Rabbi Steve

[Dream]

Long, long ago on a fairly windy day I helped someone hold down a ketubah on a picnic table as they finished some final stroke or signature. Cultural experiences thrill me. I wasn't sure if I should touch it, but the man was fighting lots of wind. Such a difficult document might have been messed up by all the flapping. Holding the down the Ketubah I noticed the amazing artistry, and I didn't know whether it was Bible verses or something else and had never heard the word 'Ketubah' before. I was a lifelong charismatic then, so I understood very little of what I saw and just tried to soak it in.

A charismatic friend in my church had begun to go 'Messianic'. He still came to church but began wearing 4 tassels that hung over his jeans, and he grew out his beard. He once tried to tell me there was a benefit of observing 'The law'. We were Christians, and I had never heard that before so just chalked it up the fact that he was a weird guy. (My friends tended towards that spectrum. On a side-note, this friend once helped 'rescue' another of my church buddies from the 'Cult of Yahweh'.) My friend liked saying things like 'Shalom', and he met a messianic girl who also liked saying 'Shalom'. In a very short amount of time, he proposed. They were young people, early twenties, with troubled pasts of varying description hoping to find stability and settle down, rear children etc.

I understand they were having two ceremonies, one of them legal and the other more ceremonial. I think they really had three or four ceremonies. The ketubah rabbi had to be flown in from Israel, and he didn't speak English. Apparently nobody else could (or would?) do the ketubah like they had wanted it. I don't think the Rabbi actually knew what the deal was, but I am not sure. My friend's parents were Christian. They were at the wedding, however I don't remember if hers were present at the wedding. They may have come to the reception. The glass was broken, the garter was removed, and the pair were raised on chairs. I actually lost track of them not long after that -- almost 20 years ago.

[bananabrain]

Originally Posted by dauer

I'm also glad that some rabbis, working with interfaith couples more closely -- that is, using a different model of interaction than the OP -- are willing to make exceptions for them in certain cases.

and so am i. i just think it should be made abundantly clear what the issues are and when they are likely to arise - i have personal experience of tremendous hurt arising from a decision taken in anger 30 years ago - and that every effort should be made to ensure that a case is made for conversion. i am all for being nice to people, but i don't think that this should be taken advantage of.

There are culturally identifying Jews for whom a wedding and indeed other transitional moments in life make use of Judaism merely for ethnic flavoring.

well, i am entitled to consider that a squandering of an incredible cultural inheritance, which reduces judaism to the level of, say, a chocolate easter bunny. what a loss to the jewish people.

Their Judaism is not my Judaism any more than it's your Judaism, but it is a Judaism and one that has quite a strong following. As long as that cultural identity is passed from one generation to the next there remains the possibility that the children might investigate their heritage more deeply.

but statistically, of course, it won't be passed to even the next generation. that is the point.

Originally Posted by wil

It seems though members of the Jewish community were first to accept homosexual unions as marriages. Is it halakhah? As you indicated a contract between two Jewish 'people'.

umph - you can't have a homosexual *ketubah*, any more than you can have a ketubah between this synagogue and church that you mention (i almost fell off my chair!) because it's a specific type of contract. of course you can have some kind of other halakhically enforceable contract, but you couldn't contract for a ketubah between other than a jewish man and a jewish woman; the actual word "ketubah" is the amount specified in the marriage contract according to halakhah as her divorce settlement and that can only take place in the context of a marriage. you could have a contract between two homosexual jews, but it could not, as a matter of halakhah, specify as a term of the contract that one of them was entitled to sexual satisfaction from the other, as it is specified in a halakhic marriage contract (the wife's ketubah is payable upon non-delivery of maintenance, sexual satisfaction and i think also shoes, but don't remind mrs bananabrain about the last bit, we don't have any more room in her wardrobes, that's plural), it would be the equivalent of a contract which specified that one of them was entitled to expect the other to feed them bacon in the morning, i think in secular law it's called "ultra vires".

Originally Posted by RabbiSteve

I totally respect the opinion that Interfaith marriages are problematic. But that is only- I repeat only- for Halachic Jews. And that fact cannot and will not change.

except that that isn't actually true. i expect you learnt, steve, that "kol yisrael arevim zeh-la-zeh", right? well, if you marry a couple and the woman's not jewish and her child comes over to the UK and falls in love with my child, that affects both me and my kid (as halakhic) and the other party - all this does is cause sinat hinam (pointless hatred) and hillul haShem (desecration of the Divine Name) - you are kidding yourself if you think that what you do doesn't have consequences for the people you think you're helping.

However for liberal mainstream Jews, Interfaith relationships, marriage and families must be supported and nurtured. They are our future.

HANG ON. how do you get from trying to help these poor misguided sods to them being "our future"? i've just come from Limmud Home. i *am* a liberal, mainstream jew and i believe that the future is in a renewed commitment to the traditional values of learning, Torah, culture, derech eretz and last but not least, halakhah. your position appears to be an enormous leap to unwarranted conclusions.

After living as a Halachic Jew for many years, I began to understand it was no longer acceptable for me. My vision had become wider- and I now embrace all choices. Halacha was never truly practiced in my Conservative communities. It was always hypocritical in application- from shabbat observance through kashrut. And it resonated for only a very few elderly people.

so your solution, rather than to remove the hypocrisy, is to remove the halakhah? well, pardon me if that makes no sense. why don't you try seeing how life is lived when halakhah is *not* a matter for hypocrisy? or, if you are determined to see hypocrisy everywhere, why do you insist that halakhah be configured to the standards of angels, not normal human beings?

But we must learn to be respectful and be non-judgmental and yes- SUPPORTIVE towards each other.

i don't see why that should be an absolute moral relativism. open-mindedness doesn't mean taking leave of one's critical judgement. a world without judgement is simply a bunch of fluffy, hot-air utopian hippy nonsense. is there *anything* you wouldn't be "supportive" of?

It is true that child of an interfaith couple might one day marry a non-Jew. Yet, if there is a spark in their hearts- that is lit by the love and support of a rabbi or cantor somewhere in their journeys- the end result might be a new Jewish generation.

what an absolutely supine and servile surrender to the selfishness of whimsy and egocentricity. you should read starke and finke's groundbreaking book on the sociology of religion: "acts of faith" - a religion that makes no demands attracts no loyalty and, ultimately, no adherents. that is what the statistics say. anything worth having involves paying a price. all you are doing is giving away a free label - and guess what people do with free stuff?

That is the premise- and guess what? It works. Many of the interfaith couples I have counseled are choosing to raise their children as Jews or at least expose them to both faiths.

that for you is "working"? sheesh. you make it sound as if "at least exposing them to both faiths" is actually an equivalent to getting a decent jewish upbringing. my kids live in a non-jewish society - they're getting plenty of exposure to plenty of other faiths, they don't live in a bubble. what you are doing is the equivalent of raising kids in a commune and not telling them which of the adults are their parents; there's been plenty of research done on the harm done by removing such moral certainties.

We must always choose love and light rather than judgment and darkness.

is that the sort of statement you'd use to get out of a speeding ticket, then? this is nothing but a load of cod-pauline feelgood tosh.

You might not understand all of the hurt- and damage- we cause in an effort to keep the flock(s) in line.

you clearly don't understand all of the hurt and damage you do by giving people anything they ask for and never demanding anything in return. i wouldn't bring up my kids like that and adults contemplating marriage have a lousy future relationship in store if they can't even bring themselves to make tough choices.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[wil]

Originally Posted by RabbiSteve

I do not surf this forum for threads to add my input but I would certainly be happy to post to any thread that would in some way be enhanced by a response from me.

Namaste Steve,

No need to surf, just click new posts and anything written since you were last online will pop up. You can peruse titles and see if anything titilates...

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Steve,

No need to surf, just click new posts and anything written since you were last online will pop up. You can peruse titles and see if anything titilates...

Indeed, but remember this forum doesn't allow unsolicited advertising.

[RabbiSteve]

"kol yisrael arevim zeh-la-zeh"

Bananabrain,

First of all thank you for your thoughtful response. I do respect you and your points of view which you certainly articulate in a scholarly manner. But I am wise enough to know that debating you point by point will accomplish nothing. We each see our paths and roles differently and I know that we should just agree to disagree.

However, the translation of the sages dictum which you quoted, which is at the core of your response is "all of Israel is responsible for one another."

I interpret that statement to mean that all the people are responsible for one other. As for me, "yisrael" means "All that G-d saves."

Shalom,
Rabbi Steve

[bananabrain]

thank you for your politeness.

Originally Posted by RabbiSteve

But I am wise enough to know that debating you point by point will accomplish nothing. We each see our paths and roles differently and I know that we should just agree to disagree.

i'm trying to understand what is in your mind and how you can justify your position. i can't see it from what you've written. all you really seem to be doing is throwing some assertions out there and then refusing to back them up. debating things point by point is a fundamental characteristic of jewish culture - eilu ve-eilu and so forth.

i interpret that statement to mean that all the people are responsible for one other. As for me, "yisrael" means "All that G-d saves."

i struggle to understand where you're getting that interpretation from. perhaps this is my ignorance, but i can't see how that word can possibly be made to mean such a thing - i can't see how yod-shin-resh can be "saves". could you provide some kind of support for this. more to the point, when the sages say "yisrael" in this context, they are clearly referring to jewish people, otherwise there are other signifiers they could use, "kulei 'alma" or "kol goyim", or any number of other ways. this doesn't feel like it stacks up as an interpretation.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[bob x]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

i can't see how yod-shin-resh can be "saves"

The root is s'in-resh-aleph (the "whistling" not "hushed" sibilant, and in first position not second, yod here being the third-person-singular imperfective verb prefix), "to contend". The gloss in Genesis, "wrestles with G-d", is not strained, although I doubt it is the original meaning: from this root we get s'ar "contender; champion" (in cases where two armies or other disputants agree to settle matters by a head-to-head trial-by-combat by single champions from each side), by extension "prince", with feminine derivative S'arah "princess" (although the original form was S'arai "my champion" and perhaps s'ar was never really used in the feminine). So I would read Yis'rael as "G-d prevails" or "G-d rules", something like that.

[bananabrain]

ah - shin-resh-alef; thanks for that, bob, i knew there was more to it than my hebrew allows and i thought i might be barking up the wrong tree with the root. however, it seems from what you said that one would still struggle to interpret the phrase in the way that steve is trying to do.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[bob x]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

ah - shin-resh-alef; thanks for that, bob, i knew there was more to it than my hebrew allows and i thought i might be barking up the wrong tree with the root. however, it seems from what you said that one would still struggle to interpret the phrase in the way that steve is trying to do.

b'shalom

bananabrain

"To save" would be the root in Yesha'yahu "Isaiah", Yehoshuwa' "Joshua", Yeshuwa' "Jesus", all "THE NAME (or "He") saves"

[bananabrain]

yes, i know that one pretty well. but it isn't connected to the other root though, is it?

b'shalom

bananabrain

[RabbiSteve]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

yes, i know that one pretty well. but it isn't connected to the other root though, is it?

b'shalom

bananabrain

Friends,

Thanks for the exposition on Hebrew grammar .

But my interpretation of "Yisrael" was metaphorically based. For me when "Yis-ra-el," "one wrestles with God, " one becomes "saved."

It is in the questioning and even rejection, rather than tacet acceptance of human based religious text of all cultures, that we become "free." That is the message I take from "Yisrael." Many if not most of the world's problems have occured in the name of "faith."

Fundemental interpretations of all religious text are fundementally responsible for the condition the world is in.

In closing, Bananabrain- you have given much thought to all of this, but you come from a halachic position and I from a non-halachic perspective. I know that we are both correct for ourselves and our communities and that we cannot agree on many things, though we can respect one another.

I only wish I was as articulate as you in presenting my positions. But that is clearly your gift.

I wish you shalom.
Rabbi Steve

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

well, i am entitled to consider that a squandering of an incredible cultural inheritance, which reduces judaism to the level of, say, a chocolate easter bunny. what a loss to the jewish people.

That is how I think quite a few people in a religion feel about it and that is pretty much what interfaith does, not through marriage alone. It indirectly widdles away at everyones culture as a real thing & attempts to disolve the core of beliefs until the only thing left in the religion is a chocolate easter bunny.

I appreciated your post on that.