[Illustration: _ISRAEL FRIEDLAENDER (born in Russia, 1876), attended
the Universities of Berlin and Strassburg (Ph.D., 1901); called to the
Jewish Theological Seminary in 1903, where he is now the Sabato Morais
Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis. Professor Friedlaender
is not only the author, editor, and translator of a number of
scholarly works but his wide observation of Jewish life in various
countries, coupled with his broad historic knowledge, have enabled him
to write and speak on present Jewish problems with exceptional
authority and insight, as for example in his new book, "The Jews of
Russia and Poland." His lectures before Menorah Societies have been
particularly stimulating and have made him a great favorite with
University students._]
VARIOUS occurrences of recent date have revealed a rift in American
Jewry which if not healed in time is likely to result in a permanent
schism. The agitation centering around the question of a Jewish
Congress is not the cause of this rift; it is rather an effect or a
symptom betokening the profound difference of opinion and sentiment
which at present divides the Jews of America. In the realignment of
American Jewry which this struggle is calling forth, the Zionists and
the non-Zionists of this country--the former centering around their
local organization, the latter represented by the American Jewish
Committee--have been taking opposite sides. Those of us whose Judaism
is broad enough to embrace with equal loyalty the ideals of Zionism
and the interests of American Judaism, cannot but view with the
deepest concern the possibility of a permanent conflict between these
two sections of American Jewry, a conflict fraught with the gravest
consequences, not only for the Jewish cause in this country in general
but also for the Zionist movement--a conflict, moreover, in which no
victory achieved by either side can be anything but a Pyrrhic victory.
The situation is one that demands careful thought and delicate action.
Only a few of us are in a position to influence the course of events
by acting, but many of us may help to clarify the situation by
thinking. A correct diagnosis is an indispensable preliminary to a
cure, and it is only by finding out whether the issues underlying the
present struggle represent a chronic and perhaps irremediable
conflict, or are rather the effect of an acute and therefore curable
misunderstanding, that a proper solution may be discovered and
proposed. It is from this point of view that an attempt is here made
to analyze the present situation in American Jewry, to trace the
causes which have produced it, and to point out the consequences which
are unavoidable unless a remedy be applied in time.
_The Two Issues in American Jewry_
TO my mind there are two fundamental issues which separate the two
groups in American Jewry from one another. They may be expressed in
the following terms: 1, _Diaspora versus Palestine_; 2, _Religion
versus Nationalism_.
Without any desire to lose myself in philosophic subtleties, I shall,
for the sake of brevity, adopt the Hegelian language and explain the
development of these issues on the principle of _Thesis_, _Antithesis_
and _Synthesis_, i. e., of the initial prevalence of one extreme, of
its yielding subsequently to the opposite extreme, and of the final
harmonization of the two in a higher unity, combining the essential
features of both. I shall endeavor to point out that the Synthesis
forms the ground on which both parties may cooperate, without
sacrificing an iota of their respective convictions.
The first issue, expressed in the formula "Diaspora versus Palestine,"
hinges on the question as to whether the Jewish people finds its best
opportunities for development in the Diaspora, i. e., as an integral
part of the nations in whose midst it lives, or, away from the other
nations, as a separate entity, on its own soil in Palestine.
_The Rise and Fall of "Diaspora Judaism"_
WHEN modern Jewry, after the isolation of centuries, suddenly emerged
from the Ghetto to seek a place in the sun in the midst of the
Christian environment, the thesis adopted by it was _Diaspora_.
Consumed with the desire for emancipation, for sharing the benefits
and attractions of the new life around them, the Jews discarded the
hope for an independent national existence in Palestine, which had
been their lode-star throughout the ages. _Diaspora_ as opposed to
_Palestine_, and as exclusive of it, became the slogan of emancipated
Jewry. The Jewish religion was refitted to harmonize with this new
striving for material and cultural progress. Reform Judaism arose, the
main object of which was to break down the previous separateness of
the Jews; and the theory of a "Jewish mission" sprang into life, not
as a spontaneous growth of Jewish tradition, but as a forced hothouse
product of practical life--a theory which proclaimed that an isolated
Jewish existence in Palestine was subversive of the very essence of
Judaism, that the mission of the Jewish people was to propagate
monotheism among the nations of the earth, and that this mission could
only be carried out in the Dispersion, in the midst of the nations
which were to be the objects of that mission.
As time progressed, however, the "Diaspora" thesis gradually lost its
force. Emancipation failed to fulfill the ardent hopes attached to it.
The nations refused to allow the Jews to participate fully and
unrestrictedly in the general life of the country. Anti-Semitism,
manifesting itself in the crude form of hatred, or under the subtle
guise of prejudice, turned, in many cases, the liberties previously
granted to the Jews into a scrap of paper. On the other hand, the
dangers of this extreme Diaspora Judaism, at first little thought of,
began to loom larger and larger. The rush for emancipation threatened
not only to disrupt the unity of the Jewish people throughout the
world, which had been maintained during the ages of suffering and
persecution, but it also led large and important sections of Jewry to
assimilation, that is, to complete absorption.
_The Antithesis "Palestine" and Its Inadequacy_
AS a protest against the thesis "Diaspora," its opposite came to life,
the antithesis "Palestine." Political Zionism sprang into being,
loudly proclaiming that emancipation was a failure; that Judaism had
no chance of life in the Dispersion, and that the only salvation of
Jewry lay in being transferred to Palestine. _Zionism or assimilation_
was the alternative placed before the Jewish people. All efforts of
Jewry, as the last attempt to escape annihilation, were to be focused
on the obtaining of a publicly and legally assured home in Palestine.
All Jewish endeavors in the Diaspora were deprecated, because
consecrated to a cause which was foredoomed to failure.
It was not long before the antithesis, too, began to reveal its
deficiencies. The difficulties of reaching the Zionist goal very soon
proved far greater than had been anticipated in the blissful ecstasy
of the Zionist honeymoon. The ultimate consummation of the national
hope receded further and further before the longing gaze of the Jewish
people, and no longer held out an immediate remedy for the pressing
needs of suffering Jewry. The conviction also gradually gained ground
that, even under the most favorable of circumstances, Palestine could
only harbor a fraction of the Jewish, people, and that the vast bulk
of Jews would still remain in the lands of the Diaspora. Zionists who
were looking reality in the face could not accept the view of the
extremists, who were ready to save a small portion of the Jewish
people at the cost of abandoning to its fate the enormous majority
thereof.
_Opposing Ideals Fused Into Spiritual Zionism_
AS a result, a new formula asserted itself: Diaspora _plus_ Palestine.
It was the combination between the two extremes of Diaspora existence
and Palestine existence. This synthesis, generally called Cultural or
Spiritual Zionism, proclaimed that Palestine was indispensable for
the continuation of Judaism, for it was the only spot where the spirit
of Judaism, undisturbed by conflicting influences, could develop
normally and unfold all its hidden possibilities, and the only bond of
unity which could save the scattered members of the race from falling
asunder into disjointed fragments. The Diaspora, on the other hand, as
the dwelling place of the overwhelming majority of the Jewish people,
had problems of its own which clamored equally for solution.
Hence the Jewish task became a double one: the Jews in every country,
while participating to the full in the life of their environment--for
the return to the Ghetto was neither desirable nor possible--had to
endeavor to secure a maximum of elbowroom for the development of their
own section of Jewry, while as part of universal Israel they had to
keep up their contact with the Jews throughout the world and labor
with them for the realization of the common Jewish hope, that of a
spiritual center in the historic land of Judaism. _Diaspora without
Palestine_ was impossible, because without the refreshing breath of a
healthy Jewish life in Palestine it was bound to wither and dry up.
_Palestine without the Diaspora_ was equally impossible, because it
lacked the backing of the people as a whole, and was in danger of
becoming a petty and obscure corner in the vast expanse of the Jewish
Dispersion, a sort of Jewish Nigeria.
This synthesis was not a pale cast of thought, the flimsy product of
an imaginative brain. It had its prototype in the actual facts of
history. For during several centuries preceding the dissolution of the
Jewish state, Palestine was the spiritual center of Judaism, in the
sense just indicated. The Jews outside of Palestine were superior, not
only in numbers, but also in wealth and influence, to those of
Palestine. The Jews of Egypt, and the same applies to other countries
of that period, were closely associated with the cultural and material
aspirations of their environment. Philo was one of the most
illustrious representatives of the Hellenic culture of his age; these
Diaspora Jews even found it necessary to translate the Holy Writings
into Greek. Yet they were, at the same time, loyal to Palestine. They
paid their Shekel, they made their annual pilgrimages to Jerusalem,
and looked upon the Holy Land as the spiritual center of all Jewry.
_The Second Issue: Religion vs. Nationalism_
THE other fundamental issue on which Jewish opinion is divided is
closely associated with the preceding one; it hinges on the formula
_Religion versus Nationalism_. From its earliest beginnings down to
the time of modern emancipation, Judaism represented an indissoluble
combination of nationalism and religion. Though ultimately intended to
appeal to the whole of humanity, Judaism was essentially a _national_
religion. Its bearer was a national community which zealously guarded
its racial purity, and its external manifestations assumed the forms
of a national life. Again the Jewish people was, first and foremost, a
_religious_ nation. Its sole reason for existence was, in the belief
of every one of its members, "to know the Lord" and to make Him known
to others. A Jew who did not believe in the fundamentals of the Jewish
creed or who did not observe the fundamentals of the Jewish ceremonial
was as much of a monstrosity as the Jew who denied the common racial
descent of the Jews in the past, or their common national destiny in
the future.
The departure of the Jews from the Ghetto and their entrance into
modern life marked a turning point also in this direction. Filled with
the desire of becoming part of the nations in whose midst they lived,
modern Jews were ready, and thought they were compelled, to deny the
national character of Judaism. The Jews were now labelled as Germans
or Frenchmen of the Mosaic persuasion, who were divided from their
fellow-citizens by the purely spiritual affiliations of religious
faith--the same affiliations which divided the Christian population.
Here, too, Reform Judaism was quick to meet the demands of practical
life. It began to chop off all the elements in Judaism which betrayed
a national character, both in the domain of doctrine and of practice,
though it halted half way, and down to this day still acknowledges, in
flagrant contradiction with its own theory, a number of rites and
ceremonies which bear an unmistakable racial imprint.
This transformation of Judaism, or rather this transformation of
Jewish terminology--for, in many cases, it was merely a question of
terms--was greatly stimulated by the development of nationalism in
Western Europe, where the structure of the modern state excluded, or
was thought to exclude, a diversity of nationalities, while the
principle of religious toleration left enough room for a variety of
religious beliefs. As a result, those Jews who lost their religious
affiliations were bound to feel that they were outcasts in the
religious community of Israel: they became either _konfessionslos_ or,
by a curious perversion of logic and conscience, became members of the
dominant faith.
_The Rapprochement of Religionists and Nationalists_
THE thesis "Judaism as Religion" was followed by the antithesis
"Judaism as Nationalism." It is interesting to observe that the
antithesis came from the Jews of Eastern Europe who, in their
overwhelming majority, were adherents of strict orthodoxy. Those Jews
of Russia and Poland who had drifted away from their religious
moorings were neither psychologically nor physically in a position to
abandon Judaism: psychologically, because they were too strongly
saturated with Jewish culture and Jewish associations to tear
themselves away from the influence of Judaism; physically, because
they were excluded from participating in the life of the environment
and were forced to remain within the fold. Living as the Eastern Jews
did in compact masses, they found it easier, both in theory and in
practice, to emphasize the national aspect of the Jewish community. As
a result, a doctrine sprang up which looked upon Jewry as an
essentially racial or national entity, in which religion was merely
one of the many passing phases of its historical development. If among
the champions of the thesis "Religion" there were Jews who celebrated
the Ninth of Ab as a holiday because it marked, in their eyes, the end
of Jewry as a nation, there were, among the others, the adherents of
the antithesis "Nationalism," Jews who arranged entertainments on the
Day of Atonement, as a public protest against the religious character
ascribed to Judaism.
Here, too, however, the synthesis was gradually paving its way, and
the formula "Religion _plus_ Nationalism" was supplanting the thesis
"Judaism as Religion" and the antithesis "Judaism as Nationalism." The
religionists, that is, the believers in the purely religious character
of Judaism, began to realize the devastating effect of their doctrine
on Jewish life and development, while the nationalists, without
sacrificing their convictions--for religion, least of all sentiments,
can be forced on modern men--began to appreciate the overwhelming
influence of the Jewish religion as a historic factor in the life of
the Jewish people, and were ready to acknowledge the difficulty and
the danger of squeezing an officially nationalistic Jewry into the
narrow frame of the modern _Nationalstaat_.
This mutual _rapprochement_ resulted, gradually, in a tacit
agreement--an agreement far more durable than a legal compact, because
founded on sentiment rather than on law--which implied the recognition
of Judaism as composed of Religion and Nationalism, but left
sufficient room to include the two extreme types of Jews: those whose
loyalty to Judaism was entirely fed from the fountain of religion, and
those whose devotion to Judaism was altogether grounded in race
consciousness.
_The Growth of Diaspora Judaism in America_
THIS development, which may be traced in various countries of modern
Europe, nowhere assumed such huge proportions and such striking
manifestations as it did in America. The struggle, hinging on the two
opposite doctrines, was nowhere else so well defined and nowhere else
fraught with so many tangible consequences as in America, for the
reason that American Jewry, as no other Jewry in the world, was made
up of two different elements, sharply divided in their traditions and
associations, as well as in their mental and psychological complexion.
The Jews hailing from the lands of emancipation in Western Europe, who
are conventionally, though not quite accurately, designated as German
Jews, brought over with them the theses _Diaspora_ as against
_Palestine_, and _Religion_ as against _Nationalism_. The immigrants
from Eastern Europe, the children of the Ghetto, who with equal
inaccuracy are termed Russian Jews, carried with them the antitheses
_Palestine_ as against _Diaspora_ and, as represented by the
extremists among them, _Nationalism_ as against _Religion_. The
fanatics of Diaspora Judaism and of Judaism as a pure faith are to be
found exclusively among the "German" Jews. The radical adherents of
Palestine and of Jewish nationalism are recruited entirely from the
ranks of "Russian" Jews.
These issues were of particular and immediate significance for the
Jews in this country; for America has, in less than one generation,
become the second largest center of the Jewish Diaspora, and bids fair
to become the first, instead of the second, within another generation.
No other country in the world offers, even approximately, such a
favorable combination of opportunities for the development of a
Diaspora Judaism, as does America: economic possibilities, vast and
sparsely populated territories, freedom of action, liberty of
conscience, equality of citizenship, appreciation of the fundamentals
of Judaism, variety of population, excluding a rigidly nationalistic
state policy, and other similar factors. It is no wonder, therefore,
that in no other country did Reform Judaism, as the incarnation of
Diaspora Judaism, attain such luxurious growth as it did in America.
It discarded, more radically than in Europe, the national elements
still clinging to Judaism, and it solemnly proclaimed that Judaism was
wholly and exclusively a religious faith, and that America was the
Zion and Washington the Jerusalem of American Israel.
_The Opposition: The Palestinian Sentiment of Russian Jews_
ON the other hand, the emigrants from Russia brought the antithesis on
the scene. They quickly perceived the decomposing effect of American
life upon Jewish doctrine and practice, and they became convinced more
firmly than ever that Diaspora Judaism was a failure, and that the
only antidote was Palestine and nothing but Palestine. The
nationalists among them beheld in the very same factors in which the
German Jews saw the possibilities of a Diaspora Judaism, the chances
for organizing Jewry on purely nationalistic lines. Nowhere else,
except perhaps in Russia, can be found a greater amount of Palestinian
sentiment, as well as a larger manifestation of a one-sided Jewish
nationalism, than is to be met with in this country.
This conflict of ideas became extraordinarily aggravated by numerous
influences of a personal character. The division between the so-called
German Jews and the so-called Russian Jews was not limited to a
difference in theory. It was equally nourished by far-reaching
differences in economic and social position and in the entire range of
mental development. The German Jews were the natives; the Russian Jews
were the newcomers. The German Jews were the rich; the Russian Jews
were the poor. The German Jews were the dispensers of charity; the
Russian Jews were the receivers of it. The German Jews were the
employers; the Russian Jews were the employees. The German Jews were
deliberate, reserved, practical, sticklers for formalities, with a
marked ability for organization; the Russian Jews were quick-tempered,
emotional, theorizing, haters of formalities, with a decided bent
toward individualism. An enormous amount of explosives had been
accumulating between the two sections, which if lit by a spark might
have disrupted the edifice of American Israel, still in the process of
construction.
_The Promise of Union and Harmony_
AND yet, not only was the conflict averted, but the impending struggle
gave way to hearty and extensive cooperation, such as cannot be
witnessed elsewhere in the whole Jewish world (one recalls
particularly the analogy of England) where East and West seem never to
meet. As the two sections came into closer contact with one another,
they learned to understand one another and to appreciate their
respective points of view. This cooperation was not founded upon the
flimsy framework of political expediency. It was grounded in that
synthesis of Jewish life which combines in a higher unity the
essential elements of the doctrines formerly believed to be exclusive
of one another. The German Jews, while emphasizing the needs of
Diaspora Judaism and anxious to build up its largest manifestation in
America, learned to appreciate the quickening and ennobling effect
upon the Diaspora of a normal Hebrew life in Palestine, and became
interested in the regeneration of the Holy Land. The Russian Jews, on
the other hand, though laying particular stress on the possibilities
of Judaism in Palestine, put their shoulder to the wheel and were
ready to assist in rearing the great structure of Judaism in America.
The so-called religionists, while looking upon Judaism as a faith,
were yet disinclined to repudiate the purely nationalistic Jews, whose
enthusiasm and devotion they admired even though it flowed from a
source they did not officially acknowledge. The so-called
nationalists, basing their Judaism on race consciousness, realized
that a common foundation of Judaism in this country could only be laid
along the lines of religious affiliation.
This cooperation found tangible expression in the recent participation
of American Jews in the upbuilding of Palestine, a participation which
one will vainly look for in a similar group (I am not speaking of
isolated individuals) in other countries. The same desire for a better
understanding was further embodied in the movement toward Kehillah
organization, which, though centering around the Jewish religion,
still clearly implied the national element in Judaism.
There was every reason to hope that this cooperation, which had been
so happily inaugurated between the two sections, would become more
intimate and more extensive, and that the interaction of the
heterogeneous elements of American Jewish life would resolve itself
in a great and strong harmony. America bade fair to become an ideal
Jewish center, where the practical wisdom of emancipated Jewry and the
idealistic intensity of Ghetto Jewry would be merged in one united
Jewish community, fully conscious of its duty as the future leader of
the Jewish Diaspora and acknowledging its indebtedness to the center
of all Jews in the land of our Fathers.
_The Old Conflict Revived_
SUDDENLY, however, a reaction seems to have set in, which threatens to
disrupt the harmony hitherto prevailing. This reaction, which is
fraught with grave consequences for the future of American Judaism no
less than for the Zionist movement, dates from, or at least coincides
with, the struggle centering around the Haifa Technikum. This is not
the place to enter into an analysis of that momentous issue. It is
enough to state that the bond of unity was disrupted with rude hands,
and the old conflict hinging on the issues of Diaspora and Nationalism
broke out with new fury. Again we see Diaspora Judaism pitched against
Palestinian Judaism, and Religion against Nationalism. Reason has
given way to passion, and discrimination to generalization. The Jews
of the new Palestine, who have given of their life-blood to the
rejuvenation of our homeland, are sweepingly declared to be
"anarchists," while, on the other hand, American Jews who, with
single-hearted devotion, have been the builders of the great Jewish
center in the New World, are contemptuously sneered at as
"assimilationists."
In this mood of distrust and prejudice, American Jewry was overtaken
by the great crisis resulting from the World War, and the disharmony
prevailing between the two factions soon found tangible expression in
the struggle over a Jewish Congress. The two elements of American
Jewry were clearly divided on the issue: the German or native Jews,
represented by leading members of the American Jewish Committee, were
opposed to the calling of a congress, while the Russian or immigrant
Jews, speaking largely through the Zionist organization, clamored for
it.
From what has preceded I believe it may be safely concluded that this
demand for a congress on the one hand, and the opposition to it on the
other, are not rooted in diametrically opposed and deeply implanted
theories of Judaism but are rather the expression of different moods
or temperaments. The immigrant Jews who were directly concerned in the
war, since its horrors affected their homelands and the kin they left
behind, and who were impulsive and sentimental, felt the burning need
of crying out in their despair, and were ready to face the
consequences which might result from this outcry. The native Jews,
whose sympathy with their far-off brethren, profound though it was,
could hardly, in the nature of the case, be more than indirect and
whose accustomed reserve and self-restraint enabled them to judge the
issues more calmly, shrunk from the risks which in their opinion were
implied in an open protest of the Jewish people before the inflamed
public opinion of the non-Jewish world. It is not my intention, nor is
it my function, to render judgment in so momentous an hour on an issue
concerning which Jewish opinion is diametrically yet honestly divided.
But it is necessary to point out that whichever side may be in the
right: serious as may be the dangers of holding a congress or not, the
dangers involved in a split over this question are incalculably more
serious. Such a split may not only result in permanent and perhaps
irreparable injury to the Jewish cause in America and to the Zionist
movement in this country, but may also, by aligning the two sections
of American Jewry against one another, spell nothing short of disaster
to the Jewish people as a whole. The stakes involved in this conflict
are infinitely greater than the issue which has given rise to it.
_The Structure of American Judaism Endangered_
SO far as American Judaism is concerned, the practical results of this
strife between Zionists and non-Zionists in America,--to leave aside
all theoretical considerations,--may prove to be fatal. It will reopen
the gap between the two elements of American Jewry which had been
almost filled. The work of American Judaism has been done by both
elements. Prominent non-Zionists and even anti-Zionists have
frequently and gratefully acknowledged the debt which American Israel
owes to the cooperation of the Zionists. The institutions of American
Jewry depend to a large extent for their existence upon the
non-Zionists, who may now by the force of reaction be driven into
anti-Zionism. But the progress of these institutions just as largely
depends upon those who are Zionists. The withdrawal of the Zionists
from American Jewish work--and such withdrawal may become a moral duty
for the Zionists who are loyal to the movement and respect their
convictions--might mean a complete standstill in the life of American
Jewry. Perhaps there are a few among us who are skeptical about the
fate of American Judaism, and who therefore see no harm in hastening
its disintegration. But those of us who are profoundly concerned about
the future of the two and one-half million Jews who are now in
America, and of twice that number who may one day be here, cannot but
view with the utmost anxiety the danger of wrecking what promises to
become the greatest Jewish center in the history of the Jews since
their dispersion.
As for the Zionist movement, one cannot help doubting whether Zionism,
even if it succeeded in defeating its opponents, would thereby obtain
its object. I am not speaking of the very considerable material injury
which the movement will suffer from the indifference and hostility of
the other side. I am rather thinking of the dangers incurred by
Zionism itself if, having repulsed the so-called classes, it becomes
a one-sided movement of the masses. Of course, no Zionist can be
otherwise than deeply gratified by the prospect of Zionism becoming a
cause of the people, but unless it manages to preserve the balance of
power within the Jewish community, it will be exposed to risks from
another source. Zionism is beset with so many difficulties that it
dare not burden itself with problems extraneous to it. The injection
of political or economic issues into the movement is fraught with
incalculable consequences for the future of the movement in this
country. These issues are so extensive in their bearings and so vital
in their manifestations that if superimposed on the delicate structure
of Zionism they may crush it, never to rise again.
Zionism must, therefore, remain neutral. While including all Jews, it
dare not identify itself with any section of them. It dare not be
either a movement of the classes or of the masses. While holding
scrupulously aloof from the issues which divide modern Jewry as part
of modern humanity, it must keep its eye fixed on one point, the
securing of a Jewish center for the Jewish people as a whole, in which
the ills that afflict humanity may be cured in the prophetic spirit of
justice and righteousness.
_A Plea for Peace and Cooperation_
THE practical conclusion of these considerations is clear. It is a
plea for reconciliation, for a return to that Synthesis which was on
the point of becoming the common ground of all American Israel.
American Judaism needs peace to carry out the great task confronting
it. Zionism is no less in need of peace in order to gain the hearts of
those whose hearts are still Jewish. The very possibility of a
conflict has bred a spirit of suspicion and unfriendliness which falls
like a blight upon every attempt at united action. The non-Zionists
may succeed in defeating their opponents; they can never dispense with
Zionism which is a driving force in American Jewish life. The victory
may perch on the banners of the Zionists but they can never forego the
assistance of the non-Zionists who still form the backbone of American
Jewry. Representing the common longings of the Jewish people
throughout the world, Zionism should serve as a leaven, quickening and
stimulating the Jewish activities of this country, and rescue them
from the greatest danger of Diaspora Judaism, the danger of
provincialism, of falling away from the main body of universal Israel.
In the particular situation confronting us Zionism ought to assert the
claims of Palestine, in addition to those of the Diaspora. But the
Zionists cannot replace the present agencies of American Jewish life,
nor can they dispense with the cooperation of the non-Zionists. Such
cooperation, based on the synthesis _Palestine plus Diaspora_, would
be of equal benefit to both parties. Zionism and non-Zionism have only
one real enemy: it is Assimilation, which preaches the suicide of
Judaism. But all those who are concerned about the preservation of
Judaism, in whatever shape or by whatever means, have the right to be
recognized, if not as fellow workers in Zion, at least as fellow
workers in Israel.
_The Supreme Test for the Jews of America_
LASTLY, if cooperation and harmony between the Zionists and the
non-Zionists be permanently needed for the welfare of American
Judaism, they are needed a thousandfold now when the catastrophe which
has overwhelmed the ancient centers of Jewry has turned the eyes and
the hopes of the whole Jewish world toward the Jews of this country.
Ever since the Jews of Russia, fleeing from the wrath of the
oppressor, began to wend their steps toward these hospitable shores,
thoughtful European Jews have been looking upon America as the future
center of the Jewish Diaspora. And as time progressed, as the numbers
and the energies of the Old Jewish World assembled more and more in
the New, American Jewry has been steadily advancing toward this
exalted position of Jewish hegemony. But what, in the natural course
of events, might have been the fruit of slow and gradual ripening, has
now been thrust upon us as the sudden result of the World War.
Crippled European Jewry is now looking, and will look more and more,
to the Jewry of America not only for comfort and support, but also for
light and leading, for spiritual advice and guidance, and the Jewry of
America, the only Jewry of consequence unscathed by the world
struggle, cannot but assume the responsibility.
Nor is the Jewry of America at liberty to choose. There is an ancient
Jewish legend which, with a subtle touch of sarcasm, tells us that
when the Lord, having descended upon Mount Sinai, was about to bestow
the Torah upon the Jews, the latter, shrinking from the obligations
imposed by it, made an attempt to refuse the proffered gift. Thereupon
the Lord lifted the mountain over their heads and angrily exclaimed:
"If ye accept my Law, well and good. If not, ye shall be crushed on
the spot!" And the Jews, yielding no less to the promptings of duty
than to the dictates of wisdom, quickly recanted and declared: "We
will do and obey!" American Jewry will either be the leader of Jewry
or it will not be. Let it fail to respond to the great call of
history,--and it will unfailingly relapse into the obscurity and
sluggishness of its former parochialism. This great world crisis will
be either the making or the unmaking of American Jewry, and no Jew
whose mind is unclouded by the ephemeral passions of party strife can
do aught except ardently pray that the Jews of America may emerge in
triumph from their supreme test.
[Illustration: Signature: Israel Friedlaender]