web analytics
June 29, 2016 / 23 Sivan, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘Reform Movement’

Reform Movement Won’t Back Nuclear Iran Deal

Thursday, August 20th, 2015

The Reform Movement in the United States is one of the most liberal religious denominations in America. It is also the largest denomination of Judaism in the United States. Members of the Reform movement voted for U.S. President Barack Obama in overwhelming numbers – both times.

And so the announcement on Wednesday, Aug. 19, that the Reform movement will not take a position in favor, or opposed, to the Nuclear Iran Deal is momentous.

The statement, released by the leaders of the Union for Reform Judaism, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, and ARZA (Reform Israel Fund), reveals a painstaking review of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

The statement referred to the debate over the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action as a “makhloket l’shem shamayim,” a “debate for the sake of heaven.”

The overall position the movement took is reflected in the following statement: “The JCPOA does present a way forward, there are real dangers to rejecting it, and it does not foreclose Iran’s ability to become a nuclear weapons threshold state.” A more refined version, but not entirely different in meaning, from Cong. Brad Sherman’s (D-CA) assessment of the deal as “the good, the bad and the ugly.”

It revealed a fear not only of an Iran with nuclear weapons and of an Iran with a too-largely unfettered ability to foment and support terrorism, but also deep alarm over the fraying of the U.S.-Israel relationship and of America’s standing in the world.

The Reform movement made clear that while there was neither unanimity of opinion regarding the Nuclear Iran Deal amongst the movement’s leadership or the movement’s general membership, they were all united on the following concerns:”First, how is it possible to address our concerns about the JCPOA? Second, if the agreement is finalized, what happens the day after? Specifically, how can we work to support the strongest possible U.S.-Israel relationship going forward?”

The numerous meetings held with military leaders, political leaders and nuclear experts revealed to the statement’s drafters that their concerns can be categorized as: deterrence, Iran’s support of terror, inspections, human rights and religious freedom, and the standing of the U.S. in the world.

Based on those concerns, the Reform movement made a number of recommendations it hopes this Administration will implement, including pledging never to take any options off the table that could prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, whether at the onset of any Agreement, or at the conclusion of any Agreement, and to provide Israel with the necessary means to deter Iran and to defend itself.

Although vaguely defined, the Reform movement also recommended that the U.S. take a lead role in a broader international effort to eliminate Iran’s ability to support international terrorism.

It also believes that additional protections are necessary than the currently designed “snapback” protocol provided in the JCPOA.

And, the Reform movement avers, the U.S. must do more to encourage and push international pressure on Iran to “expand human rights, religious freedom and the development of democratic structures.”

Regardless of whether the Nuclear Iran deal passes or it does not, the Reform movement very much wants the rhetoric between those in favor and those opposed to the Agreement to be “tamped down.”

“Calling those who oppose the deal ‘war mongers’ shuts shown constructive debate; calling those who support the deal ‘enablers of a second Holocaust’ ends thoughtful discourse,” the statement admonishes.

The statement was signed by Rabbi Rick Jacobs, President, and Steve Sacks, Chair of the Board of the Union for Reform Judaism; Rabbi Denise L. Eger, President, and Rabbi Steve Fox, CEO, Central Conference of American Rabbis; Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, Director of Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism and Jennifer Kaufman, Chair, Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism; and Rabbi Joshua Weinberg, President, and Rabbi Bennett Miller, Chair, Association of Reform Zionists of America.

Lori Lowenthal Marcus

Reform Movement: Give J’lem Site to Church

Monday, May 12th, 2014

The former head of Israel’s Reform movement has called on the Israeli government to cede part of the David’s Tomb compount, located on Mount Zion, to the Catholic church.

“Rabbi” Uri Regev, the former director of the Israel Reform Action Committee and now the head of the Hiddush- Freedom of Religion for Israel NGO, said in a press release that ceding control of the Last Supper Room, located one floor above the site that many Jews believe is the burial spot of King David, could be a “forward looking gesture” that could give the Jewish People  ability “to move beyond past disputes and persecutions … experienced in specific Christian and Muslim communities throughout generations.

However, Mr Regev stopped short of making similar demands of the Vatican to return religious objects and manuscripts stolen from Jewish communities around Europe, beginning with the beginning of the Chrstian era nearly 2000 years ago. Instead, Regev said he “expects” the church to make “similar gestures towards the Jewish community, such as returning the Jewish cultural and religious treasures looted from Jewish communities throughout history that are now stored in the Vatican.”

The Vatican is believed to posses cups, gold, the Menorah and other vessels stolen from the Beit Hamikdash during the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70. The church is also believed manuscripts writen by Maimonides and other medieval rabbinic authorities.

Church officials continue to deny researchers access to Vatican archives and storage vaults.

Jewish Press News Briefs

Rejection of J Street Best Possible Outcome…for J Street

Wednesday, May 7th, 2014

A backlash has been growing in the aftermath of the failed bid by J Street for admission to the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

The group that represents the largest denomination of American Jewry, the Union of Reform Judaism, is demanding that the Conference change its one group, one vote policy while also openly threatening to leave the umbrella group. An official of the Conservative movement’s Rabbinical Assembly is also demanding changes.

Meanwhile liberal commentators are blasting the Conference for its 22-17 vote to deny entry the left-wing lobby and making extravagant claims about this vote symbolizing the growing alienation of the Jewish establishment from the wishes of most of those it purports to represent.

Which means that, all things considered, the defeat at the Conference was the best possible outcome for the left-wing organization that came into existence not to fit in and cooperate with existing Jewish groups and coalitions but to blow them up. The negative vote enables J Street and its various left-wing sympathizers to play the victim and boosts their agenda to first delegitimize groups like the Conference and AIPAC and then to replace them.

But while it is understandable that the Reform and Conservative movements would join the lament about J Street’s defeat in order to assuage some of their liberal constituents who support the left-wing lobby, they should be careful about advancing any agenda that could undermine umbrella groups like the Conference.

While such organizations can seem at times to be irrelevant to the day-to-day business of American Jewry, they still serve a vital purpose. If the non-Orthodox denominations help J Street destroy them, they will soon learn that not only will it be difficult to replace them but also they and their constituents will not be well served by the politicized chaos that follows.

Only hours after its defeat, J Street was already attempting to make hay from the vote with a fundraising e-mail sent out to their list. It read, in part:

 

Thank you, Malcolm Hoenlein and the Conference of Presidents.

Yesterday’s rejection of our bid to join the Conference validates the reason for J Street: those claiming to speak for the entire Jewish community don’t in fact represent the full diversity of pro-Israel views in our community – or even its prevailing views.

 

Thus despite J Street leader Jeremy Ben-Ami’s public expression of disappointment about the vote, the group was clearly prepared all along to exploit a rejection to further its campaign to brand both AIPAC and the Conference as out of touch. J Street came into existence hoping to do just that, but over the course of the last five years failed miserably to do so.

Though J Street’s raison d’être was to serve as a Jewish cheerleader for Obama administration pressure on Israel, it has little influence on Capitol Hill and has even, to its dismay, sometimes been repudiated by a president it supports unconditionally. Thus it hopes to use this incident to gain more traction against mainstream groups.

But those, like Haaretz’s Chemi Shalev, who are using this vote to bash pro-Israel groups should be asking themselves why so many members of the Conference, which already includes left-wing organizations like Americans for Peace Now and Ameinu, would vote against adding one more to its ranks. The reason is that many centrist groups clearly resented J Street’s unwarranted pretensions to speak for American Jewry and to undermine the broad-based AIPAC.

The Conference was created to provide a way for a diverse and cantankerous Jewish community a single structure with which it could deal with the U.S. government. And though its members have often disagreed, and true consensus between left and right is often impossible, the Conference still provides Congress and the executive branch an address through which they can reach a broad and diverse coalition of Jewish organizations.

Jonathan S. Tobin

Thank You J Street (You Too, Reform Movement)

Friday, May 2nd, 2014

In the aftermath of being denied entry to the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, J Street has fulfilled the predictions and warnings of those who foresaw divisiveness and petulance within the ranks had  J Street been admitted.

Rather than taking the vote as a sign that the organization had not yet become sufficiently established for the mainstream organizations to feel confident it would play nicely in the sandbox with others, J Street began a letter-writing campaign ridiculing the long-serving and highly respected executive vice president Malcolm Hoenlein. That campaign also attacked the manner in which the vote had been taken – a vote in accordance with the bylaws of the organization.

J Street lashed out at those who dared to apply the same rules to it as the Conference has applied to every other new member.

The sophomoric message J Street posted on its website sought to rebuke the Conference of Presidents, and to claim that the fact it was rejected proves its conceit:  its positions are bold, brave and absent from the Conference and the fact it was rejected proves its voice is needed.

J Street suggests that without its voice as an essential and robust part of the conversation, the Palestinian Arabs will continue to be victims of the Israeli aggressors and deprived of their rights to at least half of the sliver of land to which Israel is currently in control, either due to a global licence or as the result of a defensive war.

The emptiness of those claims is revealed when one actually looks at the membership of the Conference of Presidents.

Of the 49 voting members, well more than half are easily classifiable as either center, center left or simply left, when it comes to support for Israel.  And J Street’s claim and dominant focus is Israel and Israeli security.

Americans for Peace Now, the Jewish Labor Committee, the four or five organizations which represent the Reform movement, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the four or five organizations which represent the Conservative movement, and Ameinu all represent the leftist end of the spectrum of American Judaism.

The core center is well-represented by at least a dozen other organizations such as the American Jewish Committee, Hadassah, B’Nai Brith International, the Jewish National Fund, American Jewish Congress, American Gathering/ Federation of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, the Jewish Federations of North America, the American Zionist Movement, Amit, the Anti-Defamation League, B’Nai Zion, Israel Bonds, Hadassah,  NCSJ: Advocates on behalf of Jews in Russia, Ukraine, the Baltic States & Eurasia, ORT America, Alpha Epsilon Pi,  and the Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem.

So J Street claims that its rejection from the club is because the Conference of Presidents rigged the system to exclude J Street, or that without its voice at the table American Jewry is deprived of a desperately needed view, or that J Street is entitled to an admission process different than the one  applied to every other application is yet more affirmation that the organization and not the Conference needs to change.

This is J Street’s message to its supporters:

THANK YOU, CONFERENCE OF PRESIDENTS!

Yesterday’s rejection of J Street’s bid to join the Conference validates the reason for J Street: those claiming to speak for the entire Jewish community don’t in fact represent the full diversity of pro-Israel views in our community.

The Conference of President claims to be the “the proven and effective voice of organized American Jewry.” Last night’s vote removed that pretense.

So join us in thanking Malcolm Hoenlein for for clarifying this situation and revealing to all what we’ve long known: a new voice is needed to represent the true majority of American Jews–and non-Jewish supporters of an Israel at peace.

Lori Lowenthal Marcus

MK Rotem Offers Full Apology to Reform Movement

Monday, February 10th, 2014

Israeli lawmaker David Rotem offered a full apology for reportedly saying the Reform movement “is not Jewish.”

At the start of a Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee meeting on Sunday, Rotem again addressed the remarks, which raised the hackles of religious and other Jewish groups in Israel and the United States.

“I had no intention of hurting anyone or the Reform movement,” Rotem said, reading from a prepared statement, according to Haaretz. “There were those who tried to twist my words into meaning that I did not believe that Reform Jews are Jewish. For me, any Reform Jew born to a Jewish mother is a Jew like any other.

“My intention was that I have deep differences with the Reform movement about practical matters related to Judaism. At the same time, considering that we are all Jews and members of the same religion, we need to solve these differences in discussions and conversations around the table. I apologize to anyone who may have been hurt.”

On Thursday, Rotem said his remarks made the previous day had been “misinterpreted” by the media.

The director of the Reform movement in Israel, Rabbi Gilad Kariv, thanked Rotem for his Sunday apology, according to The Jerusalem Post.

“The only way to conduct the significant arguments between Jewish denominations and the different sectors of Israeli society is through mutual respect and by seeking the common ground,” Kariv said.

Following Rotem’s apology, lawmaker Uri Maklev of the United Torah Judaism party said Rotem was forced to apologize and accused the Reform movement of bribing Israeli lawmakers, according to Haaretz.

JTA

Struck by Lightning at Camp, Ethan Kadish Battles Brain Injury

Tuesday, August 20th, 2013

On Saturday, two weeks after Ethan Kadish’s 13th birthday, the members of his family will gather around a Torah scroll in the chapel of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital for a small ceremony marking his entrance into adulthood.

This was not the bar mitzvah that Scott and Alexia Kadish envisioned seven weeks ago when Ethan was still at the Goldman Union Camp Institute, a Reform Jewish summer camp in Zionsville, Ind.

Scott and Alexia had just finished mailing Ethan’s bar mitzvah invitations and were making final plans for a week of vacation when they received the call: While helping younger campers learn the rules of Ultimate Frisbee, Ethan and two other children had been struck by lightning.

The other children were released from the hospital soon afterward. But Ethan, who suffered cardiac arrest as a result of the strike, was in critical condition. Nearly two months later he is still fighting the effects of a catastrophic brain injury.

“We know that Ethan will be in the hospital for many months,” Scott said. “But the progress we have seen — which we are measuring week to week and month to month, not day to day — has been in a forward direction.”

Initially hospitalized in Indianapolis, Ethan was airlifted to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital in early July. After two weeks in intensive care, he has regained the ability to breathe on his own, but he remains unable to engage in purposeful movements. Although he has irregular periods of open-eyed wakefulness, his parents told JTA they are not sure of the extent of his vision.

The family has benefited from the support of their community, including their rabbi, Sissy Coran of Rockdale Temple in Cincinnati, who spent the night with the Kadishes on the second day of Ethan’s hospitalization. Meals have been delivered to them three times a week, and hundreds have signed up for Team Ethan on the Lotsa Helping Hands website, which assists families caring for a sick relative.

“We have experienced the best of humanity,” Alexia said.

Now the family is seeking another kind of help.

In cooperation with the HelpHOPELive fundraising website and the Great Lakes Catastrophic Injury Fund, the Kadishes are hoping to raise money to cover Ethan’s medical expenses, many of which will not be covered by insurance, they say.

In an interview, the couple — who also have set up a webpage to keep well-wishers informed of Ethan’s condition — were candid about the emotional difficulties of the preceding weeks, from the anguished ride from Cincinnati to the hospital in Indianapolis, to the emotional pain of having an unresponsive child. But they remain hopeful.

Recently they took Ethan outside into the sunlight and were rewarded with a response from their son: a tiny but unmistakable laugh.

Nonetheless, as they prepare for the months and years ahead, the Kadishes are cognizant of the many challenges facing their family. They have two other children, ages 16 and 10.

“Our other children certainly know there has been a huge change in our family lifestyle,” Alexia said. “They see how many hours Scott and I spend at the hospital. But we’re trying really hard to create a schedule as the school year starts to provide some source of normalcy in our family unit.”

“This,” Scott added, “is our new normal.”

JTA

Did She or Didn’t She?

Friday, August 16th, 2013

Over the past two days, while the army was shooting into the crowds in Egypt and half of Beirut was lifted by a huge car bomb, and many other awful things were happening, The Jewish Press readership has been dealing with mostly the question of the possibility that a Reform Rabbi named Angela Buchdahl could have attained her high position without the benefit of a Jewish conversion.

It started with an article in The Forward (Angela Buchdahl, First Asian-American Rabbi, Vies for Role at Central Synagogue), that basically suggested Buchdahl was not Jewish according to Jewish law:

But she also engaged Judaism at a time when the Reform movement itself was undergoing dramatic change. Eleven years after Buchdahl’s birth, in a move still hotly debated in all streams of Judaism, including within Reform Judaism itself, the Reform movement overturned more than 2,000 years of tradition that recognized only those whose mother was Jewish as Jews from birth. Others, including those with just a Jewish father, were required to undergo a process of conversion, though this process varied among Judaism’s different streams.

Starting in 1983, as intermarriage advanced steadily among its members, Reform Judaism conferred a “presumption of Jewish descent” on those with one Jewish parent, whether it was a father or a mother. The one condition to this recognition was that it be established “through appropriate and timely public and formal acts of identification with the Jewish faith,” according to the Central Conference of American Rabbis.

In many ways, Buchdahl represents the flowering of this revolution in Judaism, and symbolizes a kind of coming of age of its children.

This was coupled with an article in Hadassah Magazine:

Profile: Angela Buchdahl

Though Buchdahl’s mother did not convert, she wanted her children to find a home in the Jewish community. Her father instilled Jewish pride in his children and gave them a Jewish vocabulary, says Buchdahl, but it was her mother who imparted a sense of spiritual yearning and wonder. Her mother’s Buddhism informs her Judaism, she says, noting that Jewish and Korean cultures overlap in their approach to life, their emphasis on giving back and their drive to succeed and to be educated.

So yours truly, enchanted by the concept of the non-Jewish Rabbi, charged ahead. I still believe all the points I was making were right, namely that the Reform  doctrine of patrilineal descent and the “presumption of Judaism” in the case of a the offspring of a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew were on the money.

Except that it turns out Buchdahl may have converted to Judaism after all.

Thanks, first, to our reader Vicky Glikin of Deerfield, Illinois, who wrote:

It is highly unfortunate that your facts and the very premise for this article are plain wrong. Rabbi/Cantor Buchdahl underwent an Orthodox conversion, a fact that you would have easily discovered had you actually been trying to write an intelligent work of journalism.

So I went looking for the misrepresented conversion, and found the following line in the Times (Defining Judaism, a Rabbi of Many Firsts), hidden among long, familiar paragraphs like this one:

Her first reaction was to think about a formal conversion to Judaism, but a second impulse quickly followed: Why should she convert to prove something, when she had been a Jew her entire life? In traditional Jewish law, a Jew is defined through the mother’s line. But over roughly the last 40 years, the Reform movement in Judaism accepted descent through the father’s line as legitimate for Jewish identification, so if a child has a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother who affiliates as a Jew (the mother need not convert if she is involved in synagogue life), the child does not need to undergo a conversion to become a Jew.

But then, the Times revealed: “Eventually, at 21, she did undergo a conversion ceremony, but she prefers to think of it as a reaffirmation ceremony.”

Another clue was in something David Ellenson, President of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, wrote in his letter today (Hebrew Union Pres. Pulls Fast One in Non-Jewish Rabbi Debate):  “you assume an article that was written in another newspaper and upon which your author draws for his piece reveals all the facts about her life. ”

Meaning, Ellenson may have known Buchdahl had converted in an Orthodox ceremony, but to concede this would mean that he agrees that it takes an Orthodox conversion to turn even the child of a Jewish father into a real Jew — as shown by the very poster child of patrilineal descent, the subject of our attention these past two days.

I still find the entire affair more than a little bizarre: why should someone who did convert in an Orthodox ceremony be sending out all the signals that they didn’t and that they’re proud they didn’t. Perhaps we’ll find out in the next chapter of this very strange story.

Yori Yanover

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/did-she-or-didnt-she/2013/08/16/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: