The Conservative Movement in Judaism: Dilemmas and Opportunities

Chapter 10: Internal Unity

183 Chapter 10 Internal Unity FROM CONGREGATIONALISM TO COMMUNITY Too many synagogue leaders (rabbis and board members) maintain an overly institutional definition of their mission, often to the exclusion of the purpose of building a Conservative Judaism broadly conceived. In some instances, leaders react less than enthusiastically to developments that represent more intensive forms of Conservative Jewish identity but which they think detract from the strength of their synagogue. These instances include: opposition to the emergence of smaller minyanim of more learned or traditional worshipers, unease over perceived competition from Schechter schools, failure to build on the Ramah camp experience, and the mixed reaction to aliya. By now it should be clear that the congregation is not a kehillah, but it is one entity (albeit the cornerstone) in a larger kehillah. It should be equally clear that most congregations are not synagogue-centers, because most of the center-type activities are provided elsewhere in settings considered more attractive, for whatever reasons, whether the local Federation, the Jewish community center, or independent or communally sponsored Jewish schools or private clubs. Therefore, different kinds of congregations should be encouraged to serve the range of 184 THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT IN JUDAISM interests to be found within today’s Conservative community rather than to focus on building comprehensive synagogue-centers. 1. Strong metropolitan councils for Conservative Judaism that would embrace all local Conservative institutions should be established. It would be easy to establish such councils as paper organizations to satisfy the symbolic need. They should be given real purpose and the power to carry out those purposes. In other words, the councils need teeth. They need to be able to take steps to implement and encourage collaboration in regard to staff and funding to minimize unnecessary duplication in order to become effective instruments of the Conservative Movement and hopefully even the Conservative community in each locality. 2. Leaders and activists should make a concerted effort to spend time among the various institutions, not only synagogues, so that they develop a loyalty to the furtherance of Conservative Judaism in all of its manifestations. 3. Social mechanisms should be developed that would recognize achievements in one sphere (such as a Schechter board) as a stepping -stone to leadership in another sphere (such as a synagogue or regional United Synagogue board). 4. There needs to be a great strengthening of the independence of the schools, particularly the day schools, within the Movement’s structure . One of the consequences of excessive synagogism has been to reduce much of Jewish education to an appendage of individual congregations, designed or redesigned to suit the perceived needs of that particular congregation rather than the larger needs of educating a new generation for active Jewish involvement. This is an educational necessity to enable educators to pursue their tasks with minimum deflection to serve other needs, however legitimate , and to develop cadres of full-time teachers for Jewish schools instead of relying upon a non-professional or at best a semi-professional , part-time staff. It also is necessitated by demographic realities that have reduced the number of Jewish children available in any community and have even further reduced the number available for Conservative schools to the point where simply to have viable schools, there must be transcongregational and intercongregational efforts. The proliferation of congregationally based day schools is repeating all of the mistakes of the earlier synagogization of supplementary Jewish education. Internal Unity 185 These ideas usually provoke the response that many synagogues remain alive primarily through the memberships generated by their schools. There is enough evidence from communities where community and intercongregational schools exist that partnerships can be developed between school and synagogue that will achieve the same goal. As long as congregations maintain their synagogue skills, bar mitzvah and bat mitzvah requirements, junior congregations, and/or youth groups, and as long as they maintain close relations with the schools so that the latter reinforce congregational demands and interests in this respect, they reap benefits similar to when schools were physically part of the congregations. Such independence offers several possibilities: (1) the development of intercongregational, movement, or community schools with enough of a critical mass to provide a reasonable Jewish education; (2) the reestablishment of a Jewish education profession, with full-time professional teachers able to secure sufficient employment to make Jewish education their only career; and (3) the restoration of self-respect to Jewish educational administrators who are...