If we are the population about which such leaders are concerned, we may be ill advised to leave the movement exclusively in the hands of any generation but our own.
by Maya Zinkow
When I read the Pew Research Center’s independent study of American Jews, I started worrying, I started thinking, and I started talking to my fellow millennial Jews. Of particular interest to me was the section of the study that the Forward classified as the “Conservative Collapse.” This is a pretty grave verdict for a movement that seeks to create a traditionally-minded Judaism for a modern people. Yet it seems that the leaders of the Conservative movement aren’t too worried about the near-death sentence. I am, and I would hope that the rest of the reported 11% of young Jews who still identify with the Conservative movement are as well.
It is dismaying that, in reaction to the study, three leaders of the movement chose either to shrug off shrinking numbers as old news, claim to be working on these problems without specifically identifying solutions, or spin the reality of dwindling numbers into a positive claim that Conservative Judaism is the movement of a small population of people who are truly committed to its ideals of combining modernity with tradition.
As someone whose Judaism has been primarily shaped by Camp Ramah and the Conservative group at the Columbia/Barnard Hillel (formerly Koach, which officially lost its funding from the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism in June), my gut response to the Pew study is to start brainstorming with my fellow 11% what it is we will do to improve the outlook of the movement whose leadership, time and again, is surprisingly reluctant to acknowledge the severity of the problem and the dire need for change, inspiration, and creative problem solving. Indeed, it is my experiences in these major Conservative institutions that inspire my confidence in young Jewry, in my peers.
The Conservative movement must not be reserved for an elite few. Nor is the reaction of Conservative leadership an accurate portrayal of young Conservative and Conservative-minded Jewry. If we are the population about which such leaders are concerned, we may be ill advised to leave the movement exclusively in the hands of any generation but our own. We are ready to reinvigorate and restructure programs and organizations that are no longer sustainable in bringing our Conservative ideals into Jewish adulthood. We must take on the responsibilities of reshaping our future, and I hope that existing leadership, to whom my peers and I owe a debt of gratitude for our deep connections to Judaism, will work with us to make plans and forge a new path with open hearts and minds.
Maya Zinkow is a senior at Barnard College and is an active member of the Conservative group on campus.
Top
One thing that I didn’t see mentioned as an imperative for all those who care about Jewish continuity is what Ethan Tucker of Mechon Hadar says all the time and that is that if we want to be Jewish we need to KNOW what that really means. No one should choose to be outside if they don’t know the riches they are missing. Go and learn!
Maya, as often happens in the Jewish press, a partial or distorted quote becomes the reality that everyone jumps on. Believing that the leaders of the Conservative Movement aren’t concerned or don’t have practical solutions is not only inaccurate, it shows a lack of awareness of what is actually happening. For instance, the comments in the press that USCJ doesn’t want to talk about the number of congregations is not about being “defeatist,” it’s an attempt to more accurately portray both challenges and opportunities. How so? Simply put, the congregations we are “losing” are often very small shuls with a handful of elderly congregants that are closing down or merging. The building closes, but the people move on to other shuls. In many cases, those shuls also transfer significant assets to other congregations, helping them become even stronger. So, instead of talking about the number of buildings, we talk about the many individuals and families that we are engaging in innovate ways. In that area, there are many, many wonderful things happening around the country that have been sparked by the work of USCJ. It’s a matter of looking at what measurement we are using and what it actually means. Do we have challenges? Definitely. But thinking for one minute that USCJ or other organizations aren’t aware of the issues or don’t want to address them would be wrong. As Rabbi Twerski (the psychiatrist) once said, “People have three basic needs: food, shelter and someone to blame.” We need to move beyond blame and do the hard work. Can the arms of the Movement work together in more efficient and powerful ways? Yes, but rest assured that there are many joint efforts already in place. Unfortunately, we don’t spend enough time communicating about these programs, but it’s happening. It’s also true that the great and exciting ideas that come out of our institutions are simply ignored because many of our congregations are ill-equipped (finances, leadership, vision) to embrace change or execute on new paradigms. We hope that next week’s Centennial will light a fire under synagogue leaders, pushing them to think about new models, and getting them to actually execute on them. Maya, there is passion; it’s just not evenly distributed!
Perhaps Jim next week’s Centennial will light a fire under USCJ and they will learn the value of better communications. And if that happens, I will happily connect you to other organizations that just might learn lessons from your success!
Shabbat Shalom
Maya Zinkow is to be commended for her frank and thoughtful letter. Were I in a leadership position at the USCJ, I would ask Maya and her cohort to bring 30 folks to Baltimore in two weeks and to share their feelings and thoughts with delegates assembled. It would truly get a conversation going that is vital and vibrant and certainly not scripted. Kol Hakavod Maya for your passion and your concern–and I pray that you will be a voice for that 11% whose numbers will grow with you in the coming decades!
Morris’s idea has a great precedent: in the early ’70’s, a group of students stormed the GA and demanded (it was a great decade for demanding!) funding for Jewish education. It was at a time when they also formed a network of young Jewish educators, when the first Network conference of Jewish women was held, and when CAJE was born. I don’t believe that the problems have to do so much with institutional reluctance to face challenges or to change strategies; I think problem is that we need an infusion of imaginative and relevant ideas, and the Centennial of the USCJ may be one fertile venue for generation.