Rabbi Landsberg's Blog

Feeling Peckish?

The question of outside influences is at the heart of another debate, this one about a new Conservative movement hekhsher (kashrut certification), entitled a tsedek hekhsher ("justice certification").  This new certification would evaluate labor conditions in slaughterhouses and would be a seal of social responsibility, not slaughter techniques. 

There is, of course, vehement opposition to this, for the fact that labor conditions are being assessed according to a secular liberal sensibility, not halakhah.  You can access a good summary of the issue here.

And, for those of you concerned about the treatment of the animals as well as the human workers, send thanks to my friend and colleague Rabbi Adam Frank who, together with his brother Aaron, brought about a decision by the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Conservative movement against certain previously allowed slaughter techniques.  You can read the CJLS's decision here.

Alien Impositions

My mother--an experienced rebbetzin--always said that a rabbi has no more than two or three sermons in them; rabbinic sermons are either variations on deeply cherished themes or "one-offs" (sermons for a particular moment in time, without an extended life span).

I don't know if she is correct (I'm sure many congregants in many shuls probably think so), but I do know that one of my oft repeated tropes concerns liberalism and Judaism.  I strongly believe that Judaism is not reducible to current liberal values. Much of what Jews call their values derive from the Enlightenment and its reaction--ideas that have been imbibed through the painful but liberating encounter with European thought by figures such as Moses Mendelssohn and others.   

This truth, however, can be difficult for liberal Jews to acknowledge.  Jews are plagued by a gnawing doubt and seek instead to syncretize divergent beliefs.  We fear that we are saying that Judaism is insufficient or incorrect somehow, if we acknowledge that we incorporate values from outside of Judaism into how we live our lives as Jews.  What we are doing instead--I would argue--is confusing our politics with our transcendent Judaism; the one cannot lessen the other.  I digress so let me say it more simply. I do not need the crutch of Judaism to defend with passion the values and loyalties I hold dear.

Read through a recent debate hosted by Jewcy, between Steven I. Weiss and Daniel "Mobius" Sieradski.  They touch on these matters as they argue the question Is Social Justice the Soul of Judaism?   It is a question of special importance for identified Reform Jews, given the Reform movement's historical identification of liberal values with Jewishness.

Look Left, Right, Left...

My head is spinning (and not simply because I sit in front of my computer, sipping my fourth cup of coffee).  This week, the Jewish world seems abuzzing with disputes.  Yet, despite the vast multitude of voices, opinions, ideologies and arguments out there, I am struck by how many of them center around the same question:  what are we Jews?  This fundamental question of our collective identity underlies all other debates, including the one raging right now over diaspora Jewry's proper relation with Israel. 

I will share many of these conversations with you over the course of the next week, so as to give us time to reflect on each particular dialogue.  Right now, I wanted to start with one that cuts to the bone within the liberal Jewish world.  David Klinghoffer, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and former Reform Jew (now Orthodox), throws down the gauntlet in his articulate, challenging article, "The Limitations of Liberal Pluralism."  He questions the viability of liberal Judaism over the course of several generations, noting the disproportionately high intermarriage rate among identified Reform Jews. 

Daniel Septimus, a founding editor of MyJewishLearning.com, responds directly and without defensiveness.  He posts twice on his blog, once about the value of liberalism and once about the relationship between liberalism and intermarriage.  He does not resolve the difficult challenges faced by the liberal Jewish community which seeks to maintain strong Jewish identity and continuity; instead, he simply acknowledges it.  ["Klinghoffer is right to hint at the hypocrisy of many liberal Jews who seem bewildered by the high rate of intermarriage..."].  His willingness to address real issues within the Reform community is not to be taken for granted, yet it is only a first step.  We are left with the vital question:  on what basis do we--liberal Jews--argue for inmarriage, when our children question us?

I know what I think, and I will share over the course of the week.  For now, what do you think?

Pencils Down!

An addendum to yesterday's post:  inject some humor into what is a deeply serious debate and take Slate magazine's quiz:  Are You a Liberal Anti-Semite?  Overlook the America-centrism and enjoy.

Open Forum or Den of Lions?

Tony Judt, the outspoken, sometimes outstanding professor at NYU and controversial advocate of a one state solution for the Israeli /Palestinian conflict (see his article Israel:The Alternative), is again in the news.  You may recall the hoopla several months ago when an invitation for Judt to speak had been revoked--perhaps, as Judt maintained, due to the strong arm tactics of Abe Foxman of the ADL (though this New York Times magazine piece suggests otherwise here). Judt stated that his Constitutional freedom of speech had been transgressed. 100 leading thinkers and writers signed a petition supporting Judt, though both Christopher Hitchens (read here) and Leon Wieseltier (read here) shared some choice words about Judt's claims. 

Judt railed against the alleged silencing of liberals and dissenting voices within the Jewish community.  And now, the parameters of conversation within the Jewish universe are again being discussed.  A recent article, "'Progressive' Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism", published by the American Jewish Committee posits that some Jews are feeding the current anti-semitism.  Immediately, the controversy exploded.  The New York Times' Patricia Cohen summed up the furor in an article on the matter, quoting Judt among others. 

This is a conversation that is fraught and is one that many are already engaged in [given the number of congregants who have forwarded articles on this recent debate to me]. I have little taste for Tony Judt's seeming embarrassment and vitriol. I place Jewish nationhood as one of the pivots of my Judaism, so I am obviously not in Judt's company. Those Jews who feel or think otherwise are in a different place from myself--but in fairness, they are not a historical aberration in the Reform Movement.   

It is important to recognize that the era of any easy assumption of consensus between Jews is over and--even more disturbing--that the fissures appearing between intellectual academia Jews and synagogue Jews are only the beginning.