Once again Rabbi Gil Student’s post in Hirhurim has become the springboard for one of my own. He shows there that former JTS professor Saul Lieberman was not only a Maamin, but a wise man whose approach to matters involving Emunah and Klal Yisroel were no different than are those of Torah Judaism’s own rabbinic leaders.
Gil provides us with a letter written by Professor Lieberman with respect to Dr. Louis Jacob's heretical views. This letter actually shows both the character of the man as well as his level of Emunah. I think it is clear that Rabbi Saul Lieberman in no way subscribes to the Conservative Movement’s acceptance of Bible criticism.
However, he did teach Torah at JTS. And JTS is clearly, by Professor Saul Lieberman's own definition a heretical institution. And he was in fact criticized by Orthodox rabbinic leadership for doing so. I'm not exactly sure to what extent that criticism went. But if I am not mistaken his "Tosefta K'Pshutah" was put in Cherem.
I wonder how Charedi rabbinic leadership of the type that belongs to the Agudah Moetzes views Prof. Lieberman. Do they treat him as an individual who perhaps mistakenly took a position at JTS? Or have they written him outside the pale of Torah Judaism? The latter would be consistent with their position of not participating with the Conservative Movement in any way because by doing so they give it tacit recognition. And certainly taking a teaching position with them for 40 years does that.
It should be noted that not everyone in the Charedi world refused to recognize Talmidei Chachamim that worked in JTS. Telzer Rosh HaYeshiva Rav Elya Meir Bloch published a Sefer in the 1940s. In the preface he thanked “HaGaon Rav Levi Ginsberg” for his help in getting it published. Rav Levi Ginsburg is more famously known by his English name Rabbi Louis Ginsberg, who had learned in Telshe Lithuania and was considered an Illuy (Talmudic genius). He was also one of the founding fathers of the Conservative movement and had long been there by the time Rav Elya Meir Bloch had asked him for his help.
Rabbi Ginsberg was a professor of Talmud in JTS from its earliest years and fought to define Conservative Judaism as a Halachic movement. He was in fact opposed by other founding fathers of the movement not the least of which was Mordechai Kaplan whose views on the nature of God were somewhat pantheistic. Even JTS did not accept that. But they tolerated his teaching there for many long years. He and Professor Ginsberg were ideological opponents. But in any case Rav Elya Meir Bloch had no compunction about giving credit to Dr. Ginsburg, referring to him as HaGaon..
This raises the question of whether we go too far today in isolating figures who are themselves Shomer Torah uMitzvos, like Professor Lieberman, because they have accepted positions in schools that are identified as heretical. On the one hand I understand this position. On the other hand it seems unfair to judge people when they are not in their shoes.
Perhaps we should be more like Rav Elya Meir Bloch. Tolerance and understanding combined with a clear stance apostate movements should be the new order of the day. Perhaps we can then get a lot more accomplished in trying to get our message of Emes across to the millions of Tinokos SheNishbah.
Along these lines, perhaps it is time to re-visit the issue of Lakewood Rabbi Yosef Reinman’s book written with Reform Rabbi Amiel Hirsch.
Rabbi Reinman made a very contrite apology in the “Jewish Observer” for writing the book and touring with Reform Rabbi Amiel Hirsch. But in that apology he noted that he felt that he was really connecting with secular Jews in ways heretofore impossible and regretted that he would no longer be able to do that. He was really reaching out to them while loudly and clearly distancing himself from the theology of Rabbi Hirsch. Maybe he had the right idea the whole time.
Wouldn’t this be a propitious time for changing course with respect to dealing with members of non Torah Movements? When we are losing multitudes of Jews to assimilation and intermarriage? If one man and one book can have the kind of impact Rabbi Reinman had, it is certainly reasonable to assume that a massive push in that direction would be of major consequence? The reasons for the strident separations of the past have long gone. Torah Judaism has long ago established itself as rejecting of other movements. Our identities are clear and unambiguous. As long as we continue to reinforce that position publicly, I see no reason to more proactive in reaching out to our brethren in every way possible and not overly cut ourselves off from them. The price is just too high to continue the way we are now.
