|
Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D.
|
|
[This article is to be printed in The Jewish Press during the third week of November, 2008] Judaism’s Unique Impact on America’s Constitution By Michael David Sklaroff and Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D.
The classic narrative is that America stems from Judeo-Christian principles. The truth is that the United States Constitution is almost entirely rooted in the Judaic tradition. The government modeled by the Constitution is structured upon a foundation laid more than three millennia ago. The Declaration of Independence outlined the principles upon which the Founders composed the balanced three-branches of the American government. In entailed all people as having been created as equals in the image of G-d, with inalienable rights, and freely empowered to enact a covenant; a retelling of Genesis’ narrative. The founding of the Jewish faith rested upon the contract of the Covenant, Abraham’s consent for his HEBREW nation to be governed by G-d. The Constitution parallels this concept as the AMERICAN people’s contract of governance, their own consent to be ruled. Remarkably, Locke’s contract theory of government existed long before the Enlightenment. The Israelites at the time of the Prophets had sculpted a Torah-centered government that would later be mirrored through the Constitution. The powers of the strong Commander-in-Chief (the king) were restricted by a legislative body (the Sanhedrin council of elders); both were limited in their ruling power by the dictates of a Constitutional contract of governance (the Torah). In accordance with the suggestion of his father-in-law Jethro, Moses had established the gradated judicial system (Exodus 18:25), expounding the Jewish concepts of due process, just sentencing, and “innocent until proven guilty.” The most prevalent judicial legacy from Judaism is the establishment of jurisprudence. The legislative body of the national Sanhedrin was composed of representatives from several administrative districts (tribes); the tribes otherwise could engage in internal self-government just as do the states when exercising the seminal concept of federalism. Indeed, this term is a derivative of the Latin word for “covenant” (“foedus”), reflecting the fact that the Founding Fathers regarded themselves as “the modern-day People of the Covenant.” By 200 B.C.E., this system had evolved to resemble a future-America. A bicameral legislature was then comprised of a federal Greater Sanhedrin of 71 (the full body that addressed major matters) and a provincial Lesser Sanhedrin of 23 (a committee conducting routine business). The leader of the Sanhedrin—previously the Cohen Gadol, (now the “Nasi” or “Prince” of the legislature) could serve as a tie-breaker, just as does the Vice President who also serves as President of the Senate. Further, the rabbis in the Greater Sanhedrin could interpret the Torah Talmudically, just as Congress can initiate the process of amending the Constitution. Becoming the most legally powerful branch, they could even compel the executives (the king or Cohen Gadol) to stand trial and to be convicted for any violations of the law, the precise “impeachment-trial” power harbored by the higher house (Senate). And in America, all government officials swear to uphold the Constitution rather than to follow blindly what might be felt to be the will-of-the-people at any particular moment. This mandate is stylized on the Rabbis’ commitment to uphold the Torah through a representative democracy, accepting potential limitations exercised through the functioning of a pure Grecian democracy. If any potential contrast could exist between ancient Israel and modern America, it would be found in the realm of religion, illustrating the putative “separation” of Church and State. In the Torah, many laws were issued to provide tolerance of strangers and foreign customs (“because you [Israelites] were once strangers in the land of Egypt”), and even protection of religious shrines of other peoples, only to be destroyed if they perpetrated overt immorality (such as human sacrifice). Similarly, the Bill of Rights clearly distinguishes the inability of government to establish a state religion, even as it ensures the capacity of individuals to exercise the ability to practice any religion. But, even as Christianity’s New Testament subsumed concepts canonized in its Old Testament, there is no evidence that governmental innovations emerged that supplanted those in the Torah. Only the concept of separating Church and State—manifest in the “establishment” and “exercise” clauses in the First Amendment in Bill of Rights—was presaged by this distinction: “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto G-d the things that are G-d’s” (Matthew 22:21). Obvious parallels exist between Ancient Israel and the United States, both rhetorical and operational. For example, the Puritans considered Britain, the Atlantic Ocean and America to be modern-day Egypt, the Red Sea and the Promised Land. Even if other forces—ranging from the European Enlightenment to the Iroquois Nation—may have influenced the thinking of the Founders, neither provided a structural detail contravening those within the Torah. Therefore, the underpinnings of the United States Constitution are uniquely and exclusively Jewish. Even as adversaries like Ahmadinejad portray America and Israel as satanic (the “big” and the “little”), recognition of this phenomenon enhances the concept of American Exceptionalism. For avid Zionists, recognition of how the Torah informs our government reinforces the motivation to recognize and honor how it manifests the Judeo-Christian ethic. And thus the premises of the American Constitution, its purpose, its function, as well as the government it outlines, exalt its strong Jewish legacy. Astonishingly, perhaps, the Constitution’s Enlightenment philosophy is derived from Old Testament innovations.
Mr. Sklaroff is a senior at Barrack Hebrew Academy and Dr. Sklaroff is a hematologist/oncologist.
|
|
To contact me--Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D.--just send an e-mail (rsklaroff@comcast.net).
|