|
|
|
|
Modern Orthodox Judaism
|
| |
|
| |
Modern Orthodox Judaism (or Modern Orthodox or Modern Orthodoxy) is a movement within Orthodox Judaism that attempts to synthesize traditional observance and values with the secular, modern world.
Modern Orthodoxy draws on several teachings and philosophies, and thus assumes various forms. In the United States, and generally in the Western world, "Centrist Orthodoxy" — underpinned by the philosophy of Torah Umadda ("Torah and Knowledge/Science") — is prevalent.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Modern Orthodox Judaism' Start a new discussion about 'Modern Orthodox Judaism' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
Modern Orthodox Judaism (or Modern Orthodox or Modern Orthodoxy) is a movement within Orthodox Judaism that attempts to synthesize traditional observance and values with the secular, modern world.
Modern Orthodoxy draws on several teachings and philosophies, and thus assumes various forms. In the United States, and generally in the Western world, "Centrist Orthodoxy" — underpinned by the philosophy of Torah Umadda ("Torah and Knowledge/Science") — is prevalent. In Israel, Modern Orthodoxy is dominated by Religious Zionism; however, although not identical, these movements share many of the same values and many of the same adherents.
Philosophy
Modern Orthodoxy comprises a fairly broad spectrum of movements each drawing on several distinct, though related, philosophies, which in some combination provide the basis for all variations of the movement today; these are discussed below.
In general, Modern Orthodoxy holds that Jewish law is normative and binding, while simultaneously attaching a positive value to interaction with the modern world. In this view, Orthodox Judaism can “be enriched” by its intersection with modernity; further, “modern society creates opportunities to be productive citizens engaged in the Divine work of transforming the world to benefit humanity”.
At the same time, in order to preserve the integrity of halakha, any area of “powerful inconsistency and conflict” between Torah and modern culture must be filtered out. .
Modern Orthodoxy, additionally, assigns a central role to the "People of Israel" . Modern Orthodoxy, in general, places a high national, as well as religious, significance on the State of Israel, and Modern Orthodox institutions and individuals are, typically, Zionist in orientation. An additional manifestation is that involvement with non-orthodox Jews will extend beyond "outreach" to continued institutional relations and cooperation; see further under Torah Umadda.
Roots
Modern Orthodoxy traces its roots to the works of Rabbis Azriel Hildesheimer (1820-1899) and Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888). While Hildesheimer's role is not disputed - comprising distinct philosophic and pragmatic contributions - Hirsch's role is less clear, with some Hirsch scholars arguing that his "Torah im Derech Eretz" philosophy is in fact at odds with that of Modern Orthodoxy; see further below and in the Hildesheimer article.
Torah im Derech Eretz
Hirsch’s Torah im Derech Eretz (???? ?? ??? ??? – “Torah with the way of the Land”) is a philosophy of Orthodox Judaism which formalises a relationship between halakhically observant Judaism and the modern world. Hirsch held that Judaism requires the application of Torah philosophy to all human endeavor and knowledge compatible with it. Thus, secular education becomes a positive religious duty. "Judaism is not a mere adjunct to life: it comprises all of life... in the synagogue and the kitchen, in the field and the warehouse, in the office and the pulpit... with the pen and the chisel" . Hirsch's vision, although not unqualified, extended to the sciences as well as to (German) literature, philosophy and culture. Torah im Derech Eretz remains influential to this day in all branches of Orthodox Judaism.
Note that Neo Orthodoxy, the movement descended from Hirsch’s Frankfurt community regards itself as positioned, ideologically, outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy; see further below.
Hildesheimer's pragmatism
Azriel Hildesheimer, along with Rabbi Hirsch, was insistent that for Orthodox Jews living in the
west, there was no possibility to segregate oneself behind ghetto walls. On the contrary, modern Jewish education must teach Jews how best to confront and deal with modernity in all of its aspects .
His approach, "Cultured Orthodoxy", was defined as representing "unconditional agreement with the culture of the present day; harmony between Judaism and science; but also unconditional steadfastness in the faith and traditions of Judaism" .
He was, however, "the pragmatist rather than the philosopher", and it is his actions, rather than his philosophy, which have become institutionalized in Modern Orthodoxy , and through which his influence is still felt.
- He established Jewish education for males and females, which included both religious and secular studies.
- He established Hildesheimer Rabbinical Seminary, one of the first Orthodox yeshivot incorporating modern Jewish studies, secular studies and academic scholarship in its curriculum.
- He was non-sectarian, and worked with communal leaders, even non-Orthodox ones, on issues that affected the community.
- He maintained traditional attachments to the Land of Israel and worked with the non-Orthodox on its behalf.
Torah Umadda
Torah Umadda (???? ???? - "Torah and secular knowledge") is a philosophy concerning the secular world and Judaism, and in particular secular knowledge and Jewish knowledge. It envisions a personal (as opposed to theoretical) "synthesis" between Torah scholarship and Western, secular scholarship, entailing, also, positive involvement with the broader community. Here, the "individual has absorbed the attitudes characteristic of science, democracy and Jewish life and responds appropriately in diverse relations and contexts" . The resultant mode of Orthodox Judaism is referred to as "Centrist Orthodoxy".
This philosophy, as formulated today, is to a large extent a product of the teachings and philosophy of HaRav Joseph Soloveitchik (1903-1993), Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University. In "Rav Soloveitchik's" thought, Judaism, which believes that the world is "", enjoins man to engage in tikkun olam. "Halakhic Man" must therefore attempt to bring the sanctity and purity of the transcendent realm into the material world . Centrist Orthodoxy is the dominant mode of Modern Orthodoxy in the United States, while Torah Umadda remains closely associated with Yeshiva University.
Torah Umadda is related to Hirsch's Torah im Derech Eretz, but see below for a comparison between the two.
Religious Zionism
Modern Orthodoxy draws on the teachings of Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook (1864 – 1935) - both as regards its views on Jewish Peoplehood and as regards the (related) interaction with the secular world.
- “Rav Kook” saw Zionism as a part of a divine scheme finally to result in the resettlement of the Jewish people in its homeland, bringing salvation ("Geula") to the Jewish people, and the entire world.
- In Rav Kook’s thought Kodesh and Chol (sacred and profane) play an importany role: Kodesh is the inner taam (reason / meaning) of reality, while Chol is that which is detached from Kodesh and is without any meaning; Judaism, then, is the vehicle "whereby we sanctify our lives, and attach all the practical, secular elements of life to spiritual goals which reflect the absolute meaning of existence - G-d Himself" .
In Israel, the Religious Zionism of the "Dati Leumi" (??? ?????, "National Religious") dominates Modern Orthodoxy. Here too, the ideological basis is largely drawn from the teachings of Rav Kook , and there is therefore much overlap; philosophical differences, as well as other "non-modern" forms of Religious Zionism, are discussed below.
See also Mizrachi; Bnei Akiva; National Religious Party; Hesder; Mechina; Gush Emunim; Torat Eretz Yisrael.
Comparison with other movements
Various, highly differing views are offered under the banner of Modern Orthodoxy, ranging from traditionalist to revisionist. In addition, some elements of Haredi Judaism ("Ultra-Orthodox Judaism") appear to be more receptive to messages that have traditionally been part of the Modern-Orthodox agenda. At the same time, Modern Orthodoxy’s left wing may appear to align with more traditional elements of Conservative Judaism. Thus, in clarifying its position, it is useful to discuss Modern Orthodoxy with reference to other movements in Judaism.
Haredi Judaism
- See also under Centrist Orthodoxy and Divine Providence for further elaboration of the differences discussed here.
Although there is some question as how precisely to define the distinction between Modern Orthodoxy and Haredi Judaism, there is basic agreement that they may be distinguished on the basis of three major characteristics:
- Modern Orthodoxy adopts a relatively inclusive stance toward society in general, and the larger Jewish community in particular.
- Modern Orthodoxy is, in comparison, accommodating, “if not welcoming” to modernity, general scholarship and science.
- Modern Orthodoxy is almost uniformly receptive toward Israel and Zionism, viewing the State of Israel (in addition to the Land of Israel) as having inherent religious significance.
A fourth difference suggested, relates to the acceptability of moderation within Jewish law. Both Modern Orthodoxy and Ultra Orthodoxy regard Halakha as Divine in origin, and as such, no position is assumed without justification in the Shulkhan Arukh and in the Acharonim. The movements differ, however, in their approach to strictures (chumras) and leniencies (kulas). Modern Orthodoxy holds that strictures are not normative, rather, these are a matter of personal choice ; "severity and leniency are relevant only in circumstances of factual doubt, not in situations of debate or varied practice. In the latter situations, the conclusion should be based solely on the legal analysis". (Note though, that in recent years, many Modern Orthodox Jews are described as "increasingly stringent in their adherence to Jewish law" .) In the Haredi view, on the other hand, "the most severe position... is the most likely basis for unity and commonality of practice within the Orthodox community and is therefore to be preferred". Further, "such severity... results in the greatest certainty that God's will is being performed." . Haredi Judaism thus tends to adopt chumras as a norm.
As to the contention that Modern Orthodoxy's standards of observance of halakha are, in fact, "relaxed," as opposed to moderate, see below under Criticism.
Neo-Orthodoxy/Torah Im Derech Eretz
Both Modern Orthodoxy and Neo Orthodoxy, the movement directly descended from Hirsch’s Frankfurt community, have combined Torah and secular knowledge with participation in contemporary western life, and thus some maintain that there is a degree of practical and philosophical overlap between the two. The movements are nevertheless distinct, and in general, Neo-Orthodoxy has taken a more qualified approach than Modern orthodoxy, emphasizing that followers must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world.
Note though that differences between the movements may be more than a question of degree: Hirsch scholars argue that Hirschian philosophy is at odds with that of Modern Orthodoxy , while Modern Orthodox scholars maintain that Modern Orthodoxy accords with Hirsch's worldview . These philosophical distinctions (though subtle), manifest in markedly divergent religious attitudes and perspectives; in fact, Shimon Schwab, second Rabbi of this community in the United States, is described as being "spiritually very distant" from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy .
From the viewpoint of Neo-Orthodoxy, that movement differs from Modern Orthodoxy (and particularly Centrist Orthodoxy) on three main counts .
- The role of secular life and culture: In the Hirschian view, interaction with the secular - and the requisite acquisition of culture and knowledge - is encouraged, insofar as it facilitates the application of Torah to wordly matters. For Modern Orthodoxy, on the other hand, secular culture and knowledge are seen as a complement to Torah, and, to some extent, encouraged for their own sake. Some would suggest that in Modern Orthodoxy, Judaism is enriched by interaction with modernity, whereas in Neo-Orthodoxy human experience (and modernity) are enriched by the application of Torah outlook and practice.
- Priority of Torah versus Secular knowledge: In the Hirschian view, Torah is the "sole barometer of truth" by which to judge secular disciplines, as "there is only one truth, and only one body of knowledge that can serve as the standard... Compared to it, all the other sciences are valid only provisionally." (Hirsch, commentary to Leviticus 18:4-5). By contrast, in the view of Modern Orthodoxy, although Torah is the "preeminent center", secular knowledge is considered to offer "a different perspective that may not agree at all with [Torah] ... [but] both together present the possibility of a larger truth." (Torah Umadda, p. 236).
Religious Zionism
Broadly defined, Religious Zionism is a movement which embraces the idea of Jewish national sovereignty, often in connection with the belief in the ability of the Jewish people to bring about a redemptive state through natural means, and often attributing religious significance to the modern State of Israel. (This attitude is rejected by most Haredim - but not all, particularly the Hardal movement.) Thus, in this sense, Religious Zionism in fact encompasses a wide spectrum of religious views including Modern Orthodoxy.
Note however, that Modern Orthodoxy, in fact, overlaps to a large extent with “Religious Zionism” in its narrower form ('Throughout the world a "religious Zionist day school" is a synonym for a "modern Orthodox day school"' ). At the least, the two are not in any direct conflict, and generally coexist , sharing both values and adherents. Further, in practice, except at their extremes, the differences between Religious Zionism and Modern Orthodoxy in Israel are not pronounced, and they are often identical, especially in recent years and for the younger generation .
Nevertheless, the two movements are philosophically distinct on two broad counts.
- Firstly, (conservative) Religious Zionists differ with Modern Orthodoxy in its approach to secular knowledge . Here, engagement with the secular is permissible, and encouraged, but only insofar as this benefits the State of Israel; secular knowledge is viewed as valuable for practical ends, though not in and of itself. See further under Torah Umadda.
- Secondly, under Religious Zionism, a “nationalistic coloration” is given to traditional religious concepts, whereas, by contrast, Modern Orthodoxy includes “a greater balance which includes openness to the non-Jewish world” ; thus under Religious Zionism the Jewish nation is conceived of as an “organic unity”, whereas Modern Orthodoxy emphasises the individual .
Applying the above distinction, in Israel today Modern Orthodoxy - as distinct from Religious Zionism - is represented by only a handful of institutions: the Religious Kibbutz Movement, Neemanei Torah V’Avoda, the Meimad political party, and the Shalom Hartman Institute (some would include Yeshivat Har Etzion and Yeshivat Hamivtar / Ohr Torah Stone Institutions).
Conservative Judaism
In some areas, Modern Orthodoxy’s left wing appears to align with more traditional elements of Conservative Judaism, and in fact some on the left of Modern Orthodoxy have allied with the formerly Conservative Union for Traditional Judaism. Nonetheless, the two movements are completely distinct. Rabbi Avi Weiss - from the left of Modern Orthodoxy- stresses that Orthodox and Conservative Judaism are “so very different in … three fundamental areas: Torah mi-Sinai, rabbinic interpretation, and rabbinic legislation” .
- Torah mi-Sinai ("Torah From Sinai"): According to Weiss, Modern Orthodoxy, in line with the rest of Orthodoxy, holds that Jewish law is Divine in origin, and as such, no underlying principle may be compromised in accounting for changing political, social or economic conditions, whereas Conservative Judaism holds that Poskim should make use of literary and historical analysis in deciding Jewish law, and may reverse decisions of the Acharonim that are held to be inapplicable today. . “The Conservative Movement maintains that the purpose of the law in the first place is largely to concretize moral values, and so the specific form of the law can and should be changed if it is not effectively doing that" . (Within the context that “[t]he halakhic system, historically considered, evinces a constant pattern of responsiveness, change and variety. Conservative Judaism did not read that record as carte blanche for a radical revision or even rejection of the system, but rather as warrant for valid adjustment where absolutely necessary" .)
- Rabbinic interpretation: Weiss argued that (Modern) Orthodoxy contends that legal authority is cumulative, and that a contemporary posek (decisor) can only issue judgments based on a full history of Jewish legal precedent, whereas the implicit argument of the Conservative movement is that precedent provides illustrations of possible positions rather than binding law. Conservatism, therefore, remains free to select whichever position within the prior history appeals to it.. "Conservative rabbis have great respect for the Shulkhan Arukh, but do not view it as the ultimate authority because it was written over 400 years ago and much has changed since then in the halakhah, in society and in our outlook on life" .
- Rabbinic legislation: Weiss argued that since the Orthodox community is ritually observant, Rabbinic law legislated by (today's) Orthodox rabbis can meaningfully become binding if accepted by the community (see minhag), while Conservative Judaism has a largely non-observant laity. . Thus, although Conservatism similarly holds that “no law has authority unless it becomes part of the concern and practice of the community” (and, in fact, the decision of when change is necessary is becoming “a communal matter at the congregational level”), since its constituency is generally not composed of ritually observant members , communal acceptance of a "permissive custom" is not “meaningful”, and, as a result, related Rabbinic legislation cannot assume the status of law.
In general, Modern Orthodoxy does not, therefore, view the process by which the Conservative movement decides halakha as legitimate - or with the non-normative weighting assigned to halakha by the Conservative movement. In particular, Modern Orthodoxy disagrees with many of Conservative Judaism’s halakhic rulings, particularly as regards issues of egalitarianism. See further on the Orthodox view and the Conservative view.
Modern Orthodoxy clearly differs from the approach of Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism, which do not consider halakha to be obligatory.
Right and left
The philosophical spectrum within Modern Orthodoxy has been redefined by various challenges from both the right and the left over the last 30-40 years. Among the issues have been the extent to which Modern Orthodoxy should cooperate with the more liberal denominations, support secular academic pursuits combined with religious learning, and embrace efforts to give women a larger role in Jewish learning and worship , the acceptability of modern textual criticism as a tool for Torah study is also debated.
To the ideological right, the line between Haredi and Modern Orthodox has blurred in recent years (some have referred to this trend as "haredization" ). In addition to increasing stringency in adherence to Halakha, many Modern Orthodox Jews express a growing sense of alienation from the larger, secular culture . Here “the balance has tipped heavily in favor of Torah over madda … [and many] have redefined "madda" as support for making one's livelihood in the secular world, not culturally or intellectually engaging with it” .
At the same time, adherents on the ideological left have begun to develop new institutions that aim to be outward looking whilst maintaining a discourse between modernity and halakhah. The resultant Open Orthodoxy seeks to re-engage with secular studies, Jews of all denominations and global issues. This movement has its own Yeshiva in New York, Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. Some within this movement have experimented with orthodox egalitarianism where gender equality solutions are found through halakhah. This has led to women taking on more leadership roles. Others in this movement are increasingly re-engaging with social justice issues from a halakhic point of view .
Criticism
Generalisations concerning Modern Orthodoxy are difficult to draw, and, as such, any criticism may be aimed at a straw man. This section deals with criticism relating to standards of observance and to social issues; as regards its philosophy see "Criticism" under Torah Umadda.
Standards of observance
There is an often repeated contention that Modern Orthodoxy has lower standards of observance of traditional Jewish laws and customs than other branches of Orthodox Judaism . This view is largely anecdotal, and is based on individual behaviour, as opposed to any formal, institutional position:
Introduction of reforms
Whereas the Modern Orthodox position is (generally) presented as "unquestioned allegiance to the primacy of Torah, and that the apprehension of all other intellectual disciplines must be rooted and viewed through the prism of Torah" , Haredi groups have sometimes compared Modern Orthodoxy with early Reform Judaism in Germany: Modern Orthodox Rabbis have been criticised for attempting to modify Jewish law, in adapting Judaism to the needs of the modern world.
Note that claims of this nature have been commonplace within Orthodox Judaism since the first "reforms" of Samson Raphael Hirsch and Azriel Hildesheimer. Thus, in Europe of the early 1800s, all of Judaism that differed from the strictest forms present at the time was called "Reform". Then, as now, Modern Orthodoxy took pains to distance its "reforms" - those which could be justified as based on the Shulkhan Arukh and poskim – from those of the Reform movement, which could not.
- See further under Torah im Derech Eretz; Torah Umadda.
Sociological and philosophical dilemmas
Some observe that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is inhibited by the fact that it embraces modernity - its raison d'être - and that it is highly rational and intellectual.
- Modern Orthodoxy is, almost by definition, inhibited from becoming a strong movement, because this would entail organization and authority to a degree "which goes against the very grain of modernity". A related difficulty is that Modern Orthodox rabbis who do adopt stringencies may, in the process, lose the support of precisely the "Modern" group which they sought to lead.
- Modern Orthodoxy’s "highly intellectual and rational stance" presents its own difficulties. Firstly, the ideology entails built-in tensions and frequently requires conscious living with inconsistency (for instance, modernity vs. orthodoxy). In fact, even amongst its leadership there is limited agreement "on the philosophical parameters of modern Orthodoxy" . Secondly, there are also those who question whether "the literature... with its intellectually elitist bias fails to directly address the majority of its practitioners" . The suggestion here is that Modern Orthodoxy may not provide a directly applicable theology for the contemporary Modern Orthodox family; see further discussion under Torah Umadda.
Important figures
Many Orthodox Jews find the intellectual engagement with the modern world as a virtue. Examples of Orthodox rabbis who promote or have promoted this worldview include:
- Marc D. Angel - former president of the Rabbinical Council of America, and rabbi of Shearith Israel, a Spanish Portuguese synagogue in New York.
- Yehuda Amital - A Hungarian survivor of the Holocaust, Rabbi Amital emigrated to Israel in 1944, and resumed his yeshiva studies in Jerusalem. During the War of Independence, he served in the Hagana armored corps, taking part in the famous battle of Latrun. Subsequently, he took an active role in the development of Yeshivat Hadarom, where he was involved in the formulation of the idea of Yeshivat Hesder. Following the Six Day War, Rabbi Amital founded and assumed leadership of Yeshivat Har Etzion. He is a dominant public figure in Israel who is widely respected on matters of religious and national concern.
- Raymond Apple - former senior rabbi of the Great Synagogue, Sydney, Australia, and the pre-eminent Jewish spokesperson on Judaism in Australia.
- Samuel Belkin, former President of Yeshiva University
- Eliezer Berkovits - philosopher, author of many works including Not In Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha and Faith after the Holocaust.
- Saul Berman - director of the now defunct Edah, a Modern Orthodox advocacy organization.
- J. David Bleich, professor at Yeshiva University and expert in Jewish law
- Shalom Carmy - professor of Jewish Studies and Philosophy at Yeshiva University; a prominent Modern Orthodox theologian
- Leo Jung, Rabbi at the Jewish Center
- Norman Lamm - Rosh Yeshiva, Yeshiva University ; Orthodox Forum; author of Torah U-Maddah. One of the leading voices for the validity and importance of Modern Orthodoxy.
- Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein - Lichtenstein grew up in the United States, earning Semicha at Yeshiva University, and a Ph.D. in English Literature at Harvard. He is committed to intensive and original Torah study, and articulates a bold Jewish worldview that embraces modernity, reflecting the tradition of his teacher and father-in-law, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. In 1971, Lichtenstein answered Rabbi Amital's request to join him at the helm of Yeshivat Har Etzion. He is a source of inspiration for a wide circle of Jewry, for both his educational attainments and his intellectual leadership. Author of Leaves of Faith - The World of Jewish Learning, and By His Light: Character and Values in the Service of God.
- Haskel Lookstein - Rabbi of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun in Manhattan and principal of the Ramaz School. Voted by Newsweek magazine as the most influential orthodox rabbi in the United States in 2008. Rabbi Lookstein is best known for his strong political activism which began with numerous visits to the former Soviet Union, numerous rallies on behalf of Natan Sharansky and continues today with activism on behalf of the Jews of Israel and worldwide.
- Shlomo Riskin - Formerly rabbi of the Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan, he emigrated to Israel to become the Chief Rabbi of Efrat.
- Rabbi Hershel Schachter - one of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik's most prominent students, dean of the Katz Kollel at the Yeshiva University-affiliated Rabbi Isaac Elchanon Theological Seminary (RIETS). Has published several works attempting to establish a definitive view of Rabbi Soloveitchik's Weltanschauung.
- Marc Schneier - Rabbi of The Hampton Synagogue, NY
- Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik - Known as "The Rav", he was effectively the spiritual and intellectual guide of Modern Orthodoxy in America for the mid-20th century. He is the author of "The Lonely Man of Faith" and "Halakhic Man," an outspoken Zionist, an opponent of extending rabbinic authority into areas of secular expertise, and a proponent of some interdenominational cooperation, such as the Rabbinical Council of America participation in the now-defunct Synagogue Council of America. He was known as a stern leader who described in his writings the spiritual loneliness and internal isolation of the modern religious "man of faith".
- Rav Dr. Moshe David Tendler - Rav Tendler is the Rabbi Isaac and Bella Tendler Professor of Jewish Medical Ethics, and is a Professor of Biology, as well as being a Rosh Yeshiva in Yeshivat Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (MYP/RIETS). Holding a PhD in Microbiology, Rav Tendler is among the most prominent students of both Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt'l (his father-in-law) and Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik. Rabbi Tendler is an expert on medical ethics as it pertains to Jewish law. He is the author of Practical Medical Halakhah, a textbook of Jewish responsa to medical issues, and "Pardes Rimonim", a book about the halachot of Taharat Mishpacha. Rabbi Tendler is currently Rabbi of the Community Synagogue in Monsey, NY, and is the chairman of the Bioethical Commission, RCA, and of the Medical Ethics Task Force, UJA-Federation of Greater New York.
- Joseph Telushkin - Author, teacher, lecturer.
- Avi Weiss - Dean, Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. Rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale Bronx, NY. Author, teacher, lecturer, and activist.
- Joel B. Wolowelsky - Yeshivah of Flatbush; Orthodox Forum; Tradition; MeOtzar HoRav.
- Walter Wurzburger- former pulpit Rabbi, editor of Tradition magazine and head of the RCA.
Modern Orthodox advocacy groups
There are a few organizations dedicated to furthering Modern Orthodoxy as a religious trend:
The largest and oldest are the Orthodox Union (Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America), which sponsors youth groups, kashrut supervision, and many other activities and its rabbinic counterpart, the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA). Both have Israel and diaspora (outside the land of Israel) programs.
- National Council of Young Israel is a consortium of 200 mostly modern-orthodox synagogues in the United States and Israel.
- Meimad is a political/intellectual alternative to Israel's highly nationalistic religious parties or those hostile to modern secularist values
- The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance (JOFA) a forum for enhancing the roles of Orthodox Jewish women within the Orthodox community, and reducing Orthodox religious disabilities against women.
See also
Selected Modern Orthodox congregations
- throughout the United States and Israel
- The Merrick Bellmore Synagogue, Merrick, NY USA
- Congregation in Potomac, MD, USA
- Kehilat Orach Eliezer in New York, NY, USA
- Congregation in Washington, DC, USA
- Congregation in New York, NY, USA
- Synagogue in New York, NY, USA
- Synagogue in Venice Beach, California, USA
- in Livingston, NJ, USA
- of West Orange, NJ, USA
- Beth Tfiloh Baltimore, MD, USA
- Bala Cynwyd, PA, USA
- Anshe Shalom Chicago, IL, USA
- Stamford, CT, USA
- Baltimore, MD, USA
External links
Ideology
- , Alexander Goldberg
- , Rabbi Hershel Schachter
- , Prof. Alan Brill, Yeshiva University
- , David Singer
- Rabbi Saul J. Berman
- (JPEG) Rabbi Dr Norman Lamm
- , Sh'ma Journal, February 2001
- , Prof. Eliezer Segal
- , Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch
- , Rabbi Aryeh Carmell
- , Rabbi Shlomo Riskin
- Rabbi Avraham (Avi) Weiss (pdf)
Issues
- , Rav Yosef Blau
- , Charles S. Liebman
- , Shlomo Fischer
- , Prof. Chaim I. Waxman
- , William B. Helmreich and Reuel Shinnar
- , Prof. Lawrence Kaplan
- Prof. Chaim I. Waxman
- , David Van Biema, cnn.com
- , Julie Wiener, Jewish Telegraphic Agency
- , Rabbi Shalom Carmy
- , Michael Kress
- , Mordechai Plaut
- , Rabbis A Frimer & D. Frimer
- , Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein
History
Resources
|
| |
|
|
