sometimes innovative, but always deeply rooted in the halakhah. Innovations did occur, but no radical changes. The three nineteenth century rabbinic conferences were to deal with status, the structure of family life and the liturgy of the synagogue in a totally open and democratic way. Anything could be questioned and was open to debate.
The rabbis adopted the democratic process that they saw around them. There were references to the limited democracy that had existed in the medieval councils but they were not interested in earlier precedents. This open democratic approach represented an enormous innovation and was to be the major path of all Jewish communities in the future. This path was adopted without discussion or protest as it fitted the times and the mood of those who attended. Furthermore, the deliberations, not only the conclusions would be publicized. The rabbis realized that in this new emancipated world their authority was limited to their persuasive powers. Innovations and changes had to be voluntarily accepted and could not be imposed since the Jewish communities no longer possessed any enforcing power.
Those assembled at Braunschweig saw themselves continuing the work of Napoleon 's Sanhedrin, which had been organized democratically. It had legitimized changes sought by the French emperor, but the rabbis at Braunschweig did not consider their assembly a Sanhedrin. They knew that the ancient Sanhedrin had been an institution capable of innovation and change, but tradition had surrounded it with enough restrictions to read it out of existence. It remained as a purely theoretical device. It existed on paper, but in practice could not be reconstituted.” They decided to function as a democratic assembly, a major innovation in itself.
A second innovation followed, as the proceedings were carried out in the vernacular and then published in the vernacular as well. Thus the proceedings were open and transparent; the attendees, of
Sp de in
de ou Te,