|
Post by farronwolf on May 30, 2023 23:55:26 GMT
When I think of what Christ was referring to when he spoke of the Pharisees, Mathew 25:31 comes to mind.
Folks can argue all that want about this being better, or that being better, or the Church should do this or that, or if you as a Catholic don't do this or that you aren't a real Catholic, or whatever.
Christ spoke time and time again of what he expected of his followers. First love God with all your heart, and second, love your neighbor as yourself. Without those, and without treating your neighbor as you would Christ, it is clear what judgement you will face. One can try to follow the Canon, Catechism as closely as they can, but that won't necessarily get you to where you want to go.
31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit down upon the throne of his glory, 32 and all nations will be gathered in his presence, where he will divide men one from the other, as the shepherd divides the sheep from the goats; 33 he will set the sheep on his right, and the goats on his left. 34 Then the King will say to those who are on his right hand, Come, you that have received a blessing from my Father, take possession of the kingdom which has been prepared for you since the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you gave me food, thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you brought me home, 36 naked, and you clothed me, sick, and you cared for me, a prisoner, and you came to me. 37 Whereupon the just will answer, Lord, when was it that we saw thee hungry, and fed thee, or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When was it that we saw thee a stranger, and brought thee home, or naked, and clothed thee? 39 When was it that we saw thee sick or in prison and came to thee? 40 And the King will answer them, Believe me, when you did it to one of the least of my brethren here, you did it to me. 41 Then he will say to those who are on his left hand, in their turn, Go far from me, you that are accursed, into that eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry, and you never gave me food, I was thirsty, and you never gave me drink; 43 I was a stranger, and you did not bring me home, I was naked, and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison, and you did not care for me. 44 Whereupon they, in their turn, will answer, Lord, when was it that we saw thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee? 45 And he will answer them, Believe me, when you refused it to one of the least of my brethren here, you refused it to me. 46 And these shall pass on to eternal punishment, and the just to eternal life.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on May 31, 2023 1:18:55 GMT
The Pharisees may have been a bit too rule-oriented, because they had been taught up to the time of Jesus' appearance on the scene that you honored God by following rules without question; in other words, through obedience to the Law. They thought that was what God wanted. Jesus frequently explained that God actually wanted something else. Thank you for making this almost-forgotten observation. I've had the lingering suspicion, for quite some time (really, ever since "Pharisee" started getting hurled as an epithet against traditional Catholics), that the subjective state of the Pharisees might not have been as stark as we think, because, as you well note, they thought that strict observance of "the rules" was their duty to God. Were they just automatons who had absolutely no love of God (or their neighbor) whatsoever? I really have to doubt that. To paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Pharisee is as Pharisee does". Catholics are enjoined to abstain from meat on Fridays of Lent (and exhorted to do so throughout the year). Are they being Pharisees by observing this? Or do we say "oh, go ahead and eat your meat, love is all that matters"? Indulgences are another matter that some might see as pharisaical --- they involve strict adherence to criteria set forth by the Church. I don't see them that way, but others might. As far as "do I get a plenary if I did everything almost right, but (for instance) didn't get to finish the fifth decade of that Rosary I said in church on Sunday", technically, the answer is "no", but I'm willing to put that in God's Hands, after all, it's His Church. I have often pondered that Genesis begins with two "direct orders", as it were, from Almighty God --- "be fruitful and multiply", and "don't eat from that one particular tree". I have no issue with the concept of God-as-Rulemaker. The Ten Commandments themselves are "rules". Where did "rules" get such a bad name? Maybe from people who don't want to follow them? (Better stop before I start channeling Dana Carvey's Church Lady, but you get the idea.)
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on May 31, 2023 9:15:37 GMT
The Pharisees may have been a bit too rule-oriented, because they had been taught up to the time of Jesus' appearance on the scene that you honored God by following rules without question; in other words, through obedience to the Law. They thought that was what God wanted. Jesus frequently explained that God actually wanted something else. Thank you for making this almost-forgotten observation. I've had the lingering suspicion, for quite some time (really, ever since "Pharisee" started getting hurled as an epithet against traditional Catholics), that the subjective state of the Pharisees might not have been as stark as we think, because, as you well note, they thought that strict observance of "the rules" was their duty to God. Were they just automatons who had absolutely no love of God (or their neighbor) whatsoever? I really have to doubt that. Some of the Jewish posters from CAF have observed in the past that Judaism is still largely a religion of orthopraxy, meaning that correct action/ following the Law is as important as faith in God. Whether certain Jewish groups take this to an extreme or not is in the eye of the beholder. For example, I was once at a hotel in Jerusalem where many Jewish people also stayed, and 6 days a week you got your own breakfast coffee out of the usual dispenser by holding your cup under it and pressing a switch, but on the Jewish sabbath they had employees (presumably Gentiles) standing there filling the cup for each person so that the Jewish guests would not be doing prohibited work by pressing the switch themselves. To a Gentile like me, this looks like silly overkill, but to them it's part of honoring God. With respect to the "loving your neighbor", the Jewish people in Jesus' time were constantly trying to survive being oppressed and often slaughtered by non-Jewish people. Reading through the OT, it's clear that interactions of the Jews and the non-Jews often ended badly, either because the non-Jews proved untrustworthy (as in Egypt) or because the non-Jews were a corrupting influence that led people away from God, who eventually became displeased and manifested his displeasure in some way. In the OT, God is often commanding his chosen people to entirely kill off some non-Jewish tribe, or to avoid getting involved with them and their pagan customs. This is understood as being necessary for the survival of the Jewish people and their customs.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on May 31, 2023 9:21:21 GMT
When I think of what Christ was referring to when he spoke of the Pharisees, Mathew 25:31 comes to mind. Folks can argue all that want about this being better, or that being better, or the Church should do this or that, or if you as a Catholic don't do this or that you aren't a real Catholic, or whatever. Christ spoke time and time again of what he expected of his followers. First love God with all your heart, and second, love your neighbor as yourself. Without those, and without treating your neighbor as you would Christ, it is clear what judgement you will face. One can try to follow the Canon, Catechism as closely as they can, but that won't necessarily get you to where you want to go. ... The Catechism actually includes all that stuff about love of neighbor that you posted, so if a person actually was following the Catechism closely he would do all the stuff you listed and more.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 9:49:20 GMT
It's a reasonably common view. It's what I grew up been thought. My own RE teacher at school noted that Christ for the most part adheres to the traditions more common to the Pharisees, although he obviously parts ways with them on some noteworthy issues. The Sadducees remind me of the Assyrians who had an absolutely joyless view of the afterlife, the Sadducees have taken it one stage further and eliminated it whatsoever. Judaism has always been very ambigious on the issues of life after death and even now a number of Jewish thinkers reject it.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on May 31, 2023 12:56:00 GMT
Thank you for making this almost-forgotten observation. I've had the lingering suspicion, for quite some time (really, ever since "Pharisee" started getting hurled as an epithet against traditional Catholics), that the subjective state of the Pharisees might not have been as stark as we think, because, as you well note, they thought that strict observance of "the rules" was their duty to God. Were they just automatons who had absolutely no love of God (or their neighbor) whatsoever? I really have to doubt that. Some of the Jewish posters from CAF have observed in the past that Judaism is still largely a religion of orthopraxy, meaning that correct action/ following the Law is as important as faith in God. Whether certain Jewish groups take this to an extreme or not is in the eye of the beholder. For example, I was once at a hotel in Jerusalem where many Jewish people also stayed, and 6 days a week you got your own breakfast coffee out of the usual dispenser by holding your cup under it and pressing a switch, but on the Jewish sabbath they had employees (presumably Gentiles) standing there filling the cup for each person so that the Jewish guests would not be doing prohibited work by pressing the switch themselves. To a Gentile like me, this looks like silly overkill, but to them it's part of honoring God. With respect to the "loving your neighbor", the Jewish people in Jesus' time were constantly trying to survive being oppressed and often slaughtered by non-Jewish people. Reading through the OT, it's clear that interactions of the Jews and the non-Jews often ended badly, either because the non-Jews proved untrustworthy (as in Egypt) or because the non-Jews were a corrupting influence that led people away from God, who eventually became displeased and manifested his displeasure in some way. In the OT, God is often commanding his chosen people to entirely kill off some non-Jewish tribe, or to avoid getting involved with them and their pagan customs. This is understood as being necessary for the survival of the Jewish people and their customs. "Orthopraxy", that's the term I was looking for, thanks. Yes, as you well put it, these intricate regulations, in Orthodox Judaism, are "part of honoring God". Our Lord was clearly rebuking the following of these rules and regulations without true love of God in their hearts. As was noted elsewhere in this thread, Our Lord Himself followed Jewish law, except where breaking it (healing on the Sabbath, etc.) was necessary to follow a higher law. Orthodox Jews in this day will not hesitate to call an ambulance, or if need be, drive themselves, if someone among them has to be rushed to the hospital with a medical emergency on the Sabbath. But there are limits even within present-day orthodox Catholicism. For instance, my mother asked me, WRT the "we baptize you" debacle in all of those baptisms putatively conferred by an innovative priest in Arizona, whether the Church couldn't just go ahead and accept them, in that everyone involved was sincere and no malice or sacrilege was intended. I told her no, baptism has to be done a certain way and no other. (This doesn't touch the subjective dispositions of the parties involved, nor the ability of Almighty God to confer grace outside of valid sacraments.) Similarly, if the faithful in a remote area desire to have Mass celebrated for them, but the priest has no wheaten bread or wine pressed from grapes, he cannot use (for instance) cassava flour and coconut milk instead. They just have to do without Mass and the Eucharist until such time as bread and wine are available. The Latter-day Saints would tell you otherwise, something about that it matters not what you use, as long as it is done with an eye towards His glory (the question came up of using potato slices instead of bread). And they would be wrong, quite aside from the fact that they have no valid sacramental priesthood to begin with, and they lack the intention to offer a Sacrifice in which Our Lord is truly and corporeally present.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 13:38:45 GMT
For those of us who grew up in are where there were large Jewish populations some of us will remember being asked to light cookers and turn light switches on and off for neighbours. This was something some of the neighbours asked my mother to do quite a bit on a Saturday. My mother did note to them to please, please not ask her husband as he worked on rotating shifts and was often very tired and trying to sleep during the day.
One of the stupider things I've run into with this is in my previous job we had a Jewish customer buying goods on a Saturday. Cue the next day and another Jewish customer was trying to tell us off for that and I got quite annoyed and noted it was not our job to police people buying stuff due to their religious background. We used to detest Saturday evenings as once Sunset fell the store would be overwhelmed by a tidal wave of people buying things and it would get to 11 p.m. and closing time and the person in charge of closing would have to use the tannoy again and again to get people to leave or walk around the store telling people we were now closing. Mind you that's certainly not a Jewish-only thing. That's every supermarket near closing. People take the mickey and hang around forever. When I went shopping last Sunday I made sure to be out of the store by ten to five as supermarkets mostly close at 5 pm in the UK. I then had a cup of coffee next door. Around about six p.m. the last customers were staggering out of the supermarket and I could plainly hear the tannoy booming, 'We are closed -please bring your goods to the front.' Meanwhile, people were squabbling with staff and security at the entrance about not being allowed in. My local supermarket adopts the approach that if you are not at the tills by a quarter past five on a Sunday staff stand up and close their tills down and that's that.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 14:04:41 GMT
Just for amusement, this short movie illustrates just how silly things can get: www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFInDZ8L5y8Also, the thing with Orthodox Jewish women not shaking hands alluded to her used to upset some people. I understood it is just their tradition but it really angered some people.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on May 31, 2023 14:27:51 GMT
For those of us who grew up in are where there were large Jewish populations some of us will remember being asked to light cookers and turn light switches on and off for neighbours. This was something some of the neighbours asked my mother to do quite a bit on a Saturday. My mother did note to them to please, please not ask her husband as he worked on rotating shifts and was often very tired and trying to sleep during the day. One of the stupider things I've run into with this is in my previous job we had a Jewish customer buying goods on a Saturday. Cue the next day and another Jewish customer was trying to tell us off for that and I got quite annoyed and noted it was not our job to police people buying stuff due to their religious background. We used to detest Saturday evenings as once Sunset fell the store would be overwhelmed by a tidal wave of people buying things and it would get to 11 p.m. and closing time and the person in charge of closing would have to use the tannoy again and again to get people to leave or walk around the store telling people we were now closing. Mind you that's certainly not a Jewish-only thing. That's every supermarket near closing. People take the mickey and hang around forever. When I went shopping last Sunday I made sure to be out of the store by ten to five as supermarkets mostly close at 5 pm in the UK. I then had a cup of coffee next door. Around about six p.m. the last customers were staggering out of the supermarket and I could plainly hear the tannoy booming, 'We are closed -please bring your goods to the front.' Meanwhile, people were squabbling with staff and security at the entrance about not being allowed in. My local supermarket adopts the approach that if you are not at the tills by a quarter past five on a Sunday staff stand up and close their tills down and that's that. What's a tannoy and what's a mickey? In an American retail context, you absolutely have to kiss the hindquarters of every customer who comes through your door, no matter how outrageous their actions are. Many people walk in with a highly elevated sense of self-entitlement and don't mind asking you to do anything and everything --- "Karen" is indeed a thing. There seems to be this undercurrent of not just "the customer is always right", but "I am parting with money to get goods from you, therefore I own you". That's a peculiarly American mindset, in France that definitely would not fly. There is also the mindset of "I can engage in any suspicious-looking behavior I want to, and you will have only the best opinion of me". I tell my son, when we visit stores, keep your hands in view, don't shove your hands in your pockets, don't even give the appearance of having pilfered goods. Americans pitch a fair fit over being asked to show their receipts at Walmart on the way out. The instructions now are to let people just walk out, even if they've obviously stolen something. Much of this is political correctness, as certain demographics (not totally without justification) perceive themselves as being singled out as suspected thieves.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 14:44:12 GMT
A tannoy is a public address system. It's a brand name but we use it in colloquial English in the UK to refer to a P.A. 'Taking the Mickey' means when you are winding someone up or deliberately annoying them.
Don't try walking into stores in the UK thinking you own the staff. You will be rudely disabused of that outlook. I've seen Americans do it an exit looking very upset. Some of our Jewish customers were Americans from New York and would bring this outlook in the door and get annoyed about 'how rude' Britain was. Some classics include complaints I've had come to me from customers that they didn't smile when they said, 'Thank you' or wouldn't carry my shopping to the bus-stop. Neither of these are valid complaints from my point of view. The second, I'd only expect staff to do that for disabled or blind customers - no one else.
Ah, the receipt thing. Increasingly an issue here. Sainsbury's (who are a chain of supermarkets here) got so fed up with theft that they are now asking people to validate their receipts when leaving the self-scan area. This has caused uproar. It's also stupid as a policy. I can bring one or two items to a self-scan and fill my pockets or a bag with others and that's how a lot of theft occurs on those machines.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 14:52:36 GMT
You might find this amusing HSD: www.youtube.com/watch?v=57sulvMStPE&t=488sGive it a butcher's. Maybe make a cup of rosy whilst watching it. I love watching supposedly Cockney people in American shows on the custard. They always get it wrong. Mind you I'm well aware British shows also muck up US accents and tend to use some strange mid-Atlantic vague accent at times for all Americans.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 15:03:30 GMT
And if you think that's bad wait till I get started on Irish slang, and move on to slang from the north of England. Tha'nos (Not the Marvel Villain) that will be a reet interesting chat.
|
|
|
Post by theguvnor on May 31, 2023 15:14:45 GMT
Getting back to the main point of the thread. Christ is obviously operating within a tradition he is aware of and the whole point of him talking with the elders and amazing them with his knowledge reinforces that. Judaism was operating against a backdrop of a giant empire right on top of them in Christ's era and that introduced particular tensions as it is guaranteed in such situations you will get some people who will try and placate the large empire figuring that is the best policy to follow for survival.
|
|
bluekumul
Full Member
Christian humanist, democratic socialist, world citizen
Posts: 197
|
Post by bluekumul on Jun 1, 2023 7:21:15 GMT
For example, in my mind, those who wish to eradicate the ancient Roman Rite, and equally those who claim that the Missale Romanum as promulgated by Pope Saint Paul VI in 1970 is in some fundamental way ecclesiologically deficient are engaging in pharisaical behaviour. The Pharisees as a movement or definable class of persons died with the end of priestly Judaism in around 70 A. D. Nonetheless, in the modern world, and indeed in the body of the Church, there are those and have always been those whose behaviour is in many respects emulative of the Pharisees of old. These people might score very low on Agreeableness in the psychological big 5 chart. I used to score very high and needed a lot of work to overcome that and become more outspoken. These people probably suffer from the opposite problem.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Jun 2, 2023 2:49:43 GMT
Reminds me of St. Paul, who I think was a Pharisee, and spoke with both love and admonition towards his former colleagues.
|
|