Can A
Reconstructionis
Rabbi
Go 'lb° ?
A radical feminist rabbinical student's views call
into question how a movement with no absolute
boundaries deals with limits
GARY ROSENBLATT
Editor
T
he Reconstructionist Rabbinical
College has decided not to take ac-
tion against Jane Litman, a fourth
year rabbinical student whose radical
feminist beliefs allegedly have included a
form of idol worship.
The seemingly bizarre case has attracted
a good bit of attention, perhaps in part
because it raises issues as to what are the
boundaries, if any, of religious beliefs, and
how are they determined, within Recon-
structionist Judaism.
Founded by Mordecai Kaplan in 1934,
Reconstructionism asserts that Judaism is
a civilization created by Jewish people in
history. Thus, Jews should have freedom
and variety to work out their religious
practices.
At present, there are some 60
Reconstructionist congregations in the
U.S., and approximately 60 students cur-
rently in the rabbinical school, about even-
ly divided between men and women.
Leaders of the Reconstructionist move-
ment take pride in the fact that they are
often on the cutting edge of Jewish ritual
and practice, acknowledging that this
sense of experimentation sometimes
causes problems. The Litman controversy
is a case in point.
A memo from the Reconstructionist
Rabbinical College (RRC) faculty in
Philadelphia sent to alumni around the
country this spring sought to explain "a
48
Friday, May 29, 1987
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
difficult and painful episode in the history
of our institution," precipitated by an
article in the December 4, 1986 issue of the
Jewish Advocate in Boston. The article in-
cluded an interview with Litman, 31, who
is quoted as saying that she has been ac-
cused of idolatry for making statues of
Asherah, a Canaanite goddess, as part of
an effort to "dig up women's spiritual prac-
tices from the past and see what resonates.
"I can distinguish between worshipping
a statue and worshipping the energy. I see
no conflict between that and monotheism,"
she is quoted as saying. The article went
on to elaborate on Litman's feminist views,
which she said often clashed with the sex-
ism that she finds prevalent in Judaism.
She is also quoted as calling the Talmud
and Halacha "repulsive."
In a subsequent letter to the editor, Lit-
man said she was "appalled and horrified"
by the story, charging that her comments
were "taken so far out of context as to
represent a complete distortion of my
views and opinions?' The Advocate stuck
by its story, noting that "it is unfortunate
that individuals who later regret making
on-the-record statements to journalists feel
they have no recourse but to fall back on
claims of being victimized by insensitive
reporters."
But the matter did not end there.
Negative feedback from the original arti-
cle led to a full-scale inquiry on February
6 by the faculty of the Reconstructionist
Rabbinical College (RRC). According to the
February 20 memo, "after lengthy conver-
-
sation with Ms. Litman, the faculty ac-
cepted her statement that the interview
contained serious distortions of her views
and practices. Ms. Litman emphatically
states that she neither makes nor worships
idols, nor does she use them in any public
devotional context. Her supposed com-
ments concerning the Talmud were taken
entirely out of context; the word 'repulsive'
was used regarding restrictions of the
rights of the disabled as recorded in the
Talmud, not at all regarding the Talmud or
the rabbinic tradition as a whole."
The memo goes on to say that had the
faculty "found the statements printed in
the original interview to have been a true
reflection of Ms. Litman's views, it would
have been unable to graduate her as a rab-
bi. The faculty states unequivocally that
it believes the invocation of pagan deities,
male or female, to stand outside the
bounds of Judaism as it has historically
developed. It similarly considers the use of
plastic or pictorial imagery in a devotional
context to be regressive rather than pro-
gressive in the development of Judaism
and sees no place for it within Reconstruc-
tionism. The process of defining limits
must regularly proceed simultaneously
with our efforts to expand our horizons."
Litman, who also calls herself "Lit-
woman," has long been outspoken in her
radical feminist views. An article she wrote
several years ago in Lillith, the Jewish
feminist magazine, revolved around an in-
cident in Mea Shearim, an ultra-Orthodox
part of Jerusalem. She saw young Ortho
dox girls "pushing and elbowing each
other" to catch a glimpse of Chasidic men
dancing together — an incident that, Lit-
man wrote, "makes me burn with anger
and sick with rage."
She wrote of leaving Reform rabbinical
school, her local Hillel, and several
synagogues, including a gay congregation,
"all because of sexism." She called for
breaking the "stranglehold Orthodoxy has
on Jewish growth, especially in Israel," and
for creating a future where "we as Jews will
be an ethnic, cultural and spiritual group
within a non-threatening feminist society."
In subsequent articles for Sh'ma and a
Reconstructionist rabbinical publication
she has dealt with homosexuality in the
rabbinate as well as advocating feminist
God language. Described by several of her
teachers as a "very radical feminist," Lit-
man is considered an extremely bright and
serious woman interested in feminine im-
aging of God. "Jane believes that it is
idolatrous for Jews to only speak of God
in masculine terms," said one of her
teachers on the RRC faculty.
But while the RRC memo condemned
the use of "pagan deities" as "outside the
bounds of Judaism," it did not address
itself to the use of ancient Hebrew god-
desses, the type that Litman reportedly
dealt with.