Subscribe to The Jewish Standard free weekly newsletter

 
font size: +
 

Memory through universalism at Ground Zero

 
 
 

In the past few weeks, some, including William McGurn, a former chief speechwriter for president George W. Bush, have drawn a comparison between the convent built on the perimeter of Auschwitz and the mosque scheduled to be built in the environs of Ground Zero in New York, where pieces of the planes fell. The fundamental argument has been that just as a convent does not belong on the grounds of the largest Jewish cemetery in the world, a mosque does not belong in the place where Americans representing a wide range of religions and ethnic backgrounds were killed. As leader of a group of seven who climbed the fence at Auschwitz in July of 1989 to protest against the convent, I would like to expand upon this comparison.

The convent did not belong at Auschwitz-Birkenau because well over 90 percent of those who were murdered on that soil were Jewish. To erect a convent where nuns would be cloistered and — as they themselves proclaimed — would pray for the souls of the departed, would be, in the minds of so many of the victims themselves, as well as among surviving family members and friends, an act of sacrilege. It would have been understood as nothing less than a Christian show of triumphalism, a sort of tangible declaration at this fundamentally Jewish burial site, that Christianity prevails.

I take second place to no one when it comes to showing respect for religious places of worship of all faiths. But a convent at the largest Jewish cemetery in the world is inappropriate. Although it took many years for Pope John Paul II to come to this realization, it was he himself who finally ordered the nuns to move.

In a similar vein, 9/11 was an attack against America. It was an assault on the country’s fundamental principles of pluralism, of the need to embrace all of humankind — people of all faiths, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim, believers and non-believers, agnostics and atheists. Here, right before our eyes, was the contrast between the killers, who could only see one way of living, and the American democratic way of openness and universalism that embraces people of all backgrounds and all faiths.

Hence, it would be inappropriate for there to be built at that particular place — the site of an attack against an all-embracing way of life — any edifice that represents a particular religious belief. In the place where America was attacked, the response should be one that embodies the “spirit of America.” It should include a center where believers of all faiths and, of course, non-believers too, can meditate and reflect, in an area open to all.

Opposition to the new mosque near Ground Zero does not preclude the continued use of buildings — even a mosque — that existed before 9/11. Those pre-existing buildings are in stark contrast to a colossal community center/mosque built as a clear response to the attack.

As the debate has become more acrimonious, it is important for both sides not to impugn the motives of the other. Those who favor the mosque should not attribute to all who oppose it a demonization of Islam. And those who oppose the mosque should not attribute to those who defend it a disloyalty to America or hopeless naiveté. The debate has focused on the voices of extremism on each side. The voices of the center, the majority, which are much more nuanced, must be heard.

Spirituality is intertwined with stepping back, making room for the other. With so many families and friends of victims upset by the creation of this new mosque, why not step back and find another site a bit farther away? This is what Pope John Paul II did when he ordered the nuns to leave the convent at Auschwitz and relocate farther away. Similarly, in the case of the mosque, the stepping back would not be a defeat; it would be a heroic gesture to bring calm to the community.

As a clerical first responder on 9/11, I had the task of ministering to and comforting the true heroes — police officers, firefighters, and others. I breathed the air, listened to the stories, and participated with religious leaders of other faiths in the prayer services near the makeshift morgues. At the site of the destroyed Twin Towers, during those terrible days, I felt a profound sense of universalism. The soil at Ground Zero is hallowed ground. If one walks those sidewalks carefully, one can’t help but feel the cries of all the deceased.

To those who attacked America and for those who were brutally murdered, it is critical that the response be an American one. It must be a tribute that embraces all faiths, all believers and non-believers, created in a place that represents the legacy, the vibrancy, and the continuity of America itself — a place that reflects that all of us are created equal.

Rabbi Avraham Weiss
Rabbi Avraham (Avi) Weiss is senior rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale, co-founder of the International Rabbinic Fellowship, and national president of Amcha-The Coalition for Jewish Concerns. The opinions presented here are his alone.
Disclaimer
The views in opinion pieces and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of The Jewish Standard. The comments posted on this Website are solely the opinions of the posters. Libelous or obscene comments will be removed.
 
 
 
 
Add a Comment

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:


Auto-login on future visits

Show my name in the online users list

Forgot your password?

 

A public offer to Chabad

When Rabbi Shmuley Boteach approached me to read the manuscript of his newly published book “Kosher Jesus,” I was reticent and even a bit cautious, given the massive and diverse audience of people likely to be affected by his unique perspective on the subject of Jesus. Having now read the book, however, I can say that I was pleasantly surprised to find that his approach resolved many outstanding questions that I myself have struggled with in my religious studies, particularly as they relate to Christianity and its impact on Judaism throughout history.

Still, I felt the need to interrogate Boteach further in order to discover what his intentions had been for penning this latest work on a conspicuously controversial topic. As it turns out, his earliest efforts to uncover the real facts regarding the origin of Christianity stemmed from his exasperation by the treatment unsuspecting Jews received from Christian missionaries who would target them in an attempt to convert yet another Jew to Christianity. So alarmed was Boteach at the pervasiveness of this kind of missionary work that, as a young scholar learning in yeshivah, he was often memorizing long passages of the New Testament in his Hebrew Bible classes. After all, how could he counter the words of others if he had no real knowledge of what they were saying and why they were saying it?

 

 

Our stake in ‘Beit Shemesh’

BEIT SHEMESH — It is raining as I write — a rare, cold, hard rain that is welcomed by Jerusalemites who know that it is good for them and the country. Water, like patience, is a treasured commodity here in Israel: temporarily inconvenient, but better for you in the long run.

Rain is a blessing. We pray for it.

Patience is a blessing. We pray that we have enough of it for each other.

It is a good day to stay inside and reflect on my trip to Israel and to Beit Shemesh, a city about a half-hour west of Jerusalem. Beit Shemesh and the Washington Jewish community have been partners for many years, and partners share responsibility for each other.

 

 

Israel confronts its secular identity

Suddenly, it seems, gender segregation is everywhere in Israel — buses, army bases, Jerusalem sidewalks, Beit Shemesh schoolyards and, above all, the front pages. What is going on here?

Let’s start with the buses. In the late 1990s, at the request of some charedim, the Transportation Ministry created bus lines that served charedi neighborhoods and cities. On an officially “voluntary” basis, women would enter the buses and sit in the back. These buses were deemed legally permissible because Israeli law allows discrimination when it is necessary to provide access to public services and does not harm the common weal. All the fundamental questions (necessary? common weal?) were left wide open.

 

 

RECENTLYADDED

Arab anti-Semitism, from indifference to complicity

WASHINGTON – Anti-Israel sentiment in the Middle East is not merely characterized by sharp political differences. It mimics and is fueled by the most defamatory and dangerous of historical anti-Jewish themes. For confirmation, we need look no further than a widely published political cartoonist, a Jordan-based Palestinian named Emad Hajjaj. His cartoons regularly feature blatant incitement, equating Israel with the Third Reich, crudely caricaturing Jews as bloodthirsty monsters, portraying menorahs as weapons, and showing the “crucifixion” of Palestinians on a cross marked by a Star of David.

None of this is exceptional. What is surprising, or should be, is the international indifference to — indeed, complicity in — vile and incendiary Arab anti-Semitism without parallel, quantitatively or qualitatively, on the Israeli side of the regional divide. Yet B’nai B’rith has found that among those claimed as clients by Hajjaj’s public relations firm Abu Mahjoob Creative Productions Company are not only several local government bodies, but also foreign organizations such as the British Council and the major corporations Visa, Orange, the German industrial giant Siemens, and others. If this was not bad enough, the firm’s client list features multiple agencies of the United Nations — including the United Nations Development Fund for Women (now merged into U.N. Women), the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF.

 

 

Racism’s antidote

Over the past weeks, protests have spread throughout Israel calling for a response to racism targeted at the country’s Ethiopian community. Sparked by a Channel 2 story on discrimination in Kityat Malachi, citizens have taken to the streets to show their outrage at the status quo. Although the despicable slurs and actions that triggered these protests are blatant examples of these grievances, they conceal a deeper issue.

Beyond more overt examples, Ethiopian Israelis are often considered less desirable neighbors, and frequently have a harder time finding a job. They are perceived as a poor, underprivileged community, and face the stigma of lacking the capability to contribute equally, even if this myth is belied by reality. Some of this is outright racism, but the rest is symptomatic of a deeper and far more widespread prejudice: indirect or concealed racism.

 

 

A charedi hero’s plea

JERUSALEM — The recent violence in Beit Shemesh and in Jerusalem’s Mea Shearim neighborhood has led me to speak out against the so-called “sikrikim” in the harshest possible terms, equating their actions to terrorism. Sikrikim — Sicarii-ites — is the name given to a fringe anti-Zionist vigilante group, loosely linked to Neturei Karta and said to have been at the forefront of many of the recent violent attacks against innocent Israelis.

In my mind, there is a dangerous similarity in their actions and those of Islamist terrorists. I do not use this comparison lightly. As the founder of the ZAKA rescue and recovery organization, I know only too well the horror of terror.

 

 
 
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29