Why did the Church blame the Jews for killing Jesus until 1965?

[origen314]

The Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus until Nostra Aetate in 1965. This led to 1900+ years of slaughter of the Jewish people in the name of Christ. How could the Church not just permit this mass murder but enable it? Why was it only in the aftermath of the Holocaust that the Church finally did what it should have two millennia earlier?

 

[JimG]

I’m not a good enough historian to evaluate the question–whether it is historically accurate, or to what extent it happened.

But it is an interesting question. Consider that:

Jesus was a Jew.
Jesus preached primarily to Jews.
All the Apostles were Jews.
The first pope was a Jew.
All of the first Christians were Jews. In fact, they even continued for a while to go to synagogue prayers on the Sabbath while going to the Lord’s Supper (Mass) on Sunday.

There is reason to believe that perhaps a majority of the Jews in first century Jerusalem eventually became Christian. Paul, meanwhile, began converting the Gentiles, and that raised a controversy as to whether Gentile converts to Christianity had to first become Jews, practicing the Jewish Law. (They didn’t.)

The New Covenant arises from the old covenant.

 

[Path_Finder]

I do not accuse anyone of misrepresenting the truth, I would say when one is confronted with questions like this, one should at least ponder, what sources were used to make this inquiry? Is it valid?

Some may not know what Nostra Aetate is.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostra_Aetate#Summary_of_the_final_text_of_Nostra_Aetate

Note, to me the premise of the first post makes me wonder if it is accurate, this document also deals with:

Hindus
Buddhists
Muslims.

The Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus until Nostra Aetate in 1965.

So what is the document where the Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus? And enabled what was stated in the OP?

 

[petra22]

Wasn’t it the Jews who said, “Let His death be on us and on our childdren!” Crucify Him!

So, they took responsibility. I’ll admit, it’s a heavy load to carry…

 

[Reepicheep]

There is a difference between “a lot of church members committed the sin of persecuting Jews” and “the Church officially declared the Jews to be guilty of Christ’s death”.

 

[Sam43232]

The Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus until Nostra Aetate in 1965. This led to 1900+ years of slaughter of the Jewish people in the name of Christ. How could the Church not just permit this mass murder but enable it? Why was it only in the aftermath of the Holocaust that the Church finally did what it should have two millennia earlier?

AFAIK, both premises contained in this question are not strictly true. Just to make sure there are no misunderstandings:

1. Church doctrine has never officially blamed the Jewish people as a race for the death of Christ.
2. The Church has never as a whole sanctioned the killing of Jews.
3. Slaughter of the Jews is isolated (not in terms of scale, but in terms of belonging to certain periods within those 1900 years)

Hatred of the Jews was a “popular” movement in Europe for a variety of reasons. In no particular order:

1. Christians were forbidden to engage in usury; the only significant non-Christian population with a legitimized existence was the Jewish people - ergo they became the bankers. Nobody likes paying interest or particularly loves their bank. Even today there are a lot of racist conspiracy theories that involve Jews and banks.
2. A greater focus on the death of Christ during the middle ages (lots of discussion about how to define dogmas like transubstantiation, etc) also naturally brought questions apportioning blame into the popular consciousness and there is a verse in the Bible where the Jewish leaders assembled claim responsibility for the death on them and their children’s children.
3. Jews were by and large the only visible minority in Europe during the middle ages: an unfortunately reality is that visible minorities nearly always face some form of discrimination. The Romans hated the Goths (even ones permitted to live in the Empire) and medieval Europeans hated the Jews (even though both church and state permitted them to live and keep their religion.) I’m sure other examples readily come to mind in other times and places.
4. Protestantism was connected with a rejection of Jewish law as something that leads to death - Martin Luther wrote very unkind things about the Jews and advocated burning their synagogues and taking their money until they converted, for instance.
5. I believe in Eastern Europe some rulers used the Jews to help administer regions due to their expertise in financial matters and due to the fact that they were “neutral” and could be used in Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox areas without arousing religious conflict. This contributed to their lack of popularity in the region.

SO, back to your original question… which, if you’ll allow me to rephrase it, is “How did the church conceive of Jews prior to 1965?”

For that - I’m not a “real” Catholic yet, so I can’t answer in terms of church documents. But historically there’s a pretty solid trend of:

1. Isolated persecution of the Jews on a lay level
2. Isolated attempts to protect Jews by individual bishops, popes and priests (including during WWII)
3. Any sane Christian in any era realizes what an earlier poster pointed out: Jesus is a Jew, his first disciples were all Jews, and God never proclaims that the Jews are no longer his chosen people.
4. Special laws in Christian lands often permitted Jews to live out their religion in a way not granted to other religions - a blessing in terms of tolerance, but perhaps a curse in making them a public oddity.

Knowing only the historical side of this development, I would have to guess that the church document Nostra Aetatae was calculated to head off some persistent justifications among lay Christians for persecuting Jews rather than changing what the Church taught about Jews. The Catholic Church has never been bent on blaming the Jewish race for the death of Jesus.

 

[Sam43232]

The Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus until Nostra Aetate in 1965. This led to 1900+ years of slaughter of the Jewish people in the name of Christ. How could the Church not just permit this mass murder but enable it? Why was it only in the aftermath of the Holocaust that the Church finally did what it should have two millennia earlier?

Sorry, I know my last response was long enough but just as a post-script the first slaughter of Jewish people that I am aware of in Christian territory was the result of some of the popular movements part of the first Crusade. (1096) Prior to that you’d be hard pressed to find a large scale example of slaughter of the Jews - I think some historians even refer to what happened during this Crusade as “the first Holocaust.”

 

[Kelt]

Paul was trying to convert Romans to Christianity. At the time, the Jews were very unpopular with Rome with their constant rebellions against Roman rule in what was then Palestine. They were turbulent times, leading to the rebellion that was last straw for the Romans in 66AD. Jerusalem was completely destroyed in 70AD along with early followers of Jesus who still lived there.
Judaism had become a pariah religion and some Jews who became Christians realised they had to disassociate themselves from Judaism if they were to have any influence with Romans. Also, Roman law had crucified Jesus.
Take the light of guilt off the Romans and onto the Jews…

 

[Yago]

There is a difference between “a lot of church members committed the sin of persecuting Jews” and “the Church officially declared the Jews to be guilty of Christ’s death”.

Wasn’t it the Jews who said, “Let His death be on us and on our childdren!” Crucify Him!

So, they took responsibility. I’ll admit, it’s a heavy load to carry…

No. They called out to the precious blood of Our Lord,
On the cross he prayed to his father to forgive them as they did not know what they did.

I think some historians even refer to what happened during this Crusade as “the first Holocaust.”

Nothing was done to the Jews unless they pretended to be Christian.

 

[Kelt]

---

Nothing was done to the Jews unless they pretended to be Christian.

When?
Jews were treated with contempt which led to acts of persecution on and off over the centuries. Christians used them as money lenders and then resented them even more as they got rich!
For example, in England in 12th century there were a series of pogroms against the Jews. In 1190 there was a particularly nasty massacre of the Jews in York.
Have you read the Merchant of Venice?!

 

[Yago]

---

When?
Jews were treated with contempt which led to acts of persecution on and off over the centuries. Christians used them as money lenders and then resented them even more as they got rich!
For example, in England in 12th century there were a series of pogroms against the Jews. In 1190 there was a particularly nasty massacre of the Jews in York.
Have you read the Merchant of Venice?!

I have read a lot about all of them, yet I dont remember that a single bishop supported them…

 

[Path_Finder]

I have read a lot about all of them, yet I dont remember that a single bishop supported them…

True. It’s more like both premises in the OP are false. I’d like to see the original sourcing of information.

 

[Kelt]

True. It’s more like both premises in the OP are false. I’d like to see the original sourcing of information.

Anti-Semitic feeling was running high in 12th century Europe, stoked by the fervour of the crusades. King Richard1 was about to set off himself. It stands to reason that if Christians have been told that the Jews killed Christ and that they claimed in the bible that his blood should be upon them and their children, then they are going to find it easy to use that as an excuse for treating Jews badly!

 

[Randy_Carson]

The Church blamed the Jews for killing Jesus until Nostra Aetate in 1965. This led to 1900+ years of slaughter of the Jewish people in the name of Christ. How could the Church not just permit this mass murder but enable it? Why was it only in the aftermath of the Holocaust that the Church finally did what it should have two millennia earlier?

If the Jews didn’t kill Jesus, who did? The Romans? You and me?

It is very likely that Pontius Pilate never would have heard of Jesus of Nazareth if not for the demands of the Sanhedrin. The Jewish people cried, “Let his blood be upon us”.

So, here is how I see it:

1. 
   *]All of us are responsible for the death of Jesus in that if we were not sinners, Jesus would not have been sent to die upon the cross for our salvation.
   *]The Jewish leaders thought Jesus was a threat and a blasphemer, and they insisted upon His execution by the occupying Romans. If the Romans had allowed the Sanhedrin to execute Jesus according to Jewish law, the Sanhedrin would have done so without Pilate’s involvement.
   *]The Jewish people voted for Jesus’ execution after being stirred up by agitators at the Praetorium.
   *]Pilate was afraid of the crowd and of the possibility that a negative report would get back to Rome of a rival king in Judea.
   
   So, there were lots of guilty parties, but technically, the Jews did kill Jesus; it was “death by Roman” - the first century equivalent of “death by cop”.

 

[Path_Finder]

Anti-Semitic feeling was running high in 12th century Europe, stoked by the fervour of the crusades. King Richard1 was about to set off himself. It stands to reason that if Christians have been told that the Jews killed Christ and that they claimed in the bible that his blood should be upon them and their children, then they are going to find it easy to use that as an excuse for treating Jews badly!

Pure conjecture. Saying it stands to reason sounds like the reasoning of anti-Christianity thought among many in Secular Europe.

Physical violence against Jews was never part of the church hierarchy’s official policy for crusading, and the Christian bishops, especially the Archbishop of Cologne, did their best to protect the Jews. A decade before, the Bishop of Speyer had taken the step of providing the Jews of that city with a guarded quarter to protect them from Christian violence and given their chief Rabbis the control of judicial matters in the quarter. Nevertheless, some also took money in return for their protection.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

So the question is not about whether citizens did it, it is “why did the Church blame the Jews for Killing Jesus”. Some peasants and royalty may have, this is not the church. King Richard1 is NOT the church.

Let’s see backup, not opinion.

I note that CA has just come out with a book on the Crusades. We have to be careful to trust institutions on higher learning with many non-believers as to their understanding of history.

crusadesbook.com/

Was Jerusalem sacked? It appears so but I’m sorry I didn’t go to a college that had a class in the crusades. Rome apparently was sacked at one time as well and I don’t believe we are talking about the one with the Goth invasion.

 

[Randy_Carson]

No. They called out to the precious blood of Our Lord,

The Jews at the Praetorium were not a bunch of faithful followers of Jesus calling upon His precious blood for their own forgiveness. They were saying, in effect, “We’ll take the responsibility for getting rid of this man.” Pilate specifically washes his hands of the affair and tells the crowd that they are responsible.

Matthew 27:20-25
20 But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed.

21 “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor.

“Barabbas,” they answered.

22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked.

They all answered, “Crucify him!”

23 “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”

25 All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”

The people cried out for Barabbas to be released instead of Jesus. They knew that Jesus would die, and they accepted the responsibility that Pilate was denying.

On the cross he prayed to his father to forgive them as they did not know what they did.

True. The people did not really understand that Jesus was God.

 

[Randy_Carson]

---

When?
Jews were treated with contempt which led to acts of persecution on and off over the centuries. Christians used them as money lenders and then resented them even more as they got rich!
For example, in England in 12th century there were a series of pogroms against the Jews. In 1190 there was a particularly nasty massacre of the Jews in York.
Have you read the Merchant of Venice?!

Anti-Semitic feeling was running high in 12th century Europe, stoked by the fervour of the crusades. King Richard1 was about to set off himself. It stands to reason that if Christians have been told that the Jews killed Christ and that they claimed in the bible that his blood should be upon them and their children, then they are going to find it easy to use that as an excuse for treating Jews badly!

To be fair, anti-Christian sentiment was running high for several centuries, also.

For example, you may recall that “the Jews” stoned Stephen in the book of Acts.

 

[Yago]

They were saying, in effect, “We’ll take the responsibility for getting rid of this man.”

Yes, that is correct. I base my statement from this prayer, part of annum sacrum.

Prayer of Consecration to the Sacred Heart
Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thine altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but, to be more surely united with Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy most Sacred Heart.

Many indeed have never known Thee; many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy sacred Heart. Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to Thy Father’s house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.

Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.

Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race, once Thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life.

Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: “Praise be to the divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to it be glory and honor for ever.” Amen.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Yes, that is correct. I base my statement from this prayer, part of annum sacrum.

Prayer of Consecration to the Sacred Heart
Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thine altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but, to be more surely united with Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy most Sacred Heart.

Many indeed have never known Thee; many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy sacred Heart. Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to Thy Father’s house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.

Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.

Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race, once Thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life.

Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: “Praise be to the divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to it be glory and honor for ever.” Amen.

Ah.

The Jews did call down upon themselves the responsibility for the blood of Jesus. We, in turn, call down that same blood to cleanse them of their guilt.

Same action. Two different intents.

I think you and I are in sync here.

 

[Yago]

Ah.

The Jews did call down upon themselves the responsibility for the blood of Jesus. We, in turn, call down that same blood to cleanse them of their guilt.

Same action. Two different intents.

I think you and I are in sync here.

Yes, we are in sync.:yup::clapping: