Home Home / Letter from R. Jakob Petuchowski about …

Correspondence

Apr. 6, 1988

Letter from R. Jakob Petuchowski about Centrist Orthodoxy (1988)

Modern Orthodoxy Orthodoxy & Other Denominations
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

Is Traditional Orthodox? (1960)

I thank the editor of Chavrusa for affording me the opportunity of offering several alternate ideas on the subject raised by my brother in the previous issue. First, there is nothing world-shaking about the problem of whether the name of authentic Judaism in our contemporary, confused age be called "Orthodox,” "Traditional" or anything else. There is nothing particularly sacrosanct about the name "Orthodox" or any other such appellation. Ideally, our attitude should be that no adjective is the best adjective. We are Jews, and our faith and practice is Judaism, unqualified, uncompromised, undiluted. Once we agree to an adjective of any kind before the name Judaism, we have willy-nilly implied our assent to the co-validity of other "Interpretations" of Judaism. The acceptance of an adjective means that there are many kinds of Judaism and that ours is only one special kind, perhaps the kind with most chumrot. This is a concession we must grant the dissenters, as Wouk calls them. They will give us and forgive us anything and eveiything as long as we grant them a hehksher of equal validity based on the spurious and overworked thesis that there "are many roads to the same goal.” And this is the one concession which, if we grant it, we have lost our very souls, no matter what else we have won.And yet, this too, is no solution. Our numerical weakness, our antagonists' claims to historical authenticity as the legitimate heirs of the past and the nebulous, confused ideas which go into the making of the current consensus, all conspire to make the term "Judaism” as such, fairly meaningless. It, therefore, behooves us to specify who and what we i are. The very fact that we are adjectively J־ different in name can, by means of public education, be used to drive home that,/ we repudiate the "equal validity" thesis and claim exclusive legitimacy as the Jewish faith, authoritarian as that may sound in this age of religious euphoria. If we reject an adjective we may find ourselves b…
Modern Orthodoxy Orthodoxy & Other Denominations

Correspondence

Letter from Marcel Lindenbaum about Self-Confidence and Centrist Orthodoxy (1988)

Dear Rabbi Lamm: I know that for many years your title has been Dr. Lamm, but to me you will always be Rabbi Lamm; my fond recollections of you as Rabbi will always take precedence over your presidential title. I read the New York Times summary of your recent talk at the Fifth Avenue Synagogue and am sorry I missed it, especially since I know how little similarity there often is between what the Times hears and what it reports. I would much appreciate receiving a copy of your address. At the recent YU dinner sponsored by KJ in honor of Jean Lindenbaum, you made reference to “Centrist Judaism, whatever you call it.” I know many have spoken to you about the need for YU to lead the way toward greater independence from the opinions of the right. No institution is better suited and no leader better qualified to become the nucleus for the development of a positive philosophy for this battered group. Such a philosophy would be a welcome change from the constant reflexive responses to pressure from right and left. Without a positive philosophy and the self-confidence that comes from true knowledge of self, we are doomed to continue looking over our right shoulders and mouthing apologetics. In my opinion, this lack of self-confidence is why the younger generation seems to be drifting rightward. The future is not necessarily with the right unless we abandon it to them. I have the distinct impression that those who would agree with me are becoming increasingly uncomfortable as discouragement replaces hope; while we have been losing many to the right, we risk losing some to the left as well. I do not intend here to repeat matters you have no doubt struggled with at length, but I wish to point out that a movement or philosophy with no name cannot be called a movement. I, for one, would vote for “Halachic Judaism” rather than “Centrist.” The definition and philosophy must be articulated by you together with other leaders. I would be pleased to join others in giving major support…
Modern Orthodoxy Yeshiva University Orthodoxy & Other Denominations

Correspondence

Letter from Dr. Michael Wyschogrod to R. Lamm about Centrist Orthodoxy Essay (1988)

Dear Norman: I am writing in response to your request of April 1, 1988 for comments about “Centrist Orthodoxy: Agenda and Vision, Self-Definition, and Self-Evaluation,” which you plan to publish in booklet form. I read the piece and the earlier press accounts with great interest. What you are articulating is of great importance. “Sane” or “moderate” Orthodoxy has been silent for too long, leaving the impression that it has nothing to say or that it secretly admires anti-modern Orthodoxy but does not have the courage of its convictions. The truth is that we believe moderate Orthodoxy to be the form of Judaism most pleasing to God. I therefore strongly support the enterprise of making clear what we believe. A booklet setting forth your views would be a good beginning, but even better would be something similar to which the RCA and the Union could subscribe, making it a manifesto of a movement rather than the opinion of one man. If this is not possible, then your statement alone is far better than nothing, especially as President of Yeshiva University. On the whole, I agree with your thrust, though I have specific comments. The term “Centrist Orthodoxy” is problematic. If there is little or nothing to the left of it, then the term is disingenuous and avoids the word “modern,” which I would retain. You rightly distinguish Orthodoxy from non-Orthodoxy on the basis of halakhah, but in so doing you imply that halakhah is the essence of Judaism. I disagree: halakhah is essential, but the essence is covenantal relationship with God. I have reservations about the “lighthouse” story, which seems too sermonic for a serious essay. I also find your distinction between “validity” and “legitimacy” tortured; it suffices to say that we disagree with non-Orthodox interpretations but love and respect all Jews. I am especially hard-line on conversion, which should be emphasized as the greatest danger to Jewish unity. I would be cautious in distinguishing heart from mind biblically, sin…
Modern Orthodoxy Orthodoxy & Other Denominations