Magazine

Blunder of the Reform Movement, Orthodox stagnation

03/21/2013 16:11 By ELAD UZAN

ACCORDING TO the logic guiding the actions of ‘Women of the Wall’, Judaism as a whole must undergo a revolutionary revision, in the spirit of the Reform Movement, so it can become a truly liberal and tolerant religion.

Notice in a Jerusalem neighborhood calls for haredim to ‘save the Kotel’ from the Women of the Wall

Photo by: Itai Orion

38 MAGAZINE March 22, 2013 OPINION ‘Be strong and zaye gezunt to all of you,” said Anat Hoffman, head of the Israel Religious Action Center, in her letter to a number of former paratroopers who joined the most recent Women of the Wall act of remonstrance. The analogy is quite simple: those who took part in the near-mythical act of liberating the Temple Mount are once again called to arms; this time, for the “2013 liberation of the Wall struggle.” The illustration leaves no room for imagination, and the connotation is clear. This time, Orthodox Judaism is the occupier.

Women of the Wall (WoW) has been operating for over 20 years in the legal and media spheres for the allowance of worship at the Western Wall according to the procedures of the Reform Movement. Shortly after its petition to the Supreme Court, the Religious Affairs Ministry decreed Regulation 2 (a) of the protection regulations of holy places, which provides that “in holy places, it is forbidden to conduct religious ceremonies that are not according to local custom, offending the feelings of the worshipers”; by “local custom,” the meaning here is of course the Orthodox custom.

Versus the arguments of Orthodoxy on this issue, it is important to note that under Halacha, or Jewish Law, women are required to pray, just as men are (BT Brachot). The Mishna indeed states that women are exempt from positive, commandments, but the Talmud explains that prayer is not included among these. Also, according to Maimonides, prayer is not a commandment which is limited to a certain time (Mishne Torah, Laws of Prayer), which women are exempt from.

But the main problem, in my opinion, is not “cosmetic” halachic adjustments. Contemporary deliberation focuses on the Kotel, but of course is not limited to it. According to the logic guiding WoW’s actions, it is clear that Judaism as a whole must undergo a revolutionary revision, in the spirit of the Reform Movement, so it can become a “truly” liberal and tolerant religion. Perhaps this is so. But to use the courts – an extra-halachic institution – to force Jewish religious law to change is the wrong way to do it.

Of course, the Reform Movement is not the only one to blame; haredim themselves have turned to the Supreme Court, when political conditions seemed to fit. Still, such attempts to deal with issues via the courts resulted in the Orthodox public (not necessarily the ultra-Orthodox) choosing the way of self-differentiation and compartmentalization in place of dealing with the inescapable need for comprehensive revision. This change is a must, so that Halacha can provide appropriate solutions to questions of culture, women, technological developments, etc., in a Jewish and democratic state.

Moreover, the majority of Orthodox Jews are living in a completely modern world, and the tension that exists between the religious dimensions of their life and the others is obvious. Still, this dissonance cannot be resolved by cogent legislation of any kind, and one cannot solve emotional and religious dissensions using ordinances, let alone at the site most sacred to Jews. As the late philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz noted, while Israel has religious institutions and laws, these are not necessarily of any validity when it comes to establishing what Jewish law is.

This is the mistake the Reform Movement makes.

It’s crucial to note that the Reform Movement does not want to base the changes needed on the values of Judaism and Halacha itself: they appeal to “universal” values (making an arbitrary and convenient compilation of these), as these are in its view paramount; the values of Judaism as developed in a tradition of 3,000 years have no meaning whatsoever, other than being a kind of pesky surplus. Universal values are thus to be forced on Halacha, instead of having Halacha adapt by using its own liberal tradition.

This Jewish tradition that evolved over thousands of years probably has something to teach us, and few are the nations (if any) whose ancestors bequeathed them so many cultural treasures. But beyond the abandonment of these, as often required by contemporary Reform practice, instead of calling for the establishment of a modern Sanhedrin, one reflecting all streams of Judaism and benefiting the entire Jewish nation, the Reform Movement is knocking at the doors of the Supreme Court, thinking the benefits of this approach could outweigh the risks. This mind-set causes alienation where there could have been dialogue, and contains no less calamitous elements than the halachic stagnation of the Orthodoxy.

This is nothing new. All religions have their own conflicts with modernity. Some types of Christianity embraced modernity to such a degree that, for all intents and purposes, they have given up their beliefs.

Europe is no longer Christian, but atheistic. Islam, for this among other reasons, strongly opposes any sort of modernization. Judaism, with its rich tradition of meeting modern demands together with preserving religious customs need not follow either path, especially since it does have, unlike Islam for example, a strong liberal tradition, that of “Beit Hillel.”

THE POINT of the last paragraph deserves a more detailed exposition. The risk of forcing change on religion can be seen in the fate of American religions.

According to the Handbook of Denominations in the United States (Mead, 1961), there were at the time hundreds of denominations, mostly but certainly not exclusively Christian, in the US. To pick one random liberal denomination, there was the American Ethical Union, which saw the purpose of life as “creating a more humane society.” A worthy goal but, while the AEU still exists, it is in effect one small society headquartered in New York. Similar liberal denominations, both Christian (e.g., Episcopalians) and Jewish (e.g., Reconstructionists) also suffered a decline in membership and influence. On the other hand, conservative and even fundamentalist movements are flourishing.

One need not, of course, consider religious reform only or even mainly due to its possible effect on membership.

Just because something is popular doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. However, the lesson is that one should be careful. Religion is religion, not social activism or the mere following of general ethical principles. Catholic dogma might seem absurd to the non-Catholic, but it is a religious dogma that distinguishes the believer from all other religions. But what makes an Episcopalian different from a member of the Church of England or a liberal German Lutheran, or for that matter from a Jewish Reconstructionist, if all talk of God, salvation, heaven or hell is treated almost as a fable, and all emphasis is placed on expected good behavior – the golden rule, in effect – which is the same sort of behavior expected of any decent person, religious or not? The risk Jewish Reform and Reconstructionist movements run is that, by minimizing the importance of dogma and Halacha or even jettisoning them altogether, they will cease in any important respect to be Jewish at all. The momentary popularity gained by ignoring Halacha in the short run is, history shows, likely to end with leaving Judaism altogether – because Halacha continued to be ignored in the long run. For this reason, as said, changes should be made within Halacha, gradually, and in a moderate way. It is quite possible to reform Judaism while keeping the Halacha and the Jewish dogma which makes Judaism a religion – as opposed to a mere social group – in the first place. But to do this, the change must come from within, and not be forced from without. ■

The writer is a jurist and conducts research in Business Law at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya. He writes about law, culture and history.

Uzan.elad@post.idc.ac.il •

Talkback

Blunder of the Reform Movement, Orthodox stagnation

ACCORDING TO the logic guiding the actions of ‘Women of the Wall’, Judaism as a whole must undergo a revolutionary revision, in the spirit of the Reform Movement, so it can become a truly liberal and tolerant religion.

JPosts Sites:

Sites Of Interest:

Services:

JPost Conferences:

Information: