To Officiate or Not to Officiate

First and foremost, as the authors of the study acknowledge, their findings do not account for pre-existing differences among the couples studied. Is the relationship between rabbinic officiation and future Jewish engagement a causal one or simply reflective of the predispositions of those couples? Meaning, are the intermarried couples married by a rabbi more Jewishly engaged because a rabbi officiated at their wedding, or was their decision to have a rabbi officiate their wedding a reflection of the fact that they were already more inclined to be engaged? The study does not and cannot answer this question, and until it does, it strikes me as ill-considered to change thousands of years of Jewish tradition based on data whose meaning is yet to be fully understood.

Second, and at risk of stating the obvious, Conservative rabbis should not jump to officiate intermarriages because doing so is against Jewish law. Of course Jewish law can, and oftentimes should, change. Anyone who knows me would, I think, characterize and categorize me as a rather progressively minded rabbi. And yet, if the definition of a Jewish wedding, normatively or halachically (according to Jewish law), is a wedding between two Jews, then rabbinic officiation should be reserved for such occasions. I do not begrudge a young Jew for falling in love with a non-Jew. Statistically speaking, in this day and age, it is intellectually indefensible not to be open to the possibility. More importantly, and speaking from the heart – from the depths of my heart – I get it, I really do get it. Falling in love is a reflection of the powerful and beautiful effect two souls can have on one another and on their shared dream of building a life together, and a Jew’s falling in love with a non-Jew is not due to any defect of character or deficiency in his or her upbringing. But just because a rabbi understands it does not mean she or he must be expected to bless it. Just as every individual has every right to choose his or her partner, Jewish law has the right to limit what it can and cannot accommodate. As Truman Capote once wrote, “The problem with living outside of the law is that you no longer have its protection,” or in this instance, its sanction. It is symptomatic of the bespoke, boutique nature of our age that the representatives of a tradition are called on to uproot that very tradition in response to the choices people make. Not every choice Jews make deserves to be validated by Jewish law; not every decision receives the imprimatur of Judaism.

Third, and perhaps most substantively, I don’t think Conservative rabbis should rush too quickly to perform intermarriages for the simple reason that as a parent, as a rabbi, and as a shaper of Jewish community and identity, I unapologetically want young Jews to marry other Jews. Rabbinic officiation at intermarriages signals an implicit and explicit leveling of the field, sending the message that all choices are equal, a message that I do not think wise given the undisputed place in-marriage has as the single most important determinant in ensuring Jewish continuity. Regardless of the legal prohibition or threat of expulsion, I fear that if Conservative rabbis officiate at intermarriages, we will lose our ability to argue for the preeminent importance of in-marriage in our synagogues, in the community-at-large, and in our own homes.

The Conservative Movement, this synagogue included, has a unique, delicate, and critically important message to communicate and role to play in the landscape of American Jewish life. First, we say loudly and proudly that we want young Jews to marry other young Jews. Second, if a Jew should fall in love with a non-Jew, as they are statistically more likely to do than not, then we want them to know that the path to conversion, to becoming a halachically defined Jew, is warm, embracing, and altogether doable – a subject to which I will turn to at some length two weeks from today. And third, if for whatever reason – and there are many reasons – conversion is not an option, then I want those interfaith couples to know that here in Park Avenue Synagogue and Conservative synagogues like ours, we will help you build a Jewish family and future – all the while respecting the spiritual integrity of the non-Jewish member of your Jewish family. Less discussed than the Brandeis study was another report emerging out of Boston’s Combined Jewish Philanthropies studying the demonstrable impact of interfaith outreach, education, and engagement on nurturing Jewish identity. As individuals, as families, and as a community, we must on the one hand live a model of Jewish life so vibrant that our children and our children’s children are predisposed to “lean in” toward Jewish engagement and marrying Jewish. And when – because it is only a matter of “when” and not “if” – an intermarriage occurs, we must be just as passionate in creating a culture of warm embrace for Jew and non-Jew alike. The message is not a simple one – it doesn’t fit neatly on a Twitter feed – but that is what this community stands for, and tempting as it may be to change millennia-old policy on a dime, as open and as excited as I am for the communal conversation to come, it is a policy that will continue to be in place for the foreseeable future.

The challenge for the Conservative Movement, as for any self-respecting organization, is how to maintain mission authenticity and market relevance at one and the same time. Ours is a time, no different than that of Queen Esther, when Jews live among non-Jews, speak in the vernacular, adopt the names of our host society, and, in some cases, integrate into the homes and hearts of our non-Jewish neighbors. The Reform and Orthodox Movements have staked out their territory and should be commended for doing so. I believe there is a differentiated and critically important role for the Conservative Movement to play – as the movement loyal both to tradition and the realities of our time. No different than Queen Esther herself, at some point we must ask ourselves for what reason we have arrived at this station. In this case, on this issue, there is an identifiable reason and clear path forward that is ours to take. The only question is whether we will do so or not. I look forward to continuing to share my vision for us two weeks from today.