From Our Archives: Shubert Spero – Orthodoxy Vis a Vis The General Community: Does Participation Imply Recognition?
December 5, 2009 by Shlomo Brody
Filed under From Our Archives, Jewish Culture
One of the most hotly debated questions in the 20th century within the Orthodox community related to the appropriateness of Orthodox rabbis joining rabbinic umbrella organizations comprised of rabbis from various denominations. One of the primary arguments against participation was that any form of formal association implies recognition and acceptance of non-Orthodox groups.
In the featured article from our archives (8:4 – Winter 1966), Rabbi Shubert Spero breaks down the logic behind this claim and questions whether it remains compelling. The article was in part inspired by the famous psak of the Igud Ha-Rabbonim, including Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and Rabbi Aharon Kotler, prohibiting participation in the Synagogue Council of America and the New York Board of Rabbis. The heated politics around this issue prevented Rav Soloveitchik, on behalf of the RCA’s Halakha Commission, from issuing a formal statement on this matter.
For more information, see Chapter 5 of Rabbi Louis Bernstein, Challenge and Mission, 1982, as well as Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, Community, Covenant, and Commitment, ed. Nathaniel Helfgot, p. 151-156.
For a 1986 article by Rabbi Walter Wurzburger on a similar theme, see here.
- Shlomo Brody
* Thanks to Prof. David Shatz for referring me to Rabbi Spero’s article.
Print This Post
I am not happy with Rabbi Brody’s formulation, “The heated politics around this issue PREVENTED Rav Soloveitchik, on behalf of the RCA’s Halakhah Commission, from issuing a formal statement on this matter.” “Prevented?” Were the Rav’s hands tied?! Did anyone in the RCA have the power to prevent him from issuing a ruling? Absurd even to contemplate! The Rav, given the complexities and, yes, the politics of the situation decided that the wisest course of action was not to issue a ruling. One can agree or disagree with his decision, but it was his freely made decision. Let us not say he was “prevented” from doing so as if he were some helpless party.
Rabbi Brody: I think you meant the Agudas Ha-Rabbonim, not the Iggud Ha-Rabbonim.
Am I the only person reading Text and Texture?! For the last four posts, including this one, two attracted no comments at all, and the only comments on the other two were by me!
Professor Kaplan should not worry, at least one other person reads the articles here, indeed I used the wonderful Flatto article as part of my Shabbat Shuva teaching.
I am also the head of the Chicago Board of Rabbis. One area of disappointment for me is the failure of the younger Orthodox colleagues to join. While they will join with other rabbis under the fig leaf of Federation, the Board of Rabbis is unacceptable.
The ones who suffer here are the non Orthodox colleagues. I would argue that part of my leading the organization is my “witnessing” to Torah, not trying to convince anyone to change, but rather through my teaching I am able to share Torah with other rabbis, who deeply appreciate text study as an intellectual and religious enterprise.
I am not sure what we have to be afraid of. If we really believe Torah is an expression of who we are, how can we not be willing to study with our colleagues? Should I not be learning Talmud with someone because he is a Reform rabbi? And the fact that I am the head of the Board opens a door for him to study with me.
I should add that it is precisely in the contexts of rabbinic boards stereotypes can be broken down and doors opened. And as much as we find problematic with non orthodox expressions of Judaism, is anything being solved by separating ourselves?
Thanks for the different comments:
Regarding Prof. Kaplan:
1) We get nearly 200 visits a day, so I feel pretty confident that people are reading the material! I think that in general our material does not lend itself the comments that proliferate on other blogs, since our posts are more thoughtful and substantive, and therefore require greater thought and reflection to comment on. Doesn’t both me in the slightest if a post doesn’t get comments.
2) There was something called the Iggud Ha-Rabbanim then, and that is what issued the psak. You can read about it in Rabbi Bernstein’s book,in the chapter that I cited. In Community, Covenant, and Commitment, it is also cited (I think there it is called its English name – the Rabbinical Alliance). I think that the Iggud ultimately morphed into the Agudah.
3) You are correct, “prevented” is not the most exact word to have used, but the larger point is this psak helped create a culture in which the Rav felt that he should not make a public statement. This is attested to in the letters in the C,C,C volume, and also in Rabbi Bernstein’s book.
4) As for Rabbi Balinsky’s larger point: Without taking an opinion, I think that Rabbi Spero’s article, as well as that of Rabbi Wurzburger, would place them largely in agreement with you. I would also add that I think that this whole issue should be addressed from a contemporary perspective – educated by, but ultimately independent of the psakim of the previous generations, which were dealing with different socio-political realities.
Rabbi Brody:
Re 2) Thanks for the correction. The Iggud ha-Rabbim was the rabbinic organization associated primarily with musmachim from Torah Ve-Daas. I believe that Rabbi Ralph Pelcowitz, the mara de-asra of Congregation Kenessth Israel (the “White Shul”), where my family davened, was a prominent member. For a short while, the Iggud tried to publish their own magazine, but I believe it only lasted for two or three isues. Ironically, Rabbi Spero, if I am not mistaken, was a contributor.
Re 3) I accept your larger point.