jews & judaism in greek fathers.pdf

7/27/2019 Jews & Judaism in Greek Fathers.pdf

1/12

DEMETRIOS J. CONSTANTELOS

JEWS AND JUDAISM IN THE EARLYGREEK FATHERS (100 A.D. - 500 A.D.)

There are very few books wjhich deal with the attitude of theGreek Fathers and Ecclesiastical writers toward Jews andJudaism. A few broad surveys that exist1 are limited in scope

and chronology. They are hardly adequate to vanquish oldmyths and stereotypes. Thus the clich is perpetuated that theGreek Fathers were anti-Semitic, intolerant, and narrow-minded. May I state from the outset that, in my opinion, it is anerror to accuse the Greek Fathers ofbeing "anti-Semitic." Anti-Semitism in a modern context was foreign to the Greek Fathers.

We need a series ofspecialized studies, such as the recent

Origen and the Jews,2

before a synthesis on the Greek Fathersand Judaism is even attempted. To draw conclusions from inferences and general statements is to perpetuate misunderstandings. The problem with themes like the present is, indeed, howto interpret various sermonary pronouncements and rhetoricalremarks made by different authors, for diverse occasions andfor a variety ofaudiences in the course ofmany centuries.

"Jews and Judaism.in the Early Greek Fathers" is a verylarge topic, and it cannot be treated exhaustively in the confnesof a conference ofthis nature. Therefore, what I have to offer isonly an overview. For our purpose I have selected Greek Fathers and ecclesiastical writers ofdifferent geographical areasand ofdiverse theological schools in the first five centuries ofour era.

The attitude ofthe Greek Fathers toward Jews and Judaism

should be examined in the context ofthe religious climate andthe historical milieu in which they lived. The chronologicalperiod between the Apostolic Fathers and the Cha leed o nia

A paper delivered at tha annual Conference of Christians and Jews in Philadelphia,Pa., May, 1977.

1. Robert Wilde, The Treatmentof the Jews in the GreekChristian Writersofthe First Three Centuries (Washington, D.C., 1949). For a comprehensive summary

of the attitude of the Greek Fathers toward Jews and Judaism see alsoA.C. McGiffert, Dklogue between a Christian and a Jew(New York, 1889), pp. 1-20.

2. N.R.M. deLange, Origen andthe Jews(Cambridge, 1976).


2/12

146 The Greek Orthodox Theological Review

Fathers was a period of cosmogonie events. Political upheavals,social changes, intellectual reorientations, the quest for new

moral and spiritual values, the crisis of the third century andbreakup of the unity of the Mediterranean world, and thedecline of the ancient and emergence of the medieval mindaffected the psyche and the outlook of all. One crisis afteranother gave rise to eschatological expectations and the searchfor scapegoats. Religious antagonisms, conversions, polemicaland apologetic controversies, intolerance and theological self-

righteousness had replaced the religious syncretism and tolerance which prevailed for several centuries in the Hellenisticand Roman worlds. Jewish exclusiveness was inherited byChristianity, which had come to claim possession of absolutetruth and of a special election. In the struggle between Christianity, Judaism, and the Greco-Roman pantheon, Judaismwas humiliated, Greek and Roman paganism vanished and wentunderground to reemerge later in cultic forms, while Christianity emerged as the victor and the dominant religion of theWestern world.

The Greek Fathers were the product of those transitionalyears, and they bear all the characteristics of the mind and theethos of the times in which they functioned. It can be statedfrom the outset that only a few of the Greek Fathers wrotesystematic diatribes against or apologies for the Jews as a peopleor against Judaism as a religion. Most Greek Fathers incidentallyreferred to Jews and Judaism. Furthermore, it should beemphasized that at no time were the Jews and Judaism singledout for either kinder or more ruthless treatment than wasaccorded to other religious minorities and creeds during the firstfive centuries of our era. Those of the Greek Fathers who dealtwith non-Christian subjects and faiths wrote just as much

against Jews and Judaism as they wrote against "Hellenes" andHellenism, pagans, heretics, and schismatics alike. They condemned the "superstitions of, the Jews" with as much zealas they attacked "the gods and the wisdom of the Hellenes";they opposed Judaism for the same reason that they objected toGreek, Roman, Persian, or any other religious faith.

To be sure, Jews and Judaism were condemned by a number

of Greek Fathers but, as far as the Fathers were concerned, theopponents of Christianity were not only the Jews and Judaism


3/12

JEWS AND JUDAISMIN THE BATHERS

but every non-Christian and non-Christian religion and creed.

The Greek Fathers did not single out Judaism, but they madethe whole non-Christian world their target. Their hostility,whether in the form ofa mild antipathy or violent reaction, wasdirected toward all the non-Christian world. The Jewish nation,however, was condemned because it had rejected Jesus, whowas perceived by the Jewish Christians as the Messiah. TheChristian Community was born in the bosom of Judaism, and

yet it was repudiated and persecuted by the Jews. When Christians and Jews separated and each community followed itsown course, polemics were initiated by both sides.

Evidence confirms that we cannot speak of one uniform ormonolithic position of the Greek Fathers toward Jews andJudaism. There were various and diverse attitudes and standsnot only among the Greek Fathers collectively, but also amongthe Fathers of the same ecclesiastical climate, the same theological school, and the same geographical district. Thus therewere differences among the Apostolic Fathers, the Apologists,the Alexandrians, the Antiochians, the Cappadocians, and soon. Notwithstanding the diversity, there are certain commondenominators that underlie their treatment ofJews and Judaism.

Not all Jews were invariably criticised or condemned. Afterall many of them were Christians. Few Greek fathers held all

Jews collectively responsible or guilty for the death of Jesus.When Jews were condemned, they were blamed because eventhough they had enjoyed the favor and the trust of God, theyhad betrayed the Almighty by persecuting his messengers, theprophets. There was both pity for and denunciation of thoseJews who stubbornly refused to recognize, in the person ofJesus, the expected Messiah. Several Fathers criticised the Jews

for arrogance and exclusiveness, for self-righteousness andsuperstition.

Concerning Judaism as a religion, the Greek Fathers viewed itas the most important vehicle of God's revelation to mankindbefore Christ. But for them, Judaism had fulfilled its propaedeutic mission, and it was expected to give way to Christianity.Certain fathers attacked Judaism for its rituals, sects, cele

brations, and practices, such as the rite of circumcision, theTrumpets of the New Year, the Tabernacle, the Fasts, thecharms, and amulets. But as a whole, Jews and Judaism fared


4/12


much better in the writings ofthe Greek Fathers than the paganHellenes, the heretics, the Manichaeans, and other religious

minorities and creeds.The Jews as a people and Judaism as a religion are eitherignored or seldom mentioned by the Apostolic Fathers. Whenthey are noted, they are usually discussed in connection withthe Judaizer Christians. While the Apostolic Fathers drew someof their teachings from several Old Testament books, they didnot feel that they borrowed from the Jewish heritage for theyconsidered the events and the personalities of the Old Testament of universal significance and as a patrimony of their ownheritage.

Clement of Rome writes nothing negative about Judaism. Infact, he finds in Old Testament personalities prototyped of thevirtuous life, peace, and harmony. Prophets are highly-regardedand are called "Leiturgoi charitos" or "servants of grace."3 Eventhough there was a suspicion, if not a conviction, that Jews

provoked in part the persecution of the Christians underDomitian, Clement makes no use of the rumors. The onlyrepudiation of the Jews that we find in Clement is when hecompares them with the Christians. The latter have replaced theJews in the relationship between God and mankind, and Jewscan no longer make claims to exclusiveness and special relationship with God.4

Ignatios of Antioch has been one of the most influential ofthe Apostolic Fathers. He refers to the Jews and Judaism ingeneral terms. His specific polemics were directed against theJudaizer Christians. For example, he attacked their keeping ofthe Sabbath instead of the Lord's Day,5 their dependence onthe tradition and the archives of the ancients instead of the

kerygma about Christ.6 Once a Jew becomes a Christian, he no

longer needs to observe Judaism. For Ignatios, Judaism andChristianity were two different faiths, and Christianity was theolder of the two because Christ as God pre-existed the Patriarchs, Moses, and the Fathers of Judaism. He emphasized

3. First Epistle to the Corinthians 4.7-18.

4. Ibid., 29, 30; cf. Stanley S. Harakas, "The Relationship of Church andSynagogue in the Apostolic Fathers," St. Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly, 11.3 (1967),124-26. Wilde.

5. Magnesians 9:1.

6. Ignatios, Philadelphia^ 8:3.


5/12

JEWS AND JUDAISM IN THE FATHERS 149

that since Christianity antedated Judaism, it did not base its

faith on Judaism but Judaism relied on Christianity.

Since Christianity is all encompassing and supersedes Judaism, Ignatios advised: "Should anyone expound Judaism,

do not listen to him. It is preferable, surely, to listen to a

drcumcized man preaching Christianity than to an uncircum-

cized man preaching Judaism." The task of both, the uncircum-

cized and the circumcized, was to preach Christ.7 Therefore it is

absurd to talk of Jesus Christ and at the same time to practice

Judaism, observing the rituals, keeping the Sabbath, honoring

tradition.

Everyone who professed faith in God was in a state of grace

and a Christian, even though he lived before the incarnation of

Christ. Thus the Old Testament prophets, who lived in accord

ance with the ways of Christ, who announced His coming, who

hoped in Him, who were persecuted for Him, "won the full

approval of Him."8 They-were Christians before the coming of

Christ.

Along with the prophets, Jesus, too, was persecuted and

crucified, but Ignatios did not place the blame on any one

person or people. The crucifixion was part of God's plan, and

the purpose of Jesus* death was to draw to Himself saints from

among all nations, Jews as well as Gentiles.9 Ignatios viewed Ju

daism, especially the prophets, as God's instruments for the

salvation of humankind, but mankind's expectations have foundtheir fulfillment in Christ.10 Ignatios' understanding of Juda

ism appears like a refrain in the writings of many Christian

authors.

It can be said that the prototype for Ignatios and other

Fathers, in their attitude towards Jews and Judaism, was Paul

the Hellenized Jew, citizen of the Roman Empirewho had

stood above Hellenism, Judaism, and Rome. Like Paul, theyattacked the literal interpretation of the law and saw in Christ

the fulfillment of all prophecies and God's promises. Even

though the Ekklesia and the Synagoge were rivals, the earlyEkklesia was a reformed Synagoge. The Fathers were concernedless with condemnation of the Jews and more with the need to

7. Ignatios, Philadelphians 6.

8. Ignatios, Magnesians 8 and 10.9. Ignatios, Smy means 10.

10. Ignatios, Magnesians 9:1-2.


6/12


transform Judaism in the light of Christianity.The author of a tract on Judaism which has survived under

the name of Barnabas is one of the harsher repudiators ofJudaism. The unknown author extensively used the allegoricalmethod and was greatly influenced by Philo the Jew. He is over-zealous in his Christian faith and seeks to demonstrate that theJews misinterpreted the law because they interpreted it literally.Even though scholarship has not established the author'sidentity, his use of the allegorical method and Philo's influenceindicate that he came from Alexandria and that he might have

been a convert from Judaism. Let us note in passing that someof the harshest attacks on Jews and Judaism came from Jewishconverts to Christianity.

Another Apostolic father, the anonymous author of theEpistle to Diognetos, is critical of both Jews and Judaism, buthe is no more caustic toward Jews and Judaism than he istoward the Greeks and Greek religion. He acknowledges that

the Jews are different in the sense that they believe in one God.But their sacrifices, their attachment toritual,their superstitions,and their burnt offerings make them in no way better thanthose who show the same respect to deaf-mute images. Furthermore the author ridicules the tedious Jewish attitude towardfood, their superstitious attitudes toward the Sabbath, and theirpride in circumcision, the feast of the new moon, and other

practices. He writes:And what does it deserve but ridicule to be proud of themutilation of the flesh [circumcision] as a proof of election, as if they were, for this reason, especially belovedby God? And their attention to the stars and moon, forthe observance of months and days, and for their arbitrarydistinctions between the changing seasons ordained by

God, making some into feasts, and others into occasions ofmourning-who would regard this as proof of piety, andnot much more of foolishness.11

The anonymous author considered many Jewish practicessilly and condemned the Jews for deceit, fussiness, and pride.To what degree that author was well-informed about Jewishpractices in the second or the third century, we cannot discuss

here. The fact is that here we have a panegyric on Christian

11. The Epistle to Diognetos 3, 4.


7/12


beliefs and character and an exposition of the inadequacies ofboth the Greek and Jewish religions. The Greeks were condemned for foolishness and the Jews for superstition and, ina way, for foolishness, too. Both nations are guilty ofpersecuting the Christians. "They are warred upon by the Jewsas foreigners and are persecuted by the Greeks who... cannot

state the cause of their enmity."12

The Jews were invariablycondemned when they sided with

the Roman authorities and the gentiles in the early persecutions

of the Christians.13

In some of those persecutions the Jews are

described as more fanatic and "extremely zealous" in assisting

in the workofthe persecutors.

The author of the Didache-The Teaching of the TwelveApostlesspeaks of the break between the Christian Ekklesiaand the Jewish Synagoge and indicates that a widening gulfseparates them but he does not indulge in any anti-Jewish oranti-Judaism statements.

14

The first systematic and the oldest apology for Christianityand repudiation of the Jews is "The Dialogue with Trypho" byJustin the Philosopher and Martyr. Justin's concern is to defendChristianity and explain it to both Jews and Hellenes. ForJustin the Old Testament had a propaedeutic purpose and theMosaic law only a temporary jurisdiction. In discussing the OldTestament, Justin selects passages which indicate that Israel was

rejected by God and the "Gentiles" were chosen in Israel'splace. He writes that the truth is to be found with Moses andthe prophets, but vestiges of the true knowledge ofGod can befound in the teachings and writings of the Greek philosophersand thinkers as well.

15

While some early apocryphal writers, such as the author ofthe Gospel According to Peter, place the responsibility for the

death of Jesus exclusively on the Jews, Justin placed the blameon the demons who blinded and instigated the Jews to inflict thesufferings on Jesus.Among the early writers of Alexandria, Origen was the most

12. Ibid.

13. Martyrdom ofPolycarp 12,13.

14. Didache 8:3, 8:1;cf. Harakas, pp.

126-27.

15. Foi Justin's attitude toward the Mosaic law see the penetrating monographof Theodore Stylianopoulos, Justin Martyrand the Mosaic Law (Scholars Press,1975). For Justin's attitude toward the Jews see pp. 32-44.


8/12


prolifc and the most tolerant ofall. Modern scholarship on thesubject confirms Origen's sympathies and debt to Judaism

Origen personally knew several Jewish teachers of his time. Hemakes use of Jewish methods in his exegesis of the OldTestament and gives a sympathetic view of the Jews and theirrelations with non-Jews. Modern scholarship reveals that there isa substantial influence of Jewish thought on Origen.16 The Jewhave a long tradition of Biblical exegesis, and Origen as well asother Biblical commentators borrowed from Jews in their

interpretation of the Old Testament. But in certain areas,especially in their interpretation ofprophecy, the Greek Fatherswent far beyond Jewish exegesis.17

The attitude of several Church Fathers changed afterChristianity became the state religion in 392 under Theodosios I.The most polemical of them came from cities or districts withlarge Jewish populations-Antioch, Caesarea in Palestine, and

Alexandria. John Chrysostom, the fiery preacher of Antioch,Eusebios of Caesarea, and Cyril of Alexandria devoted specialtreatises and wrote extensively about Jews and Judaism. On theone hand they tried to protect their own flock from Jewishinfluences, and on the other they intended to make converts ofthe Jews.

St. John Chrysostom, as presbyter in Antioch, deliveredmany sermons in which he is critical ofthe Jews as a people. Infact, Chrysostom was more critical than most Greek Fathersfrom any geographical region. He criticized the Jews for pride,arrogance, malice, vainglory, hypocrisy, betrayal and ingratitude,covetousness, exclusiveness, and reliance on their descent.John's arguments are based not only on the fact that they didnot receive Christ but also on the treatment that the OldTestament prophets received from them. He condemned their

pride and arrogance which, in his eyes, had no justification. Forexample, Chrysostom exclaimed in the following words: "Whydo you exalt yourself, O Jew? Why are you so arrogant? You,like all the world, are guilty, and, like others, are placed in needof being justified freely." He reminds the Jews of Antioch that"pride is the beginning of sin" and "every one who is proud inheart is an abomination to the Lord," citing the books of

16. N.M.R. deLange, pp. 1-2.

17. Ibid., pp. 133-35.


9/12


Ecclesiastes and the Proverbs (Eccles. 10:13; Prov. 16:5).For their haughtiness and pride, resulting from their belief

that they were the chosen people of God, as well as for paradingAbraham's name as evidence of their origin and of their virtue,the Jews were ridiculed by churchmen such as Chrysostom.These evil attributes were considered to be the source of God'sdispleasure and of the troubles that the Jews had with othernations.19 To what degree the Jews of Chrysostom's timesbehaved arrogantly and how much of Chrysostom's

condemnation rests on undisputed evidence are questionsbeyond the purpose of this paper. Nevertheless, Chrysostomrelied on the words of Jesus, who himself condemnedrepeatedly the continual references* and appeals of hiscompatriots to their ancestry and to Abraham in particular.Actually, Chrysostom was repeating a well establishedstereotype.

Even though Chrysostom did not attribute the guilt for thecrucifixion of Jesus to all Jews, he described Jewish justice inthe trial of Jesus before the chief priest Caiaphas asperverted.20 He condemned the Jews at the trial who cried outto Pilate "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Mat. 27:25),but he did not accept it as a curse which affected the life oflater generations. In the words of Chrysostom: 4The lover ofman, though the Jews acted with so much madness, both

against themselves and against their children so far from confirming their sentence upon their children, confirmed it noteven on them . . . and counts them worthy of good thingsbeyond number."21 Nevertheless, Chrysostom regarded theJews present at the trial and the crucifixion as "authors of thespiteful acts done by the [Roman] soldiers. . . becomingaccusers, and judges, and executioners."22

It should be noted that Chrysostom was not less critical ofHellenes or heretics. His criticism emanated from his desire tosee all in the fold ofthe Christian Ekklesia, to see "the heathenand the Jews . . . come to the right faith.'03 There is very little

18. John Chrysostom, Homilies on St. John, No. 10.2.

19. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew, No. 3.3.

20. Ibid., No. 84.2.

21. Ibid., No. 86.2.22. Ibid., No. 87.1.

23. Ibid., No. 28.19-20.


10/12


evidence that Chrysostom's condemnation of the Jews wasmotivated by the crucifixion. For him, the rejection ofChrist as

the Messiah meant rejection ofMoses and the Prophets.Chrysostom's homilies against the Jews were intended

primarily for his Christian flock and only incidentally for Jews.It should be noted that when Chrysostom delivered his famoushomilies, the Jews of Antioch were still an influential powerengaged even in proselytism.24 Chrysotom tried to protect hisflock from their influence, and in his pastoral zeal he was driven

to hyperbole.Chrysostom wrote, of course, a specific but incompletetreatise against the Jews. But this, too, was not intended exclusively for them. The Greek name of his essay is translatedinto English as "A Demonstration to Jews and Greeks ThatChrist Is God, From the Sayings Concerning Him Everywhere inthe Prophets." In this essay Chrysostom writes that the Jewshave been punished for their rejection of the Messiah and fortheir treatment of Christ.25

Another Antiochian, who wrote a special diatribe against theJews, was Theodoretos, who became bishop of Cyrus. Histreatise, however, is lost. It is only from surviving letters that wecan infer what he had to say about the Jews. The main purposeof his Contra Judaeos was to show "that the prophets foretoldChrist."26

Perhaps the most zealous polemicist among the GreekFathers not only against Jews, Judaism, Hellenes, and Hellenismbut against all heretics, schismatics, and opponents was Cyril ofAlexandria. His intemperate polemic against paganism andJudaism, as well as other dissidents, is evident in many of hiswritings, especially in his Paschal Letters.27 He was uncharitablenot only to Jews, pagans, Novatians, and other non-Christian

faiths and Christian heresies, but also to adversaries and theological antagonists. He was responsible for the Greek philosopher Hypatia's death as he was responsible for the expulsionofthe Jewish inhabitants of Alexandria.28

24. Cf. Socrates, Eccl. Hist. 7.16,17.

25. Homilies,?.G.48:843-942.

26. Epistle 145.

27. P.G. 77:401-982.

28. Socrates, Eccl. Hist. 7.12,13.


11/12


Some of the Fathers did not write directly against Jews andJudaism, and though they glow with enthusiasm for Christianity

they do not indulge in any systematic polemics. For example,Eusebios of Caesarea is critical of Judaism, but he wrote againstJudaism in order to answer accusations of the Jews that theChristians accepted Judaism's blessings promised for the Jewsthemselves without accepting the obligations ofthe law. But forEusebios the Mosaic Law was given as a temporary economy, toserve as the guide for a transition between the Age of thePatriarchs and the Age of Christ.29 Even these observations werenot directed as a polemic against the Jews but the whole treatiseof Demonstratio Evangelica was aimed at Porphyry's essay

Against the Christians.Certain Greek Fathers such as Athanasios30 and Basil viewed

Judaism as a Trojan Horse which tried to infiltrate Christianityand undermine its doctrines of the Trinity or the divinity ofChrist through heresies that derived from it. To deny the

divinity of Christ meant to deny the possibility of the divination of man through Christ. The God-made-man event meantthe man-made-God result. Christian heresies such as Sabellianismand Monarchianism drew their arguments from Judaism. Theystressed the Monarchy of God the Father and taught that Jesusis either a manifestation of the God of the Old Testament in theNew Testament, or a power of the Old Testament God. But

denial of the incarnation ofGod meant denial of the deificationofman.

The early Fathers of the Eastern Roman Empire, thought ofGreek origin or of Greek cultural and intellectual background,or simply Greek speaking persons, viewed Christianity as a faithand way of life above racial and cultural boundaries. As religious persons they were neither Greek nor Jewish. For them

Greeks and Jews were united in the Messiah, who destroyed theenmity between the two. As the cosmopolitan Paul ofTarsus (aHellenized Jew, citizen of Rome) wrote to the small GreekChristian Community of Ephesos: "Remember that at one timeyou Gentiles in the flesh . . . were . . . alienated from theCommonwealth of Israel... But now in Christ Jesus... youhave been brought near to us in the blood of Christ... He hasmade us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of

29. Demonstratio Evangelica and 2.

30. Athanasios, Against the Arians 1.38.


12/12


hostility,.. .that he might create in himself one new humanbeing in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcileus both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringingthe hostility to an end" (Eph. 2:11-16).

On the whole, the attitude of the Greek Fathers toward Jewsand Judaism was determined by the New Testament writings.Christians represented the new breed, the reborn humanity, andit was on that basis that church Fathers condemned all those

who stubbornly refused to see "the new humanity" and insistedon the old dividing wall between Greeks and Jews, Gentilesand Israelites.

To summarize: The Jews as a people were treated no differently from other people. Judaism as a religion introducedby Moses had only a temporary mission. The law ofMoses wasgiven as a propaedeutic instrument, while the law ofChrist was

perceived as the new and eternal covenant with universaljurisdiction. The old Israel of the Old Testament betrayed thetrust of God, who removed his promises and replaced the oldwith the new Israel, the believers and followers of Christ.

According to the collective mind of the Greek Fathers,31

Christian truth antedates Christ. The Old Testament prophets,as well as some Greek philosophers and thinkers who wrote

about the Logos, were Christians before Christ. Thus Jews andGreeks were admonished to dispense with their old beliefs andpractices and adopt the new dispensation. It was under the influence of this mind that the Greek Fathers expected both"gentiles" and "barbarians" to merge and become a newhumanity,"a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation."32

jews & judaism in greek fathers.pdf

Documents