My Food Is Your Food

Well, maybe not.  One of our regional heroes is an obscure Franciscan monk in the modern lineage of St. Francis of Assisi.  The current Pope adopted his name, though like all Popes he lives in splendor.  Our regional Brother does not.  He wears a hooded brown gown.  He lives simply.  But for more than forty years he has created, headed, and expanded an agency that centralizes our reach to the city's poor.  His agency provides a small amount of child care and default housing, but its central mission has been to offer meals.  For 2022, they served more than 100,000 meals.  I had the pleasure of meeting this friar many years ago when a departing medical executive opted to have his farewell reception at the agency's dining hall.  My children's Bnai Mitzvah generated sumptuous leftovers, which I transported there the following Monday.  For the Brother to accomplish this, he needs generous partners.  No group has adopted mandatory sharing of our prosperity than our Jewish community.  As community groups are solicited to take their turns providing meals, my synagogue has three sessions scheduled in the late fall every year for decades.

While this initiative should generate overflowing support from dozens of members, it doesn't seem to.  Instead, it reinforces our congregational culture, consisting of a series of fiefdoms or cliques run by and content with its few dedicated participants.  If we have good, we need not seek more than good, that view illustrates.  We can get the food cooked and served with the people we have.  They announce from the sanctuary and newsletters a few sabbaths in advance that they could use some baked goods.  I make a contribution, Kosher and in my oven, for two of the sessions, but have never been invited to join the other ladies in the home kitchen of the chairman.  

Maybe the Brother would not want me there any more than the event chair or perhaps even our Rabbi and Rebbetzin would.  There are cultural divides, perhaps even theological ones.  When I host an event at my home, kitchen experience displayed to the max most times, my kitchen output is always plentiful and elegant.  Take as much as you want.  Since we have two Challahs for Shabbos, the guest takes one home. Understandably, the friar feels this approach detrimental.  His dining center is a place of default, not celebration.  The goal for him is part rescue of an immediate situation but also a look to a future where his current consumers can become prosperous donors, able to create, enjoy, and share their own abundance.  My food is your food, eat what you like that prevails in my dining room, does not always serve people dependent on others in the best way.  The friar limits portions.  He looks at his project as a means of temporary subsistence.  While friendships and camaraderie among regular patrons likely develop, he stops short of full satiety, fearing dependence at the expense of personal growth.

While my synagogue and I each place a high value on Kosher, that same stringency is not required for the non-Jewish residents of our city who depend on the dining center for their daily, or even periodic, lunch.  And we are told that congregational members contributing food to feed these people do not need to maintain Kosher in any way.  Much of the food is prepared in the chairwoman's kitchen.  I never inquired about its kashrut.  The food is acceptable to the recipients who need it.  Yet when I contribute, the food meets the standards of my Kosher kitchen.  Should I be willing to serve a hungry person food that I would not eat myself?  Probably not as food.  Were I to give a financial contribution, there would be no restrictions on what the recipient might opt to purchase.  As a practical matter, the mission of the assigned sessions is to provide nutrition on the terms of the recipient.  It would probably not be good congregational policy to restrict baked goods donations to those made in Kosher ovens, or even with Kosher ingredients.  My food is your food, with strings attached.  Your food is not necessarily my food.  Sometimes I am the caterer, maybe a server.  Not the diner.

Our tradition has a tale of some Smart Alec asking the sage Hillel why Hashem permitted poverty when an omnipotent God could have provided adequately for everyone.  Hillel responded that God did that so people could rise to the occasion by sharing part of their larger portion.  So that is what we do as a synagogue and I do as a peripheral volunteer for that project.  Judaism seems to prefer middles.  I bake something Kosher, varying the output.  It is always created at my peak ability.  Always something that would be a little pricey for people at economic fringes to purchase from a bakery.  Always something that I've had before, both from my kitchen and high end commercially, that I especially regarded as a treat. So I share some food, restrained by the Brother's judgment on keeping his project one of nutritional default.  But in absentia and with anonymity, I also share a piece of me.  Imagination of what to offer.  Experience as a limited foodie.  The Brother cannot restrict that.

Al Tiphrosh Min HaTzibur

"don't separate yourself from the community" Pirke Avot 2:4 הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר: אַל תִּפְרֹשׁ מִן הַצִּבּוּר.

This season we find ourselves part of a lot of communities.  I am not particularly happy with my synagogue but I am part of it. Even if blackballed from its decision tree, which seems to be the case, and a bit resentful of this impression, which also seems to be the case, I am their most astute observer and therefore assume a useful role of chronicaller or challenger, whether valued or not.

We have a political season.  A lot of people wanted my vote in the primaries, where I felt free to select my best option.  But when we select office holders, I find myself part of the Democratic community, though I was once more inclined to look at the candidates independently, even when the Republican candidate seems more capable.  And we learned when the Republicans took Hillel's guidance and refused to remove a President who shouldn't be there or approved judges who fall well short of the

Torah's description of what we should aspire to in appointing judges.  Hillel's wisdom has its dark side, as much as Federations promote it when they want donations.

I root for the Iggles and for Mizzou.  When I turn on a game, I sort of want to watch the talent.  As an easterner sitting in the low rent district at Busch Stadium, I always cheered for the late Lou Brock and Bob Gibson whose talent excelled, even though I was usually partial to the Mets or Phils when they came to town.  I like talent.  I go to the football games at West Chester University where watching the progress of the game overrides any partiality to one team or another.  But not the Iggles or Mizzou.  I am partial irrespective of performance, in large part because I see myself as belonging to the region or to imprinted affiliation. The stadium stands have enabled community.  People of all ethnicities, backgrounds, aspirations, and creeds assemble without antagonism for the unified purpose of watching our city prevail over the other city or university.

We have the right kind of communities and some deficient communities.  We also have the option of defecting, which may be best option with more frequency than Hillel would have liked.  But defections bring us to a new community with a new place to worship, a new city with new neighbors, or a new ideology with a different set of partners.  Shuffle yes, sever sometimes, go it alone rarely.

Machshava for Independence Day

Moshe Taragin: Democracy and its Demons :Thoughts Upon Democracy and Religion

https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/927500/rabbi-moshe-taragin/democracy-and-its-demons-thoughts-for-july-4-and-independence-day/

Rather interesting article in anticipation of American Independence Day written by an American expatriate who teaches in Israel, which in some ways is more of an idealized democracy than America and in other ways less so. While I may be the prototype of a democracy enthusiasts, he sees some areas that leave room for improvement.

1.Rampant Individualism, Perhaps the greatest challenge which democracy poses is the emphasis upon the individual and his liberties.

While individualism prevails and has been the one force that unleashed talent, I do not think historically it was limited to democracy as an ideology. Europeans were taking it upon themselves to explore the world or science during even the most repressive environments. People who excelled in the yeshivot were rewarded for their individual achievements. Democracy did not create this but it expanded the number of participants and the talents they brought to the table.

Americans, for all the focus on individual rights, did not neglect the collective needs, sometimes good, sometimes not. Slavery for all its evils, had an economic benefit to those not enslaved. We have investment in railroads, land grant colleges, mandated land for public schools, an interstate highway system, and the Homestead Act. We mobilize effective armies, and protect assembly rights so that people can band together to pool overlapping needs. It's not all Hillel's "if I am only for myself what am I?"

2. A Life of Rights and a Life of Duty

Again, not unique to democracy. Since this comes from Israel, this American's view of negotiation typically has the Islamic side proposing gimmees with a paucity of concessions. That's not democracy and it's not duty. "We demand ours now" is that Life of Rights, though they might argue that recovering that land is their duty.

In America we protect our rights but we also have obligations, usually imposed by law. It is my right to drive on the highways but my duty to do this safely. We had a military draft for 100 years.

We accept a duty to be non-discriminatory as our laws require. Some of us go beyond that, expanding our need to protect others. While charity is regarded as voluntary, Americans in general and Jewish Americans in particular have show ourselves mostly generous.

3. The Tyranny of Moral Relativism

This may be the Achilles Heel of democracy as we know it. Live and let live has its historical tensions, again not unique to democracy. We had Crusades and we had institutional anti-semitism in the name of absolute morality assessments in the name of the one true religion long before there were elected governments. In America we had a centuries long approach to slavery that said states could decide on their own, who am I in Massachusetts to dictate the reality in Alabama? We have that now in our abortion debates. Elective pregnancy termination is widely accepted in parts of Asia and in Canada. These people who live among us are not evil. Why not accept their belief while I adhere to mine? I observe kosher laws and shabbos which are commandments of God but have no reason to impose them on anyone else. I do not need to be armed, but maybe somebody else lives in more fear than me. I think the moose is a magnificent beast who should live the way nature intended and agree that meat should be farmed and ritually slaughtered. Others take pride in the ability to gather their own food made more certain with a rifle. All of these are moral relativism, appropriate to the political debates that we have. They are not tyranny. Absolutism creates tyranny.

Good article. Made me think about America on the Glorious 4th.

s of a Life of Duty

Bimah Me Up

With the departure of our Cantor and a relative paucity of liturgical talent amongst the regular participants, I agreed to take up some of the slots for when our hired part-time Cantor is unavailable.  Filling the schedule can be a thankless job.  The two current Gabaim have skills themselves so I assume each time they do something it is by default for not being able to secure a volunteer , or like many things it is often easier to do something yourself than to get somebody else to do it.

I did shacharit last shabbat and a long Torah reading next shabbat.   Each time I try to do something new though the effort probably goes unnoticed to the listeners.  At Kiddush I treat myself to a taste of schnapps each time I perform but that is the extent of reward and certainly not the motivation to challenge myself a little each time.  I am not sure what the motivation is.  Probably to help AKSE out when they need it and to do a part to keep it a place where people are inspired to do a little more Jewishly than they did before.

As the Rabbi does things to make it more of a Conservative shabbat worship experience with a mini-drash before each Aliyah which I think disrupts the cadence of the Torah reading and eliminates a few siddur items in the interest of boosting attendance by ending earlier, I think doing my part to make the experience more like a Hillel where participants from different places importing their own tunes and variations of trop becomes increasingly important to AKSE's shabbat morning experience.

shtick

Next shabbat the Rabbi devoted his sermon time to a discussion of the Shabboton guest's suggestions for making the shabbat service experience more of a personal connection to the worshippers.  He offered a number of suggestions regarding new tunes or discussions or acting out portions of the service by turning the Bimah into a stage.  True, the AKSE services too often come across as perfunctory with little of interest.  Their purpose is ostensibly to fulfill a religious obligation for the men, which they do.  This may be why the attendance has been lopsidedly men for my entire tenure there.  There are shabbat morning experiences that I seek out from time to time or remember fondly as destinations on a Saturday morning. Creating desire out of obligation remains a challenge since you need one or the other to assure attendance.

Beth Tfiloh gets two visits a year.  My loyalty to Hillel on Shabbat morning endures and I would leave Wilmington earlier than I needed to on a weekend to be able to make it to Shabbat morning services at the JCC of Spring Valley and its subsequent incarnations.  If there might be a common link to the places I prefer to daven it may be fulfillment of the unexpected within the familiar as one element, impeccable execution as another, and an enhanced aura of common purpose among the attendees that AKSE has never been able to achieve.  I do not recall anything approaching shtick at any of them.  Moreover, I think in many ways the decline of the USCJ experience can trace its roots to either Rabbi-generated or officer-generated surrogates to replace a diminishing capacity to deliver the formal components of the traditional service experience with the proper level of expertise.  AKSE has an audience, as does Beth Tfiloh to a large extent.  Hillel and the JCC of Spring Valley had participants.

So how might one get the unexpected amid the expected?  As a casual visit to Baltimore or Spring Valley or anyplace else, this becomes fairly straightforward.  Tunes are endemic to a congregation but differ from what I am used to each week.  Rabbi Wohlberg of Beth Tfilah and Rabbi Palavin, the final Rabbi at the JCC, had a good deal of experience crafting their messages each week.  But were it not for the preparation of Hillel, I doubt I would be able to appreciate any congregational experience, let alone most congregational experiences. Universities have a way of gathering its participants from varied places and backgrounds.  Tunes differ.  At each assembly you can expect to greet people that you did not greet the week before, either because they were not there or you were immersed in a different crowd at kiddush.  The people there were part of the same community all week long, eating dinner together in the Kosher cafeteria, fretting over common exams, checking out the girls.   While there were no sermons, conversations among college students often have substance beyond the formality of a handshake with a goot shabbos appended.  It is harder to judge Beth Tfiloh or JCC where I am a visitor but the other people are not.  At the JCC there was often a curiosity about me by those there before as drop-ins were few and I had a past there to which those remaining could connect.  My presence automatically made me a center of attention.  Not so at Beth Tfiloh where Bar Mitzvah rituals with out of town guests were the norm and attendance always huge by AKSE or Hillel standards.  In many ways I function there as a spectator, doing my best to function as a participant as well as circumstances permit.   The women's section there was always well attended, one of the few ways to assess who shows up to fulfill obligation and who takes time from other possible shabbos activities to attain what can only be attained in shul.

So where might this fit with the AKSE experience?  Balancing obligation with attractiveness does not always go well.  First, I think it would be a mistake to go down the road of the Conservatives, assuming that the people in attendance are ignorant roobs who would have no Jewish connection or knowledge were it not for their Rabbi.  I never dumb down my presentations to residents or medical students to accommodate their limited capacity.  There purpose is to elevate people to standard, whether medical trainees or Jews in transition, rather than to diminish the standard to adapt to the people.  Gimmicks have a way of doing that unless flawlessly executed and appropriate to circumstance.  That is not to say special events have no place. The Senator's visit engaged the teens present like no experience they ever had at AKSE.  It is just that they need to be done very selectively and implemented in a way that nobody would assess as amateurish or tircha d'tzibbura.  Other guests given appropriate bimah time or guests at Shabbos dinners which have been well attended could fulfill this niche.  I think having women really do the parts of the service that the Rabbi deemed acceptable would be another, something that has remained dormant for some time.  At Beth Tfiloh, Rabbi Wohlberg has decided what women are permitted to do on his Bimah and in his sanctuary.  Every time I have been there, women do those things set aside for them.

The shabbat experience does not have to take place at AKSE in its sanctuary.  My most critical comments of the Rabbis and the lay ritual leadership has been that they do not insist that the Women's Tefiloh Group make a concerted effort to attain parity in performance with the main sanctuary to the extent that their permitted content allows.  You can claim respect for female congregants but never sell that as reality outside AKSE, or even within, if excellence is not the standard in any of its subgroups.  The shabbat dinners by their attendance and flexibility offer enormous opportunities for innovation that would be tircha if done in the sanctuary during services.

Should AKSE appoint a Cruise Director?  Is the role of Rabbi one of Cruise Director?  It is one thing to have a plethora of activities to offer people, quite another to goad them into taking advantage of what is there.  In many ways the congregation's stability depends to a large extent on its inertia.  Schedules need to get filled, and they do.  Officers are selected from the Recycling Pool.  Growth and development of the people does not seem a particularly self-driven process the way it would be at a Hillel Foundation.  One very simple way to shake up services and bring people along would be to establish a rule that no individual may recycle a Torah or Haftarah reading more than two consecutive years so that everyone would be forced to prepare something that is new to them.

While congregational discussion has been set aside for this with enough heads-up notice to make it thoughtful, these type of analysis tend to be seat of the pants expression of druthers rather than careful teasing out of expected outcomes of things that might get implemented.  There is a ritual committee, now relatively diversely populated without the ideological dominance and manipulation of years past.  Not that AKSE committees of any type excel at analytical thought but ultimately this seems the best forum for alteration to a shabbos morning experience that may need only minimal tweaking so that it may proceed while keeping the process transparent and the consequences accountable.