Monday, September 26, 2011

Shlomo Sand: The Invention of the Jewish People


I enjoy provocative books, particularly those with viewpoints opposed to mine. After all, how better to stretch your horizons than to read a wide variety of arguments. Some accused me of being a glutton for punishment after I reviewed Michael Coren’s book – Why Catholics Are Right. But frankly, that book was so poorly argued that it was almost amusing.

Shlomo Sand’s book, The Invention of the Jewish People, is in a completely different category. For starters, the title is so over the top, one might have thought the book was published by the Iranian Ministry of Propaganda or by Mahmoud Abbas’s historians. But since it was described as having been on the Israeli best seller list for more than 19 weeks in 2009, and having generated quite a bit of academic interest, I decided that it seemed like an interesting challenge.

Described as a work of history, the work is much more of a Chomskyesque polemic. Sand, unlike many other writers of history, does not hide the fact that the book was written with a political purpose. His goal is to delegitimize the concept of the “Jewish people.” Along the way, he aims to demonstrate that Zionism is essentially evil and racist; that the formation of the state of Israel was a “rape;” that the ongoing occupation of territory held by Israel since 1967 makes Israel an “apartheid state;” and that the only proper path forward for Israel is to create a multi-national state with no official Jewish character.

This might be enough to cause many readers to fold up the book and put it back on the table of the “Israel Apartheid Week” demonstration at York or University of Toronto during their annual week long hate fests. But I think one must read and understand many of these viewpoints and consider if and how many of Sand’s assertions can be refuted.

Given that the book spans almost 4,000 years of history, it would be quite an undertaking to check the various sources, highlight the views of opposing historians and provide a full answer to Sand. I am quite confident that a number of historians will respond in detail and those works should make for compelling reading. There have already been a number of articles which have highlighted some of Sand’s inaccuracies or liberties that he has taken. At this point, I can only provide more of a superficial review without exploring the historiography in much more detail.

But let’s look at some of the assertions.

After a lengthy discussion of how nations are made and the concept of the national myth, Sand sets out to explain why, in his view, much of Jewish history is simply fantasy. I note that the tone of the book is quite belligerent. Perhaps that keeps it interesting and makes it somewhat compelling. But Sand is full of vitriol. “Zionist,” when used to describe Israel’s intellectual founders, its historians, archaeologists, scientists and others is constantly used as a pejorative term. The Zionist world according to Sand is part of a great conspiracy in which the intellegensia in a whole range of academic fields have been conscripted into this exercise of national myth building on behalf of the Zionist enterprise to create a rationale for self-existence. Only Sand holds the truth and is sufficiently independent to expose 150 years of lies. Of course, Sand’s selective use of history, certain writers and a limited number of events are calculated fit Sand’s model, thesis and intended political conclusions. In other words, it is just as academically illegitimate as that which he accuses the “Zionists” of doing. Throughout his book, there are selective references to a limited number of works. There is little substantive discussion of “mainstream” historians other than with a very general dismissive tone. But it seems to me that this would have been the work that Sand would have had to convincingly rebut if this were genuinely a “truth-seeking enterprise.”

Beginning with the assertion that current archaeology proves that the Israelites were never enslaved in Egypt and were therefore never freed from slavery, Sand moves on to proposition that there was no united national kingdom of David and Solomon and that at best there was a “small tribal kingdom.” According to Sand, “there never was a great united monarchy and…King Solomon never had grand palaces in which he housed his 700 wives and 300 concubines.” Sand stops short of claiming that there was never actually a temple in Jerusalem (which would have put him into Arafat’s camp apparently). Perhaps, given the overwhelming archaeological evidence, Sand found that it would be too difficult, even for him, to make this suggestion.

What has drawn the significant attention and criticism of other historians is Sand’s next assertion that the exile from Jerusalem after the destruction of the second Temple in 70 C.E. is a completely invented fiction. Sand acknowledges the destruction of the first temple, in 586 B.C.E. and the resulting expulsion of the Jews from the land. Given that not all of the expelled Jews returned, this alone is a reasonable starting point for an exile that clearly occurred. Nevertheless, Sand’s focus is the Roman devastation of the first century C.E. He reduces the population of Jerusalem to 60,000 or 70,000 from Josephus’s suggested numbers in the range of one million. But he then uses the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132 CE to suggest that it proves that there had not been an exile. Historians such as Simon Schama have taken issue with Sand’s efforts to downplay the effect of Roman destruction even though there is an acknowledgement by Schama that the Romans did not necessarily physically exile all of the inhabitants.

Sand then describes the spread of Judaism between the 1st and 6th centuries CE as a result of proselytization and subjugation working as a symbiosis between the Hasmoneans and Hellenism. Ultimately, he concludes that rather than being expelled, the Jews remaining in the land of Israel underwent a slow and moderate conversion process to Islam. This argument serves Sand’s later political agenda in which he suggests that the Palestinians of today are the more likely “organic descendants” of original inhabitants of the land than those Jews who claimed to have returned to Israel from an imaginary exile.

Along the way, Sand provides a short version of how the conversion of North Africans was undertaken, as well as Ethiopian Jews in the early 2nd to 4th centuries CE. Conversion also accounts for the spread of Judaism into Spain. The lynchpin of Sand’s thesis is that virtually all of the Ashkenazi Jews were descended from the conversion of the kingdom of Khazaria between the 8th and 9th centuries CE. While Sand indicates that this is accepted history, he raises the conspiratorial suggestion that since no historical work about the Khazars was conducted in Hebrew between 1951 and 2009, this was evidence of the Zionist suppression of historical truth or the search for it. Searching for evidence that all of European Jewry was descended from the Khazars, Sand cites the prevalence of the name “Kagan” or “Khazar” among Eastern Europeans. He uses the existence of the word “daven,” which he says derived from a Turkish word, to “prove” that Yiddish developed from the Khazars rather than from the bastardized German, which it so obviously appears to be.

As Sand approaches the end of his book, he touches on the issue of the Zionist use of race and concepts of ethnos to “serve the project of ethnic nationalist consolidation in the taking over of an imaginary ancient homeland.” Well, he certainly cannot be accused of mincing his ideas. Imaginary ancient homeland??? That is the essence of Sand’s overall thesis: that the Jewish people throughout the world were united by nothing other than some common religious beliefs and practices. Despite longing for Jerusalem and praying to return to it for thousands of years, the whole concept of “return to Zion” was recreated and invented by late 19th century Zionists to serve a purely political purpose and to justify moving to and conquering the land of Palestine.

Critics of Sand, such as Schama, have noted that the idea of a Jewish People has never rested solely on the idea of some genetic purity of race – which is a criticism that Sand seems to partially concede. Yet Sand’s straw man is the idea that a linear racial link can be exposed as non-existent, which will somehow destroy the notion of Jewish peoplehood – despite the thousands of years of shared religious ritual, belief, interpretation, ceremony and yes – suffering at the hands of non-Jewish oppressors.

By the end of his book, Sand sets out his purpose for writing the book. His intention was to demonstrate that since there was no such thing as a “Jewish people” there could not be a legitimate Jewish state. Moreover, a Jewish state could not co-exist with a democracy since the non-Jewish members of the state would not have “ownership” over the state as full and equal partners.

Though some of the rights bases arguments that Sand puts forward are compelling, others are venomous. Although a convincing case can be made that Israel should take marriage, burial and other personal status issues out of the hands of the Rabbinical authorities, Sand’s call for the elimination of the Jewish character of the State and the Law of Return is more problematic. Given that the raison d’etre of Israel was, in part, a safe haven for the world’s Jewish population, which is at last count, an ever declining 13 million, the suggestion that Israel should simply commit national suicide as a Jewish entity and convert itself into a straight constitutional democracy encompassing all of the Palestinians on both sides of the West Bank is simply a recipe for cultural disaster – and perhaps physical destruction as well.

But beyond that ultimate call by Sand, Sand’s various suggestions, scattered throughout his book, that all of Judaism, its Bible, its history, its peoplehood and its longing for Jerusalem are all illegitimate and historically untenable are the type of suggestions that Jews have faced throughout their history from the most pernicious anti-Semites.

I do not dispute that there is urgency to addressing the Palestinian-Israeli dispute and to finding a resolution that will address many of the issues that Sand has raised. It appears that a two state solution would be the best vehicle for accomplishing this goal – with the Palestinian state charged with the ability to institute its own “right of return” for those Palestinians or their descendants who left or were forced to leave their ancestral homeland. Perhaps, to address Sand’s other point, there will be redrawn borders such that some of those increasingly disaffected Palestinian Israelis, currently in the Galilee area will find themselves living within the boundaries of the new Palestinian state. That would be a more realistic political result, at least as a starting point, where two “imaginary peoples” can take their place among the other imaginary peoples in the world.

Addendum:
I found this great article about the book - that I thought I should also reference.

http://www.isracampus.org.il/Extra%20Files/Anita%20Shapira%20-%20Shlomo%20Sand%20book%20review.pdf

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Tarek Fatah - The Jew is Not My Enemy


Tarek Fatah’s book The Jew is Not My Enemy is subtitled “Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti-Semitism.” It is a short but compelling read that delves into a problem that plagues both Jews and Muslims.

Fatah sets out to explode that myth that anti-Semitism is an integral part of Islam. Instead, he demonstrates that it has most recently been used as a political tool to focus attention on the Jews and on Israel rather than the problems and issues that Muslim nations face.

Fatah traces the historical roots of the Muslim-Jewish relationship. A self- described Muslim Indian himself, born in Pakistan, Fatah highlights the general absence of anti-Semitism throughout India and Pakistan until relatively recently. Early in the book, he focuses on the utter shock of the murderous attack on the Lubavitch Jewish Center in Mumbai, India in November 2008. He refers to this horrific attack by Pakistani terrorists as one of the only anti-Semitic attacks in the history of this region. Why would people living in a country like Pakistan, who have so little interaction with Jews in their lives, purposely and specifically set out to murder Jews? This question is what Tarek Fatah explores throughout the book.

Fatah traces the spread of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world since 1869, focusing in particular on the role of Sayyid Qutb, the well-known author of a thirty volume commentary on the Quran. Qutb also wrote an essay entitled “Ma’rakutuna ma’a al Yahud” (“Our Fight Against the Jews”), According to Fatah, Qutb’s work has been used by Saudi Arabia and Al Qaeda, among others, to spread ultra-conservative Islam and spread the idea that the Jews are the eternal enemy of Muslims. This view has taken hold in many parts of the Muslim world and has developed into the underpinning for modern terrorist ideology.

Fatah discusses the historical role of the Grand Mufti Haj Amin Al-Husseini in meeting with Hitler and supporting Nazism. He points out some of the little known stories of Muslims who fought against the Nazis and saved or sheltered Jews during the Holocaust. Fatah himself is well aware that Muslims would have been next on the list after Jews. It seems clear to him that the idea of Muslim leaders, such as Ahmadinejad advocating Holocaust denial is not only outrageous but it also runs against many tenets of Islam itself. Fatah discusses the powerful effect of his own journey to Poland to visit the camps.

Tackling the issue of Israel, Fatah is less convincing, though his sincerity is clear. Advocating a two state solution, even one which Israel unilaterally sets up by withdrawing from territory, Fatah nevertheless has no delusions that Israel will have a responsive peace partner. While he condemns the ostracization and demonization of Israel, and calls for the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, there is a naiveté to his suggestion that leaving the West Bank, with or without a full peace treaty, will create a sea change in Muslim opinion towards Israel and will lead to peace and acceptance of Israel by its neighbours.

Fatah faces even tougher challenges over his next few chapters in examining anti-Semitism in the Qur’an, attributed historical references to Muhammad’s anti-Jewish sentiment and in particular, the massacre of Jews at Banu Qurayza. Challenging the historical veracity of some of these accounts, Fatah also calls for a re-examination of many Hadit verses which have historically been cited to bolster anti-Semitic views. Here, the call by Fatah is for a significant reform of Islam through the reinterpretation or outright disregard of many Hadit versus.

In his final chapter, Fatah issues a clarion call towards his fellow Muslims:

“We Muslims need to reflect on our predicament. We need to understand that our hatred of the Jew or the West is an admission of our own sense of failure. We need to recognize that blaming the other for our dismal contribution to contemporary civilization is a sedative, not the cure for the disease that afflicts us all. To join the nations and peoples of this world, as brothers and sisters of a common humanity, we need to wean ourselves from our addiction to victimhood and hate.”

It is easy to imagine that if Tarek Fatah represented the majority of world Muslim sentiment, Israel could reach many bilateral peace deals and the world would be a much safer and much more tolerant place. This is in fact similar to the suggestions of Israeli leaders and politicians such as Natan Sharansky, Benjamin Netanyahu and even Avigdor Lieberman who have called for a reformation in Muslim thought and governance as a precursor to real peace. Recent events across the Middle East, from Libya to Egypt and from Syria to Iran have left little doubt that it is the scourge of poverty, inequality, and incompetent, authoritarian governance that are the really significant problems for Muslim countries in the Middle East, not the existence of Israel or worldwide Jewry.

Hopefully, over time, Fatah’s book will spread as widely as Qutb’s throughout the Muslim world and an ideology of peace and tolerance will replace the currently rampant mindsets of violence, anti-Semitism and hatred of the West.

Sunday, September 18, 2011

U.S. Air - Toronto to Tel-Aviv via Philadelphia

I wound up with another Toronto to Tel-Aviv flight on US Air via Philadelphia. The flight is not bad – and it is probably better than some of the other alternatives if you cannot take a direct flight on Air Canada or El Al.

Leaving Toronto from Terminal 1 is not too bad. However, since you have to make a connection through Philadelphia, you have to clear U.S. customs at Pearson Airport. This can add quite a bit of time. If you are going to do this often, it is probably a good idea to get a Nexus pass and bypass most of the line-up. Otherwise, allow for some extra time and patience to clear U.S. customs and immigration.

The Toronto to Philadelphia leg is operated by Air Wisconsin. It’s a small plane and the ride is only about 1 ½ hours. Since you have already cleared U.S. customs – at least on the way to Tel-Aviv – the baggage is checked right through. On arrival in Philly, there is a shuttle bus to take passengers from the remote Terminal F to International Terminal A. Fortunately, if you take the shuttle, you do not have to clear general airport security a second time. The connection is decent with about a two hour holdover time.

At Terminal A in Philly, you do have a special gate for Tel-Aviv passengers with an additional security layer – much like the change-over in Frankfurt (via Lufthansa) or in some other cities.

I managed to stop at the Envoy lounge before heading to the secondary Israel-only security. The lounge offered free wi-fi and some fruit and cheese along with a choice of drinks. It was comfortable enough but the food was quite limited.

The actual flight from Philly to Tel-Aviv is about 10 hours. The crew were reasonably efficient but somewhat aloof. US Air, like many of the other U.S. airlines is pretty cheap with its passengers. They charge for alcoholic beverages (unlike El Al or Air Canada - for now, anyways). $7 for a glass of Chilean wine, which is probably the cost of the whole bottle, if it is even that expensive. The plane, an Airbus 330, is equipped with personal video screens, music, games etc., U.S. Air charges $5 for a pair of headphones if you have not brought your own. If you are flying often, noise-cancelling headphones are indispensible, so I woudn’t have used the U.S. Air cheapo air buds, even if they were free.




I tried to buy a duty free item on board. I asked for the Johnnie Walker Blue Label, which was listed at a great price. I was told that they usually have only one, maybe two bottles per flight and they sell them out in business class. Same story for the cognac and premium Vodka (Grey Goose). So don’t count on being able to buy anything from the U.S. Air duty free service, even though the catalogue has a reasonable selection.

For me, the main reason for taking this flight was the timing. It left Toronto at 6 p.m. instead of 5 p.m. which gave me an extra hour that I really needed as compared to Air Canada. As well, the flight back from Tel-Aviv leaves Israel at 11:15 p.m. or so, giving you a night flight rather than Air Canada’s dreaded all day flight back from Israel.

Since U.S. Air is a Star Alliance partner, you can still get Aeroplan points and get all the perks of elite/super-elite status except for the upgrades. It’s certainly not as convenient as a direct flight but Air Canada’s schedule is not as good as either U.S. Air or El Al. The problem with El Al is that the Matmid program (El Al’s frequent flyer program) can’t begin to compete with Aeroplan, at least under current rules. So if you flying Toronto to Tel-Aviv and you can’t take Air Canada because of bad timing, your next best choice is to fly Continental or U.S. Air if you still want full points. With some of the other airlines, like Lufthansa or Austrian, you might only get half the points.

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Eilat - Astral Village and Snorkelling


In the middle of the summer, where it is typically 27-32C every day in central Israel, many people like to get away and try something a bit hotter...so we went down to Eilat. In mid-July, the temperature is consistently in the low to mid-40s Celsius or about 107-110F. But it's "dry heat" as everyone says - with humidity of only about 20-25% and absolutely no chance of rain.

It is about a 4 hour drive through some beautiful desert areas - including areas where you can take a camel ride, see wild mountain goats or visit crater sites and stop at some historical spots like the City of Beersheva or S'de Boker Kibbutz (Israel's first Prime Minister's home). I had to throw in this photo of an Ibex (mountain goat) family, taken along the way.

Eilat is a port and resort town, which is a very popular tourist destination for Israelis and for Europeans (who can arrive at Eilat's small commercial airport or drive about 4 hours from Tel-Aviv).

There are many hotels - ranging from 5 star beachfront big name places to small out of the way hotel suite complexes that are some distance from the beach. The big attraction is the refreshing azure red sea water. Along the coast, there are coral reefs with many colourful fish, corals and other water attractions. From the resorts and hotels, people rent boats, go water skiing, para-skiing, jet-skiing or just enjoy the beach. Along the coast there are many places to scuba dive or snorkel.


We stayed at the Astral Village Hotel - a collection of three-person suites, equipped with fridges and stoves in each of the rooms. The hotel has a large swimming pool and is located about 5 minutes' walk from the beach.


It was reasonably clean and was one of the few hotels available with flexibility as far as the number of nights reserved. Many of the hotels in the area have three to five night minimums, especially during peak tourist season. Astral Village has full dinner and breakfast buffets, neither of which offered particularly tasty food. The biggest drawback of the hotel was that the swimming pool closes at 6 p.m. (some nights 7 p.m.) for the evening. We were told this is common in Eilat. It seems to me that when it is 42C during the day and it is still 28C at night, the evening is probably the best time to swim in the pool - after spending the time earlier in the day at the beach and after dinner. The pool is not even in a shaded area.

Eilat night life is varied with lots of clubs, pubs, shops, restaurants and an outdoor market. The prices, particularly of the hotels, are wildly expensive and the whole area can get very crowded during peak times. There are a few great attractions, like the coral reef aquarium and Dolphin Beach, where you can swim with dolphins. But for many, the biggest attraction is just putting your face into the water, with a mask and snorkel and getting the feeling that you are inside a giant salt water aquarium.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Presentation of Necklace to Shakira by Israeli President Shimon Peres


Earlier today, President Peres presented a necklace to international recording star, Shakira, who was in Israel promoting education. The necklace was made by Yemenite silversmith and artist Ben-Zion David and was presented to Shakira on behalf of Shimon Peres by a young girl from Ra'anana, who I happen to know quite well.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Judith Shulevitz, The Sabbath World: Glimpses of a Different Order of Time

Judith Shulevitz's The Sabbath World: Glimpses of a Different Order of Time is a wonderful exploration of different aspects of the Sabbath, a weekly day of rest. The book was a finalist for the 2010 National Jewish Book Award and has received other critical acclaim. Part spiritual autobiography, part historical essay and part lyrical journey, the book examines the idea of the Sabbath and its history.




Shulevitz reviews Sabbath observance ranging from early and later Jewish practises, right up to Shabbat in Israel to those of other religious groups as well as secular, labour-inspired views of the need for a weekly day of rest. Along the way, she analyzes the transformation of the Sabbath in Christianity from the early days of the Catholic Church through various Protestant and Sabbatarian movements. Her discussion of the role of the Sabbath in Puritan communities in American History is detailed and fascinating.

With references to and discussions of various philosophers, theologians, novelists, academics and other thinkers throughout the book, Shulevitz overlays history, theology and philosophy with her own personal "spiritual autobiography" as she puts it to arrive at a meaningful relationship with Sabbath observance, in a Jewish context. The stories, feelings and anecdotes that Shulevitz shares imbue the book with a genuine sense of warmth and personal vulnerability.

Drawing on a wide range of sources as diverse as Abraham Joshua Heschel, Samson Raphael Hirsch, D.H. Lawrence, Marx, Kafka, Ferenczi and others, Shulevitz paints a mosaic of sometimes clashing Sabbath ideas. At times poetic, with literary excerpts and allusions, Shulevitz is at other times analytical, juxtaposing various philosophical and biblical ideas.

This not a polemic or strictly an apologetic, though Shulevitz does ultimately call for increased Sabbath observance in society, even if only justified by the secular need to improve the lives of workers, to help people gain some small amount of control over their time and as a means to improve the quality of life generally, if not religiously.

The book is multi-layered, complex, thought provoking and beautifully written. Though the book has, on the whole, a progressive Jewish slant, it examines many different ideas in open minded but critical fashion.

I have to point out that the author's self-defined Sabbath observances are ultimately quite similar to those that I follow so much of what Shulevitz has to say resonates in a very personal way, though this played no role in my original decision to read the book.

Finding a way to create one special day each week, to turn off and tune out technology and to focus on family, friends and community is not only a very important Jewish practice but also one that seems to make increasingly good sense in today's fast paced world. Shulevitz provides a bookful of reasons why this is the case.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Michael Coren's Why Catholics Are Right

Michael Coren’s latest book, Why Catholics Are Right is as pugnacious as the title suggests. Though relatively short, Coren sets out to explain or justify a wide range of official Catholic Church positions and historical conduct. Describing a variety of sources of anti-Catholic beliefs, Coren positions his book as a handbook for those who wish to defend Catholicism against its many would-be attackers. Coren paints the Catholic Church as an institution under attack. One might be confused into thinking he was describing a much smaller and more endangered religious group rather than the Church with its hundreds of millions of adherents.




Calling anti-Catholicism the “last acceptable prejudice in what passes for polite society,” Coren is on a mission to respond to those perceived slights. He points out, on a few occasions in the book, that anyone who disagrees with the views set out in his book is simply wrong. In his introduction, he generously concedes that Non-Catholic Christians, including “serious Evangelicals and Eastern Orthodox believers” are only “slightly wrong.” Others, including Christians with different interpretations of the Bible, atheists, “part-time Catholic bashers” and presumably members of every other religious group are “wrong most of the time and to a shocking degree.”

With introductory words like that, it might be tempting for someone like me to simply close the book. But I am interested in reading a range of views, so I continue on. After all, the book is a mere 200 pages and is relatively easy reading.

Coren begins the book by addressing head on what he believes to be two of the major sources of attack on the Church, the abuse scandals and the crusades.

His first chapter downplays the sexual abuse scandals of the Church by essentially arguing that the rate of this type of egregious behaviour is no worse in the Church than anywhere else. He cites various statistics dealing with rates of abuse, both within the Church and other institutions all with the aim of disavowing any relationship between Church dogmas (requiring celibacy and only male priests) and abuse and by extension minimizing the level of Church culpability. He highlights a lengthy letter written by the current Pope in March 2010 to the Irish Church as reflecting Benedict’s historical role as “one of the fiercest opponent of abusers.” Though Coren attacks Christopher Hitchens’ writings on the subject as “cruel, flippant or dumb,” I found Hitchens’ review of the Church’s role in these abuse scandals in God is Not Great to be much more persuasive.

Coren ends the chapter by briefly addressing theological equality, explaining that the Church “simply does not have the authority to ordain women.” The Pope has spoken on this issue and those who disagree can “go elsewhere.” Even though Coren later in the book discusses the role of Biblical interpretation, he dismisses the notion of equality between men and women by arguing that “gender-bending may work in some areas of life but not in the institution that will take you back to God.” By way of contrast, Coren argues later in the book that the Church’s fight against abortion is like the fight of the early opponents of slavery. Sooner or later, the rest of the world will look back on the Church’s position as the correct moral position. But with respect to women’s rights to religious equality, Coren is completely dismissive. It seems to me that the arguments in favour of women as priests are much more analogous to those who fought and opposed slavery and other forms of discrimination. But of course, as Coren points out repeatedly in the book, anyone who holds this view must be wrong. He finishes the chapter with a spirited defence of the celibacy requirement for priests before moving along.

Entitled “Catholics and History,” the second chapter offers a defence of the Church’s behaviour through various historical periods. Coren provides his thumbnail sketch of the Church’s role in the crusades, defending the Church’s conduct at all times. Whether the Church acted in justifiable response to Muslim aggression or within the acceptable ranges of conduct at the time (however barbarian), the Church was part of a generally brutal medieval world, argues Coren. He continues on to suggest that it is ridiculous to pin the Spanish Inquisition (including the mass torture, forcible conversion and expulsion of Jews and others) on the Church and even downplays the number of people “hurt or affected by it.”

Coren also addresses the Holocaust and provides his historical version of why Pope Pius XII was a righteous man whose actions during the Holocaust have been misunderstood or overlooked. There are extensive historical works covering this complex subject which are outside of the scope of a book review. However, it is worth noting that in dealing with this topic, as with every other area that Coren covers in his book, there is no room for any other viewpoint and no admission of any possible errors or wrongdoing on the part of the Church. Coren does not address the history of anti-Semitism in the Church nor the manner in which this was addressed and changed by John Paul II. That would not fit with his thesis that the Church has always been right and everything is immutable.

Moving to theology, Coren explains the doctrines of the supremacy of the Church and of papal infallibility. Coren covers the compilation of the Bible by the Church between 393 A.C.E. and 419 A.C.E. Since the Church selected and compiled this version of the Bible, the Church must be infallible, since the Bible is infallible. This seems self-evidently circular to me. But there it is in black and white. And since Coren says it, it must be correct.

Coren goes on to explain the doctrine of transubstantiation, the importance of confession, Catholic beliefs about purgatory, saints, the Virgin Mary and other sacraments. He circles back to the history and origins of Christianity near the end of his book and ties the historical points there to the various doctrines that are discussed here. Libraries of material have obviously been written about these issues and there all kinds of viewpoints. For an explanation and understanding of the history of the development of the Church and review of the origins of its beliefs and dogmas, I would simply suggest that a book like How Jesus Became Christian by Barrie Wilson provides a much more detailed and critical look at these matters.

Next Coren moves on to social issues. He provides a vigorous and unquestioning restatement of the Church’s fundamentalist positions on a range of issues – abortion, birth control, euthanasia and homosexuality and provides short arguments in favour of each of the Church’s stated orthodox positions. Coren quotes former New York Mayor Ed Koch earlier in the book as saying “many in the public…are incensed by positions the Church holds, including opposition to all abortions, opposition to gay sex and same-sex marriage, retention of celibacy rules for priests, exclusion of women from the clergy, opposition to birth control measures involving condoms and prescription drugs and opposition to civil divorce….I disagree with the Church on all of these positions. Nevertheless it has a right to hold these views in accordance with its religious beliefs.” Since Coren is right about everything, as he points out in his book on a number of occasions, everyone who holds contrary views on any of the above issues is simply wrong, including, presumably the former New York Mayor and any other Catholics who might have more liberal views.

The final chapter turns to miscellaneous issues including the most crucial historical details of the life of Jesus and the origins of some of the key beliefs of Catholicism. Coren also discusses marriage annulment, the issue of communion for non-Catholics and the historical myth of a female pope (Pope Joan). On every issue here, as throughout the book, he provides his argument in favour of the most conservative Church view, allowing no room for historical changes, nuanced Biblical interpretations or even dissenting views within the Church.

Coren saves his harshest words for those who he describes as hypocrites – people who claim to be Catholic but act as if they are not. To Coren, there is no room for any liberal interpretation of Catholicism, whether in action or belief. To him, there is one truth, described by the Church, that all Catholics must follow if they are to be taken seriously and accepted as real Catholics.

Though interesting to read, Coren’s book was not particularly stimulating or thought provoking and certainly not persuasive. It sets out a range of beliefs that Coren and many other Catholics have chosen to follow but this is not a book that uses reason, scientific method or critical scholarship. I felt much more challenged by Richard Dawkins The God Delusion or Christopher Hitchens God is Not Great even though each of those books also had its own significant shortcomings.