LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL Vol. 105:3 [2013-15] Resources to Begin the Study of Jewish Law in Conservative Judaism* David Hollander** Conservative Judaism stands at the center of the Jewish ideological spectrum. In that position it strives, sometimes with difficulty, to apply a flexible, modern out- look to an ancient system of binding laws. This bibliography provides law scholars with annotated citations to a selection of important sources related to Jewish law in Conservative Judaism, supplemented by brief explanations of the larger context of the resources. Introduction . 305 Historical Development of Conservative Judaism. 307 Primary Sources of Jewish Law in Conservative Judaism. 310 Secondary Sources of Jewish Law in Conservative Judaism. 316 Jewish Law and Conservative Judaism in Israel. 319 Conclusion . 320 Introduction ¶1 Conservative Judaism is an unfortunately named branch of liberal Judaism.1 If Orthodox Judaism stands on one side of the left-right divide of the Jewish com- munity (the right side), Conservative Judaism is firmly on the opposite (left) side. However, if the Jewish community is divided into those who view Jewish law as binding and those who do not, Conservative Judaism (in theory, at least) is firmly on the side of binding law, the same side as Orthodox Judaism. So Conservative Judaism occupies an uncomfortable position, firmly modern and liberal, while still adhering to a binding legal framework, which is a space largely occupied by the nonliberal camp of Orthodox Judaism. ¶2 This middle space is accompanied by many problems, but despite these problems, the conception of Jewish law offered by the Conservative movement represents an important and comprehensive vision that claims for itself a historical authenticity,2 and that is ideally suited to ensure that the exploration of Jewish law * © David Hollander, 2013. I wish to thank Kim Lane Scheppele, Mary George, Rabbi Steven Lindemann, and Rabbi Micah Peltz for their invaluable advice and guidance on this article. ** Law and Legal Studies Librarian, Princeton University Library, Princeton, New Jersey. 1. Internationally, and in Israel, Conservative Judaism is called Masorti, using the Hebrew word for “traditional.” 2. eLLioT n. dorFF, The unFoLding TradiTion: JewiSh Law aFTer Sinai 5 (2005) (“Conservative Judaism is an historically authentic form of Judaism—I would say the most historically authentic 305 306 LAW LIBRARY JOURNAL Vol. 105:3 [2013-15] in law schools includes a broad spectrum of views alongside the more widely cov- ered Orthodox understanding of Jewish law. In other words, Jewish legal scholar- ship produced in law schools would be greatly strengthened by substantively confronting the claims of Conservative Judaism about the origin, history, methods, and structure of the Jewish legal system. Indeed, exploration of the full, varied, and broad spectrum of Jewish legal theory and practice is necessary to, in the words of one major scholar of Jewish law from the legal academy, “accurately depict” Jewish legal principles “in a way that is faithful to the Jewish legal system.”3 This effort will necessarily include exploration of Jewish law in both its premodern manifestations (before the development of Orthodox Judaism4) and its modern era legal move- ments, both Orthodox and non-Orthodox. This bibliography is intended to foster that effort by bringing together in one document Jewish legal sources from what is perhaps the main school of thought of Jewish law that stands outside of Orthodox Judaism, that of Conservative Judaism. ¶3 Jewish law in the Conservative movement is notoriously hard to character- ize. This difficulty stems from Conservative Judaism’s position at the ideological center of Judaism. As Elliot Dorff states: “It is always easiest to understand, explain, and have passion for one or the other of the ends of a spectrum, for then one embraces that endpoint consistently, without requiring much thought.”5 He adds that “[i]t is harder to affirm a middle point on any spectrum, for then one must have the maturity, intelligence, psychological security, and wisdom to exercise judgment and to live with inconsistencies.”6 ¶4 A clear, recent example of these difficulties and inconsistencies is on display in the Conservative movement’s decisions, called teshuvot,7 on whether to ordain openly gay and lesbian rabbis. Rather than arriving at a single answer to the ques- tion, the movement adopted three positions: no,8 no,9 and yes!10 That diametrically opposing positions on this emotionally fraught issue can be both official and form of Judaism—in that it embraces both tradition and modernity and tries in everything it does to blend the two wisely in the many ways that our ancestors did.”). 3. Samuel J. Levine, Applying Jewish Legal Theory in the Context of American Law and Legal Scholarship: A Methodological Analysis, 40 SeTon haLL L. rev. 933, 937 (2010). 4. Despite common assertions to the contrary, some argue that Orthodox Judaism’s particular understanding of and approach to Jewish law developed not in ancient Israel or Babylonia, but in early modern Europe. See roBerT gordiS, underSTanding conServaTive JudaiSm 4–5 (1978). 5. dorFF, supra note 2, at 2–3. 6. Id. at 3. 7. The singular of this term is teshuva. Its English plural is responsa, and the English singular is responsum. Teshuvot translates literally as “answers.” 8. Joel Roth, Homosexuality Revisited (approved Dec. 6, 2006), available at http://www.rabbini calassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/20052010/roth_revisited.pdf. 9. Leonard Levy, Same-Sex Attraction and Halakhah (approved Dec. 6, 2006), available at http:// www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/20052010/levy_ssa.pdf. 10. Elliot N. Dorff et al., Homosexuality, Human Dignity & Halakhah: A Combined Responsum for the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (approved Dec. 6, 2006), available at http://www.rabbini calassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/20052010/dorff_nevins_reisner_dignity .pdf. Vol. 105:3 [2013-15] RESOURCES TO BEGIN THE STUDY OF JEWISH LAW IN CONSERVATIVE JUDAISM 307 acceptable under Jewish law underscores the difficulty involved in capturing the nature and spirit of Jewish law in Conservative Judaism.11 ¶5 Finally, the very nature of Jewish law in Conservative Judaism—to be open to profound change—also contributes to the difficulty in capturing its essence. In Orthodoxy, changes to the law tend to be rare or even nonexistent. A legal decision is fixed, often for generations. Conservative Judaism’s openness to change, in con- trast, makes capturing a fixed position of Jewish law more challenging. Further exacerbating the challenge is the lack of an accessible, comprehensive system to effectively track change, such as Shepard’s or KeyCite. ¶6 In sum, there are real difficulties to capturing the nature of law in Conservative Judaism. This bibliography is intended to begin the process of provid- ing resources to overcome these difficulties. Historical Development of Conservative Judaism ¶7 Conservative Judaism has its ideological roots in a nineteenth-century intellectual movement called Wissenschaft des Judentums, or the “science of Judaism.” This movement sought to study Judaism and Jewish history critically with scientific methods.12 A scholar of this movement, Rabbi Zacharias Frankel, who had broken with the Reform movement over what he believed was its exces- sive rejection of Jewish practices, founded the Jewish Theological Seminary of Breslau in 1854. There he developed his historicist approach to studying Jewish law, called the “positive-historical” school. This approach is the intellectual fore- bear of Conservative Judaism.13 ¶8 The next important step in the development of Conservative Judaism was the 1886 founding of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York. The seminary was established, however, before the development of a united and coher- ent Conservative movement. Its founders were divided between rabbis who sought 11. How and why this can happen is discussed infra ¶ 13. It should be noted, though, that the approval of multiple and conflicting decisions enables rabbis and institutions within Conservative Judaism to follow any of these approved decisions. In the case of ordaining gay and lesbian rabbis, the Jewish Theological Seminary, the flagship American institution that ordains Conservative rabbis, has followed the teshuva allowing such ordinations. See Chancellor-Elect Eisen’s Letter to the Community, JewiSh TheoLogicaL SeminarY (Mar. 26, 2007), http://www.jtsa.edu/Conservative_Judaism/The _Halakhic_Status_of_Homosexual_Behavior/Eisen_Letter_-_Ordination.xml (“I write to announce that, effective immediately, The Jewish Theological Seminary will accept qualified gay and lesbian students to our rabbinical and cantorial schools.”). This effectively sets the movement’s policy as allowing gay and lesbian ordination, limiting the real-world scope of the opposing approved teshuva. Moreover, in 2012, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards voted to approve guidelines for same-sex marriage ceremonies as well as divorces. See Elliot N. Dorff et al., Rituals and Documents of Marriage and Divorce for Same-Sex Couples (approved May 31, 2012), available at http://www .rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/2011-2020/same-sex-marriage -and-divorce-appendix.pdf. 12. neiL giLLman, conServaTive JudaiSm: The new cenTurY 12 (1993). 13. Id. at 19–23; eLLioT n. dorFF, conServaTive JudaiSm: our