Friday, November 19, 2004

Letter in the Jewish Press: Homosexuality and the Jewish Community

A new letter in the Jewish Press. My remarks are on homosexuality, in regard to a recent scandal involving the Union for Traditional Judaism, the traditional wing of Conservative Judaism. They had revoked ties with a Brooklyn synagogue who had hired Rabbi Steven Greenberg, a openly gay Orthodox rabbi, to give the sermon on Rosh Hashanah.

This is an exceptionally difficult issue for an organization like UTJ and it illustrates the difficulties caused by mixing modern life with religion. UTJ has taken a firm stand against homosexual relationships, and they felt that allowing a rabbi who is open about his homosexuality to be on the pulpit was against their principles. I thought they made the right decision without causing too much carnage. My general feeling, though, is that the Jewish community must develop a policy for addressing homosexuality that does not alienate gay Jews. Homosexual relations (not homosexuality per se) are, according to a Torah, a sin, but there are far worse sins in my view, and since most Jews commit them in some form (think Lashon Hara), it seems hypocritical, and indeed, a form of copying the nations insofar as the attitude toward homosexuality has been copied from Evangelical Christianity.

Anyway, the Jewish Press has published an editorial opining that the UTJ's response wasn't strong enough.

Here is the letter:

Flawed Editorial?

In a recent editorial, you condemned the Union for Traditional Judaism as a "(watered-down) bastion of halachic rectitude" for failing to come out unequivocally enough against the Montauk Minyan`s inviting Rabbi Steven Greenberg, an openly gay Orthodox rabbi ordained at Yeshiva University, to give a sermon on Rosh Hashanah. You also decried the notion that the halachic views of one who violates a fundamental Judaic precept are deserving of respect. You even claimed that such an idea "would indeed come as news to generations of codifiers and explicators of Jewish law, spiritual giants whose priority was sanctification, not homogenization."

I could not disagree more. The UTJ response to the Montauk Minyan`s invitation to Rabbi Greenberg deserves commendation precisely because it stands in stark contrast to the scorched earth approach taken by too many rabbis and others on the hard right of the Orthodox spectrum, an approach which (wrongly) condemns homosexuality (even though the oft-quoted Vayikrah verse condemns homosexual sex, and not homosexuality per se). One need not agree with the entirety of "Trembling before G-d,” the film in which Rabbi Greenberg was featured a couple of years ago, to understand that this self-defeating approach has only driven gay people away from Judaism, rather than helped them to understand traditional Jewish views on the subject.

The UTJ did not attack Rabbi Greenberg`s character. Nor did it condemn his scholarship. It defended a principle without trying to destroy an individual who it felt did not meet its standards. The UTJ had the courage to acknowledge that which some rabbis less secure in their Judaism do not: Rabbi Greenberg deserved a chance to present his case in some forum, even if his ideas are considered by the majority of traditional leaders to be inconsistent with Halachic principles. The principle of open inquiry requires no less.

It is utterly incorrect to claim that the halachic views of one who violates a "fundamental" Judaic precept are unworthy of respect, assuming for our purposes that the invocation against homosexual sex is a fundamental Judaic precept. (My personal view is that homosexuality is very, very far down on the list on the threats we face as a people if it is on the list at all.) The Talmud, where disagreements over fundamental Jewish practices are common, is inclusive of the views of those who violated what are considered today fundamental principles. Pirkei Avot, our ethical lodestar, includes the views of heretics like Elisha ben Ahuvah. There are rabbinic figures of our own times whose opinions are properly valued though their ethics, sexual and otherwise, have been called into question.

A final point: I cannot help but note that even the UTJ makes the mistake of referring to homosexuality as a "lifestyle." This kind of terminology, by suggesting that the raison d`être for the existence of a gay person is his or her homosexuality, perpetuates the destructive approach I am talking about. The purpose of referring to homosexuality as a lifestyle is clear; by reducing a person who happens to be gay to his homosexuality alone, one can ignore the rest of the person`s attributes, those things that might endear him as a human being to one who otherwise believes that homosexuality is inconsistent with halacha. (It also begs the question of just how people who have seemingly spent little time with homosexuals know so much about the "homosexual lifestyle.")

Michael Brenner
Woodmere, NY

You can also find this letter here, at the bottom of the page. The original editorial may be found here.