Are Museums The Next Frontier of Outreach?

On Sept. 30, several hundred people gathered at a construction site at Fifth and Market Streets in Philadelphia to celebrate the groundbreaking on a new $150 million museum devoted to American Jewish history, according to the (Philadelphia) Jewish Exponent.

The National Museum of American Jewish History is just one of several ambitious Jewish museum projects opening around the country in the next few years. In San Francisco, the Contemporary Jewish Museum is reopening this spring in a dramatic 63,000-square-foot structure marked by a giant glass cube pirouetted on one corner. In Boston, plans are afoot for a $40 million New Center for Arts and Culture on the greenway covering the central artery. While nothing in the New Center's mission explicitly says the museum will be Jewish, all of its previous events have been Jewish-themed and the project was first proposed by the Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston and the Jewish Community Centers of Greater Boston.

What does this have to do with intermarriage? Well, when I was at the American Jewish Press Association conference in San Francisco earlier this summer, I saw a presentation by some representatives of the Contemporary Jewish Museum. They discussed the high levels of intermarriage and low levels of affiliation among Jews in San Francisco. In their research they found that Jews were looking for a non-threatening, non-religiously oriented, non-exclusivist and yet still Jewish venue to take their non-Jewish partners and friends. One of the primary goals of the new museum, the representatives said, was to provide that space.

I don't know much about the initial intentions behind the New Center for Arts and Culture, but previous events hosted by the Center (in its former home at Boston-area JCC) suggest they're aiming for a similar target. In June, the New Center co-hosted Bloomsday Boston 2007 with Boston College, a Catholic university. Bloomsday celebrated Leopold Bloom, the Jewish-Irish protagonist of James Joyce's Ulysses. Representatives from Boston's Irish and Israeli consulates took part in readings, and a panel discussed similarities between the histories of Boston's Jewish and Irish communities. It was an event simultaneously Jewish and ecumenical. Previous events hosted or co-sponsored by the Center have included a combined klezmer/swing concert, a presentation on Marc Chagall and something described as "an intimate music and poetry performance that explored the devotional traditions of 13th Century Sufi Muslim mystic, Jalaluddin Rumi and the 12th Century Jewish philosopher Abraham Ibn Ezra." This kind of cross-cultural, non-exclusivist, non-religious programming seems tailor-made for interfaith couples.

In the coming years, I am excited to see if these museums open new doors for Jewish involvement among interfaith couples. Or, if they transform the very way we think about Jewish involvement.

High Holiday Tickets: High Prices, High Barriers to Involvement

Across the spectrum, including among the Orthodox, synagogues have done an admirable job in recent years making themselves more welcoming to the unaffiliated, the intermarried and the just plain timid. There's a long way to go, but between Chabad's outreach, the Reform movement's embrace of interfaith families and the Conservative movement's push for keruv, religious life is more welcoming and more accessible than it's ever been. Which makes it all the more unfortunate that the practice of charging non-members for High Holiday tickets--and in some cases, barring non-members from attending--persists.

It's one of the most shortsighted strategies in modern religion: during the small number of days that Jews actually want (or at least feel obligated) to go to synagogue, congregations charge them exorbitant prices to enter, either through one-off ticket prices or a requirement that the non-member pay dues to join the synagogue. Rather than use the holidays of Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah as an occasion to show non-members how welcoming they are, they use it as an occasion to show how restrictive--and expensive--they are.

For years, the excuse for such unwelcoming practices has always been financial. If we don't get non-members to join during the High Holidays, when we have something they want, when will we get them to join? But this rationale ignores the possibility that there may be many people--like myself when I was living in San Diego--who are so turned off by High Holiday ticket prices that they don't go to synagogue at all during the holidays. While congregations are responding to the market, and charging for a seemingly scarce resource when demand outstrips supply, they are also pricing out a portion of their potential market.

Thankfully, as Sue Fishkoff of JTA reports, there is a growing trend for "praying without paying" during the High Holidays. Inspired by Chabad, which holds free High Holiday services at most of its locations world-wide, synagogues in other movements are beginning to open their doors during the holidays to non-members, free of charge. The Conservative movement, for example, encourages synagogues to offer free tickets to a non-member for a year or two. In New York, the New York Metropolitan Conference of the Men of Reform Judaism sponsors free High Holiday services for students, young professionals and faculty members.

Meanwhile, Chabad continues to argue that not charging for the High Holidays contributes to long-term membership and who can argue? New Chabads pop up weekly in ever more obscure places, and continue to surprise local synagogues with the number of Jews they engage on a regular basis. Moreover, Chabad uses innovative fundraising techniques, from cultivating large regional donors (as opposed to congregational donors) to holding celebrity-studded telethons. It doesn't hurt that the slichim (emissaries) that start synagogues are young, driven couples who essentially work for free for several years as they get their Chabad centers off the ground.

But the rest of the Jewish world could learn a thing or two from Chabad's marketing and fundraising, starting with its strategy of not charging for people to hear the shofar blast.

Speaking of San Francisco...

Keeping with yesterday's return-from-San-Francisco theme, j., the Jewish news weekly of northern California, and The Forward recently wrote about a clever new outreach strategy from Rabbi Moshe Langer of the Chabad of San Francisco: free trolley tours of the diverse and beautiful city. But unlike other Chabad marketing--free iPods in exchange for enrolling in Hebrew classes, "spa day for the soul"--the trolley rides are not about getting people to become traditionally observant or join Chabad. All that the bearded Rabbi Langer asks is that all his passengers, Jewish or not, perform one mitzvah (good deed) that day.

It's what the Jewish Outreach Institute calls "Public Space Judaism," whereby the Jewish community engages the global community wherever they are: grocery stores, coffeeshops, even trolleys on Powell Street. I particularly admire the Chabad Cable Car because it doesn't sound like Rabbi Langer is pushing his religious agenda. By "soft-selling" Judaism and showing people of all creeds how welcoming and friendly a strongly Jewishly identified person can be, he's making Judaism appealing to unaffiliated Jew and non-Jew alike. That can send a powerful message to interfaith couples.

Turns out, though, that Rabbi Langer is only following in his dad's footsteps. His father, Rabbi Yosef Langer, has been dubbed "Rally Rabbi" after blowing the shofar during the San Francisco Giants' Jewish Heritage Night. At this year's Jewish Heritage Night in August, the Giants will be giving out Rally Rabbi bobbleheads.

The State of Jewish Journalism

I returned from San Francisco today, where I attended the 2007 conference of the American Jewish Press Association, the professional association of Jewish publications and websites. This was the fourth conference I attended and the sessions tend to be similar from year to year. There's always one or two on how to make your print publication work on the Internet, there's always one where everybody bemoans their inability to reach young readers and there's always one on media coverage of Israel. The irony in the perpetual inclusion of the first two sessions is that few significant Jewish websites are members of the AJPA and almost none of the few Jewish media outlets that have had some success reaching young Jews--Heeb, American Jewish Life, Jewcy or Jewschool, for starters--are members either. So the conversations about web presence and youthful audience occur in a vacuum, led by old media print editors.

There was a complete lack of official discussion of intermarriage, at least in the sessions I attended. This isn't a flaw, but a reflection of the fact that Jewish journalists are quite comfortable with intermarriage being a fact of life in the communities they cover. Our recent survey of 21 non-Orthodox Jewish papers revealed only four publications that would not publish interfaith wedding announcements--although two of those four are the two largest Jewish papers in the country. With the newspaper industry in such miserable shape, editors and publishers of Jewish papers don't have time to worry about defining the borders of the Jewish community--they're more interested in reaching the widest possible audience, which most certainly includes intermarried couples and their children.

I had an interesting conversation with the Orthodox publisher of a Jewish paper. He said when he started the paper that he had no interest in giving press to intermarriage. But after reading a letter to the editor in The (New York) Jewish Week where an Orthodox writer argued that the Jewish community needs to be welcoming to the intermarried, he changed his tune. He says he's still not sure exactly how he wants to cover intermarriage, but he knows he wants to give it more press than he has in the past.

We also unveiled a new syndication option to Jewish papers, where we will distribute a new article every two weeks to subscribing Jewish papers. We hope that means more exposure for our articles in the printed Jewish press.

Unlike their counterparts in many other Jewish institutions, Jewish journalists, for the most part, are quite open to welcoming interfaith couples and families into the Jewish community with open arms.

Remaking the Reform Movement

Rabbi David Forman, the founder of Rabbis for Human Rights, wrote a provocative op-ed in the Jerusalem Post arguing that the Reform movement needs to change if it hopes to engage Jews in Israel, the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and Germany. While Chabad has emerged as a dominant Jewish force in many of these places, and other more far-flung communities, the Reform movement "has barely made a dent in the consciousness of Jews in these places."

He doesn't blame the the leadership of the international Reform movement (the World Union for Progressive Judaism) or the leadership of the North American Reform movement (the Union for Reform Judaism), but rather the constitutents of the North American Reform movement.

...while ... the Union of Reform Judaism ... has adopted WUPJ's religious ideology, whereby both Jewish peoplehood and the centrality of Israel to Jewish theology should be primary forces in the life of a Jew, the URJ's constituents have not. Preaching by North American Reform leaders about commitment to the Jewish people does not resonate with most US Jews.

He blames the lack of focus on international Jewish peoplehood on three causes:

1. intermarriage


2. a focus on spirituality over intellectualism


3. a negative attitude towards Israel because it has not recognized Reform as a legitimate religious movement

Intermarriage and the focus on spirituality are intertwined in his mind. Because claims of peoplehood may ring hollow, or even offensive, to people in interfaith relationships, he says that the Reform movement in North America has become primarily a "faith-based religion." Further, in an apparent attempt to duplicate the success of American evangelical Christianity, Reform synagogues have focused on personal spirituality over intellectualism and communal prayer.

If Reform members in the U.S. change their priorities to show greater attachment to international Jewish peoplehood, he says, more money will be spent on sending Reform emissaries to all those communities that Chabad now dominates.

His conclusion is not wrong, but it seems to me he's willing to gamble with the Reform movement's greatest strength--its growing membership and presence in the U.S.--for an uncertain outcome. If the members of Reform synagogues don't quite see eye-to-eye with their leaders or the leaders of the international Reform movement, it's for a good reason. Jews in the U.S. are attracted to Reform synagogues because of the movement's open attitude towards intermarried couples and because of synagogues' attention to spiritual needs. In an assimilated, atomized society, these are more pressing needs for most Jews than a notion of attachment to international Jewish peoplehood.

I also think he casts the Reform movement in the U.S. in an overly uncharitable light. Yes, Reform synagogues may de-emphasize peoplehood somewhat and may focus on spiritualism over intellectualism, but their focus on social action is at least as strong as their focus on spirituality. And the focus on spirituality can be considered a form of marketing, much the same way it is in evangelical Christian movements and even in Chabad. You grab people with a promise to fulfill their spiritual needs and as they get further engaged, they will want to do more sophisticated study--and probably feel a greater attachment to the Jewish people. And it's not like Reform synagogues don't push trips to Israel as much as the other progressive movements. I would guess that most Reform Jews in the U.S. are totally ignorant Israel's position on Reform Jewry.

I wonder if Reform's lack of success in the rest of the world is more due to a lack of international understanding than due to a lack of American support. In Israel, for example, there are only three stops on the religious spectrum: secular, religious or haredi. Either you're secular or you're religious. If you're secular, you attend synagogue for holidays and life cycle events and keep up the illusion that you're as observant as religious Jews--and on the following day you return to your regular life.

In post-communist Russia, too, I'm not sure if people's notions of religion are sophisticated enough yet to understand the idea of a progressive Judaism. In communist Russia, you were persecuted for religious practice so only the most devout people ended up practicing their religion. I imagine that has created a gap between secular life and religion in many people's minds that can't be reconciled. Chabad, on the other hand, offers a wholly transformative brand of traditional Judaism, that probably fits in with people's faint memories of what shtetl Jews looked and acted like. And it's hardly fair to compare the success of any movement with Chabad--Chabad was an outreach organization before it was a religious movement, whereas the other movements were around for decades, if not centuries, before outreach became a central concern.

Steven Cohen Talks

The coverage of Steven Cohen's A Tale of Two Jewries continues, with an audio interview with Cohen by JTA editor Lisa Hostein and an op-ed on outreach and intermarriage from Gary Tobin, president of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research.

Responding to a question about what the most "frightening impact" of intermarriage is, Cohen says, "The most frightening impact is that we haven't yet figured out a way to keep the children... and grandchildren of intermarriage Jewish." He says the communal response to the problem should have two prongs: persuading Jews to marry Jews, and persuading intermarried couples to raise their children exclusively Jewish. He says he has a mixed opinion on outreach. Some outreach, he says, is great because it brings intermarried couples closer to Judaism, but some he says, "advocates a type of lifestyle that blends Judaism and Christianity." But he also says, "It's hard to attribute anything, for well or for good, to outreach." He says there is no evidence that outreach has helped bring intermarried couples closer to Judaism.

Finally, when asked what's new about his recommendations, he says he's advocating for three new ideas: one, getting Jews who are already receiving Jewish education to receive more (which he characterizes as different than getting unaffiliated Jews who receive no Jewish education to receive some); two, financially supporting young adults who are pioneering creative expressions of Judaism in culture, spirituality and social justice, specifically suggesting the creation of a World Jewish Peace Corps; and three, experimenting with community-funded rabbis whose sole job is to respond to the "pent-up demand" for people who want to convert.

It's important to be clear that there is much in what he says that is positive. None of his three specific recommendations for strengthening the Jewish community are in conflict with our goals. All would contribute positively to the inclusion of more intermarried families in Judaism.

With respect to conversion, Cohen, like Gary Tobin in his op-ed, wants the Jewish community to reconsider its traditional resistance to conversion and be much friendlier to anyone who expresses even some interest in converting. I don't disagree. In modern America, where religion is just one more lifestyle choice in a consumer marketplace, the most successful religions are those that market themselves, and make themselves readily available to new adherents (think Scientology and evangelical Christianity). Judaism needs to follow suit. I'm not sure there really is "pent-up demand" for conversion among intermarried couples, and I'm not opposed to having community-based rabbinic counselors available to work with prospective converts--although I think it would be more effective to have those counselors available to work with and be welcoming to interfaith couples whether or not the non-Jewish partner is interested in converting.

However, Cohen's characterization of outreach is way off-base. Contrary to his statement, no Jewish-oriented outreach group advocates the blending of religions. Moreover, his statement that there isn't "any evidence" that outreach is effective disregards every one of the handful of evaluations that have been done of outreach programs that target interfaith families, all of which show significantly increased Jewish behaviors and attitudes after program participation; and it disregards the fact that in Boston, a city with the best-funded, best-organized collection of outreach programs in the country, 60% of intermarried couples are raising their children Jewish. While the preliminiary findings of the 2005 Boston Jewish Community Survey did not make a direct connection between outreach programs and intermarried couples raising their children Jewish, there is potential for that data to be extracted from the study.

I do agree with Cohen's statement that outreach initiatives have been "miniscule" making it hard to attribute impact to them. But the worst thing about the interview is his statement that "we haven't figured out ways to get the intermarried to raise their children as Jews." Cohen takes a "heads I win, tails you lose" approach to outreach that targets interfaith families. He takes false pot-shots at it as advocating blending of religions; admits that outreach initiatives have been "miniscule," but says there is no indication that outreach works; and concludes that outreach programs that target interfaith families are not worth supporting. That approach amounts to a self-fulfilling prophecy that the intermarried will not be encouraged to raise their children as Jews.

Finally, Cohen's tone in A Tale of Two Jewries. One sure way to NOT encourage intermarried families to raise their children as Jews is to talk about intermarriage as the "single greatest threat to Jewish continuity" and to measure the success of Jewish education programs by the number of percentage points they reduce the likelihood of intermarriage. As we've said elsewhere, people won't join a group that they feel demeans them.

Marketing Day Schools to Interfaith Families

Not sure why I hadn't thought of sharing this yet, but we wrote this article on marketing Jewish day schools to interfaith families for RAVSAK, the Jewish Community Day School Network. It will be published in their issue coming out in December, I believe. It's specifically targeted to the boards and administrators of Jewish community day schools, so forgive the somewhat-dry language.

How to market community day schools to interfaith families
By Micah Sachs and Edmund Case

Of the estimated 500,000 children in intermarried households, only 5,400 (Kotler-Berkowitz, 2005), or barely more than 1 percent, attend Jewish day school. So clearly there is growth potential in the intermarried market.

When thinking about marketing to interfaith families, the most important thing to keep in mind is that interfaith families who are considering a Jewish day school education are probably not very different from inmarried families considering a Jewish day school. As Jennifer Rudin-Sable, the former Jewish life coordinator at the Rashi School in Boston has said, “Inter-faith and intra-faith families are much more similar than they are different and… the key to bringing them into our community is not identifying ‘who or what’ they are but rather identifying ‘where’ they are and ‘what they need’ to take the next step in their journey.” There is no magic bullet to reaching this diverse market; the best advice we can offer is to make sure your advertising and marketing materials emphasize your acceptance of the children of interfaith families.

Just like in-married families, intermarried families considering a day school probably fall in two broad camps: those who seek out the day school primarily for its Jewish qualities, and those who seek out the day school primarily for its educational expertise. To determine what kind of interfaith family you’re dealing with, ask the same kinds of questions of them that you would ask of in-married families: What other schools are you considering? What brought you to our school? What are you looking for in a school?

If their answers to these questions—“We are considering other Jewish day schools. We want to promote our children’s Jewish identity.”—indicate that the family is already Jewishly engaged, you can treat them as you would any Jewishly engaged in-married family. Indeed, it’s possible they may be even more interested in insulating their children from the pressures of the media-saturated, secular, presumptively Christian American culture.

If, however, answers to these questions indicate that the family is considering a Jewish day school for reasons other than its Jewish focus, then your pitch should be similar to your pitch to in-married families who are primarily looking for a good education, with a few modifications.

These interfaith families, much like their in-married counterparts, may be worried that a Jewish day school is “too Jewish.” For these families, emphasize the diversity of your community. Tell them how many Russian, Israeli and Sephardic families there are, and explain to them the diversity of Jewish religious observance of students at the school. Discuss the atmosphere of tolerance at your school.

Also, much the same way that Jesuits market the universality of their educational approach to people of all religions, emphasize the universal application of a Jewish education: how it encourages right action and kind and truthful speech, how it promotes social justice, how it focuses on spirituality and God. Contra Costa Day School in Lafayette, California provides a good model: “In our published materials, at back-to-school nights, and during school tours it helps to frame Jewish values, when possible, in a universal light,” says Dean Goldfein, the head of school.

At the same time, intermarried parents, just like their in-married counterparts, want to be told upfront everything they and their children should expect from an education at your school. Some key policies to address with prospective interfaith families include:

1) The school’s policy on accepting—or not accepting—the children of Jewish fathers and non-Jewish mothers as Jewish.

If your school only accepts matrilineal descent, you are significantly reducing the potential market of interfaith families. However, even if you do accept the children of non-Jewish mothers as Jewish, you should make prospective interfaith families aware if a significant segment of your population is traditional. Advise parents to make their children aware of the debate over descent. Train your teachers to be sensitive to this issue.

2) The school’s policy on promoting in-dating and discouraging interfaith dating.

Many parents choose day schools because they feel it provides a very good opportunity for their child to socialize with and date fellow Jews. Inform prospective interfaith parents if this is part of your school’s agenda.

3) The school’s policy on allowing students to bring non-Jewish dates to events like the prom.

This has been one of the trickier and more controversial issues for Jewish day schools. Whatever your policy, articulate it clearly to prospective interfaith parents before their children enroll.

With their focus on pluralism, tolerance and quality education, community day schools are well-placed to meet the needs of interfaith families. With a little extra sensitivity and a little bit of preparation—for teachers, students, parents and administrators—you can attract, and retain, interfaith families as supportive members of your school community.

Note: All quotes come from articles originally published on InterfaithFamily.com.

Trigger-Happy?

We recently received a video from the Robert I. Lappin Charitable Foundation, based in Boston's North Shore. We've talked about the Lappin Foundation before; they fund and manage some great programs for interfaith families, but their spokespeople never miss an opportunity to denigrate intermarriage. This new video is no different. Called "Journey of Faith," it's meant to be a "trigger for discussion" on intermarriage and conversion to Judaism. It's being distributed for free, and intended for "conversion classes, interfaith outreach programs, Introduction to Judaism courses, adult education courses, teen dialogue about dating, marriage and family, pre-marital counseling and training for clergy and Jewish communal workers."

A little more than 10 minutes long, "Journey of Faith" features Doug and Jodi Smith of Marblehead, Mass. Doug was born Catholic and Jodi was born Jewish, but after almost 10 years of marriage, Doug decided to convert to Judaism in 2005. His reason for converting is pretty simple: he wanted to feel a "full" member of his family's Conservative synagogue. He says he was especially struck at the 2005 High Holidays, when he saw his daughter on the bima and knew he couldn't join her.

The video works admirably as a "trigger" to discuss the challenges facing an intermarried couple or an interfaith couple contemplating intermarriage. Before Jodi and Doug were engaged, they agreed to raise the children Jewish. Jodi asked Doug to take a conversion course, which he said was very helpful in understanding what raising children Jewish means (it's not clear whether Jodi was trying to push Doug to convert then or not). He says conversion wasn't the "right thing for me at the time." They went into the business of parenting clear-eyed, anticipating the "bumps" ahead, and decided to raise their children in one religion before they got engaged. They compare that to several of their intermarried friends who have avoided the issue altogether. They are quite persuasive in arguing for the importance of deciding how one will raise the children early-on.

But as a "trigger" to discuss the value of conversion, the video is a failure. While the discussion questions that accompany the video speak of "the tensions that arise from inter-dating and intermarriage" and how being in an interfaith family "wasn't working for Douglas anymore," the Smiths themselves give little indication that there were any problems being an intermarried family raising Jewish children. The only two challenges they mention are Jodi's parents--who didn't originally approve of a non-Jewish mate--and what Doug calls the "biggest challenge," telling his parents about his plans to convert.

So let's get this straight: this video is about the "tensions" of intermarriage and the appeal of conversion, and the only challenges the couple faced were from their parents? If the "biggest challenge" for Doug was telling his parents about his conversion plans, isn't the video then arguing that conversion is a bigger problem than intermarriage? If anything, Doug is getting at one of the major reasons why many non-Jewish partners in intermarriages choose not to convert: they don't want to upset their parents.

While the Lappin Foundation explicitly endorses Jews marrying Jews and non-Jewish partners in intermarriages converting, the video makes living in an intermarriage seem like no big deal. Once the Smiths decided how to raise the children, they didn't suffer through any major tensions or crises. They don't discuss conflicts arising from differing cultural traditions, value systems or politics, or any of the other practical reasons some Jews offer as proof that intermarriages don't work. If anything, "Journey to Faith" proves that intermarriage can work--and conversion is not a necessary step to family peace and happiness.

What Makes a Celebrity Jewish

Around a year ago, the website Jewhoo.com went off-line. Created and maintained by Nate Bloom, an Oakland-based writer, Jewhoo was the definitive site to go to to find out which celebrities were Jewish--and which weren't. It was an amazing resource for Jewish journalists, and I'm sure I was not the only one who mourned its loss.

The site sort-of lives on in a different form in a series of columns that Bloom continues to write for the New Jersey Jewish Standard, j., the Jewish news weekly of Northern California and three other Jewish papers. Bloom's research is impeccable; he pores through every article on celebrities with Jewish-sounding names he can find to determine what their Jewish connection is. Are both parents Jewish? (Not that often.) Was the father Jewish? (Sometimes, but that can mean the celebrity practices some other religion.) Was the mother Jewish? What religion does the celebrity practice now?

It's tricky work, especially because so many celebrities are secular and are uncomfortable talking about religion. He's like an ethnic/religious detective, snooping out who's really Jewish--and who just has a -berg in their surname.

In a fascinating column recently published by the New Jersey Jewish Standard, Bloom explains how he defines Jewishness--and responds to his occasional critics.

I count as "Jewish" any famous person who has at least one Jewish parent, was not raised in a religion other than Judaism, and does not practice, as an adult, a faith other than Judaism.

Converts to Judaism are an exception. Quite rationally I count them as Jewish even if they did not have a Jewish parent or were raised in another faith.

Interestingly, these standards are very close to the definition of Jewish that the National Jewish Population Survey 2000-01 used, with the slight clarification that those with one Jewish parent who practice a non-monotheistic religion (e.g., Buddhism or paganism) would be counted as Jews, and those who practice a monotheistic religion other than Judaism (i.e., Christianity and Islam) would not be counted. Nate actually addresses this issue in his column:

There is no perfect way to do a column like this or to satisfy everyone. Some celebrities don't fit into neat categories--like Jews who claim to practice Buddhism but say they are still Jewish. Buddhism has no deity, and when you look into what these so-called Jewish Buddhists practice of Buddhism, sometimes it is no more than a few meditation techniques that are not much different from those taught in secular classes. I still don't know exactly how to deal with this situation.

While he doesn't reveal his own feelings on the debate over matrilineal vs. patrilineal descent (Bloom will voice his opinion on any TV show or movie, including ones he hasn't seen, but is notoriously reticent about any details about his personal life or his Jewishness), he does take a fair approach to the whole issue. He says:

In the case of someone who has one Jewish parent, I try to note in the column which parent is Jewish. This allows readers to make up their minds as how they want to view that person--Jewish, not Jewish, whatever.

That's reasonable, considering his readership runs the gamut from the liberal Bay Area to the heavily Orthodox Teaneck, New Jersey.

Despite his attempts at even-handedness, Bloom still says he gets criticized when "some readers... use the detailed information that I provide and turn around and accuse me of labeling as 'Jewish' people who aren't--because they are not children of a Jewish mother or for some other reason." He says:

Part of the criticism I get is based on what I call "head-in-the-sand syndrome." During the 1920s through the 1960s, when intermarriage was rare among "ordinary Jews," it was very common in most sectors of the entertainment world.

But it wasn't talked about much in the Jewish press or in profiles of Jewish celebrities in the Jewish press...

You cannot blame these journalists of prior generations. Did their readers want to hear that the Jewish George Burns, a beloved figure, was married to a Catholic (Gracie Allen) and that his children were raised in her faith? No.

Did they want to hear that the Jewish Lauren Bacall agreed to raise her children with the non-Jewish Humphrey Bogart as Episcopalian? No...

I am almost surprised these days when I find out that a famous Jewish person is marrying another Jew. I would say that almost half of the famous "Jewish" celebrities in entertainment under the age of 30 are not the children of two Jewish parents.

But he clearly struggles with the whole intermarriage issue, saying "intermarriage represents a real demographic problem for the relatively small American Jewish population--a demographic problem that can translate, in a generation or so, into a host of serious consequences for American Jewry." Because he is constantly writing about celebrities who don't have a serious Jewish commitment, he is clearly sensitive to the accusation that doing what he does promotes intermarriage, or promotes a notion of Jewish identity devoid of religious content. He asks himself: "So what, you may ask, is the value of the column?" and answers:

I think the column has value in promoting Jewish continuity by letting people know how many famous people are Jewish and, I hope, they will realize that that somewhat hard-to-define thing, "Jewish culture" is an engine--an engine of certain valuable cultural traits--that constantly produces accomplished people incredibly out of proportion to Jewish numbers. I hope readers will be influenced to believe it is a culture worth preserving.

I've always taken an interest in Jewish celebrities--as both a writer and reader of Jewish press--but I've never been able to fully justify it. It can often seem like a cheap, shallow way to connect to Judaism, but Bloom's rationale is the most persuasive, eloquent explanation of the value of highlighting Jewish celebrities I've yet seen.

Why Jewish Life?

My Yom Kippur experience was especially meaningful this year--I hope yours was too. It's a wonderful opportunity to reflect on and evaluate my life, and consider what I can do better. I feel I have an entire clean slate of a New Year to fill, and the prospect is very exciting.

I think my main motivation in founding InterfaithFamily.com, Inc. was my belief, based on my own experience and that of many friends, that participating in Jewish life can be a great source of meaning and fulfillment, not just for Jews, but in particular for interfaith couples. The Yom Kippur opportunity to reflect and evaluate is one example of that. Coincidentally or not, a wonderful article in Sunday's New York Times Magazine is another great example.

So the Torah is a Parenting Guide by Emily Bazelon tells the story of Wendy Mogel, a child psychologist who wrote a book, The Blessing of a Skinned Knee: Using Jewish Teachings to Raise Self-Reliant Children. As the book's title indicates, Mogel finds relevance in ancient Jewish texts to the most current of issues, in her case, raising children in our modern world. The book has become something of a best-seller--and not just to Jewish parents.

For many years I was privileged to take an early morning Talmud class taught by a wonderful Orthodox rabbi, Reuven Cohn. I was repeatedly struck then by the relevance of Jewish texts to modern issues. When I went back to school as part of my career change, I wrote a paper for Robert Reich's class on social policy that applied lessons from the Talmud tractate on Pe'ah (about leaving the corners of the fields for the poor to harvest) to current welfare policy.

I have often felt that the Jewish community does not do nearly a good enough job in "marketing" the appealing aspects of Jewish life, again, not just to Jewish couples, but in particular to interfaith couples. Doing a better job of that continues to be one of InterfaithFamily.com's most important goals, as this bright New Year begins.

Should High Holiday tickets be free?

Sue Fishkoff, the JTA correspondent who focuses on Jewish identity and affiliation, has just launched a new blog. Her first entry raises the question whether High Holiday tickets should be free. I posted this response:

I understand both sides of this issue. As a former synagogue president, I know what it costs to run a synagogue, that synagogues depend on member to pay dues to cover those costs, and that many members, for better or worse, attend primarily on the High Holy Days.

On the other hand, as president of InterfaithFamily.com, I know that the high cost of synagogue membership is a serious obstacle to the goal of having interfaith couples raise their children as Jews which synagogue membership definitely fosters.

I am in favor of free tickets a first year, free initial memberships, gradual dues increases, fair share dues systems, and other strategies to encourage synagogue membership. And it may take seating non-members later or "in the back" as a reasonable compromise that lets members enjoy a benefit of membership without excluding those who want to attend.

Esther: A Hero for Christians?

Whatever its other faults, the success of the The Passion of the Christ last year demonstrated a powerful fact: religious movie-goers have massive buying power. In the wake of The Passion, numerous movies have tried to tap the potential of the religious market: Tyler Perry's Diary of a Mad Black Woman and Medea's Family Reunion; The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe; The Nativity Story, coming out in December, about the events leading up to the birth of Jesus. But the common thread to all these movies is their appeal to the Christian movie-goer. Which leads to the question: are there any movies for the religious Jewish movie-goer?

The answer is yes, sort of. Coming out October 13, One Night with the King tells the story of Purim: how Esther, the Jewish wife of the Persian king, prevented Haman, the king's advisor, from executing a plot to kill all the Jews. The story of Purim is a particular touchstone for intermarried families, as its heroine is in an interfaith relationship but still deeply connected to the Jewish community. In some ways the story of Purim celebrates the political benefits of Jews marrying into the dominant culture.

But there's a catch.

One Night with the King is a product of Gener8Xion Entertainment Inc., a Christian media company based in Los Angeles. The head of Gener8Xion is Matthew Crouch, son of Paul and Jan Crouch, founders of the largest Christian television company, Trinity Broadcasting Network. More concerning is the fact that One Night with the King is based on a novel by a Christian pastor, Tommy Tenney.

It's hard to know what to expect from the movie. Like The Passion and Chronicles of Narnia before it, it's being prescreened to churches. Unlike those movies, it's also being prescreened to Jewish audiences. One Night with the King could be a powerful, inspiring story for interfaith families exploring Jewish life--let's just hope it's not also a tool for covert Christian proselytizing as well.

Touring the Temple

Before I went to Salt Lake City for the RNA conference, I was urged by my publisher, Ed Case, to take a tour of Temple Square, the world headquarters of the Church of Latter-day Saints and the site of the original Mormon Temple. Since I always do everything my boss tells me, I snuck out on Friday afternoon to take the tour. It was a fascinating experience, and it has some interesting ramifications for the Jewish community, I think.

The tour begins unlike any tour you've ever been on. After you pass the fleet of young couples being photographed after their wedding at the Temple (which apparently can happen any time of day, any day of the week), as soon as you enter the Temple Square grounds, two missionaries approach you. They introduce themselves, ask your name and ask if you'd like to go on a tour. There are no tickets, no lines, no wait. Even if they only have three people--as my group had--they happily lead you on a tour through the grounds.

The centerpiece of the site is the Temple, which is reserved for Church members only, but they take you through the visitor center, where you ascend a broad, gentle spiral ramp up to a room with a domed ceiling painted night blue with stars, planets and galaxies. In the center is a 20-foot-tall marble statue of Jesus--Christus, as they call it--and you sit on cushioned benches or couches while a booming recorded voice tells you about the glories of embracing Mormonism. The tour ends in the Assembly Hall (which looks like an early 20th century church), and you sit on wooden pews made of white pine painted by hand, with combs and feathers, to look like oak. There, your missionaries tell you how wonderful it is to have a savior who embraces them and is with them at all times. It ends with them singing "I Am A Child of God," a song they learned as children.

As I listened to the singing, it occurred to me how easy it was for the missionaries to communicate why their religion matters to them, and why it should matter to their audience. And it made me think about how difficult it is for Jews to explain why their religion matters to them, and how it's especially hard for Jews to explain why their religion should matter to others.

In our work at InterfaithFamily.com, we encourage families to make Jewish choices, but it can be difficult to articulate why. There are certainly very good reasons--a rich tradition of study and critique, a flexibility in belief and practice levels, a focus on righteous action over thought or the afterlife, a series of diverse and unique holidays, especially Shabbat and Passover--but Judaism doesn't have a simple selling point, nothing to match the succintness of my tourguide's "It's so wonderful to have a savior who loves me." Judaism lacks what marketers call the elevator pitch, a short description of what you do that you can tell somebody while you happen to share an elevator ride between floors.

There are a lot of reasons for the lack of this pitch, from our complex understanding of God to the great spectrum of differing approaches to Judaism to the ethnic/cultural element of Judaism, and I don't want to get into those (nor do I think I'm sufficiently qualified). But I think if we came up with an elevator pitch, a quick, persuasive response to the question "Why Judaism?", we might have more success convincing intermarried families to make Jewish choices, and more success getting born Jews to reconnect with their religious heritage. If you have any ideas for the content of this pitch--or know of any good sources who have already developed this pitch--we'd love to hear them.

Touring the Temple

Before I went to Salt Lake City for the RNA conference, I was urged by my publisher, Ed Case, to take a tour of Temple Square, the world headquarters of the Church of Latter-day Saints and the site of the original Mormon Temple. Since I always do everything my boss tells me, I snuck out on Friday afternoon to take the tour. It was a fascinating experience, and it has some interesting ramifications for the Jewish community, I think.

The tour begins unlike any tour you've ever been on. After you pass the fleet of young couples being photographed after their wedding at the Temple (which apparently can happen any time of day, any day of the week), as soon as you enter the Temple Square grounds, two missionaries approach you. They introduce themselves, ask your name and ask if you'd like to go on a tour. There are no tickets, no lines, no wait. Even if they only have three people--as my group had--they happily lead you on a tour through the grounds.

The centerpiece of the site is the Temple, which is reserved for Church members only, but they take you through the visitor center, where you ascend a broad, gentle spiral ramp up to a room with a domed ceiling painted night blue with stars, planets and galaxies. In the center is a 20-foot-tall marble statue of Jesus--Christus, as they call it--and you sit on cushioned benches or couches while a booming recorded voice tells you about the glories of embracing Mormonism. The tour ends in the Assembly Hall (which looks like an early 20th century church), and you sit on wooden pews made of white pine painted by hand, with combs and feathers, to look like oak. There, your missionaries tell you how wonderful it is to have a savior who embraces them and is with them at all times. It ends with them singing "I Am A Child of God," a song they learned as children.

As I listened to the singing, it occurred to me how easy it was for the missionaries to communicate why their religion matters to them, and why it should matter to their audience. And it made me think about how difficult it is for Jews to explain why their religion matters to them, and how it's especially hard for Jews to explain why their religion should matter to others.

In our work at InterfaithFamily.com, we encourage families to make Jewish choices, but it can be difficult to articulate why. There are certainly very good reasons--a rich tradition of study and critique, a flexibility in belief and practice levels, a focus on righteous action over thought or the afterlife, a series of diverse and unique holidays, especially Shabbat and Passover--but Judaism doesn't have a simple selling point, nothing to match the succintness of my tourguide's "It's so wonderful to have a savior who loves me." Judaism lacks what marketers call the elevator pitch, a short description of what you do that you can tell somebody while you happen to share an elevator ride between floors.

There are a lot of reasons for the lack of this pitch, from our complex understanding of God to the great spectrum of differing approaches to Judaism to the ethnic/cultural element of Judaism, and I don't want to get into those (nor do I think I'm sufficiently qualified). But I think if we came up with an elevator pitch, a quick, persuasive response to the question "Why Judaism?", we might have more success convincing intermarried families to make Jewish choices, and more success getting born Jews to reconnect with their religious heritage. If you have any ideas for the content of this pitch--or know of any good sources who have already developed this pitch--we'd love to hear them.