JTA: The Global News Service of the Jewish People

09/29/08 05:29 PM

I appreciate your comments. I don’t think, however, that you can place the Jewish Student Press Service and Hillel in the same category. Hillel clearly is engaged in a turf war with Chabad on many campuses (http://newvoices.org/campus-news/princeton-chabad-rabbi-becomes-university-chaplain.html), but I don’t see how you can argue that the JSPS is in a similar position. We have been consistently criticized Hillel over the past decade. Further, we don’t compete in the realm of spirituality, we aren’t an institution in any sense of the word, and we have little to lose as Chabad’s influence grows. Rather, we see ourselves as an independent third party dedicated to reporting on the big guys.

I also think you’re misreading the intention behind our stories on Agriprocessors. Our editorial mandate at New Voices is broader than just writing about Jewish things that happen on college campuses. In this case, I thought that Sara Kay did a great job finding the student angle on the biggest Jewish story of the summer. I would have her stories whether or not this was a Chabad-themed issue.

Thanks for the post. Shanah tovah.

Josh Nathan-Kazis
Editor
New Voices Magazine

10/04/08 10:21 PM

Back when I was editor at JSPS, we didn’t have any rabbis on campus, but Hillel did. In the intervening decades, JSPS now has a stronger campus presence, but Hillel a weaker one: Richard Joel shifted campus leadership from rabbis to social workers. Lubavitch typically moved in to fill the gap.

10/05/08 01:39 AM

The New Voices edition dedicated to Chabad is a example of shoddy journalism. Instead of the dealing with real issues we read poorly researched articles.

Sholom Ber Wolpo, condemned by Chabad in Israel and the US is described as the most popular Chabad rabbi in Israel. A young man whose father passed away and left Chabad, clearly a product of a from a difficult childhood is heralded. Chabad Rebbizens leave their minds at the door only to find fulfillment barefoot and pregnant. Reform rabbis with an axe to grind, a liberal professors with an agenda are all given voices. New Voices creates facts that have never happened like the coronation of the Rebbe as Moshiach. Its positions on Israel misrepresented.

Instead of a smear New Voices should to do some real journalism. It should have asked more important questions. Chabad has challenged the notion of a liberal Jewish life detached from Torah and observance. It has attempted to bridge the gap between modernity and tradition with a sense of communal responsibility. Its agenda is clear and serious challenge to a liberal Jewish establishment that wants Jewish continuity detached from classical tradition.

Instead of focusing on this central question New Voices drops to the gutter, finding a troubled Chabad kid, a radical rabbi rejected by the movement. It seeks to claim that there is some nefarious agenda under the surface when in truth Chabad is challenging the status quo of modern Jewish life. New Voices throws mud when it could of served as a podium for true debate and dialogue about strategies for Jewish survival and identity in a modern world.

10/06/08 12:30 PM

I think the characterization of a “Chabad Takedown” is very unfair. I read the New Voices edition in question and found it interesting. The articles in question for the most part deal with Chabad around the periphery. Chabad is not a monolith. There is a diversity of political thought and behavior found within its membership. I did not feel slighted by the articles and could see them written by students who love their Chabad Rabbi.

While Chabad has exploded as a presence on campus, New Voices did not examine this phenomenon. They chose, rather to look at the edges. Organizations and individuals that have little or nothing to do with Chabad on Campus. A Chabad drop out, a west bank Rabbi, and a Meat packing company presented interesting stories. But, weren’t related at all to Chabad’s presence on campus. If there is an official “Chabad” position on these issues I have not seen it. A short D’var Torah, a quick service, chicken and kugel is what we deal with.

The article that did interest me was that of the editor, Josh Nathan Kazis. In that article he examined the subliminal message that Chabad sends every Friday around the Shabbat table. Josh felt that the Rabbi and his wife were modeling normative Jewish behavior and inculcating the Shabbos participants with notions of gender roles, that perhaps funders and participants may not agree with if examined objectively.

Josh’s point really made me think about what the students pick up every Friday. I wish I could say that there was some conscious thought put into it. But, in truth, feeding 85 guests for Shabbos is not a normal activity. We are struggling with just getting the food on the table. Come by for a lunch, or a meal during the week. Then you will see a real model. I get to speak with my children, help my wife in the kitchen and actually cook some meals myself.

The real question that could have been asked, is why Chabad does this. Why, are we cooking 3 days for Shabbat every week? It is not to “make” people religious, send them to Yeshiva, or inculcate some Jewish norms. If those were our goals we would be failures.

Rather, it is to provide a safe, accepting environment, were Jews can create Jewish memories. It is the foundation of Chabad philosophy that Jews gain strength just being together. Slowly, the Chabad model is spreading to other organizations. That would be the better story.

Sincerely,
Rabbi Eliezer Sneiderman
Chabad at the University of Delaware