Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Woman as Rabbis(or preists for the Gentiles)
adam613:
To be fair at this time we are all impure but during a week of every month during women's childbearing years you will be clearly impure. While it is true that a women will hear a man's voice in most shuls the women don't look at the men either.
In terms of prayer I do think men and women should pray in the same shul although they sit separately.
I did want to mention a couple of other points that weren't mentioned if you don't mind. (I did not ask JTF yet so I only know what is said on this thread.) First of all, according to the Jewish Week in an article 2 weeks ago about 75% of the members of reform shuls are women and only 25% of men. So clearly this doesn't attract an even balance. In terms of their mock conversions it is even worse for reform in which far more women convert then men. The other issue is the fact that as far as I know both Reform and Conservative dumbed down the requirements to be a Rabbi in order to attract women. This is affirmative action. Because being a pulpit Rabbi is very time consuming so they dumbed down the requirements to attract more women. . On that alone it is a ridiculous system. The reality is the Torah exempted women from certain obligations because there primary responsibility is being a mother and wife. However, conservative and reform want it both ways. They dumbed down the requirements for a Rabbi so a women can both be a Rabbi and a mother. Their is so need for a man in that kind of system and that is why reform and conservative are for all intensive purposes is a "women's club".
Donpeyote:
Mock & Dumbed Down? in 20 Years you think Judaism in America will be like Unity or Religeous Science ? With 25to35% percent of Peoples in shul Recent Converts? (Like I will be?)
LeChayim:
A Rabbi's duties involve leading the congregation in fulfilling various religious obligations such as prayer, reading the Torah, Kiddish, and other things. In many cases, the Rabbi performs the task as a proxy for the individual members of the congregation. Another major role of a Rabbi is to serve as an authority when questions arise concerning Halachah (Jewish law). In that regard, the Rabbi studies Torah on behalf of the followers.
With very few exceptions, women are exempt from any positive commandments (as opposed to
prohibitive commandments) that are dependent on time (i.e.: Prayer, which can only be performed during assigned periods of the day, and Shaking a lulav, which can only be performed one week out of the year).
According to Jewish law, one can only perform a commandment on someone else's behalf if the person performing the commandment is under the same obligation as the one he's standing in for. For example, if I am going to listen to someone else read the Torah on my behalf, this can only be done if the reader is at least as obligated as I am to read the Torah.
Since a woman is exempt from so many of the tasks that a Rabbi regularly performs, she cannot carry out those tasks on behalf of the congregation. Thus she is disqualified from being a Rabbi.
There is an added dimension to all this. We are forbidden from making arbitrary changes to the religion. In a pure technical sense, it is perfectly fine for a group of women to get together and form a prayer group. They can even read from the Torah, and all that other good stuff. But only if it is done out of a legitimate desire to please and serve G-d, and only if it does not create the appearance of an attempt innovate the rules. We are forbidden from creating an actual female congregation with a female Rabbi (or even the impression of one), because such a thing does not exist within the confines of Judaism, and thus to create one would be mocking the Torah.
Also, Judaism does not allow for us to make changes based on our preception of fairness and equality. The laws are followed because we place G-d's perfect wisdom above of our limited understanding. If the Torah dictates differences between men and women, so be it. Whether we like it or not. Whether we understand it or not.
It is not by accident that most of the congregations with female Rabbis also bear closer resemblance to a new age feel-good club, then a Jewish institution. It is because they have chosen their own logic over the laws of G-d. And, as Rav Kahane said, once you do that, you are no longer following Judaism. If your name is Cohen, you're following Cohenism. If Your name is Green you're following Greenism, etc.
takebackourtemple:
--- Quote from: adam613 on November 21, 2006, 11:29:40 PM --- The other issue is the fact that as far as I know both Reform and Conservative dumbed down the requirements to be a Rabbi in order to attract women. This is affirmative action.
--- End quote ---
Interesting point. Of course I'm against affirmative action. While dumbing down the requirements is usually wrong, I don't know if I would categorize it as such. Using gender to appoint a woman over a man would be, and I'm sure there are many cases where it is affirmative action. Most of the dumbing down of the requirements are gender nuetral from my observations.
In most cases the orthodox synagogues are much closer to the real religion than the conservative and reform, but in my opinion all three have their strengths and faults.
As for the faults of the orthodox. While most of what they practice is real Judiasm, they often also practice Yiddish instead. Changing the language from Hebrew to something of our enemies is wrong. As a note, "shul" is incorrect. The proper term that should be used is "beit knesset". Dressing as an 18th century polish antisemite is wrong. Making a cult out of the religion where strict European traditions are practiced instead of the real religion is wrong. The Samar or Saint Mary cult is an example of Jews that don't practice the real religion, but practice Yiddish Nazism instead. The typical modern orthodox beit knesset is probably the closest to doing everything correct, but has been corrupted to some degree by this evil.
I can't particularly say anything good about the conservative or reform movements since most of what I've seen is wrong. They often do at least read the prayers correctly when they read in Hebrew. I've gone to a few services where my prayers were more meaningful because some of them were in English and I was able to understand them. Reading the prayers in English while the rest of the congregation does something else doesn't quite have the same meaning.
Getting back to the topic of the discussion, I'm not against the congregation giving equal rights to woman, but at a very minimum, the rules of the written torah must apply.
adam613:
>While dumbing down the requirements is usually wrong, I don't know if I would categorize it as such. Using gender to appoint a woman over a man would be, and I'm sure there are many cases where it is affirmative action. Most of the dumbing down of the requirements are gender nuetral from my observations.
I have to say most dumbing down has to do with catering to a special interest group whether it is gays, blacks, or women or other self interest group. People don't dumb down requirements to make a job which was difficult and challenging to attain for no reason. But, yes, I have read that they have allowed certain flex schedules and other laxity of certain requirements specifically to attract women which made the position a less serious position. .
>I'm not against the congregation giving equal rights to woman
What do you mean by equal rights? Every person has equal dignity but what do you mean by equal rights?
A younger person has more leverage then an older person in many jobs. Is that equal rights? I don't support androgyny and think it is a blatant violation of the Torah. You also have the command a man shouldn't wear women's clothes and a women should not wear men's clothing. I would tend to believe it isn't just talking about clothing like many commands likely also means in other area's as well. Furthermore, laws should take into account that men and women aren't the same and in some cases should favor a women and some laws have. But you can't have it both ways and have special rules forr women but any special rule fo a man is struck down is sexist.
Even in the workplace the women have better rights. That is the scam the feminist play that they want "equal rights". The women want "superior rights". Companies have to pay higher health insurance for childbearing women and they get paternity leave. A man doesn't. The reason is obvious but that is the whole point. That isn't equal at all. Women all want equality when it is bad for them. When it is good for them it is OK to discriminate against men. They have been shutting down male sport teams in colleges because men like sports more then women do and this is giving women "unequal rights". Yet when a male athlete wanted to take a benefit given to women and used title IX which the women use to shut down male sport teams that was not allowed. These feminists are full of crap. Then you have sexual harassment in which some women think that work is about being nice to anyone. I've read how men sometimes treat men in some jobs and the way they talk to them. I don't think it's a good thing or right some times but now the women want special rules just for them and call this "equality". The fact that the men curse each other out is OK but if a guy curses a women out it isn't ok. No matter how you look at that (and whether you think it is right for a man to treat another man like this) this is not "equal rights" at all. This is double speak.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version