Catholics to Pray (Again) for Jews to be...Enlightened

[nerdanel]

....yet another lovely reminder from my dear religion of birth that it believes that people like me are "going backwards" by embracing Judaism. Boy, do I not miss being a part of that religion. (For those Christians who may think this is an intemperate reaction, consider how you would feel if Jews yearly prayed for Christians to be enlightened so that they might acknowledge the falsity of their belief that Jesus Christ is the "savior of all men." Imagine that the Jews followed up this ridiculousness with the claim that it was okay since their congregants were only hearing that message in HEBREW rather than their native tongue. Yeah. Pretty insulting, isn't it?) Sorry that I can't post about this with the tone that we normally strive for in the TE forum, but I am livid about the disrespect inherent in this "prayer."

From The New York Times:

The revision of a contentious Good Friday prayer approved this week by Pope Benedict XVI could set back Jewish-Catholic relations, Conservative Judaism’s international assembly of rabbis says in a resolution to be voted on next week.

The prayer calls for God to enlighten the hearts of Jews “so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, the savior of all men.”

The draft resolution states the prayer would “cast a harsh shadow over the spirit of mutual respect and collaboration that has marked these past four decades, making it more difficult for Jews to engage constructively in dialogue with Catholics.”

On Tuesday, the pope released new wording for the prayer, part of the traditional Latin, or Tridentine, Mass.

Before the Second Vatican Council, also known as Vatican II, the Good Friday Mass in Latin prayed for the conversion of Jews, referring to their “blindness” and calling upon God to “lift a veil from their hearts.”

An unofficial translation of the new prayer reads: “Let us pray for the Jews. May the Lord Our God enlighten their hearts so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, the savior of all men.”

Lay Jewish groups this week called the change insufficient.

Rabbi Joel H. Meyers, executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, the Conservative rabbis’ group, said leaders from the Reform and Reconstructionist movements had also been in touch with him about issuing a joint statement on the papal revision.

“We have been very much involved in interfaith activities and dialogue for years, and relationships with the Catholic Church are really quite good,” the rabbi said. “I think it really turns back the clock a bit and reverts to some sense that the church is pulling back from the positions it took in Vatican II.”

Most Catholics worship in the vernacular, and their prayers will not be affected. But last year, the pope made it easier for traditionalists to celebrate the Latin Mass that was the norm before Vatican II.

At a meeting in Washington from Sunday to Thursday, the Rabbinical Assembly will vote on a draft resolution, which, while subject to revision, says the group is “dismayed and deeply disturbed to learn that Pope Benedict XVI has revised the 1962 text of the Latin Mass, retaining the rubric, ‘For the Conversion of The Jews.’ ”

The Rev. James Massa, executive director of the secretariat of ecumenical and interreligious affairs of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Friday that the prayer would be heard by “a tiny minority of Catholics and they will hear it in Latin.”

“The publication of the prayer and its interpretation by some of our partners in the Jewish community does lower the temperature a bit,” Father Massa said, “but we have persevered other controversies in the past and at the end of the day we are all at the table of dialogue.”

[Voronwë the Faithful]

That IS offensive. Particularly since it is not some fringe off-shoot; this is the POPE doing this. I suppose one could be impressed by the fact that he stands by what he believes in rather than doing the politically expedient thing, but it is hard to admire such an apparently arrogant stance.

What do our Catholic members think about this? Is this a good thing? How about other Christians?

[Frelga]

Man, this Pope sure knows how to build bridges, doesn't he? First he dug out some citations that upset the Muslims. Then he announced that Catholicism is the only way to salvation, which, judging from Manwë thread, did not make Protestants at all happy. Now this.

Impressed I am not, but at the end of the day, Benedict is not my spiritual leader and I am not particularly bothered by whatever he chooses to pray for.

[nerdanel]

I am only bothered in terms of his influence as the Pope, and in terms of the effect of such official liturgical prayers on relations between ordinary Catholics and Jews. I am very little concerned by the substance of whatever prayers the Pope may elect to make privately, in his personal capacity, of course. What he does as the purported leader of hundreds of millions of Catholics is relevant to all of us - particularly given the Catholic Church's extraordinarily poor historical behavior towards the Jewish people.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yup.

[Frelga]

Well, yes, that. I suppose it could be worse. At least this is "only" conversion.

Why Jews in particular, I wonder. Are Catholics also supposed to pray for the enlightenment of Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists?

[yovargas]

That's really crappy. But apart from there being lots of Catholics in the world, is it any different from any religion that believes all non-believers are wrong (ie. most of them)?

[Frelga]

Yov, in this day and age in U.S or Canada, probably not. Although apart from Islam, Christianity is the only religion I can think of that expects bad things to happen to unbelievers or cares much about their conversion. Judaism certainly doesn't, nor does Buddhism AFAIK, and while I'm not an expert on Hinduism by any means it does not strike me as likely.

However, Catholic Church does wield a fair deal of secular influence in many parts of the world, and there it might very well matter for the Jewish community what their neighbor's religious leader preaches about them.

[Faramond]

Don't forget about the Pope's talk of "weak and deviant" unions and inauthentic love regarding homosexuality. He's been casting his net wide.

[nerdanel]

Faramond, trust me when I say I have not forgotten. Indeed, I now suspect that the Pope is on a mission to piss me off personally. If he targets any of his "enlightenment" efforts towards Indians or left-handed people, I shall be convinced of it.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Or corporate attorneys.

[Frelga]

Nah, those are fair game. A profession is, after all, a lifestyle choice. I think we should all pray for more enlightened corporate attorneys.

[nerdanel]

Look, although people may choose to be gay, left-handed, or non-white, I was born a(n enlightened) corporate attorney (do you honestly think that anyone would CHOOSE to be a member of a group that is so hated, and moreover, that has to work at 9:48 PM on Saturday night?) and I demand y'all respect that!!!! Shirriffs, please edit the gratuitous corporateattorneyphobia in the above posts.

[Primula Baggins]

Oh, c'mon, Nel—everyone knows it's all true.

Let's keep in mind that there are Catholics who also disagree. Most Catholics worldwide will never pray that prayer or even hear it, or understand it if they did, nor would many of them approve of it if they understood.

I don't and won't defend it. But even among Catholics, the Pope's views are not everyone's views. I know this.

[MithLuin]

*sigh* Why does the Vatican handle the media so poorly? I will never understand this.

The Tridentine Mass was the mass decided upon by the Council of Trent back in the 1500s. Thus, all of the prayers in that mass were penned at that time (or earlier). Conversion of the Jews is one of the things they thought it important to pray for - but recall that this is the same mass (Good Friday) that refers to the people who killed Jesus as 'perfidious Jews' and (apparently) called Jews blind. In the 1500s, no one thought to complain too loudly...the Reconquista was finished in Spain, so forced conversion was not an unusual reaction of Christians to Jews living in their midst. Is any of this a good thing? No. But it is an historical reality.

When Vatican II happened, rather than just tweaking a mass that had remained virtually unchanged for over 400 years, we got a new mass, the Novus Ordo mass. Notably, the priest faces the people, the prayers are said in the vernacular (with a smattering of Latin and Greek), and the congregation (not the altar boys) say the responses. But also, many of the prayers were rewritten to better reflect the Church's understanding of liturgy...it was an attempt to return to roots, and to re-express prayers in a new way. It also incorporates the theology of Vatican II, which includes a re-working of the Church's understanding of its place in the world.

The old Tridentine mass was not entirely thrown out. They phased it out, certainly, but did not forbid people from saying or attending the old mass. Some priests, who were old or blind, were not expected to learn a whole new mass and were permitted to go on saying the ones they knew [these priests are now dead]. Some communities very much loved the old mass, and thought the new one was a travesty. In the aftermath of Vatican II, some of these groups split off from the Catholic church. So, they may still be calling themselves "Catholic," but they aren't. But as the Church pointed out, over and over again, they could keep going to the traditional Latin mass if they really wanted to. So, if they insisted on splitting, it was over other differences, and a more wholesale rejection of the decisions of Vatican II.

The current pope has made an attempt to reconcile with these fringe elements (or rather, the ones who have remained within the Church), saying that the Tridentine mass is still acceptable and should be available. That doesn't mean he says it himself - as far as I know, all papal masses are Novus Ordo masses. But, by allowing the mass from the 1500s to be said, that means that the old language is retained. So, even if allowing it as a throw-back or novelty, the pope decided to reword some of the prayers. That is what this announcement was about - changing the wording of the old prayers, so that they no longer express sentiments which the Church cannot agree with. This means that the previous pope, who did so much to reconcile the relationship between Catholics and Jews, had left these old prayers unchanged during his 25+ year pontificate.

Perhaps Benedict didn't go far enough. But I can guarantee that the people who cling strongly to the Tridentine mass probably do think that Jewish people need to convert and thus are unlikely to be happy with even this minor change he has introduced. So, I think this is a move in the right direction, and it was good not to let the old prayer (asking that the Jews overcome their 'blindness') stand. I do not think it harmful to pray for enlightenment for anyone, be they Jewish or attourneys or politicians or Catholics. And it is a Christian sentiment to want people to acknowledge Jesus as saviour. Perhaps not one that is very popular with those who are not Christian...that I can understand. But this isn't a throw-back to pre-Vatican II theology, nor is it an attempt to undo what the church has done in the past 40 years.

[themary]

I'm so glad I walked away from the Catholic Church not that I think they'd want me anymore anyway. The Catholic church continually misses the big picture because they are too busy trying to change others when they should reflect on themselves and perhaps talk to God.

The final straw was when I visited a parish in Florida and the priest opened mass by telling the congregation our views on homosexuality. I almost walked out but for my mother's sake I stayed.

[kams]

MithLuin - you are right on target! Thank you for summing much of what I could say on the subject.

*sigh* Why does the Vatican handle the media so poorly? I will never understand this.

I am sighing right with you.

But also, many of the prayers were rewritten to better reflect the Church's understanding of liturgy...it was an attempt to return to roots, and to re-express prayers in a new way. It also incorporates the theology of Vatican II, which includes a re-working of the Church's understanding of its place in the world.

Important - the prayers were re-written to reflect new theological philosophy. It had been slowly coming on for decades. (e.g Biblical Renewal of the late 1800's, lay participation in the reciting of prayers (in Latin)) Most of the push came from European scholars. Names and terms are escaping me here
Vatican II officially said "we don't think that way anymore."

The old Tridentine mass was not entirely thrown out.

It was said under indult (permission). It was meant to go away. And the particular prayer is one specific prayer said at the Good Friday Liturgy only. (Don't get the impression Catholics chant it every Sunday or something.) When Pope Benedict allowed the Tridentine Mass to be said without indult last September, he explicitly stated that the Novus Ordo form of the Good Friday Liturgy be used.

I suppose some groups still were not satisfied and now he's tweaking.

Personally, I think it is a bad idea to allow two Liturgical Rites for the Latin Church. The Novus Ordo is already in Latin! Have that one said if it has to be in the official language of the church.

That is what this announcement was about - changing the wording of the old prayers, so that they no longer express sentiments which the Church cannot agree with. This means that the previous pope, who did so much to reconcile the relationship between Catholics and Jews, had left these old prayers unchanged during his 25+ year pontificate.

I take issue with this - it is too simplified. Again, I would have to know if the Tridentine version of the Good Friday Liturgy was part of the original indult before I could agree with you on this.

But this isn't a throw-back to pre-Vatican II theology, nor is it an attempt to undo what the church has done in the past 40 years.

I agree with you completely here.

[superwizard]

Although apart from Islam, Christianity is the only religion I can think of that expects bad things to happen to unbelievers or cares much about their conversion.

Side note but I just want to chime in here and say that actually not everyone would agree that Islam says that non Muslims are destined to hell (I assume that's what you mean when you say 'bad things to happen' right? Please forgive me if I'm wrong ). I'm pretty sure that you can find a good number of Muslims who would say that but you would also definitely find a very large number (I personally think/hope the majority) that would disagree with that statement. I know for sure that I for one definitely do.

[Frelga]

S'wiz, I must admit, my knowledge of Islam is comparatively limited. I did have the impression that Islam includes the notion (or equivalent) of heaven and hell, but I don't pretend to know the details, which is why I stuck to a vague "bad things". I'd like to hear more on the subject from you.

[superwizard]

S'wiz, I must admit, my knowledge of Islam is comparatively limited. I did have the impression that Islam includes the notion (or equivalent) of heaven and hell, but I don't pretend to know the details, which is why I stuck to a vague "bad things". I'd like to hear more on the subject from you.

Islam does indeed have the idea of heaven and hell and if I'm not mistaken it is pretty similar to their Christian equivalents. For the most part everything is straight forward. Every person is judged on the Last Judgment and their good and bad deeds are weighed out and quite simply if the person's good deeds outweigh their bad and they are a believer than they go to heaven.

Where Muslims differ is on who exactly is considered a believer. Some Muslims believe that only Muslims can be believers while others believe that anyone who is honestly seeking the truth with an open heart is a believer (that is where I personally lie) though I suspect most Muslim's beliefs lie somewhere in the middle. In general I think most Muslims would answer by saying that it is impossible in Islam to say who will go to heaven and simply leave it at that.

Thanks for asking Frelga