Warm And Fuzzy "Halacha",Editorial Board

We were not all that surprised to read that the Conservative movement's Rabbinical Assembly recently voted overwhelmingly to relax the requirements for the movement's top lawmaking body, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, to make major "revisions" in Jewish law. The vote came after heated debate over the Conservative movement's heretofore negative stance on recognition of homosexual unions and clergy. Many in the Conservative movement are uncomfortable with the ostracism of homosexuals by dint of Biblical prohibitions and the resultant pain. Plainly, the change in requirements was adopted to enable the movement to redefine and "humanize" the Biblical strictures. This is the sort of compromising Divine revelation in the name of changing values that has been the mantra of Conservative Judaism.

Nor were we surprised to read an article of the Executive Director of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Conservative movement's congregational arm who glossed over, in the name of outreach to children of mixed marriages, the strict halachic rules against teaching Torah to non-Jews. In an article entitled "Reaching Out To Interfaith Children," he acknowledged that "some children with one Jewish parent are denied a Jewish education because they are not Jewish according to halacha ... therefore the Conservative and Orthodox movements understand that a child whose father is Jewish but whose mother is not must be converted...."

He went on to note, however, the "bitter paradox" that "the more people know about Jewish life, learning, values and history, the more likely they are to choose to convert...." Thus he says, the Conservative movement "call[s] upon congregational and day schools to develop policies that promote the Jewish education of the children of intermarried couples."

Again, the Conservative, feel good, unexamined relaxation of standards.

But we were totally unprepared for the news that several Cardinals of the Catholic Church were invited, in the name of religious ecumenicism, by the self-described "Open Orthodox" Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, to study Torah with their rabbinical students, in full clerical uniform, as chavrusas, or study partners. As the Forward reported, that the "session, a stop on a three day visit to New York that was spearheaded by Cardinal Jean Marie Lustiger of Paris and by official at the World Jewish Congress, ignored long-standing taboos in some Orthodox circles against teaching Torah to non-Jews."

On a different level, we are concerned with the suggestion that the Catholic Church has somehow appropriately atoned for its past, horrific, outrages against the Jewish people. To be sure, simple confession works for them. But for us, acknowledgement of and penitence for past transgression and a vow of no further transgressions are required. And there is also the not so small matter of priceless Jewish property still being held by the Vatican.

We could not say it better than the great Gaon Rav Yosef Dov Halevi Solveichik, zt"l:

We certainly have not been authorized by our history, sanctified by the martyrdom of millions, to even hint to another faith community that we are mentally ready to revise historical attitudes, to trade favors pertaining to fundamental matters of faith, and to reconcile "some" differences. Such a suggestion would be nothing but a betrayal of our great tradition and heritage and would, furthermore, produce no practical benefits. Let us not forget that the community of the many will not be satisfied with half measures and compromises which are only indicative of a feeling of insecurity and inner emptiness. We cannot command the respect of our confronters by displaying a servile attitude.

So in the name of ecumenicism, everything seems to go. Inexplicably, Rabbi Avi Weiss, the head of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, explained away the apparent violation of the heretofore universally accepted rule against interfaith dialogue on matters of theology: "This is not theological dialogue - this is a study session."

Frankly, we have long been perplexed by Rabbi Weiss's description of his institution as one following the principles of "Open Orthodoxy." We wondered about what the term meant and, equally as important, the Halachic authority upon which it is based. Unfortunately our serious concerns continue.

We sincerely venerate teachers of Torah and institutions of Torah learning. And we do not for one moment lump Rabbi Weiss and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah with others who seem to blur the teachings of the past. But we do have questions - legitimate ones, we think - about how departures from traditional views in the name of current realities are accomplished and supported by our tradition.

Read Comments (0)