“Neither is there salvation in any other” (Acts 4:12)…
Post-Catholic Vatican to Jewish Rabbis:
Old Mosaic Law is “Way of Salvation for Jews”
“Cardinal” Kurt Koch, the Vatican’s top ecumenist
The Jesuit apostate Jorge Bergoglio (“Pope Francis”) recently got in trouble with Jewish authorities after preaching Christ over Moses in his Aug. 11 Wednesday catechesis on St. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians. Some rabbis in Israel and the United States were alarmed and sent letters to the “Pope” demanding a clarification.
After all, had the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) not long replaced — one might say, superseded — the teaching of St. Paul? Why was Francis suddenly teaching St. Paul and not Vatican II? As we explained in our original post, the Jews had simply caught Francis in the act of teaching one thing to his own people and another thing to them:
Whereas “Cardinals” Walter Brandmüller and Raymond Burke are still waiting, after five years, for Bergoglio to respond to their request for clarification concerning the teaching of his exhortation Amoris Laetitia, the “Pope” didn’t want to keep the Jewish authorities waiting and quickly instructed his front man for dealing with religious relations with the Jews, “Cardinal” Kurt Koch, to respond to the rabbis’ letters. We reported on this in our follow-up post:
At the time, we noted: “It is truly lamentable that the full text of Koch’s response has not been published, but perhaps this will happen in the future.” We are happy to report that this has now happened.
On Sep. 10, the Vatican released the full text of two letters written by Koch to different rabbis. Both letters are basically identical in content, so if you’ve read one, you’ve read them both. Each letter consists of only four paragraphs that comfortably fit on one page, so it’s not a lot to read. The following links lead to the scans in PDF format:
- Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews: Letter of ‘Cardinal’ Kurt Koch to Rabbi Rasson Aroussi (Sep. 3, 2021)
- Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews: Letter of ‘Cardinal’ Kurt Koch to Rabbi David Fox Sandmel (Sep. 3, 2021)
Significantly, Koch notes that he consulted with “Pope” Francis before formulating his response, so it’s clear that this text is entirely in line with Bergoglio’s own thinking. This only makes sense, considering that the whole kerfuffle has been about what Francis himself said and meant in his audience of Aug. 11, 2021, when he said: “The Law, however, does not give life, it does not offer the fulfillment of the promise because it is not capable of being able to fulfill it.”
Some news sites have covered this latest development:
- “Vatican cardinal reassures Jewish leaders over Pope Francis’ comments on Torah” (Catholic News Agency)
- “Vatican rejects Israeli criticism over pope comments on Jewish law” (Reuters)
There is no need to comment on everything Koch wrote. Instead, we will simply call attention to the most egregious lines, which are these:
The phrase “The law does not give life, it does not offer the fulfilment of the promise” should not be extrapolated from its context, but must be considered within the overall framework of Pauline theology. The abiding Christian conviction is that Jesus Christ is the new way of salvation. However, this does not mean that the Torah is diminished or no longer recognized as the “way of salvation for Jews”….
In his catechesis the Holy Father does not make any mention of modern Judaism; the address is a reflection on Pauline theology within the historical context of a given era. The fact that the Torah is crucial for modern Judaism is not questioned in any way.
(Kurt Koch, Letter to Rabbi Rasson Arussi, Sep. 3, 2021)
First, one must take issue with the insufferable subjectivism expressed here. Koch acts as if the Divine Revelation of Jesus Christ were merely a “Christian conviction” and not the objective, God-given Truth from above that has been universally valid from the moment of its promulgation and will remain so forever, to which everyone, including modern-day Jews, must convert if they wish to be saved: “He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned” (Mk 16:16).
Second, Koch’s “explanation” doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Either the Mosaic Law (Old Covenant) does or doesn’t give life in the current dispensation (New Covenant). For Koch to point out that “the Holy Father does not make any mention of modern Judaism” is, frankly, idiotic. For if the Old Covenant was not capable of giving life when St. Paul was teaching the Galatians in the first century, then obviously neither is it capable of giving life today, two thousand years later. And why should it? It has been replaced by a New Covenant, after all: “Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old, is near its end” (Heb 8:13); “…he taketh away the first, that he may establish that which followeth” (Heb 10:9).
If Koch thinks otherwise, perhaps he can explain and demonstrate at what point the Old Covenant was resurrected and infused with life just in time for “modern Judaism” to have a valid “parallel covenant”, so to speak, with God. For that, in essence, is what the Vatican’s chief ecumenist is suggesting, even if his words admit of more than one interpretation: “…this does not mean that the Torah is diminished or no longer recognized as the ‘way of salvation for Jews'”.
So today’s Jews have a separate “way of salvation” that is theirs alone? Is he nuts?! When our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ told His disciples after the Last Supper, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me” (Jn 14:6), was He not pronouncing an absolute, perennially-valid truth but instead only making a wishy-washy statement “within the historical context of a given era”? It looks like St. Peter, too, didn’t consider the “historical context” when he boldly proclaimed before the apostate-Jewish high priest concerning Jesus Christ: “Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
To make today’s Jews believe that adherence to the Old Covenant can bring them eternal salvation, is not only a colossal blasphemous affront to Almighty God, it is also a great disservice to Jewish souls, whom our Blessed Lord and Savior redeemed no less than the rest of humanity. Christ died for them, too, and there is nothing He would rather see than these souls draw abundantly from the fountain of salvation He so lovingly purchased for them (cf. Isaias 12:3), so that, having made use of His countless graces and blessings, they would attain to eternal bliss: “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice: and the knowledge of God more than holocausts” (Osee 6:6). Instead, Club Bergoglio is happy to confirm the Jews in their blindness!
The Old Law has no other ultimate purpose than to point to Jesus Christ, as St. Paul teaches the Galatians: “But before the faith came, we were kept under the law shut up, unto that faith which was to be revealed. Wherefore the law was our pedagogue in Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after the faith is come, we are no longer under a pedagogue” (Gal 3:23-25).
This is absolute truth. It is not “Pauline theology within the historical context of a given era”, it is God’s very own Speaking! Although God used human authors for the composition of Sacred Scripture, He inspired them in such a way as to guarantee that they would understand and write down nothing but the truth He willed them to write:
For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write — He was so present to them — that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers.
(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, n. 20)
Lastly, Koch points out: “The fact that the Torah is crucial for modern Judaism is not questioned in any way.” This is yet another inane comment. Obviously, that is not what the rabbis were inquiring or complaining about. They were upset that Francis, following St. Paul, was saying that the Torah had given way to the Law of the Gospel in Christ. Unlike the Vatican, these rabbis are approaching this from an angle of objective truth. They get it: Either the Gospel has replaced the Old Law or it has not. This historicist-relativist drivel about the historical context of an era long ago, does not answer anything.
We should perhaps also point out that Christ’s preaching in the Gospel accounts was almost exclusively to the Jews. Only in very rare instances did He speak to Gentiles (e.g., see Mt 8:5-12; 15:22-28). This is significant because Our Blessed Lord constantly emphasized that there was no salvation apart from Him (e.g., Mt 7:21; Jn 3:5,14-18), so this is something He told primarily to the Jews, whose genuine King and Messias He is (see Mt 2:2; Mk 15:2; Lk 23:38)! “Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified” (Acts 2:36).
So now we know how the Vatican “witnesses to the Gospel”. This relativist double-talk must be what Francis means when he touts “the courage to proclaim the newness of the Gospel of Jesus to all, confidently, (with parrhesia) in a loud voice, in every time and in every place” (General Audience, May 22, 2013).
Back in 2018, “Bp.” Robert Barron made waves when he told Ben Shapiro, an orthodox Jew, that Jesus Christ is merely “the privileged route to salvation”. If we compare that to the statement made by “Cardinal” Koch, we find that the Vatican doesn’t even insist on the privileged part. We must infer that for them, Christ is merely one way of salvation among several — perhaps the one they happen to believe in and preach (wink, wink), but certainly not the only one.
The contrast with Divine Revelation couldn’t be more obvious:
And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mk 16:15-16)
For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. (Jn 3:16)
Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sin. (Jn 8:24)
I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. (Jn 14:6)
This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4:11-12)
In the 15th century, the Church’s Council of Florence was also rather clear about that “alternate path to salvation” the Jews supposedly have:
[This Council] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.
(Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino; Denz. 714.)
Unable to hide the obvious incompatibility between this dogmatic statement and the ecumenical-interreligious bunk put out by the Second Vatican Council, some Novus Ordo theologians have argued, basically, that the Council of Florence got it wrong! Considering whether Vatican II had reversed the teaching of Florence, “Mgr.” Thomas Guarino writes:
Here I agree with [Fr.] Francis A. Sullivan, who, for a variety of reasons, speaks of the “very limited doctrinal authority” of the Florentine decree, which in fact was a decree of union with and instruction for the Coptic Church. While formally belonging to an ecumenical council, this statement, Sullivan notes, is neither defined nor dogmatic teaching. In the case of Florence, then, one may speak of its glaring discontinuity with the teaching of Vatican II — but not of a reversal of a doctrinal landmark, of a permutatio fidei [change of faith].
(Thomas G. Guarino, The Disputed Teachings of Vatican II: Continuity and Reversal in Catholic Doctrine [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2018], p. 117; italics given.)
Oh, Florence’s proclamation is “neither defined nor dogmatic teaching” — really? That’s not what the pre-Vatican II dogmatic theology manual Sacrae Theologiae Summa (imprimatur 1955) says, which speaks of “the definition of the Council of Florence” (in Fr. Joachim Salaverri, On the Church of Christ, n. 1103; italics changed).
So, considering that Bergoglio likes to talk about a “Church that goes forth”, with kerygma and all, why does the Vatican not try to convert the Jews — lovingly, with patience and charity, not with pressure or unkindness — by using their own Scriptures? Why is there no mission to the Jews? (Well, we know why.) The second chapter of the Book of Wisdom, for example, is one of the clearest Messianic prophecies:
Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law, and divulgeth against us the sins of our way of life. He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God. He is become a censurer of our thoughts. He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men’s, and his ways are very different. We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words. These things they thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them. And they knew not the secrets of God, nor hoped for the wages of justice, nor esteemed the honour of holy souls. For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him. But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world: And they follow him that are of his side.
(Wisdom 2:12-25)
Instead, Club Bergoglio issues an anti-Catholic document on Judaism and “Cardinal” Koch himself celebrates Hanukkah with the Jews in the Vatican. Observing the Old Testament feast of Hanukkah today, after Christ the Savior has come and established the new dispensation, is a blasphemy!
The post-Catholic Vatican of our day is preaching the great heresy of Indifferentism, according to which it does not matter what religion one adheres to, because they all give access to eternal salvation. This was roundly condemned by Pope Gregory XVI:
Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism” [Eph 4:5] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him” [Lk 11:23], and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate” [Athanasian Creed].
(Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 13; bold and italics removed.)
Indifferentism is the anti-gospel that allows a “Pope” to kiss the Muslim Koran and a Mother Teresa to help Hindus become better Hindus rather than good Catholics. It sends countless souls to hell by directing them to the “broad way” and blocking the gate of Heaven (cf. Mt 7:13)! It is what Pope Pius XI denounced as “that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule” (Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 2).
It was St. John the Evangelist, the Beloved Disciple, who asked: “Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ?” — and answered: “This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son” (1 Jn 2:22).
Judas betrayed our Lord for 30 pieces of silver (see Mt 26:15).
Bergoglio and his pack of apostates do it for free.
Image source: composite with elements from shutterstock.com and youtube.com (screenshot)
Licenses: paid and fair use
No Comments
Be the first to start a conversation