The Moetzes At A Crossroads

The kol korei by the American Agudah Moetzes regarding the WZO election has the makings of a huge make-it-or-break-it gamble. The guy in the street is not being asked whether he is with the gedolei hador, or against them. Rather, he is told to choose between competing groups of gedolim – to swear allegiance to the Agudah slate rather than the other. If this were baseball, he’d be deciding between the American League All-Stars vs. the National League. Depending on whether or not people vote for Eretz Hakodesh, the Moetzes will either emerge stronger than it has been in decades, or weakened to the point of irrelevance.

The Moetzes came into being in the turbulent times of the opening decades of twentieth century European Jewry. No one at the time spoke for Torah-true Judaism as a group. There were thousands of communities scattered over the landscape, populated by Jews who looked, dressed, and spoke differently from each other. Many believed that European Jews needed to have a univocal voice, to guide and coalesce them internally, and to represent them externally. It was particularly important, they thought, to bring together chassidim and non-chassidim.^[1]

The first iterations of the Moetzes did just that. German rabbonim, Litvishe roshei yeshiva, Chassidishe rebbes (including Chabad) were all represented. After the Shoah, this essentially continued, both in Israel and in the US – with an important addition: Sefardim joined as sitting members. The Moetzes could still be viewed as the voice of the collective non-Zionist gedolei Torah.

When Rav Shach pulled Degel Hatorah out of the coalition, the Moetzes in Israel became something very different. Chassidim had their own Moetzes – although they had really reverted to the much earlier practice wherein each chassidus was guided by its own leaders. Not long after, Sefardim also broke off, and formed the Moetzes Chachmei Hatorah. The Agudah Moetzes had become the voice of the Litvishe Torah community – an important enough role in Israel, where separating religion from politics would have meant utter powerlessness.

In the US, chassidim continued to be represented on the Agudah Moetzes. For a while, there was an unofficial power sharing arrangement that guaranteed sizeable representation for both Litvishe and chassidishe leaders. In time, as the various chassidishe courts flourished and grew in size and influence, they began to work more independently – or by allying themselves with the most dominant chassidishe groups. Today, chassidim have only token representation on the US Moetzes; it can only claim to be the lodestar of the vibrant and thriving, B”H, American “yeshiva” community. That is quite a big deal – but nothing more.

But even this is perhaps no longer. This time around, American charedim are not being asked whether they will remain true to Torah principles, and seek guidance and instruction from Torah leaders, as we always have. They are being asked to chose between one group – an apparent majority of the Moetzes – and an equally impressive group that takes strong issue with the psak regarding the WZO.

People who have followed the story know that the psak does not reflect the positions of many, many Torah figures. That includes members of the Moetzes itself, some of whom have aligned themselves in recent weeks with the opinion of zekan hagedolim, R. Shmuel Kamenetsky, and many others who have shied away from any public endorsement of Eretz Hakodesh (for fear of becoming a victim of our own version of cancel culture) but have shared their feelings quietly with talmidim and mispallelim. They know that even in Israel, there are large numbers of roshei yeshiva who have endless kavod, as they should, for Rav Dov Lando – but still (quietly) disagree. They know that y”l, R. Lando has positioned himself against the stated position of R. Chaim Kanievsky, who instructed people to vote in the past.

Putting it all together, people just cannot feel that they are choosing between siding with Torah luminaries rather than lesser people. They know that this is not true. They are going to ask why they should go with the Moetzes rather than others, just because they’ve always done so in the past.

If they stay loyal to the Moetzes, it will be an important victory, one that will likely add years to its leadership. If they bolt…

Complicating matters is that this is not like other questions in the past, where Jews lined up behind their favorite rabbis, knowing that they understood very little about the issues. This is not another Get of Cleves. The caught-in-the-middle Jew in this issue may have some strong opinions about the matter that will predispose him to one side or another.

Some with traditionally strong anti-Zionist leanings will cheer on the Moetzes. Others will not. They will have a hard time squaring what they themselves know to be true with the message of the kol korei.

There are many examples contained in the kol korei that will tick people off, and send them scurrying for a different group of luminaries.

Here are just a few:

“The Zionist Movement was founded 125 years ago with the purpose of uprooting the foundations of Judaism.” Of course this is not true. It was started to allow Jews to escape persecution and penury in Europe by creating a Jewish homeland on the Land we had been linked to for millennia. Uprooting them from the foundations of Judaism was certainly what many, many of the adherents of secular Zionism wished for – and later acted upon. But it was not a definitional element of Zionism. When the children of pious chassidishe families jumped on the Zionist bandwagon, it was not for the purpose of abandoning Torah – although that happened. It was for the purpose of creating a better (they thought) life for themselves and their children. To argue otherwise is not only inaccurate, but a slap in the face of those who supported a Torah Zionism – like Rav Shmuel Mohliver, the Netziv, and Rav Isser Zalman. It is another manifestation of the position that many have come to detest, of “when we say Torah, we mean us. Exclusively.”

“The geonim the Chofetz Chaim, the Gerrer Rebbe, Rav Chaim of Brisk, the Chazon Ish, Rav Aharon Kotler, the Steipler, Rav Elazar Menachem Man Shach, and Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, zichronam livracha, forbade joining the World Zionist Organization (WZO).” People are going to wonder. Do we really determine policy based on positions of gedolei olam a hundred years ago? Has Zionism remained the same? On a given day, I daven maariv in a shul built in part by government money. I pass a mikvah built and sustained by government money. I daven the other tefilos in a chanichei yeshivos minyan populated by Kollel avreichim. Their families are subsidized by the government in multiple ways. The yeshivos they attended were recipients of large subventions by the State. If the Zionists are trying to eradicate Torah, they are certainly doing a miserable job of it.

Moreover, many of our Anglo charedim have spent time here in Israel since Oct. 7. They have seen past the headlines about protests and civil war, and witnessed the renaissance of interest in Jewish roots among those pesky secular Zionists. They have stood in awe at their mesiras nefesh for Am Yisrael. And they have stood shamefaced upon realizing that the charedi community (as a whole; I’m not speaking about thousand of yechidim acting as yechidim) has lived like a group apart from the rest of the country. They are going to be wary about positions and pronouncements that affirm the isolation of charedi Jews from everyone else, and will seek the leadership of those with a tad more openness.

“It is forbidden to agree to matters that the Torah leadership of Klal Yisroel has explicitly forbidden.” This is going to raise some eyebrows. Once again, the assertion that “the Torah leadership of Klal Yisroel” – not of Agudah, but of Klal Yisroel – is us! They will note that Shas is running its own slate in the WZO election. But what do you want from a bunch of Franks? They certainly are not part of our Torah!

Some Anglo charedim have had enough of this kind of thinking. It is infantilizing and humiliating to thinking people. Backs against the wall, they will continue to accept instruction from Torah leaders, rather than follow their own gut. That is part of what makes them charedim. But give them a legitimate choice, and bets may be off about which group they will follow. Especially because people recognize that in any mix of positions, the extreme ones have the most influence, and they understand that Peleg seems to have more influence in the Moetzes than it does in Israel!

The next weeks will be interesting, as the votes come in. Or don’t. May HKBH guide us all to proper decisions, and proper respect for each other.

1. I am indebted to Dr. Judith Bleich for this observation ↑

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The latest episode of my podcast, Two Rabbis Three Opinions is now available on Spotify: Critical Thinking: The Price We Pay When Ignoring It