NYP no. 5763.4

CCAR RESPONSA

5763.4

Conversion of an Illegal Immigrant

She’elah

A woman came to me for the purposes of conversion and told me that she is in the United States illegally. Am I obligated to treat her like any other potential proselyte (with an open heart) or would it be against our Jewish tradition to work with someone who I knew was here illegally? (Rabbi Michelle Missaghieh, Los Angeles, CA)

Teshuvah

In framing an answer to this question, we draw guidance from two principles of Jewish tradition. The first of these may be summarized by Deuteronomy 10:19: “you shall love the ger, for you were gerim in the land of Egypt.” The second is expressed by the halakhic principle that, in matters of conversion, “the decision is left to the discretion of the court.”[1]

1. It would be a sad irony were we to reject this potential Jew by choice on the grounds that she is an illegal immigrant. The word ger, which we translate as “proselyte,” in Biblical times carried the meaning of “resident alien,”[2] the “stranger” or foreigner who dwelled alongside the Israelite community but was not of the community.[3] The Biblical connotation of the word has never disappeared from the Hebrew language.[4] Thus, when the Torah notes that we were once gerim in a foreign land, it reminds us that we once shared the fate and experience of the individual in question here. As the Torah puts it, we “know the soul of the stranger” (Exodus 23:9); we of all people must not subject her to the sort of oppression and injustice that was once our lot (Leviticus 19:34 and Exodus 22:20). Indeed, the mitzvah to love and to care for the stranger lies at the root of our Reform Jewish commitment to social justice.[5] And a fundamental aspect of this commitment has been our demand that the immigrant–the ger–receive fair and ethical treatment in our society.[6]

For these reasons, one’s status as an illegal immigrant should not in and of itself disqualify him or her from conversion to Judaism. Why would we think otherwise? True, this individual has violated the laws of the United States by residing in the country without the proper legal permit. The government of the United States is entitled to prosecute or deport her, both according to its own law and according to Jewish law: under the principle dina demalkhuta dina, Jewish law accepts the validity of all legislation that pertains to the legitimate rights and powers of the civil government, and it is clear that a state enjoys the right to control its borders and to regulate matters of immigration and citizenship.[7] Yet while a government may set and enforce such laws (provided that it do so in a fair and equitable manner), this enforcement is a matter for the state and not for religious communities. On the contrary, we have always held that dina demalkhuta dina applies only to the area of monetary law (dinei mamonot) and that it has no bearing upon matters of ritual practice (isur veheter).[8] Conversion to Judaism is just such a “ritual” matter, properly the concern of the Jewish people and not of the United States government. Obviously, the rabbi and the congregation will want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in the area of immigration law in order to determine their legal responsibilities in this case. But from the standpoint of Jewish law and tradition, this woman’s immigration status does not bar her from entering our community. When we look at her, we do not see an “illegal immigrant”; we see a stranger, a reflection of our own history. She has every right to seek to join us and to take refuge “under the wings of the Shekhinah.”[9]

2. At the same time, the decision in any particular case of conversion is left to the discretion of the supervising rabbi. This authority has traditionally exerted a lenient influence upon the law, empowering rabbis to accept proselytes in cases where the circumstances might have argued for rejection.[10] Yet it also allows the rabbi to say “no” when, in his or her considered judgment, an apparently valid request for conversion is hasty, not well thought out, or based upon improper motivations. Conversion, we should remember, is an institution, an aspect of organized community life, and not simply a personal and private religious concern. As we have written before:

Conversion… is not a decision left to the heart and mind of the proselyte but a formal and public matter. One who seeks to convert seeks to join our community as a full and participating “citizen” thereof. It is accordingly for the Jewish community, acting through its acknowledged rabbinical representatives, to determine in each and every case whether an individual who wishes to convert is in fact ready to do so, for reasons that we find persuasive and compelling.[11]

As we have said, the rabbi should not turn this woman away simply because she is an illegal immigrant. On the other hand, it is the rabbi’s task to inquire as to the reasons that motivate an individual to seek conversion,[12] and it is reasonable to presume that this individual’s immigration status is a factor, an aspect of her life story, that must be explored. Indeed, it would be irresponsible for the rabbi not to explore it. Such an inquiry might lead the rabbi to conclude that the status issue functions as an improper or unacceptable influence in the decision to convert; perhaps this person believes that conversion will improve her prospects for remaining in the country. Similarly, the rabbi might find that the individual’s immigration status is an element or a symptom of a deeper issue that, in the rabbi’s opinion, augurs against conversion. The members of this Committee do not and cannot know, of course, whether such possibilities apply in this particular case; if, however, they do apply, then the rabbi may properly decide that “no” or “not yet” is the best response to this request for conversion.

Conclusion

. The fact that one is an illegal immigrant does not constitute valid, objective grounds for denying his or her request to become a Jew. Yet immigration status can be one important factor in the rabbi’s inquiry into a candidate’s readiness to take the fateful step of joining the Jewish people. The decision, in all cases, lies within the rabbi’s discretion. If this individual is accepted for conversion, the rabbi should certainly counsel and assist her in resolving her immigration status as soon as possible. The mitzvah to love the ger implies a duty to help her relieve her distress: we do not want her to remain in violation of the laws of the United States. Whatever the rabbi’s course of action, we trust that it will be undertaken with perception, sensitivity and, as our sho’elet puts it, with an open heart.

NOTES

 

  • Hakol lefi re’ut einei habeit din

; R. Yosef Karo, Beit Yosef to Tur, Yoreh De`ah 268, and R. Shabetai Kohen, Siftei Kohen to Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De`ah 268, no. 23.

  • The Targum of Onkelos preserves this bivalence. In each of the verses cited above, the ger whom we are required to love or forbidden to oppress is rendered as giyora, “proselyte,” while the word gerim as a description of our status in Egypt is translated as dayarin, “temporary residents.”
  • See Bernard J. Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (New York: Ktav, 1968), 16: “in the Bible the word ger means a foreign resident in Palestine. It is frequently joined by ‘and’ to the word toshab, meaning the same thing, and usually translated ‘sojourner.'” See also his comment to Lev. 19:34 in W. Gunther Plaut, The Torah: A Modern Commentary (New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1981), 899. On the legal distinctions between the ger and the native-born Israelite (ezrach), see Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (London: Oxford U. Press, 1972), 229-232, and Jacob Milgrom, “Religious Conversion and the Revolt Model for the Formation of Israel,” Journal of Biblical Literature 101/2 (1982), 169-176. See also Milgrom’s remarks in The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990), Excursus 34, 398-402.
  • See, for example, Rashi to Exodus 22:20: “the word ‘ger’ refers to a person who was not born in that particular community but came from another community to dwell (lagur) there.”
  • In 1997, citing Exodus 22:20 (“You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt”), the Central Conference of American Rabbis called upon the United States Congress not to reduce welfare benefits to immigrant families and to facilitate their acquisition of citizenship. In addition, the resolution urged Reform congregations to undertake efforts to provide vital services to immigrants, including those immigrants who for one reason or another are unable to attain citizenship. See CCAR Yearbook 107 (1998), 65-67 (www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/resodisp.pl?file=citizen&year=1997).
  • On the subject of dina demalkhuta dina, see our responsum 5757.1, “Loyalty to One’s Company Versus Love for Israel,” at www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file’1&year’5757 .
  • On the conditions for and limitations upon the principle dina demalkhuta dina see ibid. at notes 13-15.
  • See BT Shabbat 31a, the statement of the three proselytes: “Shamai’s strictness would have expelled us, but Hillel’s patience brought us under the wings of God’s presence.”
  • See Tosafot, Yevamot 24b, s.v. lo, referring to the decisions by Hillel (BT Shabbat 31a) and Rabbi Hiya (BT Menachot 44a) to accept proselytes whose motivations to become Jewish were not considered to be religiously sincere. In each case, the rabbi believed that the individual would one day be a good Jew (sofo la`asot leshem shamayim) and was therefore “worth the risk.”
  • CCAR Responsa Committee, no. 5758.7, “Conversion of a Person Suffering From Mental Illness,” www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file=7&year=5758 . See also our responsum 5760.5, “Conversion When The Spouse Remains A Gentile” (http://www.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file’5&year’5760), at the conclusion: “A person who wishes to become a Jew should not be rejected merely because his or her spouse will remain a Gentile… On the other hand, the spouse’s decision not to become a Jew may be an indication of serious obstacles to the proselyte’s creation of a Jewish life and of problems in the marriage. The rabbi must be satisfied that these difficulties are not serious before proceeding with giyur.”
  • Shulchan Arukh Yoreh De`ah

268:12: when a prospective ger or giyoret comes before us, we examine him or her to determine whether the motivation for the conversion is religiously sincere and–in our eyes–acceptable.

 

If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.

✕