In recent days, nearly 1,000 rabbis have signed “A Rabbinic Call to Action: Defending the Jewish Future.” The letter, written in response to rising anti-Zionism and the rhetoric of political figures like New York City mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani, affirms Israel’s right to exist and warns against the normalization of anti-Zionist language in public life.

It’s a passionate, well-intentioned statement — and it has ignited a painful public reckoning. Jewish communities are circulating spreadsheets of who signed and who didn’t. Some rabbis are being lauded for courage; others are being shamed or questioned for their silence. Congregants are searching the list to find their rabbi’s name, drawing conclusions about loyalty and belonging.

The very leaders tasked with holding the Jewish people together are, yet again, being torn apart.

Being a rabbi or cantor right now feels nearly impossible. We are expected to comfort the grieving, officiate under the chuppah, teach Torah, write and deliver sermons, model moral clarity, serve simultaneously as chief executives and moral guides, and hold divided communities together.

I have come to understand the challenges rabbis face as executive director of Atra, the national center I lead for rabbinic innovation and professional learning. Our forthcoming comprehensive study on the American rabbinate and rabbinic pipeline will show that while 97% of rabbis find their work deeply meaningful, many — especially those leading congregations — face unsustainable expectations.

And so, when a letter like this appears, rabbis can face a no-win choice: risk alienating some of the people they serve, or risk being seen as abandoning our people altogether.

There are many reasons a rabbi might choose not to sign a public political statement. Some lead communities that are split down the middle and fragile. Some worry about the erosion of trust that comes when clergy are seen as partisan. Some are thinking carefully about the changing enforcement of the Johnson Amendment and what “political activity” means for faith leaders and institutions today.

And yes, some rabbis may disagree with the letter’s framing or focus — but remain fully devoted to the safety and flourishing of the Jewish people.

Absence of a signature does not mean absence of love for Israel or for the Jewish people. It may reflect a different kind of leadership, one that prioritizes the relationships within a community over public declaration.

At Atra, we see this complexity every day — and we’re trying to help rabbis work through it. Together with Cara Raich, an expert facilitator and partner in this work, we’ve developed and led a national series of workshops on “Facilitating Difficult Conversations Across Lines of Difference.”

In one of our text studies, we reflect on two models of leadership drawn from Torah: Moses, who speaks prophetic truth and demands justice, and Aaron, who pursues peace and reconciliation. Both are holy roles.

Sometimes a rabbi must lead like Moses — speaking with moral clarity and drawing clear boundaries. In those moments, we act as advocates externally and create internal spaces where shared commitments can be affirmed. That work matters: naming what belongs in our spiritual homes helps people understand a specific community’s values and decide how they wish to engage. This is especially effective in larger communities with many places to belong.

Sometimes a rabbi must lead like Aaron — listening deeply, staying present with people in their pain, and working to keep the community from shattering. In smaller or less-resourced communities, where affinity is simply being Jewish together, a rabbi may see this as the only way forward.

The rabbinate, at its best, holds both instincts at once: the courage to stand firm and the compassion to keep everyone in the room. Increasingly, rabbis are learning from the fields of dialogue, mediation, and facilitation how to create communities where disagreement can coexist with dignity, and conflict can become connection.

Speaking with clarity matters; so does holding together and avoiding public litmus tests. In a time when few know how, we clergy are called to try. Our tradition, and good leadership practice, tells us how.

Humility reminds us that no one holds the whole truth. Empathy seeks understanding without demanding agreement. Curiosity keeps us open when it would be easier to armor up and fight.

These practices don’t erase difference; they make relationship possible within it.

The letter that so many rabbis signed is, at heart, a call to defend the Jewish future. But the Jewish future will not be defended by uniformity. It will be defended by the strength of our relationships.

By rabbis and communities who can stay in dialogue even when we disagree. By the courage to speak and the humility to listen. By the ability to say: I love Israel. I oppose antisemitism. And I also see this moment differently.

To the rabbis who signed the letter: your conviction matters.

To the rabbis who didn’t: your restraint and care for your communities matter too.

To the Jewish public watching: know that every one of these leaders is trying, in their own way, to serve the Jewish people with integrity and heart.

Let’s support rabbis — all rabbis — who are carrying impossible burdens on behalf of us all.

If we truly want to defend the Jewish future, we must resist dividing ourselves into pieces. The real work — the holy work — is learning how to stay in community, even when we don’t agree on the same sentence to sign.

—
The post Their anti-Mamdani letter makes it clear: Rabbis face pressure that fractures us all appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

US President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance arrive for a ceremony with the 2025 College Football Playoff National Champions Ohio State Buckeyes on the South Lawn of the White House on Monday, April 14, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect

US Vice President JD Vance on Thursday sharply criticized the Israeli parliament’s preliminary vote to extend its laws to parts of the West Bank, calling the move an ill-advised “political stunt” that undermines US diplomatic efforts and risks inflaming regional tensions.

The remarks came as Vance concluded a two-day trip to Israel aimed at reaffirming Washington’s support for the country and bolstering the ceasefire deal between the Jewish state and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas to halt fighting in Gaza.

Israel’s 120-member parliament, the Knesset, on Wednesday narrowly approved, by a vote of 25–24, a bill that would apply Israeli civil law to settlements in the West Bank, a move widely described as an initial step toward “annexation.” However, experts have noted that annexation in international law means taking the territory of a foreign sovereign country, explaining that since the territory in question does not belong to another country, the bill would instead apply Israeli sovereignty to the area.

Lawmakers also passed a similar bill specifically for the Maale Adumim settlement by a vote of 31-9.

Though the measures still face several rounds of approval before becoming law, the votes immediately sparked a political storm both inside Israel and abroad.

“If it was a political stunt, it is a very stupid one, and I personally take some insult to it,” Vance told reporters.

“The West Bank is not going to be annexed by Israel,” he continued, saying that’s the policy of US President Donald Trump. “That will continue to be our policy, and if people want to take symbolic votes, they can do that, but we certainly weren’t happy about it.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office moved quickly to rebuke the vote in a statement, calling it “a deliberate provocation” by members of the far-right opposition and stressing that the government had not sponsored or supported the bill.

Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition is expected to block the legislation in future readings, but the incident highlighted widening divisions within Israel’s parliament and the difficulties in both navigating Israeli domestic politics and managing Jerusalem’s relationship with Washington simultaneously.

Some observers have expressed concern that talk of extending Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority exercises limited self-governance, could derail the fragile ceasefire with Hamas and complicate renewed US-backed efforts to stabilize Gaza. Such activity in the West Bank could also pose a roadblock to potential expansion of the Abraham Accords which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states.

Vance, who visited the region as part of a broader Middle East tour, said annexation “would only serve to embolden extremists on both sides” and “undermine the trust we’ve been trying to rebuild.”

Meanwhile, Trump also warned Israel against moving toward applying sovereignty to the West Bank, saying he promised Arab countries that the Jewish state would not formally do so and warning Jerusalem such a move would harm the US-Israel alliance.

“It won’t happen,” Trump said in a newly released interview with Time magazine. “It won’t happen because I gave my word to the Arab countries. And you can’t do that now. We’ve had great Arab support. It won’t happen because I gave my word to the Arab countries. It will not happen. Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened.”

US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) also chimed in, claiming on social media that after speaking with Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter he can confirm that the vote was non-binding and not intended to offend the United States.

“He vigorously stressed no offense was meant and reinforced that no major decisions will be made by Israel without cooperation and coordination with the US,” Graham wrote.

(JTA) — After Graham Platner, the progressive Senate hopeful running in Maine’s Democratic primary, revealed this week that he had had a Nazi-inspired tattoo on his chest for nearly two decades, several of his allies on the left cut him loose. 

One who hasn’t: Vermont’s Jewish senator, Bernie Sanders.

“I’m not overly impressed by a squad of media running around saying, ‘What do you think about the tattoo on Graham Platner’s chest?’” the elder statesman of the progressive movement told Axios this week. “Between you and me, there might be one or two more important issues.”

Sanders also said he “absolutely” stood by his endorsement of Platner. Axios plans to air its full interview with Sanders on Friday but released snippets of the conversation on social media.

Sanders has backed Platner, a Marine veteran and oyster farmer, since soon after the latter announced his Senate bid this August. Platner’s anti-establishment platform, which includes embracing many progressive policies Sanders helped popularize, had made him a rising star despite his lack of any political experience. Platner has also taken a hard line against Israel.

That popularity was shaken following the recent revelation of Platner’s old Reddit posts, in which he made comments disparaging various groups. In an effort to get ahead of the opposition, Platner then himself revealed that he sported a skull-and-crossbones chest tattoo resembling an S.S. Totenkopf. He said he paid for it in 2007 while “inebriated” with fellow Marines in Croatia, and claimed he hadn’t known it was affiliated with Nazis (though subsequent reporting has suggested he knew it was a Totenkopf).

“I’m not a secret Nazi,” Platner said on Monday. He initially did not apologize for or suggest he would remove the tattoo. 

After the revelations, Sanders told Axios he was still “impressed by the guy.”

“He went through some very difficult experiences in the military as a machine gunner, seeing his friends killed, came out of the military, he will acknowledge, I’m not telling you what he doesn’t say, he had PTSD,” the senator said. “He went into a dark period in his life. I suspect that Graham Platner is not the only American to have gone through a dark period.”

Sanders then sought to draw a line between condemnation of Platner and the election of President Donald Trump. “I think as a nation, especially given the fact that we have a president who was convicted on 14 felonies, maybe we have to do a little bit of forgiveness,” he said.

He wasn’t the only prominent progressive Jew who has remained in Platner’s corner since the tattoo revelation. Jon Lovett, the co-founder of influential left-wing podcast “Pod Save America” and media company Crooked Media and a former Obama official, has accused Platner’s progressive critics of demanding “only perfect candidates off the Harvard Law conveyor belt.” (Platner revealed his Nazi tattoo on a “Pod Save America” episode.)

“Of course he SHOULD answer for that tattoo,” Lovett wrote in a follow-up post on X Wednesday. “He’s explained the story, how it wasn’t flagged as a hate symbol when he entered the army or when he received a security clearance. He’s apologized and covered it up. Maybe it’s not enough. Maybe you don’t believe him.”

Following pushback, Platner did cover up the tattoo with a different design he referred to as a “Celtic knot with some imagery around dogs.”

In a post and video he posted to social media Wednesday, the candidate lifted his shirt to reveal his new tattoo and expressed regret that the old one might have invited comparisons to Nazis.

“It’s come to my attention that it has a stark resemblance to a symbol that is used by neo-Nazis, and I want to say, that was not my intent at all. And the idea that I was going around with something like that utterly horrifies me,” Platner said. “I know that symbols like this can be incredibly damaging to people, and the idea that I had it all these years and it could have been read like that is incredibly troubling.” 

He added, “I have lived a life dedicated to antifascism, antiracism and anti-Nazism. I think that racism and antisemitism are a long scourge on our society and a long scourge on our politics, and I think it has no place in our world.”

Platner quickly pivoted, accusing “the establishment” of trying to destroy his movement with distractions. 

“Every second we spend talking about a tattoo I got in the Marine Corps is a second that we don’t talk about Medicare for All, it’s a second we don’t talk about raising taxes on the wealthy,” he said. 

Another prominent Jewish senator, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, responded to the revelations about Platner’s tattoo by making an endorsement in the race, which he had until this week avoided. He is backing Janet Mills, Maine’s former governor, saying she “is the best candidate to retire Susan Collins.”

A recent poll, conducted just before the tattoo revelations, found that Platner holds a wide lead over Mills among Democratic voters.

Platner’s opponents have started to riff on the controversy, as well: Jordan Wood, a former congressional aide also running in the primary, posted on social media to “fess up” that he, too, has a tattoo — of the symbol of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. “I got this tattoo a few years ago as a reminder of what hope and a positive vision can do in our politics,” he said on Instagram. Adding a dig at Platner, he concluded, “And yes, I knew what it was when I got it.”

A defiant Platner has pledged to remain in the race. At a rally Wednesday evening in Ogunquit, he again said he hadn’t known the meaning behind his tattoo.

He added, “If they thought this was going to scare me off, if they thought that ripping my life to pieces, trying to destroy me, was going to make me think that I shouldn’t have undertaken this project, they clearly have not spent a lot of time around Marines.”

The post Bernie Sanders downplays Graham Platner’s Nazi tattoo: ‘There might be one or two more important issues’ appeared first on The Forward.