Sunday, October 18, 2009

Rav Reuven Feinstein: Kiruv and mixed couples



I was sent a recent recording of Rav Reuven Feinstein,shlita regarding kiruv and mixed couples. He explicitly says that it is prohibited to advertise and promote seminars to attract mixed couples to come with the hope that they will eventually convert. He says that is only permitted to strengthen those couples that come on their own with a genuine interest to learn more about Judaism and without an awareness that mixed marriages are prohibited. Only such couples who are interested lshem shamayim are to be converted while those who know that intermarriage is wrong are to be rejected. He says it is not only his view but it is one Rav Eliashiv, shlita, expressed when they asked him what was permitted. Rav Reuven's view is the one I have long defended as normative against R' Tropper and his representative Roni - while they defended the view which Rav Reuven explicity rejects on this recording. Below is an example of EJF's advertisement for attracting mixed couples to a seminar - exactly that which Rav Reuven says on this recording is clearly prohibited.

Hidabroot Org BNRImgDetail ASP Qs3czfsi

11 comments :

  1. Natural question would be, if you are going to let R' Tropper's primary defender "Roni" post comments on this thread.

    Though admittedly I am and was for a general ban on him, I think that maybe a exception should be made here if he can state his points in an almost respectful manner.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Recipients and PublicityOctober 18, 2009 at 4:24 PM

    mekubal says: "a exception should be made here if he can state his points in an almost respectful manner."

    Poster Roni/Tropper abviously cannot and will not adjust to others under any circumstances.

    With him it's what you see is what you get, tocho kebaro, hand it to him, he does not fake being nice, just like to those who have Rabbi Tropper's number or whom he hates with a passion, he does not fake being nice.

    Therefore posetr Roni/Tropper will not now or ever moderate or modulate his message as he explains it, he is "allowed" to misbehave and talk like a total dyed in the wool paskudnyak "because" he has "paskened" that everyone here is conducting worse "crimes" against Rabbi Tropper. Logic and lucidity and reasonableness are not his cup of tea.

    Anger, spite, curses, vitriol, harshness, twisting of arguments, red herrings galore, false accusations, projections of his problems and issues onto anyone else, vedettas, insults are yours for the taking and getting when he's online and in the same thread with you when he diagrees with others which is almost all the time.

    It would be like asking an undisciplined wild heavyweight boxer like who in a fight notoriously bit part of an opponent'ss ear off in violation of all good sportsmanship, to box "gently" and "gentlemanly" when he is in the ring with a perceived opponent and enemy. It runs against all his instincts and wild nature.

    Therefore to allow him back, which I support as long as Rabbi Eidensohn VIGILANTLY EDITS and moderates as he did in the past, would mean that poster Roni/Poster would be himself, and in the past he was famous for spouting reams of informatioon and Torah arguments even if he was only one who thought he believed was fit or able to grasp and understnad what he was spewing forth.

    At this time when so much fresh information is flooding out, and where obviously Rabbi Tropper is constrained and cannot say much on his own blog, poster Roni/Tropper should be allowed back in the ring to act as Rabbi Tropper's attack dog and defense lawyer, even though Rabbi Tropper would never grant that courtesy to anyone else.

    Everyone in the dock deserves the right to defend themeselves or their client and to have a real voice and to appeal accusations against them and to offer new information or confirm past information as need be.


    So to come full circle, I concur with mekubal, let Roni come back, but keep him on a very tight leash.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Eternal Jewish Fraud WatchOctober 18, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    When is the recording from? Did R' Reuvein only abandon Tropper after Arutz Sheva reported on the criminal investigation?

    ReplyDelete
  4. the recording is from well before the outbreak of recent events

    ReplyDelete
  5. Recipients and PublicityOctober 19, 2009 at 2:33 AM

    to be fair, this photo of R Reuven Feinstein is of him with newly religious baalei teshuva and has nothing to do with conversions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Was R' Feinstein asked about his thoughts on this specific ad? No. Was R' Feinstien asked about his support for EJF, or R' Tropper? No.

    R' Feinstein was simply asked if he supports proselytizing... to which his answer is "No", as to be expected.

    You are jumping to conclusions and twisting things to your liking.

    It should be asked: "If the questioner's intent was to prove R' Feinstein's lack of support for EJF, why would he not simply state "Eternal Jewish Family" in his question"? Why the trick question set-up of describing proselytizing, and then broadcast that the Rav is referring to EJF?

    That's just plain sleazy reporting at it's finest.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "the recording is from well before the outbreak of recent events"

    This is quite disheartening, when secular celebrities endorse a product like deodorants, soda, tissues etc we all know that they get paid for that end they either do or do not use the product. Here we have a Michael Jackson like situation when he received millions of dollars to endorse Pepsi but still refused to have his picture taken holding a can of Pepsi.

    Do all the rabbis who hang around him and refused to give him haskama just do so because dof the mosdos they have to support ? one of those rabbis is member of the moetzes, it does not reflect well on them

    ReplyDelete
  8. Was R' Feinstien asked about his support for EJF, or R' Tropper? No.


    He was asked if a the Vienna conference(and EJF event) and others like it are ossur. His answer... "Yes".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Recipients and PublicityOctober 20, 2009 at 6:02 AM

    Rachel protesteth too much!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't get it. R' Reuven said if they have kavana l'shem shamayim then we should accept them. This advertisement clearly says "...l'nochach rtzonchem HAKEINA b'giyur.... mat'im m'od limvakshim BE'EMET lhitkarev l'yahadut... rtzonchem hakeinah *vehatahor*"

    Doesn't sound like a very good kiruv pitch anyways, it's not aimed to convince anyone to BECOME intersted... I think you're misunderstanding this whole issue.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Moyshe said...

    I don't get it. R' Reuven said if they have kavana l'shem shamayim then we should accept them. This advertisement clearly says "...l'nochach rtzonchem HAKEINA b'giyur.... mat'im m'od limvakshim BE'EMET lhitkarev l'yahadut... rtzonchem hakeinah *vehatahor*"

    Doesn't sound like a very good kiruv pitch anyways, it's not aimed to convince anyone to BECOME intersted... I think you're misunderstanding this whole issue.
    =============
    Nice try - but Rav Reuven himself singled out the Lavie seminars as something which was prohibited because of the advertising. In fact his description of the programs in America trying to attract converstion seems to be referring to EJF programs - especially in California and Arizona. If you look through past posting - especially those entitled "fishing" you will clearly see that they are inviting people to see whether they might be interested.
    You might want to look at the discussion by Jonathan Rosenblum describing the EJF conferences in California and Arizona - see especially the topics of the speakers on their program. You really have to do a lot of song and dance to rationalize all these sources. But what can you do when Rav Reuven condemned these seminars on the recording?

    Bottom line it is you who are misunderstanding the issue - obviously leshem shamayim - but it is still a misunderstanding.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.