* Orthodoxy cannot with integrity allow itself to come across, either to the non-Orthodox community or to its own community, as a choice among equals.

* The same is true for an educational institution that teaches its students Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform perspectives of Torah and halacha with no notion of what is correct and what is not. It is the ultimate perversion of Orthodoxy to require that it validate perspectives that violate its fundamental tenets.

* (This stands in sharp contrast with the diversity that one sees within Orthodoxy and its institutions. The Orthodox community recognizes pluralism within the confines of halacha and one certainly encounters, for example, Orthodox synagogues with Ashkenazic, Sephardic, and chassidic minyanim all in one place. So too, one finds Orthodox educational institutions of many different flavors sharing teachers, rebbeim and staff.)

The article, entitled “Orthodoxy and Practical Pluralism In American Judaism,” then moves from core ideology to practical applications — and, lo and behold, the “pluralism” whose practical application is discussed is precisely in accordance with the standard definition:

* Reality plays a strong role in these determinations. Therefore, I do think that Orthodox students can pray in the Orthodox minyan at Hillel even though that same institution hosts Reform and Conservative services precisely because the students in such a minyan do not perceive Hillel as compelling the Orthodox students to validate the Conservative service.

Indeed, enough said, since this was proven 5 iterations ago.

- Rabbi Michael Broyde

http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/20273/Orthodoxy_and_Practical_Pluralism_In_American_Judaism.html

I also offered other alternatives of what was meant(comment 32).

I dont know Ms. Shapiro Katz. I have never met her. Until this article I had never heard of her. The shul she goes to seems to do things that I wouldn’t agree with. I dont know for sure what she meant. But I have to speak up when words are taken out of context and twisted into meanings that don’t neccessarily fit. It seems that someone dedicated to Torah, whose seal is Truth, would want to make sure that what they write is really and actually the Truth, and not just their own interpretation of it.

I will refrain from posting any more comments on this topic.

“Well, who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?”
Chico Marx (in Duck Soup)

But when one leaves Modern Orthodox seminaries to take up a position with a Reform Temple, and says regarding this transition that “I’m a pluralist educator now and I feel liberated,” some pretty amazing hoops must be leaped through to avoid the obvious: she finds it “liberating” to be associated with teaching “pluralist” material that Modern Orthodox seminaries would not teach.

Pluralist, in a Jewish setting, means a variety of Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and other takes on Torah. That’s what it means. Torah, anti-Torah, and everything in between. It is also the only thing she *could* have meant, because contrary to what Noam implied earlier in comment 32, the seminaries where she taught certainly explore the “eilu v’eilu” within Orthodoxy (and are not known for having “those on the right… trying to stifle”). And call that “eilu v’eilu” what you wish, no one calls it “pluralism” in a Reform educational system.

As EH said, “Emily finds herself unable and unwilling to say that she is Orthodox.” In other words, Shapiro Katz is not the internal critic of the Modern Orthodox seminary system that the article presents her as being, but rather someone out on the left fringe (or, apparently, perhaps even beyond it) with her own biases.

Somehow that seems awfully reminiscent of the point made in my blog entry, and this entire debate about what pretzel-twists we might explore in order to take the word “pluralist” out of its simple meaning… is rendered moot.

It seems to me that Steve Brizel is also a pluralist, as he lives in a pluralistic society here in the United States. He is also liberated, and in fact will be celebrating the anniversary of his liberation next month with a week long event, complete with special foods, dinners, and prayers. He also considers himself outside the bounds of traditional(Chareidi) Judaism. By the way, he doesn’t hold by absolutely every psak of RYBS(see specifically the Rav on teaching Talmud to women, and the educational system at the Rav’s school in Boston).

Isn’t it great how one can take things out of context for the sake of one’s point of view, even if it really is totally misconstruing the truth?

Moreover, the ad is consistent with the position taken by JOFA on this issue-the RCA PNA is treated as a non-entity and suddenly all of JOFA’s supporters become talmidim muvhakim of R Elyashiv, as if they had all followed R Eyashiv’s Piskei Halacha on a wide variety of issues, as opposed to the Gdolim in their own backyard. When one goes to the JOFA website, one sees nothing at the site either praising the RCA PNA, urging its use or commending the fact that its use has reduced the amount of agunos and litigation. One can offer numerous reasons for this, but IMO JOFA’s founders and supporters would rather not accept a valid solution that was written by a Gadol in their own backyard and endorsed by other Gdolim simply because of their lack of approval for other aspects of JOFA’s anti-halachic agenda. IMO, those who cry out “Tzedek, Tzedek, Tirdof” and deny the existence of “any meaningful effort to remedy the plight of agunot” should realize that the Talmud tells us that while “emes yesh lo raglayim, sheker ain lo raglayim.”

Today’s fashionable fundamentalism in the feeling-its-oats right wing of Orthodoxy is something I indeed find repugnant. But let me tell you that the far Left of Orthodoxy (of which Ms. Shapiro seems an able representative) is only slightly less unattractive (to me) and not doing a great job of keeping people engaged with Torah either (a far more important criterion than the label of “Orthodox” BTW).

EH may reject the “tzitzis checking” and “witch hunts” on the right–as well an intelligent person should. But the push for ideological conformity is also depressingly powerful in the Orthodox far left, whose avant garde often seems to pulse to the beat of chic academia and the 1960s.

The excessive fixation on ‘power issues’ and “gender” “equality” (some terms that beg for definition), and the sickening infiltration of cold and dessicated academic attitudes and moods into far Left MO bode very poorly for the long term sustainability of that camp–and when I say “sustainability” I mean in terms of a project even worth sustaining.

The disgust for views (almost any views!) even slightly farther rightist/conservative on the far Left seems basically to mirror the disdain for farther left/open views from sectors of the Orthodox right–again suggesting that that particular battle is less about who’s more generically “open-minded” than it is about core attitudes and philosophical orientation. Which is fine, but we need to be clear at all times about what the issues really are. (And of course there’s everybody else who’s not at one of the extremes).

As for Ms. Shapiro Katz, when she says she’s “liberated” does she mean from the politicized suppression of uncomfortable parts of Torah on the right? (which as I know happens often enough) Or does she mean “liberated” from the frameworks of Halacha, Midrash and Chazal that are key in the life and learning of the Jewish people? I don’t know, but for her own clarity she should.

I suppose all of this, including some of our silliest politicized schisms in the name of “Torah” (of which the “girls learning Gemara” split is one), as well as the dessication of Torah that has occurred on the right (and motivates many to head leftward), is part of the tumult of galus.

Source?

I would rephrase the state of American Jewry today:

“The number of people who are associating with an Orthodox lifestyle are too many to count. (And the numbers keep rising).”

(yes, I don’t have sources to back up my assertion, either)

AK

If she’s no longer checking her tzitzit, is that not scandalous?

It was never my intention to go on a witch hunt. It was my intention to validate R’ Menken’s assertion that this person, whom I’m sure is a fine, observant Jew in most ways, seems like an odd choice for a representative of Modern Orthodoxy - especially, as you say, if she refuses to call herself Orthodox.

Once again, the notion that a majority of MO views a power oriented agenda of Talmud study, egalitarian oriented rituals or radical changes in Hilcos Gittin as a major part of their community’s agenda as to what women should study cannot be demonstrated by the evidence on the ground. The simple facts are that the overwhelming majority of MO women are interested in people issues that impact on their interaction with other people and how to be a successful spouse, mother and educator within Halachic boundaries as opposed to power issues that in many instances reflect an externally driven agenda.

I think you’re reading too far into this, and trying to shove motivation on to me that isn’t there. If you wanted to know more about me, what would you do? I’m guessing that Google would be a good place to start. In fact, let’s try it: my real name is David Michael Zakar, aka DMZ. A quick Google search gives back:

1. My home page (with blog!)
2. An AIAA paper I co-wrote.
3. Random internet posts I’ve made about Linux and programming.
4. My Facebook profile.

You could easily assemble a very good picture of me from what I’ve said on the Internet, and one that would be both good and bad in the final viewing. I’m not assigning her a standard any different than mine. Not everyone is as public as I am, I admit, but that’s how it is.

I’m glad to hear Emily Shapiro Katz is keeps Shabbos and kashrus, and so forth. Then again, I’m pretty sure I never accused her of _not_ keeping those things, because I have no evidence that she does not, and no reason to believe she doesn’t. I’m sure she’s a great person. The only thing she was accused of was being far left on the MO spectrum (I did that), and of being an unfit Orthodox educator (that was the article author). In EH’s entire rant, he never actually got around to disproving my point, except by quoting irrelevant “bona fides”, as though people never change. I know I have.

In any event, in respect to the other folks here, I will drop the subject.

Which is what I mean by a Jewish basis. Or possibly just fairness. But I prefer the former as it imports an ethical dimension to forming a judgment on another human being on the basis of hearsay from the internet.

Someone (can’t think who ;)) said the problem was that “at a certain point, ego gets so invested that well-meaning people can’t see that the path they’re moving down isn’t going to lead anywhere good for the Jewish people”. Spot on I think…

Emily’s JOFA session was focused on feminist ideas and the experience of self-identified feminists (students or teachers) in the midrashot. Emily is not on a crusade to spread feminism in the Orthodox world - she acknowledges and respects that women have (and choose) different roles in different Orthodox communities. Her message to the Orthodox feminist community was simply that it should not assume that the midrasha programs share its values, in spite of their expressed commitment to women’s Torah study.

Finally, Emily’s Orthodox “bona fides” are solid - Frisch, NCSY, HASC, Midreshet Moriah, Stern, YUSSR, Machon Gold, Midreshet Lindenbaum, Atid. Emily was every inch a young female leader in the Modern Orthodox community. Nevertheless, when pushed regarding how she identifies today, Emily finds herself unable and unwilling to say that she is Orthodox. This, in spite of being shomeret shabbat, kashrut, etc.

I would suggest that the “liberation” Emily feels has everything to do with having gotten away from the tzitzit-checking and witch-hunting that characterizes some of the above posts.

It has been fascinating, and at times dismaying, to see how some members of the Orthodox community think and write based on so little information or understanding.

On one hand, there is the “dan l’kav zchut crowd” who, baruch HaShem, demonstrates that this midah is still alive and well.

But then there is the “let’s make judgments about a person’s commitments and beliefs based on a quote or two in a newspaper and whatever a Google search turns up” crowd…

The number of people who disassociate from Orthodoxy because of this crowd are too many to count. (And the numbers keep rising).

Use the power of your browser - eg, the find function. She’s there. And like I said, the timeline is corroborated pretty well - that’s almost certainly her. As for what Jewish basis - what’s that supposed to mean? Do I need two edim and a beis din for this discussion?

I personally don’t care much that she davens at a mixed minyan. I have a lot of good friends who do the same. But, guess what? When they start calling it “Modern Orthodoxy”, I also rip into them for it, too. No one’s relying on anything to be “against” her. We’re using them to establish that she is on the left fringe of MO, and should not be treated as a representative of the movement as a whole, which then leads into why JOFA is having someone like this speak, and what that means for the organization.

Clear?

Problem is, they’ve got their sources, and they’re entirely satisfied with them NO MATTER WHAT. They’re not interested in hearing yours as to why they’re wrong. For instance, the entire Shirah Chadasha system is basically built on the back of R’ Shapiro’s (admittedly well-written) article in EDAH, and that’s it. When R’ Henkin wrote a response arguing with it, did any of the people using R’ Shapiro’s article actually care enough to stop? Or did they just ignore it and move on? Don’t get me wrong: the far right of Orthodoxy to much the same extent.

I’m not saying the individuals involved don’t mean well. But at a certain point, ego gets so invested that well-meaning people can’t see that the path they’re moving down isn’t going to lead anywhere good for the Jewish people. And, unfortunately, there are people who will use any flimsy halachic excuse to justify their own behavior, rather than using halacha to guide their behavior.

hp - I try to use my imagination to envisage why people say the things they do. In undertaking that exercise I assume (unless I have cast-iron evidence to the contrary) that they are neither wicked, wilfully undermining Judaism nor stupid. Not only does that seem to me to be compliant with the halacha about how to Judge things (which is my day job) but I am wholly unsure of the extent to which my life or my middot are improved by doing otherwise.

I hope that helps.

As I noted above, a calm and source based discussion on the halachic issues regarding women and halacha is one thing. What is outrageous and maddening is this impulse to try to discredit those to the left. If you want to discredit them, show how their view of halacha is wrong. Bring some sources. Understand what they are saying and then show why you think their way of thinking is not accurate. You may find that there is a halachic basis for what they believe and do after all. Calling people names, impugning their motives, and jumping to conclusions when all you have to go by is one article in a newspaper(and possibly a few internet pages) is not very fair.

Wow! I hope you use your imagination for great things!