Vatican bans mission to Jews

Christina, one of our regular bloggers from south of the border, submitted the following short article for comment:

Although I firmly believe that Summorum Pontificum was a great blessing for the Church and it has clearly produced much good fruit, yet the inclusion of those words of Pope Benedict – that he envisaged that …the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite (should) be mutually enriching were truly ominous. To one familiar with the ancient rite who has also attended the new, it seems insane, if not blasphemous, to suggest that the latter contains anything whatsoever with which it can ‘enrich’ the former.   

To one familiar with the ancient rite who has also attended the new, it seems insane, if not blasphemous, to suggest that the latter contains anything whatsoever with which it can ‘enrich’ the former.

To one familiar with the ancient rite who has also attended the new, it seems insane, if not blasphemous, to suggest that the latter contains anything whatsoever with which it can ‘enrich’ the former.

Predictably, those whose teeth were gnashing at the issuance of Summorum Pontificum were quick to use this clause to their advantage. In May 2012, Cardinal Koch, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, said:- 

The pope’s long-term aim is not simply to allow the old and new rites to coexist, but to move toward a “common rite” that is shaped by the mutual enrichment of the two Mass forms. In effect, the Pope is launching a new liturgical reform movement, the Cardinal said. Those who resist it, including “rigid” progressives, mistakenly view the Second Vatican Council as a rupture with the Church’s liturgical tradition.

 So it was hardly surprising that the modernists would begin, sooner or later, to chip away in earnest, and so we have the current call, by the heretical/would-be schismatic German hierarchy, ably assisted by the English bishops (read Cardinal Vincent Nicholls) re the Good Friday prayer for the conversion of the Jews. But I must admit that I was surprised and very disappointed to read a piece on the subject in the current LMS magazine Mass of Ages by Fr. Bede Rowe. The International Federation Una Voce does not support Fr. Rowe’s opinion, and as a member of that Federation, one wonders why the LMS has chosen to publish it, especially since the current issue also contains a splendid interview with Cardinal Burke.

 Fr. Rowe begins:-

 In the past few months there has been much said about the call of the English and German Bishops for a change in the Old Rite Good Friday prayers asking that the veil be lifted from the eyes of the Jews and they recognise Christ as their Sviour.

In doing so, it questions the fundamental Christian calling of announcing the Good News to all the world, as was Our Lord’s clear command. If this announcement is what we should do, and I think that this is clear, are there any exceptions? Are we to preach to the whole world or are we not? Is Christ the only way to salvation, or is there another way?

After this apparently promising start there follow several paragraphs of Vatican II-inspired waffle and then this conclusion:-

Let me make this clear. It is eminently possible, and I would say desirable, that there is no proselytism (deliberate preaching with the aim of conversion) of the Jews. This is not a principle, so I am not saying that they occupy a new theological place in the scheme of salvation, as many Church theologians seem to want to do. Rather I would say that it should not happen because we cannot effectively preach the message of Christ because of recent, and not so recent history and our share in it. Today, preaching the conversion of the Jews is so clouded by the evil of the last century, that the message of Christ becomes too severely distorted to be honest, effective or even kind..

I think that the new statements can be read in this way – in theory ‘yes’, in practice ‘no’. The Church cannot preach conversion in this present age, but we, you and I, can pray for it and yearn for it.

This sounds rather like the recent Synod’s ‘we’re not changing doctrine, but only practice’, and I would like someone to enlighten me as to what was my and our share in ‘recent and not so recent history’ that makes it impossible for us to openly pray for the conversion of the Jews in the Mass. For that matter, what part did the Church play in ‘the evil of the last century’. What is this collective guilt all about? Surely if the Jews of Jerusalem crying ‘Crucifige, crucifige eum’ bore no guilt, then why am I to bear guilt for the Holocaust and because of it refuse to pray for the conversion of all men?      

On December 10, 2015, the Vatican’s Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews released a new document calling for Catholics not to actively seek the conversion of Jews.

On December 10, 2015, the Vatican’s Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews released a new document calling for Catholics not to actively seek the conversion of Jews.

28 responses

    • Diamhuireduit

      I think things are getting beyond God’s mercy now if that was possible!

      Both things are unbelievable. That anyone could think the new Mass could ever “enrich” the old, and that the Jews don’t need Christ to be saved.

      Christ came to the Jews, the Chosen People. How can it be possible to say the Church shouldn’t try to convert them, when Our Lord did just that?

  1. If I was a Jew I would be asking what plans the Church would have to keep me captive in the light of
    the mass emigration from the Catholic Church in recent years.

    The old saying about getting your own house in order comes to mind.

  2. We have really come to a dangerous point in liturgical matters when a notorious hierarchy can imagine it has any authority or experience to call the shots here. Our Mass developed organically, and the huge volume of documents of the Congregation of Sacred Rites bears witness to this from its erection in 1588 to its abolition in 1969 by Paul VI. The then established Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments had no further interest in abrogated (they said) rites of Mass and the Sacraments. The Ecclesia Dei Commission had no teeth, and by no means did all of its members have a love of the ancient rite. Mgr. Perl said in 1998 that its mission was to phase out the ancient rite.

    So all we’ve had since 1969 is an enforced halt in organic development and now we are seeing the dangers in Summorum Pontificum’s ‘mutual enrichment’ which now enables a corrupt hierarchy to clamour for a totally un-Catholic change in the Good Friday prayer for the Jews.

    As remarked above, it is odd that the LMS should publish this article, which, is deeply un-Catholic in its conclusion, and also at odds with the position of the International Una Voce Federation. It is of interest to note here the opinion of a Jew in the final paragraph of the link.
    http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2015/12/03/no-need-to-revise-the-good-friday-prayer-for-the-jews-says-leading-traditionalist/

      • Gerontius,

        That certainly is a disquieting article. However, I think a few observations might be in order, to point to the fact that Pope Francis, despite the claims of many disillusioned, embittered and scandalized Catholics, is not, after all, the Antichrist (or even an anti-Pope):

        1. …he [the Antichrist] will please everyone, he won’t accept offices or positions, he will not show favouritism to people, he will be amiable to everyone…

        This contradicts two things: one, Pope Francis (presumably this article is an implicit reference to him) is certainly not amiable to everyone – assuming that we traditionalists, or even faithful “mainstream” Catholics, are included in “everyone.” Two, Francis does indeed show favoritism to people – specifically, to clergymen who share and endorse his completely warped views. These heresiarchs are sought after, rewarded and promoted, whilst clergy who demonstrate themselves faithful to orthodoxy are either ignored, or worse (cf. Cardinal Burke).

        2. …the “tolerance” that is transformed into indifference…

        That has got to be the understatement of the year! The whole concept of “tolerance,” in the hands of the enemies of the Church, is actually a foot in the door towards the tyranny of IN-tolerance – toward truth, Tradition, the true Faith, and toward those who practice it.

        3. This is not mentioned in the article, but my understanding is that we are currently in what is known as “The Minor Chastisement” – i.e. a forerunner of the appearance of the Antichrist, or, “The Major Chastisement.” If that is correct, then it might be helpful – though this is sheer speculation – to view Pope Francis as a foretaste of what the real Antichrist will perpetrate when he comes to power. That is, if God sent John the Baptist as a forerunner of Our Lord, then perhaps He will allow Satan, who always mimics God in the negative, to use a forerunner – thus providing us with a memorable lesson for the future in how to discern evil.

        • RCA Victor

          Thank you for a very interesting reply. I concur entirely with your observations, particularly in regard to the “minor chastisement”.

          I posted this article principally because of Our Lords words “Watch and Pray” and ” To deceive if possible even the elect” and also that enigmatic
          phrase “He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon” though I expect as you do, a future application.

          It would seem that the “mystery of iniquity” is heading towards its fulfillment with an alarming rapidity.

          That splendid man Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga explains clearly the source of our troubles and if you wish, you can read it here.

          https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/archbishop-langa-the-intention-of-the-freemasons-is-being-implemented-in-the-church/

          • Gerontius,

            Thank you for posting that article, it is very enlightening (and also the first time I had heard of this Bishop – apparently one of Bishop Schneider’s peers?).

            This statement in particular interested me: “Some Nuncios have become propagators of liberalism and modernism. They have acquired expertise in the principle “sub secreto Pontificio”, by which one manipulates and silences the mouths of the bishops.”

            I wonder, Editor, if we have any priests on this blog who would care to elaborate on that statement? Specifically, how does this principle work? It certainly explains a lot.

            • RCA Victor
              I got shut off line before I finished that “reply.” The question refers to your previous comments about chastisement. From where I reside talk of the AntiChrist and his predecessors often correlates with hopelessness and a sense that the Gates of Hell HAVE prevailed.

    • Christina,

      “The Ecclesia Dei Commission had no teeth, and by no means did all of its members have a love of the ancient rite. Mgr. Perl said in 1998 that its mission was to phase out the ancient rite.”

      Reminds me of the old Mexican (I think) saying: If you want to make God laugh, tell Him your plans!

  3. The Church cannot preach conversion in this present age, but we, you and I, can pray for it and yearn for it. (Fr. Rowe)

    That certainly sums up the Conciliar disorientation, doesn’t it? I think there are two reasons why the Church can no longer preach conversion (allegedly): 1. The hierarchy now operates on strictly natural principles, esp. the principal of human respect, these having replaced the supernatural Throne and Altar of Christ (“The Have Uncrowned Him,” said Abp. Lefebvre). “Natural principles” means a complete preoccupation with the things of this world – which, as we have bemoaned for the past 3 years especially, is Pope Francis’ agenda and obsession, but is really just the culmination of the cesspool unlocked by Roncalli and “blessed” by Montini. 2. Anything that offends human respect, therefore, must be dispensed with, discreetly (or not) put under a bushel – or, as Our Lady of Good Success might have put it, eclipsed. And “conversion,” according to this diseased way of thinking, clearly implies disrespect (for the natural dignity of man, etc. etc.)

    It’s really just Freemasonry with some altered language.

    But here is more sure proof that the Devil and his minions have been let loose on the world and in the Church: instead of the hierarchy concerning themselves with what offends God, and prescribing any traditional and effective Catholic remedies, they now concern themselves solely with what offends man…thus deeply offending Him even more. “What shall we give the sick patient?” they say. “Ahah! Let us give him more poison to cure him!”

    Conversion = triumphalism. Catholicism = bigotry. Conversely, Surrender = success and esteem.

    Any sign of the true Faith, in other words, has either already been put on the Conciliar Index, or is marked for the same fate.

    • And stunning that a pope, or anyone for that matter, would hand out copies of an address he claims he hasn’t read, or, it follows, written! It beggars belief.

  4. As Richard Stratton, a former US prinoner in Vietnam, “I am convinced that the Novus Ordo Missae cannot resist the judgment of history and will ultimately be ranked among the heresies” as well as the Second Vatican Council brigandage and those reponsible for this disaster will indeed be anathematized…
    I am not a prophet, it is simply ineluctable.

  5. Christina,

    The article you wrote is excellent and the questions you pose go right to the heart of the current crisis of faith in the Church.

    Reading the last paragraph, where you question this entirely new concept of historical guilt on the part of the Church for the evils of the past century, I was reminded again of the prophetic warning of Pius XII. I have copied it on this blog many times but feel that it deserves another posting here, since it answers that essential question admirably.

    “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith in her liturgy, her theology and her soul…I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject her ornaments and make her feel remorse for her historical past. A day will come when the civilised world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God.” (Mgr. Roche, Pie XII Devant L’Histoire, p. 52-53).

    So there it is! Pius XII saw what the enemies within the Church had planned and he warned us of it beforehand. Two particular lies have been spread universally about the Catholic Church since Vatican II. The first is that the Church persecuted, or at least encouraged the persecution of, Jews throughout history. The second is that a sizeable number of priests and religious are sexual perverts and child molestors.

    The media has been so successful in spreading these lies, the latter containing an element of truth relating to a small percentage of fallen or infiltrating clerics, with such one-sided reporting that practically the whole world has come to believe them. It has been a brainwashing made possible only because those who should be preaching the truth of the matter have rather bowed their heads in cowardly shame offering hollow mea culpas to a world they desperately want to stay friends with. These forget the words of Our Lord: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me first”.

    Like the Apostles who fled in terror when Our Lord was arrested, tried and condemned to death on the basis of lies, our shepherds today run from the truth for fear that they too may become targets for the enemies of Christ’s Mustical Body, the Church, presently being tried, condemned and crucified anew. Nor is there a shortage of those who play the part of Judas in all of this, those who sell Our Lord not for money but for the price of acceptance by a hostile world. Those who suggest that the Church has no business proselytising to Jews are such men, deniers of the infallible dogma which states that outside the Church there is no salvation (barring invincible ignorance of course).

    If we study the Acts of Apostles carefully we find that it was not the Apostles who historically persectued the Jews, but rather the Jews who persecuted the Apostles. And why were they persecuted? Because the took Our Lord Jesus Christ into the Synagogues hoping to convert their brothers. Wherever Sts. Peter and Paul travelled throughout the Acts we find them discoursing with the Jewish priests, preaching Christ to them as the awaited Messiah, and being largely rejcted for their efforts.

    I am not personally aware of any instance in Church history where the Church directly or indirectly advocated or encouraged the persecution of the Jewish race. I am however aware of the heroic efforts of Pope Pius XII to save as many Jews as possible from the Nazis, even to the extent of exhausting his personal family fortune and placing his own life and the lives of many priests and religious in peril. For that charity and heroism, recognised with gratitude by many contemporary Jews of influence before and upon his death, including no less than Golda Mieir, who declared her gratitude before the United Nations, Pius XII is today villified by all but a handful of upright Jewish scholars. And the world, eager to see the moral teaching of the Church weakened to the point of eradication, are only too happy to believe what they are told.

    But the fact remains that whether Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or other non-Christian, it is the clear and unchangeable teaching of the Church, by divine revelation and mandate, that the Gospel must be preached to all nations and that all who would save their souls for eternity must recognise Jesus Christ as their saviour and enter into the holy Church He founded and endowed with the sources of His sanctifying grace, the Mass and the Sacraments. There are no exceptions, no special covenants whereby the heavenly Father dispenses individuals or nations from the absolute neccesity of belief in His Divine Son and the Redemption He wrought on the Cross, without which there is no hope of salvation. For as Our Lord Himself said: “They who reject me, reject the one who sent me”.

    As for those paltry excuses of certain high clergy today that the present age is not conducive to preaching conversion to Christ, these should reflect on the admonition of St. Paul that we must be “instant in season and out of season”. The Apostles hardly faced a friendly world on that first Pentecost when a mere twelve of them went out to preach Christ Crucified, and yet we see how great were the fruits of their labours under extreme persecution and misunderstanding. So yes, it is a vocation that calls for brave men filled with supernatural faith in God and Christ-like love for souls who are willing to suffer for the truth. The alternative, I’m afraid, is apostasy disguised as diplomacy.

  6. Thank you, Athanasius. That is a superb and inspiring post – right to the very heart of the matter as usual, and because of it I am more than grateful to Ed for giving my more muddled musings this space.

  7. The Gospel train, which set out from Jerusalem a long time ago, is on a circular tour through all the nations and peoples of the world – until it arrives back at Jerusalem !

    Thus the Jewish people, the first to hear the Gospel, will also be the last.

    Until then, as St Paul pointed out in Romans, their eyes and ears are sealed to the Gospel – and in God’s Providence, this must be, so that the “full number of the Gentiles” can enter into the Church.

    (I believe St Bernard of Clairvaux quoted this in a letter to Pope Calixtus).

    For the time being therefore, the Church welcomes individual Jewish converts, but avoids preaching to the Jewish people as a whole.

    As for individual Jews, God judges them by their ancient Covenant with Him. Regarding the Gospel, they can plead “invincible ignorance” both as individuals and as a people.

    • TonyBuck123

      The Jews are the least who can claim “invincible ignorance” of Chirst and His Church since it was to them that He first came and preached. Anyway, by far the greatest error you espoused in your comment is that the Jews can be saved generally by reason of the Old Covenant. This is not sufficient to save them, as St. Paul himself pointed out when he wrote that justification does not come from the law but rather from faith in Jesus Christ.

      No, to suggest that God excluded the Jews from the necessity of Redemption in Jesus Christ, without whose sacrifice there is no salvation, is heresy. The gates of heaven were closed to all prior to Our Lord’s Sacrifice on the Cross, and as He Himself stated clearly: “unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven”. Baptism comes through Christ, not the old Covenant. Absolutely no one goes to heaven who knowingly rejects the Son of God and the Redemption He wrought for their salvation, be they Jews or Gentiles. I trust this clears up the misunderstanding.

  8. Modernism is a curse and a disease – but that shouldn’t lead tormented Catholics to lash out wildly at ALL that has happened in the Church since Pius XII died in 1958; notably Vatican II and Popes John, Paul and Francis.

    Vatican II was pastoral, not doctrinal, thus can hardly be accused of heresy – though Modernist heretics in the Church, by wilful misinterpretation of the Council, twisted it into a weapon they could use.

    The interesting question about Vatican II is this – in most of the world, it led to a great, wonderful and truly-Catholic renewal of the Church; but in the West, its immediate effect was catastrophic.

    This is a judgement on the West (and Western Catholics in particular), not on the Council.

    • TonyBuck123

      I am not aware that Vatican II “reform” led to any great and wonderful, truly-Catholic renewal anywhere in the world, and I have studied the subject for more than two decades. I am, however, open to demonstrable evidence if you have recorded facts to post in support of your claim. I warn you, however, that I think you’re on a loser with that one.

    • Tony, glad to hear you agree that Modernism is a curse and a disease, but I’m still waiting for your replies to my questions on another thread that you left rather suddenly:

      1. Do you believe that artificial contraception is wrong?
      2. Do you believe that homosexual activity is wrong?
      3. Do you believe that “remarriage” after divorce is wrong?
      4. Do you believe that sexual activity between a male and a female before marriage is wrong?

  9. Everyone must believe in Jesus!!! Jesus said it himself. The Vatican can’t negate the words of Christ

  10. Athanasius
    I just read that quotation from Pius XII you posted. Never heard, read nor was told of it before. I have lifted the whole post for further reflection. Extra Ecclesiam Nullus Salus is rejected out of hand around my parts. May I ask your permission to use that info in correspondence of my own? Thks again for your gift of clarity.

%d bloggers like this: