j. reports:

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, floated a trial balloon this week: In light of the economic crisis, he suggested Reform and Conservative synagogues work together more closely, and in some cases even consider merging.
Based on a small sampling of local reactions, however, that trial balloon is made of lead.
In a Dec. 15 sermon to the URJ’s board of trustees in New York, Yoffie said synagogues should consider merging or sharing services, buildings and staff with neighboring congregations, including those of other movements.
“I have always believed that the passionate pluralism of North American synagogue life is a source of strength,” Yoffie said. “But now we are in a crisis situation and it may be that we can no longer afford what we once took for granted.”

I would quibble somewhat with Rabbi Yoffie’s framing: this solution wouldn’t be giving up pluralism, but replacing one type of pluralism (a larger community that includes multiple smaller communities representing different identities) with another (multiple identities represented in a single community). But I applaud his support of Jewish diversity (the full sermon goes further: “Except in crisis situations, a city with a Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox synagogue is a stronger Jewish community than a city with one synagogue alone; and three or four Reform congregations usually make for a stronger Reform community than one with a single Reform temple. Most of the time, unity is overrated, and diversity is a blessing. “), and for precisely this reason, I think the idea of merging Reform and Conservative congregations is a great idea.
I say this not because there is no difference between Reform and Conservative congregations, but for the opposite reason: Reform and Conservative congregations are so different that a merged congregation would have no choice but to recognize internal diversity of ideology, practice, and identity. And once the congregation fully accommodates two sharply different identities, it wouldn’t be such a leap to include additional identities outside of those two boxes. A large number of liberal Jews, such as myself, wouldn’t fit in in either the Reform movement or the Conservative movement as they exist today, but might have a place in a merged community that was less fixated on building barriers.
But not everyone sees it this way:

“It’s interesting timing,” commented Rabbi Micah Hyman of Congregation Beth Sholom, a Conservative synagogue in San Francisco. “I don’t know if talking about post-denominationalism in the midst of an economic crisis is the right long-range plan.
“Liturgically and ritually, our movements have very different ways of celebrating God, and we have to be very careful of these permeable lines. I know we are singing very different tunes.”

I can’t tell from this quote whether “singing very different tunes” is meant to be understood literally, metaphorically, or both. But it doesn’t matter. My greatest hope for such a merger would be if the combined congregation is unable to find a way that everyone can pray together, and is forced to have at least two simultaneous minyanim. At first these minyanim might look like the original Reform congregation and the original Conservative congregation, but cross-fertilization and a culture of openness might lead to new options that wouldn’t have been initiated at either, and the number of parallel minyanim might expand beyond two. (The key here is that these hypothetical congregations wouldn’t be merging due to a shortage of people, but due to a shortage of money. If there are enough people in the two congregations to sustain two simultaneous services before the merger, then there should be at least that many after the merger. Praying is cheap; buildings cost money.)
If a plan like this goes through, then decoupling Jewish communal institutions from styles of prayer might be one of the greatest blessings that could come out of the economic crisis. I find it tragic that most American Jews label themselves denominationally based on what kind of prayer services they go to (if they’re going to prayer services). There is a large and growing number of active liberal religious Jews who are staying away from synagogues and finding their Jewish life elsewhere, and one major reason for this is that most synagogues are not places where we want to pray. A common complaint about this from the institutional Jewish world is that if we’re not joining synagogues, then we’re not supporting X, Y, and Z worthy non-prayer-related things that synagogues do. I would gladly join a synagogue and support X, Y, and Z as long as I didn’t have to daven there and as long as my Jewish practices and values were compatible with the range of identities accepted as normative there. If I could be part of a participant-led minyan to my liking that was free to operate without interference in the synagogue building, I’d be happy to participate otherwise in the synagogue community. And a Reform-Conservative merger would make this possible by removing the idea that membership in the synagogue implies allegiance to a single ideology or a single style of prayer. This might be the way to get a new generation to consider involvement in institutional Jewish life.
Finally, a merger might help existing denominationally-affiliated synagogue members deepen their Jewish commitments within their own denominational frameworks. Reform Jews will be able to engage more seriously in choice through knowledge when they see a broader range of possible practices in action around them, and Conservative Jews will become more committed to their Jewish paths when they are forced to define their Jewish identity in a positive way rather than in opposition to the Reform congregation down the block.