WHITHER - OR IS IT WITHER? - THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT
By Marvin Schick
There�s no quick fix for what ails the
Conservative movement.� In all
probability, there is no fix at all, even far down the road.� Membership and synagogue attendance will continue
to decline and, more importantly, internal conflict and religious and
theological confusion will place an even greater strain on the movement�s
leadership.� This is bad news for
American Jewry, including the �We told you so� crowd.� With few exceptions, those who are defecting
are not heading in the direction of greater religiosity.� They are moving further away from Jewish commitment
and continuity.
The Conservatives made a bet against history and they have
lost.� They calculated that by shedding a
portion of our heritage they could concoct a brand of Judaism that retained
much of our theology and practices in a way that would accommodate droves of
Jews who were not comfortable with the rigors of Orthodoxy.� They eliminated the mechitza and in a series
of ever more radical departures from tradition, they yielded to feminist pressure
and also chipped away at Sabbath observance.
It�s accepted that the turning point came
in the mid-1950�s when its halacha committee sanctioned driving to synagogue on
Saturday.� Since dates and events
facilitate the understanding or presentation of history, this decision is a
legitimate way of looking at the story of Conservatism.� But the emphasis that has been placed on it
masks two realities, the first being that there was much that preceded it which separated the Conservative movement from our
religious tradition, The other is that advanced assimilation was already
impelling Jews further away from observance.�
This situation was dynamic, so that irrespective of any official laxity
in halacha, the outcome would have been the same, as
Conservatives were abandoning the world of their fathers.
There is an interesting clue supporting this view in what
happened during the same period among Orthodox-affiliated Jews who were nominal
or marginal in their religious commitment.�
They once constituted much of American Orthodoxy; now they are gone with
the wind.
For quite a while, it seemed that the Conservative bet had
paid off.� Hundreds of synagogues � many
of them large � were built to accommodate the exodus to suburbia and expanded
membership.� There was intellectual
ferment at the Jewish Theological Seminary and the Conservative rabbinate
included many of quality and learning, often men who had studied at yeshivas.� Yet, there were disquieting signs.� The Conservative laity which once consisted
of Jews who were Jewishly literate and knowledgeable
experienced a steady erosion as the older generations passed on and their offspring
knew less and could care less.� Nowadays,
perhaps half of those who are identified as
Conservative are by affiliation alone and they practice rather little.� Even among the other half, there has been a
considerable decline in observance.
Inevitably, Conservative rabbis of a more traditional bent
have retired or passed away.� The younger
rabbis are in the aggregate distant from the attitudes and theology that once
characterized the movement, If Seminary students are an indication of what�s
blowing in the wind, as they must be, what awaits us is a Conservative
rabbinate that is committed to conserving very little.� The internal battle over Gay Rights is one
omen of what lies in store.� There is
also a geographic divide, as
Under these unpromising circumstances, there may be little
that Conservative leadership can do to stem the tide, to abort what is already
in the womb of time.� I have, just the
same, several suggestions, beginning with the abolition of the halacha committee. �Its
sole function is from time to time to put a veneer of religious acceptability
on additional departures from traditional practices.� While its abolition will not result in
Conservatives becoming more observant, it will mean that violations of
religious law will result from the actions of individuals and not from the
permissiveness of rabbis who in the name of halacha
are anti-halachic.� In a sense, the
Conservative movement should learn from Chabad synagogues, notably the newer
ones in outlying areas whose members drive to shul on Shabbos, without either
the approval or reprobation of local rabbis.�
Secondly, there must be downsizing, starting with the reduction of
synagogue size.� Cavernous sanctuaries
are not inviting.� The Havura phenomenon
needs to be revitalized.� Downsizing also means lower financial expectations.� The Golden Calf syndrome in Jewish life
inevitably results in younger families being turned off
and turned away.� Membership needs to be
affordable and not every activity needs to have a dollar sign attached to it.� Here, too, Chabad can point the way because
while they very much want people to contribute, they don�t
make it a pre-condition for coming to services.
Downsizing may mean a smaller movement.� Conservative leaders should worry less about
losing members and more about the loss of identity Smaller can be stronger,
particularly if the movement attempts to recapture lost ground by becoming more
religiously purposeful.
Next, the commitment to day schools should
be ratcheted up.� It is telling
that enrollment in Solomon Schechter schools has been stagnant and too few
schools have been established during the past decade,
a period marked by increased acceptance of day schools.� In various communities, the emphasis has been
on establishing Community or trans-denominational schools.� It�s my observation
that Solomon Schechter schools do a better job than Community day schools.
Most importantly, unless the Conservative movement is to
morph into an extra-strength brand of Reform, it must take a stronger stand on
Shabbos and the observance of mitzvot.� Because
the barn door of American Jewish life has been opened
wide for so long, whatever the movement does, it will experience further
membership loss.� So be it.� To survive, the Conservative movement has to
learn to swim against the tide.
Comments can be emailed to:
mschick@mindspring.com or sent by fax to (212) 334-1324