Masei: Contrasts in Justice. Che Guevara and the Cities of Refuge

Today (July 26), is the 61st anniversary of the start of the Cuban Revolution.  After six years of struggle, Fidel Castro assumed power in January 1959.

 image

In his biography Che Guevara:  A Revolutionary Life, Jon Lee Anderson describes revolutionary justice:

Throughout January, suspected war criminals were being captured and brought to La Cabana daily.  For the most part, they were not the henchmen of the ancient regime… . but the deputies, or rank-and-filers and police torturers.

The trials began at eight or nine in the evening, and more often than not, a verdict was reached by two or three in the morning.

Every night, after the trials, Che Guevara would go over the cases with his judges.  Che, the “supreme prosecutor,” made the final decision on men’s fates.

Che took to his task with a singular determination, and the old walls of the fort rang out nightly with the fusillades of the firing squads.

(Pages 386-388 condensed and rearranged).

What a contrast to the system of justice set forth in today’s Torah portion.

The Torah takes murder seriously.

You cannot buy yourself out of a murder rap.  Unlike property crimes, there are no monetary damages for murder.

The Torah institutes order in society.   We do not read about a police force.  Murder is punished by the blood avenger—the next of kin who is entitled to kill a killer.  The Torah curbs the blood avenger.  The Torah provides for asylum for a person who kills by accident.

By implication in Exodus 21 and specifically in Numbers 35 and Deuteronomy 19, the Torah provides that a person who commits a homicide by accident may flee to a City of Refuge.

The elders of the City place him on trial.  If the killing is found to be intentional, the killer is expelled from the City.  He  becomes vulnerable to the blood avenger. 

If the elders find that the killing was accidental, the killer may remain in the City of Refuge.  He must stay until the death of the high priest.

Though the killer’s life is protected, he is still punished.  He lives in exile.  He cannot buy a parole to leave the in safety. 

Rules of evidence are promulgated in Numbers 35.  The testimony of at least two witnesses is required for a conviction involving the death penalty.  In American courts, a person can be convicted of murder on circumstantial evidence alone.

 image

Moshe Greenberg

In a June 1959 article in the Journal of Biblical Literature, Professor Moshe Greenberg of the University of Pennsylvania, discusses the Cities of Refuge.  He presents—without advocating—a number of theories.

The article suggests that the different versions of asylum in Exodus, Numbers an Deuteronomy were written at different times.

Exodus 21 states at verses 12-14:

He who fatally strikes a man shall be put to death.  If he did not do it by design, but it came about by an act of God, I will assign you a place to which he can flee.  When a man schemes against another and kills him treacherously, you shall take him from My very alter to be put to death. (NJPS)

Exodus 21 is reflected in two passages in First Kings involving enemies of the King.

First Kings Chapter 1 verse 50 states:

Adonijah, in fear of Solomon, went at once [to the Tent] and grasped the horns of the alter.  (NJPS)

First Kings Chapter 2 verse 28 states:

When the news reached Joab, he fled to the Tent of the LORD and grasped the horns of the altar—for Joab had sided with Adonijah, though he had not sided with Absalom. (NJPS)

It is proposed that Numbers 35 and Deuteronomy 19 were written after King Josiah abolished the local shrines and centralized the cult in the Temple in Jerusalem.  The Cities of Refuge continue the Exodus concept of asylum. 

Joshua 20, describes the establishment of the Cities of Refuge.  It is significant that two of these cities, Shechem and Hebron, were the sites of local shrines.

In her Old Testament Lecture 10 on You Tube, Professor Christine Hayes of Yale University, discusses a 1976 article by Moshe Greenberg, Some Postulates of Biblical Criminal Law.

Greenberg says that as a result of Divine authorship of the Torah, offenses against morality are also religious offenses.  They are sins because they are infractions of the Divine will.

Sin requires expiation.  Blood pollutes the land.  The land can have no expiation for blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.  The blood guilt of a murderer is expiated by the blood avenger. 

However, Hayes suggests that the blood guilt is also expiated in case of an accidental homicide.  The slayer does expiation through his exile in the City of Refuge. 

Finally, Greenberg in his 1959 article writes that the death of the High Priest (mentioned in Numbers and Joshua, but not in Deuteronomy) acts as expiation of the blood guilt, thereby enabling the accidental slayer to return home.

On balance, the City of Refuge sounds morally neutral.  Though the life of an unintentional killer is spared and the blood guilt is expiated, society is not advanced.

 image

Samson Raphael Hirsch

However, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch offers a more optimistic note.  As reported in A Torah Commentary for Our Times by Rabbi Harvey Fields, Rabbi Hirsch says that the City of Refuge gives the unintentional killer an opportunity for rebirth. 

Rabbi Hirsch says that the City of Refuge must have teachers, students, people of science, people of spiritual and intellectual quality.  As Deuteronomy 19:5 states, unintentional murderers are to “flee to one of these cities AND LIVE.”

Advertisements

Lincoln’s Gamble—Not a profile in courage

One hundred fifty-two years ago this summer, Abraham Lincoln drafted his ultimate political achievement—The Emancipation Proclamation.  This document freed the slaves in those states in rebellion effective January 1, 1863.

 

Lincoln’s Gamble:  The Tumultuous Six Months that Gave America the Emancipation Proclamation and Changed the Course of the Civil War (Scribner) by Todd Brewster is a concise report of the political and military challenges faced by our Sixteenth President midway through the Civil War.

Brewster is a good story teller.  In a highly readable manner, he gives new understanding of the dire military situation of the Union.  The Union was falling apart.  Some 250 Federal army officers—about a quarter of the entire force—went over to the Confederacy.  The outlook was so bleak that Michigan Senator Zachariah Chandler proposed closing West Point for being a training ground for traitors.

Brewster discusses the impact of the leading military thinkers of the era (French engineer Sebastien Le Prestre de Vauban and Swiss war theorist Baron Antoine-Henri Jomini) had on Lincoln’s generals and the ineffectiveness of the Union Army.

Most of all, this book could be retitled Not A Profile in Courage.  Brewster reports Lincoln as an equivocator.  In each successive draft of the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln weakens its language.  Afraid to push the border states into the Confederacy, doubtful of his Constitution power to free the slaves, Lincoln goes so far as to propose three Constitutional amendments which would free the slaves by 1900, float Federal bonds to compensate their owners and deport the freedmen and settle them outside of the United States.  

Lincoln gave the Confederacy six months in which to end the rebellion and return to the Union.  With the time running out, Lincoln rose above his doubts and on the afternoon of January 1, 1863 signed the Emancipation Proclamation.  The Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in December 1865, after Lincoln was dead, freed the remaining slaves and resolved all legal questions about the Emancipation Proclamation.

Brewster has written an excellent book.  Five stars.

The Paris Game—DeGaulle, the difficult ally.

With the seventieth anniversary of the liberation of Paris (August 25) just ahead of us, The Paris Game (Dundurn) by Canadian journalist Ray Argyle reconnects us with the heroic days of World War II and the puzzling story of France in the late 1950’s through the 1960’s.

image

After the Germans defeated France in 1940, Brigadier General Charles DeGaulle (1890-1970) made his way to England and organized the French resistance from French troops who had been evacuated at Dunkirk and French settlers in the overseas Empire.   On June 18, 1940, he gave a radio speech (amazingly not recorded) calling France to join his movement.

DeGaulle was autocratic.  He demonstrated to the Allies little sense of democracy.  He asserted France’s right to be considered an equal in the Grand Alliance of the United States, Britain and the Soviet Union.  Though supported by Churchill, he was snubbed by Roosevelt, as the United States favored other candidates to lead Free France.

After the War, DeGaulle became prime minister and organized a new French political system (“The Fourth Republic”).  He advocated a welfare state with nationalized industries.  Unable to cope with feuding political factions, he retired from public life for a decade.

Recalled to power in 1958 amidst the Algerian fight for independence, he survived attempted assassinations, a coupe d’etat, and guided France through a referendum which resulted in Algeria becoming independent in 1962.  Some 900,000 French colonials and Algerian allies were evacuated to France.  

During the 1960’s he asserted France’s independence, withdrawing from NATO’s military organization, developing nuclear arms, and dissenting from United States policy in Vietnam and the Middle East.  He quit the Presidency in 1969, after losing a referendum on governmental reforms.

image

Ray Argyle

Argyle is a wonderful writer.  He tells a good story, with enough details to provide perspective without snowing the reader with excessive facts.  His Canadian spellings are charming.  His style is warm and quick moving.

In our America-centric world, the role of Canada in World War II is unnoticed.  Until we entered World War II, Canada was Britain’s principal ally.  Argyle quotes a letter written by the Canadian prime minister in which he said he would not be surprised if the British government would move to Canada and the Empire would be ruled from Ottawa.  Canadian troops landed at Normandy and fought valiantly in Europe.

Anglophone Canadians supported Britain and were behind DeGaulle’s fighting French.  Francophone Quebecers supported the collaborationist Vichy regime.  Marshal Petain and his pro-Nazi Vichy regime emphasized conservative values (“Work, Family, Fatherland”).  His regime was supported by the Catholic Church.  In Quebec,  at the time of World War II, the Catholic Church was the established religion  and the Church supported conservative social values.  

With Bastille Day behind us, The Paris Game is a good way to spend the dog days of summer.