Leah, I completely agree that the word "problem" in the article is exactly the problem. I'm about to get on a soap box here, but I've been following this topic for a while now and have a lot to say.
Steven Cohen used the term "welcoming strategy" -- but you can't be welcoming and call intermarriage a problem at the same time. So welcoming "strategies" are pretty much a waste of time if you're telling people that their choice of marriage partner is not ideal. Also, Cohen includes in-marriage among a list of many Jewish ideals and "shoulds." These ideals may all be equal to him, but we know anecdotally that Jews who have abandoned ALL those ideals and practices often hang on to the one last ideal they think will give them a shred of connection to Jewish identity: in-marriage. This is quite sad to me. Why is in-marriage held up higher than tikkun olam? If an intermarried family celebrates Shabbat together, is that LESS ideal than an in-married family celebrating Shabbat?
I would suggest that we need to go beyond both welcoming and "competency." Welcoming is an attitude, not a strategy. And being available to share Jewish teachings and practices is also a stance and an attitude, not a strategy per se. We need to actually go a step further and, once non-Jewish partners and family members are comfortable in the Jewish community, allow those valuable members of our community to--yes--CHANGE our community, for the better. I'm not talking about religious syncretism here, but different cultural perspectives that can enrich us. We need to stop pigeon-holing non-Jews as the "Other" (once we find a better word than "non-Jew"), but actually include them as equal members of the community who have a voice.
I think many Jews (perhaps even Cohen) are frankly afraid of that inevitable next step. What might happen to Judaism if the Jewish community is suddenly filled with non-Jews? Will it still be Judaism? Well, rabbinic Judaism was quite a radical leap too, and it turned Judaism into something completely different than it was before. So was kabbalistic literature and practice. So was hasidism. The current Jewish "establishment" needs to come to terms with its own myths of authenticity. It is those very myths--that mainstream Judaism as we know it today is somehow authentic and represents the ideal "norms" of Judaism--that makes Judaism appear inflexible and falsely static. But it's our flexibility and adaptability that has made Judaism so rich and diverse over the centuries, and sustainable.
There is no one monolithic Judaism. American Jews are perhaps the first Jews in history to have as much freedom and integration in the non-Jewish world--this a new phenomenon historically and we need to respond accordingly, not by retreating backwards in fear, but moving forward with an openness to, and even--dare I say it--an enthusiasm for change. Judaism has enough to offer the world that it won't disappear in that change, but it will be better for it. And yes, Judaism will look different once these changes have accumulated--it always has.
Leah, I completely agree that the word "problem" in the article is exactly the problem. I'm about to get on a soap box here, but I've been following this topic for a while now and have a lot to say.
Steven Cohen used the term "welcoming strategy" -- but you can't be welcoming and call intermarriage a problem at the same time. So welcoming "strategies" are pretty much a waste of time if you're telling people that their choice of marriage partner is not ideal. Also, Cohen includes in-marriage among a list of many Jewish ideals and "shoulds." These ideals may all be equal to him, but we know anecdotally that Jews who have abandoned ALL those ideals and practices often hang on to the one last ideal they think will give them a shred of connection to Jewish identity: in-marriage. This is quite sad to me. Why is in-marriage held up higher than tikkun olam? If an intermarried family celebrates Shabbat together, is that LESS ideal than an in-married family celebrating Shabbat?
I would suggest that we need to go beyond both welcoming and "competency." Welcoming is an attitude, not a strategy. And being available to share Jewish teachings and practices is also a stance and an attitude, not a strategy per se. We need to actually go a step further and, once non-Jewish partners and family members are comfortable in the Jewish community, allow those valuable members of our community to--yes--CHANGE our community, for the better. I'm not talking about religious syncretism here, but different cultural perspectives that can enrich us. We need to stop pigeon-holing non-Jews as the "Other" (once we find a better word than "non-Jew"), but actually include them as equal members of the community who have a voice.
I think many Jews (perhaps even Cohen) are frankly afraid of that inevitable next step. What might happen to Judaism if the Jewish community is suddenly filled with non-Jews? Will it still be Judaism? Well, rabbinic Judaism was quite a radical leap too, and it turned Judaism into something completely different than it was before. So was kabbalistic literature and practice. So was hasidism. The current Jewish "establishment" needs to come to terms with its own myths of authenticity. It is those very myths--that mainstream Judaism as we know it today is somehow authentic and represents the ideal "norms" of Judaism--that makes Judaism appear inflexible and falsely static. But it's our flexibility and adaptability that has made Judaism so rich and diverse over the centuries, and sustainable.
There is no one monolithic Judaism. American Jews are perhaps the first Jews in history to have as much freedom and integration in the non-Jewish world--this a new phenomenon historically and we need to respond accordingly, not by retreating backwards in fear, but moving forward with an openness to, and even--dare I say it--an enthusiasm for change. Judaism has enough to offer the world that it won't disappear in that change, but it will be better for it. And yes, Judaism will look different once these changes have accumulated--it always has.