A Conservative Jew's News and Views: On the (non-)connection between the gay-rights and patrilineal-descent issues (?)
Monday, December 25, 2006 update:
Here's a relevant comment by Rahel to my previous post on the ordination of homosexuals:
“this ruling raises questions concerning intermarriage. There is a minority oppinion, (albeit a decidedly minor one), that states that Devarim 7:4 applies specifically to those nations listed, and not to all Gentiles. I don't have the source off the top of my head, but I'll find it and leave it here as a comment. At any rate, it can be argued that, if we're going to allow something which is specifically prohibited by the written Torah, then are we going to allow something else which is not only ambiguous in the written Torah, but has minority support within the rabbinic tradition? Just my two-cents, and, I'm not advocating for the Halachic sanction of intermarriage. I'm just raising the question.
My gut instinct is to agree with my first rabbi in New York on this one--if we can't even agree on who's born Jewish, where does that leave (what's left of) Jewish unity? Is it fair to ask the children of Jewish father and non-Jewish mothers to convert? No. But is it the right thing to do? I still think it is.
posted by Shira Salamone at 8:36 PM
22 Comments:
Halachah/Jewish religious law states that a person's religion is determined by the religion of the mother.
Mmmm, mmhhmm, mhmmm... except that this law itself is historical, not eternal: Was Tzipporah Jewish? Was Asneth? Were Bilchah and Zilpah?
Originally, as a tribal religion, Judaism was passed from father to son. It's only with Ezra that we get a universal statement about Jewish mothers. So, given that mothers no longer stay home with their children and provide the majority of early-childhood eduication (we have day-schools for that), WHY do we continue to insist on the matrilineal-only descent?
I guess I see identity as a defining issue. There's so much else that separates non-Orthodox Jews from Orthodox Jews, it would be nice if we could agree on *something.*
I agree. So why don't the orthodox simply change their rulings to agree with the liberal movements?
'cause then they would be liberal, not Orthodox. There are certain bedrock issues about which the Orthodox will probably never change their minds. This is probably one of them.
By the way, one of the theories as to why Judaism went "matrilineal" is that, in ancient days when soldiers had their way with Jewish women, there was no real way of knowing who the father was, so the switch-over to basing the religion of the child on the religion of the mother, rather than the father, was a matter of practicality, and possibly even survival.
'cause then they would be liberal, not Orthodox.
Ah, but you're perfectly happy to ask the liberal movements to become Orthodox...
Do you realize that the "reason" you cited for instituting martilineality is now an anachronism, with DNA testing, etc.? That it works against your argument?
Tzipporah,
The reason we don't change is that we don't much care for unity on halachic issues where the heterodox movements have drifted from halacha. We're not asking for agreement. We're slowly, but surely, moving to the point where all non-Orthodox Jews will be required to convert just to ensure they are Jewish if they weren't raised orthodox. (I suspect we're still several generations from that happening, but I think it will happen late in my lifetime.) It's sad, but it's the Reform that introduced this as a problem. I suspect, given how the Conservative movement caved on an issue most of the laity couldn't care about, that they will eventually cave on patrilineal descent. At that point, there will be no Jewish people. There will be at least 2, maybe more.
But unity simply for the sake of unity, where halacha is being sacrificed? no, ain't gonna happen.
Tzippora, it may be an anachronism at this point, but the definition's been standing for roughly a couple thousand years, and the Orthodox aren't in any hurry to change it. So what's it gonna be, evening things out, or preserving what's left of Jewish unity? Some choice, huh? But I think jdub is right--there may very well come a point at which the Orthodox community simply writes off the non-Orthodox community as not verifiably Jewish without conversion. I'm not willing to be a party to a permanent division of the Jewish people.
jumping in very late on this, but...
The Orthodox establishment is already making it difficult for unaffiliated Jews to be counted as Jews. I'm running into this looking for a Jewish cemetery that will take me... My mother was an unaffiliated Jew whose parents emigrated from Poland -- in her father's case to get out from under the thumbs of the Czar's armies *and* the rabbis -- and my father is Christian. I have a very non-Jewish surname and do not "look Jewish." The cemeteries are asking for all sorts of documentation that I may not be able to get, because of the Holocaust, and because any rabbis who knew my Jewish grandparents have been dead for at least 30 years. My mother's birth certificate, which lists her race as Jewish, isn't acceptable because it's a secular document.
My husband and I wish to be buried side by side when the time comes. He is more identifiably Jewish and has a typical Jewish surname. He insists on a Jewish cemetery but it is proving very difficult to find one that will accept me.
Ouch. Trying to prove that one is Jewish can be a real challenge. Best of luck.
jdub said:
The reason we don't change is that we don't much care for unity on halachic issues where the heterodox movements have drifted from halacha. We're not asking for agreement.
But that's exactly what Shira IS asking for - that heterodox movements give up their own halacha (and yes, most of them think they ARE following and making halacha) in favor of the Orthodox view, to preserve Jewish unity:
From the original post:
Is it fair to ask the children of Jewish father and non-Jewish mothers to convert? No. But is it the right thing to do? I still think it is.
Yeah, that is pretty much what I'm asking for. We can agree to disagree on many things, such as the ordination of women and gays, because they don't change our religious identity--we're all still Jews. But when we start messing around with something so fundamental as who's *born* a Jew--we have enough disagreement on who's a Jew by choice--we're just asking for (more) trouble, in terms of Jewish unity.
we have enough disagreement on who's a Jew by choice--we're just asking for (more) trouble, in terms of Jewish unity.
Agreed. But you're writing about it as if there's some chance to stop this process - Reform and Recon Jews have been acknowledging children of Jewish fathers being raised Jewish as Jews for years now. The cat's out of the bag. Orthodoxy can disagree with this decision, but there are plenty of people out there living this (old? new?) paradigm, and complaining about how difficult this makes things won't stop it.
Tzipporah, maybe that's so, but I guess I count on the Conservative Movement to concern itself with matters that affect Jewish unity.
In my opinion, the refusal to accept patrilineal descent is one of the chief matters of interpretation of Jewish law that separates the Conservative Movement from the Reconstructionist and Reform Movements.
Interesting that this is where you see a line in the sand. I guess I see Reform as opposed to all other movements in leaving halachic decisions up to individuals, rather than communal decision-making processes, as much more where the line is drawn. And Reconstructionist as often more aligned with Conservative (or even Orthodox) than Reform, despite the prevalence of English instead of Hebrew, etc.
That depends largely on whether you're talking about theory or about practice. I used to belong to a dual-affiliated Conservative/Reconstructionist synagogue, and now belong to a Conservative one. My own personal experience in Conservative and Reconstructionist circles has been that, whatever the *rabbinate* may decide, many lay individuals pretty much pick and choose what to observe. In terms of personal practice by laypeople, I think that Conservs. & Recons. are often as likely to reserve the right to make our own halachic decisions as the Reform are.
possibly. But at least we'll consider them questions of *halacha* and not just personal preference.
Tzipporah, perhaps I didn't phrase my previous comment clearly enough. I guess I'm a bit more skeptical than you are about whether many Conservative Jews think of their decisions as questions of halachah. Undoubtedly, some do, but what's the percentage?
"My gut instinct is to agree with my first rabbi in New York on this one--if we can't even agree on who's born Jewish, where does that leave (what's left of) Jewish unity?"
Even limiting oneself to the Conservative and Orthodox branches of Judaism, there already isn't a consensus on who is born a Jew because the children of a woman who undergo a Conservative Jewish conversion won't be recognized as Jewish by the Orthodox.
If the Conservative Jewish movement really believes what it's preaching about Jewish unity, then it should get out of the conversion business altogether, nullify all of its previous conversions as invalid and inadequate, and announce that from now on it will only recognize conversions to Judaism that are accepted by the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. That should guarantee Jewish unity between Conservative Judaism and Orthodox Judaism, while of course also severely pissing off Conservative Jewish converts and aspiring Conservative Jewish converts.
"My gut instinct is to agree with my first rabbi in New York on this one--if we can't even agree on who's born Jewish, where does that leave (what's left of) Jewish unity? Is it fair to ask the children of Jewish father and non-Jewish mothers to convert? No. But is it the right thing to do? I still think it is."
This argument would only work if Conservative Jewish conversions were actually recognized by the Orthodox. But they aren't. If patrilineal Jews undergo Conservative Jewish conversions, then they and (for the women) their children and female-line descendants would still be viewed as non-Jewish by the Orthodox in spite of their Conservative Jewish conversions. So, ultimately if one really wants to achieve Jewish unity, one would encourage patrilineal Jews to only get Orthodox Jewish conversions, specifically only by those rabbis that are actually approved by the Israeli Chief Rabbinate.
Encouraging patrilineal Jews to get Conservative Jewish conversions might please Conservative Jews, but it doesn't please anyone else. Not the Orthodox, not Reform, and not Reconstructionist. It doesn't even achieve Jewish unity. So, why insist on Conservative Jewish conversions for patrilineal Jews when they don't actually accomplish much and don't even achieve Jewish unity? Why not drop the Conservative Jewish conversion requirement for patrilineal Jews instead and instead accept them as they are?
If they will want to be accepted by the Orthodox later on, then they will have to undergo a separate Orthodox conversion later on in any case, so why bother insisting on a Conservative Jewish conversion for them at all?
"Tzipporah, maybe that's so, but I guess I count on the Conservative Movement to concern itself with matters that affect Jewish unity."
But is spitting in patrilineal Jews' faces really an acceptable price worth paying for this? Again, the Conservative Jewish movement rejects accepting the Orthodox Jewish view on the validity of conversions to Judaism--presumably because it feels that it's unfair to converts and aspiring converts--in spite of this creating a disconnect between what Conservative Jews and Orthodox Jews consider to be an acceptable conversion to Judaism, thus dividing the Jewish people.
And again, if you wanted to get patrilineal Jews viewed as Jewish while still maintaining Jewish unity, then having them undergo a Conservative Jewish conversion is an extremely suboptimal way of going about this. Again, patrilineal Jews should instead aggressively seek to be converted by an Orthodox rabbi whose conversions are actually approved by the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Of course, it's worth noting that if one will insist on this, then the number of patrilineal Jews converting to Judaism could drop significantly. But the same can also be said for not recognizing patrilineal/bilinear descent.
And frankly, Shira, no offense, but check your privilege on this issue because you yourself are a woman!
As I said, there's a huge tradeoff between Jewish unity and accepting patrilineal Jews because the overwhelming majority of patrilineal Jews would NOT be willing to convert to Judaism in such a way that would be acceptable to the entire Jewish people. We don't need to hypothesize: We already have a gigantic live several decades-long experiment of this in Israel, where among ex-USSR immigrants of Jewish descent who are not halakhically Jewish as well as their non-halakhically Jewish descendants (several hundred thousand people in total), only a small percentage of them ever actually converted to Judaism because they deem the Israeli Chief Rabbinate's conversion criteria to be too unfair and/or too demanding of them (such as living a religious lifestyle that they have no desire to live). So, in regards to the overwhelming majority of patrilineal Jews, there simply isn't a realistic way to get them accepted by the entire Jewish people. Then the only remaining choices are either to split the Jewish people so that patrilineal Jews could be accepted somewhere among the Jewish people or to have the entire Jewish people reject patrilineal Jews by having the entire Jewish people embrace the Haredi view on what qualifies as an acceptable conversion to Judaism.
"In my opinion, the refusal to accept patrilineal descent is one of the chief matters of interpretation of Jewish law that separates the Conservative Movement from the Reconstructionist and Reform Movements."
Yes, we know that the Conservative Jewish movement deems halakha infinitely malleable other than (as Coyote said a while back on some other thread) on both patrilineal descent and intermarriage. Everything else is renegotiable, including polyamorous relationships/marriages in several decades' time or less (after all, some people are just not wired for monogamy, so why force them into this and thus force them to suffer?), just not these two things.
"I guess I see identity as a defining issue. There's so much else that separates non-Orthodox Jews from Orthodox Jews, it would be nice if we could agree on *something.*"
Using the Torah and Jewish teachings as inspiration is not an agreement on something?
Post a Comment
<< Home