Jump to content

Talk:Conservadox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I expanded the stub, suing www.scjfaq.org/faq for inspiration. It's not exactly a scholarly source, but since the term Conservadox isn't a scholarly term I though it would be okay. Benami 01:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American jews vrs. North American Jews

[edit]

I would like an explanation for the reverts, and what is ment by "again, Sam, it's not just a description of American Jews". American Jews is the broader category, and it is also the useful link. People coming to this page don't need to be linked to jews (I think they know what a Jew is by the time they come here), nor North America. They might, however find use in learning more about American Jews. Sam Spade 17:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And that would be an excellent point, were the phenomenon of Conservadoxy limited to the United States. The faq that I used for guidance in expanding the stub (and cited at the bottom of the page) uses the term "North American" in describing Conservadox Judaism, presumably because the Conservative Movement (generally the starting point for people who identify as Conservadox) exists in Canada and Mexico as well as the United States. Maybe it would make more sense to have a link at the bottom of the page to the American Jews article, if there is relevant info there. Benami 18:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Essentially, what Benami said. American Jews are not the only Jews in North America. In fact, "North American Jews" might be too restrictive - see, for example, this: [1] Jayjg (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I found this link so informative that I took the liberty of editing out "North American" altogether. Benami 19:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I am very confused. Do you guys have a different definition of American than I do? For me it includes mexico and canada. Also, the mention in the article never suggested this was a phenomena exclusive to the americas. Sam Spade 20:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We might have different definitions, at that. In the US, American is primarily an adjective meaning "of or pertaining to the United States." If you follow the link American, it will take you to the article on the US. The faq that I used as a reference says that Conservadoxy is primarily a North American phenomenon.Benami
My bad - the link takes you to a disambiguation page.Benami 21:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"American" typically means "citizen of the United States". The American Jews article is only about Jews in the United States, not Jews in Canada, or Mexico, or El Salvador, or Guatemala, or... Jayjg (talk) 21:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok, my misunderstanding. I assumed the American Jews article was about all Jews of the America's. Shouldn't it be? Sam Spade 23:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See Talk:American_Jews#What_about_Mexican_Jews.3F. Sam Spade 23:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

See edit summary. Needs good quality sources, esp academic journals or at least serious analysis in mainstream media. Also, problems with essay-style content (e.g., making an argument, expression opinions and vague impressions). Personally, I think it's of marginal significance for a stand-alone article, but there's no reason not to give folks time to pull it together IMO. Thanks. HG | Talk 20:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some references which discuss the term, although I agree higher quality references specifically on the topic would be more useful. It's fairly straightforward to establish that the term is in widespread use. I agree the sourcing for the present article content could be improved. --Shirahadasha 21:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Seating Arrangements

[edit]

Where I live (Chicago), Shuls describing themselfselves as "Tradition" are the exact same as Modern Orthodox, with the exception that Men & Women sit together, and the gender-specific prayers are omitted. I don't know how common this is in other communities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.65.50 (talk) 23:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


False statement removed

[edit]

"While there is no Conservadox denomination, the inter-movement Union for Traditional Judaism (UTJ) serves as an umbrella organization, although not all people who identify as Conservadox or Traditional are affiliated with the UTJ."

The UTJ is not an umbrella organization for Conservadox Judaism.Romabers (talk) 03:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Language Usage

[edit]

I have a problem with the word "leftward " in "Conservative movement moved leftward on a variety of liturgical and social issues". I checked a couple of dictionaries (here is one http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leftward) and "leftward" means "to the left". If this were an article regarding politics I would agree that people would know exactly what that word means, but I am not sure most would imagine what it means to be "more to the right" or "more to the left" when it comes to a Religious Denomination. Maybe I am being naive, I do not know. What do you guys think?Alessio.aguirre (talk) 23:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(A) The Leftism that has crept into Judaism expresses itself by ignoring all the laws pertaining to the different roles of men and women. Men and women sit together, a woman can wear a tallit and kippah, women sing in the choir, a woman can be called up to read/sing the Torah or Prophets. The prayers are changed from King to Sovereign and from Him/His to a genderless equivalent. Children born to a Jewish man and non-Jewish woman are regarded as Jewish. All very politicaly correct, but is it Judaism? I fear not. This is causing a very real problem for orthodox children who want to marry Jewish but encounter 'Jews' whom the orthodox Rabbis do not regard as Jewish. The Left always get it wrong and have done for Judaism. But thanks to the ultra-orthodox having a high birth rate this trend will in time be reversed and corrected B"H. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.231.162 (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The Left have taken the religion to a place that is more Torah and less Rabbinic. This might be a good thing, but is it Judaism? Does a Reform rabbi have the authority to decide for his congregation the nature of their belief and observance? Should a Liberal rabbi have the audacity to declair his disbelief in God? Why become a rabbi? Yes, the Left always get it wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.30.9.171 (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional Judaism?

[edit]

The article Traditional Judaism is redirected to here. However, Traditional Judaism is not defined here. Instead this article says that

The term "Traditional" (not to be confused with the more generic term "traditional") is sometimes applied to roughly the same sector of the community.

It then goes on to confuse!

Until the 1970s, traditional Conservative and liberal Orthodox synagogues had a substantial area of overlap, with many congregations calling themselves either Orthodox or Conservative having a similar combination of a traditional liturgy in a synagogue with mixed gender seating, together with traditional but lenient or lax personal observance among the membership. "Orthodox" and "Conservative" congregations could be almost identical in liturgy and practices, with a substantial interdenominational blurring. Changes in both the Conservative and Orthodox movements came to distinguish both movements more clearly, leaving an increasing gap in between.

Now if it should say traditional with a T, then there needs to be a disambiguation form the Union for Traditional Judaism. Nor is there a definition of "Traditional".Koakhtzvigad (talk) 11:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conservadox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conservadox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conservadox&oldid=1201110432"