Editing Modern Orthodox Judaism (section)

==Criticism==
This section deals with criticism relating to standards of observance and to social issues. See [[Torah Umadda#Criticism|"Criticism"]] under [[Torah Umadda]] for discussions of [[philosophy]].

===Standards of observance===
{{Hatnote|See further under [[Torah im Derech Eretz#Jewish law|Torah im Derech Eretz]]; [[Torah Umadda#Centrist Orthodoxy|Torah Umadda]]}}
There is an often repeated contention that Modern Orthodoxy—beyond its approach to ''chumrahs'' ("strictures") [[#Haredi Judaism|described above]]—has lower standards of observance of [[halakha|traditional Jewish laws and customs]] than other branches of [[Orthodox Judaism]].<ref>See for example, [http://www.hashkafah.com/index.php?showtopic=1926&st=20 What is Modern Orthodox?-Hashkafah.com<!-- Bot generated title -->] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070818073228/http://www.hashkafah.com/index.php?showtopic=1926&st=20 |date=2007-08-18 }}.</ref> This view is largely anecdotal, and is based on individual behaviour, as opposed to any formal, institutional position;<ref>{{cite web|last=Menchell|first=Dovid|title=Edah Holds Conference|url=http://yuweb.addr.com/v63i9/news/edah.shtml|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051110172630/http://yuweb.addr.com/v63i9/news/edah.shtml|archive-date=November 10, 2005|access-date=September 2, 2005}}</ref> see [[#The_behaviorally_modern|above]] re "the behaviorally modern":

{{Quote|There are at least two distinct types of Modern Orthodox. ... One is philosophically or ideologically modern, while the other is more appropriately characterized as behaviorally modern. ... [The] philosophically Modern Orthodox would be those who are meticulously observant of Halakhah but are, nevertheless, philosophically modern. ... The behaviorally Modern Orthodox, on the other hand, are not deeply concerned with philosophical ideas ... by and large, they define themselves as Modern Orthodox [either] in the sense that they are not meticulously observant [or] in reference to ... right-wing Orthodoxy.<ref name="Liebman2" />}}

{{Quote|[This] group is appropriately described as "modern" in the sense that those who see themselves as part of it are committed to the tradition, in general, but feel free to pick and choose in their observance of rituals. In contrast to the more traditional Orthodox, they do not observe all of the rituals as deemed obligatory by the traditional community. Their sense of "freedom of choice", although never articulated theoretically, is as evident as it is among many other contemporary Americans who view themselves as religiously traditional, but, nevertheless, are selective in their religiosity.<ref name="Waxman" />}}

Additionally, whereas the Modern Orthodox position is (generally) presented as "unquestioned allegiance to the primacy of Torah, and that the apprehension of all other intellectual disciplines must be rooted and viewed through the prism of Torah",<ref>{{cite web|title=What Does Torah U'Madda Mean to You?|url=http://yuweb.addr.com/v67i7/culture/toyou.html|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070308081945/http://yuweb.addr.com/v67i7/culture/toyou.html|archive-date=March 8, 2007|access-date=March 26, 2006}}</ref> ''[[Haredi Judaism|Haredi]]'' groups have sometimes compared Modern Orthodoxy with early [[Reform Judaism]] in [[Germany]]: Modern Orthodox rabbis have been criticised for attempting to modify [[Halakha|Jewish law]], in adapting Judaism to the needs of the [[modern world]].{{citation needed|reason=No reliable source for such claims|date=March 2015}}

Note that claims of this nature have been commonplace within Orthodox Judaism since the first "reforms" of [[Samson Raphael Hirsch]] and [[Azriel Hildesheimer]]. Thus, in [[Europe]] of the early 19th century, all of [[Judaism]] that differed from the strictest forms present at the time was called "Reform". Then, as now, Modern Orthodoxy took pains to distance its "reforms", which were consistent with the [[Shulkhan Arukh]] and [[poskim]], from those of the Reform movement (and the Conservative movement), which were not.{{Citation needed|date=December 2021}}

{{Quote|It is foolish to believe that it is the wording of a prayer, the notes of a synagogue tune, or the order of a special service, which form the abyss between [Reform and Orthodoxy].... It is not the so-called Divine Service which separates us, [rather it] is the theory—the principle [of faithfulness to Jewish law] ... if the Torah is to you the Law of God how dare you place another law above it and go along with God and His Law only as long as you thereby "progress" in other respects at the same time? (''Religion Allied to Progress'', [[Samson Raphael Hirsch]])}}

===Sociological and philosophical dilemmas===
Some observe<ref name="Waxman" /> that the ability of Modern Orthodoxy to attract a large following and maintain its strength as a movement is inhibited by the fact that it embraces [[modernity]]—its ''[[wikt:raison d'être|raison d'être]]''—and that it is highly [[Rationality|rational]] and [[intellectual]].
* Modern Orthodoxy is, almost by definition, inhibited from becoming a strong movement, because this would entail organization and authority to a degree "which goes against the very grain of modernity". A related difficulty is that Modern Orthodox rabbis who do adopt stringencies may, in the process, lose the support of precisely the "Modern" group they sought to lead. The logic: since one of the characteristics of [[orthodoxy|religious orthodoxy]] is the submission to the authority of [[oral law|its tradition]], the individual is expected to conform to all of its dictates, whereas [[modernity]], by contrast, emphasizes a measure of personal autonomy as well as rationalist truth. The very term "Modern Orthodoxy" is thus, in some sense, an [[oxymoron]].
* Modern Orthodoxy's "highly intellectual and rational stance" presents its own difficulties. Firstly, the ideology entails built-in tensions and frequently requires conscious living with inconsistency<ref name="Richlen"/><ref name="Sol Roth" /> (even in the term itself: modernity vs. orthodoxy). Secondly, there are also those who question whether "the literature ... with its intellectually elitist bias fails to directly address the majority of its practitioners".<ref>Rabbi Prof. Alan Brill, [http://www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/4_1_brill.pdf Judaism in Culture: Beyond the Bifurcation of Torah and Madda].</ref> The suggestion here is that Modern Orthodoxy may not provide a directly applicable theology for the contemporary Modern Orthodox family; see [[Torah Umadda#Modern Orthodoxy|further discussion]] under ''Torah Umadda''.
* As observed [[#Positioning|above]], the (precise) "philosophical parameters of modern Orthodoxy" are not readily defined. It is posited then that "modern orthodoxy", as such, may be disappearing, "being sucked into [[Jewish_religious_movements#Trans-_and_post-denominational_Judaism|pluralistic Judaism]] on the left and [[yeshivish]] on the right".<ref>This [[tongue in cheek]] comment is from [http://www.frumsatire.net/2009/05/13/artscroll-may-soon-be-losing-its-siddur-monopoly/ frumsatire.net]; although see Shmuel Hain in note.</ref> "Modern orthodoxy", then, as opposed to constituting an [[#Ideological spectrum|ideological spectrum]] centred on a common core of values, is, in fact, (tending towards) several entirely separate movements. In fact, "[m]any are making the argument that the time has come to state the inevitable or to admit that which already has occurred: There is no longer a cohesive, singular Modern Orthodoxy. Separate rabbinical schools and separate rabbinic organizations, the argument goes, reflect the reality of a community divided."<ref name="Hain">Shmuel Hain: [http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/07/1010497/op-ed-the-vital-center-and-modern-orthodoxy Op-Ed: The vital center and Modern Orthodoxy], jta.org</ref> See {{sectionlink|Orthodox Judaism |Modern_Orthodoxy}}.