raphael@crystal.UUCP (12/27/84)
I am troubled by the attitude of people I otherwise respect with regard to Conservative and Reform Judaism, so I would like to defend them here. Jewish practice has seen branchings before. It makes sense that Jews as a group want to preserve their unique identity, and therefore attack Jews who seem to differ from them. To some extent this attack is helpful in defining the group. One sees the same phenomenon in politically extreme left groups, which spend much of their energies attacking each other. Unfortunately, the attack is phrased in moral terms. Simply put, one group (here the Jewish orthodoxy) says "We are right, we are the true preservers of the tradition, and you are not". But tradition does change, and what is important to me is the unique identity, not the exact continuation of tradition. You may disagree with me. But let me point out that Rabbinic Judaism is a true departure from its predecessors (although the Rabbis took pains to create a traditional line for themselves to acquire legitimacy). Similarly, Khassidism is a true departure as well. Both are grounded firmly in Jewish roots, but went in new directions. Both are now considered (at least by most) as normative (for Rabbinic Judaism) and at least acceptable (for Khassidism). There were fights, though, in both cases. My point is that tradition does change, and change by itself is morally neutral. 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. Reform Judaism seems important, too, although I am not as familiar with it. Although it might seem a Protestantization of Judaism, that was not clearly its intent. It provides a form of behavior that is consonant with the entire tradition, but gives less emphasis to some aspects (Kashrus, for instance, which even to the Orthodox point of view is only a "lav", that is, a simple prohibition). From a social-ecological point of view (which may be drawing a biological analogy past its breaking point), diversity in practice and behavior can confer strength in the face of external pressures. I am not convinced that orthodoxy, as we know it, will be the ancestor of normative Judaism a thousand years from now (should the Moshiakh delay). I am happy that Jews who might otherwise be entirely lost from our unique group can find a place to exist Jewishly (by at least some standard). All three groups (and others, like the reconstructionists, which I know little about) do emphasize the traditional values of study, tradition, and personal attachment to God. I would hope that our commonalities would serve to make us proud of each other, and our differences would be a matter we could all respect, just as I respect the different food, dress, and nusakh customs of ethnically different groups within our Jewish community. The difficult moral question is where to draw the line. I wish I could give a good answer to that. I place Karaim outside the boundary; all the moreso Christians. I place Beta Israel inside the boundary, though their customs differ markedly from mine. (I don't celebrate Sigd. I hope they continue to.) I place Reform, Conservative, Misnaged, Modern Orthodox, Khassid, Reconstructionist inside the line. You may disagree with me. But even if you do, let's treat each group with respect for the structure it has carved out for itself, and not use group names as pejorative epithets.
de@moscom.UUCP (Dave Esan) (12/30/84)
> > The difficult moral question is where to draw the line. I wish I could give a > good answer to that. I place Karaim outside the boundary; all the moreso > Christians. I place Beta Israel inside the boundary, though their customs > differ markedly from mine.(I don't celebrate Sigd. I hope they continue to.) > I place Reform, Conservative, Misnaged, Modern Orthodox, Khassid, > Reconstructionist inside the line. You may disagree with me. But even if you >do, let's treat each group with respect for the structure it has carved out for > itself, and not use group names as pejorative epithets. I did not use these names as pejoratives, and agree we should not. As I pointed out in an earlier article to Eliyahu T. (ET? -:)) who made you the arbiter of what is Jewish or not Jewish? (Although I probably agree with your definitions). I spent a year studying Jewish History at Jewish Theological Seminary and learned there were two forms of Conservative Judaism, Seminary and the field. The great fear of the prospective rabbis at JTS was having to go to the field and wear gowns, or use a microphone, or abbreviate their prayers. JTS has the only Conservative sanctuary in the country with a mehitza, and does not use the standard Conservative prayerbook. The brand of Judaism I saw there was wonderful, corresponding to what my sister in Jerusalem calls "crocheted yamulke Judaism," -- Orthodoxy mixed with the understanding that this is 5745 and the electronic age, and not Poland or Yemen. It was what many refer to as left Orthodoxy, feet firmly rooted in tradition, and the brain set in today. I can see that this Judaism is a valid source for the future, but field Conservative Judaism?? (Just for reference the average age of a member of a Conservative congregation is >60. Says something about its future.) I am familiar enough with reform Judaism to tell you that it not the future, but rather a step out. Our largest reform congregation recently celebrated its anniversary with great pomp. Sadly none of the founder's descendants would come to the celebration -- since not a one was Jewish. Didn't have that problem with my Orthodox shul's centennial this year. Many of the founders's descendants still daven with the same congregation. David Esan