What defines your religion? (Row in London after Jewish School told to admit child they did not accept as Jewish?

"YOU AND THE ART OF ONLINE DATING" is the only product on the market that will take you step-by-step through the process of online dating, provide you with the resources to help ensure success. Get it now!

(Row in London after Jewish School told to admit child they did not accept as Jewish SynopsisOne child's battle to get a place at a state Jewish school has led to a landmark court ruling with major implications for other faith schools, the role of the state and the very definition of religion. As the case goes to the new UK Supreme Court, Tim Whewell examines why it has aroused such strong feelings both inside and outside the Jewish communitybbc.co.uk/programmes/b00nf01wBeing Jewish: Blood or Belief? Listen:Listen (Duration: 30 minutes) Availability:6 days left to listenLast broadcast yesterday, 20:00 on BBC Radio 4.

http://aidanmaconachyblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/jewish-boy-refused-entry-to-jewish-free.htmlDiscriminating against a Jewish child from a Jewish family on the grounds that his mother isn't 'Jewish enough' is fairly outrageous given the anti-discrimination provisions in the UK. It amounts to a form of ethnic-based discrimination. Asked by spikejones 25 months ago Similar questions: defines religion Row London Jewish School told admit child accept Society > Religion & Spirituality.

Similar questions: defines religion Row London Jewish School told admit child accept.

This issue is a longstanding one in the Jewish community. It has been a source of contention for decades, largely in the context of the Law of Return in Israel. That the UK deems it important to step into the confines of a religion's legal constructs is interesting.

That the BBC considers this to warrant high visibility in its world news through the Internet isn't particularly surprising. But, you and I have spoken about the BBC and things Israeli and Jewish before. Orthodox Judaism is not unlike Islam.It is fragmented and adherents follow many leaders.

These leaders often lack respect for their peers. So, if you belonged to an Orthodox Jewish Community in Britain, it might weigh in on matters differently from other Orthodox Jewish Communities in Britain and from yet others around the world. Orthodox Jews follow the interpretive rulings of their rabbis.

The Reform Jewish movement which began in Germany and whose torch is now being carried in the US, is a large movement, perhaps the largest, which represents a more liberal perspective in accommodating the secular in daily religious life. It has smaller liberal/progressive brother movements abroad (Europe, Israel). There are other large movements in the US, notably the Conservative and Reconstructionist Movements.

The latter is small. The Conservative Movement is almost as big as the Reform Movement. Unlike the latter, the Conservative Movement is contracting a bit.

It represents a more traditional blend of ritual and beliefs in a secular cloak. I tell you about all this for a reason. Judaism in ancient times was patrilineal.

In medieval times, when large populations of Jews lived in persecuted communities in Christian Europe, the rabbis modified the law to define a Jew by matrilineal descent. This Talmudic ruling has been observed worldwide for centuries.In the US in the 1980s, the US Reform Movement instituted a major ruling of great significance to its communities. It is referred to as Patrilineal Descent.

In actuality, it is a revised law recognizing equilineal descent.It states that a child of a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother will be considered Jewish in the Reform Jewish Community, as long as the family makes a commitment to Judaism and the children are educated as Jews. I won't go into any more specifics lest I totally bore everyone. This ruling was designed to retain many interfaith families in the flock.

I think it was a brilliant move by the Reform Movement and perhaps explains in part why Reform Judaism is a healthier movement right now in the US than its peers. US Orthodox and Conservative Jews do not recognize this ruling. The medieval rabbinic legal ruling on defining a Jew by his/her mother is considered sacrosanct.

This has led to contentious and ugly issues within the Jewish Community here in the US. Since neither traditional nor most liberal Jewish movements around the world recognize this ruling, this has the opportunity to blow up overseas as well. As any Askviller who has read my posts knows by now, Judaism is very much both a People and a Religion.It is very different from Christianity in this respect.

Most Christians I know in the US don't know this until it is pointed out to them. Then it is readily accepted.So, if the question is whether Judaism is Blood or Belief, the correct answer is that it is both People and Belief. Obviously, while there are distinctive genetic characteristics to Jews because of the ancient laws that define it as a People, converts to Judaism bring different genetics into the mix.

To say that Judaism is purely blood lineal is to be overly literalist about it. I find it very interesting that the British courts are stepping into what is an internal dispute within the Jewish Community. North American Courts have generally ceded authority to Jewish and Islamic authorities on internal religious matters.

Britain, which I believe is a Christian nation has a chief rabbi, who is involved in this Jewish matter. The concept of a chief rabbi is pretty foreign to the US. If one were appointed, he would have political authority in the community, but he would most likely not be respected in terms of Jewish authority...because of the fragmented nature of Judaism.

As for the British press, what more can I say. There is such political hatred of Israel and Zionism in the British press that I think editorial decisions are looking for more ways to brand Israel and Jews as racist. I find the BBC an exceptionally broad source of world news.

But, on Israel, Zionism or things Jewish--all of which are intertwined--I find the BBC, the Guardian, and pretty much every other UK paper I have read, horribly biased...so much so that I find them offensive to read...so I generally don't on matters relating to Judaism or Israel. There are much better media sources for those subjects. I am sure the British media knows exactly what it is doing and is appealing to a very different public than that in the US.

Some religions are simply communities of faith.As I have repeatedly observed, Judaism doesn't fit nicely into that framework. Yes, it is a system of religious beliefs--most of which underlie Christianity and Islam--but, it is very importantly also a People. All religious authorities within a nation need to respect the superiority of the nation's laws.

But, issues core to a religion like Who is a Jew are far better left to the religious communities.

Personally, Jesus defines my religion. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world" (James 1:27). But I read this morning that a French court has convicted the "Church" of Scientology of fraud.

Now, while the scientologists are confident that they'll win on appeal, this ruling nevertheless makes my point: states and governments will be defining "religion" for us.

1 Were this in the US, I'd be invoking two separate constitutional issues:1. They have freedom of association, and can define "Jewish" any way they feel like it.2. But not under the auspices of a government-funded school.

That's why we separate church from state as completely as possible, to avoid getting the government involved in religious distinctions of this kind. I've got no idea what the Law Lords will decide for UK law, because neither of those US constitutional provisions apply.

Were this in the US, I'd be invoking two separate constitutional issues:1. They have freedom of association, and can define "Jewish" any way they feel like it.2. But not under the auspices of a government-funded school.

That's why we separate church from state as completely as possible, to avoid getting the government involved in religious distinctions of this kind. I've got no idea what the Law Lords will decide for UK law, because neither of those US constitutional provisions apply.

2 timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/edu... to challenge a ruling that it broke race laws. JFS, formerly the Jewish Free School, which is heavily oversubscribed, refused to admit a boy because his mother had converted to the religion at a Progressive rather than an Orthodox synagogue. This summer the Court of Appeal found that the school in Brent, northwest London, had discriminated against the child on racial grounds.

The ruling put the court at loggerheads with the Office of the Chief Rabbi (OCR) and had serious ramifications for admissions to Jewish schools. Related LinksFaith tests do not fit Judaism Jewish school broke race laws by refusing boy It also meant faith schools could no longer turn away children who “failed” the test of ethnicity. Now the school will attempt to reinstate its admissions policy in the Supreme Court, at a hearing that is due to last three days.

Both the school and the parents of the boy, known only as M, are thought to have appointed leading barristers. Dinah Rose, QC, representing M, said at a previous hearing that JFS would accept a child of Jewish-born “committed atheists” but exclude others because of their mother’s descent even if they were “Jewish by belief and practice”. John Halford, who has represented the boy’s father, said earlier this year: “It is unlawful for a child’s ethnic origins to be used as the criterion for school entry.

Such a practice is even more unacceptable in the case of a comprehensive school funded by the taxpayer. ” Judaism is passed on through the maternal line or through conversion, and must be approved by the OCR. Another child who was rejected by JFS is the daughter of its head of English, Kate Lightman.

Mrs Lightman’s conversion did not meet with approval and her child, Maya, was refused a place. Her husband David, a former pupil at JFS, has submitted a statement supporting M’s parents that will be read to the Supreme Court. In a copy seen by The Times he says: “I am sure during the hearing there will be many well argued and considered legal arguments.

“What I think will be absent will be someone talking about what all of this means in simple human terms to the families and children who are affected by the admissions criteria that have been used by JFS. “We wanted our middle child Maya to attend JFS. Our deep desire for her to do so was fuelled by our commitment to Judaism and the connection which we both have with the school.

“Maya herself has many friends at JFS and was extremely keen to attend it. We applied for a place and were not successful because the Office of the Chief Rabbi refuses to recognise Kate as Jewish and, accordingly, refuses to recognise Maya’s Jewish status. “Because the decision to exclude Maya from the school depends on Kate’s status, there is nothing that we can do about it.

“Maya is excluded from the school simply because of who her mother is and not because of her own religion or belief. “For five long, hard and painful years we have tried to fight for the right to send our child to the school of our, and her, choice. During that time we have often felt alone and with the world against us.

“The first thing that we feel is an enormous and overwhelming sense of frustration and alienation. “We also feel great personal hurt and distress at the rejection of our child on the basis of who her mother is, and not what she or we as a family believe or practise. Maya feels ostracised and picked on that she cannot go to JFS while she knows so many who can.

“My wife feels enormous strain and pressure in her role as head of English at JFS. I can honestly say that in the last five years, there hasn’t been a day when we haven’t thought about the case or felt its implications. ” Many other Jewish schools have similar admissions policies.

JFS is one of Britain’s oldest Jewish schools and is the largest Orthodox Jewish school in Europe, with 2,000 pupils. It is described by Ofsted as outstanding. The Court of A “If for theological reasons a fully subscribed Christian faith school refused to admit a child on the ground that, albeit practising Christians, the child’s family were of Jewish origin, it is hard to see what answer there could be to a claim for race discrimination.

The refusal of JFS to admit M was accordingly, in our judgment, less favourable treatment of him on racial grounds. ” .

timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/edu... to challenge a ruling that it broke race laws. JFS, formerly the Jewish Free School, which is heavily oversubscribed, refused to admit a boy because his mother had converted to the religion at a Progressive rather than an Orthodox synagogue. This summer the Court of Appeal found that the school in Brent, northwest London, had discriminated against the child on racial grounds.