synagogue services essay

The Interpreter Foundation

Supporting the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints through scholarship.

The Role and Purpose of Synagogues in the Days of Jesus and Paul

• Article Formats:

[Page 41] Abstract: This article explores why Jesus so often healed in synagogues. By comparing the uses and purposes of Diaspora and Palestinian synagogues, this article argues that synagogues functioned as a hostel or community center of sorts in ancient Jewish society. That is, those needing healing would seek out such services and resources at the synagogue.

What were synagogues like in Palestine 1 during the time of Jesus? What were synagogues like in the Roman world during the time of Paul? Why is the synagogue a place where people can be healed? Why does Jesus do so much healing at the synagogue? Why not do the healings elsewhere? This article explores why Jesus so often healed in synagogues.

A careful reading of the New Testament suggests that synagogues played an important role in the ministries of Jesus and Paul. Synagogues provided the contextual backdrop for Jesus’s stunning Messianic announcement and his acts of healing and teaching. For Paul, synagogues constituted a staging ground for preaching the gospel message and may have been a place of lodging when first arriving to town. Hence, understanding more fully the physical configuration and social purpose of ancient Palestinian and Diaspora synagogues will provide contextual meaning of synagogical references in the New Testament, specifically why Jesus healed at synagogues.

[Page 42] Jesus and Palestinian Synagogues

When we think of Judaism, synagogues are a natural component. Though we may have a general familiarity with these Jewish houses of worship as they exist in our own day, the picture in Jesus’s day was quite different. 2

Throughout the Gospels we hear stories of Jesus entering into synagogues to read scriptures, to teach, and to heal. Indeed, the Gospel of Mark records that Jesus’s first act after making the announcement of his missionary purpose 3 was to go to the synagogue to teach and to heal (see Mark 1:21-27). Similarly, the Gospel of Luke teaches that Jesus first revealed his divine mission while at a synagogue after reading a passage from Isaiah. Because the synagogues were central to Jewish community life during the time of Jesus and during the time of the synoptic writers, we see the gospel writers share a variety of crucial stories about Jesus that are situated at the synagogue. Given the prominence of synagogues in the world of Jesus, we would do well to learn more about them.

Studying synagogues in first century Palestine (or in the first century Diaspora, for that matter) is not a simple and straightforward undertaking. Though the institution today is synonymous with Judaism and has been for more than 1800 years, the available evidence on first century Palestinian synagogues is not abundant. Nevertheless, we do have sufficient evidence about ancient synagogues to paint an intriguing and valuable contextual picture through which we can enhance our understanding of Jesus’s activities associated with them. Even though the temple was the focal point of Jewish religious life during the time of Jesus, synagogues played an essential role in Jewish communities and an important role in the lives of Jews who lived in gentile communities.

Before we turn our eyes to the first century evidence on synagogues, it may be helpful to consider what we know about the origins of synagogues prior to the time of Jesus. 4 This question entails a definition of the word [Page 43] synagogue. “Synagogue” is formed from the Greek word ago (to lead, bring along) and the preposition sun- (together). When these two words are combined, they create the word “synagogue,” which in its technical sense means “to gather in, collect, assemble.” In Greek literature, “synagogue” refers to a gathering of things (e.g., boats, produce, ideas, etc.) or people (e.g., an assembly or meeting). What is important to recognize here is that “synagogue” in its earliest usages did not refer to a physical location, especially not to a building. In fact, it was as a result of the gathering of Jews into assemblies, for which purposes they only later built structures, that the word “synagogue” eventually evolved from indicating the act of gathering together to referencing the physical location or building where the gathering took place. 5 Though the Jerusalem temple, before the Romans destroyed it, was the major focal point of Jewish religious life, synagogues functioned as community centers that could support the spiritual and physical needs of those in the community.

The earliest evidence we have of synagogues is from inscriptional references in Egypt from the second and third century BCE. 6 Now, these assemblies were not always necessarily for religious purposes. In fact, at this early period, the term synagogue referred to a gathering for the purpose of conducting community or public affairs. Centuries later the primary purpose of synagogues centered on religious activities. Originally, synagogues were multi-purpose public community gatherings. 7

[Page 44] Fortuitously, physical evidence of Palestinian synagogues near the time of Jesus exists. 8 Four locations in Palestine present unmistakable archaeological evidence that they once contained a first century Jewish synagogue: Jerusalem, Gamla (in the Galilee), Masada (the Herodian fortress near the Dead Sea), and Herodium (another Herodian fortress about 7.5 miles south of Jerusalem). 9 Though other archaeological sites suggest the existence of first century Palestinian synagogues, the evidence is not as certain. 10

What do the archaeological reports tell us about each of these sites? Architecturally, they have shared features. First, these sites are built in rectangular fashion with seats lining the walls so everyone is essentially facing the center of the synagogue. This configuration enables the congregants to clearly see anyone who stands to read or speak and have immediate visual access to all other congregants. Second, the door of the synagogue is oriented toward Jerusalem, so as worshippers leave the synagogue, they do so as if embarking upon a pilgrimage to the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Third, these sites have Mikvaot (ritual washing areas) associated with the synagogue building. And fourth, rudimentary genizahs, which are repositories for old and worn-out scriptures, have been found at these sites. 11

[Page 45] What do we know of the activities that occurred in the synagogues? The Theodotos inscription, which likely predates 70 CE, discovered in a 1913–1914 archaeological dig of the City of David (just south of the Jerusalem Temple Mount), offers an interesting list of purposes and activities provided at the synagogue. According to that list, activities in synagogues included reading the law and instructing, and the structure provided lodging for strangers, facilities for dining and water, and hostel services. 12 The first two activities are unremarkable to us as they relate to what we commonly imagine Jesus doing in the synagogues. I already noted that Jesus instructs the crowd gathered at the synagogue concerning his mission after reading from the scriptures (see Luke 4:15–21).

What is remarkable about this inscription is the other activities listed, which are seldom if ever associated in our minds with the synagogue, namely the stranger’s lodgings, hostel services, and dining and water facilities. Jesus’s work of healing and miracles at synagogues becomes unquestionably clear and expected if we listen to the words of the Theodotos inscription. 13 A study of the Gospels indicates that on several occasions Jesus heals people at the synagogue. 14 No one disputes that healing in the synagogue is an appropriate and legitimate activity. Notice that no one gets upset with Jesus for where he heals, such as the synagogue. However, when Jesus conducts his healings is a matter of dispute. Healing on the Sabbath is a sacrilege according to some (see John 5:1–18). Similarly, in the Gospel of Luke the ruler of the synagogue angrily told the people to return to the synagogue on a day other than the Sabbath to be healed, “And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said [Page 46] unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day” (Luke 13:14).

Why would people in need be at the synagogue? What better location to receive food, water, and lodging? Hospitals and care hospices as we know them did not exist in the ancient world. However, rudimentary hospitals (edifices dedicated to Asclepius), hospices, and ancient inns did exist throughout the Mediterranean world where people could receive such services. In ancient Jewish communities it may be that synagogues served as a gathering place not just for community purposes, but also for the community to care for those who required special assistance. What better location for Jesus to find the sick, the afflicted, the lame, and the downtrodden than at the ancient community center? Note, however, that Jesus also found and healed the sick, the afflicted, the lame, and the downtrodden at the Jerusalem temple. The temple of Jerusalem and the synagogues scattered throughout the land of Israel both seem to have attracted the needy in their respective communities. This may suggest why the Gospel writers often locate Jesus healing at a synagogue when he was not in Jerusalem, but when he was in Jerusalem, he healed at or near the temple instead of the synagogue.

Additionally, if ancient synagogues did function in part as a place for the needy, physically afflicted, and foreigners to gather for wellbeing, Jesus’s announcement of his mission in Luke 4:16–21 becomes all the more remarkable. 15

And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. (Luke 4:16–21)

[Page 47] Of significance is that Jesus’s mission is to “preach the gospel to the poor” and to “heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.” Jesus’s healing miracles at the synagogue fulfill this mission statement. Again, if anciently, synagogues played a role as a gathering place for the needy, both spiritually and physically, it is therefore perfectly appropriate contextually that Jesus first proclaims his mission to the needy at the synagogue and performs many of his acts of compassions on behalf of the needy at the synagogue — the ancient Jewish community center.

A few final notes on ancient Palestinian synagogues as physical structures provide intriguing possibilities. Recently, it has been proposed that synagogues, in addition to the other purposes highlighted above, were built as a geographical and symbolic extension of the Jerusalem temple. 16 The temple was rectangular in shape; so too were the synagogues. The outer walls of the temple enclosure (not the temple itself) contained step seating; so too did the synagogues. The temple was ringed by columns through which a worshipper could observe the procession of the sacrifice he had handed over to the temple priest; so too in the synagogues, congregants viewed the proceedings from between the columns that ringed the synagogue. Finally, the location within the synagogue where individuals read from the scriptures may have been physically analogous to the location of the altar at the temple. Just as one found communion with God in the temple at the altar of worshipful sacrifice, so too, reading the word of God was an act of worship that brought communion with Him.

In summary, the physical presence of a building for the Jewish community to gather served important purposes in the ministry of Jesus. It was at the synagogue that Jesus found an immediate audience accustomed to the procedures of public scripture reading and exposition. But even more surprisingly to us, perhaps, it was at the synagogue that Jesus found those in great need through whom he could publicly display with miracles that the Kingdom of God had indeed arrived.

Paul and Diaspora Synagogues

Similar to the evidentiary challenges we face when trying to reconstruct knowledge concerning first century Palestinian synagogues, so too is our experience when we cast our attention to first century Diaspora [Page 48] synagogues. Despite meager evidence, we do have sufficient to build a case for what Diaspora synagogues looked like and how they were used. 17

We can produce our summary from the two most ancient Diaspora Jewish synagogues for which we have physical evidence. They are located first on the Greek island of Delos 18 and second at ancient Ostia, 19 on the Tyrrhenian coast of Italy, not far from Rome’s modern day Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino International Airport. 20 Some of the remarkable physical features of the earliest Diaspora synagogues are the stepped seating built into three of the four walls and the Jerusalem- oriented entrance. Though a universal architectural plan for ancient synagogues never existed, the synagogues at Ostia and Delos share striking resemblance to synagogues in Palestine. Therefore, what we learned from first century synagogues in Palestine applies to Diaspora synagogues as well. The seating arrangement provided everyone unobstructed visual access to each other, truly creating a sense of community and brotherhood. Additionally, the entrance facing toward Jerusalem served as a constant reminder that the synagogue represented a geographical and symbolic extension of the holy temple in Jerusalem, similar to the first century Palestinian synagogues.

In addition to sharing physical features, Diaspora synagogues shared purposes similar to their counterparts in first century Palestine: ritual bathing, scripture reading and exposition, prayer, festivals, holy-day and communal dining, treasury, museum, documentary archive and school, refuge, manumission, council hall, court, and society house. 21 Notice that only a small portion of the synagogue’s purposes constituted what we would consider to be religious activities. As a friend helpfully reminded me as I wrote this, in the ancient world there was no distinction between [Page 49] the secular and religious. Everything was on a continuum of a religious spectrum. Therefore, these synagogue buildings, like their Palestinian counterparts, truly were multi-purpose community centers.

In our day it would strike us as strange to have an itinerant preacher from a different religious sect show up at one of our religious meetings and there be granted carte blanche to speak. When we recognize the centrality of the synagogue in Jewish Diaspora community life, it is only natural that we find Paul and other early Christian missionaries integrating themselves among established Jewish communities by means of the public synagogue. 22 As a community center, it may be possible that Paul and others made use of the synagogue’s lodging services when they first arrived at the town as they sought to establish more permanent housing and income. 23

That synagogues were more community centers than religious centers helps us also to understand why non-Jewish Greeks are in the audience when Paul preaches in the Jewish synagogue at Iconium (see Acts 14:1– 5). Additional evidence unearthed by archaeologists reveals dedicatory inscriptions for synagogues made on behalf of “God-fearing” gentiles, non-Jews who believed and worshiped God as did the Jews but never fully converted to the practices of Judaism (such as being circumcised). Though it may sound strange to our ears that a non-member would provide the monetary means to build and support a church building, synagogues were esteemed as community cultural centers, and so it was a badge of pride to be named as patron of such an important community institution, regardless of one’s religious sentiments. 24

There is one final feature characteristic of some early Jewish Diaspora synagogues that needs to be considered — they were built or modified from pre-existing non-public structures or private homes. 25 A similar [Page 50] phenomenon occurred as Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire. Early church members first met in private homes, often of a wealthy member or patron who may have also served in a leadership position. Over time as the Christian population grew, as meetings became more formal, and as church institutional structure became more pronounced, Christians began converting private homes into formal meeting places. I mention this phenomenon of early Christianity as a reference point to share that Diaspora Judaism followed a similar trajectory in many instances. As Jews settled throughout the Roman Empire, they would initially gather in private homes for community or religious activities. Then, as their population grew and their wealth increased, they would modify the existing private home used for meetings into a more formal community structure — the synagogue. 26 That Paul established Christian house-churches in various cities may simply be indicative of practices common in his day, especially among his Jewish contemporaries.

Though ancient Jewish synagogues scattered across the Roman Empire did play a religious role for community gatherings in the time of Jesus and Paul, perhaps similar to the way modern members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints view their meeting houses, ancient synagogues had multiple purposes and functions serving as a community center for local Jewish groups. In addition to their spiritual role of providing a location to pray and read and interpret scriptures, ancient synagogues also provided services to meet the physical needs of people, offering them shelter and food while traveling, a place to gather for social events, and a place to receive healing. Recognizing the [Page 51] multi-purpose nature of these buildings helps to provide a compelling context for New Testament passages depicting Jesus and Paul conducting their ministry activities. Synagogues, then, would have been the perfect place to fulfill Isaiah’s Messianic prophecy, quoted when Jesus announced his Messianic mission, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:18– 19; see also Isaiah 61:1–2).

New Testament references to synagogues:

Matthew 4:23; 6:2, 5; 9:35; 10:17; 12:9; 13:54; 23:6, 34. Mark 1:21, 23, 29, 39; 3:1; 5:22, 35-36, 38; 6:2; 12:39; 13:9. Luke 4:15–16, 20, 28, 33, 38, 44; 6:6; 7:5; 8:41, 49; 11:43; 12:11; 13:10, 14; 20:46; 21:12. John 6:59; 9:22; 12:42; 16:2, 18:20. Acts 6:9; 9:2, 20; 13:5, 14–15, 42; 14:1; 15:21; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 7-8, 17, 19, 26; 19:8; 22:19; 24:12; 26:11. Revelation 2:9; 3:9.

Go here to see the 4 thoughts on “ “The Role and Purpose of Synagogues in the Days of Jesus and Paul” ” or to comment on it.

Pin it on pinterest.

Jews Behavior in Synagogue Essay

Culture and religion are social factors that have significant influence on how individuals behave in the society. Analysis of various cultures and religions indicates that they have unique beliefs and traditions. The existence of varied traditions and beliefs affects intercultural communication among people from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds.

People from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds find it hard to communicate, interact, or worship together because they do not share the same language, traditions, and beliefs. Therefore, this essay examines how Jews behave in their synagogues relative to other cultures and religions.

To examine Jewish culture and religion, my friend and I visited an Orthodox synagogue during the time of worship, which is usually on Saturday ( Shabbat ). We stayed in the synagogue during the time of worship, from 8am to 12pm. The experience of attending a church service in a synagogue enriched us because we learned about Judaic beliefs, Jewish culture, and behaviors of Jews during worship. What surprised us was the separation of men and women in the synagogue.

Men and women entered into the synagogue through different doors and sat in their respective sections. The reason for separating women and men in the synagogue is to enhance their focus on worship and avoid discrimination based on marital status (Moss, 2013). Before visiting the synagogue, I did not know that Jews separate men and women as in the case of Muslims in their mosques. In this view, I noted that Jews and Muslims share the aspect of gender separation.

Since men and women were in separate sections of the synagogue, they were interacting with each other. Judaic beliefs prohibit congregation from turning the Shabbat, the day of worship, into a social event. Thus, the congregation kept quiet as it listened to the sermon of the day. In the synagogue, Judaic beliefs prohibit applause, use of cell phones, and cameras because they cause disturbances in the holy sanctuary.

When sermon started, the congregation bowed towards the Ark to honor the removal of holy book, the Torah . Additionally, no one was allowed to enter into or go out of the synagogue when the Ark was opened and the Torah removed. Such beliefs make synagogues to be unique places of worship, since people are not at liberty to perform activities that they want. After the sermon, people interacted freely because restrictions were only applicable in the synagogue.

Dressing code in the synagogue was a unique thing that I noticed in the synagogue. Given that the synagogue is a holy place, I noted that men wore suits while women wore dresses, which made them to appear decent. According to Strassfeld and Strassfeld (2012), men should wear a kippah on their head, while women should cover their hair with a headscarf.

The covering of the head signifies humility and acceptance of God as the head of the synagogue. Thus, I observed that all the people in the synagogue dressed well and covered their heads according to Jewish and Judaic beliefs.

The experience of visiting the synagogue on Shabbat enhanced my knowledge about Jewish culture and religion. Gender separation, covering of heads and decent dressing code are some of the Judaic practices in synagogues that are similar to Islamic practices in mosques.

The experience of the synagogue stretched my comfort zone since I thought that Islam and Judaism are distinct religions that do not have anything in common. Therefore, the experience gained and observations made in the synagogue have enhanced my intercultural knowledge, and thus have promoted my intercultural communication.

Moss, A. (2013). Separation in the Synagogue . Retrieved from https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/160962/jewish/Separation-in-the-Synagogue.htm

Strassfeld, R., & Strassfeld, S. (2012). Entering a Synagogue . Retrieved from https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/entering-a-synagogue/

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, March 31). Jews Behavior in Synagogue. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jews-and-synagogue/

"Jews Behavior in Synagogue." IvyPanda , 31 Mar. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/jews-and-synagogue/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Jews Behavior in Synagogue'. 31 March.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Jews Behavior in Synagogue." March 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jews-and-synagogue/.

1. IvyPanda . "Jews Behavior in Synagogue." March 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jews-and-synagogue/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Jews Behavior in Synagogue." March 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jews-and-synagogue/.

• Jewish Synagogue Experience
• The Dura Europos Synagogue
• What Is Shabbat (Jewish Sabbath)?
• Judaism as an American Religion
• Comparing World Religions Through Observation
• Jewish Religious Worship Features
• History of Judaism Religion
• World Religions: Judaism, Shintoism, and Islam
• Judaism and Taoism: Comparison and Contrast
• Pope John Paul II and the Jewish People
• The Bhagavad Gita: The Role of Religion in Relation to the Hindu Culture
• The Importance of the clothing in Different Religious Groups
• Summary of the Eucharist by Robert Barron
• Idolatry of Christianity
• Christian Theological Entities

What Is the Purpose of the Synagogue?

D'Var Torah By: Rabbi Jonathan E. Blake

The Hebrew term for synagogue is beit k'neset. It means "house of assembly" and thus approximates the Greek word ' synagoge' which also means "assembly." For centuries, the synagogue functioned primarily as the ancient world's idea of a "JCC," a place for Jews to assemble. These institutions dotted the Jewish landscape even while the Second Temple-shrine of our ancient worship-stood. The synagogue of antiquity might have struck us as surprisingly "secular" in orientation. Originally, people may not have come to the synagogue primarily to pray or study. They conducted local business in the synagogue, promoting the general welfare of the Jewish community. Accelerated by the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, synagogues evolved to absorb many of the ritual and religious observances of an emergent Rabbinic Judaism. Over time the beit k'neset also became a beit t'filah , a "house of worship," and often a beit midrash, a "house of study," too.

The archetype of the synagogue, the Tabernacle that constitutes the focal point of the wandering wilderness community, completes construction in Parashat P'kudei. " In the first month of the second year, on the first of the month, the Tabernacle was set up" (Exodus 40:17). The text credits Moses with erecting the completed structure and arranging all of its fixtures, beginning with its planks and posts, and concluding with the screen covering the outermost gate. "When Moses had finished the work, the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the Presence of the Eternal filled the Tabernacle" (Exodus 40:33-34). The Tabernacle, spiritual antecedent of the synagogue, is complete. The text signals God's satisfaction with the work when God's Presence enters the structure. Over the Tabernacle a cloud rested by day, and fire would appear in it by night, as a constant, visible reminder of God's nearness and as a guiding presence for the Israelites' journeys (Exodus 40:36-38).

That human beings have successfully brought God into their midst through the construction of a sacred sanctuary marks a dramatic shift in ancient Near Eastern mythology. The Mesopotamian Epic of Creation is typical in its depiction of the gods creating their own dwelling place on earth, here to be named Babylon:

The Anunnaki [Babylonian deities] began shoveling. For a whole year they made bricks for it.When the second year arrived, . . . they had built a high ziggurat for the Apsu [other deities]. (Tablet VI, from Myths from Mesopotamia, trans. Stephanie Dalley [New York: Oxford University Press, 1989], p. 262)

The Torah, in contrast, imagines human beings teaming up to fashion earthly materials (precious woods, metals, fabrics) into a place where God's Presence will abide. The inversion is poetic and brings God's work of creation full circle. In the first chapter of Genesis, God creates a home for human beings to inhabit. In the last chapter of Exodus, human beings, Israelites charged with a holy purpose, create a home for God to inhabit.

This image invites us to return to our original question: "What is the purpose of a synagogue?" Ultimately the answer is, "To make God's Presence noticeable."

Sometimes the architecture itself can achieve this. Certain synagogues through purely physical means can elicit spiritual inspiration. Some sanctuaries through their sheer magnitude can inspire a feeling of awe; others achieve this effect through opulent materials, beautiful art, and carefully designed lighting and sound. Other spaces strive for intimacy or warmth. Natural light and windows that open to the world provide a different kind of inspiration than representational art or stained glass. Still other synagogues evoke the glory of Jewish history or images from the Bible and thus may both instruct and inspire. Many people report that a synagogue's architecture helps them feel God's Presence.

However, the synagogue must also make God's Presence noticeable through other means. A famous midrash proposes that it was only through the meritorious behavior of humanity, culminating in the deeds of Moses, that God--long since alienated from the human realm by our transgressions--could return to earth and dwell among us ( P'sikta D'Rav Kahana, Piska 1:1).

God migrates to and from the world of human affairs in accordance with our ethical attentiveness or inattentiveness. Behavior matters more than a building. Indeed, the fulfillment of mitzvot on behalf of others, compassionate action for people in pain, and tzedakah for people in need can all make God's Presence more noticeable in the world. And the synagogue is the primary Jewish engine for organizing people into communities of caring.

Study, prayer, ritual observance, community building, tzedakah , concern for the welfare of all Jews and all humanity--these constitute the pillars of a thriving, inspirational synagogue. Every time I see our congregation reach out with a loving embrace, with hot meals and gentle words, to a family walking in the valley of the shadow of death, I see the synagogue making God's Presence noticeable. Every time I see congregants awaken to a new insight during Torah study, I see how the synagogue has helped make God's Presence noticeable. When youths and adults felt inspired a few weeks ago to travel on a local Jewish relief mission to New Orleans, I saw our synagogue making God's Presence noticeable. When we sing our Kabbalat Shabbat service on Friday night and even the people struggling with Hebrew are moved to sing along for L'chah Dodi , I see the synagogue making God noticeable.

Jewish mystical tradition claims that God is everywhere and in all things, if only our vision permits us to see. The shattering daily news makes it too easy to conclude that we live in a godless world. Our parashah endorses the vital role of the synagogue in restoring our faith in a world in which God's Presence abides. The synagogue functions as a spiritual magnifying glass. It helps us to see what has been there all along.

Rabbi Jonathan E. Blake is senior rabbi of Westchester Reform Temple in Scarsdale, New York.

Daver Acher By: Helene Ferris

Rabbi Blake so poetically describes the purpose of our present-day synagogue and mentions Moses's critical role in building its prototype, the Tabernacle, in the wilderness. But how was Moses able to accomplish such a prodigious task? Although Moses did not grow up in an Israelite culture, he was able to duplicate the strengths of the patriarchs on his own.

Moses learned his passion for justice from Abraham. Abraham pleaded with God in defense of the innocent of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:20-33); Moses defends the innocent Hebrew slaves, killing the Egyptian taskmaster (Exodus 2:11-12). And seeing two Hebrews fighting, he upbraids the wicked one (Exodus 2:13).

With his life at stake Moses flees into the wilderness, as Jacob had fled from Esau (Genesis 28:5, 10). His adventures parallel those of Jacob. As Jacob met his beloved Rachel at a well (Genesis 29:9-11), Moses meets Zipporah (Exodus 2:16-17). Moses works for his father-in-law and becomes, like Jacob (Genesis 29:20, 30), a stranger in a strange land with the strength to endure and prosper as an outsider.

Moses also has a link to Isaac. Isaac and Moses each have only one wife, one love; and both, though in different ways, resign themselves to a higher cause.

Only after Moses has internalized the life experiences of the patriarchs does God hear the groaning of the Children of Israel and reenter Jewish history, remembering the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:6-7). Moses is the agent through which the covenant is carried forward. To lead God's people from Egypt to Sinai and back to the Promised Land-to transform a tribe of slaves into a free people possessing a covenant with God and building a sanctuary to remind them of that covenant-required a leader with the moral stance of Abraham, the self-sacrificing resignation of Isaac, and the wily heroism of Jacob.

But for me the greatness of Moses lies beyond his embodiment of the best of our patriarchs-even beyond his faith and patience and the willingness of the people to believe in him. His greatness lies in his ability to believe in the people. If a leader does not believe in the potential greatness of those he or she is leading, then true greatness will never be realized. Moses believed in the people Israel; therein lay his prodigious greatness.

Rabbi Helene Ferris is rabbi emerita of Temple Israel of Northern Westchester in Croton-on-Hudson, New York.

" P’kudei , Exodus 38:21-40:38 The Torah: A Modern Commentary , pp. 680-690; Revised Edition, pp. 627-636; The Torah: A Women's Commentary , pp. 545-566"

• P'kudei

When do we read P'kudei

D'var torah author.

Rabbi Jonathan Blake (he/his/him) is the senior rabbi of Westchester Reform Temple in Scarsdale, New York.

Daver Acher Author

P'kudei commentaries, related podcasts.

• On the Other Hand: Ten Minutes of Torah -- P'kudei: Spirituality and Art
• English Translation of P'kudei

Make a Special Passover Gift

Together, we will champion the lessons of Passover by bringing greater wholeness, justice, and belonging to our world.

Trending Topics:

• Say Kaddish Daily
• Passover 2024

What To Expect At Synagogue Services on Saturday Morning

A guide for bar/bat mitzvah guests and other newcomers to Sabbath worship.

By Rabbi Daniel Kohn

Knowing what to expect ahead of time will ensure that your experience is a comfortable and positive one. While this article focuses on what to wear and do — and some of the people you will see — we recommend you also consult our Guided Tour of the Synagogue and Highlights of Shabbat Morning Worship .

Keep in mind that services (and service lengths) vary widely from congregation to congregation, depending on a synagogue’s denomination (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform etc.), its leadership and its unique customs or traditions. Dress codes — and attitudes about small children and whether or not it is acceptable to whisper with your neighbor — also vary widely. To learn more about the particular synagogue you will attend, you may want to consult its website or speak to a friend who is a member or has been there recently.

General Expectations for Synagogue Behavior

1.      Dress : Guests at a bar/bat mitzvah celebration generally wear dressy clothes — for men, either a suit or slacks, tie, and jacket, and for women, a dress or formal pantsuit. In more traditional communities, clothing tends to be dressier; women wear hats and are discouraged from wearing pants.

2.      Arrival time: The time listed on the bar/bat mitzvah invitation is usually the official starting time for the weekly  Shabbat , or Sabbath, service. Family and invited guests try to arrive at the beginning, even though the bar/bat mitzvah activities occur somewhat later in the service; however, both guests and regular congregants often arrive late, well after services have begun.

3.       Prayer shawl: The  tallit  (tall-EET or TALL-is) , or prayer shawl, is traditionally worn by Jewish males and, in liberal congregations, by Jewish women as well. Because the braided  fringes at the four corners  of the tallit remind its wearer to observe the commandments of Judaism, wearing a tallit is reserved for Jews. Although an usher may offer you a tallit at the door, you may decline it if you are not Jewish or are simply uncomfortable wearing such a garment.

WATCH: How to Put on a Tallit

4.       Kippah, or yarmulke : A  kippah  (KEEP-ah)  or head covering (called a  yarmulke  in  Yiddish ), is traditionally worn by males during the service and also by women in more liberal synagogues. Wearing a kippah is not a symbol of religious identification like the tallit, but is rather an act of respect to  God  and the sacredness of the worship space. Just as men and women may be asked to remove their hats in the church, or remove their shoes before entering a  mosque , wearing a head covering is a non-denominational act of showing respect. In some synagogues, women may wear hats or a lace head covering.

5.      Maintaining sanctity: All guests and participants are expected to respect the sanctity of the prayer service and Shabbat by:

• Setting your cell phone or beeper to vibrate or turning it off.
• Not taking pictures. Many families hire photographers or videographers and would be pleased to take your order for a photo or video memento. In traditional settings, photography is strictly forbidden on Shabbat .
• Not smoking in the sanctuary, inside the building, or even on the synagogue grounds.
• Not writing.
• Not speaking during services. While you may see others around you chatting quietly–or even loudly–be aware that some synagogues consider this a breach of decorum.

6.     Sitting and standing : Jewish worship services can be very athletic, filled with frequent directions to stand for particular prayers and sit for others. Take your cue from the other worshippers or the rabbi’s instructions. Unlike kneeling in a Catholic worship service–which is a unique prayer posture filled with religious significance–standing and sitting in a Jewish service does not constitute any affirmation of religious belief, it is merely a sign of respect. There may also be instructions to bow at certain parts of the service, and because a bow or prostration  is  a religiously significant act, feel free to remain standing or sitting as you wish at that point.

7.      Following along in the prayerbook: Try to follow the service in the  siddur , or prayerbook, and the  chumash , or Bible, both of which are usually printed in  Hebrew  and English. Guests and congregants are encouraged to hum along during congregational melodies and to participate in the service to the extent that they feel comfortable. If you lose the page, you may quietly ask a neighbor for help (although it is better not to interrupt someone in the middle of a prayer). During the  Torah service , the entire congregation is encouraged to follow the reading of the weekly Torah portion in English or Hebrew.

Who Participates in the Service

“Rabbi” means teacher. The major function of a rabbi is to instruct and guide in the study and practice of Judaism. A rabbi’s authority is based solely on learning.

A cantor has undergone years of study and training in liturgy and sacred music. The cantor leads the congregation in Hebrew prayer.

The “Emissary of the Congregation” (Shaliach Tzibbur)

The  shaliach tzibbur  is the leader of congregational prayers, be it the cantor or another congregant. Every Jewish prayer service, whether on a weekday, Shabbat, or festival, is chanted in a special musical mode and pattern. The shaliach tzibbur must be skilled in these traditional musical modes and familiar with the prayers. Any member of the congregation above the age of bar/bat mitzvah who is familiar with the prayers and melodies may serve as shaliach tzibbur.

The  gabbai , or sexton, attends to the details of organizing the worship service. The gabbai finds a shaliach tzibbur, assigns aliyot, and ensures that the Torah is read correctly.

The Lay Leaders

Members of the congregation may participate in all synagogue functions and leadership roles. Any knowledgeable Jew is permitted and encouraged to lead the prayers, be called up to say a blessing over the Torah (called “ receiving an aliyah “), read from the Torah, and chant the Haftarah .

Bar/Bat Mitzvah and Family

If a bar or bat mitzvah is taking place at services, the bar/bat mitzvah child will participate in a variety of ways, depending on the congregation’s customs. The bar/bat mitzvah may do some or all of the following: lead services, read (often chanting) from the Torah and/or Haftarah, deliver a dvar Torah — a speech about the Torah portion read that day. Family members are usually honored by being called up to say a blessing over (or read from) the Torah, and the bar/bat mitzvah child’s parents often deliver a speech.

Sign up for My Jewish Learning’s  RECHARGE , a weekly email with a collection of Shabbat readings and more to enhance your day of rest experience.

Pronounced: a-LEE-yuh for synagogue use, ah-lee-YAH for immigration to Israel, Origin: Hebrew, literally, “to go up.” This can mean the honor of saying a blessing before and after the Torah reading during a worship service, or immigrating to Israel.

bat mitzvah

Pronounced: baht MITZ-vuh, also bahs MITZ-vuh and baht meetz-VAH, Origin: Hebrew, Jewish rite of passage for a girl, observed at age 12 or 13.

Pronounced: GAH-bye, Origin: Aramaic, literally “tax collector,” but today means someone who assists with the Torah reading in synagogue.The gabbai usually determines who will be called up to the Torah for an aliyah and also assists with other aspects of coordinating worship.

Pronounced: KEE-pah or kee-PAH, Origin: Hebrew, a small hat or head covering that Orthodox Jewish men wear every day, and that other Jews wear when studying, praying or entering a sacred space. Also known as a yarmulke.

Pronounced: MITZ-vuh or meetz-VAH, Origin: Hebrew, commandment, also used to mean good deed.

Pronounced: shuh-BAHT or shah-BAHT, Origin: Hebrew, the Sabbath, from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.

Pronounced: shuh-LEE-yakh, Origin: Hebrew, emissary — often used to describe Chabad-Lubavitch emissaries in a community or officials sent by the Israeli government to promote aliyah and Israel programming in a Diaspora community.

Pronounced: tah-LEET or TAH-liss, Origin: Hebrew, prayer shawl.

Pronunced: TORE-uh, Origin: Hebrew, the Five Books of Moses.

Join Our Newsletter

Empower your Jewish discovery, daily

Discover More

Shacharit: The Jewish Morning Prayer Service

An outline of the prayers recited by Jews all over the world every morning.

Can Non-Jews Receive Synagogue Honors?

Being called to the Torah for an aliyah and leading certain prayers are, among other synagogue rituals, generally reserved for Jews. 

Modern Israel

Modern Israel at a Glance

An overview of the Jewish state and its many accomplishments and challenges.

• Navigate to any page of this site.

• In the menu, scroll to Add to Home Screen and tap it.

• In the menu, scroll past any icons and tap Add to Home Screen .

The Temple in Antiquity

Ancient records and modern perspectives, truman g. madsen , editor, the temple and the synagogue, shaye j. d. cohen.

Shaye J. D. Cohen, “The Temple and the Synagogue,” in  The Temple in Antiquity: Ancient Records and Modern Perspectives , ed. Truman G. Madsen (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 151–74.

It is sometimes taught that the synagogue in Jewish architecture and ritual is a surrogate temple. In this paper Shaye Cohen draws important contrasts between the two structures, and between the two Jerusalem temples. He also shows that the synagogue has provided a democratization of the priestly functions formerly reserved for the temple. In this spirit, one interpretation congenial to the Restoration movement would be that the eventual messianic temple, while making available again the full spectrum of the priestly functions (including sacrifices by the “Sons of Levi”), will also open up to every worthy person, male or female, the privileges, rights (and rites), and ceremonial enactments which in ancient days were performed, in effect, by proxy only, by the one high priest on Yom Kippur; and that eventually the same privileges will be made available to the whole human family, and on the same principle: by proxy.

My topic was suggested to me unknowingly by Truman Madsen, who in the letter of invitation sent along copies of two articles by Professor Nibley. They are “Christian Envy of the Temple” [1] and “What Is a Temple?” [2] It was while reading those two articles that I began to ponder the relationship of the synagogue to the temple. Although I do not fully accept Professor Nibley’s conclusions, his work stimulated me to prepare my article.

One of the developments which characterize post-biblical Judaism and distinguish it from the religion of biblical Israel is the growth of the synagogue. Biblical Israel had a temple, a priestly caste, and a sacrificial cult like those of its Near Eastern neighbors. Post-biblical Judaism maintained these institutions while it invented and perfected a different institution. The synagogue, unlike the temple, is a Jewish invention, a contribution of inestimable importance to the subsequent history of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic people.

However, the origin of the synagogue is unknown and, unless we are graced by some new discoveries equal in magnitude to the Dead Sea Scrolls, unknowable. The widely accepted theory that the synagogue originated during the Babylonian exile as a replacement for the Jerusalem temple which had been destroyed in 587 B.C.E. is, I admit, plausible and attractive, but it is also unsubstantiated and overly simplistic. It is unsubstantiated because it is supported by nothing whatsoever, not a bit of evidence. The only thing supporting it is its inherent plausibility, but plausibility alone is inadequate support. The theory is also simplistic because it assigns to a single time and place the origin of a most complex institution. Our earliest bona fide reference to a synagogue is from upper Egypt in the third century B.C.E., where it is called a proseuchē in Greek. Proseuchē means prayer. Presumably “prayer (house)” should be understood. Our earliest Judean synagogue is the Jerusalem synagogue of Theodotus, which was erected “for the reading of the law and the teaching of the commandments” (first century B.C.E.). Reading of the law, teaching of the commandments-no reference at all to prayer. We know, too, that synagogues often served as assembly halls or community centers, much as the temple itself occasionally did. Hence the synagogue is an amalgamation of three separate institutions: a prayer house, a study hall or school, and a community center. The time and place in which this amalgamation was effected are as unknown to us as are the origins of each of the three separate institutions which this amalgamation was effected are as unknown to us as are the origins of each of the three separate institutions which comprise the whole. [3] Even after the destruction of the second temple in the year 70 C.E., the amalgamation was not always complete. The Rabbis regularly distinguish synagogues, batē kenēsiyot , from schools, batē midrashōt , although they occasionally study in the former and pray in the latter. Hence, as I said, the origin of the synagogue is really unknown and unknowable.

However, my interest here is not the history of institutions but the history of ideology. I shall attempt here to answer two sets of questions. First: How did the Jews of antiquity see the synagogue? How did they assess its relationship with the Jerusalem temple? What kind of sanctity did they ascribe to it? In sum, was the synagogue considered a second-best institution, a poor replacement of, or addition to, the temple, totally dependent upon it and its cult for its sanctity and legitimacy? Or, was it regarded as something independent, as an autonomous institution endowed with its own importance and worth?

The second set of questions I hope to discuss: Did synagogue practice, that is, prayer and Torah study, affect Jewish attitudes toward the temple? Did the temple lose any of its centrality or importance as a result of “competition” with the synagogue?

Having posed these two sets of questions, I confess immediately that I cannot answer them, or at least I cannot answer them satisfactorily. Why? To do so would necessitate a study not only of the contrast between the temple and the synagogue, but also of the contrasts between prayer and sacrifice and between Torah study and sacrifice. We would have to look at literary texts as well as archaeological data, especially inscriptions and synagogue art. We would have to distinguish pre-70 C.E. evidence, that is, evidence from the time of the second temple, from post-70 C.E. evidence. We would have to distinguish Babylonian from Palestinian from “Hellenistic.” We would have to distinguish Tanaitic from Amoraic, Rabbinic from non-Rabbinic, and so forth. The ideology of the synagogue has not yet been studied on this basis, and I am not about to attempt such a study here. What I would like to do is to propose answers to these two sets of questions, all the while admitting that everything I am going to say is susceptible to amplification and, I’m sorry to report, correction.

A synagogue differs from the temple in three crucial areas: place, cult, and personnel. Let us look at each of these separately. We will first consider the differences in place. According to Deuteronomy, profane slaughter was permitted anywhere in the land of Israel, while sacred slaughter could be performed only at one unnamed place, which the Lord had chosen and in which He had placed His name. [4] For Deuteronomic thinkers this site was the sacred center not only for sacrifices but for prayer as well, since God would surely hearken to the prayers of both Israelites and Gentiles when offered toward or at that place. For example, in 1 Kings 8, after building an ornate slaughterhouse, King Solomon offers a long invocatory prayer which speaks only about prayer toward or at the temple and says nothing about the sacrificial cult. During the second temple period, all Jews regarded Jerusalem as this holy center, as the mother city of the Jewish people, and regarded the temple as the center of the center, as the navel of the earth, and as God’s throne, the very symbol of the entire cosmos. [5] Later, although the Deuteronomic restrictions did not apply outside the land of Israel, the Diaspora Jews apparently refrained from building temples, according instead a sole respect to the temple in Jerusalem. In contrast to all this, of course, is the synagogue, which was not hampered by Deuteronomic theology. Synagogues were built throughout the Greco-Roman world in both Palestine and the Diaspora, both before the destruction of the temple and after it. Synagogues were not built in holy places. They were built anywhere and everywhere: even a private home could be converted into a synagogue. Surely these humble structures were not cosmic centers in any sense of the term.

The second distinction is that of cult. The cult of the temple was sacrifice. What does that mean? The slaughter, roasting, and eating of animals. It was a very bloody affair; as the Rabbis state, “It is a glory for the sons of Aaron that they walk in blood up to their ankles.” [6] Prayer had no official place in this cult. Neither Leviticus nor Numbers nor Deuteronomy nor Ezekiel nor the Temple Scroll nor Philo nor Josephus nor anyone else, as far as I can determine, mentions prayer as an integral and statutory part of the sacrificial cult. The cult is silent, except for the squeals of the animals. Of course, in times of need people prayed, and where else would they pray if not at the central shrine? But these prayers were private petitions, not parts of the sacrificial cult. Similarly the hymns of praise to God sung by the Levites always remained in the background. [7] In contrast, the synagogue cult is bloodless (those who attend modern synagogues might say it’s lifeless, but I won’t discuss that), consisting of Torah study and prayer.

We now turn to personnel, my third distinction. The sacrificial cult was carried out on behalf of the Jews by the priests. The actual administrations, that is, the slaughter, the roasting, and much of the eating, were performed only by the priests. Lay Israelites were not allowed even to enter the sacred precincts, let alone to minister before the Lord. The welfare of Israel thus depended upon the piety and punctiliousness of the priesthood, a hereditary aristocracy. The synagogue, in contrast, was a lay institution par excellence . Torah study and prayer were virtues to be cultivated by every Israelite (i.e., every male Israelite). No clergy mediated between the people and their God. “Teachers” and “heads of synagogues” were titles and professions open to all (including women).

Let us now conceptualize these three differences between the temple and the synagogue. If we focus on the first difference, place, we would conclude that the crucial tension between the temple and the synagogue is the tension between the one and the many, between monism and pluralism, one sacred place versus any place. If we focus on the second and third differences, cult and personnel, we would conclude that the crucial tension between the temple and the synagogue is the tension between aristocracy and democracy, between elitism and populism. Is it a cult by the people or for the people? Do the people perform the cult, or is it performed for them? Is there mediation by a pedigreed elite or not? These tensions, that is, monism versus pluralism and democracy versus aristocracy, are closely related but are not identical. The struggle between the central shrine and the local altars (outlined by the book of Kings), those bamot which are always said not to have disappeared from the land, was a struggle between monism and pluralism, not between elitism and populism. Even bamot had priests. The prophetic tirades against the sacrificial cult and on behalf of personal morality and piety can be interpreted as attempts to democratize Israelite religion, although the prophets were certainly not in favor of local shrines. It was possible, too, for one to believe in the uniqueness of the sacred center, the sole place where heaven and earth meet, while also supporting an unmediated cult of mass participation. There is no inherent contradiction. Deuteronomy, the book which enjoins the centralization of the cult, is also the book which enjoins upon every Israelite the constant study of the words of God. This Deuteronomic ideal was to be one of the powerful forces which democratized Israelite religion and helped it to become post-biblical Judaism. The author of Deuteronomy, not appreciating the full impact of his injunction, still supported a sacrificial cult. Hence in Deuteronomy we have centralization of the cult (monism) combined with individual study (incipient democratization). The book of Lamentations bemoans the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 587 B.C.E. The author is distraught over the loss of the symbol of God’s divine protection and love for Israel. He is not, however, perturbed by the loss of the sacrificial cult. Not once does he ask how he will atone for his sins without the blood of rams. Not once does he cry out that he cannot find favor in God’s eyes because the altar is no longer. Here is a man for whom the sacred center was essential, while the sacrificial cult apparently was not. I shall argue shortly that ambivalence of this sort characterizes large segments of both second temple and Rabbinic Jewry.

During the second temple period it was easy to entertain ambivalent ideas on the centrality of the temple and its cult. The beginnings of the second temple were most inauspicious. Jeremiah had predicted that the return from Babylon to Israel would be more magnificent than the exodus from Egypt; the new redemption would completely eclipse the old one. [8] But this did not come to pass. Instead, a pagan king issued an edict allowing the Jews to return to their homeland and to rebuild their temple. No Davidic king, no miracles, no glory, no political freedom, just an edict issued by the Persian bureaucracy in the name of Cyrus the Great. Was this the return promised by the Lord? Many Jews objected. An anonymous prophet whom we call II Isaiah (whom some people call I Isaiah) scolded them.

Shame on him who argues with his maker. Though naught but a potsherd of earth. Shall the clay say to the potter, “what are you begetting?” or a woman, “what are you bearing?” Thus said the Lord, Israel’s holy one and maker. Will you question me on the destiny of my children? Will you instruct me about the work of my hands? It was I who made the earth and created man upon it. My own hands stretched out of the heavens and I marshalled all their host. It was I who roused him (Cyrus the Great) for victory, and who level all roads for him. He shall rebuild my city and let my exiled people go. [9]

God, the creator of the world, is the boss. He does with his creation as he sees fit. Once upon a time, as Jeremiah said, he appointed his servant or vassal ( ebed ) Nebuchadnezzar to destroy the temple. [10] Now, Isaiah says, God has appointed Cyrus an anointed one, [11] a step above a vassal, to rebuild the temple. Can the Jews argue with their maker? Of course not. Let the Jews accept the divine decree. Similarly, the author of the book of Ezra insists that Cyrus’ kindness to the Jews was motivated not by any selfish or personal desires, but by inspiration from God, thereby fulfilling Jeremiah’s prophecy of redemption. [12]

But these attempts convinced few. Since fire did not descend from heaven upon the newly reconstructed altar, how could the Jews be sure the new temple and its cult found favor before the Lord? [13] The old men who had seen the majesty and the glory of the first temple shed tears at the dedication of the second-not tears of joy, but tears of sadness. [14]

Matters soon became worse. Prophecy ceased. The Urim and Thummim fell into disuse. Later, corruption spread among the priesthood. A pagan king entered the holy precincts, plundered the treasury, and sacrificed swine on the altar and established idols in the temple, all the while persecuting the Jews and proscribing Judaism. Never before had such atrocities occurred. Was this God’s holy temple? Ultimately the temple was regained and the altar was rebuilt, but still no fire from heaven, no miracles, no explicit sign that God approved the doings of men, and no Davidic king. Even the high priests were no longer legitimate high priests; they were regular priests who usurped the leadership (the Maccabees). Less than a century before its destruction, the temple suffered the ignominy of being rebuilt by Herod the Great, a half-Jew and a complete madman, who incorporated pagan decorations in the structure.

The Rabbis summed this up very nicely when they said, “The second temple had five things less than the first temple.” That is, the first temple had five things more than the second temple. What were they? “The sacred fire, the ark, the urim and thummim, the oil for anointment, and the Holy Spirit (prophecy).” [15]

Yet, in spite of all this, many Jews of the second temple period were content with the cult and the priesthood. After all, the temple was still the temple. The priests were the priests. Nor was this attitude restricted to the temple clergy itself. For how else can we explain the multitudes of the faithful who journeyed to Jerusalem every year at each of the three pilgrim festivals? How else can we explain the prominence accorded to the sacrificial cult by such diverse writers as Philo, Josephus (who, I admit, was a priest), and the authors of the Sibylline Oracles ? [16] These Jews supplemented the sacrificial cult with other modes of piety. But these other modes were supplements, not replacements. Josephus, for example, boasts that all Jews are learned in the law and declares that Jews regularly pray to God to acknowledge all the bounteous gifts of the divine. [17] But at no point does he even hint that either Torah study or prayer are replacements for, or subservient to, the sacrificial cult. They exist alongside each other. Philo, too, has the same attitude. [18]

For many Jews, however, the temple was too blemished for such unquestioning allegiance. A few radical Jews, inspired either by one strand of biblical thought (viz., that God cannot be contained by the heavens, let alone by a temple) or by Greek philosophy (Zeno believed that no temple could ever be sacred since no man-made building could be worthy of the gods), or by a combination of the two, argued that God does not require a temple at all-that the entire cosmos is God’s throne. [19] A more common attitude was condemnation of the current temple and cult combined with a hope, which I assume was shared even by those who supported the cult, for the restoration of a new and perfect temple in the future. The condemnation and the hope were expressed in different ways and had different implications among the various Jewish groups. For some the second temple was impure from its very inception; even the sacrifices of Zerubbabel and Joshua the High Priest were profane. [20] For others, the profanation of the temple was of more recent vintage, since the time of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes. Some, like the Essenes, concluded that the temple was much too impure for their participation in its cult, while others, like some of the early Christians, felt that the impurity was not as great as that. (According to Acts many Christians spent their day sitting in the temple; and Paul, after returning from Asia Minor, showed his loyalty to the law by sacrificing at the temple.) For the future, some groups could imagine nothing more glorious than a new temple, a new priesthood, and the proper observance of the sacrifices and the festivals. Such was the intention of the Temple Scroll, which gives elaborate instructions for the performance of the festival sacrifices. I assume, as Professor Milgrom does, that this scroll is a blueprint for the ideal future, and the ideal future is a world based on the temple cult. Most visionaries, however, spoke more generally about a new temple which would descend from heaven in a future era; they did not specify or stress the nature of the cult in that temple. Some spoke of a New Jerusalem rather than a new temple, [21] and one wonders whether the New Jerusalem necessarily had at its center a temple with a sacrificial cult. At least one visionary proclaimed explicitly, “And I did not see a temple in her (the heavenly Jerusalem descending from heaven to earth) for the Lord God, the ruler of all is her temple.” [22]

In the meantime, before the descent of the heavenly Jerusalem and/ or the heavenly temple, what was one to do? Given the fact that the temple and the sacrificial cult were presently imperfect, how could one find favor with God? Various attempts were made to find substitutes for the sacrificial cult. Some said that contrition and humility were worthy substitutes. “We have at this time no prince, prophet, leader, burnt offering, sacrifice, oblations, incense, no place to make an offering before thee or to find mercy. Yet, with a contrite heart and humble spirit may we be accepted as though it were with burnt offerings of rams and bulls and tens of thousands of fat lambs.” [23] These words are placed in the mouth of someone who supposedly lived after the destruction of the first temple and before the construction of the second, but presumably this text reflects an ideology current in the author’s own day (second century B.C.E.?), when the second temple was standing quite soundly on its foundation. Similarly, in good prophetic fashion, other authors argued that fear of the Lord, charity, and performance of the commandments were replacements for the cult. [24] However, I know of no text from the second temple period which declares either Torah study or prayer to be the equivalent of, or the replacements for, the sacrificial cult. Psalm 119 elevates Torah study to an ideal, but does not compare it to the sacrifices. Deuteronomy enjoins the study of the law so that the Israelite would know how to fulfill the commandments. In Psalm 119 Torah study is not a means but an end. The study of the law is a mode of worship. One finds favor with God by immersing himself in the words of the Torah. Does that replace the sacrificial cult? Not a hint, not a hint. Various texts refer to the practice of coordinating prayer with the times of the sacrifices, [25] but it is unclear to me whether this indicates a conception of prayer as a surrogate for sacrifice, or rather the idea that the times ordained by God for sacrifice were also propitious for prayer. In any case, surrogates were found for the sacrificial cult: humility, contrition, charity, or fear of the Lord, if not Torah study and prayer.

And if surrogates could be found for the cult, could they not be found for the temple as well? It is likely that both sects and synagogues, whose interrelationship remains unexplored, were regarded by their adherents as replacements for the polluted and imperfect temple. Many sects, notably Christians, Essenes, and Pharisees, transferred to themselves-each sect in its own distinctive way-at least some of the laws and ideology of the temple. The corporate brotherhood, the encampment of the sectarians or the table of the group, became the new temple and the new altar. Were synagogues, too, regarded as replacements for the temple? An affirmative answer is almost inevitable, although no text of the second temple period equates Torah study and prayer with the temple cult, or the synagogue with the temple. In fact, few second temple sources even speak about synagogues. Both Philo and Josephus mention the synagogue, but neither attempts to give its history or its ideology. Their praise of prayer and study does not extend to the institution in which these practices took place. Few works of the so-called Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha even mention the synagogue, and not a single work of the Dead Sea Scrolls. [26] This reticence concerning the synagogue allows me to return to my theme and to put these pieces together.

During the second temple period the Israelitic religion was democratized. Professor Milgrom spoke about that not too long ago. Torah study, prayer and performance of the commandments by the individual Jew became the distinguishing characteristics of Judaism. Reward and punishment, life after death, immortality of the soul, final judgment-all these beliefs were individualized as the individual Jew became more distinct from the corporate body of Israel. Sect and synagogue ministered to this need for individual self-expression and self-fulfillment. These ideas are the wave of the present and the future. Against all this stood the temple and the sacrificial cult, both based on the idea that the few perform the religion on behalf of the many. Not only were these the waves of the past, but they were, even on their own terms, imperfect and blemished. Hence for many Jews, new ways of serving God supplemented and/ or replaced the old ways of the temple and the sacrificial cult, so much so that we cannot assume that all eschatological visions included a place for the sacrificial cult. In fact, few such visions emphasize or describe in detail the sacrificial cults of the future. (The temple scroll is a notable exception.)

However, the temple had one great advantage which neither the synagogue nor the school nor the sect nor prayer nor humility nor anything else could ever hope to duplicate. The temple was located on the one sacred place on Mount Moriah, where Abraham nearly sacrificed Isaac, where Jacob saw a ladder reaching into heaven, and where the angel of the Lord commanded David to build an altar. [27] It was the meeting place of heaven and earth, the center of the cosmos, the symbol of the cosmos, the visible presence of God’s oneness. As Josephus says in a rhyme which I assume he learned in the Sunday School of his time, “One temple for the one God.” [28] Any institution which upset this unity and which was not established on this sacred center was not part of the Jewish ideal. Hence synagogues and sects, by their very nature, are impermanent and imperfect institutions which have no share in the world to come. According to many texts of the second temple period, God has in the heavens a temple and/ or a Jerusalem prepared for the delectation of his faithful, but he does not have a heavenly synagogue or a heavenly sect. Synagogues and sects represent the breakdown of unity and the departure from unanimity, yet monism and unanimity are the proofs of Judaism’s truth. [29] Hence in the ideology of second temple Judaism, the sacrificial cult could be supplemented or replaced by democratic alternatives, but the temple could never be replaced. As a result, no one cared to talk much about sects or synagogues.

The Rabbis inherited these ideas as part of their legacy from second temple Judaism, and they, too, maintained an ambivalent and complex attitude toward the sacrificial cult and the temple, both of which were destroyed in 70 C.E. The entire Rabbinic enterprise is predicated on the democratic assumptions mentioned earlier which are diametrically opposed to those of the sacrificial cult. Rabbinic Jews find God through prayer, Torah study, mystical speculation, and the continuous performance of the commandments, notably the commandments of Shabbat and festivals, purity, tithing, food laws, and ethical behavior. All of these are personal and unmediated, and all of them (except mystical speculation) were incumbent upon every male Jew. The relationship of this Rabbinic piety to the sacrificial cult, which most Rabbis believed would be restored in the Messianic era, was never worked out systematically. [30] After all, the Rabbis never worked out anything systematically. Nonetheless, they always held that Torah study was at least equal, if not superior, to the sacrificial cult. Prayer, however, is in a different category, and here we find three attitudes:

• Prayer is a religious obligation which exists independently of the sacrificial cult. The presence or absence of the cult does not affect it.
• Prayer is a second-rate replacement for the sacrificial cult. Without the cult, Israel has difficulty finding atonement for its sins. Hence it yearns for the restoration of the cult, which will bring it normalcy and security.
• Prayer is a first-rate replacement for the sacrificial cult, perhaps even better than the original. The logical outgrowth of this position is the idea that the temple of the age to come does not necessarily have to have a sacrificial cult.

We see in these three attitudes echoes of the views held by the Jews of the second temple period. The sole Rabbinic innovation, as far as I can see, was the elevation of Torah study and prayer to that prophetic list of equivalents or replacements for the sacrificial cult. Just like their ancestors, the Rabbis did not endow the synagogue with an independent existence. They, too, regarded it as a poor surrogate for the temple and accorded it no role in the world to come. For the Rabbis, prayer versus sacrifice and Torah study versus sacrifice were real issues. Synagogue versus temple was not.

Having presented a summary of the Rabbinic position, I would like now to elaborate upon it briefly. It is often said that Judaism’s will and spirit were devastated by the destruction of the temple, particularly by the cessation of the sacrificial cult. This view is usually supported by the following two Rabbinic stories.

Once as Rabban Johanan ben Zokkai was coming forth from Jerusalem, Rabbi Joshua followed after him and beheld the temple in ruins. “Wo unto us,” Rabbi Joshua cried, “that this, the place where the iniquities of Israel were atoned, is laid waste!” “My son,” Rabban Johanan said to him, “be not grieved; we have another atonement as effective as this.” “And what is it?” “It is acts of loving kindness. As it is said, ‘for I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’” [31]

After the destruction of the temple, perushim (ascetics or separatists) who would neither eat meat nor drink wine became numerous in Israel. Rabbi Joshua met them and inquired, “My sons, why don’t you eat meat?” They replied, “Shall we eat meat when the continual sacrifice, which used to be offered every day on the altar, is no longer?” He then asked, “Why don’t you drink wine?” They responded, “Shall we drink wine, which used to be poured on the altar as a libation, and is no longer?” He said to them, “Even figs and grapes we should not eat because from them they used to bring the first fruits on the Azereth [Pentecost]; bread we should not eat, because they used to bring two loaves and the bread of the presence, water we should not drink because they used to pour libations at Sukkoth [Tabernacles].” The perushim were silent. Rabbi Joshua said to them, “Not to mourn at all [for the destruction of the temple] is impossible. To mourn excessively is impossible. But thus the sages have said, ‘A man plasters his house, but leaves a little bit unplastered as a memorial for Jerusalem.’” [32] In other words, just as Jeremiah wrote to the Jews in Babylonia, normalcy must be maintained, but we must never forget what happened.

The historicity of these stories I do not wish to judge here. But even if they are historical as written, they do not indicate a widespread belief among the Jews of the time that they were at a loss how to proceed after the sacrificial cult had been removed. The second story is said explicitly to concern only the perushim , a small group separate from the main religious body of Israel. Furthermore, their asceticism was prompted, not by their inability to obtain atonement, but by their feeling that it was not right for man to sup upon meat and wine while the Lord’s table, the altar, was destroyed. The first story is more germane to our discussion, but more striking than the anguished cry of Rabbi Joshua (the same Rabbi Joshua who knew very well how to handle the separatists) is Rabban Johanan’s hackneyed response. The Master merely paraphrases Hosea: deeds of loving-kindness replace the sacrifices. Indeed, if Rabbi Joshua was satisfied with this reply, the wonder is that he didn’t think of it on his own. Rabban Johanan’s statement is just another in the long chain of statements, beginning with the prophets and the book of Psalms, which declare some virtue or other to be equal or superior to the sacrifices. Rabban Johanan leaves out the truly revolutionary Rabbinic response to the catastrophe of 70 C.E.-the elevation of Torah study and prayer. Hence this isolated exchange is not real evidence for a deep-seated religious crisis among Rabbinic Jews after the destruction of the second temple.

Indeed, like the author of Lamentations, the Rabbis of the Tannaitic period [33] and the authors of the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch and IV Ezra were distressed more by the loss of Jerusalem and the loss of the temple, the visible signs of God’s presence in Israel, than by the loss of the sacrificial cult.

Presumably, the sacrificial cult had been supplemented or replaced for so long that its loss was not as devastating as it might have been. The Rabbis of the Tannaitic period, of course, hoped and expected that the sacrificial cult would be restored-indeed, one-sixth of the Mishnah is devoted to the laws of the sacrificial cult-but they did not sense a need to find an immediate replacement for the cult. Life could go on without sacrifices. It is even questionable whether the petition for the restoration of the sacrifices figures as prominently in the prayers of the Tannaim as it does in the liturgy of the following generation. [34] As I have already indicated, the real Rabbinic response to 70 C.E. is not the hackneyed declaration of Rabban Johanan but the affirmation that prayer and Torah study have as great a worth as the sacrifices of old, not as their replacement but as their equivalent or supplement . The classic statement of this view is in the Tannaitic commentary to Deuteronomy 11:13. “ To love the Lord your God and to serve Him . This is Torah study. . . . Just as the sacrificial cult is called ‘service’ ( Abodah ), so too is Torah study called ‘service’ ( Abodah ). Another opinion: ‘to serve Him’ is prayer. . . . Just as the sacrificial cult is called ‘service’ ( Abodah ), so too prayer is called ‘service’ ( Abodah ).” [35] Presumably, these Rabbis believed that the Messianic future held in store a sacrificial cult, combined in some mysterious way with prayer and Torah study, since all three are means of serving the Lord.

It was during the Amoraic period (200–500 C.E.), as the temple receded further into the past, as the prospects of restoration grew dimmer and dimmer and nostalgia for the good old days increased, that the loss of the temple and the sacrificial cult was felt more keenly than before. Rabbi Eleazer declared: “Since the day the temple was destroyed, the gates of prayer have been locked. Since the day the temple was destroyed an iron wall has separated Israel from their Father in Heaven.” [36] During this period the Rabbis were much more eager than they had been previously to find substitutes for the sacrificial cult, and the most commonly proposed substitute now was prayer. Now, for the first time, the Rabbis disputed the origin of the statutory prayers. According to one school of thought, they were established by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that is, they have an independent existence, just as the Tannaim has assumed. According to another school of thought, they correspond to, or derive from, the different offerings of the sacrificial cult. This view prevailed. [37] The sacrificial cult was the norm, the only true and effective mode of reaching God, while prayer was its inadequate, temporary, and unavoidable replacement. Paradoxically enough, this attitude was enshrined in the liturgy, which explicitly declared itself to be a poor substitute for the real thing. The last phrase of Hosea 14:3, a phrase which I cannot translate into English because it is woefully obscure and probably corrupt, was understood by the Rabbis to mean that prayer should be offered in lieu of sacrifice, and the phrase was inserted into the liturgy. Since the Rabbis declared that he who studies the scriptural passages concerning the sacrifices and meditates upon the laws of the sacrificial cult is regarded by God as if he had brought a burnt offering, these verses and laws were incorporated in the liturgy also. [38] Rabbi Sheshet used to pray on the evening after a fast day, “Lord of the world, when the temple was standing, one who sinned offered a sacrifice of which only the fat and the blood were taken on the altar, and thereby his sins were forgiven. I have fasted today, and through this fasting my blood and my fat have been decreased. Deign to look upon the part of my blood and my fat which I have lost through my fasting as if I had offered it to thee on the altar, and forgive my sins in return.” [39] It is in this spirit, I think, that we should understand the Amoraic dicta which declare, “He who moves his bowels, washes his hands, dons the phylacteries and recites the shma [in other words, he who follows the norms of Rabbinic piety and hygiene every morning of his life] is regarded as if he had built an altar and brought an offering upon it,” or which declare, “He who prays in the synagogue is regarded as if he had brought a pure offering,” or which equate Torah study and other Rabbinic virtues with the sacrificial cult. [40] The norm, the standard of comparison, remains the cult. According to this view, when the temple is rebuilt and the sacrificial cult restored in the Messianic era, prayer would have little function, although I doubt that the Rabbis imagined it would be eliminated completely any more than they imagined that Torah study and humility would disappear in the age to come. [41]

For some Jews, however, Rabbinic piety was not only a replacement of the sacrificial cult-it was superior to the original. “Torah study is greater than the continual offerings.” God told King David, according to one legend, that He took more pleasure in one day of King David’s Torah study than he would take from the thousand holocausts which Solomon would offer on the altar. Another quotation: “He who studies the Torah has no need for any of the sacrifices.” Similarly, humility and charity were said to be equivalent to all the sacrifices put together. [42] Prayer, too, was magnified and sanctified. One Rabbi stated explicitly that prayer was greater than the sacrifices, greater, in fact, than good deeds. In this spirit a late Rabbinic homily narrates that “Moses foresaw through the Holy Spirit that the temple would be destroyed and that the offerings of the first fruits would cease. He arose and enacted that the Jews should pray three times a day because prayer is dearer to the Holy One, blessed be He, than are good deeds and all the sacrifices.” A logical conclusion from such views is that there was no need in the future for the return of the sacrificial cult. After all, we already have something better. An explicit acknowledgment of this idea we find in another late Rabbinic homily: “Sacrifices are practiced only below (on earth), while charity and the commandments are practiced both below and above (in heaven). Sacrifices are practiced only in this world, while charity and the commandments are practiced in this world and in the world to come.” [43] This attitude proved congenial to many Jewish philosophers, notably Maimonides.

I have discussed here three different Rabbinic attitudes towards the relationship between the sacrificial cult on the one hand and prayer and Rabbinic piety generally on the other. We must not imagine that these attitudes were fully systematized and clearly articulated. Nor should we attempt to reconcile the contradictory attitudes. The same Rabbi might have preached in the synagogue one morning that Torah study was infinitely superior to the sacrificial cult, and then have proceeded to pray that the cult should be restored. This ambivalence, the legacy of the second temple period, was sharpened by the interplay between the sense of loss caused by the destruction of the temple and the realization that the entire Rabbinic enterprise is antithetical to a sacrificial cult. What is important for us here is that the Rabbis attempted to democratize the cult for both the present and the future. According to two of the three views sketched here, Rabbinic piety is not a second-rate replacement for the sacrificial cult: it is an end in itself, a permanent and successful way of bridging the gap between man and God-so successful, in fact, that some Jews believe that it would replace the sacrificial cult in the age to come.

Missing from all this is the synagogue. Missing from this entire discussion of replacements for and supplements to the sacrificial cult is the very institution which houses prayer and Torah study. Again, following the legacy of second temple times, the Rabbis do not bestow on the synagogue an independent ideology. The little sanctity which the synagogue has derives from two sources: the fact that it is a pale imitation of the temple, and the fact that sacred activities are conducted within its precincts. Let us examine these two points briefly.

Synagogues obviously are a reflex of the temple in Jerusalem. The ancient names for the synagogue include many which originally applied to the temple. [44] The Rabbis legislated that doors of a synagogue must face east, just as the doors of the temple faced east, and archaeologists have uncovered synagogues whose doors do, in fact, face east. The Rabbis also legislated that synagogues must be built on the highest point of the city, presumably to mimic the temple, which was built on the highest mountain of Jerusalem. Congregational prayer in the synagogue was declared akin to offering a sacrifice.

In sum, the Rabbis had good reason to mistranslate Ezekiel 11:16. “And I have become to them (the exiles) a diminished sanctity in the countries whither they have gone,” as “I shall be for them a miniature temple.” “Diminished sanctity” has become “miniature temple,” that is, the synagogue and the school. [45] But the synagogue’s status as a miniature temple does not confer upon it any autonomous sanctity or legitimacy. On the contrary, the transference of temple imagery and terminology to the synagogue indicates that the latter is an imperfect representation of the former. The temple is the ideal. Thus, according to Rabbinic legislation the doors of the synagogue face east, but when one prays he orients himself toward Jerusalem irrespective of the doors. Why? Because he faces the one holy site, the ideal center, oblivious to the fact that the imperfect but necessary structure which protects him from the rays of the sun is oriented in a different direction. [46] Unlike the temple, whose site remains holy forever, even after its destruction, a synagogue building has no inherent sanctity in Rabbinic law. Indeed, according to one opinion in the Mishna, it could even be converted into a bathhouse. [47] This law demonstrates that the sanctity of the synagogue derives from the fact that the building is used for sacred purposes. When such use ceases, so does the sanctity. Hence, many Rabbinic passages which speak of the shekhinah (the divine presence) in the synagogue do so while referring to the prayer and the study conducted by the Jews. These actions, not the building or the place or the institution, confer sanctity. For example, “Rabbi Judan said in the name of Rabbi Isaac, whenever the Jews assemble in synagogues and schools, the Holy One blessed be He assembles his shekhinah with them.” [48]

The synagogue’s status as a second-rate institution is clear again from Rabbinic eschatology. Like their ancestors in the second temple period, the Rabbis speak of a heavenly temple, a heavenly Jerusalem, a heavenly court, and a heavenly Sanhedrin. To this list they add a heavenly altar, a heavenly academy, and a heavenly school. But nowhere, neither in their mystical speculations nor in their musings about the end of days nor in the apocalyptic texts of the sixth and seventh centuries, do the Rabbis refer to a heavenly synagogue. [49] In the ideal world of the heavens and the ideal world of the future, synagogues do not exist. In one stray passage a Rabbi declares that in the future all the synagogues and academies of Babylonia will be picked up and established in the land of Israel. What happens then he does not say. Even this isolated but somewhat well-known passage does not ascribe to synagogues any important role in the Messianic future. [50]

The explanation for this phenomenon should be clear. The Rabbis attempted to democratize Judaism. Whether prayer and Torah study were legitimate supplements to or replacements for the sacrificial cult was a serious question which provoked much thought and speculation. In a choice between aristocracy and democracy, elitism and populism, Rabbinic ideology would support the latter. But between the one and the many, between monism and pluralism, there could be no choice. The Rabbis knew that in unity there is truth, that Israel’s credo of monotheism was founded on oneness. They knew that the temple was the cosmic center, that it was a symbol of the entire world, that it was the place where heaven and earth meet. [51] This could never be duplicated or replaced. Perhaps some Jews attempted to attribute this centrality to their synagogues by depicting the Zodiac and the sun chariot in the middle of the mosaic floors, as if to say, “Here is the center of the cosmos; our synagogue performs the role once performed by the temple.” The Christians made a similar artistic and architectural attempt to represent the entire cosmos within their cathedrals. [52] But these attempts were doomed to failure. For how could there be more than one cosmic center? How could there be more than one divine throne? The Rabbis, at least, ignored these attempts and did not attribute any cosmic significance to their synagogues. In fact, they attributed very little ideological significance to the synagogue. They looked forward instead to a time when they would have the monism of the temple and the democratic cult of the synagogue, an uneasy union of dissimilar ideals. However, the Rabbis tell us that contradictions are tolerated in the world of the divine. Even two contradictory statements can be the words of the living God. [53]

[1] Jewish Quarterly Review L (1959): 972–93; L (1960): 229–40.

[2] “What Is a Temple?” originally published as “The Idea of the Temple in History,” Millennial Star , August 1958, pp. 228–37, 247–49.

[3] Martin Hengel, “Proseuche und Synagoge,” Tradition und Glaube:. . . . Festgabe fur Karl Georg Kuhn (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971), pp. 157–84 (reprinted in the Ktav anthology The Synagogue , ed. Joseph Gutmann).

[4] See especially Deuteronomy 12.

[5] All Jews, that is, except the Samaritans. On the sacred center see Ezekiel 43:7. On the metropolis or mother city see Philo, Against Flaccus 46.

[6] B. Pesahim 65b, a reference I owe to my teacher Rabbi David Weiss Halivni.

[7] For a definition of statutory prayer, see Joseph Heinemann, Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns (Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1977), pp. 14–17. Since prayer was not an integral part of the temple cult, it is not discussed by Menahem Haran, Temples and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1978). Isaiah 1:15 and56:7, 1 Kings 8, and Josephus, Against Apion 2.196–97 refer to personal, private prayers or to spontaneous petitions in times of need, not to a fixed and obligatory mode of worship. This is not the place to discuss the rabbinic institution of mishmarot and maamadot (M. Taanit 4.2–4). Theophrastus (c. 300 B.C.E.) mentions that the Jewish priests pray while they sacrifice, but his account is not believable; see Menahem Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism , I (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974), pp. 10–12.

[8] Jeremiah 16:14; 23:7.

[9] Isaiah 45:9–13.

[10] Jeremiah 25:9; 27:6.

[11] Isaiah 45:1.

[12] Ezra 1:1.

[13] The lack of a sacred fire in the second temple is heightened by the Chronicler, who adds to 1 Kings that fire came down from heaven upon Solomon’s altar to indicate divine approval of Solomon’s temple (2 Chronicles 7:12 Chronicles 7:1) The author of 2 Maccabees 1:10–2:18 tried to show that the second temple did have the sacred fire.

[14] Ezra 3:12.

[15] P. Taanit 2.1 (65a) and parallels.

[16] John J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974), pp.44–53.

[17] Against Apion 2.175–78; Antiquities 4.212–13.

[18] Harry A. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1947; reprinted., 1968), 2.241–48.

[19] For the biblical thought see 1 Kings 8:27. On Zeno see Johannes von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta , I (Leipzig: Teubner, 1905; reprint ed., 1938), pp.61–62, number 264. An example of the radical Jews is Stephen in Acts 7. Josephus, Jewish Wars 5.458.

[20] Assumption of Moses 4.6–8; Ethiopic Book of Enoch 89.73–74.

[21] See the passages and the bibliography assembled by David Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon (Garden City: Doubleday, 1979; The Anchor Bible), pp. 203–5 (commentary on Wisdom of Solomon 9:8).

[22] Revelation 21:22; contrast 11:19.

[23] Prayer of Azariah 15–16 (one of the additions to the book of Daniel).

[24] Judith 16:16; Tobit 4:10–11; Jubilees 2.22; see Schrenk, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament , III: 241.

[25] Judith 9:1; Daniel 9:21 (cf. 6:11); Acts 3:1; Luke 1:10.

[26] 3 Maccabees 7:20 (written in Alexandria); Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiquities 11.8 (reminiscent of Philo and Josephus). In his translations of The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament , R. H. Charles occasionally employs the terms “synagogue” and “congregation,” but in these verses the meaning is “community,” not “prayer-house” or “school.”

[27] On Moriah see 2 Chronicles 3:12 Chronicles 3:1; Genesis 22. On Jacob’s ladder see Genesis 28:11–19. On David see 2 Samuel 24.

[28] Against Apion 2.193; cf. Antiquities 4.201.

[29] Against Apion 1.6–46.

[30] The tension between the Rabbinic enterprise as a whole and the Rabbinic desire for the return of the sacrificial cult is analyzed by Robert Goldenberg, “The Broken Axis: Rabbinic Judaism and the Fall of Jerusalem,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 45.3 (Sept. 1977), Supp., F:869–82. My analysis differs somewhat from Goldenberg’s because I distinguish between Torah study and prayer and I attempt to analyze the material chronologically. Further study will undoubtedly result in corrections to both his analysis and mine.

[31] Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan , version A, chapter 4 (p. 11a ed. Schechter); cf. version B, chapter 8 (p. 11b ed. Schechter. I follow the translation of Judah Goldin (New Haven: Yale University, 1955), p. 34.

[32] T. Sotah end; cf. a different version in B. Baba Bathra 60b.

[33] Tannaim are the Rabbis who lived from approximately 70 C.E. to 200 C.E. and produced the Mishnah and related works ( Tosephta and commentaries on Exodus [ Mekhilta ], Leviticus [ Siphra ], Numbers and Deuteronomy [ Siphre ]). Amoraim are the Rabbis of Palestine and Babylonia who lived from approximately 200 C.E. to 400–500 C.E. and produced a Palestinian Talmud and a Babylonian Talmud , both of which are allegedly commentaries on the Mishnah . In these footnotes, the names of Rabbinic tractates are preceded by either a B, P, T, or M, which indicate respectively Babylonian Talmud, Palestinian Talmud, Tosephta, and Mishnah. Much of Rabbinic literature is available in translation; see the bibliography, already somewhat outdated, by John Townsend in The Study of Judaism: Bibliographical Essays (New York: Ktav, 1972).

[34] Ismar Elbogen, Der judische Gottesdienst , Hebrew edition, ed. Joseph Heinemann et al. (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1972), pp. 88, 190.

[35] Siphre on Deuteronomy 41.

[36] B. Berakhot 32b; cf. Lamentations 3:7–9, 44.

[37] B. Berakhot 26b; P. Berakhot 4.1 (7a-b).

[38] B. Taanit 27b; B. Megillah 31b; B. Menahot 110a; Leviticus Rabbah 7.3 (p. 155, ed. Margoliouth).

[39] B. Berakhot 17a. I follow the translation of Jacob Lauterbach, Jewish Encyclopedia , 10 (1905): 625. Lauterbach and Seligsohn (p. 622) provide a useful anthology of rabbinic statements regarding sacrifices.

[40] On hygiene see B. Berakhot 15a. On the synagogue see P. Berakhot 5.1 (8d). On Torah study and other virtues see B. Berakhot 10b; B. Menahot 110a; Pesiqta de Rab Kahana , p. 87, ed. Mandelbaum (p. 998 in the English translation of W. G. Braude).

[41] Some sacrifices and prayers would cease in the world to come because they would no longer be needed. See Leviticus Rabbah 9.7 with the discussion of W. D. Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age and/ or the Age to Come (Society of Biblical Literature, Monograph Series 7, 1952), pp. 54–56.

[42] B. Megillah 3b; B. Makkot 10a; B. Menahot 110a; B. Sotah 5b; B. Sukkah 49b.

[43] B. Berakhot 32b; Tanhuma , Ki Tabo 1; Deuteronomy Rabbah on Deuteronomy 16:18 (p. 96, ed. Lieberman).

[44] For example: place, holy place, holy, house, house of God.

[45] T. Megillah 3.22–23; P. Berakhot 5.1 (8d); B. Megillah 29a.

[46] M. Berakhot 4.5–6; T. Berakhot 3.14–16; P. Berakhot and B. Berakhot ad loc.

[47] M. Megillah 3.1–3; T. Megillah 2.12–18; P. Megillah and B. Megillah ad loc.

[48] Pesiqta de Rab Kahana , pp. 431–32, ed. Mandelbaum; cf. p. 90.

[49] See n. 21 above and Joseph M. Baumgarten, “The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin,” Journal of Biblical Literature 95 (1976): 59–78. The apocalyptic texts of the sixth and seventh centuries are edited by Yehudah ibn Shemuel, Midreshē Geulah (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1954).

[50] B. Megillah 29a; cf. 28b. A sermonic plea for synagogue attendance in this world is the context for a reference to a synagogue in the age to come in P. Berakhot 5.1 (8d).

[51] On the temple as a cosmic symbol see Pesiqta de Rab Kahana , p. 8, ed. Mandelbaum. On unity and oneness, see Shaye Cohen, “A Virgin Defiled: Some Rabbinic and Christian Views on the Origins of Heresy,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 36 (1980): 1–11.

[52] Emile Mâle, Religious Art in France, XIII Century, trans. Dora Nussey (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1913; frequently reprinted). I owe this reference to my friend Professor Ivan Marcus.

[53] B. Erubin 13b.

Contact the RSC

185 Heber J. Grant Building Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 801-422-6975

Helpful Links

Religious Education

BYU Studies

Maxwell Institute

Articulos en español

Artigos em português

Connect with Us

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

• Candle Lighting Times
• Holiday Bites Podcast
• Passover Reader 5784: Not A Haggadah
• Counting The Omer
• More Holidays >>
• Daily Living
• Ritual and Prayer Items
• Spirituality
• Climate and Environment
• Jewish Identity and Pride
• - Leviticus
• - Deuteronomy
• Make Connections
• Ask a Rabbi
• Rabbinic Newsletters
• Pitch a Piece
• Exploring Judaism Blog

The Saturday Morning Shabbat Service

• Pesukei D’Zimra

Shabbat Morning Amidah

Torah service and reading, special haftarah readings, special readings and prayers, concluding the torah service, the musaf service, concluding the service, pesukei d’zimra.

There are a number of significant additions that set the Shabbat Morning Service apart from its weekday counterpart. The 100th psalm is omitted from the opening P’sukei D’zimra section and nine additional psalms (Psalm 19, Psalm 34, Psalm 90, Psalm 91, Psalm 135, Psalm 136, Psalm 33, Psalm 92, and Psalm 93) are added in its place.

Although only one of the added psalms has any specific connection to Shabbat—Psalm 92 is specifically labeled “a psalm-song for the Shabbat day”—all give voice to the dream-like mixture of recollection of the past and hope in the future that Shabbat itself inspires in the hearts of the faithful.

Because the Sabbath itself is a sign of the covenant, tefillin are not worn on Shabbat.

A long section beginning with the words nishmat kol chai t’vareikh et shimkha (“May the soul of every living creature bless Your name”) is added before the Yishtabbah (also spelled Yishtabach) blessing that closes the P’sukei D’zimra section of the service.

The word nishmat may possibly be an allusion to the n’shamah y’teirah, “the additional soul” that, according to the Talmud (Beitzah 16a), enters every Jew at the onset of every Shabbat. It is during this interpolated nishmat kol chai section that the cantor or prayer leader begins the formal chanting of the Morning Service.

Following the Bar’khu (also spelled Barchu) call to prayer, three extra paragraphs are added to the first of the two blessings that precede the Shema .

The three paragraphs are poetic statements—one is actually cast as a singable hymn—regarding the majesty and mystery of divine creation, a central theme of the Shabbat liturgy in general.

The Amidah for Shabbat consists of seven blessings: the standard opening and closing benedictions, and a middle one dealing with the special nature of the day which ends with a blessing praising God as m’kaddeish ha-shabbat, the divine source of the sanctity of Shabbat.

This intermediate paragraph, which differs from Amidah to Amidah in the course of the Shabbat liturgy, here emphasizes the fact that Shabbat observance is a commandment of the Torah revealed by God to Moses at Mount Sinai. This has an appropriate feel to it, since the congregation recites these words shortly before taking the Torah from the Ark and reading from it.

As is always the case when the prayer leader recites the Amidah aloud, a responsive reading called the K’dushah (also spelled Kedushah) is inserted into the third blessing. The K’dushah in the Shacharit Amidah speaks of the restoration of God’s rule over Jerusalem, and of the ultimate redemption of the Jewish people.

The repetition of the Amidah is followed by Kaddish.

The service for taking the Torah from the Ark is also enhanced on Shabbat morning.

We begin with a stirring liturgical introduction that starts with the words ein kamokha (“there is none like You”) and then add a long prayer taken from the Zohar, called B’rikh Sh’meih after its opening words, once the Ark is opened. Also, before the Torah is taken around the room in solemn procession, the Shema and an extra line proclaiming the uniqueness and unity of God are chanted aloud.

In the Conservative movement, a bar or bat mitzvah can be celebrated anytime the Torah is taken out to be read, and the young person coming of age can be called up for an aliyah.

More often than not, these celebrations take place at the Morning Service on a Shabbat. Saturday morning provides more opportunities for participation by the bar or bat mitzvah (reading the Torah, chanting the haftarah, leading parts of the service, delivering a d’var torah), and more aliyot and honors for the assembled congregation.

It is the optimum time for a Jewish community to welcome another Jew into its midst, and to celebrate this milestone with the family.

On Shabbat, seven people are called up to the Torah. (It is permissible to call up more, but not fewer, than seven.) The number seven is significant in this context.

Not only does it recall the seven days of the week, but it is also a subtle halakhic comment on the supreme place of Shabbat in the hierarchy of holy days, since there are six aliyot on Yom Kippur, five on all other festival days, four on Rosh Hodesh and the intermediary days of festivals, and three on ordinary weekdays when the Torah is read.

After the last regular aliyah is concluded, the Half Kaddish is recited and an extra aliyah, popularly called the maftir, is given to the person who will chant the haftarah.

For about four-fifths of the year, the haftarot are chapters from one or another of the books of the prophets chosen to elucidate the Torah portion for that specific Shabbat in some obvious or obscure way.

During the ten weeks preceding the High Holidays, however, a different approach is followed: for the three weeks before the fast of the Ninth of Av, three gloomy haftarot actually called “the haftarot of doom” are read aloud. For the seven weeks that follow the fast, which commemorates the destruction of Jerusalem in ancient times, seven special haftarot called “the haftarot of consolation” are read aloud.

(There are also special haftarot for all the festivals and even for the Sabbaths that fall during those festivals, as well as for other special Sabbaths that fall during the year, each geared to the specific holiday or special Shabbat being observed rather than specifically to the Torah reading for that day, whatever it might be. Some of those can be found here .)

In the course of the Torah service, many congregations add in prayers for the sick or special prayers (collectively called Mi She-beirakh (also spelled Mi Sheberach) prayers after their opening words) for different members of the congregation, either to honor special occasions in their lives or simply to honor an individual’s aliyah to the Torah.

There are special versions of the prayer for those soon to be wed and other lifecycle events and experiences.

After the reading of the haftarah, the Torah service also contains several additional prayers: one for sages of Israel, another for the congregation, one for the country in which the congregation is situated and for its leaders, and one for the State of Israel.

On the Shabbat before Rosh Hodesh, a prayer for the upcoming Jewish month is recited. Different congregations follow different customs regarding these prayers; some add in prayers for world peace or for the repose of the souls of the martyrs of Israel as well.

After all these prayers are concluded, a liturgical setting of Psalm 145 (popularly called Ashrei or “the” Ashrei after its first word) is recited for a second time. (It was also included in the P’sukei D’zimra section of the service before the formal beginning of the Morning Service.)

Following Ashrei, the Torah is returned to the Ark in procession as the congregation sings the Psalm 29. In many congregations, someone delivers a sermon after the Ark is closed. In some congregations, the sermon is replaced with some other form of Torah study. In others, however, the congregation proceeds directly to the Musaf Service.

An extra Amidah prayer is recited on Shabbat and festivals. This extra prayer, colloquially called the Musaf Amidah (musaf means “addition” in Hebrew) is included to remind worshipers that in ancient times extra sacrifices were offered in the Temple on Shabbat and on other festive days.

As with the other services, the Musaf Amidah consists of the standard opening and closing blessings, with a middle paragraph devoted to the occasion at hand. At Musaf on Shabbat, this section focuses on the additional offerings that were brought to the Temple on Shabbat, as described at Numbers 28:9–10.

Opening with a reverse acrostic, the middle section traditionally continues with requests for the return of the Jewish people to their land, for the rebuilding of the Temple, and for the restoration of the sacrifices, specifically including those for Shabbat.

In the middle decades of the twentieth century, many Conservative ideologues began to question the idea of praying for the reinstitution of animal sacrifices in a future Temple to be built in Jerusalem. This led to a near universal change in the text of the Musaf Amidah in Conservative movement prayerbooks, so that the prayer henceforth merely nodded to the practices of the past without actually asking the worshipers to pray that such practices be restored.

Since it seemed peculiar to recite a prayer in which the worshiper was not actually praying for any specific thing, however, the Musaf Amidah prayer itself was reinterpreted as a way for moderns to look forward to a messianic era, to the ingathering of the exiles, and to the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem as a house of prayer, not animal sacrifice.

This continues to be the norm in Conservative congregations, although it is not a universal practice.

There is also a special version of the K’dushah that is recited in the third benediction of the Musaf Amidah on Shabbat when it is chanted aloud by the prayer leader.

The Ein Keloheinu hymn is added to the service on Shabbat after the Full Kaddish that follows the Musaf Amidah.

This is traditionally followed by a selection from the Talmud (taken from BT Keritot 6a) recounting the ingredients of the incense offering in the Temple. Many Conservative prayerbooks have eliminated this passage, inserting instead one from Berakhot 64a:13-14 that speaks about the possibility of bringing peace to the world through Torah study.

Often this is followed by Kaddish D’rabbanan, and then the service concludes with Aleinu, the Mourner’s Kaddish, and the Adon Olam hymn.

Strictly speaking, Kiddush on Saturday morning takes place at Shabbat lunch. It has become the custom in many synagogues to recite Kiddush over a cup of wine as services end. This is done because, in many cases, a luncheon is served in the synagogue. It may also be a way for those who will not have a traditional Shabbat meal at home to participate in this ritual.

Adapted with permission from  The Observant Life .

The Observant Life: The Wisdom of Conservative Judaism for Contemporary Jews distills a century of thoughtful inquiry into the most profound of all Jewish questions: how to suffuse life with timeless values, how to remain loyal to the covenant that binds the Jewish people and the God of Israel, and how to embrace the law while retaining an abiding sense of fidelity to one’s own moral path in life. Written in a multiplicity of voices inspired by a common vision, the authors of The Observant Life explain what it means in the ultimate sense to live a Jewish life, and to live it honestly, morally, and purposefully. The work is a comprehensive guide to life in the 21st Century. Chapters on Jewish rituals including prayer, holiday, life cycle events and Jewish ethics such as citizenship, slander, taxes, wills, the courts, the work place and so much more.

View all posts

Share This Post

Post categories: Shabbat , Shabbat Day , Shabbat in Synagogue

Post tags: Blessing , Kiddush , Morning Prayers , Musaf , Pesukei D'Zimra , Prayer , Services , Shabbat , Shacharit , Synagogue

Exploring Judaism Recent Posts

What Do People Think About While Praying?

Havdalah Solo: My (Slightly Awkward) Spiritual Self-Care

Shabbat Morning Services: What to Expect

Find meaning in your inbox. sign up for our emails.

Exploring Judaism is a home for the Torah of Conservative Judaism, embracing the beauty and complexity of Judaism, and our personal search for meaning, learning, and connecting. There is always something to learn and explore.

Our Journey

Find meaning in your inbox., subscribe to receive our latest content by email..

We won’t send you spam. Unsubscribe at any time. Got questions? Email us.

Home — Essay Samples — Geography & Travel — Rome — The great synagogue of Rome

The Great Synagogue of Rome

• Categories: Rome

About this sample

Words: 480 |

Published: Jan 15, 2019

Words: 480 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Geography & Travel

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1131 words

5 pages / 2198 words

1 pages / 1298 words

2 pages / 1109 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Rome

Have you ever wondered how long people in ancient Rome lived compared to modern times? Life expectancy in ancient Rome is a fascinating topic that sheds light on the health, lifestyle, and societal norms of this ancient [...]

The ancient civilizations of Rome and Han China are often studied in isolation, seen as unique entities with distinct cultural, political, and social characteristics. However, upon closer examination, striking similarities [...]

Taking over Rome is a fascinating topic that illuminates the intricate interplay of power, influence, and ambition. From military conquest to political maneuvering, and from religious dominance to cultural allure, various forces [...]

The Punic Wars were the consequences of the expansion of Roman rule southward; bitter rivals with competing interests, Rome and Carthage pitted their military powers against each other. The strength of the Romans (which was [...]

‘Henry VIII broke from Rome because he wanted to increase his own power.’ Explain why you agree or disagree with this view. It could be interpreted that Henry VIII broke from Rome because he wanted to increase his [...]

After his appointed year in office, Cincinnatus retired to his farm. Rome continued to fight both internally and externally. Military disaster followed when a Roman invasion force against the Aequians, led by the Consul Mincius, [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Why I’ll Be Observing Passover Differently This Year 

“This is the bread of affliction that our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt. All who are hungry should come and eat, anyone who is in need should come and partake of the Pesach sacrifice.” So begins the Ha Lachma Anya , the declaration that is recited at the beginning of the storytelling section of the Passover Seder. These simple words encapsulate Passover’s biggest messages of justice, hospitality, and memory. They have been said by Jews around the world for millennia. But what do they mean this year?

I was raised in a deeply culturally Jewish home. However, my hippie parents practiced every kind of spirituality but Judaism. When I was seven years old, my family celebrated Passover for the first time. I was enthralled by the tiny bowls of salt water, as well as the strange array of bitter and sweet foods. Then my father stood up and began to tell the Passover story with the words: “All who are hungry come and eat.”

At that moment, I fell in love with Judaism. I loved the drama, sure—but also the underlying message of fairness. My parents never celebrated Passover again, but this one time was enough to form a core memory. Now, every year of my adult life, I lead my own seder. I have been proud to hold up a bumpy square of unleavened bread to symbolically welcome the hungry . With joy, I have taught my child that this is the heart of both Passover and Judaism.

Read More: How to Wish Someone a ‘Happy Passover’

This year is different. Right now, over 1 million Palestinians are facing starvation and the U.N. has asserted that the Israeli military is intentionally causing this hunger. In the face of this horror, how can I possibly say the words that so inspired me as a child, or teach them to my own child?

“In every generation,” we read at the beginning of the Passover seder, “one is obligated to see oneself as someone who personally went out of slavery in Egypt.” But what does this mean now? After all, the story of the Exodus is thousands of years old. The Hebrew word for Egypt is “ Mitzrayim ,” a narrow place, giving us a clue that the story can be understood as a universal parable for the human experience of oppression. In fact, the 19th century mystic Rabbi Nachman of Bretslav once said : “The Exodus from Mitzrayim occurs in every human being, in every era.” In other words, the seder teaches us how to empathize with human struggles for justice and autonomy in every generation.

Since October 7, the Israeli military has killed over 34,000 Palestinians, including more than 13,000 children. At the same time, approximately 19,000 children have been left orphaned . And more than 1,000 children have lost limbs , leading to the largest cohort of child amputees in history. Meanwhile, more than 100 Israeli hostages may still be left in Gaza, leading their family members to protest on the eve of Passover for the government to prioritize ceasefire negotiations that would bring them home safely.

This horror must end.

As Jews, we have experienced genocide, displacement, and ethnic cleansing, and our own traditions teach us how to protect against it. In the Passover story, the Pharaoh orders all Egyptians to kill first-born Hebrew sons, but the Egyptian midwives engage in an act of civil disobedience and refuse these orders. They risk their own lives to save the Jewish babies. It is this powerful act of solidarity that begins to defeat the Pharoah’s rule.

Solidarity is not just a pretty word, but a powerful tool we need to leverage in this time. As Gazan writer Mohammed El-Kurd says: “Gaza cannot fight the empire on its own. Or, to use an embittered proverb my grandmother used to mutter at the evening news, “They asked the Pharaoh, ‘Who made you a pharaoh?’ He replied, ’No one stopped me.’”

Perhaps most importantly, the story of Passover resistance is told through questions, through curiosity. And throughout the seder, many things are done differently than usual to stimulate this curiosity. My ancestors understood that critical thinking is the enemy of dehumanizing atrocities. It’s not accidental that right now, pro-Palestinian protesters asking crucial questions are being silenced at U.S. campuses across the country , most recently at Columbia where administrators suspended protesting on April 19 and had them arrested. Questioning is what we could not do while we were enslaved under Pharaoh. It’s how we imagine freedom.

This year, when my family gathers for Passover, we will not be celebrating as usual. This year, Passover will be about freedom in Palestine. When it comes time for the meal, instead of handing out gefilte fish, I will be offering my guests the Shulchan Orech pledge; this includes asking them to donate the cost of the meal to UNWRA to help feed people in Gaza, reading writing by Gazan Palestinians, and sending letters to President Joe Biden and congress demanding that they take action to fund UNWRA once again and achieve a permanent ceasefire. This would mean an end to U.S. financial support to the Israeli military, and an end to U.S. support for regional war.

We won’t be saying the words “May all who are hungry come and eat” this year. Instead, we will take time to talk about the harsh realities of enforced starvation with even our youngest guests. And, of course, we will make time for lots of questions.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• The Revolution of Yulia Navalnaya
• 6 Compliments That Land Every Time
• What's the Deal With the Bitcoin Halving?
• If You're Dating Right Now , You're Brave: Column
• The AI That Could Heal a Divided Internet
• Fallout Is a Brilliant Model for the Future of Video Game Adaptations
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

OUR MINISTER

Dr. Joseph Lozovyy was born into a Christian family in Elektrostal, Moscow Region, and was raised in a pastor’s home. From the age of fifteen, he began actively participating in the music ministry of the Baptist Church in Mytishchi, where his father served as a pastor, and also played in the orchestra of the Central Moscow Baptist Church. From 1989, he participated in various evangelistic events in different cities of Moscow Region and beyond. From 1989 to 1992, as a member of the choir and orchestra “LOGOS,” he participated in evangelistic and charitable concerts, repeatedly performing on the stages of the Moscow State Conservatory, the Bolshoi Theatre, and other concert halls in Russia and abroad. In 1992, his family moved to the United States. In 2007, after completing a full course of spiritual and academic preparation, Joseph moved to Dallas, Texas, to engage in church ministry. In 2008, he founded the Russian Bible Church to preach to the Russian-speaking population living in Dallas, Texas.

– Bachelor of Arts in Music (viola) from the Third Moscow Music School named after Scriabin, Russia (1987-1991)

– Master of Theology (Th.M); Dallas Theological Seminary, Texas (1999-2003);

– Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) Hebrew Bible (Books of Samuel): University of Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom (2007).

– Doctoral research (2004-2005) Tübingen, Germany.

– Author of a theological work published in English: Saul, Doeg, Nabal and the “Son of Jesse: Readings in 1 Samuel 16-25, LHBOTS 497 [T&T Clark/Continuum: Bloomsbury Publishing]).

https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/saul-doeg-nabal-and-the-son-of-jesse-9780567027535/

Joseph and his wife Violetta and their son Nathanael live in the northern part of Dallas.

Saul, Doeg, Nabal, and the “Son of Jesse”: Readings in 1 Samuel 16-25: The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies Joseph Lozovyy T&T Clark (bloomsbury.com)

Joseph, his wife Violetta and their son Nathaniel live in North Dallas, Texas where he continues ministering to Russian-speaking Christians and his independent accademic research.

Published Work

1. bloomsbury:, 2. buy at christian book distributors:, 3. buy on amazon:.

Mae Hampton Watt Presidential Scholarship in Psychology - Leadership and Service

About the scholarship.

The Mae Hampton Watt Presidential Scholarship in Psychology - Leadership and Service is open to undergraduate students enrolled in the Department of Psychology at Florida State University. Students who can submit an essay about their relevant leadership and service are encouraged to apply.

• Essay Required : Yes
• Need-Based : No
• Merit-Based : No
• Resident of the U.S.
• Attending Florida State University
• Undergraduate student
• Seeking a bachelor's degree
• Studying psychology
• Participation in leadership
• Country : US

Turn Your Curiosity Into Discovery

Latest facts.

15 Facts About World Health Day April 7th

8 Facts About International Day Of Light May 16th

40 facts about elektrostal.

Written by Lanette Mayes

Modified & Updated: 02 Mar 2024

Reviewed by Jessica Corbett

Elektrostal is a vibrant city located in the Moscow Oblast region of Russia. With a rich history, stunning architecture, and a thriving community, Elektrostal is a city that has much to offer. Whether you are a history buff, nature enthusiast, or simply curious about different cultures, Elektrostal is sure to captivate you.

This article will provide you with 40 fascinating facts about Elektrostal, giving you a better understanding of why this city is worth exploring. From its origins as an industrial hub to its modern-day charm, we will delve into the various aspects that make Elektrostal a unique and must-visit destination.

So, join us as we uncover the hidden treasures of Elektrostal and discover what makes this city a true gem in the heart of Russia.

Key Takeaways:

• Elektrostal, known as the “Motor City of Russia,” is a vibrant and growing city with a rich industrial history, offering diverse cultural experiences and a strong commitment to environmental sustainability.
• With its convenient location near Moscow, Elektrostal provides a picturesque landscape, vibrant nightlife, and a range of recreational activities, making it an ideal destination for residents and visitors alike.

Known as the “Motor City of Russia.”

Elektrostal, a city located in the Moscow Oblast region of Russia, earned the nickname “Motor City” due to its significant involvement in the automotive industry.

Home to the Elektrostal Metallurgical Plant.

Elektrostal is renowned for its metallurgical plant, which has been producing high-quality steel and alloys since its establishment in 1916.

Boasts a rich industrial heritage.

Elektrostal has a long history of industrial development, contributing to the growth and progress of the region.

Founded in 1916.

The city of Elektrostal was founded in 1916 as a result of the construction of the Elektrostal Metallurgical Plant.

Located approximately 50 kilometers east of Moscow.

Elektrostal is situated in close proximity to the Russian capital, making it easily accessible for both residents and visitors.

Known for its vibrant cultural scene.

Elektrostal is home to several cultural institutions, including museums, theaters, and art galleries that showcase the city’s rich artistic heritage.

A popular destination for nature lovers.

Surrounded by picturesque landscapes and forests, Elektrostal offers ample opportunities for outdoor activities such as hiking, camping, and birdwatching.

Hosts the annual Elektrostal City Day celebrations.

Every year, Elektrostal organizes festive events and activities to celebrate its founding, bringing together residents and visitors in a spirit of unity and joy.

Has a population of approximately 160,000 people.

Elektrostal is home to a diverse and vibrant community of around 160,000 residents, contributing to its dynamic atmosphere.

Boasts excellent education facilities.

The city is known for its well-established educational institutions, providing quality education to students of all ages.

A center for scientific research and innovation.

Elektrostal serves as an important hub for scientific research, particularly in the fields of metallurgy, materials science, and engineering.

Surrounded by picturesque lakes.

The city is blessed with numerous beautiful lakes, offering scenic views and recreational opportunities for locals and visitors alike.

Well-connected transportation system.

Elektrostal benefits from an efficient transportation network, including highways, railways, and public transportation options, ensuring convenient travel within and beyond the city.

Famous for its traditional Russian cuisine.

Food enthusiasts can indulge in authentic Russian dishes at numerous restaurants and cafes scattered throughout Elektrostal.

Home to notable architectural landmarks.

Elektrostal boasts impressive architecture, including the Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord and the Elektrostal Palace of Culture.

Offers a wide range of recreational facilities.

Residents and visitors can enjoy various recreational activities, such as sports complexes, swimming pools, and fitness centers, enhancing the overall quality of life.

Provides a high standard of healthcare.

Elektrostal is equipped with modern medical facilities, ensuring residents have access to quality healthcare services.

Home to the Elektrostal History Museum.

The Elektrostal History Museum showcases the city’s fascinating past through exhibitions and displays.

A hub for sports enthusiasts.

Elektrostal is passionate about sports, with numerous stadiums, arenas, and sports clubs offering opportunities for athletes and spectators.

Celebrates diverse cultural festivals.

Throughout the year, Elektrostal hosts a variety of cultural festivals, celebrating different ethnicities, traditions, and art forms.

Electric power played a significant role in its early development.

Elektrostal owes its name and initial growth to the establishment of electric power stations and the utilization of electricity in the industrial sector.

Boasts a thriving economy.

The city’s strong industrial base, coupled with its strategic location near Moscow, has contributed to Elektrostal’s prosperous economic status.

Houses the Elektrostal Drama Theater.

The Elektrostal Drama Theater is a cultural centerpiece, attracting theater enthusiasts from far and wide.

Popular destination for winter sports.

Elektrostal’s proximity to ski resorts and winter sport facilities makes it a favorite destination for skiing, snowboarding, and other winter activities.

Promotes environmental sustainability.

Elektrostal prioritizes environmental protection and sustainability, implementing initiatives to reduce pollution and preserve natural resources.

Home to renowned educational institutions.

Elektrostal is known for its prestigious schools and universities, offering a wide range of academic programs to students.

Committed to cultural preservation.

The city values its cultural heritage and takes active steps to preserve and promote traditional customs, crafts, and arts.

Hosts an annual International Film Festival.

The Elektrostal International Film Festival attracts filmmakers and cinema enthusiasts from around the world, showcasing a diverse range of films.

Encourages entrepreneurship and innovation.

Elektrostal supports aspiring entrepreneurs and fosters a culture of innovation, providing opportunities for startups and business development.

Offers a range of housing options.

Elektrostal provides diverse housing options, including apartments, houses, and residential complexes, catering to different lifestyles and budgets.

Home to notable sports teams.

Elektrostal is proud of its sports legacy, with several successful sports teams competing at regional and national levels.

Boasts a vibrant nightlife scene.

Residents and visitors can enjoy a lively nightlife in Elektrostal, with numerous bars, clubs, and entertainment venues.

Promotes cultural exchange and international relations.

Elektrostal actively engages in international partnerships, cultural exchanges, and diplomatic collaborations to foster global connections.

Surrounded by beautiful nature reserves.

Nearby nature reserves, such as the Barybino Forest and Luchinskoye Lake, offer opportunities for nature enthusiasts to explore and appreciate the region’s biodiversity.

Commemorates historical events.

The city pays tribute to significant historical events through memorials, monuments, and exhibitions, ensuring the preservation of collective memory.

Promotes sports and youth development.

Elektrostal invests in sports infrastructure and programs to encourage youth participation, health, and physical fitness.

Hosts annual cultural and artistic festivals.

Throughout the year, Elektrostal celebrates its cultural diversity through festivals dedicated to music, dance, art, and theater.

Provides a picturesque landscape for photography enthusiasts.

The city’s scenic beauty, architectural landmarks, and natural surroundings make it a paradise for photographers.

Connects to Moscow via a direct train line.

The convenient train connection between Elektrostal and Moscow makes commuting between the two cities effortless.

A city with a bright future.

Elektrostal continues to grow and develop, aiming to become a model city in terms of infrastructure, sustainability, and quality of life for its residents.

In conclusion, Elektrostal is a fascinating city with a rich history and a vibrant present. From its origins as a center of steel production to its modern-day status as a hub for education and industry, Elektrostal has plenty to offer both residents and visitors. With its beautiful parks, cultural attractions, and proximity to Moscow, there is no shortage of things to see and do in this dynamic city. Whether you’re interested in exploring its historical landmarks, enjoying outdoor activities, or immersing yourself in the local culture, Elektrostal has something for everyone. So, next time you find yourself in the Moscow region, don’t miss the opportunity to discover the hidden gems of Elektrostal.

Q: What is the population of Elektrostal?

A: As of the latest data, the population of Elektrostal is approximately XXXX.

Q: How far is Elektrostal from Moscow?

A: Elektrostal is located approximately XX kilometers away from Moscow.

Q: Are there any famous landmarks in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal is home to several notable landmarks, including XXXX and XXXX.

Q: What industries are prominent in Elektrostal?

A: Elektrostal is known for its steel production industry and is also a center for engineering and manufacturing.

Q: Are there any universities or educational institutions in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal is home to XXXX University and several other educational institutions.

Q: What are some popular outdoor activities in Elektrostal?

A: Elektrostal offers several outdoor activities, such as hiking, cycling, and picnicking in its beautiful parks.

Q: Is Elektrostal well-connected in terms of transportation?

A: Yes, Elektrostal has good transportation links, including trains and buses, making it easily accessible from nearby cities.

Q: Are there any annual events or festivals in Elektrostal?

A: Yes, Elektrostal hosts various events and festivals throughout the year, including XXXX and XXXX.

Was this page helpful?

Our commitment to delivering trustworthy and engaging content is at the heart of what we do. Each fact on our site is contributed by real users like you, bringing a wealth of diverse insights and information. To ensure the highest standards of accuracy and reliability, our dedicated editors meticulously review each submission. This process guarantees that the facts we share are not only fascinating but also credible. Trust in our commitment to quality and authenticity as you explore and learn with us.

Share this Fact:

Call Us or fill the form

+90 216 900 28 62.

Don't hesitate to contact us!

Working time

Mon - Fri: 9:00 - 18:00 / Closed on Weekends

Company Headquarters

DEGIRMENDERE MAH. SANAYI CAD. 8 SK.7

KUSADASI 09400 AYDIN TURKIYE

Only for Carriers in the US , For loads, Please enter the required information.

Our offices.

Değirmendere Mah. Sanayi Cad.8

Sk. No:7 Kuşadası 09400 Aydın

+ (90) 256 340 03 40

[email protected]

Mon - Fri: 9:00 - 18:00 Closed on Weekends

Drive to us Now

Küçükbakkalköy Mah. Fevzipaşa Cad.

Bozkır Sok. No:1 ,K:3 D:15 Ataşehir 34750 Istanbul

+ (90) 216 900 28 62

+(90) 216 576 47 90

2, Stroitelny Lane, Elektrostal , Moscow

+7 (499) 390 35 04

[email protected]

Drive to our office 

128 City Road , London EC1V 2NX

+44 20 4577 1271

[email protected]

Mon - Fri: 9:30 - 17:00 Closed on Weekends

26 Seaman Ave Hempstead 11550 New York

+1 646 980 28 04

[email protected]

Humberto 1 985,Piso 2,Ofic 222

Constitucion Capital Federal CP 1103

Buenos Aires

+54 11 52 371 371

[email protected]

Mon - Fri: 9:00 - 17:30 Closed on Weekends

site categories

Disney technology chief aaron laberge exits for cto role at espn bet partner penn entertainment, npr editor resigns in aftermath of his essay criticizing network for bias.

By Ted Johnson

Ted Johnson

Political Editor

More Stories By Ted

• White House Correspondents’ Dinner Preview: POTUS, Politics Media & Showbiz Converge For D.C.’s Party-Palooza
• Trump Hush Money Trial: What To Know As Jury Hears Opening Statements; No TV Cameras, But David Pecker And Stormy Daniels Expected To Testify
• House Passes New Bill To Force TikTok Sale; Lawmakers Also Pass $95 Billion National Security Package For Aid To Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan

UPDATE: The NPR editor who penned an essay criticizing the network for what he saw as bias in its coverage of Donald Trump and a host of other issues has resigned.

Uri Berliner , who had been a senior business editor and reporter, posting his resignation letter to NPR CEO Katherine Maher on his X/Twitter account.

A spokesperson for the network declined to comment.

Berliner had been temporarily suspended from NPR after publishing on essay for The Free Press that called out the network for losing “an open minded spirit” and lacking viewpoint diversity. He cited, among other things, audience research showing a drop in the number of listeners considering themselves conservative.

While Berliner’s essay was immediately seized upon by right wing media as evidence of NPR’s bias, some of his colleagues criticized him for making mistakes in his piece in for using “sweeping statements” to make his case, in the words of NPR’s Steve Inskeep. Maher criticized the essay in a note to staffers, writing, “Questioning whether our people are serving our mission with integrity, based on little more than the recognition of their identity, is profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.”

But Berliner’s essay did trigger some discussion within NPR, as some voices on the right, including Trump, called for defunding the network.

PREVIOUSLY: NPR has put on temporary suspension the editor who penned an essay that criticized the network for losing the trust of listeners as it has covered the rise of Donald Trump and coverage of Covid, race and other issues.

Uri Berliner has been suspended for five days without pay, starting last Friday, according to NPR’s David Folkenflik.

Related Stories

NPR’s Linda Wertheimer, One Of The Network’s “Founding Mothers,” Announces Retirement

Bob Edwards Dies: Longtime Anchor Of NPR’s ‘Morning Edition’ & SiriusXM Host Was 76

“That wouldn’t be a problem for an openly polemical news outlet serving a niche audience. But for NPR, which purports to consider all things, it’s devastating both for its journalism and its business model,” Berliner wrote. He also wrote that “race and identity became paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace,” while claiming that the network lacked viewpoint diversity.

His essay set off a firestorm on the right, with Trump blasting the network and Fox News devoting extensive coverage to the criticism, along with calls for ending government funding for NPR.

In his essay, Berliner wrote that “defunding isn’t the answer,” but that its journalism needed to change from within. The network’s funding has been a target of conservatives numerous times in the past, but lawmakers ultimately have supported public radio.

Berliner shared his suspension notice with Folkenflik, who wrote that it was for failure to seek approval for outside work, as well as for releasing proprietary information about audience demographics.

Katherine Maher, who recently became CEO of the network, published a note to staff last week that appeared to take issue with Berliner’s essay, writing that there was “a criticism of our people on the basis of who we are.”

“Asking a question about whether we’re living up to our mission should always be fair game: after all, journalism is nothing if not hard questions,” Maher wrote. “Questioning whether our people are serving our mission with integrity, based on little more than the recognition of their identity, is profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.”

Maher herself has become a target on the right, with some figures citing her past social media posts, including one from 2020 that referred to Trump as a “deranged racist sociopath.” At the time, she was CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation. In a statement to The New York Times , Maher said that “in America everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen.” “What matters is NPR’s work and my commitment as its C.E.O.: public service, editorial independence and the mission to serve all of the American public,” she said.

An NPR spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment. The network told The Times that Maher is not involved in editorial decisions.

Some of Berliner’s colleagues have been vocal in their own criticism of his essay. Eric Deggans, the network’s TV critic and media analyst, wrote that Berliner “set up staffers of color as scapegoats.” He also noted that Berliner “didn’t seek comment from NPR before publishing. Didn’t mention many things which could detract from his conclusions.”

Must Read Stories

How the ho chi minh film festival plans to lead the way in southeast asia, toni collette, andy garcia, alex pettyfer & eva de dominici go ‘under the stars’, range media partners lands investment from group including liberty global, renewal status on bubble dramas ‘all american,’ ‘homecoming’ & ‘walker’.

Subscribe to Deadline Breaking News Alerts and keep your inbox happy.

Read More About:

39 comments.

Deadline is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2024 Deadline Hollywood, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism

David Folkenflik

NPR suspended senior editor Uri Berliner for five days without pay after he wrote an essay accusing the network of losing the public's trust and appeared on a podcast to explain his argument. Uri Berliner hide caption

NPR suspended senior editor Uri Berliner for five days without pay after he wrote an essay accusing the network of losing the public's trust and appeared on a podcast to explain his argument.

NPR has formally punished Uri Berliner, the senior editor who publicly argued a week ago that the network had "lost America's trust" by approaching news stories with a rigidly progressive mindset.

Berliner's five-day suspension without pay, which began last Friday, has not been previously reported.

Yet the public radio network is grappling in other ways with the fallout from Berliner's essay for the online news site The Free Press . It angered many of his colleagues, led NPR leaders to announce monthly internal reviews of the network's coverage, and gave fresh ammunition to conservative and partisan Republican critics of NPR, including former President Donald Trump.

Conservative activist Christopher Rufo is among those now targeting NPR's new chief executive, Katherine Maher, for messages she posted to social media years before joining the network. Among others, those posts include a 2020 tweet that called Trump racist and another that appeared to minimize rioting during social justice protests that year. Maher took the job at NPR last month — her first at a news organization .

In a statement Monday about the messages she had posted, Maher praised the integrity of NPR's journalists and underscored the independence of their reporting.

"In America everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen," she said. "What matters is NPR's work and my commitment as its CEO: public service, editorial independence, and the mission to serve all of the American public. NPR is independent, beholden to no party, and without commercial interests."

The network noted that "the CEO is not involved in editorial decisions."

In an interview with me later on Monday, Berliner said the social media posts demonstrated Maher was all but incapable of being the person best poised to direct the organization.

"We're looking for a leader right now who's going to be unifying and bring more people into the tent and have a broader perspective on, sort of, what America is all about," Berliner said. "And this seems to be the opposite of that."

Conservative critics of NPR are now targeting its new chief executive, Katherine Maher, for messages she posted to social media years before joining the public radio network last month. Stephen Voss/Stephen Voss hide caption

Conservative critics of NPR are now targeting its new chief executive, Katherine Maher, for messages she posted to social media years before joining the public radio network last month.

He said that he tried repeatedly to make his concerns over NPR's coverage known to news leaders and to Maher's predecessor as chief executive before publishing his essay.

Berliner has singled out coverage of several issues dominating the 2020s for criticism, including trans rights, the Israel-Hamas war and COVID. Berliner says he sees the same problems at other news organizations, but argues NPR, as a mission-driven institution, has a greater obligation to fairness.

"I love NPR and feel it's a national trust," Berliner says. "We have great journalists here. If they shed their opinions and did the great journalism they're capable of, this would be a much more interesting and fulfilling organization for our listeners."

A "final warning"

The circumstances surrounding the interview were singular.

Berliner provided me with a copy of the formal rebuke to review. NPR did not confirm or comment upon his suspension for this article.

In presenting Berliner's suspension Thursday afternoon, the organization told the editor he had failed to secure its approval for outside work for other news outlets, as is required of NPR journalists. It called the letter a "final warning," saying Berliner would be fired if he violated NPR's policy again. Berliner is a dues-paying member of NPR's newsroom union but says he is not appealing the punishment.

The Free Press is a site that has become a haven for journalists who believe that mainstream media outlets have become too liberal. In addition to his essay, Berliner appeared in an episode of its podcast Honestly with Bari Weiss.

A few hours after the essay appeared online, NPR chief business editor Pallavi Gogoi reminded Berliner of the requirement that he secure approval before appearing in outside press, according to a copy of the note provided by Berliner.

In its formal rebuke, NPR did not cite Berliner's appearance on Chris Cuomo's NewsNation program last Tuesday night, for which NPR gave him the green light. (NPR's chief communications officer told Berliner to focus on his own experience and not share proprietary information.) The NPR letter also did not cite his remarks to The New York Times , which ran its article mid-afternoon Thursday, shortly before the reprimand was sent. Berliner says he did not seek approval before talking with the Times .

NPR defends its journalism after senior editor says it has lost the public's trust

Berliner says he did not get permission from NPR to speak with me for this story but that he was not worried about the consequences: "Talking to an NPR journalist and being fired for that would be extraordinary, I think."

Berliner is a member of NPR's business desk, as am I, and he has helped to edit many of my stories. He had no involvement in the preparation of this article and did not see it before it was posted publicly.

In rebuking Berliner, NPR said he had also publicly released proprietary information about audience demographics, which it considers confidential. He said those figures "were essentially marketing material. If they had been really good, they probably would have distributed them and sent them out to the world."

Feelings of anger and betrayal inside the newsroom

His essay and subsequent public remarks stirred deep anger and dismay within NPR. Colleagues contend Berliner cherry-picked examples to fit his arguments and challenge the accuracy of his accounts. They also note he did not seek comment from the journalists involved in the work he cited.

Morning Edition host Michel Martin told me some colleagues at the network share Berliner's concerns that coverage is frequently presented through an ideological or idealistic prism that can alienate listeners.

"The way to address that is through training and mentorship," says Martin, herself a veteran of nearly two decades at the network who has also reported for The Wall Street Journal and ABC News. "It's not by blowing the place up, by trashing your colleagues, in full view of people who don't really care about it anyway."

Several NPR journalists told me they are no longer willing to work with Berliner as they no longer have confidence that he will keep private their internal musings about stories as they work through coverage.

"Newsrooms run on trust," NPR political correspondent Danielle Kurtzleben tweeted last week, without mentioning Berliner by name. "If you violate everyone's trust by going to another outlet and sh--ing on your colleagues (while doing a bad job journalistically, for that matter), I don't know how you do your job now."

Berliner rejected that critique, saying nothing in his essay or subsequent remarks betrayed private observations or arguments about coverage.

Other newsrooms are also grappling with questions over news judgment and confidentiality. On Monday, New York Times Executive Editor Joseph Kahn announced to his staff that the newspaper's inquiry into who leaked internal dissent over a planned episode of its podcast The Daily to another news outlet proved inconclusive. The episode was to focus on a December report on the use of sexual assault as part of the Hamas attack on Israel in October. Audio staffers aired doubts over how well the reporting stood up to scrutiny.

"We work together with trust and collegiality everyday on everything we produce, and I have every expectation that this incident will prove to be a singular exception to an important rule," Kahn wrote to Times staffers.

At NPR, some of Berliner's colleagues have weighed in online against his claim that the network has focused on diversifying its workforce without a concomitant commitment to diversity of viewpoint. Recently retired Chief Executive John Lansing has referred to this pursuit of diversity within NPR's workforce as its " North Star ," a moral imperative and chief business strategy.

In his essay, Berliner tagged the strategy as a failure, citing the drop in NPR's broadcast audiences and its struggle to attract more Black and Latino listeners in particular.

"During most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed. We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding," Berliner writes. "In recent years, however, that has changed."

Berliner writes, "For NPR, which purports to consider all things, it's devastating both for its journalism and its business model."

NPR investigative reporter Chiara Eisner wrote in a comment for this story: "Minorities do not all think the same and do not report the same. Good reporters and editors should know that by now. It's embarrassing to me as a reporter at NPR that a senior editor here missed that point in 2024."

Some colleagues drafted a letter to Maher and NPR's chief news executive, Edith Chapin, seeking greater clarity on NPR's standards for its coverage and the behavior of its journalists — clearly pointed at Berliner.

A plan for "healthy discussion"

On Friday, CEO Maher stood up for the network's mission and the journalism, taking issue with Berliner's critique, though never mentioning him by name. Among her chief issues, she said Berliner's essay offered "a criticism of our people on the basis of who we are."

Berliner took great exception to that, saying she had denigrated him. He said that he supported diversifying NPR's workforce to look more like the U.S. population at large. She did not address that in a subsequent private exchange he shared with me for this story. (An NPR spokesperson declined further comment.)

Late Monday afternoon, Chapin announced to the newsroom that Executive Editor Eva Rodriguez would lead monthly meetings to review coverage.

"Among the questions we'll ask of ourselves each month: Did we capture the diversity of this country — racial, ethnic, religious, economic, political geographic, etc — in all of its complexity and in a way that helped listeners and readers recognize themselves and their communities?" Chapin wrote in the memo. "Did we offer coverage that helped them understand — even if just a bit better — those neighbors with whom they share little in common?"

Berliner said he welcomed the announcement but would withhold judgment until those meetings played out.

In a text for this story, Chapin said such sessions had been discussed since Lansing unified the news and programming divisions under her acting leadership last year.

"Now seemed [the] time to deliver if we were going to do it," Chapin said. "Healthy discussion is something we need more of."

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp and Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no NPR corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

• Katherine Maher
• uri berliner

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

What Sentencing Could Look Like if Trump Is Found Guilty

By Norman L. Eisen

Mr. Eisen is the author of “Trying Trump: A Guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial.”

For all the attention to and debate over the unfolding trial of Donald Trump in Manhattan, there has been surprisingly little of it paid to a key element: its possible outcome and, specifically, the prospect that a former and potentially future president could be sentenced to prison time.

The case — brought by Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, against Mr. Trump — represents the first time in our nation’s history that a former president is a defendant in a criminal trial. As such, it has generated lots of debate about the case’s legal strength and integrity, as well as its potential impact on Mr. Trump’s efforts to win back the White House.

A review of thousands of cases in New York that charged the same felony suggests something striking: If Mr. Trump is found guilty, incarceration is an actual possibility. It’s not certain, of course, but it is plausible.

Jury selection has begun, and it’s not too soon to talk about what the possibility of a sentence, including a prison sentence, would look like for Mr. Trump, for the election and for the country — including what would happen if he is re-elected.

The case focuses on alleged interference in the 2016 election, which consisted of a hush-money payment Michael Cohen, the former president’s fixer at the time, made in 2016 to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump. Mr. Bragg is arguing that the cover-up cheated voters of the chance to fully assess Mr. Trump’s candidacy.

This may be the first criminal trial of a former president in American history, but if convicted, Mr. Trump’s fate is likely to be determined by the same core factors that guide the sentencing of every criminal defendant in New York State Court.

Comparable cases. The first factor is the base line against which judges measure all sentences: how other defendants have been treated for similar offenses. My research encompassed almost 10,000 cases of felony falsifying business records that have been prosecuted across the state of New York since 2015. Over a similar period, the Manhattan D.A. has charged over 400 of these cases . In roughly the first year of Mr. Bragg’s tenure, his team alone filed 166 felony counts for falsifying business records against 34 people or companies.

Contrary to claims that there will be no sentence of incarceration for falsifying business records, when a felony conviction involves serious misconduct, defendants can be sentenced to some prison time. My analysis of the most recent data indicates that approximately one in 10 cases in which the most serious charge at arraignment is falsifying business records in the first degree and in which the court ultimately imposes a sentence, results in a term of imprisonment.

To be clear, these cases generally differ from Mr. Trump’s case in one important respect: They typically involve additional charges besides just falsifying records. That clearly complicates what we might expect if Mr. Trump is convicted.

Nevertheless, there are many previous cases involving falsifying business records along with other charges where the conduct was less serious than is alleged against Mr. Trump and prison time was imposed. For instance, Richard Luthmann was accused of attempting to deceive voters — in his case, impersonating New York political figures on social media in an attempt to influence campaigns. He pleaded guilty to three counts of falsifying business records in the first degree (as well as to other charges). He received a sentence of incarceration on the felony falsification counts (although the sentence was not solely attributable to the plea).

A defendant in another case was accused of stealing in excess of $50,000 from her employer and, like in this case, falsifying one or more invoices as part of the scheme. She was indicted on a single grand larceny charge and ultimately pleaded guilty to one felony count of business record falsification for a false invoice of just under $10,000. She received 364 days in prison.

To be sure, for a typical first-time offender charged only with run-of-the-mill business record falsification, a prison sentence would be unlikely. On the other hand, Mr. Trump is being prosecuted for 34 counts of conduct that might have changed the course of American history.

Seriousness of the crime. Mr. Bragg alleges that Mr. Trump concealed critical information from voters (paying hush money to suppress an extramarital relationship) that could have harmed his campaign, particularly if it came to light after the revelation of another scandal — the “Access Hollywood” tape . If proved, that could be seen not just as unfortunate personal judgment but also, as Justice Juan Merchan has described it, an attempt “to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election.”

History and character. To date, Mr. Trump has been unrepentant about the events alleged in this case. There is every reason to believe that will not change even if he is convicted, and lack of remorse is a negative at sentencing. Justice Merchan’s evaluation of Mr. Trump’s history and character may also be informed by the other judgments against him, including Justice Arthur Engoron’s ruling that Mr. Trump engaged in repeated and persistent business fraud, a jury finding that he sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll and a related defamation verdict by a second jury.

Justice Merchan may also weigh the fact that Mr. Trump has been repeatedly held in contempt , warned , fined and gagged by state and federal judges. That includes for statements he made that exposed witnesses, individuals in the judicial system and their families to danger. More recently, Mr. Trump made personal attacks on Justice Merchan’s daughter, resulting in an extension of the gag order in the case. He now stands accused of violating it again by commenting on witnesses.

What this all suggests is that a term of imprisonment for Mr. Trump, while far from certain for a former president, is not off the table. If he receives a sentence of incarceration, perhaps the likeliest term is six months, although he could face up to four years, particularly if Mr. Trump chooses to testify, as he said he intends to do , and the judge believes he lied on the stand . Probation is also available, as are more flexible approaches like a sentence of spending every weekend in jail for a year.

We will probably know what the judge will do within 30 to 60 days of the end of the trial, which could run into mid-June. If there is a conviction, that would mean a late summer or early fall sentencing.

Justice Merchan would have to wrestle in the middle of an election year with the potential impact of sentencing a former president and current candidate.

If Mr. Trump is sentenced to a period of incarceration, the reaction of the American public will probably be as polarized as our divided electorate itself. Yet as some polls suggest — with the caveat that we should always be cautious of polls early in the race posing hypothetical questions — many key swing state voters said they would not vote for a felon.

If Mr. Trump is convicted and then loses the presidential election, he will probably be granted bail, pending an appeal, which will take about a year. That means if any appeals are unsuccessful, he will most likely have to serve any sentence starting sometime next year. He will be sequestered with his Secret Service protection; if it is less than a year, probably in Rikers Island. His protective detail will probably be his main company, since Mr. Trump will surely be isolated from other inmates for his safety.

If Mr. Trump wins the presidential election, he can’t pardon himself because it is a state case. He will be likely to order the Justice Department to challenge his sentence, and department opinions have concluded that a sitting president could not be imprisoned, since that would prevent the president from fulfilling the constitutional duties of the office. The courts have never had to address the question, but they could well agree with the Justice Department.

So if Mr. Trump is convicted and sentenced to a period of incarceration, its ultimate significance is probably this: When the American people go to the polls in November, they will be voting on whether Mr. Trump should be held accountable for his original election interference.

What questions do you have about Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial so far?

Please submit them below. Our trial experts will respond to a selection of readers in a future piece.

Norman L. Eisen investigated the 2016 voter deception allegations as counsel for the first impeachment and trial of Donald Trump and is the author of “Trying Trump: A Guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .