What craziness! The March 18, 2011 issue of The Jewish Advocate, a Massachusetts weekly, reported that Israeli Jews seeking to get married in their own country must first prove that they’re Jewish. Due to the fact that the religious party is inevitably needed to form a majority coalition government in Israel‘s legislature, the Ultra-Orthodox Chief Rabbinate has been perpetually ceded exclusive jurisdiction over marriage, divorce, burial, and conversion, Jewish rituals that carry legal weight in Israel. That means that two Jews can be married in Israel only by an approved Orthodox rabbi. Now, in an escalation of their efforts to make all Israelis adhere to the Ultra-Orthodox interpretation of Jewish law, the rabbis have been asking for proof that aspiring spouses are Jewish. This has caused much aggravation to many who have no documentation of their Jewishness beyond their own knowledge of their family history. While some have gone through the effort to dig up family records, many other have preferred to either live together out of wedlock or to get married in a foreign country. Also, while Israel’s Law of Return grants citizenship to anyone with a Jewish parent or grandparent, the Rabbinate deems only those with a Jewish mother to be Jewish., thereby denying 320,000 immigrants to Israel status as legal Jews. In addition, the Rabbinate does not recognize conversions performed by Conservative or Reform Jewish rabbis or even conversions by many Orthodox rabbis outside of Israel.
This situation is insane. All other major religions welcome converts with open arms, but those given power over Jewish law in Israel not only make it extremely difficult for those who want to become Jewish to do so, but actually deny participation in major Jewish rituals to those whose identity and family history are undeniably Jewish. What a perfect way to drive Jews out of the fold and to perpetuate the status of Judaism as a relatively tiny and weak member of the world’s community of religions. With the high birthrate of the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel (see my last blog entry) and much lower birthrate of less religious Israelis, the entrenchment and audacity of the Chief Rabbinate seems likely to escalate further. This can only serve to divide the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel both from other Israelis and from Jews around the world. This does not bode well for either Israel or for the unity among Jews needed to stand up against the military and political threats by which it is constantly besieged. Israelis must take the bold step to greatly weaken the power of the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel and spread it more equitably among Jews of various levels of religiosity.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Will Demographics Ruin Israel?
An interesting article by Larry Lowenthal appeared in the March 11, 2011 issue of The Jewish Advocate, a Massachusetts weekly newspaper. The author is a former excutive director of the Greater Boston chapter of the American Jewish Committee. In it, Mr. Lowenthal highlights the population boom among ultra orthodox (Haredi) Jews in Israel along with a population bust among non-Haredi Jews, which he feels can lead to major changes in the country, mostly for the worse. He cites the fact that the Haredi, which make up only 10% of the population, have 30% of the babies, since they average 8-9 children per family in comparison to the 1.7 children per non-Haredi family. If these numbers keep up, the author predicts that the Haredi will comprise 17% of the Israeli population by 2025 and a majority by 2050. The problem the author sees with this is that such a trend can work against the "high-tech, industrialized, globally-connected" country that Israel has become. Seventy percent of the Haredi do not work, but they receive money from the government in the name of preserving the Jewish religion, and because the religious bloc is always needed to form a coalition government. In addition, while the Haredi study Judiasm, they shun important subjects such as science, math, political science, economics, foreign languages, and non-biblical history, and are allowed exemption from military service. Thus, as they become a larger proportion of Israel's population, they threaten to weaken the country's industry, economy, involvement with global intellectual life and, most dangerously, Israel's defense against its hostile neighbors. These possibilities don't bode well for Israel.
It is possible that the scenario Lowenthal describes will not play out. Not all Jews raised as Haredi will stay so. Some percentage of them will be intrigued by the outside world and will become part of the larger society. That certainly happened to most of the Orthodox Jews that immigrated to the United States from the late 1800s until after WWII. But the Haredi community has developed over the last several decades very effective systems for acculturating its children and inculcating in them a sense of belonging and religious fervor. Perhaps, while the less religious are still a majority in Israel, government policy will change so as to eliminate subsidies for the Haredi, forcing them to work in order to survive. That would put them in greater contact with the less religious and likely increase the number of them who merge into the larger society. Whatever happens, we can only hope that the current demographic trend does not weaken Israel's strong scientific, economic, and military status, and turn it into a vulnerable Third World country.
In the following week's Jewish Advocate, Mr. Lowenthal will describe another demographic threat to Israel. That is, the high birthrate of Isreali Arabs that is steadily increasing their proportion of the Israeli population.
It is possible that the scenario Lowenthal describes will not play out. Not all Jews raised as Haredi will stay so. Some percentage of them will be intrigued by the outside world and will become part of the larger society. That certainly happened to most of the Orthodox Jews that immigrated to the United States from the late 1800s until after WWII. But the Haredi community has developed over the last several decades very effective systems for acculturating its children and inculcating in them a sense of belonging and religious fervor. Perhaps, while the less religious are still a majority in Israel, government policy will change so as to eliminate subsidies for the Haredi, forcing them to work in order to survive. That would put them in greater contact with the less religious and likely increase the number of them who merge into the larger society. Whatever happens, we can only hope that the current demographic trend does not weaken Israel's strong scientific, economic, and military status, and turn it into a vulnerable Third World country.
In the following week's Jewish Advocate, Mr. Lowenthal will describe another demographic threat to Israel. That is, the high birthrate of Isreali Arabs that is steadily increasing their proportion of the Israeli population.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Appreciating Great Works of Other Religions
After scanning our local newspaper’s website for things to do on the weekend, I attended a performance of Handel’s Messiah at a Methodist church in a neighboring town. The church building was of ample size, but much of the space was given to rooms used for various activities. The section where services are conducted and where the concert took place was relatively modest in size and, in keeping with the Protestant ethic, had clean, simple lines and was pleasing to the eyes but had no elaborate decorations other than a giant gilded cross mounted on the front wall. Not being Christian, I found the cross to be rather imposing and somewhat of a distraction, but I was set on not letting that hinder my enjoyment of the concert. The area in front of the pews was not large enough to hold the approximately 100 singers, who were dressed in street clothing rather than church choir garb, so they occupied the first several rows of pews, and were organized into sections of basses, tenors, altos, and sopranos. There was also a modest orchestra of about 12 musicians.
What a concert it was! The reason that so many people like to listen to Handel’s Messiah and, especially its Hallelujah Chorus is that it is a fantastic piece of work. The two-hour performance alternated between segments by soloists (alto, soprano, bass, and tenor) and those sung by the chorus. The performance was absolutely inspiring! The four-part harmony between the choral sections was very beautiful to hear and, when the sopranos got going, they lent such an air of spirituality that it felt like their voices were projecting straight to heaven. And the last segment of the performance was the Hallelujah Chorus, that is so widely loved. The whole experience was uplifting, rewarding, and inspiring.
Appreciating a concert like that in no way made me interested in becoming Christian. I can appreciate its great beauty and inspirational qualities without feeling an attraction to the religion that sponsored such work. Over several centuries, both Protestantism and Catholicism in Europe became highly organized and wealthy religions that provided the main source of funding for the arts. Masters of the visual arts like Michelangelo and Rembrandt, and Classical composers like Bach and Beethoven were both funded and inspired by the great Christian religions of Europe. Anyone with any level of objectivity would have to agree that this combination of funding and inspiration produced some of the greatest human artistic achievements ever. Jews and others should be able to appreciate great works produced by other religions without feeling that it threatens their own identity.
What a concert it was! The reason that so many people like to listen to Handel’s Messiah and, especially its Hallelujah Chorus is that it is a fantastic piece of work. The two-hour performance alternated between segments by soloists (alto, soprano, bass, and tenor) and those sung by the chorus. The performance was absolutely inspiring! The four-part harmony between the choral sections was very beautiful to hear and, when the sopranos got going, they lent such an air of spirituality that it felt like their voices were projecting straight to heaven. And the last segment of the performance was the Hallelujah Chorus, that is so widely loved. The whole experience was uplifting, rewarding, and inspiring.
Appreciating a concert like that in no way made me interested in becoming Christian. I can appreciate its great beauty and inspirational qualities without feeling an attraction to the religion that sponsored such work. Over several centuries, both Protestantism and Catholicism in Europe became highly organized and wealthy religions that provided the main source of funding for the arts. Masters of the visual arts like Michelangelo and Rembrandt, and Classical composers like Bach and Beethoven were both funded and inspired by the great Christian religions of Europe. Anyone with any level of objectivity would have to agree that this combination of funding and inspiration produced some of the greatest human artistic achievements ever. Jews and others should be able to appreciate great works produced by other religions without feeling that it threatens their own identity.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Must Jews Close Themselves Off to Maintain Their Faith?
The Jewish Advocate is a weekly newspaper that publishes news relevant to Jews of eastern Massachusetts. It’s writers include those of the Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed, and Reconstructionist Jewish movements as well as those of secular or ethnic Jews. The paper also publishes extensive listings of community events. One column in the paper is called “Ask the Rebbetzin.” A Rebbetzin is a rabbi’s wife who, in the orthodox tradition, has some responsibilities in religious leadership, particularly to women and girls. Rebbetzin Korff point of view appears quite orthodox and her responses to readers’ questions indicate the extent to which many Orthodox Jews feel they must distance themselves from secular society in order to avoid challenging the strength of their faith.
In a letter published in the December 10, 2010 issue of the paper, a reader queried whether there was anything wrong with listening to the Christmas carols she loves. The Rebbetzin strongly discouraged listening to the carols because they are a celebration of Christianity. In another recent response, the Rebbetzin stated that a letter-writer should not attend a non-Jewish friend’s wedding in a church because, as a non-Jewish religious ritual, it is prohibited.
I find such defensive responses repugnant. Should it be assumed that the faith of Jews is so weak that to appreciate the art and music of other cultures or to participate in major life events of non-Jewish friends is enough to make one stray from his own religion? I frankly find this abhorrent. Do you think there are any Catholics or Protestants who wouldn’t attend the wedding of Jewish friends? Even priests have been seen at bar mitzvahs. Why must we be so much less secure than everyone else? There is strength in true faith that enables one to experience and appreciate beauty created by those outside the faith without feeling threatened or becoming defensive.
In a letter published in the December 10, 2010 issue of the paper, a reader queried whether there was anything wrong with listening to the Christmas carols she loves. The Rebbetzin strongly discouraged listening to the carols because they are a celebration of Christianity. In another recent response, the Rebbetzin stated that a letter-writer should not attend a non-Jewish friend’s wedding in a church because, as a non-Jewish religious ritual, it is prohibited.
I find such defensive responses repugnant. Should it be assumed that the faith of Jews is so weak that to appreciate the art and music of other cultures or to participate in major life events of non-Jewish friends is enough to make one stray from his own religion? I frankly find this abhorrent. Do you think there are any Catholics or Protestants who wouldn’t attend the wedding of Jewish friends? Even priests have been seen at bar mitzvahs. Why must we be so much less secure than everyone else? There is strength in true faith that enables one to experience and appreciate beauty created by those outside the faith without feeling threatened or becoming defensive.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Additional Comments on "Future Tense" by Johathan Sacks
I have finished the book "Future Tense: Jews, Judaism, and Israel in the Twenty-First Century. I must say that, even though I am a secular Jew and Rabbi Sacks is a religious Orthodox Jew, I have found him to be a towering intellectual who has tremendous knowledge of philosophy, history, and the world's religions. His major points are that: 1) Orthodox Jews have been turning inward, thereby shutting themselves off from communication with the larger world. This process must be reversed to enable Jewish thought to positively influence others and to gain wisdom and friends from other groups, and 2) Non-Orthodox Jews have engaged with the outside world to the extent that their ties to Judaism have weakened and intermarriage and assimilation threaten to greatly diminish Jewish numbers.
Rabbi Sacks strongly supports the right of Israel to exist, but feels that, when the Israeli government took over the charitable and human service functions that had been performed by religious and other voluntary organizations in the Diaspora, the spiritual, religious, and emotional aspects of these activities were greatly diminished. Because Israeli Jews are, in large majority, non-religious, and assume that all they need to uphold their Jewish identity is to be Israeli, deprives them of their heritage and all the spiritual benefits and wisdom about life they can gain from their religion.
Rabbi Sacks feels that Judaism brought hope to the world. Ancient Greek culture promoted fatalism. As in the Greek tragedies, people could not escape their fate, not matter how hard they tried. However, in Judaism, there is always hope for the future, as exemplified by the belief that the Messiah will come, but hasn't come yet, and by the prayer recited over thousands of years for a return of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel.
Rabbi Sacks writes so beautifully that I would be remiss not to include a few quotes from his book:
"... the Jewish people wrote a story of hope that has the power to inspire all who dare to believe that injustice and brutality are not the final word about the human condition, that faith can be more powerful than empires, that love given is not given in vain, that ideals are not illusions to give us comfort but candles to light our way along a winding road in the dark night without giving way to fear or losing a sense of direction."
"Jews have turned inwards; they need to turn outwards. They are conscious of being different, but so is every member of a minority, and in a global age every group is a minority. Our uniqueness is our universality, and it is precisely by sharing our uniquenesses that we encourage the heritage of humankind. Jews are not the only people to seek God, live lives of faith, work for the betterment of humanity or count themselves blessed by God's love. They are not alone. Jews have friends among many faiths, and among secular humanists, and they should cherish them all, making common cause with them in defence of freedom, human dignity and moral responsibility. They should not take every criticism as a form of antisemitism. They should rest secure in their unparalleled past and fact the future with vigilance but without fear."
"I have argued for a Judaism that has the courage to engage with the world and its challenges. Faith begets confidence, which creates courage. That is how Jews lived in the past and should live in the future. For they are the people of the journey to a distant destination, begun by Abraham, continued by a hundred generations of ancestors, and it still beckons, Judaism is faith in the future tense. Jews were and are still called on to be the voice of hope in the conversation of humankind."
Rabbi Sacks strongly supports the right of Israel to exist, but feels that, when the Israeli government took over the charitable and human service functions that had been performed by religious and other voluntary organizations in the Diaspora, the spiritual, religious, and emotional aspects of these activities were greatly diminished. Because Israeli Jews are, in large majority, non-religious, and assume that all they need to uphold their Jewish identity is to be Israeli, deprives them of their heritage and all the spiritual benefits and wisdom about life they can gain from their religion.
Rabbi Sacks feels that Judaism brought hope to the world. Ancient Greek culture promoted fatalism. As in the Greek tragedies, people could not escape their fate, not matter how hard they tried. However, in Judaism, there is always hope for the future, as exemplified by the belief that the Messiah will come, but hasn't come yet, and by the prayer recited over thousands of years for a return of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel.
Rabbi Sacks writes so beautifully that I would be remiss not to include a few quotes from his book:
"... the Jewish people wrote a story of hope that has the power to inspire all who dare to believe that injustice and brutality are not the final word about the human condition, that faith can be more powerful than empires, that love given is not given in vain, that ideals are not illusions to give us comfort but candles to light our way along a winding road in the dark night without giving way to fear or losing a sense of direction."
"Jews have turned inwards; they need to turn outwards. They are conscious of being different, but so is every member of a minority, and in a global age every group is a minority. Our uniqueness is our universality, and it is precisely by sharing our uniquenesses that we encourage the heritage of humankind. Jews are not the only people to seek God, live lives of faith, work for the betterment of humanity or count themselves blessed by God's love. They are not alone. Jews have friends among many faiths, and among secular humanists, and they should cherish them all, making common cause with them in defence of freedom, human dignity and moral responsibility. They should not take every criticism as a form of antisemitism. They should rest secure in their unparalleled past and fact the future with vigilance but without fear."
"I have argued for a Judaism that has the courage to engage with the world and its challenges. Faith begets confidence, which creates courage. That is how Jews lived in the past and should live in the future. For they are the people of the journey to a distant destination, begun by Abraham, continued by a hundred generations of ancestors, and it still beckons, Judaism is faith in the future tense. Jews were and are still called on to be the voice of hope in the conversation of humankind."
Monday, July 26, 2010
Book - Future Tense: Jews, Judaism and Israel
I've gotten about a third of the way through the book, "Future Tense: Jews, Judaism, and Israel in the Twenty-First Century", by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the main Orthodox Jewish congregations in Great Britain. He is an impressive intellectual who cites from many Jewish and non-Jewish historical and religious sources.
Only partway through the book, I have already been enlightened by many interesting points and historical facts Rabbi Sacks brought up. For instance, he made the point that Judaism is unique among the major religions in accepting religious diversity (what he calls particularism). He states that the Torah recognizes that people of all monotheistic religions worship the same god, can be righteous, and will not have to become Jewish when the messiah comes and brings peace to the earth. This contrasts to the "universalism" of the other major religions, whose basic tenets are that all people should follow the one true faith and that an unpleasant fate awaits those who do not.
An interesting fact that Rabbi Sacks brings up is the German origin of the term, "antisemitism." This has far more than linguistic importance in that early anti-Jewish sentiments among Christians and Muslims were related to Jews' refusal to convert to what were seen as the true faiths that evolved from Judaism. The saving grace of this religion-based anti-Jewish feeling was that Jews could convert to redeem themselves. That left a way out for physical survival. However, the term "antisemitism" refers to a race of people, not a religious group. This distinction is critical, for one cannot change one's race. Thus, the "Jewish Problem" could not be solved by religious conversion. That, of course, led to the Holocaust.
Some recommendations put forth to Jews include:
Only partway through the book, I have already been enlightened by many interesting points and historical facts Rabbi Sacks brought up. For instance, he made the point that Judaism is unique among the major religions in accepting religious diversity (what he calls particularism). He states that the Torah recognizes that people of all monotheistic religions worship the same god, can be righteous, and will not have to become Jewish when the messiah comes and brings peace to the earth. This contrasts to the "universalism" of the other major religions, whose basic tenets are that all people should follow the one true faith and that an unpleasant fate awaits those who do not.
An interesting fact that Rabbi Sacks brings up is the German origin of the term, "antisemitism." This has far more than linguistic importance in that early anti-Jewish sentiments among Christians and Muslims were related to Jews' refusal to convert to what were seen as the true faiths that evolved from Judaism. The saving grace of this religion-based anti-Jewish feeling was that Jews could convert to redeem themselves. That left a way out for physical survival. However, the term "antisemitism" refers to a race of people, not a religious group. This distinction is critical, for one cannot change one's race. Thus, the "Jewish Problem" could not be solved by religious conversion. That, of course, led to the Holocaust.
Some recommendations put forth to Jews include:
- Have pride in your religion. Don't let the negative view of others define you.
- Jewish religious observance is necessary for the preservation of the Jewish People. Ethnic Judaism leads to loss of identity within 3 generations.
- Jews must not see themselves as an isolated people with no friends. It is important to establish bonds with other religions and fight discrimination against any of them.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
High Temple Membership Costs Quash Participation
A recent editorial in Newsweek by Lisa Miller, an intermarried Jew, discussed the high cost of leading a Jewish life in the United States. The cost of day school, camp, temple membership, Jewish center membership, kosher food, etc. has been pegged at $50,000-100,000 for an Orthodox family with 3 children. Such costs are staggering. However, many Orthodox families receive financial assistance from philanthropic sources.
The less religious have little help in meeting the daunting costs of Jewish life. One such cost is temple membership, which averages $1,100 annually and can be over $4,000 in large cities, where many Jews live. This represents a large portion of after-tax income, given the median gross family income of 2-child Jewish families in the U.S. of $75,000-80,000 per year. The high cost discourages Jewish families who are interested in, but not strongly committed to participation in temple life. Lisa Miller feels that the Christian church model of inviting participation, then asking for money later, allows people to become involved before making a heavy financial commitment. The success of this approach is paralleled by that of the Orthodox Jewish Chabad centers, which welcome participation without commitment. However, most Jews in the U.S. are not Orthodox and are not ready to accept the restrictions that Orthodoxy imposes on them.
Given that non-Orthodox temple membership has been steadily decreasing, a change in the financial model of temples is needed. People must be welcome to participate in temple life without making a heavy financial commitment. The Catholic model of passing around the donation plate would be a good place to start. It allows people pay what they can afford and to develop a sense of commitment that could eventually motivate them to make a larger financial contribution. The welcome must come first.
The less religious have little help in meeting the daunting costs of Jewish life. One such cost is temple membership, which averages $1,100 annually and can be over $4,000 in large cities, where many Jews live. This represents a large portion of after-tax income, given the median gross family income of 2-child Jewish families in the U.S. of $75,000-80,000 per year. The high cost discourages Jewish families who are interested in, but not strongly committed to participation in temple life. Lisa Miller feels that the Christian church model of inviting participation, then asking for money later, allows people to become involved before making a heavy financial commitment. The success of this approach is paralleled by that of the Orthodox Jewish Chabad centers, which welcome participation without commitment. However, most Jews in the U.S. are not Orthodox and are not ready to accept the restrictions that Orthodoxy imposes on them.
Given that non-Orthodox temple membership has been steadily decreasing, a change in the financial model of temples is needed. People must be welcome to participate in temple life without making a heavy financial commitment. The Catholic model of passing around the donation plate would be a good place to start. It allows people pay what they can afford and to develop a sense of commitment that could eventually motivate them to make a larger financial contribution. The welcome must come first.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Ten Jewish Perspectives on God
The book, "Finding God: Ten Jewish Responses" by Rifat Sonsino and Daniel Syme, published by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1986, presents 10 different views of God by Jewish thinkers ranging from 4,000 years ago through the modern era. The aim of the book is to aid Jews who cannot accept traditional notions of god in finding a god concept they can accept within Judaism rather than seeking it within another religion. The ten views covered in the book are from:
- The bible
- Rabbinic Literature
- Philo: Spiritual Monotheism
- Maimonides: Neo-Aristotelianism
- Luria: Mysticism
- Spinoza: Pantheism
- Buber: Dialogue
- Steinberg: Limited Theism
- Kaplan: Naturalism
- Fromm: Humanism
There is a chapter on each of these views along with background on each thinker. A convenient multi-page chart in the back of the book makes it easy to determine which of the philosophies the reader is most compatible with.
One problem is that, even if the reader falls in love with one of these philosophies, there are not necessarily available Jewish congregations or organizations that follows them. We are limited to those congregations around us, which generally fall under the categories of Chasssidic, Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed, and Reconstructionist, with some wiggle-room within each for congregations to develop their own personalities.
My concepts fall closest to Fromm's Humanism. However, as a true agnostic, I cannot fully accept any of the God concepts put forth in the book. As far as I can tell, we have no way of knowing whether or not God exists and what his/her/its nature would be if he/her/it does exist. That makes it impossible to adopt any philosophies that claims to know the nature of God and man's relationship to him/her/it. My instinct tells me that, if there is a God, it would not be human-like. However, I consider it possible that there is one religion that has it right, but who knows which one that would be. I would be very amused if, when I die, I find myself in a particular religion's classic concept of heaven or hell. My instinct tells me that, if there's an afterlife, it would be something we are currently incapable of understanding and likely involves achieving unity with the universe.
- The bible
- Rabbinic Literature
- Philo: Spiritual Monotheism
- Maimonides: Neo-Aristotelianism
- Luria: Mysticism
- Spinoza: Pantheism
- Buber: Dialogue
- Steinberg: Limited Theism
- Kaplan: Naturalism
- Fromm: Humanism
There is a chapter on each of these views along with background on each thinker. A convenient multi-page chart in the back of the book makes it easy to determine which of the philosophies the reader is most compatible with.
One problem is that, even if the reader falls in love with one of these philosophies, there are not necessarily available Jewish congregations or organizations that follows them. We are limited to those congregations around us, which generally fall under the categories of Chasssidic, Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed, and Reconstructionist, with some wiggle-room within each for congregations to develop their own personalities.
My concepts fall closest to Fromm's Humanism. However, as a true agnostic, I cannot fully accept any of the God concepts put forth in the book. As far as I can tell, we have no way of knowing whether or not God exists and what his/her/its nature would be if he/her/it does exist. That makes it impossible to adopt any philosophies that claims to know the nature of God and man's relationship to him/her/it. My instinct tells me that, if there is a God, it would not be human-like. However, I consider it possible that there is one religion that has it right, but who knows which one that would be. I would be very amused if, when I die, I find myself in a particular religion's classic concept of heaven or hell. My instinct tells me that, if there's an afterlife, it would be something we are currently incapable of understanding and likely involves achieving unity with the universe.
Monday, March 15, 2010
"Nation of Immigrants" Seder
The Boston area is great for Jewish cultural events. If you really wanted to, you could do at least 2-3 events per week without even being a member of a temple. This past Sunday we attended the 4th annual Anti-Defamation League of New England's "A Nation of Immigrants" community seder, which was open to the public. The theme was based on an essay by John F. Kennedy in which he emphasized the positive impact immigrants have had on this country and argued for liberalizing immigration laws to end the bias towards Northern Europeans. It was an inspiring event, with about 300 people of various religions and ethnic backgrounds in attendance.
The seder was designed to maintain the basic structure of a traditional seder yet promote the relevance of its themes to all other ethnic and religious groups who meet adversity. In this sense it was a very pleasant contrast to the words found in a traditional hagadah (seder book), which tend towards the outdated and chauvinistic. The traditional hagadah talks about the Jews being freed from slavery in Egypt, and thanks god for striking down our enemies and making us fruitful in multiplying. I have found this type of writing hard to swallow because 1) Jewish slavery occurred thousands of years ago, 2) any persecution the Jewish People suffered in Egypt very likely paled in comparison to the holocaust, 3) Jews outside of Israel have had a very low birthrate and our numbers are rapidly shrinking as a percentage of the U.S., European, and world population, and 4) We live in a pluralistic society, and ethnocentrism just doesn't sit well with me and a large portion of the U.S. population, particularly non-Orthodox Jews, and 5) Who really believes that the Red Sea parted?
While telling the story of the Jews escape from Egyptian slavery, the Nation of Immgrants hagadah broadened much of the language to include the redemption of a much broader range of oppressed peoples. There was multi-cultural entertainment interspersed with addresses by people of various backgrounds. The most inspiring was a woman from Honduras who was raised in a tough town in Masachusetts and found herself pregnant as a teenager and on the road to fitting the stereotype of someone from her ethnicity and class. However, she found the strength to take advantage of the opportunities that this country offers and she will be taking the bar exam shortly to fulfil her dream of becoming a lawyer who represents the disadvantaged.
Lenny Zakim was the leader of the Anti-Defamation League of New England for many years and he did tremendous work in bringing together Jews and people of other religions and ethnic groups to work on inter-group harmony and shared goals. Unfortunately he died prematurely of cancer and the beautiful Zakim bridge was named after him. The New England ADL has also been independent in its stances from the national organization, especially in regard to promoting recognition of the Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks during WWI. An organization like the New England ADL makes me proud to be Jewish.
The seder was designed to maintain the basic structure of a traditional seder yet promote the relevance of its themes to all other ethnic and religious groups who meet adversity. In this sense it was a very pleasant contrast to the words found in a traditional hagadah (seder book), which tend towards the outdated and chauvinistic. The traditional hagadah talks about the Jews being freed from slavery in Egypt, and thanks god for striking down our enemies and making us fruitful in multiplying. I have found this type of writing hard to swallow because 1) Jewish slavery occurred thousands of years ago, 2) any persecution the Jewish People suffered in Egypt very likely paled in comparison to the holocaust, 3) Jews outside of Israel have had a very low birthrate and our numbers are rapidly shrinking as a percentage of the U.S., European, and world population, and 4) We live in a pluralistic society, and ethnocentrism just doesn't sit well with me and a large portion of the U.S. population, particularly non-Orthodox Jews, and 5) Who really believes that the Red Sea parted?
While telling the story of the Jews escape from Egyptian slavery, the Nation of Immgrants hagadah broadened much of the language to include the redemption of a much broader range of oppressed peoples. There was multi-cultural entertainment interspersed with addresses by people of various backgrounds. The most inspiring was a woman from Honduras who was raised in a tough town in Masachusetts and found herself pregnant as a teenager and on the road to fitting the stereotype of someone from her ethnicity and class. However, she found the strength to take advantage of the opportunities that this country offers and she will be taking the bar exam shortly to fulfil her dream of becoming a lawyer who represents the disadvantaged.
Lenny Zakim was the leader of the Anti-Defamation League of New England for many years and he did tremendous work in bringing together Jews and people of other religions and ethnic groups to work on inter-group harmony and shared goals. Unfortunately he died prematurely of cancer and the beautiful Zakim bridge was named after him. The New England ADL has also been independent in its stances from the national organization, especially in regard to promoting recognition of the Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks during WWI. An organization like the New England ADL makes me proud to be Jewish.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Matisyahu's "One Day"
Matisyahu makes me proud to be Jewish. Here is a religious guy from a group that is usually very separate from everyone else and whose adherents generally give the impression that they feel they know the right way and everyone else (particularly non-Chasidic Jews) is wrong. Yet he somehow manages to be very observant of his group's strict tenets yet communicates beautifully through his music and lyrics to the rest of the world, providing a message of hope and peace. Here are the lyrics and official video of "One Day." You might also like to see the video of him at the Vancouver Winter Olympics to see his immense appeal to people of all backgrounds. Matisyahu is truly fulfilling the biblical edict to Jews, "You shall be a light unto the nations."
Friday, February 12, 2010
Orthodox Jewish Laws Without Apparent Meaning
In a February 12, 2010 article in The Jewish Advocate, a Boston-area Jewish weekly, the work of a rabbi who checks for shatnez in clothing is depicted. Shatnez is the combination of wool and linen in the same garment, which is forbidden among extremely orthodox Jews. The reason for the prohibition is a biblical passage in Deuteronomy 22:11: “You shall not wear combined fibers, wool and linen together.” So the rabbi uses a microscope to examine fibers that he picks from various parts of a garment he tests. With the exception of undergarments, wigs, belts and earmuffs, no clothing may be worn until it is ruled shatnez free. That includes embroidery kits, oven mitts, blouses and baseball gloves. The rabbi states, “The mitzvah of shatnez is as important a mitzvah as ‘Do not steal,’ or ‘Love your friend as you love yourself.’
What gives here? Not combining wool and lines in clothing is just as important as loving thy neighbor or not stealing? No wonder most Jews are not Orthodox! This seem absolutely crazy. At least kosher laws have some apparent justification in being humane and promoting cleanliness. But come on now, mixing wool and linen? This is not like mixing milk and meat, which seems to be based on the callousness of washing down the meat of a calf in its mothers milk. Wool comes from the shearing, not killing, of a sheep and linen comes from a flax plant. Now what logic could there be in not mixing them? It seems like Orthodox Jews believe in following an extensive set of rules without regard to reason or benefit. This does not seem very spiritual and may even take the focus away from doing real good. The recent corruption scandal in New Jersey involving Orthodox rabbis speaks to this possibility.
What gives here? Not combining wool and lines in clothing is just as important as loving thy neighbor or not stealing? No wonder most Jews are not Orthodox! This seem absolutely crazy. At least kosher laws have some apparent justification in being humane and promoting cleanliness. But come on now, mixing wool and linen? This is not like mixing milk and meat, which seems to be based on the callousness of washing down the meat of a calf in its mothers milk. Wool comes from the shearing, not killing, of a sheep and linen comes from a flax plant. Now what logic could there be in not mixing them? It seems like Orthodox Jews believe in following an extensive set of rules without regard to reason or benefit. This does not seem very spiritual and may even take the focus away from doing real good. The recent corruption scandal in New Jersey involving Orthodox rabbis speaks to this possibility.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The Jewish Neocon Issue
The February 1, 2010 issue of Newsweek magazine has a story entitled, "The Return of the Neocons" by David Margolick. Being a political observer but not a wonk, I was a bit startled to read that several of the so-called Neocons, who were key ideologists supporting the Bush 43 administration, were Jewish. They include Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of Defence Douglas Feith, William Kristol of the conservative Weekly Standard, Washington Post columnists Charles Krauthammer and Robert Kagan, and Norman and John Podhoretz of Commentary magazine, among others. I find this disturbing for two reasons.
First, it is disturbing because I have viewed the neocons as somewhat evil, pushing war when it was not necessary, and I don't like to see Jewish people involved in less than laudatory activities (e.g. Bernie Madoff). It denigrates us as a people. While I detested Saddam Hussein and supported trying to depose him based on evidence of weapons of mass destruction, I later concluded that the evidence of such weapons was likely fabricated and the war was pushed through over legitimate objections. The Neocons seems to have played a key part in justifying the attack. In addition, they fostered the notion that the Iraqi people would greet us with open arms and embrace democracy. That didn't happen and it still seems likely that, without a U.S. military presence, Iraq will devolve into another anti-Western dictatorship. So where did the sacrifice of our soldiers get us?
Another strong reason to be disturbed by the fact that many Neocons are Jewish are the allegations that they have pursued aggressive and unilateral U.S. military action in the Middle East out of concern for Israeli rather than U.S. interests. If it were indeed the case, it would be quite disturbing. Indeed, there have been articles, books, and blog posts claiming that the Neocons represented a Jewish conspiracy to prompt the U.S. to act militarily in Israel's interest. Unfortunately, it is not easy to provide evidence to the contrary. How can we tell what is in someone's mind? The most solid evidence I've seen that concern for Israel's survival was not an important motivator to Jewish neocons is their consistent conservative and aggressive stances on issues unrelated to Israel. For example, William Kristol was a strong advocate for military action to save the Muslims of Kosovo by attacking the Serbian military. In addition, the major players in the aggressive and unilateral U.S. stance under Bush 43 were not Jewish. They included Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld among several others. I don't think such people would have let some conservative intellectuals dictate their policy. It is more likely that they used these men to justify policies that they already believed in.
Questions of divided loyalty always come up in politics. John Kennedy, in his campaign to become the first Catholic U.S. president, had to take pains to convince the U.S. public that he would not be beholden to the Pope. Barak Obama was elected as the first U.S. president of partial African ancestry in large part by convincing the public that he would focus on issues of importance to the entire nation rather than on predominantly black concerns.
I don't think it's bad for Jews to be represented all across the political spectrum. Why should any group toe one political line? Many Jews, Blacks, and Latinos have reasons to buck the predominately liberal outlooks and voting habits of their groups. This is a good thing. No group should be taken for granted by any political party. By the same token, no member of these groups who becomes conservative should be viewed as a traitor or self-hater. Thus, we must accept that Jews can become accomplished conservative ideologues just as they have traditionally been strongly represented in the ranks of liberal ideologues. That does not mean that they are acting out of divided loyalty. Democracy fosters the interplay of ideas. May the strongest ones predominate!
First, it is disturbing because I have viewed the neocons as somewhat evil, pushing war when it was not necessary, and I don't like to see Jewish people involved in less than laudatory activities (e.g. Bernie Madoff). It denigrates us as a people. While I detested Saddam Hussein and supported trying to depose him based on evidence of weapons of mass destruction, I later concluded that the evidence of such weapons was likely fabricated and the war was pushed through over legitimate objections. The Neocons seems to have played a key part in justifying the attack. In addition, they fostered the notion that the Iraqi people would greet us with open arms and embrace democracy. That didn't happen and it still seems likely that, without a U.S. military presence, Iraq will devolve into another anti-Western dictatorship. So where did the sacrifice of our soldiers get us?
Another strong reason to be disturbed by the fact that many Neocons are Jewish are the allegations that they have pursued aggressive and unilateral U.S. military action in the Middle East out of concern for Israeli rather than U.S. interests. If it were indeed the case, it would be quite disturbing. Indeed, there have been articles, books, and blog posts claiming that the Neocons represented a Jewish conspiracy to prompt the U.S. to act militarily in Israel's interest. Unfortunately, it is not easy to provide evidence to the contrary. How can we tell what is in someone's mind? The most solid evidence I've seen that concern for Israel's survival was not an important motivator to Jewish neocons is their consistent conservative and aggressive stances on issues unrelated to Israel. For example, William Kristol was a strong advocate for military action to save the Muslims of Kosovo by attacking the Serbian military. In addition, the major players in the aggressive and unilateral U.S. stance under Bush 43 were not Jewish. They included Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld among several others. I don't think such people would have let some conservative intellectuals dictate their policy. It is more likely that they used these men to justify policies that they already believed in.
Questions of divided loyalty always come up in politics. John Kennedy, in his campaign to become the first Catholic U.S. president, had to take pains to convince the U.S. public that he would not be beholden to the Pope. Barak Obama was elected as the first U.S. president of partial African ancestry in large part by convincing the public that he would focus on issues of importance to the entire nation rather than on predominantly black concerns.
I don't think it's bad for Jews to be represented all across the political spectrum. Why should any group toe one political line? Many Jews, Blacks, and Latinos have reasons to buck the predominately liberal outlooks and voting habits of their groups. This is a good thing. No group should be taken for granted by any political party. By the same token, no member of these groups who becomes conservative should be viewed as a traitor or self-hater. Thus, we must accept that Jews can become accomplished conservative ideologues just as they have traditionally been strongly represented in the ranks of liberal ideologues. That does not mean that they are acting out of divided loyalty. Democracy fosters the interplay of ideas. May the strongest ones predominate!
Monday, January 25, 2010
Jewish Pride
Writing this blog has allowed me to vent some of my resentments about organized Judaism and to largely get past them. I have since had a much more positive outlook on my Jewishness and Judaism in general. While not a member of a temple, I have engaged in some of the many Jewish activities available in the Boston area and they have been enjoyable.
A recent article published in the NY Times made me feel proud to be Jewish. It stated that "Jews make up 0.2 percent of the world population, but 54 percent of the world chess champions, 27 percent of the Nobel physics laureates and 31 percent of the medicine laureates." In addition, "Jews make up 2 percent of the U.S. population, but 21 percent of the Ivy League student bodies, 26 percent of the Kennedy Center honorees, 37 percent of the Academy Award-winning directors, 38 percent of those on a recent Business Week list of leading philanthropists, 51 percent of the Pulitzer Prize winners for nonfiction."
As to Israel, “Tel Aviv has become one of the world’s foremost entrepreneurial hot spots. Israel has more high-tech start-ups per capita than any other nation on earth, by far. It leads the world in civilian research-and-development spending per capita. It ranks second behind the U.S. in the number of companies listed on the Nasdaq. Israel, with seven million people, attracts as much venture capital as France and Germany combined."
These accomplishments are a source of pride, Yet it would be a delusion to think that Jews are better at everything. Certainly, a majority of the world’s accomplishments are by non-Jews. However, it’s nice to know we make such an outsized contribution relative to our numbers. I'm also proud that Israel has proven that Jews are quite capable of defending themselves. That contrasts sharply with the image of Jews in the Diaspora, who have seemed so helpless when attacked.
Matisyahu has been another source of Jewish pride. It was great to hear him sing “One Day” in the TV ad for the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. He sings well and the lyrics promote world peace and general optimism. Matisyahu's music video has the full song. His music shows that Jews can "be cool" and reach out to people all over the globe. This notion was also reinforced by the amazing performance of the Israeli Defense Forces in setting up an effective and efficient field hospital within 48 hours of the earthquake in Haiti, far faster than any other country.
A recent article published in the NY Times made me feel proud to be Jewish. It stated that "Jews make up 0.2 percent of the world population, but 54 percent of the world chess champions, 27 percent of the Nobel physics laureates and 31 percent of the medicine laureates." In addition, "Jews make up 2 percent of the U.S. population, but 21 percent of the Ivy League student bodies, 26 percent of the Kennedy Center honorees, 37 percent of the Academy Award-winning directors, 38 percent of those on a recent Business Week list of leading philanthropists, 51 percent of the Pulitzer Prize winners for nonfiction."
As to Israel, “Tel Aviv has become one of the world’s foremost entrepreneurial hot spots. Israel has more high-tech start-ups per capita than any other nation on earth, by far. It leads the world in civilian research-and-development spending per capita. It ranks second behind the U.S. in the number of companies listed on the Nasdaq. Israel, with seven million people, attracts as much venture capital as France and Germany combined."
These accomplishments are a source of pride, Yet it would be a delusion to think that Jews are better at everything. Certainly, a majority of the world’s accomplishments are by non-Jews. However, it’s nice to know we make such an outsized contribution relative to our numbers. I'm also proud that Israel has proven that Jews are quite capable of defending themselves. That contrasts sharply with the image of Jews in the Diaspora, who have seemed so helpless when attacked.
Matisyahu has been another source of Jewish pride. It was great to hear him sing “One Day” in the TV ad for the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. He sings well and the lyrics promote world peace and general optimism. Matisyahu's music video has the full song. His music shows that Jews can "be cool" and reach out to people all over the globe. This notion was also reinforced by the amazing performance of the Israeli Defense Forces in setting up an effective and efficient field hospital within 48 hours of the earthquake in Haiti, far faster than any other country.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Relatively Few Jews Identify Themselves as Religious
A Jan 8, 2010 article in The Jewish Advocate, a Massachusetts weekly newspaper, described a Pew Research Center poll of 35,000 Americans concerning their religiosity. The 6 New England states plus Alaska had the lowest percentages of people (36-44%) who felt that religion was very important in their lives. In contrast, the southern states of Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee had the highest percentages of religious people (72-82%). Jews were lower is religiosity than Americans overall. The following percentages compare Jews to Americans overall:
Certainty of God's existence: 41% vs 71%
Religion is very important in life: 31% vs 56%
Attend weekly religious services: 10% vs 39%
Their religion is the one true faith: 5% vs 24%
Pray daily: 26% vs 58%
College graduates: 59% vs 27%
Family income above $100,000: 46% vs 18%
What this seems to boil down to is relatively low religiosity among Jews. Judaism appears to have a strong strain of rationalism as opposed to spirituality, that probably has some historical basis, with roots in the religion itself. This rationalism has led to some highly influential theorists like Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx, and also led to great achievements in science, medicine, and literature. It has also led to a questioning of religious tenets. That, and the low birthrate of Jews in the U.S. raise the question of whether Judaism will eventually become the tiniest of minorities within the U.S., populated only by the ultra-Orthodox.
Certainty of God's existence: 41% vs 71%
Religion is very important in life: 31% vs 56%
Attend weekly religious services: 10% vs 39%
Their religion is the one true faith: 5% vs 24%
Pray daily: 26% vs 58%
College graduates: 59% vs 27%
Family income above $100,000: 46% vs 18%
What this seems to boil down to is relatively low religiosity among Jews. Judaism appears to have a strong strain of rationalism as opposed to spirituality, that probably has some historical basis, with roots in the religion itself. This rationalism has led to some highly influential theorists like Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx, and also led to great achievements in science, medicine, and literature. It has also led to a questioning of religious tenets. That, and the low birthrate of Jews in the U.S. raise the question of whether Judaism will eventually become the tiniest of minorities within the U.S., populated only by the ultra-Orthodox.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Jewish Matrilineal Descent Challenged in British Court
A recent article appeared the the New York Times entitled, "Who is a Jew" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/world/europe/08britain.html?_r=1&em). It dealt with a decision by a British appellate court that a Jewish School (state-supported as are all religious schools in Britain) cannot refuse to accept a student because it doesn't consider him a Jew since his mother was converted to Judaism in other than the Orthodox tradition. In fact, the court went further by saying that admissions criteria must depend not on family ties, but “on faith, however defined.” It proposes that belief and practice define religion rather than heritage. The British Supreme Court will take up the issue soon and make a final decision.
As I have mentioned before, the Orthodox tenet of defining Jewish identity as transmitted by the mother alone was not always part of Jewish law and is a major factor in keeping Jewish numbers low, as well as creating a division between Jews of the Orthodox/Conservative persuasions who follow the rule and the Reformed/Reconstructionist persuasions who don't. Despite claims to the contrary, the rule is not a 5,000 year-old tradition. It was instituted in about 70 AD at around the time of the destruction of the Second Temple and may have been intended to identify the children of raped Jewish women as Jews.
Why does Judaism seem to be the only religion in which belief and practice of the religion is not considered enough for membership? What do bloodlines have to do with religion? Was Hitler correct in thinking that Jews are a race more than a religion? The sooner we get away from that notion, the better. Fortunately, Judaism's genetic distinctiveness is diminishing due to intermarriage, adoption of children from non-Jewish backgrounds, and immigration to Israel of Jews from Africa and West Asia. Just as with other religions, Judaism would do well to reach the point where one cannot recognize a Jew by the shape of his nose or the combination of his skin/hair/eye color. The antiquated, arbitrary, divisive rule of matrilineal descent that weakens Judaism should find its way to the trash can. Let religion be defined by belief and practice! And let ethnic identity be up to the individual.
As I have mentioned before, the Orthodox tenet of defining Jewish identity as transmitted by the mother alone was not always part of Jewish law and is a major factor in keeping Jewish numbers low, as well as creating a division between Jews of the Orthodox/Conservative persuasions who follow the rule and the Reformed/Reconstructionist persuasions who don't. Despite claims to the contrary, the rule is not a 5,000 year-old tradition. It was instituted in about 70 AD at around the time of the destruction of the Second Temple and may have been intended to identify the children of raped Jewish women as Jews.
Why does Judaism seem to be the only religion in which belief and practice of the religion is not considered enough for membership? What do bloodlines have to do with religion? Was Hitler correct in thinking that Jews are a race more than a religion? The sooner we get away from that notion, the better. Fortunately, Judaism's genetic distinctiveness is diminishing due to intermarriage, adoption of children from non-Jewish backgrounds, and immigration to Israel of Jews from Africa and West Asia. Just as with other religions, Judaism would do well to reach the point where one cannot recognize a Jew by the shape of his nose or the combination of his skin/hair/eye color. The antiquated, arbitrary, divisive rule of matrilineal descent that weakens Judaism should find its way to the trash can. Let religion be defined by belief and practice! And let ethnic identity be up to the individual.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Birthright Israel Helps Keep Jews in the Fold
The Jewish Advocate newspaper of October 30, 2009 reported that a study of the Birthright Israel program verifies the program's effectiveness in keeping young Jews in the fold. Supported by charitable foundations, the program sends Jews up to age 25 on free trips to Israel. The Brandeis University study compared Jewish-related outcomes between a group of people who had been on the trip and a group who had applied for the trip but were not able to go for whatever reason. All study subjects were non-Orthodox Jews. Seventy-two percent of those who had been on the program later married Jews compared to 46% if the non-participants. In summary, compared to non-participants, those who went through the program were 57% more likely to marry Jews, 30% more likely to feel that raising children as Jews is very important, 23% more likely to feel very connected to Israel, and 28% more likely to attend religious services monthly or more. For the Jewish member of intermarried couples, program participants were 93% more likely to say that raising children as Jews was very important. The spouses of intermarried participants were 4 times as likely to have converted to Judaism. At its peak, the program sent 45,000 young people on the program annually. But the sagging economy and Madoff swindle of Jewish philanthropists has reduced that number to 25,000.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Atonement?
Although I have only attended High Holiday events sporadically for several years, I felt like attending some this year. I went to a Rosh Hashannah service that did not require temple membership. Everyone met at a wooded site and hiked up a hill to a cabin facing a beautiful pond. The service was conducted outdoors, in front of the cabin, facing the pond. It was a pleasant experience and I enjoyed hearing and singing some of the songs I used to sing when I attended temple during my childhood. I also attended Kol Nidrei service conducted by a Jewish workshop. I enjoyed hearing the traditional song that begins the Yom Kippur holiday. However, I could not get into the prayers and did not stay much after Kol Nidrei was sung.
I have difficulty understanding the concept of atoning in one day for sins you committed during a whole year. First of all, I think it is difficult or impossible to really atone for sins against people. I know that the prayer book distinguished between sins against God and sins against people. If the sins against God involve breaking religious rules such as keeping the sabbath, putting on tfillin, or keeping kosher, then I can understand atonement. However, how can you really make up for sins against people like beating your wife or child, breaking trust, or committing crimes? It seems to me that you should not be doing such things in the first place and, if you do them, you should not be let off the hook so easily. This is the same feeling I have about Catholic confession. Once the damage is done, it is almost impossible to reverse. I think it would be better if people knew that they could never be absolved of their sins and that, in the final accounting, all the good and bad they did over the course of their lives would be weighed. As an agnostic, I do not particularly believe in the concept of a heavenly being judging whether we should go to heaven, hell, or purgatory. However, I think that for those who do believe, their behavior would be better influenced if they felt they could not get off for their sins.
I have difficulty understanding the concept of atoning in one day for sins you committed during a whole year. First of all, I think it is difficult or impossible to really atone for sins against people. I know that the prayer book distinguished between sins against God and sins against people. If the sins against God involve breaking religious rules such as keeping the sabbath, putting on tfillin, or keeping kosher, then I can understand atonement. However, how can you really make up for sins against people like beating your wife or child, breaking trust, or committing crimes? It seems to me that you should not be doing such things in the first place and, if you do them, you should not be let off the hook so easily. This is the same feeling I have about Catholic confession. Once the damage is done, it is almost impossible to reverse. I think it would be better if people knew that they could never be absolved of their sins and that, in the final accounting, all the good and bad they did over the course of their lives would be weighed. As an agnostic, I do not particularly believe in the concept of a heavenly being judging whether we should go to heaven, hell, or purgatory. However, I think that for those who do believe, their behavior would be better influenced if they felt they could not get off for their sins.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Increase in "Cultural" Rather than Religious Jews
The August 14, 2009 edition of The Jewish Advocate, a venerable Boston-area Jewish weekly newspaper, reported that the proportion of "cultural Jews" has doubled over the past two decades to 37% of the U.S. Jewish population. "Cultural Jews" are defined as those answering the question "What is your religion, if any?" with, "no religion, atheist, agnostic, secular, or humanist", while qualifying themselves as Jews because their parents were Jewish or they had a Jewish upbringing. This sounds pretty close to what I define as "Ethnic Jews", except that some of these people may feel reluctantly Jewish, while I consider Ethnic Jews to at least somewhat enjoy the cultural aspects of Judaism. The rise in this group is attributed in the article to intermarriage and disaffection with Judaism. However, the latter must be the primary cause because people for whom religion plays a prominent role would not intermarry.
The Advocate article also reported that 500,000 out of the 3.6 million adults with a Jewish mother followed another religion, generally Christianity. The article paralleled the increase of secular Jews to the general increase in non-religious U.S. adults, which has climbed from 8% to 15% over the last 2 decades. However, the numbers show that, while secularism has risen by a similar percentage among both Jews and Christians, the proportion of the Jewish population that is secular is more than double that of the Christian population.
There seems to be two strong forces in the Jewish community that conflict with each other. One is the religious force, encouraging Jews to join synagogues and temples and to engage in Jewish prayers, rituals, and rules of behavior. The other is a tendency toward the worldly rather than the spiritual and mystical, towards the scientific rather than the dogmatic, towards open-mindedness rather than provincialism, and to reason and logic rather than blind obedience to rules. The latter cultural inclinations have no doubt greatly influenced Jewish contributions to science, medicine, academia, the creative arts, and the media. As an ethnic Jew, I admire these aspects of the culture. On the other hand, I feel some disappointment that a lack of emphasis on the spiritual and mystical in mainstream Judaism has left so many Jews indifferent about religious services. Christian religious services place an unabashed emphasis on God and spirituality, while mainstream Jewish temples emphasize humanistic values more than interaction with God.
The Advocate article also reported that 500,000 out of the 3.6 million adults with a Jewish mother followed another religion, generally Christianity. The article paralleled the increase of secular Jews to the general increase in non-religious U.S. adults, which has climbed from 8% to 15% over the last 2 decades. However, the numbers show that, while secularism has risen by a similar percentage among both Jews and Christians, the proportion of the Jewish population that is secular is more than double that of the Christian population.
There seems to be two strong forces in the Jewish community that conflict with each other. One is the religious force, encouraging Jews to join synagogues and temples and to engage in Jewish prayers, rituals, and rules of behavior. The other is a tendency toward the worldly rather than the spiritual and mystical, towards the scientific rather than the dogmatic, towards open-mindedness rather than provincialism, and to reason and logic rather than blind obedience to rules. The latter cultural inclinations have no doubt greatly influenced Jewish contributions to science, medicine, academia, the creative arts, and the media. As an ethnic Jew, I admire these aspects of the culture. On the other hand, I feel some disappointment that a lack of emphasis on the spiritual and mystical in mainstream Judaism has left so many Jews indifferent about religious services. Christian religious services place an unabashed emphasis on God and spirituality, while mainstream Jewish temples emphasize humanistic values more than interaction with God.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Taglit Birthright Israel program
My son just got back from a trip to Israel sponsored by the Taglit Birthright Israel program. Even in this time of diminished charitable contributions, the Birthright program attracts philanthropic funds because of its effectiveness in enhancing Jewish identity and support for Israel. In my son's case, I would say that the trip indeed accomplished the program's goals. He got to see religious and cultural sites like Yad Vashem, the Old City of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Tsvat, Kibbutzim, and Masada, as well as other places of interest including the Golan Heights, Sea of Gallilee, and the Dead Sea. A few Israeli contemporaries traveled with the group, giving the opportunity for friendships to develop. I think my son came away with a greater sense of being part of the Jewish People, a knowledge of Israelis as people, friends, and brothers, and a view of Israel in the context of history and present day world politics and power struggles. So, I salute the Taglit Birthright Israel program and thank those contributing funds to keep the program vibrant and available to most of those who want to participate.
More Evidence of Self-defeating Attitude Among Religious Jews
An article in The Jewish Advocate newspaper of July 3, 2009 states that Jewish religious schools prefer to exclude students who don't have a Jewish mother, while some allow such students as long as they convert ASAP. What hogwash! One can readily see why Jews are so low in number in the U.S. and represent a rapidly shrinking proportion of the country's population. What is the purpose of this exclusionary attitude? Don't the schools' leaders recognize that any student and his/her family willing to bear the burden of tuition as well as the extra daily school hours needed for Jewish studies is quite motivated to be Jewish. Isn't that enough? The religionists seem to feel that someone is a Jew if his mother was Jewish, even if he knows absolutely nothing about Jewish teachings. But they feel that someone with only a Jewish father is not Jewish even if he/she bears the burden of daily Jewish study. This attitude is maddening!! Judaism would be much stronger and more dynamic if Jewish schools and congregations welcomed those who want to be Jews rather than setting up roadblocks for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
