Project Head: Shmuel Rosner
Participants: Ghila Amati | Nadia Beider | Ariel Bendor | Eliran Carsenti | Shimrit Cohen-Barbi | Janan Danial | Dana Fahn-Luzon | Shlomo Fischer | Shuki Friedman | Avi Gil | Yehonatan Givati | Noa Israeli | Eli Kannai | Dov Maimon | Robert Neufeld | Tamir Pardo | Rivka Ravitz | Daniela Regev | Yael Ribner | Lipaz Rotkovsy | John Ruskay | Jonathan Saidel | Roy Schondorf | Amit Shoval | Noah Slepkov | Yedidia Stern | Shalom Salomon Wald | Haim Zicherman | Eldar Zilber
Long-term trends of Jewish identity erosion continued this year. At the same time, events in Israel sharpened the sense of vigilance and curiosity (and anxiety). These feelings evince a desire for engagement and contact with Israel, as well as a desire for involvement in the discussion of issues around contemporary Jewish identity. Due to these bidirectional effects, the identity gauge remains unchanged this year.
In the modern era, Jewish identity is challenged in several ways typical of the period. The first of these is the possibility of choice. In Diaspora communities, all Jews have the choice to remain Jewish or not. In addition, withdrawal from the community does not necessarily entail religious conversion. The second challenge is that of intermarriage with non-Jews. Forty-two percent of married Diaspora Jews have non-Jewish spouses. The third challenge is the rise of Jews of no religion. These Jews self-identify as Jews in terms of family background, ethnicity, or culture, but state that they have no religion. Although this group has a declared Jewish identity, its members show, on a practical level, little involvement in the activities of the Jewish community. The proportion of Jews of no religion is on the rise. Some 27% of all American Jews define themselves as Jews of no religion, as do 40% of Jews under the age of 30.
The development that has had the most acute impact on Jewish identity this year is the sociopolitical crisis in Israel, which at the time of this writing (September 2003) was still underway. The community’s reaction to the crisis has been complex. On one hand, the crisis undermined Diaspora Jews’ confidence in Israel as a central and stabilizing force of community and Jewish identity. On the other hand (as emerged during discussions in 15 focus groups of Jews around the world1∗), the crisis sparked renewed interest in what is happening in Israel, and in certain groups it also generated an impulse to action among leaders and engaged Jews. A majority of discussion-group participants said that the crisis had caused them to feel more strongly attached to Israel (57%), and many of them said that the crisis was increasing the likelihood that they would visit Israel. Seventy percent of the participants said that the crisis had caused them to discuss Israel more frequently, and most said that they were interested in taking part in such discussions. The above is also true of many Israelis living abroad who reconnected to Israel through the crisis in a context of vigilance and activism; the crisis may also have the positive effect of renewing interest in living in Israel (once the crisis abates).
Synagogues and communal organizations should conduct educational activities and discussions about the crisis in Israel.
Explanation: First, a careful effort to make information about the crisis and its causes available to Diaspora Jews would likely help soften the harsh impression the crisis creates when divorced from its complex contexts. Second, discussions about the crisis, which has made media headlines international and has entered the general consciousness, may serve as an impetus for renewed interest among Jews in what is happening in Israel. Judicious use should be made of the fact that the crisis, beyond its political causes, also touches on fundamental questions of modern Jewish identity and its meanings, and provides an opportunity to air these questions.
Non-Orthodox synagogues and organizations should seek new ways of attracting Jews.
Explanation: Once the Covid pandemic ended, Jews returned to synagogue. However, questions pertaining to synagogue attendance and the readily available, sometimes permanent alternatives created, in the form of online/remote religious services, justifies a reexamination of the existing models of active participation and a quest for ways of updating those models for a generation that, at least for a time, grew accustomed to not physically attending synagogue services. During the pandemic, the advantages of online interaction became evident, but so did its disadvantages. We recommend that the Jewish community ensure that the return to normal include a return to in-person human encounters, in synagogues and other Jewish institutions and organizations.
Ways should be sought to deepen the meaning of Jewish identity for the children of mixed marriages who identify as Jews.
Explanation: In the large North American community, 61% of Jews who have married since 2010 have married non-Jews. Such marriages have a considerable impact on Jewish identity. They strengthen social and familial ties with non-Jews, but the loosening of the Jewish social network has often led to thinner Jewish activity and engagement. However, a majority (62%) of the children of intermarriages grow up as Jews, though this identity turns out to evince low levels of involvement and attachment. This large group of Jews is becoming numerically and socially significant within the broader Jewish community, and specific frameworks should be created for the examination of its complex identity and of ways to deepen the Jewish identity of the children of mixed marriages.
