Harry, I agree with you. I embraced Orthodoxy as a teen, first in suburban Chicago and then Indianapolis in the 1970's. Sidney Steiman, the Conservative rabbi in Indy, during those years, was more of a Reconstructionist altogether, who felt threatened by kids in his congregation opting for authentic Torah U'Mesorah. With a few exceptions here and there most of the kids I was in USY with lived very secular lives, both of my siblings intermarried, and one girl in my Indy USY chapter converted to Christianity altogether.
Rabbi Steven Abraham has one of the best Jewish substacks in the community. He is thoughtful, and an excellent writer, and bases all his theses on Jewish sources which are copiously quoted. His topics are usually related to issues of current concern & interest. They align well with Harry Maryles' concerns
A few weeks ago BT who is getting involved with Chabad showed me a book written by a scientist who himself was a BT and now a full blown Chabadnik, I said, very interesting, now ask your Chabad mentors to show you a book written by Lubavitcher lifer,(i.e. went to Chabad Yeshivas and no college) who became a scientist.
There used to be (I do not know if there still are) "right-wing" Conservative Rabbis. There was one where I live -- who encouraged his congregants to send children to the local "Day school" and who OPPOSED to opening of a Solomon Schechter School to "compete". He encouraged those who wished to take on greater Shemirat Hamitzvot -- to the point that some would actually stop going to the "Temple" and start to go to "Shule".
I doubt that those Rabbis subscribed to the "Biblical Criticism". I *think* that they believed in "Toras Moshe".
Biblical criticism gets a bad rap even when it provides a useful service. I’m not talking about commentary suggesting the Chumash was authored by a creative screenwriter trying to push a movie deal star Charleston Heston with Marty Feldman as the pharaoh. I’d talking about careful, word-by-word linguistic analyses of Koheleth, Job, Tehillim, etc., from technical as well as a sapiential standpoints — the stuff R’Jonathan Sacks used to cite. (One outstanding example: C.L. Seow’s commentary on Ecclesiastes, Anchor Yale Bible 18C (Yale Univ. Press, 1997).)
Word-by-word analysis is about the opposite of source criticism. (There are many forms of Biblical criticism. When people use the phrase they usually mean Higher Source Criticism.)
Likely true -- I think because "Biblical Criticism" is cited as the "Basis" for being able to "disregard" the Torah. As a result, ANY "Biblical Criticism" (I prefer -- in that case -- to call it "Analysis of P'shat" in the tradition of the RashBam) ends up going under a microscope.
Commentary Symposium 1966-Himmelfarb points out wo name can distinguish from non Orthodox-can't distinguish Reform Conservative. Orthodox in Symposium included Agudah macher, later OO followers, RY but they wee all easily identified as Orthodox
Please forgive me -- I do not pick up on all the abbreviations . I *think* that in this symposium that you cited it means that all the participants were Orthodox...
Read the polemics from Orthodox publications roughly 65-80 years ago and you'll see that what you call RW Conservative Judaism was not attacked for practice but for belief. There was at a time an Orthoprax heresy-all that counted was performance of mitzvot. Jewish Life, Tradition in their early years was a source of that.
In the case of the Rabbi that I am thinking of, I do NOT think that there was a question of belief. I do not recall hearing of "Orthoprax" (I must have led a sheltered life).
Obviously, has been used to describe Orthodox practicing academics who clearly don't accept standard Orthodox beliefs on Torah origin and historical accuracy.-
The RCA has been much broader than an MO organization for decades-Chareidi Rabbis started joining for practical reasons and of course started making more like OU broadly based-certainly in last 40 years since the Rav stoppped bing head of Halacha Commission.
I might add that Rabbi Abraham is spot on when he addresses the inclusion of "comparative religion" in the curricula of so many religious schools affiliated not only with the Conservative United Synagogue but both the URJ and FRCH as well. 7th graders who have never so much as opened up a Rashi, we can forget about Mishnayot, are trucked off to local churches, and now mosques and Hindu temples, for the sake of "getting to know their neighbors." What good can possibly be achieved by such foolishness?
Harry, I agree with you. I embraced Orthodoxy as a teen, first in suburban Chicago and then Indianapolis in the 1970's. Sidney Steiman, the Conservative rabbi in Indy, during those years, was more of a Reconstructionist altogether, who felt threatened by kids in his congregation opting for authentic Torah U'Mesorah. With a few exceptions here and there most of the kids I was in USY with lived very secular lives, both of my siblings intermarried, and one girl in my Indy USY chapter converted to Christianity altogether.
Rabbi Steven Abraham has one of the best Jewish substacks in the community. He is thoughtful, and an excellent writer, and bases all his theses on Jewish sources which are copiously quoted. His topics are usually related to issues of current concern & interest. They align well with Harry Maryles' concerns
Not surprised. He writes well. But are his readers really listening?
FYI He is the Rabbi of a large congregation in Omaha.
A few weeks ago BT who is getting involved with Chabad showed me a book written by a scientist who himself was a BT and now a full blown Chabadnik, I said, very interesting, now ask your Chabad mentors to show you a book written by Lubavitcher lifer,(i.e. went to Chabad Yeshivas and no college) who became a scientist.
There used to be (I do not know if there still are) "right-wing" Conservative Rabbis. There was one where I live -- who encouraged his congregants to send children to the local "Day school" and who OPPOSED to opening of a Solomon Schechter School to "compete". He encouraged those who wished to take on greater Shemirat Hamitzvot -- to the point that some would actually stop going to the "Temple" and start to go to "Shule".
I doubt that those Rabbis subscribed to the "Biblical Criticism". I *think* that they believed in "Toras Moshe".
Do any such still exist?
Biblical criticism gets a bad rap even when it provides a useful service. I’m not talking about commentary suggesting the Chumash was authored by a creative screenwriter trying to push a movie deal star Charleston Heston with Marty Feldman as the pharaoh. I’d talking about careful, word-by-word linguistic analyses of Koheleth, Job, Tehillim, etc., from technical as well as a sapiential standpoints — the stuff R’Jonathan Sacks used to cite. (One outstanding example: C.L. Seow’s commentary on Ecclesiastes, Anchor Yale Bible 18C (Yale Univ. Press, 1997).)
Word-by-word analysis is about the opposite of source criticism. (There are many forms of Biblical criticism. When people use the phrase they usually mean Higher Source Criticism.)
Likely true -- I think because "Biblical Criticism" is cited as the "Basis" for being able to "disregard" the Torah. As a result, ANY "Biblical Criticism" (I prefer -- in that case -- to call it "Analysis of P'shat" in the tradition of the RashBam) ends up going under a microscope.
Commentary Symposium 1966-Himmelfarb points out wo name can distinguish from non Orthodox-can't distinguish Reform Conservative. Orthodox in Symposium included Agudah macher, later OO followers, RY but they wee all easily identified as Orthodox
Please forgive me -- I do not pick up on all the abbreviations . I *think* that in this symposium that you cited it means that all the participants were Orthodox...
Read the polemics from Orthodox publications roughly 65-80 years ago and you'll see that what you call RW Conservative Judaism was not attacked for practice but for belief. There was at a time an Orthoprax heresy-all that counted was performance of mitzvot. Jewish Life, Tradition in their early years was a source of that.
In the case of the Rabbi that I am thinking of, I do NOT think that there was a question of belief. I do not recall hearing of "Orthoprax" (I must have led a sheltered life).
Obviously, has been used to describe Orthodox practicing academics who clearly don't accept standard Orthodox beliefs on Torah origin and historical accuracy.-
Maybe that was the issue with Open Orthodox? (Or a similar issue).
I simply do not recall but I *think* that the RCA was ALSO critical of "Open Orthodox"...
The RCA never admitted YCT graduates.
Based upon the article by Yoram Hazony -- I can fully understand why the RCA did not accept YCT.
The RCA has been much broader than an MO organization for decades-Chareidi Rabbis started joining for practical reasons and of course started making more like OU broadly based-certainly in last 40 years since the Rav stoppped bing head of Halacha Commission.
Understood -- however, I think that the RCA is still considered fairly MO.
Is that Ms. Grubner the wife of Rav Yitzchok Sorotzkin?
I might add that Rabbi Abraham is spot on when he addresses the inclusion of "comparative religion" in the curricula of so many religious schools affiliated not only with the Conservative United Synagogue but both the URJ and FRCH as well. 7th graders who have never so much as opened up a Rashi, we can forget about Mishnayot, are trucked off to local churches, and now mosques and Hindu temples, for the sake of "getting to know their neighbors." What good can possibly be achieved by such foolishness?
FRCH?
Federation of Reconstructionist Congregations and Havurot.