X hits on this document

Word document






90 / 157

Aryeh A. Frimer, January 1991) that to the best of his recollection, R. Goren was indeed aware that a “women’s minyan” was functioning in the Baltimore area and that the question was being posed on their behalf. Furthermore, R. Avraham Weiss, Women at Prayer (Hoboken, N.J.: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1990), p. 111, footnote 38, indicates that in a conversation he had with R. Goren in Spring 1989, the latter had reaffirmed his support for the 1974 responsum. Nevertheless, in light of our analysis above, his subsequent December 1989 retraction is well founded.

 58.As a general rule, the member groups of the “Women’s Tefilla Network” (WTN), which number as of 2005 approximately 60 (http://www.edah.org/tefilla.cfm), do not rely on R. Goren’s original ruling and do not say devarim she-bi-kdusha; see the comments of Bat Sheva Marcus, Chair of WTN, in “Walk Humbly with Your God,” Sh’ma, 27/531 (April 4, 1997), pp. 5-7. Nevertheless, in a letter dated January 1996 to the members of the Flatbush Women’s Davening Group, Rivka Haut indicates that based on R. Goren’s 1974 responsum, women may recite mourner’s kaddish at the conclusion of the women’s tefilla. See also Rivka Haut, “Women’s Prayer Groups and the Orthodox Synagogue,” in Daughters of the King: Women and the Synagogue, supra, note 3*, pp. 135-157, at p. 141, in which the view of R. Berkovits, supra, note 56, is also cited. In light of our discussion above, such a development is halakhically improper, unfounded and indefensible. Interestingly, in a recent Letter to the Editor, Tradition, 33:2 (Winter 1999), p. 80, the present Coordinator of Flatbush Women’s Davening Group, Freda Rosenfeld, indicates that this practice has ceased. Nevertheless, in an e-mail communication dated October 4, 1999, Rivka Haut indicates that the Flatbush group still allows the recitation of another davar she-bi-kdusha, barekhu, before pseudo aliyot. This is equally problematic.

 59.The responsum, dated 12 Kislev 5745 (November 25, 1985), was subsequently published in the halakhic journal of the R.C.A. See R. Nissan Alpert, R. Abba Bronspigel, R. Mordechai Willig, R. Yehuda Parnes and R. Zvi Schachter, Teshuva beInyan Nashim beHakafot veKhu,” HaDarom 54 (Sivan 5745), pp. 49-50. It should be emphasized that the R.C.A. at no time adopted the position of this responsum as the official halakhic policy of the organization. The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of February 27, 1986, record the following: “The President stated categorically that he did not ask this question of the Rashei Yeshiva in the name of the R.C.A. He asked the question as an individual . . . The Executive declared that the opinion of the five Rashei Yeshiva was

Document info
Document views539
Page views540
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 15:07:19 UTC 2017