The Jewish-Christian Schism Revisited (review)

This book is a collection of essays written and presented in a variety of settings by Yoder, a prominent Mennonite scholar who served for many years on the faculty of the University of Notre Dame. Although some of the essays were written as early as 1971, they were updated by Yoder in 1996, one year before his death. Much of the value of this book lies in the introduction prepared by the editors, the commentaries from a Jewish perspective written by Peter Ochs, and Appendix B, a Christian view offered by Michael Cartwright.

Yoder taught that the New Testament was written by what he calls "Messianic Jews" and that there is nothing in it that is anti-Jewish, un-Jewish, or non-Jewish. In his reconstruction of the scenario, it was not until after the mid-second century C.E. and especially after Constantine and the unfortunate development of Christendom in the fourth century that Christian anti-Judaism became a factor.

For Yoder, the Protestant Reformation did not result in the break-up of Christendom, that oppressive union of Christian religion and secular political power. The rejection of Christendom was accomplished only by those who produced the so-called Radical Reformation, otherwise known as the "free church," the "peace church," and "believer's church," the groups represented by Anabaptists, Mennonites, Quakers, and other groups patterned after the powerless minority practices of the early Messianic Jews who were followers of Jesus and of Paul. Yoder claims that much of Judaism has become contextually "Christianized," secular, accepted into Western pluralism in the U.S.A. and in Israel, functioning much as Christendom functioned in Europe. Yoder considers "committed Judaism" to be a minority sect in Israel just as it is elsewhere in the world, similar in many respects to his own radical reformation "committed Christianity." Yoder considers his own radical reformation tradition to be at the center of Christian identity and in lifestyle closer not to others who consider themselves to be Christians, but to committed Jews, and "reaching sideways" to them.

As a Christian, I accept the criticisms that Yoder makes of Christendom and of "mainstream Christianity." I differ with him, however, in his basic thesis that there was a Jewish-Christian schism that began within the second century and that can and should be reversed now. I am especially concerned that he apparently considers groups and congregations of Messianic Jews in Israel under Mennonite auspices to be appropriate vehicles for reversing that schism. Cartwright's survey of Mennonite Missions in Israel in Appendix B of this volume, as well as Ochs' insight that Yoder's program has the potential for a new supersessionist strategy, helps us to see this.

Yoder's interpretation of New Testament texts and theology seems to be driven by his thesis about a schism that he said did not have to be. I question whether it is accurate or useful to use the word schism in regard to the development of Christianity. A new religion was formed with its own beliefs and practices because some of the followers of the Jesus of history, including Paul, developed a Christology in which for them Jesus as the Christ is Lord more immanently than Adonai is Lord. Writers of the Gospel According to John and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the New Testament expressed their beliefs that, as the Christ, Jesus is God, not only the Son of God, but God. This occurred under the influence of Persian and Greek concepts in which savior figures were said to have been born to selected virgin women as a result of divine intervention. It seems to me that the development of Christianity can be depicted more adequately as a new religion that has a Jewish "mother" and a Persian-Greek "father" than as a result of a Jewish-Christian schism. Also, I am not convinced by Yoder that Rabbinic Judaism is a new religion that was a result of...