Patterns of Practice
HE NEXT Section of the JRF’s essay, Is Reconstructionist Judaism For You? is the most important. (This is part three in our short exploration.) Those of you who are more-mature in your practice (this usually means Ethnic Orthodox or culturally Catholic instead of the hyper-maximalism common in the convert community) may find here a very strong sense of similarity.
One key parallel in my mind is not being discussed in the essay: the Hebrew word for the doings of the Law – Mitzvah – is usually translated “good deed”. WHilst it is a mitzvah to walk an elder across a busy intersection, it is also a mitzvah to hang a Mezuzah on the door posts, to wear a prayer shawl, to read the Torah, to keep kosher, etc. It could be said, in a Christian context, that our sacraments and our sacramentals are all “Mitzvot”. What makes the parallel even tighter is that “mitzvah” also means “connection”. In other words, I think it is helpful (in a Christian context) to see the ritual practices of Judaism as a community’s set of sacraments and sacramentals. In that light, the discussion of “patterns of practice” makes a lot of sense.
“Torah” means “teaching.” In Jewish tradition, talmud Torah, the study of Torah, is a life-long obligation and opportunity. Reconstructionists are committed to a serious engagement with the texts and teachings, as well as the art, literature and music of tradition. But we are not passive recipients; we are instead challenged to enter the conversation of the generations and to hear voices other than our own, but to add our own voices as well. Reconstructionist Judaism is respectful of traditional Jewish observances but also open to new interpretations and forms of religious expression. As Rabbi Mordecai M. Kaplan (1881-1983), the founder of Reconstructionism, taught, tradition has “a vote, but not a veto.” Reconstructionists share a commitment to making Judaism their own by finding in it joy, meaning, and ideas they can believe. Unlike Orthodox and Conservative Judaism, Reconstructionism does not view inherited Jewish law (halakhah) as binding. We continue to turn to Jewish law for guidance, if not always for governance. We recognize that in the contemporary world, individuals and communities make their own choices with regard to religious practice and ritual observance.
But where Reform Judaism emphasizes individual autonomy, Reconstructionism emphasizes the importance of religious community in shaping individual patterns of observance. Belonging to a community leads us to take the patterns of observance within that community seriously; our choices do not exist independently, but are made in response to our community as part of our participating in it. Reconstructionism thus retains a warmly traditional (and fully egalitarian) approach to Jewish religious practice.
All healthy Orthodox and Eastern Catholic communities already hold a spectrum of practice: in practices from fasting to home prayers parishes contain near-monastic sorts and those who are far more concerned with other aspects of their faith than diet or private devotion. One of my own key experiences in Orthodoxy was the sense of denial about the differences in observance: making fun of parishes who were seen as “less holy” for being “less pious” or hearing people describe themselves as “bad” because they could not eat a lot of carbs.
Again, the key is in that last paragraph: it’s not the stuff we are doing that holds the centre point, but rather it’s the doing together that is important. It is this communitarian focus that I imagine might hold together our imaginary “Byzmergent” community: if it makes room for and hold support for persons all along a spectrum of practice, then it will bring them together around the Lord’s table.
Tags: byzmergent, Judaism, reconstructionism | Category: Judaism, orthoparadoxy
Discussion: You came too late to this party
Share:
Those of you who are more-mature in your practice (this usually means Ethnic Orthodox or culturally Catholic instead of the hyper-maximalism common in the convert community) may find here a very strong sense of similarity.
Yup.
Hi –
I haven’t checked in for a while, been dealing with The Virus That Wouldn’t Leave, as well as my usual load of work, etc. Sorry I haven’t had a chance to look at parts one and two of the series. Would just like to point out that “mitzvah” is also, and more traditionally, “commandment.” I think it’s important to note that this is stronger than “good deed”; it is an obligation. (This is not an “or else you’ll go to hell” kind of obligation, btw — in Judaism you don’t earn your way into heaven, you do mitzvot — mitzvahs — out of love for God and a wish to please God, as well as a desire to live a righteous life.)
I don’t know how — or whether — there are parallels in Christian traditions. In my experience, Christians don’t view their sacraments as obligations. Also, except for what Jesus is recorded as teaching in the gospels, I don’t know that there’s the same level of commanded-ness about Christian sacraments as there is about the mitzvot. To be clear, Reconstructionist and Reform movements don’t tend to classify mitzvot as things we’re commanded to do (as your quoted passage explains), but their interpretations are so recent — since the mid-19th century for Reform, since the early 20th for Reconstructionists — that they’re a drop in the temporal bucket, so to speak.
I should probably go back and read the first and second installments of this series so I’m not taking the above out of context; because I’m wondering why you’re looking at Judaism at all, why you’re applying the word “mitzvot” to Christian sacraments, etc. But since you are, I think it’s important to emphasize that even among the liberal movements of Judaism, mitzvot are more than good deeds. This is yet another example of the sense, or nuanced, of a term getting lost in translation.
I thought I pointed out that nuance in the second paragraph? “usually” translated as good deeds, but it’s more than that?
The other two parts of the essay are Art as Culture and Community as Cornerstone.
The purpose of reading the JRF’s essay in a Christian discussion is to look at what I think is a healthy alternative to maximalism, on the one hand, and a good model for “big tent” communities that include a spectrum of levels of practice, on the other. Specifically, in this post, it’s the approach to practice that is important to me. As you know I tend to impart legalism wherever I go. This was exactly my experience also in Eastern Orthodoxy. But I was not alone.
Eastern Christianity in the USA has experienced a boomlet of converts from evangelicalism and various mainline denominations. The reasons for this are varied, but, largely, what happens is people arrive in their new location and try to be “more Orthodox than the Orthodox”. In many cases (including my own experience and the experience of some of my readers) there is an attempt to create a community rather like a village in 18th or 19th Century Russia! (This is lampooned often by “Father Vasili” of The Onion Dome. These folks – my former priest referred to them as the ORthodox Taliban – want to sap all the freedom out of religion. Ask me to tell you one time about the story of finding smoked salmon on the table at a lenten church supper. A bishop friend of mine can tell a story about a woman who wanted to label all the dishes produced by “outsiders” so that people could be sure to be keeping fasting rules right.
And, as I’ve blogged recently over the last few years, there *is* a spectrum within Orthodoxy, at all levels of practice. Others of my readers, and especially Fr Peter, Fr Greg and Fr Ernesto, can attest to more-sane versions of Orthodoxy (not to be confused with “more liberal”, but rather more relaxed? more… living?) Father David told me in confession once never to mention food again… I should have stayed with that level of sanity!
Essentially I’m looking to Reconstructionism as a model for sanity up for discussion and examination. Although some of Kaplan’s teachings do *not* work for me… some of the experiences of the Recon movement and the Havurah movement make so much more sense – and sound like the more-sensible Eastern Orthodox clergy… that I thought an exploration on-blog would make for good reading.
Having said all that…
Mitzvot and Sacraments…
No, you’ll not hear any CHristian outside of the Messianic movement refer to their Sacraments as Mitzvot, but the Eastern Approach that there are more than seven sacraments (although seven “big” ones) and the Roman Catholic use of “Sacramentals” make for far better parallels than anything within Protestantism. The Eastern fasting practice well parallels keeping kosher. The Eastern or traditional RC world is rather more like a Jewish life than modern, American converts let on: with religion touching on every aspect from what clothes to wear, what foods to eat, etc, to spending hours in community-centered worship, etc. It is, in fact, one of the most attractive things about traditional religion. For what it’s worth this same parallel exists in all traditional religion, from Shinto to various restorationist paganisms in Europe.
Whilst there is a huge parallel between the Reform Movement and liberal Protestantism in AMerica, and there are parallels between the Hassidic movement in the USA and conservative, converty sorts in RC and EO churches… I think there is a huge, healthy parallel in the Reconstructionist (and Conservative connections there) Jewish experience and the Emergent movement. That level of healthiness is what I’m exploring, seeking to integrate.
Sorry, that’s “nuance”…
Hi Huw, thanks for the links. I’ll check them out.
What you describe about converts is very familiar to those in the orthodox Jewish world as well. There’s an additional group I think you’re aware of, those who were born into Jewish families and are “returning” to observance, either from never having been raised to observe, or after having left a traditional life and coming back. They are sometimes called Baalei Tshuvot (literally “children of repentance”), vs. those colloquially called FFB’s (Frum [observant] From Birth). Right now, paralleling the boomlet you describe among converts to Eastern Christianity, there’s a trendlet of people going BT. Does this exist in the Orthodox Christian world as well?
[Side note: among non-Christians, the idea that a Christian moving from one Christian group to another is called a convert is almost incomprehensible. Even though there's often a re-baptism, anointing, or other ceremony, outside the Christian world people assume that "Christian" is an umbrella term for everyone who follows Jesus. As my mother, God rest her, said when I asked permission to become a Lutheran at age 16, "It's okay, but why do you want to worship statues?"]
When I converted to Christianity (Lutheran) as a teenager I had a convert’s intensity about everything, along with that particular intensity that goes with being an adolescent. I don’t know how my parents put up with my snooty attitude about our family’s secular-Jewish Christmases and Easters for those few years. (BTW, I now refer to my upbringing as Secular Humanist Pagan Jewish. Best term I’ve ever come up with to define it.)
In re the second paragraph in your original post: yes, it is more than that, but it’s hard to describe in a liberal context. For observant Jews (Orthodox and some Conservative Jews, and those in the middle now calling themselves Conservadox), “commandment” is really closer to the mark, because it describes a level of obedience to God that isn’t covered by “good deed.” And as this is the backdrop against which liberal Jews define themselves, there’s always a hint of guilty feelings, a defensiveness about not being observant, that lurks below the surface. Many will vehemently deny it, but it’s there. I was recently at a gathering and happened to be sitting at table across from one person of mixed Jewish-Christian descent (mother Jewish), and next to another who was Jewish. The Jewish person ordered something with bacon, and as we shared that we were all three of Jewish descent, one said to the other, “That’s what I love: pork-eatin’ Jews.” This got a big laugh from our companion. Yet, there’s a self-consciousness about this, isn’t there? You never hear non-Jews joke about being pork eaters; why would they? They’re not transgressing a commandment and a millennia-old tradition. So even among non-religious Jews who deny everything, there’s a subterranean awareness of the importance of the mitzvot as commandments and their own status as rebels against the tradition.
Also, although liberal and non-observant Jews prefer “good deed,” and talk about individual choice, etc., the onus is (theoretically) upon Reconstructionist and Reform Jews to make *educated* choices; that is, they’re supposed to be learned in the tradition *before* they make their choices. So right away you have a backdrop of learning about the importance of the mitzvot as more than just, I don’t know, suggestions for a happy lifestyle.
The problem, and here’s where I have an issue with the liberal movements, is that they’ve fallen down in the education department (as have most Conservative congregations I’ve known and heard about, actually). So while Jewish members of the Reconstructionist movement are fond of quoting Kaplan’s “voice not veto” policy, and Reform’s policy is that Jews are to make “informed” Jewish choices, the fact is that in the vast majority of these settings the tradition is not properly taught (by that I mean with all its fascinating history, complexity, and spiritual power). So, over the past couple of hundred years or so, as Jews have been permitted to integrate with their surrounding communities and attain full citizenship, the non-orthodox have rushed to assimilate, letting traditional practices fall by the wayside. So that by now, generations on, there are Jews who know nothing about their history and inherited culture. In the early 60s when my grandfather chastised my mother for not teaching me the Exodus story (although being, himself, no observer), my mother replied, “I never knew it.”
The liberal movements struggle to make observance “relevant,” while gutting the tradition of references to God, so as to make their texts and prayers more acceptable to Jews who are pretty much secular in their orientation. (Thus, the “good deed” translation replaces the “commandment” translation, which omits the whole idea of God commanding us.) So those of us who seek God often find Him (sorry, I’m old school) outside of Judaism. As a Jewish woman I met once said to me, “I couldn’t find any Jews who would talk about God.” So she started meditating with a group of nuns, and telling herself that really, Judaism was just Christianity without Jesus, right? (Don’t get me started.) Finally, I heard that she had found her way to a welcoming Orthodox (Jewish) congregation and was thrilled. Yes, there are some Jews who talk about God. But they sort of think you should also do something about God, too.
I’m still not clear about whether sacraments are real parallels to mitzvot, however. What’s the sense that sacraments are originated and commanded by God? I think that’s a big difference; in Judaism (well, orthodoxy), commandments — even those mediated by rabbinical authorities — are considered given by God, not men, and therefore are holy acts. Is this true of sacraments?
You might enjoy reading the works of rabbis who consider(ed) performing the mitzvot a way of bringing heaven down to earth, thus sanctifying the everyday. These include the late Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Schneerson and the late Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik. Is there a similar thinking about sacraments? Is the energy in those a way of drawing down and giving forth, sort of an sacred energy cycle?
I’m thinking that you might find a truer parallel in the Modern Orthodox movement (not a formal movement, an informal affiliation at best), considered the most left wing part of Orthodoxy (although not left wing as others would see it). As you say about Orthodox Christian practice, there is much variation in the Jewish tradition as well; the view that it is a dry, stagnant tradition is completely false. That’s why the rabbis are always debating! There are always new questions, rehashings of old questions, reinterpretations, etc. Social pressures always exert a push and pull. Among the Modern Orthodox, however, you have another strand: what is known as Torah u’Madda, Torah and Science (aka modern learning). These are observant Jews who engage with modern media (TV, films, etc.) to some extent, who study science as part of God’s creation, etc. This group may be a closer model to Eastern Christianity than the liberal groups.
It’s interesting to note that those who hold the reins of Reform these days have backtracked somewhat, realizing that the originators of the movement threw the baby out with the bathwater (although one acknowledges the reasons why and tries to be sympathetic with their desperate and ultimately doomed attempt to blend in with their non-Jewish neighbors). So there’s a push on within Reform leadership circles to teach Hebrew, to suggest to their congregants that they might want to consider keeping kosher (or, now, “eco-kosher,” an interesting development), find some way to keep the Sabbath, etc. Some say it’s a little too little, a little too late. I think if there’s no engagement with God as a real presence who demands something of us, it’s all window dressing on the community center synagogue model.
I’m still thinking of exploring the Reform rabbinical school, so I’ll report in if I take the tour.
Ciao.
I’ve read this a couple of times… and sat with it for a while. Two things come to mind:
1) I think you’re making my point in a way that might surprise you. Many converts to Eastern ORthodoxy and Roman Catholicism from other Christian traditions, as I noted above, do try to be MOre Frum than the Frum. I’m suggesting Reconstructionism as a more-healthy alternative. Your reply seems to agree with me even through you (rightly) point out the serious contrast between Reconstructionism and more-conservative and orthodox schools of Judaism.
2) I think your reply is more critical of Reconstructionism, per se, than of my choice to use Reconstructionism. Or I may be missing something.
As to Sacraments : Mitzvot, I think that’s a matter of theological debate in the Christian tradition too. What does a sacrament do? It is a conveyance of Grace (that is God’s Energy) to the human person engaged in the struggle for salvation. The liturgy is the Kingdom of God striking earth like lightening and the participation in the Sacraments furthers that motion into all parts of our lives and homes and communities…
Maybe Hasidic?
But the actual *teaching* on the various available tools is “All may, some should, none must” for nearly everything about which the converts get all legalistic. Informed choice *Is* the Christian approach to this where one is “informed” by one’s Spiritual Father. Of all the Judaisms I could explore on-blog, the most “all may, some should, none must” denomination is Reconstructionism. Which may be a back-handed compliment saying Recon is the most Goyische of the bunch, but, that’s not the intent.
No time for a long reply right now, but just to say: Nothing of what I wrote was intended as a criticism of anything you wrote. As for the movements within Judaism — well, I guess I mean my remarks more as observations. I definitely come from a particular point of view, which is that there is something “real” about God. For those Jews who don’t connect to that, or who connect only as a mental concept rather than as a lived experience, there’s lots in liberal Judaism that works. Anyway, I’m just trying to add to the discussion/exploration. If anything came across as criticism, I apologize. It may just be the way I write.
Ciao…
Critical = “critique” I didn’t take it as bad… Just that I thought you were discussing more Reconstructionism itself than my use of it.