A friend related the story of a Conservative rabbi contemplating retirement who was asked by a congregant to reflect on his pulpit career, during which he'd been an outspoken critic of the Orthodox establishment. This rabbi 
Nontraditional movements have not only failed to stem the tide, but may have inadvertently exacerbated the problem.
had always been known as a partisan advocate who believed in the future of his movement. However, when the conversation turned to the growing presence of traditional outreach organizations in the community and the inroads they were making among some of his congregants, the rabbi sounded a more conciliatory tone.
Surprised, the congregant asked whether the rabbi still held by the criticisms he had for years asserted against the more traditionally observant. Without argument, the rabbi responded simply: "At least their grandchildren will be Jewish."
This statement bespoke a truth that, in the past, had been squelched by the nontraditional movements, but which now is becoming impossible to ignore. It's no secret that intermarriage in America has soared over the last 30 years. Indeed, it has been the subject of many studies and much hand-wringing. No, the unspoken truth - the politically incorrect elephant in the room - is that the nontraditional movements have not only failed to stem the tide, but may have inadvertently exacerbated the problem.
The sociological reasons are probably varied, but the common feature that makes intermarriage acceptable for many is the rejection of traditional observance in favor of secular values in order to blend into the cultural mainstream. A natural consequence for those who rejected tradition was to fill the resulting void with practices and ideals deemed more acceptable to the society at large. Gone was any deep attachment to practices emphasizing Jewish uniqueness, such as kashrut and Shabbat observance. Their place was filled with secular values, and liberal or progressive political agendas. After a few generations, it often became easier for the more extremely secularized elements of Jewish society to marry Gentiles whose lifestyles they emulated, and with whom they were more socially and politically comfortable, than other Jews who remained true to traditional observance.
In 1983, the Reform Movement's governing body, the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR), voted to define Jewish identity by patrilineal as well as matrilineal descent. According to the late Alexander Schindler, then President of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations (UAHC), this move was a necessary and inevitable response to a very real intermarriage epidemic. Interestingly, the CCAR's recognition of the crisis didn't seem to extend to introspection into the reasons Reform Jews were finding it so easy to marry out, but rather in dealing with the aftermath.
Around this time, Rabbi Schindler also advocated proselytizing to "unchurched" Gentiles. Nobody seemed to appreciate the irony of a movement that had trouble keeping people within its fold, yet believed it could draw potential converts from the outside. If many Reform Jews didn't feel anchored by their movement's tenets, one wonders how their leaders expected those tenets to be attractive to outsiders.
Although patrilineal descent was rationalized by some on religious, historical or philosophical grounds, most Reform rabbis - Rabbi Schindler included - acknowledged that it was a response to facts on the ground. If intermarriage among the movement's constituency couldn't be stopped, its consequences would be absorbed and institutionalized. Accordingly, although the movement today claims a membership of approximately 1.5 million, its ranks include many who are considered Jewish by paternal descent only, as well as Gentile spouses who, according to survey data of the Commission on Reform Jewish Outreach, are afforded membership in most Reform congregations.
Reflecting the generalized acceptance of intermarriage, many Reform rabbis today officiate at mixed weddings, although without official endorsement of the CCAR. On most Sundays, the New York Times contains announcements of intermarriages performed by Reform rabbis, often in conjunction with secular officiants, Christian clergy or Hindu priests. Clearly, these rabbis have become enablers whose complicity sends the message that intermarriage is no longer taboo. This de facto imprimatur provides little incentive to the next generations to limit the matrimonial pool to Jewish partners. 
Intermarriage is not limited to the Reform.
Intermarriage is not limited to the Reform, but has also become increasingly more common among Conservative congregants. According to the 1990 National Jewish Population Study, fewer than 30% of Conservative Jews kept kosher homes, and most of the youth polled deemed it acceptable to marry non-Jews. In the absence of an intellectual sea change within the movement in the nearly 20 years since, the statistics doubtless could not have improved.
In fact, the recent American Religious Identification Study (ARIS), whose results were presented in Jerusalem on August 6, 2009, shows that the percentage of American Jews who identify as "religious" dropped by more than 20% since the National Jewish Population Study. According to ARIS co-author Professor Barry Kosmin, "Since 1990, half of all marrying American Jews have married non-Jews, with the result being that there are two new mixed households for every homogeneous Jewish one." It's reasonable to assume that the Conservative constituency reflects these changing mores.
Conservative Judaism was once the largest stream in America, but reportedly has experienced decline in recent years. Fewer of its members retain any significant level of ritual observance and, according to a 1996 survey conducted by Jack Wertheimer of the Jewish Theological Seminary, a majority of Conservative youth still believed that marriage to non-Jews was acceptable, while approximately three-quarters of the lay membership polled accepted as Jewish those who considered themselves so even if born to Gentile mothers.
Although the Conservative Movement does not accept patrilineal descent and prohibits its rabbis from officiating at intermarriages, it has in the past altered its ritual positions in response to the desires and demands of its laity. Thus, the issue seems to be not whether its rabbis will ultimately soften their views on intermarriage, but when.
Those who think this prediction is too drastic for a movement that still claims to follow halacha should consider the recent Conservative tshuvah legitimizing same-sex relationships. Some dismiss the points of tangency, but they are difficult to ignore. In discussing why he rejected intermarriages, for example, one rabbi explained that such unions could never be kedushin (sanctified) under the law and, accordingly, violated the law. Nevertheless, he was open to officiating at gay commitment ceremonies. When reminded that these unions likewise could not be sanctified under the law, and that the Torah uses strong language in forbidding such relationships, the rabbi had to concede the incongruity of his legal argument. His understanding and acceptance were not guided by Jewish law, but by the secular political agenda embraced and institutionalized by his movement.
The liberal movements have been extremely vocal in showing what they reject, but have been ineffective in
The question is whether a community can effectively separate religion from ethnicity and expect to maintain any semblance of Jewish continuity.replacing discarded observance with substance that compels their adherents to continue living a Jewish lifestyle. While Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist leaders routinely proclaim that a secular liberal political agenda is synonymous with Jewish values, and substitute a diluted concept of tikkun olam for ritual focus, their programs have been ineffectual at inspiring their congregants to greater observance. Not surprisingly, generalized support for Jewish institutions and philanthropies - and even the State of Israel - has waned in their communities.
The sad reality is that many Jews in America today identify by ethnicity alone. Although many simply have been raised with no religious attachment, many others have affirmatively rejected it, and are often lauded as independent thinkers for having done so. Perhaps even more disturbingly, the ARIS researchers found that nearly a half-million adult Jews-by-birth actually have chosen to affiliate with other religions.
In light of these disturbing data, the question is whether a community can effectively separate religion from ethnicity and expect to maintain any semblance of Jewish continuity into the future.
Religious identification was the glue that held the Jewish People together through two millennia of exile. Without it, the American Jewish community is losing its cohesion. Clearly, the attempt to eschew traditional values in the name of modernity has had disastrous demographic consequences that may not be easily reparable.