Controversy erupted at Central Synagogue after the congregation's leadership offered only a belated, hedged response to Zohran Mamdani, the avowedly anti-Zionist mayoral candidate who had accused Israel of genocide, called it an apartheid state, and refused to condemn the slogan "Globalize the Intifada." As reported previously, Central's clergy, who had shown little reluctance to use the pulpit for progressive political causes, retreated behind the synagogue's 501(c)(3) status when the threat came from the left. Now, a longtime member has submitted a resignation letter, published here anonymously, that lays out in unsparing detail what that silence cost. The letter is a sweeping indictment of Central's leadership, arguing that the congregation has failed its members by treating antisemitism as a talking point rather than an emergency, and by extending moral clarity only in directions that carry no political risk.
April 6, 2026
To the Clergy and Board of Trustees of Central Synagogue –
I cannot in good conscious continue to support Central Synagogue financially with the payment of dues. So, it is with the deepest sorrow and extreme regret that I hereby resign from the congregation of Central Synagogue. Central has been a special place for me and my family. All three of my children became bar and bat mitzvah at Central. They all gained an appreciation and love for Judaism at Central’s religious school. Perhaps most importantly, the loving and uplifting services inspired them and drew them closer to the practice of Judaism. That is why I find it so painful to continue to watch the leadership of the congregation commit the most serious of shogeg despite all evidence to the contrary.
I have reached the point, however, where for the sake of my children, grandchildren, and our community, I can no longer allow myself to be complicit. The rising tide of antisemitism did not start on October 7th, 2023. It started many years before. After the terrorist attack of September 11th, educated people responded uniformly with a defense of freedom, democracy, and Western civilization. Twenty years later, after the savagery of October 7th, they responded with a defense of the horrific atrocity and, in many circles, with a celebration of it. What changed?
To some of us, the answer is obvious. The seeds of antisemitism had been planted years ago, often with the help or at least indifference of Jews, and the roots have grown deeper and deeper into our institutions. Those seeds have been fertilized with virtuous sounding rhetoric, and with each graduating class the harvest grows larger and larger. The only surprise in the post-October 7th world, was that President Biden, the senescent old guard, after waffling, did not abandon Israel.
I have watched in vain as the slow motion trainwreck has played out before my eyes, feeling, like many others, hopeless and powerless to slow it. Our clergy, like the proverbial frog in the boiling pot, have failed to perceive the steady poisoning of our educational system and a major political party which has now become toxic. For that reason, I believe that much of the American Jewish leadership has failed us. The reform movement has most certainly failed us. Central, as the flag-bearer of the reform community, has failed us. Many of our politicians, especially Jewish ones, have failed us. The German reform rabbis in the early 1930’s were so blinded by their belief that they were German, good Germans, that they did not recognize that their nation had turned against them. Many urged patience and compliance, advising their congregation to remain in Germany because the actions of the Nazi’s were so antithetical to what they believed were German values that it was only a matter of time until reason prevailed. Rabbi Leo Baeck even protested the exclusion of Jews in the 1935 German general conscription because the duty of being in the army means the right to be a German soldier, and the reform Jews saw themselves as loyal Germans. History has now repeated itself here in the US and in our hometown of New York City.
I have written to the clergy previously, urging a more prominent role in fighting the forces that have led us to this moment and pointed to a speech by Bari Weiss given at the Federalist Society as one that really illuminated the rising institutionalized threat against Jews. What I received as a response from Rabbi Buchdahl was an email pointing to an article in the Atlantic by Franklin Foer that, unwittingly, captures the delusional partisan bias that has been ingrained in too many American Jews. In trying to reconcile the undeniable virulent antisemitism that has erupted all across the left, from political parties (Democrats), to movements (Progressive, Gay-rights, Black Lives), to institutions (blue state universities), to media sources (NY Times, CNN), he instinctually creates a moral equivalency between the left and the right to avoid shattering his guiding narrative. The problem is that no such duality exists outside of his imagination. As Foer correctly points out, Jews have enjoyed a long stretch of freedom and safety in America until this latest rise in hostility, which has unquestionably only come from one source. That is not to say that antisemitism has never existed on the right, or that it does not exist there today, or even that it will not exist in greater force in the future. But as Foer admits, it has, and currently still is, remained on the fringe as fodder for talk shows and op-ed pieces, but otherwise invisible in lives of those in our community. The far-right antisemitism has not been institutionalized. Moreover, when it has popped up on the fringe in the form of lunatic podcast personalities, it has been rightfully shunned by the mainstream party and we, as Jews, have quickly called out anyone who allowed themselves to be associated with it. Whereas the antisemitism on the left is not on the fringe and has either been embraced or at best ignored universally by the leadership. Worse yet, for reasons involving deeply embedded biases, Jewish leadership has failed to hold public figures accountable for their support or tolerance of such egregious ideologies.
Even sermons at Central have tried to equate the fear of rising antisemitism (which presumably is from the left) with a fear of losing rights (presumably from the right). The fallacy with that is that the former fear is objectively real and easy to measure. And more importantly, it should be the focus of our community leadership as it is an issue for all of us and our families. The latter fear is at best a subjective one and at worst an imagined one that serves to help rationalize when democracy does not go your way. One is very much the responsibility of Jewish leaders to address, including those in our community. The other is for political debate to be decided in succeeding elections and has nothing to do with being Jewish.
Unfortunately, Foer is not alone in his biased-induced blindness, as similar projected narratives echo across our community and our congregation. Using some form of twisted logic that is hard to follow, somehow there are those that try and tie the election of President Trump, the unequivocally most pro-Isreal and pro-Jewish president in American history by any objective measure, to Jewish kids being accosted across college campuses. Like the reform rabbis of 1930’s Germany, they are unable to comprehend that their self-identifying movement have turned against them. Even worse in this case, that the policies and values that they fought for have enabled the hatred now being directed at their children and grandchildren. While history clearly teaches us that dividing society by race, religion, or any other identity has NEVER worked out for the Jews in the long run, they continue to look for some other explanation that better fits what they want to believe.
We have reached a tipping point whereby being silent is being complicit and the silence from the clergy of Central has become too loud to ignore. When our children were hiding in library closets to avoid angry mobs looking for Jews on campus, where was Central? When our children were attending NAIS conferences and being subjected to speakers encouraging violence against them, where was Central? When our schools adopted curriculum teaching that Israel was an invader or apartheid state, where was Central? When a major political party allows prominent members to promote the destruction of Israel without consequences, where was Central? While current administration has been trying to root out antisemitism that has grown unchecked in our universities, where was Central? We have long passed the point when joining the chorus of those paying lip service to antisemitism can be said to be of any value. Without demands for consequences and accountability, empty condemnations are counterproductive, and too many of our loved ones have been left to fend for themselves without calls for accountability. I for one, have mailed my Columbia Law School and Business School diplomas back, as I believe Columbia is a failed institution. I have repeatedly called out the Dean of the Law School for his many ideological failings and have mourned the loss of what was once a great institution of learning.
Recent events have become too much to ignore. I cannot teach my children to be proud to be Jewish, to stand up for what is right, and to treat everyone with respect while tacitly supporting the antithesis by remaining a member of Central. After the death of George [Floyd], a drug addict and criminal whose life contributed nothing positive to society, I was flooded with e-mails discussing his death, which regardless of his character in life, was certainly tragic and regrettable even if not intentional. During the riots that followed, when the hard work of innocent families was destroyed, looting was widespread, and antisemitic movements like BLM came into power, Central continued to send emails urging the congregation to put the crime and destruction “in context.” Central even went so far as to recommend books by antisemites who now support the destruction of Israel to help gain that “context.” Whereas, after the assignation of Charlie Kirk in cold blood, in front of his wife and young children, which was the most significant act of political violence since the murder of Martin Luther King, there was silence. Loud silence. Charlie Kirk was a devoted family man who preached nonviolence and free speech as the cornerstones of democracy. He welcomed competing viewpoints and modeled how to address them, with spirited debate, not bullets or intimidation. While he was not Jewish, but he kept the Sabbath and was, perhaps, the single greatest defender of Israel and Jewish people to set foot on a college campus in decades, perhaps ever. That omission is not only offensive, but racist and antisemitic. It goes against everything I have taught my children about free speech, democracy, respect, and courage. I could only explain such disparate treatment to them as an example of intolerance for differing views and a complete and utter lack of moral conviction.
While the clergy continues to pay lip service to its support of Zionism, its actions, or lack of action, undermine the very notion. Their lack of real conviction and continued soft pedaling of the forces that have aligned against us and Isreal, only serves to compound the strength of those who seek our destruction. This is seen throughout Central, including the prayers said in synagogue – whereas the prayer for Isreal we used to recite asked G-d to: “Strengthen the hands of those who defend our Holy Land. Deliver them; crown their efforts with triumph,” now we ask G-d to “Give strength to the injured…and Grant wisdom and vision to the leaders of the region [not Israel]…and to Grant strength and shelter to [the] displaced in [Israel] and Gaza.” Central has also continued to invite guest speakers who have been associated with anti-Zionist, antisemitic, and racist organizations and policies.
While claiming to be apolitical, Central very strongly promoted an antisemitism speech given by Chuck Schumer and even arranged for him to speak to the congregation. If there has been a more feckless defender of Jewish rights in either national party, I am not aware of them. Like Central, his speech gives lip service to the antisemitism rising across campuses and the nation – yet where was he when the Trump administration as actually fighting to root out institutional antisemitism and racism within our educational system? As the leader of his party, where does he condemn AOC and others who call for an end of aid and military sales to Israel? Where was his challenge of the long list of antisemitic acts and statements of the mayor of his hometown during the election? Schumer is not a real defender of Zionism, he is a political animal too blinded by partisan politics to be anything other than a tool. Meanwhile, there have been more than twice the number of Republican speeches/op-eds delivered on the national stage all by politicians who unequivocally support the defense of Israel and condemn AOC, Mamdani, and all other politicians who try to undermine Israel or Jews, including those on the fringe of their own party. Whereas beyond Chuck, the handful of other Democrats who spoke to rising antisemitism on the national stage, all also supported restrictions on aid to Israel, and none had an issue with the various anti sematic/Zionist statements that have come out of their colleagues in “the squad.” And yet the Clergy would strongly argue that they are nonpartisan and not guided in their conversations with the congregation by politics. But has the Clergy reached out to local politicians who not only have spoken on the floor about antisemitism, but have taken real action to hold schools accountable, support aid to Israel, and called out those who have shown their hostility towards Jews? Like Representative Lawler, Representative Stefanik, or Representative Smith? Or national champions of Zionism like Nikki Haley, Senator John Cornyn, Senator Katie Britt, Senator John Kennedy, Mike Huckabee, [Marco] Rubio…the list goes on and on. These are actually truly committed supporters of Israel and the Jewish people, not mealy-mouthed politicians like Schumer or Nadler who now kowtow to the strong anti-Zionist segment of their party for fear of risking their political careers.
But, despite all this, it was the notification sent out by Central claiming that it was unable to comment on the mayoral election for fear of losing it’s 501(c) status that convinced me that I could no longer remain silent and passively accept such behavior. The cowardice evidence by such an email was matched only by its absurdity. With a proud antisemite and anti-Zionist on the verge of becoming mayor of our city at a time when it has been open season on Jews even under a sympathetic mayor, Central chose to fold like Vichy France. To hide behind the 501(c) status as a reason for not being able to comment on the risk to Jews posed by one particular candidate is as insulting as it is embarrassing. The excuse that the silence from Central is from fear of the IRS, given the current administration, which was more likely to give Central a federal grant to oppose Mamdani than anything else, is surreal. The idea that in a congregation of over 3,000 households or around 7,000-9,000+ Jews, there is not a lawyer or accountant capable of guiding our clergy on how to voice concern over the danger we face when our city is being run by a mayor who will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state is preposterous, if not statistically impossible.
The fact is that the combination of the IRS recently clarifying that clergy can comment on elections and candidates during a sermon to their congregation together with the chances that the IRS would look to limit that exception by challenging an influential rabbi pointing out the danger of someone like Mamdani under our current administration was literally zero. Local clergy from conservative congregations like Park Avenue to reform ones from Stephen Wise, found the courage to lead, and not follow, their communities. There were an endless number of ways that Central could have made the point that voting for anyone who held such antisemitic views was a danger to us all.
Ironically, what compounded the damage from this unforgivable silence during the election was Rabbi Buchdahl’s last minute “mea culpa” made in a surprise return sermon. While I initially appreciated what I thought was perhaps an acknowledgement, the first that I was aware of, that the time had come for some unbiased leadership based on the health and safety of our community, that goodwill was quickly undone when the sermon evolved to include “listening to,” and therefore legitimizing, the views of students she met with on the reasons for their Mamdani support. In that non-sequitur acknowledgment, once again Rabbi Buchdahl gave into her political biases and accepted ideas that aligned with a subconscious narrative rather than showing leadership and debunking such fiction with facts and logic.
The Talmud teaches us that leaders are especially accountable to speak out against dangerous rhetoric or incitement when their voices can help: “Whoever can protest the conduct of their household and does not is held responsible for the household; of their townspeople—responsible for the town; of the whole world—responsible for the whole world.” We as Jews are commanded to look out for each other and to speak up when members of the community are doing wrong, lest we share the blame for remaining silent: “All Israel are responsible for one another.” Make no mistake, there is war underway that threatens our very survival. Not the war in Gaza, that one I have every confidence will be won and it was never an existential threat. It’s the war being fought against the Jews in the wider West, on campuses, in the media, and increasingly in mainstream politics, that we must fear, and sadly, that one we are currently losing.
Those who do not speak out will have the blood of our families on their hands, and there will almost certainly be blood. If you think that the recent events of violence are about, the inhabitants of Gaza, the prime minister of Israel, or settlements, or some other red herring, you are naive. War will end, the antisemitism will not. When violence erupts and we have a mayor who generally does not believe in the police and clearly does not believe in Israel’s right to exist, who do you think will defend us? If the leader of our city sees nothing wrong with calls to globalize the anti-fada nor demands for Palestine to be free “from the river to the sea,” are our children safe? As each graduating class is increasingly against the right of Israel to exist and believes in its elimination in the name of “social justice,” what do you think happens?
Generals “always prepare to fight the last war, especially if they won it.” (French Prime Minister Clemenceau) Past generations of Jews have been guided by Jewish values and played important roles in fighting to get the underrepresented and disadvantaged a seat at the table. That fight was generally against the entrenched southern establishment and white male dominated social systems. The institutions they created, the forces they fought against, even the country as a whole, have all evolved since that time, but many “Jewish Generals” continue to tilt against past ghosts unable to see that the soldiers and battlefields have changed. Like Dr. Frankenstein’s Creature or the Golam of Prague, however, much of what they created has turned against the creator. Social Justice warriors do not want a seat, they want retribution, and it turns out the Jews are not faring well in the Oppression Olympics, putting them where they almost always end up when society starts handing out labels, directly in the line of fire. Until the training grounds for the identity-politics crusaders are shut down, Jews will remain on the front lines.
The majority of democrats already favor Hamas, a terrorist organization, over Israel. The party continues to include and increasingly cede power to those democratic politicians who would cut off all aid to Israel. They are steeped in a culture of identity politics, intersectionality, and victimhood, none of which bodes well for Jews. They see the world in terms of oppressor and oppressed, indigenous and invader, successful and not, all divisions that will result in Israel being on the short end of their narrative. The current administration is the most pro-Israel one in American history, but that will soon change. That we will eventually have an administration that favors severing ties with Israel and siding with most of the UN in condemning its existence is now close to a mathematical certainty. When that day comes, I want to be able to tell my children and grandchildren all that I did to try and stop it.
How can I teach my children the importance of standing up for your family and your community as Jews when I remain silent while watching our clergy remaining complicit as the threats to us grow increasingly louder? A big tent congregation is a mitzvah, and a very Jewish one as hachnasat orchim is a very Jewish value. But when the person who seeks to destroy you tries to enter the tent, the law of din rodef applies as we should “not stand idly by the blood of your brother.” So, this resignation is my hocheach tochiach, so that I do not bear the same sin. There is no neutral ground in this fight. If you are not with us, you are against us. The silence from Jewish leaders as antisemitism is increasingly institutionalized in our schools, promoted in biased media, and ignored by our politicians, is a tacit approval, and I do not find that acceptable.
Nothing would make me happier than to return to Central and once again participate in its loving celebration of our tradition. “You must surely rebuke…giving tochecha is not a suggestion, it is a command. Tochecha is an act of love…it’s not about pushing someone away; it’s about drawing them close…like holding up a mirror so they can see evidence of how they fell short.” (A. Buchdahl Yom Kippur sermon 5786) But until Central joins the fight to stop antisemitism at its core, I cannot, in good conscious, be a part of that denial. I pray that the leadership of Central come to realize that there is a big difference between being inclusive and being irresponsible.
I wish all of you and your families peace in their lifetimes.
Bekhavod Rav
----
Rabbi Angela Buchdahl’s October letter defending Central Synagogue’s so-called policy of political neutrality reads as if it were written for another institution entirely. In her message to congregants, she warned that “the separation of church and state has been a bedrock principle of American democracy,” insisting that turning synagogues into “partisan campaign stops” would be “dangerous for our democracy and for the state of our Judaism.” She framed Central as “a sacred space for prayer, learning, and connection among Jews of all backgrounds.” But the record of her own clergy, and of Buchdahl herself, tells a different story—one of sustained political engagement thinly veiled as moral guidance.
As documented in my earlier piece, Central Synagogue Rabbi Accuses Trump Admin of ‘A Cruel and Pervasive Disregard for Human Life’, Central’s Director of Social Justice Organizing, Rabbi Hilly Haber, used the pulpit to condemn the previous administration in language that could have been lifted from a campaign speech. She described standing “in a federal immigration court as ‘armed and masked ICE agents quietly began to line the hallways.’ One by one,” she said, “immigrants were handcuffed and whisked away in seconds.” Rabbi Haber called the Trump administration’s immigration policies “an assault on the very principles on which our country was founded,” condemning what she described as “a cruel and pervasive disregard for human life.” She then “urged congregants to support progressive legislation such as the New York for All Act and the Access to Representation Act.”
At most Reform synagogues, such remarks would barely raise an eyebrow. At Central, they expose a double standard. When Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani—now running for mayor—accused Israel of “genocide,” labeled it an “apartheid state,” and refused to condemn the slogan “Globalize the Intifada,” Senior Rabbi Angela Buchdahl said nothing. Mamdani also declared that if elected mayor, he would have Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrested upon entering New York. Only after mounting backlash, she reminded congregants that Central “does not endorse or oppose political candidates.” It was a rule conveniently applied when the target stood on the political left.
That rule does not appear to have applied when Buchdahl herself signed political petitions. She is listed among hundreds of signatories on T’ruah and J Street’s Jewish Clergy Letter Against Anti-BDS Legislation, which urges lawmakers to “defend the free speech of all Americans by opposing any efforts to pass legislation penalizing supporters of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.” The letter declares that such laws “undermine a core principle of American democracy” and “do nothing to protect the State of Israel.” Its signatories include “Rabbi Angela Buchdahl, New York, NY.”
She also joined T’ruah’s 2022 letter to the Israeli ambassador, 250+ Rabbis and Cantors to the Israeli Ambassador: Stop Settler Violence, which opened with the statement, “We have seen an alarming increase in frequent and violent attacks on Palestinians by settlers,” and called on the Israeli government to “swiftly arrest and charge the perpetrators of these attacks” and “dismantle outposts that are illegal even according to Israeli law.” The letter described certain incidents as “a pogrom” and again listed “Rabbi Angela Buchdahl – New York, NY.”
Meanwhile, Central’s own Policy on Institutional Voice, adopted August 20, 2025, states unequivocally: “We do not endorse candidates or parties. Our role is not to enter political campaigns or to endorse or speak out against candidates, but to provide moral and spiritual clarity on important public issues.” It adds that the synagogue “will generally refrain from issuing public statements unless the matter directly implicates our core values or mission,” and warns that “too many exceptions potentially undermine our commitment to those values inherent in this policy and may alienate members across the political spectrum.”
That principle has never been applied evenly. Central’s clergy have repeatedly used their pulpits to advance causes aligned with the political left—denouncing “white supremacy” in policing, promoting Black Lives Matter, and treating gender ideology as a sacred moral truth—yet invoke neutrality only when progressive politicians attack Israel or the Jewish people. The congregation that once called immigration enforcement “a cruel and pervasive disregard for human life” now insists that even acknowledging an anti-Israel mayoral candidate would breach the synagogue’s mission.
This is not integrity; it is a revolving-door morality. Rabbi Buchdahl has written to Congress about American free-speech law, signed letters to the Israeli government about settlement policy, and presided over sermons that equate partisan activism with Jewish faith. To claim, after all that, that Central cannot “endorse or oppose” a political candidate is to mistake cowardice for principle.
Angela Buchdahl is entitled to her opinions, but not to pretend she has none. A synagogue that has condemned ICE, praised Black Lives Matter, and accused a sitting president of “a cruel and pervasive disregard for human life” cannot hide behind the language of neutrality when progressive allies cross the line. What Central practices is not political restraint but selective outrage—moral courage that speaks only when it is safe to do so.
