Moving Home

Dear Reader,

The contents of this blog and my blogging activities have been migrated over to my new self-hosted WordPress blog at:

Maskil

I will therefore not be posting any further updates here, although the blog and its original contents will remain in place indefinitely.

Cafe Birkenreis retains its own distinct category on Maskil, and even its own feed, if you’re only interested in this aspect of my writing.

If you’ve subscribed by means of a feed reader, you should continue to receive updates seamlessly. If you’re not already a subscriber, please consider signing up to receive updates via e-mail, feed, FriendFeed or Twitter.

Please contact me at the following e-mail address for any comments, feedback or suggestions: maskil at maskil dot info.

Looking forward to seeing you at my new blogging home!

Regards,

“Maskil”

Mutual Recognition of Conversions

During the debate around the Israeli High Court decision regarding non-Orthodox conversions in Israel, a fellow Tweeter (also Reform) took the stance that he had no interest in the issue, as Orthodox conversions are the only ones recognised by all streams of Judaism (leaving aside the issue of retrospective annulments of Orthodox conversions that have become almost commonplace).

Obviously I disagree profoundly with that attitude, and it’s also something of a circular argument (we shouldn’t press for non-Orthodox conversions to be recognised, because only Orthodox conversions are recognised by all…). It did start me wondering about another aspect of the issue, however. Outside of Israel, why should we even care about whether progressive (in the sense of non-Orthodox) conversions are recognised by Orthodoxy or not? To put this in perspective, would the Methodist Church care about whether the Catholic Church recognised its converts or not?

Shouldn't we then see our conversions in the same way, i.e. they are converting to Judaism as a faith and Reform Judaism as a movement or stream within Judaism? It’s up to other movements to decide whether they wish to recognise them as members of the Jewish faith or not (and I think we already know the answer to that one). This does need to be clearly explained to potential converts beforehand, however. If he/she is not comfortable about acceptance of their conversion, then perhaps a Reform or Conservative conversion is not for him/her.

There needs to be some form of mutuality or mutual recognition here, an agreement (tacit or otherwise) that says that if we are to recognise your conversions, you should recognise ours. Failing that, perhaps we need to consider a tit-for-tat policy that applies the non-recognition both ways. Perhaps in the same way that we don’t allow just any Orthodox Rabbi to lead a Reform congregation? (Although we don’t want a convert to suffer because of this family quarrel.)

Judaism is and remains one faith or religion (in the same way that Christianity remains one religion), but encompasses many movements or streams (in the same way that Christianity embraces many churches and sects). What Judaism does not and should not have is one central authority to decide Halacha, declare something to be heresy or even excommunicate a member. If Orthodoxy wants a Papacy (and by many indications it does), then we cannot allow the writ of such a Jewish Papacy to extend beyond the bounds of Orthodoxy to the rest of the Jewish World.

The situation within Israel is, of course very different, in that recognition of conversions has much wider implications for personal status, citizenship, rights, etc., and we shouldn’t expect those issues to go away until all major streams of Judaism achieve equal status before the religious-bureaucratic complex there.

Has the Jewish Day School Model Failed?

An excellent article by Gary Rosenblatt on the future of Jewish education in The [NY] Jewish Week. In particular, his support for the Hebrew Charter School model and for revisiting the Hebrew (Sunday) School model is welcome. I’m not going to attempt to paraphrase the article, or sprinkle my post with extracts. Rather read it in full here:

Jewish Day School Model May Now Be Thing Of Past

Just a couple of points to add to the discussion:

Isn’t it a bit premature to conclude that the Jewish Day School model has failed (at least financially)? I think that much of the problem is that almost the entire burden of running Jewish Day Schools has fallen on the parents of those attending them (apart from donors, of course), during the course of their attendance. If we believe that day schools are truly the answer for Jewish literacy and a (meaningful) Jewish survival, then surely the burden should be picked up by the entire Jewish community, not just those whose children attend a day school. We should see this as one of the most crucial needs when it comes to communal Jewish spending.

If we look at South Africa, it is claimed that around 80% of Jewish children attend a Jewish Day School, most of which operate under the aegis of the SA Board of Jewish Education (SABJE). This is a good example of what can be achieved when the Jewish Day School model enjoys almost universal support from the community.

(The SA example is not without its flaws, with the culture of the SABJE-supported schools having been hijacked by the increasingly Haredi-oriented Orthodox structures. While the attempt to impose a higher level of “Frumkeit” has probably been largely successful, it has eroded the universal support schools such as King David once enjoyed. The 80% figure referred to above is probably quite optimistic, given the quiet drift away from organised Jewish life that has taken place in conjunction with the increased level of observance in part of the community. Simply put, a pluralistic or non-denominational Jewish education is not available through the SABJE, although it is funded by and should be accessible to the entire community.)

Related posts:

1. Israeli expatriates leading the way with day schools?
2. The best investment in Jewish continuity
3. The Haredisation of Jewish Education in SA
4. Needed: A Big Tent approach to worldwide Jewish education
5. Hebrew Charter Schools: Sit up and pay attention
6. Federal funding for Jewish day schools: The best of all possible worlds?
7. Getting more Jewish kids into day schools

SA Delegation at Connections 2009 in Israel

A delegation of 10 South Africans [including the writer] attended Connections 2009, held in Israel from 18 to 23 March 2009. The delegation was led by Steve Lurie, Chairperson of the SA Union for Progressive Judaism (SAUPJ) and organised by Reeva Forman, with assistance from the SA Zionist Federation (SAZF). It included key figures in Reform Judaism in SA, such as Rabbi Robert Jacobs, spiritual leader of Bet David congregation in Sandton.

Connections 2009 – the 34th (Biennial) International Convention of The World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) – took place in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and was attended by over 600 delegates, representing the Reform, Liberal, Progressive and Reconstructionist movements from more than 40 countries, serving 1,200 congregations with 1.7 million members worldwide. Delegates also celebrated the 30th anniversary of Netzer Olami, the WUPJ’s international Reform Zionist youth movement, now reportedly the world’s largest Jewish youth movement.

The packed agenda included addresses from prominent figures in Israeli and Jewish society. Newly elected mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat spoke at the opening ceremony, while Israeli President Shimon Peres’ address was the focus of the closing banquet. In between these highlights, delegates were treated to a profusion of keynote addresses, lively panel discussions, field trips, congregational visits and walking tours of Jaffa and Tel-Aviv. This was rounded out by innovative Shacharit morning worship and Shabbat evening and morning services with communities from the small but growing Israeli Movement for Progressive Judaism (IMPJ). An important part of such events is the formal and informal “networking” which takes place, facilitated in this case by the “Regional Shuk (Market)” and related activities.

The SA delegation was also privileged to visit key sites in Jerusalem under the expert guidance of Prof. Ophir Yarden, a lecturer at Brigham Young University. This intensive learning experience covered the Old City, the Western Wall and archaeological sites around the Temple Mount, as well as the various components of the Mt Herzl complex (including both Yad Vashem and the IDF military cemetery).

While Reform Judaism is relatively small in communities such as Israel and South Africa, Progressive Judaism can justifiably claim to be the largest Jewish religious denomination worldwide. WUPJ conventions such as Connections 2009 are the ideal opportunity for adherents of Progressive Judaism in SA to connect with like-minded individuals and communities throughout the world, thereby gaining a new perspective on the role and development of Progressive Judaism. It was also the ideal opportunity for the Progressive “family” to show solidarity with the people of Israel as a whole, as well as with Progressive congregations in Israel (which - unlike their Orthodox brethren - enjoy no official support), and new growth areas such as the Former-Soviet Union (FSU).

(This article was originally prepared for (but didn’t make the pages of) the SA Jewish Report.  On my return from Israel, I was hit by a “travel bug” and preparations for moving home, so I wasn’t able to follow up as to why the piece was never published.  Here it is anyway…)

Judaism by Proxy

The quotes below are from an excellent op-ed by Gideon Levy that appeared recently in the online edition of Haaretz. (OK, not THAT recently, but I'm a little behind, having been in Israel for a week and moved home almost immediately on my return. I'm now struggling to cope without my trusty ADSL connection.)

Orthodox society and its leadership should not be blamed for this. The Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox have the right to do everything they can to impose their faith on the secular majority. It's the secular who are to blame. Just as it's not yeshiva students' fault that they are not drafted, but rather the fault of the secular majority that allows this, so it is with the other aspects of our lives. We, the secular people, are to blame for all this. We're the ones who give in. Just as with the tyranny of another minority, the settlers, who terrorize the majority, so it is with the tyranny of the ultra-Orthodox: The tyranny exists because the secular majority has chosen to obey it.

So don't come complaining to the religious people. The secular are the majority, and the power to change the picture is in their hands. If the majority were to stand up and not surrender to the minority, buses would run every day and bread would be sold on Passover. So it could be we are much more religious than we are willing to admit. We may maintain the image of being secular, but we are religious in our essence.

If only we were willing to admit this and stop pretending to be secular. All the same, a society that pretends to be Western and enlightened cannot delude itself while maintaining such a religious and unenlightened lifestyle. Not much has changed since our school days, when we were taught to kiss a Bible that dropped on the floor. So let's enjoy the taste of the matzah and let's not try to pull a beer bottle out from behind the ridiculous nylon on the supermarket shelf, and let's admit it: We are (almost) a state governed by religious law.

I can find almost nothing to disagree with in the piece. Having said that, however, below are a few minor points I'd like to add to the discussion.

We - the secular (and also, very importantly, the progressive) majority do have only ourselves to blame for the current situation regarding religion and state in Israel. Given that, however, there are some things that could be said in mitigation:

Some of the very earliest concessions to Orthodoxy were simply inherited from the legal and social structures of the Ottoman and Mandatory regimes. They were never updated, however, to mirror the real world diversity of Jewish life, reflecting only the outdated Ashkenazi/Sephardi distinction, rather than the more significant Masorti/Orthodox/Progressive ones.

At the time that the earlier concessions were made to Orthodoxy, religion in general (and perhaps Judaism in particular) were in retreat before the forces of secularism and Zionism. The ocean of Jewish religious life in (particularly) Eastern Europe had been drained, and only a few could foresee that Orthodoxy was capable of making a comeback and throwing its yoke over Israel.

Because religion was seen as a spent force, Zionism as a whole never seriously attempted to define a modus vivendi between religion and state or society. We are today paying the price for this “laissez-faire” attitude.

The Orthodoxy of days gone by was far more in tune with spirit of the Zionist enterprise and the needs of a modern society than the backward kleptocracy that maintains its hold over the public and personal lives of Israeli citizens today.

Israel has always had to contend with a long laundry list of pressing issues, particularly on the security front. These seemingly more urgent and important issues conspired to keep the issues relating to religion and state in the background.

The Israeli electoral and political system must also carry at least some of the blame for the situation. It will be very difficult for Israel to become a secular society without radical changes to that system, and there are many entrenched interests that would like to keep the system intact.

Finally, we need to get to grips with the “Judaism by proxy” phenomenon that secular, traditional and (to a much lesser extent) progressive (Masorti and Reform) Jews display. Judaism by proxy is akin to a guilt feeling, and goes something like this: “While we may not be practicing Judaism in the way our ancestors and martyrs did, there are some folks who are still doing things the old way. Let's leave Judaism in their hands for now. They'll make sure nothing changes, and maybe one day we'll get it back from them again”. That, in a nutshell, is Judaism by proxy, and it may well be the most serious obstacle to establishing a normal, healthy relationship between religion and society in Israel.

I can only hope that, as we begin to reclaim a diverse, fluid Judaism from the dead hands of its ultra-Orthodox caretakers, we'll understand and reject the trap of Judaism by proxy, and demand a more just, pluralistic and open relationship between Judaism in all its forms, Jewish society in Israel and abroad, and the State of Israel. This more mature Judaism will realise that it does not need its hands on the levers of power in order to thrive. Until that day comes, constant vigilance will be needed to ensure there is no further deterioration in the situation.

Gideon Levy / The dark religious side of Israel - Haaretz - Israel News

Darwin and the Jews

No, as far as I’m aware, Darwin never expressed himself on the subject of the Jews. Now that I have your attention, however, here’s the point of this post.

The online article “Faithful can accept both Darwin and God, pastors say” included the following snippet in the sidebar, concerning views on evolution across religious groups.

Views on evolution by religion
In the United States, Buddhists, Hindus and Jews are the most likely among religious groups to accept evolution, while Christian evangelicals, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are least likely, according to a Pew Forum survey.
  Percent who agree that evolution is the best explanation for origins of human life:
  Buddhist...81
  Hindu...80
  Jewish...77
  Catholic...58
  Eastern Orthodox...54
  Mainline Protestant...51
  Muslim...45
  Historically Black Protestant...38
  Christian Evangelical...24
  Mormon...22
  Jehovah's Witness...8
  Source: 2008 Pew Forum U.S. Religious Landscape Survey

At first glance, a 77% acceptance of evolution (which I also take to mean an acceptance of the scientific method) sounds pretty good; right up there with the Buddhists and Hindus. On further reflection, though, perhaps there’s less reason for complacency.

I have a question regarding whether that percentage acceptance of evolution is growing or shrinking? Without understanding the Pew survey and its methodologies (including how those surveyed were selected), I can’t answer that. My intuition, however, is that it’s shrinking.

Why would this be the case? Simply because the sectors within the Jewish population showing the strongest demographic growth are the Haredi/Hassidic (ultra-Orthodox) segments, who are increasingly embracing Creationism and Intelligent Design, in imitation of their Fundamentalist Christian counterparts.

My understanding is that the cognitive dissonance between our scriptures and scientific knowledge about our universe was confronted and addressed centuries ago, by figures such as Maimonides. So, it’s something of a mystery to me as to why the sages of our very own Yahweh’s Witness movements choose to retreat into Biblical literalism.

Should this trend be of concern to us as progressive Jews in the broader sense? Our initial response might be that such views (which contradict common knowledge, common sense and scientific methods) simply cannot thrive, that they will eventually be crushed beneath the weight of evidence.

The problem with allowing events to simply take their course is that – through a combination of demographic growth, organisation and outreach, and just shouting louder – they may drown out other voices. Eventually these Fundamentalist views will be seen as part of mainstream Jewish beliefs. This will in turn succeed in driving rational Jews into the arms of all the other “isms” so dreaded by those who embrace the theology of fear, suspicion, hostility and inward focus.

The idea of Jewish Pluralism is close to the hearts of progressive Jews, but perhaps its time to be a little less accepting when we hear these backward views being identified with Judaism.

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Faithful can accept both Darwin and God, pastors say Freep.com Detroit Free Press
• Religion in American Culture -- Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
• Jewish views on evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Jews Say 'Feh' to Darwin AlterNet

Technorati Tags: Biblical Literalism,Creationism,Darwin,Evolution,Fundamentalism,Intelligent Design (ID),Jewish Pluralism

---

If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to the Cafe Birkenreis Atom/RSS Feed.

Progressive Judaism: Just Be Yourself

Last week I posted an entry regarding Hanukkah, suggesting that it’s time to become more assertive about a Hanukkah “moral” that’s more in keeping with the ethos of progressive Judaism, as well as being aligned with what we know about the personalities and events of that era.

The blog post was based on an item by Andy Ratto on MetaFilter entitled “The True Story of Chanukkah”. One of those who commented on the original piece was user Ghidorah (Jeremy Wilgus), who had this to say:

As a former conservative Jew, I'd go along with the Hassidic/Reform split. When I pretty much left the fold, it seemed to me that the conservative movement was falling all over itself to be more religious, that people in the conservative movement were adopting Hassidic practices as a form of one-ups-manship. It was pretty sad to me. I mean, the conservative movement had solid practices and rules, but through whatever kind of insecurity, or keeping up with the Lipschultzes, they were just throwing it away. As someone who had, at one point, deeply believed, yet struggled with certain things (keeping kosher, no TV on Saturday), it was another thing (of many) that pushed me away from Judaism.

A youth group I was in had a special, super-duper religious sub-section, for truly observant teens. They had an open meeting at one event a year, where anyone could come, and there would be a talmud discussion. While it's odd to say it, I kicked ass at talmud. Liking pepperoni on my pizza, however, kept me from being allowed into the club, though. That, and not wearing a kippah full time, among other things...

Although Ghidorah referred to Conservative Judaism, there’s a lesson in here that all of the progressive Jewish streams (what I’ve referred to elsewhere as ABO – Anything But Orthodoxy) need to take to heart. The lesson is that progressive Judaism needs to be centred on itself. It must not allow itself to internalise (or externalise) the belief or perception that it fits somewhere on a scale of observance or strictness, where more observant or stricter is better, less observant or less strict is worse.

Progressive Judaism is not “less observant” it is “differently observant”!

When I started to become a regular shul-goer again a few years back, I was surprised to find many rituals that were not around in the Reform Judaism of my youth had now become a part of it. While I’m quite happy that many of these beautiful traditions have found their way back into progressive Judaism, this careful and considered adoption of certain rituals should not be allowed to generate into the “observance-envy” referred to above. Down that path lies irrelevance and eventual extinction for progressive Judaism. We cannot outflank ultra-Orthodoxy and Hassidism on the right, and any attempt to do so would be tantamount to spiritual suicide.

Remember what your mother used to say about those awkward social situations: “Just be yourself!”

---

If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to the Cafe Birkenreis Atom/RSS Feed.

Hanukkah: Time to Supplant the Orthodox Rabbinic Narrative?

Andy Ratto (of the Jewish Andy blog) recently posted this interesting item on MetaFilter. “The True Story of Chanukkah” questions just about everything we fondly believe about this holiday.

I thought again how strange it is that – some 250 years since the start of the Enlightenment – even progressive Judaism is still seemingly constrained by the (Orthodox) rabbinic “narrative” when it comes to our celebrations and myths, including those relating to Hanukkah.

Why should this be a problem? These charming versions of pivotal events in our history are great for children. When those versions are challenged, however (either by the outside world or by our own questioning adult minds) we tend to see one of two responses:

• A withdrawal into fundamentalism and a rejection of any knowledge or methodology that does not square with the tenets of the cult (yes, Jews have cults too).
• A complete rejection of the entire Jewish anthology as so much “bobbe meises”, suitable only for children and the mentally deficient.

(In real life, the reactions tend not to be so radical. Many manage to somehow reconcile or hold the two versions of the Jewish anthology in balance, or keep their reservations in some private place while continuing to observe outwardly.)

Does a better understanding of the real history of Hanukkah mean we should stop celebrating it? Is Hanukkah still relevant and meaningful for the progressive Jew today? How do we as progressive (or just questioning) Jews maintain continuity, tell our story, celebrate our history and teach the lessons we would like to teach, while respecting knowledge, scholarship and science?

I believe that Hanukkah still belongs on the calendar of progressive Judaism, provided that we can bring both the storyline and the message in synch with scholarship, and with the ethos of progressive Judaism.

The tricky part is to embrace the idea the Judaism does not require a literal acceptance of every word, story or myth transmitted to us by our literature and traditions. This is central to what progressive Judaism is undergoing now, and for as long as our understanding of the universe continues to expand so rapidly, so I won’t go deeper into it here.

The easy part is to update our account of Hanukkah and bring it more or less in line with consensus scholarship, while also updating the moral and other lessons we should draw from the story. This could include the following (phrased as questions):

• How important is political independence compared to religious freedom? If religious freedom exists (and assuming there is no “existential threat”) what price should we be willing to pay for political freedom? (As we now know, the later, misguided struggle against Rome led to the destruction of the Jewish presence in Eretz Israel and almost 2,000 years of exile.)
• Is the imposition of a single Judaism worth the price of a civil war? Does monotheism have to be monolithic, or is there room for more than one interpretation of Judaism?
• Was this actually a setback for Judaism, in that the Temple cult was given a new lease of life, rather than making way for the distributed Judaism of the synagogue?
• Does religious tolerance apply within Judaism itself, or only in relation to “other” faiths?

Idol worship was at that stage the “red line” that Judaism dared not cross. In that form, idol worship no longer exists, but we could argue that more subtle forms have taken its place. The obsession with the right to settle in Judea, Samaria and Gaza might be seen as one form of idol worship; an obsession that jeopardises the unity of the Jewish people and the existence of the State. Another might be the cultist obsession with ritual observance, to the exclusion of the more subtle (and more difficult) ethical and moral imperatives of Judaism.

Judaism tends to be far more successful when it meets the ideological challenges of the day head on (as it did, very successfully, with Hellenism), rather than turning its back and refusing to engage (as “mainstream” Judaism has done in the age of enlightenment and reason) and retreating into superstition and ritual. Judaism did not stand back for or retreat from Hellenism, but learned what it could and became that much stronger for it.

Let’s continue to celebrate Hanukkah, and the rest of our splendid holy days and festivals. Let’s not, however, continue to be enslaved to the Orthodox rabbinic narrative, except where it adds value to progressive Judaism.

Judaism’s Reputation Takes a Beating Again

I should be used to it, but I still find myself disgusted by the actions of “august” bodies, such as those referred to below; one of which recently condemned Rabbi Haskel Lookstein’s participation in the interfaith service with President Barack Obama.

So, on the one hand, it’s not OK to take part in something that enhances perceptions about Judaism.

On the other hand, however, it’s OK for an entire delegation of Orthodox rabbis to meet with jailed Agriprocessors' CEO Sholom Rubashkin. A delegation that “included representatives of the Orthodox Union, the Rabbinical Council of America, the National Council of Young Israel, Agudath Israel of America and Chabad-Lubavitch”.

To observers out there, Rubashkin and Bernard Madoff appear to be vying with one another for the prize of “who has done the most damage to Jews and Judaism in 2008”. Despite this, however, we are treated to the nauseating sight of the entire pecking order of ultra-Orthodoxy in America prostrating themselves before Rubashkin. Surely he should be entitled to chaplaincy visits and nothing more?

According to the JTA article, however, the delegation was there “to offer Rubashkin support”. Is it the normal practice of these organisations to “offer support” to Jews who have entered the prison system? Or does this only apply to so-called observant Jews? Perhaps only moneyed observant Jews?

The article goes on to say that “At the conclusion of the meeting, Rubashkin led the group in prayer.” It also quoted Rabbi David Zwiebel as saying “I have to tell you, it was one of the most moving experiences I've had in some time” (referring to the prayer service). A moving experience? Please don’t make me nauseous. Taking gifts to an orphanage would be a moving experience, not this unseemly display.

It no longer concerns me that they bring Orthodoxy into disrepute by their actions; I doubt that they could bring its name any lower than it already is.

I do care, however, that their words and deeds reflect on Jews everywhere and Judaism as a whole in the eyes of the world. I do care that this fawning behaviour towards someone accused of offences that mock the very meaning and essence of Judaism affects us all. It tells both Jews and non-Jews all they need to know about the moral and ethical standards of Judaism in this age.

This is the answer they give to the questions “Why be Jewish?”, and “What is Judaism all about?” Do they really believe that the world, and those in search of answers within our own tradition haven’t noticed, and drawn their own conclusions?

(This blog post is a slightly revised version of a comment that originally appeared on the JTA website.)

Links/Reading/Resources:

• Rabbinic delegation meets with Rubashkin
• Orthodox group defends Lookstein