Shafran and Shefa

Not surprisingly, the Shefa folks are up in arms about Avi Shafran's latest shot across the Conservative bow. Shafran writes in the Jerusalem Post that "a prediction I made in an article for Moment magazine more than five years ago - and for which, at the time, I was roundly pilloried - has been confirmed by recent events." What recent event could have confirmed Shafran - none other than the clear signal that a Conservative decision recognizing homosexuality is imminent. So, while Shafran could only predict 5 years ago that the Conservative movement would drop its adherence to Halacha, now he has his proof?

But that isn't what causes me to write. It is Bill Plevan's response. Plevan takes the standard way out of this accusation - he simply states that what Shafran understands as halacha and what the Conservative movement understands as halacha are different and therefore the accusation is baseless. Plevan says, "his [Shafran's] characterization of the 'halachic process of the millennia' is at best contestable, which is precisely what many rabbis and scholars within Conservative Judaism have argued for a "century." Of course, the only Rabbis who contest this are Conservative rabbis, who, having abandoned an adherence to traditional understandings of halacha have taken it upon themselves to define halacha to fit their own pre-conceptions.

Lets face it, Neil Gillman is write when he states categorically that it is time for the Conservative movement to abandon its tortured defense of its halachic bona fides. Gillman writes in this issue of Conservative Judaism magazine that a definition of halacha as loose and flexible as that of the Conservative movement can hardly be called halachic at all. I'm no fan of Rabbi Gillman, but I have to admire his candor. I surprised that Avi Shafran didn't quote directly from the leading philosopher of the movement.