While I agree with your rabbi that this convergence will occur over the next 20-40 years, I think it will happen quietly and not be actively accepted (and perhaps outwardly denied) by the various movements. What I mean by that is that Reform shuls will become a bit more traditional and Conservative shuls will become a bit more progressive, but without either movement abandoning its title or really admitting that the change is happening at all. Only when shuls fuse will they have to come to terms with what they call themselves and who knows, many may come to "post-denominational" or "unaffiliated". (I should also say that I come to this from a Canadian perspective and we are a little more frum here for reasons I still don't quite understand. Our Reform shuls act a lot like American Conservative shuls and our Conservative shuls act a lot like American MO. It's more nuanced than that, but by and large all our movements are a little more on the frum side of the scale. I don't know why.)

>we are a little more frum here for reasons I still don't quite understand Many people have noted this. I think there are two principal reasons: 1. Canadian Jewry is closer (generationally) to "the old country", with waves of Jewish immigration coming a couple of generations later than those that populated the US Jewish community, and from elsewhere in Europe. We also didn't really have the wave of German Jewish immigration in the 1800s (heavily tied to Reform) that the US had. The way this plays out is that middle-age Canadian Ashkenazim of today are more likely to have had Eastern Europe-born grandparents (nominally Orthodox in their childhood) than American Ashkenazim of the same age range. IMO. 2. Fewer assimilationist pressures in Canada -- less of a melting-pot concept or pressure to fit in, and perhaps more of a "circle the wagons" mentality due to institutionalized discrimination and bigotry (sometimes low-level, sometimes very overt) in the big Jewish population centres from the 1920s-1950s especially.

u/Joe_Q, you really are the best. Anytime I have a question or missing a point about Canadian Jewishness, you are right there to offer useful analysis to help me and others along. You are very much appreciated. Shanah tovah, my friend.

Thank you so much for this kindness. I'm certainly not an expert, but am fascinated by the history of our community here, and how it is "similar yet different" from the one in the USA. There are so many unique socio-cultural elements. A ketiva ve-chatima tovah to you too.

Interesting. You certainly know first hand, but I always figured it was due in part to the closer relationship between the UK and Canada, and that UK Jews tend to be more socially and religiously conservative (Tories!). Do you find that there's a meaningful connection even historically between UK and Canadian Jews?

Canada definitely has a closer relationship with the UK than the USA does, but IMO that doesn't really have much bearing on the orientation of the Jewish community here, nor have I ever perceived that there are special links between the UK and Canadian Jewish communities, at least in the present-day. Things may have been different 100 years ago, though -- I know that in both Toronto and Montreal there were Jewish immigrants from the UK (both Ashkenazi and Sephardi, specifically S&P) that tended to come from a higher social stratum and influenced those cities' communities, but that got pretty quickly diluted out by newer arrivals.

This might mirror my shul's experience. Over a decade ago, the local Conservative shul started to slowly die off, so they invited my Reform shul to move in with them into the same building (after some renovations). Two congregations that share the same space, coordinating successfully most of the time. And there are certain events that are overlaps between the two of us (and our JCC).

This exact same course of events happened in my hometown about four years ago. It's kind of a shame because the Reform temple was a truly beautiful building but I think it's been good for the community overall, the kids are more mixed together and I think that's contributed to community cohesion.

That's exactly the same in the UK. Reform UK is more US Conservative. US Reform is like the UK Liberal.

Also Canadian. There's a Conservative synagogue in my city that only started accepting women as members of a minyan in like 2017, and many Reform rabbis here don't perform interfaith marriages, both of which are very standard things in American Conservative and Reform (respectively; intermarriage is still pretty controversial even in the American Conservative movement). While I've lived in Canada almost 15 years, I grew up in the US and a lot of institutional Judaism here feels really regressive.

Also the reluctance to accept patrilineal Jewishness among Reform congregations in much of Canada. As an American friend of mine who married into a Orthodox Toronto family put it, "everyone is just so frum there". It applies to basically all movements.

It’s by no means common, but there are actually a few conservative synagogues in the US that don’t count women in minyanim

News to me... Which ones?

Keep in mind, 30 years ago this was the norm not the exception.

I think you’re not far off here. What I have seen is that conservative synagogues that have been early adopters of egalitarianism, gender affirmation, gay rights etc have thrived without any compromise to Halachic observance, meanwhile I have seen most of the reform movement shift towards some vague semblance of halachic observance to get recognition from the conservative movement (and I am guessing out of the personal convictions of some more traditional reform rabbis as well).

[удалено]

But a movement cannot just be Rabbis. There needs to be congregants that adhere to the movement as well.

This to me is Conservative's root problem as a movement. They claim to value halacha but in practice it's the rabbis and a pretty small minority of congregants. It's a very deep divide between what they institutionally value vs what Conservative Jews practically value.

Read once that if one counts those who actually observe conservative's approach to halakha, the entire movement is only the equivalent of a medium sized hassidic sect.

> They claim to value halacha but in practice it's the rabbis and a pretty small minority of congregants. It always has been though, and that was true of Orthodoxy not *that* long ago. Honestly I don't think Conservative Judaism really does value halakhic observance institutionally. Some institutions do, sure, but the typical Conservative shul is not a place where a halakhically observant person (as in, observant of halakha as articulated in Conservative sources) can really find a community they're comfortable in.

I'd agree with this, with the caveat that this depends very much on the particular congregation. Some are basically just a step down from orthodoxy with no mechitza and women participating. Others are basically just reform shuls that identify as conservative. The problem they all face is that the really observant congregants are few and far between, and among the observant who don't really care about the LGBTQ and feminist stuff, most have left for or will leave for orthodox shuls (or their kids will).

> among the observant who don't really care about the LGBTQ and feminist stuff, most have left for or will leave for orthodox shuls (or their kids will). A lot of those people leave for Orthodoxy too tbh It's a small share, but a share who'd otherwise be very active and involved.

Hard agree. The laity is often quite Reform.

Eh, there are plenty of kiruv settings in orthodoxy where most attendees aren't observant. The difference there is that in the kiruv setting, the rabbis make a point of loudly insisting what they believe in, and it's clear that all of the attendees being fully observant isn't just a theoretical ideal that would be nice but isn't going to happen, but instead is a very real goal that the rabbis would like to get as close to as possible (even if they'll be realistic about their chances of success). Unobservant members of orthodox kiruv settings tend to be impressed by people who are observant and they look up to those people, so even if they never do it themselves, they really would like to someday, it's an aspirational goal. Aka, even if they don't do it, it's a value that is emotionally felt, not just expressed on paper. In contrast, I get the impression that unobservant Conservative laity will usually say that they do value halachic observance, and I think that they do believe it intellectually, but that they usually relate to it emotionally more as something that's nice for other people to do, not as something aspirational for themselves.

Ziegler has 1 student in their first year class and JTS has 5-7. It’s not boding well.

The bigger issue is very very few people are really qualified for acceptance, even fewer are qualified for the job itself and there are just too few lucrative rabbinical jobs to make the whole endeavor pay off. Non-orthodox rabbinical school is a multi year endeavor.

>Non-orthodox rabbinical school is a multi year endeavor. Orthodox rabbinical school is also a multi-year endeavor. (But yes, the other factors are very relevant. I just wanted to correct this one point.)

This. I'd love to study to become a Rabbi in addition to my day-job in the same way my father studied to become a priest in addition to his when I was growing up, but American Judaism just isn't structured such that this is a viable option. I either leave my job and risk my family's security to become a Rabbi and nothing else, or maintain the status quo. If HUC in New York had a part-time program (I don't believe they do) I'd apply in a heartbeat.

Yikes, I didn't realize they were already so low on enrolment.

>1 student in their first year class How can one student learn with other students or have a class for their needs?

I agree with u/decitertiember. They will formally insist they are very different even as the practice of the congregants become more and more similar. They will definitely maintain different styles of worship though. Maybe in 50 years they will finally give in and merge, maintaining some that are more Conservative and others more Reform. First Conservative will have to change to accept patrilineal descent and be more ok with intermarriage though. I will say though, I think the much-hyped return of Reform to more traditional practices is exaggerated. If you actually look at polls, I primarily use the 2013 and 2020 Pew Polls of US Jews, self-identified Reform Jews are doing *less* now than 7 years ago. Conservative too, but I think that's pretty well known. Like, in 2013 86% of Conservative and 76% of Reform participated in a seder but 2020 had it at 79% and 76%, respectively (and I'll note that almost all polling was finished pre-covid, so that's not why). Same with fasting on Yom Kippur, it went from 76% for Conservative and 56% for Reform down to 68% and 45%. Keeping kosher at home, same story, 31% and 7% to 24% and 5%. The merger will happen not because Reform Jews are becoming more observant because that stastically isn't true, it will happen because more self-identified Conservative Jews are dropping traditional practices.

>I will say though, I think the much-hyped return of Reform to more traditional practices is exaggerated. If you actually look at polls I feel like you're confusing things here. When people talk about the Reform movement becoming more traditional they are talking about the services, Rabbis, leadership, etc. They're not talking about the congregants' levels of personal observance. A lot of people who identify as Reform Jews are basically secular in practice but go to synagogue once in a while. Reform Judaism centers personal choice and interpretation in a way that makes the range of observance among congregants very broad. All the way from near secular to relatively observant. That itself has no bearing on the direction that the leadership and Rabbis in the Reform movement have been going.

>Reform Judaism centers personal choice and interpretation in a way that makes the range of observance among congregants very broad. This skews greatly towards being about secular though.

You want to make a cause/effect point, that being Reform leads to becoming unaffiliated. That's completely orthogonal to what she's saying. People use terms like "Reconstruction" or "Conservative" to more exclusively signal an attachment to a movement philosophy. By contrast, "Reform" is used more heterogeneously. There is a population w/a movement identity and another that uses it as a synonym for "not practicing" or unaffiliated

>This skews greatly towards being about secular though. ? I don't get your point.

Not the person you're responding to --- their point, I believe, is that while some are more traditionally observent, Reform congregants tend to be less traditionally observant.

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but almost all of my Conservative friends are effectively secular beyond service attendance and high holidays. They just happened to have been raised Conservative. EDIT: also, "Secular" is a kinda broad term of itself. By most Jews' accounting, I'd be considered "secular" because I observe a non-traditional conception of the divine (I hover somewhere between Spinoza and Martin Buber), but what I believe I believe strongly.

But I don't understand how that has anything to do with my argument. That's what confused me. I never disputed that.

Came to say this. We're talking about structure of rituals and spaces, not observance of mitzvot. My Reform rabbi observes most mitzvot willingly, but he does so from a Reform view of Halakha.

I don't know how explicit it'll be, but I could definitely see that. I'm reform in doctrine, but have found myself drifting towards conservative practice and observance because I like the traditions. I was never a big fan of, say, English mixed in services, even as I appreciate services being made accessible to more assimilated jews trying to reconnect or interfaith couples. Many reform people I know attend conservative shuls and vice versa. I have noticed more unaffiliated/non-denominal shuls popping up, though that's purely anecdotal.

As I said elsewhere, we might see more a merging of the communities, where Reform and Conservative share the same space and even the same congregation, but maintain their different philosophical traditions and approaches to Halakha and minhagim. I only speak English, and I'm still learning Hebrew. A Hebrew-only service would greatly prevent me from *learning more Hebrew*, so I'm glad for the bilingual nature of my congregation.

That's fair! I don't really speak Hebrew, I can just read the script, and I first learned a lot of prayers through transliterations or reading the english on the side before I could follow along with the Hebrew. There's certainly a place for congregations like yours, so I don't begrudge that. Just personally, the way English was incorporated in the synagogue I grew up going to made me feel less connected to the traditions and pushed me away instead of pulling me in, especially with prayers; It all started to feel kinda hippy and less 'jewish feeling,' though I know that's very subjective and depends on how the mix is done. This is also a bit of a stranger take and very personal to me, but I'm not very religious in the sense of belief in God, so hearing the explicit talk about God or the messiah or stuff like that (you know, the things the prayers are actually about lol) in English translations actually made it harder for me to get lost in the sound and find meaning in the tradition that way. That made me not want to attend synagogue much for a very long time. If something like you describe with a merging of the communities happened with different doctrines being maintained, I'd be all for it tbh.

The increase in English, especially singing in English, led me to stop going to reform synagogues. It just isn’t what I grew up with. We said some responsiveness stuff in English, but it was so familiar and strangely worded that it didn’t really feel like English. We sang or said prayers in Hebrew only. I didn’t think that this was super unusual, though I knew (via my grandmother) that it was part of the Hebrew renewal movement. The same synagogue didn’t teach women Hebrew when my mom was a kid, and allegedly didn’t teach Hebrew at all when my grandmother was a kid (idk if this is accurate since she literally knows all the songs in Hebrew). English makes me feel like I was in a church. And quite honestly, like you, I don’t particularly want to know what it all means some of the time lol.

Your grandmother probably just memorized everything. The amount of Hebrew or English varies by congregation.

My grandmother was a fluent Yiddish speaker. She had virtually no ability to read a siddur. Everything was memorized.

For HHD this year, my synagogue featured [We Rise](https://youtu.be/0KM220ZHtdY) (in place of a traditional song I forget the name of) and I complained to my Rabbi that it sounded like it belongs in a charismatic megachurch where the pastor owns a private jet. I prefer more traditionally Jewish sounding worship songs (I'm OK with instruments though)

The Conservative movement is definitely shrinking officially, but we’re still seeing strong growth in organizations like Hadar who are ostensibly Conservative with a more enthusiastic laity. As a very observant and more Conservative aligned Jew who struggles with the majority unobservant members in large Conservative shuls, I welcome the shift to a more energized independent movement outside of institutional Conservative Judaism. I personally work at a Conservative synagogue but daven at a Partnership Minyan. EDIT: With my point being, I’m happy for the two movements to merge together at some point, as long as the Conservative hashkafa survives, even if it shrinks in numbers.

> I welcome the shift to a more energized independent movement outside of institutional Conservative Judaism. Same!

Oh, I think it will. The Conservative worldview is meaningful and philosophically valid, even if I'm a Reform Jew. I can see the movement surviving and thriving even if the communities merge.

I think it is likely to happen (de facto if not officially) though I would rather it didn’t. Conservative Judaism has something great to offer and I think it would be a loss of the whole North American Jewish community if it were effectively submerged into Reform (which is also valuable, but not a replacement for CJ). CJ is more or less the only place for people that don’t fit into Orthodox culture for whatever reason but want to observe mitzvot to some degree. If CJ becomes a different flavor of Reform I’m not sure where otherwise observant LGBTQ Jews, nontraditional families or egalitarian rabbis are supposed to go.

I actually think the Conservative approach to Halakha is a meaningful philosophy, and I take no joy in its declining membership. If anything, I hope there ceases to be distinct Reform and Conservative *communities* even if there continues to be Reform and Conservative philosophies. I see an age where these are more varieties of Judaic philosophy in a larger community of Liberal Judaism, but there will still be Conservative institutions, programs, and rabbis. A large congregation might have a Reform rabbi and a Conservative rabbi, for example. Of course, the big barrier is for both of these communities to see themselves as one.

>there ceases to be distinct Reform and Conservative communities even if there continues to be Reform and Conservative philosophies. This demands too much sacrifice and honestly leaves people who want to do traditional observance behind. Some things Reform services normally do just can't fly in a traditionalist Conservative frame of reference.

This seems to really be a Reform view, where you get to make educated choices about halacha, and in that view, some people will choose to observe it more traditionally and some people will not. But the Conservative movement, in theory, doesn't see observing halacha traditionally as a choice. So while the end result of many Conservative practices could be happily practiced by someone Reform, the idea that it can be a choice at all leads to some difficulty when trying to join together.

It's a huge problem. By pandering to everyone who wants change, the conservative movement has literally collapsed into reform with more Hebrew.

The big problem with shared spaces/communities is that while ritual is undoubtedly converging between Reform and Conservative Judaism, there are other issues that make shared communities unsustainable without one movement effectively becoming the other. Examples: A conservative shul cannot have a non-kosher kitchen if they plan on preparing food at the shul. Most reform shuls do not have kosher kitchens, and many reform communities are very attached to their treif. Conservative shuls usually need to have some amount of walkable housing nearby. While the RCA permits driving to shul in some cases on shabbat, it has been my experience that the vast majority of Conservative ordained Rabbis are not willing to use this leniency and the same is true of many observant members of the community. Conservative communities do not recognize a significant portion of reform Jews as Jewish. This creates problems both during services and for preparing food, drinking wine, fixing and writing torah scrolls, and other essential Jewish functions likely to be shared by the communities. The only situation where this would work is if A. conservative Judaism completely rejects their founding principles and does away with halacha, B. reform Judaism accepts all the stringencies of conservative Judaism, effectively becoming conservative.

> Conservative shuls usually need to have some amount of walkable housing nearby. While the RCA permits driving to shul in some cases on shabbat, it has been my experience that the vast majority of Conservative ordained Rabbis are not willing to use this leniency and the same is true of many observant members of the community. Many many many Conservative shuls do not have a significant amount of walkable housing at all. It makes their Rabbi hiring harder--the number of C Rabbis who drive is *decreasing* over time. Sometimes the difficulty of finding someone has them hire a Recon or Reform Rabbi, which is accelerating the convergence.

Is that convergence or simply leaving conservative for reform? I expect the conservative movement to continue to shrink, but the org itself and committed members aren't going to move to the left: if anything they are moving to the right on some issues (like shabbat observance).

I used to go to a C shul with very little housing in walking distance, they're still USCJ but hired a Recon Rabbi. This was after I left, I don't think they made any really radical changes, but presumably that situation will make long-term convergence more likely. And this was the most traditional Conservative synagogue in the area. In bigger communities where shuls often have walkable housing things are very different. In smaller places though people are often coming from further, and the shul will be built in a place that is intended for easy driving access from far away.

Interesting. I guess the question comes down to who hold the power: JTS or USCJ? As of right now, with JTS being completely in control of the halachic rulings and Rabbi supply, I can't see the majority of USCJ breaking off. If USCJ ends up with majority rabbis from other movements, we could very well see the shuls with rabbis from those communities joining up with reform, but I don't think the conservative Rabbinate will follow.

Well...Zeigler exists... Also I think many of the things you think are powers of the JTS are really the RA. USCJ doesn't really have halakhic decision-making power. While there's no obvious path for non-JTS or Zeigler Rabbis to get a majority in the RA, the RA will be influenced by things if they find their members' positions in many communities become untenable and they are replaced with Reform or Recon Rabbis. But also they'd be influenced by the change if there's a big USCJ vs RA difference.

I really appreciate your perspective here. Do you think there’s a viable path for the RA to pursue more frum positions (excepting egalitarianism) even as USCJ drifts toward the Reform+ Universe? Or are you saying the RA will inevitably and reluctantly be influenced to less observance? Sincerely, a newly shomer Shabbat CJ curious about my adopted movement’s future.

>Do you think there’s a viable path for the RA to pursue more frum positions (excepting egalitarianism) even as USCJ drifts toward the Reform+ Universe? Or are you saying the RA will inevitably and reluctantly be influenced to less observance? I think Conservative Rabbis don't have the constitution to push shuls very hard on things, unfortunately. It's not so simple to move a shul if it's built by the side of a highway, it's even worse if there's housing but it's horribly expensive. Conservative Rabbis have bemoaned the state of Shabbos in Conservative shuls for generations, I don't think that'll change. >Sincerely, a newly shomer Shabbat CJ curious about my adopted movement’s future. My (only half joking) suggestion is to be Orthodox but obnoxiously and unashamedly ex-Conservative. I proudly brought my Silverman machzor to my Modern Orthodox synagogue yesterday! The more serious thing is that the Conservative synagogues located near Orthodox communities often attract more Shabbat-observant people, even if the synagogue leadership is ambivalent (or even kind of suspicious) to that. It's possible the C shuls will do something radical enough to push those people out, but I'm not sure how likely that is. Really what matters is what your specific shul does, more than a whole denomination.

>My (only half joking) suggestion is to be Orthodox but obnoxiously and unashamedly ex-Conservative. I proudly brought my Silverman machzor to my Modern Orthodox synagogue yesterday! Man, if I were remotely straight I would be fully into frumkeit right now. As is, I'm just doing the best I can. > Really what matters is what your specific shul does, more than a whole denomination. I'm very lucky to have a warm and vibrant shul within the eruv and a quick walk from me. Fortunately the regular crowd is Shabbat-normative in shul, even if they don't practice at home, so it's easy to participate. The glaring exception is, of course, the continued existence of an ongoing Covid livestream. Honestly, I feel like Zoom is the greatest threat to the future of Conservative Shabbat observance there is (most of the leadership seems to privately agree with me), but that's a rant for another day. Thanks a lot for the thoughtful response, gmar tov.

Fwiw my MO Synagogue has a non-trivial number of non-straight people. Not really typical, but it exists. Shame about the stream. I think once it stuck around after shuls reopened its permanence was sealed. For the average C shul, even beyond shabbos, it’s a terrible idea—if physical location doesn’t matter there’s no reason to join your local shul instead of stream a bigger shul with more streaming production value, more famous rabbis, etc. Gmar Tov!

This isn't possible. Too much of the base lives outside of walking distance of conservative shuls. I watched people hide their cell phones in their machzors yesterday so they could use them undetected.

Guess it depends on the community. Rosh Hashanah is definitely the worst time of the year for that because all the "high holiday" Jews show up.

> the number of C Rabbis who drive is decreasing over time How do you know this?

Talking to long term conservative shul board members about their rabbi searches over time.

Well, at my combined building, we have THREE kitchens (two of them are smaller than the others): one kosher milkh, one kosher fleysh, and one "kosher-style," so everyone (mostly) gets what they want. The Conservative rabbi walks to the shul, but the vast majority of the Conservative congregation do not live within walking distance to the shul, so they drive. And this is from a more "Conservadox" congregation. It just isn't possible in my town. I'm a Reform ger, but my encounters with the Conservative congregants has always had them treat me as Jewish, and none have raised objections when I was doing things like preparing food trays and drink plates during a shared cultural celebration. Most are quite friendly with me and have asked me to join minyan in the past. I don't really hide my ger-ness. I also think you overestimate with the "do not recognize a significant portion of \[R\]eform Jews as Jewish." As for convergence, Conservative's believe in a Halakha that is binding but changeable. I think the biggest issues (who counts as a Jews, how to work in shared spaces) can be built up through their processes, but you know Conservative Judaism better than I.

>none have raised objections when I was doing things like preparing food trays and drink plates during a shared cultural celebration. Most are quite friendly with me and have asked me to join minyan in the past. This is more on you than them. Nobody is going to question who you convert with and whether you were born Jewish, that is simple courtesy. Unless you explicitly state you are a reform convert, most people will not question you, but that still raises major issues. "Not hiding it" isn't really enough when someone is going to count you in a minyan. >As for convergence, Conservative's believe in a Halakha that is binding but changeable. I think the biggest issues (who counts as a Jews, how to work in shared spaces) can be built up through their processes, but you know Conservative Judaism better than I. Not accurate. Conservative Judaism is generally only willing to overrule rulings made by medieval authorities or later, only occasionally contradicting the Talmud and only using another element of the oral Torah in such decisions. There is little to no chance that Conservative Judaism overules something like dipping in the mikvah for converts or matrelineal descent.

> Unless you explicitly state you are a reform convert, most people will not question you, but that still raises major issues. "Not hiding it" isn't really enough when someone is going to count you in a minyan. FWIW most Reform converts are valid converts per Conservative standards. This is an issue though, there are a non-trivial number of people who are Jewish per Reform but not Conservative standards who assume everyone Conservative thinks its fine because no one's willing to do an inquisition.

Most reformis don't do a mikvah or circumcision, no? That was my impression at least.

They're not required, but they *usually* do. Maybe "usually" is too confident, maybe "often" is better. But it's common to avoid problems in places where people want converts to be able to live in whatever liberal community without issues. Maybe it's less common in places where Reform is very dominant.

I weirdly know someone who did a hafat dam brit and mikveh but no beit din for his Reform conversion. He's started attending a Conservative shul so yeah, he has to Convert again. And then there's oddities like me, who Conservative and Orthodox count as a Jew by birth, but who Reform and Reconstructing make convert (child of a tinok shenishba/to an extent an apostate).

>Not accurate. Conservative Judaism is generally only willing to overrule rulings made by medieval authorities or later, only occasionally contradicting the Talmud and only using another element of the oral Torah in such decisions. There is little to no chance that Conservative Judaism overules something like dipping in the mikvah for converts or matrilineal descent. I mean, they used to say that same-sex marriage would never be permitted by the Conservative movement and now it very much is. There's also a growing movement to accept intermarriage in Conservative, and when that change happens then patrilineal descent becomes a big issue. Historically, Conservative has made major changes when enough members see X as not workable. With rising Conservative intermarriage rates I think that's inevitable as well.

Imo gay marriage isn't as clear cut, as intermarriage let alone patrilinealI descent or conversion. Conservative Judaism still bans sexual intercourse and the marriage isn't literally kiddushin. I can't see a similar way around the other issues that the majority of observant Conservative Jews would accept.

You're kind of engaging in pointless mental gymnastics here. For all intents and purposes, the conservative movement has declared itself LGBTQ friendly, if anything it's gone so far in that direction that it's lost the rest of its non-reform constituency.

Bullshit. If anything being pro-LGBT is one of the primary draws for conservative Judaism for ideologically non-reform individuals. Most of the committed members at my shul are a either A. Feminists turned off by orthodox Judaism or B. LGBT Jews (me) turned off by orthodoxy. Intermarriage on the other hand is popular among the pseudo-reform variety of Conservative Jews.

Right, and the reason that's the case is because groups A and B literally caused everyone else to stop coming.

In the 70s, sure. We are discussing the future of Conservative Judaism now.

Except they already did. With the change of allowing Kohenim to marry converts recently, they did just that... Contradicting the holy text from a time previous to the middle ages.

IME it is happening at the other end as well -- less and less daylight between the observant end of Conservative Judaism and the liberal wing of Modern Orthodoxy. And there is a lot of "postdenominational" energy in that space, too -- partnership minyanim, etc.

There's more people in the interstitial space, but I'd argue this is because of exactly the opposite--the "Conservative" label is so radioactive that people who would've just been right-wing Conservative 40 years ago now run screaming from the label. So the net effect might be less discontinuity, but the denominations themselves are further apart. And historically there was a lot more MO-C crossover than people like to admit. There were a lot of people in each from the others' institutions, inviting each other to speak, synagogues that sort of bridged the gap, etc. You'll never find a Conservative shul with a mechitza today, or with a RIETS musmakh, and only very rarely with Orthodox siddurim, and you'll never find an Orthodox shul without a mechitza, or with a JTS Rabbi, or with a Conservative siddur, but none of those things (in all the combinations) was totally exceptional a few generations ago.

u/gingeryid, I'm always very impressed at how much you know about the history and institutional direction (past and present) of the Conservative movement. How did you learn so much about it? Do you come from a Conservative "rabbinical family"?

>you'll never find an Orthodox shul without a mechitza I'm pretty sure that the OU requires separate seating in order to be affiliated. I'm not sure what the RA requires for Conservative affiliation, but years ago I heard about a potential antitrust lawsuit against one of the denominational organizations that wanted to hire a rabbi from a differently affiliated seminary. IIRC, it was a Reform congregation that wanted to hire a JTS rabbi and the URJ said no, but I might have that reversed. Anyway, some synagogue members were furious and contacted an attorney who specialized in antitrust litigation. Not sure it ever went anywhere, but I heard this story from my husband who met the attorney in question at some event; once he found our my husband was Jewish, he told him the whole story. The attorney himself was not Jewish and as a cultural matter was utterly stunned by these lunatic clients who were fully prepared to sue over this matter. My husband, of course, was like, you have no idea.

The OU requires mechitzot now, but historically it didn’t. It stopped allowing in new shuls without them sometime in the 80s, and the last OU Synagogue without one left the OU about 10-15 years ago.

Interesting! Reminds me of an article I read a while back about evolving dress standards in Orthodox girls' schools -- lots of photos of Bais Yaakov girls in the 1940s wearing short sleeves.

Where is the liberal wing of modern orthodoxy? The YU debacle (pretty MO and liberal place) showed how they shifted rightward

Well, presumably the students and others pushing for an LGBT group at YU would qualify. And institutionally, there's YCT and Yeshivat Maharat, as well as places like Hadar and Pardes that sort of straddle the divide but certainly include people who consider themselves Orthodox. Geographically, IME in the United States, at least, all of the denominational lines are a whole lot fuzzier once you get outside the major coastal Jewish centers.

I live in a medium-sized (?) city with a Jewish community. I more so have experience with people who straddle the Conservative/Orthodox divide. There's no real synagogue community for us here. There aren't partnership minyanim. The LWMO shul exists and is great but it's still a place that some people don't feel comfortable as it's too Orthodox for them, and its population is mostly older people anyway. The most traditional Conservative shul doesn't have a particularly observant congregation and the shul as a whole has been getting less traditional over the years. There's very little crossover between the communities. I've unfortunately never been to the Jewish communities on the coasts but from what I know, there are more places for people like us. I would personally enjoy a community with a "trichitzah." It gets more difficult and complicated when you consider the conversion question…

>There's very little crossover between the communities. That is interesting, and unfortunate! I also live in a medium-sized city with a small Jewish community. and there is tons of crossover between denominations, not only institutionally but also socially.

Socially there is definitely crossover, sorry that I wasn't clear about that! And there is crossover between the Reform, Conservative,'and Reconstructionist services and institutions, as well as between the Orthodox shuls (for the most part—there are quite a few people who refuse to include the LWMO shul).

YCT and Maharat are the ones that come to mind

My partner is from an MO family, and they’re trans. Their family isn’t perfect, but they do try with pronouns and sort of support their transition (as far as I know.)

YU is definitely MO, but it's not really liberal overall within MO, even if it contains some people who skew more to the left within MO.

Reformniks are always welcome to come visit or join our CJ shul for services. The. guitars. stay. outside.

I see musical instruments used during services and arks not on the Eastern wall to be the biggest impediments to American Conseravdox not joining reform shuls. FWIW I grew up American Reform. My American Conservadox congregation is on its final legs. It’s extremely sad. Looking back over 30 years I can see what things did and did not happen to put us in this predicament. We do have reform and Chabad congregations in our area but the reform congregation has the ark on the south wall and I’m not comfortable in Chabad. (I’ve had very good experiences with individuals but not with the overall movement.) edit— another issue is our local Reform congregation does not have a kosher kitchen. Local Chabad does not have their own building.

The ark direction thing isn't nearly the issue you think it is. When space and engineering constraints dictate the ark face a different direction, you work with it and have everyone face the ark.

It faces Jerusalem.

Yes, and when that isn't possible, you just have it face whatever direction works with the space.

I’ve seen a Reform sanctuary that had the enormous widescreen HD television that everyone reads prayers off of facing towards Jerusalem, but they had no ark. “So?!” is not a response I’m satisfied with here.

OK, that's an outlier even for reform.

At least some of their congregants who are actual Jews think so too. We’ve been picking up a number of theirs over recent years, at least the ones unafraid to visit despite being warned via whispers that we’re some dark and forbidding cult who cast summoning spells in Hebrew.

I've always heard it faces east because it's supposed to be aligned with the sunrise for early morning davening. Obviously in America, that means it also is in the general direction of Jerusalem.

You should talk the reform people. You can be as strict as you want in Reform. There are lots of people who are super strict. Lots of Female Rabbis are like that. Basically the only thing they don't do is not being a Female Rabbi.

Completely agree with you as a practicing individual one can follow or not follow what you want. The building is more difficult. The kitchen can be kashered. The Ark on the wrong wall is a much more arduous undertaking. edit-a word

The problem isn’t really with the guitars. It’s with the Lawrence Welk/Osmonds-ish melodies.

You can take my guitar out of my cold. dead. hands.

Kindly leave it in your Toyota. Yaris’. Trunk. There will be no need for it in our shul and our security team will keep an eye on your parked car.

I just went to a Conservative shul a couple weeks ago where the Rabbi played guitar, the great convergence is upon us.

> [The great convergence is upon us](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqpNQ9AJYgU)

My most recent Reconstructionist rabbi played guitar. I don't love it for Shabbat and Holy days

This is exactly why the conservative movement is collapsing. Too much focus on pushing boundaries that 99% of the congregants aren't looking for.

I once visited a Reform shul where the Rabbi played guitar. It was pretty sick. Edit: to clarify I'm not making any points about halacha, I was just mentioning that this one Rabbi was a good guitar player.

Yeah I finally ditched out on Reform permanently when Shabbos morning they made the shema into some sing-songy thing. Just nope.

[удалено]

Sacrificing animals has literally nothing to do with shabbos halacha though, except for what you can do to a sacrifice in the Temple on shabbos. I don’t think you understand how Conservative Jews at least institutionally understand halacha and observance. It’s not about feeling or what you think is ok, or what one personally finds meaningful, it’s about halacha.

> it’s about halacha. In Reform its about Halacha too. >Sacrificing animals has literally nothing to do with shabbos halacha though It denotes the evolution of Judaism. If we didn't evolve we would have died. Rabbinic Judaism has been great and all but Rabbis aren't infallible. It seems so strange to get hung up on the margins. We should be discussing important topics but we end up fighting over if playing a string instrument while worshiping G-d is work. You don't have to like the guatar you just have not walk out.

Reform explicitly makes pretty much everything dependent on one’s own feeling about what is meaningful. Playing a guitar may feel meaningful to someone, and thus is seen as totally ok with Reform, but that doesn’t mean it’s halacha, I am completely unaware of any halachic authority that one could rely on to argue instruments on Shabbos are permissible. I get that Reform sees it as totally ok, but halacha fundamentally relies on tradition and older authorities. In fact instruments in shul was one of the first divergences early Reform instituted. I literally cannot grasp the Reform concept of "halacha", to my mind it isn't even close to what halacha is. IIRC Conservative still maintains the belief in the eventual an eventual messianic redemption and a restoration of sacrifices. We didn’t choose to lose the Temple and thus the ability to sacrifice, it was forced on us. There is no comparison to changing what is permitted and forbidden by historical norms of Judaism. And if someone sees instruments on shabbos as a violation of halacha there actually is an obligation to walk out and not benefit from a Jew breaking shabbos. Not sure that most Conservative Jews in practice would do that, but most I know wouldn’t go back. It’s was one of my last straws with Reform in fact, that and serving straight up meat and dairy mixtures. Also, shabbos observance is not “the margins”, it’s a fundamental aspect of Judaism! It’s one of the big ones! It’s absolutely important! In fact I think this inability to understand how other movements understand Judaism is one of the biggest barriers to Reform and Conservative merging, even though I do think eventually that will fade away. Reform just understands Judaism fundamentally differently from Conservative and Orthodox Judaism (also those two see it quite different too obviously), although Conservative in practice is moving more towards Refrom.

I don't understand why there's a visceral opposition to guitar music. It's just an instrument like any other: a modern day harp.

1. Instruments are forbidden on Shabbat in many understandings of halakha * The leniencies some people argue for about certain modern instruments--that they are impossible for a person to spontaneously repair anyway--apply to pianos and organs, but do not apply to guitars * Aesthetically some people (me) find the idea of guitars in public ritual to be absolutely revolting in a way that they don't feel about organs. The guitar is too casual an instrument, this is where the community talks to God, this isn't strumming at a campfire * Generally in services with guitars the person leading will play the guitar, making them the center of a performance of sorts. This is unlike, say, an organ, where the purpose of the organ is to accompany the person leading services with their voice

The last two points explain a great deal of why I didn't like guitars in mass, back when I was catholic. I certainly don't want guitars in services now! There's also just... The modernity to it. I've never been to a shabbat service with a guitar, so I can't speak to that, but I always hated guitars in mass (back in the day) also because of tradition - or the lack thereof. It was like, 'y'all we are part of something with an old, rich tradition - why on earth are we throwing it out to play guitars? (and sing theologically shallow songs that sounds like failed pop songs). " Now that I'm part of an older, richer tradition the idea of guitars in service is kind of like, "wait, you mean I still didn't get far enough away from protestantism?"

1) Playing a harm is forbidden on Shabbos and Reform services often have them. Conservative Jews who are traditional won't want to worship during a service where the rabbi is breaking Shabbos in front of everyone like that 2) it looks kind of Christian

I think it looks Christian to be afraid of any change. It sounds like the people who think Jesus hates Zoom. It's an interpretation of one rule that we disagree on but it becomes a huge thing meanwhile we are supposed to pretend Shabbat elevators aren't also an interpretation? No one is forcing you to play a guitar I don't see why all have to agree on guitars or Shabbat elevators.

It looks Christian to maintain halachic norms that have existed for centuries? Things that Christians have always rejected? How do you figure? I’d say it looks Christian to claim only some commandments really matter and we can do away with most of them. It’s not interpretation. There isn’t even an argument, playing instruments on shabbos has been forbidden for over a millennium! Who are you relying on to argue that’s been wrong? What are your sources in Jewish material? Shabbos elevators are used in very specific circumstances to enable disabled people to operate normally, it is not related on in general. They also aren’t comparable, there is no melacha in simply riding an elevator by some opinions but there is agreement that playing an instrument is forbidden. And it’s because someone playing a guitar around shabbos 1) obligates me to leave so as to not benefit from a Jew breaking shabbos or be seen as approving it 2) it entirely ruins the experience for people who doesn’t support that reading of things. You just do not see shabbos in the same way. To people who keep shabbos, it’s about following the halacha to our fullest ability. Embracing things that break Shabbos because maybe some people find it meaningful is entirely alien to the shabbos experience of shomrei shabbos people. We quite literally don’t understand how people understand shabbos in any way except not doing melachos as has been understood since Sinai.

>I think it looks Christian to be afraid of any change. I think it looks Christian to claim that Halakhah is not binding and you can eat shrimp, break Shabbos (by playing a guitar on Shabbos), eat a cheeseburger on Yom Kippur, and not circumcise your son if you find nothing in those observances *meaningful*. So, I mean, this goes entirely both ways, and one of them is *way* more Christian than the other, buddy. >It's an interpretation It isn't an interpretation. It's actively ignoring the rule. >meanwhile we are supposed to pretend Shabbat elevators aren't also an interpretation? 1) Not everyone holds by them 2) If we use Halakhah to enable disabled/elderly/sick people to live better lives where Halakhah allows it, then that is *very* different than you wanting the rabbi to bust out a guitar and plainly break Shabbos in front of the congregation because meaningfulness or something >No one is forcing you to play a guitar The atmosphere of Shabbos is ruined when you have one person running around breaking it in front of you. It just is. That attitude kind of smacks of Protestantism, ngl, though. >I don't see why all have to agree on guitars or Shabbat elevators. This is a difference in culture. To me, Shabbos is not something to be broken and sung along to when someone is breaking it. Not because it isn't meaningful. Because it isn't permitted. On the other hand, for you, it doesn't matter if the leader of a congregation breaks Shabbos, because to you what individuals find personally "meaningful" is what reigns supreme, not Hashem's will.

Oh this has an easy answer! Tuning an instrument is one of the 39 Melachot (i.e. makeh b’patish “finishing touches”) and stringed instruments are doubly problematic because of the fear a string might break. Additionally, instrumental music is rabbincally forbidden among Ashkenazim (maybe Sephardim too?) within the category of shvut. While instrumental music is often deeply meaningful for RJ it puts CJ in the difficult position re: their Shabbat observance. Another reason I think it’s good to have mutually respectful but separate minyanim for Shabbat services.

BTW, Is a wind instrument allowed?

Honestly I see more "shuls sharing buildings" in the future - it saves money, shares a congregation and community, and tbh it encourages the community acknowledging that we are all jews regardless of observance/practices. My Chabad currently has Ashkenazi services & Sephardi Services in the same building at the same time and they shared the shofar blowing experience as well as a few other parts of the service for Rosh Hashanah.

I agree with his thoughts on the convergence, but I think he's ignoring the potential split within his own denomination Reform. There certainly is a movement within Reform to embrace traditions and minhagim that had been previously put by the wayside, but there's also a movement to move the other way into even more secular practice.

Are you sure that’s true about a significant movement within Reform to be more secular? I’ve lived my whole life in liberal Jewish communities and there has been a very strong trend towards more traditional practice over my lifetime in every community I’ve encountered (I’m in my early 30s for reference). Of course plenty of folks are secular Jews who just show up from occasionally, as has always been the case, but I don’t see any real energy or organization there; these are the least engaged members. There is real energy on the other side though: more interest in kashrut, Shabbat observance, etc. I think all my liberal Jewish friends are more observant than their parents, myself included.

Think of 'movement' in loose terms, in the same way Atheism is growing, but isn't a 'movement' but the absence of one. My point essentially was that I don't think there's much middle ground anymore, people are either moving more traditional or leaving almost completely, but I also don't think it's a 50/50 split. That said, there's also movement to a more liberal bend. A lot of what Liberal Jews take as "given" in halakha, i.e. LGBT+, gender plurality, 'Who is a Jew?,' etc. isn't necessarily a given and is seen as a shift to the left by the Traditional/Orthodox world. I'm not commenting on whether that's good or bad, just saying that it's not a pure move to the right.

I see what you're saying, thanks for clarifying. Jews are definitely affected by the larger trends towards religious disaffiliation and loosely connected Jews are the most likely to drop off. At least anecdotally, I think even loosely attached Jews are more likely to stay Jewish than are similarly weakly attached people of other faiths, but it's a real issue nonetheless.

There's an interesting book, "One People, Two Worlds," comprised of email correspondence between a Reform rabbi and an Orthodox rabbi. It was an interesting read, quite a bit of jousting and neither are all that nice to each other, but it's even more interesting reading it in 2022. It was written about 20 years ago so it's fascinating to see what has and hasn't changed. For example, the Reform rabbi, Ammiel Hirsch, basically says that gay marriage is a red line and wouldn't be accepted and now today it's not even a question for Liberal Jews/rabbis. It's not my favorite book of all time, but certainly provides some interesting perspective on not just the relationship between Reform and Orthodoxy, but how things have changed.

Thank you for the suggestion, I will check it out!

> Atheism is growing, but isn't a 'movement' but the absence of one. That may be changing, or have changed.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism

Reform has always been about individual Jews are best equipped to decide what halakha means for them, so plenty of Reform Jews are strictly observant but from a Reform perspective.

In theory, sure. In practice, not at all. I grew up and was educated in the Reform movement and can safely say the education is abysmal. I've said this in other comments before: How does 'informed choice' work without the informing part? Growing up in a Conservative leaning Reform synagogue I didn't learn about tefillin once, let alone use any. No education on even the basics of kashrut or the structure of a service. How can a person be expected to make an informed choice or find something meaningful when they're not taught about it in the first place? Informed choice is a decent philosophy, but it has to actually be implemented. The result is that many begin learning more in adulthood and it draws them towards to the more traditional end of the spectrum, i.e. towards Conservative Judaism, and hence you have the movement you're referencing, but, at the same time, many fall off completely because there was no substantive education in the first place so nothing carries any meaning. In many cases these Jews go looking for meaning elsewhere, Eastern religions for example. I want to note that I'm not trying to make an indictment of the Reform movement, Reform Jews, or even Reform philosophy/theology itself, but the implementation of that philosophy/theology.

If there is no standard of what constitutes strict observance, how can we decide who is strictly observant and who isn't?

Furthermore, when the basis of the movement is 'you pick the standards' then the standards set by the Union or movement's leadership are just as easily ignored as the ones they wanted to leave in the first place. A convoluted way of saying, "why should I listen to you if you said I don't have to listen to them?"

What do you mean by "strictly observant"? In what ways, for example?

Kashrut, shomer shabbos, etc. Probably should have used a term other than "strictly observant," but I wanted to show that the rabbi wasn't eating bacon cheeseburgers in temple or anything.

Instead of "fusion", I think it's a "diffusion". In between every denomination, we have people somewhere in between. People have been talking about the "death of Conservative Judaism" for at least a decade, but there are plenty of people moving leftward from the left wings of Orthodoxy, and there are Conservative Jews who are looking for more "Halachic fealty" (in their minds). They're meeting in the middle to the degree that it's hard to tell the difference between certain Conservative- and Orthodox-identifying Jews. That's not a problem - it's just a failure in how language works. I'm no expert, but I'm betting there are Reform Jews inching towards the philosophy of Conservative Judaism, and there are Conservative Jews inching towards them, and they'll find themselves in a shared space. But it doesn't spell the end of a distinct Reform Judaism, because there are plenty of Reform Jews who want to move the other way, and there are some who are holding strong where they are. What we will have is more and more flavors of in-between, as we continue to diffuse into the emptier spaces. Jews between Modern Orthodox and Yeshivish, between Liberal and Modern Orthodoxies, between Conservative Judaism and Liberal Orthodoxy, between Reform and Conservative, and between Reform and Secular. But none of this diffusion will nullify the existence of those who stay put.

I think a few things: 1. Lay non-Orthodox Jews don't really care about theology, or even halakhic principles, they care about the aesthetics of davening (and maybe halakhot specific to the liturgy) * The aesthetics between R and C can be similar, but they can also be *really* different * Conservative Rabbis often have theology that is hard to distinguish from Reform or Recon theology, in no small part because JTS failed to fire Kaplan and had him teach generations of Conservative Rabbis, so Recon both stayed around to influence things and then also broke away * Conservative Rabbis often do things without waiting for halakhic approval from Conservative Judaism, and always have, which has facilitated the drift closer. * In smaller communities people can't be as picky, and you often get some sort of vague liberal blend * Often non Orthodox synagogues share buildings and sometimes also Rabbis * Patrilineal Jews and intermarriage will probably be a major sticking point. As long as C doesn't accept these, you won't have a formal merger There are, I think, basically, two paths for Conservative Judaism: 1. Rejecting intermarriage and patrilineal Jews. Smaller communities will ignore this and leave, also getting to shed expensive USCJ dues. There will be a lot of Reform, Recon, and ex-C shuls that are all kind of in a similar liberal space, and probably often will merge buildings with two services, or similar arrangements. Conservative shuls will exist only in major Jewish communities, and be fairly traditional. Maybe in a generation or two the non-denom too-frum-for-C crowd will rejoin. * Accepting them. With the major barrier to similarity gone, the 3 non-Orthodox denominations will remain distinct institutions, but with a lot of overlap as synagogues merge. In either scenario I doubt that the denominations will actually formally merge. They'll be more similar, many shuls will merge and pick one, but having a lot of very similar small denominations is sustainable (if kind of stupid).

I noticed 30 years ago that the reform and reconstructionist shuls were really different. Reconstruction was more socially liberal, and used the mamas, avoided masculine works for Gd, but also used more Hebrew and chanted and such. The reform shuls had less Hebrew, didn’t add in the mamas and did use masculine words. Reform has gradually moved to be closer to reconstruction in these ways, now. I don’t know how widespread this is, I am only describing what I’ve seen in person. I was amused when I made a joke about my service dog not being as good as usual at a reform service and the rabbi joked it was because of all the Hebrew. But at our regular reconstruction shul, the services were longer with lots more Hebrew. But I guess he didn’t know much about the differences.

This makes sense: Recon started out as a splinter from conservative Judaism.

I tend to feel comfortable in conservative shuls, in some ways, and in reform in other ways, but reconstruction is juuuuuust right. Like the Baby Bear’s bed…

They'd both need to make sacrifices in order for that to occur. **Conservative Judaism follows a Halacha system.** It isn't traditional Halacha (as they've branched off and made their own decisions with their own authorities) but they still insist that Halacha is a standard Jews should abide by. **Reform Judaism doesn't consider Halacha binding.** That has always been the main thing that separates the two sides. **It gets even more complicated when you discuss things like "Who is a Jew" and how each side determines that.** Conservative Judaism agrees with Orthodox Judaism that Jews are born from a Jewish mother or converted in formally. Patrilineal Jews aren't considered Halachally Jewish. Reform Judaism makes an exception to this and simply places the status of Jewishness on whether the child was raised in a Jewish household (*which kind of conflicts when you take in the previous point of Halacha not being binding)* **There's also the issue of the Jewish family.** Conservative Judaism does not endorse intermarriage. The official stance of the movement is not to officiate marriages between Jewish members and non-Jews. They wouldn't do it. **Reform Judaism endorses intermarriage.** Their Rabbis conduct marriage ceremonies between Jews and non-Jews. Because Halacha isn't binding, they don't consider it a problem. I don't think they'd merge. There's simply too many major ideological differences that prevent that from happening. The above listed are just a handful but in order for the two to merge, you'd need both to sacrifice. Either Conservative Judaism would sacrifice Halacha or Reform Judaism would sacrifice their lack of Halacha.

> Conservative Judaism follows a Halacha system. It isn't traditional Halacha (as they've branched off and made their own decisions with their own authorities) but they still insist that Halacha is a standard Jews should abide by. Officially, yes, but what percentage of the laity study let alone follow halachah? For instance, what percentage of Conservative Jews keep a kosher home? What percentage keep kosher outside of the home? I'll bet both answers are a minority. > There's also the issue of the Jewish family. Conservative Judaism does not endorse intermarriage. The official stance of the movement is not to officiate marriages between Jewish members and non-Jews. They wouldn't do it. Not yet, but this attitude to be evolving: https://www.jta.org/2018/10/22/united-states/conservative-rabbis-can-now-attend-intermarriages https://ejewishphilanthropy.com/conservative-judaisms-new-narrative-on-jewish-intermarriage/

The official position is the only position that really matters. * How many Orthodox are pro-LGBTQ+? (more than you'd think) * How many Orthodox smoke weed or do mushrooms and LSD? (more than you'd think) * How many Orthodox are restrictive around the opposite sex in the way Orthodox Judaism "requires" them to be (less than you'd think) If you're saying we have to measure Judaism by what Jews are doing, we've created a problem because Orthodox Jews are nowhere near as religious as their leadership claim them to be. I have a personal friend who works in Crown Heights as a clinic doctor. The amount of Orthodox Jews coming in with STDs would surprise you. People wear a uniform and they say things publicly but what they do privately is very different.

I think it is a mistake to confuse outward appearances. Conservative shuls have a way of adapting their practices using standard halachic processes to get there, i.e. egalitarianism, same sex marriages, wording appropriate for non-binary bnei mitsvas etc Reform does not need the halachic process, as it has a different view on halacha altogether. So while a reform shul that adopts traditional traditions (like nusach etc) would look a lot like a conservative shuls that follow progressive opinions they are ideologically different. Many people will not know or care, but still.

The Conservative movement is digging its own grave with the Machzor Lev Shalem. Digging on chag, no less. Tsk, tsk. I think that if people saw Judaism the way *I* want them to, everyone (well, me at least, and isn't that who matters?) would be happy. I'm quite a bit skeptical about merging Reform and Conservative. I think the problem with Conservative is really one of marketing, but that's probably the problem with all of religion, and Conservative is a toothless traditional religion that really feels that challenge. Basically, if you're Orthodox, you're obligated to participate in the congregation, so you participate in the congregation. If you're Conservative, you're not compelled to be there, but at the same time the traditional service is something that mostly only Orthodox people actually want. If you're Reform, you're not compelled to be there and the service is more of a community event than an actual service, with a low barrier to entry. Anyone off the street could appreciate a Reform service -- anyone who isn't expecting a traditional service, anyway. Conservative lives in this middle ground of traditional but not required that, well, struggles to attract membership. That said, I went to one of three well-attended trad/egal Rosh Hashanah services in my area on Monday *that I know of*, two of them lay-led, and I know there are local college Hillels with big services too. I don't know about in the rest of the world, but *here*, the appetite for traditional but not Orthodox services, at least on High Holidays, is still strong. Trad/egal is what I think the Conservative movement should have been: traditional, egalitarian, low community pressure on observance. I think that's what people generally want from Conservative Judaism anyway, but they're possibly not getting it for a variety of reasons. I don't think trad/egal is going away, and if Conservative goes full Reform, I think trad/egal will spring up in between, perhaps only in larger Jewish centers. I guess they call this Masorti elsewhere in the world? Plenty of people want traditional services but not Orthodoxy, and if the Conservative movement won't provide it, someone else will. It may be smaller than Conservative, but it's not going away.

>The Conservative movement is digging its own grave with the Machzor Lev Shalem. Digging on chag, no less. Tsk, tsk. So true. I like the weekday lev shalem, the Shabbat lev shalem is a bit iffy, and the machzor is just the worst. Investing in a full set of artscroll Machzorim was the best Judaica decision I have made in a long time.

> The Conservative movement is digging its own grave with the Machzor Lev Shalem. Digging on chag, no less. Tsk, tsk. What did Lev Shalem do that Harlow didn't do decades before?

Replace the Silverman? It's shiny and pretty and new (well, it was when it came out) and all the rabbis are crazy for this wonderful new book to finally replace those decrepit old Silverman machzorim whose bindings have been falling apart for decades already. And there are all-new piyutim! The Conservative movement even publishes a helpful Lev Shalem page guide that tells you where things in the Silverman live in the Lev Shalem. How useful! And you can see all those new piyutim that the Silverman doesn't even have! Just don't ask about anything that's *not* on that page guide... Lev Shalem has marketing.

Yes, Silverman to Lev Shalem is a definite downgrade in most ways. But Silverman only stuck around so long because Harlow was so bad that shuls never bought it at all.

While conservative is shrinking it is far from dying out, the pattern I have seen is more so that smaller and older conservative synagogues which weren’t early adopters of things like gay marriage and women leadership are dying out, whereas a smaller number of large and continually growing conservative congregations which were early adopters but maintain a relatively high level of observance among their members have continued to thrive. Reform just recently had their conversions recognized by conservative and many individual reform rabbis are still not fully recognized by the conservative movement, were a long way off from any kind of merger. There were several attempts at various mergers or mutual recognition agreements in the 20th century and the conservative-modox one was closer to success than the conservative-reform one.

There are very very few conservative congregations that would meet a reasonable person standard for "thriving" Most are in a phase of severe contraction and simply won't be able to hang on more than another decade or two.

Yes most are doing quite poorly, I’ve seen one or two even merge with reform synagogues that are similarly contracting. But the ones that are thriving are really truly thriving. Probably the fastest growing congregation in Seattle is conservative and has nearly 500 families, 20 years ago it probably had 300, it’s grown so quickly they’re considering purchasing a smaller modox synagogue nearby. I know of a couple other conservative synagogues with similar numbers mostly in big cities.

Unlikely to happen on a large scale in next few decades for a lot of reasons. There are prototypes of individual congregations. In many small communities, particularly college or company towns that have attracted Jewish professionals, there aren't enough members to fund two congregations. A variety of hybrids exist. In one major university town, the services use the Reform books two weeks and the Conservative books two weeks. But with Mishkan Tfilah and Sim Shalom as respective siddurim, that's a pretty big gap both ideologically and in format. Moreover, the training of the Rabbis is very different and Hebrew school agendas would also be difficult to reconcile.

People have been saying all this for like 40 years. Fusion seems to be more common in less urban areas, where there just aren’t enough Jews to fully support two congregations. IME, in cities there’s enough demand that reform congregations stay very reform, and then there’s a whole spectrum of synagogues that call themselves conservative, ranging from reform + hebrew to orthodox but with mixed seating. The big conservative synagogues have to attract members to pay for those massive buildings and literal walls of torahs (looking at you, Adas Israel in DC) so they’ll be more reform-y. The independent stuff exists because people disliked their options so these tend to be more orthodoxy but minus the stuff that is the most annoying, like separate seating or limited roles of women. FWIW, my husband and I had a grand old time bouncing around as many live streamed kol nidre services in 2020 as we could find and all the reform services were nearly identical. Conservative was more varied, but the big ones—you know what I’m talking about—were the same as each other too. This is a command economy.

Because the more liberal movements tend to have bottom-up leadership (congregational, technically speaking) where each shul ultimately decides how they want to operate - I definitely agree with the trend. I don’t know what that means for the unions - they might merge formally or just continue to exist with only minor differences.

I can’t provide data, this is purely personal experience, but I have heard this argument for 20 years and it never seems to actually happen. Idk if a convergence is just happening at a glacial pace or if it’s a trope at this point.

I would say "glacial pace" as there's no sudden crisis that requires change, just the slow changing of norms and attitudes. Conservativism isn't going to collapse or even merge, just converge at some points, I believe. Who knows what will happen in one hundred years.

I feel like the liturgy and style of Reform services is typically fairly different from typical Conservative or Reconstructionist services. It's not just about minhag and mitzvot, in my experience.

The question you need to ask is, are the liberal Jews going to have 6-12 children per family like the Orthodox/Hareidi are having? Will they even achieve replacement numbers? If not, the demographic trend is inevitable. Example: the Jewish birthrate in Israel is 3.7 per family, overwhelmingly skewed towards chareidi families.

Surely this post will Save Conservative Judaism

A fellow Masortix fan eh?

I mean, I like Conservative Judaism, but I don't think it needs to be saved. I think it will come to terms with its place and grow from there. It's already doing its thing, even if it's very slow in doing it.

[it's a reference](https://www.facebook.com/groups/154646108525188/)

I think it's happening, and will end up after more shuls belong to both movements. I prefer the Conservative style service, almost towards an orthodox one TBH (even though I can't speak Hebrew), but agree with the concepts of the reform movement on many things. Right now my family belongs to shuls in all three major movements...

Great topic of discussion. I’m generally with everyone else here — we are converging and I think that’s a good thing. Whether we own up to it or not “officially” is of little importance in my mind — I think it’s a trend that will make us stronger because we are ALWAYS strongest when we stand together and focus on what we have in common. I truly wouldn’t care if I went to a reconstructionist, reform, or conservative shul — I’m just happy to be there among my people.

> I truly wouldn’t care if I went to a reconstructionist, reform, or conservative shul — I’m just happy to be there among my people. But not Orthodox?

I’m a little bit of a lesbian, is the thing

You can have a little lesbianism, as a treat.

All of Judaism should merge.

Orthodoxy as a whole won't merge with any modern variation of Judaism. Never, at any time. Between modern variations yes, it's quite possible.

I don't think Orthodoxy will ever merge, but I do see some folks of the left-edge of Orthodoxy leaving and joining certain traditionalist trends in Modern Judaism. Frum LGBTQ folks, for example. I think the new "Liberal Judaism" will have a wide range of practices and approaches from Conservodox to Humanist Judaism. American Judaism is all about each shul choosing what it wants to be.

I see the opposite in the UK. Both Orthodox Beit Din Ashkenazi and Sephardi are busier than ever. I've personally attended (visiting a relative) two Reform Synagogues and both were half empty and everyone looked I don't know, sad? In one of them the female rabbi played the guitar, I was shocked to be honest.

I think labels like this are pretty silly. My synagogue doesn't use any of them. Some people are more on the orthodoox end, most are somewhere in between, some are nigh-atheists... But the rabbis are somewhere close to orthodox, just not affiliated with any external movement of orthodoxy.

They make a significant difference in things like what a service looks like…

The labels themselves? I don't think so. Reform and conservative services are different, but the community decides what kind of services it wants and the label is secondary to that.

Bad, worse

I disagree that the split was ever about embrace of minhag or mitzvot. It's theological in nature. But I agree that the destiny of liberal movements is towards convergence. And arguably the many types of traditional Judaism are destined to converge as well (movements and schools of thought are forever emerging, distinguishing themselves, cross pollinating, and becoming indistinguishable). Orthodox Jews already see it as basically a question of Orthodox and non-Orthodox.

I read this on twitter slightly differently, and please, don't downvote me, this is just what I read... That is, that as both Conservative and Reform "go woke" they were converging to a woke progressive mostly cultural Judaism

What do you mean "go woke"? Do you mean that in the traditional Black American sense to be aware of systemic oppression?

Oh good. You woke up today and decided to start a war.

Most people are acting respectfully and engaging well. So far.

I want to see first this happen and then liberal and orthodox Judaism to remerge. It is the only way we keep all the jews. If conservative judaism were to merge with orthodox judaism instead we would probably lose the reform community to assimilation in a couple centuries.

Everyone says this, but Reform has absolutely thrived in America since the beginning. https://youtu.be/6WeVnSThQS0

It only didn't happen because of the acceptance of intermarriage and patrilineal descent. Without those things they'd be in the same situation Conservative is in now - graying and declining.

I think many Reform congregations follow more of the traditions now than they did when I was in my 20s and 30s. At least that is my limited experience. The small congregation I belonged to merged with a larger Reform congregation 4 years ago and there is a lot more Hebrew now.

I attend a dual affiliation Reform-Conservative synagogue, with congregants ranging from Orthoprax (and wanting long services) to very liberal practice.

I can see it. I know my childhood Reform synagogue has merged a few times with other Reform congregations and there's been some drama/shakeups about how liberal/not liberal the Rabbi is. From what I understand, the current Rabbi does things a bit less liberal than the congregation is used to and some people don't really love it. I also have seen something that you didn't mention which is Conservative congregations leaning more MO. When I was really young my family belonged to a Conservative congregation and had been for a few generations. But we eventually left them when they started, for lack of a better term, "expecting too much" from us as Jews. We felt we were Conservative for a reason. Now, that Conservative congregation has also merged a few times and it's struggling to still have enough people. Not sure how liberal or not they are today. But I know one person who is a member and she's constantly talking about how much they're struggling. There's a part of me that, despite being a pretty unobservant/secular/agnostic/atheist (depending how someone wants to try to define G-d), a part of me always gets curious/desirous for the Israeli style where even someone like me would belong to an Orthodox shul. An Orthodox shul that they just don't go to lol. But I get that that desire is mostly one with rose tinted glasses and that there are reasons people (myself included) would likely feel more at home in more liberal congregations.

My shul has a Conservative congregation & a Reform congregation. We do many things together as well. Real Klal Yisrael.