Union For Reform Judaism: Serving Reform Congregations in North America
Rabbi Melanie Aron
Erev Rosh Hashanah 5764
Friday, September 26, 2003
At the upcoming biennial conference in Minneapolis this November,
it is expected that the name of our movement will be changed from
the Union of American Hebrew Congregations to the Union for
Reform Judaism. In some ways, this is a very superficial issue.
The change is being made for the sake of clarity and brand
recognition. The name Union of American Hebrew Congregations,
often called U-ac, or UAHC, is not widely recognized. I know.
I've had the experience of telling people that I am off to a
meeting of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations - and been
greeted by polite stares of incomprehension.
How did we get such a strange name anyway? And what does this
name change tell us about Jewish identity in America today?
The UAHC was formed in 1873 under the leadership of Rabbi Isaac
Meyer Wise. He envisioned one national organization for all of
American Jewry. The term Union reflected post civil war usage. In
1873 the word Hebrew was the preferred polite way of speaking
about those of the Mosaic persuasion, the word Jew being a racial
slur, not unlike the 'n' word in the 1950's. (Interestingly
United States Army and Marine dog tags use H for Hebrew and not J
for Jew to identify Jewish soldiers even today). Finally, the
UAHC was an organization of lay people and not just of rabbis,
and so the word ''congregations".
Attempts were made to change this unwieldy name beginning with
the UAHC Biennial in 1946 but it has been one misadventure after
another. The first attempt resembled our current governor's race:
everyone and their brother had an idea for the new name. In the
end, though the final tally was in favor of a change, the choice
of a new name was postponed.
In the 1950's the name change was associated with other changes
the Reform movement was going through: the introduction of more
Hebrew, the yarmulke, tallit and Bar Mitzvah, and was fought by
some of the historic classical Reform congregations.
In 1973 the handling of the issue at the Biennial was bungled.
The youth group representatives got their signals crossed and
unrolled the banners with the new name before the delegates had
voted on the proposal. Delegates felt like they were just a
rubber stamp and didn't vote for the name change.
The last attempt, at the Biennial of 1995, failed unexpectedly
after a delegate from the floor pointed out that the acronym of
the proposed new name, Union of Reform Jewish Congregations,
spelled U R J C. That was almost as problematic as the name
temporarily chosen for the national Jewish educator's
organization, now JESNA formerly the Jewish Educational Society
of the United States, J.E.S.U.S.
The new proposed name, Union for Reform Judaism, has been checked
out from every angle and enjoys widespread support. The word
union was preserved to convey the idea that in our movement
authority moves from the bottom up, unlike the Catholic Church,
for example, or even Protestant denominations, where bishops or
ad judicatories exercise authority over congregations. Reform
Judaism is who we are, and the name with which others identify
us. A byline, serving congregations in North America, lets people
know we are talking about the United States and Canada.
The switch from the word Hebrew to the word Jew is at one level
just a concession to common usage, but it also represents
something more.
Hebrew was the name used by Jews struggling for acceptance. In
the 19th century, immigrant Jews in America and Jews coming out
of the ghettoes in Europe, could not take it for granted that
they would be accepted as Americans, Germans, or Frenchmen. Jews
were viewed as foreigners, even when they had lived in the
community for centuries. Their Jewishness was something that
others felt needed to be overcome in order for them to be deemed
worthy of citizenship. This was a time when Jews sought to stress
what they shared in common with all people, when Jews were
encouraged to be "a Jew in their home, but a man on the street."
Those who have friends who are immigrants today, or whose parents
or grandparents were first generation Americans, may be able to
understand more fully the longing to fit in. It was hard to find
one's place when America was just beginning to think of itself as
a melting pot (this was way before the salad bowl image we use
today), and European countries were very homogenous in ethnicity
and religion. Being a Jew was a disability not an identity. It
wasn't something you would flout, or even speak about publicly.
Today we are in a very different situation. In recent decades, in
fact for much of most of our lifetimes, we have been
uninhibitedly Jewish. Some combination of Israel's victory in
1967, and the Black is Beautiful movement in the United States,
made us feel empowered about putting our Jewish identity forward.
We wear Jewish stars and mezuzot as jewelry, put Hanukiyot up in
public places and insist in a variety of ways, that our Jewish
identity be recognized. While Jews of the 19th century would have
been delighted to be viewed as Caucasians, I know many Jews who
look for an "other" spot on the demographic section of various
surveys, wanting to express their special identity. To me this
difference is captured by Adam Sandler singing his famous Hanukah
song, while Irving Berlin wrote "I'm Dreaming of a White
Christmas".
But there's an irony in all this Jewish pride. While we may be
much more public about being Jewish than previous generations, we
are also in many ways a lot less Jewish. Alain Finkielkraut, a
French Jew and well known journalist and political commentator
talks about this in his book "The Imaginary Jew." He notes that
while 19th century assimilating Jews were trying to prove their
humanity, the current group of Jews, whose humanity can be taken
for granted, seem to need to prove their Jewish ness.
He writes: "A Jew within, a man without; this, you will recall,
was the slogan of the first assimilation. Without always
admitting it to ourselves, we practice the same principle in
reverse; we're Jews without, for our friends, for the public, for
the outside world, while within, in the intimacy of our daily
lives, we're just like everybody else, followers of the same
styles and prey to the same fascinations, without any cultural
specificity all our own... This is Judaism reduced to self-
enunciation (expression)."
This generation of Jews, have Jewish ness, he notes, but what is
it? It's not a national identity, nor a religion. It's
perpetuated not by religious practice, nor by the building up the
homeland, but by the family, entrusted with the task of
perpetuating a sense of Jewish ness. And because it is so
intensely related to family, it becomes forever tied into our
issues of individuation and maturity, our relations with our
parents, more than to God or history. This Jewish ness is just
who we are, like having blue eyes, or being left handed, and so
we wonder why we are always being harangued to learn more about
being Jewish or to practice our Judaism in particular ways.
Finkielkraut observes in some circles a rediscovery of the charms
of tradition but notes "it is a strange mysticism where ritual is
disassociated from belief." He himself felt that he was Jewishly
possessed of "only the vaguest of reminiscences": while seeming
to others "perpetually Jewish-ly obsessed". In all of this, I
think he has hit upon something relevant to American Jews as
well.
It is a good thing that we feel more comfortable today, than one
hundred years ago, about embracing the word Jewish and about
putting ourselves forward as Jews. And the strong family ties
that we experience at the core of our Jewish identity are
important. But can family-ness be the sum total of our Jewish
identity? A generation ago, in many of our childhoods, being
Jewish was rooted in something larger -- if not in religion than
at least in an ethnic community. American Jews had Jewish
neighborhoods, Jewish secular organizations, Jewish foods, and
even a Jewish sensibility, though we often debated what exactly
that was. Our children have the dining room table: with holidays
dominated more by our family's style than Jewish tradition, and
life cycle events that take place within a circle of family and
family-like friends. So I wonder is just "being Jewish" enough
to sustain a person in the face of serious illness or death?
Does it provide meaning at times when the other things that have
dominated our lives, whether our careers or caring for our
children, recede a bit from the foreground. If all we have is
just "being Jewish", then perhaps it is not so surprising that
many go off to seek meaning in other places.
For Finkielkraut the family-ness of contemporary Jewishness was
important, he himself is the child of survivors, but it was not
enough. In his quest for Jewish meaning, Judaism became for him
"not simply a matter of expression or personal sincerity."
Writing about his own life, he notes, from my family: "I absorbed
only a droning fixation on my identity, while I came to seek ... a
spiritual dimension to my role in the course of human events."
The adoption of his own Judaism, beyond Jewishness, came as he
experienced Jewish culture that transcended family, Jewish
learning at the level of his other intellectual pursuits, and
Jewish action, as the revival of Anti-Semitism in France and
extreme anti-Zionism in the left, called him into action. Seeking
out Jewish literature, art and film, he developed what he called
Jewish memory. He became a student of Immanuel Levinas, a teacher
who straddled traditional Talmudic teaching and the western
philosophical tradition to give new life to what for him had been
"a moribund symbolic system, " and he became an activist for
Jewish issues in his role as a journalist.
This year in Minneapolis, our movement will try and answer the
question: Who are we? Our answer will be that we are the Union
for Reform Judaism, the address of a generation proud to be
Jewish, committed to non-fundamentalism in our religious outlook,
and institutionally governed by democratic principals.
For all of us sitting here tonight, Rosh Hashanah calls upon us
to answer that same question: who are we, and to consider of what
our Jewish life consists. Much may be family loyalty, the gift of
our family's affection and unique history, but how does that
relate to our commitment to the congregation, the local Jewish
community, and to Jews around the world? Someone said: "Portnoy
was more than the sum of his complaints". Can we offer our
children more than, "please- don't leave me, please don't forget
your origins?"
The Reform movement's first challenge was to prevent Jews who
were attracted to Western culture, science and philosophy, from
concluding that Judaism was something they had to abandon in
order to become a part of Europe or America. Its second
challenge, which marked the years after World War II, was to
re-embrace the particularity of Judaism, the folkways and customs
that give an emotional richness to our unique identity.
Our contemporary challenge is to remember that we are a religious
faith, providing meaning as well as community. Without reneging
on our movement's stress on intellectual honesty, we must provide
answers to the questions humans have always faced about living in
the face of death and about understanding in what way our life
matters. Preparing for the class I will teach this fall on Reform
Judaism, I was struck by the majesty of classical Reform. For all
its faults, for all that we have moved beyond its need to be
acceptable to others, it insisted on facing honestly and in a way
that was congruent with the rest of our lives, life's most
difficult questions. Our movement today must do no less.
We have not always been called Jews. At first, in Biblical times
we called ourselves and were called by others Ivrim, from the
word la-avor to cross over, the ones from over there, the
outsiders. Later we called ourselves B'nai Yisrael, the children
of Yisrael, a name given to Jacob after he struggled with an
angel, which the Torah translates: "for you have striven with God
and with man and survived". The term, Yehudi, Jew comes from the
tribe Judah, descendents of Jacob's fourth son named by his
mother Leah: "This time, I will praise God. "
The term Jew is rarely used in pre-exilic writings except by
Jeremiah. One use is in the well known Haftorah reading in which
Jeremiah is purchasing land in Anatot on the eve of the massive
attack of the Babylonians. In the presence of all the Yehudim,
Jews, at this most discouraging moment in Jewish history, he
writes up a deed: " For thus says the Eternal God of Hosts, the
God of Israel: houses, fields and vineyards shall again be
purchased in this land." Yehudim, Jews, are those who, in the
face of disaster, continue to hope and work for the future.
The word Yehudim is used once again when Jeremiah chastises the
people for failing to allow their slaves to go free in the
seventh year. He reminds them of the commandments of the Torah,
to do justice, and remember that you were slaves in the land of
Egypt. Yehudim, Jews, are those who are called upon to heed the
voice of conscience.
Jew became a common term only with the return from Babylonian
Exile, a turning point in Jewish history. That post exilic period
was a Jewish renaissance, a time when being Jewish began to mean
something different and grander than it had ever meant before,
when Judaism became a religion and not just a nationality.
May the choice of a new name for our movement usher in a similar
period of renewal for our community and for each of us. May the
name Jew be recited with pride and may it hold great meaning for
us. Descendents of Ivrim, those willing to stand alone, and of
B'nai Yisrael, God wrestlers, may we figure out what it means for
us to be Yehudim, Jews, preservers of hope and of conscience.