It's a tough issue, but I think that the article d...

2009-05-17T22:17:00.000-04:00

It's a tough issue, but I think that the article does raise an interesting "double standard" - if these movements are saying that it's okay to intermarry, and if they are claiming to be tolerant of that, how can these institutions not allow people just because they're intermarried?

But at the same time, a Rabbi should be committed to Judaism and to living a Jewish life, and maybe that requires marrying someone Jewish...

I actually have a friend who was more or less kicked out of AJU because of this issue. They told him that either he had to break up with his non-Jewish girlfriend, or leave the school. He left the school, she converted, and they got married.

In my humble opinion, if a couple is married, both...

2009-04-24T22:45:00.000-04:00

In my humble opinion, if a couple is married, both should be Jewish. If they are in a relationship but not married, free choice comes in unless the couple has children.

Wow, there is a lot here (I clicked through to the...

2009-04-24T14:32:00.000-04:00

Wow, there is a lot here (I clicked through to the New Voices article). First, some less central thoughts.

The end of the article is very telling. I don't know if the writer is fairly representing Curiel's attitude, but the quote "His struggle, in fact, is for a new brand of Judaism whose values are truly universal" got to me, and not in a good way. If Curiel is really trying to establish a new brand of Judaism, then he probably shouldn't be so surprised or (maybe) bothered when an "official voice of Judaism" rejects his vision. You can't be a mainstream maverick, can you?

That kind of thinking, along with "Curiel has written a new policy that he hopes HC and other rabbinical schools will one day adopt" strike me as pretty arrogant. Maybe I'm being unfair and/or defensive (wouldn't be the first time), but for him to lecture the movements about what is proper, while accusing us of still being in "Mitzrayim" strikes me as pretty chutzpadick.

But, that's all about Curiel. The main issue is the thing itself - intermarried Rabbis. And, what I find most interesting is what the CCAR said - it's a mistake to confuse acceptance of intermarried couples with full acceptance of intermarriage, as something equal to intra-marriage. We don't talk about this a lot, in part because it's not polite, but the reality is that much (most?) of the Jewish world doesn't see intermarriage as an equally valid option. This might be the only "official" place you'll see this, but I think these policies shed a light on that little secret. What I'd be really interested to know is, among movements with high intermarriage rates (such as the Reform movement, of which I'm a part), how many people would accept an intermarried Rabbi, and now many would find that "over the line"?

Myself? I'll confess to not seeing intermarriage as fully equal to intra-marriage. I'm not saying that intermarriage is evil (it isn't). I'm not saying it's going to be the death of Judaism, or of Liberal Judaism (it's not). I'm just saying that, in my kishkes I value intra-marriage over intermarriage. Now, if that's a reflection of my deeply held beliefs, or a betrayal of those beliefs because of fear/tribalism/etc? I'll admit that's a very good question, but one I'm not going to try to answer here!

Comments on Rabbi Jason Miller - Blog: Intermarried Rabbinical Students

It's a tough issue, but I think that the article d...

In my humble opinion, if a couple is married, both...

Wow, there is a lot here (I clicked through to the...