To save cash, Yoffie raises possibility of merging Reform, Conservative shuls

By Ben Harris · December 17, 2008

NEW YORK (JTA) -- Reacting to an increasingly perilous economic outlook, the leader of the Reform movement proposed that some of the movement's synagogues could consider merging with Conservative congregations as a cost-saving measure.

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, in a speech to the Union for Reform Judaism's board of trustees, said that while he generally views American Jewish pluralism as a source of strength, communities in the current crisis may no longer be able to afford multiple synagogues.

“In a small town it may be that a struggling Reform and a struggling Conservative synagogue will have to overcome their differences and join in cooperative programming, and even formal mergers,” Yoffie said Dec. 12 in Tampa, Fla. “And in a large city, with two or five or 10 Reform congregations, it may be that the time has come to share social services, buildings and staff.”

Barriers have been falling for some time between denominations, particularly the more liberal ones, with leaders of the various movements demonstrating greater willingness to participate in joint initiatives and share resources. This summer, the leading Reform and Conservative seminaries announced that they would be establishing a program, funded by the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation, to jointly train clergy in various areas of so-called practical rabbinics: communal trends, management and outreach.

But formal mergers between Conservative and Reform synagogues, movements that retain notable distinctions in theological outlook and liturgy, remain rare. Some eight American synagogues are members of both movements.

Rabbi Jerome Epstein, who heads the Conservative movement's congregational arm, the United Synagogue, said that while he strongly favors sharing resources, only in rare cases have formal mergers been successful.

“Our experience has been that it's fraught with peril,” Epstein told JTA. “What you end up doing is making the ideology and the values insignificant, and for many people in congregations they are significant.”

While Epstein declined to express a firm opinion on Yoffie's suggestion, he said the issue is mostly a practical one: Can a merger advance without requiring congregants to compromise their religious values? Even within the same movement, he said, synagogue mergers often raise sensitive issues regarding the new congregation's character.

Jerry Somers, the Reform board's honorary chairman, said Yoffie's suggestion was well received.

“I think difficult times call for new and innovative ways to accomplish common goals,” Somers said. “And Rabbi Yoffie's suggestion and urging that these things be considered I think was very well received and demonstrated that certainly the movements can work more cooperatively and even together on certain types of initiatives."

Discussions About this Article Elsewhere

Trackback URL: http://jta.org/trackback/1001641/

No trackbacks have been created for this article, be the first to create one.

Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments

Avi

12/18/08 01:39 PM

Bang. Another nail in the coffin of the Conservative movement. Not happening yet, but just wait....

Edward Ordman

12/18/08 05:36 PM

I’ve lived in at least one city small enough that we couldn’t afford three separate buildings. Some of the disputes were solved in ways that would seem odd to an outsider - e.g. an agreement that people would “act respectfully, like in church” on Friday evenings, but feel free to move around during services on Saturday mornings. If the people like each other and really want to work together and allow for each others’ feelings and preferences, it can be done.

pushkina

12/20/08 01:15 PM

Here in Sydney, Australia, we have three non-orthodox congregations under one roof: classical reform (the original from the shul’s 1938 founding), egalitarian masorti (Conservative which came second in the 1990s) and jewish renewal the most recent, product of the past 10 years). All other official congregations in the city except one other classical reform are orthodox, most having chabad rabbis on their bimahs. Our three rabbis were all trained at HUC; the senior rabbi is a dual member of the CCAR and the RA; our para-rabbinical staff were/are all trained either by renewal folks or by themselves, from the renewal point of view. We have no one who was trained at the JTA and who can speak about/ to Conservative issues with any sort of real deep knowledge of the movement.

As a result, folks here in the masorti congregation have no real experience with the conservative/masorti movement and how it really differs from orthodoxy and the reform/progressive movements. indeed, after a key member of the congregation ceased attending, most folks followed her to a local chabad shul.

i find the arrangement troubling; there is/should be more to a shul than just pragmatic approaches to resource management. for example, i still have no idea as to how the Hebrew school is taught and withing which movement it stands. as it is already, most shul members are clueless about what each movement believes regarding Torah, Jewish history, miztvot, values, etc.; with this arrangement it becomes harder to teach folks about the movements, the hows and whys of how they came into existence and should remain independent.

i believe that the continued “corporatization” of contemporary judaism (i.e. the concept that an MBA is better suited to run a tzedakah based institution; that ‘professionals’ are better able to run things), the focus on pragmatic issues as opposed to truly spiritual matters alienates almost anyone touched by the non-orthodox movements. people become ‘born again jews’ because they crave true spiritual leadership at shul: accountants they can see in offices.

i find it most disconcerting.

charles jackson

12/20/08 08:01 PM

A real proposal - merge the duplicative offices, staffs, mailing lists, fund-raising and spending efforts of the two movements. The administrative efforts of maintaining two “brands”, each of which is a force for spending more money on fewer users or members would be the real way to save.

To comment on this article, you must first be registered with JTA.