Non-Orthodox Attendees in Orthodox Shuls

What is their place, where is their space?

When Orthodox shuls are mortally desperate for membership revenue, “deviant,” non-observant or semi-observant Jews and their dues dollars are solicited, welcomed, and when the amounts of dollars given are large, these unorthodox Jews are honored “men and women of the year.” If one has dollars to donate, that person becomes a respected “lady” or “honored” gentleman,” a “good Jew” with a “good,” or nostalgic heart. These non – Orthodox Jews are honorable because they give gelt to alleviate their perceived guilt.

However, when Orthodox shuls reach demographic – and economic – solvency, when shul memberships becomes homogenously shomer Shabbat, the shuls often shed their capacity for “tolerance.” One “modern” Orthodox congregant once complained to me, “why am I not pushing to raise religious standards, insisting on being more strict and more challenging, and by implicit but unstated, snarky insinuation, more ‘orthodox?’” Religiously non – compliant members, it was suggested by this zealously pious member, should be invited to join the local Conservative Temple, “where they really belong.” After all, Lakewood’s Beis Midrash Govoah Yeshiva will not honor non – Orthodox philanthropists; for these pious people, sacred donation dollars may not be dirtied to launder or legitimate irreligious behavior. Bernard Madoff, the infamous fraudster whose Ponzi scheme shook the Jewish philanthropic world, not only impoverished dozens of innocent investors, he ratified the worst of anti – Semitic stereotypes. He did not keep kosher, was not a Shabbat observer, yet by dint of his dollars remained an honored member of the affluent modern Orthodox affluent aristocracy whom Orthodox institutions delight to honor in exchange for their largess, until his exposure, disgrace, and loss of dollar power.

Authentic Jewish standards are determined by Jewish law, not by the pragmatic, social, or political, consensus. If being communally more strict than is required by the plain sense of the Jewish legal canon unnecessarily alienates Jews from Judaism, the Orthodox message is muted and God’s kingdom is diminished by presenting Torah to be more demanding than it in fact it really is. Being “more strict than required” is at minimum, a discipline that is not required by Jewish Tradition understanding of God’s will. While for some zealous folks, being more strict than required is an expression of piety – or insider cultural virtuosity – this disposition is not necessarily a virtue and just may be an expression of yohora, hubris, and arrogance.

Orthodox Jewry must keep its shul’s doors and its hearts open not because these sensibilities are good for membership recruitment and balanced budgets, but because modern Orthodoxy feels – or ought to feel – morally responsible to – and for – all Jewry. If Orthodox Judaism claims to speak for all Israel, it must be both willing and able to speak to all Israel.

So Jews who ride to and from their Orthodox shul should never be driven away from the Orthodox shul; Jews who observe commandments inconsistently must encouraged to grow in their Judaism and should not be condemned for their inconsistency. It is better to be inconsistently right than to be consistently wrong. Families that do not yet observe the family purity rubric are not likely to become more religiously committed by being invited or pressured to abandon their Orthodox identity and affiliation altogether.

Dennis Prager has argued that adopting partial Kosher and some Shabbat observance is “sufficient” to be “considered” a ”good Jew” because by so doing one affirms the religious tradition. We disagree strongly in this instance as well. Being insufficiently observant remains insufficiently Jewish because accepting God as king seriously, sufficiently, and sincerely requires a making the effort to do the best that one is able. Those who wish to affirm Torah in totality are not expected to observe Torah perfectly. Even the most perfect Jew who ever lived is not fully innocent, as taught by Ecclesiastes 7:20. There has never been, nor likely will there ever be, an Orthodox Jew who had never sinned. Since Jewish Tradition teaches that one is judged by the benchmarks one judges others [mSota 1:7], finger pointing is an inadequate, and shallow response to less than consistent compliance. But Prager, in good faith, compromises the Torah template. If one accepts God’s kingship, one may miss the mark but one may not move the Torah content.

We disagree with Dennis Prager because he negotiates God’s commands rather than straining his own commitment to the Commander of those commands. Prager the political conservative is Jewishly and theologically liberal. And still, in the Orthodox shuls I served, and now currently attend, he would be welcome without judgment.

On Rosh Hashanah, one accepts God as Commander, the “’yoke’ of the commandments,” which is the commitment to try to do one’s spiritual best. One tries to recite one hundred blessings a day, each blessing an event affirming God as king. And not unlike Christian Evangelicals, we want to spread the good news, that Torah is to all Israel.

This sensibility is not the face of Orthodoxy that one finds in the media or press. In Israel, the Zionist Jewish state, the ultra –  Orthodox Chief Rabbinate not only rejects the Jewishness of all non – Orthodox Jewry, but the religious legitimact liberal and Zionist Orthodox communities as well. Jewish propriety is insinuated, Jewish law goes uncited. Maimonides, Pe’er ha – Dor 132 advises a non – exacting conversion in order to avoid an intermarriage; the Israeli rabbinate will not recognize any conversion supervised by any rabbi it chooses, without accountability, to recognize.

Political correctness, not theological correctness, is the disorder of the day. The Israeli Chief Rabbinate once correctly accepted the conversions of all registered Diaspora Jewry. Then Rabbi Gedalia Schwartz, the head rabbinical judge of the Rabbinical Council’s rabbinical court, had his conversions challenged. After developing a system where the politically/theologically correct positions were conceded by the Rabbinical Council to the Chief Rabbinate in return for its recognition, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate has again rejected R. Schwartz’s conversions, without saying why.

It appears to the innocent reader that we are not dealing with Torah law, but with a partisan ideology that views Torah law as a weapon to be wielded, not a benchmark of propriety.

Theirs is the “Torah” of the closed mind, not the open book. According to Jewish law, a conversion performed by three religiously observant lay persons is religiously effective. One would think that otherwise Orthodox rabbis would be concerned that effective conversions be supported and encouraged, because by rejecting the convert’s Jewish identity, the rabbinate tempts the convert to sin.

The Passover Seder would be incomplete without the cynical and clue – less sons found sitting at the table. Their place is, after all, at the table, not out the door.

The Succot lulav bouquet would not be complete without the willow, which being tasteless and odorless, represents the Jew who is devoid of deeds and is at a loss of learning. Yet the willow must be included if the precept is to be observed correctly.

And on Yom Kippur night, in the Heavenly court above, and in the shuls we find ourselves in this world below, with the consent of the Commander and the acquiescence of our community, it is declared that we may, indeed must pray with the sinners. The sinners, after all, are ourselves. If we close the doors, we also close our hearts, minds, and the doors of our destiny. We may not push others outside the pale if we cherish our space and place inside. We have met the wrongdoer, and we find her/him in our mirrors. Let’s try to be better together.