Home Home / Letter about The Jewish Observer's Critique of R. Lamm's Torah Umadda (1995)

Correspondence

Feb. 2, 1995

Letter about The Jewish Observer's Critique of R. Lamm's Torah Umadda (1995)

Torah Umadda Modern Orthodoxy & the Charedim Principles of Leadership
View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

RELATED CONTENT

Article

A Rejoinder (1988)

Dear Dr. Lamm, I am delighted that you have taken the time to respond to my open letter to you. It was written to elicit a response and a clarification of your views. However, your letter leaves me with gnawing and troubling concerns. I hope that you will not misinterpret the sharpness of my comments as a personal attack. Indeed, only by honestly confronting the issues can we come to grips with the rather serious repercussions that followed upon The New York Times article reporting your Fifth Avenue speech. By now it is clear that in my open letter to you I faithfully ascribed to you the views that you truly embrace. It is also clear that from beginning to end, The New York Times article was a misrepresentation of the truth. In fact, it would be accurate to describe it as a caricature of the views that you so dearly hold. You have made it clear that you are deeply offended by both the terminology and the false image that the Times created — yet you sat idly by and did nothing to set the record straight. You criticize me for not checking the news report with you, to determine what you really said. Chaval! Why did you not check the news report with yourself? You spoke to an audience of four hundred. But for the world and posterity, your words will be those that were reported by the Times. It is to those words that you and I had to respond. The Times attributed to you terms such as “ultra-Orthodox” and “fundamentalist” as references to the “Right.” It further intimated that the “Right” was not open to secular culture. This image of the Orthodox Right as fundamentalist Bible-belt know-nothings is one that the Times generally has portrayed. Your own view is diametrically opposed. You have made it clear that you are deeply offended by both the terminology and the false images that the Times created — yet you sat idly by and did nothing to set the record straight. You say the Times reported the “valid groupings and spiritual dignity” remarks out of context. In order to un…
Torah Umadda Jewish Unity Modern Orthodoxy & the Charedim

Correspondence

Letter from R. Yaakov Jacobs Inviting R. Lamm to Write for Jewish Observer (1966)

Dear Rabbi Lamm: I meant to send you a copy of the review of your book, but just didn't get around to it. "Hedge of Roses" certainly comes up to the high standards you have set in your literary work. I've just seen a copy of Jewish Life and am looking forward to reading your piece on the New Theology. I can easily imagine the many demands made on your time, yet I would like to invite you to write for The Observer. Subject matter is up to you, but it is a good idea to let me know what you plan to avoid possible duplication.Should it not be possible for you to write an article, perhaps you might care to comment on some matter discussed in our publication. We are most anxious to hear from people like yourself, I might say, even more so if you have some critical comments.Please let me hear from you.
Modern Orthodoxy & the Charedim

Correspondence

Letter Sent to the Editor about The Jewish Observer Critique of R. Lamm's Torah Umadda (1995)

In this letter, I would like to bring to light a particularly disturbing passage in a back issue of the Jewish Observer. More importantly, I would like to relate to you a conversation that I had with Reb Ely Svei about two weeks ago regarding this topic. In the March 1992 issue, an article appeared entitled “Torah U’Madda – the Book and its Ideology: a Critique” by Rabbi Yonasan Rosenblum. In this review, Rabbi Rosenblum presents a strong criticism of the book and the views presented therein. I would like to quote a specific passage from the article: “So great is the value of Madda for Dr. Lamm that the distinction between it and Torah finally blurs altogether: ‘So long as we continue to learn Scripture and Oral Law, to acquire new knowledge and to refrain from forgetting what we know, then the study of the sciences and humanities is, in effect, the study of Gemora and thus a fulfillment of the study of Torah’ (p. 165). ‘This conclusion leads him to entertain seriously such questions as: Should one recite birkhat hatorah on entering the chemistry lab? May one study calculus all day and thereby fulfill his obligation of Talmud Torah?’ (pp. 163–64).”
Torah Umadda Modern Orthodoxy & the Charedim