the jews and decide

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

i think that if the document Nostra Aetate can be interpreted correctly tell me if this (my interpretation) is right or wrong.

"...neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor all Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his passion."

heres a sentence from the decleration

now it means that some jews today can be responsibile for the crime of christs death, because it says ALL jews today for his death so it means SOME are

now it also says that ALL are not responsibile at the time of christ meaning (obviously) some are.

is it correct to say that the the jews that are not responsibile are jews by race but not by relegion and that the jews that are responsibile are practicing jews?

is my interpration correct?

[Aloysius]

no. it is using "Jew" to refer to those of the religion.

Practicing Jews do not necessarily hold some guilt for the execution of Christ just because they are practicing Jews. That's what it is saying.

Nor does the race necessarily hold some guilt for the execution of Christ just for being of that race. That is what it is saying.

By saying 'not all Jews' it is destroying the idea that being a jew (by race or religion) gives an individual guilt for the crime of deicide.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

i do not think that because one is jewish by race that one is guilty of decide. because mary is jewish. and obviously she is not responsible

so i think that the jewsih relegion is guilty of decide. does that contradict teaching?

[dspen2005]

what does the Latin say??? go back to the original Latin?

[Aloysius]

it is clear from context in any language that it is showing that simply being Jewish by race or religion doesn't make one guilty of deicide.

I don't know, in some mystical sense the religion of the Old Covenant is responsible for rejecting its completion in the New Covenant . That doesn't mean that any individual has any culpability for deicide merely by being a member of the religion of the old covenant in the past or being now a member of rabbinical judaism.

[dspen2005]

is the Latin on the vatican website.... I would prefer to see what the Latin says, before I respond.... sometimes, translations lose their real meaning....

[Thumper]

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus: Not to be nit-picky, but for the sake of correctness, you are talking about deicide (note the 2 i's), not decide.

[shortnun]

Nostra Aetate ( Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions) is a document which emphasizes the unity of all people of the world and their innate desire to return to the "one" from which we come. The section that deals with Judaism is a written reaction/apology to the centuries of persecution that the Jewish people (those of the religion and/or of the race) endured at the hands of Christians for committing the crime of deicide.

For centuries (primarily in Europe), during the Lenten season, churches would perfom passion plays (similar to our stations of the cross or passion plays we might have today). The primary difference being the emphasis on the Jews who sentenced Jesus to death by demanding that Barabus be set free. Thus it would be appropriate to say that the performance of such plays were a catalyst in the spread of anti-Semitism throughout the European (and even North American) continent.

Thus in the theme of unity and connection, Nostra Aetate addresses the bond that ties the people of the 'New Covenant' to Abraham's stock. And even though some Jewish authorities and those who followed them called for Jesus' death, the blame for this cannot be laid at the door of all those Jews present at that time, nor can the Jews in our time be held as guilty. Thus the document also [i]decries all displays of antisemitism made at any time by anyone.[/i]

The document as a whole calls upon Christians to look at the own discord we have between communities, and between Christian denominations. Without resolution (that is to say, maintaining distinct identities, and acknowledging similaries and healing hurts), the Christian Church can never fully enter into dialogue with the other religions of the world (including the one from which we come (Judaism), and to those that were are tied to through Abraham (Islam and Judaism)). In a post-modern world, with the desire to see God's self revealed in the world today stronger than ever, such dialogue between faith traditions is essential.

This is one of the biggest challenges the Church presents to us (and to the world) in Vatican II. I pray that we may become instrumental in living up to such expectations.

Hope that clears up the questions!

[avemaria40]

We all had responsibility for Christ's death, not just the Jewish ppl. We all sin, and it was our sins who put Christ on the Cross. Btw, the Romans really did want the execution to take place, as they saw Jesus as a threat to their power, as a traitor. And Caiphas was sucking up to Pilate by making it clear that the Romans were the ones in making this decision. The priests weren't being bloodthirsty, they were just giving pilate everything he wanted to ehar. and the Gospels were written by Jews who followed Christ and had contempt for their brethren who failed to obey His Word. That is why it makes Pilate seem like a good guy and the priests like bad guys. but i hate it when ppl say that the jews killed Jesus, it wasnt the Jews, we all killed Jesus. If we didn't sin, He wouldn't have to die.

[Era Might]

[quote]We must regard as guilty [for the death of the Lord] all those who continue to relapse into their sins. Since our sins made the Lord Christ suffer the torment of the cross, those who plunge themselves into disorders and crimes crucify the Son of God anew in their hearts (for he is in them) and hold him up to contempt. And it can be seen that [b]our crime in this case is greater in us than in the Jews[/b]. As for them, according to the witness of the Apostle, "None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." We, however, profess to know him. And when we deny him by our deeds, we in some way seem to lay violent hands on him

--Catechism of the Council of Trent[/quote]

The only people who have any direct personal guilt in the death of the Lord, whether Jew or Gentile, are those who layed their literal hands on him and directly betrayed him.

All other men, Jew or Gentile, are guilty for the death of the Lord in an indirect sense, by our sins. As the Catechism of Trent notes, Christians are MORE guilty than Jews in this regard, as we profess to know him.

Edited October 2, 2005 by Era Might

[desertwoman]

Word. Sin killed Jesus.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

ok next question:

are the Jewish people cursed because of the death of christ?

the bible and numerous saints have the answer to this question.

does anyone want to take a crack at it?

[Era Might]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Oct 2 2005, 10:26 AM']are the Jewish people cursed because of the death of christ?
[right][snapback]743597[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No.

[quote]Hence I ask, did [Israel] stumble so as to fall? Of course not! But through their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make them jealous.

Now if their transgression is enrichment for the world, and if their diminished number is enrichment for the Gentiles, how much more their full number.

Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I glory in my ministry in order to make my race jealous and thus save some of them.

For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

If the firstfruits are holy, so is the whole batch of dough; and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place and have come to share in the rich root of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. [b]If you do boast, consider that you do not support the root; the root supports you[/b].

Indeed you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in."

That is so. They were broken off because of unbelief, but you are there because of faith. So do not become haughty, but stand in awe.

For if God did not spare the natural branches, (perhaps) he will not spare you either.

See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.

[b]And they also, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.[/b]

For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated one, how much more will they who belong to it by nature be grafted back into their own olive tree.

--Romans 11[/quote]

As St. Paul says in that chapter of Romans, "with respect to election, [the Jewish people] are beloved because of the patriarchs" (verse 28). The stock of Abraham is in no way "cursed". Just the opposite. God seeks them with a special love, for the sake of the Fathers of the Old Testament (the Patriarchs). The Catechism notes all this:

[quote]When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, "the first to hear the Word of God." The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ", "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."

--#839[/quote]

[Thumper]

Nicely quoted, Era. I'd just underscore the last line from the catechism: "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable." God is always faithful to his covenants, and so the covenant he made with the Jewish people remains in effect.

I'm not sure if this article prompted the question, but you might want to check out "Appropriate Attitude Toward the Jewish People" on zenit.org.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. 25 And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.

3rbd century CE:
bullet Origen (185 - 254 CE): "The blood of Jesus falls not only on the Jews of that time, but on all generations of Jews up to the end of the world."
bullet St. Cyprian of Carthage (circa 200 - 258): "This name rebukes and condemns the Jews who not only spurned Christ faithlessly, but also cruelly executed Him Who was announced to them by the prophets, and sent first to their nation. No longer may they call God their Father, because the Lord confounds and refutes them, saying: 'your father is the devil' [John 8:44]. O sinful nation, O people weighed down with guilt, breed of evil-doers, lawless children, you have turned your backs on the Lord and have provoked the Holy One of Israel."
bullet 4th century CE:
bullet St Athanasius (circa 296 - 373): Jews "...have no abiding place, but they wander everywhere .... But in every place they transgress the law, and as the judgments of God require; they keep days of grief instead of gladness. Now the cause of this to them was the slaying of the Lord, and that they did not reverence the Only Begotten .... Therefore the Lord cursed them under the figure of the fig tree."
bullet St. Hilary of Poitiers (315 - 367) referred to Jews as a perverse people who God has cursed forever.
bullet John of Antioch (347 - 407) (a.k.a. John Chrysostom): He delivered a group of four homilies titled "Against the Jews". Homily 4 said, in part: "The difference between the Jews and us in not a small one, is it? Is the dispute between us over ordinary, everyday matters, so that you think the two religions are really one and the same? Why are you mixing what cannot be mixed? They crucified the Christ whom you adore as God. Do you see how great the difference is? How is it, then, that you keep running to those who slew Christ when you say that you worship him whom they crucified?" 2
bullet 5th century CE:
bullet St. Jerome (circa 345 - 420): "Judas betrayed Me [Jesus], the Jews persecuted and crucified Me....In particular, this is the story of Judas; in general it is that of the Jews....Judas is cursed, that in Judas the Jews may be accursed."
bullet St. Augustine (354 - 430) wrote: "The true image of the Hebrew is Judas Iscariot, who sells the Lord for silver. The Jew can never understand the Scriptures and forever will bear the guilt for the death of Jesus."

On another occasion, he wrote: "Judaism, since Christ, is a corruption; indeed, Judas is the image of the Jewish people: their understanding of Scripture is carnal; they bear the guilt for the death of the Savior, for through their fathers they have killed Christ." 1
bullet 7th century:
bullet The 17th Church Council of Toledo, Spain in 694 CE defined Jews as the serfs of the prince. This was based, in part, on the beliefs by Chrysostom, Origen, Jerome, and other church fathers that God punished the Jews with perpetual slavery because of their collective responsibility for the death of Jesus. 3
bullet 11th to 13th centuries:
bullet The First Crusade was launched in 1096 CE. Although the prime goal of the crusades was to liberate Jerusalem from Muslim control, Jews were a secondary target of opportunity. As the soldiers passed through Europe on the way to the Holy Land, large numbers of Jews were challenged with the order: "Christ-killers, embrace the Cross or die!" 12,000 Jews in the Rhine Valley alone were killed in the first Crusade. This behavior continued for eight additional crusades until the 9th Crusade in 1272. Hundreds of thousands of defenseless Jews died in the attacks.
bullet 13th century:
bullet Pope Innocent III wrote to the archbishops of Sens and Paris in 1200 CE that "the Jews, by their own guilt, are consigned to perpetual servitude because they crucified the Lord...As slaves rejected by God, in whose death they wickedly conspire, they shall by the effect of this very action, recognize themselves as the slaves of those whom Christ's death set free..."

In an epistle to the Count of Nevers, he wrote: "....the Jews, against whom the blood of Christ calls out, although they ought not to be killed, nevertheless, as wanderers they must remain upon the earth until their faces are filled with shame and they seek the name of the Lord Jesus Christ."

In an epistle to the Hierarchy of France, he wrote: "Crucifiers of Christ ought to be held in continual subjection."
bullet 15th century:
bullet Blessed Juliana of Norwich (1342 - 1423), "I knew in my faith that the Jews were accursed and condemned without end, except those who were converted [to Christianity]."
bullet Pope Innocent IV (1432 - 1492): "...strictly forbidding that Jews henceforth have Christian nurses or servants, that the sons of a free woman may not serve the sons of a bondswoman, but as slaves condemned by the Lord, whose death they wickedly plotted, they at least outwardly recognize themselves as slaves of those whom the death of Christ made free and themselves slaves."
bullet 18th century:
bullet St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori (1696 - 1787): "Poor Jews! You invoked a dreadful curse upon your own heads in saying: 'His blood be on us and our children'; and that curse, miserable race, you carry upon you to this day, and to the end of time you shall endure the chastisement of that innocent blood." Liguori was referring to Matthew 27:21-25 which describes an alleged interchange between Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Palestine and Phoenicia, and a Jewish mob. These verses are probably responsible for more loss of Jewish life than any other passage in the Bible:

Matthew 27:21-25: "The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children." King James Version.

[Era Might]

Am I supposed to be confounded by your quotes?

The anti-Jewish thought that extends throughout Christian history is no secret. There's a reason the Second Vatican Council formally disavowed the "theology of contempt" as it is known.

None of your citations are formal doctrinal propositions. Nostra Aetate, on the other hand, is a document of an Ecumenical Council.

This disavowal began even before the Council. Pope Pius XI was vehement in his condemnation of anti-semitism:

[quote]Mark well that in the Catholic Mass, Abraham is our Patriarch and forefather. Anti-Semitism is incompatible with the lofty thought which that fact expresses. It is a movement with which we Christians can have nothing to do. No, no, I say to you it is impossible for a Christian to take part in anti-Semitism. It is inadmissible. Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual progeny of Abraham. Spiritually, we are all Semites."[/quote]

Receiving a group of Roman Jews after the war, Pope Pius XII was even more affectionate toward the people of Israel:

[quote]I am only the Vicar of Christ, but you are his very kith and kin[/quote]

Don't go down the radical "traditionalist" anti-semitism road, EENS. Just don't do it. It will smell of elderberries you dry.

Edited October 2, 2005 by Era Might

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

what about the biblical quote i think that it holds up better than a pronouncment by a fallibile counsel.

and believe me i am not anti-semetic.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Oct 2 2005, 07:28 PM']what about the biblical quote i think that it holds up better than a pronouncment by a fallibile counsel.

and believe me i am not anti-semetic.
[right][snapback]743983[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ok, on the one hand, we have your private interpretation of a Bible verse.

On the other hand, we have the interpretation of an Ecumenical Council.

Gee, I wonder who speaks for Christ...

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

hmm lets see
here

we have 2,000 years of christian traditon and a bible verse that was interpreted to mean the jews were cursed pre vatican II

and then we have a modernistic fallibile council

and after the council the traditon is gone
the bible verse "Means something different"


so lets pretend that the bible verse would be interpreted to say that the jews are cursed

Obviously the saints interpreted the quote to mean that
they all thought the jews were cursed.

now after 1965 they are not?

sounds a little phishy to me....

[Era Might]

[quote]sounds a little phishy to me....[/quote]

Of course it does. That's why you're in the phishy group. :

You post 10 or so quotes, which you probably just ripped off some radical "traditionalist" site, and based on these quotes, you decide that you are above an Ecumenical Council and the Bishop of Rome. You make yourself, in effect, the arbiter of Tradition and Catholic doctrine. While possessing no theological (or even a college) education, you're somehow competent to fill this post.

I know it's hard to believe that 2,000 Bishops assembled in an Ecumenical Council might, just might, know a little more about Catholic doctrine than you. But they do.

You're better than this, EENS. Why do you insist on teaching the Magisterium, rather than learning from her?

Edited October 3, 2005 by Era Might