Saturday afternoon's panel discussion on reform Judaism

Prof. Sarna, as moderator, laid out focal points:

• the limits of diversity
• new developments in Reform Judaism
• the debate about ritual
• what does it mean to be a Reform Jew?

He emphasized the ‘reform’ is a constant process, that change is built into Reform Judaism.

With Rabbi Knobel and Rabbi Moffic, we are lucky to have two different positions on Reform Judaism.

Rabbi Knobel mentioned some things that are happening in Reform Judaism. He compared the 1885 and 1999 Pittsburgh Platforms. The 1885 statement in Section 2 said: We recognize in the Mosaic law a system of training for the people of ancient Palestine. Today, only the moral laws contained in it apply…It rejected all Mosaic and rabinnic laws pertaining to diet and dress as not leading to holiness.

The 1999 Platform urged on-going study of all mitzvoth and “fulfillment of those that address our community.” He said two things are worthy of note about the format of the Mishkan T’filah as they touch on current problems and directions: First, the 2-page spread, with full transliteration of the Hebrew so we all can keep up and the alternative readings on the facing pages, the idea being that “on any page…you can find yourself” (unlike the Gates of Prayer, which offers differing views among its services). Second, there is an emphasis on Jewish peoplehood, with added reference to Eretz Yisrael and Zionism, and in the 2d prayer of the Amidah, the reference to resurrection of the dead.

The 1885 Platform eliminated all bodily mitzvoth and emphasis on peoplehood. It emphasized sprit and soul and treated participants as rational beings. Today, we’re exploring what’s been rejected. Judiasim understands us as body and soul, the physical as the source of the spiritual. We use bodily powers to perform mitzvoth.

Even in 1974, Reform Judaism thought that the primary mode of being Jewish was Jewish thought and prayer. That’s why the 8 different services with different theologies are in the Gates of Prayer. We began to move away from serious theology and reflection toward sociology and marketing. We stopped being mission-driven and instead became program-driven.

We now have a wide variety of programs. The model for the synagogue seems to be the megachurch. Today the bon mot is ‘Judaism of meaning’. Each of us has to create our own Jewish identity. Supposedly this leads to spirituality (“whatever that is”). I should find some connection to God who is friend, lover….intimate and immanent, not transcendent. ­Something’s missing. There’s no ‘should’ here. We had a covenant with theology that has now disappeared.

Rabbi Moffic asked: 1. How has Reform Judaism changed? 2. How will it change? .

Reform Judaism today is less hierarchical and more intimate, not in the sanctuary but the chapel, much more interactive than before. These are the key factors influencing Reform Judaism:

• interfaith marriages (over 50% of religious school students have a non-Jewish parent)
• continued demand for interaction between clergy and laity
• the need to market the synagogue will drive the “shape” of worship; people join to find a good experience
• most American Jews won’t learn Hebrew and we’re not a worshipping culture

Judaism today is more home-based. Should we/can we do more to promote that? To bring people into the synagogue, should we have more cultural events? The sense of Jewish ethnicity will continue to diminish, so the religious component needs to become more important.

We have these theological considerations. Reform Judaism is a religion of reason. God should be both transcendent and immanent. What does this mean for synagogue worship?

1. Worship must be very inclusive. The congregation, though, can’t be all things to all people. Reflection and spirituality.must be part of it. “Synaplex” as a model could be good, but it loses the sense of community.

2. Congregations do need to market themselves. We have to create community and relationships;

you have to get people in the door before you can “say the hard things”.

3. We have to recover universalism. The 1999 Platform is more particularist, and this has been a trend for the last 30 years. What makes Jews different? There is a widespread trend toward universalism in the larger society today.

Rabbi Knobel responded: When we talk about Reform Judaism today, it’s largely a set of institutions. He told of Rabbi Eisen saying mitzvoth and community are the program for Conservative Judaism. What, then, is Reform? We’re not theological nor ideological. The synaplex may be a desperate move. We don’t know who or what we are. It would be a mistake to buy into the consumerist mentality. We have been seeing the individual as the unit of decision-making, so we reject a responsibility to the collective voice. Rabbi Knobel thinks the future is in the attempt to be mission-driven. A particular, exciting collective mission.

Rabbi Moffic agreed that we must be mission-driven. Ethics is a very important component of Reform Judaism. The synagogue has to be a place where you hear what you don’t want to hear. How are we going to include what we hear about in how we affect the world?

Rabbi Knobel responded: we can probably think about the synagogue in the 3-legged mode of Pirke Avot: torah, worship, and deeds of loving-kindness. Our tradition appeals for tikkun olam and prophetic Judaism. The consumer mentality leads to lack of a stance. Whether or not the congregation liked it, Reform rabbis wanted to preserve the synagogue as a place with a voice. The synagogue must tackle the problems of people and our society.

Fran Grossman was concerned that Rabbi Knobel was talking about what should be rather than what is, namely: fewer come on Friday night, there’s a different service on Saturday morning, so who and where are the leaders? Do we work from the top down or the bottom up? How are we going to get people here so they can hear and want to be a part of it?

Sam asked how we accommodate all the different views within the tent?

Liane Casten asked: How do we define the mission? In what way could Reform Judaism be more meaningful?

Rabbi Moffic reminded us of the phrase “Let us be a light unto the nations,” exemplify morality, and pointed out that this in the early days of Reform was linked to the sense of being chosen. The idea of the Jews being the teachers or leaders doesn’t work today, so what should the mission be? Sinai Temple’s mission is to maintain the liberal Jewish mission. And maybe temples have to have multiple services today to accommodate all the views.

Rabbi Knobel pointed out that having multiple services doesn’t equal the synaplex concept. Openness to variety and experiment is good. We don’t all have to do the same thing. To adopt the new Miskan T’fillah we have to work together; we need to engage in strong conversations with each other where we may disagree agreeably. Rabbis should inspire and push congregations. There has to be conversation between lay and professional leadership. We need facilitated conversation. We have entrenched interests, and we have people who fear speaking truth to power.

Noel Salinger asked for clarification of the significance of transcendent vs. immanent in the view of God. Does each suggest different paths?

Clive Kamins asked what’s the future of Hebrew? It’s virtually essential in the camping movement.

Lorna (from Sinai) asked, Aren’t you talking about being all things to all people? Are Reform and Conservative going to merge?

Rabbi Moffic reminded us of the phrase “You are as close to us as breathing yet farther than the most distant star” as the paradigm for transcendent and immanent. Early Reform emphasized the transcendent God, but today we regard God as immanent, especially in the past 20 years. (We have small sanctuaries, lower bima, more sense of community and participation…we are closer to God.) It would be wonderful for more people to learn Hebrew. It can teach us about Judaism, but people understand more and get more using English. Reform isn’t trying to be more like Conservative, but we are attracting many people from the Conservative movement.

Rabbi Knobel said we need a balance between Hebrew and English. As to immanence and transcendence, this is not an age of systematic theology that defines God. Ours is the narrative theology of the Bible, Talmud and midrash. We need the variety of ways our people experience God.

Rabbi Moffic said we need a balance between inviting people in vs. teaching and telling.

Monroe Roth said expanding the membership is the job of the board, not the rabbi. The rabbi should preach. Rabbi Moffic disagreed; Rabbi Knobel agreed.

Nikki Stein said there’s a split between the dedicated, active members and the passive members, and some of the passive members come but want it to be a different place. She wanted to hear more about serving the “people who come and don’t create strife”.

Prof. Sarna said that religion has been on the rise in the US, and Reform Judaism has followed the trend. Now, though, religion is getting a bad reputation; secularism is on the resurgence. How will this shift affect and shape Reform Judaism as it today “looks at the left”?

Rabbi Moffic said there’s no simple answer to conflict between old members and new. Rabbi Knobel said process makes the difference. When feelings are ignored and people aren’t consulted, there’s strife. But process also has to end. We have to be open to change. There’s a mistrust of religious institutions as they exist today. He said he still believes in prophetic Judaism, but maybe the old-fashioned rhetoric doesn’t work today. He asked: How can we reach out to people who aren’t synagogue-oriented? Young people seek serious intellectual confrontation.


Prepared by Jane Heron