That action comes in spite of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to assuage concerns in advance of the meeting by declaring that Israel’s recognition of non-Orthodox conversions performed in the diaspora is not at risk.
He did so in the face of new conversion legislation expected to be submitted shortly to the Knesset. That legislation is expected to delegitimize non-Orthodox conversions performed in Israel. Its impact on conversions outside of Israel is unclear.
Tensions were simmering around this issue as CJF opened its annual assembly here.
Martin Kraar, executive vice president of CJF, called the prime minister’s clarification “a step in the right direction,” saying it prompted “a lot of relief.”
However, it clearly wasn’t enough to buy harmony.
Rabbi Ismar Schorsch, chancellor of the Conservative movement’s Jewish Theological Seminary and an ardent defender of religious pluralism, said this week that he welcomed Netanyahu’s reassurances, which came in a letter to Jewish leaders in America. But he cautioned it was “not decisive.”
“The decisive text is the proposed legislation, and it makes it pretty clear that the ultimate decision on the kashrut of conversions will be in the hands of the Chief Rabbinate” of Israel, he said.
The bill aims to plug a hole in Israel’s Orthodox monopoly over religious affairs. The hole was opened a year ago, when the Supreme Court said there was no legal reason why non-Orthodox conversions should not be recognized in Israel.
However, the court did not explicitly recognize such conversions, saying it would be up to the Knesset to pass the appropriate legislation.
The pending measure was initiated by the Orthodox parties in Israel’s governing coalition. Those parties gained significant strength in May’s election and made support for such legislation a condition for joining the coalition.
The latest initiative, seen as a blow to those fighting for equal status for Reform and Conservative rabbis, immediately put those in the diaspora on notice that there was a risk of repeating the “Who is a Jew” debacle of 1988.
At that time there was an Israeli initiative to recognize as legitimate only Orthodox conversions in the diaspora for purposes of determining which Jewish immigrants to Israel were eligible for automatic Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return.
In issuing his letter to American Jewish leaders Friday of last week, Netanyahu was signaling that he anticipated no repetition of the political conflagration that erupted in 1988, when dozens of diaspora delegations gathered in Israel in protest.
Netanyahu pledged in his letter to “oppose any legislation which will change the status quo regarding conversions outside of Israel.”
The CJF’s decision to go forward with its resolution this week was certain to be viewed as a rebuke to the diplomatic gesture by Netanyahu, who was scheduled to appear by sattelite in Seattle Thursday night.
The resolution called on Israel’s government not to adapt or pass legislation that would “change the current situation.”
But if the risk to the status of diaspora conversions is ruled out, federations will face the dilemma of whether to get involved in fighting for the legal status of non-Orthodox conversions in Israel.
Federations have traditionally been reluctant to intervene in internal Israeli affairs.
The issue at stake is “how much CJF wants to involve itself in a resolution that concerns conversions within the State of Israel,” said Dr. Conrad Giles, the new president of CJF.
Yet, Giles added, a “substantial” number of people would likely be “unhappy if, at the very least, we don’t engage in the discussion.”
CJF clearly has calculated that it cannot afford to risk alienating the leadership of the Reform and Conservative movements here and their millions of constituents.
Eighty percent of the donors to the annual campaigns run jointly by the federations and the United Jewish Appeal identify themselves as Reform or Conservative. For their part, UJA officers were expected to pass the resolution on Tuesday.
At the same time, however, federation leaders are concerned about their Orthodox constituents, most of whom have expressed support for legislation invalidating non-Orthodox conversions.
The Orthodox Union, in a letter this week, urged the CJF “not to allow the divisive issue of religious pluralism in Israel to surface on the CJF agenda.”
But non-Orthodox leaders welcomed the CJF move.
“We’re appreciative that CJF recognizes the issue and sees right through the desperate attempts at confusing the matters,” said Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, executive director of the Association of Reform Zionists of America.
Hirsch said Netanyahu’s letter reinforces the split between the Orthodox monopoly on Jewish life in Israel and Jewish pluralism in the diaspora.
“If the prime minister wanted to be helpful, he’d come to the G.A. and declare in no uncertain terms he’ll oppose any legislation which disallows Reform and Conservative conversions inside Israel,” Hirsch said.
For Schorsch, protecting the legality of non-Orthodox conversions in the diaspora “averts a rupture between Israel and the diaspora.”
But if non-Orthodox conversions in Israel are invalidated, he said, there will be “a deepening divide between the religious and nonreligious in Israel, between Judaism and Zionism.”
For his part, Hirsch said he would hold CJF to its pledge to fight the fight and not let its resolution turn into a mere formality. “We have enough respect for CJF to think [that] if it passes a resolution, it does so with serious purpose and intent.”
CJF is prompted to act now, Giles said, because “there has been a window” for Reform and Conservative conversions in Israel after the Supreme Court decision that paved the way for such conversions.
“We took great comfort that these gains, albeit incremental, would never be taken away,” he said.
David Minkin, head of a CJF committee formed to address the issue, said this “affects the credibility and legitimacy of religious movements in the diaspora.”