In my last two posts I have lambasted some journalists for their attempts to claim that the Catholic Church has been the unique source of various evils, arguing that their approach is ill-researched and badly lacking in balance. This is a great shame in its own right, but even worse is that it gives comfort to those who try to claim that anti-semitism has not marked the history of the Christian faith.
Where Carroll blunders into seeing the New Testament, written by Jews, as anti-semitic, a better historical approach is to see it reflecting intra-Jewish quarrels, with the sort of bitterness such disputes take on; to see it as anti-semitic is to read into it what later generations put there. It was only as the ramifications of the claim that Jesus was God sank in that relations between the Jewish communities reached the stage of fracturing. It was only later, when Christianity was mainly Gentile, that some Christians began to read the NT in a way which could properly be described as anti-semitic. Two saints of the fourth/fifth centuries often cited in this context are St Cyril of Alexandria and St John Chrysostom.
In the case of St Cyril, as Professor Fr John McGuckin has commented:
The overall struggle against the power of the Jewish communities in Alexandria, however, ought never to be overlooked. It was this community which Cyril perceived as the more dominant ‘threat’ to the claim of the Christians to be the ascendant element in Alexandrian intellectual life.
Cyril’s comments are to be read in this context, where Judaism and Christianity were still struggling for ascendancy and the Christian triumph far from assured.
Writing of John Chysostom, James Parkes condemns him for:
eight sermons covering more than a hundred pages of closely printed text, has left us the most complete monument of the public expression of the Christian attitude to the Jews in the century of the victory of the Church. In these discourses there is no sneer too mean, no gibe too bitter for him to fling at the Jewish people. No text is too remote to be able to be twisted to their confusion, no argument is too casuistical, no blasphemy too startling for him to employ; and, most astonishing of all, at the end he turns to the Christians, and in words full of sympathy and toleration he urges them not to be too hard on those who have erred in following Jewish practices or in visiting Jewish synagogues. Dealing with the Christians, no text which urges forgiveness is forgotten: dealing with the Jews only one verse of the New Testament is omitted: Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do’
That seems pretty damning, but again, shows the dangers of relying on older scholarship. If we look at R.L. Wilkins’ John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late 4th Century, we see a different picture. Like Paul, St John is railing against the ‘Judaisers’, and it is these whom he calls ‘Jews’. The context is not that different to that faced by Cyril (about whom Wilkins has also written) – a Christian community threatened still by Paganism and Judaism, and those within its own ranks who were arguing for a sort of syncretism.
So, in both cases, there is certainly plenty of textual evidence to suggest extreme hostility to ‘the Jews’, and viewed through the history of the last century, more than enough cause for horror; but neither man was writing in that context, and neither should either of them be taken to account for the use later generations of Christians made of their writings. We are here, in the presence of documents composed as polemic, so it is not surprising that other polemicists took them out of context to prosecute a case which neither Saint could have imagined.
So, yes, here we can certainly see extreme hostility to the threat which Judaism and Judaisers posed to Christianity; but to trace the roots of the holocaust there is to take at face value the claims of real anti-semites. It is there we must now turn.
Servus Fidelis said:
It just goes to show that there are unforeseen outcomes to things we innocently say or do in this life. This makes me wonder what the outcomes will be in the future for our actions and words in this age.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Quite so, my friend – for those societies who have not contracepted and aborted themselves out of existence.
LikeLike
njb4725 said:
I have been thinking recently about the use of the word ‘Jews’ in St. John’s Gospel, which I am currently reading. Ioudaioi is a difficult term in antiquity. It can certainly be as broad as ‘all descendants of Jacob’ as Acts shows, where it is applied to Jews living in the Diaspora. However. it cam also simply mean ‘inhabitants of the province of Judaea’. I’m not decided on the issue, but I’ve been wondering if John meant ‘Judaeans’ – there is the theme of Jesus vs Jerusalem in the Gospels and I think John might be using ‘the Jews’ as a kind of short-hand term for this struggle.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
He might well, and he is certainly not using it to describe all Jews – being one himself.
LikeLike
Cj aka Elderofzyklons Blog said:
Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.
LikeLike
newenglandsun said:
What I want to know is which “Jews” these scholars are talking about? Jewsish Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism, Talmudic Judaism (probably), nationalistic Judaism (probable but nationalistic Judaism can easily suffer the blow of being anti-non-Jews in a similar way that the nationalistic Eastern Orthodox can be considered anti-non-Orthodox), Judaizing Christianity (Ebionitism, Adoptionism, etc.), or Reformed Judaism (not even around then!).
The problem is that professors and researchers who want to slam the Christian Church for being anti-Semitic is that they cite the word “Jew” in each of the fathers’ discourses against that without attempting at all to address which form of Judaism they are talking about since for them, there can only be one Judaism (Highlander style!).
That said, I actually have learned quite a bit from my own Jewish professors. One Jewish professor who recently obtained her doctorate is actually a student in one of my classes (Judaism and the Origins of Christianity) this semester (she’s a bit of a Jewish supremacist I have been coming to discover recently). But since they introduce you to continental philosophy to get more Orthodox Jews involved in the philosophical discussion, they’re actually good instructors at times.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
The Nazis were not fussy, they just wanted to exterminate all Jews.
LikeLike
newenglandsun said:
And gypsies, and homosexuals as well. But yes, they couldn’t care less about that dappling over “which Judaism” although for the most part, they favored an ethnic cleansing.
LikeLike
Rob said:
And also the extermination of 10s of thousands of Jews and Serbian Orthodox believers, which it seems took place with the complains of Alois Stepinac of the Archbishop Zagreb, supreme military apostolic vicar of the Ustashi army with the knowledge of the Vatican. For which the highest authorities of the RC church rewarded him with the promotion to Cardinal. Despite the fact that he had been imprisoned by the post was Yugoslavian government for war crimes. Some put the figures of theses people exterminated by the Catholic Croats as high as 1 ¼ million.
I noticed also that the Pope in a previous post you provided refused to open the Vatican archives on the 2nd. WW period, Why I wonder if there is little to hide.
While I have the greatest respect for you and other Catholics on this site and for many other Catholics friends and family members, I must say I remain extremely suppicious of the institution of the RC Church and its dark history as I have read about it.
As a historian I wonder if you have studied the facts of the 2nd. ww period in Croatia or the much earlier history I read of the ancient Waldenssian and Alibigensian Crusades and their long persecutions by the RCC.
I would be interested in your take on this as I am aware of your personal regret an abhorrence of such actions, though I doubt you will be able to ally my concerns which are not so much for the recrimination of such actions but how an institution can be so far from the Spirit of Christ and at the same time to claim to be the only true church outside of which there is no salvation.
LikeLike
Rob said:
Line 3 of my post above: please not with the compliance (not complaints) of the RC Bishop
LikeLike
newenglandsun said:
Rob, I took a course on witchcraft and heresy last year going into it as an anti-Catholic rationalist myself. The professor had us reading Ed Peters’s document sourcebook entitled “Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe”.
Couldn’t decide who the real bad guys are. Not that I would say the Church’s reaction was the best reaction but the Albigensians and Waldensians were hardly the martyrs that Protestants attempt to hail them out to be.
LikeLike
jrj1701 said:
It is distressing to see folks confuse the issue concerning antisemitism with half truths and out right lies that spread across the spectrum from denial to justification. That is where dedication to the truth is paramount, lest we forget and thus allow it to happen again.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
Quite so. Using hatred to stir up hatred is the Devil’s work.
LikeLike
Rob said:
Line 3 of my post please not with the compliance (not complaints) of the RC Bishop
LikeLike
Pingback: Salvation is from the Jews | All Along the Watchtower
Deanna Clark said:
The Gospels make no secret of the character of Jesus and His imperatives to all of us. Through the centuries it has been found easier, by some, to ignore all that and opt for power, sneakiness, murder,etc. as expedients to “defend” God…Who seems incapable of defending Himself or handling money very well.
Personally as a Catholic, the tortures and genocide s by the Ustasi, with the knowledge and collusion of the Vatican, are a barrier I can’t rationalize away. I’m waiting for a ‘hint from Heaven’ about churches.
The anti-semitic rants by St. Vincent Ferrer that led to bloody Sunday afternoon pogroms were 1100 years after the early Fathers. He’s a saint of the church. Favorite orthodox saints and Jesus’ Jewish life are removed from the liturgical canon and holidays of the RCC. Just Zapp! The excuses stink and are frankly insulting to the people in the pews.
Jews and Christians have so much common ground…but the true issue is the Torah Jewish prohibition against magical thinking and the occult. ( Devout, and easy going Jews admit that God’s mercy is a great mystery and that Jesus figures into it all.)
It’s occult and magical thinking Christians who are anti-semitic…not, say, Methodists! For instance, enthusiasts for the Shroud, magical rosaries, wearing certain jewelry, believing only one Bible translation has the pixie dust.
I cherish a hope that Judaism will rescue Christianity…Chesterton would love it!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. We can, all of us, only go as far as the Grace we have will allow 🙂
LikeLike