And unfortunately, the Catholic Church will never recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital...
Why should the Church recognize "bloodline theology"? It's anti-Christ. Israel is a state that accords rights and privilege according to one's DNA or who their mother was.
Skinheads also feel that they are God's chosen people by being born of a certain biological stock.
A "Jew" is someone whose mother is Jewish. One can be a wiccan and be a Jew yet if he converts to Christianity he's no longer a Jew. Another can lead his life in strict accordance to God's law in the Old Testament and not be one of "God's chosen people" because of how he was born.
Forget the Church, Christ Himself teaches us that this is wrong. Not only is it wrong by Christ, it doesn't resolve intellectually.
...and that national Israel is an anachronism.
It is.... prodigal son. The temple was destroyed 70 years after our Savior's death and Israel was shortly thereafter abandoned. The Jewish people were left scratching their heads wondering how they were going to get around defunct Mosaic animal sacrifice laws. He's not called "The Light of the World" for nothing you know.
Without the Christian ethos, there would be no modern Israel. The spirit of Christ (whether consciously realized or not) caused the West to show charity to the Jewish people after the horror committed on them via the Nazis.
While the Jews (in my meaningless opinion) should be left alone to cultivate Israel, they should not ever have full exclusive title to Jerusalem. There lies sacred real estate to be claimed by many.
You'll probably ascribe antisemitism to me as you often do, but that's OK.
"A "Jew" is someone whose mother is Jewish."
And also anyone who converts to Judaism.
You deliberately misinform the readers, as you don't have a clue what a Jew is or is not.
"You'll probably ascribe antisemitism to me as you often do"
Cela va sans dire, your whole post reeks of that.
However, Deuteronmy 4:19 and Malachi 1:11.
God's grace....
You already do. Everyone believes the Jews were right "at one time." The question is, at what point does this "cut off?" Your claim is that it cut off two thousand years ago. I'm sure you think that non-Jews who lived before J*sus' time had no reason to complain about not being chosen. So your argument against "bloodline theology" essentially is a non-argument. Your problem isn't its truth but at what point it allegedly ceased to be true. You might also like to read essay at my web site. Er, you might have to click on it more than once if pop ups get in the way.
Forget the Church, Christ Himself teaches us that this is wrong.
So the Revelation at Sinai gave a law at Sinai that defined a Jew as anyone born of a Jewish mother (and please don't assume a sola scriptura argument here) and J*sus contradicted it. Now let's see. Either one has to assume a priori that J*sus had the authority of abrogate the "old testament" or else he is a false prophet. And since a priori assumptions constitute a logical fallacy . . . well, you know.
A "Jew" is someone whose mother is Jewish. One can be a wiccan and be a Jew yet if he converts to Christianity he's no longer a Jew. Another can lead his life in strict accordance to God's law in the Old Testament and not be one of "God's chosen people" because of how he was born.
The Jews are a nation, not an abstract universal body with the same philosophy. The Torah is a covenant with this nation. The Torah defines anyone born of a Jewish mother as a Jew regardless of his religious belief or lack thereof (and I've always disagreed with those who insist that Jews who convert to chr*stianity are less Jewish than Jewish atheists). Non-Jews have always been permitted to convert to Judaism, however, and become full Halakhic Jews. G-d does not demand this of non-Jews, and the convert is first dicouraged up to three times. After this he is encouraged. The `amidah prayer recited three times a day on weekdays contains a prayer for the gerim, the converts.
It is.... prodigal son. The temple was destroyed 70 years after our Savior's death and Israel was shortly thereafter abandoned. The Jewish people were left scratching their heads wondering how they were going to get around defunct Mosaic animal sacrifice laws. He's not called "The Light of the World" for nothing you know.
Since they'd had to "get around" this identical problem after the Babylonians destroyed the Holy Temple I imagine they had a pretty good idea what they'd have to do. Or perhaps the first destruction meant the messiah had actually come in the days of Nebuchadnezzar?
While the Jews (in my meaningless opinion) should be left alone to cultivate Israel, they should not ever have full exclusive title to Jerusalem. There lies sacred real estate to be claimed by many.
You mean it even belongs to the moslems too? My, but you're ecumenical.
It's really too bad that the Catholic Church can't be as dogmatic about Biblical inerrancy as it is about its supercession of the Jews. Everything in the Hebrew Bible has to be submitted to science and reason before it can be believed (and the Catholic Church is the number one promoter of "theistic evolution" and Biblical criticism in the world), but there will never be a similar second look at supercessionism. It's amazing how even the most "modern" religions (and Catholicism is hepper than Leonard Cohen compared to Fundamentalist Protestantism) can be dogmatic when it really wants to. I guess there's just nothing to be gained by defending the "old testament." Perhaps the Church takes comfort from "scientific" demythologization" as legitimating its claim to have replaced it?
Long time no see my favorite FR prodigal son! I pray often for you and hope that you will someday know the real faith of the Catholic Church you left.
(I know, it's out of order!)
Be`ein chazir (that means "ain't gwine happen"). Why in the world would I want to be thrown into that state of constant spiritual turmoil again? Your Church is going down in flames (well, except for its supercessionist claim). Your priests don't believe your own dogmas (as I know by personal experience), and after your church stabbed me in the back when I really needed its support, I'd rather enter a sikh temple than one of your churches (and I can't do that, either). Contrary to your above claim about "blood theology," your church does believe in it. Only thing is, instead of the Jews (the nation that is actually the subject of the Bible) you have the Poles, the Hispanics, the French, the Belgians, the Italians, the Ukrainians, the Filipinos, the Lithuanians, and above all the Irish. These are G-d's Catholic people. If you're born into one of these you're part of the family. If you're a Bible Belt redneck who overcomes a lifetime of prejudice in order to submit to the Roman Church and you have trouble with evolution and the Bible being mythology, then you're a laughable little cracker whose suffering amuses the "real" Catholics. No sir, your Church is not and never has been universal. It's just as ethnic as any other religion. It is an urban, ethnic, and over-intellecutal religion whose members and leaders hold the simple people of the rural American Heartland in absolute and total contempt and if I had my way not a single one of us would ever even consider it again. But other people who won't profit by my example will just have to learn the hard way, like I did. And find out they will, unless they choose to sell out.
Really, what is your supercessionism but another form of scientific criticism and modern rejection of the "old testament?"
Finally, even if Catholicism wasn't to the Left of John Shelby Spong (which it is as far as I'm concerned), there is still the contradiction of "preaching Judaism to the Protestants and Protestantism to the Jews." If Protestants are wrong to believe in "faith only," if G-d demands works and rituals, why shouldn't they be the work and rituals one actually reads of in the Bible instead of a post-Biblical system which the Bible merely "prefigured?" In other words (and I don't know if you, never having been a Fundamentalist Protestant, will even understand this), Catholic arguments against Protestantism legitimate Jewish arguments against Catholicism. What, you didn't know that? Hey, you guys taught me that G-d judges us by our works and that the Bible alone doesn't constitute the totality of G-d's Revelation. Why should I now go back to a halfway house after making drawing the ultimate conclusions?
Here are two more essays (I, II) in which I make a few more points apropos to the subject of Catholicism's inherent contradiction. Kindly read them.