Were you convinced by what Dr. Sarna had to say? Let us know!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
What's on your mind about KAMII? Join our conversation!
Labels
- Panel discussion (1)
- Professor Sarna's address (2)
- Rabbi Kaplan's talk (1)
- Sunday's lecture (1)
- Welcome (2)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(7)
- ► 02/10 - 02/17 (2)
- ► 02/03 - 02/10 (2)
- ► 01/20 - 01/27 (1)
Why this blog?
Share your thoughts and ideas about life at KAMII--the Weinstein Weekend, our future, the whole congregational picture. Join the conversation!
Want to post a comment? At the bottom of each entry, there is a clickable "link" for comments. Just click there and you can post your comment!
KAM Isaiah Israel
About Us
- Person_called_PRW
- ......is the oldest synagogue in Chicago, founded in 1847 as Kehilath Anshe Maarav (KAM), the Congregation of the Men of the West. In 1971 KAM merged with Isaiah Israel to become a leader in the Reform movement. KAM Isaiah Israel is a rich and diverse Reform congregation of individuals and families who study, practice, and celebrate their Jewish lives together.
1 comment:
Well, what wasn't to like about Friday night's talk? Professor Sarna readily admitted he was a heretic, he demonstrated his masterful command of the history and context of Reform Judaism in the U.S., and he told some great jokes. But really, I am not sure Professor S. got it all right.
I mean, take the idea of a "big tent," the pluralism that he says is a fundamental feature of principle of Reform Judaism. Does this mean diversity across reform congregations, or does it mean diversity within reform congregations--or both? Goodness knows we can expect congregations in San Diego and Iowa City to differ in many ways, but what about inside those congregations? How big a tent can a given congregation provide? How can a congregation offer meaningful shared experiences to all its members, while permitting and maybe encouraging diversity of approach and intensity regarding worship, service to others, and congregational life? I think Dana Kaplan's book talks about the "multi-plex" approach of some temples, where different types of services and programs are offered to appeal to different groups within the congregation. I think we do some of that here at KAMII--is it working? Should we do more? Less? How about the "shared" part--how do we get people into the same room at the same time, doing the same thing? I don't know where we should go on that.
Another difficult aspect of the "big tent" is the conflict it presents to Kaplan's idea of "low tension" vs. high or medium tension religions. Basically, reform J. presently offers congregants a "low tension" religious option--temples don't ask much, or rather, they don't require much of members. Rabbi K. says maybe we need to move to a more demanding setup, in the direction of "medium tension." Now, if the tent is big, and we permit and even embrace a lot of variety in observance and practice, exactly what should temples require of their members? What is the "bar" members have to step over? It's not so clear to me what it would or should be.....
Finally, I am struck by Professor S.'s opening and closing image of the "wall" beyond which reform Jews cannot go without abandoning their identity as Jews. What is that wall, and has it moved? Not a new idea--even my atheist father, who rejected his evangelical Christian upbringing, enjoyed the old joke about a new arrival in heaven, who, on touring his new home with God, expressed surprise at the groups he sees there--Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians and so on, and even further surprise at the sight of a big wall, which God explained separated and hid all the other groups from the Catholics--"because they think they're the only ones here."
Anyway, is it OK to define reform J. by what it is not? Is there an affirmative line that can be drawn? That's the real puzzle in my mind.
Post a Comment