It took Pope Francis four months to respond to a letter from more than 400 Jewish scholars and rabbis regarding the Hamas terrorist attack. In his reply, he uses many words but avoids naming names. In doing so, he jeopardizes trust in the Christian-Jewish dialogue.
By Gregor Maria Hoff
Even the Vatican's initial statements were dubious. After Hamas's terrorist attack on Israel on October 7th of last year, grief for the victims and shock at the brutality of the massacres mingled with a comprehensive perspective on the multifaceted background and complex causes of a conflict that had reached an unprecedented level of escalation. Islamist terrorists murdered Jews wherever they could find them. They slaughtered, raped, and abducted. Genocidal violence (Dan Diner) struck Israel with unbridled brutality and devastating force. The Vatican joined in the worldwide horror. However, a different tone characterized the Roman reactions, including those of the Pope. Concern for peace in the Middle East was combined with a protective gaze toward the Christians in the Holy Land. Understandable—if it weren't for the lack of an unequivocal condemnation of both the act and the perpetrators responsible for 10/7.
Was Israel, from Rome's perspective, to be held accountable? The fact that this question arose for many Jews is a warning sign for Vatican diplomacy and remains a point of contention for all future initiatives in Jewish-Catholic dialogue. Since the Second Vatican Council, this dialogue has not only fundamentally changed Church doctrine but, above all, has built trust among Jews in the Roman Catholic Church leadership.
So, last November, more than four hundred Jewish scholars and rabbis appealed to the Pope. They asked Francis for a firm sign of his loyalty to Israel and Judaism – including an unequivocal statement on who bears responsibility for the barbaric escalation of violence. They had to wait four months for a reply. Now it has arrived. Why did the Holy Father take so long? Because he had to grapple with his position? And has now arrived at a clarity that is needed not only from a Jewish perspective? How difficult can it be, in the face of the horrors of October 7th, to say what a Pope cannot help saying after the Shoah?
The papal letter is worth philological analysis. While its tone is conciliatory and peace-oriented, and its closing address is embracing, the semantic hidden depths where the Pope's opinion must be sought are of interest. What matters is what the Pope doesn't say – a precarious double strategy, especially in the Catholic Church's relationship with Judaism. There is no question: the Church stands with Israel. But how? The Pope's two-page letter, his first written statement, begins with a global political assessment. Wars are increasing worldwide. "Unfortunately, the Holy Land has not been spared this pain, and since October 7th, it too has been caught in a spiral of unprecedented violence. My heart is torn at the sight of what is happening in the Holy Land, by the power of so much division and so much hatred."
Language policy dedifferentiation
Division? The semantic softening of Hamas terror gains its significance in the contextualization that Francis uses for October 7th as an epiphenomenon of his thesis about the new world wars. Against this backdrop, the Pope's emotional landscape takes shape. He wishes to express his "special closeness and affection for the peoples who inhabit the land that bears witness to the history of Revelation." What sounds pastoral and humane amounts to a linguistic and political blurring of distinctions. As in the entire text, what is missing is what determines the direction of the letter: naming the warring parties. Who attacked and who defended themselves. The Pope must acknowledge the immeasurable suffering of the people in the Gaza Strip, but not at the cost of concealing what triggered it and who has been and continues to be in control of the actions in Gaza. It is Hamas that has dictated the ongoing war to Israel and determines the logic of its course. You don't have to look into the depths of their tunnel world and the weapons caches in hospitals to see that.
All the more important, then, is the Pope's affirmation of the Church's bond with Judaism. Yet even here, Francis cautiously qualifies his statement. For "the relationship that unites us with you is special and unique, without, of course, ever obscuring the relationship with others and also the obligation towards them." While this is true in principle, in the given context it amounts to a relativization. The Pope wants to offer humanitarian redress. But what does that mean concretely in light of the existential struggle facing Israel? The international community is increasingly distancing itself. South Africa has filed a lawsuit before the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Israel as a state and Jewish people worldwide are increasingly isolated. Against this backdrop, the word "relationship" takes on a particular resonance. The reference to the Church's "unique relationship" with Judaism touches upon a fundamental insight of Jewish-Catholic dialogue: no Church without Judaism. But what does this affirmation mean when it comes to readily available loyalty in a crisis? Theologically, Francis set a milestone with his key phrase that God continues to work among the people of the Old Covenant. But what does this mean for the shared life of the Church and Israel in covenant now?
At this point, the rhetorical approach of the Pope's letter is of interest. Francis speaks of "you" and "we." You Jews. We Christians. Religiously correct, no question. But if Judaism is not merely an opposite to the Church, but rather belongs to Christian identity—shouldn't we also draw meaningful linguistic conclusions from this? For example: Whoever attacks Jews also attacks us! Not only because of Jesus Christ and the Apostles and Mary, but because we understand ourselves as the common people of God, comprised of Jews and Christians. This insight, gained through Jewish-Christian dialogue, should be politically and religiously sound.
Like John Paul II, Francis also prayed at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. This must be remembered to emphasize what seems to be increasingly forgotten in the Vatican: that more than mere expressions of sympathy are needed if the foundation of trust built through dialogue since the Second Vatican Council is not to be destroyed. This is precisely what remains at stake when the Pope, in his belated reply, addresses the plight of Jewish people but fails to demonstrate that he is truly addressing their concerns. Has he grasped the trauma of October 7th for Jewish people worldwide? The consequences are undeniable: attacks against Jewish citizens are once again commonplace in European cities and beyond. It is not enough to condemn antisemitism in general but merely subsume it into the global web of "divisions and hatred." It is not enough to condemn violence without unequivocally identifying the perpetrators. It is no use invoking the “path of friendship, solidarity and cooperation” while the Jewish partner has to fight for its survival in its own country and at its borders.
Why is Cardinal Koch also silent?
The papal letter is dated the Feast of the Presentation of the Lord . Coincidence? In the Church's liturgical calendar, the Christmas season is drawing to a close. But the Pope is carrying on as before. He is not alone in this. Since October 7, 2023, Cardinal Kurt Koch, the Vatican official responsible for religious relations with Judaism, has remained silent. Unlike Patriarch Kirill, whom Koch condemned in the strongest terms for legitimizing the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Cardinal has refrained from commenting even four months after the Hamas attack on Israel. Perhaps because he considered it a matter for the top brass? In light of the papal letter now available, one is almost tempted to understand the Cardinal's silence.
About the author
Gregor Maria Hoff, born in 1964, is Professor of Fundamental Theology and Ecumenical Theology at the Catholic Theological Faculty of the Paris-Lodron University of Salzburg and advisor to the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews.
The article appeared in the international Catholic magazine "Communio" and was reproduced with the kind permission of Prof. Jan-Heiner Tück.
