Mail.Liberal-Judaism

• Laura Shumaker Casey <lsc@wizard.net>

• Mark & Nechama Moshiri <instream@earthlink.net>

• Suzanne Silk Klein <ssklein@acs.ryerson.ca>

• Alex Herrera <aherrera@utj.org>
• toramada@netvision.net.il (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• Johanna Smith <rebiljo@erinet.com>

• Philip Borenstein <philip@world.std.com>

• Rabbi Arthur Waskow <Awaskow@aol.com>

From: Laura Shumaker Casey <lsc@wizard.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:44:50 -0400
Subject: A Solution for "Judaism-Lite": A Call for Reform Jewish Day Schools

"'I went for ten years and didn't learn anything' is invariably the feeling of
most young people whose Jewish education was limited to the Sunday school. It
should not come as a surprise. If one stops for a moment to add up the total
number of hours that goes into ten years of Sunday school, it comes to
approximately two-thirds of the time spent in any one year of a regular school
program! ...It is surely an unrealistic expectation to be able to master an
entire heritage, a whole culture, and a complex faith in this limited number
of hours." (Donin, Rabbi Hayim Halevy. To Raise A Jewish Child. U.S.A.: Basic
Books, 1977.)

Although I certainly don't agree with all of Rabbi Donin's philosophies
(especially since he doesn't even acknowledge bat mitzvah as an event worthy
of a ceremony in this book,) I was shocked when I read the above
statement. When you stop and think about it, there is so much to Judaism:
Torah, Talmud, history, language, culture, literature, ethics, art, music, and
so on and so on; and the little taste of it one gets in Sunday school is
hardly the tip of the iceberg.

The traditional Reform Jewish Sunday school education leaves us with this: a
knowledge of major holidays, a basic command of Hebrew (enough to read the
prayerbook,) a smattering of big-name Bible heros such as Esther and Moses, a
surface knowledge of Israeli culture and perhaps a little history of major
events: the Holocaust, the formation of Eretz Yisrael (but rarely the Spanish
Inquisition, although it was certainly as horrific as the Holocaust.) If one
continues on to Confirmation following bar/bat mitzvah, the class may get as
deep as Jewish social issues such as anti-Semitism and Jewish identity. Mixed
in with all this are school assemblies, Purim carnivals, mock seders, arts and
crafts. These facets, while important, take away from the classroom time,
leaving the teacher to make the decision as to what's the least important to
teach, and dropping it.

This, then, explains why so many Reform Jews don't give equal time to all the
mitzvot: They simply haven't been taught all the traditions and rituals. They
have been denied the education that would allow them to make informed
decisions as to the performance of mitzvot. It is this lack of information
that leads to a watered-down Reform Judaism. Perhaps if this were not the
case, Reform Judaism would be a more observant Judaism than it currently is.

So what is the solution? Rabbi Donin is in favor of the Jewish day school,
where children will study Jewish subjects about half the day, and secular
subjects the rest. They learn fluent Hebrew, Torah, Talmud, Jewish history,
values, ethics, laws and customs in depth. School vacations would be tailored,
conveniently, to the Jewish calender. Students in schools such as these rarely
suffer due to less time spent on traditional academic subjects; in fact, they
compete quite well with their peers in public school on standardized
tests. There is ample opportunity for art, music, holiday celebrations and
socialization with Jewish peers without losing so much valuable educational
time.

Unfortunately, in most communities, the only day schools available (if any)
are Orthodox. Many Reform parents are, understandably, uncomfortable with this
idea. There are several issues to consider: Orthodox Judaism regards the Torah
as the divine word of God and will not accept another point of view. Thus,
Orthodox Judaism will not encourage your child to make informed decisions
regarding their observance, but to follow the law to the letter.  In addition,
girls may be discriminated against and not allowed to learn certain subjects,
such as Talmud.

The solution, as I see it, (if you haven't already come to this conclusion on
your own,) is to build more Reform Jewish day schools. Schools where children
can receive the same quality Jewish education described above, but without the
shackles of Orthodoxy. They would then, as adults, be able to make those
informed decisions about their religious practice that we praise so much. They
would surely be more observant than the majority of Reform Jews today. They
would go on to develop new rituals appropriate to life in the 21st century, no
doubt improving Reform Judaism as we know it. Reform Judaism would no longer
be known as "Judaism-Lite," but as a respected, even coveted religion where
educated individuals are encouraged to make educated choices, a religion that
changes with the times, yet constantly remains spiritually meaningful since
each individual must examine it anew.

Education is a primary value in Judaism, and yet we are voluntarily denying
our children the best, most fulfilling, most energizing knowledge of all: the
complete knowledge of our Jewish heritage. I beg of my fellow Reform Jews to
correct this lack in order to save Reform Judaism from its gradual demise.

Laura Shumaker Casey
lsc@wizard.net
Find Reform Jewish spirituality at 
http://www.wizard.net/~kc/lsc/spiritquest.htm

I lift up mine eyes unto the mountains; from whence cometh my help? My help
cometh from Adonai, Creator of heaven and earth.	     --Psalm 121

Return to Table of Contents

From: Mark & Nechama Moshiri <instream@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Pluralism

[Moderator's Note: Although this mean seem to some readers to be discounting
the Orthodox view of other movements, a fundamental assumption of this list is
the pluralistic nature of Judaism, which this post seems to capture. -- DPF]

In David Lilienthal's very eloquent post regarding Reform Obligations,
which led to his discussion regarding pluralism, he wrote:

>Everybody seems to assume that the Orthodox way of life is the right one, and
>the more "reformic" you are, the further away you are from the norm.  I would
>also contend that Orthodoxy has no more claim on being an authentic
>continuation of the rabbinic tradition than does Reform or Conservative
>Judaism.

I absolutely agree with David.  Just because Reform Judaism does not "work"
for some people including myself, certainly does not mean that it is any
further away from the norm or any less Jewish.  If we were all to subscribe to
the idea that Orthdoxy is the "only" way to go, life would be pretty
oppressive and perhaps stifling for those of us who are Jewish.  Just looking
at the situation in Israel, where you "are" or you "aren't" is a prime
example.  Because many secular Jews there have not been exposed to liberal
Judaism, ie, Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist, their options in
terms of observance are very limited and they are ultimately turned off to
observance.

This "my way or the highway" attitude that I sometimes sense among some
Orthodox (and I'm certainly not saying all), does nothing but hurt people who
are trying to observe in the way that works best for them.  Our pluralism is
what makes Judaism accessible and wonderful for many different types of Jews.
If one type doesn't work for someone, they can move to another, and as people
change over the course of their lives, so too can they change their
affiliations and sense of which obligations will work for them.

>Therefore, it is not at all clear that Orthodoxy is the norm on which
>everything and everybody should be measured; rather the contrary is true: it
>is the pluriformity that is the norm! As already said, that includes
>orthodoxy as one of the authentic expressions of Judaism, but not more or
>less so than the various reform, conservative and reconstructionist
>comunities. In my not always humble opinion I think it would be helpful for
>the continuation of the discussion if this could be born in mind.

Again, I think David makes an excellent point here--we certainly cannot and
should not be measuring what is "normal" in Judaism according to an Orthodox
yard stick. It is my hope that no one on this list misconstrued my need to
take on more obligations and move on to Conservative Judaism as a statement
for "moving up the yard stick".  I simply meant that I needed to move to where
I felt most comfortable and I was uncomfortable without more of a sense of
obligation.

Nechama Moshiri

Return to Table of Contents

From: Suzanne Silk Klein <ssklein@acs.ryerson.ca>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:40:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Rabbis and Congregations

Ethel Jean, I think that your underlying questian is important, but your
answer seems to me to outline a rabbinic role that I find problematic,
especially in Reconstructionist congregations.

Rabbis do not (and should not) "manage" congregations, Rabbis are leaders who
do not direct, but who teach.  All teachers must start where the learners are,
to bring them along.  Some congregations are inherently more innovative than
their Rabbi, whose role becomes helping them understand the tradition so that
they may better integrate innovation into it.  In some congregations, the
reverse is true, and here the Rabbi has to educate the congregation on how
past innovation is now tradition, how tradition becomes enriched by extension.

I have not been to seminary, but I have been to graduate school where we were
"prepared" to become university teachers by being immersed in our subject
matter and ignoring and theory of teaching and learning.  It may well be that
seminaries haev the same oversight.  That some of us transcended our training
is miraculous.  Our best Rabbis probably also transcend their training.

In particular, Reconstructionist congregations have very narrow roles for
their rabbis, who must correspondingly be more brilliant at teaching, since
they cannot depend on authority roles.

As for the "conservatizing" of recon congregations... There are cycles.  Right
now i think that many people seek traditional rituals, perhaps because so much
in the worls is uncertain.  This too will change.

Suzanne Silk Klein 

Return to Table of Contents

From: Alex Herrera <aherrera@utj.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 08:43:11 +0000
Subject: Re: Reform obligations

David Lilienthal contends that some people prefer an authoritative structure
on which they can depend -- an outside structure such as Orthodoxy has. He
alludes to the use of Torah by referring to it as a "book" that tells one what
is right and wrong and that we obey the book even when our critical thinking
tells us the world works differently.

I think David is implying that only a fool would depend on a book without
critical review. He is correct. However, if one believes that the book came
from God Himself, one would review the book in a different light. Obviously
God is the prime authority so if you have a book of his words and thoughts,
you would treat the book with more deference than you would a book from a
frail and imperfect human author.

Since Reform believes that the Torah is just a book made of words from frail
imperfect human beings, they must, as David suggests, review it critically and
where it does not mesh with the world as it is today, reject what does not
apply. But Orthodox do not need to do the same thing. Since we believe the
Torah is composed of the words of God, logically we must treat the words as
commands or commandments from God to live our lives in a certain way. Thus
even when our world tells us to leave our children, we stay in sacred marriage
and raise them. Even when our world tells us to bed people other than our
spouse, we contain ourselves and remain true. Even when our world tells us we
need not study, we still study.

The Orthodox do not *need* "absolute authority from outside." We *have* the
reality of an absolute authority and we address that authority logically. This
is just what Reform Jews do. Reform Jews have decided that they have no way to
access that "absolute authority" so they look to themselves as individuals and
find the absolute authority on the inside -- the individual. Both of these
methods are just the logical extension of the assumptions each group
makes. Each looks silly to the other only because each has taken a different
basic assumption as true.

David then calls for many movements of Judaism so that the individual can find
his place where he is most comfortable. He calls this pluralism. I call it
correct and incorrect.

If God has written in a book what He wants us to do, then some people will
read that book and do things correctly. If others read the words and do
something differently, then one of the groups is incorrect, mistaken, or made
a boo boo. It is not a crime if both have approached the texts with care, love
and sincerity. It is just that one of the groups is mistaken. Which is the one
that is mistaken?

WAIT! That is the wrong question for one group because one group does not see
the text as the word of God. Thus they can see many groups as reading the
words differently and the consequences of having a different interpretation
are nil. Does it matter if one group reads the texts differently?

But the other group sees the text as the words of God. Thus there is a right
and wrong way of interpreting the text. Perhaps we may be ignorant of what is
exactly right and wrong, but we know right and wrong exist and can be
found. Thus, if one group thinks it has found the right answer, it must also
be true that the other groups are mistaken if they see it another way. It is
only logical. All groups are acting logically yet no ignorance or ill-intent
is involved.

> Everybody seems to assume that the Orthodox way of life is the right one,
> and the more "reformic" you are, the further away you are from the norm.

That is what I see Reform Jews thinking too. I think this is a big flaw in
Reform thinking. You all need to fix this as David suggests.  Liberal Jews
(Conservative too) seem to think that Orthodoxy is the norm and that Reform is
somehow breaking away from the norm. That was the point of a Dennis Prager
article in his journal "Ultimate Issues". It is true that Orthodoxy sees
itself as the norm. Of course it would. It was here first. It is Reform's job
to see itself as the norm rather than as the radical.

In thinking back, I hope David was not suggesting that Reform impose it's
viewpoint on Orthodoxy and force Orthodoxy to think of Reform as the norm.

Alex Herrera

Return to Table of Contents

From: toramada@netvision.net.il (Shoshana L. Boublil)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 97 19:30:45 PDT
Subject: Reform obligations

For those who haven't met me beforehand on scj or COEJL, I am Orthodox (Bnei
Akiva), and I have been living in Israel since 1968.

I found the following post most interesting, as it presents, what I 
consider, IMHO, a common basic misconception of Orthodoxy:

Maurie Fox-Warren <mfw@internetmci.com> wrote:

>Reform on the other hand proclaims that each jew is to be commanded by their
>conscience and that each jew has the responsibility to be their own rabbi -
>that is to determine what their obligations are.

Actually, according to the Orthodox view, as presented in Pirkei Avot
(Chapters of our Fathers) we find that it is, also, each person's obligation
and responsibility to reach the level of a Rabbi.  The major difference
between Orthodoxy and Reform concerning _this_ issue, is what happens in the
meantime.

>From what has been posted here (and from discussions elsewhere) especially in
this thread concerning Reform obligations, it appears that the choice of what
to perform is up to the person hirself, and that their choice is up to their
concience.

For the Orthodox, the situation is opposite, in principle: First they have to
accept all the halakhot, and then study and learn so that they can answer the
same questions asked by Reform about the various laws and halakhot.

>This is a very heavy obligation - literally it is to take on the "yoke of the
>torah" -

True, and that is what the orthodox mean when they discuss Learning Torah.

Shoshana

Return to Table of Contents

From: Johanna Smith <rebiljo@erinet.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 02:19:31 -0400
Subject: Reform obligations

I have been putting together an adult ed program "Everything You Wanted to
Know About Judaism but Were Afraid to Ask" for one of the temples in which I
teach.  When I started compiling ideas about mitzvot and obligations, the
discussions in the MLJ came to mind.

On of the most refreshing aspects of moving from Conservative to Reform
affiliation is that nobody has to "out halacha" anyone.  No one worries about
who is more kosher than whom, who is more shomer Shabbat, etc.  There is no
halachic one-up-man's-ship.

That is not to say that nobody keeps kosher or Shabbat, many of us do.  We
just don't bother looking down our noses at those who do not.  It is personal.
We don't need to compare ourselves with others to see who is a "better Jew".

I am not saying that this snobbery is a practice or tenet of more traditional
forms of Judaism, of course it is not.  In fact, it is forbidden as idle
gossip.  Yet, it seems sometimes to be a social by-product of the "supposed
to's" that are inherent in halachic movements.

So, are Reform Jews obligated to do anything?  Absolutely!

Our obligation is to learn; to try on; to work at our Judaism and our
relationship with G-d.  We just do not buy the premise that the rabbinic
tradition can, as a matter of absolute fact and taken as a whole, answer all
the needs of the individual's relationship with the divine.

If we take our Judaism seriously, we are not permitted to be lazy.  To do just
because we were told to.  We follow the path with consciousness; with kavanah.
That is the obligation of a Reform Jew.  I would argue that that is the
obligation of every Jew.

Johanna Smith

Return to Table of Contents

From: Philip Borenstein <philip@world.std.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:29:01 -0400
Subject: Why no change of name for Isaac?

Our congregation is getting ready to take on a Hebrew name after two years.  I
wanted to talk about this at Rosh Hashannah (since the meeting to choose a
name is at the end of that month), and I was trying to tie it in with the
readings for Rosh Hashannah.

It struck me that if Abraham got his name after God commanded him to
circumcise himself and his household, and Jacob/Israel got his name after he
fought the angel, why didn't Isaac get a new name after the akedah?

Are there midrashim or other rabbinic sources that talk about this?

Return to Table of Contents

From: Rabbi Arthur Waskow <Awaskow@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:53:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Event Announcement: Festival of Jewish Poetry (9/21/97, MD)

On Sunday, September 21 a Celebration and Festival of Jewish Poetry will take
place at the Writers Center in Bethesda, Maryland, near Washiongton D C..
Some 15 national recognized Jewish poets will offer workshops and seminars.

Rodger Kamenetz will keynote.  Poets include Myra Sklarew, Kim Roberts, Merril
Lefler, Jean Nordhaus, Hillary Tham, Herman Taube, Barbara Goldberg, David
Striar, Moshe Dor and others.

Max Ticktin, Arthur Lesley and other scholars will offer workshops on the
roots of Jewish poetry.  An evening concert, BLOOD, SWEAT AND SHMALTZ, will
feature contemporary Jewish poetry reading and music.  For more information
e-mail to amkolel@aol.com with name and address or call 301-309-2310.  The
event is sponsored by Am Kolel, a Judaic resource and spiritual renewal
center, based in the Washington DC area.

Return to Table of Contents

"It is not our task as liberal Jews to complain about the Orthodox attitude or to be bullied by it, but rather to choose our legitimate path according to the inner logic and development of liberal Judaism" (Rabbi Walter Jacob)

Previous Issue: v7n20		Next Issue: v7n22
MLJ Home Page	Return to Retrieval Form