THE ZIONIST IDEA IN ENGLAND
The spirit of the time――Different currents――Thomas Witherby
――Dr. Joseph Priestley――Anti-Socinus, _alias_ Anselm Bayly
――John Hadley Swain――William Whiston――Bishop Robert Lowth
――Dr. Philip Doddridge――David Levi.
IN the early years of the nineteenth century religious ideas exercised
considerable influence on the English mind, and penetrated deeply
into the soul of the nation. Public opinion was, therefore, favourably
disposed towards Zionism, and prepared to accept it from the
religious point of view. But that was not the only point of view from
which Zionism was advocated and accepted. Zionism had two aspects,
corresponding to the two meanings expressed by the words “Restoration
of _Israel_.” Those words sometimes denoted simply the tendency
towards a Jewish national revival, an aspiration as elementary and
natural as any other of the kind; at other times the idea of the
“Restoration of _Israel_” was connected with the realization of
religious prophecies, and it was held that Judaism or Christianity
(according to the point of view) was to be glorified by the
resettlement of Jews in Palestine. As religion, and especially
the Bible, was one of the most potent agencies in the formation
of political and moral theories in England, it came about that the
history of the Zionist idea was interwoven with that of religious
opinions. But, on the other hand, it is impossible to overlook the
influence of nationalist ideas which supported the Zionist cause
from another point of view, and were expressed in a different tone
and spirit. While on the one hand religious imagination gave to
the conception the richness and warmth that belong to sentiment,
♦statesmanship contributed the clearness and firmness that reason
alone can give.
♦ “statemanship” replaced with “statesmanship”
Every keen student of the literature of that epoch concerning
Zionism will readily notice that there were two different currents of
thought. We will refer only to one writer who was altogether averse
to conversionism, yet adopted the Zionist view――Thomas Witherby
(1760‒1820). He was a London solicitor of repute, who after his
retirement lived at Enfield and took up the study of political and
social problems. He wrote _An Attempt to Remove Prejudices Concerning
the Jewish Nation_ (Appendix xlv), and was opposed on some important
points to Mr. Bicheno’s prophecies (Appendix xlvi), but, essentially,
shared the latter’s opinions concerning the rights of the Jewish
nation. He was the first English author who dealt with the imaginary
incompatibility of Jewish citizenship with Jewish national claims to
Palestine. He confessed that prejudices against the Jews, though not
as vigorous then as they had been in times gone by, were still very
strong. He admitted “the sad conduct of Christians against Jews”;
he praised “the Jewish sincerity and their attachment _to their
nationality_ and religion,” and on those grounds he defended the claim
of the Jews’ citizenship. “Bad Jews would be bad citizens; good Jews
would be good citizens.” According to his view, the just demand for
equality of rights for the Jews does not conflict with the claim of
the Jewish nation to a land of its own, in which he decidedly believed.
We may let him speak for himself:
“Previous to the great and most conspicuous return of the Jews to
their own land there will be a partial restoration of many of them to
their land, which will probably be effected by the Protestant powers
who may renounce their prejudices against them, and see that the
non-acceptance of the Christian doctrines is not the bar to their
restoration to the favour of God.”
He recognized both the right of the Jews to decide for themselves in
matters affecting the preservation of the race, and the independent
validity of the considerations which lead to the recognition of Jewish
rights in all countries. It was his opinion that while humanity and
justice must refuse to recognize anything in the laws of any country
which was at variance with the principle of equality, they should be
the more ready to admit the higher claim of the Jewish nation to a
home of its own.
Witherby stood, then, for the Restoration of _Israel_ as well as for
Jewish Emancipation. There can be no stronger and more convincing
protest against the fallacious assumption of the irreconcilability of
Zionism and Emancipation than Witherby’s interesting and instructive
pamphlet. His ideal――a noble and statesmanlike ideal――was to do
justice to those Jews who lived in the country, and accordingly formed
an integral part of the organism of the State, working like others
for the prosperity and safety of the realm. Equally he considered
it a sacred duty of humanity to enable this ancient and disinherited
nation to rebuild a central home for those of its members who saw the
necessity of such a home, and had the inclination to go there. The
policy of the State towards the Jews was to be based on these broad
principles. Witherby was a man of practical sense and clear sight; he
stated clearly and forcibly the anomalies of the Jewish position, and,
unhampered by petty prejudices, sought earnestly for a solution of the
Jewish problem in its entirety.
Illustration:
_Rev._ JAMES BICHENO DAVID LEVI
_Rev._ WILLIAM WHISTON
_Dr._ JOSEPH PRIESTLEY _President_ JOHN ADAMS
In concluding this part of the review of the Zionist idea in Christian
England, we may mention the name of Dr. Joseph Priestley (1733‒1804).
Dr. Priestley was an eminent English philosopher, theologian, and
chemist. Though not a conversionist in the true sense of the term,
he was nevertheless somewhat influenced by that point of view. He was
assisted by the Rev. Anselm Bayly (1719‒1794), LL.D., Sub-Dean of His
Majesty’s chapels, _alias_ Anti-Socinus, and John Hadley Swain. In
his _Letters to the Jews_ (Appendix xlvii) and in _A Comparison of the
Institutions of Moses ... And An Address to the Jews on the present
state of the World_ (Appendix xlviii) he threw his arguments into a
series of hypothetical syllogisms, the only defect in which is that
his premises could hardly be proved. Yet the stress which he laid
on the acknowledgment of _Israel’s_ dignity atones for the sophistry
of the argument. Having cast a good idea in the stereotyped mould of
conversionism, he seems to have expected that a great impression would
be produced upon the Jews; but, naturally, his conversionist methods
evoked a storm of protest.
He found a strong opponent in David Levi (1742‒1808), a _Hebraist_ and
well-known author of books dealing with Jewish theology and ritual.
In his controversies with believers and non-believers David Levi
attempted to show that the divine mission of the prophets was fully
established by the present dispersion of the Jews. He published a
reply――_Letters to Dr. Priestley, in answer to those he addressed
to the Jews_; London, 1787 (Appendix xlix)――in which the orthodox
standpoint of passive, religious Zionism is defined in the following
terms: “And, as all the calamities that were to befall our nation,
in consequence of our transgressing the Law, as foretold by that
great prophet, and divine legislator, _Moses_, have been fulfilled in
all respects; consequently, those great and glorious promises, also
foretold by the same prophet, must likewise have their full completion.
“But the exact time of this accomplishment is not known to any, save
the eternal God Himself;... These prophecies, Sir, are our consolation
in this long, and dreadful captivity, and have been our support,
in enabling us to bear up against the many grievous and miserable
persecutions, we have suffered....” (_pp._ 2‒3). In this way Levi
withdraws Messianism altogether from human experience and the
operation of the ordinary laws of thought.
On the other hand, William Whiston (1667‒1752),¹ Bishop Robert Lowth
(1710‒1787)² and Dr. Philip Doddridge (1702‒1751),³ supported the idea
of a speedy restoration of the Jews, and, with the exception of the
liberal-minded Whiston, adopted the conversionist view. There was,
unfortunately, too much hasty and captious objection on the one hand,
and of settled and inveterate prejudice on the other; too strong a
tendency to lose sight of the broader features of the main question
in the eagerness to single out particularly salient points of attack.
Nevertheless, the steady progress of the Zionist idea is unmistakable
on both sides of the controversy. Regardless of all these polemical
discussions, public opinion began to understand that Zionism was not
opposed to and did not interfere with the Christian Millennium or the
Jewish _Messiah_, but was simply a definite conception of the way in
which humanity has to prepare for the realization of the great ideal.
¹ The Literal Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies.....
IV. Natural Preparations ... for the Restoration of the
Jews,... By Will. Whiston, M.A. ... London: ... MDCCXXIV.
² Isaiah, A New Translation; With a preliminary dissertation
and notes, critical, philological, and explanatory. By
Robert Lowth, D.D. ... Lord Bishop of London.... London:...
MDCCLXXVIII.
³ The Works of the Rev. P. Doddridge, D.D. Volume viii.... The
Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans;... Leeds:... 1805.