Congregational Senescence

All synagogues have life cycles.  While in Venice last summer, there was a Jewish quarter with vestigial congregations that assembled minyanim but were once more than part of Venice's Jewish History.  My daughter spent the Holy Days in Albania.  She could walk to a 6th century synagogue ruins but would have to take transit to an active congregation on Corfu to experience worship.  Shuls just come and go.  All were once nascent.  Some are now at their peak, others are historical sites that were once thriving.

Our shul has gone through its life cycle, senescent but not ended.  We started more than 100 years ago, had a merger, had a move to a building designed for its needs, engaged a transforming Rabbi who shaped its identity, had a school that molded a fine legacy for us in many places, and for a variety of reasons has swooned in a way that will resist reversal.  Our white elephant of a building has been converted to cash to offset declining membership  revenue.  Participatory invitations are currently largely limited to a small subset of people.  I think our current state would be one of assisted living, tenants of a more active congregation that has a better result of absorbing its members into ongoing activities and creating new ones.  We are approaching what for people would be called end of life planning.

In many ways I have been the observer and historian.  Invitations to be a participant are few and largely based on technical skill rather than my inquisitive mind, which has been helpful there in other ways but not very contributory now, or at least not very desired now.  When I started there, defecting from elsewhere, I found myself attracted to the Rabbi's knowledge and intellect.  We had many great discussions about Judaism and beyond.  A Cantor arrived, partly with my committee assistance, who also impressed me with his breadth of skill and not quite polymath mind.  I could overlook the flaws, maybe even resist the attempt to rationalize them.  A certain amount of discord developed that would create factions and competition, though never vindictive.

A change in leadership, both officer and religious, made a good demarcation point.  Talent moved on, but it also became less a source of our identity.  Hopes for a new young Rabbi making an impact on young membership never materialized.  We retain pockets of excellence but that has long since become subordinate to more perfunctory things.  Could the Rabbi have written his vision for the progress of his congregation on a yellow pad within a year of his arrival?  I don't know if he ever tried. Can he do it now?  Doubt it, but maybe.   Did he ever nurture talent or chat with defectors?  Maybe, though my best guess would be no.

We find ourselves now at a branch point.  The congregation in its current trajectory cannot sustain the career of our Rabbi to normal retirement age.  It is time to bail out.  And provisions to do that have begun.  Unfortunately, the provisions to reverse this seem a committee of the same people who misjudged the situation ten years back.  What was once a grass roots community has increasingly resembled that USY clique of remote memory.  You now have a few people invited to do a lot of things and a fair number of people with dormant talent that is not valued enough to seek out.  Reversal or renewal cannot happen with that mode of thinking.  I don't think it will.