Monday, December 28, 2015
ONE THING MISSING
In
the post below, I called the Catholic Church’s 1974 “Guidelines on Religious
Relations with the Jews” the best document it has ever produced on this
subject. It is so good that it is most often ignored. But there is one thing
missing from it. It implies this at certain points but it never comes straight
out and says what has needed to be said for a long time: Jews have a different,
and more original, relationship to Hebrew scripture than we do, and this must
be respected.
It
does say, “Dialogue demands respect for the other as he is; above all, respect
for his faith and his religious convictions.” As a general statement, that is
certainly fine. But this would have been an opportune moment to comment on the
fact that for Christians, both the people at large and leading theologians and
intellectuals, this has been difficult to do in their understanding of Jews
precisely because Jews read the Hebrew scriptures differently than Christians
do. The document should have entreated Catholics to specifically respect the
Jewish relationship with scripture.
Further
on, “Guidelines” refers to the Old Testament as retaining something of “its own
perpetual value” but then implies that some parts of the old scripture have
been “cancelled by the later interpretation of the New Testament.” It tries not
to stress this, but it clearly cannot let go of proclaiming that the New
Testament fulfills promises made in the previous scripture. It does go on to
correct the false idea that Hebrew scripture and the Jewish tradition founded
on it have been wrongly accused of being “a religion of only justice, fear and
legalism, with no appeal to the love of God and neighbor.”
On
the other hand, “Guidelines” tries to straddle two positions by proclaiming
that Jesus’ teaching had “a profoundly new character” and yet he “took his stand
on the teaching of the Old Testament.” The best thing about “Guidelines” is
that it teaches that Jews have a valid religion in its own right; their
traditions and values must not be mocked. It overthrows old Church teaching
that Judaism ended with the destruction of the Temple. It just never confronts
the conflict between the ideas that Jews will always have their own
relationship to Hebrew scripture and that Christians believe Hebrew scripture
has been superseded. Perhaps the conflict can never be resolved. What is needed
is a clear statement that the conflict is there and has been used in the past
to promote disrespect for Jews.
This
reminds me of the problems that would come with later European imperialism. At
first, meeting new peoples meant that imperial powers like Britain had to
respect the laws and customs of indigenous people. But when Britain realized it
had the power to impose itself, it abandoned the idea of two jurisdictions
existing side by side. It declared that there would be one jurisdiction for
Aborigines and white colonists alike. Even in the case of disputes between
Aborigines, only British law would be followed. The Other and his ways had to
be erased, not respected. In practice, this almost always meant that Aborigines
would be subjected to the punishments meted out by British law, but they would
never get the benefits of the law.
I
point this out so that we don’t forget that ancient problems never go away. The
relationship that the Catholic Church long ago established between Jews and
Christians would have repercussions in the colonial era. We are still
struggling to recognize it and get over it.
©
2105 Leon Zitzer
