Last week, Rabbi David Lau, the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel, weighed in on the relationship between the Jewish State’s political and religious leadership. At a conference in Eilat, Rabbi Lau urged Israel’s new justice minister, Ayelet Shaked, to confer with the Chief Rabbinate on all legislation.
“I call on the justice minister,” he said, “to establish that for every bill that the government submits, just as it seeks the professional opinion of relevant ministries on the matter, so, too, it should ask the Chief Rabbinate to present the Jewish and traditional position on the bill.”
The rabbinate’s aim, Rabbi Lau added, is “not to decide, but to give information, so that we will be conscious of the Jewish values of Hebrew law – so that we will be conscious of a Jewish bill for the Jewish state – and then the government can decide on it in a democratic way.”
Religious leaders wield significant power in Israel, especially when it comes to marriage and divorce, conversion, kashrut certification and burial. The religious parties, Jewish Home, Shas and United Torah Judaism, also hold a crucial position in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s razor-thin coalition. And yet, many Israelis would maintain that Rabbi Lau’s proposal is a bad idea, and that there must be a clear separation between state and religion.
Even so, Rabbi Lau’s idea is worthy of consideration, and it’s hard to see what the harm would be in adding the rabbinate into the legislative loop, especially given the chief rabbi’s clarification that leading rabbis are not seeking decision-making powers. Their input could be informative, so long as it doesn’t devolve into coercion.
But if the rabbis want to be involved in the process of lawmaking, perhaps there is an opportunity for lawmakers to wade into the rabbinate’s power, too. Professional opinion, after all, can go both ways, and there’s little doubt many members of Knesset, not to mention a large swath of Israelis, would welcome the chance to have their say about the manner in which the rabbinate operates.
Opposition to the rabbinate’s strictly Orthodox position has been mounting for years now. Israelis increasingly are demanding a more open and pluralistic religious leadership, one that embraces all Jewish denominations and adopts a modern approach to the key areas controlled by the rabbinate. And in recent weeks, those opposed to the rabbinate – and, more generally, the institutional control of Orthodoxy in Israel – appear to be making some headway.
Earlier this month, Israel’s attorney general, Yehuda Weinstein, cancelled fines levied against two restaurants in Jerusalem that had labelled themselves kosher even though they did not carry kashrut certification issued by the rabbinate. For the time being, restaurants that use non-rabbinate certification will not be allowed to advertise themselves as “kosher,” but Weinstein’s ruling opens up the possibility for new discussions about what the word should mean in Israel and potentially weakens the rabbinate’s power.
Religious and political leaders must work together in Israel – Rabbi Lau is correct about that. But it’s a two-way street. If the rabbinate wants to have its opinions heard on a larger scale, it’s only fair to demand that it respect the religious positions of non-Orthodox Israelis, too. — YONI