One of the areas in which the Reform movement differs from the others is in the question of independence of rabbis and congregations. In both Orthodox and Conservative, Although there is some leeway of both action and doctrine, there are still red lines. Reform allows its rabbis and congregations to set their own standards and styles. Therefore, there are many "flavors" of Reform, and it is difficult to generalize on anything.
In the mid and late twentieth centuries, two very different thinkers and leaders arose in American Reform. Both pulled Reform away from the "churchy" style that had characterized the movement for 200 years; albeit in opposite directions.Most present day Reform rabbis have been highly influenced by one or both.
One was Alvin J. Reines (1926–2004). He developed the idea called "Polydoxy". This was intended to be the opposite of "Orthodoxy"> Orthodoxy is a Greek, meaning "Straight Belief". Reines felt that, on the contrary, Jews should have different beliefs, while accepting each other's ideas as valid. For him Judaism could, but didn't have to, follow any classical texts or traditions. Each community, or person, could make his or her own Judaism. I twice attended a Reinesian service (in the early 1970s). Each had a theme. The first one I attended was "Yiddish Literature". The second one was "The American Indian". Poetry was read, the Cantor, in the first case, sang some Yiddish songs, in the second, folk songs of the American Indian. The rabbi read passages about each culture. A woman did interpretive dance, in the first instance dressed in East European "shtetel" clothing, in the second dressed as an Indian woman. At the end, the mourner's kaddish was recited, and the Friday night kiddush was made. The rabbi (himself a distinguished professor of Jewish history at a major Midwestern University) said to me "You are probably wondering how this is a Jewish service. Jews put it together, therefore it is Jewish". Reines was a professor of Philosophy at Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, the main Reform seminary. His students formed, in 1972, the Polydox Institute, which still exists. However, it now embraces not only all Jewish expressions, but all other Liberal religious ideas and practices as well.
The second one was J.J. Petuchowski (1925 – 1991) , known affectionately by his students as "Pet". I was privileged to get to know him well, as I was, in the mid 1970s, the assistant rabbi of the German Orthodox congregation in Cincinnati, of which he was a member and active participant. Although there was a 24 year difference in our ages, he befriended me, and we spent many hours in deep discussion every Sunday morning. He was himself traditionally observant; Shabbat, Kashrut, the whole nine yards. He felt that Reform offered a freedom of inquiry and expression which the other movements, in his opinion, lacked. He was strongly opposed to the deviations from Jewish tradition that Reform had adopted.He advocated "Catholic Israel", that is a universal respect and acceptance, being careful not to deviate from practices which would endanger ties with other Jews, such as in the areas of marriage and divorce. While some of his students became observant as he was, others, while not becoming observant in the Orthodox sense, nevertheless incorporated traditional Jewish practices into their life and work. Once, I was to lecture at a Reform temple for their Sunday school, where the assistant rabbi was a student of "Pet". I came early and prayed the morning service in a side room, naturally wearing my Tallit and Tefillin. The assistant rabbi saw me, and brought the entire Hebrew School to look. When I finished, he asked me to explain to the students what I was doing. I gave a fairly thorough explanation, after which the rabbi said to the children "Reform Judaism agrees with what Rabbi Siegel has said". That's it. No "buts". This scene would have been unthinkable a decade earlier. Those Reform rabbis who studied under "Pet", and many who only read some of his books, now have an openness to Orthodoxy that was unknown for many generations. While there are still many things that divide us, there is, at least in some segments of Reform, a willingness to rethink. About five years ago, when I gave a lecture on Orthodox belief, a "classical" Reform rabbi who was present, stood up and remarked that my beliefs were "silly". A student of "Pet" objected strongly to his words, and reported him the the Reform movement's ethics committee.
A huge gulf exists between Orthodoxy and Reform. But the willingness of many Reform rabbis to rethink, and even re-form, gives me a great deal of hope. May G-d lead us all to His Torah.
In my next installment, I will discuss the Conservative movement.