- This is unfair as it takes an issue out of context. What has always been central (before Agudah existed) is the primacy of Torah. The cheshbon behind kollel surely factors in the inestimable hit that Torah took in the holocaust. Seems closed-minded to be dogmatic about the one principle (men working) important as it may be, without factoring in all elements. To make a meaninful statement one would have to weigh all the factors, costs / benefits, etc, and only then make the ronouncement that kollel is not worth it. I don’t want to have to resort to the fundamentalistic-sounding argument of “because the gedolim said so” but lema’aseh whatever framework you use has to have a sound way of accounting for, and properly weighting, all the factors.

I appreciate your attempt, but I am afraid I am still perplexed. I would assume your description is the definition of “cherem,” but it is not the definition of excommunication. To excommunicate literally means to exclude from the community. According to the Moetzes’s statement, the synagogue is now to be treated as if it were a heterodox synagogue. That sounds like excommunication to me.

—————————–

Is a copy available on line?
I find it interesting that there is little,if any,real time dialog on these issues (i.e. how about 2 Rabbis who view the issue differently discussing it respectfully in a public forum rather than everyone talking past each other) IMHO A Reader’s boiling down is correct with the addition of “our understanding” before rhe words “the mesora”
KT

However, to me that is not the issue at all. Nor are the particulars of how the evidence has been gathered the central point. To me, it seems obvious that the real issue here is, whether a murderer deserves to keep on living or not. And I seem to recall that the only commandment repeated in every book of the Torah, is the one that says, “If a man sheds blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” G-d Himself has thus come out very strongly in favor of capital punishment for murderers.

I also recall reading somewhere that Jewish fiction is characterized by a virtual obsession with goodness and morality. That is one obsession worth being obsessed about. When I read fiction or any book, my purpose is to become more aware of what life on this Earth is all about, not learn about some fantasy that somebody concocts in his own mind.

As for Marcus Lehmann, I read his book on Rabbi Akiva, and it is fantastic, a book I very highly recommend. But the book with the best stories of all, really are the ones in the Torah. G-d is a great storyteller.

It is not clear if Agudah’s Moetzet is coming out against Yoetzet for Taharas Hamishpachah.

My interpretation is, that while the above positions might be outside the boundaries of the formal roles for women in the Agudah community, the Agudah does not see its role as meddling in every affair outside its community. Its main interest is achdus within the confines of Orthodoxy.

Which makes the statement against Avi Weiss granting a Rabbinic title and position granted all the more meaningful. It must be beyond the pale.

Rabbi Zwiebel’s point is well taken. Therefore, I would welcome his consistency and intellectual honesty as it relates to tradition and modern innovations. I find it ironic that “Contemporary Kollelism”, which is central to the Agudah educational and societal model, has transcended the notions of the male being the sole or primary supporter of the family. While Kollel wives juggling parnassa and family responsibilities might not qualify as Contemporary Feminism, I would welcome his Biblical interpretation of precisely how that fits into our Mesorah.

If we tell bochurim and frum girls that they should stand under the chupa and hear the kesuba promise that the man will provide food and dwelling for the wife, with full knowledge that he will not do so, we’re telling the world that traditional roles as expressed by Chazal are there to be avoided, to be subverted. Once we accept that roles that the Torah and Chazal gave men can be moved to women, we’re starting down a slippery slope that leads to women Rabbis.

If we return to honoring the Torah’s and Chazal’s roles in their entirety, we can set the example that will iy’H repair the breach.

It is not clear if Agudah’s Moetzet is coming out against Yoetzet for Taharas Hamishpachah.

Why not take Agudah at face value? This is the first time they saw fit to make a statement. Avi Weiss has given a woman an actual Rabbinic title and a more Rabbinic role within his synagogue. Now that the JPost piece is out we understand there was an underlying incident.

And while Agudah likely does not recommend the ideas mentioned above, they weren’t a political statement or as “innovative”. The positions that were created in the past (a) didn’t confer a Rabbinic title, and the roles were carefully defined to address needs in the women’s realm. Also, the Toanot Din and Yoatzot were taught in a system that emphasized the role of Poskim (i.e. male Rabbis) at the top of the hierarchy.

[YA - I share your assumption that articulating the whys and wherefores will be complex and nuanced - and therefore not appropriate for a newspaper op-ed. We could and should expect our own local manhigim to deal with the issue in longer presentations. Why assume that this will not happen? Groups all along the continuum of traditional Orthodoxy are wrestling with the question of how and when to respond, including the OU and the RCA! Yesterday, Rav Avraham Ausband dedicated a shiur at a large gathering in the Riverdale Yeshiva to the topic of mesorah, clearly in response to the issue at hand. I have not listened to it yet (my youngest son did and thought it terrific, but he is a talmid!), but I heard that it was well received by all, including baalei batim of the Centrist community who attended.

I assume that other capable voices will also weigh in.]