1. Nostra Aetate is a Vatican Two document and must be interpreted and implemented in accord with all the other documents of Vatican Two. Any interpretation or claim based on Nostra Aetate is in error if it contradicts other Vatican Two documents.

2. Pope Paul VI established a Vatican Commission to implement Nostra Aetate and placed this Commission under the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity — which is significant in itself.

This Commission has issued three official documents providing the authentic Magisterial norms for implementing Nostra Aetate. These official documents have repeated emphatically that the Church, BY HER NATURE, must proclaim Christ. This is integral to the Church’s nature and cannot change.

3. All people are called by God to sincere conversion of heart: this was the theme of the Great Jubilee. No individual Catholic or group should be concerned with targeting anyone for conversion. Pope John Paul II made this very clear in the Great Jubilee: God’s call to personal conversion is universal. God converts people; the Church’s mission — and the mission of every individual Catholic — is to proclaim Christ.

4. Honest theological dialogue must be based on the true identity of those involved. The Church’s true identity is stated in #2 above.

5. Pope John Paul II issued an Encyclical, Redemptoris Missio — 25 years after Nostra Aetate — to clarify the Church’s mission to evangelize and the role of dialogue in this mission. Less than one year after the Encyclical was issued, a clarification was published jointly by the Pontifical Council for Evangelization and for Non-Christian Religions. Both the Encyclical and the official clarification stated that dialogue is a form of evangelization and is included in the Church’s mission. In other words, the papal Encyclical and the clarifying document both affirmed that the Church’s mission is to proclaim Christ. Dialogue with Jews is an acceptable means of this mission when the Church’s true identity is evident. Any attempt to silence proclamation of the Gospel — whether in honest dialogue or otherwise — is contrary to all contemporary Magisterial Teaching.

6. Jews do not agree with each other on what it means to be Jewish. The Cathollic Church is not clear about what it means by the term “Jew.” Neither Catholics nor Jews are clear about the meaning of the terms: “Jew,” “Jewish,” and “Judaism.” However, it is universally agreed that Jesus of Nazareth is Jewish. The Holy Family is Jewish. The Twelve Apostles were all Jewish. Jesus and His disciples practiced Judaism and their followers practiced Judaism for many years after Jesus was crucified.

7. Catholics AND Jews must enter again into the Jewish dialogue of the first century between the Jewish followers of Jesus and the Jews who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah of Israel. We must enter into this dialogue with wisdom and compassion born from 2000 years of hatred and violence (from the crucifixion of Jesus to the slaughter of millions by anti-Jewish Europeans). We must enter into an honest theological dialogue knowing that God calls every person to conversion.

8. We must ask: who is Jesus of Nazareth? Is He the Promised Messiah of Israel, the King of the Jews, or should we look for another? Israel Zolli was the Chief Rabbi of Rome during WWII and he asked these questions. We must follow Zolli in openly seeking answers to the question: Who is Jesus of Nazareth? Zolli remained Jewish when he professed that Jesus of Nazareth is the Suffering Servant spoken of by Isaiah, the Jewish Lamb of God who takes away everyone’s sins.

9. When Jesus was asked what is the greatest commandment, He quoted the Shema (from Deuteronomy): “Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and might.” All are called to love God. Jesus proclaimed the Good News of Salvation; the Church, by Her nature, must proclaim the Good News of God’s boundless and eternal merciful love for all people.

March 15, Solemnity of Saint Joseph, Husband of the Blessed Virgin, 2008

Theological dialogue with Judaism has been one of Joseph Ratzinger’s priorities for many years. As Pope, he worked through his vacation to finish his response to Rabbi Jacob Neusner’s 1993 book, A Rabbi Talks with Jesus. George Weigel wrote, in God’s Choice, his 2005 book on Ratzinger’s election to the Papacy, “Pope John Paul II wanted to reconvene this dialog [with Judaism] that was broken off in 70 AD.” Pope Benedict has “reconvened this dialog” with his new book, Jesus of Nazareth.
In 2007, Remnant of Israel and the Dallas Chapter of Catholics United for the Faith, launched a continuing seminar on First Century Judaism at Catholic colleges and universities, and online. These ongoing seminars were inspired by the following thesis:

Theological dialogue with Judaism is urgent today because Jesus and His Apostles, Apostolic Tradition and Sacred Scripture – the entire Deposit of Faith, are Jewish. Jesus and the Apostles came to perfect and to preach Judaism, not to replace it; they did not start a new religion, but remained faithful to Judaism.
The current, ongoing dialogue between the American Rabbi and the German Pope focuses on Matthew’s account of the events involving Jesus of Nazareth that shook the foundations of Judaism in the First Century AD. The subject of the 2008–2009 First Century Judaism Seminars will be Matthew’s account of Jesus.

Now, we are also launching a series of extraordinary 20th Century Judaism Seminars. The first of these, April 5 2008, at the University of Dallas in Irving, Texas (droginmark@yahoo.com for details), features Dr. Robert Moynihan, Editor of Inside the Vatican magazine, and Dr. Nathan Schmiedicke, Editor of the First Century Judaism Seminar and Scripture Professor at St. Charles Borromeo Archdiocesan Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

This April 5 seminar on 20th Century Judaism will examine the issues leading to the dialogue between Rabbi Neusner and Pope Benedict; and this will prepare for a much deeper study of Matthew’s Gospel in the subsequent First Century Judaism Seminars.

20th Century Judaism Seminar
Saturday April 5, 2008, 10 am to 1 pm; University of Dallas, Art History Building
Admission is free. Space is limited.

Sponsors:
Remnant of Israel and St. Stephen the Martyr Chapter, Catholics United for the Faith

Please distribution this to all who may be interested.
Thank you,
Mark Drogin

But the Apostles all proclaimed with authority – in union with Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture – that, surprisingly, the Suffering Servant is the Davidic King who reigns over the restored universal Kingdom of Israel. This is the heart of “the theological dialogue that was broken off in 70 AD.”

Our key to reconvening this theological dialogue is in the Remnant of Israel foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul of Tarsus wrote to the Romans shortly before 70 AD: “Only a Remnant will be saved,” and “even now, there is a Remnant being saved.”

Beginning with the Acts of the Apostles, we will launch our continuing First-Century Judaism Seminar April 28. A second Seminar on Acts is scheduled for September of this year; then, we will continue to hold Seminars twice a year.

Saturday, April 28, 2007, 9:00 am to 4:30 pm, at the University of Dallas

Click the links below to view the presentations from the seminar:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Moderator: Dr. William Frank
Presenter: Stephen Pimentel, author of Witnesses of the Messiah and Envoy of the Messiah, Emmaus Road Publishing.
(Background on Stephen can be found at his website: stephenpimentel.com.)
Respondent: Mark Drogin, President of Remnant of Israel.

There is no charge to attend this Seminar. Registration is required. Space is limited to first 50 registrants. Lunch will be provided at no charge to participants.

Dinner: Saturday evening 6 pm. $15 per person, reservations required.

Seminar Schedule for April 28:

9:00 AM Introduction: Reconvening the Theological Dialogue (Mark Drogin)

The Suffering of the Remnant: Hellenism and the Maccabean Revolt
• Seleucid Persecution
• Revolt of the Maccabees
• The Sadducees
• The Essenes

9:40 Response: Mark Drogin
9:50 Discussion

10:00 Defining the Remnant: Holiness as Separation, Holiness as Charity
• The Pharisees
• Cleansing and Forgiveness of Sins
• Table-Fellowship and the Ministry of Jesus
• Table-Fellowship and Luke 15

10:40 Response: Mark Drogin
10:50 Discussion

11:30 Mass

12:30 – 2:00 PM Lunch Break

2:00 The Life of the Remnant: the Spirit and the Law
• Law Written on the Heart (Jer 31)
• Gift of the Spirit (Ezek 36)
• Pentecost and Prophecy (Acts 2, Is 11)
• New Covenant (2 Cor 3)

2:40 Response: Mark Drogin
2:50 Discussion

3:00 Opening the Remnant: the Abolition of Separation (Acts 10-11)
• Cleansing the World
• Fellowship with Gentiles
• The Good News
• The Sovereign Spirit

3:40 Response: Mark Drogin

Sponsored by:
Remnant of Israel, PO Box 142633, Irving, TX 75014-2633
www.firstcenturyjudaism.com
Phone: (214) 886-8971
Email: droginmark@yahoo.com

by George A. Morton

The unique gathering of Jewish Catholics in Washington DC last month proclaimed a profound message: all the Jewish Catholics – including the five speakers – proudly profess that they maintain their Jewish identity after entering the Catholic Church. The event was the first in a series; the next conference is scheduled for New York City March 19-20.

The title of the Washington DC conference was “Jews In the Church: More Jewish Than Ever!” It was held at the Catholic Information Center, near the White House, on Saturday December 11, and hosted by Remnant of Israel. Mark Drogin, President of Remnant of Israel and organizer of the conference, gave the day’s first talk. Drogin announced that Jewish Catholics speak with one voice in proclaiming:

We believe Jesus is the Jewish Messiah. We find the fullness of Judaism in the Catholic Church. We are proud to profess our fidelity to the Magisterium. And we are proud to proclaim that we are even more Jewish now than we were before we were Catholics.

“This is the Jewish-Catholic Dialogue the Church must pursue at this time,” Drogin explained. “The Vatican has been calling for a genuine dialogue of faith with Jews. We are Jews who know, with the certainty of Faith, that Jesus is Israel’s Messiah. Should we be excluded from this genuine dialogue of faith? On the contrary, fruitful Jewish-Catholic dialogue must begin with the Apostles and with Jews today who see, with the eyes of Faith, that Jesus came to save the Jewish People. Edith Stein is a canonized Saint: should we exclude her witness?”

Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican, served as Master of Ceremonies for the event. Moynihan and Drogin have closely followed the progress, in recent years, of Jewish-Catholic dialogue – and, specifically, the role of the Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with Jews. Drogin, however, admitted that when he began planning this Remnant of Israel conference, he was not aware that the President of the Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with Jews, Cardinal Walter Kasper, would present a keynote address on Jewish-Catholic dialogue during the same week of Advent. The similarities – and differences – of themes for these two events are noteworthy.

In his address on December 6, Cardinal Kasper referred to a new “theology after Auschwitz” as “a fundamental theological reevaluation.” [1] The horror of the Second World War and “the feeling of shame over Christian anti-Judaism,” according to Cardinal Kasper, have “led to a revision of the Christian relationship to Judaism… a change of perspective which can only be described as an epoch-making break with the past.” [2] Kasper presented this thesis to the Centre for the Study of Jewish-Christian Relations, at Boston College in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

“Nostra Aetate was a necessary and a good new beginning,” the Cardinal explained, but it “was of course only the beginning of a new beginning. We are only at the start of a new start of a ‘Christian Theology of Judaism’…. Many decisive questions still remain open.” [3]

What is this new “Christian Theology of Judaism” that “can only be described as an epoch-making break with the past”? And what are the “many decisive questions still remain[ing] open”? This effort, Cardinal Kasper proposed, “allows us to take up Romans 11 anew so that we can approach an answer to the question which occupies us here.” [4]

The group of Jewish Catholics gathered in Washington DC also examined a “Christian Theology of Judaism.” Even though the group in Washington had a different starting point and a different approach, it also recognized that any Christian Theology of Judaism must go through Romans 11.

Cardinal Kasper, in his address in Boston, posed the “decisive questions still remaining open” at least three different times. Kasper’s third articulation referred to “two theories developed during the past decades: the One Covenant Theory and the Two Covenant Theory.” [5] The Cardinal quickly pointed out that these theories are inadequate: “The relationship of Judaism to Christianity is thus so complex both historically and theologically that it cannot be reduced to one of the two theories or to a formula which is valid for all time.” [6]

When asked about these theories, Mark Drogin said, “these theories are confusing and distracting at best. Discussion of these theories often implies that Jews may be saved without Christ. To imply that anyone may be saved without Christ is an occasion of grave scandal to the Faithful because it is a direct contradiction of our Faith.”

Drogin quickly added that “Cardinal Kasper identified the approach needed for our proper understanding of the Church’s identity in the third millennium: it must be based on Romans 11. The Cardinal explained that the ‘answer which Romans 11 gives us is not a theory, but rather an image.’ In Romans 11, Paul uses the image of the root of the olive tree into which the wild branches have been grafted.”

“With this image Paul resists any Christian triumphalism,” [7] Kasper emphasized. This should be clear, Drogin claims, to anyone sincerely seeking to know Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus, “but there remain in the Church – even today – many who fail to grasp this fundamental truth of our Faith, and Kasper rightly sees the need to emphasize it. Paul resists any triumphalism and we must also reject even a hint of Christian triumphalism,” Drogin added.

“Images have the advantage of being open to interpretation,” Cardinal Kasper explained. “Images can legitimately be applied interpretatively to different situations.” [8] Jews and Christians are different “but dependent on one another for the sake of their individual identity,” the Cardinal said. “They are like two brothers who have the same father.” [9]

Drogin’s opening talk at the conference in Washington DC, titled “Israel’s True Identity and Vocation,” explored this image of two brothers. Drogin suggested the Parable of the Prodigal Son as an image for the relationship of Jews and Gentiles within the People of God. Using the Hebrew Prophets, Drogin showed that the younger brother – the Prodigal Son – may be seen as an image of the Lost Tribes of Israel who have become as Gentiles. The assimilation among the Gentiles of the lost northern tribes was so complete that they were identified with the Gentiles and thus fit Paul’s image of the wild olive branches grafted onto the root.

The older son who stayed home, according to Drogin’s reading of the Parable, may be seen as the natural olive branches who naturally belong to the good olive tree. The Parable of the Prodigal Son in the Gospel of Luke is actually open-ended, without a conclusion, Drogin noted. “It ends with the Father inviting the older brother to come in and join in the celebration because all that the Father has belongs to the older brother. We don’t know if he comes in or not. This image agrees with the image in Romans 11 of the natural branches waiting to be grafted back onto the trunk.”

In addition to theological questions, the relation of the Church to Judaism in the third millennium raises important pastoral concerns. Cardinal Kasper pointed out what is needed here: “a similar process of rediscovery and reunion is in its initial stages in Jewish-Christian dialogue. This is not possible without repentance and rethinking. In the end the relationship of Israel and the Church is a mystery of election and judgement, of guilt and even greater grace.” [10]

The Cardinal asked his audience to think about the Church’s identity in our time. “A mystery is not an irrational entity which we are forbidden to think about, instead it is true that: ‘Fides quaerens intellectum’.” [11] The “continuing existence of Israel,” Cardinal Kasper concluded, “confronts us inevitably with God’s unconditional faithfulness to His People. The existence of the Church is also a mystery.” [12]

The Washington DC conference also addressed this mystery. The conference’s approach to the mystery of the Church was profound simply because more than half a dozen Jews gathered and with one voice proclaimed their fidelity to the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church, “And we are proud to proclaim that we are even more Jewish now than we were before we were Catholics.” The continuing – and, according to some, rapidly increasing – existence of Jews who proclaim they have found the Messiah in the Roman Catholic Church confronts us powerfully “with God’s unconditional faithfulness to His People.”

Remnant of Israel, the host of the Washington DC conference, was founded in 1976 by three Jewish Catholics to proclaim the Jewish roots of the Church. One of the founders, Father Arthur Klyber, C.Ss.R., wrote many articles and books on this subject, and labored tirelessly for more than seven decades to combat anti-Judaism in the Church. Klyber was born of Jewish parents in New York City in 1900, became a Catholic 20 years later, and a priest in 1932.

In February 1945, the Chief Rabbi of Rome, Eugenio Zolli, was secretly baptized in a private ceremony in the Vatican. The news leaked to the press and soon became an international incident. Father Klyber was a Redemptorist missionary preaching in the midwestern U.S. at the time. Klyber pieced together various wire service reports of the Chief Rabbi’s baptism and reported that, when asked if he still considered himself a Jew, Zolli answered, “Did Peter, James, John, Matthew, Paul and hundreds of Hebrews like them cease to be Jews when they followed the Messiah? Emphatically, no.” [13]

The conference in Washington DC took its theme from Father Klyber’s 1945 article on the Baptism of the Chief Rabbi of Rome:

It should be pointed out that a Jew who accepts the Messiah today remains just as much a Jew as he expects to remain if and when he shall accept a Messiah at some distant future coming. In other words, a Jew who accepts Jesus as his Messiah accepts a Jew, and himself remains a Jew. This may sound strange and even heterodox to Catholics who have only a surface knowledge of Jewish Prophetic history and Catholic teaching concerning it…. When a devout Jew becomes a follower of Jesus he changes neither his nationality, which is Hebrew, nor his religion, which is Judaism. He merely brings his religion to completion, as Zolli pointed out. This is why the former Rabbi was able to say that he had not given up the Synagogue for the Church, and that one could not exist without the other. [14]

Another article by Fr. Klyber, published in The Liguorian in March 1956, quoted a Dominican priest from Ireland, Fr. Vincent McNabb, O.P.: “We Catholics are the true Jews grown up. I am a true Jew. I want all Jews to come to the fulfillment of their religion in the Catholic Church: they have really a greater right to it than we Gentiles have.” [15]

Father Klyber, in retrospect, seemed ahead of his time. Years before Vatican Two, he lamented the lack of awareness among Catholics that “the Apostles and the other followers of Jesus considered themselves always as Jews… both Peter and Paul informed pagans that they were Jews…. It is notoriously true, though a bitter pill for the Jews to swallow, that those Jews who rejected Jesus as Messiah actually rejected the Jewish religion.” [16]

Other Jewish Catholics who spoke at the gathering on December 11 were Roy Schoeman, author of Salvation Is From the Jews (Ignatius, 2003); Ronda Chervin, philosophy professor and author of several books; David Moss, President of the Association of Hebrew Catholics; and Fr. Peter Sabbath, a Roman Catholic priest in the Diocese of Montreal, Canada. Fr. Sabbath was the main celebrant and homilist for the Mass during the conference. He began his homily by saying that he, like Fr. Klyber, was “proud to be a Jewish priest.”

Roy H. Schoeman, who spoke after Drogin, agrees that Romans 11 is central to understanding the mysterious relationship of the Church and Judaism in the third millennium. On the first page of his book, Salvation Is From the Jews, Schoeman begins his approach to this great mystery with a different question than Cardinal Kasper proposed.

A Jew who has become a Catholic is the best person to explore the true meaning of Judaism. To understand salvation history, one must be a Christian, since the Incarnation, death, and Resurrection of Christ are at the center of salvation history, and the fullness of the relevant doctrine is contained in the teaching of the Catholic Church. A Catholic who is not from a Jewish background would necessarily have a more abstract and incomplete understanding of Judaism than someone who grew up within Judaism. [17]

In thoughts very similar to the words of Cardinal Kasper, attendees at the Washington DC conference sensed that the continuing – and increasing – presence of Jews in the Church confronts us inevitably with God’s unconditional faithfulness to His People. There is truly a process of rediscovery and reunion in its initial stages and it is not possible without repentance and rethinking.

We are not as far removed – as Cardinal Kasper implied in his address on December 6 – from the thousands of Jews who followed Jesus in the first century. Many Jews – in every century since then – have sincerely and proudly professed the Catholic Faith. Roy Schoeman, in his book, documents many significant testimonies in the 19th and 20th centuries. In the 20th century we see a rapidly growing number of Jews in the Church including the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, Jean-Marie Cardinal Lustiger, Archbishop of Paris, and recently canonized St. Edith Stein. Will we see much larger numbers of Jews entering the Church in the days and years ahead? In his book, Schoeman cites considerable evidence for an affirmative answer to this question.

Jews and Catholics who sincerely seek truth agree on the urgency to understand our relationship in the divine Plan. “Paul himself in Romans 11,” concluded Cardinal Kasper, “indicates the direction of such an understanding; not a theory but a docta spes, an account of the hope (cf. 1 Pet 3:15f) which is certain that in the end Israel and the Church will be reunited (cf. Rom 11:26.32).” [18]

“For anyone open to the joyous surprises of divine providence,” Drogin noted, “and especially to any professional theologian who professes the Catholic Faith, we must pay attention to the continuing presence among us of Jews who profess the Catholic Faith.” Roy Schoeman wrote on the last page of his book,

It is most important … to be aware of the experiences and perceptions of Jews who have received the grace of conversion. For with one voice they all attest to the same thing – that in their perception they were far more Jewish after their conversion than before it, and that their deepest, archetypically Jewish thirst for God could never have been met outside Christianity. [19]

For more information about the next gathering of Jewish Catholics in New York, March 19-20, and other conferences in this continuing series, visit the Remnant of Israel website: http://remnantofisrael.net/ Other sites of related interest are Roy Schoeman’s www.salvationisfromthejews.com and the Association of Hebrew Catholics’ http://hebrewcatholic.org/ Tapes of the Washington DC conference are available on the Remnant of Israel website.

Endnotes
1. “The Relationship of the Old and the New Covenant as One of the Central Issues in Jewish-Christian Dialogue”; delivered by Walter Cardinal Kasper to the Centre for Jewish-Christian Relations, at Boston College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, December 6, 2004. http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/articles/Kasper_
Cambridge_6Dec04.htm. #4.
2. Ibid. Kasper’s citation here is: “J.B. Metz, Article ‘Auschwitz II’, in: LThK Bd. 1 (1993) 1260 f.”
3. Ibid, #5.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid. In his footnote, Cardinal Kasper cites several sources for these theories.
6. Ibid. In another footnote, Kasper cites another source for this statement.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.
13. “A Rabbi Follows Jesus”; article (pages 292-299) in The One Who Is to Come: A Collection of Writings of Father Arthur B. Klyber, Hebrew Catholic Priest (Remnant of Israel, New Hope, KY; 2000); edited by Matthew J. McDonald; 298. Article originally published in The Liguorian, August 1945 (Liguori, Missouri).
14. Ibid.
15. “Crucify the Jew” (pages 324-331); The One Who Is to Come; 325.
16. Ibid, 326.
17. Roy H. Schoeman, Salvation Is From the Jews (Ignatius, San Francisco, 2003); 9.
18. Kasper, “The Relationship of the Old and the New Covenant as One of the Central Issues in Jewish-Christian Dialogue”; #6.
19. Schoeman, Salvation Is From the Jews; 355.

Copyright ©; George A. Morton 2005
This version: 23rd May 2005

Johannine Literature: Theology 6325

by Mark Drogin

This paper will briefly examine the influence on the fourth Gospel of the Suffering Servant texts from the Book of Isaiah, specifically, the One, like a lamb, who takes away our sins by suffering and dying for us.

By examining the fourth Gospel’s use of Isaiah, I will present a thematic overview of the entire Gospel rather than a critical exegesis of any particular passage.

The fourth Gospel repeatedly announces that eternal life is offered to us through the Word made flesh. We are invited to believe. Eternal life is the reward given to those who are “saved” through faith.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that those who believe in him may not perish, but may have eternal life. For God sent his Son into the world… that the world might be saved through him. (Jn 3:16-17)

PART ONE

Behold, the Servant from the Root of Jesse

Who Takes Away Our Sins:

SALVATION IS FROM THE JEWS

The problem with Isaiah 53

No text available before the New Testament, other than Isaiah 53, describes one who – even though he is innocent – takes away our sins by suffering and dying for us. [1] Accepted as a pre-Pauline formula, 1 Corinthians 15:3 is one of the Church’s earliest traditions: “For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died in behalf of our sins according to the scriptures.” I assume, and ask my reader to accept this assumption, that the evangelist of the fourth Gospel knew and believed this tradition, and assumed the readers of the Gospel also accepted this tradition.

A. According to what Scripture?

The question is “according to what scripture?” The suffering Servant text in Isaiah 53 is the only answer. “Nowhere else in the scriptures… is there a text which speaks so explicitly of a savior figure who dies in behalf of the sins of others.” [2]

Dr. Farmer’s argument provides an example for my attempt to present a thematic – or conceptual – overview of the fourth Gospel rather than a critical exegesis of any particular passage. Dr. Farmer claims a “conceptual kinship” rather than a “verbal kinship.” Citing his method (at length) as a precedent, I ask the reader to accept my method in this paper as a legitimate reflection on the fourth Gospel:

The reference to Christ dying in behalf of the sins of others exhibits a certain verbal kinship with the text of Isaiah 53:4-9, and many would conclude that there is indeed an echo of Isaiah 53 in this passage. However, this verbal kinship is not by itself compelling evidence of a clear connection between 1 Corinthians 15:3 and Isaiah 53:4-9. What serves to make this connection compelling is a conceptual similarity. Nowhere else in the scriptures that were available to Paul is there a text which speaks so explicitly of a savior figure who dies in behalf of the sins of others. It is this conceptual kinship more than any particular verbal kinship which leads scholars to identify Isaiah 53 as the most important scripture being referred to in this traditional formulation. [3]

But there is a serious problem with Isaiah 53: it was, perhaps, the biggest problem for the Apostles and evangelists in the first century and it remains (if not the biggest, at least one of) the biggest stumbling blocks to faith today. [4] Each New Testament writer treats this problem differently. Paul is explicit: he asks “Where is the wise man?… Has not God turned to foolishness the wisdom of this world?” (1 Cor 1:20) Paul preached only “Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” (1 Cor 2:2) The verbal kinship with Isaiah 53 may not be compelling but the conceptual kinship is certain.

Matthew and Luke both carefully present genealogies to “prove” that Jesus of Nazareth is descended from the lineage of David (Paul affirms this in Romans 1:3). The problem for the first Gospel is not the Royal Davidic Lineage, but Joseph and Nazareth. [5] Matthew 2:23 attributes fulfillment of prophesy to this place in Galilee. If nothing else, Nazareth indicates Jesus’ lowliness. Isaiah 53 describes a lowly Messiah. Again, if there is not a literal kinship, there is an unavoidable conceptual kinship between Nazareth and the lowliness of the Servant in Is 53. [6]

B. Expecting a triumphant, glorious Messiah

Two thousand years ago, there was a great expectation of a savior, a messiah. There are many different interpretations of “under the fig tree” in John 1 (and I will return to them later). One interpretation found in Jewish and Christian sources is that “one under the fig tree” was a person studying the prophecies and seeking the Messiah of Israel. [7] The common problem for all the apostles and followers of Jesus was simply that “before the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jews looked for the coming of a Messiah to save Jerusalem; afterwards, they looked for a Messiah to restore Jerusalem.” [8]

Were Jewish people in the early first century (BC and AD) familiar with Isaiah 53 and did they see it as a messianic prophecy? Driver and Neubauer, in the above-cited volume, affirm without question that the characteristics of the Suffering Servant were known and understood. “The question was not, ‘what is the picture?’ In this all are agreed; but ‘Whose image or likeness does it bear?’” [9] There were differing views that seemed irreconcilable.

But clearly none beforehand would understand how it could be fulfilled in one person. For none could tell beforehand, how death, which closes all on this earth, was to be the vestibule to a God-given kingdom; or how kings should bow down before one who had been the object of contempt…. Those of old, to whom the later Jews referred as authorities, dwelt on one or the other side of the picture; some on the vicarious sufferings of the Messiah, some on the exaltation, without attempting to reconcile the two. [10]

Charles Hoffman, an orthodox Jew born in Berlin in 1933, escaped on May 13, 1939. Several years later, he became a Catholic. Recently, Hoffman wrote in Inside the Vatican, “A divine suffering Messiah remains to this day an obstacle for Jews, as it was for the Pharisees at the time of Jesus.” [11] St. Paul wrote that this suffering-and-dying Messiah was a scandal to the Jews 1950 years ago. It is a scandal today – Jews are taught to expect a glorious triumphant Messiah, as Hoffman writes in April 2004.

Jesus was not the glorious Messiah I had been taught to expect, but one Who suffered and died. As an orthodox Jew I had no choice but to reject Him. I saw that Jewish leaders also had to reject Jesus…. As an Orthodox Jew, I had been taught to believe in a glorious Messiah who would restore Israel to greatness above all the nations. [12]

In sum, ancient Jewish traditions regarding the messiah are uncertain. “The apparent contradictions between a Messiah who suffers and dies and one who comes in power and glory,” writes Roy Schoeman, another orthodox Jew who is now Catholic, “were resolved by the Talmudic Rabbis proposing two Messiahs rather than one.” [13] Schoeman cites Talmudic sources showing a Jewish tradition of a suffering messiah, but again, the resolution assumes that the suffering messiah and the triumphant messiah cannot be one person. Schoeman now sees these two ancient messianic traditions of Israel remaining distinct when applied to Jesus:

The first, Messiah ben Joseph, will be defeated by his enemies, suffer and die. The second, Messiah ben David, will lead Israel to its final victory…. It is haunting that the Messiah who suffers and dies is “Messiah ben Joseph.” Jesus will, of course, come a second time in power and glory to usher in the Messianic Kingdom in its fullness. The first time He came, He came to suffer and die – and He was, quite literally, known as Jesus the son of Joseph [of Nazareth]…. Messiah ben David is as perfect a name for Jesus in His second coming as Messiah ben Joseph is in His first. [14]

C. Not two Messiahs

Schoeman’s distinctions are too simplistic – the reality in the fourth Gospel is not so “black-and-white,” not exclusively “either/or.” Son of Joseph and Son of David are perfectly united in Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth is one Person who has the same identity yesterday, today and forever. The Suffering Servant and the glorious triumphant Royal Davidic King are two descriptions of the same Person. This is one of the primary themes of the fourth Gospel. [15] Jesus the son of Joseph of Nazareth (Philip’s proclamation) is the Logos, the Word that stands forever.

“And we saw His glory – glory as of the only-begotten of the Father – full of grace and truth.” (Jn 1:14) “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.” (Jn 12:23) “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him.” (Jn 13:31) “Father, the hour has come! Glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee…. I have glorified thee on earth; I have accomplished the work that thou hast given me to do.” (Jn 17:1, 4) The Last Supper, Crucifixion, and Resurrection are one inseparable event. The Triduum (Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday) is one inseparable event in our Sacred Liturgy. Son of Joseph and Son of David are united in Jesus of Nazareth. Ephraim and Judah are united in one Israel under one King in Jesus of Nazareth (Isaiah 11:13 is fulfilled): “The envy of Ephraim shall pass away, and the rivalry of Judah be removed; Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not be hostile to Ephraim.” [16]

The Divine Person in Isaiah 53 (who suffers, dies and is raised – who is brought low and exalted) is the dominant theme throughout the fourth Gospel. Between the Gospel’s first and last chapters we find layer upon layer of revelation pointing to the fulfillment of the Book of Isaiah.

“In the beginning was the Word…. And the Word was made flesh.” (Jn 1:1 and 14) This Word of God is a Person who dwelt among us and we saw His Glory. The last chapter concludes with the command to “Feed my sheep.” The food that the Apostle will feed us is precisely this Word of God made flesh. This Person, the Logos, is the Bread of Life and unless we eat this Bread we will not have eternal life. The Suffering Servant of Is 53 is the Word made flesh; He is the food Peter feeds to us. (Jn 21:15, 16, 17)

Salvation is from the Jews

The Prologue states: “a man named John was sent from God.” The explicit identification of “a man named John” with the “Voice proclaiming” (in Isaiah 40) is essential to all four Gospels (Mt 3:1-3; Mk 1:2-4; Lk 1 and 3:4ff). In the fourth Gospel, he states in the first person: “I am the ‘voice’… as Isaiah the prophet said.” (Jn 1:23) The Word of God (Logos) is tightly linked to the “Voice proclaiming” because the “Voice” is told to proclaim: “The Word of our God stands forever.” (Is 40:8) The fourth Gospel tells us repeatedly that we also may “stand forever” through faith in the Word made flesh.

Following the Prologue, there is a direct reference to Isaiah 53: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.” [17] The Savior is the One Who takes away our sins; salvation means our sins are removed and we are saved from death. Jesus says, “Salvation is from the Jews.” (Jn 4:22) In this sense, “The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” is literally synonymous with “the Savior of the world” (Jn 4:42).

The evangelist does not focus our attention on Jesus’ statement that salvation is from the Jews, I propose, because it was widely known and believed. Both the Latin and the Greek (of Jn 4:22) use the preposition “ex.” Salvation is “out of,” or “from” the Jews/Judeans simply because the Savior is from the Tribe of Judah (through the Royal Lineage of David). This is explicit in Isaiah 11:1 and understood throughout Isaiah. The Davidic Lineage is assumed in the fourth Gospel; it does not need to be stated.

Above, I said that Is 11:13 points to the reconciliation of the dual Jewish tradition of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David. It is Jesus of Nazareth, the bud from the root of Jesse (Is 11:1) who saves us, but first Ephraim and Judah are reconciled. Isaiah 49:6 [18] tells us that all the Tribes of Israel must be united before the People of God become a Light to the Nations. Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, recognizes this divine sequence: “The Gospel is the power of God for everyone who believes: for the Jew first, and then the Greek.” (Rom 1:16; 2:9 and 10) [19]

Eternal life

The Voice in Isaiah 40 is told to proclaim, “The Word of our God stands forever.” (Is 40:8) The fourth Gospel tells us that Jesus of Nazareth is this Word of God, the Logos, and this Logos is the One who takes away our sins. It is through Jesus that we may attain eternal life.

In Jerusalem, Jesus says to the Jews, “You search the scriptures because you think you have eternal life through them.” (Jn 5:39; emphasis added) In striking contrast, Simon Peter’s confession points to the living flesh-and-blood Person rather than a book: “You have the words of eternal life.” (Jn 6:68; emphasis added) Peter’s statement is in the context of the “Bread of Life Discourse” (Jn 6:26-58) where Jesus repeats explicitly: “I am the bread of life” (v 35); “Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life” (v 47-48); “I am the living bread… whoever eats this bread will live forever” (v 51; also vs 54, 58). Jesus is the Logos, the Word of God (mentioned in Is 40:8) that “will stand forever.” Peter’s confession in 6:68 affirms that this Word of God is the Bread of Life and whoever eats this Bread will have eternal life. The evangelist contrasts Peter’s profession (“we know and believe”) with Jesus’ words to those who seek – apparently in vain – eternal life in the Scriptures. (Jn 5:38-40)

You must die

The crowd said to Jesus, “Lord, give us always this bread.” (Jn 6:34) Jesus insists that we must eat His flesh. How do we do this? How are we actually saved through faith. The evangelist gave us a hint in chapter 3: “you must be born from above.” (Jn 3:3 and 7) With Nicodemus we ask, “How can this happen?” Jesus’ answer in chapter 3 is not yet plain. But when the Gentiles (Greeks) ask to see Jesus, He tells us plainly that He will die and we must follow Him.

The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Amen, amen, I say to you unless the grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone…. He who loves his life, loses it; and he who hates his life in this world, keeps it unto life everlasting. If anyone serves me, let him follow me. (Jn 12:23-26; emphasis added)

This is a hard saying. Who can listen to it? Jesus is telling the disciples that they must die in order to gain eternal life, but they will not grasp the fullness of what is required until after Pentecost when the Holy Spirit will reveal it to them. Throughout the fourth Gospel, Jesus is pointing to the Divine Plan for His followers to become Witnesses (literally, to be “martyrs”) for the Gospel. And what is the Gospel? It is the Good News revealed by Isaiah (cf. Is 52:7) that the Servant of the Lord will suffer and die to take away our sins.

What does Jesus add to Isaiah’s Good News? Jesus makes it possible for each of us to join Him, to suffer and die with Him. In fact, He commands us to give our lives as He does if we wish to enter eternal life. In chapter 1, John announces that he is the Voice in Is 40 and immediately directs us to the Servant in Is 53. This is a distinctly Johannine theme and it cannot be understood without Isaiah 53. [20] And, as Jesus said to Nathaniel, you will see greater things than this.

“You also will bear witness”

Looking again at Peter’s confession, “You have the words of eternal life,” consider Jesus’ reply: “Did I not choose you twelve?” (Jn 6:70) At the Last Supper Jesus again says, “I have chosen you.” (Jn 15:19) In chapter 6 it is unclear what this means for those who are chosen (Jesus’ response to Peter in 6:70 seems out of place or inappropriate), but in chapter 15 Jesus explains more specifically what is required for a disciple to follow Him: we have to be martyrs.

I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete. This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends…. It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you…. I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you…. If they persecuted me, they will persecute you… And you also bear witness [martureite] because you have been with me from the beginning. (Jn 15:11-13, 16, 19, 20, 27)

As the Father sends Jesus, Jesus will send the Apostles.

As Jesus is the Father’s Chosen One, Jesus chooses the Apostles. The consequences of this “chosenness” are humiliation and death before exaltation and glory. [21] Jesus reveals this only gradually to the disciples. Levenson, an observant Jew, sees this “theology of chosenness” clearly identified with the Servant (who takes away our sins) in Isaiah 42:1: “This is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one, in whom I delight.” [22] In the first chapter of the fourth Gospel, John proclaims that Jesus of Nazareth is this Chosen Servant of the Lord (identified in Is 42:1) who takes away our sins.

The Lamb who takes away our sins is the Chosen One in Is 42 – the Suffering Servant. There is only one Messiah, the same yesterday, today and forever. [23]

The “footwashing”

Eugenio Zolli, the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, presents convincing evidence to show that Jesus, in the Johannine Last Supper Discourse, “intends to associate Himself with the ideas developed so copiously in Isaiah” in order to reveal His divinity. [24] Zolli, a highly respected Hebrew scholar, explains that the full meaning of Jesus’ words in the Johannine Last Supper Discourse is only understood as a fulfillment of Deutero-Isaiah.

After Jesus finished the [footwashing] designed to raise the disciples to the dignity of divine messengers, He passes on to another matter of supreme gravity and capital importance: He offers them proof of His divinity. His words are a clear allusion to Isaiah 41:17ff. [25]

Zolli fills the next page and a half with citations from chapters 41 to 48 of Isaiah showing that the Redeemer [26] is God Himself. Deutero-Isaiah is necessary – although not sufficient – to understand how the fourth Gospel reveals Jesus’ divinity.

The footwashing was a necessary action to cleanse the Apostles in preparation for being sent by Jesus as the Father sent the Son: in other words, to prepare them to be martyrs. [27] Jesus revealed Himself as the Suffering Servant by removing His clothes and performing a task that only slaves performed. But why this particular action? Did God choose any random action to reveal His coming as a slave? No. Jesus told Peter explicitly that it was necessary for Him to wash Peter’s feet. The disciples will have to give their lives. The footwashing/anointing in chapter 12 also is associated with His death.

Jesus will institute His Church through these disciples. He will give them divine power. The footwashing, more than a symbol, was a necessary efficacious action to prepare the disciples to receive Divine Authority on Pentecost.

Giving divine authority to the Apostles – “as the Father has sent me, so I send you” – is the formal institution of the all the Sacraments, the establishment of the Apostolic Church with divine authority. This divine authority would not be actuated until after Pentecost, but I believe the Gospel includes the footwashing in the Last Supper account because it was necessary – in some way – for the establishment of the Church. “As I have done to you, so you also should do.” (Jn 13:15) Jesus is the Servant in Isaiah who takes away their sins. He is going to give these disciples the divine power to forgive sins (Jn 20:23). They can only receive this divine power by laying down their lives: this cannot be understood apart from Isaiah 53.

“How beautiful are the feet…” (Is 52:7) is inserted strategically by Paul into the middle (Rm 10:15) of Romans 9 – 11. The Greek word for “beautiful” used by Paul (from the LXX) does not signify “comeliness” or “attractiveness”; it signifies “appropriateness.” It could be translated “fitting,” or “proper.” Conceptually it describes feet that are properly prepared to proclaim the Gospel. Isaiah 52:7 is a preface to Isaiah 53 – the Servant who bears our sins is the One Proclaiming Good. Jesus will give this Divine Power only to the Apostles (to establish an Apostolic Church). [28] Even though this will not be fulfilled until after Pentecost, it was necessary for Jesus to “cleanse” the Twelve by making their feet “beautiful” – “proper” – to proclaim the WORD.

PART TWO

Nathaniel’s Tears: Tears of Repentance – Tears of Joy

What shall I Proclaim?

All flesh is grass… the grass withers, the flower wilts…

And the Word of our God stands forever.

Isaiah 40:6-8

The last chapter of the fourth Gospel forms a “book-end” or “inclusio” with the first chapter. In the first chapter Jesus is gathering His disciples; in the last chapter He is sending them out to be the Light to the nations (“Feed my sheep”). [29]

We find a unique grouping at the beginning of chapter 21: nowhere else in any scripture or tradition do we find Peter, Thomas, and Nathaniel grouped together. These three are not only named together, each one is given a secondary identification! Why are these three grouped together with such emphasis?

Peter, Thomas and Nathaniel are the only three disciples who – after making a personal profession of Faith in Jesus – are told directly (face-to-face) by Jesus Himself about the manner in which they received the Gift of Faith. [30] To Nathaniel, Jesus said: “You believe because I said….” (Jn 1:50) To Thomas, Jesus said: “You believe because you have seen me.” (Jn 20:29) To Peter, Jesus said: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my Father in Heaven.” (Mt 16:17) To the objection that the Matthean text should not be used to explain the Johannine text, I respond as follows. The tradition (recorded in Mt 16) of Jesus naming Andrew’s brother Cephas and giving him the keys is so fundamental and universal that we must assume John, his community, and his readers would know and believe this tradition.

Further, I respond that Peter’s proclamation of Faith is included in the fourth Gospel also: “You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.” [31] Jesus answered, “Did I not choose you twelve?” (Jn 6:68-70)

The entire Gospel is “written that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and through this belief you may have life in His name.” (Jn 20:31) “An eyewitness has testified, and his testimony is true; he knows that he is speaking the truth, so that you also may come to believe.” (Jn 19:35) So, it is fitting that the last chapter begins with three examples of personal and distinct gifts of Faith.

There are also Isaian themes in these three stories. Jesus, when He saw Nathaniel approaching, quoted a verse from Psalm 32: “Behold [a man] in whom there is found no guile.” This text follows closely after John’s proclamation that Jesus is the One who takes away sins (Is 53). Psalm 32 states explicitly that God takes away sins: “Then I declared my sin to you; my guilt I did not hide. I said ‘I confess my faults to the Lord,’ and you took away the guilt of my sin.”

“Under the fig tree” is very likely symbolic language for one familiar with the Psalms, especially Psalm 32. One “under the fig tree” probably refers to a penitent who prays and studies – especially the Psalms – in the manner that the Divine Office and Lectio Divina are studied and prayed in the Church. By literally quoting this Psalm, Jesus links us directly to Isaiah 53. “Nowhere else in the life and faith of Israel outside of Isaiah 53 do we find a reference to a savior figure who gives his life in a redemptive act…. All such soteriological statements in the New Testament appear to find their ideal conceptual origin in Isaiah 53.” [32]

One in whom is found no guile (quoting Psalm 32) refers to a penitent who confesses his sins with contrition and seeks His Mercy. “Nathaniel’s Tears: Tears of Repentance – Tears of Joy” describes Nathaniel’s ecstatic outburst when he “sees” that Jesus of Nazareth truly knows that he (Nathaniel) is without guile. Only God knows if I am without guile. We might say that Nathaniel had a momentary Beatific Vision. “I saw you under the fig tree” might have communicated to Nathaniel that Jesus heard Nathaniel confessing his sins and begging for mercy. Jesus’ citation of Psalm 32 revealed to Nathaniel that God would truly “take away his sins.” As any truly contrite penitent who receives absolution from God, Nathaniel would have burst into Tears of Joy.

But this was only a momentary beatific (“Blessed is the man in whom is found no guile”) glimpse of the forgiveness to come through the Sacrifice on Calvary, so Jesus immediately said: “You will see greater things than this.”

But Nathaniel does not yet know that Jesus is God. His Faith comes through a brief “beatific” knowledge of things to come. Thomas, in direct contrast, literally “manipulates” Jesus’ wounds before he “sees” the Resurrection. Thomas’ Faith comes through sensory knowledge, through direct tangible experience. Nathaniel’s knowledge was a momentary glimpse of things to come, but Thomas sees the reality of the Resurrection in the present. Thomas’ Apostolic Profession, “My Lord, and My God,” is the final statement in the Gospel before the second ending. Jesus is Risen from the dead and He is God!

This final proclamation concludes Jesus’ teaching to the Apostles. After this, they will be taught by the Holy Spirit.

Peter is not first in chapter 1, but he is first in chapter 21 – he stands at the head of the Apostles. Unlike Nathaniel who believes because Jesus “said,” and unlike Thomas who believes because he “saw,” Peter’s Faith is not revealed through flesh and blood but directly from the Father (not through any experience but directly “infused”).

So we are able to see three basic archetypes of Faith in Peter, Thomas, and Nathaniel. In the early stages, we are Nathaniel; we are contrite and have a desire to repent. We are seeking forgiveness. We are consoled when we glimpse – briefly – that God truly can and will “take away our sins.” This is the beginning of our Faith – we will see many more things than this.

Along the way, we go from Faith to Faith (as do all the disciples throughout this Gospel). Our Faith is strengthened as the gift of the theological virtue of Faith is gradually infused into our souls. With Peter, we have come to know and believe that Jesus has the words of eternal life. Although we have matured since the initial “Nathaniel” phase, like Peter we still have a long road to travel before we will join Jesus on Calvary instead of denying Him and running away.

Finally, after the Resurrection and after Jesus breathes on the disciples and says “Receive the Holy Spirit…”, with Thomas we still wait for a personal invitation from Jesus to come and see. Our Faith is affirmed by our sensory temporal experience.

Chapter 21 begins with this compressed symbolic summary of our Faith journey (with Peter, Thomas and Nathaniel – symbolizing infused, experiential, and beatific knowledge). Then we must go out, with Peter, from Galilee to feed the Bread of Life, the Word [33], to all of God’s sheep. We must become the Eucharist.

Bibliography

Bellinger, William H., and Farmer, William R. (editors) Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins; Trinity Press, Harrisburg, PA, 1998.

Driver, Samuel, and Neubauer, Adolf, The “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters; Eugene, OR, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999; previously published by James Parker and Co., 1877.

Hoffman, Charles, “Letters to the Editor,” Inside the Vatican, March-April 2004; New Hope, KY, Urbi et Orbi Communications; Year 12, #3; 10-11.

Levenson, Jon D., The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity; New Haven, Yale University Press, 1993.

Schoeman, Roy, Salvation Is From the Jews; San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 2004.

Zolli, Eugenio, The Nazarene: Studies in New Testament Exegesis; New Hope, KY, Remnant of Israel, 1999.

Endnotes
1. Zech 12:10 is cited in Jn 19:37 and describes a suffering messiah. But Zechariah (although it affirms Is 53) does not say the pierced one will bear our sins. Only Is 53 says He will bear our sins.
2. This is the conclusion of Dr. William R. Farmer in chapter 15 of Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins, edited by William H. Bellinger, Jr. and William R. Farmer (Trinity Press, Harrisburg, PA, 1998); 263.
3. Ibid.
4. Yes, Isaiah 53 is the stumbling block referred to in 1 Cor 1:23, because the Messiah is not supposed to suffer and die. See also Romans 11:9 where Paul cites David.
5. Regardless of the unquestionable grammatical identification (in Jn 1:45) of Nazareth with Jesus and not with Joseph, Nazareth is associated with Joseph. Jesus is associated with Nazareth through Joseph conceptually if not literally or grammatically. Jesus and Mary lived in Nazareth because Joseph lived there.
6. In fact the overwhelming opinion in the Church for 1900 years has seen Mt 2:23 as a reference to Is 11:1. This is an explicit association of the Isaian Servant with Nazareth.
7. “Under the fig tree” is seen by some as a place of prayer and penance where a penitent could pray the Psalms and meditate on the One Who Is To Come in the hope of recognizing Him when He comes.
8. Driver, Samuel, and Neubauer, Adolf, The “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters (Eugene, Oregon, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999; previously published by James Parker and Co., 1877); xl.
9. Ibid., xxxix.
10. Ibid., xxxix-xl; emphasis added.
11. Charles Hoffman, “Letters to the Editor,” Inside the Vatican, March-April 2004 (New Hope, KY, Urbi et Orbi Communications); Year 12, #3; 10-11.
12. Ibid.
13. Schoeman, Roy, Salvation Is From the Jews (San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 2004); 118-119.
14. Ibid., 119, 122.
15. The first verse of the first Gospel (Mt 1:1) also refers to this union of glory and lowliness. Son of David is the Royal exalted glorious identity. Son of Abraham is Isaac, the prototype of one who – though innocent – willingly accepts his father’s intention to offer the son as sacrificial victim for the whole people.
16. Ezek 37:15ff is quite explicit. The stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph will form one stick.
17. Some scholars disagree with this statement. Jesus and the Suffering Servant (edited by Bellinger and Farmer) is an entire volume devoted to this question. To say the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” refers to the Paschal Lamb is too simplistic. If we say we don’t know to what it refers, we deny the Holy Spirit’s work through the Word in the People of God. We can say with certitude that Isaiah 53 describes a person “like a lamb” who “takes away the sins of the world.” The fourth Gospel repeatedly refers to Isaiah and the work of the Servant. Jesus reveals to the disciples that He is this Servant of Yahweh by removing His clothes and washing their feet. The word, “Gospel,” in Isaiah 52:7 means the “good news” of the One who “takes away our sins.” The Hebrew word, basar, is the same word for “flesh.” This famous verse in Is 52:7, quoted in Romans 10:15, can be understood as “How beautiful are the feet of the One Who Enfleshes Good (basar).” The Hebrew text is open to the meaning that this One (who bears the news) is Good Incarnate. This One in Is 52:7 is the Suffering Servant in Is 53 who bears our sins.
18. “It is too little, he says, for you to be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and restore the survivors (netzrim) of Israel; I will make you a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”
19. This divine sequence (foretold in Is 49:6) of first gathering all the Tribes of Israel (symbolized in Is 11:13 by the reconciliation of Ephraim and Judah), before the People of God become a Light to the Nations also provides a key for understanding the meaning of “all Israel will be saved” in Rom 11:26. But that is beyond the scope of this paper.
20. Isaiah 53 is not sufficient to understand that Jesus is telling us that we must do what He does; but Isaiah 53 is necessary to understand what is required for anyone who follows Jesus.
21. Levenson, Jon D., The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1993); 202.
22. Ibid., 200; my emphasis.
23. Am I reading too much into this text? Yes, if I were arguing that the son of Zachary and Elizabeth, named John, was intentionally pointing out the fulfillment of Deutero-Isaiah. I don’t know if he was aware of this or not. Although God sent the Voice who prepares the way of the Lord, it is likely that John did not fully grasp the significance of what he said. But the significance of these words is not excluded. Did the evangelist see the fulfillment of Isaiah 53 here? Did Isaiah see it? Without answering these questions, we know that the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy was seen by Divine Providence.
24. Zolli, Eugenio, The Nazarene: Studies in New Testament Exegesis (New Hope, KY, Remnant of Israel, 1999); 231.
25. Ibid., 229.
26. Is 41:14; 43:14; 44:6, 24; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7, 26.
27. Those who claim the footwashing is nothing more than a demonstration of humility ignore the depth and powerful coherence of the fourth Gospel. If they were correct, the footwashing would not be essential to the theme of the fourth Gospel. I strongly disagree. The literary and formal emphasis given to the episode is required because of its theological and ecclesiological significance.
28. We might understand the “mountains” in Is 52:7 as the bishops under the Twelve.
29. We find this concept in Is 49:6. First, the Tribes of Israel will be gathered together, the Twelve will be united. Then united Israel, the Twelve, will be a Light to the Nations.
30. Jesus not only speaks to each one face-to-face, what He says is unique for each of the three.
31. “The Holy One of Israel” is used several times in Isaiah 41 – 48.
32. Farmer, William R., in Bellinger and Farmer, Jesus and the Suffering Servant; 264 and 265.
33. 153 fish represent the whole Torah, the complete Word of God. Jesus is the Word.

Text of talk given by Mark Drogin at “Jews and the Church” Conference

Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church
New York, New York
March 19-20, 2005

Salvation is from the Jews.

Salvation is from a Jewish family.

Salvation comes to us through the Incarnation; and the Incarnation is in a Jewish Family. This is the Divine Plan for our Salvation proclaimed to us by the Jewish Apostles.

Today is the Solemnity of Joseph, the Husband of Mary. What is Joseph’s role in this Divine Plan for our Salvation?

The Holy Family of Nazareth is unmistakably – by any definition – a Jewish family. In Baptism we are incorporated into this Jewish Family.

Joseph is the head of the Holy Family. This statement needs urgent emphasis today because marriage and family are under attack. Joseph was – and remains – the Husband of Mary. Joseph of Nazareth was and remains Jesus’ true human father in every way except biologically.

Baptism incorporates us into Joseph’s family: Jesus is our adopted brother, Mary is our spiritual mother, and Joseph is our adopted human father. And this family is a Jewish family.

Because he was chosen to be the Husband of Mary, Joseph has a universal and unique role in Salvation. To understand Joseph’s importance, I will discuss three Jewish marriages – three Jewish families – one at the beginning of creation, a second at the center of all human history, and a third at the end towards which all history is directed: Adam and Eve, Joseph and Mary, Christ and the Church. The heart of this discussion is marriage and family – specifically, Jewish marriage and family.

These three marriages relate to three phases of Salvation history:

The marriage of Adam and Eve relates to the entire history of human life before the Incarnation.

The marriage of Joseph and Mary is essentially bound with the Incarnation at the center of all history.

And the Marriage of Christ and the Church represents the “living out” – or recapitulation – of the Incarnation in the life of the Church.

I will focus on the Holy Family because this Family is the center of all human history. The fullness of human life is revealed through the Holy Family.

Before discussing the three Covenant Marriages, I want to emphasize that the Incarnation and Salvation are inseparable. Our Lord’s Holy Sacrifice on the Cross is the supreme act of Salvation. This Sacrifice for our Salvation is the source and center of the Incarnation; and the Incarnation is ordered to Salvation. In this sense, we may see the role of Jesus, Mary and Joseph in the Incarnation as the role of the Holy Family in Salvation. And the Holy Family is Jewish.

“What do we mean by Jewish?” Everyone seems to agree that Jesus of Nazareth is Jewish. But when we speak of Jews today, the word means something very different. Whatever definition we choose, it will not resolve the endless debate about what it means to be Jewish.

We might discuss the meaning of Judaism from a sociological, cultural, anthropological, or historical point of view. But I’d rather not. Instead, let’s re-state the question: “What does it mean that Jesus is Jewish?” The Person, Jesus of Nazareth, requires us to consider our question theologically.

From a theological perspective, what does the Church teach about Judaism? I would love to tell you that the Church provides a short simple answer; rather I think the Church offers us a mystery. Judaism remains a mystery – and it is a theological mystery. To say that Jesus is Jewish is to refer to the Mystery of Salvation. Jesus Himself said to the Samaritan woman: “Salvation is from the Jews.”

Regardless of the different definitions of Judaism we encounter today, we find ancient traditional Judaism at the very center of the Incarnation. The phrase, “Salvation is from the Jews,” is meaningful to us today precisely because the Incarnation is thoroughly Jewish.

My personal view

Consider for a moment my own experience. I was raised in a secular Jewish family. Our family had a very strong Jewish identity even though we were not religious.

I was in high school and college in the 1960s. I got involved in the Civil Rights movement, the anti-Vietnam War movements, and the hippies. And mysteriously, I never lost my Jewish identity. I identified with Jews more than with non-Jews. Even though I didn’t like most Jews, I was Jewish. For a short period, I was fascinated with a “Jewish trinity”: Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and Albert Einstein – and, of course, there was Jesus Christ who is also Jewish. What is it that makes these three – these four – all Jewish? I never found a convincing answer.

Today, after thinking about this question for several decades, I see that Judaism is a mystery – a theological mystery.

In chapter 11 of Romans, Paul builds to a dramatic climax and says, “until the full number of the Gentiles comes in, and thus all Israel will be saved.” This is the famous passage where Paul proclaims: “I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery.” The mystery of the relationship of Jews and Gentiles together in the People of God remains a mystery today.

In Galatians, Paul says there is neither Jew nor Greek, but all are one in Christ, and, yet, we remain confronted with the great mystery of what it means to be Jewish. The identity of the Jewish People is a theological mystery because God created this People to bring the Savior into the world. God called His People “out” from the world and formed them with hope for the Messiah. Central to Judaism is this hope for the Messiah and faith that the Lord will keep His Promises. God created the Jews to be a People of Hope and Faith.

This theological mystery goes back to God’s call to Abraham and Abraham’s response. This mystery continues today. We continue to hope for the Messiah to come again. In this respect, we belong to the People of Hope and Faith. Mysteriously, the People called by God to bring the Messiah into the world includes those hoping for His first coming and those hoping for His second coming.

Adam and Eve

Now, let us return to the three Jewish families I mentioned earlier.

[I grew up on baseball. I was a Brooklyn Dodger fan. The first reference I heard to the beginning of the Bible was a baseball phrase. I think it came from the New York Yankees, the Bronx Bombers: they were always looking for the Big Inning. Many years later, I found the first verse of the Bible more exciting in the original Hebrew: Bereshith bera Elohim… In the Big Inning God created…]

In the beginning … there was the marriage of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were joined in a sacred marriage covenant in the presence of God. God said “they are no longer two but one.” The first Jewish marriage and family.

Why do I say the union of Adam and Eve is a Jewish marriage? Because the story of Adam and Eve is entirely Jewish. The creation story is unique to Judaism and the sacred covenant union of Adam and Eve is central to the Jewish view of mankind. This view of marriage covenant union is uniquely Jewish. In Matthew 19 Jesus, when asked about marriage, quotes this Jewish story of Adam and Eve: “they are no longer two but one.” In affirming this Jewish view of marriage, Jesus gives it solemn force by adding, “What God has joined together, let no man break asunder.” We receive from Judaism the revelation that when God created Adam, He said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make him a partner.” And male and female He created them.

I propose that an authentically Jewish view of marriage must affirm this revealed Plan of one man and one woman being joined in sacred matrimonial covenant union.

Consider the horrible crisis today related to marriage and family life. Marriage is the natural foundation of all human society – revealed and given to us from the beginning of creation.

This bears repeating: the authentically Jewish view of marriage affirms this revealed Plan of one man and one woman being joined in sacred matrimonial covenant union. And the authentically Catholic view is the authentically Jewish view taught to us by Jesus of Nazareth, the Jew of Jews.

In the beginning, God made a Covenant with man. Included in the original covenant of creation was the Sacred Marital union of husband and wife. The history of Israel – in fact, the entire history of humanity – before the Incarnation is a story of man’s failure to keep his side of the covenant.

The fullness of human life is revealed through the Holy Family of Nazareth. Today, Pope John Paul’s Theology of the Body is rapidly gaining recognition. It is not a “new” theology, but the Theology of the Body does use a different vocabulary to describe Salvation history. The Pope focuses, as I have in this talk, on three phases: the marriage of Adam and Eve, the Incarnation, and our final beatific end in union with God. He talks about the nuptial meaning of the body, that is, the “gift of self” written into the body and its intrinsic orientation toward personal union. We see the evidence of this total gift of self on the Cross where Jesus gave Himself totally for us.

In the beginning, Adam and Eve were created to share this gift of self with each other.

Joseph and Mary

Now consider the sacred marriage of Joseph and Mary of Nazareth. In the fullness of time, Joseph and Mary of Nazareth were joined in a sacred marriage covenant. Mary was found to be with child and this family is known as the Holy Family. The second Jewish marriage and family.

Vatican Two, in Gaudium et Spes, tells us that Christ fully reveals man to himself. We don’t know what it means to be fully human except in Jesus. The Incarnation shows us the fullness of humanity.

The fullness of human life is found in the Family, in the Holy Family of Nazareth. And it is unmistakably a Jewish family. And in Baptism we become members of this family. This family includes Divine and human persons joined in Sacred Covenant Union.

Referring again to Gaudium et Spes, we do not know what it is to be fully human except through the Incarnation. The life of Israel before the Incarnation finds its fullness in the Holy Family of Nazareth. And the life of the Church after the Incarnation is our Sacramental participation in the life of the Holy Family of Nazareth – in this Divine and human family.

At the center of history we see Jesus, Mary and Joseph. We see the union of God and man within sacred marriage in a Jewish Family. The eschatological goal toward which history moves is the eternal covenant union of God and man. We have a foretaste of this Beatific Joy in the Holy Eucharist, in the Blessed Sacrament.

We also see the total gift of self in the Marriage Covenant Union of Joseph and Mary. At the beginning of the third millennium, when we see marriage and family life under attack, it is vital to proclaim the true marriage of Joseph and Mary. In his Apostolic Exhortation on Devotion to St. Joseph, in 1989, the Holy Father affirmed that Joseph and Mary were joined in Sacred Matrimonial Covenant Union before the Incarnation, before the Annunciation. Betrothal meant that they had exchanged Marriage Vows. They were joined in Covenant Union.

The Church teaches that the Blessed Virgin was immaculate from the moment of conception and never committed a sin. She was preserved pure from the moment her life began and remains pure forever.

Her perpetual purity indicates that when the Blessed Virgin entered into Marital Covenant Union with Joseph she gave herself totally to her husband as was intended from the beginning of creation. She gave herself to Joseph and remained pure. She gave the pure gift of self to Joseph.

What was Joseph’s role? Was this total gift of self in marriage one-sided? Of course not. The eternal Plan for the Incarnation includes this marriage of husband and wife – this human marriage of one man and one woman joined in complete matrimonial covenant union. This is the pure marriage into which the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity entered. It is a family. Tradition tells us that Joseph and Mary intended to remain virgins after they were married. At the same time, they gave each other the total gift of self in the marriage covenant, and they were open to the children that God gave them even while remaining virgins. [1]

They became the best parents ever. This is true marriage and family life.

This is what needs to be proclaimed today because the family is under attack.

Joseph is not absent.

We need Joseph. Our world needs to hear this truth: Joseph and Mary were joined in true marriage before the Incarnation. What God has joined together, let no man break asunder. Today we celebrate “Joseph, the Husband of Mary.” God entered into this human marriage and blessed it with children. Joseph and Mary became the human parents of Jesus, and now they are the adopted human parents of all who are baptized in Christ.

I heard a homily last month on the Feast of the Presentation by a good Catholic priest teaching sound doctrine. He preached for about 15 minutes and said that Mary presented Jesus in the Temple. It was a good homily, except he never mentioned Joseph.

But images are very powerful. We need the right images. The homily painted the image of a single mother – perhaps an unwed mother. The image of a mother and child has always been a sacred image for Christians. And it is truly a beautiful image. Now it is time to make Joseph known. Without Joseph, the Holy Family would be a single-parent family. Without Joseph, the Blessed Virgin would be an unwed mother.

Salvation is through the Incarnation; and the Incarnation is through the family. It was in the Plan of Divine Providence that this pure Jewish woman would be married to a human husband before she conceived the Messiah.

Joseph was not – and is not – absent. Joseph was present for most (over 90% according to tradition) of Jesus’ life on earth. The Blessed Virgin cared for her Son and is His mother; and Joseph is His human father – in every way except biologically. Joseph taught Jesus, prayed with Jesus, played with Jesus, went on trips with Jesus, chanted the Psalms with Jesus. Joseph gave the gift of self to Mary and Jesus. Mary gave the gift of self to Joseph and Jesus. This is marriage and family life.

How can we convert the culture to be pro-marriage with an image of an unwed mother?

How can we convert the culture to be pro-family with an image of a single parent family?

( And I don’t think Joseph was an old man when Jesus was born. I think we need an image of a young strong husband and father. )

The Eternal Wedding Banquet

Christians all look forward to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. We also recognize a tension in this life between the “already” and the “not yet.” We see this “already” and “not yet” in the Marriage of Christ and the Church. The third Jewish marriage and family. Now we look at the union of God and man. The image of God joined with man in Matrimonial Covenant Union is also a Jewish image found throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. The image finds its most sublime poetic expression in the Hebrew Song of Songs.

I have presented three marriages – Adam and Eve, the Holy Family of Nazareth, and the marriage of Christ and the Church. Three families: one at the beginning, one at the center, and one at the end of Salvation history. These three Jewish marriages reveal the universal basis of marriage and family life.

In the beginning, God created Adam and Eve and they were joined in marriage covenant union. We see the fullness of this marriage covenant union in the Holy Family of Nazareth, and we look forward to our own participation in this marriage covenant by sharing in the Wedding Feast of the Lamb.

In the marriage covenant, each spouse gives him- or herself to the other. Persons who enter into a marriage covenant make vows to give the true gift of self to each other and to become members of one family. Religious and consecrated lay people may make these same vows of the gift of self.

In the Holy Eucharist, we enter into this marriage union. In Holy Communion we experience the “already” and “not yet” tension: We enter into union with our Lord in the present while at the same time we look forward in Hope and Faith to the full union of God and man. In this Eucharistic “already” and “not yet” we receive Christ’s True Gift of Self. We taste the Marriage of God of man.

He asks us to give our selves to Him. When we enter into this Covenant through the Sacraments, we become members of God’s family. We become members of the Holy Family of Nazareth, a Jewish Family. And we see the portrait of life in a Jewish family.

True Devotion

Now, in the conclusion of this talk, I will tell you briefly about the path I traveled in my personal devotion to St. Joseph.

Before I was Baptized, I found a prayer at the foot of a statue in the church where I was taking instructions. It was a prayer to Our Mother of Perpetual Help. I found out many years later that St. Alphonsus Liguouri, a Doctor of the Church, had written the prayer. In the prayer, I placed my eternal salvation in the hands of Our Mother of Perpetual Help. I memorized the prayer and said it every day. I did not realize until much later that by saying this prayer sincerely, I was consecrating myself to the Blessed Mother – even before I was Baptized.

As I look back today, 31 years after I was Baptized, I see a progression in my personal devotion. Also before I was Baptized, I started praying the rosary and learning about devotion to Mary. After I was Baptized I consecrated myself to Mary in a more formal manner.

But it was not until about 20 years after my Baptism that I began reading a book by a Dominican priest. I knew the priest personally and was aware that he was very strongly committed to following and to teaching True Devotion to Mary according to Louis de Montfort. In his book, he showed clearly that the fullness of the Louis de Montfort True Devotion should include St. Joseph. As Mary brings us most surely and most directly to Jesus, Joseph brings us most surely and most directly to Mary. We go to Jesus through Mary in imitation of St. Joseph. The best way to practice True Devotion to Mary is to imitate Joseph.

One day I was talking to the author of this book. I asked a question and he suggested I read a “prayer” he had in the book. I read it and I started saying the prayer. I have been saying this prayer now for several years. I think it is a powerful prayer. It is taken directly from the Gospel of Matthew; the entire prayer consists of words spoken by the Angel to Joseph:

“Joseph Arise, take the Child and His Mother and flee into Egypt and remain there until I tell you.

“Joseph Arise, take the Child and His Mother and return to Israel for those who sought the Child’s life are dead.”

At a personal level, I understand “Egypt” in this prayer as a symbol of my own sinful, hard heart. Israel represents the Promised Land where I hope to go when I am cleansed from sin. I pray that Joseph will bring Mary and Jesus into my own sinful heart and help me put to death everything in me that is not pleasing to our Lord. When I have been purified through the Sacraments and penance, I pray that Joseph will take Mary and Jesus with me into the Promised Land where I may be a member of the Holy Family and live in a state of Grace.

It’s a daily struggle. Every day I go down into Egypt. I ask Joseph to bring Jesus and Mary to help me come up out of Egypt back to a life of Grace.

I also see the prayer on the universal level representing the condition of all humanity. I have a quote from a book by Fr. Paul Quay. The book is called The Mystery Hidden for Ages in God. Some of you have seen this; Rosalind Moss quoted it in a promotion for this conference. Fr. Quay wrote:

“Even as Jesus was the perfect Jew, who relived all the stages of the life of Israel, rectifying what was done amiss and perfecting all else, so each Christian who lives by the grace of Christ is able to relive Israel’s life in and with Jesus. Only by such a life does the Christian become able to eventually live as befits a son of God, directed in all things by the Holy Spirit.” (Quay, p. 9)

The Holy Family recapitulates, or “relives” all the stages of the life of Israel, rectifying what was done amiss and perfecting all else.

And each one of us, through the grace of Christ, is able to “relive” Israel’s life in and with Jesus.

When we relive the life of Israel with Jesus, we hope to eventually live as true children of the Holy Family, directed in all things by the Holy Spirit.

At the center of Israel’s history – and most prominent – is the descent into Egypt and the Exodus up out of Egypt and return to the Promised Land. This descent and return begins with Joseph who was sold into slavery. Eventually all Israel goes down into Egypt and is brought up by Moses.

There are also earlier and later “types” of this descent and return. Beginning with Adam and Eve, the Fall and expulsion from the Garden is similar to the descent into Egypt. The story of Noah and the Flood prefigures Baptism and restoration to favor with the Lord.

Later, the Exile – and actually more than one exile – becomes another “reliving” of the descent into Egypt, and we see Israel praying for return and restoration.

All of these events in Israel’s history are “relived” – or recapitulated – in the Holy Family of Nazareth. Matthew carefully records the Flight of the Holy Family down into Egypt and cites Hosea, “Out of Egypt I have called my Son,” to remind us that the whole history of Israel is being recapitulated.

At the beginning of this talk I mentioned the true center of all Salvation history. The source and center is the Cross on Calvary. All the other descents into Egypt, Exiles, the Fall and expulsion from the Garden – all these events in Israel’s history are perfected on the Cross by Jesus’ Passion, Death, descent among the dead, and Resurrection.

In this sense, the “Joseph, Arise” prayer might be understood mystically as a short version of the Triduum: Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and Easter Sunday – the Passion, Death and Resurrection. You might think of it as an abbreviation of Salvation History in one short prayer. What is significant about this prayer is the role of Joseph.

In this prayer, we ask Joseph to bring Jesus and Mary to meet us where we are, in Egypt, in Exile. We express our contrition and our sincere desire to be restored to spiritual health. We want to be saints! We ask Joseph to bring us with the Holy Family to the Eternal Wedding Banquet.

Many of us try to attend the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every day. Every day we desire the grace of sharing in the Banquet. Why do we do this every day? We answer this question every time we say the Hail Holy Queen: we are sinners mourning and weeping here in this valley of tears. For the same reason, I say the “Joseph, Arise” prayer every day. Every day, I struggle to come up out of Egypt with the Holy Family.

I love the Blessed Mother. I have confidence in her intercession. I also want all the help I can get. I need Joseph. Now I have Joseph and the Blessed Mother. Joseph gives me confidence. I can identify with Joseph because he is not immaculate. I see Joseph standing in the back of the church beating his breast saying, “Lord, have mercy on me a sinner.”

Joseph gives me courage. He walked by faith. He did not know what was waiting for him when he fled into Egypt. Every day I face challenges and struggles. I face fear and disappointment, and worse. I call on Joseph who took the Blessed Mother and the Savior of the world into Egypt and protected them and brought them back safely to the Promised Land. And Joseph did it because he had complete trust in Divine Providence.

Let us pray for complete trust in Divine Providence in imitation of St. Joseph.

Through the Incarnation, God established solidarity with all of humanity. We express this solidarity in the offertory prayers of the Holy Sacrifice: “As you came to share in our humanity, may we come to share in your divinity.” We also see the real, visible solidarity of God and man in the Holy Family. We see this in the Blessed Virgin’s physical, emotional and spiritual union with her Son. We also see this tangible solidarity between Joseph and Jesus.

Consider one aspect: praying the Psalms together. I am certain that Joseph and Jesus prayed the Psalms together – much as families pray the “family rosary” together today. I have no doubt that Joseph and Jesus memorized all the Psalms and prayed them regularly – much as we pray the Divine Office. I have many favorite Psalms I love to pray “with Joseph.” It might be harder to imagine Jesus praying a Psalm asking God to forgive His sins. But I am sure Jesus prayed those Psalms, because He established true solidarity with all of humanity. He who knew no sin became sin for us. He prayed all the Psalms in true solidarity with us.

I will close with one familiar Psalm. It appears to begin as a Psalm of despair: “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” We hear this Psalm during Holy Week. It contains a vivid description of the Crucifixion. In the end, the Psalm moves to the great message of Hope and Faith. Those familiar with the Psalms know that when Jesus quoted it on the Cross, He was making a glorious proclamation of all the good deeds the Lord has done for us. It concludes with Thanksgiving. Please imagine with me now, that we are in the Holy Family of Nazareth. Joseph is leading us in praying this Psalm of Thanksgiving as we vow to proclaim the good deeds the Lord has done: Psalm 21:23-27.

“I will proclaim your name to my brethren; in the midst of the assembly I will praise you.”

“For he has not spurned nor disdained the wretched man in his misery, when he cried out, he heard him.”

“I will fulfill my vows before those who fear him. By your gift will I utter praise in the vast assembly.”

Amen.

Thank you.

For additional copies, or to invite Mr. Drogin to speak to your group:

Mark Drogin
Email

Background of the Author

Mark Drogin was born in Los Angeles and raised in a Jewish family with a very strong Jewish identity. But he never understood what it meant to be Jewish until be became a Catholic.

Mark was baptized in 1974. He continued to hold onto his Jewish identity even though it wasn’t clear to him what it meant to be Jewish. One reason Mark was attracted to Jesus was that Jesus is Jewish.

Shortly after entering the Church, Mark met Father Arthur Klyber, C.Ss.R., who was a Jewish Catholic priest. Father Klyber had been preaching for nearly 50 years about the Jewish roots of the Church, and he asked Mark to help him with this work. In 1976, they formed Remnant of Israel to proclaim the Jewish roots of the Gospel. Fr. Klyber died in 1999.

In preparing for and observing the Great Jubilee in 2000 – the Church’s Holy Year marking the millennium – Mark immersed himself in an effort to grasp the Church’s new understanding of and relation to Judaism in the Third Millennium. In 2001, he moved with his wife and family to Irving, Texas and enrolled in the Institute for Religious and Pastoral Studies at the University of Dallas. In 2004, he completed the Masters of Theological Studies, and now serves as President of Remnant of Israel.

Endnotes
1. The principle guiding Joseph and Mary in their intention to remain virgins was always “Not my will but thy will be done.” Their desire to do God’s will was always greater than anything else. When Mary was found with Child, Joseph and Mary both consented to God’s will. See Dominic De Domenico, O.P., True Devotion to St. Joseph and the Church (St. Gabriel Press, New Hope, KY 1995); 18-31.

Copyright ©; Mark Drogin 2005
This version: 18th May 2005

Holy Spirit, Be on my lips and in my heart that I may worthily proclaim your Word. All of our Guardian Angels, Pray for us.

Thank you. It is a great joy to be here with all of you. Thank you for coming.

Dear Friends, How truly good and how pleasant it is for us to be here today.

Remnant of Israel is a non-profit corporation established in 1976 to continue the work of Father Arthur Klyber. Father Klyber was born of orthodox Jewish parents and Baptized at the age of 20. He was called to the priesthood and ordained in 1932. Father Klyber never lost his Jewish identity. He was proud to be known as a Jewish priest.

He was a preacher. He loved to preach about Judaism. One of his favorite themes was this: When a Jew finds the Messiah, he remains Jewish.

And this is the basis of this conference today: When a Jew finds the Messiah, he or she remains Jewish. There are four of us speaking here today. We believe Jesus is the Jewish Messiah. We find the fullness of Judaism in the Catholic Church. We are proud to profess the Catholic Faith. We are proud to profess our fidelity to the Magisterium. And we are proud to proclaim that we are even more Jewish now than we were before we were Catholics.

Many of us are active in apostolic work for the Church. One of the goals of this meeting here is to promote better communication and more cooperation among Jewish Catholics in proclaiming this message about the Jewish Messiah. We want to serve the Good Shepherd as He gathers the lost sheep of the House of Israel. We will keep you informed as this develops.

ISRAEL’S TRUE IDENTITY AND VOCATION

The four of us decided that we would each describe briefly our conversion to the Catholic Faith. Much controversy arises when Jews and Catholics talk about “conversion.” The four of us speaking here today are frequently called “converts.” The words, “convert” and “conversion,” are commonly understood to refer to changing one’s religion. The four of us here profess that we have not actually changed religion but we have found the fullness of Judaism and we remain Jewish.

The Holy Father’s theme for the Great Jubilee was conversion. He called all people to convert back to God. Moses and the Hebrew Prophets repeatedly exhorted the People of God to convert. “Convert” simply means to turn back. We are all in the process of conversion.

Our Faith in Jesus demands that we proclaim that He is the Jewish Messiah and He has come to offer Salvation to everyone. Our job is to proclaim this Good News. God’s job is to convert people.

My conversion does not end with Baptism. Rather, my conversion is a continuing daily struggle. With this in mind, I have one anecdote from my personal spiritual journey.

As for anyone, becoming Catholic is an awesome outpouring of grace – gratuitous and wholly unmerited on our parts. More than anything else, I want to express thanks giving for our Lord’s Boundless Mercy.

I was introduced to Our Mother of Perpetual Help before I was Baptized. Let me tell you how it happened. I had hit bottom, I had despaired of any reason to live. I was an agnostic – I thought there was a God, but wasn’t sure. The obstacle was that I didn’t see any way that I could be forgiven and reconciled with this Almighty God, not because my sins were un-forgivable, but because I doubted my own contrition and purpose of amendment. I thought I would hopelessly fall back into sin over and over again no matter how many times I was forgiven.

For weeks I was looking for any source of hope; I was desperate. I went into a church and was attracted to a statue with a typed prayer at the base, which included this sentence: “O Mother of Perpetual Help, into your hands do I place my eternal salvation, to you do I entrust my soul.” I was mysteriously drawn to the prayer: I memorized it and said it every day. I entrusted my soul and my eternal salvation in the hands of this Lady, even though I didn’t know who she was, and I was not yet Baptized.

Only God knows what was going on in the depths of my soul, but I do know that a great change came into my life: I wanted to pray to Our Mother of Perpetual Help and to learn more about her. What a grace!

What wonderful Hope! Three months later, I was Baptized.

Recently, I learned that the prayer I memorized was written by St. Alphonsus Liguouri, founder of the Redemptorists and a Doctor of the Church. The founder of the Remnant of Israel, our beloved Father Arthur Klyber, is a Redemptorist and a true son of St. Alphonsus. What an amazing “coincidence”!

Also, I have come to trust in Divine Mercy. I believe that my sins are truly forgiven. I am still a sinner, and continue to need frequent confession. I continue to pray for my own daily conversion. But I understand that God reads our hearts and if we are sorry for our sins and want to change, the Lord will meet us and help us. My life has truly changed, and I have changed, in the decades since I started praying to Our Mother of Perpetual Help. God truly answers prayer. And He truly hears the prayers of Israel and keeps His Promises to His People.

The title for this talk, “Israel’s True Identity and Vocation,” comes from an article by Dr. Gregory Vall published in The Thomist, April 2002. I thank Dr. Vall for his important article on the identity of Israel, which I strongly recommend for further study. I am indebted to Dr. Vall, although I will take a slightly different approach than his article.

What is Israel’s true identity and vocation? What is Israel’s unique role in Salvation? There are many valid and meaningful answers to these questions – and, of course, if you ask four Jews you will get at least five different answers.

I propose that the Calling of Israel is this: the Lord chose Israel to be the first among all nations, and to lead all nations to Him. Israel leads all nations by turning back to God; Israel is called to be the first to turn back to God. When Israel repents and returns to the Lord, she becomes a light to the nations by manifesting the Lord’s mercy and witnessing to His forgiveness of sins.

I will focus on three aspects of Israel’s calling: repentance, the forgiveness of sins, and the restoration of God’s Covenant Family. From Israel’s history I will present some archetypes of repentance and forgiveness of sin. This will help us see how the Gospel calls each one of us to be a child of Abraham, to be restored to full membership in God’s Covenant Family, the Family of Israel.

The goal for each of us is to get to heaven. We should direct everything to that end. The obstacle, making it difficult for most of us to get to heaven, is sin.

My first point is the centrality of repentance to the vocation of Israel.

We are familiar with the centrality of repentance in the Gospel. In the first Gospel, the first word spoken by both John the Baptist and Jesus was: “Repent.” On Pentecost, nearly 2000 years ago, “Peter, standing up with the Eleven, lifted up his voice and spoke out to” the “devout Jews from every nation under heaven.” The devout Jews “were pierced to the heart and said, Brethren, what shall we do?’” Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you… for the forgiveness of your sins.” (Acts 2:5-38) Peter’s first word was: “Repent.”

We must recognize the need for repentance among Jews as well as gentiles. Paul carefully explains in Romans that “all have sinned,” both gentiles and Jews, and all are in need of redemption through the Blood of Jesus. (Rom 3:23-25) All, without exception, must repent.

Paul uses the story of the Fall in Genesis 3 to show that “all have sinned.” (cf. Rom 5:12-19) To emphasize that this is the accepted Jewish understanding of man’s sinfulness, Paul cites Psalm 14: “There is no just man, not even one.” (Rom 3:10-12)

The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception confirms that all have sinned and are in need of redemption through Christ’s Blood shed on Calvary. Except for her divine Son, the Blessed Virgin Mary was the most perfect Jew who ever lived. She followed the Law of Moses and never committed a sin; yet she was saved only through the Blood of Jesus. If the Immaculate Virgin was saved by Christ’s Sacrifice, certainly no Jew – no matter how perfectly he or she keeps the Law, no matter how holy he or she may be – will be saved without Christ.

We now turn to my second point: the centrality of the forgiveness of sins. Cleansing from sin is a central theme in Judaism. Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, is rightly considered one of the most important days of the year for Jews. The Gospel of John focused our attention on the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.” St. Paul emphasized the universality and horror of sin.

Judaism understands that we are all sinners and only God can remove our sins. Today, we join other Jews who proudly profess – with Peter and the first Jewish disciples – our belief that Jesus of Nazareth has truly offered the acceptable Sacrifice for our sins. Our belief in Jesus affirms our Jewish understanding that only God can remove our sins.

We have a Great Commission from Jesus Himself to proclaim this Good News to everyone, beginning with the Jewish people. (cf. Matt 28:18-20 and Luke 24:46-48) The greatest and most tragic form of discrimination against Jews is to withhold this Good News from them.

My third point is Israel’s vocation in the restoration of God’s Covenant Family.

Consider the importance of marriage and family. Jesus emphasizes the family covenant bond when he cites the Jewish text on the indissolubility of marriage. He quotes Genesis: “The two shall become one flesh.” (in Matt 19:5 citing Gen 2:24) Then He added His own forceful emphasis saying: “They are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” (Matt 19:6) This is the Jewish understanding of the Sacred Matrimonial Covenant union.

I propose that our spiritual adoption into Jesus’ family through the Sacraments is adoption into the Holy Family of Nazareth. We become adopted brothers and sisters of Jesus; Mary is our Mother; and Joseph is our adopted human father.

When they found Jesus in the Temple, Mary herself – referring to Joseph – said, “Son, your father and I have been looking for you.” (Luke 2:48) The Holy Family never was a single-parent family. Joseph is truly Jesus’ human father in every way except biologically. The Church teaches that Joseph and Mary were joined in Sacred Matrimonial Covenant union before the Incarnation. [Note: Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation: Redemptoris Custos, August 15, 1989]

It is unthinkable that Jesus meant to exclude His own mother from Sacred Matrimonial Covenant union with Joseph. We need Joseph! Joseph remains the Head of the Holy Family today, the Custodian of the Universal Church. “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.”

Why is this important to us here today? It is important to us because Joseph and Mary are Jewish. The Holy Family of Nazareth is a Jewish Family – the most perfect Jewish family. The history of Judaism is the family history of Israel. God chose to redeem us through the family. Judaism keeps the memory of our family alive and present.

The Incarnation reveals the fullness of human life, and the Incarnation is in a Jewish family. I think we can say that for every person the fullness of human life is found in a Jewish Family. In Baptism we become members of the Jewish Family of Nazareth.

Part One: Familial Recollections of Ephraim

Let us examine one aspect of the Catholic Church’s Jewish family history. Today “Jew” and “Israel” are used equivalently. Modern use of terms is often completely isolated from ancient historical realities. If we want to see what Our Lord meant when He used these terms, it is important for us to understand the scriptural distinctions as they are used in salvation history. The task is formidable because the history is quite complex and the use of these terms changes significantly over the centuries, but I think you will appreciate the results of the effort.

Our Lord’s story of the Prodigal Son begins: “a man had two sons.” (Luke 15:11-32) The father is usually understood to represent God.

There are different views of the two sons. One way of looking at the passage sees the sons as representing the northern and southern kingdoms into which David’s kingdom divided after Solomon’s death.

The older brother – who stayed in his father’s house – represents the southern kingdom of Judah led by members of the Tribe of Judah. The inhabitants of this southern kingdom came to be known as “Jews.” The “Jews” continued to worship in Jerusalem.

The younger brother – according to this view – would represent the rebel northern kingdom led by the Tribe of Ephraim. The entire northern kingdom came to be known as Ephraim. They refused to worship in Jerusalem and quickly began worshipping idols. Scripture refers to this civil war among the Tribes of Israel as the rivalry between Ephraim and Judah. (Isa 11:13 and cf. Isa 7:17)

Now many people ask: Who is Ephraim? Why talk about Ephraim? Lest we lose sight of our family history, we should be familiar with Ephraim. We need to know that the Hebrew Prophets often used Ephraim in place of Israel. This will shed light on the true identity and vocation of Israel.

I will explain how this came about.

Israel’s civil war began hundreds of years earlier in the rivalry of Jacob’s sons. Jacob / Israel is Abraham’s grandson. After wrestling with Jacob, God changed Jacob’s name to Israel (Gen 32:22-33). The word, “Jew” or “Jews,” is derived from “Judah,” the fourth son of Jacob. The family history of the Jews is our family history. It is the family history of Israel.

In the Book of Genesis, Jacob / Israel’s first wife, Leah, bore Jacob’s first four sons: Judah is the fourth son. Many years later, Rachel – the wife that Israel loved – bore him two sons: Joseph and Benjamin. And “Israel loved Joseph best of all his sons.” (Gen 37:3) Joseph was sold as a slave, taken down into Egypt, and became second in command to Pharaoh. Joseph married Asenath, the daughter of Pharaoh’s High Priest. (Gen 41:45) She bore Joseph two sons; the younger son is Ephraim. (Gen 48:1)

This is our Jewish family history. Ephraim will become very prominent in the history of Israel. It is important to be aware that Ephraim is the younger son of Joseph; and Joseph is the younger brother of Judah.

In the conclusion of Genesis, Israel handed down the blessing he received from God Almighty to Ephraim ! ! ! (Gen 48:3-5) Ephraim’s mother was a pagan. When Israel gave this blessing to Ephraim, I think it may be seen as a foreshadowing of the Gentiles being brought into the Covenant Family of Israel.

After Solomon’s Kingdom was split in two, the southern kingdom was called Judah or Judea; those remaining in Judea were known as “Jews.” The northern kingdom was called “Israel” or “Ephraim” interchangeably. When the northern kingdom was taken into captivity and lost among the nations, the name, Ephraim, referred to the Lost Tribes of Israel.

Returning to the Parable of the Prodigal Son, we see how the Temple in Jerusalem – in the kingdom of Judea – may be understood as the “Father’s House.” The “Jews” may be seen as the older brother. The rebel Ephraimites – who went away and refused to worship in Jerusalem – are seen as the younger brother.

God waits patiently for Ephraim, His prodigal son, to return home. In light of Israel’s history – which is our own family history – we can see the Parable of the Prodigal Son as a story about the restoration of the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel. We can see it as a parable about Ephraim repenting and returning to his Father’s House.

Part Two: Ephraim in the Gospel of Matthew

With this background in mind, let’s turn to an illustration of the repentance, forgiveness of sins, and restoration of Israel into God’s Covenant Family that is critical to a deeper understanding of the Gospel.

The first two chapters of the Gospel of Matthew are often seen as a very brief summary of Israel’s history. The Evangelist marks the infancy narrative with carefully chosen citations from the Hebrew Prophets to show how key events in Israel’s history are recapitulated in the Incarnation.

In his description of the Holy Family’s “flight into Egypt,” Matthew cites Hosea, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” (Matt 2:15 citing Hosea 11:1) In Hosea, God calls Israel His Son. But Hosea often uses Ephraim and Israel interchangeably. Hosea describes God pleading with Ephraim / Israel to repent and return to Him. Hosea ends with God’s hopeful Promise: “Ephraim! What more has he to do with idols? I have humbled him, but I will prosper him.” (Hosea 14:9) Hosea prophecies that Ephraim / Israel will be humbled, repent and return to His Father’s House – exactly as the parable in Luke describes the Prodigal Son.

In Matthew’s infancy narrative, following the Hosea citation, Matthew cites Jeremiah: “A voice was heard in Rama, weeping and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, because they were no more.” (Matt 2:18 citing Jer 31:15) This text in Jeremiah 31, as in Hosea, is a description of Ephraim returning to the Lord.

Jeremiah records the Lord’s words explicitly: “I am a father to Israel, Ephraim is my first-born.” (Jer 31:9) And again God proclaims: “Is Ephraim not my favored son, the child in whom I delight?” (Jer 31:20) Compare these statements with the essential relation of God to Israel stated in the Book of Exodus: “Thus says the Lord: ‘Israel is my son, my first-born.’” (Ex 4:22) From Jacob’s blessing of Ephraim, and from the Civil War among the Tribes, we see how Ephraim has taken the place of Israel as the Lord’s favored son.

Stay with me as I continue to unpack this theme hidden in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Returning to the infancy narrative in Matthew’s Gospel, we now see that by citing Hosea and Jeremiah together, Matthew is clearly suggesting a fulfillment of prophecy concerning Ephraim. Remember, Matthew’s infancy narrative centers around Joseph of Nazareth. Matthew is well aware that Ephraim is the son of Joseph. The title, “son of Joseph,” takes a much broader meaning in this context. In John’s Gospel also, the Messiah is identified as “son of Joseph of Nazareth.”

In Baptism, you and I become adopted brothers and sisters of Jesus and sons and daughters of Joseph. The essence of our Baptismal Vows can be seen in Ephraim’s – and the Prodigal Son’s – repentance and return to our Father’s House where we are welcomed and restored to full membership in the Lord’s Covenant Family. And it is unmistakably a Jewish family.

Again, in Matthew’s abbreviated history of Israel, we read: “Rachel weeping for her children and she refused to be consoled.” (Mt 2:18 quoting Jer 31:15) We see it as a sad text, an expression of despair. But Matthew sees it as a proclamation of the Good News. This passage in Jeremiah is one of the most hopeful Promises in all the Hebrew Scriptures! In response to Rachel’s weeping, the Lord tells her to stop crying and “wipe the tears from your eyes. The sorrow you have shown shall have its reward, they shall return. There is hope for your future, your sons shall return. I hear, I hear Ephraim pleading…” (Jer 31:16-18) Then we read Ephraim’s Act of Contrition. It foreshadows the repentance and return of all Israel.

Jews are people of Hope; and this passage is at the very heart of our Jewish Hope. “I will turn their mourning into joy; I will console and gladden them after their sorrows.” (Jer 31:13)

Chapter 31 of Jeremiah describes God’s boundless mercy. “The Father’s Boundless Mercy” is a title often used for the Parable of the Prodigal Son, a parable with striking similarities to the story of Ephraim’s repentance and return.

What does this mean to you and me today?

How do we recognize and receive God’s boundless mercy? It is quite explicit in the story of the Prodigal Son: the sinner must repent and return to his Father. The Prodigal Son does not even reach his father’s house. He intends to… but the Father, in his boundless mercy, rushes out to meet him before he reaches the house. If we only repent and turn to God with contrition for our sins and a firm purpose of amendment, He will meet us along the way and bring us Home.

Part Three: The Remnant of Israel

Now look at the Remnant of Israel in Jeremiah 31. The Remnant of Israel is a fundamental concept used by the Hebrew Prophets, and a key to Paul’s teaching in Romans 9 to 11. We read in Jeremiah 31: “Yes, a day will come when the Nazarenes will call out on Mount Ephraim: ‘Rise up, let us go to Zion, to the Lord, our God.’ For thus says the Lord: Shout with joy for Jacob, exult at the head of the nations; proclaim your praise and say: ‘The Lord has delivered his people, the remnant of Israel.’” (Jer 31:6-7) This is the call to the Lost Sheep of Israel to return to Zion, which is Jerusalem. It foretells the re-unification of the divided Kingdom of Israel.

I love the use of four verbs here: shout, exult, proclaim, say. In a very real sense, all of us – whether Jew or Gentile – are the Remnant of Israel. This is a call for us to shout, exult, proclaim and say: “The Lord has delivered his People.”

The most prominent Prophet is Isaiah; and the Remnant of Israel is central to understanding Isaiah. The Lord told Isaiah, “Go out to meet Ahaz, you and your son Shear-Jashub…” (Isa 7:3) Then, Isaiah tells us that “I and the children whom the Lord has given me are signs and portents in Israel from the Lord.” (Isa 8:18) The name, “Shear-Jashub,” is very important; it is translated: “a remnant shall return.” In describing the “Remnant of Israel,” he says, “A remnant shall return (“shear jashub”)… for though your people, O Israel, were like the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return.” (Isa 10:20-22)

The Hebrew word, “jashub,” can be translated either “repent” or “return”: “a remnant shall return” or “a remnant shall repent.” In Romans 9, Paul cites this verse from Isaiah in Greek, “a remnant shall be saved.” Did Paul change the text? No, he followed the Greek Septuagint. The Hebrew verb, “jashub,” applied to the Remnant of Israel in Isaiah, could be translated: a remnant will repent, return, and be saved. These three verbs also describe the restoration – into God’s covenant family – of the Prodigal Son, and of Ephraim in Jeremiah 31.

This is the message of the Gospel: if sinners repent and return to the Lord, they will be saved. All this is expressed in the name of Isaiah’s son: Shear-Jashub. Certainly Paul understood all these meanings when he wrote the Epistle to the Romans. We are called not only to repent, return, and find forgiveness for our sins, but also to share this good news with others, so that they too can be restored to God’s covenant family.

Now, with this idea of “the remnant shall repent, return, and be saved,” we turn to the Remnant of Israel prophecy in Zephaniah: “I will leave as a remnant in your midst a people humble and lowly…: the Remnant of Israel…. And no guile shall be found in their mouths.” (Zeph 3:11-13, 14, 15) Those who repent and return to the Lord will form the “humble and lowly people in whom there is found no guile.” Is this not the true vocation and identity of Israel?

Isaiah presents the fullness of Israel’s identity and vocation in the description of the Suffering Servant: “He was pierced for our offenses, crushed for our sins… the Lord laid upon him the guilt of us all… though he had done no wrong nor was any guile found in him.” (Isa 53:5, 6, 9) “Those who accept this call to be the ‘Servant of The Lord’ constitute the true Israel,” writes Gregory Vall, whom I mentioned at the start of this talk. According to Vall, Jesus expressed this vocation and identity on the Cross when He recited the beginning of Psalm 22: “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” Israel’s understanding of suffering and affliction, Vall points out, “became a key element in post-exilic Israel’s new awareness of her true identity and vocation.”

When Jesus addressed Nathaniel as “a true Israelite in whom there is no guile” (John 1:47), did He have Zephaniah’s Remnant of Israel prophecy in mind? Nathaniel fits the description of the Remnant of Israel – those who repent, return to the Lord, and are saved. “A true Israelite” implies that this person is following the true vocation and identity of Israel.

Conclusion

Now consider the difference between the Prodigal Son and the Suffering Servant. The Suffering Servant is innocent. Jesus is without sin. The Blessed Virgin is without sin. Joseph of Nazareth is righteous. They all suffer for the sins of others. There are many saints who suffer for the sins of others. St. Edith Stein, one of our Patrons, offered her suffering and death for her people.

But the Prodigal Son and I are sinners. We suffer for our own sins.

The Good News is that everyone – saints and sinners, Jews and Gentiles, all are invited to repent, seek the forgiveness of their sins, and enter into the fullness of human life in the Holy Jewish Family of Nazareth. All now have the opportunity to be Jesus’ adopted brother or sister, to be sons and daughters of Mary and Joseph.

Joseph has two sons: Jesus and me – or Jesus and you. Jesus is truly the “son of Joseph.” Ephraim is also truly the “son of Joseph.” We all must go to Joseph. When we repent and return to our Father’s house with contrition and a firm purpose of amendment, we are welcomed into the family by Joseph, Mary and Jesus. Through this spiritual adoption, our sufferings for our sins may now be united with the sufferings of the Holy Family.

Let me repeat this statement because it is a great mystery and it is Good News: Through this spiritual adoption, our sufferings for our sins may now be united with the sufferings of the Holy Family.

The Suffering Servant is innocent and “opens not his mouth”; he has no personal sin to confess. Ephraim, the Prodigal Son, and I have many sins to confess. And we must confess our sins.

I will end with another personal anecdote about my devotion to Nathaniel.

Jesus says Nathaniel is without guile. This evokes Psalm 32: “Blessed is he whose fault is taken away, whose sin is covered. Blessed the man to whom the Lord imputes not guilt, in whose spirit there is no guile.” (Ps 32:1-2) Nathaniel’s response, “How do you know me?” questioned how this “son of Joseph from Nazareth” could possibly know that Nathaniel’s sins were forgiven.

In my personal meditation on this gospel passage, I see Nathaniel under the fig tree confessing his sins and begging the Lord for mercy. He was a true Israelite seeking the Messiah, seeking forgiveness of his sins, seeking salvation. He prayed, fasted, and did penance for the remission of his own sins and the sins of Israel.

Nathaniel would have known the necessity of personal oral confession from Psalm 32:

As long as I would not speak, my bones wasted away with my groaning all the day…. Then I acknowledged my sin to you, my guilt I covered not. I said, “I confess my faults to the Lord.” And you took away the guilt of my sin. For this shall every faithful man pray to you in time of stress. (Ps 32:3-6)

I see Nathaniel as a believer whose faith was weak. In fear and trembling he trusted that God would forgive his sins, but he only knew it by faith. He prayed and did penance with no confirmation that the Lord truly heard his prayer. What else could he think? Every year when the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies, Nathaniel and all true Israelites prayed and fasted in the dark light of faith – a dark night of the soul made bearable by the hope that the Lord would accept their sacrifices.

When Jesus said, “I saw you under the fig tree” Nathaniel suddenly knew that he was standing face to face with the Promised Messiah! Only one sent by the Lord could know Nathaniel’s repentance, his contrition and firm purpose of amendment

Nathaniel had a major hallelujah breakdown because now he knew that God heard his prayers and his sins were forgiven. Psalm 32 says: “Blessed is the one whose sins are forgiven.”

Nathaniel repented and turned to the Lord, and he was saved. He represents the Remnant spoken of by Zephaniah in whom there is found no guile. He is a true Israelite.

Tradition tells us that Nathaniel went forth to spread the good news and eventually gave his life for our Lord. Repentance leads to acts of mercy, as the Lord said to Isaiah: “Is it not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your own flesh? Then shall your light break forth like the dawn.” (Isaiah 58:7–8)

And the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, takes its name from this famous verse: “It is too little for you to be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the Nazarenes of Israel; I will make you a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.” (Isaiah 49:6)

I will end with one of my favorite prayers, one most of you are familiar with, so please join me.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

I confess to almighty God and to you my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do; and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life. In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Thank you.

The author, Mark Drogin, completed a Masters in Theological Studies at the University of Dallas in 2004. Mr. Drogin has twelve children and 15 grandchildren, and is expecting more grandchildren soon. He serves full-time as President of Remnant of Israel. The Mission of Remnant of Israel is to proclaim the Jewish roots of Christianity.

Mark Drogin
President,
Remnant of Israel

From the Heart of a Jewish Convert:

An open letter to William Cardinal Keeler in response to Reflections on Covenant and Mission

By Rosalind Moss

Feast of the Queenship of Mary August 22, 2002

Dear Cardinal Keeler:

I have wanted to respond to the document of August 12, 2002, titled “Reflections On Covenant and Mission” (which hereafter I’ll refer to as “the document” or “Reflections”) before now. However, in my difficulty regarding several statements contained therein, I have not known how to begin. I am grateful for the clarification of August 16, 2002, from the U.S. Catholic Bishops’office of communications subsequent to the document, although the essence of the document’s statement remains unchanged.

Having been born and raised in a conservative Jewish home, I have a deep love and respect for the Jewish people, many of whom see me as a traitor now that I’m a Christian (or, more specifically, a Hebrew Catholic). While I fall far short of the depth of Paul’s heart for his kinsman according to the flesh, wishing himself accursed and cut off from Christ for their sake (Rom. 9:3), I anguish yet at Israel’s unbelief in the Messiah who came for them, through them. One of the most heart-rending statements to me in all of Scripture is that of our Lord as he wept over Jerusalem: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem. . . . How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not” (Matt. 23:37).

Yet Israel’s lack of belief is not so great a mystery to me as my belief. That we are born in original sin, which plunged us into darkness, is a fact, however sorrowful. That, in addition to our fallen condition, “a hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles come in” (Rom. 11:25), is another. But that the love and grace of God should have penetrated my heart and drawn me to him is a mystery for which I will sing God’s praises through all eternity.

I am grateful, your Eminence, that you have encouraged serious reflection on the statements of the document by Jews and Catholics throughout the United States, and I beg you to bear with me as I try to convey to you the things so heavy on my heart. (All quotes below are from the document unless otherwise indicated.)

Though the document was “meant to spur reflection,” it caused me considerable distress. I agree with much of what it says, and I am grateful for the love of the Jewish people that is at its core, but I believe the conclusions it reaches are opposed to the temp oral and spiritual welfare of this people. I beg your forgiveness if, in stating my thoughts so forthrightly, I offend you in any way. That is not my intention.

To begin with, it seems to me that the main point of “Reflections” is stated in the third paragraph of the preface: “The Roman Catholic reflections describe the growing respect for the Jewish tradition that has unfolded since the Second Vatican Council. A deepening Catholic appreciation of the eternal covenant between God and the Jewish people, toge ther with a recognition of a divinely given mission to Jews to witness to God’s faithful love, lead to the conclusion that campaigns that target Jews for conversion to Christianity are no longer theologically acceptable in the Catholic Church.”

I could not agree more, nor should attempts to “target” any people be the mode of operation in our missionary endeavors. I’ve taken Peter’s words as the model for all evangelization: “Sanctify the Lord Jesus Christ in your hearts always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you for the hope that is within you, yet with gentleness and reverence” (1 Pet. 3:15).

Toward that end, I applaud all efforts to build mutual respect through a dialogue that dispels the ignorance and caricatures that have been the cause of untold persecution through the years and that strives toward the understanding of each others’beliefs. And I am grateful for the documents, many of which are quoted in “Reflections” — from Nostra Aetate to the Pontifical Biblical Commission’s The Jewis h People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible– that have sought to understand the depth and extent of God’s eternal, irrevocable covenant with Israel, not only in light of the new covenant but also in reference to that part of Israel yet outside the Church.

But I am at a loss to understand how anyone can conclude, with Cardinal Kasper, that “the Church believes that Judaism, i.e., the faithful response of the Jewish people to God’s irrevocable covenant, is salvific for them, because God is faithful to his promises” (emphasis mine). It is this statement above all that has created in me, and in many others, such turmoil. Why then, if Israel is already in a saving covenant with God and if his coming was for the “nations other than Israel” (see comment in Reflections re Matthew 28:19) did Jesus weep over Jerusalem? Why then did the apostle Paul wish himself accursed for the sake of his kinsmen if their covenant was salvific?

There are so many confusing statements in the document that, if I took each sentence or even each paragraph at a time, this letter would become a small volume. The above is one instance. Who among us would deny that every individual’s freedom of religion and freedom of conscience should be respected? But to deny that it is Christ alone who saves, that the Old Covenant was, as Paul says, “our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ” (Gal. 3:24, NASB), the one mediator between God and men (1 Tim. 2:5), is to deny Christ for ourselves. If he is not the Messiah of Israel– God come in the flesh (1 John 4:2)– then he is no one’s Messiah.

The document quotes Cardinal Kasper in saying, “The term mission, in its proper sense, refers to conversion from false gods and idols to the true and one God, who revealed himself in the salvation history with his elected people. Thus mission, in this strict sense, cannot be used with regard to Jews, who believe in the true and one God.”

Since no source is given for Cardinal Kasper’s definition of mission “in its proper sense,” it is difficult to comment on its context. Certainly mission includes the proclamation of a message that would lead people from false gods and idols to the true and one God. But to define mission in so limited a sense and then conclude that such definition “cannot be used with regard to Jews, who believe in the true and one God,” is misleading. Is it our mission to reduce the Gospel message to that of monotheism alone, conversion to the true and one God? Nothing of the Incarnation? Nothing of the death and resurrection of the One who died a nd rose again that we might have life? Nothing of baptism, the sacraments, the Eucharist, the Church that the true and one God founded in his Son?

Did not Jesus say to Nicodemus– a Jew who already believed in the “true and one God” — “Unless a man is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:5)? And did not our Lord say to the Jews who believed in the God of Abraham, “You will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he” (John 8:24)? Did not he tell them that he himself was God (John 10:30), that it was him of whom the prophets spoke (Luke 24:44), and that to reject him was to reject the One who sent him (Luke 10:16)?

Does not mission involve the full knowledge of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who sent his Son to his own (John 1:11) that they might have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10)? The Gospel reading of this past Sunday included the very words of our Lord who said to the Canaanite woman, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). Why did he come to them who already believed in the true God, and in what sense were they lost if the covenant under which Israel existed prior to Christ was salvific?

The Catechism’s definition of mission seems to be quite different. Quoting John Paul II, it states, “The ultimate purpose of mission is none other than to make men share in the communion between the Father and the Son in their Spirit of love” (CCC 850).

I don’t imagine, your Eminence, that I could cite a Scripture passage or quote a church document that you and your committee have not dealt with in the past twenty-plus years of Catholic-Jewish relations. This makes it all the more difficult for me to understand how you are able to conclude that Israel does not need to believe in the Messiah, the Christ, for its salvation.

The document describes the Pharisee Gamaliel in Acts 5:33- 39 as declaring that “only undertakings of divine origin can endure” and concludes therefore that “Rabbinic Judaism . . . must also be of God.” But such a conclusion does not follow.

To begin with, Gamaliel’s message was that “if [this undertaking] is of God, you will not be able to overthrow [its supporters]” and further, “You might even be found opposing God!” (v. 39). That’s not quite the same as saying, and more, describing as a “New Testament principle,” that “only undertakings of divine origin can endure.” Under such a “principle,” how would we not conclude that Buddhism, for example, which existed before Christ, is from God as well?

That is not to say that God does not permit certain undertakings, as, for example, Rabbinic Judaism, as a means of preserving his people and accomplishing his purposes. But to conclude that it therefore is of divine origin on a par with the Old Covenant does not follow.

The Catechism says, “In the history of salvation God was not content to deliver Israel ‘out of the house of bondage’ by bringing them out of Egypt. He also saves them from their sin. Because sin is always an offense against God, only he can forgive it. For this reason Israel, becomin g more and more aware of the universality of sin, will no longer be able to seek salvation except by invoking the name of the Redeemer God.

“The name ‘Jesus’ signifies that the very name of God is present in the person of his Son, made man for the universa l and definitive redemption from sins. It is the divine name that alone brings salvation, and henceforth all can invoke his name, for Jesus united himself to all men through his Incarnation, so that ‘there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved’” (CCC 431- 432).

In the section titled “The Mission of the Church: Evangelization,” the document reads, “Such reflections on and experiences of the Jewish people’s eternal covenantal life with God raise questions about the Christian task of bearing witness to the gifts of salvation that the Church receives through her ‘new covenant’ in Jesus Christ” (emphasis mine).

How is it that the “new covenant” in Jesus Christ is her “new covenant” ? Does the document mean that the “new covenant” is the Church’s new covenant apart from Israel ? Is the Church not born from the root that is Israel (Rom. 11:17- 27)? Did not our Lord institute the new covenant at the Last Supper with the twelve disciples, all sons of Israel, the people for whom he came an d through whom he would bring life to the world (Luke 22:19- 20; Jer. 31:31- 32; Heb. 8:7- 9)?

A similar statement indicating that the gospel is for all nations except Israel is made later in the document in reference to Matthew 28:19. The argument is made that the Hebrew word goyim, a translation of the Greek word ethne, excludes Israel. The Catechism, however, applies Matthew 28:19 to “all men” (CCC 849). What sense would it make for our Lord to commission twelve Israelites to preach to every nation a gospel of salvation that did not apply to them? And why then did he charge the Twelve at the beginning of their mission to “Go nowhere rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel ” (Matt. 10:5)?

The last paragraph of this same section states, “Thus Catholics participating in interreligious dialogue, a mutually enriching sharing of gifts devoid of any intention whatsoever to invite the dialogue partner to baptism, are nonetheless witnessing to their own faith in the kingdom of God embodied in Christ” (emphasis mine).

I agree that when we engage in interreligious dialogue with Jews, we, through our conversation and the witness of our lives– even apart from inviting them to baptism or from sharing any part of the Gospel message– are yet giving witness to God in Christ, particularly since, in this case, our dialogue partners know we are Christians. But to say we may witness to God without speaking of Christ or the necessity of baptism (CCC 1256) is not to say that the Jewish people do not need to come to faith in Christ and be baptized. Why then did Peter say to the 3,000 Jews at Pentecost, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:37- 38)?

Growing up in a conservative Jewish home in Brooklyn, New York, I experienced considerable amounts of anti-Semitism, often from Catholics through whom, though I did not understand so at the time, the f ace of Christ was disfigured. It is not difficult for me to understand the reluctance– or, perhaps more accurately, the aversion– that most Jews have to hearing the Gospel.

Yet God, in his infinite grace and mercy, reached out to each member of my immediate family, my parents included, and not only brought us through those experiences but into the Church– and thereby into communion with the very people, though few, whose anti-Semitism had caused us such travail.

Here is a remarkable irony: In a day past when hatred, distrust, and misunderstanding prevailed between Catholics and Jews, the Church “targeted” Jews for conversion. Now, in a time when, thanks to good fruits of Vatican II and the tireless efforts of dialogue, new attitudes of trust and understanding are being built, Catholics speak of withdrawing the Gospel message?

Sadly, much of the wording of “Reflections” can be found in an article, dated July 14, 2001, by Eugene Fisher entitled, “Why convert the saved?” http://www.thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/archive_db.cgi?tablet-00544 . The title, referring to the Jewish people as “the saved,” is as problematic as its contents. The article states that “the Church believes that Judaism is salvific for Jews” and that “the Church needs today to concentrate what might be its mission ‘with’the Jews, not ‘to’ the Jews.” Sympathetic to the “centuries of collective mistreatment of Jews by Christians,” Dr. Fisher anticipates a certain amount of skepticism from the Jewish people and poses this question:

“But, many Jews would say, though the Church has abandoned any formal attempts to convert Jews, and understands itself to be ‘with’ and not ‘over against’ the Jews, don’t Catholics still in their hearts long for their conversion? Might not that longing, frustrated, pop out again one day as it has so often over the centuries?”

Dr. Fisher responds with an evaluation of the official prayer for the Jews in the liturgy of the Church and concludes, “So, no, the Chu rch does not wish the conversion of the Jews as a people to Christianity. Otherwise Catholics would at least pray for it.”

But we do. We pray in that liturgical prayer “that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption.” Dr. Fisher states that “the phrase ‘fullness of redemption’ here is not historical but looks to the Last Things.” However, the “fullness of redemption” is to be found only in Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12), and unless we embrace him in this life we cannot presume to be happy with him in the next.

Can the people of Israel be saved apart from faith in Christ? The Catechism says they can be. Not that they will be saved or that they are already saved, but that they and anyone who, “through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience– those too may achieve eternal salvation ” (CCC 847). But such an end is not ours to presume. Rather it is given to us to “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation” (Mark 16:15), and, Paul would add, “to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16).

As stated in Dominus Jesus, “There is only one salvific economy of the One and Triune God, realized in the mystery of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of the Son of God, actualized with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, and extended in its salvific value to all humanity and to the entire universe. No one, therefore, can enter into communion with God except through Christ, by the working of the Holy Spirit” (12).

It is because God is faithful to his promises and to his irrevocable covenant with Israel that he sent his Son to do what the Law could not do– not to abolish, and certainly not to leave them in their sins, but to fulfill (Matt. 5:17), to bring about a new and everlasting covenant (Jer. 31:31- 34; Heb. 8:8- 13; 13:20).

I say “Amen” to the document’s statement that “this evangelizing task no longer includes the wish to absorb the Jewish faith into Christianity and so end the distinctive witness of Jews to God in human history. ” In becoming a Christian, my Jewish faith was not absorbed into Christianity. It was transformed into the fullness of what was promised to the Jews by the One who promised. Often, as I travel and teach our glorious faith, I tell people that the most Jewish thing a person can do is to become Catholic.

I have no doubt, your Eminence, that the Jewish people would be very pleased with this document, relieved perhaps to feel that they are no longer the target of the Christian agenda. But one day they will know (Zech. 12:10). One day they will see him (Rev. 1:7). One day they will bow before him (Phil. 2:9-11). And in that day, we will hang our heads in shame, before them and before the God who gave his Son for them.

“You knew?” they will say to us. “You knew that we did not know the Messiah, that we did not recognize him at his first coming? And you did nothing? Were you afraid of our rejection of you? Did you not care more for our souls? Should we not have known the new birth and the graces that flow from the Messiah who came through our loins? Should we not have tasted of his body and blood?”

Cardinal Keeler, I have spent the last week reading hundreds of pages spanning 37 years of documents since Nostra Aetate was published in 1965. I am grateful for the Church’s confirmation of God’s eternal covenant with Israel as a people. However, I am troubled with the apparent conclusions of those involved in the Catholic-Jewish dialogue. To say that we can work together in a common cause with the Jewish people is not to say that we should not speak to the Jews about their own Messiah (cf. Rom. 10:1- 17).

Please accept my gratitude, your Eminence, for bearing with me through this letter, which a communicator more apt than I probably could have accomplished in half the space. I pray for you daily.

“May the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in you that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen” (Heb. 13:20- 21).

In the love of our Messiah and his blessed Mother,

Rosalind Moss

Rosalind Moss is a staff apologist for Catholic Answers. She co-hosted the EWTN series Household of Faith and edited Home at Last, a book of conversion stories available from Catholic Answers.