Antisemitism Studies

In his article, John Pawlikowski begins by discussing the Church's ambivalent position vis-à-vis the history of antisemitism. On the one hand, Pope John Paul II explicitly condemned antisemitism as a sin, a condemnation, which Pawlikowski notes, "represents the strongest theological statement against this pernicious disease." He also makes explicit what steps have been taken, especially since the Second Vatican Council, by both ecclesial authorities and theological scholars to remove anti-Jewish legacies from their theology. On the other hand, there are reasons to doubt whether the Church has taken responsibility for its implication in the history of antisemitism. The Church has tended towards arguing "that antisemitism came only from fringe elements in the Church who were muscled by wayward preachers and teachers." Such an argument denies the pervasive and systemic problem of antisemitism and disavows the view that it is deeply embedded in the Catholic tradition. The document We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah (1998), which Pawlikowski also mentions, is exemplary in this regard. While this document makes clear the necessity of thoroughgoing scholarly research to better understand the mechanisms that finally led to the Shoah and emphasizes that Christians have to confront the injustices of [End Page 373] the past to open up a new future (memoria futuri), the document also shifts responsibility away from the Church and its theological traditions to those Christians who failed to live according to what "might have been expected from Christ's followers."¹ Rather than recognizing antisemitism as a form of systemic racialization legitimized and institutionalized by Catholic tradition and its authorities, the document tends to reduce the problem of antisemitism to the personal failure of some.² To make matters worse, the document immediately contrasts the few rotten apples to the many initiatives taken by ecclesial authorities to halt the suffering of the Jews under the Nazis. In addition, We Remember emphasizes that National Socialism was in fact a modern, anti-Christian, pagan racist regime, which ought to be clearly distinguished from Christian anti-Judaism. By way of conclusion, the document acknowledges that "erroneous and unjust interpretations of the New Testament regarding the Jewish people" contributed to "feelings of hostility towards this people," but points out that such interpretations have been "totally and definitively rejected by the Second Vatican Council." Understood in this way, the problem of Christian anti-Judaism belongs to the past and has been dealt with appropriately within the Church; the problem of racist antisemitism is inimical to Christian tradition and its theological vision about the unity of the human race, and has been condemned in the strongest words.

In contrast to We Remember, Pawlikowski explicitly states that "thus far the roots of antisemitism in the Catholic Church have [not] been fully erased from Catholic consciousness." To this day, Pawlikowski asserts, there is a problem of latent or dormant antisemitism, which can become the ground for new more explicit expressions of hatred, such as the attacks on the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. To uproot antisemitism from Catholic tradition, Pawlikowski suggests a research program focused on biblical exegesis and the Patristic tradition, as well as on the failure of the Church to acknowledge how its anti-Jewish traditions provided fertile ground for the Shoah. Finally, he also urges us to revisit the issue of the Church's evangelizing mandate in relation to the Jewish people. [End Page 374]

I am a Catholic comparative theologian working after Nostra Aetate and I find myself in full agreement with Pawlikowski. The history of Christian antisemitism covers almost 2,000 years and we only started to grapple with it in the aftermath of the Shoah. Far from it being merely a surface issue, antisemitic discourse has seeped deeply into the core of (European) Christian culture. Antisemitic patterns of thinking were imprinted on the Christian imagination through liturgy, prayer, and sermons, but also through art, illuminated manuscripts, theatre, music, as well as legislation. Even when one is dedicated to moving beyond antisemitism, it remains difficult to step outside of this framework. As David Nirenberg states, "The peril of fantasizing our freedom from the past is great": when we...