Why Target the Conservative Movement?

Some readers of this site, no doubt aware that patrilineal descent is rejected by both Orthodoxy and Conservative Judaism, might ask why we should focus on only the latter movement in our efforts to defeat entrenched discrimination.  There are several reasons that we feel are compelling for chosing the Conservative Movement as the place to fight this battle.

First and foremost, the Conservative Movement, by its very nature, accepts the possibility that halakha can change while Orthodoxy does not.  Over the course of its history, the Conservative Movement has accepted a number of changes in traditional interpretation of Jewish law on both issues large (the ordination of women as rabbis) and small (the kashrut, or kosher, status of swordfish).  Although change within Jewish law does, in practice, occur within Orthodox communities, it occurs largely in disguise; previous interpreters of Jewish law are retroactively read to agree with current opinion and practice, in order to maintain an illusion of continuity where none in fact exists.  Conservatism, on the other hand, changes Jewish law in a much more conscious and straightforward fashion.

Second, it is an inescapable fact that the Conservative Movement holds a strategic place in setting policy for the Jewish community as a whole.  Because it occupies a middle ground between the Reform Movement (roughly equal in size) and Orthodoxy (which is numerically smaller), its policy frequently determines what constitutes the "unified approach of the Jewish people" on any particular issue.  Indeed, part of what stings us about the movement's current policy is that Conservative leaders have attacked the Reform and Reconstructionist movements for going against the "unified approach of the Jewish people," while blithely ignoring that the "unified approach of the Jewish people" depends largely on what the Conservative Movement chooses to do.

Third, widespread support for our position already exists among the Conservative laity.  A 1996 study undertaken by Rabbi Jack Wertheimer of Jewish Theological Seminary, the movement's main rabbinical school, indicated that 70 percent of the movement's laity accepted patrilineal descent as a basis for Jewish identity.  Oddly, the movement's leadership chooses to see this fact as a sign of the weak Jewish identity of the Conservative laity, rather than a wise decision not to deny the Jewishness of grandchildren, nieces, nephews, cousins, and friends whose britot (circumcisions), baby namings and b'nai mitzvah (bar and bat mitzvah ceremonies) they joyously attend.

Fourth, we feel that the time is ripe to pursue our cause in the Conservative Movement.  The Movement has recently undergone a sea change in its treatment of homosexuality and transgender issues, a change many in the movement never would have thought possible even ten years before.  Clearly the progressives within the movement have, at least momentarily, the upper hand.

Fifth, we choose to target the Conservative Movement because we feel that a strong Conservative Movement is vital to a strong Jewish community.  At present, the Movement prides itself on being "egalitarian"--meaning, largely, that it allows women an equal role in worship, while denying gender equality in such areas as Jewish divorce and, of course, Jewish descent.  We feel strongly that, over the long term, the Movement cannot afford to convey to its young people the message that sex discrimination is an evil to be fought in the world but ignored in the synagogue.  We therefore feel that the Conservative Movement's policies can and must change if the movement is to maintain any semblance of moral credibility.