Mail.Liberal-Judaism

• Ricardo Ben-Safed <rbensafe@CapAccess.org>

• Rabbi Michael Feshbach <RABBIF@aol.com>

• Rabbi Bob Kraus <BOB2070@DELPHI.COM>

• ao692@lafn.org (John Sherwood)

• Robin Cohen Anderson <robin@crocker.com>
• Mark Weintraub <mbw@efn.org>

• mythago@agora.rdrop.com (Laurel Halbany)

• rebsteve@dakota.net (Rabbi Steve Forstein)

• Rabbi Bob Kraus <BOB2070@DELPHI.COM>

• rebsteve@dakota.net (Rabbi Steve Forstein)

• ao692@lafn.org (John Sherwood)

• Internet Directory <jvoice@tribeca.ios.com>

From: Ricardo Ben-Safed <rbensafe@CapAccess.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 13:10:12 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: "Goyim" and the Chosen People

> I know that this idea of the Chosen People is deeply embedded in Jewish
> religious ideology. I have heard all the rationalizations about how "chosen"
> doesn't mean "superior," that it means "chosen for a special and more
> difficult mission," that it imposes the obligation to observe 613 mitzvot
> instead of just the Noachic seven, about how (according to Midrash) the role
> of Chosen People was offered to all the nations of the Earth and they all
> refused it except Israel. But these have always struck me as merely lame
> attempts to explain away the clear implication of superiority.  Certainly
> there is an undeniable note of smugness in the traditional Shacharit
> (sunrise) blessing

You have stated the problem and it's implications very suscinctly and I dont
want to detract from that either.  I do however want to put a positive word in
on this discussion from anthropology and psychology on what it means in an
agricultural and tribal society to not have a name. Would it not be unusual to
find an agricultural/tribal unit anywhere in the world which didnt have a name
for itself.  It would seem that a number of families require a name different
from any individual family name.  In the opening exercises of the Olympics the
five rings were symbolically demonstrated to be the Five tribes of the Human
family.  Obviously the Olympiad organizers were trying to address the issues
of "Race", and they did it very well

I think we would lose a great deal of identity if we adopted the strange and
yet modern notion that names are unimportant. Or worse, that having a special
name marks one as being superior if not racist.

Names and naming is not just a disposable social custom, it's part and partial
of all of our very being.

And rather than being just an irrelevant and unjustified sense of
superiority,names and naming is also a part of our identity. There really is
no logical reason for disposing of our individual name nor of our group names.
True the groups are nation states and have written down definitions (laws)on
who may call himself an American citizen or a South African or Israeli.
Tribal societies usually had a word to describe someone who was not of the
tribe.  And of course being a member of the tribe was always considered better
than not being a member!

> If that isn't superiority, what is it? I don't expect traditional Jews to
> let go of the Chosen People idea, but I think we on the liberal end ought
> to give it some serious rethinking. We need to universalize our message and
> stop claiming to be singled out for a special role among all the b'nei Adam
> (children of Adam) with whom we share this Earth.

Again, I'm not sure that just giving up a name really adds or detracts from
the need for human interactions based on mutual understanding and peaceful
intentions.  Just being an American doesnt require us to think or act in an
superior manner with say the Vietnamese or with the Cubans.  Or even
emerging identities such as the self-governing Palestinian Authority run by
Palestinians.

Just my thoughts and I'll go back to the list to read the comments of others.
I hope this will be a good discussion of a good issue.

b'Shalom,		-Ricardo Ben-Safed   

Return to Table of Contents

From: Rabbi Michael Feshbach <RABBIF@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 08:40:17 -0400
Subject: "Non-legal" Marriages: Oranges and Tangerines

Rabbi Richard Schachet wrote, in response to my response to him:

> I accept his point on the differences between unions and inter-marriages.
> Perhaps I was not complete in my posting Also my use of the word "rare" may
> not have been a good one.  But certainly we have turned a number of Jews off
> by rejecting them.  And there are many Rabbis who are so opposed to
> intermarriage that their rejction is loud and strong

> Re gay or lesbian unions, I think it is interesting that so many Liberal
> Rabbis will officiate at unions of Jew and Jew but not for inter-unions (is
> that a new term?)

> Some questions arise re unions.  Is it O.K. to do a "union of two people
> (heterosexual male-female) who do not want to be legally married.  i.e.
> seniors or people opposed to government interference in life cycle
> functions?  If we do officiate at a gay union and it does not work out is
> there a sort of "get" for them.  I for one believe there should be.

Richard: An interesting dialog here... I was asked, quite a few times when an
asst. rabbi at a large cong. in Florida (Boca Raton) to do the kind of
non-legal wedding you described above.  I consider it illegal (that is, using
the form of something legal, but not following through with the paperwork),
although I am not a lawyer and don't play one on tv... it might not actually
BE fraud but it certainly has the appearance of impropriety.  (Is THAT against
our rabbinical ethics code??  I would have to go back and check.)  I do
consider it immoral.

For the same reason, sensitivity to the legal implications of what I do, I
would not call a gay ceremony a "marriage" until and unless it was legal in
the state in which I did so, since "marriage" is a legal term, and it is
defined by the state (or the federal government), I DISAGREE with the federal
definition, and wanted it include gay couples, but there are other laws with
which I disagree, and have no choice but to follow.  If I performed such a
ceremony (I have not as yet) I would call it an "affirmation" or a
"committment" ceremony, or the like.  I would LIKE to call it a marriage, but
I can't, so I won't.

SO, in the end, and in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety, I am left
standing with the appearance of hypocrisy: I would probably do a gay ceremony,
but not call it a marriage (although only between two Jews, unless I change my
position on intermarriage)...which is the appearance of a marriage but without
(at this point) any paperwork... but I would NOT do the "married in the eyes
of God but not the state" ceremony for seniors.  The difference, for me, is
this: the seniors CAN get married in the eyes of the law, and are not doing so
for economic reasons with which I might sympathize at one level, but do not
agree with on principle.  The gay couple CANNOT get married at this point in
the eyes of the law, and WOULD do so (many) if they could.  We are therefore
dealing with oranges and tangerines, similar but not identical matters.

By the way... the word you used in regard to a couple not married by a rabbi
but who remained interested in Judaism was "unique."  HAD you used the word
"rare" I would still have disagreed, but I might not have reacted as I did.

It is amazing how many combinations and permutations of circumstances we
encounter in our interactions with each other in this modern world.  With all
its challenges, I, for one, feel that we are living in an age in which people
are finding comfort for themselves in many new ways, and while there remain
things that make me uncomfortable (polygamy is NOT an "alternative
lifestyle"--despite the obvious fact that it was at one time), I am overall
glad to be living now.

With best wishes,
L'shalom,

Michael Feshbach
Rabbi, Temple Anshe Hesed
Erie, PA

Return to Table of Contents

From: Rabbi Bob Kraus <BOB2070@DELPHI.COM>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 00:19:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Derivation of Yud-Hay-Vav-Hay

Sorry to come into this discussion about YHVH in the middle. I hope I don't
repeat something that has already been said. My understanding of the
Tetragrammatan is that the letters YHVH are the consonants of God's unknown
name (not the 1,000 letter name). The vowels are the vowels of the word
*Adonaye* (ah...oh...ah) as an indication by the Massorites that this four
consonant word should be pronounced *Adonaye*. There may be many other equally
valid explanations, but this is one I learned and the one that makes the most
sense to me.

Shalom,

Rabbi Bob Kraus

Return to Table of Contents

From: ao692@lafn.org (John Sherwood)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:24:33 -0700
Subject: Holy Day Tickets and Dues

It's that time of year, so I though the following might be of interest.

When I first came to Temple Emet of Woodland Hills, California, which in 1971
was a small congregation of eighty families, I presented the board of
directors an idea which they battled, but finally accepted.  We advertised
free tickets to anyone who wanted them.  However, the tickets had to be picked
up in person, and only by appointment with me.  For the entire months of July
and August and part of September, I sat in the Temple office four nights a
week, meeting each couple or individual for thirty minutes apiece, and spelled
out the temple's program and philosophy.  The first year, I held more than 100
appointments, and we gained fifty members.  The second year, the board loved
the idea, we gained another forty members.  Not only was the idea financially
successful, but each family had sat down in person with the rabbi for half an
hour or more.  Those who did not join learned that there was a synagogue
within their community with liberal ideas and a concern for personal
interaction, one that they could feel comfortable visiting.  There was no fund
raising from the pulpit.  That was the good news.

The bad news was that in the third year, a new, short-sighted board killed the
idea.  Interestingly enough, some of the board members were people who had
joined under the program, and it was four years before the temple had another
growth spurt.

Once the board insisted on selling tickets, I persuaded them that there still
should be rabbi's discretionary tickets, however they could not be advertised
in the local press, and managed to give away between fifty and a hundred
tickets a year, my commitment being that no Jew should be excluded from
services.  It took several years for them to realize that so many had been
given away.  One year, they got the idea of numbering the tickets and keeping
track of how they were distributed, and the battles royal started, and lasted
for several years.  The biggest blow up occurred when the religious activities
[sic] vice president walked in, handed me twenty-five tickets, instructed the
secretary not to give me any more, and said to me, "After you give these out,
you're through."  As soon as he departed, I instructed my secretary (This was
pre-computer days, and I had not yet learned to type.) To take a piece of my
personal rabbinic stationary, and type, "Please admit _______________________
to High Holy Day Services.", over my signature, and to run a hundred copies,
and more if needed.  No usher would deny admission to someone bearing such a
letter.  You can imagine the board meeting the following month.  Thank God, by
that time, I had tenure.  

Rabbi John M.  Sherwood

Return to Table of Contents

From: Robin Cohen Anderson <robin@crocker.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:05:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Intermarriage

Jennifer Beaufort wrote:

>It's hard for me to tell from what I've read if non-Jews are upset when they
>are excluded from synagogue policies, can't find a rabbi willing to officiate
>at their marriage, etc.  or if it is the Jews who are married to non-Jews who
>are more upset because they feel that their non-Jewish spouse is being
>excluded or slighted in some way. 

In my experience, it is the Jewish partner who feels slighted most often,
because the Jewish partner is the one with the greater emotional tie to
Judaism. In my case, I was not religious when I married my husband, and we
found a Unitarian minister to marry us; she wove in passages from Jewish
texts. Once I returned to Judaism, though, I felt some initial resentment
and disappointment because my Conservative rabbi would not have married us.
I no longer have these feelings, and understand his position (even though I
heartily disagree with it); he sees himself as a guardian of traditional
Judaism, which forbids intermarriage. My husband, on the other hand, didn't
feel insulted at all. 

I know of one case, however, in which the non-Jew is a great deal more angry
than his partner at not finding a rabbi to marry them. He is a lifelong
Unitarian and refuses to walk into any synagogue whose rabbi does not
officiate at interfaith marriages, reasoning that if the people in the
congregation don't support his marriage, he doesn't want to worship with
them. However, when I suggested to him that there are Reform congregations
around that met his criteria, he said that he didn't have a lot of respect
for those rabbis and wouldn't want to be married by them! He has obviously
found reasons to not enter a synagogue at all; therefore, I don't know how
much of his anger has to do with principle over the intermarriage issue, and
how much just reflects a basic discomfort with organized religion of any kind. 

In any case, he has very little respect for my decision to go to a
Conservative synagogue, overlook their stricture on intermarriage, and find
sustenance in the beauty of a faith that has lasted for thousands of years.
My feeling is that one would be hard pressed to find any group or
institution with which total agreement is possible--or even desirable. After
all, I learn as much through disagreement as through agreement--sometimes,
much more.

B'shalom,
Robin Cohen Anderson

Return to Table of Contents

From: Mark Weintraub <mbw@efn.org>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 21:53:41 -0700
Subject: Re: Intermarriage

Rabbi John Sherwood wrote in v.6n.22

> I was Rabbi of Temple Emet of Woodland Hills, for twenty-two years.  I wrote
> the following clause for our constitution.  Membership in Temple Emet shall
> be open to any member of the Jewish faith, and any person interested in
> Judaism.  This enabled non-converted spouses who wished to participate full
> opportunity so to do.  It also made the Temple open to people who were in
> the midst of conversion studies.  Interestingly enough, one non-Jew served
> with distinction as a board member and one of the best youth committee
> chairpersons we ever had.  Reform needs to be inclusive, not exclusive.  One
> of our rabbinic colleagues, in the CCAR Newsletter, wrote an article
> recommending that we awaken the old category of the ger toshav, the person
> who wishes to dwell in our midst without the formality of a conversion
> ceremony.  Thus, those who wish to participate in Jewish life can feel
> accepted and not rejected, and we have a better chance of building new
> generations of Jews who feel positive about Judaism and its institutions.

Thank you, Rabbi Sherwood for expressing this point so well. The congregation
in which I grew up, in State College, Pennsylvania, and the one in which I
rediscovered Judaism, in Portland, Oregon, both have similar membership
clauses in their bylaws.  In Portland, non-Jews have been Board members and
one year a non-Jew and his Jewish spouse co-chaired the planning committee for
High Holy Day services (he was a retired Protestant minister). No one, to my
knowledge, ever suggested that the distinctive Jewishness of the institution
was "diluted" as a result.

To the contrary, the congregation has served as a gateway to many besides
myself who have come back to Judaism after being disenchanted earlier in life,
or who have chosen to affiliate with a congregation for the first time. The
congregation recently bought its first building.  Attendance at HHD services
always exceeds capacity, and they keep renting ever larger halls in which to
hold them. My non-Jewish wife and I were fully accepted there, with no
distinctions made between us and together we began creating a household in
which we observed Shabbat regularly, sent our children to a Jewish day care
and preschool, and fully considered ours as a Jewish home -- notwithstanding
the fact that my wife, raised as a committed atheist, had no plans to convert.
Together, she and I happily supported with our time and dollars the many
Jewish institutions in the community.

Alas, we moved two years ago to another Oregon city, where there are two
congregations, one Orthodox, the other (the larger of the two) Conservative
(although recently disaffiliated). Here, the membership policy explicitly
excludes non-Jewish spouses and my efforts to change that met with great
resistance and even hostility. Discussions which have now dragged on for two
years have bogged down in divisive line-drawing over who shall be allowed on
the bimah and even who should be permitted to light candles in the temple. The
result is that we no longer belong to any congregation, like other
intermarried couples before us, in a college community in which it is a safe
bet that intermarried Jews outnumber the others. At home, we continue as
before, but we are not supported by the Jewish community and find ourselves
unable to support it.

Rabbi Sherwood's comment about the concept of ger toshav is an interesting
one, which has also had currency in the Reconstructionist Movement.  I would
caution those looking at the idea not to use it as a device to create a
second-class citizenship or other diminished membership status for non-Jewish
spouses. Here, it has been floated as a concept for "non-voting membership" or
the like.  I think that if you use it that way, you will simply continue to
offend and drive away intermarried families.  The non-Jewish spouses will not
feel honored or welcomed until they are fully embraced as an integral part of
the Jewish family they have chosen to create.

Shalom,

Mark Weintraub

Return to Table of Contents

From: mythago@agora.rdrop.com (Laurel Halbany)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:01:06 +0000
Subject: Jewish Singles

Ted Marcus writes:

> I have the feeling that "organized Judaism" regards me as a pariah, isn't
> interested in addressing my needs (yes, I do have other needs besides
> searching for a mate at meat market dances), and seems only interested in
> fundraising, politics, and perpetuating its own bureaucracy. Thus, I really
> don't feel any obligation to produce Jewish children to keep those
> institutions going in the next generation. [...]  And, at least in my area,
> the only thing "organized Judaism" seems to do about this problem is to
> lament it from the pulpit and in the press. Then they go back to fundraising
> or running their religious schools, and maybe sponsor a meat market dance
> now and then. The synagogue nearest me now has an elaborate outreach program
> for interfaith couples, probably the result of a grant from some
> philanthorpic organization. But they have nothing at all for singles
> (probably due to the lack of grants from philanthropic organizations).  I
> suppose the obvious solution is to go out and find a non-Jewish spouse, and
> then be welcomed as a member of the outreach program.

The really obvious solution, it seems to me, is to do the same thing that
families have done to get shuls to cater to *their* needs.

That is, go tell them what you are telling us. Surely you are not the only
single person in your area with these problems! Volunteer to help put together
some *meaningful* singles activities other than meat-market dances. At best,
it means that you will be able to get exactly the kind of things you want from
your shul. At worst, it will give you an appreciation of how hard it is to try
and please anybody, much less everybody, with social programming.

I do a lot of volunteer stuff for various groups of which I am a member. It is
*wonderful* when somebody comes to me and says "Look, I and other people would
like the group to do X. Here are some people who can chip in to make X happen;
would you help us with resources from your end?"

It is *terrible* when people instead complain (usually not *to* me, either,
but to the 'grapevine') about how they didn't like us doing X, and why can't
we do more of Y instead (never mind that plenty of people had similar
complaints when we did Y instead of X!), without ever lifting a finger to try
and help us make X happen.

I do not mean to belittle or dismiss the problem of Jewish singles, only to
point out that shul officials cannot help singles if they don't know what
kinds of programming you really *want* (remember, they are probably not
themselves single!) and if you do not try to contribute something other than
showing up at whatever activities happen to take place.

Laurel Halbany
mythago@agora.rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/users/mythago/

Return to Table of Contents

From: rebsteve@dakota.net (Rabbi Steve Forstein)
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 22:20:27 -0600
Subject: Multi-Year Wedding Anniversary Ceremony

The 1965 Conservative Rabbi's Manual has such a ceremony, p. 51-55. My wife
surprised me with it at our 20th anniversary celebration weekend. I was
conducting Shabbat evening services, and near the end, she left the sanctuary,
which was nothing exceptional, as I thought she was going to set up the last
touches on the Oneg Shabbat (sabbath refreshments). Just before we were to
start the Adon Olam some wedding music starts up, friends come up to the bimah
with a large tallit and my wife appear at the rear of the sanctuary IN HER
ORIGINAL WEDDING DRESS!!! Before her our 10 year old son is scattering rose
petals. Up the aisle she comes and I go to greet her. We end up under this ad
hoc chuppah and a friend reads the ceremony referred to above. I was
flabbergasted! A wonderful anniversary.

Rabbi Steve Forstein         rebsteve@dakota.net
605/332-4099                     fax 605/332-9261
P.O. Box 1451                    Sioux Falls, SD  57101
Moderator of Olam Katan, the Internet Mailing List
for Rural Jews and Small Jewish Communities

Return to Table of Contents

From: Rabbi Bob Kraus <BOB2070@DELPHI.COM>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 00:25:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Use of the Word "Goy" and Similar Terms

Another intrusion in the middle of a discussion. Again, I hope I am not
repeating something already said. True, the word "goy" means "nation." I tried
to pass this inocuous explanation off to one of my (not so stupid) non-Jewish
friends years ago. I explained that the true insulting word was "shegetz"
("shiksas" is the female version).  I explained that the derivation of the
word is found in the Book of Daniel where it means "abominable dung-heap." My
friend smiled at me politely and acknowledged the etomology. He went on to
protest, however, (and rightly so) that the attitude with which most Jews use
the word "goy" or "goyim" is far more insulting to non-Jews than an unknown
word which carries no such attitude. I have not used the words "goy" and
"goyim" since then.

Shalom,

Rabbi Bob Kraus

Return to Table of Contents

From: rebsteve@dakota.net (Rabbi Steve Forstein)
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 22:37:52 -0600
Subject: Wedding Fees

My personal practice is this: If the wedding (or funeral or other life cycle
ceremony) involves the family of a congregant of a congregation of which I am
the rabbi at a time when I am "on duty" (I am the visiting rabbi of a
congregation, so am there only at certain times,) I have no fixed fee.  The
family may donate what they will. If the event does not involve the family of
a congregant of a congregation of which I am the rabbi, or if it does but
involves a special trip or extending a stay, then my fee is $200 for each day
I am required to be away from my home. (Distances are great here in the plains
and mountains and the airline schedules are not always convenient.) Naturally,
in each case the participants must cover my expenses. My fee will go up to
$250 per day on Jan. 1. The rationale for this is that the fee covers the
income I would have made at my non-rabbinic occupation.

I understand I am on the very low end of what is typical for Reform rabbis.

Rabbi Steve Forstein         rebsteve@dakota.net
605/332-4099                     fax 605/332-9261
P.O. Box 1451                    Sioux Falls, SD  57101
Moderator of Olam Katan, the Internet Mailing List
for Rural Jews and Small Jewish Communities

Return to Table of Contents

From: ao692@lafn.org (John Sherwood)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:29:00 -0700
Subject: Information Request: Shabbat in Singapore

In response to Dan Fingerman's question, Singapore Shabbat services are
held Maghain Aboth, Waterloo Street, phone 3360692.  This information was
gleaned from a book I love to plug, The Jewish Travel Guide, available
through Sepher Hermon Press, 1265 46th Street, Brooklyn, NY 11219, or your
local book dealer.  Don't leave your mikdash m'at without it. 

Rabbi John M.  Sherwood

Return to Table of Contents

From: Internet Directory <jvoice@tribeca.ios.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:53:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Other Announcement: Jewish Internet Directory

The first Jewish Internet phone book is being compiled. There will be three
sections: 1- Yellow pages of organizations and companies basic listing, with
name, URL address or e-mail address by category of subject.  2- Display ad
section for those organizations or companies. 3- White pages in alphabetical
order which includes personal e-mails and URL addresses.

The project has been undertaken by Fantasty Advertising, and they offer a free
basic listing to any list, mailing list or homepage that informs their
subscribers/visitors of the project, etc..(Must have minimum of 500
subscribers or regular visitors for free listing.)

This book which will include thousands of addresses of organizations,
buisnesses and general computing info.  is a must for anyone interested in
computers, Israel, the Jewish people, Middle East or on-line services.

It will be sent out free to every Jewish organization, synagogue and Jewish
club on campuses around the world, as well as to thousands of advertizers. And
it will be sold in book stores and news stands around the world.

To be listed or purchase the Jewish Internet Directory or For more
info. e-mail JID@juno.com. or jvoice@tribeca.ios.com, or fax (718) 331 2742

The deadline is August 26.

Return to Table of Contents

"It is not our task as liberal Jews to complain about the Orthodox attitude or to be bullied by it, but rather to choose our legitimate path according to the inner logic and development of liberal Judaism" (Rabbi Walter Jacob)

Previous Issue: v6n23		Next Issue: v6n25
MLJ Home Page	Return to Retrieval Form