Dear Mr. Luke Tobias, Director of Operations, Kuma's
I have been to your restaurant once. It was fantastic. I believe I ate about 2 ¼ of your burgers
that night, not to mention an ungodly amount of French fries on the side. I confess that I am, in fact, a glutton. This is what happens when the girl to guy
ratio in your social circle hovers somewhere around 3:1 and leftovers abound. In all
truth, I have long been raving about Kuma’s to any friends who have consulted
me in their quest for the perfect Chicago burger.
Unfortunately, however, I cannot ignore the
elephant that you have this week introduced into the room: your new “Ghost” burger, which, in
a gauche and grasping attempt at humor, prominently features an “unconsecrated
communion wafer and a red wine reduction” as toppings. As you put it on your own Facebook page: "In the spirit of our undying reverence for the lord and all things holy, we give you the Ghost which we think is a fitting tribute to the supreme blasphemous activities carried out by the band itself."
I get it. The brand
of your restaurant is predicated upon capturing the rebellious charisma of
modern rock and roll. And in order to
sustain the Kuma's brand, you must constantly be pushing the envelope, poking and
prodding “the man” in much the same way that the anti-establishment giants of
rock did in the post-British Invasion years.
And, quite understandably, most of your customers are of the cultural
persuasion not to mind a delicious burger garnished with a heavy drizzle of
iconoclasm.
But, as a Catholic – and one who does happen to have something of a sense
of humor, despite your defensive assumption to the contrary – I
feel it my responsibility to let you know that Kuma's has stepped over the
line. I’ll admit: when I first encountered
the headline announcing “Chicago burger garnished with communion wafer,” I gave
a rye, annoyed smile, rolled my eyes, and nearly moved on -- that is, until I
read your
truly unfortunate reaction
to this whole flare-up: “
There are people who are offended by it,” you observed, “but we're delighted to see that generally people seem to have a
sense of humor.” The insinuation, of
course, being that those who might be offended do not have a sense of humor, and that we represent the sort of old,
no-fun, fuddy-duddies that are definitely not the target audience of the Kuma's brand.
Here’s the thing, though: in a world in which not much of
anything is held sacred anymore, we Catholics are dogged in insisting that the
Eucharist truly is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, he who is
the second hypostasis of the immortal, immutable, and ineffably sublime
Trinity. He is the Alpha and Omega,
Creator and Judge, the one at whose name every knee should bend. The Eucharist is not simply a sacred object, but the most sacred object in the Catholic
cosmos, an object in defense of which saints have literally shed their blood, and
before which even popes bow down in self-abnegating obedience (see here, here,
and here).
I understand that belief in such doctrines may seem at best
inscrutable and at worst, downright absurd.
And I certainly am not attempting to convert you – God would be much
better at that than I would. But I do believe
it my duty and responsibility to let you know that you have crossed a line, and
that most Catholics with any sort of substantial piety would likely agree with
me.
Further, I understand that anyone – especially someone who
approaches a situation like this from such a massively different perspective as
yours – can quite easily fall into an ordinary lapse in judgment. Until I read the news article about this
story, I assumed that this was basically what you had done. But to accuse those who disagree with you as
being hyper-pious stick-in-the-muds who quite obviously don’t understand that
the existence of the sacred is really only an opportunity for
capitalistically-motivated desecration – this is unbearable. What you are basically saying, is: “I know I have
offended many Catholics, and this is their fault, not mine.”
I know that free market capitalism theoretically sets no
ethical rules on how a company can brand itself or market its products and
services. At the same time, most entrepreneurs
are aware that there are certain social taboos that one doesn’t touch. It wouldn’t be right for a restaurant to conceive,
let alone market, “Jim Crow burgers” in the American south, for example. It’s not good business. And it’s social suicide. At least it should be.
Then why is it okay to hit Catholics where it hurts
most? It has been said that “Anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable prejudice” in America.
To quote Arthur Schlesinger, this bigotry is the “most deeply held
prejudice in the history of the American people.” We would blush at a similarly systematic,
intentional, and public insult to the deepest sensibilities of blacks, Arabs,
Muslims, Asians, Jews, gays, lesbians, and the mentally ill. It goes without saying that this reticence is
a very good thing, because it is a sign of the hard won public civility that
these groups now command. But it is
apparent that Catholics historically have not, and still do not, command this
sort of respect in the public square.
This is a serious problem which needs to be remedied, and it will not
happen unless Catholics speak up.
So yes, this does happen to be one of those “You no longer
have a customer in me” letters. And this
will remain true so long as you continue to blame those you have offended for
their “lack of humor.” Here’s hoping
that the “Ghost” burger will “vanish” from Kuma’s menu and that you can find
creative and humorous ways to further your brand without violating that which any group considers to be sacred.
-
Justin Bartkus, Chicago Resident
