Are Jews Our Friends?
/On February 19, 2020, Bishop Kevin Rhoades wrote a statement for his Fort Wayne-South Bend, IN diocese regarding how Catholics are to relate to Jews. Seeking collaboration in human affairs, however, often spills over into religious issues about which Christians and Jews are naturally at odds. It is a tough road for those who are seeking human friendship to wade through the rough waters inherent in spiritual matters. Over the last 70 years or so, various Catholic and Jews have attempted to forge these deep waters. Unfortunately, they find the pathway strewn with the dead bodies of compromise, contradiction and confusion. As a case in point, let us delve into the bishop’s efforts to give it another try.
Bishop Rhoades: This past November, over 1,000 Catholics and Jews of Fort Wayne, Indiana, gathered to pray together at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church in a beautiful service during the visit to our community of the “Violins of Hope”—violins that were played by Jewish prisoners at concentrations camps during the Holocaust. Our praying the psalms together and listening to the violins and our communities’ choirs brought us tears of both sadness and joy—sadness at the horrors of the Holocaust, and joy at the love we share as brothers and sisters, drawn together by a common spiritual patrimony.1
R. Sungenis: The best way to analyze the merits and demerits of Bishop Rhoades’ approach to the Jews is to measure it against what Scripture, Tradition and the Church have stated. We will start with Scripture. As such, St. Paul has two ways of looking at the Jews. They are both stated in Romans 11:28: “In respect to the gospel, they are enemies on your account; but in respect to election, they are beloved because of the patriarchs” (New American Bible, Catholic). Dealing with the first view, Paul says the Jews are enemies with respect to the Gospel. Why? The Jews oppose the Christian Gospel. They reject Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior of the world. They believe he was a false prophet, an imposter, a charlatan who tried to make himself something he wasn’t and as a result he deserved the death he suffered on the cross. With few exceptions, this was the attitude of the Jews in Paul’s day, and it continued throughout the Middle Ages and right up to the present time. For the Gentiles, Paul says the Jews’ rejection of Christ and Christianity turned out (i.e., “on your account”) to be beneficial since it allowed the Gentiles to receive the Gospel and become saved.
In Paul’s second view, he says the Jews are “beloved” with “respect to election” and “because of the patriarchs.” This will take a bit of unwrapping to understand what Paul is saying. First, with respect to “election,” Paul uses the Greek word ἐκλογήν. To understand its meaning, Paul uses the same word in verse 5 when he says concerning the Jews: “So also at the present time there is a remnant, chosen (ἐκλογήν) by grace” (NAB). Who are the “remnant”? The previous verses, 2-4, explain that in the days of Elijah, circa 800 BC, there were only 7,000 Jews who had not worshiped the false god, Baal. This number is considered a “remnant” because in 800 BC Israel contained between 5-10 million Jews.2 This means, at best, only 0.14% of the Jews in Israel followed God, while the rest (99.86%) followed Baal. Paul then uses this historical example as the precedent for the number of Jews he expects to convert to Christ in his day when he says, “So also at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.” Paul does not expect great numbers of Jews to be turning to Christ anytime soon. The few that do convert are called “the elect” (ἐκλογήν) or “the remnant” (λεῖμμα). The larger part of Jewry remains under the curse of the wrath of God, as Paul spells it out in verses 7-10:
What then? What Israel was seeking it did not attain, but the elect (ἐκλογήν) attained it; the rest were hardened, as it is written: “God gave them a spirit of deep sleep, eyes that should not see and ears that should not hear, down to this very day.” And David says: “Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them; let their eyes grow dim so that they may not see, and keep their backs bent forever.” (NAB)
This verse echoes Paul’s teaching in Rom 9:27: “And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, ‘Though the number of the Israelites were like the sand of the sea, only a remnant will be saved’” (NAB). Paul reiterates the same truth in Rom 11:14: “I glory in my ministry in order to make my race jealous and thus save some of them” (NAB). Notice it is only “some of them” (τινὰς ἐξ αὐτῶν) who he expects to convert. The rest will remain hardened in unbelief. In context, “some” means a small portion, not a large portion.
So, if we are to understand correctly Paul’s meaning of “but in respect to election, they are beloved because of the patriarchs,” the “elect” Jews who are “beloved” does not refer to all or most Jews, but only those who convert to Christ and accept the Gospel of Christianity. The rest remain “enemies” of the Gospel, which, according to Paul, refers to the larger portion of Jewry.
The next portion of Rom 11:28 we need to explain is the phrase: “because of the patriarchs.” The patriarchs are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. To them, God made two basic promises regarding the Jews. The first was that Abraham, his Jewish descendants, and all the Gentile nations of the earth, would receive the promise of eternal fellowship with God, through Christ, in an eternal heavenly land (cf. Gen 12:3; Gal 3:6-8; Heb 11:8-16, 39-40; Rom 4:13). In order to be fulfilled, the promise of God had to be believed by putting faith and trust in Him, and eventually in his Son, Jesus Christ, for salvation, whether one was a Jew or a Gentile (cf. Rom 4:1-25; Gal 3:16, 28-29). The second promise to Abraham did not include either Abraham or the Gentile nations, only his Jewish descendants in the Old Testament. Because of Abraham’s faith and obedience, God promised earthly land to these Old Testament descendants (Gen 15:15-21). The Jews received this land some five hundred years later when, under Joshua, Israel invaded the land of Canaan and took it over. This fulfillment is recorded over a fifteen hundred year period in Josh 21:43-45; 1Kings 8:56; and Neh 9:7-8.
When Paul says in Rom 11:28: “but in respect to election, they are beloved because of the patriarchs,” he is referring to the first promise God gave to Abraham, namely, that he and his Jewish descendants, along with the Gentiles, would receive the promise of salvation—eternal fellowship with God in the eternal land of the heavenly kingdom—if they believed in God and his Son who made it possible by his death on the cross. The Jews who act on this promise by putting their faith in Christ are the “elect.” Abraham was the first to do so, and now he is waiting for the end of time to receive the promise of the heavenly kingdom built by God (Heb 11:8-10, 14-16). The “remnant” of all his Jewish descendants—whether in the Old Testament or New Testament—who put their faith in God and Jesus, respectively, are also waiting (Heb 11: 20-38). Last but not least, all the Gentiles that put their faith in Christ, are also waiting, for all who put their faith in Christ are counted as “Abraham’s descendants” (Rom 2:4-16; 3:29-30; 9:30-32; 11:11; 15:9-12; Gal 3:28-29).
The main message, of course, is that most Jews, that is, those who do not convert to Christ and Christianity, are understood as “enemies” because of the Gospel we carry. As it was in Paul’s day, so it is in ours. Little has changed. Like Paul, however, we anticipate that the “elect” Jews will accept Christ and receive the same promise given to the “patriarchs,” for it is those Jews who are the “beloved.” But in order to accept Christ and become saved, the Jews must hear the Gospel. For as Paul says in Rom 15:12-15:
For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, enriching all who call upon him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” But how can they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone to preach? And how can people preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring [the] good news!” (NAB).
From this information, the first question we should pose to Bishop Rhoades is whether or not he is preaching the Gospel to the Jews when he meets in social gatherings with them, or at any other time. For example, did Bishop Rhoades, since he consistently expresses his love and concern for the Jews, offer the Gospel to them for the salvation of their souls when he cried with them at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church over the Holocaust? In order to do so, according to St. Paul, Bishop Rhoades would first need to understand the Jews are “enemies” with regard to the Christian Gospel and thus the Jews would need to hear it and accept it in order to become our friends and God’s. He would also have to understand, according to St. Paul, that most Jews do not believe in Christ, but there are “elect” Jews waiting to hear the Gospel in accordance with God’s promise to the patriarchs for their salvation. If the bishop does not have these two truths on the forefront of his mind when meeting with Jews, then he is negligent in his pastoral duties as a priest of God. Considering what St. Paul says in Romans 11, the highest love one can have for the Jew is to give him the Gospel, which tells him of his destitute spiritual condition as the “enemy” of God and Christianity due to his outright rejection of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, there is not one indication in the bishop’s February 2020 statement that he either planned to tell the Jews about their need for salvation in Christ, or actually did so, nor do we find it in any of his other meetings with Jews. But it is incumbent upon a bishop, any bishop, to follow the mandate of the New Testament, which requires him, as a man of God, to preach the Gospel to the Jews and pray for their salvation in Christ, just as St. Peter did in Acts 2 from which 3,000 Jews were baptized and became members of the Catholic Church on the day of Pentecost.
The Apostolic Nazi Project
If Bishop Rhoades had preached the need for the Jews gathered at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton to repent of their sins and accept baptism into Christ for their salvation, perhaps he might have saved dozens of Jews that very night and started a trend that could sweep the country and the world. Since he did not, we can only conclude that he considered making musical eulogies about the Holocaust more important than preaching Christ to the Jews so that they could cease being “enemies” of God. For the Gospel teaches, and St. Paul reiterates it in Romans 11, the Jews are on their way to perdition unless they accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. This is the same message the Church has been teaching about the Jews for two-thousand years, beginning with Jesus and the Apostles, through the Fathers and the Medievals, and on to our own day. Those who attempt to change it will themselves become the “enemies” of God.
It appears from his gathering at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church that Bishop Rhoades is primarily interested in accepting Jews and Judaism as they are, which means, in his mind, the Jews have no need to surrender themselves to Christ or to renounce Judaism and accept Christianity. Although we can agree with the bishop that Jews and Catholics have a “common spiritual patrimony” in the sense that we both look to the same Father as the beginning of our spiritual relationship with God (e.g., Abraham), history is clear that the Jews at large refused to progress in this spiritual relationship, for they consistently denied, and still deny today, that Jesus Christ alone is the fulfillment of the Gospel that was preached to Abraham. So while they share a certain “patrimony” with us, they deny the most decisive part of that patrimony, the only part that gives true and eternal meaning to what Abraham started for us. In denying Jesus, the Jews essentially deny the true patrimony God wanted them to know and accept. The Gospel does not teach we are to sing songs with Jews and pretend that, even though the Jewish participants outrightly reject Jesus Christ that somehow we can still be “brothers and sisters” in the Faith. Using such ambiguous metaphors does not explicate the Christian responsibility toward the Jews; rather, it portrays an “all is well” complacency about the spiritual status and destiny of the Jews.
Bishop Rhoades: We recognize that the anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism of past centuries contributed to the rise of the Nazi project to exterminate Jews. Learning from the tragedy of the Holocaust, the Church deplored in her 1965 landmark document, Nostra Aetate (In Our Time), “all hatreds, persecutions, displays of antisemitism leveled at any time or from any source against the Jews.”
R. Sungenis: Unfortunately, it has become quite common for certain Catholic clerics to say more than what Nostra aetate actually said. Nostra aetate did not say “anti-Judaism,” but only “anti-Semitism.” This is not surprising, since the Catholic Church has always deplored anti-Semitism. Hating someone just because they are Jewish is a despicable act. But “anti-Judaism,” insofar as Judaism represents a religion that denies Jesus Christ is God and the only Savior of the world, is certainly not something that Christians are to condone, embrace, or treat lightly. Anyone who teaches the contrary is not teaching the Gospel of Christianity nor abiding by the teaching of the Catholic Church. Although we might draw various moral or practical truths from Judaism—as we also can from other religions since the Church never rejects truth as truth3—the Christian must reject the essence of these religions as “anti-Christian,” since they all deny, to one degree or another, that Jesus Christ is God and the only Savior of the world. This difference is not merely a casual one from which opponents can simply agree to disagree and go on with life, but a superlative difference in which it is incumbent upon the Christian to tell the proponent of Judaism that his religion is “anti-Christ” and therefore can do nothing for the salvation of his soul. If the Christian does not tell the Jew, or anyone from another religion, that his religion is “anti-Christ,” then essentially he is not extending charity towards them, and in that sense, he is the most “anti-Semitic” that one could ever be.
The Anti-Christian Religion
Anti-Semitism is not defined as disagreeing with Jews and Judaism, since it all depends on the context in which the speech is made. If, for example, one criticizes Jews and Judaism because both the person and the religion seek to thwart Jesus Christ and his Gospel of salvation, this is certainly not “anti-Semitic.” The Catholic Church has always taught this profound truth. Unfortunately, many Catholic clerics today, influenced by liberal theology, have lost this essential purpose and meaning of Christianity, at least to the Jews. Some have lost it to the point in which they declare it is no longer necessary to preach the Gospel to the Jews, either because they believe the Jews still have their own covenant with God or that God will administer the saving of Jews in his own way and timing, outside of the normal means of preaching the Gospel, both of which are utterly false notions.
Bishop Rhoades: This important statement from the Second Vatican Council also affirmed that “the Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture. Consequently, all must take care, lest in catechizing or in preaching the Word of God, they teach anything which is not in accord with the truth of the Gospel message or the spirit of Christ” (NA 4).
R. Sungenis: Yes, it is certainly important that anyone preaching the Word of God should teach what is in accord with the Gospel. As noted above, this includes preaching the Gospel to the Jews, because the Gospel requires the Jews to accept Jesus Christ as their God and Savior. Is this what Bishop Rhoades did when he met with “over 1,000 Catholics and Jews of Fort Wayne, Indiana . . .”? If he did, no mention of it is made in his letter, but it should have been the highlight of his letter. If he were really concerned about the spiritual health and life of the Jews that attended the event, he would have made missionary activity one of his top priorities. As it stands, the Jews who attended all went back to their homes thinking that because they were told no differently by the Catholics, it was quite acceptable to reject Jesus Christ yet still be held in high esteem by God and the Catholic Church, and on their way to salvation. One reading of the Book of Acts and the epistles of St. Paul tells us that this type of self-assured mentality is precisely what Paul tried all his life to dispel from Jewish thinking, and this is precisely why they persecuted him and all the churches under Paul’s care. As he says in 1Thess 2:14-16:
For you suffer the same things from your compatriots as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets and persecuted us; they do not please God, and are opposed to everyone, trying to prevent us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved, thus constantly filling up the measure of their sins. But the wrath of God has finally begun to come upon them. (NAB).
Also important is the fact that Nostra aetate stated: “the Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture.” This passage must be understood within the context St. Paul wrote it. St. Paul states in Romans 11:1-2: “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? Of course not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.” In context, he meant that, in regard to being able to receive the Gospel and be saved by it, no Jew who yearns for salvation was, is, or will be “rejected” by God. As proof, Paul uses his own salvation in Jesus Christ that a Jew like himself can still be saved.
Why did Paul ask the question in the first place? It was because he had taught in the two previous chapters, Romans 9-10, that the Jews, as a national, ethnic and religious entity, had been rejected by God insofar as being his official representative on earth (cf. Matt 16:18-19; Acts 13:45-52; 18:6; 22:17-21; 28:25-28). They were replaced by the Catholic Church. Hence when a Jew today accepts Jesus Christ as his Savior, he is baptized and joins the Catholic Church. He does not remain in Judaism.
Paul says from his own preaching, there was a remnant of Jews who accepted Jesus Christ and became Christian (Acts 28:17-24a). Hence it is these Jews—the ones who accepted Jesus Christ—who were not “rejected” by God, while the rest are kept in their blindness (Acts 28:25-28). The same is true in our day, any Jew on the face of the earth can be saved, and therefore, in that sense alone, God has not “rejected” the Jews. But the only way the Jew of today can become saved is if the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached to him, and he is told that his Judaism, if he remains in it, has no power to save him and he will be condemned in it (Rom 10:1-32). From everything Bishop Rhoades stated, this is not how he envisions his Christian responsibility nor how he approaches the Jews. He approaches them as if they were already “brothers and sisters” who don’t need to hear a message of salvation in Jesus Christ and are on their way to heaven based on their Judaism that rejects Jesus Christ.
Bishop Rhoades: Unfortunately, there has been a rise in recent years of anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic rhetoric in our society. Further, there have been incidents of violence incited by hateful speech about Jews. The Church has firmly condemned such rhetoric and violence.
R. Sungenis: Yes, it is unfortunate that there has been such a rise. It is also good the Church continues to condemn such attitudes, as she always has. The Jews have a right to be a people among the peoples of the world, and to live in peace and prosperity.
Bishop Rhoades: Those who speak of Jews as our enemies are mistaken. Pope St. Paul VI, Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and Pope Francis have consistently referred to our Jewish brothers and sisters as “friends” whom we love and esteem, not as enemies or adversaries whom we reject. Language matters. Language that incites animosity is harmful. This is not to say that there are not disagreements between Christians and Jews about matters of faith, but such disagreements need not imply hostility.
R. Sungenis: As we have seen from Paul’s inspired teaching in Rom 11:28, it is not wrong to consider Jews as “enemies,” since with respect to the Gospel, they are, indeed, such. This does not mean we should not treat them with civility and respect, just as we do with any other non-Christian nation or individual. Yet, it is very important that we distinguish what is meant by “friend.” On a spiritual level, the Jew is not our friend. On a human level, he can be a friend. For example, I consider my Jewish doctor a friend. He helps me and my family stay healthy. If I considered him a human enemy, I might be worried he would secretly sicken or kill my family. But when I told my doctor, who is a devout Jew, that only through Jesus Christ can he be saved and that he must reject his Judaism that denies Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior of the world, he no longer wanted to be my human friend. He now has a certain degree of animosity towards me. That was his choice, not mine. I still have a high respect for him as a doctor and humanitarian, but that kind of friendship only goes so far. In the spiritual sense, he has become my “enemy,” but that is the cost of being a disciple of Christ. The world will reject us when we preach the Gospel of Christ, and it is they, ironically, who will often consider us as “enemies” because of our deep faith in Christ. Essentially, Christ is their enemy. They hate him, and anyone who follows him they will hate. This animosity against Christians from Jews has been the case ever since Jesus came, and it never changes. Jesus already told us that if they hated him, they will hate us, too (Jn 15:18).
A good example of how certain Jews have turned the tide and put the blame on Christians for being “anti-Semitic” simply because Christians preach the New Testament Gospel is the case of Jewish author Jules Isaac. In 1946, he published Jesus and Israel. In it he accuses the Evangelists themselves, who were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write the four Gospels, of being anti-Semitic because of how they regarded the Jews of their day. Jules Isaac insisted the four Evangelists had a deep-rooted animosity towards the Jews for no good reason, even though the Jewish leaders were trying to kill Jesus for claiming he was God’s son; even though the Pharisees and their followers lived wicked lives; and even though most of Israel rejected Christ. Isaac also said the Church Fathers were unanimous in their “anti-Semitism,” chief among them being St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom. He claimed the Catholic Church continued the same “anti-Semitism” throughout the first and second millennium. Isaac never admitted that Jews were spurned because their rejection of Jesus Christ led to bad behavior. Unfortunately, Isaac’s ideas were accepted by many liberal Catholics of the 20th century. Today many in the Catholic hierarchy have decided not to preach the Gospel to the Jews, some believing the Jews have their own salvation plan with God that is parallel to Christian salvation. They attempt to pacify the Jews and avoid accusations of “anti-Semitism” by pretending the Jews are already saved and on the right path to God because they have their own “covenant” with God. Suffice it to say, these are lies of the devil.
[…]
This is just an excerpt from Culture Wars Magazine, not the full article. To continue reading, purchase the April 2020 edition of Culture Wars Magazine.
