|
No
one can imagine with what unwillingness we give to
the subjoined. But, where the matter in dispute
concerns the vital doctrines of our faith, the press
has but one course of duty to pursue, to give those
who think themselves aggrieved by the erroneous
teaching of their ministers a fair opportunity of
appealing to the judgment of the
<<256>>public, in
the hope of inducing the accused to review, and
thereby to change their, perhaps, hastily adopted
opinions. We trust that, in the resent instance, our
yielding to the demand of the President of the
Beth-el Congregation of Albany, of making public,
what at the same time we heard several months ago,
may induce our learned correspondent to look into
the matter more deeply, and to endeavour to trace
the glorious doctrines of the coming of the Messiah
and the resurrection of the dead to the sacred
source whence he has drawn the ideas concerning the
goodness of God and the immortality of the human
soul, which we lay before our readers in the present
number.
To
our mind, nothing is more clearly pointed out in
Scripture than the promise of the resurrection of
Israel, and the awakening of the dead, yea, in their
bodies to everlasting life. Dr. Wise, in an
unfortunate moment, in the ardour, perhaps, of a new
position as a candidate for the ministry of a
congregation, some members and the minister of which
were supposed unwilling to receive our creed as it
stood and yet stands, was hurried away to answer
“No” to a question put to the minister referred to
by a learned divine who maintained the side of the
correct faith.
Would there be any disgrace in Dr. Wise
acknowledging in calmer moments that he was
mistaken? and that the Bible supports the ancient
hope of Israel? To our view this course would be one
of honour and glory; as it would be merely the
overcoming, a little, the pride of opinion for the
sake of truth, and all lovers of peace would welcome
him among them as an able champion of pure
Judaism.—We have always maintained, and reiterate it
upon the present occasion, that the broaching of new
doctrines can only lead to disunion and estrangement
of feelings; and we earnestly wish our reformers
could be made conscious of the fact.
Experience has proved, that wherever this kind of
reform has exhibited itself, there has arisen
strife, there has sprung up dissatisfaction with the
preacher, there has shown itself war between
the people. And what is gained by it? Nothing,
literally and unqualifiedly nothing, and we appeal
to the congregation at Charleston for a confirmation
of our words, nay, to the gentleman himself, who was
so handsomely treated on his quitting office.
There are, by the by, some remarks in his address
which seem to refer to our own unworthy self, for
the share of the persecution which he had to
endure at our hands; but we have had so much to
forgive lately of a graver kind, than merely a
misapprehension, that we can well let this pass at
present without farther note. But the very position
in which Dr. Wise has been placed, by lending his
assent to the erroneous doctrines which we noticed
in the letter to Mr. Poznanski, in No. 5 of
our first volume, proves that we were right, and
<<257>>not acting in the spirit of persecution.—In
concluding these hasty remarks, written just before
making up our magazine for this month, we would
state that we place the Occident entirely at the
service of Dr. Wise, to offer any comment,
explanation, or rejoinder to the present
communication, and we should rejoice to see him come
out of the fire of trial purified and restored
without taint or thought of blame to the position in
public confidence, which his talents so well enable
him to occupy.
We
assure him in sincerity, that whatever spirit of
persecution or personal animosity others may indulge
in, we have none of it, and that we would gladly
suppress all from appearing in the Occident, if this
could mend the matter; but as the Asmonean has
already given it publicity, our silence would be
ridiculous affectation. Ed. Oc.
To
the Editor of the Occident.
Sir:—Differences which have arisen in the
Congregation Beth-El, in this city, and which
threaten to affect alike the character and
well-being of that congregation, make it my duty to
publish through the medium of your work, the
subjoined document, and to ask all Jews, ministers,
as well as competent laymen, throughout these United
States. whether a man who denies two fundamental
articles of the Jewish faith is a fit and proper
person to hold the office of Rabbi and preacher in
a Jewish Congregation?
I
am, sir, yours respectfully,
Louis Spanier,
President of the Congregation
Beth-El.
Albany, July 22, 5610.
We, the undersigned, at the request of Mr. L.
Spanier, do herewith certify that we were present at
a public controversy held in this city between the
Rev. Dr. Raphall and the Rev. Mr. Poznanski, and
that at the said controversy, the Rev. Dr. Raphall
propounded there two questions to the meeting: the
first was:—
“Do you believe in the coming of the Messiah?”
To
which question the Rev. Dr. Wise, of Albany, who was
present, answered foremostly in a loud and distinct
voice,
“NO!”
The second question was,
“Do you believe in the resurrection of the dead?”
The Rev. Dr. Wise was again heard by us to say in a
loud and distinct voice,
“NO!”
Given under our hands and the seal of the
Congregation Sheayreet Israel, this day, the eighth
day of July, 5610.
[Signed] Samuel Hart, Sen.,
President of the Congregation Sheayreet Israel.
Jacob Rosenfeld,
Minister of the Congregation Sheayreet Israel.
S. Valentine,
Secretary and Treasurer.
Sworn to and signed by,
the Rev. J. Rosenfeld, Mr. Samuel Hart, Sen., and
Mr. S. Valentine, in the presence of L. J. Moses,
Notary Public, and Q. U., Ex. Off. |
