Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sfmag.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxm!sftig!sftri!sfmag!samet
From: samet@sfmag.UUCP (A.I.Samet)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: The misnomer "halacha"
Message-ID: <502@sfmag.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 23-Feb-85 20:07:09 EST
Article-I.D.: sfmag.502
Posted: Sat Feb 23 20:07:09 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Feb-85 03:45:06 EST
References: <16@unc.UUCP> <3780010@csd2.UUCP> <874@cbdkc1.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit, NJ
Lines: 17

> Conservative Judiasm, and I am a Conservative Jew, has certainly issued
> rulings which make permissible (rather than require) changes in how a
> Conservative Jew may behave  -- drive to shul on Shabbat, women in the
> minyan, women as bal torah and as rabbis, BUT in all cases have issued
> responsa justifying these decisions al pi halacha.  It turns out that
> many conservative rabbis, and virtually all orthodox rabbis do not
> agree that these are al pi halacha...

To someone who has  invested  years  in   yeshiva,  studying  the
Talmud,   etc.    the  exploitation  of  the  term  "halacha"  by
conservativism is a colossal deception. It's like equating "witch
doctors"  with medical doctors.

Many sincere people, like the writer of the above article,  would
be shocked to discover the extent of the misnomer.

				Yitzchok Samet