Passover for the Non-Jews
All Things Consider — By Daniel Strauss on March 29, 2010 at 3:35 pmPresident Obama will hold a private Seder dinner tonight with his family and Jewish staff members, a tradition started in 2008 while on the campaign trail.
Although Seder dinner is s a religious holiday celebrating the liberation of the Jews from slavery in Egypt, I recently discovered there’s bits of the tradition that rings true with non Jews like me.
Last Thursday, U of M’s Jewish Women’s Forum held a Women’s Seder dinner, focusing on marginalized voices within the Jewish community, but a large portion of our dinner table discussion centered on social justice issues and progressivism. It was exciting to me to see a religious gathering as a rallying moment for social change, especially at a moment of fundamentalist resurgence in America advocating conservatism (although Glenn Beck probably wouldn’t agree with this interpretation…)
Do you think the White House Seder will be a forum for President Obama to talk about health care reform as an avenue for the liberation Seder celebrates? If progressivism is on the rise in certain religions, as Beck warns, do you think religious leaders will have an increased role in state programs? Could this closer relationship between the state and religion set dangerous precedents?
–Lexie Tourek
| Share and Enjoy: |
|
Tweet |
Subscribe
1 Comment
I agree that the Passover seder can be a platform for discussing broader and less Jewish-specific ideas, such as social justice and progressive ideology. At many of my own seders, we have discussed modern-day slavery, the meaning of redemption, the meaning of spring, renewal, and change in the modern century, and other similar themes. Passover is a time to think about and reflect on what it means to be in bondage, to move a people from bondage to freedom, and how to truly embrace that freedom. It is true that these are not Jewish-specific concepts or only relevant for Jews. Yet, the specific story of the exodus from Egypt and the collective shared consciousness that is engendered at the Passover seder is truly unique and special.
The US defines itself as a democracy in which church and state are separated. This is true as a whole, and especially when compared with other democracies. Yet, there are many exceptions to this rule which we can point to quite easily. There is an official Christmas tree lighting and Easther egg hunt. Christian holidays are national holidays. Federal money is allocated to religious private schools (both Christian and non-Christian). The word “God” is used in the pledge of allegiance. Religious influence in politics is palpable and hard to miss. Yet, the Christian religious influence is even more palpable. Issues such as gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, abortion, and, yes, health care are highly influenced by religious thinking and ideology. The very concept of marriage is religious – it lacks civil justification and any reason to deny one marriage can only be found in the Bible, making the arguments against gay marriage completely invalid and inappropriate in the political democratic arena.
So, I’m now ready to more directly answer your questions:
1) The seder that Obama is holding is not public and as such would be a very silly place to push his policies. It has minimal media coverage, and it’s not in the national eye. that being said, it’s of course possible the subject will come up and he will connect it to health care. I think that he’s holding a seder because (1) it was a tradition started, as you mentioned, on the campaign trail and (2) it looks good. It looks good for his image to be reaching out to minority religions. I don’t think it’s much deeper than that.
2) I think that it’s so interesting that you ask that question about Beck. Beck is a lunatic. He warns about the rise of progressive values because he is worried that it will hurt his conservative Christian values. He’s not worried about religious influence in the state programs – he’s worried about liberal religious views. He would love it if religion intercepted with state policies – as long as it’s conservative and straight-laced. It’s hard to separate what influences policies in a nation = religion or philosophy. Does one’s personal philosophy influence one’s politics, does one’s religion influence one’s philosophy, or does one’s religion influence politics?
3) A closer relationship between the state and religion could of course set dangerous precedents. But, the problem with many of the arguments for why is that they don’t like what the religion has to offer. In other words, many people argue against religion and state intermingling because they disagree with the religion and what the religion has to offer, not necessarily because they think that any intermingling of religion with the state is a bad recipe. Progressive and liberal values should of course have a say in national politics, as should conservative values, in order to have a true democracy. The question is where do these values come from? If they come from religious backgrounds, should we exclude them? Religious infiltration of politics is a problem – it alienates and divides people, let alone is unconstitutional. Yet, it is equally as important to sort out the objections to religion = are they on the religious grounds or constitutional grounds?