Tuesday, February 5, 2008

The New Latin Good Friday Prayer

A few thoughts:

This mockery came on Shrove Tuesday. Nice gag.

I hope that in all of the confusion that will result from this development that people don't loose sight of the fact that the so-called "Jews" who have wailed for this change are only Jews in as far as Apocalypse 2;9 and 3;9 state.

Obviously, this change has come in response to very public lobbying from the ADL, AJC, the Chief Rabbinate of "Israel," papal rabbi-knight David Rosen and many others who have been shrieking for the prayer to be dropped or rewritten since the time that Summorum Pontificum was only rumored of. This has been thoroughly documented here. What happened stealthily in 1955 is now plain and in the open. The Vatican takes requests from Christ's enemies in theological and liturgical matters.

As it was anticipated, the prayer didn't do away with the idea of conversion. However, this should not be taken to indicate that Vatican prelates now seek conversion of "the Jews." If that was the case they would change the Good Friday prayer in their ordinary rite (Novus Ordo). But there is no indication that the Novus Ordo Good Friday prayer, with its Orwellian praises for the "the faithfulness to the covenant" of "the Jewish people" will be changed. The net effect here is that the Latin liturgy is gradually "updated" at a pace suitable to "trads." Most will be aware that this is the second change to the Latin Good Friday prayer for the Jews in 50 years. More changes in the same direction will come if "trads" are gauged to be ripe for them.

The change is very clever because it swaps "offensive" biblical language for other apparently more positive biblical language, rather than dropping the "offensive" words from the 1962 prayer. This is most certainly intended to project an image of conservatism. It's from the Bible, after all. Who can argue against that?

The problem with the new prayer, despite its hearkening to Romans 11;25-26, is that it takes the present-time intention of the original prayer and thrusts it into the realm of mystery and prophesy dealing with the future. The intention and meaning of the original prayer was perfectly clear: Christians pray for the conversion of the Jews here and now. Romans 11;25-26 deals with a mystery prophesied to take place in the future at the last days. The message seems to be that we should pray for the end-times to come quickly so the "Jews" will convert, and that they don't need Christ in the meantime. This is not, nor has it ever been the position of the Church. The Church always sought the conversion of Jews--real and fake "Jews" alike--not just at the second coming, but from the Pentecost until the time of the Second Vatican Council--at all times. St. Vincent Ferrer and all of the evangelists knew nothing of the new theology of the "elder brothers." Apparently, he was wrong?

The mysterious nature of Romans 11;25-26 is exploited as a playground by Judaizers such as "Hebrew Catholics" like Roy Schoeman, who use it as "support" for their crazy theses which have it that prophesy is being fulfilled by Talmudic/Kabbalistic/Zionist Khazars dragging their baggage into the Church. Judging from my study of the new theology of the "elder brothers" emanating from Rome, that is the thinking that this new prayer intends to promote--in the traditionalist fold.

The end-times nature of this new prayer calls to mind the Vatican document The Jewish People and their Sacred Scripture in the Christian Bible prefaced and signed by Benedict/Ratzinger as Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, in which it is stated:

"Jewish messianic expectation is not in vain. It can become for us Christians a powerful stimulant to keep alive the eschatological dimension of our faith. Like them, we too live in expectation. The difference is that for us the One who is to come will have the traits of the Jesus who has already come and is already present and active among us."


No, Herr Ratzinger, I'm afraid that the "one who is to come" whom Jesus Christ said will come in his own name and who "the Jews" will accept as their "messiah" will not be Jesus Christ, nor will he have the traits of Jesus Christ.


Anonymous said...

What about changing the "veil from their hearts" in the prayer? You pretty much called that.

JLF said...

Paragraph seven, last sentence. The Church does not have positions. She has teachings.

What does the last paragraph mean?

Maurice Pinay said...

The Church has teachings. Its members take positions which should be in conformity with Church teaching, but in many cases are not, such as we see in the case at hand.

Does that help?

Anonymous said...

Does the old/original prayer signify a specific conversion to the Catholic Church. Or can the new updated one easily fit into a protestant service? Just wondering.