Religion - Reform Denomination
Reform Judaism is an international branch
of Judaism and the largest in North America. It is characterized by its
liberal beliefs:
* an individual's personal autonomy overrides traditional Jewish law and
custom; the individual decides which Jewish practices, if any, to adopt
as binding,
* A modern culture is embraced,
* both traditional rabbinic modes of study and less traditional textual
analysis are valid ways to learn about the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic
literature,
* Jewish principles of faith are taught via non-religious methods, it is
the individual who decides which beliefs, if any, to adopt.
It may be referred to as Progressive Judaism, while in the U.K. Reform
Judaism and Liberal Judaism together make up Progressive Judaism.
Origin of Reform Judaism in the 1800s
In response to Haskalah and the emancipation, elements within German
Jewry sought to reform Jewish belief and practice. In light of modern
scholarship, they denied divine authorship of the Torah, declared only
those biblical laws that are easily understood to be binding, and stated
that the rest of Halakhah (Jewish law) need no longer be viewed as
normative. Circumcision was abandoned, rabbis wore vestments modeled
after Protestant ministers, and instrumental accompaniment --- banned by
Halakhah in Jewish Sabbath worship --- reappeared in Reform synagogues,
most often in the form of a pipe organ, to model what appeared in
churches. The traditional Hebrew prayer book (the Siddur) was replaced
with a German text which truncated or altogether excised some parts of
the traditional service. Reform Synagogues began to be called Temples, a
term reserved in more traditional Judaism for the Temple in Jerusalem.
The practice of Kashrut (keeping kosher) was abandoned. The early Reform
movement renounced Zionism and declared Germany to be its new Zion. This
anti-Zionist view is no longer held; see below.
Early Reform Judaism, in order to assimilate more into European culture,
held that Judaism was no more a peoplehood, but was only a religion.
This was because holding Judaism as a culture and peoplehood prevented
Reform Jews from being ordinary citizens in their host nation. Making
Judaism only a religion allowed them to announce that their host nation
was their fatherland and its non-Jewish citizens their brethren. This
also meant that other Jews elsewhere were no longer considered brethren,
and that Zionism was denounced for it could raise accusations of dual
loyalty against Reform Jews. This is no longer part of Reform Judaism,
and today, peoplehood and Zionism is a primary component of Reform
Judaism.
One of the most important figures in the history of Reform Judaism is
the radical reformer Samuel Holdheim.
Classic German Reform prayer services
The Reform movement in its earlier stages involved sweeping changes in
public worship, in the direction of rendering them more like what could
be found in services of Protestant Christians. With this in view, the
length of the services was reduced by omitting certain parts of the
prayer-book. In addition, the piyyutim (poetical compositions written by
medieval poets or prose-writers) were curtailed.
The Reform movement gradually removed the majority of traditional
prayers from the Jewish prayer book; instead of translating the prayers
into modern German, they were usually deleted. In their place Reform
liturgists created new liturgies that had only a few paragraphs in
Hebrew, surrounded by German chorals, and occasional sermons in the
vernacular. The rite of confirmation for teenagers also was introduced,
first in the duchy of Brunswick, at the Jacobson Institute. These
measures were aimed at the esthetic regeneration of the liturgy rather
than at the principles of Jewish faith or modification of Jewish law.
The Reform movement later took on an altogether different aspect in
consequence, on the one hand, of the rise of Wissenschaft des Judentums,
or "Science of Judaism," the first-fruits of which were the
investigations of Leopold Zunz, and the advent of young rabbis who, in
addition to a thorough training in Talmudic and rabbinical literature,
had received an academic education, coming thereby under the umbrella of
German philosophic thought.
On the other hand the struggle for the political emancipation of the
Jews (Gabriel Riesser) suggested a revision of the doctrinal
enunciations concerning the Messianic nationalism of Judaism. Toward the
end of the fourth and at the beginning of the fifth decade of the
nineteenth century the yearnings, which up to that time had been rather
undefined, for a readjustment of the teachings and practices of Judaism
to the new mental and material conditions took on definiteness in the
establishment of congregations and societies such as the Temple
congregation at Hamburg and the Reform Union in Frankfurt (Main), and in
the convening of the rabbinical conferences at Brunswick (1844),
Frankfurt (1845), and Breslau (1846).
These in turn led to controversies, while the Jüdische Reform-Genossenschaft
in Berlin in its program easily outran the more conservative majority of
the rabbinical conferences. The movement may be said to have come to a
standstill in Germany with the Breslau conference (1846). The Breslau
Seminary under Zecharias Frankel (1854) was instrumental in turning the
tide into conservative or, as the party shibboleth phrased it, into
"positive historical" channels, while the governments did their utmost
to hinder a liberalization of Judaism.
Development of Reform in the United States
Arrested in Germany, the Reform movement was carried forward in the
United States. The German immigrants from 1840 to 1850 happened to be to
a certain extent composed of pupils of Leopold Stein and Joseph Aub.
These were among the first in New York (Temple Emanu-El), in Baltimore (Har
Sinai), and in Cincinnati (B'ne Yeshurun) to insist upon the change of
the services. The coming of David Einhorn, Samuel Adler, and, later, the
philosopher Samuel Hirsch gave to the Reform cause additional impetus,
while even men of more conservative temperament, like Hübsch, Jastrow,
and Szold, adopted in the main Reform principles, though in practice
they continued along somewhat less radical lines. Isaac M. Wise and
Lilienthal, too, cast their influence in favor of Reform. Felsenthal and
K. Kohler, and among American-bred rabbis Emil G. Hirsch, Sale,
Philipson, and Shulman may be mentioned among its exponents. The
Philadelphia conference (1869) and that at Pittsburgh (1885) promulgated
the principles which to a certain extent are still basic to the practice
and teachings of American Reform congregations.
Early Reform Judaism's view of Zionism
In the 1800s and very early 1900s, Reform Judaism rejected the idea that
Jews would re-create a Jewish state in their ancestral homeland. They
rejected the idea that there would ever be a personal messiah, and that
the Temple in Jerusalem would ever be rebuilt, or that one day animal
sacrifices would be re-established in a rebuilt Temple, in accord with
the Hebrew Bible.
Reform Judaism rejected the classical rabbinic teaching that the Jews
were in exile ("galut"). For reformers, dispersion of Jews among the
nations was a necessary experience in the realization and execution of
its Messianic duty. Instead, the people Israel was viewed as the
Messianic people, appointed to spread by its fortitude and loyalty the
monotheistic truth over all the earth, to be an example of rectitude to
all others. For reform Jews, all forms of Jewish law and custom were
seen as bound up with the national political conception of Israel's
destiny, and thus they are dispensable.
Reform Jews ceased to declare Jews to be in exile; for the modern Jew in
America, England, France, Germany, or Italy has no cause to feel that
the country in which he lives is for him a strange land. Many Reform
Jews went so far as to agree that prayers for the resumption of a Jewish
homeland were incompatible with desiring to be a citizen of a nation.
Thus, the Reformers implied that for a German, Frenchman, or American
Jew to pray from the original siddur was tantamount to dual loyalty, if
not outright treason.
Since the Holocaust and the establishment of the modern State of Israel,
Reform Judaism has totally repudiated anti-Zionism . All factions and
official organs of Reform Judaism are now officially Zionist.
Teachings on the Oral Law
According to traditional Judaism, God revealed His Law on Mount Sinai to
Moses in two forms, (1) the written law ("Torah shebichtav"), and (2)
the oral law ("Torah shebe'al peh"). According to some Reform Jews,
human reason alone was competent to grasp and construe all religious
truths.
This philosophy was inspired by the investigations into the historical
development of Judaism. The idea of progress, historical growth, at the
time that the young science of Judaism established the relative as
distinguished from the absolute character of Talmudism and tradition,
was central in German philosophy, more clearly in the system of Hegel.
History was proclaimed as the self-unfolding, self-revelation of God.
Revelation was a continuous process; and the history of Judaism
displayed God in the continuous act of self-revelation. Judaism itself
was under the law of growth, and an illustration thereof. The laws and
customs of the Talmudic era were interpreted as appropriate for the
Talmudic period alone; however Reform scholars held that these laws are
not an inherent or necessary part of Judaism.
This was the dilemma with which Reform theologians were confronted. This
was an inconsistency which, as long as Judaism and Law were
interchangeable and interdependent terms, was insurmountable. To meet
it, a distinction was drawn between the moral and the ceremonial laws,
though certainly the Torah nowhere indicates such distinction nor
discloses or fixes the criteria by which the difference is to be
established. God, the Law giver, clearly held the moral and the
ceremonial to be of equal weight, making both equally obligatory.
Analysis of the primitive scheme in connection with the possible
violation of the precepts, tends to prove that infractions of certain
ceremonial statutes were punished more severely than moral lapses. (See
also, the various positions within contemporary Judaism as regards the
Talmud.)
National and universal elements
The principle was not carried out consistently. Reform Judaism rejected
the Sabbath and the other Biblical holy days, and the dietary laws, as
the Torah prescribed. Were these not ceremonial? What imparted to these
a higher obligatory character?
Holdhelm, to escape this inconsistency, urged as decisive the
distinction between national and religious or universal elements. The
content of revelation was two-fold: national and universal. The former
was of temporary obligation, and with the disappearance of state and
nation the obligatory character ceased; but the universal religious
components are binding upon religious Israel. While this criterion
avoided many of the difficulties involved in the distinction between
ceremonial and moral, it was not effective in all instances. The
sacrificial scheme was religious, as Einhorn remarked when criticizing
Holdheim's thesis, and still Reform ignored its obligatory nature. Nor
could Judaism be construed as a mere religion, a faith limited by
creedal propositions.
(more to be added and edited.)
Timeline
1875 Reform Judaism's Hebrew Union College is founded in Cincinnati. Its
founder was Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise, the architect of American Reform
Judaism.
1885 A group of Reform rabbis adopts the Pittsburgh Platform.
1922 Reform Rabbi Stephen S. Wise establishes the Jewish Institute of
Religion in New York. It merged with Hebrew Union College in 1950. A
third center was opened in Los Angeles in 1954, and a fourth branch was
established in Jerusalem in 1963.
1937 The Central Conference of American Rabbis adopts "The Guiding
Principles of Reform Judaism", known as the Columbus Platform.
1976 On the occasion of the centennials of the Union of American Hebrew
Congregations and the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion,
the Central Conference of American Rabbis adopts "Reform Judaism: A
Centenary Perspective".
1983 The Central Conference of Reform American Rabbis formally states
that a Jewish identity can be passed down through either the mother and
the father, thereby making official what had been the state of affairs
in many Reform communities since the early twentieth century. Despite
its rejection by Conservative Judaism and Orthodox Judaism, and the
state of Israel, descent through the mother or the father becomes the
standard for North American Reform and unaffiliated Jews. This leads to
the disintegration of the inter-denominational Synagogue Council of
America.
1997 On the occasion of the centenary of the first World Zionist
Congress, the Central Conference of American Rabbis adopts the Miami
Platform, dedicated to the relationship between Reform Judaism and
Zionism.
1999 The Central Conference of American Rabbis adopts "A Statement of
Principles for Reform Judaism" in Pittsburgh.
2003 The congregational arm of the Reform Movement in North America
adopts the new name "Union for Reform Judaism", replacing its previous
name "Union of American Hebrew Congregations" at its Biennial Convention
in Minneapolis, MN
Reform Jewish theology today
Rabbi W. Gunther Plaut writes "there is no such thing as a Jewish
theological principle, policy, or doctrine." This is because Reform
Judaism affirms "the fundamental principle of Liberalism: that the
individual will approach this body of mitzvot and minhagim in the spirit
of freedom and choice. Traditionally Israel started with harut, the
commandment engraved upon the Tablets, which then became freedom. The
Reform Jew starts with herut, the freedom to decide what will be harut -
engraved upon the personal Tablets of his life." [Bernard Martin, Ed.,
"Contemporary Reform Jewish Thought", Quadrangle Books 1968.]
Reform Judaism has always promoted theism, and monotheism in particular.
This belief is reaffirmed in its new statement of principles. However,
it also holds that personal desire is absolute; in recent decades it has
no longer asked that its adherents hold any particular beliefs. Reform
rabbis and laypeople have come to affirm various beliefs including
theism, deism, Reconstructionist naturalism, polydoxy, and non-theistic
humanism. All of these positions are considered equally valid within
Reform Judaism. The official American Reform prayerbook, "Gates of
Prayer: The New Union Prayerbook", is predominantly theistic, but also
includes a non-theistic, humanist service that omits all references to
God (pp.204-218).
The Reform movement has had a number of official platforms. The first
was the 1885 Declaration of Principles, the Pittsburgh Platform. The
next platform was written in 1937 by the Reform movement's Central
Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR). CCAR rewrote its principles in
1976 with its "Centenary Perspective" and rewrote them again in the 1999
"A Statement of Principles for Reform Judaism". While original drafts of
the 1999 statement called for Reform Jews to consider re-adopting some
traditional practices on a voluntary basis, later drafts removed most of
these suggestions. The final version is thus similar to the 1976
statement. According to CCAR, personal autonomy still has precedence
over these platforms.
Reform's position on Halakha (Jewish law) today
The classical approach of Reform Judaism was based on the views of Rabbi
Samuel Holdheim (1806-1860), leader of Reform Judaism in Germany. He
believed that Reform Judaism should be based solely upon monotheism.
Almost everything connected with Jewish ritual law and custom was of the
ancient past, and thus no longer appropriate for Jews to follow in the
modern era. This approach was the dominant form of Reform Judaism from
its creation until the 1940s. Since the 1940s the American Reform
movement has slowly begun distancing itself from its previous stances.
Many Reform Jews now go to Temples on Saturday, many have more Hebrew in
their religious services, and many are incorporating more aspects laws
and customs, in a selective fashion, into their lives. This is a
disintegration of the original reform position in favor of more
traditional Judaism.
Even those in the traditionalist wing of Reform Judaism still accept the
primary principle of classical Reform: personal autonomy has precedence
over Jewish tradition; halakha has no binding authority to Reform
rabbis. The difference between the classical Reformers and the Reform
traditionalists is that the traditionalists feel that the default
position towards choosing to follow any particular practice should be
one of acceptance, rather than rejection. While only representing a
minority of the movement, this group has influenced the new Reform
statement of principles, which states that "We are committed to the
ongoing study of the whole array of mitzvot and to the fulfillment of
those that address us as individuals and as a community."
Currently, then, some Reform rabbis promote following elements of
halakha, and belief in many parts of classical Jewish theology, while
others actively discourage adopting Orthodox practices or beliefs,
because they feel that this is not in the tradition of the Reform
movement. Both encouraging or discouraging practices stipulated by
halakha are considered acceptable positions within Reform. (See also,
the various positions within contemporary Judaism as regards Halakha.)
Jewish identity
Despite a 1973 Central Conference of American Rabbis resolution
recommending otherwise, CCAR allows its rabbis to officiate at
interreligious marriages. Recent surveys by the Rabbinic Center for
Research and Counseling show that 40% of CCAR Reform rabbis now perform
some form of intermarriages. This is an important consideration for many
Reform Jews, since according to a recent survey, 53% of Reform Jews
intermarry. [Gordon and Horowitz] However, the great majority of Reform
rabbis will only officiate at intermarriages where both the Jewish and
the non-Jewish spouse agree to maintain a Jewish home, and to raise the
children as Jewish. It is not clear what the direct impact was of the
1973 decision, since years before the decision some Reform rabbis had
already been officiating at intermarriages. It is in fact more likely
that the 1973 decision was more a result of pressure from the greater
reform laity than an actual philosophical evolution in reform doctrine.
A recent comprehensive survey of the American Jewish population [Gordon
and Horowitz] reveals the overwhelming trend towards assimilation in
Reform Jewry. The study demonstrates that out of a sample of 100 Reform
Jews in America, within two generations this sample population dwindles
to 51 Jews, within three generations to 26 Jews, and within four
generations to 13 Jewish descendants. Comparing this with statistics
from various branches of Orthodox Judaism, where within four generations
100 Jews lead to between 346 to 2588 Jewish descendants. This has given
rise to both internal and external criticism of Reform Judaism as a
movement whose demographic future is questionable.
American Reform Judaism accepts the child of one Jewish parent (father
or mother) as Jewish if the parents raise the child as a Jew by Reform
standards. Gentiles may serve on Temple committees, and may count as
full members of the movement. "In many congregations...non-Jewish
choristers and soloists have occupied positions which seemed to make
them into shelichei tsibbur [cantors, leaders of prayer services]."
Various Reform teshuvot (e.g. "Gentile Participation in Synagogue Ritual
5754.5") offer non-binding guidance limiting the role of gentiles in
Reform prayer service, but local lay and rabbinic leadership have no
obligation to accept this recommendation. Thus, 88% of Reform Temples
allow gentiles to be synagogue members if they are married to Jews; 87%
of Reform Temples allow gentiles to serve on synagogue committees, 22%
of Reform Temples allow gentiles to have an aliyah to the Torah. [Survey
conducted by the Commission on Reform Jewish Outreach, see Wertheimer
1993].
In contrast, some branches of Reform/Progressive Judaism outside the
United States rejects patrilineal descent and intermarriage, and does
not allow gentiles to lead prayers in Jewish prayer services, have an
aliyah, or count as synagogue members.
A recent trend is an increase in the number of Reform congregations that
are accepting of openly gay and lesbian members and clergy.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Judaism
Back to Religion
|
|
