Help me to understand- Evangelii Gaudium

Number 247 of Evangelii Gaudium reads: “We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked.”

Exactly how is this true? Translation error?

If not a translation error, then this is a heresy which the Holy Father holds, which can lead people to hell.

Help me to understand this.

Who told you this is a heresy?
How do you explain Romans 11:25-29?

Its obvious. The Church has believed for 2000 years that the old covenant ended when Christ instituted the new covenant.

From the Baltimore Catechism:

Q. 390. Why was the veil of the Temple torn asunder at the death of Christ?

A. The veil of the Temple was torn asunder at the death of Christ because at His death the Jewish religion ceased to be the true religion, and God no longer manifested His presence in the Temple.

Q. 391. Why did the Jewish religion, which up to the death of Christ had been the true religion, cease at that time to be the true religion?

A. The Jewish religion, which, up to the death of Christ, had been the true religion, ceased at that time to be the true religion, because it was only a promise of the redemption and figure of the Christian religion, and when the redemption was accomplished and the Christian religion established by the death of Christ, the promise and the figure were no longer necessary.

Q. 392. Were all the laws of the Jewish religion abolished by the establishment of Christianity?

A. The moral laws of the Jewish religion were not abolished by the establishment of Christianity, for Christ came not to destroy these laws, but to make them more perfect. Its ceremonial laws were abolished when the Temple of Jerusalem ceased to be the House of God.

From the Bible:

Jeremiah 31:31-34

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

Hebrews 8:13

In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 9:15

Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

Hebrews 8:7-8

For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them when he says: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,

Hebrews 9:11-15

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

Not to mention the fact that Christ said he established a new covenant at the last supper in His blood.

Then you have the testament of the Church fathers, who I won’t bother to list.

Then you have the papal bulls mandating that Jews must be converted to the Holy Church in order to receive salvation.

Unam Sanctam: Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

Cantate Domino: The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives…

Also for your Bible verses, he says his call is irrevocable. It is. He continues to call them to the covenant he has established. The Jews are still his chosen people but the Covenant is no longer salvific. They are called to accept Christ just like any others.

Quite an impressive apologetic, which I presume is your rationale to imply therefore, that Pope Francis is teaching heresy. Your understanding of the scripture I cited is rather deficient, based on likewise deficient interpretation of prior papal documents that you mentioned (U.S., and C.D.). We must understand these documents as the Church understands them, and not as you interpret them. Many have misunderstood completely what the Church intended to teach therein.

The Jews remain the people of God’s predilection, and will eventually be converted and saved. Otherwise, scripture is false, and Paul was preaching to the choir.

Also for your Bible verses, he says his call is irrevocable. It is. He continues to call them to the covenant he has established. The Jews are still his chosen people but the Covenant is no longer salvific. They are called to accept Christ just like any others.

Pope Francis is not speaking about whether the covenant with the Jews is salvific, but rather, he is referencing the irrevocable election of God’s call, which remains. May I point out that this holy Pope is most assuredly more knowledgeable in his little finger than apologists who believe they have the bottom line on scripture and are able to critique papal documents.

The word “covenant” has other meanings; without the capital ©ovenant, meaning THE New Covenant, the pope is referring to a relational ©ovenant of election.

And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.

It is clear that he who shall deliver is Christ, and he will turn Jacob away from its ungodliness. All Israel should be saved, but will they? They must accept Christ.

As concerning the gospel, indeed, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers.

“The Jews remain the people of God’s predilection, and will eventually be converted and saved.”

Exactly what I’m saying. They must accept Christ in order to be saved. The old covenant is dead. Notice how he says they are enemies of the gospel. This means they are ENEMIES. They are wrong. They are most dear to God but that doesn’t change the fact that they are wrong and must be converted.

Also I do not believe that my interpretation of the papal documents are incorrect. They are very plain and obvious. How else could you interpret Cantate Domino? Or Unam Sanctam?

How does this prove Pope Francis is teaching heresy?
He is saying the same thing, that they are still “most dear to God” – even while they are in need of conversion and Christ’s salvific grace. The document E.G. is not addressing their ultimate conversion, but their present predilection as a covenanted people.

Also I do not believe that my interpretation of the papal documents are incorrect. They are very plain and obvious. How else could you interpret Cantate Domino? Or Unam Sanctam?

That is another thread topic and I don’t want to deviate at this time.

I guess he would not be teaching heresy if this were the true meaning of his words. I just wish that he would have taught this clearer and more like traditional papal teachings. There is no question in Cantate Domino that everyone must be converted to find salvation, so I guess reading Francis through Cantate Domino makes the statement non-heretical.

Or super heretical. But I guess we just have to wait and see if he ever clarifies.

Mannn…You should be careful and very sure of what you are saying before calling the Pope Heretic.I have the impression you just jumped into the conclusion without properly examining what he said.:tsktsk:

Which is why the thread is titled “help me to understand- Evangelii Gaudium” not “Pope Francis is a heretic.”

Honestly, the POPE, in an official document, should be clearer. I’m not the only person who was confused about this matter. When the difference between heresy and affirming Catholic teaching is so small, he should extrapolate more on his point. Would it really have been hard for him to write “We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant of election with God has never been revoked.”

The Pope does not need to clarify his words to satisfy the doubtful curiosity of a layperson who has little or no theological or magisterial background to give a proper interpretation to papal writings. Those who are invested with authority will have no difficulty knowing his meaning. I had no problem, and I’m a layperson!

Which is why the thread is titled “help me to understand- Evangelii Gaudium” not “Pope Francis is a heretic.”

After your lengthly exegesis in post #3, you sure could’ve fooled me about wanting to understand, rather than teach.

Wait a minute!!!Do you really think an official document by the Pope will be released without being cross-checked for errors of doctrine?Members of cruria whose competence is theirs to edit the Pope’s writings have done their job prior to the release of this document, so if you decide to read too much into what the Pope is writing, then nothing we try to do here on this forum will convince you otherwise!

:thumbsup:

I still hold to my point that it should be clearer. If only those who are vested with authority should read it, then only those vested with authority should have access.

Why would it be so bad if it were just a little clearer?

Most people would give the benefit of their doubt rather than come on a public forum and label a Pope’s words as heretical and “could lead people to hell.” :eek: You are still not willing to let it drop and admit you were mistaken, but continue to be indignant that he was not clear enough for you.

And … you are still not understanding the Church’s position on the two earlier documents, U.S. and C.D., so how can you expect popes to expound at a grade school level just in case somebody might misinterpret? Most people who know the scripture from Romans, et al, would know immediately what he meant.

If nothing could convince me otherwise, then I wouldn’t have posted here. I genuinely didn’t understand the teaching and so I came to a forum about Catholic teaching. I presented my problem and got met with people who half answered me, and half mocked me for questioning.

However, I don’t think my understanding of the papal documents is deficient. Neither do I believe my understanding of scripture on this subject is deficient.

After your lengthly exegesis in post #3, you sure could’ve fooled me about wanting to understand, rather than teach.

It took me about 3 minutes to google and bring those Bible verses up, and I knew that CD and US had those statements in it. With this prior knowledge, looking at that statement from the Pope looked like heresy, which is why I came here to ask.

I’ve had a Bishop tell me the same thing about the Jewish Covenant. I guess I need to email him and ask what he meant, in clarity. So I guess the Bishop telling me the Jewish Covenant not being revoked, followed by Francis, made me question the saying enough to bring it to an online answer forum, after which I was properly derided as a fool.

He WASN’T clear enough for me, which is my own problem. I already admitted I was wrong. I don’t have to apologize for questioning something that I didn’t understand. I’m not mad at the Pope.

Also I didn’t label his words as heretical. I said that if they were true (in the understanding I knew) then they would be. However, you corrected my understanding. So thanks.

Also, please expound on those earlier documents if it is so relevant. They seem extremely cut and dry.

forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=10816723&postcount=45

Excellent! Thank you very much. You’ve helped to restore my assurance in my faith.

:thumbsup: God bless you.

Now that Crumbly has gotten off his hobby horse, maybe we can get back to reality. Since it referenced “Cantate Domino,” I thought folks might like the real thing. Herewith a link.

youtube.com/watch?v=ex-FZJ1j1x0&hd=1

There are a host of others on youtube; you can listen to a variety and select your favorite.
Enjoy!

deBoisvert

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.