Gavin D'Costa explores “the basic doctrines and the doctrinal trajectories” that have arisen since the postconciliar Catholic Church began to teach that Jews participate in an “irrevocable” covenant with God (vii). An introductory chapter on the nature of doctrinal authority usefully describes his methodology, but problematically suggests that Nostra Aetate has doctrinal value only in relation to conciliar constitutions (9, 14).
The ensuing chapters examine particular questions. In chapter 2, D'Costa asks: “Are Jewish ‘ceremonial laws,’ the religious practices deriving from the Mosaic covenant, effective in bringing right relationship between the Jewish people and the one true God?” (27). Concerned that post–Nostra Aetate teachings could unacceptably contradict earlier magisterial statements (31–34), he reasons that texts such as 1441's Cantate Domino—which deemed Jewish rituals to be “dead and deadening” (31) and that Jews were destined for hellfire—were conditioned by the church's limited worldview and assumptions about Jews at the time. He tentatively concludes that Jewish ceremonial laws are “alive and life-giving” because Jewish covenantal life is irrevocable (62). Moreover, he concludes that Nostra Aetate is not a “U-turn” from Cantate Domino because both uphold that there is no salvation apart from Christ (49). This logic seems premised on a questionable separation of orthopraxy from orthodoxy if the radically different Christian behaviors toward Jews fostered by the two documents are taken seriously.
Relatedly, D'Costa correctly observes that post–Vatican II Catholic teaching rejects both supersessionism and “dual covenant theology” in which Judaism is left “ontologically unrelated to Christ” (24). Regrettably, he skims over the understanding that “all salvation is from Christ, even within … Judaism” (23), which is supportable, for example, by Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, and Evangelii Gaudium. Thus, D'Costa prefers “a fulfilment view of Catholic theology” (64), which is prone to supersessionism. He also sees the various forms of “messianic Judaism”—which he helpfully categorizes (32–33, 63)—and Hebrew Catholics (183–187) as significant for fulfillment theology. Although “methodologically, Jewish voices per se cannot be the basis [better: sole determinant] for Catholic doctrine” (13), D'Costa seems to have insufficiently considered Jews’ self-understanding of their covenanting with God. The chapter's opening question, for example, seems unaware that Jews follow the mitzvot not to bring about a right relationship with God but in response to the God who graciously covenants with the people of Israel and instructs them how to live out that relationship.
In chapters 3 and 4, D'Costa asks: given that the Catholic Church accepts “the validity of the Jewish covenant … should [it not] affirm the promise of the land now found, in some way, in the land of Israel?” (64). It should embrace what he calls “minimalist Catholic Zionism” with regard to the State of Israel. Here he reasonably extrapolates from the post–Nostra Aetate doctrinal trajectory and is to be commended for insisting on respect for both Jewish religious self-understanding and the plight of Palestinians. One wonders, though, what exactly the words “Zionism” and “minimalist” mean in this context.
Finally, in chapter 5 D'Costa asks: should Catholics engage in missions to convert Jews? He concludes that “the magisterium teaches that witness to the Jewish people is required if Catholics are to be faithful to the truth of the Gospel” (186). This “witness” includes inviting Jews to baptism.
I follow what D'Costa calls the postconciliar “guide ropes” differently (13) and submit that postconciliar teaching is that: (1) the mission of the church toward Jews is dialogue, (2) in dialogue Christians always witness to Christ, not to persuade but to mutually share with Jews our respective faith relationships with God, and (3) this dialogue fulfills the church's evangelizing mandate regarding Jews because of our “‘intra-religious’ or ‘intra-familial’ … sui generis” relationship, as 2015's “Gifts and Calling” describes it. It is odd that the Catholic Church's constantly reiterated postconciliar commitment to nonconversionary dialogue with Jews is absent here.
D'Costa ends the book by characterizing his conclusions as “modest findings and fragile arguments” (190). This praiseworthy theological humility is worthy of emulation by everyone seeking to develop the Catholic Church's unprecedented post–Nostra Aetate legacy. This volume makes an important contribution to this development.
