Chief Rabbinate cuts ties with Vatican

Pope Benedict XVI insisted on Wednesday that he felt "full and indisputable solidarity" with Jews.

Benedict spoke days after his decision to revoke the excommunication of a bishop who says no Jews were gassed during the Holocaust provoked an outcry among Jews.

Benedict said Wednesday that he hoped the memory of the Holocaust would also serve as a warning against the "unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the hearts of men."

The Vatican had already distanced itself from comments by bishop Richard Williamson, who has denied that 6 million Jews were murdered during World War II. The Holy See said that removing the excommunication by no means implied the Vatican shared Williamson's views.

But on Tuesday the Chief Rabbinate of Israel broke off official ties with the Vatican indefinitely in protest over the Pope's decision to reinstate a known Holocaust denier.

The Chief Rabbinate also canceled a meeting scheduled for March 2-4 in Rome with the Holy See's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews.

In a letter to the commission's chairman, Cardinal Walter Casper, Chief Rabbinate Director-General Oded Weiner wrote that "without a public apology and recanting, it will be difficult to continue the dialogue."

According to a Chief Rabbinate source, the letter was leaked to the Israeli press before it was received by the Vatican, which might further complicate relations between the Chief Rabbinate and the Catholic Church.

Last week, in an attempt to heal a decades-old rift between the Church and a group of ultra-conservative breakaway group of clergymen, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of four bishops. The four Catholic bishops belong to the Society of Saint Pius, which opposed changes in Catholic doctrine made in the 1960s under the Second Vatican Council.

One of them is Britain's Bishop Richard Williamson, who is being investigated for Holocaust denial in Germany, according to the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

In a recent interview with Swedish state television, Williamson denied the murder of six million Jews by the Nazis.

"I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews died in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers," Williamson told the interviewer.

"The historical evidence is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler. I believe there were no gas chambers," Williamson reportedly said.

He has also reportedly endorsed the anti-Semitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion and claimed that Jews are bent on world domination.

In a parallel development Tuesday, Bishop Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the Society of Saint Pius, distanced himself from Williamson's comments.

Fellay said he has forbidden Williamson from speaking publicly about any historical or political questions and that his views "don't reflect in any way the position of the society."

"We ask forgiveness of the Supreme Pontiff and all the men of good will for the dramatic consequences of this act," Fellay said.

Haifa Chief Rabbi Shear Yishuv Cohen, chairman of the Rabbinate's commission, told The Jerusalem Post that he expected Williamson to publicly retract his statements before meetings could be renewed.

"I understand the Pope's efforts to bring about unity in the Church, but he should be aware that, indirectly, he hurt Jews. We expect him to do the best to repair the situation." Weiner's letter called Williamson's comments "odious" and "outrageous."

Rabbi David Rosen, Director of the American Jewish Committee's Department for Interreligious Affairs, and an advisory member of the Chief rabbinate's commission, said that the Pope's decision has created an atmosphere of "bad faith."

Rosen reckoned that the Pope's move to lift Williamson's excommunication, which was made public just days before International Holocaust Day, was made due to a lack of proper consultation.

"I tend to believe that the Pope simply was not informed about Williamson in advance and now he is in a very uncomfortable situation."

Rosen said that the Pope had a history of improper preparation, leading to large-scale blunders. He cited a speech made in Regensburg, Germany, in which he quoted a medieval emperor who called Islam "evil and inhuman," comments that sparked a wave of Islamic-led violence against Catholic churches around the world.

Rosen said that the Rabbinate expected the Pope to take tangible steps against Williamson.

"I don't think it is my place to tell the Church precisely what to do. But Williamson should be censured in some way or forced to retract his statements.

"Until that happens, we may be in contact with the Vatican on an individual level, but there will be no official meetings."

Then they are wrong, and misinterpreting what the Church is.

That's irrelevant, whether or not it's true. This is politics (religious politics, but politics nevertheless), and in politics you cannot simply dismiss the messages you send by your actions, however unintended, as simply "wrong."

The fact is that the Vatican has not been exactly been on the best of terms with the Jewish people for the last two millennia, nor has it been on the best of terms with Israel for most of the last sixty. Remember, Pope John Paul II only recognized Israel in December 1993. So let's look at this from the perspective of the Rabbinate:

1) The Vatican refuses to acknowledge Israel's existence for the first 45 years, and has only acknowledged her for the last 15.
2) Even having formally recognized Israel, the Vatican has tried to position itself as a "neutral" arbiter over Jerusalem's holy sites, including the Temple Mount, rather than recognizing full Israeli sovereignty.
3) As a result of the above, the Vatican has repeatedly been, shall we say, less-than-wholeheartedly-supportive of Israel when she has taken steps to defend herself.
4) At the same time that Israel's enemies are saying that the Holocaust is a Jewish lie (though they think having one would be a wonderful idea), the Vatican welcomes back into the Catholic fold a very vocal Holocaust denier.

And that's just the last sixty years. Jews have very long memories, and we haven't forgotten how we've been treated by Christians and Muslims for the last centuries. As a result, the rabbis are a bit sensitive to any hint that Christian leaders are (once again) turning on us. You might argue that it's over-sensitivity, but if you have any clue about the history of Jewish-Christian relations, you can't deny that the Rabbinate has a very real basis for its concern, especially given how narrow Israel's margin for survival is right now.

Given how sensitive the Catholics on this forum are to Protestant criticism, I'd think you'd understand.

One is joined to the Church through baptism and belief, not behavior.

And this is why the rabbis rightly point out that Christianity is the religion of the creed, while Judaism is the religion of the deed. As Jacob (James), the Lord's brother, pointed out and as Catholics are quick to quote when in debates with Protestants over sola gracia, "Faith without works is dead."

If the Rabbinate or others want to know what excommunication is and is not, they need to consult those who impose it and lift it. If they consult only themselves, they should keep their conclusions to themselves.

So . . . you're saying that the Rabbinate has no right to decide whom to maintain formal relations with?

No one -- not even the Pope -- is responsible for the distortion of his words and deeds by others.

So you're basically saying that nobody has any right to interpret the Pope's actions in anything but the most rosy way possible--but that you're free to dismiss the rabbis actions as ill-informed at best, deliberately distorting the Pontiff's position at worst. Got it.

Say, is that a beam in your eye?

The Church is in the truth business . . .

Then purge the false witnesses from your midst, and stop complaining about others pointing out when you're embracing them instead.

Shalom.

the Vatican has not been exactly been on the best of terms with the Jewish people for the last two millennia

By "the Vatican" let's assume you mean the See of Peter. Yes, there has been tension -- though historically speaking, popes have tended to be be more Jew-friendly than other bishops, monarchs, and Catholics in general. Moreover, there has been plenty of bad behavior on the Jewish side. Not to play tu quoque, but haven't many Jews over the years said and even prayed unfriendly things about Christians? Doesn't the Talmud contain contemptuous and gratuitously obscene passages alluding to Jesus and his mother? In some Orthodox communities doesn't there survive to this day a sentiment of loathing and disgust for Christians? Let's not play into black and white victimhood categories, OK?

nor has it been on the best of terms with Israel for most of the last sixty.

The Church had good reasons to be slow in recognising the state of Israel -- whose conception was not exactly without original sin. There were and are questions of justice to Gentiles that have been overlooked or neglected. Nor has Israel been in a hurry to maintain good relations with the Holy See (has that Fundamental Agreement been postponed again? One loses count how many times).

Yes, the Holy See has been slow to ratify Israel's conquest of lands outside the borders drawn by the UN. If this is how anti-semitism is to be defined, it will lose all meaning.

Yes, the Holy See has declined to issue Israel a moral blank check for any and all decisions it makes in pursuit of its interests. I'm sure we all feel "special" in our own way, but even the Lord's own people according to the flesh aren't that special.

The Church welcomes a great many oddballs and sinners into her fold. It's for their sanctification and salvation. I have already pointed out that that's not validation. Get over it, please.

Long Jewish memories seem mostly to fail when it comes to the heroic life-saving achievements of Pius XII.

Judaism is the religion of the deed.

I understood it to be a religion of the circumcised. Surely a bad or unobservant Jew doesn't cease to be Jewish. Bad Catholics don't cease to be Catholics unless they consciously apostatise.

you're saying that the Rabbinate has no right to decide whom to maintain formal relations with?

Of course not. I'm saying they shouldn't presume to instruct the Pope how to correct his errant sheep.

So you're basically saying that nobody has any right to interpret the Pope's actions in anything but the most rosy way possible

Please don't be tiresome. I'm saying that the Rabbinate have no right to expect the Roman pontiff to manage his affairs to suit their agenda.

Then purge the false witnesses from your midst, and stop complaining about others pointing out when you're embracing them instead.

Conversion is a life-long calling for every Christian. None of us is perfect, and none of us should be scandalised to discover that fact. The Church does not save sinners by driving them away.

Not to play tu quoque, but haven't many Jews over the years said and even prayed unfriendly things about Christians?

Certainly. But it's been eighteen or nineteen centuries since Jewish rhetoric had much in the way of power to cause harm to Christians, unlike the reverse.

Doesn't the Talmud contain contemptuous and gratuitously obscene passages alluding to Jesus and his mother?

There are passages that may or may not have originally referred to Yeshua. However, when they provide any historical context, they don't match up with the right dates. My own belief is that passages and legends that originally referred to other heretics were later reinterpreted to refer to Yeshua and His mother.

However, most modern Talmuds expunge the offending passages, and while there are still ultra-Orthodox who use "Yeshu" as a curse, the majority view in modern Judaism is to regard Yeshua as a Torah-observant Jew, most likely a pharisee (read: Orthodox Jew), whose later followers distorted his teachings. Indeed, most modern rabbis who have read the Gospel accounts are very complimentary towards Yeshua's insight, though they are not yet ready to accept the Messianic claims.

Btw, many of the Church fathers, including Justin Martyr and John Chrysostom, had some rather slanderous things that they said about the Jewish community as well. Have you expunged them from the ECF the way most rabbis have expunged the anti-Yeshua references from the Talmud?

In some Orthodox communities doesn't there survive to this day a sentiment of loathing and disgust for Christians?

Yes, but most likely not for the reasons you imagine. The disgust is that Christianity has for two millennia forced conversion and assimilation among Jews, cursed the Jews, slandered the Jews, and killed the Jews.

This is starting to change today because evangelicals have been wholehearted in their love and support for Israel and the Jewish people and because there are a growing number of Jews who, while professing Yeshua to be Messiah and Son of God, are steadfastly refusing to become Christians--that is to say, who remain in the Jewish community, keeping not only the Torah but the traditions of our fathers, just as Yeshua Himself and His first-generation followers did (cf. Mat. 23:2, Acts 21:20ff).

And because of this, Messianic Jews (who are born Jews; proselytes like myself will be an issue for years to come) are receiving increasing acceptance in Israel: See this news report from Israel. There is still a lot of tension, especially with some of the ultra-Orthodox, but I have been in contact with a very major rabbi and an anti-missionary teacher, both in Jerusalem, who are favorable to accepting Messianic Jews as fully Jewish.

Let's not play into black and white victimhood categories, OK?

I'm not. I'm explaining the Jewish perspective on the Rabbinate's decisions to a group of Catholics who frankly don't understand why such a dramatic gesture was needed. To you, sixteen centuries of Christian persecution of Jews is just an unfortunate historical footnote; to Jews, its both a personal wound and a precedent for the future. We are used to Christians going through waves of friendliness towards the Jewish people, only for the goodwill to dry up when the conversions don't roll in. The RCC receiving a Holocaust denier back into the fold looks to the Rabbinate like a beginning step in yet another about face.

So don't decry "black-and-white victimhood" even while you engage in it. The Pope is not a victim of the Rabbinate; he made a decision that has far-reaching implications that threaten Israel's very survival, and they reacted in a way that, in their view, is perfectly appropriate. Hopefully, it will get his attention in a way that a simple protest would not, and a workable compromise will be reached.

The Church had good reasons to be slow in recognising the state of Israel -- whose conception was not exactly without original sin.

We disagree, and in any case you undermine your own protests against the Rabbinate: You claim that the Vatican had the right to withhold formal recognition of Israel because of her perceived "original sin"--yet you can't acknowledge the right of the Rabbinate to break formal ties with the Vatican over a perceived current sin.

As usual, you are trying to have it both ways.

Yes, the Holy See has been slow to ratify Israel's conquest of lands outside the borders drawn by the UN. If this is how anti-semitism is to be defined, it will lose all meaning.

I never mentioned anti-semitism--but one wonders why you don't think Israel should keep territory that she conquered fighting defensive wars. Should the United States return the Thirteen Colonies to the British? And that was a rebellion, not a defensive war against a foreign power.

Yes, the Holy See has declined to issue Israel a moral blank check for any and all decisions it makes in pursuit of its interests.

So why exactly should we give the Roman Catholic Church a blank check on any and all decisions that it makes in pursuit of its interests?

I understood it to be a religion of the circumcised.

It is the religion of the covenant people, yes. But being God's covenant people has responsibilities to live up to--something that the NT agrees on.

Surely a bad or unobservant Jew doesn't cease to be Jewish.

In an ethnic sense, no. But the rabbis do teach that a Jew who does not keep God's commandments--with a far greater emphasis on the moral commandments than the ceremonial ones, btw--is not worthy of the name and should be treated like a pagan until he repents. The Apostles agreed.

I'm saying they shouldn't presume to instruct the Pope how to correct his errant sheep.

Nor should you presume to instruct the rabbis on how to conduct their diplomatic relationships. Nor do you have the right to expect the Rabbinate to conduct their affairs to suit your preferences.

The Church does not save sinners by driving them away.

Neither does it do them any favor by coddling them in their sins, particularly sins that affect the physical well-being of others.

Throughout your post, you've demonstrated an amazing double-standard, refusing to accord to the Rabbinate and Israel the respect, assumption of good intent, and right to decide how to conduct their affairs without criticism that you demand that we accord Roman Catholicism's leadership. All I've done is try to point that out and explain the other point of view to you. Since there is no way to conduct an open discussion with a person who holds himself so above the rules he holds everyone else to, I, like the Rabbinate, am going to terminate this discussion here.

Shalom.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.