- This topic has 218 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
Avraham avinu ditched Lot, what about achdus? What about shalom?
Pinchas killed people and he got a bris shalom.
Our gedolim tell us what shalom is, it isnt about whatevr tainted feelings we have.
Do OO weddings require a get? Maybe OO asked the Moetzes to say this to solve the aguna issue.
Joseph: There is a far gap between being Orthodox and being heretics. They can be not-Orthodox and still count for a Minyan, not make win Assur, etc. You have to explain how they’re worse than the Kusim in the time of Chazal (see the beginning of Chullin, for example).
Sam, the statement read that OO “reject the basic tenets of our faith”.
Rejecting the basic tenets of our faith equates with heresy. As far as any explanation, that question should be addressed to the Gedolei Yisroel shlit”a that issued the statement.
Popa, I think you’re on to a new homemade YCT tshuvah that uses this statement as backing.
Unfortunately the Moetzes seems to lack the shortsightedness and narrowmindedness of some individuals who object to the kol korei. They seem instead to be a victim of inverse of the adage that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to see it repeated. I will explain.
It is narrowminded to think that because OO is not an issue in Lakewood that it does not need to be addressed at all. What of the Orthodox communities spread out around the world, who may not have enough members to logically justify excluding members of OO from sharing their shuls and schools?
It is shortsighted to think that because OO has a weak foothold today that it will always be this way. OO has appeal as what I call emotional religion, which is one of the most common lines of criticism of Orthodox today. Where is our respect for women, or for people who have different orientations, or for people with different ideologies than our own? The OO movement, sad to say, has tremendous potential to snowball, and it takes but a bit of wisdom to perceive it.
History has taught us well about these types of movements. The obvious (due to its recency) parallel is Reform of the 19th century. That was a movement with intellectual appeal, as opposed to mere emotional appeal, but the threat is the same. Both seek to undermine the Torah at all costs in order to promote conformity to the present day society. Those familiar with the history know that there were two approaches to dealing with the Reform movement, and know well which was successful. The attempts at “achdus”, as some like to term it, led only to making compromises of greater and greater sacrifice, while neither gaining the respect of nor increased commitment from the members of the deviant movement.
Thus, there is only one course of action left to us, and it is not one that can be taken lightly nor is it one that any but the leaders of the generation can declare is the right reaction. And history guides us in showing that though it can be painful, it is the only way to preserve the Torah values. The KK serves as a psak to those who may be faced with the challenges of implementing it.
Austritt.
There is an old adage, you catch more flies with Honey than vinegar.
YCT people aren’t flies.
Actual flies can’t be caught with honey or vinegar. Honey is more sticky, but not sticky enough, while vinegar attracts them but can’t keep them.
Then neither the nimshol nor the moshol are correct.
Joseph: The Kusim also denied basic tenets of our faith. The Chazon Ish goes to great lengths to explain why they weren’t treated like Apikorsim.
it isn’t a moshol or nimshal, it is an adage. And it explains what different people here are stating, that whether or not someone is right, degrading individuals, making fun of them and ridiculing them is not going to accomplish the things that are being claimed to be so crucial.
It will NOT wake people up to their faulty ways,
it will not make people think the other way is correct,
it will not do much but turn people away from those with the Torah derech because it is demonstrating lack of middos instead of demonstrating defense of Torah.
If the point of degrading the apikorsim is to deter people from respecting/heeding them, then the posters here are doing a lousy job of it. It needs to be done with intelligent words that will convey a love for Hashem and disgust at the attempt to destroy His Torah. Nothing resembling that is what is being demonstrated here.
ZD: it’s not just about “catching flies? it’s about self preservation. For example, some argue that Chabad because of their outreach, is losing some of its members to different streams. This especially effects youngsters exposed to all levels of observance not yet mature and strong enough.
Didn’t the Kusim worhip doves and reject the Torah she’bal peh?
Mammele – are they losing them to other frum streams? Or do you mean the people they bring in have negative influence on the young kids?
The latter.
An extreme scenario OTOH, which I remember hearing but can’t verify, is of someone trying to promote the Sheva mitzvah bnei Noach and unfortunately completely abandoning Yiddishkeit for Christianity.
ouch. I was thinking about how some of them are looking for spirituality and find the mashichist kind, possibly leaving them in a worse place halachically then they were before they started.
I have a cousin who had a day school background but lives a secular life. She married someone with no exposure who was craving religion. He loved learning new things and had great questions. He ended up finding “kaballa”, the madonna kind, and is over his head in it. It provides him with the spirituality and false connection to Gd without making you change any of your lifestyle. What a horrible loss. And he sincerely believes he has turned his life around and made Hashem his focus, r”l.
I read the kol koreh in both languages. I am not a member of the chareidi/yeshivish/chassidic community.
I was not surprised at all by the language and tone. It expresses how the American chareidi community and its leaders feel about Open Orthodoxy, no more and no less. It was not offensive, demeaning, condescending or angry. It does not tell anyone “what to do” operatively when encountering an open orthodoxy person (Can they be identified on the subway? Do they wear OO t-shirts? I wonder).
It will have an effect or not, time will tell. Treating it as a Rashi or Rambam to be dissected on an operative halachic level may be fun, but is pure conjecture at this point. It was a declarative statement and not a plan of action.
Syag – “kaballa”, the madonna kind”
Don’t knock Madonna – if she keeps the 7 Mitzvahs, she goes to Olam Habah. I can’t say that about every Jew.
How sad. So would you object to a Kol Korah for example against the celebrity Kabalah craze if it were gaining steam within Orthodoxy or would you complain it’s too harsh?
Maybe some posters here are poking fun (which it can be argued is okay similar to ” litzonos d’avoda zorah”) but ZDs original objection was to the Kol Korah itself, with old arguments of everything is perfect in their Machne already and showing ahavos Yisroel no matter the price.
Sometimes tough love is the right approach.
No objection, they are the ones who need to put those things in writing for us.
Thanks Syag for being a voice of reason.
“There is an old adage, you catch more flies with Honey than vinegar.”
And you will note the cow manure attracts even more flies.
And once you are e so hung up on adages, flies are a nuisance and some bring disease, even deadly ones. The correct action is to drive them a away
It is true many times tough love works, but many times it not only fails , it backfires.
Tough love only works if the person receiving the tough love decides at some point they need the love and validation of the person giving the tough love. if the person who got the tough love decides they dont need the person who gave the tough love, it fails. and if the person who got the tough love thrives or believes he is more successful than the giver , it backfires.
bold is mine-29
zahavasdad,
There is an old adage, you catch more flies with Honey than vinegar.
1. Vinegar attracts flies better than honey, so I usually say bees when using that adage 🙂
2. I do not believe that swaying the Open Orthodox leadership back into the fold was the intention of the kol korei.
Really, all this talk about kiruv is on the wrong thread. The YCT people are not tinokos shenishbu with whom kiruv works. I’m all for kiruv, but this is not about that. It is about denouncing a deviant movement whose leaders, and at this point the talmidim as well, are corrupting the Torah. They don’t need to be taught the beauty of Torah and mitzvos. They know what they think of as Torah and mitzvos. They keep Shabbos, they daven three times a day, they don’t eat chazzer, etc. They end up corrupting hslachah in important ways, but at its root, it’s the wrong and dangerous hashkafos which are the problem.
Permissiveness is not love.
I do not believe that swaying the Open Orthodox leadership back into the fold was the intention of the kol korei.
Precisely.
I dont think Avi Weiss cares about the Kol Korea and its not about him, Its about the lay people who might attend the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale or any other OO place (I dont know of any others except for the Hebrew Institute).
The lay people might be able to be convicned, but you need to talk to them in a postive way and not a negative way
swaying the leadership was DY’s take, not ZD’s. ZD can correct me if I am mistaken but the context of permitting the leitzanus was to keep people away from their crazy newfangled hashkofos and I understood ZD (and others?) to be saying that our tone in this leitzanus is going to push people away from US and not deter them from OO. If we want to attract the potential FOLLOWERS to authentic Judaism, we would need to find a more productive way to do so. By slinging manure we attract noone. There needs to be more to the “bashing” that includes explanation for those who don’t understand, and an obvious defending of Torah and disgust for the desecration of it. If you think you can just post leitzanus (as is permitted) without MAKING THE POINT OF SUPPORTING TORAH, then you are just excusing yourself for bad behavior.
And one step further, By not worrying about how we present ourselves, perhaps we are misrepresenting Hashem’s Torah to those masses who are so vulnerable.
Syag, I don’t think it’s about swaying the leadership, or even the laypeople. It’s about defining what is clearly unacceptable. The benefit of doing so won’t be noticeable today, but is important for future generations.
ZD wasn’t talking about leitzanus, he immediately objected to the kol korei itself.
zahavasdad,
(I dont know of any others except for the Hebrew Institute).
In communities not far from mine, there are three Open Orthodox shuls (two of which were previously Orthodox shuls, and one still uses the term “modern Orthodox” instead of Open Orthodox), and a private school with an Open Orthodox rabbi as religious supervisor (previously modern Orthodox). The Open Orthodox rabbis have even formed their own vaad hakashrus, and are extremely vocal outside of the frum community, often criticizing the mainstream Orthodox bodies.
Rather than condemn these places , why not open an alternate place instead and show them the true torah lifestyle.
He was commenting on the attitude he believes it conveys. Just read the post he wrote before mine that wasn’t up when I posted. I disagree with him that the rabbis shouldn’t speak out, but he is right about now it ends up perceived and we need to stop pretending we are all so altruistic in our responses. If you are not conveying defense of Hashem’s Torah on your words than you haven’t accomplished anything.
ZD, there are plenty of regular, frum shuls, of many types. It’s not that they haven’t been exposed to normative Judaism; they have rejected it. In fact, two of the shuls Avram mentioned used to be frum.
Syag, please link, but either way, that’s not his main argument. If you want to discuss his secondary arguments, perhaps you want to comment on his opinion that the Moetzes issued this kol korei not l’shem shomayim, but as a diversion from its own issues.
I disagree strongly with your implied opinion that we don’t need to reject this movement for our own sakes, and for the sake of the future.
zd – these places have to be condemned because they appear to be following halacha. If you don’t condemn them, then they look like a frum choice among the many choices. You are correct that we have to keep focused on why we are condemning and make sure our message isn’t lost. We have to make sure it is always clear that we are not mudslinging for fun but rather to defend Hashem and his TOrah, but you are incorrect about the live-and-let-live idea. Giving them space without speaking out on where and why they are wrong is dangerous because it gives legitimacy. We just have to tweak our methods because we are harming ourselves in our mission.
DY- I don’t do links. i think anyone with a scroll button can figure it out. and once again you are “strongly disagreeing” with me about something i never said so once again, i will leave you to your spins and bow out.
If you “don’t do” links, quote.
Once again, you are denying something you said in black and white. Once again, I’ll quote your own words: If you are not conveying defense of Hashem’s Torah on your words than you haven’t accomplished anything.
zahavasdad,
Rather than condemn these places , why not open an alternate place instead and show them the true torah lifestyle.
There is a wealth of alternate places, B”H.
Here’s the problem: the leadership of Open Orthodoxy does not want to be shown anything. They want to shake things up and remake the landscape in their own image. You seem to assume that the Open Orthodox are victims of aggression, and that mainstream Orthodox are the aggressors, but in reality they give as good as they get, if not more so.
As far as day to day interactions, I try my best to treat everyone I meet with kindness and sensitivity. Affiliation does not affect that.
Avram
Again i am not talking about the leaders, i am talking about the lay people. You dont need to show Avi Weiss the beauty of torah lifestyle, you need to show the people who attend these places the beauty so they will attend your shuls and the OO places will close of their own free volution.
I do not support attacking the Avi Weisses is not because he is right, but because the lay people can get protective of their rabbi and will take an attack on him as an attack on themselves,
The difference between my approach and the Moetzes is I want to show people the postive points of view and not the negative points of view
As far as day to day interactions, I try my best to treat everyone I meet with kindness and sensitivity. Affiliation does not affect that.
Agreed. I was very nice to the female conservative rabbi I met last week.
The difference between my approach and the Moetzes is I want to show people the postive points of view and not the negative points of view
How would you do that?
If we followed your approach of not condemning, the mostly innocent lay people would never know that they are following leaders and a movement who are outside of the pale. Now they are given a fair chance to rejoin Orthodoxy.
How would you do that?
Open a shul near OO shuls, have a dynamic rabbi be the leader, have shiurim
Show the positive side of frumkite. Chabad does this and it works (I dont know if they open chabad houses near OO places) No reason the Agudah cant duplicate the Chabad House formula.
“The difference between my approach and the Moetzes…”
That just about says it all, zahavasd.
Thank you for clarifying!
“The difference between my approach and the Moetzes is I want to show people the positive points of view and not the negative points of view”
So, pray tell, what exactly are the positive points, from a Torah perspective about open orthodoxy?
Can you please point to some positive outreach you are doing that would draw anyone closer to yiddishkeit that we can use a kiruv resource?
I know that the members of Moetzes are involved in many such programs and constantly advise and direct many kiruv programs and individuals active in kiruv.
Apparently you never read the Moetzes letter, because there is nothing in there negative about an individual, it talks about a movement that is drawing people away from Yiddishkeit. It is not negative in anyway.
I am glad that you A) think that you are equal standing with the Moetzes, and B) are sure that you have a more informed and better Torah perspective than they (Individually and as a Group), and C) that your comments are l’shem shomayim, while the Moetzes comments were not.
There is a posuk in the Torah that states U’Biarta Harah Mikirbecha, Vchol Yisroel Yishmau Vyirau. It does not say Achdus is better.
Joseph: Before the Kusim worshiped a dove, they rejected Torah Sheba’al Peh. And yet their Shechitah was still Kosher and they did not make win Assur by touching it (until they worshiped the dove).
zahavasdad,
I do not support attacking the Avi Weisses is not because he is right, but because the lay people can get protective of their rabbi and will take an attack on him as an attack on themselves,
The difference between my approach and the Moetzes is I want to show people the postive points of view and not the negative points of view
I understand, and agree that in different circumstances that would be the ideal approach. As I see it, what complicates things is:
1. The Open Orthodox movement is trying to set up a “have your cake and eat it too” situation, claiming that one can adhere to traditional Torah Judaism while violating those traditions at the same time. So simply showing them the beauty of Torah would garner the response, “hey, we do that too!”
2. The movement is actively attempting to supplant the mantle of “Orthodoxy.”
If you have specific ideas for how these two issues can be addressed in a purely positive and inclusive fashion, I’d be very interested to learn them.
Open a shul near OO shuls
As mentioned above, there often are, and some used to be frum. It’s also not a contradiction to denouncing a deviant movement.
Sam, so your bringing a raya from the Kusim that just as they rejected the Torah Sheba’al Peh and we could drink their wine, then so too now if someone rejects the Torah Sheba’al Peh we can drink their wine today?
ZD: stop being delusional. These people are coming from an Orthodox background and are CHOOSING TO “MODERNIZE” Yiddishkeit. However, because their Rabbis designed this movement as an attempt to “kosher the chazir fissel” some are soothing their soul by deluding themselves into believing that it’s truly Kosher.
zahavasdad,
While I agree that it seems that the Kol Koreh may seem not helpful, it seems to me that there must be a reason that the Rabbanim came out with it. I trust that they know what they are doing. I assume that there was an incident (or more than one) where something went afoul which forces the Rabbanim to voice their opinion. The following is an example:
I have a friend that went to YCT, one of the early ones there. About 10 years ago, he told me that the National Council of Young Israel was really upset that a YCT graduate was hired by a YI congregation. The NCYI leadership then said that all prospective rabbis have to be approved by the NCYI. If it wasn’t for my friend telling me the inside scoop, I might have wondered why the NCYI was being so micromanaging.
Again
How many people have left an OO place because of the Kol Korea and went to an Agudah or similar place?
And if you want to say this is for the future, if you open a Shul near an OO place and try to convience the members to move over you will have alot more success, I can pretty much if the right rabbi is chosen you will get more than 1 to realize OO is wrong, You will get much better success.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.