In praise of ringing out danger
October 29, 2025 by Menachem Rosensaft
Read on for article
I have previously commended the courageous stance of those U.S. rabbis who are opposing the candidacy of the rabidly anti-Zionist Zorhan Mamdani for mayor of New York City.
Menachem Rosensaft
Let me now add an additional two cents on the ongoing controversy over whether or not rabbis should speak out publicly, even from their pulpits, when a candidate for political office holds positions that could threaten the security of the Jewish community.
By phrasing the question as I did, the answer should be self-obvious, a no-brainer, as it were. And yet we hear grumblings of discontent when some of our rabbis raise their voices in the prophetic tradition that, once upon a time, was a hallmark of Judaism.
Some naysayers argue that synagogues on Shabbat should be oases where people can escape from the turbulences of the week and the world. Others believe that a principal task of a rabbi should be to avoid offending any members of their congregation, that he or she should not take controversial public positions that do not represent a broad consensus.
Rabbis Elliot Cosgrove, Ammiel Hirsch, Marc Schneier, Joshua Davidson, and Rachel Ain are among those prominent New York rabbis who have turned their respective spiritual pulpits into bully pulpits by calling out Mamdani for what he is: a man who, in his heart of hearts, does not want the State of Israel to continue existing as part of the family of nations. I believe that they deserve our admiration and our gratitude.
More than 1,000 rabbis, cantors, and rabbinical and cantorial students have followed suit with an unprecedented public letter. They, too, deserve our unambiguous support.
Shalom Bayit — peace in the house — is a lofty and admirable goal, but not at any cost. Not if it requires turning a blind eye to danger or is predicated on the hope that the danger in question may turn out to be exaggerated. With respect to Mamdani, this ostrich-like hope is that once elected, he won’t be all that bad.
And I’m quite certain that there are those rabbis who think that by remaining silent they will have ready access to Mamdani and his administration. And that may well turn out be the case. The late Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg used to cynically refer to this type of mindset as “dinnerability,” that is, a willingness to compromise one’s principles in the hope of being invited to dinner.
But those modern-day incarnations of the Hofjude, or court Jew, are likely to find themselves breaking bread with leaders of Jewish Voices for Palestine and the virulently anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox Naturei Karta. Not the most appealing of optics, I would think.
If we agree with Rabbi Cosgrove that Mamdani is “a danger to the security of New York’s Jewish community,” then shouldn’t we all be asking ourselves whether we are doing everything we can to prevent him from being elected mayor of New York City on Nov. 4? We may not be successful. Indeed, there’s every likelihood that we won’t be. But we still have to be able to look ourselves in the mirror.
Rabbis — and members of the clergy generally, for that matter — are expected to exert a moral authority inherent in their positions. That should extend to, in the words of a famous folksong, “If I had a hammer,” using their voices and their pulpits to “ringing out danger.” Even political danger. Perhaps especially political danger.
