October 8, 2007 | 9:50 am

Bishop: Parishioners should pay for pedophile priests

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Follow me on

So let me see if I’ve got this right: The Catholic Church shelters pedophile priests, endangering thousands of children across the country, and then when the bill comes due for all this sexual abuse, the San Diego Diocese asks the friends and family and neighbors of those who were abused to help pay?

“The people who are actually culpable, a lot of them are dead, and among the rest of us, nobody has any more culpability than anyone else,” said Sheridan, a homemaker. “But I do think the Vatican can sell a painting or two. That would pay for it.”

Still, some said they would gladly support Brom.

“This is our church and we love it,” said Marie English, 76, a member at St. Mary. “If the church needs help, how can we deny it? Sometimes you have to pay for problems you didn’t cause—that’s life. Let’s pay and move on.”

Oh, don’t worry, Bishop Robert Brom has also asked parish priests to chip in for the $198 million bill. He’s got a real global (catholic?) perspective. And I thought Cardinal Roger Mahony was out of touch.

October 7, 2007 | 7:32 pm

Why it mattered and didn’t that Jefferson was an atheist

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Everybody fighting for the 2008 presidency has been talking about their religious convictions. (Cynical me, I think they’ve been a bit insincere.) Anyway, if we look back 208 years, we’d see that religion played a substantial role in possibly the most important election for the future of this country.

I had always heard Thomas Jefferson was a “deist”—someone who believed in a god but not The God. But, according to the papers of his day, laid out recently in The New Yorker, our soon-to-be third president was a “reputed atheist.” (That takes a bit of steam out of U.S. Rep. Peter Stark’s unveiling last spring as Congress’ first atheist.)

As Jefferson and John Adams, a publicly devout Christian, slugged it out on the campaign trail, the Gazette of the United States ran this:

THE GRAND QUESTION STATED

At the present solemn and momentous epoch, the only question to be asked by every American, laying his hand on his heart, is: “Shall I continue in allegiance to

GOD—AND A RELIGIOUS
PRESIDENT;

Or impiously declare for

JEFFERSON—AND NO GOD!!!”

Jefferson was vehemently attacked for being a godless, slave-owning (-impregnating) sinner. But the underlying issue was what kind of liberties would this country afford its few voting members and everyone else who lived here. Jefferson favored greater freedoms while Adams sought to strengthen the office of the president. (A proto-Bush?)

Still, many people couldn’t get over the fact that Jefferson didn’t believe in God. And though he eventually won through a complicated process in the Electoral College, some members who didn’t want to give their vote to an atheist said they would rather “go without a Constitution and take the risk of civil war.”

0 Comments — Leave your comment

October 7, 2007 | 2:13 pm

Who exactly are ‘militant atheists’ attacking?

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Voltaire famously quipped that if God didn’t exist, he would have to be invented. American publishers would enthusiastically agree because God, it turns out, is a consistent moneymaker—especially, these days, for those who want to attack him.

This opinion piece is from today’s LA Times, and it shows how The New Atheists are publishing their attacks in a much more comfortable environment than Voltaire et al, and argues that they’re often blaming the wrong forces for American actions.

The anti-God books have appeared in the wake of two developments: the rise of Islamic fundamentalism overseas and the religious right’s enormous influence on President Bush’s policies here at home. But as responses, the secular jeremiads don’t make a whole lot of sense.

Who, exactly, are they aimed at? Who is the ideal reader of these attacks on belief in God? Not Muslim or Christian fundamentalists, obviously, because one of the engines driving religious fundamentalism today is, precisely, a hostility toward modern science. If anyone thinks that Dawkins’ book, “The God Delusion”—with its “scientific” attempts to refute the existence of God—is going to persuade today’s religious fanatics, here or abroad, to loosen up and enjoy a little MTV, you have to ask yourself just who is “deluded.” It’s hard to imagine anyone abandoning his faith after reading Harris’ condescending polemic, or the science of Dawkins and Dennett, or Hitchens’ vitriol.

The attacks in the books often don’t make much sense either. For instance, Bush and his gang preach Christian values while lying us into a slaughterhouse overseas, ransacking our public coffers and ignoring social inequities and iniquities at home—and so our heroic anti-religionists attack . . . Christian values. But shouldn’t they be attacking Bush and Co.‘s hypocrisy in betraying Christian values instead?

1 Comments — Leave your comment

October 7, 2007 | 11:26 am

French priest uncovers the horrors of the Holocaust in Ukraine

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

His subjects were mostly children and teenagers at the time, terrified witnesses to mass slaughter. Some were forced to work at the bottom rung of the Nazi killing machine — as diggers of mass graves, cooks who fed Nazi soldiers and seamstresses who mended clothes stripped from the Jews before execution.

They live today in rural poverty, many without running water or heat, nearing the end of their lives. So Patrick Desbois has been quietly seeking them out, roaming the back roads and forgotten fields of Ukraine, hearing their stories and searching for the unmarked common graves. He knows that they are an unparalleled source to document the murder of the 1.5 million Jews of Ukraine, shot dead and buried throughout the country.

He is neither a historian nor an archaeologist, but a French Roman Catholic priest. And his most powerful tools are his matter-of-fact style — and his clerical collar.

The Nazis killed nearly 1.5 million Jews in Ukraine after their invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941. But with few exceptions, most notably the 1941 slaughter of nearly 34,000 Jews in the Babi Yar ravine in Kiev, much of that history has gone untold.

Knocking on doors, unannounced, Father Desbois, 52, seeks to unlock the memories of Ukrainian villagers the way he might take confessions one by one in church.

“At first, sometimes, people don’t believe I’m a priest,” said Father Desbois in an interview this week. “I have to use simple words and listen to these horrors — without any judgment. I cannot react to the horrors that pour out. If I react, the stories will stop.”

That is the beginning of a powerful profile in yesterday’s New York Times about how one man is helping write the history of the Holocaust in a country where Jews were murdered with machine guns and their bodies buried in fields.

The story was the Times’ most e-mailed yesterday. Thanks to Bloggish for sending it to me.

Seraphic Secret has a link to photos of the “Holocaust by Bullets,” and has this to say about the man on a mission:

Father Desbois is a great and righteous man. The Jewish people—dead and alive—owe him a huge debt of gratitude.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

October 7, 2007 | 11:20 am

God Blog awakening

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

So a weird and wonderful thing has happened during the past two weeks: Daily traffic at The God Blog doubled and then doubled again. Yesterday, a Saturday when I was away from the computer all day, was one of my highest traffic days since I started blogging seven months ago.

The big question is: Why?

I have little clue. So, if you’re a new reader of The God Blog, let me know how you found it and what you think. And if you’ve long been a loyal reader, please let me know what you enjoy and what you don’t.

5 Comments — Leave your comment

October 5, 2007 | 3:53 pm

Dawkins: Jews ‘monopolize American foreign policy’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Daniel Finkelstein at The Times of London has a problem with what uber-atheist Richard Dawkins has to say about Jews:

I have just come across the most extraordinary statement by Richard Dawkins. It is right there on the Guardian website without a sentence even questioning it. Here it is:

When you think about how fantastically successful the Jewish lobby has been, though, in fact, they are less numerous I am told - religious Jews anyway - than atheists and [yet they] more or less monopolise American foreign policy as far as many people can see. So if atheists could achieve a small fraction of that influence, the world would be a better place.

 

So Dawkins, a liberal hero, believes, er, that Jews control world power. And, judging from the Guardian, it is now a part of mainstream debate to say so. Perhaps you think I am over-reacting, but I am a little bit frightened. 

Chris Dillow manages some elegant reflections on social proof.

All I can manage is Oh My God.

6 Comments — Leave your comment

October 5, 2007 | 10:33 am

Cardinal: Jews should change Talmud

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Cardinal Francis George, who will soon take over as head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, recently sat down for a candid interview with John L. Allen Jr of the National Catholic Reporter. It’s a wide-ranging Q&A, but I found what George had to say about Judaism and the Latin Mass to be the most interesting:

A related issue with the old Missal is the Good Friday liturgy, and specifically the prayer for the conversion of the Jews. Where do you think we are with that?

First of all, we have to clarify something, because there are two opinions and we’ve asked the Holy See to clear this up. During the Triduum [the end of Holy Week] you may not have a private Mass. So the first reaction is, well, that means you can’t use the old Missal for the Triduum, so that’s the end of that. Others come back and say no, that if you have a parish that is only Tridentine, then they would also have the Holy Week ceremonies from that Missal. I’m not sure that’s permitted, and that’s what we’re asking.

If it is, would your preference be to use the language of new Missal for this prayer on Good Friday, even when people are celebrating the Tridentine rite?

If you’re celebrating the 1962 Missal, that would involve changing the text of the prayer.

That can be done, yes?

Of course it can be done, and I suspect it probably will be, because the intention is to be sure that our prayers are not offensive to the Jewish people who are our ancestors in the faith. We can’t possibly insult them in our liturgy … Not that any group has a veto on anybody’s prayers, because you can go through Jewish texts and find material that is offensive to us. But if we’re interested in keeping the dialogue strong, and we have to be, we should be very cautious about any prayer that they find insulting. ‘They,’ however, is a big tent. What my Jewish rabbi friend down the block finds insulting is different from what Abraham Foxman [national director of the Anti-Defamation League] finds insulting. Also, it does work both ways. Maybe this is an opening to say, ‘Would you care to look at some of the Talmudic literature’s description of Jesus as a bastard, and so on, and maybe make a few changes in some of that?’

 

Here’s Jeffrey Weiss’ reaction on the DMN religion blog:

My 2 cents: Exclusivist faiths inevitably make negative claims in their theologies about other religions. Jews want to say that Jesus was a fraud? Catholics (or Baptists) want to say that Jews got real problems in the hereafter of they don’t accept Jesus as Savior? Well, it’s what their religion teaches...I’m not sure I understand why members of the “other” religions bother to complain. Where we get problems, however, is when the theology leads to, say, pogroms or the Inquisition.

I agree that this shouldn’t be much of a surprise. Remember what the pope said about there being “one true church?”

3 Comments — Leave your comment

October 5, 2007 | 9:21 am

Adultery Web site founder’s ‘happy marriage’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Remember this summer when I posted about Match.com for adulterers? The billboard for AshleyMadison.com said, “Life is short, have an affair.” Well, yesterday Defamer got this e-mail from the company. The whole thing is worth a read, but this part’s my favorite.

Despite his own “happy marriage”, Morganstern believes that monogamy has become outdated and discovered that through the site, there could be a modern solution to this age old problem.

First off, having an affair is not a solution: It is the problem. Secondly, I love that the press release adds this ridiculous clause, “Despite his own ‘happy marriage.’” Sounds like Morganstern is the kid whose “hypothetical friend” needs help with a problem he is actually dealing with. Maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t. Whatever the case, I’m not interested in the marital success of a pimp.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

October 4, 2007 | 5:23 pm

Ahmadinejad’s Israel whoppers

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Libby Purves, a fan of The God Blog, has compiled a top-30 list of Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s “jaw-dropping quotes” on Israel. Here’s the top eight:

1. “Israel must be wiped off the map … The establishment of a Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world . . . The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of the war of destiny.  The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land.”
October 26, 2005
(In an address to 4,000 students at a program titled, ‘The World Without Zionism’)

NB The translation of this quote is debated and has also been read as “Israel must disappear from the page of history”

2. “The Zionist regime is an injustice and by its very nature a permanent threat. Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation.  The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm.”
April 14, 2006
(In a speech at the opening of the “Support for the Palestinian Intifada” conference on April 14-16 hosted in Tehran)

3. “Today, they [Europeans] have created a myth in the name of Holocaust and consider it to be above God, religion and the prophets … This is our proposal: give a part of your own land in Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to them [Jews] so that the Jews can establish their country.”
December 14, 2005
(Speaking to thousands of people in the Iranian city of Zahedan)

4. “The Zionist regime is the flag bearer of violation and occupation and this regime is the flag of Satan. …It is not unlikely that this regime be on the path to dissolution and deterioration when the philosophy behind its creation and survival is invalid.”
August 18, 2007
(Address to an international religious conference in Tehran)

5. “A new Middle East will prevail without the existence of Israel.”
August 4, 2006
(as quoted by Malaysian news agency Bernama website)

6. “In parallel to the official political war there is a hidden war going on and the Islamic states should benefit from their economic potential to cut off the hands of the enemies.”

7. “Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces…. Although we don’t accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question for the Europeans is: Is the killing of innocent Jewish people by Hitler the reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?  If the Europeans are honest they should give some of their provinces in Europe—like in Germany, Austria or other countries—to the Zionists and the Zionists can establish their state in Europe.”
December 8, 2005
(While speaking to journalists at an Islamic summit in Mecca)

8. “The Zionists are the true manifestation of Satan . . . Many Western governments that claim to be pioneers of democracy and standard bearers of human rights close their eyes over crimes committed by the Zionists and by remaining silent support the Zionists due to their hedonistic and materialistic tendencies.”
February 28, 2007
(to a meeting of Sudanese Islamic scholars in Khartoum)

 

1 Comments — Leave your comment

October 4, 2007 | 4:00 pm

Israeli newspaper cries ‘apartheid’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

A Ha’aretz editorial yesterday used the “a-word,” and the Bintel Blogger calls the liberal Israeli paper out on it:

Lamenting the situation in the occupied territories, the editorial says:

 

The de facto separation is today more similar to political apartheid than an occupation regime because of its constancy. One side — determined by national, not geographic association — includes people who have the right to choose and the freedom to move, and a growing economy. On the other side are people closed behind the walls surrounding their community, who have no right to vote, lack freedom of movement, and have no chance to plan their future.

 

[Emphasis added]

Sure, there are similarities between the lives of Palestinians under Israeli occupation and those of black South Africans under apartheid. Indeed, in certain respects, the conditions Palestinians face are arguably even worse. But while the Palestinians’ circumstances may resemble those once faced by blacks in South Africa, the apartheid analogy ignores crucial context for why this is the case.

Unlike South African blacks, Palestinians bear no small share of the responsibility for their plight. If not for repeated Arab threats and efforts to destroy the Jewish state, there would have been no occupation in the first place. And if not for wave after wave of terrorism, there would quite possibly be an independent Palestinian state today instead of a West Bank security barrier. And, it goes without saying, constant rocket barrages from post-disengagement Gaza do little to encourage Israel to end its occupation of the West Bank.

But Israel’s foes do not deploy the “apartheid” analogy simply because of its descriptive utility. It is also a term of moral opprobrium, a cudgel used to beat up and de-legitimize Israel in the court of world opinion. If Israel is like apartheid South Africa, then it is an evil regime that should be boycotted and ostracized, or so the analogy goes.

Read on here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

October 4, 2007 | 2:48 pm

Sony Pictures CEO’s Jewish journey

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Michael Lynton is running late.  It almost should be expected that the chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment would not be waiting around his Culver City office for a reporter to show up with a notebook full of questions. Especially a studio head as closely guarded as he.

Half an hour after we were set to meet—not so bad, really—Lynton steps into his office foyer and extends a hand. Short and tan, wearing suit pants and a light-blue shirt with the top two buttons undone, he leads me to a table in his office.

“OK,” he says as he slips into a chair. “What are we talking about?” “You.” Lynton seems surprised, as I note in a short profile of him in this week’s Jewish Journal, because during his meteoric rise to the third floor of the Irving Thalberg Building, he’s never liked to talk about himself.

He doesn’t speak publicly about his wife and three children, he says, because they didn’t sign up for the scrutiny. And he doesn’t talk much about being Jewish because that’s not something he did growing up in the Netherlands. “I was one of two Jewish kids in my school. We were probably one of two Jewish families in our town. And it was a really tolerant country. So it is not that you are hiding your Judaism, it is just that you don’t identify yourself as a Jew because there is no critical mass to identify with,” Lynton recalled. “So you identify yourself by other criteria. You identify yourself by what your dad does for a living, what your mother does for a living, what sports teams you like—that sort of thing. “What is unusual about the United States—and it’s something that I have never gotten used to—is that Jews here, there are so many of them and they are so important to the culture,” he said. “And they feel, rightly, so comfortable being visible and outspoken, that they identify themselves in a very prominent way in the communities they live in, whether it is the entertainment community or the banking community or whatever it is. That’s not a phenomenon you would see in Holland at all; that’s not a phenomenon I grew up with.”

0 Comments — Leave your comment

October 4, 2007 | 10:03 am

Jack Abramoff the bully

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

I had lunch last month with the LA Weekly‘s Pulitzer-winning food critic, Jonathan Gold, and we got to talking about high school. He mentioned that one of his teenage tormentors at Beverly Hills High School was his Jewish co-religionist, the now notorious Jack Abramoff, and told me he had recorded a segment for “This American Life” detailing the drama.
That segment, which originally aired in June 2006, was rebroadcast last week and is now making the blog rounds.

“He was the sort of person who would walk across the street to be unpleasant to somebody,” Gold says.

Gold, who only recently trimmed his fiery-red Hessian hair, describes his high school self as “nerdy soft kid who brings his cello to class.” Abramoff, legend has it, was the bulked-up jock who could squat over 500 pounds.

“In my most notable instance, I was walking down the hall to history class, and he hip-checked me ... I went sailing down the stairs with my cello,” Gold says. “He was laughing about it with his friends. I suspect he forgot about it five minutes later. I didn’t.”

When Abramoff was sent to prison, Gold was elated. “It’s just beautiful. It’s more than I could have wished for.”

Abramoff’s demise was a long-time coming, and was indicative of the corrupt influence of K Street on Congress. The most amazing comment Abramoff, an Orthodox Jew, gave during his downfall was to The Jewish Journal:

I had lost a sense of proportion and judgment. God sent me 1,000 hints that He didn’t want me to keep doing what I was doing. But I didn’t listen, so He set off a nuclear bomb.

For what it’s worth, Abramoff claims he’s never met Jonathan Gold. It sounds to me like Gold wasn’t the kind of classmate he would remember.

2 Comments — Leave your comment