Neo-Judaizers Are The Biggest Threat To The Church Today
The problem with their [the Neo-Judaizers] criticism is that when us Catholics are criticizing “the Jews” we are specifically referring to those who are Jewish and reject Christ.
Table of Contents
Defining Neo-Judaizers
What are the Neo-Judaizers?
Simply put, they are a group of so-called “Catholics” who have fallen into errors regarding the Church teaching on the Jews.
Moreover, they promulgate these errors to others, scandalizing the faithful.
What Are The Errors Of The Neo-Judaizers?
Their errors include things like:
- Rejecting the collective guilt of the Jews in killing Christ (Matthew 27:22-23, Mark 15:12-13, Luke 23:20-21, John 19:6, Acts 2:23, Acts 7:52, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)
- Rejecting the blood curse in Jews for killing Christ (Matthew 27:25)
- Rejecting that Jews are enemies of God and the human race (Romans 11:28, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)
- Rejecting that the sack of Rome and Diaspora in 70 AD was a fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy (Matthew 24:15-25, Mark 13:14-23, Luke 21:20-24)
- Believing that the so-called “Temple wall” is what the Jews claim it to be, in spite of Christ saying “not one stone will be left upon another” (contrary to Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, Luke 21:5-9)
- Believing that Christian-Zionism is coherent, and that the Jews have a right to a homeland, especially in the Holy Land (contrary to St. Augustine’s Doctrine of the Witness People)
- Believing that one can be both a Jew (that practices their old rites, customs, feasts, etc., contrary to Sts. Augustine, Jerome and Aquinas, and the Council of Florence) and a Christian at the same time (i.e. Judeo-Christian syncretism, contrary to the Councils of Second Nicaea and Fourth Lateran)
- Denying that the Church has superseded the Old Covenant (contrary to the Council of Florence and Pope Pius XII) and replaced the Jewish people as the true Israel (Romans 11). The Neo-Judaizer then claims that any one holding this position is a descendant of the gnostic heretic Marcion of Sinope
- Assenting to the HERESY of Dual Covenant Theology and believing that Jews can be saved outside of the Church (contrary to Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus)
- Belief in perpetual Jewish innocence/victimhood, and denial of any evidence that Jews are overrepresented in every revolutionary and Anti-Christian movement
And others…
Why Are These Errors Of The Neo-Judaizers A Problem?
This leads to Catholics believing Jews are our allies and dropping their guard.
This undermining of vigilance against the Jews leads to Jews being able to use their power and influence to push anti-Christian values and ideologies with little resistance.
We will go over the Neo-Judaizers’ different errors in more detail in this article series.
But first, we must define the other terms the Neo-Judaizers get wrong.
Defining Jews, Judaism, Israel, and Judaizers
What are the definitions of “Jews”, “Judaism”, “Israel”, and “Judaizers”?
The definitions of these words may seem rather obvious, but they are actually not.
Depending on what context these words are used in, the definitions of these words can change drastically.
And this leads to one of main fallacies of the Neo-Judaizers: Equivocation.
The Neo-Judaizers will equivocate on “Jews”, for instance, and say things like:
“Antisemitic Catholics are illogical because Jesus, Mary, Joseph, all the Apostles, and disciples of Jesus were Jews.”
There is too much to unpack here, but the gist is that they claim that us Catholics are “illogical” for criticizing the Jews because Jesus and the original Christians were Jewish.
The problem with their criticism is that when us Catholics are criticizing “the Jews” we are specifically referring to those who are Jewish and reject Christ.
Thus, their criticism falls on its face because we use words differently in different contexts, and they are merely playing language games to try to create strawman arguments to defeat.
Therefore, in this preliminary article we will show how the Church defines each of these words, in different contexts, in order to set a proper foundation for the rest of the series.
What Are Jews?
“Jews” means different things in different contexts.
The word “Jew” could mean an Israelite from the tribe of Judah.
“Jews” could also mean the Israelites who lived in Judea or the Kingdom of Judah.
A “Jew” could be referring to anyone who practices some form of religious Judaism.
“Jew” could also be just referring to someone who is just ethnically Jewish or descended from other “Jews”.
Here’s where the Neo-Judaizers would say that when us Catholics criticize the “Jews” collectively, even if we only meant one of the above definitions, we would still be criticizing Our Lord (and the Holy Family and other early Christians) because He fits all the definitions above.
However, there is another definition of the “Jews” that the Church uses in collectively criticizing them.
And Our Lord (and the other early Christians) are not included in this definition.
When us Catholics criticize the “Jews” we are criticizing those who could meet any of the above definitions of “Jews” but who also reject Jesus Christ as their Messiah.
And yes, this definition of the “Jews” existed from the beginning of the Church.
Sacred Scripture On The “Jews”
In the Bible, St. Paul says:
…the Jews, Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men; Prohibiting us to speak to the Gentiles, that they may be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath of God is come upon them to the end.
1 Thessalonians 2:14-16
And:
As concerning the gospel, indeed, they [the Jews] are enemies for your sake
Romans 11:28
Similarly, St. John the Apostle records Jesus Christ as saying:
You [Jews] are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.
John 8:44
And:
I know thy tribulation and thy poverty, but thou art rich: and thou art blasphemed by them that say they are Jews and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Apocalypse (Revelation) 2:9
Also:
Behold, I will bring of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie. Behold, I will make them to come and adore before thy feet. And they shall know that I have loved thee.
Apocalypse (Revelation) 3:9
So the Neo-Judaizers will look at these passages and say that they are referring only to a specific group of Jews: Those Jews that were Pharisees and actively persecuted Christians in the First Century.
However, this is not the correct exegesis of these passages.
Protege Of St. John the Apostle, St. Ignatius of Antioch, On The “Jews”
St. John the Apostle’s protege, St. Ignatius of Antioch, gave us this exegesis:
If anyone preaches the one God of the law and the prophets, but denies Christ to be the Son of God, he is a liar, even as also is his father the devil, and is a Jew falsely so called, being possessed of mere carnal circumcision.
THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE PHILADELPHIANS, CHAP. VI.–DO NOT ACCEPT JUDAISM
Let’s unpack that.
This says that anyone that preaches one God, the law, and the prophets, but denies Jesus Christ is a liar, son of the devil and a false Jew.
In other words, it is saying that the above Biblical passages do actually apply to all Jews that reject Jesus Christ.
Note that he is saying that anyone who identifies as a Jew but denies Christ is a “false Jew”.
Also, note that he has no consideration of “secular Jews” (but just because these didn’t exist until centuries later, which were included when they became a group).
You should ask yourself this: Do you believe that the protege of St. John the Apostle has the correct exegesis of St. John’s writings or do you believe that some Neo-Judaizer, almost 2000 years later, has the correct exegesis?
If you still aren’t convinced, let us look at a more recent definition of the “Jews” by the Church.
Modern Church Definition Of The “Jews”
La Civiltà Cattolica, published under the authority of Pope Leo XIII in 1890, says:
Judaism turns its back on the Mosaic Law
The Jewish question of our time doesn’t differ greatly from the one which affected the
Christian peoples of the Middle Ages. In a foolish way it is said to arise from hatred towards the
Jewish tribe. Mosaism in itself couldn’t become an object of hate for Christians, since, until the
coming of Christ, it was the only true religion, a prefiguration of and preparation for Christianity,
which, according to God’s Will, was to be its successor. But the Judaism of the centuries [after
Christ] turned its back on the Mosaic law, replacing it with the Talmud, the very quintessence
of that Pharisaism which in so many ways has been shattered through its rejection by Christ, the
Messiah and Redeemer. And although Talmudism is an important element of the Jewish question,
it cannot be said, strictly speaking, to give that question a religious character, because what the
Christian nations despise in Talmudism is not so much its virtually non-existent theological
element, but rather, its morals, which are at variance with the most elementary principles of
natural ethics.Defining Semitism
Nor does the question originate in aversion for a race, as apparently expressed by the
improper adjective Semitic that is attached to it. In the first place, the Israelite tribe is not the only
one in the world springing from Sem’s most noble blood. Nor can any reason be found why the
Aryans, who derive from Japheth, should harbor an inherited hatred for Sem’s offspring, in whose
tabernacles, according to Noe’s solemn prophecy, they even were to live in fraternal
harmony. Thus we take the designation Semitic whenever applied to the Jewish question, and
Semitism, whenever applied to Judaism, to be inappropriate because in exceeding the scope of
their meaning, substituting the whole for a part, they produce a false [if not inflammatory]
concept.Nevertheless, aversion to the tribe adds to it and constitutes one of the chapters of the
La Civiltà Cattolica, Series XIV, Vol. VII, Fascicule 961, 23 October 1890
question, the religious codex of the Talmud being another one. Moreover, the Jewish race, in as
far as it is a nation, though as such without a fixed fatherland and without a political organism,
lives dispersed among the nations, perhaps not without getting mixed with them here and there,
but keeping aloof from them in all things which might develop into social union, and regarding
them as enemies or even as victims fallen to its greediness. Thus it is that the great Israelite
family, dispersed among the peoples of the world, forms a foreign nation within the nations in
which it resides, and the sworn enemy of their prosperity, since the cardinal point of Talmudism is
the oppression and spoliation of the very peoples who extend hospitality to its disciples. Because
of which St. Paul, at the end of his days, characterized the Jews as displeasing God and hostile to
all men: Deo non placent, et omnibus hominibus adversantur. [Who (killed both the Lord Jesus
and the prophets, and have persecuted us) please not God and are adversaries to all men.]
The above article was written in 1890, when Jews started claiming they were a distinct biological race.
This shows the Catholic position rejects the idea that us Catholics are against the Jews because of their biology.
Instead, we are against the Jews because both as a people and religion they reject their rightful Messiah, who is Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
And since it is not a thing of intrinsic biological race, we give hope to the Jews because they can convert.
And by converting, the Jews will no longer be Jews but be Christians, since there is no Jew or gentile in Christ (Galatians 3:28).
What Is Judaism?
Like “Jews,” the word “Judaism” can mean different things in different contexts.
Judaism is considered to be the religion of the Jews.
However, Judaism can take many different forms.
There is Second Temple Judaism, Karaite Judaism, Rabbinical Judaism, and other forms of Judaism.
And within those types there are subtypes.
Second Temple Judaism had Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots, Essenes, and other sects.
Rabbinical Judaism has Haredi Orthodox Judaism, Modern Orthodox Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Reform Judaism, and other sects.
Since it is so easy to use the word “Judaism” to mean different things, it makes it easy for Neo-Judaizers to equivocate in order to strawman us Catholics.
For instance, Neo-Judaizers will say things like:
“Antisemitic Catholics are illogical because they say Judaism is an evil religion, but Jesus, Mary, Joseph, all the Apostles, and disciples of Jesus practiced Judaism”.
Again, these Neo-Judaizers are equivocating and creating a strawman because when we criticize Judaism we are not criticizing the form of Judaism Our Lord practiced.
Our Lord, His Holy Family, and His disciples practiced Second Temple Judaism, which ended with His death on the cross.
What Judaism Are We Criticizing Then?
On the contrary, those forms of Judaism that us Catholics are criticizing (Rabbinical Judaism, Pharisaism, Karaism, etc.) are those forms that reject Jesus Christ as their Messiah.
A big part of this confusion comes from the fact that people don’t understand Second Temple Judaism ended in the First Century and modern forms of Judaism were created after.
It’s just historical fact that the Second Temple was destroyed by the siege of Jerusalem by Rome in 70 AD.
When the temple was destroyed, all the Jewish priests and Levites had no way to continue to practice the religious ceremonies of Second Temple Judaism.
Thus, that religion ceased to exist (even though it was fulfilled by Christ’s death 37 years before).
And this led to the Pharisees (who reject Christ) to create Rabbinical Judaism in the Second Century.
Therefore, when us Catholics criticize Judaism, we are criticizing the false religion(s) created by Jews after the First Century.
What Is Israel?
Like “Jews” and “Judaism,” the word “Israel” can have several meanings, depending on the context.
“Israel” could refer to Jacob, son of Isaac, grandson of Abraham, and father of the tribes of Israel.
Speaking of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, the word “Israel” can refer to them.
“Israel” could also refer to the people of those tribes, the Israelites.
Also, “Israel” could refer to the Land of Israel that was given to these people by God.
Moreover, “Israel” could refer either to the United Kingdom of Israel or the Northern Kingdom of Israel.
“Israel” could also refer to the traditional Catholic understanding that the Church is the continuation of Israel.
Finally, “Israel” could refer to the illegitimate, false state of “Israel” created by Zionist Jews.
So What’s The Argument Of The Neo-Judaizers Then?
Since it is very easy to conflate what one means when using the word “Israel” the Neo-Judaizers will equivocate here in order to strawman Catholics.
For instance, Neo-Judaizers will say things like:
“Antisemitic Catholics are illogical because they hate the Jews, the people of Israel, who are God’s chosen people”.
Or:
“Antisemitic Catholics are illogical because they criticize the state of Israel, which is the nation and land that God willed for His people”.
There are reasons that Catholics cannot maintain that Jews having their own state in the Holy Land is legitimate.
But I will go over that in a future article of this series.
However, I will address the equivocation and strawman fallacies here.
Us Catholics do not believe that the Jews (who reject Christ) are part of Israel anymore.
We Catholics also reject the legitimacy of the false state of “Israel”.
Thus, we object to the entire meta-frame of this argument.
We love actual Israel, whether that refers to Jacob, his descendants, the Holy Land, the old Kingdom, or the Church.
On the other hand, we entirely reject these usurpers who claim to be “Israel” when they reject Christ and have created this illegitimate state!
And we find the fact that they call their state after our own patrimony is something we find abominable.
We Catholics are Israel. These perfidious Jews are the Synagogue of Satan.
What Are Judaizers?
Like the previous words, the Neo-Judaizers equivocate on the word “Judaizer”.
This is an obvious tactic to save face when they are called out for their errors.
“Judaizers” classically referred to those Jewish-Christians who tried to impose the Mosaic Law and circumcision onto gentile converts to Christianity.
We know this heresy was condemned in the Council of Jerusalem, recorded in Acts 15.
However, later in the Church, “Judaizers” came to mean Jewish-Christian heretics, like Ebionites, who Judaized Christianity by syncretizing un-Christian Jewish beliefs.
Of course, when us Catholics criticize the Neo-Judaizers, we are using the latter definition (whether the Neo-Judaizers come from a Jewish background or not).
But still Neo-Judaizers will equivocate and make it seem like we are using the classical definition, in order to strawman us.
St. Ignatius of Antioch criticized Judaizers trying to syncretize Judaism into Christianity, saying:
Therefore, having become His disciples, let us learn to live according to the principles of Christianity. For whosoever is called by any other name besides this, is not of God. Lay aside, therefore, the evil, the old, the sour leaven, and be ye changed into the new leaven, which is Jesus Christ. Be ye salted in Him, lest any one among you should be corrupted, since by your savour ye shall be convicted. It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God.
…It is absurd to speak of Jesus Christ with the tongue, and to cherish in the mind a Judaism which has now come to an end. For where there is Christianity there cannot be Judaism. For Christ is one, in whom every nation that believes, and every tongue that confesses, is gathered unto God.
THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE MAGNESIANS, CHAP. X.–BEWARE OF JUDAIZING
But yet the Judaizers still persist in trying to syncretize the anti-Christ Jewish ethno-religion into Christianity.
And many of today’s Judaizers can be of Jewish background or not.
The Neo-Judaizer “converts” from Judaism to Christianity try to put on the new clothes of Christ without taking off the old clothes of the Synagogue of Satan.
And the Neo-Judaizer gentiles do the opposite: They wear the clothes of Christ and sacrilegiously put on the clothes of the Synagogue of Satan over these.
I will go over the particular error of Jewish-Christian syncretization in a future article in this series.
Neo-Judaizers Equivocate On The Word “Antisemitism” Too
There are definitely other words Neo-Judaizers equivocate on.
One is the word “antisemitism” which originally meant the hatred of the Jews based on biological race.
Yes, the Church teaches that hatred of people, especially on something intrinsic, is a sin.
However, the Neo-Judaizers use the word to mean collectively criticizing the Jews in any way.
I have already written an article about why this term and definition is absurd in today’s discourse.
But the gist of that article is that Jesus Christ, the Bible, Church Fathers, Doctors, Popes, and Ecumenical Councils criticize the Jews collectively.
Thus, it cannot be a sin to criticize the Jews collectively.
And no, criticizing a group collectively is not hate, as I have already proven.
So confusing “criticism” with “hate” is as fallacious as equivocations that I have already pointed out.
Hopefully, the definitions of these words are clearer after reading this article.
Future articles in this series will focus on the errors of the Neo-Judaizers.
Until then, listen to my podcast on Neo-Judaizers and watch this video I made with Will Tucker.
Stay tuned, and God bless!