Are The Good Friday Prayers "anti Semitic"?

[mortify]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1309424' date='Jul 2 2007, 12:39 PM']So then if you guys are just going back to the 62 missae then why would there be a problem?[/quote]

That's a good question.

[quote]Cardinals, bishops and Jewish leaders are concerned by the text of the "old" Mass, which has passages, recited every Good Friday, which say Jews live in "blindness" and "darkness", and pray "the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ".[/quote]
[url="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article2723235.ece"]http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_brit...icle2723235.ece[/url]

What is the [i]real[/i] concern here?

[quote][quote]Which traditional Catholic in this thread was "up in arms" over making small changes in the liturgy? The missal used in indult's today does have small changes...[/quote]

Well, we have StThomasMore, who says he doesn't care about harming Catholic-Jewish dialogue as long as he gets his TLM. You then clarified that to mean that he meant if stuck between choosing between liturgical prayers and dialogue with Jews he would choose prayers, and you added that it didn't bother you that one of our prayers might be a cause of discord in Catholic-Jewish dialogue. And goldenchild doesn't care that his prayers might be offensive to someone else.[/quote]

No one was against small changes in and of themselves, we simply don't agree that the liturgy should be changed because [i]some[/i] people find it offensive. Since this objection is leveled at the very idea of reintroducing the Latin Mass, I'm more inclined to think its about Catholicism than a particular prayer.

Apparently dialogue requires both sides to admit they don't possess Truth and end any attempts of conversion?

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='mortify' post='1309540' date='Jul 2 2007, 02:35 PM']That's a good question.
[url="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article2723235.ece"]http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_brit...icle2723235.ece[/url]

What is the [i]real[/i] concern here?
Well, we have StThomasMore, who says he doesn't care about harming Catholic-Jewish dialogue as long as he gets his TLM. You then clarified that to mean that he meant if stuck between choosing between liturgical prayers and dialogue with Jews he would choose prayers, and you added that it didn't bother you that one of our prayers might be a cause of discord in Catholic-Jewish dialogue. And goldenchild doesn't care that his prayers might be offensive to someone else.

No one was against small changes in and of themselves, we simply don't agree that the liturgy should be changed because [i]some[/i] people find it offensive. Since this objection is leveled at the very idea of reintroducing the Latin Mass, I'm more inclined to think its about Catholicism than a particular prayer.

Apparently dialogue requires both sides to admit they don't possess Truth and end any attempts of conversion?[/quote]
amen. good post.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1309540' date='Jul 2 2007, 01:35 PM']Apparently dialogue requires both sides to admit they don't possess Truth and end any attempts of conversion?[/quote]
Yes, false dialogue does require this viewpoint.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1309352' date='Jul 2 2007, 11:18 AM']The word faithless has already been removed in th 1962 Missal. It now says "Let us pray for the Jews...O God, who dost not exclude from Thy mercy even the Jews..."[/quote]
Truth be told, I find the phrase "even the Jews" pretty offensive as well. The clear implication is that the Jews are "worse than everyone else," but that, even so, [i]even they[/i] are not excluded from God's mercy.

Indeed, if I may be so bold, the Jews - to whom God gave the promises and prophets - are that bit closer to God than the pagans, even though Talmudism is a far cry from their original covenant with God. Of course, their closeness to God is based on God's irrevocable promises, fulfilled in the person of Jesus, not in who they are or what they do, but they do have a special part to play in the history of salvation, yet to be completed.

[Apotheoun]

I find the prayers for the Jews from the older Roman Rite to be charitable in the extreme, because through them the Church asks God for the grace the conversion, that the Jews may embrace the true faith, and that they may participate in the fullness of divine worship, which can only be found in the Church -- the true Israel.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1309553' date='Jul 2 2007, 02:50 PM']I find the prayers for the Jews from the older Roman Rite to be charitable in the extreme, because through them the Church asks God for the grace the conversion, that the Jews may embrace the true faith, and that they may participate in the fullness of divine worship, which can only be found in the Church -- the true Israel.[/quote]
I absolutely and 100% am on board with the intent of the prayers. I'm just saying, the phrase "even the Jews" implies to me, anyway, that the Jews are somehow "extra bad."

[mortify]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1309552' date='Jul 2 2007, 02:46 PM']Truth be told, I find the phrase "even the Jews" pretty offensive as well. The clear implication is that the Jews are "worse than everyone else," but that, even so, [i]even they[/i] are not excluded from God's mercy.[/quote]

You yourself mention the Jews are [b]better[/b] off because of the promises and prophets that God sent them. If they possess the revelation that leads one to the Messiah, yet reject Him, are they not [b]worse[/b] off than the pagans who accepted Him even though they had false religions?

God's mercy still reaches those who were given great gifts yet rejected Him.

[Apotheoun]

That is because the prayer is being made for a particular group that has denied the Christ, and we must never forget that Rabbinic Judaism is not Biblical Judaism, but is instead an outgrowth of the rejection of Christ made by the Rabbis at the end of the first century when they added their condemnations of Christians to the Eighteen Benedictions, which can be found in the Siddur.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1309203' date='Jul 2 2007, 08:19 AM']Umm...according to Fr. Zulhsdorf, the words "perfidious Jews" weren't even in the edition of the Missal being approved for general use. Just to give another focus to this discussion.[/quote]
I don't think that the words "perfidious Jews" was ever in the Mass. The Latin term was "perfidis" which doesn't have the same meaning as the English cognate used in that pseudo-translation (where did this translation come from I wonder?). The prayer really just meant that the Jews lack the faith. This whole affair smells like anti-Catholicism to me.

I'm ad libbing here, but my understanding is that these "scandalous" prayers really don't amount to more than praying "Eternal and Omnipotent God, thou dost not even withhold thy mercies from the Jews who lack the faith." Oh my, I'm scandalized.

Anyway, I really think that we should look at the original Latin text rather than relying on some lame translations coming from anti-Catholic media sources.

Does anyone have the complete Latin text of the prayer handy? And possibly some approved English translation?

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1309566' date='Jul 2 2007, 03:05 PM']I'm ad libbing here, but my understanding is that these "scandalous" prayers really don't amount to more than praying "Eternal and Omnipotent God, thou dost not even withhold thy mercies from the Jews who lack the faith." Oh my, I'm scandalized.[/quote]

I could get on board with this translation, FWIW.

[Laudate_Dominum]

This dude's blog improves upon the main point I was trying to make.

[quote]How often to Christian's make issue of the blasphemies of the Talhmud, which condemn Jesus and call Mary a whore? They can write whatever they want as far as I'm concern. I certainly don't like it, and regard it as blasphemy, yet I think if we employ Pius IX's principle of toleration of error, it is most certainly good even for a Catholic ruler to not interfere with the Jews worship, and let them say what they should say. If that is true in a Catholic state, how much more so in a supposedly pluralistic secular state! Why should anyone care what Christians think? The Jews are not Christians, what does it matter to them that we think the they are wrong? This prayer is a beautiful prayer, it begs God to give the greatest gift we have, the gift of Jesus Christ to the Jewish people, even after their bi-millenial rejection of Him. There is no Jew hatred, in fact, to excise this passage and replace it with a prayer that confirms the Jews in their error is one of the greatest evils that could be done to the Jews, and embodies true anti-semitism!

Then it is said, that because the Missal uses the words "perfidis" (for the faithless), that it is anti-semitic because it is attacking the Jews. First of all, such people have not done their homework. To address Jewish concerns, Pope John XXIII removed the word perfidis from the Missal, and the prayer stayed exactly the way it was above without the word faithless. The Missal Pope Benedict is allegedly bringing back (1962) does not even contain that word!

Secondly, translated into English, "perfidious" has this nasty pejorative sound to it. It sounds like equating someone with something smelly and nasty, or of perverse morals. In the Latin language, perfidis has no pejorative connotation. It just means faithless, i.e. people without right faith, misguided ideals, whatever. It is a neutral adjective which simply means those without faith. That is it. There is nothing bad or wrong with the word perfidis. Nevertheless, John XXIII took the word out, which in my opinion was a mistake but he felt he was helping Jews who were offended by the term, who did not understand Latin or that no insult was inherent in the word. Since the gesture was good, and it scarcely comprises an removal of something integral to faith and morals, I can accept it regardless. It isn't a big deal to me. I'm not going to go on a crusade or start the society for the perfidious Good Friday usage. So why is everyone else worked up about something which is not even present in the Missal being permitted? I scarcely doubt anyone but those like myself who know Latin will catch the word's use if it were used at all.[/quote]
[url="http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/"]http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/[/url]

[mortify]

From LD's quote:

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1309581' date='Jul 2 2007, 03:14 PM']How often to Christian's make issue of the blasphemies of the Talhmud, which condemn Jesus and call Mary a whore?[/quote]


Apparently that doesn't affect Catholic dialogue with Jews?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='mortify' post='1309604' date='Jul 2 2007, 03:26 PM']From LD's quote:
Apparently that doesn't affect Catholic dialogue with Jews?

[/quote]
Nah, us Catholics are always the bad guys. We're the ones who go apologizing for everything and kissing bottoms.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I just thought of some words of Cardinal Arinze spoken in reference to "The Da Vinci Code".

[i]Those who blaspheme Christ and get away with it are exploiting the Christian readiness to forgive and to love even those who insult us. There are some other religions which if you insult their founder they will not be just talking. They will make it painfully clear to you.[/i]

[Era Might]

I wouldn't place too much confidence in what people claim the Talmud says. I would require full citations. How many Catholics have read the Summa and understand it in context, let alone the Talmud?