Windows and Doors

Why does an author and talk-show host who was once a settler in the west bank city of Hebron, who grew up in a largely secular, Jewish home in Chicago, where he returned to study religion at the University of Chicago and went on to be ordained as an Orthodox rabbi, become a blogger for Beliefnet.com? Because I believe that in a world with more and more walls going up between people, nations, and religious communities, we need more windows and doors, and this can be one of them.
Welcome to Windows & Doors, an ongoing conversation about how the traditions and wisdoms we value most, meet up with the biggest questions in our lives and in our world. In my case, that tradition is Jewish, though I am privileged to have teachers from many traditions and believe that Truth is found in many places and wrapped in many different garments.
I also believe that the purpose of being Jewish is not to “be Jewish”, but to be human, which is why this conversation is definitely not for Jews only. In fact, the test, for me, of the health of the tradition that I love is not simply whether it helps its own members, but whether or not it benefits those who are not. If that sounds radical, look no farther than the biblical story of Abraham’s call from God, in which he is told that his mission is to both found a nation, and also to be a blessing to the entire world. And being a blessing to the world, means serving the needs of its residents — people like you and me.
Windows & Doors is a kind of living laboratory in which the ideas, insights and practices that can make our lives better will be explored and tested against the daily turbulence that is contemporary life. If it’s in the news, it will be here. And if it’s in my heart and in the hearts of those I know, now including you, then it will be here as well. Let’s discover together how faith can overcome fear and how religious commitment (to any tradition) can be combined with genuine spiritual openness.
If you know that the big stuff in life is too important to simply be divided by words like right and left, traditional and liberal, or any of the easy dichotomies that dominate the media, then this is the place for you. If you are fascinated by the connection between faith and current affairs, then this is the place for you. If you find yourself wondering what it means to love God by whatever name we call Him/Her, in a world where religion is such a polarizing and even deadly force, then this is the place for you. I’ll meet you here tomorrow.

When he accused Presidential candidate Barack Obama of taking a “fruitcake interpretation” of the Constitution, it was clearly no compliment and neither was his accusation that Obama was “dragging biblical understanding through the gutter.” So for starters, what does Reverend Dobson have against fruitcake? I mean we all like to make fun of it, and my wife’s theory is that there are only a few of them which are re-gifted every Christmas, but still…. Next he’ll be calling such interpretation “chopped liver” and for me, them’s fightin’ words!
But more troubling is Dobson’s assessment of Senator Obama’s comments, which strike me as well reasoned and genuinely valuable to anyone who takes both the Bible and contemporary experience seriously. He did not get it totally right, but more about that later. Now to the three dangerous claims made by Dobson, with whom I often disagree but rarely find this ugly.
First, why must Reverend Dobson insist that Obama’s “mistaken” interpretations are a “deliberate distortion”? Can’t someone be wrong anymore without being accused of lying? I appreciate that Dobson thinks Obama is wrong, but there is no evidence here that he is lying, too. And confusing disagreement with disingenuousness turns ugly pretty quick and serves nobody well. Not to mention that when he suggests that Obama is “dragging biblical understanding through the gutter” because he offers an interpretation which differs from his own, he is telling all Jews, Muslims, and Christians who differ from him that we are guilty of the same dragging. If that is so, then I am proud to share that gutter with Obama and will leave the street to the ugly triumphalists who would defend Dobson’s claim.
Second, while Dobson may be correct that Obama is “worlds away in the views of evangelicals,” his claim is based on the fact that “Evangelicals…take Bible interpretation very seriously,” which he believes Obama does not. Why? Because James Dobson assumes that if you don’t share his conclusions about the Bible, you must not take it seriously. Ironically, taking the Bible seriously is the one thing that all interpreters actually share. If they didn’t, they would not bother to interpret the text, they would simply ignore it! But sadly, for a man who claims to love the Bible, I suspect that is what Dobson would prefer.
Third, the Reverend would apparently prefer a world with people who share his view of the Bible, or have so little connection to it that they have no view at all. This makes it genuinely frightening when he accuses Senator Obama of wanting everybody to agree about how to interpret the Bible. He perfectly locates the sin of spiritual arrogance, which really does get people killed, and claims that those who oppose it are most guilty of it! Well, I guess he knows that the best defense is a good offense, or in this case, the ability to be offensive.
I do hope that in the future Senator Obama will not suggest that interpretations with which he disagrees are inherently not “amenable to reason.” But that is something about which we can talk when we stand together in that “gutter” where Reverend Dobson thinks we both belong. Hey, maybe we’ll make it a picnic and I’ll bring the fruitcake.