One of my classmates at JTS was dating a non-Jewish woman, but she converted to Judaism early on in our six-year course of study and it was a non-issue.
The New Voices article, "The Coming of the Intermarried Rabbi", by Jeremy Gillick opens with the story of David Curiel (right), who decided to become a rabbi in the summer of 2008. Curiel was shocked when Hebrew College told him he would not be welcome at its seminary because his wife was not Jewish. In the "it's a small world" category, Curiel is from Metro Detroit and is the brother of a Hebrew High School classmate of mine from Adat Shalom Synagogue.The author explains that the "Conservative movement's Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS), the Reform movement's Hebrew Union College (HUC) and the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College (RRC) all refuse to admit or ordain students in relationships with non-Jews".
The policy at the Reform Movement's seminaries reads: "Because we believe in the importance of Jewish family modeling, applicants who are married to or in committed relationships with non-Jews will not be considered for acceptance to this program".
Rabbi Dan Ehrenkrantz, dean of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College in Philly said "The bedrock of what it means to be Jewish is to belong to the Jewish people. Leaders of the Jewish community, who model to others what Jewish life can be, should themselves be in homes that are fully Jewish".
There are some intermarried rabbis out there. "In 1992, Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, a founder of the neo-Kabbalistic Jewish Renewal movement, ordained Tirzah Firestone, making her the first intermarried rabbi on record. In her memoir With Roots in Heaven: One Woman's Passionate Journey into the Heart of Her Faith, Firestone recounts how her husband inspired her return to Judaism, but that their marriage ultimately fell apart because of his faith."
According to Rabbi Marcia Prager, the dean of ordination programs at ALEPH (Renewal), Firestone's experience informed the school's approximately 10-year-old policy to evaluate students with non-Jewish partners on a case-by-case basis. When ALEPH does admit such students, it does so with the hope that the non-Jewish partner will one day "join the tribe".
What do you think? Leave your comment about whether it is appropriate for rabbinical schools to refuse to admit intermarried candidates into their ordination program.
7 comments:
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!
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.
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.
Intermarriage is at the heart of a double standard within judiasm that stems from t he concept of being a chosen people. It s discrimatory to exclude from jewish institutions those who choose the have partners from other religions- we would rather tolerate those who have sex with same sex partners and yet both prevent the development of jewish families. To suggest that rabbs follow every law of judiasm is as farcical as accepting that the pope is gods representative on earth - and if we accept th at rabbis can be human and struggle with the ethics of following each and every law then we must ask which laws are more acceptable to transgress than others? As a religion that champions antidiscrimination i have never been able to reconcile the iexclusion of those who are intermarried with the strongly held belief of freedom for all to practice their religions in peace ( from exodus to the holocoaust and back)
Intermarriage is at the heart of a double standard within judiasm that stems from t he concept of being a chosen people. It s discrimatory to exclude from jewish institutions those who choose the have partners from other religions- we would rather tolerate those who have sex with same sex partners and yet both prevent the development of jewish families. To suggest that rabbs follow every law of judiasm is as farcical as accepting that the pope is gods representative on earth - and if we accept th at rabbis can be human and struggle with the ethics of following each and every law then we must ask which laws are more acceptable to transgress than others? As a religion that champions antidiscrimination i have never been able to reconcile the iexclusion of those who are intermarried with the strongly held belief of freedom for all to practice their religions in peace ( from exodus to the holocoaust and back)
I am a Los Angeles area rabbi who has watched several rabbinical and cantorial colleagues struggle with the intermarriage issue in their personal lives--including one rabbi who kept her marriage secret until her non-Jewish spouse converted. I also know a female rabbi who with a long-term live-in Jewish boyfriend and a male rabbi who lives with his non-Jewish girlfriend and an Aleph-ordained female rabbi who was married to her non-Jewish husband before she was ordained. In our "you can have it all" world, I guess this all seems normal. I find all of these situations middled and sad and, fundamentally, dishonest.
At least to be a Rabbi, your partner should be Jewish or commit to converting. This applies equally whether the partner is of the opposite sex or the same sex.
Post a Comment