Were the Church Fathers and early popes antisemitic?

[DominvsVobiscvm]

Irish Melkite:

Anyone who doesn’t believe that anti-Semitism existed on the part of some in the early Church and still continues to exist on the part of some (including hierarchs) is naive.

You fail to distinguish between anti-Semitism (hatred of the Jewish people, a form of racism) and anti-Judaism (hatred of a false religion).

Yes, I’m well aware of the fact that “Wikpedia” is not, in itself, an authoritative source. However, it just corroborated what I found by my own amateur research on the topic: Gregory of Nyssa never made anti-Semitic remarks, and those who claim he did are not able to provide a single citation.

Or, perhaps you accept the neo-Modernist definition of anti-Semitism as “the belief that Catholicism is the true religion, modern Judaism is not salvific, and Jews need to convert to the true religion to be saved (said conversion can take the form of an implicit desire, I would add).” In that case, the Fathers were anti-Semitic, and rightly so! And so am I!

You have a bad habit of applying the term "heresy"to everything with which you disagree that passes before you on the computer screen. Anti-Semitism is a hateful and sinful act, but it is not heresy.

“Hate crimes” are hateful and sinful acts. Racism, in so far as it is a false ideology glorifying one or another race at the detrement of another, is a heresy, as it is a denial of some very essential Catholic truths about the dignity of men.

Whether the phrase has been used by the Holy Office or not is irrelevant. Take the word “heresy,” as defined by the Church; then look at “racism” as an ideology. And then tell me it’s not heretical.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

You fail to distinguish between anti-Semitism (hatred of the Jewish people, a form of racism) and anti-Judaism (hatred of a false religion).

you fail to distinguish between Love and hate. this is a problem of both the past and the present. if we look around the world and observe that the Gospel is not embraced by someone, or some group, we must respond with a Christlike response. we should address others with His Love, fortified by our hope in Him. to do otherwise is an error of the present.

if anyone has failed to live out the Gospel well, whether in the past or present, i look at that with regret. however there is no need to engage in this sort of he-said-she-said diversion, which can only derail us from our call to care for God’s Kingdom in the present. neither you nor i can correct or defend someone’s error in the past. just as we, as catholics, cannot take credit for their successes. if we somehow give credit to ourselves because we are catholic, and disparage others because they are not, we tend toward self-justification, because it really is an accusation against ourselves. they and the spreading of the Gospel are our responsibility.

i defend Jesus and His Church from the lies, attacks, accusations, etc. not because they are so fragile that they might not prevail, but because the detractors distance themselves from the eternal Salvation of Christ made possible for all in the present through the Sacraments and the ministry of the Church.

remember that Jesus said “remove the wooden beam from your eye first” (Mt 7:5) He warns us away from trying to remove the splinter from another’s eye, and there are reasons for that. how much more so if the splinter is in the eye of a person who is long dead and buried. if each of us in the Church were to heed the call to work on ourselves, where in the Church would errors such as these be found?

it is my opinion that we should not fuel this kind of fire. i think Jesus would be better served if we responded to these kind of people saying “maybe you should enter the Church, lead an exemplary and sinless life, and then, go and get others to do the same. and having observed the errors of others, perhaps they can be an instructive example of what to avoid yourself, instead of you adding insult to the injuries of the Savior who died for you.”

john

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

you fail to distinguish between Love and hate.

Say what?

There is some hatred that is righteous. Hatred of persons can never be justified, hatred of false ideologies is not only justified, but in fact demanded by our love for Truth, and He Who is Truth.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

dear mr. or ms. dominvsvobiscvm,

i regret to see that you have missed the point entirely. the trouble with what you have said is that the distinction you are making does not exist in action. it is one thing to say that “there is some hatred that is righteous” but it is an entirely different matter to enact it in true christian living. “righteous” hatred does not exist in the message or examples of the Gospel.

the only creature that can be either the subject or object of Love, as revealed to us by Jesus Christ, is the human person. statements, such as “i love candy” or “i love going to the movies” are an adulteration of the Truth He revealed, and knowing the Gospel, they are empty and meaningless. Love is a gift which God reserved for Himself and those whom He created in His image.

the gift of Love can be given fully, in half measure, or denied entirely. just as it can only be a person (or God) who receives Love, only a person can be the subject or object of its denial. you may say “i hate lies” but the only one that can receive your hate is the liar. just as “love” is shorthand for words like “like a lot”, “enjoy”, or perhaps “crave” in the statement “i love candy”, so is the word “hate” in the statement “i hate lies.” if hate is some degree of denial of Love, than this is a misuse of the word.

the real problem arises when we consider what you are ‘hating’ in this particular case. Jesus said that that which is put into the body cannot defile a man, but only that which comes from his heart, and He calls us to the conversion of heart. those who have not yet “put on Christ” are no different than you and i. they hold their matters of faith deep within their hearts, as we do. so in saying ‘i hate judaism’, you do nothing but issue an attack on the heart of a person, a person for whom Jesus declared His Love. regardless of how the words are crafted, the person is the target of the statement “i hate judaism.”

as to the so-called “righteousness” of your hatred, the Church teaches that Jesus was a jew himself. if judaism is properly an object of hate, how could Jesus profess Himself an adherent of that tradition. if judaism is hatable, then Christ would not have revealed himself as a jew. remeber that He said “I have not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.” how could he say that, if in fact we should ‘righteoulsly’ hate it, as you say? secondly, the Church teaches that we find our heritage in the faith of the jews; they were the receivers and custodians of the promise of the Messiah. now that the Messiah has come, these same people are just as responsible to receive Him as we are. they cannot be dismissed as a group, just as we cannot. just as you cannot hate me for my sins, in the same way, we cannot hate anyone else. thirdly, if you feel it your duty to declare some person or group, or their ideas, etc as your enemy, do you at the same time ignore what Christ taught us about our enemies? if the Life of Jesus, Truth Himself, shows us no examples of hating, how can we in turn hate on His behalf?

i hope that it is not too much to ask that you turn hatred into Love for the glory of God and His Kingdom. i don’t know if this is the only thing Jesus is asking from us, but it has to at least be in the top ten. i don’t know how you expect people to think that it would be a good idea to profess faith in Jesus, given what you are advocating. if as a consequence of following Jesus, i had to harbor any kind of hatred, i’d think twice about professing my faith at all. hatred is the favorite food in the culture of death. in the culture of Life, we are fed by Love.

john

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

I’ll tell you what, look up the word “hate” in a Bible concordance, and then tell me that there’s no such thing as righteous hatred.

 

[Shoshana]

The above quotes are authentic. We must not forget that the early Church Fathers were a product of their own time. BTW, I love them very much and I am deep into Philokalia…

While in Israel (2X) I picked up a book "The Holocaust and the Christian World.’ It was purchased at Yad Vashem. Many other books that I have read, including one with JPII quotes, quotes these very same statements. I do not have time now, as I have to go to work, but I will come back and share with you the different tactis how the Nazi measures were built on the direct orders from the Church of many moons ago.

This saddens me to no end as I have researched this big time, and I always come to the same conclusion. Whether one calls it anti-Semitism or anti-Judaism, the fact of the matter is, it has caused the undesirable fruits up until today…

Also I have been compiling anti-Semitic quotes from books that I read and I collect them on computer (even in Bernadeete’s time!)…Our history is riddled with such junk…:crying:

Blessings,
Shoshana

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

Shoshana:

The above quotes are authentic. We must not forget that the early Church Fathers were a product of their own time. BTW, I love them very much and I am deep into Philokalia…

While in Israel (2X) I picked up a book "The Holocaust and the Christian World.’ It was purchased at Yad Vashem. Many other books that I have read, including one with JPII quotes, quotes these very same statements. I do not have time now, as I have to go to work, but I will come back and share with you the different tactis how the Nazi measures were built on the direct orders from the Church of many moons ago.

This saddens me to no end as I have researched this big time, and I always come to the same conclusion. Whether one calls it anti-Semitism or anti-Judaism, the fact of the matter is, it has caused the undesirable fruits up until today…

Also I have been compiling anti-Semitic quotes from books that I read and I collect them on computer (even in Bernadeete’s time!)…Our history is riddled with such junk…:crying:

Blessings,
Shoshana

Not all of those quotes are authentic. The one from Saint Gregory of Nyssa certainly isn’t.

The others, when read in their rightful context, are as true today as they were centuries ago. A rightful hatred of modern day Judaism is not the same as hatred for the Jewish people.

False religion is to be hated, although the elements of truth found within them are to be treasured and purified.

 

[Origen]

Actually, in the waning years of Martin Luther’s life, he was known to have become an virulent and outspoken Jew hater.

Catholic haters, please clean your own house before attacking ours.

 

[Shoshana]

To make myself clear here, I want to say that I am a devout Roman Catholic who would die to betray her faith. I also realize that my faith, in the light of anti-Semitism or anti-Judaic (as you will) that has permeated all the ages, is very real. The Holocaust would not have existed if there had been no Christianity. Tough line to take, but it is true. It doesn’t help to hide our heads in the sand, otherwise history will repeat itself. I will not discuss other denominations here, as they are not here to defend themselves. Christianity encompasses ALL the denominations. Here is the list that I promised you. I will compare below the Canonical Law and Nazi measures that were taken based on such laws. It will also make us realize that anti-Judaism had long been a visible part of christian society. Here goes…

Canonical law: Prohibition of intermarriage and of sexual intercourse between and Jews, Synod of Elvira, 306
Nazi measure: Law for the Protection of german Blood and Honor September 15, 1935

Canonical law: Jews not allowed to employ Christian servants or possess Chrsitian slaves, 3rd Synod of Orleans, 538
**Nazi measure: **Law of the Protection of German blood and Honor, September 15, 1935

Canonical Law: Jews not permitted to show themselves in the streets during passion Week, 3rd Synod of Orleans, 538
**Nazi measure: **Decree authorizing local authorities to bar Jews from the streets on certain days (i.e. Nazi holidays0, December 3, 1938

**Canonical Law: **Burning of the Talmud and other books, 12th Synod of Toledo, 681
**Nazi measure; **Book burning in Germany.

**Canonical law: **Christians not permitted to patronize Jewish doctors, Trulanic Synod, 692
**Nazi measure: **Decree of July 25, 1938

---

**Canonical Law: **Jews not permitted to be plaintiffs, or witnesses against Christians in the Courts, 3rd Lateran Council, 1179
**Nazi measure; **Proposal by the Party Chancellery that Jews not be permitted to institute civil suits, September 9, 1942

---

**Canonical Law: **Jews not permitted to withold inheritance from descendants who had accepted Christianity, 3rd Lateran Council, 1179, Canon 26
**Nazi measure; **Decree empowering the Justice misnistry to void wills offedning the ‘sound judgment of the people,’ July 31, 1938

to bec ontinued…

 

[Shoshana]

**Canonical Law: **The marking of Jewish clothes with a badge, 4th Lateran Council, 1215, canon 68 (Copied from the legislation by Caliph Omar II (634-644), who had decreed that Christians wear blue belts and Jews, yellow belts.
**Nazi measure: **Decree of September 1, 1941-the Yellow Star

**Canonical Law: **Construction of new synagogues prohibited, Council of Oxford, 1222
**Nazi measure: **Destruction of synagogues in entire Reich, November 10, 1938

**Canonical Law: **Compulsory ghettoes, Synod of Breslau, 1267
**Nazi measure; **Order by Heydrich, September 21, 1939

**Canonical Law: **Christians not permitted to sell or rent real estate to Jews, Synod of Ofen, 1270
**Nazi measure: **Decree for providing for compulsory sale of Jewish real estate, December 3, 1938

**Canonical Law: **Adoption by a Christian of the jewish religion or return by a baptized jew to the jewish relgion defined as a heresy, Synod of Mainz, 1310
**Nazi measure; **Adoption of the Jewish religion by a Christian places him in jeopardy of being treated as a Jew. June 26, 1942

**Canonical Law: **Jews not permitted to obtain academic degrees, Council of Basel, 1434, Sessio XIX
**Nazi measure: **Law against Overcrowding of German Schools and Univerities, April 25, 1933

This is enough for now. We must not forget that Catholicism was the main religion for 1500 years. Many of these laws were made before even the split with Luther. Whatever dislike Luther felt for the Jew, he inherited it from Catholics first…

Blessings,
Shoshana

---

 

[Shoshana]

DominvsVobiscvm:

The others, when read in their rightful context, are as true today as they were centuries ago. A rightful hatred of modern day Judaism is not the same as hatred for the Jewish people.

False religion is to be hated, although the elements of truth found within them are to be treasured and purified.

Exactly what are you trying to say Dominus? How can your everyday joe-blow discern the difference between the two??? Hatred for false religion snowballs into full hatred as depicted by Luther. His heart may have been in the right place when he wanted to purge Catholicism of the errors of the day…unfortunetly, his concern snowballed into full blown hatred on his part.

‘The other quotes are as true today as they were yesterday’…and by whose authority?? I think if the Desert Fathers were alive today, they would retract such words…knowing the death it has brought upon the Jewish people. I believe they would be mortified. In Scripture it says: 'I will bless those who bless you and I will curse those who curse you."

Please clarify your stand…

Blessings,
Shoshana

 

[DominvsVobiscvm]

None of your alleged parallelisms between medieval legislation and Nazism are valid; the resemblances are superficial, at best. All those law, within their historical contexts, are completely justified, as they were seen as necessary to the preservation of a truly Catholic state.

For example:

Canonical law: Prohibition of intermarriage and of sexual intercourse between and Jews, Synod of Elvira, 306

Nazi measure: Law for the Protection of german Blood and Honor September 15, 1935

To draw a parallel here is stupid. Up until very recently, Catholics were forbidden from marrying any non-Catholic except in the most exceptional of circumstances. Even Saint Paul warned against this, as were the Jews of Biblical times. (Up until very recently, Orthodox Jews were also forbidden, by their own religion, from intermarrying.)

Today, living as we do in a much more pluralistic society, dispensations are more frequently granted, but they are just that: dispensations from what should be the norm. Intermarriage does often prove a danger to the Faith, leading the Catholic spouse to possible indifferentism and making children feel confused and/or divided in religious loyalty.

There is nothing remotely anti-Semitic about this;it’s got nothing to do with race, or the purity of blood. And it applies to Jews, as it does to marrying Protestants or pagans.

Also, to suggest that the Nazis deliberately adapted this canon from a Spanish synod in order to make their own law is itself ludicrous.

Exactly what are you trying to say Dominus? How can your everyday joe-blow discern the difference between the two??? Hatred for false religion snowballs into full hatred as depicted by Luther.

That’s like saying that disciplining children will invariably snowball into child abuse. Don’t be rediculous. Do you believe that there is such a thing as a “false religion”? If so, shouldn’t we despise the errors contained therein?

Please clarify your stand…

I think I’ve clarified enough. There was anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages; no one denies it. But the quotes made above, the authentic ones anyway, are not examples of this. Do you want to go through them one-by-one, to show how they are completely compatible with Catholic dogma?

 

[Shoshana]

DominvsVobiscvm:

All those law, within their historical contexts, are completely justified, as they were seen as necessary to the preservation of a truly Catholic state.

There is nothing justifiable in the quotes, whatever century you are talking about, any means Catholicism took to ensure a Catholic state. NOTHING. By your reasoning, then, whatever the Muslims did or do in their own Muslim countries justifies the quality of muslimism. Well, there would be many who would disagree with you. If you feel it it was completely within their/our right, then, in that line of thinking it was within the Jews’ right to crucify Our Lord. They were sincere in their own right. They were sincerely wrong. According to them, Jesus was not kosher and believe me, Dominus, if Jesus came back today WE would crucify Him again and again…

To draw a parallel here is stupid.

You are entitled to your own opinion. I refuse to battle over this. Debate yes, battle, no.

Up until very recently, Catholics were forbidden from marrying any non-Catholic except in the most exceptional of circumstances. Even Saint Paul warned against this, as were the Jews of Biblical times. (Up until very recently, Orthodox Jews were also forbidden, by their own religion, from intermarrying.)

Yes, you are right. I know the Church’s wisdom in this. As I myself, married a non-practicing Anglican. It does a number on the children…:crying:

There is nothing remotely anti-Semitic about this;it’s got nothing to do with race, or the purity of blood. And it applies to Jews, as it does to marrying Protestants or pagans.

I concur.

Also, to suggest that the Nazis deliberately adapted this canon from a Spanish synod in order to make their own law is itself ludicrous.

Have you proof of this?? How would you know? Under your authority?

That’s like saying that disciplining children will invariably snowball into child abuse. Don’t be rediculous.

I do not think I am ridiculous. It happens that disciplining children can turn into child abuse, my friend. But you are comparing apples to oranges here. The ambience in the 30’s was conducive to such actions as seen in the Holocaust. It was a build-up of centuries of anti-Semitism that yielded such carnage…Please, could you tell me why Christianity (not just Catholicism) as a whole did not take a stand against such degrading treatment? and ultimately, the death of so many???

Do you believe that there is such a thing as a “false religion”? If so, shouldn’t we despise the errors contained therein?

I think I have enough on my plate trying to correct my own errors and dealing with the so many ‘errors’ of Catholic abuses. The fact that so many people do not believe in the Real Presence and the Sacred Host truly being Jesus truly slays me…why look anywhere else?

]Do you want to go through them one-by-one, to show how they are completely compatible with Catholic dogma?

Go for it, Dominus! I think we would all be interested and I would be delighted to learn from you!

Blessings,
Shoshana

 

[David_E.Mahony]

How significant was ‘Nostra Aetate’?

In particular I ask this in the context of the article listed below?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/29/nyregion/29profile.html

DEM

 

[Salvo]

First, I can’t STAND the misuse of the word “anti-semitic”. Arabs, Syriacs, Copts and Ethiopians are also semitic peoples. I cringe everytime I hear people blathering how the Palestinians are “anti-Semitic!” since they are themselves Semitic.

Second, we are at a disadvantage from these quotes here since a) they must be read within the context of the entire treatise and b) we are a bit at a loss as for the most part they are originally written in Koine Greek and Latin. While Latin is a bit easier to translate into English, the Koine Greek is not (hence the multitude of New Testament translations - good and bad). c) we need to read them in the historical context of the time they were written.

Third, I realise that anyone on this board who even MENTIONS the fact that modern day Jews in Israel or any group of historical Jews have ever been the agressors in any conflict is instantly branded as anti-Jewish (or anti-semitic :crying: ) . But the fact is that the early Christian communities in the East were often persecuted by the older Jewish communities. And by persecuted, I’m talking Jews massacring the Christians and running them out of town. One such example that I’m not sure if anyone here is familiar with is the story of Simeon Bar Kochba, who ordered the Christians of Jerusalem unless they proclaimed him to be the Messiah. The didn’t, and he killed 'em.
Given the current state and enlightened understanding Christians and Jews have of their religions, these quotes seem harsh and “un-Christian”. However, all you need to do is read the Talmud, much of it written during the same time period as these quotes. The Talmud contains a vast number of disparaging remarks against Christians, Jesus and His mother, Mary as well as proclamations allowing Jews to take advantage of Christians and non-Jews in various ways…all backed up biblically.

Of course when faced with this little fact, Jews immediately charge that we are taking the Talmud out of context, need to read it in Aramaic, and lread them in the hisotrical context of the time they were written…

 

[Luke24]

mjdonnelly:

We really would need the quotes and where the quotes are from. Quotes taken out of context mean nothing. One verse in the Bible says there is no God. It is taken out of context from the remaining verses, but that is how anti-catholics need to support their arguments.

I find your post quite obnoxious. We do not take things out of context; especially the Word of God!

Pay close attention and tell me.
1 Timothy 3:1-16 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
2 Peter 3:14-18 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

mjdonnelly:

here is a reply from JPII:

vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01111997_p-42a_en.html

It does talk about Pope Paul IV putting all the jews in a ghetto of Rome. This document explains the Church’s position. It states that there have been some anti-semitics. Some of whom are Saints and had been Popes.

I didn’t read all of those extracts - the first two were more than enough. It was like reading one of Hitler’s rants - vile. I felt physically revolted. ​

I only wish the people who who said these things could be brought back to life, to see for themselves where their dreadful talk has led. Saints, indeed ! Chrysostom’s rant is like something from a Nazi rag - he didn’t control his “golden mouth” then

The Church is branded with the mark of Cain - as, IIRC, John XXIII said. (That’s from Pinchas Lapide’s 1964 book “The Last Three Popes and the Jews” - the first part is a pretty unpleasant recital of the Church’s foul treatment of the Jewish people; it was because the Church was traditionally venomously anti-Jewish that the behaviour of Pius XI and his successors was so remarkable. The record is not unrelieved darkness, certainly; but there is more than enough to give one plenty of sleepless nights.)

Thank God that Vatican II has forsworn such horrible rhetoric. Did the Fathers think that such language would not have any evil effects ? ##

 

[SoldierMike]

It’s human nature to hold grudges. We have to let go and forgive those who tresspass against us. We have forgiven those Jews who were directly (whoever was there) responsible for Jesus’s death. We have also forgiven any one who was associated with his death. Just as the Jews have forgiven all Germans who were responsible for the holocaust and just as the Jews don’t hold any grudges against Germany, we too have forgiven the Jews.

 

[Salvo]

SoldierMike:

It’s human nature to hold grudges. We have to let go and forgive those who tresspass against us. We have forgiven those Jews who were directly (whoever was there) responsible for Jesus’s death. We have also forgiven any one who was associated with his death. Just as the Jews have forgiven all Germans who were responsible for the holocaust and just as the Jews don’t hold any grudges against Germany, we too have forgiven the Jews.

Unfortunately, therre are people on both sides who haven’t forgiven anything at all. When “The Passion” came out, I was surprised at just how many Jews still harboured such a strong anti-Christian sentiment. They claimed this was just another Christian tactic to persecute Jews and they were convinced the release of the movie would eventually lead to modern pogroms and a potential holocaust. They said the story was clearly “hate speach” and should have been banned. And even more recently, when the Pope came out to condemn the wall being built in Israel, many Jews saw this once again as proof that Christians are bent on the destruction of all Jews. The Pope and the church will simply never be able to do enough to appease some of the more radical elements in Judaism.

Incidentally, I posted about this over on the “Who controls the Holy Land Anymore” thread and gave some links to Jewish websites with forums for discussion, like this one. If anyone is interested, they can go and see what many of the Jews think about His Holiness. Not really for the fain-hearted though…

 

[Shoshana]

SoldierMike:

. We have forgiven those Jews who were directly (whoever was there) responsible for Jesus’s death. We have also forgiven any one who was associated with his death.

We do not need to forgive the Jews for Jesus’ death, nor the Romans. They were only human instruments…WE have killed Him, and still do today. Each and everyone of us has killed Him. This kind of mindset needs to stop…the conclusion would be the likes of the Holocaust. The Church has grown through these many centuries. And it is a well-known theology that it is because of our own indicidual sins, that Jesus died. We need not forgive the Jews. There is no reason.

Just as the Jews have forgiven all Germans who were responsible for the holocaust and just as the Jews don’t hold any grudges against Germany, we too have forgiven the Jews.

I tried to respond to this a couple of hours ago but my computer is playing games with me. I have not encountered one Jew who has forgiven the Germans and all those entailed in the Holocaust. My Jewish tour guide would not even go into Yad Vashem (my second time) because it is so graphic…the horror is inexprressible. I have belonged to a couple of Jewish sites, forums like this, and ALL hold some sort of negative feeling for anything Christian, and mainly Catholic due to the Holocaust. So your statement is naive at the least…the Jews will always hold us accountable for all of the damage in the many past centuries. It was certainly bad theology…and I believe Jesus would not affirm this kind of thinking. Do thet have a right to begrudge any of this? I do not judge them or condemn them. A couple of them are really good friends. They fear because anti-Semitism is on the rise again in Europe and they are just plain angry at the desecration of their synagogues and cemetaries. The are angry because people persecute them for just being who they are and not for their actions. We also would be angry at the desecration of our Churches and cemetaries.

And the strangest thing about all of htis is that the Jews who did not accept Jesus as their savior, became one of them as His brothers and sisters in theflesh were being crucified themselves along with Him who tried to save them from their own selves. A Jewish savior for Jewish people…all died.

Blessings,
Shoshana