(1) My sense is that many Conservative Rabbis would not allow piano-playing on Shabbat. Their reason might be that, even though the problem of repair is more attenuated than it is for other instruments, the weight of authority remains against allowing the practice, and there is no particularly strong moral imperative (as there is, for example, in extending religious rights and obligations to women) to challenging that line of authority.

(2) The exact nature of the oral law is, of course, complicated and contested, even from a completely “traditional” view. For my own take on the question, see http://www.columbia.edu/cu/law/svara/svara_2-2_dane.pdf

Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai – “A Halachic tradition whose source is not from a verse, or from an interpretation of a verse, but rather was transmitted orally by Moses. Many of these traditions are found in the Talmud, and act as the basis for practical laws.”

…these are the students of the sages who sit in groups occupied in Torah. These declare something impure and these declare it pure. These forbid and these permit. These declare something kosher and these declare it unfit. Perhaps a person will say, “If so, how can I study Torah?” This is what we were taught: All were given by a single shepherd [i.e. Moses]. One G-d gave them, one leader spoke them from the mouth of the Master of All Things, blessed be He. As it is written, “And G-d spoke all these things, saying…” You, too, should make your ear like a grinder and acquire an understanding heart to hear the words of all these opinions.

Chagiga 3b

- I apologize.

Clearly there is an absolute wealth of dissenting opinions within the Orthodox world, but that is not something that I have attempted to touch on here. My point is only to show that the same variation exists elsewhere as well. The only reason that I don’t want to debate these points is that I don’t want to establish myself as somebody who is defending Progressive Judaism against those sorts of indictments. I did say that it is not “my” philosophy, and I did also say that there is nothing wrong with rejecting it.

As to your diversity – they all reject the fact that Oral Torah is divine and was given by G-d on Mt Sinai and the interpretations by the Rabbis date back to that time.

If you steal $1 or $1000000 you are still a thief. Once you start to set your own boundaries, it is always movable by others.

My point as I stated is that the whole progressive idea is questionable from the start.

I understand you do not want to debate these issues. I accept that.

I understand that it was not the purpose of your article, however if someone was to write an article whether a circle has two or three corners I would feel obliged to educate that it has none or infinite I guess.

You misrepresent me. I made it very clear that I am not advocating Progressive Judaism and that I consider there to be nothing wrong with utterly rejecting it. My issue was merely with those who reject it from a position of ignorance. I think I also made it quite clear that I was simply writing a defense of its complexity, lest people like yourselves think that it’s simply about adopting a laissez-faire attitude. I cannot help but notice that neither of you actually responded to any of the points in my article. Your critiques are sociological while, if you haven’t noticed, my article was about Progressive conceptions of the halakha.

So far as your sociological criticism is concerned, this is a serious issue. But don’t pretend that reasonable studies have demonstrated the dangers of adopting patrilineal heritage: the phenomenon of our declining demographic is so utterly complex and cannot possibly be reduced to a single issue. You want to blame the Progressive movement for the fact that Jews leave it and assimilate? Then who are you going to blame for the fact that Jews are leaving Orthodox communities and joining Progressive ones?

As for where my grandchildren will be, you hit the nail on the head. However much you might wish to own your children or your grandchildren, you do not. It is your task to imbue them with a love for their heritage so that they might wish to stick with it and, while we all might disagree about the best means of doing that, I think it’s worth noting that we all still have the same goal. I am sorry that my final paragraph was not one that you have understood.

In the end – is the goal to serve myself and my needs (and I can move up and down the spectrum to suit myself) or to serve Hashem as he dictated on Mount Sinai when both the written and oral Torah were given… the real question will be the grandchildren – where will they be? My assumption is that your answer is wherever they want.

I understand your intention is to educate. I appreciate it but you opened Pandora’s box here as the legitimacy of any form of progressive Judaism is questionable.

“…Board of Progressive Jewish Education was formed, in order to fill the gap that was created…” Astonishing. How can a vacuum fill a hole? For the net result of 200-odd years of the ‘progressive’ breakaway from 3,000-odd years of Jewish tradition is a Jewish People overwhelmingly ignorant of their heritage. No wonder that, according to Holloway, the Reconstructionists see the goal of Shabbat as relaxation. Is it really?

The Reform movement which, I recall, was founded in Germany (rather than being an “American phenomenon”) likes to see itself as holding true to the prophetic tradition. By being highly selective in which bits of what the prophets said they adhere to, the movement has managed to rip millions of Jews away from their heritage and prevented the birth of many millions more. While the prophets admonished the Jewish People for their lack of Torah observance – both in spirit and in word – Reform twisted their statements to advocate the abandonment and rubbishing of the very principles and behaviour the prophets wanted us to return to! The effect has been the birth of a variety of ‘progressive’ movements each one earnestly considering how to rearrange how best to make the seating on their respective Titanics more egalitarian.

‘Progressive’ theologies do, however, represent – as Blackadder’s Baldrik would say – a cunning plan. By getting rid of most of what we have been told we should do ‘progressives’ can pursue what’s left (in, of course, whatever way they see fit) and sincerely consider themselves to be better Jews and human beings because they have not trangressed in such-and-such a way or have not failed to do such-and-such a mitzvah. By raising the fruits of their own intellects above that of G-d’s requirements ‘progressives’ have effectively made a god out of their own image.

‘Progressive’? Skipping to oblivion more like. Rabbi Lamm may well be wrong in his prediction that we will soon be saying kaddish for the Conservative movement: alas, time may show that he should have included the whole ‘progressive’ movement.