Encore

On this page, we present essays – profound or timely – culled from the CLAL literary archive. Most of the articles that appear here appeared originally in the pages of Sh'ma– A Journal of Jewish Responsibility, which was founded by Eugene Borowitz in 1970 and published by CLAL from 1994-1998.

For further information regarding Sh'ma today, click here.

(from Sh'ma 13/260, October 28, 1983)

Interfaith: An Israeli Perspective

By Geoffrey Wigoder

Profound changes have occurred in the Jewish-Christian relationship over the past fifty years. Before the War, the National Conference of Christians and Jews was founded in America, essentially to take joint action against prejudice rather than engage in any form of dialogue. In the 1930's, James Parkes began to publish his studies on the roots of Christian anti-Semitism but his was a lone voice. The revision in Christian thinking is essentially a post-war phenomenon which began to develop in the 1950's under the rather delayed impact of the Holocaust. The realization of the role of Christian teaching in creating the atmosophere in which a Holocaust was possible has led to a fundamental revision in the attitude of Christians -- Protestants and Catholics -- to Jews and Judaism. The Vatican II Statement on the Jews (1965) and the subsequent Guidelines (1975) on the one hand and declarations of the World Council of Churches and its constituent bodies on the other, have paved the way for more sophisticated interfaith relations and dialogue. Interfaith in the Western world is now not only a common fight against negative manifestations but a positive search for mutual understanding and appreciation of the traditions and faith of the other.

Jewish participation in the dialogue does not have the same level of theological motivation as the Christian participation. The very Christianity for the Christians involved, grows out of Judaism and indeed depends on it. For Jews, there is no relationship of dependency or causality. At best, they follow the lines suggested by Rosenzweig and Buber according to which Judaism and Christianity are parallel ways to God, somehow ultimately and mysteriously converging. The dialogue from the Jewish side is more pragmatically motivated, based on the feeling that mutual understanding is the key to coexistence. Moreover in a world in which religion is under growing pressure, there is the conviction that men of belief should form common cause against the challenges of atheism and secularism rather than expend their energies on internecine fights and rivalries. Shemaryahu Talmon, a leading Israeli proponent of dialogue, has nevertheless dubbed it "a partnership of losers."

A Tremendous Recent Growth

A post-war retrospective will reveal more positive steps in Jewish-Christian relations in the past twenty years than in the previous twenty centuries. Compare the situation prevailing in most American communities today with that before the war; there are exceptions, but by and large there is a new warmth and fellowship in the relationship between priest, minister and rabbi and between their respective congregants. Prayers have been changed, catechisms altered, textbooks revised so as to get rid of negative stereotypes which were still being perpetuated until only recently. Much of this is a result of Jewish-Christian dialogue and is one of its main achievements. Moreover, such developments have spread to parts of the world where the problem was most acuteSpain, Latin America and, yes, Germany. Of course, so many centuries of hatred have left scars and legacies that will take long to eradicate. But the start that has been made in this direction has been much more effective than might have been anticipated.

In a way, it is over-simplistic to talk of "Jewish-Christian" relations because neither side is monolithic. Thus on the international level, Jews have separate dialogues with Catholics, with the mainstream Protestant Churches, organized in the World Council of Churches (and often also with individual constituent churches among whom there are many variations) as well as relations with evangelical (fundamentalist) churches. Among Jews, the relevant division is between those who support interfaith dialogue (in the United States, roughly corresponding to those represented in the Synagogue Council) and those who are antidialogue and interfaith activities.

Three Major Areas of Contention

Much of the encounter is a learning experience with either side studying the faith and practices of the other, but there are also issues that remain matters of contention, of which the main ones are: anti-Semitism/ anti-Christianism, mission and the State of Israel.

The continuing prevalence of Anti-Semitism is a subject of concern to Christian participants in the dialogue. In a series of statements since the Holocaust, all major churches have taken stands opposing it and declaring readiness to be active in the fight against anti-Semitic manifestations. Of particular concern in the dialogue situation is residual anti-Semitism in a specifically Christian framework. Often this is theologically based; progress has been made in abolishing the deicide stigma but there are other aspects, such as the belief in discontinuity -- the rejection of the Jews and Judaism and their replacement by the Christians and Christianity -- which is still widely held and continues to distort Christian attitudes to Jews. Moreover, some of the "old fashioned" hardline Christian anti-Semitism is still to be found, especially within certain Protestant circles. It is today far less common than formerly and responsible Christian elements are willing to take steps to eradicate the phenomenon -- but its presence in any form gives rise to concern. Examples of anti-Christianism occur from time to time, mainly committed by extremist Orthodox elements in Israel where they are punishable by law. Christians in the dialogue are understandably shocked by such incidents and are interested not so much in the punishment of the offenders as in the nurturing of a Jewish view of Christianity that would replace negative stereotypes with more positive images -- similar to what Jews are seeking from Christians.

Changing Attitudes About Proselytization

Mission is another point of potential friction. The traditional position of Christianity was that the Jew was allowed to continue to exist as an object of mission; the non-Christianization of the Jews delayed the Second Coming and therefore mission to the Jew was integral to the Christian plan. Here, too, the post-War world has seen major changes. The Catholic Church, source of so much suffering among Jews down the ages as a result of its missionary activities, has virtually eliminated direct missions to Jews. Official Protestant statements are ambivalent, reflecting the pluralistic nature of Protestantism. The Anglican Church has completely reordered its traditional "Mission to the Jews" into service channels. The Lutheran World Federation has declared "it is a misconception that Jews be isolated into a class by themselves and then singled out for exclusive missonary attention" but there are still segments of the Lutheran Church which insist that Christians must continue "their authentic endeavor to render account according to the Gospels. Faith must not remain silent." The Rhineland Protestant Synod of 1980 declared: "The Church has the testimony to bring its mission to other peoplebut not to the Jews," a statement which spurred a counter-document from a group of theology scholars at the University of Bonn, stressing the importance of mission. However, those mission activities which are under the auspices of the mainland churches are conducted in a much more restrained manner than previously. High-power missionaries are now to be found only among certain evangelical sects who are in any case outside, and even opposed to dialogue. On the other hand, there is a small but growing body of Christians who reject the concept of proselytization and who acknowledge the theological validity of the Jewish way to God. The encouragement of these circles and the increase of their influence is another achievement of dialogue.

Continuing Hostility Towards Israel

The third major issue is the State of Israel. Here the most congenial Christian elements are the Evangelicals, although obviously they are motivated by a theology which in its long-term implications is completely objectionable to Jews (the Return of the Jews to their land heralds the Second Coming and the Jews' Conversion). However, the short-range implications have brought about a certain Jewish?Fundamentalist alliance based on a similar commitment to the immediate security and survival of the Jewish State. With the other Christian groups, Israel is often a dividing point. The Vatican has still not recognized the State of Israel and specific issues -- ranging from its advocacy of the internationalization of Jerusalem in 1949 to the Pope's recent meeting with Yasir Arafat -- have constituted serious obstacles in Jewish-Catholic relations. However, even here progress has been made: witness the many protests from Catholics, at both the clerical and grass-root levels, over the Pope-Arafat meeting. Even more difficult on this issue are the relations with the World Council of Churches (similarly reflected in the American National Council of Churches). The W.C.C. is Third World oriented and has granted funds to various resistance movements. It has been consistently critical of Israel on the Palestinian issue and last summer issued a booklet collating anti-Israel statements from all parts of the world about the war in Lebanon. Included in the W.C.C. are Middle East churches which work to strengthen anti-Israel trends. But there are also constituents and individuals in the mainline churches -- many of them in the United States -- who evince profound understanding for the State of Israel and its significance for Jewish?Christian relations; in many cases, the influence of such elements is strengthened by interfaith activities.

"Pre-Reformation" Churches in Israel

Finally, a note on interfaith inside the State of Israel. Ideally here we should be aiming for a "trialogue" -- Jew, Christian and Moslem. The involvement of Moslems, however, is very problematic: partly because of the absence of leading Moslem theologians in Israel; partly because of the general problem of religious dialogue with Islam; and partly because in Israel any such exchange immediately becomes politicized. The latter reason also affects dialogue with Christian Arabs as it is rapidly dominated by the political and social dimensions. With the Orthodox churches too, dialogue is almost impossible. Like Islam, they are pre-Reformation. Most Orthodox Jewish circles in Israel can also be characterized as "pre-Reformation" and look unfavorably on interfaith activities. Jews of Ashkenazi origin are often still suffering from the missionary trauma; those of Sephardi origin are indifferent to the Christian world. Despite these severe limitations, fruitful work is being done and its special quality compensates for its comparatively limited compass. It is of unique meaning for the Christian participants: firstly as representing for the first time in history, a Christian minority experience among a Jewish majority, and secondly, as enriching the roots of their Christianity by contact with the living Jewish people in their own land. The Jews involved, for their part, project the understanding that involvement with the Land of Israel is a fundamental and inalienable aspect of Judaism, whose national dimensions must be comprehended and respected in any dialogue situation.

It is not difficult to point to continuing problems and friction between Christians and Jews in the world. But at the same time, those committed to dialogue will cite the other side of the ledger with its many positive entries. Not so long ago there was no other side of the ledger.

We are especially interested in hearing your responses to what they have written. So after reading, you should click and go to CLAL Talk where you can join the conversation with CLAL faculty and other readers.