AntiSemitism From Jealousy of Jews A Canned Dodge Berger

The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, by David Berger. 2001

The “Hatred-Jealousy” Accusation Used to Silence Critics. Jewish anti-Christian Memes Still Operate to the Present Day

There are already many reviews of this book that spell out its essential content, and I will not repeat them. However, judging by the vehemence and depth of the informed reviews, the reader may be struck by the diametrically-opposite views of those who insist upon, and those who summarily dismiss, the scale and significance of the belief, among some Lubavitch Chabad, that Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson is the Messiah, will rise from the dead, and is God.

I analyze some of the lines of argumentation in this book, and do not take sides on its veracity (for which reason I give it three points, in order to express my neutrality). However, it is incorrect to say that Berger merely cites unnamed sources and anecdotal reports. He also supports his arguments with printed material. (pp. 92-93).

THE “HATRED-JEALOUSY” ACCUSATION INVOKED TO STIFLE CRITICISM OR DEBATE

Author David Berger contends that, for many members of Chabad Hasidism, no criticism of them can emerge from pure motives. Thus, according to Berger, “Rather, for many Lubavitch hasidim, every criticism without exception is to be accounted for by a one-size-fits-all explanation: ‘hatred-jealousy’ (SINE-KINE in the standard Yiddish pronunciation of these Hebrew words) treated as a single term.” (p. xiv).

[But don’t many Jews, as a whole, think the same way–saying that any criticism of Jews must be anti-Semitism, which moreover is driven by ‘hatred-jealousy’ of Jewish successes?]

HOW TO RECOGNIZE THE MESSIAH WHEN HE COMES

The author would have leading rabbinical authorities, from the past, dictate what the qualifications are for the messiah, and he elaborates these in Appendix I. This arguably-narrow line of thinking then trumps all other considerations. For instance, consider the tradition of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, which could mean a messiah who died and rose again. To nullify this, Berger falls back on a nineteenth century tradition that the Messiah son of Joseph would not have to die and then be resurrected as Messiah son of David. (pp. 48-49). In Berger’s mindset, that settles it.

THE FEAR OF CHRISTIANITY

The author contends that the differences between the beliefs in the Deity of Jesus Christ, and in Rebbe Schneerson as God, are not halakhically material. (p. 104). Both involve AVODAH ZARAH, which Berger defines as the worship, as God, of an entity that is in fact not God. (p. 178). Again and again, David Berger verbalizes concern that the Messianism involving Schneerson breaches the historical wall between Christianity and Judaism. (p. xxiv, xli, 27, 31, 38-39, 70, 74, 84, 91, 99-100, 112-113, 129-131, 142, 145).

In fact, Berger’s words are priceless, “Jews can still be jolted by Christian missionary campaigns, but they find it difficult to understand that accepting the legitimacy of a dead and resurrected Messiah is exponentially more dangerous to the Jewish defense against missionizing than any short-term or even long-term proselytizing initiative by American Baptists.” (p. 70).
Finally, the author, in bringing up the massacres of Jews in 1096, during the First Crusade, lapses into a purely emotional argument, as he candidly states that, “‘I have spent a significant segment of my professional life with the victims of 1096; it is not surprising that I react strongly to the effective declaration by Orthodox Jewry that on the matter of fundamental principles our martyred ancestors were wrong and their Christian murderers were right.’” (p. 74).

THE ONGOING ORTHODOX ENMITY TOWARDS EVEN ENTERING A CHURCH

Historically, Jews have been much more disinclined to visit churches than Christians were disinclined to visit synagogues. Berger inadvertently provides the reason—partly applicable even today—as he quips, “In other words, the main synagogue at Lubavitch headquarters is currently a sanctuary in which God is worshipped through his manifestation in an invisible human being. This is precisely what is done in a Christian sanctuary. Many rabbinic authorities maintain that Jewish law imposes certain restrictions on entering churches even when they do not contain pictures or images. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that such restrictions would also apply to the main sanctuary in 770 Eastern Parkway.” (p. xxxix).

CONSEQUENCES OF THE DEPARTURE OF JEWS FROM RELIGION

The progressive self-atheization of Ashkenazi Jews, throughout the last 150 years or so, is a subject beyond the scope of this work. However, the author indirectly touches on some of its implications. One of these is the nature of modern Jewish influence, “In our own time, when individuals who entirely reject belief in the Jewish religion hold the highest positions in the Jewish community and the State of Israel, it is self-evident that the issue before us cannot generate any form of technical excommunication.” (xvi). The same, of course, holds for influential Jews in western societies in general.

While advocating cooperation between different forms of Judaism, Berger cautions that, “Reform and even Conservative Judaism as currently constituted diverge in fundamental ways from Jewish belief and/or practice and are consequently not legitimate expressions of the historic faith.” (p. 89).

Berger hints at some hypocrisy among the critics, as he adds that, “Most Conservative and Reform Jews have long ago relinquished the belief in a personal Messiah; such Jews cannot readily insist that he must come from the living.” (p. 26).