Comments on: Controversial? Sure. Post-Orthodox? C’mon. R. Yosef Kanefsky

By: Route 17 » Blog Archive » Yitz Greenberg: The 10 Percent Solution

Route 17 » Blog Archive » Yitz Greenberg: The 10 Percent Solution — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:36:16 +0000

[...] “Legitimate criticism would focus on the questions of timing and long-term strategies. Should the Maharat model been given significantly more time to develop before being surpassed? Might the ordination cause have ultimately been better served through twenty Maharats first establishing a track record of exemplary service to the Orthodox community over a span of 10 or 15 years? Does the move to full ordination right now compromise the ability of today’s Modern Orthodox community to solidly establish itself within the broader YU/OU/RCA community as an ideological force that cannot be dismissed or marginalized? Is the Modern Orthodox laity ready for this yet? These are legitimate and serious questions, forming the basis of potentially legitimate criticism.” [...]

By: Mas

Mas — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:06:53 +0000

With all due respect to Rav Kanefsky, it seems that many of the people criticized in this post would, in fact, agree with a reworded version of number 3, and argue that women are halakhically barred from holding positions of serarah in the Jewish community, regardless of what positions they are allowed to hold in secular society. This argument is based on halakhic sources, although the reading and application of these sources may not be muchrach (I am personally on the fence). I don’t see how R Kanefsky can dismiss this position without argument, and also pretend that no one really believes it. For better or for worse, many of the poskim that the greater Modern Orthodox community looks to on every question besides those relating to women’s issues hold this position.

I also noticed that R Kanefsky’s description of “legitimate criticism” of this latest move only includes practical and sociological issues, and not halakhic ones. Is it obvious that the halakhic argumentation in favor of maharat/rabbah is so open and shut that there is no more discussion to be had?

By: Danny Chameides

Danny Chameides — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:34:15 +0000

I would be interested in finding out from the Moreorthodox rabbis on this site and others what exactly distinguishes Open or Modern orthodoxy from charedi orthodoxy. From my vantage point Open Orthodoxy is mostly window dressing. Take the female Rabbi issue. In essence Rabba Hurwitz(with no disrespect to her) does very little more than a highly educated Jewish person can do. At the end of the day she still cannot be counted in a minyan or read Torah for men and women, among other things. Why not make real changes how a woman can act as an Orthodox Jew rather than worry about what to call her.? You may call her a Rabbi, but when she and 9 men are in a room no minyan is there.
While Morethodox Rabbis waste their time deciding on names for female Rabbis their silence on the real issues of the Orthodox day is deafening. Where was the outrage from any of the Rabbis on this site and their colleagues about the recent sefer written by a Hesder rabbi on the West Bank claiming it is permissible to kill non-Jewish babies who might grow up to kill Jews one day? Where were the protests in the streets?
Why do these Rabbis not make real changes in halacha where it is desperately needed. Yayin Nesekh is one example. Can you imagine the reaction by these very same Rabbis if a non-Jewish religion refused to drink wine if it was ever touched by Jews? Yet, none of these Rabbis exhibit real leadership by making real changes in halacha as they look over their shoulders to see what their RCA/YU colleagues think of them. When there are no men be a man(or woman!)

By: Shmuel

Shmuel — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:58:42 +0000

Been there. Done that. It is called Conservative Judaism.

By: Joel Katz

Joel Katz — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:49:52 +0000

Did you mean to write “Rabba” (without an ‘h’)?