Missing from Mishpacha

The lack of objectivity in an otherwise fine magazine

Dr. Paul Vosolov (Mishpacha)

I subscribe. Despite the fact that Mishpacha Magazine reflects an almost exclusively Charedi perspective on the issues affecting the world of observant Jewry, I agree with Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein’s effusive praise of the magazine and its accomplishments in Cross-Currents.

But just like Rabbi Adlerstein, I have my issues with them. One of which I have discussed quite extensively. Which is their refusal to publish any pictures of women regardless of how modestly they are dressed. But I understand what’s behind their editorial policy. As noted in the article:

There are things that Mishpacha still cannot do, say, or challenge. If it would, the entire enterprise – sensitive to both the demands of a very diverse market, and the censorious barbs of extremists – could collapse.

I don’t know about collapse. But it would certainly hurt their bottom line. Mishpacha is in the business of making money. Magazines make money through paid advertisements. Rates are set by the number of readers. The greater the readership, the higher the advertising rates — and the more money they make.

I do not say this disparagingly. I am a capitalist. Mishpacha is entitled to make as much money as it can. And to use whatever ethical means are at their disposal to make that happen. But that doesn’t make me feel any better about the editorial policy that results from it. About which Rabbi Adlerstein makes some very valid points.

Mishpacha’s recent cover story is about Dr. Paul Vosolov’s plan to build a billion-dollar fixed endowment fund for yeshivos in Israel. That would solve the financial crisis facing what they call the “Olam HaTorah”. A crisis resulting from the government conditioning any further financial aid on thier participation in the IDF. Which the Charedi world overwhelmingly rejects - accusing the Israeli government of waging a war against the Torah itself!

Without explicitly saying so, Mishpacha’s editorial views on this issue seems to be identical to that of Israel’s Charedi leadership — a perspective that I have long questioned. And to this day cannot understand. Even though I am 100% certain that this is their genuine belief. As is their belief that the “Olam HaTorah” is exclusively their domain. They do not see any other form of yeshiva as a valid expression of Torah Judaism.

There are few issues of public concern to the Jewish people that upset me more than this.

Rabbi Adlerstein is far more of a gentleman than I am and would never put it the way I do. At the same time, the commentary in his article suggests that, in his heart of hearts, he may be as upset as I am. For the same reasons.

Although he admires the dedication to diligent Torah study that is the hallmark of the Charedi yeshiva world, he nevertheless recognizes its serious shortcomings, which the Mishpacha article ignores. And yet I can’t believe they are unaware of them:

What needs to be examined, however, is the impact of the article as written. When it references charedi yeshivos as THE Olam Hatorah, it reinforces the misconception that we have a monopoly on Torah. That what exists elsewhere has little or insufficient value.

We have no way of knowing how HKBH regards the Torah efforts of different groups...

If, for the sake of argument, we would stipulate that non-charedi learning is inferior and still-born, it would violate the issur of ona’as devarim to state it within earshot of the families of religious soldiers who perished or are serving. It is hard to think of something more callous than declaring to the widow of a fallen soldier — who spent every free moment of his life learning — that what he was doing was not real Torah. Full stop.

I find it hard to believe that the editors of Mishpacha don’t feel the same way. Yes, their editors and columnists are part of the Charedi world, most of whom live in Israel. But how can they not recognize the injustice? Or support a worldview that does not acknowledge the sacrifices of other religious segments of Israeli society, nor the validity of their Torah study?

Even if they don’t agree with it, would they really lose enough readers to significantly affect their bottom line if they at least mentioned that there is another segment of religious Jews in Israel with a different perspective — and understood why that segment is so upset?