Today we have been having an interesting conversation on the Association of Hebrew Catholics page on facebook. This discussion is with two Hebrew Catholics, Dave and myself (Br Gilbert) and Jason who is a matrilineal Jew who is studying to become a Catholic. We are discussing the perennial question of Jewish Identity.
This discussion began when Jason posted a link to an article about Jon Ossof who had patrilinleal Jewish ancestry and not maternal.
Jason wrote:
Mixed feelings about this article. Hebrew Catholic (Universal!) is the appropriate welcoming identity for all people of Jewish extraction no matter how remote—because of The Life, Christ. Yet I also find it frustrating that a "patrilineal" Jew is not seen as a Jew by the Orthodox and yet would be just as much at risk as any Jew in Nazi Occupied Europe (for example). However, I also respect the deep reasons for this ancient ruling (even if I only have limited understanding of them.) Jewish actually describes a physical nation (secular), ethnicity AND spirituality, and one is still considered totally Jewish as long as they meet the legal requirements which only require they fall within one of these categories. My mixed feelings stem from the fact that often the Jewish categories are not in unity and work against each other. The secular Jew demands acceptance from the religious where it's not possible. It's like a lay person wanting to be Catholic but actively working to change the magisterium before he joins. At least for my own kids who are Catholic "patrilineal", there's a careful distinction to be made that their religion is not Jewish, it is Christian/Catholic, and those who follow Judaism would not consider them so. But they are Hebrew Catholics AND Jewish in the secular sense. I still have not worked out how to articulate this complicated identity! I kind of think if someone like Ossoff really demands acceptance from Orthodox Jews he should respect it and do a full orthodox (not reform) conversion. I have heard many do.
Dave:
I am a patrilineal Jew who is Catholic. I had a strong Jewish identity growing up and all the high holidays. My dad’s family died in the Shoah. In fact if we lived in biblical times my being a Jew would not be questioned as patrilineal descent was the norm in scripture with two specific exceptions. While I respect halacha this change was post exile and post Incarnation.
[Note from Br Gilbert: I do not agree with this that maternal lineage of Jews was post the Roman exile and the Incarnation. Both Paul and Philo seem to assume this in true and even if one reads the stories of the Patriarchs this is obvious as well. Isaac was a Hebrew because his mother Sarah was a Hebrew, Ishmael's sons were not because they did not have Hebrew mothers. Ishmael himself may have been considered a Hebrew as his Egyptian mother Hagar was a convert to the religion of Abraham. Esau and Jacob were Hebrews but Esau's sons were not as they had non-Hebrew mothers. Asenath the wife of Joseph was a Hebrew because her real mother was Dinah (the daughter of Jacob and Leah) who was raped. Zilpah and Bilhah had a Hebrew father (Laban) but their mother was not but they were converts to the religion of Abraham. So this was the situation in Patriarchial times but ultimately the Community decides on who belongs to it.]
Jason to Dave:
Interesting. You know the passage when Paul circumcised Timothy on account of his gentile father because of the Jews? In this light it was to actually convert Timothy who wasn’t considered a Jew even though his mother was. Does that make sense? I always looked at it backwards but this makes more sense to me.
Interesting. You know the passage when Paul circumcised Timothy on account of his gentile father because of the Jews? In this light it was to actually convert Timothy who wasn’t considered a Jew even though his mother was. Does that make sense? I always looked at it backwards but this makes more sense to me.
Jason to Br Gilbert:
Is this the way to look at it?
Br Gilbert to Jason:
I don't think at this stage that there is any one definitive way to look at it - it is open to theological discussion and speculation. Father Elias Friedman the founder of the Association of Hebrew Catholics began this discussion with his book Jewish Identity back in the 1970's but his insights though helpful do not take into account certain developments in understandings since the the pontificate of Pope John Paul II until now.
Father Elias did stress, I think correctly, that Jewish Identity was connected to the concepts of Law and Election and that this Election was mediated by the Community. However, I think Father Elias incorrectly in certain regards separated being Jewish from being an Israelite. He also incorrectly divided Rabbinical Judaism from Mosaic Judaism as if they were not intricately connected. He thus saw rabbinic Jews as Jews but Reform, Samaritan, Hebrew Catholics etc as no longer Jewish but as Israelites. He thus saw each of these communities as Israelites (not Jews) and thus being able to mediate the Israelite Election factor while separating it from the Law aspect. He wrote:
"The power of the community to mediate the "election factor" derives from the Election itself. The people of Israel, being the material object of the Election, each of its constituent communities is capable of mediating the "election factor"."
He also wrote:
"To sum up, a community is Jewish in the sense of the term fixed by historical convention when it is ruled by rabbinical law; it is Israelite when it is in historical relation with the People of Israel prior to their dispersion from the Holy Land."
Father Elias like many of his generation were negative toward Torah observance and thus his desire to find an understanding of Israelite Election that was separate from it. Many of his ideas about that would not be acceptable today by the criteria of the documents about Judaism by the Church in the last 40 years. JPII and BXVI teachings on Jews and Judaism has demonstrated that rabbinic Judaism does serve a positive role in the economy of salvation during the times of the Gentile Church. Father Elias felt that they didn't and had no positive role other than mediating the Election factor.
Other Catholic theologians like Father Gregory Baum did see a positive role for the Jews in the economy of salvation over the last two thousand years and into the future. Father Elias mentions his disagreement with Baum. I would and I think JPII and BXVI and Pope Francis would agree with Baum. Father Elias wrote:
"The Christian is perhaps more aware of the catastrophe from which Rabbinism emerged than Chouraqui may imagine. Anyway, Chouraqui would surely agree that if what he says is true and God is in exile from the post-Christic Jewish People, the latter is automatically disqualified from playing a positive role in the economy of salvation. Consequently, we reject the affirmation of Gregory Baum according to which “Judaism continues to exercise a positive role in God’s plan of salvation”. What role did devolve on it we hope to consider later.If post-Christic Judaism were in any way valid, as Fisher pretends, the Jewish convert would be obliged to practice it even after his entry into the Church, which no one would be prepared to concede. The invalidation of Rabbinical Judaism should not be received as an offense. After all, Judaism invalidates Christianity."
Thus while in the time of Father Elias was writing his book that was one perspective that could be discussed - I believe now with the further theological development that his position on this is invalid to be held by a theologian thinking with the mind of the Church. I think if Father Elias was writing now he would revise his thinking and his book to reflect this.
I also think that Father Elias was wrong about hereditary of the individual playing no role in Jewish or Israelite identity. He emphasised the role of the Community in the Election factor to such an extent that he didn't acknowledge the importance of Jewish or Israelite biological ancestry. For example he didn't consider Spanish Catholics of Marrano ancestry as Israelites or Jews but as Spanish Catholics with Judiaizing tendencies. I and many other Hebrew Catholics would disagree with him on that. He wrote:
"...The Marranos were crypto-Jews who practiced Catholicism in public and Judaism in secret. The majority ended up by being absorbed into the Spanish Church. A handful, especially on the island of Majorca, still keep up Jewish customs, even tending to intermarry. These habits are insufficient to regard them as Israelites. They are Spanish Catholics with judaizing tendencies..."
I suppose I should write my understanding of this in a blog post but as you can see it probably needs a whole theological book written on the topic to take all the best from Father Elias while critiquing his ideas in the light of our 21st century understanding. I should also add that Father Elias does not consider those born into secular homes such as the secular Israelis to be Jewish but he does think of them as Israelites because they are part of an Israelite community. He also wrote in regard to this Israelite (but not necessarily Jewish) Election:
“...It results from a transcendental relation between the person and the divine will, mediated by the community of the elect. It is because one is born into the Elect People that one is born an Israelite. The ‘election factor’ is irrevocable for the person so born, since the gifts of God are without repentance. It is revocable for his descendants, not by an act of will, but where the descendants have ceased to belong to a community, mediator of the ‘election factor’..."
Jason to Br Gilbert:
Well it's really good information for those of who may not have time to read the unwritten book. You've opened quite a door here.
Br Gilbert:
When I wrote above, that Father Elias saw no positive role, that was in regards to its divine mandate or authority. He certainly saw many positive aspects of rabbinic Judaism from a cultural perspective.
Jason to Br Gilbert
I am somewhat inclined to agree with him. The purpose of Rabbinic Judaism is not exactly salvation. It is preservation. (Yes, it precedes salvation which in Judaism comes with the Moshiach when the religion is properly reconstituted with the rebuilding of the Temple.)
Jason:
This is where the Rabbis claimed Divine Authority. Rabbi Eliezer's miracle of the moving carob tree which they rejected. Rabbi Eliezer I believe was friendly to Jewish Christians and it got him in trouble (not in this excerpt). I remember something about Jesus commanding trees to move but it escapes me or I'm off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai
Jason to Br Gilbert:
Br Gilbert to Jason:
That is an interesting discussion about Rabbi Eliezer. It confirms for me the teaching of Jesus to Peter that "whatever he binds on earth is bound in Heaven".
It also means that the rulings of even a mediocre or bad Pope have priority over even a holy anti-Pope or leader. It, in a sense, subjects the charismatic dimension of the faith to the hierarchical and communal aspect. Thus a revelation can be given to a mystic or saint but it is only when the Church develops its theology and accepts it that it becomes authoritative to all Catholics.
Jason to Br Gilbert:
That's a great reading. But that implies you believe the Rabbis still have divine authority. Was it us who discussed that the lost Church of the Circumcision is actually Rabbinical Judaism (but asleep).
Br Gilbert to Jason:
I don't think so it must have been someone else but sounds like a fascinating insight. And yes I do believe the Rabbis still have a divine mandate and in accord with Matthew 23 they sit in the Seat of Moses.
However I believe the Seat of Peter is higher than the seat of Moses.
I feel to say that the Rabbis lost their divine mandate (authority ) so that after the destruction of the Temple they no longer had it, would be similar to saying that after the Church of the Circumcised ceased then the Gentile Catholic Church lost the divine mandate and authority.
I do think that some authority was lost in practice when the Sanhedrin ceased in the 5th century and this needs a restoration in the future before the ingrafting can occur.
On reflection, I love that insight about the sleeping Church of the Circumcision hidden in the Rabbinic community. In a sense the rise of the mystical movements based on Bahir and Zohar of the Medieval period was this Church beginning to awake and then even more with the advent of Hasidism. The Messianic Jewish and Hebrew Catholic movements are a further waking by some. I wonder if we could also say that some features of this sleeping Church is also found in the Gentile controlled Church in tracings and in its roots which will reunite with the sleeping Church hidden in Rabbinic Judaism. I love it-such a great concept that makes sense to me.
Jason to Br Gilbert:
You have intuited exactly the continuity that brought about the idea. It would have to be spiritual. It's too much to speculate that there have been Crypto Jewish Christians ensconced within Rabbinic Judaism for a thousand years.
To your point about the tracings within the Gentile Church. I have been floored by the insights into Judaism by Ratzinger and JPII, as well as the ground breaking reconciliatory work from Vatican II. It's a big part of what emboldened me to seek to join the Church.