REGAINING A SENSE OF THE SACRED

Fully clothed pornography.

I had assumed that the phrase was an oxymoron. That is, until my eye was stabbed by a promo pic of skank-della-tutti-skanks Madonna writhing and clad in a bloodied tank top and tefillin – phylacteries, the leather-strapped ritual objects worn in Jewish worship, per Deuteronomy 6:8. Tefillin are sacred to devout Jews. Christians should also know of them, as Jesus himself venerated them and criticized hypocrites who donned them with false intention (see Matthew 23:5).

Revulsion? Of course I felt revulsion. But, another emotion unexpectedly overtook me: empathy. The tawdry defamation of a sacred Jewish symbol understandably disgusts me. On the other hand, I had never before fully empathized with my Christian brethren in their hypersensitivity when their sacred symbols were defamed in the name of over-the-edge artistic expression – a crucifix soaking in urine, the Virgin Mary etched in elephant dung, a bikini clad Our Lady of Guadalupe.

As an intrepid liberal, I have long been steeped in the notion of limitless artistic free expression, even when it is outrageous, and particularly when it espouses an unpopular political or social cause. Desecration of Christian symbols in the name of cultural commentary, I thought, was an expression of artistic freedom that Christians would have to learn to tolerate, however odious it might be.

At best, I felt sympathy for their protestations. Whether my apology is accepted or not, I remorsefully confess that I should have known better decades ago. Now, I pray not too late, I feel full-blown empathy. There is fully clothed pornography that shares a deserved place in hell along with images of unclad people engaged in sexual perversity. It is the desecration of venerated objects and images that have been consecrated by time, history and higher ideals. I am not a Christian, but the Cross and depictions of Jesus and the Saints have, all things considered, come to epitomize the ennoblement of the human spirit and ethos. I hope that honorable Christians would say the same of sacred Jewish symbols.

Moreover, the American legacy is also rightfully sanctified by images that speak to our higher values: Our flag, all things considered, is a sanctified emblem. So too, the images of our founding fathers and mothers. Computer-enhanced visages of Abraham Lincoln peddling car insurance and Mount Rushmore hyping Presidents Day sales are not merely crass commercialism. Call me cranky or humorless, but they defame symbols that convey national honor and decency.

Outlaw the offensive images? Certainly not. Defend the right of free expression, even when it is outrageous and disgusting? Of course. But, defend the right to consequence-free freedom of expression? Nothing in the Judeo-Christian or American tradition grants that assurance. Purveyors of repulsive, defamatory images – even in the name of artistic freedom – should suffer the full consequences of their intolerable behavior. Years ago, a young rabbi bitterly complained to me about the criticism to which he was subjected after delivering a controversial sermon. Did he not have freedom of the pulpit, he asked. He indeed had freedom of the pulpit, I told him, but not freedom of the pulpit with impunity.

So, let us denounce, decry, moralize and rail in righteous indignation about those “artists” who promote fully clothed pornography, up to and including the tawdry, tefillin-clad Madonna. Let us not call for a “boycott,” but how about a “sustained withdrawal of enthusiasm”? Disgusting behavior need not be illegal in order for it to be intolerable. Dignity and good taste may be voluntary, but those who do not volunteer need to know that they have lost their claim to the artistic or intellectual high ground.

You will excuse the cliché, but making such a hoo-hah out of Madonna wrapped in phylacteries is not making a mountain out of a molehill. Neither is a urine-soaked crucifix or even stitching an American flag to the fanny of ones pants as a symbol of contempt. They all point to benign tolerance for the desecration of countless icons that time and ideals have rightfully consecrated. And, in their desecration, we are witnessing the far more heinous desecration of our own capacity for discerning between the sacred and the profane, between the honorable and that which eats away at the core of our humanity.