To Cynical:
You’re missing the point on the Teshuva on Tzitzis knots. It was put forward by “Rabbi” Shoshana Gelfand? A female Rabbi?
The CJLS votes on issues which a Torah-observant Jew wouldn’t even consider as needing a vote. Example:
Teshuva:
“A member of the congregation, who is somewhat observant of the Shabbat and Festivals, but who is an avowed atheist, enjoys leading the congregation in prayer. May an avowed atheist serve as a Shliach Tzibur?”
The laws of Shabbat and Festivals were given by G-d. The praying that one does is to G-d. The person is somewhat observant (what does that mean?) of the Shabbat and Festivals, and enjoys leading the congregation in prayer — but doesn’t believe in G-d’s existence, which is one of the 13 foundations of Judaism! The CJLS has to even discuss and take a vote on whether or not such a person may serve as Shliach Tzibur?!
Teshuva:
“Solemnizing the Marriage between a Kohen and a Divorcee.”
The Torah forbids this. Yet, the CJLS takes a vote on this issue, and in the end, it votes that this is allowed, because one rabbi observes that “finding of a suitable mate is difficult, and we must accept the fact that an unequivocal condemnation of such a marriage and an unwillingness to officiate may present Judaism as arbitrary and indifferent to personal happiness and as placing legal formalisms above human values, with the result that such
people would feel driven to leave the Synagogue and Jewish observances generally.”
“The high intermarriage rate is of deep concern. In an instance when two Jews express their desire to marry one another, are we not beholden to remove barriers to their relationship? The high divorce rate is a reality.”
“When a Grushah is prepared to marry a Jew, albeit a Kohen, is it appropriate for us, in this day and age, to refuse to solemnize the marriage?”
“We, therefore, support the decision of two Jews to marry even when he is a Kohen and she is a Grushah, and a member of the Rabbinical Assembly may solemnize such marriage.”
Yes, let’s take what the Torah says about forbidding this type of marriage, and vote to throw it away. But Cynical writes above: “The CJLS has never abrogated Shabbat, Kashrut, Taharat Mishpacha, or anything else (evidently, the ‘anything else’ doesn’t include forbidding a Kohen to marry a divorcee) . . . I still have very little problem saying that someone who drives only to shul is Shomer Shabbos.”
Cynical also writes above:
“The CJLS does not serve the function of a chief rabbi or rov that makes Psak Halacha. The CJLS debates Teshuvot written by its members on issues of Jewish law. After the discussion/debate, the Teshuva is put to a vote, and if it garners the required number of votes, it becomes an officially-recognized position of the Conservative Movement.”
“The lay people sit on the committee because they can inform the rabbis of what the Jews in the pews are doing and how they feel. Lay input has always been important in Halakhic decision-making because rabbis are not supposed to pass Takanot or interpret Halakha in a way that will be impossible for their followers to carry out.”
Yes, let’s make sure that the “rabbis” interpret halakhah only in a way that the lay people like the interpretation that the “rabbis” come up with — not necessarily in line with what is believed in the Torah. Otherwise, heaven forbid, the lay people may not want to carry it out! But wait – I thought Cynical just wrote that the CJLS does not pasken halakhah!
From one of the Teshuvos pages:
“The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) of the Rabbinical Assembly provides guidance in matters of halakhah for the Conservative movement. The individual rabbi, however, is the authority for the interpretation and application for all matters of halakhah.”
Cynical writes:
“These positions are not forced on anyone and simply exist to provide Conservative rabbis with multiple ways to look at issues that are likely to arise. Rabbis who step outside the bounds of what the CJLS has deemed appropriate are disciplined and risk losing their membership in the Rabbinical Assembly.”
But if “the individual rabbi, however, is the authority for the interpretation and application for all matters of halakhah,” then how does the CJLS decide how a rabbi steps outside the bounds of what the CJLS has deemed appropriate, if the CJLS does not pasken halakhah and merely provides “guidance” ?
Cynical wrote: “I maintained a civil discourse while many of you foamed at the mouth at the mere thought of a Conservative rabbi.”
Whatever you wrote was “civil,” but whoever wrote objections to this non-Judaism was “foaming at the mouth.”