Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Progressive Judaism/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on
                
Judaism
Portal | Category
Jews · Judaism · Denominations
Orthodox · Conservative · Reform
Haredi · Hasidic · Modern Orthodox
Reconstructionist · Renewal · Rabbinic
Humanistic · Karaite · Samaritanism
Jewish philosophy
Principles of faith · Minyan · Kabbalah
Noahide laws · God · Eschatology · Messiah
Chosenness · Holocaust · Halakha · Kashrut
Modesty · Tzedakah · Ethics · Mussar
Religious texts
Torah · Tanakh · Talmud · Midrash · Tosefta
Rabbinic works · Kuzari · Mishneh Torah
Tur · Shulchan Aruch · Mishnah Berurah
Ḥumash · Siddur · Piyutim · Zohar
Holy cities
Jerusalem · Safed · Hebron · Tiberias
Important figures
Abraham · Sarah · Isaac · Rebecca ·
Jacob/Israel · Rachel · Leah · Twelve Tribes · Moses
Deborah · Ruth · Solomon · David
Hillel · Shammai · Rabbi Akiva · Judah the Prince
Rav · Saadia Gaon · Rif · Rashi · Tosafists
Maimonides · Nahmanides · Yosef Karo
Jewish life cycle
Brit · Bar/Bat Mitzvah · Shidduch · Marriage
Niddah · Naming · Pidyon HaBen · Bereavement
Religious roles
Rabbi · Rebbe · Hazzan
Kohen/Priest · Mashgiach · Gabbai · Maggid
Mohel · Beth din · Rosh yeshiva
Religious Kehilla & institutions
Synagogue · Mikvah · Gemach
Religious buildings
Synagogue · Mikvah · Holy Temple / Tabernacle
Religious articles
Tallit · Tefillin · Kipa · Sefer Torah
Tzitzit · Mezuzah · Menorah · Hanukiah · Shofar
4 Species · Kittel · Gartel · Yad
Jewish prayers and services
Shema · Amidah · Aleinu · Kol Nidre
Kaddish · Hallel · Ma Tovu · Havdalah
Judaism & other religions
Christianity · Islam · "Judeo-Christian" · Others
Abrahamic faiths · Judeo-Paganism · Pluralism
Related topics
Antisemitism · Criticism
Philo-Semitism · Slavery · Yeshiva · Zionism
v • d • e

Contents

[edit] General Issues

[edit] Past/Halakhah vote not veto

Need quotes for this one - lots of places in Wikipedia claim that Reform Jews reject halakhah or don't consider themselves bound by it - that statement underestimates the role.

  • Chernick, Michael. Elu v'elu, October 30, 2006 - good block quote:

    Rabbinic Judaism should have a vote, though perhaps not a veto in the long run. To reject rabbinic Judaism would mean throwing away Hanukkah, Purim, the general framework of the prayer service that informs Gates of Prayer and Mishkan Tefillah, and lighting candles for Shabbat and yom tov to name but a few Jewish observances. Part of covenantal responsibility is responsibility to the Jewish historical experience, and rabbinic Judaism is central to that experience from at least the 8th century on, perhaps earlier. Thus, observance of mitzvot optimally starts with observance of them as they have been defined by most of Jewry for the last 1300 years. However, liberal Judaism encourages reform, and sometimes rejection, of those mitzvot that do not serve the spiritual and moral needs of its adherents.

[edit] Anachronistic usage

In several articles, pre-19th century Judaism is called Orthodox even though the term "Orthodox" did not exist until the middle of the 19th century(or later? - need to check). In the early days of the Reform movement in Judaism Jews on different sides of the debate referred to themselves as die alten(the old) and die neuen (the new) Jews. (cf. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 44). In his essay Religion allied to Progress (Die Religion im Bunde mit dem Fortschritt, 1854[1]), Samson Hirsch credits the first use of the term "Orthodox" to the reformers and makes it clear that it was initially rejected as a self-identifier:

a point of fact, it was not "Orthodox" Jews who introduced the word "orthodoxy" into Jewish discussion. It was the modern "progressive" Jews who first applied this name to "old," "backward" Jews as a derogatory term. This name was at first resented by "old" Jews. And rightly so. "Orthodox" Judaism does not know any varieties of Judaism. It conceives Judaism as one and indivisible. It does not know a Mosaic, prophetic and rabbinic Judaism, nor Orthodox and Liberal Judaism. It only knows Judaism and non-Judaism. It does not know Orthodox and Liberal Jews. It does indeed know conscientious and indifferent Jews, good Jews, bad Jews or baptised Jews; all, nevertheless, Jews with a mission which they cannot cast off. They are only distinguished accordingly as they fulfill or reject their mission....[2]

WP:NCON says that self identifying names are to be used because these are the only "verifiable" name. Anachronistic names cannot, by definition, be self-identifying because either the name itself or the associated atindividual/formal organization did not exist at that time period. Furthermore, use of "orthodox" prior to the mid 19th century is a rejected identity of traditional Jews and reflects the biases of the reformers. /* Note:additional cites might also be helpful - question: was use of orthodox rather than orthoprax an intentional statement of reformer POV? */

The same self-identifying issues apply as well to anachronistic usage of any other Jewish denomination: Progressive, Reform, Reconstructionist, Liberal, Conservative, Masorti, etc.


[edit] Denominational ownership

In more than one article material is labeled as denominational when in fact it either (a) predates the formal development of denominational identities (b) is a current shared concern of all movements or (c) is considered input in decision making for all movements (has at least a vote and sometimes more).

Revision suggestions:

  1. replace denominational claims with word "traditional" where appropriate (see above discussion of anachronistic labels)
  2. determine if denominational specific claims are shared by other denominations
    • if so, discuss as non-denominational topic (creating section if necesary)
    • if not - move to section on denominational difference
  3. if no material remaining in section on denominational differences, remove it


[edit] Template suggestions

[edit] Missing articles

[edit] Article assessments

[edit] Jewish principles of faith

This article seems slightly confused about its scope so it is a little hard to assess. On one hand it appears to be an overview of Jewish beliefs. On the other hand, it appears to be a history of formal dogmatic statements.

[edit] History of dogmatic statements assessment

[edit] Overview of Jewish belief

Most statements are unsourced

  • Tikkun Olam is buried in "Reward and Punishment" - not clear on reason - doesn't seem related to either concept. Idea dates back to Mishnah where it justified certain halakhic decisions. In middle ages (Kabbalah) seemed to pertain more to effacy of action rather than reward and punishment and explained why prayer and mitzvah can change the world. In modern thought used especially by non-orthodox Judaisms to provide theological context for ethical mitzvot (social actions, mitzvot ben adam l'havero "repair" the world). Propose as separate section?
  • Sacred texts - Acceptance of critical biblical scholarship is mentioned and belief in a human role in shaping tradition, but not historical critical school. No discussion of how different denominations juggle respect for tradition with acceptance of critical scholarship/belief in human involvement. Instead the conclusion is drawn(!) that respect for critical scholarship and human involvement means a rejection of both Oral and Written Torah.
  • God
    • Reconstructionist - eliminates God from the world and even religious discourse (God has no mind, God does not intervene, classical ideas of God rejected, etc, etc). This doesn't seem consistent with the sources listed in the JRF's on-line resource library. Is this list equating reconstructionist Judaism with the theology of Kaplan?
    • other progressive movements - no discussion of theologians important to these movements: Heschel, Buber, Rosensweig, Fackenheim, Borowitz, etc, etc. No discussion of developmental view of God concept.
    • medieval conceptions of God - Medieval views appear to be limited to Rambam and Nachmides (one mention vis a vis prayer) or completely unsourced material. No citations from either traditional sources or scholars of Rambam and Nachmides.
    • biblical and rabbinic conceptions of God - missing - given that Progressive Judaism views God concept developmentally and Reconstructionism sees each historical layer as a Jewish religious civilization with a theology in its own right - should views of God be limited to medieval use of these sources? or should it include scholarly surveys of these earlier periods?
  • reward and punishment - uncited mention of Reform and Reconstructionist views. Material seems off, again the picture seems much more complicated and needs to be integrated with holocaust theology, thinkers like Kushner (why bad things happen to good people), etc.
  • chosenness, messianic age - no citations of academic reviews of biblical, rabbinic, and medieval thought; modern thinkers limited to Rabbi Lord Jacobovitz - other thinkers missing despite significant discussion of this topic by reformers.

[edit] Minyan

[edit] Assessment

  • material that is not denominationally dependent is included under orthodoxy: customs for completing minyanim, requirements for size of minyan, prayers requiring minyanim, obligation to pray in a minyan
  • reform Jewish section mischaracterizes reform and reconstructionist attitudes towards traditional halakha - rejection instead of "past has a vote not veto" (Mordachai Kaplan). (need source for this).

[edit] Recommendations

I propose the following reorganization:

  • Minyan in bible and midrash
    • usage in Ezekiel 6:17 (check mikraot g'dolot on this verse)
    • midrash on Abraham - is this really a bubameister
    • midrash on Numbers
    • other midrash
  • Minyan in the mishnah and talmud
  • Halakhot and minhagim - combines scattered material on
    • prayers requiring minyanim
    • requirements for size of minyan
    • customs and halakhah for completing minyanim
  • Counting women in minyanim - combines scattered material on
    • halakhot and minyanim pertaining to role of women
    • changing role of women in various non-orthodox denominations
    • Orthodox reasons for not counting women
    • Orthodox alternatives to counting women, e.g. Partnership minyanim

I think this reorganization would

  • improve article flow and readability
  • make it easier to expand on and develop sections - one obvious place to put new material
  • make it easier to create main articles, e.g. Women and Tefillah (do we have such an article?)
  • better reflect denominational issues - all movements study and consider the material in the proposed halakhot and minhagim section but a lot of this material is currently in the orthodox section

[edit] Kabbalah

[edit] Assessment

  • orthodox ownership of "just" Jewish material?
    • material that is "just Jewish" or not directly related to denominational disputes is in the orthodox section - including citations from several pre-19th century rabbis
    • in several places it says "Orthodox believes" when "tradition" would have been sufficient - all movements agree that certain material is traditional - they only disagree on how it affects them now.
  • ambivalence about kabbalah: all streams of Judaism have had ambivalence about kabbalah so this issue shouldn't be split up between denominations and portrayed as a denominational difference
  • denominational differences
    • not sure what is left when we remove the discussion of ambivalence
    • there are several uncited statements about what "most" or "many" orthodox believe
    • seems to me that antagonism against and openness to kabbalah have developed simultaneously in all movements, but article implies that orthodox have always uniformly accepted kabbalah (without citation)

[edit] Recommendations

[edit] Noahide laws

  • Christianity and Idolatry: Additional material needed, including any relevant denominational differences.
  • Social Justice: Noahide laws have been discussed in connection to social justice. At least one article is available in Tikkun Olam: Social Responsibility in Jewish Thought and Law (Orthodox Forum Series). Edited by Nathan Jay Diament. (Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson, Inc, 1997).
  • Chabad: Chabad has played a prominent and even possibly initiating role in promoting the Noahide laws, seems like this story needs to be told, especially since one of its outcomes was a US Congress declaration affirming the Noahide laws. The history needs to be checked of course with proper citations.
  • Christian groups: The term "Noahide laws" is not a mainstream Christian term, but a handful of Christian groups seem to see the Noahide laws as part of their identity. Do they use the term in the Jewish way (the Jewish understanding has a rabbinic overlay on top of the biblical text)? Which groups and why? -- Web searches for Noahide laws kept bumping into pages hosted by Sabbateans and Church of Christ, among others.

[edit] Names of God in Judaism and God in Judaism

  • Minimal footnoting for a very long article
  • Little or no evidence of use of historical critical material, e.g. which names predominate in which types of Jewish literature (there is a fair bit written on this topic).
  • Customs for pronouncing name of God - claims made for Conservative and Orthodox Jews, but not for Progressive Jews. No citations.
    • What documentation exists to suppose that (a) Reform Jews are any different (b) Jews never pronounce YHWH even in academic settings (c) is it even possible to prononunce it given it has no vowel markings - in which case the discussion is moot. Needs research.
  • God in Judaism
    • has limited range of theologians and sources - Rambam, Kushner, Nachmides Gersonides, Kabbalah (type unspecified). Most of these are medieval - only one is modern.
    • no historical perspective

[edit] Jewish eschatology and Jewish messianism

  • long article with very few citations
  • Merge with Jewish messianism - why are there two separate articles?
  • Denominational differences: non of the denominations have official creeds so are denominational differences really relevant here? The Pittsburg platform of 1885 explicitly rejected "bodily ressurection"[4] - however this seems only of historical relevance. Since 1937 the CCAR platforms have refrained from making any statement negating particular messianic beliefs.
  • Messiah - seems over simplified - would benefit from study and sourcing from scholarly reviews of Jewish thought. Topics that need to be explored
    • Messianic Age vs. personal Messiah
    • Messiah in Jewish Apocalyptic literature (covered in some depth in Jewish Encyclopedia, but also has extensive scholarly literature)
    • Various conceptions of Messiah: Messiah=historical kings(Hezekiah, Alexander); Messiah=2 personal messiahs: Messiah ben Joseph + Messiah ben David - important in Kabbalah; literal vs. figurative understandings, etc.
    • Historical development: differences of opinion in rabbinic literature and medieval commentaries; varieties of viewpoints in post enlightenment era; literal vs. metaphorical understandings. Currently historical development is scant - with medieval perspectives limited to Rambam.
    • Importance of Messiah/Messianic Age relative to other Jewish issues. Seems to vary over time.
  • After-life/Olam HaBa - According to the Jewish encyclopedia article Olam HaBa has a double meaning of either Messianic Age or after life. However, the article only develops the concept of the after life. As with the discussion of "Messiah", this section also seems over-simplified and would benefit from study and sourcing from scholarly reviews of Jewish thought. Topics that need to be explored in further depth:
    • Biblical view
    • 1st/2nd century Judaism: Saducees vs. Pharasees
    • role of memory as a form of after life
    • post-medieval understandings
    • relative weight of afterlife vs. this world in Jewish thought - seems to have varied over time depending on how hopeful Jews have been about this world.
  • Messianic Age - mentioned, but not really discussed - treated as marginal, but this is problematic. It has played a key role in shaping the understanding of the relationship of both ethical and ritual mitzvot to Tikkun Olam and has been an important way for many modern Jews to remain intellectually and emotionally connected to Jewish Messianic hope.
  • Role in liturgy - also underdeveloped - sources: Elbogen, Petuchowski, Hoffman
    • trace the history of the Mechayeh haMetim clause (Elbogen?, Petuchowski?), including debates about the clause and patterns of inclusion/exclusion.
    • trace history of piutim and other Messianic insertions throughout siddur
  • Relationship to Zionism - not even mentioned

[edit] Jews as a chosen people

  • needs citations
  • huge gap: concepts of chosenness between rabbinic and modern period
  • reconstructionist - appears to downplay post Kaplan understanding
  • chosenness is not superiority - most of section devoted to relatively minor work and apologetics surrounding it. No citations for mainstream Judaism, no quotes either, despite ample sources. WP:UNDUE? move material on Kuzari and chosenness to secondary article?
  • chosenness is not racism - charges of racism not cited, explanations of why untrue/methodological problems cited from non-scholarly sources (AntiDefamation league, Gil Student) makes section seem apologetic or polemical - surely there are more scholarly sources available?
  • feminist theology and chosenness - not clear on what these sources really say - hard to tell writer's opinion from source (no citations or specific quotes) - also why are these grouped under reconstructionist - seems these thinkers are widely accepted among feminists, across denominations
  • —Preceding unsigned comment added by Egfrank (talk • contribs) 18:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Holocaust theology

  • footnotes: In particular a long list of "responses" is given without a single citation.
  • balance: orthodox and haredi thinkers are given top billing despite being little discussed or taught outside of the haredi community - on the other hand, thinkers that are highly notable and widely quoted and taught are given only brief mention or omitted entirely (Elie Weisel - Night, Victor Frankel, Arthur Cohen) Obviously the full range of responses should be discussed, but it seems that the thinkers with more exposure in the wider Jewish community and the world at large should be the focus of the article.
  • some topics missing entirely: holocaust art as theology, criticisms of holocaust theology