“Is that a correct reading of your thesis here?”

Yes, except for the bit about the sha’tz. I’m just saying that’s it one of many things that, if pointed out, could aid someone far down the line, every time they pray. That’s how it is for me.

“I’m not so sure about your argument that the liberal Jewish world treats that kaddish as a “triviality,” having “lobbed it out the window.””

Then to what would you attribute the disappearance of Kadish Shalem?

“I think the latter is a highly contentious statement.”

No doubt it is. However, it is my feeling. The Reform world is obsessed with re-wording prayers and I think that it’s the wrong approach to making prayer accessible.

“Why not make textual changes to get people to appreciate and understand prayer more?”

You can. And as someone who says Sarah, imahot, etc, I’m ok with some amount of textual changes. But I’m also not ok with a certain amount of structural change, which what I’m protesting here. And I believe that a certain amount of structural change is detrimental to our ability to understand the full scope of the service.

And I disagree that there was ever a concerted effort to re-structure the service in Reform liturgy.

Ok. Your numbered points.

1. I haven’t seen this, but if you’re seeing it or if it’s happening, good. I’m glad to hear it.

2. If you re-read what I wrote, you’ll see that I don’t deny a word-to-word level of liturgical poetry. “Certainly there is poetry in the words, but I’m talking about THE poetry–the grand sweeping meaning that encompasses the whole service structure,” as I said in the post.

There are two levels of poetry in the service, as I alluded to above. There is a word-to-word level poetry, which has beauty for the sake of beautifying the service. And that’s a good thing.

But from that level of poetry, we won’t get the grand poetry of the whole service, where one entire prayer-idea leads into the next. This is what I’m talking about.

If I’m reading you correctly, then I do agree with you that the kaddishes are incredibly useful liturgical bookmarks, so to speak.

I’m not so sure about your argument that the liberal Jewish world treats that kaddish as a “trivialty,” having “lobbed it out the window.” I’m also not convinced that there exists a “basic misunderstanding of how to make prayer accessible on part of the entire liberal Jewish world.” I think the latter is a highly contentious statement.

The kaddish was replaced/moved/removed from Reform services precicely because of a desire to reSTRUCTURE the siddur. Whether or not you agree with the decision (and I happen to side with you on disagreeing with it), it seems to me that the changes made vis a vis kaddish were done precisely because of a desire to make prayer more accessible for a specific community. It doesn’t seem so trivial to me. Remember that the siddur is not immutable. It is and has always been a human creation. Why not make textual changes to get people to appreciate and understand prayer more?

OK. Some more thoughts…

1. I agree with you that in great part, Reform liturgical education has been focused too much on translation and repetition at the expense of imbuing a deeper understanding of meaning, but I’m starting to see changes here. A LOT of work still needs to be done across the board, but I think many congregations are moving in the right direction.

2. You argue that “Jewish prayer doesn’t function on a detailed, word-to-word basis… The poetry of Jewish prayer is not to be found in individual words.”

It’s incredibly ironic that you make this statement in reference to the kaddish, since the kaddish is filled with beautiful poetry in its very individual words. The prayer is almost entirely an elevation of adverbs of praise to God, each one raising higher than the previous. Poetic indeed.

The meter of the kaddish, too, speak volumes to its poetic stature. There is a clear pattern found in the recitation of the prayer, as one enters an almost meditative rhythm right from the start.

And to speak directly to the “word-to-word” basis which you argue is devoid of poetry… The sequence of individual words in the kaddish is incredibly illuminating: “YITgadal v’YITkadash… YITbarach, v’YISHTabach, v’YITpa’ar, v’YITromam, v’YITnasei, v’YIThadar, v’YITaleh, v’YIT’halal…” Let alone the highly meditative rhythm of this passage, the repetition of the sounds in the words themselves cannot be ignored.

This is poetry. The poetry is in the individual words. Take a look and find it! Since you argue so often for liturgical honesty, integrity, and purity, do you honestly think that the psalmists (yes, the siddur is filled with individual poems) and original composers of the siddur weren’t intentionally writing poems to God?

Already?! Does the Chanukah season now begin the day after Thanksgiving too? Two Shabbatot Chanukah this year aren’t enough?

We may just have to disagree on the usefulness of Kadish in helping Reform Jews separate out the service, but I think you’d still have to agree that the loss of them is a sign of the general Reform disregard for structure.

Keep in mind that I daven weekly in a highly participatory, largely Hebrew Mishkan T’fila service, that feels a great deal like the Sim Shalom service only without the extended interludes of three words – mumble – three words – pause – three words mumble etc, and without the repetition of the two Amidahs. With or without the punctuation mark provided by a kaddish, practiced worshippers know when we are transitioning from one part of the service to another — so I don’t feel at all deprived by losing the shalems and d’rabbanans, and certainly not by losing the musaf amidah.

I agree that prayer-to-prayer, idea-to-idea is more important than word-to-word parsing — but then, I’m perfectly comfortable with understanding phrases like meivee goel and mechayeh meitim metaphorically. Rabbis obsess about those distinctions a lot more than most lay people do (present company of course excepted).

The thing I did/do like in the Conservative service is that the Kaddish Yatom is in fact an opportunity to recognize the mourners (essentially lost in most Reform services) as well as a fact for the mourners to acknowledge their special status (totally lost in most Reform services).

I also loved that we sang Adon Olam to the tune of Maoz Tsur — I don’t remember ever experiencing that before, although I have heard yom tov melodies applied to Mi Camocha.

Meanwhile, I couldn’t get your link to work so I could listen to the Kirtan Kaddish (and I’m too luddite for MP3) so I can’t comment on that part of the post.