Your Veiw on Open Orthodoxy

InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 12:36 pm

In another thread, I was reprimanded for unfairly seeing OO as not a stream of Judaism just like MO, Chareidi, Litvish.. etc. This made me wonder if we have different meanings when we say "Open Orthodoxy." I was actually pretty surprised because I had wrongly assumed that this was the consensus in all streams of Orthodox Judaism. Because the way I understand OO- is that they have a very strong emphasis on social justice, social equality, women's rights which is all wonderful and admirable BUT they see halacha as open to change and flexible.

Additionally a poster wrote "don't whine when we attack your Rabbis." That sounds like there are women here who do see OO Rabbis as their Rabbi. So to me it seems that there may be different understandings to OO then what I know. Because generally the women on here do not believe that halacha is flexible and open to change. And do not ascribe to that philosophy.

I'm trying to clarify and understand. Please, no bashing.

tichellady ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 12:42 pm

Of course halakha changes. We have an oral law to allow for that process. People may prefer to say “ halakha does not change, but halakhic approaches may change as reality changes etc” but I think that’s just semantics ( but ok if that’s how you want to think about it)

Areas in which halakha has changed that I can think of on the top of my head : going from being allowed to no longer being allowed to kill lice on shabbos, how we treat people who are mechalel shabbos, takanot, women and Talmud Torah etc

PinkFridge ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 1:09 pm

My view is that this is going to become one of the verboten topics.
To know Avi Weiss is to love him as far as what he wouldn't do for another person. I envy his zechuyos; those can't be taken away.
But I have very grave reservations about OO. I could cite the back and forth on places like Cross-Currents but I'll say this: track down the Headlines programs with OO representatives. They did not acquit themselves well.

SixOfWands ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 1:10 pm

MiracleMama wrote:

Never heard of "open orthodoxy" until now.

That's OK.

The question is does Open Orthodoxy exist? Has it ever existed?

AIUI, its just a term that some used for a movement within Modern Orthodoxy. And that those who attack it may pay lip service to not attacking MO, but the attacks relate to things that are earmarks of MO Judaism.

In any case, YCT no longer uses the term, so I would submit that if "Open Orthodoxy" ever existed, it no longer does.

causemommysaid

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 1:13 pm

I don't have a problem with Open Orthodoxy. I am fairly open minded and like their feminist views.

Thing is, I don't think they are the same as other streams of Orthodoxy as they are skirting very close to the line that defines Orthodoxy. While I applaud their movement from a social and feminist perspective, I wonder if at some point they will cross the line.

↑ PinkFridge ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 1:20 pm

I would like to say, while this thread is still up, that there are many, many RW people who consider MO fully authentic; Rabbi Reisman specifically mentioned MO last week in talking about the concept of 12 shevatim with different authentic derachim.

But they - we - cannot grant OO the same legitimacy. I'm sorry if anyone here who is MO is offended by this. We are not delegitimizing YOU.

princessleah ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 2:33 pm

Really the main difference in OO vs. mainstream MO is how women are treated within the practice.
The "ordination" of women is what pushed a lot of people away.

From what I have observed, it is a movement very committed to strict halacha but pushing the boundaries where it can.

If you attend a Shabbat service at HIR (Rav Weiss' shul) you will see: Torah being passed through women's section on its way out of and back into the Ahron, a woman reads the prayer for the country and the medina and possibly the misheberach for sick people (can't remember exactly) and that's about it. The Maharat is also there to answer halachic questions for those who have them.

Women do not lead davening. They do not leyn. They do not receive an aliyah. The yeshiva is not co-ed. They are dedicated to building bridges among the different sects of Judaism and between Jews and non-Jewish religious communities. None of the above to me is shocking or beyond the pale.

↑ SixOfWands ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 2:39 pm

princessleah wrote:

HIR defines itself as an "open Orthodox synagogue," not an "Open Orthodox synagogue." https://www.thebayit.org/

Again, I think that the "Open Orthodox" label, if it ever existed, is dead.

↑ princessleah ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 2:41 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

HIR defines itself as an "open Orthodox synagogue," not an "Open Orthodox synagogue." https://www.thebayit.org/

Again, I think that the "Open Orthodox" label, if it ever existed, is dead.

I've heard lots of conflicting information.
e.g.: current Rabbi of HIR agreed to not announce mazel tov for same gender relationships
vs. Rabbi Lopatin was dismissed from YCT for saying that OO IS part of MO while R. Weiss disagreed.

If HIR is not the flagship shul for OO, what is?

↑ InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:26 pm

tichellady wrote:

I don't believe it's mere semantics. Below is sited from an article in the Jewish Press by Daniel Retter who explains the difference between orthodoxy and OO a lot better then me. (Note I specifically am not citing from a right wing ultra Orthodox person or publication)

Open Orthodoxy challenges the interpretation of the Torah by our holy sages. Its leaders criticize biblical personalities, question adherence to the Shulchan Aruch and the Oral Torah, advocate ecumenicalism, and argue for extreme positions on women’s issues and homosexuality.

Open Orthodoxy unequivocally rejects the teachings of the Rambam, Chasam Sofer, and even Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, probably the most revered Modern Orthodox rabbi in American history. Advocates of Open Orthodoxy basically argue that their interpretations deserve the same consideration and respect as the teachings of the Torah giants who have led the way throughout Jewish history.

↑ InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:28 pm

PinkFridge wrote:

I think you right about it becoming verboten.

↑ InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:38 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

No, no and no again.
Hearing it how you see it, makes me understand why it upsets you so. You feel like it's another great way to say how MO is not valid, just more "acceptable." And boy, do I disagree.
See what I posted above. Mainstream MO does NOT decide for themselves that they have equal say to the interpretations of halacha of the ramban, rashi, and so many others. Which MO does NOT do. I cannot speak for others and there may be some who don't view MO as a legit stream of Orthodoxy. But according to mainstream Rabbanim across the MO, litvish and chareidi spectrum it is definitely not the case.

Can you specify what you mean by saying "the attacks relate to things that are earmarks of MO Judaism?" What are examples of such?

Last edited by InnerMe on Sat, Dec 23 2017, 6:41 pm; edited 1 time in total

↑ InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:41 pm

PinkFridge wrote:

Thank you. I cannot stress this enough. It seems the distinct minority who does not believe MO to be legit is a lot more vocal in their opinion then mainstream majority who does.

↑ PinkFridge ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:42 pm

princessleah wrote:

So saying mazel tov could have been a hava mina?

↑ InnerMe ↓

Fri, Dec 22 2017, 3:52 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

HIR defines itself as an "open Orthodox synagogue," not an "Open Orthodox synagogue." https://www.thebayit.org/

Again, I think that the "Open Orthodox" label, if it ever existed, is dead.

I've looked into it a bit now... and I do see that at some point OO rid itself of that label, and now claims to be a part of MO. Which it seems mainstream MO leaders don't agree with. Is that not so?

etky ↓

Sat, Dec 23 2017, 11:26 am

InnerMe wrote:

No, no and no again.
Hearing it how you see it, makes me understand why it upsets you so. You feel like it's another great way to say how MO is not valid, just more "acceptable." And boy, do I disagree.
See what I posted above. Mainstream MO does NOT decide for themselves that they have equal say to the interpretations of halacha of the ramban, rashi, and so many others. Which MO does NOT do. I cannot speak for others and there may be some who don't view MO as a legit stream of Orthodoxy. But according to mainstream Rabbanim across the MO, litvish and chareidi spectrum it is definitely not the case.

MO does not believe in "legalizing gay marriages" as Rabbi Ari Weiss does.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.666064

Can you specify what you mean by saying "the attacks relate to things that are earmarks of MO Judaism?" What are examples of such?

I seem to recall rejoicing on this site, among imamothers from across the entire spectrum of Orthodoxy, after the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. Most of the arguments in favor of legalizing gay marriage and against the rejection of gay people from the community that R' Weiss presents in the article were echoed here too, and not exclusively by MO posters.
In the article, R' Weiss underscores the fact that he stands by the biblical prohibition against homosexuality and therefore does not officiate or participate in same s-x marriages. This does not prevent him from advocating kindness and de facto acceptance of individual gay members of the community. It is a delicate balancing act and a difficult position for a leader of a community to uphold.
My hunch though is that he is merely articulating the tacit postion held privately by many Orthodox Jews, across the spectrum of Orthodoxy.