 |
IN THE KINGDOM OF KINDNESS: AMERICAN JEWS AND THE PUBLIC ROLE OF RELIGION
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
-7-
the autonomy of the civil sphere. Earlier, I cited one of Israel s most influential modern thinkers,Yeshayahu Leibowitz, who argued passionately for recognizing two kingdoms and urgedreligious authorities to foreswear political activism precisely because such matters were beyondtheir competence. Others have maintained that the kind of theocracy common in rabbinicliterature is qualitatively different from the conventional use of the term in contemporary theoryand that Judaic traditions are quite compatible with democratic governance. In practice, whateverthe political messages embedded in the Judaic tradition, Israel has enjoyed a robust democraticsystem for more than half a century. Notwithstanding such realities, the theocratic position stillenjoys normative status among many interpreters of Judaic tradition.
It is important to recognize that this debate has principally concerned the type of
governance that Jews should create in their own state. What of Jews who live elsewhere? Perhapshalacha can be adapted to the situation of the majority of the world s Jews who live outsideIsrael, especially to those who reside in societies with liberal democracies. However, among themost traditionalist segments of that population, those who follow halacha as binding, the viewsattributed to Torah should still be followed irrespective of time and place. Believers residing inopen societies are encouraged to live apart in their own insular communities where they implement the mandates of the tradition to the extent allowed by law (Boyarin 1997). While theymay participate in democratic politics as a means of securing community interest, they do notreject the principle of theocracy and continue, where possible, to govern themselves under itsdictates. It is thus unlikely that the traditionalists will devote much energy to challenging thenormative ideal of theocracy even as they negotiate a very different political environment wheretheocracy is not a realistic option .
Secularism: The Background
. . . Jewish opposition to public religion rested on the assumption that religion meantChristianity.
--Naomi Cohen,1992, 175
In the period when the classic Judaic position was codified, Jews lived primarily as aliens
in monarchies with no effective constitutional limitations on the power of the ruler. Under suchcircumstances, it is hard to imagine them envisioning democratic alternatives. With the rise ofmodernity, however, Jews encountered a fundamentally new situation the opportunity toparticipate as citizens in the public life of liberal democracies. In countries where theocracy wasnot an option, most Jews adapted in practice to the new realities. In time this led to a widespreadtendency to assume that Judaism was not merely compatible with liberal democracy but wasessentially mandated by it. While this transformation removed the temptation for most Jews toadvocate the theocratic model, it tended to put them among the staunchest opponents of religiousexpression in the public square. Although more open than theocracy, this secularist dispositiontoo is regarded by McGraw as inconsistent with the Lockean understanding of religion in thestate.
|
| |
| |
|
|
-7-
the autonomy of the civil sphere. Earlier, I cited one of Israel s most influential modern thinkers,
Yeshayahu Leibowitz, who argued passionately for recognizing two kingdoms and urged
religious authorities to foreswear political activism precisely because such matters were beyond
their competence. Others have maintained that the kind of theocracy common in rabbinic
literature is qualitatively different from the conventional use of the term in contemporary theory
and that Judaic traditions are quite compatible with democratic governance. In practice, whatever
the political messages embedded in the Judaic tradition, Israel has enjoyed a robust democratic
system for more than half a century. Notwithstanding such realities, the theocratic position still
enjoys normative status among many interpreters of Judaic tradition.
It is important to recognize that this debate has principally concerned the type of
governance that Jews should create in their own state. What of Jews who live elsewhere? Perhaps
halacha can be adapted to the situation of the majority of the world s Jews who live outside
Israel, especially to those who reside in societies with liberal democracies. However, among the
most traditionalist segments of that population, those who follow halacha as binding, the views
attributed to Torah should still be followed irrespective of time and place. Believers residing in
open societies are encouraged to live apart in their own insular communities where they
implement the mandates of the tradition to the extent allowed by law (Boyarin 1997). While they
may participate in democratic politics as a means of securing community interest, they do not
reject the principle of theocracy and continue, where possible, to govern themselves under its
dictates. It is thus unlikely that the traditionalists will devote much energy to challenging the
normative ideal of theocracy even as they negotiate a very different political environment where
theocracy is not a realistic option .
Secularism: The Background
. . . Jewish opposition to public religion rested on the assumption that religion meant
Christianity.
--Naomi Cohen,1992, 175
In the period when the classic Judaic position was codified, Jews lived primarily as aliens
in monarchies with no effective constitutional limitations on the power of the ruler. Under such
circumstances, it is hard to imagine them envisioning democratic alternatives. With the rise of
modernity, however, Jews encountered a fundamentally new situation the opportunity to
participate as citizens in the public life of liberal democracies. In countries where theocracy was
not an option, most Jews adapted in practice to the new realities. In time this led to a widespread
tendency to assume that Judaism was not merely compatible with liberal democracy but was
essentially mandated by it. While this transformation removed the temptation for most Jews to
advocate the theocratic model, it tended to put them among the staunchest opponents of religious
expression in the public square. Although more open than theocracy, this secularist disposition
too is regarded by McGraw as inconsistent with the Lockean understanding of religion in the
state.
|
|
 Convention | | All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
