Catholic Teaching on Jews and Judaism

[Iohannes Origenis]

Well, while I wait for a moderator to approve my post citing the magisterial sources most relevant to this question (it must be because I'm a newbie here? *shrugs*), I guess as a Gentile member of the Association of Hebrew Catholics, I should probably jump in. I'm hearing the Protestant idea of replacement theology/suppressionism here, and this erroneous and contrary to Catholic teaching. For purposes of definition of terms that follow, the phrase or word "Jewish People" and Jews" mean "unbelieving Jews."

The Church's teaching on the Jews and Judaism is highly nuanced and has developed over time. The most authoritative and current teachings are those found in the sacred declaration of Nostra Aetate at the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, and the most recent Catechism. Unfortunately, neither Vatican II nor any modern Pope has effectively settled the question of the status of the Old Covenant (especially as it relates to the Jews). It is, in some ways, a mystery of the Faith – analogous to aspects of Christology – divinely revealed but still having hidden aspects that may never be settled until either the Ingathering of Israel (CCC 674) or the Parousia itself. Although it is perhaps possible the development will proceed to a definitive teaching that neatly answers this question (I doubt it, lol). Who knows but God the Holy Spirit?

One thing the Church does very well though is telling us what is wrong theologically. And this is where I think there needs to be some clarity.

One the one hand is the error of suppressionism. I have seen this here. This is roughly the assertion that the Catholic Church is the New Israel (true) and the inheritor and fulfillment of many Old Testament hopes and prophecies (also true), and "therefore" (this does not follow) has replaced the Jews and suppressed the Old Covenant such that Jews are no longer chosen of God and/or hold no place in God's future plan. The Church very explicitly rejects this idea.

On the other hand is what is called "dual covenant" theology. This is an idea that there are two salvific covenants in force in the Christian Age: one for Jews and one for Gentiles. Jews who are faithful to their covenant are saved by that, and Gentiles by the New Covenant. This too is rejected by the Church (as early as St. Paul, obviously). Protestant dispensationalism, which I used to adhere to, is a form of this although it isn't quite the same.

The Church is somewhere in the middle. She teaches that Jews and Catholics (and Christians more broadly) are "overlapping and complimentary" peoples of God (as Jimmy Akin puts it well). We are both elect of God: the Jews based on the irrevocable call of God to their forefathers, and the Gentiles and Hebrew Catholics in the New Covenant (more on that later). Indeed, a Hebrew Catholic could be said to be called "twice" or have a "double inheritance." Thus, the Church is both the New Israel, and the Jews remain the Old Israel. Both-and is a basic principle of Catholic theology. While she affirms this mystery, the Church nevertheless has always taught that the Gospel is, indeed, for Jews and Gentiles...to the Jews, first, in fact. We also acknowledge that the full conversion of the Jews will not take place until before the Parousia in a yet mysterious way ("all Israel will be saved" as St. Paul ambiguously puts it).

But this is where things become more complicated and mysterious: What role does the Old Covenant still play for Jews? I will try my best to summarize this as simply as I can:

The best way to understand the Church's positive teaching is to understand the Old Covenant as being fulfilled and continued in the New. It was not obliterated nor abrogated, but fulfilled and continued. All the Church's teachings and sacraments have Old Covenant roots and parallels; hence the Church continues what God established in the Old Covenant (i.e., to be specific, the Sinai or Mosaic Covenant). Moreover, the moral law revealed in the Old Covenant remains in force (as St. Thomas Aquinas taught).

It was the ceremonial law (the things God commanded to ensure the Jews remained distinct from Gentiles for the sake of preparing for Christ) which was set aside in the New Covenant. Really, only Hebrew Catholics and perhaps those affiliated with them somehow are "allowed" (although this isn't a hard and fast rule, canonically) to keep the ceremonial law. This is because that was a "shadow" of the things to come: e.g. Mass, sacraments, the New Law written on the heart, etc. Only in the ceremonial aspects of the Old Covenant can we say there was any abolishment. Hence, the New Testament and the Church (Florence, Trent, etc.) explicitly deny the ceremonial law is salvific in any way.

At the same time, the Old Covenant – being a promise made by God – cannot be utterly undone. Hence, God does two things it seems:

Firstly, and more importantly for Catholic doctrine, He fulfills and continues the Old in the New (cf. Matt. 5:17). Yet this does not settle the promise made to the Children of Israel (Lev. 26:12, Jer. 7:23, et al.). Hence, secondly, God does not revoke His love or fidelity to Israel (Jews), even if they are unfaithful to Him. Moreover, the remaining status of Israel as God's elect is precisely why the Gentiles can enter the New Covenant to begin with, as St. Paul explains with his grafting metaphor in Romans 11 (which the Church explicitly cites in Nostra Aetate).

Thus, one way of expressing the Church's doctrine that would not be heretical would be to say that God's love, choosing, and fidelity to Jews has not been revoked, nor can it ever be. His choosing and love them, as even the Rabbis teach, is in any case the most important aspect of the Old Covenant (cf. Deut. 4:37-38). Yet, the Old Covenant, followed as most Jews do, is neither salvific nor what God ultimately desires for Jews (which is to become Catholic). But a "hardening of heart" has come on Israel, as St. Paul teaches mysteriously (even he doesn't quite seem to have full knowledge of this, cf. Rom. 11:33), and this means that it is unlikely all Jews will convert before an appointed time in God's plan. Thus, the Church teaches that at some point – probably near the Parousia – "all Israel" will be saved. Whether that means every Jew on earth or the majority of Jews is not clear, although the latter must at least be true (cf. CCC 674).

Okay, I've done my best. Hopefully when/if my original comment is approved by a moderator, one will have numerous resources to look at this in more detail.

Todah rabbah!

 

[ralliann]

So getting back to what I posted and the Catholic teaching concerning the Jewish people:

What’s more, it expressly affirmed that there is a “common patrimony” and, indeed, a “spiritual bond”—something not merely historical, though rooted in historical reality—uniting Christians (“the people of the New Covenant”) with Jews (“Abraham’s stock”). Perhaps most importantly, quoting the Jewish Christian St. Paul, it refers to the Jewish people as the “good olive branch onto which has been grafted the wild shoot, the Gentiles.”[\quote]

As far as the conversation has been going, pointing out a "common patrimony", which elsewhere is termed a "spiritual Patrimony". The document points to the Abrahamic covenant. Therefore, the covenant of circumcision is in mind here. Jew's indeed keep that covenant.

Nostra Aetate turned out to be only the beginning of the development of Catholic teaching on Jews and Judaism. Within a decade and a half of its ratification and promulgation by Pope Paul VI as the official teaching of the Church, Karol Wojtyła, the Archbishop of Cracow in Poland, would become Pope. As John Paul II, he would use Nostra Aetate as the foundation for further elaboration of the Church’s teaching, working out the fuller implications of the Vatican Council’s declaration.

It is important to understand that what concerned John Paul in this matter was above all theological, not sociological or political. He sought to understand, and to teach, the truth about how the Church properly understands and relates herself to Jews and Judaism. There were options on the table here—judgments to be made, if the topic was to be addressed at all. And John Paul made his judgments, exercising his full authority to declare the mind of Christ as Christ’s Vicar, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.

One option would have been to say that God’s covenant with the Jews had been abrogated when the Jewish people as a whole did not join the Christian Church, but we should be nice to Jews anyway, and avoid speaking disparagingly of their religion, since after all, we’ve been awfully cruel to them over the centuries, and we’d have a better chance of winning them over by being kind.

This was not the path he took or the judgment he made. This was not the mind of Christ.

Rather, he spoke of the Jews as “the people of the original Covenant.” Indeed, his exact words were “our kindred nation of the original Covenant.” To make himself even clearer, he formally declared that God’s covenant with the Jews “has never been revoked.” In 1986, speaking to leaders of the Australian Jewish community during a visit to that country, John Paul went still further, declaring the covenant to be not only still in force, but irrevocable.

[/QUOTE]
The promise to the circumcision is not revoked. Circumcision is the "original covenant. Law was added later. Which cannot abolish the promises to Abraham.

The references to “our Jewish heritage” and to the Jewish people as “our brothers and sisters” are particularly noteworthy.

In one of the most important acts of his long and remarkably consequential pontificate, both those concepts would again be center stage when John Paul made his historic visit, also in 1986, to the Great Synagogue of Rome—the first by any pope—where he made the following profound declaration:


Driving the point home, John Paul greeted Jewish rabbis in a meeting in Assisi in 1993 as “our dearly beloved brothers of the ancient covenant never broken and never to be broken.”

Benedict XVI and Francis have, of course, stood by the teachings of Nostra Aetate and of John Paul II—the teachings of the Church. So will their successors. These are magisterial teachings—declarations of the mind of Christ.

Obviously, contemporary Judaism and Christianity have important differences—above all the question whether Jesus of Nazareth is or is not the Messiah promised to Israel, the incarnate son of God who suffered and died in atonement for our sins and who by his cross and resurrection triumphs over sin and death. Neither the Second Vatican Council nor John Paul II and his successors deny these differences, paper them over, or treat them as insignificant.

They have led some Catholics to suppose that if, as Catholics of course believe, the Church is right on these questions then Judaism as such, as it is practiced today, is of no special spiritual standing or importance, that “living Judaism” has no role or mission, that God is no longer in that special form of relationship called “covenant” with the Jews, that the Jewish religion has been “superseded” by Christianity.

This is not the teaching of the Catholic Church—and faithful Catholics, by definition, want to be guided by the teaching of the Church. Faithful Catholics will therefore affirm, with the Council and with the papal magisterium, that the Jewish people are indeed “the good olive tree onto which the wild shoot of the Gentiles has been grafted,” that God’s original Covenant with his chosen people is unbroken and unbreakable, that our bond with the Jewish people is a spiritual bond, rooted in a common spiritual patrimony, and that our Jewish neighbors are indeed our brothers and sisters in faith.

I think if we keep in mind that unbelieving jew's continued to keep the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision, the above is not so confusing.
It was by the Abrahamic covenant that the redmption from Egypt came. Passover IMO, should be understood as a memorial of the fufillment of the Abrahamic promises to their fathers.

Ex 2:24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.
Ex 6:5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant.

Le 26:45 But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I am the LORD.

Jo 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.

Yes, they still have the promises and are loved for the sake of the fathers.

 

[ralliann]

Oy vey! This thread is quite disturbing and requires an intervention on multiple levels, I think, lest our separated brethren (or worse, our elder brethren!!) read and misunderstand. Authoritative sources and helpful articles now follow, written from an entirely orthodox Catholic viewpoint and rooted in the *living* Magisterium (Apostolic Teaching Authority) of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (East and West).

First & foremost, Nostra Aetate, a declaration of an Ecumenical Council of the Church:



Lest anyone wish to contest the sacred declaration of the Ecumenical Council of the Church of Jesus Christ on grounds of whether it's "infallible" or not:



Now, for the authoritative editio typica of the universal Catechism of the Bishops and the Church:



The following are excellent, in-depth, treatments of this subject by orthodox, loyal, non-dissenting theologians and teachers well-versed in this subject. For a comprehensive explanation of the teaching above, I highly recommend these sources:

"The Corporate Conversion of Israel" by Jimmy Akin (2003)

"The Covenant With Israel" by Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J. (2005)

"[Pope Emeritus] Benedict on Judaism and Christianity" by Jimmy Akin (2020)

"Latest Vatican Statement on the Jews" by Catholic Answers (2015)

I also highly recommend the brief, cheaply priced, but well-researched and faithful Catholic Answers booklet "20 Answers: Judaism" from CA Press.

More difficult to obtain is the book by Dominican Friar, Fr. Antonine Lévy, O.P. (an orthodox, faithful priest and published with the Dominican Order's Provincial approval): "Jewish Church: A Catholic Approach to Messianic Judaism" (2021).

I also, in general, would recommend the work of the ecclesiastically-approved apostolate: "The Association of Hebrew Catholics."

To conclude, I quote with humility and trembling the sage words of St. Paul to the Catholic Christians of Corinth: "Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves..." (2 Cor. 13:5).

I obtained Antoine Levi's book via kindle. It was not difficult at that time.

 

[Iohannes Origenis]

I think if we keep in mind that unbelieving jew's continued to keep the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision, the above is not so confusing.
It was by the Abrahamic covenant that the redmption from Egypt came. Passover IMO, should be understood as a memorial of the fufillment of the Abrahamic promises to their fathers.

To some degree (with one caveat), and this reflects what St. Paul does. If we understand, as St. Paul and even Rabbinic Judaism teaches, that the Abrahamic Covenant is bound up with the Mosaic Covenant at Sinai, we can better understand this. God doesn't revoke previous Covenants. They are promises made by Him and He cannot be forsworn. Rather, He seems to fulfill old covenants in new ones that continue aspects of the older ones. The Mosaic Covenant was "new" when it was revealed, but it contained the commandment (mitzvah) to Abraham of circumcision and rejecting other gods. Similarly, the Davidic Covenant (the precursor the current New Covenant) maintains the Sinai Covenant Law (Deut. 17:18). Thus, when the New Covenant appears and is revealed, it maintains, continues, and fulfills the Mosaic Covenant (but in its own way; i.e. the distinction between the ceremonial and moral aspects of the Law of St. Moses).

The only caveat I would make is that, since the revelation of the New Covenant, neither Jew nor Gentile need be circumcised (this was a ceremonial law given to Abraham as a precursor of the revealing of the Torah; Galatians makes this clear, if I recall as does Florence and Trent). Although that doesn't mean Jews cannot circumcise – and, I have little doubt, God appreciates their doing this in their ignorance.

 

[Iohannes Origenis]

I obtained Antoine Levi's book via kindle. It was not difficult at that time.

Very glad to hear this!!!

 

[ralliann]

Very glad to hear this!!!

It was much less expensive than the actual book. It is also harder to reexamine specific content. But it is a good book. I actually found it as I was keeping an eye on the helsinki consultation. All jew's of different denominations in ecumenical dialogue with Messianic Jew's. Just interesting. As for myself I was personally interesting in the "Catholic"/Orthodox views and dialogue with them.

 

[Iohannes Origenis]

It was much less expensive than the actual book. It is also harder to reexamine specific content. But it is a good book. I actually found it as I was keeping an eye on the helsinki consultation. All jew's of different denominations in ecumenical dialogue with Messianic Jew's. Just interesting. As for myself I was personally interesting in the "Catholic"/Orthodox views and dialogue with them.

Great. It's still more expensive than I'd like given how excellent a book it is, but even still it wasn't on Kindle or paperback for a long time. Fr. Névy O.P. is a great priest! I met him at an Association of Hebrew Catholics meeting, and he was just amazing and solid! Very much a Dominican too, lol.

 

[ralliann]

To some degree (with one caveat), and this reflects what St. Paul does. If we understand, as St. Paul and even Rabbinic Judaism teaches, that the Abrahamic Covenant is bound up with the Mosaic Covenant at Sinai, we can better understand this. God doesn't revoke previous Covenants.

[/QUOTE]
A caveat, when God binds himself with an "oath" he will not repent of it. He sware to Abraham.

Heb 6:16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.
Heb 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: {confirmed … : Gr. interposed himself by }
Heb 7:20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:
Heb 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec {without … : or, without swearing of an oath }
Heb 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

Also God never made the Sinai covenant with their fathers
Deut 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

They are promises made by Him and He cannot be forsworn. Rather, He seems to fulfill old covenants in new ones that continue aspects of the older ones. The Mosaic Covenant was "new" when it was revealed, but it contained the commandment (mitzvah) to Abraham of circumcision and rejecting other gods. Similarly, the Davidic Covenant (the precursor the current New Covenant) maintains the Sinai Covenant Law (Deut. 17:18). Thus, when the New Covenant appears and is revealed, it maintains, continues, and fulfills the Mosaic Covenant (but in its own way; i.e. the distinction between the ceremonial and moral aspects of the Law of St. Moses).

The only caveat I would make is that, since the revelation of the New Covenant, neither Jew nor Gentile need be circumcised (this was a ceremonial law given to Abraham as a precursor of the revealing of the Torah; Galatians makes this clear, if I recall as does Florence and Trent). Although that doesn't mean Jews cannot circumcise – and, I have little doubt, God appreciates their doing this in their ignorance.

The carnal commands circumcision and genealogy for priesthood etc. has been disannulled for sure. I believe Jew's keeping circumcision is what keeps them as his people of promise still. As the council spoke of a "spiritual patrimony".

 

[rturner76]

From the Catechism:

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways." 325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, 326 "the first to hear the Word of God." 327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ", 328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."

 

[ralliann]

From the Catechism:

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways." 325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, 326 "the first to hear the Word of God." 327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ", 328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."

Yep, Jews are the circumcision

Ro 15:8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:
Ga 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Ga 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles

 

[Michie]

Latest Vatican Statement on the Jews

No. The most recent statement from the Vatican I can find that addresses the issue of Christian evangelism to Jews is The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrev...

www.catholic.com

 

[Michie]

Can Jews Be Saved?

Yes, they can, and indeed salvation is from the Jews, as Jesus Christ teaches (John 4:22). But anyone who is saved is saved by Jesus Christ, the Jewish Messiah...

www.catholic.com

Salvation Is from the Jews

“Why is this night different from all other nights?” The answer to that question—the question at the heart of every Passover Seder of the Jewish peo...

www.catholic.com

The Corporate Conversion of Israel

The conversion of the Jewish people to Christ is a c...

www.catholic.com

 

[ralliann]

Latest Vatican Statement on the Jews

No. The most recent statement from the Vatican I can find that addresses the issue of Christian evangelism to Jews is The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrev...

www.catholic.com

Thank you michi. It is important to know it is not a doctrinal statement. Nothing concrete in that area has been settled. It is open dialogue for exploration with Messianic Judaism, and a friendly relationship to all Jew's from my understanding of it so far.

 

[ralliann]

While I appreciate your attempt to argue this and your sincerity, let it be clear to anyone reading that this is NOT at all Catholic teaching. It may be your interpretation of the Biblical data, but it does not align with what the Catholic Church teaches.

Heck, I would even argue it does not even take into account all the New Testament data, at that (Rom. 9-11 being the most glaring example!). It also runs a afoul of a lot of Old Testament passages in the Prophets, now that I think about it. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to go into all those particulars (although one day compiling them might a useful Origenist chore for me...)

There are a handfull of covenant theolgians in Catholicism. Scott Hahn being one. Like the discussions concerning Jews, covenant theology as far as I know has not been fully developed. It is an endeavor to rediscover, or recover covenantal theology seen in the early Church fathers (Irenaeus etc). It is my opinon that The issues of Nostra aetate are helped and aided with this theology. I could of course be mistaken but I do not think some of the dialogue concerning Jew's are able to be applied without a proper covenant theology.

 

[Joy]

Mod Hat On

Some Posts and Responses
have been Removed
in
Thread Clean

RV: Congregational Forum Restrictions

Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum.


Mod Hat Off​

 

[Clare73]

Mod Hat On

Some Posts and Responses
have been Removed
in
Thread Clean

RV: Congregational Forum Restrictions

Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum.


Mod Hat Off​

My apologies for posting on the wrong thread. . .

 

[parousia70]

The great news is that, thanks to 3000 years of natural genetic dispersion, every human on the planet has the Abrahamic/Jacobian genome today.
Turns out it’s a big club and we’re all in it.