A statement that His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI issued on July 7 has rightfully received a tremendous amount of attention from Jewish and interfaith organizations. Through the “Apostolic Letter in the Form of Motu Proprio” and a subsequent letter to the bishops of the Church, the pope has shifted the liturgical options for Catholics worldwide, causing some to declare that a blow had been dealt to Jewish-Catholic relations.
The criticism is based on the assumption that the apostolic letter approves of the Church returning to a pro-conversion doctrine. A closer look at the pope’s words, however, reveals that this may not be the case at all. In fact, the statement may actually allow Catholics to consciously act in ways that will enhance Jewish-Catholic relations.
The apostolic letter gives permission for Catholics to celebrate mass using the Roman Missal published by Pope John XXIII in 1962, known as the Tridentine Mass, rather than the missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI that has been in use since 1970. It states that the “normal” liturgy will still be the one used for the last 37 years, but that the 1962 liturgy may be used as an “extraordinary expression of the law of prayer.”
The earlier missal is in Latin, and for many Catholics who appreciate Latin as deeply as Jews treasure Hebrew, this statement of the current pope is good news. For Jews, however, it seems far less so, at least at first glance.
The missal of 1962 — while not as offensive to Jews as earlier Tridentine liturgy, which called Jews “perfidious” — contains in it the “Prayer for the Conversion of Jews,” to be said on Good Friday. In this prayer, Catholics are to pray:
“For the conversion of Jews. Let us pray also for the Jews that the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, you do not refuse your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness.”
The petition that God does not refuse His mercy even to Jews may perhaps be worthy of appreciation, but this prayer is clearly antithetical to any sort of meaningful ecumenical dialogue. In 1970, the Church also recognized that, and the missal was changed to a prayer that is much more accepting of Jewish belief.
“Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption.”
Currently said on Good Friday, this newer prayer demonstrates a respect for Jews not found in the earlier version. While keeping the identity of the Church, this current version accepts the Jewish choice. It eliminates the offensive language in the earlier prayer, and allows for Catholics and Jews to have theological dialogues without the underlying tensions of one side feeling superior to the other.
Much of the media attention has been based on the assumption that the pope is now allowing the antisemitic dialogue of the earlier prayer back into the liturgy. But a close reading of the pope’s words shows that while the Tridentine Mass can now be practiced, this prayer of Jewish conversion is not necessarily included in the permissive statement.
Article II of the July 7 statement specifically says that any priest may use either the 1962 or the 1970 missal “on any day except in the Sacred Triddum” — that is, during the three days from the evening of Holy Thursday until the evening of Easter Sunday. During the Triduum, Catholics are still to utilize the later liturgy — which does not contain a prayer for conversion of Jews.
During the rest of the entire liturgical year, Catholics will have the right to use either the “ordinary expression” of the last 37 years, or the Latin “extraordinary expression” of 1962. But in either choice, the offensive conversion prayer is not a part of the accepted liturgy.
So if the offensive prayer is specifically excluded, why the commotion?
From 1570 until 1962, the conversion prayer’s liturgical definition of Jews manifested in an increase in antisemitic persecutions leading to abuses, pogroms and even Jewish deaths. Pope Benedict’s acceptance of the Tridentine Mass, even without the overtly offensive conversion prayer, brings up the painful reminder of those horrific experiences and opens a psychological and spiritual wound within many Jews that has only recently begun to be healed through meaningful ecumenical dialogue.
After centuries of persecution, it is only understandable that the pope’s reintegration of the Tridentine Mass is interpreted by many as potentially dangerous. But as understandable as the reaction may be, it would be a shame to miss out on the opportunity to deepen interfaith relations presented by the apostolic letter .
According to the pope’s statement, permission to use the 1962 missal is not given until the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. On the day of the feast, which this year falls on September 14, Catholics who so desire can once again recite the prayers in Latin that were said in 1962, or they can choose to reject the implications of utilizing this liturgy entirely and continue to pray with the Roman missal that is presently used.
Every Catholic can choose whether he or she wants to pray in Latin or in the vernacular. And every Catholic can now choose whether he or she wants to pray utilizing liturgy that is associated with antisemitism, or cast away that practice entirely in favor of praying in a way that is more respectful of other faiths. Come September 14, the choice is theirs.
On that day, Jews, too, will have a choice. Those of us outside of Israel will be observing the second day of Rosh Hashanah. On the Jewish new year, we are enjoined to take an accounting of ourselves, to cast away our sins through Tashlich and to make repentance. We are enjoined to introspect, but no one forces us — it is a choice.
This year, will each of us — Jew and Catholic — cast away our preconceptions of the other in favor of having honest and meaningful interfaith dialogue? Can we cast out our prejudices and pains, our wounds and self-centeredness, in favor of creating a new time of peace between people of different faiths? Can we choose to really see each other, to value each other’s faith and traditions, and to respect each other as children of the same God?
I pray that we will make choices that allow us to recognize the divinity in each other.
Rabbi Michael Barclay serves in the campus ministry and teaches theology at Loyola Marymount University.
I am a Faithful Catholic and wish to thank you for first intelligent article I have read online on this subject. may God Bless You Rabbi Barclay.
Rabbi Barclay, I think that there is a slight misunderstanding of what the Motu Proprio states: all priests may use the 1962 missal for their private celebration except during the tridium. Reason? Private Mass is forbidden during those days due to a long standing tradition. However, public Masses on those days for stable communities, i.e., for traditional Catholics who normally attend the Old Rite, can be during the tridium. There are Good Friday liturgies using the 1962 missal all over the U.S., among the so-called Indult communities. However, at least initially, the private Masses will be much more common than the public ones. In any event, those of us who attend such a liturgy (and I am speaking of myself primarily, but expecting that this applies to the majority) see this prayer, for the conversion of the Jewish people, as authentic because it expresses our concern for the salvation of souls. The new prayer in the 1970 missal may be more comforting, but it doesn't express the biblical reality that we are called to baptize all men. Pax tecum, Ed Snyder
Why the tumult? This is barely different from the editorial policies of The Foward or Haaretz? If someone bashes Jews it's surely for some good reason and we right thinking liberals and progressives should be grateful our moral betters have taken the time to point out our abject shortcomings.
Romans 11 1I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3‘Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars; I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.’ 4But what is the divine reply to him? ‘I have kept for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ 5So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.* 7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8as it is written, ‘God gave them a sluggish spirit, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.’ 9And David says, ‘Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling-block and a retribution for them; 10let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and keep their backs for ever bent.’ 11 So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their stumbling* salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel* jealous. 12Now if their stumbling* means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
Beware of theologians who spout New Age slogans! Rabbi Michael Barclay urges us to make choices "to recognize the divinity in each other", which is a New Age trick to confuse the faithful by emphasizing Christ's human identity and devaluing Christ's divinity. Thereby, Christ's teachings may be reduced to opinions of a human teacher, rather than authentic revelations of God expressed by Christ, God in human form.
I believe you read the Apostolic Letter incorrectly. The prohibition during the Easter Triduum is on private Masses ("sine populo"), which are already prohibited during those days even using the 1970 Missal. Priests are not to celebrate Mass privately during this period because they are the most sacred days of the year. The wording is, "In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite. . .may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum." The meaning is clear.
Also, in the 1962 prayer, if Jews are being singled out, it is only because they ARE special as the recipients of the first covenant. There are three prayers, for all those outside the Catholic Church: 1) For the unity of the Church. Let us pray also for heretics and schismatics [Christians], that our Lord and God may save them from their errors and be pleased to recall them to our holy Mother the Catholic and Apostolic Church. Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, You save all men and will that none should be lost; look down on those who are deceived by the wiles of the devil, that with the evil of heresy removed from their hearts, the erring may repent and return to the unity of Your truth. Through our Lord.... 2) For the conversion of the Jews. Let us pray also for the Jews that the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, You do not refuse Your mercy even to the Jews; hear the prayers which we offer for the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of Your truth, which is Christ, and be delivered from their darkness. Through the same our Lord... 3) For the conversion of pagans [Infidelium]: Let us pray also for the pagans, that almighty God may take away iniquity from their hearts, so that they may forsake their idols and be converted to the living and true God and His only Son, Jesus Christ, our God and Lord. Let us pray: Almighty and everlasting God, You always demand not the death but the life of sinners; in Your goodness hear our prayer; free them from the worship of idols and unite them to Your holy Church for the praise and glory of Your name. Through our Lord...
Mark 16.16:The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. Matthew 28.19: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 19.28: Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Acts of the Apostles 2.36: Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah,* this Jesus whom you crucified.’
Romans 9 I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience confirms it by the Holy Spirit— 2I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred according to the flesh. 4They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; 5to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah,* who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. 6 It is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all Israelites truly belong to Israel, 7and not all of Abraham’s children are his true descendants; but ‘It is through Isaac that descendants shall be named after you.’ 8This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as descendants. . . .14 What then are we to say? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ 16So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy. . . . As indeed he says in Hosea, ‘Those who were not my people I will call “my people”, and her who was not beloved I will call “beloved”. ’ 26‘And in the very place where it was said to them, “You are not my people”, there they shall be called children of the living God.’ . . .30 What then are we to say? Gentiles, who did not strive for righteousness, have attained it, that is, righteousness through faith; 31but Israel, who did strive for the righteousness that is based on the law, did not succeed in fulfilling that law. 32Why not? Because they did not strive for it on the basis of faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling-stone, 33as it is written, ‘See, I am laying in Zion a stone that will make people stumble, a rock that will make them fall, and whoever believes in him* will not be put to shame.’
Romans 11 1I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3‘Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars; I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.’ 4But what is the divine reply to him? ‘I have kept for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ 5So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.* 7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8as it is written, ‘God gave them a sluggish spirit, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.’ 9And David says, ‘Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling-block and a retribution for them; 10let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and keep their backs for ever bent.’ 11 So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their stumbling* salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel* jealous. 12Now if their stumbling* means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
I hate to disappoint this person; but the allowance of the Traditional Latin Mass has nothing to do with Jews or people of any other faith. It is about Catholics who with to worship in their Traditional form of worship, and the fact that the Traditional Mass is very complete in it"s translation of the Faith from one generation to the next; while the Novus Ordo Mass has "no" uniquely Catholic teaching in it. In fact, any Protestant could easily celebrate the New Mass without compromising any of their uniquely Protestant beliefs. I think it is time for all these people to quit crying over something that has absolutely nothing to do with them.
Rabbi, your following paragraph is based upon a misunderstanding: "Article II of the July 7 statement specifically says that any priest may use either the 1962 or the 1970 missal “on any day except in the Sacred Triddum” — that is, during the three days from the evening of Holy Thursday until the evening of Easter Sunday. During the Triduum, Catholics are still to utilize the later liturgy — which does not contain a prayer for conversion of Jews." This is incorrect. Here is the actual text from Article 2: "In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum." As you can see, Article 2 refers only to "Masses without the people". ALL such Masses are forbidden during the Triduum. Therefore the Mass according to the 1962 Missal may be celebrated publicly, including the prayer for the conversion of Jews, which I assure you my family will offer with the greatest respect and love for the Jewish people. I beg you to recognize how terribly misguided it would be to attempt to dictate to the Catholic faithful that we are not to pray for your conversion. We will certainly continue to do so in any case, since in these matters we must mobey God and not man.
WE JOIN YOU RABI, IN YOUR PRAYER TO RECOGNIZE THE DIVINITY IN EACH OTHER AND WE BEG FOR GOD'S HELP AT THIS SPECIAL TIME IN HISTORY THAT WE DO NOT LOSE THE MOMENTUM THAT HAS COME FROM OUR BELOVED POPES IN THE PAST IN SUPPORT OF THE ECUMENTAL MOVEMENT. THANK YOU .
WE JOIN YOU RABI, IN YOUR PRAYER TO RECOGNIZE THE DIVINITY IN EACH OTHER AND WE BEG FOR GOD'S HELP AT THIS SPECIAL TIME IN HISTORY THAT WE DO NOT LOSE THE MOMENTUM THAT HAS COME FROM OUR BELOVED POPES IN THE PAST IN SUPPORT OF THE ECUMENTAL MOVEMENT. THANK YOU .
After reading the emotional and ridiculous diatribe spewing forth from the mouth of Abe Foxman, it was indeed a pleasure to read your intelligent and thoughtful response to Benedict VI's Motu Proprio. Such enlightened understanding on your part for the historical framework for this latest development concerning Catholic liturgical practice leads inevitably to a sound basis for Jewish/Catholic dialogue. Thank you, Rabbi Barclay!
Dear Rabbi, Christ taught His Apostle.and therefore all men,to go to all nations and make disciples of ALL men,"Baptising them in the name of the Father,and of the Son,and of the Holy Ghost". This means a conversion of every single human being to the One True Church:The Catholic[UNIVERSAL}Church. Rabbi,the Church has always taught,through Her infallible Magisterium{Divinely inspired teaching authority}that there is One Church,established apostalically,and containing the fullness of truth, which has been handed down from the original 12 to the bishops in union with the Holy Father. Christ asked His apostles,"...and who do you say that I am",Peter responded,"Thou art the Christ,the Son of the living God".Christ responded by saying,"no flesh and blood has taught thou this", Christ went on to tell Peter,"Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church,and the gates of Hell shall not prevail". Rabbi,Christ at this moment instituted St.Peter as the first Supreme Pontiff,and Peter handed down the authority of the Son of the living God to his succesor and so on in an unbroken apostolic chain down to Pope Benedict XVI. The authority of God lies in the Catholic Church and Catholics,out of charity, and nothing else,pray for the conversion of ALL men to the true faith.Not just the Jews,but all men. We love the Jewish people and want them to attain the beatific vision in heaven with God forever! This establishes the mandate for the conversion of all men to The only Church.The one which Christ established 2000 years ago in bringing to fullfilment the Old Covenant. Rabbi please come home to the Catholic Church,for outside of Her powerful and loving wall's there is no salvation. God bless you and yours.Dan Hunter
" I pray that we will make choices that allow us to recognize the divinity in each other." Nice try! Rabbi Barclay shall NOT mandate how Catholics pray! The original undiluted Tridentine Mass Liturgy is the CORE of the Catholic Church.
If I think that the greatest gift someone can receive is to be Christian, shouldn't I pray that you too become a Christian? It is, of course, your choice and I have no right to treat you badly if you choose not to become Christian; however, if I believe that Christianity is a great gift and I do not pray that you will receive that gift, I do not truly love you.
Romans 11 1I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? 3‘Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars; I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.’ 4But what is the divine reply to him? ‘I have kept for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ 5So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. 6But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.* 7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8as it is written, ‘God gave them a sluggish spirit, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.’ 9And David says, ‘Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling-block and a retribution for them; 10let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and keep their backs for ever bent.’ 11 So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall? By no means! But through their stumbling* salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel* jealous. 12Now if their stumbling* means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
Why does this page keep reposting one's comments if one "refreshes"? Sorry all.
Dear Rabbi Barclay, I sincerely appreciate your effort to understand the mind of the Pope on this issue. And I notice that Cardinal Bertone has suggested this morning that perhaps the prayer of 1970 will be used even within the now Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite next Good Friday, so perhaps that will happen. But, I'm wondering about something. Practicing Jews don't have any problems with Catholics praying for them, do they?
Rabbi, I'm a Catholic, and I'm not offended by Jews and Christians believing different and sometimes contradicting things. But I am offended at you calling the extraordinary form of Mass anti-semitic. We pray for the Jewish people out of respect for them as the first bearers of God's covenant. You should be more offended if Catholics did not pray you and your fellow believers. You praise the new version of the Good Friday prayer, but even though the words have changed the prayer still asks for the conversion of Jews. For Christians the "fullness of redemption" is Jesus. I would hope that you in turn, if you believe your faith is true, pray that I will stop idolizing Jesus of Nazareth so that I can properly worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Moses. How can we engage in true ecumenical discussion when we do not allow each other to fully express what we believe? While Judaism and Christianity are similar, they are not 100% compatible. Part of ecumenism means highlighting and respecting those differences and not merely focusing on similarities.
I agree with other commenters, Rabbi, in thanking you for a thoughtful article. I must agree with some, though, that it is curious that you might find it offensive that Catholics (or any Christians) would pray for the conversion of their elder brothers & sisters, the Jewish people. I realize that you may not pray for my conversion to Judaism, but if you did, there is no *way* I would find it offensive. There is no reason to think that it's impossible to both respect another person *and* believe that my beliefs are truer. It may not be politically correct to do so in our day & age, but it certainly isn't impossible or irrational.
Has no one told Cardinal Bertone that no action is needed? Latin mass change praised by Jewish leader ROME, July 19 (UPI) -- Jewish leaders in Italy praised the Vatican Thursday for contemplating the removal of a Latin mass prayer that calls for the conversion of Jews. The praise from the nation's Jewish community comes after Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the secretary of state for the Vatican, said Wednesday that the prayer could be removed soon from the reintroduced mass, the Italian news agency ANSA reported. The Latin mass was reintroduced by Pope Benedict XVI earlier this year and immediately prompted a religious furor over its controversial stance on Judaism. While the pope introduced a modernized version of the controversial prayer that eliminated harsher language, the context of the religious text remained the same, ANSA said. Therefore Jewish leaders throughout Italy said they were happy at hearing this week's announcement from Bertone. "The declarations made by Cardinal Bertone clear away the fears that we and others expressed in recent days," Union of Italian Jewish Communities head Renzo Gattegna told ANSA.
Funny theological show:what is important:the commandment of God or the tradition of men" (Mk 7:8 as reminded by Jesus from Nazareth).Liturgy, language,...private Mass-who cares any more for...dead rituals? I prefer one bottle of Pilsner Urquell and Aristotle's Metaphysics: when you apply 4 causes (material, formal, efficient and final)to explain the "necessity of Jesus" ...there will be no more need to pray or not for someone conversion. Who cares about it? Melchizedek,B.Th., (confirmed ...DIRECTLY on Jan 27, 2001 at 20.00 at "interesting"Holy Mass at Domaniewska 20, Warsaw;art 195.1 criminal code a'la Lk 23:14)Check Archbp, Police, Embassy, kard.Ratzinger
Dear Rabbi Barclay, in December a Jewish cardiologist was trying to save my life with a little wire and tube when he said "oops". Having just received Extreme Unction, I was calm and in good spirits, but the "oops" did result in my silent prayer going public. The Paters and Aves got his attention. I explained that I pray in Latin and he aksed if I understood it because he never understood his Hebrew. The surgery proceeded with good humor. I learned the Latin because six years ago we began atenting the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with the 1962 Missal. I mention this because I can't understand why the upset of Catholics praying for the conversion of Jews. We are suppose to pray for everyone's conversion to the Roman Catholic Church. "Outside the Church there is no salvation" has always been, and still is, the doctrine of the Church. Anyone who tells you different in mistaken. That being true, what kind of horible person would not pray for your conversion to the faith they believe is the only way to salvation. If you believe that Jews are still the only chosen people of God, I would hope that you pray for our conversion. Why the obsession with what Catholics believe. It strikes me as strange that on one hand we are not supposed to try to convert you, but you busily, in the name Jewish-Catholic relations, try to tell us what to believe and for what to pray. One cannot help but question your true intentions. Dialogue is all well and good, but Faith is what really matters. If Jewish faith in the One God is true then the only question is if Jesus was the Savior. If He is, then all need to be Roman Catholic, if He wasn't then we need the Chinese to make a lot more of the little bennies. One of ours faiths is corrrect, the other in wrong. No amout of talking and patting each other on the head nor countless mea culpas, sacks and ashes can change that. Dominus vobiscum.
Very balanced. Informative and fair
the history of the r.c. church is one of saving the Jew.WE had the Inquisition that could not draw blood but burned,drowned and choked.the current Pontiff I understand was a member of Hitler Youth,,the Hitler era Wermacht and was head of the office of the Inquisition under it's new name.I hope he is philo-semetic as many people say but Jews can only look to Judaism in the end because historicly Eurocentric and Muslim cultures are advocates of only their own cultures and Jews are a sometimes tolerated perifory
Am not surprised that this Pope has declared the catholics, including the molesters in their church as the only true religion. It was my impression at the beginning of his reign that we had another right wing dictator like our King George Bush. As an 85 yr old, WW2 vet am sickened by the direction of this country and the world under this Pope. The war in Iraq is a terrible decision that has cost so many lives and made Iraq a country in complete turmoil while the president insists we are being saved fron the TERRORISTS and from something called Iquida. We are all fools to live with this president, this Pope, and yes, this Mo. governor.
Rabbi, a nice piece, though it is being used elsewhere on the internet to conceal rather than to reveal what the motu proprio states and implies( e. g.. BBC radio message board). "Jewish choice." That I don't follow, I am afraid, probably because it is outside of my culture (Roman Catholic). What it cannot mean, or be made to mean, is that the RCC believes choosing Judaism or Catholicsim is an indifferent one. On the contrary, the latter is, through Christ, the fulfillment of the former, as the Church has always understood as a matter of doctrine, even if its adherents overlook Judaism as one essential facet to that doctrine. Reading the motu proprio in Latin and in its English translation, I think it represents a more brotherly and loving expression of what others replying to your piece have already pointed out: Catholics pray for everybody to enter their Church. One lesson I hope all the talk will bring about is an understanding among Catholics--historically, not great readers of the Bible--of the links between the two faiths. I have told Catholic students that Christ was Jew: they, like not a few Protestants, think he was the first Christian. Finally, sorry some have abused the privilege of this forum by quoting the NT to you ad nauseum. It's rude and and stupid and in no way reflects what the Catholics I know would ever say or do if they were actually speaking to you. The best I can say for them is the internet provides too much opportunity to make thoughtless remarks and gestures. I apologize if any of them offended or even hurt you or your readers in any way.
I hope the Holy Father values the faith and traditions of others as much as Rabbi Barclay, but I tend to doubt it, given his recent declaration that the Roman Catholic Church is the one and only true church, and that other Christian denominations -- let alone non-Christian religions -- are at best imperfect vehicles of salvation. Of course, in return many Protestant sects identify the Catholic church with the Whore of Babylon spoken of in the Book of Revelation and predict that the Antichrist will appear in the person of a pope. And I've read an essay by a contemporary Orthodox rabbi explaining that the injunction "Love your neighbor" should properly be understood as "Love your Jewish neighbor," and I've also seen it argued that a non-Jewish soul is inherently incapable of entering into a mature relationship with God. Even in Islam one occasionally detects a slight whiff of intolerance toward other faiths. It must take people quite a lengthy, intense spiritual search to achieve such dogmatic certainty, eh? Actually, no -- most adherents belong to whatever sect their parents before them belonged to. They believe they just happened to be born into the only true faith. Most have never even taken the time to investigate the other religions which they so vehemently condemn. They have about as much basis for their allegiance as the Crips or the Bloods. Rabbi Barclay writes: "I pray that we will make choices that allow us to recognize the divinity in each other." What a step that would be!
Dear Rabbi Barclay: I am concerned that an insistence that Catholics alter their liturgical books will advance, not discourage, anti-semitism. I think that it needs to be clarified that Article 5 of "Summorum Pontificum", 2007, in no way makes new provisions for use of the 1962 Good Friday Prayers. Under Catholic liturgical law, each sacred place can use only one public liturgy on Good Friday, and under Protocol 1411-99 (now published in the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis and therefore law), Catholic faithful everywhere (with the exception of one tiny jurisdiction in Brazil for some 15,000 souls) have a right to the New Missal on Good Friday in the sacred places of their territorial parishes. There are exceptions in regard to personal parishes and non-parochial churches set up exclusively for those who adhere to the 1962 Missal, but these very few exceptions (now about 20 in number internationally) existed before Summorum Pontificum was published. They do not come from the Pope's new motu proprio. While the new motu proprio does encourage that more of these personal parishes be erected, it does not enact new provisions for this, and, given the reaction of the Catholic bishops to S.P., it is likely that we shall see very few new personal parishes in the foreseeable future. As regards private Masses and semi-private Masses under Articles 2 and 4 of S.P., the text specifically disallows the 1962 Good Friday prayers. In regard to the wording of the 1962 version, the term "perfidious/faithless" is removed (from 1959). The text does refer negatively to Jews by use of the adverb "even" and by use of the nouns "darkness" and "blindness". If the tone of the 1962 Good Friday Prayers is anti-semitic, I would have expected Jewish organisations to object to them at the time they were restored, which was 1984 and 1988 ("Quattuor Abhinc Annos" and "Ecclesia Dei Adflicta"), not in 2007. I can see why very few people would be aware of the problem in 1984 (almost no one knew about the change) but not in 1988. The 1988 restoration of the 1962 books was about as public as any Catholic change could be, involving declarations of excommunication for schism of Archbishop Lefebvre and five others bishops. I cannot help but wonder why some Jewish groups are complaining now when the new measure of 2007 does not promote the Good Friday Prayers of 1962 in any way. As a traditionalist Catholic, I suspect that the real source of the complaint is not Jewish people at all but progressivist Catholics. These people hate the 1962 Traditional Latin Mass with a passion and will move Heaven and earth to stop it. Jewish groups should not become involved in this dispute; they should not agree to do the dirty work for leftist Catholics. It is a battle between real Catholics (traditionalists) and the false Catholics of the sixties revolution. Opening this can of worms cannot advance Catholic-Jewish relations. I suspect that the suggestion that Jewish pressure should be allowed to alter the Holy Catholic Mass of the Ages will only enrage conservative Catholics. Let's not go there. There is enough trouble in the world as it is.
Dear Rabbi Barclay: I am concerned that an insistence that Catholics alter their liturgical books will advance, not discourage, anti-semitism. I think that it needs to be clarified that Article 5 of "Summorum Pontificum", 2007, in no way makes new provisions for use of the 1962 Good Friday Prayers. Under Catholic liturgical law, each sacred place can use only one public liturgy on Good Friday, and under Protocol 1411-99 (now published in the Acta Apostolicæ Sedis and therefore law), Catholic faithful everywhere (with the exception of one tiny jurisdiction in Brazil for some 15,000 souls) have a right to the New Missal on Good Friday in the sacred places of their territorial parishes. There are exceptions in regard to personal parishes and non-parochial churches set up exclusively for those who adhere to the 1962 Missal, but these very few exceptions (now about 20 in number internationally) existed before Summorum Pontificum was published. They do not come from the Pope's new motu proprio. While the new motu proprio does encourage that more of these personal parishes be erected, it does not enact new provisions for this, and, given the reaction of the Catholic bishops to S.P., it is likely that we shall see very few new personal parishes in the foreseeable future. As regards private Masses and semi-private Masses under Articles 2 and 4 of S.P., the text specifically disallows the 1962 Good Friday prayers. In regard to the wording of the 1962 version, the term "perfidious/faithless" is removed (from 1959). The text does refer negatively to Jews by use of the adverb "even" and by use of the nouns "darkness" and "blindness". If the tone of the 1962 Good Friday Prayers is anti-semitic, I would have expected Jewish organisations to object to them at the time they were restored, which was 1984 and 1988 ("Quattuor Abhinc Annos" and "Ecclesia Dei Adflicta"), not in 2007. I can see why very few people would be aware of the problem in 1984 (almost no one knew about the change) but not in 1988. The 1988 restoration of the 1962 books was about as public as any Catholic change could be, involving declarations of excommunication for schism of Archbishop Lefebvre and five others bishops. I cannot help but wonder why some Jewish groups are complaining now when the new measure of 2007 does not promote the Good Friday Prayers of 1962 in any way. As a traditionalist Catholic, I suspect that the real source of the complaint is not Jewish people at all but progressivist Catholics. These people hate the 1962 Traditional Latin Mass with a passion and will move Heaven and earth to stop it. Jewish groups should not become involved in this dispute; they should not agree to do the dirty work for leftist Catholics. It is a battle between real Catholics (traditionalists) and the false Catholics of the sixties revolution. Opening this can of worms cannot advance Catholic-Jewish relations. I suspect that the suggestion that Jewish pressure should be allowed to alter the Holy Catholic Mass of the Ages will only enrage conservative Catholics. Let's not go there. There is enough trouble in the world as it is.
Fr. O'Leary: is this what you have communicated with your Bishop? Is there really 'unconscious anti-semitism' in the motu proprio? If so, where is it? Where does the incompetence, if any lie, in the English translation? I have reason not take you entirely at your word: how can you claim to know what half of two billion people think or believe? A Roman Catholic, I am sincerely wondering if you could answer these highly skeptical questions.
I have a second comment regarding this letter of Rabbi Barclay. It is a gentle correction. Rabbi Barclay claims that "according to the pope’s statement, permission to use the 1962 missal is not given until the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross". No, the Pope's new apostolic letter introduces norms that do not take effect until that day. These norms explain what rights and obligations are attached to the celebration of the 1962 Mass in Latin. But the right to celebrate the 1962 Mass itself is not created by the Pope's new initiative. On the contrary, in the fifth paragraph of his accompanying letter to the Catholic bishops, the Pope admits that the 1962 Missal "was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted". Norms for such permission were issued in 1984 and 1988. The norms of 2007, therefore, do not introduce a Mass that has been suppressed since 1970. On the contrary, under the 1988 norms, 109 of the 176 sees in the U.S.A. already allow the 1962 Missal to be used on an every-Sunday basis. In some cases (e.g. New York) there are several such celebrations every Sunday throughout the numerous parishes. Much the same can be said for France, Austria, Belgium, England and Wales, and Australia. Another thing that bothers me about Rabbi Barclay's statement is that it makes Catholic-Jewish relations primary in regard to the character of the Sacred Liturgy that sustained the Latin Catholic Church for over 1,500 years. The Sacred Catholic Mass of Tradition is not primarily about Catholic-Jewish relations but about Catholic Faith, just as the Synagogue prayers of tradition are about the Jewish Faith. Only a bigot of our time could deny that Catholic-Jewish relations have not been extremely problematical in the past. But the problem will not be solved by insisting that one religion may reach in and alter the prayers of another. That sort of initiative does not advance good relations but hinders them. The best way forward for œcumenical relations between Catholics and Jews is, for starters, to agree to accept those aspects of the other's religion which we do not like. You cannot have good relations by insisting that the other religion change those aspects of its character which displeases you. It also means respecting the traditions of the other; and tradition is that which is handed down. To many Catholics, there is nothing more precious and more noble and more dignified than the Western Mass that was given definitive form by St. Gregory the Great in the sixth century, sustained countless martyrs for a fifteen hundred years, and was corrected and preserved in the Bull "Quo Primum Tempore" by St. Pius V in the sixteenth century. It cannot be sacrificed simply because, during much of that period, some of the Catholics who attended it also persecuted Jews. The fault does not lie with the Mass of Tradition. Let's not commit the logical fallacy of false cause; instead, let us show respect for the traditions of the other.
I have a second comment regarding this letter of Rabbi Barclay. It is a gentle correction. Rabbi Barclay claims that "according to the pope’s statement, permission to use the 1962 missal is not given until the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross". No, the Pope's new apostolic letter introduces norms that do not take effect until that day. These norms explain what rights and obligations are attached to the celebration of the 1962 Mass in Latin. But the right to celebrate the 1962 Mass itself is not created by the Pope's new initiative. On the contrary, in the fifth paragraph of his accompanying letter to the Catholic bishops, the Pope admits that the 1962 Missal "was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted". Norms for such permission were issued in 1984 and 1988. The norms of 2007, therefore, do not introduce a Mass that has been suppressed since 1970. On the contrary, under the 1988 norms, 109 of the 176 sees in the U.S.A. already allow the 1962 Missal to be used on an every-Sunday basis. In some cases (e.g. New York) there are several such celebrations every Sunday throughout the numerous parishes. Much the same can be said for France, Austria, Belgium, England and Wales, and Australia. Another thing that bothers me about Rabbi Barclay's statement is that it makes Catholic-Jewish relations primary in regard to the character of the Sacred Liturgy that sustained the Latin Catholic Church for over 1,500 years. The Sacred Catholic Mass of Tradition is not primarily about Catholic-Jewish relations but about Catholic Faith, just as the Synagogue prayers of tradition are about the Jewish Faith. Only a bigot of our time could deny that Catholic-Jewish relations have not been extremely problematical in the past. But the problem will not be solved by insisting that one religion may reach in and alter the prayers of another. That sort of initiative does not advance good relations but hinders them. The best way forward for œcumenical relations between Catholics and Jews is, for starters, to agree to accept those aspects of the other's religion which we do not like. You cannot have good relations by insisting that the other religion change those aspects of its character which displeases you. It also means respecting the traditions of the other; and tradition is that which is handed down. To many Catholics, there is nothing more precious and more noble and more dignified than the Western Mass that was given definitive form by St. Gregory the Great in the sixth century, sustained countless martyrs for a fifteen hundred years, and was corrected and preserved in the Bull "Quo Primum Tempore" by St. Pius V in the sixteenth century. It cannot be sacrificed simply because, during much of that period, some of the Catholics who attended it also persecuted Jews. The fault does not lie with the Mass of Tradition. Let's not commit the logical fallacy of false cause; instead, let us show respect for the traditions of the other.
Folks, despite all the parcing and "pilpul", it is profoundly apparent that we--the fragile, somewhat pitiful and deeply dependent human race--i.e. Jew,Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Confucion, Hindu atheist, agnostic, etc. --are all under the canopy of heaven alike.
"On that day, Jews, too, will have a choice. Those of us outside of Israel will be observing the second day of Rosh Hashanah. " even in Eretz Israel they celebrate 2 days of Rosh Hashana
The Motu Proprio is incompetent in its communication -- half its readers thinks it does not allow the Tridentine rite during the Easter Triduum, the other half thinks it does. The article you quote refers to priests celebrating a private mass. Article 3 seems to allow communities to celebrate according to the old rite during the Triduum as well. In any case the backward move from the positive attitude of the present liturgy to the unconscious antisemitism of 1962's "even the Jews" is only one tiny part of the general regressive tendency of this move. Yes, there is a thirst for mystery, a sense of the sacred -- but that thirst must be met according to the decision of Vatican II -- via a more scriptural, participative and artistic liturgy, in a living language.
Several Catholic commenters reveal their misunderstanding of Judaism. They say that they pray for the conversion of Jews (and all other non-Christians) since thay believe that the church offers the only path to their salvation. If Jews believe that their religion is the only true religion, they say, then Jews should not take offense at this, but rather they expect that the Jews should be praying for their conversion. However, there is no such parallelism between Judaism and Catholocism. Jews do not believe that you have to be Jewish to have a share in the "world-to-come", the Jewish version of "salvation". Rather, Jews believe that the righteous people of other nations of the world will also have a share in the world-to-come. You do not have to be Jewish--just righteous. This explains why Jews do not actively seek converts.
After reading the new prayer. It seems to be done with the sensitivity, which matches our Jesus's desire to have all come to the fullness of grace in His body the Catholic Church Rich Flatley Libertyville Illinois
The scriptural quote the comes to mind in these quite technical discussions is from Bhagavad Gita, "All paths performed in the right spirit lead to Krishna." This brings up the central existential question: Is there more that unites is than divides us; is there more that makes us alike than distinguishers us from one another by creed or color or language or geography? I believe: What divides ones of one kind is not divine.
I am a Jew with a Jesuit education but on this point I'll side with Camus who was neither Jew nor Christian, when he wrote: "The need to be right is the sign of a vulgar mind."