The Philosophical Jew and the Identity Crisis of Christianity in Lessing's

DAVID H. PRICE The Philosophical Jew and the Identity Crisis of Christianity in Lessing’s Nathan the Wise

Drawing on Enlightenment sources as well as the construction of Moses Mendels- sohn’s persona as a public intellectual, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing developed the trope of the philosophical Jew as part of a discourse that destabilizes Christian identity, both historically and theologically. Moreover, the portrayal of the Jew as philoso- pher, however benevolent, constrains the representation of Judaism and illustrates the historical difficulty of defending Judaism from a Christian perspective.

Despite the prevalent view that Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s Nathan the Wise (1779) represents an historic breakthrough in the sympathetic por- trayal of Judaism in Germany, some critics have argued, to the contrary, that Lessing disguises Judaism beyond recognition, to the point that the play should be understood neither as a plea for toleration of Judaism nor as a favorable representation of the religion as actually practiced. The discord among Lessing readers concerning this central question is jarring for many reasons, not the least one being that both assessments are justifiable. This clash, as I will argue, stems from Lessing’s decision, signaled in the title, to portray Judaism philosophically, an approach he knew from French Enlightenment authors, all of whom were severely critical of Christianity.1 Moreover, with this strategy, Lessing pursued two distinct goals not directly concerned with Judaism: the portrayal of Judaism was designed, on the one hand, to strike at traditional Chris- tianity, both theologically and historically, and, on the other, to suggest a new identity for Christianity. While offering an eloquent defense of Judaism against the depredations of religious intolerance and violence, the play is constructed to be a critique of exclusivist religious creeds of positive (i.e., revealed) religions primarily from the perspective of weak- nesses in orthodox Christianity. Judaism, especially a Judaism in har- mony with reason, plays a central role in this discourse as a trope for destabilizing confidence in the historical and theological identity of Christianity. Nonetheless, while it effectively intensifies the critique of Christianity, the portrayal of the Jew as philosopher, however benevo- lent, ultimately constrains the defense of Judaism, revealing the histori- cal difficulty of defending Judaism from a Christian perspective. First, a few words about the discordant readings of the play. To be sure, the reception history, from both Jewish and non-Jewish readers,

1 On Lessing’s avid reception of the French radical Enlightenment, see Jonathan I. Israel, Democratic Enlightenment, Oxford 2011, p. 192.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden ZRGG 68, 2 (2016) Also available online - brill.com/zrgg 204 DAVID H. PRICE abounds in enthusiastic tributes to Lessing’s portrayal of Nathan the Jew as the paragon of virtue and reason. Moses Mendelssohn, who read and edited parts of the drama while Lessing composed it, published a brief but largely ignored tribute in one of his own defenses of Judaism, his 1782 preface to a German translation of Menasseh ben Israel’s Vindication of the Jews. Mendelssohn ranked Lessing’s play along with Johann Chris- tian Dohm’s 1781 tract On the Civil Improvement of the Jews as a milestone in the effort to promote human rights as the foundation for improving the legal status of Judaism. “Thanks be to all-beneficent Providence that it has allowed me at the end of my days to experience this fortunate point in time, in which the rights of humanity are beginning to come to life in their full extent.”2 Over time, Mendelssohn’s perception of a “for- tunate” turning point in German cultural and legal history has come to be a standard view. In a prominent Jewish publication of 1879, celebrat- ing the sesquicentennial of the birth of both Mendelssohn and Lessing, a scholar claimed that “For the Jews, Nathan was the beginning of a new age, a pillar of fire (see Exodus 13:21) that led them out of the desert life of the ghettoes and into the promised land of equal rights.”3 Given Lessing’s deeply sympathetic portrayal of Nathan as a virtuous man, it is hardly surprising that this sentiment, with various nuances, continues to dominate opinion.4 The rub is that Lessing did not portray Judaism as being particularly Jewish.5 Nathan does not refer to a single Jewish law, ritual, custom, prayer, holiday, rabbi or scholar. He is a Jew, to be sure, and has suffered unimaginable persecution, but his personal theology does not explicitly extend beyond acceptance of God’s existence, divine providence, and the moral necessity of benevolent intervention for others (charity). Therefore, it is hardly surprising that in the context of the rise of Zion-

2 Moses Mendelssohn (ed.), Manasseh ben Israel, Rettung der Juden, Berlin 1782, p. III. 3 Lessing-Mendelssohn-Gedenckbuch, ed. Der Deutsch-Israelitische Gemeindebund, Leipzig 1879, p. 4: “Für die Juden aber war der Nathan der Ausgangspunkt einer neuen Zeit, die flammende Säule, die sie hinausführte aus dem Wüstenleben der Ghetti in das gelobte Land der Gleichberechtigung.” See Ritchie Robertson, “Dies Hohe Lied der Duldung”?: The Ambiguities of Toleration in “Die Juden” and “Nathan der Weise,” in: Modern Language Review 93 (1998), p. 105. 4 Ismar Freund, Die Emanzipation der Juden in Preußen, Berlin 1912, vol. 2, pp. 22-60. Karl S. Guthke, Unter allen Nationen gute und böse Seelen, in: Die Erfindung der Welt, Tübingen 2005, pp. 104-105, emphasizes that Lessing’s characterizations of Judaism, also in his earlier play “The Jews” (1749; printed 1754), occurred at a time when Prussian law continued to impose severe limitations on Jewish life. H. B. Nisbet’s approach is also strongly apologetic, rejecting any schol- arly reaction to Lessing’s constrained representation of Jews as unwarranted; see H. B. Nisbet, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, Oxford 2013, pp. 601-623, esp. p. 617: “such allegations (i.e., criticisms of Lessing’s portrayal of Judaism) are unjustified.” 5 See Willi Goetschel, Lessing and the Jews, in: Barbara Fischer/Thomas Fox (ed.), A Compan- ion to the Works of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, , Rochester 2005, p. 200: “Curiously, Nathan’s Jewishness has been called into question, and he has been accused, celebrated, or bemoaned as a protestant, deist, or assimilationist etc.”