No crosses at the Western Wall was the message sent by a rabbi to a group of Austrian Catholic bishops who refused to hide their Christian crosses before entering the courtyard of the Western Wall, the Jewish people’s holiest prayer site.
Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovitch refused to give the bishops access to the site and avoided meeting the ecclesiastic delegation of approximately 20, led by Archbishop of Vienna, Christoph Schonborn.
Rabinovitch denied that the incident, which took place Thursday, smacked of religious intolerance.
“Crosses are a symbol that hurts Jewish feelings,” said Rabinovitch who refused to elaborate on precisely how or why the crosses were so offensive.
Unfortunate but understandable given Christianity’s history with the Jews.
Since Orthodox Jews routinely beat up or harass Christians who proselytize, this comes as no surprise. Yesterday’s victim has no right to be today’s tyrant.
dead (many Christian) bodies strewn across Europe in WWII were in some ways offensive too. Perhaps the good Rabbi can explain why that was necessary….
The Cross bothers lots of people.
Remember, for the Jews, a cross (especially one with a corpus on it) is regarded as an idol. It is not at all surprising that the Jews would not want a graven image in their holiest site. If the bishops wished to visit the Western Wall, they can and should have done it in street clothes.
I would not want a group of rabbis visiting the Church of the Holy Sepulcher decked out in [i]talit[/i] and [i]tefillin[/i]. I would explain respectfully that if they wish to visit our “holiest site,” they need to do so in respectful attire, and not in the “battle dress” of their religion.
No. 3 — The reason why it was “necessary” was that Hitler had marched the Herrenvolk across the face of Europe, declaring war on many nations (including on the United States) and threatening western liberal democracies. Surely you’re not suggesting those pesky Jews caused WWII or necessitated our involvement in it? I’m sure that would come as much surprise to those who were gassed in the concentration camps while Allied bombers couldn’t be bothered to drop a few bombs on the gas chambers and crematoria.
Christ’s temple was destroyed and rebuilt in three days.
The vestigial temple wall in Jerusalem has been replaced by the Temple of Christ.
The Talis is the fringe on a garment commanded in Leviticus, and the Tefilin is a little box containing bible verses and prayers. I would have no objection from a Jew wearing them in church — Jesus would most likely have worn them in his day.
The Chief rabbis of Israel are as much politicians as religious leaders, wielding power in often obnoxious and tyrannical ways. Forbidding the cross at the wall is more about prejudice and politics as it is about religion. I’ve never seen or heard of anyone stopped at the Kotel (Wall) wearing a cross, and there are no regulations AFAIK against doing so, so I think the rabbi had an axe to grind with these Austrian clergymen.
no they certainly did not cause WWII – but much Christian blood was shed in order to liberate the Jews. You’d think the good Rabbi would be more appreciative….
I wonder if anyone else commenting here has been to the Western/Wailing Wall in Jerusalem – presumably some would have. I walked the length of the Wall in early 1998 and would recommend that unless one has actually been there it is better not to comment on a situation that has the Wall as context.
It’s instructive to realize that in modern Judaism the whole Jewish people are understood to be the Victim, and thus a Christian conception of Jesus Christ as Paschal Victim and the sacrifice offered once for all is simply irrelevant. This is the year 5767-8 in the Jewish calendar, not 2007.
Chris, the Cross was used as a symbol of hate in anti-semitic pogroms (riots) in Europe for hundreds of years. The infallible catholic church preached sermons against these “Christ-killers,” and then tacitly approved of the destruction their followers wrought. So I can understand Jews regarding the Cross as a painful symbol. However I think that this issue was a purely political move.
Tacit, I’m Jewish and lived in Israel for years. Wrong is wrong, and the pathetic power struggle at the Wall deserves to be condemned as much as historic antisemitism is.
[blockquote]the infallible catholic church preached sermons against these “Christ-killers,†and then tacitly approved of the destruction their followers wrought.[/blockquote]
Good to know Anti-Semitism is roundly condemned here. Too bad the ‘last acceptable prejudice’ isn’t.
It would interesting if you would elaborate a bit on your comment #11, justinmartyr.
#8 Chris says:
Chris, the internet being what it is, I can’t tell if you meant that comment to be taken seriously. But if you did, it’s a rather breathtaking thing to say; not unlike suggesting that African-Americans should be “appreciative” of white Americans for ending slavery.
If what I’ve read about WW2 is even remotely correct, then the Allies were not fighting to “liberate the Jews,” mostly weren’t that interested in the Jews, and in fact only late in the war when the concentration camps began to be liberated even really believed that anything had been going on.
Combined with the centuries of Christian persecution and murder of Jews — pretty much every Crusade to the Holy Land kicked things off by indulging in a pogrom against local Jews, just for instance — I think that expecting the Jewish people to be “appreciative” of Christians in general is, let’s say, a bit much. “Gee, thanks for not killing us recently! That’s really swell of you!”
TACit: Israel has a parliamentary system rather than an American winner-takes-all presidential system. To become Israeli prime minister the largest party must cobble together a majority by making agreements with minor parties. The religious parties will typically swing to whoever can form a majority so long as they get the say on the religious issues affecting the country. The rabbis of the religious parties thus have dictatorial powers over all citizens (religious and not) regarding spiritual matters.
How does this affect the population?
-The rabbis determine the curricula for religious education of all Jewish Israelis, regardless of the wishes of parents
-Jews and gentiles may not marry in the country, and only Orthodox Jewish rabbis may preside at ANY non-Arab weddings. (It doesn’t matter if you are a Christian Jew, reformed Jew, an atheist, or otherwise.)
-Non-Jews may not be buried in Jewish graveyards–resulting in almost zero burial rights for non-Jews who are not Arabs
– Men may divorce their wives, but women may not divorce their husbands without spousal approval, even in cases of abuse.
-Dietary restrictions, and transport restrictions on the population during holidays
-Huge restrictions on freedom of speech (or proselytization, if you will)
-And control of policy regarding Jewish holy sites.
Those who control the holy sites have tremendous power, and you’ll see a constant struggle between groups to dictate policy. The Western Wall, or Kotel, is one of those hot spots. It has been dictated that Jewish women, for example, may not pray as a group at the Wall, and will be forcibly stopped if they do so.
Based on my experiences in Israel, I think that the latest brouhaha has little to do with a few clergyman wearing crosses (most Israelis see Christian clergy on a daily basis, and don’t care), and much to do with who is in power and has an ax to grind.
Hope that helps.
As my dear mom always told me, when you are a guest in some elses house, and being a guest means you are there at their pleasure, there are 3 things to remember…
1) you get to follow their rules
2) you don’t get to whine about their rules because
3) you get to leave if you can’t follow the rules.
If there was a religious objection to the crucifix being worn at the Wailing Wall, and one did not choose to remove it or conceal it, there is no other Christian choice but to depart. It is not a difficult choice to make. I’ve been to the Wall and discovered I can’t approach the Wall from the men’s vantage point. I have a choice. I can approach from the women’s side, or not at all. Demanding that the holiest site for Jews accept another religious expression is ridiculous. Whether or not anyone might be offended by the wearing of traditional Jewish worhip garments in a church is irrelevant (and ridiculous IMHO). Demanding the removal or concealment of a crucifix in a CHURCH is an outrage. I’ve experienced a new rector tell the clergy in the parish that they weren’t to wear a cross with their vestments and were not allowed to kneel during the service. I’m so glad I’m no longer part of TEC.
P. S. The Austrian bishops were OK with it, so I don’t know why this is a story.
No. 17, I think you may have misunderstood me.
I agree with what you stated. I was addressing the statements of some Christians that the Jews were somehow needlessly offended by a “cross.” I was explaining that (a) to devout Jews, the crucifix is an idol; and (b) flipping it around, I can’t imagine the custodians of the Church of Holy Sepulchre allowing a visit by Lubavitchers in full Jewish prayer “battle dress” (and rightly so).
[blockquote] it’s a rather breathtaking thing to say; not unlike suggesting that African-Americans should be “appreciative†of white Americans for ending slavery. [/blockquote]
What a strange thing to say, as if Black Americans weren’t appreciative of those who freed them. Until FDR most blacks stayed with the “party of Lincoln” out of just that appreciation.
Are you insinuating that black Americans ought to hold a grudge against all whites for slavery, or at least hold them all guilty? Isn’t that the same kind of collective guilt that fosters the very prejudice we are trying to eradicate?
The cross is offensive to Jews because they do not recognize Jesus as the Christ, and have throughout history been accused of murdering Him. What I find curious is that there are Episcopal Churches that have resident Rabbi’s on their staff, welcome Jews to Holy Communion, and believe Jews can and are saved apart from Jesus. — I find [i]that[/i] offensive.
The cross bothered Jesus too. Killed him. But then, he was a Jew so I guess they have a point.
wportbello: The Orthodox sect didn’t build the Wall, and don’t own it. They do however dictate what happens as you approach it. Your analogy doesn’t hold up very well.
And I don’t know of any one who believes that the Austrians should force access to the wall with their crosses. We were discussing simply political hypocrisy.
The problem is the twisted cross – a symbol of the the greatest evil in the history of the world. Of course we no longer recognize evil and have nothing to say.
I don’t have a problem with this — nor am I surprised.
Compare Deuteronomy 21:23 [ http://tinyurl.com/38vo7g ]
and Galatians 3:12 [ http://tinyurl.com/25r2h4 ]
“”I feel the same way about a Jew putting on a tallit and phylacteries and going into a Church” —Rabbi Rabinovitch
I don’t. Jews are welcome in my church any time, with or without tallits and phylacteries. I believe most Anglicans would say the same.
Ouroboros [#5 & 18]: The article says “cross,” not crucifix. Toward the end, it says that Rabbi Rabinovitch has prohibited Latin crosses. If crucifixes were the issue, I suspect Rabinovitch would have said so; it looks less extreme than banning crosses altogether.
[#5 ]
The US did not fight WWII to save the Jews. It fought the war to destroy a lethal threat to its national security. Attacking the camps would have served no purpose towards defeating Hitler and ending the war. It would have diverted resources that were better utilized elsewhere. The US military was under no obligation to expend effort to protect the lives of foreign nationals at the expense of American soldiers. What happened in the camps was terrible, but utterly irrelevant to the prosecution of the war.
Also remember that our principal ally in the war (the Soviet Union) murdered a greater number of its own people then did Hitler’s Germany, and (strangely enough) no one has ever suggested that we should have bombed Kolyma. I wonder why?
carl
One wonders if part of the problem may have been that these were Austrian bishops. What with trainloads of people coming in and never leaving, fumes, and so on, there are those who feel Austrian locals must have had some idea of what was going on.
It’s not unusual for Jews, even not Orthodox, to have a negative reaction to Christian religious display and especially a negative reaction when a Jew converts. There’s a long history of restrictions and pogroms, and it is by no means confined to Catholic Europe, although it did flourish there. While we, as Christians, respect and honor the Jewish roots of the faith, many Jews don’t necessarily return the respect. As the commenter said, it’s their house, and you follow their rules.
Thank you, rabbi, for the free Christian-positive publicity of an event that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. Score Christians 1, rabbi 0.
Perhaps, I am mistaken, but when John Paul II visited the Wailing Wall seven years ago, wasn’t he wearing his pectoral cross?
I was in Jerusalem in the spring. Tensions are great in that place. I was with a Christian group there for pilgrimage. Our instructions, were to take no actions or make any gestures that might be offensive to others. In the old city we did not wear crosses and our bibles were not in view. We only took them out at Christian religious sites for study. As we went onto the temple mount Bibles were to be removed from searched back packs; however the palestinian (muslim) guards allowed us to carry them in with the agreement we wouldn’t bring them out on the mount. I am a woman, I prayed at the wall on the women’s side. I saw quite a few Jewish women there (looked like they were groups to me — but I don’t know). Control of the Old City is a major big deal with the divided up districts having distinct characteristics. It is only right that we who visit there not do anything to mess with that balance. When we were at the site of calvary (the one inside the walls) we began to sing and were quieted immediately as only “authorized” religious expressions will be tolerated. It is the way things are — and if we want to have the priviledge of visiting there we should listen carefully to our guides and take a low profile.
No. 27. Carl, that’s fine, but then let’s not suggest that the reason that Christian blood was spilled across Europe in the 1940s was so that Jewish lives could be saved or that the Jews somehow must be grateful for Christian soldiers’ sacrifices in WWII.