Irene, who is currently refreshing her knowledge of Latin at Haifa uni, says: This text would not be acceptable to the majority of the Jewish people, for whom any attempt to get us to convert to belief in Jesus as Messiah goes against the tenets of Judaism. This prayer would appear to be on a par with those evangelical Christians (not all, of course) who wish all Jews to emigrate to Israel, in order to hasten to second coming of Christ.
'I have an Anglican friend staying with me at present and I read it to her and she wasn’t very amused and thought it a damned cheek, actually.
'She said. ‘It implies that if you don’t recognize Jesus Christ, you won’t be saved’. In Judaism you can be ‘saved’, or at least be worthy of heaven without being a Jew. This would appear to be the main difference between the Jewish and Catholic approaches.'
It is difficult not to conclude that this represents a re-emergence of supercessionism. A discussion of the Pope's views when he was still Joseph Ratzinger shows that the former Pope clearly regarded the 'new covenant' as the fulfilment of the covenant of Sinai.
Bolding of Irene's friend's comment is mine. A damned cheek indeed. But then of course, Jesus is only the Son of God...
2 comments:
If I agreed with you on the "Jesus is the only son of God" business,I'd be a Christian,which I'm not.
But I certainly accept that those of any religion would be inclined to pray that others would come to agree with it (and should realize that those others are praying for the reverse conversion).
Here is an outline of the recent history of the prayer
http://www.liturgy.co.nz/worship/matters.html
Post a Comment