| Letter#59 Heresy
|
|
| My dear Mr. Isaacs: |
|
| Following your
suggestion, I called to see Mr. C... F..... at the Copley Plaza Hotel last night, during
his stopover while enroute to Montreal. I found him a very agreeable fellow, as you said
he is. All through our conversation, I saw signs of friendliness towards the Catholic
Church on account of her defense of the Jews against anti- Semitism. His interest was in
Jews, and not in Judaism, and it did not seem to extend beyond a defense of them against
the injustices they suffer in Nazi-controlled territory. His understanding of Judaism, like that of most Americanized Jews, was limited to knowing that Jews are circumcised, barmitzvah, keep the Saturday Sabbath, Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah, refrain from eating pork, & etc. When it came to principles that are Jewish, he was so lacking in knowledge of them that it was necessary to talk Judaism to him, for without that knowledge it is impossible to understand that Judaism in its fulness is Christianity. Ah, he did know of the Spanish Inquisition. He wanted to know if "the Catholic Church still holds non-Catholics to be heretics, as she did the Jews and Moslems in Spanish Inquisition days." This was not a surprise, because of all things related to the Catholic Church during the twenty centuries of her existence, the Spanish Inquisition is foremost in the minds of Jews. Considering that my conversation with your friend came right after I had written to you about the Spanish Inquisition, a word regarding heresy and heretics will add to your understanding of the subject, as I hope my outline of it last night enlightened Mr. C... F..... It is commonplace for non-Catholics to assume that the Jews in Spain were all held to be guilty of heresy; that both Jews and Protestants are considered by Catholics to be heretics. This is a false notion, based upon failure to realize that heresy charges by the Catholic Church are brought against Catholics, and not against persons who openly profess to be Jews, Moslems, or Protestants, though they may believe in some things that are heretical. Jews, for instance, are, from a religious point of view, persons who believe in Judaism. Hence to hold Judaism as a faith to be heretical, would be saying, inferentially, that Christianity originated in a heresy. As for Protestants, while such originators of their churches as Luther, Calvin, Knox, Queen Elizabeth, and other rebellious Catholics were heretics, the Protestants of today, never having been members of the Catholic Church, are not classified as heretics, though they believe in some teachings held by the Church to be heretical. I was sorry not to have had a copy of "Jewish Influence in Christian Reform Movements" at hand last night when I dealt with that point, as therein Rabbi Louis I. Newman, of New York, correctly says,
The Maranos were tried, and rightly found guilty of heresy. They
were under the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church through baptism, hence their public
declaration that they were Catholics, while they were secretly following Jewish practices,
was heretical. It was their action that caused the Inquisition to be instituted in Spain
in 1480, which lasted until 1492.
Heresy is a sin. It is so declared in Jewish as well as Christian law. St. Paul enumerates heresies among "works of the flesh" (Gal. 5:20). A Catholic who denies one or more of the teachings of Christ is held by the Church to be a heretic. The Catholic Church teaches with absolute authority in matters of faith and morals, hence she is obligated to declare, as did St. Paul,
This applies to the denial of a single basic Christian teaching, for
to deny one of God's teachings is to deny God. Hence a Catholic who proclaims belief in
only nine of the Ten Commandments, for instance, is a heretic, as the denial of one of the
Commandments is a denial of God, its Author. The same thing applies to every article in
the Apostles Creed, and other teachings of the Church.
Charges of heresy are not so frequent among non-Catholics today as they were in the religious past, on account of religious indifference, and theological incoherence. In our country, in which about one-third of the Jews of the world reside, a man may believe anything or nothing and be designated by sons of Israel as a Jew. Rabbi Stephen S. Wise could stand up in his "Free Synagogue," in Carnegie Hall, and shout out,
This sensational statement obtained the desired front page in the
public press throughout the country. Of course, no one can be charged with heresy in a
Synagogue that is "Free" from dogma, and from control of any one but the Rabbi
himself. Heresy assumes an authoritatively defined belief and practice, such as obtains in
the Catholic Church. Hence I asked at the time, "Who has any right to try Rabbi Wise
for heresy, in a pulpit where he may speak on any thing he desires, in any manner that
suits him personally? The Rabbi was only making a 'stageplay' when he challenged any one
to try him for denying the Mosaic miracle." The so-called Jew or Jews, Einstein, went
a step further. He denied belief in a personal God, while speaking in a Jewish Theological
Seminary. Was he tried for heresy? Not at all. He would very likely have been, and rightly
so, were he a member of an Orthodox Synagogue.
That the charges against Spinoza and da Costa were warranted, no one
can rightly deny, for the Jews of Amsterdam had a definite doctrinal code which they had a
right to uphold, as did the Church and the State in Spain. Yet these Rabbis, who belonged
to the Amsterdam community that was started by the Maranos (the
pretended-to-be-Catholics), who cursed the Catholic Church and Spain for the deportation
of their forbears, deemed it legitimate to curse, scourge, excommunicate, and drive from
Amsterdam those of their fellow-Israelites who were guilty of heresy. To these Iberian
descendents a Dutch Auto da Fe was perfectly legitimate, but not one in Spain or Portugal,
where the welfare of the State as well as the Church was a stake. |
|
|
|
|
|