You, me, Jerry and the Anti-Christ
By Alan M. Schwartz
At Passover our thoughts naturally turn to freedom, redemption, renewal. But as the Hagaddah also presciently reminds us, "in every generation, there are those who rise up against us ..." This is not Jewish paranoia, but rather a perceptive sense of reality and history. From the Middle Ages and onward into modern times, anti-Semites have accused Jews of (and persecuted them for) using Christian blood in the Passover matzah. It's not quite what we face today, but then, who can tell which scape-goating lie will unleash the violent demons of a racist mind?
Recently, Rev. Jerry Falwell favored us with the "wisdom" of his insight that the "anti-christ " must be a male Jew. (At least we can be assured that the Devil is not a cross-dresser.) Aside from the sheer offensiveness of the statement--for which Mr. Falwell apologized following blistering criticism from the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish voices--what are the implications of this dismal incident? With all due respect to David Letterman, here are my Top Five:
1. Far-out, right-wing fundamentalists and ultra-literalists in any religion inevitably develop an insufferable and indefensible arrogance. The conviction that one has a private pipeline to heaven gives rise to the delusion that one can and does know the mind of God, God's messengers, and the manifestations of God's will.
2. Mr. Falwell's own political instincts need work. To believe that his statement, conjuring up as it does a centuries-old libel, would be accepted either by Jews or anyone else as a legitimate theological insight, is to show a poor grasp of political and social reality. It also creates some doubt as to the validity of Falwell's other views, which in fact may be perfectly well founded and respectable. Lesson: Don't foul your own nest.
(Mr. Falwell also recently circulated the notion that one of the Teletubbies (children's TV characters)--Tinky Winky, to be precise --is actually a subliminal gay role model because its costume is purple and its headgear is a triangle. He also pointed out as further evidence of homosexuality that Tinky carries a handbag, demonstrating that Falwell's powers of discernment go even beyond the ability to recognize the disguised ant-christ, since none of the Teletubbies--four fluffy, pear-shaped, infantile aliens--is gender-identifiable in any way).
3. In re-opening this spiritual Pandora's box, of the Jew as anti-christ, Falwell sprays contempt in two directions at once: First, of course, upon the Jewish people. The portrait of the Jew as the diabolical, the ungodly, the very embodiment of evil, has long been recognized as a major source of poisonous anti-Semitism dating back to the early days of Christianity and to what theologians have aptly called "the teaching of contempt."
Second, however, is the implication of contempt for the intelligence of Falwell's followers, his presumed audience. Many polls have demonstrated that evangelical Christians are far more diverse in their personal and political views than the "American Gothic" stereotype would have it. Falwell' gratuitous and insulting comment, and the expectation of its acceptance, only feeds into that witless stereotype.
4. Falwell's statement reflects the lamentable, all-too-common human need to compartmentalize and personify evil in a convenient, easily recognized form--in this case, every male Jew (shades of Pharaoh!) -- so as to facilitate scape-goating and the targeting of others as being responsible for sins and faults for which we don't wish to accept blame. The traditional (and I would assert, more reasonable) Jewish view is that there is an element of, a potential for, evil (the yetzer ha'ra) in all of us, of whatever religion, or of none, and our responsibility is to recognize it, temper it, keep it well leashed. And to pay the consequences of not doing so.
5. Finally, Jews will no longer allow themselves to be defined by others, especially when such descriptions are pejorative or involve specious charges, selective morality and hostile imagery. We defend ourselves without feeling defensive. And we demand respect of others without being offensive.
Jews differ on many things, perhaps too many. But there is, I think, agreement on this: No Jew will serve as the rhetorical punching bag for Mr. Falwell or anyone else acting shabbily in the name of religion.
|
|