Seth Kadish brought up an important point, one which I hope to deal with at some point - that of the halakhic and hashkafic boundaries of MO. In the meantime, however, I wish to address another issue. I stand accused of "paslanut" - of deligitimizing and mislabeling the Ne'emanei Torah Ve'Avodah movement as "hard left". With regard to the first charge, deligitamization, I emphatically plead "Not Guilty". If I were interested in deligitamizing them, I would have used terms like "neo-Reform", "de-facto Conservative" and all the other well-known epithets. I did not say they are not part of us, merely that they are very far to one side. As for the second charge, I still answer with a slightly more qualified "not guilty", and stand by my argument that they are on the far left of the MO spectrum.
It is true that SOME of Ne'emanei Torah Va'Avodah's public policy positions are indistinguishable from what used to be mainstream but a few decades ago. Minimizing of seperation of sexes unless halakha specifically calls for it, integration with the rest of Jewish society, an open and positive attitude (albeit a guarded one) towards secular studies and sciences - these are indeed issues with which they and I share a common ground. They are also quite brave in trying to face many of the questions we have not yet dared to ask. Nevertheless, it is at this point that the common ground ends, and here's why:
Ne'emanei Torah Ve'Avodah has no real boundaries to its left religiously, in much the same way the Charedi community has no real boundaries to its right. You will often find them in the news bashing (often rightly) the right-wing of our community for its segregationist tendencies and lack of opennes. I have yet to see anyone in that group make anything resembling the anti-Right effort against people in the religious left along the lines of "that's going too far". This in spite of the fact that the group has existed since 1978. Read any given issue of the NTV journal De'ot and you will read articles written by people who are absolutely enamored with liberalism, individualism, pluralism and any and all Jews to their left - traditional, secular or otherwise. The same cannot be said with regard to their views of halakha or hashkafa, or Jews to their right. The old Mafdal was divided into "right", "center" and "left" groups that often counterbalanced one another. NTV seems to be made up of people who are left and more left.
This is to say nothing of their persistent ideological myopia, a bygone product of another age. They speak in slogans and general lofty principles, but they either ignore or dismiss fears regarding religious fortitude. The issue on education exemplifies this approach, cherry-picking cases of educated (both Torah and secular studies) MO teachers as an example of how things were pre-Noam and Lamerchav, even though most of the teachers of that period were actually grossly underqualified. The period of integrated schools is portrayed as a veritable paradise, completely ignoring the massive "horadat kipa" that took place at the time. Some even celebrate it, "pluralism" being a principle that overrides all else. One would have expected a more hard-nosed realist approach to the subject, specifically addressing and developing coping methods for maintaining religiosity. Instead, they pay merely lip service to it, ultimately only preaching to the converted. It is no surprise, then, that NTV boasts a vocal fringe that constantly pushes the religious boundaries leftward or crosses them outright. Two examples will suffice: In the articles dealing with Biblical Criticism, no-one even so much as tries to defend the traditional position. Instead, the Documentary Hypothesis in whatever variation is either partially or completely accepted (to be fair, Rav Breuer's shitat habehinot is given a fair hearing as well). A letter to the editor of the journal even waxed poetic about the beauty of the "allegory of Sinai". This is to say nothing of the positions of Dr. Moshe Meir, member of NTV's executive. From questioning revelation to endorsing an idea of a "secularized religiosity", his positions as espoused in De'ot and Maqor Rishon are quite radical. Don't get me wrong - a lot of the questions they raise deserve serious attention. But to claim that these are "mainstream" or "centrist" ideas is to close one's eyes to the truth. When they are called on things like this, NTV members often get defensive, throwing curveballs to deflect from the problem. "I'm just as religious as you" or "stop judging people with a 'dos-meter'" are two of my favorite feints. Obviously, neither argument addresses the problem - NTV's almost cavalier attitude towards halakha and Ol Malchut Shamyim as contrasted to their fervent defenses of liberalism. It is as if Torah is completely subservient to Avodah (all the "-isms"), and at most a personal issue. I wish I was wrong in my diagnosis. I wish non-fringe NTVers would come down from the clouds and realize that reality, especially religious reality, is messy, difficult and dangerous. I wish they would switch Martin Luther King (I have a dream) for a bit of Churchill (I have nothing to promise you except blood, sweat and tears). I wish they would show anything resembling empathy towards those of us who have real reason to fear the dissolution of what's left of halakhic Judaism. Since none of that seems to be in the cards, I hold fast to my position that NTV is hard-left. Ve'hamotzi me'chavero alav hara'ayah.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Wow, I didn't expect a reaction like that. In any case I think you are a bit out-of-touch with NTA's new leadership and activities (as I was myself until not long ago).
When it comes to your views on elitist schools, for example, no one has done more positive work on the ground recently than NTA, with their massive campaign last year for sending children to MMD schoold, an effort that attracted a great many mainstream rabbanim and community leaders. Don't write off people so quickly.
As for paslanut, sorry if I said that too fast. In my opinion the main and most important feature of Modern Orthodoxy (or whatever we are to call it), and indeed the main thing that distinguishes us from the Charedi world, is that all voices are respected and fairly heard within the beit ha-midrash.
Thus, I don't really care whether or not you or I agree with certain positions of NTA. What is more important that they and everyone else can be heard, so that the Torah debate be a true one.
Dear Seth,
You are bursting through the proverbial open door. Read my post again carefully. I most certainly did not "write them off". In fact, I specifically state that I completely agree with many of their public policy principles, and I think their work regarding Mamad is avodat kodesh.
However, I find certain aspects of their positions to be far beyond what may be called mainstream. It could be that the good they do outweighs the problematic, but problematic it remains.
The most critical part of introducing MO in Israel is not to be starry-eyed. We need to be fully aware that all attitudes and positions have their advantages and disadvantages. The ability for self-criticism and self-reflection is no less critical, in my mind, than goal setting.
aiwac
Post a Comment