Jews, Christians and Muslims in Encounter

Preface

The chapters in this volume consist of articles and lectures delivered over 15 years, beginning in 1998, the year the Centre for the Study of Jewish–Christian Relations (later to become the Woolf Institute) was founded.

During this period, interfaith relations has changed dramat­ically, both in the UK and overseas. For example, in 1998, Pope John Paul II was in the process of taking major steps in fostering reconciliation between the Roman Catholic Church and the Jewish people, the first Jewish statement on Christians and Christianity in modern times (Dabru Emet) was in preparation, and the Israeli–Palestinian Peace Process appeared to be making tangible progress in resolving the long-running conflict.

How things appear to have changed for the worse during the following 15 years! The rise of religious radicalism and extremism, notably the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks, the failure of the Israeli–Palestinian Peace Process and regular outbreaks of violence in the Middle East, as well as the apparent decline of religious institutions in the West, have led to a perception that interfaith dialogue has failed.

Individually and in combination, these factors make many people today ask whether relations between faiths is part of the problem, not the solution, of many challenges facing society. For my part, I remain convinced of the positive value of the interfaith encounter and continue to pursue the vision outlined by the pion­eers of interfaith dialogue, such as Martin Buber and Wilfred Cantwell Smith, with vigour and also optimism.

Buber set the bar high when he wrote as early as in 1929, ‘a time of genuine religious conversations is beginning – not those so-called but fictitious conversations in which none regarded and addressed his partner in reality, but genuine dialogues, speech from certainty to certainty, but also from one open-hearted person to another open-hearted person’.¹ Buber emphasized the ­importance of experiencing ‘the other side’ of a relationship that transforms itself from the ‘I–It’ involved in everyday encounters to the ‘I–Thou’ of a genuinely human encounter.

Similarly, Wilfred Cantwell Smith insisted that ‘religions’ were not to be reified as ‘impersonal theoretical systems’ that could be juxtaposed and compared. ‘Ask not what religion a person belongs to but ask rather what religion belongs to that person’ is the rationale behind the first principle.² Smith affirmed that the distinctive quality of the human being was faith rather than his or her holding a set of beliefs (‘the alleged ideal content of faith’), and therefore dialogue was always from faith to faith, in Buber’s words, from ‘one open-hearted person to another open-hearted person’.³

As a scholar of interfaith relations and an active participant in the practice of interfaith dialogue, I have learnt that there is a danger in seeing everything in terms of two dimensions: of being either true or false; that there can only be one perspective. There is always more than one perspective. This is essential for a genuine understanding of the nature of interfaith reality. Each of us sees the world from different perspectives and, in the words of Jonathan Sacks, we must seek to confer the dignity of difference on how the world looks from one perspective as well as how the world looks from another.

Another way of saying this is that the interfaith world is an irreducible multiplicity of perspectives.

There is, in other words, the view of Isaac. But there is also the view of Ishmael. There is the view of Jacob. But there is also the point of view of Esau. There is the view of Adam, but also Eve. Interfaith dialogue is an attempt to do justice to the fact that there is more than one point of view.

Since we see things differently and have different perspectives on reality, how should we proceed under those circumstances? Well, we can talk. We can converse. You can tell me how the world looks to you. I can tell you how the world looks to me. We can have a dialogue. We can, through interfaith dialogue, learn what it feels like to be different, and bridge the distance between perspectives.

Interfaith dialogue is based on the principle of an ‘irreducible multiplicity of perspectives’. Personally, I do not believe that out of the many comes one. I believe that out of the one come many; there is an emphasis on the unity of God alongside the diversity of human existence. That, it seems to me, is the goal of a genuine religious dialogue, as outlined by Buber and Cantwell Smith, and the reason why I have immersed myself in the study of interfaith relations and the practice of interfaith dialogue for 25 years.

It has been no easy task selecting writings that shed light on the encounter between Jews, Christians and Muslims. That it has turned out to be so rewarding is due to a significant number of people. I would first of all like to thank my editor, Natalie Watson at SCM Press, who initially encouraged me to put this book together. I would also like to thank Martin Forward for offering his thoughts in a postlude, Shoshana Kessler, who devoted much of the summer of 2012 to editing the book and unifying a disparate array of writings, and Martin Borysek, a graduate of the Centre for the Study of Jewish–Christian Relations, who has kindly provided the indices.

There are a number of colleagues without whose help this book would not have been completed. I would first like to express thanks to all the staff at the Woolf Institute: Mohammed Aziz, Dr Shana Cohen, Claire Curran, Dr Emma Harris, Esther Haworth, Trisha Oakley Kessler, Dr Lars Fischer, Dr Josef Meri, Tina Steiner, Matt Teather and Alice Thompson.

The students at the Woolf Institute, Cambridge University, and the Cambridge Theological Federation have been, for the most part, a privilege to teach. In fact, teaching is the greatest source of learning, and much of the material in this book originated in classes and conversations with my students. I am fortunate to work in a rich learning environment, which provides an engaging forum for the study and teaching of interfaith relations. Needless to say, any mistakes in the following pages are entirely my own.

My fellow Trustees have encouraged me to write as well as to direct the Woolf Institute and I thank them all – Professor Waqar Ahmed, Lord Ian Blair, the Revd Professor Martin Forward, Bob Glatter, Peter Halban, Lord Khalid Hameed, Lord Richard Harries, David Leibowitz, Professor Julius Lipner, Martin Paisner, Lady Marguerite Woolf, as well as the previous Chairs, the Revd Dominic Fenton, Clemens Nathan and John Pickering.

I would also like to acknowledge the support of colleagues and friends in the study of interfaith relations and the practice of interfaith dialogue, who have been kind enough to offer support and encouragement in the divinely inspired task of fostering reconciliation and furthering understanding. They include Professor Akbar Ahmed, Professor Phil Cunningham, the Revd Dr Susan Durber (and numerous colleagues at Westminster College), Sir Brian Heap, Dr Amineh Hoti, the Revd Dr Toby Howarth, Professor Geoffrey Khan, Professor Paul Luzio, Professor Ibrahim Al-Naimi, Adrian Nicholas, Dr James Carleton Paget, the Revd Dr Peter Pettit, the Revd Professor John Pawlikowski, Professor Philip Renzces, SJ, Dr Robert Sansom, the Revd Martin Seeley, Martyn Sakol, Paul Silver-Myer, Professor Yasir Suleiman and the Revd Guy Wilkinson.

I am particularly grateful to two mentors, who for many years have been extremely generous in offering me their time and wisdom during the more challenging moments of leading the Woolf Institute: HRH Prince Hassan of Jordan and Lord Harry Woolf, both of whom I deeply respect and admire.

Finally, none of these chapters would have been written without the support of my family, which (in the words of George Santayana) is one of nature’s masterpieces: my parents, Willie and Jo Kessler; my wife Trisha; and our children Shoshana, Asher and Eliana. Together they remind me daily of the priorities in my life, and I am deeply grateful for their love and affection. This book is dedicated to them.

I commend to all readers of this book the following words of Mother Teresa:

‘What can you do to promote world peace? Go home and love your family.’

1 Martin Buber, 1947, Between Man and Man , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, p. 9.

2 Wilfred Cantwell Smith, 1963, The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind , New York: Macmillan, p. 332.

3 Kenneth Cracknell, ‘Dialogue’, 2005, in Edward Kessler and Neil Wenborn (eds), A Dictionary of Jewish–Christian Relations , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 125.

Introduction

Part 1 Jewish–Christian Relations: status quaestionis

This book begins with an analysis of the state of play in Jewish–Christian relations. Chapter 1, which originated from the first memorial lecture in memory of Holocaust survivor Rabbi Hugo Gryn, describes how the Shoah and the State of Israel have dom­inated relations for 50 years, since the end of the Second World War. Yet there are dangers if these two immense events of the twentieth century provide the only topics for discussion between Jews and Christians. Although the Shoah and the creation of the State of Israel spurred an intense desire among many Christians and Jews to learn about the history, theology and other aspects of Jewish–Christian relations, there are dangers when the agenda becomes dominated by either or both of them.

For example, the need to tackle the Holocaust is self-evident, but it needs to be conducted in perspective. Emil Fackenheim’s proclam­ation that the Shoah resulted in a new commandment, the 614th, which stressed that it was incumbent upon Jews to survive as Jews, is a case in point. According to Fackenheim, one remained a Jew so as not to provide Hitler with a posthumous victory. However, as a result, Jewish identity can easily become Shoah-centred – as can Jewish–Christian relations. While reaction to the Shoah is an important driving force, positive relations cannot be built solely on responses to antisemitism and Christian feelings of guilt.

A similar picture can be drawn about the State of Israel. After more than 60 years of sometimes perilous existence, Israel is no longer a recent creation and, after the large aliyah from the former Soviet Union in the 1980s and 1990s, no longer attracts significant numbers of Jewish immigrants. While Israel will retain a significant place in the Jewish–Christian relationship of the future, especially as the resolution of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict remains some way off and the gap between Israel and the Jewish diaspora widens, other matters of mutual interest to Jews and Christians will take their place.

Other topics that deserve attention include the consequences of the social and economic transformation of Europe, the import­ance of the Orthodox Christian–Jewish relationship, the growing desire for greater theological reflection and the implications of the scholarly re-evaluation of the encounter between Christians and Jews in the early centuries of the Common Era.

Chapter 2 considers the major institutional statements and charts their development. I point out that although open and direct consultations have taken place and formal declarations and guidelines have been issued, something is missing – the implementation of these statements into Jewish and Christian communal life.

Three themes can be identified in Christian documents published in recent decades, each of which has resulted in a Jewish response. First, a realization that Christians and Christianity have made a significant contribution to Jewish suffering; second, a reawakening to the Jewishness of Christianity; third, a recognition among some Christian leaders that the formation of Christian identity today is dependent upon a right relationship with Judaism.

Jewish responses to these themes have been as follows: first – distrust of Christian overtures; second – defensive involvement in dialogue (in other words, involvement for the sake of combating antisemitism); third – developing awareness of commonality as well as an appreciation of a common purpose. It is the third theme that provides the best opportunity for developing positive relations between Jews and Christians.

As the subject of Israel–Palestinian conflict is rarely far below the surface, and regular outbreaks of violence in the region result in significant pressures far away from the Middle East, Chapter 3 deals with peace and understanding (or perhaps more realistic­ally, conflict and misunderstanding), whether they take place in meetings between Christians and Jews in churches and synagogues, in Lambeth Palace and in the Chief Rabbi’s Office or in the coffee parlours of Jerusalem and Bethlehem.

Discussions are often divisive and controversial, as participants tend to be advocates of one side or another. Chapter 3 considers why it is so rare to find Christians or Jews who are both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli. Blinkered views prevail and conversations brim with emotion and passion.

While for Jews the reasons are more obvious: the centrality of the land of the Bible, as well as the survival of over a third of world Jewry, is at stake. Christians not only disagree as to the place of Israel in Christian theology, they also feel particular concern for Christians who live in the Holy Land as well as for Palestinians in general. There are of course also many Christians and Jews who are deeply concerned about the ‘Other’, making this a complicated picture to understand.

The chapter outlines the history of Jews and Christians in the Holy Land during the last millennium, explores the significance of Jerusalem and reflects on the challenges faced by Christians today, whether they live in the Jewish State of Israel or in Arab countries – in both, they face increasingly militant religious voices. Those who are committed to genuine reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians may realize that good neighbours are better than good guns, but they face increasing problems, created by those who are moving away from genuine dialogue towards a megaphone monologue, who generate noise but not hope.

Chapter 4 explores some of the theological questions that Jewish and Christian theologians are now beginning to tackle. In recent years, several theological controversies have beset official relations between Jews and Christians. These include whether Christians should pray for the conversion of Jews, whether the purpose of interreligious dialogue is to lead others to Christian faith, and whether Christians should undertake non-coercive ‘missions’ to Jews. An underlying theological topic in all these disputes is how the biblical concept of ‘covenant’ is understood in Judaism and Christianity and in their interrelationship.

Originating from a public dialogue with leading American Catholic scholar Professor Philip Cunningham in 2008, Chapter 4 reflects on a modern re-reading of Paul, especially Romans 9—11, which concerns the role of the Jewish people after the appearance of Christianity. The traditional Christian teaching of ‘replacement’ or ‘substitution’ – that with the coming of Jesus Christ the Church has taken the place of the Jewish people as God’s elect community – has been repudiated by Christian theologians, but there is less agreement about what replaces replacement theology.

Clearly, the rejection of replacement theology entails some affirm­ation of the continuing validity of God’s covenant with the Jewish people and the continuation of their covenantal relationship with God, as expressed by Pope John Paul II’s comment ‘the people of God of the Old Covenant, which has never been revoked’. However, constructing a new theology of the Church and the Jewish people remains an unresolved and formidable undertaking, because, as German theologian Johann-Baptist Metz has argued, the restatement of the Church’s relationship with the Jewish people is a fundamental revision of Christian theology.

Part 2 Jews, Christians and the Bible

The Bible provides a fundamental connection between Jews and Christians, and Part 2 explores the similarities and differences in respective approaches to Scripture and what they tell us about Jewish–Christian relations. During the last two decades, there has been increasing Christian interest in both the Jewish context of the New Testament as well as in the influence of Jewish biblical interpretation on the formation and development of Christianity.

For understandable reasons, it has generally been assumed that Judaism influenced Christianity, but relatively little attention has been given to the other side of the same coin – the question of the influence of Christianity upon Judaism. I suggest that neither Jewish nor Christian interpretations of Scripture can be understood properly without reference to the other. This is because both Jews and Christians lived – and continue to live – in a bib­lically orientated culture.

Part 2 begins with Chapter 5, with reflections on changing Jewish attitudes towards Jesus and their implications for Christian self-understanding. Over the centuries, primarily because of Christian persecution, Jews have been indifferent or hostile to Jesus and his teachings. Yet attitudes on both sides have changed in recent years and this chapter explains why.

One of the certain facts about Jesus is that he was a Jew. He was a child of Jewish parents, brought up in a Jewish home and raised in accordance with Jewish tradition. Throughout his life, Jesus lived among Jews and his followers were Jews. Indeed, no other Jew in history has rivalled Jesus in the magnitude of his influence, but when the Church persecuted Jews in an effort to convert them, Jewish indifference to Jesus turned to hostility. Up until recently, most Jews have chosen not to think of him at all.

Chapter 5 charts the dramatic change in the writings of Jewish scholars who have come to study the teaching of Jesus and their influence on Christians who, for their part, have come to admire Judaism and to appreciate the immense debt of Christianity to it. Although the hostility of centuries cannot be eliminated in the blink of an eye, the signs are encouraging. Similarly, the traditional Jewish attitude of indifference (and at times hostility) to Jesus is also being overcome. Of course, the death of Jesus cannot have for Jews the same significance as for Christians, and his significance lies in his life. For the majority of Jews, Jesus can never be what he is to Christian hearts, yet an increasing number are proud that Jesus was Jewish – that he was born, lived and died a Jew.

Chapter 6 considers the significance of Mary as a Jewish mother. Although, as Chapter 5 shows, the Jewishness of Jesus is increasingly recognized, and that in its origins Christianity was a first-century Jewish group, rarely is the mother of Jesus portrayed as a Jew. This is partly because Christianity forgot its Jewish roots, but as Christians recovered a respect for their Jewish siblings and asserted the Church’s debt to its Jewish heritage, it is well overdue that we reconsider Mary in Jewish terms. As a teacher of Christian–Jewish relations, I occasionally have to remind my students that Mary was a first-century Palestinian Jewish woman, not a Roman Catholic.

Chapter 6 examines New Testament descriptions of Mary, as well as early post-biblical Christian ones, which either ignore Mary’s Jewishness or adopt an anti-Jewish position. In the centuries that followed, Christian anti-Judaism grew, and Jews were accused of desecrating Marian images as well as deriding her cult.

The chapter concludes with suggestions as to how Christians can celebrate that Mary was Jewish like her son, Jesus of Nazareth, and followed a Jewish way of life. It is argued that as a ‘daughter of Israel’,⁴ she should be remembered as a Jewish mother.

Chapters 7 and 8 explore Genesis 22, the Sacrifice of Isaac, which is one of the most famous stories in the Bible. As a piece of writing, the biblical account has tension and drama and enough action for a five-act play or a Hollywood blockbuster. Yet it is compressed into only 18 verses. It is packed with energy and dynamism, a paradigm of Aristotle’s catharsis, arousing both terror and pity. It deals with the biggest themes and touches the deepest emotions.

The story focuses on Abraham’s relationship with God and how his faith in God, and his commitment to him, was demonstrated by his willingness to sacrifice his long-awaited son at God’s command. Abraham’s attempted sacrifice of Isaac has been an important passage for Judaism and Christianity from an early period. For Jews, from at least as early as the third century ce, the Binding of Isaac (as it is called) is read in synagogue on Rosh ha-Shana, the Jewish New Year. For Christians, from around the same period, the Sacrifice of Isaac is mentioned in the Eucharist prayers and the story is recounted in the period leading up to Easter.

A study of traditional Jewish and Christian biblical interpretations of Genesis 22 shows that both the church fathers and rabbis asked the same question of the biblical text; both were very close readers and interested in the detail of Scripture. Rabbi Ben Bag Bag, who lived in the first century ce, could have been writing on behalf of the church fathers when he stated, ‘turn, turn and turn it again, and you will find something new in it’.

This highlights a more constructive and mutually beneficial encounter between Christians and Jews during the formative centuries than had previously been realized. Indeed, it is pos­sible to uncover a fruitful two-way encounter between Jewish and Christian biblical commentators, when each side was aware of the other’s interpretations, for good, not just for ill. When Jews and Christians read traditional post-biblical interpretations, they will often discover a willingness among the rabbis and church fathers to be open to, and to engage with, each other’s teachings.

I call this an ‘exegetical encounter’ and suggest it is found not only in Jewish and Christian writing, but also in art. Artistic interpretations of Genesis 22 show similarities between the representations of Jewish and Christian artists. They also indicate a positive interaction as well as a rich diversity, and some of the artistic representations mirror literary interpretations; on other occasions, they are unique and not found elsewhere.

Chapter 9 examines the 2001 Vatican document on Jewish–Christian relations entitled The Significance of the Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible (JPSSCB). The document is important for three reasons: 1) it explores the positive significance for Christians of the fact that the history of Judaism did not end with the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 ce, but developed an ongoing innovative and living religious tradition; 2) it attempts to understand Judaism as a living faith and strives to learn by what essential traits Jews define themselves in the light of their own religious experience; 3) it is the first statement on Jewish–Christian relations issued by the Pontifical Biblical Commission, illustrating that Roman Catholic consideration of the Christian–Jewish relationship extends beyond the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. It is the concern of the Roman Catholic Church as a whole.

Most noteworthy is JPSSCB’s call for the use of Jewish commentaries by Christians since, it explains, Jewish interpretation of Scripture can be viewed as legitimate. The document’s affirm­ation that the ‘Jewish messianic expectation is not in vain’ is also significant, preparing the ground for future Catholic encounters with the Jewish people that may consider theological issues such as messianism, because, as the document concludes, ‘this people has been called and led by God, creator of heaven and earth. Their existence is not a mere natural or cultural happening . . . It is a supernatural one. This people continues in spite of everything to be the people of the covenant, and, despite human infidelity, the Lord is faithful to his covenant.’

The handling of violent Scripture is the subject of Chapter 10, the final chapter in Part 2. Religion is often portrayed, with justification, as being a cause of destruction and there is little doubt that it has, at times, been a force for evil in the world and violent actions have been justified with reference to Scripture. This chapter considers how to interpret violent biblical texts and proposes a hermen­eutic that can be embraced by both Jews and Christians. If religion per se is part of the problem, then religious thinkers and leaders need to put their minds to it becoming part of the solution.

This chapter takes as a starting point Deuteronomy 20, especially verses 16–18, in which God commands the Israelites to destroy the cities of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Peruzites, Hivites and Jebusites and kill every breathing thing – men, women, children and even animals. Rabbinic tradition made an ethical decision not to understand the command literally and annulled the genocidal meaning of the text, by declaring that military power could no longer be used. The reality was that, living as a minority in Christian and Muslim societies, Jews were instructed to follow a model of passive acceptance.

The Shoah, and the creation of the State of Israel, changed all that. The quietist approach gave way to one in which a more aggressive response to violence seemed appropriate. But as Israel has moved over the years from using military force sparingly and defensively to employing it liberally and belligerently, the danger of such violent texts re-emerged. In response, I propose a new hermeneutical principle, ‘exegetical relativity’, and suggest that it is no longer appropriate to search for the one and only correct meaning of a text. Rather, it is essential to examine, as the rabbis have traditionally done, a number of different interpretations, each with its own context. With reference also to the Christian Syriac hermeneutical tradition, I suggest it takes a high degree of maturity to let opposites coexist without pretending that they can be made compatible and that the ‘plain and obvious interpret­ation’ of the text does not hold its final meaning.

Part 3 Jews, Christians and Muslims

The final part of this book extends the study of the Jewish–Christian encounter to include Islam. It begins with Chapter 11, with a revised 2008 lecture, which took place at London’s Hellenic Centre, home of the Greek Orthodox Church in Great Britain, and explores a ‘Jewish Theology of Dialogue’, the basis for which, I suggest, is Leviticus 19.33–4 (‘You shall love the stranger as yourself . . . because you were strangers in the land of Egypt’). This is followed by a reflection on the state of play in Jewish–Christian–Muslim relations today.

From the Jewish perspective, Jews need to ponder the purpose behind the creation of Christianity and Islam, such as the significance for Jews of the Jewishness of Jesus and the existence of two billion Christian followers who read the Jewish Bible. As for Islam, Jews need to reflect on the fact that over 1.6 billion Muslims share many of the same rituals and customs as Jews and, like Jews, adhere to a strict monotheism.

One of the few pieces of good news in today’s encounter between religions is that Christian–Jewish dialogue arose despite profound theological differences and many centuries of alienation and distrust. The fact that Jews and Christians have built mutual respect and understanding does not, of course, mean that this model can be wholly applied to relations with Islam. Jews and Muslims today carry far different memories and issues than the historical baggage brought to encounters with Christians. Building positive relations with Muslims is in