cellio: (star)
[personal profile] cellio
Two takes on multiculturalism and December holidays, both written by liberal Jews, with rather different stances: one from JBCs (Jews by Choice) and one from the Velveteen Rabbi. I myself tend more toward the former; when we try to combine holidays with the goal of better interfaith relations, I think we weaken both. Christmas is the second most important day on the Christian calendar; it should be important and solemn for those who believe, and not be treated as somehow equivalent to a minor Jewish holiday commemorating, of all things, a victory over assimilation. (Think about that irony for a minute.) If I find myself in the midst of Christian affirmation, which to me includes everything from a mass down to singing Handel's Messiah, they should do their thing and I should withdraw [1]. We shouldn't have to compromise on "Frosty the Snowman" or a theme of light in the darkest days of winter.

Cross-religion education is a good thing, and I think most people would welcome serious inquiries from people of different faiths if they want to know more (or even attend services or other rituals). I've certainly participated on both sides of that and seen no problems. But I think we should remember that our religions are separate; they have different emphases and that's ok. We don't have to agree, and we don't have to try to build a lowest common denominator.

To my Christian friends, I wish you the best in your season of holiness now under way, as I know you wish similar things for me during the high holy days and at other times. I'm not offended by your observance of your religion; you don't need to water it down. Besides, the dreidel song is really insipid; please don't feel obligated on my account.

(Mind, I would have a different reaction to celebrations in a setting that's supposed to be neutral, like a public school or a place of (secular) employment. But that's not what I'm talking about here.)

[1] Some do not see a problem with things like singing Messiah. We all draw the "worship" line in different places.

OK, I'm going to be completely different

Date: 2004-12-01 12:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] eclectic-1.livejournal.com
I can not agree that "no Christmas decorations" is the way to go. I would rather include all faiths than none. Why should someone be offended by seeing a display of a different religion? A caveat that the display has to be respectful.

Hold onto your hats, but I learned Christmas songs in Public School! Not only that, I learned the Menorah song at the same time! Oh my gosh! (I have curtailed saying "Oh my God" due to a very religiously strict person at work, but it seemed like a such little sacrifice to make someone happy.) And you know, if I had learned a little more a little earlier maybe that whole "asking for pepperoni on your pizza bagel at the Jewish deli" could have been avoided.

I'm just thinking that maybe we need to share our celebrations more, throughout the year. Maybe that would even lead to more understanding of each other and peace and harmony and good things.

Adam Sandler's Chanukah songs do make up for the dreidel song.

If you get a chance, listen to Dar William's "The Christians and the Pagans". It chokes me up just to think about the song.

I had recently created a song list on my iPod with all my spiritual music. I am greatly amused that I have representation of at least five different religions. But I must confess to having very little Jewish religious music. Any suggestions? (Boy, I came to the right place for that didn't I, Monica?)

One thing I must ask, why so many different spellings of Chanukah?!?

Re: part 1

Date: 2004-12-01 02:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] eclectic-1.livejournal.com
Yes, I did assume you mean public places. I was thinking about cubicle farms myself.

I would not mind having Muslim, Hindu, or Pagan symbols around. I would object to naked women only on the grounds that nudity is considered a no-no. Ew! you just grossed me out in thinking that my boss (who is Hindu) has a nude statue! I would even question whether a person should be offended by the human body, but that's probably good for a future discussion.

The devil may be in the details of this thought. Yes, it is too easy for someone to put in their own faith into the assumptions of presenting a religion. One would hope that someday we could get to a point where people could feel free to constructively criticize and both parties could come to a compromise without either getting offended. The respect of others is so key to the whole thing working out.

I just realized that maybe I am thinking more extremely than you mean. Putting up a huge cross is one thing, but what about Christmas lights? Or a Christmas tree (which we know comes from Pagan roots)? Or a Star of David?

But this whole thought gets back to my feeling about fundamentalism (of any religion, or even cultures for that matter). I think that people that think other people are bad just because they're different is evil incarnate.

Liberals from red states, huh? Nothing personal? *smile*

Re: part 1

Date: 2004-12-02 01:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] eclectic-1.livejournal.com
***
Let me stress that I made that example up. I know that some Indian traditions include depictions of gods that are not always clothed. I don't know how that intersects with Hinduism, nor do I know anything about Hindu worship. Please don't hold anything against your boss on account of this hypothetical scenario.
***
You would have to know my boss to really get the level of "Ew!" right. Now, a boss I had a few years ago that was also Hindu, I could see *him* doing that.

Re: part 1

Date: 2004-12-02 01:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] eclectic-1.livejournal.com
Well, I would have a hard time arguing against that.

Re: part 1

Date: 2004-12-02 05:44 pm (UTC)
jducoeur: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jducoeur
But imagine coming from a tradition that says gazing upon such things is sinful. I know such traditions exist.

To give a related example (different, but in the same space):

I'm a moderately-active Freemason, and used to be moreso. Modern Masonry's attitude towards religion is studiedly ecumenical: members are required to be religious, but not required to be members of any specific religion. (There are some implicit assumptions of monotheism, but that's not technically a requirement.)

When I was more active in Masonry on the Net, back when the Internet was new and shiny and there weren't that many of us there (a close friend and sometime SCAdian put up the first Masonic webpage I know of), I often spent time answering questions about it. One of the most common misconceptions was people who believed that they couldn't join because only Catholics, or only Jews, or only Protestants were allowed in. (Yes, I've run across each religion explicitly believing that only some other one was allowed to be Masons.)

One day, I wound up in a conversation with a Baptist (don't remember the denomination), and expected to have to give the usual clarifications. Instead, it turned out that he wasn't going to be able to join for precisely the opposite reason: *because* Masonry was ecumenical, he felt he had to eschew it.

The discussion was fascinating, because the fellow was no sort of raging bigot or anything like that. But he was very serious about his religion, and took seriously the notion that his interpretation of God was the only correct one. (A statement that most religions believe deep down, but are leery of saying too loudly these days.) Therefore, the ecumenical stance of Masonry, which almost explicitly says that all religions are equally valid, was intellectually dishonest in his view; indeed, it was essentially sinful, because becoming a Mason would have meant endorsing a statement about religion that was counter to his beliefs.

Very eye-opening chat, with some hard truths in it. I'm very used to Blue-State America's religious relativism, and it's too easy to dismiss everyone else as ranting fanatics. But it illustrated that many religions really just aren't compatible with that relativism. And it doesn't require fanaticism to feel that, simply a cool intellectual look at the tenets of the faith...

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags