Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Reactions to the Prayer Revision

~from The Times by Ruth Gledhill. Please note the Anglican pope-unto-herself's reaction:
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.
Oh, what is the saying, "Be careful what you ask for?" It seems the howls of protest from certain quarters got their wish, the prayer is revised. The language updated, the sentiment the same. We want all men to be saved. How hard is that to understand? It has been the Church's express mission from the beginning. How can we deny it? Take it up with the Boss.

Here is what the director of the Council of Christians and Jews had to say:
David Gifford, chief executive of the Council of Christians and Jews, said: "I am saddened. They could have gone much further and built on the work of the Second Vatican Council."

He said this will add to the "suspicion and dismay" already created by the restoration of the Tridentine Rite, which can now be celebrated without permission of a bishop. "I am extremely sad that another opportunity has been missed."
Uh, oh, invoking Vatican II with no reference. Exactly what opportunity was missed? Chris Gillibrand, of CathCon said:
While I cannot speak for the Jewish communities, I would be surprised if this is what they expected or were seeking. The language of "illuminate their hearts" is not too different from "remove the veil". Raising concern about the existing prayer can be seen to have been somewhat counter-productive. This is the end of a long process of the softening of the language of the prayer, but the Church would be betraying its own nature, if it were not to emphasise her unique and universal salvific nature.
Exactly....

1 comment:

Dan said...

Argent,
I am completely confused as to why they changed the '62 prayers.
They seemed quite apropriate.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I believe that the ICKSP has an indult to use the pre-1955 Missal.
I shall assist at one of their chapels for the Mass of the pre-sanctified