Cold Hard Facts

On Friday, Synagogue 3000 and Mechon Hadar came out with a study on Emergent Communities: the eighty or so independent minyanim, rabbi-led groups and "other" (Brooklyn Jews) that are dotting the country's landscape these days. On the backs of Wednesday's New York Times article, I'd say it's been a big week in the synagogue shake-up world.

No need to re-hash the facts here, you can read the study for yourself, or probably already have. Rather, I want to point out (elucidate, have you) some especially interesting parts of the study.

First, the authors put to rest one claim that has been levied at the whole indi-minyan project for years: "That's great for New York City, but what about the rest of the country?" Wrong. The facts clearly attest to the fact that this is a trend which, while started in "hip" urban centers, has spread US-wide. (And Israel, for that matter. What's going on up in Canada? Anyone?)

Second, the study notes that while many synagogues have attempted to replicate the "feel" or the "grove" of the scene within the synagogues, this project largely flops. It's not authentic to what the indi-minyan scene really is all about: empowering Jews themselves to run their Jewish future in a committed, learned way - just like, wait for it, wait for it - Hillel!

Moving on. Here's the part that I found most fascinating. God knows what it means for the Reform Movement, how the leadership will respond to a near-damning conclusion about it, but, let's let the words of the study speak for themselves.

The study notes that while the participants of these communities grew up with backgrounds roughly proportional to the NJPS, when participants self-identify currently, the word "Reform" basically falls off the map. A small drop would be expected, afterall, much of this community sees itself as "post-" or "non-denominational," but while the "Conservative" label drops from 46% to 37%, and "Orthodox" from 20% to 15%, "Reform" drops from 18% to 3%, a whopping 83.3% drop-off!

Why is it that knowledgeable, committed Jews, raised in Reform institutions, often educated through the system entirely (the amount of ex-Kutznikim I meet at places like Kol Zimra is staggering) are dropping off the Reform map? Isn't this the same problem that the Meitav program has been dealing with since its inception?

The study, says the following:

These patterns do not suggest merely that many young adults in these communities are unhappy with denominational categories. They also suggest a basic incompatibility between Reform identity and emergent participants' Jewish identity. One reason is that few emergent communities take a Reform-style approach or are heirs to Reform prayer groups. Another is that, typically, participants in emergent communities see themselves as highly committed and highly identified... In contrast, Reform, as the movement with the largest number of least committed Jews - by their own testimony - may find it difficult to meet the needs of those young adults who seek to intensify their Jewish identity, and many of those young adults may perceive their new commitments as incompatible with those of the vast majority in the Reform movement.

That last sentence stings, but I have trouble seeing another explanation for this all. I've spent the last two summers trying to teach and show "committed and highly identified" teenagers that their passion and devotion need not exclude them from the movement that they call home, as much as experience is telling them otherwise. But, in the wake of the Jewish Week's own assessment of this problem last August, at what point do you pack up and go home, just accept things for how they are?

Can you? Are there alternative hypotheses? And what is there to make of it all?

Regardless, read the survey. Get those head-juices flowing. Tonto, we've got work to do.

Comments

[BZ]

Here's what I said about it [ http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2007/12/results-are-in.html ]

==========

I disagree with the report’s suggestion (p. 17) that there is a “basic incompatibility between Reform identity and emergent participants’ Jewish identity”. I would argue that many independent communities actualize the Reform movement’s professed ideals of informed autonomy much more effectively than do most Reform-affiliated congregations. The problem is that the “Reform” label has been affixed to a particular set of styles which are strongly associated with top-down synagogue worship and thus in opposition to what grassroots communities do, rather than to an aspiration that can be realized in a fully informed and participatory community. And as I have written before, the leaders of the Reform movement are complicit in this.

Suppose someone grows up in the Conservative movement, internalizes its values, and then joins an independent minyan that s/he feels best actualizes those values (perhaps better than a Conservative-affiliated synagogue). Then the vibe s/he gets from the Conservative movement is that this independent minyan is really Conservative deep down and why won’t they admit it, thus s/he is still living a Conservative Jewish life, just in a different framework. (This view about independent minyanim, which has been stated by Conservative leaders in various public forums, is inaccurate for a number of reasons, including 1) Conservative Jewish identity is tied to institutions, with which these minyanim are not affiliated, 2) this ignores the many other participants in the minyanim who have different perspectives and are there for different reasons, etc. etc., but that’s not relevant here; what is relevant is that these people can see that, justifiably or not, the Conservative movement is leaving the light on for them.) In contrast, suppose someone else grows up in the Reform movement, internalizes its values, and then joins an independent minyan that s/he feels best actualizes those values (perhaps better than a Reform-affiliated synagogue). Then the vibe s/he gets from the Reform movement is that s/he has left the fold. I mean, the whole service is in Hebrew, for crying out loud! Many in the Reform movement would see independent minyanim as something thoroughly alien to Reform, rather than as a vision of what Reform communities could look like if their participants were more informed and autonomous. So it’s no wonder that the independent minyan participants start to see their own Jewish identity as something other than Reform. I hope that Reform leaders are looking carefully at this survey and thinking about its consequences.

[David]

The authors' point, I believe, is not whether the ideology works within the indi-minyan scene; in that sense you are 100% correct.

This is sociology, and the sociologists are pointing to the practical incompatibility between the committed Jewish identity that many within that community are looking for/already living, and what they're able to do in a Reform shul.