Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo
Director, Research Center for Religion in Society and Culture

Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo

Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo is Professor Emeritus of Puerto Rican and Latino Studies at Brooklyn College and Distinguished Scholar of the City University of New York.

 ALL POSTS

Jewish Identity and Popular Religiosity

Because Judaism has weathered so many storms and waves of oppression in the past, I cannot think of an American future without Jews. Rather than measure the vitality of the religion by the numbers of its synagogues, the demographics of its membership or the training of clergy, however, I think would judge its endurance with more subtle measures: tribal togetherness and popular religiosity.

I know that the mention of the word “tribal” is politically incorrect today. Reference to inherited belonging based on genetics is sometimes considered demeaning. However, in a world when so many traits have become commodities to be bought and sold at whim and where “virtual” defines so many experiences from Viagra-induced romance to wars conducted at internet play stations – "tribal" is an enviable attribute. Moreover, although originally only a tribal religion, Judaism has moved through periods of henotheism (My god is better than your god, just like my army is bigger than yours.) and metaphysical monotheism (Only my God exists, damn you!). Modern secularity rode to the rescue of Jewish identity, thus preserving it from a fate similar to the ancient Egyptian and Babylonian religions that vanished when their kingdoms were conquered.

As explained to me by Dr. Barry Kosmin, who directs a Hartford based institute on secularism, Jews believe that they have received a code of behavior to live by. They are relatively free to explain how their law was shaped, whether by divine revelation, historical process, or a combination of both. They don’t even have to believe in God to believe in practice of this law. These points were confirmed by my Jewish students at Brooklyn College.

Although this law is essential for Jews, Dr. Kosmin explained that it ought not be interpreted as a put-down of other religions. The tribalness of Jewish identity provides insulation from fanaticism. Rather than live by rote repetition of authoritarian impositions, most Jews today practice their religion by a set of freely chosen options. Their law and practices are meant for them, and are not binding on other religions. This secularizing principle allows Jews to be fervent in personal practice of their own faith but agnostic towards all others. Their religion was correctly categorized by Isaiah as a “light to the Gentiles,” but without the obligation of conforming all others to their faith.

In some ways, American Jews today resemble their medieval Spanish counterparts when that community was a model for the world. Thus enlightened, the Jewish faith is not burdened with the Christian notion that “Outside the Church there is no salvation;” or that only baptized Christians go to heaven. I think that is why few if any Jews try to convert Gentiles. In fact, Paul the Apostle is often better understood by Jewish scholars of 1st century CE theology (e.g. Alan Segal) than by some Christian thinkers, precisely on this account.

To the extent that secularism is different from militant atheism, this agnostic side of Judaism in America makes it the very model of a modern religion. Agnosticism, after all, has a live-and-let-live mentality because it does not rise or fall on the metaphysical certainty of its own infallibility. Militant Atheists, on the other hand, are logically bound to consider all believers to be some combination of stupid or ignorant or devious – a classic expression of the flaws in modernity as understood by a two hundred years old Eurocentric Enlightenment.

While Jews can be united by the premise of doing no harm to others, I think they also seek to add passion to the mix. Popular religiosity among Jews brings the faith alive for its practitioners. For several years, I was part of several discussions sponsored by the Program for the Analysis of Religion Among Latinas/os (PARAL) between Jewish and Latina scholars. The sociologists, Ariela Keysar and Ana María Díaz-Stevens of Union Theological Seminary, were just two of these women who approached matters with a keen sense of religious conviction to illuminate their sociological method. Their salient conclusions focused on the home-based nature of religious observance. The role of the woman in the household is crucial for both identity and continuity, said both sides. The preparation of festival meals, for instance, is often a more important dimension of Passover (or Easter) than attendance at temple (or church) services. And food is only one of several key notions of popular religiosity: celebration of the birth and naming of children; weddings and wedding ceremonies; funerals and grieving for the departed, are other rites of passage that maintain religious identity outside the formal institutions of religion. In fact, it has been argued in the essay, "The Matriarchal Core" by Prof. Díaz-Stevens that the less people go to church or synagogue, the more important become these home-based expressions of religiosity.

Informed by so many notable scholars of religion, I rest confident on the future of American Judaism.

By Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo  |  January 14, 2008; 1:15 PM ET  | Category:  Interfaith Issues Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Freedom's Genius | Next: The Future of Jewish Americans

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Just to step in on a Terra/Gary exchange:

Terra:
"God/dess, Allah, Jehohva,etc...all are views of something too powerful and too diverse for our puny mind to grapple with. Why think of the Creator of all life as small enough to put in a slot?

terra"


"garyd:

So then you are telling me that God is schizoid?"

No, she's saying people are, if they insist that the 'Divine' must be defined by humans and decide that their own view must be the only view, and any others must be different 'Gods of All.'

*That's* schizoid.

In general, Pagans refuse to conflate *any* one tribal view (even those we may call our own) of a characterized 'ultimate God/dess' with some human idea of 'The one and only defined Truth.' We accept that what talk of this sort of grand unity is trying to describe is by nature beyond characterization, and are quite accustomed to the idea of many specific Gods coexisting, rather than vying for 'The only existence' in some sort of eternal cultural conflict that human belief somehow 'decides.'

'God/dess,' you might say, ain't that *small and petty* to us. If we see need for humans to worry about such grand unities in the first place. Certainly, trying to characterize a 'One God' and then vicariously impose a human idea of 'his' 'will' on others leads people to a lot of unnecessary grief.

Faith ain't a 'zero-sum' game to us.


Posted by: Paganplace | January 15, 2008 11:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Yet the Moslem concept of God is very different from the Reformed Christian sort of God in fact they are nearly polar opposites in most respects to a degree that would require a God with a rather extreme form of multipersonality syndrome. Again If I change my name to Bill Gates does that entitled me to cash checks against his bank account? If the personality and nature are different then they cannot be the same.

Posted by: garyd | January 15, 2008 5:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I agree with those who wish that people would post in 'regular' English rather than using capitals and misspellings and odd punctuation marks. I see such posts and skip them as nonsense, and please do not ask me to check wikipedia as it written by its readers.

That being said, I appreciate the comments by Yehudis, Joe and Garyd. The more we share our honest thoughts and questions, the more we begin to understand each other's religions.

My take:
God isn't schizoid - s/he manifests in a unique way to each person, and traditions built up over many years shape each person's understanding of God. Yet, some believe that their version of God's word is the 'last' word, perfect - well, my daughter (a religion major) sent me this statement: God cannot build a wall that s/he cannot climb over; therefore God is not perfect.

On Israel - The Bible says that some land in what is now the state of Israel is the 'promised land.' But we do not know God's physical boundaries. We also do not have any evidence of exclusivity - others may stay there as well as Jews. And of course there were no Jews at all in the beginning, only people, male and female, in God's image. So we should recognize that we are ALL God's people, stop fighting each other with words OR weapons.

Posted by: letsbepeaceful | January 15, 2008 4:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Why are Jews being singled out in this circumstance?

90% of Americans say they believe in a higher power, but only 26% attend services on a weekly basis. Jews are not less Jewish for not attending Shabbat services any more than their Christian counterparts.

Faith is not disappearing, but the way faith is practiced may be. It is more personalized, more private (which for most Jews has been the case for a very long time). This doesn't mean religion is disappearing.

Posted by: Mara E | January 15, 2008 4:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

So then you are telling me that God is schizoid?

Posted by: garyd | January 15, 2008 12:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Garyg,
I believe there is just one God...many faces. I am Pagan and believe that God/Creator is in all things, that you can not turn away from God, only the rules set by man and the view you have been taught. While I honor all the faces of God as being part of the Whole, you want to say one face is correct and the rest wrong...how do you know?

God/dess, Allah, Jehohva,etc...all are views of something too powerful and too diverse for our puny mind to grapple with. Why think of the Creator of all life as small enough to put in a slot?

terra

Posted by: Terra Gazelle | January 15, 2008 11:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Yehudis,

That is a funny story. And it is true of far more than Jews.

The number of Christians who only show up at church for Christmas and Easter is amazing and some of them only make one of the two. Indeed how can one be considered a football fan if one has never watched a game?

The only part that is problematic for me is the bit about many religions worshiping God. They worship a God but not the God. Different Characters = different Gods. The nature of the God of Islam is very different from the nature of the God of Judaism and still more so than the God of Christians. The difference in a nutshell is the concept of Justice.

Posted by: garyd | January 15, 2008 9:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Ahhh, the extreme lunatics are already showing up. Jacob JOZEVZ, why are you up so late? Have your meds not kicked in?

Seriously, How long will the Post allow the nonsense and surliness of the foolish, ignorant and hateful to bring these boards down?

But as a pre-emptive strike on the hordes of Jew haters and Israel bashers and just plain jerks who will soon descend here I have the following food for thought....

I should like to ask anyone here who likes to bash Israel at any chance that anything Jewish gets even remotely mentioned the following questions:

Please before spitting bile, and freaking out, just answer these questions. You may pose some to me if you answer them, otherwise you show the weakness of your side by dodging them.

1. Many who hate Israel would like to paint her in the most graphic and horrible terms. Frequently on these boards, the Israelis are compared to Nazis. OK... Given that the Palestinian population is booming, and the Israeli army is actually powerful enough to kill all of the Palestinians, yet they are still booming, do you really think there is a genocide going on there? How exactly do you define Genocide then?

2. Given that the Hamas Charter openly calls for the genocide of the Jews, that the Arab nations attacked Israel multiple times with the call of killing all the Jews or driving them into the sea, who is actually genocidal?

3. Given that every time there looks like there might be a peace accord it is the ARABS who start blowing things up, who is to blame for the failure of the process? The Oslo accords gave them 98% of the land they wanted and yet they answered with murders, kidnappings and suicide bombers. So if part of your answer is that you think the Israelis just won't negotiate, you don't even pass the giggle test.

4. Hamas was democratically elected. It is a democratically elected terrorist regime that openly calls for genocide. What responsibilities do the Palestinian electorate have for their choice. Are they really blameless if they vote for a party that has sworn to wage war until Israel is destroyed?

5. Rockets fall on Sderot every day. This is an act of war. How long do you think England would let Holland lob rockets at it? The Hezzies and the Hamasnicks openly try to kidnap and murder innocent civilians every day. Is that also not an act of war? And before you go off on the land see question six.

6. Do you remember when it was the West Bank of Jordan? If the Jordanians repudiated the West Bank, which they did just like the Egyptians repudiated their claim to Gaza, then who has to police and administer the land? Further, do consider that the Palestinians are the sort of people who film themselves dancing in the streets with body parts. This is a fact, not a slur. So seriously, should the land just be left to fall into complete chaos? Would you call dancing in the streets with body parts barbaric? What about honor killings? Are those barbaric too? What about executing people for being gay? Is that barbaric?

7. What about Darfur? All of you who like to bash Israel are woefully silent about Darfur. Darfur is a real honest genocide. Are you silent because the killers are Muslim or because the victims are Blacks?

8. Another question about the land... Does it not surprise you that it has Hebrew names? What about the actual fact that Israel is the actual historic homeland of the Jews? Does that mean nothing? If you do think it means nothing, then what about the UN charter that created it? Does that mean nothing? If you think that means nothing too, then do consider that every other nation in the modern ME was created by treaties and interventions by the West. How is Saudi Arabia, or Jordan or Syria (all used to be part of Ottoman Turkey) which were created by the English and the French, not even the UN, more legitimate than Israel. Finally, what about the fact that Israel is the only country in the world to win a war - wars started by others, win and is expected to be punished for winning? Do you expect Germany to get East Prussia back? Perhaps you expect that the Spanish should get Portugal back as well?

Anyway, go ahead and answer these questions factually. If you can then we can talk. If you can not just take your propaganda elsewhere.

Posted by: Joe | January 15, 2008 1:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment

To illustrate (and perhaps obfuscate) your point, I'm going to share an anecdote recently lifted from a friend's blog. (By the way, a true story.):

A certain Chassidic Rebbe was recently in an airport and he met a Jewish man who said that although he used to be observant, after much research he finally came to the conclusion that the Torah was not written by G-d.

The Rebbe told him that this was fine and that he had no problems with him. They could be very good friends. The man was shocked. "What do you mean? It's fine with you?!"

The Rebbe responded, "It's no problem. Maimonides codified that there are 13 Articles of Jewish faith. If you deny 12 of them, you're called a heretic, but you're still Jewish. But he says that if you deny the fact that the Torah is from G-d, it is a sign that "the disbeliever's fathers' feet never stood at the foot of Sinai." According to the Rambam, you must not be Jewish. Perhaps you were switched with another baby at birth, or there was an intermarriage that was forgotten on your mother's side. I don't know exactly what happened, but I know that the Rambam says that you are not Jewish. And if a non-Jew doesn't believe in the Divine nature of the Torah, it's no tragedy. So I have no problem with you!"

The man got very angry and asked the Rebbe how could possibly say that he's not Jewish?!

The Rebbe calmly responded, "I don't know what you're so upset about. It is not me who is saying that you are not Jewish. It is you who said that you do not believe that the Torah was given by G-d."

He further asked the man, "Why does it bother you so much that I must consider you Jewish? If you don't believe that the Torah is Diuine, why is it so important to be Jewish anyway? There are a lot of religions out there that believe in G-d. You can belong to one of them or to none at all and just believe in G-d but not the Torah. But WHY is it so important to be Jewish if you don't believe in the Torah?"

He said, "It's like insisting on calling yourself a NY Yankee, without knowing anything about baseball, the rules of baseball, or even what a baseball field looks like. Why would you insist on calling yourself a Yankee if you don't associate yourself with the priorities & rules of the team?"

With all due respect, Professor Stevens-Arroyo, I don't think that one could argue that it has been Jewish secularism that has saved the Jewish people from historical obliteration. If anything, your own article contradicts the point--since it is the passion of popular religiosity, actual practice combined with some degree of conviction in the meaning of the practice, that is the lifeblood of all cultural survival.
If anything, the rampant assimilation of the last two hundred years has taught us that certain sub-categories of tribal Jews have a dim future:
"Cardiac Jews": I feel Jewish in my heart.
"Gastronomic Jews": I eat bagels and lox rather than bacon and eggs on Sunday morning.
"Once-a-year Jews": The only time I will participate in any Jewish gathering at all is my yearly visit to synagogue for yizkor (these Jews are rapidly dying out).

Fortunately, ample opportunities exist all over the world for "tribal" Jews to tap into the power of popular religiosity (actual practice combined with belief in its grander meaning). Which is what the Rebbe in the story was trying to get across...

Posted by: yehudis | January 14, 2008 4:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company