CHRISTIAN ANTI-SEMITISM: (original) (raw)
Christian anti-semitism: past history, present challenges
2004
A contemporary film on anti-Semitism describes this centuries-long social disease as a "shadow" over the cross. Recent Catholic documents have spoken in even stronger language. In 1989 the Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace insisted that "Harboring racist thoughts and entertaining racist attitudes is a sin." And it clearly included anti-Semitism in its list of continuing manifestations of racist ideologies that are to be regarded as sinful. In point of fact, it terms anti-Semitism "the most tragic form that racist ideology has assumed in our century." My assignment here today is to present an overview of post biblical anti-Semitism, following up on Professor Hamm's analysis of forms of anti-Semitism in the New Testament.
Mishkan, 2022
Christian antisemitism, while a lamentable and prevalent force in church history, is a unnecessary foreign contaminant that developed over time, rather than being inherent in the essence of Christianity. This paper traces the historical developments that led to antisemitism becoming entrenched within Christian theology, ethics, church governance, and political structures. It ultimately argues that Christians today must strive to undo these dangerous developments.
Blindingly Obvious Christian Anti-Semitism
Faith and Philosophy, 1994
In "Stump, Kretzmann, and Historical Blindness," Paul Griffiths charges us with "being historically blind and (therefore) ethically insensitive.'" "These are harsh words," he says, but he thinks that he is justified in applying them to us as the authors of "Theologically Unfashionable Philosophy,"2 our reply to Gordon Kaufman's "Evidentialism: A Theologian's Response" (p. 79).3 Although Griffiths apparently agrees with us in rejecting much of Kaufman's position, he shares Kaufman's view that the "Christian faith ... bear[s] some significant responsibility for most of the evils" of the twentieth century (p. 79). In particular, Griffiths accuses us of being historically blind to Christian anti-semitism and therefore ethically insensitive to it. Our position leaves us, in his words, "happily untroubled by (even unaware of?) what most Christians have believed about important matters such as the status of the Jewish people before God and the modes of behavior toward Jews justified by this supposed status" (p. 84). Griffiths rests his defense of Kaufman's view on "the following particularization of [Kaufman's] more general claims: [H] Christian ideas about Jews have contributed directly and in significant measure to the occurrence of the holocaust" (p. 79). "[T]he truth of H," he says, "seems to me blindingly obvious" (p. 80). We think that all educated, fair-minded people must agree that H is indisputably true, but only on one interpretation of H. Luther's obscenely immoral "sincere advice" to Christians on what to "do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews," quoted with rhetorical effect by Griffiths (p. 83), does, of course, count as an expression of Christian ideas in a sociological sense: it emanates from the great Reformer himself writing in a pastoral capacity. Just as plainly, it must count as an expression of anti-Christian ideas in a doctrinal sense: it is incompatible with such defining pronouncements as the Sermon on the Mount and the second (at least) of Christianity'S two Great Commandments. Taking ideas associated with some institution, such as a religion, a philosophy, or a political system in a sociological sense is a matter of characterizing those ideas as they are understood by individual adherents of or participants in the institution who suppose the ideas to be part of the institution. Taking the ideas associated with that institution doctrinally is a matter of considering
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 2007
Drawing on religious coping theory, we examined whether the appraisal that Jews desecrate Christian values (the stressor) is linked to anti-Semitic attitudes (the response). Further, we considered whether religious ways of understanding and dealing with this stressor (religious coping) mitigate or exacerbate the ties between religious appraisals of Jews and anti-Semitic responses. College students completed measures of desecration, anti-Semitism, and religious ways of coping with appraisals of Jews as desecrators of Christianity. Greater desecration was associated with greater anti-Semitism, after controlling for demographic variables and dispositional measures (e.g., particularism, pluralism, church attendance, Christian orthodoxy, fundamentalism, and authoritarianism). Religious coping in ways that emphasized expressions of Christian love were associated with lower anti-Semitism; ways of coping that emphasized being punished by God and Jews as demonic were tied to greater anti-Semitism. Perceptions of Jews as desecrators were predicted by higher levels of authoritarianism and religious orthodoxy, less closeness to Jews, greater exposure to messages of desecration, and less exposure to messages that counter the perception of desecration. On Ash Wednesday of 2004, The Passion of the Christ, Mel Gibson's movie depicting his vision of the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus Christ, opened to a record-breaking audience. At the time of its release, many people, including Christian and Jewish religious leaders, found the movie disturbing (Goodstein 2004). Particularly troubling to some was the depiction of the role of Jews in the crucifixion of Christ and the possibility that this portrayal might promote anti-Semitism The public debates triggered by The Passion of the Christ are popular cultural variants of questions social scientists have long raised about the links between religiousness and prejudice. However, theory and research on religion and prejudice do not speak directly to the issues that were provoked by this movie, namely, the links between perceptions of Jews as desecrators of Christianity and anti-Semitism. It could be argued that the point is moot because few people in today's world perceive Jews to be culpable for the death of Christ or, more generally, a threat to Christianity. Surveys, however, suggest otherwise. According to a survey by the Anti-Defamation League, over 20 percent of people from 12 European countries agreed that Jews are responsible for the death of Christ (Anti-Defamation League 2005a). In the United States, over 30 percent of people agreed with the same item, an increase of 5 percent since 2002 (Anti-Defamation League 2005b). Are perceptions of Jews as desecrators of Christianity, in fact, associated with anti-Semitism? This study puts this question to test. Drawing on religious coping theory, we examine whether the appraisal that Jews desecrate Christian values (the stressor) is linked to anti-Semitic attitudes (the response). Further, we consider whether religious ways of understanding and dealing with
Jewish and Christian anti-Zionism in the history and today
2024
The rejection of a Jewish political state – known today as "anti-Zionism" – is a traditional rabbinical position that is much older than political Zionism, which only emerged in the second half of the 19th century, and its strategy of Jewish colonization of a foreign territory with the aim of founding a state "cleansed" of non-Jewish inhabitants and as "Arab-free" as possible. But also the – even older – New Testament Christianity is essentially and unequivocally "anti-Zionist" due to its biblical-messianic understanding of the "Kingdom of God" according to the teachings and interpretation of Rabbi Yeshua (Jesus) of Nazareth and the authors of the New Testament writings instructed by him. The excursus contained in this article on the term "Israel-related antisemitism" – synonymously propagated as "anti-Zionist antisemitism" – is intended to shed light on one of the most effective and aggressive fighting terms with which the Israeli Hasbarā strategists work to compromise political democracy movements and to delegitimize and criminalize legitimate boycott movements and demands for sanctions with the aim of ending the occupation. Table of contents: 7. Is anti-Zionism "anti-Semitic"? 8. Where does "biblical Judaism" come from? 9. The emergence of rabbinic Judaism 10. Zionism as an anti-Jewish ideology Excursus: The reinterpretation of "anti-Zionism" as "Israel-related anti-Semitism" a) Background b) "Israel-related anti-Semitism" as a compromising fighting term c) The consequences of the shift in meaning d) Closing words 11. Zionism as an anti-Christian ideology 12. Summary and conclusion ATTACHMENT
Christian philo-Semitism: Sources and Challenges
Taking Responsibility for Our Time: The 25th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations Between the Holy See and the State Of Israel (1994–2019), 2020
In this article, three main sources of contemporary Christian philo-Semitism have been explained.
The ancient origins of Catholic anti-Semitism -and what we owe our Jewish siblings today
America (magazine). diginal edition, 2024
The protests over the war in Gaza that roiled many college campuses in the United States this past May and June raised once again the ancient specter of anti-Semitism. This year's version of the prejudice arose from Israel's vigorous response to Hamas's attack on Oct. 7, 2023, which slaughtered 1,200 Israelis and took 251 hostages. Jewish fears of such prejudice are understandable, given their long history of suffering from violent anti-Semitism. But peaceful and clearly articulated campus protests against Israeli military actions are, of course, legitimate, to be expected and even welcomed. Christian protesters, however, may not be fully aware of the bloody history of anti-Semitism that was fueled in part by Christian anti-Judaism going back to the origins of Christianity. And the Catholic protesters among them may not be aware that their church invites them in these opening years of the third millennium to a new and positive relationship with their Jewish neighbors.