Other articles from this issue | Version in English | Version in French

Reviews: articles
The Editors

Contenu et portee de la declaration conciliaire sur les juifs - J. P. Lichtenberg, 0.13., "Nouvelle Revue Theologique" - Mars, 1966 p. 225 - 248.

79. One of the largest and best of the commentaries which appeared recently after.the proclamation of the Declaration of the Relations of the Church to non-Christian religions is that of Fr. LICHTENBERG of Strasbourg.

The placing of the Church's statement on the Jewish People in the document on non-Christian religions'"no doubt has the advantage of inserting it into a wider framework, but it.has the inconvenience of putting the Jewish religion, - arevealed religion, - on the same; footing as the non-revealed religions". The vic:_ssitudes which this Statement underwent during the Council shows "the complexity of the theological problem provoked by the existence of Israel and by her exact situation in relation to the Church".

These statements in the opening paragraphs set the tone for a thoroughly documented reflexion upon the themes of the Declaration. The author suggests a number of points which must be developed theologically and presents a critique of the attempts to answer some of the basic questions in this area of ecumenical relations. At the end, he dwells upon the question of the Jewish People and the crucifixion, discussing the Passion of Jesus from histor]T_cal, exegetical and theological points of view.

"Even if this text presents a certain retreat in regard-to the previous scheme, it is basically (finalement) positive. The Declaration constitutes a sort of new charter of the Christian attitude towards the Jews, who share a common patrimony with us. It manifests one desire: that of dialogue and esteem. The importance of such a document is immense, but this will be judged by the reality of its concrete applications, in the domain of consciences, as well as in that of institutions,in the field of teaching as well as in that of real dialogue with others; in the spirit of openness and charity which was that of Pope JOHN XXIII".

NOTE: In the issue of December 1964, Father J. MASSON, S.J., presented an article "La Declaration sur les religions non-chretiennes", giving a short historical introduction to the documents and then considering the various religions briefly before drawing some practical conclusions.
L.F.

80. In his address delivered to the International Conference "The Theological Issues of Vatican II", held at the University of Notre Dame, U.S.A. March 19 - 26, 1966, Father Thomas STRANSKY, C.S.P. outlined the history and theological foundations of the Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to non-Christian Religions. The Declaration acknowledges that men are united by their religious aspirations which have found expression within a multitude of "faith-communities". A salient point of the Declaration lies in the assertion that the spiritual and moral values found within other religions provide a generous basis for dialogue. "The Church is plunged into a reverence of God's grace-filled workings among men, everywhere, at all times. It respects, not only tolerates, all men outside the Church's walls, who, seeking the Ultimate Reality, raise their hearts to the living God".

In regard to Chapter 4'of the Declaration, it Was pointed out that amendments were necessary to clarify and emphasize both the theclogical premises on which the Declaration is based, and the conclusions which can be drawn even in the present embryonic stage of research into the question.

Finally, several "problems" are propoced on which .a deeper understanding must be gained through increased study by competent and interested theologians: "Whatia the eschatological destiny of the Jews in relation to the nature of their permanent election? (The nature of that permanency? The value of the irrevocable gifts of God; and thus the value of the Jews in themselves?), and to the incomplete, wounded universal, ity of the Church (Eph.2) as long as the "proto schism" is not healed?. What is the nature of that common messianic and eschatological hope between Jews and Christians, even though there are profound differences on the forms of the realization of the Event?....

“What is the difference between ideological antisemitism and the polemic Of the Evangelists, especially Matthew and John, whose texts tend to excuse the disciples and to accuse more and more Jews in excluding more and more Romans? Who are the "Jews" 7:hom the Evangelists accuse and whom do they represent? eg. What is the typology of the "Jews" in John?

To what extent is ideological antisemitism a heresy? What is the nature of the specific guilt of Christians (and of the Church) for so much of its past treatment of Jews? "

81. The October 1966 issue of Concilitm (under "Canon Law"); is devoted to the theme "Religious Freedom", and includes an essay by Rabbi Arthur GILBERT, entitled "Religious Freedom in Jewish Tradition and Experience".

He begins with the answers of Rabbis of the Talmudic period to the paradox of an obligation to serve God, yet the right to do so freely.

Before giving a brief outline of Jewish thought and'experience in medieval and modern times, Rabbi Gilbert admits that "Jewish tradition can offer only partial answers to such questions (of Church-State relations) since Jewish experience has been so delimited". (p.14 b).
After indicating points in the Council Declaration to 'which -Jews can or cannot agree, he states: "The Catholic Church's. Declaration on-Religious Liberty offers the most creative solution I know to the tension'resulting'from the absolute right to frcedon of conscience, on the one hand, and the duty of the State on the other, to legislate' on matters of moral concern that affect the just public order, and finally, the zeal of each religion to win all men to its own particular revelation". (p.19 a)
L.P.

82 An article of Rev. John B. SHEERIN; editor of The Catholic World (U.S.A.) in the May 22, 1966 issue of qu• Sunday_yiitor, explains the reasons behind the modifications introduced into the final draftof•the Declaration: ".„.the document would not be successfully implemented throughout the whole Catholic world unless it had behind it the affirmative votes of an overwhelming majority•of-the bishops". And -"the Pope...: centre and agent of unity in the Church....wanted to win as many conservative bishops.... as was humanly possible".

83. Christians are urged, in accordance with the.inCentive provided by the Declaration. to study and revise catechetical material and
ye myv'es on to explain the 'unction 01 -Me AMerlcan Bishops' committee to promote Catholic-Jewish understanding, to establish "mutual respect", not only "for the Prophets and the religion of ancient Israel, but also for the religion of modern Jews", and ends with reflections on the relevance of the Jewish religion today.

"The exact relation between Israel and the Church today is a mystery...." "The Jews ill have a divine call, and we should show reverence for the living religion of the Jews by acknowledging it as a valid and authentic supernatural reality".

84. The January 1967 issue of "Bible et Terre Sainte" considers the Jewish and Christian institutions found during the excavations of Dura-Europos in Estern Syria. The supplement, "The Bible in Our, Life", is devoted to contemporary Judaism, including an article by Armand ABECASSIS on Jewish spirituality and a review of several books on Jewish-Christian relations by Professor T. FEDERICI. Father. J.P. LICHTENBERG sketches some guide-lines for a Jewish-Christian dialogue.

85. When speaking of Jewish reactions, a special place must be given to the Jewish Chronicle, London. It followed the development of the Council and of Catholic thinking very closely.

Examples of these reactions to the Declaration immediately before and after its promulgation are contained in articles which appeared periodically from January to December, 1965. From April onwards, suspicions were voiced that there would be a drastic revision of the document in favour of those who wished it either omitted altogether or weakened.

"Reports that the Ecumenia-al Council's draft declaration on relations between the Catholic Church and the Jews, faces a serious new challenge from within the Church have brought expressions of regret, disappointment and sadness from Jewish spokesmen". (3.4.65) STORMY DEBATES EXPECTED OVER DOCUMENT (3.4.65) JEWISH CHAPTER UNDER HEAVY PRESSURE, (17.9,65).

These suspicions were considered justified by such events as the Pope's Passion Sunday sermon, the visit to the Vatican of President Charles HELOU of Lebanon (17.9.65), and an equivocal statement issued by Cardinal DOEPFNER as late as mid-September in which he said that the "new formulation would remove all uncertainty, both in doctrinal substance and'in relation to the meaning of the declaration in the world, particularly in the Arab world". (17.9.65) Several articles stressed the strong Arab pressure to have the Declaration dropped altogether, or at least, to have it modified considerably.

As October drew nearer, tension mounted. Several articles mentioned Bishop CARLI of Segni and other so-called "right-wing" prelates in the Vatican in connection with what was feared would be the final outcome of the document. Cardinal HEENAN'S glowing pre-vote optimism: "I can only say that it is a splendid document which will receive a very, very considerable majority", (1.10.65), acted as a rather weak catlyst.

After the Declaration, public reactions were disaprointed and somewhat cautious. ".... lukewarm reactions emanated primarily from the Jewish side...." (Zechariah SHUSTER, 12.11.65) In order to make the best of the situation, the positive aspects were stressed. The consensus'seemed to be, that although the tone of the final draft no longer had the warmth of the former documents, it was, nevertheless, a step forward, an opened door, inviting further exploration. Its worth would be seen in its practical effects on catechetics, scripture exegesis, and moral training.

These thoughts are summarised in a short editorial of November 3, 1965:

".... Assessments of the Declaration on non-Christians, including the Jews will naturally differ, but no objective observer can miss the fact that the Catholic Church as a whole has taken a hard look at its past record and future attitudes towards the Jews. However, the Catholic hierarchy will finally be judged by its future performance on the all-important question of implementation".
And farther on: "It remains to be seemhow far the spirit of the Council and its original convener, Pope John, and the Vatican's influence will be brought to bear. This will'be the test".
L.P.