Greenhut also states that the “Sectionrn8 program . . . has turned many stable,rnwell-kept neighborhoods into enclaves ofrnrun-down rental housing.” This programrnonl- uses existing rental units thatrnare kept up to code, and owner’s rents arernbased on the going fair-market rent.rnMoreover, the public housing that so incensesrnGreenhut is only one percent ofrnLima’s total housing stock.rnGreenhut says that Lima residentsrn”knew from past experience that METrnhouses brought a wave of crime, drugs,rnand lower-class culture onto theirrnblocks.” As the landlord of those familiesrnin public housing, we are able torncheck credit, references, and criminalrnbackgrounds, as well as visit their homesrnto determine housekeeping. On the otherrnhand, units under control of privaternlandlords may not be so vigilant in theirrnscreening.rnSteven Greenhut developed his opinionsrnabout our agency when he discoveredrnthat a low-income family was movingrninto his neighborhood. We call thisrnNIMBY (Not hi Mv Back Yard). Whatrndo you call it?rn—Cynthia K. RingrnExecutive Director,rnAllen Metropolitan Housing AuthorityrnLima, OHrnMr, Greenhut Replies:rnIt has been a tough few months for thernAllen Metropolitan Housing Authority,rnso I won’t begrudge Executive DirectorrnCnthia Ring for impugning my motiesrnfor criticizing her agency’s heavy-handedrnprograms. First the Lima News blew thernwhistle on her stealthy attempts to foistrnanother 28 public housing units on middle-rnclass neighborhoods, then the CityrnGouncil took AMHA to court for violatingrnOhio state law in the process. Her attemptsrnto sic the feds on the city havernbackfired, and residents have publicizedrnmanv horror stories about the agencyrnand its charges.rnRing savs my opposition to AMI lA’srnplan stems from my discovery that a lowincomernfamily was moving into mvrnneighborhood. Though untrue, this is arntypical agency ploy, if you don’t see thernwisdom of scattering housing projectsrnaround Lima, then you must be afraid ofrnpoor people, blacks, the disabled, etc.rnNone of the new houses are slated forrnmy neighborhood (unless there’s somernnev’ plan Ring has yet to share with me),rnthough I live much closer to them thanrnRing does; she lives in a rural hamlet farrnfrom her agency’s handiwork.rnI may only have lived in Lima for twornvears, but I can see what Ring has a vestedrninterest in ignoring: plopping publicrnhousing in solid neighborhoods, thenrndismissing complaints as examples ofrnselhshness, is a recipe for the kind of turmoilrnAMHA IS facing.rnSteven GreenhutrnEditorial page editor, Lima NewsrnLima, OHrnOn JudaismrnI, like many scholars, stand in awe of thernaccomplishments of Jacob Neusner, butrnhis August “Letter From Inner Israel:rnContinental Judaisms, R.I.P.” seems unusuallyrninsensitive and bizarre. Neusnerrnaccuses continental European Judaism,rnin the aftermath of Nazi and Soviet barbarism,rnof insularity, suspicion, lack ofrnlearning, and lack of faith. I should havernthought that a more compassionaternand charitable understanding of thesern”remnants of Israel” would have been inrnorder.rnNeusner claims that French, British,rnand American Judaism does not demonstraternthese negative traits. Where hasrnhe been? Judaism in these favored landsrnis marked by a rejection of prophetic Judaism’srnoutreach to the world in favor ofrna narrow rabbinical emphasis on ethnicrnpurity. Indeed, rabbinical Judaism as arnwhole, whether orthodox or in its morernmodernist form, is a rejection of thernprophetic universalism which eventuallyrnformed Christianity. Toynbee and Spenglerrnwere more right than wrong in viewingrnrabbinical Judaism as the “fossilized”rnremains of Syrian or Magian civilization,rnthe legacy of having turned entirely inward.rnWhere the challenge of propheticrnJudaism and Christianity was lovingrnone’s unloelv neighbor, the challenge ofrnrabbinical Judaism was historically thernpreparation of a priesth’ people throughrnsegregation—but only provisionalK, notrnforever—in order to bring the dixinernlight to the Gentiles. Czech and GermanrnJews today can at least be excusedrnfor their narrow defensiveness, but notrnthe prosperous and secure Jews of Britainrnand America who are preparing for nornpriestly purpose as far as I can determine.rnPerhaps Neusner should stick to his morernnarrow scholariy concerns and not tr’ tornpaint contemporary religious practicernand belief with such a wide brush.rn—Norman RavitchrnProfessor of HistoryrnUniversity of California, RiversidernRiverside, CArnDr. Neusner Replies:rnFrench, British, and North American Judaismsrnare so diverse that I cannot imaginernwhich particular Judaism practiced inrnthe West, among manv, earned ProfessorrnRavitch’s wild enmit’ or wh’. But anti-rnSemitic bias against all Judaism and inrnfavor of any Christianity does not beginrnwith Professor Ravitch and, alas, will notrnend with him. All of this is ho-hum.rnThe only interesting question his letterrnraises is, what in the world does his diatribernhave to do with my essay? He’s justrnlooking for excuses to advertise his hatredrnof Judaism. We have seen—and survivedrn—worse.rnOn Adultery and thernMilitaryrnAlthough Katherine Dal ton’s commentsrnabout the Kelly Flinn case (CulturalrnRevolutions, August) are well-taken,rnthey do not quite find the bulls-eye onrnwh’ the LIniform Code of Military Justicernoutlaws adultery. Adultery revealsrnan egregious lack of integrit’, by far—atrnleast in the opinion of this former commanderrnof Marines—the most importantrnmoral virtue for the military. The issuernis one of trust, which is the cementrnthat binds all successful combat units. Arnman who will cheat on his wife will cheatrnon his buddies, especially when thernshooting starts. Adultery is a supremelyrnselfish act, and no one who commits itrnhas honor (regardless of whether he orrnshe is the married person). The troopsrnknow this. They brag about fornicating,rnbut not about committing adultery. Anyrnqualities that a man ma ha’e as a warriorrnare tainted if he is an adulterer.rn—(Father) Paul N. CheckrnNorth American CollegernVatican CityrnOCTOBER 1997/5rnrnrn