Sunday, November 29, 2015
THE CHURCH’S “GUIDELINES”
Last
month was the 50th anniversary of the Catholic Church’s Nostra Aetate. Only a small part of it
was about relations with Jews. I discussed its inadequacies in the post below.
I mentioned there that the best document the Church produced on this subject
appeared in 1974, nine years after Nostra
Aetate. “Guidelines on Religious Relations with the Jews” was entirely
devoted to improving Christian attitudes towards Judaism. It went much further
than Nostra Aetate and deserves a
separate discussion.
Where
Nostra Aetate praised the religious
value in Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, but was silent on the religious worth
of Judaism, it now made up for this in “Guidelines”.
The
single best statement in that document was this: “The history of Judaism did
not end with the destruction of Jerusalem, but rather went on to develop a
religious tradition.” To fully appreciate what a revolution lies buried in this
statement, you have to know that from the oldest Church Fathers to the present
(1974 and even after), Catholic teaching was that Judaism had effectively come
to an end with the destruction of the Temple—which destruction signaled that
Christianity had taken over. Judaism had become frozen in time for Christians,
and now here was the Church in 1974 overturning that in one fell swoop.
Judaism’s
religious tradition, according to “Guidelines”, is “rich in religious values.”
Jewish scripture and tradition “must not be set against the New Testament in
such a way that the former seems to constitute a religion of only justice, fear
and legalism, with no appeal to the love of God and neighbor.” The Jewish soul
is “rightly imbued with an extremely high, pure notion of the divine
transcendence.” The document encourages Christians “to acquire a better
knowledge of the basic components of the religious tradition of Judaism; they
must strive to learn by what essential traits the Jews define themselves in the
light of their own religious experience.” It even affirms that there is value
in Jewish scripture “that has not been cancelled by the later interpretation of
the New Testament.”
“Guidelines”
condemns “all forms of anti-semitism and discrimination” both because they harm “the dignity of the human person” and because they harm and ignore “the
spiritual bonds and historical links binding the Church to Judaism.” In a
footnote, “Guidelines” criticizes the pejorative use of ‘Pharisee’ and
‘Pharisaism’, but I have to wonder how much has been done to actually correct
this.
Of
course, there are some comments that would be objectionable to Jews (such as to
the effect that the New Testament brings out the full meaning of Jewish
scripture), but the remarks I have quoted are more abundant and more
representative of what “Guidelines” stands for.
One
of the most curious things in “Guidelines” is that it does not quite correctly
quote Nostra Aetate’s statement about
not blaming Jews for the death of Jesus. It leaves out the part where it is
said that “Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the
death of Christ.” There are two things that can be said about this interesting
omission. One is that the authors of “Guidelines” possibly wanted to make Nostra Aetate’s confession grander and
purer than it was (Jews were not to blame, period! No ifs, ands, or
buts about it!, which is what many of us wish Nostra Aetate had said). The other is that “Guidelines” seems to
have implicitly recognized that blaming Jewish leaders and some wide contingent
around them for the death of Jesus is still an offensive remark to make about
Jewish culture; hence, they left it out. It is also historically untrue, but I doubt that the authors of
“Guidelines” had that in mind.
Besides
that, my other criticism of this best of all Catholic documents on Christian relations
with Jews is the early reference to the fact that “the gap dividing them
[Christianity and Judaism] was deepened more and more, to such an extent that
Christian and Jew hardly knew each other.” There is a similar reference to a
gap 24 years later in the Church’s 1998 “We Remember: A Reflection on the
Shoah”. What neither document does is give any thought to who and what was
responsible for creating that gap. One major contribution was made, and is still made, by the Church’s failure to explore and present Jesus’s full Jewishness. It is a frightening subject to many people (both Christians and Jews) and it
helps to create that gap between Jew and Christian. Nothing has changed on that score.
One
can wonder how much has been done to fulfill the best parts of the “Guidelines”
but there is no denying that it set a high ideal to live up to.
©
2015 Leon Zitzer
