An opportunity to think outside the box
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.
Amen. There would be obvious logistical questions since most synagogues have a main sanctuary and no second space big enough to accommodate a big congregational service. Aren’t there functioning Reform-Cons models currently? How do they work?
How many synagogues fill their sanctuaries every week?
not many, but you couldn’t have another service in the same room at the same time. I mean, Jews in the Woods has done a few related things but I am not sure that pace of innovation would be doable for most congregations. I suppose the alternative would be to rotate and have the other main service meet in the social hall or some such place and switch weekly, have one get friday night and the other saturday morning (maybe switching weekly), or perhaps have the main services be sequential (9-11:15 and 11:20-12:45?). These options wouldn’t seem intuitively appealing but might seem better considering that it could cut costs nearly 50%.
I suppose the alternative would be to rotate and have the other main service meet in the social hall or some such place and switch weekly
I vote for this one. My point was that, if the services aren’t filling the sanctuary, other rooms could be large enough.
I think this is happening already. There are many URJ-affiliated congregations that run parallel minyanim, usually with one of them being participant-led. What you propose is only a small step away from the “Synaplex” model.
I know in my own Reform congregation,(BTW–is it OK to post here if one is actually a member of a conventional synagogue?) there have been many “defections” from the local Conservative synagogue–and not because of intermarriage issues either. Locally, the Conservative congregation has suffered from some intra-membership infighting, and frankly, is quite anemic. I know several folks who are now paid members of our Reform congregation, when in actuallity their ideological leanings and preference for Shabbat morning worship-aesthetic is more what we would consider “Consevative”. In truth, I would venture to say that a significant minority–my guestimate is 25-30%–of the membership is ideologically non/post/trans-denominational.
Geography and demographics in this mid-sized southwestern city don’t allow for a vibrant indie minyan movement–so we either have to engage in our established synagogues or have no real Jewish commnunal life. In this sense, I think that the remote synagogues lead the trend over those in major Jewish population centers.
I think R. Yoffie is correctly assessing this trend, and kudos to him for directing the leadership broaden beyond denominational lines.
Ruth B writes:
What you propose is only a small step away from the “Synaplex” model.
If I understand the Synaplex model correctly, it’s about having non-prayer options in synagogues on Shabbat. Which has some similarities to having multiple prayer options (in that it’s an alternative to having one service and nothing else), but is not the same thing.
(BTW–is it OK to post here if one is actually a member of a conventional synagogue?)
I can’t tell whether you’re joking, but everyone is welcome to post comments here. Welcome!
BZ writes:
If I understand the Synaplex model correctly, it’s about having non-prayer options in synagogues on Shabbat. Which has some similarities to having multiple prayer options (in that it’s an alternative to having one service and nothing else), but is not the same thing.
My understanding of Synaplex is that’s it’s about having simultaneous options on Shabbat, t’filah or otherwise. I agree with you in that what you say isn’t exactly the same thing, because of the open tensions between the denominational understandings that would be evident. Functionally, though, as far as the logistics that synagogue boards are concerned with, it’s the same.
And, in vivo, the parallel minyanim that are happening do tend to tease out those how are into participatory davening, and those more comfortable with the professional clergy-led service.
Another local example: the local Renewal synagogue hosts a Reconstructionist minyan. And a lot of those folks show up at the lay-lead parallel minyan at the Reform schul…
I can’t tell whether you’re joking, but everyone is welcome to post comments here. Welcome!
Thanks for the welcome. I was half-joking. I often feel like I am the only in-married but childless Gen-X Jew who actually formally belongs to a synagogue…..
Younger Jews aren’t aligning themselves denominationally as much as their parents, so I see this as a good thing.
It requires a pretty high level of tolerance, something which seems easy enough until someone switches on (or off) a light on Shabbat and the camel’s back is broken.
i just have one question, what would be so bad with just praying the traditional way the torah tells us to? and you can do it the right way in english btw. and it can also be lay led. either way, hopefully its brings us close to the coming of moshicach tzidkanau
i just have one question, what would be so bad with just praying the traditional way the torah tells us to?
I missed that passage in the Torah. Please enlighten us.
You know, with the blood and and the fire and the whatnot.
As someone who grew up in a merged conservative-reform congregation, I worry that BZ is talking about could only work with a leader / leadership structure that was aware of and supportive of this model of inclusiveness and cross fertilization. Mostly, what I saw growing up was a Reform Rabbi and a Conservative Canter who didn’t get along, mixed messages to confused kids at religious school (You should keep Kosher Kashrut is irrelevant!), a reform rabbi trying and failing to lead conservative style services that neither he nor anyone else really wanted to be at, the conservative members of the community feeling the rabbi was watering down Judaism, the reform members of the community feeling the Canter was over-demanding, etc. There were Friday night Reform services and Saturday morning Conservative services, and there were few people who went to both and little evident sharing of ideas. In terms of people to people interaction, there weren’t enough Jews in my home community to demonize large swaths of them, so people got along about as well as in any other synagogue. But ritually, it never seemed to work.
I’ll throw in one more thought I had on Yoffie’s proclamation…that is his interest in perpetuating the life of URJ’s congregational dues. As synagogues disappear, there is less and less funding to the union. In my community, and as a past VP of my shul, the dues to URJ were extremely high, I believe it was about $75+ per family. Except when we needed a new rabbi, we were paying close to $30,000 a year so that we could receive emails from the union, our members got the Reform Judaism magazine in the mail, and our youth group kids and educator could attend an occassional kallah or conference…definitely not worth the money! URJ offers very little in return for the cost and I suspect that Yoffie is concerned that URJ affiliation could drop precipitously…it would be one of the first things I would cut! $30,000 for a 300+ family congregation can be better spent. Why not just take the URJ union dues and pay off a mortgage instead of merging? I am all for the pluralism, cross fertilization, post-denominational conceptions that are noted in the other comments, but for the head of Reform movement to talk virtual merger…this is about preserving money for the movement, nothing more.