Marking the 2nd anniversary of the release of the 2013 Pew Research Center’s Portrait of Jewish Americans, a highly diverse group of thought leaders from all around the United States has framed a “Statement on Jewish Vitality,” advocating strategic responses to respond to the challenges to the Jewish future.
Image courtesy Pew Research Center
American Jewry now stands at a crossroads. Our choices are stark: we either accept as inevitable the declining numbers of engaged Jews, or we work to expand the community and improve the quality of Jewish life going forward.
Despite the evidence of deeply disturbing population trends, the community is bereft of any sense of crisis.
This posture stands in stark contrast to what happened in the 1990’s when communal organizations acknowledged a Jewish continuity crisis and created elaborate task forces and special programs to address it. These include effective programs, such as Birthright Israel and leadership training efforts. Today’s near-inaction bespeaks a self-imposed helplessness. The time to mobilize the Jewish community to adopt effective policies and programs is now.
The Challenging Context
Let us recall the most salient findings of the Pew Research Center’s “Portrait of Jewish Americans”:
- Late marriage and non-marriage: most (51%) non-Orthodox Jews aged 25-39 are not married, and of those aged 40-49, fully 18% have never married.
- Frequent intermarriage: Of those raised Reform – to take one example – 80% of those who married between 2000 and 2013 have non-Jewish spouses.
- Low birthrates: Non-Orthodox Jewish women bear, on average, just 1.7 children, below the 2.1 replacement level; and owing to intermarriage, many of those children will identify as non-Jews when they grow up.
- The disaffiliation of two million Jews: Of the 7.2 million adult Americans who have at least one Jewish parent, 5.1 million identify as Jews and the other 2.1 million do not.
- Overall, we find diminished Jewish social connections, a weaker sense of meaningful and compelling Judaism, and fewer engaged Jews, outside the Orthodox sector. Down the line, we face the prospect of a community consisting of many ultra-Orthodox Jews, on the one hand, and “partly Jewish” Jews, as they call themselves, on the other.
Strategic Ideas
In light of these deeply unsettling trends, we call for: A communal mobilization campaign aimed at policy makers and philanthropists, conveying two messages:
- The decline of the Jewish “Middle” must be recognized: We are seeing severe declines in the “Jewish Middle” – Jewishly engaged individuals and communities outside of Haredi Orthodoxy.
- Effective responses are feasible: We can significantly influence the size, character, commitment and Judaic capacity of this Jewish Middle.
To put this another way, if current trends continue unchecked, the American Jewish community will grow smaller and less vital.
But there’s something we can do about it.
Research demonstrates that several communal endeavors that can counteract the alarming trends. The most effective share three critical features:
- They build Jewish social networks.
- They convey Jewish content.
- They target peer groups of Jews at crucial stages of life.
The most promising approach focuses on adolescent Jewish education … day schools, supplementary schools, overnight Jewish camps, Israel trips, and youth groups. These experiences, taking place in the crucial identity-forming high school years, work in synergy. They support one another, and recruit for one another.
Actions can be taken to expand participation in each of these settings:
- Several states have adopted tax policies that offset day school tuition. The Jewish community should support such efforts and find other ways to make day schools more affordable.
- While supplementary schools (usually congregationally sponsored) exert a limited impact in the pre-Bar/Bat Mitzvah years – there are important exceptions. Supplementary schooling lasting 7 or more years (well into the teen years) produces measurable, lasting effects, independent of other educational experiences. In fact, one value of supplementary schooling is that it serves as a critical recruiting ground for camps, Israel trips, and youth groups. The combination of supplementary education with these other adolescent programs enhances the chances of securing Jewish continuity.
- Jewish summer camp enrollment is now bumping up against capacity, and camp costs strain many family budgets. Yet, $1 million is sufficient to initiate an overnight camp on rented property that would serve 500 campers per summer on a self-supporting and sustainable basis.
- We have expanded Israel travel via Birthright. Why not provide the same support for Israel trips for teenagers, especially in light of recent research demonstrating the effectiveness of such trips, and the challenges that these teenagers will soon face on the college campus?
- Two well-funded youth groups (NCSY and BBYO) have enjoyed considerable success. What about extending philanthropic support to other major youth groups so that the vast pool of Jewish teens can be identified and organized?
- Congregations – and specifically their rabbis, educators, and youth professionals – play a critical role in recruiting and sustaining teenagers’ participation in all these educational experiences, to say nothing of the fact that they already provide a minority with opportunities for prayer, learning, service, and social experiences. Congregational leaders should give greater attention to, and raise the priority and quality of, adolescent Jewish education.
After the high school years, organized Jewish campus activities, such as those sponsored by Hillel, Chabad and other campus-oriented agencies produce positive outcomes for those whom they engage. Certainly, the number of on-campus Jewish professionals engaged in campus outreach has expanded in recent years. That said, non-Orthodox rabbis and trained Jewish educators on the campus are still few and far between. Clearly, we need additional on-campus rabbis and educators with pluralistic orientations.
Beyond the campus, the largely single, urban, young adult population displays little interest in affiliating with synagogues and other mainstream Jewish institutions. However, some do participate in less conventional Jewish venues either episodically or on a more sustained basis. Of particular appeal to the post-college set are Moishe Houses, Jewish and Israeli film festivals, concerts, and, for the more educated and engaged, independent minyanim and such Jewish learning experiences as Limmud. All could be expanded.
While all of these investments should help raise affiliation and increase the in-marriage rate, a large number of Jews will continue to intermarry. But we must bear in mind that intermarriages can be transformed to in-marriages by the act of conversion. Several existing conversion initiatives already produce a relatively large number of converts at relatively little cost. More conversion-oriented courses and institutes will raise the conversion rate further, producing more in-marriages with all the positive consequences for the Jewish future
These proven measures certainly will strengthen Jewish engagement and commitment. The success of PJ Library in reaching 165,000 families monthly speaks to the possibilities of new ways to reach Jewish families, young and old. Other ideas hold great promise as well. These include a retreat experience, perhaps in the form of a communal gift of a retreat to all young couples, or to new parents.
But beyond all of the ideas mentioned above, we face a task of a different order. Over the last 50 years, a massive public-health education effort – encompassing nutrition, exercise, education about the evils of tobacco – has extended the life expectancy of all people, particularly the well-educated. Similarly, the Jewish community can teach concerned Jewish grandparents and parents how to improve the lives of their family members and make their progeny stronger, more engaged Jews. “Jewish Public Health Education” can underscore the value of day schools, education through the high school years, Jewish camps, Israel trips, youth groups, and attending universities with strong Jewish campus communities.
The Birthright experience offers two important lessons. One is that educational interventions influence Jewish engagement outcomes in general, and inmarriage rates in particular. Second, Birthright makes clear that major transformative projects can be mounted, and that they do make a difference.
Moving Forward
In brief, we need to advance on multiple fronts in the coming years. The American Jewish community needs:
- A communal mobilization campaign
- Diminished costs for day school tuition
- More emphasis upon quality supplemental schooling that extends at least seven years
- Major investment in low-cost Jewish summer camps
- Thousands of Jewish teenagers traveling to Israel
- Significant expansion of Jewish youth groups
- Congregations prioritizing their teenagers
- More outreach-oriented and pluralist rabbis, both on and off campus
- Jewish cultural events, prayer communities, and learning activities among Jewish young adults
- Retreat experiences for young couples and families
- Jewish Public Health Education aimed at parents and grandparents
- Continue and expand Birthright Israel’s numbers
We believe these steps are not only urgently necessary for a healthier Jewish future, but are also achievable in our time.
Signatories
Institutional affiliation is for identification purposes only. Signatories are signing in a strictly personal capacity.
Rabbi B. Elka Abrahamson, President, The Wexner Foundation
Karen Adler, Board member, several national Jewish organizations, New York
Mimi Alperin, Vice-Chairman, Board of Trustees, Jewish Theological Seminary
Rabbi Sharon Cohen Anisfeld, Dean, Rabbinical School of Hebrew College, Boston, MA
Dr. Steven Bayme, Visiting Faculty, Yeshivat Chovevei Torah
Mem Bernstein, Chairman, AVI CHAI Foundation
Rabbi Peter S. Berg, Senior Rabbi, The Temple, Atlanta, Georgia
Mijal Bitton, Doctoral Candidate, NYU & Wexner Graduate Fellow
Dan Brown, founder, eJewish Philanthropy
Dr. Erica Brown, author and educator, Washington, D.C.
Rabbi Sharon Brous, Founding Rabbi, IKAR, Los Angeles, California
Rabbi Scott Bolton, Congregation Or Zarua, NYC
Dr. David Bryfman, Chief Innovation Officer, Jewish Education Project
Rabbi Angela Warnick Buchdahl, Senior Rabbi, Central Synagogue, New York
Prof. Steven M. Cohen, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, Rabbi, Park Avenue Synagogue
Rabbi Rachel Cowan, New York
Rabbi Eric Cytryn, Rabbi, Beth El Temple, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Barbara Dobkin, past Chair, American Jewish World Service
Rabbi Stephen J. Einstein, Founding Rabbi Emeritus, Cong. B’nai Tzedek, Fountain Valley, CA
Rabbi Ed Feinstein, Rabbi, Valley Beth Shalom, Encino, California
Prof. Sylvia Barack Fishman, Joseph and Esther Foster Professor of Contemporary Jewish Life, Brandeis University
Rabbi David Frank, Rabbi, Temple Solel, Cardiff, California
Michelle Friedman MD, Chair of Pastoral Counseling, YCT Rabbinical School
Rabbi Laura Geller, Senior Rabbi, Temple Emanuel of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills, California
Rabbi William G. Gershon, Rabbi, Congregation Shearith Israel, Dallas, Texas
Rabbi Arnie Gluck, Rabbi, Temple Beth-El, Hillsborough, New Jersey
Rabbi Neal Gold, Rabbi, Temple Shir Tikva, Wayland, Massachusetts
Prof. Lisa Grant, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
Harold Grinspoon, Grinspoon Foundation, Springfield, Massachusetts
Rabbi Irving (Yitz) Greenberg, Founding President, Jewish Life Network, Steinhardt Foundation
Prof. Harriet Hartman, Editor-in-chief, Contemporary Jewry; Professor of Sociology, Rowan University
Prof. Samuel C. Heilman, Harold Proshansky Chair in Jewish Studies, CUNY Graduate Center and Distinguished Professor of Sociology, Queens College
Roger Hertog, Hertog Foundation
Rabbi David Hoffman, Vice-Chancellor and Chief Advancement Officer, Jewish Theological Seminary
Rabbi Sarit Horwitz, BJ Rabbinic Fellow, Cong. B’nai Jeshurun, NY & Wexner Grad. Fellow
Rabbi Howard Jaffe, Rabbi, Temple Isaiah, Lexington, Massachusetts
Rabbi Jeremy Kalmanofsky, Rabbi, Congregation Ansche Chesed, New York
Rabbi Elana Kanter, The Women’s Jewish Learning Center, Phoenix, Arizona
Aliza Kline, Founding Executive Director, OneTable
Lynn Korda Kroll, New York
Rabbi Noa Kushner, The Kitchen, San Francisco, California
Rabbi Steve Kushner, Rabbi, Temple Ner Tamid, Bloomfield, New Jersey
Robert I. Lappin, President, Lappin Foundation, Salem, Massachusetts
Rabbi Marion Lev-Cohen, Central Synagogue, New York
Dr. Adriane Leveen, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
Prof. Jon Levisohn, Jack, Joseph & Morton Mandel Chair in Jewish Educational Thought, Brandeis University
Rabbi Cliff Librach, Senior Rabbi, United Jewish Center, Danbury, Connecticut
Prof. Deborah Lipstadt, Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
Rabbi Bennett Miller, Rabbi, Anshe Emeth Memorial Temple, New Brunswick, New Jersey
Rabbi Leon Morris, Vice President for Programs in Israel, Shalom Hartman Institute
Rabbi Danny Nevins, Pearl Resnick Dean of The Rabbinical School, JTS
Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Author and activist
Prof. Riv-Ellen Prell, Prof. of American Studies and Director, Ctr. for Jewish Studies, Univ. of Minnesota
Rabbi Richard S. Rheins, Senior Rabbi, Temple Sinai, Denver, Colorado
Rabbi Peter Rubinstein, Dir. of Jewish Community and Bronfman Ctr. for Jewish Life, 92nd Street Y
Rabbi Jeffrey K. Salkin, Senior Rabbi, Temple Solel, Hollywood, Florida
Prof. Jonathan D. Sarna, Joseph H. & Belle R. Braun Professor of American Jewish History, Brandeis University.
Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, Executive Vice President, Rabbinical Assembly
Dr. Bernard Shapiro, Principal Emeritus, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Michelle Shain, Ph.D. candidate, Heller School for Social Policy & Management, Brandeis University
Rabbi Michael Siegel, Norman Asher Rabbinic Chair, The Anshe Emet Synagogue, Chicago
Rabbi Alan Silverstein, Rabbi, Congregation Agudath Israel, Caldwell, New Jersey
Rabbi Gerald Skolnik, Rabbi, Forest Hills Jewish Center
Dr. Erin Leib Smokler, Director of Spiritual Development, Yeshivat Maharat
Rabbi Daniel Smokler, Chief Innovation Officer, Hillel International
Jonathan S. Tobin, Senior Online Editor, Commentary Magazine
Diane Troderman, past chair of JESNA (Jewish Education Service of North America)
Rabbi Steven C. Wernick, Chief Executive Officer, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
Prof. Jack Wertheimer, Professor of American Jewish History, Jewish Theological Seminary
Rabbi Ethan Witkovsky, Rabbi, Park Avenue Synagogue, New York
Rabbi David Wolpe, Rabbi, Sinai Temple, Los Angeles, California
Rabbi Irwin Zeplowitz, Rabbi, The Community Synagogue, Port Washington, New York
Rabbi Sheldon Zimmerman, Rabbi, The Jewish Center of the Hamptons, East Hampton, NY
Send to Kindle
I would like to add to this important list another significant priority moving forward: namely, major investment in the preparation, support, and growth of the field of Jewish education professionals, and commitment to expanding and developing Jewish education leadership. Few of these initiatives are possible without capable educators visioning, initiating, planning, and implementing them.
It would have been so smart for the signatories of the Statement to eliminate their anti-intermarriage tone and to include programs for interfaith families among their list of efforts deserving support. I long for the day when a more enlightened view becomes predominant. Because if Jews and Jewish leaders can’t overcome fundamental deep-seated antipathy toward intermarriage, we’re going to see not vitality, but decline. http://www.interfaithfamily.com/blog/iff/intermarriage/vitality-or-decline/
If we want the Jewish population in America to be proud and active in Jewish life then we have to be honest about the options. Many legacy and “major” Jewish organizations don’t represent the population, they are people working hard to raise funds to preserve their place in a decaying hierarchy. We need to tear down the walls and support and build the organizations that people can and want to be part of. We have to understand the differences between being Jewish and the rhetoric coming from political leaders in support of or against Israel…and we have to understand that Birthright and like minded endeavors, were, at best, marginally successful so we have to be better learners to see what worked and what didn’t. People haven’t stopped being Jews, the Jewish world just isn’t open and available to other ways of looking at being Jewish and that has to change. Organizations must be allowed to die and new ones must be allowed to grow. Organization that don’t represent anyone but a wealthy donor must be challenged in the Jewish press and be closed down and the regular cycles of mismanagement must be brought to a close. This is a vibrant community, a creative community…seeking to find a way home that works.
I agree with Ed Case’s comment, and I’d like to add an additional thought. I find it deeply troubling that the statement uses the language of disease to refer to intermarriage and interfaith families. The public health analogy is likely to be heard by many interfaith families in the Jewish community as highly insensitive and frankly offensive. Basically, what you’ve written is that we need a Jewish “public health initiative” that will combat the “ills” that are plaguing the Jewish people, and you’ve clearly established that you view intermarriage as the number one pathogen. In making that analogy, the statement even compares interfaith life in the Jewish community to the diseases caused by tobacco. I hope that this particular use of language will be reconsidered by the signatories, and that they’ll consider revising their statement. I deeply respect the different views of Jewish thought leaders on issues of interfaith life in the Jewish community, and I welcome thoughtful debate, but I hope we can refrain from the language of sickness and disease in talking about people who are part of the Jewish community, and who will continue to be so for years to come, unless they get the message that they’re regarded as lesser and undesirable.
An excellent, proactive statement. I am interested, however, in how the ‘Israel piece’ is barely visible. Yes, free high school trips. Yes, more Birthright participants. But beyond that, nothing. Most of those signing the document have strong, pro-Israel, activist Zionist credentials. But they do not seem to find a place in the shaping of strong Jewish identities in North America for a deepening of adult involvement in Israel. It would seem to me that a bi-lateral effort to deepen Israeli awareness of what American Jewish life is like, and in strengthening an American Jewish awareness of what positive and creative undertakings currently exist in Israel to shape a contemporary Jewish identity very much belongs as one of the key instrumentalities proposed in this collective declaration.
With all due respect, I must take issue with rabbi Harris.
In no way does the article equate intermarriage as an “Ill” in “Jewish public health education”.
That is your conclusion. Please read that entire paragraph again and you will see that intermarriage is not even mentioned. It is in the context of the national effort to push for better public health awareness 50 years ago that, on the same magnitude, must be undertaken again within the Jewish community to engage with our Jewish youth.
My wife converted to Judaism because it actually meant something to her deep inside to become a Jew. If it doesn’t mean enough to a person to convert, then what’s the point? We don’t have to turn people away who are not Jewish from our synagogues or away from our traditions but we should not pressure our clergy to marry interfaith couples simply to satisfy quotas.
I am surprised and troubled that social justice is not mentioned as a powerful means of engagement and a core expression of Jewish identity. According to the Pew Study, sixty-nine percent of Jews report that “leading an ethical life” is essential to their sense of being Jewish, and fifty-six percent report that working for justice and equality is essential to what Jewishness means to them. Where is the call for a creative and strategic initiative to deepen our investment in justice work as Jews?
Excellent thought piece. I plan to use it to begin discussions among organizational leadership involved in Jewish education.
I always find it interesting that no one from the demographics that are found to be “challenging” are ever part of these discussions, it says this is a highly diverse group of thought leaders, but how many of the signers:
• Have never been married?
• Are intermarried?
• Are children of intermarriage?
• Are raising children in an intermarried house?
• Are “single, urban, young adults”
At the very most a handful. After reading the first couple of paragraphs, myself and several of my fellow unmarried under-40 colleagues, took exception to how the declining number of engaged Jews seems to be measured. Our staff, all Jewish Federation professionals, all brought up in observant Conservative or Modern Orthodox Households, most went to Jewish camp and/or day school. We are not necessarily synagogue members, most aren’t members of JCCs but clearly we are engaged in Jewish life. I guess there are a few questions: Are we using the right metrics to demonstrate Jewish engagement? Does Jewish engagement need to be institution based? And as we know from Pew Studies these trends are true of most mainstream religions in America.
If the people who wrote this feel like the biggest concerns are these demographic concerns, then why are all the programs and “moving forward” items geared towards those under college age? Besides Birthright, which is a one-time trip, where is the priority of engaging 20s/30s/40s singles, many who are the children of intermarriage. We can lament this group not wanting to join synagogues or affiliate with institutions, but where is the investment into longer term experiences or ways to impact this cohort? Jdate, Moishe House, and Young Leadership missions are not enough. And worse the newer programs like Reshet Ramah or Jdate Ramah are more exclusionary than inclusive. We should celebrate those who choose to embrace their Jewish identity, not set up roadblocks. We should celebrate any young person who wants to be active in Jewish life, we should NOT hold against them that they did not go to synagogue/day school/Jewish camp/youth group/Hillel/Birthright, etc. By providing experiences and opportunities to those who fall in those groups only we are building barriers to entry.
What needs to happen? We need to think about what 20s/30s/40s are doing outside of Jewish life and find a Jewish way for these people to connect. Maccabi games for twentysomethings? Finding Jewish expression in general life? We need to focus less on ritual and more on community, younger people are looking for community—it doesn’t have to be a Jewish community, it needs to be a community of Jews.
While I admire and respect many of those who endorsed this document, I do find myself disappointed by the document’s recommendations–too much same old, too much committee-think. We need deeper, fresher, more original thinking about the challenges before us. Several of my concerns were anticipated by other commentators. I too was struck by the seeming hostility to intermarried families. At this point, this is a reality of American Jewish life, at least outside traditionally observant homes. We need to get past the hostility to engage these families and bring them in to the Jewish community, devising a better way to think about, respect, and engage the non-Jewish partners and make their children fully welcome. We need to support institutions that are already vital and creative and attracting young Jews, such as independent minyanim and Jewish studies programs at universities, as points for learning, growth and excitement. We need to support activities that help Jews to work together on important and meaningful activities, particularly in the sphere of social justice, both within and outside Jewish settings. We have to figure out how to engage (and subsidize) Jewish young adults and those just starting families, in a variety of Jewish venues, with good childcare provided. There is too little explicit focus on what makes Jewish life, including but not limited to the specifically religious, enriching and valuable in our lives, and how to demonstrate those strengths of our tradition and culture to those insufficiently aware of them. There is also a view, expressed by Shaul Magid most prominently, that we should focus more on the quality of our Jewish lives, building on the creativity and vitality present in a number of smaller niches in Jewish life. We have to remember as well that many of these trends are omnipresent in American life and in many religious and ethnic communities, reflecting powerful forces way beyond those specific to Judaism, and figure out how these realities must shape our thinking, goals, and modalities.
Responding briefly to Noel R’s disagreement with my claim that the statement uses the language of disease to refer to intermarriage, I appreciate the honest disagreement. I did, as he asked, re-read the paragraph in question, and I must say that I still feel the way I did before. If you read the paragraph in question, and then read the very next paragraph, it clearly identifies in-marriage as a desirable outcome of the kind of “public health” campaign the statement advocates. I’m not saying it’s wrong for people who share the goal of a vibrant, meaningful Jewish future to disagree over intermarriage, and I respect Noel’s take on things very much. What I am asking is for the authors of the statement to reconsider their use of the metaphor of health / disease in referring to intermarriage. I’ve already received one email from a Jewish person in an interfaith marriage who read this piece and wrote that she was pained by “a document that suggests that families like mine are not part of a healthy Jewish community.” This person is a Jewish communal leader. I believe that I’m not alone in hearing the language of this document in this way. And there’s a history, in organized Jewish communal life, of using the language of disease to talk about intermarriage. It’s been described as “a cancer” in my hearing more than once. What it boils down to is that there are different perspectives among Jewish community leaders about what are the best strategies and approaches to adapting to the new landscape of American Jewish life, and some of us disagree with continuing on with approaches that assume intermarriage is bad for the Jewish people. It’s an honest disagreement among people who all share the goal of a positive Jewish future. But it’s important to take care with our language choices and metaphors, because there are real people, and real families who are part of the Jewish community and who shouldn’t be humiliated or denigrated, even unintentionally. I presume, by the way, that the motives of the authors and signers of the statement were sincere and that they did not intend any harm. I do hope they’ll give thought to this feedback.
I have come to this article via Jonathan Tobin from an article in his Commentary Magazine, “Is It Too Late to Save American Jewry?” Mr. Tobin must bear some of responsibility for the weakness in communal bonds he bemoans. He, like others, consistently marginalizes Jews like myself as self-hating if we dare to criticise Israel. The conflation of Jewish identity with an unquestioning support for Likud Zionism is creating a terrible crisis in our community. Include that in your manifesto and you will have my attention.
The recommendations by a large group of Jewish leaders, mostly rabbis, two years after the Pew Report on U.S. Jews, re-tills much old ground, and ignores new lands.
Here are some areas for exploration, not sighted by these viewers:
-Synagogue costs. How could these be broadened to include most families, by lowering minimums while encouraging more from the wealthier? Pay-as-you-can plans are spreading slowly.
-Welcoming: How many Jews and inquirers have been put off by brusqueness or inattention? Stress warmth and welcoming.
-Efficiency: What could be done to hold down expenses, through mergers of backroom operations, or libraries, or schools; establishment of campuses in larger cities, for different branches of Judaism.
-Recognition that there is an open marketplace in religious ideas and membership, and Judaism should start competing by asserting its presence.
-Outreach, beyond intermarrieds: Simply inviting and welcoming people in the broad community to learn about Judaism gives it the biggest bang for a buck. When 20 percent of the U.S. population is reported unaffiliated, that immediately is a potential of nearly 70 million people.
-Attitude: Instead of thinking of lemonade from lemons, think of nectar from nectarines: Movements such as Messianics, or Hebrew Roots, or other Judaism-leaning Christian groups, are inclining more and more people to the basic tenets found in Judaism. How can we help this low-hanging fruit come to fruition–by welcoming these or others wanting to learn.
-Look around. As Judaism asserts itself, breaks out of its forcedly insular cocoon, there is an increasing number of people wanting to join, to be part of it.
We have a chance for Judaism to repeat and outshine the glory (10 percent of 80 million) it had in the Roman empire, and to be far greater, and vibrant, than it has been these past hundreds of years. If we open ourselves to others, others will bind themselves to us.
-Ash Gerecht, National Center to Encourage Judaism
While I have several issues with the document, some that are confirmed by the comments above, I would like to suggest that you will invite Israelis to join the list of signers. There is a community of like-minded people in Israel who deeply care about the future of the Jewish community in America. They are educators, policy makers, academics and people with personal ties. The vitality of American Jewry is an Israeli interest as well, not to mention that we might have some additional out of the box suggestions.
Thank you Steven Cohen for refusing to let go of this and to the over 70 signers – many of whom are, in my humble estimation, Jewish professional rock stars. However, the real deciders are the four leaders of foundations who signed. When there is a list of over 70 foundations/donors who stand together, committed to a healthier Jewish future, that’s when things will begin to turnaround.
I am disappointed to see this diverse group advocate for tax policy changes to support day schools. Any policy that would provide a meaningful amount of money to Jewish day schools (a very small part of the private school world) would significantly affect government revenue and public school funding. Why should Jewish communal support for day schools come at the expense of others? Have we forgotten the role public schools have played and continue to play in the lives of Jews? Have we forgotten how vital public schools are our nation?
While there is much to be applauded in this statement, I agree with Idit Klein that the failure to mention increasing avenues to expression related to social justice issues is a glaring oversight. An emphasis on education programs and camps may strengthen the core, but it will not include those beyond the inner circles. Programs and organizations that provide service and advocacy opportunities not only reflect universal values, but connect to our Jewish traditions and teachings in a way that is responsive to the ways that those queried in the Pew Study identify as Jews (ethical values, social justice). Let’s find ways to be more inclusive, and be certain that those we want to include have a seat at the table in building a broad and strong Jewish community.
I was disappointed to see that this piece ignored the important role that social justice plays in the identity of many American Jews. We know from the Pew study, and from the rich and varied experiences of many Jewish social justice organizations, that the majority of Jews see an expression of their social justice values as an integral part of their Jewish identity. The young Jewish leaders we work with at JOIN for Justice are not looking for more programs where they can be surrounded by people just like them, and they’re not interested in re-creating the same kinds of Jewish communities they grew up in. They are looking for training and support in activating their communities to act on their Jewish values. They want to bring the Jewish community into deep and authentic relationships as allies with other communities, working together on the social justice issues of our time. These young leaders are the future of our Jewish community. Ignoring their priorities in the setting of strategic directions for Jewish life is a glaring omission.
I am still internalizing the fact that nearly all non-Orthodox Jews 30-39 are being labeled a challenge for the American Jewish Community (using just the first three demographic challenges). After NJPS 2000 these same arguments were made yet the Jewish population increased since then.
If our only reason for having Jewish programming is to maintain the existence of the community we surely will follow the path of many other American minorities that are no longer found. We as a community need to move away from the demographic nightmare we have bewailed since the 1960s and focus on the value proposition we see in Jewish life.
Instead of being driven by the negative, we need to focus on the positive benefits that our Jewish identities have brought each of us. If we as a community can rally around a vision of helping all generations connect to Jewish traditions, ethics morals, community etc people will be more active in their involvement and the community will strengthen.
These data give us two options. Continue to predict our demise and guilt individuals or use these data as a jumping off point to envision the future we desire. If we are able to focus on the benefits that Jewish values can provide a strengthened middle would be a likely outcome.
There is an 800 pound gorilla in the room that no one, absolutely no one, has mentioned, and is a major major issue that I believe needs to be included.
I believe a major issue in the disaffection of youth is the lack of belief in God, whether God in general or God as taught to us in the stories of the bible and the holidays. The synagogue, while maintaining a communal and cultural role, is the center of religious Judaism and I believe is a weak force for keeping the younger generation strongly affiliated.
The disaffection with religion outside of orthodox communities is, I believe, widespread, and not surprising. Whether you agree with me or not, I believe it needs to be in the discussion.
Shalom All,
Seventy-four of today’s Jewish all stars from various disciplines, are signatories to a statement with prescriptions and recommendations for moving forward toward a non Orthodox Jewish future in light of the 2013 Pew Research Center’s “Portrait of Jewish Americans.” My question is that of Reb Nahman of Bratzlav, “Where is God?” (S)He’s nowhere to be found in the above posted document. Reb Nahman’s answer was “Wherever we let God in.” Where are you “letting God in?” And to paraphrase, where’s Torah? Again nowhere to be found in the original post. Surely she (Torah) must have a role to play!? There can be no meaningful North American non Orthodox Jewish future that is Godless and Torahless. In fact it’s fair to say that outside of Orthodox Judaism, the adjective “Jewish” has already become trivial if not meaningless. If this is not the case, what is your operating definition of the word “Jewish?” Please show me my error.
The Septuagint was the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek by seventy Jewish scholars done approximately 2100-2250 years ago. What we need today from you, the Seventy plus Four, is as, if not more momentous. We need nothing less than a meaningful, contemporary, non Orthodox Judaism: one that has the power to reach the minds and enter the hearts of the largest and fastest growing Jewish demographic, the Nones/Middles. The journey begins with clear, crisp, concise and compelling answers to the following three questions: “why be intentionally Jewish, why do Jewish,” and “why Judaism?” The rest is commentary. And here I’ll stray from Hillel (one of my finest students), and say there’s all ready been plenty of studying, let’s actually do something.
Mo’adim L’simha L’khulanu,
Biv’racha,
Jordan
I agree with the earlier posting about the 800 pound gorilla in the room that no one speaks about. However, “belief in God” cannot the problem itself, since it must be based on something underlying it. That something is the “package” that is being sold to young Jews and Gentiles alike as Judaism, and the package being offered these days is simply not attractive enough. The endless prayers in Hebrew are not at all being experienced in any way approaching the notion of “spiritual,” something to which young Jews and non-Jews alike could indeed be attracted. (By way of contrast, praying was hardly a part of “spiritual technology” in early biblical times; the first time we encounter praying in the Hebrew Bible is quite telling: Hannah, the mother of the future first prophet of Israel Samuel, is mistaken for being drunk by the High Priest Eli, because her lips were moving silently in prayer).
Thus, there is a very serious problem with the “product” that’s being promoted, the problem of unattractiveness and, worse, irrelevance… This alone would assure a sustained defection of bright young Jews toward disinterest, Buddhism, and intermarriage with return bridges burnt. Yet there is another intractable issue—and a crucial problem that is an elephant in the room that is even heavier than the gorilla—yet just as invisible.
The invisible 3,000 pound elephant that is less likely to be attended to than even the question of (the current) Judaism’s appeal and relevance, is the social-political orientation of the vast majority of American Jews. I do not intend to analyze the merits or the errors of this or any other orientation. But the tragic fact remains that the leftist-progressive agenda and views, with the Jewish emphasis on tikun olam, social action, and political correctness seen as highly positive—these factors not only make even committed Jews conflate them, the factors, with spiritual-religious issues. If Israel remained the one issue that was until now seen as the indisputable and paramount point of agreement among Jews of all stripes, suddenly—as a rude wake-up alarm—-this can no longer be taken for granted. Quite to the contrary. Simply put, the leftist-liberal worldview is now in a direct conflict with Israel, with Israel’s often desperate attempts to survive against all odds in the unrelenting hatred, disinformation, and very real threats the world—and not just the Arab-Islamic world—continues to spew out.
A couple of recent examples I’ve witnessed. During a meal in a sukkah the other day, the officiating young Conservative rabbi asked us to share who we’d want to invite to the sukkah as special guests. After those present, including a dozen children, have shared their spiritual calling out to such figures as Abraham and Moses, or to their departed loved ones, or to some other singular individuals, this very progressive rabbi stated that his fond wish would be to invite to our sukkah the Syrian refugees. In another setting, a Renewal rabbi’s Rosh ha-Shanah sermon—traditionally one of the spiritual heights of the year—was about the question of “justice” concerning Palestinians.
Seeing this as politicizing Judaism through-and-through does not really get us to the root of the problem I am compelled to highlight. That would have been bad enough—assuming a supposedly politically-neutral space one is expecting at such places and times, nonprofit status of synagogues and the supposedly religious-spiritual issues that one may have been looking forward to during the High Holidays. But, you see, these ARE the religious-spiritual issues for these wonderfully progressive “spiritual” leaders.
While I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of the signers of this letter on “Strategic Directions for Jewish Life: A Call to Action,” what they propose will not change anything at all in the direction taken by the American Jewry. Excepting some miracle, it’ll continue to disappear. Since the old, and now obsolete contention for this still-influential Jewish community’s importance has always been its unvarying support for Israel, one is left to hope—on a day such this, with the onset of Simkhat Torah holiday in a few hours—that this still-nominally Jewish segment of American people will not be front and center among the most hardened enemies of the State of the Jews.
This is a significant contribution to creating a positive vision of creative non-Orthodox Jewish life in the United States. I want to particularly note the significance of Steven Cohen and colleagues attention to the “declining middle” in American Jewry (those who are neither totally absent from any form of Jewish connection nor are Orthodox).
I won’t repeat some comments made above several times: that intermarried Jews are part of the community, not only a “problem.” Differentiating sociological observations from personal judgements (actual or perceived) is a challenge. Social justice activity is absent, and spirituality hardly mentioned.
I do want to add one critique: almost the entire set of recommendations focuses on children, teens, college students, “young singles” and a bit (the PJ program) on young parents. These are all important groups for outreach and new initiatives. But there is little here (a passing reference to Limmud, which is multi-generational) that says engaging anyone over about 40 is significant. One could conclude a) that the Jewish involvement/connection of those Jews who are middle-aged or older is satisfactory or b) that no initiatives have shown promise for multi-generational group or c) to borrow and re-purpose Jay Michaelson’s recent image of progressive Judaism as a lifeboat http://forward.com/opinion/319520/progressive-judaism-wont-win-in-my-lifetime-and-thats-okay/?attribution=author-article-listing-4-headline– there isn’t room, and the middle-aged and seniors will have to be tossed overboard.
Personally, I see a lot of room for including and welcoming those who are neither children, young adults, or parents of young children — a group that includes many of the signers of this statement. But where are they in this plan?
Michaelson actually wrote (Forward, Aug.26, 2015):”…Progressive, committed Jews have lost the battle for the American Jewish soul, but there are many islands of fantastic, innovative, exciting progressive Judaism out there. Some are in synagogues, some outside. Some are in denominations, some outside. Some are supported by large-scale Jewish philanthropy, others (most) are not.
But they are out there: amazing synagogue education programs, powerful social justice efforts, life-changing spiritual programs, vibrant Jewish culture almost wholly unsupported by the IJC[Institutional Jewish Community], new forms of political engagement, and schools and camps where innovation is thriving. In terms of opportunities it is actually a fantastic time to be a progressive Jew.
The orientation, however, needs to shift. Numerically, financially, statistically, these efforts will not save the sinking ship. They need to think of themselves as lifeboats instead….”
Read more: http://forward.com/opinion/319520/progressive-judaism-wont-win-in-my-lifetime-and-thats-okay/#ixzz3nnJp2BA8
Where are the creative dissidents? More than 400 Rabbis signed a strong statement upholding the Great-Power nuclear-weapons-prevention agreement with Iran. Anathema to ADL, AJC, most of the big Federations — and of course, these were gutsy, independent-minded rabbis. Were its organizers invited to take part in drafting the Statement? Were they even asked to sign? More than 400 Rabbis signed a strong public letter on the Climate Crisis. Not quite heresy according to “Official hoo-has,” but way out in front of the “official” community. Did any of its initiators sign? No. Were they asked to? I would know, & the answer is No. There is an Interfaith Families network that reaches many thousands pf Jews.. Were any of them invited? How could they be, considering they were defined as “sick”? Were the leaders of J Street? of Rabbis for Human Rights? Of ALEPH Alliance for Jewish Renewal (who continue to move forward with the spiritual energy & wisdom of Reb Zalman, Reb Shefa Gold, and others who have awakened tens of thousands of Jews? How many LGBT leaders? Any leaders of the Kohenet/ Hebrew Priestess movement? Of Open Hillel? Of (gasp; I’m having a stroke!) Jewish Voice for Peace?
The stones that the officially licensed builders reject are becoming the cornerstones of a new Temple. WAY different.
Blessings of shalom, salaam, sohl; peace, l’chayyim, Earth! — Rabbi Arthur Waskow
Repeatedly the responses to e-Jewish philanthropy address issues of identity towards youth and unaffiliated adults who are disengaged from Jewish life. I would recommend that leaders and philanthropists look at the huge numbers of empty nesters and beyond who are totally identified with their Judaism, have discretionary income and time, and are largely ignored by most Jewish institutions. Also, the signatories to your action list have few if any Jewish leaders from South Florida, the third largest Jewish community in the US. Perhaps, philanthropists might consider issues that impact baby boomers and their children and grandchildren— like Hospice and Funerals where there are the most compelling demands for doing what is “Jewish” to honor parents. A perfect teachable moment for both education, engagement, and continuity. Not to mention the teaching opportunities in assisted living, senior centers, and retirement communities that impact older Jewish adults and their families who visit and are captive interested audiences.
If all Jews would become Orthodox, then what would happen to the percentage of Jews who intermarry with non-Jews? Would that percentage: increase or decrease or remain the same?
If all Jews would become Orthodox, then what would happen to the percentage of Jews who have at least three children by age 30 and at least four children by age 40? Would that percentage: increase or decrease or remain the same?
Like others, I applaud the group who put this together for their effort and concern, but am surprised how “same-old” and narrow the recommendations seem. I loved the wonderful 60s book “Growing Up Absurd” by Paul Goodman. Goodman pointed out that if the adult world isn’t one that kids would want to grow into, “education” is going to run into problems. The kids and the young adults will still tune out or drop out or, if you’re lucky, rebel. The questions this statement barely addresses are: What kind of adult Jewish community is sufficiently meaningful and compelling that young Jews would want to grow up into it? And what are the sustainable structures of such a community? The core structure of the affiliated American Jewish community in the 2nd half of the 20th century was the synagogue, an institution whose image (though not always reality) was primarily of a place you paid a couple thousand dollars to not go to services. That’s just not going to cut it in the 21st century. My congregation, along with interested non-members, is in the midst of a “visioning process” to try to imagine what a sustainable and flourishing Jewish community looks like in North East Connecticut. We started the process with the idea everything is on the table; nothing is taken for granted. We’ve so far learned that our vision participants want mutual care, lots of Jewish culture, a vibrant and flexible spirituality, a Jewish community that welcomes its non-Jewish members, and they want to be a positive force in the larger community. They want this community to be multigenerational. How does one create such a community? Is it sort of like the congregation we’ve been, but with a major tune-up? Maybe. Is it some kind of extension of the Moishe House concept – multigenerational Jewish co-housing providing a community center for a larger, non-residential community? Interesting idea. What would a Cultural-Spiritual center look like? What would be an institutional framework that puts gemilut hasadim (caring deeds) at its center? Those are some of the questions we’re now asking. I think they’re the kind of questions Jews and their leaders should be asking all over the continent.
I appreciate the good work and obvious thought that went into this piece, as well as the thoughtful and truly enriching comments that have come after it.
I want to add one additional perspective that hasn’t been mentioned yet, and that is to add the lens of global Jewish community and Peoplehood. I totally agree with Elan Ezrachi’s comment that the Israeli Jewish community also has a lot to gain and contribute to the future of North American Jewry, but I would expand the conversation beyond the parochial limits of just North American Jews to include Jews all over the world and in all their diverse communities. Yes, the Pew Report deals primarily with the North American Jewish population (so I understand the catalyst and focus of the conversation here), but the challenges and issues facing North American Jews are just a few years ahead (if that) of other Jewish communities, so this conversation is relevant to all. And it is not only the relevance that demands that we expand the conversation. It is also that the very nature of global Jewish peoplehood is in itself a powerful resource and strength that can impact all. Adding a broader, global Jewish component to many of the strategies mentioned in the article will only make those strategies more effective, offer sources of inspiration and be true to what Jewish civilization has to offer in today’s world.
Shalom Rabbi Jeremy,
You wrote, “We’ve so far learned that our vision participants want mutual care, lots of Jewish culture, a vibrant and flexible spirituality, a Jewish community that welcomes its non-Jewish members, and they want to be a positive force in the larger community.”
How are you defining the adjective “Jewish,” as you use it above; i.e., Jewish culture, Jewish community, and non-Jewish? This is not a trick question as the Orthodox have an unambiguous answer, while it seems that the non Orthodox, have yet to formulate, or are avoiding this fundamental need for clarity. Without an answer, plain and simple “there’s no there there.”
Biv’racha,
Jordan
Clearly, there is a lot to talk about and in the context of serving the purpose of starting a conversation, the article has served that goal well.
As a Rabbi operating significantly outside the “system,” who believes that we face issues rooted far more in the infrastructural realities of the modern Jewish community, here are my thoughts: http://ejewishphilanthropy.com/but-why-does-it-matter/.
I was very disappointed to read this article and see the wonderful array of people who signed on to the article. I have spent the last 25 years of my professional career working to advance social justice as a core part of our Jewish communal agenda. Working with Barry Shrage in Boston we created a vibrant Jewish community that was committed to BOTH serious Jewish learning and the pusuit of social justice and we built many programs and initiatives to integrate the two. Over the past 20 years, I have had the honor of helping to build a Jewish social justice movement. With generous support from the Cummings Foundation we have built a Jewish Social Justice Roundtable with dozens of Jewish organizations that have joined the roundtable. Yet, the article did not mention the amazing initiatives going on both within and outside the “organized” Jewish community to engage younger members of the Jewish community in universal social justice through a particular Jewish lens. There are many gateways to “Jewish Continuity” and engaging in meaningful social justice work is one of them! My current organization, National Council of Jewish Women, has been pursuing justice for over 120 years and continues to thrive in a non-denominational context in 70 communities across the country.
The Jewish world would benefit from the existence of a global program bank that would allow communities to share ideas. An initiative or program that proved effective in one part of the world to strengthen Jewish identity may very well have lessons for communities elsewhere. An interactive website with program categories into which organizations could upload program descriptions with contact information could be a useful information tool to community professionals worldwide.
As a 25-year old Jewish woman living in Chicago, this statement strikes me as antiquated and boring – same old, same old. I was raised in an interfaith household, attended Jewish summer camps, studied abroad in Israel and consider myself to be more observant than many of my peers. I am also in an interfaith relationship and can tell you that there is a vast number of intermarried or interfaith couples looking for something spiritual to fill the void that’s been created for interfaith couples. While there is a very supportive community in Chicago, I am disappointed to see words using intermarriage as a “problem” when truly it is an opportunity to recapture the hearts of many Jews and their spouses.
I was profoundly disappointed by the “Strategic Directions for Jewish Life: A Call to Action.”
It read exactly like the policy statements issued in the mid1990s when the Jewish community first looked carefully at rising rates of intermarriage.
The anti-intermarriage tone — the view that the only good intermarriages are those where the non-Jewish spouse converts — it’s as if nothing has changed since 1995.
I would respectfully suggest that the signatories consider reaching out to the thousands of adult children and grandchildren of intermarriage, who receive almost no Jewish outreach, despite being the majority of Jewish Millenials.
Issuing statements implying that their parents or grandparents should not have intermarried is not likely to encourage their participation in the Jewish community.
Sincerely,
Robin Margolis
Coordinator
Half-Jewish Network