In a recent article in Jewish Ideas Daily, I sought to measure the degree to which the ideological legacy of Mordecai Kaplan, one of the most important Jewish thinkers of the modern age, is still being honored within the Reconstructionist movement that he founded and that claims him as its own. My objective was neither to throw stones nor to point fingers but to encourage discussion, especially among those in whose hands lies the future of the movement. A variety of private responses suggests that to some extent I succeeded.
A decidedly different impression, though, emerges from Rabbi David Teutsch's response to my article here on HuffPost Religion. Not only does Rabbi Teutsch detect enmity where there is none, he fundamentally misrepresents both of the arguments that he addresses, thereby evading the point of my exercise.
Fairness dictates that I acknowledge one valid, if minor, correction entered by Rabbi Teutsch. The organization Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP), insofar as it advocates boycott of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and not of Israel as a whole, diverges somewhat from the more sweeping program of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. I regret not having made that distinction clear. And while I am at it, I gladly affirm for the record that I take very seriously the moral obligation of the Jewish state and those who support it to show concern for the wellbeing of any and all with a stake in its activities, notably the Palestinian Arabs.
Nonetheless, I reject entirely the idea that such affirmations of concern provide moral legitimacy to the actions of those who participate, even partially, in the BDS movement. And here I come to Rabbi Teutsch's first misrepresentation. In a sweeping imputation of motive, he conflates my position with that of fanatics who "would like to see the Jewish community treat as traitors anyone who shares the view that Zionism involves a profound commitment to the values embodied in Israel's Declaration of Independence and its Basic Laws." Whoever such unnamed excommunicators may be, I do not know them. My concern is with the fanatics involved in promoting boycotts of their Jewish brethren, elevating differences of theology and politics to a fratricidal pitch, waging economic warfare against citizens of a democracy and close American ally, and lending cover to Israel's myriad delegitimizers on the international scene.
It may well be that Rabbi Teutsch and I will have to agree to disagree in our assessments of the respectability of JVP activists. What is not disputable, however, is my observation that a far higher proportion of Reconstructionist rabbinical ordainees participates in this movement than do rabbis of the other liberal Jewish denominations. While at least 15 Reconstructionist rabbis conduct overt economic warfare against their fellow Jews, only four Reform and one Conservative rabbi, out of ranks far more numerous than the total of 310 Reconstructionist rabbis, do the same. Clearly, Rabbi Teutsch must feel it wise to sweep such stirring skeletons back into the closet.
The second argument taken up and misrepresented by Rabbi Teutsch is my statement that "neither [Mordecai] Kaplan nor his thought features prominently in [contemporary] Reconstructionist self-understanding." This he dismisses as "laughable," patronizingly pointing me, in lieu of evidence, to his new book on Jewish practice while managing to muster a single fact of which I was fully aware when I wrote: namely, that students at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College are exposed to Kaplan's thought as a component of their training.
Granted. But what influence, if any, does such exposure wield over a student's outlook or behavior? And even if we assume, despite considerable evidence to the contrary, that today's students and young rabbis are indeed as committed to Kaplan's vision as they may be well versed in its precepts, what about the movement they lead -- the real, stated object of my concern? On this point, I refer Rabbi Teutsch to one of his own students, Rabbi Ben Weiner, who observed in 2010 that, as a whole, Kaplan's movement has "shifted" over the decades "from a cadre of highly knowledgeable free-thinkers toward a catchall for dim sum Jews who [are] seeking a noncoercive environment for the blending of tradition and self-expression, their literacy and commitment varying widely."
Hardly a strong internal endorsement. True, this "dim sum" approach to religious life constitutes a, if not the, main challenge to all the embattled branches of liberal Judaism. But what does Rabbi Teutsch's wan rejoinder say about the leadership of a movement reduced to measuring success by what its rabbis may have learned regardless of the motivations, interests and commitments of its members?
I do not count myself among those who see liberal Judaism as doomed. But if its branches are to thrive, as I hope they will, their leaders will need to show more willingness to grapple with the arguments of critics from within and without, especially the well-wishers among them.
Rabbi Teutsch's display of derision and defensiveness ill suits one who concludes his string of evasions and animadversions by pleading for mutual understanding and "respect."
Joseph J. Siev is a program officer with the Tikvah Fund in New York.
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation - Home | Jewish ...
Reconstructionist Judaism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Branches of Judaism - Reconstructionist Judaism - Liberal Jewish ...
Rabbi David A. Teutsch: (Mis)understanding Reconstructionist Judaism
Well put.
Retold: My concern is with the fanatics/fundamentalists involved in economic apartheid of their Abrahamic brethren, elevating differences of theology and politics to a fraticidal pitch, waging economic warfare against a repressed society, not allowing them a Democracy and encouraging the wrath of the United States, and lending cover to the inhumane treatment through false rationalizations and immoral justifications."
In terms of the questions you raise about rabbis' affiliations relating to Mideast peace, the statistical distinction between 4 and 15 JVP supporters within the context of an entire rabbinate is meaningless. My experience is that American rabbis are all over the map regarding their positions on issues regarding how to best further a peaceful solution of the Mideast conflict. There is a long list of rabbis across all the movements who support JStreet and a two-state solution, and probably many more who feel that they cannot publicly make even this statement (although hundreds have). It is impossible to know how many may privately support a limited boycott of West bank products. The distinction you offer between your understanding of Rabbi Teutsch's assessment of your view of JVP activists and how you actually describe them in your response is rather murky. I wouldn't say that it reflects the kind of tolerance of diverse opinions that you claim to favor.
Further, Kaplan assumed that the way his students and his students' students would interpret his ideas would grow and change over time; this is the meaning of the term "reconstruction." It is impossible to know how he would personally respond to every one of these interpretations, but my guess is that he would be pleased that they continue to develop, quite directly in response to his life's work. With maybe some possible exceptions, the idea of Reconstructionist rabbis not learning from and building upon Kaplan in direct ways is simply absurd. Maybe a better reading of the one rabbi whom you quote would suggest that his real message is that Reconstructionist rabbis strongly tend to be process oriented, something they learned from Kaplan; pluralistic and more accepting of diversity, something they learned from Kaplan; willing to experiment, something they learned from Kaplan; certainly they would prefer "noncoercive environment(s)" such as Kaplan championed. Also, quite frankly, the very nature of American Judaism in 2011 points to the need for "blending of tradition and self-expression." Just taught to non-Orthodox Jews and this is what will be plainly obvious; yes, one doesn't need Kaplan for this since it is a sociological fact of our time.
In sum, I thought that your original essay and Rabbi Teutsch's response represented an exchange that was quite sufficient. This further response doesn't further that dialog.
I would go even further as to say that there are few American rabbis, maybe even including modern Orthodox, who do not take for granted many of Kaplan's basic ideas: that American Jews live in two civilizations, that Judaism is the sum total of Jewish "civilization"/culture and not "just" a religion, that behaving and believing flow out of peoplehood/belonging... just to mention a few broadly accepted tenants.
Kaplan's functionalism (understanding a ritual, an idea... by how it functions within context), and notion of historical evolution inform how Reconstructionist rabbis are taught and teach, whether it's texts, ideas, religious practice... The model of democratic process that informs Reconstructionist organizational models draws directly from Kaplan and is reflected in the way that most of the Reconstructionist rabbis I know conduct themselves in their role as rabbi. I could go on and on; no simplistic one-liners about Kaplan's role in Reconstructionism does any justice to the question raised in this dialog.