|
|
|
Teshuvot -- Jewish legal opinions
|
Toldot 5766 Anyone who has a brother or a sister-or anyone who has more than one child-has been exposed to the effects of sibling rivalry. If you have had problems because of sibling rivalry, you will be glad to know that scientists have recently discovered what causes sibling rivalry. Having more than one child. In this week's Torah reading, parshat Toldot, we read the beginning of the
story of Jacob and Esau, which seems to prove the "scientists" right. Jacob and
Esau are fraternal twins, who start struggling with each other before they even
leave the womb. The twins are very different - Esau is ruddy, a "man's man" - a hunter, a trapper. Dad's favorite. Jacob comes across as somewhat more delicate, hangs around the tents, a Momma's boy. The fact that their parents pick favorites no doubt adds greatly to the sibling rivalry. Jacob's mother Rebecca prods him to engage in a bit of deception and steal Dad's blessing, which by rights should go to Esau as the older of the two (by a few minutes, but he's still the first born). When Esau finds out about how he got cheated out of his blessing he is furious. Rebecca finds out that Esau was planning to comfort himself by killing Jacob. Mom sends Jacob on a long trip-exiles him-for his own safety. Despite the difficult relationship-despite Esau's murderous intent and Jacob's exile-the two brothers eventually are reconciled, with Esau falling on Jacob's neck and crying. Jacob, of course, is also given the name Israel after an all night wrestling match with an angel. Jacob-Israel is the father of people of Israel, the ancestor of the Jewish people. In rabbinic literature Esau-also called Edom-is considered the ancestor of the Romans, meaning he is the ancestor of the Christians. As Jacob and Esau struggle in our Torah portion, over the years the descendants of Jacob have struggled with the descendants of Esau. Relations between Jews and Christians have often been difficult. Yet, just as Jacob and Esau reach a reconciliation in the Torah, Jews and Christians are reaching a reconciliation as well. As we recently observed the 40th anniversary of the Catholic Church's issuance of Nostra Aetate, a groundbreaking document regarding relations between the Church and the Jews, this is an appropriate time to reflect on the state of relations between the descendants of Jacob and the descendants of Esau. The good news is that the relationship between Jews and Christians in general, and between Jews and Catholics in particular, is better than at any time since shortly after the death of Jesus. Many of the intervening 1,900 years, however, have been very difficult. At first, Judaism and Christianity started out very similar - the early Christians, in the 1st century and early 2nd century were mostly observant Jews, who just happened to believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Not unlike how today there are some Orthodox Jews who believe that the late Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson is the Messiah and he's going to come back from the dead. You can believe someone is the Messiah and still be Jewish. In figuring out what happened that led to the major breach between Judaism and Christianity in the 2nd century, it's hard to figure out the exact sequence of things. Did Christians take on all sort of strange ideas imported from Greek mythology, which smacked of idol worship, which led the Jews to reject them? Or did the Jews reject the "sectarians" who thought Jesus was the Messiah, pushing them away from Judaism and toward Greek thought? Or was it some of each? Either way, it is pretty clearly that it was the Jews who did the rejecting first. The early Christians still considered themselves Jews, they offered sacrifices at the Temple, they observed all the rituals. At some point, the rabbis decided they should no longer be considered "members of the Tribe" and they added a 19th blessing to the Shemoneh Esrei (which means 18), calling for the destruction of the "sectarians," which seems to have been pointed at Christians who were still hanging out in the synagogues. After the destruction of the Temple in the year 70, the Christians became more focused on pursuing adherents from among the Gentiles, and they brought in a lot of ideas from the Greeks that were anathema to Judaism: the idea of a person as God, of the Trinity, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation - all ideas rooted not in Judaism, but in Greek mythology. The more ideas the Christians absorbed from the Greeks, the deeper became the theological split between Judaism and Christianity. Over time, the theological split led to Jews and Christians viewing each other as "other." The Christians no longer viewed themselves as Jews. This is a crucial turning point: if you read, for example, the Gospel According to Matthew as "in-house" criticism-as a Jew criticizing other Jews, just as you would read Isaiah or Jeremiah as a Jew criticizing Jews-there is nothing anti-Semitic about it. As soon as you start reading as one group, Christians, criticizing a different group, Jews, it becomes powerfully anti-Semitic. In a modern context, African-Americans can say things-use epithets-to other African-Americans that a white person could NEVER say. One of the most significant theological splits between Jews and Christians which continues to have repercussions today is our different reaction to the destruction of the Temple. I was quite surprised when an Anglican Priest and theologian who is an acquaintance of mine pointed out that the destruction of the Temple was as big a crisis for early Christians as it was for Jews. But as he pointed out to me, the early Christians were just as "Temple-centric" as the Jews. The Christian response was to "spiritualize" the Temple. To say the physical place was no longer important, that what mattered was the spirit. The "heavenly Jerusalem" became a place totally disconnected from the physical place for Christians. The Jewish response, on the other hand, was to build reminders of the Temple into our daily life. As it says in Psalm 137, "How shall we sing the Lord's song in a foreign land? If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember you, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy." The rabbis put a prayer for the physical restoration of the Jews to Israel and for the physical restoration of the Temple into our prayers three times a day, in the heart of the Amidah. The wine and bread of the Sabbath table - the same thing Catholics use as a connection to Jesus - we use a reminder of wine and grain offerings in the Temple. The theological importance of the physical place Israel to Jews is VERY high - which leads to friction in Jewish - Catholic relations. Something a lot of Christians don't get is that we identify so closely with Israel that criticizing Israel feels like criticizing Jews. By the 4th century, Jewish-Christian relations were bad and getting worse. For a Jew, the worst thing a person could be is an idol worshipper. Not all Gentiles were seen as idol worshippers-a Gentile who was an ethical monotheist was also assured a portion in the world to come. But Christians were considered WORSE than idol worshipers, as illustrated in a teaching from the Talmud: Rabbi Tarfon is recorded as saying that if someone was pursuing him to kill him, or a snake was pursuing him to bite him, he would enter a pagan Temple for refuge, but would not enter a church, because pagans are ignorant of God -- which is not as bad as the Christians-who know of God yet deny Him. The Christians, for their part, came to believe that Jews were despised by God. Some charged the Jews with deicide, with killing God, for their role in the trial of Jesus. Until the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in 312, these differences of opinion were largely irrelevant. Jews and Christians were both oppressed sects with no political power, what did it matter if we called each other names? All that changed when Constantine converted and the Christians now had temporal power. The oppressed became the oppressors practically overnight. The fourth century St. Augustine said Jews were needed as witness to the prophecies that were given beforehand: "the house of Israel that God has cast off…those on whose closed eyes He shed His light" And this was the root for centuries of an official Catholic position of persecuting Jews but not killing them. They deny Jesus and should suffer for that - but should not die because they are witnesses. Fueled by Augustine and other theologians, for almost 1600 years the Catholic Church defined Jews as a people abandoned by God. The Church claimed that the Jewish Bible had been superceded and replaced by Christian teachings. When the Popes were in temporal power, they issued anti-Semitic edicts banning Jews from public office, forcing them to live in ghettos and to wear distinctive clothing. Loyal Catholic kings, with consent of the Vatican, expelled Jews from their homes. The Inquisition persecuted Jews who converted to Christianity, ironically, to avoid persecution. Even in the 20th century, Catholic priests had spread anti-Semitic lies, not necessarily on orders from the Vatican, but not being stopped by the Vatican either. This isn't to say that all Catholics during those long years were anti-Semites: there were a few notable exceptions, like Abelard, who wrote in the 12th century "To believe that the fortitude of the Jews in suffering would be unrewarded was to declare that God was cruel." Unfortunately, Abelard's voice was a lone one crying out in the face of the majority. [And we also know what happened to Abelard, don't we??!!!] On the eve of the Holocaust there was still a lot of anti-Semitism but there were also forces moving in the opposite direction. Pope Pius XI is seen as a man who stood against anti-Semitism. In 1938 he said "Anti-Semitism is inadmissible. We are all spiritually Semites." But not much happened in the wake of his statement: there was a call for an encyclical condemning anti-Semitism which was never issued. From a Jewish perspective, his successor, Pope Pius XII was a disappointment. Despite knowing what was going on Germany, he failed to speak out clearly and definitively against the Nazis and the Holocaust. There may be all sorts of reasons why he did not, including fear for German Catholics-but his failure to be a force to lead a charge against the Nazis is a strongly felt lingering disappointment to Jews. So we come to the 1960s with a great deal of mistrust on both sides of the Jewish - Catholic relationship. An official Catholic theology which considers Jews abandoned by God, and a Jewish theology that likens Christians to idol worshippers. Not a promising background for finding common ground. That background makes Nostra Aetate a MOST amazing document. Instead of blasting Jews, as Augustine did, as "the House of Israel that God has cast off," Nostra Aetate proclaims "God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes or of the calls He issues-such is the witness of the Apostle. In company with the Prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice and "serve him shoulder to shoulder." For centuries, one of the favorite charges that priests would raise against Jews was deicide-they killed God. In Nostra Aetate, that charge is explicitly repudiated: "True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today." For the first time ever, anti-Semitism is officially rejected as church doctrine: "Furthermore, in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the Church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons but by the Gospel's spiritual love, decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone." Halleluyah! Which, by the way, is two Hebrew words: Hallel, or Praise, and Yah, a name of God. There are those who debate whether Nostra Aetate goes far enough in rejecting supersessionism, the theology that Catholicism comes to replace Judaism. I would say that Nostra Aetate clearly does reject supersessionism, especially as it states "God does not repent of the gifts He makes or the calls He issues." In other words, the Jews still have a special covenant with God. There is clearly more work that needs to be done on developing a theology which somehow integrates this teaching with an understanding of what is the meaning then of the "new covenant" that Jesus speaks of at the Last Supper. Does it mean there are now two covenants? I leave that one to the Catholic theologians to sort out. For our part, the vast majority of Jews today consider Christians "B'nai Noach," sons of Noah, righteous Gentiles. I, and most other rabbis, happily accept Catholics in this category. When I have discussed the idea of the Trinity with priests, I have been assured that they still believe God is One, but there is a capital "M" Mystery surrounding how God can be manifest in three distinct ways. I don't consider crosses or icons idol worship because I know those objects are used as a focus for meditation, not worshipped in themselves. There is no Jewish equivalent to the Pope-no one rabbi who calls the shots for everyone. There are still some Jews who debate whether it is permissible to take a shortcut across a church parking lot lest you benefit from idol worship - but they are a small minority. So theologically, in the wake of Nostra Aetate, we have room for a reconciliation between Jews and Catholics. As amazing as Nostra Aetate was in its time 40 years ago, personally I am even more moved by Pope John Paul II's remarkable visit to Israel in March, 2000. I'm sure any of you who has attended an interfaith gathering has sat in slightly pained silence as a Christian offers a prayer for an interfaith group which repeatedly invokes the name of Jesus. We feel left out if when someone offers a prayer we can't say "amen" to. So I find it particularly moving that when the Pope came to Israel he stood at the wall which is a remnant of the Temple where Jesus prayed and preached, and he offered a prayer which did NOT invoke Jesus' name. When the Pope visited the Western Wall, he followed a custom many Jews practice: leaving a petek, a piece of paper with a prayer written on it in the spaces between the rocks. The slip of paper he left reads "the God of our Fathers, You chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your name to the nations: we are deeply saddened by the behavior of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer and, asking your forgiveness, we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the covenant." Nostra Aetate and the Pope's visit and beautiful words and prayers do not mean that everything is copacetic. There is still a lot more work to be done in building better Jewish - Catholic relations. There are two areas in particular that continue to be of concern to the Jewish community. We would like to see a fuller acceptance of and acknowledgment of the behavior of the Church during the Holocaust, and we would like to see improvement in the relations between the Vatican and Israel. In 1998 the Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews issued "We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah" which was an attempt to answer the question of the extent to which the Vatican had any responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. The Commission came to a conclusion which most Jews would strongly disagree with. The Commission said that the Church was not responsible for what happened because while the Church had, they sadly admitted, in the past encouraged in "anti-Judaism" they never encouraged "anti-Semitism." The report admitted the Church had taught "anti-Judaism," and had been guilty of attitudes of mistrust and hostility, but they said that had nothing to do with the hatred of Jews which led to the Holocaust. Someone who is a committed Jew has a hard time seeing the difference between anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism. To tell Jews all you have to do to avoid persecution is convert to another religion is still anti-Semitism. Many Jews feel that the Church has not yet gone far enough in acknowledging the role that Christian anti-Semitism played in Hitler's singling out the Jews for special treatment, and many feel the Church has not been willing to take a sufficiently critical look at Pope Pius XII's activities - or inactivity -- during World War II. Pope Benedict XVI has called the Holocaust the result of Hitler's neo-pagan racism. We have not heard an acknowledgement that this racism would not have found masses willing to accept it if not for the fact that Christian anti-Semitism paved the way. Since we do identify so strongly with Israel, relations between the Vatican and Israel are very important even to those of us living in the Diaspora. Nostra Aetate was proclaimed in 1965-yet it took nearly 30 years, until 1993, for the Vatican to establish official relations with Israel. There is tension between Israel and the Vatican on a couple of issues. The Vatican is concerned because the detailed implementation of the Fundamental Agreement between the Vatican and Israel that led to diplomatic relations that was signed in 1993 has never been worked out, leaving the official status of church holdings and tax exempt status in a little bit of limbo. Israel is concerned because the Vatican has criticized Israel over issues like the security fence between Israel and the Palestinians, which Archbishop Sambi, the Apostolic Delegate to Jerusalem and Palestine, has claimed violates the Fundamental Agreement because it restricts movements of Catholics between religious sites. The Fundamental Agreement also acknowledges that Israel has a right to take appropriate security measures. Israel is very sensitive to people who would condemn terrorism in New York or London but ignore it in Israel. So back in July, when the Pope issued a statement condemning recent terrorist bombings in Egypt, Turkey, Iraq and Britain, many Israelis wondered why the Pope hadn't mentioned Israel, which also recently had suffered from a terrorist bombing. After a lot of press and heated words that went back forth, the matter was amicably resolved when the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Angelo Sodano said it was simply an oversight-he affirmed the Vatican condemns terrorist acts wherever they occur. Despite a few occasional rough spots, Jewish-Catholic relationships are quite good. Pope Benedict XVI has shown that like his predecessor his is committed to improving relations between Catholics and Jews. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has said the Pope is "a true friend of Israel, genuinely committed to advancing tolerance, understanding and reconciliation." As a symbol of how important improving relations with Jews is to the new Pope, very shortly after his election he visited a synagogue in Cologne and spoke to the Jewish community. He said "We must come to know one another much more and much better. Consequently I would encourage sincere and trustful dialogue between Jews and Christians, for only in this way will it be possible to arrive at a shared interpretation of disputed historical questions, and, above all, to make progress towards a theological evaluation of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. This dialogue, if it is to be sincere, must not gloss over or underestimate the existing differences: in those areas in which, due to our profound convictions in faith, we diverge, and indeed precisely in those areas, we need to show respect for one another." I agree with the Pope that we must keep that dialog going. That is why I have been active in ecumenical work since before I was ordained. Since coming to Toledo I have been active in the Inter-faith Inter-racial Religious Council sponsored by the Toledo Area Ministries, I have been a frequent speaker at Multi-Faith Council events, I helped in planning the Erase the Hate campaign this year and I invited a Catholic nun and Muslim Imam to come speak to us about repentance. Last month I gave a talk similar to this one to a group sponsored by the Catholic diocese of Toledo. I encourage all of you to be active in inter-faith programs and activities. Even though it doesn't do anything to change the problem, I always find it comforting when I speak to priests, ministers, or imams about the problems they face in their communities. It's comforting because what I see is they struggle with the same problems we do. When I was in Vancouver I spoke before a gathering of Lutheran ministers. After my talk, one of them came up to me and asked "do you have trouble keeping your teens involved?" We will not have peace in the world until we have peace between religions. We will not have peace between religions until we get all people to recognize that God is so big there is more than one way to approach Him. A Christian once asked the 18th century rabbi Moses Mendellsohn "how can your religion be right if my religion is right?" He replied there is but one pasture, but many gates. Or, as it says in Christian Bible, in John 14, "In my father's house, there are many mansions." May God help us to meet and join together with people of other faiths in that one pasture, that one house, to make His world a better place, regardless of which gate we came in, Amen. |