Approaches to Messianic Halacha: An Introduction (Part III) [UPDATED]

The Right to Communal Halacha

It is a universal principle of Judaism that each community is allowed to interpret halacha for itself.  But it's also true that Yeshua has authorized His community to establish halacha.

Methodology for Developing Halacha

Scientific Method:

(1) observe all possible sources for halacha (e.g. Written Torah, New Testament, secondary sources such as Talmud, Codes, Commentaries, etc, etc);

(2) hypothesize as to general principles (which in my opinion should be topically categorized according to the Mishna's system of classification but more on that later);

(3) verify the principles (this is where the Kol Echad Initiative might be handy);

(4) systematize an integrated body of halachic principles

Philosophy of Halachic Jurisprudence

The overview:

 "The Jewish people (Am Yisrael) is a polity of equals, a commonwealth (edah), with all that implies for the organization and conduct of Jewish political affairs....The classic Jewish political worldview can be summarized as follows:  The family or kith (moledet) of tribes (shevatim) descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob which God raised up to be a nation (goy) became the Jewish people (Am Yisrael) through its covenant (brit) with God, which, in turn, laid the basis for the establishment of a Jewish commonwealth (edah) under Divine sovereignty (malkhut shamayim) and hence bound by the Divine constitutional teaching (Torah).  The am so created must live as a community of equals (kahal) whose locus is the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel), under the rule of law (hukah, hok) which applies to every citizen (ezrah), defined as a partner to the covenant (ben-brit)."  Daniel Elazar, The Jewish Polity.

Toward a specific jurisprudence for One Law Messianic halacha:

"It is my proposition that a pluralistic and tolerant attitude dominated the pre-70 halakhic environment....The most outstanding difference between the pre- and post- 70 periods is the pluralism of the halakhic environment, with respect to both doctrine and practice, which characterized the pre-70 period....I shall substantiate [this thesis] by assessing the following postulates that constitute its main elements:  a) Pre-70, religious rules were determined by tradition, and by the ad hoc decisions pronounced by various erudite men who enjoyed respect and obeisance in their respective communities.  These men had no titles or public functions; the titles Rabban, Rabbi, and the generic denomination Sages were a later development...

b) Contradictory halakhic decisions by different Sages were of no concern to the functioning of public institutions.  Decisions were not archived, nor were they considered final and binding on all the people.  Certain decisions may have become a permanent part of the general Israelite tradition; others, however, were likely practised solely within their restricted communities and for a limited time.

c) There was no intention to establish one final and definitive legal codex, and the performance of the Torah's precepts in everyday life was, therefore, quite unregulated with respect to minute details.  The lack of a consistent and comprehensive legal system in that period in fact left an extended imprint on the subsequent developmental stages of Jewish law, allowing the preservation of a flexible legal system.  This also explains the prohibition against preserving the halakhot in writing.

d) Differences in daily rules and customs did not, therefore, provoke serious divisions, and disparate practices could co-exist in the daily social-political sphere.

e) These circumstances stand in complete contrast to the post-70 period, when Rabban Gamaliel, the first acknowledged leader and assumed Patriarch of the post-destruction period, attempted, for political motives, to establish a single, fixed halakhah.

f) The Sages were resolutely opposed to this revolutionary method, which in effect curtailed the independence that they had, up to then, enjoyed.

g) The creation and implementation of a single fixed codex, from its inception to its general acceptance, thus constituted a lengthy process, continuing over many centuries" (from Pluralistic Halakhah by Paul Heger).

Framework for Analyzing Issues of Halacha:

What jurisdiction is granted to the One-Law Messianic community?  To answer this question, jurisdiction for the following spheres should be delineated:

(1) family;
(2) local community;
(3) entity-wide community;
(4) civil government;
(5) malkhut shamayim (Divine Authority)

A good place to start is where the biggest issue is likely to occur:  the jurisdiction of civil authority.  What jurisdiction is granted to civil government?  The authority to punish or prevent evil, to provide redress for harm caused by evil, and to encourage/promote good in society.  What does this imply?  That civil government has no jurisdiction over exclusively religious matters.

The next issue is how political authority should be structured within the religious sphere.  I think everyone will agree that the family is the original religious authority.  Judaism says that the father of the house is the most fundamental type of authority figure.

However, when a community is built around ten or more men (heads of households) and they covenant to form a community then a new level of authority is created.  A communal covenant authorizes the creation of a court system for the community.  It's jurisdiction is religious in nature but can include civil matters.

The entire religious community composed of a network of local communities can similarly covenant in order to create a higher level of authority.  However, the jurisdiction here would be limited to issues that could not be resolved on the local level.  It would further be limited by the fact that it would only have those powers which were specifically enumerated in the covenant.

Finally, since G-d is THE authority, then everyone in the community is bound by the Torah as the Constitution.  What does this mean for halacha?  This means that we must have an analysis for determining the Constitutionality of any provision of halacha.  Once again, I propose the following analysis:

(1) Torah includes the Tanak and the New Testament;
(2)  the provision of halacha must bear an obvious relation to a legitimate goal of Torah;
(3) the provision must not be prohibited by Torah.

Halacha Categorized According to Areas of Practice:

Here is one way to organize halacha according to areas of practice.  It is obviously not the definitive way to categorize halacha.  This is more of a initial guide to allow people to start contributing.

(1) Kashrut and Shechitah;
(2) Times;
(3) Tefillin;
(4) Mezuzah;
(5) Blessings;
(6) Mikvah (e.g. ritual baths, utensils, etc);
(7) Tallit and Tzitzit;
(8) Synagogue;
(9) Judges;
(10) Knowledge (e.g. Hermeneutics, Character Traits, Idolatry);
(11) Women (e.g. Marriage, Divorce, Adultery, Niddah, Taharat HaMishpocha, Tzniut);
(12) Approaches to Civil and Criminal Law.