On This Day In Messianic Jewish History

Otto Klemperer (14 May 1885 – 6 July 1973) was a German conductor and composer. He is widely regarded as one of the leading conductors of the 20th century.

Klemperer was born on 14 May 1885 in Breslau. Although the boy first wanted to be an actor rather than a musician, the aid of a wealthy family member allowed him to pursue a musical education. With the support of his parents, he dropped out of secondary school to study music in Frankfurt, several years later moving to Berlin to continue his studies at the conservatory.

In 1905 he began a period of study with Hans Pfitzner. At the beginning of the war in 1914, he received his first big break as the temporary replacement for Pfitzner as the opera director for the city of Strasbourg. By the end of the war, with the defeat of Germany and the drama of the November Revolution, Klemperer, increasingly radicalised, had become a faithful supporter of the new Weimar Republic. He moved to Cologne, and formally converted to Catholicism in 1919.

In the mid-1920s he returned to Berlin, a centre of musical innovation in Weimar Germany. It was there that he held probably his most significant post, as conductor of the Kroll Opera, where he was a vocal advocate of composers like Ernst Krenek, Kurt Weill and Schoenberg. However, the increasingly conservative atmosphere of Germany, along with the severe economic depression, claimed him as an early victim, and he lost his position at the Kroll in 1931. Instead, he was offered a position working at the Prussian State Opera, where he was conducting when Hitler came to power.

Despite the response to his production of Wagner’s Tannhäuser in early 1933, Klemperer initially did not want to leave Germany, and hoped that his fame and apolitical stance would protect him. In April 1933, however, he fled to Austria, leaving his wife and children behind, to follow when he had secured a permanent residence. Unlike many of his fellow German-Jewish refugees, Klemperer was to establish a successful musical career in exile. Upon arrival in the United States, where he had already toured successfully in the 1920s, he was offered the position of musical director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra.

In 1939 he underwent an operation for a brain tumour, which left him with facial paralysis and worsened his emotional problems. He was so incapacitated that he ceased to conduct for several years. After the war, however, he was to resume an impressive international musical career. He became known as one of the best living conductors of the classical German repertoire, particularly of works of the Viennese school and his early idol, Mahler. In later life he reverted to Judaism in the 1960s, and became a citizen of the State of Israel in 1970. The conductor died in Zurich in July 1973, at the age of 88. He was buried in the Jewish cemetery in Zurich.

Prayer: Thank you Lord for this man and the beautiful music he produced. Despite his emotional and personal struggles, he articulated the beauty of God through his musical gifts, and expressed the faith you gave him as a Jew, a Catholic, and a human being caught up in the struggles of life. Even as he brought alive great works of music such as Bach’s St Matthew Passion that proclaim your glory, help us to live lives of faith, worship and devotion to you. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

http://holocaustmusic.ort.org/politics-and-propaganda/third-reich/klemperer-otto/

http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Vocal/BWV244-Klemperer.htm

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WVTSGoGfmuMC&pg=PA134&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.jta.org/1973/07/10/archive/otto-klemperer-to-be-buried-in-zurichs-jewish-cemetery

Joshua ben Abraham Herschel (aka Friedrich Albrecht Augusti), was born in the middle of the seventeenth century and  died at Prostnitz at the beginning of the eighteenth century. He was baptized in 1674 at Strassburg, having formerly been the Chazzan (Cantor/Precentor) at Bruchsal. After having occupied for twenty years the chair of Semitics at the university of Leipzig, he retired to Prostnitz. [Bernstein]

Augusti, Friedrich Albrech (originally Joshua ben-Abraham Herschel), a Lutheran minister of Germany , was born June 30,1691, at Frankfort-on-the-Oder. His Jewish parents educated him according to their custom. While yet a boy, he expressed a desire to go to Jerusalem.

At that time a man by the name of Jecuthiel had come to Frankfort with a view of collecting money for his coreligionists in the Holy Land, who urged the boy’s parents not to oppose his wishes. Permission having been granted, they both started for the Holy Land, but on the way our young traveller was attacked by a gang of Tartar robbers and made a slave.

A coreligionist from Podolia redeemed him and set him free. From Smyrna he went to Poland, and continued his studies at Cracow and Prague. He returned to Frankfort before he undertook a journey to Italy; but in Sandershausen, on. the night of Nov. 25, 1720, he was maltreated by a gang of robbers who had broken into the house in which he resided. On the following morning he was found, to all appearance, lifeless. He recovered, however, and during his continued stay at Sandershausen, he became acquainted with the superintendent of that place, the. Rev. Dr. Reinhard, who finally became the instrument of leading Joshua to Christ.

On Christmas day, 1732, he was baptized under his new Christian name, his sponsors being the reigning princess and the prince Augustus of Schwartzburg-Sondershausen, the duke of Saxe-Gotha, the duchess of Brunswick-Wonlfenbuttel, and the princess palatine Charlotte Christina. After his baptism, he decided on the study of divinity. He entered the gymnasium at Gotha, and in 1727 he commenced his theological studies at Jena and Leipsig. In 1729 he was appointed collaborator at the gymnasium in Gotha, and in 1734 minister of the parish of Eschberge, in the duchy of Saxe-Gotha, where he preached until his death, May 13,1782. The famous theologian Johann Christian Wilhelm Augusti was his grandson.

Prayer: Thank you for this much travelled and learned Jewish believer in Yeshua, whose adventures and writings are fascinating to us today. May our lives be as significant in your purposes for your people Israel and all nations. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

Auguhsti, Friedrich ( Dt.-Jewish theologian;. student of Jewish Theology in Cracow.. 1719 Lecturer in Prague; 1720 rabbi in Sondershausen, baptized in 1722 there Evangel;. students at the high school Gotha; student in Jena and Leipzig; 1730 high school teacher in Gotha, 1734 Vicar and Pastor in 1739 Eschenbergen; 1754 Dr. phil hc. ).

Christiani’s works comprise the following, all published at Leipzig.

(1) “Zebah Pesah” (The sacrifice of Easter), an account of the Jewish celebration of Easter in the time of Jesus, and at the present.

(2) “Seudath Purim” (The meal of Purim), 1677, a description of Jewish fasting and feasting.

(3) “Zahakan Melumad Umethareth” (The Scholarly Gambler repenting) 1683, a German translation of the work of Leon of Modena on gambling. (4) “Abravanel’s Commentary on the first prophets, with a Latin index,” 1686.

(5) “The text of Jonah with the Targum Massorah and the commentaries of Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Kimchi and Abravanel, and a Hebrew Latin Vocabulary,” 1683.

(6) “Iggereth” (Letter) 1676, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, translated from the Greek into Hebrew.

(7) “Traktat von dem Glauben und Unglauben der Juden,” 1713.

http://www.unz.org/Pub/AugustiFriedrich-1842?View=OL_1

http://www.portraitindex.de/documents/obj/34002836

http://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/A/augusti-friedrich-albrech.html

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2135-augusti-friedrich-albrecht

https://archive.org/details/lifeoffriedricha00auguiala

Aungusti wrote Diss. de Adventus Christi Necessitate (Lips. 1794): — Aphorismi de Studiis Juda orum Modiernis (Goth. 1731):-Das Geheimniss des Sambuthion (Erfut, 1748): — Nachrichte der Karaiten (ibid. 1752): — Dissertationes Historicophilosoph.’ (ibid. 1753). His grandson was the famous theologian Johann Christian Wilhelm Augusti.- The Life of Augusti has repeatedly been written by several writers and published in the form of a tract. See Delitzsch, Saat auf Hoofnung (1866); Axenfeld, Leben von den Todten (Barmen, 1874) ; The Life of Friedrich Albrecht Augusti (transl. by Macintosh, Lond. 1867); Barber, Redemption in Israel (ibid. 1844), p. 78 sq. (B. P.)

Augusti published several works in Latin and German, of which “Das Geheimniss des Sambathian” (The Mystery of the Sambathian), the fabulous river mentioned in Talmudic literature, which casts stones during six days of the week and rests on Saturday, is probably the most curious. His work on the Karaites, mentioned by Fürst in his “Geschichte des Karäerthums,” vol. iii. 66, 67, of which the full title is “Gründliche Nachrichten von den Karaiten, Ihre Glaubens-Lehren, Sitten und Kirchen-Gebräuche” (Erfurt, 1752), is full of inaccuracies and extravagant statements. Baumgarten, in his “Nachrichten von MerkwürdigenBüchern,” vol. i. 341-351, exposes many of these, and justly refuses to believe Augusti’s claim that his sources were rare manuscripts which, after he had used them, were partly burned and partly stolen, and of which no duplicates remained. The best proof of his negligence or ignorance of the subject is that he wholly ignores the  (Dod Mordecai), the full description of the Karaites and Karaism which was written by the Karaite Mordecai ben Nissim, at the end of the seventeenth century for Prof. Jacob Trigland of Leyden, and published with a Latin translation with Trigland’s “De Karæis” by Johann Christian Wolf in 1714. Augusti also confuses Judah ben Tabbai, who lived at least a century before the common era, with Judah ha-Nasi, who flourished about three hundred years later.

The “Life of Augusti,” by an anonymous author, published in 1751 by Weber, is also reviewed and severely criticized by Baumgarten in the volume cited above (pp. 337-340). The Christian critic displays sufficient familiarity with Jewish affairs and customs to disprove the biographer’s claim that Augusti, before his conversion, was a rabbi at Sondershausen, and proves that in reality he was a school-master and possibly a slaughterer of animals or “shoḥet.” Several other biographies of Augusti were written, mostly for missionary purposes, one translated into English by Macintosh, London, 1867.

Bibliography:

• Delitzsch, in Saat auf Hoffnung, 1866;
• McClintock and Strong, Cyc. Supplement.

Hugh William Montefiore (born Hugh William Sebag-Montefiore; London, 12 May 1920 – 13 May 2005) was Bishop of Kingston from 1970 to 1978 and Bishop of Birmingham from 1977 to 1987.

He was educated at Rugby School, where he underwent a sudden conversion to Anglican Christianity. He then served in World War II and gained the rank of Captain in the service of the Royal Artillery, in the Royal Buckinghamshire Yeomanry. Afterwards he graduated from St John’s College, Oxford, with a Master of Arts (MA) in 1947, legally changing his name by Deed Poll on 7 January of that year, and from Westcott House, Cambridge.

He was ordained as a Deacon in 1949 and became the Dean of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, where he was a University Lecturer in Divinity. He graduated also from St John’s College, Oxford University, in 1963 with a Bachelor of Divinity (BD).

He was Vicar of the Great St Mary’s, Cambridge, from 1963 to 1970, Bishop of Kingston-upon-Thames from 1970 to 1978 — he was consecrated at Southwark Cathedral on Michaelmas day (29 September) 1970 — and Bishop of Birmingham from 1977 to 1987.

Montefiore was the author of more than 20 books, including The Probability of God (1985), Christianity and Politics (1990), Credible Christianity (1993), On Being a Jewish Christian (1998) and The Paranormal: A Bishop Investigates (2002). He was a Friends of the Earth trustee for two decades, but was forced to resign in 2004 after expressing support for nuclear power as a means to achieve climate change mitigation.

Here is my review of On Being a Jewish Christian (Hodder and Stoughton, £7.99, 195 pages, 1998)

Montefiore is an Anglican Bishop from a distinguished Anglo-Jewish family. He wears his heart on his sleeve as he explores some of the blessings and problems of one who claims to be both fully Jewish and fully Christian.

Hugh Montefiore had a powerful religious experience as a young man, seeing a vision of Jesus dressed in white and saying “Follow me.” This led Montefiore into the Anglican ministry, first as a don in Cambridge, and then as a senior if controversial bishop. Thinking that he is “now too old to cause trouble” he has put pen to paper to try to unravel some of the theological and personal issues that arise from his decision. The book is a well-written exploration of two thousand years of Jewish-Christian relations, bringing an insightful and heartfelt plea to Christians to be more understanding of the Jewish people, and to Jewish people to consider afresh the message and person of Jesus.

Montefiore does not duck the difficult issues such as the eternal fate of those who perished in the Holocaust, the dilemma of the modern State of Israel, and the tension many Christians feel between dialogue and evangelism. Nor is he reticent in giving his own views, which, even though you may not agree with them, make an important contribution from an often neglected perspective, that of a Jewish Christian.

Montefiore traces the roots of anti-Semitism to the New Testament itself. He sees the Johannine condemnation of “the Jews” not as an inner-Jewish debate, but as did his cousin, Claude Montefiore, the evidence of bitter hatred between Jews and Christians. Likewise he evaluates Paul’s argument in Romans 9-11 as “dangerously flawed.” In all this he adopts the liberal and critical agenda that discredits the New Testament by misreading its context. Montefiore seems out of touch with more recent scholarship such as Stephen Motyer’s recent “Your Father the Devil?” (Paternoster 1997) which convincingly argues that this is a wrong reading of the material, despite the polemical purposes it was made to serve by later Church Fathers.

Montefiore also reveals his sense of personal identity, and the perceptive reader will find much on which to ponder. He is particularly stimulating on the question of Messianic Congregations, and Messianic Judaism. The Bishop has mixed feelings about this more recent expression of what he himself has tried to live out, seeing both the strengths and weaknesses of the movement, and preferring to identify with it in Israel, but not in the UK. He prefers, as do many of the previous generation of Jewish believers in Jesus, to emphasise that he is a Christian who happens to be Jewish. The newer emphasis of Messianic Judaism, whilst not denying the primacy of faith in Christ and commitment to the universal church, tries to communicate this faith in terms more appropriate to the Jewish community, contextualising belief in Jesus as the Messiah within a Jewish perspective. Hence the term “Messianic Judaism”, which raises the question of an integrated Jewish form of Christianity and Christian form of Judaism.

We live in postmodern times, we are told, yet the struggles each of us face to be loyal to our roles and publics are tellingly illustrated by Montefiore’s feelings as an “outsider” in the Passover celebrations his relatives invite him to, and his ambivalence towards his people in Israel. His task is to recognise the hostilities and tensions between the two faiths, and act as a peace-maker and bridge-builder between the two communities. For him witness must be by deed rather than word, and he approves of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s refusal to accept the patronage of the Church’s Ministry among the Jewish People (CMJ), one of the most unfortunate beginnings to the Decade of Evangelism. His book receives the commendation of the Chairman of the Council of Christians and Jews, but Montefiore himself recognises the unfairness of the exclusion of Jewish Christians like himself from membership of CCJ and the dialogue process.

Montefiore’s book is well worth reading. Whilst he clearly identifies as a “Jewish Christian” rather than a “Messianic Jew”, his profound scholarship, thoughtful and reflective questions on Jewish and Christian identity, and his clear and luminous writing, challenge and delight the attentive reader. Anyone wanting to understand the issues involved in Jewish-Christian relations today will find it, like the Bishop himself, personal, informative and challenging.

Prayer: Thank you Lord for the life, faith and ministry of Hugh Montefiore, a leading figure in the Church of England from a distinguished Jewish family. Help us, like him, to integrate the identity you give us as Jewish followers of the Jewish Messiah in a way that shows the love, character and mind of Yeshua. In his name we pray. Amen.

http://www.lcje.net/reviews.html#harvey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Montefiore

Samuel Gobat (26 January 1799 – 11 May 1879), was a Swiss Lutheran who became an Anglican missionary in Africa and was the Protestant Bishop of Jerusalem from 1846 until his death.

Born to a Lutheran family in Crémine, Bern, Switzerland, Gobat studied at the Basel Mission Institute, the Missionary Institute in Paris, and the CMS training institution in Islington (London), England. Ordained in the Lutheran church, he nevertheless volunteered for service with the CMS. During six years of service in Abyssinia (Ethiopia), broken by a short stint in Europe from 1833 to 1834, during which he married Maria Zellerin, Gobat worked energetically and to some degree successfully at building rapport with the Orthodox Coptic Church.

In 1836 he was forced by poor health to return to Europe. He was subsequently sent to Malta, where, between 1839 and 1845, he supervised the translation of the Bible into Arabic and served as vice-president of the Malta Protestant College. In 1846 he was nominated by King Friedrich Wilhelm IV of Prussia to succeed the recently deceased bishop of Jerusalem. Until his death (in Jerusalem), Gobat was notable for the energetic practicality and consummate Christian diplomacy that marked his fulfillment of this difficult and frequently exasperating role. In addition to his several publications cited below, and the Arabic translation of the Bible mentioned above, Gobat left behind thirty-seven Palestinian schools with a combined enrollment of 1,400 students, and twelve indigenous churches. A nephew of Bishop Gobat, Charles Albert Gobat, received the Nobel Peace Prize 1902.

Gobat’s policy in Jerusalem was to focus on the indigenous Arab Christians, as mission to Jews and Muslims became problematic. Charlotte van der Leest explains in her doctoral thesis on Gobat:

[p.110, footnotes omitted] In his missionary work Gobat soon ran into difficulties concerning the conversion of the Jews. Jews who converted to Christianity lost their jobs and became the target of the mockery and disdain of their families and friends. This was a problem, as the majority was very poor and would become dependent on alms.53 From Gobat’s annual letter for 1848 it appears that he tried to ‘solve’ this difficulty by changing the mission’s policy regarding the conversion of Jewish people. He now formulated the condition that all Jews who were serious about their conversion and wanted to be baptised should be willing to learn a trade, if they were able to work. As a true Evangelical, Gobat linked to baptisms a “true conversion of the heart”; people’s readiness to learn a craft would be proof of their sincerity. Furthermore, it was a pragmatic solution, making Jewish converts self-supporting and less dependent on alms. For this reason Gobat was glad that the House of Industry was reopened after a period of closure.

Because of his stance on the issue of Jewish converts, Gobat was reproached more than once in LJS circles with having no heart for the Jews because he did not share the millenarian “poetical hopes”, as he himself called it, for a rapid conversion of the people of Israel. He dissociated himself from all efforts especially directed at the Jews without proclaiming the Gospel to them. He did not agree with the underlying idea that the [111] return of the Jews in Palestine, their establishment, and the restoration of the temple would happen before they would recognize Jesus as their Messiah.

It comes as no surprise that the cooperation between the bishopric and the LJS was not as close during the Gobat years as it was during his predecessor’s episcopate, in which the mission of the LJS and the bishopric seemed to be united. As the memorandum in favour of the LJS church in Jerusalem in 1845 made clear, the mission to the Jews was important to many people in Britain. Consequently, Gobat’s attitude towards the LJS and its mission to the Jews, together with the fact that he did not share the millenarian expectations of many regarding the restoration of the Jews in Palestine, evoked much criticism from LJS members and supporters in Britain.

Gobat’s distancing himself from the mission among the Jews was linked to his focus on other Christians. Although the “Statement of Proceedings” prohibited the Protestant bishop from interfering in the affairs of Christian denominations, Gobat’s autobiography and his (annual) letters demonstrate that his missionary activities were mainly directed towards these denominations. He believed that it was not God’s will to restrict the mission to Jews only. With an appeal to the apostle Paul he said that he considered it his duty to direct his energies not only towards the Jews, but also towards the Greeks, Barbarians, ‘Papists’, Armenians, the Turks etcetera.

Moreover, he realised that the conversion of the Jews was not the real mission object of his Prussian patrons. This extension of the focus of the bishopric is already reflected in Gobat’s (first) annual re- port for 1847. From this account it appears that Gobat had appointed three Bible readers, who were required to read the Bible to people from various religious and denominational backgrounds. One of them was a Greek Catholic who had not yet for- mally separated from his church, but, according to Gobat, knew and loved the ‘truth’. The other was a former Roman Catholic, and the third a converted Jew trained in Hebrew College. They read the Bible not only to Jewish people, but also to Muslims and Christians of various denominations.

Prayer: Thank you Lord for this significant figure in the life of the church in Israel in the 19^th century, and for his legacy of institutions, buildings and the people whose life he touched. In the midst of challenging political and personal circumstances he consistently lived an example of faith and service. Help us to follow in his example, wherever we may be called to serve you, and in whatever capacity. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

Conversion and Conflict in Palestine: The Missions of the Church Missionary Society and the Protestant Bishop Samuel Gobat Protestant Bishop Samuel Gobat Samuel GobatCharlotte van der Leest – 2008 ISBN 978-90-9023203-4  available here:

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/12957/Thesis.pdf?sequence=1

https://archive.org/stream/samuelgobatbisho00goba#page/n7/mode/2up

http://www.bu.edu/missiology/missionary-biography/g-h/gobat-samuel-1799-1879/

http://www.stfrancismagazine.info/ja/images/stories/DuaneMiller-oct2012.pdf

1879: Samuel Gobat, who had been serving as the Protestant Bishop of Jerusalem since 1846, passed away.  Unlike his predecessor, Gobat refrained from trying to convert Jews and Moslems and worked among Christians.  He and his wife who had also died while living in Jerusalem are buried in Mount Zion Cemetery.

Church Missionary Society (CMS) missionary to Abyssinia

Jonathan J. Bonk, “Gobat, Samuel,” in Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions, ed. Gerald H. Anderson (New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 1998), 245.

This article is reprinted from Biographical Dictionary of Christian Missions, Macmillan Reference USA, copyright © 1998 Gerald H. Anderson, by permission of Macmillan Reference USA, New York, NY. All rights reserved.

Bibliography

DIGITAL TEXTS

“Art. IV.—Gobat’s Three Years’ Residence in Abyssinia.” The Theological and Literary Journal 4 no. 1 (July 1851): 134-58.

Gobat, Samuel. Journal of Three Years’ Residence in Abyssinia. Accompanied with A Biographical Sketch of Bishop Gobat by Robert Baird. New York: M. W. Dodd, 1834.

Gobat, Samuel and L. Roehrich. Samuel Gobat: His Life and His Work. A Biographical Sketch Drawn Chiefly from His Own Journals. With Preface by the Right Hon. the Earl of Shaftesbury. With Portaits and Illustrations. London: J. Nisbet, 1884. [Originally written in French by Mme. L. Roehrich. English translation made from the German ed. of 1884.]

_____. Samuel Gobat: missionnaire en Abyssinie et évêque à Jérusalem, sa vie et son oeuvre. Bale: C. F. Spittler, 1885.

“Gobat, Samuel, D.D.” In Men of the Reign: A Biographical Dictionary of Eminent Persons of British and Colonial Birth Who Have Died During the Reign of Queen Victoria, edited by Thomas Humphry Ward, 355-6. London: G. Routledge and Sons, 1885.

Schäfer, Theodor. “Gobat, Samuel: Second Anglican-German Bishop in Jerusalem.” In The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: Embracing Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology and Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Biography from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, edited by Samuel Macauley Jackson, et al., 5:1. New York and London: Funk and Wagnalls Co., 1908-1912.

Stock, Eugene. The History of the Church Missionary Society: Its Environment, Its Men, and Its Work. 4 vols. London: Church Missionary Society, 1899-1916.  Volume 1; Volume 2; Volume 3; Volume 4.

SECONDARY

“Art. IV.—Gobat’s Three Years’ Residence in Abyssinia.” The Theological and Literary Journal 4 no. 1 (July 1851): 134-58.

Baird, Robert. “A Biographical Sketch of Bishop Gobat.” In Samuel Gobat, Journal of Three Years’ Residence in Abyssinia. New York: M. W. Dodd, 1834.

Conway, John S. “The Jerusalem Bishopric: A ‘Union of Foolscap and Blotting-paper.’” Studies in Religion 7 no. 3 (1978).

“Gobat, Samuel, D.D.” In Men of the Reign: A Biographical Dictionary of Eminent Persons of British and Colonial Birth Who Have Died During the Reign of Queen Victoria, edited by Thomas Humphry Ward, 355-6. London: G. Routledge and Sons, 1885.

Kildani, Hanna. Modern Christianity in the Holy Land: Development of the Structure of Churches and the Growth of Christian Institutions in Jordan and Palestine: The Jerusalem Patriarchate in the Nineteenth Century in Light of the Ottoman Firmans and the International Relations of the Ottoman Sultanate. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2010, especially pages 522-65.

Payne, Eric. Ethiopian Jews: The Story of a Mission. London: Olive Press, 1972.

Schäfer, Theodor. “Gobat, Samuel: Second Anglican-German Bishop in Jerusalem.” In The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: Embracing Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology and Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Biography from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, edited by Samuel Macauley Jackson, et al., 5:1. New York and London: Funk and Wagnalls Co., 1908-1912. Also Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1963-1967.

Stock, Eugene. The History of the Church Missionary Society: Its Environment, Its Men, and Its Work. 4 vols. London: Church Missionary Society, 1899-1916.

Stunt, Timothy C. F. From Awakening to Secession: Radical Evangelicals in Switzerland and Britain, 1815-35. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2000, especially “Swiss missionary recruits in London,” pages 128-33.

Tibawi, Abdul Latif. British Interest in Palestine 1800-1901: A Study of Religious and Educational Enterprise. London: Oxford University Press, 1961, pp. 237-255.

I am resisting the temptation to blog about today being the birthday of Karl Barth, but I think he would be in agreement with much of the statements below from theEuropean Lutheran Commission on the Church and the Jewish People (LEKKJ).

At its annual meetings, 2001 – 2003 the European Lutheran Commission on the Church and the Jewish People (LEKKJ) studied a number of liturgical texts, and especially the prayers which have as their theme the relationship between the church and the Jewish people.

This study revealed that obscurities, misunderstandings and anti-Jewish formulations both old and new continue to be perpetrated. It demonstrates, therefore, the urgent need to devote as much care to liturgies and to liturgical texts as to other documents devoted to the subject of Judaism. Hence, the following points ought to be considered with great care –

Section I

1. New insights have been gained by our churches; these are publicly available and ought to be used when composing the text of prayers.
2. It is, for example, no longer possible to speak of ‘Israel’, or the ‘Jews’, as if their significance were confined to past history, when, in fact, they are of considerable significance in the present time.
3. To whom precisely do the words ‘Israel’, ‘God’s people’, ‘Your people’, or ‘we’, refer? No ambiguity must be allowed to enter the minds of the congregation which participates in such prayers. What, for example, is meant when use is made of such expressions as ‘Your covenant’, or ‘the blessing which you have promised’, or ‘promise’? To whom do these concepts refer?
4. The effect of the words and images used must be examined, as the danger frequently arises, when, for example, ‘Israel’ is being prayed for, that this gets associated with the state of Israel, and not with the religious concept of Judaism, although this is what was intended.
5. Concepts and ideas which occur in both Judaism and Christianity are to be examined with a view to ascertaining whether their use carries the same meaning in both communities; for example: Are their respective eschatological expectations really identical?
6. Is it not a fact that there are liturgies which preserve traditions hostile to the Jews? They contradict insights gained during Christian-Jewish dialogue, but continue to be handed on through the liturgical tradition. A number of more recent liturgies contain elements which, according to Lutheran official documents ought long ago to have been consigned to past history. In some churches it continues to be possible to read out Josephus’ account of the fall of Jerusalem on the 10^thSunday after Trinity, which includes comments unambiguously hostile to the Jews. Or, again, some recently revised liturgies contain flagrantly unsuitable passages, designed, perhaps, to express ecumenical solidarity with the Catholic tradition, while leaving out of account their anti-Jewish potential.
7. One problem can consist in the deliberate omission of Israel from liturgical prayers. A way of overcoming this difficulty might be to speak of God’s abiding faithfulness to his people in the Communion liturgy.
8. It is imperative, in all services, to observe the practice of reading out at least one passage from the Hebrew Bible, i.e. our Old Testament.
9. Under no circumstances must a reading from the Old Testament be given inferior liturgical status as against other readings.

Section II

We request the churches –

1. when liturgies are being revised, that members of the working parties engaged in Christian-Jewishdialogue be consulted;
2. that the persons responsible in the churches for both introductory and advanced courses of study include in their programs the criteria discussed in section I above and take into consideration the results achieved by Christian-Jewish dialogue.

Graz,Austria, 10th May 2003.

These recommendations were adopted unanimously by the LEKKJ delegates at their annual meeting for the year 2003.

Prayer: Thank you Lord for this timely reminder to rid Christian worship of anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic content. May the time soon come when the role of Yeshua as Messiah of Israel today, and the place of Messianic Jews as his disciples, is similarly recognised. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

http://www.sacredheart.edu/faithservice/centerforchristianandjewishunderstanding/documentsandstatements/europeanlutherancommissiononthechurchandthejewishpeoplemay102003/

Pope Innocent IV was born in 1195 in Genoa, Italy. He became a Catholic priest and scholar and was elected as Pope in 1243.

On May 9, 1242 Innocent IV issue a papal bull [bulla – the seal on papal decrees] to French King Louis IX entitled Impia judoerum perfidia [the unpious treachery of the Jews]. This phrase is a popular epithet against the Jews, calling them a “perfidious” race.

Pope Innocent IV explains that Jesus tolerates Christians and Jews living together, but only in the expectation that the Jews will eventually convert to Christianity. He goes on to say:

“For their part, these ungrateful do not admit [and none repent] their errors and do not revere the honor of the Christian faith.

They have abandoned the law of Moses and the Prophets, following a few traditions of their elders. …”

King Louis IX is ordered to publicly burn the Talmud and other Jewish texts throughout France because the Talmud contains “blasphemies against God and Christ, the Virgin Mary, forgery and abuse of untold mischief.”

Pope Innocent IV also bans Jews from employing Christian nurses or servants because their faith might become confused, causing them to bring down the wrath of God on themselves.

The Papal bull (law) reaffirmed the restrictions on Jews implemented by Pope Gregory IX. The Jewish Talmud was banned and Jews were prohibited from hiring Catholics to avoid manual labor.

The phrase “perfidious Jews” continues to be used in the liturgy until it was removed in 1959.

Prayer: For too long the church prayed for the ‘perfidious Jews’, and for too long the Jewish people suffered calumny, persecution and anti-Semitic treatment as a result of Christian theological anti-Judaism. Lord, have mercy, both on your church, your people Israel and on all who suffer prejudice, discrimination and hatred because of race, creed or life choices. Help us to model the love, mercy and reconciling forgiveness of your Son the Messiah. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

http://cdn.theologicalstudies.net/8/8.1/8.1.3.pdf

Schlomo Simonsohn, The Apostolic See and the Jews. (Toronto, The Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1991), 306.

http://skepticism.org/timeline/may-history/5619-pope-innocent-iv-writes-papal-bull-condemn-jews.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_prayer_for_the_Jews

Joseph Samuel Christian Frederick Frey (born Joseph Levi) (1771–1850) was a missionary to the Jewish people. In 1809 he founded the London Society for promoting Christianity amongst the Jews after disagreements with the London Missionary Society.

In 1813 he founded the Beni Abraham, a congregation of Jewish believers in Yeshua that met in the East End of London.

In 1820 Frey founded the American Society for Meliorating the Condition of the Jews. A colourful and larger than life character, he was a speaker, organizer, apologist, fundraiser, and controversial character, both to his friends and his enemies. We have already looked at his influence and the agencies he formed. Here we remember his baptism by sprinkling in 1799. He would later be baptized by immersion in the USA on August 28, 1827.

Frey’s writings and ministry are well worth study for anyone interested in Messianic Judaism today. He has a theological imagination that outstripped many of his contemporaries. He lived as a marginalized figure in both Jewish and Christian communities. His personal life was not without its faults and flaws. But his contribution to the Jewish missions movement, and his early anticipation of the modern movement of Messianic Judaism cannot be denied, and we remember today his personal declaration of faith in Yeshua.

Prayer: Thank you Lord for this man of vision, faith, theological depth and organizational ability. As a child of his time he lived with the limitations of Christian lack of understanding and sympathy with Jews and Judaism, and was similarly influenced by these constraints. Yet he pioneered a new engagement with your people Israel, and in his own life sought to integrate what it means to be Jewish and believe in Yeshua.

https://jewinthepew.org/2015/04/14/14-aprl-1820-joseph-frey-founds-american-society-for-meliorating-the-condition-of-the-jews-otdimjh/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Joseph-Samuel-C-F-Frey/222847314537253?fref=ts

https://jewinthepew.org/2015/04/14/14-aprl-1820-joseph-frey-founds-american-society-for-meliorating-the-condition-of-the-jews-otdimjh/?preview_id=2035

https://archive.org/details/essaysonchrist00frey

https://archive.org/details/essaysonchrist00frey

Hebrew Grammar 1813

http://ia600308.us.archive.org/31/items/shaarharishonell00freyrich/shaarharishonell00freyrich.pdf

Essays on Baptism 1829

http://archive.org/details/essaysonchrist00frey

The theological lectures of Rev. David Bogue, never before published, Volume 1 (Google eBook)http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_theological_lectures_of_Rev_David_Bo.html?id=ewFMAAAAYAAJ&redir_esc=y David Bogue, Joseph Samuel Christian Frederick Frey L. Colby, 1849 – Theology, Doctrinal – 806 pages

General search

http://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Frey%2C+Joseph+Samuel+C.+F.+%28Joseph+Samuel+Christian+Frederick%29%2C+1771-1850%22

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Samuel_C._F._Frey

The term “Operation Mercy” or “Operation Grace” is used for the evacuation of Hebrew Christians in April and May 1948, when one hundred or more individuals left Palestine at the termination of the British Mandate. Those who organized this operation, Christians as well as Hebrew Christians (not least those affiliated with the International Hebrew Christian Alliance), believed that through the grace of God they had “saved” these persons from imminent danger.

Others who remained in Israel, both Hebrew Christians and Christians, believed that the evacuation was not only unnecessary but constituted treason against the grace of God that came to expression in the establishment of the State of Israel; not only did the evacuated Hebrew Christians show cowardice, they were also “unfaithful.”

Just as there was much disagreement in 1948, when the events surrounding Operation Mercy are interpreted today there are still different views. In today’s post we report on the event, without casting judgment one way or the other.

In a full issue of Mishkan devoted to the topic some of those involved in Operation Mercy share their perspective, so that we might understand them. For several articles by participants and observers, see here. For more of Gershon Nerel’s writings on the topic, see here.

Here is Rev. Hugh R. A. Jones account, edited by Kai Kjaer-Hansen – Described in Two Letters from Jerusalem, June 4 and 5, 1948

We have chosen to allow Rev. Hugh R. A. Jones, then Head of Church Missions to Jews (CMJ) in Israel, to speak in this first article. And we do it without explanatory footnotes so that the readers may form their own impression of how a person who played no insignificant part in Operation Mercy feels and thinks a few weeks after the operation has been carried out. He is filled with gratitude to God that it was possible to save lives.

So what we have is a subjective account from an eyewitness. Whether Jones’ assessment is objectively correct and provides an adequate picture of the situation – did he, for example, exaggerate the danger for Hebrew Christians in Palestine/Israel in the spring of 1948? – is a different but nevertheless important question. Jones actually dealt with that issue in April 1949, in a letter to the Archbishop of York, which Gershon Nerel includes in his article and on which I also comment in “The Organizers behind Operation Mercy” in this issue of Mishkan.

The individuals mentioned in these two letters by Jones appear in other articles and will be identified there. Roger Allison was in charge of CMJ’s work in Jaffa. (As to the Hebrew Christians Weinstock and Oko, see my article on Weinstock.)

Miss Hannah Hurnard played a major role in Jerusalem in the first stage of Operation Mercy. She was in CMJ’s employ and remained in Jerusalem in 1948 together with other Protestant missionaries. She has provided an eyewitness account about the time before and after May 15, 1948, which we shall return to in the next article. There we shall also meet some people who, to put it mildly, had quite a different view of Operation Mercy than Jones had.

In the reproduction of Jones’ letters, the headings and indentation are mine; a few obvious misprints have been corrected and a few explanatory words have been inserted in brackets.

The letter concludes with eighteen hand-written lines, in which Jones mentions that the Bishop in Jerusalem has asked if Allison could be transferred to Haifa for some time, as Reverend Moxon wishes to return home.

Operation Mercy According to Hugh R. A. Jones – Described in Two Letters from Jerusalem, June 4 and 5, 1948 – I.Z.L. stands for Irgun Zvai Leumi = National Military Organization, usually referred to as the Irgun.

Letter of June 4, 19481 by Hugh R.A. Jones, Christchurch, Jerusalem, to

Rev. C.H. Gill, M.A., 16, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London, W.C.2. June 4th, 1948

Dear Mr. Gill,

I would like to try and give you some idea of the position of the Hebrew Christian as it has been crystalising in Palestine during the last six months. First let me quote from a recent Evangelical Christian Magazine, an American publication, which I think states the position pretty accurately:

The lot of the Hebrew Christian in Palestine today is deplorable. It will be more so tomorrow; and when the British depart is likely to be unbearable. Zionism is not a religious movement basically, but a political one. It is only religious in the sense that most of its leaders and its adherents hate like poison those Jews who have embraced Christianity . . . It is confirmed by a writer in the current issue of “World Dominion” who says in an article on “A Christian View of Palestine”: ‘There are Hebrew Christians whose fate is pitiable; they hardly dare to be mentioned, such is the hatred of their Zionist brethren. A Christian Jew may not be admitted to Palestine on a Jewish immigration quota: Jews who are atheists or communists, or who reject the fundamentals of Judaism, are freely admitted as Jews. The Jewish Agency has ruled that Judaism is a purely racial concept, with one exception – no Christian, whatever his ancestry, may belong to the Jewish race.’

We have made the prediction that Christian work amongst Jews in Palestine will largely cease when the British depart, and the fate of those who love the Lord Jesus Christ and are left behind may yet shock the moral conscience of the world . . . The Jew of Palestine knows no tolerance for the Christian of his own race, however much he may talk about religious freedom and liberty of conscience in New York or Toronto.

Hebrew Christians Subjected to Thorough Cross-examination

I think the experience of a number of our own converts which I have described to you during the past few months adequately bear out this point of view.

The Hebrew Christian who escaped wounded into Christ Church compound from an Arab mob in December; the Okos who were bottled up in Christ Church for several months; the experiences of Mr. J. at the hands of Stern Gang, all go to show that the lot of the Hebrew Christian in Palestine, at any rate for the present, is an extremely difficult one. More recently I have heard from Roger Allison that Weinstock has not been allowed to live in his flat on the Jaffo Tel Aviv border and spent seven days wandering the streets of T.A. with his family before he could find a temporary abode.

Of the twenty or so Hebrew Christian members of our congregation who were living in the Hospital compound, several were taken on a number of occasions and subjected to a pretty thorough cross-examination, either by the Haganah or the I.Z.L. It became clear that three at least of them were in very real danger from the I.Z.L and in the end we managed to move them from the Jewish area and to put them in a neutral area – Zone B. – where we had to keep them for about three weeks, incidentally costing us LP [Palestinian Pounds] 80 for hotel bill, until we could get them moved to St. George’s on May 1st. As time went on it became clear that the most satisfactory thing to do was to try and evacuate the bulk of the remaining Hebrew Christian members of our congregation, totalling about thirty. The bulk of them were living in the Jewish area and had no prospects of work after the end of the Mandate.

Problems Getting Enough Visas

Together with other Missionary Societies we brought the fate of these people to the notice of our Home Committees and eventually the Home Office granted fourteen visas for Hebrew Christians in Palestine considered to be in difficulty or danger. I managed to obtain five of these visas for members of our Hebrew Christian staff and one for a member of the congregation. Fourteen visas, however, were wholly inadequate to meet the problem and a meeting was held on April 12th in the Secretariat in the office of the Chief Secretary, who was present with his Under-Secretary, together with the Bishop, Canon Witton-Davies, Rev. Clark Kerr of the Church of Scotland and myself. The Bishop explained to the Chief Secretary that many more than fourteen visas were needed and said that at least fifty, probably more, Hebrew Christians throughout Palestine were in need of being evacuated. As the Government had received from the Foreign Office no permission to grant an unlimited number of visas, the C.S. [Chief Secretary] agreed to wire the Home Office and explain the situation. About a fortnight later we were informed that any Hebrew Christian considered to be in danger could be granted a temporary visa for the United Kingdom. We felt that the majority of the Hebrew Christians of our congregation should be granted visas and as time was getting very short it meant that we had to get moving pretty quickly; however, with the invaluable help of Ronald Adeney, we gradually got all their papers straightened out and necessary laisser-passers, etcetera, issued and visa-ed. …….

May 1 – The First Stage of Operation Mercy

During the morning Miss Hurnard, with her Morris 8 van, collected ten Hebrew Christians from our Hospital compound and deposited them at one of the two assembly points on Zone B. Normally there would have been difficulty in taking people out of the Jewish area past the Haganah road check, as no-one was allowed to enter or leave the Jewish area without official Jewish sanction. It happened that the man in charge of the road check on this morning had his mother, a Hebrew Christian, amongst the party of the ten evacuees so he winked an eye at all that was going on!

Miss Hurnard completed her good work by conveying, the three Hebrew Christians from the hotel in Zone B., which was in rather an exposed situation, to the same rendez-vous where the others had been assembled from the Jewish area. Altogether seventeen persons, twelve of them of our own congregation, were collected at this spot. The second group were assembled in a hotel in Talbia (“Stag” Zone); a total of nine were picked up at this point. At about half-past three a three-tonner appeared, coming from the German Colony, where the first Hebrew Christian, a Roman Catholic, had been collected. The first group was then loaded and I followed behind in the station wagon with A. and the Gentile wife of one Hebrew Christian with an infant-in-arms.

We then proceeded through Zone B to assembly point number 2, where the rest were put in the army vehicle apart from one mother and small son who were taken into my station wagon. We then proceeded to the exit of Zone B in Julian’s Way where we linked up with the army officer who preceded us in another station wagon; then we proceeded down Julian’s Way, past the Mamilla crossroads and up St. Louis’ Way, past Barclay’s Bank, a station wagon before and behind the three-tonner. Words of amazement came from the two mothers in my station wagon who had not been through this desolate part of Jerusalem since the beginning of the trouble in December. All went past Barclay’s Bank and down the hill past Notre Dame towards the Damascus Gate. We were waved past the road checks and so to St. George’s without incident.

Here we met one snag; the three-tonner was too big to drive in through the narrow entrance into the courtyard, and so, after much manoeuvring, the lorry was backed into the entrance and the Hebrew Christians hustled out as quickly as possible, as we did not wish this operation to be viewed by any stray Arabs in the vicinity. While this operation was going on, Miss Hurnard turned up with one Mishkan 61.indb 8 11/16/2009 9:00:10 AM 9operation mercy according to hugh r. a. jones of the Hebrew Christian women who, in the flurry of loading at one of the assembly points, had got left behind in a room upstairs!

This operation was completed by Canon Witton-Davies and myself signing a receipt for the safe delivery of twenty-seven Hebrew Christians at St. George’s on route for England. This receipt was delivered by the army officer to the Arab Higher Committee, who wished to have a Gate guarantee that they had got safely past the road checks at the Damascus Gate and that nothing untoward had happened to them during their short but pregnant journey. The same evening that the Hebrew Christians were taken to St. George’s a house curfew was placed on the whole of the Jewish area and a search was made to check up on those who had not registered for national service! There are no mistakes in God’s time table.

May 7 – The Second Stage of Operation Mercy

The party was kept at St. George’s until the following Friday when they were escorted by police armoured cars in two pick-ups to Kalandia aerodrome. Again nothing untoward happened on the way, though a group of Arabs had assembled at one point of the journey where the road runs through a small Arab village. They seemed to have got wind that something unusual was going to pass through that morning, but they took no more than a quizzical notice of the convoy. We did have to wait long on the air-field before a couple of Dakotas came down. The party, which now totalled forty – thirty-five Hebrew Christians and five English nuns – were taken on board and were soon speeding on their way to Haifa, marking the end of stage 1 of Operation Mercy, through all of which, I think, the good Hand of our God had been evident, undertaking and guiding in a very wonderful way.

I am afraid this evacuation has meant a lot of extra work for you and I realise that the planning for the future of these people will be no easy business. We feel that this has been for us a kind of spiritual Dunkirk. Since the beginning of the troubles last December, no fewer than forty-three Hebrew Christians, including eight children, belonging to Christ Church congregation, have left the country. Temporarily, at any rate, it marks a considerable retreat in our work, but it has been quite clear to us that there was no alternative course, though I realise that we cannot sit down and accept this as a permanent defeat. God must have a plan and a purpose for the future of work amongst Jews in this country, though, until this present chaos sorts itself out it may not be clear to us just what are the next steps to be taken. We can only wait patiently in prayer and expectancy for His guidance and leading.

A letter from the British consul warned Jones to leave Jerusalem; he stayed (Courtesy of Christ Church)

Prayer: Lord, you alone know the times and seasons of our lives, as individuals, societies and nations. Everything is under you divine providence, and you oversee the flow of human history. Whilst we rejoice at the formation of the State of Israel in 1948, we grieve over the loss of life and the unceasing hostilities that have continued to this day. We thank you for the preservation of life and the safety of those who left under “Operation Mercy”, but we regret the loss of a communal testimony to Yeshua by his Jewish followers that took a generation to rebuild. Thank you for the vibrant community of Messianic Jews that exists in the Land of Israel today. Strengthen the work of their hands we pray, as they share the Good News of Yeshua, live lives according to Torah, and make peace, seek reconciliation and pursue justice with all. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/independence-day-1948-war-diary/

Gershon Nerel’s articles on Operation Mercy (Grace) – 1948

225. (1) ‘Operation Mercy’ on the Eve of the Establishment of the State of Israel: The Evacuation of Jewish Yeshua Disciples from the Land, Part 1, ZOT HABRIT 20 (2004) 11-12 (Hebrew). Operation Mercy Evacuation of JBY, Part 1 (Hebrew), ZOT HABRIT, 20 (2004) 11-12

226. (2) ‘Operation Mercy’ before the Establishment of the State of Israel: The Aftermath of the Evacuation of Jewish Believers in Yeshua from Eretz Israel in 1948, Part 2, ZOT HABRIT, 21 (2007) 11-12 (Hebrew). Operation Mercy in 1948, Part 2, ZOT HABRIT, 21 (2007) 11-12 (Hebrew)

227. (3) ‘Operation Grace’ in 1948: The Theological Position of Messianic Jews vs. the Historic Churches, Part 3, ZOT HABRIT, 23 (2009) 11-12 (Hebrew). Operation Grace Theological Positions, Part 3, (Hebrew), ZOT HABRIT 23 (2009) 11-12

228. (4) “Operation Mercy”: The Evacuation of Messianic Jews from Eretz Israel in 1948, IGGUD – SELECTED ESSAYS IN JEWISH STUDIES, vol. 2 (History of the Jewish People and Contemporary Jewish Society), World Union of Jewish Studies, Jerusalem 2009, 83-109 (Hebrew). Operation Mercy Evacuation of Messianic Jews (Hebrew), IGGUD, v. 2, Jerusalem 2009

229. (5) Operation Mercy before Establishment of State of Israel, MISHKAN 61 (2009) 21-32. Operation Mercy before Establishment of State of Israel MISHKAN 61 (2009) 21-32

230. (6) «Operation Gnade» oder die Evakuierung messianischer Juden aus Eretz Israel im Jahr 1948, NACHRICHTEN AUS ISRAEL, Dec. 2009, 8. Operation Gnade die Evakuierung messianischer Juden aus Eretz Israel 1948, NAI, Dec. 2009

231. (7) L’«Opération grâce» ou l’évacuation des Juifs messianiques hors d’Eretz Israël en 1948, NOUVELLES D’ISRAEL, Dec. 2009, 8. LOperation grace evacuation des Juifs messianiques DEretz Israel 1948, NDI Dec. 2009, 8

232. (8) «Operaţiunea Harul» sau evacuarea evreilor mesianici din  Ereţ Israel în anul 1948, STIRI DIN ISRAEL, Dec. 2009, 8 (Romanian). Operatiunea Harul sau evacuarea evreilor mesianici din Eret Israel 1948, SDI, Dec. 2009

233. (9) «Operatie Genade» of de evacuatie van Messiaanse Joden uit Eretz Israel in 1948, NIEUWS UIT ISRAEL, Dec. 2009, 8 (Dutch).Operatie Genade evacuatie Messiaanse Joden uit Eretz Israel 1948, NUI Dec. 2009,8 (Dutch)

234. (10) Response to Kai Kjaer-Hansen’s Articles on ‘Operation Mercy,’ MISHKAN 62 (2010) 69-74. Response to Kai Kjaer-Hansen Article on Operation Mercy, MISHKAN 62 (2010) 69-74

A work-group of Evangelical and Roman Catholic theologians met, May 6-8, 1950, at Bad Schwalbach, called together by the Hesse Council for Jewish-Christian Cooperation and the German Coordinating Committee for Christians and Jews.

Martin Buber’s house (1916–38) in Heppenheim, Germany. Now the headquarters of the International Council of Christians and Jews.

They worked over the Ten Points of Seelisberg and produced “Theses on Christian Doctrinal Pronouncement with regard to continuing errors about the People of God of the Old Covenant”. (Theses 1-5 corresponded to the first five Seelisberg points; theses 6-8 to points 6-10 in altered succession.) These elaborations were offered for study as points which every believing Christian can make his own without conflicting with “some ecclesiastical doctrinal decree of his own confession”.

These are the more important points presented:

“1) ,This one God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If we Christians do not believe in this one God then we believe in a false God, even if we call, him the Father of Jesus Christ….

2) When Christians name Jesus the Christ we acknowledge that, since He is the Son of David, … we participate in the redemption which, for Israel, is linked with the coming of the Messiah…. It is no less certain that we still await the day when we will see the manifest fulfillment.

3) The ‘Church … consists of Jews and Gentiles who are … joined together as the new people of God….

5) It would be wrong to haughtily disparage ‘the Jews’ of the biblical or post-biblical time in contrast to ‘the Christians’ instead of simply acknowledging the Gospel as the fulfillment of the Law.

7) In so far as men may judge …, the guilty attitudes of the contemporaries of Jesus can be divided into three very different degrees:

a) the commissions and omissions of the comparatively few who somehow became entangled in the Crucifixion, beginning with those who were driven by political ambition or religious fanaticism to plot the murder of Jesus, … even to the disciples who denied him out of cowardice;

b) the attitude of innumerable people who were irresolute to accept the witness of the Apostles to the Resurrection of Jesus and … his messianic mission rather than the arguments which seemed to charge the one executed for blashemy and rebellion;

c) the hatred with which the many persecutors and detractors pursued Jesus’ disciples. (It must not be forgotten however that since Maimonides the Jewish authorities in ever increasing number recognized the baptized Gentile as worshipper of the true God.)

8) What meaning the Crucifixion of Christ brings to the Alliance between God and Israel — this is a hidden decree within the inviolable faithfulness of God to His people which even … the Epistle to the Romans reveals but vaguely and rather by way of suggestion….

9) The unique New Testament passage which uses the word ‘rejection’ in reference to the destiny of the Jews (Rom. 11:15) is followed immediately by an allusion to their ‘assumption’. It would be a deformation of Revelation to stress the one side — the actual and temporary one —while neglecting the other — the final one —which will triumph over the first”.

What actual effect the Ten Points of Seelisberg and their elaboration has had on theological writings has yet to be studied. A parallel development, less comprehensive in theological thinking but more official is seen first at the World Council of Churches, then at Rome.

Prayer: For 2000 years the church’s teaching on Jews and Judaism has been marked with theological contempt and supersessionist polemic. Thank you Lord for the work that has been done to return to the scriptures and a right understanding of your ongoing love and purposes for your people Israel. There is still much work to be done in this area, so please forgive the errors of the past and set us firmly on the path of the truth of your word. In the name of Yeshua, the Incarnate Word of God we pray. Amen.

http://www.notredamedesion.org/en/dialogue_docs.php?a=3b&id=1344

http://www.iccj.org/fileadmin/ICCJ/user_upload/Copeland/TwelvePoints.PDF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seelisberg_Conference

Among the 70 participants from 17 countries were:

• 28 Jews, including Jules Isaac, Jacob Kaplan, acting chief rabbi of France, Alexandre Safran, chief rabbi of Romania, the writer Josué Jéhouda, of Geneva; Professor Selig Brodetsky, president of the Representative Council of the Jews of England.
• 23 Protestants,
• 9 Catholics, including Père Marie-Benoît, Father Calliste Lopinot, Abbot Charles Journet, Father Jean de Menasce, Father Paul Démann.

International Council of Christians and Jews

The 10 Points of Seelisburg, 1947

“The following statement, produced by the Christian participants at the Second conference of the newly formed International Council of Christians and Jews, was one of the first statements following World War II in which Christians, with the advice and counsel of Jews, began to come to terms with the implications of the Shoa.”[2]

Remember that One God speaks to us all through the Old and the New Testaments (see divine simplicity and monotheism).

Remember that Jesus was born of a Jewish mother of the seed of David and the people of Israel, and that His everlasting love and forgiveness embraces His own people and the whole world. (see Dual-covenant theology and Judaism’s view of Jesus)

Remember that the first disciples, the apostles and the first martyrs were Jews. (see Apostle (Christian))

Remember that the fundamental commandment of Christianity, to love God and one’s neighbour, proclaimed already in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, is binding upon both Christians and Jews in all human relationship, without any exception (see Ethic of reciprocity).

Avoid distorting or misrepresenting biblical or post-biblical Judaism with the object of extolling Christianity. (see legalism and pharisees)

Avoid using the words Jews in the exclusive sense of the enemies of Jesus, and the words The Enemies of Jesus to designate the whole Jewish people. (see Jew (disambiguation))

Avoid presenting the Passion in such a way as to bring the odium of the killing of Jesus upon all Jews or upon Jews alone. It was only a section of the Jews in Jerusalem who demanded the death of Jesus, and the Christian message has always been that it was the sins of mankind which were exemplified by those Jews and the sins in which all men share that brought Christ to the Cross. (see Passion play and deicide)

Avoid referring to the scriptural curses, or the cry of a raging mob: His Blood be Upon Us and Our Children, without remembering that this cry should not count against the infinitely more weighty words of our Lord: Father Forgive Them, for They Know no What They Do. (see blood curse)

Avoid promoting the superstitious notion that the Jewish people are reprobate, accursed, reserved for a destiny of suffering. (see Wandering Jew)

Avoid speaking of the Jews as if the first members of the Church had not been Jews. (see Council of Jerusalem)

HOMEM, ANTONIO: Jewish martyr; born in 1564 of Neo-Christian parents at Coimbra, Portugal; suffered death at the stake in Lisbon May 5, 1624. His father’s name was Vaez Brandão; and his mother was a granddaughter of Nuñez Cardozo, called “the rich Jew of Aveiro.” Like many secret Jews who, in order to escape from the snares and persecutions of the Inquisition, caused their sons to embrace a clerical career, the parents of Antonio had him educated for the Church. He entered a religious order and studied at the university of his native town.

On Feb. 22, 1592, he took his degree as doctor and “magister,” and after having served the Church in various offices he was appointed deacon and professor of canon law at Coimbra University. He aroused the suspicion of the Inquisition and had to appear before its tribunal (Feb. 1, 1611), but as the author of some theological works he was acquitted. His colleagues closely watched him, however; and in 1619 a secret synagogue was discovered in Lisbon in which Homem conducted the services and preached. On Dec. 18 of that year he was brought before the tribunal of the Inquisition and condemned to death; and five years later at an auto da fé at Lisbon he was burned alive. His house was demolished, and in its place was erected a pillar bearing the inscription “Præceptor infelix.”(From the Jewish Encylopaedia_

Bibliography:

• Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, pp. 291-292.

From Ha’aretz

On May 5, 1624, Antonio Homem – a Christian theologian and church official – was burned at the stake as a Judaizer during an auto-da-fé in Lisbon.

In 1564, Antonio Homem was born in Coimbra, the inland city in north-central Portugal that had the country’s oldest university. Both his parents were descendants of New Christians (Jewish converts to Christianity) and, in the hope that Antonio would not go through life under a cloud of suspicion, he was educated at Jesuit institutions.

Homem entered a religious order and studied at the University of Coimbra, receiving his doctorate in 1592. In 1614, he was appointed a professor of canon law there, and he also was a canon at the city’s cathedral, as well as a confessor.

In February 1611, Homem was arrested by the Portuguese Inquisition, and subject to interrogation on suspicion he was pursuing a secret Jewish life. The charges were dropped, on the basis of his theological publications, but from then on he was kept under surveillance.

On December 18, 1619, Homem was again arrested, after the discovery in Coimbra of a secret synagogue he had established. He was sent to Lisbon for questioning, the transcript of which has survived. It includes, for example, the text of a sermon he gave on Yom Kippur of 1619, during which he told his fellow secret Jews that the main difference between Judaism and Christianity is in the Jews’ Sabbath observance and in their non-worship of images.

He also declared that, when one is living under conditions of persecution, it is sufficient to have the mitzvot (Jewish commandments) in mind, even if one is not able to carry them out.

Additionally, according to the informant who reported on the synagogue to the Inquisition, Homem exhorted his fellow congregants to “live in the law of Moses,” referring to certain authorities of the Old Testament; at certain passages the people performed guayas – a lamentation similar in meaning to “oy.” He also was said to have “blown in a horn and made a low sound several times that day.”

Homem was convicted, although apparently he did not confess, and was sentenced to death – a punishment that was carried out more than five years later. In the wake of his trial, however, 131 other people were arrested and tried on charges of membership in the Jewish “cult.” These included four other canons from Coimbra Cathedral, 52 nuns and a variety of students and teachers from the University of Coimbra.

At the auto-da-fé – the public religious ceremony that preceded the execution – Friar Antonio de Sousa spoke about the perfidity of Judaism, noting that “the many Jews in all ranks that are daily discovered allow us to presume the worst about the generality” of that people.

Homem and the other condemned prisoners were then turned over to the authority of “civil justice,” and marched to the place of execution, at Terreiro do Trigo. He was garroted (strangled) and then burned.

After Homem’s death, his home was destroyed, and in its place a pillar was erected bearing the inscription “Praeceptor infelix” – Latin for “Unfortunate teacher.”

Prayer: Lord, we so grieve over the persecution of your people Israel in your name, and of Jewish believers in Yeshua who were prevented from retaining their Jewish identity as members of the body of Christ. Have mercy on your church for perpetrating such evil and injustice, and may Messianic Jews today be free to live out their faith as members of the Church and of your people Israel. In Yeshua’s name we pray. Amen

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/this-day-in-jewish-history/.premium-1.588936

https://archive.org/details/antoniohomemeinq00teix

http://dererummundi.blogspot.co.il/2008/11/antnio-homem-e-inquisio.html

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7838-homem-antonio

http://www.executedtoday.com/category/what/public-executions/auto-de-fe/

Documentos manuscritos relativos a António Homem na exposição “Coimbra Judaica”, Sala de S. Pedro da Biblioteca Geral da Universidade de Coimbra

HOMEM, António, 1564-1624. Sequitur explicandus t[i]t[ulus] Qui filii sint legitimi: ab infelicíssimo D[octore], Anno D[omi]ni 1608 [Manuscrito]. [Século XVII]. Ms. 985

HOMEM, António, 1564-1624. Sequitur explicandus t[i]t[ul]us De causa possessionis et proprietatis a D[octore] Antonio Homem anno 1615 [Manuscrito]. [Século XVII].Ms. 796

SENTENÇA de Antonio Homem Lente de Prima de cânones na Universidade de Coimbra e conego Doutoral nella, [Lisboa, 5 de Mayo de 1624] [Manuscrito]. [Século XVII]. Ms. 595