Getting more Jewish kids into day schools

The Jewish Exponent (serving the Jewish community of Greater Philadelphia) recently carried an article concerning a tuition reduction scheme being piloted at the local Perelman Jewish Day Schools. The initiative is spearheaded by venture capitalist David Magerman’s Kohelet Foundation. (I won’t get into the details of the tuition discounts, which are covered within Bryan Schwartzman’s article.)

Similar programs also exist in communities such as Cleveland, Massachusetts and Seattle.

The article mentioned a 2003 Boston survey indicating a strong interest in Jewish day schools amongst 18% of Jewish parents, but a reluctance to sacrifice academics or extra-curricular activities to send kids there. According to the article, the following factors are inhibiting a wider adoption of the day schools model by Jewish parents (as the parent of a child of school-going age, this list certainly resonates with me):

• Affordability (almost certainly the #1 issue)
• The quality of the secular education and extra-curricular activities
• Exposure to diversity
• General ambivalence towards Jewish identity

Is it possible to come up with a Jewish day schools model that will address all these factors, leading to much wider availability and adoption of this education option? I believe that it is feasible, provided that we redefine our community priorities and responsibilities when it comes to Jewish education.

What do I mean by this? The benefits of Jewish literacy accrue to the entire Jewish community over the lifetime of the individual and beyond. The costs of this literacy, however, are incurred almost entirely by the parents over the +/-12 years of schooling. These costs are in many cases incurred at a time when the parents are at their most stretched financially (young, growing family, study debt, early stages of career, etc.).

I’m therefore suggesting that if we want parents to send their children to Jewish day schools, the financial burden needs to be picked up by the entire community, not absorbed solely by the parents. In fact, provision of such an education to whoever wants it should be seen as one of the (if not THE) most important functions of the community; a cornerstone responsibility.

If not free, cost should certainly not be an inhibiting or prohibitive factor when it comes to Jewish day school education.

The quality of secular education and extra-curricular activities can be addressed by means of standards, monitoring and inspection at local, state or national levels to ensure a uniformly high standard. In addition, if education is given the priority it deserves by the community, the recruitment of qualified, experienced and dedicated staff becomes easier.

Exposure to diversity might be more difficult (but not impossible) to achieve. The issue of Jewish diversity must first be addressed. Day schools should offer a “Highest Common Factor” Jewish curriculum, focusing on Hebrew and Jewish culture, civilisation and history. Such a curriculum should find acceptance across almost the entire Jewish spectrum (apart from the Orthodox end of the scale), based on the premise that beliefs should be addressed in the home and the synagogue, not the classroom. Admission should be open to so-called sociological Jews (those with only one (either) Jewish parent), as well as to non-Jews agreeing to study the Jewish curriculum. Exposure to diversity in the wider sense could be achieved by a full and enthusiastic involvement in the local community, joint activities with other schools, and just plain effort.

The only issue that this community day schools initiative can’t address is that of the general ambivalence towards Jewish identity. I think most would agree that this is outside the scope of this project, although we would hope to raise a generation of graduates for whom this ambivalence is much less of a factor.

What about those who are not ready to commit to a fully-fledged Jewish day school education, but do want some exposure to their Jewish heritage? Why not leverage the investment and available resources by offering an after-hours Hebrew and Jewish studies program to those attending public or other private schools? Programs could be offered at both basic and advanced levels; the basic requiring a commitment of 1-2 afternoons a week, with the advanced requiring 3 or more. Adult education programs could be offered in a similar fashion.

Neither Judaism in the religious sense, nor a secular Jewish culture or civilisation can exist for long without a minimum level of Jewish literacy. As a people, we should be in a position to offer free, universal Jewish day school education to every Jewish child anywhere in the world. If we can’t get that right within the next generation or so, it puts a huge question mark over our commitment and the commitment of our community structures and institutions to Jewish survival and growth.

Related posts:

• Cafe Birkenreis: Israeli expatriates leading the way with day schools?
• Altneuland: The best investment in Jewish continuity
• Altneuland: The Haredisation of Jewish Education in SA
• Altneuland: Needed: A Big Tent approach to worldwide Jewish education
• Altneuland: Hebrew Charter Schools: Sit up and pay attention
• Cafe Birkenreis: Federal funding for Jewish day schools: The best of all possible worlds?

Netzer effectively banned at King David Schools

This article on the SAUPJ (SA Union for Progressive Judaism) website highlights the controversy surrounding what is effectively a ban against Netzer (the Reform youth group) activities at King David Schools (KDS) – the flagship schools of the SA Board of Jewish Education (SABJE) - in Gauteng.

My initial reaction? Disgusted but not surprised.

Due to a unique set of circumstances - and unlike elsewhere in the English-speaking world – Orthodoxy came to be exclusively identified with Judaism in SA. While Progressive Judaism and Reform Jews participated fully in Jewish life and institutions in SA, they did so provided that they “knew their place”, i.e. did not attempt to upset the status quo that regarded Orthodoxy as normative Judaism.

Rather than being content with this status quo, however, it appears that official Orthodoxy is doing everything it can to squeeze Progressive Judaism (and Reform Jews qua Reform Jews) out of Jewish institutional life. This is pretty much to be expected, and occurs wherever Orthodoxy tends to dominate Jewish public life (Israel being the prime example). It is also the opposite of what generally occurs in the Western Democracies, where cooperation and pluralism tend to prevail.

Perhaps it’s a good thing that matters have come to a head in this way, with the SAUPJ having now set up an online petition calling for Netzer’s access to KDS to be restored. To my mind, however, this still doesn’t go far enough.

I would actually like to see the Progressive community call on the SABJE to re-constitute all the Jewish day schools for which it is responsible (including KDS) as general community or pluralistic (rather than Orthodox) day schools. It should also withdraw support for schools that cater to only one part of the community (albeit currently the majority).

Failing this, the SABJE should be called on to reconstitute itself as the SABOE (SA Board of Orthodox Education) or SABHE (SA Board of Haredi Education), and a new, pluralist SABJE should then be established.

The Pluralist SABJE should call on all those within the Jewish community who espouse a pluralist approach to Judaism to withdraw all financial and other support from KDS, and establish a non-denominational Jewish day schools network, initially in Gauteng.

Support for such a network is likely to come not just from current KDS pupils, but also from those enrolled at secular and multi-cultural private schools such as Crawford and Eden, which currently perform the role that a non-denominational Jewish day schools network should be fulfilling. It is also likely that even students currently enrolled at government schools would be attracted to an open, pluralistic approach to Jewish education in SA.

One thing is clear, however: Things cannot be allowed to remain as they are. As I said in one of my previous pieces on this subject, “Jewish education is too important to be left in the hands of a cabal of Orthodox rabbis”.

The next institution to be tackled in the same manner is the SAJBoD (SA Jewish Board of Deputies), the SABJE’s silent partner in these shenanigans. The SAJBoD claims to speak on behalf of all of SA Jewry, but appears to do little to promote cooperation and tolerance between denominations in issues such as this.

Oh, and please don’t forget to sign the petition here, or join the Facebook group here.

Yesher Koach to The Movement for Quality Government in Israel

According this recent article in the Jerusalem Post:

The Movement for Quality Government … petitioned the High Court of Justice to order the government to stop subsidizing haredi elementary schools that are not recognized by the state and are not under its supervision.

… the Ministry of Education allocates each year more than NIS 170 million to haredi elementary schools, known as talmudei torah, which are not part of the recognized Independent education and Ma'ayan Hachinuch Hatorani haredi streams, even though there is no legal basis for the funding.

"If Israel is based on the rule of law, this situation cannot continue. Not only does it transfer millions of shekels of public money without a legal basis... [the state] transfers the funds to a private body which has no experience or training in supervising the spending of the funds and whose interests are not identical with the public interest," the petition says.

Recently, the Knesset passed a law obliging the state to allocate to yeshivot [haredi secondary schools similar in age group to state high schools] 60 percent of the funding that it grants state secular and religious schools, even though the yeshivot refuse to teach the core curriculum.

Anyone who cares about the future of a rational Judaism, the Jewish people and a secure and just Israel should applaud this move on the part of an organisation doing what the various arms of government itself should be, and are failing - in fact not even attempting - to do.

I firmly believe that not one shekel of public funds (or one dollar of donated funds) should be diverted to support schools that are not controlled and supervised by the education ministry. The fact that they exist should be enough, but they need to be paid for entirely by those who utilise them, not out of funds diverted (misappropriated might be a better word) from the treasury. The Israeli taxpayer should not be subject to this form of “double taxation” by being forced to pay for both a public and various private educational systems.

The same discipline and controls need to be applied to donations from abroad, etc., unless the funds have been specifically raised for the purpose of subsidising Haredi education, with the knowledge and permission of donors.

At the same time, however, the Jewish content of the state educational system needs to be reinforced in a pluralistic manner, that gives weight to other ways and interpretations of Judaism and Jewish culture.

There is a word for the redirecting of public funds to private purposes: that word is corruption. We all owe a debt of gratitude to The Movement for Quality Government in Israel for tackling this abuse head on. Show your support for what the MQG is attempting to do by joining (and contributing, if you are in a position to do so) here.

Technorati Tags: Corruption,Education,Movement for Quality Government

Stand Up for Reform Judaism in Israel!

The IRAC (Israel Religious Action Centre) of the Israeli Movement for Progressive Judaism has prepared a petition which will be sent to President Shimon Peres. The petition calls for the State of Israel to officially recognize Rabbi Miri Gold, who serves as the Rabbi of Birkat Shalom congregation in Kibbutz Gezer.

If you’ve no wish to read any further, please click here to be taken to the online petition. You can sign up for the interesting and informative weekly IRAC e-newsletter (The Pluralist) at the same time.

For those who want the complete story, here it is as per the official IRAC petition website. I think it’s important enough to be quoted in full:

Rabbi Miri Gold has served as the Rabbi of Birkat Shalom congregation in Kibbutz Gezer since her ordination as a Reform Rabbi by the Hebrew Union College in 1999. 16 other local rabbis serve the area of the Gezer regional council and receive a State salary. Rabbi Miri Gold, who serves the entire region, is not recognized by the State because she is a Reform rabbi. Out of the thousands of rabbis recognized by the State of Israel there is not a single Reform rabbi!

It is time for a change – it is time for recognition!

In 2005 The Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism filed an appeal with the Israeli Supreme Court through the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC), demanding that Rabbi Miri Gold is recognized by the State. The court has ordered the State to present the criteria according to which rabbis are recognized. To this day the State has not replied. This fall we hope that the State will present an equal and just set of criteria, such that is accepted by the Supreme Court.

Recognition of Rabbi Miri Gold by the State of Israel means a true breakthrough, a precedent leading to the recognition of hundreds of rabbis from liberal streams in Judaism. Please join the struggle and sign this petition.

We, too, are Jewish. We, too, deserve Rabbis

A call for the State of Israel to officially recognize Rabbi Miri Gold

We the undersigned believe the time is long overdue for our nation to recognize that there is more than one way to practice Judaism and to acknowledge the value and importance of supporting spiritual leaders of all denominations to the stability and growth of our communities and our quality of life.

Whereas

1. Despite being the most popular and effective rabbi in the Gezer region, Rabbi Miri Gold is the only one who does not receive a salary from the State;
2. Rabbi Gold is denied equal status solely because she is female and Reform;
3. In 2005 Rabbi Gold, along with the Israel Religious Action Center, petitioned the Supreme Court for recognition, however the Court has repeatedly delayed making a decision.;
4. Though only 17% of Jews in Israel identify as Orthodox and 12% as traditional, Orthodox rabbis are the only ones recognized, and therefore, funded by the government.; and
5. The spiritual needs of 71% of Israelis are going unmet and even being denied, a form of brazen discrimination against liberal Jews.

Therefore - We urgently call on you to

1. Recognize immediately Miri Gold as an official rabbi of the Gezer Community and
2. Apply government funding to support the work of Rabbi Miri Gold and her peers, and to equally support all streams of Judaism in the spirit of Klal Yisrael, thereby fulfilling the religious pluralism and freedom that should be the hallmarks of the only Jewish and democratic state.

Even if you’ve never signed another online petition in your life, please sign this one!

IRAC - Petition

Impressions of Limmud South Africa 2008

It’s almost a week since Limmud SA’s 2008 all-day session on Sunday, 31 August. I don’t think I’ve digested the whole experience yet, but I just wanted to capture some comments and impressions before they dissipate in the heat of other priorities.

I haven’t seen any official statistics yet, but the event was well attended; I would venture to say very well attended. I’m guessing that 2007’s attendance figures (as well as the estimates for 2008) were exceeded by a comfortable margin. There was also a “vibe”, a “buzz”, something that wouldn’t show up in the numbers.

In a previous post, I discussed the SA Orthodox rabbinate’s decision to boycott Limmud. I experienced Limmud as a festival, a celebration of Jewish culture and learning, exploration and discovery. Quite frankly, I can’t see how they could have added value, while their disapproving presence would have just soured the event for many. I look forward to their absence from next year’s event as well. (The boycott was the subject of one of the sessions, but quite frankly I wasn’t that interested.)

The standard of the sessions was exceptionally high. I only attended one lecture that disappointed somewhat (no names, no pack drill). I came away with a whole lot of new insights, like Gershom Gorenberg’s observation about the “division of duties” between the observant and the secular, with the former attending to ritual while the latter have adopted social justice as their “observance”. Needless to say, I believe the latter is the authentic Jewish way…

Now we just need some sort of “virtual presence” mode, so we can attend all the sessions, instead of having to choose between them. (That’s a joke.)

There was also a marvelous full-day track for kids. Unfortunately we’d already made other arrangements for our daughter, because I know the activities would have been right up her street. We’ll know for next time.

Talking about next time, reminder to self: take along a backpack or day pack to hold all the usual conference stuff, and still have both hands free (when exploring the shuq, for instance).

The event was run entirely by volunteers and was, to my mind, extremely well organized. I have no criticisms to make; just a couple of suggestions for the future that I hope to pass onto them for next year:

The ecological footprint of the event was probably relatively small. One thing I did notice, though (at both the refreshment stations and the cafeteria), was “genuine” garbage, leftover food and the plastic crockery/cutlery disappearing into the same garbage bags. If there was any intention of recycling, this would obviously make it a whole lot more difficult and unpleasant. I would suggest setting up (assisted?) stations where delegates can scrape leftovers into one receptacle and drop recyclables into another.

The final programme distributed on registration included times, speakers, subjects, rooms, etc., but just not the “track”, e.g. Art & Culture, Spirituality, Torah. This was only included in the Conference 2008 Handbook. Please could we have the track on the programme as well? Perhaps also include a version or release number on the programme, so delegates can ensure they’re referring to the latest.

One of the spinoffs of Limmud for me is that I’ve resolved to attend at least two Jewish cultural or educational events each month. They’re out there, usually free, usually of a high standard. You just have to make the effort to attend.

Kol Hakavod to everyone involved in either organizing or sponsoring this event. May it go from strength to strength in South Africa. We really need the break from the drabness, dourness and sameness that is increasingly characterizing Jewish society here.

p.s. I’ve sometimes wondered whether I’m imagining it, but this time I took careful note: Jews will stop anywhere, anytime and have a conversation! On the stairs, in a doorway, in the middle of passage, you name it. Fortunately we all managed to get to our destinations eventually…

Technorati Tags: Boycott Limmud, Jewish cultural educational events, Jewish pluralism, Limmud SA 2008, Limmud South Africa 2008, SA Jewish society, SA Orthodox rabbinate

Reform rabbis ordained in Holland for the first time

According to this recent JTA Breaking News item,

Reform [Liberal] rabbis were ordained in Holland for the first time.

The Robert A. Levisson Institute ordained its first five graduates Wednesday at the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue of the Liberal Jewish Congregation in The Hague.

…The new rabbis are all Holland residents who took part in the five-year, part-time rabbinical program while continuing in other careers.

Lilienthal … told JTA his dream was to encourage people from Holland who wished to pursue rabbinical studies but could not afford to do so abroad.

There are some 40,000 Jews in Holland today, and about 4,000 are members of Reform congregations, Lilienthal said.

As someone who believes that the progressive streams of Judaism are our best hope for salvaging something from Judaism for the benefit of Jews and humanity as a whole, I was very pleased to see that one more community is beginning to embrace Reform to some degree.

That these graduates took part in a “five-year, part-time rabbinical program while continuing in other careers” impresses me even more, and tells us something about the character of those who took part.

Should this additional load really be necessary, however? Shouldn’t the progressive community globally take more of an interest in the education and training of rabbinical candidates everywhere in the world? Doesn’t the progressive community command the resources to be able to provide full-time training of rabbinical candidates (in the language of the target community), preferably without burdening the students with massive study loans?

Perhaps the WUPJ should be granted a more generous budget - subsidised by its wealthier member communities (countries) – in order to sponsor programs to develop and support fledgling communities or, as in this case, fledgling spiritual leadership cadres.

In a previous post, I expressed my shock and disappointment with those Reform Jews who support Chabad financially, despite all the accounts of Chabad delegitimizing Reform and its adherents. Perhaps those benefactors could be persuaded to instead channel their financial support into initiatives such as this?

Please read the full (brief) item for more of the background. The story will also be covered in the WUPJ Newsletter in due course.

Technorati Tags: Dutch Reform (Liberal) Jewish community, Liberal Jewish Congregation The Hague, Progressive Judaism, Reform [Liberal] rabbis, Robert A. Levisson Institute, Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue, World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ)

Federal funding for Jewish day schools: The best of all possible worlds?

According to the JTA Breaking News item “Orthodox schools get federal funding” from 08/26/2008:

Several Orthodox Jewish day schools in Houston will receive $70,000 in federal funding.

The fervently Orthodox umbrella group [Agudath Israel of America], in partnership with other faith groups in Houston, successfully lobbied the school board for an expansion of federal support.

The funds are part of a total of $610,000 in federal dollars allocated to private educational institutions. They can be used for supplies, textbooks and staffing expenses for remedial programs, the statement said.

I trust that Jewish day schools affiliated to the Conservative and Reform/Reconstructionist movements, as well as schools not affiliated with any of the movements will take note of this development. The Jewish day school concept is under threat on a number of fronts, with budget issues probably the most pressing. If Federal assistance can be obtained for struggling schools (without compromising on the separation between church and state), then every effort should be made to do so.

The leaders of those movements should also see this as a possible threat. In Israel, the ultra-Orthodox schools – with help of massive subsidies from the overburdened Israeli taxpayer – are succeeding in attracting traditional and secular students, because they are able to offer a more stable educational experience then even state religious schools. Those students would then tend to gravitate towards the ultra-Orthodox sector, further artificially skewing the demographic balance in Israel. It is not inconceivable that a well-funded ultra-Orthodox day schools network in the US could achieve the same objective.

Like the Jesuits, the Haredim have long realised the importance of control over the educational process.

Related posts:

Cafe Birkenreis: Israeli expatriates leading the way with day schools?

Altneuland: The best investment in Jewish continuity

Altneuland: The Haredisation of Jewish Education in SA

Altneuland: Needed: A Big Tent approach to worldwide Jewish education

Altneuland: Hebrew Charter Schools: Sit up and pay attention

Technorati Tags: Demographic balance, Haredim, Jewish day schools, Jewish education, Ultra-Orthodox

Jewish Values, Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Last week I attended a talk by Rabbi Brian Walt (Rabbis for Human Rights - North America (RHR-NA)) on the subject of Jewish Values, Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

This is not intended to be a comprehensive report on the talk and the discussion which followed. Something along those lines will no doubt be provided in due course on behalf of the SAUPJ by the attractive and talented Darryl Egnal, who was also present. Rather, these are just my impressions and reactions; those of someone who started out far to the right of positions that may be taken by RHR-NA!

I couldn’t contribute my questions to the discussion, as it was continued over the optional dinner, which I didn’t attend. These are issues I’ve been grappling with for some time, without having formulated a clear position yet. For that reason, I can’t draw a line between what Rabbi Walt had to say, and my own questions and views. In no particular order:

What is the basis of Judaism’s ethics? That we were all created in God’s image, or that we are enjoined not to do what is hateful to us? Either one leads us quite shockingly far from where (especially Orthodox) Judaism (at least as observed in Israel) is right now.

The fact that we even have an organisation called Rabbis for Human Rights is a serious indictment of Judaism and Jewish society. It implies (correctly) that we have rabbis indifferent to human rights, to say nothing of rabbis AGAINST human rights!

Israel’s acts and omissions (particularly since the Six-Day War) serve to remind us that it’s easy to have clean hands when you’re powerless. Prior to 1948, Jews were able to assume the moral high ground with regard to the treatment of The Other. With the benefit of experience, we can now see that victimhood and powerlessness are not the same as moral superiority. Power over others’ lives is the real test, one which Israel appears to be failing, quite dismally. Welcome to the human condition.

Having said that, let me immediately add that the existence of Israel as a secure Jewish State (hopefully along democratic, secular and Western lines) is an absolute red line for me (and no, not one of Olmert’s blurry red lines). I cannot and will not visualize a Jewish world without an Israel in something like its present form.

We should be able to discuss and debate every position and viewpoint regarding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (short of talking about dismantling Israel) without resorting to accusations of anti-Semitism or Jewish self-hatred. At the same time, however, we must acknowledge that some of Israel’s opponents (physical or spiritual) are actually driven by just those motivations.

So, how do we express principled opposition to certain of Israel’s policies (or, sometimes of even more concern, her lack of policies) without crossing the line from critic to enemy? How do we remain members of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition (Her Majesty in this case being Israel itself)? (It should be noted, however, that those on the right are generally not accused of disloyalty even when espousing the most radical views.)

Some questions are even more fundamental. For instance, I still don’t see any evidence of a genuine desire for peace on the part of either the Palestinian Arabs or the larger Arab/Muslim world that surrounds Israel.

How does one protect (or at least respect) the human rights of enemy combatants and civilians or even our own minorities, while not falling prey to the delusion that we can bring about peace by changing only what we do? (If it was that simple, we would have had peace decades ago.)

Oppression may be damaging to the other, but being the oppressor is also damaging to us. (At the same time, I do believe that any oppression we may be inflicting on others is pretty mild compared to anything done to us.)

I am not a peacenik. I believe that Jewish physical survival worldwide requires a militarily and strategically robust Israel. Because of the Jewish character, however, we need to have justice on our side in order to manifest that strength. Perhaps that’s the missing ingredient in many of Israel’s military endeavours since, say 1982?

Human rights are not an absolute good for me, at least not separate from other considerations. Here in South Africa our human rights regime is unparalleled, certainly in our own history. At the same time, there is probably no more corrupt, dangerous, unjust and even outright racist society in the world today. What is the value, the good of human rights in such a situation?

Technorati Tags: Anti-Semitism, Human Rights, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Jewish ethics, Jewish self-hatred, Jewish Values, Peace process.Rabbis for Human Rights, RHR-NA

UOS caters to the needs of over 95% of SA Jewry?

This amazing factoid appeared in Volume 1 Issue 3 Tamuz 5768 of The SA Jewish Board Cast (“A review of Jewish South Africa today”), published by the SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD).

The item read “It (the Union of Orthodox Synagogues or UOS) is the largest Jewish religious organization in the country and caters to the needs of over 95% of SA Jewry”.

There’s no doubt that it is the largest Jewish religious organization here, but over 95%? The last figures I saw suggested that SA Jewry is +/-80% Orthodox (still a substantial figure), 10% Reform (presumably this includes the single Conservative/Masorti congregation) and 10% un- or dis-affiliated. We really have no way of knowing for certain right now. Estimates of the total Jewish population in SA vary between as little as 50 thousand and as many as 80 to 100 thousand.

In my opinion, even 80% overstates the Orthodox position, while the 10% figure for those not affiliated is probably greatly understated. These are the “consensus” numbers generally bandied about, however, so I’m really not sure why the UOS felt the need to inflate their market share.

The same item mentions that The Office of the Chief Rabbi provides “unified national leadership for the South African Jewish community … dealing with government, media and civil society”. Strange, but that sounds more like it should be the role of the SAJBD rather than that of The Office of the Chief Rabbi. I guess I must have missed out on the subtle nuances in the distinction between the organizational roles of these two bodies.

As for “unified national leadership for the South African Jewish community”, this might have been true for previous incumbents of this office. It is certainly not the case for the current incumbent, who appears to have done his best to drive a wedge between the Orthodox and Reform communities, overturning perhaps half a century of generally harmonious relationships between the two.

As a footnote, the reason for the overwhelming preponderance of Orthodoxy in SA is best explained in this article by Jocelyn Hellig.

One reason for its [the Reform community] smallness may be that a large body of Orthodox Jews, who did not follow a fully observant lifestyle, felt no need to change their affiliation. They could ride to shul on Shabbat and pick and choose which mitzvoth to observe.

I labelled them the 'non-observant Orthodox' and their predominance was the key to understanding the religious expression of our community at the time. The preponderance of Orthodox affiliation in South Africa is an accident in history because such Jews would have felt distinctly uncomfortable in an Orthodox congregation in the US, for example.

Technorati Tags: Jewish South Africa, 'non-observant Orthodox', Office of the Chief Rabbi, SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD), SA Jewish population, South African Jewish community, Union of Orthodox Synagogues (UOS)

JPost.com international online survey: relationship between state and religion

According to an item on the JPost.com website:

The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition JPost.com - Israel's most read English web-site and most recognized Israeli media brand around the world - is conducting an international online survey about the relationship between state and religion.

Don't miss this opportunity to let your voice be heard! Many media outlets and national leaders are interested in your opinion.

The survey on the state-religion relationship will analyse responses to the following questions:

• Which stream of Judaism should be recognized by the state when performing marriage ceremonies?
• Should the state recognize civil marriage?
• Which stream of Judaism should be recognized by the state when performing conversions to Judaism?
• Should ultra-Orthodox yeshiva students be exempted from service in the IDF?
• Is the Law of Return discriminatory?
• Should state and religion be separated in Israel?

A valid e-mail address must be provided in order to participate. This is presumably in order to prevent ballot stuffing.

Anyone interested in correcting the skewed relationship between religion and state in Israel is encouraged to make their views known by taking part in this survey.

This is a rare opportunity for those who hold a pluralistic view of Judaism, and who question the role of Orthodoxy and ultra-Orthodoxy within Israel’s “religious-bureaucratic complex” to make their views known. Perhaps some of those politicians and other public figures who have an almost Pavlovian urge to genuflect and kiss the ring of anyone wearing basic black may even sit up and take notice!

Certainly anyone who is a member of (or identifies with) the ABO (Anything But Orthodox) streams of Judaism (Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform, etc.) should respond appropriately.

Hat tip to Joel Katz at the indispensable Religion and State in Israel blog for this one.

You can complete the survey here.

Technorati Tags: Anything But Orthodoxy (ABO), Civil marriage, Conversion to Judaism, Israel’s religious-bureaucratic complex, Pluralistic view of Judaism, Religion and state in Israel, Separation of religion and state

Women’s voices in the corridors of power

(This piece began as a response to the issue of female MKs being excluded from the Knesset choir which sang the national anthem during the British PM’s visit to Israel. It has mutated into a more general rant against the black tide that continues to sweep through the Jewish world (particularly Israel) today. So be it.)

Elsewhere in the world, Jews gravitate towards societies that protect freedom; economic, social and religious.

Elsewhere in the world, Jews are in the forefront of the ongoing struggle to ensure the separation of church (religion) and state.

Elsewhere in the world, Jews recognize, condemn and distance themselves in all ways from religious fundamentalism, whether Christian, Islamic or Jewish.

Elsewhere in the world, Jews are the first to rush to defend the rights of minorities and disadvantaged or marginalized groups, from the largest “minority” (women) to the smallest.

This is as it should be. In Israel, however, the opposite appears to be happening.

Here, the advocates of Grim Judaism are managing to turn back the clock in another arena of public life, and that arena the Knesset, the very body that should be a powerful bulwark against the tyranny of those claiming to speak in the name of tradition.

Middle Israel, the mainstream, the secular and traditional majority that makes up the very essence of Israel appears not to recognize the danger, or perhaps to have become reconciled to it or exhausted by it.

The public figures (including notably and disgracefully the Speaker of the Knesset, Dalia Itzik) who should be fighting these battles appear to have sold out their constituencies once again. Once again the public and the ideals they should be serving have been betrayed, and they have handed over to the Dark Side what does not belong to them; what belongs to all of us.

And so the country that proudly (justifiably) holds itself to be the only outpost of democracy in this benighted region betrays fully half its population in one fell swoop. How? By allowing that a woman’s voice should not be heard singing in the very place that should fight to the death to protect that right.

And to whom do they make this concession?

To the opponents of Zionism, to those whose every action and deed undermines it.

To those who played little part in the making of an independent Israel, and who to this day play only the feeblest role in furthering it.

To those who isolate themselves from the rest of Israeli society, who fail (nay, refuse) to send their sons (and daughters) to defend it, who send their women out to be both breadwinners and caregivers.

To those who contribute little but grasp all they can from the public purse, with their ceaseless demands and their ceaseless procreation.

There are so many threats to the present and future of Israel, this precious and irreplaceable gift from just a few generations that immediately preceded ours, and including the one still with us, our own Greatest Generation.

The most insidious threat, however, is this one. This black tide has the potential to transform Israel from a strong, vibrant democracy where any and every Jew can find a place, into a dismal Kehilla, a bloated Ghetto that will exclude and include, allow and forbid, until Middle Israel gives up and leaves, and those who remain fall to the sword-stroke of a waiting Islam.

Am I being overly dramatic? Perhaps. But this would not be the first society to be destroyed because it failed to confront its enemies, domestic and foreign.

Right now the real Israel has the ability and the mandate to end these attacks on its core values.

Just weeks ago, it could have ended this crisis by inviting – politely but firmly - those who find the sound of women’s voices in song offensive (or who can’t concentrate because lust overwhelms them) to simply absent themselves from the event.

Will it still be able to do this in a year from now? In five or ten? I fear the worst.

I’m glad to see that at least some recognize the significance of this seemingly insignificant event. I hope that those who have defended the rights of women in Jewish society elsewhere in the world and on other issues will take up this particular struggle as well.

Time is running out. How much more of this erosion can Israel’s institutions endure?

Technorati Tags: Black tide, Female MKs, Grim Judaism, Knesset choir, Middle Israel, Minority rights, Religious fundamentalism, Separation of church (religion) and state, The Dark Side

Why I’m not on JBlogSphere [.] com: Does this explain it?

In a post late last year, I speculated as to the reason why I couldn’t get my Israel advocacy blog Altneuland onto the JBlogSphere [.] com Jewish blog aggregator. At the time, I assumed it was either a technical issue, or that the site was no longer being maintained.

It appears there may be a simpler explanation. I accidentally clicked through to the site the other day, and I see that the following banner is now displayed on the home page:

Welcome to JBlogSphere [.] com - aggregating Frum Jewish Blogs online.

The site description now reads as follows:

JBlogSphere [.] com - Jewish, frum and religious blogs in the jblogosphere

So, I guess that explains it. Altneuland was not considered “frum” enough. Cafe Birkenreis would presumably be considered even less so!

I guess I must be doing something right.

At the time, I had this apparently naïve belief that in order to be added to these J-Blogosphere aggregators and directories, I simply needed to ask. As with so many other things in the Jewish world these days, however, it seems that your “yichus” must first be vetted. I guess I must have been really desperate for inbound links…

Related posts:

Cafe Birkenreis: Pimp my Blog: J-Blogosphere: JBlogSphere [.] com

Technorati Tags: Altneuland, Blog aggregators, Blog directories, Café Birkenreis, Frum, Israel advocacy, J-Blogosphere, Yichus

Limmud SA and the Orthodox rabbinate: What are they afraid of?

A reminder to my readers in SA that Limmud South Africa takes place in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg over the period 29 August to 3 September 2008. Check the Limmud SA website for exact details for your city. If you’re planning to boycott Limmud in line with the call from the Orthodox chief rabbi and rabbinate (SARA), boy, are you ever on the wrong blog!

From the little that I’ve been able to find on the web regarding the boycott, this appears to be the best explanation (from It's Almost Supernatural):

The rumours I have heard seem to indicate that SARA is uncomfortable with the fact that Reform Rabbis and secular scholars will be giving talks on the Jewish religion. The logic as I was explained it, is that the Orthodox Rabbinate sees itself as the only legitimate vehicle for Jewish religious instruction in South Africa. Limmud with a mix of talks by representatives of all Jewish streams clearly presents a threat to this monopoly. Moreover they can not accept the premises of Limmud that all subjects of Jewish interest (from Torah to food) should be given equal space.

Fortunately the Orthodox rabbinate no longer has the coercive power of the Kehilla, so the boycott is limited to the rabbinate itself and to anyone over whom they have some form of influence (not to be underestimated). Limmud will miss out on the participation of those who heed the boycott, but at the same time those who heed it are unlikely to have benefited from Limmud anyway. Limmud, I guess, will benefit from all the free publicity surrounding the boycott. Win some, lose some.

To me it almost appears as if Orthodoxy in SA is still fighting the war against Emancipation and the Enlightenment. I see this as the tragedy of Judaism in the centuries since then; that “mainstream” Judaism (what has now come to be identified with Orthodoxy) failed to meet the challenge of these critical events and ideologies, and instead chose to turn inward.

In my understanding, this was the first time ever that Judaism had withdrawn from competing in the marketplace of ideas, and the repercussions can be felt to this day.

While various movements within Judaism (Reform, Conservative, even Zionism) went on to try and meet the challenges of the secular age, the blessing of Rabbinic Judaism was withheld from these attempts. The flight from Judaism into assimilation, the delegitimisation of the ABO (Anything But Orthodox) streams of Judaism, the Haredisation and contraction of Orthodoxy can all be traced back to this turning point.

Emancipation and Enlightenment did not represent a greater challenge than previous ones (consider Paganism, Hellenism, Christianity, Islam, etc.), but because the challenge was not met head on, it proved to be the crucial one. The failure to respond cohesively left much of the Jewish world asking fundamental questions about Judaism and being Jewish; questions that remain without a consensus answer to this day.

End of amateur sociological lecture.

Head on over to the Limmud SA website and book (please). Booking in advance will assist the organizers (all volunteers) in their planning. In addition, if you book before 10 August (Johannesburg only), conference fees are discounted. Fees vary from venue to venue and are discounted for children, students and pensioners.

Technorati Tags: Anything But Orthodox (ABO), Assimilation, Conservative Judaism, Emancipation, Enlightenment, Haredisation, Kehilla, Limmud SA, Limmud South Africa, Orthodox Rabbinate, Rabbinic Judaism, Reform Judaism, Secularism

Don’t donate to Chabad!

Below is the text of a letter I’ve just submitted to the Reform Judaism Magazine. I’m a bit dubious as to whether it will ever make it into print or not; Reform Judaism is published only quarterly, with just a small selection of letters being included. So, in case it never makes it between the covers of RJ, here it is:

I was shocked to read (Letter from Rabbi Michael M Remson in the Spring 2008 edition of Reform Judaism) that “many Reform Jews donate to Chabad”. In the US they may be more circumspect, but in South Africa and elsewhere, Chabad makes no secret of the fact that it considers Reform Judaism to be Reform, not Judaism. Our rabbis are little more than reform clerics and our converts are quite simply “not Jews”.

The letter also mentioned that “Chabad unabashedly claims to be doing God’s work”, but that’s a claim any TV evangelist can make.

Yes, we should be motivated by the work and the attitude of their Shlichim (emissaries), but we should be motivated to imitate their example, not support it. To my mind, there is no discussion: Chabad is no friend of Reform Judaism, and should not enjoy the support of the Reform community or individuals.

Those within Reform who wish to give to initiatives that reach out to the marginalized or unaffiliated should rather consider supporting the activities of The World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ), the global umbrella body for progressive Judaism in all its diversity. Pioneering congregations throughout the European Union, the former Soviet Union, Israel and elsewhere need our support; financial, organizational and moral.

Have a look at the newsletters on the WUPJ website and, the next time you reach for your checkbook to support outreach to the unaffiliated, ignore pseudo-outreach organizations such as Chabad. Rather make your check out to the WUPJ and stipulate that you’d like to support the activities of Rabbi Joel Oseran, their vice president for international development. I’m sure the URJ has or supports similar initiatives within the US itself.

Imitation is indeed the sincerest form of flattery, and I believe we should be imitating (NOT supporting) Chabad’s example when it comes to global outreach. I’m not sure yet how we could achieve this without the cultist mindset of the Chabad Shlichim, but one of the most apparent needs amongst fledgling progressive communities is for trained (and preferably full-time) spiritual leadership, i.e. a rabbi. So, how about setting up a fund for “Rabbis in Remote Places”, to cover the cost of training and subsidizing the remuneration of spiritual leaders for these start-up communities?

Let’s hear from you out there!

Links/Reading/Resources:

Reform Judaism Magazine - Home

Reform Judaism Magazine - Spring 2008

The World Union for Progressive Judaism | WUPJnews

The World Union for Progressive Judaism | Our Newsletter

Related:

Cafe Birkenreis: A Jew is a Jew is a Jew...: You contradict yourself

Technorati Tags: Chabad, Progressive Judaism, Rabbi Joel Oseran, Reform Judaism Magazine, Shlichim (emissaries), World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ)

The conversion crisis: End the religious-bureaucratic complex

I was pleased to see from this JTA article that Diaspora Jewish leaders are finally beginning to respond to the crisis in Israel regarding conversions to Judaism. Jewish leaders outside of Israel are understandably reluctant to intervene in something that may be considered an internal Israeli matter, but this is something that affects Jews (and in particular Jews by Choice and their descendants) everywhere.

According to the article:

Leaders of the United Jewish Communities federation umbrella organization sent a sharply worded letter to Olmert on July 9 urging him to assign his Cabinet secretary "to oversee conversion."

In order to keep up the momentum generated by this initiative, I would like to see the leadership of all the major non-Orthodox streams of Judaism – both in the US and globally – direct similar letters to all leadership figures in Israel.

The leaders of the Conservative, Reconstructionist and Liberal/Progressive/Reform streams of Judaism worldwide should call on all the main Israeli leadership figures and offices to do their utmost to ensure that conversions performed by these streams of Judaism – both within and outside Israel – are unequivocally recognised by the Israeli authorities.

Petitions should be addressed to the President, Prime Minister, Speaker of the Knesset, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the heads of all the major non-Haredi political parties.

The leadership of the non-Orthodox streams of Judaism should actually go further than the UJC and call for all matters regarding conversion to be taken out of the dead hands of the Haredi-dominated rabbinate. There should be a complete separation between those responsible for bringing converts into Judaism – the rabbis and courts of all the major streams of Judaism, duly authorised by their own movements – and those responsible for recording such conversions for Israeli identity purposes (the Interior Ministry). The ministry should not be permitted to question the validity of such conversions on religious grounds.

A complete separation between secular and religious functions – an end to the religious-bureaucratic complex - in Israel is long overdue. All members of the non-Orthodox movements should call on their leadership to put pressure on Israel to end this anachronism, and with it the harm that it inflicts on Judaism and the Jewish people daily.

UJC, JAFI press Olmert on conversion - JTA, Jewish & Israel News

Technorati Tags: Conversion crisis, Conversion to Judaism, Diaspora Jewish leaders, Jews by Choice, non-Orthodox Judaism, Religious-bureaucratic complex

Road under construction

I am in the process of implementing new Blogger/Blogspot XML templates across all my blogs.

Please bear with me, as there may be some disruption, broken links and widgets, etc., during the transition.

I will be utilizing various 3-column layouts from the eBlog Templates website. (See the link below.)

Free Blogger Templates and How-To Blogger Articles | eBlog Templates

How to change the world: a guide for inter faith families

I regularly correspond with someone intensely involved in trying to have the status of Patrilineal Jews formally and unequivocally recognized within progressive Judaism and the State of Israel. At the end of the last round of e-mails, the questions weighed heavily on my mind: how DO we go about making the Jewish world (or rather, the progressive part of it) more friendly and accommodating towards those in inter faith relationships (IFRs) and sociological Jews (the “hyphenated Jews”, variously referred to as Patrilineal Jews, half-Jews, non-Halachic Jews or even non-Jews; anyone who happens to have been born with the "wrong" Jewish parent)?

These notes are an attempt to answer that question. This is still very much a draft, so comments and feedback would be welcomed and appreciated.

• Stay informed regarding efforts to reach out to those on the fringes of the Jewish world (Jewish Outreach Institute), those in IFRs (InterfaithFamily.com) and Patrilineal Jews (Jewish Justice).
• When issues relating to outreach, etc., are aired, make your views known by means of letters to Jewish and general publications.
• Put your views across by means of timely and relevant comments on Jewish and other websites when outreach issues are raised.
• Where appropriate, consider creating or supporting online petitions to help change the status of sociological Jews, those in IFRs, etc. (I’m not aware of any currently in operation.)
• Support those organizations attempting (in various ways) to build a welcoming Judaism. Big Tent Judaism (a JOI initiative), InterfaithFamily.com and the Jewish Outreach Institute are the ones I’m aware of. I’m sure there are a number of others that haven’t appeared on my radar.
• Link up with other individuals or families in the same situation. The sites referred to can help point you in the right direction. Facebook and other social media sites may well be the way to achieve the initial networking.
• Look out for and share resources such as organizations, books and other publications and websites or blogs. The few I’ve mentioned are, I’m sure, just the tip of the iceberg.
• When considering membership in a congregation or minyan, make it clear that your decision to join or not join will be heavily influenced by the attitude towards IFFs and sociological Jews.
• If you’re unable to find a suitably welcoming spiritual home for you and your family, consider starting your own minyan or congregation. In the same way that LGBT congregations are now becoming mainstream, such “Outreach” congregations could help to change attitudes while providing comfort zone for those on the margins.
• When considering a Jewish day school for your children, be upfront about concerns regarding outreach. (Your options are, however, likely to be somewhat limited here. Perhaps we’ll see an improvement once Hebrew charter schools start to gain traction.)
• Likewise, when considering joining or supporting any other Jewish organization, make your views known, and let it be understood that your decision will be influenced by its stance regarding outreach.
• When casting your vote for office bearers in any Jewish organization to which you already belong, make it clear that the candidates' stance on outreach and acceptance is key.
• Similarly when donating to a particular Jewish cause. Here’s where you REALLY have the upper hand. Make your donation count, by aligning your giving with strongly held beliefs. There are plenty of worthy Jewish causes out there; avoid supporting those that discriminate against IFFs (inter faith families).
• On occasion, your purchasing decisions can also be made to count. I’m not a great believer in the efficacy of boycotts, but take a consumer activist approach and try to ensure that your purchasing power is aligned with your beliefs and ideology.
• Understand the case for the recognition of Patrilineal (or equilineal) descent in Judaism. The Jewish Justice website is the best resource in this regard.
• Make use of the form letters on the Jewish Justice website to bring the plight of Patrilineal Jews to the attention of those who currently have the whip hand.
• Within progressive Judaism, call for a uniform approach and attitude towards IFRs and their offspring across the entire WUPJ. One’s Jewish status should not change when moving to another congregation or country.
• If you’re a sociological Jew, you should probably stick with Reconstructionist and Reform Judaism, unless you’re prepared to undergo (another?) conversion, that is. In which case this is probably not your fight anyway…
• Prepare your kids, particularly those being raised by a non-Jewish mother. Just because they’re accepted by their own community does not mean they will never encounter the “you’re not really Jewish” canard from some smug, self-satisfied “Real Jew”. Make them aware that they may encounter such attitudes and how to deal with them.
• Steer clear of pseudo-outreach organizations such as Chabad. Rather channel your hopes, efforts, energy and dollars to those organizations genuinely concerned with all of those on the fringes of the Jewish world, not just so-called Halachic Jews.
• There is probably much that can be learned from the struggle of LGBT Jews for acceptance by the Jewish community. This is a process of changing attitudes that may take decades, but based on the LGBT experience, there is no reason why it can’t succeed. The issue of outreach to IFFs is one that that probably impacts a much greater part of the Jewish community than does the LGBT issue.
• Realize that this is probably THE central issue confronting the Jewish world today, and that you’re on the just side of the debate. Expect the mainstream to eventually catch up and invest far more effort and funds into outreach.

I’m positive that if we all take as many of these actions as possible, we will succeed in making the Jewish world a friendlier place for those on the fringes, who still see themselves as part of the Jewish assembly.

Big Tent Judaism

InterfaithFamily.com

jewish matrilineal patrilineal descent

Jewish Mosaic: The National Center for Sexual and Gender Diversity

The Jewish Outreach Institute

JewsByChoice.Org: Your people will be my people and your G-d will be my G-d - Ruth 1:16

As Acceptance Grows, Gay Synagogues Torn Between the Straight and Narrow

Technorati Tags: inter faith families (IFFs), inter faith relationships (IFRs), Jewish outreach, LGBT, Patrilineal Jewish Descent, sociological Jews

A Jew is a Jew is a Jew...: You contradict yourself

The SA Jewish Report for 9 May 2008 (.PDF) carried a piece by (Lubavitch) Rabbi Yossy Goldman entitled “A Jew is a Jew is a Jew...” The piece dealt with the growing trend within SA Judaism’s religious right to delegitimize and denigrate Jews who don’t meet the required standard of Orthodoxy, observance, frumkeit, or whatever the measure is. Anyone not meeting the required standard is simply dismissed as “not a real Jew” or not a Jew at all.

Despite what Rabbi Goldman says, this attitude is far, far more widespread than he acknowledges, not just in SA. It has now also become common currency with Israel’s political right, even where it does not overlap with the religious right. Anyone who breaks ranks with entrenched positions runs the risk of having his or her Jewish bona-fides called into question.

Leaving aside Rabbi Goldman’s spirited defense of “the spiritual nature of every Jewish soul”, I found one the Rabbi’s concluding paragraphs to be quite enlightening. He says:

On the other hand, we mustn't confuse issues. While a Reform Jew is fully Jewish, no Orthodox rabbi will agree that a Reform convert is authentically Jewish. It's not only Chief Rabbi (Warren) Goldstein or the Beth Din but Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (of Great Britain) as well.

So, while a Reform Jew is fully Jewish (gee, thanks Yossy, that makes me feel so much better), Reform Judaism is presumably not even close to being “fully Jewish”. Rabbi Goldman scrupulously avoids using “Reform Judaism”, preferring the term “Reform”. (As a member of Chabad, perhaps Rabbi Goldman should recall the history of his movement and how early Hasidism were persecuted by the Mitnagdim for many of the same reasons as he now uses to deny Reform its authenticity. They only managed to achieve eventual acceptance by becoming “more Catholic than the Pope” in terms of observance. The erstwhile revolutionaries are now the establishment.)

So, if Reform is not Kosher, and Reform converts are not authentically Jewish, I guess a less than welcoming attitude towards Reform Jews in general is understandable. Who knows, the Reform Jew standing in front of you may well be a Reform convert, or the offspring of a Reform convert.

Your age-old definition of a Jew is “one born of a Jewish mother”. In an era where we are all “Jews by Choice” it will no longer suffice. My definition of a Jew is one with a longer and even more distinguished pedigree, “all those who would cast their lot with the Jewish people”.

As the old saying goes, “With friends like that, who needs enemies?”

Perhaps the Reform and unaffiliated Jews (particularly in the US) who contribute to the outreach efforts of Chabad need to be made aware of attitudes like this before reaching for their wallets.

Technorati Tags: Chabad, Conversion, Frumkeit, Hasidism, Lubavitch, Mitnagdim, Observance, Outreach, Reform Judaism, SA Jewish Report, Unaffiliated

Joel Oseran at SAUPJ Indaba

In a previous post on the blog Altneuland, I mentioned the address given by Rabbi Joel Oseran at the European Region Conference of The World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) in Vienna (March 13 through 16, 2008). I suggested that “it [the address] needs to become something akin to a manifesto for Liberal, Progressive and Reform Jewish communities worldwide.”

According to an article on the SAUPJ (The SA Union for Progressive Judaism) website, it appears that Rabbi Oseran will be a keynote speaker at the SAUPJ Indaba, its biennial conference, to be held in Cape Town from Friday 13 to Sunday 15 June.

The other guest speaker will be Dalya Levy, executive director of Arzenu, the Zionist movement of Progressive Judaism based in Israel.

Presumably only those on the committees of the various Reform congregations countrywide and various invited guests will be attending. Perhaps one day when I’m big, I’ll also get invited to events such as this (no irony intended)!

Technorati Tags: Altneuland, Arzenu, Liberal Progressive Reform Judaism, Rabbi Joel Oseran, SAUPJ, SA Union for Progressive Judaism, WUPJ, World Union for Progressive Judaism

Alternative SA Jewish Report – 30 May 2008

The Great Debate on Mashiach

Page 5 of this week’s edition of the SA Jewish Report carried a half-page advert for various events related to Shavuot at the Mizrachi Shul.

One of the items featured is a “Great Debate on Mashiach”, including such thought-provoking questions as “What will he look like?”, “When is he coming?” and “How will we bring him?”

At one, time, this obsession with Mashiach (usually rendered Moshiach to prevent any odious confusion with the Messiah of another faith) was the domain of Chabad. With conventional Orthodoxy seemingly having lost its way in so many other respects, it is probably not surprising that Moshiach fever has taken hold there too.

Belief in the Messiah is one of Judaism’s 13 principles of faith (“I believe with perfect faith in the coming of the Messiah; and even though he may tarry, nonetheless I wait every day for his coming.”), but it appears to me that Chabad and those of like mind are elevating it to the status of a super or defining principle. Questions along the lines of those quoted above seem to me to be a pointless exercise in religious self-stimulation, given that none of us can possibly know or even guess at (never mind intelligently debate) the possible answers.

Let’s rather have a debate along the lines of “Observance – is it taking the place of ethical behaviour?”

Lag B’Omer at Great Park Shul

Pages 6 and 18 featured the Lag B’Omer bonfire and other activities at Johannesburg’s Great Park Shul.

According to the glowing account of Rabbi Dovid Hazdan:

There was a marvellous diversity of people that lent their logos and support including Chabad, Bnei Akiva and Aish Hatorah, and others from the different synagogues, shuls and schools.

The greatest joy for Hashem is when communities get together in harmony.

When Jews are sharing smiles, when His children are close to each other, then they are close to our Father.

There is so much Ahavas Yisroel here - surely the time to bring Moshiach, he said.

His sentiments were followed by those of Chief [Orthodox] Rabbi Warren Goldstein who paid tribute to Rabbi Hazdan and the organisers, saying that Lag B'Omer in the forest had become an institution for South African Jews who can teach everyone the concept of achdut, unity.

We are 'one person with one heart'. May this continue to go from strength to strength. Every Jew is a part of Hashem and we have to focus on each other's similarities rather than the discrepancies.

This concept of diversity can probably be paraphrased as “you can be as diverse as you like, so long as you’re Orthodox”. Don’t expect to see a warm fraternal welcome extended to the SAUPJ, Netzer, Tamar or the SA Union of Temple Sisterhoods here. Reform or Masorti Jews would presumably have been welcome in their individual capacities, but not as representatives of these organisations. Marvellous diversity indeed.

Likewise, in the case of Rabbi Goldstein’s pronouncements that “we have to focus on each other's similarities rather than the discrepancies”; this only applies when dealing with other religions. Reform Judaism need not apply for this dispensation.

Brushing off evil: Dinner with Mugabe

I really enjoyed these gems from author Heidi Holland, author of Dinner with Mugabe on page 8:

Heidi Holland … said she had tried to present a "more nuanced version" of the man as much of the reporting on him was "rather shallow" - due to the fact that he had banned "most" journalists from the country.

Yes, I imagine that if a journalist can’t even get into the place, any reporting might start exhibiting signs of shallowness.

She had first met him 30 years ago and said she had been impressed with him then and had thought of him as "caring".

I can clearly remember the fate of any unfortunate white Rhodesian who happened to fall into the clutches of his “caring” terrorist cadres from the mid-60s to the mid-80s.

She claims that he has been "deeply hurt" by his rejection by whites and his response has been to take revenge.

He certainly gives every indication of having been “deeply hurt”. As we all now know in the age of PC, the oppressor is the real victim. It doesn’t explain how this translated into taking revenge on his entire country, not just the whites who rejected him.

Describing his "traumatised psyche", she said he was "emotionally incapable of accepting defeat" and was "now going for revenge as we've never seen before".

Holland disagreed, saying: "I think the West should talk to Mugabe - Britain should engage with him and make peace with him." She described as "tragic" the fact that President Thabo Mbeki had been left to resolve the situation in Zimbabwe.

Talking to someone has and will always solve every problem. That’s why our world has so few problems, it’s because we’re all talking to one another. I do agree with you on the Mbeki thing though.

She predicted that Mugabe would win the election "on his own terms. I think he's still running the place - I don't think he's been displaced," she added.

Definitely on his own terms. And yes, he’s definitely still running the place.

I can’t wait for Heidi Holland’s next book, “provisionally entitled “Cocoa with Hitler”. Rumours of a third volume “Chardonnay with Bin-Laden” have been strenuously denied by her publishers, however.

Yes Heidi, it is possible to find some redeeming human attribute in just about anyone. Just remember that explaining or understanding evil does not justify or excuse it.

Technorati Tags: Chabad, Jewish diversity, Jewish pluralism, Lag B’Omer, Mashiach, Moshiach, Mugabe, Orthodoxy, SA Jewish Report, SAJR

An inauspicious event

I’ve scheduled a post to go Live on Altneuland on Saturday night (i.e. after Shabbat). What’s the big deal? It will be the 100th post there since I started. It’s also almost exactly one month to go until the 1st anniversary of my leaving the corporate world to write full time (15 June 2007).

So where am I?

On the positive side, the blog has stabilised, I’m posting regularly (usually 3 times a week), reading lots, got into quite a good discipline. Visitor and page numbers are creeping up steadily. Very positive feedback from guys like Joel Katz (Religion and State in Israel) and a couple of others (thanks Mom).

On the negative side, I’m bogged down with trying to keep up with my reading, haven’t caught up my backlog of admin and capture. Spending too little time on actual writing and research. I feel totally ignorant about much of the technology I’m using and still have so much to learn about many of the things I’m writing about. I’m battling to break through the 10 hits a day ceiling, still nowhere near $10 each in revenue from AdSense and Amazon. Still very few comments. Still battling to achieve some visibility and recognition. The J-Blogosphere mostly sucks.

I’m by no means ready to give up (in fact I feel like I’ve just started), but the whole process is more difficult and taking a whole lot longer than I ever imagined. I estimated 6-12 months to achieve a breakthrough. Yeah, right…

Well, here’s to the next 100 posts and 12 months. I really believe I’m strongly placed to grow from here. Some routines will have to change, and I still have a steep learning curve ahead, but I’ll get there!

Also, I could never go back to where I was, in any sense.

Happy 60th birthday, Israel!

Dear Israel,

Happy 60th birthday!
May you have many, many more, and may the best of your dreams come true.
Thanks for always being there for us.
Sorry we can't be there to share the occasion with you. L Maybe next year.
You're in our thoughts and prayers constantly.

Love,

Us

Altneuland
Blog:

http://blog.altneuland.info/
Feed:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/Altneuland
E-mail: http://www.feedblitz.com/f/f.fbz?Sub=307264

Who runs the back office for Judaism?

The SA Jewish Report (SAJR) on both 11 and 18 April 2008 carried letters concerning the introduction of a mechitza in the ohel (sanctuary) of the Jewish section of West Park Cemetery (Johannesburg’s largest cemetery). The mechitza was apparently introduced by the Chevrah Kadisha in Johannesburg, at the request of the Beth Din. The letters protested this measure and it appears that it will not be enforced at progressive funerals or where otherwise requested.

I’m not proposing to get into a discussion about the religious pedigree of the mechitza. I hold the progressive view that the mechitza no longer has a place in Jewish life or worship. Not in the synagogue, and still less at the graveside. If you’re of another opinion, my blogs will probably not be to your taste.

What I’d like to first make note of is what I refer to as the tactic of creeping Halacha. Introduce an extension or embellishment to an existing law, custom or tradition. If nobody squeals, the new measure quickly assumes the status of Halacha. If there is some resistance, back off a little, try again later. This is (presumably) acceptable within a congregation. It is not acceptable when applied to the Jewish “public domain” as a whole. Those (such as the letter writers above) who observe the phenomenon at work should continue to raise the alarm.

Secondly, and the main reason for this posting, is the issue of how Jewish social and religious “services” (such as burials) are being provided and who is providing them.

For as long as anyone can remember, the ABO (anything but Orthodoxy) end of the Jewish spectrum has relied on Orthodoxy to provide these services. The non-Orthodox streams of Judaism were only too glad to leave the supervision of Kosher kitchens, etc., up to Orthodoxy. The services would be paid for by Jewish public funds, to which secular, traditional and progressive households contributed (probably more than) their fair share. Of late, however, we’ve started seeing the following worrying trends worldwide:

Raising the bar. Such as with the mechitza issue mentioned above, where our comfort with the level or nature of observance expected in order to utilize the services is continually being tested.

Exclusiveness. Services are increasingly being denied to the secular, members of progressive communities, the inter-married, converted, those with only one Jewish parent or who otherwise don’t meet the requirements, but are fully accepted within their own congregations or communities.

We can confidently expect both of these practices to become increasingly prevalent.

So, can we still trust Orthodoxy to continue to run the back-office for the rest of Judaism? Or, is it perhaps time for the ABO streams within Judaism worldwide to consider setting up shared parallel Jewish religious and social services, provided in a pluralistic, egalitarian and non-denominational manner or form. Perhaps it’s not the most important or urgent item on the Jewish agenda, but I believe it will start becoming more and more of a priority.

One of the first steps in setting up these shared parallel services would be to set up proxy funds. All contributions from those wishing to participate would be channeled into these proxy funds. Monies collected would be handed over to the bodies currently responsible for providing Jewish religious and social services, with conditions attached as to the market and tone of services expected. If at any stage the community wishes to go ahead with the actual shared parallel services, it would then be a simple matter to divert the proxy fund to the new “ABO” services.

A further initial step would be to define exactly what services would be provided. The list could include kosher/eco-kashrut supervision, ritual baths, charities and burial services and all other services traditionally supplied by Chevrah Kadisha societies. This could also be defined as all services provided by and to the community as a whole rather than a specific congregation.

Traditionally, we have always relied on Orthodoxy to provide the “Jewish infrastructure” for the entire community. Increasingly however, we are having to deal with a whole host of hidden and not so hidden agendas with regard to the delivery of these social and religious services. Perhaps it’s time to start thinking about new ways of delivering these services in a pluralistic, egalitarian and non-denominational manner tailored to the needs of the alternative streams of Judaism.