mentalblog.com comments:
That old-fashioned Jew-hatred by Alan M. Dershowitz
When does anti-Zionism cross the line into anti-Semitism? That is a question roiling college and university campuses across the world.
Harvard's President Lawrence Summers helped to stimulate constructive debate about this issue when he urged students and professors to challenge "vigorously" Israeli policies with which they disagree, but he condemned as "anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent" calls to single out only Israel for such extreme sanctions as divestment and boycott.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman joined this debate by writing that "Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic, and saying so is vile. But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is dishonest."
I too have joined this debate in my new book The Case for Israel, in which I argue that "It is important to understand that although criticism of Israel is not by itself anti-Semitism, there are certain kinds of criticism of Israel that are clearly anti-Semitic, even if the word Jew is never mentioned.
"An obvious instance is Amiri Baraka claiming in his poem that Israel and Sharon knew about the attack on the World Trade Center before it happened and warned 4,000 Israelis to stay away. Can anyone doubt that this variation on the blood libel is anti-Semitic to the core?"
Now a new blood libel against the Jews has been issued by a cardinal of the Catholic church who, according to James Carrol, who writes about Catholic matters for The Boston Globe, is "one of a small number of likely candidates to succeed Pope John Paul II."
Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Meridiaga, who is the archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, has been telling anyone who is willing to listen that "the Jews" are to blame for the scandal surrounding the sexual misconduct of priests toward young parishioners!
The Jews? How did Cardinal Rodriguez ever come up with this ridiculous idea? Here is his "logic." He begins by asserting that the Vatican is anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian. It follows, therefore, that "the Jews" had to get even with the Catholic Church, while at the same time deflecting attention away from Israeli injustices against the Palestinians.
The Jews managed to do this by arranging for the media which they, of course, control to give disproportionate attention to the Vatican sex scandal. Listen to Rodriguez's own words:
"It certainly makes me think that in a moment in which all the attention of the mass media was focused on the Middle East, all the many injustices done against the Palestinian people, the print media and the TV in the United States became obsessed with sexual scandals that happened 40 years ago, 30 years ago.
"Why? I think it's also for these motives: What is the church that has received Arafat the most times and has most often confirmed the necessity of the creation of a Palestinian state? What is the church that does not accept that Jerusalem should be the indivisible capital of the State of Israel, but that it should be the capital of the three great monotheistic religions?"
Rodriguez then goes on to compare the Jewish-controlled media with "Hitler," because they are "protagonists of what I do not hesitate to define as a persecution against the Church."
When asked whether he wanted to reconsider his attack, Rodriguez replied: "I don't repent sometimes it is necessary to shake things up."
THE PRIME media culprit is The Boston Globe, which has won numerous journalistic awards for its exposure of the sex scandal and coverup. The Globe is owned by The New York Times, which is controlled by the Sulzberger family. Hence the Jewish conspiracy.
The problem with this cockamamie theory is that the Jewish community of Boston was very close to, and admiring of, Cardinal Bernard Law, who presided over the archdiocese during the scandal. Law had built bridges between the Catholic and Jewish communities of Boston, and when the scandal was exposed by the very un-Jewish Boston Globe the Jewish community remained largely supportive of Law.
None of the leading media critics, lawyers or politicians who railed against the church was Jewish. Most were Catholic. But that didn't matter to the bigoted cardinal, who along with other classic anti-Semites believes that if there is a problem "the Jews" must be to blame for it.
As James Carrol, himself a Catholic, has characterized Rodriguez's "crackpot" mindset: "When the church has a problem here is the oldest move of all blame the Jews." Nor is Rodriguez the only current cardinal afflicted with such bigotry.
Cardinal Joseph Glemp, the primate of Poland, has blamed the Jews for Polish communism, alcoholism and collaboration with Hitler. He also accused Jews of trying to kill nuns. Other high-ranking priests, especially in Central America and Poland, have leveled similar anti-Semitic accusations against the Jews and Israel.
These blood libels demonstrate that the Vatican still has a problem with anti-Semitism at the top levels of its hierarchy, even after Vatican II declared anti-Semitism to be "a sin." How can serial sinners like Cardinals Rodriguez and Glemp retain their statures as princes of the Church while continuing to preach blood libels against the Jews?
Would a cardinal who advocated gay marriage or abortion not be defrocked? Why not defrock those cardinals who themselves commit the sin of anti-Semitism? This age-old problem will not go away unless the Vatican takes action to enforce its parchment protest against anti-Semitism.
The writer's latest book is The Case for Israel.
I understand your point, but the Flag Code of the US gives Congress the abillity to dictate when the US Flag will sit at half mast. The Flag Code also dictates that the US Flag must be raised higher than any other flag, so our Degel must also be a half mast.
True no one is going to punish this synagogue for not placing the flag at half mast, but it's not appropriate to publicly not do so.
I believe there might be Jewish laws against this sort of thing.
I really do not think that there are any halachot that govern the lowering of the Israeli flag. If there are, I would be very interested in seeing them pointed out. And Anon commenting above has a very good point about dina d'malchuta dina and the necessity to follow the US flag code. I appreciate that does not look great to lower the Israeli flag for the death of a Catholic leader, but I do not see that there existed a choice in the matter.
Alas, Tzemach -- I give you no peace. Not only are we "obsessed" with the Pope (at least, I am, but thanks for your patience) -- but the Canadian flag was at half mast for a week, and so the Canadian and Israeli flags outside Jewish schools were also at half mast. (The Israeli flag for the same reason of protocol - can't have Canadian flag at half mast, but the Israeli flag at full mast). Obsessed is the wrong word - i just think that JP2 is a major story, and that the Jewish dimensions around him, his life, and perhaps most of all the amazing coverage of the Jewish angle of his life in the last 2-3 weeks have been important, interesting and controversial. Even historic.
BTW - I quick count gives 14 bloghead posts, long and short, directly/indirectly connected to the Pope this year(since Jan).
orthomom, but the are halochot against commemorating a high priest of an idolatrous religion.
Paul, the only thing I can think of is how many people of a heavenly caliber we lost during the war in the same town where he grew up and I still can�t get over auto da fes and all that was done to destroy our Sephardic civilization. I don�t care for taboos, but my memory is long.
Now now Tzemach. Hakaras hatov. He did turn the papacy around from antisemitic fervor to an honest effort to begin healing, incomplete though it may have been. My thought on this, http://rebeljew.blogspot.com/200...aul-ii-
rip.html
Tzemach, I understand why it would bother you, but what do you suggest doing about the flag codes? Isn't dina d'malchuta dina important as well? I just don't see there being much of a choice here.
rebeljew, It's hard to tell when a force of individual imposing his will on history stops and waves of history carrying a person to the inevitable begin.
I highly doubt anyone would think that a Synagogue proudly displaying the degel would think they are honoring the leader of an idolatrous religion.
That is, of course, you think that Christianity and Catholic Christianity specifically is avoda zara. It's not clear and there are many meforshim that argue either side.
Even if you do accept Catholic theology as avoda zara, dina d'malchuta dina comes in to play. Of course the Ran in Nedarim says that Dina D'Malchuta Dina only applies in cases where you're afraid of getting kicked out of the land and since the US is a democracy...
alright I'm done, but the point is that there's clearly a halachic argument for allowing them to lower the degel.
Oh no! Atlas, do not let this slide into another papal הספד! Folks, please remember - we do not say הספדים in חב"ד! Therefore we can't possibly be obligated to say one here, not even for the reason of דרכי שלום!
see the update to the post.
There is fellow in my Shule who bough a house behind the Archdiocese of Boston. I was having a lunch in his house and inquired about a building visible behind his back yard. Oh, that's where they raped all the kids, he said calmly.
Tzemach
Well put. And with Acharei Mos and Kedoshim coming up, we would do well to be cautious. Still, if we do not give hakaras haTov when leaders (I consider the Pope a political leader) bravely face down blatant and widespread antisemitism, and try to move their own countrymen away from longstanding negative attitudes, how can we encourage their successors to follow suit and go even further?
One other thing:
Being that he was Polish and from the WWII era, he might have been well sheltered from the "waves of history", had he so desired. Case in point: Cardinal Glemp.
Its nothing short of a shanda for a Jewish synagogue even if it is of a non Halachic nature , to commemorate the death of a Pope.
May I propose having their ritual director say kaddish for him too.
In this case I think the past chief rabbi of Warsaw Joskowicz had it correct in the manner he welcomed the "heilige foterel" a few years back.
They are not commemortating the death of the Pope! (Not in a relgious sense anyway)
I don't live in Great Britain but I imagine that they would lower the flags there too when the monarch dies. Since the Queen is the head of the Church of England would lowering the Union Jack to half-mast be commemorating her as the Queen (read: dina d'malchuta dina) or as the head of the Church?
This isn't even about commemorating the Pope's death! It's about the Law of the Land and the rules governing whether any flag is allowed to be higher than the American flag. And it isn't. How would that look for a Jewish temple to be openly flouting the law? I'm not sure why this is even a little unclear!
I am not much bothered by the flags - they represent states and as such can be used to honor anyone.
But I do have it on good authority that a certain rather large conservative congregation not only had the rabbi's speech dedicated to the Pope last Shabat, but also said kadish for him.
Where is the congergation?
I find it VERY HARD to believe that a Conservative Congregation said Kaddish for the Pope.
I have known many many Conservative Rabbis - none of them would support such a practice.
Let me double check before I release the name. But I was told this by someone who was there.
Indeed, I confirmed it: Temple Emanuel (in Newton MA) rabbi did say a sermon about the Pope and then concluded with Kadish for him.
I will try to confrim this.
Confirmed
Commenting by HaloScan
