The Open Orthodox Race to the Edge and Beyond: When Will It Stop?

The RCA needs to take a stronger stand. It was not hard to see this all coming but too many, including rabbanim, were naive to think YCT intends to stay within the bounds of Orthodoxy.

Anyone can operate a shul and call it Orthodox. However, the OU and/or Young Israel don’t have to accept it. I believe that the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale is an OU member shul – why does the OU allow them to remain? If I was traveling to a community and the community had an OU shul or a Young Israel, I would be shocked to find egalitarian practices in such a shul and I believe strongly that I would walk out.

Where is R Weiss in all this? People should read his article (google ‘open orthodoxy’) and compare with YCT/ Dr farber/ Yanklowitz’s actions and statements. By it’s own founder’s defenition, OO is no longer O at all if they believe all this stuff.

R’ Gordimer writes: “In truth, it would seem that the mainstream Orthodox community should engage in introspection and determine whether its failure to properly formulate and articulate the role of Mesorah to its laity and youth has been a major factor in Open Orthodoxy’s ability to challenge and discard Mesorah on so many fronts.” The main problem with his entire diatribe is that he continues to use “mesorah” as his overriding argument against Open orthodoxy – suggesting that there is one unified history of Mesorah throughout Jewish History. What did his vaunted Mesorah have to say about R’ Hirsch’s Torah Im Derech Eretz idealogy or Sarah Schenirer’s Bais Yaakov movement. Now I’m not personally comfortable with some of the new innovations espoused by some Rabbis under the banner of Open Orthodoxy, but if you are going to criticize these practices, please bring exact Halachik p’sak chapter and verse to do so. Blurring the line on what is Mesorah and what is Halacha lacks a degree of credibility. Also, what exactly does R’ Gordimer mean by “mainstream orthodoxy” – essentially there only exists Modern Orthodoxy and Ultra Orthodoxy; Mainstream Orthodoxy is a dying ideal and Ultra Orthodoxy seems to be mainly interested in becoming more and more separatist. So, perhaps R’ Gordimer would be better served if he recalibrated his message to modern orthodox jewry – and offer viable, halachik alternatives to Open Orthodoxy’s attempts to be more responsive to the spiritual asperations and needs of many well-educated, torah-abiding women.

Many thanks to Rabbi Gordimer for keeping us up-to-date. The blogosphere was recently so pre-occupied with Farber’s foibles that we may have missed those of Yanklowitz and Hefter. Rabbi Gordimer reminds us that the slide down the slippery slope is not a theoretical risk, but is actually well underway.

One question: when Yanklowitz interprets the posuk in Michah, is he saying that the navi is accepting of avoda zara, or is he saying that they will have different ways of serving Hshem? It’s still at odds with mashma, pshat, and drash, but it might not exactly be actually sanctioning AZ.

First off, Rabbi Gordimer deserves a huge Yeyasher Koach for taking the time and demonstrating the bravery required to compose this article. We all owe him a debt of gratitude.

Secondly, what Rabbi Gordimor is even more damning than anything I’ve read before about YCT, but none of it should come as a surprise. Once you jump out the window, it’s only a matter of time until you hit the ground. It’s not a question of “if” but of “when.” YCT jumped a long time ago.

Thirdly, while referring to YCT grads as Rabbis is definitely the PC thing to do, it’s a very misleading term. Very very few of them have anything resembling a comprehensive knowledge of Torah sources. Many are rather lax in laws such as kashrus and tzniyus. Virtually all are smitten with far-left views that are then rammed into Torah as a means of legitimizing them. They may refer to themselves as rabbis, but in reality, they’re nothing more than activists and that’s the term that should be used when referring to them.

As a current YCT student, I am willing to say that R’ Gordimer raises very good points about things that musmachim of the yeshivah have said. Yes. There are people who were trained as Orthodox rabbis who afterward don’t (always) act like it. That’s nothing new. Big deal. Would I prefer to see YCT musmachim publishing more traditional works of torah literature and contributions to the broader Orthodox society? Yes. Would I love to see a panel discussion or debate that included more RW Orthodox rabbis? Of course. Too bad that for every event that YCT holds with HUC, JTS, Hadar, etc, the Yeshivah also invites YU and sometime also invites other more RW Orthodox institutions, and those invitations are always ignored, because the Rav wrote an essay 49 years ago saying that it might not be the best thing. Too bad there haven’t been any changes in Orthodox theology, society, practice, or leadership since then, eh?

“…I and others who watched the Ohev Sholom video were struck by a common theme that runs throughout it as a description of the mindset and approach of the Ohev Sholom innovators and Reformers: the desire to institute changes to ritual and minhag simply because these changes make some of the congregants feel good and spiritual.”

how do you understand the institution of s’micha for women (for korbanos, not rabbahs 😉 ). wasn’t that EXACTLY the point – “to institute changes to ritual and minhag simply because these changes make some of the congregants (i.e., women) feel good and spiritual” ?

It is truly sad that on the day after the Pew Report, CC decides to publish this piece as its lead article. The house is burning down– 22% of Jews do not identify as Jewish; 30% are unaffiliated. Only 10% are Orthodox and of those 3% are MO.

So what does RG write? an attack on YCT a minuscule sliver of MO. What concerns RG? That this tiny faction will sway the 3% who MO and move them away from true Orthodox Judaism.

Wow. What about the 22% who don’t consider themselves Jewish or the 30% unaffiliated?

It is this small, petty perspective that later generations will lament as the great failure our generation.

Interesting article, but I think a discussion as what is considered the ikkar halacha or going beyond the ikkar halacha in the context of chareidi/orthodox accepted standards is more relevant to the vast majority of frum people here in Israel and abroad

I’m from the D.C. area. Even the shuls with YU alumni in the pulpit may be very left wing by the standards of this website – as in, women dance with sifrei Torah on Simchas Torah, maybe there’s a quiet womens’ mincha laining…

Would there be an uproar if a shul hired a dynamic Rabbi/Rebbetzin team, with the contract stating the the Rebbetzin is expected to teach regularly and mentor women and girls in the community? What if it hired a female educational staff member with title of יועצת הלכה or מורה ליהדות or something else that doesn’t raise the hackles like Maharat and wasn’t tinged by association with Avi Weiss? I think the whole thing would have slipped under the radar.

I have met a couple YCT alumni and found them solidly grounded and more than capable of holding their own in halachah. If there are other other alumni filling the web with silliness, do we tar the institution on their account? Have we done the same for YU or any other yeshiva that produced a תלמיד שאינו הגון?

I’m tired of the slippery slope argument. So someone found some nice pasukim to say when they have a womens’ aliyos. Who cares? When it crosses the apikorsus line, let’s call it what it is, and defend the sources of that decision. Till then, can we ask instead: is Ohev Shalom finding that their staffing decisions are drawing more people into the shul, and encouraging members to grow? Or is it like the story of Rav Soloveitchik telling the woman to put on a tallis without tzitzis attached?

Dan M-I think that you missed the point of R Gordimer’s well documented esaay. The point was that YCT alumni are publicizing and rationalizing perspectives that can be fairly described as Apikorsus, Kefirah and Am HaAratzus as well as deviations from Halacha, as opposed to merely “good points about things that musmachim of the yeshivah have said.”
The Minchas Chinuch is a sefer that is known for its well known focus in every Mitzvah of discussing the Cheresh, Shoteh and Katan, and also the Chatzi Ben Chorin and Chatzi Eved. If the Sefer were to be written today, it would probably include discussions of the Shlish Apikorus, Shlish Am HaAretz and Shlish Kofer BaIkar.

Beyond UJA’s collaboration with Footsteps, the organization recently launched a new effort, called Tov B’Yachad, to strengthen the relationship with the Orthodox community and communicate the shared values of the Orthodox community and UJA-Federation. Which branches of “Orthodoxy” they aim to attract, or will ultimately participate, is yet to be determined. Ultimately, “Orthodox” and its variation is simply a term and a title, the focus of Orthodoxy – whether Centrist, Yeshivish, Modern, Open – needs to be how do we bring Torah values and the importance of Mesorah into the live of all Jews today. Members of each denomination – Orthodox, Conservative, Reform – ask the same questions and struggle to find answers for a meaningful life as a Jew. Hopefully the UJA initiative will offer a forum for Orthodox Jews to connect with each other and the broader Jewish community in a constructive manner and help all Jews identify and develop a the meaningful, purposeful, and holy life of kiddush Hashem that is rooted in Torah values and love of Hashem, with less of a focus on the nuance with which each individually personally chooses to the draw his/her own line.

There are lots of valid points here, but somehow, this article triggers a childhood memory. Sometimes a child will slightly misbehave, but not in a way that will harm anybody. Child will display a sense of creativity, adventure, and risk outside the so-called cultural norms. Wise parent, instead of giving a petch, will say, “Luzzem”. Leave him alone. Let him be adventurous and learn from his mistakes. Especially after the Pew Report, does Open Orthodoxy, bearing new ideas, need to be given a petch? Or shall we say, Luzzem? I cautiously vote for the Luzzem Doctrine.

In response to L:

You wrote, “for Orthodox rabbis to share a stage with them is akin to declaring non-O opinions on matters of halacha/hashkafah equally valid.”
I disagree, as do many others. Just as in any political debate, the notion of dialogue and discussion does not imply validation, so too here. Further, these events never focus on matters of halacha and hashkafah. The issues being discussed are usually matters of professional training (chaplaincy etc.), communal issues in America, and matters regarding Israel.

You wrote, “if you were convening scientists to discuss the ramifications of global climate change … it would be wholly inappropriate to invite either improperly credentialed scientists, or scientists who deny the very reality of global climate change, to participate in your convention.”
I, trained as a physicist and the son of two scientists, know of no scientific organization or conference that would bar anyone from participating, provided that they paid the entrance fees and dues. The great strength of the scientific world is the freedom and strength to rely on the facts and sound argumentation necessary to support what is deemed to be a legitimate position. Anything less does not stand. In this modern era, the openness of our society results in the indisputable reality that all the information is available. Reform and Conservative Judaism cannot be brushed under the rug for no Orthodox Jews to see. They exist. The true test of emunah is to be able to have a conversation while fully sure in one’s own opinions. If one is unsure, then these encounters are a chance to probe and question, until the truth of the matter is uncovered. Imagine R’ Ibn Ezra ignoring Karaite criticism of Torah shebeal peh. Imagine R’ Hirsch, Malbim, etc. ignoring the challenges posed by the german Reform of their day. Think of how much we have gained in the past my encountering positions with which we disagree, and clearly articulating why. If we are unable, it is a sorry state of affairs.

You asked, “Do you think that were the Rav alive today, he would say anything different?”
Yes I do. And my Rebbeim do as well (not only at YCT). The arena has changed. Reform and Conservative have changed. There is much more risk for affiliated Jews to defect to unbridled secularism than there is a fear that Orthodox Jews will defect to Conservative and Reform. Even Haredim who leave their communities rarely end up in MO, Conservative, or Reform Judaism. Instead, the draw of modern society is to secularism. Thus, there is little fear of validation through confrontation, unlike an era when Conservative Judaism was more halachically observant, and Orthodox was less. An era when many Orthodox shuls did not have mehitzot, and some Conservative shuls did. The current face of American Orthodoxy is such that there are no Rabbis of the Rav’s “knowledge and stature,” but I have learned with several of his close talmidim, and scholars of his life and work, and I feel that their evaluations (upon which I base my own) are justified. Further, it is unfair that what was published as an essay is being wielded as a psak. The Rav’s stance in the 60’s was to oppose the psak of the other American gedolim, and to instead advise his community through a philosophical approach. His essay Confrontation does not read like a psak. Do not treat it now, 49 years later, as if it were then or if it is now.

In response to Steve Brizel:

I understood Rabbi Gordimer’s essay exactly as you described it—that several (far from the majority by any means) musmachim of YCT and affiliated persons have published statements that are not traditionally considered Orthodox, and that I and many of my cohort DISAGREE with their evaluations. Many YCT students are just as displeased as R Gordimer when radical, fringe opinions are espoused by YCT musmachim. The problem in life, in general, and in these cases specifically, is that the silent majority is overlooked and overshadowed by the loud minority. I encourage all my colleagues to publish more and do more to show the world that we are genuinely normal-Orthodox. Sadly, normal does not usually make the news.

Thank you for your summary of the argumentative structure of the minchas chinuch. It is one of my favorite seforim. I hope that you are not accusing me of being either an apikores, am haaretz (in the colloquial sense; obviously no modern Jews are ochlei hulin betaharas terumos), or kofer beikar. Also, I am not sure which nafka minahs would come out of such a triplicate classification—please do elaborate.

Have you tried speaking to Shmuly Yanklowitz, Herzl Hefter or the other individuals discussed in your article?

Rabbi Gordimer: I appreciate your taking the time to respond to my comment. Firstly, you say that mainstream judaism has not done enough to repel open orthodsoxy – barring YCT grads from the RCA and the YI not allowing them to be rabbis of their shuls is not insignificant. Secondly, if I may ask you – being that you are a Rabbi – have you ever had to counsel a sincere, shomer torah umitzvos frum woman struggling with what she perceives to be considered her role as a second class citizen in Judaism. Or if you were a pulpit rabbi of a modern orthodox congregation, what would you do to encourage the women of your shul to be more engaged intellectually and religiously in yiddishkeit? Would you just continue with the status quo and leave things as they have been? These are issues that cannot be just push aside and pretend aren’t significant. Relegating women to the same religious status as they have had for 2,000 years when at the same time, their level of religious education (certainly in the modern orthodox world) and opportunity in the secular world has become virtually on par with men is, in my opinion, a recipe for disenchantment and failure. As a parent of B”H 2 children (a 4 yr old boy and a 1 yr old girl) I have already have feelings of uneasiness how I will in the future satisfactorily be able to explain to my daughter why is that her older brother gets to have much more of an opportunity to have “hands-on” exposure to the whole shul experience, while she has to sit on the outside looking in. I feel strongly that if you could imagine how you would feel as a woman desperately seeking to feel more connected to the shul experience, then perhaps you would see the current open orthodox movement with less disdain, and just maybe you would seek to offer positive solutions to this very real and growing issue, rather than railing vehemently against it. Good Shabbos!

R Gordimer quoted this excerpt from R Yanklowitz:

“Rabbi Yanklowitz further writes:

The fantasy of returning to one centralized monolithic form of Judaism is not only wishful thinking. It’s also dismissive of two of the most important aspects of modern Jewish life: diversity and adaptability.”

This idea flies in the face of a wonderful mitzvah that was and is a core element of the Yamim Noraim on an individual and communal level-Teshuvah. Where else can someone from a small town in Podunkville sit next to a Gadol HaDor either in davening or or at Seudah Shlishis and talk in Divrei Torah? Without the mitzvah of Teshuvah and the visions of those in the American Orthodox community who believe in the overarching importance of kiruv, such events would be a dream or a fantasy, as opposed to realitities that happen very frequently for any BT.

Ari: Thank you for the kind word. However, I did not state that, “mainstream judaism has not done enough to repel open orthodoxy”. As to your query: BH, I have a wife and two daughters, and we live in Manhattan – very exposed to everything. Yet the females in my family have never felt jealous or resentful about not being able to enter the rabbinate, serve as chazzan, etc. They have been taught that their relationship with Hashem and their chelek in His Torah and unique and precious, and I think that this is the key. In fact, many people have told me that they view the Maharat movement as an insult to women, as it encourages women to view men’s roles as superior and to thus try to mimic the male roles. (Please see my YUTorah.com piece on Bas Mitzvah for more of my feelings on this general topic.)

Ari: Torah U’Mada is a means not a goal. It is dramatically different than the goal of creating a new Orthodoxy that is pluralistic and embraces all sorts of forces in order to redefine the norm. And the ratio of RIETS musmachim involved with controversial endeavors is miniscule, with that ratio even less or perhaps zero among RIETS’ leadership. I do not wish to portyay this an a numbers game, but the distinction is significant in terms of goals and the rest.

Dan M:
Your analogy to a political debate is flawed; there certainly is validation in being invited to participate in such a debate, regardless of whether or not there is agreement. Only official candidates for a particular public office are welcome to share their views, not just any random person on the street who wants to throw in his 2 cents. The fact is that the participants must be legitimately qualified and dedicated to the same basic political process.

However, if as you say “the notion of dialogue and discussion does not imply validation”, then why wouldn’t the panel discussions convened by Chovevei address matters of halacha and hashkafah, as you assert they do not? Could it be that the leadership of YCT does in fact recognize that your views on validation are incorrect? Also, I fail to see how discussing “matters of professional training (chaplaincy etc.), communal issues in America, and matters regarding Israel” with non-O clergy is somehow less validating of their credentials/status, since these are topics that they are presumably being considered legitimate experts in, based on their very status as rabbis.

You propose that no paying individual would be barred from participating in a scientific conference (which is simultaneously both cynical and optimistic), but do you really believe that, for instance, Andrew Wakefield would be welcome on a panel of autism researchers, no matter how much money he had paid? The general openness of the scientific world notwithstanding, the majority of the Orthodox world views Reform and Conservative as fraudulent movements that deny our most basic truths.

Another inconsistency: If, as you say, “the draw of modern society is to secularism. Thus, there is little fear of validation through confrontation”, then why would debate with Reform and Conservative clergy even be necessary in the first place? According to your claims, it would seem that for the majority of Orthodox Jews who are at risk of abandoning Orthodoxy, Reform and Conservative are largely irrelevant, and we should instead focus our efforts on preventing their descent into secularism. I really question the purpose of these interdenominational panels–are they truly aimed at strengthening our emunah and ensuring that we have great clarity about the truth of Orthodoxy, as you seem to believe we must engage in debate in order to properly do? Or are they more about finding commonality, and de-emphasizing our differences, as I suspect is likely the case? In which case, such panels are not just benign and pointless–they are problematic and likely to lead to confusion on many levels.

Finally, re: R’ Soloveichik’s position, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. By your own admission, the Conservative movement is far less observant than it was 50 years ago–and yet you are somehow convinced that the Rav would be even more willing to engage with them now?! It is also sad that the Rav is the only gadol of the previous generation whose opinions on such matters are even considered by the Chovevei establishment. Do you ever even contemplate the opinions of, for instance, R’ Aharon Kotler? R’ Moshe Feinstein? R’ Gifter? R’ Hutner? Or is it too hard to reconcile the Open Orthodoxy brand of Jewish philosophy with theirs?

I had an opportunity today to be at a simcha where many men who were ordained by the ITJ-Institute for Traditional Judaism founded by Prof. Weiss-Halivni were present. I asked one of their main leaders if since their group is small and their ordainees can’t find pulpits, why don’t they merge with Chovevai Torah. He answered that their haskofos are to the right of Chovevai, that they oppose ordaining women. He also said that Chovevai is afraid that by merging with these break aways from the Conservative Movement, they-Chovevai- will be accused of not being fully orthodox. The question raised by this discussion is not so much what is wrong with Chovevai but what are we doing to address real issues.
A person told me that the latest iteration of the coerced get thuggery is a Chilul Hashem. But, he said the greater chillul Hashem is that the frum community can’t figure out any way to deal with the real problem of Agunos, most yeshiva leaders do not require a pre-nup and even oppose it. So, besides the methods of these thugs, what exactly are we doing to help women trapped by the refusal of a husband to give a get? If we are indeed helpless, this will say that we cannot deal with the challenges of modernity.

Ari Heitner wrote in part:

“R’Gordimer, I hate to say it, but from where I’m sitting – an entirely chareidi neighbourhood in E”Y – I could say the same thing about YU: An institution with a stated mission (“Torah uMadda”) which is questionable at best (equal weight to Torah and secular studies?! academic perspectives on Torah?!) and which produces a high percentage of left-wing talmidim doing fringe stuff (כנ”ל – all these DC-area shul rabbonim letting the ladies dance with the Torah etc.).

Frankly, when I came back to the DC area to run NCSY, I wondered if the community was frum at all. But in seven years with NCSY, first in DC then in Toronto (agav, the polar opposite of DC), I learned that commitment to Yiddishkeit is not measured by whether the mother wears pants. I saw kids go off the derech from MO homes and from Yeshivish homes, and I saw what works in bringing kids back. I saw what attracts totally unaffiliated kids and what doesn’t.

NCSY is phenomenally successful at being mekarev girls, bli eyin hara. Pashut piles of them. And while most will want a shmooze about whether they can get an aliyah or wear tefillin, I haven’t seen them by and large attracted to that. There are a few who come from very left-wing-conscious homes who maybe feel an extra pull. If a talmidah asked me could she go to a womens’ Shabbos minchah laining, and I knew the people running it were doing what’s muttar because the halachah says it’s muttar, and not what’s assur because the halachah says it’s assur, I would have no problem telling her to go. And if she asked me could she go to some silly Conservative thing I would tell her no. And 10 times out of 10, that same student will quickly perceive if the leader of that group has real Torah content, or has a brain full of fluff (full disclosure: I have one talmid at the Jewish Theological Cemetery. His brain is not full of fluff).

But what does turn of kids of all stripes, over and over again, is petty divisiveness and telling people why this or that stripe of frumkeit isn’t ok. Don’t get me wrong: I will always clearly show my kids why Reform and Conservative are narishkeit. And with a little exposure to the real stuff, they pick up on the fluff quickly. But if somebody is about Torah & Mitzvos, I’d rather let the kids go experience things firsthand for themselves. Even to the point of checking out Reform/Conservative, they do well if we tell them, “You go look at what’s they’re doing, and choose the community you want to belong to.”

As a proud NCSY alumnus with a loving but critical view of YU which once had a great program for BTs ( JSS) well in advance of the Charedi BT yeshivos, I would point out that one should never confuse RIETS, and its RY, who are Gdolei Torah, with TuM ( which hasn’t been YU’s mission or ad slogan for decades), lectures on academic Bible or Talmud and the antics of LW MO rabbis. The key as you know, is to show the beauty of a life devoted to Torah observance and to ignore the urban myths and stereotypes trotted out by the extreme elements in the MO and Charedi worlds.