Dear Moe: I received, just recently, a carbon copy of your letter to Larry Kobrin about the youth problem. I am sorry to hear about "roadblocks" that you mentioned were thrown up by one of the people on the Yeshiva side in the negotiations. I had been under the impression that all was clear and simply awaiting ratification by Mr. Belkin and yourself. I have a strong intuitive feeling that these obstacles are not quite as formidable as they seem. Even if they are, you have overcome far greater difficulties in a brilliant career in public life, and I would strongly urge you to leap over the present "roadblocks" and try to solve the difficulties together with Dr. Belkin as soon as possible. I keep on hearing complaints from many of my colleagues about the cross-purposes at which our groups are working in the Orthodox camp. I feel very strongly that now, and especially now, is the time for action, and that such propitious occasions may not arise as often in the future. One meeting between you and Dr. Belkin may very well unify our forces with regard to youth — an area in which we are sorely lagging behind the Conservatives, no matter how impressive our triumphs heretofore may seem. Warmest personal regards, Sincerely, Rabbi Norman Lamm

Dear Moe: I am emotionally hyper-sensitive to mixing business and advertising with religion. Nevertheless, the enclosed seems to have very respectful sponsors, and since you receive this invitation every year I think it might be good for you to go at least once, Perhaps you will find something of value for Orthodox Jewish life. At any rate, I do not think you have anything to lose. Best wishes for a Happy and Kosher Passover. Cordially yours, Rabbi Norman Lamm P.S. I still have not received your check for Mrs. [redacted].

My dear Rabbi Lamm, In a way I would like to continue our conversation of last time, when we met at your office. The fact is that there are two types of Orthodoxy. For lack of a better terminology, I think we’ll need the “doctors” and the “historians.” Writing to you, I need not elaborate. I feel very strongly – and I hope you agree with me – that the time has come to organize a working group in which the present Orthodox camp is well-represented, in which the great thinkers on its distinctive problems meet to establish its own ideals, and reach a definition of the character and nature and specific purposes it should have. Such a group should be built on the most powerful qualities and personalities we have in our generation. It should include men of the younger generation, who already today are great possibilities, and it should be evident that this group speaks for Orthodox Jewry in its most representative way. I believe many thoughtful younger people will feel themselves much more identified with an Orthodoxy which has a self-clarified and well-articulated position. Next beyond the purely congregational and communal, such a group would also have to provide the background to the undertaking of those essential scholarly programs that are discussed on the occasion of such meetings. Needless to say, not all that needs doing can be undertaken at once. But a beginning must be made. It is long overdue. I plan to be in N.Y. at the week-end of March 19, arriving Friday. If necessary, I may be able to stay to the 22nd. Would you be able to interest a few like-minded people to meet in order to discuss the idea? Shortly, I’ll write and suggest names of people. But if not, almost any time should be convenient for me. I am not writing on similar terms to Rabbi Rackman. Kindest regards, Sincerely, Eliezer Berkovits

Dear Max: I received your sad letter here in Lake Como, Pa., and I am dictating a response which my secretary is typing up and sending to you together with the enclosed letter which I am returning herewith. Your letter, quite frankly, made very painful reading. It looks like a classic example of "hillul ha-shem.” Anything that diminishes Orthodox Judaism, diminishes each of us at the same time. However, quite honestly, I would be most reluctant to attempt either to justify the young man or the daughter of this [redacted]. My own experience in counselling married couples has taught me that there are almost always two sides to every story, and that even when you are aware of both it is exceedingly difficult to assign major blame to one side or the other. Your [redacted] quite understandably blames his son-in-law, and justifies his daughter. Perhaps if you heard the other party speaking, you would get the reverse impression. There is, frankly, very little that you can do to dissuade [redacted] from his generalization that because his son-in-law is Orthodox, and his son-in-law is indecent (according to his interpretation), therefore all Orthodox Jews and Orthodox Judaism is wrong.What should you do? I would suggest writing to him and telling him the following: first, that you are deeply grieved to hear of the unfortunate situation that developed, and that you hope all will go well. Second, tell him that it was his misfortune to have gotten involved with an Orthodox Jew who is the exception rather than the rule. Inform him of your own wide experience, and of the fact that you have rarely come across such a case among commited, Jews, but that no group, nor individual is perfect. I would plead with him not to judge all Orthodox Jews on the basis of the misconduct of one such person, even as we rightly appeal to the non-Jewish world not to judge all Jews because of the misdeeds of one or several Jews.Finally, as to the practical question, I would strongly suggest that he s…

Dear Rabbi Lamm, I want to write to you in order to tell you that I deeply admire your religious convictions, your broad range of learning, and your ability to write clearly with much depth. No one more than I appreciates it since I along with you like to base a personal philosophy of life within the framework of Judaism. I have read your reply to the questions posed in Commentary on the August symposium and have also had occasion to read your lecture Why be Orthodox in which particularistic insights like this in common with those who are firm in Tradition and Jewish life are meaningless. In general I am very happy you have taken this stand because nothing but harm and confusion is produced among those who have long since left Orthodoxy or to those Jews in the United States whose perspective of Judaism is one brought anything but learned and committed minded scholars. As a young man of age 26 and a graduate of the University of Wisconsin in Madison in political science along with having a religious background, I have been influenced strongly by such distinguished Orthodox Jewish writers and Jewish leaders by Leo Jung, Studies in Judaism by Solomon Schechter, Man and Judaism by Eliezer Berkovits, Judaism Eternal by Samson Raphael Hirsch, Judaism, Scholasticism and Islam by Louis Ginzburg, Jewish Law and Jewish Life by Pinchas Peli, The Philosophy of Judaism by Samuel Belkin, Reconstructionism, a Critical Appraisal by Eliezer Berkovits, Judaism, A Historical Presentation by Solomon Freehof, A History of the Jewish People by Max Margolis and Alexander Marx. I have a regular subscription for the past ten years to the Jewish Observer newspaper. I usually do not buy or read Commentary except on special occasions. However I find much dignity and honesty in what is expressed. I have wondered whether there were times when both the Orthodox and the Conservative were when Judaism was being trampled under by the numbers from Eastern Europe to the United States. Certainly West…

Dear Marvin: I haven’t responded to your letter of May 7th because of the overwhelming press of weight of my own work and burdens. I am truly sorry, but I am not in position to act on your problem. One of the fruits of a community that is not sensitive to social issues or ethical concerns is that it doesn’t even know how to protect its own interests in society. Perhaps the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations or some such group can be prevailed upon to take the initiative, or maybe Rabbi Abraham Besdin, the new Associate Director of Rabbinical Council of America, AL 5–1900. He is an able person who can understand the significance of this project, and maybe he has some free time since he is a new man.Beyond this, I am physically incapable of following this up or anything else. If there were 50 Rabbis sensitive to the issues, then I am sure a few of them would be free to work upon it. It comes back to the same pedagogic and ethical issues that I have raised in the community. It is certainly no source of satisfaction to me to point out that you seem to be happy with trends in the community but unhappy with the fruits of such trends.I am sorry that this is all I can do at this point. I truly believe that this is an important project and regret that your own effectiveness is crippled by the unresponsiveness of the community.Sincerely yours,Irving Greenberg, Rabbi P.S. Are you sure you contacted all the proper sources? I recall going home in the car with Henry Wimpfheimer and Naftali Cohen of the Breuer community. They mentioned they were on a committee concerning “neighborhood stabilization.” Perhaps you should speak to them rather than the rabbi who may be busy and less responsive to your concerns.---June 15, 1970 Rabbi Irving Greenberg Riverdale Jewish Center 3700 Independence Avenue Riverdale, New York Dear Yitschok:Though I cannot remember the issue or the context, I seem to recall that about a year ago, in an exchange of correspondence, you wrote something quite …

Dear Rabbi Lamm, I am an alumna of YUHSGM and TIH, now a proud Jerusalem housewife. I believe that I owe my presence here and much more to YU. I am also a great and longstanding admirer of your written and spoken words, and I thus feel obligated to comment on your address “Radical Moderation” – a copy of which just arrived in my mail. The glorification of moderation and abhorrence of extremes are appropriate for Americans Butler and Twain. Not being heirs to the word of G-d, they are confronted in this world with many possible truths. It is reasonable for them to advocate a middle course. Our position, epitomized for us just now in פרשת נצבים, is altogether different. For us, the course to follow was laid out clearly, visibly: “החיים” says the verse. (30:15) “…life, and good; death and evil.” Choose. Surely it was not the intention of your address to recommend that we walk a middle path between these two choices. Yet, that is what your words suggest. My education – mostly in YU – taught me an approach more like this: Where a policy for our people in our Land is an application of Torah, it should be supported – wholeheartedly. Otherwise, a course which leads with maximum efficiency to the Torah view should be pursued. Always, our behavior should be an expression of consummate כלל ישראל. Our goal should be unqualified: perfection, “והלכת בדרכיו ועשית הישר והטוב בעיני ה׳.” If the words I use are made synonymous with “extreme” and if this is a dirty word, that does not mitigate our obligation. Not the נביא nor any other Torah source I learned gives a basis for the extension of the middle-way idea to areas outside character traits. Quite the contrary. I strongly suspect that the actions of יהושע and the command which gave יהושע such a hard time would be dubbed “destructive extremeness.” Nevertheless, this was the will of G-d at the time. In the absence of prophecy, we must use alternative methods of determining His will today. But we must be unrelenting in the search, …

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…

Dear Dr. Lamm: Although we have met personally only once, at one of the institutes arranged by David Hartman, I have long been an admirer of your writings in both Tradition and Moment. The favorable impression I have gained from your writings has now been greatly reinforced by reading the draft of your “Centrist Orthodoxy.” Thank you for sending it to me. First of all, let me tell you that I like the spirit of ahavat Yisrael in which that pamphlet is written. I like the call for moderation and the cooling of tempers. And I like your way of defining Centrist Orthodoxy per genus et differentiam. The spirit of your presentation reminded me somewhat of the atmosphere of Torah im derekh eretz, in which I had been brought up in Berlin. Could I engage in some nit-picking arguments with what you have to say? I suppose I could. Right as you are in saying that “Torah Judaism” is a redundancy, “for what is Judaism if not Torah?,” I feel somewhat uneasy about having any one group within Judaism lay a monopolistic claim to that name. Granted that Conservative Judaism, for example, is subject to the kind of criticism you level against it, I would argue that, even within Conservative ranks, there have been – and are – some believers in, and practitioners of, “Torah Judaism.” And hard as those believers and practitioners may be to find within the organizational structure of Reform Judaism, I would argue that, if you look hard enough, you might find one or two even there. The recently deceased Rabbi William G. Braude z”l of Providence, Rhode Island, could certainly be considered as such. But then, I understand that it is in the nature of any orthodoxy to make monopolistic claims; and as long as such claims have to be made, it is better to hear them expressed with your kind of derekh eretz than hurled in the strident voice of self-righteousness. It is certainly kind of you to inquire whether you reported my opinions correctly. On the whole, you did, although in my JRJ article I did …

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…