Vatican document on Jews and conversion

[jwhitlock]

This was interesting news from the Vatican concerning the relationship between Catholicism and Jews. While there's much to applaud in the document, the following stood out:

Quote

How God will save the Jews if they do not explicitly believe in Christ is "an unfathomable divine mystery," but one which must be affirmed since Catholics believe that God is faithful to his promises and therefore never revoked his covenant with the Jewish people, it says.

It appears that the Vatican is basically saying that a belief in Christ is not needed for salvation. I'm curious as to what our Catholic posters on the board think of this.

[rpn]

Don't know about your question, but that isn't substantially different from the LDS position.  We just have the advantage of knowing that the Jew's Jehovah is aka Jesus Christ.

[jwhitlock]

2 hours ago, rpn said:

Don't know about your question, but that isn't substantially different from the LDS position.  We just have the advantage of knowing that the Jew's Jehovah is aka Jesus Christ.

Actually, Christ is central to salvation in LDS theology. There is no other way, and unless the Jews come to Christ they cannot be saved.

[3DOP]

9 hours ago, jwhitlock said:

This was interesting news from the Vatican concerning the relationship between Catholicism and Jews. While there's much to applaud in the document, the following stood out:

It appears that the Vatican is basically saying that a belief in Christ is not needed for salvation. I'm curious as to what our Catholic posters on the board think of this.

Hi jwhitlock. The only "unfathomable mystery" is how one reconciles this "truth" with the missionary activity, teachings, and prayers of the Catholic Church for nearly two thousand years:

"Almighty and everlasting God, Who drivest not away thy mercy from even the Jews: hear our prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy truth, which is Christ, they may be rescued from the darkness..." (prayer for the conversion of the Jews according to the Good Friday liturgy of the 1962 missal of Pope John XXIII). Lex orendi, lex credendi is a principle of the faith which teaches that the law of prayer is the law of belief. One can only believe the document by denying what the Catholic Church taught for two millenia. Not a problem for non-Catholics I know. Heh.

3DOP

Edited December 13, 2015 by 3DOP
attempt at clarity, why else?

[jwhitlock]

4 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

Hi jwhitlock. The only "unfathomable mystery" is how one reconciles this "truth" with the missionary activity, teachings, and prayers of the Catholic Church for nearly two thousand years:

Almighty and everlasting God, Who drivest not away thy mercy from even the Jews: hear our prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy truth, which is Christ, they may be rescued from the darkness..." (prayer for the conversion of the Jews according to the Good Friday liturgy of the 1962 missal of Pope John XXIII). Lex orendi, lex credendi is a principle of the faith which teaches that the law of prayer is the law of belief. One can only believe the document by denying what the Catholic Church taught for two millenia. Not a problem for non-Catholics I know. Heh.

3DOP

That's what I thought.

Actually, this should be a major problem for non-Catholics. You can't have a change like this that de-emphasizes salvation through Christ from the worlds largest Christian denomination and not have some negative fallout across the board.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 12/12/2015 at 0:17 PM, jwhitlock said:

....................................................  

It appears that the Vatican is basically saying that a belief in Christ is not needed for salvation. I'm curious as to what our Catholic posters on the board think of this.

What aspect of salvation are you discussing?  Final salvation, or only an episode of Christ doing a saving act during the Latter Days on this Earth, at the time when the fulness of the Gentiles has come?  D&C 45:39-55 provides the proper sequential context for Romans 11 and for a number of otherwise obscure references in Zechariah, in which the Lord comes to the Jews in distress on Mount Olivet (which has been split in twain), and they will ask where he got those wounds in his hands and feet.  It will be then that he will tell them who he is, and they will realize that some of their ancestors had crucified him, which shall cause them lamentation.  The Vatican now realizes that their supersessionism was in error, and that the NT certainly demands that the Jews come into their own in the End Time.  God will not forget his covenant people, even if they do not recognize Christ first.  Of course a belief in Christ is needed for final salvation.  Most people just don't understand the correct order of events in the Last Days.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Robert F. Smith

[jwhitlock]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

What aspect of salvation are you discussing?  Final salvation, or only an episode of Christ doing a saving act during the Latter Days on this Earth, at the time when the fulness of the Gentiles has come?  D&C 45:39-55 provides the proper sequential context for Romans 11 and for a number of otherwise obscure references in Zechariah, in which the Lord comes to the Jews in distress on Mount Olivet (which has been split in twain), and they will ask where he got those wounds in his hands and feet.  It will be then that he will tell them who he is, and they will realize that some of their ancestors had crucified him, which shall cause them lamentation.  The Vatican now realizes that their supercessionism was in error, and that the NT certainly demands that the Jews come into their own in the End Time.  God will not forget his covenant people, even if they do not recognize Christ first.  Of course a belief in Christ is needed for final salvation.  Most people just don't understand the correct order of events in the Last Days.

I don't disagree with what you've said, but the point is that the Vatican's document appears to go beyond just correcting the excesses of supersessionism that have occurred in the past. It appears to indicate that God will save the Jews because they are His covenant people, without regard to whether they ever acknowledge Christ. If that is the case, then it is a major shift in Catholic doctrine indicating that Christ is not necessarily the focus of all salvation.

[3DOP]

14 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

What aspect of salvation are you discussing?  Final salvation, or only an episode of Christ doing a saving act during the Latter Days on this Earth, at the time when the fulness of the Gentiles has come?  D&C 45:39-55 provides the proper sequential context for Romans 11 and for a number of otherwise obscure references in Zechariah, in which the Lord comes to the Jews in distress on Mount Olivet (which has been split in twain), and they will ask where he got those wounds in his hands and feet.  It will be then that he will tell them who he is, and they will realize that some of their ancestors had crucified him, which shall cause them lamentation.  The Vatican now realizes that their supercessionism was in error, and that the NT certainly demands that the Jews come into their own in the End Time.  God will not forget his covenant people, even if they do not recognize Christ first.  Of course a belief in Christ is needed for final salvation.  Most people just don't understand the correct order of events in the Last Days.

Hi Robert. It seems like you might not be familiar with Catholic teaching on the end time conversion of the Jews.

Catholics have never denied, but have always affirmed that the Jewish people in large numbers will embrace Christ and His gospel in the end times. According to Fr. Joseph Pohle (1852-1922), the conversion of the Jews is the second of six signs which must occur before the end of the world. The twelfth volume of a dogmatic theology that he wrote is called Eschatology, and he cites Scripture and St. Jerome to prove that the Catholic Church holds this to be a necessary event before the general judgment. He also cites the teaching of Martin Luther negatively, inasmuch as he opposed the teaching of the Catholic Church on this matter.  Anecdotally, I have come across the teaching repeatedly from other Catholic sources. I can get more references if necessary, but for now I'll give only one, the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), to demonstrate that "Catholic supercessionism" has never opposed the New Testament where it is most clearly proposed that the the Jews will convert "even if they do not recognize Christ first".   

Quote

According to the interpretation of the Fathers, the conversion of the Jews towards the end of the world is foretold by St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans (11:25-26): "For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, . . . that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles should come in. And so all Israel should be saved as it is written: There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob".

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08552a.htm

Even in the end times the Jews who are finally saved will not be able to claim that it is because they were mere physical offspring of Abraham and Sarah. The promises made to Moses have never been thought by Catholics to be adequate for final salvation. Baptism of desire teaches that everyone, who through no fault of their own lacks knowledge of Christ, may be saved. In that respect, we have always had some hope for all unbelievers.  But the new policy, with its call to discontinue any efforts to convert modern Jews, seems to indicate a shift in teaching that is not compatible with what has always been believed. So the Old Covenant now saves Jews who explicitly deny the teachings of the Gospel?

This is not a correction of a past error, but a corruption of a present truth. Hopefully, you can see that Catholics have always held, from the times of the Fathers, that there are Old and New Testament promises that many Jews, "looking upon Him whom they pierced", will accept the New Covenant in the Latter Days. Traditional Catholics agree with Mormons about that. But this new policy goes too far. Being against trying to convert Jewish people today, in this hour, cannot be acceptable without a corresponding belief that the promises referred to in the Scriptures affirm that Jews can be saved today, by adhering to the Old Covenant alone.

Regards,

Rory

 

 

Edited December 13, 2015 by 3DOP
clarity

[Damien the Leper]

Or how about all of Christendom mind their own business and not try to have an authoritative say about salvation and Israel. People must always remember that Jesus died a believing Jew and was not a convert to a re-imagined form or successor to Judaism. Jesus is not Christian and he's not LDS.

[Tacenda]

On 1/5/2016 at 0:20 AM, Valentinus said:

Or how about all of Christendom mind their own business and not try to have an authoritative say about salvation and Israel. People must always remember that Jesus died a believing Jew and was not a convert to a re-imagined form or successor to Judaism. Jesus is not Christian and he's not LDS.

That's very interesting.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

That's very interesting.

I think so too,  This is a very open perspective of who Jesus really is.

[jwhitlock]

7 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I think so too,  This is a very open perspective of who Jesus really is.

Perspectives are a dime a dozen. Correct perspectives are another thing entirely.

[3DOP]

On 1/5/2016 at 11:20 PM, Valentinus said:

Or how about all of Christendom mind their own business and not try to have an authoritative say about salvation and Israel. People must always remember that Jesus died a believing Jew and was not a convert to a re-imagined form or successor to Judaism. Jesus is not Christian and he's not LDS.

Catholics believe it was okay to say this to Israelites after the Crucifixion and Resurrection: "...be it known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God has raised from the dead, even in this name does he (a formerly crippled man) stands here before you, sound. This is 'The stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the corner stone. 'Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4, St. Peter, speaking of a crippled man who had been healed)

So the generation of Jews of whom it was said "whom you crucified", were required to change their minds about Jesus if they would be saved, but their children are saved by an Old Covenant that still rejects Him who fulfilled the Old Covenant and who has the "only name given to men by which we must be saved."?  I don't know what Catholic source of revelation could convince me that the Apostle Peter would have agreed that Jews of any post-resurrection generation need not convert.  The question raised is about a Catholic Church that has still not rejected Acts 4. In fact it was the epistle reading for last Sunday's Mass. 

I can understand being non-Catholic. I can understand believing that Catholics have always been wrong about teaching that Jews need to convert. I can't understand being Catholic and believing this at the same time. There is an episode in Jewish Spain. Late 1300's. It is deplorable and I am ashamed of it. But Jews were compelled for political reasons to be baptized. This was done without concern for whether the "baptisms" would be valid. (Of course the baptisms were invalid). Why would this happen if the Catholic Church taught that Jews don't even need to convert? For the Catholic Church to deny 2,000 years of continuous effort to continue the ministry of St. Peter to convert Jews, Catholics are in big trouble. Who would want to be associated with such a mess as reconciling this new Vatican statement about Jewish salvation, with what Catholics have always believed and how Catholics have always behaved with regards to the sons of Abraham after the flesh? I have been taught that Jewish people would convert in large numbers at the end of the world (looking upon him whom they pierced) and that this would be a cause of rejoicing. Why would we rejoice about that if conversion is unnecessary for Jews?

In my opinion, this is simple duplicity. "The Vatican" seems desperately fearful of being perceived as anti-semitic. This whole campaign is nothing less than lies intended to curry favor with a tiny minority of loud, angry, implacable Jews who hurl accusations at us. We should be defending great popes like Pius XII, who let Jews hide in the convents and monasteries of Rome in order to save them from the death camps. He did that without making up stories about Catholic teaching. Who loves the Jews more? Pius XII who saved many Jewish lives, and won a few Jewish souls? Or these lying bootlickers who kill souls by telling the world that that we think Jews are going to heaven without Jesus Christ?

If this is really something they expected us Catholics to believe, "the Vatican" needs to show us Catholics how to reinterpret the New Testament, or even disbelieve the New Testament. Then we need to know why we would want to be "Catholic" anyway, since we reject 2,000 years of Catholic interpretation of Scripture  and 2,000 years of missions to Jew and Gentiles. Yeah, maybe Gentiles are saved too...just because! If those who represent "the Vatican" in this instance, are serious about this nonsense, maybe "the Vatican" needs conversion as much as the Jews?

Edited January 7, 2016 by 3DOP

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, jwhitlock said:

Perspectives are a dime a dozen. Correct perspectives are another thing entirely.

Do you ever wonder that there is a possibility that you are wrong about something? 

[jwhitlock]

34 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Do you ever wonder that there is a possibility that you are wrong about something? 

Of course. Don't you wonder about yourself?

But that doesn't stop me from expressing what I think is correct.

[Jeanne]

28 minutes ago, jwhitlock said:

Of course. Don't you wonder about yourself?

But that doesn't stop me from expressing what I think is correct.

I do wonder ..many times and always trying to learn.  I guess I am just more open to what is and is not correct.

[jwhitlock]

6 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I do wonder ..many times and always trying to learn.  I guess I am just more open to what is and is not correct.

Well, if you find out a way of clearly understanding what is correct without the Spirit, let me know.

[Jeanne]

15 minutes ago, jwhitlock said:

Well, if you find out a way of clearly understanding what is correct without the Spirit, let me know.

The spirit and I will definitely let you know,

[strappinglad]

If Christ isn't a Christian, no one is. 

[saemo]

On December 12, 2015 at 0:17 PM, jwhitlock said:

This was interesting news from the Vatican concerning the relationship between Catholicism and Jews. While there's much to applaud in the document, the following stood out:

It appears that the Vatican is basically saying that a belief in Christ is not needed for salvation. I'm curious as to what our Catholic posters on the board think of this.

If you read the document it says explicitly that there is not two ways to salvation, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. It is also explicit that Christianity does not replace Judaism, but as St. Paul teaches in Romans 11 to Gentiles, that we Gentiles are grafted onto the tree that already exists and is rooted in holiness  

Also, what St. Paul teaches in Romans 11, that is, that the call and gifts of God ar irrevocable. And also, that Jews remain elect, even in their unbelief, and this election is is what leads to their salvation, AND the salvation of all nations. 

[jwhitlock]

6 hours ago, saemo said:

If you read the document it says explicitly that there is not two ways to salvation, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. It is also explicit that Christianity does not replace Judaism, but as St. Paul teaches in Romans 11 to Gentiles, that we Gentiles are grafted onto the tree that already exists and is rooted in holiness  

Also, what St. Paul teaches in Romans 11, that is, that the call and gifts of God ar irrevocable. And also, that Jews remain elect, even in their unbelief, and this election is is what leads to their salvation, AND the salvation of all nations. 

So, election - and not Christ - is what leads to salvation?

[saemo]

1 hour ago, jwhitlock said:

So, election - and not Christ - is what leads to salvation?

Our Salvation IS Jesus Christ. 

Read Romans 11. 

Edited January 16, 2016 by saemo

[saemo]

On December 13, 2015 at 7:21 AM, jwhitlock said:

I don't disagree with what you've said, but the point is that the Vatican's document appears to go beyond just correcting the excesses of supersessionism that have occurred in the past. It appears to indicate that God will save the Jews because they are His covenant people, without regard to whether they ever acknowledge Christ. If that is the case, then it is a major shift in Catholic doctrine indicating that Christ is not necessarily the focus of all salvation.

The document being discussed doesnt change doctrine. 

[saemo]

On December 13, 2015 at 7:57 PM, 3DOP said:

Hi jwhitlock. The only "unfathomable mystery" is how one reconciles this "truth" with the missionary activity, teachings, and prayers of the Catholic Church for nearly two thousand years:

"Almighty and everlasting God, Who drivest not away thy mercy from even the Jews: hear our prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of thy truth, which is Christ, they may be rescued from the darkness..." (prayer for the conversion of the Jews according to the Good Friday liturgy of the 1962 missal of Pope John XXIII). Lex orendi, lex credendi is a principle of the faith which teaches that the law of prayer is the law of belief. One can only believe the document by denying what the Catholic Church taught for two millenia. Not a problem for non-Catholics I know. Heh.

3DOP

Hi 3DOP,

I read the document as reconciling the people of the old covenant to Christians. In the news article it covers the Jewish response, which is that reconciliation could not occur if it is seen as a means to the conversion of Jews. This then is an act of charity, in the truest Catholic sense of Caritas. That is, loving the other without expectation of something in return. I'd say, it is evangelization. Not all evangelization is done with missionaries. 

[jwhitlock]

23 minutes ago, saemo said:

Our Salvation IS Jesus Christ. 

Read Romans 11. 

You're avoiding the question.

Is Christ necessary for salvation for all people? Is salvation ONLY through Jesus Christ? Do the Jews have to come to Christ in order to obtain salvation?

That's what the Vatican document brings into question. What are your answers to the above three questions? And how is the Vatican document consistent with an affirmative answer to all three questions?