Narratives of Enlightenment 147
101. /bid., 47. 102. Ibid., 117, 98.
103. Some legal scholars have recently suggested that Jewish law, as a coherent legal system that nonetheless tolerates and even encourages a high degree of interpretive pluralism, offers a helpful comparison to American legal theorists who struggle with similar issues. For a survey, see Suzanne Last Stone,“In Pursuit of the Counter-Text: The Turn to the Jewish Legal Model in Contemporary American Legal Theory,” Harvard Law Review 106(1993), 813-894. Stone’s view is that the differences between an essentially religious legal tradition and the secular foundations of American law outweigh the helpfulness of the comparison. I am not as convinced, but that is an argument for another time.
104. White, Heracles’ Bow(note 20, above), 77.
105. Peter Brooks ,“The Law as Narrative and Rhetoric, ” in P. Brooks and P. Gewirtz , Law's Stories(note 20, above), 17.
106. See, in general, Mark Washofsky,“Abortion and the Halakhic Conversation: A Liberal Perspective,” in Walter Jacob and Moshe Zemer , eds., The Fetus and Fertility in Jewish Law(Pittsburgh : Rodef Shalom Press, 1995).
107. Binder and Weisberg(note 19, above), 23.
108. For an extended argument on this point see Mark Washofsky,“Halachah , Aggadah , and Reform Jewish Bioethics: A Response,” CCAR Journal 53:3 (Summer, 2006), 81-106.
109. For a stunningly over-the-top and(apparently) deadly serious description of the“Gadol B’Yisroel’as a charismatic and nearly mystical figure, see Emanuel Feldman ,“Trends in the American Yeshivot: A Rejoinder,” in Reuven P. Bulka, Dimensions of Orthodox Judaism(New York : Ktav, 1983), at 334-335.