Rabba Rachel Khol Finegold (JWA) |
I call her ‘Rabba’ because she decided to change it from her
former title Maharat. She indicated that the term was quite a mouthful. Which few people
understood. In choosing Rabba, she makes it a lot clearer what it is she is
doing. Frankly if I were her, I would just go all the way. Why stop at Rabba? Why not Rabbi?
Rabba was chosen by Rabbi Avi Weiss when he ordained Rabba Sara Hurwitz,
the first Orthodox woman to do so. He said it was simply the female
form of the word rabbi. But rabbi is really an English word and no
longer has any gender connotation. It is almost sexist to dance around that title.
This of course does not mean I agree with any of it. I do not. Just recognizing what is really going on here.
So why do I feel sorry for her? I truly believe that this new
phenomenon will eventually go the way of the Traditional movement. Which has a
lot on common with the version of Orthodoxy of which Rabba Feingold is a part. A version that has embraces the idea of ordaining
women as consistent with Halacha.
What is interesting is that Rabba Feingold would never take
a pulpit that does not have a Mechitza separating men from women. As she notes
she would never do anything that is against
Halacha.
That was exactly the same argument used by the Conservative
movement when they took out the Mechitza in favor of family seating. The fact
is that the Shulchan Aruch does not mention the requirement to separate the
sexes. The basis of that is derived of the fact that men and women were eventually
separated in the Beis HaMikdash. It became a tradition thousands of years ago
that went unbroken and unchallenged.
Until the early 20th century when the
Conservative movement was founded. Their motives were pure, too. They saw the
American Jew assimilating quickly in the melting pot environment of the time. Conservative
leaders felt that if they didn’t ‘Americanize’ their pews, no one
would attend. They saw it as a sort of Eis La’assos that in any case did not
violate the letter of Jewish law - the Shulchan Aruch.
Now a century later we see where that has led. A movement
that with the best of intentions attempting to accommodate the spirit of the
times in order to conserve Judaism is now a movement in rapid
decline.
The Traditional movement who had the same intention when they removed
the Mechitza was led by fully Orthodox Rabbis. But their demise was even quicker that
the Conservative Movement.
One would have never predicted that back in the 60s.
Traditional Shuls were mushrooming all over Chicago. Rabbis that took those
pulpits were just as sincere in their motives as Rabba Finegold.
Aside from
removing the Mechitzos and using microphones that were turned on before Shabbos
- they stayed true to Halacha in their personal lives and in
their synagogues. And they had the backing of a major Talmid Chacham, Rav Chaim Dovid Regensburg, who not
only permitted them to take those Shuls, he actually encouraged it as a means
of keeping them in the Orthodox fold while trying to influence their members to
send their children to religious schools. At which they were pretty successful. Nevertheless, those Shuls are for the most part gone – replaced by an explosion of fully Orthodox
Shuls over the last decade or so.
The bottom line is that even if one concedes that there is
nothing Halachicly wrong with a female rabbi (which is a questionable premise
in any case) the fact that is that it as been widely rejected by all rabbinic
authorities as a serious and unacceptable break from tradition.
That there are
a few outlier Shuls that are willing to accommodate a membership that is
so heavily influenced by the common
culture does not mean it has any better future today than the Traditional Movement
had in its day. Which is why it is so sad that an obviously intelligent and sincere woman
has decided to dedicate her life to a lost cause. This is not the wave of the Orthodox future.
This is not to say that women should not be Jewishly
educated comparable to their male counterparts. I have absolutely no problem with
women studying anything they wish. Just as I have no problem with men studying anything they wish.
The problem is not even in using that knowledge in ways that benefit the Jewish
community. i am all for that. The problem is breaking with a centuries old tradition by choosing to become a female clergyman equal
to a male clergyman. What this sincere
woman is doing is in essence - what the sincere Traditional rabbis had done. And even what the
early Conservative rabbis had done - many of whom were personally observant even
by Orthodox standards.
I remain unconvinced that the general cultural influences of
our time are not at least partly responsible for any sincere Orthodox woman choosing
the rabbinate as a profession. The times we live in places the highest value on
egalitarianism and personal fulfillment. True - serving God and the Jewish people is how they see
themselves. But every time I read an article like this it’s hard not to see a cultural component by contrasting it to the overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewish
women who would never challenge the wisdom of our traditions recognized by virtually all recognized Poskim to be inviolate.
I’ve said before. More times that I can count. This has
absolutely nothing to do with denying women opportunity. I fully support
treating all people equally. The only thing that should matter is ability. Not race,
religion or gender (Allowing for certain exceptions due to modesty concerns –
which is beyond the scope of this post.)
However, when it comes to serving God the
way we believe He intends us to, we ought not to be seeking other ways to do it
– even when we feel a calling. That is not the way Judaism works. Jewish history
is filled with failed movements that were at the time thought to be the best way
forward for Judaism. That is where I believe this current trend is headed.