[Avodah] TIDE and Austritt

[Richard Wolpoe]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org> wrote:

> The question I was exploring when I spun this thread off the original
> was
> 1- Does TIDE necessitate Austritt, or are they two ideas emerging from
> the same mind?
> 2- If Austritt is part of TIDE, what does that mean lemaaseh today for
> people who want to raise its banner?
>
Micha
>

I was in the process of composing a short article on how AUSTRITT has driven
out TIDE in every community that parctices - or better CLAIMED - to practice
both.

Danny Frankel [son of KAJ Cantor Frankel] wrote a series of essays to the
Beuer community. He made a pretty strong case that TIDE is permanent and
Austritt as Hora'as Sha'as, but in general it's been tread the other way in
every TIDE-Austritt community I know.

One chaver off-list confirmed this same trend in Western Europe.

TIDE is kinda like American third parties. While completely both are
completely dead , they finluenced the survivors.  For example, in the 1920's
and 1930's English speaking Orthodox Rabbis were mostly Treif-Passul inthe
USA nad HAD to found the RACE. Rembmer the Kitzur {R. S Ganzfried]
considered the Neolog proposalsto have sermons in Hungarian a clear break
with Orthodoxy. Today, virtually every yeshiva accepts English as Kosher
language and some even permit college.  I have often speculated whether Ner
Israel permitted college because R. Neubereger was himself a Yekke.

Again, in Frankfort 1850 TIDE would nto have worked without Asutrit because
the lines had not been drawn. Despite protests on theis list otherwise, very
few people would construe interactoin of Modern O Rabbis with C or R Rabbis
as any kind of endorsement of their lifestyle.

In 1968, I attend a Soveit Jewry rally in Downtown Hartford and I was
appaled when a local C rabbi got up to spoke and prompty removed his kippah
just before speaking.  The fac t that Orthos were in solidarity with C
clergy re: Soveit Jews did not dimnish my disdain for his outrageous public
beahviour. I don't see how ANYONE would have construe me as a yeshiva bachur
as in ANYWAY endorsing C rabbis just because we stod together re: Soviet
Jewry. I find that argument specious - a canard if you will.  And what is
the big deal if a a C rabbi says a kappitel Tehillim at a UN rally.

One final note. When myu preedecessor, Rabbi Ralph Neuhaus [FWIW his father
Leopold was abosolutely the last pre-Holocaust rabbi in Frankfort] passed
awy the levaya was done vai Breuer's. Breuers' policy is not to share the
podium at a levary with ANY other pseaker other than the Rav of the
Kehillah. so despite the fact that I was teh hazzan at the shul and a
musmach, and eventually named his suceesor for 15+ years, I could not speak
at the levaya.
Now is this TIDE or Austritt at work?

-
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080711/9b135dd0/attachment-0002.htm>