As Jack Wertheimer recently observed in Mosaic, the coronavirus has led many Orthodox Jews to pray in small outdoor minyanim, where social-distancing regulations could be properly adhered to—and, having come to like the informality and intimacy of these gatherings, not all are eager to return to their synagogues. Ezra Schwartz, in an assessment of COVID-19’s effects on American Modern Orthodoxy, believes that this new trend toward decentralization calls for a reevaluation of pulpit rabbis’ obligations:

To some extent this emerging American rabbi will need to model himself after the Israeli model of the rav ha-ir or rav ha-sh’khunah [city or neighborhood rabbi]. In that traditional Israeli model, the rabbi is not limited by the walls of a particular building. I [visiting the Israeli town of] Modi’in a decade ago when the current Ashkenazi chief rabbi, David Lau, ran from synagogue to synagogue on Shabbat morning. From what I am told, he spoke at eleven different minyanim that Shabbat, inspiring and sharing words of Torah (sometimes the exact same words) in each location.

This rabbinic model [resembleds that of] pre-war European communities as well. . . . . There may have been a large synagogue that served as [a particular rabbi’s] base, but his orbit extended to the entire community.

The American model of a rabbi for every synagogue is historically novel. However, it serves a tremendous need. The ideal American congregational rabbi is far more than a teacher and preacher. He is a life guide and lifelong mentor for his flock. He offers pastoral counseling and is deeply involved in the life of his congregants. . . . The question to ask is how can the essential personalized pastoral role of the American rabbi persist in a decentralized world of backyard minyanim and shtiblakh [very small synagogues]? How can the successes of a century of American congregational rabbis be maintained if many of the changes wrought by the pandemic remain in the post-pandemic world?

Yesterday, the Iranian foreign minister flew to Geneva to meet with European diplomats. President Trump, meanwhile, indicated that cease-fire negotiations might soon begin with Iran, which would presumably involve Tehran agreeing to make concessions regarding its nuclear program, while Washington pressures Israel to halt its military activities. According to Israeli media, Iran already began putting out feelers to the U.S. earlier this week. Aviram Bellaishe considers the purpose of these overtures:

The regime’s request to return to negotiations stems from the principle of deception and delay that has guided it for decades. Iran wants to extricate itself from a situation of total destruction of its nuclear facilities. It understands that to save the nuclear program, it must stop at a point that would allow it to return to it in the shortest possible time. So long as the negotiation process leads to halting strikes on its military capabilities and preventing the destruction of the nuclear program, and enables the transfer of enriched uranium to a safe location, it can simultaneously create the two tracks in which it specializes—a false facade of negotiations alongside a hidden nuclear race.