David Gibson's piece on Carrie Prejean, Queen Esther and American Evangelicals was an eye-opener for me, and I am not even entirely clear about his conclusion. But the fact that the conflict-embroiled Miss USA wannabe is being touted by many Christians as a contemporary Queen Esther is pretty interesting. And in some ways, they have a point.
Like Queen Esther, Miss Prejean seems to be caught up in a controversy that is beyond either what she ever intended or even fully comprehended. Like Queen Esther, and totally unlike the current mis-reading of the story by Prejean's Evangelical supporters, this is a story with many players pulling at, and pushing on, the heroine to get her to do what they want as much as her acting based on her own deeply-held beliefs.
Contrary to the quoted Boston University professor in his piece, Esther never asserts the belief that she has become queen in order to save her people. Those are Mordechai's words when he pushes her to speak out on their behalf. In fact, Esther is only able to carry out the mission on which she is sent because she resigns herself to failure and even death if she disappoints the king.
The most interesting thing here about the comparison to queen Esther is that for the parallel to work, we would need to presume that Evangelical Christians are being persecuted by a government which seeks their physical destruction. Is that what they believe? Now that's something worth exploring....
What does it mean when a community that is as much as 100,000,000 people strong in America alone, portrays itself as a victimized minority? Is that kind of victim status ever the ground of the most responsible decision-making? How often is the mantle of victimhood worn as insulation from asking questions about our own communities and their behavior?
This is not an Evangelical thing or a Jewish thing, it's a human thing. But given the size and power of the American Evangelical community, they need to be especially cautious about assuming that they play the role of Esther in the Biblical story.
At the very least, they need to ask themselves what other characters in the narrative they may be. The Bible, which portrays Haman as the ultimate bad guy, reminds us that he is from the Amalekites, which means that he is from Esau. Esau was Jacob's twin brother. So we are all each of the characters in the story, at least a little bit. Let's hope Miss Prejean and those who imagine her to be a modern-day Esther can remember that.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of 
This is a very interesting discussion. I want to comment on the way the word evangelical is used. There is a great variety of evangelicals. For example the difference between Jim Walis of Sojourners and James Dobson of Focus on the Family are stark. For me, a mainline Protestant, the word evangelical has lost all meaning. Fundamentalists would more accurately describe the evangelicals characterized in this discussion. Years ago, I heard a Mennonite theologian describe fundatmentalists as a psychology and not a theology. That pretty much descriges how I have experienced them as a pastor. It is pointless to enter dialogue with a fundamentalist. And yes, fundamentalist like to be victims. They need to be victims.
My daughter died in my arms, of a rare liver cancer. There is nothing worse to a mother? To anyone actually if they are human? The torture was horrifying, and it tore my soul out of my body, and shattered my spirit? Made me feel like the Black Hole. However I survived and life goes on. I still gasp for air for the emptiness in my heart throbs, and you never really get over it as they say? But she is with God. No question, but that is the only thought that helps me get through the days of the rest of my life. So think people how rotten it is for these 3rd world dinosauers to torture and sacrifice children? Or child molesters? These are sub-humans, not nearly human?
the only thing that is to do with them is to leave them behind! In the dust, Dust in the wind that is all they are! So treat them as such for they are the enemy. May God Bless
A previous poster commented on the fact that Carrie had no problem sashaying around with her breasts hanging out and an expression that said, yes, lust after me! you quivering slimeballs! I grew up in a fundamentalist family so I am very familiar with how many of them take the Jewish culture and make it their own (badly). So a fundamentalist boy might grow his hair and imagine he is mighty Sampson, with the strength of many men! Of course, to the neighbors in his suburban neighborhood he is either a rebellious creep or cross dressing wimp. My point is that people with no culture of their own (what ever happened to it?) have glommed on to another cultures history etc and tried to make it their own. Therefore, Carrie can be seen as the great Queen Esther instead of someone you never heard about who must have a gigantic ego and would probably like to turn her 15 minutes of fame into a conservative political career like Sara Palin is trying to do.
Carrie Prejean should be rewarded for speaking her mind, liberals want to shut out the truth and human trash like Perez Hilton should be the ones quieted.
Carrie is likened to Queen Esther simply because she was willing to stand up for what she believed though it cost her. Queen Esther took a "chance" with the king by exposing her true identity and thus perhaps it costing her life. We see that God intervened, the king had favor on her, was willing to truly listen and so her life was spared. It's sad because it is hypocritical that so many would malign Carrie for her forthrightness. Years ago, this would be the kind of person with gumption who would be appointed a leadership position. So I conclude that like any other American, she is permitted to have her own viewpoint yet like Haman, who wanted to stealthily kill Queen Esther's people, much of the media and those at the pageant very apparently appear to want to trap her into answering politically correctly instead of honestly from her heart. It isn't Carrie we ought to be concerned about but those who choose to force, by their intimidation, everyone to be like robots...to have to accept the popular instead of stand against the tide. Don't we all have to stand against personal obstacles at one time or another so that we can push through to success? Maybe our mother encourages us or a friend gives us the encouragement to push on through. Why should we deny another human being the same advice just because they don't agree with the vocal ones? Their intimidation silences many (much to many people's delight esp. when one sees how they have hurt Carrie), but the Lord will come through for His people one day. We may be shushed here below, but one day, there will be no one to shush our praises to the One who knows all our sorrows and has given His truth in His Holy Word.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.