prohibit, lehatkhilah(ab initio) the acceptance of converts for the purpose of marriage".*® Breish wrote to the Chief Rabbi of Eretz Yisrael, Isaac Herzog , requesting his support for the struggle of the Orthodox Community of Switzerland against conversion. Breisch published Herzog ’s 1947 responsum which fully justified milhemet Hashem(God 's war) waged by Breisch and his Agudat Harabanim against conversion in Switzerland . Herzog spares no halakhic argument in opposing conversion for the sake of marriage:
"Although the halakhah has determined that those who converted for ulterior motives and not for the sake of Heaven, are nevertheless proselytes post factum, I have a compelling reason to claim that this is not the law today. In the past, almost every Jew was constrained to observe the mitzvot, otherwise he would be rejected and held in contempt. This social situation strengthened the assumption that the gentile who has come to convert to Judaism , was truly resolved to kept the Shabbat , etc...but today the situation is different and it is possible to be a Jewish leader, while desecrating the Shabbat and eating forbidden foods in public. Therefore, how can we make the assumption that the gentile has resolved, even if only at the time of conversion, to observe Judaism ? This is especially so, when the overwhelming majority, and perhaps all proselytes of this ilk, do not even begin to keep the fundamentals of our religion."
Here we see an extremist view of conversion. Herzog is willing to re-interpret a lenient Talmudic ruling to justify the exclusion of prospective converts. David Ellenson analyzes the decisor’s motivation as well as the sociological background of this responsum:
"Herzog clearly viewed conversion in cases such as this as causing intermarriage rather than regarding them as a
92