February 2025 News: New 18Doors CEO, One Rabbi’s Radically Inclusive Approach, Conservative Movement, Judaism Is About Love, New Research and more

|

A New CEO for 18Doors!

I was excited to see 18Doors’ announcement, picked up in the Atlanta Jewish Times, that Mike Wise, a very experienced Jewish professional, most recently co-founder of Honeymoon Israel, is their new CEO. I loved what Mike is quoted as saying:

With more than a 75 percent interfaith marriage rate among non-Orthodox Jews, it is critical for the Jewish community to welcome these couples who are Jewish and support them in building a Jewish home in whatever ways work for them. My work as founder and co-CEO of Honeymoon Israel is but one great example of the potential of deep engagement with couples coming from multiple faith backgrounds. Our deep commitment to working with and training rabbis is another critical piece of our work on behalf of the Jewish community.

I hope the organization will go from strength to strength under Mike’s leadership.

A Radically Inclusive Approach to Ritual Participation

Rabbi Fred Greene, who serves a Reform congregation in Boulder CO, wrote one of the best essays we’ve read in a long time – Everything Has Changed – In Synagogues, Too!

Rabbi Greene addresses one of the Center’s key advocacy positions, that partners from different faith backgrounds should be allowed – even encouraged – to fully participate in Jewish ritual:

I have shifted my positions to become much more expansive in how we officiate our life cycle events. In addition to officiating weddings where one partner might not be Jewish, we also include numerous opportunities for loving family members of bet mitzvah students to be included in aliyot.

When people can make informed and authentic choices, when those making Jewish choices in their households feel they can participate fully in ritual life without necessarily being Jewish (celebrating the ger toshav, the Biblical “sojourner” with the Israelites), they are not just thankful for the opportunity, they feel seen and needed. They, then, become more deeply grounded in our synagogue.

Amen!

Conservative Movement

The Conservative movement’s Intermarriage Working Group, that I’ve previously written about, send an email on February 10 seeking feedback. It’s an important message that’s worth reading.

The co-chairs of the Working Group, Shirley Davidoff and Rabbi Aaron Brusso, reiterate that past disapproval of interfaith marriage did not discourage it, but instead discouraged affiliation with Conservative synagogues. (All of the Working Group’s members are listed in the message.) They intend to “gather best practices, collect meaningful data, and commission innovative ideas to adapt halakhah, ritual, and ceremonies across the continuum of dating, engagement, marriage, and family life. Our goal is to shift from binary perspectives (“what is permitted vs. what is forbidden”) to a more holistic, nuanced, and pastoral approach to intermarrying couples.”

In furtherance of that effort, the email linked to a survey. Results should be interesting!

Judaism Is About Love – But What About Interfaith Love?

Rabbi Shai Held’s book, Judaism Is About Love, is a magisterial work of moral theology. I learned a great deal from it. When I first heard about the book, I was excited to see what it had to say about love between Jews and partners from different faith backgrounds. But there are only ten pages or so about romantic love between partners or spouses, and nothing directly about love between interfaith partners.

There are several interesting observations related to interfaith love, described in my review. Rabbi Held says “the assumption that we cannot control our emotions is a mistake”; people who disapprove of interfaith marriage, or who don’t support making any accommodations that might engage interfaith couples, sometimes justify their position by saying that the Jewish partner made a choice. Rabbis who officiate for gay and lesbian couples but not for interfaith couples, for example, sometimes justify the distinction by saying that being gay is not a choice.

Rabbi Held recognizes that how we view people can maim them: “A person or group of people can suffer real damage, real distortion, if the people or society around them mirror back to them a confining or demeaning or contemptible picture of themselves.” I couldn’t help thinking how this is applicable to partners from different faith backgrounds who are viewed as undesirable marriage partners for Jews.

Rabbi Held says that “any covenant theology will necessarily have both insiders and outsiders.  We can soften the edges around that fact but can’t sidestep it altogether. Covenants, like religions in general, like identities in general, are inherently particular; what matters from a moral perspective is not whether or not they have outsiders but how they imagine and interact with those outsiders.” I’m not sure what he means by “soften the edges,” but, as I have argued elsewhere, we could define the covenant as between God and not only people who are Jewish, but also people who do Jewish, who are Jewishly-engaged.

All in all, it’s a very important book, deserving of all the acclaim it is receiving, but I do wish more had been said about interfaith relationships. Perhaps that will be a future subject.

New Research

The Bay Area JCRC released a survey that is mostly about how safe Bay Area Jews feel after October 7. The J’s David Wilensky made an interesting comment in his weekly email newsletter:

47% of respondents are part of an interfaith family — almost half. 7% identify as people of color, and 19% live in a household that includes at least one person of color. I hear some congregations around here patting themselves on the back for being welcoming of interfaith families and people of color. Yet I also recently spoke with a Jewish friend whose spouse — a non-Jewish person of color who is helping to raise a Jewish kid — has been treated poorly at more than one large Bay Area synagogue. Again: If this survey is correct, almost half of Bay Area Jews are part of an interfaith family. Synagogues and other Jewish spaces simply cannot afford to dismiss them — or worse.

The Pew Research Center just released its Religious Landscape Survey – all 375+ pages of it. There’s a very good story about the survey by Judy Maltz in Ha’aretz. Her key takeaways include that Jews are more likely than members of other religious groups to say that religion is not too important or not at all important in their lives; that only one in three Jews reported that religion was very important to their family when they were growing up; and that among married Jews, 35 percent reported having non-Jewish spouses (compared to 25% of Catholics having non-Catholic spouses and 19% of Protestants having non-Protestant spouses). A separate section of the report, devoted to Religious Intermarriage, says that intermarried adults tend to be less religious than in-married adults.

The Jerusalem Post reported “exclusively” on February 9 about a new study of the impact of Birthright Israel. The Post’s story had a good headline: “Birthright Israel works: Alumni are more Jewishly active than their peers, study finds – exclusive.” Coverage of the Cohen Center’s past studies often touted that the trip led fewer participants to intermarry, which we always said contributed to negative attitudes about interfaith marriage and would deter children of interfaith families from participating. We always said that the goal of the trip should be to increase participants connections to Jewish life – regardless of who they marry. This story’s lead is that the trip instilled “long-term connections to Judaism and Jewish life for participants and their families, including for those who” intermarry.

The study does find that “Birthright participants were substantially more likely to have a Jewish spouse” – whether their first spouse (55% of participants compared to 37% of non-participants) or current spouse (63% compared to 46%). There’s nothing wrong with measuring or reporting on the rates in which trip participants in-marry. Suggesting that the goal of the trip is to reduce interfaith marriage is a bad strategy, that neither the study nor the JPost story do.

The study does not claim that Birthright participants and non-participants (those who applied for the trip but did not go on it) are representative of all Jews of the same age; the fact that the rates of in-marriage for both participants and non-participants are higher than the 2020 Pew report’s 28% of non-Orthodox Jews suggests that that is the case.

I thought two findings were especially interesting, because they address how couples are raising their children Jewishly, and differences between interfaith and in-married couples in that regard. 76% of trip participants with Jewish partners enrolled their children in early childhood programs, compared to 67% of participants with non-Jewish partners (I’m using the study’s “non-Jewish” terminology here); 47% of non-trip participants with Jewish partners did so, compared to 37% of non-trip participants with non-Jewish partners. 51% of trip participants with Jewish partners had a b’mitzvah ceremony for their children, compared to 26% of participants with non-Jewish partners; 33% of non-trip participants with Jewish partners did so, compared to 14% of non-trip participants with non-Jewish partners.

This data supports different conclusions. With respect to early childhood programs, there’s a difference, but not a big one (10% or less), between those with Jewish partners and those with non-Jewish partners. There’s a much bigger difference (25% and 19%) with respect to having a b’mitzvah, and one could say that almost half of trip participants with Jewish partners not having b’mitzvah ceremonies for their children is not a very satisfactory result. But to me the most important thing is to understand the reasons why interfaith couples choose not to raise their children Jewishly, and to address those reasons.

In Other News:

  • The Interfaithing podcast has a two part review of Nobody Wants This.
  • A JTA story about “swanky secular Shabbat parties” in New York City includes this:

Another aim of the new-school Shabbat dinners is to embrace the diversity of New York City’s Jewish community — and to welcome non-Jews to the table as well. “The main thing is to create the kehillah, the community,” Elad Zvit, the co-founder of Bar Lab, a hospitality company that operates the restaurant, previously said about Mesiba’s Shabbat dinner series. “We have a lot of diversity between our friends — some of them are Jewish, some of them are not. But the one thing we all have in common: We like to break bread together. We like to eat, we like to drink, we like to party together.”

  • You Should Know Rabbi Lizz Goldstein is a nice story in the Washington Jewish Week about a rabbi who grew up in an interfaith family.
  • A review in the Forward of a book about Finnish Jews in WWII is a good example of a casual comment that equates interfaith marriage and assimilation: “Assimilation and inter-marriage rates in Finland raise doubt about the community’s long term survival prospects. Author John Simon includes a sobering statistic in Strangers In A Strange Land: nearly every Jewish family in the country has a member who married outside the faith.”

January 2025 News: Jewish Families Today, Thinking Beyond Jewish Continuity, the Impact of October 7, and more

|

After all the December holiday media buzz, and with January attention focused on distressing events here and in Israel, there was little interfaith family inclusion news to report – until this week.

Jewish Families Today

This past Monday, eJewishPhilanthropy reported that Rosov Consulting released an important qualitative study, Jewish Families Today. The study focused on Jewish families with diverse backgrounds and identities, especially families not deeply involved in Jewish communities and institutions, with data generated from 40 focus groups and 40 individual interviews. It reports that parents want to build strong Jewish identities in their children, in homes that are also tolerant and inclusive of multiple heritages and faiths.

For the Center’s purposes, what’s most relevant are the “bumps, obstacles and difficult contexts” families face. In addition to cost, geographic distance, and political polarization, “Families with marginalized identities – whether interfaith, LGBTQ+, or multiracial – often feel sidelined within traditional Jewish institutions, encountering subtle or overt exclusion.”  Parents of children who have multiple identities “are especially aware that prejudice exists toward some, all, or simply the combination of these identities on the part of others, including in Jewish spaces.”

A key finding is that parents are “desperate” for community. They are not fleeing traditional institutions, but are looking for congregations that are inclusive of them. One parent said that the webpages of local synagogues did not have any kind of message explicitly addressed to interfaith families telling them who they could contact or what to expect. They are looking for “early signals of inclusion.” “Many families seek clear commitments to inclusivity that some institutions have been hesitant to extend.”

One interfaith couple had a lukewarm experience in Jewish institutions but were “actively engaged by their neighborhood Catholic church.” The study warns that “families who belong to more than one faith community may opt to participate in the non-Jewish one if it is more accessible and welcoming.” “Intentional, explicit practices of inclusion are essential if Jewish institutions are to attract families with marginalized identities.” “Families are “simply struggling to find communities … that “walk the walk” when it comes to including diverse families and where they know they will be welcomed and affirmed for their whole selves.”

I wish that the report had delved more into what underlies the prejudice or exclusion that some families experience. The Center’s theory is that interfaith families will engage Jewishly if the partners from different faith backgrounds are considered and treated as equal; they experience prejudice or exclusion when they are considered as lesser and their participation is restricted. It’s not clear from the report whether the study participants experienced this or not.

One of the study’s key recommendations is to “shift culture to become a more inclusive and welcoming community,” noting that “Even when synagogues and organizations attempt to welcome Jewish families with intersectional identities, challenges can exist in the interpersonal interactions within the community.” The Center believes that adapting how Jews think about and treat partners from different faith backgrounds is essential to any shift in culture towards inclusion.

Thinking Beyond Jewish Continuity

Then this past Tuesday, eJewishPhilanthropy published Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz’ “Thinking Beyond ‘Jewish Continuity.’” It’s very worth reading; I agree with Rabbi Shmuly’s call to go beyond defensive fear and be aspirational about fostering robust Jewish community, to “go deep” and to “feed souls.”

In describing the conversation we need to go beyond, he says “Jews are assimilating. Younger Jews are intermarrying,…” There’s a hint there of equating intermarrying with assimilating, but I’m pretty sure that’s not the way Rabbi Shmuly thinks. I do wish that he had explicitly included appealing to interfaith couples and partners from different faith backgrounds when describing his five ideas for cultivating a shift.

The Impact of October 7 on Interfaith Couples, Families and Professionals

18Doors has released an excellent resource with research and discussion questions for couples, grandparents, and professionals. “It behooves the Jewish community to lean into loving relationships when they exist. We need to welcome anyone and everyone who wants to be Jewish, anyone who is throwing their lot in with the Jews or is related to a Jewish person. These people can be among our greatest strengths.”

In Other News

“Relationship advice: Your duty to the Jewish people matters more than what makes you happy” is an awful piece in the Jerusalem Post by Rav Hayim Leiter, an Orthodox rabbi in Israel, who says “our priorities need to be building and raising healthy Jewish families, and there’s no way to do that when marrying out.”

A year ago, Rav Leiter responded to a mother, who felt strongly after October 7 that her children and her family are Jewish, writing that her children aren’t Jewish because Judaism is “transmitted through the maternal line.” As I said in our February 2024 newsletter, that was cruel, insensitive, “false as to much of the Jewish world outside Rav Leiter’s Orthodox lane, and counter-productive to anyone who wants to see the number of Jewishly-engaged people expand.”

It’s unfortunate that those like Rav Leiter can’t respect that there is more than one way to be Jewish, or see the benefit to the Jewish people overall of including interfaith families. It’s unfortunate that their hostile views continue to be expressed.

Cantor Rabbi Mark Goldman, who serves a Reform synagogue in Florida, wrote two interesting but curious posts in the Times of Israel blogs. In the first, he questions whether the approach he has taken to interfaith couples, conditioning wedding officiation on their committing to raising a Jewish family and taking an introduction to Judaism course, is productive, or instead leads couples to not work with him. That’s a very good question.

But in the second, he writes that “without structured opportunities to continue engaging in Jewish life, many [young adult Jews] drift away, making intermarriage more likely… If young Jews lack community during this stage, their likelihood of marrying outside the faith increases significantly.” He urges expansion of opportunities for young adult Jews to have “appealing, contemporary experiences [to] make Judaism feel accessible and relevant.” It’s ill-advised to make the goal of engagement opportunities to make interfaith marriage less likely. Why not be explicitly clear that the opportunities are for young adult Jews who are in interfaith relationships too, with the goal of interfaith couples experiencing Judaism as accessible and relevant?

The Wall Street Journal published “Jewish Identity in Crisis” (at page 35), a review of books including If You Will It  by Elliot Abrams. I haven’t read the book yet; the reviewer says that peoplehood is the book’s “key word” and quotes Abrams as saying ““The underlying problem is that a striking proportion of American Jews have very weak feelings about being part of the Jewish people in anyway at all.” In the past, Abrams was no friend of interfaith marriage; it’s interesting and hopeful that the review at least doesn’t reflect any blaming of interfaith marriage for weakening feelings of peoplehood. Moreover, to strengthen peoplehood, it’s all the more important to be inclusive of interfaith families.

In a similar vein, eJewishPhilanthropy reported that a group of 40 Israeli leaders convened to discuss Jewish cultural (as opposed to religious) identity. It is interesting and hopeful that they spoke of those who married “outside the tribe” in a non-judgmental way:

True, these young Jewish adults are often not observant and do not belong to traditional or institutional Jewish frameworks, which may seem “too religious” or irrelevant to their Jewish identity and life choices (particularly for LGBTQ and those who marry “outside the tribe”). Nevertheless, their Jewish identity is present and meaningful in their lives. They describe taking pride in their Jewish identity, celebrating holidays, feeling a sense of tribalism and connecting to Judaism through family and pluralistic values. Additionally, as we’ve seen over the past year, they are not indifferent to Israel. Focusing on what they are and using positive terms rather than “un-” to describe them is the first cornerstone of creating a more meaningful Jewish cultural identity.

“How Jewish Identity Is Formed Matters” is a very interesting op-ed that’s not directly about interfaith marriage. The author, Rabbi Yehudah Potok, is the senior director of the Jewish Education Program at Facing History and Ourselves. One comment that struck me: “when a person finds security and comfort in one’s own identity, they generally do not feel as threatened by the identity of others. Developing a strong sense of self promotes empathy and inclusivity.” That made me wonder whether, if we were more secure and comfortable in our Jewish identity, we’d be more inclusive of and not threatened by interfaith marriage and partners from different faith backgrounds.

Finally, in an interesting sign of the times, the Conservative movement in the UK is offering a discussion course for mixed-faith couples. The course is “designed to help couples think about what a mixed-faith relationship means, and a brief introduction to Jewish life and practice.” The course “isn’t about conversion, although conversion may be something that couples are thinking about.” It notes that “Masorti rabbis do not officiate at mixed-faith ceremonies, although mixed-faith couples are welcome to join Masorti synagogues.”

July 2024 News from the Center

|

Instead of a quiet summer, and in the midst of the consuming news of presidential politics and from Israel, there’s been quite a lot about Jewish inclusion of interfaith families in the media this month.

It’s happening against a backdrop of a more general attention to growing “interfaithness” in America. First there was JD Vance described as a convert to Catholicism with a Hindu wife. Then, closer to home, there was discussion of Kamala Harris as a “Baptist married to a Jewish man, … influenced by the religious traditions of her mother’s native India.”

Doug Emhoff, the Second Gentleman, was previously intermarried, and apparently was not Jewishly engaged (he became very much engaged later on); the Forward reports that his children were not raised with and do not identify as Jews.

But then there’s the new Prime Minister of the UK Keir Starmer and his Jewish wife, who the Forward reports regularly mark Shabbat, are raising their kids as Jews, and belong to a liberal synagogue. News like this always raises the question, what can be done to encourage more families like the Starmers?

The HUC Decision, and the Need to Adapt Fundamental Attitudes

Last month JTA published my op-ed, The Reform movement’s decision to admit intermarried rabbis is good. Truly welcoming them would be great. I said the decision was “momentous” and congratulated HUC’s leadership for finally getting to that result. But I said that the messaging surrounding the announcement did not express the fully inclusive attitude towards interfaith marriage that would encourage more interfaith families to engage Jewishly, in turn enabling liberal Judaism to thrive in the future. Instead, it reiterated that “Jewish endogamy is a value,” and added language requiring that students in interfaith relationships commit to “exclusively Jewish practice.” 

I am apparently the unnamed “HUC critic” in Dr. Steven Windmueller’s essay, Hebrew Union College: Facing the Future, which cites my op-ed twice. Dr. Windmueller has been affiliated with HUC for a long time, including as dean of the Los Angeles campus. He seems to be positive about the decision, explaining it as a balancing “the preservation and integrity of Jewish practice” with being “mindful of shifting cultural and social trends.”

But again, his message is not fully inclusive – he says the shifting demographic reality is not “unconditionally embraced” and repeats the “endogamy is a value” statement. He defends the “exclusively Jewish practice” requirement as HUC simply remaining “fully committed to the proposition of its clergy demonstrating serious personal Jewish engagement” – but why would anyone seek to become a rabbi if they were not seriously personally Jewishly engaged? And why was it necessary to add the requirement only when students in interfaith relationships were to be admitted? For more discussion of the Windmueller piece, see the Center’s Facebook post.

In The anguished dilemma of a Reform rabbi, Rabbi Mark Cohn, ordained by HUC nearly thirty years ago, lamented the HUC decision as part of a trend toward “preeminent individualism” and “disengagement from the Jewish people.” Rabbi Cohn then engaged in a revealing podcast discussion with Mosaic editor Jonathan Silver.

I found it very curious that Rabbi Cohn officiates at weddings of interfaith couples, defends patrilineal descent, and emphasizes the lived reality of Reform rabbis responding to the needs of their congregants – but disagrees with the decision to admit students in interfaith relationships.

Noting that intermarried rabbis would interface with other Jewish communities and with non-Jewish communities, Rabbi Cohn asks (I’m quoting to the best of my ability) “how serious will I be taken by others if I’m not living a serious Jewish life, a deeply committed and engaged Jewish life.” It seems clear from this that Rabbi Cohn believes that being intermarried is inconsistent with living a serious, deeply committed and engaged Jewish life. Indeed, he turns the “role model” argument around, and suggests that in intermarried rabbi could not be a role model for inmarried couples; that only makes sense if being inmarried is part of what should be modeled. For more discussion of the podcast, see the Center’s Facebook post.

What’s common to what Dr. Windmueller and Rabbi Cohn say is holding on to a preference for inmarriage. Endogamy is a Jewish value; living a serious, committed, engaged Jewish life is inconsistent with being intermarried. These are fundamental attitudes that I believe need to change if we are going to see more interfaith families Jewishly engaged – like Keir Starmer’s family.

At just the right time, Rabbi Micah Streiffer, leader of Laasok and one of the few rabbis in Canada who will officiate at weddings of interfaith couples, makes an important contribution towards changing attitudes. He describes his own shift in thinking in “Embracing Interfaith Wedding Couples: Building the Jewish Future.”

Traditionally, rabbis see officiating weddings as contributing to the Jewish future and sought to ensure that the wedding “really, authentically, is the beginning of a Jewish home.” Traditionally, the criteria to measure whether couples take Judaism seriously has been that both partners are (or are becoming) Jewish.

But Rabbi Streiffer points out that rabbis routinely perform weddings for two Jews who are not really engaged in Judaism because in those cases they see the wedding as an opportunity for engagement. He argues that’s how rabbis should treat weddings of interfaith couples:  in turning them away, “we miss the chance to engage them, and they miss the chance to engage in Judaism.”

Rabbi Streiffer cites the famous story of Shammai turning away the person who seeks to convert while learning the entire Torah standing on one foot, but Hillel converting him saying the “golden rule” is the entire Torah and inviting him to study. Hillel answered the inquiry “not with a litmus test but with an invitation. Hillel seems to understand that the very fact that this non-Jewish man has stepped into his study is, in itself, an act of Jewish engagement. And further, he seems to understand that inviting him for a process of learning is an opportunity to deepen that engagement.”

To Rabbi Streiffer, an interfaith couple asking a rabbi to officiate is in itself an act of Jewish engagement; if they welcome and invite them in, they have an opportunity to build a Jewish future. What underlies this kind of thinking, that emphasizes invitation and engagement opportunity, is a fundamental approach that what is important is not whether people are Jewish – a litmus test for inclusion – but rather, what people do Jewishly.

I can’t agree more that “we, as a Jewish community, need to shift away from litmus tests and toward creating engagement opportunities.” And that “rabbis need to figure out authentic ways that we can say ‘yes’ – that we can stand on the bima, in the classroom, and even under the chuppah with individuals who care about Jewish life, including when they are not Jewish themselves.” For more discussion of Rabbi Streiffer’s piece, see the Center’s Facebook post.

Finally, at an even more progressive end of the spectrum, we have Episode 439 of the Judaism Unbound podcast, in which Rabbi Lex Rofeberg and Dan Libenson have a fascinating discussion with their guest Rabbi Ari Saks. Saks, ordained as a Conservative rabbi by JTS, works with interfaith couples who are “doing both,” including through his podcast Interfaithing.

Rabbi Saks has a halachic perspective, yet says that interfaith marriages are “Jewishly great,” as Rofeberg puts it. Saks says that his role at a wedding of two Jews is to “enact a halachic wedding” that requires both partners are Jews; but his role at weddings of interfaith couples is to “represent the Jewish side.” Because of that, he says he can do things he wouldn’t do in a halachic wedding – like co-officiate, with representation from the other faith background, or officiate on Shabbat.

It is fascinating, and I think rare, that Rabbi Saks is not bothered by having the name of Jesus said under the chuppah at weddings he conducts. He sees that as a statement not of theology, but about one partner’s relationship with Jesus, with Saks standing behind the couple.

Most fascinating is the suggestion that halacha can adapt to a more favorable view of interfaith marriage. (This is reminiscent of what Noah Feldman suggests in his book To Be a Jew Today). Saks suggests that the interfaith weddings he conducts, which he says are “questionable to some” – and that’s putting it very mildly – might in the future be viewed more generally as appropriate, or even normative. He refers to Blu Greenberg’s famous comment that “where there is a rabbinic will, there is a halachic way;” he refers to a Talmudic view that it takes one with real understanding to come up with a lenient position. The reason the Torah prohibits intermarriage with some tribes was that it would lead Jews astray to idolatry. The fact that today many interfaith couples want to embrace Judaism, not to take Jews away from it, could justify a different rule. For more on Rabbi Saks, see the Center’s Facebook post.

What’s Happening in the Institutional World

From the traditional world, a Chabad international gathering of young professionals includes a session on intermarriage led by Rabbi Eliezer Shemtov, author of “Rabbi, why can’t I marry her,” who said “It is our responsibility to adequately educate our community members on the importance of marrying Jewish and the dangers of intermarriage.”

From the liberal world, the Reform movement has launched “a new venture within the URJ focused on making it possible for individuals from a wide range of backgrounds (Jews of Color, LGBTQ+ identifying Jews, Jews with disabilities, people from interfaith backgrounds, including but not limited to single people, people with kids and people choosing to remain childfree, and others from a variety of often underrepresented backgrounds) to engage with Judaism in ways that are meaningful to them.” It’s not clear whether this effort, led by assistant vice president Sarah Norton, will focus on people in interfaith relationships.

I often note when institutions don’t say anything about interfaith families in situations where I think they should. This month, in the Conservative world, an otherwise very interesting essay, “Conservative Judaism must slay its zombies,” doesn’t say anything about the movement’s approach to interfaith families. An article about JCC’s innovating for changing times doesn’t say anything about any focus on engaging interfaith families. The board chair of Global Jewry’s essay “Toward a United Jewish People” doesn’t say anything about interfaith families being included in that unity.

Also in the news:

  • A nice piece, “This Is the Jewish People,” about all of the people from different faith backgrounds participating in a progressive synagogue, with Linda Rich concluding, “A few short decades back, many thought that intermarriage would destroy the Jewish people. We lacked the confidence to imagine that our way of life would appeal to others, that more would opt in, and that fewer would opt out.”
  • Another nice piece by Robert Jones, who argues that the period of time between Juneteenth and the Fourth of July could, like the ten days of repentance, be a period for critical improvement; this caught my eye: “Among the many gifts of being in an interfaith marriage is the ongoing invitation to experience and learn from a tradition that is not your own. As I’ve participated in the Jewish High Holidays over the last 20 years, I’ve been moved by the power of the moral space that opens in the ten days [of repentance].”
  • A reality show about an Orthodox Jewish man engaged to a Catholic woman who may be converting?
  • A Kveller article by an intermarried woman raising her daughter with Jewish humor.

June 2024 News from the Center

|

Momentous Decision

Hebrew Union College decided – finally! – to revoke its policy not to admit students who are in interfaith relationships. This is long-awaited – overdue, really – good news. Something I’ve been advocating for, for fifteen years.

A policy that says that rabbis can’t be in interfaith relationships can only be based on the view that interfaith marriage is bad and partners from different faith backgrounds are undesirable. There’s really no other explanation. So revoking such a policy is an important step.

Unfortunately, in explaining the decision, HUC missed the opportunity to say, we’re revoking those views, we don’t care what the religious identity or background of the partners of Jews is, we only hope that everyone will engage Jewishly. Instead, they said that in-marriage was a value and that they were adding standards for their students that they have exclusively Jewish homes and children.

They probably had to do that in order to get enough approval of the policy change, but it’s still unfortunate, and illustrates that there’s more work to be done.

I spell all of this out in my JTA op-ed, “The Reform movement’s decision to admit intermarried rabbis is good. Truly welcoming them would be great.” (also in the Times of Israel blogs)

Here is the decision, the JTA article about it, a great op-ed by Samira Mehta, a great blog post by Susan Katz Miller, and another piece by a Bay Area rabbi. I’ve only seen one criticism so far, that doesn’t really explain the reasons. If you’re interested in more, there’s an entire section of the Center’s website devoted to the seminary admissions issue, with a reading list (PDF) of statements on the question, and a history (PDF) of the discussion to date.

Momentous News from 18Doors

On June 18, 18Doors announced that Jodi Bromberg was stepping down as CEO, and a national search to fill her position was underway. As the founder of what used to be known as InterfaithFamily, I care a great deal about the ongoing health and growth the organization. I hired Jodi to be my successor and I have always thought she did a great job of maintaining the organization and keeping it going. I didn’t agree with every change, but the website and officiation referral service are tremendously improved, the Rukin Rabbinic Fellowship is a jewel, and she built a strong and engaged board.

I wish Jodi happiness and fulfillment in her next steps, continuing success for the organization, fulfillment for Laurie Beijen as she becomes the new board chair, and good luck to Alicia Oberman as she heads the search committee.

Also in the News

There was a second annual Re-charging Reform conference this month, where most of the discussion understandably was reportedly about Israel and antisemitism.. Other than a session at which Jodi Bromberg spoke, I’m not aware of engaging interfaith families being a topic of discussion.

The URJ website had a nice article about the 150th anniversary of Temple Emanuel in Denver. I visited more than once, long ago when Rabbi Steve Foster was there; it’s a flagship Reform congregation. When asked about future projects, the current senior rabbi, Joe Black, said “We’re looking at how to be more affirming to Jews of Color, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and Jews living with disabilities.” They did have a program on May 15 in which Adam Pollack, 18Doors’ chief program officer of 18Doors, participated; but I thought Rabbi Black’s not mentioning interfaith families in response to the question was telling.

Also worth reading:

May 2024 News from the Center

|

After October 7

The JTA Teen Fellowship produced an excellent article, “For teens in interfaith families, the war in Gaza can be a stress test of their Jewish identities,” that describes the experiences of three Jewish teens from interfaith families. Fern Chertok, a leading researcher on interfaith families, said “[b]eing able to learn from different viewpoints is often a dividend for teens from interfaith families… They are the natural bridge builders.” Rabbi Jessica Lowenthal, who works with teens from interfaith families as director of her congregation’s religious school, made the most important point – she “doesn’t see a difference between how interfaith families or other Jewish families relate to Israel, given the disagreements and diverse upbringings among Jews.”

The JFNA staff responsible for a new JFNA survey described in eJP “newfound interest in Jewish life” after October 7, describing a “Surge” of people showing up who previously were not very engaged and who are “craving community.” The authors say this “explosive increase in interest and engagement … is an opportunity and responsibility of historic proportions;” a key response is to “increase belonging,” more training in relational engagement for staff and volunteers, more notice and welcome of everyone. So far, no data has been released on whether the Jewish engagement of Jewish respondents was affected by how their partners who are not Jewish feel in Jewish settings.

New York Community Study

The UJA-Federation of New York federation released the New York 2023 Jewish Community Study, discussed in the New York Jewish Week and in eJP.  

The JTA story only noted that “The rate of intermarriage is lower in New York than among Jews in the rest of the country.” While the overall percent of New York married couples who are intermarried is 37%, it is 46% of all non-Orthodox couples, and 57% of non-Orthodox couples who are 30-49 years old (compared to 34% of those who are 65+).

The eJP report quotes Ira Sheskin as attributing the 6% growth in Jewish households since the last survey in 2011 “in part to interfaith marriages” – “If two Jews marry one another, you get one Jewish household. If two Jews marry non-Jews, you get two Jewish households.”

The study found that 16% of adults in intermarried families report they are raising their children Jewish and 5% Jewish and something else (compared to 96% and 0% respectively in in-married families). Emily Sigalow, one of the study’s directors, is quoted in the eJP story as saying “a lower percentage of interfaith couples said they raised their children Jewish than expected… In other big Jewish communities like Los Angeles and Chicago, there are higher percentages [of people saying their children are Jewish]…” Sigalow “attributed the difference to how pollsters phrase the questions: ‘We asked about how children are raised, whereas others asked about their Jewish identity.’”

Importantly, as to 20% of the children in intermarried families, and 27% of the children in those families under three years of age, the parents have not decided yet on religious upbringing – representing a big opportunity. Moreover, 44% of adults in intermarried families reporting they are raising their children as “none of the above” – yet 66% of those families celebrate Hanukkah and 62% attend a Passover seder. This illustrates the lack of clarity and consistency around what it means to raise a child Jewish, or Jewish and something else, or neither of those choices.

However, only 27% of intermarried households with children held a Jewish naming ceremony, and only 17% have had or are planning to have a bar or bat mitzvah. The low figure for naming ceremonies is understandable given the large percentage of undecideds with younger children, but the low figure for bar/bat mitzvah, when children obviously are older, is concerning.

The study asked questions about the reasons people did not attend religious services, but unlike some other local community studies, did not give as a possible answer not feeling welcome.

Finally, the study asked respondents how important it would be that their grandchildren be Jewish and marry someone Jewish. They conclude from the answers that Jewish New Yorkers feel that “Jewish continuity is important” – suggesting, wrongly I would say, that marrying someone Jewish is necessary for Jewish continuity. In fact, intermarrieds in the survey understood this: while 42% said it was important that their grandchildren be Jewish, only 17% said it was important that their grandchildren marry someone Jewish.

Progress

In March I wrote that Noah Feldman’s new book To Be a Jew Today offers A Fresh Perspective on Interfaith Marriage. This month an article in the Harvard Law Bulletin (where Feldman teaches) says he “explores the tension in discouraging intermarriage amid societal expectations that we should be free to marry whomever we happen to love, writing that ‘there is something troubling about saying that I can only love someone if the person is part of my Us, not if the person is part of my Them.’”

Samir Mehta’s “For American Jews, interfaith weddings are a new normal – and creatively weave both traditions together” is a very pleasant recounting of the ways interfaith couples incorporate their families’ traditions. At the end, under the heading “Tough conversations,” she writes that “Not everything is fun and easy in the world of interfaith weddings.” Couples who she interviewed told her stories about their weddings – but some were about rabbis who would not officiate for them, or family members who disapproved. But she concludes, “Overall, however, most people’s weddings were happy memories that offered hints to the interfaith lives and household that they would go on to create together.”

The second (perhaps annual?) Re-CHARGING Reform Judaism conference is being held May 29 and 30. As I wrote last year, although one of the motivations for the gathering then was “lagging Reform synagogue attendance and declining revenues,” nothing was said about inclusion of interfaith families as a way to reverse declining enrollment. I was pleased to see that this year, 18Doors’ Jodi Bromberg is a panelist, and I hope to report on what was said next month.

Also in the news:

  • In a positive development from Israel, the Supreme Court ruled that non-Orthodox conversions conducted in Israel would be recognized for purposes of Israeli citizenship. Previously, non-Orthodox conversions outside of Israel were recognized, but not those conduced in Israel. One leading political figure “welcomed the ruling, saying, ‘We all need to live here in mutual tolerance and respect.’”
  • A report of a presentation by Dr. Tatjana Lichtenstein, a professor at the University of Texas, on the experiences of intermarried families in the Holocaust.
  • PRRI published a survey on “Family Religious Dynamics and Interfaith Relationships” but unfortunately did not report any data on Jews or Jewish families.

December 2023 News from the Center

|

Most of the Jewish world’s attention is still focused – appropriately I would say – on what’s happening in Israel. But it feels right to start reporting and commenting on interfaith inclusion news again. Especially since December is always a big month for interfaith families.

December Holidays

The UK Institute for Jewish Policy Research issued a new study that found that 28% of Jews in the UK have a Christmas tree at least some years. For interfaith couples, it’s 45% every year, compared to 36% who light Hanukkah candles. I appreciated that the JPR referred to Christmas trees as a “cultural manifestation.”

Most important, the JPR, which is a pretty traditional organization, did not criticize or bemoan the presence of Christmas trees, but instead calmly concluded that the findings “capture both the tenacity of Jewishness today and the realities of Jewish life in the modern multicultural age… Maintaining a Jewish identity in a non-Jewish society has long been a challenge; the ways in which we adopt non-Jewish customs and practices says a great deal about who we are and how we manage those dynamics.” (The Jewish News article on the report had a catchy title – “Oy to the World” – and refers to “ChristmasTreeGate” – but ultimately quotes the same conclusion.)

I read a few stories in Jewish and secular media about how interfaith families were celebrating the December holidays, but didn’t really notice anything new. The Reform movement’s website had some nice and very accepting advice in Five Ways to Approach Family Conversations Around Hanukkah and Christmas.

There was one story I didn’t care for, “I packed away Christmas 35 years ago, but I still bring holiday joy to others.” Janet Silver Ghent grew up in a Jewish family that celebrated Christmas, then married and divorced a man who was not Jewish, then married a Jewish man who had been in an interfaith marriage; at that point she gave up Christmas because she “reclaimed [her] Jewish identity after decades of assimilation.” She told a step-daughter, who asked why they couldn’t have a little tree, “a little tree is like a little pregnant.”

Ghent’s story stood out to me for a tone that is critical of Jewish families that celebrate Christmas, something I did not see much of elsewhere this December. Assimilation means losing Jewish identity and practice; it seems that more and more people in the Jewish world understand that having a Christmas tree does not mean that an interfaith family has assimilated.

Attitudes about Interfaith Marriage

The Shalom Hartman Institute and its co-president Donniel Hartman, an Orthodox rabbi, are deservedly among the most highly-regarded Jewish educational institutions and leaders in the world. When someone of Rabbi Hartman’s stature speaks about engaging interfaith families positively, it’s amazing, a cause for celebration.

In his new book, Who Are The Jews – And Who Can We Become, Hartman refers to “non-assimilationist exogamy;” says “most North American Jews who marry non-Jews do not see selves as rejecting Jewishness;” says interfaith marriage “can no longer be a boundary that defines Jewishness – it is now the norm of Jewish life;” talks about expanding “the parameters of Jewish identity” and “the inclusion of intermarried Jews and their spouses who chose to join us;” and recommends, “rather than digging our heels into a self-defeating discourse of denial, we marshal our collective creativity to ensure a vital next chapter in the Jewish people’s story.” This was all music to my ears.

I was equally amazed when the institute’s US-based co-president, Yehuda Kurtzer, another top Jewish public intellectual, in an opinion about the reshaping of the American Zionist left after October 7, said,  “[T]he big tent should be inclusive of anyone seeking to belong. One fascinating outcome of this could mean that we stop the decadeslong obsession with intermarriage as the marker of Jewish peoplehood. After Oct. 7, identification with the Jewish people at a time of suffering is a much healthier, and maybe more accurate, indicator of belonging.”

Speaking of top intellectual leaders, I was very saddened by the death of Rabbi David Ellenson, the much beloved past president of Hebrew Union College. As explained in my remembrance, he had the most remarkable generosity of spirit of anyone I ever met. Although I publicly criticized his decision to maintain HUC’s policy not to admit rabbinic students in interfaith relationships, he became a supporter and a friend,  publicly endorsing InterfaithFamily’s work several times, speaking at the afternoon of learning when I retired from InterfaithFamily, and providing the cover endorsement for my book. He never said this to me, but I can only imagine that he felt our policy differences were disputes for the sake of heaven.

Research

The Cohen Center at Brandeis released the 2022 San Diego Jewish Community Study. In San Diego, 49% of married Jewish individuals are intermarried, and 67% of couples that include a Jewish person are intermarried; in intermarried households, 55% of children are considered by their parents to be Jewish, and another 20% are considered to be Jewish and another religion. During 2024 I hope to complete my analysis of the Cohen Center’s recent local community studies.

I am excited about the prospects of a new study, funded by the Crown Family, Harold Grinspoon and Jim Joseph foundations. The study by Rosov Consulting and led by Alex Pomson will explore “the interests, needs, hopes, and challenges of a wide diversity of Jewish families, including those with more than one religious or cultural tradition…” They will examine which elements of the parents’ heritages they wish to continue, which they have chosen not to, and why.

The first part of the study is a just-released review of research which clearly notes that welcoming Jewish attitudes and institutions make a difference. I appreciated the review’s statement that the last decade’s research “dispels the still-common tropes in communal discourse about the ‘dangers’ [interfaith families] pose to Jewish continuity.” I appreciated the recognition that structural factors, including institutional policies and ideologies, impact on couples’ decision. For interfaith families, that means experiencing pressure to convert, encountering attitudes and policies that privilege matrilineal descent, and hearing interfaith marriage characterized as a problem. I appreciated the review’s noting that for LGBTQ+ couples who are also interfaith, “many of the Christian partners were more favorably inclined toward Judaism because they viewed the Jewish community as more welcoming of LGBTQ+ people.”

I liked what the review said about terminology:

[W]e use the term “interfaith” to refer to all couples and their families in which one partner is Jewish (in some way) and the other is from a different religious, cultural or ethnic background, including those in which one partner has converted to Judaism, those in which each partner adheres to a different faith tradition, and those who do not consider themselves to be religious. All such families face similar challenges in negotiating which elements of the parents’ childhood heritage to perpetuate or discard.

Finally, coming full circle back to December, the review also notes the negative influence of Jews choosing to “code” Christmas traditions as “religious” and not “cultural,” and “therefore incompatible with a Jewish home, even though … arguably devoid of strictly religious meaning for many who engage in them.”

I find all of this very promising, and look forward to further reports as the study takes shape.

* * * * * *

At this difficult time, I hope your December holidays were as good as they could be, and I send sincere wishes for a good and better new year.

August 2023 News from the Center

|

Our Jerusalem Post Op-ed

In the run-up to the High Holy Days, the Jerusalem Post published my op-ed, Can Judaism find a loving approach to include interfaith families?

The UK’s Institute for Jewish Policy Research had published a report of rates of interfaith marriage around the world. I was startled when the Post’s editorial said interfaith marriage is not only “a significant phenomenon that cannot be ignored” but more importantly that it must “be approached thoughtfully and sensitively.” I was more startled when the editors applauded creative approaches to interfaith marriage that among other things took into account “the feelings of both Jewish and non-Jewish spouses.”

My op-ed applauds the Post editors’ enlightened thinking. I wanted to say more about what a thoughtful and sensitive approach would involve, and took the opportunity to explain how considering and treating interfaith couples as equal to inmarried couples, and partners from different faith backgrounds as equal to Jews, is both essential to more interfaith families feeling included in Jewish settings, and very challenging to traditional views.

The IJPR’s executive director, Jonathan Boyd, in his own op-ed in the Post, said that in the month of Av, “We’re called on to choose between love and hate across our differences. Choose the former, and we may achieve something together.” In my piece I asked if a loving approach to interfaith couples and partners from different faith backgrounds was too much to hope for, and that’s where the Post got the title.

Embark Acquired by Moishe House

eJewishPhilanthropy reported that Embark, a program for interfaith couples funded by Laura Lauder, has been acquired by Moishe House. Embark has run programs in Miami, Atlanta, San Francisco and Philadelphia to educate interfaith couples about Jewish life and rituals; under Moishe House, a two-day retreat will be added, allowing participants to meet, and Moishe House will offer interfaith couples the option to live its trademark subsidized homes in exchange for hosting Jewish programming for fellow Jewish young professionals.

This sounds like a great match.

The article has a lot of back-and-forth about conversion; I appreciated Laura Lauder’s conclusion, “Whether or not people convert is not going to be a sign of success. We enable young Jewish couples to raise Jewish children, and I would like the world to know that Jewish life in America is going to thrive with interfaith couples, not despite interfaith couples.”

Traditional Attitudes About Interfaith Marriage

The IJPR report, and the Post article about it, are refreshing for concluding that low fertility rates – not interfaith marriage – are the “main threat to Jewish demographic sustainability.” But the author, Dr. Daniel Staetsky, clearly expresses a traditional perspective, in particular when he says that “transmission of Jewishness is partial in the case of intermarried [Jewish] mothers… based on empirical reality.” There isn’t acknowledgment or recognition of the possibilities for full, powerful “transmission of Jewishness” by interfaith parents.

Dr. Staetsky says that “the definition of Jewishness dictated by Jewish law… is broadly accepted by all Jews, while the modifications to it, or expansions, are not.” That’s the root of the problem – the traditional perspective doesn’t tolerate inclusion of interfaith couples or their children. It views high rates of interfaith marriage as a problem, a failure. Comparing the rate of all married Jews who are intermarried, the IJPR study finds the US in the middle of the pack at 45%, compared to Israel at 5% and Poland at 76%; a self-congratulatory comment in the British press notes their 22% rate is third lowest in the world.

The report is positive in mentioning the possibility that Jewish law could change, saying that that is beyond the limits of a demographic study and “belongs in the realm of rabbinical thought.” It is also positive in recognizing the “critical question” of “how to treat the consequences of intermarriage” and asking “How and to what extent … should communities accept and incorporate the offspring and spouses of intermarried Jews into communal activities.” It goes on to ask, “can some normative standards be developed across the Jewish world?” Given traditional attitudes, I’m not optimistic about that.

Conservative Movement

More evidence of the persistence of traditional attitudes is news that the Rabbinical Assembly’s ban on Conservative rabbis officiating at weddings of interfaith couples will continue, the outcome of a strategic planning process. The RA reportedly does want to help rabbis “lead productive conversations with interfaith couples prior to their weddings, even though they can’t officiate.” The article describes a “deep divide,” possibly generational, among the movement’s rabbis, with some optimistic that the ban would not change even in the long term, and others openly defying it.

From our perspective, even if there are “productive conversations,” the ban will continue to make interfaith couples feel that they do not belong in Conservative synagogues.

On the other hand, the schedule for the United Synagogue’s March 2024 convention includes “Can We Talk About Patrilineal Descent.” The description includes: “Given the reality of modern families and ready availability of genetic testing, are our reasons for preserving matrilineal descent still valid? Does maintaining the status quo align with our egalitarian values? Our commitment to LGBTIA+ inclusion? How has it felt when we’ve needed to turn people away from our synagogues and institutions? Is the language of “completion” or “affirmation” instead of conversion sufficient to create meaningful portals of entry?” It’s a positive sign that these questions are being discussed.

Jewish Unity Efforts

In an effort to connect with the editors of the Jerusalem Post to submit the op-ed, I reached out for help to Sandy Cardin, a longtime friend and strong advocate for inclusion in the Jewish community. Sandy is Chair of the Board of the Global Jewry initiative. In my op-ed I said that efforts to build unity among Jews in Israel and the Diaspora, like Global Jewry and President Herzog’s Kol Ha’am, did not explicitly refer to the need to include interfaith families and partners from different faith backgrounds.

Sandy pointed me to new text on the Global Jewry website: “We believe in inclusivity and embrace Jews of all backgrounds, affiliations, and levels of observance. Whether you’re Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform, Just Jewish, exploring your Jewish identity or supporting your Jewish partner, you’ll find a warm and accepting space here.”

I asked the Jerusalem Post to change the statement about Global Jewry, which was no longer accurate, prior to publication, but they unfortunately did not.

I’m thrilled to see the inclusive language on the Global Jewry site, and thrilled that Sandy invited the Center to partner with Global Jewry. We look forward to participating as we continue to work with all who will listen to the call for a more inclusive unity among Jewish communities.

In Other News

I have mixed feelings about “There is a solution to 70% intermarriage among US Jews.” On the one hand, the author’s “solution” is to “make immigration [to Israel] easy, attractive and compelling for families who have intermarried” so that their children in turn will not intermarry, given the rarity of interfaith marriage in Israel. Not only is this unrealistic, it is based on an underlying attitude that interfaith marriage is bad. On the other hand, the author does call strongly for welcoming and embracing interfaith couples and their children, and even for Jewish weddings in Israel for children of interfaith couples. Sadly, that’s unrealistic too.

I liked “Building the Jewish Future One Bunk at a Time” because it says “Jewish camps are essential in building Jewish identity, creating lifelong Jewish friendships and nurturing future Jewish leaders” – which is great – and doesn’t say that attending camps leads to less interfaith marriage. I do wish the authors had included some mention of the importance of Jewish camps for the children of interfaith families though.

I liked a JTA article about the wedding of David Corenswet, the actor who will next play Superman, because it is so matter of fact that the actor’s rabbi, Edward Cohn in New Orleans, co-officiated his wedding in a Catholic church. The church’s wedding coordinator reportedly said, “The bride and groom were just so determined to intersperse the Jewish traditions with the Catholic traditions, which to me just enhanced the beauty and the strength of both faiths.” Rabbi Cohn said Jewishness is an important part of the actor’s life and that the couple intended to affiliate with a congregation. A model of inclusion keeping doors open to Jewish engagement.

This Torah portion commentary was very challenging – it says that Deuteronomy 23, 20-21 says that it is permissible to lend money and charge interest to a “gentile” but not to a fellow Jew. The author, an Orthodox rabbi, says this is not discrimination against those who are not Jewish, they are to be treated with justice and morality, but there is a preferred attitude towards Jews, our spiritual brothers, to be treated like siblings. I don’t know, sounds discriminatory to me.

Thanks to Susan Katz Miller for pointing out that in an otherwise fascinating article about the Bradley Cooper “Jewface” controversy about his prosthetic nose playing Leonard Bernstein, the author says, “I’m Jewish, and was raised culturally Jewish, but because I had a Jewish father and a Catholic mother and am therefore not a matrilineal Jew, I grew up hearing from various schmucks and nudniks that I was ‘not really Jewish,’ ‘not technically Jewish,’ and ‘not Jewish enough.’”

Finally, a very interesting piece on ableism and people with disabilities included this statement: “The presumption of normativity forces disabled folks to shoulder the burden of disclosure and do the work of negotiating access. Every disabled person I know has stories about the cost of living in a one-size-fits-all society, about being shut out by attitudes, assumptions and physical structures that demand everyone’s body and mind fit within the same basic norm. This isn’t only a disability story. Fat bodies, Black and brown bodies, Jewish bodies, Muslim bodies, femme bodies and queer, trans and nonbinary bodies — so many of us know the costs that normativity exacts.” I wish the author had included interfaith families among the groups disadvantaged by notions of normativity.

July 2023 News from the Center

|
Progress

The Forward ran a great article by Joanne Kaufman: ‘Are you a Jew?’ To serve on a synagogue board, increasingly the answer can be ‘no’.  Kaufman says that the Jewish movements “don’t track the number of congregations with non-Jewish board members… But conversations with leaders in those movements indicate that while it’s not typical to have a non-Jew on the board, it’s no longer rare.”

Kaufman apparently was not aware that there actually is data on this important issue. The Center conducted a survey of Reform congregations’ interfaith inclusion policies in 2019; 50% of the movement’s congregations participated; the by-laws of 43% of congregations permitted partners from different faith backgrounds to serve as members of the board, and of 21% permitted them to serve as officers (not necessarily including president). The Center conducted a survey of Reconstructionist congregations’ interfaith inclusion policies in 2021; 48% of the movement’s synagogues and havurot participated; 68% permitted partners from different faith backgrounds to serve as Board members, 66% as officers other than President; 28% as President; 2% did not permit them to hold leadership positions.

The Center advocates for treating partners from different faith backgrounds as equal to their Jewish partners. More synagogues allowing them to serve as board members and officers is an important step in that direction.

The Interfaith Families Project posted an edited transcription of a great talk by Rabbi Lex Rofeberg of Judaism Unbound and discussion with Susan Katz Miller. You can also watch a video of the presentation, which has a lot more than the transcription, here.

Missed Opportunities

An eminent group of Jewish leaders penned an eJewishPhilanthropy letterabout efforts like “Our Common Destiny,” a “global effort to build stronger bonds between and among Jews all over the world,” mentioning ENTER: The Jewish Peoplehood Alliance, and Israeli President Issac Herzog’s “Kol Ha’am – Voice of the People: The President’s Initiative for Worldwide Jewish Dialogue.”

The group announces “a new, grassroots global initiative” that aims to “provide a platform for Jews of all ages, celebrate their appreciation for the Jewish values, principles and heritage we all share, reaffirm the importance of Jewish peoplehood and declare their commitment to strengthening the global Jewish community.” They invite people to share their ideas at info@globaljewry.org.

Dialogue and unity are laudable goals, but the descriptions of efforts like this tend to be the same – there’s never even a nod to the many partners from different backgrounds who are participating in Jewish communities; there’s tone-deafness to their pervasive presence in the North American Jewish community – which needs to be inclusive of them in order to be strengthened.
Is This Really Necessary?

Book author Andrew Ridker wrote a cute storyabout how he tracked down the subjects of a photograph of two teenagers awkwardly slow dancing at a bmitzvah, because  it was perfect for the cover of his book. Unfortunately, he went off the rails with this: “The short, brown-haired boy dancing with the tall, blonde girl seems to stand in for…  the history of the Jewboy and the shiksa.” Ridker said that tracking down the photo subjects taught him “something about the state of Jewish-American identity today.” I hope drawing distinctions like that isn’t what he learned.

In Other News

The May program on Radical Inclusion at the Springfield MA JCC is now available on the Centers YouTube channel here.

The last News from the Center missed two things from late June:

  • a nice piece by Rabbi David Levin in the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent, Intermarriage Can Enrich Our Community
  • a report in the Jerusalem Post that as many as three quarters of Russian immigrants to Israel are not Jewish themselves – they are able to immigrate because under current law – which the current government wants to change – having one Jewish grandparent is sufficient.

* * * * *

Please consider donating to the Center with a contribution you can make here. We appreciate your support! And please follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube and Twitter.

I hope your summer continues to be good,

June 2023 News from the Center

|
Re-CHARGING Reform – More Silence and Missed Opportunities

There was an important conference May 31-June 1, Re-CHARGING Reform Judaism. More than 300 rabbis and lay leaders attended, according to JNSand Religion News Service accounts. I wasn’t invited, but have watched several of the sessions on youtube, including the keynote by lead organizer Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch (which you can also read here) and a panel of Reform movement leaders offering their vision of the future.

An important motivation for the gathering, as the JNS story puts it, apparently was “lagging Reform synagogue attendance and declining revenues.” I continue to be astonished when Jewish leaders do not emphasize the imperative to be more inclusive of more interfaith families as key to reversing declining engagement – but that’s what happened at this gathering.

Coincidentally, the New York Times had a fascinating opinion piece on “dechurching” – the decline in people regularly attending houses of worship which the piece says is particularly prevalent among Jews. It notes that people are looking for new spiritual communities that are “less exclusionary than the denominations they were raised in;” one, who was raised Jewish but “became disillusioned when I could not find a rabbi who would conduct an interfaith marriage ceremony,” joined and now leads the Interfaith Families Project in the DC area.

Any lesson about not being exclusionary was not reflected in the movement leaders’ session at the Re-CHARGING Reform conference. Rabbi Rick Jacobs, head of the URJ, did say that “our numeric strength is largely due to our inclusion of interfaith families who have felt our loving embrace… an embrace that has been transformational.” He continued that those not yet connected “still include many interfaith families” – but said nothing about what could be done to connect more of them.

Rabbi Hara Person, head of the CCAR that serves rabbis, said nothing about helping them engage and include interfaith families; she did mention the importance of the CCAR’s resolutions – which still include an exclusionary one that says “we do not condone mixed marriage” and “the ideal toward which we rabbis strive, teach and lead is that Jews should marry Jews.” (Coincidentally, a Tablet article on Reform rabbis seeing “an increase in conversion – much of it coming from the LGBTQ+ community” notes that the CCAR “runs year-round programming supporting the LGBTQ+ community and clergy, such as training for inclusive worship life cycle events.”)

Andrew Rehfeld, head of HUC, referred to the smallest entering classes at the Reform seminary in decades – with no mention of its exclusionary policy not to admit or ordain rabbinic students who are in interfaith relationships.

Rabbi Hirsch in his keynote said we need to figure out how to engage the unengaged and to attract many more people. It made me nervous when he emphasized Jewish particularism and the particularistic covenant of the Jewish people, because that could mean circling the wagons and including only those who are Jewish (including those who convert) and not also those who do Jewish – an exclusionary approach that will not attract or engage interfaith families.

In another missed opportunity, the Jewish Federations of North America announced their priorities for the coming year, which include (in addition to Ukraine, security, antisemitism, and Israel) expanding their equity, diversity and inclusion initiative – an effort that focuses on Jews of color and not on interfaith families.

The silence of Reform movement and federation leaders on including interfaith families fails to counter the continuing Orthodox voice in Israel that denounces any inclusion of interfaith families at all. There was an awful diatribe in Arutz Sheva by an Orthodox rabbi and professor, Dov Fischer, who contends that many of those reported to be Jewish in the 2020 Pew report aren’t “in fact” Jewish because they don’t meet Orthodox standards. In a previous piece, Alan Cooperman, principal author of the Pew report, aptly explained that like all other surveys, Pew is based on self-reporting of identity, and that Pew didn’t take a normative position on the question “who is a Jew?” That’s something that our movement and communal leaders need to do.
More Studies

The Cohen Center released another Jewish community study, of Portland OR. This summer I’m hoping to update my analysis of the Cohen Center’s studies to include the most recent ones. In the meantime, I noted that 63% of married couples are intermarried, and that while 51% of inmarried respondents feel some or a great deal of a sense of belonging to the local Jewish community, only 14% of intermarried respondents do.

In Other News

  • There were not one but two articles about parents disinheriting children who intermarried.
  • Another celebrity with intermarried parents, basketball’s Amari Bailey, identifies as Jewish.

What Local Community Studies Tell Us About Interfaith Family Inclusion

|

Seven years ago, the Pew Report found that 72% of non-Orthodox Jews were intermarrying. One of its many other findings – that while 89% of intermarried Jews were proud to be Jewish, only 59% had a strong sense of belonging to the Jewish people (51-2) – raises the question whether interfaith couples feel welcomed and included in Jewish communities.

Since the Pew Report, the Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies at Brandeis University has conducted four studies of interfaith couples and eleven local Jewish community studies, analyzed by the Center for Radically Inclusive Judaism in a recent paper. What surfaces repeatedly in both bodies of research is the feeling of being “other” that people in interfaith relationships say they experience. We believe that the impact and extent of that feeling of being “other” explains the Pew Report’s finding that interfaith families do not feel that they belong to the Jewish people, and points the way to what needs to be done to engage them.

Studies of Interfaith Families

The 2019 Beyond Welcoming: Engaging Intermarried Couples in Jewish Life study stated “we have succeeded in making intermarried families feel welcome,” and that “barriers to engagement with Jewish life have been largely eliminated.” These statements were premature declarations of victory, in part because of the study’s own statement that interfaith couples who did not feel completely welcome “emphasized their feelings of being ‘other’ and not fitting in.” (42)

The Swimming Upstream: Interfaith Families in Toronto study, released in August 2020 and largely unnoticed in the midst of the COVID pandemic, is inconsistent with the declaration of success at welcoming. It states that “Couples felt unwelcome when interfaith relationships were denigrated, when the non-Jewish partner felt pressure to convert, or when they were expected to negate or hide the non-Jewish partner’s religious identity.” (1) It repeatedly describes interfaith couples’ feelings with words like “outcasts,” “outsider,” “inferior option” and “undesirable” (emphasis added):

[T]o be accepted as part of a community with families like ours would be nice for us. We feel like outcasts sometimes. (Non-Jewish partner, survey) (14)

One partner often feels like an outsider, so it’s difficult to prioritize events/feel comfortable attending. (Jewish partner, survey) (33)

“[T]he desire to be seen in a positive light and not denigrated as an inferior option, inherently less Jewish, or dysfunctional” was what they most wished the Jewish community understood about them. (28)

Couples fear some Jewish institutions will view them and their families as undesirable or unfortunate. (41)

While the tone of the two other studies of interfaith couples, in Boston and Pittsburgh, are generally more positive about the interfaith couples’ experiences, still in Boston, in some cases, “despite the initial welcome by a congregation, couples felt an undercurrent of disapproval or being treated as outsiders rather than as integral and valued members of the community” (17) and in Pittsburgh, some non-Jewish partners worried that their acceptance might be conditional or superficial and were concerned that they or their children were thought of differently or more negatively than inmarried couples and their children (12)

The Toronto study finds that “Many interfaith couples indicated they felt pressure from family, friends, and religious leaders for the non-Jewish partner to convert to Judaism.” In Toronto and in Pittsburgh (12), expectations about conversion felt unwelcoming, judgmental and intrusive.

I wish that the Jewish community didn’t put so much emphasis on having a Jewish spouse or partner. I find it highly offensive when my husband’s siblings speak about not accepting if their children were to date someone who wasn’t Jewish. It is offensive to myself and my daughter and really turns me off of the religion. (Non-Jewish partner,Toronto survey) (28)

Families are perceived to be more welcoming than community organizations. In Toronto, “Non-Jewish partners especially appreciated welcoming messages and actions that made them feel they belonged in their new extended families.”

When I first met [Jewish partner’s] parents, it felt like I was kind of already part of the family. I wasn’t the outcast. They’re very welcoming and very friendly. (Non-Jewish partner, interview) (30)

Feeling welcomed in families but not in Jewish organizations may explain why 89% of Toronto surveyed couples engaged in some celebration of the High Holidays, but 76% did not attend services, celebrating instead in home settings with family or friends. (13)

Local Community Studies

A. Interfaith Families Connection to Jewish Community

In the Twin Cities, as one example, 48% of intermarrieds feel not connected to either online or local community, compared to 8% of inmarrieds. (52) The following average data from the local community studies suggest that interfaith families do not experience being welcomed or made to feel part of Jewish communities:

  • Fewer intermarried (25%) than inmarried (54%) respondents said that being Jewish is very much a matter of community. Fewer intermarried (57%) than inmarried (89%) respondents said that being part of a Jewish community is important or essential to what being Jewish means to them.
  • Fewer intermarried (5%) than inmarried (28%) people say that they feel very much of a connection with or very much like a part of their local Jewish community.
  • Fewer intermarrieds (18%) than inmarrieds (43%) said they feel very much connected to Israel, a traditional measure of feeling part of the Jewish people.

B. Welcoming

People in interfaith relationships generally found their local Jewish organizations and community less welcoming than inmarrieds did. Six of the studies explicitly asked how welcoming the local Jewish community was to interfaith families; 54% of intermarrieds, compared to 69% of inmarrieds, said their local Jewish community was a little/somewhat or very much welcoming; more intermarrieds (42%) than inmarrieds (25%) said they had no opinion.

In Boston, for one example, 20% of intermarrieds compared to 8% of inmarrieds said that not welcoming was a reason they did not give their children Jewish education (TA 42). In Baltimore, as another example, only 15% of intermarrieds very much agreed that local Jewish organizations were welcoming to “people like you,” compared to 46% of inmarrieds. (TA (Technical Appendices) 121) The executive summary of the Baltimore study bluntly states: “Households that include an intermarried couple tend to feel that the community is not welcoming to them, does not care about them, and does not support them.” (3)

C. What Interfaith Families Say About Welcoming and Inclusion

Several local community studies invited comments about what prevented people in interfaith relationships from participating in Jewish life. In Baltimore (82) some interfaith families “felt unwelcomed in Jewish spaces, or feared they would be, because of who they are – in some cases, this belief was a result of direct experience and in others, it was an assumption.”

My wife is not Jewish, so my children are not Jewish according to Halacha, even though I am teaching them about Jewish culture. I feel like my family and I may not be accepted by the Jewish community.

As the non-Jewish spouse in a Jewish family, I am worried I won’t be accepted and have felt that way in some Jewish events in the course of my relationship with my husband. (84)

In the Twin Cities, despite a general feeling that the community is supportive of their needs, “some members of interfaith families, expressed their struggles with feeling accepted and welcomed.”

A major gap is making interfaith families feel welcome, especially the non-Jewish partner. This keeps us from being more involved when one person doesn’t feel welcome. (120)

In Pittsburgh, interfaith families felt that the community could do more to make them feel welcome.

We have a mix of religions in our home, though in practice we only practice Judaism. We found that we were not always welcomed or respected at [our area] congregations. Even Reform ones. (90)

In Washington, some interfaith families reported ways that the community made them feel unwelcome. One said,

As someone from an interfaith household, it’s hard to engage with the community if I have to convince my spouse, ‘Don’t worry, you’ll feel comfortable and welcome.’ She often feels like the Jewish community is insular and skeptical of non-Jews, and that makes it hard for me to find ways to engage in the community as well. (93)

Dual Faith Families

Data from the local community studies show that 15% of the children of intermarried parents are being raised Jewish and another religion. In the Twin Cities local community study (24) and the Boston study of interfaith families (17-8), some couples expressed concern about not being fully accepted if they decided to raise their child in two religions, or include both religions in their home life and in their identification of themselves as a family. One Boston respondent said:

There are some resources that say that they’re open to interfaith couples… But, it’s framed as for folks wanting to build a Jewish home … What I hear about interfaith [is]couples where one person is Jewish, and a Jewish community accepts that because they’re going to raise their kids Jewish. We are going to raise our kids Jewish, but we’re also gonna raise them actively something else… I feel anxious about finding those resources that don’t want me to be a kind of blank… I’m not a ‘nothing’ religiously. (Non-Jewish partner) (17-8)

What Can Be Done

The local community studies typically end with recommendations for future action. The Pittsburgh study clearly states the two main lines of efforts needed to engage interfaith families:

If the community can increase its outreach to intermarried families to make them feel more a part of the community, and if the community can offer them programs that stimulate their interests and meet their needs, there may be a significant opportunity to increase their Jewish engagement and encourage their children to develop their Jewish identities. (90)

There is a great deal of data and comment in the Cohen Center’s research that supports the view that people in interfaith relationships feel less welcomed and less a “part of” than inmarried people do. What a significant segment of people in interfaith relationships say, demonstrates a persistent feeling of being “other.”

Some of their comments point the way forward. One from the Boston study of interfaith families highlights the difference between feeling welcomed as a guest and included as part of the community: “Some couples recounted being regularly welcomed when they attended activities at a synagogue but never really progressing to feel like they belonged in the community.” (17)

Inclusion requires treating partners from different faith backgrounds as equals, like the Jewish partner’s Toronto family who treat the partner from a different faith background “as if I’m Jewish” (31), or the congregation in Boston where both partners are “treated very equally as members of the community” and are “both equally members of the congregation and that is really, really important to the fact that we feel at home here.” (16)