|
In consequence of a desire expressed by several
persons to read the remarks, which the editor of the Occident lately
addressed to the New York Tribune, and as it has been found impossible
to procure even a small quantity of copies of the paper in which they
appeared, he now presents them in his own pages, not from any great idea
of their intrinsic merit, but because they may be used as a standing
rebuke to impertinent intermeddling in our domestic affairs, which is
the field of operation in which the New York and other conversion
societies are constantly active. We cannot hope that one or even a dozen
rebukes will silence our calumniators; they are either too blinded by
ignorance, or urged by other more tangible motives, to work for our
destruction; and hence it is well to furnish less fortunately situated
brothers, with ready means to defend themselves when attacked. If we
rest quietly, and let all injuries pass unnoticed, they will increase
rapidly, because they are unopposed; but if we rise up in our
indignation and hurl the defiance of an honourable spirit back into the
teeth of our opponents, we at least will acquire their respect, if we
fail to bring conviction home to them of the wrong they do us. By
pusillanimity we shall surely increase the number of our enemies; by
brave opposition we may succeed in arresting their augmentation. Hence,
the readers of this magazine will, it is hoped, excuse the apparent
vanity of the editor’s offering them a republication of what he wrote as
a matter of defence for another journal, a piece of apparent egotism of
which he has not hitherto been guilty.
The history of this article is as follows: During
the last month of May, among other anniversaries in the city of New
York, the A. S. M. C. J. held their annual exhibition, and delivered
reports and speeches as in such cases is usually the custom. A clergyman
of the Episcopal Church, whom we would name had we his permission, wrote
on the folly of the effects of the above society, under the signature of
Ludwig, <<360>>in the New York Tribune. We regret not having the article for
republication; but enough, it excited the ill-will of a tool of the
society, one of its officers we believe, who appeared in the same
journal on the other side. He had the honour of a republication in the
Jewish Chronicle for June, the editor thereof accompanying it with
sundry remarks of his own, fortifying his position by a disjointed
extract from the Occident.
Some weeks after, the author of “Ludwig” met the
editor of the Occident in this city, and complained to him of the
injustice he had suffered in consequence of the Occident being quoted on
the side of the sinning party, as a defence of their misdeeds. In
consequence of this, the editor forwarded as he then promised, an
explanatory article, the one now given, to the Tribune, the editors of
which kindly inserted it some days after. We have also to add in
conclusion, that up to the moment of writing this, the Chronicle has not
replied either in its columns or the public press; wherefore it is fair
to assume that it feels truly convicted of having done a wrong to our
people. It is to be hoped that its future course, (should it continue to
live), will be more in accordance with justice and fair dealing, and
exhibit more of that Christian spirit of which it so liberally
boasts.
To the Editors of the Tribune:
It is probable, that although engaged to some
extent in the same calling with yourselves, my name is unknown to you;
but this I trust, will not deprive me of the privilege of a space in
your columns: First to defend my fellows in belief from unfounded
aspersions, and secondly, to come to the rescue of one of your
correspondents who lately spoke out on a subject of a great and general
interest, and who is attacked in return by the parties whom he justly
blamed, this attack being fortified by a reference to what I said about
four years ago. Although so many things appear constantly in the daily
press, and in none more than yours, still I presume that you will call
to mind, that you lately gave publicity to a paper signed “Ludwig,”
professed to be written by a Christian clergyman, against the
proceedings of the Society styling itself the American Society for
Meliorating the Condition of the Jews, that is, “for converting the Jews
to Christianity,” which is all it professes to accomplish, as any
melioration of our temporal or moral condition has never yet been
attempted by it, and is in fact entirely beyond its means to accomplish
in even the smallest degree. By-the-by, an impartial history, drawn from
its own records, since its first organization, about twenty-five years
ago, would be a curious exposure of credulity, fraud and deception, such
as societies seldom present in this country; and still it
<<361>>goes on
calling for more funds to convert Jews, while it cannot point to a
single intelligent male or female native American Israelite, converted
by its means, either directly or indirectly; for I take it as conceded,
that all the fruits of its labours do not embrace one individual, who
could with propriety be classed among the educated and intelligent men,
who are not wanting among the Israelites of America.
I forbear to
characterize the converts, as they deserve, and as I can prove them to
be, because, this has nothing to do with the question; and I only say
what I do to call your attention to the folly of converting Jews to
Christianity, while there exist such miserable haunts of vice and
ignorance, or rather vice through ignorance, in all the large and
small towns in the Union and elsewhere, on whom the efforts of honest
philanthropists could so much better, and for so far greater a result,
be expended, than on our people, who at least are not so morally
degraded as thousands on thousands of nominal Christians to be met with
in all directions, and this not rarely at the very doors of the churches
where such strenuous appeals are made to the pockets of sympathizing
friends of humanity on account of the awfully benighted state of the
Jews.
Where we are known all such foolish exhibitions are
looked upon with contempt; but it is not everywhere that we are brought
personally under the cognizance of our fellow-citizens of other
persuasions; and we feel extremely anxious that the inhabitants of
Maine, New-Hampshire, Vermont, and other places where there are few or
no Jews, should have as kindly a regard for us as those who appreciate
our character, from a daily intercourse with us in many other parts of
the Union. But let one ignorant of us read the highly wrought portraits
of our degradation, which the conversion preachers and writers present,
and he will surely come to the conclusion that we must indeed be sunk
very low, and be deserving of the pity, at least, if not the hatred,
(and this feeling too is perhaps, and this designedly, evoked) of all
sincere and pious Christians. I ask you, Messrs. Editors, if this is
right? Is it correct that any class of American citizens is to be held
up through systematic efforts to the pity or scorn of all others? And
still this is the evident course of the reverend and other gentlemen
connected with the A. S. M. C. J. (initials almost as fearful as the
ancient S. P. Q. R.), and it is for this reason that I should be obliged
to you to give me a corner in The Tribune to enter, as one of the
Jews, my solemn protest against such doings from gentlemen, who, though
they may be, and no doubt are, all honourable men, do a great injury to
those who have never offended them.
It is true that I control a press of
my own; but then, “The Occident” is only a monthly, and of but limited
circulation, and this <<362>>among Jews chiefly, and therefore it is, through
its means only, out of my power to appeal to the public at large; and
hence the daily or weekly press is the only vehicle through which we can
reach the public eye and attention. Have you, Messrs. Editors,
independence enough to place it once in a while at the disposal of the
friends of light and absolute social equality? If so, let me speak
through your columns; and if not, say so freely, and then I shall know
that even here, in these United States, in this age of progress, there
is no freedom for the weak, but mere toleration, a word hateful
to the heart of those who have, through so many centuries of darkness,
of doubt, of oppression and of death, thirsted for the dawn of a better
period. But I will not complain, decide as you will; for I know the fate
that awaits those who dare to differ from, and thus by implication
insult the self love of, the majority; and the voe victis, freely
rendered, “the minority have no right,” resounds as yet in the ears of
those, who have been rendered familiar with all the scorn and
malevolence of the ignorant, the selfish and the fanatic for centuries
past. Still I will write on, and leave you to dispose of this first
piece as you may deem proper, either on the table or under it, as it may
suit your humour, interest or convenience.
But you may perhaps think that my introduction will
never end, and indeed were I to speak out all I feel, it would be a
long introduction; still it is time to come to the point, and to the
particular subject-matter which now moved me to write to you. So to
begin in good earnest. Perhaps you are as little aware of the existence
of the Jewish Chronicle in New York, as of the Occident in
Philadelphia, still there are two such little planets revolving round
their peculiar axis; the former to malign the Jews, and to report all
their faults and apostasies, the latter to be in a measure their
advocate, and to reprove without hesitation and reserve when errors
and wrong are discovered; the former is the organ of the A. S. M. C. J.
and is thus the mouth-piece of a board of managers; the latter is my own
property, not depending on party or clique, and all the support I
receive is the individual subscription of those who take it. It so
happens that the Chronicle for June* takes notice of the two
communications of “Ludwig” and “Philo-Israel,” which appeared lately in
your paper. I have not the first before me, because with characteristic
candour, the Rev. Editor of the Jewish Chronicle only copies
<<363>>the reply and leavers the first unprinted, by which
means his readers can form no comparison for themselves.
But in
the present case it does not matter much, as Ludwig does not require me
to defend his words, which he is amply able to do himself. It is only in
respect to my alleged admission of our national unworthiness that I wish
to aid “Ludwig,” as he has no access to the old numbers of the magazine
which I edit, at least not as readily as myself; nor can it be expected
that he should be able to explain my misunderstod meaning as readily as
this can be done by me. In the note which the Editor of the Chronicle
attaches to the communication of Philo-Israel, reprinted from The
Tribune, he says under head 3 as follows:
“Another grievance, and that which more than
anything else seems to have stirred Ludwig’s passions, was the
statement by one of the speakers that a large portion of the Jews of
this country—(we did not observe that he said ‘the large majority)—are
‘practically infidels.’ All such imputations Ludwig treats as
‘false, scandalously false,’ and asserts, on the contrary, that ‘the
Jews search the Scriptures more, even the New Testament of our Lord;
they are more earnest in prayer; they are more constant in the
recognition of the Divine Mercy; as a body they abound far more in the
fruits of the spirit than the American Christians.’ From this it is
apparent enough to what spiritual school Ludwig belongs.
‘For a Christian Minister’ his tastes must be rather peculiar. A man
with him is all the more a Christian the less he believes and the more
he hates Christianity. Now, at the risk of renewing the agitation of
Ludwig’s bosom, we deliberately reaffirm what was only incidentally
alluded to by Dr. D.[owling].”
Now, I do not mean to vindicate Ludwig’s Christian
character, for this is his business; I am no Christian, and therefore
not able to define what constitutes the essentials of a character of
that kind. But surely the Editor of the Chronicle, does not include
slander and detraction of an innocent set of men among the qualities of
a Christian Minister; for if these be needed, then most men would thank
their Maker that their lot has not been cast among them. But I stray
somewhat, and must stick to my text. Well, the Editor of the
Chronicle deliberately asserts that a large portion, a majority of
the Jews in this country, are practically infidels; and though he
“cannot be suspected of any wish to strengthen the wicked prejudices
from which Israel has so long suffered, and still suffers, even in this
land,” he still believes, “not being willing to flatter the Jew to his
eternal ruin, that whatever zeal of God survives in Israel, is a zeal
not according to knowledge, while the general aspect of their spiritual
condition is precisely what prophecy of old declared it should
<<364>>become,
and what all Christian Missionaries in all the ends of the earth declare
it to be—barren, desolate, and ‘very dry.’” No, indeed, Messrs. Editors;
the good soul of the Chronicle revolts at the idea of exciting
prejudice against the Jews; he only tells, month after month, that they
are barren, desolate and very dry.
Beautiful thoughts! kind expressions!
such as will warm the hearts of Christians for the once loved children
of God! No prejudice is thus excited! none will despise the Jews for
being so thoroughly worthless! and then this is all in fulfilment of
ancient prophecies. Will the Editor be good enough to put his finger on
a single passage which truly interpreted avers this? Can he find no
other texts which give us a better insight into the dread decrees of
God, and the dispensation under which we have been maintained for so
many years and centuries, a people amid the nations? No prejudice! not
he, indeed, entertains the least; the Editor loves Israel, but only to
destroy, to blot out their memory from the souls of men, though the
Scriptures emphatically speak of the very dry bones that they are the
house of Israel, and that the spirit shall come in them and they shall
live, as Israelites, on the land which God had given to their
fathers.
But I must not trespass too much on your space and
good nature; so I will confine myself to one single assertion of the
Chronicle, and close at least for the present. In evidence that we
are so corrupt, he adduces as a proof— “Or, what if Dr. D. had said that
the Israel of our day ‘can lay no claims to the title of a religious
community?’ Well, the Occident of Philadelphia had confessed
only a little* before, that that dreadful fact had ‘become perfectly
evident.’”
So you observe, Messrs. Editors, that I am adduced as a witness that
we are practically infidels; for this is the matter in dispute. But I
wish to explain what I said and how I said it. In the first volume of
the Occident (From April 1843 to March 1844,) I wrote several leading
articles under the heading “The
Demands of the Times,” in which I endeavoured to point out the
low religious state of modern times, not among Jews only, but Christians
also, and in one I traced the delinquency among us to the fearful moral
debasement which had its rise in the first French Revolution. Now, I “flatter the Jew to his eternal ruin,” as little as
the Rev. Editor of the Chronicle, but from a different motive;
and so I resumed the discussion of our demands in the
sixth
number of my second volume, commencing on page 265, in order to call the
attention of the Jews to their condition,—not to say that they were
practically infidels; and therefore, in
<<365>>averring that we were not a religious community, or
in other words, that as a community religion had not followers enough,
we said what every Christian minister asserts every Sunday from his
pulpit when he denounces the misconduct of his flock. Are Christians,
therefore, practically infidels? Let the Editor answer for himself.
But I will transcribe my remarks from which the
italicised quotation has been made, and this not for the first time: “We
have always been sorry (and what honest man could be otherwise?) to be
compelled to confess that the state of religion among us is very low
indeed. Not that people do not have faith in religion, but that they do
not act up to the standard which has been presented to us by our
forefathers. The indifference is one of supineness, not of an aggressive
nature. In America there may be a few enemies to our religion, men who
would seek designedly to injure our holy structure; but their number
must be small indeed, if we may trust to the opinion which we have
formed from our very general intercourse and extensive acquaintance with
all classes of persons. There is—we say it sincerely—no enmity to
Judaism existing to any great extent. There are but few who would gladly
see their neighbour yield himself a captive to infidelity, or join
another system of faith. When, however, we come to enumerate those who
look with indifference upon religious observances, we fear that the
number will be found exceedingly great. The observance of the Sabbath,
that weekly sacrifice of our time to the Divine will, is neglected to
such an extent that honourable Christians speak of it, as a shame, as a
disgrace to us; and with respect to the prohibited kinds of food, the
non-conformity is too glaring to escape detection. The same may be said
with respect to other duties; for it has become perfectly evident that
we can lay no claim to the title of a religious community.”
I will not ask you to copy more of my article; I
only wish to place the fragment in connexion with the passage to which
it belongs. And now I leave you to judge whether it justifies the wicked
attack of the Rev. Dr. Dowling, and the reiteration thereof by the Rev.
John Lillie. At all events, if Christians are correct, the sins we
enumerated as stamping us as sinners, are not sins; and therefore
we are on a par with them if we even neglect these observances. But
without exculpating ourselves, I will maintain, that were Christians as
much exposed to temptation with regard to the first day of the week, as
we are to the seventh, the churches would present a beggarly show of
empty benches, in place of their now crowded state. And as it is, on
week days when meetings are held, the females form the largest portion
of the audience, the men being engaged in their avocations.
This, I say, does not excuse the Jews for a neglect
of duty; <<366>>but it certainly is enough not to authorize our opponents to
condemn us as a worthless race of infidels; and this because a Jewish
editor, to reprove and thereby improve his readers, tells them
wholesome, though perhaps unwelcome truths. Of one thing I will absolve
the editor of the Chronicle, he never will expose Christianity to
such a misunderstanding by a bold mode of speaking, as I have done my
fellow-Israelites, and myself among them, by my plain words—words,
nevertheless, which could only be distorted and misunderstood by malice
or prejudice, and tortured into such a sense as to cast undeserved odium
upon a people who have much to contend with even in this land—to quote
the Editor’s own words—to observe their religion.
I will not follow him in his other points, as I
have occupied too much space already; but I can assure him and his
society and its supporters, that it is not a difficult thing to meet
them on all the questions which they can raise. If they believe us
infidels, let them look around the land and observe the number of new
Synagogues springing up as if by magic in New York, Philadelphia,
Cincinnati, Albany, Cleveland, Baltimore, Richmond, Charleston, Mobile,
Louisville, New Orleans, Easton, Syracuse, Buffalo, and elsewhere,
considering that our people are poor, and many of them labouring hard
for their daily bread, and I am sure they will alter their opinions. As
we increase in numbers, the character of our ministry will also improve,
and this will again cause an amelioration of our moral and religious
character without the aid and despite of the efforts of the American
Society for Meliorating the Condition of the Jews, which I hope may have
the same amount of success which it has had hitherto, from its birth to
its tottering manhood.
As I scorn to fight in disguise, I have written so
that an anonymous signature would be out of place, and therefore I
subscribe myself, gentlemen,
Your humble servant,
Isaac Leeser.
Philadelphia, July 11, 5608, A. M.
|
