Druckschrift 
Napoleon's influence on Jewish law : the Sanhedrin of 1807 and its modern consequences / edited by Walter Jacob in association with Moshe Zemer
Seite
41
Einzelbild herunterladen

Napoleon 's Sanhedrin and the Halakhah 41

The largest incidence of mixed marriage and conversion to Christianity , in many cases, was found in the German -speaking lands of Central Europe . This began in the generation after Moses Mendelssohn , and occurred in the fashionable circles of the upper class as well as among those who sought upward mobility. Much has been written about Rachel Varnhagen and her intellectual circle, but we should note that the phenomenon also existed among those further down the social ladder. Eastern European Jews who settled in Central Europe in large numbers throughout the 19th century were equally involved in this phenomenon. If we look at the entire 19th century, we shall find that approximately ten percent of the Jewish population was intermarried. The percentage remained fairly stable throughout the century, but increased in the 20th century.

The lands of Eastern Europe and the Balkans were not entirely free from this problem, although the numbers involved were smaller.'

We should remember that opposition to mixed marriages remained equally strong on the part of Catholics and Protestants . Hesitantly some Protestants granted concessions if the children were raised as Christians . The Catholic Church insisted that such marriages were not valid and that remarriage was necessary after conversion of the non-Catholic partner, although some changes in this view began to occur in 1821". Slowly intermarriage was legalized in modern European states. This occurred in Germany in 1875, in Hungary in 1895, and in Rumania a little later. In 1913 it was still prohibited in Austria , Russia , Spain , Portugal , and Islamic lands. Even within the Jewish community, marriages between subgroups like Ashkenazim and Sefardim were rare in the 19th century.

These strong and consistent objections to mixed marriages and their recognition did not permit any deviation. The discussion of the Assembly made this clear and provided a negative mildly worded response. Only with the question on inter-marriage did the Assembly