Signs tacked to the guardrail of the road leading up to Jerusalem and flags flying from Chabad “mitzvah tanks” in cities across the country carry the same shocking message: “May our Master, Teacher, and Rabbi the King Messiah live forever and ever!”
According to David Berger, an Orthodox rabbi and professor of history at Brooklyn College, the doctrine behind that statement sets its adherents outside the bounds of Judaism. In his new book The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, Berger argues that a substantial percentage of Lubavitch Hasidim believe in a second messianic coming of their deceased Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson. Berger also asserts that some have even conflated Schneerson with God, stepping beyond simple heresy into the realm of idolatry.
Berger calls on the Orthodox world to act before false messianism becomes entrenched within the major institutions of the Jewish world. He proposes, among other measures ostracizing messianist Lubavitch rabbis and refusing their services in matters such as kashrut supervision.
Structurally, the book follows the course of Berger’s struggle against false messianism, from Berger’s first exposure to the nascent messianic movement prior to Schneerson’s death to his later efforts, through articles in major Jewish publications and lobbying important Orthodox institutions, to convince Orthodox leaders to denounce the notion that Schneerson is the messiah. Interspersed with this narrative, Berger challenges the arguments, culled from classical Jewish sources, put forward by false messianists to support their beliefs.
The messianic tradition has importantly influenced Jewish thought throughout history. For the majority of rabbinic commentators, such as Maimonides, the messiah is expected to be a male member of the Davidic line who will restore the Temple, fight the wars of the Lord, gather together the exiles, and compel all of Israel to follow the Torah. That the messiah cannot, like Jesus, die and return to complete his task is a core tenet of faith, central to some medieval disputations between Jews and Christians.
In order to justify doctrines such at the second coming of a deceased messiah, or the identification of Schneerson as “the essence and being of God placed in a body,” the classic sources on the topic must be consciously misread and their rational meaning distorted.
These arguments though are not the book’s most important point. Rather, Berger argues vehemently that the Orthodox world must act or be a silent partner to a radical shift in Judaism itself. This change–the acceptance of a second messianic coming as a legitimate Jewish belief–is what Berger sets out to prevent. The doctrine is anathema not only for its boldfaced contradiction of the texts, but for the manner in which it blurs the line between Judaism and Christianity. Some Christian groups have already seized upon this missionary opportunity. Berger cites the example of a Christian organization’s billboard in California bearing a picture of Schneerson and the message: “Right Idea, Wrong Person.”
For all his campaigning, however, Berger records precious few successes. Despite the private encouragement he has received from important Orthodox leaders, the only public results have been statements of condemnation issued by the modern Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America and Orthodox Union. For more traditional Orthodox Jews, these statements are not binding. The influential Council of Torah Sages, a leading rabbinic body, has not yet released a statement, Berger’s lobbying efforts notwithstanding.
Berger cites a number of relevant points as to why there has been no concerted Orthodox reponse to Lubavitch messianism. Among them are the desire to avoid strife within the community; the dependence of the Orthodox world on Lubavitch institutions and resources, which include emissaries across the United States and in approximately 50 countries around the world, kosher food supervision, and synagogue leadership; and gratitude for all the “good things” Chabad does, including concerted outreach to non-observant Jews. One other point Berger cites, the continuing balkanization of the Orthodox community into various subgroups–a situation not conducive to excising a large group from within its midst–brings to light the fatal flaw in his reasoning.
Berger is right to condemn false messianism, an issue of critical importance, not only to Orthodox Jews, but to the entire Jewish community. But he denies non-Orthodox Jews an active role in his effort against false messianism. “The future of this belief will not be determined by secular, Reform or Conservative Jews,” Berger writes. “Once you deny a particular doctrine, you lose your standing in the debate.” Not only is his assertion that the two major movements have “denied” the doctrine of the messiah incorrect, but it also leaves to their own devices those non-Orthodox Jews who take advantage of Chabad’s outreach institutions. In excluding the majority of world Jewry, Berger perpetuates the sort of balkanization that keeps a superficially Orthodox false messianism within the communal fold.
