Why Inter-religious Conflict: Judaism And Christianity?

WHY INTER-RELIGIOUS CONFLICT AND WHAT HOPE FOR INTER-RELIGIOUS PEACE? CHRISTIANITY AND JUDAISM WHAT CONFLICT?

In our modern society we feel comforted that the public cries of ‘Christ-killer’, ‘wellpoisoner’ and ‘sorcerer’ of the Middle Ages have long since died out. The church no longer accuses Jewish people of being in league with the devil nor believes forced baptisms are an appropriate course of action. It thus seems that despite this often bloody and slanderous history, Christianity and Judaism may have finally reached an acceptable state of peace and tolerance, and whilst anti-Semitism regrettably remains a real presence in our society, the issue no longer seems to be a specifically Christian one. On entering this debate one would not therefore be blamed for asking ‘what conflict?’ Unfortunately many of the attitudes towards Judaism that perpetuated so much persecution remain under the surface in present Christian understanding of Judaism. History has shown that not only do these attitudes carry a dangerous risk of expression in acts of religious or racial hatred, but that they hinder any form of constructive dialogue between the faiths that may enrich both. Whilst there are many routes into understanding the history and possible future of Jewish-Christian relations a particularly interesting one lies in the shared sacred text that both faiths hold to. It is on this avenue that we shall look at what must be done to make people aware of these underlying attitudes in order to heal this rift, and overcome the impasse that still largely prevents any form of constructive dialogue between the faiths. A PARTING OF WAYS

At its birth, Christianity was very much an internal Jewish movement which hailed Jesus as the long awaited saviour of the chosen people of Israel, promised in the scriptures since Moses. However, as this message was quickly spread into the nonJewish world, the proportion of Jewish adherents dwindled. It became clear that despite Jesus’ relationship to the Jewish nation and scriptures, the Jewish people at

large were paradoxically not going to be involved in this movement. Somehow Christians needed to work out how these promises and laws apparently specific to the Jewish people contained in scripture were to apply to them as non-descendants of Abraham. In this identity crisis of the early centuries of Christianity, arguments raged with some demanding that Christians adopt Jewish practice and laws to follow God and at the other end that the God of Jewish scriptures was no more than a vengeful demi-God. It seemed convenient for many Christians in fact, that most of what they would like to say was contained in the gospel accounts of Jesus and letters of the apostles that came to be known as the New Testament. There seemed to be little problem with these texts, which largely promoted God’s universal plan for the salvation of all peoples. However, as these texts referred to the Hebrew Scriptures as authoritative and relied upon ideas set out in these Jewish writings, most still wanted to retain this Jewish inheritance. Yet whilst it seemed useful to draw religious authority from the Hebrew Scriptures, stories of genocide (Joshua 10:40) and suicide attacks (Judges 16:27-30) seemingly sanctioned by God as well as perplexing ritual laws also became difficult to reconcile with the non-violent and moral teachings of Jesus. The Hebrew Scriptures became for many, as they do to this day, like the voice of an embarrassing grandparent in the room, occasionally producing horrendously non-politically correct remarks about ethnic minorities. As most of us do when confronted with such a situation, the Church’s reaction, whilst not wanting to deny its existence, was to disassociate itself with this history. Somehow a solution had to be found which could retain the Hebrew scriptures, yet not tie Christianity down to its focus on a particular ethnic group. The view that came to dominate the Church was that Christianity had somehow fulfilled or replaced the now obsolete Jewish faith. What was distinctly Jewish was labelled the ‘Old’ Testament, and the superior

Christian New Testament teachings took primary position as the definitive lens by which all the Old could be read through. This allowed Christians to diminish the significance of much of the Hebrew Scriptures, as that was from an earlier time before the set up of the new Christian way. In fact to the Christian, history really doesn’t get started until the coming of Christ (which is perhaps why the entrance of Jesus sets the first century Western calendar). All before became a poor shadow of what has now arrived, as the spiritual church had replaced the original Jews as God’s chosen people. COLONIALISATION OF THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES

As Christianity developed, this underlying attitude resulted in a remarkably narrow minded approach to reading the Hebrew Scriptures. The manner in which the Hebrew Scriptures were handled became comparable to the British Empire’s colonising the supposedly ‘primitive’ cultures it annexed. Underlying the British Empire’s expansion was the assumption that the undeveloped cultures it encountered would be very much improved by the imposition of our superior culture, and so suppressed the wealth of indigenous culture by exporting and imposing our ‘civilised’ education, literature and culture upon these ‘fortunate’ recipients. Not being entirely altruistic, the Empire was able to recognise valuable material resources in the primitive milieu and extracted such assets from their former mismanaging and incompetent owners. Correspondingly, the Jews were seen as the mismanaging owners of the Old Testament, who need not be consulted in extracting the valuable theological diamonds occasionally buried within. After all, the primitive Jew simply did not understand the symbolic meaning of their text: in their short-sightedness they saw only a literal meaning in Old Testament laws and consequently slavishly obeyed such earthly rules and rituals. The enlightened Christian however was above such petty attempts to win God’s favour and could disregard Jewish interpretation of the texts. In effect, the Old Testament could be reduced to a long-winded account of a number of basic premises;

generally creation and Fall, then numerous prophecies of the coming Christ which offer proof and validity of the Christian message. In this way the rich cultural traditions and nuances outside of this Christian mapping of this foreign territory were then generally brushed aside in the wake of this narrow minded extraction of theological resources. WIDENING THE RIFT

As this attitude formed, communication and relations between Christianity and Judaism subsequently broke down. As understanding was lost, the Church began to associate Judaism with all that Christianity was not. As Paul preached salvation through God’s grace as the Christian message, it was merely assumed that Jews did not believe in grace and think their good deeds would merit salvation. In addition, Jesus’ denouncements of the corrupt Jewish authorities of his day in the New Testament were read not as criticisms of specific persons, but as a general condemnation of the Jewish people. Likewise the Gospel narrative of a small number of Jewish leaders collaborating with Roman authorities to kill Jesus was transposed onto the Jewish people as a whole as murderers of God. These distortions of originally internal issues within a Jewish culture into anti-Jewish polemic resulted in Jews becoming identified as the enemies of Christianity. Whilst we do not have a clear picture of the overall relationship between the faiths during the rise of Christianity, the movement at first received a mixed reception from Jews. To many, Christianity would have appeared as one of many failed attempts to proclaim that the long awaited messiah had come to liberate Israel. The fact that Christians were claiming that their great liberator had not only failed to end Roman oppression but been tried and killed as a criminal unsurprisingly did not appeal much to Judaism. Still, this did not prevent some dialogue between members of the faith, and Jewish-Christians at least would have been allowed into some synagogues. On one point however, the Christian’s claims could not be merely overlooked. That Christians worshiped a man named Jesus and claimed him to be God was simply unthinkable to the Jewish mentality. Such

blasphemy did not receive a positive reception from some, and there is some evidence to say some cases (perhaps isolated) of Jews persecuting Christians occurred. By the time Christianity had grown to become the dominant European power, the seeds of miscommunication and antiJudaism had already been firmly planted. The Jews became victim to ongoing persecution and discrimination at the hands of the Christian authorities. Throughout the repeated violence, accusations and denials of political rights that the Jews suffered during the Christianised Roman Empire, Middle Ages and Christian dominated Europe a distinctly negative view of Christianity was understandably cemented in Judaism. Eventually under the Nazis, the antiSemitic attitudes ingrained in European culture culminated in the unthinkable. Whilst the Nazis were by no means acting on any Christian principles or authority, the centuries of anti-Judaism the Church had perpetuated in Europe meant that it could not escape some responsibility for the events that took place. Given this tortured history of relations with Christianity, it is understandable that there is little desire for many Jews to now engage on a level playing-field with Christians. WHY TALK NOW?

As history has shown, misunderstanding seems to be one of the primary contributors to conflict. Had the average Christian over the centuries had even the most basic understanding of Judaism it would have been difficult to imagine how the fear and belief that the Jews were the enemy of Christianity could have arisen. However, it would seem a distinctly pessimistic stance to think that the only motivation for inter-religious debate is to avoid persecution. Whilst this duty is by no means insignificant, it is important to recognise the possibility that faith groups could actually gain through communication. The question then, is why be interested in what the other group has to say? Firstly, it seems true that any religious community must be willing to listen to

criticism, reassess and adapt. Any religious, social or political organisation will require renewal and repair at some point. This is by no means a foreign idea to the Jewish and Christian faiths. From the earliest stages in each tradition, judges, prophets and reforming theologians and figures have repeatedly been required to correct thinking and practice as well as to direct the community towards new directions and restore its relevance to its world. One cannot also listen only to internal voices, as this is likely only to perpetuate the same vices. Instead criticisms from outside can be an invaluable voice if considered seriously. Again, this is by no means a radical idea. It was only through engaging with external criticism and heresy that theologians were pushed to revise and form the doctrine and ideas that we inherit today. It is perhaps due to the common origins and scripture though, that a promising window to debate is available. As these faiths developed in opposition to each other, there was often a tendency to define one’s own beliefs as the opposite of the other. This is to say when one group emphasised certain aspects of scripture, the other would distance themselves from that position. For example, when Christians started to widely read a Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures known as the Septuagint, Jews became suspicious of the translation primarily because of Christian interest in it. Such reactions that diminish what were aspects of one’s own tradition do no justice to either group. However, it means that there is now potential that discussion and interreligious peace may allow both traditions to rediscover what has been lost in the conflict. For Christians, Judaism is in a unique position to enrich Christian understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures. By listening to the fruits of 2000 years of Jewish practice and reflection on the law, Christians may find that a far richer and helpful understanding can be gained. Perhaps much of the unease many Christians feel regarding the law of Moses could be set to rest in this way. For the Jew, offering their interpretations in conversation may be a way in which to fulfil the children of Abraham’s calling to be a blessing to all the nations of the earth (Genesis 12:3).

HOW TO PROCEED?

In entering dialogue on a level playing field there is the worry that one’s integrity to one’s faith may be somehow compromised. The thought may be that to discuss theological matters with a group of differing ideas that a watering down of belief is inevitable. This fear may be down to an assumption that inter-religious dialogue must proceed by finding some form of ‘lowest common denominator’ beliefs and basing all discussion upon this. Such approaches that ignore differences between groups may in fact only amount to self-appreciation, as it is only the reflection of one’s beliefs in the other that is valued. Surely we would gain more by going beyond talking about only those matters on which there is agreement. If dialogue proceeded by first recognising that a number of unbridgeable gulfs exist between the faiths, it would perhaps be possible then to learn and be challenged by a different perspective, whilst crucially retaining fidelity to one’s own faith. Specifically, a Jewish person need not accept the divinity of Christ to learn from other Christian ideas, and a Christian similarly needn’t drop their beliefs to realise that they don’t have a monopoly on all Hebrew Scripture interpretation. WHAT HOPE?

Despite the potential that exists for fruitful dialogue, it must be asked how realistic the prospect of significant change in Jewish-Christian relations is. The tortured

history that lies between these groups will not be laid to rest or healed quickly. The steps that must be taken before a positive future can be envisioned are likely to be slow and careful. However, such crucial steps have at least been made by both sides in the last century. A number of important Jewish thinkers have started to ask in what respects Christianity may be a valuable influence in introducing talk of the God of Israel to the world. Likewise Christian attempts to recognise their historical responsibility for propagating anti-Jewish attitudes have been in statements such as Nostra Aetate by the Catholic Church. Perhaps then, a relationship can be forged by learning from the other tradition, through which respect can grow and the other can be valued for and not despite their differences.

If you’re interested in pursuing this issue further, an excellent web resource is: www.jcrelations.net Another key book on the topic is: Kendall Soulen The God of Israel and Christian Theology (Fortress Press)