Walter Cardinal Kasper, who heads the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, told a Liverpool university audience yesterday that the Catholic Church had weakened itself by “cutting itself off from its Jewish roots for centuries . . . a weakness that became evident in the altogether too feeble resistance against the persecution of the Jews” during the Holocaust. Cardinal Kaspar also said that the Vatican would open all of its wartime archives to scholars.
This important address was covered by the London Times and Daily Telegraph, whose religion correspondent Guy Walters wrote,
It is impossible to underestimate the significance of the address made by Cardinal Walter Kasper at Liverpool Hope University on Monday night, in which he promised that the Vatican archives on the wartime record of Pius XII will be opened within six years. This is a hugely welcome piece of news, as the 260th Pope has been the focus of junk historians for decades. “It is our belief that we have nothing to hide and that we do not need to fear the truth,” said Kasper, and he may well be right.
It is noteworthy that the American media universally ignored Cardinal Kasper’s remarks, whose importance far exceeds the announcement that the archives will open. The vilification of the wartime pope, Pius XII, for alleged inaction during the Holocaust presumes that the Vatican had the power to stop the Nazi murder of six million European Jews simply by denouncing it. But the Cardinal made a far more important admission of Church responsibility, and one that Jews should accept in full satisfaction of their grievance against the wartime Vatican: by cutting off its Jewish roots, the Church had weakened itself to the point that it was incapable of offering adequate resistance to Nazi evil.
Cardinal Kasper stated that “the church must draw its vigor and strength from the rootstock of Israel. If the engrafted branches are cut off from the root, they become withered, weak and eventually die. Thus, cutting itself off from its Jewish roots for centuries weakened the church, a weakness that became evident in the altogether too feeble resistance against the persecution of Jews.”
That is precisely correct. Nazi neo-paganism intended to destroy Christianity after it destroyed the Jewish people. In no way can the evil of National Socialism be associated with Catholicism. But the resurgence of neo-paganism in Europe—which destroyed the political power of the Catholic Church—was abetted by the failure of the Church to nurture its own Jewish roots. This failing on the part of the Church, which Cardinal Kasper has recognized in the clearest possible language, led to its own enfeeblement.
By 1939, there was nothing the Church could have done to stop the slaughter of Jews. The Vatican could not even protect Catholic priests in Poland, whom the Nazis murdered in large number. Regarding Pius XII, Cardinal Kasper stated:
The serious recent historical research is differentiated. There are still today Jews who defend Pius XII, and on the other side there are Catholic authors who are critical about his attitude. So there is no clear frontline between Jews and Catholics, though the majority of Jews, especially in Israel, are still critical. Whether this is partly due to a lack of information about more recent historical research work, I would like to leave open.
The main problem is access to the sources…The Archives are now working under intense pressure on the project to prepare access to the Pontificate of Pius XII, but the registration and preparation of millions of documents in a due professional way needs time and will be completed in about five or six years, after which general access for scholars will be granted. For it is our belief that we have nothing to hide and that we do not need to fear the truth.
As a Jewish writer who has urged the Catholic Church to recognize that its own interests are inextricable from those of the State of Israel, and who has urged Jews to view Pope Benedict XVI as a friend, I have declined to enter the debate about just what Pius XII did or should have done. There is no doubt that he did a great deal to save Jewish lives; whether he could have done more, the historians may conjecture, many years after the terrible events. If he had (for example) excommunicated the Nazi hierarchy, he would have been displaced and perhaps killed, and part of the Church would have split and turned into a Nazi-controlled creature. Would this have saved Jewish lives? I do not know; perhaps it would have enhanced the moral standing of the Church after the war. But it is easy for us, in the safety of our own lives, to second-guess decisions made under unimaginable stress during the darkest hours of Western civilization.
What matters more than the speculation about just what Pius XII did or should have done is the future. It is of inestimable importance for the Jewish people that the Church publicly and passionately explains its own continuing dependence on the Chosen People of God. Franz Rosenzweig said that the history of the world is the history of Israel, for the hope that a loving Creator will sustain his faithful creatures for all of eternity is the most powerful idea ever embraced by human beings.
In discussing the relations between the Church and the Jews, Cardinal Kasper virtually paraphrases Rosenzweig:
Without the engrafted branches the root remains unfruitful. The engrafted branches give the root stock new vitality and fertility. Thus the church has spread universally among the nations the monotheism of Israel and the Ten Commandments as the core of the Mosaic law, and has thereby contributed to the fact that the promise given to Abraham that he would be a blessing to all nations (Gen. 12:3; 18:18, etc.) has come true. Israel without the church is in danger of becoming too particularistic and reclusive, while the church without Israel, as the example of Marcionism makes clear, is in danger of losing its historical grounding and becoming ahistorical and Gnostic. Judaism and Christianity need each other and therefore are dependent on each other. A true ecumenism without Israel is not possible.
Whether the Jews without Christianity inevitably would have become reclusive is something Jews well may doubt. Our apparent reclusiveness was in large measure forced upon us. But the spread of the Jewish idea to the world, and its embodiment in the American concept of inalienable God-granted rights, is the work of the Christians, who gave our written Torah to the world, even if it was embedded in a religion we cannot accept.
How, then, should we understand each other, Christians and Jews? It is a mystery. Here is what Cardinal Kasper said in Liverpool:
Between Judaism and Christianity, therefore, there is a differentiation that is neither simply a parallel co–existence, nor an opposition. Rather, Paul has shown in his insights concerning salvation–history in Romans 9–11 that the two are dialectically related to each other in their difference. This relationship can hardly be reduced to a formula or a catchy phrase. It is, as Paul says, ultimately a mystery (Rom 11:33–36). If one wishes, one can try to describe this mystery in a similar way to the formula of the Council of Chalcedon (AD 451) and define the relationship of both with a double negation: without confusion and without separation.
We as Jews have no need and no right to ask for more from the Catholic Church. We do not expect to agree on many things. But what we should agree about is that our respective presence in the world mysteriously reflects God’s plan for the salvation of humanity.
May 26th, 2010 | 1:59 pm
David,
Before I focus on the substance of this post, which I much appreciated, I feel I have to be upfront in saying that I probably disagree with much of what you say regarding the modern nation state of Israel. I say that not to sidetrack this into that particular theological and political debate, but rather to be clear about which parts of what you say here I support and those from which I demur.
Having gotten that out of the way, I think that both what the Cardinal said and your commentary are both apt and important. Catholics especially, as the inheritors and keepers of the traditions of the original Apostles, should be both mindful of and connected to our roots in the Jewish faith. The same probably holds true for the Orthodox and Coptic traditions (I say “probably” only because I do not feel sufficiently knowledgeable about either Church History or theology to make a more certain statement.) As far as our Protestant brethren (and sisteren), that’s up to them to decide, I guess.
One of the benefits of Vatican II lies in how it has opened up the Church to examine the issues which both you and the Cardinal raise here. Although some could (with good reason) mock certain aspects of the post-V2 parish in which I was raised, I learned much more about Judaism in my fourth or fifth grade catechism class than I ever learned in public school.
Often during the homily at mass, I find myself wishing that the priest would focus more on the Old Testament readings or take the effort to put certain New Testament readings, particularly those of John, into more of a historical and theological context. I have dropped gentle hints about this, but I know they are overworked and underpaid . . . ;)
At the risk of opening up another can of worms, I have avoided watching The Passion of the Christ for various reasons, among which are the concerns many have raised about how it depicts Jews (Though, not having seen the movie, I can’t comment directly on that point), even though everyone depicted in the film, except the Romans, would have been Jewish . . . When people ask me if I’ve seen the movie, I respond only half-jokingly that I don’t need to, since I’ve already read the Book.
Anyway, thank you for this thought provoking piece.
May 26th, 2010 | 2:05 pm
Thank you for pointing out this story. I completely missed it.
May 26th, 2010 | 2:41 pm
Peter S,
To follow up on the fourth grade catechism comment, in my fifth grade cathechism in the late 70s, I recall that my C.C.D. teacher spent part of each class going over any scene in the Old Testament where there was some sort of fighting and then he would also draw maps of the middle east and explain the Six Day War. Every boy in the class was enthralled.
His main points: God is powerful, and the people of Israel are God’s first and truest loves. Mess with Israel and you mess with God.
Jesus was born in Israel under Roman administration. As a young Roman Catholic, I felt a kinship with the idea that my sacramental and religious life, while under a Roman (Catholic) administration, was inextricably tied to the love God has for Israel. Without that background, my relationship with Jesus did not make as much sense to me.
May 26th, 2010 | 3:33 pm
It is nice that the Cardinal says that the Church must adhere to the “rootstock of Israel” – but the Jewish people need to adhere to that rootstock – the Holy, God-given Torah, as well and not sacrifice all of the Torah’s values to perpetuate the Zionist state of Israel. How many lives have been lost protecting that state, while its leaders throughout its history have denied God’s Torah. In short, the Cardinal is more of a Jew than the Zionist leaders.
May 26th, 2010 | 3:35 pm
Peter S., you might want to read the linked First Things essay “Zionism for Christians” and explain just what it is that you reject. I argue that the existence of the State of Israel is of indispensable benefit to the Church. That has nothing to do with one’s agreement or disagreement with particular Israeli policies.
May 26th, 2010 | 3:43 pm
Eliezer, I would be interested in your thoughts on Michael Wyschogrod’s essay “A King in Israel” published in the most recent First Things. If you don’t have a subscription, now might be a good time to get one.
May 26th, 2010 | 4:46 pm
The so called church being “To Feeble” to resist the persecution of the Jews is such a weak excuse for being cowards! The Jehovah’s Witnesses stood up to the Nazi persecutions and were persecuted themselves and they aren’t even a 10th of the size of the so called catholic church. Call it like it is….the so called were cowards and didn’t stand up for God or the Jews nor what was right… Cowards.
May 26th, 2010 | 6:58 pm
The kindergarten teacher at St. Teresa’s asked me today if I had a recommendation for an end-of-the-year field trip for the kids. I recommended a Guilt Trip to the David “Galore” Goldman theme park with a stop at the sky-is-falling ice cream parlor.
May 27th, 2010 | 1:23 am
David,
I tried to read the article, but it is only available to current FT subscribers (I did not renew an earlier subscription because I could get it at a local store, until recently at least.) So, I can’t respond directly to that particular article.
May 27th, 2010 | 2:01 am
[...] Goldman reacts to Cardinal Walter Kasper’s comments about the Church’s role in World War [...]
May 27th, 2010 | 8:17 am
One thought: The nation of Israel does not require land for existence. It exists in God as does the Church. This does not minimize the horrors that can occur and have occured when it has no place from which to defend itself. Still, God’s promise remains: “But hear, now, O Jacob My servant, Israel whom I have chosen! Thus said the Lord, your Maker, Your Creator who has helped you since birth: Fear not, My servant Jacob …” Isa. 44:1-2
May 27th, 2010 | 11:23 am
For those who have been wounded by the sins and failings of those in authority in time of war — may God heal you. For those who are leveraging those wounds to attempt to start another war — may Galore not lead you too far astray.
China said it remains a long-term investor in Europe.
May 27th, 2010 | 12:30 pm
David, et. al.,
Ars Artium’s comment comes pretty close to expressing my view on the relationship between the biblical Israel and the modern nation state of Israel. God’s covenant is with the people of Israel, no matter where they are located geographically. That does not mean that I oppose the existence of the state of Israel. It does mean that I consider Israel to be just as subject to scrutiny and criticism as any other nation state. I do not believe that God gives a “favored nation status” to any modern state, be it the U.S. or Israel.
I suppose that, to be consistent, I would have to add to that list the Vatican. If, for some reason, the Vatican ceased to be, the Pope could relocate to, say, a condo development on the outskirts of Sioux Falls, SD, and we would still have the Church.
Many years ago I lived in France, and my best friend was a bright, thoughtful man from Morocco. He had grown up exposed to a lot of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli propaganda, but he was also critical of the government that emitted that propaganda and was generally skeptical about politics. He would sometimes complain about Israel by speaking of “les juifs”. I discussed with him the distinction between the Jewish people and the Jewish faith and the state of Israel. After that, at least around me, he focused his complaints on “les israelis”.
I sometimes wonder what would have happened if the U.S. and other nations had offered themselves as places of asylum to the many Jewish refugees from the Nazi regime who tried but failed to escape for lack of a place to go. The state of Israel might still have come into being, but perhaps its existence might not have become so equated with the survival of the Jewish people.
These are difficult issues to discuss. I hope that anyone who might take offense at what I have said will give me the benefit of the doubt. We only know one another through these words we write on our screens.
May 27th, 2010 | 3:33 pm
Many Old Testament figures are saints in the Catholic Church. In the liturgical calendar, Saint Abraham, for example, has his day on October 9; Saint Moses, September 4; Saint David, December 29. Except for a few Solemnities (Annunciation, Christmas), though, every day has several saints, and in practice the Old Testament saint gets buried at the bottom of the list of saints for that day.
Where are the local churches named for Saint Elijah (July 20), Saint Samuel (August 20), or Saint David of Bethlehem? Where are the popular devotions to these saints? Nowhere, the answer to both of these questions appears to be.
So much of the Church’s Jewish heritage has been stowed away up in the attic. When we unpack it and begin to use it again, as I gather Cardinal Kasper is suggesting we do, the graces we will enjoy and the power and the glory that the world will see in this development — I think it will be literally awesome.
May 27th, 2010 | 5:07 pm
Peter S distinguishes between “les juifs” and “les israelis.” His view is that the Church has a deep connection to the former but not necessarily to the latter. I wonder, though, whether the truth is actually the opposite. In both the Pentateuch and in St. Paul, God’s covenant is with Israel.
The term “Jews,” referring either to members of the tribe of Israel or to citizens of the nation-state of Judah, relates to the division of the Davidic kingdom Israel into a southern (Judah) and a northern (Israel) kingdom.
By the way, Peter S, much of the difficulty you indicate you have with the Gospel of John can be resolved if, instead of accepting the common translation of the Greek “Ioudaios” as “Jews” or “Jewish,” you remember that it could also mean (and, I think, more plausibly means, at least in most cases in the New Testament) “Judeans” or “Judean.”
May 28th, 2010 | 2:28 am
Nicholas,
I would have to read up some more before responding to the points you make in your first two paragraphs.
Regarding the third paragraph about John’s gospel, that is interesting. I would want to read more in order to better understand the significance of that. Under any circumstances, the translations I have read, or, more significantly, heard from the pews, seem to use “the Jews”. Even if I could arrive at a more precise or sophisticated understanding for myself, I would still want priests to provide more commentary about this in their homilies. In fact, it might make me more of a nag about it.
June 10th, 2010 | 6:47 pm
Mr. Goldman states that “What matters more than the speculation about just what Pius XII did or should have done is the future.” I beg to disagree. Not knowing or disregarding the past is a sure way to repeat the same errors in the future. I thorough understanding of the Church’s relationship with the Jews and Judaism, including what the Church did and didn’t do during the Holocaust, followed by the appropriate remedial measures, is a necessary precondition for a lasting, fruitful brotherly relationship between the two faiths.
Gabriel Wilensky
—————————————————————————————————
Author
Six Million Crucifixions:
How Christian Teachings About Jews Paved the Road to the Holocaust
http://www.SixMillionCrucifixions.com
Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/sixmillionbook
Become a Fan on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/SixMillionCrucifixions
—————————————————————————————————
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact