Chana Tannenbaum (chanmosh@gmail.com) has taught Tanakh, Education and Psychology at the High School and University levels in Israel and the U.S. Mrs. Tannenbaum was the founding Dean and Director of Shaalvim for Women, and received the Baumel Award as Yeshiva University’s outstanding faculty member in 1993. Currently, she lives in Israel and teaches Tanakh.

Natan Sharansky (2008) describes identity as

“the magnetic force field in which energies of the world today are moving… One universal quality of identity is that it gives life meaning beyond itself. It offers a connection to a world beyond the self… whatever its form identity offers a sense of life beyond the physical and material, beyond mere personal existence. Identity satisfies a human longing to become part of something bigger than oneself… Identity is about links with others. This tie to the community in the past, present and the future is what adds a further dimension to your own immediate activities.”

Nonetheless, as Western society evolves to become almost “boundary-less”, with race and gender not standing in the way of even presidential candidates, religious identification has become less clear. Tolerance and openness brings with it the risk of losing one’s uniqueness and the ability to distinguish between different groups. Multiculturalism proposes dissolving national identity into whatever groups are present in a society (Sharansky, 2008).

Jewish Identity: Towards a Definition

The identifying features which help each individual distinguish himself as a member of a religious group – especially in Judaism – have proven elusive. Is it enough for a person to just consider himself Jewish? Does there need to be any affiliation, practice, belief associated with that identity? Can we regard those who identify with the cultural aspects of Judaism but not its religious content as having a Jewish identity? Can someone who wasn’t born Jewish but wants to belong, or marries in, be included as part of the group?

Jewish identity may be defined according to a wide number of internal and external criteria including practice of religious law, self identification and social categorization. Religious and ethnic aspects of Jewish identity are no longer inseparable in the modern world and it is debatable whether religiosity is essential for the maintenance of a distinctive Jewish identity in the Diaspora (Sinclair & Miller, 2005). This identity is not solid, but rather remains fluid and changes in different situations and life experiences (Charme, 2008).

Chein (1955) famously enumerated three different types of Jews: the “out of pocket Jew” who feels that he has fulfilled his Jewishness by giving to charity, the “cardiac Jew” who experiences Jewishness in the heart, and the “gastronomic Jew” who feels Jewish when he has a Jewish meal. On the other hand, Chein also maintains that there are many Jews who, while identifying themselves as Jews, do not care about anything which is Jewish (Sanua, 1968).

Sinclair & Miller (2005) suggest, based on interviews with Jewish British teens,that there are five components that make up Jewish identity: 1) kinship and connection, i.e., the ways in which people feel connected with, or related to, other Jewish people, 2) awareness of being different than the majority (being part of a minority) and recognizing its ramifications, 3) attachment to Israel as a national homeland, 4) religious dimension of personal faith and observance, and 5) a commitment to the study of religious doctrine and personal development. It is not necessary to have all components to be considered as one who identifies with Judaism.

Whatever criteria are used to determine Jewish identity, it is prudent to consider the external factors that influence and shape a person’s religious identity. In doing so, we can help ensure that during the important early years, when teens (and pre-teens) form their religious identity, the stimuli and influencers which play roles in a youngster’s religious growth can be modulated to appropriate and desired levels.

Stimuli and Influences in Adolescent Religious Development

Ethnic identification begins in childhood. The process is well underway even before a child reaches his teens. The period of adolescence is often considered crucial in the formation and stabilization of ethnic identity (Marshall & Marstrom-Adams, 1995). However, just as the process does not end in childhood, it does not end in adolescence either. Ethnic identification is enhanced and attenuated by adult experiences as well (Dashefsky and Shapiro, 1974).

The adolescent is exposed to many stimuli and influences. Many possible influences are encountered by the teenagers throughout the course of the typical day. Family, peers, teachers and environment all compete for the attention of the adolescent. For culture or religion to be maintained, outside influences need to be effectively modulated so that religious values can be successfully transmitted from one generation to the next.

What influences adolescent religious behavior? Researchers have identified four principal agents of religious socialization: family, church, peers (Martin, White & Perlman., 2003) and religious schooling (Benson, Donahue & Erikson., 1990). Which is strongest? The studies are inconclusive. (Note: most of the studies cited in this section focus on Christian adolescents. It is unclear whether there are significant differences with regard to Jewish adolescents.)

Family and Church

One trend which appears within the research highlights the significance of the parents as influencing religious tendencies in their children. Parents are among the most powerful influences on adolescent religious behavior (Boyatzis, Dollahite, & Mark, 2006 ; Smith, 2003). Most young people are likely to remain affiliated with their parents’ denomination or with some similar religious denomination than to convert to another religion or become religiously uninvolved, and parents have the greatest influence on their children’s church attendance (Benson, Donahue & Erikson, 1990). The best predictor of what the religious and spiritual lives of youth will look like is what the religious and spiritual lives of their parents look like (Smith, 2003). Parental influence is manifest by socialization and, indirectly, by the way parents relate to their children and the forces in their environment. The closer the relationship a child has with his/her parents the more likely the individual will remain within their parent’s religion. Firstborn children tend to have a closer relationship with their parents than subsequent children hence, firstborn children tend to be more religious (Argyle and Bait Hallahmi, 1975). Parents socialize their children to religion through verbal communication, induction and indoctrination of beliefs, disciplinary tactics, reward and punishment and behavioral modeling including embedding religious routines at home (Boyatzis, Dollahite & Marks, 2006). Studies also indicate that clear, messages of love and support between parents, consistency between parental words and actions and frequency of religious activities in the home seem to enhance overt religiousness on the part of adolescents (Benson, Donahue & Erikson,, 1990).

Parents’ age, education and denomination had some relationship to transmission of creedal assent. Interestingly, the younger the parents, the more successful they were in transmitting religious values to their sons. Among girls, value transmission was most successful when their mothers and fathers were both high in creedal assent. Transmission of value improves when the parents agree on religious beliefs. Other family characteristics did not predict successful value transmission. Value transmission from parents to children is sometimes weak and sometimes strong depending greatly on the concreteness and saliency of the particular topic under study (Hoge, Petrillo & Smith. 1982).

In most families it is the mother who is the primary figure in the children’s’ religiosity. This is due to the fact that women are more religious than men and attend services more often. Women pray more often, mothers speak to their children more often than fathers, and are more likely to talk about their emotions and have religious discussions with their children than fathers. The personal nature of religious issues could put the more communicative and intimate parent in the crucial role for discussing religion (Boyatzis, Dollahite & Marks, 2006).

Despite the compelling evidence outlined above, other research studies paint a wholly different picture. Hoge, Petrillo & Smith. (1982) found that parental involvement in church had no discernable influence on children. Iannaccone (1990) suggests that childhood religious instruction as well as parents’ frequency of mass attendance will have a positive effect on the religiosity of the child. Nelsen & Potvin (1995) found that warmth between parent and adolescent was not a factor in transmission of religious values while Francis and Brown (1991) found that income, parental education, class had no effect on religiosity of offspring. Wilson and Sherkat (1994) found that parents of higher income may produce children less likely to resemble themselves.

Even if we are unable to conclusively determine if parents directly and obviously influence their children’s religion, their impact leaves an impression. Some view the influence of parents as “channelers” of their children. Parents “channel” their children into various settings and institutions that can reinforce and help maintain the teen’s religious beliefs and commitments. Religious experiences of parents at home will indirectly influence children (Martin White, & Perlman., 2003). Alternatively, Iannaccone (1990) suggests that religious capital is accumulated during childhood through participation in the household. The adolescent’s religion will reflect the quality and quantity of the accumulated experiences. Accumulation of these experiences is more likely in families with stable, harmonious households in which transmission of these religious values are a primary concern of the parents. The more familiar and comfortable the teen is with religious doctrines, rituals and other members of the religious group, the more satisfaction he/she will receive from participation in that religion and thereby increase the likelihood and probable level of one’s religious participation (Iannaccone, 1990).

Another source of influence on adolescent religion is older siblings. Adolescent boys with older brothers exhibit low church-attendance rates, while adolescent boys with older sisters exhibit the highest attendance rates (Argyle and Beit Hallahmi, 1975). Siblings can also offer each other religious and spiritual input and modeling. Younger siblings can overhear older siblings’ discussions and therefore grow as a result (Boyatzis, Dollahite & Marks, 2006).

In the Jewish world, the family has always been an important vehicle for the transmission of Jewish identity. This system, however, is currently in decline, particularly with the disintegration of the family unit, the pressure on all family members from the outside and the American society are negatively affecting the family’s ability to transmit basic values and beliefs (Dashefsky and Shapiro, 1974). As more children in the general society are being raised in single parent, blended or non traditional family structures, similar trends are affecting the transmission of Judaism, which is traditionally based on a two parent, heterosexual nuclear family (Keysar, Kosmin & Scheckner,, 2000).

Peers

Surprisingly, DeVaus found that there is no evidence that peers made any significant impact on adolescent religiousness (DeVaus, 1983), although peer groups probably do have an impact on religious variables such as youth group attendance and attitudes (Hoge & Petrillo, 1978). It appears that while peer influence is indirectly important, it may not be salient to a number of central religious variables. Many U.S. teens feel that they cannot share their religious ideals with their friends; religion is not an appropriate topic of discussion in school settings (Smith, 2003).

Religious Schooling

Religious schooling does have a long term impact on adolescent religiousness, especially during the high school years and if they involve at least 1,000 hours annually of classroom instruction in religion (Benson, Donahue & Erikson,, 1990). Greeley (1976) found that among Catholics the decline in adult religious practice is less for those with ten or more years of Catholic schooling.

Schiff and Schneider (1994) maintain that greater exposure to Jewish day school education yields more pronounced Jewish behavior. Jewish schooling is not a foolproof guarantee of Jewish continuity, but it does have long term effects on its students. The data clearly suggest that extensive Jewish education is an important tool for the formation of Jewish identity and its continued vitality (Dashefsky and Lebson, 2002). Cohen (2005) claims that almost all forms of Jewish education diminish the frequency of intermarriage and elevate adult Jewish engagement, albeit with significant variations in magnitude of impact, with day schools uniformly leading the list. All forms of Jewish education, except Sunday school, are associated with higher levels of Jewish identity in teenagers and their parents (Cohen, 1995). Yet three different studies, of Catholic, Protestant and Jewish denominations, indicate that Judaism was the least successful in transmitting the religion (i.e. Jewish identity) to the next generation (Argyle and Beit Hallahmi, 1997).

Jewish Youth

To stem assimilation and intermarriage, a well developed Jewish identity needs to be cultivated. The more this identity is nourished and fortified in childhood and adolescence the more of an impact it will have in the future (Charme, 2008).

When adolescent Jews were asked to identify the greatest influencer on their Jewish identity, they responded (in descending order): parents, teachers, synagogue official, grandparents and their peer group (Kress & Elias, 1998). When these children’s parents were asked to list the influencers on their children, they offered a long and varied list. The top seven responses (out of eighteen choices) were (in descending order): family member, Jewish school related experiences, holidays/Shabbat, peers, temple/services, youth groups and experiences related to Israel (Kress & Elias, 1998).

Research focused on the American Jewish teenager found that there are many spheres of influence that are involved in shaping the adolescent’s Jewish identity. Researchers contend that the degree of commitment to Judaism is predicted by involvement in Jewish identity enhancing contexts such as: the family (Dashefsky and Shapiro, 1974), educational settings (Schiff and Schneider, 1994), peer group (Himmelfarb, 1980), general community religious climate (Himmelfarb, 1980) and involvement in Jewish youth groups and summer camps (Keysar, Kosmin & Scheckner 2000, , Sales & Saxe, 2003).

Adolescents who live in a predominately Jewish neighborhood tend to identify more with Judaism both socially and in practice. This may be due to the fact that the adolescent is embedded in a highly Jewish society, has Jewish neighbors and attends Jewish school. In addition, parents may be more committed to socializing their children into Jewish society, as is evidenced by their choosing to live in Jewish communities and have their children educated in Jewish school (Markstrom, Berman & Brusch, 1998), despite the financial burden. There is a much lower percentage of intermarriage in the New York metropolitan area as compared to the rest of the U.S. (Keysar, Kosmin & Scheckner, 2000).

Youth groups and Israel travel exerted far less influence upon intermarriage probabilities than did Jewish schooling but also seem to be associated with increments in Jewish involvement (Cohen, 1986). Israel trips work well to foster entry into the upper reaches of Jewish involvement but it does less to raise overall levels of involvement (Cohen, 1986).

Summer camp, by creating an all encompassing environment, provides participants an opportunity to be the majority, meet role models, experience a Jewish environment, and encounter Jewish peers. This environment allows youth to explore and develop a proactive Jewish identity (Cohen, 2006). The informal religious education provided at the camp gives participants tools to address questions and difficulties raised in their home communities. What is it about Jewish camps that make them so successful at instilling in children Jewish identities so deep that they last a lifetime? “Each camp has a very strong and intentional culture, camp by camp. Camp’s power to socialize young Jews – How do I be a Jew? How do I be a member of the Jewish community? – depends on this culture” (Sales & Saxe, 2003).

Researchers have also investigated Orthodox religious teens’ year(s) of study in Israel and the impact on Jewish identity. A significant portion of graduates of yeshiva high schools in America spend a year (or more) before college studying Judaism in an intensive program in Israel. Jacobson (2004) performed a qualitative study and Berger (1997) a quantitative study on the impact of this year of study. Both concluded that the Israel experience is having a significant affect on the religiosity of the participants. While it would be interesting to discover how much of the success of this year in Israel is actually due to seeds planted during the student’s high school years, and precisely which aspects of the Israel program were most successful in promoting religious growth, it is beyond the scope of this article.

Conclusion

Judaism, a religion with a relatively small following, must compete for relevance as youngsters gradually develop their personal identities while immersed in a Western culture. Since Judaism is the least successful transmitter of its traditions among the three major religions, and modern society is in a perpetual state of flux, it behooves the Jewish community to frequently reevaluate the various socializers and look for ways of improving diverse influencers. It also suggests some soul-searching as to why, of the three major religions in the U.S., Judaism is the least successful at transmitting its values. To successfully ensure that Judaism will become a significant and defining component in the identity of young, American Jews, parents must use all available means to promote this goal. By exposing teens to programs with other Jews, (i.e. youth groups, summer camp, day schools etc.) parents can at least provide adolescents with a Jewish social and academic milieu that will help fortify their Jewish identity.

Since the best predictor of what the religious and spiritual lives of youth will look like is what the religious and spiritual lives of their parents look like, (Smith, 2003) it is up to the Jewish communities to find ways to increase identity and practice within Jewish families. Congregational Jewish educational leaders should consider broadening their focus in an effort to reach the whole family and not just the children. Schools should actively seek ways to involve parents in more than P.T.A. events or school plays, but educationally as well. Parents should be invited to learning sessions, shabbatonim, hagigot, etc., and programs adjusted so that adults may participate and learn as well.

Those families who are already committed and send their children to full time Jewish day schools must ask: did they unwittingly allow the school to take the place of the home? Do they have time and interest to see what their children are learning? Are they in full agreement with the school’s educational philosophy and theology? Who are the role models that their children are choosing?

The larger and more difficult question is how does the Jewish community help unaffiliated Jews who don’t belong to a synagogue, have Jewish friends, Jewish culture or family interested in perpetuating Judaism? Who or what is going to shape their Jewish identity? To address this population all denominations, community based organizations and philanthropies need to work together. If resources can be pooled, programs improved and talents combined, maybe more Jews could be successfully reached. These times call not for more separation and distinction between denominations and organizations but a healthy, working relationship to reach unaffiliated families and together find ways to address the crucial challenge of effectively transmitting Jewish identity.

One final point is the importance of Jewish educational research. Investigation into specifically which programs are effective for which specific populations can help educators, administrators, principals and synagogue Rabbis develop winning programs. And teachers need to learn and master modern educational techniques to meet the needs of today’s youth. This can only be achieved with a firm commitment to educational research.

References

Argyle, M. & Beit Hallahmi, B. (1975) The Social Psychology of Religion, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Beit Hallahmi, B. and Argyle, M. (1997) The Psychology of Religious Behavior, Belief and Experience. London and New York: Routledge.

Benson, P. L., Donahue, M..J. & Erickson, J.A. (1990) “Adolescence and religion: a review of literature from 1970 to 1986,” Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, Vol.1 pages 153-181.

Berger, S. (1997) A Year of study in an Israeli yeshiva program: Before and after (Doctoral dissertation), Yeshiva University.

Boyatzis, C., Dollahite, D., & Mark, L. (2006) The family as a context for religious spiritual development.,” in Roehlkepartain, Ebstyne, Wagener, Benson (Eds.) The handbook of spiritual development in childhood and adolescence. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage Publication.

Charme, S. (2008) “The gender question and the study of Jewish children,” Religious education. 101 (1) 21-39.

Chein, I. (1955) The problem of Jewish identification, Jewish Social Studies. 17:219-222.

Cohen, E. (2006) “Jewish youth in Texas: Toward a multi-methodological approach to minority identity, Religious Education. 101:1 40-59.

— (2004) “Components and symbols of ethnic identity: A case study in informal education and identity formation in Diaspora,” Applied Psychology. 53(1) 87-112.

Cohen, S. (1986) Jewish Travel to Israel: Incentives and Inhibitions Among U.S. & Canadian Teenagers, The Jewish Agency.

— (1995) “The impact of varieties of Jewish education upon Jewish identity: An intergenerational perspective,” Contemporary Judaism. 16:68-96.

— (2005) A tale of two Jewries: An inconvenient truth, Jewish Life Network conference, Aspen, Colorado.

Dashefsky, A & Lebson,C. (2002) “The relationship between formal Jewish education and dimensions of Jewish identity,” Contemporary Judaism. 23:96-131.

Dashefsky, A. & Shapiro, H. (1974)Ethnic identification among American Jews. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath and Company.

DeVaus, D. (1983) “The relative importance of parents and peers for adolescent religious orientation. An Australian Study,” Adolescence. (18) 147-158.

Francis, L.J., & Brown, L. (1991) “The Influence of Home, Church and School on Prayer among Sixteen Year Old Adolescents in England,” Review of Religious Research, 33:2 112-122.

Greeley, A.M. (1976) Catholic Schools in a Declining Church, Kansas City, Mo.: Sheed and Ward.

Himmelfarb, H. (1980) “The Study of American Jewish Identification: How it is Defined, Measured, Obtained, Sustained and Lost,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 19(1) 148-160.

Hoge, D. R., Petrillo, G.H. & Smith, E.I.( 1982) “Transmission of Religious and Social Values from Parents to Teenage Children,” Journal of Marriage and the Family (August ) 569-579.

Hoge, Dean R. & Petrillo, G.H. (1978) “Development of Religious Thinking in Adolescence: Test of Goldman’s Theories,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 17(2) 139-154.

Iannaccone, Laurence J. (1990) “Religious Practice: A Human Capital Approach.,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 29 (3) 297-314.

Jacobson, D. (2004) Psychological and Religious Change of Orthodox Jewish Boys During a Post-High School Year of Study in an Israeli Yeshiva (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University).

Keysar, A., Kosmin, B. & Scheckner, J. (2000) The Next Generation Jewish Children and Adolescents, State University of New York Press: Albany.

Kress, J. S. & Elias, M.J. (1998) “It Takes a Kehilla to Make a Mensch: Building Jewish Identity as part of Overall Identity,” Jewish Education News, 19 (2), 20-24.

Markstrom, C. A., Berman ,R.& Brusch, G. (1998) “An exploratory examination of Identity Formation Among Jewish Adolescents according to Context,” Journal of Adolescent Research, 13:2 202-222.

Marshall, S. K.. & Markstrom-Adams, C. (1995) “Attitudes on Interfaith Dating among Jewish Adolescents,” Journal of Family Issues. Vol. 16 , No. 6, November 787-811.

Martin, T. F., White, J.M. & Perlman, D. (2003) “Religious socialization: A test of the channeling hypothesis of parental influence on adolescent faith maturity,” Journal of Adolescent Research, 18:2 169-187.

Nelsen, H. M. & Potvin, R.H. (1995) “Gender and regional differences in the Religiosity of Protestant Adolescents,” Review of Religious Research. Vol 22 no. 3:268-283.

Sales & Saxe (2003) How Godly are thy tents: Summer camps as Jewish socializing experiences, Boston: Brandies University Press.

Sanua, V. D. (1968) “The Jewish Adolescent” Jewish Education.38:3 36-52.

Schiff, A. & Schnieder, M. (1994) Far reaching effects of extensive day school attendance., Azrieli Graduate Institute of Jewish Education and Administration at Yeshiva University. New York.

Sharansky, N. (2008) Defending Identity: Its indispensable role in protecting democracy, Public Affairs: New York.

Sinclair, J. & Miller, D . (2005) “On being Jewish,” Journal of Adolescent Research. Vol 20 (1) 91-117.

Smith, C., Faris, R. Denton,,L..D. & Regnerus, M. (2003) “Mapping American adolescent subjective religiosity and attitudes of alienation toward religion: a research report,” Sociology of Religion 64 (1) 111-134.

Wilson, John & Sherkat, D.E. (1994) “Returning to the fold,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33 (2) 148-161.