The Chief Rabbinate; A Blessing or a Curse? part 4

Following the First World War, which also saw the Land of Israel come under the control of Great Britain under a mandate from the League of Nations, Rav Kook became Chief Ashkenazi rabbi of Jerusalem. He appealed to the leadership of the Zionist movement to establish a central, recognized rabbinate for the entire country. Many were opposed to Torah authority in general, let alone a State recognized rabbinate. (It must be remembered that in nearly all European countries, all clergy are government appointed and salaried). Using all his influence and prestige, a central rabbinate was established in 1921. There had long been a position of Rishon L'Tziyon (lit. First of Zion) which served as a sort of Chief Rabbinate, but without political standing. Almost all who occupied that position were Sepharadic. Now, the Rishon L'Tziyon became the Sepharadic Chief Rabbi of the country, together with Rav Kook as the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi. Israel has had two Chief Rabbis ever since. Shortly thereafter, he established his own Yeshiva and Seminary, called Mercaz HaRav. The name has a dual meaning. It can mean "The Rabbi's Center", or "the Center of the Many". Mercaz made a point of teaching all traditional ideas and practices, while leaving room for appreciating what the secularists were doing for the building of the Land. Whereas most "Moderrn Orthodox" types are somewhat wishy-washy, Mercaz was, and is, anything but. It has all the fervor of the Hasidim, the scholarship of the Lithuanians, the inclusion of Sepharadic teachings, while maintaining a strong Zionist identity. Rav Kook established very high standards for those seeking to be ordained rabbis. The breadth and depth of knowledge required to be ordained at the Chief Rabbinate, is exponentially greater than at any Yeshiva I know of. What did Rav Kook have to gain from these institutions? First of all, the acceptance of the idea of a Chief Rabbinate stamped Zionism with a Jewish spiritual identity, rather than just an ethnic, national one. This is analogous to visiting the home of a non-observant Jew, who nevertheless has a mezzuzah on his door. It is a statement. Secondly, as all legal rabbinical positions must go through the Chief Rabbinate, charlatanism became virtually impossible. Outside of Israel, many rabbis receive smichah (ordination) as a favor, or attend phony rabbinical programs (as little as two weeks training). These rabbis often get work, as the congregants are not equipped to judge their competency I shudder when I see videos of popular online rabbis, who stumble over Hebrew words and expressions, or who present superstitions as Judaism. In Israel, one cannot serve as a rabbi without being approved by one of the Chief Rabbis. To be rabbi of a city, one must be approved by both Chief Rabbis, as well as by at least three members of the Supreme Rabbinical Council of the Chief Rabbinate. Since they are completely in control of marriages and divorces for all Jews, the problem of offspring from forbidden unions, who, in many cases, are forbidden from marrying according to Torah law, is exceedingly rare. Rav Kook wanted all Jews to be able to marry all Jews. I t is perhaps the worst thing about being a rabbi in America. I sometimes have to tell a couple that they are not marriageable, by me or any other Orthodox rabbi, nor will any of their descendants be able to. Thanks to Rav Kook, this almost never happens in Israel. Criticisms of this system were many. Allowing secular authorities a say in who can and can't be a rabbi can be dangerous. The Chief Rabbis are chosen not by other rabbis, but by a government committee. More right leaning (religiously) rabbis who have difficulty with the institution of a government rabbinate, cannot legally be chosen as a rabbi by a community (Theoretically, he is subject to arrest and imprisonment, but this has never been enforced) The Chief Rabbinate became, in fact, the rabbinate of a small segment of Orthodox Jews in Israel; those who supported Rav Kook's ideology. Rav Kook's successor, Rabbi Herzog, wrote in his diary that he was very disappointed after Statehood had been achieved, that he was not invited to cabinet meetings to give the "Jewish view" on issues. To a large extent, the critics were right. The rabbinate was merely a fig leaf. But a fig leaf that was in a position to ensure the rights of the religious minority, in a society that was overwhelmingly hostile. I can never forget seeing on TV, a prominent Israeli journalist, who later went into politics, saying "Religious Jews are vermin, and need to be treated as such". That they are not so treated, is in no small measure due to the institution of the Chief Rabbinate. However, the sense of unity that was envisioned by Rav Kook, soon displayed cracks. That will be my next post.