Culture, Identity, Politics, Religion

Orthodox, FTW?!

Is this the twilight zone? What parallel universe has Yeshiva University Chancellor Rabbi Norman Lamm been living in?
According to Lamm, Reform Judaism has never played a role in American Jewry, and Conservative barely has. And the increased membership in Reform congregations is only because when you “add goyim to Jews then you will do OK.”
He claims that only Modern Orthodox and Hareidim will play a role in the future of American Judaism. “The future of American Jewry is in the hands of haredim and the modern Orthodox. We have to find ways of working together.” He is wrong. No, the answer is not doing kiruv to Reform and Conservative Jews (and, no, those denominations are not about offering a “watered down” version of Judaism).
His opinions are arrogant, insulting, and completely out of touch with reality. That someone with his (potential) influence, overseeing a large institution of students, teachers, and future leaders, can spread such a twisted version of history is amazing. Had he said, “denominational Judaism was disappearing,” sure, I wouldn’t disagree. But the blurring of denominational affiliation, the rise in independent and unaffiliated communities, does not mean “Orthodox wins!”
(It also seems like Lamm was just looking forward to having a soapbox, as he took the opportunity to talk about the Pope, interfaith relations, and homosexuality as well.

46 thoughts on “Orthodox, FTW?!

  1. The National Jewish Population Survey of 2001 found that of the 46 percent of US Jewish households belonging to a synagogue, 33% were affiliated with a Conservative synagogue, a 10% fall from the 1990 survey. In contrast, the Reform Movement was up from 35% to 38% and Orthodox Jews rose from 16% to 22%. Two percent were affiliated with the Reconstructionist Movement and 5% with “other types” of synagogues.
    Sociologists familiar with US Jewry believe that similar trends continue.
    “Reform is out of the picture, because they never got into the picture, and the Conservatives are getting out of the picture,” Lamm said.

    According to my calculations, this still makes Orthodox the third-largest denomination. In that light, Lamm’s quote reminds me of what Yale alum Montgomery Burns said after the Harvard-Yale Game: “Honestly, Smithers, I don’t know why Harvard even bothers to show up. They barely even won.”

  2. Thanks for this critique of Lamm’s embarrassing statement. Missing, though, are a few choice words about YU’s blind trust of one Bernard Madoff, formerly the Treasurer of said institution, and now awaiting sentencing in what seems to be the biggest financial shande of American Jewish History. Surely not a case Lamm wants to remember.

  3. Actually, come to think of it, isn’t this more an example of the Jerusalem Post’s attack on Liberal American Jewish Values, like KRG’s “Is the Economy Killing off the Rabbinate?” last week? I mean, Lamm is a scholar and shouldn’t be saying things like that, but the JP is sensationalizing it in a way that other news organizations might not have done…

  4. an example of the Jerusalem Post’s attack on Liberal American Jewish Values
    Now you know how the rest of us Jews feel reading Haarets, Ynet, and every other lefty Jewish publication, when two words out of five hundred, taken out of context, mistranslated and converted to braille are sensationalized into “haredim bake children’s blood into matza!”.

  5. Thank you Feygele for bringing this to our attention.
    I wrote a full response in my blog:http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/conservative/entry/saying_kaddish_for_conservative_judaism
    Saying Kaddish for Conservative Judaism
    In his recent remarks to The Jerusalem Post, Rabbi Norman Lamm, the esteemed chancellor of Yeshiva University, pronounced the time near to say Kaddish [the prayer for the dead] for the Conservative and the Reform Movements.
    I shall leave it to the leaders of the Reform Movement to react to his criticism of their stream – I shall react to his criticism of Conservative/Masorti Judaism.
    Rabbi Lamm states, “The Conservatives are in a mood of despondency and pessimism.”
    I am not certain upon what he bases this assertion. I, for one, am optimistic and foresee a firm future for Judaism and for the Masorti Movement.
    I would take no solace in knowing that the numbers of any Movement were in decline, for each Movement has a valuable contribution to make to our people. But the Conservative Movement is well served by new dynamic leadership in almost all of its branches.
    Its Day Schools, summer camps, and Rabbinical Schools are at full capacity. The number of teens who visit and study in Israel is a source of pride.
    I am not comparing numbers with the Orthodox Movement or with the Reform Movement. Sociological circumstances impact on these statistics. Numbers can be misleading and Rabbi Lamm has fallen into the numbers trap.It is the dynamic nature of Masorti/Conservative Judaism that will ensure a bright tomorrow not only for its affiliated members, but for all Jews.
    Rabbi Lamm suggest that in time we may be ready for women to serve as rabbis. Why wait? It is the very openness of the non-Orthodox Movements to greater inclusion that will force the Orthodox to move in such a direction.
    Regarding women rabbis he states, “Women have just come into their own from an educational perspective. I would prefer not to have this innovation right now.”
    I am not sure in which reality Rabbi Lamm lives. Women have had equal access to Jewish learning in the non-Orthodox world for decades. Even in the Modern Orthodox world women have been studying at the highest level for quite a while. So I would ask Rabbi Lamm, “If not now-when?”
    The Jerusalem Post reported: “Regarding homosexuality among Orthodox Jewish men, Lamm said he drew a distinction between those who ‘kept it to themselves’ and those who ‘proselytized’.”
    Again I ask about Rabbi Lamm’s reality. Exactly where are these proselytizing Orthodox homosexuals about whom he speaks? I appreciate his effort to be respectful. I say that in full sincerity. But it is difficult to read an enlightened Rav speak in such archaic language.
    The Orthodox religious establishment is making itself increasingly irrelevant. Please take note that I am not suggesting that Orthodox Judaism is becoming irrelevant. But many of its institutions are.
    The brouhaha over the sale of lands during the Shmita year, the refusal of the Israeli Rabbinate to accept converts form most mainstream American Orthodox rabbis, the ugly reception given to the Pope during his visit to Israel by some leading rabbinic figures, the corruption in the area of Kashrut, the discrimination against Sephardi children in Haredi schools in Israel, the continuing plight of Agunot [refers to a woman whose husband disappeared while travelling or at war, or is physically unable to write her a binding get (i.e. he is in a coma or has a mental illness), but cannot be proven deceased”, Mavoi Satum definition; literally ‘chained’ or ‘anchored’], the refusal of the Orthodox establishment to accept rabbis who study at more progressive Yeshivot all bode poorly for drawing unaffiliated Jews close to the Orthodox world.
    I take no pleasure in the failings mentioned above. Rabbi Lamm, and others of his stature, have the power to ameliorate much of this, if only they could act boldly. But the much of the Orthodox world seems to defy the laws of physics. The harder they are pushed from the right – the more they move to the right.
    Of course there are shining exceptions. Here in Israel we have the rabbis of Tzohar who have riled the official Orthodox rabbinic establishment. So too Neemanei Torah V’Avoda. In North America the work of Rabbis Avi Weiss and Marc Angel provide a breath of fresh air.
    Rabbi Lamm says, “Change has to come to religion when feasible, but it should not be rushed.” On this we agree. But I see progress today as something quite feasible and even necessary.
    It was Mark Twain that said, “The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.” This is why I do not see Masorti Judaism as even vaguely close to the time when Kaddish will be recited. Instead, I believe it shall continue “from strength to strength.”

  6. R. Sacks, please don’t try to make the present brighter than it is. Masorti Jews have essentially no access to Jewish learning because many of them think its not something worth paying for. Lamm is being stupid, but that’s no excuse for lying about the problematic state of the Liberal movements (which is one of the main reasons people are joining Indy minyanim and prefer not to affiliate with movements).

  7. Now you know how the rest of us Jews feel reading Haarets, Ynet, and every other lefty Jewish publication, when two words out of five hundred, taken out of context, mistranslated and converted to braille are sensationalized into “haredim bake children’s blood into matza!”.
    Newspapers can definitely take things out of context and make people look stupid. But I’m afraid that in this case Rabbi Lamm has done it to himself. This isn’t “two words out of five hundred, taken out of context.” Rather, it’s a series of condescending attacks on Conservative and Reform and gay Jews. Multiple statements on the same subject can’t be written off as out of context or “translated into braille.”
    Also, Ynet as a lefty newspaper?! Snort.
    Says Lamm:

    “With a heavy heart we will soon say kaddish on the Reform and Conservative Movements,” said Lamm. [And I’m sure his heart is oh so heavy…]
    “The Reform Movement may show a rise, because if you add goyim to Jews then you will do OK,” added Lamm…
    “Reform is out of the picture, because they never got into the picture, and the Conservatives are getting out of the picture,” Lamm said.
    “The future of American Jewry is in the hands of haredim and the modern Orthodox. We have to find ways of working together.”

  8. Rabbi Andrew Sacks: Shalom. You frequently discuss problems you see with institutions in Israel that are run by the Orthodox. So if the title of your J Post blog was say, “Problems I have with Israeli run institutions run by the Orthodox.” I would feel more credibility towards you than when you write about these matters in a J Post blog titled, “Masorti Matters”. The problem with your blog is basically the same problem that has hurt the Conservative movement in many of its manifestations for a long long time. The C. movement keeps defining themselves by what they are not or what they are against instead of what they are for. It seems like in your current post, R. Sacks, you finally write at least a sentence or two about our own movement and unfortunatley you can’t even get that close to being correct. You find positives that Conservative day schools, summer camps and rabbinical schools are full. But someone who writes for our movement needs to be honest about real issues affecting parts of the movement that have been successes in the past but reality as we know it strongly suggests they won’t be in the near and long term future. Going forward for the forseeable future I think you know that our camps, day schools and rabbinical schools will suffer. So yes, today Ramah camps are full. And yes to this point they have been a bright spot for the C movement to show off. But let’s discuss the very real likelihood of so many families being turned down for scholarship money from Ramah and their local communities for this coming summer and in the future that I believe will take a huge toll on Ramah enrollment. You also bring up Conservative day school enrollement as something positive. Really? Mostly when I read articles lately about C. Day Schools I read about them closing down. I also read about C. Day Schools who were originally Solomon Scheter day schools that have now become Solomon Scheter “affiliated” day schools. To me that sounds like that in masse parents and teachers involved with these schools don’t really buy the movement’s vision for the education of their children. You also write about C. Rabbinical Schools being full. To me that makes sense for all the people who banked on the economy of previous times and the wealth that synagogues had in the past. Rabbi Sacks tell us how many Conservative synagogues you think can afford what Conservative rabbis expect to make these days? IMHO why should Conservative rabbis with pulpits expect to make significant money when the big issue that you Rabbi Sacks IMHO lack the cahones to ever mention in your blog are the obvious issues that lots of Conservative synagogues have significant fewer dues paying members than in the past and many of the people that even do pay dues refuse to show up to minyan or other events on any kind of regular basis. So Rabbi Sacks before you write another post on “Masorti Matters” can you please really start wrting on that topic in a truthful way? The relatively few Jews left in the pews in Conservative synagogues that care about C Judaism getting stronger like I do need leaders like you to discuss real visions about what our movement needs to do instead of spending all of our pulpit time denouncing what others say and do. And if you can’t do that Rabbi Sacks then please stop writing your blog and ask the J Post to find a Conservative rabbi that can write honestly about Masorti Matters. Shalom. Kishkeman

  9. To clarify a bit about Rabbi Lamm’s stance:
    Here at Jewschool we often analyze how jewish “movements” are doing- and we analyze their strengths and weaknesses as movements- ie. the institutions and official leadership that comprise the movement as a whole. At jewschool “movement” is a separate term from individual and local communal jewish practices (and I advocate for spreading the understanding of these distinctions).
    When Rabbi Lamm says a MOVEMENT is dying- he is not evaluating whether HUC is doing a good job, or if conservative synagogues are vibrant or dying- he is talking about the concept of Judaism that deviates from his view of halakha. So to him the distinction that many of us see between a large suburban synagogue that is gender egalitarian and an independent minyan that is gender egalitarian is non existant. Ie. I don’t think Rabbi Lam is saying that he thinks JTS is dying- he wants to say kaddish for “non-halakhic” (in his eyes) forms of Judaism bc he thinks they’ve failed to provide sustainable or meaningful Jewish life. And since he sees no difference, he is therefore able to say that Orthodoxy will obviously lead the way, as opposed to imagining that some other institutes could emerge as leaders of liberal varieties of Judaism.
    While its fair to be offended at Rabbi Lamm’s statements (you don’t have to love a movement to think its pretty hubristic for him to make such sweeping generalizations) , and its fine to use them as a jumping point to talk about how movements are doing and how developments in Orthodoxy will effect non-Ortho Judaism (classic Jewschool discussion)- I think for clarity’s sake its important to point out that Rabbi Lamm sees weaknesses in the movements as indictments of all non Ortho Judaism’s viability.

  10. MS says:
    When Rabbi Lamm says a MOVEMENT is dying- he is not evaluating whether HUC is doing a good job, or if conservative synagogues are vibrant or dying- he is talking about the concept of Judaism that deviates from his view of halakha
    Fair enough. But if that’s really what he’s saying, he’s even more out of touch than it seems on the face of it. Some of the institutions of liberal Judaism may not be doing so well, but the concepts of liberal Judaism are alive and well.

  11. One of the reasons David Ben Gurion acceded to so much Orthodox hegemony in Israeli life was that he thought that within a generation, Orthodoxy would die. He was wrong.
    And if David Ben Gurion could be wrong, why not Norman Lamm?
    The difference is that B-G had something immediate to gain by mollifying the Orthodox. Lamm, on the other hand, has nothing to gain but something to lose — a reputation for intellect and rationality.
    Unfortunately, liberal Jews who look at the Orthodox as the guarantors of the Jewish future give them more credibility than they deserve. It’s the members of the liberal movements who built an environment in which Jews can thrive at all levels of practice.
    If he really said what he is quoted as saying, Lamm puts himself in the category of the proud mother watching the military parade and announcing, “Everybody’s out of step except my Willie.”

  12. rooftopper- exactly the point.
    He is out of touch (shockingly) and somehow thinks that the enrollment numbers at a shechter or whatnot are indication of whether or not liberal jewry will continue to exist.
    I just wanted to point out that when Rabbi Lamm says “the conservative movement is about to die” and an indie minyan goer says the same thing they mean entirely different things.
    and since Rabbi Lamm probably mainly interacts with liberal jews who semi affiliate with orthodoxy due to outreach institutions- they probably reaffirm his ideas that “there is no future or community in liberal judaism.”
    and LK- rabbi Lamm does have something to gain. for every liberal jew out there who wants something different out of Judaism and feels that their local synagogue is dying- they now have inspiration to turn to the movement that “does it right” and the one that will be the future of Judaism.

  13. Amit accuses me of “lying about the problematic state of the Liberal movements.”
    Amit may not care for my perspective or for my spin-but to accuse me of lying? Shame on you Amit!
    It was stated above by Kishkeman that “Rabbi Sacks IMHO lack the cahones to ever mention in your blog…”
    No need to get down and dirty in this manner.
    I am among the first to admit to the shortcomings of the Conservative Movement. And I have written essays on the subject. You need only look at the many publications where they have appeared.
    But this is not what I do with my blog. But you should feel free to blog away about the shortcomings of the Conservative Movement if that would make you happy.
    You sate: IMHO why should Conservative rabbis with pulpits expect to make significant money …
    Well, maybe because they work hard in an effort to bring people close to Judaism following many years of expensive education.
    Maybe because “Ein Torah” without “Kemach” (parnasa).
    I would also add that with all of the difficulties within the Conservative Movement – there are many positives. My point is not “see how great Conservative Judaism is.” My point is that it is not time to say Kaddish.
    In addition- I feel all of the Movements have have serious failures. The seeming glee with which Rav Lamm speaks of the irrelevance of non-Orthodox Judaism is troublesome. So too his approach to feminism and to Gays.
    The so-called Modern/Zionist Orthodox rabbinate has been denied legitimacy by the Orthodox establishment. This is bad for the Jewish people.
    RCA rabbis may not have their conversions accepted by the State of Israel. So too rabbis who have been ordained at Hovevei (I am not speculating. I work closely with the Interior Ministry).
    I truly have nothing against Orthodox Judaism. Quite the contrary.
    I take issue with a triumphant feeling of exclusive truth and what I feel is a crude sociological understanding of feminist and Gay issues.
    Rav Lamm is a seminal figure in Judaism today. I think he erred in some of his remarks.
    But if Rav Lamm wishes to say Kaddish- at least he recognizes us all as Jews.

  14. Rabbi Andrew Sacks: Again your blog is called Masorti Matters. Yet you respond that you don’t write about Masorti Matters on your blog. So in fact you are misrepresenting the spirit of the blog every time you write on this blog. So in IMHO you show a lack of morals taking that attitude. (Is that a fairer way to get down and dirty in your eyes? That I a Conservative Jew thinks a Conservative rabbi is showing a lack of morals.) Why should anyone take you seriously when a blog you write called Masorti Matters that consistently is only just a sound off for whatever your pet peeve is with Orthodoxy. Let me tell you that I think that attitude of yours really stinks. And it’s disgraceful that you are the one given the honor of discussing the Masorti/Conservative view when you personally don’t wish to write about Masorti Matters. You say you have written elsewhere about the shortcomings of the C. Movement. Where exactly are these writings? It could be good fodder to hoist you on your own petard in the future. Or will you ignore that request?
    IMHO Conservative Rabbis as a whole are not working hard enough to bring Jews closer to Judaism. The empty pews, the declining memberships, the desire by those who are left to add more reforms, and the high intermarriage rates all point to that. Worth their money? Hardly.

  15. You might be irritated, Kishkeman, but it’s really a bit hyberbolic to say that Rabbi Sacks’ choice of blog topics is “lacking morals.” Also, while I can’t comment specifically on Rabbi Sacks’ blog because I haven’t read it, I can comment on what it’s like to be a non-Orthodox Jew living in Israel. I can tell you that you spend waaaaaayy more time thinking about, interacting with, and butting heads with Orthodox Judaism and Orthodox state establishments than a liberal Jew ever typically does in the US. It’s just how it works when you’re trying to be Jewish in a way that the state frowns on and tries to make difficult. So maybe Rabbi Sacks’ blog makes sense given its context.
    IMHO Conservative Rabbis as a whole are not working hard enough to bring Jews closer to Judaism. The empty pews, the declining memberships, the desire by those who are left to add more reforms, and the high intermarriage rates all point to that. Worth their money? Hardly.
    1. There are gazillions of Conservative rabbis “working hard… to bring Jews closer to Judaism” who happen not to be working in pulpits.
    2. It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that you think that the sole responsibility for preventing intermarriage and declining shul membership, etc. should fall on the rabbi. That belief reflects a model in which community members act like consumers and anything Jewish that happens (for good or ill) happens because the rabbi makes it happen. This is neither sustainable (viz. your post) nor sane. See havurah Judaism and Orthodoxy for other, more viable models.

  16. It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that Conservative Rabbis primarily opt for making so many concepts into halachic realities that in fact destroy the short and long term fabric of their communities.
    It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that Conservative Rabbis primarily don’t admit when their new reforms have gone too far to the point that a lot of people simply opt not to show up or go to a reform or indy minyan shul because they can implement those reforms better than Conservative rabbis and their institutions can.
    It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that in general all the rabbis of the movement are on board with the hechser tezdeck while pretty much doing nothing to promote the welfare of other employees in their own institutions. If the janitor or the preschool teacher in a Conservative synagogue isn’t provided with health care benefits then neither should the rabbis and cantors. Period.
    It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that the whole Hechser Tzedek movement has taken up so much time and energy in our collective thought and yet to date the Hechser Tzedek has yet to stamp it’s approval on any product or plant.
    It’s a failure of the Conservative movement that rabbis and cantors feel that $100,000+ salaries like the one my local Conservative shul is offering for a senior rabbi and a cantor and we hardly have any takers. How my shul can offer such a salary while we consistently decline in numbers is bewildering to me. How Conservative rabbis and cantors looking for a job today feel that they deserve or can get any better is also amusing. To me Conservative Rabbis and Cantors are very disconnected with the laity. What are they teaching you at your seminaries to create such ineptness?

  17. Kishkeman,
    So what are you doing to make your Shul/Congregation/Community a better one? What have you tried that worked or didn’t? How many Conservative congregations have you visited in the past year?

  18. ML: I’m have a degree from JTS. I’ve been to plenty of shuls of all denominations over several decades. I do a lot for my local Conservative shul where I live. But what I am most proud of is that I am not afraid to speak the truth as a caring Conservative Jew because I have lived a lifetime as a caring Conservative Jew. Even when it hurts.
    One thing I’ve done on my own level that does work, that I have implemented with of course my wife’s equal help, is to recognize that the Conservative movement’s current mandate that men and women are equally obligated to pray three times a day is incredibily impractical and it hurt the fabric of our family life for a long time. After spending years under the spell that egalitarianism in davening is the only way things can work, we came to the sober idea that only one of us could take the time to daven 3 times a day while other parenting responsibilities gets done by the other person during davening times. So I thank my wife a lot for helping us get to that point. Does that put me out of the big tent of Conservative Judaism? For the militant egal wing? yes. Do I think they are wrong? yes. But I know my local Conservative shul is still thankful to have my tush in a seat among the rows and rows of empty pews around us. Apparently the militant egal wing also has better things to do with their day when it’s minyan time. So why should I care what they think?
    If there is anything else I can help you out with ML let me know. Thanks. Kishkeman.

  19. Kishkeman writes:
    One thing I’ve done on my own level that does work, that I have implemented with of course my wife’s equal help, is to recognize that the Conservative movement’s current mandate that men and women are equally obligated to pray three times a day is incredibily impractical and it hurt the fabric of our family life for a long time.
    Meaning that lots of Conservative Jewish children are neglected because their parents are off davening all the time?
    After spending years under the spell that egalitarianism in davening is the only way things can work, we came to the sober idea that only one of us could take the time to daven 3 times a day while other parenting responsibilities gets done by the other person during davening times. So I thank my wife a lot for helping us get to that point.
    So you’re taking care of the kids while your wife goes to minyan?

  20. BZ says: Meaning that lots of Conservative Jewish children are neglected because their parents are off davening all the time?
    I say: The children aren’t being neglected. But davening is. The only egalitarian aspect I see to the davening in my local Conservative shul is that neither of the two parents are davening. As parents we need to find ways to fit in both.
    BZ’s 2nd question: So you’re taking care of the kids while your wife goes to minyan?
    My answer: On Shabbat the answer is yes because I go to an early minyan on Shabbat she goes to the regular minyan and we take turns with the parenting. On Weekdays no. I go. Except of course when the poopy diaper needs to be changed or if the baby is sick etc. The baby comes first. Comes last. And because of that when things are normal around the house, the baby should see a parent that makes davening a priority and a parent that makes the house a priority. Sometimes we get lucky and we get a babysitter and me and the Mrs. can both go to minyan. If you ever want to help with the babysitting BZ please let me know. Thanks. Kishkeman

  21. I say: The children aren’t being neglected. But davening is. The only egalitarian aspect I see to the davening in my local Conservative shul is that neither of the two parents are davening. As parents we need to find ways to fit in both.
    That may hurt the quality of the davening, but how does it “hurt the fabric of family life”? Also, it’s not just parents of young children who are avoiding davening at Conservative shuls — this is something that unites all age groups.

  22. …. Do you even know what FTW means?!
    See, I thought it was Lamm was saying Orthodox will win out over the other movements (Orthodox, FTW), but the question mark and exclamation point was feygele adding a WTF to the FTW. No?

  23. BZ: When ML asked me what I was doing to try to make my shul/community a better one and what I have tried that worked or didn’t, I said that for my wife and I trying to reach the current Conservative bar of both men and women davening three times a day hurt the fabric of our – meaning me and my wife’s – family life.
    I wasn’t attempting to discuss how Conservative Judaism’s bar of men and women both being obligated to daven 3 times a day effects any other family. Though to be honest, I’ve wondered how Mrs. Schorsch would have felt if Chancellor Schorsch instituted that ruiling while they were still raising the kids instead of waiting until the mid 90s to invoke it.

  24. Kishkeman,
    I appreciate your work and your forthrightness. I guess I’m not sure what exactly constitutes “militant egalitarianism.” I thought in the Conservative movement that meant you thought men and women should be equal insofar that both could produce Jews, rather than just Jewish women. (The “Is matrilineal descent egalitarian” argument.)
    Are men obligated to perform all of the mitzvot that were traditionally in the woman’s realm, or is it a one way street?

  25. Kishkeman says:
    IMHO Conservative Rabbis as a whole are not working hard enough to bring Jews closer to Judaism. The empty pews… all point to that.
    and Kishkeman says:
    One thing I’ve done on my own level that does work…is to recognize that the Conservative movement’s current mandate that men and women are equally obligated to pray three times a day is incredibily impractical
    Just pointing out that, as it seems from your own words, one of those “empty pews” is due to a particular arrangement you’ve made with your wife. Nothing to do with the rabbi.

  26. Rooftopper:You aren’t worth the title of Rav when you try to put me and my wife down because we don’t both come to daily minyan while trying to care for our child. We have enough respect for a minyan that we don’t consider a minyan to be daycare. And the people who do show for the minyan appreciate that we get that concept too. Maybe you haven’t been fortunate enough to try to care for a child while being wrapped in talit and tefilin. But I have been blessed to have that opportunity. And early on I learned the obvious. The baby’s care always comes first. But I will also say while I care for the baby that I can’t daven at the same time. I freely admit that. My question to you is Who can? And furthermore why can’t you appreciate a family where one parent goes to minyan on a regular basis? One of us getting to shul is better than the bunch of families who get zero people to shul. It appears that you can’t appreciate a wife who gives her husband the opportunity to go to minyan on a regular basis. And you can’t appreciate a husband who goes to an early minyan on Shabbat so his wife can daven at the regular minyan at least on Shabbat and spend time with her friends and community at least on that day while I take the main responsibility for parenting during that time? And you are supposed to be a Rav? Yeah Right. Rooftopper Rav: Another failure of Conservative Judaism.

    1. Kishkeman-
      How do you know that the other people who don’t go to minyan don’t also have a valid reason not to be there? It seems that you’re displaying the actor-observer bias — when it’s about you and your family, there’s a valid justification, but when it’s about other people, it’s a failure of Conservative Judaism.

  27. BZ: Like I said earlier I don’t see the militant egal community, and it sounds like you are one of them, hardly ever showing up to minyan on anything near a regular basis. So why should I care about criticism from those places when at least I (with the help of the Mrs.) continue to go to minyan on a regular basis and they don’t?
    I can think of a lot of excuses not to get to minyan on a regular basis. But this is what the tradition demands of us. And I try to mold my life to what the tradition demands of my family and me. We do what we can so we don’t make the tradition fit us. Because when the tradition is continually molded to the needs of the people and rabbis follow the whims of the laity, instead of standing up for tradtion, you get chaos, empty spirituality, fewer desires to ever show up to shul. In essence you get what Conservative Judaism looks like in a lot of places today.
    BTW: I read in today’s New York Jewish Week about another group called Bonim that wants to do away with the USCJ. If anyone associated with them is reading this, please let me know how I can support your efforts.

    1. Like I said earlier I don’t see the militant egal community, and it sounds like you are one of them
      I’m not “militant” because I’m not fighting — my communities are already egal.
      Because when the tradition is continually molded to the needs of the people and rabbis follow the whims of the laity, instead of standing up for tradtion, you get chaos, empty spirituality, fewer desires to ever show up to shul.
      If nobody is interested in showing up, the logical inference is that the community is insufficiently meeting the needs of the people, not meeting those needs too much.

  28. Kishkeman:
    Wow. I very deliberately made no comment about what I thought of your davening arrangement with your wife. What I wanted to point out was how your two statements were inconsistent with one another. On one hand you blame rabbis for empty pews, and on the other hand you name a reason why someone in your family is missing from shul that has nothing to do with the rabbi.
    I’m pretty taken aback by your ad hominem attack.

  29. My point was that if in the spirit of egalitarianism, both men and women are required to pray three times a day, why not in that same spirit, exempt both from the requirement for the duty of taking care of small children?
    It still always seems to me that the egal thing is a one way street.

  30. A couple of observations to add:
    Orthodoxy (in whatever form) may well end up winning the battle of numbers. Not because of intellectual, spiritual or moral leadership (it has none of these), but simply because of demographics (younger, larger families) and more success at transmitting their heritage to the next generation.
    Denominational Judaism as we know it today will indeed disappear, or at least change dramatically. I’m sure that in a few years only two “denominations” will remain; Halachic and non-Halachic Judaism (in Orthodox terms), backward and progressive Judaism in my terms. Sadly, Modern Orthodoxy will not be one of the survivors; by constantly deferring to the Haredim, it has lost its way, undermined its own reason for existence.
    I look forward to a bright future for progressive Judaism in all its forms, provided it embraces Jewish literacy (Day Schools, Hebrew Charter Schools, “Sunday Schools”, etc.) and begins to put more emphasis on continuity and the Jewish family (including and perhaps even especially those in “inter-faith relationships”).
    Let’s hope that all the progress that has been made since the Emancipation and Enlightenment to make Judaism a religion of reason and conscience will not be undone because we’re not having a couple of kids and bringing them up in our faith. Raising a single Asian orphan is not a good model for the progressive Jewish family of the future.

  31. My point was that if in the spirit of egalitarianism, both men and women are required to pray three times a day, why not in that same spirit, exempt both from the requirement for the duty of taking care of small children?
    Lots of men and women are already exempt from the duty of taking care of small children — viz., men and women who don’t have small children. It doesn’t make sense to generalize to an entire gender because of a situation that only affects some people (and even if you do, it doesn’t cover all cases — what do single fathers do?).

  32. Do Progreesive movements see themselves as non-Halachic, Maskil?
    Also, is there no legitimate intellectual, spiritual, or moral leadership in Orthodoxy?

  33. I don’t understand how we decided that the bad guys in this world were rabbis trying to make a decent living (i.e. on a par with their congregants) instead of Lamm. THe conservative movement has problems, but rabbis’ salaries aren’t one of them (unless they’re too low). It’s easy to lambast the weakest link of the chain.

  34. em wrote: See, I thought it was Lamm was saying Orthodox will win out over the other movements (Orthodox, FTW), but the question mark and exclamation point was feygele adding a WTF to the FTW. No?
    Exactly.

  35. Amit, thanks. I thought the comments on Lamm’s accuracy were interesting… and found the disparaging remarks about Conservative movement rabbis, and then Rooftopper Rav specifically, to be a hijack of this post. Which is fine, except when it becomes personal and insulting. I remind everyone commenting on Jewschool that by submitting a comment, you’re agreeing to attack a point of view, but never the person who expresses that point of view.

  36. ML-
    R. Ethan Tucker, in a shiur at DC Minyan, quoted a source that allowed widowed men with children, who are actively taking care of the children, to miss davening. He suggested that this could apply to any father actively taking care of his children.
    Also, there are charedi communities that require women to daven, kids or no kids, and suggest that the father watch the kids while she davens.

  37. Ooops. I meant to write this:
    My point was that if in the spirit of egalitarianism, both men and women are required to pray three times a day, why not in that same spirit, exempt both from the requirement for the duty of davening if they have children to care for?

  38. @ Jonathan1
    The way it’s usually explained to me is that outside of Orthodoxy, Halacha has a vote but not a veto. Hence I see this as the dividing line, rather than issues of ritual or observance.
    That was a very broad, sweeping statement I made, and like all such statements it contains an element of unfairness. No doubt some figures, institutions and trends within Orthodoxy do show leadership, but these are hugely overshadowed by the face of Orthodoxy many of us see, e.g. fastidious adherence to ritual accompanied by low moral standards, disdain for the Other (non-Jew or non-observant Jew), superstition, Biblical literalism, rejection of other interpretations of Judaism and concern for only the interests of Orthodoxy rather than the wider Jewish community. Certainly not what I’m looking for when it comes to Jewish leadership.

  39. Maskil writes:
    The way it’s usually explained to me is that outside of Orthodoxy, Halacha has a vote but not a veto.
    The original line from R. Mordecai Kaplan is “The past has a vote but not a veto.” That’s not the same as halachah. When we do new things that depart from how they’ve been done in the past, that too is halachah.
    Biblical literalism
    There are a lot of things to say about Orthodox biblical interpretation, but “literalism” is not one of them. Exhibit A: Don’t cook a kid in its mother’s milk.

  40. @BZ Many thanks for replying. Your learned responses are helpful in clarifying exactly what it is I’m trying to say.
    Reform and Halacha. Far too many progressive Jews (even Reform Rabbis) see Halacha as something owned and operated by Orthodoxy, and are reluctant to take issue with aspects of it (at least theologically, if not in practice). This reluctance to depart too radically from Orthodox Halacha simply ends up deligitimising progressive Judaism, and sends the message that we don’t really feel we have the right to tamper with things as they are. (Reform Judaism in SA, for example, now recognises and performs marriages between LGBT couples, but has made no move to recognise so-called Patrilineal Jews in the way that Reform in the US does.) This to me smacks of fear that if we go too far somehow, Orthodoxy will “divorce” us. Once again we deligitimise our own movements and hand the crown back to Orthodoxy.
    Biblical Literalism. The example I was thinking of is Creationism, which is now increasingly being adopted by the Haredi/Hassidic end of the spectrum, apparently aping (excuse the pun) their Christian Fundamentalist counterparts. I agree, though, that Biblical literalism has never been held much ground in Orthodoxy or mainstream Judaism prior to Orthodoxy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.