United Jerusalem

United Jerusalem
United Jerusalem Party for City Council

Sunday, June 18, 2017

The Jewish Daily Backward

כ״ד לחודש השלישי תשע״ז



I received the following e-mail message from the Jewish Forward. Did you receive it, too?
Hi, A Conservative Rabbi is performing interfaith weddings, despite the Conservative movement's law against it. He knows that this decision risks his title as a Conservative Rabbi. Does this signify a shift in the Jewish community at large for dealing with intermarriages?

The conversation around intermarriage in the Jewish community is important, and one that I know is near and dear to your heart. The Forward wants to hear from the Jewish community. If you have stories, anecdotes, or memories that you would like to share and have published in the Forward, please send them to community@forward.com. Conversely, if you believe that accepting non-Jewish spouses is problematic for Jewish continuity, please tell us why - and share your stories, too.

Sincerely,

(Name Withheld)
The Forward, Social Media Intern

Esser Agaroth (2¢):
Let's start from the beginning, shall we?
A Conservative Rabbi... 
I'm just going to touch this one. It would take to long....
...is performing interfaith weddings, despite the Conservative movement's law against it.
About 18 years ago, I actually overheard a woman use the term "Conservative halakhah," halakhah being Torah Law. Most believe this to be an attempt to gain legitimacy as a Torah-based denomination of the religion known as Judaism. The reality is that this feeds the breaking down of a Jew's respect for Torah. Whereas the so-called "Reform Movement" originally rejected Torah sheb'al Peh (Oral Law), and later summarily decided -- according to Western feeling-based logic -- that halakhah was no longer binding, the Conservative Movement's strategy has been to encourage the belief that the Torah is as pliable as you want it to be. At least the Reconstructionists are intellectually honest, by applying the [ridiculous] rule that "The past has a vote, not a veto."

Is this statement by a Jewish Forward intern a mistake in composition? Or does the "Conservative Movement" really believe that its Committee on Laws and Standards really possess the same authority as the Sanhedrin (Highest Rabbinical Court)?

And by the way, the prohibition against intermarriage is Torah Law, not "Conservative Law,..." whatever that is anyway.
Does this signify a shift in the Jewish community at large for dealing with intermarriages?
Jewish community? How many of those members of "Conservative" communities are even Jewish? Sure, some of them are safeq (status in doubt). But, with all of those non-Jews duped into believing that they are Jewish, not to mention all those who went through this process just to get married.

But in this trend takes off, well there will be even less Jews identifying as "Conservative," because many of them will not actually be Jewish. That's for certain.

The "Conservative Movement" has already so the above announcement regarding "converting" students with Jewish fathers and non-Jewish mothers, who attend their schools. I still do not understand why. These children are not Jewish. End of discussion. How does giving these kids "conversions" helping anything, save for easing the Jewish father's guilt?

I know you're just "doin' your job." So,...

I wonder how many of them are even Jewish? Sure, some of them are safeq (status in doubt), but in this trend takes off, well there will be a lot less Jews identifying as "Conservative." That's for sure.

Let us not forget the non-kosher gittim (bills of divorcement), which are supervised by those who disqualified from doing so, and that is given the assumption that such individuals even bother to give a get. To clarify, if a proper divorce is not executed between a couple, they still considered married. If one of the couple "marries" another Jew without a proper divorce, any children resulting from the relationship are very likely to have the very problematic status of mamzer. Roughly translated as bastard, a mamzer is severely limited as to who he or she can marry according to halakhah. That's actually halakhah, and not the distorted, overly viable, and fake version some Jewish "leaders" are pushing.

The "Conservative Movement" isn't about the breaking down of a Jew's respect for Torah; it is about the breaking down of the Torah itself.

But, wait! The e-mail message continues...
The conversation around intermarriage in the Jewish community is important, and one that I know is near and dear to your heart. The Forward wants to hear from the Jewish community. If you have stories, anecdotes, or memories that you would like to share and have published in the Forward, please send them to community@forward.com.
If the conclusion of paragraph were cut off, it wouldn't sound so bad, would it? In fact, it would be quite appropriate to ask for readers' opinions regarding a particular topic. Now read on...

Conversely, if you believe that accepting non-Jewish spouses is problematic for Jewish continuity, please tell us why - and share your stories, too.

Clearly this reveals the Jewish Forward's opinion on the matter, and it is not the "against" opinion either.

This publication may considered to be "progressive," but with messages such as the one above, it is helping to move the Jewish People in another direction, and that direction isn't forward. This is why I believe the Jewish Forward should actually be called the Jewish Backward instead.

No comments:

You Might Also Like...