The SSPX website, THE MYSTERY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN HISTORY . I wasn't suggesting it was mainstream Catholic thought, in my post 47 noted is as the type of theological issue that might have to be dealt with. You might note the views on Jews there, which are more problematical than this one.
Isaac isn't worth arguing since, but I drew that from Ishmael, the first to be born and the natural offspring of the slave, Hagar, represents the Synagogue of the Jews, which glories in its descent from the flesh of Abraham. But Isaac, born miraculously of the sterile Sarah according to a Promise of God, represents the Church which, like Isaac, is born by faith in the Promise of Christ. I can see where that could be as easily read a miraculously in the sense she was able to bear children by virtue of a miracle, my conclusion came from the contrast with the flesh of Abraham/
Thank for the link. I am suprised you chose the passage on the two sets of brothers, as in context it is fairly orthodox. It analogizes the concept of spiritual adoption without actually claiming that the Jews are NOT of Isaac and Jacob. My previous remark is more to the interpretation that you were giving than to the excerpt itself.
I did not read it closely, but some of the conclusions toward the end cannot please a Jew, and they are unorthodox. It is not the position of the Church that the Jews and Christians should not mix, not have equal civil rights, or that Christianity and Judaism are in some kind of cosmic unending struggle. I read the fathers of the Church daily, and I do come across some strong language, but it is always confined to the historical conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees and the persecution of the Church immediately after that.
Whether or not Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak are at liberty to express their private exegesis as Catholics is not for me to say, but I can see how it could be problematic.