 |
|
|
There have been many issues that have marked or marred the last Jewish year but none has quite affected us more than the unseemly rows regarding who we are. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if ‘Who is a Jew?’ was a fantastically creative game-show, used in our Cheder, to give our young people, the future of Jewry, a sense of fun and pride in the wonderfully diverse achievements of the People they took their identity from. They could find modern role models from Scarlett Johansson to Pink and Rachel Stevens, Craig David, Sacha Baron Cohen, Kenneth Cole, Levi Strauss and Calvin Klein, Jack Black, even Einstein!
Sadly, ‘Who is a Jew?’ and who has the authority to make that decision is a serious matter that plays with real peoples lives. If it is anything to go by, the increasing number of parents asking me for my autograph on the form to say their children had attended enough religious services to pass the United Synagogues’ ‘faith test,’ we are just off on a new round that will affect those in our Community.
Interestingly, the major flash-point that perhaps initiated the latest round of the ‘Who is a Jew?’ bun-fight was internal to the orthodox community, but had ramifications for everyone. In an unprecedented decision, the High Rabbinical Court of Israel declared invalid all conversions performed since 1999 by the Orthodox Rabbi Haim Drukman, who was the head of the State Conversion Authority. They also ruled that it was permitted to retroactively cancel the conversion of someone who does not observe the Sabbath. In the specific case that led to these rulings, the Jewish status of the woman was put in doubt and her children were listed as me'ukvei nissu'in (people unable to marry under Jewish law). Out of extra caution, her husband was added to the list of ‘illegal marriages’ despite being born a Jew. The verdict renders the Jewish status of thousands, retroactively invalid and requires them to convert a second time. One Rabbinical Court decides you are Jewish and another decides 10 years later after living as a Jew that you are not.
There have been many cases this year including the JFS cases, but I am sure that you are sick to the teeth of these! The most vile and obnoxious cases I have come across relate to those whose pedigree was thrown into doubt by the Shoah, where the inability to show the right documentation, or the fact that they had fallen in love with someone non-Jewish before being told that they were Jewish, rendered them ineligible to be considered Jewish. I am sure that Rabbi Hillel would be able to cite any number of cases where individuals who have come from Spanish and Portuguese backgrounds have been doubted, because of the hidden nature of their heritage, even 500 years after the Inquisition.
We have heard the cases, but have not heard the situation framed from a Liberal Jewish perspective. Where we stand is what I would like us to consider tonight? I do so because I am so delighted that we have attracted to NPLS, Jews and many Associate Members from so many backgrounds within which not everyone has grown-up with a Liberal Jewish perspective on Judaism. I also rejoice, as I see more and more young people coming to join us and am convinced that if we are microcosm of Anglo-Jewry, we are on the verge of a new reality that will seriously challenge the status quo.
Who is a Jew?
There are two parts to this question: identity and status.
Identity concerns a sense of self that generally provides stability even though it may involve change over time. We usually take our identity for granted and rarely if ever, consider it in any depth. However, one might appreciate the importance of identity in extreme circumstances. One sometimes hears of stories of prisoners who have faced torture and seclusion for their political or religious identity. The dehumanizing tactics of the captor is aimed at taking away the individual’s identity. Naturally there are those who succumb, but there are those who fight incredible physical and psychological pain to maintain their sense of self, their sense of identity. Defining one’s own identity is a basic human right.
The Jewish leitmotif of this genre we recall in tomorrow’s musaf - additional – service. “Rabbi Akiva had defied the decree of the Romans and continued to teach. He was among those taken. He was led to his death at the time when the Shema is recited, and as his flesh was flayed, he said Shema Yisrael, Hear O Israel. ‘Even now?’ his disciples asked. He replied: ‘All my life I have been troubled by the phrase “with all your soul;” now I know what it means, “Love God, even to the point of death.” I have always longed to be able to fulfil this, and now I can!’ And with his final breath he said Adonai Echad – The Eternal God is One –prolonging the last word till life was gone. Thus was God affirmed in a godless world.”
Therefore, the answer to the first part of our question, ‘Who is a Jew?’ is someone who self identifies as a Jew. They may do so for any number of reasons but most usually by accepting certain defining features that have become normative over time. That is status, in the vernacular, yichus, one’s Jewish pedigree.
In other words, a Jew is someone who accepts their status as being that of a Jew by accepting their standing as a person in law. At one point in time, Jewish status was rather more fluid. It might have been by birth into a tribe via a paternal line, or association with Jews or observance of some Jewish rituals. As Shaye Cohen states in his authoritative book, ‘The Beginnings of Jewishness,’ “Jewishness [in antiquity] was not a function of objective or empirical criteria.” By the second century B.C.E., the ancient Rabbis were concretising the boundary between the Jew and the non-Jew. Intermarriage was proscribed, but a conversion process was established. The concrete was set in 200 C.E., when, in the Mishnah, matirilineal descent first appears as a guiding principle, ‘without explanation or justification.’ Although there is no direct evidence, Cohen postulates that: “this principle entered rabbinic law either under the influence of the Roman law of persons, or as a result of rabbinic reflection on the nature of mixtures, the crossbreeding of diverse kinds.”
Whatever, the background, a hierarchical system was created that had at its pinnacle a product that protected genealogical purity. One could become Jewish, but could never become as good as the born Jew. Once one had become a product of a relationship that did not reflect the ideal, one tumbled irredeemably down the scale. This system recognized Jewishness by religion, but it could not trump Jewishness by birth.
In essence, the ancient Rabbis created a tribal caste system. Jewish status was governed by Jewish Law, halakhah, and it was enforced by the halakhic authorities, the Rabbis. True there were ways that one might subvert the system. One could move area and start life afresh as information technology did not allow the easy verification of status. Whilst technological advances have fashioned television programmes such as ‘Who do you think you are?’, that help an individual better understand their genealogical heritage and identity, it has also now closed that status loophole as the halakhic authorities are dab hands at using information technology, except perhaps on shabbos! Indeed, the Rabbis for nearly two millennia have sought to tighten the boundary between Jew and non-Jew as new situations evolve that the Rabbis of previous generations could not even have thought of. Cohen suggests that Rabbinic hegemony was also reinforced by external influences. Christianity and Islam, expressed in religious terms, but also politically and socially, represented another pressure that led to the separateness of Jews.
The nineteenth century Emancipation of the Jews changed all that. The barriers to political, cultural and social integration collapsed and the Jew had the possibility to take on multiple identities. Over time, they could become defined by nationality, a German, French or British Jew or a Zionist supporting, specifically, Jewish nationalism. They could become politically defined by becoming a Bundist, following a socialist points of view; a feminist Jew, a cultural Jew, a gay or lesbian Jew, a sports Jew, or just a plain, old boring Jew.
At the same time there was a religious change ushered in by the Haskalah (the Hebrew term for the Enlightenment): the liberation of our Sacred Text to the same kind of analysis as arts and sciences. The Haskalah resulted in two forms of Judaism, orthodoxy which was a reaction to the Haskalah and non-orthodoxy that accepted its logical outcomes. The early reform movement, led especially by Abraham Geiger, who was born 200 years ago this year, sought the possibility to reform halakhah but then, acknowledging the systemic failures of rabbinic law, moved beyond it. Post-halakhic Judaism is here to stay. It is here to stay because I would argue that in the next generation in this country, more traditional Jews will take control of their own Jewish destinies and actually acknowledge what is already a reality – Anglo-Jewry is post-halakhic. Excepting the ultra-orthodox, mainstream traditional Jews do not look to their Rabbis halakhic guidance. They look to them as I think you look to your Rabbis, for learning, spiritual leadership and moral idealism.
What do they get from their Rabbis? On an issue of Jewish status Geoffrey Alderman, although not speaking to a specifically Jewish audience, wrote:
“As for conversion, what is meant exactly by the phrase “reputable ecclesiastical court”? Who decides the question of repute? There are in the UK today women who have undergone conversion through the auspices and with the imprimatur of the Chief Rabbinate of the State of Israel — the Jewish state — but whom the Chief Rabbi of the London-based United Synagogue refuses to recognise as at all “Jewish”. These mothers and their children are Jewish in Israel, but somehow, en route from Tel Aviv to Heathrow, they apparently cease to be so. I recognise them and their offspring as 100 per cent Jewish; the Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks does not.”
For how long will members of United Synagogues accept the hegemony of their Rabbinic leaders, especially when more and more are shipped in from Hasidic yeshivot in Israel? They are already having to accept the equal possibility of their children falling in love with a non-Jew as with a Jew. Will they accept their children and grand-children’s status falling down the yichus chain?
I, therefore, believe that we could be at the cusp of another Haskalah -another Enlightenment – this time of those Jews who had refused to accept the logic and remained unenlightened with regards to their religion. We have entered an age of mistrust of formal authorities and so identity might increasingly be self-defined. Some will not respect any authority and therefore status will become irrelevant to them. One ultra-orthodox man who converted with the aforementioned Rabbi Haim Druckman, commented when told that his conversion would probably not be recognised by the London Beth Din. "Once I might have cared," Campbell says. "Now I thought," and at this point he finishes the sentence with a hand and arm gesture not normally associated with ascetic, pious types.
However, authority that is based on the learning, spiritual leadership and moral idealism that I and my colleagues in the Liberal Rabbinate seek to provide will be increasingly sought; because we value, ‘truth above tradition, sincerity above conformity and human needs above legal technicalities.’
We welcome someone as being Jewish who has one Jewish parent and a Jewish upbringing or education. We welcome those who wish to join us and our guidance and rules aim to provide for a humane and dignified integration in to our Communities. We are committed to providing rituals that are imbued with true meaning and gravitas to mark an individual’s life journey. Following this path, Anglo-Jewry might just merit the right to determine Jewish status for itself rather than be subject to civil court actions.
Humanity needs rules. It needs structure and within Judaism and humanity there are some ultimate rules that hold good throughout time. However, we have never been afraid to kick out rules when they no longer serve any purpose. In 1902 at the beginning of Liberal Judaism, we championed complete equality for women, ahead of suffrage. A century later, Liberal Judaism was still radical and innovative as we introduced mixed-faith marriage blessings and same-sex commitment ceremonies, the latter again at the vanguard of civil society. Liberal Judaism was the only fully inclusive form of Judaism in Britain. Liberal Judaism is still the only fully inclusive form of Judaism in Britain and let us pray that, in the future, for the good of Anglo-Jewry, we remain the form of Judaism that counts Jews in, not out.
I firmly believe in a God that demands that Judaism be enjoyed by all. I do not believe that God wants us to legislate for the occasion that the slip of a tiny minority might cause some harm in the heavens. God delights when humanity is celebrated, respected and is enjoyed. May the time come, that ‘Who is a Jew?’ is a fun game-show for our children and not an issue that ruins peoples lives.
Eternal God, give us the wisdom and the strength to continue to act with humanity, and as Jews, to provide our children with a wonderful example, by having a joyful 5770.
Amen.
|
|
