 I have just enjoyed one of the most exciting and rewarding weeks of my rabbinic career.
It began with an invitation to Canterbury to co-lead a session on Jewish-Christian relations as part of the Lambeth Conference.
The two-hour slot was allocated to the Council of Christians and Jews – I am one of their two Jewish Presidents. My task was to give a lecture on the theology of Christian-Jewish relations. This was followed by discussion on the practical implications, led by my friend and colleague Rabbi Danny Rich, the Chief Executive of Liberal Judaism.
Since the 650 Bishops of the Anglican communion had been over-programmed and it was the first sunny afternoon without an obligatory plenary, our session did not require the largest lecture hall that the University of Kent possesses. The group, however, was extremely interesting and included the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, a Palestinian.
Whilst my Jewish Co-President, Chief Rabbi Sacks, presented the urbane, erudite, public face of orthodox Judaism to all the delegates at a plenary, I was encouraged to play a very different role as the risk taker who is ‘permitted’ to engage at a theological level.
As I explained to the group, my experience comes out of dialogue groups which have lasted for years and built intimate relationships of friendship and trust. Exposing myself in the context of a one-off group of strangers was high risk indeed.
I began by describing the personal experiences that had led me to the deep conviction that God does not want Christians to become Jews; that our different prayers are heard, ultimately, by the same God; that the New Testament is a book of revelation; that Christians also stand in a covenantal relationship with God; that Christianity is fully entitled to its own theological space.
I also suggested that we are siblings – with all of the consequences implicit in my recognising that Christians are my brothers and sisters, children of the same father, Abraham.
Finally, I acknowledged the difficulties that Christians experience with Israel, having themselves given up the concept of land. I acknowledged the challenge to Anglicans of having a significant part of the Anglican communion in East Jerusalem and Bethlehem and a tradition of bias in favour of the poor, needy and oppressed.
The group was clearly moved.
In the closing pages of my lecture, I suggested to them that there were consequences to my theology and that I expected of them similar empathy and radicality. I said that Jews also demand independent theological space – with an end to conversion, supersessionism and any suggestion that Judaism is not an equally valid source of salvation. I pointed out that if we are siblings, then I want to be treated in the way one sibling should treat another – not as identical but as an equal and with love and respect. I emphasised that whilst Christianity may have moved beyond ‘holy land’, Judaism has a geography as well as a history. We expect to be allowed to be ourselves and not subjected to attack and criticism for not sharing the same understanding of land as Christianity. I mentioned the problems Christians have had with the exercise of power over the last 1500 years!
We all face an enormous threat – from fundamentalists who are destroying the good name of religion and we, faithful Jews, Christians (and Muslims), currently the most dysfunctional family in the world, needed to collaborate for the sake of humanity and the globe. I ended by calling for an unequivocal rejection of the fundamentalism that has so damaged the three Abrahamic faiths and said, “I am your brother and Our Father so needs us to love one another and collaborate for the good of humanity and the globe”.
The group was still clearly moved. They said so during the discussion. Including the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed