Jump to content

Talk:Catholic Church and Judaism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 14:37, 18 August 2021 (Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Relations

Very weak article. sounds like it was written by the Pope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.40.31 (talk) 14:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See "anti-judaism" ???

It's rather rude and unseeming that the title of the historical overview is titled "anti-judaism" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.220.14.77 (talk) 20:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Jew" vs. "Jewish person"

Is there some reason the circumlocution "Jewish person" needs to be substituted for the simpler and shorter "Jew"? Is "Jew" some sort of dirty word? Jayjg (talk) 16:14, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish person is a more accurate description as "Jew" can sometimes have a negative anti-semitic connotation. Also this sounds better. Its like saying "The first black to be knighted" this sounds a little derogatory. Also if you don't want to use "Reverend Cantor", which is an elevated status, at least give the poor guy his proper title of Cantor. -Victor 6 May, 2005

Jew as a noun is not anti-Semitic, and it is insulting to suggest it is. Jew is simply a description; it's like saying the "the first American to be nominated" etc., which is not at all derogatory, unless you think "American" is a bad word too. As for "Cantor", people aren't described by their titles multiple times in an encyclopedia article; he is described as a Cantor once, that's plenty. Jayjg (talk) 20:48, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Turning this article into a vanity page

The text read:

The artist Cantor Lawrence Eliezer Kepecs presented Pope John Paul II with a personally designed mezuzah inscribed with the "Priestly Blessing".

Um, thousands of people have presented the Pope, and other high ranking Catholic clergy, with gifts. Why is this one gift by this one man so important that it merits inclusion in this article? Is Cantor Kepecs a leading figure in Catholic-Jewish relations? Nope. He is just one of hundreds of Jewish people who have met the Pope. Let's not turn this article into a vanity page. RK 16:59, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it's part of a campaign to make Kepecs as prominent as possible, and to promote the minor event as perhaps the most earth-shattering one of the 20th and 21st centuries. It should be deleted, as should article on Kepecs. Jayjg (talk) 18:17, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Reverend Cantor Victor I. Beck, President of the Jewish Ministers Cantors Association of America. I led the delegation of cantors - one of the 13 cantors who were selected to sing for the Pope on 1/18/05. It was a monumental event unprecedented in Judeo-Christian history. Rev. Cantor Kepecs gave the Pope a mezuzah that he created for that purpose - to show that the Jewish people really want to have reconcilliation with the Catholic church. The Pope very much wanted this meeting. Being the President of the oldest Cantorial organization (dating back to 1896)who had such illustrious members as Cantor Yossele Rosenblatt, Ben Zion Kapov Kagan, Chaskele Ritter, David Koussevitzky, Moshe Koussevitzky, Berele Chagy, Israel Alter, Mordechai Hershman, Adolf Katchko, Leib Glantz, Alter Yechiel Karniol, Zavel Kwartin, Samuel Malavsky, Shlomo Mendel, Yeshia Meissels Pierre Pinchik and many others, I feel in my expertise that Cantor Lawrence Eliezer Kepecs is more than a noteworthy cantor, he is an exceptional Cantor and artist, who deserves a page in your encyclopedia. I can only assume that those who wish to remove mention of Cantor Kepecs in this forum are either ill-informed or have other agendas which are not in keeping with the historical and informative nature of this forum.-Rev. Cantor Victor I Beck, President JMCA May 5, 2005

This is an encyclopedia, not a "forum", and it contains information that is of encyclopedic value. Jayjg (talk) 20:51, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removed vanity section

I've removed this entire section, except for one unrelated paragraph about the ADL that I moved to the beginning of its parent. This entire detailed description about a meeting held with John Paul II is unencyclopedic. As the (now-deleted) text notes, the pope had knighted into the Order of St. Gregory at least seven or eight Jews; hence, he seems to meet with Jews pretty often, really. The meeting was undoubtedly special for the folks involved, but there's no evidence that it was important to Relations between Catholicism and Judaism in a broader sense. See also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Gary Krupp and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lawrence Eliezer Kepecs. CDC (talk) 20:56, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This event with the pope was the most positive event in relations between Israel, and the Vatican in 2,000 years of history. You want to fight the notability of this event? Personally, I do not see what you have against the entire event, as this is part of history. --Rabbis 13:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Everything is part of history; this event was not notable. You've spent months trying to pump up its importance, including creating half a dozen Wikipedia articles about it, but the best you can actually provide is a puff-piece in the Sacramento Bee. This is an article about history, not trivia. Jayjg (talk) 16:55, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You've gone too far removing this. If you do not leave the article alone, the situation will escalate. I've discussed the matter with my colleagues, and we are getting the Anti-Defamation League involved now. You see, the event happened whether you like it or not. It made history, and you do not have the right to rewrite history by removing all references to the event in your so called "encyclopedia.". I hope you are content. --Rabbis 12:12, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Really, making vague threats doesn't help your case. As Jayjg pointed out above, the extremely thin press coverage (in the back pages of two small-circulation papers) makes it hard to believe that this one-day meeting was really the "most positive event in relations between Israel, and the Vatican in 2,000 years of history." Wow - that's quite a statement, and I haven't seen any evidence of that except your unsourced claims. By the way - obviously, I don't claim that this event didn't happen, just that it is not notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. CDC (talk) 16:31, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One would have thought the Vatican recognizing Israel, or the Pope visiting Jerusalem, or the removal of the "perfidious Jews" prayer by Vatican II, or the Pope's visiting the synagogue in Rome, or the Pope referring to Jews as "our elder brothers", or dozens of other events, would be more important than some cantors singing to the Pope and giving him a mezuzah. Jayjg (talk) 22:39, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"Perfidious Jews" was changed to "unfaithful Jews" in 1949 by Pius XII. What Vatican II is drop any negative connotations.--T. Anthony 13:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Pope

It would be interesting if we could have an entry about the possibility of a Jewish Pope. Saint Peter, the first Pope, was himself Jewish. There was also a medieval antipope that was reportedly Jewish. There are other stories as well from the Byzantine period and in Jewish folklore. Some had also speculated that the Jewish Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger could have become Pope. [1] ADM (talk) 01:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pro life issues section deletion

I deleted the section. The section stated that under jewish law, even according to the most pro-life jews, abortion is sometimes even required. The source given for this statement was: Religion and abortion#Judaism. This page states nothing like what was written in the 'pro life issues' section. Furthermore, you can read on Judaism and abortion that "Generally speaking, traditionalist Jews firmly oppose abortion, with few health-related exceptions, [...].". I'm not an expert on this subject(at all) but it seems that the "pro life issues" section held wrong information and so it should not be on the page until it can be proven that the information is correct after all. Richardprins (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The anti-Defamation League has asserted that certain fringe elements of the pro-life movement harbour anti-semitic views, presumably because of support for abortion among large sections of the American Jewish community. [2] ADM (talk) 04:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Church Sponsored Anti-Semitism

There are gaping holes in this article that neglect all of the times that the Church had instilled pogroms on the Jews. You have the Crusades and proselytizing lectures to children, etc. Then you have stolen property with churches that used to be synagogues that they won't return. Saxophonemn (talk) 13:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Attacks in Israel

I tend to agree with Ewawer that the recent additions have not been described by reliable sources as stemming from "Relations between Catholicism and Judaism". Discussion is needed here to arrive at consensus on which, if any, of these events should be listed here. Here come the Suns (talk) 17:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Catholic Church has now officially complained that attacks against Christian churches in Israel are not individual, random acts, but organized, repeated attacks by extremists who believe that churches represent "idol worship" and that churches should be burned. The complaint of the Catholic Church about organized attacks by Jewish religious extremists should be included.VanEman (talk) 06:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Relations between Catholicism and Judaism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why this article?

Why do we have an article that covers most of a century of history, but not the long prior period? This comes across as an attempt at spin, to separate away the various shameful efforts of the Church toward Jews. It jumps from 380 to WWII... that's a huge and vital gap. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems like propaganda

I agree with Nat Gertler in everything but his accusation of shamefulness. This glosses over the well developed and complex history between Jews and the Church for seemingly no reason and seems to be an attempt to present the church in a spirit of Vatican 2 light for seemingly no reason. Reform this Article please Magjozs (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catholic_Church_and_Judaism&oldid=1039406683"