David also points out that Judaism is not a centralized Jewish movement. Although it was centralized at the start under the leadership of Moshe, it is indeed not centralized now. There are many legitimate but differing Hashkafos. But what is equally true is that it is a movement whose rabbinic leadership has historically resisted the winds of societal change. No matter how many people clamored for it.
The distinctions he makes about the genesis of Conservative Judaism versus Open Orthodoxy are irrelevant. It doesn’t matter why those movements were formed. It only matters what form those movements take.
Near the conclusion of his article, David says the following:
In my experience, Open Orthodox rabbis are empathetic, intellectual and interesting. Their faith in Jewish tradition’s relevance to the modern mind and heart are inspiring. They are able to speak the language of non-Orthodox Jews and non-Jews (and Orthodox Jews), while remaining true to their halakhic commitments. They are invested in confronting the growing pains of Jewish tradition out of love for the Jewish people.
I’m sure that’s true. Which is why I am so upset that they have taken this turn. He concludes that he is not alone in his thinking. And he is happy that his rabbis follow him in this regard. I wish I could be happy that his rabbis follow him. But I am quite sad that they are not leading him instead.