50.49.131.162 (talk) No edit summary |
50.49.131.162 (talk) |
||
Line 53:
As the Church, like a mother, condemns most severely the injustices which are committed against innocent people everywhere, so she raises her voice in loud protest against all wrongs which are done to Jews, whether in the past or in our time. Whoever despises or persecutes this people does injury to the Catholic Church.}}
If predominenty Latinate Catholic conservatives within the [[Roman Curia]] were opposed to any document on the Jews for theological reasons, then the [[Arab world]] (whether Muslim or Christian) was concerned with it for immanently political reasons, relating to the [[Arab-Israeli conflict]].<ref name="comm">[https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/commentary-bk/vatican-ii-the-jews/ Commentary Bk. (1965). Vatican II & the Jews. Commentary Magazine]</ref> [[Egypt]], then under the leadership of [[Gamal Abdel Nasser]], particularly concerned itself with
With the Curial conservatives—largely from Italy and Spain—and the Arab Christians now on the backfoot, a different approach was presented; the security of [[Christians in the Middle East]].<ref name="comm"/> It was put to Roncalli that nothing must be done that would compromise the position of the Catholic Church in the Middle East and that the Church has a pastoral responsbility to ensure above all that Christians in the Middle East could practice their faith unmolested (any kind of outreach to Jews likely being seen as a precursor to Holy See recognition of the [[State of Israel]]). Instead of a document just dealing with Judaism, a general statement on non-Christian religions should be prepared and in any case any Council should be delayed until at least 1965, they argued.<ref name="comm"/> Instead of agreeing to their demands, Roncalli doubled down on his project. He stated that a Council would be called in the following year and addressing Jewish-Catholic relations would be put to the [[Central Preparatory Commission]].<ref name="comm"/> The ''[[Commentary Magazine]]'', an American Jewish publication, also claimed in an article published in 1965, that Roncalli intended to set up a permanent Secretariat for Jewish Relations after the Council, the SECU itself would be permanent and that non-Christian advisers would be permitted to attend the Council and be able to submit documents to it, despite not being members of the Catholic Church.<ref name="comm"/>
|
Revision as of 23:30, 30 March 2021
Nostra aetate (Latin: In our time) is the Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions of the Second Vatican Council. Passed by a vote of 2,221 to 88 of the assembled bishops, this declaration was promulgated on 28 October 1965 by Pope Paul VI.[1] It is the shortest of the 16 final documents of the Council and "the first in Catholic history to focus on the relationship that Catholics have with Jews." Similarly, Nostra aetate is considered a monumental declaration in describing the Church's positive relationship with Muslims.[2] It "reveres the work of God in all the major faith traditions."[3] It begins by stating its purpose of reflecting on what humankind has in common in these times when people are being drawn closer together. The preparation of the document was largely under the direction of Cardinal Augustin Bea as President of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, along with his periti, such as John M. Oesterreicher, Gregory Baum and Bruno Hussar.[4][5]
Following an approach by Jules Isaac, a French-born Jew who was associated with the Seelisberg Conference of the International Council of Christians and Jews, in which , he claimed that what he called "Christian antisemitism", had prepared the way for the Holocaust, a sympathetic Pope John XXIII endorsed the creation of a document which would address a new, less adversarial, approach to the relationship between the Catholic Church and Rabbinic Judaism. Within the Church, conservative Cardinals were suspicious and Middle Eastern Catholics strongly opposed the creation of such a document. With the Arab-Israeli conflict in full swing, the governments of Arab nations such as Egypt (in particular), Lebanon, Syria and Iraq vocally lobbied against its development (the document was subjected to several leaks during its development due to the involvement of the intelligence agencies of several nations). Jewish organisations such as the World Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee and B'nai B'rith also lobbied for their side with the assistance of sympathetic liberal clergymen.[6] After going through numerous drafts, compromises were made and a statement was added on Islam to molify the security concerns of the Arab Christians. Finally, statements on Eastern religions; Buddhism and Hinduism; were also addded.
History of the document
Originally, Nostra aetate was only supposed to focus on the relationship between the Catholic church and Judaism. Some bishops and cardinals objected, including Middle Eastern bishops who were unsympathetic to the new state of Israel. Cardinal Bea decided to create a less contentious document which would stress ecumenism between the Catholic Church and all non-Christian faiths. While coverage of Hinduism and Buddhism is brief, two of the document's five sections are devoted to Islam and Judaism.[7]
Title | Date | Author |
---|---|---|
Decree on the Jews (Decretum de Iudaeis) | 1 November 1961 | Written by Secretariat for Christian Unity |
On the Attitude of Catholics Toward Non-Christians and Especially Toward Jews | 8 November 1963 | Written by Secretariat for Christian Unity |
Appendix 'On the Jews' to the "Declaration on Ecumenism" | 1 March 1964 | Written by Secretariat for Christian Unity |
On the Jews and Non-Christians | 1 September 1964 | Written by Second Vatican Council Coordinating Commission |
Declaration on the Church's Relationship to Non-Christian Religions | 18 November 1964 | Written by Secretariat for Christian Unity |
Amendments to Section 4 | 1 March 1965 | Written by Secretariat for Christian Unity |
Before the Council: Decretum de Iudaeis, 1960—62
The first draft, Decretum de Iudaeis, was undertaken by Cardinal Bea, head of the Secretariat for Christian Unity, at the direction of Pope John XXIII on 18 September 1960. It was completed in November 1961 but never submitted to the council.[8] The question arose of whether this should be a separate document of the council, included in a document on the Church or on ecumenism among Christian religions, or a separate declaration on the Church's relations with non-Christian religions. Five drafts were to be produced and then amendments to the declaration before its final adoption.[9]
The first draft, entitled Decretum de Iudaeis ("Decree on the Jews"), was completed in November 1961, approximately fourteen months after Pope John XXIII tasked Cardinal Augustin Bea, a Jesuit and biblical scholar, with its composition. This text was not submitted to the council, which opened on 11 October 1962. It read:
The Church, the Bride of Christ, acknowledges with a heart full of gratitude that, according to God's mysterious saving design, the beginnings of her faith and election go as far back as to the Israel of the Patriarchs and Prophets. Thus she acknowledges that all Christian believers, children of Abraham by faith (see Gal 3:7), are included in his call. Similarly, her salvation is prefigured in the deliverance of the Chosen People out of Egypt, as in a sacramental sign (Liturgy of the Easter Vigil). And the Church, a new creation in Christ (see Eph 2:15), can never forget that she is the spiritual continuation of the people with whom, in His mercy and gracious condescension, God made the Old Covenant.
The Church, in fact, believes that Christ, who "is our peace," embraces Jews and Gentiles with one and the same love and it also believes that He made the two one (see Eph 2:14). She rejoices that the union of these two "in one body" (Eph 2:16) proclaims the whole world's reconciliation in Christ. Even though the greater part of the Jewish people has remained separated from Christ, it would be an injustice to call this people accursed, since they are greatly beloved for the sake of the Fathers and the promises made to them (see Rom 11:28). The Church loves this people. From them sprang Christ the Lord, who reigns in glory in heaven; from them sprang the Virgin Mary, mother of all Christians; from them came the Apostles, the pillars and bulwark of the Church (1 Tim 3:15).
Furthermore, the Church believes in the union of the Jewish people with herself as an integral part of Christian hope. With unshaken faith and deep longing the Church awaits union with this people. At the time of Christ's coming, "a remnant chosen by grace" (Rom 11:5), the very first fruits of the Church, accepted the Eternal Word. The Church believes, however, with the Apostle that at the appointed time, the fullness of the children of Abraham according to the flesh will embrace him who is salvation (see Rom 11:12, 26). Their acceptance will be life from the dead (see Rom 11:15).
As the Church, like a mother, condemns most severely the injustices which are committed against innocent people everywhere, so she raises her voice in loud protest against all wrongs which are done to Jews, whether in the past or in our time. Whoever despises or persecutes this people does injury to the Catholic Church.
If predominenty Latinate Catholic conservatives within the Roman Curia were opposed to any document on the Jews for theological reasons, then the Arab world (whether Muslim or Christian) was concerned with it for immanently political reasons, relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict.[10] Egypt, then under the leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser, particularly concerned itself with all Vatican documents on the Jews which were published since the time of Isaac's visit to Roncalli back in 1960.[10] The Voice of the Arabs, based in Cairo, ascribed this move to a "Zionist plot to capitalize on the Vatican Council in order to further the oppression of the Palestinian refugees."[10] The Lebanese Embassy and the Egyptian Embassy in Rome made their complaints known to the Vatican.[10] In spite of this, Roncalli allowed the SECU under Bea to continue its work on a document on Jewish-Catholic relations. Bea openly met with Ralph Friedman and Zacariah Shuster[11] of the American Jewish Committee at Rome in 1961, inviting them to submit a memorandum on anti-Jewish elements in Catholic textbooks and liturgy. The AJC responded to the SECU with two documents; "The Image of the Jew in Catholic Teaching" and then "Anti-Jewish Elements in Catholic Liturgy"; outlining the changes to Church teachings and practices that they wanted the planned Council to implement.[12][13][11] As part of this, Bea also agreed to meet with Abraham Joshua Heschel of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America and Max Horkheimer of the Frankfurt School in November 1961 to discuss new Church approches to the Jews.[11]
With the Curial conservatives—largely from Italy and Spain—and the Arab Christians now on the backfoot, a different approach was presented; the security of Christians in the Middle East.[10] It was put to Roncalli that nothing must be done that would compromise the position of the Catholic Church in the Middle East and that the Church has a pastoral responsbility to ensure above all that Christians in the Middle East could practice their faith unmolested (any kind of outreach to Jews likely being seen as a precursor to Holy See recognition of the State of Israel). Instead of a document just dealing with Judaism, a general statement on non-Christian religions should be prepared and in any case any Council should be delayed until at least 1965, they argued.[10] Instead of agreeing to their demands, Roncalli doubled down on his project. He stated that a Council would be called in the following year and addressing Jewish-Catholic relations would be put to the Central Preparatory Commission.[10] The Commentary Magazine, an American Jewish publication, also claimed in an article published in 1965, that Roncalli intended to set up a permanent Secretariat for Jewish Relations after the Council, the SECU itself would be permanent and that non-Christian advisers would be permitted to attend the Council and be able to submit documents to it, despite not being members of the Catholic Church.[10]
Working underneath Bea were four clerics; John M. Oesterreicher, Gregory Baum, Leo Rudloff and Georges Tavard.[14] The German, Karl Thieme, who was not involved in the drafting, was a major influence on the intellectual reorientation of Oesterreicher due to the debates the two had.[14] After meeting several times at Seton Hall University in New Jersey, the group drafted for Bea a study document "Questions Concerning the Jews" (Questiones de Iudaeis), which was drafted properly as the "Decree on the Jews" (Decretum de Iudaeis), with Oesterreicher's pen being most prominent.[14] The document was completed in November 1961. External pressure on the Catholic Church to conform to the zeitgeist and make an explicit statement on Judaism was also heightened by a meeting in New Delhi in December 1961, where the World Council of Churches (a major ecumenical organisation controlled by Protestants) issued an explicit proclamation in which they stated "the historic events which led to the Crucifixion should not be so presented as to fasten upon the Jewish people of today responsibilities which belong to our corporate humanity."[15] The polemics intensified, as Egyptian media outlets such as Al Gomhuria claimed that Bea's ancestral name was "Behar" and that he was of Jewish ancestry. The actually confirmed Jewish ancestry of converts who were involved in writing the document under Cardinal Bea; Oesterreicher and Baum; was also highlighted as proof of a supposed "Zionist plot".
In June 1962, the World Jewish Congress, acting on its own initiative, appointed Dr. Chaim Wardi, an Israeli official, as an "unofficial Jewish observer" at the Council. The Israeli Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Religious Affairs, endorsed this. The issue became known as the "Wardi affair" and caused a political crisis for the Vatican under Roncalli, who had maintained that the document had no political implications and was about encouraging amicable religious relations.[16][17] Within five days of Wardi's "appointment", Cardinal Amleto Giovanni Cicognani as Secretary of the Central Preparatory Commission removed the Decretum de Iudaeis schema from the agenda (as Cardinal Secretary of State, he was particularly sensitive to diplomatic issues).[16] While the Jewish schema was off the agenda for the First Session of Vatican II, the issue was not put to rest, as liberals, starting with the actions of Cardinal Achille Liénart made a strong early showing to direct the general course of the Council. The possibility of a Jewish document still loomed large for its opponents. In October 1962, with the opening of the Council, a document entitled Complotto contro la Chiesa ("The Plot Against the Church") under the pseudonym of Maurice Pinay was anonymously distributed to all attending.[12][10] Allegedly funded by Egypt and elements in northern Italy, the author (or authors) of the document has remained a mystery.[10] Though some Italian sources have attributed authorship to Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, a Mexican priest and former Jesuit. It warned vigilance to the Council members, with the 800-page polemic claiming that since the times of Christ, for 1900 years, Judaism had worked to overthrow Christianity and the Catholic Church, claiming involvement of the "Synagogue of Satan" in every major heresy, as well as encouraging "enemies" such as Freemasonry and Communism.[18]
Second Session of the Second Vatican Council
Since his initial meetings with Bea in 1962, with many other meetings following, including significantly a meeting at the AJC's headquarters in New York on 31 March 1963; Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel became the primary figure articulating the religious Jewish viewpoint to the Vatican on behalf of the American Jewish Committee during the Second Vatican Council. He had been brought into contact with Bea, through his student, the AJC's Rabbi Marc Tanenbaum.[19] Associated with Conservative Judaism, Heschel also had a keen interest in the Kabbalah. Unafraid to get involved in politics, Heschel had inserted himself into the American civil rights movement and protested against the Vietnam War. His memorandum on behalf of the American Jewish Committee, entitled "On Improving Catholic-Jewish Relations",[20] had a significant influence on proceedings of Bea's Secretariat.[19][21][22] The meeting in New York had also been attended by Bea's Secretary Msgr. Johannes Willebrands and Fr. Felix Morlion, president of Rome’s Pro Deo University.[22] The evening following the AJC meeting, a lavish dinner was put on in honour of Bea at New York's Plaza Hotel. It included over 400 Jewish, Protestant and Catholic leaders. As well as Herschel and Bea, other major figures present included U Thant, the Secretary General of the United Nations and Muhammad Zafarullah Khan, President of the UN General Assembly, American Cardinals Richard Cushing and Francis Spellman and also Nelson Rockefeller as Governor of New York, amongst many others.[22]
The main aims of Heschel and the Jewish side had been to encourage the alteration of the Catholic presentation of Jewish responsibility in regards to the trial and crucifixion of Jesus Christ (what is sometimes known as Jewish deicide).[22] And in addition to this, the Jewish side wanted a stop any efforts at converting Jews to Christianity.[22] While Cardinal Bea was highly sympathetic, attempting to present this within a framework of Catholic doctrinal orthodoxy, which it would require to pass through the Council was proving difficult to achieve, for a number of reasons.[10][23] Specifically, the Gospel of Matthew mentions the blood curse and the Gospel of John many similar themes.[10] In addition to this, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church traditionally affirmed Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus and that the covenant with God, since Jesus Christ was exclusively with the Christians and that the Catholic Church is the New Israel (superseding any ancestry-based Old Covenant; rendering Jewish rites null and void).[23] These teachings had passed down through the Gospels, many Church Fathers, Doctors of the Church and Ecumenical Councils over numerous centuries.[10] Nevertheless, Cardinal Bea, with the blessing of Roncalli intended to press forward at the Second Session with these proposed changes. It had been decided that, after the setback of the Wardi affair, the schema, now entitled "On the Attitude of Catholics Toward Non-Christians and Especially Toward Jews" would be incorporated as a fourth chapter under a document "On Ecumenism"; this was satificatory to its proposers because the drafting of that document also fell under Bea's Secretariat.[10]
In 1963, a controversial play was released by the German writer Rolf Hochhuth called The Deputy, which popularised a theme of insinuating Pope Pius XII's "indifference" to Nazi Germany's mass killing of Jews during World War II. The play, offensive to the sensibilities of Catholics, led to a rebuff by Pius XII's former advisor Giovanni Montini, Archbishop of Milan.[10] In addition to this, Oesterreicher, writing in America, addressing the AJC and B'nai B'rith directly, urged them to speak out against the play.[24] Before the start of the Second Session, John XIII died in June 1963, setting off the 1963 Papal conclave in the middle of the Council. Several years after the death of John XIII, a fraudulent "Prayer for the Jews" was published in Commentary Magazine (associated with the AJC), starting an urban legend that Roncalli had intended it to be read out before his death but that it was stopped by the Church.[25] The author, one "F. E. Cartus", claimed that the prayer included the lines "We realize that the mark of Cain stands upon our foreheads. Across the centuries our brother Abel has lain in the blood we drew, or shed tears we caused by forgetting Your love" and "Forgive us the curse we falsely attached to their name as Jews. Forgive us for crucifying You a second time in the flesh."[25] According to John M. Oesterreicher, one of the periti who worked under Cardinal Bea, this "prayer" was a complete fabrication by Malachi Martin, a Jesuit priest who lived a double-life and used a wide number of pseudonyms.[25] Giovanni Montini (who took the name Paul VI) emerged from the 1963 conclave as a continuity John XXIII candidate for the Council; the conservative elements in the Curia had backed Cardinal Ildebrando Antoniutti and the more radical liberal elements had proposed Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro, but settled on Montini on the suggestion of Cardinals Frings and Liénart. Montini confirmed that Cardinal Bea's mandate on addressing Judaism had been renewed.[23]
The Second Session of the Council began in the Autumn of 1963 and by 8 November 1963 when “On Ecumenism”, including its fourth chapter "On the Attitude of Catholics Toward Non-Christians and Especially Toward Jews" and fifth chapter “On Religious Liberty” was distributed to the Council Fathers, the liberals were confident, having gained in other areas of the Second Session.[10] Elements in the Roman Curia, concerned that the chapters included heresy, approached Paul VI in private with severe concerns, accusing the Collegialists of setting up Bea as a de facto “Second Pope”.[10] A document was also published, "The Jews and the Council in the Light of Scripture and Tradition", arguing that the chapters were heretical.[24] In addition to this, Paul VI was due to visit the Holy Places in East Jerusalem (then held by the Kingdom of Jordan) on 4 January 1964, whereby he would be meeting with Orthodox Patriarch Athenagoras I of Constantinople, with the ecumenical goal of mending the schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.[10] Members of the Curia thus argued that approving the controversial chapter on the Jews would jeopardize this effort and leave the 400,000 Orthodox Christians in the Arab world (including many Palestinian Christians) almost certain to oppose any sort of reunification with Rome. The 1st to 3rd schemas should be put up to consideration and then at some later date (only two weeks of the Second Session remained) the 4th and 5th schemas should be looked at again.[10] The stalling tactic worked and when the Second Session closed without the issue being voted on, Moderator, Cardinal Gregorio Pietro Agagianian was non-commital on a future review of the chapters.[10]
Third Session of the Second Vatican Council
In the United States, where Western political power was centralised in the 1960s and most of the American Bishops represented at the Council were staunch supporters of a pro-Jewish statement and a declaration on religious liberty—with the notable exception of Cardinal James Francis McIntyre—-there was anxiety about the way the Second Session had ended voiced at the National Catholic Welfare Council. During Paul VI’s visit to East Jerusalem, he travelled briefly through what was the State of Israel but was bogged down defending the record of Pius XII in light of The Deputy and made a speech hoping for Jews to convert to Christianity.[24] The concern of the American Bishops was shared by the two secular Jewish points-of-contact for the American Bishops and thus the Vatican; Zacariah Shuster of the AJC and Joseph L. Lichten of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (Frith Becker of the World Jewish Congress also kept an eye on the happenings, but was not as interested in directing documents).[24] On the contested deicide issue, Cardinals Joseph Ritter,[26] Albert Gregory Meyer, Richard Cushing[27] and Francis Spellman were particuarly insistant on supporting the Jewish position, as were Archbishop Patrick O'Boyle[28] and Bishop Stephen Aloysius Leven;[29] they also had the support of the Catholic Media Association.[24] Some hope had been restored after six AJC members, headed up by Rose Sperry, had an audience with Paul VI in Rome and he personally agreed with the sentiment of Cardinal Spellman on the deicide issue.[24]
A report was “leaked” to The New York Times on 12 June 1964 reporting that the deicide issue had been cut out of the document. Whole sections of the confidential document turned up in the New York Herald Tribune.[24] According to Edward Kaplan, the author of Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America, 1940-1972, the AJC had secured a secret “mole” or "double-agent" within Bea’s Secretariat, an eccentric Jesuit priest, Malachi Martin.[30] As part of his activities, Martin leaked pieces of confidential information about the progress of draft documents to the AJC and the New York media (in particular The New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune and Time Magazine) under the name “Pushkin”.[30][24] Shuster referred to Martin in reports as "Heschel's young friend". In May 1964, an insider “tell-all account” about the Council was published as "The Pilgrim", under the pseudonym of “Michael Serafian”.[31] This work was published by Malachi Martin, at the behest of Abraham Joshua Heschel, through Roger Straus’ Farrar, Straus and Giroux.[31] Disparaging to Christianity, it claimed “no one conscious of what has made modern Europe can deny that the pyres and the crematoria, the mephitic smoke and stench of the extermination camps in Nazi Germany, were, if not the logical conclusion, at least one extremist consequence of the normal Christian attitude to the Jews.”[32] Around this time, Msgr George G. Higgins arranged an audience with Paul VI for Arthur Goldberg, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations. And then Cardinal Cushing arranged a meeting between Paul VI and Shuster, with Heschel also present. The Pope and Heschel clashed as the latter demanded the topics rejecting the decide charge and blood guilt be reinserted and forbidding all Christian proselytising to Jews, to which Paul VI would not agree. Shuster somewhat embarrassed, spoke to Paul VI more diplomatically in French to cut Herschel out (as a secular man, Shuster was less concerned about the proselytising issue).[24] Like Jules Isaac before him, Herschel invoked the Holocaust, in an article from September 1964 he wrote, "I am ready to go to Auschwitz any time, if faced with the alternative of conversion or death."[22]
During the Third Session of the Second Vatican Council, the schema "On the Jews and Non-Christians", was discussed on the floor from 28 September 1964 and lasted two days. The Bishops from the Arab nations continued to ask that it be withdrawn, while Cardinal Ernesto Ruffini, Archbishop of Palermo and one of the most prominent opponents of the document stated, "We do not need exhortations to love the Jews. They need exhortations to love us."[33] The document now included material on the relationship between the Catholic Church and Islam and other religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, as well as this the word "deicidal" had been removed. Cardinal Bea and his associates still wanted to strengthen the document to be more favourable to Jews, while the conservative side wanted to scrap it all together.
Controversy erupted on 9 October 1964, as two letters had been received by Cardinal Bea from Cardinal Pericle Felici, Secretary General of the Council.[33] It dealt with two highly contested documents, the creation of which were under the auspices of Cardinal Bea's Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity; "On Religious Liberty" and "On the Jews and Non-Christians."[33] The letter stated that Pope Paul VI wanted a new text to be drafted for "On Religious Liberty", with a more mixed commission involved in creating the draft; including the addition of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Cardinal Michael Browne, Fr. Aniceto Fernández Alonso (Master of the Order of Preachers) and Cardinal Giovanni Colombo, all of whom were critical of the currently proposed document.[33] Meanwhile, "On the Jews..." would not be a stand alone document, but would become part of Lumen gentium. This too would be rewritten by a more mixed commission including members drawn from Bea's Secretariat and Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani's Doctrinal Commission.[33] It this proposal were to happen, it would have given a greater voice to elements associated with the Roman Curia and the Coetus Internationalis Patrum group, whose primary concern was upholding Catholic doctrinal orthodoxy.
More "leaks" occurred from Cardinal Bea's Secretariat, this time about the contents of Cardinal Felici's two letters, which became articles featured in publications such as The New York Times, sounding the alarm and putting on the pressure.[33][34] A memorandum was issued by a group of liberal-leaning Cardinals who were keen to push through "On Religious Liberty" and "On the Jews and Non-Christians." The most vocal of these were the so-called "Rhineland" liberal cleric and certain Cardinals from the United States. A gathering took place at the residence of Cardinal Josef Frings of Cologne and a number of other Cardinals added their voice to the petition to Paul VI, urging him not to change the direction the Council was headed. Supporters of the Frings motion explicitly named by the media included Cardinals Raúl Silva Henríquez of Chile, Joseph Ritter of St. Louis, Albert Gregory Meyer of Chicago, Julius Döpfner of Munich, Franz König of Vienna, Achille Liénart of Lille, Joseph-Charles Lefèbvre of Bourges, Bernardus Johannes Alfrink of Utrecht, Giacomo Lercaro of Bologna and Leo Joseph Suenens of Brussels.[34][35]
Fourth Session of the Second Vatican Council
The critical paragraphs read:
3. About the Muslims
The Church regards Muslims with esteem: they adore the one God, living and enduring, the all-powerful Creator of heaven and earth who has spoken to people; they strive to obey wholeheartedly His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham did, to whose faith they happily link their own.
Though Muslims do not acknowledge the divinity of Jesus, they revere Him as a Prophet. They also honor Mary, His Virgin-Mother; at times they call on her with devotion. Furthermore, they await the day of judgment when God will reward all those who have risen.
Furthermore, as they worship God through prayer, almsgiving, and fasting, so they seek to make the moral life—be it that of the individual or that of the family and society—conform to His Will.
In the course of centuries, however, not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Muslims. Hence this Sacred Synod urges all not only to forget the past but also to work honestly for mutual understanding and to further as well as guard together social justice, all moral goods, especially peace and freedom, so that all of humanity may benefit from their endeavor.
4. About the Jews
As this Sacred Synod searches into the mystery of the Church, it remembers the bond that ties the people of the New Covenant to Abraham's stock.With a grateful heart, the Church of Christ acknowledges that, according to God's saving design, the beginnings of her faith and her election were already among the patriarchs, Moses, and the prophets. She professes that all who believe in Christ—Abraham's sons according to faith—were included in the same patriarch's call, likewise that her salvation is mystically foreshadowed by the chosen people's exodus from the land of bondage.
The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament from the people with whom God in His ineffable mercy concluded the Ancient Covenant. Nor can she forget that she feeds upon the root of that cultivated olive tree into which the wild shoots of the Gentiles have been grafted (cf. Rom. 11, 17–24). Indeed, the Church believes that by His cross Christ our Peace reconciled the Jews and Gentiles, making both one (cf. Eph. 2, 14, 16).
The Church keeps ever in mind the words of the Apostle about his kinsmen: "Theirs is the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and of them is the Christ according to the flesh," the Son of Mary the Virgin (Rom. 9, 4–5). No less does she recall that the Apostles, the Church's foundation stones and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ's Gospel to the world, sprang from the Jewish people.
Even though a large part of the Jews did not accept the Gospel, they remain most dear to God, according to the Apostle, for the sake of the patriarchs, since Gods gifts and call are irrevocable (cf. Rom. 11, 28 f.). In company with the prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice and "serve Him shoulder to shoulder" (Soph. 3, 9; cf. Is. 66, 3, 9; cf. Is. 66, 23; Ps. 65, 4; Rom. 11, 11–32).
Since the spiritual patrimony common to Christians and Jews is of such magnitude, this Sacred Synod wants to foster and recommend that mutual knowledge and respect that are, above all, the fruit of biblical and theological studies as well as of fraternal dialogues. Moreover, this Synod, in her rejection of injustices of whatever kind and wherever inflicted upon people, and recalling our common patrimony, deplores and condemns hatred and persecutions of Jews, whether they arose in former or in our own days.
May all, then, see to it that in their catechetical work or in their preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that could give rise to hatred or contempt of Jews in the hearts of Christians. May they never present the Jewish people as one rejected, cursed, or guilty of deicide. All that happened to Christ in His passion cannot be attributed to the whole people then alive, much less to that of today. Besides, the Church has always held and holds now that Christ underwent His passion and death freely, because of the sins of all people and out of infinite love. Therefore, Christian preaching is to proclaim the Cross of Christ as a sign of God's all-embracing love and as the fountain from which every grace flows.
Nostra aetate
The document begins by stating:[3]
In our time, when day by day mankind is being drawn closer together, and the ties between different peoples are becoming stronger, the Church examines more closely her relationship to non-Christian religions. In her task of promoting unity and love among men, indeed among nations, she considers above all in this declaration what men have in common and what draws them to fellowship.
The key observation about other faiths reads: "The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings, which though different in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of truth which enlightens all men."[36]
Nostra aetate examined, among other belief systems, Hinduism and Buddhism, and stated that the Church "rejects nothing that is true and holy" in other religions.[37]
As regards to the Jewish people, the declaration contradicted the common teaching of the time that the Jews were guilty of deicide for the death of Jesus Christ.[38] It ruled out anti-Semitism for Christians and called God's covenant with the Hebrew people eternal.[39]
Religious freedom became a new part of Catholic teaching with Vatican II and this declaration. Nostra aetate declared that there are positive elements in other religions and religious stereotypes and prejudices can be overcome through interreligious dialogue. Pope Francis said, "From indifference and opposition, we've turned to cooperation and goodwill. From enemies and strangers, we've become friends and brothers."[39]
The final paragraph calls on Catholics to enter into "dialogue and collaboration" with those of other faiths.[40]
It describes the eternal questions which have dogged men since the beginning, and how the various religious traditions have tried to answer them.
It mentions some of the answers that some Hindus, Buddhists,[1][41] and members of other faiths have suggested for such philosophical questions. It notes the willingness of the Catholic Church to accept some truths present in other religions in so much as they reflect Catholic teaching and may lead souls to Christ.
Part three goes on to say that the Catholic Church regards the Muslims with esteem, and then continues by describing some of the things Islam has in common with Christianity and Catholicism: worship of One God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, Merciful and Omnipotent, Who has spoken to men; the Muslims' respect for Abraham and Mary, and the great respect they have for Jesus, whom they consider to be a Prophet and not God. The synod urged all Catholics and Muslims to forget the hostilities and differences of the past and to work together for mutual understanding and benefit.
Part four speaks of the bond that ties the people of the 'New Covenant' (Christians) to Abraham's stock (Jews). It states that even though some Jewish authorities and those who followed them called for Jesus' death, the blame for this cannot be laid at the door of all those Jews present at that time, nor can the Jews in our time be held as guilty, thus repudiating an indiscriminate charge of Jewish deicide; 'the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God'. The Declaration also decries all displays of antisemitism made at any time by anyone.
The Church keeps ever in mind the words of the Apostle about his kinsmen: "theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises; theirs are the fathers and from them is the Christ according to the flesh" (Rom. 9:4–5), the Son of the Virgin Mary. She also recalls that the Apostles, the Church's main-stay and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ's Gospel to the world, sprang from the Jewish people. True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. The Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ. Furthermore, in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the Church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons but by the Gospel's spiritual love, decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone.
The fifth part states that all men are created in God's image, and that it is contrary to the mind of Christ to discriminate against, show hatred towards or harass any person or people on the basis of colour, race, religion, and condition of life.
Post-Conciliar developments
Nostra aetate was one of Vatican II's three declarations, the other documents consisted of nine decrees and four constitutions. It was the shortest of the documents and it contained few, if any, references to the debates and the rationale that had gone into its making; therefore, the changes which were supposed to be brought about by the declaration on the Church's Relations with non-Christian Religions, Nostra aetate, carried implications which were not fully appreciated at the time.
To flesh out these implications and ramifications, the Vatican's Commission on Interreligious Relations with the Jews issued its Guidelines and Suggestions for Implementing the Conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate in late 1974.[42]
This was followed by that same body's Notes on the Correct Way to Present Jews and Judaism in the Teaching and Catechesis of the Roman Catholic Church in 1985. These developments were paralleled by accompanying statements which were made by the U.S. bishops.
The above-referenced statements which were made by the Vatican's Commission for Interreligious Relations with the Jews, as well as other developments, including the establishment of more than two dozen centers for Christian–Jewish understanding at Catholic institutions of higher learning in the United States along with the participation by rabbis in seminarian formation training, demonstrate how the church has embraced Nostra aetate.
The significance of Nostra aetate as a new starting point in the Church's relations with Judaism, in light of the foregoing, can be appreciated from the vantage point of the passage of forty years. The U.S. Congress passed a resolution acknowledging Nostra aetate at forty,[43] and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. also noted this anniversary. This is in addition to the marking of the occasion at the Vatican's Gregorian University itself and at major centers of Christian–Jewish understanding around the United States.
The Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews released a new document exploring the unresolved theological questions at the heart of Christian–Jewish dialogue. Entitled The Gifts and Calling of God are Irrevocable, it marked the 50th anniversary of the ground-breaking declaration Nostra Aetate.[44]
On the fiftieth anniversary of the document's release, Sayyid Syeed, the national director of the Islamic Society of North America's Office for Interfaith and Community Alliances, pointed out that Nostra Aetate was released during the 1960s civil rights movement in the United States, at a time when Islamic centers and student groups were being founded on university campuses, and from these humble beginnings the "Catholic church acted as a big brother" in its understanding of a religious minority, a sentiment that has continued since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 when the Church opened its doors to them amidst growing Islamophobia.[45]
Phil Cunningham of Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia has summed up the deeper impact of the decree: "There's a tendency to think we've got it all figured out and we've got the fullness of truth. We have to remember God is bigger than our ability to conceive of God, and interreligious relations bring that out."[36]
See also
- Dignitatis humanae
- Dominus Iesus
- Ut unum sint
- Unitatis redintegratio
- Jules Isaac
- John Paul II Center for Interreligious Dialogue
- Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue
- Drafters
References
Footnotes
- ^ a b Pope Paul VI (28 October 1965). "Declaration on the relation of the church to non-christian religions — Nostra aetate". Holy See. Retrieved 25 December 2008.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - ^ Elgenaidi, Maha (11 September 2015). "Muslims and Nostra Aetate: Fifty Years of Rapprochement". Islamic Networks Group. p. English. Retrieved 31 October 2020.
- ^ a b Nienhaus, Cyndi (2013). ERIC EJ1016112: Nostra Aetate and the Religious Literacy of Catholic Students. pp. 67, 73.
- ^ Melloni, Alberto. (2015). The “Nostra Aetate” Generation. Amicizia ebraico-cristiana di Roma
- ^ Connolly, John. (2012). Converts Who Changed the Church. The Forward
- ^ P. Madigan, Nostra aetate and fifty years of interfaith dialogue – changes and challenges, Journal of the Australian Catholic Historical Society 36 (2015) Archived 15 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine, 179-191.
- ^ Markoe, Lauren (10 December 2015). "The 'Splainer: What is 'Nostra Aetate,' and what does it have to do …". Religious News Service. Retrieved 18 January 2019.
- ^ "Nostra Aetate Drafts". Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations. Retrieved 18 January 2019.
- ^ "Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations".
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Commentary Bk. (1965). Vatican II & the Jews. Commentary Magazine
- ^ a b c AJC. (1961). Anti-Jewish Elements in Catholic Liturgy. American Jewish Committee
- ^ a b Rosen, David. (2017). In Our Time: AJC and Nostra Aetate: A Reflection After 50 Years. American Jewish Committee
- ^ AJC. (1961). The Image of the Jew in Catholic Teaching. American Jewish Committee
- ^ a b c Rush 2019, pp. 435
- ^ Rush 2019, pp. 430
- ^ a b O'Malley 2010, pp. 210
- ^ SJ. (2015). Nostra Aetate – the moral heart of the Second Vatican Council. Jesuits in Britain
- ^ Pinay, Maurice. (1962). The Plot Against the Church. Anonymous.
- ^ a b Marans, Rabbi Noam E. (2011). Challenges facing the Vatican’s Jewish point man. JTA.
- ^ Heschel, Abraham Joshua, (1963). On Improving Catholic-Jewish Relations. AJC.
- ^ Notre Dame de Sion, (2015). Celebrating 50 Years of Vatican II. Sion News.
- ^ a b c d e f Spruch, Gary (2017). Wide Horizons: Abraham Joshua Heschel, AJC, and the Spirit of Nostra Aetate. AJC.
- ^ a b c Stransky, Thomas (2005). The Genesis of Nostra Aetate. America.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Roddy, Joseph (1966). How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking. "Look" Magazine.
- ^ a b c Oesterreicher 1986, pp. 155
- ^ Oesterreicher 1986, p. 197
- ^ Oesterreicher 1986, pp. 197–98
- ^ Oesterreicher 1986, pp. 199–201
- ^ Oesterreicher 1986, pp. 198–99
- ^ a b Kaplan 2008, pp. 243
- ^ a b Kaplan 2008, pp. 254
- ^ Serafian 1964, pp. 49
- ^ a b c d e f DNY. (2012). Remembering the Second Vatican Council: Second Intersession, December 1963 to September 1964. Dignity NY
- ^ a b NYT. (October 13, 1964). GROUP AT COUNCIL URGES POPE BACK SCHEMA ON JEWS; Cardinals Ask Him to Resist Conservative Pressure for Modified Statement; HE IS EXPECTED TO ACT; Religious Liberty Also Issue as Progressives Move to Bolster Majority View, December 1963 to September 1964. New York Times
- ^ See Oestereicher, pp. 195ff.
- ^ a b Sadowski, Dennis (13 October 2015). "In 50 years since 'Nostra Aetate,' church has built strong interreligious ties". Catholic News Service. Retrieved 18 January 2019.
- ^ Clooney, Francis X. "Nostra Aetate and the Catholic Way of Openness to Other Religions." Nostra Aetate, edited by Pim Valkenberg and Anthony Cirelli, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C., 2016, pp. 58–75. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1g69zbs.11.
- ^ Fiedler, Maureen. "Nostra Aetate proves that change is possible".
- ^ a b Poggioli, Sylvia (1 November 2015). "'Nostra Aetate' Opened Up Catholic, Jewish Relations 50 Years Ago". National Public Radio. Retrieved 18 January 2019.
- ^ Fredericks, James L. "Nostra Aetate and Pope Francis: Reflections on the Next Fifty Years of Catholic Dialogue with Buddhists." Nostra Aetate, edited by Pim Valkenberg and Anthony Cirelli, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C., 2016, pp. 43–57. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1g69zbs.10.
- ^ "Nostra aetate". www.vatican.va. Retrieved 25 March 2021.
- ^ "Guidelines and Suggestions for Implementing the Conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate". www.vatican.va. Retrieved 29 December 2018.
- ^ US House Concurrent Resolution 260 Recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council's Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra aetate, and the continuing need for mutual interreligious respect and dialogue.
- ^ Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with Jews (10 December 2015). "The Gifts and Calling of God are irrevocable". Holy See. Retrieved 29 December 2015.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - ^ Zimmermann, Carol (21 May 2015). "Muslim leader praises 50-year-old church document on religious dialogue". National Catholic Reporter. Retrieved 23 February 2019.
Bibliography
- Pope Paul VI (28 October 1965). "Declaration on the relation of the church to non-christian religions - Nostra aetate". Holy See. Retrieved 25 December 2008.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Pope Paul VI (28 October 1965). "Declaratio De Ecclesiae Habitudine Ad Religiones Non-Christianas - Nostra aetate" (in Latin). Holy See. Retrieved 25 December 2008.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Akasheh, Khaled (28 June 2006). "Nostra aetate 40 Years later: 'Dialogue' Between Christians and Muslims". L'Osservatore Romano: 8.
- Banki, Judith (7 December 2005). "The Interfaith Story behind Nostra aetate, transcript of a talk given on the occasion of the observance of the 40th Anniversary of Nostra Aetate". United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Archived from the original on 27 January 2008. Retrieved 26 December 2008.
- Bea, Augustin (1967). "The Church and the non-Christian Religions". The Way to Unity After the Council. London: G. Chapman. OCLC 956846.
- Oesterreicher, John (1986). The New Encounter: Between Christians and Jews. New York: Philosophical Library. pp. 103–295. ISBN 0-8022-2496-2.
- Serafian, Michael, The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision, Farrar, Straus, New York, 1964
- de Poncins, Léon (1965). The Problem with the Jews at the Council. Rome.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - de Poncins, Léon (1967). Judaism and the Vatican: An Attempt At Spiritual Subversion. London: Britons.
- Cassidy, Edward Idris Cardinal (2005). "Section II: Interreligious Dialogue - Nostra aetate". Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue: Unitatis Redintegratio, Nostra Aetate. New York: Paulist Press. pp. 125–225. ISBN 0-8091-4338-0.
- Connelly, John. From Enemy to Brother: The Revolution in Catholic Teaching on the Jews, 1933–1965 Harvard University Press, 2014.
- Cunningham, Philip A. "Nostra aetate: A Catholic Act of Metanoia" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 July 2011. Retrieved 23 February 2011.
- Kaplan, Edward K (2009), Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America, 1940-1972, Yale University Press, ISBN 978-0300151398.
- Kinzer, Mark S (2015), Searching Her Own Mystery: Nostra Aetate, the Jewish People, and the Identity of the Church, Cascade Books, ISBN 978-1498203319.
- O'Malley, John W.; Komonchak, Joseph A.; Schloesser, Stephen; Ormerod, Neil J. (2008). What Happened at Vatican II. New York: Continuum. ISBN 978-0-8264-2890-5.
- Willebrands, Johannes Cardinal (1 December 1974). "Guidelines and suggestions for implementing the conciliar declaration "Nostra Aetate" (N. 4)". Commission For Religious Relations With The Jews (Holy See). Retrieved 25 December 2008.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - "40th Anniversary of Nostra Aetate (A collection of resources)". Archived from the original on 31 January 2009. Retrieved 25 December 2008.
- US House Concurrent Resolution Recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council's Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate, and the continuing need for mutual interreligious respect and dialogue.
- "In Our Time". Forward. New York. 28 October 2005. Retrieved 25 December 2008.
- Robinson, Neal (December 1991). "Massignon, Vatican II and Islam as an Abrahamic religion". Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. 2 (2): 182–205. doi:10.1080/09596419108720957.
- Rosen, Rabbi David (27 October 2005). "Nostra Aetate — Forty Years after Vatican II, Present and Future Perspectives". Commission For Religious Relations With The Jews (Holy See).
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - Ruokanen, Miikka (1992), The Catholic Doctrine of Non-Christian Religions: According to the Second Vatican Council, BRILL, ISBN 9789004319882.
- Rush, Ormond (2019), The Vision of Vatican II: Its Fundamental Principles, Liturgical Press, ISBN 978-0814680742.