|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Interested
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 1:57 am Post subject: On Catholics and Jews |
 |
|
A tasty little morsel for those here that have a bit of a thing for religion.
The pope's Jewish dilemma
| Quote: |
If you want to test how well Catholics know their faith, ask them what name their religious calendar gives to 1st January. When they reply, "New Year's Day", tell them they are wrong and that if they look it up in the lectionary, they will find it says "Feast of Circumcision". Why? Because 1st January is eight days after 25th December (the birth of Jesus) and like all Jewish males he was circumcised on the eighth day as commanded in Genesis.
Most Catholics � and indeed most Christians � are startled to think of their Lord being circumcised, but it indicates beyond all argument the Jewish origins of Jesus and the strong links between the two faiths.
This could have led to Judaism and Christianity having an amicable relationship over the centuries, but unfortunately it took a very different, and bloody, path for much of the last 2000 years. It was not until 1962 that a religious revolution occurred through Vatican II. Suddenly, Jews were no longer deviants, but brothers. Interfaith dialogue replaced conversion attempts. But amid this rapprochement, there was still one major stumbling block: the Vatican refused to recognise the state of Israel and exchange ambassadors.
Astonishingly, it took another 32 years before this occurred. The reason � which Benedict XVI will have to wrestle with on his travels over the next week � is that the rebirth of Israel presents a serious religious problem for Christianity. Traditional doctrine stated that the Jews had been forsaken by God, had been superseded by the church, and were sent into exile to wander the earth in a state of humiliation until they accepted the truth of the Gospels.
The re-establishment of a Jewish national homeland is a theological slap in the face for that notion. Moreover, if rejecting Jesus no longer results in eternal damnation, does that mean that accepting Jesus does not carry eternal rewards either? What message does it give Christians (and potential Christians) about reward and punishment?
There is another problem facing the pope. Vatican II may indeed have sought to develop a new theology, trying to cast away old assumptions about Christian supremacy and Jewish sinfulness, but it is undermined every day when believers read the text of the Gospels declaring that Jews are damned or that one can only come to the father through the son. Unless a new Vatican II version of the New Testament is printed, with difficult passages omitted or explained away, there will always be a huge gulf between what the scriptures teach and what the modern church claims to teach.
It is this underlying tension that has never been properly addressed but which periodically surfaces in other guises � such as controversy over the proposed canonisation of the war-time Pope, Pius VI, or the reinstatement of the Tridentine mass, or the furore surrounding reconciliation with the Lefebvrist bishops. On the Catholic side, it is seen as claiming back aspects of the true faith; on the Jewish side, it is seen as sliding back to rejection of the Jews.
This is the real conundrum that faces Benedict XVI on his visit to Israel, which begins on Monday � should he be loyal to the Gospels which claim that only acceptance of Christ can bring the messianic age, or should he endorse Vatican II which acknowledges that Jews (and members of other faiths) can find the kingdom of God via a different route? Should he look inwards or outwards, backwards or forwards? At the heart of the Pope's trip this week lies an unanswered religious mystery more powerful than anything Dan Brown can conjure up.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 3:06 am Post subject: Re: On Catholics and Jews |
|
|
| Interested wrote: |
A tasty little morsel for those here that have a bit of a thing for religion.
The pope's Jewish dilemma
| Quote: |
If you want to test how well Catholics know their faith, ask them what name their religious calendar gives to 1st January. When they reply, "New Year's Day", tell them they are wrong and that if they look it up in the lectionary, they will find it says "Feast of Circumcision". Why? Because 1st January is eight days after 25th December (the birth of Jesus) and like all Jewish males he was circumcised on the eighth day as commanded in Genesis.
|
|
My mother has a lectionary although i didn't know that's what is called. I don't remember any 'feast of circumcision though', and never remembered it from the vigil mass on new year's eve or new years day.
So I wikied it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_of_the_Circumcision
It is now called the Solemnity of Mary, The mother of God. It changed in 1969. It seems it was only solely called the feast of circumcision for the 13th and 14 th centuries and has went under several different names before and after. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
The article is wrong about the date of the birth of Jesus. The Bible says he was born while shepherds were watching their flocks, that would be in the springtime as they had to watch for the birth of new lambs.
The Catholic church even admits as much, they said that the 25th of Dec was chosen to coincide with the old pagan celebration marking the winter solstice. They say this was done in hopes that it would make the "new religion" more acceptable to the former pagan masses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
The article is wrong about the date of the birth of Jesus. The Bible says he was born while shepherds were watching their flocks, that would be in the springtime as they had to watch for the birth of new lambs.
The Catholic church even admits as much, they said that the 25th of Dec was chosen to coincide with the old pagan celebration marking the winter solstice. They say this was done in hopes that it would make the "new religion" more acceptable to the former pagan masses. |
I don't think the article is saying he was really born on the 25th. They are saying 'we say he is born on the 25th, so 8 days later we say he was circumcised". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
