Messianic JudaismI received an email earlier today regarding a Messianic conference to be held later this year. In the brochure mention was made of a new siddur produced by First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ). The brochure I read seemed to imply that the new siddur would have modifications made to certain prayers.
Without having read the siddur, I assume that these changes are likely in the vein of those introduced by individuals such as Tim Hegg. I have also seen this practice at one other Messianic synagogue. The starting point for these modifications is an Orthodox Siddur.
The practice of modifying prayers for theological or social considerations based upon the inclusion of non-Jews is problematic and troubling to me. Changing prayers should not be something that is done lightly and I believe is done without a complete review of the Jewish theological basis and history of the prayers that are being modified.
The preferred practice that should be followed should not be the written modification of the prayers, but rather the verbal and personal modification of the prayer. This preserves the prayer that has been, for lack of a better term, sanctified if nothing else by the Jewish people through the centuries, if not divinely inspired through the Sages.
An example of this “verbal and personal” modification is as follows. The Birchot haShachar (morning blessings) include the blessing said by males “…not making me a woman” and by woman “…for making me in accordance with your will.” To avoid at least part of the fray surrounding the egalitarian issue, and for those congregations that recite these, the Hazzan should consider reciting this particular blessing silently.
This preserves the bracha as written; allows the Hazzan to follow his personal preference, and allows individuals to recite either the traditional bracha or one modified in accordance with their personal convictions.
This approach does not address all circumstances nor all prayers, but offers an alternative to those looking to modify prayers. Messianic synagogues are not ready to make such alterations nor should they present themselves as having the authority for doing so.
This is not to say that Messianic synagogues cannot make alterations as Reform, Reconstructionist, Jewish Renewal, or even Conservative Judaism has. It is however a recognition that a movement that is still largely disconnected to Jewish liturgy so should easily make changes to prayers that are to borrow from the siddur ” from days of old.”
Tags: Birchot haShachar, Conservative Judaism, FFOZ, Hazzan, Jewish Prayer, Jewish Renewal, Messianic Synagogues, Reconstructionist, Reform, Siddur
26 responses so far ↓
1 Diggory // Mar 10, 2008 at 7:57 am
Keep in mind that the siddur is the only living work of Judaism. While the canons of the Tanach, Mishanah and Talmud are closed, the siddur has always been a living work. There is not a homogenous, “final” siddur (although Artscroll has attempted to produce one). As the needs of the community arise, there have been prayers inserted which have become part of the communal norm.
I think the main changes in the FFOZ siddur are this type of thing. They are adding prayers that are from the Apostolic Writings, and inserting phrases where needed. One example is in the prayers you mentioned, the Birchot HaShachar. Many of the people who will be using this siddur will be non-Jews. It wouldn’t be appropriate for a non-Jew to pray Baruch…shelo asani goi (Blessed… for not making me a gentile). Therefore, it is necessary to come up with a solution that doesn’t take away from the theological or sociological constructs that already exist, but somehow deal with the issue. So, the wording from a passage in Acts was chosen as an option for non-Jews: Baruch…Asher natan gam l’goyim et hat’shuva l’chayim (Blessed…Who has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life).
I think you will find that FFOZ has been very sensitive to these issues and has not taken this lightly, especially as Aaron Eby (the main translator and overseer of the project) is very connected to the greater Jewish community.
2 Jay // Mar 10, 2008 at 9:51 am
Hot Diggory!
While I see your point that a brand new, from the ground up siddur would be a bad idea, that is not what is going on here. I think the siddur project will help unify the fractured movement of “Messianics” by ensuring that they are together in what they are praying. Isn’t it simpler to write the oral changes down in order to bring unity, rather than tell people verbally how to make changes. If the Messianics all went to one Synagogue then the verbal changes would be simple to implement, but since most congregations are so spread out, it seems the greater good is done by writing down the changes. While I also have not read the siddur, it does sound as if FFOZ was very sensitive to the original text, and didn’t make changes just to make changes.
3 daniel // Mar 10, 2008 at 11:21 am
Jacob, I know that you already wrote about this regarding intermarriage, can you deal with the modern movement of non-Jews keeping Torah. Thank you.
4 daniel // Mar 10, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Also what’s up with people adding Yeshua here and there on the siddur? I knew a Messianic “rabbi” that would say Yeshua instead of Adonay in the Hebrew or Hashem on the English. I understand his assertion from a Christian standpoint, but even if we knew the name of our creator we should address him with respect and not confuse the Ben ha Elohim with Avinu Malchenu eventhough they are echad (however you want to interpret that!). I have a problem with people adding “Beshem Yeshua” to traditional prayers or for them to through the Avinu (our father) or Apostles prayer in the midst of the siddur. What abbout praying the “messianic psalms” instead. Ps. 45, 110, 2, 40, 69, 89, etc. That would be the more scripturally focused way to deal with the siddur
5 admin // Mar 10, 2008 at 10:24 pm
My criticism regarding the potential FFOZ changes, or those made by others is the fact that the solution may lie within the realm of the traditional siddur itself. An alternative wording of the bracha present in various siddurim is as follows:
Baruch atah Adonai,
Blessed are You Hashem,
Eloheinu melech ha-olam,
our Eternal One, Sovereign of the universe,
shelo asani nochri/nochriyah
The translations is “who has not made me a stranger to You” or simply not made me a stranger. This is the version recited in our community which I believe automatically resolves the theological concern non-Jews would have.
The issue for me then is familiarity with traditional sources as the means to address these issues instead of a readiness to modify existing texts. The familiarity of traditional texts is not sufficiently high in most circles to justify such changes in more than local communities. This also raises the issue of producing liturgical texts that would be used beyond a local community begging the question “upon what authority are such changes made.” I believe that a local community does have the “right” to express its own Judaism (within certain boundaries and certain models) but surpassing these boundaries and attempting to apply such changes to many congregations in light of generally limited knowledge of siddur is problematic.
6 admin // Mar 10, 2008 at 10:25 pm
My criticism regarding the potential FFOZ changes, or those made by others is the fact that the solution may lie within the realm of the traditional siddur itself. An alternative wording of the bracha present in various siddurim is as follows:
Baruch atah Adonai,
Blessed are You Hashem,
Eloheinu melech ha-olam,
our Eternal One, Sovereign of the universe,
shelo asani nochri/nochriyah
The translations is “who has not made me a stranger to You” or simply not made me a stranger. This is the version recited in our community which I believe automatically resolves the theological concern non-Jews would have.
The issue for me then is familiarity with traditional sources as the means to address these issues instead of a readiness to modify existing texts. The familiarity of traditional texts is not sufficiently high in most circles to justify such changes in more than local communities. This also raises the issue of producing liturgical texts that would be used beyond a local community begging the question “upon what authority are such changes made.”
I believe that a local community does have the “right” to express its own Judaism (within certain boundaries and certain models) but surpassing these boundaries and attempting to apply such changes to many congregations in light of generally limited knowledge of siddur is problematic.
7 admin // Mar 10, 2008 at 10:28 pm
I think it would be more appropriate to enact a siddur with the traditional text with margin notes with alterations or variations.
The concern is not promote a view that established practice can be so easily changed even if seemingly justified. Local minhag (custom) is something which I believe can effectively “smooth” out the theological adjustments that should be made.
8 anonymous // Mar 11, 2008 at 10:41 pm
I think it would be appropriate to leave the siddur alone and print something else apart from the siddur if a congregration feels the need to use something additional in their services.
The very real possibility of introducing errors (which in hebrew can be dramatic even if vowels are altered) is almost certain to occur.
Changing traditions or ‘christianizing’ something is where things went wrong very early on in the first century ce and only got worse.
9 Diggory // Mar 13, 2008 at 12:44 am
Daniel - You have a combination of founded and unfounded concerns. Any substitution of “Yeshua” for Hashem is, in my opinion, blasphemous.
But on the issue of using the phrase “beshem Yeshua,” this is totally unfounded. Within the siddur itself we pray in the merits of many (both the patriarchs and the matriarchs). The Breslovers ask that their prayers be heard via the merits of their rabbi, Rebbe Nachman, haTzaddik, zt”l. The Lubavitch chabadniks ask the same thing via Rebbe Schneerson, haTzaddik, zt”l. It is only appropriate that we ask that our prayers be heard via the merits of HaTzaddik HaTzaddikim, Yeshua, our Righteous Moshiach. This is a non-issue, and a knee-jerk reaction to church-o-phoebia.
10 admin // Mar 13, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Diggory is correct I believe. The substitution of Yeshua for anywhere Hashem appears is shows how ignorant of even classical Christian thought, the person that did this was. I know of no classical Christian tradition that would embrace such a move.
11 admin // Mar 13, 2008 at 2:30 pm
What does “more scripturally focused” mean?
12 admin // Mar 13, 2008 at 2:32 pm
As the siddur is full of Psalms, simply incorporating more Psalms may not sufficiently add the messianic distinctive we seek to both embrace and exemplify. The model of Yeshua instructing his disciples to “pray in his name” seems to be the most proper implementation of this.
13 daniel // Mar 13, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Church-o-phobia? Does anyone ever read what other Jews think about messianics? If we want to engage our brothers and not fall into the categorization of stealing classical Judaism for our own purposes, we must take seriously their concerns. The Christianizing aspect of what Anonymus was speaking of is all over the messianic movement. Adding and substracting things as well as incorporating scriptures that have not been used in a Jewish context for centuries is what the rest of the Jewish community finds disrespectful. I have a problem with adding things unnecesarily. The Tanak speaks of both the qualities and character of Meshiach all over the place specially the Psalms. If people just assume that is ok to add new testament passages here and there they are not taking into consideration that the new testament did not exist while Yeshua and his followers were practizing Judaism. At the same time, their is a messianic culture that feels that unless you talk about Yeshua on every prayer service somehow you are denying him. That is ridiculous, we unite with other Jews in prayer and acknowledge Hashem above all things with our New Life in Meshiach living out his covenant and lookng at the promises Hashem made to our people with Meshiach’s example and love before us.
14 daniel // Mar 13, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Scriptually focus-for lack of better terms-Based on the Tanak.
15 slevi // Mar 13, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Yechi Adoneinu Moreinu v’Rabbeinu Melech haMoshiach l’olam vo’ed!
http://www.chabad.org/tools/ohel_cdo/aid/36248/jewish/How-to-Send-a-Letter.htm
16 Diggory // Mar 14, 2008 at 10:08 am
Daniel -
You said: “If people just assume that is ok to add new testament passages here and there they are not taking into consideration that the new testament did not exist while Yeshua and his followers were practizing Judaism.”
I don’t intend to sound crass, but evidently, you don’t understand the siddur. Have you ever looked at other siddurim, especially olde siddurim, besides the Artscroll siddurim? You will find a great diversity in the prayers. Many of the prayers did not come about until the middle ages or later. Some prayer will always be accepted or rejected by certain communities. Each community has it’s own nusach and even though the core remains the same, the tefillim for each community nusach are varied.
This is all this project is meant to do, create a Messianic nusach which addresses the needs of the Messianic community. I was once in your frame of mind. However, I have recently become more balanced in my understanding and been able to view the Apostolic writings and words of our Master (and his shlichim) with a more Judaic perspective, rather than my previous Xian lenses. I pray time and study will aid in the development of your paradigm as well.
17 Diggory // Mar 14, 2008 at 10:28 am
Daniel - I owe you an apology. I am really sorry for my condescending attitude in that last message. I apologize and ask your forgiveness. That was uncalled for and I did not guard my words. Please forgive me.
18 daniel // Mar 14, 2008 at 11:02 am
Lets go back to the topic at hand. Has everyone read the Menorah Ministries Messianic Siddur? What do you guys think of it.
19 Jay // Mar 14, 2008 at 11:18 am
What was the purpose of the url listed above? Was that to show an example of how people pray to Hashem in the name of their rabbi? That seems to reinforce the idea of what is going on in the Messianic movement - praying in the name of our Master, Yeshua HaMashiach. I do agree that their is no need to “force” Yeshua into things, but rather the natural fit like teeth or cogs in a gear. It was designed to fit and the meshing of the two is a thing of beauty. I don’t force Yeshua into our celebration on Shabbat, Moshiach is there. Not in some mystical sense, but much like the melodic line in music. The concept of Moshiach has always been there. As you said earlier, it shows up in the psalms and other places. I don’t see any issue with incorporating Apostolic writings into the personal prayers that we pray from a traditional Siddur. It brings balance and helps to reinforce our beliefs in a world where holding firm to something is looked at with disdain. Good discussion, though. It made me re-evaluate the reason I am looking forward to a Messianic-style Siddur.
20 Diggory // Mar 14, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Daniel - I am beginning to understand your point. Although I have not read the Menorah Ministries Messianic Siddur, I have used the one (including the Machzor) from Messianic Liturgical Resources and I do not recommend it at all. It is severely lacking in many regards. It totally re-writes the Amidah to the point it looks nothing like the original. I’m assuming the one from Menorah Ministries is the same. Other Messianic siddurim that I have seen have been at least as lacking. Some of them are a total of about a dozen pages, a far cry from orthodoxy.
I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the sensitivity and caution of FFOZ in its evaluation of these concerns. However, only time will tell. I think they may have their bentcher out by Shavuot and that will give you a good idea of how the rest of the project will look.
21 daniel // Mar 14, 2008 at 12:32 pm
The only orthodoxy that I see in messianic circles is that everyone uses the Menorah Ministries creed, why? I would use ps.89 but maybe is to shadowy for some people
(Menorah Ministries, Siddur, 1988, page 83):
Blessed are You, O L-rd, Who has given us the
way of salvation in Yeshua.
He walked among us filled with Your Spirit, the
only one who ever fulfilled Your Torah.
He healed the sick and raised the dead. The
multitudes of our people sought his touch.
He taught as no man taught. With authority,
He brought forth the treasures of the Torah.
How the children sought Him! The lepers He
touched and made clean.
How the despised and outcast found love and
release from their sin!
How the hypocrites feared Him whose words
uncovered their sin!
Despised and rejected, acquainted with grief,
He bore the sins of Israel.
All we like sheep have gone astray, turned
every one to his own way.
Our iniquities were laid upon the King, the sins
of the world His burden to bear.
He rose from the dead and opened the way to
life everlasting, Baruch HaShem!
We are in Him, His Spirit empowers; new life
is ours with joy and peace.
Blessed are You, O L-rd, our G-d, who has
given us Messiah Yeshua, our King.
22 slevi // Mar 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Praying in someone else’s name if one thing. Praying to them is another.
Messianics in chabad pray to Schneerson. You can email him or pray to him at the ohel.
It is substituing him for G-d. Likewise, substituting Y’shua for G-d is also out of line.
Catholics pray to their saints I think. Out of line.
23 daniel // Mar 14, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Other groups take the 13 principles of Maimonedes and change the ending to point to Yeshua, without an explanation. I think that is still adding in substracting and looks bad in the eyes of outsiders.
24 admin // Mar 14, 2008 at 5:55 pm
The reality is that any “outsider” can critique anything we do. We have a mechitzah, we don’t have a metchitzah, we include non-Jews, we don’t include non-Jews in the minyan, we are egalitarian, we are not egalitarian….inevitably every community has to adopt a general philosophy and identity which will be subject to the criticisim of outsiders…
25 admin // Mar 16, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Daniel, What do you mean when you refer to “The only orthodoxy that I see in messianic circles is that everyone uses the Menorah Ministries creed, why?” That is, what do you mean by “orthodoxy?”
26 daniel // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:28 am
That everyone is doing it, the only unifiying factor accross all messianic congregations from UJMC, MJA and the independent ones too.
Leave a Comment