Emma O’Donnell Polyakov. Journal of Ecumenical Studies. Volume 53, Issue 4, Fall 2018.
Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Jerusalem, this essay explores a contextual form of Christian-Jewish dialogue evidenced in Catholic monasteries and convents in Israel. It proposes that this phenomenon draws from the precedents set by two forms of interreligious dialogue—by the patterns of Christian-Jewish dialogue developed in the twentieth century in Europe and North America, and by monastic interreligious dialogue—and adapts and develops these precedents to fit the religious and cultural context of contemporary Israel. Informed by the past fifty years of Christian-Jewish dialogue in the years since Vatican II, these practices result in a highly contextual form of Christian-Jewish dialogue, which reflects the unique position of Catholic religious who are living in the Jewish milieu of Israel in a Jjost-Nostra aetate world.
Introduction
Although monastic interreligious dialogue, as it has taken shape since the Second Vatican Council, has been centered on the experiences of monastics who meet across geographically and religiously distant places and traditions, in Jerusalem today a number of nuns and monks have been practicing a form of interreligious dialogue that, although substantially different from most forms of monastic interreligious dialogue, brings Catholic nuns and monks into deep and meaningful encounter with neighbors whose religious tradition is closely intertwined with their own. Rarely have forms of monastic interreligious dialogue occurred between two religions so tightly wedded that they have been characterized by sibling metaphors throughout history as have Christianity and Judaism. It is precisely this close relationship that inspires and facilitates these practices of Christian-Jewish interreligious dialogue and learning in Jerusalem.
This essay explores this phenomenon, drawing on recent ethnographic fieldwork conducted within Catholic monasteries and convents in Jerusalem and the nearby vicinity. It explores practices of Christian-Jewish dialogue and perspectives on Christian-Jewish relations within a select group of Catholic religious—nuns, monks, and religious sisters and brothers. The interview subjects are originally from Western contexts, and each expressed a deep dedication to aspects of Jewish-Christian relations, including interreligious dialogue, contemplation of the Jewish roots of Christianity, the study of Judaism, and prayer for the Jewish people. Sharing excerpts of first-person narratives from this fieldwork, this report shares the subjects’ reflections on their engagement with Christian-Jewish dialogue in a variety of forms and their experience of this as a spiritual “call.” It is proposed here that this phenomenon draws from the precedents set by two forms of interreligious dialogue—by the patterns of Christian-Jewish dialogue developed in the twentieth century in Europe and North America, and by monastic interreligious dialogue—and adapts and develops these precedents to fit the religious and cultural context of contemporary Israel. Informed by the past fifty years of Christian-Jewish dialogue in the years since Vatican II, these practices result in a highly contextual form of Christian-Jewish dialogue, which reflects the unique position of Catholic religious living in a Jewish milieu in a post-Nostra aetate world.
Christian-Jewish Dialogue in the Context of Israel
In the last half-century Christian attitudes toward Judaism have changed radically; Christian-Jewish dialogue initiatives have become increasingly common, and many Christians have made great efforts toward reconciliation, particularly in Western contexts, where the legacy of Christian anti-Judaism weighs heavily on the historical conscience. In Western settings, these efforts reflect a world in which Christians are the majority and have been in a position of power for centuries, whereas Jews are a very small minority, bearing a history marked by repeated suffering at the hands of predominantly Christian power. As Western Christianity grapples with the history of Antisemitism, it struggles to come to terms with the contribution of Christian theological anti-Judaism to the Holocaust. As a result, Jewish-Christian dialogue in Western contexts is often based in searching for “right relationship” or reconciliation through teachings, documents, textual interpretation, and public dialogue events. This kind of work falls primarily within the fields of scriptural interpretation, systematic theology, and pedagogy, reflecting the academic and ecclesiological contexts in which it is drafted, intended for theological education and scholarship.
Here, however, we explore one strand of work in Christian-Jewish relations that is far less visible than these forms. It is not constructed in Western contexts, but in Israel, specifically in Jerusalem, and the dedication to Christian-Jewish relations expressed by the subjects in this study departs notably from the norm of work in Christian-Jewish relations that has occurred in Western scholarly and ecclesiastical contexts since the mid-twentieth century. This engagement with Judaism and the Jewish people adopts theologies of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism from Western contexts, and it adapts these theologies to reflect the religiously diverse context of Jerusalem. This form of interreligious dialogue is also very experiential and relational; it develops in interpersonal relationships and daily interactions, through intentional engagement with Jewish religious traditions and immersion in the Jewish milieu in which the subjects live.
In Israel, the context is notably different from that of Europe or North America, resulting in distinct forms of Christian-Jewish encounter. Although Christians comprise a religious majority worldwide—and, in many countries, Christianity holds a dominant position culturally and religiously—Christians in Israel find themselves in a context in which they are a minority within a Jewish majority. In both Israel and Palestine today, the majority of Christians are ethnically Arab; of this population, most self-identify as Palestinian. For Palestinian Christians, relations with Judaism and the Jewish people are complicated through being tightly interwoven with interpretations of the political conflict. In the words of Fr. Jamal Khader, “For the Palestinians, Jews are now the Zionists of the State of Israel who occupied our land and control our lives with a military occupation.”
Palestinian Christian identity and history also impact Christian-Jewish relations in Israel in another significant way, concerning the response to the Holocaust. Many representatives of the local Palestinian Christian population have clearly expressed that their communities do not consider themselves responsible for the European legacy of Christian anti-Judaism. This factor, combined with the political tensions, leads to a very different approach to Christian-Jewish relations from that of Western Christians. As Khader and David Neuhaus, S.J. explain, “The Local Church does not reflect on this dialogue from the same starting point as its European counterparts, strongly influenced as they are by the history of anti-Judaism and antisemitism. Christians in the Holy Land see themselves as free of the taints of antisemitic practice, policy and the responsibility for the fate of European Jewry.” Expressing this perspective is particularly potent in Israel, in which Jewish national identity is quite firmly linked to the memory of the Holocaust. Indeed, the public expression of this perspective may be part of a more general effort on the part of Palestinians firmly to disengage from anything seen as a rationale for Zionism.
The particular voices heard in this study unlike Palestinian Christians, have come to live in Israel as part of their religious vocation, living within monastic and apostolic religious communities established in what is known in Christian tradition as the Holy Land. They are of European and North American nationalities and have been living in Israel on a long-term basis, often for many decades. They carry with them the memory of a long history of European Christian anti-Judaism, and, driven by the responsibility to face the tragic memory of the Holocaust in constructive ways, they bring the memory of this dark history into a social and religious context entirely different from that in which it originated. Western Christians living in Jerusalem are outsiders both religiously and nationally; they approach local concerns and conflicts with the perspectives of outsiders, yet also as long-term residents immersed in a primarily Jewish milieu. All of this sets the stage for highly particular, contextual approaches to Jewish-Christian relations in Israel.
Of the many forms of Christian engagement with Judaism and the Jewish people in the context of Israel-Palestine, a few polarized paradigms often receive the most attention in the public sphere. These paradigms tend to place theological interpretations of land, people, and the Christian narrative in political contexts, linking theological agendas with support for political movements. On one end of this spectrum is the movement known as Christian Zionism, which sees the return of the Jewish people to the land of Israel to be a significant part of a Christian eschatological vision and expresses staunch political support for the State of Israel. On the other end of the spectrum are interpretations of Christian social-justice teachings that focus on political activism in support of Palestinian rights. These theologies see Palestinian Christians as the “living stones” of Christ, emblematic of the marginalized and oppressed. This movement creates theologies of liberation that are highly politicized, often framing Palestinians and Israeli Jews as victims and aggressors, respectively. However, between these poles lies a complex middle ground that rarely draws public attention. Located on this middle ground, the subjects of this study reject highly polarized and politicized theologies and seek instead a theological and personal engagement with Judaism based on reconciliation, contemplation, prayer, and a sense of love, as shall be explored in what follows. The voices shared here explore new modes of interreligious relationship through religious vocations that are dedicated to strengthening Jewish-Christian relations in the conflicted interreligious environment of Jerusalem today.
Vocations Dedicated to Christian-Jewish Relations
These voices do not comprise an organized or self-defined group but are collections of individuals who belong to various religious congregations, who, each in their own way, experience Christian-Jewish relations to be central to their religious vocations. Several belong to a congregation or community within which these goals are shared and made explicit, such as the Sisters of Sion, who are known in Israel and in many places around the world for their work in Christian-Jewish relations, and who direct many educational programs aimed at teaching Christians about Judaism. Others, finding themselves alone in their community in this regard, express that their fellow community members do not share these goals, theologies, or spiritual inclinations to the same degree. The latter have come to this on their own, motivated by personal experience, relationships, or other factors. Despite their decentered and diverse traits, these people together comprise a distinct, albeit small, phenomenon. It is marked by the goal of improving Christian-Jewish relations and developing a greater understanding of the theological relationship between the two religions, from within the vocational context of vowed religious life and within a post-Nostra aetate theological context in which the Catholic Church has continued to develop theologies of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism that are increasingly more sensitive to Jewish self-understanding.
The term “Christian-Jewish dialogue” implies a rather narrowly defined activity, but here the term is used much more inclusively to refer to many varieties of encounter and relationship between Christians and Jews. In some cases, it follows the interreligious dialogue format established in Western contexts, in which Christians and Jews, often scholars or religious leaders, gather for intentional dialogue about religious issues. These instances are rare, however, and, as many of the participants in this study expressed, simply living in Israel can be a form of interreligious dialogue, for interreligious encounters occur daily, even for those living in cloistered monasteries. Some of the many forms that this “dialogue” takes include studying rabbinic literature and other aspects of Jewish tradition, nurturing friendships within the Israeli Jewish community, hosting Jewish Israeli guests at monasteries, teaching about Judaism in programs for the many Christians who visit Jerusalem, and participating in Jewish liturgy.
Many of the participants in this study came to a dedication to Christian-Jewish relations gradually, through years of religious life in Israel. Others, such as Sr. Pilar, a Sister of Sion, felt a call to it from a young age. Growing up in Spain in the 1940’s, well before the Catholic Church made efforts to amend its teaching on Judaism, she felt drawn to healing relations between Christians and Jews, even as a young child. She explained, “My decision to enter religious life was for the love of God, who loves the Jewish people. That is why I joined the Congregation of Our Lady of Sion. Because in my heart, if God is God, God is faithful, and if God is faithful, God is faithful to his people, which he has chosen. God doesn’t change his mind.” She was drawn to the Sisters of Sion because of its commitment to healing Christian-Jewish relations, unlike most of the other members of the congregation, who developed this focus only after entering the congregation. She continued, “The call to religious life for me was very clear; it was to a congregation for the love of the Jewish people. It was very difficult to find, where to find it? But then I found it.”
Others experience and practice a similar dedication on their own, and not as members of a congregation sharing these aims. For Sr. Michaela, a contemplative Benedictine nun who has been living in a monastery near Jerusalem for thirty-four years, this dedication stems from an interior impulse. She explained, “I have felt since I was very young that my life was meant to be offered for the Jewish people. That’s not something you go around advertising. It’s a very silent offering, it’s very personal.” For her, the feeling is based on a gift of self, and she believes that “life is only completely fulfilled if it’s offered.” While she explains that “there are so many vocations in this world that are called for offering,” giving the example of the relationship between a husband and wife, she has chosen to give her offer of her life in prayer, and she feels specifically called to make this offering for the Jewish people.
Others, however, express different motives and analogies, such as Sr. Talia, a nun from another congregation who lives near Jerusalem and expresses her dedication in terms of contemplating a mystery. Speaking of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism, she said, “Eternity is not enough to understand. It is a mystery; this is what Paul said…. And I think it is one of the keys of my vocation, just to think about it.” Describing this mystery, she reflected:
We Christians, we have a word to describe it, but I know that this word is not very well received in Judaism. We call it the mystery of Israel… It is like an ocean. You enter this ocean, and you can just have a drop of it. You can-not understand it with your intelligence, it is bigger that your intelligence. And, I think my approach to Judaism is like that, it’s such a mystery. It’s a mystery I don’t understand everything.
Sr. Marie Yeshua, a contemplative nun in the Order of Saint Clare, also spoke of mystery, on which she dwells in her contemplative life in the monastery in Jerusalem where she has been living for thirty-two years. She sees her interior life of contemplative prayer to be a form of work, meditating on the relationship between Christianity and Judaism. Bringing a copy of the recent Vatican document, “The Gifts and the Calling of God Are Irrevocable,” to the table, she set in down, declaring, “All that we are living inside in prayer is here. I feel as though my work is finished, with this document.”
Sr. Gemma, a Sister of Charity who has been living in Jerusalem since the 1970’s, has been deeply engaged with Jewish Israeli life and culture for forty years. She has made Israel her home. In addition to teaching about the Holocaust in programs at Yad Vashem, she has brought aspects of Jewish tradition and thought into her Christian faith, particularly through Jewish liturgical practice. Speaking of her participation in Jewish liturgy, she said, “I try to observe some of the things that are observed in Judaism. For example, I do try on Shabbat to go to the beit knesset. Now, it’s a small, Reform synagogue, unfortunately we don’t read all the Torah passage, we only read a third of it.” She explained that attending a synagogue weekly every Shabbat is one of the ways that she keeps in close contact with Jewish life in Israel. She identified this as one of two ways to keep that connection: “There’s another way, I think; one is with participation in the Jewish tradition of prayer, especially the reading of Torah, and the second thing, I think, is trying to be involved in Hebrew. Because I do think that’s a great help to keeping one in the mode, in the thinking mode.” She found that speaking Hebrew offers not only a way of communicating better with Israelis but also has allowed her to be in touch with a mode of thinking and responding to life in Israel, through language.
A Non-exclusionary Love
The concept of love appears often in the narratives of the voices presented here, serving as a motivating factor in Christian relationships with Jews and Judaism. This affective focus differs from the motivating factors behind much Christian-Jewish dialogue in other contexts, which is often motivated by a desire to seek reconciliation in light of historical injustices, by theological concerns such as salvation and covenant, and by other related issues. While these issues remain of great concern to the subjects of this study most of them also share an intensely affective motivating factor. Expressing the interpersonal nature of this dialogue in the context of Israel, the subjects in this study spoke of an affective sense of closeness, friendship, and interrelatedness with the Jewish people today, deepened through living in Israel. Many express a mode of Christian-Jewish relations based specifically in love, in which praying for the Jewish people becomes praying for the beloved. Some spoke of this love very concretely, as manifested in loving relationships with individuals. Others spoke of loving the Jewish people as a whole and understand it as a religious prerogative, modeled on God’s love for God’s chosen people, according to the biblical narrative.
Although the subjects of this study expressed a particular love for and dedication to the Jewish people, many were careful to specify that this love is not exclusionary. Love for the Jewish people does not exclude love for other peoples, and, in the context of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they were careful to enunciate that this love crosses political, religious, and ethnic boundaries. The subjects in this study were very conscientious about keeping their dedication to Jewish-Christian relations primarily theological rather than political. They expressed a theological sense of connection with the Jewish people and the land of Israel, while also maintaining a concern for social justice for all people.
Sr. Carmen, a Sister of Sion who has been living in Jerusalem since the 1960’s, in what was then Jordan, reflected on this as she recalled the years she spent teaching in schools for Palestinian girls. She loved her Palestinian students while also carrying the same love for the Jewish people that she has today. As she recalled, “I can say that in those twenty-two years that I was there [teaching in the East Jerusalem municipal school], I was loyal to Palestinians and to Israel at the same time. Never did I allow myself to love one at the expense of the other. For me, that’s the biggest strength that I carry with me, and I hope that I will always be faithful.”
A similar experience was expressed by Sr. Michaela, who spoke of a love that does not choose one over the other: “Carrying this love [for Israel] does not negate [my love for Palestinians]. I have friends in Bethlehem, who live behind the wall and have their water cut off for three weeks in the summer, and they really suffer. And I don’t have a solution for that. And it doesn’t diminish my love for the land [of Israel] and the Jewish people. It has opened me into the reality of the other people who live here.”
Sr. Katherine, another Sister of Sion, expressed the complicated feelings surrounding this sense of love for the Jewish people in the context of the current political conflicts in Israel-Palestine. She spoke of feeling torn: “Seeing the injustice that is a reality here, much of which, but definitely not all, but much of which comes from the Israeli side, I often feel torn apart.” She felt solidarity with the Jewish people but clarified that this feeling is complicated and is challenged by the political reality of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: “In the meantime, because of this injustice, and the government, the word ‘solidarity’ has become a little difficult for me, and what has come into the foreground is much more that it’s simply out of love for this people.” She explained this feeling of solidarity or love through relating a saying of St. Therese of the Child Jesus: “[St. Therese said] ‘my place is at the table for sinners,’ meaning not because I’m so generous that I choose to sit with the sinners, but meaning that I too am a sinner. And so now, when I talk about solidarity, and love, that includes my feeling torn apart by the things that happen here. Certainly not my solidarity with the injustice that is done, but my solidarity with the people, because I too am a sinner.” The love and solidarity that she feels is not diminished by her recognition of political injustices, for she identified her own sins with those of others, placing herself at that metaphorical table. The love that she feels is neither affiliated with any particular political movement, nor challenged by political conflicts; rather, it transcends these divisions. This characterizes the views and experiences of many in this study, who feel a deep dedication to the Jewish people within the context of Israel, yet abstain from linking theological views with political views.
Monasticism, Hospitality, and Dialogue
The voices shared in this study are not all monastic, according to the precise definition of the term, which excludes religious sisters and brothers in apostolic or “active” religious vocations, but all are vowed members of religious congregations that have sprung out of the monastic tradition. The tie to monasticism runs deep, encompassing not only a historical relation but also similar spiritual goals, daily practices, spiritual dispositions, and more. Many of these elements of monasticism address the proper reception of the other, whether the other is a guest in a monastery, a fellow monk, or a stranger. This conscientious focus on reception of the other has implications for interreligious relations, too, and can give rise to a monastic disposition toward interreligious dialogue.
This comes to the forefront in the practice of monastic hospitality which is specified in many monastic rules. The Rule of St. Benedict, which has served as a template for the monastic rules and governing principles of many religious congregations, places hospitality as one of the highest virtues and as obligatory for monastic life. The Rule instructs, “Let all guests who arrive be received as Christ,” declaring that a monk must treat an outsider with the same attitude with which he approaches Christ. The passage continues, “In the greeting let all humility be shown to the guests, whether coming or going; with the head bowed down or the whole body prostrate on the ground, let Christ be adored in them as He is also received.” According to the Rule of St. Benedict, the superior of the monastery is then to perform a ritual washing of the feet of the guest, while reciting, “We receive your mercy, O God, in the midst of your temple.” Hospitality, in this context, is not just how one behaves when welcoming a guest; it is also an attitude with which one may approach all interpersonal encounters. As Gilbert Hardy observed, the practice of monastic hospitality is “by its very nature dialogue-oriented, and it is, indeed, the primary context within which monastic [interreligious] dialogue can gently unfold and silently grow.”
These traits of monasticism have made it conducive to interreligious dialogue in many contexts, but, in the context of Israel, the monastic vow of stability, through which one vows to remain in one monastery for life, also becomes a point of connection between monastics and Israeli Jews. Br. Paul, a contemplative Benedictine monk who has been living for twenty years in a monastery close to Jerusalem, reflected on this interaction. In his understanding, his commitment to stability within his monastery bears some similarities with the Jewish Israeli commitment to live in Israel and to regard it as a national and religious homeland. He explained this parallel relationship in terms of vocation: “The Benedictine vocation itself is very similar to the Jewish vocation… For us, being here in stability makes us still closer to the challenge that they are going through, because we also will not escape our responsibility…. We came to be with [the Jewish people] to be in the same boat, so once the boat has left the shore, you don’t leave the boat.” Br. Paul felt that this commitment to remaining in Israel, as defined by the vow of stability, helps Israeli visitors to the monastery to feel a sense of connection. Many Israeli visitors ask how long the monks intend to stay in Israel. When the monks answer that they plan to stay permanently, they often react with “a smile on their faces, and they sort of breathe fresh, so they understand… Of course, they appreciate it, and they immediately get the message of our presence, which is only to be in the same boat.”
Monastic Interreligious Dialogue
Given these traits of monasticism, is not surprising that monastic life lends itself well to interreligious dialogue. However, although elements of monastic practice have always been conducive to welcoming the other, monastic interreligious dialogue as it is known now was extremely rare prior to the decades following World War II, and it was neither widely recognized nor accepted until after Vatican II. In addition, many of the early pioneers of monastic interreligious dialogue were initially inspired by a missionary impulse for conversion, so they travelled to Asia to “convert pagans” and to work toward deeper inculturation of Christianity in Eastern contexts. The dialogue, in this case, was not intended to allow mutual learning and respect but to convince the other to accept Christianity.
This impulse inspired the establishment of the Secretariat to Aid the Implantation of Monasticism (AIM) in 1960. This, too, was inspired by a proselytization motive, as its original intent was to spread Christian faith through the establishment of monastic communities in Africa and Asia. The organization gradually shifted away from this original intent. In 1965, inspired by Nostra aetate, AIM suggested that learning about monasticism in non-Christian religions, specifically in Eastern religions, could contribute to a renewal in Christian faith. This shift was reflected in a series of changes to its name, from the Secretariat to Aid the Implantation of Monasticism, to Aid among Monasteries, and finally to the current name, Alliance among Monasteries, emphasizing dialogue rather than conversion.
In 1978, through the initiative of AIM, two commissions for monastic interreligious dialogue were established, one for North America and one for Europe: the North American Board for East-West Dialogue, and the commission for Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique. Practitioners and proponents of monastic interreligious dialogue, generally referred to as DIM/MID (Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique/Monastic Interreligious Dialogue), led a number of initiatives in interreligious dialogue between Christian monastics and monastics of other religions, marking a dramatic turn away from the earlier precedents of Christian encounter with other religions—generally characterized by the intention to convert, and in many cases met by hostility.
Today, monastic interreligious dialogue has become a rather technical term, denoting a specific activity occurring within a set of guidelines.
Although DIM/MID has by now successfully shifted its motive from conversion to open dialogue and the search for mutual understanding, it has remained focused almost entirely on dialogue with members of Eastern religions, reflecting the historical precedent of monastic dialogue in Asia. DIM/MID also continues to maintain a preference for fully intermonastic dialogue, which requires that the dialogue be conducted between two members of monastic traditions in different religions. Monastic interreligious dialogue by this definition, however, would not be possible with members of religions that have no traditions of monasticism.
The interreligious dialogue practiced by the participants in this study differs markedly from monastic interreligious dialogue as it is formally defined. Most evidently, in the context of a dialogue between Christians and Jews, it is not possible for both participants in the dialogue to be monastic, since there is no tradition of monasticism in Judaism. As previously discussed, the interreligious encounters explored here rarely take the form of organized dialogues; rather, they are manifested in diverse ways of relating to Jews and Judaism within the context of a Jewish milieu.
Another significant difference between the precedents of monastic interreligious dialogue and the kind of interreligious relations practiced by the participants in this study lies in the very close theological and historical relationship between Christianity and Judaism. The two religions are intricately intertwined, with countless points of intersection in biblical literature, theological belief, and ritual practice, as well as in historical, cultural, political, and geographic issues. Interreligious dialogue with members of Eastern religious traditions is notably different, sharing very few of these points of intersection. Dialogue between Christians and Jews, then, is viewed by many as a necessity internal to religious self-understanding. It addresses issues at the core of both Christianity and Judaism, and the points of intersection do not need to be creatively imagined, for they are present at every turn. Interreligious relations between Christians and Jews are internal to the Christian and Jewish experience, especially for Christians living in Israel within a primarily Jewish population. In short, although the Christian-Jewish dialogue practiced by the nuns, monks, and religious sisters and brothers in this study draws upon aspects of monastic interreligious dialogue, it is a distinct phenomenon, shaped by the context of Christian and Jewish life in contemporary Israel.
Conversionary Motives? The Problematics of Prayer for the Jewish People
The intention to proselytize, whether overt or hidden, hovers like a shadow over interreligious dialogue. This can be seen in the brief history of monastic interreligious dialogue offered above, and it is particularly threatening in Christian-Jewish dialogue, due to the long history of Christian proselytization and forced conversions of Jews. The issue of proselytization also rises to the surface in the practice of praying for the Jewish people. The concept is weighted by a history of Christian prayer for the conversion of Jews to Christianity, which is not only offensive to Jewish self-understanding but also historically associated with a wide range of acts of injustice, oppression, and violence. In short, the concept of Christian prayers for the Jewish people is problematic enough to require very careful enunciation and specification.
Many of the participants in this study feel that they have a calling to pray for the Jewish people. They identify it as an important aspect of their religious vocation, yet they are quite clear that the aims of this kind of prayer must never include the hope for conversion. The practice of prayer for the Jewish people, as enunciated by the subjects of this study, is undertaken in recognition of the injustices perpetuated throughout the history of the Christian desire for Jewish conversion. They do not merely abstain from the desire for the conversion of the Jewish people to Christianity; rather, their spirituality and theological outlook is characterized by an explicit rejection of precisely this problematic history.
Sr. Katherine, another Sister of Sion, contemplates this issue often, feeling that it is the will of God that Jews remain Jewish and not convert to Christianity. She elaborated, “I am profoundly convinced that God wants the Jews to remain Jews. I think the Jewish presence is necessary for the Church and for the world.” Throughout history other Christians have stated that Jews must remain Jews to remind the world of their sin in failing to recognize Jesus as the messiah, yet Sr. Katherine’s reasoning for the necessity of Judaism is profoundly different from this. She continued:
One reason is when you think of Church history the Church had forgotten so much that the Jewish people proclaims, not necessarily in words, but as a light for the world, and that’s necessary. And so I think their presence is necessary for the world, and for the Church, to remind the church of things that are essential and that the church had forgotten, or had never really received…. I never pray for the conversion of the Jews to Christianity.
Sr. Pilar felt that prayer for the Jewish people is central to her religious vocation, describing her personal sense of mission to be “to pray to the God of Israel and to intercede for the Israel of God.” She clarified that she not only prays for the Jewish people, but as she understands it, she symbolically prays with them: “I pray for and with the Jewish people…. In the midday and the afternoon we pray the psalms in Hebrew, to pray with them, it’s the psalms that they pray… So we pray with them. So we unite our prayer to their prayer.” Clarifying the goal of this prayer, she explained, “We pray that they are faithful to their vocation. It’s beautiful the vocation of the Jewish people… And praying that the Church understands this richness of the Jewish roots, and the richness of the Jewish people that is always there. It has a lot to teach us.” When asked to clarify what she meant when she referred to this vocation, Sr. Pilar was quite specific. Counting the points off on her fingers, she answered, “To be faithful to God, one; to be a witness to the unicity of God; and to be a witness for the nations. The vocation of the Jewish people is for the Nations, [they] are the people who say to the nations that God is one.”
Sr. Carmen also believed that praying for the Jewish people was absolutely central to her religious vocation. When asked what precisely she prays for, she responded, “I pray so that they may be faithful to their call. And their call is not isolated from the call of Benei Noah. There’s a big call, and there’s a specific call. So there is no division, but it’s a continuity.” Here, she referred to her understanding of the relationship between the specific call or vocation of the Jewish people and the universal vocation of all people, or Benei Noah. She saw these two calls as existing in unity, as part of the same interaction between God and humanity.
Despite these very admirable prayer intentions, however, the notion of Christian prayer for Jews in general remains complex and problematic. At the root of the problem is the centrality of evangelization or “witness” within Christianity and the belief that “confessing the universal and therefore also exclusive mediation of salvation through Jesus Christ belongs to the core of Christian faith.” The tension between the call to evangelize and the belief in God’s enduring covenant with the Jewish people creates a difficult theological issue within the Catholic Church, particularly when coupled with sensitivity to the troubled history of proselytization.
The theological issue of salvation is inseparable from the call to evangelize, for evangelization is fueled by the conviction that one must have Christian faith to be saved. The belief that Jesus Christ is the universal savior of all people becomes particularly theologically complicated in relation to Judaism. Coupled with the recognition of God’s enduring covenant with the Jewish people and the ongoing validity of Judaism, the conviction that faith in Jesus is necessary for salvation becomes a point of theological irresolution, even paradox. This is a perplexing issue for Christians dedicated to Christian-Jewish dialogue and prayer. In an effort to navigate this issue, many of the voices heard here resorted to an apophatic stance, speaking of the mystery of God’s work, contemplating what cannot be known, rather than what can be determined.
This contemplation of mystery is seen in Sr. Talia’s experience. She explained that, when she prayed for the Jewish people, she did not pray that they would come to believe that Jesus is the messiah. Instead, she prayed “that the will of God will be accomplished for his people.” However, she retained great humility regarding God’s will and expressed an apophatic theology of salvation. She continued, “But we do not pretend to know the will of God, and so this is my prayer…. I’m not going to interfere in these kinds of things. Who am I? But I will pray so that these people will be ready to receive the incredible gift of the love of God. But which form [of God] is it? I do not have a clue. Once again, I don’t know.” So, for Sr. Talia, the emphasis is not on Jesus as the object of faith but on the unknowable ways of God and the suggestion that God may appear in many forms.
Sr. Maureena, a Sister of Sion who has been living in Israel since the 1970’s, became passionate when speaking about the necessity of remaining humble regarding the capacity to understand God’s ways and the path to salvation. Recognizing the history of violence that has accompanied Christian claims to absolute truth, she declared, “As for Jesus, I believe his name has been maligned by many of his followers, by those who claim he is the answer to all the questions of life. In his name, people have been persecuted and killed.” Reflecting on the ultimately unknown nature of God and the way to salvation, she continued:
As to the question whether Jesus is the only way to salvation, my answer is “no.” And I claim that no one can say “yes” to that question. Who has absolute truth except God? So I am against all those who are out there trying to convert others to believe in Jesus as their savior. Let each one seek the truth and be faithful to their own search… If there is a God and if there is an afterlife they will be there with God.
Conclusion
The subjects discussed here carry a burden of cultural memory and collective responsibility. From their North American and European origins, they bear the memory of the history of Christian anti-Judaism. In the context of the convents and monasteries in Jerusalem, this history is expressed in new forms. Drawing also from the precedent of monastic interreligious dialogue and from the traits of monasticism conducive to interreligious dialogue, this phenomenon comprises a unique form of Christian-Jewish dialogue that is specific to the context of contemporary Israel in a post-Nostra aetate era.
When viewed from within the context of a church just beginning to grapple with the Holocaust and with the contribution of Christian theology to the history of Antisemitism, this phenomenon becomes more than a few individuals praying alone in monasteries. Rather, it becomes a significant case study in Christian perceptions of Jews and Judaism in a time of rapidly changing theological and cultural contexts. The individual voices and narratives heard here reflect developments in Catholic understandings of Judaism that are not found within official Church documents but arise in interpersonal encounters and interior experiences on the ground in Israel. It is a product of a specific cultural and religious context. Still, although this phenomenon is far from widespread, it also reflects more general shifts in Christian thought and may serve as a harbinger of future developments in Christian-Jewish relations and Christian understandings of Jews in a post-Holocaust world.