|
Mr. Editor:
I
perceive by the last number of your valuable periodical, that you have
not been unmindful of the importance of the above subject, which
concerns a practice, which, unless something be done, and that in the
most decisive manner, and with the most unflinching firmness, will
shortly undermine and destroy the harmony and well-being of our
religious society in this country. It is a subject, above all others,
demanding at this time our consideration, from the large number of
persons who have contracted marriage
with those not of our faith; a subject which presses itself upon the
attention of every well-wisher of his religion, and which concerns the
very existence of the Israelites as a separate nation. In this country,
where, by its peculiar form of government, and the liberality of its
laws, there are no legal disabilities for the maintenance of any
opinion, the Jew, like every other citizen, is untrammelled in his
religious and civil rights; it is therefore a natural consequence that
he should mingle and associate with persons of different religious
beliefs in social and friendly intercourse and business pursuits. But it
is a great misfortune, and one which ought speedily to be remedied by
the great body of Jews in the United States, that many of our people,
and generally those who could support a wife of their own persuasion
comfortably, and often in affluence, become intermingled with the
gentiles by marriage; and it so happens, that after so marrying, they
are allowed to remain in good standing in the various congregations and
societies to which they formerly belonged, as if they had committed no
wrong, nor done any thing against the common welfare of Jewish society,
much less been guilty of an act which, above all others, is most certain
to destroy them and their associates from being a nation on the earth
with distinct laws and origin. It has farther to be remarked, that the
offspring such marriages are generally introduced into the community of
Jews, without their having become regular proselytes; they are
unfortunately not looked upon by many as strangers to our faith, which
they actually are; and thus the landmarks of our religion are broken
down by the intermarriage of such children with those who are truly of
the house of Israel, destroying thus those well-established lines of
ancestry, and those religious
and national distinctions, which have kept us a peculiar people during
so long a period, amidst all the troubles, oppressions, and
persecutions, which we had to encounter.
In
fact the time has now arrived, when it is actually necessary, in
self-defence, to commence doing something towards remedying this growing
evil; for every congregation has ample power within itself of discarding
all its members who marry gentiles, and unless something of the kind be
shortly done, it will be difficult, in but a few years hence, to know
who among us are actually entitled, according to our laws, to be
regarded as Jews.
How
ridiculous it is to see a man who has married a gentile wife, and has
for her sake given up every thing which his religion demands of him,
mount the reading-desk on our most solemn days, and participate in the
religious services of the day; or to see a woman who openly says that
she has married a gentile, boldly entering the place of worship, and
placing herself in the front ranks among the true daughters of Israel,
as though she had not violated the duties of her religion. It is a great
fault in the trustees of congregations, that they do nothing to prevent
these things; and that they in a manner encourage them, by selling seats
in their places of worship to persons of this class, thus setting a
baleful example for their own sons and daughters. To countenance acts
like these is not the way to put a stop to them; not to punish by
setting on them a mark of public disapprobation, is to encourage them;
and surely we do not set a good example to the rising generation, whom,
we pretend, we are striving to rear by all means at our disposal to
become proper representatives of Judaism, whilst we do nothing to
prevent this increasing bane of our nation, since we allow a person who
has in a measure voluntarily abandoned his religion, to remain a member
of our societies and congregations. Among us the object of punishment is
not so much the disgrace of the guilty as the deterring of the yet
innocent from the committal of wrongs; and I therefore hold it
requisite, in order to infuse a wholesome fear in the minds of the
young, not to permit any of those who have married out of the
congregation, be they men or women, to have any part or share with us in
the religious rites or services of our ancient and holy religion; they
have voluntarily withdrawn themselves from us, there let them remain, it
is an act of their own, done without any necessity, and our very
existence as Jews demands of us, as such, that they should not be
permitted to re-enter,* or to have extended to them, any of the rites or
privileges of our religion; they should not be permitted to purchase or
hire a seat in the Synagogues ; the men should not be allowed to be
called to the reading of the law, nor to be reckoned to make Minyan,†
nor in any way to be countenanced or regarded as Jews. Besides this, in
case of their death no especial notice should be taken of them, they
having made their selections of companions for life, let their gentile
relatives take care of their dead bodies, and inter them in any manner
they may deem proper.
This
may be considered severe punishment, but desperate diseases require
desperate remedies. To put this much needed reform into practice is,
however, not without its many difficulties; for many of the above
persons have fathers, and brothers, and other relatives, among the
rulers or managers of our congregations and religious societies, and
this cause, if no other, offers great obstacles to carrying out
effectually and fully the great principles I have just presented. But
however unpleasant it may be for a person to be compelled to refuse
another those offices or services, which he would under any other
circumstances willingly render, stern necessity requires that this class
of offenders should no longer be permitted to be associated with us in
the conducting of our religious affairs; for if not prohibited from
interfering in our societies, and this intermarrying with gentiles be
permitted without any show of opposition on our part, by allowing the
transgressors to retain their former rights in congregations and
societies, the name of Jew, in this country especially, will, I fear,
soon be a matter of history, but not of reality. Yours, &c.
Simeon Abrahams.
New
York, January 24th, 5605.
Note
by the Editor.—We present above the views of one of our
people on the article which we gave in January, under the head
“Dangers of our Position.” We would merely remark that it is no
motive of illiberality which prompted the production of our article; we
spoke as a Jew should speak, fearlessly, upon a subject which has
withdrawn many families from our communion; and we think at the same
time that, when our religion is concerned, we cannot regard the feelings
of parents, or of relatives, nor of our Christian friends, but must
speak out what we deem for the best interests of our faith. It must not
be forgotten that a marriage with a gentile is an act which is not
liable to a remedy, at least it is of difficult attainment; since if we
even were willing to adopt the gentile wife or husband into our
persuasion, which we are opposed to on the principle, not to admit
proselytes where we suspect interested motives, it is very doubtful
whether the parties themselves would consent, or would have conviction
enough to demand admission, except in rare instances; and then whether
they would honour our religion by their strict conformity after they had
been admitted into the body of Israel. Our recommendation therefore of
withdrawal of fellowship, was owing to the superior claims religion has
over consanguinity; and thus it would be an affectation of liberality
which we neither possess, nor care about possessing, to hesitate, and to
recommend merely half-measures, which would avail nothing in the end. It
must be remembered, that we are in the minority all over the world, and
that if we wish not to diminish, we must keep all our members within our
pale. We know of no coercive measures, and if we did, we should neither
recommend nor adopt them, to prevent persons following their inclination
in matters of affection; but we actually think, that there ought to be a
fair warning, proved but the punishment being carried out, that
whoever quits the household of Israel, quits also the friendship of its
members. Our illiberality is not against the gentile wife nor
husband—it is against the offending Israelite; and whilst we would
discard the one from our affections, we would protect the other and
their children to the utmost of our power, though we would still regard
them as not belonging to Jews, owing to their defective parentage. There
may be a question whether parents will feel sufficient religious zeal,
to act up to our recommendation; this is another thing; but that does
not prove that our views are either wrong in principle, or not consonant
with the strictest principles of mercy, for we regard just punishment to
an offender, in every relation of life; as the best means of showing
mercy to the innocent. There has, however, latterly sprung up a species
of strange sensibility, which looks professedly to prevention of crime,
by what is termed the reformation of the criminal; but still there must
be punishment of some sort, or else the criminal could not be reformed,
for no one is senseless enough to maintain that a gentle admonition by
judge and jury will punish a murderer, or prevent a man of unbridled
passions from laying violent hands upon his neighbor’s life. So then
imagine a punishment decreed for the punishment and reformation of the
offender, and the peace of the non-offending many; but no sooner has the
decree been pronounced than the criminal becomes an object of pity, he
has grown from the abhorred violater of the laws, into something to
excite commiseration, because what every one demanded, the security of
society through the visitation of evil upon the offender, has actually
taken place. The crime, to be sure, is condemned, but the least
punishment places the criminal upon a platform where the innocent do not stand, he is an object of tender
regard to the sensitive philanthropists, and his misdeeds are forgotten
in the tumult of pity, whilst those whom he has injured are not heeded,
because they are sufferers, not criminals. Now we protest against such a
system in our religion; the Bible demands that the guilty shall
be punished as a recompense for the wrong, and as a warning to others;
and upon this principle we claim that those who renounce, tacitly or by
words, the fellowship of Israel, should, upon conviction of this great
sin, forfeit our esteem, as a punishment to themselves, and a warning to
others. This is our view, and we cannot help expressing it, whether it
be regarded as illiberal or just.
Our
correspondent will see that we have struck out a part of his
recommendation against persons who lead a notoriously immoral life.
Christians, as well as we, condemn such
practices; Judaism has nothing peculiar to dread or to recommend in the
premises; and if one is notorious for his bad conduct, it is for the
people themselves to refuse honouring him by bestowing offices in the
Synagogues or societies upon him; but there is no power for excluding
him from public worship or to hold a seat in the Synagogues. The latter
is the case also, according to our apprehension, with persons married
out of the pale; they are not entitled to any honour, at least each
congregation, as we believe, can pass a law excluding them; but we do
not think that we could, or ought to, prevent them possessing a seat in
the Synagogue; all they can claim is to be buried themselves without the
usual honours, and this we cannot refuse to any Israelite who has not
publicly renounced his faith, and even then we doubt whether there is
any power to refuse him burial, since we do not admit the right any Jew
to disconnect himself from the congregation, and we regard all as
Israelites though they have grievously sinned to the last. It is our doctrine
אף
על פי שחטא
ישראל הוא “Though
he has sinned, he is still an Israelite.” Is this liberality or not ?
Let our readers decide.—Still though we differ from Mr. A. in some of
his views, we give them to the public under the full persuasion that
free discussion must ultimately bring out the truth. We are glad in the
meantime that the subject has elicited attention, and we shall be happy
could we be assured that we have contributed a little towards correcting
so great an evil as admixture with gentiles, through bonds of
consanguinity, the greatest danger which Israel is exposed in the
dispersion. |
