Sweatin Over Self-Definitions Word from: Jake

We generally tend to avoid the directly political/ideological discussions on Mima'amakim, but I'd like to post a few quotes from the recent Jay Michaelson's article on "flexidoxy" because the questions he discusses are crucial for any Jewish intellectual/artist today.

Here's the question Jay poses:

What do you call a Jew who thinks the Torah was written by people, but who keeps strictly kosher and doesn't use electricity on Shabbat? What do you call a Jew who prays at an Orthodox synagogue, but supports equal synagogue roles for women and the ordination of gay rabbis?

Here it is again, in fuller elaboration:

I liked that it [Orthodox Judaism] worked as a system, and that it was trans-subjective - that it contained my preferences, rather than catered to them, hearkening back to an imperative that transcended humanity. Most of all, it was coherent, and it worked. The people at synagogue cared more, and the people at my Shabbat dinner table sang more. They even knew the words by heart.

But I never bought into Orthodox ideology, or how I had to either pretend that biblical criticism, astronomy and evolution didn't exist, or somehow "interpret" the Torah in order to make room for them. And gradually, I came to see that Orthodox values weren't "trans-subjective" - they were just the results of other people's subjectivity. And those people had no understanding of my life, my spirituality or my sexuality, and didn't want to gain any.

At the same time, the Conservative movement, with its countless social structures, rationalizations, and, at times, equally obtuse ideologies, didn't feel like home either. I have more in common with meditating Reform Jews, spiritual Hasidim and committed Reconstructionists than with mainline, rattle-your-jewelry-on-Rosh-Hashanah Conservative and Orthodox Jews. Where do Jews like me fit into the spectrum of movements and denominations?

And somewhat of a conclusion:

... flexidox Jews have practice, but not theory. Flexidoxy is defined by its refusal to defend itself or invent rationales to justify this or that deviation from traditional religious practice. [...] I don't defend my practice or try to make it fit an ideology - two key indicators of flexidoxy. I understand that I'm on a slippery slope, but I've found a home there.

I'm very excited about the article, even though I'm not entirely happy with it. Jay sites "sincerity" of intention as the solution to his dilemmas, which I think is pure kindergarden; similarly, some heavy questions are left undiscussed - for instance, separation from the community and the loneliness of blurred self-definition. This here is not a happy-go-lucky or trendy phenomenon: any "sincere" religious search elicits, above all, hard-core angst, pain, loss. You can't just inhale prana (or sm'n else) and ease it. At the same time, the relief I felt reading the article was tremendous - yes, there are people out there thinking the same thoughts, going through the same processes. Bless up to that.