MARK WASHOVSKY

rabbis return to the activism that once characterized halakhic decision and adjust their methods of analysis to reflect changing economic and social reality. Urbach and his colleagues, who writings fill the pages of Amudim, Mahalkhim, De'ot and other journals, deny that contemporary Orthodox extremism is synonymous with"halakhic Judaism .” While these groups and individuals differ in their sectarian attachments, they share the conviction that Jewish law can and must change to meet the challenges of our time, that halakhah is"much more open to diversity and to‘modern’ sensibilities than the modern Orthodox myth is ready to acknowledge."

The problem for these liberal halakhists- and indeed for our new Institute --is that this portrait of a dynamic and flexible halakhah is difficult to maintain in the face of concrete practice. Whether the halakhah can be or ever was"liberal", it is certainly not"liberal" today. The plight of the agunah and the mamzer; issues of conversion and Jewish status; the role of women in ritual and communal life; attitudes toward non-Jews and contact with them; questions of new technology and medical ethics; challenges to traditional Jewish life raised by the establishment of the state of Israel --these are but some of the areas in which halakhah has taken decidedly illiberal positions. Liberals contend that traditional rabbinic law can yield positive,"enlightened" solutions to these problems, and their suggested solutions have made up what might be termed the liberal halakhic agenda. Nevertheless, the vast majority of recognized halakhic authorities have invariably denounced these proposals as invalid. This yawning gap between theory and practice is the Achilles heel of liberal halakhah. One can hardly argue that there is no conflict between halakhah and liberal values when every suggestion for mending that apparent breach is rejected by the leading authorities as contrary to Jewish law.