"Obnoxious" is an excellent way to put it, ADDeRabbi.
I say its time to jettison these types of Chareidim. A bunch of obnoxious liars. We should split worldwide orthodoxy, and kick the lunatics out of it pubclicly and definitively. Who needs them? It's probably gonna happen sooner or later anyway, if we don't do it they will. Plus we have the money and they have all the poor kollel people. Get rid of them! Ban them from playing our game I say.
Hmm...
Sometime I wonder if we're in the same religion
The obnoxiousness of this Vaad that I noticed years ago on the Yated website is that their desire for all Geirim to be Talmidei Chachomim has nothing to do with Halacha. The Rambam in Issurei Biah paints a TOTALLY different picture of Giur. And even the Shulchan Aruch and later Acharonim who focus on the "Chutz Mimitzvah achas" problem don't passel limafreia if that wasn't stated explicitly.
They are megaleh panim batorah shelo kehalacha in order to limit the number of conversions. Truth be told, being in Yehupitz, I do understand the goal. But their method is dishonest. They want to take thousands of people who are Jewish al pi halacha, many of whom are TOTALLY frum pshuto k'mashmao, and declare them goyim.
shame.
Reb Nochum is an landesman of mine - a talmid, as a youngster of Rav Aron Soloveichik. I can assure you that were Rav Aron alive today Nochum would be read the riot act.
From what I've heard there are calls from the left to dismantle the Rabbanut, a most unfortunate but now understandable outcome.
Short of that Adderabbi, what can be done?
we can fight fire with fire. publish our own defenses and polemics. davka not acquiesce to certain chumras, even if it means b'davka going le-kula, like the prushim would davka be metamei the person who shechted the parah adumah le-hotzee mi-liban shel tzedukim.
It sounds like this is a similar tactic to the organization(s) which is/are always yelling and screaming about Jewish graves being desecrated. In Prague the local Chief Rabbi came to an agreement with a insurance company that was building a building about dealing with some Jewish graves that were found and suddenly people from England starting demonstrating in Prague against the building, even though the Chief Rabbi found a solution with which he was satisfied. I also remember that in Pisgat Zeev in North Jerusalem there was a problem with potentially Jewish graves and Rav Elyashiv came to an agreement with the municipality and one of these groups ignored Rav Elyashiv and kept on demonstrating and vandalizing construction equipment. I think that these groups feed off of legitimacy which is granted to them by people, both willingly and sometimes unwillingly.
So what should we do? Find a kula and hold by it "to show them?". Okay, I'll stop using Salt AND Vinegar to check lettuce, but I might just lose my job.
Which one?
Also, the idea that we'd use religion for political means seems "dirty" to me.
Oh, thanks for fixing my mistake.
MM - difference is, the rabbanut is consulting w/ this group.
like so many in america who had moms with conservative converstions and then underwent otrhodox ones (unfortunatly american othodox ones)...i share personnaly in the plight.
keep fighting for us.
George
Is there any requirement in Halacha that one Beit Din is REQUIRED to recognize the conversion of another Beit Din?
The fact is that - for better or worse - the Rabbanut is the body entrusted in israel with 1) providing marriage and divorce services for Jews and 2) for converting non-Jews to Jews. This is enshrined in Israeli Law. The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled countless times that the Interior Ministry is obligated by law to register as Jewish, even those converted abroad in conversions not recognized by the Rabbanut as valid. However, by law, they cannot order the Rabbanut to recognize them as Jewish as far as marriage goes, and the Rabbanut will not marry those people they do not consider Jewish.
While, I might (and probably do) agree with much of what you wrote, I have to take offense at your suggested methodology. The Rabbanut in Israel is a statutory body. The law defines what they can and can't do (as recently expounded by the Suprem Court in the decision restricting their jurisdiction on monetary matters). The only way to come change what they can and can't do is to come to Israel, live here, vote and seek to change the legislation.
As an aside I want to add that I have come across situations whereby batei din in the UK did NOT recognize orthodox conversions done in the USA. The way to change that is to move to England and become a dues paying member of the United Synagogue, which is also a statutory body under UK law.
I'm not suggesting that a gemeindschaft approach is neceesarily the best one - and I firmly believe that in certain circumstances (including many issues in Israel today) an austritt is what is called for. However, the reality is that even if the Rabbanut is "called to order" on this, it will probably lead to the establishment of "private" megillot yuchsin and nothing will have been accomplished. I think that the left-wing of the MO RCA inherently knows this and that is why they will agree to limit the number of Rabbis who can convert under their auspices.
First, the ruling isn't about the RCA or RCA sanctioned geirus. Rather, it's about the MEMBERSHIP of the RCA. It's saying that being a member does not guarantee that one's geirus is as they pasqen. It's most likely a slap at YCT, if any institution.
Second, I do not think that one wants to defend the practices of the more leftward MO by invoking the concept of bedi'eved. (Okay, we know it's supposed to be bedi'avad, but I'm talking jargon, not Aramaic.) Do you really mean to imply that institutions like YCT can't be denigrated because to do so would be to eliminate bedi'eved? Are they bedi'eved? If so, you've handed over half the battle.
Sorry:
If you say they're pasqening lechat-chilah based on what's okay bedi'eved, you've handed over the entire battle.
Since when are we talking about YCT? Looks like someone's trying to deflect both blame and victimhood here.
If you say they're pasqening lechat-chilah based on what's okay bedi'eved, you've handed over the entire battle.
I don't want this to sound snippy, but Micha's point assumes no cost to klal yisrael from adopting the (superficially) more machmir shitos. In truth, we're choosing between bedi'eveds (there's a painful colloquialism).
>They want to take thousands of people who are Jewish al pi halacha, many of whom are TOTALLY frum pshuto k'mashmao, and declare them goyim.
What's outrageous is that they have no authority whatsoever to do so. Once someone is a ger ke-halakha then they are Jewish, and no chnyak can make them a goy any more than one can make the chnyak a goy.
It's a power play, nothing more, nothing less. Of course a cynic would say this is blowback to the MO rabbis who certainly had no problem when the rabbanut wouldn't accept non-O conversions.
BB wrote:
Is there any requirement in Halacha that one Beit Din is REQUIRED to recognize the conversion of another Beit Din?
There's a Halakhic requirement to recognize a Jew as a Jew. There is also a Halakhic requirement not to oppress a Ger.
Micha and BB - nobody is disputing the right of the Rabbanut to set standards for the acceptance of converts. The issue here is the 'guilty until proven innocent' attitude, the wholesale dismissal of the American MO Rabbinate by a group of zealots trying to monopolize conversions according to their own interpretations. It's saying that a member of the RCA has no 'chezkas kashrus'. Dem's fightin' words.
The lechatchila bediavad question is very important here. The Rabbanut's job is to decide the status of these people. Are they Jewish or not. There is definitely a concern about conversions being done too quickly or for the wrong reason, or worse, but raising awareness of this is not the Rabbanut's mandate. It this Vaad would concern itself with that, and that alone - great. But this is very different. It's saying that a bediavad gerus is no gerus. That's not a halakhic decision but a punitive public policy decision, which i am loath to see in the hands of the likes of Nachum Eisenstein. I hope that clarifies.
I had to deal with a case in which a Jew in a community I am familiar with was denied admission to a frum school because of this very issue (WRT the mother's Orthodox conversion.) When I confronted the principal of the school, he told me he asked a shaila but refused to disclose the identity of the poseik. I then approached R. Weinberg z'l and told him of the details. His face turned beet-red and he practically yelled, "Of course he won't tell you the name of the poseik. Because if I knew who it was, I would make sure that the poseik would never be asked a shaila ever AGAIN!"
Sof maaseh: Turned out the shaila was phrased dishonestly.
Several of the articles linked talked about "standards" and yet not a one of them actually says what those standards are. As a convert it is very frustrating as I cannot find out what these "standards" are that I am to be held to. Nor is there an easy way for me to find out whether my conversion was kosher per x, y, or z.
When I was converting I would have loved to be able to get my hands on "approved beit dins" that are universally accepted - but no such thing exists. There are a few rabbis that have "short lists" but most are unwilling to release those list so that converts would be able to make sure that they did not become a pawn in a political war.
Rabbi Ohana may not have known a word of English, but so what? What he did, when the Rabbanut received a request to recognize a giyur and the rabbis officiating were unkown to them, was to call a rabbi who *was* known to and trusted by the Rabbanut and ask about the bona fides of the converting Beit Din.
> They want to take thousands of people
> who are Jewish al pi halacha, many of
> whom are TOTALLY frum pshuto
> k'mashmao, and declare them goyim.
Including my wife and son. My wife had to undergo an extra tevila for gerut lechumra becuase of documentation issues with my m-i-l's giyyur. Now the Rabbanut says my wife and son are not Jewish. I am this close to abandoning frumkeit because of this.
given that YCT musmakhim are not yet members of the RCA I find it hard to believe this is aimed at YCT.
This is aimed at mainstream (note, not Modern) orthodoxy, since many RCA members would deny that they are Modern Orthodox in any way. This is just a giant tzitzit check against the left and center of Orthodoxy.
I find the whole thing somewhat silly, but I guess we now know what the Conservative and Reform members feel like. Of course, it's worse, in a way, for us, since we think we're playing the same ball game as the chareidim, albeit in jeans and kippot srugot, instead of frock coats and black hats. This is a warning sign that they don't see us as any different than the non-Orthodox.
Hmm..
I wonder whether there's any significance to Rav Nachum's connection to Rabbinical politics (and power struggles) in Chicago and this slight to to Rav Gedaliah Schwartz.
Just wondering.
anonymous frum person:
Please don't blame Ha-Kaddosh Baruch Hu for the actions of these people-He allows bechira.
A talmid chacham of the old formerly common type with a Centrist orientation and with a strong secular education reminded me a fews years ago that the pendulum of left to right orientation swings both ways and with time matters will return to a more balanced position. If we remember the Jewish History is a long progression, this craziness won't last- there's a self-balancing mechanism in Jewish history. I already see signs of this as a few chareidi people begin to realize that they need a secular education for parnasah. Meanwhile lo alman Yisrael- we have other reliable balanced talmidei chachamim and we can quietly ignore the others despite their momentary popularity.
Be-hatzlacha
afp - though i don't feel that my frumkeit is challenged by this mess, i will say that it shakes my faith more profoundly than anything that paleontology or literary criticism can throw.
Hold on a second. They are NOT invalidating all these conversions. All they are saying is that the RCA's Ishur may no longer be enough. Not that it's no good. Just that they might require more investigation.
Not pleasant, but not the R-C-like treatment that would be a disaster.
Right?
I think they should ban all conversions from the Rabbinical Alliance (Iggud) which is directed by the swindler Gershon Tannenbaum of the Jewish Press. Why have the chief Rabbis been dealing with a swindler like him???
Considering these douchebags have been given a monopoly on Judaism in Israel, its no wonder there's an anti-religous sentiment among Israelis
Much of the discussion misses the point.
Bedi-eved, a giyur is valid if done with kabbolas hamitzves in front of three kosher dayyonem (dayyen not = guy with yoden-yoden smiche).
Most assumed giyurem aren't kosher because there's no sincere acceptance of the mitzves. (It's a major mistake to think that if they fooled the rabbis, it's kosher bedi-eved. Also, a conversion for the purpose of marriage is indeed valid after the fact, but only if this unkosher motivation led to the acceptance of the mitzves.)
Now, if cases of obviously invalid "conversions" accumulate with a given rabbis, he might lose his credibility. It's a matter to be judged by poskem if it plays a rôle if the rabbi did so naďvely, negligently, or consciously, for example out of some political conviction.
It's undisputable that geirem are not to be looked down at, but there's no law that asks us to praise non-Jews who claim or even think they're Jews. Anyway, it seems to me most cases of unpleasant behaviour towards such people isn't in mistreating geirem but in doubting their kashres. That's a big difference, even if this doubt is hurting or annoying the victim.
Interesting take on this issue. Nochum Eisenstein was one of my contemporaries at HTC. He and his twin brother Bernie, AH, were both Kano'im in everything they did back then. Rav Nochum Eisenstein has not changed at all it seems, and is a bigger Kanoi than ever. In fact without knowing for cwetain, I suspect that he had no small part in the "murder" (character assisination) of two innocent people who by all accounts were just trying to serve God the best way they knew how, Rabbi Nosson Kaminetsky and Rabbi Nosson Slifkin. Rav Eisenstein who is Rav Elyashiv's right hand man (as I understand it) does not serve his mentor well. Although I am certain that he beleives he acts L'Shem Shamayim, in my view he abuses his position. What he deems a Kiddush HaShem has largely turned into a Chilul HaShem in my view. It has caused tremendous damage to the honor of Torah.
Harry, I think you are being irrational. Criticising someone publicly for things you "suspect" takes away any moral authority that your original indignation has.
I like you and your blog, but you have perceived that there was an attack on Rabbi Schwartz, and suddenly lose your cool.
harry - i was going to post about similar roots of this issue and the slifkin issue. i do believe that they are products of the same worldview.
Rav Schachter from YU was at the Eternal Jewish Family Program conference in Florida.
They admit it here.
A rabbi at NIRC once asked R Elya Svei why he fought the MO so strongly. The reply was that he wanted to keep the M aspects of MO from being accepted as acceptable mores. When asked to provide examples, the only one he gave al regel achas was of a feminist nature.
The Chareidi kanoi askan-ship has probably always been biding its time for the right opportunity to push the envelope and render aspects of MO as being beyond the pale of acceptability, something R Aharon Kotler hoped for. It seems that the past couple of years has seen them succeed in a few areas.
steg - so what?
I guess i just overimagined what you meant by They played a strong role in the recent “Eternal Jewish Family” conference in Florida.
Harry, I think you are being irrational. Criticising someone publicly for things you "suspect" takes away any moral authority that your original indignation has.
I like you and your blog, but you have perceived that there was an attack on Rabbi Schwartz, and suddenly lose your cool.
My suspicion is based on more than speculation. I remeber him well from our time at HTC. He was a Kanoi then and had little respect for his own Yeshiva and did his own thing. He had an aura of smugness about him. I have been told by those who have encountered him recently that he still has the same aura about him.
Also I do not say that he is an evil person. I truly believe that he thinks that he is acting L'Shem Shamayim and that he reflects the views of R. Elyashiv. I'm sure for the most part he does refelct those views. But not 100% of the time as he thinks he does.
afp - though i don't feel that my frumkeit is challenged by this mess, i will say that it shakes my faith more profoundly than anything that paleontology or literary criticism can throw.
adderabbi | Homepage | 05.09.06 - 2:42 pm | #
I fail to see why. You're completely ignoring the fact that it has always been within the purview of every local beis din/rabbinate to determine who can marry and who can't. The only reason you're all foaming is that the Rabbanut HaRashait LeYisrael has done this and not the United Synagogue of London and the Commonwealth or the Edah Haredit. This is b/c the Rabbanut HaRashit represents the largest body of Jews in the world and you're all citizens of Israel in potentia. However, as long as the Rabbanut acts within the mandate afforded them by Israeli Law (and even with all the chipping away the Supreme Court has done - some of which indeed twists the letter of the law to the SC's favor in mitigating the rabbanut's authorities) there is nothing you can do other than moving here and voting. As it should be. And frankly, even though I am opposed to the policies of the Rabbanut and am upset that it has been taken over by Haredi elements, well that's the political system and they used their political power to get their way. When the moderates get the sense to approve civil marriages in Israel all of this will end anyhow, as even religious people will take advanatage of this solution (actually even Haredim will - there was a case recently of an underage Haredi couple that applied for marraige permits at an age that required family courrt approval. The court refused and the parents took the kids to Cyprus to get a marriage certificate)
Frankly, as a Beit Din and a large one at that, the Rabbanut should assert its authority in these matters. Why should they automatically accept conversions performed by the next Marc Gafni?
Harry, I have looked into it and in fact, he was involded in the Slifkin affair. He was not involved to the same extent, in the banning of Making of a Godol.
BB - you think that the Rabbanut's decision-making process is democratic? HAH! What has my vote got to do w/ ANYTHING?
Again the issue is not having a standard, but the wholesale assumption that American Rabbis are guilty until proven innocent (a standard which R' Elyashiv's boys had no problem reversing for Yonah Metzger).
And my issue is not with the Rabbanut, though it certainly is corrupt. the issue is raising awareness that there's a group that's actively trying to disenfranchise american Modern Orthodoxy. Are they entitiled to? Let's say yes. And am i entitled to expose them, shout their agenda from the rooftops, and encourage a response? Again, yes. And am i entitled to withhold my donations from institutions which promote this type of zealotry? Again, yes.
turn it into a 'democracy' issue? I don't think you're that naive.
btw - steg - as it turned out, RHS did not attend the conference. He gave one shiur there, which was video-linked. His halakhic positions, and, to a large degree, those of r' reuven feinstein (i.e., the two bona-fide gedolim involved in the conference), were marginalized, and those espoused by Rabbis Eisenstein, Tropper, and Ehrentrau given center stage.
the Canonist (http://www.canonist.com/?p=763#more-763) interviews r' tropper, who makes it sounds like there was agreement and bipartisanship, but what did you expect from the conference chair being interviewed by a blog with an overwhelmingly MO audience.
>A rabbi at NIRC once asked R Elya Svei why he fought the MO so strongly. The reply was that he wanted to keep the M aspects of MO from being accepted as acceptable mores. When asked to provide examples, the only one he gave al regel achas was of a feminist nature.
Interesting. That only began, really, around 1970. What was the problem before then?
There's an interesting parallel to the situation, especially in Europe, of private NGOs being given a major say in government regulations. It's undemocratic and unaccountable. Just pointing it out.
Harry, I'd say he serves his rebbe all too well.
While there may be truth to the question of marginilization of the MO rabbinate no one here is discussing the case as presented in the yated. If those facts are taken as true it should not be unreasonable to question the geirus of that rabbi.
As mentioned before and no one responded geirus for marriage is kosher b'dieved but as I learned in YU semicha kabbolas ol mitvos is required and if a short time after (I believe the amount given was 1-2 months acc. to R Moshe) the conversion they are not keeping the mitzvos it is retroactively not valid.
In the case in yated (which they might have chosen b/c it was the most extreme) ther were a lot of fishy circumstances that happened that caused them to investigate. based on there conclusion with no one ever saying this person tried to keep mitzvos they doubted a member of the rca with a prominent shul, in which case it is totally logical to rule that membership in the RCA is not an automatic stamp of approval. Which as as someone who was in YU semicha and knows some of the people in it is not surprising. Based on comments from R Schachter about YU semicha I think he might very well agree that not everyone who gets YU semicha should be doing geirus without guidance.
Since almost every geirus has 3 rabbis involved (even though hedyotot can make up the beit din according to the halacha), it seems that the idea that nobody can do geirus without guidance or at least cooperation. If all 3 of the rabbis on a giyur are 1 or 2 years out of semicha, they should probably be examined no matter whether they are in the RCA, the Agudah, or in Bnei Brak. But here we're talking about doubting giyur and certification from older, much more experienced rabbis. I know that if I did a giyur I would want to make sure that the other 2 rabbis on the beit din are older and more well-established than I am.
Hmm...
As for this chevrah's connection to the hit job on Slifkin, wasn't Leib Tropper a part of that as well?
SDD - i think GH has written about Tropper's involvement in the Slifkin business. It seems that this is the same war, but just a different battle.
Former YU - i agree with you that if (and that's a big if) the Yated article is factually correct, then that giyur is problematic. to take it as a rayusa on the chezkas kashrus of every MO Rabbi in America, guilt by association, if you will, is both unfair and untrue.
Compare this case to those of Rabbis Metzger and Tendler, and the selective application of the 'dan le-kaf zechus' principle by the VERY SAME PEOPLE becomes all the more disturbing.
pretty sad ad hominem attacks...I had no familiarity with this issue at all, and so read the links thoughtfully provided about the horrible Rabbi Eisenstein who had the temerity to "take on" Rabbi Sacks...Eisenstein's remarks in that link seem to be pretty valid...who told Rabbi Sacks to ignore decades of precedent within his own organization? If Sacks doesn't like the policies, he should either work to change them, or make a new org... not ignore them. Then I went to the link provided to the Florida confernece...in attendance were Rabbi schachter of YU, the Sefardic Chief Rabbi of Israel...it seems to me that the obnoxious actions are the ones taken by those with axes to grind, specifically adderabbi...
sandman,
what provoked the attacks on the orthodoxy of Rabbi Riskin and Rabbi Goldin?
While I agree that it seems harsh to then challenge the entire RCA, the rabbi mentioned has a fairly prominent shul and it makes sense to not take membership in the organization as sufficient. They did not say that RCA rabbis aren't excepted just that it is not an automatic approval and based on the case (assuming the facts as presented are true, and we know there are always 2 sides) RCA rabbis cannot be automatically trusted. T Therfore when there are warning signs like in this case it makes sense to research, as well as insure guidelines that other cases don't have similar problems. so despite the fact that it sets a dangerous tone there migth be merit to the action. In addition in chareidi circles it would be hard pressed to find a similar rabbinic umbrella organization (excluding agudah shul rabbis which is much smaller) and therefore individual rabbis not going through the standard city beis din would already be checked.
Only in the modern world is there an organization that wants to vouch for 1000 rabbis at once, which seems highly presumptous. It would be surprising if all those rabbis really are qualified (one would hope that only qualified ones do geirus, but I would not be surprised if that wasn't accurate either.)
Sandman, don't post without reading.
nhattan in a very famous Synagogue had a conveted woman gave birth to a baby and the briss was taking place on the the last days of pessach. They set briss for the afternoon for the reason that the father of the baby (israeli jew) had to come back from work on yom tov! This is called "commitment" "bedieved" to observe torah and mitzvot?? This is what you call "bedieved"? Aree these kinds most of the "bedieved" conversions performed by your rabbis?
See Reb Moshe Feinstein where he cites in tshvuot that when there is an "umdenoh dmuchach" that there was no kabbolas hamitzvot it is retroactively invalidated! (small teshuva YD 157).
See also another teshuva of his where he said how unhappy he was from the conversions in america...
Instead of attacking the messenger see if you can fix the message. See that the converts under your auspices have basic commitments to keep basic shabbos (not even talking about not talking on thephone or elevator, but not driving etc.), see if they are willing sincerely to send their kids to yeshivas, make a survey what actually happens with those converts....see if you have done a service to klal yisroel by bringing converts who do not keep mikveh laws (i'm talking basics!) and then attack the messenger. ADDERABOH!
Its time for the Secular Jews in Israel and the Diaspora to stop implicitly acknowledging thelegitimacy of the haredi. They are to Judiasm what Jim Jones, Jerry Falwell and Pater Robertson are to Christianity/
The "Israeli Jew" is not a convert; his wife is. What makes you certain the she is not shomer mitzvot? Or that her husband, the Israeli, was not shomer hag one day rather than two? Perhaps he lives in Israel some of the year? If so, some poskim hold he does not need to keep second days.
As fro the rest of this, in my opinion, AddeRabbi is correct. I know of an incident where a MO rabbi of a town, a man there for 30 years with yadin yadin, was ***NOT*** on the Rabbinut's approved list, but the newly-arrived very young haredi rabbi was. This haredi rabbi had no practical experience of note before taking this particular pulpit. Now why would that be?
I should add that, after discovering that his conversion were not accepted, the MO rabbi went to the Rabbinut and threw a very large fit. He got on the list.
But this was under Rabbi Ohana, who, in my experience, tried to be fair (at least when challenged). The same cannot be said for Rabbi Krispel.
shmarya - i also had to throw a fit by ohana once, and it worked. a test that i took had been misgraded; i got a 22 and my chavrusa got a 91. hardly plausible. i had it regraded and it was found to be a passing grade (high 70s, i believe).
"However, according to accepted procedure, the affidavits of the RCA require additional examination.
"From the first examination of the certificate, it became clear that the conversion was made for the purpose of marriage, and such types of converts are not to be accepted according to the halocho. Therefore, at the outset, doubts regarding the credibility of the letter of the av beis din of the RCA, who had written that all had been done kedas ukedin, began to emerge. It also became clear that there was a problem about the date of the conversion. What's so problematic about the date? The wedding took place on the 4th of Kislev. However, when a female convert marries, the halocho stipulates that she must wait 91 days from the date of her conversion until her wedding. In this case, the three month waiting span hadn't been maintained."
Some actual real poskim hold that prenency tests remove the need to wait the full 91 days.
Further, poskim also hold that – when the couple cannot be separated, it is better to do the conversion if possible so the children will be Jews.
Obviously, the Yated and its chevra disagree with both these decisions. I would assume that Rabbi Elyashiv disagrees as well, and that he is the driving force behind this.
nachum - I have now gone through every one of the links provided...it seems to me that membership in any organization, whether it be Aguda, the RCA, or anything else, is not a sufficient reason to accept anything the member does, whether it be on the subject of conversions, kashrut, or anything else...if there are clear guidelines on what is an acceptable conversion, and it is clear that the Orthodox rabbi - modern or otherwise - follows those guidleines, then his conversion should be accepted... saying that someone makes 'obnoxious' statements is a very vague and subjective way of discrediting someone, as is accusing the person of writing false credentials...the issue has to stand on its own merits, pro or con, without invective...are there any standards? Is there a system? Does it work? From adderabbi's own comments (throwing a fit to get accepted, etc) and others, it would seem that the entire process needs review --
Commenting by HaloScan
