The scholarly exploration of American Judaism has a legacy that extends as far as the first Jewish settlers came to the United States. Jews in the Diaspora face many issues of identity; amidst the Christian-centric, every changing American society we live in, developing our understanding of Judaism, of American Judaism in particular, is essential to our understanding of religion.
Two Orthodox scholars attempt to gain just such insight in their essays “American Judaism” by Chaim Waxman, and “The Essence of American Judaism” by Charles Liebman. Certainly, these essays explore different ideas in the same field—Waxman seeks to explain the numerous incarnations of Judaism as a religion, ethnicity, and culture, and the effect of American culture, while Liebman wrestles with the boundaries of Judaism, how it is defined, and the changes that occur among the denominations. Both authors come together in their perceived pessimistic tone and the prophecies they forecast for the future of American Jewry. Though there are some difficulties in discovering an accurate portrayal of the Jewish community in the United States, the results are well worth the effort: we see the rapidly changing nature of Judaism and religion in general when engrained with American culture.
Both authors begin by capturing a loose definition of Judaism, and explaining some of the issues involved with defining this entity. Waxman introduces a study on the Yankee City Jews of New York in an effort to show his determination to define Judaism as the Jews do.
“They did not cease to define themselves as a religioethnic group, nor proceed to become solely an ethnic group, nor seek to eliminate the ethnic component of Jewishness in order to define Jewishness as solely a matter of religion, as Reform had done” (Waxman 102).
He uses this group to make insightful generalizations about American Judaism throughout his piece. For Liebman, the task of defining American Judaism is much of what his piece comprises. He found that the defining boundaries of Judaism were dependent on whether it was defined as a religion, ethnicity, culture, even a civilization.
He further explains that in looking at American Judaism as its own ethnicity and religion that, “…there was a structure or an essence called Judaism, and the behavior or beliefs of individual Jews could be measured by the extent to which they conformed to or deviated from the norms and beliefs of Judaism” (Liebman 133). Liebman uses the similarities among denominations in Judaism as the most effective ruler for defining what Judaism is and is not.
Waxman iterates this connection between religion, ethnicity, and culture in his essay as well. In the beginning of his essay, he prefaces, “This essay goes beyond those data and examines American Jewish patterns of religious behavior as well as belief in a socio-historical context. In an effort to unravel the meaning behind these actions or convictions, I examine and interpret the various patterns, their changes over time, and their relationship with the broader patterns of religious behavior and belief within American society” (Waxman 101). This is Waxman’s way of presenting his work as a comparative study: of Judaism to other religions, of Jewish denomination to Jewish denomination, even of Jew to Jew. He studies and surveys the opinions of American Jews themselves to see how they define themselves. He notes as the writing continues that though the rituals and traditions of Judaism continue to assimilate into the daily rituals of American life, the focus on social justice and charity is foremost among all denominations and continues to be a contributing factor to the definition of American Judaism as a culture.
In Waxman’s unique perspective, he examines the threat of Americanization in Judaism. He sees the generic religion of America, surely some type of Christian hybrid, as one based on the materialistic desires of the typical American. Perhaps this materialism has spawned from the age of the American Dream where the goal was to work hard to achieve economic and social success. In post-materialist American Judaism, Waxman sees a need for spirituality. This need increases the utilization of religion among American Jews to finding meaning, fulfillment, and guidance in their lives.
Waxman believes, as Liebman does, that American Judaism continues to factionalize because of the generally held belief among Jews that they can sort of “pick and choose” what tenets of the religion they agree with and which they don’t, which traditions and rituals to follow and which to disregard. Whereas Liebman spends time sorting through the difference among denominations, Waxman discusses the subject without the aforementioned social justice has taken priority over observance among the majority of American Jews, making charity and social cohesiveness the foremost defining quality of Judaism in the United States.
Liebman attempts to capture the essence of American Judaism. The way he sees it, somewhat unlike Waxman, the difference among denominations is a major factor in contributing to the definition of American Judaism. He sees certain “markers” amongst most major Jewish organizations (such as the bar and bat mitzvah, and views on Jewish marriage) that, though sometimes ignored on an individual basis, are unanimous enough to be a true tenet of the religion. In the same way, beliefs that have become steadfast amongst certain denominations will influence the others. To illustrate this point, Liebman points out the influence of Conservative Judaism on the marriage laws of Reform Judaism.
Liebman states that “…whereas a belief in a construct called Judaism did not reduce all differences about what Judaism meant, it did dictate the nature of the debate about the legitimacy of each denomination and of decisions reached within each denomination. Furthermore, it provided a limit or boundary of sorts to such decisions—they had to be arguably within the boundaries of Judaism” (Liebman 134). The author uses these statements to better define Judaism, by eliminating trends, beliefs or tendencies that are not shared by the more traditional denominations and organizations. The definition of Judaism and the perspectives of the denominations go hand in hand. While Waxman believes that having a strong definition of Judaism can fight the invasion of American culture, Liebman thinks the importance of the definition is to keep the denominations honest in a sense. “One consequence of changing ideas about the existence of a Judaic essence is that denominations no longer need to legitimize the innovations and changes they introduce in terms of how they fit into the basic norms of Judaism”
(Liebman 135). In a way though, Liebman agrees with Waxman here, that the greatest tool American Jews have is their focus on tradition and, most importantly, social cohesiveness. These traditions and social ties have many different manifestations depending on the Jew; nevertheless, these are the few components of Judaism that can truly be agreed upon by most religious scholars.
These works are integral to the understanding of American Jewry from the perspective of Jews. Not only are the authors both Orthodox, their studies actively engage the Jewish community in America and seek to define, and redefine the boundaries of Judaism as seen from the point of view of those living as Jews in American society.
Liebman states, “In my opinion, whether a scholar decides that there is or is not an essential Judaism depends very much on what that scholar wishes to find. The conclusion rests on how much weight one gives to one set of facts rather than another set of facts, or on how one interprets one or another set of facts” (Liebman 134). Liebman is right—the only way to truly understand any religion is to take into account the wealth of understandings and perspectives that come from a collective of individuals following the same set of religious tenets.
Works Cited
Kaplan, Dana Evan. The Cambridge Companion to American Judaism (2005). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Pages 101-114 and pages 133-145.