Sunday, May 23, 2004
Kosher and Me, AHC style
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 18:27:02 EDT
From: xxxxxxxx@aol.com
Subject: Re: To eat or not to eat--check out this extensive answer. Wow.
Dear All,
Acts 15: 10-11 gives St. Peter's decisive speech at the Council of
Jerusalem: Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on
the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we
have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved
through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they." Peter is
here being very 'Pauline.' Jewish as well as Gentile disciples are saved
through the grace of Christ, not by Law. Those Messianic Jews who argue
that the Law is still binding on Jewish Christians are arguing that it is
necessary for one group of believers to follow a path that is not
necessary for salvation. In other words, they are adding another yoke to
the believer over and above the yoke of Christ. What does seem crystal
clear is that there is no obligation to observe, for example, the laws of
kashrut. Someone may do so out of private devotion, out of a desire to
show cultural identity with Orthodox Jews or because they find it
personally impossible to eat 'treyf' in the same way that an English
person would find it impossible to eat horse meat. I think there is
freedom here unless someone believes that kashrut is obligatory and
necessary for salvation. For me, the problem with Messianic Judaism is
that it is very 'thin' theologically and often seems little more than
Pentecostalism with a 'Jewish' dressing, a dressing often applied by
converts who were very secular before their conversion and then become
'more Catholic than the Pope.' They are split in many different and
often opposed groups. Perhaps unfairly, I do detect a hint of pride in
some of their writings and a lamentable ignorance of church history. As I
mentioned before, when I hear of Gentile converts to Messianic Judaism
becoming more 'kosher than the chief Rabbi,' my alarm bells as a priest
begin to ring. Certainly, a Hebrew Catholic community would be one that
would be seen as distinctively Hebrew. Man is not a disembodied spirit
and therefore this community would be visibly Hebrew. Here, the thought
and writings of Fr. Elias will be germinal: we cannot work out in detail
how things will evolve but it will, of course, be within and inspired by
the Church. It will be also something which will show to Jews that they
can be Catholic without being assimilated. It will involve a profound
sense of solidarity with the Jewish people, their history, culture,
Hebrew language and suffering. It will also be a visible sign of all
that it is true and good in Judaism, showing how all the hopes and dreams
of the Jewish people down the centuries find their fulfilment in Christ.
With every kind wish, Canon Michael Lewis
From: xxxxxxxx@aol.com
Subject: Re: To eat or not to eat--check out this extensive answer. Wow.
Dear All,
Acts 15: 10-11 gives St. Peter's decisive speech at the Council of
Jerusalem: Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on
the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we
have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved
through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they." Peter is
here being very 'Pauline.' Jewish as well as Gentile disciples are saved
through the grace of Christ, not by Law. Those Messianic Jews who argue
that the Law is still binding on Jewish Christians are arguing that it is
necessary for one group of believers to follow a path that is not
necessary for salvation. In other words, they are adding another yoke to
the believer over and above the yoke of Christ. What does seem crystal
clear is that there is no obligation to observe, for example, the laws of
kashrut. Someone may do so out of private devotion, out of a desire to
show cultural identity with Orthodox Jews or because they find it
personally impossible to eat 'treyf' in the same way that an English
person would find it impossible to eat horse meat. I think there is
freedom here unless someone believes that kashrut is obligatory and
necessary for salvation. For me, the problem with Messianic Judaism is
that it is very 'thin' theologically and often seems little more than
Pentecostalism with a 'Jewish' dressing, a dressing often applied by
converts who were very secular before their conversion and then become
'more Catholic than the Pope.' They are split in many different and
often opposed groups. Perhaps unfairly, I do detect a hint of pride in
some of their writings and a lamentable ignorance of church history. As I
mentioned before, when I hear of Gentile converts to Messianic Judaism
becoming more 'kosher than the chief Rabbi,' my alarm bells as a priest
begin to ring. Certainly, a Hebrew Catholic community would be one that
would be seen as distinctively Hebrew. Man is not a disembodied spirit
and therefore this community would be visibly Hebrew. Here, the thought
and writings of Fr. Elias will be germinal: we cannot work out in detail
how things will evolve but it will, of course, be within and inspired by
the Church. It will be also something which will show to Jews that they
can be Catholic without being assimilated. It will involve a profound
sense of solidarity with the Jewish people, their history, culture,
Hebrew language and suffering. It will also be a visible sign of all
that it is true and good in Judaism, showing how all the hopes and dreams
of the Jewish people down the centuries find their fulfilment in Christ.
With every kind wish, Canon Michael Lewis
