MANNA 89 Editorial - Racism Shrieks Out Of This Rabbi’s Words
Written by Rabbi Tony Bayfield Tuesday, 20 December 2005
The Editor took me to lunch. “Why are you so quiet?” he asked. “Why aren’t you more challenging and controversial? Why don’t you take issue with other sections of the community?”
“You are not the first person to ask me that,” I replied.
“First, I am a Jewish pluralist. I have a real passion for Reform Judaism and think that it has a lot to offer a lot of Jews. But I do not believe that it contains all Jewish truth. I think that all sections of the Jewish community have their importance and value and the survival of the community depends on all of us.
Second, I really do not like kicking my fellow Jews when they’re down. I suppose that my subconscious is saying that there but for the grace of HaShem go I.
Third, we have a unique set up in this country with an established ‘church’, the United Synagogue and an ‘Archbishop of Canterbury’ in the Chief Rabbi. If I were them I would defend that position for all it is worth. It is a huge problem for us but one has to be realistic.
Finally, and most importantly, I do not think it plays well with British Jewry”.
“What doesn’t?” said the Editor. “Publicly challenging the Jewish establishment and having public slanging matches,” I replied. “There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that it works. It makes good newspaper copy, I understand that, but it does not bring us in more members.”
“Jonathan Sacks and I, as you know, have been trying to work out a modus vivendi for years. The problematic issues are tackled behind the scenes where there is more scope for manoeuvre than in the glare of the press. You may remember us coming out with a formulation quite recently:
‘Religious differences, which should always be treated with respect, should not prevent different sections of the community from working together for the common good. Indeed, wherever they can do so, they must do so’.”
The Editor looked decidedly unconvinced and, being an unreconstructed 1960s liberal, I could understand why. When in doubt, talk – so I went on: “The problem arises for me when I find it impossible to respect the difference, the other point of view. Let me give you an instance which is playing on my mind at the moment.
“A couple of weeks ago the Jewish Chronicle ran a prominent headline over an article in which they reported a speech by the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, Ovadiah Yosef. He said explicitly that Hurricane Katrina had been God’s punishment for George Bush’s support for the withdrawal from Gaza. He went on to say that the victims had been poor blacks because you could not expect Torah amongst blacks and blacks do not have a God. The term blacks, by the way, was his term not mine. The article went on to quote other “sages” – a renowned kabbalist, for instance – saying the same sort of thing.
“I was shocked rigid,” I plunged on. “But what shocked me most was that there was no editorial comment. Not one single letter, I am told, was received, let alone published, protesting. The JC had to commission a response from a lay leader of the orthodox community, Lord Winston”.
The Editor was not surprised. “I think that a lot of British Jews feel that since it was said in Israel rather than here it does not concern them. It is not news – we have heard that sort of thing before. And I think that some would say that he is a great Torah scholar who has made an outstanding contribution to Torah learning and we would not want to damage his reputation as a Torah scholar by attacking his bizarre political views.”
I shook my head. “You may be right as far as some are concerned,” I said, “but I think this has a lot to do with that UJIA research report – Beyond Belonging by Steven M Cohen and Keith Kahn Harris – that says that the British Jewish community is unique in its obsession with authenticity. Although most people do not want it for themselves, they think that far-right Judaism, haredi Judaism is the real thing, they respect those you call Torah scholars as being exponents of authentic Judaism and they do not appreciate attacks on their meshugases whereas they mind far less attacks on the meshugases of those of us who are, in many ways, closer to them.”
The Editor was right. What Ovadiah Yosef said has been said before. “But it is a total perversion of Jewish theology,” I ranted, “mainstream Judaism does not look at tsunamis, earthquakes and hurricanes and trumpet divine retribution. Think of the ending of the Book of Jonah in which Jonah demands punishment for the sinful people of Nineveh and God asks rhetorically whether God should not have compassion on 120,000 people who do not know their right hand from their left.
The idea that God kills innocent children as punishment for the alleged sins of political leaders is a hillul HaShem, a profanation of God’s name. The remarks were not only theologically offensive but morally appalling. Racism shrieks out of almost every word. Since I have started my tirade, I might as well finish by saying that such remarks are hugely damaging to the Jewish people, branding us all with those views and allowing our enemies to pigeonhole us along with the fanatics and ideologues of extremist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity.
In the last analysis, I really do not think that British Jewry wants to hear this, I concluded. “It shatters illusions and undermines their faith in where authenticity and truth lies. But even I place limits on tactics and realism. I am more than up for invitations to say so publicly.” I am still waiting.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
