By Rabbi Dow Marmur
JERUSALEM–Following its very successful exploration of Reform Judaism two years ago, the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem has just held a similar two-day conference on Conservative Judaism. The event was held at a time when the movement is having difficulties, especially in the United States where it’s no longer the dominant force.
Conservative Judaism has always seen itself as being in the centre, the authentic exponent of contemporary normative Judaism that affirms Halakhah (Jewish law) while at the same time advocates change as a reflection of the spirit of the time. It distanced itself from ultra-halakhic Orthodoxy that claims that everything new is forbidden by the Torah and from the anti-halakhic “informed choice” of Classical Reform. But this was easier than to find a place in our post-halakhic age that appeals to so many Jews.
As a result, the formula that brought American Jews into the Conservative movement – with its desire to retain tradition yet adapt to their drastically altered social and economic circumstances under the motto, Tradition and Change – doesn’t seem to work anymore. What set out to be magisterially centrist has ended up sitting uncomfortably in the middle accused of being wishy-washy and moving to the periphery.
To cite all the reasons for the shift offered by the many analysts at the conference would turn this page into a tract, which isn’t the intention. Hence only this:
A term used by several speakers was “branding” with its implied marketing connotations. It suggests that the market in which Conservative Judaism is now competing is less interested in the centre yet doesn’t want to go to the middle. Those who want Halakhah turn to Orthodoxy, which they consider to be more authentic, and those who want change turn to Reform. To paraphrase the terminology of Reginald Bibi (the Canadian sociologist of religion), Jews who want a conventional religious diet turn to Orthodox Judaism; those who want what he calls “religion a la carte” go to Reform.
The leaders of Conservative Judaism are now struggling with the dilemma and are seeking to find an ideology that’s sufficiently different from modern Orthodoxy and very distinct, especially in matters of Jewish status, from Reform. Most of them find this very difficult. As a result, those on the “right” have a tendency to flirt with modern Orthodoxy, whereas those on the “left” may end up in Reform or Jewish Renewal congregations.
Conservative Jews are particularly disappointed that they haven’t done better in Israel. Though they have twice as many congregations and many times as many members as Reform, they’re no less shunned by the Orthodox establishment than Reform and suspect in many “post-secular” circles that aspire toward (often anarchic) observance. Many Conservative exponents seem to find the rejection visibly painful.
Some say that Israeli men stay away because of the Conservative (and Reform) clearly liberal insistence on gender equality, for Israel remains a macho society.
Given the choice, I surmise, many exponents of Conservative Judaism would be prepared to be adopted by modern Israeli Orthodoxy (such as it is) but they’re not welcome there. Reform, on the other hand, would be happy to make common cause with Conservative Judaism, yet those overtures are being consistently rejected.
Conservative Jews, therefore, might get used to sharing the fate of today’s Jewish liberals and learn to live as a minority, even though they wear kippot and keep kosher.
*
Rabbi Marmur is spiritual leader emeritus of Holy Blossom Temple in Toronto. He now divides his yer between Canada and Israel