Vatican: Jews do not wait in vain for Messiah

According to a new Vatican document, recently released in English, Jews should continue to anticipate the coming of Messiah.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission released the English version of "The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible" in May. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger signed the work.

"The Jewish Messianic wait is not in vain," the statement says. "It can become for us Christians a strong stimulus to maintain alive the eschatological dimension of our faith. We, like them, live in expectation. The difference is in the fact that for us, he who will come will have the traits of that Jesus who has already come and is already active and present among us."

The document is the latest of several that some believe suggest the church is softening its stance toward Jews and their salvation. For example, several scholars said Dominus Iesus, a 2000 document that reaffirms that salvation comes through Christ and the church, does not apply to Jews the way it does to members of other non-Christian religions.

Two Covenants? Darrell Bock, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, noted that the new statement seems to imply belief in a two-covenant view of salvation. "This would undercut evangelism to Jews and does not make sense of the efforts of the earliest church to reach out to Jews as seen in the New Testament," Bock told Christianity Today. "On the key question of whether Judaism can save, the document is very unclear."

John Pawlikowski, director of the Catholic-Jewish Studies program at the University of Chicago, said the statement raises questions about the way the church understands Jews and salvation. "It demands some kind of further reflection on the significance of the universality of Christ's redemptive action," he said. "To what extent, then, does their salvation depend primarily on their own covenant rather than, say, on the universal work of Christ?"

The statement is "like the camel's nose of universalism in the tent of the Catholic Church," said David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus. "Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews, or he's no one's Messiah.

"I think it's important for us as evangelicals to recognize that the Catholic Church has long given up the notion of a forthright evangelistic outreach to the Jewish people," Brickner said. "The evangelical church should see this as a cautionary tale. The uniqueness of Christ is what's at stake."

Relations with Jews Yechiel Eckstein, founder of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, said the statement could help Christians respond to Jews in a way that is respectful, but does not compromise Christian beliefs.

Eugene Fisher, associate director for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the document may help Jews and Christians pursue a more intense level of interfaith dialogue using their shared Scriptures.

"It provides a solid basis of understanding for a local congregation to speak to a local synagogue—not only on social issues that we can get together on, but precisely on 'Let's talk about how we understand, say, the Book of Genesis,' " he said.

Leon Klenicki, a past president of the Anti-Defamation League, said the statement is good for Catholic-Jewish relations. But, he said, the document only describes Jewish beliefs and does not grant them theological validity.

Brickner cautions that interfaith dialogue, though valuable, should not replace evangelism. "This document demonstrates that those who have in one sense given up evangelism and replaced it with dialogue ultimately end up compromising the essence of the gospel itself."

Despite questions, many religious leaders say the statement is a valuable step forward. Mary Boys, professor of practical theology at Union Theological Seminary, said the study's emphasis on reading the Scriptures in their original context is helpful in correcting "the disparagement of Judaism that has been like a virus in Christian theology."

Marvin Wilson, author of Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith, agrees. "For nearly 2,000 years, the Christians took the Jewish Scriptures and proceeded to essentially disregard Jewish scholarship and Jewish interpretation."

Wilson, professor of biblical and theological studies at Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts, says evangelicals need to hear the Jewish Scriptures "as a word meant for Israel, not just the word that gets validated for us because we can spiritualize it or Christolocize it, validating it by some kind of New Testament connection."

you have to admit both the existance and the population of Hell.

O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy.

I say that prayer many times every day.

I don't quite understand how you can ask God to "lead all souls to heaven" if you think such a thing can't be. And sinkspur never said categorically that there is no one in hell; as I understand it, he would agree with Fr. Neuhaus that we may legitimately pray that all men be saved, though we certainly can't count on it. (Fr. Neuhaus in the same article also found the contention of the "virtuous" that they gave up a lot to achieve heaven and why should those who live it up here below also win heaven to be beneath consideration.)

Re Judas (notwithstanding whoever said above that he is clearly in hell) -- my own grammar school and high school nuns -- formed at least before VII -- assured us that the Church has never declared any individual to be in Hell -- even Judas.

"To use the verb "subsist" is deliberately ambiguous. It could mean a number of things: to live within something or to remain within something. In other words, the Church that now exists is not necessarily the Church that Christ founded, though some elements may live or remain within it."

Many have proposed that the word is intended in an ambiguous sense, however, the Latin "subsistit in" is very specific in that it literally means "is in", "is under" or "stands under" the Catholic Church and not outside of it, i.e. the same Church that Christ founded is in the Catholic Church and is to be found nowhere else. It does allow for the fact that "elements" of the Church exist outside her boundaries such as valid baptism and the Pater Noster for instance, but these elements alone are not sufficient for salvation as the constant tradition of the Church has taught.

The CDF issued a notification re Leonardo Boff which dealt with the correct way that this word should be understood and made it clear that he and many others had misinterpreted it. There are still many liberal scholars though who put the wrong slant on it - implying that the Church also exists outside of the Catholic Church. This is clearly false as Our Lord is not an adulterer - He is the bridegroom of one spouse only - but don't you think that agreeing with them that the meaning is ambiguous will only encourage their doubt?

With hindsight the word has been so manipulated by those of ill will and little faith that, with retrospect, it would have been better if the traditional formulation had been used. I imagine that most of the council fathers had no idea what would be the consequences of using this one little word!!

In the face of those who continue to insist on its ambiguity, however, we can only point them to the principle that truly magisterial teachings must by definition be in harmony with prior tradition.

You may not evangelise other Christians, but I certainly try to and I think you'll find the fruits of modernism all around you - Boston, Los Angeles, Milwaukee!!!!!

So tell me, where do suicides go?

So, what am I -- the Delphic oracle? I won't say I don't know anything, but I don't know much, except that the love and mercy of God are extraordinary. I do know that God not only makes the trees, but He personally draws forth each leaf. (If I get to know you better, maybe I'll explain how I know that -- in any case, you don't have to believe it; I am utterly convinced of it.)

Suicide is a terrible thing. As Chesterton said, "The man who kills a man kills one man; the man who kills himself kills all men." He thinks the instinct of the Church to bury the suicide at a crossroads and not in consecrated ground is a true one, but he recognizes the sad and tragic apparent motivation behind most suicides. I would doubt that any suicide acts with "full knowledge and full consent of the will."

I agree with you regrads the leaves, as for suicides, I believe the teaching of the Church. I believe that when the saints visions of Hell all agree that there ARE pour souls there in torment that they are correct. I frankly am just ever so slightly astounded that any Catholic could imagine that none of the evil people who stud our histories with evil could be in Hell. When I was told a saint said the streets of Hell are paved with the skulls of Bishops, I understood. From those who are given much, much is expected. Read about Aristide and how he had VOODOO icons inscribed on his priestly vestments. I could go on forever listing the evils of this world and the names of those who proclaim, not a love of God, but a hatred. It would avail not. If you want to believe that none have ever gone to Hell, there is nothing I can say to change that opinion. I simply do not share it, nor does our Church.

Dear narses,

"If you want to believe that none have ever gone to Hell, there is nothing I can say to change that opinion. I simply do not share it, nor does our Church."

Though the confusion is easy, that misrepresents what maryz is saying, what sinkspur is saying, and what I say, as well.

We do not believe that no one has ever gone to Hell. We have no idea whether anyone is damned. Being in a state of ignorance, we can speculate, we can hope, and we can pray.

Hell was not made for man. It was made for the demons. Hell pre-existed Adam and Eve, and was created prior to the Fall. Unless you are willing to adopt some sort of Calvinistic view, it's difficult to reconcile the idea that Hell was made for sinners prior to Adam's sin.

When I speculate, my speculations lead me to the conclude that it is likely that there are some souls in Hell. I will not speculate whether either Heaven or Hell will ultimately be the more populated place, but I will speculate that it is likely that there will be at least some souls in Hell.

Nonetheless, my friend, I don't know that, and it is not an article of Catholic faith.

Thus, I hope that my speculation is wrong, and that when all is said and done, no human soul will be damned. I hope it, I don't know.

And that is why we can pray, "O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy."

It doesn't say, lead some souls. It says all. It doesn't say lead the souls of virtuous people. It says especially those most in need of Thy mercy.

sitetest

If you want to believe that none have ever gone to Hell, there is nothing I can say to change that opinion.

I didn't say I believe that no one has ever gone to Hell. Neither did sinkspur. I don't know. With sinkspur and Fr. Neuhaus, I think we may legitimately pray that all men will be saved. And I do. And you say you do -- or at least you say the prayer "lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Your mercy." If you think it's impossible, it makes no more sense to say those words than to pray that the US won a resounding victory in Vietnam or that you'd been born rich instead of good-looking (one of my mother's sayings, that!). I really don't understand what you're intending when you say the words.

It wasn't until I was in college that I learned from my freshman theology professor (an utterly orthodox nun) that limbo for the unbaptized, especially babies, is not an actual doctrine of the Church -- just the best notion that theologians could come up with which was consistent with actual doctrine. That God has told us everything necessary for our salvation doesn't mean that He has told us everything.

When the Gospel says , "...there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." Matthew 13:41-42, it sounds to me like a certainty that there are souls in Hell. When I pray the Act of Contrition, I acknowledge that I could be bound there and fear that fate.

The Church talks of Hell in the Athanasian Creed: "They that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire" In all reason, can you honestly presuppose that ALL men have escaped Hell? If virtue is rewarded in the next life, cannot the rational man see that evil will be punished? Unless we deny evil (and in this day, who can?), we must acknowledge both Hell and the damned in Hell and fear and pray for our own and others' souls.

"Is in" is not "Is" Once you break the connection of identity, then you might ask--is the Church of Christ also elsewhwhere else--in the Methodist faith, for instance? We know the Catholic faith is not Methodism. But the door is wide open to the idea that Methodism might also contain within it the Church of Christ--which, of course, was the whole idea of the liberals posing the change in the first place. But then we might ask--if the Church of Christ may also be in another religion, why must I bother following such a strict religion like Catholicism? Why not become something a little easier and more morally accommodating? In fact, this is the drift of the Conciliar Church as it moves further and further from traditional belief. Little by little these major changes are being injected into the Catholic organism like so much poison. It accounts for the divisions among us and for the sense of malaise in general. This is happening in much the same way that changes in doctrine and culture were introduced in England after its break with Rome. Out went the altars and statues and rosaries and saints. In came the Vernacular and secularist thought.

Most Catholics are unaware of how subtley these changes are being introduced. Words remain the same--but their meanings are shifted so that nobody notices. The word "Sacrament", for instance, has a different meaning in the newer theology than it has had for two millenia. It is now used in such a way that it subtley undermines the concept of the Real Presence, setting up a veil of symbolism. This has had major consequences in our understanding of the Mass. In sum, the thrust is toward Protestant ideology and away from traditional Catholicism.

Dear narses,

Good points all. That a soul can be eternally damned is not in dispute. It is possible that a person can go to Hell. In fact, it is very possible.

But I haven't presupposed anything. I just don't know. I don't know who is in Hell. I know some of the people who certainly are not in Hell. The Church has not revealed than any particular person is in Hell. And the Holy Catholic Church permits us to pray that all souls will be saved.

That I may legitimately pray for a thing does not mean that I will receive precisely for that which I pray. I've prayed for physical healing where the result was death. I've prayed to be able to avoid problems and difficulties in life, where the only way past them was through them. We may legitimately pray for the things that nonetheless will not turn out as we wish.

"Unless we deny evil (and in this day, who can?), we must acknowledge both Hell and the damned in Hell and fear and pray for our own and others' souls."

I don't deny evil, I take it very seriously. I tremble for my own soul (which is one reason I like the prayer cited above so much). I acknowledge that Hell exists. But it was not created for men. Men can go to Hell, but there is no necessity there.

I also acknowledge that there are demons in Hell. I also acknowledge that it is possible that there are human souls in Hell.

But I hope and pray that there are no human souls in Hell, and that ultimately, there will be no human souls in Hell.

Please distinguish, my friend, between these three things:

- What my reason tells me is likely (there are likely at least some souls in Hell);

- What I hope for (that my reason has come to the wrong conclusion, and that Hell is ultimately empty of human souls);

- And what I pray for (that Jesus will lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of His mercy [like me]).

sitetest

Dear narses,

"Where we diverge is in being able to believe in or imagine souls in Hell."

No. I don't agree with that. I believe that souls could be in Hell. I can imagine them being there.

"The pilots of the jets that flew into the Twin Towers, for example. The face of Satan was seen in the smoke. I saw it. The Infernal One smiled. I have no doubt that others are in Hell just as I have no doubt I could end there myself."

This is where we differ. I do have doubt that the evil-doers are in Hell. I have no problem imagining that they are in Hell. I have no problem speculating that they are likely in Hell. But I don't know, I have some doubts. And I nurture those doubts. And pray that they aren't in Hell.

I have no doubt that any of us could end in Hell. When I focus on my sins, it's tough to imagine otherwise. But when I focus on my Savior, it's not as hard.

sitetest

I so often agree with you that I find it difficult to disagree. I do though. Our Lord had very specific things to say about those who hurt the little ones. "But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea." Innocent children died in the evil, vicious attacks on the WTC. While I concede that there is the remote possibility of a change of heart and an act of perfect contrition too late to stop the killing, I am certain that possibility doesn't change the fact that some of the hideous, evil people who did that terrible deed (and the ever so many like it that occur every day around the world) are nonetheless in Hell. Not all of humanity who knows of the Grace of God accepts His Grace and some work willingly against it.

I appreciate all your responses and the deep charity and thought with which you have approached this subject.

I've been reading NEARER MY GOD by William F. Buckley, in which he narrates an exchange between Arnold Lunn, the inventor of the slalom in skiing, a lifelong friend of Buckley's, and the inquisitor in a dialog in the 30's with Fr. Ronald Knox, a famous convert from Anglicanism. Lunn was an agnostic at the time (he later converted to Catholicism and was baptized by Knox), and said, along with John Stuart Mill, that "Compared with the doctrine of endless torment, every objection to Christianity sinks into insignificance."

Knox, too, said that when he himself was received into the Church, the problem of eternal punishment was the single difficulty still on his conscience. Knox accepted the teaching of the Church, but struggled with the doctrine for many years. He finally worked through His own doubts. His arguments are persuasive: eternal punishment provides a symmetry to the Christian edifice (shouldn't eternal punishment be a counterpoint to eternal bliss?); the Church could have posited simply the annhilation of the soul of the wicked--that it did not is conclusive to the existence of hell; heaven is not had for the asking, which is the way we would go if we assumed that God's mercy would always intervene between the sinner and eternal punishment.

Knox concludes his argument, however, by saying that it is certainly a part of Christian hope to pray that hell is empty and that, when asking the question whether a particular person, guilty of particular sins, are deserving hell, one must say "Well, if he doesnt' deserve hell, he won't get it. More than that, I'm not sure we can say."

Needless to say, it is a fascinating dialogue, and it raised the question about whether or not we are required to believe that there are actually souls in hell.

I want to reiterate that I certainly believe in hell, but that hell was created for Lucifer and his minions. Men can go to hell BECAUSE they can also go to heaven. But because we can envision an infinitely merciful God not wishing that any of His creation perish, but have eternal life (as THE HOUND OF HEAVEN by Francis Thompson so powerfully illustrates), it is not contrary to Faith to hope and pray that no one is in hell. Maryz, thanks for referencing Fr. Neuhaus' as one who also joins in this hope.

It's a theoretical question, of course, since none of us can answer it.

Again, I appreciate the contributions made by all.

How then could anyone's prayers diminish the number of souls already in hell, let alone reduce it to zero?

The merciful, infinite God sees and hears the prayer of the long-suffering mother for a wayward son. Though his sins may persuade other men that he is in hell, God sees the son, and the mother who would literally give her life for him.

In the parable of the workers in the field, did the landowner not give the same salary to the men who began work at 3:00 as he did to the workers who began work at 9:00? He pointedly told the complainers that "Did you not agree to work for what I offered you, and can I not dispense my money as I wish?"

We see through glass, but darkly.

In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin.
Ecclesiastics 7:40.

Good evening, sitetest!

I believe this is a very worthwhile topic and that the four last things (Death, Judgment, Hell, Heaven) ought to be subjects of mediation for all of us.

You wrote:

When I speculate, my speculations lead me to the conclude that it is likely that there are some souls in Hell.

Speculations? Some souls?

And that is why we can pray, "O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy."

In a later post you write:
But I hope and pray that there are no human souls in Hell, and that ultimately, there will be no human souls in Hell.

If you or anyone else truly believes in the Fatima apparitions, then, in this case, you “hope and pray” for an impossibility.

I have a couple of points. Although your rendition is the way the “Fatima” prayer is said by most people in most places, it does not reflect the actual translation from the Portuguese as spoken by Our Lady to Sister Maria das Dores (Lucia) in 1917:

“O my Jesus, pardon us, and save us from the fire of hell; draw all souls to heaven, especially those in most need.” page 220: Our Lady of Fatima by William Thomas Walsh, Image Book.

We can speculate as to which souls are “in most need”, but, I don’t believe it necessarily refers to those who have abandoned Jesus Christ and His Church nor does it necessarily refer to those who WE mortals would consider the worst of sinners. The judgements of the Lord are inscrutable.

The second point is that if one believes in the Fatima apparitions, then why not also quote what Lucia said about her vision of hell and also what Our Lady has said about the “MANY” souls who go there?

"She opened Her [Our Lady’s]hands once more, as She had done the two previous months. The rays [of light] appeared to penetrate the earth, and we saw, as it were, a vast sea of fire. Plunged in this fire, we saw the demons and the souls [of the damned]. The latter were like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, having human forms. They were floating about in that conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames which issued from within themselves, together with great clouds of smoke. Now they fell back on every side like sparks in huge fires, without weight or equilibrium, amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fright (it must have been this sight which caused me to cry out, as people say they heard me). The demons were distinguished [from the souls of the damned] by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, black and transparent like burning coals. That vision only lasted for a moment, thanks to our good Heavenly Mother, Who at the first apparition had promised to take us to Heaven. Without that, I think that we would have died of terror and fear."

And lastly:

Pray much and make sacrifices for sinners, for many souls go to hell because there is no one to make sacrifices for them.(Our Lady—August 19, 1917). [emphasis added]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.