The Holy Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to Divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the Sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally.
Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel, they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel, it asserts they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation.
All therefore who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation unless someday they recover from these errors…
In other words, Replacement Theology. And as Catholicism is the one and true Christianity and Protestantism has always been born of a deviation and has continued in that spirit ever since, this is the last word on the subject. The OT has no significance in Catholic theology. I used to go to Mass here, and the homilies always had to do only with the New Testament.
In other words, the OT isn’t even Christianity or at least it’s not anymore if one sees Christianity logically as the outgrowth of Judaism that it can only be. And all of these Protestant sects fetishizing the OT are, in my opinion, heretical. Basically they are practicing Judaism. So convert already!
And because of the endless fetishization of the OT by Protestantism for centuries, this suggests that Protestantism itself at the very least contains the seeds of heresy if not the actual content. And those Protestants who are doing this, really, are not even Christians anymore. They’re just Jews. And they act a lot like them too, if you think about it.
One more thing, Replacement Theology, which the Jews kvetch is antisemitism, is simply Christianity itself, and it’s only the gutlessness of Christianity proper vis a vis the Jews with regard to the fake Judeo-Christianity heresy that prevents Christians from coming out with some real talk.
The only ones with the nerve to do so have been the Christians of the Arab World, who are almost all Catholics, either Eastern or Western. In particular, Palestinian Christian clerics have strongly pushed Replacement Theology in actual word. If Jews think that Replacement Theology is antisemitism then that can only mean that Christianity itself is antisemitism, which, after all, is always an interesting argument.
The best way to look at this is to see Christianity as some sort of radical, albeit heretical, proto-Reform Jewish sect which was rejected by Jews as they reject all such heresies. This sect was excommunicated from Judaism proper by the Jewish authorities.
However, they continued to think of themselves as Jews until at least 60 AD. In fact, for a long time, you could not be a Christian unless you were a Jew first. Can you imagine that? You could imagine if nowadays only Jews could become Christians? So Christianity was very Jewish for a long time.
At some point there was a big fight about whether non-Jews could convert to Christianity. I believe that Paul’s conversion on the way to Damascus paved the way for other non-Jews to convert. But Jesus himself was as Jewish as anyone who ever lived. He was just a Jewish radical like Chomsky. Modern Jews would have called Jesus a self-hating antisemitic Jew, not that he’s as bad as Gilad Atzmon. Jesus had a Jewish mother. He lived and died a Jew. His last meal, as all of his meals, was kosher.
But the tail of Judaism continues to be present in modern Christianity just as the tail of our collective past continues to be present in all of us as part of the present, driving us forward to the future, which itself with contain and be the fruit of our present moment.
And in that sense, one can make that case in terms of the Philosophy of Time that the past, present, and future in a way all happening at exactly this moment, as the present is nothing but the accumulation of the collective past and the future will be nothing but the shoots that grow from the seeds of our present moment. And in that sense, since the past is also a part of the present, the past will be also part of the future. See The Harmony of the Spheres, by W. J. Tucker, 1964, for more along those lines.