view counter
JFNA To Promote Civil Marriage

In Israel, federations walk a fine line to support religious freedom without opposing Chief Rabbinate.

Wed, 05/28/2014
Editor and Publisher
Gary Rosenblatt
Gary Rosenblatt

The Jewish Federations of North America, or JFNA, may soon launch an effort that would include supporting groups in Israel working to limit or end Orthodox control of personal-status issues such as marriage, divorce, conversion and burial, The Jewish Week has learned.

Clearly this is a key, often emotional, issue in this country, where about 85 percent of the American Jewish community is non-Orthodox; some feel they are looked upon as second-class Jews by Jerusalem. But the proposed project, known as iRep — Israel Religious Expressions Platform — while presented as advancing freedom of religious expression, may stir controversy among many observant Jews and those uncomfortable with the notion of diaspora Jewry stepping up its support for critics of Israeli policy, especially through the vehicle of JFNA, its primary consensus organization.

On June 9, iRep is likely to pass a preliminary vote of the board of trustees of JFNA, the umbrella group of North American federations, along with two other proposed projects. The initiative will not be described as an attempt to bring down the Chief Rabbinate, which has become increasingly haredi, and insular, in the last several decades in overseeing issues of personal status. Rather it will be cast in positive terms as promoting individual rights and freedom of choice, with an initial focus on support for civil marriage in Israel.

(At present all marriages in the Jewish state must be religious ceremonies conducted by an Orthodox rabbi. Many Israelis, resentful of that requirement, choose other options, and more than 25 percent of marriages are believed to take place out of the country, primarily in Cyprus. The current Knesset is weighing several pieces of legislation to allow for civil marriage.)

Acceptance of civil marriage is considered “low hanging fruit” on the political-religious vine of personal status issues. Even some Orthodox leaders have spoken positively of it as an alternative for those who cannot marry under traditional halachic requirements. A common example would be a Kohen who is forbidden from marrying a divorced woman.

“Our goal is to build community and connection to the State of Israel,” explained Jerry Silverman, CEO of JFNA, in an interview this week. He said the intention of the iRep project “is not to delegitimize the rabbinate but to create more educational awareness of the different types of religious expression in Israel. We want to have a stronger educational and informational platform there, for Israelis to drive the discussion.”

He noted that JFNA has a long history of involvement in freedom of expression issues in Israel. The most recent was over conversion legislation and efforts to provide equitable space for non-Orthodox prayer at the Western Wall. The iRep project is seen as particularly important as an educational tool at a time when JFNA and others, through the free Birthright Israel trip, are helping to bring tens of thousands of young people on visits to Israel. The great majority of them have little knowledge of the rabbinate and its responsibilities.

Promoting Collective Giving

The proposal to the trustees will come from the Global Planning Table (GPT), a JFNA committee created several years ago to promote the Jewish federations’ “collective global work and drive collective solutions to important issues within the global Jewish community,” according to its website. In recent years local federations have become increasingly autonomous in deciding how to spend their charitable donations. The GPT is an attempt to reinvigorate the concept of collective giving, especially overseas. Progress to date has been slow, with the committee working against the trend of increased emphasis on local needs and wariness over funneling funds through a central agency.

David Butler, a Washington attorney and chair of the GPT, is upbeat about the group’s recent efforts to “identify and excite the donor base, expand the campaign, increase dollars to support JFNA activities, and work with foundations who share similar interests.”

He said that two “signature initiatives,” defined as involving at least 10 federations pledging to spend, collectively, a minimum of $500,000 annually for three years on them, will be up for an initial vote at the June 9 JFNA meeting.

One is called JQuest and is designed to create an immersive experience for Jews in their 20s and 30s from around the world for a period of two weeks to five months. Modeled in some ways after an American Jewish World Service program, it would take groups out of their locale and have them do social service somewhere else, anywhere where they are needed — the U.S., Israel or another country. It would include a Jewish learning component as well as pre-training and a post-program.

The second project, the Israel Children’s Zone, is based on the success of the Harlem Children’s Zone, and would seek to break the cycle of poverty in specific Israeli communities through a holistic system of education, from early childhood through high school, as well as social service and counseling for families and community-building programs.

Butler said there is much enthusiasm among donors and professionals for both JQuest and the Israel Children’s Zone; the two would start with pilot programs at a cost of under $5 million a year, with the hope that they will grow and expand based on their success.

He acknowledged that iRep, the plan to fund a coalition of Israeli groups working to liberalize personal-status issues under the control of the Chief Rabbinate, is “not a simple matter.” Some advocates are deeply supportive, insisting this is a vital issue in terms of strengthening Jewish identity in the diaspora. Others, including some who agree with its goals, feel it would be a tough sell. The initiative would likely be viewed, according to critics, as inappropriate for JFNA since it would be funding programs seen as attempting to counter Israel’s status quo on matters of religion and personal status.

In practical terms, though, Orthodox Jews, who are most likely to take exception to the initiative, represent a relatively small percentage of major donors to federations.

The Israeli partners in the “freedom-to-marry” coalition include Hiddush (“For Religious Freedom and Equality”), Yisrael Hofshit (“Be Free Israel”), the Masorti (Conservative) movement, the Reform movement, Mavoi Satum (which deals with agunot and divorce issues), and New Israel Fund’s operating arm, Shatil, which advocates social change. A number of additional groups are expected to join in the next few months.

‘A Coalition Of The Willing’

Sensitive to the issues at hand, the GTP has designated iRep a “voluntary project, not a signature project initiative — it’s a coalition of the willing,” according to Butler. He added, though, that a significant number of communities are interested in supporting its modest budget of $2 million a year.

UJA-Federation of New York will support iRep as a means of “helping to strengthen Israel and solidify the essential bonds between world Jewry and Israel,” according to an official there who spoke off the record.

Recognizing the need for a nuanced approach, Butler noted: “We have to be careful not to poke anyone in the eye, but rather to emphasize that this is meant to broaden religious expression in Israel.”

Similarly, JFNA CEO Silverman explained: “We are trying to build bridges of understanding, to create something that is not challenging halachic standards of Orthodox Jewry but at the same time creates opportunities for the non-Orthodox.”

It won’t be easy. In part because the project could put federation professionals in a tight spot, between donors who want to either change — or preserve — a controversial Israeli policy. And on a deeper level the issue exposes the often discussed but little acted-on conundrum of maintaining both a Jewish and democratic state, played out through the lives of Israeli citizens and, by ripple effect, Jews everywhere. In this case the issue is who and how they marry.

Preserving Jewish identity is at the core of our religion and the Zionist cause; equal rights and freedoms are at the heart of our sense of justice. Finding ways to avoid choosing between them is the challenge at hand.

Gary Rosenblatt has been the editor and publisher of The Jewish Week for 20 years and has written more than 1,000 "Between The Lines" columns since 1993. Now a collection of 80 of those columns, ranging from Mideast analysis to childhood remembrances as "the Jewish rabbi's son" in Annapolis, Md., is available. Click here for details. 

Get The Jewish Week Newsletter

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.


Transferring control of explicitly religious institutions such as "marriage, divorce, conversion and burial" from religious authorities to irreligious ones makes as much sense as transferring control of state diplomacy to anarchists or surgery to Christian Scientists. "Hi, I'm a convert to a religion I don't believe in!" Good grief.

I still firmly believe that, on the subject of who is Jewish, jewries are the answer. Take it out of the hands of those seeking power. Jews, common, ordinary, loving homebodies should get exclusive authority to determine who is Jewish, and on a case be case basis.

If you don't live there. mind your own business

Redefining marriage,redefining who is a jew,Secular and "politically correct" concepts of warped American liberalism will destroy what's left outside of the orthodox community.Playing golf after Saturday morning services,eating lobster with Benjy,or taking a 14 day tour to Israel does not make a jew.All these movements are a deliberate attempt to destroy Judaism.Be smart stay orthodox and leave your kids an heritage.

The UJA is going to spend 2 million dollars a year to try to get marriage laws changed in Israel? Is there really nothing better for them to spend money on? Are there no problems which are more pressing? If the UJA thinks this is an issue which more then a very tiny minority of American Jews care about, or are even aware of, then it shows that they are out of touch. Use the money to buy food for the hungry, or do something along those lines which is more necessary, and less controversial.

Civil marriage is seen as a good solution for Israel by non-orthodox American Jewry, at least partly, for one reason: it allows their (American-trained) clergy to perform weddings. Weddings will bring revenue. The truth is, though, most secular Israelis are not interested in religion AT ALL. Unless they can marry at city hall in a civil ceremony in Eretz Israel, they simple will travel abroad. The Reform and Conservative movement would like to enter the wedding business -- which is perfectly fine -- as it generates another revenue stream for their synagogues and rabbis who, sadly, do not receive the same financial assistance as they Orthodox colleagues.

Mr. Rosenblatt writes: "Even some Orthodox leaders have spoken positively of it as an alternative for those who cannot marry under traditional halachic requirements. A common example would be a Kohen who is forbidden from marrying a divorced woman."

In fact, there are Orthodox rabbinic leaders who have supported civil marriages or unions for whomever wants it, not only those who cannot be wed halakhically. This includes the former chief rabbi Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron, the very influential Rabbi Eliezer Melamed of Har Bracha, Rabbi Yaakov Medan of Yeshivat Har Etzion and of the Medan-Gavison Covenant, and the late Rabbi Yehuda Amital of Yeshivat Har Etzion and Meimad.

how dare those israelis have their own laws instead of meekly obeying the american dictat. Horrible! They must be taught a lesson.

Israel can't have it both ways. You cannot call for almost unconditional support from American Jews, while treating the majority of them as second class Jews. If the Israeli non-orthodox public ocntinues to support right wing parties who allow the Orthodox to maintain their monopoly over Jewish life in Israel, then that public needs to know there is a consequence for that electoral indulgence. Maybe when America, feeling less pressure from the Jewish community does not veto resolutions leading to sanctions, and sanctions begin to bite, the Israeli public will "get religion". Sometimes love has to be hard.

Good to see more US organizations take a stand on this issue, underscoring the fact that the crisis of the Israeli marriage system is not just an issue for Israel but for all Jews.

This is just another attempt to usurp the right of Israel to have its own laws. I was never in support of that when I lived in the diaspora and now that I live in Israel I feel more strongly than ever. We Israeli Jews love all Jews but you can't keep making your own rules and imposing them on us. Further, aliyah from the U.S. is a trickle compared to the potential. If you live in Israel, you are not coerced to be religious but clearly marriage is one of those areas that should be ruled by traditional religious law that is not the product of a historically recent ideology. Changing this status quo would severely endanger the Jewish character of the State. The vast majority of Israelis support the idea of the status quo, even those who are not religious.

AVI - Like you, I also recently made Aliyah (August 2013). Like you, I refrained from critiquing Israel in terms of making policy demands when I was not a citizen. Like you, at least partially, I believe that a huge increase in aliyah from the US would increase the potential for change. The other way change will come is when the Chief Rabbinate becomes so intrusive into the daily lives of Israelis that they are no longer willing to tolerate it, go out into the streets, and remain there until a change is made.

However, where I differ with you is on the issue of kiddushin in the State of Israel. First, Jewish law does not require that a rabbi perform a wedding. It is only in Israel that this is required. It is no longer an issue of halacha; rather, it is an issue of politics, budgets and employment. Removing the governmental requirement that a rabbi perform weddings would remove a major source of income to those governmental employees (rabbis, that is) who are permitted to perform weddings. The chance to perform weddings is not only denied to Reform and Conservative Rabbis (full disclosure: I am a Conservative Rabbi and lead the Fuchsberg Jerusalem Center) but many Orthodox rabbis as well. Those of us who were married in the diaspora, be it in New York or Cyprus, are registered as married in the eyes of the State even though our weddings were not performed by a representative of the Chief Rabbinate. Thus, the argument that changing the status quo would "engender the Jewish character of the State" is simply not the case.

Second, the vast majority of Israelis do not support the status quo. A huge number of Israelis fly to Cyprus to have a civil marriage ceremony and then fly back to Israel and are registered as married. They then go and have anyone they want perform chuppah and kiddushin. Why continue to force Israelis to flee the country to get married in a civil ceremony when Olim married in the diaspora are considered married as far as the State is concerned. Civil ceremonies accepted by the government would mean that Israel would still benefit financially from the wedding (fees are not insignificant in all of this), the couple would still have a civil marriage accepted by the government, The couple would save money from having to fly to Cyprus and would be free to marry religiously however they wanted.

Third, civil marriage would still allow the government to restrict, or more precisely forbid, marriages that are prohibited according to Jewish law specifically where related to marrying first cousins and other categories that are prohibited such as siblings. Thus, halachic categories would still be enforced.

I live here. I live a halachic life. I want religious ceremony to be above reproach. I want the kashrut here to be kadosh rather than a nasty business and a monopoly. I want to see the kedusha return to so much of Jewish life where it is missing when government becomes intertwined and where the monopoly of the Chief Rabbinate results in corruption, self-serving policy that has little if anything to do with Jewish law, and pushes away more Jews than it draws near.

Hag Sameach,

Rabbi Loren Sykes

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.