AmericanPapist Comments
I love Ann.
She really knows how to stir things up, and, boy, can she promote herself and her books!
Her most provocative comments always seem to crop up during book-release week . . . funny how that happens!
Here's my question: What would an observant Jew say about Christians? Are we infidels, because of our belief in the Trinity? Will we make it to Heaven? Or do we need to be "perfected" in their eyes?
I think your giving way too much credit to Ann.
For the love of our Saviour, please don't tell me you're doing anything to _defend_ Ann Coulter. She is either disturbed, in which case we should draw a veil of charity over her entire life, or genuinely thinks she's funny, which is simply hateful. She's unacceptable in any context.
She laughs like Hillary. Is that bad?
The thing here is that she is not only trying to be inflammatory, but she is smart enough to know how to explain these concepts in less inflammatory was, but does not. She never once says "I don't want to get rid of all Jews, as an ethnicity or otherwise, I want all Jews to convert to Christianity, thereby fulfilling the promises of the Old Testament by accepting their Messiah." Or something to that effect. She even had a commercial break during which she might have thought of some way to put it. Rather, she keeps tossing around the word "perfected," and here's the other problem, in reference to "Christians" rather than "Christianity."
Saying that "Christianity is perfected Judaism" is one thing, saying that "we Christians" are "perfected Jews" is another.
She also slips at some point and says "We consider ourselves to be perfected Christians," which is, to the point, exactly the problem with Coulter, Falwell and their brand of evangelical Christianity.
I'm *only* trying to make the point that the word "perfected" is being taken the wrong way. I'm not a) defending everything Ann Coulter has done and represents or in the least way condoning her words.
But the fact remains that she *is* correct, precisely speaking. And if she's wrong on *this* point, it's an issue that Jews (and the world) have to take up with Christianity - not Ann Coulter.
I'm with Am.Papist here. Her delivery is flip, as usual, but she is technically correct. Aren't we all supposed to be perfected? And how does this perfection take place?
But on another and far more shallow note, will someone please give Ann a steak dinner? or two? She's looking way too skinny these days.
Of course in charity we should try to put others' words and actions in the best possible light. So there's nothing wrong with what Miss Coulter said.
At the same time, Miss Coulter needs to be "perfected" as well, since she is not Catholic.
Of all the things Ann Coulter says and does, this clearly is NOT one to be upset about. We are in perfect agreement (as you could probably see in my post on Voxa Nova today).
I read this blog daily. I appreciate and respect the contents and the work behind them.
However, in my opinion, I think the "defense" of Ann Coulter was way out of line. Her remarks were blatantly offensive to me, a Roman Catholic. I can not imagine how they would be taken by a Jew.
The lady is not a lady.
Coulter was not using any theological precision, and her clarification after commercial break made that much perspicuous. "Perfected" for Coulter meant "continuation" of "your [Jews'] testament" and a "fast track" to heaven. Where Jews have to "obey," Christians are on a fast track. And who does Coulter cite as her authority? Jerry Falwell. To close, Coulter asserts that Jews are going to heaven by obeying their laws and Christians just simply go to heaven. How could any Catholic see any precision in Coulter's presentation of Christianity? I can only conclude that your desire to defend Coulter (perhaps due to her political views) trumps your intellectual formation in Catholic theology.
And to Henry, my fellow Vox Nova contributor, we must charitably disagree with one another if I am reading you correctly. Your comment seems to endorse Thomas' contorted defense of Coulter. Perhaps (and hopefully) I am just misreading you.
42 years later, it is time to read again "Nostra Aetate"
I have been deeply disturbed by this rather petty parsing of the word "perfected." I never heard of it before in relation to the Jews.
Perhaps it is a translation of something from Marcion?
Otherwise, I still find the remarks of Ann Coulter deeply offensive.
I am not a great admirer of the Government of Israel, but I do agree with the remarks of Pius XII, viz., that we [Roman Catholics] are spiritual Semites.
And, of course, Abraham is "our father in faith."
How, then, can this woman's remarks possibly be defended by a "papist" blogger?
For the love of our Saviour, please don't tell me you're doing anything to _defend_ Ann Coulter. She is either disturbed, in which case we should draw a veil of charity over her entire life, or genuinely thinks she's funny, which is simply hateful. She's unacceptable in any context.
Good grief. I dislike Ann Coulter's view on the war, economy and other things which are contrary to Catholic teaching (she's not Catholic so I could scarcely take offense at her for that), but I have to say she has more cajones than many Bishops currently do. When was the last time you heard a Bishop get out and pray for Jews to accept our blessed saviour? Furthermore, why should Jews be offended because a Christian really believes what she believes? David Horowitz, a Jewish political commentator, has recently said exactly that. Why should Jews be offended because Christians believe in the new testament?
Modern Jews follow a religion created by the pharisees in 70AD. The religion of ancient Israel finds its fulfillment in the new covenant of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, which established the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Anyone who is happy to let Jews go to their fate without even trying to convert them is an anti-semite, not Ms. Coulter.
The ICC, the International Court of Justice, in the Hague, was set-up specifically to prosecute and bring to justice those responsible for the worst crimes - genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes - committed anywhere in the world. The court has been signed and ratified by over 100 countries globally, including the UK, Germany, France, Poland, Canada, Australia etc – although the US, Iran and Israel are amongst those who have signed but not yet ratified.
Notwithstanding this, if evidence is confirmed that the Israeli army deliberately or knowingly killed unarmed civilians, including hundreds of children and dozens of women – then the European Union should initiate steps to have arrest warrants issued against the two Israeli ministers responsible for the military action in Gaza, i.e. EHUD OLMERT and EHUD BARAK.
In such an eventuality, these two persons should be brought before the ICC to answer charges of war crimes against the people of Gaza. The fact that Israel has signed a comprehensive agreement of co-operation with the European Union, (the EU-Israel Association Agreement), gives the EU the right – and indeed the duty – to take action to bring any such persons suspected of war crimes before the World Court.
emirates uk, maybe all of Hamas needs to go before the Hague and then shot.
they certainly kill their share of innocents.
Commenting by HaloScan
