The issues of how to assess the intentions and impact of other religious groups and whether and how to engage with them are critical issues and I am glad that R. Adlerstein is laying out his very instructive experiences and thoughtful observations on the matter. I note a tendency, however, for such discussions (even when they are informed - which is rare) to focus solely on the “other.” What are their intentions? What are their purposes? What are their beliefs? Can we trust them? Interestingly, of course, these conversations flow mostly around groups which are trying to befriend and help Jews - it is a non-starter around those who snub us or are overtly hostile. (Even when it comes to liberal Jewish apologist types who constantly try to hook up with liberal Christian denominations, these questions aren’t asked - in fact they stubbornly avoid the libs’ obvious and unrepentant hostility toward us.)

I think there always needs to be a parallel - indeed, an interwoven - track in such conversations and I’d like to start that in the instant case - What are our intentions? What has our track record been in dealing with these groups or the issues that matter most to them? What criteria have we been using to determine the appropriate nature of engagement?

Awareness of Jewish history and clarity about the remarkable durability and danger of real anti-Semitism is vital. But self-indulgent wallowing in a sense of contextless eternal victimhood weakens us spiritually, morally and politically.

A Catholic aquaintance just couldn’t believe that L’Osservatore Romano, a Vatican newspaper, could have been so obtuse and mean-spirited as to criticize Israel for offering IDF field hospitals to Sri Lanka.

She was right. Catholic World News has run a retraction. In fact, the paper criticized Sri Lanka for spurning the aid offered by Israel! The Vatican paper was in fact complimenting Israel, and attacking the small-mindedness of the Moslem forces within Sri Lanka that militated for a refusal of an Israeli presence.

Given that world media stayed away in droves from the story of Israel’s quick and generous offer, the Vatican’s getting it right and broadcasting it should be noted by us with appreciation.

A few days ago, I threw out the idea that the adoption of divestment motions by mainline churches is a greater threat to Jewish interests than PETA’s challenge to shechita. The former introduces the Big Lie of Israel as an apartheid state to mainstream America; the latter is the work of folks most Americans see as kooks.

I stand by my assessment, although the cheering in the background is barely audible.

My posting told a story of a Presbyterian hierarchy so entrenched in their contempt for Israel, that they have moved beyond the original motion, compounding mendacity with borderline Jew-baiting. I promised to talk about another side to the story. Some of it has already been anticipated by several bloggers and commenters in the last few days.

I have invested much time in the last year getting to know different Christian denominations. It would not be inaccurate to say that almost all denominations have, one way or another, so significantly modified their stance towards Jews, that we must think of modifying our approach to them. (Those who are not Hebrew-text-challenged should check out the comments of the Netziv to the meeting of Esav and Yaakov, where our Sages tell us, according to one opinion, that Esav at that moment was moved to embrace Yaakov as a beloved brother. The Netziv tells us that this is a paradigm for the future. There will be times when the world of Esav will reach out to us in brotherly embrace, at which time we will reciprocate that embrace and acceptance.)

The Jewish Times article (dicussed below) talks about our blog and the perceived media bias against observant Jewry, but also talks about the inherent conflict between journalism and Judaism.

It is difficult to be a good journalist and follow the rules against lashon harah, gossip or evil speech… Journalism schools teach that all information is good and as long as it is presented accurately and in the proper context, what people do with that information is not the journalist’s problem.

This was an appropriate part of the article, because it explains in part why there are so few Orthodox journalists. Since most journalists are therefore on the outside looking in, a substantial part of the distorted portrayal of Torah observance in the news media is the result not of intentional bias, but simple ignorance.

Similarly, after I quoted Greg’s note about us, someone submitted the following query in the comments section, asking how one balances blogging with the laws against lashon hora, gossip:

David Klinghoffer on black and white and shades of gray…Personally, I think I disagree. I think it is is all black and white, you just have to get really close to distinguish the pixels.

“Orthodoxy and The Blog” is the title of an article about Cross-Currents, appearing in this week’s edition of the Baltimore Jewish Times. It’s a good article! I do not recall saying that the blog is intended to give “the community a place to vent,” though that may be accurate once in a while.

The writer is Joel Shurkin, whom the denizens of soc.culture.jewish and soc.culture.jewish.moderated know as a Conservative idealogue — but a fair one. He and I share a dedication to the Jewish People, a good and growing friendship, and very little agreement on substantive issues. My impression is that he finds that a bit more troubling than I do — but he’s learning that yeshivos train people to argue passionately with their best friends.

One substantive point: the article refers to “men who generally comment and start the conversation.” We continue to search for more writers, and we are equal-opportunity! Suggestions for writers able to help with gender diversity will be accepted at the front desk.

Okay - so here’s the idea - Every year, the excellent bloggers at National Review Online’s “The Corner” issue predictions for the year to come. At the end of the year, their predictions are reviewed for prescience…

Why don’t we do the same for the Jewish world? (Yeah, yeah - we shoulda done it back in Elul, but that’s the time of year we’re busiest; this is the time of year we’re the least busy, so I pasken it’s mutar.)

Anyone else up for this?

Jonathan sends me a cautionary note; but it is a “reminder” of something that I have never forgotten.

I only mention this fascinating item as a reminder to those like myself and my friend Jeff Ballabon, who have been buoyed by the widespread support of evangelical Christians for Israel, that Christian anti-Semitism still exists and is often theological in nature.

It is not some universal benevolent Christendom, out there, Jonathan. My work in that regard is about something primarily (not quite uniquely - but almost) American.

One day we’ll do a whole shpiel about the tribal core of Europe vs the idea core of America and how that distinction manifests in religion.

Fascinating stuff…

Thoughts?

My latest Jewish Week column (December 24) discusses the mounting troubles faced by the Conservative movement. I noted that Solomon Schechter schools, many of which are experiencing a declining enrollment and some have closed, are Jewishly superior to nearly all transdenominational Community day schools and that their decline and the more general decline of Conservatism does not bode well for Israel or kiruv activities. I also suggested that Conservatives needed to have a more unified and more vigorously led movement. A Rosh Yeshiva called to say that the column was “a hot potato,” with people wondering why I felt it necessary to give advice to Jews who aren’t observant. Perhaps I shouldn’t be giving such advice. Perhaps it would be better if the Conservatives would move further away from our heritage and ultimately walk away entirely from Jewish life, taking the path already taken by at least half of American Jews.

Abe Foxman is at it again. The publicity-seeking head of the Anti-Defamation League recently wrote to Israel’s Chief Rabbis urging them to condemn the phenomenon of yeshiva students in Jerusalem’s Old City attacking Christians. Only one such incident, however, has been reported, in which a teenager studying at a national religious high school (who was wrongly described by the New York Times as “fervently Orthodox”), spat at a Greek Orthodox clergyman. The boy subsequently apologized.

Journalist Diane DuBrow asked Laura Kam, the director of the ADL’s Jerusalem office, whether the office possessed any documentation of any other such incidents. Kam replied that she had no such documentation.

It appears that Foxman was just seeking a little more air time at the expense of religious Jews.

Some readers of this site may have caught Hillel Halkin’s piece in last week’s New York Sun in which he quoted at length from a letter from a girl named Sarah written soliciting contributions for her upcoming wedding. Halkin found the letter infuriating and berated the poor girl and the community from which she comes for turning to working people like him for tzedakah. He even questioned whether Sarah really exists.

At least on the latter score, Halkin can rest easy. By rather remarkable serendipity, I was able to check out Sarah’s story. It turns out that a neighbor of mine teaches Sarah in the Old Beis Yaakov Seminary in Jerusalem, where Sarah is completing the equivalent of a B.A. degree in music. The girl’s actual story is even sadder than that quoted by Halkin. Her mother passed away when she was ten (in Sarah’s arms) and her father is not emotionally stable or able to work. Sarah lived in a variety of foster homes after her mother’s passing. The young man she intends to marry also lost his mother when he was less than two, and after his father remarried shortly thereafter, was shuttled through a long series of foster homes.

Despite these inauspicious circumstances, it appears that Sarah and her husband-to-be have pretty good chances in life. She is very talented. A musical in which she starred recently played numerous times in Jerusalem, and he is described as a budding talmid chacham.

Halkin’s assertion that chareidim regularly turn to secular Jews like him for tzedakah is laughable. Down-and-out Jews are more likely to go door-to-door in chareidi nieghborhoods, even if they are not religious, than to affluent secular neighborhoods, like that in which Halkin lives. They know chareidi Jews are trained to give. Or they make come to one of the many soup kitchens founded by chareidi organizations, like Meir Panim or Chazon Yeshayahu, which primarily serve non-religious Jews.

NOTE: This was a mistranslation, as our blog helped publish. L’Osservatore Romano condemed the fighting Sri Lankans for not setting aside their differences to welcome Israeli help.

One remarkable by-product of the horrendous disaster in the Southeast Asia was a denunciation of Israel that appeared in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano. Israel was accused of having refused to send relief supplies to Sri Lanka, a charge that a moment’s research would have revealed to be patently false. Israel is typically one of the first nations to respond to any natural disaster. In this case, Sri Lanka turned down Israel’s offer of medical relief supplies and personnel because the relief team was part of a military unit.

The editorial by the Jesuit publication employed a variety of anti-Semitic tropes from ancient to modern. In the face of devastation that should ‘reinforce the universal perspective,” opined the paper, some nations, referring to Israel, seem incapable of escaping a “small-minded approach that restricts their horizons.” Thus the paper conjured up ancient stereotypes of Jews as haters of all but their own, which it implicitly juxtaposes to the universalism and love of the Church.

The paper went on to urge a “radical and dramatic change of perspective” among people “too often preoccupied with making war.” In the Vaticans eyes, it is Sharon and Israel who are the warmongers standing in the path of an era of peace and love for all in the Middle East.

Can…We… Just… Get… Out…. Of… The… UN, …Already?!?

The only one who got the PETA thing right was Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Weinreb of the OU.

I’m glad I finally said it. I’ve been wanting to say it for weeks, and didn’t have the guts.

Everyone else made two egregious errors. First – you can’t win every battle, even when you are right. Second – not everything that we do in the name of Judaism in general or of shechita in particular is all that holy and defensible.

Greg (see Yaakov’s previous post) says: “Overall, this means a net increase in the quality of ideas and dialogue available, but I wonder how long before the censorship and stigmatization common to the traditional, offline Orthodox world sets in to the point where it is no longer worth it to participate in the conversation.”

The raisha (first part of this statement) is a nice compliment. I hope there is truth to it - some thoughtful Ortho discussion would be a breath of fresh air in what looks to me to be a really mixed bag of Jewish blogs used as personal therapy.

Greg, of the Presence blog, found us last week:

Via Hirhurim comes Cross-Currents, a new blog featuring some heavyweight Orthodox Jews, in both the rabbinic and political spheres.

Things are starting to get interesting. While Orthodox Jewish use of the Internet as a means of social expression and communal interaction began with those on the fringe (meaning, people like me with somewhat skewed theologies, or the kollel-wives-cum-posekim over at Hashkafah.com), expect the mainstream, beginning with organizations like Torah.org to enter the conversation. I’ll wager organizations like the OU or Star-K will have blogs (or blog-like pages) up by the end of 2005. Overall, this means a net increase in the quality of ideas and dialogue available, but I wonder how long before the censorship and stigmatization common to the traditional, offline Orthodox world sets in to the point where it is no longer worth it to participate in the conversation. It wouldn’t surprise me if, in three years time, your kids could get suspended from school for what you write on your blog.

First Scary Thought: I find myself in a blog among Orthodox heavyweights. Which is true, although my reason for being here is because I first had the idea to create a blog of this nature, and knew how to set up the software. Oh yes, and I do enjoy writing about “issues of the day.” But the truth is that the diverse writers here are, as those who know them will tell you, a truly outstanding group, and I’m lucky to be allowed in. This is no exercise in false humility. Ask Greg — he worked for me one summer. He knows.

I hated his piece on hate…but I love his piece on love…absoutely terrific stuff from Meir Soloveichik.

(I agree with the general principle that hate plays a vital role, but I thought the hate piece was way too broad a defense of all kinds of unsavory things - suicide, cruelty, revenge. But this love piece is beautiful.)

I couldn’t resist. My heart just bursts with gratitude. And to think I ever said anything mean about PCUSA head Clifton Kirkpatrick.

His letter to President Bush must have been his Christmas gift to me. He writes about the recent trashing of one of his own churches in Mosul. You would think that this disturbed him. You would think that he realized that it wasn’t done by Catholics in a replay of the Counter-Reformation.

No, he hasn’t figured that out. True to his liberal colors, he has managed to learn why a bunch of Islamofascists trashed his church. Does it have anything to do with a program of invalidating any other faith besides radical Islam? Nah…

“In a part of the world where Christians lived in relative peace and security with their majority Muslim neighbors prior to the U.S. invasion, this is a great tragedy.”

http://www.animalscam.com/organizations.cfm

or, how about this one?

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/images/ads/enlargement/print_peta_rats.jpg

I want to open up the following discussion with my fellow bloggers and with any of the millions of of our readers who care to comment (gee, I hope the server can handle it):

How should our community - in this case, let us define that as the highly affiliated, religiously/philosophically traditional, observant Jewish community - react to (or become involved in fighting) if at all, the wholesale slaughter of Christians in Sudan?

Hmmm… I think R. Yaakov and R. Avi are on to something…maybe that’s what the Talmud means when it says that immediately preceding the advent of the Messiah “pnei hador k’pnei hakelev” (the face of the generation is like the face of the dog)…

Oops. Turns out that PETA was misquoting their own fearless leader. This, in the very same letter in which PETA proudly claimed that it “has never been duplicitous.”

The Mishnah says that in the era before the Messiah’s coming, Chutzpah will proliferate. Truly the Messiah must be knocking on the door.

The following from Rabbi Avi Shafran:

Hey, R. Yitz, I agree that the “mainstream” churches you mention are a problem. When, on earth, have I ever suggested otherwise? Your charge - that I am oblivious to them simply because I chose instead to mention the danger of the far left in a previous post - is completely baseless.

On the other hand, the fact that you do not consider the “loonies” as you put them to be threatening simply suggests that you don’t realize how much access and influence they have - in DC as well as in state capitals.

While some of my colleagues on this blog (Yaakov Menken and Jeff Ballabon in particular) continue to hammer away at their keyboards in high dudgeon, they are oblivious to the real devils lurking out there.

PETA? Everyone knows they are crackpots. Leftist loonies? They may not be out, but they are down, after the reds trashed the blues. They will continue to do damage, but much of the wind has departed their sails. The majority of the country is just not paying all that much attention to their whining.

Relax, guys. We shouldn’t be expending so much energy on those problems. Israel will continue to be demonized by the radical left, especially on campus. The real power-brokers outgrow that stuff, and the majority of Americans ignore it. The real danger is when the rhetoric of the left wends its way into the heartland of America, when leftist rant is garbed in respectability.

The people who are doing that are in the so-called Mainline Protestant churches: Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists and Lutherans. The calls for divestment from Israel – implicitly equating Israel with apartheid South Africa, the only country to be the target of a sustained and successful divestment campaign in the past – are exporting the output of leftist fever swamps and their hatred of Israel to the pews of Establishment America. This is what we should really be worried about.