(no subject)
Dec. 7th, 2006 09:50 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lauraanne_gilmanBusy and even more busy these days (more on that later) but a pause to share this, from the New York Times:
Conservative Jews Allow Gay Rabbis and Unions
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: December 7, 2006
The highest legal body in Conservative Judaism, the centrist movement in worldwide Jewry, voted yesterday to allow the ordination of gay rabbis and the celebration of same-sex commitment ceremonies.
The decision, which followed years of debate, was denounced by traditionalists in the movement as an indication that Conservative Judaism had abandoned its commitment to adhere to Jewish law, but celebrated by others as a long-awaited move toward full equality for gay people....
But in a reflection of the divisions in the movement, the 25 rabbis on the law committee passed three conflicting legal opinions — one in favor of gay rabbis and unions, and two against.
In doing so, the committee left it up to individual synagogues to decide whether to accept or reject gay rabbis and commitment ceremonies, saying that either course is justified according to Jewish law.
“We believe in pluralism,” said Rabbi Kassel Abelson, chairman of the panel, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly, at a news conference after the meeting at the Park Avenue Synagogue in New York. “We recognized from the very beginnings of the movement that no single position could speak for all members” on the law committee or in the Conservative movement.
more here, va the NYT.
The thing to remember here is that Judiasm doesn't have the equivalent of a papal bull -- as the article says, this is just a theological ruling; the practical applications thereof are left to individual synagogues. And by 'individual' they don't mean "Western New Mexican synagogues" or "Northern American red-headed synagogues." They mean individual synagogues. And, as a rule, the decision will be made not by the rabbi/cantor of each synagogue, but by the members thereof, in a vote. So things could get veeeeery interesting soon.
(I was raised in the Reform tradition, where we don't get what the fuss is about. So long as they're good to each other, are good neighbors, who should say what they should do in private?)
And, in a total random comment, the 'i' key just came off my keyboard. Anyone have any suggestons on the best way to reglue it? (just the plastic top, not the actual mechanism)
Conservative Jews Allow Gay Rabbis and Unions
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: December 7, 2006
The highest legal body in Conservative Judaism, the centrist movement in worldwide Jewry, voted yesterday to allow the ordination of gay rabbis and the celebration of same-sex commitment ceremonies.
The decision, which followed years of debate, was denounced by traditionalists in the movement as an indication that Conservative Judaism had abandoned its commitment to adhere to Jewish law, but celebrated by others as a long-awaited move toward full equality for gay people....
But in a reflection of the divisions in the movement, the 25 rabbis on the law committee passed three conflicting legal opinions — one in favor of gay rabbis and unions, and two against.
In doing so, the committee left it up to individual synagogues to decide whether to accept or reject gay rabbis and commitment ceremonies, saying that either course is justified according to Jewish law.
“We believe in pluralism,” said Rabbi Kassel Abelson, chairman of the panel, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly, at a news conference after the meeting at the Park Avenue Synagogue in New York. “We recognized from the very beginnings of the movement that no single position could speak for all members” on the law committee or in the Conservative movement.
more here, va the NYT.
The thing to remember here is that Judiasm doesn't have the equivalent of a papal bull -- as the article says, this is just a theological ruling; the practical applications thereof are left to individual synagogues. And by 'individual' they don't mean "Western New Mexican synagogues" or "Northern American red-headed synagogues." They mean individual synagogues. And, as a rule, the decision will be made not by the rabbi/cantor of each synagogue, but by the members thereof, in a vote. So things could get veeeeery interesting soon.
(I was raised in the Reform tradition, where we don't get what the fuss is about. So long as they're good to each other, are good neighbors, who should say what they should do in private?)
And, in a total random comment, the 'i' key just came off my keyboard. Anyone have any suggestons on the best way to reglue it? (just the plastic top, not the actual mechanism)
