Michael R. Cohen. The Birth of Conservative : Solomon Schechter's Disciples and the Creation of an American Religious Movement. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. ix + 210 pp. $50.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-231-15635-6.

Reviewed by Matthew LaGrone

Published on H-Judaic (October, 2012)

Commissioned by Jason Kalman (Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion)

In 1972, Beth Tfloh in Baltimore, a large con‐ nary, would drive the movement forward, not‐ gregation afliated with the , ap‐ withstanding their collective ideological incom‐ pointed David Novak as its . What made this patibility; 3) and despite that incompatibility, appointment unusual was that Rabbi Novak re‐ these disciples promoted unity over any divisive ceived his ordination at the Jewish Theological platform, resulting in a movement devoted, at Seminary (JTS), which trains clergy for the Con‐ least in its early stages, to pluralism. servative movement. It is unlikely that an Ortho‐ Cohen’s initial task is to overturn several per‐ dox synagogue would consider a JTS candidate to‐ sistent theories regarding ’s day. In fact, the Seminary was placing graduates origins. Most accounts of the movement locate its in Orthodox pulpits regularly into the 1950s. And, beginnings in the nineteenth century, either with as Michael Cohen shows in his important new Zecharias Frankel’s “positive-historical school” in work, The Birth of Conservative Judaism, the Germany or in the , with the opening boundaries between the Conservative movement of the frst Jewish Theological Seminary in 1886. and the other streams of American Judaism (Or‐ But evidence for a clearly defned centrist move‐ thodoxy, in particular) were rather permeable ment, fully separate from Reform and Orthodox well into mid-century, and there was a great deal Judaism, is gossamer-thin prior to the twentieth of boundary-crossing. I took away three other sig‐ century. Cohen argues that the beginnings of Con‐ nal insights from Cohen: 1) that Conservative Ju‐ servative Judaism are found in the frst half of the daism emerged as a separate denomination only twentieth century with the students of Solomon after the death of Solomon Schechter (1915), and Schechter, identifying roughly a dozen of these even then it took another generation to work out students (and later ) as key leaders in shap‐ a coherent ideology; 2) that the relationships be‐ ing the movement. Cohen also restores Schechter tween Schechter’s disciples, nurtured at the Semi‐ to the center of the narrative, replacing Frankel, H-Net Reviews

Sabato Morais, and Alexander Kohut, among oth‐ methods, and an emphasis on synagogue deco‐ ers, in the story of the movement’s creation. rum (p. 8). Their very commitment to diversity Cohen then identifes two distinctive features mitigated against any deliberate delineation of of Schechter’s disciples in the making of Conser‐ what the movement represented. When any vative Judaism: their dedication to Jewish diversi‐ movement decides to formally defne itself, diver‐ ty and their steadfast personal ties to each other sity necessarily diminishes. Once you commit to and Schechter. With few exceptions, Schechter writing “this is what we believe and this is what did not envision the Seminary creating a new de‐ we ought to do,” the choices made exclude alter‐ nomination, but rather a diverse, “big-tent Ju‐ natives. This is the opportunity cost of denomina‐ daism” that would encompass the broad center of tionalism: coherence at the expense of pluralism, religious American Jews, excluding only radical even if pluralism remains a value. Reformers--namely, those who adhered to the Re‐ Perhaps the greatest strength of this very form principles outlined in its 1885 Pittsburgh strong book is its discussion of the enduring Platform--and what we would today call the Hare‐ friendships and professional relationships of di, the isolationist Orthodox. For example, at a Schechter’s disciples. The joint fdelity of speech at an Indiana synagogue, he declared that Schechter’s disciples to JTS as an institution and Judaism is “as great as the world, and as wide as Schechter as teacher, friend, and father fgure is the universe, and you must avoid every action of central to Cohen’s narrative. This insight suggests a sectarian or of a schismatic nature.”[1] He want‐ that we cannot look only at large structural fac‐ ed to attract “the mystic and the rationalist, the tors in the shaping of religious life, choices, and traditional and the critical”[2] to JTS and main‐ institutions, but that soft factors, difcult to mea‐ tained that the Seminary “should also prove sure, matter. Regarding this web of relationships, broad enough to harbor the diferent minds of the one of the rabbis, Eugene Kohn, stated the matter present century.”[3] He prized unity above all thusly: “The ties of sentiment based on memories else; diferences could be smoothed over. His stu‐ of common or similar experiences in student days dents fulflled his wishes, and ft the diversity he and further cemented by later association in grap‐ sought: some were European, others American; pling with similar problems, however diferent some promoted substantial ritual and liturgical the solutions we may propose for them, possess a changes, others hewed more closely to traditional‐ force and validity that cannot be denied” (p. 121). ism. The more liberal among Schechter’s students Kohn continued: “The only efective bond that called regularly for a more thorough distinction unites us and distinguishes us from other Rab‐ between themselves and the Orthodox. The tradi‐ binic bodies ... is our common devotion to the tionalists, on the other hand, insisted on a vague Seminary” (p. 121). These rabbis sought unity adherence to Schechter’s “Catholic Israel,” the even at the price of sacrifcing ideological purity, trans-geographic and trans-temporal unity of the not wishing to defne their fragile movement, as Jewish people. Among their points of disagree‐ defnition would necessarily lead to exclusion, to ment, they diverged over family seating and the casting out as well as pulling in. use instrumental music on the Sabbath. They also But it would be the generation after the group quarreled among themselves about whether the Cohen focuses on (though he does detail their ac‐ Conservative movement should become the third tivities), those who did not have a direct relation‐ denomination among North American Jews. ship with Schechter, that would mark out Conser‐ Along with an allegiance to pluralism, however, vative Judaism defnitively as North American Ju‐ they did agree on three central ideas: sermons in daism’s third denomination. Without the com‐ English, the utilization of modern educational

2 H-Net Reviews manding presence of Schechter--his “charismatic” benefted from a fuller contextualization of Con‐ authority (p. 5), writes Cohen--and the deaths of servative Judaism within the American religious some of his students, authority at JTS and among landscape. the rabbinate passed to this younger generation The foregoing, however, is a minor quibble. that wished to make Conservative Judaism a fully- The Birth of Conservative Judaism should quickly dressed denomination. In the immediate post- become the standard work on the emergence of WWII era, this group (led by Robert Gordis, Mor‐ the movement. Cohen’s careful scholarship and ris Silverman, and Max Arzt, among others) creat‐ tightly reasoned arguments are powerful correc‐ ed a siddur that would be adopted by most Con‐ tives to common misunderstandings about the de‐ servative congregations and established a law velopment of Conservative Judaism. And as con‐ committee to render halakhic decisions, decisions temporary Conservative Judaism struggles to fnd that did not seek sanction in the Orthodox world. it feet again, leaking members and congregations Cohen notes in particular the movement’s respon‐ like a sieve, casting about for a new message, its sum permitting the use of electricity and driving leaders would do well by learning from its own on Sabbath as frm gestures away from the broad history. This book is a good place to start. strategy of Schechter and most of his students Notes (who tried, ftfully and ultimately unsuccessfully, to attract the modern Orthodox to their version of [1]. Schechter, “Altar Building in America,” in American Judaism). Seminary Addresses and Other Papers (New York: 0 0 Ark Publishing Co., 1915), 87. 0 6 One feature that I wish Cohen would have discussed in greater detail is found in the book’s [2]. Quoted in Mel Scult, “Schechter’s Semi‐ subtitle. In what way was Conservative Judaism nary,” in Tradition Renewed: A History of the Jew‐ an American religious movement? Cohen correct‐ ish Theological Seminary, ed. Jack Wertheimer ly frames the denomination as a new religious (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of Amer‐ 0 0 movement, but what made (and makes) denomi‐ ica, 1997), 58. 0 6 nationalism seemingly irresistible? Some of [3]. Schechter, “The Charter of the Seminary,” Schechter’s students and many in the next genera‐ in Seminary Addresses and Other Papers, 25. tion chafed against the ideological muddle of the movement, insisting on a demarcation of the Con‐ … servative Judaism from Reform and Orthodoxy. As one rabbi impatiently said: “the United Syna‐ gogue cannot maintain its present know-nothing attitude for very long” (p. 73). Religion in America, with its low barriers to entry, its high levels of in‐ ternal and external switching, its emphasis on voluntarism, denominationalism, and pluralism, forms the background of Conservative Judaism’s birth. In such a framework, in the absence of any compelling reason for religious unity and in the presence of conficting values, people will sepa‐ rate on opinions, arranging a situation amenable to their religious sensitivities. Cohen does draw helpful parallels between American Judaism and Protestantism, but the monograph would have

3 H-Net Reviews

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-judaic

Citation: Matthew LaGrone. Review of Cohen, Michael R. The Birth of Conservative Judaism: Solomon Schechter's Disciples and the Creation of an American Religious Movement. H-Judaic, H-Net Reviews. October, 2012.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=36425

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

4