The Freudian version
Sir: As becomes a traditional Rabbi, HYala Maccoby (7 May) rejects the historical reality that the Jews precipitated the crucifixion and, hence, the claim evangelium. His polemic against what be describes as the thesis implicit within MY review of Dr Grant's Jesus neatly illustrates and confirms Freud's view that the rePr°aCb; which pervades Christian anti-semitism is the disavowal by the Jews of baying murdered God. In Moses and MonotheisM Freud explicated the reproach thus: will not admit that you murdered God (the primary picture of God, the primary father and his later incarnations)." There should be an addition declaring, "We did the smile thing to be sure, bat we have admitted it and since then we have been absolved." Rabbi Maccoby continues steadfastly to refuse ta admit: the absolved Christian, flaunting his redemption, continues to reproach the Jew,' Committed to his faith Maccoby reveas he is as anti-Christian as the Christian ls anti-Jew: the Rabbi must needs Wall Judaism and, manically, deny the ambiva„i'. ence of his and my and everyone's oediP't relationship, claiming that Judaism and 110 Christianity is the religion of the ever lovalgt never hating son. But he really must n°0 imply psychoanalysis is on his side wile making such a pretentious claim. Freud10. the contrary view bluntly :'Judaism had a religion of the father: Christianity becarn: a religion of the son. The old God the Father fell back behind Christ: Christ the Son took his place, just as every son hake hoped to do in primeval times.' This was t"bi view I adopted in my review. Rabe Maccoby's quarrel is with Freud, not But Freud happily was one of the comrat in disbelief and, emancipated from t'i'se imprisonment of religious orthodoxies, was able to explore insights within both tn`r Judaic and Christian myths without evc.., masking the essential conflicts betwee" them.
Leo Abse, MP House of Commons, London SE1
Previous page
