A couple of weeks ago I went to the synagogue where I went to Hebrew school as a child to hear a lecture given by my friend Rabbi Neil Gillman. The topic was Halacha in the Conservative movement, specifically about comments that he made at the USCJ International Biennial Convention in Boston.

“When aggada changes, halacha changes along with it,” he said. “That’s what happened with feminism.”

To be a Conservative Jew is to live with constant tension, Rabbi Gillman continued. That can be difficult. “If the purpose of religion is to order the world, to turn chaos into order, why are we introducing more tension into a tension-filled experience?” Because, he said, “embracing tension and ambiguity is good. It is healthy. But are we prepared to do this? Polar positions are always clear. The center is more complicated.”

Seems reasonable to me. Others were not so happy with his position.

In calling for a new vision at the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism’s biennial in Boston, Rabbi Neil Gillman, professor of Jewish philosophy at the Jewish Theological Seminary, argued that calling itself a halachic movement is intellectually dishonest and has failed to inspire increased religious commitment of congregants.

“We have to be open and honest, and try to project a religious vision, a theological vision,” Rabbi Gillman told The Jewish Week…

“He deconstructed everything and offered nothing, spiritually speaking,” observed Rabbi Michael P. Singer of Temple Beth David in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. “I couldn’t disagree more with Rabbi Gillman,” he said, asserting that “the idea of Conservative Judaism is to move our members toward an understanding of halacha,” which he called “the link to the past, present and future.”

Okay, when I went to see Rabbi Gillman in his office a few months ago, not long after this convention had taken place, I admit that I was none too thrilled to hear him say that we as a movement should cease to characterize ourselves as “halachic.” Many, it seems, have latched on to that tidbit as well, and it has caused a bit of a stir in the movement.

When I heard Rabbi Gillman speak at East Midwood Jewish Center, however, it became clear that reports of his declaration of the death of halacha in the Conservative movement had been greatly exaggerated. His opinion on the matter turned out to differ only slightly from mine:

Conservative Judaism has always defined itself as a halachic movement… but with an asterisk. The problem here is that the Orthodox also define themselves as halachic, but without the asterisk. It is through our own fault that the asterisk is on our head, because we as a movement don’t know how to assert the authority of our halachic process convincingly. Much of this is an educational challenge, as our laity for the most part doesn’t know which way is up… they don’t realize that they belong to an ideologically strong movement and tend to believe that we can be summed up as “Ortho-lite” or “Reform-Plus.” Either view suggests a state of transition, where the ultimate positive goal is Orthodox-style halachic adherence.

The problem is that we don’t believe in the type of halacha adhered to by the Orthodox, which we view as frozen in time and inflexible in a way that halacha was never meant to be from the beginning of rabbinic exegesis. We as a movement accept halacha, but as Rabbi Gillman notes, we combine it, as did the Rishonim, the great sages, with aggada, with the story of our time. We shape our path as we tread it, because that is what a religion must do in order to remain relevant. We retain what is important while also accepting that which is important. As Rabbi Gillman put it, “Gays and lesbians can enter rabbinical school… but oysters are still treyf.”

Why?

He and I agree that we can tell the difference. There’s no hard and fast system for determining what stays and what goes. This is something with which I have been struggling for a while, thinking that in order to move forward, I needed to come up with a solid presentable plan. That’s the whole point, though. There is no plan. There is only we, the people, to invoke a nice little cliche to drive the point home. Halacha is eminently flexible. It’s really not as though our halacha is less-than because we have chosen to take it in a slightly different direction than the Orthodox.

Still, Rabbi Gillman and I disagree slightly on what do do semantically. He seems to believe that, because of our asterisk mistake, we should abandon our claim to halachic viability, leave the label halachic for the Orthodox, and redefine ourselves as ourselves, not in relation to the Orthodox. Maybe it’s because I’m young and bellicose, but I’d much prefer to fight for it. Throw off the asterisk and build up our movement’s strength and momentum primarily through education and cultural initiatives. It’s harder to do that way, but infinitely more valuable in the end if we can pull it off.

But what do I know? I’m just a kid.

Oh, wait… no, I’m a grownup. And I’m exactly the age demographic that The Movement is trying to attract right now! Hot-diggedy-Hebrew-National-Dog!

Honestly, some days I feel like I need to just drop whatever I’m doing and go out and fight a war for Conservative Judaism single-handed. Sounds like fun, right?