VIII

But meantime we are waiting, and the soul "waiteth for the Lord more

than watchmen look for the morning, yea, more than watchmen for the

morning." Again, as in earlier periods of history, the world lies in

darkness, listening to the silence of God--a silence that can be felt.

"Watchmen, what of the night?" Such a blackness fell upon the ancient

Jews when Hadrian passed the plough over Mount Zion. But, turning from

empty apocalyptic visions, they drew in on themselves and created an

inner Jerusalem, which has solaced and safeguarded them ever since.

Such a blackness fell on the ancient Christians when the Huns invaded

Rome, and the young Christian world, robbed of its millennial hopes,

began to wonder if perchance this was not the vengeance of the

discarded gods. But drawing in on themselves, they learned from St.

Augustine to create an inner "City of God." How shall humanity meet

this blackest crisis of all? What new "City of God" can it build on

the tragic wreckage of a thousand years of civilization? Has Israel no

contribution to offer here but the old quarrel with Christianity? But

that quarrel shrinks into comparative concord beside the common peril

from the resurrected gods of paganism, from Thor and Odin and Priapus.

And it was always an exaggerated quarrel--half misunderstanding, like

most quarrels. Neither St. Augustine nor St. Anselm believed God was

other than One. Jesus but applied to himself distributively--as

logicians say--those conceptions of divine sonship and suffering

service which were already assets of Judaism, and but for the theology

of atonement woven by Paul under Greek influences, either of them

might have carried Judaism forward on that path of universalism which

its essential genius demands, and which even without them it only just

missed. Is it not humiliating that Islam, whose Koran expressly

recalls its obligation to our prophets, should have beaten them in the

work of universalization? Maimonides acknowledged the good work done

by Jesus and Mohammed in propagating the Bible. But if the

universalism they achieved held faulty elements, is that any reason

why the purer truth should shrink from universalization? Has Judaism

less future than Buddhism--that religion of negation and

monkery--whose sacred classics enjoin the Bhiksu to camp in and

contemplate a cemetery? Has it less inspiration and optimism than that

apocalyptic vision of the ultimate victory of Good which consoles the

disciples of Zoroaster? If there is anything now discredited in its

ancient Scriptures, the Synagogue can, as of yore, relegate it to the

Apocrypha, even as it can enrich the canon with later expressions of

the Hebrew genius. Its one possible rival, Islam, is, as Kuenen

maintains, as sterile for the future as Buddhism, too irretrievably

narrowed to the Arab mentality. But why, despite his magnificent

tribute to Judaism, does this unfettered thinker imagine that the last

word is with Christianity? Eucken, too, would call the future

Christian, though he rejects the Incarnation and regards the Atonement

as injurious to religion, and the doctrine of the Trinity as a

stumbling-block rather than a help. Abraham Lincoln being only a plain

man, was not able to juggle with himself like a German theologian, and

with the simplicity of greatness he confessed: "I have never united

myself to any Church, because I have found difficulty in giving my

assent, without mental reservation, to the long, complicated

statements of the Christian doctrine which characterize their Articles

of Belief and Confessions of Faith." "When any church," he added,

"will inscribe over its altar, as its sole qualification for

membership, ... 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,

and with all thy soul, and with all thy might, and thy neighbour as

thyself,' that church will I join with all my heart and with all my

soul."

Can one read this and not wonder what Judaism has been about that

Lincoln did not even know there _was_ such a church? But call the

coming religious reconstruction what you will, what do names matter

when all humanity is crucified, what does anything matter but to save

it from meaningless frictions and massacres? "Would that My people

forgot Me and kept My commandments," says the Jerusalem Talmud. Too

long has Israel been silent. "Who is blind," says the prophet, "but

My servant, or deaf as My messenger?" He is not deaf to-day, he is

only dumb. But the voice of Jerusalem must be heard again when the new

world-order is shaping. The Chosen People must choose. To be or not to

be. "The religion of the Jews is indeed a light," said Coleridge in

his "Table Talk," "but it is as the light of the glow-worm which gives

no heat and illumines nothing but itself." Why let a sun sink into a

glow-worm? And even a glow-worm should turn. It does not even

pay--that prudent maxim of the Babylonian Talmud, _Dina dimalchutha

dina_ ("In Rome do as the Romans"). Despite every effort of Jews as

individual citizens the world still tends to see them as Crabbe saw

them a century ago in his "Borough":--

Nor war nor wisdom yields our Jews delight,

They will not study and they dare not fight.

It is because they fight under no banner of their own. But the time

has come when they must fight as Jews--fight that "mental fight" from

which that greater English poet, Blake, declared he would not cease

till he had "built Jerusalem in England's green and pleasant land." To

build Jerusalem in every land--even in Palestine--that is the Jewish

mission. As Nina Salaman sings--and I am glad to end with the words of

a daughter of the lofty-souled scholar in whose honour this lecture is

given--

Wherefore else our age-long life, our wandering landless,

Every land our home for ill or good?

Ours it was long since to join the hands of nations

Through the link of our own brotherhood.

Chosen Peoples Being the First "Arthur Davis Memorial Lecture" delivered before the Jewish Historical Society at University College on Easter-Passover Sunday, 1918/5678 · 第 13 / 15 题