Click for Related Articles
Catholic Views on IsraelFrom March 26 Haaretz, by Lorenzo Cremonesi.Lorenzo Cremonesi is the Jerusalem correspondent for the Italian daily Corriere della Sera QUOTES FROM TEXT: EXCERPTS: Once-distant Church comes to embrace the Jews
By Lorenzo Cremonesi It is one of the most radical and complex processes of ideological and doctrinal revision of this century, but one of the least known, especially among Jews in Israel - the major center of the people which was for many centuries, the principal victim of this very ideology.In October 1965, the Catholic Church came to discuss two main decisions in the famous Nostra Aetate declaration: The Jews as a whole were no longer a people of "deicides," responsible for the death of Christ, and, above all, they were no longer considered "rejected by God" or "cursed." These were the seeds of positions that were to mature more clearly in subsequent years. The most important of these positions was that the Old Testament was to be considered still valid and capable of coexisting with the New Testament. These were assertions that clearly contradicted traditional readings of the Gospels, constituting a veritable upheaval that could be compared to a declaration in the most dogmatic period of Stalin's dictatorship that private property is compatible with socialism. The ideological revolution of Nostra Aetate was even more profound, upsetting the foundations of an ancient institution of some 2,000 years, along with its way of relating to itself and the world. Moreover, the Church let it be understood that it was no longer striving to present itself as standing in opposition to Israel, no longer hoping to take the traditional place of the chosen people, but rather seeking a formula of coexistence which would no longer entail the classic vision of the "replacement" of Israel with the "New Covenant." One of the reasons this debate is not widely known concerns a major preoccupation of the Church and recent popes - especially Karol Wojtyla, who at every opportunity seeks to present himself as the apostle of a "new evangelization" on earth. In this western, secular world, little if any attention is given to theological questions within the Church. In fact, very few, even among practicing Catholics, are familiar with Christian dogma, catechism or doctrine. For the vast majority of people, the question of theological relations between Christianity and Judaism appears utterly remote, abstract and esoteric, concerning only a few experts, but with no bearing upon daily life. Too much, too late In this sense, Nostra Aetate came too late. From the Middle Ages until the modern era, it would have been extremely useful, since Christian anti-Semitism was in fact at the root of the persecution of Jews in Europe. Undoubtedly, had it been pronounced before the Holocaust, Hitler would have been far more limited in his implementation of the "Final Solution." Pius XII would probably have acted differently regarding the extermination of the Jews. It is also true, however, that in the considerably de-Christianized western world of today, the theology of Nostra Aetate has practically no effect on the general public. In order to understand the significance of this change, one should take a look at the Gospels, the Book of Acts and the famous Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans; taken together, these works form the basis of classic Christian anti-Judaism. The literature on the subject is vast and is constantly growing, so that it seems more convenient to read the sources directly. The quotes begin with the first Gospel, Matthew, the pattern of which is later more or less faithfully repeated in other Christian sources. In his famous Sermon on the Mount, delivered on exactly the same Mount of Beatitudes visited this Friday by Pope John Paul II, Jesus presented his mission as the fulfillment of Judaism: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill" (Matthew 5:17). The new Church has thus become the perfection and the replacement of the Jewish one. Later (Matthew 5:8), Jesus announces that the messiah rejected by Israel will be accepted by the pagans but, for the moment, he still instructs the apostles (Matthew 10:5): "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not," exhorting them rather to "go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." When their message is repulsed by the Jews, he then predicts the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and the persecution of the Jews. This is repeated in the parable of the "vineyard and the husbandmen" (Matthew 21:33-45): Those who did not know how to bring to fruition the advantages received from God would lose their privileged position, which would pass over to the pagans. The advent of Jesus signifies for the Jews the end of "chosenness." Jesus's attack against the Pharisees and the Jewish leaders at the time of the trial, condemnation and crucifixion (Matthew 23:25-39) was extremely harsh: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." Thus Jesus's cry of anger and cursing (Matthew 23:37-39): "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chicks under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." It is a cry that expresses the complexity of Christianity's filial relation of love and hate toward Judaism. A Jew among Jews Jesus, a Jew among Jews, clashed with the rabbis and was sentenced to death by the Sanhedrin, the ancient council of Jewish elders. "Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and consulted that they might take Jesus by surprise, and kill him (Matthew 26:3)." The Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, "washed his hands" of Christ's fate. "I am innocent of the blood of this just person," he cried to the Jews, "see ye to it." And the people replied in unison: "His blood be on us, and on our children (Matthew 27:24-26)." The story concludes with the final insult from the Jews: they refuse to believe the announcement of Jesus's resurrection and spread the word that the body of Christ has been stolen and hidden by his followers. Matthew comments: "This saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day." The Gospel of Mark follows the same pattern, with special emphasis on Christ's battle against the "legalism" of the Jewish leaders at the time. In Luke, the theory of "replacement" becomes more clear-cut. In the Gospel according to John - believed to have been written around 100 C.E., about 40 years after the first three Gospels - the distance between Judaism and the words of Jesus is even greater. "I am the son of the Father - ye are from beneath; I am from above; ye are of this world; I am not of this world," he said to the unbelieving Jews, adding: "I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go - I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me." (John 8:13-24). The unbridgeable gap The gap was by now unbridgeable. Jesus purports to be the messenger of God, his father, and the Jews reply that they already have a god and have no need of another. The clash is inevitable and is even more pronounced in Acts, where the universalism of the new religion open to the pagans contradicts Judaism's traditional particularism. The apostles appealed to the "uncircumcised," inviting them not to respect the laws of kashrut, preaching that the Holy Spirit can come to anyone who has "the will and spirit to attend." Consequently, their first council in Jerusalem opened with the discussion of whether it is necessary to be circumcised in order to "join the family of Moses." The decision was a minimalist one: "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication (Acts 15:29)." It would be useful to conclude this brief and perhaps overly ambitious review of the sources of early Christianity with a look at Paul's Epistle to the Romans, generally considered the first great work of Christian theology. Here the new religion defines itself in constant contrast to its Jewish "mother faith," and in refuting it and striving to change it, in fact establishes its new and distinct identity. Paul differentiates between "circumcision of the heart, in the spirit," and "outward circumcision." He poses the problem of the Jews's refusal to convert, and does not really know how to respond. For him, it is the source of a great deal of sadness: the chosen people, to which he himself belongs by birth, do not live up to their status as the chosen of God. Paul found partial consolation in affirming that the "fall" of the Jews, who were "incapable" of recognizing God in Christ, was to the benefit of the pagans, who were now given the opportunity to inherit the salvation that was once the Jews' exclusive province. The new Church was "inserted" in place of that which had existed since the time of Moses. Historical asymmetry Even this brief glance at the Holy Scriptures demonstrates how unique and complex Christianity's relationship to Judaism is. It is so complex for Christians because it is an integral and inescapable part of their history and faith. It is not a symmetrical relationship, since the Christian theological and doctrinal implications regarding the Jews do not exist for Jews with regard to Christians. Over the centuries, many approaches have been tried, such as denying the Judaism of Jesus or, conversely, excessively emphasizing it. The female statue with a blindfold over her eyes in the cathedral of Strasbourg, placed opposite the statue representing Christianity - which sees the truth - remains the symbol of a long and difficult relationship characterized by constant friction. How can this inherent tension be overcome? One must look to the trauma in the aftermath of the Holocaust in order to find the first attempts to revise Catholic doctrine. There was an attempt in 1947 by the International Council of Christians and Jews which, meeting in Seelisberg, Switzerland, presented a 10-point plan to fight anti-Semitism. Everyone strove to highlight the fact that "the God of the New and Old Testaments is one and the same," that Jesus "was born of a Jewish mother," that the early Church consisted entirely of Jews, that not all Jews are responsible for the death of Jesus, and that they are not eternally "cursed." These points spawned deeper reflection, which was destined to grow following the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958 and the election of Pope John XXIII, a man of the Secretariat of State who (according to published diplomatic documents corresponding to the years of the Holocaust) was revealed to be particularly sensitive to the horrors of anti-Semitism during his nunciature in Ankara. In 1959, John discontinued the use of the adjective "perfidious" in Good Friday prayers in reference to the Jews. To the proposal of the French-Jewish intellectual Jules Isaac (who wrote a series of seminal works on the Catholic "Teaching of Contempt" and its role in Jewish suffering over the centuries), he added in 1960 the idea of preparing a declaration on the Jews to be included in the resolutions of the Second Vatican Council. The debates between the cardinals who were opposed to these changes and those cardinals who were in favor of them was disrupted by pressure from the Arab world, which saw in all of this "theological recognition of Israel." Finally, on October 28, 1965, by a majority of 2,221 in favor and 88 against, Nostra Aetate was approved. These were its main points: "The Church cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom God, in his inexpressible mercy, deigned to establish the ancient covenant. The Church recalls, too, that from the Jewish people sprang the apostles, the Church's] foundation stones and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ to the world." An end to deicide The text admits that the Jews did not recognize Jesus, but confirms that "the Jews still remain most dear to God because of their fathers, for he does not repent of the gifts he makes, nor of the calls he issues." An end was thus put to the ancient accusation of deicide - murdering God. "True, authorities of the Jews and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in his passion cannot be blamed upon all the Jews then living, without distinction, nor upon the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God, as if such views followed from the Holy Scriptures." The path of theological revision had by then clearly begun. The "crime" of deicide was now limited to the few who were directly involved in the trial and sentencing of Jesus 2,000 years ago, not the entire generation alive at the time, and certainly not their descendants. It thus became necessary to clarify the relationship between the "old" and the "new" Israel. How could their co-existence be guaranteed without presenting the Jews as "fossils," and without theorizing about the need to convert them? These issues remain, to this day, matters for reflection. A number of solutions were presented in 1974 in the Vatican document entitled "Guidelines and Suggestions for Implementing Nostra Aetate," and in 1985 in the "Notes on the Correct Way to Present the Jews and Judaism." These were two urgent appeals to the Church and to Christians to understand Jews "in the way in which they present themselves." They asserted that Christians must accept the fact that elements of "the Old Testament retain their own perpetual value," highlighting again that one had not canceled the other, "while both Old and New illumine and explain each other." A role was played in the second document by the personal intervention of John Paul II, a pope who was very sensitive to the Jewish question, and to the necessity of removing the Christian element in ideological anti-Semitic baggage. An ancient link John Paul is also, however, an extremely conservative pope from a theological point of view, inexorably rooted in the ecclesiastical movement that sees a direct continuity between the Bible, Jewish history and the culture of the Church. He declared in 1982, "Christianity and Judaism are linked together at the very level of their identity." The 1985 document cites John Paul in order to stress that Catholic teaching should not see in the Jews "merely an historical or archaeological element of foundation," but rather a vital element of its own identity: "Understanding the Jews, helps us to understand ourselves." From this perspective, the Old Testament is harmoniously integrated into the Catholic experience, being "relevant not only for the Jews, but also touching personally upon all of us." It is a total embrace. The Church tells the Jews that it is prepared to read their eschatology, making an effort to understand it in the way in which it is read by them. "Jesus was and always remained a Jew; his ministry was deliberately limited to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Why they never followed him "remains a mystery hidden with God." There is, however, a limit to this openness. The Church is not ready to give its theological blessing to Israel's policies. "The existence of the State of Israel and its political options should be envisaged not only in a perspective which is in itself religious, but in their reference to the common principles of international law." This view is shared by many among the secular public in Israel, against the danger of the connection between religion and politics. And yet the Pope has now truly come to visit the holy places, with a firm belief in the undisturbed continuity stretching from Moses to Jesus, from the First Temple to the Church of Rome. For him, there is no contradiction between the ancient kingdoms of Israel and the message of the Holy Sepulcher. Nor does he see Ehud Barak or Yisrael Lau as a couple of "Christ-killers" because in his worldview, the Jews serve the message of salvation in Christian eschatology. The revolution that transformed the "Theology of Contempt" is now complete, but perhaps in the long run, when Israel will have overcome the novelty and wonder of this papal visit, there will be those who will find his embrace a little too suffocating. Lorenzo Cremonesi is the Jerusalem correspondent for the
This page was produced by Joseph
E. Katz
|
