Get 2 Jews in a Room...

[hgc]

... and you'll get 3 opinions. That's a little quip I grew up with.

In this article about the Conservative Jewish Movement considering same-sex unions and allowing gay rabbis, about which there is much disagreement in the law committee, I was struck by this passage...

The committee may even adopt conflicting opinions, a move that some members say would simply acknowledge the diversity in Conservative Judaism. The committee's decisions are not binding on rabbis but do set direction for the movement.

"I don't think it is either feasible or desirable for a movement like ours to have one approach to Jewish law," said Rabbi Gordon Tucker of Temple Israel Center, in White Plains, a committee member who has collaborated with three others on a legal opinion advocating lifting the prohibition on homosexuality.

Where's the insistence on fealty to one or other interpretation to religious doctrine?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/06/national/06rabbi.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fG%2fGoodstein%2c%20Laurie&oref=slogin

 

[Cleon]

Where's the insistence on fealty to one or other interpretation to religious doctrine?

In Conservative Judaism? Almost none.

Judaism is very decentralized. For the most part, this new policy would have little effect beyond what's written on the paper; congregations would still believe whatever they felt like.

The Orthodox are a bit more stringent, but the same rules would generally apply. (Though if they adopted a pro-gay-marriage stance, a ****load of congregations would leave the Orthodox Union.)

Really it's only the Hassidim who take the "if the rebbe says it, it becomes law" approach. And then there are a bunch of different Hassidic sects, so I guess even the rebbe's authority breaks down at a certain point.

 

[David Swidler]

Rabbi Gordon Tucker? This has little to do with the thread, but his ex married Senator Lieberman.

 

[Angus McPresley]

... and you'll get 3 opinions. That's a little quip I grew up with.
[...]
Where's the insistence on fealty to one or other interpretation to religious doctrine?

That's a beautiful thing. The reason I'm not a "joiner" is that it bugs me to no end when I join an organization and they officially endorse an opinion I don't agree with, even if I agree with 99% of the rest of what they say. I despise when others speak for me. But if the organization can adopt conflicting views, and there's an implicit understanding that not everyone involved agrees with every statement?

That's the organization for me. Sign me up as a Jew. I already love the jokes.

 

[CriticalThanking]

That's the organization for me. Sign me up as a Jew. I already love the jokes.

And the food is pretty good, too.

A traditional family weekend get together.

Saturday
7-8am: eat bagels, lox, smoked whitefish, kugel, and anything else you can get your hands on.
8-10am: sit and talk about relatives and what you are going to have for lunch
10-11pm: various phone calls, snoozing
11-1pm: lunch of pastrami, roast beef or other sandwiches.
1-3: sit and talk about relatives and where you are going to dinner
3-5pm: break into various discussion groups around plates of snacks
5-8pm: drive to ethnic restaurant for a long dinner
8-10pm: discuss the relative merits of the meal you just ate, plan for breakfast

Sunday
repeat
(Sunday night, 11:30pm - wonder why you gain weight when getting together with relatives)

CriticalThanking

 

[David Swidler]

That's a beautiful thing. The reason I'm not a "joiner" is that it bugs me to no end when I join an organization and they officially endorse an opinion I don't agree with, even if I agree with 99% of the rest of what they say. I despise when others speak for me. But if the organization can adopt conflicting views, and there's an implicit understanding that not everyone involved agrees with every statement?

That's the organization for me. Sign me up as a Jew. I already love the jokes.

The acknowledgement of diverse - and contradictory - positions in Judaism has been around for millennia. I'm reminded of an exchange from Yentl:

"But Rabbi, they can't both be right?!"
"You're right, too."

The general approach in Talmudic scholarship is to understand each position, and in the process sometimes one or more become untenable. But more often the principle is, "Both these and these are the words of the living God." It's just that for consistency's sake only one position can be implemented in practice most of the time, so rules have emerged for determining which ones to follow.

Hey, if you really want to sign up as a Jew, I suggest you refer to my title....