",! ,.."
~~ ,..... 9 ! assumptions have eroded. SYI ~'. the difficulty experienced by ( .J.. ~ the same religious movement 'f , versation when they address I 1 For close to two millenni, 'r.; ." ily law upon a vast body of Je' and continuing with rabbinic, , • also drew on later Jewish lega much to say about family life.. What Is aJewish Family? \~ .I Jewish religious tradition, deY< I ~ tives of Israel's patriarchs and J Changing Rabbinic Views ,;, commandments and prohibiti' J, mandments are that: (I) men "': Jack Wertheimer ) rabbinic works considered pro( i and (3) they are obligated to tei 1, ofIsrael. (4) Women, as concei1 ,'"'{ to their children-consequen ~ obligations. The biblical text, LTHOUGH NO ONE can gainsay the fluidity of family life over the I rate upon prohibitions affecti long course of Jewish history and in the many social and cultural "'" ~ are forbidden, (2) even sexual environments inhabited by Jews, several fundamental assumptions A '( ulated by laws of menstrual p about what constitutes a Jewish family and what ought to be sanctioned and t bidden, including exogamous encouraged by Jewish religious institutions have remained relatively stable, ,. and regulated.) Together, these; at least since the emergence of rabbinic Judaism some two thousand years 1 t Judaism to hold legal force eith. ago-until our own time. Over the past few decades, changingsocial pat t T While a vast corpus of ra terns within the American Jewish community have prompted a reconsider f family matters, many addition ation of profound questions concerning the nature of the Jewish family: its T <' gious law, but rather were sub purpose, composition, and proper roles. As has been the case in American ~' minated the changeability of tI society at large, the questioning of long-held assumptions and religious prac
assumptions have eroded. Symptomatic of the radicalization of discourse is 9 the difficulty experienced by contemporary rabbis-including those within CI7;) the same religious movement-to find a common language of religious con versation when they address certain questions related to the Jewish family. For close to two millennia, rabbis have based their decisions about fam ily law upon a vast body of Jewish literature, beginning with the biblical text and continuing with rabbinic works such as the Mishnah and Talmud. Rabbis also drew on later Jewish legal codes and exegetical works, all of which had much to say about family life. The Pentateuch itself, the formative text of the oily? Jewish religious tradition, devotes considerable attention to the family narra tives ofIsrael's patriarchs and matriarchs and also contains an extensive set of views commandments and prohibitions. Among the most important of these com mandments are that: (l) men are to marry,2 (2) they are to procreate (some rabbinic works considered procreation to be the first of the commandments),3 and (3) they are obligated to teach their children about the religious traditions of Israel. (4) Women, as conceived by rabbinic Judaism, above all, are to attend to their children-consequently they are exempt from time-bound ritual obligations. The biblical text and subsequent rabbinic Judaism also elabo le fluidity of family life over the rate upon prohibitions affecting family life: (1) certain types of sexual acts n the many social and cultural are forbidden, (2) even sexual relations between husband and wife are reg veral fundamental assumptions ulated by laws of menstrual purity, (3) certain types of marriages are for what ought to be sanctioned and bidden, including exogamous marriages. (Divorce, however, is sanctioned ; have remained relatively stable, and regulated.) Together, these do's and don'ts were understood by rabbinic daism some two thousand years Judaism to hold legal force either as religious duties or religious prohibitions. w decades, changing social pat While a vast corpus of rabbinic literature developed to address these .ity have prompted a reconsider family matters, many additional concerns were not regulated by Jewish reli e nature of the Jewish family: its gious law, but rather were subject to local custom. Recent research has illu s has been the case in American minated the changeability of those family arrangements that were governed l assumptions and religious prac by custom, rather than law. The age of marriage and childbearing has var lithin Jewish denominations and ied greatly, arranged marriages were more popular in some environments l . movements. than in others, the roles of women inside the home and in the marketplace and interpreters of Judaism, rab have undergone changes, views of the parental role in the disciplining of rmishes. They have been pressed children have varied, conceptions of proper sexual modesty have changed, 19S regarding family matters, and and so too have attitudes about the enjoyment of sexual pleasure within een challenged to reconsider their marriage. Circumstances and custom also shaped the relationship between sanctuary and school, and under the nuclear and extended family. •binie discourse has shifted con In the modern era, new cultural perspectives and legal and social cir alyses have been brought to bear; cumstances further accelerated changes within the Jewish family over the past g traditionalists, long-standing 250 years. 4 The ideal of romantic love triumphed over arranged marriages, so 246 JACK WERTHEIMER
much so that Jewish Enlightenment figures took up the cause of freedom of In 1983, the Reform movi choice in the selection of a spouse.s Fertility rates plummeted in all modern the plurality ofAmerican Jew izing Jewish communities.6 Thanks to the decline in their family size and their inition of Jewish identity by embourgeoisement, upwardly mobile Jews could afford child care and the lux intermarriage as a Jew. In the ury of doting on their children.? Migration, a disruptive ex~erienc~ un~er nents argued that the shift, gone by most Jewish families in the modern era, upen~ed famIlY,:'elatlon~hlp~: already practiced within the casting children as educators of their parents and wives as the breadglVers moreover, ameliorated the co who supported their families. 8 Jewish assimilation also increased the numbers their children as Jewish, and i of Jews who lapsed in their religious behavior. Rates of intermarriage soared tus of males and females, sincl in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in much of western and to Jewish mothers or to Jewi1 central Europe. And when communism triumphed in Russia and other parts was more equitable, as it gavi of eastern Europe, intermarriage became the norm there. But while rabbinic redefinition of Jewish identity and communal leaders certainly scrambled to address a host of legal and com Though often described, munal issues prompted by such massive changes, the fundamental religious ment in fact was nonlineal in understanding of what constituted a Jewish family remained unchanged. descent from a Jewish mothe During the last two decades of the twentieth century, new questions sur was formal conversion to Jll( facing about family have prompted the adoption of radically new approaches redefined as an act of persona and policies toward families by various branches ofAmerican Judaism. What sumption" of Jewish status w follows is a thumbnail sketch of the four most contentious issues and the mal acts of identification . arguments employed by proponents ofchange.9 consequence of this decision: between the family and JewisI WHO Is A JEW? Jewish community primarily lineal decision added or subs1 Until quite recently, Jews ofdifferent religious denominations, whatever th.eir tion as considerations for Jewi theological disagreements, could agree on who was a member of the Jewish of the slogan, "we are all Jews community. Early in the Common Era, rabbinic Judaism determined that gan that reflects a radical breal a Jew was one who either had been born to a Jewish mother or had con of Jewish identity as inherited verted to the Jewish faith. \0 The rabbinic standard was universally accepted, sen characteristic. and the barriers to intermarriage created by internal Jewish taboos as well This ruling has been dull as by gentile hostility saw to it that the standard was easily maintained. But movements, both of which IT with today's massive increase in exogamy, some have been prompted to Jewish identity and regard Je... reconsider traditional definitions. mental taboo. Consequently The first and most obvious target has been the doctrine of matrilineal nity over who is a Jew, a disp descent. II Why, some have asked, should a child with only one Jewish parent particularly because it revoh be treated differently by the official religious community if that parent hap long ago, an Internet forum [. pens to be the child's father rather than his or her mother? Should not com Conservative rabbis who do r: munity and synagogue alike embrace such children and thereby encourage fraternize with their peers fr() "interfaith" families to identify as Jews? Is it not self-destructive to risk the loss this could lead to dating your of hundreds of thousands of children solely to maintain a principle which, traditional criteria. Or consid. whatever may be said for it historically, no longer suits our circumstances? by a female congregant to off 1" WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 247
;)Ok up the cause of freedom of In 1983, the Reform movement, currently the denomination with which ates plummeted in all modern the plurality of American Jews identify, formally rejected the traditional def jne in their family size and their inition of Jewish identity by adopting a resolution accepting any child of :rId afford child care and the lux intermarriage as a Jew. In the rabbinic debate over the resolution, propo a disruptive experience under nents argued that the shift would merely recognize the de facto policy 'a, upended family relationships, already practiced within the Reform movement. 12 The patrilineal policy, y' ; and wives as the "breadgivers" moreover, ameliorated the condition of Jewish fathers who wished to raise tion also increased the numbers their children as Jewish, and it continued the process of equalizing the sta r. Rates of intermarriage soared 1 I tus of males and females, since it avoided giving preferential treatment either ~ lturies in much of western and to Jewish mothers or to Jewish fathers. As one rabbi put it, the new policy Jphed in Russia and other parts was more equitable, as it gave "the father's religion a vote." 13 In short, the norm there. But while rabbinic redefinition of Jewish identity was justified in the name ofgender equality. 14 address a host oflegal and com Though often described as a policy on patrilineality, the Reform docu Jges, the fundamental religious ment in fact was nonlineal in its approach to Jewish identity: no longer was family remained unchanged. descent from a Jewish mother a necessary condition; nor, for that maUer, ieth century, new questions sur was formal conversion to Judaism. Rather, the child's Jewish identity was ion of radically new approaches redefined as an act of personal choice, the only proviso being that the "pre hes ofAmerican Judaism. What sumption" of Jewish status was "to be established through public and for ost contentious issues and the mal acts of identification with the Jewish faith and people."15 The Ige.9 ~ I consequence of this decision has been the intentional severance of the link 1 1 between the family and Jewish identity: rather than base membership in the N? Jewish community primarily upon descent from a Jewish family, the patri lineal decision added or substituted personal choice and acts of identifica ; denominations, whatever their tion as considerations for Jewish identification. 16 Hence, the proud embrace ho was a member of the Jewish of the slogan, "we are all Jews by choice;' by a range of Jewish groups, a slo binic Judaism determined that gan that reflects a radical break from earlier Jewish thinking, which conceives ) a Jewish mother or had con of Jewish identity as inherited and fIXed, an ascribed rather than a freely cho ndard was universally accepted, 1 sen characteristic. I internal Jewish taboos as well This ruling has been duly rejected by the Conservative and Orthodox lard was easily maintained. But r : movements, both of which maintain the traditional rabbinic position on some have been prompted to , Jewish identity and regard Jews who intermarry as having broken a funda 'f mental taboo. Consequently there is no agreement in the Jewish commu -cen the doctrine of matrilineal 'f nity over who is a Jew, a dispute that has important social repercussions, lild with only one Jewish parent i particularly because it revolves around questions of personal status. Not community if that parent hap T long ago, an Internet forum for Reform rabbis was buzzing with stories of r her mother? Should not com i L Conservative rabbis who do not allow the teenagers in their synagogues to :hildren and thereby encourage I fraternize with their peers from local Reform temples, on the grounds that )t self-destructive to risk the loss r, this could lead to dating young people not considered Jewish according to to maintain a principle which, 1 traditional criteria. Or consider the dilemma of a Conservative rabbi asked onger suits our circumstances? f by a female congregant to officiate at her marriage to a young man who is ~ I r r T t r T J 248 JACK WERTHEIMER
Jewish only according to Reform's patrilineal dispensation. A rabbi who the door open to the interfai acquiesces will be committing an act punishable by expulsion from the orga Significantly, the rabbinic orgi nization of Conservative rabbis; a rabbi who declines will end up alienating at movements do not apply any least two families on account of"intolerance." We are rapidly approaching their "autonomy," their right the time, moreover, when there will be rabbis who are themselves offspring But some Reform and Re of interfaith families, and who will not be recognized by their colleagues as officiating at such ceremonie1 Jews. This state of affairs actually has some historical precedents: various form weddings between Jews Jewish sects erected high social barriers that discouraged social mingling and don't apply if both people al marriages with members of competing religious groups they deemed to be Jewish ceremony-and I wa misguided Jews. But it is more difficult to find examples of a time when Another Reform rabbi explaiI adherents of Jewish groups could not marry one another because they dis dition says I can't do this. Ani agreed about the definition of what is necessary to be counted as a Jew. contrary to my tradition."2o Orthodox and Conservative WHAT Is THE RELIGIOUS STATUS OF INTERFAITH FAMILIES? firmly opposed to such cerer who officiated at an "interwec As rates of intermarriage have soared since the 1960s, reaching nearly 50 per A different set ofquestior cent of all Jews who marry in this country, religious institutions have been with Jewish religious institut challenged to formulate policies vis-a-vis the huge population of interfaith vices. When the child of such families.!? To begin with, rabbis must decide whether they will officiate at should the non-Jewish parent wedding ceremonies at which a Jew marries a non-Jew. The fundamental lic during the relevant religiou question is whether the traditional ceremony with its assumption that both like to offer a Christian, Islarr partners adhere to "the religion of Moses and Israel" (as the traditional for included in a synagogue ser' mula puts it) makes any sense when one partner is not an adherent of Wasserman has written is the that religion. Beyond that, a rabbi may be asked to incorporate aspects ier access to the rituals by wh of two religious traditions in the ceremony, and to coofficiate with clergy of aries:' 21 Here too some synag another religion. Rabbis must decide whether such syncretistic ceremonies in public prayer and partake of J any sense can be called Jewish elr can conform to any recognizable under is that the synagogue wishes t standing of what makes for a Jewish wedding. 18 On a deeper level, a rabbi the Jewish education of their· needs to reconcile his or her participation at such a wedding with biblical over, on their inclusiveness, t1: and subsequent Jewish prohibitions against exogamy, such as the explicit lies, both the conventional anc statement in Deuteronomy, "you shall not intermarry with them." rabbi has put it in the cours. Several hundred Reform, Reconstructionist, and nondenominational "Given a choice between a ne rabbis participate in such ceremonies, convinced that their presence will synagogue] prefers the arms t draw interfaith families closer to the Jewish community and encourage them Finally, religious instituti. to raise their children as Jews. As a cantor who has performed hundreds of should explicitly encourage il such weddings put it, "I feel I have a calling. God wants me to help his peo biguous Jewish identificatior ple stay in the Jewish fold.... A Jew is entitled to a Jewish wedding." 19 agencies of the Jewish comm Officiating at "interweddings" is justified in a number of ways: it is a Jew's such a direction, lest they set: right to be married according to a Jewish rite, families wishing for such a thy, however, is the extent to '" service are entitled to it, and the long-term effect will be positive, as it leaves As one rabbi put it, "The rig!:: WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 249 leal dispensation. A rabbi who the door open to the interfaith family's future participation in Jewish life. lble by expulsion from the orga Significantly, the rabbinic organizations of the Reform and Reconstructionist declines will end up alienating at movements do not apply any sanctions to such rabbis, deferring, instead, to :e." We are rapidly approaching their "autonomy," their right to decide for themselves. is who are themselves offspring But some Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis nevertheless desist from ~cognized by their colleagues as officiating at such ceremonies. As one Reform rabbi explained: "I don't per ~ historical precedents: various form weddings between Jews and non-Jews because the berachot [blessings] iiscouraged social mingling and don't apply if both people aren't Jewish. I would have to perform a non ~ious groups they deemed to be Jewish ceremony-and I wasn't ordained to do non-Jewish weddings." find examples of a time when Another Reform rabbi explains his position even more directly: "Jewish tra yone another because they dis dition says I can't do this. And I don't feel comfortable doing it because it's 5ary to be counted as a Jew. contrary to my tradition."2o Both of these views sum up the positions of Orthodox and Conservative rabbinic organizations that are on record as IF INTERFAITH FAMILIES? firmly opposed to such ceremonies, claiming they would expel a member who officiated at an "interwedding." le 1960s, reaching nearly 50 per A different set of questions arises when interfaith families make contact religious institutions have been with Jewish religious institutions and wish to participate in religious ser le huge population of interfaith vices. When the child of such a union reaches the age of bar or bat mitzvah, le whether they will officiate at should the non-Jewish parent be permitted to utter a Jewish prayer in pub ~s a non-Jew. The fundamental lic during the relevant religious service? And what if the gentile parent would ly with its assumption that both like to offer a Christian, Islamic, or Buddhist prayer: are such prayers to be ld Israel" (as the traditional for- I included in a synagogue service? The deeper question as Rabbi Michael partner is not an adherent of t Wasserman has written is the "authentication as Jewish families [and] eas e asked to incorporate aspects , I ier access to the rituals by which the Jewish community defines its bound and to coofficiate with clergy of ) aries." 21 Here too some synagogues have bent, welcoming non-Jews to lead r such syncretistic ceremonies in , public prayer and partake of Jewish religious services. The rationale offered )rm to any recognizable under I is that the synagogue wishes to honor parents who participate positively in IS I _ng. On a deeper level, a rabbi I the Jewish education of their children. Synagogues pride themselves, more at such a wedding with biblical r over, on their inclusiveness, their openness to many different types of fami st exogamy, such as the explicit lies, both the conventional and the unconventional. As a liberal Conservative ntermarry with them." \ rabbi has put it in the course of explaining his policies on such matters: ionist, and nondenominational 1 "Given a choice between a note of welcome or a message of distance, [his I lvinced that their presence will T synagogue] prefers the arms that are open to the hand that is closed."22 :ommunity and encourage them I Finally, religious institutions grapple with the question of whether they vho has performed hundreds of r should explicitly encourage interfaith families to decide in favor of unam I . God wants me to help his peo I biguous Jewish identification. Communal leaders of the so-called secular ltitled to a Jewish wedding."19 I agencies of the Jewish community shy away from exerting any pressure in n a number of ways: it is a Jew's T such a direction, lest they seem insufficiently inclusive. What is notewor \ rite, families wishing for such a 1 thy, however, is the extent to which some rabbis subscribe to this approach. effect will be positive, as it leaves r As one rabbi put it, "The right thing to do is not to be judgmental about a I r T 1 1 t 250 JACK WERTHEIMER
decision that has already been made ... the question is, 'How can we help family to continue to be part I you work through it?'''23 In other words, some Jewish religious leaders favor Even some Orthodox rabbis I a therapeutic approach, preferring to help couples "working through" any mazal tOY [congratulations] difficulties in their relationship, and to remain studiously "nonjudgmental," begun to explore how intermc rather than encourage interfaith families to become ... Jewish. synagogue services. 28 Not long ago, the leader of the Reform movement conceded that this Gone are the days when way of thinking permeates many synagogues. Writing in the pages of the would flatly declare, as did Mil house organ of the Reform Judaism, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of 90 percent of intermarriages (] the congregational arm of the Reform movement, described how bility of the home ... and bri souls that can never be healed, conversations with both rabbis and lay leaders lead me to believe that his forty-one years in the rabl in most instances we do not encourage conversion by non-Jewish Or a researcher like Louis Ber spouses in our synagogues. Perhaps this bespeaks a natural reluctance to do what we fear will give rise to an awkward or uncomfortable sit intermarriage is classically uation. Or perhaps we have been so successful in making non-Jews feel authority. Intermarrieds il comfortable in our congregation that we have inadvertently sent the strong, the rebels, those wh ·th . M message t hat we nel er want nor expect converSIOn. ordinary rules of society. P ety's disfavor of intermarri(] In Yoffie's analysis, the key to understanding his movement's inaction is con each other's conflicting int cern for "comfort;' a further symptom of the therapeutic role synagogues life. Furthermore, attitudes are now expected to play. opposition to intermarriagl In catering to the population of intermarried Jews and their families, sition to divorce. How coul synagogues and community centers have created an unprecedented new ual is guided by the dictun lobby. Congregations now often require their rabbis to officiate at interfaith weddings, often alongside Christian clergy,25 and discourage them from By the end of the twentieth Cl speaking about or urging conversion to Judaism. Agencies of Jewish philan sheer size of the intermarried thropy employ a large cadre of social workers to help keep intermarried fam the feelings of interfaith famili ilies intact. In religious schools run by synagogues, teachers can no longer hospitable congregational env: utter a word in favor of endogamy or prevent Jewish youngsters from being even in more traditional religi exposed to the jumbled religious views of their dual-faith classmates who, Conservative rabbi exhorts his. often "confused about which religion is which" (as one observer has married"-a remarkable reve reported), have trouble telling "who is Jesus and who is Moses."26 long been regarded as outcast~ Still, defenders of change argue the virtues of an open, hospitable syna gogue. They exhort congregations to engage interfaith families, and do what is necessary to insure their comfort. These are standard features of Reform WHAT Is and Reconstructionist congregational life, but interestingly some rabbis in The sexual revolution of the P' the more traditional camps of the Conservative and Orthodox movements tion of sexual ethics, ranging 0 also have begun to worry about putting forth a more inviting welcome sign. partners, extramarital relatiOi A recent Conservative publication urged the involvement of "non-Jews in most noteworthy is the abselt the Torah service [which] may offend certain members but it allows loving community about some of the: t I f WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 251 r I Ie question is, 'How can we help 1 family to continue to be part of their children's and grandchildren's lives."27 I :ne Jewish religious leaders favor , Even some Orthodox rabbis have been pressed by congregants to "extend a couples "working through" any mazal tov [congratulations] to a recently intermarried couple" and have :lin studiously "nonjudgmental;' I begun to explore how intermarried Jews should be treated when it comes to I • become ... Jewish. , synagogue services.28 , movement conceded that this ! Gone are the days when a rabbi, let alone a sociological researcher, ues. Writing in the pages of the ,r would flatly declare, as did Milton M. Barron some two generations ago, that obi Eric Yoffie, the president of r 90 percent of intermarriages are unsuccessful and only "undermine the sta -ement, described how bility of the home ... and bring children into the world with a rift in their souls that can never be healed." Or a Rabbi Dangelow who opined, based on ~aders lead me to believe that \ T his forty-one years in the rabbinate, "mixed marriages are rarely happy."29 ::: conversion by non-Jewish I Or a researcher like Louis Berman who claimed in 1961 that bespeaks a natural reluctance I I 'kward or uncomfortable sit I intermarriage is classically viewed as an act of rebellion against social :ssful in making non-Jews feel authority. Intermarrieds include more than their share of the head If have inadvertently sent the + strong, the rebels, those who think of themselves as "exceptions" to the 24 I : conversion. f ordinary rules of society. Perhaps their unwillingness to yield to soci I ety's disfavor of intermarriage reappears as an unwillingness to yield to ~ I his movement's inaction is con I each other's conflicting interests in the day-by-day drama of married the therapeutic role synagogues I life. Furthermore, attitudes which predispose a person to flout society's I opposition to intermarriage should also help him flout society's oppo :narried Jews and their families, I sition to divorce. How could it be otherwise? In each case the individ created an unprecedented new ual is guided by the dictum that his marital state is a private affair. 3o :ir rabbis to officiate at interfaith 1 ~y, 2S and discourage them from I By the end of the twentieth century, such voices had been silenced by the .aism. Agencies of Jewish philan sheer size of the intermarried population and the concern about hurting ~s to help keep intermarried fam I 31 I the feelings of interfaith families. Moreover, the impulse to create a warm, agogues, teachers can no longer hospitable congregational environment had trumped long-standing taboos 'nt Jewish youngsters from being f even in more traditional religious circles. In a telling forthcoming article, a their dual-faith classmates who, Conservative rabbi exhorts his movement's congregations to "love the inter \ ; which" (as one observer has married"-a remarkable reversal considering that intermarried Jews had s and who is Moses."26 I long been regarded as outcasts and renegades. 32 tues of an open, hospitable syna f e interfaith families, and do what r WHAT Is A JEWISH WEDDING? are standard features of Reform I but interestingly some rabbis in I The sexual revolution of the past few decades has prompted a reconsidera 'ative and Orthodox movements I tion of sexual ethics, ranging over issues such as premarital sex, multiple sex th a more inviting welcome sign. I partners, extramarital relationships, and homosexuality. What is perhaps .he involvement of "non-Jews in t most noteworthy is the absence of serious public discussion in the Jewish :lin members but it allows loving r community about some of these issues. Whereas Jewish religious teachings ~ r r f 252 JACK WERTHEIMER
have had much to say about sexual ethics, it appears that few Jews bother to The majority ruled against ral consult with rabbis about such matters. A study of Modern Orthodox Jews ity ruled in favor. Within tw claimed that even within this relatively traditional sector of the Jewish com intolerable that the Reform n munity, attitudes toward premarital sex had liberalized considerably within tion overturned the findings the rank and file, though not the rabbinate.33 Somewhat belatedly, rabbinic rabbis to follow the dictates 0 organizations have published pamphlets to clarify their understanding of There are, ofcourse, man) 34 some of these issues. uality, but for our purposes a fe One issue that has garnered a good deal ofpress attention over the past To begin with, the debate over two decades is the religious status of homosexuality. All Jewish religious tion ofJewish attitudes toward movements outside of the Orthodox world have gone on record in their a Conservative rabbi deeply UI opposition to civil discrimination against gays (though they differ on homosexuality illustrates how whether gay marriages should be recognized by the state). Rabbinic leaders earlier Jewish religious thinkiI have also addressed the question of whether openly gay and lesbian Jews damn," he declared, "what they ought to be ordained as rabbis and whether same-gender relationships gives clear expression to the ~ should be sanctified through a religious ceremony conducted by a rabbi. In one's business what two consen the ensuing debates no one has argued that there is a precedent for either; judgment applies only to gays; the argument in favor ofchange revolves around new understandings of sex significant departure fi-om tra< uality and the family, and also proper respect for fellow human beings. because the Bible and subsequ What is fascinating in these debates is the extent to which no common Jewish people "do when they g< language can be found to bridge differences. The point is illustrated in a reli so seriously that they selected gious responsum issued by the Reform rabbinate in 1996 in reply to an with forbidden sexual relationsl inquiry about whether "a Reform rabbi [may] officiate at a wedding or 'com Rabbis who favor officiat mitment' ceremony between two homosexuals," and whether "such a union consciously have rejected pas! qualif[ies] as kiddushin from a Reform perspective:' (The term kiddushin nature ofJewish wedding cere] refers to a sanctified Jewish marriage; precisely what that means was at the ten the traditional ceremony, c heart of the debate because a rabbi does not sanctify a Jewish marriage, (qiddushin) and some of the a rather the bride is sanctified to her husband during the ceremony, accord have come to substitute newl ing to the traditional rabbinic view, or the couple sanctifies each other, in have also rethought the very the more liberal view.) The responsum began with a lengthy explanation of rabbi, for example, has asser the tortured process by which the committee arrived at an answer: liturgy for any two people WC:1 whether they be roommates, t This question ... has been an extraordinarily difficult one for our The downgrading of the wed· Committee. This is not only because we disagree as to its answer. ... regarded as a private affair th The difficulty in this case arises from the fact that argument itself, entering into any kind of rela understood as the joint deliberative attempt to reach a common ground through persuasive speech, has broken down and proven impossible. On this she'elah [question], we have discovered that we no DOES JUDAISM Cc longer share a language of argument.... We have split into two or The debate over homosexuali more camps, each framing the issue in a language or argument which family constellations-has ind 35 the other side finds foreign, indecipherable, and obtuse. tion of marriage and its relati. ,I I WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 253 r I appears that few Jews bother to I The majority ruled against rabbinic officiating at such marriages; the minor I tudy of Modern Orthodox Jews r ity ruled in favor. Within two years, however, this ruling was deemed so tional sector of the Jewish com I intolerable that the Reform rabbinate through a plenum vote at its conven .liberalized considerably within I tion overturned the findings of its own responsa committee, authorizing 33 Somewhat belatedly, rabbinic I I rabbis to follow the dictates of their conscience on the matter.36 ) clarify their understanding of I There are, ofcourse, many complex nuances to the debate over homosex r uality, but for our purposes a few aspects ofthe discussion are especially salient. Iofpress attention over the past I r To begin with, the debate over gays and lesbians has prompted a reconsidera osexuality. All Jewish religious ,I tion ofJewish attitudes toward sexual expression. A recent pronouncement by d have gone on record in their a Conservative rabbi deeply unhappy with his movement's current stance on .t gays (though they differ on .~ homosexuality illustrates how willing some rabbis are to break radically with d by the state). Rabbinic leaders I earlier Jewish religious thinking about matters of sexuality: "We don't give a er openly gay and lesbian Jews I I damn;' he declared, "what they do when they go to bed."3? This pithy outburst ler same-gender relationships I gives clear expression to the wish of many to privatize sexual ethics: it is no emony conducted by a rabbi. In I one's business what two consenting adults decide to do in private. Whether this t there is a precedent for either; l' I judgment applies only to gays and lesbians or to all Jews, it surely represents a und new understandings of sex r significant departure £i'om traditional Jewish thinking about sexuality, if only ct for fellow human beings. I because the Bible and subsequent rabbinic texts take a strong interest in what he extent to which no common I I Jewish people "do when they go to bed;' and the rabbis took these prohibitions The point is illustrated in a reli I so seriously that they selected the Torah portion of Leviticus 18, which deals lbbinate in 1996 in reply to an I with forbidden sexual relationships, for the afternoon ofthe Day ofAtonement. r] officiate at a wedding or 'com I I Rabbis who favor officiating at gay commitment ceremonies quite self lals;' and whether "such a union ! consciously have rejected past views. Indeed, some have also rethought the ·spective." (The term kiddushin , I nature ofJewish wedding ceremonies. As a practical matter, they have rewrit sely what that means was at the r ten the traditional ceremony, dropping references to the act of sanctification lot sanctify a Jewish marriage, I (qiddushin) and some of the other traditional blessings.38 In their place they d during the ceremony, accord I I have come to substitute newly composed liturgies. Moreover, some rabbis couple sanctifies each other, in I have also rethought the very purpose of the ceremony. One Conservative III with a lengthy explanation of r, rabbi, for example, has asserted his willingness to "create an appropriate ~e arrived at an answer: I liturgy for any two people wanting to enter into a covenantal relationship, I whether they be roommates, business partners, or a gay or lesbian couple."39 inarily difficult one for our 1 r The downgrading of the wedding ceremony could not be clearer: it is now disagree as to its answer.... r regarded as a private affair that affirms the "covenant" between two people Ie fact that argument itself, r entering into any kind of relationship. tempt to reach a common I ) broken down and proven r r DOES JUDAISM CONTINUE TO VALUE MARRIAGE! 'e have discovered that we no i .. We have split into two or T, The debate over homosexuality-and also the emergence of nontraditional I language or argument which r family constellations-has indirectly led to the rethinking ofthe very institu 35 tIe, and obtuse. r tion of marriage and its relationship to the Jewish family, as is evidenced by r r f t 254 JACK WERTHEIMER two documents issued by the Reform and Reconstructionist rabbinates dur then, are two documents on hi ing the 1990s. The first of these, ''A Statement on Human Sexuality" drafted major rabbinic organizations, ; by the Reform rabbinate, explicitly acknowledges the change in thinking: sary context for the expression family life.42 In our age, the traditional notion of family as being two parents and The astonishing radicalizal children (and perhaps older generations) living in the same house within ever expanding sector hold is in the process of being redefined. Men and women of various remarkable when we note the ro ages living together, singles, gay and lesbian couples, single parent cies have been overturned. Co households, etc., may be understood as families in the wider, if not tra Reform rabbinate was asked to ditional sense. "Family" also has multiple meanings in an age of we extend Temple membership increasingly complex biotechnology and choice. While procreation and ried family? (2) Should a your family are especially important as guarantors of the survival of the Temple as a family unit rather Jewish people, all Jews have a responsibility to raise and nurture the tion engage a known homosexi next generation of our people. The importance of family, whether bio secretary? In all three cases, the logically or relationally based, remains the foundation of meaningful said no. Within a few years, < human existence. through a formal decision or "c bis and congr~gations,43 This statement radically expands the definition of a Jewish family to encom How are we to explain this· pass all kinds of relationships. Quite dramatically, it also omits one element traditional views of the family previously thought to be the sine qua non of Jewish sexual expression and of a larger trend within Americi family life-marriage. Indeed, this document on the Reform Jewish view of the question of who is a Jew a: human sexuality "encourages adults of all ages and physical and mental lies may have few parallels ot capabilities to develop expressions of their sexuality that are both responsi Christian denominations over ble and joyful;' but it never once encourages Jews to marry!40 ordering of family life. The t A second document issued by the Reconstructionist rabbinate also changing social realities have fI avoids an endorsement of marriage as a Jewish ideal. The framers of the doc nize their religious tradition; ument list a series of values that "undergird our stance on homosexuality," denominations have altered to including equality, loving, caring relationships, stable family and commu terparts within American Juda. nity life, personal freedom, inclusive community, democracy, physical plea Still, the Jewish communit sure, and spiritual health. Marriage is absent from this list, but not from the on family matters than are od document, where it is described as historically a relationship of"two unequal stituents of a voluntary comml parties." By contrast, the document extols today's ideals: "Contemporary lib tions are scrambling to be as in eral Jews affirm the equality of both partners and understand that it is the of American Jews affiliated wi. obligation of each partner to treat the other with dignity. It is the qualities congregations are under enorrr of mutual respect, trust, and love that we consider the fundamental attrib that demonstrate just how wer utes of loving partnerships"-not, however, marriage. Similarly, when dis afford to draw boundaries th cussing "stable family life" the document affirms its "commitment to research has demonstrated, mo preserving the traditional primacy of family because we understand the fam gious decisions based solely uf ily as the primary, stable unity of intimacy." But the document is quick to Religious leaders are, therefor add that "many old and new kinds of families can fulfill these values."41 Here, sumer demands, rather than w r I I WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 255 r
.econstructionist rabbinates dur I then, are two documents on human sexuality and on the family issued by nt on Human Sexuality" drafted t major rabbinic organizations, and neither endorses marriage as the neces -ledges the change in thinking: sary context for the expression of sexuality and the construction of Jewish ~ family life.42 lily as being two parents and I I The astonishing radicalization of rabbinic thinking that has taken hold IS) living in the same house I within ever expanding sectors of the Jewish community is all the more _Men and women of various r remarkable when we note the rapidity with which traditional religious poli .sbian couples, single parent cies have been overturned. Consider the following: In the early 1980s, the _milies in the wider, if not tra f Reform rabbinate was asked to address the following questions: (1) Should :iple meanings in an age of I we extend Temple membership to the non-Jewish member in a mixed mar :hoice. While procreation and r ried family? (2) Should a young unmarried couple be permitted to join a .antors of the survival of the , Temple as a family unit rather than as individuals? (3) Should a congrega :ility to raise and nurture the , I tion engage a known homosexual as a religious school teacher or executive rtance of family, whether bio secretary? In all three cases, the responsa committee of the Reform rabbinate he foundation of meaningful ~ said no. Within a few years, all of these decisions were rejected, either I through a formal decision or "on the ground," by a great many Reform rab , bis and ccingregations.43 :ion of a Jewish family to encom I How are we to explain this turn of events? To begin with, the rejection of -tically, it also omits one element t I traditional views of the family by sectors of the Jewish community is part of Jewish sexual expression and I of a larger trend within American society to rethink "family values:' Whereas nt on the Reform Jewish view of I the question of who is a Jew and the proper treatment of interfaith fami 1 I ages and physical and mental I lies may have few parallels outside the Jewish world, battles do rage in sexuality that are both responsi 1, Christian denominations over questions of homosexuality and the proper ~s Jews to marry!40 t ordering of family life. The broader sexual revolution and the rapidly -constructionist rabbinate also I changing social realities have forced most religious communities to scruti ish ideal. The framers of the doc I nize their religious traditions, and some of the more liberal Christian :l our stance on homosexuality," I I denominations have altered their policies in ways that parallel their coun hips, stable family and commu r terparts within American Judaism. unity, democracy, physical plea r Still, the Jewish community is even more apt to reconsider its position t from this list, but not from the I I on family matters than are other religious groups. For one thing, as con lya relationship of"two unequal I stituents of a voluntary community that is losing adherents, Jewish institu j .day's ideals: "Contemporary lib tions are scrambling to be as inclusive as possible. With only 40-45 percent r ~rs and understand that it is the T of American Jews affiliated with a synagogue at any given moment, Jewish ~r with dignity. It is the qualities I congregations are under enormous pressures to institute "inclusive" policies onsider the fundamental attrib I that demonstrate just how welcoming they are. Most conclude they can ill r, marriage. Similarly, when dis I T afford to draw boundaries that will exclude potential members. Recent It affirms its "commitment to I research has demonstrated, moreover, that large numbers of Jews make reli because we understand the fam I gious decisions based solely upon the inclinations of the "sovereign self."44 '," But the document is quick to r Religious leaders are, therefore, under enormous pressure to bow to con :s can fulfill these values:'41 Here, r sumer demands, rather than work to convince individual Jewish families to r ,r t r I l T I 256 JACK WERTHEIMER
t surrender any of their autonomy. Hence, Jewish religious and communal , crimination. When the Womer leaders prefer to bend rather than break. I I Reform women rabbis, led the c, Jews, moreover, are especially susceptible to the types of arguments made I ative responsum on homosexual in favor of change. As past victims of intolerance, Jews are especially vulner observed that this effort "once ag able to an argument framed in terms of civil rights, nondiscrimination, and I nation of women as rabbis and inclusiveness. Proponents of change understand this and shape their case I here too is clear: just as gender accordingly. To cite a particularly striking example: urging his colleagues to I Jews, so too must the struggle f( ~ support the introduction of civil legislation to legitimize same sex marriages, heterosexual relationships. one rabbi drew a parallel between the struggle for homosexual rights in our I Perhaps, just as important, own time and the battle for racial equality in the middle of the twentieth cen I Jewish religious circles in the Uni tury: "We were there then," he declared. "We have no choice to be there I I of contemporary American sens now."45 The implication is clear: opponents of same sex marriages are bigots. I a matter of choice, and particip I Given such a reading, how can a rabbi possibly side with foes of civil rights? "meaningful experience." Reli~ Similarly, those who oppose the special treatment of interfaith families in the I I understanding and compassion synagogue bemoan such policies as discriminatory and exclusive; and oppo I odds with contemporary CUltUi nents of the matrilineal policy stigmatize it as nonegalitarian because it dis I I judge, to assert a language of res) criminates between Jewish fathers and Jewish mothers who are intermarried. I tend sociologists Charles S. Liebl A study guide issued by the Reconstructionist movement ups the ante I instead, is expected to offer the even further by linking the "mistreatment and negative stereotyping directed I i attend to the personal needs of at Jews and [at] gay and lesbian people": it encourages a group discussion I needs of the group.49 I within synagogues designed to foster an understanding of "the nature of As rabbis continue to adapt t groups targeted by a people and the parallels between anti-Semitism and the I I to reconcile current religious sen mistreatment of gays and lesbians."46 I mandments and prohibitions. 'tV It is unthinkable for most American Jews, let alone their rabbis, to resist I of the vitality and integrity of Ie' I such arguments. American Jews, after all, have for decades registered the I encounter new challenges pos view that anti-Semitic discrimination poses the greatest threat to Jewish life I American ideals and the impera in the United States. The official representatives of Jewish organizations I open-minded will need to draw accordingly have embraced the cause of civil rights and fought for an end after all, seeks to level distinctior to any form of discrimination, marching under the banner of American boundaries. Judaism, by contra egalitarianism. Given these deeply entrenched tendencies, there is little that distinguishes between Jews prospect that the American Jewish community will long resist those who ality and homosexuality, and be challenge fundamental teachings about Jewish family life and obligations as In the short term, though, r long as those challenges invoke ideals such as equality, privacy, inclusiveness have reshaped Judaism to fit At and pluralism-precisely the framing ideals employed in numerous battles seen how well the new rabbinic 1 against anti-Semitism. the Jewish family. In a more positive vein, proponents of change also link their causes to past struggles in which Jews have played an active and successful role as agents of change. We have already noted the parallel drawn between the struggle for black equality and gay rights. In a similar vein, proponents of 1. On the heightened religiou homosexual equality link their cause with the struggle against gender dis marked the past few decades, see ~ , I I WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 257 I Jewish religious and communal crimination. When the Women's Rabbinic Network, the organization of I Reform women rabbis, led the campaign to overturn their movement's neg .e to the types of arguments made r r ative responsum on homosexual marriages, one leader of the group proudly ;rance, Jews are especially vulner r observed that this effort "once again highlight[ed] the link between the ordi il rights, nondiscrimination, and I ~ nation of women as rabbis and gay and lesbian issues."47 The implication rstand this and shape their case I here too is clear: just as gender equality has won wide acceptance among ,xample: urging his colleagues to I I Jews, so too must the struggle for parity between homosexual liaisons and to legitimize same sex marriages, heterosexual relationships. gle for homosexual rights in our r Perhaps, just as important, the changing rhetoric and policies within I the middle of the twentieth cen Jewish religious circles in the United States reflect the internalization by Jews ~We r have no choice to be there , of contemporary American sensibilities. Religion has come to be defined as of same sex marriages are bigots. a matter of choice, and participants in religious activities expect to have a ibly side with foes of civil rights? r I "meaningful experience." Religious leaders in turn are valued for their :ment of interfaith families in the understanding and compassion, not for their teaching of a perspective at inatory and exclusive; and oppo r odds with contemporary cultural assumptions. "There is a reluctance to as nonegalitarian because it dis , I judge, to assert a language of responsibility and a posture of authority:' con h mothers who are intermarried. I tend sociologists Charles S. Liebman and Sylvia Barack Fishman.48 Religion, ctionist movement ups the ante I r instead, is expected to offer therapy, to help people feel "comfortable," to :1d negative stereotyping directed I attend to the personal needs of the individual, rather than the collective : encourages a group discussion I needs of the group.49 mderstanding of "the nature of I t As rabbis continue to adapt to this new climate, they will be hard-pressed :s between anti-Semitism and the I to reconcile current religious sensibilities with Judaism's long-standing com I mandments and prohibitions. With the passage of time, rabbis, as guardians I 'Vs, let alone their rabbis, to resist , of the vitality and integrity of Jewish religious expression, will undoubtedly have for decades registered the r encounter new challenges posed by the continuing disparity between • the greatest threat to Jewish life I American ideals and the imperatives of Judaism. Ultimately, even the most _tatives of Jewish organizations I I open-minded will need to draw a line in the sand. American egalitarianism, vil rights and fought for an end I after all, seeks to level distinctions between peoples, to efface categories and under the banner of American I boundaries. Judaism, by contrast, has been a distinction-making religion I lched tendencies, there is little that distinguishes between Jews and gentiles, men and women, heterosexu unity will long resist those who r ality and homosexuality, and between the married and the unmarried. ish family life and obligations as I In the short term, though, rabbis have underplayed the dissonance and r 'is equality, privacy, inclusiveness r have reshaped Judaism to fit American egalitarian ideals. It remains to be :s employed in numerous battles I seen how well the new rabbinic thinking will serve the Jewish religion-and I the Jewish family. .change also link their causes to I :ill active and successful role as r :he parallel drawn between the r NOTES I [n a similar vein, proponents of ,r I. On the heightened religious polarization among American Jews that has the struggle against gender dis- marked the past few decades, see Jack Wertheimer, A People Divided: Judaism in r r / r r I I 258 JACK WERTHEIMER
Contemporary America (New York, 1993); and Samuel G. Freedman, Jew vs. Jew: The binate has never formulated a defin Struggle for the Soul ofAmerican Jewry (New York, 2000). marking Jewish identity. 2. In the traditional formulation, these requirements apply to males only. A cru 16. It has been a subject of som ciallegal shift occurred when polygamy was formally banned byAshkenazic rabbis are required of all Reform Jews or ( about a thousand years ago. We do not know how widespread nonmonogamous Gill, "Patrilineality," 96. marriages were before then or in lands where this ban was not accepted. 17. The precise national figure t 3. "The duty of procreation," writes David M. Feldman, "has the popular dis a decade. In the early 1990s, the Nal tinction of being called the 'first mitzvah [commandmentl' of the Torah." Marital marriage rate of 52 percent for Jev Relations, Birth Control, and Abortion in Jewish Law (New York, 1974),46. different method, a study conducte 4. For an overview of these changes, see Paula E. Hyman, "The Modern Jewish but claimed that between 1995 an Family: Image and Reality," in The Jewish Family: Metaphor and Memory, ed. David were intermarriages. The Nationa Kraemer (New York, 1989), 179-93. Challenge, and Diversity in the Arne 5. See Jacob Katz, "Marriage and Sexual Life among the Jews at the End of the 18. While many rabbis may grap Middle Ages," Zion 9 (1944): 21-54 (in Hebrew). authenticity, some are preoccupied' 6. See Paul Ritterband, ed., Modern Jewish Fertility (Leiden, 1981). ate a wedding ceremony that includl 7. See, for example, Marion A. Kaplan, The Making of the Jewish Middle Class: ing anyone?" In reply, one Reform r Women, Family, and Identity in Imperial Germany (New York, 1991). to achieve than you might think." • 8. See the depiction of this process in Irving Howe, The World of Our Fathers. I admonition to "avoid saying prayer See also Anzia Yezierska, Breadgivers (New York, 1925), for a fictional account of the I I "offend" Christians. The operative new roles played by immigrant women. I to achieve religious authenticity ani 9. Because this chapter focuses on changing attitudes, it devotes less attention I Approach to Interfaith Wedding ( to the arguments of traditionalists. issue7.1erner.htm. 10. The historian Shaye J.D. Cohen has traced this process of clarification to the 19. Alan H. Feiler, "Will You M first five centuries of the Common Era. See The Beginnings ofJewishness: Boundaries, Interfaith Couples," Baltimore Jew; Varieties, Uncertainties (Berkeley, Calif., 1999). 20. Andrea Jacobs, "'Interwedc 11. Some also question whether conversion is still necessary and instead favor Jewish News, December 27, 2002. self-identification with the fate of the Jewish people as a sufficient qualification for 21. Michael Wasserman, "Inte) acceptance as a Jew. See, for example, Egon Mayer, "Love Means Never Having to Be Double Bind;' Conservative Judaisi Proactive," Sh'ma, October 1999, 1-3. 22. Rabbi Mark Loeb, "From thf 12. As early as 1947, the Reform rabbinate had defined informal guidelines for (Beth El Congregation of Baltimo: accepting as a Jew the child of a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother; these guide 23. Ami Eden, "Should the Wa lines were included in a rabbis' manual produced in 1961. See Ellen Jaffe-Gill, Seeks to Help Intermarried Familie "Patrilineality: Creating a Schism or Updating Judaism;' Moment, December 1998,71. May 4, 2000, 6. 13. Quoted by Jaffe-Gill, "Patrilineality." 24. Eric H. Yoffie, "A Call to Ou 14. A summary of the debate appears in the Yearbook ofthe Central Conference of 25. For specific cases, see American Rabbis 93 (1983): 14-60. To be sure, proponents justified the change by Intermarriages," Forward, Februar referring to the Hebrew Bible's patrilineal approach to the matter of tribal identity 26. Quoted in "Reform Rabbis C (i.e., an Israelite was of the same tribe as his father), and observed that only with the Opinion, December 1999,3. codification of the Mishnah in the third century was matrilineal descent deemed 27. Federation of Jewish Men's determinative for Jewish identity. But the rationale offered for change was based on Dual-Faith Families (New York, 2C the conviction that fathers and mothers must be treated equally. 28. Meryl Ain, "Re-Examine l 15. The document appears in Walter Jacob, ed., American Reform Responsa: Jewish Week, February 7-13,1992,4. Questions, Rabbinic Answers (New York, 1983), 547-50. The small Jewish Recon 29. Quoted by Louis Berman, 'j structionist movement made a similar decision fifteen years earlier. The Reform rab and Culture (New York, 1968), 17e r I I WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 259 r amuel G. Freedman, Jew vs. Jew: The r binate has never formulated a definition of what constitutes "public and formal acts" Irk,2000). I marking Jewish identity. lirements apply to males only. A cru I I 16. It has been a subject of some debate whether "acts of formal identification" rmally banned by Ashkenazic rabbis are required of all Reform Jews or only those born to non-Jewish mothers. See Jaffe how widespread nonmonogamous r Gill, "Patrilineality;' 96. his ban was not accepted. r 17. The precise national figure for intermarriage has been hotly debated for over I M. Feldman, "has the popular dis I a decade. In the early 1990s, the National Jewish Population Survey claimed an inter Imandmentl' of the Torah." Marital I I marriage rate of 52 percent for Jews who married between 1985 and 1990. Using a Law (New York, 1974),46. different method, a study conducted in 200D-2001 reduced the figure to 43 percent, ula E. Hyman, "The Modern Jewish r but claimed that between 1995 and 2000, 47 percent of marriages involving a Jew !y: Metaphor and Memory, ed. David were intermarriages. The National Jewish Population Survey 2000-2001: Strength, I Challenge, and Diversity in the American Jewish Population (New York, 2003), 16-20. fe among the Jews at the End of the ,I 18. While many rabbis may grapple with these questions of religious principle and ,). r authenticity, some are preoccupied with a more mundane question: "How can we cre Fertility (Leiden, 1981). , ate a wedding ceremony that includes aspects of both of our traditions without offend e Making of the Jewish Middle Class: ing anyone?" In reply, one Reform rabbi opined: "It is not only possible, but it is easier my (New York, 1991). r to achieve than you might think." Remarkably, her formula for success includes an :1g Howe, The World ofOur Fathers. r admonition to "avoid saying prayers in Jesus' name;' as if such a ceremony might not > 1925), for a fictional account of the r "offend" Christians. The operative concern, of course, is to avoid giving offense, not I to achieve religious authenticity and coherence. Rabbi Devon A. Lerner, "One Rabbi's 19 attitudes, it devotes less attention r Approach to Interfaith Wedding Ceremonies," www.interfaithfamily.com/article/ I issue7.lerner.htm. ~d this process of clarification to the r I 19. Alan H. Feiler, "Will You Marry Me? Rabbis and Cantors Who Say 'I Do' to Beginnings ofJewishness: Boundaries, t Interfaith Couples," Baltimore Jewish Times, August 6, 1993, 50. I 20. Andrea Jacobs, '''Interweddings': Should Rabbis Officiate?" Intermountain 1 is still necessary and instead favor , I Jewish News, December 27, 2002. ~ople as a sufficient qualification for 21. Michael Wasserman, "Intermarriage and Jewish Continuity: The Rabbinic rer, "Love Means Never Having to Be f I Double Bind," Conservative Judaism, 48, no. 2 (1996), p. 35. I 22. Rabbi Mark Loeb, "From the Rabbi: A Concern to Draw People Near," Bulletin had defined informal guidelines for I (Beth El Congregation of Baltimore), February 1996. d a non-Jewish mother; these guide ,r 23. Ami Eden, "Should the Walls Come Tumbling Down? The Jericho Project luced in 1961. See Ellen Jaffe-Gill, Seeks to Help Intermarried Families Find Their Way," Jewish Exponent (Philadelphia), daism;' Moment, December 1998,71. May 4, 2000, 6. 24. Eric H. Yoffie, "A Call to Outreach;' Reform Judaism, Fall 1999, 32-33. Yearbook of the Central Conference of 25. For specific cases, see Gabriel Kahn, "Wanted: Rabbi Who Does . proponents justified the change by I Intermarriages," Forward, February 9, 1996. 'oach to the matter of tribal identity 26. Quoted in "Reform Rabbis Confront Issues of Intermarriage;' Jewish Post and ler), and observed that only with the f Opinion, December 1999,3. Iry was matrilineal descent deemed 27. Federation of Jewish Men's Clubs, Building the Faith: A Book ofInclusion for lale offered for change was based on r Dual-Faith Families (New York, 2001),17. Ie treated equally. 28. Meryl Ain, "Re-Examine Intermarriage, Orthodox Rabbis Urged," Jewish j., American Reform Responsa: Jewish r Week, February 7-13,1992,4. ),547-50. The small Jewish Recon 29. Quoted by Louis Berman, The Jews and Intermarriage: A Study in Personality fifteen years earlier. The Reform rab r and Culture (New York, 1968), 176-77. , f r
Ii 260 JACK WERTHEIMER
30. Quoted by Berman, Jews and Intermarriage, 178-79. 41. Meyers and Gluck, Homose 31. The massive increase in intermarriages has also provided more than sufficient 42. For a different perspectiv evidence that such relationships are not doomed, even though they continue to be A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Rc prone to higher divorce rates than in-marriages. . Rabbinical Assembly, February 11 32. Dan Isaak, "Love the Intermarried;' in Let's Talk about It ... A Book ofComfort posits marriage as the appropriat, and Guidance for Intermarried Families and Synagogue Leadership (forthcoming). "Contrary to the contemporary n 33. Samuel Heilman and Steven M. Cohen, Cosmopolitans and Parochials: Modern teaches that our bodies belong to ' Orthodox Jews in America (Chicago, 1989), chap. 5. versy for offering guidelines for "r 34. See the pamphlets issued by the Reform and Reconstructionist movements 43. Jacob, American Reform Re. cited below, and also "A Letter on Intimate Relations" issued by the Conservative the committee in the early 1980s., rabbinate in February 1995. on gay marriages was also overtur 35. "On Homosexual Marriage," CCAR Journal: A Reform Jewish Quarterly, 44. Steven M. Cohen and Arn Winter 1998,5. Community in America (Bloominl 36. "Resolution on Same Gender Officiation," Central Conference of American 45. "Reform Rabbis Approve (J Rabbis, March 2000, ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/resodisp.pi?fiIe=gender&year=2000. On April 3, 1996, 1. the Reconstructionist position, see Lenore Meyers and Robert Gluck, Homosexuality 46. Robert Gluck, Homosexualil and Judaism: The Reconstructionist Position: The Report on the Reconstructionist (Wyncote, Pa., 1993),52-53. Commission on Homosexuality, rev. ed. (Wyncote, Pa., 1993). This report includes a 47. Denise 1. Eger, "Embrac helpful survey of how this topic was discussed by Jewish groups across the denom Innovation," in Contemporary Dei inational spectrum (32-36). In late 2002, pressure had built within the Conservative Kaplan (New York, 2001),186-90 movement to reexamine its decade-old consensus statement that prohibited gay 48. Charles S. Liebman and S} ordination and opposed rabbinic officiation at gay commitment ceremonies. toward Outmarried Families," JOtli "Consensus Statement on Homosexuality," papers from the CJLS deliberations on 49. On this theme, see Bernard homosexuality, March 25,1992; reprinted in Kassel Abelson and David J. Fine, eds., Strategies for a Jewish Future (Nevo Responsa: 1991-2000 (New York, 2002), 612. 37. Abby Cohen, "Conservative Rabbis Here Ask Movement to Liberalize Policy on Gays:' Jewish Bulletin ofNorthern California, February 28, 2003, http://www .jewishsf.com/content/2 -0-/moduleIdisplaystory/story_id/ 19836/format/html! edition_id/404/displaystory.html. 38. Alexandra ]. Wall, "Conservative Rabbis Here Defy Movement's Ban on Gay Nuptials," Jewish Bulletin of Northern California, March 30, 2001, http://www .jewishsf.com/content/2 -O-/module/displaystory/story_id/ 15812/formatlhtml! edition_id/308/displaystory.html. 39. Quoted in Wall, "Conservative Rabbis." 40. Report ofthe Ad Hoc Committee on Human Sexuality submitted to the Central Conference of American Rabbis in June 1998. A reference to marriage is included only at the end of the report, which invokes "the traditional unique status of het erosexual, monogamous marriage in Judaism." But that is a descriptive comment about the past, not a prescription for the future. Even more significantly, the actual report refers to "covenantal relationship" as a major ground for "sexual expression in human relationships" and the need to "ground" them in "fidelity and the inten tion of permanence" but avoids any reference to marriage. The report's authors freely concede that "the value systems of liberal Jews are based upon contemporary secu lar norms." r t I WHAT Is A JEWISH FAMILY? 261 I age, 178-79. 41. Meyers and Gluck, Homosexuality and Judaism, especially 12-13. 3S also provided more than sufficient r 42. For a different perspective, see "This Is My Beloved, This Is My Friend: ::ed, even though they continue to be A Rabbinic Letter on Intimate Relations," issued by the Conservative rabbinate's s. I Rabbinical Assembly, February 1995. This document explicitly declares, "Judaism r t's Talk about It ... A Book ofComfort , posits marriage as the appropriate context for sexual intercourse." It also declares, Jagogue Leadership (forthcoming). r "Contrary to the contemporary notion that my body belongs to me, our tradition ~smopolitans and Parochials: Modern I teaches that our bodies belong to God." Still, the document has occasioned contro p.5. versy for offering guidelines for "nonmarital sex." I and Reconstructionist movements 43. Jacob, American Reform Responsa, 45-54. All the decisions were rendered by lations" issued by the Conservative I the committee in the early 1980s. As already noted, the responsa committee's ruling on gay marriages was also overturned. lurnal: A Reform Jewish Quarterly, I 44. Steven M. Cohen and Arnold M. Eisen, The Jew Within: Self, Family, and ~ Community in America (Bloomington, Ind., 2000). :1," Central Conference of American I r 45. "Reform Rabbis Approve of Same Sex Marriages," Jewish Post and Opinion, '1isp.pl?file=gender&year=2000. On , April 3, 1996, 1. ~rs and Robert Gluck, Homosexuality ,t 46. Robert Gluck, Homosexuality and Judaism: A Reconstructionist Workshop Series .he Report on the Reconstructionist (Wyncote, Pa., 1993), 52-53. te, Pa., 1993). This report includes a r 47. Denise L. Eger, "Embracing Lesbians and Gay Men: A Reform Jewish by Jewish groups across the denom , Innovation," in Contemporary Debates in American Reform Judaism, ed. Dana Evan -Ie had built within the Conservative I Kaplan (New York, 2001),186-90. nsus statement that prohibited gay r 48. Charles S. Liebman and Sylvia Barack Fishman, "Jewish Communal Policy I at gay commitment ceremonies. I toward Outmarried Families," Journal ofJewish Communal Service, Fall 2000, 17-27. Jers from the CJLS deliberations on 49. On this theme, see Bernard Susser and Charles S. Liebman, Choosing Survival: Issei Abelson and David J. Fine, eds., r r Strategies for a Jewish Future (New York, 1990). I ~ Ask Movement to Liberalize Policy ~ lia, February 28, 2003, http://www I tory/story_id/19836/format/htmll r I I Here Defy Movement's Ban on Gay I mia, March 30, 2001, http://www r :ory/story_id/15812/format/htmll , I !n Sexuality submitted to the Central A reference to marriage is included I, he traditional unique status of het , ., But that is a descriptive comment ,r =. Even more significantly, the actual r :lajor ground for "sexual expression I lld" them in "fidelity and the inten r marriage. The report's authors freely I 'lre based upon contemporary secu- I, r r r r r, r r