|
"The
Passion" A Preview
by
Rabbi David Zaslow
March, 2004
The
paper known as Nostra Aetate issued by the Vatican in 1965
created a revolutionary shift in the attitude of the Church
toward the Jewish people. Pope John XXIII wrote, “Forgive
us the curse which we unjustly laid on the name of the Jews.
Forgive us that, with our curse, we crucified Thee a second
time.” After the reunification of Jerusalem in 1967 many
Evangelical churches became Israel’s most vocal supporters,
and courageously remain so today in the face of growing anti-Semitism
that is sweeping across Europe. Sadly, Mel Gibson’s father
is a member of a small, break-away Catholic denomination that
has rejected the new position of the Church toward the Jewish
people. They remain dedicated to the position that the Church
has replaced Israel and that the covenantal relationship of
the Jewish people to God has been severed. This replacement
doctrine has been rejected by most mainstream and evangelical
churches who have worked hard in recent decades to teach the
spiritual validity of the Jewish covenant.
Mel
Gibson’s film “The Passion” is apparently magnificent
in its presentation the gospel of Christianity, yet I understand
that it cleaves to the mythic depiction of the Jewish people
turning Jesus over to Pilate for crucifixion. The citizens
of Jerusalem are portrayed as an angry mob representing the
Jewish people, and the Roman Empire is portrayed as passive,
bewildered, and not primarily responsible for Jesus’
death. Historically, this is far from the truth. But just
as the film has the potential to stir up old wounds, myths,
and stereotypes so it also has the potential to heal old wounds
if it inspires honest dialogue.
For
two-thousand years translational errors, and a lack of telling
the Passion story in its correct historical context have caused
certain groups to blame the Jews for Jesus’ death. Today,
almost every pastor I know in our Valley teach that the death
of Jesus was caused “by all of humanity” and that
he “willingly gave his own life.” This, of course,
is a higher level, modern interpretation of the text –
for most of two-thousand years it was the Jews who were blamed
for the crucifixion who were labeled throughout Europe as
“Christ-killers” and the traditional of European
Passion plays performed before Easter often led to anti-Jewish
violence.
Most
of the popular English translations of Christian Scriptures
do seem to place the blame for the death of Jesus on the Jews.
For example if Acts 2:36 is taken out of historical context
is seems clear that “all the house of Israel” was
responsible for the crucifixion. Paul writes, “Therefore
let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made
that same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
The same is true with many other passages as well (i.e. Matthew
27:20 & 25, John 19:6, etc.). The uneducated reader gets
the sense that the “multitude” that handed Jesus
over to the Romans represented all the Jewish people rather
than a tiny minority of priests who were working for the Romans,
and who themselves were disliked by the general Jewish population.
An
objective knowledge of first-century Judaism is also crucial
for understanding the Passion story. The theology of the priests
and the Sanhedrin (Jewish court) was seen by most first-century
Jews as narrow minded, and serving to further the Roman occupation.
According to the Talmud, the Sanhedrin at that time was “bloody,”
corrupt, and despised by most of the population. The puppet
judges, priests, and scribes of the Roman Empire who were
threatened by Jesus were also threatened by all the authentic
Jewish teachers of that period. Thankfully, most American
pastors and priests ceased blaming Jews for the crucifixion
decades ago. However, in Europe, Latin America, and the Middle
East the historical reality of Jesus’ life is not always
taken into account when the Passion story is told.
According
to the Roman historian Josephus the streets of Jerusalem were
lined with Jewish martyrs who were crucified during a century
of Jewish revolts. Somewhere between 50,000-100,000 Jews were
crucified along with Jesus during that period, and more than
a million Jews died of starvation or in battle against the
Romans. The New Testament was written for people who knew
the historical context, but today this context is lost without
the commentary and courage of our pastors. The film, I am
told, may accurately portray the teachings of the gospel,
but it does not do justice to historical reality. The first-century
sect that opposed Jesus’ teachings were known as the
Saducees. This sect, in fact, was opposed to the teachings
of most of the local rabbis who represented the general population.
According to Jewish records the Saducees were the Temple leaders
and had been corrupted by the Roman Empire in the decades
preceding Jesus’ birth. Too many people for too many
centuries have been mistaught that the "some" of
the Jews (the Saducees) represented “all” of the
Jews.
The
curse in Matthew 27:25 is especially misunderstood, and has
misled readers of the Gospel accounts to believe that the
Jews have been eternally cursed for the sin of killing Jesus,
a sin called Diecide (the killing of God) by early Church
leaders. In the second century Justin Martyr wrote, “Those
who slandered Him [Jesus] should be miserable....Jews suffer
because they are guilty of not having recognized the One with
whom they had to do in their own history. When he appeared,
they killed him. Not knowing this One, the Logos, Jews fail
to know God.” In the fourth-century John Chrysostom wrote,
“It is against the Jews that I wish to draw up my battle...
Jews are abandoned by God and for the crime of Deicide, there
is no expiation possible.”
The
Roman occupation was not passive, but brutal. Yet a New Testament
reader may not get this crucial fact. Thankfully, many American
pastors are now including historical context and alternative
translations to the Greek text of the New Testament when they
deliver their Easter sermons. I pray that Christian leaders
everywhere will use this opportunity to advance the truth
of the gospel, but also use the film as a starting-point to
discourage anti-Semitism. If this is done, I believe, God’s
will can be accomplished. From the last few decades of interfaith
dialogue Jews and Christians are beginning to learn to not
confuse the two ways Jesus is approached – historically
and theologically. The Christian teaching that Jesus died
for all of humanity needs to be understood by all of us who
share our love and service to God with our Christian brothers
and sisters – this is the theological Jesus. Conversely,
Jewish sensitivity to the way the Passion story is told needs
to be understood by our Christian friends, and this is where
more learning about the historical Jesus is needed. The greatest
gift of the film that I anticipate is patience, compassion,
dialogue, learning, and greater understanding between Christians
and Jews. That certainly will be the case for Havurah members
and our friends at Trinity Episcopal Church since we plan
on studying the film together this month.
|
