The Creative Cost of Modern Orthodoxy (original) (raw)
Sliding to the Left? Contemporary American Modern Orthodoxy
Modern Judaism, 2011
During the second half of the twentieth century, many observers of American Orthodoxy were struck by its move to the right, and a small group of social scientists offered a number of basic sociological factors to explain why Orthodoxy in modern society adopted a stance of greater isolation and ritualistic stringency. Perhaps the first social scientist to point to that phenomenon was Charles Liebman, who indicated (albeit without explaining) the trend in his pioneering analysis of American Orthodox Judaism. 1 Almost two decades later, he wrote his seminal essay, ''Extremism as a Religious Norm,'' 2 which analyzed religious extremism in general and Jewish religious extremism in particular but did not deal specifically with American Orthodox Judaism. Rather, he focused on developments in Orthodox Judaism in Israel. In a paper that focused specifically on American Orthodox patterns, Chaim Waxman distinguished between haredi Judaism and Modern Orthodoxy in terms of three variables. The first involves attitudes toward the larger society and the larger Jewish community and essentially is a matter of ''isolation,'' the stance of the haredi, versus ''inclusion,'' which is that of the Modern Orthodox. A second variable entails attitudes toward modernity, general scholarship and science, with the haredi being antagonistic and Modern Orthodoxy being accommodating if not welcoming. The third involves a basic difference between the two communities in their attitudes toward Zionism and their active involvement in Jewish national rebirth and development, with the haredi being antagonistic towards the Zionist enterprise and the Modern Orthodox welcoming it as a religious value. A number of examples of ''haredization'' were presented but perhaps its most conspicuous manifestations were in American Orthodox Jewry's greater punctiliousness in ritual observance, perceived by many to be a proclivity to adopt unduly stringent stances, humrot, on ritual matters, as well as a distinct inward turn highlighted by decreased cooperation with the Conservative and Reform branches of American Judaism. By the turn of the 21st century, these tendencies advanced to the point where a keen observer of the American Jewish scene perceived a kulturkampf in American Judaism, with the
According to sociological indicators, Modern Orthodox Judaism in America of the late 20 th and early 21 st centuries is struggling for survival. While some of its members abandon it for left-wing Judaism or secular lifestyles, many of its institutions and leaders move toward the right. Its very existence as a moderate religious movement, which strives to fuse the orthodox world with values of the modern world, is unstable and uncertain. The Preface to the present work claims that one of the main reasons for this phenomenon perhaps even its leading cause lies in the vagueness of the movement's ideological and spiritual directions. Modern Orthodoxy is suffering from an identity crisis, and is unable to find a solution. The roots of this identity crisis lie in the haziness of the concept of "synthesis" which has accompanied Modern Orthodoxy since its earliest beginnings. This concept is misleading, since in the American reality, apart from extreme Orthodox circles, all Orthodox Jews lead lives that involve some kind of synthesis between the modern and religious worlds. Many hold jobs, obtain a broad education, and open themselves in some degree to modern culture. If this is the case, what is it that differentiates Modern Orthodoxy? In what way is the synthesis upheld by this movement different from the lifestyles of other Orthodox Jews?
I t is widely believed that "America is different," 1 and it is the thesis of this article that American Orthodox Jewry is different as well. As a result, typologies of American Orthodoxy which may have been appropriate and useful during the twentieth century are no longer relevant. New typologies are needed for an understanding of the contemporary reality. During the second half of the twentieth century, many observers of American Orthodoxy were struck by its move to the right and a small group of social scientists offered a number of basic sociological factors to explain why Orthodoxy in modern society adopted a stance of greater isolation and especially of ritualistic stringency. Perhaps the first social scientist to point to that phenomenon was Charles Liebman who, in 1965, indicated (albeit without explaining) the trend in the pioneering analysis of American Orthodox Judaism that he published in the
2020
This article argues that the case of religious authority within Orthodox Judaism is an important counterexample to the broader and understudied developments in American religion during the final decades of the twentieth century. Using an array of untapped primary sources and drawing on themes addressed by scholars of American religious history and modern Jewish history, this article demonstrates how Orthodox Jewish elites used “approximational heresies” to police their faith community. In so doing, Orthodox leaders furnished “indicators” of apostasy that were unknown in previous epochs and served to stand in for traditional types that proved otherwise insufficient to counteract new trends in modern life and culture. Orthodox Jewish “antimodernism” was animated by a need to demonstrate what was “in” and what was “out” of bounds as well as by the emergence of a triumphalism that was unique among American faiths. Likewise, the rank-and-file abided because they either agreed with these measures or feared becoming “outsiders.” This outlook contrasts with the attitudes of other religious groups—on the “left” and the “right”—that absorbed a spirit of “inclusiveness” and, therefore, eschewed heresy hunting and the boldness evinced by Orthodox elites during this period. The article concludes that the pervasiveness of this counterculture among the Orthodox Jewish community was so powerful that it, counterintuitively, introduced the strategies of the antimodernists to the American-acculturated, so-called Modern Orthodox community.