Page 2-THE NEWS-November. 1988
In the Aftermath..**
THE CHARLOTTE JEWISH NEWS
Published monthly by:
Charlotte Jewish Federation...- Michael L. Minkin, Director
Foundation of Charlotte Jcwisli Comnnunity &
Jewish Community Center - Barry Hantman, Director
Lubavitch of N.C ...Rabbi Yossi Groner, Director
Editor - Rita Mond
Advertising Blanche Yarus
Copy deadline the 10th of each month
P.O. Box 13369, Charlotte. N.C 28211
The arv««raHcc *f «dv«rtlsiNS In Th« Ntwt d*«s n*t CHStltut* a kMhrnth
•nd*rMM«nt.
Editorial
Let’s Remember
Kristallnacht Together!
Judaism is a religion that stresses remembrance —
zakhor. We are admonished in the Bible to “remem
ber Amalek,” and along with Amalek goes Haman,
Titus, and all the others who have persecuted and
murdered Jews over the centuries. The Holocaust was
an inhumanity towards man; 6 million Jews were
slaughtered along with 5 imllion others. We can not
forget this atrocity; we nxust not forget this terrible
blot in history; we must see to it that it does not oc
cur again.
The Holocaust is something that did happen...it
happened in our lifetime and in the lifetime of our chil
dren...there are still parents and grandparents who
can talk about it. However, they will not be around
us much longer. Because of that, it is imperative that
we teach our children ancd their children about this
catastrophic event that has no parallel. We must ex
pose them to the history, culture and psychology of
the event; we must let the world not forget what hap
pened in Europe during the ’30s and ’40s!
On November 9 at 7:45 p.m. there will be a com
memoration of the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht,
the “night of broken glass/' the opening salvo of the
greatest Jewish tragedy of all time. I urge each and
every one, adult and child, in our entire Charlotte com
munity to attend this service. This is a small way that
we can show our empathy for the survivors emd vic
tims... a way in which we C£in show our concern for
other human beings.
— Rita Mend
1 CONDOS
FoiMW yToIn- Aforsale
Excavation Reveals Philistine Palace
JERUSALEM (JTA| - /V
building of monumental
stature, possibly a Philistine
palace, is currently being ex
cavated in one of the leirgest
biblical-period archaeologicaJ
sites uncovered in Israel.
The site, known as Tel Mi-
qne, is located on the sight of
the former city of Ekron, one
of the five city-kingdoms of
the Philistines.
The Philistines controlleci
the south-central coastal area
of Israel from about the 12tli
century BCE until their cities
were destroyed some 600
years later by the Babylon
ians.
Archaeologists from tl»e
Hebrew University of Jeru
salem and the W.F. Albright
Institute of Archaeological
Research located Tel Miqne
while working in the fields of
Kibbutz Revadim, which is
near Ashdod.
The Philistine building, wiCh
some 300 square yards in size
uncovered so far, lies in what
is believed to have been tlie
city-center, spanning some 25
acres. It has been dated back
to the 11th century BCE.
Inside the buildi^, diggers
found an intact iron knife with
bronze rivets and an ivory
handle. Archaeologists believe
the knife, not an ordinary
utensil, may have been in the
possession of an important
person or perhaps was used in
cult practices.
During this year’s excava
tions, the 103rd olive oil pro
duction building was un
covered in the former city of
Ekron, making it, according to
archaeologists the largest food
industrial procesing operation
in the ancient world.
This number of installations
would have been able to pro
duce over 1,000 tons of olive
oil per year, it is estimated.
The excavations were head
ed, as they have for the past
five years, by Professor Tnide
Dothan of the Hebrew Univer
sity Institute of Archaeology,
and Professor Seymour Gitin
of the Albright Institute.
Funding for the project at
Tel Miqne for the 1988 season
came from the two universities
Involved in the digs, as well as
Boston College, Brown Uni
versity, the Lehigh VaUey
Center for Jewish Studies,
Southeastern Baptist Theo
logical Seminary and the
University of Lethbridge.
By Rabbi Marc Wilson
Our recent dialogue with
Mayor Myrick on the role of
religion in public life was an in
teresting and memorable
forum, but not exactly a high
point in the annals of com
munity relations. There is lit
tle to be gained by assessing
fault or laying blame. Let it
suffice to say that we were all
participants in an extraor
dinary breeikdown of commu
nications. In the aftermath,
there are a few things that I
would like to say, or reiterate,
to the Mayor, the Jewish com
munity and the community at
large. I speak from no “of
ficial” position, but only as a
constituency of one.
First, I do not in any way
question the Mayor’s good in
tentions in trying to unite all
people of goodwill in what Dr.
King called a “beloved com-
munity.” To the contrary, the
Mayor’s credentials in the
struggle for understanding
and socijil justice are impec
cable. I have never heard
anyone in the Jewish com
munity second-guess the
Mayor’s sincerity or motiva
tions in interjecting her strong
religious convictions into the
fabric of public life. Unfor
tunately, motives and good in
tentions are not the end, but
merely the beginning, of the
processes that make for a be
loved community. The best of
motives and intentions must
be carefully scrutinized for
their ultimate results, because,
bluntly, sometimes ideas that
seem good do not turn out to
be good. Our tradition teaches
that the truly wise person is
not necessarily the one of pure
motives, but the one who is
able to see the lasting con
sequences of his or her actions.
When Jews (and, I would
like to believe, edl people of
goodwill) behold attempts to
impose a religious context on
secular issues of public gover
nance, we instinctively react
with uneasy wariness. That
wariness is not bom of para
noia or hypersensitivity. It is
bom of a long history of pain
and oppression that stems
from the ease with which
religion has been co-opted to
do the sinister bidding of
demagogues, tyrants and
despots. Most Jews that I
know, by the way, are just as
wary of the imposition of a
Jewish theocracy upon Israel
as they are of the imposition
of a Christian theocracy upon
the United States.
Second, with regard to the
specific nature of the Mayor’s
Prayer Breakfasts: Non-Chris
tians wiU never feel entirely
“included” in any public
gathering at which prayers of
a distinctly Christian nature
are the center of the agenda.
The fact that Christian
prayers are offered at the
Mayor’s Breakfast, however,
does not bother me anywhere
nearly as much as do two
unspoken assumptions that
the Breakfasts make about
the role of religion in public
life:
1. The premise of the
Mayor’s Prayer Breakfasts is
that the primary contribution
of religion to social wellbeing
is prayer, and that prayer
necessarily means an appeal
for direct Divine intervention
in the course of human events.
Many responsible members of
our religious community
would certainly disagree with
that premise. Many of us, in
cluding many devout Chris
tians, are steeped in a tra
dition that believes that the
primary contributions of
religion to the commonweal
are wisdom, transcendent
perspective and moral guid
ance. We believe that prayer is
not £m end in itself, but a
rehearsal while “waiting in the
wings” for the real role that
God has for us to play on the
stage of life. Many of us em
brace a theology in which
prayer for direct Divine in
tercession subverts the idea of
God and His children working
together in covenantal part
nership. We pray not for God
to miraculously re-order our
lives, but for determination,
willpower and guidance to do
those things that God expects
us to take on as our human
responsibility.
Particularly troublesome
about the Mayor’s Prayer
Breakfasts is the idea of a
public official reading a list of
concerns that more than
vaguely resembles her com
munal platform — regardless
of how noble it may be — and
asking that those gathered
pray for Godly intervention to
hasten its ratification. The
broad implication is that we
will tell God how we have
decided His world should be
run, and He will obediently
answer “Amen.” To many of
us, this is a shameful abuse of
prayer, if not downright
heresy. We should be praying
to God for the insight neces
sary for establishing a fair and
decent civic agenda, not to
rubberstamp approval on an
agenda we have already deter
mined was right.
2. Prayer Breakfasts, and
the entire impetus to co-
mingle religion with political
processes, take off from the
premise that the religious com
munity and political leader
ship should work together in
cohesive, harmonious partner
ship. That has a nice ring to it,
and it certainly holds more
than a modicum of tmth. But,
it denies the even more crucial
“prophetic” role that religion
and religious leadership must
play in social advancement.
The Judeo-Christian tradition
warns those of religious in
clination to keep a healthy
distance from those in posi
tions of political power. Draw
ing too close might com
promise the position of moral
autonomy that religious
leaders neki to be gadflies and
critics of corruption, abuse
and social injustice, in the
great prophetic tradition of
Nathan, Elijah, Amos, Jere
miah and Jesus of Nazareth.
The integrity of both re
ligion and political processes is
seriously threatened when re
ligious leaders become yes-
men for the politically power
ful, or when political leaders
are patsies of the religiously
influential. Back in the days ai
Nixon’s “Imperial Presiden
cy,” Gary Wills commented
about a national religious
celebrity who wiU remain un
named, “It is well to remem
ber that real prophets are rid
den out of countries on a rail,
not invited to preside at their
National Prayer Breakfasts.”
As appealing as it sounds for
religion and politics to work
together hand-in-glove, it is
even more important that
there be a little hesdthy skep
ticism and distance so that
each may chedlenge the other
in its inevitable desire to
become overly powerful and
manipulative.
All told, I have great ad
miration for Mayor Myrick,
her motives, intentions, ideal
ism and even (most of) her
agenda. Her religious fervor
should be admired, not scorned.
But, her religious fervor must
be tempered by a deeper sen
sitivity for the justifiable con
cerns of all members of her
constituency. It must be mod
ulated by a sharper awareness
of the ^versity of opinions
that is operative even within
our religious conmiunity.
And, above all, it must be
tempered by a desire to draw
upon the wisdom of our resp^-
tive religious heritages in
ways more substantial than
convening a conglomerate of
well-meaning pec^le for scram
bled eggs and sectarian
prayers for Divine interven
tion in the human give-and-
take of building a healthy com
munity. Otherwise, despite the
best of intentions, the people
of our community are likely to
become even further divided
and polarized, rather than
united in a transcendent agen
da for the conunon good.
— Special Deadlines —
For December For January
Nov. 7 Dec. 5