The Jewish thought journal, Sh’ma ,
convened panels of prominent progressive and innovative rabbis to discuss and rethink their communities and institutions. SHI’s Rabbi Dr. Rachel Sabath Beit-Halachmi commented on their forums in this article for the journal.
By RACHEL SABATH BEIT-HALACHMI
The sages of the Mishnah were the first rabbinic leaders to understand that what may at first seem to be only a tragedy may also lead to extraordinary opportunities. They knew that the loss of the sacrificial cult and even the physical structure of the Temple did not mean the end of prayer or ritual but rather the strengthening of other forms of worship and leadership and the development of new schools of thought to nourish the Jewish people in a new context. The covenantal commitment wasn’t shattered; it was made anew.
Today, many North American rabbinic leaders also know that historical watersheds demand historically minded, creative, and large-scale thinking about core values, methodology, institutional structure and leadership. Such grappling also often demands the renegotiation of faith in the necessity and potential of those same foundations.
While the radically changing nature of the Jewish community and affiliation in North American synagogues might be far from the dramatic paradigm shift of the first century, it certainly poses significant questions about the nature of institutional Judaism. The data show that for many, if not most of the active Jewish community, the familiar model of synagogue and membership will continue to provide the most significant, deep, and consistent context for their Jewish communal life. But what about others who seek Jewish contexts and meaning but not membership or institutional structures? What about Jewish communal life and learning opportunities for those who don’t and will likely never affiliate with a synagogue?
The Roundtable of rabbinic leaders including Rabbis Sharon Brous, Lizzi Heydemann, Darren Levine, Rachel Nussbaum, and Zushe Greenberg demonstrates the many dynamic and inspired projects that have already changed the way in which Jewish life can be imagined. Beyond movements, beyond buildings, and playfully experimenting at the center of the largest Jewish communities, these leaders are simultaneously engaging large numbers of those Jews otherwise thought to be at the periphery of Jewish life. I am struck by this ironic reversal of the early 20th century German Jewish philosopher Franz Rosenzweig’s call for a return from the periphery to the center. While he meant it figuratively, in many ways these leaders model a kind of leadership moving the community from centralized authority and structures to the dynamic periphery of more decentralized leadership and fluid structure.
Each of the leaders in our discussion envisions a way in which many synagogues, old and new, might continue to reinvent themselves for a new era, for a new set of needs, and in many ways for a newly defined Jew – one with a multilayered identity, living out a complex set of connections to the Jewish and non-Jewish world. Each focuses on the ways in which rabbis need to be trained differently, and trained over a life-time. Taken together, the remarks of Rabbis Rick Jacobs and Steven Wernick as well as those of David Cooper and Shawn Zevit underscore the urgency and proportions of the current challenge and demonstrate how, when the needs of the hour are responded to with honesty and creativity, new possibilities can emerge.
This discussion is radical because these leaders are not simply maintaining their covenantal commitments but are boldly rethinking even the most fundamental aspects of their institutions. Each of the participants in this Roundtable display a willingness to reimagine the organizational structure, vision, and mission as well as the changes in rabbinic training necessary to meet the new challenges.
With this kind of openness and brave spirit we can envision many new possibilities and many more initiatives like those described here. We should soon see more cross-denominational conversations that reevaluate synagogue structure and rabbinic training; we should nurture more experimentation and more collaborative projects. The implications of these ventures should lead to the expansion of more intensive leadership study and training programs that intellectually and spiritually challenge and nourish leaders so that they can deepen their thinking and practice. Every rabbi, not just a small minority, should engage in what HUC Vice President Michael Marmur calls a “60-year curriculum,” one that begins but doesn’t end with rabbinic school.
The implementation of all of these grander visions, however, will require sustaining the communal discomfort of uncertainty while paradigms shift toward the future and while, at the same time, age-old covenants are renewed.
