bds@homxa.UUCP (B.STERMAN) (01/02/85)
>The Conservative point of view seems to be misunderstood by many of its >detractors. Its only departure is to say that we can still make halokho if we >ground our decisions in Jewish sources. The conservative movement allows >itself some flexibility to struggle with both the laws as they stand and the >original intents of those laws, to the extent that they can be determined. In >reaction, the Orthodox sector has become less flexible and in general more >strict than they were a century ago. (Witness the worries about kosher cheese, >an issue that as far as I can tell only bothered people in this century.) >However, an observant Conservative Jew (I am one) keeps Shabbos and Kashrus >as meticulously as an observant Orthodox Jew. I will not hazard a guess as to >the relative percentages of observance in these two schools. I see no reason >to say that Conservative Jews have deserted Judaism or tradition. Years ago, when asked what type of Jew I was, I would invariably respond something like 'I don't believe in defining my religion in sectarian terms'. I was quite attracted to the Conservative rhetoric of "flexibility of halacha" and "historical perspective". Lately, however, I find that I have no moral problems in declaring myself Orthodox. I have come to the conclusion that Conservative Judaism is at best misguided and perhaps hypocritical and deceitful. I refer to the ideology of JTS when I make these statements, since as was mentioned in another article, the Conservative in the field is no different than Reform. Conservative claims to work within the accepted traditional system of halacha - the difference being that they are much more willing to accept modern intellectual developments and use them to weigh the issues more objectively. Once again though, they claim to still be working within the traditional system. In fact, this view is the exact position of many Orthodox thinkers, such as Eliezer Berkowitz (see his works on halacha "Not in Heaven" and "Halacha, Kocha Vetafkidah"). In reality, however, Conservative Judaism is misrepresenting itself. To receive ordination from the Semanary one must have learned at least 50 pages of Talmud. How can one profess to know anything at all about the traditional Jewish legal system after 50 blatt of Gemara? In a previous article I argued that law can only be changed by those who have studied it thoroughly. This is an obvious point. Over the past sixty odd years, of all the responsa coming out of JTS, one - the Lieberman Ketubah - was accepted by the Talmud faculty there. In every other case the Talmud faculty was not even consulted. What kind of respect for the law is that? Where is the honesty? Why not test your theories with the true scholars in the field? The responsum on using electricity on Shabbat, for example, is a farce. One position, based on another single opinion is quoted and accepted. An Orthodox responsum will typically quote all the sources, then fight to show that the author's opinion is correct. For all the nonsense about intellectual honesty and historical influence, what right does a shul rabbi have to tamper with the legal system without consulting the experts? I was speaking with a graduate of the Semanary about Taharat Hamishpacha- laws of family purity. She said that although her husband was ordained by JTS she was did not go to go to the Mikvah. This law is biblical - there is absolutely no way out of that. She felt that since these laws came about because of superstitious assumptions, pagan influences, ancient social customs and what not, she need not follow them. Amazing. A few courses in Bible and already she's able to determine the reasons for one of the most complicated and crucial of Jewish rituals and reject it. One that Masters and Johnson called the greatest method of keeping the vitality and excitement in a marriage that they had found in all their years of research. At least Reform Judaism has the honesty to admit that it rejects the halachic system. I disagree with its views regarding the nature of Judaism, but at least we're being honest. I'm tired of hearing JTS students tell me that Orthodoxy doesn't address this or that, but Conservative, in it's zeal to save Judaism from becoming petrified, has returned to the age of dynamic halacha. There is not one issue that Conservative Judaism has raised that is not addressed by Orthodox thinkers. Sometimes, after careful study, Orthodoxy may determine that leniency is not the best option, but intellectual honesty searches for truth, and is guided by objective evaluation, is it not? Scholarship insures that one is seeking truth and not merely rationalizing. Baruch Sterman ihnp4!homxa!bds
robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison) (01/07/85)
The following quote goes right to the cruxz of the Conservative Jewish Problem: In article <987@hou4a.UUCP> mab@hou4a.UUCP (Michael Brochstein) writes: > > Let me start out by saying that there is unfortunately two sides >to the Conservative movement. There is the Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS) >version and the congregational version. The JTS (or Camp Ramah) version is >composed of strict observance of the laws (kashrut, shabbat, etc...) whereas >the average congregant of the average Conservative congregation is not very >learned or observant. Please do not judge the movement by the >average congregant... It is indeed true that the official position of JTS (generally enforced at the Ramah camps) is much stricter than most Jews would suspect, and remarkably close to a great deal of the yoke which Orthodox Jews accept. But the remarkable lack of acceptance by the congregation creates a bizarre separation. The Rabbis can not lead; they are followers of those who set the religious standards in their congregation. Much of the "logical" justification for Conservative Judaism rests upon the JTS standards that are not observed. The grandchildren of Congregationist Conservative Jews will know hardly anything about their religion if they congreagations continue to follow this pattern. - Toby Robison (not Robinson!) {allegra, decvax!ittvax, fisher, princeton}!eosp1!robison