"An indelicate silence". (Current Theological Writing).

JOSEPH EDELHEIT, A RABBI IN MINNEAPOLIS, HAS WRITTEN a vivid dissertation on the problem of "Interfaith Marriage and the Jewish Christian Dialogue" (1) which, I believe, raises new and poignant questions that have been regularly suppressed. Submitted to Professors David Tracy, a Catholic theologian; Michael Fishbane, a Jewish scholar; and Martin Marty, preeminent Protestant historian of American religion--all at the University of Chicago Divinity School--this detailed dissertation probes the uncomfortable question of marriage and, especially, joint weddings between Jews and Christians.

Two-thirds of marriages involving a Jewish partner also include a non-Jewish, putatively Christian, partner. Only one out of three such marriages is between two Jews. The question Edelheit raises is: who performs these ceremonies and in what way? The answer is chilling: many clergy persons in many churches and some rabbis and cantors participate. The resultant events are neither Jewish kiddushin nor Christian sacrament but, rather, what Edelheit denominates clearly syncretistic events, a meld of impossible ingredients which betrays both Jewish and Christian understandings of true marriage.

Edelheit summons authentic Protestant support for his critical view:

An example of how Jewish/Christian dialogue can make a difference regarding interfaith marriage, for a Christian thinker, is Professor James F. Moore of Valparaiso University. He has participated in significant Jewish/ Christian dialogues on issues such as Christology, antisemitism, the Shoah, the state of Israel and sexuality. His work, Sexuality and Marriage: A Christian Foundation for Making Responsible Choices (2) confronts interfaith marriage from a Christian point of view, with a heightened sensitivity directly rooted within Jewish/Christian dialogue. Moore approaches interfaith marriage as a Christian thinker, committed to the essential and necessary differences between Judaism and Christianity. In his final chapter, "Accepting Each Other in Response to God's Love," Moore considers three critical issues of "God's faithfulness as understood in the context of covenant"--divorce, inter-Christian marriage, and inter-religious marriages (Jewish/Christian). This Christian thinker does not shy away from the r eal life issues that demand pastoral guideposts. Yet, and this is very important, he stands firmly rooted in his own Lutheran consciousness, even as he attempts to be open to and aware of the otherness of Judaism. (3)

Edeiheit finds Moore's perspective refreshing:

His view as a Christian thinker/pastor/dialogue partner on interfaith marriage (Jewish/Christian) is a paradigmatic example of how a Christian might respond to this critical issue among Jews. He understands the truths of both Judaism and Christianity, and recognizes that "the choice for both partners to commit themselves to either of the two religious communities is a choice of one of the spouses to convert, and that choice is a major trauma for anyone" (Moore 1987, 137). He asks whether officiation of either arabbi or a pastor or co-officiation is ever a positive statement. "Both a rabbi and a pastor would misrepresent their communities and actual circumstances if they acted officially to consecrate the marriage" (Moore 1987, 137). He argues that "the integrity of the two faiths would be diminished" if the marriage would be merely accepted as mixed, co-equal and homogenized. He speaks about the personal, pastoral, communal and congregational tensions, and concludes, "Rabbis and pastors cannot be a part of th at which serves to weaken rather than strengthen matters of faith" (Moore 1987, 140). Moore's conclusions, though not accepted by all Jewish and Christian clergy, are at least a Christian position that is carefully thought through from within a Jewish/Christian relationship of dialogue. He is absolutely consistent with his views on the Shoah, scripture, Israel, antisemitism, prayer and his view on marriage. (4)

But by no means are most non-Jewish clergy in agreement. Indeed, there is a huge industry devoted especially to the supply of protocols, advice, personnel, and moral encouragement for inter-faith combinations and conjoint weddings. These pseudo-liturgies and ceremonials would be ludicrous if they were not so pervasive and so tragic. They undermine the essential nature of Jewish self-understanding:

J. Hawxhurst (1996) (5) offers a selection of various wedding options. In the introduction, Ms. Hawxhurst sets the tone for the need and value of the volume. "From the Christian community, by and large, you'll receive a supportive response. Ministers and priests in all but the most conservative denominations have come to accept the reality of interfaith marriage....Christian clergy people do not feel that their faith tradition is threatened by your decision to reach beyond the fold" (Hawxhurst, 10). In stark comparison to this invitation of acceptance is the first sentence of the next section. "Expect a very different response if you decide to approach a rabbi about participating in your wedding. Even if you ask your family's long-time rabbi, he or she may well refuse your request. While it may be difficult to see past the hurt this causes, try not to take your rabbi's decision personally. It is part of a much bigger--and very complex-issue. The majority of the Jewish community, as you probably have already s ensed, sees interfaith marriage as a danger to be avoided" (Hawxhurst, 11). (6)

Edeiheit here confronts the key issues of contemporary Jewish-Christian relations:

The tone and direction of these two statements affirms one of the oldest and most tragic of Jewish/Christian comparisons. Christianity is characterized as loving and accepting while Judaism is legal, harsh and rejecting. Neither statement accurately depicts the diversity of clergy among Christians or the caring and effective counseling and outreach among rabbis. Regardless of whether the services rendered through this text are validated by the couples' experiences, the content and tone of the text works in opposition to the values of Jewish/Christian dialogue. Surely, after more than 40 years of serious conversation, those committed to the dialogue do not want it characterized by Christian love and Jewish legal rejection. The Dovetail project now also provides physical elements for the syncretistic ceremonies, including a specially developed ketubah, Jewish wedding contract.

Edelheit continues his incisive commentary: "The willful attempt to be universally inclusive rather than particularistic illuminates that danger of syncretism. It is ironic that the makers of this interfaith religious document use a quotation from the Baal Shem Toy, an eighteenth-century ultra-orthodox rabbi who founded the Hasidic movement in Judaism. The use of his words is a desecration of both meaning and intent and a dangerous denial of Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Toy's role in Jewish life. The manipulation of the quote out of and beyond the context of its source is a primary characteristic of syncretism." Furthermore, the cultural emphasis produces mixed signals:

The Half-Jewish Book: A Celebration (7) is another measure of the cultural integration of interfaith marriage. The authors claim, "Undeniably we are living in the era of the half-Jew. As a majority of American Jews marry non Jews, the number of American half-Jews under the age of eleven now exceeds the number of American full Jews under eleven. And this half-Jewish population will only grow older and larger as the general population ages and the percentage of intermarriages increases...a person is half-Jewish if half his genetic/cultural makeup is Jewish and half is not. That's it" (Klein and Vuijst, xv, xix-xx). Such definitions and assertions have literally nothing to do with how Jews define themselves religiously, nationally, or culturally, and certainly not historically. Yet, here is a popular press, non-fiction book representing the children and grandchildren of interfaith marriages as genetically and culturally part Jews. The text argues for a new category of Jewish/non-Jewish identity that reflects the reality of the secular/ethnic communities out of which interfaith marriages have come. If one accepts the basic definition that allows for 1/2 (1) a person's identity, then Jewish is severed from Judaism and the primary source of identity is culture not faith. This would be a significant shift within the self-understanding of Jews. (8)

Edelheit questions the integrity and authenticity not only of Jewish participation in mixed ceremonials but, especially, of Christian misunderstanding of basic Christian sacramentalism:

A Christian marriage theology begins with Genesis 1:27-28 and 2:24, but then adds Ephesians 5 in which Genesis 2:24 is quoted. "Where the Old Testament (sic) [Hebrew Scripture] compared the marriage bond to that of the covenant that existed between God and Israel, this quote [Ephesians 5:22-33] compares the marital bond to the relationship that exists between Christ and the church.... Marriage is placed at the heart of the mystery of God relating to the world...the text goes on to explain that this bonding of husband and wife is the foreshadowing of the bond between Christ and the church" (Martin 1990, 33-34). (9)

Here some theological history is relevant:

As Christianity developed through the Patristic period, Augustine argued that it was a sacrament, not using it in its later idiomatic-Catholic-sense, but emphasizing the commitment and witness which the couple gives to others who see God's plan of salvation in being together. Marriage and family became a significant means of the work and mission of Jesus and more practically keeping the church going.

This theology was expanded thru the medieval and early modem periods. Both Catholic and Protestant traditions while differing significantly share a parochial Christian sacred value that puts "marriage and family in the center of Christian living" (Martin 1990, 112). Addressing the added dimension of the sacramental/sacred covenant nature of marriage, using the term as an inclusive Christian illumination of God's grace within ritual. "[S]acred signs, instituted by Christ to give grace" (Cooke 1983, 56), emphasizing that marriage and family are relationships within which God's salvific relationship is present. (10)

Christian marriage has a very specific meaning:

"God is working salvifically in all situations of genuine love, for it is our consciousness of being loved both humanly and divinely that most leads us to the full personhood that is our destiny.... The meaning of God in his relationship to humans became part of the meaning of marriage, and marriage of explicitly signifying and God.... In this sacramental relationship, a Christian man and woman are truly 'grace' to one another; they express and make present that uncreated grace that is God's creative self-giving...the Christian family is meant to be the most basic instance of Christian community, people bonded together by their shared relationship to the risen Christ.... Christianity sees the love relationship of a Christian couple as sacramentalizing the relationship between Christ and the church, between God and humankind" (Cooke 1983, 86, 89, 91-92, 93).

A Christian marriage theology understood as a sacramental/sacred covenant goes far beyond the communal legal affirmation of Judaism's traditions. How then is the uniquely Christian salvific dimension diminished when both partners are not baptized Christians? Can a Jew married to a Christian share in this vision of God's saving presence in the world? These are not mere rhetorical questions given the reality of interfaith marriage, but fundamental challenges to Christian clergy and institutions for which God's saving presence thru the ministry of (the) Christ Jesus is their defining mission. (11)

The personal narratives of families that have been and still are enmeshed in their own versions of Christian-Jewish syncretism are darkly fascinating. They show a willingness to personalize, to the extent of utterly transforming, family and community traditions in the service of personal choice and "creative" re-fashioning. Each family determines what it wants and finds a way to get exactly that, with results that often seem to satisfy the family in every possible way:

The anti-institutional attitude justified by the entitlement of individual spiritual autonomy undermines our fundamental role as transmitters and guarantors of our faith traditions. "'We wanted our son to know more about Judaism, so it seemed sensible to enroll him in an afternoon class at the Reform synagogue in the neighborhood,' an intermarried Jewish mother of a sixth-grade son recalled, describing her attempts to fill that instructional gap with a traditional form of religious schooling. 'What became clear, unfortunately, was that the program and its teachers couldn't accept the Christian part of my son's identity. They didn't value it. They didn't think it was something for him to be proud of. They wouldn't even acknowledge it, except in a negative way. Only his Jewishness counted, in their eyes, and that exclusive message wasn't what we wanted him to hear.' Had she enrolled her child in a Christian program, it's not unlikely that she'd have found the same insensitivity to his Jewish needs. The bias and inexperience with interfaith families, especially with the children, conditions the teaching in many, if not most, Jewish and Christian institutions, and that imbalance and limited perspective dissuade many parents from taking advantage of that ready-made option" (Gruzen 1987, 177). (12)

Have we not turned religious tradition into supermarket consumerism?

Dovetail, the newsletter "by and for Jewish/Christian families," contains literally dozen of interviews and personal statements which confirm these circumstances. (13)

"Unfortunately, synagogues and churches don't seem to offer support for interfaith families that wish to raise their children in both religions. Interfaith families are going to have to form their own communities, and that is already happening ... while a Jewish-Christian marriage could be defined as a loss for either faith, it is a triumph for humanity" (Dovetail June/July 1996, 7).

Nancy Nutting Cohen, often quoted in Dovetail as a specialist in interfaith religious education, writes about her daughter's "coming-of-age" ceremony: "We belong to a very liberal Catholic community that has given us lots of support over the years. But much to our frustration, the Reform temple to which we also belong has made it clear that they wish to deal only with children seeking a strictly Jewish identity (in spite of the fact that one-third of the families there are interfaith)" (Dovetail June/July 1995, 3).

Finally, a couple, each of whom is a religious professional and are seen as exemplars of how interfaith marriage ought to be, argue in their personal testimony, Celebrating Our Difference: Living Two Faiths in One Marriage, that family observance is more important than religious institutions: "We had an odd advantage in living in a town lacking a large, formally constituted Jewish population. Our eclectic little Jewish community created no obstacles to our sending our kids to Hebrew school. (They had baptized their children as Christians.) Your community may not offer such an option, especially if you're not willing to make Jewish education the sole commitment for them.... We've said we don't believe unthinking group identity is the best way to cultivate religious life, but there's no question that being one of the group is more comfortable than being an oddball.... More important than outside institutional religion in our family has always been what we do at home" (Rosenbaum 1994, 116-117). (14)

Choice here overcomes history and institutions:

In all of these statements we hear the unequivocal tone of personal and autonomous entitlement. Here then are the real life situations that confirm the studies of Roof, Mayer, Tobin and others; religious life today is merely another item on each individual's consumer list. If you want your child who has been baptized as a Christian to have a Bar or Bat Mitzvah and the local congregation denies "you, what you want," then you hire a private tutor, rent a hall, and have your "own" religious ceremony. The Rosenblooms encouraged their son to experience this quintessential Jewish rite of passage even though he is Christian, and he writes about this in Dovetail.

"My mother is Presbyterian, and my father is Jewish. As a child I was raised primarily Christian. A regular attendee of church, I didn't think much about my being 'interfaith.' It wasn't that big of a deal. The Presbyterian church in which I was raised is quite liberal.... I was incredibly turned off by Judaism, yet I tried to respect it. Some time during the seventh grade I started to get a nagging thought in the back of my head. I wanted to have a bar mitzvah.... The bar mitzvah presented an opportunity for me to educate myself and to put myself at ease with my dual religious status. My dad was supportive of my idea, and he hired a Hebrew tutor for me.... As I learned the rituals for the bar mitzvah, my father, a cantor, began to create the service.... In the local cultural center, I celebrated my bar mitzvah before family and friends.... (In the two years that have passed) I now realize that it does not matter if other people approve or disapprove of the ritual. I did the bar mitzvah for myself.... I am no w able to understand (sort of) what is going on in temple. I have also realized that most people actually don't really know what is going on. They are just good pretenders" (Dovetail June/July 1995, 5, 15). (15)

Acute American sociologists have been telling us for a very long time that Americans, of the boomer generation in particular, have been personalizing their religious and communal affiliations in a dramatically new way, unprecedented in prior generations. God becomes my idea of god. Religion is only my own personal spiritual quests. Institutions are present for me to shop in, not to create, support, or obey. So marriage is inevitably my marriage, our ceremony, with a text and a context convenient to my own life style. No authority is going to prescribe, much less impose, on my event its own preconditions or its own, old-fashioned framework.

Thus a couple who can hire a rabbi and priest for a wedding assume it is in the best interest of their six-month-old son to do the same for him.

"Elizabeth and I have come to realize that we will never please all the outsiders, so we consciously work to do what is best for us. Again we agreed to show Justin (their son) the best of both worlds with this joint blessing ceremony. The rabbi performed a naming ceremony, giving Justin a Hebrew naming and saying the prayer for a circumcision, even though Justin had already been circumcised in the hospital. The priest gave a blessing over Justin to bring [him] into this world and baptized him without our promise to bring him up Catholic. The rabbi and priest gave us certificates to commemorate the naming and baptism. Some people think we are crazy, but we believe that there are worse ways to raise a child" (Dovetail June/July 1995, 12-13). (15)

Sometimes the couples involved claim more than personal privilege to choose their own way. They see their syncretistic event as a sign of future, universal hope and an ultimate union of traditions that have been disparate and even hostile in the long past. So learned a Protestant theologian as Harvey Cox sees in his own marriage to a Jewish woman and his raising a Jewish child a messianic sign of future interfaith collaboration and proleptic cooperation. But what space is left for dialogue if the present already merges two into one? Is it not in our very otherness that our love and respect for one another are nurtured?

Edelheit is concerned, properly, about the possible, perhaps the inevitable loss of Jews to these new mergers. I believe that God is primarily responsible for Jewish survival. But I, too, want to tell these salesmen of the blunted interface to keep their hands off our sons and daughters. If there is any lesson in the last century's traumas and catastrophes, it is that Jews are entitled to be left alone to work out their own destiny, under God. Unity candles, binding the Havdalah taper with Christian motifs; a circumcision under a crucifix (which I have seen with my own eyes); raising children in two or more seriously differing traditions--all these can do nobody any good.

Rabbi Edelheit interprets the story of Jacob and Esau to good advantage. Whatever else may be required for Jews and Christians to engage in dialogue seriously, attention to the theological problem of intermarriage is essential. We have avoided talking to each other, much less working together on our common problem. We are truly guilty of an "indelicate silence" as here accused. It is time to face up to the dirty business of undercover and blatant interfaith ceremonies. But, more than that, we must now ask our Christian brothers and sisters if they really care about the survival and integrity of the Jewish people in America. What should we do if they are unable or unwilling to respond?

It was the great Ray Soloveitchik who perhaps best understood the pitfalls and temptations in interfaith crossing of boundaries. Edelheit brings some of the Ray's deep wisdom to our present problem:

We relate ourselves to and at the same time withdraw from, we come close to and simultaneously retreat from the world of Esau. When the process of coming nearer and nearer is almost consummated, we immediately begin to retreat quickly into seclusion. We cooperate with the members of other faith communities in all fields of constructive human endeavor, but, simultaneously with our integration into the general social framework, we engage in a movement of recoil and retrace our steps. In a word, we belong to the human society and, at the same time, we feel as strangers and outsiders. We are rooted in the here and now reality as inhabitants of our globe, and yet we experience a sense of homelessness and loneliness as if we belonged somewhere else (Soloveitchik 1964, 26). (17)

NOTES

(1.) Joseph Edelheit, "Interfaith Marriage and the Jewish Christian Dialogue" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 2001).

(2.) James F. Moore, Sexuality and Marriage: A Christian Foundation for Making Responsible Choices (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1987).

(3.) Edelheit, p. 32.

(4.) Edelheit, pp. 32 ff.

(5.) J. Hawxhurst, Interfaith Wedding Ceremonies (Kalamazoo, MI: Dovetail, 1996).

(6.) Edelheit, pp. 37 ff.

(7.) D. Klein and Freke Vuijst, The Half-Jewish Book: A Celebration (New York: Villard, 2000).

(8.) Edelheit, pp. 37 ff.

(9.) Edelheit, p. 58.

(10.) B. Cooke, Sacraments and Sacramentality (Mystic: Twenty-Third Publisher, 1991).

(11.) Edelheit, pp. 58 ff.

(12.) Lee F. Gruzen, Raising Your Jewish-Christian Child: Wise Choices for Interfaith Parents (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1987).

(13.) Dovetail: A Journal By and For Jewish/Christian Families. 1992-Dovetail Institute: New Beginnings. 2001.

(14.) M. and S. Rosenbaum, Celebrating Our Differences: Living Two Faiths in One Family (Shippendsburg: Ragged Edge, 1994). Edelheit, pp. 66 ff.

(15.) Edelheit, pp. 69 ff.

(16.) Edelheit, pp. 69.

(17.) J. B. Soloveitchik, 1964, in D. Hartman, Love and Terror in the God Encounter: The Theological Legacy of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Vol. I (Woodstock, NY: Jewish Lights, 2001). Edelheit, p. 122.

ARNOLD JACOB WOLF, a contributing editor, is Rabbi Emeritus of K.A.M Isaiah Israel Congregation in Chicago. Unfinished Rabbi: The Selected Writings of Arnold Jacob Wolf was published by Ivan Dee in 1998. His article, "Habad's Dead Messiah," appeared in the Winter 2002 issue.