Supersessionism is not Catholic Doctrine. Never has been. Never will be.
Your odd ideas about theology are in no way attributable to Catholic Doctrine nor are they to be found in Catholic Doctrine. You have no idea about what constitutes Catholic Doctrine.
Your odd and irrational claims can not be found in any Ecuemnical Council Document, any Papal Encyclical, any Catechism, any Catholic Encyclopedia, or any Catholic Dictionary.
Will that stop you from making your claims? Of course not. You will take any sentence from, say, Decree for the Jacobites and misuse it to your own ends, not understanding the idea about the Develoment of Doctrine.
I am just setting the record straight for those interested in the facts.
The New Covenant in Christ - in which you refuse to participate in the New Covenant Sacrifice and New Covenant Heavenly Banquet - fulfills all prior Covenants. God does not revoke His Covenants.
Please stick with your own community and do not presume to speak for the Church established by Jesus.
Despite some universalist backtracking by JP II in his last years of decline and probably due to the influence of the liberal theological element in Rome, the position of Rome has been and remains officially that of supersessionism.Supersessionism was traditionally considered by the Roman Catholic Church to be its ex cathedra irreformable position on the relationship with post-Messianic Judaism. The Council of Florence of the 15th century solemnly defined, that "(...) and Jews (...) are damned to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" if they consciously and obstinately refuse to embrace the Catholic Christian Faith.[2] The only logical explanation for this teaching then was, that Judaism of the Old Testament had been replaced by or rather transferred to the New Testament with its own law and sacred rites. In fact this is what Popes taught throughout all centuries. Pope Pius XII also re-affirmed this doctrine in his encyclical Mystici Corporis (June 29th, 1943), when he authoritatively taught, that "the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished" and that "on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. 'To such an extent, then,' says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, 'was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.'" Pope Pius XII also clearly condemned the two-path approach dividing Gentile and Jew once again as in the Old Testament, when he taught, that "Christ, by His blood, made the Jews and Gentiles one 'breaking down the middle wall of partition...in His flesh' by which the two peoples were divided; and that He made the Old Law void 'that He might make the two in Himself into one new man,' that is, the Church, and might reconcile both to God in one Body by the Cross." Hereby Pope Pacelli doctrinally affirmed, that the Church was from the beginning established for the salvation of all people, both Jews and gentiles, thereby excluding the possibility of a two-path-approach for all Roman Catholics.[3]
In the 20th century, certain hierarchs of the Roman Catholic Church issued a number of theological position papers which appear to reject this concept outright, and affirm that the Torah is a valid path for Jews and Jewish proselytes to achieve salvation, that their covenant with God is still valid, and that the Jews of modern times are a direct unbroken continuation of the ancient Children of Israel. This view is not accepted by all Roman Catholic theologians, and it is rejected outright by traditional Catholics though it has been reaffirmed several times by various contemporary Catholic hierarchs. The Catholic Church no longer proclaims - according to some - Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, supposedly subtly shifting, in the teaching of Pope John Paul II, to the axiom "Sine Ecclesia Nulla Salus"- that is, that although the presence of the Church in the world makes salvation possible, membership of the Church is by no means required in order for individuals to be saved. The Catholic Church however recently affirmed the necessity of Jesus for salvation in the declaration Dominus Iesus. However, although salvation comes from Christ, the teaching of the Church expressed in the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium is that those "who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience" may by some extraordinary way achieve salvation - the conditions for which however are traditionally believed to be very strict and implying isolation and invincible ignorance.
Furthermore, another Vatican II document Nostra Aetate, as well as the repeated comments of Pope John Paul II, according to some clearly repudiate supersessionism by insisting that the divine covenant which constitutes Israel as a nation remains permanently in force. However at the time of its approbation at Vatican II it was not understood as dispensationalist at all, mainly as affirming that the Old Testament's promise was never taken away, but was "perfected" in the New Testament religion and thus, that the Old Testemant had been transferred into the New Testament, while being abolished and void of salvification if taken only by itself.