AMBIVALENCE IN PROSELYTISM
logical outcome of social conditions where Jews and gentiles socially interacted with one another. Hence he felt these conversions attenuated the strength of Judaism in the contemporary setting...
Herzog’s responsum obviously stands as a stringent interpretation of, and perhaps even expansion on, Jewish law in this field. It reflects the embattled position Orthodox rabbinic authorities perceived themselves as occupying vis-avis the non-observant Jewish community and, as such, it represents the ever-increasing polarity between Orthodox and non-Orthodox Jewries in the contemporary world."
Ellenson shows here, as in his other works, that halakhic decisions cannot be understood in terms of rabbinic law alone, but must be studied in the framework of the sociological and organizational needs of the decisor and those whom he supports.®!
In contrast with this extremist position, Herzog authored a very different responsum on this subject. He was asked about the validity of the conversion of a gentile woman, who was civilly married to a Jew. Could this woman have a Jewish marriage with her spouse? In a closely reasoned teshuvah, composed in 1941, the Chief Rabbi relies on a responsum by Maimonides , who permitted a man to manumit his female slave and marry her contrary to Talmudic law.”> Herzog states that"according to the situation, there are times one should permit such prohibitions so that a Jew would not become mired in sin." Furthermore, he explains:"A great deal depends on the judgement of the decisor and his kavannah for the sake of Heaven." Herzog then goes on to give a lenient decision:
"If they were coming to ask whether to convert her or not, we would say: Convert her so that she may be married, for it is certain that they will not separate from one another, so
23