TRILOGY: Bk I (Jackass for the Hour), Ch 22

[[ Caveat lector: This is another controversial chapter in the Trilogy. A serious critique of Islam and, now, Zionism begins and continues here. A note to wordpress and (especially European Union) countries where freedom of speech is restricted: this critique does not contravene any laws, but is a serious examination of the issues at hand in the world today. The characters and arguments will develop. Patience! Some statements of some individuals of the Catholic Church are not left out of the discussion. ]]

Sag niemals nie! Never say never!
Never again! Plus jamais! Nie wieder!

Before Father Alexámenos answered, the Rabbi continued, hoping that attacking some Catholics would provide the Muhammadan with a way to join them. “The Old Covenant must effectively be replaced by the New Covenant inasmuch as the Old is to be fulfilled and transformed in the New. The Old Covenant cannot be salvific on its own, even before any Messiah comes, for the Old had to look forward to the New, which fills it with Life. If the view is that the New has come, the Old must necessarily become sterile, even if it is not purposely cut off from the New, and no matter how much God respects the sincerity of Jews who do not even know what the New Covenant is all about. In that case, God may give grace to the Jews simply as His gratuitous gift, but not because God makes valid what cannot be made valid in the Old Covenant if the New has arrived.” Since Father Alexámenos did not interject, the Rabbi continued: “Your Cardinal Froben, nevertheless, gives us the lowest common denominator of no one having any covenant, telling us, absurdly, that both the Old and the New Covenant can be salvific at the same time. If the Old Covenant doesn’t look forward to the New, it is not actually the Old Covenant we are talking about, and if the New Covenant doesn’t fulfil the Old, effectively replacing it even while fulfilling it, it is not actually the New Covenant we are talking about. The two independent, salvific covenants of your Cardinal Froben are two other religions, neither Jewish or Catholic, or, for us who are Jews, neither the Old Covenant, nor the New Covenant for which we wait. Froben and his kind must stop insulting our intelligence. Tell me you understand!”

“Rabbi, I know exactly what you are…”

“Do you?” pressed the Rabbi.

“I regret,” said Father Alexámenos, “that Cardinal Froben has scandalously claimed that our aim in a dialogue is not to come into any kind of communion or unity, but simply to improve constantly those relationships and to work together. What he says is not what the Church nor I believe. I’m for unity in Charity and Truth. Saint Paul goes out of his way to say that…”

“I wonder about your regret,” interrupted the Rabbi, “Your Saint Paul makes it clear that he loves the Jews,” said the Rabbi, “but Froben and those like him do not seem to know who he is. They take every opportunity to send us to Auschwitz again. Take that document on the Shoah…”

“In reading that document, I just couldn’t believe that…” Father Alexámenos began to say.

“You Catholics,” interrupted the Rabbi, “speak of your Tradition as Faith provided by the Holy Spirit to each person so univocally throughout time that it seems as if this Tradition is created by one person handing on a book to another person. Yet, you Catholics always spoke of any human involvement as merely ‘quasi per manus’, ‘almost by hand,’ so that Tradition is God’s work. It is part of Revelation, God-given Faith, going hand in hand with Sacred Scripture, inspired by God, authored by God, using human authors to whom He gave the Faith, this Tradition. It seems as if the Faith, though living, is handed on as a thing, by hand, in the sense that it is always the same.”

“That is true,” said Father Alexámenos. “In fact…”

The Rabbi, instead, wanted to make his point, and said, “We Jews believe the same thing about Tradition and Faith, but we use different words. Tradition for us is our own assent to the Faith as found with our historical ‘handing on’ of commentary by which we ‘soil our hands’, as with the Mishna, Tosepta and Talmud. This Tradition is not rendered ‘quasi per manus’, ‘almost by hand’, but actually by hand alone, without the direct intervention of divinely given Faith. That is why the Mishna, Tosepta and Talmud are not even read in our liturgy. But much more than this, we believe that the Torah, the Prophets and Writings were not only written with assent to the Faith, like this other commentary, but were also revealed and written under inspiration. They are eternal words, as we say. I can understand that you Catholics can be confused by the different use of terminology. However, I don’t like it when you so easily take a polemical statement and make it representative of what Jews believe. For instance, just because of a few of our comments, you think that the Prophets and Writings have nothing within them that is as essential to Judaism as the Torah, the first five books of the Bible. Yet, the establishment of the Davidic line is essential to whom God wants us to be, namely, a holy People being led by one person who is a priest, a prophet and a king. This is far superior to the Aaronic priesthood. The New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah 31,31-34 is also essential to whom God wanted us to be. Check out 1 Samuel 2,27-3. Do I need to mention the Suffering Servant described by Isaiah, and how he is the Son of David?”

“I’m sure that all these misunderstandings can be sorted out,” said Father Alexámenos.

“Are you so sure?” asked the Rabbi. “Why, then, do some Catholics so easily believe that the Jewish Scriptures were complete only after what you call the ætas apostolica, the apostolic age, within which even your New Testament had to be finished for it to be inspired and canonical?”

“But the Hebrew Scriptures were complete before Christ’s birth…” began Father Alexámenos.

But the Rabbi interrupted him, saying, “I’ll tell you why. Because you want to condemn us to Auschwitz all over again. If you say the Jewish Scriptures were not written in view of the coming Messiah, the fulness of Revelation, whom you believe to be Jesus, then your insincerity is evident. You are actually saying that you do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah, and that the Jewish Scriptures point to a different Messiah. In fact, you say that no Jew ever read in the Jewish Scriptures what you read in the Jewish Scriptures, thus making even your Jesus into the greatest liar and fraud of all time, or at least those who wrote the New Testament, which, for you, makes the Holy Spirit into the greatest liar and fraud. You run away from the problem by saying that Catholics and Jews have two Faiths which are so ‘irreducible’ that we Jews not only would never become Christian – believing in Jesus as the Messiah – but could never do so. What an insult! What hatred of the Jews! If we are so cut off, in your view, from knowing the fulfilment of the Old Covenant in the New Covenant promised by Jeremiah, cut off from knowing the fulness of Revelation, of the Messiah’s Charity, that He is the Davidic Priest, Prophet and King, why not just condemn us to hell forever, as if we want to kill the Messiah. Auschwitz, here we come!”

“But Rabbi, those who say we have two different Faiths are heretics. In my dream…”

“Don’t deny that this is the only problem, as if answering it – even with your ‘dream’ – will be the end of it all,” said the Rabbi. “How about when your Preacher said that you Catholics cannot invite us to believe in Christ? He said that you have lost the right to do so because of some mistakes of some people who used coercion. He said that first the wounds must be healed through dialogue and reconciliation. But you have no basis for dialogue and reconciliation if you deny us Charity and Faith, the very things you hold dearest. You keep us away, as if you fear that we, if we did believe in Jesus as the Messiah, would brook no dissent within the Church, which I do not doubt for a second… We would be so passionate. That’s what you’re all afraid of !”

“I cannot wait for the hour when…” Father Alexámenos began to answer.

“We can reject you if we want. Don’t worry about that!” insisted the Rabbi, “but hold out to us Him whom you know to be Charity Incarnate. Do not refuse to love us! Otherwise, the sins of the past become reality again.”

“Did you read the revised prayer for the Jews for our Good Friday Liturgy?” asked Father Alexámenos.

“The trouble is that it can be read, at first glance, in the perspective of Cardinal Froben that I’ve been condemning,” the Rabbi replied.

“In fact, he himself has read it that way,” said Father Alexámenos.

“And for good reason. Those involved have a history of that kind of attitude,” said the Rabbi.

“But it can be read in a good way, if one pays attention to the citation of Saint Paul,” offered Father Alexámenos.

“Again, who even knows Saint Paul exists?” asked the Rabbi. “I mean, what hypocrisy it is to keep screaming about the Shoah, Never again! Plus jamais! Nie wieder! when that is just what you are about to do again. Sag niemals nie! Never say never! It can happen again. All the pieces are falling right into place. For hypocrites, wir leben nur als Last, but life is only a burden for those who hate life.”

“The cry Never again! is so often just self-congratulations, proclaiming that humanity does not glut itself as much as it can on violence, so that religion – added on top of this feigned general human niceness – merely adds more, optional niceness,” said Father Alexámenos. Religious people with this attitude are so dangerous. “Anyway, that preacher is just a simple priest, who…”

“If it’s a Cardinal you want,” interrupted the Rabbi, “how about the one who said that we are all waiting for the Messiah? At least he was severely criticised for saying what he did.”

“Yes, I distinctly remember the occasion. Some in the Ghetto felt sorry for him, even for contradictory reasons, some regretting he was castigated by others, some regretting that he seemed to be a hypocrite. He said that dialogue would continue until the Lord comes, meaning that he didn’t expect the Jews to become Christian until then. But then it is too late. Saint Paul says that only a part of Israel will be hardened, and only until the fulness of the nations enter. When they do enter, that part of Israel will also become Christian, and, then, and only then, the Lord will come. Telling people that they are not supposed to become Christian until it is too late is evil.”

“Evil?” asked the Rabbi, “not ignorant, misled, sycophantic perhaps?”

“Perhaps he didn’t mean it, but what he said is evil. It doesn’t advance justice, peace or unity.”

“Now you’re getting it,” said the Rabbi. “To me, they are all following those who seem to be anti-Semites, like your Secretary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, who, as is reported in the Holy See’s official acts, the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, wrote – just two and half years after the Shoah – that the first chapters of Genesis were related ‘en un langage simple et figuré, adapté aux intelligences d’une humanité moins développée…’ Not only did no one ever reprimand him, but he is praised as the Zeitgeist of your anti-Syllabus, pro-modernism rubbish to this day.”

“I’ve been battling over the years to have the Holy See admit to that very thing,” replied Father Alexámenos. “If Genesis were written ‘in a simple and figurative language, adapted to the understandings of a less developed humanity,’ that means that the account of Genesis either had to have been written by a non-Semite, who pitied the stupidity of the Semites, or that Moses, or any other Israelite, could not have written the account, but simply caught it as it dropped out of the sky. But that goes against what we both believe about the inspiration of the sacred writer. It’s completely ridiculous. We’re not ‘people of the book’ Muslims or fanatic Bible thumpers! Even more, that statement means that the Semites are stupid not simply because they were lacking in culture at a particular period of their history, but that they were stupid because their very humanity had not developed, as if they were neanderthals, for, as it is, one can be intelligent, and have good understandings, even if one’s culture is not developed. Figurative language calls for highly developed intelligence, and a great deal of culture, isn’t that true? Perhaps, then, he’s saying that the account was written the way it was in order to deceive those who would read it. The evil of his statement is what it is. The one who signed it died within months, and now knows the truth of his remarks, but the Holy Father should express regret for what that priest wrote, since it was published as an official Vatican document, and since it is still cited ad nauseam by biblical scholars and theologians. Sorry! I’m getting carried away. What I mean to say is that any expression of regret should include a mention of who it was who prepared the document. I’m quite sure it was not the person who signed it. It certainly wasn’t Pius XII, who saved more Jews than all others put together. The one who wrote it was probably…”

“Your little investigations won’t solve anything, Father,” said the Rabbi dismissively, wanting the priest to be prudent in these matters, but wondering how it was that the priest could be thinking along the same lines as himself.

“Not my investigations, Rabbi! Someone at the Centre…”

“The Pio Decimo Centre?” asked the Rabbi.

“Yes, Rabbi. One of the students at the Centre proofreading a thesis showed me the first note on page one. I did my own investigations after seeing that. But, anyway, never mind that. I should like to warn you of something, Rabbi,” said Father Alexámenos, trying to inject some humour into the conversation at the expense of Libreria editrice Vaticana: “Be careful not to be sued for citing Vatican documents verbatim. It could cost you as much as…”

“Thirty pieces of silver?” asked the Rabbi. “It’s only a conversation!” After a moment, he laughed, and said, “Oh, I see… It would be rather difficult for them to defend their copyright on behalf of such blatant anti-Semitism. Hah!” Both he and Father Alexámenos laughed, but it was the sad laughter of one who is faced with ignorance before which it seems one can do nothing.

“As it is,” said Father Alexámenos, “I never hesitate to offer an examination of conscience to those who have governance in the Church by way of the characters in the stories I write.”

“Savonarola redivivus, only better,” said the Rabbi, chuckling. “I’d like to read your works.”

“I would be most honoured,” said Father Alexámenos, “but I’ve lost everything in Haïti.”

“Not to worry,” encouraged the Rabbi. “Disasters like that only make a second try better.”

After reflecting on the conversation for some moments, Father Alexámenos said, “Rabbi, when I say that the Pope should express regret for a past mistake of someone in the Roman Curia – and with the Pope now being Jewish – I do not mean to say that the Church should embark on a process of hypocritical self-absolution. Regret must be accompanied by the fruits of repentance. For instance, if anyone speaks bigoted, ambiguous rubbish – whether or not they understand what they are saying – real penal, medicinal sanctions are to be given to them.”

“Yes, that would be good,” said the Rabbi. “It’s called governance, being a father.”

“The trouble is that a few of those with hierarchical responsibility to be fathers to the family of faith add insult to injury,” added Father Alexámenos, “while their subjects, who thirst to see the fatherhood of the hierarchy in action, are then marginalised by way of this abuse of authority.”

“I’m sick of mea culpa apologies for something one didn’t do,” said the Rabbi. “That’s hype. I don’t think apologies coming from your Popes had that intention, however much your theologians looked at it that way from ulterior motives. It wasn’t so much a mea culpa as regret for the bigotry of others. Regret is always appreciated if, as you say, it is followed by actions different from those about whom one is expressing regret. In this case with the Biblical Commission – which is so conveniently overlooked to this day – I appreciate your regret, but I want Pope Tsur-Ēzer to express regret, not for himself or the Church, but for the Holy Office with its tunnel-visioned Biblical Commission, not to mention the Dominicans, the Grand Inquisitors, one of whom signed that document about us Jews being examples of those having understandings of a less developed humanity. I myself regret that such a high-profile priest disgraced himself during the Pontificate of Eugenio Pacelli. That Pope, by his action and discretion, was more of a friend to us than anyone during the Shoah. Without his discretion, many more would have died. More recently, this kind of discretion was seen in many places, saving many lives… Rwanda comes to mind immediately.”

Father Alexámenos shook his head in disgust. “In fact, this all reminds me of the opposite situation. A priest I met from Africa in Paris told me that if he were to be caught up in a genocide, he would imitate Peter denying our Lord three times, with the intention of being able to serve our Lord another day…” Father Alexámenos paused for some seconds, but finally said, “My dream went on; it has to do with the legitimacy of violence in the Holy Land.”

“I’m afraid to ask you to go on,” said the Rabbi, “but, please, continue.”

Rabbi Shelomoh took a sip of his orange juice. Father Alexámenos also took a drink from his cup, and looked thoughtfully at the can. Surprisingly, it said that the provenance of the juice was not the Florida citrus groves, but Jericho, which Father Alexámenos pointed out to the Rabbi.

“I’ve never understood why some people call Jericho’s oranges ‘Cleopatras’,” said the Rabbi.

“The next scene of the dream,” said Father Alexámenos, “is of the adulterous woman dragged in front of Jesus. She is just about to be stoned to death.”

“Yes, I also know that story as well,” said the Rabbi. “I regret that many have thrown it out of your New Testament, out of the Gospel of John.”

“Including some of our Cardinals,” said Father Alexámenos. “At any rate, in my dream, instead of stoning the woman to death, they are dropping their stones, walking away with smiles on their faces, looking as if they had the Messiah where they wanted Him. As each went his way, only a soldier who had been behind the crowd remained. With demonic violence, he threw his rock. As it flew through the air, the scene changed to the Garden of Gethsemane, where Christ was praying a stone’s throw from his apostles. As the rock was about to hit not her, but Him, the scene again changed to Calvary. The rock turned into a spear piercing His side, for He was already on the Cross. All of this took place on the Rock of Sacrifice.”

“And the faces of the crowd, the woman and the soldier?” asked the Rabbi.

“The same. They all had the face of Christ taking their place,” said Father Alexámenos.

“And the Rock was Christ?” asked the Rabbi, quoting Saint Paul.

“Yes,” answered Father Alexámenos.

“But why shouldn’t she suffer so as to make up for the sufferings lacking to Christ,” asked the Rabbi, referring to Saint Paul, and wanting to entrap Father Alexámenos in a contradiction.

“The justice demanded for the legitimacy of mercy and the pedagogy necessary for this,” replied Father Alexámenos, “was perfectly and forever fulfilled in Christ, for He is a divine Person. We believe, Rabbi, that, in being redeemed, we are incorporated into the Body of Christ. Any lack in the sufferings of Christ refers to the mercy we are yet to receive, including the grace of witnessing to this mercy no matter what, a martyrdom which can include death, or simply praising God while living in this world, which always involves a death to our fallen ways.”

“Is that all there is to your dream?” asked the Rabbi.

“Saint Stephen getting stoned to death with the help of Saul,” said Father Alexámenos.

“You are completely without shame, aren’t you?” asked Rabbi Shelomoh. “Other Catholics I know hate that incident, thinking that what Stephen said on that occasion is embarrassing to modern-day Catholics, that it is politically incorrect, that he should not have insisted so thoroughly that Jews and Christians have but one Faith, that he should not have said that the Jews were now simply resisting the grace of the Holy Spirit being given to them, as did their Fathers.”

“Rabbi, God wanted Stephen’s martyrdom – which he underwent out of love for the Jews – to be an occasion of grace for the conversion of many, of whatever time or place, including that of Saul into Saint Paul. It was not merely Stephen’s love, but Christ’s in him. People still like to see this Charity in action, that of Christ doing the will of our Heavenly Father, laying down His life for us in the members of His own Mystical Body. Yet, it is not so much the Jews who would put Stephen to death today as those Catholics who have strayed far from the Truth of the one Faith of Catholics that had been given to the Jews.”

“So, do you mean to tell me that you really think that the fulfilment of the Old Covenant with the New Covenant must be a fulfilment, and not something absolutely different?” asked the Rabbi, happy to repeat himself. “Do you really think that Jesus, as the Jewish Messiah, fulfilled Judaism? Do you really think that neither of us would have any Faith if this were not true?”

“That is what I believe, Rabbi. If Jesus did not die and rise for us all, our Faith is in vain. Even if you do not yet see that He is the Messiah, it is from Him that the Jews had received the gift of Faith, as long as you do not reject Him after having come to know that He is the Messiah.”

“Are you telling me that you are another one of those universal salvationists, who say that everyone is saved regardless of their religion?” asked the Rabbi. You’re as bad as your Cardinal Froben.

“Instead, Rabbi, the case of the Jews not believing in Jesus as the Messiah is analogous to Saint Thomas Aquinas regarding the fulness of the truth of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. He believed this by way of supernatural Faith, though not entirely with an assent to anything understood by his intellect. As long as he wasn’t malicious, he believed with this supernatural virtue, just as we believe that a baptised infant enjoys this supernatural virtue of infused Faith, of sanctifying grace, even though it cannot yet think and then give assent to anything.”

“I see,” said the Rabbi, unable to find any hypocrisy in the words of Father Alexámenos. “In order to stop the endless cycle of violence, it seems to be expedient for everyone to be Christian.”

“Anyone who pretends to be a Christian from ulterior motives would be living a lie,” said Father Alexámenos, “which goes hand in hand with a continuous spiral of violence.”

“But what you are really saying is that today’s Jews and Muslims who are not becoming Christians are guilty of all the violence in the world,” asserted the Rabbi.

“Many Catholics are guilty of atrocities,” replied Father Alexámenos. “They do not act as Catholics. They do not live out the Faith. I believe that any Jews, Muslims, Catholics or others, who go out of their way to reject Christ, knowing who He is, knowing His goodness, kindness and mercy as the Messiah of God – but reject Him anyway – lay themselves open to being violent as the only way to salvation. Jews could claim that they have the divine right to kill any non-Jew, even children, in the Holy Land, while Muslims may say they have a right to be there, given Muhiammad’s journey, and so have the right to kill Jews and Christians, even children, that they may claim to be invaders. For Jews, Abraham’s would-be child-sacrifice of Isaac would be understood like that of Ishmael by Abraham as imagined in the Qur’an, as nothing more than bribing one’s way into the favour of a blood-thirsty god. Catholics would lose their Faith in the Sacrifice of the Son of God, the Mass, the Last Supper and Calvary, the Child-Sacrifice, if you will, of our Heavenly Father. They would be soft, defined by political correctness, begging for Catholics to lose the Faith, condemning those getting baptised, forbidding conversions, mocking prayer and goodness and kindness. They would not understand that Jesus’ laying down His life for us was fulfilling the justice demanded by His having mercy on us, saying, from the Cross, ‘Father, forgive them…’ We gave Him our worst, what we, then, deserve in justice; He, being innocent, and taking that on Himself, had the right in justice, so to speak, to have mercy on us, to forgive us, to bring us to Himself.”

“For myself,” said the Rabbi, approaching the topic from a different angle, “I have often wondered how it is that a handful of rabbis had the hubris to decide, at the end of the first century in Jamnia, that there was to be no more Revelation, especially anything written down in Greek. How did they know?! How could they pretend to gag the Most High?! They didn’t want to see anything written in Greek, for the New Testament was written in Greek, and most of the citations made by the New Testament were made from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Most Jews at the time kept using the Greek translation, the Septuagint. No one rejected the comments being put together which we now call the Talmud, but no one thought of those comments as Revelation truly and properly speaking…”

“And so…” interrupted Father Alexámenos, overloaded with information. “What’s the point?”

The Muhammadan in the row of seats ahead of them was ignoring them. He was uploading into his computer the digital recording he made of part of the conversation. He should have been paying attention. He might have changed his mind about the email he was preparing.

“If there was to be no more Revelation,” said the Rabbi, “violence is not a pedagogical means to teach about the Suffering Servant, the Messiah, who, for us, is yet to come. Do you get it?”

“Please, explain,” replied Father Alexámenos, enthralled.

“If there is to be no more Revelation from that time onward, then Revelation is complete. All pedagogical exercises about the gravity of sin are complete. But the Messiah must be the fulfilment of Revelation, the fulness of Revelation. The Rabbis in Jamnia were trying to make the Messiah redundant, forbidding Him to come. The only way we Jews can embrace violence as our Salvation, systematically exterminating the Palestinians, is by claiming that we have the fulness of Revelation even as we deny the Messiah. The contradiction is outrageous. The Law, Prophets and Writings point straight to the Messiah, who must not, who cannot permit ethnic cleansing, as if that were an ongoing pedagogy about the seriousness of sin, a pedagogy somehow needed even after the fulness of pedagogy about sin to be had with the Suffering Servant. Any more pedagogy would be blasphemy. In effect, the Rabbis at Jamnia proclaimed that Christ is the Suffering Servant, the Messiah.

“You should publish that,” Father Alexámenos said with feigned reserve, enthusiastically but mistakenly thinking he was going to hear a request for Baptism. “But what do you mean?”

“All I know, for now, is that, one way or the other – and despite what the inane Christian Zionists think – we are not to do any ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians just because they live in the Promised Land,” replied the Rabbi. “The murderous Christian Zionists held a raucous party in Silwan after nineteen Palestinians were murdered years ago. They use that as a precedent for rejoicing in ethnic cleansing. But all that aside… tell me, Catholic priest, who is the most guilty of the death of Jesus?”

“You make me think of my own life, Rabbi… but to answer your question, each one of us is most guilty, for God loves us, each of us, so much… and yet, each of us sins, which means that the question isn’t so much about being the most guilty, but who is closest – by mercy – to the Heart of God. That place is reserved for the Mother of the Messiah, the Woman of Genesis 3,15.”

==================

Chapter 23 coming soon…

Don’t hesitate to use the comments box.

© 2007-2008 Renzo di Lorenzo — All rights reserved

Tags: Allah, Bible, Catholic, Child Abuse, Christianity, Church, Faith, God, Interreligious Dialogue, Islam, Israel, Jesus, Jews, Judaism, Muhammad, Muslims, Palestine, Politics, Qu'ran, Religion, Spirituality, Terrorism, Theology, Vatican, Zionism