No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2018
I argue that the authors of the December 2015 Vatican statement “The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrevocable” both present the Jewish Old Covenant as a good covenant (rejecting traditional Christian supersessionism) and nonetheless view Jews’ conversion to the better Christian New Covenant as desirable. I challenge the assumption that post–Nostra Aetate positive views of the Jewish covenant, including the claim that Jews are already “saved,” preclude a desire for Jews to convert to Christianity. On the contrary, I show that the authors’ claim that the New Covenant is the “fulfillment” of the Old Covenant provides a motive for contemporary Christians to emulate the efforts made by those early followers of Jesus who shared the gospel with their fellow Jews. To support my argument, I first carefully study the writings of Cardinal Walter Kasper. The authors of Gifts draw almost entirely on Kasper's nuanced and complex views regarding the desirability of Jewish conversion to Christianity, adopting even his approach to and format for presenting this controversial claim.
1 Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, (2015), “The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrevocable” (Rom 11:29): A Reflection on Theological Questions Pertaining to Catholic–Jewish Relations on the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of “Nostra Aetate” (No. 4), http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/relations-jews-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20151210_ebraismo-nostra-aetate_en.html (hereafter, Gifts). Citations of this statement are according to paragraph number.
2 E.g., “Catholics Should Not Try to Convert Jews, Vatican Says,” BBC, December 10, 2015, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35061357; Bill Chappell, “Catholics Should Not Try to Convert Jews, Vatican Commission Says,” The Two-Way, National Public Radio, December 10, 2015, http://www.npr.org/ssections/thetwo-way/2015/12/10/459223058/catholics-should-not-try-to-convert-jews-vatican-commission-says; Gaia Pianigiani, “Vatican Says Catholics Should Not Try to Convert Jews,” New York Times, December 10, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/world/europe/vatican-says-catholics-should-not-try-to-convert-jews.html; Philip Pullella, “Vatican Says Catholics Should Not Try to Convert Jews, Should Fight Anti-Semitism,” Reuters, December 10, 2015, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-jews-idUSKBN0TT1BK20151210; “Vatican: Catholic Church Must Not Try to Convert Jews,” JTA, December 10, 2015, https://www.jta.org/2015/12/10/news-opinion/world/vatican-catholic-church-must-not-try-to-convert-jews; Lisa Palmieri-Billig, “‘The Gifts and Calling of God Are Irrevocable,’ a Jewish Perspective,” La Stampa, December 13, 2015, http://www.lastampa.it/2015/12/13/vaticaninsider/the-gifts-and-calling-of-god-are-irrevocable-a-jewish-perspective-NImEjsOAHpoPWsLjzeUXDO/pagina.html. A more skeptical reading is offered by J. J. Goldberg, “What New Vatican Memo Really Means for Jews for Jesus—and Us,” The Forward, December 18, 2015, http://forward.com/opinion/327449/what-everyones-getting-wrong-about-that-vatican-memo-on-converting-jews.
3 Pope Paul VI, Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (Nostra Aetate), October 28, 1965, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html (hereafter, NA).
4 Kasper's views on Judaism have received little scholarly attention. Useful summaries of his thought can be found in Groppe, Elizabeth T., “New Paths of Shalom in Christian-Jewish Relations,” in The Theology of Cardinal Walter Kasper: Speaking Truth in Love, ed. Colberg, Kristin M. and Krieg, Robert A. (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2014), 203–22Google Scholar; Philip A. Cunningham, “Celebrating Judaism as a ‘Sacrament of Every Otherness,’” ibid., 223–40. His successor at the commission, under whom Gifts was composed, is Cardinal Kurt Koch.
5 It is important to note that Kasper does not use these terms with precision or consistency or assign them a fixed or technical meaning; see discussion below. Kasper frequently repeats or reuses portions of his earlier statements in later statements, sometimes with small (usually insignificant) changes. There is no indication of any significant development in his views over the course of his tenure regarding the issues I focus on.
6 Quotations of and references to Kasper in Gifts, however, are never attributed to him, and his name does not show up anywhere. For a thorough study of the earlier sources that influenced or are incorporated (sometimes verbatim) in Gifts, many from Kasper, see Cunningham, Philip A., “The Sources behind ‘The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrevocable’ (Rom 11:29): A Reflection on Theological Questions Pertaining to Catholic-Jewish Relations on the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of Nostra Aetate (No. 4),” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 12 (2017): 1–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 It is important to note that other Christian theologians have come to different assessments of the two covenants; see Bolton, David J., “Catholic-Jewish Dialogue: Contesting the Covenants,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 45 (2010): 37–60Google Scholar; Boys, Mary C., “The Covenant in Contemporary Ecclesial Documents,” in Two Faiths, One Covenant? Jewish and Christian Identity in the Presence of the Other, ed. Korn, Eugene B. and Pawlikowski, John (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005), 81–110Google Scholar. A comparison of Catholic and other Christian views and how they relate to attitudes toward conversion would be a fruitful area of future research.
8 See the appendix for a list of the short citation forms used for references to Kasper's writings. For a more detailed discussion of Kasper's and Gifts’ comparisons of the two covenants, see Gregerman, Adam, “Superiority without Supersessionism: Walter Kasper, the Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrevocable, and God's Covenant with the Jews,” Theological Studies 79 (2018): 36–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
9 The phrases “Old Covenant” and “New Covenant” are often used in Kasper's writings, both positively, to refer to the covenant with Jews and the covenant with Christians. I focus below on the meanings he gives them. However, his discussion of Old and New Covenants coexists with a related but different claim denying that there really are two distinct covenants. The Old and New Covenants, while linked with two different peoples, were made by and with the one God (and also must include in some way a role for Jesus Christ, even if Jews do not recognize his presence) (2001 Jewish-Christian; 2011 Foreword). If God is one, Jews and Christians thus constitute in some sense one covenanted people, who “share the same faith in God: … the God of the Covenant” and are “partners of God in his covenant” (2001 Theology). While recognizing this other usage, I will continue to speak of two covenants and two peoples, as Kasper consistently does as well.
10 Pawlikowski, John, Restating the Catholic Church's Relationship with the Jewish People (Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 2013), 83–84Google Scholar; Boys, Mary C., “Does the Catholic Church Have a Mission ‘with’ Jews or ‘to’ Jews?,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 3 (2008): 1–19, at 6–7Google Scholar; Kessler, Edward, “Covenant, Mission, and Dialogue,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4 (2009): 1–10, at 8Google Scholar. The Catholic tradition of course includes extensive discussions of soteriology, as does the Jewish tradition (to a lesser degree), though these are not relevant to his argument.
11 While Kasper here speaks of multiple “covenants,” it is more accurate to say that all of these are different historical manifestations of the same Old Covenant.
12 Cunningham, “Celebrating Judaism,” 227–34; Groppe, “New Paths,” 212–13.
13 Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, Dialogue and Proclamation, May 19, 1991, note 8, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_19051991_dialogue-and-proclamatio_en.html. The reader is directed to Vatican statements exclusively about Jews. See Connelly, John, “The Catholic Church and the Mission to the Jews,” in After Vatican II: Trajectories and Hermeneutics, ed. Heft, James L. and O'Malley, John (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2012), 96–133, at 114Google Scholar.
14 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dominus Iesus: On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, June 16, 2000, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html. See Boys, “The Covenant in Contemporary Ecclesial Documents,” 92–93.
15 In contrast to the authors of Dialogue and Proclamation, who early in their statement attempt to clarify and differentiate the terms they use (§§8–13), Kasper's usage of terms such as witness and mission is neither clear nor consistent (see also below). Surprisingly, Kasper nowhere mentions Tommaso Frederici, “Study Outline on the Mission and Witness of the Church” (paper presented at the Sixth Meeting of the Liaison Committee between the Roman Catholic Church and the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations, Venice, March 28, 1977). This early work, by a consultant member of the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, addresses some relevant issues. However, Kasper may refer to it without quoting it (see below).
16 While this theme is of course ubiquitous, a helpful example appears in Dialogue and Proclamation §§20–21, where it is discussed in a section on biblical Israel.
17 E.g., Dialogue and Proclamation, §70.
18 Discussions of Paul appear in multiple places in Kasper's writings. In this section I draw from all of them.
19 In this statement (and others) he speaks repeatedly of missionary activity to the Jews as an open “question” (e.g., “The question must therefore be dealt with great sensitivity”; “a question which touches the heart of both of us”; “the question of mission” [three times]).
20 I consider Kasper's use of narratives about Paul in Acts and in Paul's letters. I do not evaluate the accuracy of his interpretations on exegetical grounds or consider whether it is appropriate to use Acts as evidence of Paul's activities or views.
21 See also 2008 Striving; 2010 Recent.
22 Other verses cited include Acts 13:42-52; 14:2-6.
23 Pawlikowski notes Kasper's insistence that “Christ's mission as universal needs to be retained”; see Pawlikowski, John, “Reflections on Covenant and Mission Forty Years after ‘Nostra Aetate,’” Cross Currents 56 (2006–7): 70–94, at 84Google Scholar.
24 This verse is quoted in NA §4, and Kasper repeatedly cites it (2001 Dominus; 2002 BC; 2011 Foreword).
25 In this section all quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from 2002 BC.
26 This “strongly contested document” (in Kasper's words) was issued by delegates of the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Council of Synagogues. See the discussion by Cunningham, Philip A., “Official Ecclesial Documents to Implement the Second Vatican Council on Relations with Jews: Study Them, Become Immersed in Them, and Put Them into Practice,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4 (2009): 1–36, at 26–30Google Scholar.
27 A noncontroversial concept of mission might include joint service to humanity in sharing knowledge of God, ending conflict, and rejecting hopelessness. “In today's world, we, Jews and Christians, have a common mission. …Together we must be ambassadors of peace and bring about Shalom” (2001 Dominus).
28 Earlier in his statement he considered the use of terms other than mission, recognizing the confusion it engendered, but then admitted that the problem went beyond “misleading terminology.” Groppe argues for a “technical sense” of key terms such as “mission” and “evangelization.” This both misses Kasper's own skepticism about the helpfulness of formulating precise terminology and overlooks the absence of any consistent (“technical”) meaning of these and other terms by Kasper; see Groppe, “New Paths,” 212–13.
29 The word “targeting” unfortunately obfuscates his larger point. Elsewhere, he uses it with a different and pejorative meaning, in contrast to the use of the term here for a benign and noncontroversial form of mission.
30 Pope John VI, Ad Gentes, December 7, 1965, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19651207_ad-gentes_en.html (hereafter, AG).
31 On “testimony,” see below. Relevant as well is his citation of AG §9 in the sentence preceding this excerpt, for that statement includes the requirement that “the Gospel must be preached to all nations.”
32 On various interpretations, see Donaldson, Terence L., Jews and Anti-Judaism in the New Testament: Decision Points and Divergent Interpretations (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2010), 38Google Scholar.
33 While it is not stated explicitly in this scene that Jewish listeners responded to the speech by believing in Jesus (Acts 4:21 says, “All of them praised God for what had happened”), this seems to be the obvious conclusion.
34 Were Kasper looking to exempt Jews from those who should hear the gospel and believe, there are many other biblical verses (from Acts or elsewhere) on preaching to Gentiles but not Jews that he could cite. For example, Acts 13:46-47; 18:6; 28:25-28.
35 In this section all quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from 2008 Striving.
36 On the dispute regarding the Good Friday Prayer, see Henrix, Hans Hermann, “The Controversy Surrounding the 2008 Good Friday Prayer in Europe: The Discussion and Its Theological Implications,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 3 (2008): 1–19Google Scholar; Moyaert, Marianne and Pollefeyt, Didier A., “Israel and the Church: Fulfilment beyond Supersessionism?,” in Never Revoked: “Nostra Aetate” as Ongoing Challenge for Jewish-Christian Dialogue, ed. Moyaert, Marianne and Pollefeyt, Didier (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010), 159–83, at 173–81Google Scholar.
37 While I focus not on the prayer itself but on Kasper's statement about it, it obviously provides some evidence of Catholic hopes for the conversion of the Jews.
38 There are two questions here, the first about intention (i.e., prayer), the second about action (i.e., missionizing).
39 On Kasper's views of the eschatological message of the Good Friday Prayer, see Moyaert and Pollefeyt, “Israel,” 180.
40 In footnote 6, Kasper offers a brief but important comment regarding the 2008 prayer. He says that the Jewish salvation prayed for does not mean “the entry of Israel into the Church,” contrary to what some “Jewish critics” said. By using “Israel” here, he refers only to the entire Jewish people, to whom (he says) the prayer does not refer. This explanation appears intended to allay these Jewish concerns. Likewise, his explicit focus on corporate Israel then appears in his claim that the prayer hopes for “the salvation of the greater part of the Jews” at the end of days without having to convert to Christianity. One sees in all of Kasper's carefully phrased explanations an effort to limit his nonconversionary interpretation to corporate Israel, that is, to the Jewish people as a whole; he says nothing about the conversion of individual Jews.
41 He appears inconsistent in his use of the term mission, for the sense it has here seems at the very least to depart from the more positive use elsewhere.
42 In a similar discussion of “institutional missionary work,” he speaks ambiguously about the church's rejection of conversion as a “strategic goal,” which also seems to indicate opposition to some type of formal, bureaucratic program; see 2011 Foreword; 2001 Dominus.
43 Connelly, “Mission,” 97. By contrast, some churches, such as the conservative Protestant Southern Baptist Convention, do use such methods. See the Southern Baptist Convention's 1996 “Resolution on Jewish Evangelism,” http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/655/resolution-on-jewish-evangelism. This and other statements have provoked highly critical Jewish reactions.
44 Bolton is correct that Kasper has (vague) eschatological expectations for Jews and Catholics and that these culminate in “an eventual Christian eschatological triumph.” However, Kasper's views are not limited to the end of days, and his eschatological focus does not preclude conversionary activity; see Bolton, “Catholic-Jewish Dialogue,” 46–47.
45 This is of course not the sole or even primary goal of Jewish-Catholic dialogue, but rather an additional goal; they are not mutually exclusive. Earlier, Kasper said that “the aim of dialogue is not for Jews to become Christians or Christians to stop being Christians. … This is the only way they can speak to each other and mutually enrich one another. Dialogue has nothing to do with proselytism” (2001 Theology). This reasonably reflects the primary focus of his office on dialogue itself, while accommodating missionary witness so long as it avoids “proselytism” (a term that seems carefully chosen so as to preclude specifically coercion or deception).
46 On such a demand in Jewish-Catholic dialogue, see Henrix, “Controversy”; Gregerman, Adam, “Jewish Theology and Limits on Reciprocity in Catholic-Jewish Dialogue,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 7 (2012): 1–13, at 4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
47 This quote appears in footnote 5.
48 As noted above, these terms for inappropriate forms of mission are used often and indicate Kasper's efforts to formulate carefully just what is (and is not) acceptable.
49 Quoted in Connelly, “Mission,” 122.
50 See D'Costa, Gavin, “What Does the Catholic Church Teach about the Mission to the Jewish People?,” Theological Studies 73 (2012): 590–613, at 599CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
52 For a discussion of the term “proselytism,” and especially its negative connotation, see Frederici, “Study Outline,” II:a:1–19.
53 A recent statement regarding the views of Norbert Hofmann, currently secretary for the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, in an interview after the release of Gifts is relevant here as well: “Father Hofmann said the Church can still pray for the Jews’ conversion, which the Church used to explicitly do in the pre-conciliar liturgies, but said there is no longer ‘a call to conversion’ for the Jews”; see Edward Pentin, “Pope Francis’ Synagogue Visit Underscores New Document on Catholic-Jewish Relations,” National Catholic Register, January 16, 2016. He appears to distinguish between a formal liturgy and the general desirability of Jewish conversion.
54 See Marshall, Bruce D., “Christ and Israel: An Unsolved Problem in Catholic Theology,” in The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson, ed. Anderson, Gary A. and Kaminsky, Joel S. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 2013), 330–50, at 330–33Google Scholar.
55 Alon Goshen-Gottstein has summarized this perception: “Suspicion of a hidden missionary agenda is probably still the greatest impediment to advancement in Jewish-Christian dialogue. … One cannot overestimate the significance of [missionizing] for a Jewish public”; see Alon Goshen-Gottstein, “Jewish-Christian Relations: From Historical Past to Theological Future,” Jewish Christian Relations, http://www.jcrelations.net/Jewish-Christian_Relations__From_Historical_Past_to_Theological_Future.1577.0.html?L=4. Some Jews have insisted that “if they dialogue with Christians there should be no hidden missionary agenda or desire for their conversion”; see Kessler, Edward, An Introduction to Jewish-Christian Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 182CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
56 See Groppe, “New Paths,” 204–8.
57 On soteriology in the statement, see Langer, Ruth, “‘Gifts and Calling’: The Fruits of Coming to Know Living Jews,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 12 (2017): 1–10, at 8–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cunningham, Philip A., “Gifts and Calling: Coming to Terms with Jews as Covenantal Partners,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 12 (2017): 1–18, at 3–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
58 For a critical analysis of “fulfillment” terminology in Gifts, see Procario-Foley, Elena, “Fulfillment and Complementarity: Reflections on Relationship in ‘Gifts and Calling’,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 12 (2017): 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
59 Strictly speaking, first-century Jews did not “convert” to Christianity, but their coming to believe in Jesus (as Lord, Messiah, etc.), being baptized, and joining a community of those who shared this view resembles in its essentials what we call “conversion” in the present context.
60 Jews’ unique religious status vis-à-vis Christianity is a prominent theme throughout the current statement (e.g., Pref.; §§14–15, 20–21).
61 This verse is cited by Kasper (in 2002 BC) to make a similar point.
62 Pope John VI, Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html (hereafter, LG).
63 This resembles Kasper's view (e.g., 2008 Striving) and also may have been influenced by Frederici, “Study Outline,” II:a:18.
64 See D'Costa, Gavin, “Supersessionism: Harsh, Mild, or Gone for Good?,” European Judaism 50 (2017): 99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
65 See Cunningham, “Gifts and Calling,” 9. See also LG §17.
66 This quote from Bernard is in Kasper's writings (2008 Striving) and was used by Pope Benedict to make a similar claim about an eschatological salvation of corporate Israel; see Benedict, Pope XVI, Jesus of Nazareth: From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 44–46Google Scholar.
67 Again, among examples cited above, recall the section heading “6. The Church's mandate to evangelize in relation to Judaism.”
68 This conversionary meaning of the term “proclamation” (used only here) is indicated by its usage immediately after the reference to LG §14 and the authors’ expression of hope for the creation of a new people, “both Jews and Gentiles,” through baptism and incorporation into the church.