*************************

“Reclaiming Zionism”   
Erev Rosh Hashana 2007

This past Spring, two publications were released that challenge the meaning and value of “Zionism.” The first was a paper by Steven M Cohen and Ari Kelman, well-known Jewish social scientists. They reported that in a broad-based survey of American Jews, 82% regarded themselves as “pro-Israel” but only 28% thought of themselves as “Zionists.” While we don’t have figures from a generation ago, I suspect that for most us, in the 40 years since 1967, being “pro-Israel” also meant that we considered ourselves, at least to some extent, “Zionists.”       

In 1975, when the UN decided that Zionism was racism, our American Jewish community vigorously defended Zionism and it’s declaration that Israel is the spiritual, cultural, religious and historical home of Judaism. In the years after 1975, I and many of my colleagues spent considerable time telling both Jewish and non-Jewish groups that Zionism encompasses a wide variety of religious and national philosophies. I think it’s safe to say that by the 1990’s most of us who supported the State of Israel and her right to a safe and secure existence, would have identified ourselves as “Zionists.” So what has happened in the last 10 to 15 years?

The answer has to do with a change in our historical perspective, and a change in Mid East political reality. In years past, Zionism was justified as a national liberation movement of the Jewish People, especially after the Holocaust. In recent years, however, the romance of ‘national liberation’ has paled, in part because that is precisely the plaintive cry of the Palestinians, but also because American Jews no longer identify with liberation movements. And if we deserve the homeland because of “Jewish suffering”, can we then discount the sufferings of the Palestinians these past forty years?        

Once, the Western World viewed Middle East politics and policies as white-hated “good guys” in righteous and defensive battle against black-hated “bad guys”-- but that day is gone. Right and wrong are not so clear anymore. And increasingly American Jews identify “Zionism” with Israel’s Right Wing, whose policies we question, and the Settler movement whose theology we challenge.

The second publication this past Spring that took many of us by surprise was a book published by Avram Burg called Defeating Hitler. Actually it was not the book itself that made the news, but a long European review of it in early June, which was then piece-meal repeated in the American-Jewish press. The headlines from that review proclaimed that Burg rejected the very notion of a Jewish state, saying that Israel has lost its moral core, and has become a brutal regime sliding toward totalitarianism. Serious charges!       

Understand that Avram Burg’s book is only printed in Hebrew, and folks like you and me have little more than English translations of Hebrew reviews with which to judge it. But for all his purported explosive statements, it appears that Burg’s book is not as radical as the first reviewer would have us believe.       

Avram Burg, former Knesset speaker, former chair of the World Zionist Organization, and son of Yosef Burg, the longtime leader of Israel’s National Religious Party, first gained notoriety when in 1982 he helped lead a soldier’s revolt against the first Lebanese War. More recently, and prior to the publication of his book, he wrote a newspaper article claiming that Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank and Gaza was undermining the moral foundations of Israel.       

And because we haven’t his newest book in English, we must rely on reviews in translation to understand his criticism of Zionism and the State of Israel. Burg does have harsh words for the state of Israel. He writes that years of confrontation and fear have created a militaristic spirit and widespread contempt for the human rights of Muslim Israelis. He contends that the democratic and idealistic values of social harmony and universal justice which brought immigrants to Palestine before 1948, and drew Jews to Israel since then, have been eroded by Israel’s national priority of protecting the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Strong words yes, but I’m on his side.        

The breaking news review of Burg’s book accused him of abandoning Zionism and rejecting Israel. So of course the review made international headlines! In fact, Avram Burg has not “abandoned” Zionism nor “rejected” Israel. He does say that we can no longer afford to understand Israel as a “Jewish State”, that we need to begin thinking of it as a state of the Jewish People. Calling it, and believing it to be a “Jewish State,” promotes a single-minded, self-centered predisposition for a sectarian morality that allows for the second-class status of Palestinians (my words not his). 

       Burg writes that in identifying Israel as a “Jewish state,” we in effect say that the criteria by which the Nuremberg laws identified us for destruction, are the same criteria set by the Law of Return. Calling his book Defeating Hitler, he means that we should not allow Hitler to define Israel or its people, that Israel must rise above chauvinism and exclusivism, to become not only a just and ethical model of representative democracy in the Middle East, but a nation of Jews that will enrich the lives of all Jews, everywhere.

It is, in my opinion, a far-fetched reach for him to connect the Nuremberg Laws and the Law of Return, but I understand his point that because Israel has defined itself by its exclusionist Jewish character, it tacitly  allowed its society to be divided, not only as Israelis and Palestinians, but also as Orthodox and non-Orthodox Jews. Burg says that Zionism has become a divisive social philosophy, and thus its international tarnished image.

Because we care about and support the State of Israel, and because we want the next generation of American Jews to continue that concern and support, we must redefine what we mean by Zionism, while hoping that Israeli leadership will continue both its pursuit of a just and equitable state for all its citizens, and its support of a self-sustaining, non-belligerent Palestinian state on its borders.        

I do not believe that without Israel we cannot be authentic Jews, or cannot live authentic Jewish lives. Our American Judaism does indeed sustain itself. What we have established here is real and meaningful and fulfilling, and what we can take from connecting-with-Israel, will only enhance who we are as Jews, and how we understand and give expression to our Jewish identity.       

I am a Zionist because the State of Israel helps me to appreciate the breadth and depth of my Jewish identity. I am a Zionist because I believe that a state of the Jews is good for the Jews, and is good for the world.

I am a Zionist because throughout Jewish history, the Land of Israel has been central to the Jewish experience, because it embodies the concept of Jewish peoplehood, and because I want that land and its people to have a place in my life. And because I am a Zionist, I want us, this Temple Emanu-El congregational family, to feel more connected to that land, to that history, and to that people. And in this year of the 60^th Anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel, we have created a number of opportunities for us to celebrate and connect with Eretz Yisrael/the Land of Israel, M’dinat Yisrael/the State of Israel and Am Yisrael/the People of Israel.

In the Directory of Opportunities, on page 42 is a description of a wonderful project at Kibbutz Yahel, a Reform kibbutz north of Eilat in the Negev. JNF is partnering with Yahel to build a park at the entrance of the kibbutz, a rest and refreshment “oasis” for travelers on the main north/south route through the Negev. The Reform synagogues of metro-Detroit have pledged our combined support for the project, and our gifts to Yahel/JNF can make a real difference to the future of our kibbutz. Please look carefully at the information in the Directory of Opportunities, and help our Reform kibbutz through the JNF however you can.       

In next month’s October Bulletin, my message will be devoted to ARZA, the Association of Reform Zionists of America. ARZA’s mission is to connect Reform Jews in America with the State of Israel and with the Israeli Reform Jewish community. ARZA is the voice of the Reform Movement as we champion activities that push Israel to be a pluralistic, just and democratic Jewish state. I am a lifetime member of ARZA, and as you’ll read in your next Bulletin, I’m hoping to bring many of you into membership as well. 

Because this is Israel’s 60^th, we are developing special programming in our Religious School and with our adult Community of Learners. Of special note is a project for some of our 5^th graders who will join with 5^th graders in the Galilee for a year-long program exchange, a project which Marcia Leibson developed with the principal of the school in Nazaret Ilit.

We will bring to our adults, to our Monday night high school, Hebrew School, and Sunday morning students, a number of creative and innovative opportunities to connect to the history and the people of Israel. We’ll have a film series of my three favorite Israel films, a Shabbat afternoon study session/travelogue with Michael Leibson and me, and our Spring Scholar is a Reform activist in Israel—all of these are described in the Holiday Directory of Opportunities you received this evening. And they’ll be more opportunities, as our committees complete their planning.

Next summer we will be participating in the Federation’s Teen Mission to Israel. I would like nothing better than to take 20 or 30 of our high school students with me as we walk the ground of our history. I’ll be inviting them more directly during Monday Night School. And of course I will be leading a Temple Emanu-El two-week adult trip to Israel in April. We will arrive just as the
excitement in Israel builds for its 60^th birthday. There are still openings on our bus, and I am happy to send you information on costs and a full itinerary. I promise you that it will be a trip of a lifetime, and for those not quite sure—I’m happy to give you a list our participants from ’05, who will happily and excitedly tell you all about it!

I expect that our Jewish community will be doing a lot for this special year in Israel’s history. I already know that there will be a variety of programs offered by various Jewish institutions. Please take advantage of these opportunities for learning, enrichment and entertainment. And I’m hoping that some of the programs will focus us and challenge us to explore the many and varied meanings of “Zionism”. I was really surprised when I read last Spring that only 28% of American Jews think of themselves as “Zionists.” It seems that we have indeed “lost that lovin’ feeling,” that our romance with the pioneer-farmers who built the kibbutzim has all but disappeared into the recesses of pre-1948 history; and that the excited and enthusiastic rush that followed the ’67 Six Day War, has evaporated after 40 years of occupation.        

But the historical and political and emotional connections that tie us to the Land of Israel and its people and its struggle, are still very strong and vibrant and real. Though tempered by a generation of conflict, our commitment to the future of the Jewish State and its people is secure, as is our confidence that Israel will find a way to secure a lasting peace with her neighbors. That expectation too, is a Zionist hope.       

There is, I think, something of substance to Avram Burg’s claim that Zionism has lost its directional bearings. And it’s a message he’s been preaching for at least four years. In the summer of 2003, Avram Burg wrote in an op-ed piece: “The Zionist revolution has always rested on two pillars: a just path and an ethical leadership.” I agree that we’ve lost that path and that leadership. Burg said then, that what Israel’s leadership ought to proclaim this: “We love the entire land of our forefathers and in some other time we would have wanted to live here alone. But that will not happen. The Arabs, too, have dreams and needs.”

So I agree with Avram Burg, that it will only be when Israel and Palestine work out a recognized and secure international border, with a shared capital in Jerusalem, that Zionism can again be a revolutionary philosophy that promotes justice and equity for all who inhabit the land that God gave us.

L'shana tova

Rabbi Joseph P. Klein [rabbi@rabbiklein.com]

Temple Emanu-El
14450 W 10 Mile Rd.
Oak Park MI 48237
248-967-4020; fax 248-967-4284
www.emanuel-mich.org

*************************

What all five of these books share is that they are blunt, no-holds-barred, and angry attacks on religion, faith and belief. And I find it remarkable that they have become mainstream reading and best-sellers. One is tempted to say that this is a cultural correction to evangelical, right-wing Christianity that has for a generation claimed to speak for America. And indeed, the authors of these books say that their success shows that America is finally fed up with the consequences of believing in God. But I’m not so sure that we can judge the national mood from the New York Times Bestseller list.

A Newsweek poll last Spring claimed that 91% of Americans believe in God. Though that number is certainly exaggerated, I think it’s safe to say that three-quarters of us do, and every survey shows that Americans identify themselves as “religious” in percentages far higher than most countries. So if it’s fair to say that most of us are on “God’s side”, how do we explain the popularity of these books which are, as one reviewer said, “devoted, with sledgehammer force and angry urgency, to breaking the spell of religion.”? [Ronald Aronson, The Nation]

I read two of these books this summer—God is Not Great, and Letter to a Christian Nation, and what I found most interesting was the brash self-confidence and angry intellectual bite of Hitchens and Harris. Hitchens spends most of his book cataloguing the crimes and absurdities of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Harris is so certain of his truth, that he unilaterally declares any faith in God as “stupid.” It seemed to me that because they are so angry and perturbed by our gullible and naïve culture, they read less like intellectual scholars, and more like comic caricatures of critical thinkers. But my primary pobjection is that both of them see all religion, faith and belief as look-alike versions of a monolithic fundamentalist faith. They certainly don’t understand liberal religion in general, or Judaism in particular.

This morning we read from Genesis the story called “The Binding of Isaac.” Apparently Christopher Hitchens, in God is Not Great, How Religion Poisons Everything is unaware that we have for generations challenged and argued with this text. He writes as if his outrage is somehow revelatory. He doesn’t know that critically thinking Jews have long found it singularly upsetting. Hitchens says: “The connection between religious faith and mental disorder is . . . very ob­vious and highly unmentionable. If someone murders his children and then says that god ordered him to do it. . . or announces himself to be god's anointed, and begins stockpiling Kool-Aid and weapons and helping himself to the wives and daughters of his acolytes, we [at least] raise a skeptical eyebrow. But if these [very] things can be preached under the protection of an established religion, we are expected to take them at face value. All three monotheisms… praise Abraham for being willing to hear voices and then to take his son Isaac for a long and rather mad and gloomy walk. And then the ca­price by which his murderous hand is finally stayed, is written down as divine mercy. [p. 53]”

I don’t appreciate the smug and self-satisfied sarcasm with which this book and the others are written. It bespeaks an arrogant intellectual superiority that out-of-hand belittles believers, and can’t imagine that you or I are able to look critically at religious traditions or Biblical texts. Hitchens, for instance writes as if his clarity is revolutionary: “Thus the mildest criticism of religion is also the [most] radical and … devastating one. Religion is man-made. [10]”

Radical?, Devastating?—hardly. He goes on to speak of the absurdity of a man-made religion whose believers claim “Not just to know that god exists, [to know] that he created and supervised the whole enterprise, but also to know what ‘he’ demands of us—from our diet to our observances to our sexual morality. . . Such stupidity, combined with such pride, should be enough on its own to exclude belief from the debate.” [10]

I suppose Hitchens has some excuse in that he’s not Jewish! Because were he to understand Judaism and Jewish theology, he would appreciate that we’ve always said that we can never “know God”, that we can’t even intellectually grasp or linguistically pronounce the name of God, much less “know” anything about who or what is God. The rabbis of 2000 years ago were quick to dismiss the anthropomorphical attributes of God described in Scripture. Though the text ‘said’ God has hands and feet and eyes and ears—not really. God who is “he” and God who walks and speaks, is only for the benefit of the human reader who needs that description. The rabbis said that since God is Infinite, the finite human mind can never grasp, understand or appreciate “The Infinite One” because it is by definition beyond our mortal capacity and capability. They wrote that God placed in our hands at Sinai the necessary tools and instruction for us, on our own, to follow the right path, to do the right thing. Ever since Sinai it has been our responsibility to make sense of that instruction, to create for ourselves a systematic construct within which we may find meaning and value as Jews in covenant with God.

To Hitchens’ charge that “the mildest criticism of religion is also the [most] radical and … devastating one-- religion is man-made,” We respond: Of course it is! We have created and continue to fashion the artificial rubric of rite and ritual of “Judaism” that gives us substance and structure as Jews. Anything that we say or do or believe or think about the Infinite God is necessarily the product of our finite humanity. Like Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel’s metaphor of standing, rooted on the shore of the “known,” we can only gaze out toward the immense expanse of the infinite, forever beyond our reach. We know that that ineffable reality exists, even though from our place on the shore, it cannot be weighed or measured, known or understood. “Between the two,” he wrote, “we set up a system of references, but we can never bridge the gap. They are as far and as close to each other as calendar and time, as violin and melody.”

We affirm the truth of the rubric we call Judaism because it speaks to us, because it helps bring order and value and meaning to a disordered and increasingly chaotic world. We light candles and sing the blessing on Friday nights not because God told us to, not because God gave us those words and that melody – but because we’ve decided that lighting the candles separates the week from the Sabbath, separates us from a non-Jewish and increasingly secular community, and reminds us that rest and refreshment of soul are crucial to our personal health and well-being. And in saying or singing the blessing that of course was written by the rabbis (!), we are intimately and immediately connected to hundreds of generations past and generations future of Jewish families who have sung or recited, and are singing and reciting, those very same words.

Our Jewish Heritage is in every way our response to an ineffable, infinite God that enters our awareness only occasionally with an insistent confirming presence. At those transitory and transcendent moments of connection, I “know” that I am part of something far bigger than me and mine. And in wanting a communal and personal expression, that best affords me a tangible connection to the infinite, I choose Reform Judaism as my “system of references” as Heschel called it, because Reform Judaism best meets and satisfies my needs and beliefs.

Hitchens and Harris declare that the great and fatal flaw of religions is that since they are man-made, no one religion is better, or truer than any other. Precisely, I would tell them, and properly so-- for each of us needs to find and celebrate our own meaningful path to the infinite God. And I am not so self-assuredly confident (or religiously arrogant) as to think that there is only one covenant path to an Infinite God.

Both Hitchens and Harris castigate religions as being the source of violence, hate and war. Hitchens writes “It was never that difficult to see that religion was the cause of hatred and conflict, that its maintenance depended on ignorance and superstition. [p. 255]” While it is certainly true that religious wars and warriors are particularly dangerous because they are not only defending God, but their own eternal souls— that doesn’t at all mean that religion is the first-cause of hate, war, and violence. And these authors completely dismiss the prophetic imperative of social justice, so inherently significant to our western religions. And as Reform Jews, who so strongly define our religious identity by “doing justice, loving mercy and walking humbly with God”, this generic tar-and-feathering of faith is offensive and insulting.

But what I found really upsetting is that Hitchens and Harris declare that faith and belief are dangerous to children and other living things. Harris writes: “One of the enduring pathologies of human culture is the tendency to raise children to fear and demonize other human beings on the basis of religious faith. [p. 80]” And Hitchens says: “How can we ever know how many children had their psychological and physical lives irreparably maimed by the compulsory inculcation of faith? [p. 217]” Religion, they say, teaches vulnerable children to accept everything inside the faith without question, to and distrust, even fear, everyone and everything outside it.

For Hitchens and Harris, Dawkins and Dennett—all religions apparently look alike and sound alike. There appears to be no distinction in their minds between fundamental faiths which declare that they alone speak truth and know God, and communities like ours, which pushes its members to challenge both the traditional texts and the modern context of our Jewish Heritage. To declare that we do our children grave and debilitating harm by indoctrinating them into our faith, is to completely ignore everything that we are and we do.

Our children leave their religious school education not only with a healthy respect for their traditions, rites and rituals, but also with the expectation that we want them to challenge what we say and what we do. If our education programs, from Religious School through EMES, do anything – they encourage children and adults to take very seriously their responsibility to find and affirm truth for themselves. And though we promote and explore the wealth and richness of our own Jewish history and heritage, we are clear in declaring that there must be many paths to God. For if God is Infinite—there can be no single, finite and exclusive “way” into that covenant.

These books are overbearing in their sarcasm and unrelenting as they beat up and batter faith and belief. And in reading their books, I want only to tell these guys that what they think religion certainly is and always must be, is not at all what lives and grows and blossoms in this synagogue and among our families. On mornings like this, when it is abundantly clear that there is value and meaning and worth in the rites and rituals of our religious community, I am saddened that Hitchens and Harris and the others are so enmeshed in their own mishigas that they are utterly unable to see the power and promise of religion, faith and belief.

Shana tova

Rabbi Joseph P. Klein
Temple Emanu-El
14450 West Ten Mile Road
Oak Park, MI 48237
248-967-4020 phone
248-967-4284 fax
rabbi@rabbiklein.com

To Top

*************************

Paratactic Creation"            
Rosh Hashanah II      2007

Our Torah reading for this second day of Rosh Hashana is not
traditional. It is only our Reform machzor, Gates of Repentance, that
has decided that we will read the first chapter of Genesis on the second
day of the year! It is, nevertheless, an obvious choice!
       Our Jewish calendar declares this to be the new year of 5768.
Calculating back through Scripture, rabbinic tradition determined that
5,768 years ago Wednesday evening, God said "y'hee or-There will be
light". This then is the anniversary of creation, the birthday of the
world. What better reading from Torah could there be, but chapter one of
Genesis?!
       Though asked rhetorically, it does raise a real question! For if
it is appropriate to read about the creation story of Genesis chapter
One, then it is also appropriate to read the contradictory and competing
creation story of Genesis chapter Two! It used to be, way back when
religious school teachers really didn't want us to ask too many
questions, that we were taught that the second creation story
overlapped, and further explained the first. They were not 'competing'
you see, just another view, another version, another rendition of the
same creation. Had we really looked at the two stories, we would have
certainly concluded that with Genesis One and  Genesis Two we have
contradictory and clearly incompatible stories! What our teachers didn't
want to deal with, was the obvious problem that since they both can't be
true, one must be false-but how can there be a false story in Torah?!
       Today, we're not going to resolve the conflict. We have only one
of the versions before us, and as far as this morning is concerned,
that's all there is! But this is a new year, and you have plenty of time
to read the other story and make your own comparisons-you have a year to work on it. The question you will have to ask yourself is this: why does
Torah present us, particularly present us at its own beginning, with two
parallel and contradictory accounts of the same story, laid out in a
dynamic sequence that forces upon us this textual confrontation?!
       I would call chapter one of Genesis the "Paratactic Creation".
It means to 'move in a series, one thing or idea after another.' The
famous line from Julius Caesar, the only Latin we know: veni, vidi,
victi -- I came, I saw, I conquered" is a paratactic phrase. And now you
can use "paratactic" in casual conversations, guaranteed to impress
everyone. Chapter One of Genesis describes a paratactic creation. It is
beautifully choreographed as a cosmic dance. There is a rhythm and rhyme
to the repeated pattern and flow of images. Each day begins with the
world-forming Divine declaration: "And God said...", and then, each day
ends with the formal refrain "it was evening and it was morning." This
paratactic creation emphasizes an orderly sequence from a Divine
perspective: we see things over the shoulder of God (as it were), as God
calls into being the elements of our universe.

The orderliness of chapter one is both stylistic and conceptual:
creation advances through a series of balanced pairings, which in most
instances are binary oppositions. What am I talking about?!? God builds
by making opposites! God creates light in opposition to darkness,
separates the waters above from the waters below, splits off the realm
of earth from the realm of sea, sets luminaries to shine from above,
onto the earth below, commanding birds to fly under the surface of the
sky as the fish swim under the surface of the water.
Moving from one day to another we find dark and light, night and day,
evening and morning, water and dry land, sun and moon, grass and trees,
birds and fish, beast of the field and creeping thing of the ground, and
finally human 'he' and human 'she'. Each of these are balancing
opposites, producing different expressions in a given category of
creation.
       Even the six days themselves reflect this stylistic and
conceptual pairing: the first three days are matched with the last three
days! The origin of light on the first day parallels the appearance of
the heavenly lights on the fourth day; the separation of cosmic waters
on the second day forming sea and sky parallels the creation of the sea
creatures and the sky creatures on the fifth day; the appearance of the
earth and vegetation on the third day parallels the origins of animals
and humanity on the sixth day. One and four; two and five; three and
six. From one to the other, we move in pairs, finally arriving at the
seventh day- for which is there is no pair, no equal or opposite. There
the parallelism, and repeated commands and comments are finally focused into four verses which not only wrap it all up with a triple repetition, but carry us back to the very beginning by using certain key words: "And God completed on the seventh day the work which God made. And God ceased on the seventh day from all the work which God had made. And God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, for on it God had ceased from all the work which 'God created' to make." [Genesis 2:2-3]

This chapter is more than a grand paratactic progression, for the end
returns us exactly to where we started. "B'reshit bara elohim, In the
beginning God created..." leads us to a repeat of the words bara elohim,
"God created" with which God concludes Creation. This completed
narrative thus stands with a singular unity within the theology it
declares: God is order, and thus 'coherence' is the keynote of creation.
Everything comes into being in orderly progression, measured in a
numerically sequenced plan. The blueprint for the six days becomes the
pattern for all life thereafter-this is the model of what we've come to
call natural law. The underlying characteristic of the universe is a
directed natural law that points to a divine harmony. From its opening
words to its closing phrase we are told that this is a moral, orderly
and regulated world, one in which we are only the concluding element.
And then surprisingly, we move into chapter two which directly and
completely contradicts God's presence as ultimate organizer and
supervisor. Chapter two posits a caring but disorganized deity, an
amorphous creation, and the primary centrality not of the universal
Divine Plan, but of pleasing a single human person.

We are left to struggle with the challenge of this contradictory
introduction to Torah, which forces us to ask: Who are we in relation to
God and to God's Creation? Is there a plan to Life and Living, or must
we manage as best we can? Is God the distant, transcendent architect who orders the present and planned the future as described in chapter 1, or is God the God of chapter 2-- a more immanent, immediate presence who struggles with us, and for us, as we meet the uncertain challenges of
daily living? And aren't these questions the very issues we're supposed
to confront on these great Days of Awe?

Shana tova

Rabbi Joseph P. Klein
Temple Emanu-El
14450 West Ten Mile Road
Oak Park, MI 48237
248-967-4020 phone
248-967-4284 fax
rabbi@rabbiklein.com

To Top

*************************

"With What Gift Will You Be Remembered?"
Erev Yom Kippur 2007

In the summer of 1973 Barb and I were in the heart of Mississippi,
working at the Southeast Regional Reform summer camp. A Rabbinic student then, I was the camp program director and Barb ran the office. I
remember vividly the opening day of the first session: as cars would
drive in through the gates, the backseat doors would burst open with
eager and excited new campers-some anxiously looking for old friends,
others a bit overwhelmed by so much activity. My job was to welcome each
car, introduce myself as the Program Director, and direct them to
parking and registration.
       As I finished instructing one parent, their little boy, probably
eight or nine years old, slipped out of the car and walked up to me
saying, with a thick southern drawl "Excuse me sir-are all of these
folks Jews?"  I told him yes. "All o'them?" he asked, pointing to a
hundred or so milling parents and campers and counselors. "All of them"
I told him. "I can't believe it", he whispered to me, "I've never seen
so many Jews, all in one place."
       A few weeks into camp one of our counselors came to me with a
request. In her cabin of 14 year olds, one girl from a small town in
Tennessee has expressed her regret at not becoming Bat Mitzvah. There
was no synagogue in her town, the nearest was Knoxville a couple hours
away, and her family only went there for the High Holidays. She was a
third year camper and heard about her campmates Bat Mitzvah services.
The counselor wanted to know if we could Bat Mitzvah her here at
camp-she'd be staying through second session, so we had six weeks to
prepare.
       I met with her every day during rest hour after lunch. We
started with the Aleph-Bet, and were soon working directly on reading
the Hebrew of the portion for the last Shabbat in camp. And on that
morning she did beautifully. All of us were very proud of her. It was a
wonderful way for the camp to celebrate its last Shabbat.
       Twenty-two years later, in November of 1995 I was attending the
National Biennial of our (then) UAHC which was meeting in Atlanta. I am
always impressed by these national biennials that bring thousands of
Reform Jews together for a long weekend of speakers, classes and
congregational discussions. And I remember specifically, at that Atlanta
Convention, with well over 3000 participants, how amazing it was, that
there were all these Reform Jews in one place, and I recalled the wonder
and the wide eyes of that camper arriving at our Mississippi camp.
       And that very afternoon, a woman came up to me, and promptly
introduced herself. She was that 14 year old Bat Mitzvah student at
camp, 22 years later. Now grown, married with children, elected to the
board of her Atlanta congregation-she was a delegate at the Biennial.
She had been looking for me, assuming that I would be attending the
National Biennial. She told me that the summer of her Bat Mitzvah had
changed her Jewish life. From a marginally and quietly Jewish, little
girl from Bristol Tennessee-here she was, a representative of her
congregation at the national convention of the Reform Movement. She said
that she'd been waiting to thank me for changing her Jewish life. So
excited, she wanted her husband and kids to meet me, and was hoping that we could get together on Sunday before the biennial ended. We never did meet up and we've not spoken since. One never knows what little thing, what small gift of time or effort, will change a life. And had she not
found me in Atlanta, I would not have known what I had given her.

A few years ago a married couple came to temple for Friday services, but didn't enter the building. Neither one of them was Jewish, but they
believed that Judaism was what they wanted for themselves. Not knowing,
and somewhat fearful, of what these Jews would say to strangers, they
sat in their car, debated whether or not to go in, and eventually drove
off. They were back the next Friday night, and again sat in their car
watching folks go into the building, and they compounded their distress
as they went back and forth: 'what if we do something wrong?', but 'what
have we got to lose?', but 'what if we embarrass ourselves?' And again
they drove away. The third week, they told themselves that this was
silly. What could the Jews inside do or say that was worse than what
they were doing to themselves? So they entered the building and walked
into the sanctuary.
       Telling me their story, weeks later, they said that in an
instant, their fears vanished when they were met by two ushers in the
sanctuary. With smiles they were welcomed and given a service bulletin.
They told the ushers "this is our first time." "Then we're especially
happy to have you with us", the usher said, and added "if we can help
with questions or anything else, we'll be right here."
       A year later the couple joined Temple Emanu-El on the day of
their conversions, and have since then, they have personally welcomed
and made comfortable anyone who comes into their congregation as a
stranger. The ushers that Friday night will never know the magnitude of the impact they had on that young man and woman, or the generational
consequences of their five second smiling welcome.

Often, you never know and certainly do not plan, on changing or
transforming lives. But sometimes that is exactly what we intend to do.
When our Lech Lecha Endowment Fund first started, we told ourselves that it was vitally important to establish a self-sustaining flow of
endowment income. The tireless efforts of a few relentless leaders has
built our Lech Lecha Endowment into a million dollar fund that will put
perhaps $50,000 into this year's budget. Those of us who pledged and
gave to Lech Lecha have ensured a lasting legacy that will continue to
sustain our congregation long after we are gone. With what gift will you
be remembered here?

On Yom Kippur specifically, but throughout these ten days, our tradition and our prayerbook call for us to reflect and consider our actions of the year just past. I would put a different challenge to you tonight. Instead of looking back, regretting what you did and who you were- look ahead and ask yourself 'what will be my legacy? For what will I be remembered in my congregation?'
       We do not know, and we cannot know, the small but deeply
meaningful ways we impact others. How many of our Friday night or
Saturday morning ushers are responsible for first-time visitors becoming
long-time members? How many of our Hebrew School teachers lit an
"ah-hah" moment in the mind of a student so that letters-and-vowels-together made sense? How many of you, in merely smiling and saying hello to a stranger in the sanctuary, or showing what page we were on, changed forever that person's mind about Jews or Judaism? We do not know and we cannot know the small things that are very big things! The truth is that every time you enter this building is a gift opportunity.
       Some of us are fortunate enough to know that we make a
difference in the lives of our families and members and students. I am
privileged every May to bless our High School graduates and to hear from
them how much Temple Emanu-El has meant to them, has affected and
changed them and shaped their Jewish identity. I'm lucky in that I am
there with our kids as they enter our school at Consecration, on the
bima for Bar/Bat Mitzvah, in class and on the streets of New York with
our Confirmation students. In fact, last spring our Confirmation Class
was my first Consecration Class ten years before, and though I know
their parents were proud of them as they led their service, for me it
was wonderful beyond words. And though the rabbi is unique in who he is and what he does in the congregation-- you too can have direct and
lasting impact on our children and adults and families.
       Next Fall, a year from now, the new cantor that blesses our
Consecration Class, will later prepare them for B'nai Mitzvah, and sing
with them at Confirmation, and bless them at Graduation. The next
generation of Temple Emanu-El cantorial leadership begins with your
sustaining gift to the Norman Rose Memorial Cantor Fund. You may not be
able to endow a permanent program at temple, not all of you are able to
lead or direct our congregation on the Board of Trustees. Only a few
will become TEMTY or Brotherhood or Temple President-but your gifts of
interest and energy and involvement make things happen and do make a difference. What will your legacy be? How will you be remembered?

Of course, the prior question is 'how do you understand your
relationship to the congregation?' For some we are a "service center",
providing for their immediate Jewish needs of religious school and b'nai
mitzvah. And for them, when they no longer want or require what we
provide, they will leave the congregation because there's no reason to
pay for services they won't use.
        Some of our folks think of their membership as a religious insurance policy. Even though they no longer need us for our school or for regular worship, they will one day want clergy for weddings, and funerals. I think of both these kinds of relationships as "contract memberships", a very clearly defined business-type association for which there is an expected quid pro quo of fees paid and services rendered.
       And I'm not disparaging these "contract memberships." It's the
way things are, it brings families into the congregation, and they keep
us going. I would hope however, that yours would be a "covenant
membership." And there are plenty of models out there to emulate.
Families first join the Detroit Zoo or the D.I.A. for example, because
they want to take their children there, because the zoo or the museum is
a valuable family educational experience. And sooner than later, they
realize that these institutions deserve our support because they are
important beyond their own family needs or even participation. They are
worthy of our ongoing support because of what they provide for the
greater community, because they are cultural imperatives that ought to
be protected now and into the future.
       And if animals and art are important, entities that are outside
the immediacy of my self and soul, then how much more important is the
institution that nourishes and sustains my personal Jewish identity,
that protects and preserves Judaism and my Jewish community? I've quoted before this statement from Rabbi Alexander Schindler "The synagogue is where Jews are made, where the individual soul and the community are joined. . . All other institutions in Jewish life are created by Jews. Only the synagogue creates Jews, child by child, family by family." [UAHC Biennial 1991]

We are here today because 50 years ago, young Jewish families recognized the necessity of establishing and insuring a Reform synagogue presence in southeast Oakland County. Necessary and important for them, and for the generations that came after them. I am quite sure that they were aware that by their gift they would be remembered, that theirs was a
legacy with a life of its own. What will you leave as a legacy to your
congregation?
       Tonight our tradition and our worship call upon us to reflect
and consider who we were and how we lived this past year. I challenge
you to enter Yom Kippur with just the opposite mindset. Instead of
looking back on what might have been, what could have been- look ahead and ask yourself 'what will be my legacy? For what gift
will I be remembered in my congregation?'

Shana tova

JP Klein

To Top

*************************

To Top