Heightening Ideology, Diminishing Community: A Review Essay

Abstract

100 SHOFAR Winter 1994 Vol. 12, No.2 HEIGHTENING IDEOLOGY, DIMINISHING COMMUNI1Y: A REVIEW ESSAY by Chaim 1. Waxman Professor of Sociology Rutgers University The Coming Cataclysm: The Orthodox-Reform Rift and the Future of theJewish People,.by Reuven P. Bulka. Brooklyn, NY: Mosaic Press, 1984. 126 pp. One People? Tradition, Modernity, andJewish Unity, byJonathan Sacks. London: Uttman Ubrary ofJewish Civilization, 1993. 254 pp. A People Divided: Judaism in Contemporary America, by Jack Wertheimer. New York: Basic Books, 1993. 267 pp. Until recently, it seemed that American Judaism was essentially consensus-oriented, that the lines between its denominations or "branches " were more or less established organizationally, and that the ideological distinctions among them were of decreasing social significance. Within the past decade, however, the significance of religious ideology reasserted itself. One of the first to elaborate on the growing significance of the ideological divides was the Canadian Orthodox rabbi and psychologist, Reuven P. Bulka, who titled his book on the subject The Coming Cataclysm : The Orthodox-Reform Rift and the Future of the JeWish People. Bulka's brief tract presented the problem as entirely ofReform making and emphasized their deviation from tradition, especially with respect to divorce and conversion procedures. He was so disturbed that he predicted that"if present trends remain unchecked, the policies which prevail within Reform Judaism ... can very likely result in a cataclysmic split within the North American Jewish community ... and the separation-cum-divorce" of Orthodox and Reform Judaism "into a mainstream and a,new reli- Heightening Ideology, Diminishing Community 101 gion...." Bulka's work was largely regarded as an exaggerated jeremiad which could safely be ignored, especially since it was published by a house which caters almost exclusively to the sectarian Orthodox community. Earlier this year, the erudite Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Commonwealth,Jonathan Sacks, wrote a book with essentially the same theme, One People? Tradition, Modernity, and Jewish Unity. In a much less combative style, Sacks undertakes an exhaustive exploration of approaches for, both Orthodox and Reform to adopt in order to stave off the ideological chasm which threatens the unity of the Jewish people. Even if his solutions are less than ideal, he provides penetrating analyses which are informed by incisive perspectives from the sociology of religion as well as modern Jewish thought. Most recently, Jack Wertheimer, a professor of history at the Jewish Theological Seminary ofAmerica, wrote A People Divided:Judaism in ContemporaryAmerica , a penetrating, even ifsomewhat skewed, detailed analysis of developments within American Judaism, especially during the past two decades. Wertheimer, too, sees American Judaism beset by deep strife and, although he disclaims long-term forecasts, implies that the issues are very deep and do not leave much room for optimism in terms of their resolution. One of the most fascinating aspects of the three analyses is how each of the authors sees the same issue from his own unique perspective. All see the same rift. However, Bulka sees Reform as the villain. Sacks is much less combative but asserts that on certain matters, all Orthodox are fundamentalists , implying that liberalism is the problem. Wertheimer, from the vantage point of his position at Jewish Theological Seminary, sees Conservative Judaism as "centrism," the implication being that it is "the golden median" and the Orthodox and Reform are the extremes whose mutual reactions are polarizing. Indeed, Wertheimer spends a considerable amount of time on what he perceives as the extremist tendencies in both Orthodoxy and Reform, while suggesting that Conservatism has succeeded in bridging the gap in its midst which the late Marshall Sklare analyzed, namely, that between its rabbinic seminary and its community-at-large. When I read Bulka, in 1984, I thought he was exaggerating the conflict and its implications. Just a year earlier, I had published a book on America's Jews in which I pointed to numerous signs of strength and growth. In my concluding chapter, I was critical of the sociologist Herbert Gans, who had described American Judaism as "symbolic Judaism." As a self-described "survivalist," that is, one who is committed to Jewish survival, who saw signs of strength and growth, I had difficulty accepting 102 SHOFAR Winter 1994 Vol...