Right-wing Women

into it too. In Christian countries, the two groups have suffered contempt, persecution, and death in each other’s shadow ever since; they have been linked by demagogues seeking power

through hate—demagogues like Paul; trying to pacify the likes of

Paul, they have often enough repudiated and hated each other; and

each group has hidden from the soldiers of Christ in its own w ay.

*

Democracies electing their sewage

till there is no clear thought about holiness

a dung flow from 1913

and, in this, their kikery functioned, Marx, Freud

and the american beaneries

Filth under filth. . .

Ezra Pound, “Canto 91”

The textual bases for what became the major anti-Semitic charges

against the Jews are in the Gospels. Some Jews were money

changers in the temple, tax collectors, liked money; some Jews

plotted to have Christ killed; some Jews asked Christ tricky legalistic questions to try to expose him as a poseur or a heretic (claiming to be God violated Jewish law); it was a crowd of Jew s—but not all

the Jew s—that demanded the crucifixion of Christ. Jews denied

Christ and Jews believed in Christ. Most Jews may have been the

enemy of this new God because they did not recognize him; but it

was Paul who made all Jews into the enemy of all Christians. The

acts against Christ came to represent, as Paul saw it, the Jewish

character; the acts against Christ summed up the Jews. It is Paul

who begins to build institutional Christianity by destroying the

institutions of Judaism; and it is Paul who begins to build a distinctly Christian character by annihilating the character of the Jews. The roots of the continuing association of the Jews as a people with culture, social liberalism (tolerating sin), and intellectual-ism go back to Paul: he constructed the modern Jew in history.

Before the coming of Christ, the law was God’s word. The law

signified God’s presence on earth and among his people. The law

had a divine significance. The Jews did not consider the law social;

for them, one obeyed because it was written—obedience was faith.

The coming of Christ meant that God’s will was embodied in a

person: son of man. In Paul’s interpretation, the law became a

body of dogma that interfered with faith. It became cultural, not

sacred. It was the legalism of the Jews, their intellection, their pedantry, that kept them in sin, kept them from recognizing the Christ: in practical terms, the law became the symbol of Jewish

resistance to this personal God, this God whom Paul knew— unlike Abraham, Moses, or David. Paul could speak in behalf of this new God, and any adherence to law that challenged Paul’s authority was wickedness. The law of the Jew s, the intellect of the Jew s, and the culture of the Jew s in fact were the enemies of Paul’s

authority as one, sim ply, who knew Christ.

In undermining the authority of Jew ish law, Paul over and over

linked that law to sin, especially to homosexuality. It was the social

tolerance of the Jew s for homosexuality in private that proved the

corruption of Jew ish law. It was the lack of m asculinity implicit in

this tolerance that lost the Jew s physical circumcision as their mark

of supreme manhood; spiritual circumcision, the kind that would