Editing Conversion to Judaism (section)

==Attempts to resolve the "Who is a Jew?" issue==
{{Main|Who is a Jew?}}

===1950s: proposed joint beth din===
In the 1950s Rabbi [[Joseph Soloveitchik]] and other members of the [[Rabbinical Council of America]] engaged in a series of private negotiations with the leaders of Conservative Judaism's [[Rabbinical Assembly]], including [[Saul Lieberman]]; their goal was to create a joint Orthodox-Conservative national beth din for all Jews in the United States. It would create communal standards of marriage and divorce. It was to be modeled after the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, where all the judges would have been Orthodox, while it would have been accepted by the larger Conservative movement as legitimate. Conservative rabbis in the Rabbinical Assembly created a ''Joint Conference on Jewish Law'', devoting a year to this effort.{{Citation needed|date=May 2009}}

For a number of reasons, the project did not succeed. According to Orthodox Rabbi Louis Bernstein, the major reason for its failure was the Orthodox rabbis' insistence that the Conservative Rabbinical Assembly agree to expel Conservative rabbis for actions they took prior to the formation of the new beth din, and the RA refused to do so.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Bernstein|first=Louis|title=The Emergence of the English Speaking Orthodox Rabbinate|publisher=Yeshiva University|year=1977}}</ref> According to Orthodox Rabbi [[Emanuel Rackman]], former president of the RCA, the major reason for its failure was pressure from [[haredi]] Orthodox rabbis, who held that any cooperation between Orthodoxy and Conservatism was forbidden. In 1956, Rabbi [[Harry Halpern]], of the ''Joint Conference'' wrote a report on the demise of this beth din. He writes that negotiations between the Orthodox and Conservative denominations were completed and agreed upon, but then a new requirement was demanded by the RCA: The RA must "impose severe sanctions" upon Conservative rabbis for actions they took before this new beth din was formed. Halpern writes that the RA "could not assent to rigorously disciplining our members at the behest of an outside group." He goes on to write that although subsequent efforts were made to cooperate with the Orthodox, a letter from eleven [[Rosh yeshiva|Rosh Yeshivas]] was circulated declaring that Orthodox rabbis are forbidden to cooperate with Conservative rabbis.<ref>Proceedings of the CJLS of the Conservative Movement 1927–1970 Vol. II, p.850-852.</ref>

===1978–1983: Denver program, patrilineal descent ===
In [[Denver]], Colorado, a joint Orthodox, Traditional, Conservative and Reform Bet Din was formed to promote uniform standards for conversion to Judaism. A number of rabbis were Orthodox and had ''semicha'' from Orthodox yeshivas, but were serving in synagogues without a [[mechitza]]; these synagogues were called ''traditional Judaism''. Over a five-year period they performed some 750 conversions to Judaism. However, in 1983 the joint Beth Din was dissolved, due to the unilateral American Reform Jewish decision to change the definition of Jewishness:<ref name="Wertheimer, A People Divided">{{Cite book|last=Wertheimer|first=Jack|title=A People Divided: Judaism in Contemporary America|publisher=University Press of New England|year=1997}}</ref>

{{Blockquote|text=The move was precipitated by the resolution on patrilineality adopted that year by the Central Conference of American Rabbis. This decision to redefine Jewish identity, as well as the designation of Denver as a pilot community for a new Reform out reach effort to recruit converts, convinced the Traditional and Conservative rabbis that they could no longer participate in the joint board...the national decision of the Reform rabbinate placed the Traditional and Conservative rabbis in an untenable position. They could not cooperate in a conversion program with rabbis who held so different a conception of Jewish identity. And furthermore, they could not supervise conversions that would occur with increasing frequency due to a Reform outreach effort that was inconsistent with their own understanding of how to relate to potential proselytes.|author=Wertheimer|source=A People Divided<ref name="Wertheimer, A People Divided" />}}

Specifically, in 1983, the [[Central Conference of American Rabbis]] passed a resolution waiving the need for formal conversion for anyone with at least one Jewish parent who has made affirmative acts of Jewish identity. This departed from the traditional position requiring formal conversion to Judaism for children without a [[matrilineal descent|Jewish mother]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/reform-movement-s-resolution-on-patrilineal-descent-march-1983|title=Reform Movement's Resolution on Patrilineal Descent (March 1983)|website=www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org}}</ref> The 1983 resolution of the American Reform movement has had a mixed reception in Reform Jewish communities outside of the United States. Most notably, the [[Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism]] has rejected patrilineal descent and requires formal conversion for anyone without a Jewish mother.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=840313&ct=1051515|title=The Establishment of Reform Judaism in Israel|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304114546/http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=840313&ct=1051515|archive-date=4 March 2016}}</ref> However, in 2015 the majority of Britain's Assembly of Reform Rabbis voted in favor of a position paper proposing "that individuals who live a Jewish life, and who are patrilineally Jewish, can be welcomed into the Jewish community and confirmed as Jewish through an individual process."<ref name="jpost1">{{cite web|last=Lewis |first=Jerry |url=http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/UK-Reform-rabbis-accept-patrilineal-descent-409298 |title=UK Reform rabbis accept patrilineal descent - Diaspora - Jerusalem Post |date=17 July 2015 |publisher=Jpost.com |access-date=2015-07-19}}</ref> Britain's Assembly of Reform Rabbis stated that rabbis "would be able to take local decisions – ratified by the [[Beit Din]] – confirming Jewish status."<ref name="jpost1"/>

The end of the joint Beth Din program was welcomed by Haredi Orthodox groups, who saw the program as illegitimate. Further, Haredi groups attempted to prevent non-Orthodox rabbis from following the traditional requirements of converts using a ''mikveh''. In the Haredi view, it is better to have no conversion at all than a non-Orthodox conversion, as all non-Orthodox conversions are not true conversions at all according to them.<ref>''Fifth Anniversary of the Mikveh of East Denver'', Hillel Goldberg</ref>

===1980s: proposed Israeli joint ''beth din''===
In the 1980s Modern Orthodox Rabbi [[Norman Lamm]], Rosh Yeshiva of [[Yeshiva University]], along with other American and Israeli Orthodox rabbis, worked with Conservative and Reform rabbis to come up with solution to the "Who is a Jew?" issue. In 1989 and 1990 Israeli Prime Minister [[Yitzhak Shamir]] spearheaded an effort to find a way to resolve the impasse.{{Citation needed|date=May 2009}}

A plan was developed by Israeli Cabinet Secretary [[Elyakim Rubenstein]], who negotiated secretly for many months with rabbis from Conservative, Reform and Orthodox Judaism, including faculty at Yeshiva University, with Lamm as ''Rosh Yeshiva''. They were planning to create a joint panel that interviewed people who were converting to Judaism and considering making ''aliyah'' (moving to the State of Israel), and would refer them to a beth din that would convert the candidate following traditional halakha. All negotiating parties came to agreement:{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}}
# Conversions must be carried out according to halakha
# the ''beth din'' (rabbinic court) overseeing the conversion would be Orthodox, perhaps appointed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, and
# there would be three-way dialogue throughout the process.

Many Reform rabbis took offense at the notion that the ''beth din'' must be strictly halakhic and Orthodox, but they acquiesced. However, when word about this project became public, a number of leading haredi rabbis issued a statement denouncing the project, condemning it as a "travesty of halakha". Rabbi Moshe Sherer, Chairman of Agudath Israel World Organization, stated that "Yes we played a role in putting an end to that farce, and I'm proud we did." Norman Lamm condemned this interference by Sherer, stating that this was "the most damaging thing that he [Sherer] ever did in his forty year career."<ref name="Landau">{{Cite book|last=Landau|first=David|title=Piety & Power|publisher=Hill & Wang|year=1993|page=320}}</ref>

Rabbi Lamm wanted this to be only the beginning of a solution to Jewish disunity. He stated that had this unified conversion plan not been destroyed, he wanted to extend this program to the area of halakhic Jewish divorces, thus ending the problem of ''mamzerut''.<ref name="Landau" />

===1987: Brichto proposal===
In 1987, American-born British rabbi, [[Sidney Brichto]], of the country's [[Liberal Judaism (United Kingdom)|Liberal Judaism]] movement, published widely-discussed proposals for a historic compromise between progressive streams of Judaism and [[Orthodox Judaism]]. He advocated for the Orthodox [[Beit Din]] to oversee contentious areas. In return, progressive rabbis would earn respect from the Orthodox rabbinate, a degree of recognition and a role in Beit Din processes concerning progressive Jewry.<ref name=one>{{cite news |last=Kleerekoper |first=Victor |date=26 February 1993 |url=https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/261664606?searchTerm=Perth%20Hebrew%20Congregation |title=Can we be one community? |newspaper=The Australian Jewish News |access-date=3 January 2025}}</ref> Brichto's proposals encouraged rabbi [[John Levi (rabbi)|John Levi]] to support such an initiative in [[Melbourne]].<ref name=one/>

Among Brichto's proposals, progressive streams of Judaism would stop processing their own conversions to Judaism.<ref name=jcohen/> Instead, their prospective converts would have their status conferred on them by an Orthodox Beit Din.<ref name=jcohen/> The Beit Din would be expected to show more leniency than usual, but only expecting that those before them demonstrate knowledge of Orthodox practice rather than observance.<ref name=jcohen>{{cite news |last=Cohen |first=Jeffrey |date=18 November 2008 |url=https://www.thejc.com/judaism/how-chief-rabbis-have-battled-against-reform-yy7ycrjz |title=How Chief Rabbis have battled against Reform |newspaper=The Jewish Chronicle |access-date=3 January 2025}}</ref>

The proposal was rejected by [[Immanuel Jakobovits, Baron Jakobovits]], then [[Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth]]. Jakobovits reasoned: "How can an Orthodox Beth Din validate a conversion without kabbalat mitzvot [acceptance of the commandments]?"<ref name=jcohen/>

However, in 1990, the Chief Rabbi-elect, [[Jonathan Sacks]] was more favourable to the proposal.<ref name=jcohen/> In a letter to Brichto, he wrote: "As soon as I read your article... I called it publicly 'the most courageous statement by a non-Orthodox Jew this century'. I felt it was a genuine way forward. Others turned out not to share my view." He continued: "It will be a while - 18 months - before I take up office. But I believe we can still explore that way forward together. For if we do not move forward, I fear greatly for our community and for Am Yisrael."<ref name=jcohen/>

===1997: Neeman Commission proposal===
In 1997 the issue of "Who is a Jew?" again arose in the [[State of Israel]], and Orthodox leaders such as Rabbi [[Norman Lamm]] publicly backed the Neeman commission, a group of Orthodox, Conservative and Reform rabbis working to develop joint programs for conversion to Judaism. In 1997 Lamm gave a speech at the World Council of Orthodox Leadership, in Glen Springs, New York, urging Orthodox Jews to support this effort:

{{Blockquote|text=Lamm told his listeners that they should value and encourage the efforts of non-Orthodox leaders to more seriously integrate traditional Jewish practices into the lives of their followers. They should welcome the creation of Reform and Conservative day schools and not see them as a threat to their own, Lamm said. In many communities, Orthodox day schools, or Orthodox-oriented community day schools, have large numbers of students from non-Orthodox families. The liberal movements should be appreciated and encouraged because they are doing something Jewish, even if it is not the way that Orthodox Jews would like them to, he said. "What they are doing is something, and something is better than nothing," he said in his speech. "I'm very openly attacking the notion that we sometimes find in the Orthodox community that 'being a goy is better{{'"}} than being a non-Orthodox Jew, he said in an interview.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Orthodox leader speaks out on Jewish unity, breaking long silence|last=Nussbaum Cohen|first=Debra|date=5 December 1997|publisher=Jewish Telegraphic Agency}}</ref>}}The committee recommended the establishment of a joint institute for Jewish studies, which would be a joint effort by all three streams of Judaism. The committee also recommended that conversion proceedings themselves be held in special conversion courts, to be recognized by all denominations in Judaism. The purpose of the proposal was to prevent a rift in the Jewish people, while at the same time bringing about a state-sponsored arrangement for conversion. On 7 September 1998, the government adopted the Ne'eman Commission Report.

A year later, the Joint Institute for Jewish Studies was established, and since then it has been the official state operator of conversion courses in Israel, including the military conversion courses. In 2015 the institute's name was changed to Nativ – The National Center for Jewish Studies, Identity and Conversion.

===Conversion annulments===
A recent development has been the idea of annulling conversions to Judaism, sometimes many years after they have taken place, due to a reduction in religious observance or change of community by the convert. [[Chuck Davidson]], a Modern Orthodox expert on this conversion crisis explains "From the Middle Ages onwards, the greatest of the rabbis wrote explicitly that even if immediately after the conversion the convert goes off to worship idols, the person is still considered Jewish."<ref name="timesofisrael.com">{{cite news|first=Amanda |last=Borschel-Dan |title=Top court backs rabbis who revoked conversion over secular lifestyle: Israeli justices decide rabbis had the right to cancel Yonit Erez's conversion two years after she became Jewish|date= 18 December 2014|work=[[The Times of Israel]]|url= http://www.timesofisrael.com/top-court-backs-rabbis-who-revoked-conversion-over-secular-lifestyle/}}</ref> The justification given for the change in approach is that the original conversion must never have been valid in the first place as it is clear from the convert's subsequent actions they were insincere at the time of conversion.

A situation of confusion in Jewish identity in Israel was made worse when Haredi Rabbi [[Avraham Sherman]] of Israel's supreme religious court ({{lang|he|בית הדין הרבני הגדול}}) called into question the validity of over 40,000 Jewish conversions when he upheld a ruling by the Ashdod Rabbinical Court to retroactively annul the conversion of a woman who came before them because in their eyes she failed to observe Jewish law.<ref>{{cite web |title=A Tragic Annulment |first=David |last=Ellenson |work=The Jerusalem Report |date=September 2008 |url=http://huc.edu/news/08/8/A%20Tragic%20Annulment.pdf |access-date=2008-09-25 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100527181434/http://www.huc.edu/news/08/8/A%20Tragic%20Annulment.pdf |archive-date=27 May 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Cancelled Conversion |website=[[Center for Women's Justice]] |url=http://www.cwj.org.il/press/rivka-ynet-articles/cancelled-conversion |access-date=2011-09-24 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120324035026/http://www.cwj.org.il/press/rivka-ynet-articles/cancelled-conversion |archive-date=24 March 2012}}</ref>

This crisis deepened, when Israel's Rabbinate called into question the validity of soldiers who had undergone conversion in the army, meaning a soldier killed in action could not be buried according to Jewish law.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/israel/amar_calls_netanyahu_quash_military_conversion_bill |title=Amar Calls on Netanyahu to Quash Military Conversion Bill |publisher=The Jewish Week |date=1 December 2010 |access-date=2012-07-21 |archive-date=11 October 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161011024950/http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/israel/amar_calls_netanyahu_quash_military_conversion_bill  |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2010, the rabbinate created a further distrust in the conversion process when it began refusing to recognize orthodox converts from the United States as Jewish.<ref>{{cite web|last=Mandel |first=Jonah |url=http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=216218 |title='National religious rabbis ... JPost - Jewish World - Jewish News |date=6 January 2011 |publisher=Jpost.com |access-date=2012-07-21}}</ref> Indeed, the great-niece of the renowned Zionist [[Nahum Sokolow]] was recently deemed "not Jewish enough" to marry in Israel, after she failed to prove the matrilineal Jewish descent for four generations.<ref>{{cite news|work=[[Ha'aretz]]|title= Sokolow's niece not 'Jewish' enough to get married here|url= http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/sokolow-s-niece-not-jewish-enough-to-marry-here-1.304882}}</ref>

Following a scandal in which U.S. Rabbi [[Barry Freundel]] was arrested on charges of installing hidden cameras in a ''mikveh'' to film women converts undressing, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate said it would review the validity of all past conversions performed by Freundel, then quickly reversed its decision, clarifying that it was joining the Orthodox [[Rabbinical Council of America]] in affirming the validity of the conversions.<ref>{{cite web|work=[[Jewish Telegraphic Agency|JTA]] |title=Rabbi Freundel Conversions Are Valid, Israeli Chief Rabbinate Says|date= 21 October 2014|via= [[The Forward|Jewish Daily Forward]] |url=http://forward.com/articles/207698/rabbi-freundel-conversions-are-valid-israeli-chief/}}</ref>

In December 2014 an Israeli court decided that a conversion could be annulled. In his decision Justice Neal Hendel wrote: "Just as the civil court has the inalienable authority to reverse – in extremely rare cases – a final judgment, so too does the special religious conversion court. For otherwise, we would allow for judgments that are flawed from their inception to exist eternally."<ref name="timesofisrael.com"/>