| « | Geopolitics reemerges |
»
|
|
Sunday, April 25, 2010
His Chosen People: A Sunday Rumination
As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people were urging them to speak about these things on the next Sabbath. When the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who were speaking with them and were persuading them to continue in the grace of God.On the next Sabbath almost the whole city assembled together to hear the word of the Lord. But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy, and they began to contradict what Paul was saying by reviling him. Both Paul and Barnabas replied courageously, "It was necessary to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we are turning to the Gentiles. For this is what the Lord has commanded us: 'I have appointed you to be a light for the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'" [Acts of the Apostles, 13:42-47]
The Chosen People of the Old Testament were the Jews, placed under that burden by God Himself in giving Moses the Ten Commandments of Mount Sinai. And a burden it most certainly was: the persecution of the Jewish people dates as far back as Abraham. Even during times of Judaic political and military power, the Jews have been maltreated and reviled by persons of other descent.
The Jews have borne that burden proudly for millennia. Their endurance under trial, their relentless striving for betterment regardless of where on the globe they might wander, and their notable eminence among scholars of every sort testify to the fiber of a great people. Christians are right to assume a protective attitude toward the Jews, and toward their ancestral homeland, for they are forever under attack by "those who have not joy." A good Jew's place in the eternal realm is as secure as any good Christian's.
Yet it is a well-established fact that Christianity could make little headway among first-century Jews. Christianity claimed a status for Jesus that nearly all Jews of that time had expected to belong to a temporal, rather than a spiritual, leader: one to raise them permanently from bondage and make them first among the nations. Additionally, Christian preachment set aside much of what the Jews regarded as sacred tradition. That goes a long way toward explaining Saint Paul's willingness to fold as much of Mosaic / Levitical law into his preaching as he could get away with, without baldly transgressing against the teachings of the Redeemer.
It was inevitable that the Apostles should turn to the Gentiles. For one thing, Christ's parting command to the Apostles was to "Go and teach all nations." For another, the gift of tongues bestowed upon the Apostles at the Pentecost was not limited to the tongues of the peoples of Judea and Samaria. For a third, to restrict Christian evangelism to the Jews alone would have been an immense strategic error: Judaism was then and remains today a tribal creed, linked as strongly to specific ancestry as it is to specific Scriptural pronouncements.
Yes, it's possible for a non-Jew, born of a Gentile mother, to convert to Judaism. But rabbis are taught to make it very, very difficult: to resist the would-be convert, and to put as many obstacles in his way as they can. I'm not entirely clear on the reasons for this, but the practice appears to be quite uniform.
It's not easy to become a member of that Chosen People.
The very term "Chosen People" makes plain that those outside the nominated group were not chosen. Of course, "Chosen for what?" is also on the tip of the tongue, but that's best reserved for another screed.
God chose the Jews of classical times to bear the Messiah and be the first witnesses to His ministry. He had a good reason to do so. Indeed, no other people on Earth could have done the job. The Chosen People had to have extensive experience of oppression, and had to rise to that degree of rational and ethical appreciation that would make possible the comprehension of the New Covenant. In other words, the Jews were chosen not only to produce Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God made flesh, but also to produce the Apostles and the other initial converts without whom Christianity would have died aborning.
That aspect of the Jews' work is completed. They have more to do -- please, God, may it be far less unpleasant than what they've endured to date -- but in fulfilling their role as the womb of Christianity, they've already rendered Mankind a service unparalleled in history.
Yet there are people who denigrate the Jews because they fail to recognize Christ as the Messiah. A few dismiss Judaism as "obsolete," because the Messiah has already arrived. That's just not fair. Even were their temporal burdens no greater than any other people's, it still wouldn't be right. Given the enormous weight of their tradition, including the firmness of their belief that the Messiah would be a temporal savior, a King of Kings on Earth, it's understandable that they'd be skeptical of claims advanced by one of lowly station. In this connection, bear always in mind that for every proposed miracle attributed to Divine power, there's always an alternate possible explanation that excludes Divine intervention.
Skepticism is no sin.
But it behooves us to ask if "chosen people" might now include more than just the descendants of Abraham and the followers of Moses. Is there a people other than the Jews to whom the term might apply equally well today? If so, in what connection?
I think there is, but it's not a people identifiable by lineage, race, or geography. I believe there's a self-chosen people: those who elect to bear the Christian message as modern-day apostles.
They don't wear armbands or sandwich signs. Some are outgoing; others are reserved. Some of them preach, while others exemplify, and no man can say in which undertaking they achieve more. Indeed, many of them would decline the title "Christian." Whether they're vocal or silent, we are among them whenever we set foot outside our homes.
The above might seem self-contradictory: How can one "bear the Christian message" yet not elect to be called Christian? Ever so simply: by being a good man. By peaceable and honest dealings in all things and venues. By remaining humble. By treating others as one would wish to be treated.
By making it possible for us to believe in good faith, and therefore to trust our fellows, they make orderly human society possible.
Have I just described the overwhelming majority of men? I can't say of my own knowledge, nor have I the time to make a conclusive survey. I think I've described the overwhelming majority of Americans, though.
One way or another, every good and decent man, who only does unto others as he would have others do unto him, is one of God's chosen people.
It's a strange topic for a Rumination, I know. But it's vital, for more reasons than one.
Sectarianism is straining Mankind's seams. The stitches are tearing in many places and circumstances. Some of that, of course, is the doing of evil men, men who, given the opportunity, will "do unto you" and then run like hell. But some flows from our unwillingness to see beyond formal differences, or our desire to believe ourselves superior to others.
It is eminently possible to be a good person, a person whose actions exemplify the key messages and themes of Christianity, without being a Christian -- indeed, even without an explicit, conscious belief in God. I've known countless such persons. They deserve our respect, perhaps even our gratitude, simply for being what they are.
This is not a brief for accepting every "religion" as sacred, nor for unconditionally forgiving the unrepentant, nor for declaring every scheme of morality equivalent to every other scheme. The Ten Commandments, buttressed "from above" by the two Great Commandments, remain paramount. But have you ever known a good person, of whatever religious convictions, who'd argue against them?
Despite that, we distrust, exclude, and even condemn on the basis of formalisms. As C. S. Lewis put it, speaking through his demon-protagonist Screwtape:
I think I warned you before that if your patient can't be kept out of church, he ought at least to be violently attached to some party within it. I don't mean on really doctrinal issues; about those, the more lukewarm he is, the better. And it isn't the doctrines on which we chiefly depend for producing malice. The real fun is working up hatred between those who say "mass" and those who say "holy communion" when neither party could possibly state the difference between, say, Hooker's doctrine and Thomas Aquinas's, in any form that could hold water for five minutes.
When the Catholic Church embarked upon its ecumenism initiative in the Sixties, it was acting in recognition that all of Christianity is essentially one. It's possible to go beyond that: Regardless of their denominations or formal allegiances, all good men are God's chosen people, eligible for eternal bliss in His nearness, and must be conceded that status until they demonstrate otherwise. Gentiles though they may be, as long as they "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," it is incumbent upon Christians to embrace them, not exclude them.
Verily, verily I say unto you, this sad old world will not know any significant measure of peace until we concede that fact and learn to live by its implications.
May God bless and keep you all.
Comments
It is interesting that you say that the place of a good Jew is as secure in heaven as that of any Christian (did I get that quote right?).
That does not quite seem to square with the words of Christ himself: John 14:6 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Most (good) Jews do not accept the words of Christ.
Posted by on 04/25/2010 at 04:43 PM"No man cometh unto the Father except through Me,” indeed, but Where is He not? Is it our place to decree such a thing?
Posted by Francis W. Porretto on 04/25/2010 at 05:20 PMIt is not a matter of it being out place to make the statement, but simply to hear and understand it.
You ask “Where is He not?” If the antecedent of He is the Father, it is usually understood that the Father remains in Heaven. It was from Heaven that the Father sent the Son to mankind on earth. Today we have the Holy Ghost about us.
But again, it is not a matter us decreeing any thing at all, only hearing the words of Christ and believing them.
Posted by on 04/25/2010 at 06:12 PM...it is not a matter us decreeing any thing at all, only hearing the words of Christ and believing them.
If that were required for eternal life, it would condemn all the unfortunates who’ve never had the chance to hear the Gospels, or who had been deceived or misled about what Christ taught. That would contradict the assumption that God is just and merciful, which is unsustainable.
Besides, “In my Father’s house there are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you.” So broaden your vision and open your heart. God makes room for all the humble and the just; wherefore, then, should we do otherwise?
Posted by Francis W. Porretto on 04/25/2010 at 08:22 PMYes, it’s possible for a non-Jew, born of a Gentile mother, to convert to Judaism. But rabbis are taught to make it very, very difficult: to resist the would-be convert, and to put as many obstacles in his way as they can. I’m not entirely clear on the reasons for this, but the practice appears to be quite uniform.
It’s not easy to become a member of that Chosen People.
For better or worse much of this can be laid at the feet of the church, both Roman and Greek Orthodox/Cyrillic. From what I have read there were laws that made it a capitol crime to convert to Judaism, for the convert and his teacher. Also when things like this happened entire communities were expelled from their homes. Much of this happened during the middle ages when the churches were consolidating their power.
again from what little I have read before the Christian era Jews did actively seek converts and get them.
marc
Posted by on 04/27/2010 at 11:53 PM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
