As many synagogues seek to define themselves by meta-values that transcend Judaism’s major movements, perhaps congregations of different stripes can find common ground

Rabbi Adam Cutler
Beth Tzedec Congregation, Toronto

Rabbi Adam Scheier
Congregation Shaar Hashomayim, Montreal

Rabbi Cutler: One of the results, if not the purpose, of the Rabbi2Rabbi format is to demonstrate the remarkable similarities in thought and practice shared by rabbis of different denominations. Indeed, in our ongoing dialogue, we have mostly focused on shared concerns and overlapping experiences.

I am often asked about the difference between Conservative and Orthodox Judaism. In a city like Toronto, which has some of the most right-leaning Conservative congregations in North America situated in close proximity to modern Orthodox synagogues and partnership minyanim, the question is especially salient. I often explain that on a Jewish legal level, we are 98 per cent in sync, with some obvious differences pertaining to synagogue seating and less obvious liturgical dissimilarities. 

Still, I think we better understand ourselves when we are able to define what sets us apart from others. When we are close on many matters, that process can be particularly fruitful. Moving beyond Halachah, how are we different? What are the issues about which we disagree? How do our worldviews diverge?

Rabbi Scheier: I imagine that, were we to focus on our differences, we would come down to two Ms: mechitzah and method of halachic decision-making. The mechitzah might symbolize all of the differences that visitors to our respective synagogues would easily observe, and we might differ in how we come to our halachic decisions, even if the decision are often the same – for example, we might use different sources or give different weight to the same Jewish legal sources.

If we are as similar as you claim, then of what value is denominational affiliation?  It has now been many years since my congregation became independent in terms of affiliation – meaning, while the congregational standard is to be a synagogue that observes Halachah in every aspect of our communal conduct (and I am a proudly Orthodox rabbi), we remain unaffiliated with any particular movement.  

Rabbi Cutler: The modern denominational system is a product of 19th-century Germany. The earliest Reform Jews found it necessary to create a distinct grouping, which enabled them to find common cause among their brethren and brought with it institutional support in the form of a synagogue association and rabbinical group. 

These products, their descendants and sister groups – the Union for Reform Judaism and the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Rabbinical Assembly, as well as the Orthodox Union and the Rabbinical Council of America – continue to provide essential support for Jewish life in ways that are denominationally appropriate. There are many tasks that national or international groups can do that independent synagogues and rabbis are simply unable to accomplish.

Yet, we know that younger Jews are less likely to define themselves by any given denomination. In a generation that is ambivalent toward membership-based organizations and identity labels, these Jews may define themselves as “Just Jewish” or “halachically observant Jewish” or “post-denominational Jewish.” In practice, much of what they do would be mainstream in my shul or yours, but they would prefer to forge their own Jewish identity rather than link it to a broader denomination. 

I am not especially worried about this trend. Jewish organizations in general and synagogues in particular are sufficiently creative and flexible to serve the needs of this generation. I am excited to see what types of Judaism will be expressed in 50 years.

Rabbi Scheier: I agree with you that the larger association and rabbinical groups serve an important function, though I wonder what our world would look like if they were organized by a principle other than religious denomination. 

As many synagogues seek to define themselves by meta-values that transcend the denominations, perhaps common ground might be found between, say, an Orthodox synagogue that is committed to social justice and a Reconstructionist synagogue with the same dedication. Or, for example, synagogues with a strong emphasis on music might band together to share resources and ideas, regardless of the ritual proclivities of that particular synagogue.

Perhaps our conversation can best be summed up by the words of Rabbi Yitz Greenberg: “It doesn’t matter which [denomination you belong to], as long as you’re ashamed of it.”  

I would add: it doesn’t matter, as long as you’re committed to furthering the denomination’s ability to bring Jewish meaning and pride to our community, in all of its facets.