Pages

Thursday, March 10, 2011

On the Demise of Conservative Judaism... Maybe


A few weeks ago, after the publishing of the post Hemorrhaging Orthodoxy, a Conservative Jewish woman sent me a long, fascinating message after mentioning the parallels the post had with Conservative Judaism. The message was a letter she had written to her brother, a Conservative Rabbi whom she describes as "but/and observant - not the uber liberal sort", a couple of days earlier. In her introduction to the message, she notes while she used to fit into a traditional form of old-school Conservadoxy, in her city "...it's either join the liberal crowd or try to fit in with the far-right crowd. I'm neither. So I wrote to my brother asking about the future...and with the same concerns about hemorrhaging... In case you're interested, I pasted my note below...and hope you don't find it too harsh."


The message led to an excellent discussion back and forth, and I asked for and received full permission to post the discussion on this blog. I plan on discussing various relevant excerpts, though truth be told the entire conversation has been fascinating as have the parallels to Orthodoxy. Below is the woman's original message (Ezzie's note: Please be aware that I've slightly edited the letter, mostly for reading ease), and please feel free to comment on any aspect of it. I'm presenting this initial message without my response so as not to take away from what I believe is a great letter.
The demise of Conservative Judaism... okay, maybe an overstatement :)

So, I've been reading the USCJ's strategic plan (PDF) and the associated documents. I have a serious question that's rattling around my head. Aside from the question as to what you think and where you stand on the proposed document (which to my reading was just dull and not overtly strategic... just a lot of words), my question is this: Is there really a place any longer for liberal Judaism?

I am not trying to be a provocateur. It's a real question.

On the one hand it feels as if assimilation and intermarriage has "won." It's no longer a shonda and people don't hush when they say their son or sister married out. It's just "that's who they fell in love with..." and then maybe some line about raising the kids Jewish or celebrating both sets of holidays.

Support of and for Israel is no longer a given. The little blue boxes. The connection to am yisrael... it feels like there's pockets of connection but only within groups and not between them.

It feels on the other hand that the more right-wing elements in Judaism have taken on an even more right-wing tone. The old YU model of Torah u'mesorah feels like it's lost ground to the black hat chumrah of the month club. It was always hard to be "a Jew at home and a man in the street" as the old saying went... to keep closely tied to tradition and balance modernity. But now it feels as if the man standing just off stage with the old crook is trying to use it to yank everyone away from the precipice that is the modern day Gemorrah.

What I'm seriously wondering after reading this is: Is Conservative (and engaged Reform) an anachronism? Both Conservative and engaged Reform have lost ground (and members) in recent years. It used to be (in the 1940s-50s) that Conservative Judaism was the shining star. It was certainly able to hold the line in the middle of the last century when much in society was changing. But has that time come and gone? What worked then may not be tenable now.

In the 1950s people moved out to the suburbs and built these palatial synagogue centers -- country clubs that let in our kind of people. But the kids grew up and moved away and not just geographically. Fast forward to the 2000s and yes those shuls may be full on Yom Kippur, but bringing in the numbers a couple of times a year doesn't necessarily mean these movements are healthy. Plus these synagogues have lent themselves to some of the things I think are wrong about where we're going... lackluster supplemental education programs (and how can it be otherwise when you have kids "trapped" into going, people teaching who can't necessarily inspire, carpool Judaism, difficulty retaining post-b'nai mitzvah youth), in some communities changing demographics -- aging populations that don't step up for sisterhood or men's clubs, etc.

I will say that what I think is working is camp and programs like Birthright or Nesiya or Nativ (although that presupposes a strong connection beforehand...and ditto for USY/NFTY... you're already dealing with the "in" crowd). I'd like to say day school, too. In a few years I guess I'll see how well the lessons have "stuck" but as a concept, I'd say it's (hopefully) one way we can encourage the next generation to remain within the fold.

So I go back to my question: Is there really -- for the long-long-l-o-n-g term -- a place for liberal Judaism or will we ultimately have a few people who cling to an ideal that once was the middle and see a swell on either side... those who want to remain tied to Judaism and find their option is frumkeit and the others who have fond memories of pastrami on rye (mustard no mayo... they haven't assimilated that much) and maybe an early-era Woody Allen film?

I agree there needs to be a strategic plan and some serious soul searching in the USCJ (and the URJ) -- cheshbon ha nefesh in this case. I'm not advocating that people throw off their talleisim, discard Judaism and run out for a ham and cheese on white on a Saturday. And, I'm not advocating that people should cast off their multicolored knit kippot or lace head coverings in favor of a spodek, streimel or spitzel peeking out from a pillbox.

We can (and some congregations do) have inspired leaders. We can have engaged kehillot. We can have non-Orthodox Jews who are learned, connected, striving, practicing... but often these leaders, kehillot and yidden are few and far between.

What I am is questioning. Ultimately, I really do wonder: Is there sustainability in non-Orthodox Judaism as a movement? And if so, how can an East-coast centric, old school institution reinvent itself in such as way that it produces a ground swell of enthusiasm to reignite people from where they are (in the geographic sense as well as in their lives, hearts and minds)? Leaving aside the issue of conversion and bringing people into Judaism through that door, I wonder how this strategic plan will really inspire people to come back, recommit and go forward as an integral part of the Jewish people?

Discuss.

36 comments:

  1. There's no question. The Conservative "movement" is dying. Over the last 20 years, a major split has taken place. All of Judaism in America is moving to "the right". True committed Reform Judaism -- definitionally the real "liberal" Judaism -- is moving closer towards one group of Conservatives. "Modern" orthodoxy has attracted many Conservative Jews in the other direction. What's left in the middle? Nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Do you think we're headed to a situation where there are no real movements (except by name), just liberal and religious Judaism?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is there really a place any longer for liberal Judaism?

    ...

    On the one hand it feels as if assimilation and intermarriage has "won." It's no longer a shonda and people don't hush when they say their son or sister married out.


    The author seems confused. Liberal Judaism is Judaism that accepts assimilation and intermarriage. Liberal Judaism is quite active and in fact represents the largest number of Jews in America. If it's losing members, it's because it doesn't try to enforce adherence by opposing intermarriage and assimilation. You want to be a liberal Jew? Great, come on in. You want to assimilate or marry a non-Jew? Okay, cool, we still love you. Bring your spouse to Temple if you like.

    What she wants is non-liberal Judaism that is also non-Orthodox. Or Judaism that is liberal in this one very specific area but not in others.

    I don't think that balancing act is sustainable in the long-term, no. It worked when people were kind of Conservative by default, when people lived in the same town they grew up in and the community remained intact. They could be pretty Orthodox-minded, or kind of Orthoprax, or Conservadox, or really not that into it at all, or pretty liberal and still be a part of the same community.

    With cultural changes that have led to more mobility and communal fluidity, however, there's not really as much a need for Conservative Judaism. I just don't think there are that many people any more who think intermarriage is a shonda but also that Orthodox Judaism isn't the One True Judaism.

    Being a liberal and opposing intermarriage simply does not make any sense. If you honestly, deep-down believe in liberalism, then you just wouldn't consider intermarriage a shonda. (You also would naturally start seeing both sides of the Israel issue.)

    If you're not liberally-minded, then you're conservative, and conservatives are attracted to rules (intermarriage bad!) and black-and-white philosophies (Israel good!) Conservative Judaism seems to offer just a lesser version of Orthodoxy's.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't think she's confused at all; I think she's saying/asking exactly what you're suggesting: That this balancing act simply isn't working anymore, is it, and therefore perhaps this needs to be rethought.

    I'd also give two different definitions of liberal Judaism - liberalism which happens to be Jewish, or a meld of liberalism and Judaism. You'd define it the first way and say the latter is impossible, while Conservative Judaism felt for decades it could be the latter. She's saying that it doesn't seem to be holding true today.

    Being a liberal and opposing intermarriage simply does not make any sense. If you honestly, deep-down believe in liberalism, then you just wouldn't consider intermarriage a shonda. (You also would naturally start seeing both sides of the Israel issue.)

    If you're not liberally-minded, then you're conservative, and conservatives are attracted to rules (intermarriage bad!) and black-and-white philosophies (Israel good!) Conservative Judaism seems to offer just a lesser version of Orthodoxy's.


    I'm not sure why you feel views have to be blanketed like this. You're saying liberalism must require a certain set of beliefs, that it doesn't have limits, while saying the same about conservatism. I don't see why people can't place limits on various beliefs, or why not being liberal forces one to be conservative or vice versa.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'd also give two different definitions of liberal Judaism - liberalism which happens to be Jewish, or a meld of liberalism and Judaism. You'd define it the first way and say the latter is impossible, while Conservative Judaism felt for decades it could be the latter.

    Not at all. I think that the meld isn't only possible, it's been done. It's called Reform Judaism. I think Conservative Judaism is not liberal, but is in fact conservative. That's my whole point about it.

    Conservative isn't not Orthodox because it's liberal (the author's contention) but because it differs on basically theological/doctrinal issues. I mean, I guess it's true in some sense that it's more "liberal" theologically, but I'm referring more to temperamental liberalism, which it is not at all.

    My point is that a temperamental conservative would be drawn towards Orthodoxy and without the large Conservative community that existed more as a de facto kind of thing in previous generations, there's no reason for him to settle in Conservative Judaism, especially now that people are more socially mobile. Many who were brought up Conservative will stay there, but they are few in number and can't make up for the assimilation factor. And on the other hand, very few people who are brought up outside Conservatism will gravitate towards it, while many will gravitate towards both Orthodoxy and Reform.

    I'm not sure why you feel views have to be blanketed like this. You're saying liberalism must require a certain set of beliefs, that it doesn't have limits, while saying the same about conservatism. I don't see why people can't place limits on various beliefs, or why not being liberal forces one to be conservative or vice versa.

    I'm not talking about requirements, but temperaments. It's not that liberals shouldn't consider intermarriage a shonda, it's more that liberalism is inherently incompatible with seeing it that way.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Not at all. I think that the meld isn't only possible, it's been done. It's called Reform Judaism. I think Conservative Judaism is not liberal, but is in fact conservative. That's my whole point about it.

    Conservative isn't not Orthodox because it's liberal (the author's contention) but because it differs on basically theological/doctrinal issues. I mean, I guess it's true in some sense that it's more "liberal" theologically, but I'm referring more to temperamental liberalism, which it is not at all.


    OK, fair points; I think she'd say that it's liberal in its practice (especially as compared to Orthodoxy) but not necessarily in its beliefs.

    Many who were brought up Conservative will stay there, but they are few in number and can't make up for the assimilation factor. And on the other hand, very few people who are brought up outside Conservatism will gravitate towards it, while many will gravitate towards both Orthodoxy and Reform.

    Agreed.

    I'm not talking about requirements, but temperaments. It's not that liberals shouldn't consider intermarriage a shonda, it's more that liberalism is inherently incompatible with seeing it that way.

    But that means liberalism is almost self-contradictory.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Another interesting thought -- women tend to be more liberal than men. Orthodoxy, being very patriarchal, limits the effect of that difference to a great degree. Conservative Judaism, while more patriarchal than Reform historically, does not exercise nearly the same influence over women, and so the daughters of Conservative Jews are more likely to be more liberal than their parents (on average) and the sons are likely to marry women who are both more liberal than them and less deferential to their husbands in passing their philosophies to their children.

    ReplyDelete
  8. OK, fair points; I think she'd say that it's liberal in its practice (especially as compared to Orthodoxy) but not necessarily in its beliefs.

    Yes, I agree! One of my major points was that this combination worked great in previous generations for people who were temperamentally conservative but couldn't or didn't really fit Orthodox rules into their lifestyles (working on shabbos, eating with non-Jews, etc.) Now it's much easier or more expected for people to follow the rules if they believe in them. People are Conservative now only if they believe in it -- not because it offers a lighter version of Orthodoxy.

    But that means liberalism is almost self-contradictory.

    I don't follow.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Another interesting thought -- women tend to be more liberal than men. Orthodoxy, being very patriarchal, limits the effect of that difference to a great degree. Conservative Judaism, while more patriarchal than Reform historically, does not exercise nearly the same influence over women, and so the daughters of Conservative Jews are more likely to be more liberal than their parents (on average) and the sons are likely to marry women who are both more liberal than them and less deferential to their husbands in passing their philosophies to their children.

    Interesting, but not sure I agree. Women also tend to be more religious.

    Now it's much easier or more expected for people to follow the rules if they believe in them.

    You'll see this point discussed later. I suggest that one of the primary causes is that Orthodoxy has shown its ability to allow people to do just about anything professionally and in other ways, defying the idea of its limitations.

    I don't follow.

    Ideas which are inherently incompatible suggest a closed definition of acceptability, which seems contradictory to acceptance of the legitimacy of varying ideas and viewpoints. But that's really off topic.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Interesting, but not sure I agree. Women also tend to be more religious.

    Irrelevant. "Religious" can be Reform or Orthodox.

    You'll see this point discussed later. I suggest that one of the primary causes is that Orthodoxy has shown its ability to allow people to do just about anything professionally and in other ways, defying the idea of its limitations.

    I agree, sort of. I mean I'm not sure Orthodoxy has "shown" that. It's more that cultural changes have "allowed" that. Just one generation ago, there were lots of clubs, beaches, etc. were Jews weren't even allowed, regardless of religiosity. Certainly Jews were discriminated against in the workplace, forget about taking off for shabbos.

    Ideas which are inherently incompatible suggest a closed definition of acceptability, which seems contradictory to acceptance of the legitimacy of varying ideas and viewpoints.

    That's one of those things that you think sounds clever but doesn't really make sense. :-) That's like the old "hurf durf, if you're intolerant of intolerance than you're not tolerant!"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Also, Jews got a lot richer (on average.) As you know, it's a lot easier to be Orthodox and ensure your kids stay Orthodox if you're rich.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If the basic principle of a given religious group was essentially unlimited improvisation in belief, practice, and ritual, what, other than total isolation, would hold it together in the long run? What would give its clergy any true authority?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'd like to contribute to this conversation, but I will attempt to do so without addressing semantics or political nit-picking of what comprises the values of the various Jewish subgroups. Also, please forgive me if I am not as precise as I mean to be; I believe this topic is multifaceted and has many different influences. To address them all is extremely difficult, and to address too few is oversimplifying the discussion and not doing it justice. Additionally, no offense is intended in my comments, and I apologize in advance if my comments cause anyone an offense.

    My belief, and I think this can be supported be looking at history, is this. When Jews started immigrating to America pre and post WWII, America itself was more conservative in its beliefs and values than it is today. Often, Jews immigrating to America already had mixed degrees of commitment to Judaism. Coming from Europe, immigrants encountered a society that did not particularly offend their personally held values and their Jewish identities. This similarity in shared values to the America of the 1920's-1960's led to a blurring of what distinctions were necessary in order to maintain a balance of values and identity between being American and being a Jew. With such a blurring it is difficult to discourage individuals from “leaving the fold”, since there is little perceived difference between those who go to Synagogue on the High Holidays and those who go to Church every Easter and Christmas.

    As American culture became more liberal and held on to fewer of the conservative values of the first half of the 20th century, Jews were faced with a choice. If Jews allowed their values to shift to the left along with the values of America, the line of distinction between a Jewish American and an American might blur so much that there would be little to no distinction whatsoever. If Jews wanted to maintain their values as distinct from that of America, where would the line be drawn? How far is far enough to maintain the integrity of our identity as Jews? Apparently, far enough not to allow intermarriage and assimilation, at least as a minimum.

    Let’s not forget, also, that if we are going to align ourselves to the “middle” of Jewish values and principles, it is hard to maintain the status quo. To the “right” is a value system that emphasizes growth and avoidance of stagnation. To the “left” is a system of maintaining a cultural identity of Judaism while allowing for liberal values. As Ezzie mentioned in his previous post “Hemorrhaging Orthodoxy”, technology allows for disindividuation and assuages what guilt we might feel for compromising our values. With these 2 polarized sides, is it hard to believe that the liberal left will become more liberal in an attempt to keep pace with mainstream America, while the insulated right will progress even further to the right in an attempt to promote growth and further insulate itself from the same mainstream America?

    I would also like to add a caveat to my previous paragraph, that I do NOT believe that movement to the right and incorporating greater stringencies in religious observance is always a. appropriate b. representative of spiritual growth c. makes one a better person than the next. I DO believe that with every society that experiences movements to two different extremes of a continuum, there will be an equalizing movement that will allow for a reset of what will define the norm and standards for that society. After setting standards that are a norm of sustainable values, “religious growth” then becomes personal choice and an indication of personal growth, not an influence of conforming to one’s religious surroundings or a reaction to the mainstream society.

    ReplyDelete
  14. JA - Irrelevant. "Religious" can be Reform or Orthodox.

    I think it's quite relevant. Within each group, women are more likely to be religiously conservative. (Certainly this seems true within Orthodoxy.)

    I agree, sort of. I mean I'm not sure Orthodoxy has "shown" that. It's more that cultural changes have "allowed" that. Just one generation ago, there were lots of clubs, beaches, etc. were Jews weren't even allowed, regardless of religiosity. Certainly Jews were discriminated against in the workplace, forget about taking off for shabbos.

    Sure, but my point is that Orthodox Jews today are able to succeed in just about any field they choose to be in and aren't "held back" by their religiosity, at least in any way that they care. I think that's the salient point there (and you seem to agree with that).

    That's one of those things that you think sounds clever but doesn't really make sense. :-) That's like the old "hurf durf, if you're intolerant of intolerance than you're not tolerant!"

    I don't think it's clever, but I do think it makes sense, since ultimately you'd put a line on what is and isn't okay: At the end of the day, liberals and conservatives both have a line of acceptability. It's where that line is and which way it goes that they differ on.

    Also, Jews got a lot richer (on average.) As you know, it's a lot easier to be Orthodox and ensure your kids stay Orthodox if you're rich.

    Be Orthodox - yes. Stay that way? Questionable. I wonder if my friend doing a study on remaining religious or not has any data on that.

    Bob - If the basic principle of a given religious group was essentially unlimited improvisation in belief, practice, and ritual, what, other than total isolation, would hold it together in the long run? What would give its clergy any true authority?

    The former, agreed and I'm not sure. The latter - advanced study of the original (old?) knowledge and perhaps social activity. I think that by and large the respect Reform and Conservative Rabbis receive is due to their knowledge and study.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anon - I'd like to contribute to this conversation, but I will attempt to do so without addressing semantics or political nit-picking of what comprises the values of the various Jewish subgroups. Also, please forgive me if I am not as precise as I mean to be; I believe this topic is multifaceted and has many different influences. To address them all is extremely difficult, and to address too few is oversimplifying the discussion and not doing it justice. Additionally, no offense is intended in my comments, and I apologize in advance if my comments cause anyone an offense.

    Agreed, and it's all right. Almost by definition a topic like this will result in broad statements and assumptions that are somewhat over or understated. I'm sure I'm guilty of much it myself, but certainly I believe that the commenters here are typically able to keep it all in perspective.

    My belief, and I think this can be supported be looking at history...Apparently, far enough not to allow intermarriage and assimilation, at least as a minimum.

    I would accept the entire premise, I believe.

    With these 2 polarized sides, is it hard to believe that the liberal left will become more liberal in an attempt to keep pace with mainstream America, while the insulated right will progress even further to the right in an attempt to promote growth and further insulate itself from the same mainstream America?

    But within each of those groups in America are large if not majority swaths who are not interested in shifting further right or left (and many I'd say are heading toward the middle). Outside of the East and West coasts, I don't know that so many people are shifting much. But perhaps.

    I just don't know how that translates with Judaism, though. Yes, there's certainly within Orthodoxy a shift to the right among some and left among others, but there's also a shift toward the middle by a large swath. But within Judaism as a whole? I think it's probably more like what you seem to be suggesting, that there's a shift left and right only. I think the basis of her letter and the ensuing conversation is that Conservative Judaism simply doesn't seem to have what to base itself on today: If it's liberalism over Judaism, then there's this shift to the left; if it's to Judaism over liberalism, then there's a shift toward the right. There just doesn't seem to be the balance there was anymore (if it ever existed) in Conservative Judaism.

    I would also like to add a caveat to my previous paragraph, that I do NOT believe that movement to the right and incorporating greater stringencies in religious observance is always a. appropriate b. representative of spiritual growth c. makes one a better person than the next. I DO believe that with every society that experiences movements to two different extremes of a continuum, there will be an equalizing movement that will allow for a reset of what will define the norm and standards for that society. After setting standards that are a norm of sustainable values, “religious growth” then becomes personal choice and an indication of personal growth, not an influence of conforming to one’s religious surroundings or a reaction to the mainstream society.

    Agreed.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "I think she'd say that it's liberal in its practice (especially as compared to Orthodoxy) but not necessarily in its beliefs."

    Despite (?) being a life-long Conservative Jew, I'm liberal in my beliefs (especially as compared to Orthodoxy) but not necessarily in my practice. No wonder I'm a denominational misfit!

    ReplyDelete
  17. To JA and his comment that the author seems confused. No, the author is troubled and thoughtful and pondering…but not confused.

    I am the author.

    Perhaps I wasn't clear regarding the use of the words liberal and conservative. If this is the case, I apologize.

    While some folks think liberal values and liberal Judaism are synonymous, I draw a line. One can have some liberal (or so-called Democratic or left-leaning) values without "letting it all hang out" or assume that a politically left form of Tikkun Olam is the raison d’etre of Judaims…just as one can also espouse conservatism (particularly in terms of frumkeit) without being labeled a Neanderthal.

    If I say I completely oppose intermarriage does that automatically make me conservative? It may make me an oddball in my community with its 70% intermarriage rate. But will I stand firm in my belief? Yes. What if I share my belief with a local Reform rabbi who agrees with me, what then? Are they also a conservative?

    What if I say I support a woman's right to control her reproduction? Does that automatically make me liberal? What if I consult text/rabbaim and get a heter?

    In my mind the terms liberal/conservative aren't completely black or white. But that's a key point for me. Sometimes one can be both at the same time – which is what I thought Conservative Judaism (on some level) was to be about…balancing. In my email to Ezzie I was speaking only for myself. And the point of my letter, which was originally addressed to my brother, a prominent Conservative rabbi, was to raise questions for discussion. That was the goal at least.

    From what I know of Conservative Judaism, it’s based on halacha and on conserving (key word) laws and practice etc. as a reaction to Reform Judaism. My understanding is that the initial founders were Orthodox.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Those currently engaged and within the movement (e.g., in the Sem or Schechter Institute or AJU or on pulpits for example) would argue that changes, decisions and any evolution are based on a careful reading of the text and loads of debate. It’s all about halacha and serious analysis. (When R’Golinkin writes something, I prick up my ears.)

    Yes, there are times when the Conservative movement has made a change and then tried to justify it after the fact. (In this case I’m thinking of the ordination of women…and to JA’s comment that women are more liberal from my observation (and in my kehilla), it’s the women who are more observant, traditional and religious…after all it’s long been said that spirituality and religiosity is in a woman’s nature and that’s why time-bound mitzvoth are commanded of men…) But unlike how Reform has made some of its changes, I believe Conservative did/does reach back to halacha for proof texts. Anyway, I wasn’t planning to go there (and my feelings about this subject [women’s ordination] are complicated) but I will add that perhaps something good came out of the liberal movements’ decisions vis-à-vis to the Orthodox community. Today there are far more opportunities for women’s learning and leadership at a high, scholarly level…maybe those on the more conservative end were influenced for the good, in this case, by the liberals?

    I wouldn't say Conservative is not Orthodox dafka because it's liberal. There are doctrinal differences. I'd still argue that Conservative Judaism is closer philosophically to Orthodox than it is to Reform – at least at the academic level (in the Sem etc). What I would say is that some Conservative Jews may be more liberal in terms of their personal doctrine, philosophy, politics and observance as compared with Orthodox Jews -- but not necessarily. I guess I didn’t do a good enough job of separating out movement from followers.

    What I was questioning and struggling with is this: how to balance two seemingly disparate concepts? In my worldview there is a value to holding onto some liberal beliefs just as there is to conserving others. How far can a person go before they find themselves in one "camp" or another? Is there anything worth retaining from one movement to add to and enhance the others? I’m still questioning and struggling because there are no easy answers – at least not in my mind.

    I would never say I’m “just” a Conservative Jew. My practice is informed by (and tied to) Orthodox Judaism. I also have some strongly liberal values (intermarriage, assimilation and BDS movement/Israel-bashing not among them.) What am I? What did I try to do in my email? I tried to bring up questions, to spark a thoughtful debate and to say that I’m a striving Jew. Finding one’s place within one movement or across the spectrum isn't clear cut and it’s not easy.

    Hope I didn’t jump the gun here Ezzie and derail where you were going with this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think it's quite relevant. Within each group, women are more likely to be religiously conservative. (Certainly this seems true within Orthodoxy.)

    I don't agree at all. Women are more likely to be more "spiritual" not more conservative.

    Sure, but my point is that Orthodox Jews today are able to succeed in just about any field they choose to be in and aren't "held back" by their religiosity, at least in any way that they care. I think that's the salient point there (and you seem to agree with that).

    Yep, agreed.

    I don't think it's clever, but I do think it makes sense, since ultimately you'd put a line on what is and isn't okay: At the end of the day, liberals and conservatives both have a line of acceptability. It's where that line is and which way it goes that they differ on.

    Well, sure, both have a line, but the area inside the liberal's lines is much larger. They're not down with murder, but if you want to be Orthodox, cool, if you want to assimilate, cool, if you want to be a "BuJew", cool. They're much more tolerant of people finding what works for them.

    Be Orthodox - yes. Stay that way? Questionable. I wonder if my friend doing a study on remaining religious or not has any data on that.

    I was thinking of the effects of sending your kids to day schools and keeping them away from non-Jews and non-Orthodox Jews.

    ReplyDelete
  20. To JA and his comment that the author seems confused. No, the author is troubled and thoughtful and pondering…but not confused.

    I am the author.

    Perhaps I wasn't clear regarding the use of the words liberal and conservative. If this is the case, I apologize.

    While some folks think liberal values and liberal Judaism are synonymous, I draw a line. One can have some liberal (or so-called Democratic or left-leaning) values without "letting it all hang out" or assume that a politically left form of Tikkun Olam is the raison d’etre of Judaims…just as one can also espouse conservatism (particularly in terms of frumkeit) without being labeled a Neanderthal.

    If I say I completely oppose intermarriage does that automatically make me conservative? It may make me an oddball in my community with its 70% intermarriage rate. But will I stand firm in my belief? Yes. What if I share my belief with a local Reform rabbi who agrees with me, what then? Are they also a conservative?

    What if I say I support a woman's right to control her reproduction? Does that automatically make me liberal? What if I consult text/rabbaim and get a heter?

    In my mind the terms liberal/conservative aren't completely black or white. But that's a key point for me. Sometimes one can be both at the same time – which is what I thought Conservative Judaism (on some level) was to be about…balancing. In my email to Ezzie I was speaking only for myself. And the point of my letter, which was originally addressed to my brother, a prominent Conservative rabbi, was to raise questions for discussion. That was the goal at least.

    From what I know of Conservative Judaism, it’s based on halacha and on conserving (key word) laws and practice etc. as a reaction to Reform Judaism. My understanding is that the initial founders were Orthodox.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Those currently engaged and within the movement (e.g., in the Sem or Schechter Institute or AJU or on pulpits for example) would argue that changes, decisions and any evolution are based on a careful reading of the text and loads of debate. It’s all about halacha and serious analysis. (When R’Golinkin writes something, I prick up my ears.)

    Yes, there are times when the Conservative movement has made a change and then tried to justify it after the fact. (In this case I’m thinking of the ordination of women…and to JA’s comment that women are more liberal from my observation (and in my kehilla), it’s the women who are more observant, traditional and religious…after all it’s long been said that spirituality and religiosity is in a woman’s nature and that’s why time-bound mitzvoth are commanded of men…) But unlike how Reform has made some of its changes, I believe Conservative did/does reach back to halacha for proof texts. Anyway, I wasn’t planning to go there (and my feelings about this subject [women’s ordination] are complicated) but I will add that perhaps something good came out of the liberal movements’ decisions vis-à-vis to the Orthodox community. Today there are far more opportunities for women’s learning and leadership at a high, scholarly level…maybe those on the more conservative end were influenced for the good, in this case, by the liberals?

    I wouldn't say Conservative is not Orthodox dafka because it's liberal. There are doctrinal differences. I'd still argue that Conservative Judaism is closer philosophically to Orthodox than it is to Reform – at least at the academic level (in the Sem etc). What I would say is that some Conservative Jews may be more liberal in terms of their personal doctrine, philosophy, politics and observance as compared with Orthodox Jews -- but not necessarily. I guess I didn’t do a good enough job of separating out movement from followers.

    What I was questioning and struggling with is this: how to balance two seemingly disparate concepts? In my worldview there is a value to holding onto some liberal beliefs just as there is to conserving others. How far can a person go before they find themselves in one "camp" or another? Is there anything worth retaining from one movement to add to and enhance the others? I’m still questioning and struggling because there are no easy answers – at least not in my mind.

    I would never say I’m “just” a Conservative Jew. My practice is informed by (and tied to) Orthodox Judaism. I also have some strongly liberal values (intermarriage, assimilation and BDS movement/Israel-bashing not among them.) What am I? What did I try to do in my email? I tried to bring up questions, to spark a thoughtful debate and to say that I’m a striving Jew. Finding one’s place within one movement or across the spectrum isn't clear cut and it’s not easy.

    Hope I didn’t jump the gun here Ezzie and derail where you were going with this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Blogger seems to be having some commenting issues, so... CJ Author said:

    To JA and his comment that the author seems confused. No, the author is troubled and thoughtful and pondering…but not confused.

    I am the author.

    Perhaps I wasn't clear regarding the use of the words liberal and conservative. If this is the case, I apologize.

    While some folks think liberal values and liberal Judaism are synonymous, I draw a line. One can have some liberal (or so-called Democratic or left-leaning) values without "letting it all hang out" or assume that a politically left form of Tikkun Olam is the raison d’etre of Judaims…just as one can also espouse conservatism (particularly in terms of frumkeit) without being labeled a Neanderthal.

    If I say I completely oppose intermarriage does that automatically make me conservative? It may make me an oddball in my community with its 70% intermarriage rate. But will I stand firm in my belief? Yes. What if I share my belief with a local Reform rabbi who agrees with me, what then? Are they also a conservative?

    What if I say I support a woman's right to control her reproduction? Does that automatically make me liberal? What if I consult text/rabbaim and get a heter?

    In my mind the terms liberal/conservative aren't completely black or white. But that's a key point for me. Sometimes one can be both at the same time – which is what I thought Conservative Judaism (on some level) was to be about…balancing. In my email to Ezzie I was speaking only for myself. And the point of my letter, which was originally addressed to my brother, a prominent Conservative rabbi, was to raise questions for discussion. That was the goal at least.

    From what I know of Conservative Judaism, it’s based on halacha and on conserving (key word) laws and practice etc. as a reaction to Reform Judaism. My understanding is that the initial founders were Orthodox.

    ReplyDelete
  23. (continued)

    Those currently engaged and within the movement (e.g., in the Sem or Schechter Institute or AJU or on pulpits for example) would argue that changes, decisions and any evolution are based on a careful reading of the text and loads of debate. It’s all about halacha and serious analysis. (When R’Golinkin writes something, I prick up my ears.)

    Yes, there are times when the Conservative movement has made a change and then tried to justify it after the fact. (In this case I’m thinking of the ordination of women…and to JA’s comment that women are more liberal from my observation (and in my kehilla), it’s the women who are more observant, traditional and religious…after all it’s long been said that spirituality and religiosity is in a woman’s nature and that’s why time-bound mitzvoth are commanded of men…) But unlike how Reform has made some of its changes, I believe Conservative did/does reach back to halacha for proof texts. Anyway, I wasn’t planning to go there (and my feelings about this subject [women’s ordination] are complicated) but I will add that perhaps something good came out of the liberal movements’ decisions vis-à-vis to the Orthodox community. Today there are far more opportunities for women’s learning and leadership at a high, scholarly level…maybe those on the more conservative end were influenced for the good, in this case, by the liberals?

    I wouldn't say Conservative is not Orthodox dafka because it's liberal. There are doctrinal differences. I'd still argue that Conservative Judaism is closer philosophically to Orthodox than it is to Reform – at least at the academic level (in the Sem etc). What I would say is that some Conservative Jews may be more liberal in terms of their personal doctrine, philosophy, politics and observance as compared with Orthodox Jews -- but not necessarily. I guess I didn’t do a good enough job of separating out movement from followers.

    What I was questioning and struggling with is this: how to balance two seemingly disparate concepts? In my worldview there is a value to holding onto some liberal beliefs just as there is to conserving others. How far can a person go before they find themselves in one "camp" or another? Is there anything worth retaining from one movement to add to and enhance the others? I’m still questioning and struggling because there are no easy answers – at least not in my mind.

    I would never say I’m “just” a Conservative Jew. My practice is informed by (and tied to) Orthodox Judaism. I also have some strongly liberal values (intermarriage, assimilation and BDS movement/Israel-bashing not among them.) What am I? What did I try to do in my email? I tried to bring up questions, to spark a thoughtful debate and to say that I’m a striving Jew. Finding one’s place within one movement or across the spectrum isn't clear cut and it’s not easy.

    Hope I didn’t jump the gun here Ezzie and derail where you were going with this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Shira - Hehe!

    JA - I don't agree at all. Women are more likely to be more "spiritual" not more conservative.

    Disagree, in my experiences.

    They're not down with murder, but if you want to be Orthodox, cool, if you want to assimilate, cool, if you want to be a "BuJew", cool. They're much more tolerant of people finding what works for them.

    Not sure if that's so true - for instance, if that group has beliefs that they disagree with. But we can save that discussion for another time. :)

    I was thinking of the effects of sending your kids to day schools and keeping them away from non-Jews and non-Orthodox Jews.

    Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Today there are far more opportunities for women’s learning and leadership at a high, scholarly level…maybe those on the more conservative end were influenced for the good, in this case, by the liberals?

    I've always thought that Orthodoxy's big gain from Reform and Conservative Jewry was essentially waiting out and watching how they implemented various ideals and then turning around and implementing those that were truly important/would add something in a way that coincides with Orthodox approaches.

    Hope I didn’t jump the gun here Ezzie and derail where you were going with this thread.

    Not at all! I expect much of what we will get to to be discussed in comments along the way. It'll just add to it all.

    Thank you! :)

    ReplyDelete
  26. CJ Author:

    I agree that "liberal" and "conservative" have different meanings etc and that one doesn't have to be all one or all the other. I do think that opposing intermarriage (for other people! considering it a shonda, etc.) is profoundly illiberal. I think that most people who feel that way would have largely conservative temperaments for that reason.

    Being pro-choice doesn't make you a liberal (especially since halakha pretty much requires you to be pro-choice.) Being a Democrat doesn't either. I'm not talking about political liberalism, I'm talking about liberalism as a mindset. Maybe it's the wrong word, I don't know.

    What I'm getting at is I think there's an inherent contradiction between opposing intermarriage and being a liberal (in the religious sense) Jew. Obviously, individuals can be and usually are contradictions in their own minds, but it's not a stable place for a movement. Movements last when they are on one side or the other. You need if not a coherent message at least a coherent ethos.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think this is a tremendously complex issue in great part because there are several layers of definitions that can be operating here for the terms conservative and liberal.
    1) Personal value system of the individual
    2) Actual behavior of the individual
    3) How the above terms relate to the behavior and decisions of the decisors for the religious group being discussed.

    Given all of the above I see the loss of the Conservative movement for a few reasons, the biggest to me being that it is now very unclear what it is trying to conserve. I think it is very hard to convince children and young adults that the Conservative movement represents authentic Judaism, thus I see many people either becoming Orthodox even if in the MO-lite sense(credit to R. Maryles for the term) or dropping their religious observance altogether and becoming reform.
    I would point out that there are many people who term themselves Orthodox who are only nominally so and might be better termed Conservadox or even Conservative. For example particularly on the UWS you can regularly find people who say they are Orthodox riding elevators, pushing electronic door buttons etc on Shabbos. So some of this is definitely related to the definitions being used. I would venture to guess that if you talked to such people there theological beliefs are to the right of those of the conservative movement, but their behaviors may not be.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Liberal Judaism in New York City is rocking. (Can't speak for the rest of the USA).

    And no, all of Judaism in America is not moving to the right. They may be moving towards greater observance, but definitely not to the right. Witness the growing support right alongside with increased ritual for gay marriage etc,

    Ezzie your comment that there will be liberal and/or religious Judaism is offensive to liberal Jews as it implies that they are not religious.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Judaism itself, as understood for thousands of years, isn't moving anywhere. Some Jews are moving towards Judaism and some away.

    ReplyDelete
  30. JA - What I'm getting at is I think there's an inherent contradiction between opposing intermarriage and being a liberal (in the religious sense) Jew.

    But that's just it - why is that? Why can't someone view the practice of the religion more liberally and yet still feel that what makes someone Jewish is having Jewish parents, and therefore marrying out is problematic? Or that there's a religious pride that should be motivating someone to do so?

    You need if not a coherent message at least a coherent ethos.

    Agreed.

    Kisarita - They may be moving towards greater observance, but definitely not to the right. Witness the growing support right alongside with increased ritual for gay marriage etc,

    Good point.

    Ezzie your comment that there will be liberal and/or religious Judaism is offensive to liberal Jews as it implies that they are not religious.

    I think you misread the context of the quote - from the point of view of one who is Conservative, the two choices seem to be liberal (i.e. Reform et al) or religious (Orthodoxy). Obviously within each group there are subsets, but this is from a broader point of view.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Josh Josephs - Agree that there are several layers of terms; I hope that doesn't get too confusing moving forward.

    I think it is very hard to convince children and young adults that the Conservative movement represents authentic Judaism, thus I see many people either becoming Orthodox even if in the MO-lite sense(credit to R. Maryles for the term) or dropping their religious observance altogether and becoming reform.

    Exactly.

    I would point out that there are many people who term themselves Orthodox who are only nominally so and might be better termed Conservadox or even Conservative. For example particularly on the UWS you can regularly find people who say they are Orthodox riding elevators, pushing electronic door buttons etc on Shabbos. So some of this is definitely related to the definitions being used. I would venture to guess that if you talked to such people there theological beliefs are to the right of those of the conservative movement, but their behaviors may not be.

    Agreed - see this post on Cultural Orthodoxy, which is something that I'm going to get to in this discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Why can't someone view the practice of the religion more liberally and yet still feel that what makes someone Jewish is having Jewish parents, and therefore marrying out is problematic?

    Again, I'm talking about temperamental liberalism. There's no contradiction between practicing liberally and opposing intermarriage (and let's not sugarcoat it -- the author didn't say "problematic," she said shonda.) The contradiction is with the liberal temperament.

    What are the reasons one might oppose intermarriage? Because God said so? Well, they might think that he didn't. Because the rabbis said so? So what? Liberal Jews are allowed to disagree with the rabbis. Because Jews are superior/unique as people? Fundamentally at odds with the liberal idea that people are people, regardless of creed (or race, gender, etc.) Because the tradition must be maintained? The liberal doesn't feel as strongly about the need to keep tradition. She loves the tradition, perhaps, and might not marry a non-Jew herself, but if someone else wants to, who is she to say that person must instead uphold the tradition?

    There just aren't any good reasons to strongly oppose (a shonda!) other people's intermarriages if you are a liberal. All of the objections are fundamentally conservative in nature.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I should add that I keep harping on "shonda" because it I think points to the fact that the moral values behind such an expression are "purity/sanctity" and perhaps "Ingroup/Loyalty", which are values held much more deeply by conservatives than liberals, who are much more concerned with "Harm/Care" and "Fairness/Reciprocity".

    See my post on Conservative vs. Liberal Morality.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think most people have the "line in the sand" that they draw based on their beliefs.

    "Liberal" does not mean "free for all". Most "liberal" people I know consider intermarriage (and, interestingly, bacon) their "line in the sand". Most do consider it a shanda. There is a huge difference (imho) between rejecting kashrut and thinking it's ok to marry out. However, I can see why someone who is truly Orthodox cannot understand this. For example, for part of my family who is Orthodox, rejecting Kashrut is pretty much like marrying out - why non-Orthodox Jews make a distinction is a mystery for them. Nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of things about strict Orthodoxy I do not understand.

    I'd also like to get over the impression that Reform means totally non-observant. I will grant that the majority of "Reform" Jews say they are because they are nothing, but saying they are "Reform" allows them to feel they are "still a Jew." This does NOT make you Reform. It makes you secular. A thoughtful, active Reform Jew participates fully in Jewish life, day in and day out. A true Reform Jew is religious and observant. Certainly not in the Orthodox sense, but in the sense that the rhythm of life, both time-bound and life choices, are centered around Judaism and a Jewish perspective, and is the result of both faith and learning.

    /soapbox ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  35. I think one point we'll get to more later is that within each group there's a marked difference between the ones who follow the intentions of the originators vs. the culturally [insert group].

    ReplyDelete
  36. I find it fascinating that there is a category of "culturally Orthodox". I had never heard of such a thing.

    ReplyDelete