GIFT OF VIEWS ON THE SYNOD COMPILED BY COMMITTEE OF THE CENTRAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN RABBIS s^fiySpS^ 1905 THE FRIEDENWALD CO. BALTIMORE, MD. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD COMPILED BY COMMITTEE OF THE CENTRAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN RABBIS 1905 Q^afrimore (pvt THE FRIEDENWALD CO. BALTIMORE, MD. .V BALTIMORE, MD., U. S. A. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Preface 3 Preamble adopted for the Establishment of the Union of the Israelites of America (July 12, 1841 ) 5 Leeser (1845) 6 Appeal of Berlin Genossenschaft (1845) 7 Samuel Holdheim's Comment on above Appeal 7 S. Stern on above Appeal ( 1845) 8 M. Hess (1845) 10 Address by Breslau Genossenschaft (1846) 10 The Friends of Reform at Worms ( 1848) 1 1 Call for a Synod (1848) 12 Ludwig Philippson's Plan of a General German Synod (1848) 13 L. Philippson's Additional Remarks ( 1848) 15 Isaac M. Wise's Call (1848) 19 L. Philippson ( 1849) 23 Call for Synod to the Jewish Religious Communities of Germany ( 1849) . . 25 I. M. Wise (1856) 32 B. Felsenthal (1856) 34 Protest of Har Sinai Congregation, Baltimore, against Cleveland Confer- ence (1855) 35 Leopold Stein ( 1856) 35 I. M. Wise (1857) 35 S. Holdheim (1857) : 36 Zacharias Frankel (1857) 38 A. Geiger (1865) 39 Alliance Israelite on Synod ( 1867) 40 Resolution of Cassel Conference ( 1868) 41 From Minutes of Cassel Rabbinical Conference (1868) 41 A. Geiger (1868) 42 Jewish Chronicle ( 1868) , 44 Editorial in Occident (1868) 49 321396 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Invitation to Synod by Adler, Philippson, and Aub (1869) 52 Jewish Chronicle on Synod ( 1869) 55 L. Philippson (1869) 56 B. Wechsler (1870) 57 M. Lazarus ( 1871 ) 59 E. G. Hirsch (1880) 64 E. G. Hirsch (1881) 65 I. M. Wise (1881) 66 J. K. Gutbeim (1881) 72 Samuel Hirsch ( 1881 ) 73 K. Kohler (1882) 74 The Jewish Synod. A Paper by Dr. H. G. Enelow (1900) 75 From Dr. Silverman's Presidential Message (Detroit, 1903) 104 Dr. Jacob Voorsanger ( 1903) 105 Dr. M. Margolis (1903) 107 From Dr. Krauskopf's Presidential Message (Louisville, 1904) 108 Report of the Committee on Synod (Louisville, 1904) in Majority Report on Synod (Louisville, 1904) 121 Minority Report on Synod (Louisville, 1904) 122 Some Jewish Questions. Paper by Dr. B. Felsenthal (Louisville, 1904) . . 123 Rabbi Max Heller ( 1904) 131 Dr. S. Schechter's Views ( 1905) 134 D. W. Amram's Reply ( 1905) 143 Alfred M. Cohen's Reply (1905) 145 Morris M. Cohn's Reply ( 1905) 155 S. S. Riser's Reply (1905) 156 Ephraim Lederer's Reply ( 1905) 158 M. A. Marks' Reply ( 1905) 159 Jacob H. Schiff 's Reply ( 1905) 159 H. Weinstock's Reply ( 1905) . 160 PREFACE At the meeting of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, held at Louisville, Ky., in June, 1904, the committee to whom was referred the suggestion in the president's report to convene a Synod presented a majority and minority report. Because of the differ- ences of opinion in the committee and among the members of the conference at large the signers of the majority report recommended that the executive committee be instructed to issue a pamphlet con- taining opinions pro and con on the subject, this pamphlet to be distributed among the people with the purpose of forming and educating public opinion on this vital question. The executive com- mittee entrusted the preparation of the pamphlet to a committee consisting of David Philipson, chairman ; H. G. Enelow, Morris M. Feuerlicht, Adolf Guttmacher, and Wm. Rosenau. The committee has compiled opinions on the Synod voiced by leaders of Jewish thought during the past sixty years. The committee has attempted to maintain a purely objective attitude and has included opinions favorable and unfavorable to the project. It has carefully excluded, as far as possible, all articles of a personal nature and also those of a purely polemical abusive character. The material has been drawn for the most part from the files of Jewish newspapers and magazines. The committee has not aimed to reproduce everything that has been published on this theme, but merely to present a number of state- ments which, in its judgment, discuss the subject from various points of view. The committee is indebted to Dr. E. Schreiber, of Chicago, for having placed at its disposal some material in his possession ; the articles which he has compiled and translated are subscribed with his initial. In accordance with the instructions of the Conference the papers and reports read at its meetings touching the subject of the Synod have been included. The committee hopes that this compilation may aid those who read and study these opinions to come to a clear decision and conclusion as to the advisability or non-advisability of forming a Synod as the representative Jewish organization; 4 PREFACE notably the members of the Conference who are to decide upon this all-important question at the coming session in Cleveland, the city- in which the famous Conference was held fifty years ago, at which the Synod question was discussed for the first time in a gathering of Jewish notables in this country. The following circular letter was sent to a number of laymen throughout the country by the committee. The answers received are given in this publication. November 23, 1904. Dear Sir: You are aware, no doubt, that at its last convention in Louisville, the Central Conference of American Rabbis discussed the advisability and feasibility of establishing a Jewish Synod in this country. The Conference realizes that even were such an institu- tion to be established, it would be worthless unless it responded to the needs and the will of the people. For that reason, a committee has been appointed, to publish a pamphlet on the question, and to distribute it broadcast for the general enlightenment of those in whose behalf the Synod shall, or shall not be organized. In addition to some historical literature and the reports and papers presented before the Conference, it is the purpose of the committee to publish, in a pamphlet, the opinions of some eminent Jewish laymen, on the subject. We take the liberty of asking you, as a representative Jew, to favor us with a statement of your position in this matter. As we know that the plan of the Synod is but partly understood by the people, and has often been misrepresented, we mail you under separate cover, the Conference reports on the subject, and we hope that you will be so kind as to read them carefully, and consider them in the expression of your view. It is needless to say, that the committee addresses this request to you, because it believes you to be interested in the welfare of Juda- ism, and is confident that your opinion, whatever it be, will be worthy of the attention and respect of all those interested in this important movement. Sincerely yours, VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 1841. PREAMBLE ADOPTED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A UNION OF THE ISRAELITES OF AMERICA, JULY 12, 1841. The Israelites of Philadelphia, in common .with their brethren in other places in America, have long since been alive to the many evils under which they labor in the great downfall of religious observance and the want of proper religious education among them. But, deem- ing it their duty to leave no means untried to counteract the deplor- able state of want of proper observance, and to promote a due knowledge of the blessed religion they have received from their fathers, they have resolved to propose a union of all Israelites resid- ing in America, to effect by a common and united effort, that which would evidently be beyond the power of accomplishing by any one of the small congregations in which the Israelites of this country are divided. They, therefore, offer the following suggestions, which they hope will forward greatly the desired result ; in, first, establish- ing a competent ecclesiastical authority, agreeably to the injunction of the law in Deut. xvi : 18, " Judges and officers shalt thou appoint for thyself in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee throughout thy tribes " ; secondly, by establishing schools for general and religious education under Jewish superintendence, as com- manded in Deut. vi : 7, " And thou shalt teach them diligently to thy children " ; thirdly, by promoting harmony and a concert of action among all their brethren scattered over the western hemisphere, in accordance with the lofty aspiration of the Psalmist who says (cxxxiii : i) : " Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for breth- ren to dwell together in unity." With these views the committee recommend the adoption of the following rules and regulations for the government and action of the Israelites of America. [See The Occident, Vol. Ill, p. 176.] 6 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD LEESER, 1845. i UNION FOR THE SAKE OF JUDAISM. We are well aware that there are not a few in this country (and for that matter in Europe), who have a great aversion to priestly domination, and for one we wish to be reckoned among this class; for to our view there exists nothing more odious than a man who, whilst professing to be guided by the humbling tenets of religion, lifts up his heart above his fellowmen, as though his calling were not for their, but exclusively for his, own benefit. Many among these may therefore object to all ecclesiastical authority, as leading to a tyranny over the conscience more to be dreaded than the great liberty now so universal. But we beg to differ with those who entertain this thought. There is unfortu- nately enough of priest-power now in the local ministers, quite as much as is likely to arise if we have spiritual chiefs. We have seen enough to convince us that, whereas at times the ministers are too little regarded by their constituents, they are at others looked upon with a ridiculous air of veneration, as though a mortal man must be infallible because he has a clerical character. In this foolish de- votion men and women exhibit their folly alike j even in this free and enlightened country ; and to judge from circumstances, this un- wise course has led to many unpleasant feelings towards those who could not so regard as infallible the idolized ministers. We have seen this frequently among our gentile neighbors ; and so little have we profited by this evidence of its evil consequences, that we have occasionally followed upon the same path. The men, however, who, according to our plan, are to be invested with authority, will have nothing of a coercive power conferred upon them ; they are only to advise, to instruct, to admonish, to teach by example no less than by precept ; and as such they can never have a party attached to them, unless, which God forfend, the spirit of madness should seize upon the minds of teachers and people, which would lead to those results which induce them to forsake the plain letter of the law and the tradition to substitute the fancies of men in their place. Such a result, how'ever, we do not fear ; it is in fact the isolated state of our congregations, which may lead to the formation of parties among VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 7 us ; and only by the selection of intelligent teachers can this threat- ening evil be avoided [See Occident, Vol. Ill, pp. 220-221, Aug., 1845.] FROM THE APPEAL OF THE BERLIN GENOSSENSCHAFT FUER REFORM IM JUDENTHUM, APRIL 2, 1845. Our appeal goes forth to you, our German coreligionists far and near, that you associate yourselves with us, assure us of your sup- port by word and deed and assist us so that we, in great numbers, can convene a synod which shall renew and establish Judaism in a form worthy of continuing as a living force for us and our children. [Allgemcine Zeitung des Judcnthums, 1845, PP- 2 34~ 2 36; Der Israelit des neunzehnten Jahrliunderts, 1845, PP- 129-130.] DR. SAML. HOLDHEIM'S COMMENT ON ABOVE APPEAL. The idea of a synod which governs and inspires the signers of the appeal, though they have as yet no particular community in mind, is in the first place not exempt from internal contradictions, and, probably on this account, cannot be carried out practically. The belief in authority is innate in man, so that even he who is apparently most free cannot entirely guard against it. When Lessing said " all who mock at their fetters are not free," he spoke truthfully. Do away with priesthood in one form, it will always return in another. What the appeal wishes to accomplish through the convening of a synod is, on the one hand, the agreement of a large number of like- minded persons on the expressed convictions, and, on the other hand, the cooperation or support of theologians by profession who are the real experts and have a scientific training. 1 1 Der Gedanke einer Synode, der die Unterzeichner des Aufrufes, weil sie noch nicht das leibhafte Bild einer an einem Orte befindlichen Gemeinde vor Augen hatte, beherrschte und sogar begeisterte, ist erstens nicht frei von innern Widerspriichen und (vielleicht deshalb) zweitens ein praktisch unaus- fiihrbarer. Der Autoritatsglaube steckt den Menschen in den Gliedern, dass die Freiesten sich dessen nicht ganz erwehren konnen, und es bewahrt sich das Wort Lessing's, " es sind nicht alle frei, die ihrer Ketten spotten." Man mag das Priesterthum in einer bestimmten Gestalt austreiben, es kehct in einer andern Gestalt immer wieder. Was der Aufruf durch die Berufung einer Synode erstreben will, ist einerseits die Zustimmung einer grosseren VIEWS ON THE SYNOD S. STERN ON ABOVE APPEAL, 1845. [A comment on the suggestion to call a synod contained in the Appeal of the Berlin Reform Association, by Dr. S. Stein, one of the founders of the Association, and one of the writers of the appeal in his brochure, Die Gcgcnwarlige Bewegung im Judcnthume, Berlin, 1845, PP- 44-45-] The synod will be composed of representatives elected by the con- gregations and its essential task will be to see that it express in its decisions the convictions of the community at large and satisfy its needs. It is not to consider itself an authority whose duty to make laws which, because they are issued by it, shall be binding upon all, but it is to look upon itself as the only and highest means by which the conviction and will of this body, composed of many, shall find expression. For the new form in our religion is not to be im- posed from without as has been the case but should spring from the genuine and well-understood need of the present. Only in this way can the synod fully and properly satisfy this need. The synod then will be composed of true representatives of the congregations, that is, of men who not only know the convictions of the same, but have imbibed them in their deepest and purest sense. The synod is not a rabbinical conference but naturally it will be an essential re- quirement for the fulfillment of its tasks that science and theology as well as the immediate, practical needs of life be well represented by men eminently fitted. The decrees of the synod must be decisive and binding on the congregations, which have joined this religious union. Binding (bindend), I say, but not forever (bleibend). Binding for the moment but not for eternity. The essential signifi- cance of the present movement in Judaism is the casting off of the shackles of traditional ceremonialism, and so we cannot call into being new institutions which would lay claims to similar eternal validity. Therefore we must not look upon the decrees of this synod as the authentic interpretation of the divine will, but as the complete expression of the contemporary religious consciousness and as the Anzahl von Gleichgesinnten zu den atisgesprochenen Ueberzeugungen, und andererseits die Mitwirkung resp. Unterstiitzung von eigentlich sachver- standigen wissenschaftlich gebildeten Theologen von Fach. [Geschichte dcr Entstchung und Entwickelung der judischen Refonngemcinde in Berlin, 1857, p. 119.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 9 realization of the religious needs apparent in the Judaism of to-day. Consequently sessions of the synod must take place at stated times, not too frequent, so that the idea of the uninterrupted development of Judaism be not lost sight of without becoming at the same time too domineering a factor. 2 2 Die Synode wird aus selbstgewahlten Vertretern der Gemeinden bestehen, und es als ihre wesentliche Aufgabe anzusehen haben, in ihren Beschliissen die Ueberzeugung der Gesammtheit zu verwirklichen und ihren Bediirfniss die Befriedignng zu gewahren. Sie wird sich nicht als eine Behorde anzu- sehen haben, der es zusteht Gesetze zu geben, die, well sie von ihr ausgehen, bindende Kraft fur die Gesammtheit haben, sondern sie wird sich als das einige und hochste Organ betrachten, in welchem die Ueberzeugung und der Wille dieser vielfach gegliederten Gesammtheit ihren Ausdruck finden. Denn die neue Form unserer Religion soil nicht wieder eine von Aussen gegebene, sondern eine dem wahrhaften und wohlverstandenen Bediirfniss der Gegen- wart entsprungene sein; und nur so wird sie diesem Bediirfniss vollkommen und in der rechten Weise zu geniigen vermogen. Die Synode wird also aus wahrhaften Vertretern der Gemeinden zusammengesetzt sein, das heisst aus Mannern, welche die Ueberzeugung derselben nicht nur kennen, sondern sie am tiefsten und reinsten in sich aufgenommen haben. Die Synode ist keine Rabbinerversammlung ; doch wird es naturlich ein wesentliches Erforderniss fiir die Erfiillung ihrer Aufgabe sein, dass das Element der Wissenschaft und der Gottesgelehrheit krarftig in derselben vertreten sei, so wie auch das unmittelbare Bedurfniss des Lebens durch Manner vertreten sein muss, welche mit ihrer ganzen Personlichkeit diesem angehoren. Die Beschliisse der Synode miissen entscheidend und bindend fiir die Gemeinden sein, die sich einmal dem gemeinsamen Religionsverbande angeschlossen haben ; ich sage bindend, aber nicht bleibend, bindend fiir den Moment aber nicht fiir die Ewigkeit. Das wesentliche Moment der gegenwartigen Bewegung ist die Befreiung von der Stabilitat der gegebenen religiosen Formen des Juden- thums, und wir konnen nicht neue Schopfungen hervorrufen, die wieder eine gleiche ewige Geltung fiir sich in Anspruch nehmen. Dartim miissen die Beschlusse dieser Synode nicht als authentische Auslegungen des gottlichen Willens, sondern als der vollstandigste Ausdruck des gegenwartigen Reli- gionsbewusstseins, und als die Verwirklichung des im heutigen Judenthum sich kundgebenden religiosen Bediirfnisses angesehen werden. Dartim muss die Erneuerung der Synodalversammlung in bestimmten, freilich nicht allzu- kurzen Zeitabschnitten festgestellt werden, damit das Element des ununter- brochenen Werdens im Leben des Judenthums nicht untergehe, ohne allzu- machtig in demselben zu walten. [From Die Gegenwdrtige Bewegung im Judenthume, Dr. S. Stern, 1845, PP- 44-45-1 io VIEWS ON THE SYNOD M. HESS, 1845- In the reform movement an assembly inaugurated by the people and composed of its most intelligent and high-minded members, a synod, is the best means of establishing the elements common to all as well as guarding individual religious freedom. 3 1846. FROM THE ADDRESS ISSUED BY THE BRESLAU GENOSSEN- SCHAFT FUR REFORM IM JUDENTHUME, APRIL 2, 1846. THE REFORM MOVEMENT IN BRESLAU. The rabbis, for certain reasons, can surely not anticipate all needs. These must first make themselves felt distinctly. Religion is not merely the affair of the scholar, the guide and teacher of the com- munity. It concerns every individual, especially since there is ki Judaism no distinction between clergy and laity. Those who are not rabbis must also attempt to gain a clear conception of the convictions and needs of Judaism and give utterance to them. This is what we greet as a glorious sign of the times in the Association for Reform in Berlin. This association has, indeed, not yet given expression to any hard and fast principles. It has merely demonstrated the evi- dent need for a more decided reform than has been instituted hitherto It has arranged for a meeting of all the friends of reform to be held on the i/|.th and I5th of April for deliberation and consultation. Theirs is an example for us to copy. That we come to some understanding on numerous points to be brought up at the above-mentioned deliberations, is certainly a matter of great import- 3 Eine aus dem Volke hervorgehende und seine intelligensten und gesinnungs- vollsten Glieder zahlende Versammlung, eine Synode, ist am ersten geeignet bei dem Werk der Reform sowohl das alle gemeinsame festzustellen als die individuelle Glaubensfreiheit zu wahren. [Editorial comment on same, Der Israelit des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, 1845, Vol. VI. p. 163.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD n ance to us ; let us not then permit the opportunity to slip by of strengthening and rectifying our convictions by mutual discussion. 4 THE PROVISIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE BRESLAU ASSOCIATION FOR REFORM IN JUDAISM. BRESLAU, Mar. 30, 1846. 1848. PROGRAM OF THE FRIENDS OF REFORM OF THE JEWISH RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OF WORMS. We consider that the congregational policy best suited for the future which shall accord the opportunity to all members of the congregation of expressing their opinions directly, as well as through representatives, and of thus participating in the shaping of religious 4 Freilich konnen die Rabbiner auch noch aus andern Griinden nicht alien Bediirfnissen zuvorkommen ; diese miissen sich erst selbst bestimmt geltend machen. Die Religion ist nicht bios die Sache des Gelehrten, des Fiihrers und Lehrers der Gemeinde, sie ist die Sache eines jeden Einzeln, und nament- lich im Judenthume gibt es keinen Unterschied zwischen Laien und Priestern. Es miissen also auch die Nicht-Rabbiner iiber die Ueberzeugungen und Bedurf- nisse sich klar zu machen suchen und sie aussprechen. Das ist es, was wir in der Reformgenossenschaft zu Berlin als ein schones Zeichen unserer Zeit begriissen. Diese hat allerdings bis jetzt keine festen Grundsatze ausge- sprochen, sie hat bios das Bediirfniss einer entschiedenen Reform, als sie bisher sich gezeigt hat, kundgegeben, sie hat .... auf den 14. und 15. April Berathungen angesetzt mit sammtlichen Freunden der Reform im Judenthume. Wir sehen hierin ein Beispiel, das von uns Nachahmung verdient. Eine Verstandigung uber mehrere Punkte, welche bei jenen Berathungen vor- kommen, ist gewiss auch fur uns von grossem Werthe, und so wollen wir uns das Mittel nicht entgehen lassen, durch gegenseitige Besprechung auch unsere Ueberzeugungen zu kraftigen und zu berichtigen. DAS VORLAUFIGE COMITE DER BRESLAUER GENOSSENSCHAFT FUR REFORM IM JUDENTHUME. BRESLAU, den 30. Marz, 1846. {Der Israelit des ncunzehnten Jahrhunderts, Vol. VII, Apr. 26, 1846, p. 134.] 12 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD affairs. Therefore, we demand periodical public assemblies of the congregations, and just such synods. 5 [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, July 17, 1848, Vol. XII, p. 431.] 1848. CALL FOR A SYNOD TO TAKE PLACE OF THE RABBINICAL CONFERENCR We are of the opinion that the rabbinical conferences are no longer in keeping with the need of the time. The people must take their religious affairs into their own hands. Judaism demands that the work of progress be done by the communities themselves. There- fore, instead of a rabbinical conference we must have a synod whose members must be chosen directly by the people irrespective of the fact as to whether they are rabbis or not, for Judaism knows no distinction between rabbis and laymen. 5 Als die angemessene Gemeindeverfassung der Zukunft erkennen wir diejenige, welche alien Gliedern der Gemeind^ Gelegenheit gewahrt, sowoh), unmittelbar als auch durch Vertreter sich auszusprechen und an der Gestalt ung des religiosen Lebens sich zu betheiligen. Wir verlangen daher perio- disch, wiederkehrende, "offentliche Gemeindeversammlungen und eben solche Synode." [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, July 17, 1848, Vol. XII, p. 431.] 6 AN DIE VEREHRLICHEN MlTGLIEDER DER BISHERIGEN RABBINERVERSAMMLUNGEN. .... Wir sind der Ansicht dass .... das Institut der Rabbinerversamm- lung nicht mehr als zeitgemass zu betrachten sei; das Volk will und soil, auch in religioser Beziehung seine Angelegenheiten in die eigene Hand nehmen .... Das Judenthum erwartet und fordert jetzt das Werk seiner Fort bildung von den Gemeinden selbst; sie miissen sich scharen und einen, dam it das gemeinsame religiose Band befestigt, der religiose Geist des Judenthums von Neuem geweckt werde ; und wir leben der Ueberzeugung, dass die Gemeinden, auf die gehorige Weise angeregt, aus ihrer theilweisen Erschlaft- heit sich erheben, ihre Aufgabe erkennen, den hohen Beruf, fur welchen sie, die Tragerinnen der altesten, wahren Gotteserkenntniss, der Weltgeschichte verantwortlich sind, erfiillen werden. Wir erlauben tins daher, zunachst an Sie, geehrte Amtsbriider, die Sie durch Ihr Erscheinen bei den bisherigen Rabbinerversammlungen Ihr lebhaftes Interesse fur die Erhaltung und Fort- bildung des Judenthums an den Tag gelegt, dann aber an alle unsere Herren Kcllegen nahe und fern, denen die bedrohliche Lage unserer Religions- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 13 f 1848. LUDWIG PHILIPPSON'S PLAN OF A GENERAL GERMAN SYNOD. (1) A synod composed not of rabbis, preachers, theologians and teachers but of Jews of whatever station or occupation. (2) A synod so directly representative of the people that what really lives among 1 them will find expression and confirmation. (3) A synod whose guides and members are men of the people, be they rabbis or not. (4) A synod which represents not one city, one province or state, but the whole of the German fatherland without excluding other countries which may desire to participate. We are now living in a period not only of political but of spirit- ual freedom. Israel has entered upon a phase of its existence un- like any during the whole course of its history. We have ceased to be a nation among the nations and are purely a religions community. Religion alone unites us. Such conditions call for a synod. Such an assembly must express itself regarding the meaning of Judaism as it shows itself to-day in the consciousness of those who profess it. A synod must give its opinion as to the value and power of ceremonialism and also as to the reorganization of the cult. With gemeinde zu Herzen geht, die dringende Bitte, dass Sie in engeren und weiteren Kreisen, durch Wort und Schrift, mit uns dahin wirken wollen, das an die Stelle der Rabbinerversamifllungen eine Synode trete, deren Mitglieder aus der unbeschranktesten, freien Wahl der Gememcjen hervorgegangen, den im Judenthume unbegrundeten Unterschied zwischen Rabbinen und Laien nicht kennend, unter dem Beistande Gottes einen Geist hervorrufen werden, welcher als der gemeinsame Geist der Judenheit sich zu erkennen gebe^und wirke. Wir in unseren Kreisen werden, nach getroffener Uebereinkunft mit den Mannern von Einsicht und Einfluss, zu einer gemeinschaftlichen Be- rathung, wie eine Synode in kurzester Zeit in's Leben zu rufen sei, zusammen- treten und iiber das Resultat seiner Zeit offentliche Mittheilung machen. Wir ersuchen Sie, auch iiber Ihre Schritte durch die offentlichen Organe moglichst schleunig berichten zu wollen. DIE MITGLIEDER DES BISHERIGEN AUSSCHUSSES FUR DIE VIERTE RABBINERVERSAMMLUNG. H. WAGNER, S. ADLER, A. ADLER, FORMSTECHER, STEIN. WORMS, 24. Juli, 1848. (.From Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, Aug. 7, 1848, p. 47Q.] 14 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD what purpose. So that religious life may be reinvigorated, that it follow new channels and become generally active. So that questions of religious life be taken out of the hands of quarreling thelogians and be solved by the people. 7 7 Auf einige Tage in Frankfurt anwesend, war es mir eine der ersten Aufgaben, niit den geschatzten Kollegen Stein und Formstecher (Offenbach), die Frage der Synode zu durchsprechen, und meine Meinung dahin darzu- legen, dass eine allgemeine deutsche Synode das nothwendigste Bedurfniss der Jetzzeit, unumganglich, zur thatkraftigsten Erwirkung empfohlen, sei. Die genannten Manner kamen mir mit derselben Ansicht entgegen, und handigten mir zugleich Behufs Abdrucks den unten folgenden Bericht und resp. Aufruf des bisherigen Komite's fur eine vierte Rabbinerversammlung ein. Also eine allgemeine deutsche Synode! Eine Synode, die nicht aus Rabbinern, Predigern, Theologen, Lehrern besteht, sondern aus Juden, welchen Standes welcher Beschaftigung es sei. Eine Synode, die so unmittelbar aus dem Volke hervorgeht, um das, was im Volke wahrhaft und wirklich lebt, zum Ausdruck und zur Feststellung zu bringen. Eine Synode, deren Leiter also Volksmanner sind, seien sie Rabbiner, seien sie Nicht-Rabbiner, deren Mitglieder Volksmanner sind. Eine Synode, die nicht eine Stadt, eine Provinz, ein Land reprasentirt, sondern das ganze deutsche Vaterland umschliesst, ohne selbst damit andere Lander, die sich ihr anschliessen wollen, auszuschli^ssen. Wir haben damit wohl das ausgedruckt, was in Vieler Geiste lebt. Die erste Frage lautet : warum ? Brauchen wir zur Bearttwortung dieser I^age hinzudeuten auf die Zeiten, die gekommen sind? Auf die Zeit volliger Glaubens- und Gewissensfreiheit, auf die Zeit, wo aber auf der einen Seite das Aufgeben aller positiven Reli- gionslehre, auf der andern Seite das starre Festhalten des Formwesens gleich wesentliche Gefahr droht, auf die Zeit, wo die momentane Noth im Verein mit feligiosem Indifferentismus die Gemeindeverbande aufzulosen beginnt, auf die Zeit, wo Alles in Frage steht, aber auch Alles sofort eine Antwort haben will? Es kann gar nichts Dringlicheres sein, als dass in solcher Zeit das Volk selbst seine Stimme abgebe, was es meine und wolle. Woher soil denn sonst die Ueberzeugung kommen, dass " innen im schaffenden Marke" noch ein voiles Leben pulsirt? Aus den leeren Gotteshausern? Aus den zerfallenden Gemeinden? Nein, wie einst das Volk unter Josua versammelt ward und tagte, und die Frage beantwortete : wollet Ihr fernerhin dem Herrn dienen, und seine Lehre bekennen? Mit einem, bis zu uns noch heruberschallenden Ja! Ja! iirmerdar so muss auch in einer solchen Zeit das Volk seine Stimme erheben und sprechen. Wir sind eingetreten in eine Zeit der Frejheit, nicht bios 4er biirgerlichen, VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 15 1848. PHILIPPSON'S ADDITIONAL REMARKS ON SYNOD. In the immediate past, Judaism has been less active than any other existing human institution. No irresistible influence, no powerful activity has appealed to common interest. There has been a great deal of bickering, wrangling and abuse, but with scant sondern auch der geistigen Freiheit. Israel ist jetzt in eine Phase eingetreten, wie sie fiir dasselbe noch gar nicht da gewesen ira ganzen Verlaufe seiner langen Geschichte, wo es aufgehort hat, vollig aufhdren muss, ein Volk zu sein unter den Volkern, sondern lediglich eine Religionsgemeinde verbleiben kann, die eben nur in Religiosen ihr Gemeinsames und Vereinigendes hat. Nun, so muss eine solche Zeit begriisst werden durch den Allgemeinen Zuruf : eine Solche sind wir, und nur eine Solche, und waiter Nichts, aber eine Solche wollen wir und unsere Sohne und Tochter verbleiben! Aeusseres und Inneres drangen so zu einer Synode. Wozu ? die zweite Frage. Eine Synode muss sich aussprechen iiber den Inhalt, den Lehrinhalt des Judenthums, wie er im Bewusstsein seiner heutigen Bekenner lebt ; muss sich aussprechen iiber den Werth des Formwesens, ob dasselbe eine verpflichtende Kraft hat, wie weit dieselbe ginge oder nicht ginge ; muss sich aussprechen iiber die Neugestaltung des Kultus; muss sich aussprechen iiber die Neuge- staltung des Gemeindewesens. Was hiermit bewirkt werde? Dass das religiose Leben neu erwache, in einen neuen Fluss gerathe, allgemein werde und sich bethatige ; dass das religiose Leben genommen werde aus den Handen streitender Theologaster und verlegt werde in die Herzen des Volkes, mitten hinein, wo es Herz und Geist wieder in Besitz nehme ; dass die Freiheit auch in Israel zur Wahrheit werde, und aus dem Grusse dieser Freiheit, aus der Anerkennung dieser Freiheit eine neue Begeisterung geschopft werde. Haltet Ihr dies fiir wenig, fiir entbehrlich? Wie? die dritte Frage. Nach meiner Ansicht muss die Synode bestehen aus, von den sammtlichen Mitgliedern der Gemeinden nach einem gewissen Wahlmodus gewahlten Abgeordneten, denen sich aber auch auf seine Kosten Jeder, der den Beruf in sich fiihlt, anschliessen kann. Dies die kurze Andeutung, die ich heute geben wollte. In Kurzem wird sich ein Komite zu Frankfurt am Main bilden, welches die weiteren Auffor- derungen und Bestimmungen erlassen wird. Die gelegenste Zeit wird die gleich nach dem Sukkotfeste sein. PHILIPPSON, [From Allgemeine Zeitung de$ Judenthums, Aug. 7, 1848, pp. 469-470.] 16 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD result. In general, sluggishness, inertia and inflexibility have been the rule, due to the fact that the Jews have long been accustomed to passive resistance ; to endure but not to fight ; to defend but not to attack. That reorganization in Judaism is necessary needs no proof. This has already been recognized and many attempts at it have been made. The public service has been beautified, the press has worked, and rabbinical conferences have been held. But all to no avail. All efforts at reorganization met the same fate. They were short-lived and made no impression on the masses. Why was this ? The reason is plain. Because these movements did not get at the root of the trouble and especially because they did not originate from the people. The leaders did not recognize that the traditional legal code is religiously authoritative for the Jews of to-day. The rabbinical conferences did, it is true, regard this question as important but they did not concern themselves with the question as a whole. They debated about the Hebrew language, the Sabbath boundary and the unbiblical holidays. Here it is that the Synod steps in. It is our belief that this vital problem of Judaism can be solved by a synod appointed by the people at large. If we are mistaken, an universal synod would, at any rate, give an impulse towards a united movement in Judaism, which in itself would be an important achievement. Therefore, all pains must be taken and all efforts made to bring a synod into being. Heads of communities, rabbis and teachers use all your strength for this end. Be not idlers in this cause ; be not indifferent or unsym- pathetic. Every Community should send delegates. None should consider itself too small. The task of the delegates sent to the synod will not and cannot be the making of decrees which shall have the power of law. The synod can only express the living conviction of the Jewish people and its power and efficacy will come from the truth of its dicta. 8 8 Man kann wohl mit Grund behauptcn, class in der ganzen jiingsten Vergan- genheit .... unter alien bestehenden grosseren Instituten der Menschheit, die Judenh.eit die geringste Energie bethatigt hat. Es ist in derselben im grossen Ganzen keine machtige Regsamkeit, keine ergreifende, hinreissende, Alle in VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 17 Bewegung setzende Thatigheit fur das gemeinsame Interesse sichtbar ge- worden. Es gab viel Parteistreit, es wurde sehr viel geschrieben, viel geschimpft und gezankt aber das schwamm Alles auf der Oberflache, hatte zumeist eine lokale Begrenzung und brachte wenig Resultat Dies ist nun die Frage : wird es anders werden? wird jetzt, wo es iiberaus nothwendig ist, dass die Herzen und Geister ergriffen werden, um unter dem Fliigelschlag einer neuen Zeit den alten Bau des Judenthums von Neuem zu begriinden, dass sich auch auf ihm die neue Zeit lebendig aufzubauen ver- moge, wird jetzt dergleichen vor sich gehen? Wird es jetzt gelingen, mehr als eine kurze, oberflachliche Erregung zu bewirken? Wird jetzt mehr daraus werden, als dass, um volksthumlich zu sprechen, Einige die Kopfe zusam- menstecken, und, wenn sie sie wieder auseinander thun, Alles eben wieder voriiber ist? Es gilt hier jetzt die Sache der Synode. Eine aus dem Volke selbst herworgehende Synode ist die letzte Instanz, ist der letzte Versuch, eine Neugestaltung da hervorzubringen, wo sie noth- wendig geworden, und wo alle anderen Versuche scheiterten, und zwar scheiterten, weil sie nur theilweise Versuche waren ; sie ist eine Appellation an die Masse, um durch sie zu bewirken, was sonst Niemand bewirken konnte. " Eine Neugestaltung, wo sie nothwendig geworden." Dass eine solche nothwendig geworden, brauchen wir nicht lange zu erweisen. Es sehe nur Jeder um sich herum, es sehe nur Jeder auf das aufwachsende Geschlecht, und die ihm eingepflanzte Richtung, es sehe nur Jeder darauf, ob das alte Juden- thum mit Allem, was jetzt vorgeht, sich noch lange vereinbaren lasse dann hat er sich selbst die Antwort gegeben. Zu dieser Neugestaltung wurden viele Versuche gemacht, man verschonte den Kultus, die Presse arbeitete, Rabbinerversammlungen wurden abgehalten. Alle diese Versuche haben denselben Erfolg gehabt nach kurzem Leben starben sie ab, sie drangen wenig in die Masse ein, sie iiberwaltigten dieselbe nicht, einige Athemziige und es war wieder vorbei. Man fragt: warum? Sehr einfach, weil die Bewegung nicht aus der Masse selbst hervorging, und weil sie eben iiberall nur ein theilweises Ueber- tiinchen einiger wunden Flecken waren, nicht aber auf den Kern der ganzen Frage eingingen. Dieser Kern der ganzen Frage im heutigen Judenthum ist offenbar : hat das Formgesetz fur die gegenwartigen Bekenner des Judenthums noch reli- gios verpflichtende Kraft oder nicht? Es hilft wahrlich Nichts mehr, um den Brei herumztigehen, ohne ihn zu beriihren, weil man sich die Finger daran verbrennen konne. Es gilt endlich einmal die Wahrheit imumwunden auszusprechen. Die Rabbinerversamm- lungen fiihlten wohl auch, dass dies die Lebensfrage sei aber sie nahmen nur immer ein Stiickchen vor, statt die ganze Frage. Sie debatirten iiber die Verpflichtung zur hebraischen Gebetsprache, iiber die Verpflichtung zur Sab- batgrenze, zu den unbiblischen Festtagen, und so weiter. Aber diese Brocken i8 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD konnten eben die Sache nicht zu irgend einer Entscheidung bringen. Das Leben stand an der Pforte und klopfte mit der Frage an: hat das ganze Formgesetz noch religios verpflichtende Kraft oder nicht? aber sie wiesen es mit der Frage ab, und suchten es mit kleinen Schnittchen zu sattigen. Da wollte es denn zuletzt Nichts mehr davon wissen. Als nun gar die Rab- binerversammlung miter Geiger's Leitung diese Frage nicht einmal in der Verhandlung iiber den Sabbat zulassen wollte, war jene von selbst todt. Also dies ist die Frage, dies ist die ganze Frage, und eine Entscheidung iiber diese Frage kann und soil von einer Synode, die aus alien Theilen der Masse ztisammengesetzt ist, getroffen werden. Indem im Leben ein sehr grosser Theil der Juden, namentlich der Jtigend, das ganze Formgesetz ver- lassen hat und sich hochstens nach Belieben bald dieses, bald jenes Stuck bewahrt; indem andrerseits ein grosser Theil der Juden, namentlich der an Jahren alteren, das Formgesetz in seinem ganzen Umfange noch festhalt ist es eben die Lebensfrage : ob das Formgesetz religios verpflichtende Kraft habe oder nicht? Also die Synode. Wir sagten, dass diese die letzte Instanz, der letzte Ver- such sei, in und aus der Gesammtheit eine Antwort fur die Frage zu erlangen, und das Leben der Gesammtheit nach einer bestimmten Richtung zu konzen- triren und zu bewegen. Wiirde die Synode nicht zu Stande, bei wiederholten Versuchen nicht zu Stande kommen, oder wiirde sie zu keinem Resultate fiihren dann miisste man die Sache sich ganzlich allein iiberlassen, und ruhig zusehen, was daraus wiirde, was in der allgemeinen Gahrung der Zeit sich daraus von selbst gestatte. Allerdings wiirde eine erste allgemeine Synode zunachst erst den Anstoss geben fur die gesammte Bewegung damit ware aber auch schon eine Haupt- sache gewonnen. Es muss daher Alles aufgewendet werden, alle Anstrengung gemacht werden, um eine Synode zu Stande zu bringen. Gemeindevorsteher, Rabbiner, Lehrer, hierfiir setzt alle Eure Kraft, alle Eure Bemuhung ein! Lasset Euch hierin nicht als mitssige Manner betreffen, hullet Euch hier nicht in den Mantel der Gleichgiltigkeit oder der Theilnahmlosigkeit ein, Ihr, Rab- biner, spielet nicht wieder die auf zweien Seiten Hinkenden, die erst den Erfolg abwarten wollen es wiirde der Tag der Abrechnung Euch nicht allzu- fern liegen, und Euere zerfallenen Stiihle wiirden Euch bald auf die eigenen Fiisse stellen. Die Frage : wie eine solche Synode zusammenzusetzen sei ? haben wir in der vorigen Nummer schon zu beantworten gesucht. Unsere Leser wissen, dass wir in religiosen Dingen keine Vertretung anerkennen, es kann eben die religiose Ueberzeugung des Individuums nicht durch einen Dritten vertreten werden. Aber es handelt sich zunachst an der Vertretung der Theilnahme, und darum muss die Synode zunachst aus Vertretern der einzelnen Landschaften, Kreise, Gemeinden bestehen. Wer vertreten sein soil? Jede Gemeinde, die sich vertreten lassen will, sei sie gross sei sie klein. Jeder Vertreter, der hinge- schickt wird, ist eben nur Vertreter der Theilnahme, der Betheiligung an der VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 19 1848. ISAAC M. WISE'S CALL. To the Ministers and Other Israelites: To my brother Israelites in North America, I call in the name of my God, uu im prnrui pin " Be firm, and let us strengthen each other in behalf of our people." The Rev. Editor of this periodical has granted me the favor to give publicity to my views about the association of Israelitish congregations in North America, to produce one grand and sublime end to defend and maintain our sacred faith, to the glory of God and for the benefit of Israel and all man- kind. Brethren ! though I am a stranger among you, unknown and un- important ; though I am aware that there are men among you much better than myself, jnD mr DJBp " whose little finger is thicker than my loins ;" though my years are but few in numbers and among you are men gray-haired and highly experienced, notwithstanding all this, I make use of the Rev. Editor's permission to express publicly my views on this important subject, because I think with Elihu, son of Borachel, the Buzite of old, ^ won *1B> nDBW E^JNZI SM nil px " Verily it is the will in man " (that renders him able to speak and act), "it is the spirit of the Almighty that gives understanding to Synode. Man wahle daher lieber den Namen Abgeordneter. Jede Gemeinde sende einen Abgeordneten zur Synode, einen Abgeordneten, der die Gemeinde eben nur als an der Synode betheiligt vertritt. Es glaube keine Gemeinde sich zu klein, urn einen Abgeordneten zu senden. Es werden doch schon genug Gemeinden sein, die keinen Abgeordneten senden. Es halte also keine Gemeinde dafiir, dass es ihrerseits einerlei sei, einen Abgeordneten zu senden. Die Synode wird also zunachst aus den Abgeordneten der jiidischen Ge- meinden bestehen. Dann aber halten wir dafiir, dass auch Jedem, der in sich den Beruf fiihlt, der Zutritt zu Synode gestattet sei. Die Synode hat nicht, kann nicht die Aufgabe haben, Beschlusse zu fassen, die Gesetzeskraft batten; sondern: das im Bewusstsein der jiidischen Glaubensgenossenschaft Lebende auszusprechen. Kraft und Giltigkeit wird dies dann eben dadurch erlangen, dass in diesem Ausspruch die Wahrheit liegt, die wirkliche Ueber- zeugung grosser Theile der Judenheit. Darum kann es bei der Synode nicht auf angstliche Zahlung berechtiger Stimmen ankommen, sondern auf moglich grossten Zufluss Aller, die Herz und Geist fur unsre heilige Sache haben. [From Allgetneine Zeitung des Judenthums, Aug. 14, 1848, pp. 481-483. See also ibid., Dec. 4, 1848, No. 50, pp. 711-714.] 2O VlEWS ON THE SYNOD them " (who have a good will devoted to God and virtue), or if I shall express the same idea in a Talmudic form of speech, I may say I trust toiDBn KWDn " in the help of heaven." It is one of the holy demands of our religion, vann roW> to walk in the ways of God. God is a unity, nriN 'n wherefore all mankind will one day be united for one great end to worship in truth the Most High, to adore His holy name, with humility and purity. Then will also be fulfilled nriN lossn that God's name will be one. To bring about this sublime unity, God has selected the people of Israel from among all nations, to be the bearers of divine truth, and to diffuse the bright light of religion among mankind. Where- fore we may justly say, our cause is the cause of mankind, our eleva- tion and success are the elevation and success of the human family, our fall is also the fall of all society ; since everyone must admit the fact that true religion is the basis of civilization. There is perhaps not a single Israelite among my readers who is not fully inspired with the inclination to share in the mission of his ancient people, as the voice of God called to each individual of Israel, without exception of either sex, or age, or spiritual abilities : " But you shall be unto me a kingdom of priests." Now in order to fulfil our sacred mission, to send our important message to mankind, it behooves us to be united as one man; to be linked together by the ties of equal views concerning religious questions by uniformity in our sacred customs, in our form of worship, and religious education. We ought to have a uniform system for our schools, synagogues, benevolent societies for all our religious institutions. This we need to have throughout the world, if we are to be considered as the same descendants of Israel, the same disciples of Mosheh if we are truly to fulfil our sacred mission. Our fathers, while living in the Holy Land, were commanded to appear three times every year at the place selected by God himself. This commandment had not for its sole object the prescribed sacrifices, but chiefly it was calcu- lated to uphold a friendly union a religious uniformity among all Israelites. Let us now direct our attention to the country where we live, and the circumstances in which we are placed. The majority of our congregations in this country have been established but a few years VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 21 back; they are generally composed of the most negative elements from all the different parts of Europe and elsewhere ; they have been founded and are now governed for the greater part by men of no considerable knowledge of our religion, and generally of no particu- lar zeal for our common cause. The consequence of all this is, that many congregations have no solid basis, no particular stimulants to urge on the youth to a religious life, and no nourishment for the spiritual Israelite. This naturally produces an enormous amount of indifference, and each congregation pursues its own way, has its own customs and mode of worship, its own way of thinking about religious questions, from which cause it then results that one Jew is a stranger in the synagogue of the other Jew. It is a pity to observe that any man who is so happy as to have a license fnhop) to kill from some unknown person, can become the minister of a congregation, and the teacher of the youth, without any proof of his knowledge of religion, and in the absence of any evidence of his conduct as a Jew. I will be silent about what is called DDn I will be silent about the pi, though our wise men teach Dnoi; porn* "?K pc?npi pto^i 3*02 *p^ " Whoever is not thoroughly acquainted with divorces and marriages, shall not have anything to do with them." I will be silent about the whole casuistic theology, and ask only the community at large : " What will become of our synagogues? what of our youth? " You see we have no system for our worship, nor for our ministry and schools, and we are therefore divided in as many fragments as there are congregations in North America. It is lamentable, but true, that if we do not unite our- selves betimes to devise a practicable system for the ministry and religious education at large ; if we do not take care that better educated men fill the pulpit and the schoolmaster's chair ; if we do not stimulate all the congregations to establish good schools, and to institute a reform in their synagogues on modern Jewish principles, the house of the Lord will be desolate, or nearly so, in less than ten years, and the zeal of the different Christian missionaries will be sufficient to make among us a large number of unprincipled infidels. It needs no prophetic spirit to read this horrible future in the present circumstances. I lay down these lines before the throne of history as a solemn protest against the spirit of separate action and of in- 22 VlEWS ON THE SYNOD differentism which has taken hold on so many noble minds of our brethren, and I proclaim before the whole world, before the present and future, my sincere conviction that now something must be done to defend and maintain our sacred faith. Nor is it too late ; every- thing can be done if we are all united before God. But who are the men that shall lay the corner-stone to this re- union? Are not the ministers of Israel those who must take the first step? Is not the spiritual welfare of Israel entrusted into their hands? Are they not responsible for it, if coming generations should be corrupted through their neglect? Are not included in this class the pious laymen who sigh over the downfall of the ancient customs and forms, without the establishment of the modern ones? Shall we not include those learned laymen who mourn to see how some people in their ignorance sanctify the profane, but profane the holy? Yea, it is the duty of all those to unite themselves, and work for the reunion of all the congregations. I call on you in the name of our God : " Be firm and strengthen yourselves for the sake of our people." Arise, ye men of piety and wisdom, ye shepherds, ye fathers of Israel, let us all meet. Vim vh t?'K; let us first take counsel what should be done, and how it must be done ; let us amicably consider what we ought to do as men and Israelites for the spiritual welfare of the present and coming generations; fet us earnestly deliberate on a plan to unite all Jews to defend and main- tain their sacred religion for the promotion of the glory of God and the bliss of Israel! I call upon all my honored friends, both ministers and laymen, and all who have an interest in the promul- gation of God's law : come, let us be assembled in order to become united! Exercise all your influence on your friends and acquaint- ances, to bring together all men of zeal and piety, of wisdom and knowledge, to consider what should be done for the union, welfare and progress of Israel And may God, the great Father of all, unite and bless the house of Israel ! May He enlighten all men with the shining light of truth, be gracious to all that seek Him, and merciful to all that have forsaken Him. Amen. ISAAC WISE, D. D., Rabbi of Albany. ALBANY, Qth day of Marcheshvan, 5609. A. M, [From " The Occident," Pec. 1848, pp. 431 -435. ] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 23 PHILIPPSON, A YEAR LATER (1849). A synod must be established. Sufficient matter will present itself for its consideration. Its principal work will be the formulating of the general truths of Judaism. The function of the synod will be the same as that of the old Synhedrin. At a time when the world shows its teeth to the Jews we must have settled and fixed principles by which to be guided, not only for the present but for the future. Judaism must be protected against those disturbing elements which are arrayed against it. Its work will be largely dogmatic. This is apt to frighten people. True, many imagine that Judaism has no dogmas. This, however, is a fallacy ; as soon as the philosophical spirit entered Judaism, dog- matism entered it, as witness the systems of Saadia, Maimonides, Albo, etc. It may, however, be said, " Dogmatism is a fettering of the spirit." True; but since we have cast aside all restraint as regards form, we must nevertheless retain some restricting element. Without this no community can exist. As soon as this restricting element becomes burdensome it can be cast off. This is the work of the synod. Therefore it is a necessity, and it will come to pass if not this year, the next year or some following year. That does not signify. Only if our premises were wrong would our conclu- sions be false. 9 9 DIE SYNODE UND DIE GEGENWART. .... Aber eine Synode muss zu Stande Gebracht warden. Sie wird manch- erlei zu thun haben, das Hauptwerk wird sein ; die Hauptprinzipien des Judenthums, so fesl: diese auch an sich sind, feierlich zu verkunden, um der kommenden Zeit die Parole zu geben, um die sie sich zu schaaren. Die Synode hat jetzt dasselbe Werk zu vollbringen, was unsere Vater in den nachsten Jahrhunderten nach der Zerstorung Jerusalems, das Synedrion zu Tiberias, vollbrachte, das Judenthum irgendwie fester zu gestalten fur die Zeit, die da kommt, gegen die Auflosenden Elemente, die auf dasselbe los- sturmen werden. Damals bedurfte es der Jahrhunderte, um es zu konsolidiren, warum sollte es nicht jetzt der Jahrzehende bedurfen? Und all die Versuche, die bis jetzt gemacht worden sind, sind Vorbereitungen, die allmalig zu einem bestimmten Ziele fiihren. Wir sind durchaus nicht besorgt. Grade je mehr auf religiosem Gebiete das ausserste Extrem sein Haupt erhebt, desto eher werden sich im Kampfe die Streiter fur die Religion Israels zusammenfinden, desto eher die Massen sich wieder um sie schaaren In einer Zeit, wo eine Welt sich feindlich gegeniiberstellt, da muss eine Masse, wie die Juden sind, ein Bestimmtes, genau Artikulirtes haben, an und 24 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD in dem sie leben kann. Ein solches Werk muss auch das Judenthum fur die kommende Zeit haben, um an und in ihm, selbst den feindlichsten Elementen gegeniiber, bestehen zu konnen. Und das soil ihm die Synode nicht in einem, nicht in Zwei Jahren, in Jahrzehenden schaffen. Darf man einen Vorausblick wagen, so wird ein solches Werk fiir die Zukunft insonders ein dogmatisches sein. Man erschrecke nicht davor. Man hat sich immer etwas gewusst, dass das Judenthum keine Dogmatik habe. Verstand man dies so, dass die Dogmen des Judenthums nicht genau durchgearbeitet, nicht sorgfaltig artikulirt und gegliedert waren, so hatte man Recht. Aber wozu auch eine Dogmatik in einer Zeit, die sich um die Lehre gar nicht kiimmerte, sondern der allein das Formgesetz Wichtigkeit hatte? Meinte man aber, dass das Judenthum gar keine Dogmen habe, so war dies nur eine Selbsttauschung, welche die neuere Kritik, die Pantheistische Philosophic hinlanglich auf- gedeckt hat. Sobald der philosophische Geist im Judenthume sich Luft machte, war auch die Dogmatik da, Saadias, Maimonides, Albo, u. s. w. sind Zeugen ; man dachte so fort sogar an genau gegliederte Glaubens bekenntnisse, Ueberhaupt die prinzipielle Durcharbeitung einer Lehre mogen die Resultate sein, welche sie wollen ist Dogmatik. Wie die Aufgabe des Prophetismus die Belebung der mosaischen Lehre und des mosaischen Sittengesetzes in ihren Allgemeinen Parteien war, die Aufgabe des Talmudismns die Durch- arbeitung und Feststellung der Lebensformen, die Aufgabe des Rabbinismus die Aufrecht-haltung der Autoritat des Gegebenen; so kann nur die wahre und wesentliche Aufgabe des zukiinftigen Werkes, also der Synodalbestreb- ungen die Dogmatik sein. Dafiir spricht der Geist der Zeit, dafur die Natur des Kampfes, fur den das Werk geschaffen wird, und der im kultuslosen, geistigen Heidenthume sein Element hat. Abermals wird man erschrecken : ist Dogmatik nicht Fessel des Geistes? Haben wir nicht eben die Fessel der Form gebrochen, oder sind noch darin begriffen, und wir sollen uns eine neue Fessel auflegen? Nun, etwas Fessel, etwas Fesselndes muss jede Gemein- samkeit haben, denn ohne jenes kann diese gar nicht bestehen. Alles Gemeinsame ist das, worin die Individualitaten aufgehen, dem sich die Indi- vidualitaten hingeben. Insonders aber muss allerdings eine Sturmzeit auf einen Wall, einen Damm, eine Mauer treffen, und die sich bergen hinter der Mauer miissen den Schutz mit dem Opfer von etwas freier Aussicht erkaufen. Kommt die Zeit, wo das Bindende eben eine Fessel, ein Joch, eine Biirde wird, da fehlt es an der Kraft, ihrer ledig zu werden, niemals, und noch keine Mauer, kein Zaum (;PD) widerstand dem Andrang von innen, wenn er auch Jahrtausende dem Andrang von Aussen widerstand. Dies ist das Werk, die Aufgabe der Synode. Daraus geht ihre Nothwen- digkeit hervor. Darum wird sie auch zu Stande kommen. Wenn nicht in diesem, doch im nachsten Jahre. Wenn nicht im nachsten doch im nach- nachsten, oder einem der folgenden. Das macht Nichts aus. Nur wenn unsere Voraussetzungen (Pramissen) irrig waren wiirde unsere Folgerung falsch sein. [Allgemcine Zeitung des Judenthums, June n, 1849, No. 24, pp. 313-316.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 25 CALL FOR SYNOD BY DR. JACOB AUERBACH, LEOPOLD BEER, DR. FORMSTECHER, MOSES B. GOLDSMIDTH, DR. J. M. JOST, LOUIS LOTMAR, RABBI LEOPOLD STEIN, DR. JACOB WEIL IN 1849. To the Jewish Religious Communities of Germany: The thought has taken root in Judaism, that cooperation, organ- ization and concentration shall take place within and between the various communities, so that the integrity of the communities may be maintained, that religious progress may be furthered and that our faith may be guarded. Thus, without infringing upon any one's individual rights, religion would obtain a new lease of life, communal affairs would be regulated, divine services would be held in accord- ance with the times, and the self-consciousness of the Jewish religious community would receive a new impulse? The people whojttow have a voice in their own government should and will assert their rights in religious affairs. Consequently, in order to bring about the above- mentioned results, an assembly for this purpose must not be composed entirely of rabbis and preachers. Guided by these thoughts, a num- ber of men gathered together on August 31 of last year at Frankfurt- on-the-Main to appoint a committee to arrange for a general Jewish synod. They decided to issue invitations to individuals and com- munities to cooperate in bringing about a preliminary meeting. This meeting was held on the 23d and 24th of October of last year and consisted of 68 members among whom were rabbis, preachers, heads of congregations and professional men. The pro- ceedings were brought to a close in three sessions, during which matters were discussed with a printed outline as a basis, from which the conference picked out the most important points. The results of the proceedings were intrusted to the undersigned committee, which was to issue an appeal to the Jewish communities. The reason that this has not already been done is partly on account of the delayed re-reading and partly because the fundamental laws, which contain the basic rights for all classes of German people, including the Jews, have not yet been completely introduced. We are of the opinion that as long as these new provisions have not yet obtained full sway everywhere, as the relations between the State and the individual religious communities are not sufficiently clear, 26 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD and as the Israelites of the different parts of Germany cannot attain a clear idea of the claims and needs of the religious communities, the calling of a synod at present would not lead to the desired end. In order, however, that the connecting link between the prelimi- nary meeting and the synod to be called later may not be weakened and in order to keep alive the interest in synodal concerns, we, there- fore, announce to the Jewish communities the following declarations and resolutions of the preliminary conference, on the basis of which the synod is to be convened. I. The purpose for convening a synod was unanimously recog- nized by the conference. II. Concerning the conception of the synod, the following wa*s confirmed by a large majority. The synod is a central organization chosen by the congregations* and associations. At legally appointed sessions, Hie synod is to deliberate upon religious and communal questions which concern Jews as a whole as well as the bodies represented. The synod is to regulate these questions by decrees. In order to avoid misunderstanding, the conference empowered us to add the following explanation, namely that the words " und durch Beschliisse ordnet " (regulate matters by decrees) mean only that the synod is to put its declarations in the form of decrees which, however, are not to have any binding force. It is only the esteem and moral weight of the synod that are to influence the congre- gations. They are to accept voluntarily the synod's declarations and by carrying them out into practice give them force. Likewise, it is incumbent upon us to explain the word " Genossen- schaften " as it is used in the report of the conference. By this is not meant brotherhoods or such religious societies as are formed within the communities to perform certain religious practices or labors of love. What is meant is independent, religious societies legally constituted, which regulate their affairs in a manner not in accordance with that of the communities as a whole. III. As regards the character of the synod, the conference, by an overwhelming majority, declared as follows: The synod shall be called as a representative body of Israel. This decision, according to the previous discussions is to be understood as follows : The synod is not to be convened as repre- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 27 sentative of a specific tendency in Judaism but of Judaism as a whole and in the assembly, it is hoped, all views will find expression. IV. As regards the choosing of delegates to the synod, the fol- lowing was decided: (a) Every Israelite, who is of age, is entitled to vote in the con- gregation to which he belongs. (b) Every Jewish religious congregation or religious organization is entitled to send one representative to the synod. Congregations containing over one hundred, who are elligible to vote, have the right to send one additional representative for every additional hundred. (c) The voting is to take place under the supervision of the board of directors or of a committee. (d) Any reputable Jew, who is of age, is eligible as a delegate. It may be explained in addition, that a number of communities, especially small ones, may unite to choose a representative in com- mon. The delegate chosen must not of necessity be a member of the community which elects him ; he may be chosen from any Jewish community. We must also remark that the word " selbstandig" (independent) was, in the original plan, used in connection with remarks (a) and (d). But as in the opinion of one member, the interpretation of this word might cause strife and confusion in the communities, the president decided and the conference agreed that such details be left to the committee. We thought it proper to leave out this word entirely. V. Concerning the time and place for holding the synod, the following was agreed upon : (a) The first synod is to be held in the spring of 1849. The time for the holding of subsequent synods is to be decided by the preceding synod. (b) The synod shall last fourteen days. (c) The first synod is to be held at Frankfurt-on-the-Main, the place for subsequent meeting to be decided by the synod itself. VI. As regards the expenses the following was decided upon : (a) The expenses of each delegate are to be paid by the body sending him. 28 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD (b) The expenses of the synod are to be met by voluntary con- tributions. We reserve the right for ourselves to make appeals in accordance with remark (b), for the creation of a synodal fund. We will only note here that several communities have voluntarily offered con- tributions. If individuals in the various communities would feel themselves invited to take signatures for future contributions, when the proper moment will arrive, matters would be greatly expedited. VII. The conference finally decided to appoint a standing com- mittee for the first general synod and the undersigned were named as such. Upon this committee the conference enjoined the duty of making all preparations for the coming synod. As soon as the proper mo- ment comes, we will joyfully and with devotion to the good cause, undertake those duties and we will take care to convene the synod at the most opportune time. Our opinion of the matter has not changed. To-day, as formerly, we recognize the pressing need of a free but yet united synodal organization. Only in order to create such an institution with greater assifrance of success, are we of the opinion that it should not be organized amidst such conditions as will make it impossible for so many communities of the German fatherland to share m the common task. Meanwhile we shall be looking forward to the expressions of opinion, either in public or by direct communica- tions, of those who have been assembled here as well as of everyone who feels a warm interest in the maintenance of Jewish communal life. May the matter be discussed as much as possible, agitated in the congregations and the district assemblies, so that the needs, de- sires and views may become known. Thus will we be able to decide what must be done in this weighty matter. 10 FRANKFURT-AM-MAIN, Feb., 1849. 10 AN DIE ISRAELITISCHEN RELIGIONSGEMEINDEN IN DEUTSCHLAND. Es hat in neuerer Zeit in unserer Mitte mehr und mehr der Gedanke Wurzel gcfasst, wie nothwendig auf dem Gebiete des Judenthums, zur Erhaltung der Gemeinden, zur Forderung des religiosen Fortschrittes zur Bewahrung VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 29 des Glaubens, ein moglichst einheitliches Zusammenwirken in und zwischen den Gemeinden, ein organisirendes Verfassungswesen und insbesondere ein geeigneter Zentralpunkt erscheine, von welchem aus, ohne der Freiheit der Einzelnen zu nahe zu treten, das religiose Leben seine Erfrischung, das Ge- meindeleben seine Ordnung, der Gottesdienst seine zeitgemasse Gestaltung und das Selbstbewusstsein der israelitischen Religionsgesellschaft einen neuen Aufschwung erhalten moge. Dass dieses nun nicht mehr durch eine bios aus Rabbinen und Predigern zusammengesetzte Versammlung bewirkt werden konne, indem der zur Herrschaft gelangte Volks- nnd Gemeindewille auch auf religiosem Gebiete sich geltend machen will und soil, ist ebenso gewiss und unzweifelhaft, als auf der andern Seite vorziiglich in der Gegenwart, der machtigen Zeitbewegung und der neuerrungenen Religionsfreiheit gegeniiber, die Nothwendigkeit sich um so dringender herausstellt, auf Mittel zu sinnen, wie nach den Grundsatzen der Freiheit und Gerechtigkeit die verschiedenen religiosen Richtungen, innerhalb desselben Gemeindeverbandes, nebenein- ander bestehen und ihren Bediirfnissen Rechnung getragen werden konne. Von diesen Gedanken geleitet, hatten sich am 31. August zu Frankfurt am Main mehrere Manner zur Bildung eines Komite's zur Vorbereitung einer all- gemeinen israelitischen Synode vereinigt, und beschlossen, zu diesem Behufe durch eine sowohl an einzelne Manner besonders, als offentliche an die Ge- meinden zu richtende Einladung eine vorberathende Synodeversammlung in genannter Stadt zu veranstalten. Diese Versammlung wurde am 23. und 24. Oktober v. J. abgehalten, und es haben sich an derselben mehrere Mitglieder aus versehiedenen israelitischen Oberrathen, Rabbinen, Prediger, viele Ge- meindevorsteher, Gelehrte verschiedenen Faches, in Ganzen 68 israelitische Manner aus der Nahe und Ferae, betheiligt. Die Verhandlungen wurden in drei Sitzungen zu Ende gebracht und auf Grund einer gedruckten Vorlage gepflogen, aus welcher sich die Versammlung die ihr dringlichst scheinenden Punkte durch Berathung und Beschlussnahme aneigncte. Das Ergebniss der Verhandlungen wurde der tinterfertigte Ausschuss beauftragt, den israelitischen Gemeinden in einer Ansprache mitzutheilen, und wenn dieses bisher nicht geschehen ist, so wolle man den Grund hierzu in keinen andern Umstanden suchen, als theils in der verzogerten zweiten Lesung, theils in der zur Zeit noch vollstandig bewirkten Einfuhrung der deutschen Grundreehte, in welchen der neue Rechtsboden fiir alle Zustande des deutschen Volkes, also auch fiir die judisch-religiosen, gegeben ist. Wir sind namlich der Ansicht, dass so lange diese so tief in alle bestehenden Ver- haltnisse eingreifenden neuen Bestimmungen nicht iiberall voile Rechtskraft erhalten haben, somit auch das Verhaltniss des Staates zu den einzelnen Religiosensgesellschaften nicht in der nothigen Klarheit hervortritt, auch die Israeliten der verschiedenen Landestheile Deutschlands nicht zur klaren Ein- sicht ihrer Auspriiche und Beditrfnisse auf dem Gebiete der Religionsgemeinde gelangen konnen, und deshalb die Berufung einer Synode im jetztigen Zeit- punkte wohl nicht zu dem erwiinschten Ziele fiihren mochte. Um jedoch das Band zwischen der vorberathenden Synodalversammlung 30 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD und der spater zu berufenden Synode nicht zu schwachen tmd das Interesse an der Synodalangelegenheit lebendig zu erhalten, theilen wir hierdurch den israelitischen Gemeinden folgende. Erklarungen und Beschliisse der Vorver- sammlung mit, auf deren Grunde die Synode spater zusammentreten soil, unter Beifiigung der nothwendig scheinenden, den Protokollen entnommenen Motive und Erlauterungen : (1) Die Zweckmassigkeit einer zu berufenden Synode ivurde von der Ver- sammlung einstimmig anerkannt. (2) Ueber den Begriff der Synode wurde mit grosser Mehrheit Folgendes festgestellt : Die israelitische Synode ist ein von den Gemeinden und Genos- senschaften selbstgewahltes Gesammtorgan, welches die dabei betheiligten Gemeinden und Genossenschaften vertritt und in gesetzlich geordneten period- ischen Sitzungen die Angelegenheiten des gesammten israelitischen Religions- und Gemeindewesens, so wie die der vertretenen Gesammtheiten Berathung nimmt und durch Beschliisse ordnet. Die Versammlung hat uns beauftragt, znr Verhiitung von Missverstand- nissen, die Erklarung beizufugen, dass die Worte " und durch Beschliisse ordnet " lediglich den Sinn haben, dass die Synode ihre Erklarungen in der Form von Beschliissen giebt, ohne dass dadurch irgend ein bindender Zwang entstehen soil. Es ist nur das Ansehen und das moralische Gewicht der Synode, was die Gemeinden bewegen soil, sich freiwillig ihren Erklarungen anzuschliessen und durch praktische Ausfiihrung ihren Beschliissen Kraft und Nachdruck zu verleihen. Ebenso haben wir im Auftrage der Versammlung den Ausdruck " Genossen- schaften " dahin zu erklaren, dass unter diesem Worte keineswegs Briider- schaften, d. h. solche religiose Vereine zu verstehen seien, die innerhalb der Gemeinde zu gewissen religiosen Uebungen oder Liebeswerken sich vereinigt, sondern selbstandige religiose Vereine, welche sich statutenmassig und zu dem Zwecke konstituirt haben, ihre religiosen Angelegenheiten in einer Weise zu ordnen, die von der in den betreffenden Gemeinden vorherrschenden Richtung abweicht. (3) Ueber den Charakter der Synode hat die Versammlung mit iiberwie- gender Majoritat sich dahin ausgesprochen : die Synode soil als ein Gesammt- organ der Israeliten berufen werden. Dieser Beschluss ist, gemass den vorhergegangenen Verhandlungen, dahin zu verstehen, dass die Synode nicht als die Vertreterin einer einzelnen Rich- tung im Judenthume, sondern als eine allgemeine, auf welcher es hochst wunschenswerth erscheint, dass alle Ansichten ihre Vertretung finden, berufen werden moge. (4) Ueber die Wahl cur Synode wurde folgendes beschlossen : (a) Wahlberechtigt ist jeder volljahrige Israelit in der Gemeinde, welcher er angehort; (b) Jede israelitische Religionsgemeinde oder Religionsgenossenschaft ist berechtigt, einen Stellvertreter zur Synode zu schicken. Gemeinden von iiber VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 31 hundert Wahlberechtigten haben das Recht, fur je hundert Wahler mehr je einen Vertreter mehr zu senden; (c) Die Wahlen geschehen unter Aufsicht der Vorstande, oder eines Komite's. (d) Wahlbar ist jeder unbescholtene, volljahrige Israelit. Hier fiigen wir die erlauternde Bemerkung bei, dass mehrere, insbesondere kleinere Gemeinden sich vereinigen konnen, um einen Vertreter gemeinsam zu wahlen; ferner, dass der zu erwahlende Vertreter nicht Mitglied der be- treffenden Gemeinde oder Gemeinden sein musse, sondern auch aus jeder andern israelitischen Gemeinde gewahlt werden konne. Auch mussen wir bemerken, dass bei den Punkten (a) und (d) in der Vorlage sich das Wort " selbststandig " befunden hatte. Auf die Bemerkung eines Mitgliedes, jedoch, dass die Aufnahme dieses Wortes in den Gemeinden Streit und Verwirrung herbeifiihren wiirde, schlug der President vor, und die Versammlung stimmte bei, hieriiber das Nahere der Redaktionskommis- sion zu iiberlassen. Wir hielten es nun fur geeignet, jenes Wort ganzlich wegzulassen. (5) Ueber Zeit und Ort der Synode wurde beschlossen : (a) Die Zeit der Synode ist fur die zuerst zu berufende das Friihjahr 1849. Die Zeit der folgenden Synode bestimmt immer die vorhergehende selbst. (b) Die Dauer der Synode ist vierzehn Tage. (c) Der Ort der Synode ist fur die zuerst zu berufende Frankfurt am Main ; spater immer von der Synode selbst zu bestimmen. In Betreff des Beschlusses (a) beziehen wir uns auf die Eingangs erwahn- ten Umstande, welche es rathsam erscheinen lassen, fur die Berufung der Synode den geeignetern Zeitpunkt abzuwarten. (6) Ueber den. Kostenpunkt wurde Folgendes beschlossen : (a) Die Kosten des Synodalbesuches bestreitet jede Wahlgesammtheit ftir ihren Vertreter ; (b) Die Kosten der Synode werden durch freiwillige Beitrage aufgebracht. Wir behalten es uns fur die spater zu erlassende Ansprache vor, auf den Beschluss (b) resp. Bildung einer Synodalkasse zuruckzukommen, und wollen hier nur bemerken, dass uns bereits von einigen Gemeinden unaufge- fordert Geldbeitrage angeboten worden sind. Wiirden sich nun in verschie- denen Gemeinden einzelne Manner jetzt schon aufgefordert fiihlen, Listen zu entwerfen und Einzeichnungen von eventuellen Beitragen zu veranlassen, so wiirde das, wenn der rechte Moment erscheint, der Sache gewiss hochst forderlich werden. (7) Die Versammlung hat endlich beschlossen, einen standigen Ausschuss an hiesigem Orte fur die erste allgemeine israelitische Synode zu ernennen, und hat dazu die Unterzeichneten erwahlt. Diesem Ausschusse hat die Versammlung die Verpflichtung auferlegt, alle Vorarbeiten fur die zu berufende Synode zu ubernehmen. Wir werden uns nun, sobald der rechte Zeitpunkt eingetreten sein wird, mit Freude und mit 32 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD WISE ON SYNOD, 1856. Let us, first, repeat the premises, from which we start in our reasoning on this subject. There can be no Judaism without the observation of the biblical laws. None has a right to dispense with them. The biblical laws are impracticable unless they are ex- pounded. The Jewish standard of exegesis in regard to biblical laws, and the precedents guiding us in our decisions are in the Talmud, the historical development of the Law without which we not only depart from the historical basis of Judaism, and must even- tually be dissolved into diverging sects, but are also without any safe guide in our biblical researches. The Talmud contains deci- aller Hingebung fur die gute Sache jenen Arbeiten tmterziehen, und den Moment nicht voriibergehen lassen, welcher zur Hervorrufung der Synode geeignet erscheint. Unsere Ansicht von der Sache hat sich nicht geandert. Heute wie friiher erkennen wir fur das Judenthum das dringende Zeitbedurf- niss einer freien und doch vereinigenden Synodalverfassung. Nur um dieses Institut mit desto grosserer Sicherheit in's Leben zu rtifen, halten wir es fur gut, den Zeitpunkt seiner Begriindung nicht in Verhaltnisse zu setzen, welche es so vielen Gemeinden des deutschen Vaterlandes noch nicht moglich machen, sich an dem gemeinsamen Werke zu betheiligen. Indessen sehen wir schon jetzt den Meinungsausserungen sowol der hier versammelt gewesenen Manner, als Aller, die fiir die Atifrechterhaltung des israelitischen Gemeindelebens ein warmes Interesse fiihlen, entweder in den offentlichen Organen des Judenthums oder in unmittelbaren Zuschriften mit Verlangen entgegen. Moge der Gegenstand moglichst allseitig besprochen, in den Gemeinden erortet, in Bezirksversammlungen zur Anregung gebracht werden, damit die Ansichten, Wiinsche und Bediirfnisse sich zu erkennen geben, und wir darnach das ermessen konnen, was nach der ausgesprochenen offentlichen Meinung und im Interesse des Ganzen in dieser wichtigen Angelegenheit ferner zu geschehen habe. FRANKFURT-AM-MAIN, Feb., 1849. DER STANDIGE AUSSCHUSS FUR DIE ERSTE ALLGEMEINE ISRAELITISCHE SYNODE. DR. JAKOB AUERBACH. LEOPOLD BEER. DR. FORMSTECHER. MoSES B. GoLDSCHMIDT. DR. I. M. JOST. Louis LOTMAR. RABBINER LEOPOLD STEIN. DR. JAKOB WEIL. [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, No. 14, April 2, 1849, PP- 184-186.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 33 sions on laws, and new laws from the different sources, decisions of synods and decisions of schools ; the former are arbitrary ( IJBJ n;n ) or based upon the Bible, Mishnah, etc. ; the latter are only based on the Bible, Mishnah, etc., by the thirteen rules of interpre- tation. Every student at any time has the right of correcting the decision of a school, if he finds it incorrect according to the rules of interpretation. But the decisions of a Synod can be amended or repealed by a Synod only. This is the historical Jewish method of perpetual reform and research in the Law of God. A Synod has the right: First. To suspend a biblical command for the time being, if it intends to preserve the rest. Second. To abolish rabbinical ordinances which are not prac- ticed, ntD>Q &AG? fTHJ which are in conflict with the just demands of the time [m TiftrS pSnnmn nil pe> nvn] of which the cause of their enactment exists no longer, [orta tea] or which no longer support the idea which they were intended to embody. Third. To make such regulations and establish such customs as are subservient to maintain the unity, forward the prosperity, or elevate the dignity of Israel, not however, in contradiction to the Law or its legal consequences. We pause here and say: we challenge the most orthodox and most learned Talmudist to say, that there is one word in the above, not strictly according to Jewish laws. On the other hand, we chal- lenge the sincere friends of reform to say that not all desirable re- forms within the pale of Judaism could be obtained in this legal and historical way. We are certain that none will successfully contra- dict us. The cause of the objection against these principles is three- fold: 1. The want of investigation in the matter. 2. The unwillingness of the old school men to confess that there is in Judaism a legal way of reform. 3. The desire of many of our friends of reform to stand aloof from their brethren, and go their own way without caring for the vast majority of their brethren. If these premises are admitted, the necessity, benefit and legality of a Synod must be understood without any further exposition. 34 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD It will be seen from what is said above, that reforms must be legal and necessary; and first must be decided by the scholars, ^ pK "piDUG? taaN? &6tf and the latter must be decided by the people or their delegates; therefore, the Synod must consist of ministers and laymen. The cry of hierarchy, spiritual despotism, bishops, popes, and other such nonsense, which some raise just for the purpose of having something to say, is of no avail ; for if the vast majority of the Synod consist of lay delegates, their cry falls at once to the ground. This is the only legal way of reform, and the only method of reconciling perpetually, life and religion. As long as there are not Synods organized in each country, and these Synods do not elect again their delegates, to meet at least every ten years in a Grand Council [n^HJ p-nnjDl in any part of the world, there is no hope for the preservation of Israel's union, the reconciliation of life and reli- gion, or the restoration of the peace and concert in Israel. Besides this, it must be considered what new life this body would bring into the Synagogue, what beneficial institutions they could establish and how they at once would re-elevate the Synagogue to that high position which it once occupied. " Who will not tell shall bear his iniquity " is the word of the Bible. It is our duty to tell, to show again and again the remedy which should be applied to the existing evil. If there is even none to listen, we must still do our duty, and to the last day of our life we will yet say, only a Synod can do us any good. If none will hear, God will hear, and judge and decide. [Israelite, Sept. 19, 1856, p. 84, editorial, " The Synod Again."] B. FELSENTHAL, 1856. " The modern Jewish consciousness is even opposed to all San- hedrins, denies them the right to usurp the authority which belongs to the individual Jews. Even if a Sanhedrin, with exclusive power to bind and to solve would still exist, the modern consciousness would employ all legitimate means to destroy it as an obstacle of the de- velopment of Judaism, and as disturbing, checking, and fettering the freedom of thought and liberty of conscience of the individual." S. February, 1857, p. 406.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 35 PROTEST OF HAR SINAI CONGREGATION, BALTIMORE, AGAINST THE PLATFORM OF THE CLEVELAND CONFER- ENCE IN 1855 RECOMMENDING THE CONVENING OF A SYNOD. " May the free American Israel be guarded against hierarchical schemes, which under the cover of sweet harmony and peace try to enslave and fetter it. The original plan was to establish a Consistory. Let once the great work of peace be perfected and everything be brought under one 'hat and pretty soon the hat will be transformed into the mitre of the bishop, then a chief shepherd will be needed for the large herd, and Jewish Popes will be a fixture. Let us thank God for the blessings of religious freedom in this country, and let us beware of placing a yoke upon our shoulders, under the burden of which neither the old nor the reformed Judaism would be able to breathe freely." S. [Einhorn's Sinai, I, 28.] LEOPOLD STEIN, 1856. " With us in Europe the endeavor to guard against every seces- sion in one and the same congregation is justifiable. This considera- tion has in many places prevented more decisive and radical reforms. But things are different in America. There is secession from the start. Why, then, make attempts to force uniformity? It was always our most cheerful hope that in the land of liberty Judaism, unchecked by external disturbances, and free from the yoke of tal- mudic casuistry would indeed soar to the heights of freedom. But with a feeling of bitterness we must confess that we are deeply disap- pointed in this hope. A Synod, based upon such principles, could perhaps establish a North American 'High Synagogue.' But the chances are that the dissenters might soon constitute the majority." S. [Stein's Volkslehrer, V, 418-19.] WlSfc 1857. We must have reforms, a new position in society requires an out- ward change of matters and things ; but we want no illegal reforms ; sucH a Synod or its committee which will decide to be legal, are so, notwithstanding the weeping of the ultraconservative and the noise 36 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD of the radicals. We want progressive reforms which sever not the ties of our nation ; such reforms can originate only with a Synod in which the congregations are represented. We want a conserva- tive authority opposed to the nullifying attempts of ignorance and frivolity, the arrogance of self-made ministers and overbearing Parnassim, the money-raising speculations, to which congregational officers are now reduced. We must have an authority to form a center of union, to produce and carry out plans for the revival of the Jewish spirit by thorough knowledge, eminent learning and true piety. This authority is the Synod in every country with its execu- tive committee, and the General Synod, consisting of members elected by the several Synods, and of its executive committee. Let the individual arrange his own religious affairs as his con- science dictates, but the affairs of Israel's religion, the Messiah of the world must be managed by Israel aggregately. Israel in union and harmony, in one mind and one spirit. [The Israelite, March 27, 1857, p. 300, editorial, " Another Voice in Favor of Synod."] HOLDHE1M. 1857. It is not so absolutely true as is commonly thought that the pres- ence of a regularly constituted religious authority retards and that its absence promotes free development in Judaism. On the con- trary, from an historical point of view the opposite must be main- tained. As long as a body existed which was possessed of the sanctified authority to arrange of its own volition the religious life of the people according to its needs, so long was the progress of the religious spirit, even against the Bible, free and active. This ceased only when the dead letter gained power and religious life which had till then continually developed was benumbed. The au- thority of the Bible was embodied in the authority of the central religious organization and the letter of the former was full of the living spirit of the latter. . . . \ The authority of the central religious organization (Synhedrin) was based only apparently on old traditions. In reality it depended rather upon the fact that it took cognizance of the life and conditions of the people and thereby made itself the true and apt organ of the VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 37 religious sympathies of the people. The people are always very susceptible to belief in the divine authority -of that religious organi- zation from which the furtherance of its spiritual well-being pro- ceeds. Tradition was, therefore, not the root but rather the crown on the trunk of the authoritative religious organization (Religions- behorde) ; this latter was not the child of tradition, but vice versa. Had the German rabbinical conferences known how to maintain and enhance the sympathies of the educated public, which originally hailed them with joy, they would not have lacked authority whereby to become gradually the guides of the religious spirit in Judaism and to fortify themselves in this position. Unless we are much mistaken as to the future, this must eventually happen in Judaism. Over all the chaotic dissensions there hovers and rules the historical spirit of Judaism, and this will not fail to create its organ. 11 [Geschichte der Entstehung und Entwickelung der judischen Reformgemeinde in Berlin, Holdheim 1857, Note 3, pp. 220-221.] 11 Es ist nicht so unbedingt wahr, wie allgemein angenommen wird, dass durch eine constituirte Religionsbehorde die freie Bewegung im Judenthume gebunden und in Ermangelung derselben die Freiheit gefordert werde. Viel- mehr muss vom historischen Standpunkte aus das Gegentheil behauptet wer- den. So lange eine Behorde existirte, die im Besitz der geheiligten Autoritat war, das religiose Leben der Nation nach deren Bediirfnissen selbstandig zu ordnen, war die Fortleitung des religiosen Geistes, auch der Bibel gegeniiber, eine freie und lebendige, die erst dann erstarb, als der todte Buchstabe das Regiment uberkam und das bis dahin fliissige und bewegliche religiose Leben in ihm erstarrte. Die Autoritat der Bibel war in der Autoritat der Relig- ionsbehorde verkorpert und der Buchstabe der erstern voll des lebendigen Geistes der letztern Die Autoritat der Religionsbehorde beruhete aber nur scheinbar auf alten Ueberlieferungen, im Grunde vielmehr darauf, dass sie auf das Leben und die Lebensverhaltnisse des Volkes Riicksicht nahm und sich dadurch zum wahren und gliicklichen Organ der religiosen Sympathien des Volkes machte. Das Volk ist immer sehr empfanglich fur den Glauben an die gottliche Au- toritat derjenigen Religionsbehorde, von der es Forderung seiner geistigen Wohlfahrt erhalt. Die Tradition war daher nicht die Wurzel, sondern viel- mehr die Krone an dem Stamm der Religionsbehorde, und diese ist nicht aus jener entsprossen, sondern jene von dieser erzeugt worden. Hatten es die deutschen Rabbinerversammlungen verstanden, sich die Sympathien der gebildeten Gesammtheit, die ihnen anfanglich zujauchzten, zu erhalten und dieselben zu steigern, es hatte ihnen an Autoritat nicht gefehlt, sich 38 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD ZACHARIAS FRANKEL. 1857. If we are, therefore, rio't able to give again to learning its former activity, then all the more is it incumbent on us to prevent that dis- union which presumption, nourished and maintained by increasing ignorance here and there, threatens to bring about. The only relief lies in a supreme religious congregation in the form of a consistory or Synod independently chosen by the congregations themselves. There was such an authority of old in Judaism. It went by the name of the great Sanhedrin in the temple at Jerusalem and its dicta were accepted by all Israel. This institution was not re-estab- lished after the downfall of the Jewish state. It was thought best to allow learning the widest 'possible range. The universality of scholarship and the active religious spirit which resulted therefrom warranted that it would neither batter down the restraints of the faith nor yet hold it in gloomy subjection. The necessity for a supreme, religious organization is, we cannot deny, a melancholy phe- nomenon, yet its institution is peremptory, if we do not desire a worse condition. Scholastic freedom as well as the independence of the congregations will be more secure in the hands of such an authority than it is in the present chaos where the " priestly garb " ( jn:A rfet?) here, there and everywhere is exploited in the most unworthy manner to the injury of learning and of the normal development of the congregations. It is possible that Judaism at present is not qualified to create such an institution because of the many different elements within it. Yet real religious necessity forces its way through hindrance and obstruction. Many recent events point to a remedy along the lines indicated above and a not distant future will witness its realization in all likelihood. 12 immer mehr und mehr zur Fortleiterin des religiosen Geistes im Judenthume zu machen und in derselben zu befestigen. Wenn uns unser Blick in die Zukunft nicht triigt, wird es im Judenthum doch dahin kommen mussen. Ueber alien chaotischen Zerwiirfnissen schwebt und waltet der geschichtliche Geist des Judenthums. Dieser wird nicht verfehlen, sich sein Organ zu schaffen. [Geschichte der Entstehung und Entwichelung der judischen Reformgemeinde in Berlin, Holdheim, 1857, note 3, pp. 220-221.] 12 .... Vermogen wir daher nicht der Wissenschaft ihre fruhere Leben- digkeit wiederzugeben, so ergeht um so mehr die dringende Aufforderung, VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 39 GEIGER. 1865. Two things are necessary. In the first place a Jewish theological faculty. . . . . Secondly, large assemblies for the discussion of Jew- ish questions. By such means only does regenerated interest as well as mutual understanding and enlightenment arise. This is the cen- ter of gravity of the whole matter. In such assemblies, general, practical questions, which are continually cropping up, spring forth of themselves. They cannot be prescribed beforehand. It is a mis- der Zersplitterung vorzubeugen, welche die durch die iiberhandnehmende Unwissenschaftlichkeit genahrten und geforderten Anmassungen von der einen wie von der andern Seite herbeizufiihren drohen. Die Abhiilfe zeigt sich allein in einer von den Gemeinden, in Form eines Consistoriums oder eine Synode selbststandig gewahlten obersten Religionsbehorde. Das jiidische Alterthum kennt eine solche Behorde: sie residirte unter dem Namen des grossen Synhedrins (Synhedrions) im Tempel zu Jerusalem und ihr Aus- spruch war massgebend fur ganz Israel. Das Institut wurde nach dem Unter- gange des jiid. Staates nicht erneuert; man wollte der Lehrfreiheit den weitesten Umfang geben, und dass sie weder die Schranken des Glaubens durchbrechen, noch ihn in dumpfer Unterwiirfigkeit darnieder halten werde, dafiir burgte die Allgemeinheit des Studiums und der durch es geweckte lebendige wie glaubensstarke Geist. Das Bediirfniss einer obersten Re- ligionsbehorde ist, wir konnen es nicht verhehlen, eine triibe Erscheinung und dennoch unabweisbar, wollen wir nicht noch truberen Erscheinungen ent- gegengehen. Auch wird die Lehrfreiheit so wie die Selbstandigkeit der Gemeinden im Schosse einer solchen Behorde gesicherter sein, als in der jetzt allenthalben hervortretenden Zerfahrenheit, wo das " Priestergewand " nSftt? jroS hier wie dort in der unwiirdigsten Weise zum Nachtheile der Wis- senschaft und der naturgemassen Entwickelung der Gemeinde ausgebeutet wird. Zwar diirfte unsere Gegenwart nach mehrfach sich in jhr geltend mach- enden Elementen zu der organischen Schopfung eines solchen Instituts nicht befahigt sein ; doch das eigentlich religiose Bedurfniss kommt durch Hinder- nisse und Hemmnisse zum Durchbruch, es dringen vielfache Vorgange auf eine Befriedigung in obigem Sinne, und es wird sie wohl eine nicht feme Zukunft bringen [Monatschrift filr Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums, Dr. Z. Frankel, 1857, pp. 15-16.] 40 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD take to continually insist upon a declaration of a practical, tangible purpose from such an assembly, when the practical lies in the very gathering together of such a large body which is susceptible of every sort of stimulation and is ready to lend its strength to every movement towards every revival and improvement in wider and narrower circles. Finished results and definite aims should not be presented to it but means should be offered to bring about a more correct knowledge of Judaism and to affect a blending of the re- ligious spirit with life, by which means in every instance the ade- quate result will be accomplished. Every epoch brings its prob- lems, which affect now a smaller and now a larger sphere, but which are not solved properly because general interest and the vigor of combined action are lacking. 13 ALLIANCE ISRAELITE ON SYNOD, 1867. It is only natural that the Alliance Israelite Universelle should decline to send a delegate to the Synod since it is a political organi- 13 WAS THUT NOTH? Also zwei Dinge thut Noth : erstens eine jiidisch-theologische Facultat Das zweite besteht in grosseren Versammlungen zur Besprechung jiidischer Fragen. Nur aus ihnen erwachst ebenso ein neu belebtes Interesse wie ge- genseitige Aufklarung und Belehrung. Hierin liegt der Schwerpunkt des Ganzen. In solchen Versammlungen bilden sich die.iiberall vorliegenden und jeden Augenbllck neu hervortretenden praktischen Fragen von selbst; sie konnen nicht von vornherein, vorgeschrieben werden. Ich halte es fur ein Missverstandniss, wenn man hier immer auf die Angabe eines praktischen greifbaren Zweckes dringt, wahrend das praktische gerade in deni Mittel liegt, eine grossere Schaar zu sammeln, die fur eine jede Anregung emp- fanglich ist, und einer jeden Belebung und Verbesserung im grosseren und engeren Kreise ihre Krafte zu leihen bereit ist Nicht fertige Resultate soil man entgegen bringen, nicht bestimmte einzelne Zielpunkte aufstellen, son- dern gerade dem allgemeinen Ziele einer richtigeren Erkenntniss des Juden- thums und einer Verschmelzung der religiosen Idee mit dem Leben die Mittel darbieten, wodurch in jedem einzelnen Falle das angemessene Resul- tat erreicht werde. Jeder kurze Zeitabschnitt bringt seine Frage, die bald einen engeren bald einen weiteren Kreis bewegt, und die nicht zur geeigneten Losung kommt, weil die allgemeine Betheiligung, der Nachdruck der gesammtthatigheit fehlt [Jiidische Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft und Leben, 1865, pp. 254-255.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 41^ zation which aims only to protect and educate our persecuted brethren. [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, Aug. 13, 1869, No. 15, pp. 289-290.] 1868. RESOLUTION ON SYNOD PASSED BY RABBINICAL CONFERENCE AT CASSEL, AUGUST, 1868. The assembly at Cassel unanimously decided upon the following: 1. To call a Synodal assembly composed of rabbis, Jewish schol- ars and representatives of the congregations. 2. To choose committees from the various spheres of Judaism who are to formulate propositions for the synod, and to explain and prove them in memoirs. 14 FROM MINUTES OF CASSEL RABBINICAL CONFERENCE, 1868. The rabbinical conference at Cassel is of the opinion that a Synod, called from time to time, would stir matters up in Judaism. The next Synod shall be held in 1869. The desire was also expressed that district and provincial Synods be constituted to make prepara- tions for the General Synod. It is understood that in these smaller Synods, Jewish scholars and representatives of communities can and should ^take part as well as rabbis. 15 14 Die Versammlung zu Cassel beschloss daher einstimmig : 1. Eine Synodal versammlung aus Rabbinen, jiidischen Gelehrter und Ver- tretern der Gemeinden, zu berufen; 2. Commissionen zu erwahlen, welche aus den verschiedenen Gebieten des Judenthums fur die Synodalversammlung Antrage formuliren und in Denk-. schriften auseinander setzen und begrunden sollen. [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, Jan. 26, 1869, Vol. 4, p. 63.] 15 BERICHT UBER DIE VERHANDLUNG DER RABBINERVER- SAMMLUNG ZU CASSEL. 2. Die gegenwartige Versammlung nimmt die bei ihr eingehenden Antrage in Empfang, entscheidet, -ob alsbald dariiber beschlossen, oder nach kurzer Berathung je ein Referent, Coreferent oder Commission ernannt werden sollen die ihre Berichte der jetztigen oder nachsten Versammlung zu uber- geben haben. Nach diesem Beschlusse wurden die verschiedenen eingegangenen Antrage 42 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD GEIGER. 1868. The rabbis' meeting at Cassel (August, 1868) decided to agitate for mixed assemblies, in which, however, the rabbis were to pre- dominate. The rabbis will and really ought to form the nucleus for they combine expert knowledge with an understanding of the needs of practical life. The assemblies, furthermore, should be deliberative but not authoritative. If the term " Synod " has been used frequently to designate these assemblies it should denote only the combination of the various elements, not the fulfillment of a choice and the right to make decisions. If representatives of con- gregations (Gemeindevertreter) are mentioned as to form one of the elements of the assembly, along with rabbis and scholars, such are to be men who are capable of participating in such deliberations. They will be known to be such through the confidence which the congregations show by choosing them as representatives and through the insight into and knowledge of the needs of the congre- gations which they have gained as administrators of communal affairs. But this does not mean exclusively men who have been ex- pressly chosen and delegated by the congregation or the directorate for this purpose, not representatives. The vital point is not the verlesen die ihrem Inhalt nach in 4 Kategorien sich theilten, indem sie (i) den Cultus, (2) die Synode, (3) die Schule und (4) das Ritual- namentlich Ehegesetz betrafen. Es wurde zur Abstimmung die Frage gestellt : in welcher Reihenfolge iiber die Antrage berathen und beschlossen werden solle ? Nach langerer Debatte wurde durch Stimmeneinheit beschlossen, in erster Reihe iiber die Berufung periodischer Synoden sich zu verstandigen, Denn das leuchtete ein das religiose Leben in den Gemeinden wird ein Ferment erhalten durch von Zeit zu Zeit wiederkehrende Synoden. Die nachste Synode soil in Jahre 1869 einberufen werden. Die Unterzeichneten wurden damit betraut, dazu die Vorbereitungen zu treffen. Auch der Wunsch fand Anklang, es sollen in engern Bezirken Local- und Provincialsynoden sich con- stituiren, um fur die jedesmalige Generalsynode vorzuarbeiten. Es versteht sich von selbst, dass dort wie hier ausser den Rabbinern auch andere judische Gelehrte und Gemeinde-Vertreter sich betheiligen konnen und mogen. ADLER, PHILIPPSON, AUB. [Beilage zur Allgemeiner Zeitung des Judenthums, No. 4, Jan. 26, 1869.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 43 credential indicating authorization to cast a vote for the congrega- tion. The power of conviction not delegated power must be the supreme influence. In law-making and legislative bodies, when it is a question of the immediate satisfying of inevitable demands, the people, the majority, must yield, give the final decision through their representatives. Spiritual questions and those involving conviction can be discussed and brought to a head only fry those who are by nature capable and called and not by delegates. 16 [Jiidische Zeitschrift filr Wissenschaft und Leben, Dr. Abraham Geiger, 1868, p. 245.] 16 DIE VERSAMMLUNG VON RABBINERN IN CASSEL. Also .... gemischte Versammlungen, in denen doch die Rabbiner den Schwerpunkt bilden werden, beschlossen die zu Cassel Tagenden anzttre- gen. Ja, die Rabbiner werden und sollen auch ferner deren Schwerpunkt bilden, weil sie eben die beiden massgebenden Momente der Sachkenner- schaft und des Lebensbedurfnisses in sich vereinigen. Die Versammlungen sollen auch weiter ganz den bisherigen Charakter der freien Berathung und nicht der Entscheidung haben. Wenn der Ausdruck " Synode " haufig fur dieselben gebraucht worden, so sollte derselbe die Zusammensetzung aus verschiedenen Elementen, nicht die Vollziehung einer Wahl und die Be- rechtigung zur vertretenden Entscheidung bezeichnen. Wenn neben Rab- binern und Gelehrten noch von " Gemeindevertretern " die Rede ist, welche ein Element der Versammlung bilden sollen, so sind unter ihnen Manner verstanden, welche Beruf und Befahigung zur Theilnahme an solchen Berathungen bekunden durch das Vertrauen, welches ihnen die Gemeinde durch die Berufung zur Vertretung ihrer Angele- genheiten bewiesen, durch den Einblick und die Erfahrung uber die Bedurfnisse der Gemeinden, welche sie durch die Verwaltung erlangt haben. Keineswegs sind aber etwa damit ausschliesslich Manner gemeint, welche ausdriicklich zu diesem Behufe von der Gemeinde oder dem Vorstande ge- wahlt und abgeschickt werden, nicht Abgeordnete. Es gilt nicht die abschliessende Entscheidung, nicht die Legitimation, dass man befugt sei fur die Gemeinde ein Stimmrecht auszuiiben. Die Macht der Ueberzeugung muss wirken, nicht die iibertragene Gewalt. Bei gesetzgebenden Versamm- lungen, bei Landtagen, wo es die unmittelbare Befriedigung unausweichlicher Anforderungen gilt, muss die Masse, die Majoritat, beziehungsweise ihre Vertretung das Endurtheil abgeben ; Fragen des Geistes und der Ueberzeug- ung konnen nur zu Discussion, zur Reife gebracht werden von den dazu innerlich Befahigten und Berufenen, nicht von Delegirten. [Jiidische Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und Leben, Dr. Abraham Geiger, 1868, p. 245.] 44 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 1868. JEWISH CHRONICLE. THE PROJECTED S^NOD. A subject of considerable interest to the Jewish community is now being discussed by a portion of the Continental Jewish press. It is the expediency of convening an universal Synod, or, to borrow an ecclesiastical term from our neighbors, an oecumenical council. The idea was suggested by the Vice-President of the Central Consistory of France, and met with the approbation of the eminent Jewish his- torian, Dr. Gratz, and we believe also of some of the other leading scholars of the Jewish people. Without inquiring whether provin- cial and even local conferences should or should not precede the proposed universal- gathering ; whether preliminary meetings for the purpose of preparing and eliciting public opinion on the matter should or should not be held in the several centers of the Jewish population ; and whether a programme of the work to be done should or should not be published we are inclined to believe that the meeting of such a Synod in our days is neither impracticable nor undesirable. A satisfactory answer, however, must depend upon the nature of the replies that can be given to a series of questions, some of pri- mary and others of secondary importance, and which may thus be formulated. Is there anything in the existing state of Judaism that should render such a convention at all desirable? And if the state .of Judaism should be such as to call for such a meeting, what remedy could this offer for healing any of the existing evils? Lastly, sup- pose remedies were suggested, what means would the Synod have to apply them ? To illustrate this by a simile taken from every-day life, the question is, Is there really sickness in the house? and if this be the case, Is the sickness of a nature to allow of successful treatment? and what means is there to induce the patient to submit to the proposed treatment? And should all these questions receive a solution in the affirmative, then it may be asked, By whom is the Synod to be convened where is it to meet? is it to be composed of voluntaries or delegates of communities? and in the latter case, what are to be the qualifications of a candidate ? It need hardly be VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 45 stated that an exhaustive answer to these questions would require an essay. Nevertheless a general reply to them may be given within a much narrower compass ; and this attempt we will now venture to make. We are not afraid of being contradicted by any of our readers if we characterize the present state of Judaism in the civilized world as one calculated to give rise to very serious apprehensions. Gradu- ally, ever since the partition walls of the ghettos have been broken down, and their secluded tenants invited to come forth and take up a position in general society, there has arisen a deplorable dishar- mony between Jewish inner life such as shaped by traditional habits, practices, tastes, views and associations of olden times, and the opin- ions, customs, notions, and demands of a period under the -dominion of radically different influences, motives of action and aspects of things. No one, however superficially he may have observed the events of the day, can deny the existence of powerful agents gnaw- ing at the very vitals of Judaism, incessantly corroding and disinte- grating its elements. The gulf between Judaism and Judaism, as in theory and practice, becomes daily wider. Theoretically, we, in reference to Judaism, still occupy the standpoint on which the Polish Rabbi Isserles, the last authoritative commentator of our religious code, placed us in the sixteenth century ; but practically where are we ? Parodying the words of the prophet, we may say, " The num- ber of thy congregations are thy codes of law, O Judah ! " Whether in dogma, practice or culte, which is their visible manifestation and expression, the unfortunate differences are equally striking. Not even the leading doctrines have escaped either the mutilating knife or the decomposing process of an unscrupulous age. We do not create the differences if we point them out ; we do not enunciate an opinion if we characterize it. We simply chronicle what already exists. Now it cannot be denied that there are at present whole congre- gations and these by no means small in number or uninfluential which no longer wish for a restoration to the land of their fathers, and which shrink from the very idea of the reinstrtution of animal sacrifices. Nay, more ; the idea of * a personal Messiah is alto- gether alien from their minds. And accordingly, from the prayer- 46 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD books compiled for these communities all references to these doc- trines have been carefully eliminated. New and individual interpre- tations of inconvenient laws and practices have in many cases been substituted for traditional ones, hitherto considered authoritative; and in accordance and in harmony with these new views, alterations have been made in public worship as well as in the observances once customary in private life. All these matters being notorious, can it be denied that there is indeed desolation in Judah, that from the sole of the foot to the crown of the head there is nothing whole, that there is sickness in the house, and that there is time to call in medical aid? But what remedy, it will be asked, could a Synod propose ? Would any Council, however earnest, devout and learned, have authority profanely to lay hand on the sacred building designed by the sages of old, and completed in subsequent ages after the model bequeathed to them? Has not, with the conclusion of the Talmud, all capacity for further development, the formation of new institutions, and the modification and abolition of old ones, however useless, however subversive of their primary object, ceased? Were we of this opin- ion, there would of course be an end to all further inquiry. What would be the use of calling a physician into the house of sickness, if the case is known to be incurable ? But this view of ultra-ortho- doxy is altogether unfounded. It would take more space and time than we can conveniently devote to the subject, were we to attempt conclusively to show the untenableness of this opinion. Suffice it for the present to state in general terms, that the Talmud was never intended by its authors and compilers as a finality; that its conclu- sion was rather owing to circumstances from without persecution and suppression of academies than design; that its decisions have never been received as final by any Synod ; that the authority which it undoubtedly possesses is rather due to the respect which its indi- vidual representatives instilled into the minds of the people, to the tacit assent of the leaders of Israel, and to the necessity felt of pos- sessing some standard for uniformity, than any distinct conscious- ness in the popular mind of its intrinsic merit and solemn reception by the whole dispersion of Israel; and that if there are here and there found in the Talmud, dicta which seem to arrogate to it final VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 47 authority, they are neutralized by others of a contrary sense ; that the Talmud itself presents to us the most striking instances of differ- ences of opinion; and that, after all, although in a smaller degree, further development, extension and contraction have taken place in subsequent ages. If Israel, within the last thirteen centuries, has apparently stood still; if in the decision of all grave questions it exclusively leaned upon this staff, it was because of the hostility of the outer world which rendered all joint deliberation and action impossible; and thus, if religious anarchy was to be avoided, pointed to the status quo as preferable to the disintegration which must have been the conse- quence of a single-handed movement ; it was because the instinct of self-preservation amidst deadly foes, incessantly plotting the relig- ious destruction of the people pointed to the book which, more profoundly than any other of its writings, sympathetically responded to it ; and lastly, it was because the mighty yearning after union, so deeply felt amidst the elements aiming at separation, outweighing every other consideration, attached itself with irresistible tenacity to the volume which, more than any other, was calculated to gratify the longing and to uphold the fellowship. But these claims of the Talmud to the legitimate influence undoubtedly due to it, and happily exercised by it, to the just authority which it enjoys, and the well- deserved veneration in which it is held, cannot, and in fact, were not intended by its authors and compilers, to override the rights of a future generation to examine, as they themselves have done, the principles of the Law, to adopt the practices and observances grow- ing out from them to the ever-varying wants of every age, and while sacredly preserving the foundation, modify the superstructure according to circumstances. But while vindicating these rights for every duly constituted uni- versal Synod, and claiming for it the power of resuscitating, as it were, the authority of the Sanhedrin, which was never extinct but only held in abeyance, while outward circumstances prevented its reconstitution, we as firmly deny that any single section of Israel can, of its own accord, legally carry out any such modifications, how- ever justifiable on general grounds. Indeed, were any such au- thority conferred on any single section of Israel and what would 48 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD be accorded to one could not be withheld from another its unity must soon cease ; and whatever the advantage that could possibly accrue to any single section from such an authority, wpuld be more than counterbalanced by the injury which it must inflict on the totality by the forcible destruction, or at least weakening of the bonds of union now joining together Israel's dispersed throughout all the world. An universal duly constituted Synod, therefore, it is our firm conviction, could re-establish between the demands of the age and those of traditional Judaism that reconciliation so much needed, and without which the sons of the patriarchs must forever oscillate between the two, or, by keeping near the one set, leave the other unsatisfied. Indeed, were such a reconciliation established it would not be the first time. A precedent may be found, although the event which had disturbed the harmony was quite of a different nature. When, after the destruction of the second temple and the dispersion of Israel, our national institutions had, as it were, lost the center of gravity some having been deprived of their vitality, while the altered circumstances rendered new ones necessary the constituted authorities of the time did not fail energetically to go to work to adopt, to modify, to create, rescind or suspend, as the case might have been ; and the Mishnah has preserved many a striking in- stance of the blissful activity displayed by those truly enlightened preservers of Judaism, one of whom we refer to Rabbi Jehudah the Prince candidly admitted that what he undertook was not in accordance with the Law as received by him, but was rendered nec- essary by Israel's increasing oppression and ever widening circle of dispersion. But if even the Synod should come to the conclusion that it is not in its power to propose a remedy, the meeting would not have been in vain. It would show to Israel what cannot be done; and this, too, would be a gain. For every member of the house of Israel would then know that it is useless for him to wait for the means of reconciling conflicting claims made upon him that he him- self must be the umpire in his own cause, and that he must act accordingly. But suppose, it will be asked, the Synod should discover and pro- pose the much-needed mode of reconciliation, what means has it to VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 49 ensure acceptance for it among the several sections of Israel ? Would not all the inquiries, all the debates and all the resolutions be as much waste of time, if Israel should decline receiving what is ten- dered to it ? This is a very grave question, the last of three upon the reply to which we said the expediency of convening a Synod rests. NOTE. This question was to be discussed in the next number of the Occi- dent, but the article never appeared. [From The Occident, February 1868, Vol. 25, p. 545.] EDITORIAL IN OCCIDENT, 1868. A SYNOD. Some months ago we printed an article from the London Jewish Chronicle, advocating the convention of a Jewish ecclesiastical Synod. There were some suggestions thrown out as to the object of such a gathering, and the action deemed necessary. It was urged that the differences of opinion prevailing among the various congre- gations, might, to a great extent, be reconciled by the judicious counsels of the learned, and Israel once more become united. Such a general council has not been held for a long time, and the fact that former generations have deemed it necessary to have such convo- cations is not the lightest of the arguments in favor of the measure. If, however, the state of the European Jewish community makes such a movement advisable, surely the condition of our American " synagogue " imperatively demands it. In proportion to our popu- lation, we have many more schisms than our trans- Atlantic brethren ; for, wherever " reform " has penetrated nearly each congregation has a Minhag of its own, and it would be hardihood to say, that any two bodies, who have abandoned ancient Judaism, have services exactly similar. It is impossible to say how many prayer-books are in use, or how much of each has been discarded by particular con- gregations. Suffice it, that every rabbi, who boasts of his enlight- enment has instituted some changes. The most curious and trouble- some feature of it all is, that the clear spirits of the new apostles see things in such various lights that no two of them agree. We have, for instance, the moderate " orthodox," who thinks that our fathers did exactly right, but for the sake of peace and harmony, is 5o VIEWS ON THE SYNOD willing to cut a piece off the service here and add another there, who heartily sympathizes with the aesthetic feelings of his cultivated flock and gives them a fashionable choir, composed of men, women and children without distinction of faith ; who adds German or English hymns and goes into holy ecstasy over the devotion produced by the salutary changes. Then we have the moderate "reformer," wno believes that the age has gathered all the enlightenment of the world, and that however sensible. our ancestors might have been in their days, they would cut but a sorry figure in ours. He is not prepared to break down entirely the bridge which connects us with the Juda- ism of the past. In other words, although he has profound faith in the wisdom of his own age, a fair share of which he modestly Scribes to himself, although he thinks that his pet ritual is the great panacea which cures all the evils of " orthodoxy " and converts it into a beneficent " reform ;" although he denies the truth of opin- ions which have been generally receiyed by Jews all the world over, yet does he profess or entertain a sincere admiration for what he calls pure Judaism, uncorrupted by human additions. Lastly comes the "ultra-reformer," who philosophizes away all Judaism and all religion, and yet preaches vague generalities about the pure religion of Moses, which he asserts to be his own, and considers every one else as a benighted heathen who must be looked upon with contempt. This enumeration alone, although it gives only the strongly marked parties and omits the many minor shades of distinction, is sufficient to show that there is a great lack of unity among us. Two questions therefore arise : Can these differences be reconciled ? How can we effect the reconciliation? These queries are of the gravest import, and may well engage the attention of our deepest thinkers. As to the first we are inclined to believe that there is no insuper- able obstacle to the harmony of the great mass of American congre- gations, or perhaps of all of them ; at least so far as the ritual and outward observances are concerned. We cannot make articles of faith to which all will subscribe, but this we neither need nor desire. Never, we think, has a general council laid down dogmas for Jews, the unbelief of which made one heretical, and our age would be the most impracticable for the commencement of such a course. True, all Israelites for centuries believe in certain principles ably summar- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 51 ized by some of our leading men ; but the whole matter was left to the individual conscience, and that is the only tribunal which we, for our part, should ever desire to see established on this point. But imperious as is the necessity for the perfect freedom of thought on dogmas, which, after all, may have no decided practical bearing on the performance of our moral and religious duties, it is no less nec- essary that there should be a standard for our practice to which all should conform An American Synod ... is not desirable. We have, how- ever, enough men of the requisite character and accomplishment, adhering to the various shades of Judaism, to constitute worthy rep- resentatives abroad in an assembly of the wise and learned of the world. Orthodox and reformers should there meet, lay down a solid basis for their action and then proceed. Had the Cleveland confer- ence been sufficiently national, so that its decrees might have been authoritative, had it strictly adhered to the principles laid down at the beginning, it might have been an important service in the unifi- cation of American Judaism. If a general Synod as proposed should meet, take as its cardinal rules those of the Cleveland assem- blage or something similar, we do not despair of harmony if the proper kind of men be there, men earnest in their desire to produce peace and unity. One thing above all it would require, a faithful and conscientious acquiescence in the determination of the confer- ence upon such points as would properly be within the scope 1 of its powers. This would be the principal difficulty, but scarcely an in- surmountable one. If we investigate the cause of the disputes among Jews, as among others, it will be found that a difference of opinions on certain beliefs is the foundation of it. There are but two main principles, we think, which would be necessary for the guidance of the convention, viz., that the Mosaic law is obligatory upon the Jewish people, and that the Talmud contains its authorized and recognized exposition. Any one denying the first is certainly not a Jew, as that word has been understood up to the present time, and the admission of the first principle cannot be well utilized by any other means than by the admission of the second. We do not believe that the great mass of the Jewish people differ on these points, and it may be that upon that basis a uniformity most desir- 52 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD able can be established all over the globe. The experiment is cer- tainly worth trying, even if it should have no other effect than to make our leading men of various countries acquainted with each other. The meeting of the learned and worthy will produce good fruits in any event. Some central point, such as Paris, might be selected, and the year 1870 would perhaps not be too early. We think the question an important one and hope to see it discussed and agitated till some steps are taken which will assure a practical and a beneficial result. [The Occident, Aug. 1868, Vol. 26, pp. 193-200.] INVITATION TO SYNOD, 1869. Under the influence of the completely changed conditions in which the Jews have been living since the close of the last century, new and fresh activity arose in the religious province with the result that differing views and many conflicts became apparent Individ- uals and congregations interpreted religious practice arbitrarily. Parties arose and internal divisions and violent conflicts took place, whereby the condition of Judaism became more and more precarious. A religion of the minority can be exposed to no greater danger than to become internally divided and agitated by violent party strife. It is easily seen that the only way to remedy this dangerous confusion is through cooperation and union. A real bettering of conditions can only be brought about by uniting the many and this union can only be produced by a proper and sufficient authority. For this purpose, on the nth, I2th, and I3th of August of last year, rabbis from all parts of Germany and Switzerland met at Cassel and unan- imously decided as follows: (1) To call a Synod composed of rabbis, Jewish scholars and representatives of congregations. (2) To choose committees, who are to formulate propositions for the synod, on subjects of varied Jewish interest and explain these in memoirs. It is to be especially noted that the congregations which send dele- gates to this first synodal assembly by no means bind themselves to VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 53 accept its decisions and results. What is desired above all is that a start be given to effective cooperation free from any external com- pulsion." 17 EINLADUNG AN DIE RABBINEN, JUDISCHEN GELEHRTEN UND GEMEINDEVORSTANDE ZUR SYNODALVERSAMMLUNG. Die von der Rabbinerversammlung zu Cassel gewahlte Commission hat folgende Einladung an die Vorstande der jiidischen Gemeinden ergehen lassen. WOHLLOBLICHER VORSTAND ! Mit dem Ende des vorigen Jahrhtmderts traten die europaischen Juden in das allegemeine Culturleben ein, indem allmalig alle Schranken des gewerb- lichen Lebens, des geselligen Verkehrs, der allgemeinen und wissenschaft- lichen Bildung und endlich des offentlichen Dienstes niedersanken. Unter der Einwirkung dieser vollig umgestalteten Verhaltnisse erwachte auch in unsere Mitte ein neues frisches Leben auf dem Gebiete der Religion, in dessen Folge in dem Bereiche des Glaubens verschiedene Anschatmngen und im wirk- lichen Leben vielfache Conflicte entstanden. Bei aller unerschutterlichen Glaubenstreue der Juden, welche heute, wie in der ganzen Vergangenheit, alle Opfer in Thun und Dulden zu bringen bereit ist, entstand in den Individuen wie in den Gemeinden eine wachsende Zerfahrenheit, eine fast unabsehbare Mannigfaltigkeit. Die Individuen legten sich die religiose Praxis ein Jeder nach seiner Weise zurecht, und diesem Beispiel folgten die Gemeinden in ihren cultuellen Instituten. Aus diesen Conflicten gebaren sich aber auch Parteiungen, welche innere Spaltungen hervorriefen, und an vielen Orten heftige Kampfe weckten, wodurch die Lage des Judenthums noch verwor- rener und bedrohlicher wurde. Eine Religion der Minderheit, eine Religion zerstreuter, kleiner Bruchtheile kann einer grosseren Gefahr nicht ausgesetzt sein, als innerlich gespalten, zerfallen, schwankend, und von heftigen Partei- streitigkeiten erschiittert zu werden. Leicht begreift man aber, dass man aus diesen Wirrsalen nur durch die Gemeinsamkeit, durch die Vereinigung heranzukommen vermoge. Eine wirkliche Besserung und Hebung der Zu- stande is nur durch die Verbindung vieler zu Stande zu bringen, und diese all ein kann eine billige und angemessene Autoritat erlangen. In diesem Sinne tagten, wie dariiber der in der Beilage zur A. Zeitung des Judenthums Nro. 4 gegebene Bericht weitere Kunde gibt, am n., 12. und 13. August v. J. zu Cassel 24 Rabbinen aus alien Theilen Deutschlands und der Schweitz. Diesel- ben erkannten, dass fiir die gegenwartigen Zustande im Judenthum das nachhaltigste Heilmittel in der Schopfung einer Vereinigung der wohlgesinn- testen und tiichtigsten Krafte bestehe, dass aber eine solche nicht in dem Zu- sammentritt und den Beschliissen einer kleineren oder grosseren Zahl von Rabbinen gefunden werden konne, sondern durch den Hinzutritt von des 54 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD Judenthumes kundigen Gelehrten und vor Allen von Vertretern der Ge- meinden selbst gebildet werden miisse. Die Versammlung zu Cassel beschloss daher einstimmig : (1) Eine Synodalversammlung aus Rabbinen, judischen Gelehrten und Ver- tretern der Gemeinden, welche diese letzteren zu diesem Zwecke entsenden, zu berufen, und mit dieser Berufung die Unterzeichneten zu beauftragen. (2) Commissionen zu erwahlen, welche aus den verschiedenen Gebieten des Judenthums fur die Synodalversammlung Antrage formuliren und in Denkschriften auseinander setzen und begriinden soil. Es ist einsichtlich, dass Seitens der Rabbmerversammlung nichts weiter als diese Zusammensetzung aus solchen Mannern, welche den theologischen Lebensberuf, die theologische Wissenschaft und die Gemeinden vertreten, beschlossen werden durfte, der ersten Synodalversammlung hingegen alle naheren Bestimmungen iiber ihre kiinftige Gestaltung, Geschaftsordnung, Abstimmungsmodus u. s. w. in volliger Freiheit vorbehalten bleiben mussten. Die Commissionen iiber den Cultus, das Schulwesen, das Eherecht und die sonstigen Ritualien uberriahmen die Verpflichtung, ihre Arbeiten so recht- zeitig vor dem Zusammentritt der Synodalversammlung zu veroffentlichen, dass Alle, die an ihr theilnehmen werden, sich vorher geniigend damit be- kannt machen und sie priifen konnen. Auch das ist kaum nothig hervorzu- heben, dass die Gemeinden durch die Beschickung dieser ersten Synodalver- sammlung durchaus noch keine unmittelbare Verpflichtung fur die Beschlusse und Ergebnisse derselben ubernehmen. Es gilt vielmehr vor Allem, den Grundstein zu einer grosseren und innigeren, aber vollig freien und jedes ausseren Zwanges entkleideten Verbindung, zu einer sichtbaren und wirk- ungsvolleren Gemeinsamkeit und Zusammengehorigkeit zu legen. Wir treten daher an die judischen Gemeinden iiberhaupt und an den wohlloblichen Vorstand insbesondere heran, urn Wohldenselben zur Beschick- ung der im Laufe des Sommers 1869 zu veranstaltenden Synodalversammlung durch einen oder mehrere Vertreter aufzuforderen. Wir thun dies im Be- wusstsein, dass der wohllobliche Vorstand sowie die anderweitige Reprasen- tanz seiner Gemeinde die ganze Bedeutung, die segensreiche Tragweite des beabsichtigen Werkes zu wiirdigen weiss. Gewiss ! wir zweifeln nicht, dass auch Sie sich der Gesammtheit in keiner Weise entziehen wollen und mit Freuden dazu beitragen werden, fur das Heil derselben zu sorgen, fur ihre Zukunft thatig zu sein ! Wir sehen keinen anderen Weg ab, um dem fort- schreitenden Zerfall kraftig und zugleich im Geiste unserer Religion, deren hochster Grundsatz die Bruderlichkeit ist, sowie im Geiste des Glaubens und der Gewissensfreiheit entgegen zutreten. Wir finden aber auch keinen einzigen triftigen Beweggrund, der von der Theilnahme an dieser Versammlung zu- riickhalten konnte. Wird sich doch in ihr jede Meinung, jede Richtung frei aussern konnen. Ja, nur der Friede ist aufrichtig, nur die Einheit eine wahr- hafte, welche aus der Verstandigung, aus der gegenseitigen Uebereinkunft entspringen, und sollten diese auch noch mit mancherlei Ringen und Kampfen VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 55 JEWISH CHRONICLE ON SYNOD, 1869, AS QUOTED IN ALLGE- MEINE ZEITUNG DES JUDENTHUMS. FOREIGN COMMENTS ON THE SYNOD. The Jewish Chronicle: A Synod should not endeavor to enforce its decisions upon unwilling communities. Religion must be spon- taneous. Of what use then will a Synod be, it may be asked, if its conclusions cannot be enforced? In order to make the answer to this question clear the Jews as a whole are divided into three classes, namely (i) the materialistic and Christianized Jews, (2) the ultra- Orthodox and (3) the large body of Jews between these two ex- tremes. This third class believes that the function of man is not to cut himself off from the world, but that he has duties to perform which demand that he come in contact with his fellow-beings and exert as beneficial an influence as possible upon his surroundings. These men feel that the confining walls of the Ghetto have been destroyed and the Jew is called upon to take part in European cul- ture. Their duties are not only those of Jews but of men and citi- zens. The problem that faces them is how to reconcile their tradi- tional faith with the activities new conditions have brought with them. To whom shall they turn for guidance? Each one to his own spiritual leader? Confusion alone will be the result. This is where the proposed Synod will be of most use. A Synod composed of scholars, good and pious men should be established and should carefully consider those questions which new times and new needs produce. Such a body should deliberate and discuss verbunden sein. Alle diese Erwagungen legen wir dem wohlloblichem Vor- stande an's Herz und ersuchen ihn, uns seinen Beschluss iiber Beschickung der Synodversammlung baldmoglichst, spatestens binnen vier Wochen, mit- zutheilen, und zwar an die Adresse eines der ergebenst Unterzeichneten. Mogen wir Alle, eingedenk dessen, was wir dem erhabenen Erbtheil unsref Vater, der Religion der vier Jahrtausende schuldig sind; unter dem Segen Gottes das Werk 'der Vereinigung vor unsren Augen bald erwachsen sehen ! DR. L. ADLER, DR. L. PHILIPPSON, Landrabbiner in Cassel. enter. Rabbiner zu Bonn. DR. J. AUB, Rabbiner der jiidischen Gemeinde in Berlin. [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthunts, Feb. 9, 1869, No. 6, pp. 101-102.] 56 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD with mature reflection and announce its decisions with calmness and seriousness. Jews of the third class, above-mentioned, would hearken gladly to such a Synod. They would no longer be obliged to solve their religious problems for themselves individually, and their spiritual guides, when asked for advice, would not have to rely entirely upon the confusing code of religious duties. The decisions of the Synod would be at hand. It would not be necessary that all the decisions of the Synod be adopted immediately. Some might be accepted while others would be rejected according to the ideas and needs of the individual communities. But in time, all of them would become authoritative. [Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, No. 8, Feb. 23, 1869.] PHILIPPSON. 1869. THE APPROACHING SYNOD. The period from the end of the last century to the present day is an important epoch in the history of the Jews. During it the Jews have gladly abandoned the physical and spiritual ghetto in which they have been so intolerantly confined. These new conditions have brought to the surface many conflicting questions concerning the daily material life of the Jew and the strict observance of re- ligious precepts, ceremonies and forms. A new view of Judaism is being taken, bringing with it a change in the religious life, and causing to spring up a number of conflicting parties. These questions clamoring for solution must be solved by the Jewish community as a whole. A true bettering of conditions can only be brought about by the union of the many, and such an union alone can be properly and justly authoritative. The recent rabbinical convention at Cassel in considering condi- tions in Judaism recognized the fact, that improvement could be brought about only by concerted action, and this not only on the part of the rabbis but with the cooperation of Jewish scholars and, above all, representatives of the religious communities. The mat- ter does not concern itself merely with theoretical and scientific discussions and decisions but with questions of real life influenced by a religious spirit. Remedial measures cannot be worked out and enforced by the professional men alone. They must be influenced VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 57 by men of practical life who, by their management of congregational affairs, are acquainted with the needs and tendencies of their com- munities. [From the Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, Jan. 26, 1869, No. 4, pp. 61-63.] DR. B. WECHSLER, CHIEF-RABBI OF OLDENBURG, 1870. " There was an idea that the Synod is a continuation of the Rab- binical Conferences. The task seemed the same. Yet both assem- blies are in many important respects so different, that the Synod far from being an extension is in reality a limitation, straiten- ing and concentration There was much good, color and ' Richtung ' in the Rabinical Conferences. What if from certain quarters a hue and cry was raised on account of their bold tend- ency ; what if timid, anxious, cautious rabbis demonstratively left the Conference with eclat there was no wavering, no vacillating, no empty phraseology. We could even rejoice in the bold, brilliant, sometimes eccentric, word of the sainted Holdheim, because only honest, sincere men of scholarship were together, who strove after an adjustment of their own religious conception, and who desired to learn one from the other, and then to give the results of trans- actions to the world. Whosoever reads the old reports of the Rab- binical Conferences will be surprised at the power of the free word among us, and if he draws a parallel with the reports of the Synod in Leipsic, he will notice quite a different spirit, and not always the spirit of progress. Did we go backwards? or did we in those days go too far? If we concede neither the one nor the other, then the explanation must be sought in the very nature of things. In a Synod, we (the rabbis) have lost, so far as freedom, candor and unrestrainedness are concerned. We have bound ourselves in our discussions and resolutions. The representatives of congregations, while often far in advance of their congregations, nevertheless in the resolutions keep the interest of their congregations more in mind than the cause of Judaism. Their first consideration is the welfare of the congregation ; they do not want to endanger its peace and harmony. I need not tell what influence this must have on their vote. And the rabbis? They occupy a different position in a Synod. They stand, talk and vote, as it were, in the midst of their 58 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD congregation, some are even especially delegated. It is, therefore, only human that they have to take account of this fact, that they feel themselves more bound and straitened. A glance at the steno- graphical reports of the Leipsic Synod will convince every reader of the truth of this statement. From such mixed assemblies discus- sions of purely theoretical nature which presuppose thorough famili- arity with biblical and post-biblical sources, or questions of science have to be excluded. Such was not the case in the Rabbinical Con- ferences. Things seemingly are better when it comes to the solu- tion of practical questions. But there, too, we find semblance with- out truth There are the questions of the revision of the dietary, Sabbath, and marriage laws. But the Synod approaches these questions with hands tied, which was not the case with the Conference of Rabbis, which solved such questions solely on the basis of theory, of theology, of scientific research. In the Synod this is different. Suppose the important question of the Sabbath and other ceremonies is to be decided. There are, as a matter of fact, a large number of ' Synodalen/ who without ever having put the questions, have long ago broken "these laws. I do not reproach them on this account, certainly not, not even that 'they nevertheless are ' Synodalen/ Perhaps their hearts beat for all that just as warmly and even more so for the interests of Judaism. They are perhaps the best and most worthy men in their congregations. But to even discuss such questions in their presence would mean to sit in judg- ment, and to vote on their worthiness and religiosity. Suppose a com- mittee should declare that the non-observance of certain ceremonies is a gross violation of the Jewish religion?' How shall men vote who belong to the habitual violators of those laws? And suppose these very violators should talk and vote in the sense of the com- mittee, I should consider this a scandal, a discredit to the whole Synod. Resolutions concerning the Sabbath, etc., no matter how, would be disturbers of the peace. And thus there are nowadays still so many men among us who deny right and life to criticism, who particularly in the case of biblical criticism, are always ready with a ' categorial imperative.' This fact ought to be a warning ; Judaism can stand difference of opinions. But it cannot bear forced unity and compulsion in matters of creed and life. Should a Synod VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 59 attempt, no matter how gently, to exercise such' force, it will dig its own grave." S. [See Geiger's Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft und Leben, Vol. VIII, pp. 28-35.] M. LAZARUS. FROM PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SECOND SYNOD. When there is a conflict in the individual congregation confined to a few, it is essential to be able to refer to the opinion of a great Synod chosen from many congregations and composed of many learned and honored men. The difficulty of every reform within Judaism is to establish an authority. This has always been the difficulty and will continue to be so for a long time to come ; this difficulty we would not remove by any means hitherto known. All reform within Judaism must win the people, must appeal to convic- tion and must be conclusive. Authority does not exist. No one has it and no one should desire it. We do not speak here of that small party which, forsooth, declares that an absolute authority does exist, namely the written word which has only to be read in order to know what Judaism is and what it means. In reference to this we need not take counsel; this requires.no speech; we might as well be dumb ; one needs only to read what the Shulchan Aruch including Isserles and later commentators contains. 18 18 REDE ZUR EROFFNUNG DER ZWEITEN SYNODE, AUGSBURG, 1871. Wo der Streit in der einzelnen Gemeinde ist, wo er meist auf wenig Kopfe, sagen wir es auch auf wenig Zungen gestellt ist, da kommt es gar wesentlich darauf an, dass man hinweisen kann auf eine grosse aus vielen Gemeinden gekommene, von vielen gelehrten und verehrten Mannern beschickte Synode, von der man seine Meinung geholt hat. Das ist ja von jeher die Schwierig- keit jeder Reform innerhalb des Judenthums gewesen und wird es noch lange hin bleiben, eine Schwierigkeit, die wir wenigstens durch bisher be- kannte Mittel nicht entfernen mochten, die Schwierigkeit namlich, eine Au- toritat herzustellen. Alle Reform innerhalb des Judenthums ist verpflichtet, die Gemiither zu gewinnen, die Gesinnungen zu sich heriiberzuziehen, die Ueberzeugungen zu pflanzen. Es gibt keine Autoritat, Niemand hat sie und Niemand darf sie haben wollen; denn von jener kleinen Partei, welche etwa behauptet, es gebe eine absolute Autoritat, namlich die geschriebene ; die geschriebene, welche man bios abzulesen brauche, um zu wissen, was Juden- 60 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD The communities and many of the gentlemen demand that the deliberations and transactions of the Synod be practical. Very well, what does " practical" mean? Gentlemen, in all things and espe- cially in religion the more ideal, the more practical. A man who has grain and wishes to turn it to good account in the most practical manner, will grind it into flour and bake bread of it. That is certainly practical. If I plant my corn and wait until the next year for it to grow, that is impractical. Gentlemen, he who is practical in such a manner can expect no harvest in the following year. The Synod has to concern itself not only with the small, pressing questions of the present, but must provide also for the real and true growth of ideas in Judaism which will confront us in the future. But, I admit, that he who plants all his corn relying en- tirely upon the future may go hungry for want of bread. Therefore, it becomes necessary that we have a care to think and work for the present, and at the same time see to it that not only small modifica- tions and adjustments here and there be made but that great thoughts for the future be planted. We cannot set our ideal too high. Slight reforms will be introduced by each Synod but at the same time certain changes will be made and certain forms and tra- ditions abolished. But, " Does the ploughman plough all the time to sow ? Does he open and harrow his ground continually ?" Isaiah xxviii: 24.) If we consider not merely the insignificant, if we think not of to-day alone, but of that which is great and eternal in our religion then we can certainly hope that the congregations will all the more willingly be guided by us. It is usually said that a thing to be practical must at the same time be opportune, and in this case it is required that we know before- hand that the congregations will accept the Synod's results. But what we already know that the congregations will accept, the Synod has no need to teach. The task of the Synod is to pave the way for thum ist und was Judenthum heisst, von dieser Partei reden wir hier nicht; denn dazu braucht man Nichts zu berathen, dazu braucht man auch Nichts zu sprechen, dazu darf man stumm sein; man braucht bios mit den Augen zu lesen, was der Schulchan-Aruch herunter bis zum Rema und noch Spa- teren gedrtickt enthalt. [Verhandlungen der Zweitcn Israelitischen Synode zu, Augsburg, p. 13. Berlin, 1873.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 61 the congregations, guiding and at the same time teaching them. We would be moving in the most vicious circle if we waited for the congregations to accept reforms and afterwards have us propose these very reforms, while our propositions ought to be really of such a character as to instruct the congregations. 19 19 Aber freilich, die Gemeinden verlangen und auch viele von den Herrn, die Berathung, die Verhandlungen miissten praktisch sein. Nun ja, was heisst " praktisch ? " Meine Herren ! In alien Dingen und in religiosen zumeist je idealer, desto praktischer. Wer Getreide auf seinem Boden hat und recht praktisch es verwerthen will, der wird Mehl daraus mahlen und Brod backen, das ist gewiss praktisch. Vergleiche damit : Wenn ich Korn in die Erde lege und bis ins nachste Jahr auf Wachstum warte, das ist doch unpraktisch. Meine Herren ! Wer so praktisch ist, der hat eben keine Ernte im nachsten Jahre zu erwarten. Die Synode hat nicht bios fur das tagliche Brod der kleinen brennenden Fragen, sondern fur das wirkliche und wahrhafte Wachs- thum der Ideen im Judenthum zu sorgen, die kiinftig aufgehen sollen. Aber freilich, wer all sein Korn nur in die Erde legte, damit es wachse, und sich nur auf die Zukunft verliesse, konnte dariiber verhungern, er hatte kein Brod zu essen. Daher handelt es sich darum, dass wir weise und wohl beach- ten, wie wir theils fur die Gegenwart denken, fur sie arbeiten, aber immer auch darauf bedacht seien, dass nicht bloss kleine Modificationen, kleine Einrichtungen hier und dort, sondern dass grosse Gedanken aufgepflanzt werden ; nicht hoch genug konnen wir das Ziel uns stecken. Es handelt sich darum, dass immer kleine Reformen durchgefiihrt werden, auf jeder Synode; vollends aber gewisse, ganz bestimmte Einrichtungen modificirt, bestimmte einzelne Formen, bestimmte Ueberlieferungen abgestelt werden. Aber, "Welcher Pfliiger pfliigt jeglichen Tags, um zu saen, lockert wieder auf und glattet seinen Boden" (Jesaias 28, 24). Aber wenn wir nicht eben bios fur das kleine sorgen, wenn wir nicht fortwahrend bios an den Tag denken, sondern an das, was gross und ewig ist in unserer Religion, dass dieses hoch und heilig gehalten werde, dann haben wir allerdings auch zu hoffen, dass die Gemeinde uns besser folgt. Dies ist der gewohnliche Ausdruck auch fiir das Praktische, dass es oppor- tun sei; dass man bereits weiss, die Gemeinde werde es auch annehmen. Allein das, wovon man bereits weiss dass es die Gemeinde annehmen werde, braucht die Synode nicht erst zu"lehren; die Aufgabe der Synode ist es eben, lehrend mit ihren Gedanken den Gemeinden voranzugehen. Wir bewegen uns sonst in dem iibelsten Cirkel, den es nur gibt, dass wir von der Gemeinde erwarten, sie werde die Reform annehmen, dann wollen wir sie vorschlagen, indess unsere Vorschlage doch das sind, was die Gemeinden belehren soil. [Ibid., p. 17.] 62 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD MISSION OF THE SYNOD. (1) Since the days of its inception in hoary antiquity, Judaism has passed through many phases of development and in them has unfolded its inmost being more and more. (2) A new and highly significant crisis has occurred in its his- tory. The spirit of the true knowledge of God and of pure morality is filling more and more the consciousness of mankind and is im- pressing itself constantly on the life of the nations, on state and people, on art and science. Judaism joyfully recognizes in this phenomenon an approach to those aims which' have at all times guided its course through history. (3) The essence and mission of Judaism remain unchangeable in themselves, but the mighty change which is taking place con- stantly in the views of all mankind, and of the followers of Judaism in particular, as well as the entirely new position of the latter among the nations, has called forth an urgent necessity for reorganization of many of the forms of Judaism. (4) Judaism from its inception always stood for knowledge and has likewise constantly premised and demanded harmony between thought, feeling and deed. Along this line it seeks courageously and confidently to effect the above-mentioned change. It follows only its innermost instincts when, with full esteem for the higher and eternal possessions of life and with due recognition and rever- ence for the past, guided by the results of earnest, scientific research, it strives to do away with antiquated and inappropriate customs and to forge ahead in consonance with the spirit of the times. (5) The Synod aims to be the organ of this development. In it the living convictions and efforts of Judaism of to-day are to find decided expression. With clear purpose, it aims to bring about the result that the reorganization striven for during several decades should be as widely acceptable as possible and should be carried to a successful conclusion with due regard to the needs of all our co- religionists. It would protect the bond of unity, which twines about all our coreligionists, against disintegration, and would further with all its power the common higher interests in life and science. (6) The Synod claims for its resolutions no other validity than VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 63 > that which the force of truth, of sacred earnestness and of firm con- viction imparts. It knows, however, that this power, the only one which should be effective in the realm of religion, is irresistible and must finally gain the victory in spite of all difficulties and obstruc- tions. (7) While the Synod seeks to meet the demands of the times, it is convinced of the fact that it is working for the maintenance of Ju- daism. Thus it feels itself in unison with the spirit of Judaism in its whole historical development, at one with all its coreligionists of whatever tendency, and hopes to bring about reconciliation not im- mediately, it is true, and not through the denial of convictions, but through the spirit of truth which, according to our old teachers is the essential condition of peace. (8) The mission of the Synod is not to be confined to the above declarations. Considering the intimate relation existing between re- ligious life and social and political conditions, it seems rather to the Synod to be a peremptory duty, that in the matters, which will come before it, fitting expression be given to the consciousness of relation- ship as regards the political and social standing of our coreligionists. 20 [Ibid., p. 253.] 20 (i) Das Judenthum hat seit seinem in die friihe Vorzeit hinaufreichenden Bestande verschiedene Phasen der Entwickelung durchlaufen und in densel- ben sein innerstes Wesen immer mehr entfaltet. (2) Ein neuer, hochst bedeutungsvoller Wendepunkt ist in seiner Ge- schichte eingetreten. Der Geist der wahren Gotteserkenntniss und der reinen Sittlichkeit erfiillt immer mehr das Gesammtbewusstsein der Menschheit und pragt sich im Leben der Volker, im Staat und Burgerthum, in Kunst und Wissenschaft immer deutlicher aus. Das Judenthum erkennt hierin mit Freuden eine Annaherung an die Ziele, die ihm auf seiner geschichtlichen Bahn zu alien Zeiten vorangeleuchtet haben. (3) Wesen und Aufgabe des Judenthums bleiben an und fur sich unver- anderlich dieselben; der machtige Umschwung jedoch, der in den Anschau- ungen der gesammten Menschheit und der Bekenner des Judenthums insbe- sondere sich unaufhaltsam vollzieht, sowie die vollig veranderte Stellung desselben inmitten der Volker, hat ein dringendes Bediirfniss der Neugestalt- ung vieler seiner Formen hervorgerufen. (4) Das Judenthum hat von seinem Anbeginne auf Erkenntniss gedrungen und in gleicher Weise stets die Uebereinstimmung zwischen Gedanken, Ge- fiihl und That vorausgesetzt und gefordert In diesem Sinne sucht es muthig und zuversichtlich jene Umwandlung ins Werk zu setzen und folgt 64 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD EMIL G. HIRSCH, 1880. " From certain quarters complaints are heard that there exists no norm and no rule within Judaism, and that in order to put an end to the arbitrariness of the individual it is high time to call a Synod, nur seinem innersten Grundtriebe, wenn es in voller Werthschatzung der von ihm bewahrten, hoheren und ewigen Lebensgiiter, mit aller Anerkennung und Ehrerbietung gegen die Vergangenheit nach den Ergebnissen ernster, wissen- schaftlicher Forschung bestrebt ist, das Veraltete und Zweckwidrige zu be- seitigen und sich im Geiste der neuen Zeit fortzubilden. (5) Die Synode will ein Organ dieser Fortbildung sein. In ihr sollen die im heutigen Judenthum lebenden Ueberzeugungen und Bestrebungen ihren entschiedenen Ausdruck finden. Sie will mit klarem Bewusstsein dahin wirken, dass die im Judenthume seit mehreren Jahrzehnten angestrebte Um- gestaltung von einem moglichst einheitlichen Geiste geleitet und mit moglichst gleicher Rucksicht auf die Bediirfnisse aller unserer Religionsgenossen zu einem gedeihlichen Ziele gefiihrt werde. Sie will das Band der Einheit, welches die Religionsgenossen umschlingt, vor Lockerung bewahren und die gemeinsamen, hoheren Interessen im Leben und Wissenschaft nach Kraften fordern. (6) Die Synode nimmt fur ihre Beschliisse keine andere peltung in An- spruch als diejenige, welche die Kraft der Wahrheit, des heiligen Ernstes und der festen Ueberzeugung verleiht; sie weiss aber dass diese Kraft, die einzige, welche im Gebiete der Religion wirken soil, eine unwiderstehliche ist, und zuletzt trotz aller Schwierigkeiten und Hemmnisse den Sieg erlangen muss. (7) Indem die Synode den Anforderungen der Zeit nachzukommen strebt, halt sie sich davon versichert, dass sie fur die Erhaltung des Judenthums wirkt. In dieser Weise fuhlt sie sich eins mit dem Geiste des Judenthums in seiner ganzen geschichtlichen Entwickelung, eins mit alien ihren Religions- genossen, welcher Richtung sie auch folgen mogen, und hofft ein Werk der Versohnung zu stiften, freilich nicht fur den nachsten Augenblick und nicht durch Verleugnung der Gesinnungen, sondern durch den Geist der Wahrheit, der, dem Ausspruche unserer alten Lehrer gemass, die Grundbedingung des Friedens ist. (8) Die Aufgabe der Synode soil durch die vorhergehende Erklarung nicht abgeschlossen sein. Bei dem innigen Zusammenhange zwis'chen dem reli- giosen Leben und den socialen und burgerlichen Verhaltnissen erscheint es vielmehr der Synode als unabweisliche Pflicht, in den an sie herantretenden Fallen dem Bewusstsein der Zusammengehorigkeit auch in Beziehung auf die biirgerliche und sociale Stellung der Religionsgenossen den angemes- senen Ausdruck zu verleihen. {Ibid., p. 253.] VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 65 which once for all should decide all questions. Those who argue thus betray only ignorance of the Jewish spirit. Generally it is orthodoxy which cries for a Synod, although the code of Joseph Karo with the notes of Moses Isserles ought to be its norm But also in our own camp the cry for a Synod is heard. I think the anarchy, which by advocates of a Synod is claimed to be rampant in Judaism, is greatly exaggerated. Which are the burning ques- tions of the day, that are anxiously waiting for decision by a Synod? Perhaps the question of ritual? The German Rabbinical Conferences of 1844 to 1846 and of 1869 in Philadelphia have laid down the principles which guided the German and American authors of prayer-books in reform congregations to this day. Suppose a Synod should make a new prayer-book? Will all congregations in- troduce it? I doubt it. Hence we should simply have one more prayer-book. The prayer-book was never the bond uniting all Jew- dom. The thought that we should pray in all synagogues according to one pattern (Schablone) is borrowed from Catholicism. Or is a new ' Eben Hae'zer ' needed for the regulation of the marital re- lations? The Philadelphia Conference has solved this question. Then remain the questions of Sabbath and acceptance of Proselytes. It is illusion to imagine that any resolutions of a Synod can heal the deep conflict betwen doctrine and life. While in political questions majorities decide, they are not decisive in matters of religion. Re- ligious principles are not political rules, and cannot be settled by resolutions of a Synod. And how could a Synod enforce its deci- sions?" S. [Zeitgeist, I, pp. 200-201, 1880.] IBID., 1881. " Granted that the opinion of individuals are subject to change. Are the opinions of the majority not subject to the same dangers? Majorities are recruited from individuals, and with the change of individual views follows a change of the views of the majority. The only means to check such changes in politics is the autocracy, and in religion an infallible papacy with a well-organized hierarchy. If majorities are in the right against minorities, why do the Jews not embrace Christianity, Lslamism or Buddhism, the latter being nu- 66 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD merically the strongest religious community? We are astonished that such argument should be used before a Jewish audience. The whole Jewish history is a protest against these views. Majority of votes is no criterion for the truth of a religious conviction. For this truth our ancestors have bled and suffered. A Synod of 400 priests of Baal on Mount Carmel and only one Elijah, this is the picture of the inner history of Judaism. * Not because ye are numer- ically more than other nations ' is the parole of Israel's messianic mission. Why was Maimonides censured by his opponent from Posquieres ? Because Maimonides attempted to substitute as author- ity for the Jews a code of laws instead of the opinions of individual teachers of law. All the catechisms and prayer-books agree in the essential principles of Judaism. And liturgy and Minhagim were at no time uniform among us. Or shall the Synod impose on Judaism a new Dogmatic? Shall a Synod by a majority vote decide, whether in the matter of biblical criticism, Wellhausen or Delitzsch, Popper or Curtis, Geiger or Graetz, Kohler or Wise, are in the right? And suppose the Synod decides, will one of the opposing parties peni- tentially cease to express his scientific convictions ? If so, the Synod will create hypocrites. And, are hypocrites fit to occupy Jewish pulpits ? The Synod can only do harm. Instead of furthering unity it will destroy the bond of union. Where there is much light there must be much shade. Individualism may also have its disadvantages. But who will not prefer the many-colored coat of Joseph to the uniform of the soldier or to the stripes of the convict? " S. [Zeitgeist, II, pp. 256-7, Aug. 4, 1881.] WISE. 1881. THE SYNOD. MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN : In our last annual meeting a committee was appointed to take into consideration the advisability of convening and organizing a Synod of American Rabbis to be a permanent body. Having been named chairman of that committee, I wrote to my colleagues to solicit their opinions and suggestions on the subject, and received an undecided answer from one and a negative answer from the other. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 67 The former being a private letter, I mention no name ; the latter was by the Rev. James K. Gutheim, of New Orleans, who declares him- self averse to the Synod, and gives his reasons therefor. It is evident, therefore, that I cannot report on the subject, and must ask further time unless the committee be discharged. I cannot report, because my personal opinion is not the opinion of a committee, and I am in favor of establishing and upholding a Synod of American Rabbis. All I can do, and with your permission will do, is to give expression to some of the motives which actuated me in forming this decision. WHAT A SYNOD Is. A Synod is a perpetual body, consisting of all the officiating rabbis and professors of the college or colleges, who, by a vote of their respective congregations or by their own declaration, have attached themselves to that body. The Synod meets at stated times and places, discusses and decides, by a vote of the majority of the members present, all questions concerning Judaism, brought before it by any of its members or by any congregation ; and is guided in its discussions and decisions by a code of laws which it enacts and from time -to time may amend for its own government. The decisions of the Synod are advisory to the congregations and individuals, and binding upon the members of the Synod ; i. e., the Synod does not interfere with the autonomy of the congregations or the conscience of the individual, but must demand the full support of its own members. These three brief paragraphs contain the outlines of what I think a Synod signifies. In organizing the same we can start only from the statu quo. Whoever is now the elected rabbi of a congregation must be accepted as such, because we have no right and no means to go behind the returns of the congregation. The Synod in exist- ence might enact qualification laws for its own protection as well as for the protection of the congregations against unauthorized persons. If there are now any rabbis engaged in our country who are not entitled to that office and its functions, it is an evil which cannot be remedied now, although a Synod might check it for the future. I do not wish to be understood as personally objecting to any rabbi in 68 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD office now anywhere in this country, for, as far as my knowledge ot them goes, they are honorable men whose sincerity and piety I have no right and no cause to doubt. It is evident also that a Synod can only resolve and decide and not execute, as none of us, being Israelites and American citizens, would be willing to submit to ecclesiastical coercion or to enforce it upon others. Freedom is the foundation of Judaism. Neither religion nor morals can be enforced, for if enforced they are religion and morals no longer. Freedom, however, includes not independ- ence from reason, whatever reason dictates is self-enforcing; it includes not the self-delusion that I, the individual, know better than all my associates, for all know better than one ; nor does it include licentiousness, that I must be permitted to do as I please, for society lias interests and duties apart from the individual. Therefore, it interferes with no man's freedom if he submits his views and propo- sitions to the judgment of many, and submits to the decision of the majority if he cannot convince them to think like him. Obedience to law is no invasion of liberty. Submission to argument curtails nobody's freedom. To be governed by the will of the majority is the safeguard of all free institutions, and the right to oppose it by legitimate argument is inalienable. It is no violation of principle, no transgression against reason, and no sin against Judaism to submit to the arguments and decisions of the majority ; but it is a necessity now, as it was in the days of the Tana'im, that a Synod should insist upon that one point, vis., that every one of its members should be bound in conscience and honor to sustain the body by not acting contrary to its resolutions and decisions. Without this point a Synod is a mere debating society, which we need not establish, as we can do all the debating in this Literary Association. A member can resign from the Synod or be suspended for non-compliance with its regulations and the Synod remain intact ; but a Synod, as little as a State society, association or lodge, cannot remain intact, if the will of its individual members is superior to that of the majority. Two sovereign wills cannot govern simultaneously. None can imagine a Synod without the obligation of its members not to act contrary to its decisions. I need not, in presence of all these learned gentlemen, point to the VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 69 history of Israel to substantiate my arguments. All of them know the Bible, Talmud, Josephus and the other records of Synods, up to that of Leipzig, and so all of them must confess that the institution is historically Jewish, and was always sustained by the majority rule as established by the Tana'im. (man 1 ? D"3i nn) I only beg permis- sion to state, because it is recorded nowhere, that as long as there were Synods in any form, Judaism was a living, progressive, and animating system of development to higher conditions. When the Synods ceased the iron scepter of casuistics was taken up and laid in chains, the free-born daughter of heaven. Thousands of stere- otyped law paragraphs replaced the free spirit and free word. His- tory argues in my favor, centuries of experience plead my cause. I submit the case to the judges. THE NECESSITY OF A SYNOD Now. I have yet to say a few more words in defense of my humble opinion, just a few words in reply to the legitimate question. "Is a Synod necessary now and here? " I suppose that everybody pres- ent knows that up to this century all Israel has been guided by the Bible and the Rabbinical code. These were the center of our union, regulating all our congregational affairs and relations, also the affairs and relations of the Jew as such. All questions of doctrine or dis- cipline, of duty or observance were decided according to the code, and there was unity. With the exception of the few Karaites and Kabbal- ists, there was uniformity among all Jews in all parts of the world. The variety of local customs (DMHJD) was no disturbing element, because all men of letters considered it non-essential. Any rabbi was enabled to decide any ordinary question for his flock by the code, and every man's conscience was satisfied with the information that the Law so ordained it. This center of union is destroyed. The Rabbinical code has lost its authority. The Bible well, I need not review the various stand- points occupied by its expounders, as you know the public secret. The doctrine ! Alas ! I have a recollection of one hundred and twelve catechisms and forty-two books of worship, which have but that one element in common, that they are all printed. The union of Israel is destroyed, the negation has remained, and negation is not 7o VIEWS ON THE SYNOD religion. We are not Christians, not Mohammedans, not heathens, not atheists, not deists, that is the element we have in common. Rabbi A cannot tell how Rabbi B will decide this or 'that question, because he is guided by his individual standpoint. No congregation can predict what doctrine its preacher will advance next, because a man's opinions are liable to change. No individual can tell what one must actually believe or do to live up to his faith as a conscientious Jew, without being contradicted by his neighbor. It is useless to hide it, we have landed in chaos. We have as many sects as congre- gations, the number almost as many as there are individuals. That we are so in theory only, and not also in fact, has its cause in the in- destructible religious consciousness of our people, in the inherited conscience and faith of the non-speculative class, the unconscious and indomitable spirit of piety peculiar to the Jew. None can tell how long this " merit of the fathers " ( nnx no? ) will hold out ; hence none can tell how long under the influence of these dissolving agencies Judaism will last in this country. At present no rabbi can decide any question without being contradicted by some one of his colleagues, no individual can be sure of his opinion; hence I opine none will undertake to decide the above question without contra- diction. Right here two questions arise, vis., Are the Israelites of this country willing that their descendants should give up Judaism? Is it the rabbi's duty to conserve Judaism or to accommodate his flock to the so-called spirit of the age? The first question, methinks, is answered practically and decidedly by the works of this generation. Here are your gorgeous temples in all parts of the country, your asylums, hospitals, societies, and funds ; here is the Union of Amer- ican Hebrew Congregations, the College with a Jewish faculty ; here are your congregations ; all of which have been established and are supported at an enormous expense, with wonderful enthusiasm and sacrifices, by the present generation. Hence the Israelites of this country are evidently not willing that our descendants should desert Judaism. There are undoubtedly a number of latitudinarians and servants of indifferentism among our people ; but the vast majority reply in a mighty chorus, we and our descendants shall be faithful to VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 71 the God and the cause of Israel. On every occasion they repeat the exclamation of the fathers on Mount Carmel : D'nSxn Kin 'n Is not the rabbi a Jew? is the question with which we reply to our second question. If a Jew he is, it must be his sincere desire to conserve Judaism. It must be his first and most solemn duty, for he is appointed a shepherd in Israel ; and none doubts that this is the first object in the mind of every rabbi in Israel. Necessity compels them to harmonize the dicta of Judaism with the pressing demands of the age, to conciliate the teachings of Israel with the spirit of this progressive generation and country. They yield in order to win, they abolish in order to conserve, they cut off the dead limbs in order to rejuvenate the tree. The intention is excellent, the work is efficient, but it threatens disintegration and dissolution ; because it is the one man's work, it lacks the caution and circumspection of col- lective wisdom, the maturity of united deliberation, the unity which grows out of plurality. Therefore, there can be no doubt that every rabbi must have pro- posed to himself the question, How shall the threatened evil be remedied ? None of us alone can do this, that is certain ; perhaps all of us united with the help of God can accomplish it. The ancient authority which has kept us up and together is no more; we must establish a new central authority to give force and consistency to the sacred cause for which we live, direction and weight to our labors, unity and harmony to our exertions in behalf of Israel; to conserve and elevate, to protect and support one another, to bring law and order out of this chaos ; and all Israel shall know and be sure that there is a positive Judaism, which is taught and expounded alike by all the teachers of our faith. I have failed to discover another central authority for us in this democratic country besides the Synod on strictly Jewish principles. I can think of no other remedy to meet the evil, no more rational project to reach the "proper end. Every honest man not captivated by self-delusion must be willing to submit his opinions to many of 72 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD his compeers. Every man of practical reason must feel satisfied that the decision of a majority is a safer guide than that of one in all practical matters. Therefore, I am in favor of a Synod, although I have no right to make an official report, and can offer you only a notion of my own. The following is the letter of the Rev. Dr. James K. Gutheim re- ferred to above : NEW ORLEANS, March 25, 1881. THE REV. DR. I. M. WISE, Chairman of Committee on Synod: Reverend and Dear Sir: Though late, I trust it is yet time to communicate to you my views concerning the advisability of con- vening a Synod. I did not think the matter so pressing, as the meeting at which the subject is to be considered does not take place until July. Hence the delay in my answer. I understand under " Synod " an assembly of theologians to delib- erate on religious matters and decide on questions of doctrine and practice. Such an assembly must be invested with power* to enforce its decrees. Whence shall a Jewish Synod derive this power ? The Synhedrin employed the Din, to coerce obedience. The only notable Synod held in the Middle Ages was that of DBru "i, when the Din was also used to insure compliance with its decrees. In our day excommunication has lost its force. It is neither desired by the religious authorities to impose it, nor are the people willing to respect it. Under these circumstances a Synod would be powerless to command compliance with its rulings and orders. The consequence of this non-compliance would be a pronounced schism in Judaism. Hitherto in spite of the existing different shades of opinion and variations ' of practice, a schism has been avoided. While at present Judaism presents various schools of so-called Orthodoxy and Reform, ranged under one banner, there would be added heretics and sects, and the one mm be split into many nnm. Moreover, the difficulty of laying down precise definitions of doc- trinal points must not be lightly treated. What will become of the diverging views entertained and expressed by prominent rabbis of VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 73 the reformed school concerning the fundamental doctrines of Juda- ism, the idea of God, of Revelation, of Immortality? The now serried ranks would separate, and, so far from effecting uniformity, a disintegrated Judaism would be the result. For these and many other weighty reasons, which I might advance, I hold that the creation of a Synod is impracticable, inexpedient, and hence inadvisable. I have the honor to be yours respectfully, JAMES K. GUTHEIM. [A paper read by Isaac M. Wise before the Rabbinical Literary Association, Chicago, July, 1881. From The American Israelite, October 21, 1881, Vol. 28, page 132. \ SAMUEL HIRSCH, 1881. Dr. I. M. Wise publishes now, after more than three months, his lecture on the Synod, which was delivered in the Rabbinical Literary Association. But he does not inform his readers that he concluded his address with the words, that in the name of the Rabbinical Asso- ciation a resolution favoring the Synod should be offered the fol- lowing day before the Council of the Union of American Hebrew Congregation. It was this concluding passage which prompted my violent opposition. Among the assembled rabbis were very few who had the courage to oppose Dr. Wise publicly. Without my vehe- mence this resolution most likely would have passed. I think that in a Synod only experts should be entitled to a seat and to a vote. Why then bind the minority against their well-grounded opinions by the arbitrary vote of the majority? The Rabbinical Conferences in Braunschweig 1844, in Frankfurt 1845, in Breslau 1846, in Phila- delphia 1869 never dreamt of doing violence to the convictions of the minority. Call a Synod ! The sooner the better. Let it dictate. But what I request of the gentlemen of the Synod is this: Talk what you please, resolve what you please, only' say it in your own name, and not in the name of Judaism. S. [Zeitgeist, Nov. 10, 1881, Vol. II, pp. 368-369.] 74 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD K. KOHLER, 1882. " A Synod is not our ' Popanz.' Nb majority of votes can foist upon us dogmas, which Judaism as a religious community never accepted. May five hundred ever so solemnly proclaim their belief in the authenticity of the books of Moses, my No has to-day more weight than their Yes by a majority of five hundred votes, and not I have to fear the excommunication, but they who would excommu- nicate. For the curse of excommunication by the public opinion of all thinking men will fall upon their heads. What could a Synod representing American Judaism in its totality resolve or effect? Could it again enforce the generally neglected dietary and purity laws, which Mosaism had transferred from the priesthood to the whole people, even with the rabbinical additions to the same, as some short-sighted Romanticists demand it? Just try it, to put the old yoke on Jewry of to-day, to make slaughter- and bath-houses ad- juncts of the congregation, to make policemen of the rabbis and see whether you will succeed. Or, do they really and in all seriousness believe that by means of a resolution of a Synod the historical Sab- bath can be restored to its pristine sacred dignity, that banks, manu- facturing establishments, retail stores and offices will be closed on the Sabbath, and young and old will be driven into the synagogue? A Synod is too impotent to enforce its resolutions. Only on the basis of radical reform can a Synod have an object. Such a Synod would at the outset have to make the following declaration: Old, Mosaic Rabbinical Judaism of Legalism, finding itself in a state of dissolution, the whole ceremonial system being bankrupt, our whole ' Weltanschauung ' being incompatible with the five books of Moses, which are recited every Sabbath as the word of God, we must renew, strengthen and clarify our religious life, thought and feeling on the basis of Prophetical Judaism, a Judaism that strives after the Messianic goal. Only such a Synod I favored a year ago' in course of conversation, not, however, one, in which ignorance and lack of clearness in conjunction with a majority of votes would form the decisive factors, and would dominate. But the people must first be VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 75 prepared for this work by means of discussions of long years. Competent men must first accomplish the fundamental labors, before such a Reform-Synod could be called. Only no sweetish sentimentalism, where holy prophetical earnestness is needed. Bread is wanted, not sugar, wherewith to catch simpletons. A thousand times better is an effervescent servant of truth, whom I am bound to respect, even though I cannot agree with him, than a time-serving hypocrite, who turns whichever way the wind blows. I prefer even the impulsive dare-devils to the smart calcu- lating wiseacres, who want others to burn their fingers and pull for them the chestnuts out of the fire. In a word, we need men of cour- age and energy for serious work, and not for the sake of playing hide and seek. Then and then only, it will be time to think of a Synod." S. [Zeitgeist, Vol. Ill, p. 24, January 19, 1882.] THE JEWISH SYNOD. (Paper read before the Central Conference of American Rabbis at Buffalo, N. Y, July 4, 1900.) By RABBI H. G. ENELOW, D. D. " Institutions," according to a recent American writer, " are the warp and a good part of the woof of human history; events have filled out the design and formed most of its brilliant patches of color." The same author furthermore defines an institution, his- torically speaking, as " a usage, a habit of human action, made up of a multitude of similar acts repeated on innumerable occasions by many men through a considerable period of time." : The insti- tution which I have this day the exceptional privilege of presenting to you, certainly comes within the scope of this definition. No matter what our individual opinions may be concerning the resto- 1 Edward P. Cheyne, Recent Writing on English History, The International Monthly, I, p. 400. 76 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD ration of the Jewish Synod in this country a plan which, as you know, has had its champions we cannot deny the fact that the threads of the Synod have run through the entire historical texture of Israel. These threads it is now my task to point out to you making my exhibition as brief as possible 2 that you may judge for yourselves as to whether or not the Synod might, historically speaking:, be styled a Jewish institution. I. Synod is the Greek name for an association of men assembled for common deliberation; specifically, it is applied to ecclesiastical de- liberative assemblies, stated or special, local or general. The Latins called such assemblies Councils. 3 The first association, then, which may fairly demand our attention in a survey of the Jewish Synod, is the Council of Elders. This institution cannot be accounted in any way peculiar to Israel alone. On the contrary, we find it promi- nent in the annals of all ancient peoples, no matter what their stage of civilization. The Council of Elders, it may be said, is the primal germ of government, both economic and political, interior and ex- terior; it is the alpha in the vocabulary of sociality. What created it? Necessity. The necessity, namely, which frequently arose among several tribes dwelling in close contiguity of taking counsel together on subjects of common concern, particularly in seasons of common danger or distress. At such deliberations each tribe was represented by its leading men, its elders, whose prestige was sure to capture the consent of the masses. " And out of such Confer- ences/' as Robertson Smith has summed it up. " arose the senates of the elders found in the ancient states of Semitic and Aryan antiquity alike."' How, then, was it in Jewish antiquity? There is no telling what the exact relations were among the several tribes, but this we know 3 The exposition, the arguments, and the authorities are reduced to a mini- mum in this paper, which is a summary of a larger essay on the same subject by the present writer. * Cf. Standard Dictionary. 4 Religion of the Semites, Rev. ed., p. 33; cf. Herbert Spencer, Principles of Sociology, Vol. I, p. 520 ff. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 77 full well that their medium of intercourse and association on occa- sions of general import were the Elders (Zeqenim). Nay, more ; not alone were the Elders the vicegerents of the people, but they were also regarded as the collective substitute of the people, as the sum- mary of the latter, as it were, its embodiment. For this reason, no doubt, the elders, on our first acquaintance with them, aside from serving as intermediaries between Moses and the people, 5 also accom- pany the prophet in his interview with Pharaoh, as representatives of their tribes, and when the monarch devises punishment for the Israelites because of their delinquencies, the thrashing, quite natur- ally, is administered to none but the Elders. 6 This certainly was rather unenviable ; but, in return, the zeqenim did duty as synonyms of the whole nation on many a more pleasant and flattering occa- sion. All these events I cannot recount here, but a few instances must suffice : the promise of the Elders to abide by the Divine Coven- ant, for instance, is as good as the promise of the whole people; 7 when Jephthah is about to be chosen judge, the Elders of Gilead are delegated to bring him home ; 8 the introduction of royalty is preceded by a convention of the Elders at Raniah ; 9 when David is in temporary exile, during the rebellion of Absalom, the appeal for his return made by the Elders is alluded to as the will of " all the men of Judah " ; 10 at the dedication of the Solomonic temple, the Elders take a leading part in the festive ceremonies ; n when King Josiah contemplates his religious reforms and the introduction ef the Book of the Covenant, the Elders of Judah and of Jerusalem, the national representatives, that is to say, and the local, have the benefit of a preliminary reading and the privilege, mayhap, *of approval ; 12 the revolution in the days of Rehoboam ensues upon the king's rejec- 5 Ex. V:6-2i. /Wrf., III:i6ff, VI 127. 7 Ex. IV : 29-30 ; XIX : 7, 8 ; Jos. XXIII : 2 ; XXIV : I. 8 Ju. XI: 5. 8 1 Sam. VIII : 4 ; in this chapter the interchange of the terms " the elders " (v. 4) and "the people" (vv. 7, 10, 19, 21) and the "the men of Israel" (v. 22) is to be noted. 10 2 Sam. XIX: 12, 15. 11 1 Kings VIII : i ff. "2 Kings XXIII: i. 78 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD tion of the reforms suggested by the people's representatives (char- acteristically styled " the congregation of Israel " and " the peo- ple ") ; " in the reign of Ahab, the Elders, on a noted occasion, sub- vert the royal policy of peaceful submission to the bullying monarch of Syria. 14 And thus you may run through the entire domain of biblical literature: from entrance to exit you encounter the Elders, from Moses to Ezra. 16 The time when they began to organize into close local and national senates 16 is, of course, unknown, even as the number of the latter is indefinite." But it is quite probable that out of the larger number of Elders a narrower circle was selected to serve both as Shophetim and as Shoterim, as judiciary and execu- tive officials. 18 This much, at any rate, is clear: the Elders com- posed the first representative organism of Israel they guided and governed the community; they were accredited with its merits and its misdeeds ; they sought atonement for it by offering the communal piacula, 18 so that when the prophet Ezekiel wished to depict the gen- eral religious decadence of his contemporaries, the metaphor he employed was the degeneracy of the Elders. 20 II. From the Elders as the representative body of the people emerges the Great Synod (Keneseth Haggedolah). The mention of this title, no doubt, will remind you of the great storm of controversy which raged about it in the second half of this century; no doubt it will occur to you that Kuenen has written a long and learned 13 1 Kings XII. "Ibid., XX 17. 15 Ezr. V:5, 9; VI : 7, 14; X:8. 16 For local elders cf. Jos. XX 14; Jg. VIII: 14; Ruth IV: 2; i Sam. XVI: 4; i Kings XXI : 8, etc. In the Deuteronomic legislation the reference is usually to local elders (Dt. XIX: 12; XXI : 2-4, 6, 19 ff, etc.). 17 Seventy is the proximate number frequently occurring. Cf. Dt. XXIV : i ; Nu. XI : 16 ; Ju. VI II : 14 ; Ez. VIII : 1 1. 18 Dt. 18 ; cf. Schuerer, Geschichte d. jiid. Volkes, 3 ed., II, p. 176. 19 Ex. XVIII: 12; Lev. IV: 13 ff; Dt. XXI: 4; cf. T. B. Snh. I3b; Robert- son Smith, op. cit., p. 417. 20 Ez. VIII: ii. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 79 essay to prove that the Great Synod, to use a homely Hebrew phrase, lo haya welo nibhra, never existed; 21 you will be reminded, also, of the rough and ready dictum with which Wellhausen has banished this institution from the world of reality: "an exegetical mythus having its foundation on the narrative of Nehemiah VIII : 10." * Nor, indeed, are these two scholars alone in their negation of the historicity of the Great Synod. In fact, the latter-day critique of this institution was instigated by a Jewish savant, Nahman Kroch- mal. 23 From Krochmal, who opened up the era of scepticism towards the Great Synod, to this day, there have been numerous students, both Jews and Gentiles, who have more or less disrupted its traditional ground-work, until, under the critical hammers of Kuenen and Wellhausen, its basal stone seemed to be hopelessly splintered. Now, I am both too regardful of your patience and too sensible of the inverse limits of my topic and my time, to lead you at present into the labyrinth of controversy concerning the Great Synod. You will certainly deem it both more pleasing and proper if I confine myself here solely to the statement of my view of the subject, leaving for a more leisurely occasion its detailed defense. The Great Synod, then, to my judgment, presents the second stage in the evolution of the Jewish representative organism. Both the time and the causes of its appearance seem to me very clear, and the talmudic reports alluding to it, though at times tangled, are yet, on the whole, quite congruous. When was the Great Synod formed ? In the days of the Restoration : Ezra laid its foundation, and Nehe- miah set up the gates of it. How so? The relations of the time and the records of tradition warrant this assumption. The heroes of the Restoration, you will readily 'grant, were possessed by a two- fold ambition. None need hypothesize upon the exact nature of the latter ; we find it finely described in the royal edict with which Ezra was equipped : " And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God that is in thine hand, (first) appoint magistrates and judges, which may de mannen der groote Synagoge, German translation in Gesam. Abhandlungen, pp. 125-160. 22 Enc. Brit., Israel, Vol. XIII, p. 419, note 2. 23 See More Nebokhe Hazzeman, chap. XL 8o VIEWS ON THE SYNOD judge all the people, all such as know the laws of thy God, and (secondly) teach ye him that knoweth them not." ' Here we have the twofold program of the Restoration : educational and executive, the setting up of an efficient administrative order, and the intellect- ual improvement of the people. Without the latter, moreover, the former could be of no avail, seeing that the Torah, which was to regulate the new life, could be neither observed nor enforced unless it were commonly understood. What, then, was Ezra's course? Noting the stupendous ignorance prevalent among the people, he, at the outset, let go of all administrative ambitions and devoted himself chiefly to the pursuit of intellectual rejuvenescence. He made himself neither prince nor priest, posts either of which he might easily have arrogated ; * but, in the phraseology of tradition, he became a new Shaphan, a new Moses 26 he became a Sopher, Scribe. As such he not only produced copies of the Torah the new constitution, the new " map of life " but he also instructed the people in it, interpreted it, popularized it. Alone? Certainly, not; he required assistants, apostles. These he found among the contemporary men of letters the school represented in the Bible by the Wisdom literature among the Hakhamim Quite a num- ber of the Sages, no doubt, turned Scribes, and thus Ezra was sur- rounded by a group of men pursuing with him one part of his orig- inal program: the educational. The administrative side of it, be- yond a doubt, meantime suffered corresponding neglect, and never did it achieve any success until Nehemiah, the man of action, ap- peared on the scene. This happened after Ezra had, so to say, for fifteen years (485-444.8. C.) conducted his preparatory school. Then commenced the organizing activity, practical reform, obedi- ence to the Torah. The alliance, in brief, of Ezra and Nehemiah, the intermarriage of theory and of action, engendered the Restora- tion. " Then they that feared the Lord," records a contemporary 24 Ezr. VII : 25. 25 Cf. Cant. Rob. V:4. 26 Cf. Siphre to Dt., Pisqua 48; Qohel. Rab. 1:8; T. B. Snh. 2ib, and paral- lel passages. * Cf. Cheyne, Jewish Religious Life after the Exile, p. 216 ff. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 81 prophet, " spake one with another : and the Lord hearkened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before Him, for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon His name." ' A general betterment of conditions was manifest ; in lieu of the laxity and the lethargy which the prophets of the preceding age had to bewail, great vitality now was regnant, attempts at organization union. The Sopherim themselves, no doubt, had in good oriental fashion, formed a council of their own, a guild, but when Nehemiah arrived and began in good earnest the promulgation of reforms, this is what occurred : the people at large resolved to select a represen- tative body of men to bear the burden and the business of the government, seeing, no -doubt, how futile the endeavor was to settle gravely momentous matters at the open-air mass meetings which Nehemiah was accustomed to convoke. 29 And this delegated body, you can imagine, no longer could consist of the old-time represen- tatives alone, the tribal aristocrats, the Elders, but it needs must admit a new element that both deserved and demanded representa- tion, a new factor thenceforth potent in the policy of the people, the Sages, the Scribes. 30 This corporation, personifying the result- ant of the people's best theoretical and practical forces, was taxed with promoting the future of the Restoration: and this, I take it, was the genesis of the Great Synod. Our knowledge of the spiritual activity of the Great Synod is not mere guesswork. The problem relating to its composition and its mode of operation is too complex and irrelevant to our present inquiry ; 31 its activity is what interests us here, its role in Jewish history. And this we find summed up in the Mishnah. The object of the Keneseth was to " raise up many disciples," to " make a fence round the law," and to establish a careful judiciary system. 32 It would be interesting to know what part the Synod played in the politics of the nation, but thereof hardly any records have been pre- 28 Mai. Ill: 16; cf. Ezr. IX 14, X:3; Cheyne, op. cit., p. 62 if. 29 Neh. X : 28 ff. ^Neh. IX 138, X: i ff; cf. T. B. Meg. i7b; T. J. Bcr. II 14 (ed. Krot. 4d) ; Meg. 1:5 (Tod). 31 For a good summary of the problem first mentioned, see Taylor, Pirqe Aboth, 2 ed., p. no f. "Aboth l:i. 82 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD served. This much, however, is certain, that spiritually its task lay in the elucidation and the transmission of the Torah, as well as in the adaptation of the latter to the new environment. Its business was so to interpret, to clarify, to expand the old law that reply might be readily found in it to the queries of the new life a programme destined to remain the standard of all subsequent Jewish Synods. Numerous reforms which emanated from the Great Synod go in tradition now by the name of Ezra, and now by that of the Elders, and now again by the name of the Scribes. But this is, no doubt, a simple case of synecdoche: Ezra, as the founder of the Synod, was often treated as its eponym, as were occasionally the Scribes also, who as specialists in the theory undoubtedly suggested those innovations which the whole Synod ratified, and which its lay mem- bers, the Elders, eventually enforced in practice. 33 Aside from the purely intellectual reforms for which the Synod became responsible such as certain exegetical and textual emendations in the Law, the introduction of the style of the sages (Leshon Hakhamim) for use in the popular discourse, and of the new script (Kethabh Ash- uri) 54 and aside, also, from its reforms in the administrative and judicial system, it took an important part in the formation of the new liturgy. Of course, I need not pause here to dwell on the meta- morphosis of the liturgy after the Restoration ; to remind you of the fact that it is then that fixed forms of prayer were adopted, regular music was introduced at the services, and the Psalms were largely collected to serve as a congregational hymn-book ; well may I withhold my little candle of archaeologic knowledge from where the sun of erudition shines. I wish to point out, however, that the Great Synod, no doubt, applied itself to this task of establishing the liturgy. Tradition credits it distinctly with a great deal of such work, as the authorship of the Tephilah and similar prayers of Sanc- tification and Separation (Qedushoth and Habdaloth), the introduc- tion of the Hallel, the institution of the Megillah reading. 88 All this 85 Weiss separates the Sopherim and the Keneseth into two bodies, which seems unnecessary. Cf. Dor Dor Wedoreshow (2 ed.) I, p. 65. 84 Cf. T. B. Snh. 2ib; Zbah. 62a. 85 Cf. Siphre to Dt, Pisqo 3431 T. B. Meg. 2a, i;b; Ber. 33a; Yalqut, Kings, 192 ; Weiss, op. cit., I, p. 62. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 83 work, of course, cannot have been accomplished in a trice, neither in one age nor in two ; but it was, no doubt, the product of the sev- eral generations comprised in the history of the Great Synod. It would be incongruous with the whole history of the Great Synod, if its termination had offered no ground for controversy. But it has. The statement in the Mishnah that Simeon, the Just, was one of the last members of the Keneseth 30 has naturally caused speculation as to the identity of the man in question. Some identify him with Simeon I, 3T others with Simeon II, 38 and still others with Simeon III. 39 It is safe to assume, however, that the Mishnah has reference to Simeon I, in whose lifetime, owing to the detrimental invasion of Ptolemy Lagos (320 B. C.), the Synod may have fallen into temporary abeyance. Who knows but what its name even, Keneseth Haggedolah, may in that period of trouble and tragedy, have been lost and neglected? As the people's representative insti- tution, however, it survived, you may be sure, for many more years, bearing the interchangeable title of the Council of Scribes, or of Sages, or again, of Elders. In fact, its traces may be found in the period bordering on the Mishnah, and certainly in the Maccabean era, 40 in which latter period one of its pre-eminent products, I should say, was the thirteenth doxology of the Tephilah, in which side by side with such genuine Maccabean terms as Zaddiqim and Hasidim, allusion is found to the Zeqenim of Israel and the remnant of the Sopherim" The two salient features to remember, however, are these: that the Great Synod was called into existence by an obvious necessity the need of a central organ of administration at a most critical junc- ture of Jewish history and that its activity chiefly found expres- m Aboth f I:i, 2. "Weiss, op. cit., I, p. 80; Graetz, Geschichte, vol. 2, II (2 ed.), P- 235. ""Krochmal, op. cit. (3 ed.), P- 107. TO Loew, Ges. Schrifien, I, p. 411. 40 Cf. Krauss, Jew. Quar. Rev., Vol. X, p. 364 ff. I Mac. XIV: 23, may have specific 'reference to the Great Synod. (Cf. Jost, Gesch. d. Judentums und seiner Sekten, I, p. 91, note.} 41 The original nucleus of this prayer may be older. (Cf. Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, p. 299!) Zunz's date appears unwarranted by the context (Gott. Vortr., 2 ed., p. 381). See Hamburger, Real-Encyclop., Vol. II, p. 1096. 84 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD sion in the continuance of tradition, in the interpretation of the Torah, and the shaping of it in the mold of the new circumstances. III. If we concurred with Graetz, we could not speak of the Great Synod as a phase in the history of our institution. For, according to Graetz, the Keneseth Haggedolah was only an ephemeral episode in the life of Nehemiah, the large popular assembly, namely, which he convoked; while all the social and religious reforms after the Return our historian attributes not to the Great Synod, but to an- other institution which he believes to have been founded immediately after the days of Nehemiah the Beth-Din-PIaggadol, the Great Court of Justice, later known as the Synedrion. 42 The Beth-Din, however, appears to me to have been organized much later; the name Synedrion, moreover, only came into vogue after the Great Synod had passed through an era during which its membership was reduced to seventy-two, and the name it bore was, again, Council of Elders. 43 How the Elder came anew to be eponymous of the people's representative institution, it lies not within the scope of this paper to elucidate. But there can be no doubting the fact that the Elders, on the one hand, are frequently identified with the Great Synod, and, on the other, they become, later on, the constituent mem- bers of the Synedrion, while again and again they are alluded to as a distinct corporation. In other words, it can be proven that be- tween the Great Synod and the Synedrion lies the history of another Council of Elders, or, as it was styled in Greek, the Gerusia. The Gerusia was not a foreign importation, despite the fact that its name first greets us in Jewish history during the Greek period. Only the name was a new adoption ; the institution itself was indi- genous to Judea. No wonder, then, that Schuerer observes the radical difference between the Jewish Gerusia, which was essentially aristocratic, and all similar corporations created under Hellenic in- fluence, which were undeniably democratic. 44 The reason lies on tt Cf. Geschichte, 2, II, p. 155 and p. 178 ff. 43 Kratiss, ibid., p. 374 ff. "Cf. op. cit., p. 191. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 85 the surface : the Jewish Gerusia could not be cut after the Hellenic pattern, because it antedated the Hellenic invasion, because it had behind it the traditions of many centuries, because its structure was grounded in the history of the people. Nothing but a new name the Grecian conqueror superimposed upon the time-honored council, and under it we find it first mentioned in Josephus, at the time of Antiochus the Great (223-187 B. C.). 46 The Gerusia, in those days, not only fulfilled those functions in the social and religious order which from of yore belonged to the representative institution, but also shared with the high-priest the governmental duties which, by reason of the weighty privileges granted to the Jews by the Hellenic rulers, must have been both multiplex and onerous. It would be interesting at this moment to speculate somewhat more minutely on the probable activity of the Gerusia particularly on the question as to whether this council, consisting of seventy-two Elders, may not somehow be associated with the Septuagint, 46 which as biblical scholars have pointed out, " was written down to satisfy the religious needs of the Jews by a translated Torah," 4r but to plunge into such problems would mean, for the success of my paper,, to heed a siren's song. I must, on the contrary, hasten to remind you that it is in the days of Hyrcanus II, who was made Ethnarch in 63 B. C., that we find the council first bearing the future-fraught Greek name of Synedrion, and endowed with judicatory and admin- istrative privileges that embraced all Judea. 48 The central Synedrion of Jerusalem raised to their apogee the activity and the influence of the Scribes. No matter who the pres- ident of the institution was whether it was the high-priest, as the latter-day biblical critics 49 would have it, or the foremost member of the contemporary rabbinical schools, as the Talmudic tradition informs us " all the same, it was the experts in the interpretation 45 Annt. XII, in, 3. 46 Cf. Erdman, History of Philosophy (English translation), Vol. I, p. 213. 47 Wellhausen, in Enc. Brit., Vol. XXI, p. 667 ; Robertson Smith, O. T. J. C. (2 ed.), p. 75f. 48 Cf. Ant. XIV, ix, 4 ; Schuerer, op. cit., p. 193. 49 Cf. Kuonen, Over desamenstelling van het Sanhedrin, Germ. Transl., loc. cit., pp. 49-81 ; Schuerer, ibid., II, 203 ff. -Mishnah, Hag. 11:2. 86 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD of the Torah, the bearers of the treasures of tradition, the Scribes, that played the leading role in the council. The activity of the Synedrion at Jerusalem, in effect, continued the chain of ideals first linked by the Great Synod ; like the latter, it aimed at the develop- ment, the strengthening of the inner life of the people. This it sought to accomplish by attending to the particular demands of the time, by the expansion of the Torah through diligent and ingenious interpretation, so that it might respond to contemporary needs. The Synedrion was the new captain to help the people circumnavi- gate life according to the chart of the Torah. Of course, specific- ally, it was also a tribunal of justice, but its judicial work was quite limited, none save cases of supreme import being submitted to it, and that, too, only as a resort of last appeal. Ordinarily, the local courts " settled all matters of judicature ; while to the Synedrion the higher spiritual and administrative interests of the people were entrusted, its guidance through all the intricacies of secular and religious transformation. " The Synedrion is your eyes, O Israel ! As the whole body fol- lows the eyes, thus all Israel follows the Synedrion." J This dic- tum applied not solely to Judea, within the borders of which the Synedrion possessed actual jurisdiction, sanctioned by the govern- ment, but to all countries where Jews lived. The obedience rendered to the central institution at Jerusalem was universal and unequivocal, though entirely voluntary. From the most distant parts inquiries came to the Synedrion relating to religion and life, to the law, and its pronouncements were regarded as authoritative. Adherence was unfailingly acceded to the Teqanoth, the Synedrial ordinances, which contained decisions on the variegated topics of religious interest. Whenever, in fact, a new problem arose, no matter what its import, the Synedrion worked out its solution, and forthwith spread the latter broadcast in the form of an ordinance. 63 These Teqanoth a term, by the way, to remember for future reference dealt with the most multifarious themes : the family purity of the priests, the 51 Cf. Mat. V : 22 ; X : 17 ; Mark XIII : 9 ; Mishn. Sheb. X : 14 ; Sot. 1:3; Snh. 1:6; XI: 4; Josephus, Annt. IV, viii, 14; Bell Jud. II, xx, 5; T. B. Meg., 262. 83 Cf. Cant. Rab. I, 63, and parallel passages. 83 Cf. Acts XXVIII: 21 ; Tosephta, Snh. II; T. J. Snh. I: I (i8d). VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 87 regulation of the calendar, the improvement of the judicial routine, the adjustment of marriage settlements, the supervision of public education, the introduction of popular feasts, taxation, and such like. In brief, what Graetz says of Simeon ben Shetah and Judah ben Tabbai, two towering synedriites, was more or less characteristic of all their fellows : " They resuscitated old laws, created new ones, and sought means to impress them upon the memory and the atten- tion of the people." M Purposely, I have avoided the mention of the composition of the Synedrion, the appointment of its members, the Lishkath Hagga- zith, the temple hall consecrated to its sessions, for all these prob- lems are, again, for the present occasion, too intricate and irrelevant. I am sketching the continuancy of the representative institution of Israel; to draw its contour is my aim here, not the details of each one of its separate phases. At the fall of the State and the Temple, the Synedrion, of course, likewise collapsed, but not never to be rebuilt. In the catalogue of the merits of R. Yohanan ben Zakkai it should be accounted one of the chiefest that he had no sooner founded his academy at Yamnia than he succeeded, likewise, in resuscitating the Synedrion. Great vigor of personality may have been needed to acquire for the new institution all the reverence for- merly coupled with the hallowed atmosphere of the Lishkath Hag- gazith; popular prejudice may have required palliation. But not for naught was Yohanan called both " the right hand pillar and the mighty hammer " of his time ; not in vain was he addressed as " the Light of Israel." ' His Synedrion gained the universal adhesion of the people. Nay, the total transformation through which Judaism was passing just then made its services priceless. In this period of transition it played a part parallel to that of the Great Synod in the early days of the Restoration. R. Yohanan ben Zakkai was, in reality, a new Ezra. His Synedrion not only abolished anachronous rites, but its weightiest task was the laying of an utterly new basis for the future life of the people, the translation, the transfiguring of the old doctrines ; the adaptation of the Torah to totally new, unpre- cedented circumstances. Its activity thenceforth embraced all "Op. cit., vol. 3, I (4th ed.), pp. 137 ff. 88 T. B. Ber., 28b. 88 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD branches, you may be sure, of the inner life of the Jews : the appoint- ment of New Moon and feasts, the regulation of the new form of worship, the final fixing of the liturgy, 57 not to mention minor topics. In fact, there were nine distinct institutions, the introduction of which was accredited to R. Yohanan ben Zakkai alone, of which the most significant, mayhap, was his methodical insistence upon the principle : Sheyeheyu toqein bekhol maqom sheyesh bo beth din 67 that the trumpet of religious life (to turn one of his reforms into a trope) should be blown wheresoever the Synedrion should chance to be ; a doctrine which, one must admit, he himself carried out with- out compromise. 68 This certainly was an auspicious principle, seeing that a period of peregrination was in store for the Synedrion. For, after the death of Yohanan, the institution began to move about with its presidents, holding sessions now at Usha, whence emanated the noted Teqanoth Usha now at Beth Shearim, now at Sepphoris, and now at Tiberias. The sunset of the Synedrion in Palestine, however, was, no doubt, accelerated by two circumstances : the mul- tiplication, on the one hand, of talmudic schools and ordained schol- ars throughout the country, which was bound, in the long run, to counteract the centripetal tendency ; and on the other, the collection of the Mishnah by Judah I, which by giving to the people an authori- tative compendium of the interpretations of the Torah, removed, to a great extent, the necessity of turning to the Synedrion for the solution of religious difficulties, and thus caused detachment from it. The Synedrion can not be dismissed, however, without a brief allu- sion, at least, to its offspring in Babylonia. While the central council was on the decline in Palestine, and the splendor of the Babylonian academies was constantly growing, the following opinion gradually began to prevail: Sanhedrin nohegeth baarezn-bhehuz la-arez the Synedrion is legitimate both in, and beyond, Palestine. While such 06 Cf. T. B. Snh., iia. "Mish, R-Hash., IV: i. 58 Gemara, ibid., 2pb. In later times the Synod again held its sessions at Yamnia, and we have relics of its activity, relating to the liturgy and the canon, in Mishna, Yadayim, 111:5, T. B. Berakh, 28b, f , Taanith, 3ia. 59 Cf. T. B. Kethub. 4Qf, M. Qat. i;a, Sab. isb. 00 T. B. Makkoth, Ja. ; cf. Git. 6a, B. Qama 8oa. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 89 a maxim was altogether out of harmony with the predelections of the Palestinian Synedrion, yet had the latter no sooner commenced to abey, than a Synod was in full swing in Babylon. Its groundwork was the academies at Sura and at Pumbeditha. These latter, from their very inception, had made a practice of setting aside two months annually as Yarhe Kallah G1 months, namely, during which scholars from far and wide pilgrimed to the seats of the academies to enlist in the " tournaments of the Torah," as Tanhuma puts it ; 62 for in- struction, that is, mutual assistance, and common deliberation. In the course of time, these assemblages forfeited more and more their instructional character, and assumed the aspect of administrative and legislative Synods a circumstance brought about largely both by the endless multitude of religious inquiries, which began to reach the academies from all parts of the Diaspora, and by the ever-grow- ing facilities which, with the completion of the Talmud, young students had for self-instruction. The assemblages, in point of pure education, thus turned into mere examining universities, so to speak, while their main energy was dedicated to the people's larger issues, both religious and secular. 63 These semi-annual Synods continued, with mayhap slight interruptions, throughout the history of the Babylonian academies, a period approximating seven centuries, their duties being in the main: the preservation, firstly, of talmudic scholarship, and the constant recruiting, through examinations, of synedrial candidates ; secondly, the maintenance of a steady corre- spondence with the Jews of the Diaspora, who were accustomed to turn with their, difficulties to the new Synedrion ; and, thirdly, the renderipg of legal decisions necessary even after the conclusion of the Talmud, since in the latter such could not be found, being, as it is, a compilation of legal discussions rather than a compendium of 61 See instances and discussion in Kohut, Aruch Completum, Vol. IV, p. 227 f. 62 Cf. the old Tanhuma, Noah, 3; cited in Buber, Midrash Tanhuma, p. 15: The " destruction of Jerusalem " and the " exile " alluded to in the passage quite likely are Midrashic expressions for the decay of the Palestinian Syne- drion and the consequent emigration of the scholars. It is an interesting contemporary document. 83 Cf. Graetz, op. ciL, IV, chap. 2. 90 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD laws. 04 In matters of minor import, the Synods of Snra and Pum- beditha acted as two independent bodies ; but when questions of exceptional gravity arose, they combined into one Synedrion, the enactments of which conveyed incontrovertible authority. In this manner the Babylonian Synods continued the traditions of the Jew- ish representative body : the transmission of the Torah, and its adap- tation to, and interpretation for, the new conditions of life. IV. The conditions of life in Europe, where the Jewish communities grew ever more appreciable, of course, tended to generate many a religious problem. As long as the Synedrion existed in Babylon, it is thither that they were sent for solution. But when that foun- tain of authority was dried up, it became incumbent upon the Euro- pean Jews to resolve their own perplexities. Very soon, then, you see the opening of the era of Synods in Europe; particularly in those countries where the Jews excelled in point of population and of scholarship. The Teqanoth which formerly were imported from Asia, you now find shaped in Germany, and in France, and in those other countries where environment necessitated a modification of the ancient theory. I cannot hope to enumerate here all the Synods of which we have distinct knowledge, and shall, therefore, content my- self with merely indicating the causes which led up to them. Before doing this, however, I must remind you that the first widely accepted Teqanoth which emanated from Germany, bore the signature not of a Synod, but of an individual : the Ordinances of R. Gershom, who lived while the light of Sura was flaring its last (960-1028 A. C.). M Everybody knows Gershom's three principal institutions : the prohi- bition of polygamy, the necessity of the wife's consent for the validity of a divorce, and the involability of letter secrecy; for the author- 64 Cf. Weiss, op. cit., IV, chap. 2. 68 On the nature of the medieval Teqanoth, cf. Abrahams Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 58-61. ^Jost places R. Gershom, also, at the head of a Synod convened by him, and cites in support of his statement Meir ben Barukh of Rothenburg, Re- sponsa, No. 1019, which, unfortunately, it is impossible for me to verify. (Cf. Gesch. d. Judent. u. s. Sekten, II, p. 389.) VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 91 ship of which he was fondly surnamed " The Light of the Exile." It was, however, about a hundred years after this rabbi of Mayence produced his Teqanoth, that regularly constituted Synods began to appear both in France and in Germany. By that time, not only was there a sufficiently large number of prominent Jews in these coun- tries to band together for deliberation on matters of religious mo- ment, but, what is more certain and noteworthy, such deliberative assemblies became exceedingly importunate. The entire series of Synods which convened between the twelfth and the seventeenth centuries, and which, "for convenience sake, I shall style the Medieval Synods, were called into existence by the following four causes : 1. The religious conditions of the time. What had been the chief task of the Great Synod and of the Synedria? To interpret and adapt the Law to new conditions of life. And now, too, the Law, "both the Torah and the Talmud, required modifications in order to respond to the new circumstances. A radical difference there was between the environment in which the Talmud had been produced and the Christian countries in which the Jews now lived. Inter- pretation alone of the traditional literature sufficed no longer ; actual augmentation was required the era was come, not of the Parshan, but the Tosaphist, not of Rashi, but Rabbenu Tarn. Such confu- sion and heterogeneity, in fact, had crept into the religious practice, that, as a means of averting anarchy and introducing clarity and harmoniousness, the Synod suggested itself most forcibly. 2. The judicial position of the European Jews demanded a Synod. In the middle age, you remember, the Jews were treated as aliens by the several nations, and were left to themselves in their inner administration and judicature ; they had their own courts of justice and executive boards. For the efficient exercise of such judicatory and administrative functions, however, the need was strongly felt of uniformity of rules and regulations. And this could be best achieved by synodal assemblies. 3. Another factor in the creation of the Synods was the manifest need of elevating the manners and the morals of the people. The Crusades, the persecutions, and the consequent instability of for- tunes had directly and indirectly caused moral degeneracy among $2 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD the Jews. Luxury, loose conduct, illegitimate trades, lack of deco- rum, were rampant, all of which, it was felt, could be counteracted more effectively by a Synod than by the rabbis individually. 67 4. The numerous persecutions of the later middle age, in fine, called forth many temporary Synods, at which methods were de- vised for averting the common danger. As a rule, such Synods levied a tax on the communities for the purpose of bribing the per- secutors, though they made themselves responsible for many another Teqanah calculated to diminish prejudice and to stem the tide of trouble. Having thus suggested the causes of the several Synods, I rely on your indulgence if, for the sake of economy, I abstain from a detailed account of the several assemblies. Suffice it to say, that their success, on the whole, was quite marvelous ; that in matters of uniformity of jurisdiction, of religious organization, and of the moral uplifting of the Jewries their efficacy was well-nigh bound- less. One method solely they had of enforcing their enactments the threat of excommunication ; but that was quite enough. Resist- ance to the Teqanoth of a Synod was practically unknown within the purlieus of its authority within the districts, that is, from which delegates were sent to its assemblies and which, again, were not prevented by their political position from joining it. For, as you know, no Synod in those days could possibly assume an international character, for the reason, if for none other, that the Jews, regarded as chattels by their several princes, were liable to the diversity of temperament and treatment of the latter. Synods were, therefore, local, provincial, national, as, e. g., the Synod of Spanish Jews, which met, presumably, at Barcelona, under the presidency of R. Nis'sim b. Reuben, in the years 1354-56 ; C8 the French assemblies of Rheims and Troyes in the twelfth century ; the Synods of Shu in (Speyer, Worms, Mayence) in the year I223, 69 and again in 1381 ; 70 67 Cf. Giiclemann, Gesch. d. Ersiehungswesens, Vol. I, p. 255 ff. 68 The document regarding it was published in He-Haluz, I, 1852, p. 20 ft. Cf. Jost, Geschichte des Judcntutns und s. Sekten, III, p. 90 ff. 69 Cf. Graetz, op. cit., Vol. VIII (3 ed), p. 102. 70 Cf. Moses Menz, Responsa, No. 10. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 93 the Synod at Erfurt, about the year 1400;" at Nuremberg, about 1440," and such like never were they international. Nor was obedience expected without representation, and the only instance known to me in which the enforcement of the contrary principle was attempted by the Synod of Bingen, about the year 1455, caused unmistakable resentment. Frequently, however, the assembled dele- gates extended an invitation to all rabbis and representative laymen not present at the Synod, to become signatories to the Teqanoth adopted, in order to secure for them the widest possible sphere of adherence, as was, e. g., done at the memorable Synod at Frankf ort- on-the-Main in the year i6i3. 74 Certainly, many an enactment thus found currency beyond the bounds of the particular Synod respon- sible for it, not to mention the fact that often Teqanoth were reen- acted by later assemblies, and thus either resuscitated or reinvigo- rated. The synodal assemblies continued throughout France, Ger- many, and Italy from the beginning of the twelfth century when R. Tarn may have started the movement till the seventeenth cen- tury, when the Synod of Frankfort, which I have just mentioned, and which was attended by the leading men from all Germany, in- volved the Jews of the country in a preposterous trial for secret conspiracy. The utility of the Synods was as vast as their author- ity ; they became " the Shepherds of Israel." Many a communal in- stitution owed its origin to them, many a charitable organization, a hospital, a school; not to mention their merits in elevating the ethical status of the Jews and in averting from them, through circum- spectness and corporate endeavor, numerous dangers, in a period when, Heaven knows, there was lack of neither danger nor distress. Few of us, indeed, may know, what Dr. Gudemanri has pointed out, that the entire modern communal life of the Jews in Germany and kindred countries, in so far as it is of indigenous development, in reality, was first given shape and expression at the medieval Synods." 71 Cf. Isserlein, Terumath Haddeshen, No. 24. 72 Cf. Jacob Weil, Responsa, No. 101. 78 Cf. Isserlein, ibid., No. 252 f; Menz., ibid., No. 63, 1-5; Graetz, he. cit., p. 211 ff, 427 ff ; Giidemann, Gesch. des Erziehungswesens, Vol. Ill, p. 38 f. 74 Cf. Horovitz, Die Frankfurter Rabbiner-versammlung v. Jahre 1613, p. 25. 75 Cf. loc. cit., p. 256 ff ; Abrahams, he. cit., p. 58. 94 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD V. Were not economy uppermost in my mind at present, I might dwell at length on a certain Synod of world-wide import for the conception of which the medieval persecutions and the desire to unify Israel were alike responsible. But as the importance of the Synod in question never really passed the borders of imagination, it will suffice here just to make mention of it and dismiss it as one of the many dreams dreamt by the sons of Israel. I am speaking of the Synedrion which Jacob Berab (1464-1541) tried to re-estab- lish in all its pristine glory in Palestine. Berab's underlying idea was thus to create a highplace for the unification of Israel, which as his most curious blending of rabbinic erudition and mystical dream- iness had led him to believe needs must precede the advent of the Messiah. Learned, rich, and influential, he had gone as far as ob- taining the old-time Ordination Semikha from his fellow-rabbis at Safed, and thus was in position, in accord with talmudic teaching, to ordain others. He might even have arrived at a realization of his dream, were it not for the bitterest opposition which his plan evoked from R. Levi ben Habib, the chief-rabbi of Jerusalem. The con- troversy with the latter nipped the synedrial flower of Berab's imagi- nation in the bud, despite his managing meanwhile to confer the Ordination on four of his colleagues and disciples. Among these was Joseph Karo, another mixture of talmudism and mysticism, who observing the failure of his master to create an actual Synedrion for the unification of Israel, attempted to achieve the same result in another manner, and thus produced the Shulhan Arukh a Written Synedrion. VI. At no time, however, has Israel consisted entirely of dreamers. The charm of Jewish history lies in the contiguity it presents of dreamland and reality, in the welding of Dichtung and Wahrheit. While Berab was laying the groundwork of a universal messianic Synedrion in Palestine, the more sober-minded and prosaic Jews of Poland were preparing to establish a Synod for more practical, though more provincial, wants ; a Synod, however, destined to be- come the most notable post-talmudic institution of its kind. The VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 95 Synod of the Four Provinces Wa'ad de-Arba Arazoth has left a deep impression in Jewish history, despite the fact that most of its Minutes have been either lost or destroyed, and the problems relat- ing to it are only now in the course of solution. This Synod is a polyonymous institution ; you find it under many aliases: now it is the Synod of the Four Provinces, now of Five, and now of Three. It is, therefore, essential to remember that all this signifies a mere variation of names, the provinces meant always including Little Poland, with Cracow as capital city ; Great Poland, with Posen ; Russia, or Podolia, with Lemberg ; Volynia, or the Ukraine, with Vladimir, and Lithuania, with Brest only that Great Poland and Little Poland ofttimes were included under the name of Poland, while Podolia and Volynia were designated as Russia, Lithuania always being treated as an independent Grand Principality ; as a rule, however, a fourfold division prevailed, Great Poland and Little Poland being separated, whence the common name of the Synod : Wa'ad de-Arba Arazoth. What caused the inauguration of the Polish Synods ? Again, the peculiar relations of life. The Synods were the direct outcome of the position of the Jews among their neighbors, or, more specific- ally, both of the privileges they obtained from the Polish Kings, and of the acute social antagonisms dominant in Poland. On the one hand, the Jews possessed, by royal concession, the right of their own jurisdiction in civil entanglements ; on the other, the peculiari- ties of the gentry had brought the judicial system of Poland to such a pass, that almost every portion of the population every caste and sect came to depend upon its own governing and judiciary organization. The autonomy of the Jews was thus quite a neces- sity ; a fragment of the larger life of Poland. Add to this the fact that both Poland and Lithuania adopted the system of treating the Jews as a unit of taxation, the allotment of which required the services of a central body; add, furthermore, the circumstance that where courts of justice existed, superior courts of appeal were requi- site, and that frequently conflicts occurred of a nature that disal- 79 Cf. Dembitzer, Miktebhe Biqqoreth, p. pf; Dubnow, Yevreyskaya Istoriya, II, p. 319. 96 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD lowed of settlement by a local tribunal and the need of a central organization will grow quite obvious. 77 The Synod of the Four Provinces did not monopolize the super- vision over the affairs of its constituency. The work was rather superintended by a number of concentric organizations: first, there were the local Oahals Congregations entirely autonomic within their sphere ; then came the district assemblies, then the provincial assemblies, and, at length, the General Synod. Lithuania, in par- ticular, had an altogether independent Synod of her own, analogous in activity and composition to the Polish council, and consisting of five so-called " Synagogues." All the affairs of the Lithuanian Jews stood beneath its surveillance, and only in instances of particular moment it joined forces with the General Synod, either voluntarily in matters of exceptional interest, or in events of such royal legis- lation as affected the Jews of the entire kingdom. 7 - 8 Nothing would afford me greater pleasure than to detail here the multifarious activity of the Synods of Poland and Lithuania. But this is quite impossible, seeing that I should then be constrained to narrate the story of a highly energetic institution which was, with slight interruption, active for about two centuries. The Polish Synod, it may be noted briefly, was founded some time within the reign of Sigismund I (1506- 1548)," soon after the immigration of Jacob Pollack, while Lithuania established hers some time toward the close of the same century, after the Lublin Union (1569). The General Synod at first met at desultory places, until it resolved to hold periodic sessions during the fair at Lublin, and later, also dur- ing the fair at Jaroslaw. At these two places, then, the Synod met at semi-annual intervals, with slight interruptions, as I have said, for about two hundred years. Its decay began in the earlier part 77 Cf. Dubnow, ibid., p. 305 ff. 78 The entire subject is now admirably dealt with by Dr. Harkavy and Rab- binowitz in the latter's Hebrew translation of Graetz's History, Vols. VII and VIII. The volumes reached the writer too late for utilization in the present paper. 79 A document is extant dating from the year 1533, in which King Sigis- mund I enjoins upon his subjects obedience to the jurisdiction of the court of "Jewish Doctors" that was held in Lublin (see Bershadski, Russko-Yev- reyski Arkhiv, Vol. I, p. ip2f ) . Cf. Dembitzer, he. cit., p. 6f, ipf. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 9? of the eighteenth century, when the Jaroslaw sessions were the first to cease, when the Lithuanian Synod consolidated with the Polish, when gradually tri-ennial meetings were substituted for the annual, until, at length, in the year 1764, the Diet of Warsaw ordered its total abrogation, after having done away with the lump taxation of the Jews. The Polish Wa'ad was not alone an administrative organization, or tribunal of justice, or revenue department for the King: it was, in addition, the cultural centre of the Polish Jewries, the Mecca of the intelligence and the scholarship of the land. What time could be spared from the making of all possible Teqanoth enactments stretching over the highways and by-ways of life was zealously devoted to the general improvement of mind and soul. The Synod was truly an assembly of the wise: if you were a learned man and parent of some new idea, it was thither that you pilgrimed with your intellectual offspring, where you knew you could make show of it to experts; if you hit upon some new trick of exegesis, con- cocted an ingenious pilpul, you knew where your inventiveness had the best chance of recognition ; if you were the author of a new work, a new collection of Responsa, nay, a new volume of Hiddu- shim (Novellae) than which, to be sure, as a Polish rabbi you could produce nothing nobler then, indeed, you could find no bet- ter distributing centre than the Synod. Nor, I assure you, was there any lack of argumentative exhibitions at the assemblies, where many a talmudic tournament occurred, many a spear of specula- tion and lance of learning were broken, and where, if you were a young rabbi, you had the opportunity of joining the jousters and displaying your dexterity in discussion, which chance, if it proved to your credit, often procured you, by way of guerdon, a call from a congregation, unless, indeed, your rich merchant of a father-in- law bought the office for you at the fair, as he was quite apt to do. VII. While I sincerely regret my inability to dwell more at length on the Polish Synods, I shall, without the least compunction, allot the briefest space possiffie to the notorious French Synedrion. And this not alone for the reason that while of the former our knowl- 98 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD edge is most meager, we have the fullest information concerning the latter, but also because the French Synedrion appears to me as the most jejune and least Jewish chapter in the history of our insti- tution. The least Jewish, I say, for both the Convocation of Notables and the subsequent Synedrion, the combined activity of which lasted from July 26, 1806, to March 25, 1807, were not a real outgrowth of the existent needs among the Jews of France, but rather reflected the megalomania of Napeoleon. On May 30, 1806, this monarch issued a decree, according to which the Jews were to hold an assembly of Notables, under imperial supervision, for the sake of answering certain questions anent their religion and their patriotism. The delegates to this assembly, including some really noted rabbis and laymen, were not selected by their respective com- munities, but appointed by the prefects of police. The initial ses- sion was held on a Sabbath, which was certainly not Jewish. The leading questions submitted to the assembly were as to whether the Jews loved France and the French, whether they considered the laws of the land binding, whether they sanctioned intermarriage with Christians, and usurious dealings with Christians. Between these were sandwiched in several minor interrogatories. What time was left to the delegates in and between making reply to these questions, they spent in conveying compliments to the monarch, in a display of oratory, and in rhetorical rodomontade wherewith Napoleon was so heartily pleased that he disclosed to the Notables his further aspirations on behalf of Israel his desire to re-estab- lish the Synedrion. What a grand vision! The centre of Jewish authority in France ! Paris the new Jerusalem ! The hearts of the Jews the world over turned toward the capital of Napoleon ! The monarch may have had a deep-seated consciousness of the utility of such a cosmopolitan ally as the Jews ; the Synedrion, mayhap, was part and parcel of his mad craving to unify the world under his sceptre. As for the Jews, however, they were intoxicated with the plan; they saw visions of a new age, and dreamt dreams of rejuvenation. A new Ezra was arisen, the Emperor ; a new Nehe- miah, Napoleon! However, after the Synedrion had really as- sembled (on the pth of February, 1807) and put the stamp of its authority upon the work of the Notables, wnich, Napoleon said, VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 99 would make the latter binding for all Jews, it soon discovered that unless it be for the making of long-winded speeches and the build- ing of Babylonian towers of phraseology, it really had no raison d'etre. And thus it died in just thirty days, leaving as its only monument in the history of the Jews in France the institution of the Consistory, regarding the utility of which, needless to say, there is divergence of judgment. 80 VIII. What made the French Synod so un-Jewish was that it did not respond to any real demand of the people. It was not called into being to readjust any social relations or to solve pressing problems ; it was engrafted on Jewish history by the vagaries of an external personage. That it might have followed the example of preceding Synods, and devoted its attention to the disentanglement of con- fronting perplexities to the reinterpretation of the Torah, you might say there can be no gainsaying ; but this is neither here nor there. The next Synod after the traditional pattern convoked, that is, for the distinct purpose of readjusting the ancient religious theories to a new environment and to new conditions of life was not to occur until Reform Judaism was strong enough to spread its wings over it. And this event took place at Leipsic, in the year 1869. In saying this, I omit to make mention, first, of the Con- sistory of Jacobson which was organized at Cassel in 1808; and, secondly, of the several Rabbinical Conferences held in Germany in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. My reason for doing this is that, as for the former, it was too apish a copy of the French Synod, and too characteristic a product of Jacobson's estheticism and vainglory to require notice, and, as for the latter, they of course were not Synods at all, but simply deliberative assemblies of rabbis. Had I enough time at my disposal, nothing, I am sure, could be more appropriate than to point out the role which these very Rabbinical Conferences have played in the molding of modern Judaism: how 80 A summary of the questions and answers of the French Synedrion may be found in the Year Book of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, 1890-91, p. 8of. ioo VIEWS ON THE SYNOD the caucus called by Geiger at Wiesbaden in the year 1837," and then the Conferences at Brunswick in 1844, and at Frankfort in 1845, and at Breslau in 1846, all strove for an adjustment of historical Judaism to modern conditions, for the devising of means by which " the preservation of Judaism and the awakening of the religious sense might be promulgated." ' But, aside from my disinclination to overstep my limit of time, the Conferences really fall beyond the scope of my paper, since, as I have said, they were mere rabbinical associations, and not deliberative assemblies of both rabbis and lay- men, Synods. The Synod which met at Leipsic from the 29throf June to the 4th of July, 1869, and subsequently at Augsburg from the nth to the 1 7th of July, 1871, was not the child of a day. . The Rabbinical Con- ferences had done their share in preparing the day for it, though even more anxiously than the rabbis, had the several Reform asso- ciations, particularly the Refonngenossenschaft at Berlin, advocated it and bided its coming. The simple fact is, that the new condi- tions in Germany, grown out of the emancipatory movement, had aroused universal interest among the Jews in the problem of self- adjustment. Emancipation signified the end of the era of isola- tion, the end of judicial autonomy, it denoted full citizenship, and participation in the political, social, and educational privileges and duties of the country. 83 The question then was, how the ancient Law was to affect, and to be affected by, these new circumstances. It was a climacteric period in Jewish history: the entrance of Israel into Western life. A day like the day of the destruction of Jerusa- lem: then the Jews had lost their nationality; now they found it again. That tradition needed reinterpretation was commonly felt; there was an instinctive self-assertion, moreover, of the synodal idea. On the one hand, Rapoport, one of the parents of Jewish science, advocated the founding of a Synod in Galicia, for the purpose of settling authoritatively what portions of rabbinic literature were to 81 Cf. Jost, Neuere Geschichte, III, pp. 143-148; Rabbinowitz, Biography of Zunz (Hebr.), pp. 156-159. 82 Cf. Jost, ibid., p. 238 ff; Year Book of the C. C. A. R. f loc. cit., p. 81 ff. 88 Cf. Jost, ibid., p. 6 ; Lazarus, Was hcisst national? in Treu und Frei, p. 95 ff. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 101 be considered superannuated, thus to allay the suspicions of the Government concerning any anti-Christian sentiment allegedly found in it. 84 On the other hand, you could find throughout Germany circles, unions, associations, consisting of young and ardent Jews, professional students and laymen, all craving after a certain read- justment of life, and feeling the strength which is in union. 88 The Rabbinical Conferences, also, were so many columns in this structure of unification, while the Synod formed the keystone. That the Reformgenossenschaft should have gloried in its convention was but natural ; for many, many years it had undertaken single-handed the remodeling of its mode of worship and code of doctrines, all the time emphasizing the provisional nature of its innovations and leaving them subject to the sanction of a Synod. 86 Nay, as early as 1846, it had actually attempted the convocation of such a Synod, which, however, proved premature and futile. 87 The German Synod, into a detailed account of which I need not enter here, thus aimed at a rejuvenescence of the contents of the Jewish religion, at the proper spiritual bringing-up of the rising generation; it aimed at the spread of knowledge, of a genuine appreciation of religious in- stitutions, and of a religious idealism, where ignorance, materialism, 84 Cf. Jost, ibid., pp. 84-88. The Synods at the time existing in Galicia were mere wheels of the governmental taxation machine. A worthier Synod of Galician Jews, in which over two hundred congregations participated, took place at Lemberg, in the year 1878, under the auspices of the " Shomer Israel " association. At that conference numerous religious and cultural problems of the Galician Jews were broached, and their present communal organization was devised. Unfortunately, the much-promising Synod was then killed by the opposition of the orthodox rabbis, under the leadership of R. Simon Schreiber, of Cracow. It now seems, however, to have been revived. A con- vention of the Galician congregations, represented by about two hundred dele- gates, was held recently (May 1-3, 1900) in Lemberg, at which the confronting problems of religion and of culture were discussed. (N. Samuely, in Voskhod, April 27, 1900; Jewish Chronicle, May 4, 1900.) 85 Most notable is Der Verein fur Cultur und Wisscnschaft des Judentums in Berlin, glowingly depicted by Heine in his eulogy of Ludwig Marcus (Ver- mischte Schriften, Vol. II). 86 Cf. Jost, loc. cit., p. 253, and Gesch. d. Indent, und seiner Sckten, III, p. 381 f. 87 Cf. Jost, Neuere Geschichte, p. 383. 102 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD superstition, and flat commonplaces had come to prevail ; it aimed, above all, at the reduction of the power of external formalism by an instillation of greater inwardness into religious life, and by an awakening of the historic sense and intelligence among the people. The Synod, in addition, was also to be a Zion as Dr. Lazarus has put it a distinguished place whither the delegates might pilgrim periodically and find an abode where after the troubles, the trials, the pettinesses and the petulancies of daily life they would feel again the bliss, the buoyancy, and the inspiration that flow from genuine spiritual association. 88 An account of the successes and the failures of the Synod cannot here be attempted ; but who will gain- say the important role played by it in the making of our latter-day Judaism ? It is a role parallel to the part of the Synods at all other crossways of Jewish history. IX. Whether my paper has made it apparent that the Synod has formed " the warp and a good part of the woof " of our religious history, it is not for me to judge. At any rate, we have, by simply following the course of events, discovered a Synod at every notable historic juncture. The Elders, the Great Synod, the Gerusia, the Synedrion of Jerusalem, the Synedrion at Yamnia and its success- ors, the Babylonian Synedria, the stately series of Medieval Synods covering five centuries at least^ the Synods of Lithuania and Poland, the Modern Synods their records, you may be sure, would make the best synopsis of the development of Judaism, not to men- tion their share in our secular history. What wonder, then, that this genuine Jewish idea, the importance of the Synod, should have swayed most strongly the man than whose name none shall shine more brilliantly in the annals of the American Jews? What won- der that our deeply lamented master, our sainted leader, should have championed in this country, with that energy and power of his which never shall cease to inspire, the founding of a permanent 88 Cf. Lazarus, Synodalreden in Treu und Frei, pp. 1-52, and 313-315; par- ticularly pp. 8, 10, 33, 44 ff. A summary of the work of the Synods may be found in the Y ear-Book of the C. C. A, R., loc. cit., pp. 100-17. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 103 Synod? It would be fascinating to dwell now now, in particular, that for the first time his beloved voice is unheard at the convention of the Conference on the enthusiasm, the power, the clairvoyance, with which Isaac M. Wise struggled for the unification of Israel in America, and for the founding of a Synod. 88 But clearly I dare not lend myself here to this fascinating pursuit. Suffice it to say, that Dr. Wise observed the unprecedented and unparalleled distinctive- ness of the position of the Jews in this country from what it ever had been at any other place. None saturated with the spirit of Jewish tradition but must admit that the environment called, to employ the phrase again, for a reinterpretation of the Torah. And by whom had such work always been accomplished? By Synods conventions of Zeqenim and Sopherim, Gedolim and Hakhamim, rabbis and laymen. Wise advocated the establishment of a similar Synod spoke on its behalf since the year I848, 80 wrote and fought. As early as 1855, on October 17, he had managed to convene an assembly at Cleveland, attended by both orthodox and reform dele- gates, to work out a plan for synodal organization a plan proposing to unite all the Jews of the country and to centralize the captaincy of all their national affairs: education, the charities, and communal work. 91 But not only was this plan still-born, but all its successors also. The Synod remained to his last day one of Wise's ideals, of which, however, portions have been realized through his indefati- gable energy. The several Rabbinical Conferences the Philadel- phia Conference of 1869, the Pittsburg Conference of 1885, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis you all know to have been the outcome of his propaganda, despite the fact that his spirit domi- nated not at all the first-mentioned, and only partly the second; while, on the other hand, had there been no Dr/ Wise, it is safe to say, there should have been no Union of American Hebrew Congre- gations. Both the rabbinical and the congregational unions are manifestations of the synodal idea they are two fragments of the ideal which Wise never ceased to nourish and which possibly yet awaits complete realization: the continuance of the Jewish religion 80 Cf. Wise, Address of Welcome, in the Y ear-Book referred to above, p. 14 f. 00 Cf. ibid., and Selected Writings of Isaac M. Wise, pp. 45-53. 91 Ibid., pp. 71-73- IO4 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD in the New World through the medium of that time-honored Jewish institution, the Synod. FROM DR. SILVERMAN'S MESSAGE, DETROIT, 1903. A SYNOD. In this connection I desire to remark that the lack of a central authority is not only felt with regard to general secular matters affecting Jewish interests but also with regard to ecclesiastical mat- ters that are of great moment. The autonomy of congregations is jealously guarded with the result that we have almost as many phases of Judaism as we have congregations. The Central Con- ference of American Rabbis has mitigated this evil to a great extent by bringing the rabbis together for discussion and concerted action on matters calling for unanimity. But there is no denying the fact, that much of the value of our deliberations and conclusions is lost because we lack the means of making them effective. The Con- ference has thus far been only a literary and deliberative body whose influence has only been suggestive and advisory. For many years we have felt this weakness which has been recognized by all leaders of our times and by the zealous rabbis of former genera- tions. Every great period of ancient Israel had its Sandhedrin or Synod. A history of these would form an outline of the develop- ment of Judaism. We feel the need of such an authoritative ecclesiastical body in Judaism to-day. Whilst the Conference endeavors to reach and often succeeds in obtaining unanimity, we have not the power to enforce our decisions. When a year ago* we reverted to this subject in our message (vide Year-Book, 1902, pp. 37 and 96), the Conference acted favorably thereon and agreed to the appointment of a Committee to consider the possibility and means of extending the scope and increasing the authority of the Conference. The Committee was appointed, but, owing to the death of its chairman, Dr. M. Mielziner, it has failed to act and has no report to offer. I have, therefore, undertaken to outline a tentative plan which I submit to your consideration. I have realized the necessity of the Conference as a body of rab- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 105 bis remaining intact and I propose that we create a joint meeting between the Conference and lay delegates from congregations. This joint assembly is to be called a Synod, and to it are to be re- ferred such conclusions arrived at by the Conference by three- fourth vote, and for whose execution it is necessary to have con- gregational authority. The lay delegates to the Synod should be limited to one for every 100 members of a congregation, but every congregation that has more than 50 and less than 100 bona fide members shall be entitled to one lay delegate. Rabbis of congre- gations can only become members of the Synod if they belong to the Conference. When a recommendation of the Conference has been endorsed by a three-fourth vote of the Synod, it shall be de- clared the law and practice. The Synod shall meet every two or three years. It is imperative that such a Synod be convened at as early a date as possible for the purpose of deciding upon the following matters on which the Conference has already acted : 1. Articles of Jewish Theology. 2. How to further Sabbath Observance. 3. Best Methods of Electing Rabbis. 4. Best Methods of Gaining the Unaffiliated. 5. Intermarriage. 6. Proselytism. 7. Cremation. 8. Uniformity in Synagogue Music and Ritual. 9. Better Observance of the Festivals and Holy Days. 10. Uniform System of Religious Instruction. DR. JACOB VOORSANGER. The great need of our people at the present time is that ctf a strong and correct definition in what, aside from official service, charity and the natural manifestations of virtuous conduct, Judaism really con- sists. To punctuate the necessity for such a definition we need not travel beyond the environments of this great Sabbath question. Our people generally are adversely inclined to an official change of the day. Assuming for a moment that such a change, which is not and cannot be contemplated, would conduce to their spiritual content- io6 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD ment and the strengthening of religious ties, under what authority could each Jew sanction for himself so grave and radical a depar- ture? To what precedent may he appeal? By what dicta will his proceeding be justified and protected? No individual rabbi can sanction the change. No Jewish congregation can presume to invest its Sunday service with the character of a Sabbath celebration. The question at issue eminently demonstrates the great need of our American congregations, namely, an authority to which all questions of discipline and religious practice may be deferred; an authority, democratic enough to be considered representative of the people and yet strong enough to be able to popularize and insure acceptance of its decrees and decisions. It is respectfully submitted that the chaotic state of our ritual practice and discipline will not materially change until such an authority has been properly defined. No reli- gious organization, if we consult the experience of history, can permanently flourish without presenting its constitutional principles in a permanent and concrete form. American Judaism has no such permanent form at the present time ; and until it has, the freedom with which many questions are interpreted, because it lacks the pro- tecting voice of a collective authority, naturally appears as unwar- ranted and unsanctified. Under present conditions no rabbi has individually any authority. No congregation can legislate upon any question affecting the vital principles of Judaism as they are mani- fested in the life of individuals or communal bodies. And yet, here are questions which affect us collectively : and even this Conference, composed of the exponents of Jewish principles and the learned guardians of the tradition, has no power to legislate upon problems upon which much of the future of American Judaism seems to depend, or actually does depend. Is it then possible to create an authority that could competently treat every question by the success- ful solution of which the spiritual unity of American Judaism can be promoted? In answer to this last question the following scheme of organiza- tion is respectfully submitted for the consideration of the commission and the Conference : i. State Conferences to be organized, to be composed of the rabbi and president of each congregation within the State and three VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 107 delegates at large from each congregation. Such State Conference will have opportunity for treating and discussing all matters pertain- ing to local and communal administration. 2. At a certain time during each year each State Conference shall elect five delegates, composed of two rabbis and three laymen, to a National Conference which, according to the present number of States and Territories, would at the present time count two hundred and twenty-five delegates, composed of three-fifths laity and two- fifths clergy. This National Conference, or whatever its designation may be hereafter, shall immediately upon its convocation and organi- zation divide into two bodies, one to be known as the Central Con- ference of American Rabbis, the other representing the Union of American Hebrew Congregations. The first body shall discuss and pass upon all matters pertaining to religion and discipline, the second shall concern itself with all matters pertaining to education and administration; but both bodies shall submit their conclusions to a ratifying discussion and vote of the joint organization. 3. This National Conference shall elect an Executive Council of fifteen, composed of nine laymen and six rabbis, which shall repre- sent it during adjournment and constitute the actual center of all religious and administrative unity of American Jewish Congrega- tions. 4. The National Conference, when organized, shall invite all national Jewish organizations of whatever description to affiliate and meet concurrently with it, so that, without disturbing the auton- omy of any one of them, they may all report to one central agency, and so promote the national, unity of Jewish communal life. 5. The appointment of a committee of five to carry this plan into effect is herewith requested. [Report of Sabbath Commission, Year Book, C. C. A. R., Vol. XIII, pp. 153 ff. | FROM DR. M. MARGOLIS' PAPER ON "THE THEOLOGICAL ASPECT OF REFORMED JUDAISM," DETROIT, 1903. As a member of this body, I move I. That this Conference, before it adjourns, appoint a committee charged with preparing the Creed of Reformed Judaism, which work shall consist of a brief text and an exhaustive historical and io8 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD theological commentary in language accessible to the educated classes, using, if it so choose, the draft herein presented as a basis. 2. That the Committee report in manuscript to the Conference meeting next year. 3. That the Conference, after adopting the work prepared by the committee, or a similar work, lay the Creed before a Synod to be convened in 1905, for confirmation. 4. That the Synod then to be convened consist of one-fifth of the members of this body duly elected in the Conference, and of an equal number of laymen elected by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and that two-thirds of the membership of the Synod constitute a majority of votes. 5. That the presiding officer of the Synod be a member of the Conference. 6. That the Synod promulgate the Creed presented to it by the Conference as the CREED OF THE REFORMED JEWISH CHURCH OF AMERICA, and that the Synod act upon other matters only when presented to it by the Conference, but not of its own initiative. 7. That the Synod, constituted and elected in the same manner as for its first convention, meet hereafter every five years and act on matters laid before it by the Conference, and that the quinquen- nial 'conventions be particularly charged with the revision of the Creed if such revision is recommended by the Conference. 8. That the Conference have a standing committee on Creed and Doctrinal Matters. FROM MESSAGE OF DR. JOS. KRAUSKOPF, PRESIDENT OF CENTRAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN RABBIS, TO THE FIFTEENTH ANNUAL CONVENTION, LOUISVILLE, KY., JUNE 27, 1904. I strongly recommend that at this session the Conference enter seriously upon the formation of a Synod. Our late lamented leader and founder, Dr. Wise, whose comprehensive grasp of American Jewish problems is -a marvel to every student of American Jewish history, and whose prevision of events calls forth to-day the admiration of even one-time foes, realized the necessity for a synod more than a quarter of a century ago, if not earlier, and VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 109 it was mainly in its interest that he organized this Conference. With the changes of time, old forms and institutions lose their one-time accepted binding authority. New ones arise to take their place, and the old never having been authoritatively discarded or the new authoritatively accepted, the Rabbi often finds himself in a quandary. Time and again, he is thrown upon his own resources for decision, and his conclusions frequently conflict with the prefer- ences of others, in some instances being diametrically opposite to those of Rabbis, even of his own school. Much of the contention and embarrassment arising from so chaotic a state of affairs could be obviated by synodal decision. Instances might be cited to sub- stantiate this statement, the most familiar one perhaps being the action taken by this body some years ago with regard to the rite of admission of Non-Jews into the Jewish covenant. There are a score of questions of greater or less importance that require synodal de- cision to relieve the Rabbi of considerable perplexity and the Jewish community in general of much annoyance. To cite only one case, there is the question as to what constitutes conversion to Judaism on the part of a Non- Jewish woman. A case in point came before the court in Philadelphia but a few days past, and is worthy of being briefly quoted: A certain sum of money was left by will to a son on the condition that he marry a Jewess. He married a lady of Non- Jewish birth, but who embraced Judaism prior to her entering into the marital state. The son's right to a share of the money was denied on the ground that he had married a Non-Jewess, the oppos- ing attorney claiming in open court that he could not conceive " how a Jew could be made out of a Gentile." Then there is the vexing question of the burial of Non-Jews in Jewish cemeteries. Jews and Jewesses have married outside of the faith, and in all proba- bility will continue to do so, without the Non- Jewish party entering the Jewish faith. Frequently burial lots are purchased by the Jew- ish party of such union. In case of the death of a child of such an alliance or that of the Non-Jewish spouse, burial is by many Jewish cemeteries denied on the ground that the right of burial within the cemetery is to be granted to Jews only. Serious difficulties ensue, and frequently appeal is made to the courts. The Rabbi's decision is asked, but, even when given, it can only be that of an individual no VIEWS ON THE SYNOD and can therefore have but little weight. Like unto these, many other questions arise that need synodal action. We have shrunk from the word synod as if it were some secret foe of Israel, and by shrinking from it we have but exposed ourselves to real and open foes. What we really shrink from is the fear lest we create for ourselves a Vatican, and voluntarily place ourselves under the tyranny of ecclesiastical bondage. But that, as I have already endeavored to point out, is an impossibility in Israel. Enough for us to have decisions rendered on ritual or liturgical or vital religious questions, after mature study and deliberation by an authoritative body such as this, merely for guidance, to be fol- lowed or not, in accordance with the independent judgment of each individual or community. And such quasi authoritative conclusions could possibly be reached in accord with a plan something like this : A standing committee of seven, designated as the Synodal Committee, to be elected by the Executive Board. Synodal questions are to be assigned to that committee, at least a year or two before their presentment, that they may be thoroughly considered from the standpoint of Jewish law, literature, decision and opinion. After having been thus considered by the Synodal Committee, the questions are to be submitted to the Conference together with a digest of the material on the subject. For the discussion of synodal questions the Conference is to be divided so that it shall comprise an upper and a lower house. The upper house is to be composed of such Rabbis as have been actively in the ministry at least fifteen years, those who have ministered less than that period to serve as members of the lower house. Synodal questions are to be discussed independently in each house, and the conclusions arrived at to be presented before the entire Conference, for discussion and ultimate decision. The younger members will then not be awed by the older nor the older carried away by the impetuosity of the younger, each profiting from the other, as the Rabbis taught, p&Vtip D*OBp "idim }p D^Dp 1 ? DWDG?a D^njnp inn njj>K This may be one method, there may be other and better ones. The best will undoubtedly be given us by our colleague, Dr. Enelow, "Happy the generation in which the old listen to the young, and happier still the generation in which the young listen to the old." VIEWS ON THE SYNOD in who has given the subject much study and research, more espe- cially within the past year. We trust that he will present a report at this session and that you will give it the attention it merits. It is true, mere mention of the creation of a synod will give rise to criti- cism and will probably call forth attack in quarters where innovation generally meets with hostile reception. Such has been the fate of every wholesome innovation during the past fifty years. Such was the fate of the introduction of a service in the vernacular, of the family-pew, of the organ, the Union Prayer-Book, the establishment of the Hebrew Union College, and what not. As reformers, ours is the duty to lead. Let those attack who will, in due time they will admire and follow. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SYNOD, LOUISVILLE, 1904. To the President and the Members of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Louisville. "A magnificent historical phenomenon," Geiger has called Judaism eine grossartige weltgeschichtliche Erscheinung. We cannot ignore the fact that Judaism is an historical religion, with all its institutions and beliefs rooted in the past, and having gone through a long process of change and adaption. It were unwise and unworthy to undervalue the importance of this historicalness. To one who understands the secret of human institu- tions, and what constitutes the source of their influence and efficiency, the historical character of Judaism will at once appear to be its chief beauty and bulwark of strength. It is well, therefore, in the consideration of our imme- diate problems, to appraise them from the historical standpoint, and when we suggest a solution, nothing can stead us more than the certitude that our proposal tallies with the spirit of Judaism in the past. That we call true conservatism, not the insensate, superstitious sanctification of lifeless cere- monies and exploded creeds the magnification of mummies but the development and preservation of our faith in accord with the spirit of the past, and an honest adaptation of its time-honored institutions to the needs and duties of the present. The intelligent Reform Jew should feel this obligation more- deeply than his Orthodox brother. We have no quarrel with Orthodoxy; we have none with any religious organization. As far as inward religion is con- cerned (which is the only practical religion), it is essentially alike whatever its outward form. " God fulfils Himself in many ways." But when it comes to a philosophic or theoretic discussion of our religious problems and insti- tutions, there is a wide gulf between Orthodoxy and Reform. It is a differ- ence of method. Orthodoxy is guided by sentimental, unreasoning respect 112 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD for things as they are, and in its historic valuations exercises a certain arbi- trariness of judgment. Reform, on the other hand, is pledged without preju- dice to the historic method, looks upon the whole of Jewish history as an evolutional process, and in the examination of the contents of Judaism seeks to ascertain the fundamentals, and to trace the growth and the decay of doctrines, as well as the meaning and the life of ecclesiastic institutions. Wholeness of conception, largeness of interpretation, forms the excellence of Reform Judaism. The spirit of things, whether ideas or institutions, is its proper study. Lo bisekhuth aboth hu ba ella bizekhuth ha-tora " the messianic redemption will not come by the merit of the Fathers but by the merit of the Tora." Not by inactive reliance on our past, and babbling about our traditions, but by absorption and development of the spirit of Judaism, shall we work out and fulfil our mission. For this reason, it is our paramount duty in discussing the advisability of an American Jewish Synod, to ascertain what Jewish history has to say on the subject. The Chairman of this Committee at the Buffalo Conference had the honor of presenting a paper on the Jewish Synod. It was of a purely historical nature. It did not enter into a discussion of the feasibility of the institu- tion at present. Indeed, it disclaimed any desire to do so. The author at the time was anxious in a dispassionate way to present the results of an historic inquiry. And this is what his study demonstrated: (1) The Synod is a typical Jewish institution, found at every critical juncture of Israel's history from the time of Moses down. (2) Though the Synod in Israel has not formed a continuous institution, suffering interruption and discontinuance again and again, it is an autoch- thonic institution, and has been resuscitated and reorganized at different periods according to the needs of time and place. (3) The Synod is found especially at the crossways of history, at periods of change and transition; wherever there is need of clarification and refor- mation in the religious life, and wherever new conditions tend to create confusion and anarchy without the intercession and leadership of a central council. On such occasions, the Synod has served as clearing-house of ideas, and secured order and definiteness of purpose and policy where otherwise chaos would have ensued. (4) The Jewish Synod has always comprised representatives from the Laity and the Scholars the specially trained theologians and the community at large. This combined representation has differentiated the Synods from mere rabbinic conferences. (5) The Synods, particularly in Europe, concerned themselves almost ex- clusively with the regulation of Jewish practice, and the furtherance and surveillance of communal affairs. Questions of doctrine it has always been Jewish custom to leave to the authoritative decision of prominent rabbis. Hence, the copious rabbinic literature of the middle age. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 113 (6) The Synod in Israel never attempted to force its decrees or enact- ments on any community not .represented at its convention. As for those represented, they, by the very act of participation, pledged themselves mor- ally to the support of the Tekanoth, which in all instances they did. Some- times communities and rabbis not represented were solicited for their approval of the Tekanoth adopted at a certain Synod, the securing of which rendered the new signatories amenable to their observance. Within the communities so obligated, every individual was held accountable. Infringement of the Tekanoth was threatened with the ban. Now the question presents itself: Is there anything of so radical, critical a character going on in American Judaism as to suggest or necessitate the creation of an American Jewish Synod? Surely, our religious life is under- going, and for several decades has been undergoing, a very critical transmu- tation. Certainly as critical as the change which produced a Synedrion at Yamnia and in Babylon, and which necessitated the repeated convocation of Synods in medieval Germany and France and Spain, and gave birth to the Polish Synods. Our problems may not be of the same character as those that confronted the Synods just named, seeing that our political and social status has changed completely and that the latter entered very largely into the Synodal programs; but they are none the less vital and none the less loudly call for proper solution. It is the German Synods of the last century, the Synods of Leipsic and Augsburg (1869 and 1871) that had to deal with questions "most closely resembling those confronting us. Those questions hardly need to be re- stated; every careful observer knows them. It is simply that we are living in a condition of uncertainty. Some call it anarchy. The better and truer way of stating it, is to say that we are passing through a period of transition. At such a period it is natural that the need of a central organization for the regulation (as far as possible) of our religious life, for the coherent presen- tation of our purpose in the world, and for the supervision of our larger communal affairs should be expressed on all hands. It is significant that at the last Convention of the Central Conference of American Rabbis the plea for a central organization should have come from three different sources the President of the Conference, the Chairman of the Sabbath Commission, and the author of the learned paper on the Theology of Reformed Judaism. It is felt by these gentlemen, and a great many others concur with them, that what American Judaism needs most for its self-clarification, for the crystallization of its ideas, for the advancement of its mission, and for the unification of its adherents, is a central institution, a national council or Synod. It is well to remember that this cry is not of yesterday, or the day before. Indeed, the first man to point out the desirability of a Synod in this country was Dr. Wise, of blessed memory. It was he, who was not only scholar but also far-sighted leader, that recognized the essentiality of a Synod for a sure and steady development of Judaism in this free land. The Cleveland Con- H4 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD ference of 1855 admittedly was but a stepping-stone to a Synod. Its plat- form confessed itself as such. "The Conference of the rabbis and congre- gational delegates, assembled in Cleveland, actuated by the earnest desire to preserve the union of Israel and its religion by mutual understanding and union, and convinced that the organization of a Synod is the most efficient means to attain this sacred aim, whose legality and utility is taught in the Bible, Talmud, and history, consider it their duty to convene a Synod and call upon the American Jewish Congregations in an extra circular to send their ministers and delegates to the said Synod." Thus ran the declaration. That the times were not ripe and circumstances inauspicious for the successful consummation of the project, we all know. We know what a time of dissension, what an age of animosities that was. Not out of such could the Synod come. The failure of the Synod project led* to the advocacy and the eventual formation of the two separate organizations American Judaism now pos- sesses, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations (1873) and the Cen- tral Conference of American Rabbis (1889). The establishment of these distinct associations really meant the subdivision of the hypothetical Synod. Suppose the two bodies to act together on any subject of vital concern, and you would have a Synod in the historic sense of the term. None will deny, however, that as separate institutions both have accomplished incalculable good the Union by way of solidifying the congregational life of American Jews, and fostering educational movements ; the Conference in bringing about harmony and unity among the rabbis of the country, raising the dignity of the Jewish ministry, clarifying several important points of modern Jewish doctrine, simplifying and unifying our order of worship, and in diverse other ways securing the welfare and stimulating and directing the energies of our religion. The cry at present, it would seem, is for concerted action. The Union is in its nature an organization of laymen, while the Conference is one of theologians; at least, that is what the community at large thinks. There is the most accidental, if any, sort of cooperation between the two bodies. This in spite of the fact that both are devoted to the same cause ultimately, namely, the practical benefiting and advancement of American Judaism. For, while it is true that the Conference occasionally engages in purely aca- demic discussions, and listens to scientific papers, none will deny that these latter, as far as the Conference is concerned, are but a means to an end. Lo ha-Midrash iqqar ella ha-Maase. The Conference is not a summer school of theology. Its purpose is practical. While, on the other hand, the Union, in its endeavors to solve our communal problems and to serve our sacred cause, is rather anxious, one would judge, to act in accord with the spirit of enlightened Judaism as revealed by thorough study and interpreted by expert opinion. Naught would seem more natural, therefore, than that such cooperation should be brought about. Not only would it mean the consummation of the VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 115 original plan of the founder, but it would give American Israel that part of it we represent a central organization of the character Jewish Synods have ever possessed. There seems to exist a great deal of dread of the Synod. The word is ominous, unpopular. Much of this prevalent apprehension must be set down as superstition. It is certainly groundless. Synod means council, and, as indicated above, it has again and again existed in Israel. It has never done any harm. History tells us nothing to that effect. One cannot even cite instances where Jewish Synods had acted as heresy-hunters or theologic policemen. All these fears and phrases are imported. Because such things have happened, and do happen, in the Synods of other faiths, some imagine that heresy-hunting and the manufacture of ironclad creeds are part and parcel of such an institution. But such apprehensions are set at naught by the entire history of the Jewish Synods, which, as a rule, were not tribunals of judgment or formulators of faith, but rather organs of communal activity and progress. This is not to say that a modern Synod might not, if it deemed it advisable to do so, issue an authorized statement as to the nature of Judaism, and the doctrines of its belief. We must, again, bear in mind that the needs and tasks of Israel have changed from age to age, and if to formulate our faith, or to restate our doctrines, be our chief need to-day, both for the sake of clearing up the minds of our own brethren and for the enlightenment and persuasion of the world, there would be no reason why a Synod should not assume that high responsibility, and it would be a shame to play the ostrich and hide our heads in the sands of indifference. Nor would the issuance of such a statement by the Synod, embodying the best thought of the best men we could marshal, involve any one differing from it in the awfully and solemnly prognosticated calamity of excommunication. The Synod would depend for its triumphs upon the compulsive and conquering power of Truth, and the measure of Truth represented by it would be the guarantee of its success. Spiritual despotism and ecclesiastic coercion would lie outside its province. It must be noted, moreover, that the medieval ban which fills some of us with ghastly fear, was really an outgrowth of the social and political position of the Jews and was not employed, primarily like excommunication in other churches, as a weapon against heretics. The medieval Jews formed a separate community wherever they lived, and had a judicial system of their own which governed all their internal relations. It was necessary that they should have a special punitory system to give effect to their courts, and it is of this latter that the ban constituted a part. It was the medieval Jewish way of segre- gating an offender, and corresponded in purpose to modern incarceration. With the collapse of the Ghetto and its courts of justice, the ban also was doomed. All efforts to endamage the synodal idea by appeals to the modern dread and disapproval of excommunication lack historical support, which even the cases of Uriel Acosta and Spinoza cannot furnish. u6 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD Ofttimes one hears remarks by men posing as representatives of the older German Reform movement, posing as the only true-blue, true-bred Reform rabbis, as if the Synod idea were a purely American invention, a vagary of the young dreamers of this Republic, an aberrancy of the young decadents. No Synod, they boast, as long as there are German-bred rabbis among us ! None would say a word of detraction concerning the German masters and pioneers of Reform Judaism none that has drunk of their waters and marveled at their wisdom. But let us not falsify them! The fact is that the need of a modern Jewish Synod, for the careful regulation of our transforming religious life, was first perceived and eloquently advocated in Germany. It was there that the communal conscience, in days when it was still quick to the requirements and sanctity of Judaism, clamored for a Synod, and made every innovation in the polity and practice of individual congregations subject to the ultimate approval of a general council. It was in Germany that the two Synods Reform Judaism has ever had were held, the Synods of Leipsic and Augsburg, at both of which that illustrious philoso- pher and idealist, that loyal and eloquent Jew, Professor Lazarus, presided, with Abraham Geiger, the Ezra of Reform Judaism, as Vice-President. That the Synod was discontinued in Germany proves nothing against its character and does not write failure across its name for all time to come. For even so we know that the rabbinical conferences did not last in Ger- many, and yet the Central Conference of American Rabbis has shown the feasibility and fruitfulness of such an institution. It does not follow from the fate of the German Synods that a similar American institution would be short-lived. Neither is the utility of a Synod disproved by the fact that this or that enactment of any previous Synod a generation afterward may have been ignored or overlooked, and the discussion thereof reopened. The Jewish Synod has never claimed finality for its opinions, has never legislated for all times, and history shows that our Synods again and again have altered or amended or reaffirmed the enactments of their predecessors. This has saved the Jewish Synod from ecclesiastic despotism and the presumption of infallibility, and has preserved for it the character of a deliberative and advisory institution, adaptable to the times, and expressive at the several periods and in different countries of the communal conscience and needs of Israel. Some, however, rebel against the synodal institution on the ground that it may narrow or confine Judaism. It is affirmed that Judaism is broad beyond measure, that it is a philosophy, an ethical principle, a mission, and such like, and that it cannot be promoted by the pronouncements of Synods. But wo must remember that whatever be the foundation and the goal of Judaism, be it purely philosophical or ethical or anything else, it is presented by us to the world as a religion. And a religion cannot thrive on the mere abstract concepts of a few highly trained philosophic minds, or the remote visions of idealists. We must bear in mind that the religion the Prophets taught was not VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 117 uttered as mere abstract speculation or philosophic idealism, but had a definite social setting and political background, and was founded on a theology the chief elements of which were commonly accepted. Any student of the Bible, with critical insight, can derive from the messages of the Prophets their theologic creed, which, it may be stated in general, had its foundation in national history, even though in the long run it outgrew the national frame. It is idle to deny, and foolish to forget, that in biblical times the Nation jvas the visible centre, the soul of Israel's religion, and that the Prophets sought to make the national institutions the vehicle of their religious ideas. Similarly, it cannot be gainsaid that throughout the subsequent history of Israel the national sentiment formed not only the hope, but also the centre of Jewish life. Subconsciously there lurked in every Jewish heart the con- viction that somewhere in the distant future the miraculously reestablished Jewish State would form the centre of Judaism. That fundamental concept was never absent; it was the mainspring of the Jewish creed; and without direct or indirect reference to it no Jewish philosophy was written. This is to say, that if the Prophets in biblical times and the philosophers of the middle age did not advocate the establishment of any specific ecclesiastic institution, it was not because they held that Judaism was merely an intel- lectual and spiritual theory, and could, nay must, do without any visible organization, but rather because with them the organization behind Judaism was the Nation either real or imaginary. This, of course, does not mean that their religious outlook was narrowly national ; for the religion of the Prophets stood for the broadest universalism. But the Nation was looked on as the centre from which the religion was to issue into the world, its practical organization, its instrument of work. It is only Reform Judaism that has consciously and unequivocally cut loose from the National conception of Israel's destiny. Aforetime this non- nationalist idea of Judaism may have existed in germ, but Reform Judaism has brought it into full efflorescence. Israel, we maintain, is a Church, in the broad sense of the term; in the sense that was uppermost in Ezra's mind after the Return, and in the minds of the Pharisaic masters, and of the ethical teachers of the middle age, only without all those national appendages which clung to their ideas. We realize that a religion can work best, and on a broader scale, without wearing a national uniform. We realize that a spir- itual community is higher and more lasting than a political state. And a spiritual community is a Church. The stronger, the larger, and the better organized such a church is, the better the chances of victory for the religion it incarnates and seeks to advance. On this subject some observations of Professor Toy may be helpful. "The conquering religion," he says in his famous book, "Judaism and Christianity," "offers what is needed in the way of precision and organiza- tion. It will possess not only a general fundamental religious idea, but also the framework necessary to give it popular acceptation. A simple ethical- religious conception, however broad and pure, is usually neither intelligible n8 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD nor acceptable to the masses of men; they demand in addition a drapery of processes and forms, a certain quantity of machinery, a routine by which life may be ordered. There is no instance on record of wide popular acceptance of a religious system whose essence was merely a principle of the inward life; there is no reason to suppose that a reformer who should confine him- self to this subjective ethical-religious sphere would be successful unless his work were supplemented ... A conquering religion must be a church if it is to have a visible organized victory." It is certainly true that Reform Judaism has these many decades been protesting that Israel has naught save a religious mission. If so, it is our duty to provide ourselves with all those institutions and instruments which are indispensable to the success of a religion. It has become impossible to continue to halt between the two opinions : Is Israel a Nation or a Church ? Not alone for the spread of Judaism in the world, but also for the sake of the continued loyalty of those born within Israel's household, we must come to clear decisions, and have a crystallization of ideas. Otherwise, we shall remain, like the old man in the Talmudic story, kereah mikkan wekereah mikkan, "bald from here and bald from there." The fact is that the Synod has shown its usefulness and necessitousness as a communal institution, not as supervisor or dictator of the individual con- science, not as instructor of individual disciples, but rather as upbuilder and guardian of the larger work of Israel. According to the needs of the age its interests have changed, and must change ; but it must be the centre of the Jewish community. The truth is that no matter how spiritual a program you may have before you, you must have institutions through which to work it out. " Whoever appoints a place for his Tora, his enemies shall fall under him," R. Simeon b. Yohai is reported to have said: Kol ha-qobea maqom letoratho oyebhaw nophelin tahtaw. The Synod is designated for the ad- vancement of Israel's cause, of his corporate welfare. Dr. Schreiner has well said in his noteworthy book ("Die jiingsten Urteile") : "The originally non-Jewish concepts which have crept into Judaism reached permanent im- portance only when they were adopted into Judaism by prominent teachers of the Synagogue. And (this is true of the entire history of Judaism) Judaism through its institutions introduces every individual right into the heart of the historical life of the Jewish community." It is in this sense, we take it, that Dr. Wise has written of the conference which was to pave the way for a Synod. " We convened the Conference in Cleveland to bring life into all congregations, so that the one may not remain stagnant while the others, reforming head over heels, break with the history of our people." We can well imagine that had there been a Synod in American Israel these fifty years, an institution which conscientiously and cautiously would have led our congregations not by coercion but by united thought and counsel through the period of transformation, our reforms would not have come so thick and threefold; but think, on the other hand, how much confusion and laxity and egoistic perversion we might have been spared ! Haste is VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 119 waste. Israel is not atomistic Congregationalism. It is not only a collection of separate synagogues, but a community; there is such a ttfing as Keneseth Yisrael, we believe, with a communal mission. And such a community ought to have a central organ of work and influence, call it by whatever name you choose. "The Synod," Dr. Lazarus said at Augsburg, "must care not only for the daily bread of the petty burning questions, but for the real and genuine growth of the ideas in Judaism, those that shall sprout in the future." The Synod must be the Zion of Judaism, particularly of Judaism detached from political Zionism. It must be the heart of the Jewish community. We believe that the Conference, which has hitherto successfully accom- plished difficult tasks, should now address itself to the formation of such a central body as has been indicated. There has been ample evidence of late years that members of the Conference, some if not all, believe the times ripe for this important step. At the last convention, as has been said, the same suggestion came from three sources. In other quarters, also, the question of the establishment of a central organization has been mooted. There is no reason why to such a central body the time-honored name Synod should not be given, a name fraught with meaning in Jewish history, despite the fact that it is the style now to hold it up as a bogey. It is not likely, of course, that the work of a Jewish Synod in America would reproduce or parallel the work of any previous Synod in the Old World. Our conditions of life have changed, and so have our tasks. But to any one deeply interested in the purposes and the spiritual program of Judaism it must be plain how many duties would and could fall within the scope of such a council, and how much good it might effect. The propaganda of Judaism, the spread of it among Jews and non-Jews, the securing of its future, as well as its support in the present such would be the larger items on the program. And such work can, and ought to, be done by a representative body of Jews, representing both the laity and the ministry, the scholars and the men of affairs a democratic institution such as shall befit the spirit of our country and our religion. Neither shall such an institution be hurt by having the hated word eccle- siasticism flung at it. For it will not be guilty it will make it its business not to be guilty of any ecclesiasticism in the bad sense: of any heresy- hunting, creed-clubbing, intellectual despotism, or the monopoly of heaven. On the other hand, it will be an ecclesiastic institution in the proper sense, representing the Church of Israel Keneseth Yisrael thus emphasizing the true character and mission of the denationalized Jew and doing all in its power to accomplish his mission in the world. The world lives by its insti- tutions. Influences are spread through them. The Jew needs a central insti- tution. If Israel is a Nation, it must be Zion. If Israel is a Church, it must be a Synod. We have no patience with those who maintain that Israel is neither Nation nor Church, but an indefinable something. Of course, inde- finable somethings need no representative institutions; but neither can they thrive and win the world. We repeat, the Conference should address itself to this task of forming a I2O VIEWS ON THE SYNOD central administrative body for American Judaism. This is as much as we can do for ouf religion. An ecumenical Synod is out of the question at present, though there is no reason why that should be so forever. Lo alekha ha-Melakha ligemor welo ata bhen horin lehibatel mimmena. The start must be made somewhere. And if it be true, as a great many believe, that the future of Judaism lies in America, then a strong central institution in this country must prove of ever growing importance to the cause of our ancestral religion. Nor does it seem possible to deny that the form of Judaism to which the Jew in America will continue to gravitate is Reform Judaism, no matter how hard our Tories and Rip Van Winkles may try to resuscitate the things that are dead and with the magic wand of Romance, and argumenta- tive conjuration, seek to revive deceased ceremonies and institutions long interred. With America's assumption of the hegemony in Israel shall grow the importance of Reform Judaism and its central organization. And for the founding of such an institution the times were never so auspicious. We have a sufficient sense of unity developed among the rabbis, and a large number of earnest devotees of the cause; and likewise, there is a considerable contingent of laymen in our congregations who are enlightened enough, and very enthusiastic, to help further and upbuild the holy work of Israel. The following plan of organization is therefore suggested: (1) The Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Union of Ameri- can Hebrew Congregations shall conjointly form the American Jewish Synod. (2) Neither of the constituent bodies of the American Jewish Synod shall by this act of confederation lose its identity or discontinue its periodic con- ventions and regular activity. (3) The Synod shall consist of one-fifth of the members of the Conference and an equal number of laymen from the Union, all duly elected. Two-thirds of the membership of the Synod shall constitute a majority of votes. (4) The Synod shall meet every five years for the consideration of ques- tions submitted to it by either the Conference or the Union. (5) The Synod shall have an executive board of at least ten men, consist- ing of the President, who shall be a member of the Conference, and five members from the Conference and four members from the Union. The general task of the Synod may be summed up in one of the paragraphs framed by the Synod of Augsburg : "The Synod shall aim to be an organ of the development (now taking place). Through it the convictions and aspirations that animate modern Judaism shall find definite expression. With a clear purpose it shall work to the end that the transformation for many decades striven after in Juda- ism shall be guided as far as possible by an harmonious spirit and be led to a successful consummation with the utmost possible regard for the needs of all our coreligionists. It shall guard the ties of union now encircling our fellows in religion against loosening, and according to its powers advance our common, higher interests in life and learning." VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 121 And again: "The Synod arrogates for its decisions no other authority save that which springs from the power of truth, of holy zeal, and strong conviction; but it is aware that this force, which is the only kind to be exercised in the realm of religion, is irresistible, and will, in the long run, despite difficulties and obstacles, gain the victory." It may be well to conclude with the remark of Mr. Israel Abrahams, the eminent scholar, anent the suggestion of the President of the Central Con- ference of American Rabbis at last year's convention : " This is an important proposal," Mr. Abrahams says concerning the Synod, " and one that otfght to be fruitful of much good. We badly need, everywhere in Judaism, that joint lay and clerical authority which alone can win acceptance. The problems of to-day can only be solved by the combined wisdom and experience of the men of affairs and the men of books. To lay down decisions as to what is or is not permissible under modern conditions of Jewish life this is a thor- oughly desirable purpose which a Synod might serve." May the Central Conference of American Rabbis be granted the wisdom and power to father such an institution! Respectfully submitted, H. G. ENELOW, Chairman. MAJORITY AND MINORITY REPORTS ON SYNOD QUESTION, LOUISVILLE, 1904. MAJORITY REPORT. Ad. I. It is becoming more and more apparent that a central religious organi- zation is needed in American Israel. Questions of religious, ethical and com- munal import are arising constantly which should be considered and pro- nounced upon by such a body. A synod consisting of rabbis and of delegates from the people is a historic and traditional institution in Israel. We there- fore endorse the recommendation of the President referring to this need. Such synod shall not be an ecclesiastical court with power to dictate to the individual conscience, to restrict or interfere in any wise with freedom of either belief or conduct. The purpose of such a synod, in our judgment, is to guide by a consensus of academic and practical wisdom and thereby educate Jewish public opinion. We recommend that a pamphlet be prepared by the Executive Committee containing the paper on Synod read by Dr. Enelow at Buffalo, the sugges- tions contained in the messages of Presidents Silverman and Krauskopf at Detroit and Louisville, the suggestions made in the report of the Sabbath Commission presented at the Detroit Conference, the remarks in Dr. Mar- golis' paper on "Theological Aspects of Reformed Judaism," the report of the Committee on Synod submitted at Louisville, Dr. Felsenthal's paper on " Some Jewish Questions," the majority and minority reports on recommenda- tion No. i of President Krauskopfs message, together with such other expla- 122 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD natory material as the Committee shall deem necessary; five thousand copies of the same shall be printed and distributed so as to bring the matter before the Jewish people of this country and thus enable them to form an intelligent judgment on the subject. We recommend that the Executive Committee of the Conference take the necessary steps preparatory to the convening of a preliminary meeting to effect the organization of a synod in conformity with these principles. DAVID PHILIPSON. MAX HELLER. JOSEPH STOLZ. MAX MARGOLIS. MAURICE H. HARRIS. MINORITY REPORT. There are certain parts in the report in regard to which we disagree from the majority, and to which we cannot subscribe.* Foremost among these parts is the proposition to create a central institution to be called "a synod." There is no necessity of pursuing such centralizing tendencies in American Israel. If, for practical purposes, and only for practical purposes we mean, for such purposes which concern the welfare of Israel in general, conjoint action becomes necessary, then let conferences ad hoc be called. But a stand- ing central synod is, we repeat, unnecessary. Furthermore, the synod idea, in its very kernel, is a dangerous one. Insignificant as at present the idea may appear, and innocent as it may look to the furtive observer, yet, if we examine the matter more closely, we must conclude that there is poison in that seed, and this poison may spread out and produce in coming times ills and dangers to American Israel not yet dreamt of. To the words, " a synod for American Israel," a very bad odor has become attached during the last fifty years. While in other parts of the world and at other times in history the word synod may have had an innocent meaning, in America it embodies the idea of being a central power to regulate not merely outward practical measures for the benefit of the American portion of the Jewish people but it has, since 1855, when the so-called Cleveland platform was constructed, and ever since days prior to 1855, received the sense of being an institution by which the religious opinions and the religious practices of congregations, their members and their officers shall be governed and guided. A hasty glance upon the Cleveland platform will show that great dangers were there in an embryonic state in that platform. Furthermore, do we not remember that at later times, again and again, even within the last few years, endeavors have been made, and the demand has been accentuated, to publish a " Union Catechism," to formulate a crystallized creed, to bring about a uni- formed American Israel in matters spiritual and exclusively religious, in matters which should forever be left to the individual ? It is possible, yea, it is likely, that at present the advocates of a formation VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 123 of a synod for the Jews in America have not the remotest idea of thereby creating a vehicle for the suppression of free thought and for creating obstacles hindering free organic development of thoughts and endeavors within Israel; and yet in future times the intended central power may easily degenerate and may become truly dangerous. It may enslave the minds, may cripple the free mental activities, it may diminish or weaken the possibilities for sound and true progress. It is wise to oppose bad movements in their very beginnings. Principiis obsta! is a wise saying, which has come down to us from olden times. Kill off bad propositions when they are still in an embryonic state. After such propositions have once been adopted, and after they have grown somewhat, it may be a difficult task to kill them and to exterminate them as they deserve. Therefore, kill them in the very beginning! Burn them in a very heated furnace! Bury them deeply in a grave from which there is no resurrection for such mediaeval specters! There is death in the pot. Throw it away as far as you can. Throw it away! In the haste in which these remarks have been penned, we could impossibly enlarge more on the topic and enter into a closer examination of the ideas expressed in this matter in the majority report. We refer, however, once more to the paper read last Monday by one of the signers of the present re- port, namely, by Dr. B. Felsenthal, before the Central Conference in open session. Respectfully, B. FELSENTHAL. SAMUEL SALE. T. SCHANFARBER. THOUGHTS CONCERNING SOME JEWISH QUESTIONS OF THE DAY. (Paper read before the Central Conference of American Rabbis, June 27, 1904.) By B. FELSENTHAL. During the last few years some highly important questions have been discussed amidst the Central Conference of American Rabbis, among them the questions, What is the true theological aspect of our Judaism? What are the essential dogmas of the same? Shall we, or shall we not, distinctly formulate these dogmas, find for them clear and sharp-cut words, and proclaim them before all the world as our Articles of Faith? Shall we, or shall we not, create a Jewish Synod, and endow it with ecclesiastical powers, which Synod shall 124 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD give an official sanction to the dogmas agreed upon, and which shall have the highest authority to promulgate other doctrines whenever found advisable to do so, and to enact other laws binding for the Jewish people under its jurisdiction? Answers to these questions have, been given by eminent and in- fluential members of the Central Conference, which, if they should be concurred in by the majority, might bring forth exceedingly harm- ful results, aye, destructive results, and which might expose Amer- ican Israel to the danger of becoming disrupted. Considering that these topics, lately brought forward for discus- sion and for the purpose of taking action thereon, are of the utmost importance, I hope, dear friends and colleagues, that you will not regard it as improper, if I now venture to contribute my little mite to this discussion, and I would ask you to receive friendly the paper which I am going to read before you and to refer it to the proper committee with the instruction to report on it in the next annual meeting of the Central Conference. Let me now proceed to submit to you my views of and thoughts on the subject matter under consideration. 1. Israel is not merely what is called "a church," not merely a religious denomination at the side of other, non-Israelitic denomina- tions. It is perfectly unhistoric and unscientific to assert that Israel is " a church " only. It is a people united by the ties of racial affin- ity, and everyone who is a descendant of Jewish parents belongs to the house of Israel. In other words, he is a Jew. Whether such a one is a mystic or a rationalist, a believer or an infidel, a so-called Reformer or a so-called Orthodox ; whether he joins this or that con- gregation or whether he neglects, or refuses, to join any congre- gation whatsoever, he is and he remains a Jew. 2. " Judaism " an abstract noun derived from the concrete noun " Jew " denotes, in its narrower sense, the sum total of all the relig- ious thoughts, sentiments, hopes and aspirations, which the national soul of the Jewish people in the course of its history brought forth, and which in the course of the centuries were subject to the laws of evolution and underwent many gradual changes. " Judaism " furthermore includes laws, institutions, usages, etc., which were pro- duced by the national mental life of the Jews, or were created by the VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 125 necessity of existing conditions, and which also were, and still are, subject to the laws of gradual evolution. 3. First were 'the Jews, and then came, as a production by the Jews, what is called Judaism. Without Jews there is no Judaism ; without a Jewish people there is no Jewish Church. 4. The Jewish religion teaches certain thoughts and fosters certain sentiments and hopes, which are of -a universal character, which have won already a firm foothold amongst the civilized nations, and which, together wivh certain other thoughts and sentiments and hopes, produced by non- Jewish nations, will become the common property of all mankind. Shem and Japhet will build unitedly the city of the future whose name will be Adonai Shamah, and harmon- iously working together they will create a new mankind which will be called Hephzibah. And if we would stretch somewhat the biblical ethnology and would include Japan in the Ham division of mankind, might we not then suppose that Ham too will come forward with some building material for the new city, and will furnish some co-workers in lifting up the human race to loftier heights, to the heights of a new and better mankind ? However mankind is, and will forever remain, divided and sub- divided into various branches, into different nations. And as their languages will forever be different, so the outward manifestations of their religions, their festivals, their ceremonies, their forms of wor- ship, etc., will forever remain different. And in so far Judaism is a national religion, and evidently it will continue to be a national religion, with a specific national Jewish garb, and it ought to remain one as long as there will be a separate and distinct class of people in the world called the Jewish people, or the Jewish nation. 5. There are some Jews in our present time who deny the plain fact, so clear to every unbiased and competent observer, that there is an Israel in the world as an ethnic unity, and that an Israel really exists as a separate and distinct racial family.* These men it is, indeed difficult to understand it think that by their mere subtle, yet fallacious reasoning they could undo a divinely established fact, a * A lucid and strictly scientific treatment of the subject by an acknowledged ethnological authority is to be found in A. Reibmayr's Insucht und Racen- mischung beim Menschen. Leipzig, 1897. 126 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD fact as clear as sunlight, and that by their mere saying so they could push out of the world a whole race and speak of it as not existing. And some of these men go even so far 'as to say that, if really a distinct Jewish people should exist, it ought not remain any longer standing aloof from other nations, it should allow itself to become disintegrated and it should disappear as such; in other words, it should become absorbed by the other nations among whom its members happen to live. Drawing the logical conclusions from such premises, it will necessarily follow that in our present times and in these United States a separate Jewish Church has no reason to be, and that, if nevertheless maintained, it is an anachronism and the most superfluous thing in the world. Is it not correct to say that the universal elements in Judaism or, as others call them, the prophetical elements in Judaism, as f. i. the doctrine of the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of mankind, the sanctity of duty, the purity and nobility of our life's conduct, etc., are now-a-days also taught in the " liberal Churches " of the gentiles, and in thoughtful books and from the professorial chairs of non- Jewish philosophers and teach- ers? We thank God for these grand gentile teachers and for these grand liberal Churches. But we, conscious of our own and separate ethnic situation, we maintain our separate religious position, our " Jewish Church," as being adapted for us of the Jewish nation, and only for us Jews. We are not antagonistic towards other lib- eral and good nations and religious denominations. On the con- trary. We acknowledge in them gladly our brethren, and our co- workers in erecting the Temple of Humanity. But we we remain Jews. 6. In regard to the contemplated creation of a hierarchical body with legislative powers, which shall be the highest authority in all matters of dogmatics and of general religious life among the Jews, a firm and decided stand should be taken by the C. C. A. R., and in clear and unmistakable words it should declare, once for all, that we, the children of a modern world, living at the beginning of the twen- tieth century, will not, and never shall, accept a medieval system of a hierarchical government for the Jewish people. In the grand principle of perfect and unrestricted freedom for every individual to do his own thinking and to profess his own convictions, and to VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 127 search in his own ways for learning what is the truth, in this grand principle we recognize one of the highest and most valued results of the long warfare between the powers of light and the powers of darkness ; between spiritual freedom and spiritual thraldom ; between the dominion of an intelligent, democratic individualism and the dominion of an obscurant, spirit-killing clericalism. This being so, we must say that, according to our deepest con- viction, it is a very sad and a very deplorable fact that among an association of American Rabbis who claim to be the most enlight- ened, the most liberty-loving, the most progressive teachers of Juda- ism in all the world, that in the midst of this association some very erudite scholars and very respected gentlemen should have arisen who are so un-American as to advocate spiritual slavery for Israel and to plead for chaining free thought and for curtailing the oppor- tunities for unhindered religious development. Indeed, it is a sorry sight to see such un-American Americans who move that we, modern men with modern ideas, should help them to resurrect from their graves such gruesome spectres of medieval times. A few years ago we thought it not possible that among Jewish- American freemen such retrogressive, night-born attempts should be made again. But alas ! we were in error. Dark onslaughts on freedom of thought are made, and we grieve over this fact ; and with us all liberty-loving Jews in Europe and in America, be they orthodox or reformed, feel sad on account for it. But let us hope, and let us work together unitedly and with energy, that the powers of night shall not prevail again in our midst and that, with God's help, no hierarchical Synod, no popes and no popelings, shall ever rule over us. We protest likewise against all attempts of laying down final dog- mas by an accidental majority in an assembly of "ordained" or " non-ordained " clergymen, or by a so-called Synod consisting partly of a number of Jewish " clergy " and partly of a number of Jewish "laymen." We acknowledge as a firm and self-evident principle that Israel, in consequence of a God-ordained fact, is a race united by national ties ; further, that to every member of this race unre- stricted freedom is to be granted and the indisputable right is to be accorded to have and to hold his own theological views and to shape his own ceremonial conduct in a wise it seems best and appears honest 128 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD to him. No one, be he an orthodox fanatic or a reform fanatic, shall have the power and authority or shall we say, the impudence ? to arrogate to himself the right of commanding me, or you, what we must believe, or what, in Church matters, we must do or not do. As long as anyone of us, by having and holding our own theological views and by following our own honest ways and convictions regard- ing precepts of " the Church," is not encroaching upon the rights of his fellow-Israelites, and is not curtailing their freedom of religious thinking and religious manner of living, so long we must not be disturbed and interfered with by anyone. Within Israel, to a so-called Orthodox the same rights and privileges must be accorded as to a so-called Reformer, to the mystic Kabbalist or the neo-Chasidaic dis- senter the same rights must be granted which are possessed by the talmudic Mithnagged or by the Jewish American opponent of the Talmud and the Shul-chan Arukh. Freedom for all ! Toleration for all ! Yes, toleration for all, except for the intolerant ones. This is what we demand, and upon this we shall insist. Not a one-headed pope do we want, nor a many-headed pope ! And no schism within Israel must be brought about. United we are, united we will remain, and united we will step forward into the future, -jio uopTil WTW3 A Synod? A hierarchical government? There is not the least necessity for such an institution. We thank for it. In the words of Heine (in his " Deutschland, ein Wintermahrchen ") : " Bedenk ich die Sache ganz genau, So brauchen wir gar keinen Kaiser" or, with changing the last word in this quotation : If I consider the matter more closely, I must conclude that we need neither a Synod, nor a formulated binding, crystallized Creed. No, we need not a Synod, or an Ecumenical Council, or a Pro- vincial Council, or any other hierarchical power above us to regulate our theological thinking, or to rule in our ecclesiastical domain. United we are without such anachronistic and antiliberal institu- tions, we are united by the Creator himself who has put us into the world as a separate people and has made us as of one family. Within this people, or within this family, or by whatever other name you may call Israel, the inner life must never be gagged, never be hindered in its free, organic development. Harmony, mutual under- standing, sound progress will come nevertheless. This Central Con- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 129 ference which thus far has been only a deliberative body and which thus far did not possess any legislative cr administrative powers, is sufficient proof of this. Did it lack in eff ectiveness ? Did it, as a mere Conference, as a mere deliberative body corporate, not have deep and wide influence upon American Judaism? Has it not suc- ceeded in achieving unity of ritual in a very large number of Jewish Congregations ? And is it not clear that in the course of a few more years the Union Prayer Book will be adopted by still more congre- gations in the east and the west ? Was any Synod required to bring this about? We might refer to other points, where the debates and resolutions of the Conference have brought forth practical results. Whether these results are in every instance good ones, or not, this is not to be discussed here. It is enough that we show here that a solely deliberating Conference is fully sufficient to achieve great visible results. The people grant willingly religious leadership to such a Conference. And why? Because the people see or believe that in the Conference greater learning and sounder expert knowl- edge is to be found than among the outsiders, the masses of the peo- ple ; further, that wisdom of a high degree and piety of a true kind guide the members, and that, foremost of all, unselfishness and altruistic devotedness to sacred causes and to high ideals are prevail- ing among the eminent men who constitute the Conference. Let me add that, in my opinion, this Conference has been constructive and is therefore deserving praise in so far as its majority until now have withstood destructive attempts and have constantly been in favor of strengthening and fortifying the oneness of Israel in matters truly essential, in matters by which this oneness is manifested before the world. As to a formulated Creed, is there really a pressing necessity for having one ? Must we have one ? What for ? Many kinds of flow- ers bloom in God's garden, and many kinds of trees grow in God's orchard. The best way is, to leave metaphysics, speculative theo- logy, dogmatics, and the like, to the individual philosophers and would-be philosophers, to the theologians, to men whose mental proclivities run that way. The great majority of the people, as we can easily notice every day, concern themselves very little with such speculations lying beyond their horizon. There is, we admit, here 130 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD and there someone to be found who has a natural liking for such " graue Theorieen " ; there is here and there " ein Kerl, der speculirt." And why not? ff Es muss auch solche K'duze geben." Let them write to their hearts' content " philosophical " essays and metaphysi- cal books ; let them, if they are inclined to do so, publish Catechisms and teach therein their Creeds, their Articles of Faith ; let them enter into the Pardes of the theological speculations, as the four Tannaim did, but out of which Pardes only Rabbi Akiba returned unhurt, and let them write books about what they saw in that Pardes, if their mind impels them to do it. But upon this we insist: Do not force your Catechisms, your philosophies, your Creeds upon others, un- willing to accept them, and do not ask a Synod, or a similar hier- archical body, to stamp them officially as the only true and correct ones. Concede to the others the right either to accept or to reject them, or, if they prefer to do so, to -ignore them entirely. Let no such body be so conceited, or so arrogant and impudent, to" claim for themselves ecclesiastical powers and to say to others, " You must ac- cept these dogmas, you must teach this Catechism, you must preach these doctrines, you must believe these articles, and so forth, which we, the infallible saints of the holy Synod, proclaim as the only correct ones ; if not, you will be heretics," etc. 7. Even as it exists now, the C. C. A. R. should disclaim for itself in words clear and loud, and in a manner which cannot be misunder- stood and cannot be misconstrued, all desires for legislative preroga- tives, it should say before all American Israel that it has no priest- craft's authority, and that nothing is farther from the Conference than the thought of assuming such an authority. It should furthermore proceed and explicitly say that it does not claim authority even over the minority of its own members who conscientiously vote " No ! " when a motion of a general character is pending and is being voted upon, and that only in regard to such resolutions which concern the C. C. A. R. as a body corporate, as f. i. resolutions concerning time, place, and manner of the meetings, election of officers, printing of the minutes, and other similar matters, the minority has to abide by the resolutions passed by the majority. Aside from this, a member of the minority has the same unrestricted freedom of thinking and act- ing as any other Israelite has, who is not officially connected with VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 131 the Conference. He may pursue his own ways in matters of dogma and ceremonial practices which he considers right and proper, or he may follow such teachers whom he personally acknowledges to be his masters and who are considered by him as authorities, to whom in his own free will he submits. In ritual matters, to every congregation also the right must explicitly be accorded to act independently of the dictates of any Conference or Synod or any other similar would- be hierarchical power. Coercive measures in religious matters must forever remain things foreign and must forever be considered as un- Jewish within our midst. The only allowable means to propagate among the people such views in religious matters which we consider better, and to bring forth more warmth and enthusiasm for and ad- herence to really good religious usages in general and to the Syn- agogue especially, are the words of instruction and the good ex- ample set by our conduct and by our unselfish labors in behalf of the Good and the True, especially in behalf of a united Israel. We, the Rabbis, are teachers in Israel, nothing else, and we decidedly refuse to subscribe to the doctrine that a Rabbi belongs to a clergy who as such have powers and privileges which a non-Rabbi has not. In conclusion I would once more refer to the onslaughts upon Is- rael's great treasure, viz. : the freedom of research and the liberty of thought, which onslaughts are made by the attempts to formulate a final Creed and to establish a Synod, and I would say to this Asso- ciation : ns ,-jEnn n&o nin n ,nnarn n&o mTnn n ovn "pa? Tiro run inwrai nixzn ,D"m mmi; jnnn nion n MAX HELLER, 1904. Do we need a Synod ? Would a Synod be helpful to American Judaism ? The answer to these questions will depend largely, if not alto- gether, upon what we mean by a Synod. If a Synod is to be an ecclesiastical council, substitute for an infallible Pope, if it is to be a body clothed with absolute authority to fix a creed and to pre- scribe religious statutes ; if it is to decide who is and who is not to be considered a Jew ; if it is to have power to prosecute heretics and to excommunicate, then we are all agreed to a man that we need and 132 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD want no such Synod. Jewish temperament and American atmos- phere are alike intolerant of any such institution. The Christian denominations that attempt to enforce ecclesiastical discipline in mat- ters of belief are only injuring themselves in the eyes of the public and losing hold upon their followers ; while in Judaism even the darkest orthodoxy Russia must beware against employing coercion and insisting upon its authority. It is raising the merest bugaboo to warn against hierarchy, spirit- ual slavery and sect-division, when the establishment of a Synod is proposed. Those who sound this warning misread altogether both the natural disposition of the American Jew and the unalterable con- ditions under which we live in this Western civilization. They should give due weight to the indisputable fact that there is not the remotest danger that the American Jew would ever tolerate the im- position of spiritual slavery. All over the occidental world, wher- ever spiritual authority is in the least organized among Jews, we find the authority assailed on all sides, eking out a precarious existence ; the menace to our faith, a menace that threatens from Jewish inde- pendence as well as from the spiritual currents of the age, is the menace of individualism. We need a Synod, if by Synod we mean not an ecclesiastic council, but a representative religious body that commands universal confi- dence by the weight of its wisdom and learning. We need a Synod not for the purpose of excommunicating Jews, but for communicating Judaism, not to split up into sects, but to crystallize scholarship and practical wisdom into something that shall guide the people. Through the labors mostly of one man, our immortal Dr. Wise, the reform wing of American Judaism has attained to a measure of cooperation in its congregational union, its college and its confer- ence. Out of this conference, largely again through the self-sacrifice of Dr. Wise who gave up his own Minhag America, there grew a certain measure of ritual uniformity in the almost universal adoption of the union prayer-book. This was the very first step from mere cooperation towards uniformity ; the splitting up into innumerable private rituals had been the most absurd and burdensome outgrowth of rampant individualism which had, often, degenerated into the merest egoism. Here the American rabbi had to learn first to give VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 133 up that indulgence of idiosyncracy which means not freedom, but disintegration. In the last years of Dr. Wise's long career it was his favorite dream to call a Synod and to formulate a creed. Being in touch with the people he felt that the excessive individualism of our pulpit and press had a confusing effect ; he knew that the conference was too young a body, too liberal in its rules of membership to command, with the people in general, the necessary weight for its declarations. He appreciated the fact that among the people there is a desire for clearer and more definite teaching, that Judaism is weakened by the endless disagreements between those who are to teach it. He wished to place before the people an aggregate of truths and precepts, clearly formulated which shall have the endorsement of a representative, widely trusted, body. It is easy enough to say that our Central Conference essentially fulfills these requirements. We may readily grant that the Confer- ence is a gathering of capable men, of earnest workers ; we may flat- ter ourselves that, as it pursues its steady way, it is growing in the esteem of the people, that its discussions and pronouncements are read more widely and regarded more highly year after year ; yet it is beyond doubt that some men of the highest standing in the reform pulpit remain away from its deliberations and that a large portion of our press presumes to speak disdainfully of its work and standing. The motives for both attitudes we need not now investigate ; the fact is sufficiently telling that such conduct should escape universal censure. We need a Synod to put some sort of a stop to the prevailing anarchy. That every man should be doing what is right in his own eyes is a state of affairs which must be reprehensible in a faith that has a past, no matter how ideal a condition of things it may appear to those who believe in unhindered self-development as the highest law. An American Jewish Synod will and can never degenerate into an instrument of hierarchy; it will be a deliberative body like the conference ; its authority will be one of confidence and personal weight ; consisting of rabbis and non-rabbis it will deal with practi- cal questions in a courageous, sober spirit; convened at long inter- vals it will deal only with momentous questions such as will be laid 134 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD before it by the vote of Jewish organizations ; it will have ample time and unlimited resources for delivering opinions that shall com- mand universal respect. The details of the plan will, no doubt, be worked out in due time so as to ensure the formation of a body of the highest standing and efficiency ; when it will once be understood that there is no intention to coerce or discipline, to create hierarchical authority or ecclesiasti- cal power, the present opposition will melt away, being founded upon apprehensions which are opposed to every probability. [American Israelite, Aug. 18, 1904.] VIEWS OF PRESIDENT SCHECHTER OF THE JEWISH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF AMERICA. EDITOR ISRAELITE: Sir: In reply to your kind invitation to give my opinion on the advisability of calling a Synod composed of rabbis and lay members for the purposes of discussing and deciding certain religious problems in need of solution, I beg to state that this question was put to me some ten years ago by the editor of the American Hebrew. My answer then was, that, far from being helpful in any way to the cause of Judaism, such a Synod is bound to prove harmful and mischievous. I do not remember the exact wording of my answer, but I have a clear recollection that my negative attitude was dictated by the dread of every movement calculated to foster or to encourage hierarchical pretensions and sacerdotal tendencies among us a dread which I have felt from my earliest youth. I frankly confess that this dread was hardly justified in that part of the Dispersion where my early youth was spent. Religious in- struction there was general and greatly aided by the religious life at home. I scarcely remember a case of a Jew in the community who was not able to read his prayers in Hebrew, or utter the Benediction when called up to the Law, or perform the Service at the Table on Passover Eve. A strong minority could and did read the Bible in the original ; at least the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and those lessons from the Prophets which were read as Haftarah; these men were even familiar with the lighter portions of the Talmud ; whilst almost every Jewish community could boast of a goodly number of private stu- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 135 dents holding their diploma as rabbis, though they did not choose to make of their Torah " a spade to dig with." Since almost all of those over whose spiritual councils he presided had more or less share in the knowledge of the Torah, from which source his authority emanated, the rabbi was only a primus inter pares, and he realized that the difference between him and his flock was merely a matter of quantity and- not of quality. Any attempt on the part of the rabbi to minimize the importance of the Torah as the source of his author- ity, or to play the role of lawgiver instead of law-interpreter would have been resented as rank treason and fought to the bitter end. In fact, I do not remember a single instance of such usurpation. My fears of priestly arrogation of authority, I judge now, must have been the outcome of what I had read and heard of other denominations, rather than of anything for which the regular rabbi in the eastern parts of Europe could fairly have been made responsible. But this early dread, whatever the cause may bave been, was cer- tainly not removed by my later contact with the religious life in the civilized West, where ignorance of the Hebrew language and indif- ference nullified all historical safeguard over the rabbi, where loyalty to the Torah was largely replaced by devotion to the pet orator, where rabbis were actually " ordaining disciples " instead of examining pupils, where rabbis made invocation and imparted the priestly bless- ing with the most approved pontifical manner and mien, and where, lastly, rabbis, lacking in all sense of humor and in all sense of propor- tion, were talking of themselves as prophets and seers, only, of course, more advanced and more " evolutionized " than Isaiah and Micah. It is evident under these conditions which must grow worse with the disappearance of those immigrants who still cherish reminis- cences of an early contact with a vigorous and active Jewish life during their youth in the old countries that the possibility of there developing among us a regular ecclesiastical body with all the cus- tomary hierarchical arrogance and sacerdotal pretensions is much greater than it ever was at any period since the synagogue became a recognized institution in Judaism. Not the white necktie, nor the clerical waistcoat makes the presumptuous priest ; much as one may ridicule these paraphernalia and " aids to dignity." That which 136 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD propagates and develops sacerdotalism is the consciousness of the rabbi that he is the sole and last authority in matters spiritual. To possess the power of abrogating doctrine, of ignoring Scriptures, of relegating liturgies to the lumber-room, of playing at will with the festival calendar, of abolishing ceremonies and observances and bidding defiance to all precedent and custom, means to wield a greater authority than any Pope has ever enjoyed, and means to be surer of one's own infallibility than any church ever claimed for its head. And I have enough experience to know that our modern divines are not less dogmatic than the old hierarchy, not less jealous of their glory, not less exacting in obedience, not less fanatical and not less ready to stigmatize their opponents as atheists and sceptics. Thus, I am fully alive to the danger which may grow out of such a Synod, and entirely share the fears expressed in Dr. Felsenthal's admirable article, though our point of view is not always the same. On the other hand, there is a plea for the creation of such a legis- lative body on the ground that individualism has run riot, or, as others expressed it, that we are now in a state of spiritual anarchy. I am not blind to these dangers. Holding the views for which I am known to stand, it would not become me to enter into details upon this point. Probably much that I would describe as anarchy and lawlessness would be defined by others as a mark of vigorous life and progress. Sufficient to state, that the uneasy feeling that we are in a condition of anarchy is not confined to one party ; we are all agreed the evil is there, whatever its exact nature and various manifestations. The creation of a Synod bound in some way to exercise a controlling influence upon the whim and caprice of the individual would, so it is thought, prove the best means to counteract the evil. Much, however, as I realize the danger and sympathize with those who are endeavoring to meet it, I am hardly able to sup- press the great fear that the remedy may prove worse than the evil. Anarchy as a negative quality is devoid of substance and reality. It is its own worst enemy and ends in over- throwing itself. But the evils of a Synod may be lasting, defying all remedy. The evil I am thinking of is that of a permanent schism in the congregation of Israel. I must explain myself more clearly. In the " Year Book for 1904 of the Central Conference of Ameri- VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 137 can Rabbis," there is a quotation from an address of the late Dr. Isaac M. Wise, from which we learn that in his creation of the Con- ference of Rabbis and Congregational Delegates, which he apparently wished to develop into a regular Synod, he was " actuated by the earnest desire to preserve the union of Israel and its religion by mu- tual understanding and union." The impression conveyed by this passage, though he only addressed himself to the American congre- gations, is that he had the union of Israel at large at heart and wished to preserve and to perpetuate it. His reference, in the same quotation, again to the Bible, Talmud and history, by which he en- deavors to prove the legality and usefulness of Synods, impresses one that it was these Books considered sacred by the whole of Israel which he looked upon as authorities in matters of religion. I have not the least desire to foist orthodox views on the late Dr. Wise. The disciples of Dr. Wise and his contemporaries who were in per- sonal touch with him certainly have a better right to interpret the views of the former President of the Hebrew Union College. Im- pressions, indeed, are vague, and I may be wrong in my deductions, but my impressions gain somewhat in strength by another quotation from Dr. Wise, in which he speaks with apparent disapproval of " the others, reforming head over heels, break with the history of our people." He evidently desired to avoid this break. But it is just this break, which such a Synod as at present proposed, might bring about. I know that there are many among our leading rabbis who are of the same opinion as their master. I myself have the honor of having friends among those rabbis who are in favor of a Synod, who are just as anxious to preserve the unity of Israel and perpetuate the continuity of our history and tradition, as ever any rabbi in Israel was ; but even this knowledge does not dissipate my fears. I hope it will not be considered invidious on my part if I maintain that the spirit with which the creation of a Synod is approached, does not augur well for unity and preservation. At least, this is the impres- sion which I have received from the lengthy report introducing the subject of the Synod. Therein we meet with such expressions as the " superstitious sanctification of lifeless ceremonies and exploded creeds." It is further assumed that " orthodoxy is guided by senti- mental, unreasoning respect for things as they are, and in its historic 138 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD valuations exercises a certain arbitrariness of judgment." Again, it is maintained that " Israel is a Church in the broad sense of the term ; in the sense that was uppermost in Ezra's mind after the return." This is only a paraphrase of the well-known apercu of Wellhausen, who maintained, " It was not the nation that returned from exile, but a religious sect." This platitude is repeated by all the Bible critics ad nauseam, as it naturally fits into their whole system, which en- deavors to prove that the practice of the Law was incompatible with the life of a civilized community, and that an unbridged gulf yawned between pre-exilic Israel and post-exilic Judaism. Every student of Jewish literature, especially of the Halacha, where, we meet more with the daily and the practical life of the nation, with its traits, its games, its artisans, its peasants and merchants, its days of mourning and days of joy, its public dances, knows that this assertion is an absolute falsehood. Franz Delitzsch, who knew more about post- Canonical literature than his son, Frederick Delitzsch, knows about the Bible, exclaims : " Why should the post-Exile people be counted a sect? Unity of religion, common religious worship, and a central sanctuary are surely not things which rob people of national character." I have neither the time nor the inclination to enter upon a contro- versy, though I should think that one ought to be a little more re- served in his denunciations, considering the fact that the great major- ity of the best Jewish thinkers, the most learned Jewish scholars, the most able Jewish historians, men renowned for their critical acumen and sound judgment, did not belong to the radical section of the community. It may, in passing, be remarked that Frankel, Jacob Bernays, and Sachs were the best Hellenistic scholars among the Jewish rabbis of the last century, but at the same time they were the most staunchly conservative of their generation. The knowledge of Hellenism does not lead to the results which the " Occidental man " is so fond of parading. Nor would, indeed, such a controversy be in any way profitable. When all Jewish opinion is practically set at naught, and Wellhausen is thought to have spoken the last word on the Bible and the history of Israel, and Spencer the last word on philosophy, we have no longer a common platform to make mutual understanding possible. All I wish to urge is that there is a strong VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 139 bias among some of us to approach Jewish problems in a spirit alien to Judaism and on assumptions or views largely based on non-Jewish opinion. A Synod in which such a spirit would be prevalent is bound to dissociate us from the large bulk of Israel, which looks for the interpretation of its Scriptures and its history to Jewish opinion, and recognizes in the propagation of the views of certajn schools the revival of ancient hostile sects in deadly feud with the Jewish nation and the Jewish religion. To those who are desirous of more infor- mation on this point I would recommend the study of Diestel, 11 Geschichte des Alten Testaments in der Christlichen Kirche." They will learn there how the attacks made by the church upon the Old Testament now repeat themselves in the synagogue. Perhaps they will see, too, that the fathers of the church were more reveren- tial in their language, and mofe hesitating in their abrogation of the law, than many a Jewish theologian of to-day. It is true many of these separatist views are preached and taught in many a pulpit, but we are not yet always taken seriously by the rest of Israel, nor by the world at large. Our theological pronounce- ments are considered as mere excesses of a young community in which theological opinion is still in an unripe and in a transi- tory condition. They belong to the " chapter of accidents," inevi- table in a country like America. People shake their heads but make allowance for the pioneer with his unrest, his constant rush, and his nervous condition, knowing all the time that none is more anxious for an orderly settled life than this pioneer himself. Like- wise, it is hoped that, with the increase of knowledge and the establishment of more Jewish communities and the leisure attendant upon a properly settled life which allows man to meditate upon his past, and provide for his spiritual future, Judaism will come to its rights, and tradition and historical institutions will become the same factors in religion as they are now becoming in other departments of life. But when much that is now considered the mere crudities of youth will have been refined into opinion and will have received the sanction of a regular Synod, the face of the matter will wear a new look. Then the schism is sure to come, and we shall be cut off from the universal synagogue. To illustrate my opinion, suppose the Synod decides that Judaism is a church, not a nation. Let us further 140 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD suppose, for argument's sake, that the inference drawn from the de- cision will be that it is in the interest of the church to substitute the Sunday for the Sabbath, which latter day is inconvenient, and to invent some new mode of initiation, taking the place of the rite of the Covenant of Abraham, which has so often been denounced as bar- baric. Suppose, further, that the church, after the necessary self- clarification and crystallization of ideas will arrive at the conclusion that it is time to give Jesus, who is declared from many a pulpit as one of our greatest prophets and martyrs, his proper recognition, and to introduce parts of the New Testament say, the Lord's Prayer and the Sermon on the Mount into our liturgy and our Scriptures. Suppose, further, that for the purpose of propagating and developing the universalistic mission of the church, intermar- riage with non-Jews will be declared not only sanctioned, but desir- able and worthy of being promoted. All these views have been mooted, and may appear and reappear. I am certain that at present such a program will meet with stern resistance ; but men pass away while Synods remain. I know further how majorities are swayed by the specious arguments of plausible and high-sounding rhetoric, and these arguments gather strength when they are supported by the considerations of comfort and convenience. In this wise such a program might some day be set up as the sanctioned, canonical test of affiliation with the church. And let me say that we shall be the sufferers. I am free to confess that I personally dread none of the biblical punishments as much as Karcth, as being " cut off " from my people. History teaches that the synagogue can survive any amount of persecution and any number of threatened schisms, but sects de- cline spiritually and materially and disappear. If the Synod should become a blessing, it must first recognize a standard of authority and this can be no other than the Bible, the Talmud and the lessons of Jewish history as to the vital and the essential in Judaism. When, for instance, history testifies that Juda- ism was prepared to suffer martyrdom rather than give up the Sab- bath and the Abrahamic rite, we know that their abolition would mean death to Israel. Or, again, when history teaches that Israel always placed the center of gravity of Judaism in the Pentateuch, maintaining this center at the peril of its life, and that all sects hostile VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 141 to Judaism were ready to attack it first, we must feel that to shift the center would be to hurl us outside of Judaism. As far as I know, no Jewish Synod of early times representing the whole of Israel ever presumed to abrogate a doctrine or to abolish a single law, biblical or rabbinical. The work of such a Synod was of a disci- plinary kind, strengthening the Law and protecting it. After great persecutions, it occasionally introduced new ordinances relating to the laws of evidence and similar matters. Sometimes it forbade things for which there was no distinct authority in the Law, but which fell under the general law of " Holiness " and " Sanctification of the Name of God." The authority was vested not in the rabbis, but in the Torah, by which they were guided in all their actions. It was only in this way that we could avoid the danger of sacerdotalism, as the rabbi would in this case be only its interpreter and executive officer ; whilst, on the other hand, the Torah, being the recognized authority of all Jews, those coming by the " Power of the Torah " could only act in a spirit serving to strengthen and preserve " the union of Israel and its religion by mutual understanding and union." Respectfully, S. SCHECHTER. NEW YORK, April 5, 1905. REPLIES TO LETTER OF COMMITTEE (VIDE PREFACE) ADDRESSED TO LAYMEN FOR VIEWS ON THE AD- VISABILITY OF ESTABLISHING A SYNOD. Philadelphia, January 3, 1905. Dear Sir: In reply to your request for my opinion on the reports and discussions published in the Year-Book of the Central Confer- ence of American Rabbis for the year 1904, on the subject of the establishment of a Synod, I may say in the first place, that I can see no valid reason against such an organization. The reasons suggested for such a Synod at the end of the report of Rabbi Enelow seem to me to outweigh all the opinions expressed against it. The union of two such bodies as the Central Conference and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations would result in an organization fully representative of Reform Judaism. Of course, such a body would neither have, nor attempt to exercise, legislative or judicial functions, nor attempt to enforce its decrees. All this is impossible at this time. The resolutions and decisions of such an organization would affect individual belief and practice only in so far as the essential reasonableness of such resolutions and decisions would eventually gain acceptance for them among those who are represented in this organization. Such an organization might ex- press its formal opinion upon many minor questions of practice and ritual as well as upon Jewish educational problems and the like, and there can be no doubt that its influence in this direction would be beneficial. The very existence of such an organization would limit the output of new so-called reforms dictated by the fancy or caprice of individual rabbis. It could do much toward cultivating and di- recting intelligent public opinion and thus preventing many of the " improvements " that have heretofore been offered in the name of Reform Judaism. But the great importance of such an organization, it seems to me, will be found in a much broader field of activity. Many questions now exist and will hereafter arise affecting the Jews of America in a broad way. These are not questions of faith or ceremonial, but 144 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD questions of religious liberty. The relation of the Jew to his en- vironment has by no means been settled in this country, and the existence of a representative and important body, such as this pro- posed Synod might be made to become, would be of the greatest use in many an emergency. The Jews in America need a spokes- man of recognized authority and influence to take the place of the well-meaning, but often misdirected, volunteer efforts of individuals. The Reformed Jews are now a minority in this country, and will probably continue to be so for a long time, but they are an import- ant minority. The bulk of the communal work is done by them and their voice is heard more frequently than that of the Orthodox or conservative. As a matter of fact, the real Orthodox Jew has not yet taken his proper share in the communal work outside of the Ghetto. The conservative element which is frequently called the Orthodox to distinguish it from Reformed Jews, but which in reality should be called moderate reform, differs in some important respects from the so-called reform element, and this difference is due largely to the fact that the reform movement in America has not been di- rected or influenced by an authoritative body of its best men. Had such an organization existed during the last fifty years there would probably have been very little difference to-day between the con- servative and the reformed elements among American Jews. The fault has been that in the absence of intelligent and authoritative direction the vagaries of the individual rabbi have done much to bring about the present condition of anarchy in our religious life. The reform movement seems to me now to be making an effort to re-attach the broken fibers of the chain of historical tradition, broken in many a hasty and ill-directed individual effort to hasten the mil- lennium by reforming Judaism out of existence. In the direction of conservative control and wise progress a Synod such as that proposed can do great work. The time may come when Orthodox Jews will likewise organize themselves and establish a Synod to represent them. The functions of this Synod will differ materially from those of a Synod of Re- formed Jews. After the establishment of both these organizations the final result may be a union of all Jews in this country in one organization. This now seems impossible, and if at all realizable VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 145 will be so only in the distant future. For the present the organiza- tion of a Reform Synod will be a step in the right direction, con- sidering it in its larger aspect as well as in its more immediate results on matters of lesser importance. Yous truly, D. W. AMRAM. Dear Sir: Soon after the Louisville meeting of the Central Con- ference of American Rabbis, The American Israelite invited contri- butions from lay Jews all over the country to a symposium on the subject of a Synod as proposed to and discussed by the Conference. At that time the year book of the Conference, which has since been published, was not available, hence those who wrote for The Ameri- can Israelite had to rely upon press reports for information of what took place at the Conference. I complied with a request addressed to me for a contribution, with that which follows. Therein are stated the views I held last summer and no reasons have been presented to my mind since, to make me change them. My attention has been called to the fact that the majority report of the committee, to which the Synod-subject was referred, and which report favors the formation of a Synod, nowhere refers to an amalga- mation of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations and the Central Conference of American Rabbis for Synodal purposes, and that, therefore, my criticism of such a proposal was unjustified. However, I have carefully read every word of the discussion con- tained in the Year Book, since published, and I fail to find that any one, either in committee or otherwise, found fault with the plan of organization suggested by' Rev. Dr. H. G. Enelow, Chairman of the Synod Committee, the first paragraph of which is : " The Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations shall conjointly form the American Jewish Synod." Furthermore, the report of the President of the Conference (Rev. Dr. Joseph Krauskopf) discusses the urgent need of a Synod and makes some suggestions concerning its formation but defers to the opinion of Dr. Enelow in this graceful way : " The best will undoubtedly be given us by our colleague, Dr. Enelow, who has given the subject much study and research, more especially within the past year." 146 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD I would add another word. My contribution appeared in The American Israelite within the week preceding the Day of Atonement, and I have it upon reliable authority that quite a number of the Jews of Cincinnati, whose places of business have been open on that day for years, closed them in 1904. Mention is made of this circumstance because it seems to justify by belief, expressed in the appended article, that much apparent callousness and indifference of the laity might be removed by direct effort on the part of the Rabbis. It is strange that the Committee on Synod should have recom- mended to the Conference a plan of organization which provides that " The Central Conference of American Rabbis -and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations shall conjointly form the Ameri- can Jewish Synod," thereby overlooking the important fact that the fundamental law of the Union of American Hebrew Congregation's forbids such an alliance. And this oversight is the more surprising in view of the stress which the committee lays on the history of the unsuccessful attempt of the sainted Dr. Wise to organize a Synod in Cleveland in 1855 and crediting that failure with responsibility for the formation of " the two separate organizations American Judaism now possesses, the Union of American Hebrew Congrega- tions (1873) and the Central Conference of American Rabbis (1899). The establishment of these distinct associations really meant the subdivision of the hypothetical Synod." When the Union of American Hebrew Congregations was formed, the Cleveland experience of eighteen years before was not forgotten ; '73 was no more favorable to the formation of a Synod than was '55. No one was more clever in reading the signs of the times than Dr. Wise; moreover, he never deluded himself. So when the Union of American Hebrew Congregations was in contemplation, all thought of making it a Synod in name or in fact was banished not dismissed indirectly or inferentially but emphatically and con- clusively, as any one who reads the earliest sections of the Constitu- tions must realize. These clauses are : The objects of the Union are A. To establish and maintain institutions for instruction in the higher branches of Hebrew literature and Jewish theology, with the VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 147 necessary preparatory schools in such cities of those States as may hereafter be designated. B. To establish relations with kindred organizations in other parts of the world, for the relief of the Jews from political oppres- sion, and for rendering them such aid for their intellectual elevation as may be within reach of this Union. C. To promote the religious instruction of the young by the train- ing of competent teachers, and generally encourage the study of the Scriptures and of the tenets and history of Judaism. All this, however, without interfering in any manner whatsoever with the worship, the schools, or any other of the congregational institutions. I have italicized the words to which attention is especially called. Witnesses there are, and plenty of them, now in life who were active in the formation of the Union, who know that unless those pregnant words had been given place where they are, the efforts to organize the Union in Cincinnati would have been only a repetition of the failure to form a Synod in Cleveland. The truth is that on both occasions congregational autonomy was demanded and insisted ori. * It will not do to say that the Synod, which our good friends of the Conference would form, does not intend to interfere with the inde- pendence of individual congregations that was doubtless said in 1855, and has been said whenever a Synod has been proposed. Now if, fundamentally, the Union of American Hebrew Congre- gations is forbidden from interfering in any manner whatsoever with the worship, the schools, or any other of the congregational institu- tions, surely it cannot join with another body in doing the pro- hibited act. The learned chairman of the committee submitting the report to the Conference frankly says : " Suppose the two bodies (the Union and the Conference) to act together on any subject of vital concern, and you have a Synod in the historic sense of the term." Well, it was a Synod that was frowned upon at Cleveland, and only because in unmistakable terms the intention not to form a Synod was expressed in the first paragraphs of the Constitution of the Union, that it was formed, with an incalculable amount of resultant good. 148 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD The legal and moral impossibility of a confederacy of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations and the Central Conference of American Rabbis, for the purpose of forming a Synod, is so manifest to me that I cannot refrain from expressing surprise that the com- mittee, in the first instance, should have urged such an alliance, and, having done so, that some other member of the Conference should not have seen the inappropriateness of the proposition. If I am correct in the above conclusion, then, technically, I have fully complied with the terms of the invitation to express my views on the Synod question proposed at the Louisville Conference, with which the Israelite has honored me. But I assume that the real desire was for an expression of opinion from the viewpoint of the man in the pew, as to the wisdom, advisability, and desirability of the formation of a Synod composed of rabbis and laymen in short, a discussion of the spirit of the Conference proposal, rather than the letter thereof. The request for my views came to me several weeks ago, and my answer is not the creature of impetuosity. Appreciating the im- portance of the proposition, I have tried to look it squarely in the face, and to thaj: end I have endeavored to secure all possible light thereon. Guided by the information available to me and such experi- ence as I have had in matters Jewish and among my co-religionists, I am not able to conclude that a Jewish Synod in this country will realize the expectations of those who advocate its formation, and if one were able to stop with this remark the experiment might be worth trying; but, as I shall attempt to show hereafter, the result of failure will be to make conditions infinitely worse, instead of bettering them. Failure would not leave us where we began; it would thrust us into confusion worse confounded. Let us admit that conditions in American Jewry are deplorably chaotic ; that there are so many degrees of so-called Reform that the most conservative bears closer resemblance to mild orthodoxy than to the ultra-radical. Let us concede that there is no body in existence that has authority to announce what departures may be made from ancient and medieval doctrines, customs and practices, without forfeiting the right to full membership in the household of Israel. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 149 Let us grant that if it were possible to convene an assemblage of universally-conceded competent Jews competent in the widest sense, so competent that their judgment would be accepted as final- then with all haste there should be submitted to them the questions which perplex and divide the Reform Jews of America. But such a convention admittedly is beyond present day possi- bilities. The committee proposes that the Synod shall be nominally the " central administrative body for American Judaism." It is not actually to be invested with the first attribute thereof, i. e., authority to execute its own decrees. Here is contradiction ample to furnish food for contention for all time. I cannot help believing that a mixed Synod, with the functions ascribed by the committee, would be calculated to further embarrass present circumstances. If I judge indications aright, the opinions of such a Synod would not unify rabbis and laymen now holding divergent views. To the extent that present practices were perse- vered in after the Synod had pronounced against them, there would exist that chaotic state which all deplore, plus the element of disre- gard for what had been decided by duly constituted authority in name, at least. In a word, we would then suffer from chaos and rebellion. Those, who differ from this view and hold that opinions of such a Synod would meet with respectful acquiescence regardless of how they reversed prevailing habits and actions, must needs attribute to rabbis and laymen, among other qualities, these : Willingness to surrender life-long convictions. The manly courage which alone prompts the maker of mistakes to admit them. The sort of unselfishness that is involved in yielding up pet ideas. Readiness to concede to others that sincerity of purpose claimed for self. Preparedness to alter, to an extent, one's mode of life and bear the loss incident thereto. I am compelled to confess that I cannot discover in the men who occupy pulpit or pew that standard of broadmindedness, unselfishness, and disinterestedness which furnishes the test of capacity to make 150 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD these concessions. Of course, I speak of men as they are found in general. Thank God, there are exceptions. We would fare badly if there were not. Here are some reasons why I am skeptical: Suppose that the Synod should declare that the hoary seventh-day Sabbath is Israel's Sabbath, which neither time nor circumstances may change, and further should declare that where its observance is not possible by reason of commercial stress a week-day service with Bible lesson or appropriate sermon may be given with perfect propriety, but this shall never be done to the exclusion of the regular Sabbath service proclaiming that a place of worship is not a Jewish place of worship if its doors are sealed on the Jewish Sabbath do you think that such a pronouncement would revive Sabbath services in a house of prayer that had denied them for two decades ? Do you believe that the rabbi who feels it an honor to be called on to marry a couple, of whom one by birth is a member of the rabbi's faith and the other is not, would cease to regard the request as an honor should the Synod set its stamp of disapproval on such a per- formance? My word for it, rabbis and others who make advances ( ?) such as these are not apt to recall them. Is it supposable that the congregation in the East which listened for years to its well-beloved rabbi's appeal to abolish the Oriental custom of covering the head during services, and repeatedly refused to comply, lately accepting his resignation rather than make the change and the rabbi is a member of the Conference, too I repeat, is it supposable that such a congregation would heed the behest of a Synod to do the thing which had thus been rejected? It will require more than a dictum to change the trend of thought that prevails there. Had the Central Conference of American Rabbis done nothing beyond satisfying the great need of Reform congregations for a uniform prayer-book, that act, in the word of our old Haggadah, would have been dayenu sufficient to justify its existence. One would think that only some very weighty cause would prevent this book from being used in all temples spiritually presided over by members of the Conference, under whose auspices it was prepared and is published. Yet he who thus reasons would be in error, for it VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 151 is not so used, and among those who neglected it is an exalted officer of the Conference, who does not use the Union Prayer-book in his temple, for if he did it would displace a ritual prepared by himself. This rabbi is a firm believer in a Synod. Nor do I see in the lay Jew of to-day either the religious fervor of the knowledge of his faith and its history and traditions essential to make him a useful member of a body designed to mould the con- duct of the Jewish masses. Regretfully do I notice, in place of zeal, indifference, and instead of anxiety to learn what it is that has kept a handful of people intact these countless ages among the nations, great and small, that have come and gone a problem which all the world, aside from the Jew, is intensely interested in solving I observe a full-nigh abso- lute callousness upon the part of many of my co-religionists. Why this should be so I do not know. Maybe it is because most of the fathers of the present generation lived in the period of transition from Orthodoxy to Reform, when the old was discarded and the new not embraced, or, if embraced at all, only with half-heartedness, and when the younger set came to the fore in order not to be out- done by their elders they yielded up the other half of the heartedness and retained none of it for themselves. Now too, the material tendencies of the age have not escaped the Jew nor left him scarless. He has prospered enormously, and in prosperity religious zeal and fervor are never found as in times of severe trial and adversity. But whatever the causes may be, the lay Jew, as I view him, is not fit to take part in the work of a Synod because he has not the necessary knowledge to perform the service intelligently, and besides too frequently his course of life from a Jewish standpoint utterly disqualifies him from laying down a standard after which the Judaism of others should be patterned. Am I too severe ? Let us see. These lines are written within a fortnight of the solemn Day of Atonement and I am thinking of it and its observance in my home city, which bears the reputation of being above the average in the conservatism of its Jewish inhabitants. If they are deficient it surely is not because they have not had the association, inspiration, and guidance of as able religious teachers 152 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD and leaders in the past and in the present as this land has ever known. The presumption, therefore, is not violent that the laxity, which prevails there, exists elsewhere in at least like degree. The time was, and that within the memory of those who have not yet passed the meridian of their lives, when not a single place of business conducted by a Jew was open on this sacred day in Cin- cinnati. Suddenly, a few years ago, one or two departed from custom, and their example, like a contagious disease, has bred defection until now very many of the largest establishments owned and conducted by Jews are in as full operation on this as on any ordinary day. And there are lawyers, too, the extent of whose practice does not require them to work overtime, who sit at their desks as if there were nothing to distinguish this from the general run of days. Who are these men? Are they Jewish castaways, black sheep, ne'er-do-wells that are to be found in every community ? By no means. Included among them are Temple trustees, Sabbath-school Com- mitteemen, pillars of Jewish organizations of national scope which undertake to speak and act for American Israel. And as truly as I live, if a Synod were created, among the laymen selected therefor would be found not a few of these holy day desecrators. No excuse can be offered for their conduct, and none would be given. They would simply say that they consider the ancient injunctions for the day have no application to the twentieth century in America. It has often occurred to me that if I were the rabbi of a Congre- gation, having among my flock and especially if he were an officer, trustee or Sabbath-school committeeman such an offender as I have described, realizing that I had failed to reach him from the pulpit, either because he would not come to hear me, or having heard, heeded not, I would call upon him and urge him meditate upon the course he was pursuing. I would present to him his shortcoming with due gravity. If I failed to move him by argument and reasoning, from the depth of my soul I would pour my feelings into his soul and plead with him to reconsider his waywardness, and I would try to make him realize that if his course were adopted VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 153 generally the end of Judaism had come. ' I would direct his attention to the inconsistency of his actively supporting a distinctively Jewish institution a house of prayer and his living in diametrical opposi- tion to its teachings. I would appeal to him by the thrilling history of our ancestors, who at certain periods fought, bled, and died on the field of battle; at other times endured persecution, ostracism, and banishment, and again walked willing martyrs to the stake and faggot, rather than forsake the Holy Torah, so that it might descend undefiled to him and to me ; and if thus I did not penetrate his Jewish feelings, I should pursue the subject in a personal way, saying that his flagrant abuses were a reflection on me as his rabbi, construable in no other way than that I was incapable of accomplishing the task performed by my predecessors for thousands of years, and finally, all else availing not, I would speak to him of decency and manliness and fair play. I would point out to him that it is cowardly to take advantage of his neighbor-tradesman who respects the day and gives his Jewish employes an opportunity to do the same without asking it as a favor, and that these Jewish merchants were entitled to at least the same spirit of fellowship at his hands as he shows his Christian neighbor, when he suspends business operations on days which cannot possibly appeal to him, only because a kindly feeling ought to prevail, and not to shut down business on such days would be regarded as taking unfair advantage of those who do. If I were a rabbi and had pursued the course thus briefly outlined, and success crowned my endeavor, I should be supremely happy ; if I failed I should feel that to the extent of my ability I had done my duty. In a preceding paragraph the attempt has been made to show that the lives of too many Jews of prominence do not comport with positions which they now hold in Jewish institutions, and much less does their conduct justify their selection as members of a Synod. Reference has likewise been made to the lack of proper equipment of the laity to fill the place. Apropos of this last feature and as illustrating that lack of proper equipment does not necessarily mean absence of scholarly ability, I would like to repeat a few words from the learned disquisition prepared for this symposium by Mr. Israel H. Peres, which appeared in the Israelite of August 18. He said : 154 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD " The creed of the Jew is a belief in God and His all-wise Providence, in the immortality of the soul, and although he no longer waits the coming of Christ in the Orthodox sense, he is waiting in patience and in suffering the coming of Christ's great influence upon all the peoples of the earth, when they, bending under His love, will dwell together in peace and harmony and cease to hate and kill each other." Here is a new doctrine in Judaism sure enough. " Waiting in patience, and in suffering the coming of Christ's great influence upon all the peoples of the earth." Of course, the author intended this beautiful sentiment to be taken as a figure of speech merely, but we need protection against such flights of fancy. Figurative ex- pressions like the one quoted are at least as inappropriate as a cross crowning a synagogue would be misplaced, even though it were put there merely to satisfy a craving for the beautiful in 'architecture. I have written of rabbi and laymen unrestrainedly but with a heart which harbors neither bitterness nor despair with the single purpose of presenting reasons why I do not believe a mixed Synod at this time would subserve the cause of Judaism in America. While not responsive to the terms of the invitation extended by the Israelite, I desire to say that as a layman I heartily approve the purpose of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, or to be more precise, I believe that an organization composed exclusively of rabbis, the object of which is to discuss and decide questions which in their opinion are of importance to the Jews of America, ought to exist, and is better qualified to advise on matters of religion and religious practice than a body part clerical and part lay would be, for the best of all reasons, that the subjects treated are clearly and definitely within the domain of their special study and calling. Moreover, the estimate that should properly be placed on a minister's words and arguments can be made with fairness only by those who are thoroughly versed in the subject matter under discussion ministers and not laymen. The wisest course, that could be pursued by laymen if a mixed Synod were instituted, would be to adopt the views of the rabbis in whom they have greatest confidence and that is not always a just way to act. The main if not the sole purpose of introducing the lay element into a Synod is to secure practicality in its proceedings. As to this VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 155 let the rabbis announce what is. right; what is Jewish; and the governing powers of each Congregation will decide how closely the members are able under existing conditions to conform thereto, and that would be done even though the Synod were mixed a disclaimer having been entered in advance that there is the slightest intention of encroaching on the right of Congregational self-government. Finally, I would have the members participate in the work of the Conference as ministers in Israel and not as rabbis filling particular pulpits. Emphatically their labor will be better done if undertaken in behalf of American Judaism than if it spells the desires of special communities. I would have them meet as ministers of God, on a plat- form as broad as great Judaism itself, unhampered by a narrow thought of any kind ; with heart and mind and soul intent on serving the Eternal by promulgating in their pristine purity His all-wise messages to mankind. x ALFRED M. COHEN. f Little Rock, Ark., December n, 1904. Dear Doctor: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23d of November, answer to which was delayed until after I received the book you referred to. In reply to your request that I give you my views upon the expediency of establishing or intro- ducing the Synod, I have to say : A-Synod, to put the idea into different words, means a combina tion of experienced and discreet men, brought together for tht purpose of settling doctrines or disputes relating to the spiritual affairs of a given creed. In matters of creedal welfare so far as concerns the affairs of Reform Judaism in the United States in a material point of view, a combination of individuals has long been current, in the form of the Union of Congregations and the com- mittees of that union. Hardly any one will deny that this combina- tion has been beneficial in a practical point of view, and that the benefits so resulting would have been impracticable if we would have depended upon the discreet activity of individuals working inde- pendently of each other, however able such individuals may have been. The Synod will, from another direction, do work in combi- nation, for the welfare of the common creed, and will inform that 156 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD creed with characteristics which are common, and are not the eccen- tric productions of geniuses acting separately. And in this way it will supplement the work of the Union. It need not follow that dogmatism and crystallization of creed will thereby occur to a prejudicial extent. We have arrived at a stage of social progress which, so far as Judaism is concerned, leaves little room for well-grounded fear of reactionary results from this, or any other effective source. If to combine upon an increasing and widening scale is the almost universal feature of the modern age, in material, educational, artis- tic and moral matters, it is obvious that combination must be of as much, if not more, importance in matters which affect our spiritual good and effect our spiritual regeneration and advancement. For these reasons, and for the reasons set forth by the committee of your Conference and by Dr. Margolis, in a recent brochure, I favor the Synod. Yours truly, MORRIS M. CORN. Indianapolis, February 15, 1905. Do we want a Synod in Reform Judasim? This question can well be answered in the negative as the creation of such a body would be dangerous, perhaps fatal, to the progress of Judaism in this country. During the past fifty years Reform Judaism has made wonderful progress, keeping step with the reform spirit of the country and of the age. To-day a new condition is presenting itself. With the influx of the multitude of Jews coming to our country to escape the tyranny of persecution, we are confronted with the problem of assim- ilating this mass of orthodoxy, and while teaching these people how to live in a free country, to also teach them the beauties of a free religion. It has always seemed to me that one of the beauties of our religion was the fact that each individual was at liberty to worship the one God in such a manner as his heart and his conscience dictated with- out any human agency trying to force him to follow along a narrow path. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 157 Reform Judaism has tried to get away from obsolete ceremonials and has taught that true religion consists not in empty forms and ceremonies, but rather in an effort to make humanity more Godlike ; to give the Jew higher ideals of life ; to make him feel that each man has a mission to perform, and that each man can make the world better for having lived. Then why should we take a step backward and install a body that would sooner or later take upon itself to try and direct all Jewish thought, all Jewish life, and relegate American Judaism back to the narrow groove of ceremonials and dogma that has so often been its bane. The American Jew is one of independent thought, who, while firmly believing in the cardinal principles of Judaism, will not allow a human agency to dictate to him the manner in which he shall worship his God. The foreign Jew, who is now coming to our shores, is bound around with the shackles of orthodoxy, and unless we can offer in exchange a religion free from the restraints such as a Synod would doubtless inject into Reform Judaism, will either remain within the tenets of his orthodoxy, or seek the freedom of the unchurched. The question that confronts American Judaism is not whether the marriage of a Christian girl to a Jew entitles her upon her death to sleep in a Jewish cemetery, or whether a Jew dare worship his Creator upon any of the seven days of the week, but rather what shall we do to Americanize this foreign element that is now coming to these shores, both as to its citizenship and its Judaism. This can be done in both cases by teaching him the beauties of freedom in all things so long as it does not interfere with the rights of others. This is the question that confronts the American rabbinate as well as the laity, and it is to this that we should bend all our ener- gies, depending upon the methods that have enabled the American Jew to place his religion upon the high plane it occupies before the world to-day, ever trying to take a step forward, relegating to the rear the things that in the past were tried and found wanting. SOL. S. KISER. 158 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD Dear Sir: I feel that your courteous invitation, to one who is not in harmony with the principles represented by your Conference, to state his opinion on the question of the advisability of forming a Synod, demands a reply even at the risk of its proving to be an un- satisfactory one. That the reform party in Judaism forms a separate and distinct branch of the Keneseth Yisrael is so patent that it must be recog- nized by all. However much we may regret the schism, we are bound to recognize that it exists, and that the breach cannot be healed. It is entirely in consonance with the principles I believe in, to hope that the development of reform Judaism may proceed on an orderly system and in such a way as to discourage the vagaries and anarchy of extreme individualism. A Synod properly constituted might check these radical tendencies and lead to a systematic evolu- tion. But on the other hand it might give these tendencies and practices the force and prestige which an official endorsement con- veys. We should then witness the sorry spectacle of reform Judaism authoritatively sanctioning Sunday services, which are un- Jewish in spirit, notwithstanding the declaration of the Conference at its last meeting to the contrary ; and we might witness the official confirma- tion of equally un- Jewish doctrines which are nowadays frequently promulgated from Jewish pulpits, particularly in the absurd Christ- mas and Easter sermons with which we are annually favored by radical preachers. The constitution of the Synod is therefore a matter of vital im- portance. The personal equation cannot be ignored. Not all minis- ters who possess a rabbinical diploma are qualified to pass on ques- tions of Jewish law, custom and tradition. The number of those who are not ministers who are so qualified is so small as to render the indiscriminate inclusion of such an element in a Synod a pal- pable absurdity. I greatly doubt whether the decrees of any Reform Synod would command the support of all of its members. If it would not, its creation would be useless labor. A number of the members of your Conference, on their own initiative, still persist in using prayer-books and hymnals arranged by themselves and others to the exclusion of those which are authorized by the Conference. What likelihod is there that they would treat the decrees of a Synod with any greater respect? VIEWS ON THE SYNOD 159 If a Reform Synod had been created at the inception of the reform movement it would have had a basis from which to proceed. After half a century of individualistic chaos where can such a basis be found ? I have been requested to answer a question and instead I am asking others. But they are questions which the Conference must ask itself in order that it may arrive at a safe conclusion. For after all the Conference and not those, who are, like myself outside its sphere of influence, must decide the question according to its idea of what is best for the religious welfare of the constituency which its members represent. Yours very truly, EPHRAIM LEDERER, Philadelphia, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio, December 24, 1904. My Dear Doctor: Pardon my delay in replying to your favor of November 23, asking for an expression as to the advisability and feasibility of establishing a Jewish Synod' in this country. In reply would state that I do not believe a Synod either advisable or feasible. Not feasible because neither the Union of American Hebrew Congre- gations, nor the United Conference of American Rabbis (especially the Conference) have a real harmony, and not advisable because no authoritative body is desired. If the Synod is to be a body with authority, it is not to be desired in American Israel ; and if it is to be a body without authority, it is unnecessary. Better that the Con- ference should do its work and do it successfully and that the Union should do its work and become a real Union of Congregations. Very truly yours, M. A. MARKS. New York, January 20, 1905. My Dear Sir: I have read over the reports on Synod in the Year-Book of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, which you have been good enough to send me. It is not quite clear to me, nor have I been able to get sufficient information as to this in the report and discussions on the subject, 160 VIEWS ON THE SYNOD. what work the Synod is actully to perform. I do not believe that the Reform Jew in the United States will much follow* and be interested in advice given by an ecclesiastical body, such as i believe is in the mind of the proposers of a permanent Synod, nor would the Reform Jew submit to laws or regulations promulgated by aiSynod or any other body. Unfortunately the large mass;; of American Israelites have become a law to themselves, doing wihatiappears right in their own eyes without reference to the iuaito ocfirMerees^andtfci'aditiottj and I fear this state of affairs could nofobe aflsfoeted diroctlytfor indirectly by a Synod, such as is suggested^ by the miejarityj report on the subject. iiija < I feel, therefore, reluctantly constrained to advise against the proposition and only wish I could bring myself to a different view, for the tendency to disregard celestial authority, which so generally prevails, cannot be but unfortuna4^,^T)the future of Judaism. Believe me, with much respect, yours very truly, jApds 5 H. Sa - '<>. rtei sw ai! Sacramento, CaL, December 19, 1904. :n '..>(! Dear Sir: Your letter of the 2$d inst., also a cojjy y of the pro- ceedings of the Central Conference of American. I^aj^is for 1904 came duly to hand. Before attempting to comply with your request, to express an opinion as to the advisability and feasibility of establishing a Jewish Synod in this country, I carefully read the proceedings of the Con- ference, which in the discussion presents strong reasons on both sides of the question. I endeavored to read the discussion judicially with a view of reaching a conclusion purely on the merits of the reasons presented pro and con. The frame of mind in which the discussion left me was that the advocates for the Synod overestimate its importance and its probable value to American Judaism, and that the advocates against the Synod overestimate the evil likely to follow its creatioa To my mind, the proposed Synod is likely to do little good and little harm. If never brought into existence, little will be lost; if created, little or no harm will follow. VIEWS ON THE SYNOD. 161 If it is proposed to establish an ecclesiastical body in this country with power to enforce its decrees, it would then be important for the laity to have a representation in such body, so that its views might be heard and its interests considered. Were it possible to clothe such body with power to enforce its decrees, sooner or later the evil would develop of these decrees becoming tyrannic and despotic in spirit, and all the possible good to be derived from a central body would be more than counterbalanced by the despotism and tyranny which it would be likely to bring forth. But, fortunately, it is im- possible, in this country, to give such a body the power to enforce its decisions and its enactments; and hence, all that it can hope to accomplish must be purely recommendatory in character. This being so, I cannot see what is to be gained by watering questions on purely spiritual and religious issues by lay opinions. Yours truly, H. WEINSTOCK. The Bloch Publishing Company, New York, is the Sole Agent for the Publications of the Central Conference of American Rabbis. 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWI LOAN DEPT. on Renewed books are subject to immediate ' MAY 2 7 1962 MAR 9 1967 * * MAK L~t -LOAN DbJ^T LD 2lA-50m-8,'61 (Cl795slO)476B General Library . University of California Berkeley Gaylord Bros. Makers Syracuse, N. Y. PAT. JAN. 21, 1908 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY