Making Myths

Agent327

Observer
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Messages
16,102
Location
In orbit
Book review

Leonard Rutgers, Making Myths: Jews in Early Christian Identity Formation

Admittedly not the most catching title imaginable by this professor of Late Antiquity, currently holding the only academic chair in this field in the Netherlands. Rutgers studied archaeology and religious history in Amsterdam, Rome, Vienna, Jerusalem and the US. Winning international fame with his research into the catacombs of Rome, he is currently investigating the relations between Jews, Christians and polytheists in Antiquity. In his recently published book Making Myths he describes how during the 4th century the verbal animosity of the church fathers took to the streets. Christian church fathers were writing against 'the synagogue' since the 2nd century, the synagogue being a metaphore for all Jews within the Roman empire.

Following Nero's blaming of Christians for Rome's fires in 64 the first generation of church fathers developed the theory of 'true Israel', Verus Israel, presenting Christianity as the corrector and successor of Judaism. Around 400 this results in physical attacks on synagogues, which can be deduced first from the countless imperial instructions to protect synagogues sent to all parts of the empire. Archaeologically it can be seen from churches built upon the fundaments of synagogues, just as they appeared on top of pagan remains. Rutgers then argues that the ideological battle of the church fathers ultimately resulted in miltant anti-judaism: "The church fathers not only entrusted their exegesis onto parchment, they also preached in churches. And if it is endlessly lectured that the synagogue is synonomous with Evil, you can count on it that the listener will resort to action eventually." He refers to a research done at the Vrije Universiteit ('Free University', or VU, a nominally Protestant university in Amsterdam), which showed that when verbal abuse is being justified with religious principles listeners become extra aggressive.

In 533 emperor Justinian issues a law known as Novella 146, which 'advises' against the use of Hebrew and 'advises' the use of a Greek translation in synagogal liturgy. At this point the ideas of the church fathers permeated the law, which up til then had protected Judaism: "The church fathers did not read Hebrew, whereas in disputes often was referred to the bible. Being able to read the bible in its original language made it easy to win such a dispute." Insciptions in Jewish catacombs suggest, however, that this legislation also did not have the effect desired: until circa 500 Greek and Latin were used, but after that its use diminished. "Late antiquity also shows the rise of rabbinic Judaism with the talmud, a very distinct corpus of writings. This is written in Aramaic, and in early medieval funeral insciptions people resort to Hebrew again."

(Excerpt from an interview published in the Science section of NRC Handelsblad, December 19, 2009)
 
Sounds interesting. My only caveat is the implication that "the church fathers" all had the same views. Whereas one could hardly lump, say, Justin Martyr and John Chrysostom together when it comes to attitudes towards Judaism. Also, of course, there were a fair few "church fathers" who could read Hebrew, including Origen and Jerome.
 
Thanks. To be true, it's an excerpt, so I've shortened the original text quite a bit. The author indeed mentions that anti-judaism was one trend, and respect for the Judaic tradition another; both trends remained in existence throughout antiquity, and indeed throughout history.

If people are interested I can do a longer translation of the interview. (I've checked, but there's no mention of the interview in NRC's international edition; possibly there are mentions in English media, which I haven't checked yet.)
 
Sounds interesting. My only caveat is the implication that "the church fathers" all had the same views. Whereas one could hardly lump, say, Justin Martyr and John Chrysostom together when it comes to attitudes towards Judaism. Also, of course, there were a fair few "church fathers" who could read Hebrew, including Origen and Jerome.

Jerome (Hieronymus of Strydon) delivers a good example of the two streams in theology when it comes to Judaism: his philological work, which resulted in the Latin Vulgata, was criticized by Augustine for attaching too much value to the Hebrew language. Chrysostom ("Golden Mouth") was a typical example of the anti-judaic trend; the verbal abuse and sheer lies he uttered when preaching on the Jews certainly didn't justify that name. The first stream is later exemplified when the expulsion of the Jews from Iberia wasn't followed by the Papal State - as one might perhaps expect -, although gettofication did occur there. The difference with the 4th century, when the emperor still intervened om behalf of threatened Jewish communities, is that now there were no papal instructions to the contrary. In Luther the two streams even come together: while delivering a completely new bible translation (into German), he also wrote fervently anti-Jewish statements.

I wouldn't say that Rutgers 'lumps' the church fathers together, though, and perhaps his statement on the lack of knowledge of Hebrew was merely intended to reflect the situation around 533, when Justinian issued his Novella, and not intended as referring to the church fathers in general (which indeed would be strange, if merely considering Jerome's Vulgata).
 
Back
Top Bottom