Bud Out

Listening to the Republican National Convention on NPR as I sat in traffic on La Cienega this evening, I excitedly turned up the volume when I heard Rudy Giuliani come to the microphone in Minnesota. Not that I especially like him, or his policies, or his ridiculous bid for the Republican presidential nomination, but, as a somewhat homesick former New Yorker, I couldn't help but feel pride and nostalgia as I listened to the mayor-past orate.

He cracked jokes at Obama before leading his fellow party members in a raucous chant of "Drill, baby, drill!" I snarled to myself for a moment, inched further forward in traffic, and continued to listen to his speech all the way home.

And then, just as I pulled into my driveway, he turned his attention to other matters, one, in particular, close to my heart. He said, about Jerusalem, and I paraphrase,

"Obama, speaking before a pro-Israel organization, said he supported a unified Jerusalem. Only one day later, just one day, he changed his mind... But John McCain, like me, will always support a unified Jerusalem!"

A giant room of Republicans went crazy in excitement and applause. Most of them have no idea what a "unified Jerusalem" even means, but, apparently, they support it. And, thank God, so too does their presidential candidate.

My own politics aside, I couldn't help but feel a bit of revulsion at the thought of all these Americans, in some room in the Midwest, trying to interfere (ideologically at least) in the method and manners of Israeli-Palestinian peace-making. If Israelis decide to "divide" Jerusalem, let them! If Israelis think that it is an acceptable sacrifice in exchange for some sort of peace, by all means.

Let them make their own choices. Bud out, Republicans!

I awoke with the rising of the sun to find an email from a colleague with links to this issue of Commentary Magazine. There was, I learned, an eruption of letters to the editor in response to an article published back in June. How I missed all the excitement, only God knows.

In the magazine's last issue, Jack Wertheimer wrote a piece exploring the state of the Reform Movement, in light of its unique American history, modern dilemmas, and claim as the largest Jewish movement in the country. Wertheimer effectively hits dead-on the most significant issues affecting the movement, it's future and its principles in our day. You can read the many responses to the article, including Leon Morris' brilliant letter, full of many large words the meanings of which I do not pretend to know.

As I read through this extensive body of literature over my day's first cup of coffee, I nearly spilled all over my computer as I noticed the crux of so much of the magazine's discussion.

Late in his treatise, Wertheimer notes the role of autonomy and individual choice in the mind and life of the Reform Jew - the extent to which "choice through knowledge" affects decisions of observance, whether such a creed makes any sense, and the possibility for observance within the largely non-observant denomination.

As proof for Reform's fatal flaw at inclusiveness, Wertheimer notes:

In a remarkable statement issued last summer, Rabbi Yoffie distinguished the Judaism practiced by Reform from other forms of Judaism in these words: “If you take it all upon yourself as an obligation rather than as a choice, you’ve reached the point at which you’re no longer a Reform Jew.”

Here, at last, is a candidly non-inclusive position. What it suggests is that in today’s Reform, red lines continue to exist to the Right: for a rabbi or a congregant to flirt with the basic concept of religious obligation, or venture too close to traditional Jewish observances, is to rule oneself out.

I read these two paragraphs, and the ensuing letters to the editor in response to them, many times over. I read them again, and again, and again, just to be sure that I got them right.

You see, in case you don't remember, these words - the referenced quote and Wertheimer's conclusion - come within a larger context.

Late last summer, the Jewish Week ran an article about the emergence of kippah-wearing, tsit-tsit donning trouble makers within the Reform movement. Like me. And the response to those who would call themselve's "halakhic Reformers" from the head of the movement made unequivocally clear that there is a red line, beyond which Reform cannot tolerate, and that that line begins at the notion obligated mitzvah.

I read Wertheimer's article, and the ensuing, and continuing debate today as an outsider - one who understands and remembers what it was like to be a part of that argument, but no longer needs to be. It is no longer mine to be had, no longer my fight to fight.

Because I found a place, I found another tent, that includes me and my ideas. I found a place where the theology makes more sense for me. Fine. I'm at home. So what do I care what the red lines are of the Reform movement? What do I care how the Union for Reform Judaism and its institutions define and understand chiyuv and mitsvah? I don't.

But I do. No way around it.

No matter how far I go, my past will always be with me. It is my present. It is my future. I am me, and that me never changes - merely the context in which I exist does.

So, as I read that article, I could not help but snicker at the fact that today, a year later, the ripples of intellectual debate still flow in places that I have long since left behind. I could not help but be glad to be a part of the religious discussion - both in places where I am welcome and places where I am not.

And I could not help but feel a little guilty - that I left behind all those others with whom I agreed and fought on behalf of for so long and so hard. Guilty that, in the eyes of many, my departure was a sign of giving up.

And just a little bit guilty that ideas of me and my friends and colleagues are still creating waves, even if I'm on the outside, even if it is no longer my debate to be had, even if maybe I should just bud out.

Comments

[Barkin]

Marc Gellman's response is the best one. He skewers everyone.

"The decline of Mr. Wertheimer’s own Conservative movement shows what happens when the leaders of a movement tell the people that they know what is best for them."

"For better or for worse, the Jews of tomorrow, who will probably not refer to themselves with any particular label except Jewish, will decide our future. And as scary as some of their choices may seem to Mr. Wertheimer (and to myself), I consider them preferable to the elitist fulminations of professionals in today’s moribund movement world who pathetically sound the bugle for a cavalry that will never mount up for them."

Blam-o!

[Rich]

It's interesting to note a couple of things about Yoffie's statement. The first is that Yoffie got nailed on the blogs for it and retreated somewhat - I would have to do a fair bit of fishing to find it.

The second is that this same Yoffie, at the Biennial a few months later, compared one who gathers information on his Blackberry on the sabbath to the Wood gatherer in Exodus who was stoned. If that analogy does not convey a sense of obligation, I don't know what does.

And here is the last and most significant point - given the nature of Reform, nothing Yoffie says has any ultimate consequence. If a sense of Halachic obligation is spiritually meaningful for me, then within the rubric of Autonomy, if I choose to take on the Yoke of Mitzvot, its all good.

Personally, I wear Kipa, I wear Tallit, I even lay Tefillin. But I do not do so because of Halacha, I do so because this things help bring me nearer to God, which, I believe, is the ultimate purpose of ritual. Somedays, the ritual may be empty, somedays it may be laden with meaning, and somedays it may start out with me going through the motions, and by those motions arriving at meaning. This is the importance of "showing up."

And really, in reference to the event that sparked it all, I don't think Yoffie should have said anything more than that the campers in question transgressed Jewish Law and Values by humiliating their musical guest.

[Josh Levin]

Hard call.

Some of us I'm sure won't mind if you keep making waves.

Sorry about the guilty conscience.

[Rachel Wolman]

Just think of the next generation of teenagers you influenced. We're going places, maybe because of you maybe not. But this for sure is not over.