Question/ Did Mel Brooks really convert?
Ztlog
converted from being a Jew to a christian. Is this true? I didn't hear anything
about it anywhere but the person who told me said that she read it in a
magazine. It seems bizzare but I was curious as it seems highly unlikely.
David Lloyd-Jones
news:20010923104736...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Probably trying to seduce Jane Fonda.
-dlj.
Samuel Liddicott
It seems more likely to hear of it than it to happen.
As a child I remember Lionel Richie being Baptist/J-Witness/Mormon depending
on who told me.
Sam
The Big Cheese
"Ztlog" <zt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010923104736...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Fred Rosenblatt
<dav...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Impossible. I heard him recently and he's as funny as ever.
Seriously, I can't see him converting to Christianity unless he were
strictly "born again". All the less idealistic reasons that Jews
have for converting to Christianity - marriage, upward mobility,
acceptance, physical safety - hardly apply to a man who has spent
half a century becoming rich and famous for being Jewish (although
I admit the Jane Fonda suggestion is a possibility).
William R. Dixon
I have to ask: Is Jane Fonda Mel?
Bill
Fred Rosenblatt
>> >Probably trying to seduce Jane Fonda.
>
>I have to ask: Is Jane Fonda Mel?
Only if breaking up doesn't make Tom Cruise.
Skorpion Stinger
as a Christian but he was not at all funny, (his Christian name was Moishe
Broch, which didn't sound Jewish enough) so he converted to Judaism and
changed his name to Mel Brooks, really Jewish, and thereby became one of the
funniest men in history; only Jews understand humor. HK
Bernie $
biography it states, "Mel Brooks was born Melvin Kaminsky to a Russian
Jewish family on June 28, 1926, in Brooklyn, NY."
"Skorpion Stinger" <chan...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:KcFt7.10776$iG3.1...@news1.cableinet.net...
meirm...@erols.com
<cb...@lvcm.com> posted:
>HK: I don't know where you found that faulty information but in his
>biography it states, "Mel Brooks was born Melvin Kaminsky to a Russian
>Jewish family on June 28, 1926, in Brooklyn, NY."
That's why he converted. He loved his parents so much!
:) Do I have to include a smiley in a humor group?
>"Skorpion Stinger" <chan...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:KcFt7.10776$iG3.1...@news1.cableinet.net...
>> Yes Mel Brooks did convert, but it was the other way round. He started out
>> as a Christian but he was not at all funny, (his Christian name was Moishe
>> Broch, which didn't sound Jewish enough) so he converted to Judaism and
>> changed his name to Mel Brooks, really Jewish, and thereby became one of
>the
>> funniest men in history; only Jews understand humor. HK
>>
>
mei...@QQQerols.com If you email me, please let me know whether
remove the QQQ or not you are posting the same letter.
David Chorley
No, but Albert Einstein did change his name to Brooks to be more saleable
David
meirm...@erols.com
chorl...@hotmail.com (David Chorley) posted:
Albert Einstein would have faced a lot of high expectations.
>
>David
Away for about a week from Wednesday!!!!!!!
Jeffrey Garfield
about his marriage to Ann Bancroft. Johnny asked him about his
conversion to Catholicism (Ann's Catholic). He said and I'm
paraphrasing, "When something bad is happening a Catholic crosses
himself (up down left right), and he's protected. For a Jew by the time
he finished making the Mogen David (Jewish Star) it's all over."
This was his wise cracking answer to a serious question. He did convert,
but for love!!!
Dan Kimmel
"Jeffrey Garfield" <cpus...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3BCD2446...@earthlink.net...
> Some years ago I was listening to Mel Brooks talking to Johnny Carson
> about his marriage to Ann Bancroft. Johnny asked him about his
> conversion to Catholicism (Ann's Catholic). He said and I'm
> paraphrasing, "When something bad is happening a Catholic crosses
> himself (up down left right), and he's protected. For a Jew by the time
> he finished making the Mogen David (Jewish Star) it's all over."
>
> This was his wise cracking answer to a serious question. He did convert,
> but for love!!!
I don't know why this urban legend keeps proliferating, but there is no
evidence (even this memory from "some years ago") that Brooks converted. He
has not. Go to the Jewhoo site which confirms that Brooks is Jewish but
Anne Bancroft is not. He referenced his Jewish identity as recently as his
appearance at the Tonys where he won an armload of awards for "The
Producers."
David Lloyd-Jones
intermarry, conversion is left as an option for the non-Catholic, but is not
insisted upon. On the other hand there is heavy ..."pressure" is not quite
the right word... drift toward the assumption that the children will be
brought up Roman Catholic.
I do not know whether this is made to be a condition for receiving a
Catholic wedding, or for continuing to be allowed Communion; in any event,
the situation is fairly common, and the Catholic Church seems to take it in
stride.
-dlj.
"Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:johz7.116039$3d2.3...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Fred Rosenblatt
"Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Given the premise of "The Producers" he probably wanted to remind
everyone of his Jewishness loudly and often.
meirm...@erols.com
(Fred Rosenblatt) posted:
I know nothing about the man and I'm certainly not saying he
converted. But people can reference their Jewish identity even if
they have converted out. Unless he spoke of his adherence to Judaism
and his rejection of other religions, he probably spoke of his ethnic,
family, or national identification (the Jewish people), his concern
for the state of Israel, or food and humor and getting together with
other Jews. Again I'm not talking about him, but there are lots of
ways people can give an image, or merely accurately display their own
image of themselves, without giving a total picture. It doesn't even
mean they are lying or trying to mislead. Converts out have usually
come to terms with their conversions, and see what we see as a
contradiction as just different aspects of their lives.
PtLeek
>I know nothing about the man and I'm certainly not saying he
>converted. But people can reference their Jewish identity even if
>they have converted out. Unless he spoke of his adherence to Judaism
>and his rejection of other religions, he probably spoke of his ethnic,
>family, or national identification (the Jewish people), his concern
>for the state of Israel, or food and humor and getting together with
>other Jews. Again I'm not talking about him, but there are lots of
>ways people can give an image, or merely accurately display their own
>image of themselves, without giving a total picture. It doesn't even
>mean they are lying or trying to mislead. Converts out have usually
>come to terms with their conversions, and see what we see as a
>contradiction as just different aspects of their lives.
>
I quite agree plus the site Jewhoo lists Lenny Kravitz as Jewish. His Dad was
which doesn't make him halachachly Jewish. So it seems Jewhoo lists could be
suspect.
meirm...@erols.com
(PtLeek) posted:
Jewhoo a couple years ago was trying not to get into the issue of
patwhatever, and he wrote me that there were only 3 (or was it 4)
people listed in that category. I forget if LK was one of them or
not. But he has gone into more detail in quite a few cases, since
then, and I think you should write him with what you know. Darn, I
forget if he wants a source or a specific connection for such things.
FTR, even though I called it an issue, I don't think there is even an
issue and that it takes a Jewish mother to be born a Jew.
Pobirsm
Scott
pob...@cs.com (Pobirsm) wrote:
> DNA testing officially makes that logic obsolete.
Makes what? You didn't quote that to which you are responding.
Don Levey
I suspect it's the requirement for matrilineal (vs patrilineal)
descent. If the original logic for the former was that you always
knew the mother even if you don't know the father, then in a situation
where you can definitively know the father one should be able to
accept Jewishness from either parent.
-Don
John C Darrow
(No other context appeared in the message.)
"Pobirsm" <pob...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20011107234401...@mb-mq.news.cs.com...
Fred Rosenblatt
d_l...@hotmail.com (Don Levey) wrote:
Requiring a Jewish mother is more a requirement for nurture than
for genetics. We've always been willing to accept that a father
is Jewish even before DNA, but we've always said that it doesn't
make the child Jewish.
Don Levey
> >I suspect it's the requirement for matrilineal (vs patrilineal)
> >descent. If the original logic for the former was that you always
> >knew the mother even if you don't know the father, then in a situation
> >where you can definitively know the father one should be able to
> >accept Jewishness from either parent.
>
> Requiring a Jewish mother is more a requirement for nurture than
> for genetics. We've always been willing to accept that a father
> is Jewish even before DNA, but we've always said that it doesn't
> make the child Jewish.
This, though, can make things fuzzier.
There are many instances, especially now, where the father has as much
(if not more) to do with the nurturing of the child as the mother.
This doesn't even take into account situations where the father is
raising the children alone. The "nurture" line could then accept
"raised Jewish" as a criterion, but that has never seemed to be valid.
My wife, for example, converted to Judaism. However, that conversion
was supervised by a Reform rabbi. To some, that means that she is not
Jewish and by extension neither is our son. It doesn't matter that he
was circumcised with Brit Milah, that he is being raised Jewish, or
that our home is one of Jewish identity. The nurturing plays no part
in some people's decisions as to whether or not he is Jewish - only
the status of the genetic mother.
I take it that adopted children must be formally converted?
-Don
Fred Rosenblatt
d_l...@hotmail.com (Don Levey) wrote:
>fre...@juno.com (Fred Rosenblatt) wrote in message
news:<fredr5-1211...@mac99124170840.jpl.nasa.gov>...
>
>> >I suspect it's the requirement for matrilineal (vs patrilineal)
>> >descent. If the original logic for the former was that you always
>> >knew the mother even if you don't know the father, then in a situation
>> >where you can definitively know the father one should be able to
>> >accept Jewishness from either parent.
>>
>> Requiring a Jewish mother is more a requirement for nurture than
>> for genetics. We've always been willing to accept that a father
>> is Jewish even before DNA, but we've always said that it doesn't
>> make the child Jewish.
>
>This, though, can make things fuzzier.
>There are many instances, especially now, where the father has as much
>(if not more) to do with the nurturing of the child as the mother.
I think we make rules based on majority tendencies. Fathers are of
course as welcome to be nurturing as they want to be, but that
doesn't change normative sociological reality. There is some debate
as to whether a single parent father should be exempt from time
bound mitzvahs as women are, but I think the concensus is that they
are still obligated, even if they have to make accomodations.
>This doesn't even take into account situations where the father is
>raising the children alone. The "nurture" line could then accept
>"raised Jewish" as a criterion, but that has never seemed to be valid.
>
>My wife, for example, converted to Judaism. However, that conversion
>was supervised by a Reform rabbi. To some, that means that she is not
>Jewish and by extension neither is our son. It doesn't matter that he
>was circumcised with Brit Milah, that he is being raised Jewish, or
>that our home is one of Jewish identity. The nurturing plays no part
>in some people's decisions as to whether or not he is Jewish - only
>the status of the genetic mother.
When I mentioned nurturing I was thinking not only of that aspect
of child raising that has been traditionally ascribed to mothers,
but also of the Jewish aspect of nurturing, that instills into young
children the appreciation for doing mitzvahs, learning Torah, etc,
that will stay with them for their lifetimes. Those who have problems
with Reform conversion are asserting that Reform itself, by its own
declaration, no longer considers these things important in the same
way they were in past generations. A few years ago tens of thousands
of people around the world completed the study of the entire Talmud
together, having learned every day before or after work, on their
commuter trains, over the telephone, etc for 7+ years. They filled
Madison Square Garden and hundreds of other stadiums and halls.
R' Meir Shapiro, the rabbi who started this program 70 years ago, was
inspired to do it from the time he was a young child, because one
day his first Hebrew tutor failed to show up, and he saw his mother
burst into tears. That's nurturing.
>
>I take it that adopted children must be formally converted?
They are "formally converted", but must reaffirm that conversion as
their own decision whem they reach b' mitzvah age.