In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

7 Defining the Uniqueness of the Holocaust: Preliminary Clarifications and Disclaimers Given th e confusion , crosse d purposes , an d misunderstanding s tha t have accumulate d aroun d th e evidentl y contentiou s questio n o f the "uniqueness " o f th e Sho'ah I should like , in thi s chapter , t o clarif y six elemental issues that must be understood arigh t if any real philosophical advance is to be made in the analysis of this matter . I In advancin g an d supportin g th e positio n tha t th e destructio n o f Euro pean Jewry betwee n 193 3 an d 194 5 is phenomenologically uniqu e I am not proposing or endorsing any particular theological conclusion(s). It is not a t al l clea r t o m e tha t ther e i s a direct , an d preferred , theologica l meaning t o b e draw n fro m th e exceptionalit y o f thi s event , a t leas t no t as I wil l describ e an d interpre t thi s singularity . A s I understan d th e multiple epistemologica l an d metaphysica l issue s bot h th e theologica l radicals1 —e.g., Richar d Rubenstein , Arthu r Cohen , Emi l Fackenheim , Yitzchak Greenberg , an d o n th e Christia n side , e.g., suc h Protestant s a s A. Ro y Eckard t an d Alic e Eckardt, 2 t o a degre e Jurge n Moltmann, 3 Franklin Littell, 4 Frankli n Sherman, 5 Pau l Va n Buren, 6 Harr y Jame s Cargas,7 an d suc h Catholic s a s Kar l Thieme , Davi d Tracy , Clemen s Thoma, an d t o som e degre e Joh n Pawlikowski, 8 a s wel l a s th e theo logical conservatives—e.g., Elieze r Berkovits,9 Jacob Neusner,10 an d th e Lubavitcher Rebbe, 11 and on the Christian side , e.g., the Protestant Kar l Reprinted b y permission o f Sheffield Academi c Press. 162 Defining the Uniqueness of the Holocaust 16 3 Barth,12 an d the Catholic theologian s D . Judant an d Charles Journet, 13 have al l run ahea d o f the available evidenc e an d the extant philosophi cal -theological argumentatio n t o posit conclusion s tha t ar e not epistemically o r intellectuall y persuasive . Neithe r Rubenstein' s endorsemen t o f the "deat h o f God" nor the Lubavitcher's Rebbe' s conservativ e kabbal istic pronouncements o n the Sho'ah a s a tikkun14 flo w necessaril y fro m the even t itself . Bot h these , an d othe r denominationa l expositions , ar e premature an d inconclusive. They represent, in essence, a priori imposi tions tha t ar e extrinsic t o th e Death Camp s an d roote d i n deepl y hel d prior theological positions. 15 Any theological position, at present, is compatible with the singularity of th e Sho'ah. Religiou s conservative s wh o "intuitively " rejec t th e uniqueness o f the Holocaust o n the, usually implicit , ground s tha t suc h an unequivoca l conclusio n woul d necessarily entai l ominou s alteration s in th e inherite d normativ e Weltanschauung ar e simpl y mistaken . Tha t is, one can, without self-contradiction, adop t an unexceptional conserva tive theologica l postur e (eithe r Jewish o r Christian ) while , a t th e sam e time, accepting the discrete contention tha t th e destruction o f Europea n Jewry wa s an historica l novum, give n th e disciplined understandin g o f the concep t o f historica l novum tha t I woul d wis h t o argu e fo r an d employ.16 Conversely , th e theological radical s who hold tha t th e singularity o f th e Sho'ah necessaril y entail s religiou s transformations , an d within Jewis h parameter s halachi c changes , hav e no t show n thi s t o b e the case . They hav e merel y assume d i t to b e so, positing th e "require d changes" they take to be obligatory withou t providin g either halachic...

Share