All the wheeling and dealing around the selection of the final candidates for the positions of Chief Rabbis of Israel is precisely why the method of appointment needs to be changed. It needs to be removed from politics, and removed from the hands of the politicians. The politics involved, the negotiations, the smearing - none of that brings honor to the rabbis under consideration, nor to whichever rabbi will end up being chosen. At the end of the process it is the rabbis who had the "dirtiest" and more "ruthless" backers that will end up in the positions.
The negotiations and dealings and considerations for changing the law cause a situation where every day a different rabbi, generally one who is "connected" somehow, is named as the target beneficiary of the dealing, and never has it yet been discussed why this or that rabbi is more worthy than the others or more appropriate than the others for the position.
As I have said before, I believe that whichever candidate ends up getting the position will not affect most people directly in any way, except for maybe State policy regarding shmitta that is coming up soon. Just about everything else will stay the same. It is a shame to turn the selection of a rabbi, one who is supposed to represent the people and to be someone the people can proudly look up to, into a political selection totally devoid from values. Perhaps they really do deserve the lack of respect so many people have for the position.
Any chief rabbi candidate that would say he refuses to be a part of this dirty process is the one that is most deserving of the position. The rest of them, all those that are trying to benefit from the dirt being dealt, are the ones who should not be in the seat.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
Personally I think they need to pass the "Amar Law" as well. Not just because I think Rav Shlomo Amar has done a very good job and would like to see him serve another term. But because I think Term limits serve to force change when it isn't necessary.
ReplyDeleteWhy should a really good Rav be forced to step down(think Rav Lau) just because he has served ten years, to make way for a less qualified Rav(think Rav Metzger).
I have no problem with the idea of there not being a term limit (though I wish there was one in politics), or maybe it being set at 2 terms, but I do not think it is appropriate to change a law for a specific person. If the law is to be changed, in my opinion it should only apply after the coming term. it is practically anarchy and a dictatorship when the government passes a law every time it wants to benefit a specific person.
ReplyDeletehow would you recommend the chief rabbi to be chosen? if not by politicians then by whom? public elections? by other rabbis?
ReplyDeleteand why is this process any different that the choosing a president which is also a "political" process?
I dont know that the process of choosing the president is any better. rabbinics should be devoid of politics though. it just brings rabbinics into the gutter, which is not where it should be.
ReplyDeleteI dont know whats better. Maybe an elective body of rabbis and community leaders. Such an elective body already exists, but it is controlled by the politicians. It needs to be separated so that the position of chief rabbi doesnt just become a job a popular politician can give to a friend.
The desecration of the office was the dirty, back alley process that led to the appointment of Metzger. The desecration of the office was every day that Metzger served.
ReplyDeleteThis time we not only have candidates who are qualified from moral, learning, and leadership perspectives, but a process that is much more transparent.
Agreed. But, I don't think you went far enough... Post forthcoming.
ReplyDeleteAdd to my above comment,the desecration of the office was most of its Rabbinnic position being hijacked by Shas, to the detriment of the Clal, who would have benefitted from having local Rabbis who served the people rather than having Rabbis who sought only power and money for themselves.
ReplyDeleteHow can one underestimate the value of having a Sephardi Chief Rabbi not beholden to Shas?