ina 4 tral tA ge Py se Race est Se Hes anne estar Pete ahs See aT eg, Seo ee Sess be < = e Pek = ess - =e a : 7 y a i Sones 1 iat ens : ee Se encore a ce series carpet meres , i. » ae ANS, lai, , ie nh cee a 6 — ee ee S = = fe ee ee ~ ‘ vA eat att if ‘ i i ¢ iy ihe \ BERNHARD FELSENTHAL TEACHER IN ISRAEL Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/bernhardfelsenthOOfels We 4 ES SIA Poy AUT PRIN OCT 20 1924 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL.,.» TEACHER IN ISRAEL a SELECTIONS FROM HIS WRITINGS WITH BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH AND BIBLIOGRAPHY BY HIS DAUGHTER EMMA FELSENTHAL FOREWORD BY CYRUS ADLER NEW YORK OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMERICAN BRANCH: 35 WEST 32np STREET LONDON, TORONTO, MELROURNE AND BOMBAY CopryriGcutT 1924 By Emma FELSENTHAL PRINTED IN Tue Unrrep Srarus or AMERICA Tosy Rupsovits Inc. FOREWORD It is a high privilege to be permitted to write a foreword to a volume devoted to the life and writings of Bernhard Felsenthal. ‘This privilege I ascribe in part to the fact that his daughter, the editor of the present volume, has placed an unduly high value upon the slight encouragement and help given her in its preparation. I confess that I was not sanguine of her success when she first broached the project to me, for as a rule the son or the daughter is an unsuccessful biographer. In this case we have the rare exception to the almost universal rule. The beautiful and noble figure of Bernhard Felsenthal is made to live before our very eyes. We can see his lovely personality re-created for those who had the good fortune to know him, and his very form and figure made evident to a new generation who will be blessed through the acquaintance of such a man. I prefer to believe, however, that Miss Felsenthal—even if subconsciously—accorded me this opportunity because of a special personal relationship which I was permitted to have with her father. When I was a lad of sixteen, I rashly undertook to prepare a catalogue of the library of Isaac Leeser, and zealous friends caused the catalogue, the first of its kind in this country, to be published. It naturally contained many errors and those Doctor Felsenthal took the trouble to point out in detail, but with words of great kindness and en- couragement. Four years later I published another cata- logue—of the library of Doctor Joshua I. Cohen of Baltimore—and to this Doctor Felsenthal gave generous praise in a review. V1 FOREWORD At about the same time, I began to contribute a series of articles on American Jewish history to the Menorah and it was he who suggested to me the formation of the American Jewish Historical Society. At that time I should not have had the temerity to undertake its organization without his encouragement and the feeling that a man of his years and standing was prepared to further the enterprise. I had the pleasure too of taking part, as chairman of the Board of Directors of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, in conferring the degree of Doctor of Divinity upon Doctor Felsenthal in 1905. Since so many of those concerned have now passed away, it may not be amiss to reveal the fact that this action was suggested by Judge Sulzberger to Doctor Schechter. The latter eagerly took up the sugges- tion and wrote and telegraphed to all of the directors so that he might early be able to apprise Doctor Felsenthal of the proposed distinction. With the restraint customary upon such occasions Doctor Schechter on June 18, 1905, conferred upon Doctor Felsenthal the Honorary Degree of Doctor of Divinity “as a mark of recognition of his attain- ments, his zeal and his devotion to the cause of American Judaism.” For those who are accustomed to weigh words, this was indeed a deserved tribute. Nothing need be added to it— nothing is to be taken away. Cyrus ADLER PREFATORY NOTE Many have shown kindness to me in the preparation of this book. Iam very grateful to those who have generously given of their time and knowledge, and have assisted me with information, suggestion, or encouragement. I think first of Dr. Gotthard Deutsch, now also departed from among us, who, only a short time after my father’s death, gave the first impetus to the making of one portion of this volume when he expressed the hope that a selection from my father’s writings should some day be gathered together and published. Dr. Deutsch knew of the plans for this book, saw the bibli- ography in unfinished form, and encouraged me to continue. Dr. Cyrus Adler, Dr. Samuel Schulman, and Dr. H. G. Enelow have all given me friendly encouragement and advice; Dr. Samuel S. Cohon has aided me in the translitera- tion of Hebrew words and in other matters involving a knowledge of Hebrew; Dr. Alexander Marx, librarian of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and Mr. A. S. Freidus, the late librarian of the Jewish Division of the New York Public Library, have given helpful suggestions in regard to the bibliography and have extended to me many courtesies in the two libraries administered by them. From Mr. Freidus I received invaluable aid in summarizing the Hebrew articles which the bibliography contains. Mr. I. George Dobsevage, secretary of the Jewish Publication Society of America, and others of its officers have shown me kindness. From Miss Anabel E. Hartman, formerly of the faculty of the University of Illinois, I have received most cordial assistance, and a number of others to whom I have appealed for information or aid have responded freely and vii Vill PREFATORY NOTE generously. I gratefully acknowledge the service they have rendered me. | It is not possible adequately to express my deep sense of obligation toward Mr. Toby Rubovits, who has given abso- lutely without stint of his time and thought and effort in order that this book should appear in worthy form. He has taken upon himself the burden of a thousand details con- nected with its publication, and has done this solely out of devotion to the memory of the teacher whom he loved and reverenced in life. No words of mine could do more than reflect faintly the heartfelt gratitude I feel toward this most loyal, most generous friend. EmMMA FELSENTHAL URBANA, ILLINOIS January, 1924 It seems well to state here that I have made a few changes in the language of my father’s English papers. I have wished to remove the more obvious Germanisms which they contain. My alterations have been few and slight and have been limited for the most part to changes here and there in the order of words, to occasional substitutions of one preposition for another, etc. JI am confident that the sense has not been in the least affected by this small amount of editing which I have done. aed fh CONTENTS HORE WORDIBY, CYRUS TADLER UR ITUh: | kM eV OR Paya tdie Saunt! Fe V REE ATOR VoNOTE i Ucn cee ae ren ei has @ REO Oe re We ENT PART I. BERNHARD FELSENTHAL, TEACHER IN ISRAEL PRN SRUATELE ROG e Ue Ar aye Gumi saa Wie Mi Gide ithe a RON Aas 2 len OUTHEINN GERMANY. 7 1522-TO04 Sify elie, vey cel neh 0S 7 III. Frrst YEARS IN AMERICA. LEADERSHIP IN REFORM Ebel OOAM MLAB TT cite COU LLU INEM RMT Me RAL CN or ig cor La 20 IV. SCA BDIPATE/ LONG TOOA TOO fe he Mer enaun SW retire pate siar 30 Weegee TIREMENT MEnLOo7 LO 7 lm dire Mee wir ehaline Nae ulin) GO NA ACTIVITYOFOR ZIONISMS 2. TSO 71008 1), vile! | end Wine") uy ESAS TANCE AR GT OO Zon QOs iy) oun) Say tanec uawl Se hitce Aer a AMM Loe APPENDIX: GERMAN ORIGINALS OF LETTERS INCLUDED IN TEXT 102 PART II. SELECTED WRITINGS PRAVVEELE PORES WHR EJOICE saad bi cliley Mle hi aicnaulys RE OF 2. THE ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND Its THREE EpocHSs . . . 139 Pe B EB ISDA TRICK mmr rau Att. cei Tetmuediaa Volo RWeeh teh Ts TOA’ 4. BIBLE INTERPRETATION: How AND How Not... . 177 5. CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE CHRIst”. . . . 188 DaRUUPAVVANDERINGS JEW UU db hee Miran yn. ie eee TOS Pen EVISU RESTS gin citi e acca Mnt aman Marsares), ve citi cane neam on hfe. SV EER ET OSWE: OTAND 0.) jal ee emmite rai) dct mei main 22 8 ix x CONTENTS 9. SELECTED PASSAGES: On Judaism On Reform Judaism On the Synod Question On Zionism . On Christianity, the Relation of Te atid the eee to the World, etc. On Ethics and Religion, Philosophy K Life, ELCe PART IIL ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY . INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY. PAGE 241 250 254 256 265 270 283 355 PART I BERNHARD FELSENTHAL TEACHER IN ISRAEL uf 5° Bea oi ho) vt Ai VA i err *% vi a Pend : “on - ¢ gee r\ } Ly } ' ' 4 Pt he ae & P ay, “Ay . \ v ¥ . | 4 \ ' 1 ' ’ ? { ¢ \e 3 * & Lite f nae 1 fl f . fi é ’ Ras, ‘ 4 - ‘ ane is { Z Ms im Pe c ghey r p {ih +e Al : oO ive Ad ae i > LS Most Vat b hs | ee A) Le eo bel hin } i a Stig rei 1 vv ‘ ik 7 git MY FATHER ON the fourth of March, 1903, my father sat in his study on the third floor of our house on Prairie Avenue, Chicago, writing a letter. This study, or “‘library,” as we called it, was a large, plain room, having as its main furnishings a capacious desk and three bookcases, two of which were simply sets of shelves, carpenter-made and home-stained, which my father had used in library after library for thirty years, in various moves from one house to another. The books on these shelves were also old and plain. They were nearly all in Hebrew or German, and with very few exceptions they had to do with Hebrew literature, Jewish history, Jewish problems. The tall folios of the Talmud leaned against each other on the lowest shelves. It was the library of a Hebrew scholar who had had little money for books and had had to satisfy himself with owning the absolute indispensables in his subject, and very few others. In 1903 this privation troubled him no longer. It was one he had long since grown accustomed to and indeed had always taken philosophically, as he had taken all the events and circumstances of his life. In the very letter he was at that moment writing he refers to the ‘‘spiritual calm,” the “objective attitude of mind” which he has always endeav- ored to cultivate in relation to the facts of life. This letter holds up the mirror perfectly to his inward self, shows us clearly what was his state of mind and heart and soul at eighty-one. It shall therefore be given in full in 3 4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL these pages. First, however, let me tell how he appeared to the outward physical eye. There is double reason to describe him at this late period of his life, only five years before its end: one remembers him best then, as is natural; and he was then most character- istically himself. Some men, the very active, are always young, as they come to our minds; my father’s qualities were those which attach themselves rather to vigorous old age. He looked ten years less than eighty. There was not a trace of feebleness in his walk, in his voice, in his posture, which was erect as the average man’s. His head was large and well shaped, his hair very thick and very gray—not even yet entirely white. His features were large but not heavy; the forehead noticeably full and broad and high. The eyes were very dark brown and deep set and glowing—as with a soft fire, partly of the mind, partly of the spirit— under straight, thick eyebrows almost black. ‘There were deep lines about the eyes, otherwise the skin was unusually smooth for one of his years. A short beard covered his chin. Only an inch or two more than average height, he gave the effect of being taller than he was, because of his slenderness of build. He gave little thought to his appearance, yet was not neglectful of it. No doubt he looked a little old-fashioned to others—not in his soft house coat, but on the street, with the high silk hat he continued to wear (a little large for him and so worn too far back on his head) long after other men had adopted other fashions, and in his long ministerial- looking black coat and narrow tie. His expression was serious, mild, thoughtful, kindly. In conversation his face shone with a sweet friendliness. He could look amused, pleased, very happy—and also sad, troubled, or angry; being quite unconscious of self, his TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5 expression reflected frankly the feeling of the moment. Just as perfectly it reflected his settled permanent self. He was not of “‘magnetic” or “stimulating” or ‘‘com- manding”’ personality; these words do not fit one so modest and retiring. For all that, the impression he made was immediate. One recognized instinctively that he was wise and good and lovable—such a man as could write the letter which I now set down. March 4, 1903 Miss Bertha Levi Frankfort on the Main Dear Nigce! Several weeks have already passed since I received your last letter, dated December, and still—I regretfully acknowl- edge—it remains unanswered. Let me hope, dear Bertha, that you will be so considerate as to pardon me, and will find excuse enough in the fact that I am no longer one of those happy carefree young people who cheerfully seize their pens in order to exchange thoughts with dear friends far away. Now do not contradict me, dear Bertha,— do not tell me I need only a 1 and an 8 to write the number of my years. Well, in that you are correct. But—but—the figure 8 belongs at the left, and the figure 1 at the right; not the other way round. Do not forget that 81 years lie behind me, and not 18, and that a man in his eighties is inclined to be more or less inactive, neglectful, to dislike the labor of writing, and so on, and soon. One cannot resist the laws of nature, neither those which govern our mental life, nor those which govern our physical life; we are obliged, every one of us, to resign ourselves submissively to their rule. “Uncle is low-spirited; is harboring pessimistic thoughts; he must surely be writing on a cloudy day,’’—perhaps this is what you will think after reading so far. But it is not so. I am not giving vent to philosophical reflections, neither optimistic nor pessimistic reflections; I am merely stating facts. But facts also have their two sides. I have always been accus- tomed to face the facts of life with spiritual calm, and in an objective attitude of mind; I have always endeavored to look upon life’s events without prejudice, from both their cheerful and their gloomy sides. Now let me add, lest you conclude from what I say that old age is 6 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL weighing heavily upon me, that I have good reason to point to the bright side of the picture, and that, considering my years, I am well and happy, not yet bowed down by weariness and weakness and lan- guor and other ills of old age. For this thanks to my Creator! Old age is not the time of hope, but of memory. To me these years seem like the evening hour which follows a long and crowded day, in which rain and sunshine, storm and calm, clouds and blue sky have succeeded each other. We sit before our door and thought- fully watch the sun as it slowly sinks in the sky. In spirit we live over again the fast-fading day. Many pictures pass before the inward eye and many are the thoughts which rise, one after another, in our minds. Well for us if the sight of the setting sun does not disturb the serenity of our souls, and if we can look back with a quiet conscience upon the day that is past; if we can say that the happy hours have outnumbered those that were sad, and if we can with peaceful and contented mind face the rapidly approaching night in which the sun will no longer shine for us. As I write these last words, a stanza comes to my mind from my best-beloved poet, Goethe, who expresses immeasurably better than I am able to do it the thoughts which at this moment fill my soul. “Ueber allen Gipfeln—ist Ruh’—in allen Wipfeln—spiirest Du— kaum einen Hauch.—Die Vogelein schweigen im Walde.—Warte nur, balde—ruhest Du auch.” But enough of this! I am serene and confident; physically, too, quite well and strong. .. . How is it with you, dear Bertha? It will ever give me extraor- dinary happiness to know that you at all times are joyful of heart, are passing through life pure and serene in spirit, and that the good God, Ruler of our destinies, has also bestowed upon you health and well-being in rich measure. Farewell for today! A thousand affectionate greetings from your far-away uncle, who yet in thought is so very near to you. B. FELSENTHAL In spirit we return to the fields of memory. “Many pictures pass before the inward eye.”’ II YOUTH IN GERMANY 1822-1854 My father spent his childhood in the village of Miinch- weiler in the Rhenish Palatinate in the province of Bavaria. His father had a small shop, and also, like the other villagers, a small farm or vineyard, where, however, no agricultural knowledge seems to have been acquired by any of the family, and it may be assumed that the three sons occupied them- selves in other ways than in work on the farm. There was one sister, and my father was the oldest of the four. The first of my father’s ancestors of whom he had any knowledge (I tell of them chiefly because of his own great interest in family relationships) was a certain Isaac, who lived in the beginning of the eighteenth century in the small town of Idar, some fifty miles west of the Rhine and about the same distance south of Coblenz. ‘This Isaac had a son Jacob, born in 1732, who established himself in the near-by village of Rathskirchen, not far from Miinchweiler, and it was his name (Jacob Rathskirchen, that is, Jacob of Raths- kirchen) we heard mentioned most often in conversations about the family between my father and one whom we called Uncle Henry, though he was several degrees more distantly related to us than that—my father’s devoted friend, Henry Greenebaum. ‘These two knew the facts about the rather large number of descendants of Isaac of Idar better than any- one else, and Uncle Henry also felt that strong interest in ties of blood which was common a generation or two ago, and especially so under the conditions in which the Jews Vi 8 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of Europe lived. Uncle Henry made much, in his genial way, of every “connection,” and my father, though less expansive, was always glad to meet his cousins any degree removed, and knew exactly where they belonged on the family tree. Noth- ing could be more consistent. Everyone knows, who has read two paragraphs of his writings, what deep attachment he felt toward those whom he thought of as a larger family, the whole people of Israel. Many times he defends our deeper interest in those nearest to us, saying that it springs from a simple and eternal law of man’s nature—which does not prevent him from loving humanity, but which makes him love more than others his own people, his own friends, his own brothers. In this spirit he writes in 1878 to Mr. August Blum, whose mother was my father’s cousin: So far as I am concerned, it is not only the bond of friendship toward an earnest striving young man, and the bond of respect for an admirable character, that draw me to you—it is the bond of blood relationship also. It is now nearly twenty-four years since I left Germany and settled in America; yet I am still such a confirmed German “old fogy”’ that I continue to lay stress on mishpochah.t Your departed mother, whose lovely image will not fade from my mind so long as memory lives, was from my earliest childhood so intimate and dear a friend that for her sake too I feel myself peculiarly drawn toward her son. It is not surprising, then, that my father enjoyed talk with Uncle Henry about “ Jacob Rathskirchen,” enjoyed meeting relatives, whether close or distant, and even wrote out a brief genealogy. He calls this simply, ‘‘Some Notes for the History of Our Family.” It was written in 1891 for a nephew who had asked for information as to his forebears, and begins, in imitation of the old Jewish fashion of the days when Jews t Family. TEACHER IN ISRAEL fe) were without family names, “To my dear nephew Adolph bent David ben Simon ben Isaac ben Jacob ben Isaac Felsenthal.’’ And indeed for the oldest two in the series of grandfathers the name Felsenthal could not be rightly used, for it was only during the lifetime of my father’s grandfather, in 1807, that the surname was adopted. In that year an edict was issued by Emperor Napoleon which required that all Jews in France adopt regular family names, and the Rhenish Palatinate, where the family resided, was then a part of the French empire. The only other fact of interest which my father tells in these notes is that one of the family, his grandfather’s brother, ‘‘was a member of the great ‘Sanhedrin,’ con- vened by Napoleon in 1806, which assembled in Paris in that and the following year.” Aside from this distinction there is probably no fact (or there was none known to my father) that might further embellish a family history. The Felsenthals back through the several generations of which we have any knowledge appear to have been respected typical German Jews, having their full quota of leading citizens, but for the most part without special claim to notice outside a limited circle. Of the intimate side of his childhood my father told us almost nothing; nor were others of his family given to recounting reminiscences from that time. One brief auto- biographical fragment remains in the notes he made for an address delivered when a man of sixty before a boys’ club in Chicago. From this it appears he was a quite normal boy, playing, running, shouting. Yet I cannot imagine his giv- ing himself up to play with quite the abandon of the other boys of his age. I am sure at least that from the first day he knew what printed letters meant he preferred to read. 1Son of. IO BERNHARD FELSENTHAL His school was, of course, the separate one maintained by the Jews of the village. One may venture the guess that outside of school hours he mingled in a friendly way with those who were not Jewish, as was possible in Germany at that time. For it was not from any hard experience of discrimination against him personally, or of persecution personally suffered, that he felt all his life long the bitterness of anti-Semitism. At thirteen he was sent to the “‘ Kreisgewerbschule”’ in Kaiserslautern, where he followed a general course for three years, and from which he went on to the Polytechnic High School in Munich. This school was doubtless more ad- vanced than its name would indicate to American readers and corresponded in a general way to one of our colleges. A university, in the European sense, my father never attended, strange as it may seem, when one remembers the respect in which his scholarship was held in later years, the Hebrew grammar he wrote, the Ph.D. he received honoris causa little more than a dozen years after coming to this country. It is not so strange. There are other roads to scholarship for some men than through schools and uni- versities. During all the years of his youth the study of books and meditation upon them—for he laid stress on the significance of facts, not on their accumulation—were his life. There were no personal cares to distract him; his family, though not what one might call prosperous, did not need his material help; they respected learning and were proud of their studious son and brother: he was entirely free to live the life of the student. No one is left to tell us of those days and nights in Kaisers- lautern, in Munich, when he was scarcely ever seen without a book. I vaguely remember, from my childhood, one of TEACHER IN ISRAEL II his generation, a distant cousin living in Chicago, who had known him as a young man in Germany, speaking of his quiet ways and of his studiousness. But one does not need the testimony of those who saw him. He read, read, read, so much is certain; and was tempted by no time-wasting pleasures of any kind. Yet he never lost himself so com- pletely in the world of books that he forgot the world about him. ‘‘Dear cousin Felsenthal,’? wrote someone many, many years later, “‘your personality is bound up with the most precious recollections of my childhood. Somehow I connect you with the story of the marriage of the mouse and the nut shell, and with other stories too, though it could not have been you from whom I heard them.”’ His Jewish education was begun at an early age in Miinchweiler, and was continued under the instruction of Rabbi Moses Cohen in Kaiserslautern, but the impression among us is that in this field also he studied, for the most part, alone. The great fact is that in these years of his youth he became master in some way of a great store of Jewish learning. It was not in order to become a rabbi that he devoted himself to the study of Jewish literature, of Hebrew, and of kindred subjects. It was his expectation, until he was eighteen, to enter the government civil service, and to this end he “‘specialized,”’ while in the high school at Munich, in mathematics, a subject which he loved. For a civil serv- ice career, what value had Talmudic lore? But at that time, as my father wrote many years later,' referring to the boyhood of a friend who likewise had studied Torah for the love of it, “‘at that time these studies were pursued for their own sake, without regard to a profession to which they might lead. The study of the Torah was not looked upon as ‘a spade with which to dig, nor a crown with which to adorn Cf. Liebmann Adler. Eine Gedenkrede. Bibliog. 240. 12 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL one’s self.’ No practical considerations were attached thereto, and one studied for higher, more ideal reasons.”’ It is certain that my father, at a very early age, became passionately devoted to special Jewish studies, and solely for love of them he went on and on—from Hebrew to Semitic languages in general; from Jewish history and Jewish thought to their background in and relations with the religious history and religious philosophy of the world. He must indeed have been well prepared when, recogniz- ing finally how impossible it was for a Jew to advance him- self in the service of the state, he changed his plans, entered the teachers’ seminary at Kaiserslautern about the year 1840, and two years later became a village teacher. But though the study of Judaism became early his special interest—not Jewish religion alone, but Judaism in the wide sense in which he used the word, “the sum total of all the manifestations of the Jewish spirit’—this was by no means to the neglect of other subjects. Mathematics interested him, as I have said, and history, and philosophy, and literature, in particular German literature. There must have been epoch-making hours at this period of his life when he sat with his book by lamp or candle. In one of these he first made the acquaintance of Lessing, his revered Lessing; in one he first read Faust—enormous event! These two, Goethe and Lessing, were for him espe- cially beloved names. He quotes from them often and often in his own writings, and there would be no question, even if we had not his direct statement, that they exercised a profound influence upon his spiritual life. Toward Lessing he felt special gratitude for his immense service to the cause of religious tolerance. Goethe he read for all the reasons that one reads Goethe; he read and re-read him all his life long, and when in his middle years and his old age he had TEACHER IN ISRAEL aT? not in his hand a work of Jewish literature, his book was almost sure to be Faust. } If one may judge from the high respect in which he always held the work of elementary teaching, and from the words he wrote when a man of sixty, my father felt his own school life to have been vital in its influence upon him. ‘‘The impressions which one carries from the schoolroom are deep and lasting,’ is what he says. ‘‘Whoever casts an intro- spective glance into his spiritual being, whoever seeks to discover the inner springs of his own conduct, whoever recognizes clearly what it is that has made him such as he is and no other, what it is that makes him behave in such and such a way and not otherwise, will acknowledge that the school as well as life has helped to form him.’ A friend from the Munich days was Moritz Mayer, a brilliant young student of law at the University, who later, in this country, in the fifties and sixties, shared in the ideas held by my father and others as to the exact direction of Jewish Reform, and worked for the cause of Reform as a rabbi in the South. It is a pleasant picture of Moritz Mayer that my father once drew, and one which casts a reflex light upon himself. ‘‘I well remember how his eyes were beaming, and how his whole face was radiant when he spoke of and quoted from his favorite poets, the Latin classics, Horace, Martial, and others.’’ One likes to think of these two, Bernhard Felsenthal and Moritz Mayer, walk- ing together to near-by villages (places so many “hours” away was the expression they used), or visiting each other in their rooms, sharing with beaming eyes their literary enthusiasms. t A number of the quotations from B.F. which appear in this sketch have been translated from the German. It has not been thought necessary to indicate in every case the language of the original. 14 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL There must have been other friends of this time whose names we do not know; for though my father’s world was first of all the world of thought, it was never wholly this, and one may be sure that he felt in youth as in age a genuine interest in the people about him. He lived, as the saying goes, within himself, but himself was never the subject of his thinking. His relations with others must always, there- fore, have been frank and natural, and others looked up to him with great respect and with affection. “Tt probably was so,” “‘It must have been so,’’—too many times I am obliged to use these expressions. We know so little of his early life because it never occurred to him to talk about himself. He did not live in the past, not, at least, in its little everyday affairs; yet there is no doubt that they were clear in memory. He spoke a few times of long walks he took to other villages, and he must have been physically strong, though not of noticeably robust type. Once I asked him whether he had known so-and-so in Ger- many. ‘Yes, indeed,’ he answered, and went on to relate in an amused way an incident showing how extremely simple over there in his youth the household arrangements were of a friend who had grown very rich and lived luxuriously in America. | And once he described, in a published article on the hymn “Lekhah Dodi,” the hymn of welcome to the Sabbath, the Friday evening service in the synagogue, as it used to be, writing in such a way that one cannot doubt it was his own experience he was relating: O I think with joy of the Friday evening service when I went with dear father to the synagogue, and when [ heard our ’Hazzan sing with his sonorous voice and in a melodious tone the popular hymn. “Boz Khallah! Boi Khallah! Come, thou bride! Come, thou bride!” The whole congregation was enraptured. Another spirit came over them TEACHER IN ISRAEL 15 and remained with them throughout the whole Sabbath. It was as though a Neshamah Yetherah, an ‘‘Oversoul,” had come from on high and had lent to their lives a more sublime character, more holiness, more beatitude, and true bliss. The everyday thoughts disappeared as by magic when the Sabbath’s coming was greeted by song and psalm; a Sabbath spirit, a spirit of freedom from earthly cares and of enjoyment in God took possession of the congregation. Of the twelve years from 1842 to 1854, in which my father was a teacher of Jewish children, there is almost noth- ing that may with certainty be said. From his description (before the Peerless Society) of the school he himself attended, we may suppose that he taught not only Hebrew language and literature, Jewish religion, history, and cus- toms, but mathematics and geography also, and German, and history in general. One is glad to think that the course in my father’s school included secular as well as religious subjects. For he rejoiced profoundly that there had been a Mendelssohn in the previous century who had induced the German Jewish people to leave their ‘spiritual ghetto” and become acquainted with the wider culture of the world; and in teaching German literature in addition to Hebrew, Roman history as well as Jewish, his feeling as to what was best for his people was exactly represented. In either case it is unthinkable that he did not, in his special Jewish teach- ing, draw constant comparison with the facts of general his- tory, and with modern views in science and morals, as was his later habit in writing on Jewish subjects, and did not attempt to give his pupils that true sense of relations and of values which his own wide reading had brought to him. It was during the forties that the Russian government took steps to organize a system of schools for Jews. My father had some thought of going to Russia to teach in these schools, but the plan failed, and he remained in Germany. ae - BERNHARD FELSENTHAL I think he must have been very happy in his teaching. He had had his special preparation at a teachers’ seminary, and realized the importance of this. ‘‘To be a teacher in the full sense of the word,’ he wrote, “‘one must be acquainted with psychology [die Seelenkunde], with the study of method, with pedagogy.”’ It was never routine work for him; he never for a moment lost sight of its ideal side. I remember when, at the public celebration of his eightieth birthday, he came forward to respond to the kind speeches in which over and over again his far-reaching services had been referred to—it had been difficult for him to sit high up before the eyes of the large congregation and be eulogized—he spoke, not of his larger work, but of the personal contact he had had with the children and young people in the Sab- bath school. He found in this, he said, one of the great gratifications of his life. It could not have been different when in the forties, as a young man, he taught there in a German village. There was no doubt another great source of satisfaction for him during these quiet years in the opportunity which his life of teaching gave him of continuing his own studies. Kaiserslautern was only ten miles distant from Miinchweiler; perhaps he made an occasional journey there to examine a book, or to discuss a mooted Talmudic question with Rabbi Cohen or some other Jewish scholar. Certainly he spent his leisure, every hour of it which was not filled by one friendly duty or another, with his books. How else would he have been able to cite later with such sureness chapter and verse, not only of one Book, but of many books of literature, of religion, of language, of history ? Stirring events occurred in Germany during this decade in both the political and the Jewish religious world. There is no contemporary statement of my father’s attitude toward TEACHER IN ISRAEL 17 these events. Long after he refers in some place to “the glorious year of the people’s uprising in 1848”’; but one would not need to be told in so many words that my father, lover of freedom, desired intensely that the struggle with kings which then took place should end in the victory of the people. Nor does one need other proof than his own views on Jew- ish Reform, clearly expressed ten, fifteen years later in Amer- ica, to be certain that, as he read at Miinchweiler what had been said and resolved and laid down by Geiger and Hold- heim and Adler and others at the rabbinical conferences at Brunswick and Frankfort and Breslau, in 1844, and ’45, and ’46, his soul rejoiced over every sign they gave of progress toward liberalism in Jewish thought and Jewish life. He felt that it was a Jewish renascence into which he was born. “Die geistigen Str6mungen, welche seit einem Vierteljahr- hundert das Judenthum durchziehen, haben ein Leben unter den Glaubensbriidern wach gerufen, wie ein solches seit den letzten fiinfhundert Jahren nicht mehr bestanden hat”’ (“The movement which during this last quarter-century has passed through Judaism has called into being a more vigor- ous religious life among its adherents than has existed for five hundred years’’) are words he wrote some twenty years later, by which time, in a new country, he had taken no insignificant part in keeping this new life in Judaism at its fullest. Who knows? Perhaps the secret desire to share in such a work was aroused in my father in his Miinchweiler days by these epoch-making rabbinical conferences of the forties. The years passed, and in 1854, with his father and sister, he came to this country. -The two brothers had preceded them; the mother had died at home in the little German village two years before. The reason for the family removal was the same which dictated the step to thousands of other 18 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL German Jews in the early fifties, and, for that matter, to thousands of other Germans. ‘They knew that on this side of the ocean they would breathe a freer air, could expect for themselves and their children opportunities which, the revolution of 1848 being without result, would never be open to them in the land of their birth. In the case of Jews the situation, as has been suggested, was especially difficult, because certain avenues of development, certain professions, were entirely closed to them, or definite limits were set to the degree of advancement allowed to Jews within them. My father had considered entering the government service in some other capacity than that of village teacher. But he knew that, had he done so, Germany would have said to him, “‘So far shalt thou go, and no farther,’ and he would have been forced, solely because he was a Jew, to remain in an obscure position. There remain from that journey from Bavaria to Central United States a few pages of penciled notes in a little cloth- covered notebook. The family sailed from a French port, and passing through France on their way to the vessel, they must have had some slight contact with the French peasant, for we find in the little book an observation on his superiority to the German Bauer—the Frenchman agreeable, cordial, possessing a native grace of manner, the German boorish by contrast. A passing observation this, and in regard to one group only. It must not be taken to represent his attitude toward Germans and Germany in general. ‘There are hundreds of sentences in his later writings, his letters and articles, which show his devotion to Germany, the Germany of his youth, with its Gemiithlichkeit, its spirit of simple friendliness, its noble literature. How deep the influence of his early years was, how truly he remained a German in some respects to the end of his days (and, it may be said in TEACHER IN ISRAEL 19 passing, what were the limits of his devotion to things German), is best indicated in his words, written in rgor, in an essay dealing in part with the Jews considered as a race:? Racially I am a Jew, for I have been born among the Jewish nation. Politically I am an American, as patriotic, as enthusiastic, as devoted an American citizen as it is possible to be. Spiritually I am a German, for my inner life has been profoundly influenced by Schiller, by Goethe, by Kant, and by other intellectual giants of Germany. I have drunk from the springs of German literature; I have sat at the feet of German teachers; and I acknowledge with a certain pride, in thought and feeling | am a German. Thus he acknowledges his relation to the spiritual Ger- many of his youth. What his feeling was toward political Germany may be inferred from his love for its opposite, free America: “I am as patriotic, as enthusiastic, as devoted an American citizen as it is possible to be.” But there is a passage from an informal piece of writing dated New Year’s Eve, January 1, 1888, which shows still more clearly his attitude toward the two nations considered in their governmental aspects: In Germany Bismarck reigns and the old Kaiser says Yes and Amen to all that Bismarck commands. More soldiers? Very well; the army must be increased. More taxes? Certainly. ‘The father- land needs mightier armies, more forts, larger fleets; must be prepared to meet its hereditary enemies to the East and to the West, the Muscovites and the Gauls. And if in the meantime the spirit of free development within the country lowers its torch and every thought and every effort in the direction of nobler things is discouraged, so that material aims may reach fulfillment, what of that ? The Britons? That nation of shopkeepers, as people are so fond of calling them? As for me, I praise these Britons and their American cousins in spite of everything. ‘They are the upholders and preservers of true freedom—not that freedom which is fashioned from above, which comes as a gift from those in power, but that more genuine freedom which springs from individual self-determination and is limited by respect for the freedom and the rights of others. t Jiidische Thesen. Bibliog. 297. III FIRST YEARS IN AMERICA. LEADERSHIP IN REFORM 1854-1864 ON arrival in this country (my father carrying a bag of prunes which someone in Miinchweiler had asked him to deliver to a relative in New York), the three traveled west to Louisville, where one of the brothers had established him- self. My father after a few months went on to Lawrence- burg, Indiana, in which place he remained for a year as teacher in a Jewish family, leaving early in 1856 for the neigh- boring town of Madison where a situation had offered itself. Madison was a town of 8,000, having, as it happened, a rather vigorous Jewish life. There was a congregation of fifteen families, with a resident rabbi, and the usual congrega- tional school, where secular as well as religious branches were taught and much more of religious education was attempted than in our Sunday schools of today. My father went to Madison as teacher in this school. Here he stayed for two years, toward the end of that time performing some of the functions of rabbi, though it is clear that he did not then nor for some years after think of himself as a rabbi or even as one looking forward to a rabbinical career. The congregation was of course Orthodox. Before 1860 there were in the entire country hardly more than a half dozen congregations which had accepted the principles of Reform and were acting upon them in their synagogal life. It created no small excitement in the Jewish community of Madison, therefore, when my father made a speeech in monthly meeting—it was a Sunday afternoon, the first of 20 TEACHER IN ISRAEL 21 February, 1857; then and there began his practical efforts in the cause of Jewish Reform in America—in which he sug- gested that radical changes be made in the Sabbath service. His proposals are conservative enough to many of us now in the reading, but they sounded bold indeed in the ears of some of his listeners. ‘‘What!”’ exclaimed X, when my father had ceased speaking, ‘‘a man with such notions expects to read prayers for us on Rosh ha-Shanah? Such a person wants to teach our children Judaism 2” My father quotes the remark (also other more approving ones) in an article describing the lively meeting which ran through several numbers of the Deborah in March of that year.t| His own speech is there given in full. It is informal and refers mainly to the local situation; nevertheless, it clearly foreshadows the - two important statements of Reform principles which came from his pen during the two following years. The spirit of the Madison speech and its fundamental ideas are identical with those of Kol Kore Bamidbar. He began to write for the Jewish press when he contrib- uted, from Lawrenceburg, and then from Madison, two or three articles to Dr. Wise’s Israelite. From Madison he contributed also his first article to the magazine Sina1, a monthly devoted to the discussion of Reform principles which was edited by Dr. David Einhorn, of Baltimore. Dr. Einhorn was one of the outstanding figures in American Judaism at this period, a man of splendid intellect and force of character. My father had the strongest admiration for him as a leader and as a man; said of him that he was “‘ein prophetischer Geist”; and the close friendship which began with Einhorn at this time was one of the great satisfactions of my father’s life for the next twenty years. They met only a very few times—in 1860 and again in 1869—but they «“‘Reformbewegungen in den israelitischen Gemeinden Amerika’s.”” Bibliog. 8. 22 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL exchanged many, many letters and discussed in a confi- dential way problems and persons in Judaism, particularly in American Judaism, and practical and personal matters also. In later years (Einhorn died in 1879) their views diverged somewhat, my father’s radicalism (radicalism for that time, let it be understood) being a shade more con- servative than that of Einhorn. But in the fifties and sixties and early seventies they were in complete (or almost complete) intellectual harmony. Einhorn and Samuel Adler—these were the two among that early group of leaders whom my father most admired and with whom he had the closest personal relations, the two whom he char- acterized (in 1891, after the death of Adler) as “the Luther and the Melanchthon of the Jewish Reform movement.” Correspondence with Adler, also frequent, began in January, 1859, when my father was in Chicago, in connec- tion with an extremely important event of which something will be said in these pages. Adler’s first letter begins, ‘“Geehrtester Herr College! Stossen Sie sich nicht an dieser Ueberschrift. Ein Mann, der denkt und schreibt und wirkt wie Sie, der ist unser College, wenn er auch keine Besoldung dafiir empfingt” (‘‘My dear colleague! You must not wonder at being thus addressed. A man who thinks and writes and works as you do is our colleague, even though he receives no salary therefor’), and he signs himself, ‘‘mit briiderlichem Gruss, Ihr S. Adler.’”? And my father, in turn, looked up to Adler as one of Israel’s wisest men, and loved him for his mildness as well as for his wisdom. Life in Madison, while not without its compensations, chiefly in the form of pleasant friendships, had its difficult side. In the fall of 1857 my father wrote to his friend Moritz Mayer in Charleston that he had not the leisure nor the peace of mind to contribute other articles to Sinai, as he TEACHER IN ISRAEL 23 should like to do. “Es gibt selten eine Stunde, wo man ruhig genug ist, um einen natiirlichen Gedanken nieder- zuschreiben.”’ And there are other indications that he was beginning to think it would be well to seek a position elsewhere. Dr. Mayer wrote to him shortly thereafter of a position in Mobile, where there would be a real opportunity to influence an Orthodox congregation into becoming one of Reform character (only he should by no means mention in his letter of application that he hoped to work such a trans- formation). He did not apply for the Mobile position; he was strongly anti-slavery in his opinions, and this may have had something to do with his decision. However, his stay in Madison lasted only a few months longer, and in April, 1858, urged by friends in Chicago, in particular by Mr. Gerhard Foreman, whom he had known well in Germany, he came to the city, then a town of 80,000, where he was to remain to the end of his days. In Chicago his first employment had nothing to do with his special abilities and preparation. He became a bank clerk and sat (very likely) for so many hours a day before a thick book on a high stool. It amuses one a little to think of him in such a capacity, knowing how limited his knowl- edge always was of finance and of business in general; but his routine tasks were probably not seriously distasteful to him, since they had to do with figures, and the occupation was, for that reason, not a poor alternative for teaching. It left him perfectly free, also, to live his own life when away from his desk. And his employers, Greenebaum Brothers, who were at the same time his countrymen, his kinsmen, and his very good friends, recognized that in his case the avoca- tion was far more important than the vocation, and assisted him to combine the two the more easily by fitting up for him a small room behind the office as a study. Here he had 24 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL his books, and here he read and thought and wrote during his leisure hours. No doubt it was here in this little back room at 45 Clark Street that his Kol Kore Bamidbar, that one of his writings which was to stir the minds so profoundly and affect so directly the religious future of many of his fellow-Jews, was planned and took shape. There were, in 1858, two Jewish congregations in Chicago, both of them Orthodox. They conducted their services entirely in Hebrew (which was sufficiently understood by very few) according to a ritual based in part on outworn ideas, retained the traditional ceremonies, and stood for the strictest adherence in the private religious life of their members to the usages and customs of the past. The 613 Biblical injunctions were to be literally obeyed, and the Talmud was to be the authority on their interpretation. The Aaronides—those who were believed to be of priestly origin—retained their special privileges. Certain primitive marriage regulations remained in force. The Bible was held to be directly inspired. One prayed for the coming of a personal Messiah, the restoration of the Palestinian mon- archy with a descendant of the house of David as ruler, the restoration of the sacrificial cult—repeating prayers many centuries old without, perhaps, very close attention to their content. or, to quote my father’s opinion, there were the Gewohnheitsmenschen (‘creatures of habit’’), and there were the sincerely orthodox; and the Gewohnheitsmenschen were holding in a superstitious and unthinking way to custom while giving no thought to the great fundamental religious principles of Judaism; were giving expression in their prayers to beliefs and ideas which in their secret hearts they had abandoned. Such were the prevailing opinions and sentiments among the Jews of Chicago at this time, such the religious atmos- TEACHER IN ISRAEL 25 phere. Sentiment and opinion were, however, by no means unanimous. A few of the members of Kehillath Anshe Maarabh, influenced by the modern spirit, and by what the Reform movement had accomplished elsewhere, desired earnestly that the congregation should adapt itself to West- ern and nineteenth-century ideas, and after much debate some changes were introduced into the ritual. But no one was satisfied—neither those who had been persuaded against their will to alter a few of their religious habits, nor those who had proposed that the changes be made. What these young men wished was reform of a much more decided and thoroughgoing character. Though they worked more or less blindly, they realized that a few external reforms were unimportant when underlying ideas remained unaffected. My father came to Chicago in April, 1858, and imme- diately this small group gathered about him, and two months later, in the office of Greenebaum Brothers, organized them- selves into the Jiidischer Reformverein (Jewish Reform Society), with the ultimate object of establishing a separate congregation and the immediate one of winning over others to their way of thinking. My father was elected secretary, and under his leadership the society began to discuss the definite principles of Reform. The twenty-seven theses’ which my father submitted at the first meeting and which were debated at this and subse- quent meetings were adopted by the society practically without change. This paper, written in a form which was a favorite one with him—he loved to set down his thoughts thus succinctly, in clear, orderly, systematic fashion—was the first complete statement he made of his Reform opinions. In it are to be found, either directly expressed or implied, his views on many of the subjects on which he wrote often 1 Cf. The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congregation. Bibliog. 277. 26 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL and forcibly in later years—the religious freedom of the individual, the synod, Jewish dogma, the racial unity of the Jews, and others; and it is of great interest to observe that, with the one exception of ‘‘the mission of Israel,’”’ in regard to which his thinking underwent a notable modification,” of which I shall speak later, he held the same views consist- ently from then to the end of his life. These theses were followed in 1859 by the forty-page pamphlet, Kol Kore Bamidbar (‘A Voice Calling in the Wilderness’’), in which my father, speaking to a wider public, the Jewish community in general, gave fuller expression of his views in language persuasive and eloquent. Inspired by the vision of a clarified and enlightened Judaism, which here in America had its special opportunity, he pleaded for a regen- eration of the religious life; for adaptation of the ceremonies to modern and Western conditions; for the willing recognition of the opportunity which the dispersion had brought to Israel for the spread of its sublime ideas. “Here,” he said, “let Judaism blossom forth in such wise that ‘our wisdom and our understanding will appear before the eyes of the nations.’” (“Hier muss ein Judenthum emporbliihen das ‘unsere Weisheit und unsere Vernunft vor den Augen der Nationen’ ist.’’) , Regarding reform of the ceremonial life, his views, briefly stated, were these: Judaism was a religion of development and had therefore the right to alter its forms and institutions. Ceremonies had no special sacredness in themselves; they might be of exceeding value in fortifying and elevating the religious and moral nature, but if through changed conditions they lost their power, it was better to cast them aside. ‘‘A religious law which is not rooted either in the spiritual or the physical nature of man is binding only so long as it continues to exert a sanctifying influence on head and heart, on char- TEACHER IN ISRAEL 2 acter and conduct.” Ceremonies which were clearly anti- quated should then be discarded, and as to the Mosaic laws, history had rendered many of them obsolete forever. But let all care be taken to preserve those ceremonies and usages which still retained their religious significance—the Sabbath evening customs in the home, the Seder service, the lighting of the Hanukkah candles. ‘Man soll nicht das Kind mit dem Bade ausschiitten.”’ There was very great danger in reform which took no account of the past. Reform did not indeed consist in destroying, it was a building up, a regeneration of the religious life. ‘“‘Immerhin bleibt das Aufbauen die Hauptsache.” In what was this regeneration to consist ? In renewed devotion to the great principles of faith in God and morality in human relations, in intenser loyalty to Judaism, to Judaism enlightened and clarified. Kol Kore Bamidbar, as has already been suggested, exerted a marked influence in Chicago. In addition, the Reformverein as a society made various attempts to influ- ence those outside its membership. ‘Two large public meet- ings were held, at both of which my father spoke; a ‘‘call”’ to the friends of Jewish Reform in Chicago to unite to estab- lish a congregation was issued; letters were sent to Dr. Samuel Adler, asking advice on the course it would be wise for a young Reform congregation to pursue, and these letters (written by my father, but signed by an official committee), as also Dr. Adler’s replies, were published in Sinai. It was at this time that Dr. Adler wrote to my father (still a bank clerk, it will be remembered), calling him “‘ Geehrtester Herr Gollece:;: The society grew slowly, and though its purpose was finally accomplished, in 1861, it was only after a period of struggle and effort greater than my father lets appear in the historical sketch which he wrote some forty years later, 28 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL “The Beginnings of Chicago Sinai Congregation.” In a letter to a friend in Lawrenceburg, Mr. L. Adler, he analyzed the situation at the time in this way: Our efforts at reform are making headway very slowly. You will not wonder at that when you remember what mighty opponents they are who stand in the way of efforts of this kind. There is, first, stupidity and ignorance, and ‘against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain”’; there is, secondly, crude fanaticism, which threatens with the auto-da-fé anyone who attempts to lay a finger on its sacred dust and rubbish; thirdly, there is the complete absorption in money- making of the great majority who look with cold indifference on every idealistic and disinterested endeavor. Yet I do not lose courage; I am confident that a better day will succeed this dark night of our Judaism. And thirty years later an early member of the society, Mr. Leopold Mayer, one of the nine who were present at its initial meeting, wrote in a reminiscent letter to my father: Reform was not accomplished in Chicago in the course of friendly promenades. Many a battle was fought, and many were the disillu- sions that fell to the lot of those early champions of Reform. It was always you who led in the fight. It was always you who heartened our small band, encouraged us to new efforts, and clarified our aims for us. By word and deed you arrived at the goal of your desires. Do you recall the fierce debate you had with Dr. M in my house? O many and many a time I have lived over again vividly those early days; but the memory arouses in me sad thoughts also, when I com- pare the present indifference with the devoted labors of early days.! Sinai Congregation came finally into being in June, 1861, and my father became its rabbi. He accepted the position with hesitation, for which there could have been no reason other than his extreme modesty. Whatever doubts lingered in his mind as to his own abilities should have been dispelled by the unmistakable manner in which both Einhorn and t Translated. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 29 Adler had borne testimony to his scholarship, as well as to other qualities fitting him for religious leadership. They had even taken pains to express themselves formally upon the subject. The Zeugniss which Dr. Einhorn sent my father in February of that year, and which no doubt he wrote with the Chicago congregation in mind, speaks of his “thorough knowledge,” his “‘holy ardor,” his “‘excep- tional character.”’ A few months later Dr. Adler conferred upon him the title of ““Morenu ha-Rab,’’* and in very glowing terms referred to his learning, his love of truth, his profoundly religious spirit. Freely translated from the Hebrew original, these are the concluding words of the document: Frankly and openly he will labor and with all the strength of his mind,—and his works will bear witness to his righteousness,—for learning and wisdom dwell with him,—and piety is his spiritual crown. In 1863 Dr. Einhorn bestowed the title upon him for the second time, likewise in terms of high appreciation. But modesty was in him the most firmly rooted of traits, and it would have been natural for him to pause before any position of prominence to ask himself and others if he were indeed the one best fitted to do its work. In sucha situation he was certain to underestimate his own powers. Yet it would not be true to say that he had the habit of self- depreciation. Under ordinary circumstances his powers and abilities did not enter his mind at all; he simply used what he possessed. And he instinctively retreated from anything which forced attention to him in his personal character. His modesty was not self-depreciation, it was not humility; for he had the dignity which is lacking to the humble. It was that modesty which is the outward sign of absolute self- unconsciousness. t Literally, ‘“‘our teacher.” The degree or title was that usually conferred upon students upon examination. It might be conferred by any rabbi. 30 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL In connection with my father’s hesitancy in 1861 it is of interest to know that in 1860 he had been a candidate for a pulpit in Philadelphia. The vote against him there stood twenty-five to twenty-three, and the explanation for his non- election, as reported to him in all friendship by Dr. Einhorn, lay in his oratorical manner—or shall I say his lack of orator- ical manner, since he spoke with entire naturalness. On a later page I shall speak more fully of this aspect of my father’s public life. For there was another occasion when his defects as a public speaker—for such they were considered to be— affected the course of his life. They weighed nothing, however, with the organizers of the new congregation. With unanimous voice they urged him to become their leader officially as he had been unofh- cially during the difficult period now brought to a close. In Sinai for August, 1861, a brief paragraph reported that ‘“‘Felsenthal, in spite of his extreme modesty, was finally obliged to yield and accept the position of rabbi and teacher with Sinai Congregation. His sermons captivate his listeners.”’ The event concludes one of the most important epochs of his life. Between 1858 and 1861 he had accomplished two things. He had put forth in Kol Kore Bamidbar his most comprehensive statement on the subject nearest his heart, Jewish Reform, and the brief brochure stands out as one of the two most valuable of all his writings, most repre- sentative and influential. (The second of these two, the essay Jiidische Thesen, was not to appear until more than forty years later, in 1901.) And he assisted largely in creating—if he did not himself create—an institution intended to embody in a new section of the country the principles of Jewish Reform as set forth in the brochure. What the significance of the establishment at that time TEACHER IN ISRAEL 31 of a Reform congregation in Chicago of the exact character of Sinai was, in the history of middle western or American Judaism, can best be described by others. But the fact of its significance is acknowledged; in the judgment of many this is the most important achievement of my father’s life. I would qualify that statement even while I give it as the opinion of others. The most important among his achieve- ments of a concrete, tangible kind, let us say. For who would wish to compare the intangible with the tangible, weigh in the same scales his work as a founder with his influence as a teacher ? The brief period from 1861 to 1863 was one of great happiness for my father. In his communal life he enjoyed the most gratifying rewards for his efforts; a splendid spirit of harmony reigned within the congregation, there was mutual friendship and esteem between the members and their rabbi. And in his home there was love and peace and joy. Early in 1862 he was married to Caroline Levi, also from Bavaria, whose acquaintance he had made in Chicago. Of this union a child, Ida, was born. And then, when Ida was a year old, Caroline Felsenthal died after an illness of a week. My father spoke at her funeral, “‘ praising God, even while His Hand lay heavy upon him.” ‘Habe ich nicht alle Ursache zum Preise des giitigen Gottes? Zwei iiberaus gliickliche Jahre verlebte ich mit der Ent- schlummerten, ein hiusliches Stillleben, reich an innerm Gemiithsfrieden, den sie durch den Adel ihres Herzens und die Fille ihrer Liebe zu schaffen verstand.’’ And he thanks the departed one “‘fiir die innige Liebe und Treue, die sie mir | erwiesen, fiir die zahllosen Lebensfreuden, die sie mir bereitet; vor Allem fiir die milde, poetisch schéne Héus- lichkeit, die sie mit weiblichem Zartsinn zu_schaffen 32 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL verstand.” (‘Have I not every reason to praise the good God? Two most happy years I have lived with her who now lies asleep; our quiet home was blessed with deep spiritual peace such as she, in the nobility of her heart and the fulness of her love, knew how to create.”” And he thanks the departed one “‘for the heartfelt love and loyalty which she has shown me; for the numberless joys which she pre- pared for me; above all for the quiet and beautiful home life which she in her womanly affection knew how to create.’’) His words were written down afterward. He could not refuse the earnest request of her friends, the members of a society to which she had belonged; for them he wrote out what he had said. And so there remains for us one more proof of the intensity of feeling of which he was capable, and his power of control. This was his nature: to feel deeply, and to know how, as a man, to subdue his feelings. Thus 1864 began sadly, and in the middle of the year occurred another painful separation. He tells the incident only in part in his Beginnings of Sinat Congregation. It was the custom at that time to elect the rabbi for one year only. The injustice of this was clear. My father had protested in 1863 without result, and in 1864, when again elected for so short a term, he declined to accept. There may have been a second reason for the action of the congregation. Much as they honored and loved him there were some among the members who were not entirely pleased that their rabbi had not all the graces of delivery, all the superficial excellences of the popular orator, in addition to his other excellences. These men wished to see him re- placed by a more effective speaker. Of my father’s manner in the pulpit it may be said that he had no striking defects, no unpleasant mannerisms, that TEACHER IN ISRAEL 33 might distract or annoy the listener, but he had this defect: his attention seemed to be on his sermon rather than on the people before him. He gave the impression of speaking his thoughts aloud rather than addressing an audience. His earnestness and deep sincerity had, of course, their own effectiveness with those who were more interested in ideas than in the purely external manner of their presentation, and it can scarcely be doubted that a great part of his influence rested upon the fact that he did deeply move men’s hearts from pulpit and platform. Yet it is true he was not an orator, but a simple-mannered, profoundly thoughtful, profoundly religious man speaking. Oratory as an art did not, in fact, interest him. He believed that the conscious study of ways to impress was likely to lead to insincerity and shallowness. He thought in a Somewhat similar way of the art of composition. ‘‘Why study how to write? Fill your mind with fine thoughts,” he once said, “‘and then write as you please.” While at Madison my father spoke against slavery a number of times before German Republican clubs, and later in Chicago preached forcefully on the subject from his pulpit. The only piece of anti-slavery writing from his pen which remains, however, is an article printed in 1862 in the Illinois Staatszeitung,' in which, discussing the attitude of Jews toward this, ‘‘the most shameful institution on earth,” he pours scorn upon the heads of those few (die Fanatiker der Ruhe) who detest agitation because of its effect on their own material welfare, the disturbance it causes in their own private concerns. From the Civil War years, it may be important to mention also the correspondence he had with Senator Wilson t “Tie Juden und die Sclaverei.” Bibliog. 19. 34 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of Massachusetts which led to the amending of the law regarding field chaplains to read that they shall be “regu- larly ordained ministers of some religious denomination’”’— “religious” instead of “Christian.” ‘The word Christian had been inadvertently used; there was no intention to exclude from the army chaplains from non-Christian reli- gions.t This is proved by the speed with which the law was altered in Congress when once attention was called to its unfortunate phraseology. My father was not unduly sensi- tive in the matter, but he believed it important to point out the unwisdom of having on the statute books, in a land where state is absolutely divorced from church, a law which read as if the country were officially Christian, and which gave the appearance of discrimination between different faiths. A dozen years later the point arose in more chal- lenging form in connection with the agitation in Chicago for Bible reading in the public schools, and at that time my father responded to the challenge in a spirited way. In 1862 he considered it rather a matter of form. When, some months after his correspondence with Senator Wilson, an actual case of discrimination occurred in the expulsion by General Grant of all civilian Jews from the territory within his control, he was perhaps more seriously disturbed. He protested against the order in a letter to the War Depart- ment—unnecessarily, as it proved, for, by order of President Lincoln, it had already been rescinded. The letter to Mr. Adler, of Lawrenceburg, dated March, 1859, from which I have already given an extract, gives us his point of view on various aspects of national politics: How sure of itself the Democratic party was in 1854, even in 1856; it considered itself quite invincible, a veritable Gibraltar! Today things are different, and even though the politicians may ™ Cf. “Senator Wilson und das Feldpredigergesetz.” Bibliog. 21. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5 succeed in sending a Democratic president to the White House in 1860, the free soil idea has taken such firm root in the minds of the people that it can never be eradicated. No power on earth is strong enough for that. Isn’t it true, friend Adler, that you yourself are somewhat less enthusiastic for this filibustering, Cuba-covetous, slavery- spreading, corrupt Democratic party than you were two years ago? If indeed you are still a Democrat at all. It would surprise me very much if I heard that you would still give your vote to Buchanan. Well, politics are politics. He is fortunate who can keep well out of the mire of political affairs, and who has a realm within his home where no hostile parties exist, but where all are attached to one another in a spirit of love and loyalty. In this realm women have their rights; they may even take the president’s chair, and rule by virtue of womanly grace and amiability. The letter touches also on my father’s private affairs. What he said in 1859 applied with equal truth to his circum- stances in 1864, or, for that matter, to those of any later date. As for my outward possessions, they have not increased, nor is there any prospect of their doing so. Fortunately I am so made that money has no great value for me. ‘“‘Das Geld, das Geld ist eine Chimare,’’—you remember the passage in Robert der Teufel. To be sure there is some truth in the answer that Baron Rothschild is said to have made from his box when he heard these words at the opera one night, ‘“‘Wer aber kaan’s hat, ’s ist doch ’ne G’sereh.”” Indeed it is, and how many things one must renounce, sorrowfully renounce, for which one’s very soul longs. But what is there to do? In such a case one is fortunate if he can preserve the equanimity of the stoic, and if he can say in the words of the old folk-song, ‘‘ Freund, ich bin zufrieden, geh’ es wie es will.” IV RABBI AT ZION 1864-1887 By this time Chicago had grown in population and territory, and many Jewish families had settled on the ‘West Side,” as the section west of the Chicago River was called. Among these were a number of ‘‘Reform Jews.” On account of the distance from Sinai Temple, they felt the need of an organization of their own, and Zion Congregation was accordingly established in the summer of 1864, and my father invited to its pulpit. His ministry began on Rosh ha-Shanah with the preach- ing of a noble sermon in which he once again set forth his convictions on the subject of Reform. His views were fully shared by the group of men who were gathered together at Zion, they were eager to follow where he led, and Zion from the beginning took its place beside Sinai as one of the leading Reform congregations of the West. Early Reform in Chicago, it may be said in passing, had its very distinctive character, and its religious earnestness and clear understanding of the relation of sound scholarship to Jewish religious leadership have been in large part attributed to my father’s influence. For twenty-three long, active years my father was rabbi of Zion. To Zion he gave unlimited devotion, and its members in turn repaid him with deepest respect and appreci- ation and affection. The relation he held toward them was the double one of teacher and friend. ‘‘Teacher” is the word that indicates 36 TEACHER IN ISRAEL 37 best what his conception was of the position of rabbi. Their friend he was in the close personal sense, for, especially during the earlier years, the congregation, its members all of German birth, formed an intimate social group as well as a religious organization. ‘They exchanged informal visits; were interested in each other’s family affairs. My father was intimately of this group; at the same time he held a very special place in the hearts of the members of his congre- gation. ‘‘Beloved teacher!’ This was the term which gave him the greatest joy to hear. ‘‘ Believe me,” he exclaims in an early English sermon, addressed chiefly to the young people, ‘‘believe me, I beg you, when I say that my greatest happiness in life would be to perceive that around me congregate boys and girls, men and women, saying, ‘You are our beloved teacher and friend, your words have not fallen upon barren ground, we listen to you, and we strive to heed your words, and to conform our lives to them.’ I beg you repeatedly, encourage me in this way.” If not all his words were fully heeded—as in this case, where his special plea was for observance of the Sabbath—yet in some measure the happiness of which he speaks was granted to him. On many a special occasion, as also in their constant attitude, his congregation gave proof that they looked upon him as their beloved teacher and friend. Until well into the eighties, this most gratifying, most happy relationship continued without hint of change. My mother, whose name was Henriette Blumenfeld, came to my father’s house in 1864 to make a home for him and to take the place of mother to the little girl Ida. She had come to America from Wiirttemberg, Germany, as a young girl, some eight years before. In 1865 my father and mother were married, and she became mother to Ida in a truer sense, as well as true helpmate in a thousand ways to my father. 38 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Very soon they had a common grief to bear in the death of Ida, who died at three, “‘a lovely, lovely, extraordinarily promising child, to whom the father’s soul’’—thus he spoke at her funeral—‘‘had clung as Jacob’s to Benjamin, and whose childish devotion had brought him such deep and pure happiness as could not be expressed.” Repeating the words of Job, my father bade Ida farewell. The year after their marriage, my parents moved into a pleasant roomy house in what was then a pleasant neigh- borhood (it is now part of the Hull-House district) and lived there nineteen years, a stretch of time nearly coinci- dent with the period of my father’s active ministry. I suppose, of the various houses in which he lived in Chicago, this seemed to him the one that was most truly “home.” Plain and comfortable as it was, and with space on every side, like an old house in a small town, it suited well his tastes and habits. In this house we, his five children, were born, and here he enjoyed years satisfying in work and comparatively free from personal care. A half-mile from our house stood the very unpretentious little building in which the congregation worshiped from 1869 to 1885, and during this time my father’s external life revolved about these two places, the house on Desplaines Street and the little white frame ‘‘Temple,”’ with its two outside stairways, at Jackson and Sangamon. “The rabbi’s life is a busy one,” he wrote early in this period, mentioning charities, societies, teaching, and congre- gational matters. In addition he read constantly—auntil early morning, my mother used to tell us—and lectured and wrote much. During the first years of Zion’s existence he taught daily in the congregational combined secular and religious school. Later the school assembled only for the usual hour or two TEACHER IN ISRAEL 39 on Saturday and Sunday mornings, but this was a change he could scarcely have welcomed, since it meant just so much less of Jewish knowledge acquired by the children. On the subject of the importance of Jewish education for the people in general, he had strong convictions, and expressed his views a number of times. ‘‘ We should take care,” he wrote, “that in American Israel there are not on one side a few learned priests, and on the other side thousands of ignorant laymen.”* But the spirit of the times, the demands of general education, the environment in general, combined to make impossible even comparatively intensive study in the religious schools. My father had very definite ideas on certain of the larger questions of the religious school; in particular, he was inter- ested in what was and what was not suitable as subject- matter to present to little children.2 He would postpone, for instance, premature discussion of theories of creation and begin with hero tales. He would omit miracle stories and emphasize those parts of the Bible ‘which convey great moral. and religious lessons, which are apt to influence and shape our inner life for the better.” These views are exactly what one would expect from one of his mental make-up. He was himself less interested in philosophical speculation than in history. And it was the ethical and religious aspects of every subject that occupied him first. Add to these facts his understanding of the spirit of childhood in general, and we see the clear relation between his expressed opinions on this subject of Bible teaching and his own qualities of mind. | In respect of organization and administration, my father’s school was, I think simply the average one of its day. His 1 Cf. Bibliog. 99. 2 Cf. ‘‘Biblical History in Our Sabbath Schools.” Bibliog. 227. 40 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL chief success lay, there is no question, in the influence of his personality. He had a moral ardor which tended to com- municate itself to others. Men and women, thinking back to the time they were his pupils, remember him, not as one in whom it had been natural to confide their small affairs, but as a teacher, high-minded and kindly natured, with whom it had been a privilege to be in contact. On his side there was affection and genuine interest. This birthday postcard written in 1876 to a bright-natured young girl of whom he was fond is characteristic: Good morning, my dear friend, Miss Mary G. It gives me very special pleasure on this, your birthday, to join your many other friends who are offering you their cordial congratula- tions. I should like to tell you all the fine and beautiful things I wish for you, but I shall sum up everything by saying, May He who rules our destinies open before you a bright and beautiful and sunny path through life, which you . . . and so on, and soon. You will easily be able to finish the sentence for yourself. One so intelligent as you will find no difficulty in completing half-sentences, and one who, like yourself, possesses both a noble heart and a wise head, who beautifully unites purity of soul with clearness of mind will find it a simple and delightful task to create happiness for herself and others. Now, dear Mary, just imagine a few dozen pages added to this, all written over with the most charming good wishes for you, with thoughts which could only come from the pens of the most inspired poets, and say to yourself that all these splendid thoughts and heartfelt wishes are dedicated to you as a birthday offering by your cousin and friend and former teacher, B. FELSENTHAL Mary G., returning the card a quarter of a century later,’ wrote of the “kindly judgment and sweet nature” of her “loved old teacher.’’ When my father spoke of societies which took much of his time, he must have had in mind, first of all, the B’nai ™ Then Mrs. Charles Haas. TEACHER IN ISRAEL AI B’rith. He became a very active member immediately after coming to Chicago, and from then to the end of his life his interest in the order never ceased. He believed that B’nai B’rith was an organization which could work with great effectiveness for the general social advancement of the Jews of the country, and he supported its philanthropic and educational program with enthusiasm. His share in its work was of a more practical kind than one might have expected from a man of his scholarly interests. He worked on con- stitution and relief committees; he served as officer of local and district lodges; he attended conventions; spoke in his usual forceful way on its affairs, urging, characteristically, greater democracy of organization, abandonment of the element of secrecy which had been borrowed from the Masonic and other orders on which this had been modeled, abandonment, also, of the utterly childish feature, as it seemed to him, of the wearing of regalia.* Not infrequently he made addresses before the Chicago lodges. ‘Two of his published pamphlets were originally such lodge addresses. One of these, in 1866, discussed at length the subject of Jewish education in America; the other, delivered in 1869, was on Christian missions, and was occasioned by the efforts of a missionary society which existed in Chicago at the time to make converts among the Jews. In general, one may say of his lodge addresses that they were of serious Jewish interest, but were not on sub- jects which he would have thought precisely suitable for the pulpit. In B’nai B’rith he found a convenient platform from which to express opinions on general Jewish topics. There was another society before which, between the years 1877 and 1884, my father often spoke. ‘Zion Lit.,”’ as it was affectionately called by its members (for Zion * Cf. “Minority Report” (Annual session, D. G. L. No. 2, 1867). Bibliog. 33. 42 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Literary Association), was a club of young men and women whose families ‘‘belonged”’ to the congregation. They met to read essays to each other, to listen to addresses from invited speakers, and to enjoy extremely sociable times. My father spoke to these young people on ‘“Self- Improvement,” on ‘Schiller,’ on chapters in mediaeval Jewish history, and sometimes he selected what one might call sermon topics, such as “The Eternal and Transient Elements in Judaism,” ‘‘Who Is a Jew 2” and so forth. It is interesting to note that, simple as his customary style was in writing and speaking, his tone here was a shade more ‘popular,’ even, than was usual. Some of his most direct and epigrammatic statements on matters of vital Jewish interest, some of his most vivid and glowing passages occur in these long-forgotten addresses before ‘‘Zion Lit.” He was pleasantly acquainted during these early years with a number of the leaders of liberal Christianity in Chi- cago. I havea shadowy recollection of one of these ministers, the one whom I think my father knew best, Dr. Thomas of the People’s Church, a tall, friendly man who came some- times to our house, and who wrote to my father in a tone of affection. During the early eighties, possibly also before then, he and my father and others among the liberals used to meet for informal discussion, calling themselves the “Round Table.’”? My father talked to them once on mod- ern Judaism,’ no doubt welcoming the opportunity to correct in the minds of a few persons of influence some of the mis- taken impressions regarding Jews and Judaism which he observed were so common among even educated Christians. He tells on one occasion of being asked to describe the man- ner in which the Jews of today prepared their temple sacri- * Cf. On the Present Status of Modern Judaism. Bibliog. 136. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 43 fices. The simplicity and modernity of liberal Judaism, as he expounded it, may have been a surprise even to some of the members of the ‘“‘ Round Table.” An interesting incident of the time has been related from another point of view by Dr. John Haynes Holmes in his biography of Robert Collyer. Dr. Collyer had invited my father to take part in the dedication exercises of the new Unitarian church, only to find later that there was a min- ority of considerable size among the Unitarian membership to whom the sight of a Jew on their platform on that occasion would be unwelcome. It seemed best to him to withdraw the invitation, and he did so in a frank and fine letter which was received by my father in friendly and understanding spirit. Of greater importance was the occurrence of 1869 when a missionary society, the Western Hebrew Christian Brother- hood, established themselves in Chicago and attempted to make converts. My father resented their presence hotly, wrote denunciatory letters to the papers,’ and before his B’nai B’rith lodge delivered a long and vigorous address on missions, with particular reference, naturally, to missions to the Jews. In the course of this address he asks the question, ‘“‘But who are the missionaries of the Jews? Shall we do nothing for the spread of Jewish ideas?” and he names as Jewish missionaries “‘the printing press, and the telegraph, and Lessing’s Nathan the Wise, and Renan, and Channing, and Parker, and unprejudiced (Jiberalen) teachers of history, and all those who work against the forces of superstition and darkness.” The address was issued as a pamphlet? (I have already mentioned it in connection with his B’nai B’rith Cf. “‘The Jewish Christian Mission,’” Bibliog. 45, and “Conversion of Jews,” Bibliog. 47. 2 Kritik des christlichen Missionswesens. Bibliog. 44. A4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL activity), but-being in German, was probably limited in its influence. However, this particular missionary society soon withdrew from Chicago, having accomplished nothing. Dr. Collyer did splendid service for the Jews at this time, speaking from his pulpit so bravely and forcibly that an orthodox Christian weekly called him ‘‘ Rabbi Collyer” and made the satirical proposal that the Unitarian churches make themselves over into synagogues. ‘There is a sentence or two in Dr. Collyer’s sermon on the folly of attempting to convert the Jews which it is more than probable were an echo from what my father had said in lecture or conversa- tion. Speaking of liberal Judaism and its exponents, Collyer’s words are, “The rationalistic party is growing daily. The best men among them... claim our own great and devout Channing, our own scholarly and sincere Parker, as members of the true Israel.” My father did indeed deeply admire these great Uni- tarians, and in the essentials of religion was aware of no differences between their beliefs and his own. “Many roads lead to Rome. And from many points of the circum- ference radii travel toward the same centre,” he said, refer- ring to the religiously liberal-minded, and he took a natural and profound pride in the fact that it was Jewish thought (even though not always recognized as such) which they were laboring to spread in the world. His perfect sympathy with progressiveness in religious thinking is indicated by the fact that, in 1879, he was elected one of the twelve honorary vice-presidents of the Free Religious Association, of which Professor Felix Adler was president at the time, and among whose other vice-presidents were Emerson, George William Curtis, Lydia Maria Child, and Thomas Wentworth Higginson. On the one side he stood in friendliest relations with the orthodox among his TEACHER IN ISRAEL A5 own people, on the other side with those who were the freest thinkers in other churches and sects, or who, for religious reasons, had separated themselves from all churches. Though much out of place as to date, let me quote here from a letter that came from Dr. Thomas in 1889. My father had sent him an article he had just published on Sabbath-school teaching. Dr. Thomas expresses his “hearty and unqualified approval” and goes on to say: What you have said applies equally to the Christian S. S. as well as to the Jewish. There is no greater need in the religious world of today than for proper and helpful instruction of the millions of chil- dren in the S.S. . . . One cannot doubt that some one will be called to lead in this needed reform; and why, my venerable friend and brother, should not the good work be done by you? Surely no one is better qualified by ripe scholarship, and devout spirit, and a deep sympathy for children, and for the welfare of the rising generations. Here was religious unity and brotherly spirit indeed! He spoke before the Young Men’s Christian Union in their Sunday evening lecture series, on one occasion dis- cussing, in a tone of lofty enthusiasm, the gifts which Israel has made to humanity—the Bible, monotheism, the moral laws which govern Western civilization.’ He had also various interesting acquaintanceships and contacts in the non-Jewish scholarly world. For two or three successive years, early in the eighties, he lectured before theological students and ministers in the Hebrew Summer School at Morgan Park, of which Dr. William Rainey Harper, afterward president of the University of Chicago, was the leading spirit. (In 1866 my father had received the honorary degree of Ph.D. from the old University of Chicago.) He contributed occasionally to journals devoted to the study of Hebrew and wrote book reviews in his special subject for the Nation. Cf. The Wandering Jew, p. 195, this volume. 46 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL . But these things were after all quite incidental; his main interest lay in the field of specifically Jewish affairs. The great event to record from the first decade of his ministry is his participation in the rabbinical conference which took place in Philadelphia in 1869, when the leaders of Jewish Reform in America (Einhorn, Adler, Hirsch, Wise, and others) met to discuss matters of vital importance for the progress of reform. It was a conference memorable for the liberal character of the resolutions passed, and not unimpor- tant, my father thought, in its influence on American Juda- ism. He never ceased to regret that, “‘as a result of deplor- able circumstances, it was not followed by other con- ferences.” I quote here words he wrote more than twenty years later.t He is referring to the breach between the leaders which did not indeed begin at the meeting itself, but which was connected with it in ways which need not be described in this place. It is sufficient to say that in his opinion ‘‘disunion’’ was a thing of serious consequence for American Judaism. He wrote with frank indignation about its causes at the time, and thought sadly, even with some bitterness, about it to the end of his days. My father took the opportunity in this conference again to express his opinion on the subject of Jewish theological schools in America.?, He had done so before in his pamphlet on Jiidisches Schulwesen in 1866; he did so later, in ’73 and *76. It seems to have been an issue of the time, and one that he considered of surpassing importance. In his judg- ment the time was not ripe—would not be ripe for years to come—for the establishment here of a rabbinical college. One reason for this was that the atmosphere in ‘‘noisy and turbulent America” was not conducive to the making of ™ Cf. “Samuel Adler. Nekrolog.” Bibliog. 237. ‘Cf. “Antrige.” Bibliog. s9A. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 47 scholars. Since Germany still remained the fountainhead of Jewish learning, the plan which seemed best to him was to send young men abroad for their rabbinical preparation. Sound scholarship is a sine qua non for the Jewish rabbi— this is the keynote of all his expressions on the subject. I remember a young man of seventeen or eighteen once coming to him (it may have been about 1900) to ask my father’s opinion on the advisability of his beginning then to study to bea rabbi. My father told him it was far too late, advised him to choose another profession, said it would be impossible for him now to acquire the learning in Hebrew and other fields which the rabbi ought to have. It is interesting also in running through the report of this Philadelphia meeting to see that my father agreed heartily with the statements made by the conference in regard to the ‘mission of Israel’’; and to notice that he characterizes as “romantic”? a certain Palestine colonization project of the time, one to which Adolphe Crémieux, among others, had lent his support. He thinks it would be well to enter protest against it. This is interesting in view of his later ardent advocacy of Zionism and his emphatic repudiation of the theory that to fulfil its mission the Jewish people must be scattered over the face of the earth. One should read in connection with his remarks here his 1902 article, “* Jewish Weltanschauung, Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Concep- tions.” There, in words which he puts into the mouths of Einhorn, Samuel Hirsh, Geiger, and other long-dead pio- neers of Reform, speaking in Gan Eden (Paradise), one finds the explanation for his own whole-hearted acceptance at this earlier time of the mission idea. In the affairs of the community in general, my father seldom attempted to make his influence felt in a large way. 48 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL He once took the initiative in an educational matter, when, in 1881, he headed a petition for systematic ethical instruc- tion in the public schools. This paper, a characteristic bit of writing, contained an expression of opinion as to the utilitarian character of American education and a brief out- line of a graded course in everyday ethics. Another time, when the attempt was being made by citizens of Chicago to persuade the Board of Education to reintroduce Bible reading into the schools, he raised his voice in strong objection. To present the sacred literature of any group, even though that group constituted the majority of the people, would be, he said, ‘‘an inexcusable, an undemocratic, an un-American tyrannizing of the minority.” This may have been the view which the Board also took of the matter. At any rate, they took no action. His petition in regard to ethical instruction, however, was received without favor. My father was an interested observer of politics, but with one exception he did not, after slavery times, publicly express himself on the issues of the day. The exception occurred in 1882, when he wrote a column in the Chicago Tribune on Sunday laws, prohibition, and blind party loyalty in local affairs. The article was cast into the form of a letter to the voters of the Fourth Senatorial District, in which my father announced himself as a candidate for the state legislature. For a dozen reasons it is impossible to think that he intended his candidacy to be taken seriously; he merely chose to write in this eye-arresting way in order to secure a larger number of readers for the little preachment on reli- gious tolerance and personal liberty and enlightened citizen- ship which his letter in effect was. This appeared, as I say, in the Chicago Tribune, its subject making it suitable for publication in a general newspaper. But religious articles from my father’s pen also appeared in TEACHER IN ISRAEL 49 the secular dailies, in the Illinois Staatszeitung especially, with surprising frequency. In the case of the Staatszeitung the fact that no inconsiderable proportion of the readers of the paper were German Jews may be explanation enough for the editor’s readiness to publish material distinctly Jewish in scope. The articles in the English papers bear witness chiefly to the interest of the general public of that day in religious discussion; perhaps they offer too some slight evidence of the absence of any serious amount of anti- Jewish feeling. The larger number of my father’s writings were of course published in the monthlies and weeklies of the Jewish press. Dealing with subjects which in many cases have lost all but their historical significance, what he wrote was in great part. ephemeral. Yet however slight the intrinsic value of these articles, these addresses, these “‘letters to the editor,’ may be, after the passage of so many years, they show forth clearly many and many a trait of his character and intellect— his kindliness, his sympathy for human suffering, his passion for scholarly exactness, his optimism, his quiet humor, as when he quoted Faust, ‘‘Es much doch auch solche Kéuze geben” (‘‘there have to be queer fellows like that’’), apply- ing the sentence to himself. A review of Berthold Auerbach’s Briefe, written in 1885, is illuminating as to my father’s attitude toward the ethical aspects of imaginative literature. He finds it wholly praise- worthy that Auerbach, in his Dorfgeschichten, is animated first of all by ethical motives. Appreciating both moral and aesthetic values in literature, there was no question in his mind as to which was of first importance. A similar thought is expressed in ‘“‘Jiidische Zeit- und Streitfragen,” where, comparing the influence of art and religion upon the inner life, he maintains that religion is of immeasurably 50 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL greater value. It may be true, he says, referring to a line of Goethe’s,? that, to one like Goethe, art and science may take the place of religion: they can never do so with the rank and file of humanity. Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum, which my father wrote in 1878, is the longest and best-known of his writings of this period. Discussing the rites which a proselyte must undergo on becoming a Jew, and the larger question which this involved of the universal character of the Jewish religion, he took, as was consistent, the liberal as against the traditional view. From both Orthodox and Reform quarters his posi- tion was vehemently assailed—both assailed and defended. One of those who agreed with my father was the Galician scholar, O. H. Schorr, whom my father greatly admired and whose support he was proud to have. The pamphlet was an entirely characteristic piece of writing, in its historical method of attacking the problem and in its “frank and cordial tone’ (to use the words of one of its reviewers), as well as in its point of view. It was another illustration of the way in which conservative and liberal tendencies bal- anced each other in my father’s mind. On the one side, there was his deep reverence for things of the past, his firm convic- tion that the soundest growth is built upon the past; on the other side, there was his entire willingness to consider every proposed reform, every public (or private) question from the point of view of its inherent reasonableness. It was a paradox in his life that he, a man of peace, was occasionally involved in controversies. There was this one on proselytism which followed the publication of .his pam- phlet; there was the one with Professor Delitzsch, of which I shall speak on another page; and there were others. He held his opinions firmly and defended them vigorously, *“Wer Wissenschaft und Kunst besitzt, der hat auch Religion.” TEACHER IN ISRAEL 51 though without a trace of dogmatism. In personal rela- tions, too, he was the reverse of dogmatic or magisterial. Once or twice he was personally attacked in the press, and on these rare occasions, he replied in a spirited way. He was gentle and peace-loving—so truly a lover of peace that the sound of voices in dissension caused him visible suffering; but slander and the injection of personalities into public affairs roused his extreme indignation, and caused words of anger to flow even from his kindly pen. There were, of course, many hours when my father occupied himself with lighter matters, when he turned from his scholarly books to the daily paper, or to other books, and from the writing of articles to correspondence, and, with the greatest possible pleasure, to friends. I think of three with whom he was especially intimate—Henry Greenebaum, Julius Rosenthal, Rabbi Liebmann Adler. His friendship with Mr. Greenebaum (Uncle Henry) had an affectionate, brotherly character, was based on admiration and enjoyment each of the other’s personality rather than on likeness of mind or temperament. They were strikingly different in very many ways: Uncle Henry vivacious, active, overflow- ing with enthusiasm, always radiantly happy, delighting in the company of young people, with the manner and charm. of a cultivated man of the world, an admirer of scholarship but not himself a scholar; my father, satisfied to touch life at fewer points than Uncle Henry, quiet, and with a scholar’s mind and tastes. They were alike in their way of looking at all problems from a standpoint of high idealism. It was not easy to resist the magnetism of Uncle Henry’s personality, and on my father he had a tonic effect. In turn my father’s calm wisdom was a never-failing source of inspiration to Uncle Henry. 52 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Uncle Henry was my father’s enthusiastic supporter in the congregation, and they worked side by side in B’nai B’rith. They met often in lodgeroom and synagogue and office, made frequent visits to each other’s houses, and knew and cared about each other’s most intimate concerns. With Mr. Rosenthal, who was one of Chicago’s most respected and scholarly lawyers, my father enjoyed many hours of delightful intellectual companionship. He used to visit him in his office; Mr. Rosenthal was never unwilling to interrupt his work to talk with my father of literature, of new books in Jewish science, of points in Jewish law, or of similar serious topics. Several of my father’s articles were based on conversations with Mr. Rosenthal, or were sug- gested by him. He was the rare example of a layman intensely interested in Jewish learning. He bought books in this field, shared them with my father, seconded his efforts to gain support in Chicago for this or that literary enterprise. On one occasion, in a letter written in 1877, my father took Mr. Rosenthal to task for sending, or for encouraging others to send books to a library of Jewish literature outside of Chicago, his reason being that this would prevent the estab- lishment of such a library in Chicago. He had had this at heart for twenty years, had spoken with others regarding the matter, “‘but I can achieve practical results in nothing.” His mood of discouragement was not entirely justified, for, to mention one instance of successful effort of the kind on his part, it was due directly to his suggestion that a certain valuable collection of Hebraica and Judaica was brought over from Amsterdam in 1868 by Temple Emanu-El of New York.'' This library was presented to Columbia College in 1892 and is now a part of the university library. * Cf. “A Valuable Library to be Sold.” _Bibliog. 40. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5G Evidently Mr. Rosenthal and my father did not always carry on their discussions in entirely serious fashion; for after one of their talks my father went home to write what represents his highest overflowing of spirits, a parody of a scene in Faust,t into which, playing upon their names (Felsenthal, valley of rocks; Rosenthal, valley of roses), he put himself and his friend as characters—Petraula and Vallisrosarum. It is a gay little piece, with a chorus, Jufivallera! Jufivallera! Only Mr. Rosenthal, of all my father’s acquaintance, could, I believe, have inspired him to just this sort of expression. He had exactly that type of quiet intellectual humor which my father knew how to appreciate, and to which it was most easy for him to make response. Mr. Rosenthal and my father exchanged frequent letters, writing most often on literary topics, and continuing dis- cussions begun in Mr. Rosenthal’s office. The following refers evidently to some such friendly debate: Gegner, doppelt iiberlegen, Ausgeriistet mit zwiefalter Waff’ als Dichter und Sachwalter; Wenn ich dir mich stell’ entgegen, Nenn’ ich’s um so mehr verwegen, Als, wie du mir selbst gedroht, Dir als Anwalt dar sich bot Gute Sach’ und mir die schlechte; Dass mir bangt, wie ich verfechte Falschheit gegen Treu im Tod. DEAR Mr. ROSENTHAL: I adopt the above lines in all sincerity as a motto for this letter, and with them close the discussion we have been having with each other during the last few days. They shall serve, mutatis mutandis, t Noch a paar Schnaderhiipferle, zu ‘Faust, zer Theil, einzuschalten auf S.170 Bibliog. 315. 54 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL as my friendly last words. A bit of literary history will help to explain the original meaning of the verses. Sixty years ago Uhland and Riickert debated with each other in verse on the subject, whether the death or the faithlessness of the beloved one inflicts the greater sorrow. Uhland began with a poem of four ten-line stanzas, and Riickert responded with one of the same length. ‘The stanza which I give here is the first in Riickert’s poem. It was my intention at the beginning of this week to entice you, if possible, into public debate, but I was not successful. What you said to me in private might have been repeated before a larger public. The subject is by no means exhausted. You will readily admit that. Yours, with best greetings, B. FELSENTHAL Cuicaco, Dec. 2, 1886 On Mr. Rosenthal’s seventy-fifth birthday, in 1903, my father sent him a characteristic letter* in which, in dialogue form, two voices, Me and Not-me (Ich and Nicht-Ich) debate whether he shall address Mr. Rosenthal as alter Junge or qunger Alte. “It all depends,” he finally concludes, “on where you wish to lay the emphasis—on the number of years, or on mind and heart. . . . I think I will address my letter Lieber alter Junge.” At the close he quotes a stanza from Vischer, written in the poet’s old age: “‘Ihr Leiden- schaften ade!—Euer Scheiden thut mir nicht weh!—Nur eine mocht ich behalten, ja eine—den Zorn auf das Schlechte, das Gemeine!” (“Ye passions, farewell!—I feel no regret that you leave me—One only would I wish to retain— Hatred for all that is vulgar and mean!’’) The old Suabian’s thought pleases him greatly, and he has taken it for his motto. He believes that Mr. Rosenthal also will heartily subscribe to it, and signs himself, ‘‘ Your 81-year-old young friend.” | Dr. Adler, deep-voiced, kindly, lovable rabbi of Kehil- lath Anshe Maarabh (the congregation in Chicago which * This letter is given in full, Appendix, p. 107. ——eeEeEeEeEe—eeee ee ee = — —— = TEACHER IN ISRAEL 55 stood midway between Reform and Orthodoxy), was so much like my father in general outlines of character that it is enough to quote from my father’s characterization of him (in his memorial address, spoken in 1892) to make plain the attraction each had for the other. ‘‘Of simple and childlike nature—satisfied with his lot—without a trace of envy or unkindness—a lover of peace—gentle and modest—cheer- ful of spirit,’ my father describes him to be. The two were indeed Geistesverwandten, to use an expression my father loved; having, moreover, similar intellectual interests, they delighted doubly in each other’s company, met when they could, and counted each other’s friendship among the truly satisfying things of life. I have mentioned my father’s large correspondence as one of his diversions. I believe in his case it may truly be called that. Certainly no more conscientious or punc- tual correspondent than he ever existed. And if it was a pleasure for him to express himself in letters to friends, what joy must have been his when he read the letters others wrote to him! For there is scarcely one among the hun- dreds of those which are still in existence, but has some heart-warming expression of extreme respect, of admiration, or of love.. I have in mind, when I say this, the correspond- ence of his entire life, from the sixties and seventies on, not only that of the period of which I have been writing. Inti- mate, friendly letters came from Szold and Mielziner and the elder Gottheil and Alexander Kohut; from Deutsch and from Felix Adler; from George Kohut and Richard Gottheil; from Isidor Busch and Simon Wolf; from Henrietta Szold. From Europe came letters from Geiger and Schorr and Steinschneider and Berliner and Chwolson and Derenbourg and Kayserling and Buber; from humbler folk also. They wrote of doctrinal or Talmudic matters, of Hebrew libraries , 56 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of Hebrew bibliography (a subject of the very greatest interest to my father), of educational or philanthropic move- ments in the Jewish world, and they wrote too of their private interests, and of themselves, and with great love and respect, as I have said, of my father. No small part of my father’s correspondence was carried on in Hebrew. In this language he exchanged letters with orthodox rabbis, both here and in Europe, with editors of Hebrew journals, with authors of Hebrew books, frequently with men quite unknown to him, who wrote for information or advice. ‘Thus, for example, someone writes from Prussia to ask whether it would be advisable to emigrate to America. How soon could one who had studied medicine abroad obtain the degree of M.D. in the United States? And could one support himself in the meantime by giving lessons in Hebrew? A letter written by my father asks for information about Jewish life in Roumania. Other letters refer to Tal- mudic questions or to matters of Jewish doctrine. Some are quite casual. On the whole there is no great difference either in subject matter or in cordiality of tone between these Hebrew letters and the others in English or German, and they are mentioned here chiefly because they were an element of decided interest in my father’s life. It was about 1884 that the desire of the young people of Zion Congregation for more English in the pulpit began to manifest itself. My father appreciated the reasonableness of their preference; from as far back as 1871 he had preached in English not infrequently. But he had never entirely mastered the language; though he wrote it easily and clearly, even impressively, there were certain Germanisms that clung to him, and, what mattered more, he spoke English with a German accent. German was his language, it will be remem- TEACHER IN ISRAEL 57 bered, until he was thirty-two. He preferred to speak it; and there were still enough older foreign-born members in the congregation to justify its continued use to some extent in the pulpit. To solve the difficulty, an assistant rabbi was engaged for a year or two, and later, in 1887, my father was made Rabbi Emeritus. His immediate successor was Rabbi Joseph Stolz. Two years previously the congregation had left their pleasant little temple and built more pretentiously in a newer neighborhood to which, in the expansion of the city, the members had gravitated. We joined the others. The neighborhood in which our house stood had been steadily going down in respectability, and my parents, with the savings from a modest salary (remarkable feat of manage- ment, this of my mother’s, to put something away each year from that small income), bought a house less picturesque and comfortable looking than the one on Desplaines Street, but nearer our friends and the new temple. Here, freed from official duties, my father was able to spend long hours in his library, at his writing table, or in his old high-backed yellow reading-chair. He by no means withdrew from participation in Jewish affairs, was able, indeed, to exert through his pen quite as great an influence as before; but to some extent the period which now began may be thought of as one of scholarly retirement. V IN RETIREMENT 1887-1897 THE last twenty years of my father’s life divide them- selves into two periods, according to the section of the city we lived in. There was the Randolph Street period, ending in 1897, then the South Side period; 1897 happens also to be the year in which my father, according to his own statement, began to be active in the Zionist movement. ‘The date is therefore one of real significance in his life. The ten years following his retirement, during which we continued to live on the West Side, were outwardly un- eventful. He made occasional addresses, officiated for short periods at Zion during the absence of its rabbi, attended at rare intervals lodge or rabbinical conferences, worked in various ways in the interest of the Russian Jewish immi- grants of the city; but for the most part, as I have said, he followed the scholar’s quiet routine. He began even before this time, though without the slightest reason, to refer to his advancing age. ‘“‘ You see from this letter that Bernhard is beginning to grow old,” he wrote in 1885 to his intimate friend, Elias Greenebaum. Mr. Greenebaum contradicted this emphatically, saying that his writing was “‘ardent and youthful; stimulating, elevating, and instructive as it had ever been.” And certain it is that he did not, even at seventy, seem more than elderly to us of his household, and there is abundant reason to believe that this was the impression he made also upon others. His health was good, his constitution hardy, and he suffered only rarely from any indisposition. 58 TEACHER IN ISRAEL 59 In particular, he had a remarkably healthy nervous system. Even when harassed by private troubles, he could go to his study and write with vigor and enthusiasm on subjects of public interest. As children we did not hesitate to interrupt him for any trivial reason. He never showed annoyance and was able, the moment the interruption was over, to go back with perfect ease to his writing, or, as was his habit, to pacing his study floor with thoughts bent inwardly. He was as unassuming in the family circle as he was in the world outside. He could never bear to “‘give anyone trouble.” Forceful, zealous, determined as his work shows him to be, in the home it was the softer qualities that one was aware of rather than his strength. His influence was all-pervading, but it was a silent influence. I could wish it had been more actively exerted. But he was the scholar and kept to his study, and we, his children and my mother, never expected him to share fully in our small affairs. We spoke of them at table, he knew all that went on, but he never really lived our life with us—any more than we entered in any full sense into the life he lived with his Hebrew folios. The details were too foreign to his interests; but the large facts of family unity and affection were, of all things in the world, what he most cared for. It was not in my father’s nature to be demonstrative; he found it difficult to express affection in spoken words. But one was not the less aware of hisfeeling. Beneficence and kindness and love emanated from him. He was ambitious for his children no more than for him- self. To fill a useful place in the world, to do as well as one could a modest piece of work, to be respected and self- respecting, seemed to him all that was worth striving for, and he never urged us on, never urged any young person on, to 60 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL higher place, to positions of power and leadership. Personal ambition was not for him one of the high virtues. I think it may be said that he did not entirely understand people who lived in a very different world from his own. He did not realize how intense desires and impulses could be that were of a kind he had never known. The moral world was a simple one for him, and he would perhaps not have conceded that any moral situation was other than simple. The only rule was to behave according to the highest principles, and there could be no difference of opinion as to what these were. He realized persons in their broader out- lines only. His manners were simple, unaffected, democratic, and he ignored many of the small conventions of society. Not deliberately, nor in active disapproval of them, but he lived above these things, was unaware, in any real sense, that they existed. He did not realize, he never could have real- ized, of what vast importance the “‘social”’ life is to many, even to men of large minds. In this, as in more vital things, his reading of human nature was generous. He believed in people; he judged them better than they were. I do not mean that he deliberately showed his trust in people in order to encourage them to deserve it. It was not by an act of will that his attitude was one of belief in others; I cannot associate with him the thought of anything so studied. In a perfectly simple, absolutely genuine way, he believed others to be good. I think this was because there were no complexities, no subtleties, in his own character. Anyone could read him—if not completely, at least with certainty so far as the reading went. ‘There were no eva- sions, no diplomacies, no pretensions which might deceive. What he appeared, the simple-mannered, good, wise man, that he was. And so, not knowing in himself what it was TEACHER IN ISRAEL 61 to work for power or place, to be “‘tactful”’ for reasons of personal ambition (one might as easily think of the prophets as ‘“‘tactful’’), it never occurred to him that others might act out of motives such as these. He was, of course, conscious of malice in the world, not through books and newspapers alone, but through actual contact with it. Not everyone always was just even to him. But disappointing, bitter, as these experiences were (one knew it without words), they did little to shake that trust- fulness of men which was one of his most characteristic qualities. He loved books. To that let it be added that he loved and believed in men. Not Man, but men—this neighbor, that friend, the child casually met, the servant in the house. He was ready to believe that they were all well-intentioned, kind, loving, and unselfish. And if now and then one betrayed that trust, there was from this no slightest effect afterward on his judgment of other men. The tendency to think well of people led him on more than one occasion to recommend for positions men who had begged him to speak a word for them, but who were quite unsuited by ordinary tests of personality and adaptability to fill the positions to which they aspired. His judgment in such cases was affected by pure kindness of heart; one can scarcely doubt it. But it is also true that he disregarded external characteristics—mannerisms and the like, forgetting that the opinion of the world in general depends in no small degree on just such elements of personality. There was, for instance, Dr. S., a gifted, extremely sensi- tive young rabbi, who, along with his excellent qualities, possessed certain unfortunate superficial traits which were constant obstacles to his real success. But my father, think- ing only of his ability and character, helped and encouraged him in many ways. Writing a last letter to my father in 62 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 1885, he says, ‘‘ You, my friend, were the only man that really understood me. Your keen eye penetrated the youthful countenance and Bohemian manner, and discerned the ear- nest enthusiast beneath.” Dr. S. venerated my father, using in letter after letter the strongest expressions of devo- tion. ‘“‘I would rather lose my right hand than forfeit your friendship,” he writes. One remembers also in this connection my father’s inter- course with Mr. X, a journalist learned in Jewish fields, a man of genuine ability, but, to his misfortune, decidedly erratic in temperament. He wielded too sharp a pen and refused to adapt himself in the slightest degree to the ways of others. Failure, or at best a meager uncertain living, was his portion. He wrote frequently and fully to my father, discussing his affairs, describing his literary projects, etc. The most ambitious of these, the writing of a history of the Jews in Russia, was suggested by my father. It was carried out in part, separate chapters appearing in a secular maga- zine, but the book as a whole never appeared. My father recognized the weaknesses of Mr. X, even pleaded with him for the sake of his future to correct his faults; at the same time he respected his fundamental good qualities and was a faithful friend to him through many dark years. “Tell me my faults,” writes Mr. X. ‘‘I will accept your kind advice and believe in your kind disposition and intentions toward me; for all in the world I would not have you mis- understand me or judge me more harshly than I deserve.” Toward incapacity his attitude was one of pure kindness, never patronizing nor critical—as if he were not conscious of his own superiority. My father’s simplicity of heart kept him from such self-knowledge, and therefore men met him easily. No one ever felt abashed in his presence. Among his visitors were sometimes men with strange hobbies, TEACHER IN ISRAEL 63 eccentric persons, self-made failures whom it was impossible to help. He listened patiently, kindly, allowing them to take his time as suited their desire to unburden themselves; it would have seemed unfriendly to have terminated such interviews, even the most useless of them, and he was never able to do so unaided. In practical matters concerning the family welfare it was usually my mother who decided what was to be done. ‘This was in part because of my father’s slight aptitude for such things and his absorption in weightier matters; in part it was because my father felt that the home was the wife’s kingdom. ‘“‘In this realm,” as we have already read from his pen, “‘women may even take the president’s chair, and rule by virtue of womanly grace and amiability.”” ‘“‘ You and your dear wife,’ he writes to Uncle Henry in 1896, ‘You and your dear wife—but no, I ought to say your dear wife and you, for good wives should always be given the place of honor.” He did not undervalue or ignore the practical side of life, let it be said. Quite the opposite is the fact. He was observant in every way of the small requirements of daily living, was prompt and punctual as one in ten thousand. An appointment was certain to find him waiting long before the time. A business letter was answered literally posthaste. Nothing, in fact, irritated him more than carelessness in fulfilling the obligations of everyday life. My father spent a great deal of time those years in the “Twelfth Street neighborhood,” the district in Chicago where most of the Russian Jewish population, especially the more lately arrived among them, lived together. The great influx of Russian Jews to this country began, it will be remembered, in 1881, following an outburst of savage 64 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL persecution on the part of the Russian government. The refugees found themselves here among conditions immeasur- ably better than those from which they had fled: their lives and their little property were safe; the schools were open to their children; they could worship in what manner they pleased; and they no longer lived in an agony of fear as to what terrible event the next week, the next day, the very next hour, might bring forth. Yet life in the new strange land was not at once wholly pleasant for them, desperately poor.as nearly all of them were, and ‘“‘different” (as all immigrants are), and orthodox, with an orthodoxy far more extreme than was, in general, that of the Jews who had preceded them. ‘Thus a situation was created which had its economic, its social, and its religious difficulties, and which called for the most generous sympathy and help, the most tactful behavior, on the part of the older Jewish popula- tion of the country. My father’s interest in the Jews of Eastern Europe did not begin at this time. ‘‘The bond of race’’—‘‘national ver- wandtschaftliche Bande’’—the phrase had often occurred in his writings. Every Jew, wherever and whatever he was, was his brother. ‘‘ Notwithstanding these great differences in religious belief we feel ourselves drawn to them; we feel in our hearts they are our brothers. It is Israel to whom they and we belong.”” And now that Jewish refugees from Russia were crowding into Twelfth Street, naturally the problems of Twelfth Street absorbed him, mind and heart. He consulted with others concerning the immediate economic welfare of the unfortunate people; he assisted in organizing evening schools; he made friends of their rabbis and leaders. He made frequent visits to the school established by the B’nai B’rith in 1888, and took a deep personal interest in the progress of the individual students. In recognition, they TEACHER IN ISRAEL 65 called a society which grew out of this school, The Felsenthal Educational Society. He loved to encourage the struggling young journalists of the Yiddish and Hebrew press (though, in passing, let me say that he deplored the use of Yiddish— called it ‘‘an abominable language”). ‘‘He used to come into the Courier office,’ says one who remembers those early difficult days of Jewish journalism, ‘‘and talk with us about what we were trying to do. When Keren Or began (a Hebrew monthly), he expected it to accomplish great things. He was kind to everyone, sympathized in their per- sonal difficulties, did what he could to assist them. He showed special interest in anyone with Hebrew learning, and his own learning—and this is partly why he was so respected and admired by all of us over there—his own Hebrew learn- ing was as great as that of the old Polish rabbis.”’ Many of these Orthodox rabbis had spent their lives within the narrow limits and in the almost mediaeval intel- lectual atmosphere of the Russian pale. Their contact with modern world culture had been extremely slight, their educa- tion had been exclusively in Jewish fields. My father understood these men, respected their religious devotion, thought of them first of all as brother-Jews, and the differ- ence in religious viewpoint formed not the slightest barrier to friendly intercourse. On their side, the Orthodox rabbis recognized in my father a man of true sympathy. They had little patience with “‘ Reform,” but they deeply respected and admired and loved this leader of Reform. It was in part because he was learned in fields which to them were all-important; but chiefly they loved him because he under- stood and respected them and met them on terms of absolute equality. Many proofs they gave him of their confidence. They came to our house, sent their friends to him for help, and 66 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL brought him their intellectual as well as their material problems. Some of those who came were pathetically out of place in America, equipped with Talmudic learning and no other, having no knowledge of trade or business or. profession which might be the means of gaining a live- lihood—men like the father of Mary Antin, as he is described in The Promised Land. Advice on material matters my father for obvious reasons was not able to give. He had to send his visitors to the organizations which had been created in the crisis, and sometimes he sent them to his friends in the business world who might possibly find or make a place for one more and one more poor untrained Russian immigrant in their shops or offices. Once or twice he offered in print some general advice of a practical kind. In a brief article in a Yiddish paper he set forth the necessity of learning English as speedily as possible. Another article, in Hebrew, which described first some of the conditions of freedom in “this blessed land,” urged parents to see to it that their sons learn a trade, their daughters the arts of the household, and expressed the hope that many of the newcomers would leave the crowded cities and turn to agriculture for their daily bread and for peace and enjoy- ment of life. Other men came who did not need advice on material matters, but came to discuss topics of Jewish learning. I remember one so Orthodox he refused to shake hands with my mother, some ancient law forbidding him to defile him- self with the touch of a woman. My father was intellectu- ally utterly out of sympathy with these men, but he was absolutely tolerant, never for a moment tried to urge his views upon them, and found immense pleasure in con- versing with them on topics in which they had a common interest. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 67 No better illustration could be given of my father’s understanding of those who held Orthodox views than the letter which he wrote concerning the policy of a Jewish hospital which refused to take into consideration the reli- gious practices of its Orthodox patients and provide kosher food. He had expressed his opinion before in regard to the dietary laws. ‘They belonged, he had said, to a phase in the history of Judaism, and there was no need to deplore the fact that more and more they were being disregarded and forgotten. ‘But there are pious men and women who hold to the old customs which to us appear antiquated. Let no one be constrained.’’ Now, in this instance of what appears to him to be constraint, he speaks of the demoraliz- ing effect of “forcible reform,” and of ‘radical fanaticism.” “Radical fanaticism (among Jews as among others) says to the poor and sick, ‘We will help you, but only on the condition that you accept our religious views.’ . . . My modest plea is only that a small corner in the hospital kitchen be provided for a Jewish cook who will prepare kosher food for those who desire it.’? He refers to “the longing of the dying Jew to have near him, in his dark hour, sympathetic, understanding co-religionists,’’ and urges that Jews be included among the staff of the hospital. “How unkind, how cruel it would be to deny such com- fort to a dying man! Would it indeed be too difficult to find ways and means by which these things could be arranged ?”’ “T close,” he says characteristically, ““begging you to believe that it is only sympathy for suffering and needy men and women which impels me—after long hesitation— to make this plea.’”? t Food prepared according to the dietary laws. 2 A longer extract from this letter is given in Appendix, p. 109. 68 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL There were many and touching proofs of the affection in which my father was held by the Orthodox Jews of Chicago. On two great days which stand out in the memory of those closest to him, his seventieth and his eightieth birthdays, delegations came from Orthodox congregations and societies to express their joy and to offer congratulations. They sent him flowers; they presented him with resolutions; they made him beautiful speeches. As if it happened yesterday, I remember the visit, on the afternoon of January 2nd, 1902, the day my father was eighty, of a group of gray-haired old men who came to tell him how they and their friends de- lighted to do him honor. They stood with my father in our living-room, while one, their spokesman, came forward and made his speech of congratulation in Hebrew. My father answered in Hebrew. I remember the sound of the ancient language, even more impressive in our home with its new- world, twentieth-century look than in the synagogue, the patriarchal appearance of the visitors, my father’s happy expression, as he stood, vigorous, keen-eyed, listening and speaking. I remember the quiet and the dignity of it all. To my father, I believe it was one of the very happy moments of his life. His writings between 1887 and 1897 reflect his various interests and include studies, some quite brief, some longer, on subjects in Jewish literature, Jewish religious history and theology, Jewish problems of the time. Among these last there were several articles on “‘authority”’ in Judaism, fore- shadowing his later emphatic statements on the synod question. Usually he wrote in response to requests from editors, or to appeals for information, or on subjects of temporary or local importance, in which, however, larger principles were involved. In other words, he seldom wrote TEACHER IN ISRAEL 69 except under stimulus from without. Thus he used his great store of knowledge only incidentally, as in reviews of scholarly works of other men. ‘There were two reasons, perhaps three, why he did not write such works himself. He was too modest, and did not think that the world needed books from him. ‘‘Far too much is written,’ he sometimes said. ‘Es wird viel zu viel geschrieben.” And he believed that work of real value in the field of Jewish science could not be produced with the limited materials at his command. In Chicago where were the books that he would have needed ?" Then, third, he seemed to care most to influence the course of events in his time, to do his part in bending Judaism in America in this or that direction. He possessed the intensest interest in the actualities of the present in his religious world, and, as he conceived it, his duty was, not to pore over books of the past, or to write books dealing with the past, for the love of history or of science, but to assist in solving problems of the present, bringing his learning to bear, however, when there was occasion, upon these problems. He left, therefore, no lengthy work of scholarship. Skilled as he was in com- bining simplicity and readableness with learning, one cannot but regret the books that did not come from his pen. One cannot but regret that he experienced the scholar’s satisfac- tions in far too limited a way. It was characteristic of him that the large majority of his writings were addressed to the layman, and that he wrote simply and without any attempt at literary effect. ‘Rabbi Patrick,” ““How Old Is ‘ Lekhah Dodi’ ?” and the series called “Literary Miscellanies,’’ which ran in the Menorah Monthly from May to October, 1887, are particularly striking examples of informal treatment of subjects easily capable of being treated in dry-as-dust fashion. t Cf. Introduction to “Zur Bibel und Grammatik.” Bibliog. 267. 70 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL The kind of simplicity which marks his writing is some- thing different from ordinary clearness. It was not that he felt it a duty to adapt his style to the mental processes of those who were to read or listen to him, though it would have been in harmony with his character so to do had his natural style been involved or difficult: he wrote as he did because he best expressed himself so. His power is not the power of suggestion, but the power that comes from sympathy—from likeness rather—with the average mind. ‘There was, it may be said, almost the quality of naiveté in his writing, as if indeed he were unaware, as perhaps it was temperamentally impossible for him to be otherwise than unaware, that all men were not simple-hearted, unaffected as himself. My father’s historical interest was always marked. He had been in Chicago only five years when he read a paper before the Chicago Historical Society on ‘‘The Israelites of Chicago.”” Once he remarked, in a letter to Einhorn, that philosophical speculation interested him far less than the history of philosophy. The general fact is quite evident from his writings, in which, as I have already said, there is brought to bear upon the discussion of modern problems a broad and deep knowledge of historical facts and a clear understanding of their significance. The first suggestion for the founding of the American Jewish Historical Society came from him, in a letter addressed to Dr. Cyrus Adler in 1888, and from the time it was established in 1892 he was active in furthering its aims. He contributed a few papers to its Publications; he served as a member of its Executive Council and for many years as one of its vice-presidents; he suggested subjects for research. A letter to Professor Richard Gottheil, dated May 18, 1898, contains the following passage: TEACHER IN ISRAEL 71 You wrote me some friendly words a few weeks ago in regard to my historical monograph, The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congre- gation. For this accept my very cordial thanks. Let me now makea suggestion. You are a member of the Executive Council of the A.J.H.S. You and the other members of the Executive Council should, in my opinion, arrange to have similar monographs written by competent persons on other subjects in American Jewish history. For instance: in the 1820’s there was a decided tendency toward Reform in the congregation Beth El in Charleston, S.C. To discover its origin and trace its history is more difficult today than it was even twelve or fifteen years ago. Is there not all the more reason then for the governing board of the Historical Society to commission some one in Charleston to set down in the interest of history the facts concerning those early manifestations of Reform in Charleston ? Another example: Toward the close of the sixties, Maimonides College was founded in Philadelphia. It existed two or three years. The history of this undertaking should now be written, and could, as I believe, be written at this time without the least prejudice. The occasion of its founding, the incidents of its career, the reasons why it ceased to exist should all be studied and the facts set forth. A comprehensive article might be written on the history of the benevolent institutions in the city of New York in the nineteenth century. In separate monographs might also be treated Mt. Sinai Hospital, the Orphan Asylum, the Old People’s Home in Yonkers, the United Hebrew Charities, etc. Still to be written are also the biographies of certain American Jews who after all fill a very different place in history from, let us say, Col. Is. Franks or Major D. S. Franks, about whom articles appeared in the latest volume of Publications of the A.J.H.S. Have these men been of the slightest importance in the history of Jews and of Judaism in America? Erase their names and it will make no difference on the pages of history. They have passed, leaving no mark. It is quite another case with Isaac Leeser, with Samuel Isaacs, M. J. Raphall, L. Merzbacher, and S. Adler; with Abraham Reis of Baltimore; and with various others who were active in this country during the first half of the century. At all events, the art of biography would have worthy subjects in these men. And for Emma Lazarus who has now 72 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL been resting in her grave for ten years and more our Historical Society ought to provide a biographical memorial. Another field for historical research lies in the bibliography of American Judaica and Hebraica. Equally great was my father’s interest in the Jewish Publication Society, which was founded in 1888. He was a member of its Publication Committee from the beginning until his death in 1908, and during all but the last of this period he read manuscripts and gave counsel from a distance in wise and genial fashion. He took part, in 1890, in a conference between Jews and Christians arranged by Mr. William E. Blackstone, a resident of Chicago who was more or less active in efforts to “enlighten” the Jews religiously. A little blue-covered peri- odical, called The Peculiar People, sponsored by him, came to our house pretty regularly for a while, and Mr. Blackstone himself came sometimes to visit my father—not, I am sure, expecting to convert him, but to discuss questions of creed. My father met him in friendly spirit, recognizing his sincer- ity and respecting the frank and courteous manner of his approach. As to conferences between men of opposite faith, my father believed them quite useless; they were likely to create misunderstanding and ill-feeling. However, this conference once organized, he could not refuse to take part in it and spoke with entire frankness on the subject, ‘“‘ Why the Jews Do Not Accept Jesus as the Messiah.” Even before this he had on one or two occasions discussed the dogmas of orthodox Christianity. But, as I have suggested, he never did this from choice, and at one time, in a contro- versy with Professor Franz Delitzsch, he made a statement as to the occasions when discussion of or comment on other creeds is proper.t A comparison of dogmas is sometimes not * Cf. “Professor Delitzsch iiber interconfessionelles Verhalten.” Bibliog. 172. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 73 to be avoided, he said; a teacher or a representative of a particular religion is sometimes obliged to criticize the intimate religious opinions of others, but such occasions occur only rarely. He understood by orthodox Christianity, of course, the religion of Paul, and he drew the distinction between this and the religion of Jesus, which, he pointed out, was identi- cal with the Jewish religion. He believed there were many Christians who retained their connection with orthodox churches and were counted among the orthodox who yet were liberals at heart. Others ‘“‘believed that they be- lieved’”’; this was a phrase of his. But whatever the reli- gion of other men it deserved respect if sincerely professed. Tolerance was for him a high religious duty, and he was intolerant only of intolerance. As to the division of the human race into “believers” and “‘non-believers,” this had wrought infinitely more harm than the division into separate nations which was considered by some so deplorable. To Christianity my father gave the credit for bringing into the consciousness of the world the sublime idea of the oneness of humanity first expressed by the prophets of Israel. ‘‘But while accomplishing this,” he said, “the unfor- tunate admixture, from foreign sources, of mystic and super- stitious dogmas occurred.” VI ACTIVITY FOR ZIONISM 1897-1908 WE moved to the South Side in 1897. My father was then seventy-five, but strong as he had ever been both mentally and physically, and it was with the enthusiasm almost of youth that he threw himself into the movement in Israel which had its modern beginnings about this time. His first public expression on Zionism is to be found in a letter written in May, 1897. His last published word on any subject is in part on Zionism. It was his final, and during these last ten years of his life, his most absorbing interest. My father has himself dated his Zionist activity from 1897. A letter written in 1905 to Dr. J. L. Magnes, then secretary of the Federation of American Zionists, contains this passage: I do not know whether you are aware of the fact that I really was the very first one among the non-Polish American Jews who came publicly forward as an advocate of Zionism. Several months prior to the first Basle Congress, the American Hebrew in its issue of May 7, 1897, published a letter from me, in which I strongly called upon American congregations and societies to send delegates to the Congress, and in the months following I defended the stand I took in a number of articles in the American Hebrew, the Jewish Exponent, etc. Should you ever publish in the Maccabean or elsewhere a few historical docu- ments bearing on the subject, my first article, I think, should have a place among them. Iam really proud to think that I was the Zionist avant-garde among non-Russian Jews in this country. It was the one time in his life, I believe, that he expressed pride in anything he had done or thought. 74 - — a a! -_ TEACHER IN ISRAEL 75 My father gives 1897 as the date of his first Zionist article, but evidence is clear that he was predisposed toward Zion- ism long before 1897, even long before the movement can be said to have existed. I do not refer to his life-long convictions of Jewish racial unity, but to his definite expres- sions in regard to colonization in Palestine which appeared, one article in 1891, another in 1893.1 Modern political Zionism dates from 1894, it will be remembered, the year of publication of Herzl’s Judenstaat (The Jewish State). My father’s articles on Palestinian colonization contain exactly the same ideas that he expressed over and over again in his later definitely Zionistic writings. He touches on the phil- anthropic, the political, and the religious aspects of the problem, saying (the passage is taken from his 1891 article): What the political status of those Jews would be [in a colonized Palestine]? What the religious aspects of the future Judaism in “the Holy Land” would be? What would the future be? My dear sir, I do not play any Zukunftsmusik; I have no desire to indulge in any speculative political Kannegtesserei; I leave this for the present to the diplomats of Europe, who, I trust, will at an early day meet in the international conference asked for, and I confide in the natural historical development of events. With me, this Jewish question is at the present time a philanthropic question and nothing else. Mil- lions of oppressed Jewish brethren appeal: “Help us! Assist us!” and we listen compassionately to this appeal, and it is our duty to help and assist. To entertain an opposing position to the movement on religious grounds and because of the attempts that will be undoubtedly made to restore the ancient Mosaic institutions . . . seems to me to be wrong and cruel and illiberal. Not all the Jews will return to Pal- estine; none will be compelled to go and live there. The American Jews, the German Jews, the French Jews, and other Jews will, I hope, be permitted to live where they are. . . . They will solve their reli- gious problems as suits them; let the Palestinian Jews do the same. « Cf. “The Palestine Memorial,” Bibliog. 236, and ‘‘The Palestine Question,” Bibliog. 244. 76 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL It is interesting to remember in this connection that, in earlier days he had sometimes spoken with a touch of scorn of the paldstinensischer Jude, having in mind, however, those who set before everything else, as the main desideratum, the restoration of the old Zion with all its laws and customs of a long-departed age. After 1897 my father could scarcely write of any other subject than Zionism. Herzl and Nordau had succeeded in making the establishment of a Jewish state an actual possibility. Zionism had become the most vital problem before the Jewish world, and men began to range them- selves on one side or the other. The Reform rabbis, with very few exceptions, were anti-Zionists. My father’s opin- ions were received by his colleagues with surprise. They accused him—vehemently they accused him—of disloyalty to his early convictions in regard to the universal character of Judaism and to the Jewish “mission” to uphold mono- theism in the world. He denied that he was disloyal, denied that there was any incompatibility between ‘Reform’? and Zionism. I heard him say in so many words, answering someone’s question, ‘‘When did your views begin to change ?” (it was in Wilmette, in 1907; he looked for the moment a little stern), ‘“‘I have never changed.”” And when one remembers the strength of his attachment to the people of Israel, the intense nationalism, both latent and expressed, in his writings from the very beginning, his enthusiastic advocacy of Zionism cannot but appear entirely logical. It is true, in the days of his activity for Reform, in the fifties and sixties and seventies, he had taught that it was for the Jewish people to rejoice and not to mourn that they had been dispersed among the nations, since through the dispersion they had been enabled to become a blessing to the world and might in the future continue to TEACHER IN ISRAEL a7 be a blessing. But if his views on this one point, the “‘mis- sion”’ of Israel, were to some extent modified, this modifica- tion did not amount to the complete reversal of opinion which was ascribed to him by his opponents. The Jews still had a mission, had still their contribution to make toward the building of the ‘‘Grand Temple of Humanity,’” in which words my father expressed his final conception of Israel’s mission, but it was not necessary for them to remain scattered and dispersed in order to fulfil this mission. ‘“A small and well organized nation can work more effi- caciously for good than many millions scattered and dis- organized,” he wrote. Between Zionism and a mission thus redefined there is no conflict. As for the mission idea as conceived and ardently promulgated by the great Reform leaders of the past, would they not, he asks, all today acknowledge, in consequence of Zionism, that it was a mistaken idea, and one that should be revised? He listens to an imaginary conversation, Geiger, Einhorn, Wechsler, Hirsch, and others talking in Paradise, hears them agree that Zionism has changed everything, and through words which he puts into their mouths explains to us his own altered views. Altered, as I have said, in this one respect only: the preten- tious ‘‘mission”’ of former times, that ‘‘mission”’ which the Reform rabbis continued to preach, he held up almost to scorn; the Jewish mission, as he finally conceived it, was simply to work, as one nation among many, to further the ends of humanity. On his side my father did not understand how others could remain apart from the movement. The vast majority of the Jews of the world were living under frightful conditions in Eastern Europe, were persecuted and miserable. Was it 1Cf. “Jewish Weltanschauung, Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Conceptions.” Bibliog. 302. 78 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL not for the few who were free and happy in Western countries to join in an effort which promised to save them? With Zionism in mind, he wrote in 1901": Und Diejenigen, die in ihrem grenzenlosen Jammer uns um Hiilfe anflehen, sind unsere Briider, unsere Stammesgenossen! Und da merkwiirdiger Weise noch immer viele eine klare naturgeschichtliche und geschichtliche Thatsache ableugnen wollen, und sich gegen die Stammesgenossenschaft wehren, so wollen wir ihnen zu liebe sagen: Es sind Millionen unserer Glaubensgenossen, die sich in unsagbarer Bedrangniss befinden. Es sind Millionen von Juden in Russland, in Ruininien und anderswo, welche von Ausrottung und Vernichtung bedroht und dem Untergange verfallen sind—nicht bloss dem leib- lichen, sondern auch dem geistigen, dem sittlichen, dem religidsen Niedergang—wenn nicht bald Hiilfe kommt. O helfet, rettet, siumet nicht! (And they who in their boundless misery implore us for help are our brothers! ‘They are flesh of our flesh! But since, curiously enough, there are still many who deny the obvious fact, the scientific and historical fact, of our blood relationship, let us, on their account, use other words: There are millions of our coreligionists who are living under unspeakable conditions of oppression. ‘There are millions of Jews in Russia, in Roumania, and in other countries, who are threat- ened with extermination, with annihilation, with ruin—who will be destroyed not only physically, but also spiritually, morally, religiously —if help does not come soon. O help them! save them! do not delay!) In other places he said in effect, ‘‘Must this martyrdom continue in order that the great truths of our religion be preserved? ‘These truths are the possession of the world. We as individual Jews have no special message to deliver to mankind. From Palestine, from a Jewish Musterstaat, our so-called ‘mission’ can best be fulfilled.” Thus in article after article. And he had the strong faith that those who opposed the movement now and who reproached him for his ardent advocacy of it would them- ™ Cf. “Ueber Antisemitismus und Verwandtes.” Bibliog. 295. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 79 selves be won over in the course of time. ‘Alle, Alle werden Zionisten,” he predicted, and when, later, there began to be a noticeable wavering among the anti-Zionists and first a few and then others, finding there was no incompatibility between Reform and Zionism, declared their changed opinions, he wrote rejoicingly of the fact. In addition to his writing, my father served the Zionist cause in practical ways asa member of the Actions Comité of the World Zionist Congress, as the international organiza- tion was at first called, as vice-president of the Federation of American Zionists, and as adviser to its Executive Com- mittee. In Chicago he was a member of a local Zionist Society, and even in his eighties attended meetings and made addresses with all the fervor of youth. His fellow-Zionists appreciated his counsel, reverenced him for his wisdom and ardent enthusiasm, and loved to do him honor. A letter from Professor Gottheil, written in 1899, reads in part as follows: My VERY DEAR DocToR FELSENTHAL: I have your note of September 27th, and say quite openly that I would never think of putting another man, no matter how young he might be, in your place. If I am not mistaken, it is quite un-Jewish to prefer young men in place of older and experienced ones. We can- not do without the support of your counsel, and of your name, and you will excuse me being so rough as to refuse absolutely to entertain for one single moment your request. I know how much you would like to be present at our meetings. If you cannot, let us at least feel that you are with us in spirit, and am sure that that feeling will enable us to find the proper counsel.in those affairs which shall busy us. A few years after this, in 1906, when he had for the third time been elected honorary vice-president of the Federation of American Zionists and felt himself in truth physically unable to be of service, he wrote sadly to Dr. Magnes, who was secretary at the time: 80 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL I feel my inability to do anything, by word or otherwise, for our cause the more keenly, as my enthusiasm for the same and my con- viction that the aims of Zionism and the methods it pursues are the only ones which will bring a durable salvation to Israel, are as alive within me as they ever were. Alas! It is sad to be such a poor invalid as I am. Dr. Magnes replied: Your letter telling us the reasons for your forced inactivity in the Zionist movement made a very deep impression upon me as it did upon those who had the honor of reading your letter. We have all been aware, much to our sorrow, that your advanced age has not permitted you to do that which your mind and heart have prompted you to do. But we have also known—and your letter is but an additional proof of this—that you still take fire at the thought of oon mow o9 os mann (‘the revival of the nation in the land of the nation’’]. We younger men need the courage such a life as yours can inspire within us. ‘‘ Jiidische Thesen,’’ which appeared in 1901, makes no direct allusion to Zionism, nevertheless it may be considered my father’s most important contribution to the movement. At all events its significance was immediately recognized by Zionists; it was translated and published under the title ‘“‘Fundamental Principles of Judaism,” in the Maccabaean, a Zionist monthly, and there characterized as ‘‘one of the most cogent, clear, and concise statements of the principles under- lying the Zionist movement that has appeared in some time. The propositions discussed by Dr. Felsenthal form the philosophical basis upon which the Zionists must build the Jewish state.” Reprinted in its original German in a collection of papers published in Berlin in 1903, its clarity and force were commented upon by one writing in the Revue des études juives: “Il fait véritablement plaisir de voir un homme de quatre-vingt-un ans combattre avec une pareille ardeur juvénile pour ses idées.” (“It is truly TEACHER IN ISRAEL 81 refreshing to see a man of eighty-one defend his ideas with such youthful ardor.’’) Even here, in this calm, logical, systematic series of statements, the reviewer discerns the passionate feeling underneath. My father spoke of himself once as phleg- matic. “Ich befinde mich schon lange in einem ziemlich vorgertickten Alter, in welchem leidenschaftliche Erregungen nur selten zum Vorschein kommen. Ueberdies war ich mein ganzes Leben lang von Natur aus ein arger Phlegma- tikus. Dennoch aber gibt es zuweilen Veranlassun- gen... 7% (‘I arrived a good while ago at a period in life when one is seldom disturbed by passionate feeling. Besides, I am by nature an extremely phlegmatic ‘person. I have always been so. Nevertheless, there are occa- sions ...”) He maligned himself. Phlegmatic? No. Controlled and calm? Yes. The equanimity of the old began with him in his youth; that is true. But the zest of youth lasted on to his old age. | There are passages in his correspondence which illustrate better perhaps than anything in his formal papers the intensity of his enthusiasm for Zionism. To Professor Gottheil he wrote in 1898 the following letter. It is the same from which his remarks on the work of the Historical Society have been quoted. My DEAR DOCTOR: As a consequence of this unholy war into which our country has been driven by unprincipled newspapers and unprincipled men, we are living in these days in the midst of unspeakable noise and confusion. Some are impelled to seek refuge from these conditions in books, in nature, in intercourse with friends who have known how to remain calm and composed. JI too feel at times the longing for peace and quiet. You will not take it amiss, then, my dear professor, if I seek t Cf. “‘Ueber Antisemitismus und Verwandtes.”’ Bibliog. 295. 82 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL forgetfulness in your company for a quarter of an hour, and chat with you about one thing and another ? Under present circumstances, Zionist activity in America will naturally be greatly hindered. Nevertheless let us hope that America will be represented at the second Basle Congress by a good number of delegates, men of standing and influence. Now who are the men who should be elected delegates? ‘There is no need to mention names—you at all events must be one of them—and you must bring your weighty influence to bear upon the selection of the others. I myself am unfor- tunately too advanced in age; else I should, spite of my ingrained shyness, come joyfully to the front, and to the question MOWN "2 MN "25 apr ™3° [Whom shall I send and who will go for me ?”’] answer in the words of the youthful Isaiah, "275w 7257 [Here am I; send me.”’]. But alas, I can no longer play an active part, least of all in CHissiield we Those high-minded and generous-hearted enthusiasts whom you will see in Basle—extend my greetings to them, and tell them that on the shore of distant Lake Michigan there is an old man who longs for the blessed fulfilment of their hopes. ‘‘ Dreamers of the Ghetto” Zangwill has called them; them also. Would to God we had many thousands of such dreamers! The world needs them, in this domain and in many others. What would have become of humanity, what will become of humanity, without dreamers such as these? I take the following paragraph from a letter addressed to a Zionist society in Chicago: Dear friends, it is a high and holy cause in the service of which you are enrolled. ‘This cause is directed toward the emancipation of our brothers, our brothers both in blood and in faith, from unspeakable misery, and the recovery of a homeland, our own ancient homeland, for persecuted and suffering Israel. O do not grow weary, do not lose courage, let nothing diminish your enthusiasm for this cause. Already it has fired the hearts of myriads of our brothers in all parts of the world. Is not this alone success enough? Is it not wonderful to see how, through Zionism, glorious hopes have been kindled and many many hearts inspired and characters ennobled? Truly, friends, we have the right to say 7>N DD FINN Ww yy "D8 (“Happy the eye that beheld all this!’’| TEACHER IN ISRAEL 83 Finally, in a letter to Dr. Magnes, under date of March 4, 1907, 1s to be found this: Did the Board.of Officers of the F.A.Z. ever discuss the matter of bringing in an efficient way the Great Jewish Question—in regard to its importance and to its wide-reaching extension, the greatest Jewish Question in all Jewish history since the downfall of the Jewish Com- monwealth in the year ’70—before the approaching Peace Congress at the Hague? If not, I would suggest that you, dear Doctor, would cause the question to be discussed before the very next meeting of the Board, and would urge the speedy passing of proper resolutions. Let the American Federation enter into correspondence with the Great Actions Comité, and conjointly with them and other Federa- tions let it prepare a Memorial to be officially laid before the Hague Congress and let a special Committee of Three—the chairman of which must of course be Dr. Nordau—be appointed, who are to proceed to the Hague, to stay there while the Congress is in session, and to use there all the proper means for the realization of the end which you and I and the hundreds of thousands of our Zionistic Gesinnungsgenossen are longing and acting for. . . . If the present opportunity for taking steps in a world-historic movement is neglected—who knows when again such an opportunity will offer itself? Therefore act! act!! act!!! From day to day my conviction becomes more intensified that Zionism alone will be the savior of our nation and its religion, and save it from death and disappearance. I know that the anti-Zionists, and especially those in the so-called Reform camp, do not share in this view; they—the ‘‘ Dreamers’’—believe that by their ‘‘reforms” they will save Israel, and that thereby they will empower it to fulfill what they call the Jewish Mission in the world! Just in the opposite direc- tion their endeavors will run. Absorption of Israel by other nations and gradual dying of Judaism, this will be their achievement. I often thought in these last days of a certain passage in the Talmud (in Tr. Sanhedrin), wherein, in connection with the Biblical verse, 722 4979 mame [And thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”’], it is said, MB” MV 1D AMD [‘Select for him a beautiful form of death’’]. A beautiful death, euthanasia, is in certain circum- stances something highly desirable. But to bring it about in regard to the people of Israel—no, I do not wish to be an accomplice in such a criminal proceeding. 84 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL When Herzl died in 1904 there was mourning in the hearts of Zionists all over the world. In Chicago a funeral procession marched several miles through the streets of the Jewish district, escorting an empty carriage. My father was one of the silent marchers. VII LAST YEARS 1897-1908 THE chief joy of my father’s last ten or twelve years was his grandfatherhood. His face was radiant when he looked at the children. He played with them—dquiet games with pencil and paper—told them stories, wrote them loving letters, mingling good advice with his expressions of affec- tion, and always exalting the simpler virtues. This is to a two-year-old: DEAR LITTLE HELEN: What do you think, Helen—there is a man in Chicago who, since you left our city, daily, hourly thinks of you, though he does not much speak of you! ‘This is one of his habits to be silent. He has the idea that silence is a virtue. And do you know who that man is? Now try to guess it. Well, you can guess it right away. “That’s my grandpa!” you will exclaim and you are correct. It is your grandpa who early in the morning and late in the evening and even during the night, when he has his sleepless hours, thinks of you and— chats with you, as well as such is possible in your absence. Now tell me candidly, Do you also think of your grandpa, or have you forgotten him? No, you have not forgotten him; I know it. So weak your memory is not. How do you spend your time? I suppose with your dollies, your picture books, your balls, your tops, and so forth; but mainly with your mamma and papa; principally. with yourmamma, I think. For she is constantly with you and near you, while papa is attending to his business. Many kisses, dear little Helen! Give my regards to your parents! Kiss them for a ‘‘Good Morning” and a “Good Night,” and say, That’s for me. And then give them some more kisses and say, That’s for Grandpa. And if you will continue, neither your papa nor your mamma will object. Goodbye, dear Helen! Your Grandpa 85 B. FELSENTHAL 86 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL This to Helen at five: Helen, do you still remember the stories which Grandpa used to tell you about Little Red Ridinghood, Struwel-Peter, Beebla-Baabla, and the Good Boy and the Bad Boy, and so forth? Well, Helen, I think, when the next time you come here, I may have some new stories to entertain you with, and soon brother Lawrence may participate in listening to Grandpa’s fairy-tales. On a seventh birthday: My dear and good and sweet Helen, I congratulate you.... I wish—nay, I know that in the next year, as in the previous one, you will be a good and lovely child, an obedient daughter to your dear papa and mamma, a loving sister to Laurie, an attentive pupil to your good teacher, a beloved friend to the other children in the school and in the neighborhood... . Later in the year: DEAR HELEN: It is so very kind of you to send me regularly every week a letter. I am very much delighted to read them. It is a pleasure to me to notice that you progress finely in your studies. For I think that your letters become nicer and better every week. The art of letter-writing—I must stop here, for in my mind I hear you interrupting me and remarking: “‘Grandpa, you say ‘the art of letter-writing.’ But is it really an art ?” Yes, dear Helen, I believe it is. Some people will never succeed in mastering the art of writing a really beautiful letter. What they call “‘letters’’ is in comparison with truly good letters, not more than an ugly painting, the work of an unskilled common artisan, would be in comparison with a painting of a grand master. How can we learn this art? In my opinion, the main rule is: Fill your mind with good and correct thoughts and your soul with good and noble sentiments, and then sit down and write. Write just as you please. Your letter will turn out to bea good one. The contents will be beautiful, and the writer will prove that there is within him, or within her, a beautiful soul. And that is the main thing. Of course, the words must all be correctly spelled, and the gram- matical rules must all be observed. Furthermore, the penmanship must be nice and clean, neat and orderly. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 87 . Before you commence to write a sentence, think it out to the end in your mind and then write it down, word by word, just as you have formed it in your mind. But I will not longer detain you with an essay on letter-writing. When you are somewhat older, then we may again discuss the subject. However, I shall not make any firm promises. . . . Hoping that you will enjoy good health and that you will grow up not only bodily, but also in the beauty of your heart and soul, and that you will win the love of all the good people in your town, I remain, my dear and beloved child, Your grandfather BERNHARD FELSENTHAL In answer to a child’s scrawl. It was before Lawrence could write: DEAR LAWRENCE: You have written a very nice letter to me, your grandfather, and I was very much delighted in reading it. Not everyone in the house was able to read it. But I could. Now I will tell you how I read it, and you will tell me afterwards whether I read it correctly. You wrote as follows: | “Dear grandpa, I love you, I love you very much. I hope that you are not sick any more. When the next time I come to Chicago, you and I go together to Washington Park, and there we shall see the fine flowers and the thousands of trees and bushes, and the little fish swimming in the ponds, and we shall listen to the birds singing in the air. Will this not be fine, grandpa? And when we go home, you will say, Now, Lawrence, I shall buy you some candy. But I will answer, Do not buy for me candy—lI do not like candy—lI will rather have peanuts or popcorn. Grandpa, will this not be very nice? Grandpa, I repeat it: I love you very much. JI am your grandson, LAWRENCE” This was your letter, and in this way did I read it. Did I makea mistake ? I have not much more to say today. Only this I will add: Kiss your papa, and kiss your mamma, and kiss your sister, and tell them 88 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL that grandpa has said that you should do this, and that you have to mind your grandpa. Remain a good boy, and then you will grow up and become a good man. Your grandfather BERNHARD FELSENTHAL His letters to others of his family, to nephews and nieces, and to his children, were like these in the affection they expressed, the interest they showed in what the young people were doing, the advice they contained as to conduct and character. His letters encouraged as well as admonished. It was easier for him to write words of praise than to speak them. “You endeavor to fill your place in the world becomingly,”’ he wrote to a girl of nineteen, and quoted Heine, ‘‘ Mir ist als ob ich die Hande .. .” It was during these years that he carried on the corre- spondence with his niece in Germany that gave him so much pleasure. One of these letters has been placed at the begin- ning of this sketch. The two which follow were both written in 1905. My DEAR NIECE: Considerable time has passed since I last wrote you. But you will be quite mistaken if you conclude from the infrequency of my letters that my love and friendship for you have diminished. Rest assured—my dear friends in the old far-distant homeland are always present tomy mind; and many an hour when I sit solitary in my study, or on sleepless nights, when my thoughts wander hither and thither, my soul is filled with thoughts of all of you, my beloved friends in far- away Germany... . I have just this moment re-read your letter of September 1st, and have found your lively and warm-hearted and unaffected talk most refreshing. With God’s help, may you remain cheerful and bright- spirited for a long long time—yes, your whole life long. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 89 A joyous disposition has its source in a heart which is pure and innocent and good. A pure and innocent heart—that, after all, is a possession whose worth transcends all else. An ever pure and child- like and innocent-heart, an ever bright and happy nature—where in the world is anything lovelier to be found? And because IJ set so high a value on the qualities of the heart, I rank above every other kind of education the education of the heart! There are few words so widely misunderstood, so falsely applied as the word education. Whom does the world not call “educated”! Whoever knows how to use the phrases current in so-called “society”’ (phrases frequently so empty of meaning) is an ‘‘educated”’ person. But I do not hesitate to maintain that without cultivation of the spirit this other is no more than mere semblance, hollow appearance, thin veneer. And when one removes this veneer, what is to be seen? Cultivation of the spirit is worth more than intellectual culture, more than aesthetic culture, more than external refinement, more than acquaintance with the niceties of social intercourse. I am glad to see from your letter that you spend many a Sunday afternoon in the public library and the city museum. In reading great works of literature, in associating with great poets and thinkers of the past, the mind expands, and thoughts and feelings arise within us, often echoing long, long after, which may influence our whole being for good, ennoble our character, guide our lives. It is the same when we contemplate great masterpieces of painting or of sculpture. Then too we feel ourselves lifted up to the heights, to regions of spiritual purity. However, he who is wise will not wish to live, nor will he be able to live, constantly on this high spiritual plane. Con- stantly? No, that is impossible. Our everyday life makes its demands, requires us to fulfill the duties which it lays upon us. One returns to these duties with renewed desire, with renewed strength, one does the day’s task with greater joy and contentment after spend-. ing some blessed hours in the company of Schiller and Goethe, of Raphael and Michael Angelo. .. . And now farewell, you dear “Frankfurter Madel,” as you have called yourself in your letter. Farewell, you golden Frank- furter Miadel.” Wait! One thing I have to ask you. When he comes, the prince from fairyland who will find his lovely princess in you, the ‘Frankfurter Madel,”’ into whose beaming eyes and golden go BERNHARD FELSENTHAL heart he will look, and whose hand he will take, and to whom he will say—well, I will stop here. I will leave you to guess what I was about to write. But when it happens, Berthachen, my dear, you will let me know all about it—will you not? This other is in a different vein. My DEAR NIECE BERTHA: . . . Most cordial thanks for the photographs. They are beau- tiful—most beautiful. How dear and lovely the original must be! Looking long at them there came into my mind the first line of a familiar poem of Heine’s: “‘Du hast ja die schénsten Augen.” ‘The remaining lines, to be sure, do not apply so well. But what of that? The eyes are beautiful. And they do not only look outward, they reflect also the soul within; disclosing to him who looks into their depths a pure and innocent heart, an active mind which yet is peaceful and serene. Yes, the beautiful eyes, and the beautiful soul and heart of which they tell, are more precious than diamonds and pearls. In your last letter you have expressed yourself most enthusiasti- cally in regard to Wagner’s operas. Tannhduser in particular has lifted you up out of the prose of everyday life. You can scarcely find words to describe its inspiring effect upon you. Music is indeed a high and holy art, always provided it is used in the service of the truly beauti- ful, the sublime and elevating, and does not cater to the vulgar taste of the uncultivated, provided it sanctifies and inspires and elevates, and does not drag one down into the dust and dirt. This applies, of course, to every form of art, to poetry and rhetoric, to painting and sculpture. Art, true art, has contributed enormously to the advance of mankind, to its higher spiritual development. Art has been a factor in history whose importance can not be overestimated. But this is true, I repeat, only of genuine art, and not of that which merely displays the external forms of art. A rhymester expressing his prosaic ideas in rough, or even in smooth verse, is far from being a poet. Anda mere color-mixer, painting wooden figures and lifeless scenes in a lifeless way is far from being a true painter. It is the same with music. Tn this sphere also we have art and its imitation; noble and cultivated taste on the one hand, coarse vulgarity on the other; the power to elevate and the power to degrade; a purifying influence and a debasing force. Now I have not the least doubt that Wagner is to be counted TEACHER IN ISRAEL QI among the true artists; nor that he has even been a pioneer of a new form of music which is winning for itself more and more cordial recognition and daily widening its influence. But I myself do not pretend to have any judgment in the matter. What do people like me know of such things? J grew up in a time when one still looked up in reverence to the more melodious Mozart and Haydn and Rossini, and the new music, which only a short time ago was called the music of the future, but which appears already to have become the music of the present, is less easy for us of the older generation to comprehend. I too have heard Tannhduser, and also several others of the operas of Wagner. I admire the rich orchestration in the new music. Of this Mozart and his contemporaries had no conception. But to compen- sate for that, their music was, as I have just said, more melodious, the arias more singable, and an ordinary unlearned listener could under- stand it far more easily. But I ought not to express an opinion. I understand nothing of these things. People of my sort take the great- est delight in a beautiful song, or in operas like the old Magic Flute, or Don Juan. You young people of today—you over-educated young people, I would call you, if I were not afraid of being misunderstood— you prefer more highly seasoned fare and—Wagner music. It may be that my judgment of Wagner has been unconsciously affected by a slight prejudice against the composer which I have never been able to overcome. Forty years ago (nearly) Wagner published a brochure entitled The Jews and Music. ‘This revealed him as an out-and-out anti-Semite, as one who feels deep antipathy against everything connected in any way with Jews or Judaism. In all such things, including “‘Jewish” music, he finds nothing but what is ignoble and mean, nothing elevating or inspiring; even the virtuosi on the stage or in the concert hall are in his eyes not sincere disciples of art, but only people animated by vain ambition or vulgar avarice; Cle. el. Shall we applaud such ideas? the ideas on which Wagner’s judg- ments were based? Must not every Jew with a remnant of Jewish feeling in his soul indignantly oppose such views? Felix Mendelssohn, noble and glorious, both as man and as musician, whom J, at least, rank high above Wagner—only think! this Mendelssohn, he says, is only one of those Jews who through their music have vitiated the German national spirit! My judgment regarding music as such is only that 92 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of a dilettante; but I know at least so much, that Wagner, in this respect, at any rate, was ignoble-minded and contemptible. Now I must stop. I have talked enough for this time. Greetings to you and your dear mother and sister. Faithfully your uncle, B. FELSENTHAL My mother died in 1901. ~My father bore his loneliness, after thirty-six years of marriage, as a wise old man, experi- enced in life, would. He said little and after the first shock of separation showed no change in manner, though he wrote sadly enough of the blow that had fallen upon him. Shortly after, we established a joint household with one of my sisters, and this brought to my father, among other satisfactions, that of having for a year or two, until the families separated again, a small grandchild in the house. It was the next year that his eightieth birthday was celebrated. Many gathered to hear the words that were publicly spoken in appreciation, in reverential appreciation, of his work and character. Resolutions, letters, gifts, came from groups and individuals, and Orthodox as well as Reform Jews joined in doing him honor. One Jewish organization sent him a laurel wreath in gold inscribed in Hebrew, ‘‘ The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree”; George Kohut wrote a sonnet which appeared in the Menorah Monthly; Naphtali Herz Imber dedicated to him the English transla- tion of his Hebrew Zionistic poem, ‘“‘Hatikwah” (‘‘The Hope’”’); the Hebrew Union College conferred upon him the honorary degree of D.D. He was deeply moved by all these tributes of respect and affection. His letters showed it, as did also the modest responses he made after the ordeal of the public addresses. I say ordeal, for something in his attitude, in his expression, made one aware of the inward embarrassment he felt as he listened to praise of himself. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 93 In 1905 the honorary degree of D.D. was conferred upon him for a second time by the Jewish Theological Seminary, of which Dr. Solomon Schechter, great and learned, was presi- dent at the time. One remembers regretfully that Dr. Schechter and my father, congenial spirits, never had the joy of conversing with each other. They had the same passion for Jewish learning, had (at this time) similar if not identical viewpoints in regard to certain vital Jewish problems, and had qualities of character which would have made intercourse between them a delight. They knew each other’s worth, and the few letters they exchanged and the words they spoke, each of the other, had the tone of admiration and true friendship. When I say that Dr. Schechter and my father had similar opinions in regard to Jewish problems, I do not forget that Dr. Schechter represented a more conservative school of thought than that with which my father had all his life been identified. But my father, it must be said, was deeply disappointed in the later results of Reform. ‘That gratifying increase of religious fervor and religious loyalty which had been its first fruit had not been permanent. The movement had been over-zealous in one direction. Too much had been discarded. Customs and ceremonies and institutions which still retained their “life-giving power” had been cast aside along with the others. ‘‘Man soll nicht das Kind mit dem Bade ausschiitten,” my father wrote in Kol Kore Bamidbar in 1859, but it was just that which later he seemed to think had actually happened. He began to express his misgivings as early as 1875, 76, °78. In various articles and addresses published during those years he spoke with great emphasis of the danger of Jewish reform which does not place the accent on its Jewishness. ‘‘We must not utterly cast aside all the 94 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL great traditions of our past,” he says, “‘nor consent to mow down ruthlessly everything that is characteristically Jew- ish.”* Among his papers an undated scrap, headed “Signs of Disintegration,” contains this significant sentence: “A generation has risen up to whom Jewish rites and customs and usages are as unknown as those of the Hindus.” And this change, he adds, has taken place within the short space of twenty years. To be sure, he did not yield easily to discouragement, and on more than one occasion, as, for example, in 1886, on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of Sinai, he spoke of the excellent results which had been accom- plished by Reform. By the 1900’s, however, his doubts appear to have become settled convictions, and in the last year of his life he wrote (in a letter to Rabbi S. N. Deinard, dated March 1, 1907): It will one day be recognized that what we call “Reform Judaism” is not the highest and finest and best thing to be found in modern Israel, is not that which is most worthy of our devotion. The thought often comes to my mind that this extreme Reform we have in America, which knows no limit, will lead gradually to the extinction of Israel and its religion. ... Do you not agree with me that our Reform friends are preparing “‘a beautiful death” for Judaism ? And he goes on to say, as in the letter to Dr. Magnes, already quoted, that he would not wish to be an accomplice in such a proceeding. Yet it would be entirely wrong to infer from these expres- sions that he did not hold as firmly as ever to his conception of Judaism as an ever developing religion. From beginning to end this thought colors his opinions—is, rather, their *Cf. “Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gotteshiuser Pforten der Gerechtigkeit ?” Bibliog. 97. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 95 very foundation. It would not, perhaps, be incorrect to state his later views in regard to Reform in some such words as these: Reform is not the solution of the Jewish problem; for Reform, as practiced by Jews scattered among the nations, leads to absorption by non-Jewish nations and creeds, and for such an event it is ‘‘at least a thousand years too early.”’ Zionism, by reuniting the Jews in a land of their own, will give Judaism the opportunity “continually to adapt itself in its outward forms to time and circumstance,’ its adherents still remaining Jews. Thus his final hope, Zionism, did not contradict but rather contained, as a part of itself, the convictions of his early active years. A last change of residence occurred in 1904. It was the fourth in seven years, each one necessary for one practical reason or another. How my father—whose natural pref- erence would have been to live in one family homestead all his life—disliked these movings! I remember his saying, more than half in earnest, that 1t embarrassed him to report another change of address to his correspondents and to his newspapers and journals. We were at that time a household of only three, and my father’s days passed in a quiet routine. Two or three times a week he went to read in ‘“‘the library” (the Chicago Public or the Newberry) as he had done from as far back as we could remember; he attended meetings of the Chicago Rabbinical Association; occasionally he made visits. More often others came to see him—relatives, old friends, rabbis passing through the city. Most days passed without inci- dent and were followed by short, quiet evenings in which he sat reading in his Morris chair beside the lamp. t Cf. “Unsere Freude bei der Tempelweihe.”’ Bibliog. 24. 96 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL In some ways it was a too restricted life. For it is clear that he would have deeply enjoyed many things circum- stances prevented him from having—music, a large library of his own, more constant intercourse with scholarly associates. But he could do without. To say that he did not complain or that he did not even let it be known that he missed such intellectual joys is to state the matter crudely. I think it never occurred to him that he was deprived of these things. Among such and such conditions in life he was placed, and this and that was his work. In some such fashion he might have expressed himself in regard to the life, the very simple life, he led. He never knew how to make demands for himself, neither of persons nor of Life. There was one brief interruption to the quiet of this period when my father went to Louisville in the summer of 1904 to register his emphatic nay before the Central Conference on the question which was then prominently before the Reform rabbis of the country of establishing a synod. Such a proposal had been made at various times in the past, and had always drawn from my father vigorous expression of his views, and sometimes indignant, even impassioned protest. ‘The modern Jewish consciousness,” he had written as far back as 1857, ‘‘is opposed to all Sanhedrins; denies them the right to usurp the authority which belongs to individual Jews; would, if a Sanhedrin still existed, employ all legiti- mate means to destroy it as an obstacle to the development of Judaism, disturbing, checking, and fettering the freedom of thought and liberty of conscience of the individual.’ And in one of the twenty-seven theses which the next year *Cf. “Offenbarungsglauben und Reform. Sind Beide zu vereinbaren ?”’ Bibliog. 7. TEACHER IN ISRAEL 97 he presented to the Jiidischer Reformverein, he spoke of the _ danger inherent in a formulated “confession of faith,” and laid down as the one and only dogma to which the members of the society must subscribe: ‘“‘ Absolute freedom of faith and of conscience for all.’”’ In 1881, in 1886, in 1890, and whenever, through the years, he touched upon this subject of authority in the personal religious life, he wrote as one to whom the very thought was unendurable. This, for instance, is characteristic: What? A majority shall rule over us in matters of religious thinking and doing? It is difficult to understand that American Israelites, otherwise so deeply imbued with Jeffersonian democratic principles, and especially with the principle that each individual has the right to worship God according to the dictates of his own con- science, should advocate the proposition to erect over us a hierarchical institution with law-giving and law-enforcing powers.? At the time of the Louisville conference in 1904 there was imminent danger that such an institution would be estab- lished. A number of the leaders favored it, and a vote was to be taken which might bring the synod actually into being. In justice it must be said that the sponsors of the synod conceived it somewhat differently from my father: they denied any intention to fetter the individual in his religious thinking, and in general refused to see in the synod the dangerous possibilities which my father felt convinced were there. But to him the attempt of 1904 seemed “a treacher- ous assault upon our spiritual freedom, upon our personality, which, in the words of Goethe, is surely the most precious possession of the sons of men.”’ My father could not remain away from the Conference at such a time, could not remain silent when by speaking he 1 Cf. “Some Questions of the Day.” Bibliog. 233. 98 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL might influence the minds of a few. He traveled to Louis- ville and made an extraordinarily vigorous address before the assembled rabbis, with the result that the synod was defeated, the vote being tied. ‘The question of its establish- ment has not, however, been raised again since that day. The incident, gratifying to my father in its result, must have been so on its personal side also. The members of the Conference, of whatever shade of opinion they were, listened to him with extreme respect. They gathered about him as about a revered leader. One among them called him “‘the aged yet youthful master,” and spoke of the inspiration which he brought to them—‘inspiration which evidently flows from a perpetual spring.” The last chapter of my father’s life, his two last invalid years, began on Sunday, the fifteenth of October, 1905. He had taken part that morning in the special service which was held at Sinai Temple to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniver- sary of Rabbi Hirsch’s connection with the congregation. I remember that he stopped for a moment in the Sunday- school rooms to look at the children before going up to the auditorium. J remember his beautiful expression, his look of health and vigor. At midnight he lay in a hospital under- going a serious operation for which sudden and terrible pain had shown the immediate need. His recovery, alas! was not complete. When he came home to us at New Year’s, he was no longer young and strong—no one called him after that the young old man— but dependent, weak, an invalid, for whom the remem- brance of strength made invalidism hard to bear. Never for a single hour from this time on was he free from discomfort; on many days he suffered intensely; and, TEACHER IN ISRAEL 99 what was hardly less severe a trial to him, he needed always _ to be waited upon. He would never before this so much as allow one to help him with his overcoat or to take his arm in crossing the street. He bore it all, not with the stoicism of which he had been capable in earlier years, but patiently, though he was inwardly very sad. ‘‘ Wie Gott will, ich halt’ still,’ he wrote in his letters, but indeed he did not know how to complain. Grateful for every small service, slow to ask even for necessary attention, the closer one came to him the more lovable he appeared. Everyone loved him—nurses, doctors, neighbors, the little Bohemian maid-servant. To his family, inexpressibly precious are the memories of those years he was dependent upon us, those years in which he showed, as never before, that it gave him comfort to have us near him. Once during this time, in a letter to Uncle Henry, he gave expression to dark thoughts on life and suffering and human destiny. He quoted Heine (his sentiment if not his words): ‘‘At the end, Death stops our questionings with a handful of earth stuffed in our mouths. But is that an answer?” The letter reflects a transitory mood, born of weakness and pain. His permanent philosophy, as is clear from everything else he wrote and from every word he spoke, was one of courage and faith. But I must not write as if these years were wholly sad. After the first hard months, my father was able to sit with us at table again, to take short walks, to read and write in the family living-room. His two grandchildren in the city, little girls of three and five, were often in the house. Listen- ing to their sweet voices he forgot his pain, and his eyes shone with love and happiness. ‘The stories he told them! the songs he sang! 100 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL The world outside held his absorbed interest to the end. On previous pages I have included letters touching on Zionism written during this period. He feels keenly, he writes in one of them, his inability to do anything for the cause. His enthusiasm for Zionism is as alive as it ever was. . . . I remember a day when, surrounded by four or five ardent Zionists, he spoke of Zionistic aims and hopes, and his face and voice were like a prophet’s. Uncle Henry came often to see him. His visits were “like rays of golden sunshine.”’ Other friends came. His eighty-fifth birthday was a gala day. There were many visitors, and the house was filled with flowers. My father was grateful for every sign of love, and was happier than we could have believed, a year before, that he would ever be again. During the summer of 1907, we lived in a suburb near Chicago. For the first time he was satisfied to leave his books and greatly enjoyed the trees and the blessed quiet. When we returned to the city in September, he was better in health and more serene in spirit. Accustomed now to his invalid state, he settled quietly into the home routine. Day followed day, the autumn passed—and then, just before the close of the year, my father fell sick of pneumonia, and on the twelfth day of January, 1908, ten days after he had completed his eighty-sixth year, his life ended, and our dearly beloved father passed from our sight. That my father should vanish utterly from the earth, that the world should go on so much the poorer, was a thought I could not bring myself to accept. Somehow he must be made to live in the minds of more than those few with whom TEACHER IN ISRAEL IOI he exchanged words. While he lived, it was good to come in contact with him; and if it were possible to draw in words his soul’s portrait, would it not be as though he were still among men, still an uplifting presence in the world ? If it had been possible to me, I would have written in such a way that the very quality of his presence would have been conveyed. I would have made it seem as though he entered the room where one read. As best I could I have tried to share what I have had. APPENDIX ORIGINALS OF GERMAN LETTERS INCLUDED IN TEXT Translation, p. 5 4. Marz 1903. An Fraulein Bertha Levi, in Frankfurt am Main. LIEBE NICHTE! Bereits mehrere Wochen sind verflossen, seit ich Deinen jiingsten, im Dezember an mich abgesandten Brief erhalten habe, und bis heute—ich muss mich selbst anklagen—ist er unbeantwortet geblieben. Hoffentlich, liebe Bertha, bist Du nun nachsichtig genug gesinnt, um mich zu entschuldigen und um eine geniigende Erklirung dafiir in dem Umstande zu finden, dass ich doch nicht mehr zu den jungen Leuten mich zahlen kann, welche heitern Sinnes, froh und frei, zur Feder greifen ké6nnen, um mit fernen theuern Freunden in Briefen Gedanken auszutauschen. Nun widersprich nicht, liebe Bertha, sage nicht, dass ich ja, um die Zahl meiner Jahre auszugeben, bloss die zwei Ziffern 1 und 8 niederzuschreiben hatte. Ja, darin hast Du wohl recht. Aber—aber—die Ziffer 8 muss links placirt werden, u. die Ziffer 1 rechts; nicht aber umgekehrt. Vergiss nicht, dass ich 81 Jahre hinter mir habe, u. nicht erst 18, u. dass ein mehr als Achtzig- jahriger von Natur aus mehr oder minder unthatig wird, schreibfaul, nachlassig, und so weiter, und so weiter. Den Naturgesetzen, den Gesetzen des Seelenlebens sowohl wie denen des leiblichen Lebens, kann aber Niemand sich widersetzen, u. wir Alle miissen uns ihrem Schalten u. Walten in Ergebung unterwerfen. “Der Onkel wird missmuthig, haingt pessimistischen Gedanken- gangen nach; er schreibt gewiss an einem triiben Tage,’’—so wirst Du vielleicht denken, nachdem Du bis hierher gelesen haben wirst. Aber es ist denn doch nicht so. Ich ergehe mich nicht in philosophischen Lebensbetrachtungen, weder in pessimistischen, noch in optimist- ischen, sondern ich berichte bloss Thatsachen. Doch auch das Thatsichliche hat ja zwei Seiten. Ich war immer gewohnt, ja ich habe mir immer Miihe gegeben, iiberall in objectiver I02 TEACHER IN ISRAEL 103 Ruhe u. ohne Voreingenommenheit alles Seiende u. Geschehende von zwel Seiten zu betrachten, von der dunkeln u. der heitern. Damit Du nun nicht glaubst, mich belaste u. bedriicke das Alter in sehr hohem Grade, so will ich beifiigen, dass ich auch Grund habe, auf die helle Kehrseite des Bildes hinzuweisen, u. dass ich im Stande bin zu sagen, das ich in Anbetracht der Zahl meiner Lebensjahre wohl u. vergniigt bin, u. von Ermattung u. Erschlaffung u. Hinfalligkeit u. Greisenhaftigkeit noch nicht erdriickt werde. Meinem Schépfer sei Dank dafiir! Das hohere Alter ist nicht die Zeit der ausblickenden Hoffnungen, sondern der riickschauenden Erinnerungen. Ich vergleiche solches hohere Alter der Abendstunde, da nach einem langen arbeits- u. wechselreichen Tage, an welchem Regen u. Sonnenschein, Stiirme u. Ruhepausen, Wolken u. blauer Himmel abwechselnd uns zu Theil geworden. Man sitzt ruhig vor der Thiire seines Hauses u. blickt gedankenvoll der allmiahlich sich senkenden Sonne nach. In unserer Erinnerung wendet sich der Blick unseres Geistes zuriick zu dem entschwindenden Tage. Allerlei Bilder ziechen vor dem innern Auge voriiber, u. mancherlei sind die Gedanken, welche kaleidoskopisch vor uns sich aufrollen. Wohl uns, wenn dadurch nicht die heitere Ruhe u. Selbstzufriedenheit unseres Geistes gest6rt oder gar zerstort wird, wenn wir mit ruhigem Gewissen auf den dahingegangenen Tag zuriickschauen kénnen, wenn wir sagen kénnen, es seien der schénen Tage doch mehr gewesen als der unschdnen, u. wenn man dann auch in Friede u. Freudigkeit der nun rasch nahenden Nacht entgegen gehen kann, in der das Gestirn des Tages uns nicht mehr scheint. Indem ich vorstehende Worte niederschrieb, fiel mir ein gar tief empfundener Vers meines Lieblingsdichters Géthe ein, der unendlich besser als ich es auszudriicken im Stande bin, den Gedanken Ausdruck leiht, die in diesem Augenblick meine Seele erfiillen. Der Vers lautet so: “Ueber allen Gipfeln—ist Ruh’—in allen Wipfeln—spiirest Du— kaum einen Hauch.—Die Végelein schweigen im Walde.—Warte nur balde—ruhest Du auch.” Doch genug davon! Ich bin heiter u. getrost; auch koérperlich ganz wohl u. riistig. .. . Wie geht es denn Dir, liebe Bertha? Es ist mir ausserordentlich erfreulich, denken zu kénnen, dass Du in allezeit lebensfreudiger Stimmung u. heitern reinen Sinnes durch das Leben schreitest, u. dass 104 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Dir auch vom allgiitigen Schicksalslenker Gesundheit u. Wohlergehen in reichem Masse beschieden sein wird. Adieu fiir heute! Tausend Herzensgriisse von Deinem so fernen u. doch in Gedanken Dir nahen Onkel B. FELSENTHAL Translation, p. 8 Was mich betrifft, so ist es iibrigens nicht bloss das Band der Freundschaft zu einem wackerstrebenden jungen Mann und das Band der Achtung vor einem tiichtiggn Character, das mich zu Ihnen zieht,—es ist auch das Band der nahen Blutsverwandtschaft, das uns zusammenhalt. Wohl bin ich schon seit fast 24 Jahren aus Deutsch- land ausgewandert u. in Amerika angesiedelt, aber trotzdem bin ich immer noch ein so starker deutscher old fogy, dass ich stets noch viel auf mischpochah halte. Ihre selige Mutter, deren herrliches Bild nicht aus meinem Geiste schwinden wird, so lange ich im Stande sein werde, Erinnerungen festzuhalten, und mir neu in’s Bewusstsein zuriick zu rufen, war mir von friihester Kindheit an so innig befreundet, dass ich auch schon um ihretwillen zu deren Sohn mich besonders hingezogen fiihle. Translation, p. 28 Unsere Reformbestrebungen gehen sehr langsam vorwarts. Es wird Sie dies nicht Wunder nehmen, wenn Sie bedenken welche michtigen Feinde solchen Bestrebungen entgegen stehen. Da ist (1) die Dummheit und Unwissenheit—und ‘‘gegen die Dummbheit kampfen die Gotter selbst vergebens’’; da ist (2) der rohe Fanatis- mus, welcher mit Awto-da-fés antworten méchte, wenn man seinen heiligen Staub und Moder angreift; da ist (3) der bloss in Geldsucht sich concentrierende Sinn des grossen Haufens, der kalt und gleich- giiltig an jedem idealen und uneigenniitzigen Streben voriibergeht. Doch verzage ich nicht, dass eine bessere Morgenréthe auch fiir unsere umnachteten jiidischen Zustiande tagen wird. Translation, p. 34 Wie fiihlte sich die moderne, amerikanische ‘‘Democracy” 1854, ja noch 1856 so sicher, so uniiberwindlich, ein wahres Gibraltar! Heute ist es anders, und wenn es auch mdglich sein mag, dass 1860 die Drahtzieher noch einmal es dahin bringen dass ein demokratischer TEACHER IN ISRAEL 105 Prasident in’s ‘‘weisse Haus” einzieht, so hat doch das free soil Ele- ment eine so feste Wurzel in den Ueberzeugungen der Masse gewonnen, dass es nicht mehr auszuwurzeln ist. Keine Macht auf Erden ist hierzu stark genug. Machen Sie, lieber Adler, nicht an sich selbst die Erfahrung dass Sie, wenn Sie iiberhaupt noch ein Demokrat sind, nicht mehr mit derselben Begeisterung an der Partei hingen, wie vor zwei Jahren, an dieser filibustierenden, Cuba-stehlen-wollenden, Sklaverei-ausdehnenden, corrupten Demokratie? Ich miisste mich sehr irren, wenn ich annehmen miisste, Sie wiirden heute noch einmal fiir Buchanan stimmen. @ Doch lassen wir Politik Politik sein. Gliicklich der, welcher diesem Schlamm politischer Wiihlerei fern steht, und dem innerhalb seines Hauses ein Reich bereitet ist, wo keine feindseligen Parteien bestehen, sondern wo Alle sich in inniger Liebe und Treue zugethan sind. In diesem Reiche bestehen auch Frauenrechte, und mégen auch Damen den Prasidentenstuhl einnehmen, und durch Anmuth und liebenden Sinn herrschen. Translation, p. 35 In Bezug auf meine dussern Giiter, so wollen dieselben sich nicht mehren, noch sehe ich keine Aussicht dafiir. Aber gliicklicher Weise bin ich so ‘‘genaturt,’’ dass Geld keinen besonders grossen Werth fiir mich hat. ‘‘Das Geld, das Geld ist eine Chimdre,”—Sie erinnern sich dieser Passage aus Robert der Teufel. Zwar hat auch Baron Rothschild einiges Recht, der, als er einst in der Oper jene Worte vernommen hatte, von seiner Loge aus den Zusatz gemacht haben soll, “‘Wer aber kaan’s hat, ’s ist doch ’ne G’sereh.”’ Freilich ist es eine ‘‘G’sereh,” und auf manches muss man verzichten, ja mit Schmerz verzichten, woran die Seele hangt. Doch was ist da zu machen? In solchen Lagen ist es gut, wenn man sich einen stoischen Gleichmuth bewahren kann, und wenn man mit dem alten Volkslied sagen kann, “Freund, ich bin zufrieden, geh’ es wie es will.”’ Translation, p. 40 Guten Morgen, meine werthe Freundin, Frl. Marie G. An Jhrem heutigen Geburtstagfeste gewahrt es mir eine besondere Freude, mich unter die Zahl Ihrer Freunde zu mischen, die Ihnen herzliche Gliickwiinsche darbringen. Ich méchte Ihnen recht viel 106 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Liebes und Schénes sagen, doch ich fasse alles in das eine Wort zusammen: Mége der géttliche Schicksalslenker Ihnen einen recht heiteren, schénen, sonnenbestrahlten Lebensweg erdffnen, den Sie, u.s.w., u.s.w. Nun, Sie konnen sich die Fortsetzung selber denken. Wer, wie Sie, einen so klaren Geist besitzt, dem fallt es nicht schwer, halbe Satze zu erginzen, und wer, wie Sie, zu hellem Kopfe auch ein edles Herz gesellt, mit lichtem Gedanken ein reines Gemiith har- monisch vereinigt, dem ist die Aufgabe siiss und leicht, sich u. andern das Leben gar begliickt zu gestalten. Nun, liebe Marie, denken Sie sich noch etliche dutzend Seiten mit den schénsten Wiinschen fiir Ihr Wohl beschrieben, mit Gedanken wie sie nur der Feder unserer genialsten Dichter entstammen kénnen, u. glauben Sie dann, das Alle die herrlichen Gedanken u. herzlichen Wiinsche Ihnen zum Geburtstage geweiht seien von Ihrem Vetter u. Freunde u. ehemaligen Lehrer, B. FELSENTHAL Translation, p. 53 Gegner, doppelt iiberlegen, Ausgeriistet mit zwiefalter Waff’ als Dichter und Sachwalter; Wenn ich dir mich stell’ entgegen, Nenn’ ich’s um so mehr verwegen, Als, wie du mir selbst gedroht, Dir als Anwalt dar sich bot Gute Sach’ und mir die schlechte; Dass mir bangt, wie ich verfechte Falschheit gegen Treu im Tod. GEEHRTER HERR ROSENTHAL! Mit den obigen Verszeilen, die ich ganz bona fide als Motto an die Spitze der gegenwartigen Epistel stelle, schliesse ich meinerseits die Discussion, die ich in diesen Tagen mit Ihnen hatte. Der Vers soll, mutatis mutandis, als mein freundliches Schlusswort gelten. Zum besseren Verstandnis des urspriinglichen Sinnes der Verse seien noch die folgenden literarhistorischen Notizen beigefiigt. Vor 60 Jahren haben sich Uhland und Riickert einmal gegenseitig ‘‘angedichtet.”’ Das Thema der Wechselgedichte war: Ist der Treubruch oder der Tod der Geliebten das Betriibendere? Zuerst begann Uhland mit 4 TEACHER IN ISRAEL 107 zehnzeiligen Strophen, und dann antwortete Riickert mit einem Gedichte gleichen Umfangs. Meine Verszeilen an der Spitze dieses Briefes bilden die einleitende Strophe im R.’schen Gedichte. Meine Absicht am Anfang der Woche war, Sie mit Ihren Argu- menten vor die Oeffentlichkeit zu locken; aber es gelang mir nicht. Was Sie mir privat sagten, das hatten Sie auch vor einem grisseren Publicum sagen kénnen. Erschépft iibrigens—das geben Sie wohl zu—ist das Thema noch lange nicht. Beste Griisse von Ihrem B. FELSENTHAL CHICAGO, 2. Dezbr. 1886. Cf. p. 54 MEIN LIEBER FREUND ROSENTHAL! I5. sept. 1903. Ich bin doch ein recht sonderbar veranlagter Mensch. Aus vieljahrigen, theils bewussten, theils unbewussten Selbstbeobachtungen ist es mir klar geworden, dass meine ganze Denkmethode von Natur aus eine dialectische ist. Neben meinen eigenen Gedanken ver- nehme ich das Dazwischenreden eines—wie soll ich sagen ?—eines Nicht Ich, und darauf antwortet mein Ich wieder in seiner Weise. Eben jetzt, da ich mich zum Niederschreiben des gegenwirtigen Briefes niedersetze, ist es mir als ob in meinem Inneren zwei Stimmen im Wechselgesprach sich héren liessen, und ihr heriiber u. hiniiberreden lasst sich etwa in der folgenden Weise wiedergeben: Nicht Ich: An wen schreibst Du denn eigentlich den Brief den Du jetzt beginnst ? Ich: An einen lieben alten Jungen dem... Nicht Ich: Wart ein wenig! Du sagst an einen lieben alten Jungen. “Alter Junge’—ist das nicht ein Widerspruch in sich selbst ? Ich: Nun so wollen wir den Ausdruck umwenden. Sagen wir dafiir an einen jungen Alten. Nicht Ich: Ach was, das ist ja fast dasselbe, “Alter Junge,” “Junger Alte’—so was gibt’s nicht. Ich: Warum nicht? Kannst du Dir nicht denken, dass es Menschen gibt, die bereits eine lange Reihe von Jahren durchlebt haben, die aber trotzdem an Geist und Gemiith jung geblieben sind ? 108 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Nichi Ich: Also das ist’s was Du meinst? Aber was ist denn das Richtigere, “Junger Alte” oder ‘Alter Junge’? Dass es eine gewisse Nuancierung der Begriffe ergibt, wenn man den einen oder den andern dieser Ausdriicke gebraucht, das weiss ich wohl. Wel- chem dieser Ausdriicke sollen wir nun den Vorzug geben? Ich: Das hingt davon ab, auf welchen Umstand wir gerade den Hauptaccent legen wollen, ob auf die Zahl der Jahre, oder auf Geist und Herz. In dem einen Falle gebraucht man das eine Wort als das Haupt- und Grundwort u. das Andere als das naherbestimmende Eigenschaftswort. In dem andern Falle macht man es gerade umgekehrt. Nicht Ich: Nun, welche der beiden Bezeichnungen wirst Du im gegenwirtigen Fall vorziehen ? Ich: Ich glaube ich will meinen Brief an den alten Jungen addressieren. Sehen Sie, Freund Rosenthal, in dieser Weise schnurrt es in diesem Augenblick in meinem Denkapparat hin u. her. Mein Schreiben ist namlich fiir Sie bestimmt und—und—well, ich schreibe an meinen lieben alten Jungen. Was aber veranlasst mich heute zu diesem Schreiben ? mich den Schreibfaulen, mich den in seiner Correspondenz so Nachlassigen ? Soll ich’s Ihnen sagen? Wohlan, es ist mir dieser Tage recht- zeitig zu Ohren gekommen, dass Sie am 17 d. M. Ihr 75. Lebensjahr vollenden werden, u.s.w. Da werden doch an diesem Tage viele Ihrer Freunde, theils in Person, theils in Briefen u. Telegrammen, an Sie hintreten u. Ihnen Gliick u. Segen u. fernere heitere Jahre wiinschen etc., etc. Kann ich da, darf ich da zuriickbleiben ? Ja, mein lieber Freund Rosenthal, Sie sind nun auch 75 Jahre alt geworden, ein “alter Herr,” aber ein junger alter Herr. Wir—mit dem wir meine ich uns, Ihre Freunde,—wir freuen uns dass Sie an Kopf und Herz jung und frisch geblieben sind, dass Ihr Denken immer noch ein riistiges u. energisches, Ihr Gefiihlsleben immer noch ein griines und bliihendesist. Ja, wir freuen uns dessen, und wir wiinschen dass es so bleiben mége bis—bis—wissen Sie wie Ihre selige Gross- mutter den Satz erginzt haben wiirde p—“ Bis zu hundert Jahr.” Thr Grossvater hatte dieselbe Erginzung gemacht, nur in andern Worten: at atNl nde TEACHER IN ISRAEL 109 Ich konnte jetzt aufhéren, ja ich sollte jetzt aufhéren, denn am Ende ist’s unrecht von mir, dass ich Ihnen zumuthe eine lange Epistel von mir zu lesen; insbesondere heute, da die Madchen draussen warten, mit denen Sie doch tanzen miissen, indess die Melodie auf- gespielt wird: Als der Grossvater die Grossmutter nahm. Aber ich kann mich nicht zuriickhalten wenigstens noch einen Vers hier zu citieren, welcher von dem altgewordenen Vischer, dem ‘‘ Vauvischer”’ herstammt und welcher folgendermassen lautet: Ihr Leidenschaften ade!—Euer Scheiden thut mir nicht weh.—Nur eine mocht ich behalten, ja eine—den Zorn auf das Schlechte, das Gemeine! Mir gefallt Gedanke u. Wort des alten Schwaben gar sehr. Ich habe es mir gleichsam als ein Motto fiir mich erwahlt und weil das Wort mir so zusagt, so meinte ich, es kénnte auch Ihnen aus der Seele gesprochen sein. Wenn nicht, nun dann, nichts fiir ungut. Wir bleiben die Alten nichtsdestoweniger. | Nun ist’s aber Zeit adieu zu sagen. Adieu. Empfehl’ mich Thnen. Ihr alter 81 Jahr junger Freund, B, FELSENTHAL Chip..07 Mein bescheidenes pPlaidoyer fiir die armen, kranken Juden zielt nun auf die Bitte ab, ein Winkelchen in der Hospitalkiiche irgend einer jiidischen Kéchin, u. sei diese selbst eine unwissende u. un- geschickte Polin, fiir Zubereitung koscherer Speisen zu iibergeben, u. solchen Kranken, die koscher zu essen haben wollen, koschere Speisen zu verabreichen. Lassen Sie mich in dieser Verbindung noch einen Punct beriihren. Im Hospital ist auch nicht ein einziger jiidischer Bediensteter. Fir manche auf dem Sterbelager Liegenden und fiir deren AngehGrige ist’s ein ungemein peinlicher Gedanke, dass in der letzten Scheidestunde kein Glaubensgenosse am Leidenslager stehe. Ware es gar nicht méglich, hier Abhiilfe zu schaffen? Zur Zeit, als man es in Frage stellte, ob denn iiberhaupt ein besonderes jiidisches Spital eine Existenzberechtigung habe, berief man sich unter Anderm auf das Bediirfniss sterbender Israeliten, in dunkler Stunde gleichfihlende, mitempfindende Glaubensgenossen um sich zu haben, u. wies man darauf hin, wie lieblos, u. vandalisch es wire, wenn man einem Ster- IIo BERNHARD FELSENTHAL benden solchen Trost versagen wollte. Sollte es denn nun gar so schwer sein, fiir solchen Zweck Wege u.. Mittel zu finden ? Ich unterbreite nun ganz ergebenst obige Gedanken Ihrer Erwia- gung. Ich iiberlasse es auch Ihnen zu entscheiden, ob es weise ware, Vorstehendes zur Kenntnisnahme der Hospitalverwaltung zu bringen. Und ich schliesse mit der Bitte, es mir zu glauben, dass ich nur von dem Gefiihl der Theilnahme fiir arme, hiilfsbediirftige Menschen bestimmt worden bin, endlich—nach langem Zogern—die Feder zu ergreifen. Translation, p. 71 Sie waren vor etlichen Wochen so giitig iiber meine historische Monographie, The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congreg’n, mir einige freundliche Worte zu sagen. Ich danke Ihnen dafiir von ganzem Herzen. Aber ankniipfend daran méchte ich einen Wunsch 4ussern. Sie sind ein Mitglied des Executive Council der A.J.H.S. Sie, in Verbindung mit andern leitenden Herren im Executive Council, sollten nun meines Erachtens geeignete Persdnlichkeiten zu bestimmen suchen, solche Monographien tiber andere Partieen der amerikan.— jiidischen Geschichte zu schreiben. In den 2o0er Jahren z.B. entstand in der jiid. Gemeinde Beth Elohim in Charleston, S.C., eine starke reformistische Stro6mung. Deren Quellen u. Verlauf aufzusuchen u. zu beschreiben, ist heute schon schwieriger, als es vor 12 oder 15 Jahren gewesen. Aber sollte nicht um so mehr der Verwaltungsrath der Historical Society jetzt sich die Mithe geben, einen Herrn in Charleston zu veranlassen, dass er im Interesse der Geschichte einen objektiven Bericht iiber jene Charlestoner Bestrebungen zu Papier bringe ? Ein anderes Beispiel. Ende der 60er Jahre wurde in Philadelphia das Maimonides College gegriindet, u. dasselbe bestand 2 oder 3 Jahre. Ohne alle subjektive Erregtheit u. ohne alle Leidenschaft k6énnte u. sollte, so meine ich, nun die Geschichte jenes Unternehmens geschrieben werden, sollten die Veranlassungen dazu, der Verlauf desselben, die Griinde des Zusammenbruchs, etc., aufgesucht u. dargelegt werden. Auch in einem zusammenfassenden Artikel ware die Geschichte der im r1oten Jhdt. in der Stadt New York geschaffenen jiid. Wohltatigkeitsanstalten zu schreiben. In geschichtl. Monographien kénnten vielleicht auch behandelt werden: The Mt. Sinai Hospital, TEACHER IN ISRAEL III the Orphan Asylum, the Old People’s Home in Yonkers, the United Hebrew Charities, etc. Es sind auch noch die Biographien von amerikan. Juden zu schreiben, die doch noch eine ganz andere Stelle einnehmen, als z.B. Col. Is. Franks oder Major D. S. Franks, iiber welche Mittheilungen im neuesten Band der Publications A.J.H.S. enthalten sind. Die Letztgenannten u. noch manche Andere—welche Bedeutung haben sie tiberhaupt fiir die Geschichte der Juden u. des Judenthums in Amerika? Man streiche sie ganz hinweg u. man wird keine Liicke in dieser Geschichte empfinden. Sie sind einflusslos voriibergegangen. Anders ist es mit Isaac Leeser, mit Samuel Isaacs, M. J. Raphall, L. Merzbacher, S. Adler, auch mit Abr. Reis in Baltimore u. etlichen Andern, die in der ersten Halfte dieses Jhdts. hier thaitig waren. Jedenfalls hatte hier die Biographik Objecte, an denen sie ihre Kunst zeigen u. tiben sollte. Auch der nun seit mehr als to Jahren im Grabe ruhenden Emma Lazarus sollte nun seitens unserer Hist. Society ein biographisches Denkmal errichtet werden. Ein anderes Gebiet fiir historische Forschung bietet sich dar in der Bibliographie der amerikanischen Judaica u. Hebraica. Translation, p. 81 GEEHRTER HERR Doctor! Ein tobender Lirm u. ein unruhevolles Getése ist’s, das durch den unseligen Krieg veranlasst wurde, in welchen unser Land durch bése Zeitungen u. bose Menschen hineingestossen worden ist. Da treibt es denn doch Manchen, sich heraus zu fliichten aus dem Toben u. Tosen, u. Ruhe zu suchen bei seinen Biichern, oder in der Natur, oder im Verkehr mit ruhig und besonnen gebliebenen Freun- den, oder auf andern geeigneten Wegen. Auch mich iiberkommt zuweilen solche Stimmung, solches Sehnen nach Ruhe und Frieden. Werden Sie mir’s nun veriibeln, mein lieber Herr Professor, wenn ich auf ein Viertelstiindchen zu Ihnen mich fliichte, u. mit Ihnen plaudernd mich ergehe iiber Dies u. Das Pp— Die nach aussen bemerkbare Thatigkeit fiir den Zionismus wird nun allerdings unter gegenwirtigen Zeitlauften in Amerika vielfach gehemmt u. gehindert sein. Dessenungeachtet werden hoffentlich eine Anzahl von einflussreichen u. geachteten Mannern als amerika- nische Delegierte zum zweiten Baseler Congresse gehen. Wer sind II2 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL nun die Manner, welche als Delegaten erwahlt werden sollten? Ich brauche Ihnen keine Namen zu nennen,—aber jedenfalls sollten Sze einer derselben sein,—u. Sie kénnten u. sollten bestimmend auf die Wahl geetgneter Vertreter Einfluss tiben. Leider bin ich zu sehr vorgeriickt in Jahren, sonst wiirde ich, trotz aller meiner angeborenen Scheuheit, mit Freude u. Bereitwilligkeit vortreten u. auf die Frage: 495 Sion "a5 MON 2 MN wie der junge Jesaias antworten: "237 “srw. Doch leider kann ich nicht mehr, zum allerwenigsten auf diesem Gebiete, praktisch thatig sein. .. . Ihren |. Vater griissen Sie in meinem Namen bestens. Auch den Herren, den edelsinnigen u. hochherzigen Enthusiasten, die Sie in Basel sehen werden, richten Sie gefalligst meine Griisse aus u. sagen Sie denselben, dass an den Ufern des fernen Michigansees ein alter Mann sich befindet, der ihnen seine Segenswiinsche sendet. “Dreamers of the Ghetto” hat auch sie Zangwill genannt. Gebe Gott, wir hatten viele Tausende solcher Triumer! Die Welt bedarf ihrer, wie auf diesem, so auch in andern Gebieten. Was ware aus der Menschheit geworden, u. was wiirde aus der Menschheit werden, wenn es keine solche Traéumer gabe? Translation, p. 82 Liebe Freunde, es ist eine hohe u. heilige Idee, in deren Dienst Sie sich gestellt haben. Es ist die Idee der Befreiung unserer Stammes- u. Glaubensbriider aus unsdglichem Elend, u. der Wiedergewinnung einer Heimath, unserer alten Heimath, fiir das verfolgte u. leidende Israel. O verzagen Sie nicht; erschlaffen Sie nicht in Ihrer Begeisterung fiir diese Idee! Bereits hat dieselbe die Herzen von Myriaden unserer Briider in allen Theilen der Welt ergriffen. Und ist das allein nicht schon Erfolg genug? Ist es nicht erfreuend, wahrzunehmen, dass durch den Zionismus so schéne Hoffnungen geweckt u. so viele Herzen gehoben u. so viele Charaktere veredelt werden? Wahrlich, Freunde, wir haben recht, wenn wir sagen: 55 MN 7W vy "WN TION. Translation, p. 88 CuHIcaGo, ILL., 1905 An Fri, Bertha Levi—Frankfurt */M. MEINE LIEBE NicuTeE! Es ist schon eine geraume Zeit verflossen, seitdem ich nicht mehr direct an Dich geschrieben habe. Aber Du wiirdest die Thatsache, dass meine Briefe so selten sind, ganz falsch TEACHER IN ISRAEL BiG beurtheilen, wenn Du, liebe Bertha, darin eine Verringerung meiner Liebe u. Freundschaft fiir Dich erblicken wolltest. Glaube mir, die lieben Freunde im alten deutschen Heimathslande sind mir, wenn auch raumlich ferri, im Geiste immer nahe, u. manche Stunde in Tagen, wenn ich einsam u. allein in meinem Studierzimmer sitze, oder in schlaflosen Nachten, wenn ich wachenden Auges meine Gedanken schweifen lasse dahin und dorthin, erfiillt sich mein Geist mit Gedanken an Euch Alle, Ihr lieben Freunde, die Thr driiben im fernen Deutschland Euch befindet. .. . Abermals habe ich Deinen lieben Brief vom 1. Sept. durchgelesen u. mich an Deinem heiteren u. herzlichen Geplauder erquickt. Mége Dir der giitige Gott noch recht lange, ja Dein ganzes Leben lang diese Geistesheiterkeit u. diesen Frohsinn erhalten. Wo solche freudevolle Lebensstimmungen fortwahrend heimisch sind, da muss der Quell, aus dem sie sprudeln, das Herz, ganz gewiss rein, klar u. lauter sein. Ein lauteres, unschuldvolles Herz,—das ist am Ende ein Besitz, iiber des- sen Werth gar kein anderes Besitzthum hinausgeht. Ein stets klares, kindlich unschuldvolles Herz, ein stets froh gestimmtes Gemiith,—wo gibt’s etwas schéneres in der Welt? Und weil ich das Herz so hoch halte, deshalb schiatze ich auch die Herzensbildung mehr als jede andere Art von Bildung! Es gibt gewiss nur wenige Worter, die so vielfach missverstanden u. falsch angewandt werden, als das Wort Bildung. Wen nennt die Welt nicht ‘‘gebildet”’? Ja, wer auch nur von den modischen, oft so inhaltsleeren modischen Tagesphrasen, die in der sogen. ‘‘ Gesellschaft’? umher schwirren, Gebrauch zu machen weiss,—ist der nicht auch “gebildet”? Aber ich zogere nicht zu: behaupten, dass, wenn nicht Herzensbildung dazu kommt, das andere nur hohler Schein ist, ein wesenloser Schein, ein diinner Firniss. Und wenn man diesen Firniss abkratzt, was kommt zum Vorschein? Herzensbildung ist mehr als intellectuelle Bildung, mehr als asthetische Bildung, mehr als dusserlicher Schliff, mehr als Eleganz u. Gewandt- heit im Verkehr mit andern, u.s.w. Ich freute mich, in Deinem Briefe zu lesen, dass Du manche Stunde an Sonntag-Nachmittagen in der 6ffentlichen Bibliothek oder im Stadel’schen Museum verbringst. Im Lesen von klassischen Schrif- ten, im Umgang mit den grossen Dichtern u. Denkern in vergangenen Zeiten, thut sich unser Geist weit auf u. es werden Gedanken u. Gefiihle in uns geweckt, die oft noch recht lange in uns nachklingen. u. auf unser ganzes Sein, auf unsern Charakter u. unsere Lebensftihrung II4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL veredelnd einwirken kénnen. Ebenso verhialt es sich, wenn wir 6fters sinnend vor Gemilden u. Sculpturen grosser Meister weilen. Auch da empfinden wir, dass wir in hohe u. heilige Geistesgefilde eingetreten sind, dass wir emporgestiegen sind zu Gipfeln, wo wir reinere Hohenluft athmen. Allerdings wird der besonnene Mensch nicht fortwihrend in solcher Luft leben wollen oder leben kénnen. Fort- wihrend, das geht nicht. Unser alltigliches Leben fordert seine Rechte u. dringt auf die Erfiillung von Pflichten, die es uns auferlegt. Zu diesen Pflichten kehrt man dann immer wieder neu angeregt u. neu gekraftigt zuriick u. man erfiillt sie mit neuer Freudigkeit u. Willigkeit, nachdem man mit Schiller u. Godthe, mit Raphael u. Michel Angelo etliche selige Stunden genossen hat. .. . Und nun adieu, Du liebes “Frankfurter Madel.” (“Frankfurter Madel,” so hast Du Dich selber bezeichnet in Deinem jiingsten Briefe.) Adieu mein goldiges Frankfurter Miédel, adieu! Nur noch eine Bitte! Wenn Er kommt, wie der Prinz aus dem Marchenland, der in dem ‘‘ Madel”’ die herrliche Prinzessin erkennt, der er tief in die strahlenden Augen u. in das goldene Herz hinein schaut, u. die er dann bei der Hand fasset u. spricht . . . well, ich will nicht weiter fortfahren; ich iiberlasse das, was ich eben niederschreiben wollte, Dir zum Errathen. Aber nicht wahr, mein liebes Berthachen, Du lassest mich dann das Niahere wissen ? ieu! Nochmals adieu! Dein treuer Onkel B. FELSENTHAL Translation, p. 90 CHICAGO, DEN 6. FEBR. 190 MEINE LIEBE NICHTE BERTHA! : 995 .. . Fiir die Photographieen sage ich Dir herzlichen Dank. Ja, sie sind sch6n, sehr sch6n. Wie muss nun das Original so lieb u. herzig sein! Bei langerm Anschauen kam mir unwillkiirlich der erste Vers eines bekannten Gedichtes von Heine ins Gedichtniss: “Du hast ja die schénsten Augen.” Aber freilich, die iibrigen, auf den ersten Vers folgenden Zeilen diirften vielleicht nicht passen. Aber was thut das? Die Augensindschén. Die Augen blicken aber nicht bloss auswarts, sondern wenn man in sie hinein blickt, so leuchten sie in das Innere dessen hinein, in die Seele dessen, dem diese Augen zu eigen sind, u. lassen uns ein ebenso klares, lichtes Herz erblicken u. ein ebenso reines Gemiith u. ein so lebendiges u. doch so ruhiges u. friedliche TEACHER IN ISRAEL II5 Gedankenleben. Ja, die schGnen Augen, u. das was hinter ihnen ist, die schéne Seele, das schéne Herz,—sie sind mehr werth, als “Diamanten u. Perlen.”’ | In Deinem jiingsten Briefe offenbarst Du Dich ja als eine ganz enthusiastische Schwirmerin fiir Wagner’s Opern; insbesondere hat der Zannhduser iiber das gewohnliche prosaische Denken u. Empfin- den des Alltagslebens Dich emporgetragen, u. Du kannst fast nicht Worte genug finden, um Deine gehobene Seelenstimmung darzulegen. Musik im Allgemeinen ist freilich eine hohe und heilige Kunst,— immer vorausgesetzt, dass sie im Dienst des acht Schénen, des Erha- benen u. Lauternden steht, u. nicht dem oft rohen Geschmack uncul- tivierter Massen frodhnen will; dass sie das Leben und Denken weihet u. heiliget u. in reinere Regionen emporhebt, es aber nicht hinabzieht in den Staub und in den Schmutz. Das gilt ja tiberhaupt von jeder Kunstgattung, von der Poesie u. Rhetorik, von der Malerei u. Bild- hauerkunst. Die Kunst, die ware Kunst hat ungemein viel dazu beigetragen, die Menschheit aufwarts zu fiihren u. vorwarts zu bringen. Sie war ein Factor in der Geschichte, der nicht genug gewiirdigt werden kann. Aber ich méchte accentuiren, dass sie dchter Art sein muss, u- dass sie nicht bloss dusserlich als Kunst ercheinen darf. Ein Reime- schmied, der Alltagsgedanken in holperige oder auch in glatte Verse einzukleiden weiss, ist noch lange kein Dichter. Und ein gewéhn- licher Schildermaler, oder ein Farbenkleckser, der geistlose Menschen und Scenen in geistloser Weise darzustellen weiss, ist lange noch kein Maler. Aehnlich verhalt es sich in der Musik. Auch da gibt es Kunst u. Handwerk; veredelten Geschmack u. rohen Genuss; rei- nigende Macht u. niederzwingende Gewalt. Ich will nun gewiss nicht daran zweifeln, dass Wagner zu den achten Kiinstlern gehort, ja, dass er einst ein Bahnbrecher fiir eine neue Art von Musik gewesen ist, die immer mehr sich Anerkennung erringt u. Einfluss verschafit. Aber ich selber darf mir kein Urtheil anmassen. Was weiss unser einer von solchen Dingen? Ich bin in einer frithern Zeit aufgewachsen, da man noch zu den melodieenreichern Mozart u. Haydn u. Rossini verehrend emporschaute, und uns Alten ist die neuere Musik, die man noch vor kurzem die Musik der Zukunft nannte, die aber, wie es scheint, bereits zur Musik der Gegenwart geworden ist, weniger ver- stindlich. Ich habe auch einmal Tannhduser gehért u. auch noch etliche andere Opern von Wagner. Ich bewundere die reichere Orchestrierung in der neuern Musik. Davon hatten Mozart u. seine r16 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Zeitgenossen noch keine Ahnung. Aber dagegen waren sie, wie ich oben bereits sagte, melodieenreicher, die Arien waren sangbarer, u. der schlichte, einfache Hérer konnte ihnen leichter Verstandniss ent- gegenbringen. Doch ich muss schweigen. Ich verstehe nichts von diesen Sachen. Unser einer muss sich begniigen, an einem schénen Liede von einem Einzelnen oder von einem Chor vorgetragen, sich innig zu erfreuen, oder an der alten Zauberflite oder am Don Juan. Ihr Neuen,—ich wiirde sagen: Ihr Ueberfeinerten, wenn ich nicht fiirchten wiirde, dass ich missverstanden werden kénnte, —Ihr Neuen liebet mehr die gepfefferten Speisen und—die Wagner’sche Musik. Vielleicht gesellt sich, mir unbewusst, zu meinem Urtheil tiber Wagner noch ein kleines Vorurtheil gegen den Componisten, das nicht ganz zu iiberwinden ist. Vor nahezu 40 Jahren veroffentlichte Wagner eine Broschiire unter dem Titel: Das Judenthum in der Musik. In derselben offenbarte er sich als ein recht gehissiger Antisemit, als ein Mann der voller tiefer Abneigung ist gegen Alles, was mit Juden u. Judenthum irgendwie zusammenhangt. Er will in allem diesen, u. so auch in “‘jiidischer’’ Musik, nur Unedles, Gemeines finden, nichts was erhebt u. lautert; selbst die ausiibenden Musiker, die Virtuosen, die auf der Biihne oder im Concertsaal vor das Publikum treten, sind in seinen Augen keine wahren Jiinger der Kunst, sondern nur Menschen, die von eitler Ruhmsucht oder gemeiner Geldsucht erfiillt sind, etc., etc. Solche Gesinnungen aber, aus denen die Wagnerischen Vorurtheile herausgewachsen sind,—sind sie fiir uns beifallswerth? Muss nicht jeder Jude, der noch einigermassen “‘jiidisch-patriotisch” denkt,— wenn das Wort gestattet ist,—sich auflehnen gegen derartige Gedanken und sich ablehnend verhalten gegen derartige Urtheile? Felix Mendelssohn, der als Mensch u. als Musiker Hohe und Herrliche, der ideal gesinnte, reine, edle Mendelssohn, den zch wenigstens hoch iiber Wagner stelle,—ja, denke Dir nur, dieser Mendelssohn soll auch nur ein solcher Jude gewesen sein, der durch seine Musik den german- ischen Volksgeist vergiftet hat! Wenn ich auch iiber Musik an sich nur ein dilettantenhaft Urtheilender bin, so verstehe ich doch so viel, dass Wagner ein gesinnungsroher u. wenigstens in dieser Hinsicht tief zu stellender Mensch gewesen ist. Ich muss nun aufhéren. Fiir heute, denk’ ich, habe ich genug geplaudert. Griisse an Dich u. die 1. Mutter u. Schwester. Dein treuer Onkel B. FELSENTHAL TEACHER IN ISRAEL Ti Translation, p. 94 Man wird endlich einmal auch in weitern Kreisen zu der Ueber- zeugung gelangen,» dass das, was man innerhalb der Judenheit ‘‘Reform”’ nennt, nicht das Héchste, nicht das Schénste, nicht das Erstrebenswertheste u. Allerbeste ist, was es iiberhaupt in Israel gibt. Mir scheint es oft, dass die extremen u. ganz in’s Uferlose gehenden jiid. Reformbestrebungen in Amerika allgemach zum Untergang Israels u. seiner Religion hinleiten. . . . Meinen Sie nicht auch dass unsere Reformfreunde dem Judenthum “einen schénen Tod”’ bereiten ? ve cone hl i bs an : CNMI ec Liha ate al “a 2 Pub a Fis ‘ a i Le wee 4404 jee 7 ae a a tORiTIN r is) Shes Py ae A > 7 ~ a ~ : 7 J 7 vy pai ta Oya” } ! : | v: uae PAA | Lead f ee Hint: apelin (Rs ‘ 4 = P J j A ar if : , é ee ate oP i p 4 i a iil Se CRM ae ea er ae \ ci Goh. Rov! LPs j an 5 + “a 7 | se A : ‘ i’ * er “an +s i -. (a ‘ oii A | BBL eh rs lal ale i adie al aan i , J Hy ; re ‘‘ ‘ re ‘ Vey Ainepek . ya ' i , * . ri ve = : ' ‘ & 4 i “ a2 ; f “* i, ha i ¥ : ' > om ! Y ~ 1 “se } el, ' ' } 5 ; . - he ‘ 3 i ; 4 y ‘ A “J a _¥ : . A ‘ ; i | ? ; j + F a 1 ‘ ts ah 1 f P , ‘ Pe te y ; . - af , i. ‘ : y : icles \y | ‘ ; ’ A) PF Pon hl fh} : “ ‘ . j ei i / Mi " ; ' ! rT] = - ¥ - : ; f °° . F Med ’ ; b ra 4 * iff ’ i] 7 | af F yf 2 \ , i J i "¥\" uo ‘ ‘ ' ' i ’ 7 ‘ ’ : ; A " ) wy . en 7 ’ ta is - ue i tas it i iy? ; - : Ly Lad J r { ‘ 7 : is F rf d ; ' Whig oa y > if 6 ri j as ‘v AY RA , . . of q ne ad iy nt dy j si iA ae" : cA ' io Ee, tee se : ; , 5 a) ah wi aii [ Poal . Ce. , : , : ; o ’ YS * A ; Pr wif uy 7 i +e d » erase 7 ial windy Pics ve 4. x PAR elie SELECTED WRITINGS O mighty current of time, which carries the acquiescent forward rejoicing; while those who protest are nevertheless borne away against their will! O mighty tide of time! My soul greets thee exultingly. Spiritual darkness can never again reign on earth. ‘Tyranny is ban- ished forever.—Address before General Convention, I.O.B.B. 1868. WHEREFORE WE REJOICE? DELIVERED AT THE DEDICATION OF ZION TEMPLE, 1864 The Lord hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for his habitation. Teal eA, BECUZ My. A NEW congregation has been established in Israel; we have consecrated in this hour a new center for Jewish wor- ship, a new center for elevation of the spirit and ennoble- ment of the character from the Jewish standpoint. Our hearts swell with gratitude, and solemn, festive joy fills our souls. And truly, friends, we have reason for our joy. We rejoice as members of the race of Israel, we rejoice as friends of an enlightened movement within Judaism, and we rejoice over the founding of this congregation and the dedi- cation of this temple from the point of view also of all humanity. 1. Aside from all else, even as sons of the ancient Hebrew race, there is ample reason for our pure and holy elevation of spirit. Is it not an inspiring thought that even here, in the distant West, almost at the frontier of civilization, another edifice has arisen, consecrated to the service of that God whom Israel has worshipped for more than three thou- sand years, dedicated to the teaching of those blessed and sublime and world-redeeming truths which arose in Israel in remote times and which have been cherished by Israel to this day—truths which in their essence and purity shall at 1 Translated from Unsere Freude bei der Tempelwethe. I21 122 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL some time be the supreme possession of all mankind? Are we not filled with pride and joy seeing for the first time a new Jewish congregation assembled here for divine service? O my fellow-Israelites, translate your emotions into thoughts, express them in language, and you will clearly recognize that your joy is fully justified. Not only on the heights of Moriah and at the foot of Carmel, on the shores of the Jordan and the sea of Tiberias, on the plains of Sharon and Jezreel are heard the teachings of Judaism. In every place where civilization has made its way, there are children of our race. Some have come of their own free will, some have been led by destiny—or let us rather say by the hand of God—and everywhere they remember with holy enthusiasm their mission to be bearers of those elevated doctrines which in their entirety are called the Jewish religion, to be promulgators of those pure truths before which ancient heathenism collapsed and before which the heathen- ism of our own time, the degrading cult of materialism, will sink into nothingness. It is not only the temple of Jeru- salem which is dedicated to the service of the One, Eternal, Spiritual Father of the Universe; numberless now are the places where the sublime word resounds which unites all Israel, and which today for the first time we have solemnly and fervently pronounced in this edifice: Hear, oh Israel, the Eternal is our God, the Eternal is One. And while we, as Jews proud of our Jewish consciousness, rejoice in the victorious onward march of our ancient Jewish faith, let us not refrain from also expressing our joy that it is not the Children of Israel alone who acknowledge the sublime character of our ancient laws and teachings, but that among all civilized nations the conviction of the divine truth and holiness and fitness of these laws and teachings is steadily gaining ground. ‘The more deeply they penetrate SELECTED WRITINGS 122 into the consciousness of the world, the more fully is it recognized that as regards absolute truth and morality they are of infinitely. higher value than all the philosophical systems of the Greeks and all the laws of the Romans; and thus it has come to pass that the sublime truths proclaimed by the inspired prophets and psalmists of Israel are known and valued by others besides the descendants of Jacob. Wherever you may go, to the churches of Edom or the mosques of Ishmael, to the civilized countries of the West or the less civilized countries of the East, everywhere you will hear proclaimed the moral laws handed down on Mt. Sinai, the teachings promulgated on the fields of Moab; everywhere you will listen to the inspiriting songs of our psalmists, the soul-stirring speeches of our prophets; and you will recognize that these laws, these speeches, these psalms have been of the greatest influence in the ethical life of almost every nation having a history, that they have determined the lives even of those who call themselves ‘‘free- thinkers’? and who believe themselves completely emanci- pated from their rule. The source of these living waters is in Jacob, but from this source broad streams of enlighten- ment and morality have flowed to the West and to the East. They have borne, it is true, much pagan sediment, but have proved themselves notwithstanding beneficent agencies of light and love. They have washed away indeed whole mountain ranges of crude paganism from the face of the earth. And if thou, O Israel, remainest ever true to thyself and thy mission, then the streams that separated them- selves from thy waters in Galilee and Arabia, one carrying divine enlightenment west, the other east, will, as God- ordained instruments, lead the world to that great day when knowledge of God and love of man shall fill the whole earth as the waters cover the sea. 124 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL The historical mission of Christianity and Mohammedan- ism has long ago been interpreted in this way by great Jewish thinkers, such as, for example, Judah ha-Levi, and Maimonides.’ And even in the early days of universal dark- ness and intolerance preachers and interpreters of the Scrip- tures attained to this exalted view, and acknowledged that “the truth came first from Sinai’’ but it “‘enlightens also Seir’”’—Seir, the home of Edom, being a symbol, in our older writings, of the Nazarene faith; also “it radiates from Paran’’—Paran, the home of Ishmael, being a symbol for the teachings of Mohammed.? And shall not we who have emerged from the ghettoes into which fanaticism and intolerance have imprisoned our fathers, and likewise from the confining walls of narrow religious views—shall not we who have penetrated all strata of society, all phases of life, all branches of science, and all spheres of art, shall not we exult over this dominion of Jewish ideas in the spiritual life of all mankind? We remember with deep affection the grandeur of ancient Jerusalem, but we do not share the wish to return to conditions that represented the mere beginning of development; we cherish instead the joyful hope of seeing the entire world one Jerusalem of enlightenment and virtue. The history of mankind points unmistakably to the fullest realization of this hope. Without passing through the phase of a militant church in the worldly sense, the persecuted faith will be victorious through sheer force of its divine teachings. ‘Therefore we rejoice and give voice to our glad- ness. Our Jewish hearts beat high when, envisaging the future, the glorious picture unrolls itself before our mind’s eye. See! all mankind—countless millions, all races, nations, * Cf. Kuzari, 4, 23; H. Melachim, 11, 4. The term was used in this sense even before Aben Ezra’s time, as witness his commentary to Deut. 33:2; cf. also Albo’s Ikkarim, 1, 20, and other passages. SELECTED WRITINGS 125 tongues, religions, not only Israel and Edom and Ishmael, not only Shem and Ham and Japhet, but all the children of men are assembled, radiant in the light of the knowledge of God, crowned with the resplendent crown of universal virtue and brotherly love. One God, one humanity, all men brothers, and Israel the first-born among them! Israel, who led the way carrying aloft the banner with the flaming inscription, Adonai Elohenu! ‘The Eternal is our God!” And the nations shout aloud to him whom they formerly derided and whom they now look upon as their honored elder brother, Sema Yisrael! ‘Hear, oh Israel, the Eternal is also our God! the Eternal is One!’ Our thoughts, dear friends, have carried us into the distant future in which the whole of mankind will unite in one single grand temple of God. Let us return to our own time and to this young Zion Congregation. The congrega- tion and its temple are signs of both the inward steadfastness and the outward spread of the power of the Jewish spirit. Where only a few decades ago were the hunting grounds of the Indians, another Jewish House of God has arisen. Where only a short while ago savage tribes swung their murderous tomahawks in fratricidal strife, descendants of Jacob now testify to their belief in the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, and to their belief that man is made in the image of God. Where a few years ago barbarism reigned, intent upon nothing but the satisfaction of the material wants of life, men now strive after truth, enlighten- ment, morality. Itis for this that joy and gratitude fill our hearts, it is for this that we sing hymns of praise. If the echo of our voices could reach our brethren beyond the seas, they would say, ‘‘From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs” (Isa. 24:16). And if they were to inquire of us, ‘‘Why this rejoicing? Why these hymns of praise ?” 126 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL we would answer, “‘We have reason enough for praise and for gratitude and for gladness of heart. For see! Israel lives! Jacob is not dead! he lives on in his children, as this new congregation testifies; Judaism lives, as this new temple testifies. See! here is a new Zion whence the Torah shall go forth, a new Zion chosen by God for a home.” 2. Yes, friends, we rejoice because another congregation, another temple, has been added to the countless numbers of Jewish congregations and houses of worship. But we have a special source of joy in the thought that here in this temple Judaism will be preached in its purity, that here its divine teachings will be cherished for their power to gladden the heart, enlighten the mind, and ennoble the spirit. The precious gold of our religion is covered with the dust of cen- turies: it is for us to remove the dust and restore the gold in radiant splendor. What is eternal and essential in our religion lies buried beneath a dead weight of ceremonies which have lost all meaning: it is for us to remove this dead and deadening mass, to bring new life into religion and new religion into life. To our pure Jewish faith superstition is attaching itself as with leaden weights and is trying to drag it down to dark and low-lying regions: it is for us to oppose with all our might both the consuming fire of super- stition and the icy cold of materialism and to do all in our power to make the light and warmth of the sun of Judaism shine in all its glory and splendor in this edifice and on this congregation. The current of further development, the trend toward modification of external forms according to time and place and circumstance, is hemmed in by an iron wall of opposition, an iron wall which, according to a Tal- mudic expression,’ separates God and Israel since the de- t Cf. Berachoth, 32 b. SELECTED WRITINGS 127 struction of the Temple. It is for us to release the stagnant mass, so that its living current may again bring blessing to Israel and all mankind. | Judaism is capable of unlimited development—this is our conviction. Judaism must constantly adapt itself in its outward forms to time and circumstance—this is our motto. To be sure, we must remain upon firm foundation and direct our course toward a clearly recognized goal. The founda- tion is: the belief in one eternal, premundane, and tran- scendental God and Ruler of all things; the belief in the destiny of mankind to realize the purest morality in thought and action and in its progress toward the highest attainable heights of knowledge and love and virtue; the belief in the mission of Israel to be exemplar, teacher, and guide of man- kind along the path to the Alpine heights of enlightenment and virtue. The goal—we have already described it in indicating the unshakable foundation of our faith. And how does this our conviction accord with Holy Writ and with all that great and significant literature which the Jewish national spirit in its fervent love of God has brought forth? Let us remember that these writings are but mile- stones on the road of Judaism’s progress—noble, impressive, but milestones only; in largest part they mark the comple- tion of but a portion of the journey, not its final goal. Some of these writings, including a part of the Hebrew Scriptures, do indeed mark the final and farthest goal of man. Partic- ularly with regard to the Mosaic Law we would say: The spirit of the ancient Biblical laws and institutions is eternal, their aim the highest which it is possible for any human being, however divinely inspired, to conceive. But Israel did not at once climb the heights. While their great lawgiver stood on the summit, they, the people, remained in the 128 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL valley, or even in the abyss. To guide and elevate them, it was necessary to create laws and institutions of an educative character. The purpose of these laws once fulfilled, their authority ceased, and others, in keeping with the altered conditions of life, had to be created for the furtherance of the aims of Israel and of humanity. This must ever be the guiding principle in reform. We must take heed, however, that we do not follow the wrong path and that we keep our aim steadfastly in view; to this end we must turn again and again to our Holy Scriptures, must fill ourselves with their spirit and be guided by their spirit. The spirit, not the letter! Of what consequence is it for our religious thinking and doing whether Moses wrote the books named after him or not? whether the authorship of Isaiah is to be ascribed to one man or two? whether the Psalms of David are in truth his or another’s? However great the number of contradictions, interpolations, and omis- sions which may yet be pointed out by Biblical critics, even if they brought us to the conclusion that Moses and David and Elijah were mythical personages only, who never existed in reality, it would not trouble us. We would not there- fore reject or condemn criticism, for criticism which labors honestly to arrive at the truth and which does not purposely undermine what is venerable and holy is deserving of all honor and respect. Our Judaism does not depend upon belief in the existence of Moses, but on belief in the existence of God. Our religion does not demand belief in the holiness of the letter of the Bible; it demands that men strive them- selves after holiness. Our religion is not endangered through facts incorrectly narrated in the Bible, but it would be endan- _ gered if we were to forget or deny the fact that Israel has been chosen to be a priest-people among the nations. A religion SELECTED WRITINGS 129 like ours stands firm, whatever the discoveries of Biblical criticism. For its ultimate sources are to be found in our spir- itual nature and in the entire history of Judaism. But the most sublime and noble among the written evidences of Juda- ism is—let us never tire of repeating it—the Holy Bible, and always and always we will return to it for spiritual refreshment and regeneration. Our later writings are also of inestimable value to us, when we rightly understand them as the expression of a dis- tinct phase of evolution. In the maxims of our ancient sages and in the accounts of the lives of Israelites of former times there is material from which our own religious life may be vastly enriched. And we are in duty bound to turn to our voluminous post-Biblical literature for the additional reason that we find therein the ultimate source of countless details of our present-day religious practice. Viewing broadly the history of Judaism, we see that it divides itself into two great epochs. ‘The first of these is the Biblical epoch; of this the great fundamental work is the Bible. The Apocrypha and a few other writings which have been lost amplify the Biblical contents. The second, the Talmudic-Rabbinical epoch, has as its great fundamental work the Talmud in its various parts. Upon this the vast rabbinical literature of the Middle Ages was based. And since we have by no means yet completely emerged from this epoch, it is an absolute necessity for us to study Talmudic and rabbinical sources if we wish to understand the religious conditions of the present. But Judaism is clearly entering upon a third period of its history—a period which had its inception with Moses Mendelssohn and of which one characteristic is that it endeavors to emancipate the individual from the rigid authority of the past. In consequence the sayings and 130 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL opinions of the rabbis are not always to be quoted as author- ity, but are often to be considered in their polemical aspects only. We pay deepest reverence to the Mosaic and Tal- mudic and rabbinical laws and ordinances, but cannot allow them always to determine our lives. Possessing such views, it is plain that we cannot wish for the restoration of, let us say, the sacrificial cult. If it was justified in an earlier stage of civilization, it is at the present time utterly foreign to our religious ideas. Our idea of sacrifice is that of the prophets and psalmists and not that of the Mosaic Law, and we strive to realize it in thought and deed in ways vastly different from those of ancient Jerusalem. We no longer wish to retain the institution which provides that certain religious duties are to be performed only by members of certain families. During the lifetime of Moses, such an institution was no doubt necessary, since the people as a whole proved themselves (doubtless to the inexpressible sorrow of the lawgiver) unfit for the high task placed upon them at the foot of Mt. Horeb. As for our- selves, we joyfully assume the dignity and also the burden of universal priesthood. Willingly we take upon ourselves the duties which are implied in the prophet’s pledge, “Ye shall be named the priests of the Lord” (Isa. 61:6). Gladly we admit that Judaism is not confined to a particular country, nor to a particular people, nor to a particular period and stage of culture. We would cast aside without hesitation those remnants of antiquated oriental and nationalistic ideas and customs which still remain a part of Judaism today. Above all we refuse to acknowledge that the essence of religion resides in those thousands of petty statutes which encumbered the religious life in former times and have been left as an inheritance to ours. On the contrary, we prefer SELECTED WRITINGS 131 to leave to the individual the outward expression of his religious thinking. For religious acts are moral acts having spiritual value only when they are free; performed under compulsion of religious law, they are without effect and have no relation to the inner life. Whenever circumstances require us to act as a congre- gation, we shall be guided, as far as conditions permit, by these principles. Where we cannot as yet put our prin- ciples fully into practice, we shall at least work toward their realization, calmly and with consideration for those who think differently from ourselves, but without hypocrisy or equivocation. At all times and under all circumstances we must have the courage of our convictions. Through such endeavors, it is our hope to make ideal Judaism real in this congregation. It is our hope that here religion will be such as the psalmist describes it: restoring the soul, making wise the simple, rejoicing the heart, enlighten- ing the eyes, and righteous altogether. It is our earnest hope that the seed sown in this place will fall into our hearts and take root and blossom forth beautifully in righteous thoughts and words and deeds. Because we have assembled here to consecrate this house to such a purpose, our hearts overflow with gladness and our mouths sing praises of the Lord. And when our brethren in far-away lands exclaim, “‘ From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs” (Isa. 24:16), and when they ask of us, ‘“‘Why, you Israelites on the shore of distant Lake Michigan, why this special rejoicing, why this extreme exaltation ?’”’ we will answer, ‘‘It is not only because we have built a new Jewish house of worship, but because it is the temple of a Reform congregation; because in this place we shall endeavor to serve what is eternal, unchanging, essen- De BERNHARD FELSENTHAL tial, and not that which is transitory, impermanent, and incidental; because here we shall endeavor to keep the highest purposes of Judaism steadfastly in view.”’ As yet there are not very many of such houses of worship in Israel. They are still oases in the desert. But we per- celve with joy that there is new life stirring in very many congregations, and that new desire for improvement of religious conditions prevails. In very many places both laymen and rabbis are earnestly desirous of altering the out- ward forms of worship so as to bring them into harmony with the time and are eager to clarify the doctrinal content of our religion so as to make it square with the achievements of science and the advance of culture. Hundreds of congre- gations and thousands of our brethren are striving, in all the aspects of their lives, to apply the divine commandment pro- hibiting double weights and measures: they do not wish longer to be sons of the present age in their daily lives and in their scientific views and their ordinary thinking, and sons of the Middle Ages in the pulpit and in their books of prayer. They are striving to do away with the fatal discord between. life and doctrine, past and present, and to substitute con- sistency and harmony. ‘The effort deserves all praise—if it does not halt midway, does not content itself with a few inadequate changes, but instead pushes forward with youth- ful enthusiasm toward the realization of high aims clearly conceived, and if it does not rest until these aims have been fully realized. ‘They go from strength to strength. Every one of them appeareth before God in Zion”’ (Ps. 84:8). But, alas! one is aware often of aims not high, but low, aims which are determined not by religious motives but by vanity or the prevailing fashion. We, dear friends, are inaugurating a divine service which cannot fail to satisfy, by reason both of its form and its content, every thoughtful SELECTED WRITINGS 133 member of our faith who has kept pace with the times. But ‘it is not enough to have attained an enlightened religious attitude. This is the seed but not the fruit. Let us labor together that from this seed issue the noble fruit of worthy thoughts and deeds. A few years ago we made bold here in this city to interpret Judaism from the standpoint of children of the modern age; a voice called into the religious wilderness. There were many who spoke then in angry opposition to us; others listened with indifference, and still others refused to believe that any result would follow from our efforts. But we con- tinued steadily to sow our seed, certain that sooner or later the harvest would be reaped. With the Prophet we said, ‘Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare. Before they spring forth, I tell you of them”’ (Isa. 42:9). And behold, in this short time the harvest has ripened; there are now in this city two sister-congregations, inspired by the same ideas and animated with the same spirit. A few decades hence and there will be a great number of such congregations. After a dark night the dawn comes slowly, but ever higher and higher rises the golden sun, ever clearer and brighter grow its rays, and ever farther and farther its light is spread. The golden light of the morning sun shines upon our Zion Congregation. May the Eternal choose this Zion too for His abode! 3. Thus, dear friends, we have ample reason, as members of Israel and as children of the present, to let ourselves be carried this day upon the wings of consecrated thought and sanctified feeling into those higher regions where dwell the eternally divine and the eternally human. But our joy is further justified from the standpoint of the spiritual welfare of all humanity. This temple and this congregation are evidence that not all men serve gold and pleasure; there are 134 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL many who recognize higher values in life. It is a fact which cannot be denied that the overwhelming majority of our contemporaries take no interest in things of the soul, but devote all their thoughts to material realities. ‘“‘What do we care,” they say, “for things which cannot be perceived by the senses, which cannot be weighed and measured, which cannot be turned into gold? What do we care for knowledge if it does not improve the conditions of practical life? What to us are religion and religious institutions ? They only reduce our material possessions, lessen our joy in life, diminish our pleasures. What to us are the sublime aspirations which people endeavor to cultivate through prayer and hymn and sermon, what to us this talk of char- acter and the moral life which one hears in temple and synagogue? Religion has long been obsolete; religious truth—a chimera; morality—a delusion; freedom of the will —a meaningless concept. That only is real which is evi- dent to the senses, which may be seen and heard and tasted and felt; life, property, pleasure, are real; the god whom we worship is gold.” Yes, dear friends, such sentiments are expressed every day in street and market-place, in home and office, from professor’s chair and popular platform, in ephem- eral journals and in the serious works of recognized scholars. Our generation would go to ruin speedily enough along this steep downward path if there were not a wholesome reaction, a teshuba, to which, in these days of the teshuba,? we ought to give our serious attention. We earnestly, solemnly, repeat: Spiritual and moral ruin must ensue where men take such a materialistic view of life. He to whom the words God, spirit, freedom, are empty sounds, signifying nothing, is robbed of all incentive to noble aspiration and moral ‘This sermon was preached on New Year’s Day, the first of the Ten Days of Repentance. The Hebrew word for “‘repentance”’ is teshuba, “return.” SELECTED WRITINGS 135 living; everything low and contemptible and mean in human impulse and thought and conduct finds easy entrance into his soul. And if you remind me that there are many persons of excellent character who deny the existence of God and spirit and who have enthroned the sorry idol Necessity in place of that freedom of the will which is the root of all -morality and all human dignity, I will answer, these men are protected by the fulness of their knowledge and their good habits of thought and life from moral decadence; keeping away from everything that is low and base and immoral, their intellectual assumptions remain without influ- ence on their character. But the masses, lacking their education and culture, will draw the strict logical conclusion from the premises, will argue from the non-existence of God the non-existence of all moral obligation, and will act accordingly. Friends, we are not blind to the one-sidedness and even the danger of that spiritual tendency which expresses itself in aversion to all that is earthly and material, in ascetic practices and mystical incursions into supernatural regions which the human spirit is unable to penetrate, will forever be unable to penetrate, so long as human limitations remain what they are. Nor are we in the least blind to the inesti- mable value of those sciences which further the ends of earthly life, which aim to satisfy the needs of men, lighten their burdens, lessen their cares, increase their pleasures, their comfort, their well-being. We do not sanctimo- niously condemn the impulse to acquire worldly goods or to seek innocent enjoyment, but agree without hesitation that protection of one’s self and one’s family against want is a natural instinct of human nature. We believe, furthermore, that wealth concentrated in the hands of individuals can be the source of great benefit to society—if those who possess 136 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL = it are men of character who have the interests of the com- — munity at large at heart. Trade and industry may be advanced and the well-being of great numbers of people increased where wealth is rightly used. Pleasure, likewise, has its place in life. It is no gloomy, puritanical spirit which animates Judaism. ‘‘He [did not create the earth] as a waste, He formed it to be inhabited,” ° says the Prophet (Isa. 45:18). And with few exceptions, the teachers of Judaism are in accord with the author of Kuzari, when he says (2, 50): ‘The humility and contri- tion of the holy day do not bring thee any nearer to God than does the joy of the Sabbath and the festival, if thy joy comes from a sound and sober heart.’ For all that, we do not forget that body is less than soul, that matter is less than spirit, that the life of pleasure is lower than the moral life. Not gold nor pleasure nor physical well-being, not fine houses nor splendid raiment nor choice food and wine represent the highest good of man; there are higher values, more exalted aims than these. Nor are they the only realities; the spirit, too, is real, the effort to satisfy the demands of the spirit is real, and it is a crude and sensual materialism which looks upon the body and its needs as the only true reality. ‘To be sure, there is also a false idealism which forgets the body and its claims and loses itself in mystical states of mind and in spiritual effort which has no relation to practical life. But religion must not be confounded with this false idealism. If religion were indeed what the materialists say it is, a system of teachings about supernatural things of which we mortals can know nothing but which we must blindly accept, they would be justi- fied in declaring it obsolete. But this is a false concep- tion. Religion is the aspiration of the spirit toward high and sublime ideals; the effort of man to overcome his lower SELECTED WRITINGS 137 nature; the desire to ennoble the sentiments and purify the feelings, to direct the will toward what is noble and virtuous, to inspire and kindle it with devotion to all that is good, to enlighten the mind and free it from darkness and superstition. An indestructible element in human nature is religion, and till the very last day men will seek to satisfy their religious impulses. Such is religion in general. Jewish religion, or Judaism, is religion upon a Jewish-historical basis, nourished by the recollection of our race history and by Jewish doctrine, and inspired by those eternal truths which were first pro- claimed by Israel, but which have been carried far beyond its racial borders and have become the possession in more or less pure form of a large part of mankind. To the service of this religion, you, members of Zion Congregation, have dedicated this house. You have thereby given testimony that you are not dominated by one-sided and false materialism, but that you value rightly the higher possessions of mankind—enlightenment of the spirit, nobility of the heart, religion, virtue, the faith of your fathers. You have shown thereby that you are not only true Israelites and adherents of a purified Judaism, but are also high- minded and idealistic human beings. Truly, where aspira- tions and feelings such as yours seek to express themselves, in noble endeavor and righteous deeds, where they do not die down like a fire of straw but endure, there is a Zion of God’s choosing, an abode of the Divine Spirit. These are the reasons, dear friends, for the joy and enthusiasm of this hour. We are Israelites, and nothing that concerns Israel leaves us unmoved—hence our joy in adding a new Jewish house of worship to the thousands of others that exist. We are friends and adherents of Reform Judaism, and nothing that concerns the triumphant progress of this enlightened movement leaves us indifferent—hence 138 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL our joy in dedicating a temple consecrated to the Judaism of the present and the future. We are human beings, and nothing that concerns mankind is foreign to us—hence our joy in finding men and women here who do not bow the knee to the modern Baal, but who look upon God and freedom, religion and morality, as ideal and at the same time real possessions. Joy, pure joy, fills my heart and yours. May such joy bless you always, now and evermore. Amen. THE ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND ITS oR eh ROCH =: 1867 ONE of the characteristics of modern historical and phil- osophical science is its emphasis upon the study of origins. This interest in the sources of historic phenomena and phys- ical life is proof of the soundness of scientific research at the present time; for an understanding of the origin of any living thing, anything subject to law, sheds much light upon its further development. For example, the correct under- standing of the origin of Christianity is, as it were, a lumi- nous torch by the aid of which the entire road traveled by Christianity during the eighteen centuries of its history is brought more clearly into view. For the sake, therefore, of pure science as well as of daily life it is of very great importance to examine, from the most diverse points of view, into the beginnings of that great religion which holds sway throughout the Western world. As with Christianity, so with language and languages; learned scholars—Grimm, Renan, Max Miiller, and others— are laboring zealously in this field and bringing material of untold value to the light of day. Kuhn, Schwarz, Del- briick, are instructing us as to the sources of mythology, Darwin as to the origin of species in the animal and plant world; yes, the scientists of today are even audacious enough to attempt to penetrate the primordial mists in their search after the beginnings, not only of our earth and the life upon it, but of the entire universe as well. t Translated from Ueber den Ursprung des Judenthums und die Epochen des- selben. An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago. 139 140 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL It shall be our common task, ladies and gentlemen, to consider the origin of a great historical phenomenon of special interest to many of us, because it concerns a religion which is ours by birth and confession. How did Judaism come into being? ‘This is the question before us. But first of all let us clearly understand the nature of Judaism. What zs Judaism? A conception of Judaism based on the assumption that the Judaism of the entire past is identical with Judaism as it is professed and practiced today would be utterly false. For the Judaism of 1867 differs essentially (and not only in externals and minor details) from the Judaism of 1767; and the Judaism of the last two thousand years differs essentially from the Judaism of early Biblical times or from that of the Jewish national period. Three great epochs of Judaism may be distinguished— Mosaic, Rabbinic, and Modern (or Prophetic) Judaism, as they may be designated. The element common to all three and constant through all changes is monotheism, the belief in a spiritual, transcendental, premundane and only God, who is the Creator of the universe, the conscious and uncondi- tioned Ruler of nature and of history. This belief, which formed the great central idea around which the Jewish church was built, the rallying point for its adherents, arose in remote antiquity among the an- cestors of the Jewish people. The gradual development of Jewish religious life in its outward aspect, the entire complex of concepts and ideas contending at various periods for domination within Judaism—these are matters of history. For our purpose, which is briefly to characterize Judaism in its various epochs, it may perhaps be well to reverse the chronology and consider first Modern, then Talmudic- Rabbinical, and finally Mosaic Judaism. SELECTED WRITINGS 141 In this our own time, we see a vast change taking place within Judaism. ' A kind of fermentation is vigorously going on, and its results are in part already evident to us. If you hesitate to call this mighty spiritual fermentation a revolu- tion, you will at any rate not deny that an exceedingly significant phase is occurring in the spiritual evolution of the Jews of the civilized world. In the terms of Christian theology, Christianity has usually been called a religion of love, and Judaism a religion of law. Naturally we do not admit that Christianity has a greater claim to the title of a religion of love than Judaism; for, in its teachings as in the life of its adherents, Judaism has given evidence that it lays quite as much weight upon love as does Christianity—at times, indeed, even more. On the other hand, the official pronouncements of the Christian church and the life and practice of Christian peoples during fifteen centuries have proved the designation ‘‘religion of love”’ to be a decidedly hyperbolic one—to be taken, indeed, with a grain of salt. The sentimental, otherworldly, and practically inapplicable sayings and commandments of the gospels in regard to love have been entirely ignored by the adherents of Christianity, except by a few spiritual-minded enthusiasts. But if in the light of historical facts we must deny that Christianity has an exclusive right to be called a “religion of love,” we are at the same time obliged to admit that Judaism, in its second, its Talmudic-Rabbinical phase, has always been, and is to this day, a religion of law. Of this we are living witnesses, for the adherents of Talmudic Judaism are still very numerous. They have great and flourishing congregations and, in some localities, eminent protagonists who would by no means concede that they are trying to revitalize the mummy of a dead-and-gone stage of development. Throughout the Middle Ages was not the 142 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Law the predominant force in Judaism? Can it be denied that every movement and every thought of the “rabbinic”’ Jew is prescribed ? every step from the cradle to the bier, from the dawn of day to the dead of night? At the very beginning, indeed, of the Shulchan Aruch, the book of rabbinic law, ordinances and regulations are set down con- cerning the washing of hands, the putting on of garments sacred or profane, etc. The foundation for this Judaism of laws and statutes was laid in pre-Maccabean times—it has been twenty centuries in the building—and now, what Gothic cathedral, with all its thousands of arabesques and scrolls and fantastic gargoyles, can be compared with the gigantic spiritual edifice of Talmudic Judaism, where “‘law has been heaped upon law, line upon line, here a little, there a little” ? The great European cathedrals are the results of the labors of centuries, but the stratifications of Talmudism have been superimposed, one upon the other, during two millennia. Upon the foundation stones laid by the sopherim of the pre- Maccabean period was built the superstructure—the work, successively, of the tannaim, the amoraim (or post-Mishnaic teachers of the Talmud), the saboraim (or redactors of the Talmud), the geonim (whose period reaches into the eleventh century of our common era), the rabbis of the Middle Ages, and so forth to the present time. (Let me say, in passing, that in certain aspects of Judaism as in other fields of thought and activity, in political life and in the church, we are still living in the Middle Ages.) It should be remembered also that this gigantic edifice of Talmudic Judaism has not been built by architects of one city or one country alone. On the banks of the Euphrates and the Tigris, the Vistula and the Nile, men have labored upon it. Talmudism, besides being an historical necessity, was, dur- ing many centuries, further justified by the hold it had upon SELECTED WRITINGS 143 the people, and by the fact that it was surrounded by a halo of sanctity and in consequence had an ennobling influence upon life. The entire system was based upon the sound idea that religion as a sanctifying power must guide men in all relations of life and must not be considered (as many of our “enlightened” spirits appear to consider it) as having a claim upon men only at certain times and in certain places— as, for instance, on Sabbaths and holidays and at the hour of death and in places of worship and houses of mourning, to be quietly disregarded in business and in the give-and- take of daily life, where indeed it may be regarded as an intruder. In the course of time, however, this multitude of Tal- mudic laws became thoroughly ossified, as was inevitable; laws and ordinances came to be observed in a purely mechan- ical way, and thus they lost completely their spiritual and moral effect. In this state of affairs, a change was bound to come, and out of Talmudic Judaism developed Modern Judaism, which to a large extent has already made its spiritual conquests and to which, without a doubt, the future belongs. What is the distinguishing characteristic of Modern Juda- ism? Emancipation from fixed religious observances! I repeat, from fixed religious observances, from lifeless mechanical ceremonies! The spirit of Modern Judaism may perhaps be described with sufficient exactness in these words: Only such laws, Biblical or post-Biblical, as still retain the power to elevate and inspire the mind and heart, and influence thought and conduct, deserve to survive; laws which have lost their power to sanctify have ceased to be of binding force. This, however, is merely the negative aspect _ of Modern Judaism. On its positive side it consists in the preservation of the sublime spiritual teachings of the proph- 144 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ets and in the endeavor to render them fruitful for our life and the life of the world. ‘To this end suitable ceremonies are necessary; these are in part to be preserved and in part to be created anew. ‘‘ Abolition of ceremonies”’ is therefore a false motto for Reform. ‘‘The Torah has not been given to angels,” but to men who perceive through their senses and who need ceremonies as an aid to spiritual life—only the ceremonies must be fit for their purpose. If you ask me now if the kernel of Reform Judaism does indeed consist entirely in this, if it is not quite as much a matter of the evolution and clarification of dogmas as it is of rites or freedom from rites, I will answer, “‘Such a ques- tion in the mouth of a Christian would not surprise me. For Christians naturally assume that the Jewish intellectual . currents of our time run parallel with their own, and that the circumstances are similar in the two religions. But we Jews have no redemption by faith, no original sin, no elec- tion by grace, no vicarious atonement, no mediator, no trinity, to affirm or deny. ‘There is, in truth, no problem to be dealt with save that of the authority of the Law.” I do not doubt that among you who sit before me there are many who at this moment are silently opposing my contention. “Surely,” you would say, ‘‘there are also matters of dogmatic controversy in Judaism. Will a mes- siah arise from the House of David, reunite the Jews now dispersed over the world, and lead them back into Palestine ? Will the dead be resurrected? Will the Mosaic sacrificial cult be restored ?” Opinions on these and similar points diverge widely, it 1s true, even in our own day. But it would be a mistake to point to this divergence as the fundamental cause of differ- ence between the religious parties. For Judaism never has had any fixed dogmas, and even in the darkest period of the Se SELECTED WRITINGS I45 Middle Ages there existed a measure of spiritual freedom. No one was excommunicated for his doubts—only for offenses against the Law. Nor would a genuinely Orthodox rabbi today disqualify a candidate for the office of shochet for disbelief alone, but only for definite disregard of this or that rabbinical or Biblical ordinance. One Rabbi Hillel (not the fanna of that name but an amora of the fourth century) once said openly that Israel need not expect the advent of a personal Messiah; that the prophetical passages alluding to him refer to King Hezekiah. Hillel’s, to be sure, was only a solitary voice, and his words met with vigorous opposition. Even today the great majority of the Jews believe in a personal Messiah. The belief of the majority, however, is beside the question. I am merely attempting to demonstrate the fact that some measure of doctrinal freedom existed. ‘To be sure the attempt has several times been made to formulate Articles of Faith and give the syna- gogue a creed. Maimonides came nearest to succeeding with the Thirteen Articles which he laid down in a passage of his commentary to the Mishnah. But notwithstanding the great and well-deserved esteem in which he was and is still held, he did not altogether succeed, but met with con- siderable opposition even among his own contemporaries. Rabbi Abraham ben David, for example, declared it pre- sumptuous, from the Orthodox point of view, to attempt to force the doctrinal contents of Judaism and the Bible into a series of formulations. Others opposed the attempt from the religio-philosophical standpoint. Albo, in his book Ikkarim, formulated three basic Articles of Faith; other men set up other dogmatic systems; but not a single one of them was finally and definitely accepted. Being thus untram- meled by a créed, the Jewish thinkers of the Middle Ages differed markedly in their dogmatic views. Many of them 146 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL were indeed exceedingly bold for their time. Thus, to mention one example, as long ago as the fourteenth century, Rabbi Levi ben Gershon rejected miracles and the doctrine of creation out of nothing, and asserted the eternity of mat- ter. Orthodox rabbis (even some of the wiser among them) denounced his ‘‘battle against God,” as they called it, and accused him of heresy. Nevertheless there were those who shared his views. At this point you may perhaps expect me to refer to Spinoza. But notwithstanding our justifiable pride in this incomparable thinker, I should be guilty of deception were I to mention him in this connection. Spinoza was a Jew only in a limited sense. He was the son of Jewish parents. In his youth he had stored his mind with the spiritual treasures of Judaism. And it is incontrovertible that one who is born a Jew can no more renounce his Jewishness than a German can cease to be a German, should he so desire. To be a Jew remains his fate. If we consider Judaism, how- ever, in its spiritual sense, we have no right to claim Spinoza asa Jew. Judaism gives us great spiritual latitude, but, if it has no Articles of Faith, it has a definite content of faith, the chief element of which, as has already been said, is this: One God exists, eternal, premundane, transcendental, spiritual, and holy, who is, to use the language of Heine, not bound hand and foot to blind natural causation, but who has His elbows free for action. Against this basic concept of Judaism, Spinoza, who was not, indeed, an atheist, but an acosmist, Spinoza, the founder of modern Pantheism, who more truly than Kant may be called the arch- iconoclast, the Robespierre in the world of thought, turned sharply with his teachings of an immanent World-Soul and the enslavement of the human will even in matters moral. Consequently he did not protest when the Rabbinical College SELECTED WRITINGS 147 of Amsterdam excommunicated him because of non- observance of the Jewish law, and he did not claim in the face of his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and his Ethics to be a Jew. Similarly, the numerous Jewish pantheists and material- ists of our own time are Jews only in a restricted sense. They who assert that God does not exist in reality, that He is merely the creation of man’s imagination and not Himself the Creator, stand in direct opposition to the central principle of Judaism. Judaism does not forbid honest struggle and inquiry in the realm of thought—on the contrary, it demands it, even at the risk of independent thought leading to utterly un-Jewish conclusions. For this reason scientific material- ism has the right to exist among Jews and to have its say. We refuse to justify only that sensual materialism which expresses itself in the formula: Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die! It is true, Modern Judaism sets aside certain beliefs formerly held sacred and emphasizes certain others con- sidered formerly of lesser importance. But our Orthodox adversaries (or the more learned among them) would not very strenuously object to that—‘‘if the kopherim [sceptics] would only abide by the written Law,” they say. Indeed they would willingly leave it to Heaven to settle scores with those who insist that the Torah does not teach the resurrec- tion of the dead. The problem now arises, How did Modern Judaism come into being? To answer this question we must extend our view from the place and time in which we live to more distant regions and back to the last century. There we may be able to pick up certain strands originally woven into the mediaeval fabric but which extend beyond the Middle Ages and afford the connection with Modern Judaism. Let us 148 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL turn our eyes first to Moses Mendelssohn, the man in whom the history of Modern Judaism has its beginning. Mendels- sohn himself did not break with the Law—on the contrary, he was law-abiding, even scrupulous in the observance of the religious rites of daily life, and never omitted, morning or evening, one may be certain, the recital of the prescribed prayers. But he ventured to talk pure German to Lessing and to Gleim and to Nicolai and others; to speak a language which only the other day was pronounced heretical by a Hungarian fanatic, to abandon the Judaeo-German jargon which this same contemporary of ours has called holy, and which, if I am not mistaken, he says is the language in which the Torah was written; to publish German works in German characters. It was a significant step forward. In the year 1754 appeared the first book ever written and published by a Jew in the German language, Mendelssohn’s Philosophische Gesprache. ‘This event and this year may well be considered the turning-point in the history of Judaism—if history per- mits of such exactness. For the exact fixing of dates of this character is always a delicate matter. Movements develop slowly and gradually and many a deed may be done today, the full historic signifi- cance of which will only be appreciated by a later historian and which indeed cannot now be thus appreciated, since no one is in a position to know to what mighty chain of events the present happening may form the first causal link. This was the case with Mendelssohn’s first German writings. After his unpleasant controversy with Lavater, Mendels- sohn’s activity became more definitely Jewish in character: he translated a large part of the Bible into pure German and wrote commentaries which in their simplicity and directness presented a striking contrast to the strained and artificial commentaries of the Talmudic schools. By his example SELECTED WRITINGS 149 even more than by his direct teaching, Mendelssohn influ- enced the Jews hitherto confined within their spiritual ghettoes to accept general world-culture and German thought and custom. After Mendelssohn, Jews began at once to ascend the heights of modern culture and science. During the first half of the eighteenth century only a few, here and there, had learned, in secret, their German alphabet. But the century had not yet run its course before German Jews had arrived at positions of eminence in society, in art, and in the sciences. Salomon Maimon, Lazarus Bendavid, Dr. Markus Herz, David Friedlander, Rahel Levin (afterward Frau Varnhagen von Ense), and many others who might be named in this connection were children of the eighteenth century. . The acceptance by Jews of modern secular culture made it inevitable that theoretical and practical revision in the realm of religion should also take place. An improved aesthetic sense soon demanded that the synagogue discard its uncouth mediaeval ways and make a more pleasing ex- ternal appeal. Participation in civic and political life, lim- ited though it was, gave rise to conflicts between the demands of Jewish Law and those of modern life which persistently clamored for settlement. Participation in the scientific work of the time showed the worthlessness of many con- ceptions which in the ghetto had been naively considered as sacred truth. In the beginning, attempts at practical Reform were naturally timid and uncertain, and in part they failed com- pletely. Sometimes they even originated from discreditable motives, such as vanity striving for the approval of Christian neighbors, or unmanly eagerness to make a bid for condi- tional civil emancipation. Gradually, however, these at- 150 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL tempts at Reform became bolder, more enlightened, more sincere, and in the end they were successful, until now many reforms widely discountenanced only two or three decades ago are generally accepted, and others which two or three dec- ades ago were considered sacred are today in general disuse. Orthodoxy has surrendered a great many of its outer forti- fications and is now defending only its innermost stronghold. Choral singing, denounced only a few years ago as an un- Jewish custom, has been introduced even in Orthodox synagogues, and sermons, vehemently opposed, at least in — their modern form, in many quarters, are now delivered by the most determined protagonists of modern Orthodoxy, as, for example, Hirsch in Frankfort, Lehman in Mainz, Klein in Kolmar, Adler in London, and Leeser in Philadelphia. And even far more important things might be mentioned— important, that is to say, from the viewpoint of Ortho- doxy—which have been given up as beyond recovery. It is time to proceed, or rather to turn back, to a survey of the Talmudic-Rabbinical epoch. Since we have already characterized this epoch as one of rigid legalism, our survey may be brief. Where and when did Talmudic Judaism originate? Where? ‘That is easily answered: in Palestine and Babylon. When? Itis not possible to assign any exact date to its beginning. Such a revolution—or evolution—is not the work of three days (as in the case of some modern political revolutions), nor of three years. It took a thousand years to bring Talmudism into being. It began five hundred years before the birth of Christ, about the time of the return from the Babylonian exile, and came to an end five hundred years after Christ, with the conclusion of the Babylonian Talmud. Its ultimate source is still hidden in profound darkness. In view of the dearth of material by which accu- SELECTED WRITINGS I51 rate knowledge and understanding of these remote times might be obtained, we are compelled, from such scanty sources as do exist, and with the aid of race psychology as also individual psychology, to construct the period for ourselves, both as to outward fact and inward spirit. Much has been accomplished in this way by the ingenious deductions of eminent scholars. Nevertheless, in our search for the ultimate beginnings of Talmudic Judaism we still encounter much that is mysterious and unexplained, and that has thus far eluded all attempts at a satisfactory explanation. We know that during the time of the First Temple the inhabitants of the two kingdoms, Israel and Judah, lived at times in a state of downright anarchy, productive of violence and immorality, and that crude indecency was common, not only in the streets of Jerusalem and Samaria, but throughout the provinces as well. We know, furthermore, that the people lapsed frequently into the idolatry of their neighbors. The idea of monotheism which inspired the patriarchs and was subsequently pro- claimed with divine eloquence by Moses and Elijah, by the psalmists and the prophets, had as yet by no means taken root in the mind of the masses, and while in . the Temple on Mt. Moriah sacrifices were brought to the God of Moses and the prophets, there stood upon the heights throughout the country the altars of the Canaanite gods, upon which Israelites worshiped Baal and Moloch, Ashtoreth and Chemosh, Chiun and Tammuz-—a state of af- fairs that persisted until the overthrow of the kingdom. The legend is preserved, in the Book of Daniel, of the terrible warning that flashed before the eyes of the Babylonian king, Belshazzar, as he feasted with his lords: Mene mene thekel upharsin—‘ Weighed in the balance and found wanting.”’ Some decades earlier, in the time of King Zedekiah, the 152 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL same decree had been pronounced over Judea, Mene mene thekel ubharsin—foredoomed is the fate of the country. The enemy came from the north, Judea succumbed, and the Jews went into Babylonian captivity. Seventy years later they re- turned—a changed people! Nota trace of idolatry remained! The inclination toward Canaanite worship and heathenish Canaanite ideas had disappeared as by magic. An entirely new world of religious conceptions now confronts us. The nation shows henceforward unshakable firmness in its faith in the God of the prophets, sacred zeal and glowing enthu- siasm for this faith, intense and deeply rooted love of it, and extraordinary attention to the observance and development of the Mosaic Law. The second Isaiah and the later prophets—Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, etc.—address an audience totally different from that of the first Isaiah or Hosea or even Jeremiah. And in addition to the astonishing phenomena of monotheism suddenly become steadfast and the Mosaic Law suddenly clung to with eager devotion, we perceive that entirely new ideas have taken root and devel- oped among the returned exiles, as, for instance, the belief in angels and demons, in resurrection of the body, in previous existence of the soul. We account for these new elements in the Judaism of that time by the fact of the intimate contact of the Jews during the exile with Parseeism and Zoroastrianism, and with the philosophical and religious conceptions of Central Asia. As a consequence of this contact, a multitude of foreign ideas, many of them dis- tinctly anti-Jewish, penetrated Judaism to such an extent that the prophets and even the Talmudists of the early Christian Era had to inveigh against Parsee dualism, against Ormuzd and Ahriman. All this, however, does not satis- factorily explain that vast spiritual change which took place during the exile. Such tremendous spiritual revolutions, SELECTED WRITINGS 153 tremendous both in depth and in extent of influence, do not ordinarily occur within the space of half a century. They cannot possibly do so. How then did the change take place in the times of Zerubbabel and the high priest Joshua, of Ezra and Nehemiah? How did Talmudism arise out of Mosaism, and Judaism out of Israelitism? How? Let us open the books of the historians. The early writers had, of course, no idea of pragmatic historiography, and only recounted external events; they do not introduce us into the secret workshops of spiritual life in which the roots of history really lie. Moreover, they give us only very scanty accounts of the period, which accounts may be supplemented by the discovery of hitherto unknown sources, or of literary treas- ures which the world had thought forever lost, by the read- ing and interpretation of inscriptions and old coins and the like. We can become acquainted with the inner life of the period only through inference; we ourselves must determine the causal relation between thought and thought, between thought and deed, and between deed and deed. Up to the present time, unfortunately, Judaism has not had many historians with the proper conception of the writ- ing of history, and their answers to our present problem are quite inadequate. The names of Jost and Herzfeld and Graetz may all be mentioned in this connection, for not one of these men explains the origin of Talmudic Judaism. If we turn to non-Jewish authorities, such as Professor Ewald of Goéttingen or the Catholic teacher and dignitary Déollinger of Munich, we find many isolated facts skilfully brought to light and many glittering hypotheses; but the main question—how it came about that Judaism emerged from exile entirely transformed—they leave unexplained. Indeed they cannot do otherwise, since the chief sources, the historical traditions set down in the voluminous literature 154 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of the Talmud, are for the most part closed to them. For since Buxtorf the study of the Talmud has been much neglected in the non-Jewish world, and one writer after another has simply copied the errors of his predecessors. If not errors in the laws themselves, at any rate false inter- pretations are repeated again and again, like inherited illnesses passed on from one generation to another. Thus Strauss 1s most misleading where, in his account of the period preceding the rise of Christianity, he attempts to describe the spiritual life of the Jews. ‘Though Strauss in his criticism of the gospels may appear far more learned and scholarly than does Renan in the inspired work of fiction which he has called La vie de Jésus, the truth is just the reverse: the Frenchman surpasses the German in understanding of Judaism in the time of Jesus—and this simply because of his superior knowledge of Hebrew and other Semitic languages. It is Geiger who has shed most light upon the obscurity of Jewish history in the time of the Second Temple, par- ticularly through his important book, Urschrift und Ueber- setzungen der Bibel. Geiger is not only a most learned critic, he is also an investigator of genius; and following the two- thousand-year-old trail of Jewish spiritual life, he has often come, by intuition, upon the true facts. He has shown us the evidence of the existence of an old Halachah which not only ceased to be of practical effect ages ago, but which has even completely disappeared save for scattered allusions in ancient and little-known writings. It was he who first interpreted correctly the intense factional strife during the period of the Second Temple, and who proved, beyond dis- pute, that the division between Pharisees and Sadducees had not only a religious but likewise a political significance. Yet, notwithstanding Geiger, many laurels remain to be won in SELECTED WRITINGS 155 this field of historical research, and a future investigator may perhaps say, as did Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi when he declared the harvest of Beth-shean exempt from the payment of tithes: “‘My predecessors have left me opportunity to distinguish myself also.” Let us hope then that future research will accomplish the task left to it of shedding light upon the still obscure beginnings of the Talmudic epoch! So obscure are these beginnings that even the figure of Simon the Just, one of the last of the Men of the Great Synod, is hidden by a dense mist of legend. From the Maccabean period on, however, the sources are more numer- ous and our knowledge is clearer. Contemporary writings are available, both Jewish and non-Jewish, Palestinian and Alexandrian. We perceive that the seed sown in the time of Ezra has borne fruit; that synagogues have arisen beside the Temple; that the characteristic exegesis of the Talmud which reads more into the Scriptures than out of them is already in full flower; that in the natural course of history many forms and institutions different from those of the Bible have come into being; that the Bible is considered the norm for everything, and its words are interpreted to suit the conditions of the time at whatever sacrifice of natural meaning. ‘“‘Study Holy Writ,” admonished an ancient sage, “let it illumine every side of life, for everything is contained in it.”” The controversies between the parties, the scholastic wrangles of the sages, the disputations of the masters and the pupils, of the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel, of Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Ishmael, etc.—all centered about the effort to prove, by this or that Biblical passage, that individual views had the sanction of divine authority. The Halachah of the Sadducees did not gain recognition, nor did certain aspects of the Pharisaic Halachah. Thus, for instance, Rabbi Akiba won the victory over Rabbi 156 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Ishmael, as did others over their antagonists. There is abundant documentary evidence of all this in the Mishnah, Tosephta, Mechilta, Siphra, Siphre, the two Talmuds and the old Midrashim. In the fifth century, Talmudic liter- ature, properly so called, came to an end with the final redaction of the Babylonian Talmud. Then came cruel times. Persecution began with inde- scribable violence to rage anew against the helpless Jews. Under its onslaught the active spiritual life died away, the academies fell into decay, and stagnation ensued. Follow- ing the enthronement of Christianity in Byzantium, came a dark period both for Judaism and the Jews. The geonim, first in Bagdad, then in North Africa and Spain, and later in France and Germany, continued to build upon the Talmudic foundation. ‘There was no desire to dispute anything laid down in the Talmud, nor was there, as people believed, any justification for doing so. Mediaeval rabbinism, therefore, does not represent a new epoch, it is merely a continuation of Talmudism—the period in which the Talmud was epito- | mized, systematized, and codified. For proof of this, we may turn to the great halachic writings of Alfasi, of Maimonides, of Moses of Coucy, of Asher ben Jechiel, of Jacob ben Asher, of Joseph Caro, and others, all thoroughly Talmudic in spirit. Let us now survey the remotest of the three epochs and examine the origin of Mosaic Judaism. Properly the word Judaism should not be used in this connection. ‘‘Israelit- ism’’ or “‘ Mosaism”’ would be more correct. But exception may also be taken to the word Mosaism, which is ordinarily used to designate the totality of institutions, cultural as well as legal and political, supposed to have been the crea- tion of Moses, whereas Judaism lays claim to pre-Mosaic origin. Abraham is the true father of Judaism. Will he, SELECTED WRITINGS 157 too, evaporate in a myth? The sceptically inclined will have no trouble in blotting him out from the pages of history. Professor Ewald has succeeded in doing so, as has also Professor Steinthal, who denies historical personality to Abraham just as he does to other so-called patriarchs and legendary kings. In the opinion of these scholars, these names which have come down to us from remote antiquity merely designate the heroes of nebulous legends. Without going into extended discussion of the matter we would merely say that it appears to us wiser to leave Abraham in his place. Many things are more satisfactorily explained by the hypothesis of an Abraham than by any other theory. Not that the name of the first monotheist matters greatly. At some time monotheism had its beginning in the world. Upon the mind of some human being the grand idea of monotheism first dawned. And this first monotheist was a patriarch of the Jews—Abraham, let us call him! We stand here before a great problem of world-history— the origin of monotheism, Judaism’s central and eternal principle, its unchanging and essential element. All mankind was steeped in the darkness of idolatry, all the world covered by the night of heathenism—when, to a shepherd pasturing his flock on the banks of the Jordan was revealed the God-idea which has been cherished in Israel to this day. All mankind was steeped in the darkness of idolatry, all the world covered by the night of heathenism— when, to a tiny people in Palestine, far inferior in other aspects of culture, in the arts and sciences, to their contem- poraries of Greece and Egypt, there was proclaimed the purest and most sublime monotheism. All mankind was steeped in the darkness of idolatry, all the world covered by the night of heathenism—when there arose in Israel a monotheism of such perfection and purity that today, after 158 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL three thousand years, we have not gone beyond it. For the religious ideas we possess today are not purer nor more elevated than those of the prophets and psalmists upon which they are based. The school children of the present may be better versed in arithmetic and geography and physics than were Moses and Isaiah, David and Asaph; but as regards a vision of God, our greatest philosophers are on a level with the dust as compared with them. Many a century will pass before mankind—before even a small part of mankind—will attain to that noble conception of God which inspired the prophets of Israel. But how did it happen that this great thought came first to a Hebrew, to a member of the simple and unlearned He- brew folk ? ‘‘But monotheism did not originate among the Hebrews alone,” I am answered, ‘‘the entire Semitic group was monotheistic. Monotheism was an instinct of the Semitic race.” With what zeal scholars have attempted to disprove the fact that monotheism was brought into the world by Juda- ism! ‘Thus, for instance, Nork and others insisted upon a connection between Judaism and ancient Brahmanism, a contention so absurd as to be scarcely worth refuting. Roth and others denied Judaism any claim to originality and described it as made up partly of Egyptian mysteries and partly of Bactro-Persian ideas. It was maintained already eighteen hundred years ago, by the Alexandrian anti-Semite Apion, against whom, as is well known, Josephus wrote a polemical tract, that Judaism had borrowed from Egyptian theology. The same assertion was repeated by Schiller, whose essay Die Sendung Moses attempts with the aid of brilliant rhetoric to make the Alexandrian nonsense plausible. It is conceded that the forms of some of the Mosaic ceremonies have been taken from the Egyptians— SELECTED WRITINGS 159 their forms only, not their spiritual content. But the Jewish conception of a one and only God differs in its essence so completely from the Egyptian conception of a fourfold god- head with its numerous categories of inferior gods, and the realistically conceived God of the Jews differs so completely from Egyptian deifications of metaphysical concepts of time and space, spirit and matter, that we can only conclude that somehow the learned Roth, usually so circumspect, has allowed himself to be led into serious error. In the same way the statement may be refuted that one source of Juda- ism lies in Bactro-Persian religious ideas, at least in so far as we are concerned with the main element of Judaism, monotheism. Certainly it is a simple matter to perceive the sharp distinction between the strict monotheism of Juda- ism and the frank dualism of the Parsees. However, these theories are now more or less discredited. Instead, one hears much about Semitic monotheism, the alleged monotheistic instinct, that is, of the Semitic race. Renan, in particular, has argued for this theory in a spirited and scholarly way. On close inspection it proves to be nothing more than an iridescent soap-bubble. ‘To be sure, the monotheistic religions of the world, Judaism, Chris- tianity, and Mohammedanism, are all of Semitic origin. But Christianity is indisputably the offspring of Judaism— Jesus and the apostles were true members of the Jewish community—and as for Mohammed, it has long ago been proved that his monotheism was directly transplanted from Judaism. The Arabs of his time were star worshipers. Neither Jesus in Galilee nor Mohammed in Mecca arrived at monotheism independently of Judaism. Consider now the non-Hebraic Semites, the Babylonians and Assyrians, the Phoenicians and Carthaginians, the Canaanites and Arabs. These worshipers of Baal, of Ashtoreth, of Dagon and 160 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Moloch, of Milcom and Elyon, of the sun and the stars— were they monotheists ? The names of Semitic gods frequently embody the idea of “Lord” or “King” or ‘‘ Highest,”’ but this fact does not preclude polytheism—as little as the names Dyaus, the Shining One, or Brahma, the Mighty One, or Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the Best and Greatest, prove that polytheism was unknown to the Hindus and Romans. The appellation Lord, or King, proves only that the Semites conceived of one of their deities as the highest but not the only god. Thus the Midianite priest Jethro exclaims, ‘‘Now I perceive that Jehovah is greater than all other gods.’”’ Even some of the psalmists, exalting Jehovah high above all other gods, are not free from this conception. Renan, discussing ‘“‘Semitic monotheism,” first in his Histoire générale des langues Sémitiques, published in 1857, later in several monographs, and with particular emphasis in the famous address he delivered on entering upon his pro- fessorship in Hebrew at the Collége de France, posited a religious as well as a lingual relationship between the Semitic peoples, and declared monotheism to be an instinct of the Semitic race. Likewise he attributed an instinct for phi- losophy, natural science, and politics to the Aryan races. His thesis is false on either side. Romans, Teutons, Slavs, Persians, Hindus, have no natural bent for philosophy. Philosophy arose among a single Aryan people, the Greeks, and from Greece it spread to other nations. Similarly it was a single Semitic tribe, the Israelites, which gave birth to monotheism, and from Israel it made its way to the rest of the world. To Abraham and his descendants the world owes the blessing of monotheism. In the heat of controversy evoked by this theory of a ‘‘Semitic instinct,’”’? Renan descended from the level of an SELECTED WRITINGS 161 impartial scholar and historian to that of a special pleader. With great diligence he followed every trace of monotheism among Semitic peoples but carefully avoided every evidence of polytheism. The baselessness of his contention has been convincingly shown by several great scholars, notably by Professor Max Miiller of Oxford and by Renan’s own suc- cessor, the celebrated Solomon Munk, whose knowledge of Semitic peoples and languages was even more thorough and minute than that of Renan, whose excellent scholarship and brillant intellect, however, we would by no means wish to deny. Moreover, the word instinct explains nothing. What is instinct ? In Renan’s use of the term, it does not have its ordinary psychological meaning, but is a vague phrase devoid of any rational content other than mere super- natural revelation. Had the Semites originally been pos- sessed of such an instinct, how could they lose it so completely ? Can an instinct be destroyed ? Even the assumption that the Hebraic tribes possessed such a race instinct is utterly untenable. Again and again we see the people of Israel relapsing into polytheism. From the mouths of many inspired psalmists and prophets we hear the praise of Jehovah as a God lifted above all other gods—a proof that in scriptural times monotheism had by no means yet attained perfect purity nor permeated all Israel. It needed a zealot like Elijah to bring the people on Mt. Carmel to confess: Jehovah, He is Elohim! Joshua instructs the people that their ancestors, even Terah, the father of Abraham, had served strange gods and calls upon them to make their choice. Laban, Abraham’s very kinsman and contemporary, calls the idols stolen from him by his daughter Rachel, his gods. In the face of all this, what becomes of the Israelite’s instinct for monotheism ? 162 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL According to all the evidence of history, monotheism had its inception in the person of Abraham. From him it descended to Isaac, who in turn bequeathed it to Jacob, from whom it came as an inheritance to his descendants, the Children of Israel. The glorious chain of the prophets kept it alive, preserved it from destruction, protected it from irrelevant additions, gave it more profound meaning, and instilled it into the people. But how did Abraham arrive at his monotheistic belief ? A question difficult indeed to answer. ‘The ordinary laws of psychology offer us no explanation. It is necessary to have recourse to a word unacceptable to many of you—the word revelation. Let me say at once that I do not mean by revela- tion the proclamation to men of truths from without. Rev- elations are psychological processes—processes, however, which are beyond the reach of our observation and which do not come under the ordinary laws of psychology. The divine voice that spoke in Abraham and to Abraham, in the prophets and to the prophets, is the same divine voice which speaks to every human being—but the organs of perception in most of us are either wanting or defective. These organs of perception do not lie in the intellect or the imagination or in strange instinctive feelings, but in a power and elevation of the spirit which are scarcely conceiv- able to us in their high ethical purity. Not syllogisms nor visions nor mystical ecstasy made the prophets, but God’s own election. He revealed Himself to them by giving them organs capable of receiving his revelations. Divine revela- tions are neither unnatural nor supernatural, but, being divine, they are past our comprehension. In the field of science we also speak sometimes of revela- tion. ‘Thus the incident of the falling apple suddenly making clear to Newton the mystery of gravitation is figuratively SELECTED WRITINGS 163 referred to as enlightenment from above—as revelation. But Newton’s mind concerned itself constantly with the subjects of mathematics and physics, and even if he could not show forth the logical chain of thought which led to the new knowledge, because of the lightning-like rapidity with which judgments and conclusions passed through his brain at the moment of the falling of the apple, we still need not have recourse to the supernatural in accounting for it. Archimedes furnishes us with a similar example in the sudden revelation which came to him in his bath concerning the loss of weight which bodies undergo in water. In either instance the revelation which came to these heroes of science was but the last link in a logical series too rapid for consciousness to follow. But in the case of Abraham there was no such chain of reasoning to which the concept of one spiritual and holy God could be added as a final link. That shepherd-emir, tending his flocks on the banks of the Jordan in southern Palestine, made no religio-philosophical investigations; he knew nothing of teleological or theophysical proofs for the existence of God. A ray of light miraculously illumined his soul. How? We cannot tell. If you choose to call the event miraculous, mysterious—well, it 7s a mystery, and before it, as before many another mystery, we can only stand in wonder. It would be proper at this point to sketch for you, at least in broad outlines, the development of Judaism in its first epoch. But I am afraid I have already exceeded my allotment of time, and I must therefore reserve the continua- tion of our theme for another occasion. RABBI PATRICK * 1889 READERS of the Menorah, permit me to make you acquainted with a rabbi who lived about sixteen hundred years ago and whose name is mentioned several times in the Talmud and in the Midrash. This rabbi whom I am going to introduce to you was, it is true, not a very promi- nent man, and he did not occupy a particularly brilliant position among those of his contemporaries who were engaged in the fields of the Halachah or of the Haggadah. He belonged rather to the common rank and file. Neverthe- less, I claim a little attention for him, if only on account of his name. Ladies and gentlemen, I introduce to you Rabbi Patrick, the son of Rabbi Dositheus and the brother of Rabbi Drusus. Rabbi Patrick? Rabbi Patrick? Many of my readers, I imagine, will be incredulous. For very likely they may be of the opinion that Patrick is a name exclusively in use among the Irish, and that there was never a Jew living whose name was Patrick. ‘No, it is not possible,” says Mr. Hubert Falkenstein, “that a Rabbi Patrick was ever existing. I hail from the city of Berlin, where more than sixty thousand Jews are living, and I am certain that not one Patrick is among them. I travelled extensively in the different parts of the European continent, and I never met any Jewish Patrick. J have read the eleven volumes of Graetz’s History, and I am sure that nowhere therein the name Patrick occurs. I am inclined to believe that some joke is meant by this ‘Rabbi Patrick.’” 9 * Reprinted from Menorah Monthly, 6: 19-29. 164 SELECTED WRITINGS 165 “TI agree with you, Mr. F alkenstein,” says Mr. Berush Warshawski. ‘You know I am a Lithuak by birth, and in my younger days I attended the yeshibah in Wolosin, and there I read the entire Talmud over and over again. But that I ever found the name Rabbi Patrick in it, this is more than I can say. Or has my memory ceased to serve me?” Mr. Zalman Teitelbaum, a native of Galicia, is also a sceptic. He says that he was forty years old before he came to America, and for the first time did he learn in America that there were people in the world whose names were Patrick. A Jew in Talmudical times could not possi- bly have been called by such an Irish name. And thus we are met on all sides by unbelief and blank denial, or at least by doubting and scepticism. What is to be done now? We must bring forward our authorities, and we must demonstrate that there was a Rabbi Patrick and that his name zs mentioned in the Tal- mudical literature. And to this we now proceed. But bear with me, dear readers, if now, in producing my evidence, I write as a real Dr. Dryasdust. I know that I am speaking to the readers of the Menorah, and the Meno- rah is a monthly which does not circulate merely among Hebrew scholars. Its circle of readers is larger, and the majority of them would not be satisfied if too often articles of dry learning were offered to them in the manner and method of erudite researches. But every rule has its excep- tion. And so I indulge now in some dry notes in which I shall attempt to prove the truth of the assertion made above. In Midrash ’Hazitha ad Song of Solomon, III, 10, also in Bamidbar Rabba, Sec. XII, and in Yerush. Yoma, IV, 4, there is to be found a definition of zahabh muphaz, the 166 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL name of a certain kind of gold, by Rabbi Patrick (*pPrnus "p mp), a brother of Rabbi Drusus. In Bab. Zebhwhim, 12 a, and in ’Hullin, 81 a, Rabbi Patrick (*P™NUEN “Pp "TIWEN) discusses the question whether a calf or a lamb or a kid is fit to be offered as a sacrifice in the night between the seventh and the eighth day of its life. In Mena’ hoth, 55 b, we find R. Patrick ((p"s1u5s) laying down a hermeneutical canon concerning the application of a certain logical rule. In ’Hullin, 64 b, Dositheus, the father of R. Patrick ("D""1WEN) expresses his opinion on the question whether or not an egg in a certain condition is permitted to be eaten. In Babha Metzia, 5 a, the question is considered whether in a civil suit before a court a partial confession is conclusive, or whether more evidence is to be desired in order to estab- lish the truth. And among those who participated in this discussion was the father of R. Patrick (*P"™WEX). ‘‘Hold on,” Mr. Teitelbaum here interrupts, “hold on. Your quotations, I admit, are reliable and are given accu- rately. But are we sure that the proper name appearing in these passages and brought forward by you is really a tran- scription in Hebrew letters of the name Patrick, or of the older name Patricius from which Patrick is derived? In most of the passages quoted the name appears as "P™UEN, and therefore I consider it as possible and likely that my Rebbe may have been correct after all when he taught me to read ‘Rabbi Aphtoriki.’” To which we answer: In the passage from Mzdrash ’Hazitha, cited above, there is a better reading of the name, viz., “p™1uD (Patriki). If now in the Babylonian Tal- mud we have the name appearing in the form "Pp™1Q5N, or "p"IOEN , we must consider the aleph in the beginning as a so-called aleph prostheticum, which is so very common in SELECTED WRITINGS 167 neo-Hebraic and Aramaic word formations, and especially in the transliteration of loan-words borrowed from other lan- guages; compare, for instance, NWi372N8 (magian), NOAINCTN (stomach), N™>p=ECN (glass, looking-glass), 710558 (Platon), etc.; and the vav in the middle, we must either take as a sign of a dialectical modification of the name or as an accidental misspelling. We must be prepared to meet still another objection. Mr. Warshawski rises to remark that the older form of the name was Patricius, not Patrick. How, then, he says, can the Hebrew letter koph be justified in the trans- literation ? Very easily, thus: The ancients pronounced the letter c in all cases—before @, e and 7, too—as k, and so it is but natural that this c in Latin words is always rendered by a Hebrew p. Thus we find for Cesar, "O"p; for oceanus, CiS"PIN; for circus, NCP p; for Ursicinus (the name of a Roman general of the fourth century mentioned several times in Talmud and Midrash), O2°"p"O"s8; and so forth. The letter koph will still more readily be admitted as correct when we consider that most of this class of words are directly borrowed from the Greek, and that the Hebrew koph stands for the Greek kappa. In addition to what has been said thus far, we can fur- thermore state that the name Patrick (p70) clearly appears as a Jewish name in a document of the first half of the tenth century without any prefixed or suffixed letter whatsoever. In a collection of Teshubhoth Geonim (Legal Responses of the Geonim), ed. A. Harkavy, Berlin, 1887, we are told (Resp. No. 535, p. 263) that once a case was sub- mitted to R. Saadyah Gaon regarding a donation made under compulsion by a certain Patrick, in conjunction with a woman by the name of ’Hayona, and Saadyah decided that a 168 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL conveyance of property under such circumstances was null and void. Here we have then another Patrick. But, it may be asked, can it be possible that Jews living in Asia, amidst Mohammedans and Parsees, should have had such a European name? The bearing of such names by Eastern Jews will not appear so very strange when we consider that even in those distant days of the past there was constant intercommuni- cation between Jews in Persia and Jews in the Byzantine Empire. In evidence of this fact we refer to No. 225 (p.105) of the Teshubhoth named above, where we read that a gaon who was interpreting a certain Talmudical word of Greek origin, said: ‘‘We have asked our Greek pupils hailing from Constantinople, and they said that in Greek .. . ” and so forth. In this place we must not omit to state that Schorr, in his ’Haluz, Vol. X, pp. 12 and 22, considers the names "pyIOEN and “"pinuy, together with many other names, as being not exactly proper names, but as being a kind of cog- nomination whereby certain sayings of the men bearing these names were alluded to. In order to find the meaning of these, according to him, appellative names, Schorr goes back to Greek roots. But in the present case we cannot agree with him. Schorr is undoubtedly one of the greatest Talmudical scholars of our age. His two articles on names in our ancient litera- | ture are the production of a master mind. With genuine ingenuity he found the key to the proper understanding of many enigmatical names in Talmud and Midrash. But in going into details he misapplied, in some cases, the evidently correct rule which he discovered, and he considered some nouns which, beyond any doubt, were nothing else but com- mon proper names given to children by their parents, as SELECTED WRITINGS 169 having been of such an appellative character, and as having been bestowed upon the men in their later life or after their death. In consequence of his doing so some of his explana- tions are undoubtedly far-fetched or even baseless. Let us make more clear what we intend to say here by an illustration. Suppose two thousand years hence a histori- ographer says that in the nineteenth century men were living in America who were called ‘“‘Rail-splitter,” ‘‘ Great Commoner,” “Horizontal Bill,’ ‘‘Watchdog of the Treas- ury,” ‘‘Weather-clerk,” and so forth, but that these names were not the real names of these men, and that these men were only called so by their cotemporaries in allusion to certain deeds done by them, or for certain peculiarities in character, or for some other reason. ‘This historiographer, we know, would be perfectly correct. But suppose he went farther and said also: A general was then living who was called Grant, because he granted humane conditions of surrender to General Lee and the Southern armies. Would this historian be also correct in this statement ? Would he not go too far in the application of a favorite theory ? I trust I have given sufficient reasons for my disagreeing on this point with the eminent scholar in Brody, and for my rendering the names "p°"05, etc., by ‘ Patrick.” And now, after my long digression—which I expect you have skipped—I come back to you, kind ‘‘general reader.” You have glanced rapidly over the preceding ‘‘dry”’ notes, and you have pronounced them to be nothing else than unfruchtbare Notizkrameret. You have put them aside as not being worth the attention of any man who values his time. Now, dear friend, I do not speak of my “Notizenkram”’; you may think of it as little as possible, and I shall not dis- turb you in your opinion. But I would like to have my say 170 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL in regard to such “hunting after details,” as you call it, in general. Mark, there is a difference between Notizkradmeret and Notizkrémeret. One may be an industrious gatherer of liter- ary curiosities, a successful collector of historical rarities, and yet be nothing but the possessor of a number of isolated and detached facts and of some hundreds of discon- nected details which are stored in the mind without one’s understanding their significance in themselves or their organic connection with other facts in history and literature, with causes and conditions preceding them and with facts and events following them. Such “‘kram”’ is idle, is dead. The owner of it may have extensive Kenninisse. But as to Erkenntnisse, he may be totally innocent, notwithstanding the abundant stores in his memory. You are correct in supposing that such Kenntnisse will not have much fructifying influence upon mind or upon heart or upon volition. You are correct in saying that the term “science” would be misapplied if we would desig- nate by it such dead stuff. But you are not correct in ascribing no value at all to the digging after learned details, and to the collecting and sifting and arranging of minor points in scholarship. The mastery of such details 1s the con- ditio sine qua non without which no true scholarship is possible. With such details the true scholar builds up his “‘system,”’ and from such details he deduces his conclusions. Without them he would build baseless castles in the air; he would “construe the world a priori”? by hollow speculations; he would dwell in dreamland, and would live upon phrases— upon phrases which might be agreeably sounding, but which, nevertheless, would be empty, devoid of all sub- stance, without power to give to the mind any wholesome nourishment. SELECTED WRITINGS 171 Or do you think Mommsen, or Ranke, or Macaulay would have become such great historians without any labori- ous investigation of details? Old manuscripts, difficult to read, they have deciphered; legends upon ancient coins, and inscriptions upon broken gravestones, and other epigraphic remains from olden times they have restored and read and unriddled; to numberless details and to minutiae without an end they have devoted ceaseless and untiring studies. And thus they performed the work of rigid preparation and laid a good and solid foundation before they proceeded to erect their firm and enduring superstructures. And the same is to be said of such ‘‘kletnliche Notizen- krémer” as Zunz, Geiger, Luzzatto, Derenbourg, Stein- schneider and other truly learned Jewish scholars. As in history and literature, this view holds good in natural science and in other provinces of learning. It is true, you and I both make use of Darwinistic terms; we speak so unhesitatingly and with such fluency and such self- satisfaction of the survival of the fittest, of natural selection, of the struggle for existence, of the origin of species, etc. But do you know what people think of your knowledge and of mine in natural science? You and I who have drawn our knowledge in this regard from our daily newspaper or from a few essays in a popular monthly—we are both ignoramuses, they say, and cheeky pretenders, or at best superficial phrase- mongers. You, too, dear reader, are included. Yes, you particularly. For you understand nothing at all of the details. And yet .. . well, let us drop the subject. For Darwin it was not such an easy matter. He spent a lifetime in careful observations, in painstaking investiga- tions, in long and costly experiments. And only in con- sequence of them, and only after many years of conscientious ' studies and investigations, he reached his results. They were 172 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL grand, yet he remained modest. And after he was satisfied and convinced that he had found the truth, or what he con- sidered to be the truth, he published his works. And there- fore he will be one of the immortals. May I add yet some more remarks before I conclude? “Rabbi Patrick” has been dug out from the grave of oblivion, and a special article concerning him is herewith presented. But what of that? Pedantry! they cry out. Micrology they callit. ‘Without any value whatsoever’’ is the judgment pronounced. It would certainly be pedantry, and the whole article would certainly be nothing more than an insignificant-anecdotic curiosity, if we could not draw from it any larger lesson, and if we were not led by it to some important inferences. However, I request you to look at it in its connection with the inner and the outer life of the Jews and with certain parts of the history of the Jews and of Judaism. You may then possibly learn from it more than what you can behold upon the surface at first sight. You will then discover in it another piece of cumulative evidence for a fact which has been proved by Zunz already in a learned essay some fifty years ago; you will then see here another support for our asserting that since the remotest antiquity the Jews did not live in a mental ghetto, so to say, and out of contact with the non-Jewish world. For here is another instance, little in itself, but signifi- cant in its bearings, that Jews in ancient times gave to their children Gentile names. Furthermore, we can conclude from the Patrick whose name we have found in an old legal document written in Persia in the tenth century, that there was in those days a migration of Jews from the East to the West and from the West to the East. (The older Patrick of whom we have spoken above and whose name is found in SELECTED WRITINGS 173 the Talmudic and. Midrashic literature was a Palestinian, and from his cotemporaries who are named in connection with him we can judge that he probably lived toward the end of the third century.) In other regards, too, even such common matters as the proper nouns used in certain locali- ties and in certain periods of time may instruct us; they may reveal to us the true cultural or intellectual or religious or political standpoint of whole classes of people. You shake your head? You doubt this? Yes, I repeat it and I emphasize it, that a good historian and a well-trained scholarly mind can learn a great deal from the names com- mon among certain nations, even if other sources of informa- tion are lacking; he sees in them a reflection of the ideas and ideals animating these nations. If we had no Biblical literature, if no book of our Bible had come down to us and no literary production of ancient Israel had been preserved for us except the genealogical lists contained in various chapters of the Bible and a record of the numerous other names men- tioned in the Bible, could we nevertheless not gain from these names alone a deep insight into the mental life of ancient Israel? We would reason thus: Here are hundreds of names commencing with Yo, or Yeho, or El, others ending with yah, or yahu, or shaddat,; surely, this people believed in a Supreme Being. Here we find such names as Eliab, Joab, Josaphat, Eliezer, Zurishaddai, ’Hananyah, etc.; surely, this people must have believed in the fatherhood of God, in his Divine Providence, in our moral accountability before a Divine Judge, etc. Here we meet such names as Joseph, Zebulon, Samuel, Mattithyahu, etc.; surely, children must have been looked upon by this people as a blessing from God, etc., etc. Should we then, in further examining these lists, find also that David had a son whose name was Beelyada (Baalyada), which name in another place of our Bible is stated to have been 174 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Elyada; furthermore, that Jonathan had a son whose name was Meribaal, a name which by another Biblical author was altered into Mephibosheth (Saul also had a son named Mephibosheth), and that Saul had another son whose name was Eshbaal, a name which was also amended by another Biblical writer and changed into Ishbosheth, then we would probably reason thus: There was a time when either the conception of God had become much darkened and dete- riorated in Israel by the irresistible power of Canaanitish and other heathenish influences; or Israel’s theology, which in some periods appears to have been so low and so mixed with pagan elements, must have been impure in the begin- ning and must have risen gradually into purer heights in the course of the centuries. For do we not detect in such names as Eshbaal and similar ones traces of a belief in the divine character of Baal? And in the alteration of these Baal- names by certain Biblical writers, in the substitution of “bosheth” (ignominy) for ‘Baal,’ in the attempts to en- tirely obliterate the memory of Baal, do we not have clear indications and evidences that pious men arose who sternly opposed having ‘“‘Baal’’ as a component element in a Jewish name ? Should we after this proceed to compare the proper names of the Israelites with those of the Phoenicians, or of the Assyrians, or of other Semitic nations, then we would dis- cover unmistakable proofs for the fact that in Israel alone the monotheistic idea originated and germinated, while the other ancient Semitic nations were and remained poly- theists. We take, for instance, the Phoenician or Punic names Hannibal (572:7), Hasdrubal (Sya-77), Eshmuna- zar ("I9272D8), Hamilcar (map>am). In these names also do we discover a religious turn of mind, an acknowledgment of and a submission to divine beings (mark well, to divine SELECTED WRITINGS 175 beings, in the plural), to Baal, Eshmun, Melkarth. But now let us look upon the corresponding Israelitish names ’Han- niél (or Yo’hanan), ’Azaryah, El’azar, A’hiyahu—are here also traces of prevailing polytheistic ideas ?* It is the same with the Babylonian and Assyrian names found in Israel’s Bible or brought to light in inscriptions on the cuneiform monuments and tablets excavated in Meso- potamia during this century. We select a few such names from the Bible, leaving other names not found therein to the Assyriologists, who are better prepared and more qualified to speak on this subject than the present writer is. We point for example to San’heribh, Nebukhadnetzar, Belshatzar, Adrammelekh, Evilmerodakh, etc., and upon the first glance we discover here the names of several gods, in the plural, of the Babylonians and Assyrians—the names of Sin, Nebu, Bel, Adar, Marduk, etc. What a contrast to Israelitish names! A student of the science and history of language will also draw some instructive conclusions, when he notices what linguistic decay took place in these names and what morphistic and other changes the names underwent in the course of time and in migrating from one nation to another. The subject might indeed be much enlarged upon. But would we now go on, we might perhaps be tempted to seek answers to kindred questions, as for instance: Can we gain some insight into the national psychology of the Jewish people from their custom of giving to children the names of departed parents and other relatives? Can we deduce any It may interest even the general reader to note that the German Johann, the English John, the French Jean, the Italian Giovanni, etc., are direct descendants of the Hebrew name Jo’hanan and cousins of the Punic name ’Hannibal. The final syllables kann in Johann and vanni in Giovanni as well as the final letters hn in John and an in Jean are etymologically, though somewhat altered in form, the reproduction of ’hanni in "Hannibal and of ’hanan in Jo’hanan. 176 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL lesson from the names selected by American Jewish parents of our present day for their children? What is, consciously or unconsciously, the reason which guides parents in mak- ing their selection of names? Why is it that Jews in Poland so obstinately persist in giving to their children such names as Lezb, Kreinle, Dovritch, etc., while Jews in Ger- many and other Western countries prefer in their stead such names as Leopold, Clara, Dorothea, etc.? And so a number of other germane questions might be raised. However, in trying to answer them we would be led too faraway. More- over, this paper has already grown longer than we intended it should be, and therefore we will stop here. BIBLE INTERPRETATION: HOW AND HOW NOT?! 1884 THAT a Jew is now permitted, and indeed invited, to speak before Christian ministers of the gospel is a hopeful sign that we are approaching the time in which seekers of truth of the various denominations can work together, harmoni- ously and peacefully, like true brethren. All study and investigation must have but one and the same object in view, namely, to overthrow ignorance, to emancipate the mind from preconceived, but unfounded notions, and to arrive at the truth. Any why should Christians and Jews, Trinitarians and Unitarians not work thus together? There is no Jewish Hebrew grammar, no Christian Hebrew gram- mar; no Presbyterian Greek language and no Episcopalian Greek language—there is but one and the same Hebrew and one and the same Greek forall. I would even go farther. I would say that there is no denominational ecclesiastical history and no sectarian Bible exegesis. In these fields, likewise, the truth is but one. Jn church history, it is of course natural that a Jew should be more interested in the rabbinical literature of the Middle Ages and the later devel- opment of the Jewish church, than a Christian, in most cases, would be. On the other hand, it is also to be expected that a Christian student will take a deeper interest than a Jew in the study of the history of specific Christian doctrines and institutions. A Baptist will naturally be more attracted by the study of the question of baptism than a Unitarian. But the absolute truth, I repeat, is but one. And so I fore- see the time when, instead of four or five theological semi- t A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School, Morgan Park, IIl. 177 178 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL naries in Chicago and its suburbs, there will be but one excellently equipped and excellently endowed institution, with a large number of teachers for the various branches, with libraries and other advantages which may well be compared with those in Oxford and Cambridge, in Berlin and Leipzig. .This institution for “theological” learning will, as I foresee it, be connected with a great coming university, and will form an integral part of it. And in this university of the future, by the side of professorial chairs for all other possible departments of knowledge, and under the silent yet powerful influence of the other branches of learning, the “theological”? studies will be secured against the creeping in of a spirit of mental narrowness on the one hand, and a spirit of undue haughtiness on the other. But what have I to say concerning the exegesis of the Scriptures? Is this not to be taught differently in separate denominational seminaries? I answer, without hesitation, no. rom the professor’s chair, the Bible must be explained and studied without any preconceived doctrinal or sectarian bias. History, archaeology, philology, must be the hand- maids of Biblical science, and not denominational considera- tions. Whether in our day a man may marry his deceased wife’s sister, or not, is, as a practical question, to be settled by the legislative authorities of the Episcopalian church, in England by the English Parliament. But whether such marriages were allowed, or prohibited, by the Bible, is for the unbiased Old Testament student to say. When and in what manner the rite of baptism should be performed, is to be decided by the councils and other competent authorities of the various Christian sects. But whether the Hebrew verb ?ébhdl means ‘‘to immerse,” or “‘to sprinkle,’’ and whether immersion or sprinkling was the practice among the Jews eighteen hundred years ago, are questions for the SELECTED WRITINGS 179 Hebrew philologist and Bible commentator, for the historian of Judaism and Christianity, and not for the elders of churches and for delegates to church conventions to determine. These questions must be answered and can be answered fully, inde- pendently of denominational disputes and rituals. And such is even the case in still more important questions of dogma and practice. Professors and learners in the field of Bible science must rise above all denominational bias. A biased teacher will too easily and too frequently darken where he should enlighten, and convey errors where he should give nothing but the absolute truth. Such biased teachers we find among the Jews as well as among the Chris- tians, among the Protestants as well as among the Catholics, among the Muhammedans as well as among the teachers of the two older religions of Semitic origin. Let me give here a few instances of such expositions of the Bible, tinctured by religious prejudices. Muhammedan theologians find in the Old Testament quite a number of predictions of, and typical allusions to, the prophet of Mecca, where an unprejudiced Jewish or Christian Bible reader would not dream of detecting a trace of such an allusion. They see, e.g., Muhammed alluded to in Haggai 2:7, in these words: “The desire of all the nations shall come.”’ The desire (hemdah) of all the nations is Muhammed—so the theologians of Islam say—and this is_ sufficiently demonstrated by the fact that the words hemdah and Muhammed are derived from the same root, from the verb hamddh. Is it necessary for us, who do not live under the shadow of the mosque, and into whom Muhammedan teach- ings have not been engrafted, to show the total fallacy of this interpretation? First, the word hémdah, in this passage, cannot mean “‘the desired one’’; its meaning is rather ‘‘the desirable objects,” ‘“‘the precious things” (plural), as the 180 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL verb (ubhad’#) is in the plural (‘‘they shall come,” not ‘‘he shall come’’). Secondly, the whole contextual structure shows that the prophet speaks of the coming glory and grandeur of the new temple, the erection of which had just begun in his time; and, referring to the bright future of the rising sanctuary, the inspired prophet says: ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, In a little while I will shake the heavens and the earth and the dry land; and I will shake all nations, and the precious things of all nations, they shall come |i.e., into this house], and I will fill this house with glory,” etc. To another instance of Muhammedan Bible-exposition I call your attention. You know that Muhammedan theol- ogy admits the divine origin of Judaism and of Christian- ity; but at the same time it claims that Islam is also divinely revealed, and that, moreover, it occupies a higher place among religions than do its two older sisters. In sup- port of this doctrine, Moses is brought forward and made . to bear testimony! Of the words with which his parting blessing (Deut. 33:2) commences, Muhammedan theologians give the following explanation, ‘‘ The Lord came from Sinai”’; that means, the Lord revealed himself to Israel; for Sindy signifies the Hebrew people; “‘and He rose in light from Seir to them’’; that means, to Christendom also God revealed himself; for Sé%r, the country in which Edom dwelt (see Gen. 36:8 and other places), stands for Edom, and ‘‘ Edom” came, in the course of time, to be regarded as a symbolical name for Rome, for the Roman Empire, and afterwards for the Christian world, whose spiritual center was in the city of Rome; ‘“‘He shone forth from Mount Paran”’; that means, God revealed himself also to the Arabian prophet, to Muham- med; for Pdérdn, where Ishmael, the patriarch of the Ara- bians, was living (Gen. 21:21), is used here to designate the Ishmaelite Muhammed. Furthermore, it deserves mention SELECTED WRITINGS 181 that Muhammed himself appealed to the Hebrew Scriptures, which, he said, he did not come to destroy, but to fulfil, and which, as he argued, for those who had eyes to see, pointed to him: ‘A prophet from the midst of you, from your brethren, like unto me, will the Lord your God raise up unto you; to him you shall hearken.”” Thus we read in Deut. 18:15; and, in reference to such and similar passages, the doctors of the Koran ask: Was Muhammed not like unto Moses? Did he not come from Israel’s brethren, from the children of Ishmael? Is there not, in the Hebrew Scriptures, the prophecy, and here, in the rise of Muhammed, the fulfilment? Are there not, in the old Bible, the types, and here, in the new Koran, the antitypes? Did not the inspired men of Israel foresee the coming prophet of Arabia ? These peculiar methods of interpreting the Bible remind us of the methods which Persian believers in the Koran employ in the interpretation of the odes of their great national poet Hafiz. Shems ed-din Muhammed Hafiz, as is well known, sang of wine, and of love, and of nightingales, and of roses—in fact, of beauty in every form. Can such poetry be accepted by the ecclesiastical authorities in Persia and by the pious ministers of the Muhammedan religion in that country? Yes, the odes of Hafiz, so they say, must only be understood rightly; it must be believed that they are intended as an allegorical and mystical revelation of things divine. And so their commentators tell us that ‘“‘the wine” signifies the true faith, and that “‘the beloved lad”’ stands as a symbol for God, and that ‘“‘the intoxication’’ means pious ecstasy brought forth by a deep contemplation of the divine works and words, etc. This has, indeed, been carried so far, that pilgrims from all parts of Persia now resort to the tomb of Hafiz, and almost regard that frivolous poet as a saint. (Who is not reminded, by these commentaries upon 182 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Hafiz, of a number of commentaries, Jewish and Christian, upon the Song of Solomon, Psalm 45, and other parts of the Bible ?) The theologians among the Muhammedans assert that their Bible expositions reveal the real and true meaning of the Scriptures. If now some of them would face us today, and would notice how we shake our heads at their strange interpretations, they would probably say: You are too superficial in your explanation of the sacred books; the “inner light” has evidently not dawned upon you; the ‘“deeper sense”’ of the Scriptures has remained hidden to you. The Christian mystics speak also of a ‘‘deeper sense”’; the Jewish Kabbalists speak likewise of mysteries, Sdédhdth, etc. But do Muhammedans alone interpret the Bible under the influence of their religious prejudices? Jews and Christians also have sinned, and do continue to sin, in the same direc- tion. Not that they sin consciously; not that they pervert the sense of the Bible wilfully; they err unconsciously. They believe that their expositions are the true ones, the only true ones. And they have not, and in centuries gone by they could not have, sufficient philological and other neces- sary knowledge to prevent them from making errors. We, rising above sectarian narrowness, must now be ready to admit that, in many instances, our own teachers in olden times erred, and that, in many instances, their interpre- tations cannot stand the light of criticism. Here also we may give illustrations. Rashi, an excellent Jewish expounder of the Bible, who wrote eight hundred years ago (he died 1105), explains the first verse of Genesis thus: ‘‘B*ré’shith, in the beginning; ‘b‘ré’shith’ is equivalent to ‘bish‘bhil ré’shith,’ for the sake of ré’shith. For the sake of ré’shith God created the world. Ré’shith is then, first, a designa- tion of the Torah; for, in Prov. 8:22, the Torah is called SELECTED WRITINGS 183 ‘ré’shith darké,’ the beginning of God’s ways. Ré’shith, secondly, means God’s chosen people Israel; for, in Jer. 2:3, Israel is referred to in the words ‘ré’shith t°bhii’athd,’ the beginning of God’s productions.” Rashi desires, by his inter- pretation, to set forth the idea that God created the world in order that the Torah should become manifest therein, and be a power therein, and for the further purpose that Israel should, so to speak, have a standing-place, a sphere for his being and his fulfilling his mission in the world. Rashi here followed older Jewish authorities who preceded him with. this explanation. We now find little to admire in this kind of interpretation; we think that b’ré’shith means simply “in the beginning,” and that no other sense, no “deeper sense,’ no “hidden sense’”’ is contained in it. So much is certain to us, that the author—whether it was Moses, or someone living hundreds of years after Moses—did not think of the Torah, or of Israel, when he wrote down the word b’ré’shith. And our object, in our endeavor to under- stand the Bible words correctly, must now be to find an answer to the question, What did the author at first mean by his words? Of former interpretations, be they by Rashi, or by St. Jerome, or by Luther, or by others, we take re- spectful and grateful notice, but we do so in the same spirit and manner as historians take notice of old documents, of old scientific views and systems. We carefully examine them; we accept what appears to us good and true; we reject what, according to our understanding, is erroneous. But far be it from us to take everything in them as abso- lutely true. . We have given a few examples of old Jewish explications which, in the light of modern scholarship, we unhesitatingly declare to be incorrect and untenable and to be colored by Jewish bias. But Catholics, and Protestants also, other- 184 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL wise quite erudite and quite independent in their studies and researches, show, often enough, in their Bible expositions the mighty influence upon them of opinions and doctrines that were inculcated into their minds when they were young. There have been, and probably there are, Catholic scholars who find in the Old Testament quite a number of allusions to the virgin Mary, the queen of heaven, as they call her, and to the almost divine attributes which are ascribed to her by the Roman church. In the so-called Protevangelium — (Gen. 3:15), where it is said that the seed of the woman will bruise the head of the serpent, Catholic theologians found the sense that she, the holy virgin, will bruise the serpent’s head—+psa conteret caput tuum, as the present editions of the Vulgate read, not zpse, etc., the feminine gender being used instead of the masculine, despite the Hebrew text having the undisputed masculine pronoun and verb (hi y*shtiiph’kha) and not the corresponding feminine forms. Thus a text undeniably perverted is preferred to the true original reading, in order to make a Roman Catholic doc- trine more plausible and to give to it a Biblical basis. Is it different with Protestant Bible expounders? Are the exegetical works of many of them not tinctured by religious prejudices and dogmatical presuppositions ? Some of them discover Christ in almost any page of the Old Testament, some of them find the doctrine of the Trinity indicated in the very first word of the Bible—for are not the letters beth, resh, aleph of the word B*ré’shith the initial letters of bén, rtidh, ’abh (“‘son, spirit, father”) ? According to some of these exegetes it was the Cross that sweetened the waters of Marah, for is not the numerical value of the Hebrew word for “‘tree” (Exod. 15:25) or “wood” (y¥=70+90) the same as that of the word (in later Hebrew) for ‘‘cross”’ (n5s=90+30+40)? And may not therefore the words SELECTED WRITINGS 185 “wood”? and “cross” be interchanged? With some of these exegetes, aye, with large numbers of them, Shiloh, Immanuel, etc., are but typical names of Jesus of Nazareth; for has not “the Church” so taught it for many hundred years? And this is called Bible Science! But place yourselves, for a moment, in the position of one who had never heard from a Christian pulpit, or from the lips of a teacher, or who had never read in a book of Christian devotions, that ‘‘Immanuel” is Christ; and then read that chapter in Isaiah where Immanuel is spoken of. In such a condition of your mind the idea will never occur to you that in that plain, clear oration of Isaiah any reference is made to a divine savior who would come more than seven hundred years later. Before the gates of Jerusalem, in the presence of King Ahaz, and of a multitude of the inhabitants of Jeru- salem, the prophet is standing. The prophet says: Do not despair! Be hopeful! Be of good cheer! The Syrian armies and the armies of Ephraim, who are coming from the North, and who threaten you, and who, you fear, will conquer your land, lay waste your country, and destroy your sanctuary, will not succeed. In a few years the danger will all have passed away, and you will not be molested any more by the enemy. And this sign I will give you. Behold yonder young woman (‘d/mah), she has conceived, and she will bear a son, and she will call his name Immanuel; and before that child will be able to distinguish between what is good and evil, the enemy will have gone, the danger will have passed away, and a time of glory and of peace and of happiness will come for the kingdom of Judah, etc., etc. Is this not a plain prophetical oration which hardly admits any misconstruction? And yet, not only pious women and devout peasants, but learned expounders of the Bible cling tenaciously to the idea that Isaiah meant origi- 186 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL nally Jesus of Nazareth! And in order to make this idea more acceptable, they force upon the word ‘dlmah—which means any young woman—the meaning, immaculate virgin! And in such a forced manner other so-called ‘‘messianic”’ passages are explained. Jam well aware that many of these ‘““messianic”’ passages were already understood and explained as messianic and as having reference to Christ by the authors of the New Testament. It would probably be improper for me to say before you, gentlemen, composing my present audience, that the New Testament expositions of Old Testa- ment passages were not always exact and correct. To many of you the New Testament is the very highest authority in everything, and you may say, Thus far a Bible student may go, not farther. Where Jesus of Nazareth has ex- pounded the words of the Old Testament, or where Paul of Tarsus has set forth their meaning, the true and only true exposition is given. If a modern expounder undertakes to give another explanation, not in harmony with the New Testament, he is presumptuous, he has left Christian ground. Far be it from me to combat in this assembly such a position. So much only I may be allowed to state in this connection, that explanations of Old Testament passages similar to those of St. Paul and the other New Testament writers we find also in the Talmud and Midrash and in the mediaeval literature of the Jews. ‘‘Shiloh” and Tsemah (“Branch”) were also understood by some Jewish teachers of former ages as having reference to a Messiah. ‘There is, however, a great difference between the Midrash of the Jews and the Midrash of St. Paul, or rather between the posi- tion of the Jewish student toward the Jewish Midrash and the position of the Christian student toward the Christian Midrash. ‘The former sees in the Jewish Midrash historical documents showing how the Scriptures were understood by SELECTED WRITINGS 187 the Jews at certain times of the past; and to him, to the Jewish student, a transitory stage of Jewish Bible exegesis is thereby made clear. The Christian student, however, finds in the Christian Midrash, that is, in the New Testa- ment, expositions of the Hebrew Scriptures, which he does not consider as merely transitory, as merely characteristic of their times, but which have become for him petrified, authoritative, unalterable... . | I have arrived at the limit of the time allotted to me, and therefore I must close. The logical conclusion of all that I have said seems to me to be this: The main question which a scholarly Bible student should ask himself is: What was the original meaning ‘which the Biblical author desired to express by his words? And in attempting to find a correct answer to this question, one laying claim to the title of a Bible scholar should free his mind from all misleading preconceptions, from all sectarian bias. Truth, nothing but the truth, should be his aim. CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE CHRIST”? 1899 1. A SHARP and clear distinction has to be made between the historical Jesus, that grand teacher who arose amidst the Jewish people about nineteen hundred years ago, and the mythical Christ, who is an unreal production partly of homi- letical or midrashic explanation of passages in the ancient Sacred Scriptures of the Jews, partly of philosophemes cur- rent in the Platonic and neo-Platonic schools of philosophical speculation, and partly of oriental (Jewish and non-Jewish) superstitions. 2. The belief in an historical Jesus has a real and sub- stantial basis. The belief in the mythical Christ, as con- ceived by the dogmas of the more or less orthodox Christian churches, has not, and never had, any basis in reality. 3. It is difficult to gain a full and correct view of the historical Jesus. The main sources, almost the only ones, for the history of Jesus are the. three Synoptic Gospels. But these Gospels contain many statements contradicting one another, and many legendary ornamentations of the person of Jesus, and many reports of miraculous deeds said to have been worked by ‘“‘the Master.”’ ‘To accept all the legends and miracle-stories of the Gospels as sources of his- tory, an unbiased critical historian will hardly ever be ready. 4. The Fourth Gospel, viz., that of St. John, and the Epistles of St. Paul, and the other New Testament books are, from the viewpoint of the historian, sources still less «This paper was sent in September, 1899, to a learned and very prominent Christian gentleman in New York City, in response to a request that I should give him my estimate of Christ, etc.—B.F. 188 SELECTED WRITINGS 189 authentic and less reliable for a correct and true biography of Jesus of Nazareth than the Synoptic Gospels are. 5. However, the grand, sententious, and sublime sayings of Jesus are, to a large extent, preserved in the Gospels. So are his parables, some of his sermons, or fragments of them, and some of his other teachings. An hypercritical mind may have his doubts here and there, whether this or that saying was literally uttered by Jesus himself, or whether this or that teaching was truly promulgated by Jesus himself. But what of that? If not by Jesus, then these words were enounced and these teachings were preached by one or the other of his disciples, or by one or the other of his followers in the first two or three generations after him. ‘These words and teachings bear testimony to Jesus’ sublime thoughts and pure spirit, and readily we may acknowledge that, though they do not contain any idea absolutely new, yet, in a certain sense, Jesus fathered them. All of these teach- ings, or at least the greater majority of them, are full of, and in harmony with, the grand spirit manifested in the sacred orations and teachings of Israel’s prophets—of an Isaiah, a Jeremiah, an Amos, a Micah, and of some of the rabbis living in New Testament times—of a Hillel, a Gamaliel, a Jochanan ben Zaccai, and others. Jesus was a spiritual son of the prophets. 6. For us Israelites he is still more. He was a true son of our nation, not only according to the spirit, but also ac- cording to the flesh. He was our brother; a child of Jewish parents, living among Jewish surroundings, influenced by Jewish conditions of life, especially by Pharisaism, purified and freed from dead formalism and petrified ceremonialism and life-lacking letter-worship, nourished by the words of our Torah and our Nebiim; a national Jewish teacher. And for these particular reasons the Jewish people can never Igo BERNHARD FELSENTHAL and will never disclaim him. He belongs to Israel. The literature which he, not directly, but indirectly, brought forth, the New Testament, is Jewish literature. 7. The New Testament literature, as indicated above, contains some elements which—partly coming from foreign sources, partly growing out of merely temporary and tran- . sitional conditions of Judaism in yonder age—cannot be accepted by thinking and truly religious Israelites who faith- fully adhere to their own Jewish religion. Of these un- Jewish, or anti-Jewish, elements which thus unawares were _ taken in by young Christianity and which by and by were considered as the essentials of the Christian religion, a few may be briefly indicated here: the doctrine of a logos; of a trinity; of a mediatorship necessary between man and his Father in heaven; of an incarnation of the deity or of a part of the same; of a vicarious sacrifice brought by Jesus dying at the cross; of salvation by merely believing in certain irrational, or at least undemonstrable, metaphysical or mythological doctrines; and so forth. 8. For the incorporation of these doctrines, or dogmas, into the Christian religion, the apostle Paul and some other Christian teachers in the first centuries after Christ are responsible. Jesus himself knew nothing of them. ‘The religion of Jesus was the Jewish religion—the Jewish religion in its purity, freed from some untenable outgrowths of the times and from the overburdening with ceremonies which had become meaningless and were practiced mechanically. 9. This religion of Jesus will have to be the guiding star of the Christian churches in their further development, and the eternal principles basic to it will finally be acknowledged and accepted generally, viz.: the principles of the existence of a Supreme Being, a One God who never shares his glory with another being, and who is the Father of the one man- SELECTED WRITINGS 191 kind, the ruler of the one cosmos. From this ancient Jewish doctrine flow naturally the sublimest precepts for an ethical life, the precepts of love and of justice toward all, of purity of heart and of mind, of sanctification of words and of deeds, of the antagonism to unholy warfare among the nations of the world, and so forth. That these Jewish doctrines and principles in the course of time will prevail among mankind, is an old Jewish hope, repeatedly expressed in the prayers of the synagogue and in the literature of the Jews. ro. It must not be concluded, however, that according to such views all the world must accept Judaism as their religion. Only the main principles of Judaism will be adopted by the nations—the main principles which were also at the basis of the religion of Rabbi Joshua of Nazareth, of our brother and kinsman Jesus. Judaism, with its own Sab- bath and festivals and calendar, with its own Jewish insti- tutions and forms of divine worship, etc., is, as its name indicates, a national religion, a religion of and for the Jews and not a universal church. _ tz. And as the Gentile world will not have to accept Judaism in its ninteenth-century garb, still less will it have to return, and will not return, to “‘the Christianity of Jesus,” to ‘‘the Christianity of the Apostolic Age”’; that is, to Juda- ism as it was two thousand years ago. Modern life and modern culture are such that a return to obsolete conditions of life and to an antiquated state of culture is neither possi- ble nor desirable. The Judaism of the present age does not demand such a return from its own adherents; why then should it be desired of Gentiles? Judaism acknowledges the right of a natural, free, and unhampered development upon an historico-national basis. How then coulda it insist upon a retention of stagnant principles or upon a return to conditions of past ages? 192 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 12. There are some of Jesus’ teachings in regard to prac- tical conduct of life which do not fit the conditions of our modern world, as, for instance, some of his teachings regarding family, property, justice (or rather sufferance of injustice), etc. These teachings rest upon a peculiar quietis- tic basis, they tend toward what has been called other- worldliness, or overworldliness, and as society is at present _ constructed, they are totally unpracticable. But such a quietism was not rarely to be met with among the Ebionites, that is, among the Judaeo-Christians of the first century, who in considerable numbers had come over from the school of the Essenes. 13. National churches, unhampered by fetters of unalter- able dogmas and resting upon the unshakable foundations of a few theological and ethical principles, and not a “universal church,” will evidently be the final outcome of religious developments. The Jewish church will be one among many other national churches. A universal church is but a dream— a dream which will never be realized. 14. Such national churches, fraternally co-existing, but differing in the forms of their outward manifestations, and each one paying regard to the history and the peculiar habits and customs of the respective nationality (the word ‘nationality’? to be understood in its ethnological and not in its political sense)—such national. churches will be root- ing firmly in good ground, and their roots will be deep and mighty, and their fruits will be sound and healthy, and under their reign mental freedom will be secured to each member of the nation. For a national religion needs not a chain of dogmas, it can grant and will grant to each one belonging to it perfect freedom in matters of belief. It will therefore be a religion of perfect toleration of and justice to other national religions, it will help to establish the ‘“‘ Kingdom of SELECTED WRITINGS 193 Heaven” upon earth. In the words of one of Israel’s prophets: ‘‘All the nations may walk each one in the name of his God, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.’ 15. A “universal church,’ whose members are not uni- fied by the historical ties of a God-given nationality, would of necessity have to be bound by other unifying ties, keeping the confessors of that religion together. And what could these ties consist of ? Of what else than certain dogmas common to them, which the member of the church nolens volens would have to subscribe to if he should desire to remain in good standing within the church? Many of these dogmas would require the sacrifice of the intellect; they would produce mental slavery and put men who in their inner life ought to be free into bondage to the letter of creeds. Think- ing people will not require much time to decide which to prefer: religions free of all crystallized dogmatics or religions whose essentials tend to create a state of mental thraldom. 16. The true religion of Jesus, if properly understood and properly lived up to, does not demand blind acceptance of dogmas. It lays the main accent upon the holy conduct of life. There are but very few in all the history of mankind who, in regard to world-historic, deep, and far-reaching influence, can be compared to Jesus—among them Moses, whose religious influence has been still greater than that of Jesus. For out of the wells which he dug, Jesus as well as Mohammed drew living waters. At any rate, Jesus is among the foremost and greatest religious teachers of man- kind. He is one of those who prepared the way for the coming of the messianic kingdom of the future; as such he was acknowledged by some of the most eminent Jewish rabbis in the Dark Ages, in times when religious fanaticism and obscurantism were prevailing everywhere among the 194 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL nations; as such he was recognized by Moses Maimonides, for instance, seven hundred years ago. And another Jewish teacher, Judah ha-Levi, who flourished about a half a cen- tury before Maimonides, admitted freely that the nations who have adopted Christianity or Mohammedanism have been most beneficially influenced by these religions, and that these religions, the daughters of Judaism, would finally help mankind onward and would accelerate the coming of the expected messianic times. 17. Not yet has the time come when the erroneous iden- tification of the historical Jesus with the mythological Christ will be given up by Christianity, and when the Christology of the churches will not be confounded any more with the teachings of Jesus himself concerning his nature and his mission. Not yet can the main emphasis be laid upon the many important points of agreement between the religion of the Jews and of the Gentiles, and not yet can the points of disagreement between them be pushed aside as really less important. But day is dawning. The world is pro- gressing. Darkness will gradually disappear. Light will come. Truth will prevail. And Love and Justice will rule upon the earth. THE WANDERING JEW* 1872 And it shall come to pass that, in the same degree as ye have been a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing; fear not, let your hands be strong. ... In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations shall take hold—yea, they shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, “Let us go with you; for we have heard that God is with you.” —Zech. 8: 13-23. Every one of you, my dear friends, is undoubtedly acquainted with the old legend of the Wandering Jew, who, since more than eighteen hundred years, is compelled to wan- der from place to place, from country to country, from clime to clime, through centuries and centuries, without ever being able to find any rest for his weary foot, and who is forced thus to wander on until the end of days. Time has been when the Wandering Jew was supposed to be a real person, and witnesses appeared—witnesses who certainly were either impostors or self-deluded men, laboring under some hallu- cination—witnesses who testified that they had seen the illustrious traveler, and that they had conversed with him. Now-a-days hardly any educated man may be found express- ing belief in such a gross superstition, and every educated man will admit that the Wandering Jew is but a mythical person, a fiction of poetry. And yet the same has, in some sense of the word, a real existence. The Jewish people 1s the Wandering Jew. Just about eighteen hundred years have elapsed since these people were driven from their home, since they began t An address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian Union. 195 196 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL their wanderings, and were dispersed all over the world. The nation which had previously dwelt in its own country, in Palestine, had heroically struggled for several years to maintain its national independence. But finally the war for independence terminated unhappily for poor Judah, the Jews had to succumb, and the victory was with the Romans. In the month of August, in the year 70 A.c., Jerusalem, the capital, was conquered by the enemy and the Temple, the much revered sanctuary, was laid in ashes. Hundreds of thousands had either been slain by the enemy’s sword, or had perished by famine, by fire, by pestilence, or otherwise. Of those that remained after the awful catastrophe, thou- sands and thousands were led away captives to the mines of Upper Egypt, to the slave marts of Rome and of the other cities of the Italian Peninsula, to Hispania, to Gallia, and to other provinces of the vast Roman Empire. And from that time the wanderings of the Jew date their beginning, and in those days Israel’s migrations took their commence- ment. From this time on the words of David may be applied to the history of the Jews: ‘“‘They went about from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another people.”’ Thus far the comparison between the Wandering Jew and the Jewish people holds good. But only thus far, and not farther. In other points the real state of things does not allow a parallel between Israel and the hero of the mythical tale. What is the reason that the Jew of the Christian legend and of the Christian theology wanders on and on, and that he never and nowhere can find any rest? ‘The answer is: Because on account of a sin of the greatest magnitude a curse rests upon him; he is conscious of being guilty, and this consciousness pursues him wherever he goes, and deprives him of every joy and of every happiness. SELECTED WRITINGS 197 But is this indeed so? Is this not a theory built in the air and without any foundation at all? You have every day occasion to meet members of the Jewish race. You know, perhaps, that there are Jews who enjoy excellent social positions, that some have become famous for their eminent learning, for their contributions to the treasures of science and art, for their literary attainments, for their acts of benevolence, for their deeds of noble philan- thropy. Now approach such a Jew, and say to him, ‘‘Oh, my poor friend, how I pity you! You are in such a forlorn condition, you feel so unhappy as a stranger in a foreign country, you have no sleep at nights, no enjoyment during your days,” and so forth. Speak in such a manner to your Jewish neigh- bor, and he will hardly understand you. He will sarcasti- cally smile at you, thinking, perhaps, that there is a certain class of people who stick with wonderful tenacity to their notions, be they as unfounded as possible, and if he answer you he will say, “My friend, you are entirely mistaken. I _ feel as happy and as satisfied as any other man in my cir- cumstances. Jam not weighed down by any agony of mind. I do not feel the least disquietude in my conscience for any sin said to have been committed by my forefathers some thousands of years ago, nor do I think that my God, a God of love, and of mercy, and of justice, is so cruel and revenge- ful as to punish me for such sins, even admitting, for a moment, that these sins were perpetrated by my ancestors. I do not feel myself a stranger in this country, where equal rights are granted to Jew and Gentile. My friend, I do not understand you with your peculiar ideas.”’ “But,” says the pious Christian interrogator, ‘‘is not the dispersion of your people amongst the nations visibly a sign of the wrath of God, a punishment, a curse ?”’ 198 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ‘““No,” is the Jewish answer, “we do not see it in this light. Not only that we do not look upon this dispersion as a curse; on the contrary, we regard it as a blessing—a blessing for you and all mankind. God said to the Jew, when he handed to him the wanderer’s staff, ‘As I have chosen thy ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and his children and descendants from amidst the nations, that they should know Me and My precepts and laws, and should preserve this knowledge in their midst, as I have selected them that they should be the first banner-bearers of religious truths, so I have now selected thee to go forth to the nations, to thy brothers in the Gentile world, and to bring them, in My name, gifts and treasures of the highest value, and thereby thou wilt become their benefactor, their Messiah, their Savior and Redeemer!’ And obeying the behests and decrees of his Heavenly Father, the Wandering Jew went forth and brought invaluable presents to his Gentile brethren. For its salvation from heathenism, for its deliverance from the grossest immorali- ties, for the possession of the highest treasures of the purest religious truths, and of the most sublime moral tenets, the world is indebted to—to Buddha ? to Confucius ? to Zoroas- ter ? to the soothsayers of Delphi ? to the augurs of Rome? to the Druids of Germany and Britain? No! to the despised Wandering Jew. Indeed, we have the authority of a New Testament writer for saying, ‘Salvation has come by the Jews.” This is for many Christians a new standpoint from which to view Israel’s place in history. But it is the standpoint which Israelites are wont to take. And history justifies this standpoint as being the correct one, and supports the Israelitish view. What has just been said, will become more clear when we consider what kind of treasures and of gifts Israel, the Wan- SELECTED WRITINGS 1Q9Q derer, had to offer, and did offer, to his brethren, to the Gen- tiles, to mankind. And to this consideration let us now proceed. The first present made by poor Wandering Israel to his Gentile brethren is a Book, a plain, simple book. It is not un- usual that a person gives a book as a present to a promising child, to a beloved friend, to a dear relative. But although such a gift-book might contain poetry of the highest order, might be illustrated with pictures of truly artistic worth, might be bound in the most splendid manner, can it in any way be compared to the book which Israel has presented to mankind? You know what book I mean. It is the Book— the Bible. “Bible” is a word of Greek derivation, meaning ‘‘book.”’ But, properly speaking, the Bible is not a mere book, it is a literature. It is the literature of Israel, containing:the liter- ary remains of the chosen people, parts of which date back to the remotest antiquity, to the times of Moses and of Israel’s wanderings in the Arabian wilderness, and parts of which originated in later periods, some even in the times of the Maccabees, in the second and first centuries before Christ. Let me say here, before I proceed, that, if I speak of the Bible, I mean the Old Testament, which alone is regarded as canonical by the Jews. But also in the books of the New Testament we have the work of Jewish authors, and a Jew- ish spirit pervades them to a great extent. Now you may ask, ‘‘ Why is so much stress laid upon the importance of this book, or, to express it more correctly, of this literature? Isit on account of its antiquity? See here the Vedas of the Hindus, or the Zend Avesta of the Parsees, or the Holy Scriptures of the Chinese; read there, on those bricks of Nineveh and of Babylon, in yonder wedge-shaped 200 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL inscriptions, whole cyclopedias of science; look at these books, containing the Homeric songs, the philosophical speculations of the earliest thinkers of blessed Greece; see, these are books, literatures, remnants of literatures, as old, in part older, than the Hebrew Bible. Why, then, are we to pay special veneration to this Bible ?”’ My friends, it is not on account of its age that we claim respect and reverence for the Jewish Bible. It is on account of the truly divine spirit that breathes through all its pages, and on account of the immense wholesome influence it had upon the origin and the formation of the leading religious and moral ideas prevailing now in nearly all the civilized world. Other nations also had their sages, their poets, their orators. In some respects the orators and poets and sages of other nations may have excelled those of Israel. But in regard to the sublimity of its teachings, the eternal truths which it contains, the power which it possesses of making men better, the great historic transformations and changes of mankind which it has wrought, the Bible is beyond any comparison. ‘Truly, it is an inspired Book. Far from us be that kind of bibliolatry, which would make an idol of the Book, and which would demand of us that we worship its every letter. Far be it from us to imi- tate the example of Caliph Omar, who, after he had con- quered the city of Alexandria, in Egypt, gave orders to destroy the famous Alexandrian library. ‘“‘For,” said he, “either the books collected there teach what the Koran teaches, and then they are superfluous; or the books teach doctrines contrary to the Koran, and then they can not be suffered to exist any longer, and must be destroyed.” No, we would not advocate such a Bible-worship. The man who is interested in critical research is as much entitled to study the Bible in his own way, as is he who reads it SELECTED WRITINGS 201 only in devotion and for the sake of edification. One point only we would ask from any reader of the Bible, and that is, to enter the portals of this literature with a reverential spirit. If, furthermore, we combine with a reverent spirit the hon- est endeavor to discover and to understand the right sense of the Biblical authors, then the mighty words of the seers and singers and prophets and historians of old will become true, significant, elevating, edifying. But if we read the Bible uncritically, as a child reads fairy tales, if we take figurative language in a rude, literal sense, if we find a prosaic record of occurrences where the Bible con- tains poetry, or bits of poetry, if we interpret as true statements of facts what obviously has been legendary folklore only, or popular tradition, written down in compara- tively late times, many centuries after the events related were said to have happened, if we see in numbers of natural events the immediate and miraculous workings of supernatural agencies; then the deep and mighty words become shallow, feeble, meaningless, and give cause for derision, for scoffing, for ill-considered unbelief. The interpretation of the Bible in the manner just indicated can never stand before the eyes of a scholar, before the forum of criticism. But if read and studied in the right way, the Bible must and will appear as a divine Book. And this Bible, this divine Book—Jews have written it and the Wandering Jew has given it as a present to the world. For the first time it was offered to the world, and laid open before the world, when, in the third century before Christ, a king of Egypt caused a number of Jewish scholars to trans- late for him the Jewish Scriptures into the language then predominant among the educated classes, the Greek lan- guage. ‘This oldest translation of the Bible, known as the Septuagint, is still extant. Through it learned men in Alex- 202 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL andria, in Athens, in Rome, became acquainted with the Jewish Bible. Through it, to a great extent, the Gentile world became prepared for the more ready acceptance of the daughter of Judaism, Christianity, when this made its ap- pearance inthe world. Through it Japhet came, for the first time, in spiritual contact with Shem, entered the tents of © Shem, dwelt therein, and learned to appreciate the costly things found therein. Later the Targumists of Palestine and Babylonia trans- lated the Bible into Aramaic; others translated it into Syriac; St. Jerome and others into Latin; Bishop Ulfias into Gothic, and now there is hardly any tongue or dialect into which the Bible has not been translated. Now go from East to West, from North to South; enter not only the synagogues of the Jews, enter also the meeting-houses of the various Christian denominations, the chapels of the Greek Christians, the cathedrals’ of the Roman Catholics, the tabernacles of the Protestants; visit public Christian worship in St. Petersburg, in Rome, in Geneva. What hymns do you hear sung there? The psalms of David and of Asaph. What sentences of wisdom do they utter? The wisdom of Solomon and of Job. What laws and precepts do they impress upon the minds of the congregations? ‘The laws and precepts of Moses. What orations and admonitions do they read? ‘The orations and admonitions of Isaiah, of Jeremiah. And wherefrom do the preachers select the texts upon the foundation of which they build up their ser- mons? From the Jewish Bible. It is indeed wonderful, astonishing, to see the wide-spread authority, the incalculable influence, of this plain Book, the Jewish Bible. And who can tell what would have become of mankind without the Bible? Rome has conquered Jerusalem? Oh no, Jerusalem has conquered Rome! Ye pious men of Judah, who saw the SELECTED WRITINGS 203 downfall of your country, the destruction of your Temple, the slaughter of your neighbors and friends, and who wept and despaired over it, you had no reason to weep and to despair. Structures of wood and of stone were laid in ruins; but that other structure, erected by the inspired lawgivers and singers and prophets of Israel, remained. ‘Treasuries of gold and of silver were pillaged, but another treasury, Israel’s Torah, they could not deprive the world of. Men and women were killed, but the spirit of the Holy Scriptures they could not kill. It seemed then as though Jerusalem had fallen before proud Rome. But not many centuries passed by until it became clear that 1t was Rome which had fallen, and that Jerusalem was the victor. And as Jerusalem really has triumphed over old heathenish Rome, so it will certainly tri- umph over new heathenish Rome. And the time will come when all the world will accede that this triumph 1s justified, when Israel, the Messiah of the nations, will be acknowledged as such by the nations. And in those days it will be seen clearly by all, that it was Israel—he of low birth, despised and shunned by men, who “was wounded for the transgres- sion of the nations, and bruised for their iniquities, and through whose bruises healing was granted to the nations.” In those days it will be said of Israel, that “‘he was the child born unto us, and the son given unto us, on whose shoulders the government was placed, and whose name is called Won- derful, Counselor of the Mighty God, of the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.” In those days mankind will, with reference to Israel, break out in one mighty chorus: Shout the glad tidings, exultingly sing: Jerusalem triumphs, Messiah is King. But let us return to our subject. Let us proceed with the question: ‘‘What other gifts, besides the Bible, did the Wan- dering Jew give to mankind ?”’ 204 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL And now, my friends, we have to answer: ‘From the hands of the Jew mankind received monotheism, that is, the truth that there is One God only, a living, self-conscious, independent Spirit, an all-perfect Being, all-kind and all- merciful, all-just and all-holy, a God who has created the world, who preserves it and governs it.” At the time of Abraham, the patriarch of the Jews, the first monotheist, the Canaanites and the other nations amongst whom he was leading a nomadic life, worshiped idols. ‘They had their Moloch, their Chemosh, their Baal, their other deities whom they served and to whom they sacri- ficed the lives of their sons, the chastity of their daughters, their virtue, their manhood, all and everything. And not only the inhabitants of Canaan, of Phoenicia and Philistia, of Edom, of Ammon, of Moab were then sunk in the mires of heathenism and the immoral practices of idol-worship— all the world waded then through such mire, and walked then in such thick darkness. Abraham was then selected. Into his mind fell a ray from above, revealing to him the nothingness of idols, the reprehensibility of human sacrifices, the sublime truth of monotheism. And this monotheism was inherited by Isaac, from Isaac it was transmitted to Jacob, and from Jacob to his children, until finally this belief and faith in the One Supreme Being, the Creator of the uni- verse, the Father of mankind, was so deeply rooted and implanted in Israel that no storm could uproot it again. And so the Wandering Jew bears the banner of his God still aloft, and proudly he unfurls before all the nations this banner, upon which in never-fading letters the golden inscription is written: Shema Yisrael Adonai Elohenu Adonai Echad—“ Hear, O Israel, the Lord who is our God, the Lord is One.” You could crush the Jew, you could slay him, you could kill him with a thousand deaths, but this banner you SELECTED WRITINGS 205 could not wrest from him. You could try it with your decoys and allurements, you could tempt him with your sweet words and promises, you could entice him with your gold, with your offices, with your social honors; but his faith in the Sole and One Everlasting God he would not give up. And he will never give up this banner. He will carry it onward, until complete victory is gained and until opposing heathenism in all its forms and combinations has disappeared from our globe, until all nations unite in saying: Shema Visrael—‘‘ Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ‘Otome _ And the battle zs won and victory 7s gained—at least par- tially. Not that people alone who were chosen by God to march at the head of mankind with this banner, not the Jews alone are now confessors of the One God, the Creator of the world, the Father of mankind—the Christians and the Mohammedans are also, more or less, antagonists to poly- theism, and believers in monotheism. But let us be impartial and deal justly. Let us admit that Christianity and Mohammedanism are but direct off- spring of Judaism. As to Christianity, you know very well that all its founders and first preachers were Jews. In their veins Jewish blood ran, and the system taught by them was mainly Jewish. In branching off from the main stem, some foreign and un-Jewish elements entered into young Christianity. It would lead us too far out of our way to designate in detail these un-Jewish component parts of Christianity, and to point out to you the ways by which and the reasons why these foreign elements were admitted into the Christian religion. But it may be permitted to state this fact, that a Jew expressing his opinion on the subject, or even a so-called liberal Christian, would say that these foreign elements are rapidly segregating themselves from the 206 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL system and do not prove to be of an everlasting character. This much at least we may venture to assert without fear of being contradicted: Christianity is a gift from the Semitic Jew to the Aryan or Japhetic nations of Europe and those countries dependent upon Europe. And with equal right we can make a similar statement in regard to Mohammedanism. Historical and critical researches made by scholars of the last half century have shown, beyond any doubt, that the best part of the Koran, the Holy Writ of the confessors of Islam, and particularly the doctrine of Allah, the One God, are directly and imme- diately taken from Jewish sources. Islam, therefore, can also be looked upon as a gift made by the Jew to various Semitic and to various Aryan nations, dwelling on the south- ern shores of the Mediterranean, on the banks of the Nile and the Euphrates, and upon the vast plains of Central and Southern Asia. The Kingdom of Israel, the Messiah, is visibly extending its limits. Let us unite our voices with the enthusiastic Jew, when he exclaims: Shout the glad tidings, exultingly sing: Jerusalem triumphs, Messiah is King. Thus far we have mentioned the Bible and the doctrine of the One God, and considered them as gifts made by the Jew to the Gentile. We may now add that the best and most important parts of the moral laws which govern state and society in our civilized world are also presents of the Jew to the Gentile. Much is our society indebted to Greek and Roman civilization. Arts and sciences we may trace back, until we find their origin in the seven-hilled city, or in Athens and Corinth. But if we search for the sources of the moral ideas now prevailing in mankind and shaping their social intercourse, their private life, their institutions, their legis- SELECTED WRITINGS 207 lation, we shall chiefly find them amidst the people who stood around Mt. Sinai and who listened to the inspired orations of the prophets in Jerusalem. It is a grave error and it implies an unpardonable histori- cal blunder, to style whatever is kind and charitable and humane as ‘‘Christian’’; it is a grave error to speak con- tinually of Christian charity, of Christian virtue, of Christian kindness. The laws of love and of kindness and of charity | are of older origin than the Christian religion; they are of Hebrew origin. And who will dare to say that the practice of these laws is the exclusive privilege of the adherents of the Christian religion ? And as it is with these laws concerning charity and kin- dred subjects, so it is with the other parts of the moral laws, regarded by modern civilized society as obligatory and bind- ing. ‘They are of Hebrew origin. We have no time this evening to particularize and to go into details. But this one instance we cannot forbear from quoting, that even the prin- ciple of equal rights for all—a principle which is one of the corner-stones of our American constitution, and which is adopted by few nations as yet and is still rejected by many— that even this principle was already announced in the Mosaic legislation. ‘‘One law and one code shall be for you and for the stranger that sojourneth with you’’—such are the words as they were repeatedly expressed in the Pentateuch. And this principle was only restricted, theoretically, by one lim- itation, viz.: No idol-worship and no idol-worshipers should exist in the Israelitish commonwealth. And what unprejudiced searcher after truth will deny that all the sublime ethical sayings and precepts of the Sermon on the Mount—I do not mean those which are so sublime that they are against human nature—that all these ethical sayings and precepts are drawn from older springs and sources, that 208 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL they were but copied from the lawgivers, teachers, and prophets of Israel? Who will deny that the doctrine of the universal brotherhood of men and all the consequences aris- ing therefrom are of Jewish origin? ‘That the degradation of this principle by establishing different considerations for the faithful and the unfaithful, by creating a particular heaven for the believers, and eternal damnation for the unbe- lievers—that this alloying of the pure gold of prophetical Judaism was not perpetrated by the Jews? As the Jogos, the Word that became flesh and appeared upon earth and that was made to share divine glory with God the Father himself, was an idea borrowed from the speculative theol- ogy of Alexandria, as the messiahship of the young Nazarene rabbi was claimed upon the basis of popularly misunder- stood Scriptural passages, so was the distinction between believers and unbelievers also un-Jewish, opposed to the all- embracing spirit of the Hebrew prophets, and reflecting the views then preponderating in the Gentile world, where dis- tinctions were made between the members of the respective nations and the barbarians outside. In Judaism, at least, the germs of universality were then already in evidence, and laws opposed in spirit to this principle were disappearing. Let us then acknowledge that thus far Jewish ethics have gained a firm footing in the world, and that the prospects are good that this footing will be firmer from year to year. Let us acknowledge that most of the moral ideas now enter- tained by the world have been received as a gift from the Wandering Jew, this despised Messiah of mankind. Our list of gifts made by the Jew to the Gentile is not yet complete. We have only time to glance hastily at them, we cannot tarry long in the contemplation of each one in particular. Weare in the position of a traveler who has only a single hour’s time to look at the rich collections of objects SELECTED WRITINGS 209 of art in a famous gallery. The man who leads this traveler through the gallery and shows him the pictures names to him hurriedly the masterpieces of Raphael, of Titian, of Correggio, but he cannot stop long before any single piece and devote to the contemplation of it as much time as would be desirable. We have a similar experience in attempting to enu- merate the gifts of the Jew to the world in one single lecture. Therefore we shall only very briefly mention now that in the so-called Dark Ages Jews have fostered and preserved science for the world. Their Ibn Gabirol, their Judah ha-Levi, their Moses Maimonides, Levi ben Gershon, David Kimchi, and hundreds of others cultivated every branch of science, and at their feet the most eminent teachers of mediaeval Chris- tian Europe sat as learners. They had their dark ages, too, the poor, persecuted Jews, but they had no dark ages in the sense in which the Christian nations of Europe had them. And when in the fifteenth century a better morning began to dawn, it was the Jew who stood ready to say to the world awaking from its slumbers, ‘‘While you have slept, I was awake. I have worked mentally. I have also worked for you. Come now and quench your thirst after science at these springs, part of which I have guarded from being lost forever, and part of which I have digged anew.” And in this connection let us say that the Jew contributed also to the reformation of the Church in Germany, although but passively and indirectly. Hebrew, the language of our Bible (the Old Testament) was totally forgotten in the Christian world. And not until toward the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century did a few Christians begin to study the old tongue, under the guidance of Jewish teachers. These instructions in Hebrew imparted by Jews to Reuchlin and others, were of world’ historic consequence. Instructors and pupils did not have 210 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL and could not have, any idea of the great importance of these lessons. To them they were only single, detached, insignificant facts, of which scarcely any person took notice. We—living more than three centuries later—see them in another light. We behold in them links in the great chain of history; we know now what immense results sprang therefrom. Thus works Providence, thus works God in history, by little unobserved facts and things, and we, short- sighted men, we pass by and do not see anything. But more still is to be said in this connection. In the beginning of the sixteenth century the Dominicans—a reli- gious order known for its bigotry and fanaticism—com- menced a crusade against all Hebrew books, all the immense Hebrew literature. In this impending danger the German Jews implored the Emperor to come to the rescue of their literary treasures. And the Emperor asked the opinion of Reuchlin. Of course Reuchlin, who had learned to appre- clate the Hebrew language and literature, declared himself in favor of saving the productions of the Jewish mind, and so he thwarted the plans of the Dominicans. This enraged them and their dark associates furiously. A literary con- troversy of very great dimensions and of a very exciting character followed, in which all Germany took part. Here the virt obscuri—the obscure men—of the Church, there the men of light, of free research, of unfettered mind; here the monk, there the scholar; here mediaeval darkness, there the dawning of new morn; here Hoogstraten and Pfefferkorn, there Reuchlin and Ulrich von Hutten. The war, which was bitter and vehement on both sides, lasted several years. When, a few years later, Martin Luther inaugurated the movement for a,reformation of the Church, he found the Ger- man people prepared for the movement by the previous war against the obscurants. Who knows whether the steps of SELECTED WRITINGS 211 Luther would have been crowned by success, had not the fight against the obscurants taken place just a little while before? Were we now, my dear friends, to descend to more recent times, we could easily show that the Jew contributed his full share toward building up our present state of culture and civilization. Not long ago he was everywhere rudely re- jected when he came and offered his stone to the building. In many semi-barbarian countries whose inhabitants call themselves civilized, he is still rejected, driven aside, and chased away by the builders. But let every impartial man say, whether the Jew has not done wonderfully in the short time he has been allowed to work conjointly with others. I will not detain you by reading a long list of truly brilliant Jewish names whose bearers have excelled in science, in art, in the republic of letters, in the realm of statesmanship, in the fields of industry, etc., etc. To draw up such a list would indeed be an easy task. Let this suffice, however. Wetrust that we have made it clear that the Wandering Jew does not go through the world laden with a curse, but is sent to the nations to bring them invaluable gifts and to be a blessing unto them. Let us deal justly with the Jew. Let the Jew be looked upon by the Gentiles as their elder brother who has some claim upon the thanks of his younger brethren, and let fraternal feelings toward him be a living sentiment in the hearts of all. For have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? One God, one mankind, one brotherhood! ‘This must be the watchword of the future, the guiding idea of mankind saved. Come, then, all of you; come, then, Jew and Gentile, Unita- rian and Trinitarian, Episcopalian and Puritan; come, then, let us join hands and hearts, and let us exclaim in harmony, ‘‘We are all brothers, and He in heaven is our common Father.” And let every one that hath breath praise the Lord. Hallelujah! JEWISH THESES IQOL FIRST SERIES I ‘““JupAIsM”’ and “‘ Jewish religion” are not synonymous terms. “Judaism” is more comprehensive than “ Jewish religion,”’ for ‘‘ Jewish religion”’ is only a part of ‘‘ Judaism.” Judaism 1s the composite of the collected thoughts, sentiments, and efforts of the Jewish people. In other words, Judaism is the sum total of all the manifestations of the distinctively Jewish national spirit. II The Jewish religion is, then, only a part of Judaism, though by far its most important part. Among no other people on earth has religion occupied so large, so significant a place in their spiritual life, as it has among the Jews. But besides religion there were, and there still are, other elements in Judaism. Iil If we were to understand by the term Judaism only the Jewish religion and nothing more, and if the word Jew sig- nified only one who confesses the Jewish religion and in that alone was differentiated from non-Jews, then no historian of Judaism as such would be justified in selecting as the sub- ject of his investigations or as material for literary presen- * Translated from Jiidische Thesen. This translation is based chiefly on the 1903 edition of the essay, which differs very slightly from that of 1gor. 2 2, SELECTED WRITINGS 213 tation the copious literature written by Jews in the Middle Ages on medicine, mathematics, astronomy, chess, etc. On the same premises, Siisskind of Trimberg would as little deserve a place in the history of Judaism as Walther von der Vogelweide in a history of the Christian religion or the Christian church. There would be no more reason to men- tion the sculptor Antokolsky in a work on Jews and Judaism than to mention Thorwaldsen in a work on Christianity or the Church. And it may even be questioned whether one would be justified in referring in a history of Jewish litera- ture to the Mulloth ha-Higgayon of Maimonides, or to the Mishnath ha-Middoth, that anonymous treatise on geometry which dates from the ninth or tenth century. IV If it be true that the Jews constitute merely a religious community or a church, and not primarily a people, a race, a nation, or whatever one may please to call it, why, in a history of Jews and Judaism, should reference be made to the Jews who played a part in the discovery of America, or to those who, in more recent times, have attained name and fame as statesmen or as musicians, or who have distinguished themselves in other fields of art or science? And why, if the above statement is correct, should our Jewish newspapers proclaim so loudly and emphatically and jubilantly that His Majesty, the German Emperor, has conferred upon this or that Jewish merchant the Order of the Red Eagle of the Fourth Class, or that he has graciously deigned to allow this or that venerable Jewish scholar to be designated hence- forth by the title ‘‘Professor,”’ or that, in a city of the United States, one of “our people” had again been elected mayor? What have such things to do with the Jewish religion ? 214 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL V The Jewish people, or the Jewish race, is the fixed, the permanent, the necessary sub-stratum, the essence, the substance. The Jewish religion is that which inheres in and qualifies this substance—an “‘accident,”’ as logicians would term it. The concept ‘‘ Judaism,” in its narrower sense, as religion, may therefore be correctly and adequately defined in these words: Judaism 1s the religion of the Jews. As to the content of this religion, that is a different matter. VI Judaism is not a universal religion. Rightly understood, it is a national religion. Without Jews, there would be no Judaism. VII But Judaism contains certain universal elements, certain absolute and eternal truths. It holds that certain meta- physical propositions which have found expression and acceptance among the Jewish people and certain ethical principles which they have adopted are destined to become the common property of the whole world, and it cherishes the hope that they will indeed become the possession of all peoples at some future time. VII But Judaism is not limited to these universal elements, which in part, at least, are already acknowledged by other peoples. It has, of necessity, manifested itself outwardly in various ways: through a special ritual, through certain established national festivals and days of consecration, through definite national symbols and ceremonies. ‘The selection of the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath SELECTED WRITINGS 215 Day, the Jewish festivals, the Jewish calendar, and the like—these are elements in the Jewish religion which are national only; they have no universal character, and it would be folly to claim for them universal recognition. IX If we were to remove from Judaism all that is nationally Jewish, the traditional Sabbath and festivals, the features of our ritual that are still generally observed throughout Israel, and should limit ourselves to that which is called the eternal, the unchanging, the universal in Judaism, then indeed we would have a church or religious fellowship which would rest on the basis of Theism, and would teach and demand the loftiest ethics. Then we would have a world- religion such as is desired by those who dispute the proposi- tion that Judaism is primarily a racial community and who would substitute for this, as a fundamental principle, the proposition that Judaism is a religion and nothing more than a religion. xX But if we assent to this reasoning, are we not compelled to draw the logical conclusions therefrom? There are already a very large number of Jews racially bound to us who have not joined any Jewish congregation and who do not wish to join any; or who have become affiliated with liberal religious organizations the members of which are not exclusively of Jewish stock. These men say that for those Jews who emphatically repudiate the theory of Jewish racial unity and who deny that any racial difference exists between Jews and people of other nationalities, and likewise for those Jews among whom Jewish national sentiment has entirely disappeared, there is not the slightest reason for 216 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL preserving anything nationally Jewish or for continuing to maintain any barriers between Jewish and non-Jewish theists; that these barriers should be permitted to fall, and that we should, indeed, do what we can to hasten their complete destruction. XI Judaism confined within national limits, as a national church, rests upon much firmer and sounder foundations than would be the case if it expanded and became a so- called world-religion. In the Jewish national religion, it is community with the Jewish stock, that is, birth within the Jewish race, that constitutes the bond which unites and holds its members together; within this, however, there can exist the broadest freedom of thought and research for the individual, the widest room for free and full development for the church as a whole. There is no necessity, in a national church, for a definitely formulated system of dogmas. The religion of the ancient Greeks had no fixed dogmas, nor was there in the old Germanic religion any “credo” or cate- chism. If these ancient national religions had not been displaced by the Christian world-religion and its accom- panying dogmas, advancing culture and increasing knowl- edge would have worked here also as liberators and would have freed them from the errors and absurdities of their time. And thus they too would have attained the heights of clarity and truth. XII Also in non-Jewish religious organizations which are free from dogmatic constraint, the ritual and other forms are determined inevitably by the geographical and historical conditions of the people among whom they exist. In the far North the fir tree and not the palm branch is used for SELECTED WRITINGS 217 ritual purposes; in a warmer country the reverse is the case. In North America the harvest festival is celebrated in October or November; in Argentina or Brazil, in March or April. In the United States it is the fourth of July which we dedicate to the idea of liberty, while in France it is the fourteenth of July; among the Jews, however, and only among the Jews, it is the fifteenth day of Nisan. Such liberal religious fellowships, nationally distinct but alike in essentials, can and will exist side by side in friendship and harmony, co-operating each with the other in a spirit of mutual helpfulness. ‘‘ Wenn die Rose selbst sich schmiickt, schmiickt sie auch den Garten.” And each national religion, developing in purity and truth, and influencing for good the nation to which it belongs, contributes at the same time to the advancement of all mankind. XITT A so-called universal religion would expose humanity to a serious danger. For this religion would have the tendency to forge spiritual chains which would hinder freedom of thought and effort in many ways, and would also prevent its own development. For the confessors of such a religion must necessarily have something in common, and what could this be but an obligatory system of dogmas? But where there are dogmas there are heretics; and where there are heretics there are heresy trials; and after heresy trials follow the dismissal of religious leaders, excommunication, etc. And the soil is then prepared for intolerance, fanati- cism, and other poisonous growths. XIV The final triumph of Judaism will not be the making over of all men into Jews—that is impossible, for humanity will ever and always be divided into races and nations. It 218 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL will consist in the universal recognition of the eternal truths of Theism and its lofty ethical demands for holiness of life; in the universal acknowledgment of these truths as ideal forces which must control all life. SECOND SERIES I The Jew is born a Jew. It is not through any special ceremony of initiation that the child of Jewish parents is admitted into the Jewish community; nor can he withdraw through any act of his own from this community. In consequence of his birth he is and remains a Jew until the day of his death. How often of late has this proposition been repeated without any conception of its real meaning and significance! Not so in the case of Aub and Einhorn, Jellinek and Stein. They and many other prominent Jewish theologians, in catechisms and sermons, in Gutachien and other articles, gave it complete and emphatic approval, and did so in. perfect—and conscious—accord with a recognized ethno- logical fact and with the teaching of Judaism at all times. This fact and its corresponding principle are: The Jews are a distinct race, and every Jew (with the exception, of course, of proselytes) is born into the race. II Ethnology and anthropology furnish us also with the fundamental, almost axiomatic, principle that every human being enters the world as an individual; that he is at the same time the child of his parents, a member of a family, of a clan, a race, and finally of all humanity. This is the order of nature, and our personal opinions and assertions do not alter it in the slightest degree. SELECTED WRITINGS 219 III As regards the teachings of Judaism in past times, we find that, according to the Bible, the Jews, or more correctly the descendants of the patriarch Jacob, were beyond ques- tion a distinct race. The eleventh chapter of Genesis gives us the genealogy of the Patriarchs, who, together with their descendants, are there designated B’nai Shem, Sons of Shem, Semites. Other tribes mentioned here, or their supposed ancestors, are called, some Hamites, some Japhet- ites. In this Biblical ethnology all mankind are conceived to be descendants of Noah, and are called B’nai Noach, Sons of Noah, Noachides. And those who observe the seven Noachian laws are accorded a higher place by the Halachah in several respects than are other Noachides who devote themselves to gross idolatry. IV The division of mankind into Semites, Hamites, and _ Japhetites was regarded as scientifically correct throughout the Middle Ages and up to the middle of the eighteenth century. As with scholastic philosophy, that of Jews and Christians alike, so with science. The exact sciences could not free themselves from the tyrannical rule of the- ology, ‘‘queen of all the sciences.’’ Consequently this Biblical-ethnological division of mankind remained undis- turbed until so late a day. V Even if the word “‘Semite”’ does not actually appear in European literature before the eighteenth century, as has been maintained by authorities of note, its equivalents cer- tainly had been in use; for the concept, and the fact under- lying the concept, had existed for three thousand years. 220 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL En passant, anti-Semitism also, both concept and fact, is very old. The circumstance of Renan’s coining the word in the middle of the last century (if indeed he did coin it) does not affect the truth of this statement. It will hardly be said that Renan, mild, noble, and humane, was the father of anti-Semitism, nor was he the man to countenance it. He hated it. VI The Prophetical portions of the Bible and the Hagiographa also conceive Israel to be a race, a nation. ‘The same is true of all our prayer-books and other liturgical works up to the present time. Proofs of this are so numerous and so well- known that it is unnecessary to adduce examples. Vil But what is the attitude of the Talmud and the rabbis concerning the question? So clear were their views, so decided were their teachings on the subject, and the regula- tions made by them, that they considered even an apostate to be a Jew until the end of his life—though of course a sinful Jew, a stain upon the family honor. For, they argued, quite logically, how is it possible to withdraw from a family or a nation in which one has been placed by nature, or, to use the language of theology, by God? One can withdraw from an association created by men, into which, willingly or unwillingly, one has been received by the act of the association; not, however, from one’s family or race. Now race and religion being inseparable in Israel, according to the Talmud and the rabbis, the regulations which governed the conduct of the orthodox Jew were held to be equally binding in the case of the apostate—for he was a Jew. For this reason, one was forbidden to employ an apostate for work on the Sabbath, or to offer or sell him food that was SELECTED WRITINGS 221 not kosher, or in any other way cause him to act contrary to Jewish law. The apostate, if the occasion arose, was obliged to obtain a bill of divorce drawn up strictly according to the law, or, in the case of a levirate marriage, he had to follow the regular procedure for relieving him of his obliga- tions, if the woman in question wished to be regarded as a gerushah, or a chaluzah. Otherwise, she would still be bound to him, the “Jew.” Vill And the proselyte, the ger zedek? Was he not a Jew, a Jew in all respects, the same as if he were born into the race? No, he was not. To prove this briefly, suppose it becomes the duty of a beth-din (a Jewish court of three) in Warsaw or Cracow, or, let us say, in New York or Chicago, to consider the granting of a ritual divorce, or to preside at the ceremony incidental to the release of the persons con- cerned from the obligation of the levirate marriage. At the formation of the beth-din a man is present who is thor- oughly versed in Talmudic literature and law, and who is strictly orthodox in his mode of life. Proposed as dayyan, he is rejected by the presiding rabbi. “‘Rabbi Warder Cresson, Junior, cannot be associate judge here,” says the latter. Why not? ‘Because he is a proselyte.” True, he was only a child when his parents were converted to Judaism and he with them; true, his parents reared him in strictest orthodox fashion; true, he studied Talmudic sub- jects for many years in yeshiboth (Talmudic high schools) both in this country and Poland. He is honored as a faith- ful Jew, and recognized as a great Jamdan. But inasmuch as he is a ger, he cannot bea dayyan. Rabbi Jacob Ettlinger of Altona, who as recently as sixty years ago acted regularly as magistrate in civil cases between Jewish litigants, would 222 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL have decided precisely in this way. ‘The undeniable fact is that proselytes, according to the Halachah, were not quali- fied to hold office. Only one who was born a Jew, that is, one whose mother was a Jewess by birth, might be entrusted in Israel with an office. IX In other relations also a proselyte was regarded as on a different level from the born Jew. Certain of the Biblical marriage restrictions did not apply in the case of the prose- lyte. This was so in consequence of the Talmudic principle, Sap “pw Nd OM Sp, “A congregation of proselytes is not a true Jewish congregation,’ not a “congregation of God” from which certain elements must be rigidly excluded. On the other hand, a Cohen was forbidden to take a proselyte to wife. And there were other regulations of the same kind. Also, certain limitations existed in respect to inheritance rights which were applicable only to proselytes.* re In the course of three or four generations the descendants of apostates, intermarrying with members of other races, cease, naturally, to belong to the race of their ancestors, while the descendants of proselytes, In consequence of the marriage of their fathers with full-blooded Jewesses, become part and parcel of the Jewish race. XI There is an etymological connection between the German words Stamm and abstammen, between the Lation words nation and natus, and possibly between the Hebrew words * No proofs for these statements will be needed by the learned readers of these theses, American rabbis and others, who are acquainted with the sources. It is expected that other readers will also accept them without question, especially since the sources, even if given, would in all probability be inaccessible to them. SELECTED WRITINGS 228 umma and em. ‘This is a proof that, in deciding the race or nationality of an individual, the chief stress was laid, even in very ancient times, upon descent, and not upon physical characteristics or the like, which a person might happen to possess in common with others. In classifying the human species it is not the shape of the skull and not the color of the hair that decides, but descent. Who were the parents? Who were the more remote ancestors? ‘That is the question. Granted there are long-headed and short-headed, dark- haired and light-haired Jews. There are also Bavarians and Mecklenburgers; yet all are German. There are Arabian race-horses, Norman draught-horses, and Shetland ponies; yet all are horses. There are trees that bear sweet cherries and others that bear sour; yet all are cherry- trees. They are merely varieties of a species, merely divisions of a larger unit. If difference in skull-formation seems to provide an argument against Jewish racial unity, we would reply to that argument by saying, Granted there are brachycephalic and dolichocephalic Jews; but consider them, pray, merely as varieties of the Jewish race. The conception of the Jews as a race is still correct. XIT It should also be noted that Jews and Gentiles alike have always considered the Jews as a distinct race. The philosophic, the scientific, and the imaginative literature of the world, the statute-books and proceedings of legislative bodies, the commercial and social intercourse between Jews and non-Jews, furnish a thousand proofs of the fact. One or two illustrations may here be given. About a year ago, twenty representatives of the Austrian diet—anti- Semites, of course—drew up, signed and formally presented a bill, the object of which was to exclude anyone from public 224 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL office who had a Jewish ancestor as far back as the fourth generation. A similar incident occurred a number of years ago when Professor Paul de Lagarde of Gottingen, in a bill for the establishment of a new order of merit, inserted several incisive and characteristic paragraphs to the effect that no one should be admitted into this order who, exactly as in the other case, had a Jewish ancestor even four generations back. It is clear that the distinction here made is not between Jews and Christians, but between Jews and Aryans. Moreover, it is made not only by de Lagarde, the bitter, saturnine, though extremely learned anti-Semite, but also by Mommsen, the great historian and liberal-minded philo- Semite. However, the conclusions which Mommsen drew from the fact in question were totally different from those drawn by his colleague of G6ttingen and by others who shared his views. XIII These anti-Semites—it must here be said—display not only their intellectual perversity, but shocking moral turpitude as well. They are at war with justice, with humanity, with true culture. They undermine the moral foundations of the state and society—their only possible foundations. They threaten the world with relapse into barbarism, with brutalization of character and conduct. They refuse to acknowledge that, in a state based on right and justice, no curtailment of the rights of any class of citizens, no oppression or persecution must be allowed to exist. They refuse to see that, in all social and political associations, the possession of intelligence, integrity, and moral excellence constitutes fully as valid, nay, a more valid claim to membership in them than the mere fact of belonging to the Teutonic or the Gallic or any other race. SELECTED WRITINGS 225 XIV The intermingling of races produces, naturally, a mixed. race. One can speak properly of a mixed race, however, only when the elements which combine to form it are in equal or nearly equal proportion. If single families with- draw from one race and join another, only the descendants of these families are of mixed blood. As the process of their absorption goes on, the one racial strain diminishes with the rapidity of geometrical progression, as may be indicated by the following series: 3, +, 4, +4, etc.; the other gains correspondingly: 3, 2, %, +3, etc. Consequently, the original racial characteristics of the family are soon lost, like a spoonful of salt dissolved in a large vessel of water to which more water is continually added. XV According to the testimony of history, an incalculable number of Jews have, in the course of centuries, chiefly as a result of barbarous persecution, been lost out of the Jewish race and been absorbed by other races. At the same time, an exceedingly small number of non-Jews have entered Judaism. Leaving the Chazars out of account, the majority of whom, according to the recent investigations of Russian scholars, soon returned to Christianity or to Islam, not a thousand non-Semites, since the first century of the Chris- tian Era, or at any rate since Christianity became the religion of the Eastern Empire, have entered the ranks of the Jews and been assimilated by them. A thousand? No, not five hundred. Perhaps not even three hundred. It is very certain that the Jews are ethnically one of the purest races in the world. 220N BERNHARD FELSENTHAL XVI Now if some one were to ask the writer of these theses, “Well, what are you? Are you really a Semite? Do you really believe you belong to a separate Jewish race?” I would answer, ‘“‘I am a Jew and an American and a German.” ‘But I do not understand. Tell me what you mean.” ‘Well then, listen. Racially I am a Jew, for I have been born among the Jewish nation. Politically I am an American, as patriotic, as enthusiastic, as devoted an American citizen as it is possible to be. Spiritually I am a German, for my inner life has been profoundly influenced by Schiller, by Goethe, by Kant, and by other intellectual giants of Germany. I have drunk from the springs of German literature; I have sat at the feet of German teachers; and I acknowledge with a certain pride, in thought and feeling I am a German. At this moment, however, the question is to what race I belong, and to this I answer, again with a certain pride, I am a Jew.” XVII Of recent years the intermingling of races seems to pro- ceed at a more rapid pace, and it is impossible to prevent it. Should it be prevented? Certainly not by civil or hierarchical authority or interference. Of course the Jewish minority does not absorb the Aryan majority. The major- ity absorbs the minority. Considerable portions of our Jewish nation are dropping away from us before our very eyes. Nevertheless, the latent Jewish racial feeling is still so strong that there can be no doubt but that the greater number of Jews will continue in the twentieth century to maintain their separate racial existence, even in Western and more civilized countries. In other semi-civilized coun- SELECTED WRITINGS 227 tries, where our co-religionists still suffer unspeakable oppression, the race will most certainly continue in un- diminished strength. XVITI This much is certain. As in the nineteenth century the most important problem in western Judaism was whether to raise high the banner of Reform or whether, in a spirit of loyalty, to maintain unchanged the traditional in our religion, so in the twentieth century just opening, the chief problem will be whether Judaism shall continue to exist as a distinct race and a separate religious fellowship, or whether it shall unite with other races and other religious fellowships and become amalgamated with them. It may confidently be asserted that, in spite of some disintegration through the falling away of large numbers of families hitherto Jewish, Judaism will in the main pre- serve its forces, nay, under more favorable conditions, it will flourish reinvigorated and rejuvenated. p97 DA MAY NISW WN POND MOND “Maya wap WHERE DO WE STAND ?! 1895 In the early seventies there appeared in Germany a book which challenged the attention of a wide circle of readers and created a vast sensation: Der alte und der neue Glaube, by David F. Strauss. The author expounded herein, in excellent style and with a wealth of ideas, the new, non- Christian view of God and the world professed by him and others of his way of thinking and anticipated to a greater or less extent long before his day by thousands of thoughtful persons. ‘The first chapter, if I remember aright, bore as a heading the question: ‘Are We Still Christians?” After a calmly objective and circumspect inquiry the author arrives at the conclusion: We have ceased to be Christians— the pronoun, of course, referring to himself and his intel- lectual following. A few years later, another German scholar, the well- known ‘philosopher of the unconscious,’ Eduard von Hartmann, published his book: Dvze Selbstersetzung des Christenthums. Starting from different premises he also came to the conclusion that Christianity had passed its climax, and that, for a considerable time, it had been grad- ually tending toward its ultimate dissolution. To be sure, neither Strauss nor Hartmann expected to see the formidable “Rock of the Church” seriously shaken within their own lifetime, let alone shattered and put out of the way. But with profound insight, they recognized the symptoms of gradual decline and disappearance, and predicted that a t Translated from Wo Stehen Wir? An address delivered before the Chicago Rabbinical Association. 228 SELECTED WRITINGS 220 time was approaching, albeit very slowly, in which there would no longer be a Christian church; that the religion of the future would be built upon a different foundation and would uplift and sanctify mankind by different means. About a year ago the voice of another eminent German philosopher arose in confirmation of the foregoing. Pro- fessor Ziegler of Strassburg, an authority of wide and favor- able repute, published last year a history of ethics. In the preface, he refers to the question raised by Strauss twenty yeats ago, which was, indeed, not new even then, but which was formulated by him in so striking a manner. Ziegler, arriving at the same conclusions and basing upon them the same convictions as Strauss, felt likewise constrained to say: We have ceased to be Christians; we are the professors and heralds of a new, non-Christian view of God and the universe, a new ethics, a new religion. There is no need to enumerate other eminent teachers of this nascent non-Christian religion. We are not speaking here of a single swallow foreheralding a budding spring, there are hundreds and thousands of them, chirping and singing all about us: The Old World is passing in decay. Our grandsons and their descendants will live in a new and better world that is now taking shape; in a world whose religion will have a different spiritual content, a world tn which the factors which make for noble human living and elevated human sentiment will be different from those which are active today. It is not my present intention to discuss whether there is any basis for these predictions or the hopes that are based upon them. J am merely relating the facts. But if thoughtful non-Jews have asked themselves: Are we still Christians ? many Jews have similarly broached the question, some aloud in clear and unmistakable terms, and others in the stillness of their hearts: Are we still Jews ? 230 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL True, the source of this question is, in many cases, simply ignorance or lack of understanding. Men have believed that the essence of Judaism was to be found in the Law, and perceiving that strict adherence thereto was rapidly on the decline, especially in this country, that even those laws hith- erto considered to be divinely revealed were being neglected by ever-increasing numbers of persons, perceiving further that they themselves were being drawn nolens volens into the current, they have begun to question themselves anxi- ously: Are we still Jews? The answer of our hearts is immediate: Yes, we are still Jews, and our religion is still Judaism. ‘To this the rejoinder is made: If so, then define Judaism. Among various replies we hear the following: Judaism consists in fulfilment of the moral law. To do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with thy God—this is the whole of Judaism. But if this sentence indeed expresses what is characteristic of and peculiar to Judaism, then Socrates and Seneca and St. Francis of Assisi would have been Jews; likewise every tender-hearted Sister of Mercy in the hospitals, every Florence Nightingale on the battle- fields, in short, all Christians, professing or nominal, who ever gave proof, in lives devoted to the service of others, of a spirit of charity and saintly helpfulness, all would be Jews. Why no, say others, these are not Jews, the definition just given is far too broad. Good deeds must be accom- panied by the recognition of religious truth. A Jew must acknowledge the one and only God, he must have a sincere and earnest conviction of the truth of ethical monotheism (to use the phrase recently come into common use); in plainer language, the belief in one holy God must have entered into the very fibre of his being. SELECTED WRITINGS 231 But is not this definition also too inclusive? Would it not include as Jews non-Semitic Unitarians, Mohammedans, and those Hindus who belong to the Brahma Samaj? Assuredly, it must be admitted that this definition also is too broad and therefore incorrect. It does not correspond with the facts. Channing and Parker were not Jews, nor are the followers of Islam, nor are monotheistic Hindus. On the other hand, the definitions current among many Orthodox Jews and many of the conservative-historical school, so called, and other parties which steer a middle course, are too narrow, inasmuch as they posit a number of laws, institutions, and doctrines as a noli me tangere and dis- pute the right of anyone to call himself a Jew who no longer looks upon them as of binding force. For, when we look about us, we find that there are those who have ceased to live up to these ritual and doctrinal tests and who yet are considered by most of their fellow-Israelites as Jews. I have already had oocasion in the year 1887 to attempt a clarification of this question.‘ Looking beyond the limits of our city and our country, I saw in my mind’s eye those kinsmen of ours in Arabia and Persia, in Turkey and Morocco, in Russia and Poland, who think and live so very differently from ourselves, who people the heavens with corporeal angels, and the earth and the underworld with cor- poreal evil spirits, who carry in their heads innumerable other superstitions and monstrous ideas, whose theology has been formed in part by the union of Zohar mysticism and of Talmudism and rabbinic casuistry. Most certainly, these people also are Jews—Jews, indeed, to the very core—and no one dreams of casting them out of Judaism. At the same time I envisaged those Jews of Berlin, of Chicago, and of other great centers—Jews who are neither 1 Cf. Menorah Monthly, 3: 259 ff. 232 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL mystics nor believers in the Shulchan Aruch, who are com- pletely emancipated from all the shackles of tradition. These too are Jews, considered as such even by the thoughtful Orthodox and the historical conservatives; no one thinks, or more correctly speaking, no one should think of consider- ing them as non-Jews. Only a “crank” or an occasional ignorant person or an occasional Christianized American Jew would say of them: They are no longer Jews. A definition of Judaism must be found which brings together, under a common denominator, both the wonder- working rabbi of Sadagora and the American Reform rabbi, and at the same time excludes the non-Semitic Unitarian, the monotheistic Moslem, and the Hindu who acknowledges the one and only God. The definition which I formulated in 1887 reads as follows: Judaism as a religion is a sanctifying rule of life based upon the recognition of a single and indivisible first cause which at the same time conditions and fosters morality; a vital force which germinated and developed among the People of Israel—the Jews. Judaism, further- more, is a religion which created, from time to time, such usages, laws, rites, and institutions as were appropriate to the local and temporary exigencies and conditions of life among the Jews. Mr. Leo N. Levi, a highly respected Jewish lawyer of Galveston, Texas, has criticized this definition, in a speech delivered a few months ago in New Orleans, as too nebulous, too indefinite and vague. It certainly is—for those who have in mind only a certain type of Jew and give no thought to Israel as a whole. The definition is too vague and its limits are too broad for those who see only what exists today, but not what existed yesterday nor what is in process of becoming. But he who keeps before his vision the entire historical process will scarcely be able to give a more exact definition than the one attempted above. SELECTED WRITINGS 233 And this definition may be reduced to a single brief sen- tence which, at first sight, may appear to some persons still more indefinite, to wit: Judaism is the religion of the Jews. Yet this statement is the only true and correct one. The Jews, thank God, have no central hierarchic authority. They have preserved, at all times, an individual freedom of faith, despite repeated attempts of this or that group to put others into spiritual shackles by laying down the law for them. Every individual Jew has, in a way, a religion of his own, just as, according to the well-known ghetto proverb, every Jew has his own Shulchan Aruch. No one denies that those in power have often enough enforced their own doctrines in daily life, but at least they have excommunicated no one born in the lap of Judaism. Even the orthodox acknowledge the principle, Nin Dew Nonw "p op ox. “A Jew, even though he has greatly sinned, remains a Jew.’ To the truly ortho- dox this doctrine represents a cardinal principle. It never occurs to genuine orthodox Jews to eject certain categories of Jews—in the language of American politics, to ‘‘read them out of the party.” To such depths of ignorance and thoughtlessness they have, as yet, not fallen. Every Jew is born a Jew and remains a Jew as long as he lives. He does not enter into the covenant of God with Israel through cir- cumcision or Barmitzvah or confirmation—his entrance into the community of Israel is effected in the hour of his birth, and through his birth. The Jews are, consequently, not only a religious com- munity, and Judaism is not only a religion. ‘The Jews are primarily a race, and Judaism is the sum total of all the psychological characteristics peculiar to the race. First among the psychological traits of Israel rank its religion and cult-life. This is far more truly the case with them than with any other race on earth. But Judaism, in the larger sense 234 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of the word, is more than Jewish religion. To repeat: Judaism is the sum total of all the psychological character- istics peculiar to the race of Israel. That the Jewish race is not absolutely pure, that it has originated in antiquity out of the mingling of tribes, and that, in more modern times, a few of non-Jewish blood have found admission in Israel—all this does not alter the fact that the Jews are primarily a race. The English are cer- tainly not racially pure; nor are the French, the Germans, the Italians. But despite this fact, are not these peoples considered distinct nations? An American nation does not as yet exist in these United States, where a great number of racial currents flow side by side without mingling. But before many centuries have passed these will unite and form a distinct American nation of a clearly recognizable type, in which it will be scarcely possible to distinguish or trace the component elements. In exactly the same way there is a Jewish nation or a Jewish race, and every Jew is a member of it from his birth. It is incorrect to say that Israel is nothing more than a church or religious community, and that the Jew enters it at birth as one professing Judaism. One is not born a member of a religious community; one enters such a community, either through solemn parental pledge on behalf of an infant, or through the act of joining it of one’s own free will, in matur- ity. It is different with the Jews. The child is born into the race, and as a member of it he assumes an obligation of loyalty toward the racial religion. That the Jews are a race is not an ex-parte statement of personal views subject to dispute, but a fact capable of scientific proof. The entire Jewish religious law has, all these thousands of years, been founded upon general accept- ance of this fact; all Jewish history—and Jewish history, let SELECTED WRITINGS 235 it be understood, is something more than the history of Judaism, it is the history of the Jews—rests upon it as a foundation. Our sentiments, thoughts, actions, today, the position assumed toward us by the non-Jewish world, as well as many other things concerning us, are to be explained only in the light of this fact: We are a distinct race. Our preachers, who speak so frequently of inherited Jewish racial virtues and defects, without in all cases fully understanding the implications contained in what they say; our Jewish periodicals, which by no means confine them- selves to religious discussion and religious news, but which treat all matters concerning Jews; our clubs, which certainly no one would describe as associations with a religious aim; our Jewish balls and picnics, which are scarcely to be con- sidered religious manifestations; all these testify to the incontrovertible fact that the Jews are a community held together by the bond of race. Many of our reformers failed to perceive this. The Jews, they said, area church, not arace. This thesis might be acceptable as norm for a new trend or movement in Jewish history, aS a program for the future, but it can in no wise claim to be a statement of actually existing fact. David Einhorn was among the most uncompromising of the exponents of the racial view. He contended sharply and indefatigably, in his prayer-book, in his textbook of religion, in his sermons, that the Jews are a race, endowed by God with certain special racial qualities that enabled them to fulfil their divine mission, to march in the front rank of humanity, and to lead men upward to a clearer understand- ing of religious truth and a purer conduct of life. And until their high mission is fulfilled—thus Einhorn in numer- ous passages—the descendants of Abraham must remain a 236 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL distinct and separate people (cf., for instance, Einhorn’s Lehre des Judenthums, §§ 87 and 89). Just because Einhorn laid such stress upon trace he was so determined an opponent of intermarriage. In his char- acteristically emphatic manner, he said, “ Intermarriage is a nail in the coffin of Judaism.” For intermarriage, he argued, leads to assimilation; the families of those Jews who inter- marry are in most cases-absorbed by the non-Jewish portion of the community in whose midst they live. No longer Jews in the racial sense, they also cease to be Jews in the religious sense. Einhorn was without doubt in one respect one of the most powerful and most influential protagonists of what is called Reform Judaism. It was he and Holdheim and Samuel Hirsch who stood in the forefront and fought most deter- minedly against the principle that a complex of inviolable laws forms the essence of Judaism. They boldly contended both through the written and the spoken word that the “yoke of the Law,’ which weighed down upon the adherents of Judaism instead of uplifting them, would have to be cast off. Here Einhorn stands almost alone. But with regard to the questions: Are we a race, or a church free from the restrictions of race? and, What should be our attitude toward mixed marriages? Einhorn was distinctly a national, a racial Jew. | How different the attitude of Geiger toward these vital questions! He, too, was a genuine liberal, and in this matter of observance of the Law, of Biblical as well as post- Biblical laws, his attitude was, in theory, quite as liberal as Einhorn’s. But, in keeping with his more conciliatory nature, he did not enter the arena to fight for an immediate setting-aside of these laws; he hoped and expected that mod- ern life would, of itself, without any assistance from the SELECTED WRITINGS 237 rabbis, eliminate such laws and institutions as had lost their vitality. As regards mixed marriage, however, he is far more advanced than Einhorn. His view is set forth in Ji- dische Zeitschrift (VIII, 88, 89), from which we quote: Religion can refuse to countenance a marriage only if it lacks ethical foundation, or if it is entered into from immoral motives. The Biblical and post-Biblical laws forbidding marriage between per- sons related to each other in certain ways are binding at the present time only if judged according to this principle. The prohibition, in our early history, of marriage with non-Jews rested upon the same basis. It was generally believed that non-Jews did not recognize the ethical obligations incurred through matrimony; there existed no confidence in the chastity, in the moral restraints of wedlock outside of Judaism. This view, a natural one in the age of mediaeval oppression, does not prevail in any of the religious groups of present-day Judaism; the sanctity of the matrimonial bond is no longer looked upon as the exclusive property of one religion; love of family and ethical relations between husband and wife are now conceded to be the noble fruit of a widespread cultivation of the higher sentiments. A marriage between a Jew and a Christian, therefore, if legally contracted, is by no means to be considered immoral, and religion consequently cannot refuse to acknowledge its validity. If, therefore, a rabbi complies with the request of such a couple for a religious solemnization of their union, there can be no objection, provided there are no moral issues. The very request testifies to the presence of a religious impulse, which has, indeed, nothing to do with the forms of any particular sect, but which, in the sanctification of the marriage bond, is concerned only with its broad human and ethical character. | Whether mixed marriages should be encouraged by ministers of religion is quite another question. On the one hand, intermarriage would seem to be a step toward the realization of universal human brotherhood, that glorious ideal which has ever been proclaimed by Judaism in inspired fashion. On the other hand, it must be acknowl- edged that a difference in outlook upon life conditioned by a difference _in religion is likely to prove a disturber of matrimonial peace and a barrier to intimate communion of souls. Moreover, it will not be 238 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL possible to suppress the fear of being influenced each by the other’s religion. Because of these considerations, the adherents of a religion are justified, especially if they are in the minority, if they hesitate to encourage intermarriage and even provide some slight hindrances to it. Thus Geiger. Which of the two is right, Einhorn or Geiger? In such a matter, one cannot expect unanimity, as if it were a question of historical fact or of science or of mathematics. We are dealing here, not with definite facts, but with a norm for our action, with official policies, and opinions will differ widely. ‘The underlying question, how- ever, is: Are we to keep racial Judaism intact or shall we allow our racial boundaries to melt away? Reflection shows that this vital question is linked with other problems which confront Israel today, especially Israel in America. Let me suggest a few of these. There is a tremendous ferment going on in the religious world of America, and the congresses of “liberal religious societies”’ are at the pres- ent time the chief symptoms of this ferment. Should rep- resentatives of Judaism take an active part in these? Should they co-operate, as has been suggested, in the establishment of ‘‘liberal churches”’ in our smaller towns, which shall con- sist of Jews and non-Jews? Should Jewish preachers and rabbis accept calls to the pulpits of such congregations? If they do so, there will be heard, from one side, a vigorous protest. It will be said, You American Reform rabbis, who favor mixed marriages, who are quite ready to accept the leadership of “free congregations,’ who permit Sabbath and holidays to be neglected, who allow many other char- acteristic features of Jewish cult and Jewish life to pass away —you are laying the axe at the root of Judaism; you are destroyers of Judaism. In the words of a Talmudic simile, you shatter the cask, but you will not be able to save the wine. The wine will be spilled. On the other side, there SELECTED WRITINGS 230 will be heard voices maintaining that such acts will con- tribute toward the glorification of true Judaism, will help to free Judaism from its national limitations, and to make of it a universal religion. And these voices will continue to speak, saying, We are the children of a new age, and it is the spirit of the age that urges us forward. Waur schieben nicht, wir werden geschoben. We must not pass through the world unthinking creatures, narrow-minded laggards in the march of civilization, nor ought we shut ourselves out by our absence from liberal religious congresses from a field of activity which it is our sacred duty to enter, because it affords us an opportunity to assist in upbuilding—upbuilding in the Jewish spirit—and so forth, and so forth. We have thus come in American Judaism to a parting of the ways. But such differences of opinion have occurred before, even in very early Jewish history. Very early, two currents were to be observed in Israel flowing parallel to each other. Even among the prophets there were some who held that the barriers between Israel and other peoples were not erected for all time, and others who laid most stress upon the continuance of Israel’s separate national existence. What a difference between the elevated utterance of Isaiah, who proclaimed that God’s temple would become a house of prayer for all nations, that God would select priests and Levites from among the Gentiles also, and that of Ezekiel, who excluded from the temple of his vision the alien and the uncircumcised! How different the sublime spiritual aspira- tions of the universalist Micah from the narrower view of the nationalist Malachi! But to return to the present. We are living in an age of ferment. It is to be hoped that the age of clarification is not far distant. Many things have disappeared, many 240 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL will disappear, that have endeared themselves to us of an older generation, things that are entwined about our hearts with a thousand tendrils. ‘That which gives us sorrow may give others joy. These are personal feelings, however, and neither our sadness nor the rejoicing of others can greatly change the aspect of affairs. We are in the midst of a cur- rent which we will not be able to stem nor turn back. Let us then take to heart the saying of Spinoza, that nothing should move us either to ecstasy or to indignation, but that we should endeavor to understand in all equanimity of spirit whatever is or is to be. SELECTED PASSAGES ON JUDAISM THE doctrine of the one living God is the very corner- stone of Judaism. With the same it stands or falls. For Judaism is neither Feuerbachian atheism, nor Spinozistic pantheism, nor Voltairean deism, but monotheism manifested in such historical forms and institutions as were created by the genius of Israel. And with the psalmist, Israel will never cease to proclaim: ‘‘My heart and my flesh shout in joy toa living God.” Forever it will teach that there is more wisdom and true philosophy in the words of the inspired Bid eins | heers the, source of lite 7.) 0) bhoursendest forth Thy spirit and they are created,’’ more truth in the very first verse of the Bible: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” than in all God-denying cosmog- onies of olden or modern times. —Israel in America. 1875. ‘There is a God’’—exclaims the Jew—‘‘but He is not like anything one can see or imagine. He is the author and ruler of all things, the friend of every creature, the Father of all souls. He wills our absolute righteousness and He must be obeyed. He wills our highest good and must be thor- oughly trusted. In the deepest of sorrows, in the worst degradation of sin, He will never leave us or forsake us. We have nothing to do but to love Him with all our hearts, and minds, and strength. If we wish to please Him best, we shall love our neighbor as ourselves and walk in obedience to His moral laws. We have no fears and no restless anxieties to lift the veil of the world unseen and the veil of time to come. 241 242 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL In His hands are the issues of life and death, and though He slay us, yet we will trust in Him.”’ —Judaism and Other Religions. A Comparison. 1883(?) Our God is one and undivided, and He does not share His glory with any other being. He is the highest wisdom, the highest justice, the highest love. And this God, is He without a son? Verily, He has a son; His son is Man, created in the image of God, and God is his Father. And this son of God is endowed with a ray of God’s spirit; is endowed with a mind that elevates him far above all other creatures in this visible world; is endowed with a freedom of will in all his moral doings, that makes him responsible for his acts; is endowed with a power to overcome all evil inclinations, that makes it possible for him to gain the laurels of victory in life’s holy battle. —The Doctrines of Judaism in Juxtaposition to Those of Christianty. 1866. Jewish theology has no definitions of God, and it needs none. The very names which custom or piety have sanc- tioned are no part of that Being Himself in whom the souls of men can seek and find their everlasting home. What- ever may have been the historical, social, political conditions of Israel in its earliest discipline, anthropomorphic ideas of God have been either totally banished or reduced to the very smallest possible dimensions. Nothing in heaven above, or on earth beneath, or in the invisible world supposed to lie hidden beneath the canopy of the deep, was ever permitted to be used as a symbol or emblem of the Eternal. Not the noblest man who ever adorned humanity, nor the most spotless spirits who—to use an expression of a prophetical oration—surround the throne of glory, could ever be a true SELECTED WRITINGS 243 image of the majesty of Him whom “the very heaven of heavens cannot contain,’ and who yet makes His home in the hearts of the lowly. —Judaism and Other Religions. A Comparison. 1883(?) The sources of universal religious truths are: Nature about us—the universe; Nature within us—the life of the spirit and the history of mankind. The sources of specifi- cally Jewish principles are the history of Judaism and its confessors. —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1859. Thus the Jews lived in Europe, thus they suffered and died. And yet they live. The swift tide of time swept by the Jew: the mighty Roman Empire fell, barbarian king- doms were established, cities were built and cathedrals erected, so-called chivalry flourished, and the schoolmen babbled—they all disappeared like the apparitions in a camera obscura, and the Jew remained. And he remains to this day. And he will remain for coming centuries. Even if the cohesive powers of race should not be strong enough to give him continual life, the quickening power of his divine religion will be for him a spring of life from which he will draw eternal vigor and eternal youth. —English and German Jews in the Middle Ages. 1879. It would indeed be hasty to condemn all these ceremonies as idle, or to look upon the regard in which they are held as superstitious. The time is approaching in which, still more so than at present, these ceremonies may be safely dispensed with, and in which the distinctive outer forms may be dis- continued without the least risk to the faith which the cere- monies were designed to protect. But till that day comes, we, as faithful Israelites, must stand by our own people, 244 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL without evasion and without hesitancy, and both by word and deed each one of us should own thankfully, if not proudly, our high descent and our sublime creed. Notwithstanding the great regard which is deservedly due to Jewish ceremonial life, yet any one among our people who possesses any knowledge and understanding of the matter must confess that, however valuable and necessary the ceremonies may have been, they do not stand, and never did stand, on the same footing as the fazth of Israel. This alone is essential, this alone is permanently sacred. All the rest 1s expected to perish, or to endure in exact relation to its moral value. And thus, in former ages as in the present, our teachers were unanimous in distinguishing between the essential and the accidental in Judaism, between the funda- mental and abiding elements of our religion and the changing and transient ceremonies of the same. When we now lend word to the grand hope that the time will come in which Judaism will be the religion of the world, you will understand that this means the glad adoption by the world of the essen- tial and eternal elements of our religion, and only of these essential elements. | —The Eternal and the Transient Elements in Judaism. 1883. A familiarity with [Jewish history] produces a greater love and a higher degree of esteem for our Judaism. Per- ceiving such a long array of noble men and women, learning of so many grand and consequential acts done by our fore- fathers, hearing how by them culture was preserved in the world amidst the reign of barbarity and of spiritual darkness, how they furnished examples of endurance, of faithfulness, of living and dying for a higher idea, etc.—learning all this, it is but natural that a justified sentiment of pride should be implanted into our hearts and that such a sentiment should SELECTED WRITINGS 245 become a powerful incentive for us to try to become the worthy sons of worthy sires. —The Study of Jewish History. 1878. The Jews are a nation, united by a common origin. ‘This is an established fact. The few non-Jewish elements which in the course of the last fifteen hundred years have entered Israel have been completely absorbed and assimilated. They who have come to us from without have been Jews only in the religious and not in the ethnological sense, but through inter- marriage with us their descendants have become part and parcel of Israel—Jews in the complete sense of the word. An analogous case is that of the foreigner naturalized in Germany who becomes a citizen of the German state but who is not, racially speaking, a German. The German who becomes a citizen of France remains a German as to blood, but is no longer a German as to his political affiliation. Several generations later, however, his descendants, through miscegenation, have ceased to belong to the ancestral race, and are accepted as full members of the adopted nation. (Some centuries must still elapse before it will be correct to speak of an Americanrace. Thestream of immigration must first dwindle to insignificance, and the density of the popula- tion must increase very considerably, before an American nation can begin to develop. ‘Today there exists only the American people, composed of members of various races and nations living side by side, but among whom the process of mutual interpenetration has scarcely begun.) The Jews constitute a nation of purer blood and more ancient than the German, French, Italian, English, or simi- lar nations, these having only come into existence during the last fifteen hundred years through the mingling of various races. —Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1869. 246 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL The Chasidim in Galicia and Moldavia, and others of our blood in distant Arabia and neighboring regions who have been untouched by modern culture—are they our coreligion- ists in the true sense of the word? ‘There are thousands of enlightened non-Jews in Germany, England, France, Amer- ica, whom we have a better right to call our coreligionists than those mystics in the Carpathians and those poor Jews on the shores of the Red Sea who are still sunk in spiritual darkness and superstition. Nevertheless, we feel our- selves drawn to them; we feel in our hearts they are our brothers. It can scarcely be said that it is the bond of reli- gion which unites us—it is the racial bond, the bond of kin- ship, the bond which even the Jewish apostate does not will- ingly loosen. It is Israel to whom they and we belong, and not Judaism—neither Judaism as we conceive it and which they repudiate as heresy, nor Judaism as they conceive and practice it and which to our minds is full of error and obso- lete dogmas. At most we are willing to admit that among these scattered sections of dispersed Israel a kernel of Juda- ism lies deeply buried which shall one day sprout forth out of mud and rubbish, throw off its wrappings of delusion and error, and unfold in radiant splendor. Under present con- ditions, however, these Jews are indisputably of our race, but can only be considered our ‘‘coreligionists” if we use the term in an extraordinarily broad sense. —Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1860. Let us be united as brethren who in their large majority are as yet of the same race. Let us be united in the idea that we have been charged with the same mission, viz., to be the bearers and preservers of the monotheistic belief, the guardians and practical adherents of the purest ethics, the precursors of the messianic times, when Judaism will have SELECTED WRITINGS 247 ceased to be a racial religion and will have become a universal religion—quite in accordance with the grand visions of our prophets. —On Authority in Judaism. 1890. It is a very severe trial which American Judaism has to stand. The raging storms of persecution in the Dark Ages did not succeed in inducing the wanderer Israel to lay aside his garments of a separate existence. Now it remains to be seen whether the sun of liberty under whose rays we now live is powerful enough to cause the wanderer to cast off his Judaism and to be absorbed (at least a thousand years too early) by non-Jewish nations and creeds. —Israelin America. 1875. For the present we wish to preserve our Jewish distinc- tiveness; we will seek ever more and more to purify and clar- ify religious life and thought within the limits of our own nationality, and will take only a very small part in the religious activity of the non-Jewish world. Indirectly, however, through the silent, innate power of divine Judaism, through the writings of inspired leaders in Israel, yes, even through the mere fact of our existence, we shall exert an influence upon the religious development of the world; not indeed of the kind which is easily discerned by the super- ficial observer, yet which will be vast and immeasurable. —Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1869. There are many persons in these Western lands of culture who have become enlightened or who remain so without associating themselves with Jewish congregations, and who work independently for the enlightenment of their fellow- men. But individuals are mortal, and only institutions 248 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL live through the centuries. Let us preserve Judaism and its congregations. —Vom jiidischen Schulverein in Chicago. 1877. A friend acknowledged to me recently that he was a con- fessor of the “religion of no religion.”” The expression is less dangerous than it appears. At all events, in the mouth of the one who used it in a letter to me, and who has been endowed by nature with a deeply religious spirit, it is no more than a striking phrase. What my friend was referring to was merely the new “religion of humanity.” But he and others of his way of thinking do not seem to have con- sidered that our Judaism is very emphatically a “‘religion of humanity”; that, in Judaism, they would destroy a vessel which has proved entirely capable of holding and protecting the content of the “religion of humanity”; that many of the characteristics of present-day Judaism which do not appeal to them personally are not essential but merely accidental; that the new vessel which they wish to create for ethical and humanitarian thought may in the end prove untrustworthy; further, that the danger exists that the descendants of the second and third generation of those who today fall away from Israel and Judaism may join non- Jewish historical churches. —Wege und Ziele neuester jiidischer Geschichte. 1878. You, my dear coreligionists, may learn from the shining example of Adolphe Crémieux that one can be a warm- hearted, active Israelite besides being a cosmopolitan. Your sympathies certainly may be, certainly shall be, with the world. Your love is due to the whole human race. In the words of the old Roman you should say, I am a man, and nothing whatsoever that is human shall be foreign to me. SELECTED WRITINGS 249 But in accepting this noble sentiment as a motto and guide for your life, you are not prevented from adding also, I am an Israelite, and whatever concerns Israel shall not remain foreign to me. Be Israelites, then, not in name merely, but in thoughts and words and actions. Learn from Adolphe Crémieux that the highest cosmopolitanism, the greatest liberalism, the truest humanitarianism can be united with sincere Israel- itism, and that one does not necessarily exclude the other. And be not deceived and led upon false paths by the glitter- ing word “‘cosmopolitanism.’’ With the best of intentions, you cannot benefit the whole cosmos, you cannot serve all the world. You can only select a very small segment of the © universal mankind for whom and amongst whom you can labor. Adolphe Crémieux. 1880. Wilhelm von Humboldt was the famous brother of the famous Alexander von Humboldt and the intimate friend of Schiller and of Goethe. He was one of the finest minds in Germany in his time, a man of the highest literary culture, standing in the front rank of those whom we might call the humanists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Of him it is reported that once he said his hour of departing from this world would be serene and happy if only a friend would read to him in his dying hour a few passages from the Iliad, even some of the dryest ones, some of the most prosy ones, as, for instance, the catalogue of the ships which went from Hellas to Troy, and the like. To many Jews—provided they are sufficiently familiar with the language of the Hebrew Bible, and provided, fur- thermore, that a Jewish national consciousness is more or less alive within them—the books of the Torah are of such 250 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL heart-elevating and soul-inspiring character as the J/zad and the Odyssey were to Wilhelm von Humboldt, and many of our idealistic Jewish brethren say, in a similar spirit to that of von Humboldt, ‘‘Only read to me in my last hour some verses from the Torah, no matter which verses you select, and I will depart hence with more peace and more serenity.” —Concerning the Readings from the Torah in Our Synagogues. IQO4. ON REFORM JUDAISM “THE Bible is not the source of Judaism!” “It isnot? Well, that is heresy, indeed.” ‘Softly, my orthodox friend. We say the Bible is not the source of Judaism, but we consider it a product of Juda- ism, and we concede, without reservation, its most splendid and holiest product. But Judaism is older than the Bible. Judaism originated at the moment when God breathed into the first man the breath of life. For the kernel of Judaism 1s natural religion in the soul of man.” —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. The only dogma which we consider binding upon all our members is: Absolute freedom of faith and of conscience for all. —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. Every Israelite has the right and the duty himself to search the sources of religious truth with the aid of his God- given intellect. For truth is not inculcated in us by others; the human spirit is not penetrated from without, rather from within outward shines the light of divine truth. —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1859. SELECTED WRITINGS 251 As long as the prophets held sway in Israel, and the spirit of God was the living and shaping influence in the life of the people, and not the authority of the written law, so long it was possible for old gradually to give way to new. The withered coverings fell from the buds on the tree of religion, and the blossoms unfolded at the right time. It was other- wise after the closing of the canon. Then there were ‘‘ Holy Scriptures,” to which one must hold fast. In a short time, they became fixed and inflexible. Writings of the most varied character, even such as did not belong together, or which even contradicted each other, and which stood side by side only through the accident of their collection in one book—all were preserved, commented upon, amplified, and provided material for discussion and fine-spun arguments withoutend.... The time for Talmudic casuistry is over. One section of Judaism, fully conscious of the significance of what it was doing, has passed out of the period of Talmudic inflexi- bility, and has entered unmistakably upon a new historical period. It behooves us now to indue the time afresh with the spirit of life, of freedom, and of truth, according to the prophetic ideals of old. —Beutrdage zum Verstaindnisse der biblischen Ehegesetze. 1872. In the course of time the ceremonies, usages and customs of our forefathers have become, so to speak, petrified, while the great rational doctrines of Judaism have been buried beneath the dust of centuries. In the place of dead fossils we must again have a living organism and instead of a dust- covered jewel we must be able to point to a brilliant and shin- ing one. ... Judaism is very little known amongst our Christian fellow-citizens, and even educated men have very crude notions about it. They must learn that Judaism is not 252 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL the religion of Palestine, not the religion of the ante-Christian era, but the religion of all the world, all time, a// mankind. They must learn that Judaism is the reflection of human rea- son and human conscience as they reveal themselves in the historical development and actual state of the Jewish people. —Extract from a Letter. Jewish Times. 1869. Is Judaism destined to become a universal religion or must it remain forever a national religion, retaining its Palestinian character and its Palestinian forms and cere- monies, even in chuz la-arez (outside the Land), even in Europe and America? .. . Is it, as Kant has said, merely ‘“‘a statutory religion,’ an aggregation of laws, fixed and immutable as the laws of the Medes and the Persians, to whose authority one must blindly subject himself? Or is it a system of religious principles and truths which one freely accepts, and which, like a healthy plant, puts forth customs and institutions and forms in accordance with changes of time and place and circumstance? Shall we continue “in behalf of the living, to inquire of those who are dead,” as the prophet has expressed it, or shall we turn to better coun- sellors ? ——Rede, gehalten am 25. Jahrestag der Griindung der Sinai- gemeinde in Chicago. 1886. In order to strike root and be widely effective in time and space, an act of reform must be justified not only in itself but historically also. For this reason it is necessary to explore the past of Judaism thoroughly, to understand it as clearly as possible, and to recognize which of its elements still retain their life-giving power before we can hope to accomplish anything of lasting value in the present and future. —Wege und Ziele neuester jiidischer Geschichte. 1878. SELECTED WRITINGS 253 Hebrew in the synagogue is a tie which unites all Israel. There are stronger ties, to be sure; nevertheless, this too is not without importance. There is, however, another argument for the retention of Hebrew. It is the ‘holy tongue,” the language spoken by our God-inspired singers and prophets, and its sound makes a deep impression on the soul of every Jew—elevating, purifying, awakening rever- ence. It provides an element of mystery in the service which we would not willingly dispense with. Mystery within proper limits—we do not say mysticism—has its place in the spiritual life of man, more especially in the serv- ice which we dedicate to an incomprehensible God. Is not the soul itself strange and mysterious, full of unknown and inscrutable depths ? ? —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. We must retain our connection with our conservative brethren. We must not utterly cast aside all the great tra- ditions of our past, nor consent to mow down ruthlessly everything that is characteristically Jewish. The golden kingdom of the future, the kingdom of light and of truth, will be established nevertheless. Only let us continue to work to the utmost of our power on the build- ing of the temple of humanity—and for the present we can do this most effectively in our capacity as Israelites—and God will bless our labor and bring about its glorious consum- mation. Allmiachtiger! Vom Himmel schauw’ Den Tempel baw’ Worin Dich alle Zungen preisen, Dich alle Volker Vater heissen! —Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- hduser Pforten der Gerechtigkeit? 1876. 254 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL I am in favor of reforms within Israel but not of the abandonment of Israel. I do not wish Israel to be absorbed —not yet—by humanity as a whole. It is still one or two thousand years too early for that. —Correspondenz. Jewish Times. 1869. ON THE SYNOD QUESTION THE word synod signifies an organization which deter- mines by majority vote what is right in matters of religion and the church, and what is not. . . . Against such a synod I solemnly protest, in the name of the American spirit, and particularly in the name of the Jewish religion. . . . Not majority and not authority, but individuality is our watch- word! Religion and legalism are not only not identical—on the contrary, they are almost opposed to each other. You ask me now, if I do not recognize at all the conception of law and conformity tolaw. But can you think for a moment that I would speak in behalf of lawlessness, of mere arbitrary self-indulgence? Certainly there are laws—moral laws, religious laws—and these laws issue from the very highest authority, from God Himself. But let no ecclesiastic, by virtue of his clerical office, nor any priestly council by virtue of its self-assumed ecclesiasti- cal authority, dictate to me what the divine will is, what religion and morality demand of me. If I obey this or that law, I do so freely, after having given my inward consent to that which is imposed upon me from without, and in the last analysis, my obedience rests upon my individual will. —Sind Sie fiir oder gegen eine Synode? 1881. SELECTED WRITINGS 255 We find it difficult to be grateful even for resolutions “favorable to Reform” passed by rabbinical synods, so far as these resolutions have reference to individual conduct. We do not wish to be ‘‘permitted”’ anything, no, not even by the most enlightened hierarchy, nor do we wish a new dialectic and casuistry to assume authority over us in our practical affairs. The Middle Ages are dead, and the present demands new ways. —Review of ‘‘ Die jiidischen Speisegesetze.”” 1881. What was it Heine said? ‘‘Wenn ich die Sache mir recht bedenk’, so brauchen wir gar keinen Kaiser.” It is said that the synod can aid in the process of religious devel- opment. But it can also obstruct. We do not need its aid, we do not wish its obstruction. We say to the bee, “‘I crave neither your honey nor your sting.” —Ueber Proselytenaufnahme. 1886. As to a formulated creed, is there really a pressing neces- sity for having one? Must we have one? What for? Many kinds of flowers bloom in God’s garden, and many kinds of trees grow in God’s orchard. The best way is, to leave metaphysics, speculative theology, 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 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? ‘‘Es muss auch solche Kéauze geben.” Let them write to their hearts’ content ‘philosophical’ essays and metaphysical books; let them, if they are inclined to do so, publish catechisms and teach 256 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 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 unwilling to accept them, and do not ask a synod or a similar hierarchical 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. —Thoughts Concerning Some Jewish Questions of the Day. 1904. ON ZIONISM THAT which unifies the widely scattered Jews is mainly and in the first place their racial, or—let us not hesitate to use the word—their national affinity. It shall not be denied that the religion of Israel, too, is, in a measure, a unifying element amidst our people in the Golah. But the religion has this potency of binding together all Israel into one cor- porate body only by its being the religion of the Jewish nation. First comes the Jewish nation, and then, as one of the characteristics of this nation, comes the Jewish religion. (We purposely use in this connection the term ‘‘ Jewish religion’’ in preference to the term “‘ Judaism.’”’ The word ‘‘Judaism”’ comprehends far more than the words ‘‘ Jewish religion.”) Without a distinct Jewish nation, there is not a Jewish religion—at least not a Jewish church. The Jewish religion is a national religion. True, there are some universal basic elements in the Jew- ish religion which it shares with a few other religions and SELECTED WRITINGS 257 which every Jew hopes will finally enter into the religions of all nations of the earth and will be acknowledged therein as eternally true. But aside from these few dogmatical and ethical fundamental principles, the Jewish religion (or rather the Jewish church) consists of institutions, rituals, festivals, ceremonies, etc.—we must not forget also to mention here the Jewish calendar—which are not of a universal, but are, and will remain, of a Jewish national character. Another remark I must insert here, in order to protect myself against a wilful perversion or unconscious mis- understanding of my thought. I desire to have the words “nation,” ‘‘nationality,”’ used here to be understood in their ethnological, and not in their political, sense. We cannot enter here into a more lengthy exposition of the thesis that the Jews are a nation and not merely a reli- gious community. For thinking readers a lengthier demon- stration is not necessary at all. And evento mere superficial observers it is almost self-evident that Israel is a nation, a branch of the Semitic race, and even such superficial observers will concur in what the Bible, what ethnology, Volkerpsychologie, history, the public opinion of all the world, the Halachah of the Jews, the legislation of the various non-Jewish nations, etc., teach us, viz.: that Israel is a nation by itself. Politically, we ceased to be a nation at the time when Titus conquered Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish commonwealth; ethnologically, Israel remained in existence as a separate nation, differentiated from other nations. Politically, we belong to that nation under whose territory we happen to live; ethnologically, we are by our- selves. Thus Magyars are ethnologically a nation by them- selves, while politically they are citizens of the Austro- Hungarian Empire. Thus the Poles in Upper Silesia and in the province of Posen belong ethnologically to the great 258 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Polish nation, while politically they are Germans. Thus the Germans in the Baltic provinces and the Finns in Finland are ethnologically to be counted as members of the German and Finnish nationalities respectively, while politically they are subjects of the Russian Czar. Similarly the Jews, wherever they live, are members of one and the same nationality, members of the Jewish nation. Now as regards the relation of the Jew to his fellow- Jews, to the members of his own nationality, it is natural that he feels himself more closely drawn to people who belong to the same race or nationality than to people more distant from him. This is so in consequence of a certain psycho- logical law which governs all mankind. Let us then continue to maintain and foster this senti- ment of relationship between Jew and Jew. Wherever Jews, as such, are oppressed or persecuted, let us, in so far as possible, lend them our sympathy—not merely by empty words and hollow phrases, but by efficacious steps in their behalf, by actual endeavors to open before them the ways of deliverance from tyranny and fanaticism, and the paths leading to a life fit for human fellow-beings, to mental and moral uplifting. Caused by such deep-rooted sympathy with several millions of our persecuted and suffering Jewish brethren-in-race, the Zionistic movement has sprung up, and by this time it has become a mighty power in the world. It has already proven, in various ways, a highly beneficial power, and it is confidently hoped that in coming years it will be acknowledged still more as such by all impartial judges. It will bring forth great beneficial results—directly for our Jewish brethren in the lands of oppression, indirectly for the Jews everywhere and for mankind at large. The Zionistic movement must especially find a loud echo in the hearts of those among us who do not desire a speedy SELECTED WRITINGS 250 extinction of the Jewish nation from amidst the nations of the world, but who believe and hope that Israel will continue to have a separate and distinct existence. We do not charge all the opponents of Zionism with con- sciously aiming at and working for the disappearance of Israel from the world. But this disappearance will become a sad fact, in case the Zionistic movement should, God for- bid! turn out to be a failure. What is the gospel preached by the anti-Zionistic leaders of the masses? ‘‘ Assimila- tion!’ But assimilation leads to amalgamation, and amal- gamation leads to becoming absorbed, and becoming absorbed leads to becoming extinct, to total annihilation of Israel. We have no quarrel with those individuals who honestly think that mankind would best be served by Israel committing a national suicide. But there are still millions who differ; there are still millions who are not ready, or willing, to ‘‘assimilate.”” Among them, the majority are sufferers—sufferers from hunger and cold and _ sickness, from despotic persecutions, from degradation, from being hunted from place to place, from being excluded from all opportunities to live as human beings. For their sake we join the ranks of the Zionists. —The Jew as Politician. 1899. It is the deepest compassion with the indescribable sufferings of hundreds of thousands of my Jewish brethren in various parts of the world, which moves me. I see thou- sands and tens of thousands of Jewish families driven from their homes, deprived of the means for making a bare liveli- hood, derided, slandered, spit at, treated as outcasts, de- spised as people said to be lacking in the sense of duty, of patriotism, of honor, the schools closed to their children, the avenues to agriculture, to industrial pursuits, etc., 260 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL barred before them, and so forth; and this tragedy, a greater and a sadder one than any other I can conceive, this tragedy should not fill my heart with the sentiment of woe and my soul with sympathy ? It is my conviction that no other means of aid will be so effective as the establishment of Jewish colonies in Palestine and the adjacent provinces of the Turkish Empire will be. I would have to overstep largely the lines of the space which I can ask for this paper in your journal, should I venture to write more at length and to give my reasons more fully why I consider all other means which have been tried and pro- posed as insufficient and inefficient and why I regard coloni- zation in Palestine as the very best means, yea, as the only means of bringing radical salvation to my suffering brethren. It is my conviction that anti-Semitism is of an immortal character and will never cease to trouble us as long as for Israel or a considerable part of Israel no national home has been found. It is my conviction that that which some Jewish doc- trinaires call “the mission of the Jews”’ can be fulfilled just as well, and even much better, if for the Jewish nation— hold on! Do not shake your head at this term ‘‘ Jewish nation’’; I use it as an equivalent for ‘‘ Jewish race’”’—yes, that the mission of Israel can be better served if a center for the dispersed nation exists in their old Palestinian home. It is my conviction that Palestine can become as popu- lous, as flourishing, and as good a country for agricultural purposes, as it was in the time of Josephus, if the land is properly irrigated, if, under the direction of good engineers and others, roads in all directions are built in the country, and so forth, and that within ten years 50,000 farms, yea more, could exist and flourish in the old Promised Land, and SELECTED WRITINGS 261 that Jewish farmers could live there peacefully, undisturbed, happily. A report of the United States Consul in Jerusalem, recently published by the government, supports this, my hope and belief. It is my conviction that, if at a future time the large majority of the inhabitants of the land should consist of Jews, the people in this land could just as well and even with more justification be entrusted with the right of self- government as the Greeks, the Servians, the Montenegrins, the Roumanians, and the Bulgarians have been. The Jews hailing from Europe would not unlearn their European man- ners of thinking and living and would not adopt Asiatic semi-culture; they would rather carry Europe into Asia, they would Europeanize Palestine and the countries sur- rounding it. The Jewish republic of the future would be governed by the principles of Jeffersonian democracy. To each one the constitutional right would be granted to serve God according to the dictates of his conscience: the orthodox Jew could live, in so far as circumstances would allow it, agreeably to the ordinances of orthodox Judaism, the so- called progressive Jew could live in accordance with his religious views, and the orthodox would be prevented by the constitution of the republic from hindering him in this; the Christian and the Mohammedan would have the same civic and political rights as the Jew, and especially the right to exercise unmolestedly their religious laws and confess unmolestedly their religious doctrines. The Mosque of Omar and the Cave of Machpelah would be left in the possession of the Mohammedans, and “‘the sacred sepulcher”’ would remain entrusted to the Christians. Eventual out- bursts of fanaticism would be suppressed by the executive power which will then exist in the model Jewish republic of the future. 262 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL “But these are dreams—Phantaste-bilder!”? Be it so! Let us, then, leave these Zukunftstrdume to another genera- tion, and let us now work for that which is attainable at present. —An Open Letter on Zionism. 1897. The people of ancient puny Hellas had their mission too. And how grandly did they realize it! From them went forth a mighty stream of aesthetic culture, of better methods in systematized science, of true philosophical thinking—not despite, but because of their living together in their own country, in little Greece. They could never have contrib- uted so much toward building the temple of true culture among mankind if they had been scattered in the world, especially not if these scattered Athenians had been com- pelled to live among the Scythians and Sarmatians, in poverty and abject misery, suffering from hunger and cold, and had been despised and hated by the barbarians, and if their children had been deprived of the right to visit schools, and been robbed of all other opportunities to rise in the ld. wor —As toa Jewish State. 18099. The Jewish state, as understood by me, will be a state based upon Jeffersonian principles of democracy. The ancient Mosaic theocracy can not be re-established; nor can the Talmudical principles of government find realization in the new Jewish state. Christians and Mohammedans and others will have and will enjoy equal rights with the Jews there, and, the Talmudical laws notwithstanding, the Gen- tiles will be just as much entitled to occupy official positions and to be eligible as legislators in town councils, in provin- cial lawgiving assemblies, etc., as the Jews will be. If, in the course of time, the Jews will form seven-eighths or per- SELECTED WRITINGS 263 haps a still larger part of the population, it is natural and likely that the majority, or perhaps all, of the offices and the seats in legislative bodies will be occupied by Jews. Neither the Mosaic constitution nor the Talmudic constitu- tion can be in force in new Zion. In theory and in practice it will be a modern state. And it will be an ideal state, such as there never was anywhere and at any time. ‘On- wards and upwards to the heights of the prophetic ideals!”’ will be the motto of new Zion. ~ As to the mutual relations of the new Jewish state and Jewish communities scattered throughout the world, I think that such will consist only in reciprocal moral influence. Neither party can claim or ought to claim legal power, ecclesiastical or of any kind, over the other party. But I hope and expect that a newly established Jewish state in Palestine will exercise an influence over the Jews in the Diaspora by awakening in them the spirit of a stronger attachment to Judaism, a deeper, purer, and healthier religious sense, a lifting up of the minds of many from low and vulgar materialism to a higher and nobler Jewish idealism. On the other side, I hope and expect that the Jews in the new state will receive from their brethren who remain in Europe and in America much aid and much furtherance in Western culture, in the ways of cultivating methodically the fields of science, in the applying of new discoveries in mechanics, chemistry, electricity, and other fields, etc. And so I conclude with part of a stanza in a well-known Hebrew hymn: Ivay ANANSN "2 (wad lap Msva !yInh ‘Shake off the dust of the centuries, O my people! Put on the garments of thy glory, O my people!”’ —As to a Jewish State. 1899. 264 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL There is no special Jewish message to be delivered by us to the nations of the world. Universal high ideals they are, recognized as such among the cultured nations every- where, for whose realization in the world we have to work in conjunction with the better classes of other nations. Stimulating is for us the thought that we Jews have to occupy a place in the front rank of those who build the Grand Temple of Humanity; that we, the members of the Jewish race, have to bear proudly, courageously, faith- fully, the flag of Justice, Love, Incorruptibility, Peace, Truthfulness, Freedom for every honest conviction, Tolera- tion for every doctrine subjectively true for him who believes in it, and so forth. In the endeavors, harmoniously undertaken with others for building up the Temple of the Future, the work of a united Israel, of an Israel having a political center, will be more efficacious than any work would prove to be which would be done by thousands and tens of thousands having no such center. Israel’s ‘‘Mission”’ can be better fulfilled by a Jewish Musterstaat than by a million disconnected individuals. —Jewish “Weltanschauung,” Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Conceptions. 10902. I look forward into the future, and see my people rising— rising from darkness to light, from oppression to freedom, from lowliness to a high eminence. Israel is not lost. ‘““Barkai! It dawns in the East!” as the young priests exclaimed in the old Jerusalem temple, when they noticed the first rays of the rising morning sun, the early dawn of the coming day. —Jewish “Weltanschauung,”’ Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Conceptions. 1902. SELECTED WRITINGS 265 ON CHRISTIANITY, THE RELATION OF JUDAISM AND THE JEWS TO THE WORLD, ETC. THE religion of Christ is essentially identical with the religion of Israel. Paradoxical as it may sound, it is never- theless true that the Jews are the true Christians, and that the so-called Christians are not Christians, inasmuch as they profess a number of doctrines totally foreign to the religion of Christ. They confess a religion whose real founder is not Jesus of Nazareth, but St. Paul, and whose expounders are St. Augustine, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and others. By this religion they are led to a belief zm Christ, but are estranged from the belief of Christ. For in the belief of Christ no incarnate God, no mother of God, no dark fatalism, no hereditary sin had any place. —A Panorama of Jewish History. 1874. Neither in fact nor in law has this assertion [‘‘this is a Christian country, and ours is a Christian civilization’’| the least foundation. On the contrary, this is not a Christian country, and ours is not a Christian civilization. If the expressions “‘Christian country” and “Christian civiliza- tion”’ shall not be considered meaningless, hollow phrases, but if a sense is to be connected therewith, then these expressions have no other meaning than the following, viz.: The distinguishing features of Christianity characterize all our public and private life, and the superstructure of our polity is based upon the foundation of this peculiar Chris- tianity. What are the distinguishing features of Christian- ity said to give character to our country and our civiliza- tion? I suppose that our protesting fellow-citizens will not claim that Christian dogmatism is thus all-prevailing. For this would be such a flagrant contradiction of the existing state of things that even the dimmest eye would perceive 266 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL it as such. But they will probably insist that Christian ethics are at the bottom of all modern civilization, and that their spirit permeates all the public life of our country and all our American institutions. Let us examine this assertion for a moment. The distinguishing features of Christian ethics, whereby the same differ from other ethical systems, are love, meekness, submission even to wrong (Matt. 5:38—a1; Luke 6:20; I Cor. 6:7). As sublime and idealistic as this principle of “love” and of submission to wrong appears upon first sight, it is nevertheless a fact that in our sub- lunary world and in real life it is not carried out, and can- not be carried out, and ought not to be carried out. Not submission to wrong, not meek suffering of injustice, but standing up manfully for one’s rights, and battling for the same, if necessary, with all energy and all courage, resisting and resenting wrong with all might and means, that is it, and not Christian “‘love” that characterizes our modern civilization. The modern world regards it even as a moral duty for every man thus to battle for his rights; for, in standing up for his own rights the individual assists in better securing for human society right and Justice 7m abstracto. Instead of the Christian doctrine, “Suffer injustice,’ the modern un-Christian or perhaps anti-Christian civilization teaches: “Do not suffer injustice; resent it; and if any one smites you upon your right cheek, do not turn to him your left cheek, but strike back, have him properly punished, and help thereby to maintain the virtues of justice and manhood in the world.” Such are the un-Christian ideas permeating the politics of all Christendom, and the codes of all modern states; and in no state of the Union, nor anywhere else, is there a law-book which is characterized by Christian ‘‘love,” and which therefore could be designated Christian. SELECTED WRITINGS 267 A “Christian state” means not only a state whose insti- tutions and laws are permeated by the spirit of Christian ethics, but it means a state wherein the Christian church or a branch of it is acknowledged as the ruling state church. Thus the papal states and the kingdom of Naples were “Christian states” as long as they existed, because they recognized only one branch of the Christian religion and the Christian church, viz., the Roman Catholic church, and Jews, Protestants, etc., could live there by sufferance only. Thus Mecklenburg and Norway until a few years ago were Christian states, because their constitutions declared the Protestant religion as the state religion, and non-Protestants were denied equal rights with Protestants. Thus Maryland forty or fifty years ago was still a Christian state, because the constitution then in force contained the clause that only believers in the Trinity were eligible to state offices. Thus North Carolina was not long since still a Christian state, because her constitution insisted that state offices could be filled only by confessors of the Christian religion. Thus England was a Christian state before she emancipated the Catholics in 1829 and opened the gates of Parliament to the Jews in 1858; and of her it may even today be said that she is a Christian state, because there is an estab- lished state church there to the support of which Jews, dissenters, and Catholics are forced to pay their contribu- tions, and because, if I am not mistaken, some high clerical dignitaries of the state church are ex officio members of the upper house of Parliament. But happily our Union, and the states in our Union, have now all refuted the obsolete Christian-state idea. They have broken the chains which the Christian state riveted. God be praised that church and state are separated in our country! God be praised that the constitution of the United 268 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL States and of the single states are now all freed from this danger-breeding idea! God be praised, that they are ‘“‘atheistical,’’ as they have been accused of being by some over-zealous, dark warriors who desire to overcome the nine- teenth century and to restore again the fourteenth century! God be praised that this has been accomplished in our Union; and may our constitutions and state institutions remain ‘“‘atheistical”? just as our manufactories, our banks, and our commerce are. —The Bible in the Schools. 1875. We live, God be praised, in the freest land in the world, in the United States of America, where church and state are entirely separated, and where everyone can follow the dictates of his own conscience and the precepts of his own religion, so long as he does not thereby infringe upon the rights and privileges of his neighbor. Let now the Jew who desires to keep the Sabbath in his own way have the undis- turbed right to keep it when and how he wishes. And let no unholy or sacrilegious hand attempt to attack the sanctu- ary of American freedom. May the dark day never come on which it shall be decreed by any legislative or executive power in America that one certain day for keeping the Sab- bath and one certain manner of keeping it be forced upon unwilling minorities. The Sabbath is a grand and sacred institution—we all agree to that. But its celebration must be left to the individual; this belongs to the category of his eternal and inalienable rights. American liberty, I venture to say, is a still grander and a still holier institution, and the maintenance of it is entrusted to each and every American citizen. We praise the weekly Sabbath, we are sure that from it immense blessings will spring forth—blessings for the mental and for the moral life of individuals, of families, SELECTED WRITINGS 269 and of society at large. But what the laws and statutes enacted or to be enacted by the legislative authorities of our American states can do for the Sabbath is this and only this: —They can protect and ought to protect every congre- gation asembled on their Sabbath for divine worship—in a church or a chapel or a synagogue or a mosque or any other place—against being disturbed in their worship; and they can guarantee and ought to guarantee to each person in our land, even the poorest laborer, one day of perfect rest in each week of seven consecutive days. All further Sabbath legislation by the states or the United States is unnecessary and would be un-American. But let us, let all the friends of the great and sacred Sabbath institution trust in the power of public opinion. Relying upon this great power and upon the divine blessings of our Heavenly Father, we can look hopefully towards the future, and can rest assured that the land at all times will have a Sabbath, a genuine Sabbath. —The Sabbath in Judaism. 1803. But shall we then do nothing to clear a path in the world for the principles of Judaism? Shall we send out no mis- sionaries for this purpose? We have neither the right nor the desire to keep the truth for ourselves alone. Yes, we have our missionaries. The chief missionary on whom we rely is the sublimity, the innate power, of our religious teach- ings. The sun of itself breaks through the clouds and dis- solves the mists, no matter how thickly they cover its path. And Judaism will make a path for itself, spite of every giant obstacle which stands in its way. It has already conquered a great part of the civilized world and it will continue to make conquests among humanity. Philosophy and science are on the side of Judaism, missionaries of exceeding impor- 270 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL tance, working for the destruction of heathenism and the establishment and dissemination of our teachings. The printing-press, the telegraph-wire, everything which con- tributes to the banishment of ignorance and the spread of knowledge serves the cause of Judaism. Lessing’s Nathan was a missionary for us. So was David Strauss, Ernst Renan, William C. Channing, Theodore Parker. So were Alexander von Humboldt and John Herschel. So are unpre- judiced teachers of law and history in every institution of learning. So are all those who labor successfully to under- mine the foundations of superstition and heathenism, of darkness and wickedness. ... The triumph of Judaism consists in the ever-widening dominion of its ethical teach- ings and its very few basic religious doctrines—doctrines which are never in the slightest degree inconsistent with logic nor the established facts of science. Let us rejoice that the victory is ever more clearly apparent. Jewish ideas govern the civilized world. —Krittk des christlichen Missionswesens. 1869. ON ETHICS AND RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE, ETC. MAN is weak, and he follows all too frequently the impulses of his heart; he listens all too frequently to the voice of his sensual nature, his lower impulses. But man is also strong, and able to subdue his sinful desires, his sinful will. His feet rest on the ground; his head is free in air. It is for you to decide which of your two natures shall prevail. No ‘‘foreordination”’ from above condemns you to an unworthy life, and no divine “‘grace’”’? empowers you to lead a pure life. For your strength or weakness of body, your illness or health, your wealth or poverty, you are not in most cases SELECTED WRITINGS yw responsible. These are the result of an order of things which you can alter very little if at all; they are circumstances determined from on high. But your honesty or dishonesty, your good or bad character, depend solely upon yourself. In the sphere of the moral life man is free; necessity does not constrain him. This doctrine of the freedom of the will and the capacity of man to master his sinful impulses has been proclaimed at all times throughout the history of Juda- ism. “If thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door; and unto thee is its desire, but thou mayest rule over it,” we read at the very beginning of the Holy Scriptures (Gen. 4:7). “T have set before thee life and death; choose life,” said Moses to his people (Deut. 30:19). ‘‘Freedom is given to man,” teaches the Mishnah (Aboth, 3, 19). ‘‘Everything is determined by God save the fear of God,” are the words of a well-known sentence in the Gemara (Megillah, 25 a). Such is the teaching of the rabbis in every century of our PASEO. wee, It is conceded that our moral life is determined in part by physical laws; that food, climate, and the like act upon body and mind and through these influence our behavior; that training and environment and our position in life play considerable part in the formation of our ideas, and that our ideas again affect our conduct in no uncertain way. And yet, difficult though it may be to draw the line between freedom and necessity, it remains nevertheless true that beyond the line there is a sphere of action which is absolutely free. It is a similar and an equally difficult problem to determine where the boundary lies between physical and mental life. The nervous system forms the point of con- tact; yet the two may be said to merge into one another. Notwithstanding this fact, no one will deny that there is a world of ideas, a life of the spirit, which is entirely dis- 272 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL tinct from the life of the body. For this reason we believe firmly in the doctrine of free will, and we rejoice to think that this doctrine, this cornerstone of all morality, has been one of Israel’s teachings from the very beginning—even at that time when, in Hellas, Prometheus, chained to the rock, was shaking his fist defiantly in the face of Heaven, and hurl- ing angry words at Zeus: ‘Thou too standest under the law, art obedient to the god of necessity, who is thy god and mine.”’ Let us pay reverence to our Judaism, which thus strengthens in us the consciousness of human worth and the foundations of our moral life; let us rejoice that this bright jewel in our religion has maintained its purity spite of the ‘iron destiny” of the old heathenism and the “blind neces- sity’’ of the new; spite of the “‘divine grace”’ taught by the reigning religion of the West, and the “fatalism” incul- cated by the prevailing religion of the East. —Sitiliche und religiose Lebenserneuerung. 1864. In those days [the 1850’s] materialism began to raise its head and thought to take the world by storm. From philo- sophical materialism which denied the existence of God and the soul and recognized matter alone, and which undertook to solve all world-problems on the basis of this conception of the universe, the descent soon began to vulgar material- ism, and every ideal, every noble aspiration, every act of altruism was dragged without distinction through the dust and slime of a mean physical existence. Now it may be entirely possible to unite philosophical materialism in prac- tice with a noble life, with the most idealistic thoughts, yes, even with unselfishness so complete that it amounts to self- sacrifice. But vulgar materialism? An enemy of human- ity, an evil demon out of the depths, against which we must battle with all our strength! —Rede tm Sinat Tempel. 1886. SELECTED WRITINGS oMyihe It is true that no healthy social order can be created, no enduring social and political structure can be erected, with the aid of idealism alone, one-sided and exaggerated idealism. For idealistic aspirations need always to be accompanied by careful consideration of actual conditions. But alas for the people among whom idealism is undervalued, or from whose midst it has entirely vanished! Alas for the age in which this occurs! Impractical dreamers, as you call them, men who think only high and unworldly thoughts, may not achieve the same material success as others who are more practical-minded. Nevertheless, they are the light of the world; they shine by their own light, the reflection of which falls upon wide circles, transfiguring and ennobling. O, how dreary and sad the world would appear were it not for the eS —Liebmann Adler. 1892. Religion is the struggle to rise above the finite, the yearn- ing toward what is higher and mightier. As such, it is inborn in the human heart, a necessity of the soul-life; hence religion will never never vanish from among mankind. —Jiidische Zeit- und Streitfragen. 1878. Nothing on earth is so firmly fixed as not to be subject to the processes of historical development, and so it is with the treasures of religious thought. And if you say: Reli- gious doctrine remains forever the same, religion stands still forever, the opposite opinion is culpable heresy—you will hear the answer resounding from every side, And still it moves. —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. A religious law which is not rooted either in the spiritual or the physical nature of man is binding only so long as it continues to exert a sanctifying influence on head and heart, on character and conduct. _ Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1850. 274 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Men speak of the fanaticism of so-called “believers’’; of the dogmatism of the religious. But there is also a fanati- cism of atheism, a dogmatism of unfaith, and these are as a rule to be found where ignorance and thoughtlessness and stupidity hold sway. The sincere and thorough seeker after truth ismodest. Hesays: There are limits to our knowledge; what lies beyond we do not and cannot know. —Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- hiuser Pforten der Gerechtigkett? 1876. Among the laws of the Torah there are many which, as regards intrinsic value and comprehensiveness, stand far above the decalogue, as for example, the injunction, Ye shall be holy; or, Love thy neighbor as thyself. —Was ist Judenthum? 1887. Results of lasting value are not accomplished by the noisy and violent overthrow of things. Only those move- ments which are deeply rooted in history, and which pene- trate slowly, quietly, steadily, deep into human life are of permanent historic significance. —Abraham Geiger. 1874. Only the tree which sinks its roots deep in the soil of history will produce vigorous branches and splendid blos- soms and give promise for the future. —Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- haiuser Pforten der Gerechtigkeit? 1876. We are gloriously endowed by our Maker, but these endowments are not only glorious ones, but also responsible ones. We have great faculties, but we must develop and guide and impel them. We have passions and inclinations, but we must watch and control them. We observe currents of thought within our minds, but we must sometimes stay SELECTED WRITINGS 276 them, or. change them. We have an intellect, but we must often concentrate it on objects which we wish to compre- hend. We can fix our eyes on the summits of perfection, but we must also try to climb up towards them. —On Self-Improvement. 1880. Seek intercourse with superior minds, and learn from them. Here is a source for enjoyment and happiness which none should neglect. In enjoying the daily companionship of noble and superior minds, we widen not only the horizon of our intellect, we expand also our hearts and ennoble them, and we purify our inclinations and passions and direct them toward good aims. Now don’t interrupt me by saying that it is impos- sible to have daily such excellent company. Do not say that many live retired and isolated, and must forego such pleasures. You can have them, every one of you, if you only wish them. In their books great men talk to you. Do you desire the company of Shakespeare? ‘Take then the volumes yonder, and he will open unto you worlds of imagi- nation and the workings of the human heart. Would you spend an hour with Franklin? ‘There on that shelf you will find a book of his that will enrich you in his practical wis- dom. Or would you soar into higher regions with Goethe and Schiller? Why, they will come unto you, even into your modest dwellings, and will open unto you the golden gates of poetry, and will carry you high up to regions of true bliss and unalloyed enjoyment. —On Self-Improvement. 1880. Friends, I venture to remind you of an old sentence in the Talmud, which says: JD "M81 TAN DIN Wad aby rian. “First learn something positive, and afterwards speculate.”’ And furthermore, I would call your attention 276 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL to the words of Rabbi Eliezer: 7730N 772 OS") Wa. “Keep the boys away from philosophizing!”’ This I would do, and this I might add: Learn, my friends, for in order to build one must have, first, building materials; second, these mate- rials must be good and well tried, able to withstand hail and rain and heat; third, they must be used in their proper place and in the right manner and in good connection with the other parts of the wall into which they are to be put. If you, from your nebulous height scorn to learn this lesson and to heed it, all your building will be but air-castles without foun- dation and all your philosophical constructions and theolog- ical speculations will be—well, what? Swindle! An airy nothing! ’Halomoth! Learn first, my friends! —Interary Miscellanies. 1887. It is one of the great mistakes of our age to exalt talent and learning above virtue and character, and to place intel- lectual culture above moral culture. It is more than a mis- take, it is a crime, to sacrifice moral culture to intellectual culture; to regard education only as a stimulus to learning; to worship talent, and a brilliant mind, and a gift of witty conversation, above rectitude, honesty, truthfulness, sym- pathy with our fellow-men. —On Self-Improvement. 1880. Blessed is the family in whose midst dwells an honored grandfather, or a grandmother rich in years! Blessed is the city and the country where many worthy old people reside! They produce, even if they are entirely inactive, merely by virtue of their presence, wealth of the greatest value. They produce sentiments of piety, of reverence, of respect, of love, in the hearts of the younger members of the family; they produce the same sentiments in the community in which they spend their days. Where they dwell, rude behavior SELECTED WRITINGS 277 and vulgar thinking are banished; thought and conduct are ennobled and purified. —Inebmann Adler. 1892. In all human activity progress is gradual; slowly, though steadily, we advance from an imperfect good to a less imper- fect better. For this reason thinking men will not oppose a good measure because it is not the best it is possible to con- celve. c —Sittenlehre in der Volksschule. 1881. The closer a person is to us, in time, in space, in blood relationship, in profession, the greater our interest is in him. This is entirely natural, and psychologically easily to be explained. If, then, I do an act of practical charity first to a needy relative or a colleague or a fellow-member of an organization one should not immediately conclude that I am without sympathy for the sufferings of other men; and if I appeal in the interest of unfortunate brother- Jews to the more prosperous among our coreligionists it does not imply that the misery of others awakens no sym- pathy in my heart. Necessity demands that we select a small segment out of the great circle of universal humanity, all of whose evils we cannot cure, and direct our charitable efforts towards that. Should means be sufficient, so that we can benefit neighboring segments also, it then becomes our duty to labor for the good of those beyond the limits of our enosen field... . It is entirely proper therefore to refrain from supporting chimerical impossible projects; not to undertake, like Don Quixote, to fight and vanquish every evil in the world, and make all humanity happy. Such a view does not denote illiberality; it merely takes actual conditions wisely into account. : : —Correspondenz. Jewish Times. 1871. 278 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Deep-seated and widespread sentimental aspirations fall more heavily into the scales of a people’s soul-life and give more powerful direction to a people’s movements and actions than thousands of coolly considered reasons of vulgar utility. —As to a Jewish State. 1890. Don’t you know that the “‘majority,”’ in whom so many would trust, is often wrong? that it is often in the service of untruth? that, if you acknowledge its authority, it tyrannizes the minority? There are large fields of human activity where of necessity the majority must rule. In such necessary things, as an old saying is, there must be unity. But—so the very same saying adds—in things not necessary let us have liberty, and in all things love! —Some Questions of the Day. 1890. The world is not governed by theories conceived and proved in the quiet of the study. One must take actual facts into account. —Review of “ Religidse Scheidewdnde.” 1881. God is our Father, is One, and necessarily mankind is One. . . . Love one another, you nations of the earth, and get rid of the notion that one people is destined to be the master, and another people is destined to be the servant. —The Doctrines of Judaism in Juxtaposition to Those of Christianity. 1866. As Israel is simply a part of mankind, so every nation is simply a part of mankind. Patriotism < Internationalism; Nationality < Humanity. —From a draft of a German sermon. 1884. SELECTED WRITINGS 279 Let us never forget that the Old Testament and the New Testament, the Talmudic and the Patristic literature, etc., must be considered as historical documents—highly impor- tant as witnesses to the gradual development of religious and moral ideas, but nevertheless as documents which we would not see in their true light if we considered them as being in all their words and ideas the final blossom and the highest results of the mental and moral life of mankind. The Chris- tian of the nineteenth century and the Jew of the nineteenth century are mentally more enlightened and in certain respects morally higher advanced than the Christians and the Jews of the first and second and third century of the common era, and in many a point our ideas are truer and loftier and purer _ than the corresponding ones of the times of St. John and of Rabbi Akiba, of Tertullian and of Simon ben Yochai. —An Important Ethical Principle. 1808. O glorious golden messianic time! When we think of thee, our eyes shine with more radiant light, our breast expands more proudly. O mighty messianic trumpet call! According to Biblical legend the walls of Jericho fell miracu- lously at the sound of the trumpet; so, likewise, when the great messianic trumpet sounds on that distant day, walls and barriers will again be overthrown, those barriers which separate man from man and brother from brother. —Schofarklange. 1860. ‘Ch <\ \ ano} i aN Veet re at on Met ert ‘ ae ui a pee <% Muy i % ae ipa ; oa A Ny hy \. “) nes / AN Susy Ua uy hy My A ih ‘ , ai vines ve awe Svat Bt ey ban Asa iy a Aus, aie i bey vad iy 1 \ ear :, 2, an anh ee Sima! ee LENA GE ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Intropuctory Note.—This list falls short of completeness by the omission, first, of sermons in manuscript, these being for the most part festival sermons not intended for publication and not used in the pulpit; second, of one or two small pieces in manuscript form evidently written by B. F. for his own amusement, as, for instance, a poem, “Der Herbst,” signed ‘‘Laurentius Biedermeyer, der Jiingere,”’ which is a parody on a poem which had appeared in a weekly journal; third, of a very few printed articles which bear upon personal relations or deal with personal affairs and have no general historical interest; and, fourth (most regrettably), of several articles on Reform Judaism contributed to the Illinois Staatszeitung in 1859, of which no additional information has been obtainable. Doubtless, also, other articles have escaped the notice of the compiler. It is believed, however, that with the exception of the articles in the Staatszeitung, nothing of any con- siderable importance is lacking, and that the list affords a fairly adequate view of the opinions of Bernhard Felsenthal (so far as these were expressed by him in writing), as also of his interests and activities. The arrangement is strictly chronological according to date of publication, with one exception to which attention is called in the proper place. In the case of unpublished manuscripts of addresses, etc., the date used is that of delivery of the address, when known. Books, pamphlets, and reprints separately published are indicated by an asterisk (*) preceding the title. 1855 HEBREW LIBRARIES. Israelite, 1:309, April 6, 1855. On the study of Hebrew literature as an essential part of Jew- ish religious life, and on the difficulty of pursuing such study in America. Suggests that every congregation establish a Hebrew library. (1) On Know-Noruincism. Lawrenceburg (Ind.) Democratic Register, May 18(?), 1855. i 2 283 284 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ANOTHER REPLY TO THE QUESTION: “IS THE TALMUD ANTI-SOCIAL?” Israelite, 2:4-5, July 13, 1855. Follows an article on the subject by M. Mensor (Israelite, 1:388-89). Brings evidence to prove that the spirit of the Tal- mud is ‘‘not the universal human, but the illiberal national spirit.”” The fundamental idea of the Talmud is, however, that of historical development, and it is this which has preserved Judaism. (3) 1856 RATHSEL. Deborah, 1:255, March 21, 1856. Riddle in verse, concerning one who is half Jew, half Christian. (4) On REFORMS IN THE SYNAGOGUE. Israelite, 3:141-42, November 7, 1856. Sets forth emphatically the need for reform of the synagogue service. Advocates revision of the prayers, the use of the ver- nacular, etc. (5) TEKUFOTH—AN OLD SUPERSTITION—ITS REASON—THE ASTROLOGY IN THE TALMUD. Israelite, 3:165, Novem- ber 28, 1856. Finds in Chaldaean astrology the origin of a certain old Jewish superstition connected with the beginning of the seasons. 6) 6 1857 OFFENBARUNGSGLAUBEN UND REFORM. SIND BEIDE ZU VEREINBAREN? Sinai, 2:404-9, February, 1857. Grants the consistency of the Orthodox position on the basis of belief in the doctrine of revelation, and points out the need for as logical a foundation for Reform. ‘Reform has, for thousands of persons, all the force of subjective truth. Has it also been raised, by scientific reasoning, to the plane of objective truth ?” There is a passing reference to synods with denial of their author- ity. Discussion by the editor, David Einhorn, follows the article. (7) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 285 REFORMBEWEGUNGEN IN DEN ISRAELITISCHEN GEMEINDEN AMERIKA’S. Deborah, 2: 237-38, 242-43, 253-54, March eee aL Oy. Unsigned. Describes a congregational meeting in Madison, Indiana, and gives the text in full of an address by “F” which advocated radical reforms in synagogue services; also reports with appreciation of its humorous aspects the lively discussion which followed. ‘The views of various members—A, B, C, X, Y, Z, etc.—are quoted, each representing a typical attitude of the Jews of the time. (8) Aus DEM WESTEN. Sinai, 2:624-26, August, 1857. Unsigned. On Jewish religious conditions in the West (written from Indiana), and on the essentially Reform character of all the ‘‘parties,’’ whatever they may call themselves. (9) 1858 UEBER DAS JUDISCH-RELIGIOSE LEBEN. VERMISCHTE BLATTER. Sinai, 3:1058-62 (I-II), 1093-96 (III-V), 1130-32 (VI), 1154-57 (VII); 4:38-41 (VIII), 73-76 (VIII-IX), 210-13 (X), October, 1858—August, 1850. I. Dre PARTEIEN. Presents a new classification of the Jewish “parties,” as follows: A. The religious B. The irreligious 1. Reformers 1. Deformers 2. Orthodox 2. Creatures of habit or, A. The educated (Wissende) B. The ignorant 1. Reformers 1. Deformers 2. Orthodox 2, Creatures of habit II. Das NEvE Gesetsucu. An enthusiastic review of Ein- horn’s prayer book, Olath Tamid. III. ALTER DES JUDENTHUMS. Quotes the sentence, “Juda- ism is as old as humanity,” adding the corollary, “In its essence, pure Judaism is identical with pure humanity.’’ Shows the 286 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL bearing this has on our understanding of the Bible and of post- Biblical Jewish literature, and on the relation of this literature to the Judaism of the present. ‘Touches on the changeable char- acter of Jewish dogma, the authority of the Mosaic Law, the Talmudic Law, etc. IV. DAs JUDENTHUM UND DER TALMuD. Calls attention to the fact that the Talmud in many places broke the letter of the Biblical law, and declares that the reformers of the present have an equal right to attempt further regeneration of the Jewish cere- monial life. It is vitally important, however, to maintain his- torical continuity, and for this a thorough understanding of the Talmud is necessary. ‘‘ We recognize in the Talmud an historic phenomenon which at the same time concluded one period and became the foundation for another, a phenomenon which we must endeavor to understand fully and clearly if we wish to keep the ground under our feet and rebuild the synagogue on its proper foundations.” V. TALMUDISCHE EXPOSITIONEN DER BIBLISCHEN GESETZE. Opposes the view that Biblical laws must be practiced according to Talmudic interpretation. VI. BIBEL UND WISSENSCHAFT. ‘The Bible is not to be con- sidered a source-book in science or history, but its deep religious significance is not affected by the fact that it is not literally true. ‘We distinguish between the letter and the spirit. We discern throughout the holy Scriptures a profoundly religious and ethical spirit, and this it is which is eternal and divine.” VII. BrseLtkritik. Shows that the contradictions in the Bible, pointed out by Biblical criticism, render the supernatural theory of its origin untenable. VIII. BrstiscHe GeEseTzE. Maintains that many of the Mosaic laws have become obsolete by the passage of time, and offers as a test of validity the principle that only such laws are binding which have their source in the physical or spiritual nature of man, or which have power to influence men religiously. IX. BisiiscHE DocmaTiK. Shows that dogmas are not fixed and absolute in the Bible, and it is unreasonable, therefore, to rest modern beliefs on Biblical authority. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 287 X. RELIGION UND GESETz. Asserts that acts performed solely in obedience to external laws are not truly religious. Emphasis should be placed not on ceremonies but on sincerity of feeling and purity of life. (10) 1859 *KoL Kore BAMIDBAR. UEBER JUDISCHE REFORM. EIN WoRT AN DIE FREUNDE DERSELBEN. Chicago: Charles Hess, 1859. 39pp. 8vo. Appendix, pp. 33-39. Re- printed in No. 277, “The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congregation.” A call to those favoring the Jewish Reform movement to organize a Reform congregation. The Orthodox and Reform standpoints are differentiated, the principles which should guide Reform congregations are stated in the form of theses, and their application in such matters as ritual, festival observance, and religious education, is discussed. The Appendix gives correspond- ence between Samuel Adler and a committee of the Jiidischer Re- formverein concerning the advisability of establishing a Reform congregation in Chicago, the selection of a prayer book, etc. Reviewed by Einhorn in Sinai, 4: 111-20, May, 1859. Gx) II SKIZZE EINES VoRTRAGS. Ms. 1859. 7 pp. An address delivered before the Jiidischer Reformverein. A plea for Reform. (12) [Diz GRUNDIDEEN DER REFORMBEWEGUNG.| Sinai, 4:153- 54, June, 1859. First appeared in Illinois Staatszettung. Abstract of an address held at a public meeting of the Jiidischer Reformverein, Chicago, April 17, 1859. Describes the religious conditions of the time, and sets forth the great need for reform. (13) EINE LITERATURGESCHICHTLICHE BEMERKUNG. Svat, 4:248, September, 18509. Brief comment on citations contained in Steinschneider’s Hebraeische Bibliographie, 1859, referring to the magnet in Jewish literature. (14) 288 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 1860 *SCHOFARKLANGE. Chicago: n.p., 1860. 21 pp. 16mo. A sermon delivered on Rosh ha-Shanah, 5621, before Kehillath Anshe Maarabh. Reviewed in Sinai, 5:305-7. (15) 1861 Nur HINAUF. In Hymnen, gesammelt und herausgegeben auf Kosten der Sinaigemeinde in Chicago (Chicago, 1861), Dp. 27. Unsigned. One of a collection of thirty-four German hymns by various authors. (16) Muss MAN SICH BEIM BETEN NACH OSTEN WENDEN? (Ern Votum.) Sinai, 6:110-11, May, 1861. The question had arisen in reference to the synagogue of Sinai Congregation, Chicago. The opinion here given is that it is not necessary to observe the custom. (17) 1862 UEBER DIE BEHANDLUNG VON STERBENDEN UND TODTEN, SOWIE UBER TRAUERGEBRAUCHE. Ms. 1862. 9 pp. Written at the request of Mr. Julius Rosenthal, Chicago, and addressed to him in the form of a letter. Suggests definite reforms in custom, these to be embodied in the Revised Constitu- tion of the Hebrew Benevolent Society. Many of the prevailing practices are condemned as superstitious. The subject is treated both historically and practically. (18) Die JUDEN UND DIE SCLAVEREI. § Tllinois Staatszeitung, June 6, 1862. Same in Sinai, 7:158-63, July, 1862. Asserts that the great majority of Jews in America are anti- slavery in opinion, and explains the causes for the views held by the minority. Noted in M. J. Kohler, ‘‘ Jews and the American anti-Slavery Movement,” Part Il. American Jewish Historical Society. Publi- cations, 1901, No. 9, p. 52. (19) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 289 LEGISLATORISCHE BARBAREI. NEGERRECHT UND ‘“‘ JUDEN- RECHT.” Illinois Staatszeitung, July 9, 1862. An article occasioned by bills passed in the Senate declaring Negroes incompetent to act as witnesses in the District of Colum- bia. Similar restrictions in the case of Jews are traced from Justinian to the present time, and examples are cited of existing statutes in several of the German states. ‘‘What can justify such barbarism? Russia does not lie only between Kalisz and Kamchatka, but is also on the shores of the Potomac and Lake - Michigan.” (20) SENATOR WILSON VON MASSACHUSETTS UND DAS FELDPRE- DIGERGESETZ. Illinois Staatszeitung, July 12, 1862. Same in Simat, 7:200-201, August, 1862. Refers to the amendment of the law regarding field chaplains, by which the word “religious’’ was substituted for ‘‘Christian”’ in the phrase “regularly ordained ministers of some Christian denomination.” Senator Wilson had introduced the amendment at the request of B. F. (21) 1863 *7UR ERINNERUNG AN FRAU CAROLINE FELSENTHAL. Chi- cago: Illinois Staatszeitung, 1863. 8 pp. 8vo. Privately printed for the members of the Young Ladies’ Hebrew Benevolent Society, Chicago. Cf. p. 32, this yolume. (22) *7UR ERINNERUNG AN FRAU SARAH GREENSFELDER. Chi- cago: Illinois Staatszeitung, 1863. 4 pp. 8vo. A funeral address. Expresses belief in the indestructibility of the spiritual element in man. (23) 1864 *ZWEI REDEN. Chicago: M. Hofmann, 1864. 3opp. 8vo. Contents: UNSERE FREUDE BEI DER T’'EMPELWEIHE, pp. 5-20; SITTLICHE UND RELIGIOSE LEBENSERNEUERUNG, pp. 21-30. The first of the two sermons reprinted in translation in this volume, with title, ‘‘Wherefore We 290 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Rejoice.’’ Same, condensed, in Chicago Telegraph, Octo- ber 2, 1864, with title, REDE BEI DER EINWEIHUNG DES TEMPELS DER ZIONGEMEINDE. Two sermons delivered on Rosh ha-Shanah, 5625, before Zion Congregation. ‘‘Unsere Freude bei der Tempelweihe” was delivered at the first service of the newly founded congregation, and the one at which B. F. first officiated as its rabbi. He makes clear his own religious standpoint, summarizes the leading ideas of Jewish Reform, and pleads for the subordination of the mate- rialistic to the higher aspects of life. ‘“‘Sittliche und religidse Lebenserneuerung”’ deals, first, with the moral life of man, laying emphasis on the freedom of the will; second, with the duty to cast aside outworn religious conceptions and ceremonies, and to cling with increased devotion to the great fundamental truths and the glorious /iving institutions of Judaism. The Sabbath and festivals are held to be particularly vital to the future of Judaism. (24) Diz EINWEIHUNG DES NEUEN GOTTESHAUSES B’NAI SHOLOM. Chicago Telegraph, September —, 1864. Abstract of sermon. A comparison of Orthodox and Reform Judaism. “Let our Judaism in the future be wholly Jewish. Let us cast out its extraneous elements. We shall not therefore regard with disdain the Judaism of the past, any more than would a daughter her mother, if she appeared in old-fashioned gar- ments.” (25) 1865 DriE ERMORDUNG DES PRASIDENTEN. Illinois Staatszeitung, April 25, 186s. Address delivered in Zion Temple, Chicago, on April 19, at the hour when President Lincoln’s remains were removed from the White House to the Capitol. Lincoln is described as one in whose private and in whose public life justice and love, firm- ness and kindness, were splendidly combined. (26) GEDANKEN UBER JUDISCHE JOURNALISTIK. Progress, Octo- ber 27—November 10, 1865. Discusses the kind of subject matter with which Jewish jour- nals may properly deal, the faults of Jewish journalism in Amer- ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 291 ica, the proper attitude toward Christianity, etc. Incidentally a tribute is paid to the Puritans and their contribution to de- mocracy. ‘There is a passage on “humbuggery.”’ (27) 1866 *]JUDISCHES SCHULWESEN IN AMERIKA. Chicago: A. Heun- isch, 1866. 40 pp. 16mo. An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, December 13, 1865. Sets forth the urgent need for systematic Jewish religious education. As a remedy for the serious situation which condi- tions had brought about for American Judaism, it is proposed that schools be established in all cities, in which Hebrew studies should be a part of the curriculum. Outlines a course of study and discusses the pedagogy of Jewish subjects. Special emphasis is laid on the need for higher rather than for elementary schools. The final section discusses rabbinical training and advocates the sending of young men to Europe rather than attempting to educate them in America, there being as yet no proper foundation in this country for a theological seminary. Germany still remains at the date of writing the fountainhead of Jewish learn- ing and Jewish thought. (28) THE DOCTRINES OF JUDAISM IN JUXTAPOSITION TO ‘THOSE OF CHRISTIANITY. Chicago Republican, January 8, 1866. A sermon delivered in Zion Temple, January 6. ‘The doctrines are examined according to the criterion of reason, and the moral implications of pure monotheism are set forth. (29) Diez JUDISCHE UNIVERSITAT NOCH EINMAL. Hebrew Leader, August —, 1866. Signed “Gebar Jehudai.”” Emphatically opposes the establish- ment of a Jewish university, asserting that “‘the holiest interests of American Judaism would thereby be betrayed.” Jewish students should be sent to Germany for theological training. The lack of Jewish knowledge among the general mass of Ameri- can Jews is to be overcome by schools for systematic Jewish education in all the larger cities. (30) 292 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 1867 UEBER DEN URSPRUNG DES JUDENTHUMS UND DIE EPOCHEN DESSELBEN. Chicago Sonntags-Zeitung. Extra-Beilage, January 27, 1867. 2 pp. (Reprinted in translation in this volume, with title, ‘‘The Origin of Judaism and Its Three Epochs.’’) An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, January 16, 1867. The three great epochs of Judaism—Mosaic, Talmudic, and Modern—are discussed as to origin, development, characteristic features, and governing ideas, with critical glances at the work of various historians and interpreters of history, such as Renan, Strauss, Geiger, and Graetz. ‘The portion of the paper devoted to the Mosaic period is chiefly given over to the discussion of the origin of the monotheistic idea. The spiritual discovery of mono- theism is compared from the psychological standpoint with the scientific discoveries of Newton and Archimedes. (31) EXCLUSIV JUDISCHE BEGRABNISSPLATZE ODER NICHT? Hebrew Leader, May to, 1867. The question having arisen in connection with the proposed purchase by Sinai and Zion Congregations, Chicago, of burial ground in a non-sectarian cemetery, B. F., as rabbi, advised that the purchase be made; while Talmudic opinion was chiefly against the burial of Jews with non-Jews, such pronouncements need not be binding upon us; the custom of maintaining separate cemeteries was partly the result of conditions in mediaeval times which no longer exist; and finally, the question of place of burial is not to be considered a religious one. ‘“‘ Religion is for the living and not for the dead.”’ Closes with comment on the importance placed upon Jewish burial by many who show nothing but indif- ference and neglect toward Judaism in more vital matters. Ga Minority Report. In Joint Report of Representatives of Lodges of Independent Order B’nat B’rith in Illinois at Annual Session of District Grand Lodge No. 2, Mul- waukee, July 14-17, 1867 (Chicago, 1867), pp. 19-29. Discusses the ‘‘Jewish University,” regalia, organization of a new District Grand Lodge, and other controversial matters. The re- port had been denied publication by D.G.L. No. 2. (33) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 203 LETTERS FROM A JEWISH RABBI [ON MODERN JUDAISM AND Its PECULIARITIES]. Christian Freeman, July 18, 1867. The first, and apparently the only letter published, of what was intended to be a series. Contains a rapid survey of Jewish history in post-Biblical times to the death of Herod, preceded by remarks on the prevalence of false ideas concerning Jews and Judaism. “Judaism is as Christianism, as Mohammedanism, as Hinduism, an historical phenomenon, and only an historical method of looking at such religious systems will lead us to a true and full knowledge of the same.” (34) GEDENKREDE AUF Dr. Moritz Maver. Hebrew Leader, September 13(?)—20, 1867. A eulogy. Moritz Mayer was rabbi at Charleston, S.C., 1852-61, and was active in the Reform movement. (35) BELEUCHTUNG DER VON DR. JASTROW AUFGESTELLTEN PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, November 8-15, 1867. WEITERES UBER DIE PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, Decem- Dernie-27 51907) January 3; 1868: SCHLUSSWORT UBER DIE PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, Jan- uary I0, 1868. | All the articles except the final one of January ro are signed “Bikatha Dekephaja.” Authorship is acknowledged in the issue of December 20, and it is explained that ‘‘ Bikatha Deke- phaja”’ is the Chaldaeized form of the author’s real name. The series constitutes a critical examination of the “platform” of Rabbi Marcus Jastrow. Answers by the editor are in issues of Novem- ber 15, 22, and 29, under the heading, “‘ An den verehrten Bikatha Dekephaja,” and also in footnotes and at the end of articles. See also “‘Einige Bemerkungen auf Herrn Bikatha Dekephaja’s Beleuchtung meiner Platform,” by M. Jastrow, in Hebrew Leader, following conclusion of series. (36) 1868 *CONFIRMANDEN-UNTERRICHT. [Chicago]: Max Stern, 130—(?) 18 pp. 16mo. Unsigned. Brief catechism intended for the confirmation service. (37) 204 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL DENKSCHRIFT, DER GENERAL CONVENTION DES U.O.B.B. UNTERBREITET. Ms. 1868. 16 pp. | Memorial presented to the General Convention of I.0.B.B., July, 1868, by the three Chicago lodges. Urges adoption of a new constitution, etc. (38) *A PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE. New York: L. H. Frank, 1868. 99pp. 8vo. Reviewed in Occident, 26:g0-91, May, 1868, and by E. M. F. in Hebrew Leader (reprinted in Living Age, 98:269-71, August 1, 1868). (39) A VALUABLE LIBRARY TO BE SOLD. WNation, 6:492, June 18, 1868. A letter calling attention to the approaching sale in Amster- dam of an extremely valuable collection of Hebraica and Judaica, made up of the libraries of Guiseppe Almanzi, Jacob Emden, and Chief Rabbi M. J. Lewenstein of Paramaribo. B. F. suggests that the collection be secured for America. It was purchased the same year by Temple Emanu-El, New York, and later, in 1892, presented to Columbia College. Cf. No. 261. (40) NP WON Dans Ha-Mageid, »12°105-00, 9204; meee June 24, 1868—January 18, 1860. Letters from America, describing conditions of freedom and prosperity in the United States, and suggesting that those who suffer in Moldavia and elsewhere under persecution and poverty emigrate to this country. Only those should come, however, who can adapt themselves to the conditions of American life, and immigrants should not remain in the large cities, but should take up agriculture in the western states. The Jewish Reform move- ment in America is touched upon, and the service in the Reform synagogue is described. (41) [REDE.] Hebrew Leader, 12, no. 17:2-3, July 31, 1868. Address delivered before the first General Convention of 1.0.B.B., New York, July 23, 1868. An earnest defense of the existence of the order, on the ground that it is an institution of great educational value for which an influential future may be expected. (42) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 295 DER ORDEN DER B’NE B’ritH. Illinois Staatszeitung, August 8, 1868. An account of the General Convention held in New York, July 19-27, 1868, preceded by a brief history of the order, and a statement of its philanthropic and educational purposes. The reforms instituted by the Convention are described, B. F. express- ing gratification over the abandonment of such outworn features as secrecy of meetings and wearing of regalia. Changes in organization and other acts of the Convention are also considered to be in the direction of improvement. (43) 1869 *KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN MISSIONSWESENS, INSBESON- DERE DER “‘JUDENMISSION.” Chicago: Ed. Buhler, TOOOsmE2 On DDemeo VO; An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, January 20, 1869. Occasioned by the establishment in Chicago of the Western Hebrew Christian Brotherhood, a society for the conversion of the Jews. Discusses aims, methods, and results of missions in general, and of missions to Jews in particular, and denounces them as insulting and as dangerous to the peace of society. Incidentally the principles of Judaism and of orthodox Chris- tianity are contrasted, and the complete absence of any effort on the part of Jews to make proselytes for Judaism is justified on religious and on specifically Jewish grounds. Reviewed in Jewish Times, 1, no. 1:10, and in Chicago Repub- lican, February 28, 1869. (44) “THE JEWISH CHRISTIAN MiIssION.” Chicago Evening Journal, January 26, 1860. Answers a communication which had appeared in the issue of January 23 over the signatures of the Executive Committee of the Western Hebrew Christian Brotherhood. (45) CONVERSIONS TO JuDAISM. Chicago Tribune, February 17, 1860. A correction of an article in the issue of February 15. Gives the general facts as to the frequency of conversion and the 296 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL absence of “articles of faith’? in Judaism. Also explains the attitude of Jews toward conversion. (46) CONVERSION OF JEWS. Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1869. Same in Jewish Times, 1, no. 3:6-7, March 10, 1869. A letter to the editor, contradicting the statement made in a sermon by the secretary of the Western Hebrew Christian Brotherhood that ‘“‘twenty thousand Jews in Europe join in worshipping the great King [Jesus].’’ Calls attention to other ‘“‘deviations from the truth” on the part of the conversion society, and asserts that its real aim is to benefit its treasury. (47) EXTRACT FROM A LETTER. Jewish Times, 1, no. 2:11, March 12, 1860. Letter to the editor expressing interest in the new publication, and encouraging it in its aim “to elevate Judaism and to repre- sent it nobly before the non-Jewish world.” (48) Dr. GRAETZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 5:13, April 22, 1869. Unsigned. Answers aspersions on the Reform movement which had appeared in Graetz’s Monatsschrift. (49) CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, I, no. 10:13-14, May 7, 18609. Criticism of Professor Graetz and the theological seminary at Breslau. (50) UEBER DAS PROSELYTENMACHEN VON SEITEN ISRAELS. Jewish Times 1, nO. 115312-13; NO.) 10e1 2 15:11-12, No. 19:12, June 11 July 0; 160G: An essay suggested by an article on the same subject by David Einhorn (Jewish Times, 1, no. 12:10-11). Explains the absence of all Jewish proselytizing effort by the fact that Jews are a race, and racial distinctiveness, important still to preserve, would be lessened by the adoption of large numbers of proselytes. It is sufficient, moreover, if the universal elements in the Jewish religion be accepted. Agreement in religious fundamentals does not involve the adoption also of special pecularities of wor- ship. The Biblical and Talmudical attitudes toward the ques- tion are historically examined. (51) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 297 DIE ANGEDROHTE SPALTUNG. Jewish Times, 1, no. 20:12- 13, July 16, 1860. Referring to an article by Graetz in Monatsschrift, April, 1869, p. 174, B. F. sets aside as negligible the threat of schism between Orthodox and Reform Judaism. (52) EHEVERBOTE FUR AHRONIDEN. Jewish Times, 1, no. 23: 11-12, August 6, 1860. Discusses further certain points brought up in No. 51. Shows the irrationality and the immorality of some of the Biblical marriage laws. (53) ZEICHEN DER VORZEIT. Jewish Times, 1, no. 26:9-10, August 27, 1869. Remarks on the strength of the opposition to Reform on the part of certain rabbis in Eastern Europe, with illustrations of the lengths to which their adherence to traditionalism leads them. Contrast is drawn between the emphasis laid by these men on the smaller matters of Jewish custom, and the broad spirit of men like O. H. Schorr, active in the larger concerns of Jewish science. The prediction is made that such mediaeval Kram will before many decades have lost its appeal even in Poland. (54) GEMASSIGTE UND ENTSCHIEDENE REFORM. Jewish Times, POs AatO- 11 eNO. 20. 11-12, SepLemiber 3-17; Log. Certain concessions on the part of prominent exponents of “conservative Reform” in regard to marriage laws are taken as indications that in the near future no real difference will remain between the two parties of ‘“‘radicals’”’ and “conservatives.” It is shown, however, that the abrogation of any of the Mosaic laws is inconsistent with the doctrine of direct scriptural revela- tion held by the conservatives, and they are urged to adopt a more logical position. (55) AUS EINEM BRIEFE DES HERRN Dr. FELSENTHAL IN CHI- caco. Jewish Times, 1, no. 32:11, October 8, 18609. In praise of the rare wit and learning displayed by M. G. in his series of articles, ‘“‘ Franzésisch-jiidische Literatur,” appearing in Jewish Times, August 13—October 15, 1869. “‘‘Wo des Him- mels habt Ihr denn all’ dies’ Zeug zusammengegabelt ?? The 298 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL same question which Cardinal von Este asked of the poet of Der rasende Roland one would like to put to this M. G. after reading one of his essays.”’ (56) CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 38:11, November 1Q, 1869. Makes clear his attitude on the Sabbath question, asserting that the retention of the Saturday Sabbath is bound up with the question of the continued separate existence of Israel. ‘Touches on other reforms within Judaism, of which he does heartily approve, saying, ‘‘Life of itself is strong enough to eliminate at the right time nolens volens all dead matter from the living organ- ism. Reform is on the side of life, conservatism on the side of death.” (57) CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 41:12, December 10, 1869. ; Favorable comment on the character of the discussions in Jewish journals of the Philadelphia Conference of Rabbis. (58) 1870 ANTRAGE (BEILAGE No. 8). In Protokolle der Rabbiner- Conferenz abgehalten zu Philadelphia, November, 1869 (Philadelphia, 1870), pp. 69-75. ' A. SCHULWESEN BETREFFEND. On the education of rabbis and Jewish teachers. Advises the establishment of elementary congregational schools, and of intermediate schools in some of the larger cities, and asserts that a rabbinical seminary can be established only after provision is made for the necessary prepara- tory education. For the immediate present it would seem best to send young men having the proper preparation to Germany for some years of study. In the religious education of children no theological discussion should enter. Certain of the miracle stories should be omitted from the Biblical history taught, but not those which contain ethical lessons. Attention is called to the need for proper textbooks. B. EHERECHTLICHES BETREFFEND. On the reform of the marriage laws. Maintains that the institution of the Cohanim is not justified under modern conditions, and proposes that the ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 290 Conference declare the special marriage regulations concerning the Cohanim, as also their special privileges, to be without sanc- tion, and that similar action be taken regarding certain other marriage regulations retained from Biblical or Talmudical times, among these the requirement of the get (rabbinical decree of divorce). | C. DEN GOTTESDIENSTLICHEN GESANG BETREFFEND. On syna- gogue music. Sets forth the desirability of publishing a collec- tion of hymns, the text of which shall contain distinctively Jewish thought and possess literary merit, and the music be selected in part from traditional synagogue melodies. Original compo- sitions and classical music of suitable character may also be included. D. Dir BILDUNG EINES GEMEINDEVERBANDES BETREFFEND. On an association of Reform congregations of America. The aims should be the furtherance of undertakings which will advance the cause of Reform Judaism and which are not possible for single congregations, the publication of liturgical works and religious schoolbooks, and the provision of means for the edu- cation of teachers and rabbis for Reform congregations. gp) [Das VERHALTNISS DER KIRCHE ZU DEN JUDEN.] Jllinots Staatszeitung, February 19, 1870. A lecture delivered before Hillel Lodge, Chicago. Answers the claims made by Reverend Father Gallus Hoch as to the toler- ance shown by the Roman Catholic church toward the Jews. The historical facts as to Jewish persecution during mediaeval times are rehearsed, and it is shown that even at the date of writ- ing great intolerance prevailed in the church. ‘“‘It will be differ- ent some day. E pur si muove!” (60) GEGEN OBERRABBINER FASSEL. Jewish Times, 2:171-72, May 13, 1870. A reply to the objections raised by Rabbi H. Fassel, of Nagy Kanizsa, Hungary, against the resolution of the Philadelphia Conference of Rabbis (1869) no longer to require the ritual divorce. (See Jewish Times, 2:141.) The resolution of the Conference is defended from the Reform standpoint, as against the Talmudical, which Fassel represents. (61) 300 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL PROGRESS OF JEWISH IDEAS. Jewish Times, 2:244-46, June 17, 1870. Same, with title, Jewish IDEAS CONQUER THE WORLD, in American Jewish Pulpit (Cincinnati, 1881), pp. 67-75. A sermon delivered on Shabuoth. A survey of the teachings of Judaism and a discussion of their influence, through other religions, upon the world. (62) DIE ZWEITE CLEVELANDER CONFERENZ. Jewish Tvumes, 2378-70 W ATOM aAUCUStel 220 OT! Criticizes severely the work and motives of the Conference, discussing the revision of the prayer book, Minhag America, and the relation of the Conference to the Philadelphia Conference of 1869. (63) [To tHE Eprror.] Jewish Times, 2: 391, August 109, 1870. A correction of Rabbi Max Lilienthal’s statement (Jewish Times, 2:358) that the Cleveland and Philadelphia Rabbinical conferences of 1869 and 1870 did not ‘“‘come into co Ilis ion.” (64) 1871 CORRESPONDENZ. AUS DEM SECHSTEN District (U.O.B.B.) Jewish Times, 3:170, May 12, 1871. Explains decision of D.G.L. No. 6 regarding frequency of general conferences. (65) SAMUEL ZARZA UND ISAAK CANPANTON. Jewish Times, 3°305500, August To, 1o71. Disproves the assertion made by Rabbi A. Huebsch that Samuel Zarza was burned at the stake in 1380. Examines the historical evidence in detail. ‘There are remarks upon the impor- tance of making historical researches in a purely objective spirit. (66) [SAMUEL ZARZA AND ISAAC CANPANTON.] Ha-Zofe be-Erez ha-Hadashah, September 29—October 30, 1871. Supplementary to No. 66. (67) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 301 ZUR KRITIK DES Manwariyt. Hebrew Leader, October 13, 1871. | Discusses the interpretation of the word Erdépfel in a passage in the Book of Maharil, with its bearing on the genuineness of the passage. Refers to article in Hebrew Leader, September 20. (68) CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 3:570, November 3, 1871. Describes the extreme need existing among large numbers of Jews in Chicago after the fire of October 9, and defends the col- lection of special funds for Jews, asserting that such special collections do not imply narrow sympathies. (69) THe [.0.B.B. RELIEF COMMITTEE OF CHICAGO AND ITS Dorncs. Jewish Times, 3:602, November 17, 1871. As president of the B’nai B’rith Relief Committee after the fire, B. F. appeals for further aid from co-religionists in other cities. (70) CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 3:635, November 24, 1871. Discusses distribution of funds collected by I.0.B.B. among members of the order. An explanation called forth by a letter protesting mildly against discrimination against non-members. (See Jewish Times, 3:596.) Again defends,separate collections, asserting that they are justified on psychological as well as on practical grounds. (71) EIN NEUES GEBETBUCH. (Review of B. Szold’s Abodat Yisrael.) Jewish Times, 3:733, December 29, 1871. From the point of view of those who still believe it possible to retain the old forms of worship (of whom the reviewer is not one), the book is pronounced excellent. As regards content, it is found to contain the essential ideas of Jewish Reform. (72) 1872 *Toe WANDERING Jew. A STATEMENT TO A CHRISTIAN AUDIENCE OF THE JEWISH VIEW OF JuDAISM. (Chicago Pulpit Extra, No. 1.) Chicago: Carpenter and Shel- don [1872]. rt4pp. 8vo. Samein Jewish Times, 3:779, 302 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 799-800, 819, January 19—February 2, 1872; also in A Set of Holiday Sermons (Chicago, 1906), pp. 35-48. (Reprinted in this volume.) Address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian Union, January 7, 1872. On the gifts which Israel, the Wander- ing Jew, has made to humanity—the Bible, the doctrine of mono- theism, the moral laws governing. modern civilization, and others. (73) BEITRAGE ZUM VERSTANDNISSE DER BIBLISCHEN EHEGE- SETZE. Jewish Times, 4:397-98, 417-18, 457-58, July Merron AMBUSAERSIE gi) AW ogi 2 Historical and critical examination of the marriage laws of the Bible, with some reference to marriage customs in primitive society and in various non-Jewish nations. ‘The changes in inter- pretation of the Mosaic Law in Talmudic times are traced, and the validity of these laws at the present time is tested from the modern viewpoint in science and morals. The conclusion reached is that they no longer have any authority for us today. Exception is made as to the marriage of near relatives. (74) GEIGER’S “ JUDISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR WISSENSCHAFT UND LEBEN.” Jewish Times, 4:781, November 22, 1872. Calls attention to the great value of the journal and briefly indicates the position of Geiger as an exponent of Jewish science. (75) DER NEUE “ MINHAG AMERIKA.” Jewish Times, 4:870-71, December 20, 1872. Severe criticism of the prayer book of this title. Continued in Nos. 77-78. (76) 1873 ZUR KRITIK DES MINHAG AMERIKA. Jewish Times, 4:929-30, January I0, 1873. A reply to a letter in Jewish Times, 4: 8090. (77) UEBER NEPHESH, NAPHSCHOTH HAMETHIM, U.S.W. Jewish Times, 4:978, January 31, 1873. (78) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 303 [To THE Epiror.| Jewish Times, 4:987, February 7, 1873. Account of convention of D.G.L. No. 6, [.0.B.B., with com- ment upon the affairs of the lodge in general. (79) THE CINCINNATI CONFERENCE: REASONS WHY CHICAGO CONGREGATIONS DECLINE TO SEND DELEGATES. Jew- Ise Lines... 5° 200,,|UlY 11,,107 3. Letter to the Board of Representatives of the Jewish congrega- tions in Cincinnati. Signed by officers of Zion Congregation, but written by B. F. The letter protests at some length against the proposal to form a second ‘‘union of congregations,” and against the establishment of another Jewish theological school. ‘The arguments concerning the latter are identical in substance with those expressed in a motion submitted by B. F. at the Rab- binical Conference at Philadelphia, 1869. Cf. No. 59 A. . (80) REMARKS ON SOME PoINntTs IN JEWISH Law. Albany Law aio OO UO 22 710. 202-02) OCLODE TN 2 Saas November 8, 1873. Occasioned by an article, ‘“‘Desultory Suggestions in Reading Historic Law,” by Judge Philip J. Joachimsen (Albany Law Journal, 8:193-95), which referred to Talmudic law. B. F. points out errors in this article and discusses the Prosbul (docu- ment which enabled one to collect from a debtor after the Sab- batical year), and the Jewish law of divorce. In the second part of the article, pp. 276-77, a scene in a courtroom in Nazareth at the beginning of the Christian Era is sketched, illustrating the legal procedure. : (81) AN ANSWER TO AN ANSWER. Albany Law Journal, 8:382- Oa mWecember, 13,1073: Follows a reply by Judge Joachimsen to No. 81. (See Albany Law Journal, 8:325-27.) Contains brief additional remarks on Prosbul and on Jewish divorce. (82) 1874 Tue ‘‘SHAPIRA”? SWINDLE. Nation, 18:171, March 12, 1874. A letter concerning the spurious Moabitic antiquities purchased for the Berlin Museum by the Prussian government in 1873. (33) 83 304 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL A PANORAMA OF JEWISH History. Ms. 1874. 18 pp. Address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian Union, April 6, 1874. A survey and characterization of the four periods of Jewish history, with remarks on the religion of the fu- ture. Asecond Ms., which appears to have been a first draft of this, touches also on the distinction between the religion of Christ and the Christian religion. (84) THE ‘‘WINE” OF THE BIBLE. Chicago Tribune, April 16, 1874. Same in Jewish Times, 6:136-37, April 24, 1874. A letter to the editor, refuting the assertion made in a religious conference that the wine of the Bible meant in all cases the unfer- mented juice of the grape. ‘“‘It is a vain attempt to deprave the religion of the Bible into a religion of ascetic austerity. A cheer- ful and happy enjoyment of the blessings of the earth is fully in accordance with the letter and the spirit of the Scriptures.” (3) a THE BIBLE AND WINE. Chicago Tribune, April 23, 1874. Same in Jewish Times, 6:148-49, May 1, 1874. A reply to a sermon of the Rev. S. M. McChesney, which took issue with statements made in the above article (No. 85). (See Chicago Tribune, April 20, 1874.) The present article brings forward proof that wine is mentioned without disfavor in the Bible, and that its use on certain occasions was even enjoined by Biblical law. Opposes the total abstinence movement on the ground that it is not the best method of furthering the cause of temperance. (86) THE JEWISH CALENDAR. Young Israel, 4:686-95, Novem- ber, 1874. Methods of calculation explained in detail, with examples. In dialogue form. (87) Dr. ABRAHAM GEIGER. NEKROLOG. Jllinois Staatszeitung, November 13, 1874. Same in Jewish Times, 6:622, November 20, 1874. Brief biographical survey with critical estimate. Includes excerpt from letter of Geiger to B. F., written a few weeks before his death. (88) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 305 Dr. ABRAHAM GEIGER... In Geddchinissfeier fiir Dr. Abraham Geiger. [Chicago, 1874.] 2pp. Fol. Reprinted from Illinois Staatszeitung, November 18, 1874. One of five addresses delivered at memorial service, Chicago, November 15, 1874. Recounts with profound appreciation Geiger’s great and varied achievements in the field of Jewish science, showing the significance of his researches in relation to the Reform movement. Touches also on his practical efforts for Reform in synagogue, conference, and Jewish institution of learn- ing. ‘‘He was the Master, we others the disciples; and always we looked up to him with love and gratitude.” (89) 1875 ISRAEL IN AMERICA. Chicago Tribune, January 17, 1875. Same in Jewish Times, 6:760, January 22, 1875, included in editorial, ‘‘The Duty of the Hour.” An address delivered before the Grand Lodge, I.0.B.B., at its annual meeting, Chicago, January, 1875. Describes the reli- gious condition of the Jews in America. The situation is found to be alarming, the existence of a separate Jewish community being threatened through the increasing religious indifference and the lack of all Jewish knowledge on the part of the rising generation. (90) THE SECRET CHARACTER OF THE ORDER B’NAI B’RITH. A Minority Report. Chicago Times, January 31, 1875. Same in Jewish Times, 6:805, February 12, 1875. In favor of removing the final remnants of secrecy in the order. (gr) Dr. ZACHARIAS FRANKEL. NEKROLOG. Illinois Staats- zettung, March 9g, 1875. An appreciation of Frankel’s important researches in the field of Talmudic literature, and a characterization of his religious attitude. ‘‘He lacked what Alexander von Humboldt called the courage of one’s convictions.”’ (92) 306 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL REVIEW OF R. B. Smith’s Mohammed and Mohammedanism. Nation, 20:349, May 20, 1875. (93) THE BIBLE IN THE SCHOOLS. Chicago Tribune, November 6, 1875. Same in Chicago Times, November 6, and in Jewish Times, 7:584-86, November 12, 1875. Following the exclusion by the Chicago Board of Education of Bible reading from the public schools, a number of citizens petitioned the Board to rescind their action. It was stated, among other reasons, that “ours is a Christian civilization,” and ‘‘this is a Christian state.” This letter urges the Board not to yield, on the ground, first, that this is not a Christian state, second, that the Bible, in its entirety, is of very little value for educational purposes. ‘The importance of definite ethical instruc- tion of another type is, however, emphasized. ‘Even if we should admit (which we however do not) that it is but a minority who favor the exclusion of the Bible from the schools, would it not be an inexcusable, an undemocratic, an un-American tyran- nizing by an accidental majority, to force their religious views and practices upon an unwilling minority ?” In regard to ethical training, ‘‘the state has not only a right, it has the duty to provide for the moral training of the rising gen- erations. ‘The too materialistic character of American schools should be counterbalanced by introducing into them a number of such studies as would, if of no measurable value in practical life, have the tendency to ennoble the heart, to better the senti- ments, to purify the will, and to give to the whole mind a higher turn.” (94) Is CHRISTIANITY A PART OF THE ComMMON LAW OF THE Country? Albany Law Journal, 12:359-60, Decem- ber 4, 1875. Same in Jewish Times, 7:709, January Fey aitelr Loy A letter to the editor quoting a conversation between the author and a Chicago lawyer. Reference is made to Thomas Jefferson’s “unanswerable disquisition”’ on the subject, printed as appendix to “Reports of Virginia Cases.” Cf. No. 94. (95) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 307 1876 REVIEW OF James Picciotto’s Sketches of Anglo-Jewish His- tory. Nation, 22:102-3, February 10, 1876. Unfavorable review, continued on pp. 245-46 in a note by the editor, for which material was furnished by B. F. (96) UNTER WELCHEN BEDINGUNGEN SIND DIE PFORTEN UNSERER GOTTESHAUSER PFORTEN DER GERECHTIG- KEIT? Jewish Times, 8:171-74, May 12, 1876. A sermon delivered at the dedication of Sinai Temple, Chicago, April 8, 1876. Sets forth the main principles of Judaism and of Jewish religious life, and touches upon religious indifference, the historical Sabbath, and the danger to Judaism of giving up its distinguishing characteristics. (97) [OPINIONS ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH SEMINARY.| In Hebrew Theological Seminary Association. Proceedings of the First Convention, May 24-25, 7876 (New York, 1876), Deel 2 Ome AIG Ie CISL) LIMes wo. 22 7 3A Ine Os with title, OPINION ON THE HEBREW COLLEGE QUESTION, In answer to a circular letter, opposes the establishment of a theological seminary at this time. It is asserted that the neces- sary preparation for such an institution could not be obtained in America. If, however, its establishment in some form is inevitable, the endowment of professorial chairs in ‘‘some well- known American university’? is considered preferable to the erection of a separate institution. Emphasizes instead the need of preparatory schools for the people in general. (98) To THE Epitor. Jewish Times, 8:231, June 9, 1876. Repeats briefly and more emphatically the arguments brought forward in No. 98. ‘‘We should take care that in American Israel there are not on one side a few learned priests and on the other side thousands of ignorant laymen.” (99) THE MISSION OF JUDAISM. Ms. 1876. 14 pp. A lecture delivered before Hillel Lodge, Chicago, November 16, 1876. ‘The mission of Israel, as “‘a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), is compared with the mission of 308 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Greece, Rome, the United States, and various other nations. “Every nation has its own calling; every nation has to bring its own and peculiar contributions towards the erection and com- pletion of the grand temple of mankind. . . . The mission of Israel is not yet fully consummated, and it is therefore necessary that a race continue to exist ever conscious of the high custodian- ship over the most sublime religious truths reposed in them, and ever mindful of the duties they have to fulfill in consequence of the special mission with which they are entrusted.” (100) SOLLEN WIR FERNER NOCH JUDEN BLEIBEN? Ms. 1876. 14 pp. Address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago, December 6, 1876. Identical in substance with No. 100. (ror) UEBER JUDISCHE ERZIEHUNG. UEBER UNTERRICHTS- UND ERZIEHUNGSWESEN UNTER DEN JUDEN. Ms. 1876. IO pp. Address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago, December 20, 1876. A survey of Jewish education from the earliest times, with discussion of the present need in America for more systema- tized and thorough instruction in Jewish subjects. (102) Ory UEBER DEN URSPRUNG DES CHRISTENTHUMS. Ms. 1877. 17 Pp- “Mit besonderem Bezug auf Bruno Bauer’s Christus und die Cdsaren.”’ Sub-title. Refutes the claim that Christianity had its beginnings in Graeco-Roman thought. Judaism is shown to be its main source. The introduction discusses the value of investigation of origins in connection with the study of any sub- ject. (103) Vom JUDISCHEN SCHULVEREIN IN CuHIcAGO. Libanon. Bei- blatt zu *‘ Young Israel,’ 3:21-27, February, 1877. Reproduces, with brief introduction and concluding comment, the opinion (Gutachten) signed Adler, Felsenthal, Kohler, Norden (written by B. F.), submitted to the Jewish Educational Society of Chicago, on the purposes, principles, and methods of such a ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 309 society. Deals with the danger for Judaism in America in allow- ing Jewish youth to grow up without knowledge of Jewish religion and history, and Hebrew language and literature. A day school where Jewish subjects may be included in the general curriculum is considered the most effective method of dealing with the prob- lem. ‘The establishment of Sabbath schools throughout the city, and of a system of lectures on Jewish subjects, is also discussed. (104) BARUCH SPINOZA. EINE GEDENKREDE. Der Westen, Febru- ALE 25 LO 77: Abstract of address delivered in Zion Temple on the two hundredth anniversary of the death of Spinoza. Biographical survey with remarks on Spinoza’s influence as a philosopher and his relation to Judaism. (105) “Diz jUDISCHE NATIONALITAT.” Illinois Staatszeitung, March 24, 1877. Same in Libanon. Beiblatt zu ‘‘ Young Steam = 70, VAY, 1O7 7. A letter giving the arguments for considering Jews a race rather than a religious community. ‘Touches on the question of intermarriage and its results for Judaism. “Individuals do not count for much in the world. They are disappearing atoms, and, by a natural law which holds in the spiritual realm as well as in the physical, they are attracted to larger masses. Only organized institutions endure. And Judaism is therefore an organism still very necessary to the world. The time is still far distant when its usefulness will be over.” (106) IO REVIEW OF Outlines of Hebrew Grammar (G. Bickell), trans- lated by Samuel Ives Curtiss, Jr. Nation, 24:371, PUNE 211577; (107) ZUM KAPITEL DES SONNTAGSGESETZ. PARALLELEN AUS DEM JUDISCHEN Recut. Reformer and Jewish Times, 9, N01970;)n0, 19:0, June 20-—July 0, 1377. On the legality, according to Talmudic law, of contracts made on the Sabbath. An article occasioned by judicial decisions made in Maine and elsewhere in the United States. Under Jew- ish law such contracts are shown to be legal. (108) 310 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL WHo Is a JEw? Ms. 1877. 10 pp. A lecture delivered before Zion Literary Association, Chicago, October 19, 1877. Maintains that Jewish birth and not accept- ance of Jewish religious doctrine (except in the case of proselytes) is the criterion of Jewishness. (109) JiIscHE ZEIT- UND STREITFRAGEN. Libanon. Beiblait zu ““Voung Israel,” 3:178-80; 4:1-4, December, 1877— January, 1878. Deals with ‘‘the most vital Jewish problem which has arisen since the return from Babylon’’—whether Judaism as a distinct religion will continue to exist in the future. By way of intro- duction the nature and necessity of religion in any form is con- sidered. (110) 1878' WEGE UND ZIELE NEUESTER JUDISCHER GESCHICHTE. In Illustrated Hebrew Almanac for the Year 5639 (New York, 1878), pp. 22-27. Résumé of causes and tendencies in Jewish history from Men- delssohn to the date of writing. An explanation and defense of Reform, and a warning against reforms which take no account of the past, and which are therefore not only anti-Orthodox but anti-Jewish in their results. (111) *Z7UR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Chicago: E. Rubovits, 1878. 48 pp. 8vo. Contents: ZuR PRos- ELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM, pp. 7-38; NACHTRAG- LICHE BEMERKUNGEN UBER GLAUBENSFREIHEIT IM JUDENTHUM, pp. 39-48. Same, with omissions, in Neuzeit (Vienna), 18:46-47, 54-55, 62-63, 69-71, 77-78, 84-85, 102, 105-10, 117-16, 134-35, 140-40 ue Bebruary, 6--./Une 25,1575: , An opinion in regard to circumcision as a requirement for Jew- ish proselytes. In the light of the universal character of the Jewish religion, the rite is not considered indispensable. ‘The The chronological arrangement has been departed from between No. 112 and No. 117 in order to bring together controversial articles which supplement Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 311 attitude in Biblical and Talmudical times toward the general question of acceptance of proselytes and toward the circumcision of proselytes in particular is reviewed. ‘‘Let us not seal our gates hermetically. Let us rather, in harmony with the words and the spirit of the prophets, and contrary to the teachings of the narrow and casuistic and minutiose Halachah, keep them wide open for those who seek religious satisfaction and religious peace among us.” ‘The appended essay discusses the absence of dogma in Judaism. Notice, in Archives Israelites, 39:162; notice, with summary by B. F., in Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Juden- thums, 27:236-40. Summaries in M. Steinschneider, Hebrdische Bibliographie, 18:11-12; in Chicago Tribune, September 8, 1878. Reviews in Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, 24:139-40; Deborah, 23,n0. 3:2; Israelit (Mainz), 19:347-49, 375-77; Jewish Advance; by M. Mielziner in Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 12:5; Jewish Record; Jewish World (London), no. 261:3; Reformer and Jewish Times, 9, no. 48 (separate articles in English and German sections). Controversial articles by various persons, including four letters from B. F. (cf. No. 113) in Israelitische Presse, 2, nos. 6-26, February 8—July 5, and in Supplement to Jsrael- itische Presse, 2, nos. 28-31, July 19—August 9. (112) [ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM.] Israelitische Presse, 2, NOS. Q, 10, 11-12, 24-25, March 1—June 28, 1878. In Hebrew, except third article, which is in German with Hebrew characters. Chiefly comment on the tone of articles in controversy in Israelitische Presse. Ci. No. 112. (113) ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Reformer and Jew- ish Times, 10, no. 1:6, March 1, 1878. Supplementary to No. 112. Deals with the opinions as to necessary ceremonial prerequisites for initiation of proselytes held by the rabbis of the Talmud. A passage from the Talmud (Yebamoth, 46 a, b) is included in translation. (114) ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Reformer and Jew- ish Times, 10, no. 3:6, March 15, 1878. Gives the substance of a personal letter from O. H. Schorr, of Brody, Galicia, in which Schorr expresses his agreement with 312 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL the conclusions of B. F.’s brochure, but offers new interpretations of certain Talmudic passages therein referred to. (115) THE INITIATION OF PROSELYTES. Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 17:4-5, May 3, 1878. A reply to the review by M. Mielziner of Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum (Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 12:5). B. F. defends himself against the charge of Jesuitical reasoning. (116) RELIGION UND Race. Jllinois Staatszeitung, September 11, 1878. Same in Jewish Advance, 1, no. 15:6—-7, Septem- DETR 20, Mar Gi. Answer to a criticism by K. Kohler, in previous issue, of Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum. B. F. declares himself against exclusion of proselytes for the sake of maintaining the purity of the race. ‘‘The Jewish religion need not be forever bound up with race.” (117) TYPOGRAPHICAL Errors [IN HEBREW Books]. Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 6:5, February 8, 1878. A brief article. The distinction is made between errors ‘caused by ignorance,” and those which are the result of “the oversight of an over-worked corrector.”’ ‘So erben sich nicht bloss Gesetz’ und Rechte, sondern auch Druckfehler wie eine ewige Krankheit fort.” (118) SCHILLER ALS DRAMATISCHER DICHTER. Ms. 1878. 1I7pp. Address before Ramah Lodge, May 1, 1878. (119) GERMANISMS IN HEBREW. Jewish Advance, I, no. 3:4, June 28, 1878. Briei article calling attention to Germanisms in certain modern Hebrew works. (120) va pw Israelitische Presse, 2, no. 42:5, November 1, 1878. In Hebrew. Interprets the Talmudic expression 77 Sw to mean, “Let the debtor escape, and the guarantor be made lable.” (121) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 313 [THE Stupy or JewisH History.] Ms. 1878. 13 pp. Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, December 21, 1878. (122) 1879 THE SOCIETY FOR ETHICAL CULTURE. Jewish Advance, 2, nos. 30-34, January 3-24, 1870. A comparison of the principles of the society with those of Reform Judaism, with a discussion of the causes which led to its establishment, and its possible future influence. (123) [Minna KLEEBERG.] Nacurur. Jewish Advance, 2, no. 2Ua74) January, 10, 1870. (124) THE JEWS OF SPAIN IN THE Mippre AcEs. Ms. 1870. 13 pp: Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, January D7 L070: (125) ENGLISH AND GERMAN JEWS IN THE MIppLE AGEs. Ms. 1370801 2.pp- Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, February 14, 1879. An account of persecutions suffered, with description of outstanding events, such as the massacre of York. (126) ERWIDERUNG. Jewish Advance, 2, nos. 36-37, February PA—21s 1570: A reply to “Race oder Glaubensgenossenschaft” (Jewish Advance, 2, no. 34:7, unsigned) in which issue was taken with opinions expressed in No. 123. B. F. repeats his conviction that Israel is primarily a race, and only secondarily a religious com- munity. Continued in No. 128. (127) WEITERES UBER DIE FRAGE: OB RACE, OB RELIGIONS- GENOSSENSCHAFT. Jewish Advance, 2, no. 39:7, March 7, 1879. (128) 314 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL UEBER MAGNETE UND TELEGRAPHEN IN DEN SCHRIFTEN UNSERER ALTEN. I[sraelitische Presse, 3, no. 16, April 25, 1879. In German, with Hebrew characters. Answers a question which had appeared in the previous number, regarding state- ments made in Shelah, by Isaiah Horowitz (1649). (129) JEwIsH CHAUVINISM. Jewish Advance, 3, no. 53:5, June 13, 1879. Same in Reformer and Jewish Times, 11, no. 17 <155) Une 620, ms 70. A lecture, delivered before Zion Literary Association. On the tendency of Jews to praise everything Jewish, to claim eminent men as Jews, to trace modern culture in all its aspects to Jewish sources. ‘‘Modern . . . civilization is a complex whole, formed by the mingling of two great rivers of culture running through the history of mankind. . . . It was a sort of historic collabora- tion, a blending of Semitic and Aryan ideas, by which our first culture has been brought forth. . . . But is it not glory enough for us that the thinking world is forced to admit that modern culture owes its Religion to Israel ?” (130) Danna N wip Lsraelitische Presse, 3, no. 24, June 20, 1879. Questions a statement in Maimonides concerning the omer of barley. (131) YAM SUPH’S GEMAUSCHEL. JIIlinois Staatszeitung, August QTL: Letter to the editor, expressing indignation over the use of an “abominable Jewish jargon” in an article signed “‘ Yam Suph,” which had appeared in Deborah. ‘To B. F. this seems like a retrogression to the old days before Moses Mendelssohn, before Jews had learned to use pure German and had not entered into the life of Western culture. Some general remarks on certain depressing conditions in American Judaism close the brief article. (132) 1880 : *ya5" q722 HEBREW READER. Chicago: Max Stern, 1880. 43 pp. 8vo. Second edition, 1886, added four pages for beginners. ’ (133 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 315 THE JEws oF Cuicaco. In R. Blanchard, Discovery and Conquests of the Northwest, with the History of Chicago (Wheaton [IIl.], 1880), pp. 628-34. An outline of the history of the Jews in Chicago from its settle- ment'to 1880. Cf. No. 240. (134) EIN LITERARISCHES DEPARTMENT BETREFFEND. Zeitgeist, 1:10, January 1, 1880. Discusses books as documents of contemporary social history, and as influences upon individuals and social groups, and con- siders the question what books are advisable to review in a Jew- ish periodical. (135) ON THE PRESENT STATUS OF MODERN Juparsm. Ms. 1880. II pp. Presented at a meeting of the ‘‘Round Table,’’ a society com- posed of ministers of liberal churches, in Chicago, February 3, 1880. Outlines the religious beliefs prevailing among Jews in Western Europe and America. (136) ADOLPHE CREMIEUX. Jewish Advance, 4, no. 92:1, March 12, 1880. ) Address delivered at the memorial service in Sinai Temple, Chicago, March 7, 1880. Outlines the activities of Crémieux in ameliorating the condition of the Jews, narrating certain historic incidents with dramatic detail. Points to “the shining example of Adolphe Crémieux that one can be a warm-hearted active Israelite besides being a cosmopolitan.” (127) ZUR FRAGE UBER MISCHEHEN. Zetigeist, 1:130-32, April 15, 1880. Considers the subject both historically and from the viewpoint of modern Judaism. Maintains that the regrettable feature of intermarriage is not the mingling of blood but the falling away from Judaism of the descendants of mixed marriages. Advises, as a means of preventing this, that the non-Jewish parties to such marriages be accepted as proselytes without unnecessary formality. (138) 316 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL [OPINION ON QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY DISTRICT GRAND LopcE No. 6, 1.0.B.B.] Jewish Advance, 4, no. 102: 5, May 21, 1880. Same in Report of Executive Committee of Constitution Grand Lodge I.0.B.B., 1880-1881 (New York, 1881),;'pp. 112-10. A document submitted in Appeal XLVI (I.0.B.B. Court of Appeals). Answers the question, whether the child of a mixed marriage is to be considered a Jew, affirmatively, “provided he himself desires to be considered one.”’ The second question refers to initiatory rites which a candidate must undergo in order to become an Israelite, and is answered as in No. 112. (139) MEINE STELLUNG IN DER MISCHEHENFRAGE. Deborah, 25, no! 24:2). |une m1; 1880: Holds that intermarriage is undesirable from the standpoint of preservation of Judaism, that it frequently results in unhap- piness, but that it is not for these reasons to be considered immoral. Distinguishes between Jewish race and Jewish religion, and denies that it is a duty to preserve unchanged the limits of Jewish nationality. (140) [On SELF-IMPROVEMENT.| Ms. 1880. 10 pp. Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, June 18, 1880. (141) REVIEW OF F. De Sola Mendes’s Concise Lexicon to the Tal- muds, Targums, and Midrash Works. Zeitgeist, 1:203, June 24, 1880. Brief notice. (142) REVIEW OF E. Schreiber’s Die Selbstkritik der Juden. Zeit- geist, 1:253, August 5, 1880. Favorable review of book called forth by anti-Semitic move- ment in Germany, which boldly points out the failings and weak- nesses of the Jews. (143) REVIEW OF J. S. Bloch’s Quellen und Parallelen zu Lessing’s “Nathan.” Zeitgeist, 1:261, August 19, 1880. Contains observations on Jewish humanitarianism and toler- ance. (144) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Biz REvIEw OF Ueber die Philanthropie des Mosaischen Gesetzes (Philo). Uebersetzt und erlaiutert von M. Friedlander. Zeitgeist, 1:261, August 19, 1880. (145) “APPEAL No. 46.” Jewish Advance, 5, no. 116:4—-5, August 27, 1880. Discusses in its practical bearings a decision rendered by the Court of Appeals of I.O.B.B. in a case bearing on the eligibility for membership in the order of the offspring of mixed marriages. Cf. No. 139. (146) REVIEW OF Mischnath Hammidoth. Die erste geometrische Schrift in hebraischer Sprache. Uebersetzt und erlau- tert von H. Schapira. Jewish Advance, 5, no. 117:73 no. 126:7, September 3—November 5, 1880. Unsigned. B. F. sets the probable date of the book between the seventh and tenth centuries, differing in this point from the translator. (147) REvIEW OF M. Giidemann’s Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und Deutschland vom 10. bis zum 14. Jahrhundert. Zetigeist, 1:305, September 16, 1880. Includes observations on the historian’s use of sources and the writing of history. (148) [IN REFERENCE TO SABBATH SCHOOLS.| Hebrew Review, Peso 2 clover Tinoco, Report of Committee on Resolutions offered by M. Mielziner. Occurs in Proceedings of Rabbinical Literary Association of Amer- ica, July 13-15, 1880. Cf. No. 227, which develops the subject at greater length, but is identical in substance and partly in text with this. (149) RELIGIONSPHILOSOPHIE. (Review of J. J. Riilf’s Der Ein- heitsgedanke.) Zeitgeist, 1:351, October 28, 1880. The review contains remarks on Jewish contributions to the philosophy of religion. | (150) 318 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL REVIEW OF S. Sekles’s Poetry of the Talmud. Nation, 31: 331, November 4, 1880. (151) REVIEW OF J. Hamburger’s Realencyclopddie fiir Bibel und Talmud. Zeitgeist, 1:385; 3:108-9, November 25, 1880; March 30, 1882. (152) TALMUDISCHE DIALEKTIK. (Review of A. Hahn’s Sepher Okere Harim. The Rabbinical Dialectics.) Zeitgeist, 1;417, December 23, 1880, In part an independent discussion of the subject of the book. (153) 1881 SCHILLER. Ms. 1881. 10 pp. Incomplete manuscript of an address delivered before Zion Literary Association, February 4, 188r. (154) NEUHEBRAISCH. (Review of Die Juden [Lessing]. In’s Hebriaische tibersetzt von H. L. Teller.) Zeitgeist, 2:100, March 17, 1881. The article is chiefly given over to a discussion of the use of Hebrew as a language medium in modern writing. (155) REviEw oF P. I. Hershon’s A Talmudical Miscellany, or A Thousand and One Extracts from the Talmud. Nation, 32:156, March 3, 1881. (156) Zu Dr. S. ADLER’S ABHANDLUNG UBER ‘TALMUDISCHE GLAUBENSLEHRE. (Review of Adler’s ‘‘Tenets of Faith and Their Authority in the Talmud,’’ Hebrew Review, I:193-205.) Jewish Advance, 6, no. 150:7; no. I51:7. Contains a digression on the subject of Jewish nationality, deploring the emphasis placed upon it by certain Reform rabbis. (157) REvIEW OF E. Lehmann’s Gabriel Riesser, ein Rechtsanwalt. Zeitgeist, 2:196, June 9, 1881. An independent essay rather than a review. Describes Riesser as a forceful and admirable character. ‘His attitude was not ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 319 that of a humble petitioner, begging for privileges, but that of a free-born citizen, courageously demanding his eternal and natural rights.” (158) “SIND SIE FUR ODER GEGEN EINE SYNODE?” (AUS EINEM BRIEFE.) Jewish Advance, 7, no. 158:7, June 17, 1881. Same in Zeitgeist, 2:209, June 23, 1881. Reasons for opposing a synod. (159) REvIEws OF L. Rauchmann’s Religidse Scheidewinde, W. Molchow’s Ist der Pentateuch von Moses verfasst ? and Die jiidischen S'‘peisegesetze, by ““Theologus.” Zeit- ETS 2 th) | | UNG PaETOO Tr: Summaries of the three pamphlets, all radical in character, with brief discussion of Bible criticism and its doubtful value for the people in general, dietary laws, synods, assimilation, and tolerance of the opinions of others. (160) PROFESSOR DELITZSCH UBER INTERCONFESSIONELLES VER- HALTEN. Zetigeist, 2:304-5, September 15, 1881. Unsigned. A defense of Jewish candor on the subject of Jesus and Christianity. Expresses great impatience with the disre- spectful manner in which Christianity has been occasionally referred to in Jewish journals, in this agreeing with the published protest of Delitzsch, but contends that courtesy does not demand that Jews remain silent on Christian topics. Quotes with approval Geiger’s view of Jesus, as, personally, ‘‘eine unbedeu- tende Erscheinung.”’ Cf. No. 172. (161) REvIEWS OF L. R. Landau’s Die Reformation im Judenthum, J. S. Bloch’s Jean Bodin, ein franzdsischer Staaismann und KRechtslehrer, ein Vorldufer Lessings aus dem 16. Jahrhundert, and M. Mannheimer’s Das Gebetbuch u. der Religionsunterricht. Zeitgeist, 2:355, October 27, 1881. The second of the three reviews contains a characterization of Bodin and his chief work. (162) GABRIEL RiEssER. Ms. 1881. 16 pp. Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, October 28, 1881. Riesser is eulogized as champion of Jewish rights in Germany. (163) 320 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Dir WISSENSCHAFT DES JUDENTHUMS. IHR WESEN UND THRE THEILE. Zeitgeist, 2:372-73, 386-87, November 10-24, 1881. Same, in English, with title, THE SCIENCE OF JupaIsmM. Irs NATURE AND Its Divisions. Hebrew Review, 2:28-41, 1882. Read before the Rabbinical Literary Association at its annual meeting in Chicago, July 11, 1881. ‘‘The science of Judaism is concerned not merely with the religion of the Jews but embraces all the relations, all the labors, all the peculiarities, and all the experiences of the Jewish people.”’ (164) [PETITION TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, CHICAGO.| Chicago Times, November 23, 1881. Abstract in Chicago Trib- une, November 23, 1881. A plea for instruction in non-sectarian ethics in all grades of the public schools. Includes suggestions for a graded course. For the most part identical with a passage in No. 94. Signed by a number of citizens, including ministers of several denomi- nations. (165) SITTENLEHRE IN DEN VOLKSSCHULEN. Illinois Staats- zettung, December 3, 1881. A letter written in reply to an editorial in the previous issue in which doubt was expressed as to the efficacy of the plan for ethical instruction submitted to the Board of Education by B. F. and other petitioners. Cf. No. 165. (166) 1882 UNSECTARIAN ETHICS IN OUR PUBLIC ScHOOLS. Nation, 34°34.) aADUaLY oro, 91502. A letter to the editor. Similar in content to No. 165. (167) [RELIGIONS AND RELIGIOUS PEOPLES ComPARED.] Ms. 1882. 9 pp. An address delivered January 28, 1882. The statement is made that “‘our religion is the best religion upon earth, but we Israelites, taken as one community, are not the most religious people upon earth.”’ (168) i ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 321 Review oF G. S. Ensel’s Ancient Liturgical Music. Zett- geist, 3:56, February 16, 1882. Unsigned. (169) [REMINISCENCES FROM My CuiitpHoop.| Ms. 1882. 9 pp. Address delivered before the Peerless Society (a boys’ club), Chicago, February 19, 1882. (170) REVIEW OF “ Ein Bandchen Poesieen,”’ by M. Kohn-Bistritz and 8. Heller. Zeztgezst, 3:109, March 30, 1882. Unsigned. A sympathetic brief review. (70) PROFESSOR DELITZSCH UBER INTERCONFESSIONELLES VER- AEE Nem, CILOC1S| wai Oa oye 5202 we ADI Ue Ze Vay PD LOS2. A reply to the brochure of Professor Delitzsch, Christenthum und jiidische Presse, in which the author had complained of the views expressed by Jews in regard to Jesus, and in which he had alluded to the article by B. F., “‘Professor Delitzsch iiber inter- confessionelles Verhalten” (No. 161). The originality of Jesus is discussed from the Jewish point of view, the right to free expres- sion of opinion on this and similar topics is defended emphatically and at some length, and Delitzsch’s attitude is characterized, in the light of his own missionary activities among Jews, as incon- sistent. Finally are set down the occasions when religious po- lemic is justifiable. (172) Das NEUE TESTAMENT IN HEBRAISCHEM GEWANDE. (Re- view of F. Delitzsch’s translation of the New Testa- ment.) Zeitgeist, 3:165, May 25, 1882. Second half in English, with title, Tak NEw TESTAMENT IN HEBREW Dress, in Hebrew Student, 1:69, July, 1882. B. F. sees in this translation “nothing else than a missionary document” aimed at the Jews of Poland and adjacent countries, basing this judgment on the fact that, the New Testament having been originally written in Greek, no scientific purpose is accom- plished by its translation into Hebrew. ‘The translation as such is found to be excellent, though exception is taken to the choice of Hebrew words in certain important instances. ‘The portion 322 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL of the article which appeared in the Hebrew Student included only the discussion of the translation from the point of view of lan- guage. (173) TOTAL ABSTINENCE AND THE BIBLE. Maccabaean, 1:321- 29, June, 1882. Purports to be “extracts from a correspondence between a minister of the gospel and a teacher of Judaism.” Brings together the substance of a published sermon by the Rev. S. M. McChesney (cf. No. 86) and B. F.’s two previous articles, ‘‘The ‘Wine’ of the Bible” (No. 85), and ‘“‘The Bible and Wine” (No. 86). (174) MARRIAGE BETWEEN UNCLE AND NIEcE. Chicago Legal News, 14:327-28, June 17, 1882. Same in American Hebrew, 12:58, September 13, 1882. A letter to Mr. Adolph Moses of Chicago. Shows that marriage between uncle and niece was permitted under Mosaic law while marriage between aunt and nephew was prohibited. Summarizes the views held on the matter by Talmudists and jurists of later times, and refers to Roman and English ecclesiastical law on the subject. (175) REVIEW OF L. Stein’s Der geklarite Judenspiegel. Zur ge- treuen Darstellung des jiidischen Wesens und Lebens. Zerigerst, Bv201 ns] Une 22682, (176) [LETTER] TO THE VOTERS IN THE FOURTH SENATORIAL DIS- TRIcT. Chicago Tribune, September 23, 1882. B. F. announces himself as a candidate for the state legislature and gives his views on prohibition, Sunday laws, and the folly of voting for local officials on the basis of their party affiliations. His candidacy was not intended to be taken seriously. (177) REVIEWS OF J. S. Bloch’s Hellenistische Bestandthetile 1m bib- lischen Schriftthum, and Emma Lazarus’s Songs of a Semite. The Dance to Death, and Other Poems. Zeitt- geisil 2381s, ,Octobercr2:e1532 The second review relates briefly the historical episode which is the basis for “‘The Dance to Death.” (178) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 323 REVIEW OF Jerusalem. Jahrbuch zur Beforderung einer ge- nauen Kenniniss Paldstinas. Herausgegeben von A. M. Luncz. Erster Jahrgang. Zevigeist, 3:328-29, October 26, 1882. (179) REVIEWS OF L. Stein’s Gebetbuch fiir israelitische Gemeinden, and J. S. Bloch’s Der Arbeiterstand bet den Paldstinen- sern, Griechen, und Rimern. Zeitgeist, 3:345, Novem- ber 9, 1882. The first of the two reviews contains observations on Jewish religious conditions in Germany and the difficulty of instituting reforms there. (180) First HEBREW Books. Hebrew Student, 2:111-12, Decem- ber, 1882. | Brief notes about early printing establishments in Italy and Spain. Gives a partial list of Hebrew incunabula, including only Biblical books and Biblical commentaries, 1475-94. (181) GABRIEL RresserR. Ms. 1882. 11 pp. | In German. An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago, December 6, 1882. (182) 1883 [JUDAISM AND OTHER REticions. A Comparison.] Ms. To 28( 2 Nilo: DD: Address before Zion Literary Association. Maintains that the fundamental principles of Judaism are identical with natural religion. (183) THE ETERNAL AND THE TRANSIENT ELEMENTS IN JUDAISM. VEStee O93. 7 DD; A lecture delivered before Zion Literary Association, April 27, 1883. On the comparative importance of the faith of Judaism and the ceremonies of Judaism. ‘The historical value of the traditional ceremonies in preserving Israel as a distinct people is acknowledged. (184) 324 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ON THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF THE JEWS IN THE TIMES OF JESUS AND THE APOSTLES. Ms. 1883. 22 pp. A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School, Morgan Park, Ill., July 18, 1883. Deals chiefly with language. A second manuscript, with substantially the same title, written August, 1882, discusses more fully the character and value of Jewish post-Biblical literature, and includes bibliographical matter. (185) THE RECENT CINCINNATI COUNCIL. Occident, I1, no. 14, July 20, 1883. An informal account of the meeting of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations. Discusses the career of Rabbi Isaac M. Wise, Hebrew Union College, and touches on the dangers of ecclesiastical centralization. Among other possible future acts of a central body, warns that “‘some fine day a Council, or a Synod, or a Committee, by virtue of their assumed ecclesiastical authority, might officially declare that America is our promised land and that Washington was our Messiah.” (186) 1884 THE LAW OF RELEASE AS UNDERSTOOD AND PRACTICED IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE. Old Testament Student, 3:145-40, January, 1884. Describes the gradual change under more complex social con- ditions in interpretation of the law according to which debts were annulled at the Sabbatical year (Deut. 15:1, 2). Repro- duces the legal form (Prosbul), and illustrates the legal procedure in general by a description of a scene from a Jewish court in a Galilean city. (187) NOTES ON THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN ENGLAND AND THE AMERICAN COLONIES. Jewish Messenger, 55, no. 1:5, January 4, 1884. Same in C. P. Daly, The Settlement of the Jews in North America (New York, 1893), pp. 155-560. Same in American Hebrew, 53:208-9, June EOMEOO SE Correspondence between B. F. and Judge Charles P. Daly, of New York, dealing with the civil rights of the Jews in England ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 325 and in the American colonies during the eighteenth century. The letter of B. F. refers chiefly to exclusion of Jews in the colo- nies from holding state offices. (188) ANTI-JEWISH PREJUDICES AND THEIR Sources. Chicago Inter-Ocean, April 27, 1884. An address delivered before Zion Literary Association, March 29, 1884. ‘The causes are found to be threefold—religious intolerance, racial antipathy, and complete ignorance concern- ing the religion, history, customs, and achievements of the Jews. B. F. is hopeful in regard to the first, believing that fanaticism is rapidly dying out in America; as regards the second, ‘‘no man of sound moral principles will judge an individual by national characteristics. What the Jews have to do under the circum- stances is to labor conscientiously and constantly on [their] own self-improvement.” As to the third cause, ‘“‘What once has been written down by pens steeped in venom is now, without further examination, accepted as indisputable truth. Poisonous seed is implanted into the hearts of ignorant and unthinking masses. What wonder if poisonous plants grow up!”’ (189) ON “INTERMEDIATE SYLLABLES.” Hebraica, 1:60-65, May, 1884. Discusses syllabification and other subjects in Hebrew phonol- ogy. (190) *LEOPOLD ZuNz. [Chicago: TJilinois Staatszeitung, 1884.| 3 pp. 4to. Reprinted from Jllinois Staatszeitung, Aug- ust 8, 1884. Same in Jewish Herald, August 15, 1884. Written on the occasion of Zunz’s ninetieth birthday. Dis- cusses his importance as the founder of Jewish science, and pays tribute to his profound scholarship, his thorough under- standing of modern problems, and his possession of the true humanistic spirit. (191) MONTEFIORE-FEIER. REDE. Der Westen, October 26, 1884. Same in Deborah, 28, no. 19:5-6, November 7, 1884. Address delivered at the celebration of the one hundredth birthday of Montefiore, Zion Temple, Chicago, October 25, 1884. ‘And all this was done by him, the conservative Jewish English- man! And thereby proof has been given that even the most 326 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL orthodox Judaism and genuine humanitarianism do not exclude each other; on the contrary, that Judaism furthers humanita- rianism and leads to it.”’ (192) BIBLE INTERPRETATION; How and How Not. Old Testa- ment Student, 4:114-19, November, 1884. (Reprinted in this volume.) A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School at Morgan Park, Ill., July 7, 1884. An answer to the question, “Ts not the exegesis of the Scriptures to be taught differently in separate denominational seminaries?” ‘“‘No. From _ the professor’s chair the Bible must be explained and studied without any doctrinal or sectarian bias. . . . Truth, nothing but the truth, should be the aim [of the Bible scholar].”’ Lllustrations are given of Biblical interpretations by Mohammedans, Jews, and Christians, colored by such bias. (193) ‘“GAMALIEL BEN PEDAHZzUR.” FERMENTED OR UNFER- MENTED WINE? Old Testament Student, 4:131-32, November, 1884. Refers to a statement in the Book of Religion, Ceremonies, and Prayers of the Jews, by Gamaliel ben Pedahzur, London, 1738. “Neither Jewish life nor Jewish law knew anything of the theory of total abstinence.” | (194) 1885 ADDITIONAL ARAMAIC WoRDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Hebraica, 1:188-89, January, 1885. Supplements ‘‘The Aramaic Language”’ (Hebraica, 1:98-115), translated by Charles R. Brown from Kautzsch’s Grammattk des Biblisch-Aramiischen. (195) REVIEW OF M. Mielziner’s The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce. Old Testament Student, 4:234-36, January, 1885. (196) REVIEW OF Berthold Auerbach’s Briefe an seinen Freund Jakob Auerbach. Der Westen, August 2, 1885. Great admiration is expressed for the character of Auerbach as displayed in “this excellent, this refreshing book.” The EE ee ee ee ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ao review includes a discussion of Auerbach in his relation to the anti-Semitic agitation in Germany. (197) 1886 AUS DER CHICAGOER SINAI-GEMEINDE. Jewish Reformer, -I, no. 4:13, January 22, 18386. In reference to criticism of Sinai Congregation for declining to take part in a synod or to join a union of congregations, it is shown that the congregation has remained faithful to the prin- ciples adopted at the beginning of its history. Resolutions dated 1859, bearing on the autonomy of individual congregations and on the religious independence of individual members are quoted. Ci, No. 277. (198) ZUR GESCHICHTE DES NAMENS SCHLEMIHL. Jewish Re- former, I, no. 4:12, January 22, 1886. Notes on the history of the name Schlemihl, or Schlumiel. Discusses also what historic character is immortalized by the proverbial use of the word, its rarity as an actual given name even in former times, etc. “And if the name Schlumiel should drop entirely out of usage, we may nevertheless comfort our- selves. The race of Schlemihlim is in no danger of dying out.” Supplements an article by K. Kohler in Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 1:14, January 1, 1886. (199) REVIEW OF Studia Biblica. Essays on Biblical Archaeology and Criticism and Kindred Subjects. By members of the University of Oxford. Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 5:5, January 20, 1886. (200) AN DIE REDAKTION. Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 12:13, March 19, 1886. Refers to article ‘‘Pesach-Wein aus Jerusalem!’ (Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 11:13) which, with humorous intent, connects B. F. with ceremonies at the custom house. (See also “Our Chicago Letter,” signed “Radical,” in Jewish Reformer, 1, no. Tt On) (201) 328 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ANDENKEN AN Moses RvuBEL. Deborah, 29, no. 39:6, March 26, 1886. A funeral address. (202) PROSELYTES, CONFERENCES, REFORM, ETC. Jewish Mes- senger, 59, no. 15:5, April 9, 1886. B. F. repeats briefly his views as to the acceptance of proselytes (cf. No. 112), but declares that no rabbi can ‘“‘accept”’ proselytes, being without authority, and rightly so. Conferences, likewise, are without authority, nor are they needed for the furtherance of religious reform. (203) REDE. Jewish, Reformer; 1, 10.422 11-12; NO. \2eenaees May 28—June 4, 1886. Address delivered in Sinai Temple, Chicago, on May 16, 1886, the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of the congregation. Describes the religious situation in American Judaism at the time of the founding of the congregation and reviews the aims of the founders, B. F. being its first rabbi. Holds that Reform Judaism has accomplished its purpose in bringing about an increase of zeal for Judaism, and closes with a statement of those profounder religious problems which in these later times have presented themselves to the attention of the Jewish people. (204) A LETTER FROM DR. FELSENTHAL. Occident, 14, no. 8, June 4, 1886. Corrects a misstatement in the previous issue in regard to his attitude toward the Bible. (205) REVIEW OF B. Szold’s The Book of Job, with a New Commen- tary. Hebraica, 2:254, July, 1886. (206) UEBER PROSELYTENAUFNAHME. Deborah, 30, no. 4:5, July 23, 1886. On the universal character of the Jewish religion and on liberal opinions of the present time as to the requirements for proselytes. Quotes in translation a passage from Schorr, He-’Haluz, XI, 72, deploring the fact that the entrance of prose- ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 329 lytes into Judaism had been made difficult from early times. The synod as authority in Jewish problems is emphatically rejected. (207) EIN KLEINER BEITRAG ZUR CULTURGESCHICHTE. Illinois Staatszeitung, August 20, 1886. Concerning the translation into Hebrew by the Jewish scholar Abraham Shalom of one of the works of Marsilius of Inghen, and of other evidences that the Jews during the Middle Ages, contrary to the usual belief, interested themselves in European culture. (208) AN ETHICAL PROBLEM. WNation, 43:433, November 25, 1886. The problem raised is whether, in cases of extreme physical suffering, when death is certain, it ‘‘be not permissible to the attending physician, aye, would not be his duty, to ease the sufferer’s last moments, by applying a drop of strong poison, or a spark of electricity, or any other method whereby . . . death would be accelerated.” (209) 1887 MYRTHENSTRAUSS UND GEWURZBEET. ERZAHLUNGEN AUS DEM LEBEN DES EDLEN MENSCHENFREUNDES MOSES MoNTEFIORE. Von Abraham Schaffner. Aus dem hebrdischen Original-Manuscript in’s Deutsche tiber- tragen [von B. Felsenthal]. New York: Sarasohn and Son, 1887. 96 pp. rI2mo. The volume contains Hebrew text and German and English translations. Includes two letters in Hebrew from B. F. to the author. (210) Literary MIscELLANtES. Menorah M onthly, 2:262-65 (I-III), 289-94 (IV-VII); 3:29-32 (VIII-X]I), 107-12 (XII-XIV), 240-43 (XV—XVII), May—October, 1887. Informal causeries. I. A New Hesrew Dictionary. (Ha-Ozar, by S. J. Fuenn.) Calls attention to the unique character of the work, in that it 330 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL includes not only the words of the Bible, but post-Biblical Hebrew also. II. HeBrREw Works PUBLISHED BY THE “‘ MEKITZE NIRDA- MIM’? IN 1886. Notice of books published in the second annual series, with information about the society. UI. A New “Zeitscurirt.” 3-5,) March 8/1007; A vigorous assertion that the Jews of the present have no special message for the nations of the world, and that a scattered people can work less effectively for humanity than a united Israel having a political center. Maintains that the idea of the ‘mission of Israel,’ as promulgated a half century previously by leaders of Reform, would very certainly, in consequence of Zionism, be revised by them today. (302) 1903 [ARE JEws A Race?] Union of American Hebrew Congrega- tions. Proceedings, December, 1903. 1904. 6:5047—49. In reply to a circular letter from Mr. Simon Wolf asking opin- ions as to the proper method of classification of Jewish immi- grants by federal authorities, it is here maintained that such immigrants are properly listed as Jews, the word being correctly used to designate race as well as religion. Shows, through illus- trations, the distinction between race and religion, and suggests the desirability of recording information on both of these points as well as on political status. _ (303) 1QO04. THOUGHTS CONCERNING SOME JEWISH QUESTIONS OF THE Day. Central Conference of American Rabbis. Year- book, 1904. 14:193-201. Same in Views on the Synod (Baltimore, 1905), pp. 123-31. Read before the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Louisville, June 27, 1904. Emphatically opposes the establish- ment of a synod on the ground that such an institution would interfere with the religious freedom of the individual. (304) 352 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL ARE THE JEWS A RACE OR RELIGION? Zion Messenger, 1, no. 3:3-5, October, 1904. Same in Jewish Tribune, 4, no. 13:1, November 11, 1904. Same, with slight verbal changes, under title, ARE THE JEWS A RACE ORA DENOMINATION ? in Maccabaean, 8:240-42, June, 1905. Based on No. 303. ‘“‘The Jews constitute a race, and not merely a denominational community, and they are bound together more closely and unified more strongly by racial ties than by religious ties.” (305) CONCERNING THE READINGS FROM THE TORAH IN OUR SYNAGOGUES. Chicago Israelite, 51, no. 25:15, Decem- DEC OOA. Criticizes the practice of reading disconnected extracts, and urges a return to the custom of reading the Torah in its entirety in a triennial cycle. ‘To us our Bible is more than mere litera- ture, more even than sacred literature—it is Jewish National Literature. And every word of it is of significance to us.” (306) 1905 BRIEF AN HERRN Dr. KOHLER, VORSITZENDER DES COMITE, ETc. Central Conference of American Rabbis. Year- book, 1905. 15:107-I0. A minority report, containing further remarks on the synod question and defending the emphatic tone of his previous expres- sions on the subject. (307) Minority REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SyNoD. In Views on the Synod (Baltimore, 1905), pp. 122-23. Signed by B. Felsenthal, Samuel Sale, and T. Schanfarber. Gives briefly the reasons for opposition to the synod and refers to the paper by B. F., “‘Thoughts Concerning Some Jewish Questions of the Day” (No. 304). (308) [To THE Epitors.] Ha-Leom, 4, no. 9, February 2, 1905. In Hebrew. Praises the journal Ha-Leom. Contains also some general remarks on the discouraging condition of Jewry and of Judaism in this country, and on the service to Israel of the Zionists of America. (309) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 353 CONCERNING THE MOVEMENT TO CREATE A SYNOD AND TO PROMULGATE A CREED WITHIN AMERICAN ISRAEL. Jewish Tribune, 5, no. 11:7, April 28, 1905. Extracts, with title, A SYNOD AND CREED FOR AMERICAN ISRAEL, in American Hebrew, 77:97-98, June 23, 1905. Supplementary to No. 304. An even more vigorous statement of the dangers inherent ina synod. “It is to be hoped that no Conference of Rabbis and no similar body will become guilty of destroying the oneness of Israel and of creating a schism by efforts to establish a synod and to formulate a creed. Beware! A Synod may enter—may enter? No, it wll enter as a forceful dividing wedge into American Israel, and inevitably it will lead toa schism. Beware!” (310) DIFFERENT OPINIONS. Zion Messenger, 2, no. 5:3-6, May, 1905. Same in American Hebrew, 77:13-14, June 2, 1905. On Zionism, considered in relation to the danger of total sub- mergence of the Jewish people, and to the ‘‘so-called mission”’ of Israel. ‘‘A small and well-organized nation is more efficacious for good in the world than many millions scattered and disor- ganized.” (311) 1900 [SuNDAY SERVICES.| Central Conference of American Rabbis. Yearbook, 1906. 16:107-8. An opinion included in the report of the chairman of the Com- mittee on the Influence of Sunday Services. Acknowledges the necessity for Sunday services in some congregations, but urges that, in these cases, the historical Sabbath be also observed. (312) 1907 [MotIOoNs SUBMITTED TO THE C.C.A.R.] Central Conference of American Rabbis. Yearbook, 1907. 17:31-34. Three resolutions bearing on Zionism, and one on Scripture reading in the synagogue. Touches on the “mission of Israel,” the question, Who is a Jew? and the relation of Zionism and 354 ' BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Reform. Refutes the assertion that these two movements are opposites. ‘The history of the world did not stand still during the last sixty years which have elapsed since the rabbinical con- ferences in Braunschweig, Frankfurt, and Breslau. . . . Should then we, to speak in the language of the prophet, in behalf of those who are living, inquire of those who are dead ?”’ (313) DATE UNKNOWN EINE GERICHTSCENE IN BERLIN. Ms. 3 pp. Brief satirical sketch in dramatic form, bearing on anti- Semitism. (314) NocH A PAAR SCHNADERHUPFERLE, ZU ‘“‘FAUST, 3ER THEIL,’ EINZUSCHALTEN AUF 8.170. Ms. 8 pp. Parody of a scene in Faust, in which two of the characters, Pater Petraula and Vallisrosarum, represent B. F. and his friend Julius Rosenthal. (3759 ‘ INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY Academies, Babylonian and Palestinian, 259 Adler, C., comp., Catalogue of the Hebrew Library of Joshua I. Cohen (Review), 215 Adler, Liebmann, 240, 294 Adler, Samuel, 237; Tenets of Faith and Their Authority in the Talmud (Review), 157 Anti-Semitism, 189, 293, 295; in Ger- many, 197, 239, 276, 314; in the United States, 279. See also Perse- cution of Jews Aramaic language, 185, 195 Assimilation, 160, 297 Atonement, Day of, 254 Auerbach, Berthold, 197; Briefe (Re- view), 197 Bauer, B., Christus und die Cdsaren (Review), 103 BEGINNINGS OF CHICAGO SINAI COoN- GREGATION, THE, 277 Bible: Amos 6:10, 250, 267; and science, 10 (VI); criticism, 10 (VII), 160; exegesis, 193; in public schools, 94, 264 BIBLE INTERPRETATION; How AND How Not, 193 Biblical history, teaching of, 59 (A), 149, 227 Bickell, G., Outlines of Hebrew Gram- mar (Review), 107 Bikatha Dekephaja, pseud. of B.F., 36 Bloch, J. S., Der Arbeiterstand bei den Paldstinensern, Griechen, und Rémern (Review), 180; Hellen- istische Bestandtheile im biblischen Schrifithum (Review), 178; Jean Bodin (Review), 162; Quellen und Parallelen zu Lessing’s ‘‘ Nathan” (Review), 144 Blood accusation, 239 B’nai B'rith, 33, 38, 42, 43, 65, 70, 71, 79, 91, 139, 146, 255, 282 Bodin, Jean, 162 Book-reviewing in Jewish periodicals, 135 Book reviews. See Adler, C.; Adler, S.; Auerbach, B.; Bauer, B.; Bickell, Gy eBlochia | Wot Delnard: aise: Delitzsch, F.; Einhorn, D.; Ensel, G.S.; Felsenthal, B.; Friedlinder, M.; Fuenn, S. J.; Giidemann, M.; Hahn, A.; Hamburger, J.; Heil- prin, M.; Heller, S.; Hershon, P. I.; Kohn-Bistritz, M.; Kohut, A.; Kohut, G. A.; Krauskopf, J.; Landau, L. R.; Lazarus, E.; Leh- mann, E..; Loeb, I.; Luncz, A. M.; Mannheimer, M.; Mendes, F. De Sola; Mielziner, M.; Molchow, W.; Picciotto, J.; Rauchmann, L.; Rodkinson, M. L.; Riilf, J. J.; ochapira, = laces) ochorre sUyar bias Schreiber, E.; Sekles, S.; Smith, R. B.; Stein, L.; Studia Biblica; szold, B.; Teller, H. L.;° “‘Dheo- logus’’; Wise, I. M. Books, 135 Breslau, Jiidisch-Theologisches Seminar, 50 Burial customs, 18 Calendar, Jewish, 87 Catechism for confirmation, 37 Catholic church, relation to the Jews, 60 Cemeteries, separate Jewish, 32 Ceremonies, value of, 184 Chaplains in U.S. Army, 21 Charity, on applying for, 225 Chauvinism, Jewish, 130 Chicago: B’nai Sholom, 25; Jewish Educational Society, 104; Jews, history of, 134, 249; Jiidischer Re- formverein, 277; Kehillath Anshe Maarabh, 266; Moses Monte- flore Hebrew School, 220; Reform movement in, II, 277; Sinai Congregation, 198, 204, 277; Zion Congregation, 24 Chicago fire: relief for Jewish sufferers, 70; special collections, 69, 71 395 350 Christianity, 29, 84, 228; discussion of, by Jews, 161, 172; origin of, 103 Chronograms, Hebrew, 274 Chronology, Jewish, 211 (IV—-VII) Circumcision, 112-116, 139, 233, 235. Sze also Proselytes Colonies, American, civil rights of Jews, 188 Colonization, Jewish, 236, 238, 244 CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE CHRIST,” 284 Conversion: of Jews, 47; to Judaism, 46 Cosmopolitanism, 137 Creed. See Dogmas Cremation, 242 Crémieux, Adolphe, 137 Daly, C. P., correspondence with, 188 Death, tree of, 209 Deinard, E., comp., Or Mayer (Review) 2 Beas Franz, 161, 172; New Testa- ment (Hebrew translation) (Re- view), 173 Dialectics, Talmudical, 153 Dietary laws, 160 Divorce, Jewish law of, 81, 82 Dogma, Jewish, ro (III, IX), 112 Dogmas in Judaism, 263 Education, Jewish, 28, 30, 59 (A), 98, 99, 102, 104 Einhorn, D., Olath Tamid (Review), 10 (II); tr. by E. G. Hirsch, 265 Emigration, advice to European Jews, AI England, civil rights of Jews, 188. See also Jews in England English, immigrants advised to learn, 220 Ensel, G. S., Ancient Liturgical Music (Review), 169 Ethical Culture, Society for, 123 Ethics, instruction in, in public schools, 94, 165-167 Fassel, H., 61 Faust, parody of, 315 Felsenthal, B.; reminiscences of early life, 170; tr., Schafiner, A., Myrthen- BERNHARD FELSENTHAL strauss und Gewitirzbeet, 210; JipIscHE FRAGEN (Reviews), 263: JiipiscHE THESEN (Reviews), 297; Kot Kore BAMIDBAR (Review), 11; KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN MISSIONSWESENS (Reviews), 44; A PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE (Reviews), 39; SCHOFARKLANGE (Review), 15; ZUR BIBEL UND GRAMMATIK (Summary), 267; ZUR PROSELYTEN- FRAGE IM JUDENTHUM (Reviews), I12 Frankel, Zachariah, 92 Freedom of the will, 24 Friedlander, M., tr., Ueber die Philan- thropie des Mosaischen Gesetzes (Philo) (Review), 145 Fuenn, S. J., Ha-Ozar (Reviews), 211 (I), 212 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF JUDAISM, 207 Funerals, 226, 296 G., M., ‘“‘Franzésisch-jiidische Litera- tur,” 56 Gebar Jehudai, pseud. of B. F., 30 Geiger, Abraham, 75, 88, 89 Germany: Jews in, 126; Reform in, 180 Grist ES DOGMEN IM JUDENTHUM? 263 GRAETZ, H., 49, 50 Greenebaum, Mrs. Henry, 287 Greensfelder, Mrs. Sarah, 23 Griinebaum, Elias, 247 Griinebaum, Jacob, 268 Giidemann, M., Geschichte des Erzieh- ungswesen u. der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und in Deutschland (Review), 148 Ha-Leom, 309 Hahn, A., Sepher Okere Harim. The Rabbinical Dialectics (Review), 153 Hamburger, J., Realencyclopddie fiir Bibel und Talmud (Review), 152 Haphtaroth, reading in synagogues, 211 (XIV) Hebrew language: Germanisms in modern books, 120; grammar, 39, 300; meaning of certain words, 78; phonology, 190; revival, 238; use of, in modern literature, 155 INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY Hebrew literature, study of, 1 HEBREW READER, 133 Hebrew Union College, 186 Heilprin, M., Bibelkritische (Review), 251 Heller, S., and M. Kohn-Bistritz, Hin Bandchen Poesieen (Review), 171 Hershon, P.I., A Talmudical Miscellany (Review), 156 Heyse, Paul, 276 Hirsch, Samuel, 221 Historical research, 66 History: Biblical, teaching of, 59 (A), 149, 227; post-Biblical, teaching of, 149, 227, 246 History of Jews, 34, 84, 111, 122, 125, 126 Hymn by B. F., 16 Notizen Ibn Ezra, Abraham, LEpigrams, tr. Dy be e213 Immigrants, advice to Jewish, 41, 223 Incunabula, Hebrew, 181 Intermarriage, 106, 138, 140, 146, 263 Intermediate syllables, 190 Jastrow, Marcus, discussion of views of, 36 Jehovah (the name), 218 Jesus, 161, 172, 284; as Messiah, 228 Jewish question, 288, 293 JEWISH THESES, 297 Jewish Times, 48 Jews: children of mixed marriages, 139; continuance as separate race, 293, 297; contribution to civilization, 73; history, see History of Jews; in England, 126; in Germany, 126; in Spain, 125; in the United States, 90, 309; legal disabilities, 20; not the most religious people, 168. See also Race, Jewish Jews and European culture, 208 Journalism, Jewish, 27, 58. See also Ha-Leom, Jewish Times, Jiidische Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und Leben, Keren Or, Menorah Monthly, Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 357 Judaism, 29, 31, 34, 62, 97, 100, 101, 183, 184, 214, 263, 207; age of, 1o (III); compared with other religions, 168, 183; influence of, 62; modern, 136; science of, 164; study Of 210 a (1s) sh SUrVival soln i110; universal character of, 207 JOUDISCHE FRAGEN, 263 JoDISCHE THESEN, 297 Jiidische Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und Leben, 75 JoéDISscHES SCHULWESEN IN AMERIKA, 28 Keren Or, 223 Kimchi, ’Hayyim, 211 (XI) KIMCHI ODER KAMCHI, 250, 267 Kleeberg, Minna, 124 Know nothing party, 2 Kohn-Bistritz, M., and S. Heller, Ein Béndchen Poesieen (Review), 171 Kohut, A., ’"Arukh Completum (Review), 241 Kohut, G. A., ed., Semitic Studies (Review), 278 Kot Kore BAMIDBAR, II, 277 Krauskopf, J., Half a Century of Jud- aism in the U.S. (Review), 217 KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN MISSIONS- WESENS, 44 Landau, L. R., Die Reformation im Judenthum (Review), 162 Law, Jewish, 81, 82, 108 Lazarus, Emma, Songs of a Semite (Review), 178 Lehinann, E., Gabriel Riesser (Review), 158 Lekhah Dodi, 219 Liberty, German and Anglo-Saxon conceptions of, 216 Libraries, Jewish, 1 Library, Jewish, sale of, 40 Lincoln, Abraham, 26 Literature, Jewish, 185 Loeb, I., Tables du calendrier juif (Review), 211 (IV-VII) Luncz, A. M., ed., Jerusalem. Jahr- buch (Review), 179 358 Madison, Indiana, reform in, 8 Magnet, references to the, in Jewish literature, 14, 129 Maharil, passage in Book of, 68 Mannheimer, M., Das Gebetbuch u. der Religionsunterricht (Review), 162 Marriage laws: Biblical, 53, 74; reform of, 59 (B), 61; uncle and niece, 175 Mayer, Moritz, 35, 243 Mekize Nirdamim, 211 (II), 245 Mendelssohn, Moses, 249 Mendes, F. De Sola, Concise Lexicon to the Talmuds, Targums, and Mid- rash works (Review), 142 Menorah Monthly, 211 (X) Mesaref, 250, 267 Mielziner, M., Introduction to the Tal- mud (Review), 253; The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce (Review), 196 Mission of Israel, 100, ror, 302, 313 Missions, Christian, 44, 45 Mixed marriage. See Intermarriage Molchow, W., Ist der Pentateuch von Moses verfasst? (Review), 160 Monotheism, discovery of, 31 Montefiore, Moses, 192, 210 Mosaic Law, authority of, ro (III) Mosaic laws, 10 (V, VIII) Music in the synagogue, 59 (C) Mysticism, Jewish, 219 Nasi, David, 224 Negroes, legal disabilities, 20 Noda’ bi-Yehudah, 256 Omer, 131 ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND ITS THREE Epocus, THE, 31 Orthodoxy: and doctrine of revelation, 7, 55; and Reform, to (I), 25, 52; future of, 54 Pardo, David, 249 Party politics, 177 Persecution of Jews, 126, 239. See also Anti-Semitism Picciotto, J., Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History (Review), 96 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Ploni Almoni, pseud. of B. F., 218 Polemics, religious, 172 Political clubs, Jewish, 286 Post-Biblical history, teaching of, 149, 227, 246 PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE, 39 Praying, facing east in, 17 Prisoners, treatment of, 272 Prohibition, 177. See also Total ab- stinence Prosbul, 81, 82, 187 Proselytes, 51, 112, 117, 138, 203, 207, 233, 235. See also Circumcision Puritans, 27 Rabbi, non-authority of the, 203, 233 RABBI PATRICK, 222 Rabbinical Conference; Cleveland (1870), 63, 64, 217; Philadelphia (1869), 58, 59, 61, 217 Race, Jewish, 51, 106, 109, 117, 127, 128, 157, 229, 230, 293, 297, 303, 3955353 Ramah Lodge, Chicago, addresses before, 28, 31, 44, IOI, 102, FEO, 182 Rauchmann, L., Religidse Scheidewdnde (Review), 160 Réé, meaning of, 280, 281 Reform Judaism, 5, 7, 10-13, 24, 36, 49, 55) 57, III, 203-4, 233; and Orthodoxy, 10 (I), 25, 52; move- ment in the United States, 8, 9, 204, 277. See also Chicago, Re- form movement in Reifmann, Jacob, 291 Release, law of, 187 Religion, 110; in daily life, 262; of the future, 84; philosophy of, 150 Religions, national, 297 Revelation, doctrine of, 7, 55 Riesser, Gabriel, 158, 163, 182 Ritual, 5, 8, 293 Rodkinson, M. L., New Edition of the Original Babylonian Talmud (Re- view), 257-60 Rubel, Moses, 202 INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY RULES PETS. 5) 4 Der (Review), 150 Einheitsgedanke Saadyah Gaon, 231, 232 Sabbath: Jewish, 248; legality of con- tracts made on, 108; legislation, 177, 248 Sabbath schools, 246 Schaffner, A., Myrthenstrauss und Ge- wirzbeet, tr. by B. F., 210 Schapira, H., tr., Mischnath Hammi- doth (Review), 147 Schiller, 119, 154 Schlemihl, history of name, 199 SCHOFARKLANGE, 15 Scholarship, 222; necessary to the rabbi, 21r (XVII) Schorr, O. H., 54, 115, 211 (XV-XVI); He-’Haluz, XII (Review), 211 (XV-XVI) Schreiber, E., Die Selbstkritik der Juden (Review), 143 SCIENCE OF JUDAISM, THE, 164 Sekles, S., Poetry of the Talmud (Re- view), I51I Self-improvement, 141 Sermons, 301; delivered by B. F., 15, 24, 25, 29, 62, 97, 262 Servants, 262 Shalom, Abraham, 208 Shapira, M. W., forgery of, 83 Shlof duz, 121 Sinai Congregation. Congregation SITTLICHE UND RELIGIOSE LEBENSER- NEUERUNG, 24 Slavery, Jews and, 19 Smith, R. B., Mohammed and Moham- medanism (Review), 93 Spain, Jews in, 125 Special collections, 69, 71 Spinoza, 105 State legislature, B. F. a candidate for, See Chicago, Sinai 177 Stein, L., Gebetbuch fiir israelitische Ge- meinden (Review), 180; Der geklarte Judenspiegel (Review), 176 Studia Biblica (Review), 200 Sunday legislation, 177, 248 359 Sunday-Sabbath question, 57, 312 Surinam, Jews in, 249, 261 Synod question, 7, 159, 160, 186, 108, 203, 207, 233, 234, 304, 307, 308, 310 Szold, B., Abodat Yisrael (Review), 72; The Book of Job with a New Com- mentary (Review), 206 Talmud, 3, 10 (IV); authority of, 10 (III-V) Tekufoth, 6 Teller, H. L., tr., Die Juden (Lessing). In’s Hebriische iibersetzt (Review), T55 Texts for sermons, 301 Theological seminaries, 28, 30, 59 (A), 80, 98, 99 “Theologus,”’ Die jiidischen S peisege- setze (Review), 160 Tolerance, 160 Torah, reading in synagogues, 211 (XIV), 306, 313; two-year cycle, air (VIII, XII, XIII) Total abstinence, 85, 86, 174, 194 Transliteration, Hebrew, 300 Typographical errors in Hebrew books, 118 Union of American Hebrew Congre- gations, 186 Union of Reform congregations, 59 (D), 80, 198 United States: anti-Semitism in, 2709; idealism in, 252; Jews in, 90, 309; not a Christian state, 94, 95; Reform movement in, 8, 9, 204, 277. See also Colonies, American UNSERE FREUDE BEI DER TEMPEL- WEIHE, 24 WANDERING JEW, THE, 73 WHERE Do WE STAND? 263 WHEREFORE WE REJOICE, 24 Wuy Do THE JEws Not Accept JESUS AS THEIR MESSIAH? 228 Wine, use of, in the Bible, 85, 86, 174 Wise, Isaac M., 186; Minhag America (Review), 63, 76-78 Wo STEHEN WIR? 263 360 Yiddish language, 132, 220 Zarza, Samuel, 66, 67 Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland, 211 (III) Zion Congregation. See Chicago, Zion Congregation Zion Literary Association, Chicago, addresses before, 109, 122, 125, 126, 130, 141, 154, 103, 183, 184, 189 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Zionism, 270, 271, 273, 275, 283, 285, 286, 288, 289, 293, 299, 302, 311, 313. See also Colonization, Jewish Zionist Congress, first (1897), 270; fourth (1900), 290; fifth ( 298 Zionists in America, 292 Zunz, Leopold, 191 ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM, 112 1901), ‘ INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY, ARRANGED BY PERIODICALS, ETC. UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPTS E28155°30)"S4, 1100-103, 100, 110; 122, 9255,1 20,130,141, 0154, 103, 1081170, 182-85, 284, 314, 315 SEPARATE PUBLICATIONS (PAMPHLETS, BOOKS, REPRINTS) II, 15, 22-24, 28, 37, 39, 44, 73, 112, 133, £0050 220, 0240," 240,1 201," 203,) 200, 1277, 282, 207 INCLUDED IN OTHER WORKS 16, 33, 59, 62, 73, 89, 98, 111, 134, 139, EOOm2LO,8221,0225,)240,1.248,. 202.0207, 277, 280, 288, 294, 297, 304, 308 ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS AND OTHER SERIAL PUBLICATIONS Albany (New York) Law Journal, 81, 82, 95 American Hebrew (New York), 175, 188, 226, 279, 275, 285, 296, 299, 3109, cour American Israelite (Cincinnati), 259, 275 American Jewish Historical Society. Publications (Baltimore), 249, 261 American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature (Chicago), 278 Camden (Ark.) Herald, 299 Central Conference of American Rabbis. Yearbook (Cincinnati), 233, 242, 263, 304, 307, 312, 313 Chicago Daily News, 283 Chicago Evening Journal, 45 Chicago Inter-Ocean, 189, 243 Chicago Israelite, 259, 275, 300 Chicago Legal News, 175 Chicago Republican, 29 Chicago Sonntags-Zeitung, 31 Chicago Telegraph, 24, 25 Chicago Times, 91, 94, 165 Chicago Tribune, 46, 47, 85, 86, 90, 94, 165, 177, 264 Christian Freeman (Hillsdale, Mich.?), 34 Deborah (Cincinnati), 4, 8, 140, 192, 202, 207, 250, 252, 295, 207 Ha-Ibri (New York), 245 361 Ha-Leom (New York), 309 Ha-Maggid (Lyck, East Prussia), 41 Ha-Pisgah (Baltimore and _ various places), 238 Ha-Tehiyyah (Chicago), 290-92 Ha-Zofe-be-Erez-ha-Hadashah (New York), 67 Hebraica (Chicago), 190, 195, 206, 212, 241 Hebrew Leader (New York), 30, 32, 35, 36, 42, 68 Hebrew Review (Cincinnati), 149, 164 Hebrew Student (Chicago), 173, 181 Hebrew Union College Journal (Cin- cinnati), 289, 293 Illinois Staatszeitung (Chicago), Intro- ductory Note, 13, 19-21, 26, 43, GonS3) Sos 025 2100,715 7.41325 100. IQI, 208, 237, 239, 247, 208, 273, 2705257 Israelite (Cincinnati), 1, 3, 5, 6 Israelitische Presse (Chicago), 113, 121, 129, 131 Israel’s Messenger (Shanghai), 302 Jewish Advance (Chicago), 117, 120, 123, 124, 127, 128, 130, 137, 139, 146- 48, 157, 159 Jewish Exponent (Philadelphia), 215, 234, 235, 269, 271, 300, 301 Jewish Gazette (New York), 286 362 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL Jewish Herald (New York), tor Jewish Messenger (New York), 116, 118, 188, 203, 229 Jewish Reformer (New York), 198-201, 204 Jewish Times (New York), 47-58, 61-66, 69-80, 85, 86, 88, 90, 91, 94, 95, 97-99 Jewish Tribune (Portland, Ore.), 305,310 eee ame (St. Louis), 231-33, 244, 25 Jiidischer Courier (Chicago), 220, 225 Keren Or (Chicago), 223, 224 Lawrenceburg (Ind.) Democratic Regis- ler, 2 Libanon. Beiblatt zu ‘Young Israel” (New York), 104, 106, 110 Maccabaean (Chicago), 174 Maccabaean (New York), 297, 302, 305 Menorah Monthly (New York), 211, 213,421 Asa2t 5.) 2108222. 1227 20) 231, 233, 243, 248, 207 Monitor, Dist. No. 6, I.0.B.B. (Chi- cago), 255 Nation (New York), 40, 83, 93, 96, 107, I51, 156, 167, 209 National Corporation Reporter (Chi- cago), 272 New Year, The (Chicago), 216 New Yorker Staatszeitung, 237 Occident (Chicago), 186, 205, 217 Old Testament Student (Chicago), 187, 193, 194, 196 Progress (New York), 27 Reform Advocate (Chicago), 228, 236, 240, 248, 251, 253, 254, 257, 258, 260, 265, 274, 279-81, 302 Reformer and Jewish Times (New York), 108, 114, 115, 130 Sinai (Baltimore), 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 1G;:2n Téglicher Jiidischer Courier (Chicago), 298 Union of American Hebrew Congrega- tions. Proceedings (Baltimore), 303 Westen, Der (Chicago), 105, 192, 197 Young Israel (New York), 87 Zeitgeist (Milwaukee), 135, 138, 142-45, 148, 150, 152, 153, 155, 158-62, 104, 100; 171-735°1 70, 1 Tosco Zion Messenger (Chicago), 305, 311 PRINTED IN THE U-S.A. Bs ¥ iii 1 1012 01195 1557 ae ~ le ae ga = gn ge owe a - a es te see 4 ha | ] : pe ea eit is . i 4 aime GAT? i) “nh We — vay tah MiALD kt ; aes f no ahe cy av, ‘i *; ad ves Pian Ms ee vy i det Area Te Bh F i ij ay iy \ Phin 4 s ye oe LS ’ Vy , Nd | ee Oa, MeN E | 4 VA A Ried ‘t @ rs Cae } ed - a Noa TS AA? ws) he Go oy ; , iy ae ; nh nee ) ee aeecnretnd 1 Wives blindness ironed abet strats haeetens aes awe beat Me nwt atier ven -nais= pati ns Ong tt aelnesti ts aoc Shean Ag oa oe ne ee eee eS ee Le eT ee © a ee. oor le, - . was . a “ gi Se NE Alay x SENS smear TFS