The Emergence
of Modern Denominationalism II
The development of
Orthodox, Conservative, and Reconstructionist Judaism
By Louis Jacobs
The following article is reprinted with permission from The
Jewish Religion: A Companion, published by Oxford University Press.
The reaction to Reform by Orthodox took two different forms.
In the first, the Orthodox denied that the West had anything of real value to
teach the Jews. Only in external matters of little ultimate consequence was the
Jew obliged to confirm to Western mores. Spiritual needs could be catered for
entirely adequately by the rich tradition Jews had inherited. The Hasidic
movement, which arose in eastern Europe in the eighteenth century, went its own
way, in any event, concerned solely with the joy of drawing nearer to God. The
Mitnaggedim, the traditionalist opponents of Hasidism, also pursued their own
path, establishing Yeshivot, schools of Talmudic learning, into which were
introduced the ideals of highly individualistic, moralistic Musar movement with
its stress on self-improvement as the goal of Jewish life.
A different response to Reform was that of neo-Orthodoxy, founded by Samson Raphael
Hirsch of Frankfurt (1808-88). Hirsch advocated total loyalty to the Torah in
its traditional formulation, but recognized that the Jew could gain much from
than appreciation of the values of Western civilization. For neo-Orthodoxy,
there was no need for the believing Jews either to opt out of Western culture,
as the other traditionalists advocated, or to surrender any practices of the
Torah, which, for neo-Orthodox were divinely ordained and hence immutable. The
neo-Orthodox were to be found occupying positions in the highest echelons of
Western society—as university professors, physicians, bankers, writers,
musicians, scientists, and businessmen no different in dress and in many of
their ideas from their Gentile friends and neighbors yet staunchly and proudly
adhering to the Orthodox way of life in all its details.
The emergence of Nazism in Germany and the Holocaust which
followed led many of the erstwhile followers of Hirsch to become thoroughly
disillusioned with the master’s high regard for German culture. A significant
number began to argue that Hirsch did not advocate neo-Orthodoxy as in any way
an ideal but only as a means of halting the drift towards assimilation and
Reform, in which, they claimed, it was in any event unsuccessful. Consequently,
many of them preferred to embrace Hasidism or to enter the Yeshiva world with
its basic indifference to the modern world and its values. The movement known
as Modern Orthodoxy, however, in the USA, has an ideal not very different from
that of Hirsch’s neo-Orthodoxy.
A third religious movement, Conservative
Judaism—particularly strong in the USA but with adherents in other parts of the
world (in Israel and in England this form is known as the Masorti
(“traditional”) movement)—seeks a balance between Orthodoxy and Reform, taking
issue with Orthodoxy in its theory and with Reform in its practice. Conservative
Judaism affirms the validity of traditional observances, accepting the
authority of Halakhah, yet more open to change than Orthodoxy. Conservative
Judaism maintains that historical investigation has exposed inadequacies in
Orthodox theory. The Torah, on this view, has now to be seen not as a single
entity revealed by God at one time in its entirety, but as the product of the
historical experiences of the Jewish people over the ages in their loving quest
for God. In the Conservative view, Jewish observances are binding on the Jew
because they are the means by which he gives expression to his religious life.
Divine inspiration is seen in a dynamic way; a human element is always present
to understand and cooperate with the divine. On this view, God did not only
give the Torah to Israel but through Israel. Accordingly, the
devout Jew can allow himself to be completely open on the question of origins;
this is a matter of scholarship, not of faith. But it is not origins which
matter for religion. What matters is the development of ideas and institutions
so as to serve the Jewish quest for God. For instance, the Conservative Jew is
not disturbed by the suggestion that the dietary laws may have had their origin
in primitive taboos, nor that the Sabbath may have originated in ancient
Babylon. The fact is that the dietary laws and the Sabbath have become powerful
vehicles for Jewish survival and for the holy living that is the aim of such
survival.
An offshoot of Conservative Judaism in the USA is
Reconstructionism, which, as its name implies, seeks to structure afresh Jewish
life so as to embrace other aspects of Judaism as well as the religious. In the
expression of its founder, Mordecai Kaplan, Judaism is not only a religion but
a religious civilization. Reconstructionism generally has a naturalistic view
of religion itself in which God is not a Person but the “power that makes for
salvation.”
If Judaism is thought of as a triad consisting of God,
Israel, and Torah, than it can be said that contemporary Reform places the
emphasis on God, Orthodoxy on the Torah, and Conservative Judaism on
peoplehood, though all three movements affirm all three and it is largely a
question of where emphasis is to be placed.
Louis Jacobs, founding
rabbi of the New London Synagogue, is a renowned scholar and lecturer.
c. Louis Jacobs, 1995.
Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this
material may be stored, transmitted, retransmitted, lent, or reproduced in any
form or medium without the permission of Oxford University Press.