[Avodah] R' Angel & Geirus Redux

[Michael Makovi]

> R' Meir Shinnar <chidekel at gmail.com> wrote:
>  a) WRT R A Folger response to my comments:
>         i) I appreciate his description of gemeinde - but,BMKVT,it is
>  irrelevant to the point that I was making.  I wasn't arguing that
>  anyone held gemeinde to be the ideal in the sense that isn't it
>  wonderful that instead of everyone being O, we have diversity.  The
>  issue that arose on this list was the very permissibility of dealings
>  with the non O, given their status, according to some poskim, as
>  kofrim - and the heter being sought was that they were tinokot
>  shenishbu.  My point was that the gemeinde approach permitted and
>  even encouraged such interaction - I would agree for the sake of the
>  masses who were am aratztim - but the status of the leadership did
>  not prevent the formation of institutional ties.  I would think that
>  the vast majority of American R/C are as much am aratzim as the
>  German 19th century -  and the lack of institutional relationships
>  limits our ability to reach out to them.

Also, though, I would argue that even according to an pure austritt
position like RSRH, today's R clergy are not like those of his day. In
his day, the R clergy KNEW what they were doing, knew they were
deviating from classical Judaism - there was NO ignorance. But today's
R/C clergy are as ignorant and misguided as their laity - not in terms
of textual knowledge, but rather in terms of weltanschauung.

Now, RSRH would probably still insist that an Orthodox congregation
cannot belong to an R umbrella organization, if the O's membership is
lending legitimacy or material assistance to any R activities, such as
publishing R educational materials or funding HUC - an in fact, I
cannot imagine most supporting such an O membership of such an R
organization. But if the organization is doing nonsectarian activities
that are not inimical to the goals of O, or if the organization is
dialog exclusively, etc., then I would say that perhaps even RSRH
would permit working together. His austritt was because O membership
aided the R in their efforts, and because R was not TsN, but since
today R certainly is TsN (IMHO), and if the organization is not
inimical to anything O, then perhaps RSRH would permit.

Rabbi Moshe Shmuel Glasner in haTzionut b'Ohr haEmuna argues that
austritt is perfect for when O and R oppose each other, but when they
share a common goal, austritt is out of place. His example of a common
goal is Zionism (RMSG was Mizrachi), which is national/peoplehood and
not purely religious, but I would extend this to any activity in which
R and O have the same goal. And I'm adding that additionally, today's
R are TsN unlike RSRH's R, so this is an additional factor to permit.

Mikha'el Makovi