January 16, 2010

  • Question 221 - Catholics For Israel's Challenge

    19. CFI: we affirm the irrevocable and permanent nature of God’s covenant with the Jewish people and oppose the false teaching of replacement theology (supersessionism), which claims that the Church has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people. 

    R. Sungenis: The author has now made his most blatant rejection of the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, which has taught for nearly 2000 years that the Jewish covenant has been revoked and superseded by the New Covenant and the Catholic Church. Here are those teachings in brief: [there follows a long list of quotes from some Scriptures already quoted above and a number of Church Fathers.  We retain only one here for the sake of brevity:]  Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).

    CFI: Of course, Sungenis has taken Ratzinger's statement out of context.  The quote continues:

    So the expectation of the New Covenant... does not conflict with the Sinai covenant; rather, it fulfills the dynamic expectation found in that very covenant.

    For the Apostle [Paul], the Mosaic Law, as an irrevocable gift of God to Israel, is not abrogated but relativized, since it is only by faith in God’s promises to Abraham, now fulfilled in Christ, that we receive the grace of justification and new life. The Law finds its end in Christ (cf. Rom 10:4) and its fulfillment in the new commandment of love.  (Pope Benedict XVI, Homily on St. Paul and Justification, Nov. 19, 2008; emphasis added)

    Yes, in one sense we may say that the Sinai Covenant is "superseded" in the sense that in of itself it was insufficient for salvation, and it was fulfilled into the New and greater covenant (cf. Mt 5:17).  But fulfillment and completion does not mean the same thing as abrogation and rejection.  The fact that the spiritual promises are indeed fulfilled in the Church does not mean that the original promises to Israel (sealed by divine covenant and solemn oaths) have been snatched away from its original recipients. Moreover, even the New Covenant is also promised first and foremost to the Jews ("the house of Israel and the house of Judah," Jer. 31:31-37). There is no other 'new covenant' for Gentiles, who participate in the New Covenant, in a certain sense, 'via' Israel

     

    R. Sungenis: My answer is very simple. The Mosaic covenant had once given Israel and the Jews the primacy in God's relationship to mankind. That is no longer the case. After Christ, everyone is on an equal footing, and Jews are not "special" people just because they are Jews or because they once possessed a time when they were special. Mr. Ami wants to keep the specialness of the Jews (in contrast to Gentile Christians) in the New Covenant, but that is spiritual racism, and it is an insidious sin that continues to pervade the mentality of Jews today. As long as they keep this attitude, they will generate animosity against themselves. If anything, Jewish Christians should assume the humblest position in the Church, not the position with the most esteeem, due to their notorious Old Covenant history (cf. Rom 10:16-21 - 11:1-11; Acts 7:1-56; Matt 23:37-38).