When is it worth starting a fight? A few thoughts on the recent RCA controversy

We don't learn anything from History. That was the first thing I was told in University. We don't get wiser with time but are somehow fated to make the same mistakes endlessly, never being able to explain something until it happens: the collapse of the Berlin Wall, 9/11, the credit crunch, These are things Historians did not predict.

 "Ah but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now". Obligatory Dylan quote. But this position is slightly modified by the fact that we constantly use history to inform our decisions. E.H Carr mentions that many of those who convened at Versailles had Waterloo in mind when deciding upon reparations, and Chamberlain's infamous appeasement policy was clearly in large part a product of wanting to avoid the horrors of the first world war. The lessons of history weigh heavily in the minds of those entrusted with major decision-making.

And in this sense, history is at the forefront of everyone's mind when thinking about the role of appointing female rabbinic leaders in Judaism. There are two dominant perspectives; the first, clearly in the minds of many contemporary Orthodox rabbis, is the slippery slope leading to Conservative or Reform Judaism. The very concept of a female rabbi takes them on a journey which ends in assimilation, apostasy and the end of the Jewish people. The second is quite the opposite. History is filled with positive innovations. Particularly in the realm of women's educations, many perceived innovations are now accepted as critical to the spiritual wellbeing of the Jewish people. Why, they might say, Copernicus' model of the universe was also an innovation.

Whilst the halakhic considerations are certainly paramount, what you increasingly have are two groups who see a monumental period in history which requires action. This is, like it or not, the definitive issue in the contemporary Jewish Orthodox scene. But there is another issue. How do you present these ideas? Even if you consider a movement to be potentially heretical what is the point saying something in a way that can only create discord?

The age of the internet has created  the greatest revolution in the spread of knowledge since the invention of the printing press. This deeply affects the way people respond to authority, particularly in religion. Whilst a signed letter of condemnation may have been powerful when people could view it under certain limited conditions, for example in print. But today when anything is said or released, instantly the whole of cyberworld goes crazy and points that are raised with the voice of authority are mercilessly attacked, sometimes harshly and sometimes constructively, in split seconds. Since the days of the Herem being rendered obsolete as a means of social control, condemnations from figures of authority have become less influential. In today's world they almost always attract derision.

Who is the wise person? One who sees the newborn. It is true that history cannot predict specific events. But it should be able to create a deeper understanding of the way the universe and humanity work. The bad feelings from fights take a long time to go away, as things get personal and unpleasant. As well as the technical rights and wrongs of a situation, leaders should try and take full account of responses, reactions and consequences when making decisions. 

Like Pieterson, there is a time and place to publish a book, particularly when you want to get back into the Test team.