Why Did The Feminist Chicken Cross The Road?

"Rabba" Hurwitz with Avi Weiss. 

Q: Why did the feminist chicken cross the road?

A: To daven for the amud at The Hebrew Institute of Riverdale.

It's been a while since I wrote about Avi Weiss, who heads the Hebrew Institute in Riverdale, NY, and whose list of radical innovations in a supposedly "orthodox" synagogue include the recent ordination of a women, Sara Hurwitz, as a "Rabba."  When I last visited this issue, I castigated the Rabbinical Council of America for a weak-kneed response and their failure to throw Weiss out of the organization.The following link contains the RCA's official statement.  Essentially, the RCA told him not to do it again, and he agreed. It's important to note what the RCA did not require of him. They did not demand that Weiss remove the title Rabba from Sara Hurwitz, or remove her from her post. They neglected to deal with the dangerous precedent that even one Rabba represents to Torah Judaism. This concession was a major victory for Weiss and the other ortho-feminists out there. At the end of the day, the Hebrew Institute has a female Rabba. (For more on this subject, read my post, The RCA Is Dead.) As seen by this screen shot from the HIR website, Sara Hurwitz still retains her title.

I wasn't even aware of Weiss's latest outrage, until I stumbled upon an online article from The Jewish Week entitled, "Weiss Moves Beyond Rabba."  The title was appropriate, for indeed Weiss had moved beyond the issue, by allowing a female congregant to lead the Kabbalat Shabbat prayer service one Friday night. 

I don't feel like regurgitating the article. Read it yourself and consider the following points that jumped right off the screen at me:

• Just how smug and brazen is Avi Weiss, to take this next descent into the abyss right after a public clash with the RCA? He's making an absolute laughingstock of the RCA, and they have neither the courage nor the intellectual honesty to remove him.

• Consider the contempt he has for many of his former and present congregants, some of whom have already left his congregation, and others who may now reconsider it, after being put off by this latest incident. Avi Weiss does what he wants and the congregation can come along for the ride or leave. Of course there are many sheep in his congregation who will adapt to the innovations of their esteemed rabbi and mentor. In time they may even learn to enjoy it. And then they will hail him as an even greater innovator of "open orthodoxy."

• Surprisingly, Rabbi Shafran of the Agudath Israel of America had mild words about the incident. While obviously opposing these innovations as contrary to yahadut, his response was parve. This is what I got out of Rabbi Shafran's words. "Rabbi Weiss's move saddens me." Really earth-shaking sentiments. I would have expected the condemnation to have some bite. It did not. And for that the Agudah should be ashamed of itself. Of course, in the grander scheme of things,  the Agudah is irrelevant to Avi Weiss. We're talking about two different planets.

• Ironically, Rabbi Shmuel Goldin of the RCA had stronger words on the matter, as seen in the following segment of the article. This makes the RCA's subsequent failure to address the issue even more inexplicable:

Rabbi Shmuel Goldin of Englewood, N.J., a vice president of the Rabbinical Council of America, said RCA leadership is critical of Rabbi Weiss’ action, but has not yet decided on any action it may take.

“A woman serving as shaliachat tzibbur [the cantor] for any portion of synagogue services is unacceptable,” Rabbi Goldin said. “If such a thing occurred, it would obviously be wrong and not in keeping with Orthodox tradition.”

The recent RCA agreement with Rabbi Weiss, in which he agreed not to ordain women, did not foresee and “did not address” a woman leading services, Rabbi Goldin said, so Rabbi Weiss’ action is not in technical violation of the agreement. “The question is, is it a violation of Jewish tradition, and we believe it is.”

Does Rabbi Weiss face disciplining by, or suspension from, the RCA?

“It is premature for us to comment on any particular action that we will be taking,” Rabbi Goldin said, “but all actions are on the table.” 

This article was from August 4, 2010 (one day short of a mere five months after the RCA's "Rabbah statement"). From the tone of Rabbi Goldin's words, it sounded like Weiss was in trouble with the RCA.  I've checked the RCA website. I've clicked on every link and searched the site repeatedly. I don't even see a reference to the incident, let alone a statement reflecting any discipline. I don't know about you, but I find this this very disturbing. (I suspect that one or more philanthropists who support  Weiss and the RCA may have put a damper on any plans to oust him.) The RCA purports to represent "Torah true" Judaism. Yet time and time again, they fail to stand up for the Torah. Exactly how far can Avi Weiss push the envelope before they throw him out? Perhaps when a lesbian "Rabba" blows the shofar following neilah.Then again, maybe not.

Where is the public outrage from Torah leaders? There are striking similarities between orthodoxy's collective  failure to address the menace of Lubavitch messianism that arose after the Rebbe's (of blessed memory) death, and this very different but no less dangerous infection that endangers many segments of the "modern-orthodox" world.

"Separate but equal." An obscenity when it comes to dividing people based on skin color, or absurd notions of race. But in yahadut, separate but equal is essential to the perpetuation of the mesorah (tradition). One could surely argue that the role of the woman is even more essential than the man's. In many aspects I believe this to be true. The Torah requires a separation in roles, both for halachic and hashkafic (idealogical) reasons. And both are critical for the Torah observant Jew. Gender confusion, role reversal, these will prove to be the spiritual death of the Jewish family. Jews will leave the fold in even greater numbers if the fundamentals of our tradition become warped, skewed, and finally abandoned. (When Jonathan's Ema starts behaving like a second Aba, something is bound to go wrong.)

Women are as good as men. And Jewish women are as essential to Judaism as men are. But they are not men, and men are not women. Let women find fulfillment as Jewish women in accordance with the Halachah. And let them not be led astray by the false shepherds, who would sacrifice the flock to the wolves, to satisfy a feminist agenda. 

A Pop Quiz For The RCA

Disclaimer: The following post should not be taken as an attack against individual rabbis within the RCA. My problem is with the organization itself, which purports to represent  a segment of the "orthodox Rabbinate", and then releases a statement that is contrary to Halachah. A rabbinical organization has an obligation to formulate a statement from a Torah framework, without resorting to the kind of politically correct nonsense that one expects to hear from the Anti-Defamation League. Naturally, I have zero confidence in the RCA, which leads me to my next point. If there are individual rabbis within the RCA who disagree with the official position, I believe they have an obligation to publicly state their opposition and then rescind their membership. In this manner, they will be able to distance themselves from an egregious desecration of The Almighty's name. As a general rule, in the interest of maintaining respect for the Torah, one should accord respect to the individual rabbis within the RCA (Most of them anyway. Some have gone off the deep end.), despite the collective chillul Hashem of the organization's statement, which cannot go unanswered. Yahadut maintains that whenever there is a desecration of G-d's name, one cannot remain silent.


As Ricky Ricardo would say, the RCA has some "splainin to do." I'm still waiting for a comprehensive Halachic statement from the RCA which addresses the issue of renting and selling property to non-Jews in the land of Israel. After all, they were the ones who interfered when several Tzfat Rabbis stated the Halachic prohibition of selling or renting property to Arabs  in Israel. According to the RCA, the issue is more "complex", yet in their entire statement they neglected to mention even one Torah source. Somehow, I don't think that Rav Soloveitchik (of blessed memory) would have authored such a statement (whatever his position would have been). So much for their commitment to "Halachic Man." So I'm waiting for something more substantial from the RCA. Something with meat in it. Perhaps there are sources that the Tzfat Rabbis are unaware of. I want to see these sources. Don't lecture us, without giving us a proper shiur. 

No. There were no Torah sources, but there were a lot of tired cliches from the PC obsessed RCA. Instead of Halachah, we were lectured on the need to show "special sensitivity to societal realities, widely-held ethical principles, and historical injustices." The RCA noted that, " it is wrong and unacceptable to advocate blanket exclusionary policies directed against minorities of other faiths or ethnic groups. Of all people, Jews should know that such practices are beyond the pale, having ourselves suffered from them in the past." Very moving of course, but what about the Halachah? 

I'm not finished with the RCA. I've got a pop quiz for them. Open book, in fact. It shouldn't be difficult for anyone who underwent the rigors of semicha (rabbinical ordination). The questions may seem a bit disjointed, but I assure you they were chosen with great deliberation. I wrote them because I am concerned with the theoretical mindset behind this recent RCA statement. The purpose of the quiz is to get a sense where they are coming from. Obviously, the "7 Nations" are not around anymore (see question 1) but a response to the question will tell us a lot about the hashkafah of the individual members. To ascertain if they are more modern than orthodox. To gauge their perception of yahadut. (I'm considering emailing this quiz to the RCA, with a request to take my test. I don't expect that any of them will oblige me. Of course, my readers can also print up this post and hand it to their local RCA affiliated Rabbi. With respect of course. Always with respect.) 

The Jewish Fist Pop Quiz: Answer the questions as detailed as possible, citing any and all classical Torah sources that are available. Feel free to bring in the Acharonim.

1. What was the Halachic mandate regarding the "7 Nations", when the Jews first entered Israel? 
2. What were the Jews required to do with the rampant idolatry (temples, altars) ?
3. What is a ger toshav? What are the criteria for becoming a ger toshav?
4. What is the Halachah regarding selling or renting property to non-Jews in Israel? (What did you expect, that I wouldn't ask this?)
5. What is Judaism's classical approach to individuals who want to convert Jews to another faith? 
6. May Jews date or marry non-Jews? 
7. What is a milchemet mitzvah? How does the Halachah instruct us to treat the enemy, during a milchemet mitzvah?
8. In your opinion, was Matityahu, the Hasmonean priest, correct in slaughtering the idolatrous Jew in Modiin? If yes, what halachic justification can be cited for killing a man without following the standard halachic procedure of justice?
9. The Torah speaks of an ongoing war "from generation to generation" against the nation of Amalek, including an eventual final showdown where Amalek is obliterated. How do you rationalize the original mandate (as well as any implications for the future) which calls for collective annihilation against seemingly innocent members of society? In your understanding of the issue, will the future war with Amalek require us to slaughter men, woman, and children? 
10. Is Israel's current democracy consistent with the Halachah? Theoretically, would it be proper for an Arab to become Prime Minister if Israeli demographics were to change? What should a religious Jew do when the secular state of Israel engages in actions that contradict or violate the Torah? May one evict Jews and tear down Jewish homes?

Oh, and one last thing, before I forget. I expect Torah answers to these Torah questions.

The RCA Is (Still) Dead: Part II

"What will the goyim say?"  

Recently, a group of Israeli Rabbis disseminated a letter regarding one aspect of the Halachic status of non-Jews in the land of Israel. They correctly stated that according to the Torah, Jews are prohibited from selling or leasing property to gentiles in the Holy Land. The responses to this honest but politically incorrect statement came from all ends of the political and religious spectrum. The secular leftists condemned the declaration as racist and contrary to democratic values. Unfortunately, there is little to be done with people who have no concept of Torah, and whose ethics are premised on self-indulgence, hedonism, and the diseased ideology of moral relativism. 

The real tragedy in this whole affair is that too many orthodox Rabbis (both in Israel and abroad), publicly condemned this statement and declared it to be a distortion of the Halachah (Jewish law). To my knowledge, these Rabbis consistently neglected to cite even one Torah source to support their position. Regardless of how one chooses to interpret the Halachah (assuming that it is done with intellectual honesty and the fear of Heaven), a Torah scholar always brings a Torah source to validate a position. 

One prominent opponent of the letter in Israel was Rabbi Druckman, who after expressing his own dissatisfaction with the letter, went about revising the statement and drafting a more parve version.  (I don't know whether or not the original group of Tzfat Rabbis agreed to sign the revised "Halachah" or whether they're still standing by their original position. Naturally, if they agreed to follow the latter statement, it would negate their original action.) Several other prominent mamlachti (state-worshiping) Rabbis chimed in with their dissatisfaction. An absolute chillul Hashem (desecration of The Almighty's name).

Religious opponents of the "extremist" letter received a boost from across the Atlantic, when the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA) stuck its nose into the affair. Had the RCA stood up for Torah and not the perceived interest of American shtetl Jewry, their interference would have been appreciated. Unfortunately, the RCA took a stand against the Tzfat Rabbis. As the old adage goes, they should have stayed home.

For an excellent treatment of this subject, check out my friend and fellow blogger's post, Esser Agaroth On The RCA. He covers all the bases. But I wanted to make a few comments of my own about this latest disgrace from the RCA. (For some of the RCA's previous "winning moments", see my older posts The RCA Is Dead (audio), and Where Is The RCA?)  In the interest of presenting my objections to this recent RCA position, I have included the entire statement below. My own comments (in blue) follow each paragraph:

Statement on Renting to Non-Jews Tsfat RCA Statement Regarding the Sale or Rental of Property to non-Jews in Israel

Dec 14, 2010 -- The Rabbinical Council of America places great value on the judicious balancing of halachic and ethical principles of policy and action. The brilliance of the halachic tradition lies in its ability to affirm the Torah and rabbinic teachings of past generations, in a way which elevates and ennobles contemporary life, while bringing honor and respect to the Torah. This requires a special sensitivity to societal realities, widely-held ethical principles, and historical injustices. This is true no matter the particular circumstances that might militate in favor of policies or actions intended to protect a narrow community concern or interest.

The Jewish Fist Commentary: A whole lot of pseudo-babble without any Torah sources. The opening statement sounds like it was drafted by the Rabbinical Assembly, which is the international association of Conservative Rabbis. (I've often said that the RCA should drop the "c" and merge with the former group.) It pays homage to Halachic commitment while affirming the need to recognize "societal realities, widely held ethical principles, and historical injustices." Let's be honest. This is really a call for a malleable halachah that can be melted and molded to the times. What they really mean to say is that the Halachic prohibition of selling land to goyim in Israel is somehow affected by the fact that Jews (in America, and elsewhere) refuse to pack their bags and make Aliyah. This statement was written by people who are uncomfortable with an uncompromising politically-incorrect  psak Halachah coming out of the mouths of a minority of Israeli Rabbis. They don't want to be labeled "Jewish fundamentalists" by their goyish American neighbors.

For this reason, the Rabbinical Council of America finds the recent statement by certain rabbinic leaders in Tsfat, Israel, regarding rental and sale of residences to non-Jews, to be objectionable. The halachic issues at hand are indeed complex, and we are surely sympathetic to the impulse to protect a Jewish community in the face of intermarriage, communal conflict, or unsafe neighborhoods. We are also mindful of the need to respect the halachic and policy rulings of rabbis in other countries and specific locales, given their general familiarity with the facts on the ground.

The Jewish Fist Commentary: The Halachic issues are not complex. Playing pilpulisitc gymnastics with the Halachah because it makes you uncomfortable, isn't the definition of a complex issue. On this particular point, the Halachah was as clear to the Chazon Ish as it was to the Rambam. 

Rambam-Laws of Foreign Worship 10 4 [3] 

"One does not sell them houses or fields in Eretz Yisrael; but in Syria one may sell them houses, but not fields. One may rent them houses in Eretz Yisrael, provided that one does not make them a neighborhood -  and there is no neighborhood with less than three [households]. One does not rent them fields; but in Syria one rents them fields. And why were they strict regarding fields? For two reasons -[because they would] expropriate the tithes and be allowed to settle the land."

Keep in mind that there is unanimous agreement among the Rabbinic decisors (from the medieval periods to modern times), that only a ger toshav (Halachic resident stranger) who accepts 'tribute and servitude' can remain in the land.  It is important to note that while there are disagreements among these decisors regarding the exact criteria that must be met for one to be called a ger toshav, no gentile in Israel (Arab or otherwise) fulfills these criteria.

Chazon Ish-In a Letter to Rav Betzalel Zolti, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (Kovetz Torah Sheb'al Peh, 11 pg. 44)

"I can find no pretext to allow selling land either to a non-Jew or to a Jew suspected of selling land to non-Jews."

Presumably, the RCA has sources that the Chazon Ish was unaware of. They just don't want to disclose them to us.

In spite of all of these considerations, we find it necessary to express our views from afar insofar as the statement in question affects not just Jewish communities in Israel, but communities in North America as well. In addition many rabbis across Israel whom we hold in high regard have spoken out in opposition to the statement.

The Jewish Fist Commentary: Within this statement, we see the typical reaction of shtetl Jews who worry about the goyim of the world. They pick and choose their religious Zionism. On the one hand they acknowledge the great miracles that The Almighty performed (and continues to perform for us) with the creation of the State of Israel. I'm fairly certain that most of the RCA membership would admit that the Israeli wars (past and present) constitute a Milchemet Mitzvah. However, when it comes to applying the Halachah as it pertains to goyim, the RCA suddenly becomes uncomfortable and plays what essentially boils down to as the "Satmar card." You can't upset the goyim before the Messiah arrives on eagles wings. (Of course, if a non-Jew entered Williamsburg and tried to entice Satmar girls to sin, they would hang him from the lampposts. On this issue I applaud the Satmar approach, despite their inconsistency.)

Recently, a group of religious Israeli women (their husbands are Rabbis) came out with a statement urging Jews to refrain from dating Arabs. What does the RCA make of this? Are the issues pertaining to intermarriage too complex to make such a blatant statement, or were these women correct to state what every observant Jew already knows? Isn't the RCA concerned about how American x-tians will react to such intolerant beliefs? If they are, I present Exhibit # 2 for the RCA to merge with the Conservative movement. If they agree with the position, then they need to immediately take the following actions:

• Draft a letter in support of these strong women, regarding the dangers intermarriage poses to the Jewish people.
• Make a retraction  for their recent statement and publicly acknowledge that some issues have to be stated outright regardless of how gentiles will perceive their statements.

It is our view that in spite of the concerns of the authors of the statement, it is wrong and unacceptable to advocate blanket exclusionary policies directed against minorities of other faiths or ethnic groups. Of all people, Jews should know that such practices are beyond the pale, having ourselves suffered from them in the past. This is especially so, when as in the statement issued by the rabbis in question, the halachic sources and arguments are a matter of debate, and even disagreement. And even were that not the case, it is not at all clear that the principles in question would apply in the State of Israel in the 21st Century.

The Jewish Fist Commentary: First we have an appeal not to use "blanket exclusionary policies against minorities..." Then the authors remind us that we have an obligation as Jews to remember that we suffered from discriminatory practices. First of all, to equate the Halachah with the kind of treatment we received at the hands of our muslim and x-tian hosts is the stuff of nausea. As if the motivations of the proper application of the Halachah have anything in common with the kind of psychopathic hatred that the goyim of the world visited upon us. Furthermore, the fact that we were treated brutally by gentiles doesn't  change the Halachah. For example, the Torah commanded us to wipe out the 7 Nations, despite the fact that we as Jews had already experienced a genocidal enemy known as Amalek. Nevertheless, the obligation to wipe out the 7 Nations (as well as Amalek) stands. Would the RCA like to cut out all sections of Tanach that make us look intolerant? 

We thus respectfully call upon the authors of the statement in question to reconsider their position, in the interest of communal harmony, societal peace, and the public sanctification of God's name, which are as always the hallmarks of the Torah way of life.

The Jewish Fist Commentary: There you have it in a nutshell. The RCA is calling upon Rabbonim to alter the Halachah so that it's more palpable for goyim to digest. It's bad enough that the RCA is unwilling to abandon the American exile and change the name of their organization to the RCI ("I" for Israel). But to call for the sanctification of G-d's name while trampling upon basic Halachic truisms, is another degree of outrage.

I remind the reader that in their entire statement, the RCA did not include one Halachic source. which permits Jews to sell or rent land to non-Jews. The problem is that there are no sources. Throughout history, this issue was never contested by those who know the Halachah. You can be certain that if there was a reliable source, the RCA would have included it. 

The Halachah is clear that the status of the non-Jew (any non-Jew) in Israel is not the same as a Jew. Only within the framework of very strict and specific conditions, (which includes acceptance of tribute and servitude) may a limited number of gentiles reside in Israel under the category of ger toshav. Without this status, no gentile can even remain in the land! This crucial point has been overlooked during this public outcry. The first Halachah that the Tzfat Rabbis (and indeed all Rabbis) should have stated is that gentiles who don't meet the criteria of resident stranger cannot remain in the land. Unfortunately, only Rabbi Meir Kahane (may G-d avenge his blood!) had the courage to state this without apologetics. The whole issue involving the prohibition of selling land to non-Jews only arises in the context of the "resident stranger", who can remain in the land with strict limitations.  Obviously, the murderous, thieving, non-Noahide Arabs do not fall in this Halachic category!

The RCA purports to represent a Torah position.  It's bad enough that they lacked the courage to state the truth.  At the very least they should have remained silent. (Not a high level, to be sure, but light years ahead of where they are now.) Instead we have this tremendous chillul Hashem that will never go away. It doesn't matter that the RCA presented their objections "respectfully" and at least superficially with respect for the Rabbis in question. That was all a veneer. They threw mud at the handful of Rabbis who had the courage to state the Halachic truth. They threw mud at the Torah, when they twisted the Halachah and declared that the impure was pure. Given the prominence of the RCA, another sin they can add to the list, is that they did it in front of the goyim. 

We can learn two important lessons from this affair:

1. After 2000 years of degradation and despair at the hands of gentiles, we have whole communities of neurotic Jews today who behave like grasshoppers. Tragically, this includes learned Rabbis who make Halachic decisions on controversial issues, while ruminating about what goyim will think on the matter. As we've already seen, this is a disease that crosses oceans. In this particular case, the first grasshoppers that chirped were heard in the Holy Land.
2. Anyone who acts like a grasshopper has no business making Halachic decisions, regardless of their intellectual brilliance or Torah accomplishments. Follow the advice of Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Forefathers) carefully. Choose for yourself a rebbe (teacher), not a grasshopper.

The RCA is (still) dead. 

Shabbat Shalom! 

The RCA Is Dead (audio)

The Rabbinical Council of America is dead, as far as I'm concerned. While never a fan of the organization myself, I believe they have lost the right to refer to themselves as an orthodox one. I recorded this a week or so ago, but nothing has changed. The RCA is still the same bunch of cowards, who bent like flimsy reeds when they needed to take a stand on behalf of the Torah. Welcome to the future of "modern-orthodoxy", where men aren't men, and woman can become "Rabbis". Mark my words. This is only the beginning. The feminist perverts who masquerade under the guise of "modern-orthodoxy" are only getting started.

Blu and "Yitz" Greenberg must be shepping a lot of nachas. That should say enough.

The RCA Is Dead

The Rabbinical Council of America is dead, as far as I'm concerned. While never a fan of the organization myself, I now consider them a partner in the destruction of Halachic Judaism. I believe the RCA has lost the right to refer to themselves as an orthodox one. A recent piece in "the Jewish Week" (the only thing Jewish about the paper is the name) cited rumors that the RCA was going to rescind Avi Weiss's membership for officially recognizing Sara Hurwitz as a "Rabbah".

"This will make it clear to everyone that Sara Hurwitz is a full member of our rabbinic staff, a rabbi with the additional quality of a distinct woman’s voice," said the statement issued by Weiss' office

While I hoped it was so, I knew that it would not be.The RCA is supported and funded by many rich and powerful people many who love Avi Weiss. The script was written. Avi Weiss declared that he wouldn't ordain any more women with the title "Rabba". In return, the RCA left him alone.

The RCA must think that we are stupid. As if we didn't see what just happened. What a chillul Hashem! What cowardice in the face of such an abomination! This is a victory for Weiss, who kicked down the fence of the Torah and brought "orthodox" women into the clergy of the so-called "orthodox" camp. He needed to be cast out like a weed. Now he can smirk with satisfaction, knowing that the next generation can carry on his life's ultimate work, a commitment to pluralism and progressive ideals that have everything to do with Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem, and nothing at all to do with Torah.

Avi Weiss's activism on behalf of Jews may have been parve, ineffectual, and largely shaped both ideologically and tactically by non-Jewish ideas such as pacifism, but at least he displayed a commitment to the welfare of other Jews. That's a lot more than many other Jews did. So it makes it even more tragic that this will be his legacy. Destroyer of the mesorah, and the bridges of modesty that separate the critical roles of the sexes in perpetuating the mesorah. Unlike segregating people based on some irrelevant trait such as skin color, when it comes to yahadut, "separate but equal" is the most moral code of all. It is the sole guarantor of

The scourge of feminism that has infected large segments of the "modern-orthodox" world is as foreign to Judaism as any pagan rite. The false priests of pluralism that dress in the cloak of "modern-orthodoxy" scored a major victory. It doesn't matter that Avi Weiss said he wouldn't ordain any more Rabbah's. One Rabbah was too many, and she's still retaining her position. That's a victory for him, where I come from.

The RCA is a partner in Weiss's grotesque behavior. Shame on them. They had a chance to show that in their own way (hashkafic differences aside), they were just as committed to the mesorah as the rest of the Torah world was. Halachic Judaism was dealt a mortal blow, and they needed to take an uncompromising stand. The RCA turned it's cheek. They will ultimately pay the price for their silence. As far as I'm concerned, they have nothing to say to Jews who are committed to Torah. They should at least be honest with themselves and drop the charade. Hell, they should drop the "C" in the RCA, and merge with the conservative "Rabbinical Assembly.

Where Is The RCA?

Caution: Reading "The Jewish Week" can be hazardous to your soul. Proceed with caution. Rabbis Set To Rumble Over Rabba? - (Jewish Week Article)

A friend directed me to the above article. As a general rule, I rarely post a link to any of "The Jewish Week's" articles, which are usually a forum for federation influenced Hellenists to bash religious Jews and distort Judaism in general. Occasionally, I read it online (I would never pay a cent for that rag) to get a sense of what's going on in the world of secular American Jewry. I found this article interesting, because I have been calling on the RCA to oust Avi Weiss from their organization, due to his numerous "progressive" actions that pose a threat to Halachic Judaism. The most notable examples within the last year have entirely crossed the line. First there was his unprecedented ordaining of a woman as a "Maharat" (a "rabbi" for all practical purposes, but at the time they were still trying to insist that it wasn't the case), and more recently, when he put aside the charade and made her a full member of his synagogue's rabbinical clergy, under her new title of "Rabbah".

If what the article is positing is true, (and I hope it is) then the RCA should stop dawdling and expel him immediately, while they still retain some semblance of credibility. Avi Weiss has been barking up this feminist tree for years without any consequence. (The RCA considered throwing him out years ago, but they backed off, due to pressure from certain individuals from within the organization.) Enough is enough. Ordaining a woman as a "Rabbi" is antithetical to the most basic concepts of yahadut, and a direct assault on Halachic Judaism.

The RCA needs to follow the lead of the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah, who recently came out with a statement condemning this abomination and declaring outright that, "Any congregation with a woman in a rabbinical position of any sort cannot be considered Orthodox." (There are a great many issues that I disagree with when it comes to the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah. This is not one of them.) The RCA needs to throw him out before his contagious belief system spreads and creates another version of the heretical conservative movement. They have already waited too long.

It will speak volumes if the RCA allows Avi Weiss to remain. In my opinion, the RCA is facing a critical decision today. The Hellenists are on the march and they need to make a decision. Will they show courage and come out with an unequivocal statement fighting for Halachic Judaism even if it means that they lose the support of the more "pluralistic" members of the organization? Or will they shirk away from the issue and desecrate The Almighty's name as Halachic Judaism takes another gut shot?

Years ago, when the Lubavitcher Rebbe (of blessed memory) passed away, prominent Lubavitch personalities and organizations faced a similar moment when they neglected to condemn the heretical/idolatrous messianics in the movement, either due to similar convictions (in the majority of cases) or fear of taking an unpopular stance. As a result they lost credibility among those who have any understanding of the heresy that transpired. How the RCA responds (and silence will also constitute a response) will also resonate for years to come. The RCA needs to decide. Will they stand up for yahadut, or become partners in the continued erosion of the mesora?

Personally, I have no confidence in the RCA (or any Jewish organization for that matter). My gut tells me that they're going to bury their head in the sand and let this abomination slide. I hope they prove me wrong.