-
1. The Theological Tradition
- University of Pennsylvania Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
The break with Judaism was the definitive, oedipal event in the history of Christianity. With their decision to turn their backs on the faith of their fathers and abandon the effort to convert their fellow Israelites, the leaders of the nascent Church redirected their energies toward the infinitely more ambitious—yet, paradoxically, more practical—goal of spreading the Gospel to the ends of the earth. It was a brilliant move, one which inaugurated a breathtaking scries of events that saw Christianity grow from a minor Jewish sect into the most influentialideology and set of institutions in world history. Yet the break was not clean. Rather, it was accompanied by hard words and harder feelings and a vague promise that at some point the battle would be rejoined. And so it was.While there were long periods of latency throughout the medieval and early modern periods, Christian frustration at the Jews' refusal to accept Jesus as the Messiah resurfaced time and again, especially at moments of internal crisis. Then the old arguments were dusted off, philippics were composed, and there was a spasm of missionary activity which, after early signs of promise, ended in failure. Finally the movement either collapsed in exhaustion, or—more frequently—erupted in acts of violence. The ultimate source of this recurrent preoccupation with Jews was, of course, Jesus himself. Not only was Christianity's putative Messiah a Jew; more important, Judaism provided the context for everything he said and did. His messianic claims, his scriptural quotations and allusions, his attacks on the Pharisees and temple priests, and his sacrificial death are all intelligible only in terms of Jewish history and scripture. Nor is it possible to accept Jesus as Messiah without also believing in the Mosaic covenant, the Davidic monarchy, and the divine inspiration of the Hebrew scriptures. In a very real sense, anyone who wishes to become a Christian must first become a Jew. But if Christianity has historically required its converts to accept the scripture, history, and theology of Judaism, it has also demanded that they utterly eschew its ritual practices. This ambiguous attitude—approbation i. The Theological Tradition of Judaism's creed, condemnation of its cult—arose from the decision of the Church's leaders in the second century to excommunicate Christians who continued to observe the ritual precepts of the Law. It was then that the phrase "Jewish Christian" became a contradiction in terms. This development was not inevitable. The words and actions of Jesus were ambiguous on the issue of the Law, so much so that the earliest Christians continued to observe at least some of its ritual precepts and to frequent the Jerusalem Temple. Furthermore, the apostolic decision to free Christians from the regulations of the Mosaic Law was originally tactical rather than doctrinal: circumcision and the various dietary precepts were hindering missionary work among non-Jews. Only later did the early Fathers begin to argue that continued observance of the Mosaic precepts involved an implicit denial of Christ. Jesus, they declared, had not merely fulfilled biblical Judaism; he had established a new religion which had supplanted Judaism as the one true faith, and his followers constituted a new tribe which had replaced Israel as the chosen people of God. Jesus' nuanced position had been transformed into a stark choice: Christian or Jew, Christ or the Law. Patristic theologians claimed this supersession theory followed logically from elements in the Bibleitself, particularly certain passages from the Gospels and Paul. But Jews and other critics of Christianity were quick to point out that it flew in the face of a number of texts from the Hebrew scriptures and the New Testament. For instance, they argued that the notion that the Law has been invalidated contradicts passages such as Leviticus 16.29 which clearly state that the Law was a perpetual covenant. They also emphasized Matthew 5.17—19, where Jesus declares in no uncertain terms that he has not come to abolish or even alter the Law. Finally, they noted the tension between the supersession theory and passages in Acts which depict the Apostles attending Temple services, observing at least some of the Mosaic dietary regulations, and performing various other ritual acts prescribed by the Law—all after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. For most modern commentators, these passages pose little difficulty. Since they view the Bible as a complex, heterogeneous work based on a variety of written and oral traditions rather than as seamless revelation, they are not troubled...