Literary Production. Morais, Sabato. Philadelphia, PA. Jan 1885 · Sabato Morais Digital Repository · Legacy Projects from Judaica DH at Penn Libraries

Title

Literary Production. Morais, Sabato. Philadelphia, PA. Jan 1885

Author

Morais, Sabato

Date Created

1 January 1885

Location(s)

United States -- Pennsylvania -- Philadelphia

United States -- Pennsylvania

Format

10 pages on 4 sheets

Rights

http://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/?

Language(s)

English

Source

Katz Center for Advanced Judaic Studies

Sabato Morais Collection, Box 10, Folder 7

Has Format

https://colenda.library.upenn.edu/items/ark:/81431/p3mg7gd83/manifest.json

Link to Colenda

https://colenda.library.upenn.edu/catalog/81431-p3mg7gd83

Provenance

Transfer of Custody from the Hebrew Education Society, 10 March 1913.

Is Format Of

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/judaicadh/morais/main/TEI/SMBx10FF7_3.xml

content

115

On the first Ministerial
Conference in N. Y. Jan. 1885.

Brethren. A brief account of a recent event incident in Judaism of America, may not be inappropriate, nor distasteful to my hearers. What was the object of has the Conference of Jewish reverend Mi--nisters just held in the city of New York had in view, and what results it produced, are questions that I have been asked by many. It was reasonably thought that the meeting of a considerable number of persons holding occupying religious offices, but differing widely in their views ideas, had for its principal aim a conciliative reconciling of opposite ideas opinions to the welfare of Judaism at large. At the outset, I had myself entertained that belief, and had wel--comed in my mind the contemplated conference, as means to a blissful end. I had entertained had no doubt, but that a dispassionate discussion of the logical sub--jects would have shown the necessity of checking the irregular proceedings of "Reform,"--as it is called--, and have thus vindicated the course followed by cultured conservatives not to venture upon institu changes without Synodic authority. But the anticipations, which others, like myself, had originally formed, were frustrated. The wording of the circular of invitation, debarred the possibility of debating theological points.

Hence, nothing properly belonging to the doctrines and precepts observances of Judaism was brought forth at the conference. On the contrary, it became clearly mani--fest, on all sides, that the endeavours of the speakers' endeavour was to studiously to avoid whatever might savor of ritualism and or touch upon Synagogue government. I regretted that circumstance, because some enthusiastic friends had urged my attendance, fearing that my absence from the ministerial meeting might give room to a misconstruction. It might be interpreted as an unyielding deter--mination, on the part of Orthodoxy, to deny every concession even when an through by so doing its obstinacy a golden opportunity to effect a re--ligious unification is presented lost. Well: the Conference was amicable, agreeable, very social, and to myself personally, beyond expectation, satisfactory. Still, it was not at all calculated to bring or--der out of the chaotic state into which the ancestral faith has been involved. An almost fastidious care was prescribed exercised, not to give open congregational offence, nor wound in the least each other's suscep--tibilities.

I do not underrate the advantage of seeing face to face men whom, we from principle we may have unsparingly strenuously opposed in writing for conscience sake, and hearing from their own lips assurances of good will and regard. It is pleasant, and pro--motive of brotherly feelings. It is also negatively useful, inasmuch as it inspires respect for religion, disproving the charge that those who represent it, are always at variance. But Israel of America needs a great deal more than that in order to be drawn obediently to the Divine Law. It must receive positive signs of a unanimity of sentiments among our the Hebrew clergy, touching Mosaic tenets and the traditions of the fathers. His all-import--ant desideratum was not gratified accomplished by the meeting which took place, this week lately in New York. Nevertheless Papers were read and approved, and complimentary resolutions were passed, and all parties satisfied, doctrinally nothing was gained. Nevertheless I do not regret my partial attend--ance, for upon the second of the two days du--ring which it lasted, I read perused myself and listened to writ--tings papers, whose contents bid fair to be product--ive of permanent good. Not to ourselves us immediately, thank fortune, for we do not stand in need of help, but to hapless creatures to whom we are bound with sacred ties.

Those writings aimed at pressing forward the work of the Universal Israelitish Alliance, extending its operations in America, where, outside of Pennsylvania, and a few cities beyond it in other in neighboring states, it has no foothold. As I judge that the ministers who agreed to exercise their influence in behalf of that all-embracing organization are men of their word, I look forward anticipate with unfeigned sa--tisfaction to a happy result. The favored He--brews who dwell in the United States, will prac--tically sympathise with their suffering coreligionists in oppressive lands, by aiding in its labors an association ever alive to the wants of the perse--cuted. If such, as I hope, is the issue of the first Ministerial Conference, none will sure--ly accuse it of its having been held in vain.
But a printed paper which was handed to me by its author, just as the Tuesday the second day's morning session opened, deserves our consideration, and I will deem it advisable to refer to its object. It advocates conferences among teachers, as well as Rabbis, to discuss all pending essential questions, and pave the way to harmonious action.

Sensibly, that paper gives precedence to Sab--bath or Sunday Schools reform to all other genuine reforms; for, situated as we are in our country, those institutions are may be regarded as the germs of a religious life. and Upon their the growth the future of Judaism vastly depends. The writer argues with much force the need of an exinterchange of thoughts with a view to unify, simplify, improve and widen the range of studies pursued in our schools. None will deny that the obj idea is excellent. All will admit likewise admit that the adoption of the same text books, imparting the knowledge of Jewish morals and the history of our people would be might prove of incalculable advantage. Our child--ren would early learn to understand, and to practise alike their duties; no clashing instruction would set them at variance, and peace and kind feelings would increase. At present, the same evil existing about prayer books, prevails about school books. Each writer pleads for his own creation; he holds that what has proceeded from his pen cannot be surpassed. A pardonable self-esteem makes him urge the acceptance of his production. Possi--bly self-interest may be the leaven mixed up in that desire blending with that solicitation.

It follows At all events, through that scarcely two schools will be are found and scarcely two superintendents who guided by the same standard of tuition regulations, in which an identical system prevails is followed. A year ago I opposed on this pulpit and in the Jewish press, the proposition emanating from the West that catechisms and historical volumes of one character and Diction should be introduced in all schools. I op--posed it notwithstanding my advocacy of uniformity of method in training our youths; because the person who headed the scheme had acknowledged, with otherwise laudable candor, that he meant it in the interest of "Reform"--so called. Now, he who proposes the plan of harmonising our children's system of tuition mode manner of instruction, belongs to the same party--if the term may be allowed, yet he displays a liberal conciliatory spirit, commending itself to all parties, and offers suggest--ions deserving of our approval. The writer of the paper to which I have reference sees the injudi--ciousness of formulating our teaching after that of gentilism; he complains that we accept volumes on Biblical or post-Biblical history at the hands of the Church, instead of composing some ourselves, based upon our Rabbinical and post-Rabbinical literature, so inexhaustively rich, and so adapted to our purposes.

He approves of illustrating subjects in scriptures and in later writings by pictures, as means to reach let the attention of young pupils be rivetted thereon, but he is strongly against such engravings such as those with which Sunday school books abound, and which are mostly borrowed from non-Israelites to benefit a religion that we repudiate. A feature which I like best much in that paper, is a recommendation to make the study of the Hebrew language obligatory upon our young sons, and not optional, as customary now a days. I also fully coincide with the writer that to interest the young in the sacred language, the teaching must be less mechanical; that more life must be breathed into it, that the imparting of elementary rules, always dry and wearisome, must be varied with a simultaneous gradual training at the same time into the translation of words & of and phrases. Many are the points on which the writer and myself would act in perfect accord of sentiments, yet I never could recommend his plan. My objection to it rises principally from the irronconcilable divergence of opinion between believers in revelation and unbelievers.

Could I advocate the adoption of a catechisms, or of historical books which ignore altogether the cere--monial code of the Pentateuch, and are perfectly keep are entirely silent about the oral laws? Walking in the light I have received, I do not see the possibility of a Judaism, without Jewish laws ceremonialism; of a history of our people, without the explaining and enforcing of fasts and festivals. and fasts. It is all well to make the ethical portion of our faith its ground work, and convince explain to point out to our offspring that nothing which is humanising and refining needs be borrowed from our neighbors of another creed. Unless our progeny are told shown in all earnestness and very early in life, when impres--sions are lasting the necessity of outward forms; unless they are convincingly told the ceremonial practices of Mosaism and traditionalism are essential to our national existence, our sons and daughters will be apt to exchange the unpopular Synagogue for the popular Church. No: so long as Reform arrogates to itself the right to draw a dividing line between what suits its ever changing reason, and that which the prophets and the sages have

ordained, so long we will be compelled to discard their its books, and reject its plans.
But just because we prefer to remaining alone to dealing falsely with the Torah, therefore ought we to keep close to each other, to join hands in whatever will give permanence to our institutions. We ought to improve them better their condition to support them amply, to increase their number and popularity. In a word; we must prove that our conservativism is not iron-bound, but enlightened and progressive visibly, incontestably progressive.
(Here followed an address to a Bar Mitzvah)

Identifier

p3mg7gd83

identifier

SMBx10FF7_3