35
ImagInIng the JewIsh Future
Remember, when you’re collaborating,
presenting an idea is not a commitment.
We feel that if we talk about a big
idea, someone will turn to us and say,
“
You’re the chair.” “You’re paying for
it.” “And you’re the committee.”
Sometimes you just have to put ideas
out there and let them marinate. So,
imagine Reform congregations in a
small geographic area decide to have
one collective membership fee. If you
join one, you join them all – each with
their own buildings.
Then imagine if those congregations
develop specialties. One congregation
specializes in K through 3, and you
have the best K through 3 education
imaginable, because you are going to
have one unbelievable educator who
knows elementary education. And
then, you have another synagogue
that specializes in 4 through 7, with
amazing programs. And then, you
have a high school that is second to
none, that brings all those high school
kids into one place so they meet more
Jews and make more connections. And
then, there are no longer individual
temple youth groups. There are regional
youth groups with professional youth
group advisors.
Imagine if you sold the building of
one of those synagogues and you raise
$7 million that you can then use to
generate 5,000 staff people, including
engagers in your community to go out
and go find those Jews.
I think we have enough buildings. I
would like to put a camera up in every
Reform synagogue in my community
and watch the traffic for a week.
How many people come and go in
a week? What are we paying to heat
those buildings? What are we paying
on mortgages? Let’s do real estate
assessments. And what would be the
cost of leveling it?
Let’s redesign a Jewish community built
for 30,000 Jews. Let’s just design it
from the ground up. How many think
it would look just like it looks today?
How many are pretty sure it would look
different? So, the question is: what keeps
us from getting to different?
As for the College-Institute, if we
are developing congregations that
specialize in certain areas, why not have
campuses at HUC-JIR that become
real “collaboratories” for very specific
topics of Jewish life? Anywhere you
go, you will hear everyone talking
about how to attract the 20s and
30
s, the Millenials. Why not, at
least in a temporary fashion, create a
“
collaborator” on one of the HUC-JIR
campuses that is focused on studying
that population, does focus groups on
that population, conducts academic
research on the sort of developmental
reality of that population. What does
it mean to be a Jew with No Religion?
And then disseminate the information
to the Reform Movement. I know that
a small number of communities are
trying to have these conversations. But
talking is not doing.
In conclusion, let’s look at the last
behavior problems. Once you get these
imaginative ideas out there, however,
we think of barriers to everything.
Here’s why we shouldn’t do it.
For example, if we sold off one building,
used all those assets, and co-located
with the congregation 90 seconds
away, what will happen to our Sefer
Torah, our memorial wall? How are
we going to pay two rabbis? And the
conversation stopper of all conversation
stoppers: what about High Holy Days?
Where are we going to fit the 1,200
Jews if not in our building?
That cannot be the conversation
stopper. We can solve the big problems
if we stay with them longer. Now, I
don’t want to minimize congregational
identity and the attachment people
have to their synagogues. That’s a
huge barrier. But I also don’t want to
minimize the fact that the numbers
are telling us that we’re not attracting
people the way we ought to into the
existing structure.
By the way, when 185 business
managers were surveyed recently
to see if they were collaborative, an
unimpressive 16% scored as highly
collaborative. Those of us who have
achieved some measure of success
in our congregations have done so
because we’re driven to succeed within
a competitive system, so we really have
to push against the status quo to build
a collaborative culture.
As the great leadership thinker John
Gardner said, “A pluralistic society
invites each organization, institution,
or special group to develop and enhance
its own potentialities. But the price
of that treasured autonomy and self-
preoccupation is that each group
concern itself also with the common
good. That is not idealism, it is self-
preservation. If the larger system fails,
the subsystems fail. That should not
be such a difficult concept for the
contending groups to grasp, but it is.”
How do we lead in this world and
not react in this world? The future
announces itself from afar, but most
people are not listening. The noisy
clatter of the present drowns out the
tentative sounds of things to come.
The sound of the new does not fit old
perceptual patterns and goes unnoticed
by most people.
So I’m trying to sound the bell a little bit
that we may need to rethink our patterns.
What would it be like if we realized
that we can’t get to the next level unless
we had to unlock the future together?
What if we open up our synagogue?
What if those locks didn’t work unless
we shared the keys?