by Richard Marker
[Published by Sh'ma, Fall 1999]

A few years ago, I became a Shul shopper. For the previous twenty five years I had visited or spoken in many synagogues throughout the country, but I had never before been an anonymous "davener" in a variety of synagogues.

My experience included three major metropolitan areas and a wide variety of denominationally affiliated synagogues. With all due respect to my colleagues and paying tribute to the few - very few - notable exceptions, it was not a pretty sight. I learned what the experience of amchah is and I understood why the general attitude toward synagogue participation and affiliation is so negative.

Like most of the majority of American Jews, despite my personal commitment to Tradition, I had simply decided to write off synagogue involvement. It was only this year, under the public challenge and private prodding of Edgar Bronfman, for whom I work, that I begin to look more closely at what was really going on-and more importantly, what might be.

I learned that there are some significant successful synagogues in North America. There are a number of productive and often charismatic Rabbis. There are efforts to revitalize and reenergize the existing institutions, under the auspices of Synagogue 2000, the Koret Initiative, to mention just 2 of several. I have learned to respect the passion and commitment which many have brought to this late 20th century challenge, and to respect even more the perseverance of many thousands of lay people who have stuck with the synagogue in its present structure despite its limitations.

But, for all of the good work and even better effort, I have come to a conclusion that none of these efforts goes quite far enough. It is time to reconsider the very role of the synagogue and the roles it has been asked to play. In doing so, we would be maintaining a long tradition in Jewish history - to consciously and purposely reconsider how the synagogue must be changed and adapted to maintain itself as a primary entry point to Jewish involvement, learning, and connection.

During the 2nd half of the 20th Century, the synagogue has tried to play an all encompassing role - as a center for prayer, community development, Jewish education, rites of passage, holiday celebrations, and even in some places, as a shop for Kosher food and/or Judaica objects. The sheer weight of expectation and overlapping roles have led the typical American synagogue to be unable to fill any of the roles very well. It may be time to de-couple many of these roles from the synagogue - or at least every synagogue.

Diversity

The typical North American Jew today is post-denominational. Rarely do North American Jews choose which synagogue to attend on the basis of ideology. Behavior patterns among congregants are largely interchangeable except for certain Orthodox communities. No one style of service can respond to everyone's needs all of the time.

Even the same individuals may prefer variety - sometimes opting for a more formal service, at others more informal; sometimes more educational, sometimes more experiential; sometimes with families and sometimes only with adults; sometimes emphasizing the need for deeper spirituality and sometimes emphasizing the need for social interaction. It is not surprising that synagogues that try to satisfy everyone with one service will frustrate most of the people most of the time.

Therefore, synagogues (as some already do) should foster a variety of different services on a regular basis. Attendees should feel comfortable opting for different styles without having to feel that they must commit themselves to that group or that style. To be sure, some people will always prefer one style over another, but the very fact of the diversity should encourage a greater level of satisfaction - assuming that services are done well.

Most synagogues will not be able to sustain many different kinds of services. This would be a wonderful opportunity for collaboration. Why not have several synagogues together sponsor a variety of services? This would help participants think more clearly about what experiences they would like rather than which place has the more reasonable dues or is the more socially acceptable place to attend. In addition, this would foster the opportunity for those who want a more abbreviated or innovative service not to feel in competition with those who have a stronger preference for Tradition, and those who would like to study the parashah not to feel imposed upon by those who simply want to recite the prayers. This is not a new model in Jewish history. Even small communities have been know to foster diversity - for but one example, the small community of Ferrara, Italy, has a single building with four different synagogues, each with discreet traditions - and that for a population never numbering more than several hundred.

Communal Affiliation

The current funding arrangement of synagogues militates against many of these ideas. Each congregation is a self contained membership organization which depends on the commitment and generosity of its own membership to sustain itself. If there were no school, or an adult educational program, or huge banquet facility, a synagogue would be concerned that it could not maintain enough viability to hire staff and pay for the space. Perhaps the time has come where one pays a community affiliation fee allowing one to participate fully in every synagogue in the community. (There are some local examples which have been moderately successful. In Chicago, the Northside Kehillah provides a single membership arrangement for all young adults. This membership allows them to use any of the four synagogues and the JCC in the immediate area.) There are many organizational details to be resolved, but the concept re-positions the relationship of individuals to the synagogue and allows the synagogues to focus on what they can and should do best, and encourages individuals to focus on their own needs.

Location/Size/Design

Outside of a few large cities, the synagogues with which most North American Jews are familiar with are "destination monoliths." They are free standing, often not connected to a neighborhood or any other particular destination in the community. This works against the viability of the synagogue as an integral part of one's daily existence. Historically, synagogues were found on the same streets as the butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker. Even if one was not a pious or observant Jew, the people who went to the synagogue and the institution itself were a part of the daily life of the entire community.

Within a few older large cities, synagogues are an integral part of the physical fabric of a community. In suburban America, where the vast majority of American Jews now live, one must go out of one's way to go to the synagogue. Why aren't synagogues located within the malls - the equivalent of the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker? Why don't synagogues have storefronts in strip malls for some of their activities? Most synagogues buildings are built for a three-time-a-year attendance and are large empty warehouses the rest of the year. Why not build synagogues which house their weekly or monthly needs and find external spaces when necessary. One late respected leader of the Jewish community used to argue that the Jewish communities should rent their civic centers for High Holidays and not waste so many millions of dollars on empty space. He was on to something.

To have huge community-wide celebrations of High Holidays and other occasions does not argue against the validity and viability of smaller and more focused community synagogues. There is no reason that neighborhood synagogues would not continue to serve a population of those who choose to go there. But the vast majority of North American Jews have no particular connection to those synagogues and would just as soon join the throngs at a community sponsored large event. This has proven to be viable within the Christian community in the United States - the mega churches throughout the United States attract literally thousands of people on Sunday mornings. They build on the counter-intuitive fact that Americans often feel most connected when they can maintain their anonymity.

Many of the ongoing synagogue initiatives, such as Synagogue 2000, are addressing the idea of changes to the interior designs of synagogues. The classic role of the leaders in worship in the synagogue is not to speak or chant to the congregation but rather to lead the congregation. That is why in most Traditional synagogues, the bimah is in the center or even toward the back of the room so that the leader serves as shaliach-tzibbur (the representative of the congregation). This structure allows there to be a reduced distance between the prayer experience of individuals and the community.

Among the other elements which are being explored have to do with sign-age and other aesthetic improvements to make alienating institutions more welcoming. These are welcome and necessary changes, but it is my contention that if synagogue facilities themselves continue to be physically isolated from the daily lives of people, they will be places which the vast majority of people inhabit only on special occasions.

Jewish Education

The role of synagogue as bet-midrash, house of study, is a cherished one. In the contemporary world that too often means "house of supplementary Jewish education." In other contexts, I have argued that the existing system of the pre Bar/Bat Mitzvah supplementary school is flawed and cannot succeed even if the education is done better. I concur with those educators who posit that pre-adolescent influence is best done with family involvement and therefore support those who would replace the current system with a family education approach whereby families must participate together in a variety of educational and celebratory events on a regular basis.

It will inevitably lead to a different role for bar/bat mitzvah planning and celebrations - but, as most would agree, it is long overdue to rethink how best to acknowledge this rite of passage.

Adolescents/Teens

Even more important than pre-Bar/Bat Mitzvah education is a much more intensive approach to adolescents. Since that is the time when peer experience has a greater impact on identity, the family education approach will inevitably be less successful. The Jewish community has, until now, invested heavily in the younger years and under-invested in the adolescent years. This approach would reverse that investment, with an attempt to develop an entirely new construct on how to involve teens. It would build on some of the successes identified through USY, NFTY, NCSY, and Young Judea as well as summer camps and certain Israel trips, and go beyond that provided anywhere at present. Since this is the least involved cohort in North American Jewish life, such a rethinking and focus is called for independent of the consideration of the synagogue - but few synagogue can hope to impact the majority of their community's adolescents alone.

Collaboration and Community Education

It is also questionable whether each synagogue can be an educational center for children or adults. While study is an indispensable part of what every synagogue should be, it is less clear that each synagogue should try to present a full fledged educational program on its own. A synagogue can only fulfill its educational role when it utilizes effective educators. The success of Boston's Me'ah program is evidence of the value of a community-wide approach and quality educators. Some communities have begun experimenting with similar approaches for children and adolescents as well. If the synagogue system develops a reputation for excellence and responsiveness, all synagogues will benefit - but more important, the Jewish community will be better served.

Community and Family

Synagogues historically never were intended to be the totality of the community or to take the place of family. It was understood that those functions would be filled organically elsewhere. As organic communities dissipated in the second half of this century, and the connectedness within families has become more tenuous, synagogues often have been called upon to fill those roles. It will still be necessary for synagogues to facilitate serving those needs for the foreseeable future. But there is a difference between facilitating and being the community or a substitute family. The degree to which synagogues play a role, as part of a panoply of organizations, in anticipating and responding to continually emerging needs of what communities want and need, they will be viable institutions. The degree to which they attempt to go it alone and attempt to be all things to all people at all times, they will continue to be lacking.

Staffing/Leadership

The current leadership structure reflects the all encompassing nature of the synagogue. Rabbis and Cantors and professionals expect to serve many roles, rarely doing any of them very well. When the synagogue is reconfigured, it will be possible to determine what skills are necessary. Certainly there will continue to be need for educational expertise, community organizing expertise, counseling expertise, and liturgical expertise. For the foreseeable future, it is hard to imagine that there are enough high quality professionals around to sustain all the different skills necessary in the many smaller, more attentive institutions which this model calls for. It would be much more efficient and more successful if there were to be the possibility of selecting people with each expertise on a community wide basis rather than within each synagogue.

It is also time to re-establish the role of lay persons as leaders in worship [shlichai-tzibbur]. The Jewish tradition gives no sacramental role to the Rabbi or Cantor, and there is certainly no service during the year which requires their leadership. It would be much more empowering to both clergy and laity if larger numbers of the community understood that they could learn how to lead the service. And it would allow rabbis to become, once again, the educators and leaders of their communities.

A healthier partnership - between newly focused rabbinical leadership and knowledgeable and impassioned laity - should begin to reflect itself in the ongoing dynamics of synagogues, less distanced and more accessible, and more integrated into the lives of those for whom it exists.

Conclusion

This vision of the synagogue calls for a fairly profound restructuring of how the Jewish community is put together. It calls for significantly different staffing models, facilities, affiliation patterns, and experiences. It recognizes continually changing needs and, therefore, posits a much more agile synagogue system. And it also suggests that the real challenge in creating the renaissance of Jewish life is to make sure that there is a fabric of institutions and understandings which foster the greatest sense of satisfaction and connectedness while encouraging authentic innovation and respect for tradition.

After all, as important as the synagogue is, its role is not to increase membership. It is to help shape and inform and inspire individuals. The measure of its success must be the greater knowledge and commitment of the many individuals who comprise the total Jewish community.

By the way, we are still shopping.

Back to top