Everything the rabbi says is true. And shame also on some of the reporting. As Gellman says,[blockquote]Ken Lay of Enron shame was never identified as a “prominent Protestant energy broker.” The most aggressive accusers of the governor of Illinois seldom describe him as “the prominent Serbian-American governor of Illinois.”[/blockquote]I heard an excellent sermon this morning (church on Fridays in Cairo) about grace. Grace is what distinguishes Christianity from the other major religions, including Judaism, where our roots are firmly planted. God forgives sinners who haven’t done one single thing to be worth forgiving. Grace is not earned, but a free gift to those who will receive it. Let us pray for Madoff and for all people who are not aware of God’s great love for them.
#1… Matt is right on the mark here. The letter is pure Law. Not an iota of Gospel in it — not the tiniest possibility of grace (i.e. love for the utterly undeserving). Now as Luther observed, along with St. Paul, the Law is absolutely right and holy and good and true. There is nothing wrong with the Law. What it SAYS is absolutely true… it just in itself has no power to engender that which it commands.
Matt is right to see this as a fundamental disconnect between Judaism and Christianity. The NYT recently published a piece in which another eminent rabbi was quoted as saying:
It is not possible for him to atone for all the damage he did,†the rabbi said, “and I don’t even think that there is a punishment that is commensurate with the crime, for the wreckage of lives that he’s left behind. The only thing he could do, for the rest of his life, is work for redemption that he would never achieve.
Of course, in a way, the rabbi is absolutely correct. There is no way that Madoff can atone for his monstrous sins. But the unstated premise is that the rest of us can, via sufficently hard work, rack up enough good points to atone for OUR monstrous sins.
Romans 7:1 – 8:1 (and don’t leave out 8:1!) is helpful reading for us all. Praise God for the One who came who can and did atone for my sins.
I can understand those who were impacted financially by Mr. Madoff’s swindle wishing to strike out and those who will be painted by the same anti-semitic brush hollering too but it appears a wasted effort. To do what Mr. Madoff is accused of doing you’d have to be a sociopath with an enormous ego and in my experience such individuals lack any feelings at all for other people. As such the best reaction you might expect from Mr. Madoff to this open letter would be a bewildered look and maybe a, “yea..so?”
So some of the above commentators are bothered that the Rabbi doesn’t talk about redemption through Jesus? Really? From a Rabbi, you would expect this? Or, are you saying that everything the Rabbi has to say is useless because he’s not a Christian?
Personally, I agree that the letter is harsh but appropriate. Madoff has done enormous harm to millions of people. Yes, there is redemption, but that’s not his faith tradition.
Thank you, Kendall, for seeing this letter and posting it. Brilliant strong, candid letter. Paul would probably regard the single most important contribution of Judaism, in the spirit of his remarks in Romans 9-11, as reminding the church of the wrath of God, and the seriousness of final judgment, saving the church from sentimentality and amnesia and robbing the cross of its power. Karl Barth, in the light of atrocities of the Third Reich, also saw deep into the holiness of God and the cost of his love. Jesus Christ took that punishment in obedience to the Father who sent him, out of love, his and the Father’s, to restore us by the Holy Spirit’s work. Rabbi Gellman is absolutely correct that this is the kind of hell mankind can create, and does create, in acts big and small both. Jesus Christ is the only address to that, and without him, the penalty is overwhelming. The deep irony is that Madoff need not even see that in his own soul for it to be a reality all the same, causing the kind of collateral damage Rabbi Gellman notes. Great Christian teachers always return to this theme, so deeply ingredient in the scriptures Paul called the oracles of God entrusted to the Jews – whether Charles Spurgeon or PT Forsyth, or Karl Barth. Rabbi Gellman points to the cross by reminding Christians what it is that God was doing in sending his son.
Can it be said that one of the fruits of the spirit is not having an unrealistic expectation for humanity? Possibly we would be less prone to falling for a Madoff if we were better tuned in to Original Sin. If we see that our only claim to righteousness is in His perfect obedience, then possibly we can see humanity for what it is and not be continually surprised.
I think the Rabbi was just venting. Hopefully he feels better after doing so. The chances that Maddoff would 1) read this and 2) care seem slight.
I agree with “the Roman.” I suspect Madoff is a sociopath, since his actions don’t bear any of the marks of the normal criminal. Why would he let his own family be entangled in this? What did he imagine the end game was going to be? Most crooks run a carefully defined con, then take the money and run. Did he think this was going to last until he died? Did he not care that his sons and the rest of his family would be then be ruined and disgraced?
I think he was playing a giant game and loving every minute of it and figuring “well, some day it may all come crashing down but it will have been worth it for 20 years of the greatest thrill you could ever have.”
I suspect that, as with most sociopaths, the fact that he will be talked about in financial circumstances for the next few centuries is viewed by him as a feature, not a bug. I mean — if you can’t achieve physical immortality at least you can have the satisfaction of knowing that children as yet unconceived will grow up to continue to litigate the mess you left.
I liked the incisiveness of the rabbi’s comments. I hope Madoff does
read it and does get very upset.
Catholic Mom wrote of Madoff that “…he was playing a giant
game and loving every minute of it …”. That puts me in mind of
the remark made by Groucho Marx (?) which runs something like this :
“The key to success in life is honesty and integrity. If you can fake
those, you’ve got it made.”
The OT is replete with instances of undeserved grace. God’s redemption of Israel and God’s treatment of David after having Uriah killed are but two examples. The NT does not stand alone and Law is never without recourse to grace. II think we need to be careful and avoid the awful Marcionite tendency to set the OT against the NT and to avoid facing the instruction and guidance that the Law can provide for us.
[i]I am not comfortable with the fact that so many of the articles about you specifically identify your prominent place in the Jewish community. Ken Lay of Enron shame was never identified as a “prominent Protestant energy broker.”[/i]
But if Ken Lay had been a prominent Pentecostal and had most conspicuosly swindled Pentecostals, we would have heard about it early and often.
More broadly, why do news reports tell us that a recently indicted malefactor “attends church regularly.” Why did news reports repeatedly remind us that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen]Robert Hanssen[/url], the FBI agent who spied for the KGB, was a devout Catholic?
The answer probably lies in the disconnect between what the malefactor purported to be and what he actually did. Hanssen, the daily mass Catholic, spied for the Evil Empire. Ken Lay, the prominent hypothetical Pentecostal, made billions by exploiting the trust of his Pentecostal brothers and sisters.
Irenaeus — yes I agree. Why is the Rabbi so angry at Madoff? Precisely because he (Madoff) IS a Jew. It’s relevent to the Rabbi so I can assume it would be relevent to the media.
We’ve been looking at assisted living places for my mom to move to. There is a great one near me run by the Archdiocese. They take you for life. You pay until you run out of money. When you run out of money, there is a Catholic charitable foundation that picks up the bill. I was telling my husband about this and he said “are you sure the Foundation didn’t have its money with Madoff?” I said “Fortunately or unfortunately Madoff seems to have specialized in destroying Jewish charities.” It’s true and its relevent.
This letter is one that is born out of hurt, and anger over a betrayal that is obviously more than a little personal to the Rabbi. As such it is understandable. Victims of terrible injustices (even Christians) are not required to suspend their humanity, a part of which is the emotion of anger. Anger can be a moral reaction provided that it does not carry over to vengeance or an unwillingness to forgive. Indeed in some instances it can be a moral virtue to rebuke or shame (publicly in some cases) a notorious and unrepentant sinner.
A number of comments above have touched on the lack of any call to redemption or forgiveness. While I am not an expert on Judaism I believe that these concepts receive much less focus than they do in Christianity (not to say they are absent). Atonement is a fairly big deal under Jewish law. And I think the Rabbi is right in noting that such is practically impossible given the sheer scale of the crimes. But again he is speaking from the Jewish perspective.
As an Orthodox Christian we believe in the limitless Mercy of God, which we are obliged to emulate to the best of our poor human ability. The Fathers teach us that we can not hope to stand uncondemned before the judgment seat of God if we have not forgiven even the worst offenses against us. To ask for divine justice to be visited on someone else or call down a curse upon them is to implicitly ask for the same justice to be visited on ourselves. While I have not stolen billions of dollars from anyone I am sufficiently conscious of my own failings that I do not seek God’s justice, but rather His mercy.
Under the mercy,
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
An [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4pUphDitA]Orthodox [/url] Christian
#14… That’s very true. But if I understand you correctly, you were saying that because you thought either myself or Matt K were implicitly saying the opposite.
I wasn’t and neither did Matt. I made no references to the Old Testament. I never said that the OT was without an iota of grace. I did say that the rabbi’s letter was without an iota of grace, and in this it was in keeping with some of the other rabinnical responses I have heard.
And while I do agree with you 100% that the OT has much Gospel in it (and I would also agree that the NT has Law as well) — such a Law/Gospel lens by which one views both Testaments is a CRUCIFORM lens. It is by nature of the Cross, by refusing to look at anything except thru the Cross (Crux sola est nostra theologia), that we see so much Grace/Gospel in the OT.
It is only this deeply cruciform reading that leads a person to look at Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism, which characterize most religions, and reject them both, in favor of the need for absolute total help from a Saviour.
This is simply not the view that either rabbi we refered to expressed.
The Rabbi exposes well the scope of evil that an unrepentant sinner refuses to see… the same letter might have been written to Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10), which makes the grace of God in Christ all the more amazing.
I am reminded as to what what the Scriptures haveto say about reconciliation and restitution:
[blockquote]Leviticus 6:1-5 ESV Leviticus 6:1 The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “If anyone sins and commits a breach of faith against the LORD by deceiving his neighbor in a matter of deposit or security, or through robbery, or if he has oppressed his neighbor 3 or has found something lost and lied about it, swearing falsely- in any of all the things that people do and sin thereby- 4 if he has sinned and has realized his guilt and will restore what he took by robbery or what he got by oppression or the deposit that was committed to him or the lost thing that he found 5 or anything about which he has sworn falsely, he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it, and give it to him to whom it belongs on the day he realizes his guilt.
And lets look to the NT:
Luke 19:2-10 2 And there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector and was rich. 3 And he was seeking to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was small of stature. 4 So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, for he was about to pass that way. 5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, hurry and come down, for I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he hurried and came down and received him joyfully. 7 And when they saw it, they all grumbled, “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner.” 8 And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.” 9 And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”
Here we have a beautiful example of grace and Law. In fact Zacchaeus, in his repentance, exceeds the Laws requirements.[/blockquote]
But you did say, Matt, that it was “perhaps the worst public letter I have ever read.” Rather than criticizing those who don’t understand what you mean by this bald assertion, perhaps you could elaborate and/or explain what you meant by that? It is not always immediately clear to many of us what your cryptic assertions mean.
Do you ever ask yourself why you go negative so quickly? Or why you’re so frequently “misunderstood”?
#22, with regard to ‘he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it” – in this case that would involve $60 billion (I’m pretty sure I read he stole $50 billion), so how in any practical way could we expect him to come up with even $600 million, let alone $60 billion? Surely there is an alternative solution? Like he lives in jail for the rest of his life and forfeits every asset he owns?
I’m not trying to assail Scripture here, only to point out the impracticality of following it to the letter IN THIS INSTANCE (and yes, I realize that opens the door to things like gay marriage, but we need to be able to make distinctions).
Should you not restore what you stole with interest? But then maybe you should not steal what you cannot restore? And as you suggest, how can you make restoration when it is beyond your means? The point is that you are trying to assail scripture.
And, I might add, most criminal judgments contain a restoration requirement, even if it cannot be paid. Further, a crime is also against the state. Time served is payment to the state. Restitution is to the victim. It seems to me that God was way ahead of us on this one.
Hey Chris… perhaps the distinction you may be searching for is one between God’s law and Man’s law. The two are often different. For example, it is not an infraction of US law to curse the name of Jesus, to speak spitefully to your mother, to privately experience a moment of anger, and so on and so forth. It’s probably good that we don’t try to use the power of the state in this fashion. But as Christians we can certainly say that these things are a violation of God’s law.
So yep, I would certainly say that for the guy to comply with God’s law he must repay 60 billion dollars. But I’d go much further. He’d also have to do it honestly, joyfully, humbly — without the tinest flicker of resentment or bitterness or deceit or hypocrisy. Because it is God’s law that we comply in our inward hearts as well.
So as you may be saying, whoa! There’s no way he’ll ever be able to do that. Exactly. There’s no way he can ON HIS OWN DESERVINGS OR WORKS comply with the Law. It’s burden is total, crushing. It is absolutely correct and true and holy and right. And there is no way I can meet it.
That’s why the Gospel is such Good News. It tells the story of one who DID meet the law in every respect, and then went further and even accepted the law’s ultimate penalty of capital punishment — and did so in my stead. Pro mea, for me.
So I think the solution to the intolerability of the Law is not in any way to soften or blunt it or to find casuitical exceptions to it. Rather, as Jesus did in the Sermon on the Mount, we need to intensify it, to “bring it on” as the kids say nowadays — so that it causes us to flee to the Cross as our only refuge.
I think as a non Jew that there is no way we can understand the depth of betrayal Rabbi Gellman was speaking to. The Rabbi was saying that Madoff had not just harmed the Jewish image in the eyes of the world, he had undone the truth of the goodness of a people. He had done it in such a monstrous way that the infamous legacy would be carried forward for generations to come. I think that the Rabbi understood the damage better than any of us could imagine and many were silently angry with the Jews about this. Examine your own private thoughts. Madoff helped me dredge up some antisemitic prejudice. God forgive me!
As a Jew who converted to Christianity, I appreciate your comments in response to Rabbi Gellman’s fear that Madoff’s treachery opened the door to renewed anti-semitism. Believe me, the horrors of the Holocaust still color the concerns of most American Jews, even those whose religiousity (? I think that’s a word) consists solely of attending the High Holy Days services, lighting a Hanukkah menorah, and nibbling on matzah at a Passover seder. While Jews would wish for their Christian/Moslem brethren to castigate Madoff solely for his “financial terrorism”, their fear (and mine still, too, even though I am eternally grateful that Jesus died to save me) is that Madoff’s criminal behavior will stain the reputation of his fellow religionists.
Matt,
Part of the reason Rabbi Gellman is criticizing Madoff so harshly is because of this fear of a revived anti-semitism. As for me, if Madoff were to honestly convert to Christianity tomorrow, I would still expect him to demonstrate “the outward sign of the inward grace” through apology and good works while in jail. Cf. Michael Milken (also Jewish, God help us), who committed his criminal acts with junk bonds, and has attempted to atone for his sins (in the only way a non-Christian can so attempt) through apology and good works.
thanks #28, I think what it means is that Madoff will be in debt until he comes up with the $60 billion, but can he be entirely forgiven without paying the full amount? Isn’t is it more important his attitude and his heart than a dollar figure? I’m trying to find a way out for this man, but I’m plenty angered at what he did – he managed to reinforce many of the negative stereotypes people have about Jews, that’s just a terrible thing.
And if the thief on the Cross could be forgiven by Christ himself, why not Madoff? Presumably the thief did not pay back everything in full plus a fifth either, more likely he paid nothing.
#32…. great questions, Chris. For God to forgive Madoff, he needs his debt to be paid. Which is what God in Christ does — as an utterly sinless man he accepts the weight of Madoff’s crime entirely on his shoulders and accepts the penalty of death by torture for it. God is at once fully just (the crime is fully punished) and fully merciful (since the judge himself stands in for the criminal).
We are all like the thief — as you rightly observe, we ourselves pay absolutely nothing. We are pure recipients of the gracious act of the Judge who steps in and takes the punishment in our place.
Madoff is ultimately in the same boat that you and I are in, it’s just easier to see with him. He’s committed monstrous sins (like I have) and he’s so far in debt that there’s NO way he can ever make it up. What he needs is a Substititute — that’s the only thing that can save him. Even his attitude and heart are a mess. He needs someone with a completely good attitude and a totally pure heart.
Fortunately that’s what he will find in Christ Jesus. Let’s pray that Madoff does! Because that is the ONLY way out — there is no other.
PS. Of course, what you and I are talking about is the question of the divine Law and how its breakers can be reconciled with its Giver. We’re not talking about US law. That’s a question for lawyers. I know nothing about how much time he has to serve, etc. Even after he gets out, he’ll still probably be permanently on record as a felon; so again there is no real forgiveness, no total wiping away of his guilt, in the World.
A great discussion, somewhat more interesting than the letter itself. Nothing to add, except to suggest that those with a searchable Hebrew Tanakh look up the word “yeshua” (salvation) which is all over the place, but translated in different ways.
(Not to take this off topic, but was anyone else intrigued by the Rabbi’s definition of “to’eva?”)
“The Bible calls such things a toevah, ‘an abomination’. It means an act so alien to our values and our natures that it cannot be understood or explained.”
Its use in the context of business ethics recalls Deut 25:13-16.
I don’t know. There seems to be evidence going back at least as far as ’99 that those who did due diligence knew Madoff’s scheme was too good to be true. In fact, it has been reported by pretty reliable sources (just Google it–there were complaints to the SEC years ago) that at least some investors knew something was awry and this was PRECISELY the reason they invested with Madoff. Now, that’s got to make you wonder a bit, and maybe reflect on why it might be important to make this one guy look as evil as possible–as a form of damage control, perhaps? But, regardless of how badly Madoff and/or his accomplices behaved, is this really (really?) the only or even the worst Ponzi-like schtick that’s been going on in the banking and investment industries lately? Again, you have to ask, why would it be important to point and wag the finger so very vigorously in this particular direction? Sure, it’s a huge and egregious case. But, are his victims more special than the millions who worked and sacrificed for years only to see their meager retirement investments decimated? Why isn’t someone writing open letters on their behalf? Is Madoff’s crime so very different than those perpetrated by the monsters on Wall Street aided and abetted by their bedmates on Capitol Hill?
Clueless #33, I couldn’t possibly associate myself with your comment. To complain that the Rabbi is only upset when the victims are Jews is beyond the pale, frankly.
[i] This is a difficult area and while not wishing to close discussion down, we encourage commenters to consider carefully before commenting, lest in criticising we ourselves can be criticised for behaving in an un-Christian and uncharitable manner.
I am going to end the thread because I don’t want it veering off in any unhelpful directions. The thread was meant to be focused on the wrongness of the actions and the outrage which is the understandable response.
The point is there are red lights and green lights in the universe. The rabbi’s letter express well the sense that something is desperately wrong here, and it needs to be righted, and, indeed, redeemed, which points in the direction Dr. Seitz mentions in his comment #6.
Everything the rabbi says is true. And shame also on some of the reporting. As Gellman says,[blockquote]Ken Lay of Enron shame was never identified as a “prominent Protestant energy broker.” The most aggressive accusers of the governor of Illinois seldom describe him as “the prominent Serbian-American governor of Illinois.”[/blockquote]I heard an excellent sermon this morning (church on Fridays in Cairo) about grace. Grace is what distinguishes Christianity from the other major religions, including Judaism, where our roots are firmly planted. God forgives sinners who haven’t done one single thing to be worth forgiving. Grace is not earned, but a free gift to those who will receive it. Let us pray for Madoff and for all people who are not aware of God’s great love for them.
#1… Matt is right on the mark here. The letter is pure Law. Not an iota of Gospel in it — not the tiniest possibility of grace (i.e. love for the utterly undeserving). Now as Luther observed, along with St. Paul, the Law is absolutely right and holy and good and true. There is nothing wrong with the Law. What it SAYS is absolutely true… it just in itself has no power to engender that which it commands.
Matt is right to see this as a fundamental disconnect between Judaism and Christianity. The NYT recently published a piece in which another eminent rabbi was quoted as saying:
Of course, in a way, the rabbi is absolutely correct. There is no way that Madoff can atone for his monstrous sins. But the unstated premise is that the rest of us can, via sufficently hard work, rack up enough good points to atone for OUR monstrous sins.
Romans 7:1 – 8:1 (and don’t leave out 8:1!) is helpful reading for us all. Praise God for the One who came who can and did atone for my sins.
I can understand those who were impacted financially by Mr. Madoff’s swindle wishing to strike out and those who will be painted by the same anti-semitic brush hollering too but it appears a wasted effort. To do what Mr. Madoff is accused of doing you’d have to be a sociopath with an enormous ego and in my experience such individuals lack any feelings at all for other people. As such the best reaction you might expect from Mr. Madoff to this open letter would be a bewildered look and maybe a, “yea..so?”
So some of the above commentators are bothered that the Rabbi doesn’t talk about redemption through Jesus? Really? From a Rabbi, you would expect this? Or, are you saying that everything the Rabbi has to say is useless because he’s not a Christian?
Personally, I agree that the letter is harsh but appropriate. Madoff has done enormous harm to millions of people. Yes, there is redemption, but that’s not his faith tradition.
Thank you, Kendall, for seeing this letter and posting it. Brilliant strong, candid letter. Paul would probably regard the single most important contribution of Judaism, in the spirit of his remarks in Romans 9-11, as reminding the church of the wrath of God, and the seriousness of final judgment, saving the church from sentimentality and amnesia and robbing the cross of its power. Karl Barth, in the light of atrocities of the Third Reich, also saw deep into the holiness of God and the cost of his love. Jesus Christ took that punishment in obedience to the Father who sent him, out of love, his and the Father’s, to restore us by the Holy Spirit’s work. Rabbi Gellman is absolutely correct that this is the kind of hell mankind can create, and does create, in acts big and small both. Jesus Christ is the only address to that, and without him, the penalty is overwhelming. The deep irony is that Madoff need not even see that in his own soul for it to be a reality all the same, causing the kind of collateral damage Rabbi Gellman notes. Great Christian teachers always return to this theme, so deeply ingredient in the scriptures Paul called the oracles of God entrusted to the Jews – whether Charles Spurgeon or PT Forsyth, or Karl Barth. Rabbi Gellman points to the cross by reminding Christians what it is that God was doing in sending his son.
Can it be said that one of the fruits of the spirit is not having an unrealistic expectation for humanity? Possibly we would be less prone to falling for a Madoff if we were better tuned in to Original Sin. If we see that our only claim to righteousness is in His perfect obedience, then possibly we can see humanity for what it is and not be continually surprised.
As always, Jimmy D makes a remark that is right on the money.
I think the Rabbi was just venting. Hopefully he feels better after doing so. The chances that Maddoff would 1) read this and 2) care seem slight.
I agree with “the Roman.” I suspect Madoff is a sociopath, since his actions don’t bear any of the marks of the normal criminal. Why would he let his own family be entangled in this? What did he imagine the end game was going to be? Most crooks run a carefully defined con, then take the money and run. Did he think this was going to last until he died? Did he not care that his sons and the rest of his family would be then be ruined and disgraced?
I think he was playing a giant game and loving every minute of it and figuring “well, some day it may all come crashing down but it will have been worth it for 20 years of the greatest thrill you could ever have.”
I suspect that, as with most sociopaths, the fact that he will be talked about in financial circumstances for the next few centuries is viewed by him as a feature, not a bug. I mean — if you can’t achieve physical immortality at least you can have the satisfaction of knowing that children as yet unconceived will grow up to continue to litigate the mess you left.
I meant “financial circles.”
Now that is an artful polemic! So artful that the author almost seems to be enjoying himself.
I liked the incisiveness of the rabbi’s comments. I hope Madoff does
read it and does get very upset.
Catholic Mom wrote of Madoff that “…he was playing a giant
game and loving every minute of it …”. That puts me in mind of
the remark made by Groucho Marx (?) which runs something like this :
“The key to success in life is honesty and integrity. If you can fake
those, you’ve got it made.”
The OT is replete with instances of undeserved grace. God’s redemption of Israel and God’s treatment of David after having Uriah killed are but two examples. The NT does not stand alone and Law is never without recourse to grace. II think we need to be careful and avoid the awful Marcionite tendency to set the OT against the NT and to avoid facing the instruction and guidance that the Law can provide for us.
Wel,, Br–AMEN to that! Well stated.
[i]I am not comfortable with the fact that so many of the articles about you specifically identify your prominent place in the Jewish community. Ken Lay of Enron shame was never identified as a “prominent Protestant energy broker.”[/i]
But if Ken Lay had been a prominent Pentecostal and had most conspicuosly swindled Pentecostals, we would have heard about it early and often.
More broadly, why do news reports tell us that a recently indicted malefactor “attends church regularly.” Why did news reports repeatedly remind us that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen]Robert Hanssen[/url], the FBI agent who spied for the KGB, was a devout Catholic?
The answer probably lies in the disconnect between what the malefactor purported to be and what he actually did. Hanssen, the daily mass Catholic, spied for the Evil Empire. Ken Lay, the prominent hypothetical Pentecostal, made billions by exploiting the trust of his Pentecostal brothers and sisters.
Irenaeus — yes I agree. Why is the Rabbi so angry at Madoff? Precisely because he (Madoff) IS a Jew. It’s relevent to the Rabbi so I can assume it would be relevent to the media.
We’ve been looking at assisted living places for my mom to move to. There is a great one near me run by the Archdiocese. They take you for life. You pay until you run out of money. When you run out of money, there is a Catholic charitable foundation that picks up the bill. I was telling my husband about this and he said “are you sure the Foundation didn’t have its money with Madoff?” I said “Fortunately or unfortunately Madoff seems to have specialized in destroying Jewish charities.” It’s true and its relevent.
This letter is one that is born out of hurt, and anger over a betrayal that is obviously more than a little personal to the Rabbi. As such it is understandable. Victims of terrible injustices (even Christians) are not required to suspend their humanity, a part of which is the emotion of anger. Anger can be a moral reaction provided that it does not carry over to vengeance or an unwillingness to forgive. Indeed in some instances it can be a moral virtue to rebuke or shame (publicly in some cases) a notorious and unrepentant sinner.
A number of comments above have touched on the lack of any call to redemption or forgiveness. While I am not an expert on Judaism I believe that these concepts receive much less focus than they do in Christianity (not to say they are absent). Atonement is a fairly big deal under Jewish law. And I think the Rabbi is right in noting that such is practically impossible given the sheer scale of the crimes. But again he is speaking from the Jewish perspective.
As an Orthodox Christian we believe in the limitless Mercy of God, which we are obliged to emulate to the best of our poor human ability. The Fathers teach us that we can not hope to stand uncondemned before the judgment seat of God if we have not forgiven even the worst offenses against us. To ask for divine justice to be visited on someone else or call down a curse upon them is to implicitly ask for the same justice to be visited on ourselves. While I have not stolen billions of dollars from anyone I am sufficiently conscious of my own failings that I do not seek God’s justice, but rather His mercy.
Under the mercy,
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
An [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4pUphDitA]Orthodox [/url] Christian
#14… That’s very true. But if I understand you correctly, you were saying that because you thought either myself or Matt K were implicitly saying the opposite.
I wasn’t and neither did Matt. I made no references to the Old Testament. I never said that the OT was without an iota of grace. I did say that the rabbi’s letter was without an iota of grace, and in this it was in keeping with some of the other rabinnical responses I have heard.
And while I do agree with you 100% that the OT has much Gospel in it (and I would also agree that the NT has Law as well) — such a Law/Gospel lens by which one views both Testaments is a CRUCIFORM lens. It is by nature of the Cross, by refusing to look at anything except thru the Cross (Crux sola est nostra theologia), that we see so much Grace/Gospel in the OT.
It is only this deeply cruciform reading that leads a person to look at Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism, which characterize most religions, and reject them both, in favor of the need for absolute total help from a Saviour.
This is simply not the view that either rabbi we refered to expressed.
With love,
Jon
The Rabbi exposes well the scope of evil that an unrepentant sinner refuses to see… the same letter might have been written to Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10), which makes the grace of God in Christ all the more amazing.
I am reminded as to what what the Scriptures haveto say about reconciliation and restitution:
[blockquote]Leviticus 6:1-5 ESV Leviticus 6:1 The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “If anyone sins and commits a breach of faith against the LORD by deceiving his neighbor in a matter of deposit or security, or through robbery, or if he has oppressed his neighbor 3 or has found something lost and lied about it, swearing falsely- in any of all the things that people do and sin thereby- 4 if he has sinned and has realized his guilt and will restore what he took by robbery or what he got by oppression or the deposit that was committed to him or the lost thing that he found 5 or anything about which he has sworn falsely, he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it, and give it to him to whom it belongs on the day he realizes his guilt.
And lets look to the NT:
Luke 19:2-10 2 And there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector and was rich. 3 And he was seeking to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was small of stature. 4 So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, for he was about to pass that way. 5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, hurry and come down, for I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he hurried and came down and received him joyfully. 7 And when they saw it, they all grumbled, “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner.” 8 And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.” 9 And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”
Here we have a beautiful example of grace and Law. In fact Zacchaeus, in his repentance, exceeds the Laws requirements.[/blockquote]
But you did say, Matt, that it was “perhaps the worst public letter I have ever read.” Rather than criticizing those who don’t understand what you mean by this bald assertion, perhaps you could elaborate and/or explain what you meant by that? It is not always immediately clear to many of us what your cryptic assertions mean.
Do you ever ask yourself why you go negative so quickly? Or why you’re so frequently “misunderstood”?
#22, with regard to ‘he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it” – in this case that would involve $60 billion (I’m pretty sure I read he stole $50 billion), so how in any practical way could we expect him to come up with even $600 million, let alone $60 billion? Surely there is an alternative solution? Like he lives in jail for the rest of his life and forfeits every asset he owns?
I’m not trying to assail Scripture here, only to point out the impracticality of following it to the letter IN THIS INSTANCE (and yes, I realize that opens the door to things like gay marriage, but we need to be able to make distinctions).
Should you not restore what you stole with interest? But then maybe you should not steal what you cannot restore? And as you suggest, how can you make restoration when it is beyond your means? The point is that you are trying to assail scripture.
And, I might add, most criminal judgments contain a restoration requirement, even if it cannot be paid. Further, a crime is also against the state. Time served is payment to the state. Restitution is to the victim. It seems to me that God was way ahead of us on this one.
Hey Chris… perhaps the distinction you may be searching for is one between God’s law and Man’s law. The two are often different. For example, it is not an infraction of US law to curse the name of Jesus, to speak spitefully to your mother, to privately experience a moment of anger, and so on and so forth. It’s probably good that we don’t try to use the power of the state in this fashion. But as Christians we can certainly say that these things are a violation of God’s law.
So yep, I would certainly say that for the guy to comply with God’s law he must repay 60 billion dollars. But I’d go much further. He’d also have to do it honestly, joyfully, humbly — without the tinest flicker of resentment or bitterness or deceit or hypocrisy. Because it is God’s law that we comply in our inward hearts as well.
So as you may be saying, whoa! There’s no way he’ll ever be able to do that. Exactly. There’s no way he can ON HIS OWN DESERVINGS OR WORKS comply with the Law. It’s burden is total, crushing. It is absolutely correct and true and holy and right. And there is no way I can meet it.
That’s why the Gospel is such Good News. It tells the story of one who DID meet the law in every respect, and then went further and even accepted the law’s ultimate penalty of capital punishment — and did so in my stead. Pro mea, for me.
So I think the solution to the intolerability of the Law is not in any way to soften or blunt it or to find casuitical exceptions to it. Rather, as Jesus did in the Sermon on the Mount, we need to intensify it, to “bring it on” as the kids say nowadays — so that it causes us to flee to the Cross as our only refuge.
I think as a non Jew that there is no way we can understand the depth of betrayal Rabbi Gellman was speaking to. The Rabbi was saying that Madoff had not just harmed the Jewish image in the eyes of the world, he had undone the truth of the goodness of a people. He had done it in such a monstrous way that the infamous legacy would be carried forward for generations to come. I think that the Rabbi understood the damage better than any of us could imagine and many were silently angry with the Jews about this. Examine your own private thoughts. Madoff helped me dredge up some antisemitic prejudice. God forgive me!
Irenaeus, Catholic Mom,
As a Jew who converted to Christianity, I appreciate your comments in response to Rabbi Gellman’s fear that Madoff’s treachery opened the door to renewed anti-semitism. Believe me, the horrors of the Holocaust still color the concerns of most American Jews, even those whose religiousity (? I think that’s a word) consists solely of attending the High Holy Days services, lighting a Hanukkah menorah, and nibbling on matzah at a Passover seder. While Jews would wish for their Christian/Moslem brethren to castigate Madoff solely for his “financial terrorism”, their fear (and mine still, too, even though I am eternally grateful that Jesus died to save me) is that Madoff’s criminal behavior will stain the reputation of his fellow religionists.
Matt,
Part of the reason Rabbi Gellman is criticizing Madoff so harshly is because of this fear of a revived anti-semitism. As for me, if Madoff were to honestly convert to Christianity tomorrow, I would still expect him to demonstrate “the outward sign of the inward grace” through apology and good works while in jail. Cf. Michael Milken (also Jewish, God help us), who committed his criminal acts with junk bonds, and has attempted to atone for his sins (in the only way a non-Christian can so attempt) through apology and good works.
29 and 30. Thank you for insightful and edifying comments.
thanks #28, I think what it means is that Madoff will be in debt until he comes up with the $60 billion, but can he be entirely forgiven without paying the full amount? Isn’t is it more important his attitude and his heart than a dollar figure? I’m trying to find a way out for this man, but I’m plenty angered at what he did – he managed to reinforce many of the negative stereotypes people have about Jews, that’s just a terrible thing.
And if the thief on the Cross could be forgiven by Christ himself, why not Madoff? Presumably the thief did not pay back everything in full plus a fifth either, more likely he paid nothing.
Comment deleted by Elf
#32…. great questions, Chris. For God to forgive Madoff, he needs his debt to be paid. Which is what God in Christ does — as an utterly sinless man he accepts the weight of Madoff’s crime entirely on his shoulders and accepts the penalty of death by torture for it. God is at once fully just (the crime is fully punished) and fully merciful (since the judge himself stands in for the criminal).
We are all like the thief — as you rightly observe, we ourselves pay absolutely nothing. We are pure recipients of the gracious act of the Judge who steps in and takes the punishment in our place.
Madoff is ultimately in the same boat that you and I are in, it’s just easier to see with him. He’s committed monstrous sins (like I have) and he’s so far in debt that there’s NO way he can ever make it up. What he needs is a Substititute — that’s the only thing that can save him. Even his attitude and heart are a mess. He needs someone with a completely good attitude and a totally pure heart.
Fortunately that’s what he will find in Christ Jesus. Let’s pray that Madoff does! Because that is the ONLY way out — there is no other.
PS. Of course, what you and I are talking about is the question of the divine Law and how its breakers can be reconciled with its Giver. We’re not talking about US law. That’s a question for lawyers. I know nothing about how much time he has to serve, etc. Even after he gets out, he’ll still probably be permanently on record as a felon; so again there is no real forgiveness, no total wiping away of his guilt, in the World.
A great discussion, somewhat more interesting than the letter itself. Nothing to add, except to suggest that those with a searchable Hebrew Tanakh look up the word “yeshua” (salvation) which is all over the place, but translated in different ways.
(Not to take this off topic, but was anyone else intrigued by the Rabbi’s definition of “to’eva?”)
“The Bible calls such things a toevah, ‘an abomination’. It means an act so alien to our values and our natures that it cannot be understood or explained.”
Its use in the context of business ethics recalls Deut 25:13-16.
I don’t know. There seems to be evidence going back at least as far as ’99 that those who did due diligence knew Madoff’s scheme was too good to be true. In fact, it has been reported by pretty reliable sources (just Google it–there were complaints to the SEC years ago) that at least some investors knew something was awry and this was PRECISELY the reason they invested with Madoff. Now, that’s got to make you wonder a bit, and maybe reflect on why it might be important to make this one guy look as evil as possible–as a form of damage control, perhaps? But, regardless of how badly Madoff and/or his accomplices behaved, is this really (really?) the only or even the worst Ponzi-like schtick that’s been going on in the banking and investment industries lately? Again, you have to ask, why would it be important to point and wag the finger so very vigorously in this particular direction? Sure, it’s a huge and egregious case. But, are his victims more special than the millions who worked and sacrificed for years only to see their meager retirement investments decimated? Why isn’t someone writing open letters on their behalf? Is Madoff’s crime so very different than those perpetrated by the monsters on Wall Street aided and abetted by their bedmates on Capitol Hill?
[i] Is this really . . . the worst Ponzi-like schtick that’s been going on in the banking and investment industries lately? [/i]
Theft is different in kind from conducting honest business ineptly.
Clueless #33, I couldn’t possibly associate myself with your comment. To complain that the Rabbi is only upset when the victims are Jews is beyond the pale, frankly.
[i] This is a difficult area and while not wishing to close discussion down, we encourage commenters to consider carefully before commenting, lest in criticising we ourselves can be criticised for behaving in an un-Christian and uncharitable manner.
Elf [/i]
I am going to end the thread because I don’t want it veering off in any unhelpful directions. The thread was meant to be focused on the wrongness of the actions and the outrage which is the understandable response.
The point is there are red lights and green lights in the universe. The rabbi’s letter express well the sense that something is desperately wrong here, and it needs to be righted, and, indeed, redeemed, which points in the direction Dr. Seitz mentions in his comment #6.