How big is Boston’s big tent?

March 24, 2011- Many things have changed since Jews were wanderers in the desert – but some things have not. The proverbial tent was once a literal meeting place for community elders and priests – the tabernacle, a center of Jewish life. Today, it’s a metaphorical tent, filled with Jewish organizations, but still right in the center of Jewish community.

In Greater Boston, one tent is erected by the Jewish Community Relations Council and funded by Combined Jewish Philanthropies. It encompasses dozens of organizations that focus on community outreach, social action, and Israel aid and advocacy. Just how far the tent stretches is now at issue as JCRC reviews the more than 40 groups that belong to its Greater Boston council. “Our bylaws require us periodically to look at organizations that are part of the council,” said Alan Ronkin, acting JCRC executive director. “We just finished our strategic plan, and we decided now was a good time to do it.”

The review, though, comes at a time when more liberal groups have come under fire for not being sufficiently pro-Israel. For example, conservative critics have raised questions about J Street, which never was officially voted onto the council, but became a member when it absorbed the grassroots peace organization Brit Tzedek last year. Ronkin said the membership review committee will look at every organization represented on the council – controversial and noncontroversial alike – to make sure they are compatible with the JCRC mission statement. That statement calls on JCRC to “pursue social justice, ensure a vibrant Jewish community, and build a network of support for Israel.”

The tricky part is that last goal. Ask J Street, the Zionist Organization of America, the New Israel Fund or CAMERA to define support for Israel and you could get four different answers. That’s OK, Ronkin said. “The whole point of the council is to have a rigorous community dia- logue.”

Robert Leikind, director of the American Jewish Committee Boston (another JCRC member), agreed. “There is a compelling need for those of us in the Jewish community to be engaged with one another as much as possible,” Leikind said.

But, he added, lines still must be drawn: “There are times when a particular viewpoint is so abhorrent and contrary to the collective sense of what is good that it is not only legitimate but morally necessary to separate oneself from those organizations or its advocates.”

In November, CJP went on the record against funding or supporting any group that advocates for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. In a column in the Advocate, its president, Barry Shrage, wrote: “BDS advocates have chosen to place themselves outside the realm of the honest, open and civil dialogue and debate.… They have no place under the ‘big tent’ of our Jewish community.”

Some members of the JCRC council are calling for J Street’s expulsion. Morton Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America, called J Street’s inclusion in the pro-Israel tent a “disgrace.” Alex Safian, the associate director of the Center for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), raised questions about the sources of J Street’s funding and its stand on the BDS.

“J Street should not be welcomed in the Jewish community unless they change the way they do things,” said Safian. While J Street is on record against the BDS, its annual conference last month included a panel with speakers on both sides of the issue. In Israel, a Knesset committee is questioning whether the group is actually “pro-Israel” as its slogan, “Pro Israel, Pro Peace,” claims. Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street president, went to Israel this week to testify before the committee.

“We are still very firmly in the tent,” said J Street spokesperson Amy Spitalnick. “We’ve partnered with groups on campuses and off to combat BDS. Of course, we have a nuanced message, but in order to secure a future we need to have an open conversation.” Talking about BDS and other controversial issues does not mean the organization supports them, Spitalnick said. “The idea that we shouldn’t hold conversations with groups we disagree with is antithetical to Jewish values.”

Shrage also rejected efforts to tie J Street to the boycott movement. “They have vigorously spoken out against BDS,” he said. “It is very clearly on the record.” Another council member, New Israel Fund, also has come under fire for what some say is a soft stance against the BDS movement, as well as for its human rights activities in the West Bank and Gaza.

“It is sad that there is a push to exclude groups that want very much to see Israel thrive and prosper,” Rabbi David Rosenn, NIF’s New York-based chief operating officer said. “We understand that people disagree with how you go about that, but when disagreement leads to delegitimization of other organizations you risk diminishing the power of the entire organization.” Bill Gabovitch, president of JCRC, said he expects the ninemember review committee to report its findings within a month. The council, which includes community representatives as well as representatives from all the organizations, will then vote whether to remove any of its members.

Like Ronkin, Gabovitch said no one group was being singled out. “We certainly [get calls] about many Israel groups from time to time, including J Street, but it’s not being looked into any more of less than any other organization,” he said. “The JCRC has 60 years of representing the Greater Boston community and we have a good idea of who we are and who represents our community,” he said.

Noting the diverse views of the Boston Jewish community, CJP’s Shrage stressed the importance of inclusivity. “The Zionist Organization of America and Brit Tzedek sat on the council together for many years without one demonizing the other,” Shrage said. “The more we can have respectful discussion and not throw each other out of the tent, the better off we are.”