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.