Darwin and the Jews

No, as far as I’m aware, Darwin never expressed himself on the subject of the Jews. Now that I have your attention, however, here’s the point of this post.

The online article “Faithful can accept both Darwin and God, pastors say” included the following snippet in the sidebar, concerning views on evolution across religious groups.

Views on evolution by religion
In the United States, Buddhists, Hindus and Jews are the most likely among religious groups to accept evolution, while Christian evangelicals, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are least likely, according to a Pew Forum survey.
  Percent who agree that evolution is the best explanation for origins of human life:
  Buddhist...81
  Hindu...80
  Jewish...77
  Catholic...58
  Eastern Orthodox...54
  Mainline Protestant...51
  Muslim...45
  Historically Black Protestant...38
  Christian Evangelical...24
  Mormon...22
  Jehovah's Witness...8
  Source: 2008 Pew Forum U.S. Religious Landscape Survey

At first glance, a 77% acceptance of evolution (which I also take to mean an acceptance of the scientific method) sounds pretty good; right up there with the Buddhists and Hindus. On further reflection, though, perhaps there’s less reason for complacency.

I have a question regarding whether that percentage acceptance of evolution is growing or shrinking? Without understanding the Pew survey and its methodologies (including how those surveyed were selected), I can’t answer that. My intuition, however, is that it’s shrinking.

Why would this be the case? Simply because the sectors within the Jewish population showing the strongest demographic growth are the Haredi/Hassidic (ultra-Orthodox) segments, who are increasingly embracing Creationism and Intelligent Design, in imitation of their Fundamentalist Christian counterparts.

My understanding is that the cognitive dissonance between our scriptures and scientific knowledge about our universe was confronted and addressed centuries ago, by figures such as Maimonides. So, it’s something of a mystery to me as to why the sages of our very own Yahweh’s Witness movements choose to retreat into Biblical literalism.

Should this trend be of concern to us as progressive Jews in the broader sense? Our initial response might be that such views (which contradict common knowledge, common sense and scientific methods) simply cannot thrive, that they will eventually be crushed beneath the weight of evidence.

The problem with allowing events to simply take their course is that – through a combination of demographic growth, organisation and outreach, and just shouting louder – they may drown out other voices. Eventually these Fundamentalist views will be seen as part of mainstream Jewish beliefs. This will in turn succeed in driving rational Jews into the arms of all the other “isms” so dreaded by those who embrace the theology of fear, suspicion, hostility and inward focus.

The idea of Jewish Pluralism is close to the hearts of progressive Jews, but perhaps its time to be a little less accepting when we hear these backward views being identified with Judaism.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Faithful can accept both Darwin and God, pastors say Freep.com Detroit Free Press
• Religion in American Culture -- Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
• Jewish views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Jews Say 'Feh' to Darwin AlterNet

Technorati Tags: Biblical Literalism,Creationism,Darwin,Evolution,Fundamentalism,Intelligent Design (ID),Jewish Pluralism

---

If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to the Cafe Birkenreis Atom/RSS Feed.

Progressive Judaism: Just Be Yourself

Last week I posted an entry regarding Hanukkah, suggesting that it’s time to become more assertive about a Hanukkah “moral” that’s more in keeping with the ethos of progressive Judaism, as well as being aligned with what we know about the personalities and events of that era.

The blog post was based on an item by Andy Ratto on MetaFilter entitled “The True Story of Chanukkah”. One of those who commented on the original piece was user Ghidorah (Jeremy Wilgus), who had this to say:

As a former conservative Jew, I'd go along with the Hassidic/Reform split. When I pretty much left the fold, it seemed to me that the conservative movement was falling all over itself to be more religious, that people in the conservative movement were adopting Hassidic practices as a form of one-ups-manship. It was pretty sad to me. I mean, the conservative movement had solid practices and rules, but through whatever kind of insecurity, or keeping up with the Lipschultzes, they were just throwing it away. As someone who had, at one point, deeply believed, yet struggled with certain things (keeping kosher, no TV on Saturday), it was another thing (of many) that pushed me away from Judaism.

A youth group I was in had a special, super-duper religious sub-section, for truly observant teens. They had an open meeting at one event a year, where anyone could come, and there would be a talmud discussion. While it's odd to say it, I kicked ass at talmud. Liking pepperoni on my pizza, however, kept me from being allowed into the club, though. That, and not wearing a kippah full time, among other things...

Although Ghidorah referred to Conservative Judaism, there’s a lesson in here that all of the progressive Jewish streams (what I’ve referred to elsewhere as ABO – Anything But Orthodoxy) need to take to heart. The lesson is that progressive Judaism needs to be centred on itself. It must not allow itself to internalise (or externalise) the belief or perception that it fits somewhere on a scale of observance or strictness, where more observant or stricter is better, less observant or less strict is worse.

Progressive Judaism is not “less observant” it is “differently observant”!

When I started to become a regular shul-goer again a few years back, I was surprised to find many rituals that were not around in the Reform Judaism of my youth had now become a part of it. While I’m quite happy that many of these beautiful traditions have found their way back into progressive Judaism, this careful and considered adoption of certain rituals should not be allowed to generate into the “observance-envy” referred to above. Down that path lies irrelevance and eventual extinction for progressive Judaism. We cannot outflank ultra-Orthodoxy and Hassidism on the right, and any attempt to do so would be tantamount to spiritual suicide.

Remember what your mother used to say about those awkward social situations: “Just be yourself!”

---

If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to the Cafe Birkenreis Atom/RSS Feed.

Hanukkah: Time to Supplant the Orthodox Rabbinic Narrative?

Andy Ratto (of the Jewish Andy blog) recently posted this interesting item on MetaFilter. “The True Story of Chanukkah” questions just about everything we fondly believe about this holiday.

I thought again how strange it is that – some 250 years since the start of the Enlightenment – even progressive Judaism is still seemingly constrained by the (Orthodox) rabbinic “narrative” when it comes to our celebrations and myths, including those relating to Hanukkah.

Why should this be a problem? These charming versions of pivotal events in our history are great for children. When those versions are challenged, however (either by the outside world or by our own questioning adult minds) we tend to see one of two responses:

• A withdrawal into fundamentalism and a rejection of any knowledge or methodology that does not square with the tenets of the cult (yes, Jews have cults too).
• A complete rejection of the entire Jewish anthology as so much “bobbe meises”, suitable only for children and the mentally deficient.

(In real life, the reactions tend not to be so radical. Many manage to somehow reconcile or hold the two versions of the Jewish anthology in balance, or keep their reservations in some private place while continuing to observe outwardly.)

Does a better understanding of the real history of Hanukkah mean we should stop celebrating it? Is Hanukkah still relevant and meaningful for the progressive Jew today? How do we as progressive (or just questioning) Jews maintain continuity, tell our story, celebrate our history and teach the lessons we would like to teach, while respecting knowledge, scholarship and science?

I believe that Hanukkah still belongs on the calendar of progressive Judaism, provided that we can bring both the storyline and the message in synch with scholarship, and with the ethos of progressive Judaism.

The tricky part is to embrace the idea the Judaism does not require a literal acceptance of every word, story or myth transmitted to us by our literature and traditions. This is central to what progressive Judaism is undergoing now, and for as long as our understanding of the universe continues to expand so rapidly, so I won’t go deeper into it here.

The easy part is to update our account of Hanukkah and bring it more or less in line with consensus scholarship, while also updating the moral and other lessons we should draw from the story. This could include the following (phrased as questions):

• How important is political independence compared to religious freedom? If religious freedom exists (and assuming there is no “existential threat”) what price should we be willing to pay for political freedom? (As we now know, the later, misguided struggle against Rome led to the destruction of the Jewish presence in Eretz Israel and almost 2,000 years of exile.)
• Is the imposition of a single Judaism worth the price of a civil war? Does monotheism have to be monolithic, or is there room for more than one interpretation of Judaism?
• Was this actually a setback for Judaism, in that the Temple cult was given a new lease of life, rather than making way for the distributed Judaism of the synagogue?
• Does religious tolerance apply within Judaism itself, or only in relation to “other” faiths?

Idol worship was at that stage the “red line” that Judaism dared not cross. In that form, idol worship no longer exists, but we could argue that more subtle forms have taken its place. The obsession with the right to settle in Judea, Samaria and Gaza might be seen as one form of idol worship; an obsession that jeopardises the unity of the Jewish people and the existence of the State. Another might be the cultist obsession with ritual observance, to the exclusion of the more subtle (and more difficult) ethical and moral imperatives of Judaism.

Judaism tends to be far more successful when it meets the ideological challenges of the day head on (as it did, very successfully, with Hellenism), rather than turning its back and refusing to engage (as “mainstream” Judaism has done in the age of enlightenment and reason) and retreating into superstition and ritual. Judaism did not stand back for or retreat from Hellenism, but learned what it could and became that much stronger for it.

Let’s continue to celebrate Hanukkah, and the rest of our splendid holy days and festivals. Let’s not, however, continue to be enslaved to the Orthodox rabbinic narrative, except where it adds value to progressive Judaism.

Judaism’s Reputation Takes a Beating Again

I should be used to it, but I still find myself disgusted by the actions of “august” bodies, such as those referred to below; one of which recently condemned Rabbi Haskel Lookstein’s participation in the interfaith service with President Barack Obama.

So, on the one hand, it’s not OK to take part in something that enhances perceptions about Judaism.

On the other hand, however, it’s OK for an entire delegation of Orthodox rabbis to meet with jailed Agriprocessors' CEO Sholom Rubashkin. A delegation that “included representatives of the Orthodox Union, the Rabbinical Council of America, the National Council of Young Israel, Agudath Israel of America and Chabad-Lubavitch”.

To observers out there, Rubashkin and Bernard Madoff appear to be vying with one another for the prize of “who has done the most damage to Jews and Judaism in 2008”. Despite this, however, we are treated to the nauseating sight of the entire pecking order of ultra-Orthodoxy in America prostrating themselves before Rubashkin. Surely he should be entitled to chaplaincy visits and nothing more?

According to the JTA article, however, the delegation was there “to offer Rubashkin support”. Is it the normal practice of these organisations to “offer support” to Jews who have entered the prison system? Or does this only apply to so-called observant Jews? Perhaps only moneyed observant Jews?

The article goes on to say that “At the conclusion of the meeting, Rubashkin led the group in prayer.” It also quoted Rabbi David Zwiebel as saying “I have to tell you, it was one of the most moving experiences I've had in some time” (referring to the prayer service). A moving experience? Please don’t make me nauseous. Taking gifts to an orphanage would be a moving experience, not this unseemly display.

It no longer concerns me that they bring Orthodoxy into disrepute by their actions; I doubt that they could bring its name any lower than it already is.

I do care, however, that their words and deeds reflect on Jews everywhere and Judaism as a whole in the eyes of the world. I do care that this fawning behaviour towards someone accused of offences that mock the very meaning and essence of Judaism affects us all. It tells both Jews and non-Jews all they need to know about the moral and ethical standards of Judaism in this age.

This is the answer they give to the questions “Why be Jewish?”, and “What is Judaism all about?” Do they really believe that the world, and those in search of answers within our own tradition haven’t noticed, and drawn their own conclusions?

(This blog post is a slightly revised version of a comment that originally appeared on the JTA website.)

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Rabbinic delegation meets with Rubashkin
• Orthodox group defends Lookstein