The furor that has broken out in recent days within
Britain's Jewish community over the participation of Orthodox rabbis in a
cross-communal festival has brought to the surface long-simmering tensions. It
has also proved that the fault lines running under British Jewry are very similar
to those dividing between Jews in Israel.
Controversy was kicked off last month when the newly
installed Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis confirmed that he would be speaking in
December at this year's Limmud conference. A five-day jamboree of Jewish study,
culture and entertainment attended by thousands of Jews from all religious (and
non-religious) persuasions, Limmud has been taking place in England for a
quarter of a century and successfully exported to dozens of countries.
The chief rabbi's participation would be a most normal
occurrence, but for the past 20 years Rabbi Mirvis' predecessor, Jonathan
Sacks, succumbed to pressure from the ultra-Orthodox rabbis of the London Beth
Din (religious court) who have slammed Limmud for offering a platform to rabbis
and educators from the Reform and Masorti movements, and kept away from the
event. Sacks' departure raised expectations among Limmud devotees, but even
they were surprised at the speed with which Mirvis acted. "We thought he
would come perhaps next year," said one of the conference's organizers,
"but he almost immediately said he was coming in December."
Last week, the Haredi wing of the religious establishment
hit back with an open letter written to the ultra-Orthodox weekly The Jewish
Tribune, in which they warned that "any Jew whose heart has been touched
by the fear of God and who wishes to walk upon paths which will be viewed
favourably” not to take part in Limmud, ruling that “participating in their
conferences, events and educational endeavours blurs the distinction between
authentic Judaism and pseudo-Judaism and would bring about tragic consequences
for Anglo-Jewry.”
What gave the letter increased significance was the fact
that among its seven signatories were Dayanim (religious judges) of the Beth
Din nominally presided over by the chief rabbi. chief among them was Rabbi
Chanoch Ehrentreu, the venerable 81-year-old former head of the London Beth
Din, who officially retired seven years ago, but is still widely regarded as
the most influential arbiter on matters of halakha (rabbinical law) in Britain.
For two decades, the outward face of religious Judaism in Britain was Chief
Rabbi Sacks, while on crucial matters of matrimonial law, conversion and
religious discourse, Sacks ceded his authority to Ehrentreu. The letter to the
Jewish Tribune was a clear signal of Ehrentreu's displeasure at the independent
spirit of the new chief rabbi.
On Tuesday, the mainstream leadership of the community
decided to react by sending an open letter - signed by almost 30 senior Jewish
leaders and philanthropists - to two mainstream publications, The Jewish
Chronicle and The Jewish News., In it, they welcomed Mirvis' decision to attend
Limmud and expressed deep regret at the Haredi rabbis' letter which they
described as "a shocking failure of leadership" and warned that it
"has the potential to cause great harm to our community and appears to be
rooted in tactical power play, as opposed to religious principle."
The letter by the community leaders finally exposes a split
that has existed in British Jewry for years, between the growing ultra-Orthodox
community and the rest of British Jews who do not understand why rabbis and lay
members of the different religious streams cannot work and study together. As
opposed to the United States, "affiliated" Jews in Britain are
predominantly members of the Orthodox United Synagogue movement, even though
many of them do not observe mitzvot in a strictly Orthodox fashion. Haredi Jews
in Britain are not members of the United Synagogue, nor do they recognize the
Chief Rabbi as their spiritual leader; however, many of the rabbis at United Synagogue
and all the Dayanim of the Beth Din are Haredi, possibly due to a lack of
qualified candidates.
While for the ultra-Orthodox any cooperation with the
"progressive" streams on religious affairs is anathema, the more
moderate United Synagogue members generally see no problem with it. A
relatively small number of United Synagogue members have attended and presented
at Limmud over the years, irrespective of the absence of the chief rabbi, and
represented there the more open and tolerant face of Orthodox Jewry in Britain.
The dispute this week over Rabbi Mirvis' attendance is not just about Limmud,
but a signal of the growing tensions within Orthodoxy between modernizers and
hardliners, similar to that which has been going on in Israel between religious
rabbis and educators advocating a more inclusive attitude to the wide Israeli
public and those who promote a more rigid adherence to halakha.
One notably silent voice this week was former chief rabbi
Sacks. Freed from the constraints of office, it may have been hoped that the
still revered Sacks would weigh in in defense of his successor, or at least
explain why he lacked the courage himself to defy the dayanim. In his new
website launched this week, Sacks posted his homily for last week's Torah
portion, headlined "The Courage not to Conform." This courage seems
not to extend to finally standing up to the Haredi rabbis.
No comments:
Post a Comment