Blood curse
Template:Short description Template:About Template:Pp-vandalism
_-_James_Tissot_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
The term "blood curse" refers to a New Testament passage from the Gospel of Matthew, which describes events taking place in Pilate's court before the crucifixion of Jesus, and specifically the alleged willingness of the Jewish crowd to accept liability for Jesus' death.<ref name=Beau>The Historical Jesus Through Catholic and Jewish Eyes. Bryan F. Le Beau, Leonard J. Greenspoon and Dennis Hamm, eds. Trinity Press International, 2000. pp. 105-106. Template:ISBN</ref>
Biblical narrative
Template:Bibleverse reads: Template:Blockquote
Interpretation
This passage has no counterpart in the other Gospels and is probably related to the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70 CE.<ref>Craig A. Evans, Matthew (Cambridge University Press, 2012) page 455.</ref> German Protestant theologian Ulrich Luz (b. 1938) describes it as "redactional fiction" invented by the author of the Matthew Gospel.<ref>Ulrich Luz, Studies in Matthew (William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005) page 58.</ref> Some writers, viewing it as part of Matthew's anti-Jewish polemic, see in it the seeds of later Christian antisemitism. In the view of the late Graham Stanton, a British New Testament scholar in the Reformed tradition, "Matthew's anti-Jewish polemic should be seen as part of the self-definition of the Christian minority which is acutely aware of the rejection and hostility of its 'mother' Judaism."<ref>Graham N. Stanton, A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew, T & T Clark, 1992; Westminster John Knox Press, 1993. p. 157. Template:ISBN On Matt. 27:25, in the note on p. 148, Stanton cites the work of German Protestant Karl Heinrich Rengstorf and American Jesuit J.A. Fitzmyer, among others.</ref> Howard Clark Kee has written, "The bitter words he [Matthew] attributes to the Jews have caused endless harm in arrousing anti-Jewish emotions."<ref>Howard Clark Kee, "The Gospel According to Matthew," The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary On the Bible, Abingdon Press, 1971. p. 642.</ref> Donald A. Hagner, a Presbyterian New Testament scholar and theologian, has written, "It cannot be denied that this statement, unfortunately, has been used to promote anti-Semitism. The statement is formulaic, and the reference to 'our children' does not make them guilty of the death of Jesus, let alone children or Jews of later generations."<ref>Donald A. Hagner, "Anti-Semitism", Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 2nd ed., Joel B. Green et al., eds., IVP Academic, 2013. p. 20. Template:ISBN</ref>
Anglican views
N. T. Wright, an Anglican New Testament scholar and theologian, has stated, "The tragic and horrible later use of Matthew 27.25 ('his blood be on us, and on our children') as an excuse for soi-disant 'Christian' anti-semitism is a gross distortion of its original meaning, where the reference is surely to the fall of Jerusalem."<ref>N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, London: SPCK; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. p. 546, n. 26. Template:ISBN</ref>
Anglican theologian Rowan Williams, then Archbishop of Wales, and who would soon become Archbishop of Canterbury, has written of Matthew's Gospel being made "the tool of the most corrupt and murderous misreading of the passion stories that has disfigured the Church's record".
Catholic views
In the Roman Catechism which was produced by the Council of Trent in the mid-16th century, the Catholic Church taught the belief that the collectivity of sinful humanity was responsible for the death of Jesus, not only the Jews.<ref>Norman C. Tobias, Jewish Conscience of the Church: Jules Isaac and the Second Vatican Council, Springer, 2017 p.115.</ref> In the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), the Catholic Church under Pope Paul VI issued the declaration Nostra aetate, which repudiated the idea of a collective, multigenerational Jewish guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus. It declared that the accusation could not be made "against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today".<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>
The late Franz Mussner, a German Catholic New Testament scholar and theologian, has stated, "No Christian can with a good conscience call upon Matt. 27:25 as a justification of his anti-Judaism. If the blood of Jesus comes upon the children of Israel, it comes upon them as a savior's blood."<ref>Mussner, Franz (1984). Tractate on the Jews: The Significance of Judaism for Christian Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress Press; London: SPCK. pp. 196-197. ISBN 0-8006-0707-4</ref>
Pope Benedict XVI in his 2011 book Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week wrote:<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Pilate's need to declare his innocence, "I am innocent of this man's blood", has been interpreted as a reversal of roles: although historically, Jesus was on trial before Pilate, Pilate is also on trial before Jesus.<ref>Heschmeyer, J., Herod and Pilate - on Trial, Catholic Answers, published on 28 March 2018, accessed on 24 November 2024</ref>
Chrysostom
St. John Chrysostom delivered a series of eight homilies to his Antioch congregation directed at members who continued to observe Jewish feasts and fasts. Critical of this, he cast Judaism and the synagogues in his city in a critical and negative light. His homilies were expressed in the conventional polemical form.<ref>See Wilken, p.xv, and also "John Chrysostom" in Encyclopedia Judaica</ref>
As quoted by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Catena Aurea (1263), Chrysostom said: Template:Blockquote