Talk:Michael Lerner (rabbi)

message: If people whose semicha isn't universally recognized aren't called by the title "rabbi", then by this logic, no Conservative, Reconstructionist, or Reform rabbis should be called "rabbi".  I added "rabbi" back in at the top.  Dreyfus 01:15, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked into this person's list of contributions and sort of suspected they were up to the same, but am not sufficiently familiar with Jewish Renewal to be sure of this. I'm mainly just familiar with Lerner (whom I worked for in the summer of 2007 [I created the stub of the "Left Hand of GOd" article at that time]) and Art Green (whom I took an undergrad course for in 1974).--WickerGuy (talk) 18:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Followup: Contacteeperson is a confirmed sockpuppet and has been banned, along with a whole sockfarm under the same puppetmaster, many of whom were vandalizing here also. Rooster613 (talk) 16:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rabbi 

message: : For the maximum convenience of some of the more careful editors (& talk users), the full context of a contrib made where it was off-topic is included (albeit struck thru) in the following.
Apologies if this is posted in the wrong spot - I'm not too familiar with the Wikipedia editing system.  Anyway, there is I think an error on this page, since it states that Lerner supports a binational state in Palestine/Israel.  Lerner has in published articles specifically opposed a binational state on the grounds that in it, the Jewish people wouldn't have national self-determination.  I haven't been able to find any reference outside this Wikipedia article that states that Lerner supports a binational state, nor anything in his writing that suggests it.141.117.102.38 19:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone ahead and made the deletions that Dale suggests. To include the reference to Lerner's support for a binational state, I think the editor should provide a footnote that can be checked. I've also deleted the category Reconstructionist rabbi because Lerner is not one. Though one or more of the rabbis who sat on his beit din may have been ordained Reconstructionist rabbis, that does not make him a Reconstructionist rabbi. He is not and never was a member of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association (RRA). The RRA does not accept "private semichah" candidates for potential membership. Sam* 04:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

text: * I've refactored Sam*'s half-off-topic contrib. AFAI can see, it is a response to one of our discussion topics, followed by starting a new discussion on another one. If i've missed some relevant context in my refactoring, i trust colleagues will correct my error. --Jerzy•t 05:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reconstructionist" comment refactored from "Error in the Lerner article" section 

message: Lerner is very prolix about all his accomplishments and Jewish learning (on his website).  But about his ordination, he merely states that the rabbinical court that granted it consisted of three Orthodox rabbis, all of whom had, in turn, also been ordained by Orthodox rabbis.  But Lerner has consistently refused to identify these rabbis, so his claims to an Orthodox ordination are, on their face, invalid.  Credentials whose origins are kept secret are not credentials. 74.66.82.195 (talk) 19:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credentials 

message: I just removed the section entitled "Conspiracy Theorist." It was copy-and-cut plagiarized  and hopelessly POV. However, the facts themselves were basically true. If someone wants to add the section back in, it would provide some balance to the article. Unfortunately, articles indicating his real beliefs are scattered all over the Internet. - Pingveno ( talk | contrib ) 11:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence-based (talk • contribs) restored the paragraph you removed, word for word, in another section. I've been editing the article for the past few days, and I edited the paragraph from the Forward so (a) it isn't a cut-and-paste job and (b) it's NPOV. Malik Shabazz 22:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conspiracy Theorist 

message: I first moved said heading just below the "Lerner's Views" item, and then changed the heading level to make it a subheading of "Lerner's Views", since it seems to me that Lerner's "Criticism of leftist antisemitism", whether or not one agrees with such criticism or characterization, falls under that category.  I'll have more to say about that later, but this is just a technical note about a technical edit.  --Davecampbell 07:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorder and change level of heading "Criticism of leftist antisemitism" 

message: First an apology - the following is mostly either my opinion or my personal factual knowledge or both.  I was involved in a different organization (Bay Area United Against War, aka BAUAW) during the period in question when ANSWER is accused of "barr[ing] him from speaking at their rallies ... because of his criticism".  I have my own criticisms of ANSWER, and my own criticisms of Lerner, but the actual basis of denying Lerner personally a spot on the platform, is that, because of the rancor between the various organizations within the anti-war movement, a custom had arisen as a peace-keeping measure to not have such rancor broadcast from the rally stage.  The broad mass of the anti-war movement were already sick of the sectarian infighting, as well as the principled discussions that invariably devolved into sectarian infighting, and demanded in numerous ways that we organizer-types concentrate on stopping the (insert expletive) war.  Lerner had already made a habit of trashing ANSWER from numerous platforms; it was decided not to invite him to do so from theirs - and the rest of us agreed, in an open letter (which may still be extant, but I'm not up for researching it at the moment).  ANSWER and others talked it over with the Tikkun organization (which, as noted, was a member of the ANSWER coalition), and another representative spoke at the rally instead.  The only party who expressed dissatisfaction with the result was Lerner.
It is interesting to note that, while on one hand Lerner is forced to fend off attacks from the ADL and others who equate any criticism of Israel with antisemitism, he yet insists that any criticism of the idea of Israel, of Zionism, is "leftist antisemitism".  He is entitled to that opinion.  He has many vehicles for expressing it.  But the fact that such a disproportionate number of the organizers of the anti-war movement (including some of the more vociferous critics of Israel) are Jewish, and as such we do not take kindly to real antisemitism, might be taken into account.  As for the occasional picket sign (which the newspaper and TV cameras always seem to focus on) which could be considered antisemitic (the swastika = Israeli flag pops up way too often), most of us are put off by that sort of thing, but we can't control what signs people carry.  From the stage, I can't testify personally (because I frankly don't pay attention to the speeches, I'm too busy trying to organize), but I'd be surprised if anyone would ever get away with pulling a Mel Gibson; I find it much more likely that, again, the anti-Israel rhetoric went further than Lerner is prepared to go, or allow.
--Davecampbell 07:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I live on the East Coast. I read about the Lerner/ANSWER spat second-hand and I also got the impression that there was more to it than he said. But in my experience, the speakers at ANSWER rallies spend an inordinate amount of time bashing Israel and blaming the Iraq War on Israel. It makes me very uncomfortable and unwelcome, and many fellow Jews feel the same way. At the last big rally they had in Washington, Rabbi Arthur Waskow led a separate march that met the bigger rally so that Jews and others could show that we were opposed to the Iraq War but also opposed to the anti-Israelism and sometimes antisemitism of the ANSWER crowd. And when ANSWER invites the same speakers who make the same speeches every time, they can no longer claim that they have no idea that their speakers will be bashing Israel and the Jooooz. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 17:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note about Lerner's "Criticism of leftist antisemitism" 

message: In another article on the Seattle Seven, Learner was reported to have later been on the Clinton's advisement council.  Any verification?
This seems a significant claim.
RRM MBA (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working for the Clintons? 

message: whether to mention this (and how) on the mainpage: Rabbi Lerner's Response to Amma.
:Austerlitz -- 88.75.88.160 (talk) 12:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't know 

message: I know there's already two headings in this talk page with that same title, but they're old and I think this deals with a different subject.
That being said, the language being used is outrageously NPOV. Take this sentence: "...that has risen among some leftists." Which leftists? Who are they? How are they anti-semitic? The language is taking this charge as granted and is basically implying that Mr. Lerner is pointing out objective reality.
This sentence is also written in the same fashion: "...the left often denies antisemitism". Could there be a more biased sentence? This could all be fixed with a simple "he asserts" or "believes that", and I would be more than happy to do so, but the article is locked, and as such, the problem can't be fixed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.50.59.30 (talk) 00:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Criticism of Leftist Anti-Semitism" 

message: He never graduated from any rabbinic seminary and has no rabbinic ordination recognized by any branch of Judiasm.[ http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/07/poor-michael-lerner%E2%80%99s-petunias/]
Membership in the Board does not mean anyone has acknowledged one’s rabbinic credentials as bona fide; to join only one pays annual dues.[ http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/07/poor-michael-lerner%E2%80%99s-petunias]
He has no Rabbinic training and was never ordained as a Rabbi by any Rabbinic training seminary or institution. [ http://www.conservativetruth.org/opinionet/archives2/ccsp/2002/ccsp52.htm] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contacteeperson (talk • contribs) 23:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In no way do these fit Wikipedia's criterion for reliable sources. They are blatantly partisan sources. However, JWeekly states The Board of Rabbis of Northern California has accepted Michael Lerner who received ordination from Aleph, the Alliance for Jewish Renewal.--WickerGuy (talk) 23:53, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  He is only a "self professed" Rabbi  

message: Admin: Please change (or just delete)
"Some local rabbis disagree with his credentials. The president of the Northern California Board of Rabbis and JTS graduate Rabbi Alan Lew states "That is arrogant nonsense" "I spent six years in extremely rigorous, round-the-clock study in the classic texts of our tradition. Authentic Jewish spirituality is in the texts, not in some fancy New Age ideas or watered-down kabbalah [Jewish mysticism]" [13]
to
Some local rabbis challenge Lerner's decision to not be educated in a classical Jewish Seminary, although Lerner has said that the nonseminary track is one taken by "every Chabad rabbi takes, & every ultra-Orthodox rabbi". When Lerner attacked seminaries for being "more interested in producing organizational men for Jewish life than spiritual leaders connected to the deepest spiritual and social-justice minds", rabbi Alan Lew said ""That is arrogant nonsense...I spent six years in extremely rigorous, round-the-clock study in the classic texts of our tradition. Authentic Jewish spirituality is in the texts, not in some fancy New Age ideas or watered-down kabbalah"[same citation]
The quote in the article in no way challenges his ordination, and as it stands it is unclear what "credentials" mean and the cited quotation is wayyyy out of context.--WickerGuy (talk) 21:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: At the discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Michael_Lerner_.28rabbi.29, User:FormerIP agrees that User:SevaSevaSeva has doctored his sources. Please remedy.--WickerGuy (talk) 21:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So put the entire quote in.  --SevaSevaSeva (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not an appropriate solution.  When you two come up with one, use this:  (but don't include the tl| visible in the edit box).  If any admins happen to be watching here: the passage Seva has added is indeed improper and should be removed per BLP while this discussion takes place.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

text: I was just getting started with a civil and friendly conversation with him on his User talk page.--WickerGuy (talk) 17:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admin: Please change or delete 

message: I've added a lot of citations to this article. I'm not sure if they are enough to justify removing the tag at the top of the article, but they will certainly discourage overzealous dissidents from deleting large chunks of material on the grounds that it is uncited.
To uncite is to incite deletion by the excited.--WickerGuy (talk) 21:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added a lot of references 

message: I have given up trying to edit Wikipedia, it is solidly under the control of leftists. Now I only post rants my opinions on the talk pages, exposing the hypocrisy and bias of the Wikipedia's liberal controllers. But sometimes when I do, libs come in and revert it because of the explanation "not a forum for general discussion." Even when I make numerous references to the article and how to make it better. The same happened on this article, an admin reverted my edit after I asked why there is no section for "criticism," the way there would be if Lerner was not a liberal.Winston S Smith (talk) 23:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Criticism section on the Wikipedia article on Al Sharpton is much longer than the Criticism section in the article on Bill O'Reilly. Although there is no "section" as such, there is plenty of criticism of left-wing film director Oliver Stone in the article on him, and hardly any criticism at all in the WP article on William F. Buckley. Maybe you should be careful about scapegoating the alleged liberal bias of the editors of Wikipedia.--WickerGuy (talk) 19:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Soundly put. Activist (talk) 20:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What exactly is a talk page for? 

message: I'm looking to see if we can merge the relevant information from Beyt Tikkun Synagogue, the synagogue Lerner founded, here.  There's not a lot of detail about the synagogue to sustain an article, but lots about Lerner contained in its references and it might improve this article too.  Thoughts? Thargor Orlando (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Michael Lerner (rabbi). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120327053912/http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/05/seattle_seven_vietnam_proteste.php to http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/05/seattle_seven_vietnam_proteste.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120325093716/http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/451/451.F2d.372.26889.html to http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/451/451.F2d.372.26889.html
*Added  tag to http://www.cityclubofsandiego.com/city_club_past_details_db.asp?id=13334
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100706010801/http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/index.cfm?n=27&sn=85 to http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/index.cfm?n=27&sn=85
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090222010038/http://www.shiftinaction.com/discover/luminaries/rabbi_michael_lerner to http://www.shiftinaction.com/discover/luminaries/rabbi_michael_lerner
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071025092534/http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/article.php?story=covenant to http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/article.php?story=covenant
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071025092005/http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/article.php?story=20070228183252814 to http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/article.php?story=20070228183252814
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061210023227/http://www.morehouse.edu/communications/newsreleases/archives/000203.html to http://www.morehouse.edu/communications/newsreleases/archives/000203.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified