"Modern Orthodoxy has a highly positive attitude toward the State of Israel. Our Ultra-Orthodox brethren recognize only the Holy Land, but not the state"
About this Quote
A single sentence, and Norman Lamm manages to map an entire fault line in Jewish modernity: the difference between a sacred place and a sovereign project. As an educator steeped in Modern Orthodoxy, Lamm isn’t merely describing intra-Orthodox nuance; he’s staking out a political-theological identity built on synthesis. “Modern Orthodoxy” in his usage is not just more relaxed observance. It’s a worldview willing to treat the modern nation-state as a legitimate vessel for Jewish destiny, not a profane interruption of it.
The subtext is a quiet rebuttal to Ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) suspicion of Zionism. By contrasting “Holy Land” with “the state,” Lamm spotlights a split between metaphysics and governance. Everyone can revere Eretz Yisrael; the real test is whether you can affirm the messy, coercive apparatus of “the State of Israel” - elections, armies, taxes, secular courts - as religiously meaningful rather than spiritually contaminating. Lamm’s phrasing “our Ultra-Orthodox brethren” softens the critique, but it also draws a boundary: family, yes; shared civic theology, no.
Context matters. Lamm came of age after 1948, when the existence of Israel forced Orthodoxy to answer a new question: is Jewish power a mitzvah, a temptation, or a theological error? His intent is to normalize the Modern Orthodox answer - that commitment to halakha can coexist with, and even demand, positive investment in a Jewish state - while acknowledging that for many Haredim, holiness remains safely pre-political. The line works because it compresses a century of argument into two nouns: land versus state.
The subtext is a quiet rebuttal to Ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) suspicion of Zionism. By contrasting “Holy Land” with “the state,” Lamm spotlights a split between metaphysics and governance. Everyone can revere Eretz Yisrael; the real test is whether you can affirm the messy, coercive apparatus of “the State of Israel” - elections, armies, taxes, secular courts - as religiously meaningful rather than spiritually contaminating. Lamm’s phrasing “our Ultra-Orthodox brethren” softens the critique, but it also draws a boundary: family, yes; shared civic theology, no.
Context matters. Lamm came of age after 1948, when the existence of Israel forced Orthodoxy to answer a new question: is Jewish power a mitzvah, a temptation, or a theological error? His intent is to normalize the Modern Orthodox answer - that commitment to halakha can coexist with, and even demand, positive investment in a Jewish state - while acknowledging that for many Haredim, holiness remains safely pre-political. The line works because it compresses a century of argument into two nouns: land versus state.
Quote Details
| Topic | Faith |
|---|
More Quotes by Norman
Add to List



