In this recent op-ed in the NY Times, Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld discusses the revelation that Agriprocessors, Inc., the largest kosher meatpacking plant in the US, engaged in illegal and abusive employment practices. Child labor, physical abuse, over-long shifts, and hiring illegal immigrants all allegedly took place.
Rabbi Herzfeld rightly calls for an immediate halt to such practices, and chastises some of his co-religionists who have taken a wait-and-see approach.
One thing in the article, however, struck me. Herzfeld argues that there is precedent in Jewish tradition to declare food un-kosher if the employees that prepared it were treated unfairly. It is hypocritical, he says, to call something kosher when it is “being sold and produced in an unethical manner.”
This makes sense on one level. But let’s tease out the implications. If the people overseeing the food’s preparation are treating the workers poorly—indeed, sinfully—and thus voiding the kosher status, doesn’t that call into question whether anything can be ultimately kosher? If the sin of the plant supervisors towards their employees taints the kosher-ness of the meat, what about their less visible sins? I mean, where do we draw the line regarding where sin begins and ends? What if the plant manager treats the employees well, but in his or her heart harbors racist prejudices towards them? What if he entertains lascivious thoughts about them? And what about the rest of his life? Does the sin in his home life have no bearing? Or only the sin that takes place within the plant?
The practices at Agriprocessors are justifiably condemned and should be halted. But from a theological perspective, the article falls short. Its view of sin is simply too shallow and too delineated. Sin is not only external, but internal. And deeply so. It is pernicious, subtle, and often hard to spot. So even if all the apparently unethical practices at Agriprocessors were stopped tomorrow, the place would still be drenched in human sin. Because there would still be human beings there.The idea that our problem with sin is much more an internal problem than an external one is not new. Check out what Jesus said about it:
“Don’t you understand that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach and then passes out into the sewer? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these things defile a person. For out of the heart come evil ideas, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are the things that defile a person; it is not eating with unwashed hands that defiles a person.” (Matthew 15:17-20)
Many Christians miss this point. They are working on getting a few “big” sins under control. Unfortunately, the problem is a lot bigger than that. The problem, according to Jesus, is what’s already in our hearts.
Suffice it to say, I’m going to keep eating my bacon, and clinging to the cross.
Sign up for the Mockingbird Newsletter
COMMENTS
5 responses to “Sinful Steak? Upton Sinclair in a Yarmulke”
Leave a Reply
actually, in Judaism, sin is more about action against other humans (or God), and not really about our inner thoughts and feelings. That is one big difference from Christianity.
Aliza: tru; but i think Aaron is pointing out where that theology is wrong. Jesus–a Jew–was very clear that it’s more than that action and that it’s heart (ref. his matt. quote). Not to mention that in deut. 30:6 “And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live” (esv) is pretty clear that it’s about the issue of the heart rather than just “doing” what is right. Essentially, Moses is confirming that the Isrealites won’t be able to do a thing, no matter how hard they try, until their hearts are cricumcised (which won’t happen until the arrival of the Messiah). So, essentially, if it were Moses standing up against this issue which Aaron references, he’d say much more about the condition of the heart over the actions.
Just to back up what Lauren said, Judaism certainly sees the distinction between heart and actions. Further, it recognizes that one can sin inwardly, while presenting a righteous exterior. Check out these verses from Proverbs:
Proverbs 26:23-26
Like a coating of glaze over earthenware are fervent lips with an evil heart.
The one who hates others disguises it with his lips, but he stores up deceit within him.
When he speaks graciously, do not believe him, for there are seven abominations within him.
Though his hatred may be concealed by deceit, his evil will be uncovered in the assembly.
Also, who can forget this verse:
Isaiah 29:13-14
13 The Lord said: Because these people draw near with their mouths and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their worship of me is a human commandment learned by rote; 14 so I will again do amazing things with this people, shocking and amazing. The wisdom of their wise shall perish, and the discernment of the discerning shall be hidden.
So when Jesus comes along and talks about the very real issue of “sins of the heart,” he is picking up a thread found in Jewish thought. He just takes it to the highest possible pitch. And correctly diagnoses the human condition.
The title of the post makes me think about the sin involved in eating beef. The degradation of the earth – beef production is number one in deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions. Also the many human rights violations, exemplified by this article. Not to mention animal rights, depending on your beliefs. I think this goes for consumption in every department, and is not remedied by vegetarianism. It’s like this talk DZ used to give at Focus: referencing a Quaker billboard, his conclusion was, “How does my life NOT contribute to the causes of war?”
As an Anglican minister, I’m grateful for the following in the 39 Articles:
Article XXVI: Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament
Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ’s, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in the receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ’s ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God’s gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ’s institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.