The Culpability of the Jews

[chosen_people]

Hello, I am new to the forums and I come bearing many questions. I have spent most of my life non-religious, but over the past few years discovered a love for Christian patristics. I can now say that I truly want to be a Christian. One question remains - what is authentic Christian belief? A cursory reading of the church fathers will tell you that Protestantism is right out. The authentic Church must be unchanging. Catholicism has a continuity to it that really catches my attention. I cannot, however, be Catholic because I feel it has departed from patristic teaching.on several issues. I could be wrong though. I am no expert on the fathers, so I would appreciate anyone willing to take to time to discuss Catholic teaching in light of patristics. Thank you in advance for your time.

My first question deals with the culpability of the Jews regarding death of Christ. This topic has generated a good deal of attention in light of Pope Benedict’s newest book. To what extent can Jews be blamed for the death of Christ?

CCC 597 states :

"The historical complexity of Jesus’ trial is apparent in the Gospel accounts. The personal sin of the participants (Judas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate) is known to God alone. Hence we cannot lay responsibility for the trial on the Jews in Jerusalem as a whole, despite the outcry of a manipulated crowd and the global reproaches contained in the apostles’ calls to conversion after Pentecost. Jesus himself, in forgiving them on the cross, and Peter in following suit, both accept “the ignorance” of the Jews of Jerusalem and even of their leaders. Still less can we extend responsibility to other Jews of different times and places, based merely on the crowd’s cry: “His blood be on us and on our children!”, a formula for ratifying a judicial sentence. As the Church declared at the Second Vatican Council:

. . . [N]either all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his Passion. . . [T]he Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture."

It sounds very politically correct, but is it what Christians have always believed? The church fathers I have read seem very set on a specifically Jewish culpability for the death of Jesus. Basil writes :

"And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit the blood-guilt of their fathers; for they cried out: “His blood be on us and on our children”

Augustine writes :

“…they [the Jews] bear the guilt for the death of the Savior, for through their fathers they have killed Christ. The Jews held Him; the Jews insulted Him; the Jews bound Him; they crowned Him with thorns; they scourged Him; they hanged Him upon a tree.”

Gregory of Nyssa writes :

“Jews are slayers of the Lord…”

Even Eusebius in his* Church History* seems to share such sentiments concerning the Jews, their culpability, and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem as divine retribution.

This seems to be the consensus of the early church - the current Catholic view appearing to be a caving into political correctness. I would appreciate any commentary on the matter. I am not trying to be confrontational or argumentative, so please don’t interpret it as such. I simply have a lot of questions . Once again, thank you in advance for your time.

Well as you pointed out on another thread, the Jews have even been able to fabricate a whole Holocaust sham in order to get the state of Israel:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8010530&postcount=21

Now if the Council of the Elders of Zion have the power to pull that one off, it must be pretty clear that the same power could be used and has been used to get the Catholic Church to back pedal, despite what is written in the Christian scriptures and by the Church fathers, despite what was known for centuries to be true, about the Jews killing Jesus. Do I correctly understand the gist and intention of your thread?

 

[KathleenGee]

The earliest Christian church was Jewish. There were multitudes who listened to Christ, were fed and nurtured by Him, who experienced first hand His miracles. These communities exist up to today, intermarried with Arab and Gentile Christians in Israel, a great testimony to us.

These Christian leaders were referring to those who actively opposed Jesus. The Shephardic Jews were known to acknowledge Christ, if not Savior, atleast the benovolence of His message.

 

[theistgal]

No.

Catholicism is based on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Every Sunday is the greatest feast because we are celebrating Jesus Christ. If we apply ourselves, we experience the same presence of Christ in the Word and Eucharist as those did on Resurrection Sunday–but minus any apparition.

OK, if you mean that every Sunday we celebrate the Resurrection, I’m with you.

But we don’t call every Sunday “Resurrection Sunday” (at least not in my church) - and we do refer to Easter, Pascha, as the “Sunday of the Resurrection”. So perhaps you can see why I might be a little confused by your terminology.

 

[Hail_Linus]

The earliest Christian church was Jewish. There were multitudes who listened to Christ, were fed and nurtured by Him, who experienced first hand His miracles. These communities exist up to today, intermarried with Arab and Gentile Christians in Israel, a great testimony to us.

These Christian leaders were referring to those who actively opposed Jesus. The Shephardic Jews were known to acknowledge Christ, if not Savior, at least the benovolence of His message.

Do you ever wonder why prior to Constantine the Christians were persecuted but the Jews were not? The reason is the Jews disowned the Christians. The Jews were protected as a lawful religion in the Roman Empire. Once the Christians were no longer considered Jewish they had no protection from Roman persecution it was e Christians that were frequently used as scapegoats.

I would appreciate any references you have of the Sephardic Jews’ positive views on Jesus. Maimonides said some bad things. But perhaps these positive views are why many converted to Christianity in Spain (although many were pressured).

 

[Hail_Linus]

Well as you pointed out on another thread, the Jews have even been able to fabricate a whole Holocaust sham in order to get the state of Israel:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8010530&postcount=21

Now if the Council of the Elders of Zion have the power to pull that one off, it must be pretty clear that the same power could be used and has been used to get the Catholic Church to back pedal, despite what is written in the Christian scriptures and by the Church fathers, despite what was known for centuries to be true, about the Jews killing Jesus. Do I correctly understand the gist and intention of your thread?

Thank You for pointing out this thread Chosen People. I guess I did not understand the point of this thread after all. I thought GregoryPope was upset about the Patristic Father’s statements, it turns out he is upset with the Catechism.

BTW GregoryPope I did meet one of those American Soldiers that liberated the Jews from the concentration camps. He had taken photographs which were absolutely disgusting. He was deeply affected by the horror he saw.

 

[LOCO]

Thank You for pointing out this thread Chosen People. I guess I did not understand the point of this thread after all. I thought GregoryPope was upset about the Patristic Father’s statements, it turns out he is upset with the Catechism.

BTW GregoryPope I did meet one of those American Soldiers that liberated the Jews from the concentration camps. He had taken photographs which were absolutely disgusting. He was deeply affected by the horror he saw.

Sounds like GregoryPope is upset that the Church has clarified that doctrine. Why people would prefer to interpret this into ‘collective guilt’ is beyond me. Doctrine develops over time and may or may not devolop into dogma. Dogma on the other hand never changes. It appears GP approves of the whole notion of ‘collective guilt’ which is as rational as blaming the entire ‘white race’ for both world wars. What nonsense.

Early Fathers were referring to** Jews present at the time**, the Pharisees who incited the crowd which influenced Pilates verdict.

In the end, Yeshua forgave all of them, everyone involved in his persecution, trial, torture and crucifixion, Romans and Jews, for they knew not what they did.

It is a foolish soul who would attempt to ‘undo’ what Our Lord has already forgiven.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Patristic Fathers were referring to the Jews that opposed Christ, following the same attitude and persecution as those in the Sanhedrin.

Also, in defining Catholic beliefs, the catechism has called its members to honesty and fidelity, and to be law abiding citizens, productive members of their society since its beginnings.

Individual Patristic experiences with Jews in their times does not equal Catholic ecclesial thought either—pronouncements/councils made in communion with bishops and authority of Rome.

 

[GregoryPope]

The discrepancy only arises when when one reads the relevant statements through the lenses of our politically correct age. There is nothing wrong theologically with the statements of the Patristic Fathers. However, if anyone made statements like that today it would be considered anti-Semitic since it would be interpreted in the way you are interpreting them. That is why the Catechism has to clarify this issue in a modern way.

I am really not seeing how the catechism "reinterpreted " these teachings. St. Basil writes :

"And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit theblood-guilt of their fathers; for they cried out: “His blood be on us and on our children”

That is a a 100% different understanding than what both the CCC and Vatican II teach. St. Basil teaches that the Jews to this day carry the consequences of their father’s actions because they “persevere in their blindness” i.e. reject the salvation offered by Christ.

 

[GregoryPope]

Well as you pointed out on another thread, the Jews have even been able to fabricate a whole Holocaust sham in order to get the state of Israel:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8010530&postcount=21

Now if the Council of the Elders of Zion have the power to pull that one off, it must be pretty clear that the same power could be used and has been used to get the Catholic Church to back pedal, despite what is written in the Christian scriptures and by the Church fathers, despite what was known for centuries to be true, about the Jews killing Jesus. Do I correctly understand the gist and intention of your thread?

No, that is not the purpose of this thread. I suspect, however, that the issue of Catholic teaching on Jewish culpability and the Holocaust are linked together. Nostra Aetate’s draft dealt strictly with the Jews - a likely response to the Holocaust. Elie Wiesel stated that Auschwitz “represents a grave theological challenge to Christianity.” - no doubt a popular position in our modern age. I supect that VII meant to respond to the accusations that Christianity was somehow responsible for the Holocaust. In doing so, I fear that they abandoned the traditional Christian teaching so as not to appear “anti-Semitic”.

 

[GregoryPope]

Thank You for pointing out this thread Chosen People. I guess I did not understand the point of this thread after all. I thought GregoryPope was upset about the Patristic Father’s statements, it turns out he is upset with the Catechism.

BTW GregoryPope I did meet one of those American Soldiers that liberated the Jews from the concentration camps. He had taken photographs which were absolutely disgusting. He was deeply affected by the horror he saw.

I don’t want to get too off topic, but bad conditions in the labor camps don’t exactly prove the Holocaust. As I mentioned in the other thread, supply lines leading to the camps were destroyed by Allied bombers, thus hindering the shipment of supplies (food and medical). The pictures of starving Jews and piles of bodies are typically authentic, but not because of some German plot to exterminate them - it was simply malnutrition and the spread of disease near the end of the war.

 

[GregoryPope]

Early Fathers were referring to** Jews present at the time**, the Pharisees who incited the crowd which influenced Pilates verdict.

They are quite clear that it is not exclusively the Jews alive at the time who are guilty. The Jews descending from them, by clinging to their fathers’ rejection of the messiah, carry their guilt and shame. Again I will quote St. Basil the Great :

"And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit the blood-guilt of their fathers; for they cried out: “His blood be on us and on our children”

 

[Hail_Linus]

I am really not seeing how the catechism "reinterpreted " these teachings. St. Basil writes :

"And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit theblood-guilt of their fathers; for they cried out: “His blood be on us and on our children”

That is a a 100% different understanding than what both the CCC and Vatican II teach. St. Basil teaches that the Jews to this day carry the consequences of their father’s actions because they “persevere in their blindness” i.e. reject the salvation offered by Christ.

The Jews do bear guilt of rejecting Jesus. What St. Basil means is they suffer the consequences as I have already explained. However, the catechism is clarifying that although this is true, the Jewish people themselves are not guilty and should not be treated as guilty of the actual sin of rejecting Jesus. It is a similar principle to Original Sin. All humanity bears the consequences of the guilt of Adam and Eve for rejecting God yet no human being is actually guilty. It is as simple as that.

 

[KathleenGee]

About Resurrection Sunday…I used it…that is what the essence is…and why the Church is calling us to participate more fully in Sunday Mass…so we can draw on the full benefits of Christ.

 

[KathleenGee]

My father had the ‘Black Book of Poland’. It was printed in 1941. He told me that there were rumors coming out of Europe as to what was happening to the Jews in Poland and elsewhere.

I opened it up when I was 9 years old…and it changed my life. My father would watch films on the Holocaust and told us never to forget what happened to the Jewish people. I saw this one show, ‘World at War’, with Jewish mothers and children boarding a train…and some looked like my own brother, and it would make me cry. I cried seeing the picture of this beautiful Jewish toddler, 2 years old, well dressed, full of light, but dead thrown on a heap of skeletal adult prisoners. I read all sorts of things done by Joseph Mengele, that woman in Belsen; I read how they treated Catholic priests, and I saw pictures of the German priests being led to execution for opposing Naziism.

There were many Orthodox and Catholics and other undesirables who were also placed in camps. I have worked with Jewish clients. I had one client who was in a Nazi concentration camp. Never spoke to her about it. She was born in Hungary and then her family moved to Cechoslovakia. One day we were going some place in the summer and came to a stop because a box car went by. She got so silent…and I then recalled stories about the box cars…I asked her something…and then she told me she had to stand on one for two days. The Nazis came in to her house. She was staying with her sister and had a baby. I asked what happened to her baby, and she said she was left behind…I was so sad…the next day she clarified and said her sister, who became a Christian, took care of her daughter and they were reunited after the war.

She told me she was at Dachau. She was a large woman, and she was given the job to carry stones at the quarry. Then one day she had to go to this place and she was being set up for execution. But that was the very day the Americans came in and saved her life.

About Shephardic Jews…I read they were more pastoral in culture…and converted…I thought it was referencing Israel at time of Christ…although I read they were labelled Nazarene Jews…they worshipped with the Jews in their synagogues…but in time got into arguments, and then the Jews expelled them from the syngagogues, so they started their own, refusing the 40 day fast out of protest, and moving worship to Sunday’s…again, out of protest.

I also have another Jewish client whose cousin was from Spain, and went to a Catholic boarding school. My client wanted to become a Carmelite nun, but her family swooped her out, and took her to NYC. Her cousin went to boarding school…She did not believe but when she did go to Mass, she would partake in the Eucharist…which is forbidden…but she received with respect…and she said that without even trying…she would experience God immediately and then everything around her would seem wonderful…in time she learned Christian concept of forgiveness and wrote another book about it. I read her book on the Murranos…Jews who are outwardly Catholic, and to this day have great fear in exposing their Jewish identity.

HebrewCatholic.org is working to help reconcile and reach out to them and help them be public in their Jewish origins.

I came across materials on the Catholic Church in Germany, and Hitler’s relationship and empty promises to the Church and Christianity in general. The bishops in time rose to oppose him and Naziism…Pave the Way Organization went to Rome to the library to find all that they could on Pius…and left saying no one had done more for the Jews than Pius. That whole issue of Pius not doing enough is not finalized yet.

There are many Jews who have come to Christ. Scriptures say in the Old Testament the messiah would come, no stranger to suffering, and by His wounds we would be healed. St. Paul said God hardened the hearts of the Jews so the Gentiles could enter. My contacts with the Jewish people are very positive. Some have told me they wish they weren’t Jewish, in spite of their successful lives…and I always affirm them and their goodness. Others question the existence of God, and always affirm Him to them.

The Jews will always be the Lord’s Chosen People, and I see that effect in my contacts living very near the Jewish community, and serving them. I witness now the Catholicism of the Hebrew Catholics, and recognize a very special authority from them. It is nothing they have earned…it is there.

One of them told me that whoever, though, rejects Christ with full knowledge suffers the same fate as the rest…and they believe that some day the Hebrew Catholics will be of great help to Christianity.

A rabbi said on TV that he thinks it will be like this, 'See, we Christians told you we were right…and the other will say, ‘See, we Jews were right’…the two lampstands to the world.

St. Theresa of Avila mentioned her contact with some Jews…and it sounds like an open conflict of words…St. Basil…you have to read the dates and times and context of when he lived to get the full picture.

 

[chosen_people]

Hail_Linus;8015323**:

The Jews do bear guilt of rejecting Jesus.

What St. Basil means is they suffer the consequences as I have already explained. However, the catechism is clarifying that although this is true, the Jewish people themselves are not guilty and should not be treated as guilty of the actual sin of rejecting Jesus. It is a similar principle to Original Sin. All humanity bears the consequences of the guilt of Adam and Eve for rejecting God yet no human being is actually guilty. It is as simple as that.

Well in the past 3500 years the Jews are not only guilty of rejecting Jesus but also Mithras and Osiris and Tammuz and Adonis and Balder and Attis and Dionysus and Hercules and Perseus and Theseus (to name just a few). All worshiped and believed to be gods, all had virgin mothers and all had divine fathers. They all died in the service of mankind and they all were resurrected. In fact, the only thing the Jews haven’t rejected is their eternal covenant between the Jewish people and God, and I for one certainly agree that the Jews must and should bear full consequences for that decision.

Even more fascinating, for me anyway, is a forum in the 21st Century on the “culpability of the Jews”. Indeed the analogy to original sin is apt. However all mankind is descended from Adam and Eve. On the other hand, not all of humanity is descended from the Jews. The Jews killed Jesus. The Jews rejected Jesus thus preventing any absolution for this crime. Without absolution this culpability is passed on to each new generation of Jews. Indeed this was the basis not only for Church purity of blood rules concerning Christians of Jewish extraction but also for other necessary Church restrictions on the Jews. Since the Jews haven’t changed their attitudes, any change in attitudes toward the Jews on the part of the Church seemingly would require a conclusion that either the Jews did not kill Jesus or that they somehow received absolution despite their rejection of Jesus.

 

[KathleenGee]

Jews followed Jesus and became part of the New Covenant, and comprised the first church in Jerusalem. Judaism is the roots of the Church through Christ, a Jew.

Imbalanced focus on ‘Jews killed Jesus’…

 

[Hail_Linus]

Hi Chosen People:

I am just giving the Catholic point of view. I know it can sound offensive to a Jew. However, it also sounds offensive to hear a Jew say Jesus was just a man. But a Jew is correct, from the Jewish point of view, in saying that Jesus was just a man and I applaud him/her for it. Another thing we inherited from Judaism was the rejection of syncretism.

Just my intentions are not misunderstood I give you the following information about me:

1. I am actually a big fan of Judaism. I study as much as I can and I cannot resist listening to a good Rabbi.
2. Although I welcome Jewish converts and have been inspired tremendously by Hebrew Catholics, I actually go around trying to convert Jews to Orthodox Judaism, which I would be if I did not believe in Jesus.
3. Many of my ancestors were Sephardic Jews and I am proud of it. We even still have some Jewish customs in my family. I do not know whether they converted willing or if they were coerced.

However, for the sake of friendly debate…

Well in the past 3500 years the Jews are not only guilty of rejecting Jesus but also Mithras and Osiris and Tammuz and Adonis and Balder and Attis and Dionysus and Hercules and Perseus and Theseus (to name just a few). All worshiped and believed to be gods, all had virgin mothers and all had divine fathers. They all died in the service of mankind and they all were resurrected.

1. Jesus was a Jew and a real person the others were neither. Christianity is not a Protest of Judaism. Christianity cannot exist with out the validity of Judaism.
2. If scripture is accurate then we all came from Noah’s family. So similarities are to be expected. For example the Gilgamesh/Noah Flood stories.

In fact, the only thing the Jews haven’t rejected is their eternal covenant between the Jewish people and God, and I for one certainly agree that the Jews must and should bear full consequences for that decision.

1. In the Old Testament, there are many examples of the Jews rejecting God. In fact, God told Samuel that the Jews demand for a King was a rejection of God as their King.
2. Bearing the negative consequence of loyalty to God is admirable. Another trait inherited from the Jews.

Even more fascinating, for me anyway, is a forum in the 21st Century on the “culpability of the Jews”. Indeed the analogy to original sin is apt. However all mankind is descended from Adam and Eve. On the other hand, not all of humanity is descended from the Jews. The Jews killed Jesus. The Jews rejected Jesus thus preventing any absolution for this crime. Without absolution this culpability is passed on to each new generation of Jews. Indeed this was the basis not only for Church purity of blood rules concerning Christians of Jewish extraction but also for other necessary Church restrictions on the Jews. Since the Jews haven’t changed their attitudes, any change in attitudes toward the Jews on the part of the Church seemingly would require a conclusion that either the Jews did not kill Jesus or that they somehow received absolution despite their rejection of Jesus.

I was not phased at all until you pointed out the motivation of the person who started the thread and then I became horrified although not surprised. In the U.S. I have been noticing an anti-Israel sentiment brewing for the past 15 years. It has become worse and worse. Before we only had to look at the extreme right. Now we are starting to see it in the entire left. I sincerely pray for Israel’s well being.

Any Catholic that made such purity of blood rules would be guilty of the same crime as the Jews that rejected Jesus. In Catholicism a mortal sin is a sin so serious that it amounts to a rejection of God. It does bother me that my converso ancestors may have been persecuted by their fellow Catholics just because they had Jewish blood. It also bothers me that some of my ancestors may have done some of the persecuting. However, I know those were heretical behaviors.

Really the only culpability the Jews carry (from a Catholic point of view) is the Kingdom was taken away from them as I stated in one of my prior posts.

Finally, although you are right that not everyone descends from the Jews I would argue that humanity’s salvation and morality descends from the Jews.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

The discrepancy only arises when when one reads the relevant statements through the lenses of our politically correct age. There is nothing wrong theologically with the statements of the Patristic Fathers. However, if anyone made statements like that today it would be considered anti-Semitic since it would be interpreted in the way you are interpreting them. That is why the Catechism has to clarify this issue in a modern way.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

The Jews do bear guilt of rejecting Jesus. What St. Basil means is they suffer the consequences as I have already explained. However, the catechism is clarifying that although this is true, the Jewish people themselves are not guilty and should not be treated as guilty of the actual sin of rejecting Jesus. It is a similar principle to Original Sin. All humanity bears the consequences of the guilt of Adam and Eve for rejecting God yet no human being is actually guilty. It is as simple as that.

I tend to agree with this.

OTOH, how does one explain St John Chrysostom:

“I hate the Jews. God hates the Jews and always did.”

One can’t really explain that away from a certain “perspective,” does it?
I am NOT questioning Chrysostom’s place as Doctor of the Church, BTW.

I just don’t know how to square that with “they were condemning only the Jews of that time.”

 

[KathleenGee]

St. John C. said that??? Isn’t he addressing those who actively hate and curse Christ?

If people think Christianity is teaching people to hate Jews…they are not dealing with the context.