"Gentle, compassionate, natural, caring," reads one slogan, adding more to the irony.
Perhaps female circumcision would be permissible in this country if it were performed in a "holistic, gentle, compassionate, caring" manner?
So how did this mash-up even occur?
The rabbis that coin this oxymoron probably use the term to mean a circumcision that is not performed in the hospital, but instead in, what they claim to be, the "gentle, compassionate, caring" environment of the services they provide. (Isn't that convenient!)
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
But the true meaning of the term "holistic" makes its combination with the term "circumcision" (in this case the forced amputation of a healthy, non-consenting child's foreskin from his penis) truly an oxymoron. Like "fireproof match." It doesn't work.
According to the entry for "holism" in Wikipedia:
Holism (from ὂλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, whole, entire, total) , is the idea that natural systems (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic, etc.) and their properties, should be viewed as wholes, not as collections of parts. This often includes the view that systems somehow function as wholes and that their functioning cannot be fully understood solely in terms of their component parts.
Interesting, for tradesmen who consider the foreskin to be "extra" and/or "superfluous" to the male organs, and whose sole services are its extirpation at the expense of the most basic rights of the child.
"Gentle?" If you consider holding a child down while you cut off part of his most sensitive and intimate organs "gentle."
"Compassionate?" If you consider ignoring the child's cries and disregarding his rights to self-autonomy "compassionate."
"Natural?" Only if you also consider amputating a normal, healthy part of the human body "natural."
"Caring?" Not for a healthy, non-consenting minor, that's for sure.
All things considered, the juxtaposition of the terms "holistic" and "circumcision" couldn't be any more oxymoronic. A mohel is about as "holistic, gentle, compassionate, natural" and "caring" as a doctor.
So why are mohels reaching out to a Christian clientele?
I can only speculate that the increasing scrutiny of circumcision and the growing intactivist movement has intimidated them (IE, the San Francisco circumcision ban), and they hope to establish strength in numbers.
Perhaps these mohels have never read the New Testament. Or, at the very least, they count on Christians never having read it.
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."
For further reading on what the bible says regarding circumcision for gentiles, visit the following: