The U.S. kosher market has become an unheralded boom for food manufacturers. Today, consumers are concerned about more than just the kosher status of their food. Over 12 million American consumers choose Kosher food products for reasons related to health, food safety, taste, vegetarianism, lactose intolerance, and other dietary restrictions. Generating over $12 billion in annual sales, the kosher food industry has become big business.
Certifying over 800,000 products produced in more than 8,500 plants located in 100 countries around the world, OU Kosher is the clear leader in the kosher food industry. As the world’s largest, most respected kosher certification agency, the OU certifies close to 70% of the kosher food sold worldwide. Increased industrialization of food production has boosted demand for kosher certification.
Foods are increasingly produced using complex processing techniques and multiple additives, all of which require kosher certification services. The OU is at the forefront of this worldwide industrialization with Rabbis who have specialized expertise in all areas of food production.
Of well over 200,000 packaged food products on U.S. supermarket shelves, the OU kosher symbol is found on close to 70% of all products combined. OU certified companies know that having the OU symbol on their products immediately and universally enhances their marketability. That’s why they choose the OU.
Will OU Oust Shuls With Women Clergy?
Concern whether visits to four congregations will lead to compromise or punitive action.
Less than three months after the
Orthodox Union issued a halachic prohibition against women serving in
clerical roles, three leaders of the influential national body have
begun meeting with the rabbis of the four OU-member synagogues in the
U.S. that employ women clergy, The Jewish Week has learned.
Some
believe the visits may be a first step toward punitive measures, and
possible expulsion, for congregations that do not conform with the OU’s
decision.
“It’s a threat, no question,” said Rabbi
Shmuel Herzfeld of Ohev Sholom, also known as The National Synagogue, in
Washington, D.C., which employs Maharat Ruth Friedman. (Maharat is a
Hebrew acronym that translates as female leader of Jewish law,
spirituality and Torah.)
But according to OU sources, the goal of the
visits of OU’s executive vice president, Allen Fagin, its president,
Mark Bane, and past president Martin Nachimson, is to look into the
policies and practices related to women of the four congregations in
question, and to report back to the OU board.
The OU, which serves some several
hundred Modern Orthodox congregations around the country, hopes to find a
path to ensure that the congregations remain member synagogues without
violating its prohibition.
The four congregations — the Hebrew Institute
of Riverdale, Beth Sholom in Potomac, Md., Bnai David-Judea in Los
Angeles and Ohev Sholom in Washington, D.C. — have women with various
titles to indicate they serve rabbinic functions.
In February, the OU released a 17-page report
by a nine-rabbi panel that praised advanced Torah study and teaching for
women but stated that women cannot have the title of rabbi or the
status of a clergy member.
The rabbinic statement, endorsed in an
accompanying OU report, said that women in the clergy was contrary to
the “halachic ethos,” and not in keeping with traditional Jewish gender
roles.
Those close to the discussions, which are
private and at an early stage, say some OU leaders want to “nip the
problem in the bud” by removing the four synagogues from membership now
rather than waiting until there are more congregations employing women
in clerical positions. The belief is that a decisive action will
dissuade other congregations from contemplating such a move.
Others within the OU camp believe its leaders
hope compromises can be reached — such as changing the titles, roles or
practices of the women clergy — that would allow the synagogues to
retain their OU status. While the primary role of the women in question
is Torah education and pastoral counseling, which is not only
permissible but exemplary according to the OU report, the chief sticking
point appears to be the women’s titles.
Any designation suggesting a rabbinic role,
such as maharat, rabba (or assistant rabba) or rabbanit, is problematic,
according to the OU, not so much for the title itself but for the
context of how it is publicized and what it connotes in terms of duties
and responsibilities. The real problem for the OU is if a woman is seen
to be on a rabbinic track rather than an educational or pastoral role
model.
The formation of the rabbinic panel, which was
charged with determining whether it is acceptable under halacha (Jewish
law) to “employ a woman in a rabbinic function,” was prompted by what
the OU’s Fagin described to The Jewish Week in February as “an
acceleration of shuls that hired or contemplated hiring female clergy in
the last several years.”
Rabbi Herzfeld noted that in a survey taken by
his D.C. synagogue among its membership of 400 families, 82 percent
agreed that female spiritual leadership enhances members’ spiritual
connection with Judaism; less than 4 percent disagreed.
Further, 90 percent felt the Orthodox community should have female spiritual leadership, and less than 2 percent disagreed.
Perhaps most significant, more than 68 percent
of the respondents — about 37 percent of the membership — said that
“the OU statement about female clergy makes me less likely to affiliate
with Orthodox groups in other contexts.” Sixteen percent disagreed with
that statement. And almost three-quarters of the members polled said the
OU statement about female clergy “diminished” their view of Orthodox
Judaism.
“That’s what makes me most sad,” said Rabbi
Herzfeld, who is scheduled to meet, along with Maharat Friedman, with
the three OU leaders later this month. “The survey demonstrates that
this very aggressive position of the OU is causing people to be less
likely to affiliate Orthodox.
“Many of our congregants,” he said, “and
especially the younger ones, may conclude: ‘If this is Orthodoxy, I
don’t want any part of it.’”
Traditionalists might well counter that if a synagogue permits women clergy, it’s not really Orthodoxy.
Jonathan Sarna, professor of American Jewish
history at Brandeis University, put the issue in historical context,
noting that “women’s issues have become defining ones for a Jewish
religious movement. This has a long history — first, Orthodox debated
the size and placement of the mechitza, then the question of mixed
seating itself became a hotly debated issue, and now women clergy.”
The problem with making women clergy the
dividing line between Orthodoxy and the other denominations, according
to Sarna (whose daughter, Leah, is a student at Yeshivat Maharat), is
three-fold: Orthodoxy has trained a significant number of well-educated
women, some of whom are less willing to automatically accept
interpretations of male rabbinic leaders on a given issue; the Orthodox
movement has “greatly benefited from being inclusive” so that “some in
the OU understand they are playing with fire when they start talking
about expelling congregations over this issue”; and “women Orthodox
clergy are becoming more and more prevalent in Israel,” where “the title
of choice” has become rabbanit.
Sarna observed that as women clergy become
increasingly accepted in Israel, “one suspects that the opposition in
America will decline. But in the short term, some at the OU believe they
can still stamp out the trend toward women clergy.”
It’s not hard to imagine a divide within
Modern Orthodoxy on the issue of women’s ritual roles, but as Sarna
points out: “The question that Orthodox leaders have to ask themselves
is whether such a division would ultimately strengthen Orthodoxy in
America or weaken it.”
For now, the OU leaders are set to hold
meetings in the next week with the rabbinic team at Hebrew Institute of
Riverdale, which is led by Rabbi Steven Exler and includes three women
(full disclosure: I am a member there), and with Rabbi Nissan Antine of
Beth Sholom in Potomac, Md., where Maharat Hadas Fruchter is assistant
spiritual leader.
Rabba Sara Hurwitz, dean of Yeshivat Maharat,
where each of the women at the four congregations received ordination,
said she was pleased to learn the OU is “finally meeting a few of our
graduates,” and noted that five more women will be ordained there next
month. Ariel Groveman Weiner, chair of the board of the women’s yeshiva,
said she was certain the OU leaders will hear “what Yeshivat Maharat
knows to be true — that Orthodox female clergy are deeply embedded and
respected, and have raised the level of Jewish commitment, engagement
and connection in the communities they serve.”
The OU leaders met in Los Angeles in recent
days with Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky of Bnai David-Judea, where Rabbanit
Alissa Thomas-Newborn serves.
The rabbis in question appear to want to
remain within the OU, among whose many programs include the National
Conference of Synagogue Youth (NCSY), popular with teens, and Yachad,
which offers a range of inclusion activities for children and adults
with disabilities.
But the rabbis also believe that having women clergy enhances Orthodox Jewish life.
In an Opinion piece in The Jewish Week in
February, in response to the OU rabbinic statement, Rabbi Kanefsky
described it as “a leadership error of historic proportions.” He wrote:
“I do not know what action the OU will take against us. But I do know
that we will be strong, and that we will be resolute, because that’s
what you do when you are right … [and] your driving value is the service
of God and of the Jewish people.”
Gary@jewishweek.org
This had nothing to do with religiosity. Some ultra-orthodox rabbis are threatened by change, nothing more, nothing less. If women serving as rabbis enhance the religious experience of their congregants, they should be embraced in the rabbinical role. If synogogues were to respond to the question "Why are we here?" with "We are here for our congregants," this would be a no-brainer.
ReplyDelete>Rabbi Herzfeld noted that in a survey taken by his D.C. synagogue
ReplyDeleteYeah, but no. If we were to take a survey amongst all America Jews we'd find that Shabbos, kashrus and taharas mishpacha are optional and don't need to be observed to be a good Jew. Halacha is not determined by surveys.
Perhaps ocassionally, Halacha needs to change with the times.
ReplyDelete