A No-confidence Vote?
In talking about the selection of Arnold Eisen as the next chancellor of JTS, Shmuel Rosner writes:
Rosner hits the nail right on the head. Where is the next Heschel or Kaplan, Buber or Rosenzweig? Where are the Rabbinic thinkers who inspire, challenge and lead us to new and rediscovered paradigms? Is it any wonder that the Conservative movement has lost its way; there is no one to raise the flag and inspire us to follow. Who can articulate a vision for the Conservative movement that excites and inspires the laity?
Instead, we have factionalism and fragmentism. We have those who would abandon the basic tenets of the Conservative movement at the altar of modernity and pluralism. We have those whose adherence to a specific outcome decries the very notion of halachic evolution.
It is far too early to decide whether the selection of Arnold Eisen is a good one or not. But, I completely agree with Rosen that the selection of a non-Rabbi is the clearest signal to date that the Rabbinate is losing its relevance to modern Judaism.
(Update 5/9/2006 - Neither Buber nor Rozensweig were Rabbis, a fact of which I was aware, but neglected to point out in my original post. Perhaps, then, one should hope that a non-Rabbi can do what our current group of JTS Rabbis have been unable to do - to produce a vision that serious Conservative Jews want to follow )
However, some tough questions arise from this choice. The first and most important one is: Where have all the rabbis gone? Aren't there any good enough rabbis to take on such a job? When one come to think of it, there once was a time in America in which rabbis cast a very long shadow (in a good sense) over the community - but these days are probably over, at least for the time being. Eisen's choice is a vote of no confidence in the new generation of rabbis.
Rosner hits the nail right on the head. Where is the next Heschel or Kaplan, Buber or Rosenzweig? Where are the Rabbinic thinkers who inspire, challenge and lead us to new and rediscovered paradigms? Is it any wonder that the Conservative movement has lost its way; there is no one to raise the flag and inspire us to follow. Who can articulate a vision for the Conservative movement that excites and inspires the laity?
Instead, we have factionalism and fragmentism. We have those who would abandon the basic tenets of the Conservative movement at the altar of modernity and pluralism. We have those whose adherence to a specific outcome decries the very notion of halachic evolution.
It is far too early to decide whether the selection of Arnold Eisen is a good one or not. But, I completely agree with Rosen that the selection of a non-Rabbi is the clearest signal to date that the Rabbinate is losing its relevance to modern Judaism.
(Update 5/9/2006 - Neither Buber nor Rozensweig were Rabbis, a fact of which I was aware, but neglected to point out in my original post. Perhaps, then, one should hope that a non-Rabbi can do what our current group of JTS Rabbis have been unable to do - to produce a vision that serious Conservative Jews want to follow )
posted by Derek Fields at
3:20 PM
1 Comments:
I’m actually more in agreement with Rabbi Goldfarb’s position on the new chancellor from message 737 posted on Shefa by, our good friend, Menachem Creditor
Hevre, last week on Israeli TV the computer correspondent for Maariv reported about encyclopedias. He made two points:
1) In the past, the publishers of encyclopedias took efforts to make sure that the entries were written by recognized experts in the given field. Today, in the electronic age, entries in Wikipedia, the most frequently used encyclopedia, are written by whoever decides to put his two cents in, without any confirmation of credentials, which makes you wonder. (That's we he said – I claim no expertise in this area.)
2) Having said that, he pointed to some serious study recently that found that the academic quality and reliability of the entries in Wikopedia were not significantly less than those of the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Ma inyan shmita etsel Har Sinai? [what's the connection here?] The fact that Arnold Eisen, whom I'd not heard of before last Friday, is "Wikipedia" and not "Britannica" does not necessarily detract from his potential to be a good Chancellor. And what I’ve read/seen so far is impressive – a nice guy, brilliant, a devoted Jew. I've heard kudos for his thinking and writing from serious people here in Israel, too.
The selection is a breath of fresh air, much needed for a suffocating movement. There are plenty of stale corners that can use it.
So I disagree with those saddened that a rabbi was not chosen. Instead we have a Conservative Jew at the head of JTS. That’s no small feat, and therein lies the rub of Conservative Judaism. We have a wonderful movement and wonderful rabbis but not so many wonderful Conservative Jews. And this discrepance, the gap between a clergy who feels the importance of learning and mitsvot, and a laity which, with all their degrees and professional and business success, does not have a clue what we’re talking about, is the biggest problem we face.
I hope the JTS Board did not pick Arnold Eisen for his academic credentials, as impressive as they are. I hope they did not tell him “your job is to keep JTS a first rate academic institution,” because that’s not going to save our movement. If the next chancellor worries only or primarily about what happens within the 4 amot [cubits] of JTS, he will be preserving the quality of the faculty on the Titanic. Scholarship impresses scholars, it does not touch hearts and souls.
We have to convey to our laity the conviction that being Jewish makes a difference and means being different, that Jewish people have a fate and mandate to themselves and the world, that the way to carry them out is through Torah and mitsvot (in the many ways we interpret them), and that we have the obligation and opportunity to be an Am Kadosh [Holy People]. If we don't, we’ll be in trouble, real trouble. The future is not bright for a movement of rabbis and Jewish studies professors.
So maybe having a lay person be the model and bring this message will have an impact. Our lay people seem tired and indifferent to hearing it from rabbis, who, perhaps, they perceive as trained and paid to be different, not from the goyim, but from them.
I wish Arnold Eisen much hatzlacha.
Rabbi Daniel Goldfarb
The chancellor of JTSA is more of a figurehead of the Conservative Movement. By not having a Rabbi as Chancellor of the seminary, it shows a vote for the laity that it is possible to represent the Conservative Movement without having a title before your name. It also separates Rabbinic politics from the Seminary, leaving the Rabbis to deliberate on Halacha without worrying about managing an institution.
I agree that the role of Rabbi as it is now is going to be considered a little more outdated in the coming years. Information on Jewish Law is readily available in a language that everyone can speak and read, and with the Conservative Movement’s growing emphasis on empowerment and incorporation of Ramah Style davening and teaching, I don’t believe the Congregational Rabbi is going to be the final voice for a community’s Halachic Stance (as an example, Rabbi Silverstein, as far as I know, as only made one definitive Halachic stance, and that’s his opinion on Swordfish (not kosher)
Avi Eisen
By
Avraham YD Eisen, at 9:01 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home