Scared, or Sacred?

This past week has been heartbreaking and terrifying, and the Geretz-Kotzker family is looking forward to Shabbat if only for the ability to disconnect from the overwhelming dimensions of the crisis that now confronts our world.

At this time, it is easy, and tempting, to focus on the news, and our anger at people all over who seem to be acting out of self-interest and greed.  Numerous examples abound and I will not trouble you with them here.

I suggest we look at this weeks parasha as an example of working to overcome our fear and anxiety over this crisis. In Exodus 35, we read about the Israelites’ tremendous outpouring of genuine and unstinting support for the construction of the portable sanctuary. This outpouring was so overwhelming that our tradition teaches us that the tribal princes, who had held back their donations, reasoning that they would make up any shortfall, were alarmed that there might not be a shortfall and they might not be called upon to contribute at all.

The Israelites’ motivations to support the building of the portable sanctuary came from a place of selflessness and love.  It is exactly this sort of selflessness and love that is necessary to transform an edifice into a sacred space. And it is this same sort of selflessness and love, rather than selfishness and greed, that will help us to cope with this crisis, and help us to remain together as a sacred community.

Fred (“Mister”) Rogers often spoke about coping with tragedy. “My mother would say to me, ‘Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.’ To this day, especially in times of disaster, I remember my mother’s words, and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers — so many caring people in this world.”

This Shabbat, and beyond, I encourage you take these lessons to heart. Rather than being selfish, or focusing on the selfish acts of others, be kind to yourself and others.  Focus on all of the wonderful people in our community and beyond who are stepping up to the plate, and acting out of kindness, despite their own feelings of anxiety and terror.  Acknowledge them and encourage them.

May it be God’s will that by acting out of selflessness, kindness, and love, God will treat all of us with kindness and help us to build a sacred community and begin to heal from this devastating crisis.

Shabbat Shalom

Eulogy for Rachel "Chela" Geretz, April 28 1937 - August 29 2019

Mom studied to be a nurse and worked as a nurse in Israel and in the Twin Cities. As a result, Mom appreciated, and we all deeply appreciate, the compassionate nurses at Methodist Hospital and at Shalom Home who made Mom’s final, difficult journey a little easier. Yet, in truth, Mom did not really want to be a nurse. Mom wanted to be a doctor. Being a woman in Israel in the 1950s, this just was not possible.

The Talmudic principle tafasta meruba lo tafasta, maybe most aptly translated as “less is more,” is used to express the idea that when it is possible to derive a particular law from two different sources, it should be taken from the narrower of the two, in order to stay on the safe side and avoid making assumptions.

Taken metaphorically, tafasta meruba lo tafasta teaches us that one is more likely to succeed when they focus not on a goal, but on a process. Goals are important as an ideal, yet when one focuses exclusively on attaining a goal at all costs, one is more likely to fail in their attempt to reach that goal. Life is mainly about the process, not the product.

A well-known physician’s prayer attributed to Maimonides makes a profound statement about the place and role of a physician. It focuses not on the goal of being a physician, but the process of becoming someone who helps heal others. It is clear in retrospect that although circumstances didn’t allow Mom to follow her dream of becoming a doctor, she nevertheless spent her life engaged in a lifelong process of becoming someone who helped others.

Maimonides writes, “Almighty God, Thou hast endowed man with the wisdom to relieve the suffering of his brother, to recognize his disorders, to extract healing substances, to discover their powers and to prepare and to apply them to suit every ill.” It is clear that, as a nurse, Mom engaged in relieving the suffering of others. It is perhaps not so obvious that, when Mom started an interpreting business later on in life, she was also working to relieve the suffering of others. Having been a new immigrant not once, but twice, and having to learn a new language not once, but twice, in her life, Mom knew how bewildering it is to navigate a government bureaucracy, or seek medical or legal services, not being familiar with the local language. In starting her business, Mom worked to relieve the suffering of countless immigrants who might otherwise have been marginalized or deprived of their fundamental human rights and dignity.

Maimonides writes, “Do not allow thirst for profit, ambition for renown, and admiration, to interfere with my profession, for these are the enemies of truth and of love for mankind and they can lead astray in the great task of attending to the welfare of Thy creatures.” Mom did not seek recognition or accolades. Mom’s focus was on helping others rather than personal gain or honor. Indeed, the timing of this funeral, occurring as it is on a Friday afternoon, was probably planned by Mom in an effort to avoid inconveniencing out-of-town relatives who might otherwise feel obligated to attend, by making it almost impossible for them to do so.

Maimonides writes, “Should those who are wiser than I wish to improve and instruct me, let my soul gratefully follow their guidance; for vast is the extent of our art. Let me be contented in everything except in the great science of my profession. Never allow the thought to arise in me that I have attained sufficient knowledge, but vouchsafe to me the strength, the leisure and the ambition ever to extend my knowledge. For art is great, but the mind of man is ever expanding.” Mom was a life-long learner in pursuit of the art of helping others.  Even as a stay-at-home Mom, Mom continued her education in nursing and biology. Mom also was an early adopter. Mom started her interpreting business in the early 1980s, “BI” (before Internet.) Mom learned how to use an acoustic coupler and to do word-processing using Wordstar on a CP/M computer with 8-inch floppy discs. As new technology became available, Mom kept up with that technology.

There is another aspect of tafasta meruba lo tafasta reflected in how Mom chose to die.  Mom suffered for many years from Parkinson’s disease, and a number of challenges over the past few months triggered a cascading decline.  At the age of 82, Mom might have focused on the goal of living as long as her beloved mother Dina Lerner, ob”m, who lived to 96, or her beloved sister Sara Younger, ob”m, who lived to 87.  Realizing what suffering such a focus might entail, Mom instead invoked tafasta meruba lo tafasta and chose to be admitted to hospice. 

In so doing, Mom gave herself and all of us the most valuable gift – the gift of time, free of other distractions, to focus on what was most important.  Mom’s decision gave all of us the opportunity to be with her during her last few weeks and months, and to say important things we might not otherwise have had the chance to say. Let us honor Mom’s memory by living our lives in the spirit of tafasta meruba lo tafasta, and work not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Tehi nishmata tzerura bitzror hachayim

(Obituary may be viewed at https://www.hodroffepsteinmemorialchapels.com/obituaries/Rachel-Chela-Geretz/#!/Obituary)

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

A brief writeup of my remarks before my Shabbat HaGadol shiur, given on April 13, 2019, in memory of my uncle Rabbi David Younger z"l.

Werner Heisenberg first introduced his uncertainty principle in 1927. One of the foundational principles of quantum physics, Heisenberg’s principle asserts that any observation has an effect on the observed.

The same can be said to be true of any human interaction. Whenever two people come together to interact with each other, even in the most perfunctory way, they necessarily observe each other, and each one comes away affected and changed in some way by the interaction. In chaplaincy, even the mere act of visiting a patient and taking a spiritual history has an effect on that patient (as well as on the chaplain) and can be considered an intervention. There is no such thing as non-interventional human interaction.

This idea is expressed in Mishna Sanhedrin 4:5, which discusses how witnesses in a capital case are “sworn in.” Unlike taking an oath or affirmation which we might be familiar with by dint of serving on a jury or even watching “Perry Mason” or “Law and Order,” being a witness in a capital case before a Jewish court was a serious business. The court engaged in a process of being “me-ayem” the witnesses - a process of inducing a feeling of awe in them so that they would realize the gravity of giving testimony in a capital case. Rather than thinking that they were innocent bystanders, only reporting what they saw, the witnesses were encouraged to realize that their testimony might possibly have a devastating effect on the accused, or on them.

The mishna goes on to make a homiletical point: Man was created alone to teach us that when one destroys a single life, Scripture holds that person accountable as if they had destroyed an entire world; when one sustains a life, Scripture considers it as if that person had sustained an entire world.

My uncle David Younger z”l spent his entire adult life as a rabbi and teacher. Good teachers know that material must be tailored to the needs of the student, and my uncle was a teacher par-excellence and knew this well. By tailoring the material and interacting with each student as an individual with potential, my uncle provided a Jewish education and spiritual sustenance to his students. He affected countless lives in a positive way, and was affected by those students. Truly, my uncle David was a sustainer of not only one world, but of many worlds.

As Jews, we believe in an immortal soul, and thus, it can be said that this observer effect continues even after death. Any time we honor the memory of those whom we love who are no longer with us, we affect them and allow them to continue to affect us, even though they are no longer physically here. It is my hope that in some small way, this shiur, given to commemorate my uncle’s fifth yahrtzeit, will affect him, and allow him to affect us and help to bring about the ultimate redemption.

On Public Debate of Controversial Issues

Over the past few days, there has been vigorous and public debate about Rav Dov Linzer’s decision not to grant semikha to an openly gay student at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. It is not our interest here to get into the debate about Rabbi Linzer's decision not to grant semikha. It is our interest to discuss how the public debate ought to be conducted, and how talmidei chakhamim ought to be treated.

We are mindful of the fact that we are a few weeks away from Pesach, and from the period of Sefirat HaOmer which begins on the second day of Pesach. We remember the reason that Rabbi Akiva’s students were decimated during Sefira - because they did not conduct themselves in an honorable way with each other. How much more so is it a problem when students do not conduct themselves honorably with a rebbe, or a Rosh Yeshiva who is a talmid chakham.

As a musmakh of YCT (Daniel) and a student at Maharat (Jennifer), we value the open exchange of ideas and the intellectual freedom to explore all aspects of halakha at our institutions. Such exchange of ideas, between students and students, must be done in an honorable way - for the sake of heaven, not in a way where it embarrasses people or causes undue pain and anguish.

When exchanges with rebbeim or Rashei Yeshiva occur, there is an additional requirement to conduct those conversations in a way which comports with the Torah value of emunat chakhamim.  While all people are human and can and do make mistakes, emunat chakhamim dictates that students recognize that rebbeim have more knowledge, more experience, and have had more practice in developing the judgment necessary to adopt sometimes unpopular positions.  When challenging a rebbe or a Rosh Yeshiva, a great degree of humility is necessary, as well as an attitude of willingness to be challenged, to see things from a different perspective, and to possibly change one’s mind.

We have had the honor of calling Rav Linzer our posek for many years, and trust his vast Torah knowledge, his expertise, his humility, his sensitivity, and his good judgment. Rav Linzer has proven himself to be a sincere ally of the LGBTQ+ community, as he has already demonstrated his support on many occasions.

Those wishing to serve as genuine alllies of  LGBTQ+ individuals within the religious Jewish community can do so more effectively by demonstrating sensitivity and respect for halakha as well as modeling the Torah value of emunat chakhamim.

Rabbi Daniel Geretz, YCT/SFRP 2017

Jennifer Kotzker Geretz, Maharat 2020

Dementia and Depression

אלקי נשמה שנתת בי טהורה הוא

God, the soul that you have implanted in me is pure

- Jewish morning liturgy

I have spent quite a bit of the past year doing per-diem chaplaincy in hospice. A significant percentage of my patients suffer from some form of dementia or mental deterioration.

Dementia is a catch-all category which includes a lot of behaviors: Some patients can carry on perfectly “normal” conversations that are very out of touch with reality; others say nonsensical words; yet others are withdrawn or angry and do not speak at all.

What is common with all of my patients who suffer from the various forms of dementia is that they are still fully human beings. Our liturgy, which includes the above quote as part of the morning blessings upon waking, makes it clear that despite what physical and mental deterioration we all experience, the soul that God has given each of us is pure and undiminished at all stages of our lives.

Those of us who minister to dementia patients ought to have this part of the Jewish liturgy first and foremost in our minds every time we enter a patient’s room. Chaplains, who deal with matters spiritual, must be aware that in each and every dementia patient we serve, there is an undiminished spirit, and conduct ourselves accordingly.

Additionally, clinicians must be careful not to write off all patient behaviors as symptoms of dementia. Since an undiminished spirit still resides in each patient, they are subject to illnesses such as depression, which in at least some cases has a strong spiritual component. Clinicians ought to do a better job screening even dementia patients for mental illness including depression, which is sometimes treatable with medication. This can significantly improve quality of life for some patients and help to make the other symptoms of dementia much more tolerable.

Help! I'm Trapped in the Dilbert Zone! - a one act play

Help! I’m Trapped in the Dilbert Zone

A one act play, as told to Daniel Geretz

Prologue:

11:30 pm, a Monday night about two weeks before Rosh Hashana. Our hero’s (OH) home office.

It is open enrollment for medical coverage at “The Big Company, Inc.”  (TBC) For some reason lost in the mists of time, TBG’s annual renewal with Guardian Galaxy (GG) always occurs on a random date less than two weeks after Simchat Torah (OH suspects that perhaps alcohol, condoms, anti-Semitic trained monkeys and a dartboard played a part.) OH feels enormous pressure at this time of year, especially since God has not blessed the Jewish people with a Rosh Hashana that falls on Shabbat and Sunday since 2009.

OH has been corresponding with the new agent at Acme Brokers, Inc. (AB) about coverage questions. The new agent mysteriously has been more interested in pitching supplemental insurance through Quack Quack, Inc. (OH also idly wonders about another matter beyond his pay scale - how TBC ended up with AB as its broker for GG.) OH has been riding AB since July to get the new rates from GG, but new rates are not issued by GG and AB does not usually furnish them until well after Rosh Chodesh Elul.

As we watch, OH pecks out an email…

“M, I am working on putting together election letters for our employee meeting on Thursday.  I still need the rates on the three plans we are offering for X, who wants to add a dependent, as well as Y, who is not yet eligible but will be in mid-November.

“Also, a few questions about the benefit highlights document you put together. I am pretty sure that our option Z plan pays nothing until the deductible is met, shouldn’t it say somewhere next to the copays that the deductible must be met first? ..."

Act I, Scene I:

1:45 pm, The week after Simchat Torah, a few days before the anniversary date. OH’s office at TBC.

OH has all election options and paperwork to AB/GG, but is still working out coverage details for the new employee who is not yet eligible.  OH got a quick answer from the agent at AB, but wants to make sure that it is accurate. OH reaches for the phone…

GG automated attendant: (Asks for account number which OH types into IVR) Our wait times are longer than normal (this message never changes) – please hold for the next agent. (Muzak; thankfully, no additional inserted helpful announcements which might lead one to believe that a real live person had picked up the line for half a second before having one’s hopes dashed. Some time later…)

GG agent: Hello, this is Veronica, how can I help you?

OH: I have a question about enrollment for a new employee.

GG agent: OK, but first, can you give me the company name. (OH and Veronica go back and forth. At the end, apparently, Veronica is satisfied that OH is the real deal and not some deranged teenager with so much time on his or her hands that they would actually call GG and listen to Muzak for half an hour.)

OH: (explains complex question involving out-of-state employees with individual coverage, anniversary dates, hire and qualifying dates, etc.)

GG agent: OK, so you are asking (repeats back question with a number of factual errors, making it clear the question was not understood.)

OH: May I speak to a supervisor, please?

GG agent: Sure, but first, let me ask you (some inane question about OH’s question, seeking clarification.)

OH: Please, may I speak to a supervisor?

GG agent: Sure, but first, let me ask you (some other inane question.)

OH: Please, just transfer me to a supervisor.

GG agent: You mean you want me to transfer you to our escalation team?

OH: (“escalation team” sounds better than what OH has now.) Yes, please.

GG agent: Please hold (thankfully, no additional “Sure, but first”s. More Muzak.)

GG agent: Sir, I am going to need to have someone call you back.

OH: When will that be, tomorrow?

GG agent: Five to ten minutes.

OH: Five to ten minutes? (Trying to keep sarcasm out of voice) OK, so I’ll expect that call back by __.

GG agent: Thank you.

(Dissolve; 25 minutes later)

TBC Receptionist: OH, there’s a call for you from GG on 701.

OH: (Shocked to get call back on same business day, picking up line.) Hello?

GG agent: Sir OH? This is Veronica, from GG.

OH: (Uh oh… Guardedly) Yes?

GG agent: I am calling you back about your question about (irrelevant)

OH: (Cutting off Veronica) I asked to speak to a supervisor? Are you a supervisor?

GG agent: No.

OH: May I please speak to a supervisor?

GG agent: Sure, but first I want to confirm that you are asking a question about (irrelevant.)

OH: We’ve been through this. May I please speak to a supervisor?

GG agent: Sure, but first I want to ask whether you are ready to speak to someone on our escalation team.

OH: (“escalation team” – oh yeah…) Yes, please.

GG agent: Please hold. (Muzak. After about five more minutes.)

GG supervisor: Hello, sir OH. How can I help you.

OH: (begins to explain complex question, giving dates and facts. About sixty seconds into the explanation, realizes that line has gone unusually quiet and there are periodic unusual clicks.) Hello? Hello? (waits about 30 seconds, hears occasional snatches of conversation. Waits another five minutes with phone off hook, hoping that supervisor will notice that line is disconnected and calls back. No dice. Hangs up phone. Idly wonders where call center is. Philippines? Is that close to North Korea? Checks world news on Internet.)

(Dissolve; a few minutes later)

TBC Receptionist (overheard from a few cubicles away): Hello? I can’t hear you! I think we have a bad connection. Hello? Hello? Can you hear me? Hello?

(Dissolve; a few minutes later)

TBC Receptionist (overheard from a few cubicles away): Hello? I can’t hear you! I think we have a bad connection. Hello? Hello? Can you hear me? Hello?

(Dissolve, about 30 minutes later; “I can’t hear you” calls have gradually petered out and come to an end.)

OH reaches for the phone…

GG automated attendant: (Asks for account number which OH types into IVR) Our wait times are longer than normal (suprising) – please hold for the next agent. (Muzak; Some time later…)

GG agent: Hello, this is Veronica, how can I help you?

OH: (Calculating the odds that the call center has only one employee and her name is Veronica, and the odds that everyone in the call center is named Veronica, and deciding that regardless of the odds, for expediency this is the same agent from before.) Hi, it’s OH again. I spoke to you a bit before…

GG agent: (confused) Sir OH?

OH: I spoke to you before, I asked to speak to a supervisor. You were going to transfer me, but no one was available, so someone called me back.  We got disconnected. Can you put me back through?

GG agent: OK, but first, I want to find out why you are calling.

OH: We’ve been through this before on the last call. My question is complex and I want to speak to a supervisor. May I speak to one?

GG agent: Sure, but first, I want to find out if you want to speak to a member of our escalation team.

OH: (Tries to get “escalation team” through thick skull.) Yes, please.  And in consideration of the fact that it’s late here, and I was disconnected, I am going to insist on speaking to them now rather than waiting for a call back.

GG agent: Please hold. (Muzak. A lot of it. Finally…)

GG supervisor: Hello, Sir OH. How can I help you.

OH: (asks complex question, gets to end, and GG supervisor is still there.)

GG supervisor: So, if I understand you, you are asking (repeats question back, with a bunch of factual erros. Clearly GG supervisor does not understand OH.)

OH: (exasperated) Um, is there anyone there who is a native English speaker?

GG supervisor: Sure, but first, let me understand your question (begins to repeat question back, making clear GG supervisor has no clue what OH is talking about. “Out of state”? The US has states? Who knew?)

OH: May I please speak to a native English speaker?

GG supervisor: Sure, but first, I want to be sure that I understand what you are asking for…

OH: (Cutting across GG supervisor) Are you a native English speaker?

GG supervisor: No.

OH: Please let me speak to someone who is.

(Fade to black.  At this point, OH is transferred to Stephanie who actually knows the difference between Pennsylvania and New Jersey and even knows what towns are in Eastern Pennsylvania and Western New Jersey.)

The Orthodox Union Statement on Women's Ordination

A few days ago, Rabbi Avi Shafran published an opinion piece in the Forward about women’s ordination.  In it, he states:

“For these reasons, the OU is correct in insisting than Orthodox Judaism is not compatible with female clergy. But not everyone agrees, and now the OU faces the decision of what, if anything, to do about five member synagogues that insist on retaining women clergy. 

"Some rabbis of OU-affiliated congregations feel that expelling those synagogues that flout the rabbinic decision is inadvisable, and that there is no need for the organization to do anything more than what it has already done by issuing the decision. 

"Others, though, assert that a clear rabbinic decision is not something a group pledged to halachic standards can ignore, even if it means taking painful steps. 

"Unity and comity, to be sure, sometimes require 'looking the other way,' and not pressing even pressing issues. But standing up to a Zeitgeist-fueled innovation rejected by halachic authorities is the essence of Orthodoxy – and always has been. 

"The OU is in fact Orthodox, and stands proudly for halachic integrity, in both the kashrut and congregational realms, even when doing so may be unpopular and buck contemporary mores. 

"It has every right and reason to expect its congregations to display the same courage.”

Perhaps I am not reading this correctly, and I am sure Rabbi Shafran will correct me if he is not in fact encouraging the Orthodox Union to expel member congregations which do not conduct themselves in accordance with the responses of the rabbinic panel that the Orthodox Union convened.

When the Orthodox Union statement on women’s ordination and the accompanying responses of the rabbinic panel were released earlier this year, I chose not to comment publicly on the documents until such time as I had read them closely, and to reflect on the issue.  Based on Rabbi Shafran’s opinion piece, which is only the last in a series of misrepresentations and distortions about the content of the Orthodox Union statement, I now feel compelled to speak out on the issue.

First off, I will note that Rabbi Shafran is the Director of Public Affairs and Spokesman for Agudath Israel of America. Last I checked, Agudath Israel of America is not “Modern Orthodox” and it baffles me as to why someone like Rabbi Shafran would weigh in on what is essentially a Modern Orthodox issue.

Be that as it may, I will also not that Agudath Israel of America enacted an Internet ban a while ago, so perhaps Rabbi Shafran can be excused for not having read the entire Orthodox Union statement nor the entire rabbinic response – maybe he read it on the sly in a hurry, or maybe he read a “reader’s digest” version furnished by one of his askanim.

I will reproduce the relevant parts of the statement and the rabbinic response here.

From the Orthodox Union statement:

“We therefore urge all segments of our community to recognize and focus upon what unites us. As articulated by the Rabbinic Panel, women can and should teach Torah, including at advanced and sophisticated levels; give shiurim and divrei torah; assume communally significant roles in pastoral counseling, in bikkur cholim, in community outreach to the affiliated and unaffiliated, in youth and teen programming; and in advising on issues of taharas hamishpacha, in conjunction with local rabbinic authority, when found by a community’s local rabbinic and lay leadership to be appropriate. Let us focus our energy and communal creativity on increasing and enhancing the contributions that women make to our shuls and communities, rather than being consumed with limitations.”

Note that Rabbi Shafran has decided to ignore the Orthodox Union statement which encourages communities to focus on “what unites us” and, as an outsider, has decided to exploit those issues internal to the Modern Orthodox community on which there is disagreement to sow further discord and destroy that community.

The sentiments in the Orthodox Union statement are also expressed in the rabbinic panel response:

“That being said, female role models are, of course, absolutely critical for the spiritual growth of our community. Communities depend, and have always depended, upon women’s participation in a wide array of critical roles, both lay and professional, that are wholly consistent with Torah’s guidelines. Women should most enthusiastically be encouraged to share their knowledge, talents, and skills - as well as their passion and devotion - to synagogues, schools and community organizations. The restriction on assuming a clergy role has not precluded, and need not preclude, women from making vital and substantial contributions to the Jewish people.”

Rather than focusing on the one divisive issue addressed in the Orthodox Union statement, one hopes that the Orthodox Union will commit to doing the following, particularly within those Modern Orthodox communities and synagogues which are its constituents:

• Encourage member synagogues to begin offering shiurim and classes for women that are on the same intellectual level as those offered for men. These shiurim need not be coed; they ought to be, however, on the same level. For someone who prepares a shiur or class, giving the class a second time actually helps to refine the material presented.  On this 40th anniversary of the Rav’s opening shiur on Talmud for women at Stern, this ought to be a no-brainer; the reality is that many communities still offer daf yomi or gemara for men and parashat hashavua for women, which simply cannot do for any community which calls itself Modern Orthodox.
• Encourage member synagogues to develop schedules, at least on Shabbat, such that services are scheduled to enable both parents of small children can attend the entire Shabbat morning service.  Communities which offer a "main" minyan at around 9 am and do not offer a hashkama minyan much later than 7 am ought to do some serious cheshbon hanefesh as to what message they are sending not only to parents of young children, but also to the young men and women that they expect to lead children’s groups or the like.
• Encourage member synagogues to move Shabbat morning drashot from before musaf to after Adon Olam, to afford equal opportunities for both learned men and women to give divrei Torah to the entire community.  This change makes it clear that the devar Torah or drasha is not at all part of the Shabbat morning service and would obviate any objection to having a woman address the community from the pulpit.
• Encourage member synagogues to design and/or redesign sanctuaries and prayer spaces such that they are “women friendly” and afford adequate and equal space for women, with mechitzot that are designed to halakhic standards yet afford clear sightlines of the aron, the pulpit, and the shulchan, so that women can feel the same intimacy and immediacy of a prayer space that men do, rather than feeling like spectators. Encourage synagogues to include an equal number of women on design/redesign committees rather than just one or two to be “yotzei” on having “consulted the women.” While women are not normatively understood to be halakhically eligible to lead prayers, they certainly are men's partners and equals when it comes to sharing a prayer space and they ought to have equal say in the aesthetics of any such space, at the very least.

I am sure that were we to put our minds to it, we might come up with any number of additional meaningful suggestions. The above list is not meant as an exhaustive list of suggestions; it is meant as a starting point. It is also a positive starting point for implementing the recommendations in the Orthodox Union statement.

I am personally disappointed that the Orthodox Union felt compelled to take any position on women’s ordination, since I believe the Orthodox Union has put itself in a no-win situation by doing so. Nonetheless, I laud the Orthodox Union for encouraging the Orthodox community to focus on what unites us, and I offer the above suggestions as a positive way to do just that.