offending them by trying to convert them.

I know I don't try to convert them overtly.

I know when I see people who live the life in Christ, yourself included, Sir, I want to be more like them and am drawn to Christ in a fuller way.

If that is what we are talking about here, I've no problem.

And to say that Judaism and its spiritual life is quite capable of engendering union with God, in and of itself - don't see an issue there either.

If I were a Jew and came to believe in Jesus but without wanting to be joined to Him in faith and baptism - that would be a moral issue for me personally.

I accept my Jewish friends and colleagues as they are, without telling them their religion is somehow deficient and they need to convert.

I don't understand the problem with that position.

In any event, I will remove myself from this thread, as I said I would, since I know that anything further I can say to this might be offensive (and I might be called an apostate - shudder! ).

To quote St Thomas More to King Henry VIII: "Your Grace, I'm not fitted to meddle in these matters. To me it seems a matter for the Holy See . . ."

Have a great weekend, Sir!

Alex

No you did not. You very clearly and formally accused the bishops of changing the Church’s teaching:



There is no possible way this accusation can be understood as anything but an accusation. You did not simply post the link and ask for an explanation but instead assumed that the bishops had abandoned Church teaching and accused them of doing so as if it were obvious to the world that they had done so. You then went on to attempt to claim that you didn’t want to blame the bishops again and the further made a request for someone to post “more Orthodox Catholic comments”, which is nothing more than poorly veiled accusation that you already believed the bishops to be unorthodox on this issue.

"Does not Jesus love the Jews even when they don't believe in Him?"

Yes, but that's not really relevant to the issue here. God also loves you when you are sinning -- does that mean it's okay to be a sinner? Of course not. Of course, Jews are not, by virtue of who they are "sinners", but my point is that God's love is constant and therefore its presence can't be used to justify whatever state of affairs one may find oneself in.

"Does not He use them and others for His purposes as well?"

Again, this is not relevant.

"How would you, as an Orthodox Christian, and an extremely well-read and deeply committed one at that, witness to a colleague who is a Jew without offending him or her, AND that is entirely in keeping with what you have yourself said is in keeping with the teachings of the Fathers in this regard?"

Actually, one of my former colleagues at work is a former Christian (a former RC at that) who is married to a Jewish woman who was (and perhaps still is -- he no longer works here) contemplating a conversion to Judaism. We had numerous talks and discussions about a wide variety of theological issues, and I patiently explained, in a respectful way, the Christian perspective on the relationship between the OT and the NT, and the meaning of Christ, and the understanding of the Church from the beginning relating to post-Christian Judaism. It is possible to explain it correctly without being offensive, and to be honest, I think he found my candor more refreshing that a white-washing would have been.

"The bishops have not said that all religions are equal in the eyes of God. That is your interpretation of what they have said."

I don't think that I wrote what you say here, but in any case the "reflections" certainly do say that Christianity and Judaism have some sort of joint witnessing role in the world, to wit:

"Specifically, the Catholic Church has come to recognize that its mission of preparing for the coming of the kingdom of God is one that is shared with the Jewish people, even if Jews do not conceive of this task christologically as the Church does."

and

"We both therefore have missions before God to undertake in the world. The Church believes that the mission of the Jewish people is not restricted to their historical role as the people of whom Jesus was born "according to the flesh" "Rom 9:5) and from whom the Church's apostles came."

and

"Their witness to the kingdom, which did not originate with the Church's experience of Christ crucified and raised, must not be curtailed by seeking the conversion of the Jewish people to Christianity."

The difference appears to be only that we respectively bear witness to God and his Kingdom in a different way -- we're basically the same but we bear witness in a different way. That is novel. It is also novel to suggest, as the final passage I quoted does, that because Judaism predates Christianity, it must not be absorbed by Christianity. Again, that seems to go against the core idea of the NT fulfilling, completing and thereby superseding the OT. It's quite a novel understanding indeed of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism.

Brendan

Alex,

Too often we think of evangelization as knocking on doors and passing out Christian tracts. This is certainly important and a necessary part of evangelization but the real evangelization is how we live out our lives of faith in Christ. People who know we are Christians learn about Jesus Christ in how we live our lives. To them, we are Christ. If we live a life of faith in Christ then people will see that this faith we have in Christ is real and true. If we only give lip service to the life of Christ then people will conclude that it must be false because we do not live it.

I have had the privilege of knowing someone who was Jewish who embraced Christ and is now a practicing Byzantine Catholic. He says the ultimate thing that convinced him that Christ was indeed the Savior was that he saw this in others and came to see for himself because of their unspoken witness. I think it was Sharon who recently used the quote on this Forum from St. Francis of Assisi: “Proclaim the Gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.”

Respect for your Jewish friends means that you cannot constantly witness Christ to them in a way that is harassing. You can only be open about your faith in Christ and respond accordingly when the opportunity presents itself. We need to call all people – including Jews – to accept and follow Christ. Our best witness is in how we live out our own life of faith.

Regarding your wishes for me to have a great weekend, has Canada officially gone to the four day work week? If it has, I am sure that all of us Americans would be willing to embrace this Canadian custom.

Finally, Brendan’s comments in the above post are accurate. I look to the bishops for further clarification of what this document is trying to communicate. It is the command of Christ to baptize all nations in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This commandment includes Jews.

Admin