Tag: Dikla Blum

AJN Letters: Maurice Sendak + Chaim Ingram on Marriage Equality – May 18 2012

18 May 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition

Letters to the editor should be no more than 250 words and may be edited for length and content. Only letters sent to letters@jewishnews.net.au will be considered for publication. Please supply an address and daytime phone number for verification.

Wild thing made my heart sing

THE death of Maurice Sendak takes me back to my childhood, on a journey that many of us could share similarly. I recall turning the pages of his Wild Things book with wonderment and enjoying the scariness of the story and illustrations.

Not knowing until today that Sendak was of Jewish heritage, it is but one of the many things about him of which I was previously unaware. Another is that he had a male partner of 50 years, Eugene Glynn, who pre-deceased him in 2007.

I’m confident that Sendak’s diverse legacy will live on and enrich the lives of future generations, as it did mine.

MICHAEL BARNETT
Ashwood, Vic

Rabbis opposition to same sex marriages

DIKLA Blum (AJN 11/04) need be neither surprised nor baffled by the Rabbinical Council of NSW submissions (in consort with those of the Organisation of Rabbis in Australasia and the Rabbinical Council of Victoria) to the Senate and the House of Representatives opposing a change in the law that would recognise samesex marriage.

As a self-describing “mainstream” Orthodox Jew, Ms. Blum ought to be aware that the concept of homosexual marriage – and indeed homosexual relations – is incompatible with Orthodox, i.e. halachic Judaism.

Moreover since homosexuality is outlawed in the Noachide Code which is the basis of the JudaeoChristian ethic that has governed modern Australia since its inception, rabbinical organisations as guardians of that ethic have seen fit to fight to guard and protect that ethic.

Regarding the RCNSW’S use of the word “mainstream”, our president Rabbi Ulman has already clarified (AJN 27/04) that “by its very definition Reform/progressive theology deviates from the mainstream” and therefore it is an adjective we are fully entitled to use.

As for the representation issue: the rabbinic bodies in Australia purport to represent Torah and Torah values as is our mandate.

If this happens to conflict with the dogmas and mantras of the modern age which have turned some heads 180 degrees on this particular issue within a single generation, we the teachers of Judaism cannot be held to blame.

As it happens, I believe that were a survey of the opinions of the Orthodox community, and for that matter the wider Jewish community, to be conducted anonymously Ms Blum would again be surprised.

RABBI CHAIM INGRAM
Bondi Junction, NSW

AJN Letters: RCNSW & Marriage Equality – May 11 2012

11 May 2012
The Australian Jewish News Melbourne edition

Letters to the editor should be no more than 250 words and may be edited for length and content. Only letters sent to letters@jewishnews.net.au will be considered for publication. Please supply an address and daytime phone number for verification.

RCNSW should be careful what it claims

IT is with much surprise that I read the statement by the Rabbinical Council of NSW on the topic of same-sex marriage and their assertion over “mainstream Judaism (AJN 27/04)”.

For the record, I support same-sex marriage wholeheartedly.  And for further clarification, lest it be thought that I am a Progressive Jew, I can abate the Rabbinical Council’s fears that I have never ascribed to this stream of Judaism.

So, as a self-selecting Orthodox, thus “mainstream” Jew by the Rabbinical Council definition, I am baffled by the Rabbinical Council’s desire to manufacture such conflict around this issue.

One might think that our community faces sufficient challenges – anti-Semitism, anti-zionism, the threat of BDS, assimilation to name but a few – [without needing] to voluntarily create conflict and attempt to marginalise significant sections of our community.

The reality is that we are a pluralistic community with a variety of different beliefs and customs, from political beliefs, through to religious customs originating from our respective countries of origin, as well as our views on Jewish expression.

I wonder, as such, where the Rabbinical Council draws the line of what constitutes “mainstream Judaism”.  What can we expect next?  Is Ashkenazi tradition the “mainstream”, or should we look to Sephardi custom?  Is Hebrew prayer the “mainstream” expression of the right way to connect with God, to the exclusion of those who cannot speak or read the language?

And in putting forward the Senate submission, under the assertion they represent “all mainstream synagogues in NSW”, did the Rabbinical Council seek input from the members of these so-called “mainstream” synagogues?

So confident is the Rabbinical Council in its position of representation that surely the council would not object to such an action of surveying the opinions of its members? Perhaps we should put that to the test?

DIKLA BLUM
Glebe, NSW