Re: Kol Isha: Theology and Halakha

[wiener <wiener...>]

Jordan,

"[I]n your initial post, you were not questioning anything. You were condemning 
sight unseen a system of belief, the details of which you yourself express 
ignorance.  That is not questioning.  That is wholesale rejection of deeply 
held religious beliefs of your CO-religionists, who I think are entitled at 
least to the benefit of the doubt that their 2000 year old system of 
jurisprudence painstakingly derived in a fair manner.  [The issue should be] 
respect for a group of Observant Jews and the Torah that they observe." 

If the quote above seems familiar it may be because it is yours.  I encourage 
you to reconsider your statements below concerning the theology of the 
Conservative movement, until you have at least browsed through Isaac Klein's "A 
Guide to Jewish Religious Practice" (the Conservative Movement's Shulkhan 
Arukh) and some T'shuvot of the Conservative movement's Law Committee.  
Otherwise some might say that you are prejudging the legitimacy of the Halakhic 
Process as understood and applied by the Conservative Movement by its 
conclusions.  

In fact, Joel Roth, the author of "The Halakhic Process", to whom I referred in 
an earlier post, was the chair of the Law Committee for many, if not most, of 
the past 20 years.  And I'm not sure that if you read that work you would 
quickly conclude that it is written by a Conservative rabbi.  The same goes for 
Isaac Klein's work.  And the approach of the T'shuvot (aside from some of the 
results).  BTW, the Conservative movement still supports matrilineal descent, 
taharat hamishpacha, kashrut, and does not accept homosexuals into its main 
rabbinical school -- all because of Halakhic rather than political reasons.

As you might well know, the decision about women cantors (as Sh'lihot Tsibur) 
was far more complex halakhically than the decision about women rabbis.  But I 
ask you not to condemn the conclusion without having read the responsum.

I do agree that the Conservative Movement has been more ready to reconsider 
issues raised using the Halakhic Process than have the Orthodox.  But that's 
why some Jews choose to be Conservative Jews.

We don't have Louis Finkelstein to ask, but we do have Neil Gillman.  Perhaps 
you think us both naive.

Bob

P.S. Pardon my rushed post.  We're off to a toddler's BD party and I'm writing 
in the brief moments between getting ready.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: TROMBAEDU (at) aol(dot)com <TROMBAEDU (at) aol(dot)com>
    To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
    Date: Monday, February 19, 2001 11:33 AM
    Subject: Re: Kol Isha: Theology and Halakha
    
    
    In a message dated 2/19/01 7:34:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
    wiener (at) mindspring(dot)com writes: 
    
    
    
        Jordan, are you claiming that the principle of "Kol Isha" itself 
(considered 
        separately, for now, from the issue of a woman as Sh'lihat 
Tsibur/cantor) 
        falls into the category of those "certain Takkanot [that] cannot be 
        overturned, nor established."? 
        
        Bob 
        
    
    
    No, I make no such claim. I only claim that In the case of Takkanot, there 
is 
    not really a mechanism to overturn them, nor really to institute them in 
the 
    same way. Kol Isha is not a Takkanah. Why do you ask, does the Conservative 
    movement seem to be acting agaisnt the traditional approach advocated by 
    Rabbis Finkelstein and Gilman? How is it that if Kol Isha is the product of 
    Torah SheBaal Peh, Conservative Shuls can have WomanCantors? Well, first of 
    all, while the Conservative movement claims fealty to Torah Shebaal Peh, 
they 
    see it as a more fluid process, which allows for previously unthought of 
    ideas being handled by contemporary Rabbis, using their understanding of 
    Torah Shebaal Peh to come up with solutions to problems. But additionally, 
it 
    would be naive to think that the Conservative movement of the last twenty 
    years operated in any fashion similar to the one imagined by Rabbi 
    Finklestein. 
    
    Jordan