Outros artigos deste número | Versão em inglês | Versão em Francês

The pioneer - 1955 to 1972: Biblical pionner in dialogue (work in Holland from 1955 to 1966)
A. C. Ramselaar

Introduction

This contribution can be nothing more than personal memories which are, in any case, incomplete and subjective. Nevertheless, they are still very much alive, their advantage being that they show the person of Kees Rijk — as he is known in Holland — against the background of his times. It is equally true that his work bears the stamp of his very unusual personality, hence its luminosity. But the originality of his personality is drawn above all from the unusual period that led to his activity: the renewal of Jewish-Christian relations.

A Rapid Awakening

For most of the earliest workers in these relations, the starting point of their ties with the Jewish people derived from their personal experience of the years of the Holocaust and the birth of the state of Israel; but this was not so for Kees Rijk. He was one of those rare men who grasped the greatness and the tragedy of the Jewish people solely through an unprejudiced study of the Bible and of Jewish history. He saw in these great historical events a living biblical experience, both Jewish and Christian. In the ups and downs of Jewish history he was able to discern the nature and vocation of the Jewish people, and in his own Christian experience he discovered the Jewish source of an inexhaustible new life from which Christians and non-Christians alike are able to draw. Through the influence of his teachers, moreover, especially the future Cardinal Willebrands, the ecumenical movement opened up new horizons for him.

A crisis in the life of faith began after the second World War, posing burning questions on the viability of the vision of Christian faith and the government of the church. In 1955, when Fr. Rijk became professor of theology and biblical studies, he was plunged into the deep troubles of the post-war society. Storms wereon the horizon in political and social life, and hence in ecclesiastical life also. Those who were in the church saw, perhaps, in its lack of energy, the basic cause of the confusion. In any case it was obvious that the flow of history was not going to be determined from an armchair, but precisely through being totally immersed in the life of the world.

Two antitheses absorbed people:

— the place of the Jewish people after the Holocaust. In one way or another all peoples were involved in this question;

— the problem: renewal or revolution — the opposition between rich and poor countries.
Few were really aware of the unprecedented change of bearings brought about in the world by the second World War. Those who did realize this became ipso facto pioneers. In protestant circles one thinks immediately of names like Karl Barth, and in Holland, still more of Miskoffe.

In Catholic circles the voices of Leon Bloy and Jacques Maritain were heard through Pieter van de Meer de Walcheren, but the masses were devoid of any motivation to arouse their enthusiasm. Among Catholics the movement came from the grass roots, beginning with Sophie (after baptism, Francisca) van Leer who became a Catholic during Kurt Eisner's revolution in Munich in 1918, and began the movement known as "Amici Israel" which was dissolved by Rome in 1928. Only a few people took up this thread again after the war. The Reformed Churches were interested, especially through the work of the Reformed Church of Holland and the Council for Church-Israel relations. Catholics rediscovered Sophie van Leer with her faithful and prophetic champion, Matien van Wijnhoven, a Little Brother of Charles de Foucauld. The torch was taken up again by Miriam Rookmaaker van Leer, formerly a Protestant, who had become a Catholic without their knowing. She initiated the Catholic Council for Israel in 1951, meeting with little interest and deep prejudices, but achieving something all the same. Very soon Kees Rijk became her dynamic guide.

One of the most fruitful contacts was Rabbi Jacob Soetendorp who became a highly appreciated radio and television lecturer. At the same time Henri van Praag appeared on the scene. He was well-known for his great projects, being president of the "Anne-Frankhuis" (Anna Frank House). He founded the "Leerhuis" (Leer House), thus beginning Jewish-Christian dialogue, with Kees Rijk in the front line inspiring confidence everywhere. From then on we can discern the main direction of Kees's work, because through him this little nucleus became very deeply convinced and was marked by a sincere love for Israel. To attempt to measure this activity in terms of the size of the organization and the number of participants would be to mistake the reality — faith and love cannot be measured. When one considers that all of this took place over and above each one's professional engagements, that it was carried on without financial means, points to a genuine commitment that is clearly a sign of the Spirit.

Dialogue

Contacts between Jews and Christians in Holland have taken their own specific shape. The name might be "Leerhuis" but it matters little that the organization has a name. In innumerable places, above all in the built-up areas of the large cities, encounter groups have sprung up. Their enthusiasm went hand in hand with the dynamism of the young ecumenical movement, feeling themselves closely united to it as to a kindred spirit. Their name was a recognizable sign, Kees Rijk being so well known among them. So many had listened to his lectures or read some of his writings. The road they were following pointed to Jerusalem, and he did everything he could to strengthen this, organizing and guiding study tours and pilgrimages to Israel. These contacts contributed a great deal towards giving back to Amsterdam its name of Jerusalem of the West. That this had become possible in spite of the decimated and diminished Jewish community shows courage on both sides. A clear sign of this was the celebration of Father's memory after his death, when a member of this community recited Kaddish at the closing of the requiem Mass in Amsterdam. Theologians and professors of Judaic Studies, historians, psychologists and sociologists have been engaged in fresh studies of Jewish and Christian traditions, more particularly during the intertestamentary period, when the break between Jews and Christians emerged. In Holland at the beginning of the sixties a series of commentaries on the main books of the Bible was begun. The leaders were Soetendorp and van Praag,van Goudoever and Kees Rijk. The latter had a special gift for this work, thanks to his lively pen, knowledge of languages and clarity of style.

International Collaboration

These initiatives in dialogue made it evident that only international collaboration would be able to stir up general interest in and co-operation with the Jewish people. This became all the more pressing because in the Reformed and Catholic traditions there were widely divergent concepts of the status of the Jewish people. Activity without necessitates order within. Thus there arose ideas of creating links between Jewish-Christian dialogue centers throughout the world, leading up to two international meetings in Holland — Apeldoorn, 1958 and 1959 — and one in France — Strasbourg, 1967 — either leading up to or following on from the special declaration of Vatican Council II on the Jews. SIDIC, also, followed on from that same declaration, but there is no need here to name Kees in connection with that Center except to say that this was to become his life's work. Thanks to all these initiatives contacts were also made with the great international Jewish organizations: The World Jewish Congress, B'nai Brith, and the American Jewish Committee. What came out of all these contacts is still in the making so that a historical summary is impossible.

Development of Ideas

At no time were there any advance plans. Eyes were opened by the logic of facts: developments in Israel, in the Near East, in world politics. This led to the influence of ecumenical inspiration on theological problems. Dialogue became above all the search for a new society; a movement from the margin to the center. Church-Synagogue relationship no longer corresponded to the Jewish-Christian reality, nor with the questions to which it gave rise.

It seems obvious that in Jewish-Christian relations, the Christian approach shows, at the grass roots level especially, that what is at stake is not only an inexhaustible mystery, but also a daily inevitable but inscrutable reality.

Kees Rijk was personally an incarnation of this development of thought. It was impossible to discern the inner combat of his life through his external equanimity. His thought and the questions he put himself had already carried him beyond the completion of his work. Kees was a precursor; his work urges us to ever-renewed study. The development of Jewish life can bring much light to bear on the search for a humane society.