Modern Orthodox Judaism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Modern Orthodox Judaism (or Modern Orthodox or Modern Orthodoxy; sometimes abbreviated as "MO" or Modox) 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 [1].
Contents |
[edit] 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 avoided. [2].
Modern Orthodoxy, additionally, assigns a central role to the "People of Israel" [3]. 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.
[edit] Roots
Modern Orthodoxy traces its roots to the works of Rabbis Azriel Hildesheimer (1820-1899) and Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888). Both are regarded as pioneering, having made distinct philosophic and pragmatic contributions. Their impact manifested initially in the sociological and religious condition of Western European Jewry, but is today felt worldwide. See further discussion in the Hildesheimer article.
[edit] Torah im Derech Eretz
Hirsch’s Torah im Derech Eretz (תורה עם דרך ארץ – “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" [4]. 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 - and in particular, that segment which followed Rabbi Joseph Breuer and his successor, Rabbi Shimon Schwab - regards itself as positioned, ideologically, outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy; see further below.
[edit] 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 [5].
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" [6].
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 [7], 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.
[edit] Torah Umadda
Torah Umadda (תורה ומדע - "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 appropiately in diverse relations and contexts" [8]. 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 "very good", 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 [9]. 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.
[edit] 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 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 extremely important role. Here, Kodesh is the inner taam (reason) of reality and the meaning of existence 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" [10].
In Israel, the Religious Zionism of the "Dati Leumi" (דתי לאומי, "National Religious") dominates Modern Orthodoxy. Here too, the ideological basis is largely drawn from the teachings of Rav Kook [11], and there is therefore much overlap; philosphical 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.
[edit] 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.
[edit] 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: [12]
- Modern Orthodoxy adopts a relatively inclusive attitude stance towards 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 [13]; "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" [14].
- 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." [15]. 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.)
[edit] Neo-Orthodoxy
Ideologically, Neo Orthodoxy is generally regarded as positioned outside of contemporary Modern Orthodoxy. Although both communities have combined Torah and secular knowledge in contemporary western life, Neo-Orthodoxy has done so in a more qualified fashion, emphasizing that followers must exercise caution in engagements with the secular world. Though the resultant philosophical distinction is sometimes subtle, it manifests in markedly divergent religious attitudes and perspectives; Shimon Schwab, second Rabbi of this community in the United States, is described as being "spiritually very distant" [16] from Yeshiva University and Modern Orthodoxy.
Neo-Orthodoxy differs from Modern Orthodoxy particularly as regards broader communal involvement: Neo-Orthodoxy, influenced by Hirsch's philosophy on Austritt (secession), "could not countenance recognition of a non-believing body as a legitimate representative of the Jewish people", and is therefore opposed to the Mizrachi movement, which is affiliated with the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency [17]. Modern Orthodoxy, on the other hand, is characterised by its involvement with the broader Jewish Community and by its Religious Zionism.}
[edit] Religious Zionism
Religious Zionism differs with Modern Orthodoxy as regards the philosophical value of secular knowledge. For the Dati Leumi – based on Numbers 33:53 per Ramban – engagement with the secular is permissible, and encouraged, but only insofar as this benefits the State of Israel [18], and the value of secular knowledge, then, is largely practical; see the discussion under Torah Umadda.
A further distinction is that Religious Zionist thought is characterized by "collective organicism", with a focus on the nation, whereas, in general, Modern Orthodoxy focuses more upon the individual [19].
In practice though, except at their extremes, the differences between Religious Zionism and Modern Orthodoxy in Israel are not pronounced, and the boundaries between them are "porous" [20], especially in recent years and for the younger generation.
In Israel today, Modern Orthodoxy proper - as distinct from Religious Zionism - is represented by only a handful of institutions: the Religious Kibbutz Federation, Neemanei Torah V’Avoda, the Meimad political party, and the Shalom Hartman Institute (some would include Yeshivat Har Etzion and the Ohr Torah Stone Institutions). This stream is characterized as supporting “open-mindedness and unrestricted contact and confrontation with modern Western culture and values and continual synthesis of modern cultural and Torah values” [21]. As with other "liberal" streams of Orthodoxy one of the major issues faced here today, is feminism and gender equality.
Note that, strictly, the only factor that differentiates a "Religious Zionist" from another Orthodox Jew is the view on the modern State of Israel. Thus, in its broader sense, "Religious Zionism" includes a large spectrum, encompassing movements to the left of Modern Orthodoxy [22] , as well as Hasidic Jews, and Haredi (Ultra Orthodox) Jews [23]. Haredi Jews within Religious Zionism - are sometimes referred to as "Chardal" (חרד״ל: an abbreviation for "Haredi leumi (Nationalist Haredi)").
[edit] Conservative Judaism
In some areas, Modern Orthodoxy’s left wing appears to align with more traditional elements of Conservative Judaism — some on the left of Modern Orthodoxy have even allied with the formerly Conservative Union for Traditional Judaism. Nonetheless, the two movements are completely distinct.
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. By contrast, 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. "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" [24]. Further, [t]he 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" [25]. (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" [26].)
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.
Rabbi Avi Weiss, a member of the left wing of Modern Orthodox Judaism, characterized the differences between Orthodox and Conservative Judaism from the viewpoint of the Orthodox side as follows:
- Despite variations in style and approach, the system that we hold as holy sets us fundamentally apart from our Conservative coreligionists whose vision of the Jewish legal process is so very different in each of these three fundamental areas: Torah mi-Sinai, rabbinic interpretation, and rabbinic legislation.
- The belief in Torah mi-Sinai is, for all Orthodox Jews, the foundation of faith and at the core of the halakhic process. Conservative Judaism does not subscribe to this teaching. Moreover, in the area of rabbinic law, we Orthodox - Modern and Right alike - contend that legal authority is cumulative, and that that a contemporary posek (decisor) can only issue judgments based on a full history of Jewish legal precedent. In contrast, 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. Likewise, we adhere and turn to the wisdom of the most distinguished religio-legal authorities in making Halakhic determinations. Not so the Conservatives. Truth be told, when the Conservative movement faced some of its most controversial "new halakhot", such as the ordination of women, it turned away from its own Talmudic scholars and experts in Halakha, who had almost universally rejected the reasoning on which this new practice was to be based, and who have since virtually all left the faculty of the Jewish Theological Seminary.
- Finally, in understanding the value of rabbinic law legislated by today's rabbis, it must be appreciated that at this juncture in our people's history in America, the Orthodox community is blessed with large numbers of ritually observant Jews. Across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, myriads of people meticulously keep Shabbat (the Sabbath), Kashrut (the Dietary Laws), Taharat ha-Mishpaha (the Laws of Family Purity), and pray three times a day. Thus, if a "permissive custom" is accepted, it can become binding. This is not true of Conservatism's constituency, which is generally not composed of ritually observant Jews. Thus, only in our community if a "permissive custom" is accepted, can it be meaningful. [27]
[edit] 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 [28].
To the ideological right, the line between Haredi and Modern Orthodox has blurred in recent years (some have referred to this trend as "haredization" [29]). In addition to increasing stringency in adherence to Halakha, many Modern Orthodox Jews express a growing sense of alienation from the larger, secular culture [30]. 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” [31].
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 [32].
Various of the points of contention are addressed below.
[edit] Modern forms of textual criticism
Some Modern Orthodox scholars may acknowledge insights provided by some tools of modern textual criticism into Judaism's sacred works and rabbinic literature. However, it also maintains that the Torah is of divine origin, and has been transmitted with almost perfect fidelity from the time of Moses until today. Modern Orthodox Jews often study academic biblical criticism but rely on traditional authorities for normative interpretation of the Torah. The documentary hypothesis is only of academic interest for observance. Modern Orthodoxy is ambivalent, at best, about the use of academic criticism for other books of the Hebrew Bible because if one allows these techniques to be used here, one might then be tempted to eventually look at the Torah in this light as well. Orthodox Judaism makes clear distinctions between the books of the Hebrew Bible, holding that the first five books - the Torah - are of a special nature, being directly dictated by God to Moses on Mount Sinai. The rest of the books of the Bible, the Neviim ("Prophets") and Ketuvim ("Writings") are also considered holy, but are less direct transcriptions of God's will. As such some forms of higher criticism of these book are sometimes considered acceptable. A certain amount of Modern Orthodox acceptance of higher criticism for non-Torah books of the Bible can be found in the Soncino Books of the Bible series, and in the Pentateuch and Haftarah by Rabbi Joseph H. Hertz, both works which are widely used in the Modern Orthodox community.
[edit] 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.
[edit] 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 [33]. This view is largely anecdotal, and is based on individual behaviour, as opposed to any formal, institutional position [34].
- “There are at least two distinct types of Modern Orthodox.. One is philosophically or ideologically modern, while the other is more appropriately characterized as behaviorally modern… [The] philosophically Modern Orthodox would be those who are meticulously observant of Halakhah but are, nevertheless, philosophically modern….The behaviorally Modern Orthodox, on the other hand, are not deeply concerned with philosophical ideas... by and large, they define themselves as Modern Orthodox [either] in the sense that they are not meticulously observant [or] in reference to… right-wing Orthodoxy.” [35]; see also [36].
[edit] 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" [37], 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.
- "It is foolish to believe that it is the wording of a prayer, the notes of a synagogue tune, or the order of a special service, which form the abyss between [Reform and Modern Orthodoxy]... It is not the so-called Divine Service which separates us, [rather it] is the theory - the principle [of faithfulness to Jewish law]... if the Torah is to you the Law of God how dare you place another law above it and go along with God and His Law only as long as you thereby "progress" in other respects at the same time?" (Religion Allied to Progress, Samson Raphael Hirsch)
- See further under Torah im Derech Eretz; Torah Umadda.
[edit] Sociological objections
Some observe that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is, ironically, inhibited by the fact that it embraces modernity - its raison d'être - and that it is highly rational and intellectual.
- The very term “Modern Orthodoxy” is, in some sense, an oxymoron. One of the characteristics of all religious orthodoxies, is the submission to the authority of its tradition - authority and tradition are a prerequisite for orthodoxy, and within an orthodoxy, the individual is expected to perceive himself as not having any choice but to conform to all of its dictates. Modernity, by contrast, emphasizes a measure of personal autonomy as well as rationalist truth [38]. Some implications are that 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 [39] (for instance, modernity vs. 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" [40]. 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.
[edit] 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.
- 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 Edah, a Modern Orthodox advocacy organization.
- Benjamin Blech
- Shalom Carmy - professor of Jewish Studies and Philosophy at Yeshiva University; a prominent Modern Orthodox theologian
- J. Simcha Cohen, presently rabbi in West Palm Beach, Fl., formerly rabbi of the Melbourne, Australia, Mizrachi community. Author of a series of Modern Orthodox response collections.
- Shmuel Goldin, Congregation Ahavath Torah, Englewood, N.J.; Chair, Shvil Hazahav
- Rabbi Professor David Hartman - founder of the Shalom Hartman Institute
- 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.
- B. Barry Levy - former professor at Yeshiva University, now professor at McGill University. His work attempts to reconcile modern day biblical scholarship with Orthodox theology.
- Mendell Lewittes - Author of Jewish Law: An Introduction.
- 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 - Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun, NY
- Joseph Lookstein- Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun, NY
- Michael Melchior - Affiliated with Meimad
- Emanuel Rackman - Chancellor Bar Ilan Univ, Israel ; member of Edah; former president of the Rabbinical Council of America, and author of One Man's Judaism. A leader in defending the rights of agunot, women who are prevented from receiving a divorce under Jewish law.
- Shlomo Riskin - Formerly rabbi of the Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan, he emigrated to Israel to become the Chief Rabbi of Efrat.
- Sol Roth - author of "Judaism and Culture"
- 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
- 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, even severe, 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 the leading 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 - Rosh Yeshiva, 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.
- Alan Schwartz - Rabbi of Congregation Ohab Zedek (OZ) on the UWS (Upper West Side, Manhattan) and professor of Jewish Studies at Yeshiva University's undergraduate colleges
[edit] 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.
- Edah,with its slogan of: The Courage to be Modern and Orthodox, is a non-membership advocacy operation. It is seen as representing the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy. Edah has announced its intention to close by the end of the Summer 2006, with leader Saul Berman and at least some of its programs transferring to a new continuing education arm of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah
- 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. Considered a far-left organization by centrist-Orthodox mainstream.
[edit] See also
- Torah Umadda
- Orthodox Union
- Yeshiva University
- Yeshivat Chovevei Torah
- Divine Providence in Contemporary Jewish thought
- Partnership minyan
- Shira Hadasha
[edit] Selected Modern Orthodox congregations
- Young Israel throughout the United States and Israel
- Beth Sholom Congregation in Potomac, MD, USA
- Kehilat Orach Eliezer in New York, NY, USA
- Kesher Israel Congregation in Washington, DC, USA
- Ohab Zedek Congregation in New York, NY, USA
- Lincoln Square Synagogue in New York, NY, USA
- Pacific Jewish Center Synagogue in Venice Beach, California, USA
- Synogogue of the Suburban Torah Center in Livingston, NJ, USA
- Ahavas Achim B'nei Jacob and David of West Orange, NJ, USA
- Beth Tfiloh Beth Tfiloh Baltimore, MD, USA
- Lower Merion Synagogue Bala Cynwyd, PA, USA
- Anshe Sholom B'nai Israel Chicago, IL, USA
[edit] External links and references
[edit] Ideology
- Modern Orthodoxy - BBC Religion and Ethics, Alexander Goldberg
- Modern Orthodoxy, Rabbi Hershel Schachter
- History and philosophy of Modern Orthodoxy, Prof. Alan Brill, Yeshiva University
- The Ideology of Modern Orthodoxy Rabbi Saul J. Berman
- Some Comments on Centrist Orthodoxy (JPEG) Rabbi Dr Norman Lamm
- Modern Orthodoxy, Sh'ma Journal, February 2001
- American "Centrist" Orthodoxy, Prof. Eliezer Segal
- Religion Allied to Progress, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch
- Torah Im Derech Eretz, Rabbi Aryeh Carmell
- "Torah u'Maddah" and "Torah and Derech Eretz", Rabbi Shlomo Riskin
- "Open Orthodoxy: A Modern Orthodox Rabbi's Creed" Rabbi Avraham (Avi) Weiss (pdf)
[edit] Issues
- Religious Zionism And Modern Orthodoxy, Rav Yosef Blau
- Modern orthodoxy in Israel, Charles S. Liebman
- Fundamentalist or Romantic Nationalist?: Israeli Modern Orthodoxy, Shlomo Fischer
- Dilemmas of modern orthodoxy: sociological and philosophical, Prof. Chaim I. Waxman
- Modern Orthodoxy in America: Possibilities for a Movement under Siege, William B. Helmreich and Reuel Shinnar
- Revisionism and the Rav: The Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy, Prof. Lawrence Kaplan
- American Modern Orthodoxy: Confronting Cultural Challenges Prof. Chaim I. Waxman
- Caught In The Middle, David Van Biema, cnn.com
- Yeshiva U. confronts fault lines of modern Orthodoxy, Julie Wiener, Jewish Telegraphic Agency
- Orthodox Judaism and The Liberal Arts, Rabbi Shalom Carmy
- The State of Orthodox Judaism Today, Michael Kress
- The "Torah Only" Attitude to Torah Im Derech Eretz, Mordechai Plaut
- Women's Prayer Services - Theory and Practice, Rabbis A Frimer & D. Frimer
- Torah Study for Women, Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein
[edit] History
- Samson Raphael Hirsch: The Father of Neo-Orthodoxy, Louis Jacobs
- Rabbi Esriel Hildesheimer's Program of Torah u-Madda, Marc B. Shapiro
- American Orthodoxy: Part I; Part II, Moshe D. Sherman
[edit] Resources
- Introduction to the Philosophy of Rabbi Soloveitchik, vbm-torah.org
- torahweb.org, Roshei Yeshiva at Yeshiva University
