Jewish Life Winter 1976 by Jewish Action

$1.25

ADAR 57366

Comments /Zionism: Telling It Like It Is / The American Jewish Press /On Prayers Old and New /Political Parties in Israel: Are They “Gut Far Yiden?" The Karen Quinlan Case A noted scholar examines the issues from the Torah perspective 23

The “Jewish Position" Game /How the game is played and some proposals for changing the rules Changing Neighborhoods: The Drive to the Sea / An urbanist examines the problems of constant intra-city migration Is it the Worst of Times?—Or Is It the Best of Times? /A veteran observer weighs the answers and finds them wanting

|£3 Franklin D. Roosevelt: Friend of the Jews or A Co-conspirator Against Them? /A survey of recent work on FDR and the Jews

A publication of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America

78th Anniversary National Dinner of the

Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America Sunday Evening, May 23, 1976 23 lyar 5736 at the

New York Hilton will honor

Marcus Rosenberg recipient of the

UOJCA KETHER SHEM TOV AWARD and these nationally renowned community leaders recipients of the

UOJCA PRESIDENTS AWARD: Jacob Eisenberg

Murray Berkowitz

Leonard Brown

Miami Beach, Fla.

Freehold, N.J.

Queens, N.Y.

Max J. Holmes

Judge Nathan J. Kaufman

Fred Schwartz

Forest Hills, N.Y.

Detroit, Mich.

Fairfield, Conn.

Dr. Harold Shire

Dr. Nathaniel Futeral

Dr. A. Abba Walker

Beverly Hills, Cal.

Baltimore, Md,

Far Rockaway, N.Y.

and

Rabbi Herschel Leibowitz Baltimore, Md.

Recipient of the

UOJCA NATIONAL RABBINIC LEADERSHIP AWARD Couvert: $100.00 per person For reservations and further information contact:

UOJCA NATIONAL DINNER COMMITTEE 116 E. 27th Street, New York, N.Y. 10016

(212) 725-3400

Solomon T, Scharf - National Dinner Committee Chairman Rabbi Fabian Schonfeld - Rabbinic Chairman Harold M. Jacobs - UOJCA President

Editor: Yaakov Jacobs Editor Emeritus: Saul Bernstein Editorial Consultants: Dr. Herbert Goldstein Mrs. Libby Klaperman Dr. Jacob W. Landynski Rabbi Solomon J. Sharfman Chairman, Publications Committee: Lawrence A. Kobrin

Contents 2

Comments

Personal Comments

The Karen Quinlan Case / David Bleich

The "Jewish Position" Game / Simeon Goldstein

Changing Neighborhoods: The Drive to the Sea / Jack Simcha Cohen

The Heroic Life of Trina Klein / Emile Marmorstein

Is it the Worst of Times? — Or is it the Best of Times?»/ Saul Bernstein

Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Friend of the Jews or Co-conspirator Against Them? / Rena Qmnt

Caring for the Aged in Israel: How They Make It (Them) Work 7 Shirley Horowitz

Book Review / Leo Levi

Associate Editor: Yaakov Komreich

Published by UNION OF ORTHODOX JEWISH CONGREGATIONS OF AMERICA / President: Harold M. Jacobs / Chairman of the Board: Joseph Karaskick / Honorary Chairman of the Board: Samuel C. Feuerstein / Honorary Presidents: Moses I. Feuerstein, Max J. Etra, Dr. Samuel Nirenstein i Senior Vice Presidents: Dr. Bernard Lander, David Politi /Vice Presidents: Nathan K. Gross, Julius Berman, Marvin Herskowitz, Sheldon Rudoff, Reuben E. Gross, Fred Ehrman / Treasurer: Marvin Hochbaum / Honorary Treasurer: Morris L. Green / Secretary: Michael C. Wimpfheimer / Financial Secretary: Bernard Levmore / National Director: Rabbi David Cohen. Copyright 1976 by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. Material from JEWISH LIFE, including illustrations, may not be reproduced except by written permission from this magazine following written request. JEWISH LIFE is published quarterly. Subscription: 1 year - $4.00, 2 years - $7.00, 3 years - $10.00. Foreign: Add $.40 per year. Single copy $1.25. Editorial & Publication Office: 116 E. 27th St., New York, N.Y. 10016. Second Class Postage Paid New York, N.Y.

Zionism: Telling It Like It Is Journalists distinguish between an "event" and a "non-event." An "event" is "hard news," something that has happened and is reported. A "non-event" also "happens" in a sense, but it is planned and staged for the news media. Like Bishop Berkeley's stone which falls silently in a personless forest, the "non-event" would really not have happened at all were it not for the presence of the tape-recorders and cameras. A "non-event" can have vast repercussions, just as a real event, but it is important for the observer to distinguish between the two in making his judgments on their meaning and importance. The U.N. General Assembly's "Zionism Resolution" was a "nonevent." It was planned, meticulously staged, and played out before a world-wide audience. It has no binding effect on the member nations, yet it has made shock waves that will be felt for a long time to come. American Jewry responded to this "non-event" as-if it were one more Arab atrocity. In effect, the resolution signalled the beginning of ideolog ical warfare by the Arab nations against Israel. One sensed the Madison Avenue approach, and one could hear the account executive telling his petro-rich client: "You've got to drop that image of the unshaven ter rorist in Arab head-dress, with a time-bomb sticking out of his back pocket. We in the West gave that up decades ago. Killing school children in border attacks, and killing civilians with time bombs is hurting your cause. You've got to hit your competition in the ideological arena." And how did American Jewry respond to this radically new approach? Within days three separate national Jewish organizations placed large advertisements in the New York Times. Each attempted to refute the charge that Zionism is racism in distinct ways, but each ended the same way: On the bottom of each ad was a coupon soliciting a contribution —the tried and true technique: "shick gelt!" Each group saw the resolu tion as an opportunity to add to their coffers, or to bolster a sagging membership. The new ideological thrust against Israel was also met by yet another standard Jewish organizational technique: the mass rally: beat the drums for a big turn-out, charter the buses to bring the "troops" out, and fill the program with whatever politicos saw a chance to make some hay by supporting Israel, and the usual friendly non-Jewish leaders, preferably clerics. Perhaps the rally was necessary, but it was hardly sufficient. The ads and the mass rally were soon followed by the bumper-stickers and buttons: "I am proud to be a Zionist." After some squabbling between Israel's Ambassador to the U.S. and American Jewish leaders, as to who should be calling the shots, a hastily convened conference of world Jewish leaders was called by Prime Minister Rabin to be held in Jerusalem. The delegates assembled in the King David Hotel, heard the usual speeches, attended the usual receptions, and issued a statement pledging help for Israel "to fulfill its historic mission in the return to Zion," which had little impact on the world—least of all on those Jews whose love for Eretz Yisrael made them eager to hear an encouraging word emanating from Zion. Amidst all of the rhetoric and angry outpourings, there was a refusal 2

to deal with one troublesome question: granted Zionism is not racism, how do we define it? Abe Lincoln, as a young lawyer trying to discredit an unfriendly witness, asked him how many legs a donkey has. Getting the correct answer, he put the further question: "Now if we call his tail a 'leg,' how many legs does he have?" When the witness replied "five," Lincoln shook his head from side to side, and looked the man straight in the eye—"It's still only four, because calling a tail a 'leg' doesn't make it one." The word "Zionism" as used in the wake of the racism equation has two distinctly different meanings. "Zionism" is a political movement organized during this century to establish a Jewish State in what was then Palestine. "Zionism" has also been used to refer to the centuries old yearning of the Jewish People to return to their homeland where they could re-establish the Kingdom of G-d. But calling this yearning "Zionism" does not make it Zionism, and proving that Zionism is a valid expression of Jewish nationalism does not properly deal with the Arab attack on the State of Israel. It is revealing, that when the Foreign Minister of Mexico traveled to Israel to make amends for his nation's vote in favor of the resolution, he placed a wreath on the tomb of Theodore Herzl. Surely Jews committed to Torah and love for Eretz Yisrael stand firmly with their brothers in Israel and throughout the world in this latest attempt to strike at the Jewish People. Yet, while bitter experience teaches us that a thrust against any group of Jews is a thrust against Klal Yisrael, we must not ignore the implications of the new campaign against us initiated by the racism resolution. In essence, the racism resolution is calling our bluff. The Arabs, for their own dubious reasons, are posing some of the questions that Jews in Israel and the Golah have been asking each other. Is Israel a secular state, or is it a religious state? Is a Jew in Israel the same as a Jew in any other country? Is "Jew " defined by ancient tradition, or by legislative or executive fiat decreed by delegates of a secular state. We are not speaking out of school when we admit that these questions divide us as Jews; and that the answers of our secular brothers in effect weaken our moral position in the world. Gan we expect our secular brothers who are the primary leaders of the State of Israel to change their answers to basic questions in the face of an Arab ideological assault, when they have refused to do so in confrontation with fellow Jews?—not likely. What then do we propose? The nations of the world must be clearly told that Israel belongs to the Jewish People by Divine Mandate. It is ours because it was given to our fathers by the Almighty G-d. Jews have through the centuries yearned to return to Eretz Yisrael, and in our time they have done so in large numbers. That many Jews returned under the impetus of Zionism, a secular political movement, is a historical fact, but it does not negate the older fact that Eretz Yisrael is the Promised Land. That Jews in Israel are sadly and tragically divided on their commitment to Torah and Jewish tradition is also a fact. But this fact does not negate the fact that hun dreds of thousands of Jews live in Israel because they believe it is a Torah imperative to do so. That Jews have defended the Land with their 3

blood for conflicting reasons, is also a fact, but Jews will continue to defend the Land, and every Jew who gives his life for the Land, dies al Kiddush Hashem and is mourned by all Jews. Religious Jews, committed to Torah and to G-d and to Eretz Yisrael must speak with one voice in proclaiming this commitment. We stand as one with our secular brothers in Israel and the Diaspora, but we serve notice on them that we will not rest until each of them has reclaimed their heritage of Belief as they have reclaimed the Land. Torah sheds light on our past; it gives meaning to our present; and it is the wave of the future. Let this be our response to the power brokers of the General Assem bly: a proclamation emanating from the Holy City of Yerushalayim endorsed by every Jewish group loyal to Torah, re-affirming our love for Eretz Yisrael and pledging our continued support. Nothing less will counteract the diabolically clever campaign begun by the Zionism resolution. Nothing less will win for Israel the support arid the admiration of enlightened nations and peoples. Nothing less is the Truth.

The American Jewish Press British Jewry, whose communal institutions pale by comparison with those of American Jewry, has its Jewish Chronicle, a weekly newspaper which, though today virulently anti-Orthodox, is unrivalled by any newspaper published in America. Why this is so, is a subject beyond the scope of editorial comments, though it surely merits some heavy think ing. For years the writer of these comments has bemoaned this fact. The time for bemoaning is not yet past, but the demands of honesty dictate that we recognize an attempt to create an independent, literate weekly newspaper which can become a vital force in American Jewish life. We do live in Western society in the year 1976 of the common era. It sometimes appears that non-Orthodox and secular Jews are less ready to admit this than those of us who cling to our traditional past. In our Western society we recognize that a vital component of good govern ment and healthy communal life is a healthy press which serves as a watchdog—ugly word that it may be, and nasty as some of our watch dogs may be—keeping our elected and appointed officials from taking to themselves the power which people have merely delegated to them as a public trust. Which of us, as Americans, would want to live in a society without a free and independent press? Yet, we appear to be quite comfortable living in a Jewish community where those newspapers even marginally worthy of the name, are controlled by the communal forces they should be constantly and critically examining. More and more of the so-called "Anglo-Jewish" newspapers are being taken over by local federations. Imagine the expressions of outrage that would emanate from liberal Jewish quarters, if the Washington Post and The New York Times were revealed to be operated by the CIA. "A death-blow to our way of life"—would be typical of the rhetoric. Yet no sense of outrage is generated by a controlled Jewish press. 4

In the last year, a consortium of Jewish philanthropists closely as sociated with the Federation of Jewish Philanthropies and their new sister agency, the United Jewish Appeal, bought into The Jewish Week, a small circulation weekly which was the offspring of a number of mergers of older newspapers. To this observer, it appeared that The Jewish Week would become another , casualty in the co-opting of the soft, still voices of Jewish journalism. This has yet to be demonstrated. To the contrary, Philip Hochstein, the editor/publisher of The Jewish Week, while giving extensive coverage to the Federation/UJA combined appeal, has stubbornly retained his editorial rights. Indeed, it is being whispered, that he is "giving ulcers" to some of the professionals of the organization which is responsible for keeping his newspaper alive. It is still too early to make a judgement as to how the newspaper will develop and how it will deal with pressures from its backers. Yet it is encouraging that an attempt is being made to create an independent Jewish newspaper. As for American Orthodoxy, the finest, most objec tive newspaper cannot meet the need for an independent Orthodox voice. A newspaper objective about Jewish belief is opposed to Jewish belief. We still need an Orthodox Jewish weekly that can be read and respected by all Jews.

Are Religious Political Parties in Israel "Gut Far Yiden" Many Jews, committed to Torah, have had misgivings about having Torah represented by political parties in the Holy Land. The arguments are familiar on both sides. "Politics is a dirty business and religious parties are no better than any other. Politics-not Torahrwill rule." "Torah has flourished in Israel through political deals, and like it or not, it's a reality we must live with." Sure there is much more to each side than that, but in most debates that's what it comes down to. Needless to say, in such a debate the parties themselves will be strongly opposed to their own liquidation. No one likes to close shop and go out of business. In this respect Agudas Yisroel and Mizrachi (MAFDAL) have taken a similar line. Now there is a crack in the wall. The Kislev 5736 issue of The Jewish Observer is devoted almost entirely to a debate on this issue. Professor Leo Levi, a recent oleh and Torah ideologist-and himself an Agudist-has brought the question out of the closet. In a lengthy study "Agudath Israel in Israel: Time to De-Politicize," Dr. Levi argues that it is indeed time for Agudath Israel to abandon the political route, which he argues hinders the growth of Torah in the Holy Land, and return to Agudath Yisroel as a national Torah movement working outside the political area without the taint of politics. His study is followed by a rebuttal written by Joseph Friedenson, editor of the Agudah journal, Dos Yiddish Vort. The Ob server is published by Agudath Israel of America, and while it takes independent editorial positions, the publishing of this symposium indi cates uncertainty within the party. We commend editor Nisson Wolpin 5

on his courage and fortitude in airing this delicate issue. This is the calibre of Torah journalism which the Torah world yearns for. Both sides on any issue must benefit from debate based on mutual respect and understanding.

Murder: "the Ultimate Thrill" In an article, "The Mass Media and the Jewish Soul," which appeared in the July/August 1970 issue of this journal, the writer projected that "the next logical step in the march toward permissiveness... may reveal itself in a newspaper review that might read as follows: "Five minutes before the curtain came down on the opening night performance of 'Darkness and Death/ a member of the cast was shot to death before a packed house. The shooting was not accidental - it was in the script - and will be repeated at each performance. "At a press conference held back stage, John Guilden, peppery young producer of the play, explained that the 'killing' was perfectly legal. The revolver that fired the shot the audience heard, he explained, contained blank cartridges, but the victim has an apparatus strapped to his chest which sends a live bullet close to his heart when he activates a switch in his trouser pocket. He actually kills himself, but this doesn't diminish the dramatic impact of the closing scene. The bullet is placed so that it takes five minutes before the man dies, precisely as the curtain slowly descends. "Asked if he wasn't guilty of abetting suicide, Guilden said, 'If we are dragged into court, our attorneys will argue that this is not suicide since the man could change his mind at the last moment.' He refused to identify the dead actor, but made it clear that he had of course consented, and his wife and children will be paid for his services. 'We have consenting adults lined up for what we hope will be a long run,' Guilden said, 'and there will be an actual death at every performance.' "Critics had mixed reactions to the play. Clifton Stem of this newspaper noted that the play suffers from the traditional weak second act, but it is nevertheless a significant breakthrough for the freedom of the arts. An official of the ASPCA, questioned after the performance, refused to comment other than to say, 'We can't be all over the ball park: our concern is primarily with animals.' In an actual newspaper article the New York Daily News of October 3 of last year reported that: "Police... are close to acquiring a copy of an 8-millimeter film in which a young actress is actually murdered after participating in a series of sadomasochistic activities, Sgt. Joseph Horrnan of the Organized Crime Conctrol Bureau said yesterday. "Our sources tell us the film is actually in existence and in the city." said Horrnan, a veteran smut battler. "I know that the promise of a murder on film sounds wild, but I believe it actually happened. The film is now being sold to highly selected private dealers." Horrnan said existence of the film has been confirmed by underworld sources whom he described as "highly reliable." The murder scene is considered to be the ultimate thrill for customers who pay $200 and up for private showings. There are eight of the so-called "snuff" films available. Snuff is a word for homicide coined by mass murderer Manson...

Horman said the film had hern made in South America, probably in Argen tina. "The girl and several men participate in assorted...sadomasochistic acts," he saidi "One of the men produces a knife and begins to stab the startled young woman. Her death is clearly depicted on the screen...." There is yet some way to go from a filmed murder to a nightly "live" murder, but a good part of that way has already been traveled.

On Prayers Old and New Prayer is a highly personal experience. Each of us prays in a one-toone relationship with our Maker. Yet prayer is at the same time a communal experience. We pray with a minyan to express our collective—yes our national—yearnings to G-d. Perhaps this is why in the Hebrew phrase for communal prayer T'fila B'tzibur, the word Tfila (prayer) is in the singular. We pray privately—together. Jewish law permits private prayer in any language, permits and even encourages improvisation. It insists, however, on the use of Hebrew in communal prayer, and forbids tampering with the prayer formulations of the Tal mudic Sages. Reform Jewry very early opted for prayer in the vernacular, and for new formulations of petitionary prayers "in keeping with the times." This necessitated periodic revisions, which were slow in coming, as Reform became fixed in its own "orthodoxy." The Union Prayer Book, first published by the American Reform movement in 1895, was long out-moded until it was revised in 1922, and then newly revised in 1941. This past October there was issued the latest entry, Gates of Prayer The New Union Prayer Book. As reported in The New York Times—where else announce a new prayer book—it "has more Hebrew than its predecessor and takes cognizance of the Holocaust and the establishment of the State of Israel." We welcome our Reform brothers to the twentieth century, and we pray that the holiness of the Holy Tongue will bring them closer to our common heritage. But. . .they are fighting a losing battle, in their effort to keep up with the times. Things change too fast for any prayer book to remain current for any length of time. Those who know and love and use—the traditional Siddur, have no problem relating the old categories used in traditional Hebrew prayers to their lives in these very modern times. To everyone's good fortune, no one proposed the up dating of such archaic usages as "the Lord is my shepherd," even though few of us know or have even seen a shepherd, and even though literary scholars might describe the passage as a dead metaphor. Some years ago, when air travel became a more common experience, some one (we haven't been able to determine who) composed a special text for Tfilas Ha'derech, the traditional prayer for the traveler, adapted to travel by air. Conspicuously absent from this prayer was any refer ence to the dangers of highwaymen surely not applicable to travel in a modern jet airplane. Right? After all: how would thieves operate in a jet. We pray that one day soon our Reform brethren will completely renounce what C. S. Lewis has called the "chronological fallacy," the notion that an idea propounded in the year X-Y is clearly more profound

than an idea propounded earlier in the year X; that some future revision of the Union Prayer Book will turn out to be just an ordinary everyday, general-use Siddur. Fantasy? Science Fiction? It is of such fantasy that Jewish dreams and Jewish existence are made.

A Super-Agency for Jewish Culture It is one of the hallmarks of our time. We distill nature out of some aspect of our lives, and then attempt to re-introduce it chemically. An early example of this was the elimination of various nutrients from milled flour, in order to make it more attractive (whiter); followed by the introduction of "enriched flour" with the nutrients artificially restored. Awhile ago Ralph Nader proposed that computer scientists restore the "human element" to computer programs, and we visualized a prog rammer finishing a program and pushing a button labeled "human element." All this comes to mind as we read that the 44th general assembly of the Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds (CJFWF) has proposed a new national superagency to "provide a new level of leadership and a new quality and integration of services for Jewish education on all levels, and in Jewish culture." This proposal comes on the heels of the phasing out of the Institute for Jewish Life which CJFWF created four years ago with the same grand purpose—and has proved to be "largely (read a total) failure." Ideologically, we seriously suggest that Jewish communal leaders take a look at the growth of Orthodox institutions of learning in American Jewry, which has organically resulted in an upsurge of interest in Jewish culture and which has produced a new level of leadership in Jewish life. Pragmatically, we refer CJFWF to the sad experience of New York City government with superagencies. To aggravate the City's fiscal agonies, leaders of the City's administration have been burdened with the dis mantling of superagencies, which drained the City's resources with no return, a task which appears to require super-human efforts. Is it utterly utopian to propose that CJFWF pour its resources into America's yeshivos and day schools, which have already demonstrated their capac ity to generate Jewish leadership and cultural concern, rather than throwing good money after bad for a Jewish cultural superagency.

Our Tishrei Issue The response to our Tisrei issue was most encouraging. Loyal readers of Jewish Life responded warmly and favorably to our new format and to the editorial content. Hundreds of new subscribers joined our ranks—more than had come in following any previous issue. For this we are grateful. Much to our regret—however—our printing was quickly exhausted and we were unable to meet the many requests for copies of the issue from new and lapsed subscribers. Going back to the press was economically not feasible and we apologize to all those we had to disappoint. However, readers interested in specific articles may obtain copies from our office at the cost of reproducing the pages. We hope that this issue makes up for the disappointment, and we won't be caught short again. We did have one severe disappointment from our readers.

Letters to the Editor One of the great joys of editing publication is the response of readers to what one has to say. Over the years I have enjoyed written friend ships with scores of people throughout the English-speaking world. Not all have agreed with me, but all have been stimulating. I've often had people say to me something to the effect: "I like your magazine, but I don't agree with you all the time." Trying to avoid a hollow-sounding humility my response has been that I shudder to think that anyone would agree with me even most of the time. But—with the exception of several warmly complimentary letters—which we have chosen not to publish—we received no letters directed to the editor which reacted to the substance of our editorial content. This was disappointing. We know that some of our articles caused negative comment, but why did no one see fit to put those comments in a letter to the editor? A more affluent publication might have retained a research firm to find out what went wrong. Left to our own resources we came to a conclusion that may be simplistic, but when you're poor you often have to settle for simplicity. Not having published for a while, our Tishrei issue contained no letters to the editor, and nowhere in the issue did we explicitly ask for reader response. (People who write fund-raising material know that the most effective statement of one's purposes will bring little response unless there is an explicit request for money.) I hope this explains your silence, and so we herewith ask for your written response to our columns. We want to know what you think not only to enliven our relationship, but because of the intellectual stimulation your views will bring tq bear on Jewish Life. No publication can print every letter received, but this we pledge: every letter will be read seriously, and we will print as many as we can. We are anxious to hear from you, and the more critical your letters, the greater will be our response. We know—again without the benefit of research findings—that among our readers are people who are at the heart of Jewish life, and we want to hear from all of you.

This Issue of Jewish Life The most recent advances in medical science and technology have brought with them ethical and moral questions undreamed of only decades ago. To the Jew committed to Torah, the vast resources of Torah literature are the fount from which the answers must emerge. While these questions confront the Orthodox rabbi and posek with increasing intensity, it is what has come to be known as the "Quinlan Case" which has brought the area of bio-ethics to the attention of millions of people through its coverage in the mass media. We asked Dr* David Bleich, who has brought to bear his own Torah and secular scholarship to the field of bio-ethics, to examine "Quinlan" in the light of Torah. We are pleased to share his insights with our readers in this issue. Hardly a week goes by without some statement by a "leading Jewish spokesman" espousing "the Jewish position" on some matter of public interest. In "The Jewish Position Game" Simeon Goldstein questions the authenticity of these positions. Some readers may find his judg ments harsh, but this is the stuff of which intellectual clarity is born. We welcome your responses. It is impossible to conceive of a group of Jews getting together these days without some talk about "bad neighborhoods," "good neighbor hoods," or "changing neighborhoods." Rabbi Jack Simcha Cohen, who has been in the thick of these problems in New York City tells us in this issue what some people have done about the problem. Intellectual fads come and go quite quickly in American life. But the new fascination with Death among medical and social scientists is likely to be with us for a longer period, since Death is an omnipresent aspect of Life. In "The Heroic Life of Trina Klein," Emile Marmorstein, British writer, describes the response of a young Jewish woman to the knowl edge that she was soon to die. Talk of the "vanishing American Jew" has, for some reason subsided. Has the tide been turned, or are we still vanishing? In "The Best of Times The Worst of Times," Saul Bernstein, Editor Emeritus of Jewish Life tries to set the record straight. In modern man's adaptation of a primitive technique, many of us have attempted to deal with the Destruction of European Jewry by simply giving it a name: "Holocaust." Theologians and scholars have turned it into an academic industry. While the Torah imperative demands that we never forget, there is something chilling about reducing the tragedy to "holocaust studies," a scholarly pursuit with all of the paraphernalia of academia. Nevertheless, we must deal with the past, distasteful as it may be. In the context of the recent offensive mounted by the Arab nations and their Third World partners against the Jewish People, the non-theological political realities of the destruction of six million Jews

becomes all the more relevant. Rena Quint, in "Franklin D, RooseveltProtector of the Jews...or Co-conspirator Against Them" brings together recent scholarly findings on the role of American leaders in the "Final Solution." Confronted by the growing needs of older Americans, the Congress of the United States responded by dipping into the U.S. Treasury and making the necessary appropriations. Years later, and billions poorer, Americans now know that institutionalizing people who have grown old, and footing the bill for their care, is not the solution. Again refusing to face up to the problem, we have focused on financial abuses in the program, as if all would be well if the dollars were properly spent, and fiscal integrity maintained. In "Caring for the Aged in Israel: How They Make it (Them) Work," Shirley Horowitz tells us in this issue how it is done by our Israeli brothers, and suggests we might have something to learn from them.

Books in Jewish Life Books in contemporary publications are relegated to "the back of the book," While we have maintained this tradition, we do it in the Jewish tradition, of "adiaron chaviv," the most significant is often held for the last. In this issue, Dr. Leo Levi, a distinguished Jewish scientist re views "Concept of Judaism" by Isaak Breuer. This review was prepared for press for the Tishrei issue but was held back because of space con siderations—perhaps not the best editorial judgment. But the title has become all the more relevant in the ensuing months. We hope to expand our book section in future issues.

David Bleich

Karen Ann Quinlan: A Torah Perspective Karen Ann Quinlan's tragic life—and protracted death—have not been in vain. Unconscious though she may be, she has served as the fulcrum of a recurring moral dilemma. Euthanasia, usually passive, but at times active, has been and continues to be practiced with a high degree of frequency, albeit clandestinely. The physicians at St. Claire's Hospital are to be commended for not opting for the path of least resistance and for their tenacity in scrupulously discharging the moral and professional duties with which they are charged. The controversy surrounding the care of Karen Quinlan has called attention to and sharpened the ques tion which will be posed over and over again: Who is the arbiter of life and death, man or G-d? The Quinlan case, particularly as tried in the press, presented three critical issues. The first: whether or not Karen should be pronounced dead, was a specious question from the start. It quickly became evident that Karen Quinlan is alive even according to the most liberal definitions of death. The second question was that of vicarious consent; may par ents authorize withdrawal of treatment? From the legal perspective, proxy consent remains a clouded area; from the perspective of Jewish law parents have no standing whatsoever in this matter. The obligations which exist with regard to treatment of the sick are autonomous in nature and are not at all contingent upon the desire of parents, or for that matter, of the patient. Judge Muir's statement, "...the only cases where a parent has standing to pursue a constitutional right on behalf of an infant are those involving continuing life styles," is quite consistent with Jewish ethics. The third question is by far the most crucial: Does anyone have the right to choose death over life? Since the New Jersey Supreme Court had already ruled in a unanimous opinion that no one has a "right" to die, Judge Muir's decision was a foregone conclusion. His decision was but a procedural prologue to a re-examination of this fundamental question by the New Jersey appeals court and perhaps ultimately by the federal courts as well. It is this issue which will be debated in the months—and perhaps years—to come. There was a time, not too long ago, when man could do but little when afflicted by serious illness and found himself powerless before the ravages of nature. Man could only proclaim with resignation: "The Lord hath given; the Lord hath taken; let the name of the Lord be blessed." In our day, many feel that since scientists and physicians have succeeded in prolonging life through the application of human intellect and technology it is therefore fitting and proper that members of the scien tific community be the arbiters of whether the quality of such life is worth preserving. The argument acquires a measure of cogency when the decision to terminate life is reached for a purportedly higher pur pose, such as transplantation of an organ from a moribund individual to a patient with greater chances for recovery. The new dictum appears to 13

There was a time, not too long ago, when man could do but little when afflicted by serious illness and found himself powerless before the ravages o f nature. Man could only proclaim with resignation: "The Lord hath given; the Lord hath taken; let the name o f the Lord be blessed." In our day, many feel that since scientists and physicians have succeeded in prolonging life through the application o f human intellect and technology, it is therefore fitting and proper that members o f the scientific community be the arbiters o f whether the quality o f such life is worth preserving.

Rabbi Bleich recently completed a one-year fellowship at the Hastings Center Institute o f Society, Ethics, and the Life Sciences where he brought to bear Torah perspectives in the growing field* o f bio-ethics.

Why the confusion? Psychologically, it is not at all difficult to understand what has transpired. No one really wants to sanction murder. Homicide is abhorrent; man is endowed with a moral consciousness which recoils with shock at the very idea of taking the life of a fellow human being. No one wants to let another human being die. Man has a deeply-ingrained sense of responsibility for his fellow ; man does perceive himself as his brother's keeper.

be: "Science hath given; science hath taken; let the cause of science be blessed." The same argument is also heard in instances in which there is simply scant hope that the patient will recover. Man, it is argued, should not become the victim of his own technology. Man should not be forced to cling to life simply because he has the technical ability to do so. Nature should be permitted to take its course. Man is instinctively repulsed by the prospect of becoming the agent responsible for the death of his fellow. This repugnance is keenly felt regardless of the patient's condition and of whether the contemplated act of euthanasia is active or passive. The reconciliation of termination of the life of a fellow human being with one's instinctive moral feelings is indeed a formidable challenge. The widespread press coverage of the Quinlan case highlighted a most curious aspect of contemporary thought processes. Now that a decision has been handed down and the case is being appealed before the Supreme Court of the State of New Jersey, every informed person recognizes that the issue being adjudicated is that of "refusal of treat ment", that is, does a person—or his proxy— have a right to demand that he be permitted to die or does the state have an overriding, compel ling interest in the preservation of the life of each of its citizens. Yet, when the case first received publicity in the media it was presented in an entirely different guise. It was then presented as a "definition of death" case. We were urged, both on editorial pages and in what passed for straightforward news reports, to accept "brain death" as the scientifi cally precise criterion of cessation of life. This tactic was abandoned only when it became patently obvious that Karen Quinlan must be consi dered to be alive even if the newly-advocated definitions of death were to be accepted. Why the confusion? Psychologically, it is not at all difficult*to under stand what has transpired. No one really wants to sanction murder. Homicide is abhorrent; man is endowed with a moral consciousness which recoils with shock at the very idea of taking the life of a fellow human being. No one wants to let another human being die. Man has a deeply-ingrained sense of responsibility for his fellow; man does perceive himself as his brother's keeper. Confronted with the tremendous emo tional and financial toll exacted by the protracted care of a comatose patient, man finds himself impaled upon the horns of a dilemma. Moral sanction for abandoning the patient eludes him, yet the burden of sustaining life seems intolerable. The resolution of the problem is to pass between the horns of the dilemma by means of a lexicographical sleight-of-hand. If the patient may somehow be pronounced "dead" the problem is dispelled. Treatment may then be suspended without doing violence to ethical sensitivities. This exercise in semantics can be, and has been, extended to resolve other bioethical problems. If one wishes to avoid the moral onus of snuffing out a human life when performing an abortion it is logically imperative that the fetus be denied status as a person. The transition from one position to the next is clearly delineated in a letter to the editor which appeared in The New York Times on March 6, 1972. The author,

Cyril C. Means Jr., Professor of Constitutional Law at New York Law School, writes: "An adult heart donor, suffering from irreversible brain damage, is also a living human 'being/ but he is no longer a human 'person/ That is why his life may be ended by the excision of his heart for the benefit of another, the donee, who is still a human person. If there can be human 'beings' who are nonpersons at one end of the life span, why not also at the other end?" Once one moral concept is abrogated by the process of "redefinition" does any norm remain sac rosanct? Another case in point is the problem of defective newborns. Babies bom with severe congenital abnormalities or suffering from serious mental retardation are bound to be a burden to their parents, their siblings, and society. What can be done? Killing them is unthinkable. Abandoning the baby to custodial care in public institutions merely shifts the financial burden from parents to society at large and carries in its wake feelings of guilt to boot. Moreover, the extensive care and treatment which such infants require does create a genuine strain upon already limited and inadequate health care resources. Resolution: Let us redefine birth. Birth shall no longer be regarded as taking place at the moment of parturition but as occurring seventy-two hours after emergence of the infant from the birth canal. Since the baby is not yet bom, in the event that it is found to be physically or mentally defective it could be destroyed with impunity up to the moment of "birth." This proposal was made, in all earnestness, by Dr. James Watson, co discoverer of the double-helix in DNA. Situation ethicist Joseph Fletcher counsels that such infants should not be considered human children but should rather be viewed as "reproductive failures." And so the game continues. "Compulsory Death" Quite apart from theological considerations, definitions of death which, in reality, are value judgments in disguise are fraught with danger. Who is to decide at which stage physical or mental deterioration life is no longer worthwhile? It is but a short step from the notion of "brain death" to the formulation of a definition of death centering around "social death," that is, an individual's capacity to serve as a useful member of society. It is entirely conceivable that eventually the concept of death will be broadened to include a person who consumes more of society's resources than he produces. Such a person is not productive and, from a societal perspective, his life appears to be hardly worth preserving. Fears such as these should not be dismissed as ab surd. England's eminent biologist and Nobel Prize laureate, Dr. Francis Crick, has already advanced beyond this point in advocating compulsory death for all at the age of eighty as part of a "new ethical system based on modern science." Human civilization has in the past witnessed attempts to make the right to life subservient to other values. Exposure of the aged to the elements was practiced by primitive societies; infanticide was not at all uncommon in 18th-century England; the Nazis broadened their infamouse "final solution" to encompass the mentally ill and feeble minded. Each policy was undertaken in the name of enhancing the

Quite apart from theological considerations, definitions of death which, in reality, are value judgments in disguise are fraught with danger. Who is to decide at which stage o f physical or mental deterioration life is no longer worthwhile? It is but a short step from the notion o f "brain death" to the formulation o f a definition o f death centering around "social death," that is, an individual's capacity to serve as a useful member o f society.

Generations ago our Sages wrote, "Against your will you live; against your will you die." While conventionally understood as underscoring the irony that a baby wishes to be bom no more than an adult wishes to die, these words today take on new meaning. They may be taken quite literally as an eloquent summary o f the Jewish view with regard to both euthanasia and the withholding o f life-sustaining treatment. In the Jewish tradition the value with which human life is regarded is maximized far beyond the value placed upon human life either in the Christian tradition or in Anglo-Saxon common law. In Jewish law and moral teaching life is a supreme value and its preservation takes precedence over virtually all other considerations. Human life is not regarded as a good to be preserved as a condition o f other values, but as an absolute basic and precious good in its own stead. Even life accompanied by suffering is regarded as being preferable to death. (See Sotah 20a.)

quality and dignity of human life. This is a road which men have trodden in the past. The achievement was never dignity, but ignominy. It is quite true that man has the power to prolong life far beyond the point at which it ceases to be either productive or pleasurable. Not infrequently, the patient, if capable of expressing his desires and al lowed to follow his own inclinations, would opt for termination of a life which has become a burden both to others and to himself. Judaism, however, teaches that man does not enjoy the right of selfdetermination with regard to questions of life and death. Generations ago our Sages wrote, "Against your will you live; against your will you die." While conventionally understood as underscoring the irony that a baby wishes to be bom no more than an adult wishes to die, these words today take on new meaning. They may be taken quite literally as an eloquent summary of the Jewish view with regard to both euthanasia and the withholding of life-sustaining treatment. Judaism has always taught that life, no less than death, is involuntary. Only the Creator who bestows the gift of life may relieve man of that life even when it has become a burden rather than a blessing. In the Jewish tradition the value with which human life is regarded is maximized far beyond the value placed upon human life either in the Christian tradition or in Anglo-Saxon common law. In Jewish law and moral teaching life is a supreme value and its preservation takes prece dence over virtually all other considerations. Human life is not regarded as a good to be preserved as a condition of other values, but as an absolute basic and precious good in its own stead. Even life accom panied by suffering is regarded as being preferable to death. (See Sotah 20a). Man does not possess absolute title to his life or his body. He is charged with preserving, dignifying, and hallowing that life. He is obliged to seek food and sustenance in order to safeguard the life he has been granted; when falling victim to illness or disease he is obliged to seek a cure in order to sustain life. The category of pikuach nefesh (preservation of life) extends to human life of every description and classification including the feeble-minded, the mentally deranged and yes, even a person in a so-called vegetative state. Shabbos laws and the like are suspended on behalf of such persons even though there may be no chance for them ever to serve either G-d or fellow man. The mitzvah of saving a life is neither enhanced nor diminished by virtue of the quality of the life preserved. Distinctions between natural and artificial means, between ordinary and extraordinary procedures, and between non-heroic and heroic mea sures recur within the Catholic tradition, but no precisely parallel categories exist within Jewish law. Judaism knows no such distinctions and indeed the very vocabulary employed in drawing such distinctions is foreign to rabbinic literature. Rambam in his Commentary on the Mishnah, Pesachim 4:9, draws a cogent parallel between food and medica tion. G-d created food and water; we are obliged to use them in staving off hunger and thirst. G-d created drugs and medicaments and endowed man with the intelligence necessary to discover their medicinal properties; we are obliged to use them in warding off illness and *dis-

ease. Similarly, G-d provided the materials and the technology which make possible catheters, intravenous infusions, and respirators; we are obligated to use them in order to prolong life. Judaism does recognize situations in which certain forms of medical intervention are not mandatory. This is so not because such procedures involve expense, inconvenience, or hardship, but because they are not part of an accepted therapeutic protocol. The obligation to heal is limited to the use of a refuah bedukah, drugs and procedures of demonstrated efficacy. (See R. Ya'akov Emden, Mor-u-Ketziah 338). Man must use the full range of benefits made available by science; but he is not obliged to experiment with untried and unproven measures. Nor is he obliged to avail himself of therapeutic measures which are in themselves hazardous in the hope of effecting a complete cure. Even Chayyei sha'ah, a short, transitory period of existence, is of such inestimable value that man is not obliged to gamble with precious moments of life, even in the hope of achieving health and longevity. The physician's duty does not end when he is incapable of restoring the lost health of his patient. The obligation, "and you shall restore it to him" (Deuteronomy 22:2) refers, in its medical context, not simply to the restoration of health but to the restoration of even a single moment of life. Again, Shabbos and other laws, are suspended even when it is known with certainty that human medicine offers no hope of a cure or restoration to health. Ritual obligations and restrictions are sus pended as long as there is the possibility that life may be prolonged even for a matter of moments. The sole exception to these principles which halacha recognizes is the case of a goses, a moribund patient actually in the midst of death throes. The physiological criteria indicative of such a condition must be spelled out with care. (See Rema, Even Ha-Ezer 121:7 and Choshen Mishpat 221:2). It is surely clear that a patient whose life may be prolonged for weeks and even months is not yet moribund; the death process has not yet started to commence and hence the patient is not a goses. The halachic provisions governing care of a goses may most emphatically not be applied to all who are terminally ill. The aggressiveness with which Judaism teaches that life must be preserved is not at all incompatible with the awareness that the human condition is such that there are circumstances in which man would prefer death to life. The Gemara, Kesubos 104a, reports that Rebi Yehudah, the Prince, redactor of the Mishnah, was afflicted by what appears to have been an incurable and debilitating intestinal disorder. He had a female servant who is depicted in rabbinic writings as a woman of exemplary piety and moral character. This woman is reported to have prayed for his death. On the basis of this narrative, the thirteenth-century authority, Rabbenu Nissim of Gerondi, in his com mentary to Nedarim 40a, states that it is permissible, and even praisewor thy, to pray for the death of a patient who is gravely ill and in extreme pain. Although man must persist in his efforts to prolong life he may, nevertheless, express human needs and concerns through the medium of prayer. There is no contradiction whatsoever between acting upon an

The physician's duty does not end when he is incapable o f restoring the lost health o f his patient. The obligation, "and you shall restore it to him" (Deuteronomy 22:2) refers, in its medical context, not simply to the restoration o f health but to the restoration o f even a single moment of life. Again, Shabbos and other laws are suspended even when it is known with certainty that human medicine offers no hope o f a cure or • restoration to health. Ritual obligations and restrictions are suspended as long as there is the possibility that life may be prolonged even for a matter of moments.

existing obligation and pleading to be relieved of further responsibility. Man may beseech G-d to relieve him from divinely imposed obligations when they appear to exceed human endurance. But the ultimate deci sion is G-d's and G-d's alone. There are times when G-d's answer to prayer is in the negative. But this, too, is an answer. In the Republic (I, 340) Plato observes that a physician, at the time that he errs in treating a patient, is not worthy of his title. When the physi cian's knowledge fails him, he ceases to be a practitioner of the healing arts. Our teachers went one step further: They taught that a physician who declines to make use of his skills is not a physician; they ad monished that a physician who gives up his patient as hopeless is not a physician. "And he shall surely heal—From here it is derived that the physician is granted permission to heal" (Baba Kamma 85a). The Chassidic Seer, the Chozeh of Lublin, added a pithy comment: "The Torah gives permission to heal. It does not give the physician dispensation to refrain from healing because in Jiis opinion the patient's condition is hopeless." This lesson is the moral of a story told of the 19th-century Polish scholar, popularly known as Reb Eisel Charif. The venerable Rabbi was afflicted with a severe illness and was attended by an eminent specialist. As the disease progressed beyond hope of cure, the physician informed the Rabbi's family of the gravity of the situation. He also informed them that he therefore felt justified in withdrawing from the case. The doctor's grave prognosis notwithstanding, Reb Eisel Charif recovered com pletely. Some time later, the physician chanced to come upon the Rabbi in the street. The doctor stopped in his tracks in astonishment and exclaimed, "Rabbi, have you come back from the other world?" The Rabbi responded, "You are indeed correct. I have returned from the other world. Moreover, I did you a great favor while I was there. An angel ushered me in to a large chamber. At the far end of the room was a door and lined up in front of the door were a large number of well-dressed, dignified and intelligent-looking men. These men were proceeding through the doorway in a single file. I asked the angel who these men were and where the door led. He informed me that the door was the entrance to the netherworld and that the men passing through those portals were those of whom the Mishnah says, The best of physi cians merits Gehinnom.' Much to my surprise, I noticed that you too were standing in the line about to proceed through the door. I im mediately approached the angel and told him: 'Remove that man im mediately! He is no doctor. He does not treat patients; he abandons them!'" To depict any human condition as hopeless is to miss entirely the To depict any human condition as spiritual dimension of human existence. Dr. John Shepherd, a hopeless is to miss entirely the neurosurgeon at Nassau County Medical Center, claims the cure of at spiritual dimension o f human least two comatose patients whose vital signs were even more discourag existence. Dr. John Shepherd, a ing than those of Karen Quinlan—but that is not the point. Even were it neurosurgeon at Nassau County Medical Center, claims the cure of true that medical diagnoses and prognoses are infallible, the decision to a least two comatose patients terminate treatment is not a medical decision; it is the determination of a whose vital signs were even more moral question. That the physician possesses specialized knowledge and discouraging than those o f Karen Quinlan-but that is not the point. unique skills is unquestionable. However, his professional training

guarantees neither heightened moral sensivity nor enhanced acumen. He may quite legitimately draw medical conclusions with regard to anticipated effects of the application or withholding of various therapeu tic procedures. But the decision to proceed or not to proceed is a moral, not a medical, decision. From the fact that a condition is medically hopeless it does not follow that the remaining span of life is devoid of meaning. "Nistarim darkei Ha-Shem"—"the ways of G-d are hidden." He has decreed that we must love, cherish and preserve life in all its phases and guises until the very onset of death. While even terminal life is undoubtedly endowed with other meaning and value as well, subservi ence to the divine decree and fulfillment of G-d's commandment is, in itself, a matter of highest meaning. The sanctity of human life is not predicated upon hedonistic procliv The sanctity o f human life is not ity, pragmatic utility or even upon the potential for service to one's predicated upon hedonistic proclivity, pragmatic utility or fellow man. The telos of human existence is service of G-d and the even upon the potential for service performance of His commandments. It is in this explanation of human to one's fellow man. The telos of existence that Me'iri (Yoma 85a) finds the rationale underlying the obliga human existence is service o f G-d tion to preserve the life of even the hopelessly ill. Me'iri observes that and the performance o f His commandments. although the moribund patient may be incapable of any physical exer tion he may be privileged to experience contrition and utilize the preci ous final moments of life for the achievement of true repentance. One personal experience lives vividly in my mind. My family and I had travelled some distance to attend a family simchah. Arriving on erev Shabbos we were grieved to learn that an elderly relative had experienced renal failure and was in a critical condition. At the hospital I requested and was shown the patient's medical chart. It was readily apparent that the patient was not being treated aggressively and, indeed, none of several available forms of therapy had been instituted. I immediately telephoned the attending physician and demanded an explanation. In reply I was informed that the doctors were unanimous in their opinion that the patient was terminal though they could not predict how long she might survive in a comatose state. The doctor could see no point in prolonging life under such conditions. As a matter of halachah I had no choice but to insist upon the administration of therapeutically indicated medication. However, the decision, humanly speaking, was not an easy one. But then an incident occurred which put the entire matter into a different perspective. Late Shabbos afternoon I returned from Minchah and, although the patient had been totally unresponsive for over thirty-six hours, I walked into the hospital room and said "Gut Shabbos" in a loud voice. I was greeted in response by the flickering of an eyelid and, in a weak but clear voice, the words "Gut Shabbos" in return. At that moment there flashed across my mind the comments of Rab Akiva Eger (Orach Chayyim 271:1) who declares that even the simple, standard Shabbos greeting expressed by one Jew to another constitutes a fulfillment of the mitzvah: "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." At that moment I realized not only intellectually, but also emotionally, that every moment of life is of inestimable value. Here was a dramatic unfolding of the lesson that every moment of life carries with it the opportunity for the performance of yet one more mitzvah. 19

The coining o f the phrase "death with dignity" by advocates of passive euthanasia was a stroke of genius. Opponents o f su ch' practices are immediately disarmed. Everyone respects "rights" and no one decries "dignity." Yet, while repeated use o f a glib phrase by the press and media may influence attitudes, the coining o f a cliche is not the same as making a case. Is sickness or frailty, however tragic, really an indignity? Is the struggle for life, in any form, an indignity? Is it not specious to insinuate that the attempt to sustain life is aught but the expression o f the highest regard for the precious nature of the gift o f life and o f the dignity in which it is held?

Sections o f this article appeared in different form in Shema.

No scientist has ever determined the absolute (as distinct from record able) threshhold of psychic activity. No clinical experiment has ever been conducted to determine at what level of consciousness a comatose pa tient becomes incapable of remorse and repentance. But, even if possi ble, such an undertaking would be irrelevant. Me'iri's rationale adds a measure of understanding but does not establish the parameters of the halachic obligation. Halachic ramifications frequently remain operative even in situations in which the reasoning upon which they are grounded is not strictly applicable. Halachah acquires a sanctity, sui generis, of its own. Human life, regardless of its quality and, indeed, of its potential for even the most minimal fulfillment of mitzvos, is endowed with sanc tity. (See Bi'ur Halachah, Orach Chayyim 329:4). The coining of the phrase "death with dignity" by advocates of pas sive euthanasia was a stroke of genius. Opponents of such practices are immediately disarmed. Everyone respects "rights" and no one decries "dignity." Yet, while repeated use of a glib phrase by the press and media may influence attitudes, the coining of a cliche rs not the same as making a case. Is sickness or frailty, however tragic, really an indignity? Is the struggle for life, in any form, an indignity? Is it not specious to insinuate that the attempt to sustain life is aught but the expression of the highest regard for the precious nature of the gift of life and of the dignity in which it is held? There is a definite conflict between the ethical teachings of Judaism and the prevalent moral climate. Unfortunately, Jews are prone to cele brate Jewish thought when it coincides with what chances to be in vogue and to ignore it when it runs counter to ideas or practices heralded by the dominant culture. Judaism has something to say-—^and. to teach— about all moral issues. Jewishness is more than a matter of ethnic identity and Judaism more than perfunctory performance of ritual. Jews who take their Jewishness seriously must necessarily search for the uniquely Jewish answers to the dilemmas of life and death which emerge from the Jewish tradition. Judaism teaches that man is denied the right to make judgments with regard to quality of life. Man is never called upon to determine whether life is worth living—that is a question over which G-d remains sole arbiter.

Coming in future issues: The Growing Rate of Divorce in Orthodox Jewish Life by Rabbi Bernard W einberger Jewish Medical Ethics a review by Lowell Eliezer Beilin, M.D. M.P.H. A Trade for an Aristocrat (From the Notebooks of Jacob M arateck) retold by Shim on and Anita W incelberg Reb Yitzchak Blaser: A Mussar Giant by Rabbi Aaron Rakefet Rothkoff Building Day Schools in Am erica — In the 1840’s by Eli Lazar 21

NEWS RELEASE E \ \ | \ U ' 1 ‘ AMERICAN JEWISHCONGkcaS*

«¡gg |||g

THEOFFICE OF ¥ E § IS m N m R M A T IO N

115 EAST 8 4

N E W oj Jf

E R T S

: * > C ai WsrrruTE s,r*»t. N.

^S H C C ^ **lATlOHs *• Y. .

f t d S.rw.V-

17857263

One West Forty-Seventh Street, New York, N.Y. 1 0 0 3 6 -(2 1 2 ) 246-3175 New York, N.Y.—1The National Council of Jew ish Women, oldest major American Jewish Women’s organization, today

announced^fiflE9tai^^ShM 0tf

/fly. •T ra fa lg a r 9 - 4 5

Simeon Goldstein

The "Jewish Position" Game Many voices speak out in the name of Judaism or of the Jewish People, on numerous general American social, economic and political questions. Those who do this are, in most cases, entirely sincere, having convinced themselves that their views really represent Judaism or the best interests of the Jewish People. Yet an excellent case can be made to prove that Judaism, or Jewry, belongs on either side of some of the most important current public questions. It would therefore appear that Judaism is often being used as an ideological mirror, to reflect the views of those persons who are speaking or writing, when it is cited as favoring any particular position in the great American social, economic or political controversies of our time.. Nothing here is intended to question the role of Orthodox rabbis in instructing their respective communities, as to what is and what is not Judaism. It is directed primarily at the application, in Jewish affairs, of the story of the husband who said that he and his wife have an arrangement: on minor matters, such as where they should live and when he should change jobs, his wife makes the decisions. On major matters, such as what Congress, the President, and the United Nations should do, he makes the decisions. Similarly, on major matters, such as what public officials should do, many regard it as the prerogative of Jewish leaders to make any demands that they wish, in the name of Judaism and the Jewish People. But, on minor matters, such as observance of Kashrus away from home and many other Jewish rituals which entail inconvenience or personal sacrifice, as well as the application of Judaism's ethical teachings to our dealings as individuals with customers, suppliers, employees, employers or our government-it is widely considered more appropriate for Jewish leaders not to mix into personal affairs. Three major public questions are cited below, with arguments in one column for a Jewish position on one side of the question, and with argu ments in an opposite column for a Jewish position on the opposite side. In order to satisfy those who regard Judaism as being defined by religi ous tradition-as does the author-as well as those who do not, data are submitted from Biblical and religious sources, as well as from secular life.

An excellent case can be made to "prove" that Judaism, or Jewry, belongs on either side o f some o f the most important current public questions. It would therefor appear that Judaism is often being used as an "ideological mirror," to reflect the views or those persons who are speaking or writing, when it is cited as favoring any particular position in the great American social, economic or political controversies o f our time.

Militarism vs. Pacifism The Traditional Position The Torah repeatedly teaches that one of the greatest blessings which can be given to a people is peace. Peace is one of the names of the Supreme Being. David was not permitted to build the Bais Hamikdosh because of his career as a warrior.

The Secular Position Because of the Jews' insecure and exposed position in gentile so ciety, our people are among those who suffer most from wars. Some of the leading pacifists in modern times have been Jews. The normal greeting upon meet ing someone, in Hebrew and Yid dish, to this day, is peace to you. 23

Simeon Goldstein is a realtor and attorney in New York City. For several decades he has been observing and commenting on the American Jewish scene. He is at the same time actively engaged in Jewish communal work, and now serves as Chairman o f the Endowment Fund o f the National Council o f Young Israel which assists needy branches in getting started or staying alive.

The Traditional Position In the Torah the Supreme Being is sometimes referred to as a Man of War, military training is praised, and wars were often commanded. The Torah provides for compul sory military service. It specifies some exemptions, but conscienti ous objection is not among them. The Torah says that a King should not have too much money. The Talmud defines this as only enough for his military establish ment. (Sanhedrin 21).

The Secular Position The State of Israel unmistakably rejects pacifism. Political parties representing the great majority of Israeli voters either support this policy or want an even stronger one, and Jewry elsewhere gener ally respects it. Only if the United States is heav ily armed can it spare military equipment for Israel. Jews have fought and distin guished themselves in all Ameri can wars.

Ethnic and Economic Integration, and Race Relations Generally The Traditional Position The Torah teaches the inherent dignity and worth of every human being. It does so, among other ways, by indicating that we were all made by the same Creator and that we are all descended from Adam and Eve.

The Secular Position As long as the rights of others are threatened or denied, we Jews are not safe. Only if freedom and equality prevail for all, can we, who are merely a small minority, rely on receiving fair treatment. Jews suffered in Europe from the hardships of ghetto life, and even tually were able to escape it. We, therefore, have a special duty to protect others from similar mis treatment. Jews have been in the forefront of the fight against segregation in modern times.

The Traditional Position The Torah commanded that each Jew live with his own tribe: almost the ultimate in residential segrega tion. The Torah teaches that one's birth limits one's permissible mar riage partners, and in some cases also one's potential occupations.

The Secular Position If we must wait until freedom and equality prevail for all, it means that we must wait until human beings are perfect. One cannot count on logical con sistency in others. Governments have, in some cases, treated Jews fairly while discriminating against others, as in South Africa. Con versely, there are public policies in the United States today, designed for the laudable purpose of redres sing wrongs which a predomi nantly Christian nation inflicted on other minorities, whose practical effect is to deny equal opportunity

to Jews by subordinating merit to race in order to achieve ethnic ba lance in jobs. Although American Jews have been able to live almost wherever they wish for several decades (ex cept for a few upper-income areas), there are distinct Jewish neighbor hoods in many large American cities. Also, we have repeatedly fled communities which were per ceived as facing a large immigra tion of groups economically much lower than ourselves. Accordingly, residential integration is not part of current American Jewish folkways. Social Control of Property, and the Rights of Labor and the Poor vs. Private Enterprise, and the Rights of Capital The Traditional Position The Torah contains many princi ples of social legislation. It man dates support of the poor, the widow and the orphan, through a tithe (a compulsory contribution of 1/lOth of most crops) as well as through other requirements im posed on those who produced food. These laws are further de veloped in the Torah. The Torah warns that the disad vantaged must receive equal treatment in the courts. The Torah provides for sever ance pay, an advanced social con cept. The Torah requires redistribu tion of agricultural land every 50th year, the Jubilee Year. The Torah condemns those who oppress the poor.

The Secular Position Jews have been among the lead ing advocates of social reform, in modern times. In the United States, those con stituencies where Jews predomi nate almost always elect liberal candidates. The State of Israel has advanced social legislation to protect the rights of workers, as well as exten sive government intervention in the economy, and these policies are supported by parties representing most of its voters. Jews should never forget that the Holocaust came from those on the Right,

The Traditional Position The Torah and the Talmud pre suppose a system of private own ership, both of consumer goods and of the means of production. Jewish religious law and tradi tion call for much respect for pri vate property.

The Secular Position Jews have been in the forefront of the pioneering and venture ac tivities of modern capitalism. Jews' self-identification with liberalism, today, is a cultural lag. It reflects conditions during the frac tion of Jewish history represented 25

The rabbis made decrees which, in the short run, favored the wealthy, in order that the door should not be closed before the borrower. This implies that when you soak the rich you ultimately hurt the poor, while if you make investment attractive, you help the poor.

by the period from the French Re volution to the end of World War II. In the 1970's, it is not those on the Right, but the Soviet Union, Red China, and their allies, who are the most powerful enemies of the State of Israel, of our religion, and of the material interests of most Jews. Liberals find it harder to oppose them than do conservatives.

The practice of speaking in the name of Judaism on American public questions also often involves interesting internal contradictions, outlined below: Contradiction The articulate voices of American Jewry energetically advocate the prin ciple of Separation of Church and State. (Supporters of government aid to day schools for teaching non-religious subjects do not oppose that princi ple but believe that financing of secular teaching is consistent with Separa tion). Contradiction Many Conservative and Reform leaders condemn, as religious coercion, There are some organizations whose names imply that they are Israeli laws which mandate Jews in that country to submit to traditional Jewry's spokesmen, who believe Judaism's teachings regarding marriage and divorce and which require that they are speaking for the Jewish people rather than for the observance of the Shabbos and Kashrus in public facilities. Many of the same leaders who emphatically insist on the Wall of Separa Jewish religion. But, let us assume that‘ Christians formed tion between Church and State, support or engage in the practice of telling similar organizations, from government officials, in the name of Judaism, what the American State which people o f other faiths were barred. Let us imagine that these should and should not do. Many of the same leaders call upon American public officials, whose "Christian" clubs issued pronouncements on a variety of constituency is predominantly Gentile, to follow Judaism's teachings (as social, economic and political they understand them), on matters affecting the entire population, includ questions o f general concern. ing economic policies and national defense. Would they not be condemned as These contradictions have various roots. Some prominent Protestant religiously segregated, political organizations! churchmen in the United States—both clergy and laity—ardently favor separation of church and state, and simultaneously advocate religious social action programs to be enacted by the government. This fact is tacitly assumed to make such contradictory conduct equally proper for Jews. Admittedly, Protestant America has treated Jews unusually well. But, that does not mean that we can blindly accept Protestant practices as our guide to what is right and what is wrong. In other words: Some of my best friends are Protestants, but I'll be damned before I regard any of them as my Pope. Moreover, there are some organizations whose names imply that they are Jewry's spokesmen, who believe that they are speaking for the Jewish people rather than for the Jewish religion. But, let us assume that Chris tians formed similar organizations, from which people of other faiths were barred. Let us imagine that these Christian clubs issued pronouncements on a variety of social, economic and political questions of general concern. Would they not be condemned as religiously segregated, political organiza tions! It has been argued that religion must take a position on current controv26

ersial topics in order to be relevant to modem man, or in order to attract youth. However, that assumes by implication that Judaism is not a set of divinely ordained rules, but that it is analogous to a political party which adopts principles to please the electorate. Even from the viewpoint of expediency, such a policy involves serious objections. Some Christian denominations took a stand, in various coun tries, in support of governments which were autocracies or which were run by a few families. That may have been the prudent thing to do at the time. But, when political power shifted, those religions suffered. A similar fate awaits any religion which allies itself with the left of center, if the pen dulum swings to conservatism. Professional politicians in the United States rarely make a mass appeal to youth, the way that they do to labor, farmers, or the middle class. There are good reasons for this. The attitudes of youth as a whole, reflected on college campuses and elsewhere, have repeatedly changed from one direc tion to another. In addition, as individuals who have been young experi ence the responsibilities of raising families, their personal viewpoints commonly undergo a metamorphosis. If Judaism made the frequent alterations in its teachings necessary to be continually relevant, then the animal often portrayed on theparoches, cover ing the ark in our synagogues, should be changed, from the Lion of Judah, to the chameleon (a creature which can modify its color to match that of its environment). Some Jewish religious leaders have indeed been successful in attracting many young people to their synagogues. Those who have done so include rabbis who speak the language of youth (literally and figuratively), who arrange for youth participation in religious services, and for synagogue sponsorship of social clubs and athletic activities, who engage in formal and informal teaching, who are available at the convenience of their con gregants rather than at their own convenience, and who—unlike those who would have Judaism take stands in order to be popular—inspire respect for their personal sincerity. Here is an illustration of what I believe should be Judaism's relationship to social questions. A matter on which all branches of Jewry agree is the importance of preserving human life—including one's own. But, determi nation of the best ways of applying that portion of Judasim is generally left to the individual. Few, if any, resolutions or sermons furnish guidance on the importance of safe automobile driving, avoidance of cigarette smoking, annual medical check-ups, a diet free of excessive fats or cholesterol, and other health rules. Admittedly, there is no unanimity concerning some of these points. But, lack of unanimity is even more true of social, political and economic issues which are public questions precisely because there are wide differences of opinion on them. Judaism should inspire individuals so that they will apply the values which our religion has taught them, when they make decisions as citizens of a great democracy. But, Judaism should not be utilized as a mirror, to reflect the personal views of those who speak in its name.

■

r JM M C T lH B

/ASA p h o to by D ore G old

Jack Simcha Cohen

Changing Neighborhoods: The Drive to the Sea No Jew lives in New York City. Ask any Jewish New Yorker where he lives and, invariably, the answer will be: "Forest Hills," "Far Rockaway," "Washington Heights," "The Lower East Side," "Boro Park," or "Crown Heights," or some other specific neighborhood. Indeed, the history of New York Jewry is mirrored in the inexorable rise and fall of neighborhoods where Jewish institutions and populations first flourished and then declined. Since this process continues to this very day, neighborhood stabilization programs must be of vital concern to all Jewish communal groups. Yet, despite the importance of the issue, despite the fact that the existence and well-being of Jewish institutions are directly affected by environmental decisions, most Jews have shown little interest in such programs. Basic to this aversion have been miscon ceptions regarding the term "neighborhoods stabilization." Just as the black community heads call for "safety" and "protection" as synonymous with calls for police brutality, so too is the term of a huge stop sign at the entrance of a community reading, "blacks keep out." Residents of stable communities, on the other hand, argue that even talk of stablization programs conjures up images of encroaching decay and oppose such efforts as being premature and counterproductive to the stability of the community. Even residents of ghetto neighborhoods frequently misunderstand such programs. These areas have lost their leaders who have departed for the more comfortable suburbs, and the people left behind erroneously assume that community support programs must await government in itiatives. Neighborhood stabilization must be viewed not as a clearly-defined entity with a clearly defined result, but as a coordinated process of productive community initiatives. It encompasses all areas of concern to a neighborhood: housing, safety, crime prevention, economic develop ment, government action, social services, and community relations. Abandoning Old Neighborhoods The concept of neighborhood stabilization evolved during the past two decades in reaction to repeated out-migrations from primarily Jewish neighborhoods. This process occurred throughout our nation as Jews continued to abandon old neighborhoods. In wave after wave they ran from enclaves of Jewish religious and cultural life..the Lower East Side, Brownsville, and the Bronx in New York City; the West and South Side of Chicago; Dorchester and Roxbury in Boston; North Broad Street in Philadelphia. In small communities as well, the centers of cities became Jewish wastelands as Jews moved en masse to suburban areas. 29

Rabbi Cohen is Executive Director o f the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty in New York City. He has written on urban affairs in scholarly and popular journals.

The Orthodox Last to Leave Who was left behind? What was left behind? The poor, the old, and the weak always remained. In the community, the Orthodox institutions Orthodox Jews require a variety of generally were the last to leave a neighborhood. Orthodox Jews require institutions to maintain and a variety of institutions to maintain and perpetuate their way of life. perpetuate their way o f life. They They need a synagogue in walking distance from their homes; a yeshiva need a synagogue in walking to train their children; a mikvah for their wives; and shops to supply distance from their homes ; a yeshiva to train their children ; a mikvah for kosher food. Not every neighborhood can provide these needs and so their wives; and shops to supply the process of relocation is much more difficult for the Orthodox. In kosher food. addition, established Orthodox congregations generally have large num bers of elderly congregants who simply cannot afford to relocate. And what about hard cash — the millions of dollars of Jewish money left behind in tabernacles of stone? One need only visit some of these old neighborhoods — such as the South Side of Chicago — to see the magnificent edifices that were once proud Jewish institutions and are now cathedrals and churches. What was the fate of these once populous Jewish communities? Some One need only visit some o f these old neighborhoods-such as the West were depleted of their Jewish population; others lost their former attrac Side o f C hkago-to see the tion for Jewish in- migration; still others became areas of radical popu magnificent edifices that were once lation change, while in some, efforts were made to stem the outward proud Jewish institutions and are now cathedrals and churches. movements of Jews. The Flight of the Whites A key issue affecting neighborhood stabilization is the racial composi tion of an area. Jewish communal concern becomes aroused when the black population shows a significant increase. Three primary factors contribute to the growth of black population within a given area: a high birth rate among blacks; a high rate of black in-migration from other areas; and a high rate of white out-migration. In a study dealing with urban population changes completed in August, 1975, Larry H. Long noted that the major reason for the marked increase of blacks in Ameri can metropolitan centers during the past 20 years was the out-migration of whites from these cities. In Washington, D.C., for example, in 1950 other-than-whites comprised 35.4 percent of the population, while in 1970 they numbered 72.1 percent. According to the study, some twothirds of this increase was attributed to the flight of whites to the suburbs. The prime exception to this trend, however, was New York City where the percentage of the other-than-white population rose from 9.8 in 1950 to 22.8 in 1970. Unlike the other cities studied, white out migration contributed less than one-third to the increase in the otherthan-white population figures. These statistics underscore the vital need of Jewish communities to prevent a hysterical out-migration of whites from their neighborhoods: the one factor within their control in the effort to stabilize a neighbor hood. By way of illustration, let us review Laurelton, Crown Heights, and Far Rockaway, three New York City neighborhoods that are in varying

stages of transition and the actions being taken by their residents to curb panic selling, promote harmonious inter-ethnic relationships, and bring about an element of stability for the entire community. Laurelton: a Classic Case Laurelton presents the classic case of a community that had been "blockbusted," but which is fighting back to retain the few remaining Jewish families, attract newcomers through bold and imaginative public ity and word-of-mouth advertising, and function harmoniously as an integrated community. Until the late 1960's, Laurelton had been one of the more desirable suburban-type neighborhoods within the New York City limits. Its housing stock consists mainly of well-built pre-World War II single and two-family houses which were inhabited primarily by young Jewish families. A rich cultural life flourished. Attracted by the Attracted by the desirability o f the desirability of the area, several black professional couples began tenta area, several black professional tively exploring the possibility of buying homes in the area. Spurred on couples began tentatively exploring the possibility o f buying homes in by blockbusting real estate agents out to make a kill, Jewish families fled the area. Spurred on by blockbusting in mass panic when they saw the first black family. Almost overnight, real estate agents out to make a kill, the trickle became a flood. Houses became a glut on the market, and Jewish families fled in mass panic selling to black families became the sole means of economic survival. when they saw the first black family. Within a few short months, the Jewish population of Laurelton was wiped out. But there were Jewish families determined to stay. Local synagogues and temples in the area joined together in efforts to stem the outgoing tide. A series of Sunday afternoon community-sponsored "cof fee Matches" were held where prospective buyers were shown the advantages of moderately-priced homes in good condition: they were offered free congregational membership as an added inducement, and in general made to feel wanted. Though these efforts have helped some what in stemming the mass exodus, it was too late. Large numbers of Jews have already left Laurelton for good. Crown Heights: Another Example A second example of a neighborhood in transition is Crown Heights. Crown Heights occupies a critical geographical position, lying adjacent to such black-dominated areas as Bedford Stuyvesant and Brownsville, and extending to the borders of white, middle-class Flatbush. Crown Heights is one of the more stately older areas of New York. Street after street is lined with solid brick houses and fine brownstones. Many of the streets are tree-lined, and dotted with newly-installed gaslights. "Doc tors' Row" on President Street is an outstanding example of an urban street with single family homes. Some of the finest apartment houses in all of Brooklyn surround Grand Army Plaza. In recent years, the Crown Heights neighborhood has undergone several transitions. From the 1920's until recent years, the Jewish population was dominant. During the last decade, there has been approximately a 75 percent turnover in Crown Heights' population — the largest part took place between 1965 and 1970. What had hitherto been a homogeneous, exclu sively white group, with many Chassidic Jews, became a melange of

Crown Heights is one o f the more stately older areas o f New York. Street after street is lined with solid brick houses and fine brownstones. Many o f the streets are tree-lined, and dotted with newly-installed gaslights. "Doctors' Row" on President Street is an outstanding example o f an urban street with single family homes. Some o f the finest apartment houses in all o f Brooklyn surround Grand Army Plaza.

The decision o f the Lubavitcher Rebbe in 1969 to remain in Crown Heights and not forsake the neighborhood, turned the tide.

The community has devised ingenious methods to attract young married couples to the neighborhood. One example is the provision of monthly rent subsidies to newly-married couples for one year. This program alone, conducted entirely with privately-raised funds, has attracted 20 couples to the area within the past year.

racial and ethnic mixtures. Crown Heights, too, sought to stabilize. But here a unique factor was present: the decision of the Lubavitcher Rebbe in 1969 to remain in Crown Heights and not forsake the neighborhood, turned the tide. Not only has this edict — faithfully adhered to by thousands of the Rebbe's disciples — kept the chassidic families from moving, but it has stimulated attempts to work with the conservative middle- and upper-income blacks who comprise a large percentage of the area's black population. Utilizing the concept of "preventive mainte nance," Crown Heights is concentrating upon rehabilitating apartment houses: assisting and encouraging private businessmen to invest in the purchase of apartment buildings: influencing property owners to up grade their stock: and in general encouraging programs and projects that would tend to stabilize the area. The community has devised ingenious methods to attract young mar ried couples to the neighborhood. One example is the provision of monthly rent subsidies to newly-married couples for one year. This program alone, conducted entirely with privately-raised funds, has at tracted 20 couples to the area within the past year. Programs specifically geared to assisting newly-arriving Russian Jewish immigrants have simi larly attracted a sizeable contingent of this group. On an ongoing basis, such activities as community patrols and transportation and escort ser vice from public transportation stops have contributed to the stability of the neighborhood. Outreach Public Relations As already noted, the concept of neighborhood stabilization involves the interrelationship of housing, safety, crime prevention, economic development, and outreach public relations. A concerted campaign on all these fronts is being conducted by the local area Jewish community council in Far Rockaway, a predominantly Jewish community that is struggling to maintain its identity in the wake of an increasing influx of low-income welfare families. A summer resort of the wealthy at the turn of the century, Far Rockaway gradually evolved into a year-round com munity with the advent of subway transportation after World War II. Here opulence and poverty exist side by side: the plush single family homes of the affluent are in close proximity to crumbling unheated summer bungalows now being used as year-round residences by the poor. While the proliferation of low-income developments in contiguous areas and the continued movement of low-income minority groups has caused some out-migration to the "Five Towns" area in adjacent Nassau County, two areas of Far Rockaway are experiencing a resurgence be cause of the high concentration of religious, educational, and cultural facilities that are attracting observant Jews from other sections of the City. Many young Orthodox families have moved to the Reads Lane area attracted by such major day schools as the Hebrew Institute of Long Island (HILI) and the Torah Academy for Girls (TAG). The neighbor hood and its immediately adjacent areas are also serviced by eleven other educational institutions with a total enrollment of more than three thousand students. The stable, middle-class Bayswater section of Far 32

Rockaway affords highly desirable real estate values and continues to attract a growing number of Orthodox families with yeshiva-age chil dren. Under the aegis of the Jewish Community Council, a series of positive programs have been initiated. Existing housing stock in Far Rockaway is being refurbished and strategies have been developed to retain the present Jewish population as well as to reach out and attract young and middle-income families. Liaison has been established with the local Police Precinct, and a volunteer community patrol manned by some fifty volunteers patrols the area nightly. The local council was in the forefront of a variety of efforts to revitalize the downtown shopping area, such as the "Rediscover Far Rockaway Day," urban redevelopment programs, and the current campaign to promote Sunday shopping to attract Sabbath-observing residents. Loans have been sought from the Small Business Administration to assist individuals seeking to establish businesses within the community. Local leaders have engaged in faceto-face dialogue with various community groups to "sell" them on the advantages of the Rockaways. Thus, an area being threatened by the influx of welfare population is continuing to hold its own. Yet, one can not walk backwards into the future. New neighborhoods are developed, old ones are forgotten, and new institutions and loyalties are established. But, somehow, the plague of Jewish neighborhood de terioration steadily enroaches upon the stability of even newer neighborhoods. Must this pattern continue? Must Jews constantly seek new horizons — and new neighborhoods? Robert Weaver, former head of the Federal Housing Administration, and the first black cabinet member, once maintained that every neighborhood should have some black residents. Thus, the whites would realize that lily-white areas are impossible, and would stay in the neighborhood and improve its welfare-not run away. Should not the Jew also realize that we are running out of neighborhoods to move to? Should not the Jew begin to stay put and improve his condition? It is evident that positive programs must be developed to assess local needs at every level of community development. Affluent neighbor hoods need programs that are geared to insure continuity, stability, and growth. Changing neighborhoods require programs to mitigate and slow the process of deterioration. Changed ghetto neighborhoods must be afforded programs specifically designed to sustain and protect the sur viving remnant of Jewish life. By now it should be self-evident to the Jewish community that we have just about run out of time and space. We must come to grips with all issues affecting neighborhood stabilization. We must stop running from our communities in panic. We must make a determined stand to preserve our neighborhoods and our institutions - now!

Robert Weaver, former head o f the Federal Housing Administration, and the first black cabinet member, once maintained that every neighborhood should have some black residents. Thus, the whites would realize that lily-white areas are impossible, and would stay in the neighborhood and improve its welfare-not run away. Should not the Jew also realize that we are running out o f neighborhoods to move to?

Emile Marmorstein

The Heroic Life of Trina Klein

I) 1 $

An air of mystery hovered over Trina's funeral. For one thing, news of her death (28th Teveth 5735) had to be withheld — on authoritative rabbinical advice — from the Holy City lest it postpone her brother's imminent nuptials; and this consideration weighed heavily, of course, on the substantial gathering of relatives and close friends of the family. But their emotions were, I believe, predominantly transcendental. Even the elements hinted at them. No sooner had the cortege turned from the narrow lane into the gates of the water-logged cemetery than the sun burnt through the darkness of a squally afternoon, as if to evoke Trina's capacity to dispel the sadness which knowledge of her disease inevitably spread among her visitors. The panegyric matched our mood: softly intoned by one of her eminent uncles, it outlined the beliefs that had inspired Trina's triumph over affliction; and the final plea for her inter cession before the Glorious Throne reinforced the conviction, which each of us had already formed in his heart, that we were taking leave of a saint of the Living G-d. As we filled the grave with clods of Hertford shire clay, I was surely not alone in feeling that here prayers could be offered in the assurance of a favorable answer. In my resolve to write about her, I may have been alone. Once released from the imprisonment of the flesh, precious souls testify to immortality by pervading thoughts and turning impulses into commands. Trina was born in Cambridge on 5th October 1942, the fourth child of Rabbi Barnet David Klein and his wife Pearl, daughter of the holy Rabbi Elye Lapian. War circumstances had temporarily restored her father to the university city where, in the earliest of our undergraduate days, our friendships-to my eternal gratitude-began. His talent for friendship is of a rare quality, a compound of faith, sincerity and concern, which, though it compels him to rebuke as well as praise, attracts enduring affection. Accordingly, his children were born not only into a large and growing kinship group but also into a fraternity of survivals from differ ent layers of their parents' histories which continued to expand through its embrace of new and the natural increase of old friends. Moreover, their Tufnell Park home was not merely a hospitable and helpful link between contiguous circles: from it the light of the Holy Torah flashed in the gloom of the empty quarters separating London's strongholds of the faith and hallowed the flow of sound counsel and practical aid. Such is the relationship which brought to my door, in the spring of 1958, a shy schoolgirl with a fresh complexion, an oval facé ending in a gently pointed chin, eloquent eyes and a smile brilliant enough to invest homely features with a touch of beauty. Priding myself on my skill in imparting the technique of translation from any language of which I have a reading knowledge, I had agreed to coach Trina in French and Latin for her O Levels. Her father's utilitarian attitude towards secular education (in the sense that he regarded it not as an end in itself but as a means to the only legitimate end, the service of G-d) led him to take a

No sooner had the cortege turned from the narrow lane into the gates o f .the water-logged cemetery than the sun burnt through the darkness o f a squally afternoon, as if to evoke Trina's capacity to dispel the sadness which knowledge o f her disease inevitably spread among her visitors.

In my resolve to write about her, I may have been alone. Once released from the imprisonment o f the flesh, precious souls testify to immortality by pervading thoughts and turning impulses into commands.

Priding myself on my skill in imparting the technique of translation from any language o f which I have a reading knowledge, I had agreed to coach Trina in French and Latin for her O Levels. Her father's utilitarian attitude towards secular education (in the sense that he regarded it not as an end in itself but as a means to the only legitimate end, the service o f G-d) led him to take a keen interest in his children's school careers.

It was a year or two later, when her visits were coordinated with attendance at Dr. Adler's nearby surgery, that she first mentioned her illness-cheerfully, echoing her father's words o f encouragement and expressing her determination to "learn to live with it."

keen interest in his children's school careers. Trina, a dutiful daughter in this and other respects, responded conscientiously, and her success in the examination helped to overcome her doubts of her intellectual abil ity, which stemmed partly from her admiration for the quicker wits of her elder sisters. Diffident she may have been, but she was far from inarticulate: we looked forward to her animated reports of family affairs, festivities and forthcoming events. Sometimes she would raise points originating in her studies with her father or dwell on her teaching experience in her father's synagogue classes, clearly indicating that she had already decided in favor of teaching Jewish children as her vocation. Judging from the speed with which she endeared herself to our own, she seemed gifted in that direction. So Trina became our friend in her own right. We enjoyed her com pany, appreciated her readiness to make herself useful and predicted her early marriage into the world of Torah. No fears of her health clouded these expectations: even when not long after her A levels (1960) she contracted German measles, which was followed by a severe illness diagnosed as meningitis, years passed before we realized that this may have marked the onset of multiple sclerosis. On the contrary, we gathered that she was gradually recovering. She began reading for the B.A. at Jews' College with a teaching career in view. During the follow ing summer, she spent a week of her vacation with us in Felpham (1961), joining in our walks and generally contributing to the success of the holiday. It was a year or two later, when her visits were coordinated with attendance at Dr. Adler's nearby surgery, that she first mentioned her illness-cheerfully, echoing her father's words of encouragement and expressing her determination to "learn to live with it." In fact, she persevered with her studies: her failure—in one subject—in her final examinations was due solely to her physical condition: had she been allowed to dictate her answers, she would undoubtedly have completed the paper in time and been awarded a degree (1964). If not the first manifest sign of the tragic discrepancy between the mental powers which she retained and the inexorable decay of her constitution, this blow to a cherished aspiration may be* considered the start of the middle phase of her ordeal. The next five years Trina spent in the employment of Freshwaters, beginning in the accounts department and finishing by entering details of the internal post. In other words, her employers took the trouble to find her work within her reach, while she tried hard to earn her pay. Their practical benevolence, admirably concealed, as it was in a high degree of administrative flexibility, enabled her to keep her self-respect and delivered her, by means of an orderly routine in a friendly milieu, from excessive introspection. For she was simultaneously engaged in a spiritual battle which reached its climax after her parents' departure for the Holy Land the end of May in 1968. It was being waged calmly and unpretentiously as part of her programme of sacred study, and that is how I was introduced to it. A glutton for Rebbitzin Schlesinger's style of homiletical exposition, Trina arranged to come to supper once a fortnight on evenings when the Rebbitzin could be heard in Golders Green. After the meal at which she usually regaled us with a fresh

supply of family news and extracts from the most recent letter from Jerusalem, my wife would accompany her to listen to the Rebbitzin, who volunteered to take her back to her lodgings in Stamford Hill. We then arranged to read selected chapters of Tehilim together in the alternate weeks. During these sessions she made no secret of the trend of her reflections. Her straightforward rendering of the text invariably led to her groping for its specific relevance to her plight. "What has it got to say to me?" she would ask. Under the surface lurked another more urgent question which she once blurted out in the form of "Why is this happening to Trina?" Despite her full and intelligent participation in the ensuing discussion of the theological problem of human suffering, it evidently missed the point. Even in her irritable moods, she never seemed to despair of Divine providence: her confidence in her prayers and in those offered on her behalf-~particularly her grandfather's—and, indeed, her hope of eventual recovery were unshaken; and her enquiry was directed solely at the Divine motive underlying her affliction, that is to say, at the course of conduct and state of mind Divinely required of her. My contribution was, I fear, minimal: my inveterate tendency to allegorize was not altogether attuned to her concrete approach to her quest. More effective stimulus was provided by operators on the same wave-length-the content of her correspondence with her parents and siblings revealed a near-perfect communion of outlook and insight-and when her spirits soared at the prospect of spending Pesach in Jerusalem (1970) she made the impression of having discovered the path she had been seeking. Her exhilaration on her return confirmed it. Here, I must emphasize, I do not want to imply that she was granted a vision or any other kind of dramatic aid to acceptance of the Divine will. It was her profound love of Heaven that induced her to accept her suffering so lovingly during the years ahead when her spiritual resources had to compensate for diminishing control of her muscles. On 18th February 1971, after a two-months stay—owing to a persistent infection—in the Prince of Wales Hospital, she was brought to the nearby Jewish Home and Hospital in Tottenham, by far the youngest of its patients. My first visit left me pleasantly surprised both by the bright and spacious interior of the massive redbrick building and, above all, by Trina's cheerful demeanour. Although she could scarcely take a step without the support of a frame and her eyesight was now so blurred that her reading was limited to extra-large print, she concentrated on such assets as her wheelchair's easy access to the Synagogue, the wine and rolls her eldest brother brought her on Friday afternoons so that she could make Kiddush, and the extent to which Shabbos, Yom Tov, and Kashrus laws were observed. Naturally, she produced her father's last letters from her handbag, drawing attention to salient passages, and enquired as to the chapter of Tehilim I was prepared to read with her; but there was no trace of self-pity or complaint in her conversation on these or other topics, so that only towards the end of the return journey was my sense of tragedy renewed. The fine summer of that year helped Trina to settle down. She re ceived visitors in the large shady garden, attended weddings and the like and took part in the outings to the sea and countryside which some

We then arranged to read selected chapters o f Tehilim together in the alternate weeks. During these sessions she made no secret o f the trend o f her reflections. Her straightforward rendering of the text invariably led to her groping for its specific relevance to her plight. "What has it got to say to me?" she would ask. Under the surface lurked another more urgent question which she once blurted out in the form o f "Why is this happening to Trina?"

Here, I must emphasize, I do not want to imply that she was granted a vision or any other kind o f dramatic aid to acceptance of the Divine will. It was her profound love o f Heaven that induced her to accept her suffering so lovingly during the years ahead when her spiritual resources had to compensate for diminishing control o f her muscles.

A group o f devout girls began paying regular visits. She welcomed their company; and they talked to her o f their activities, repeated some o f the more memorable words o f sacred wisdom they had heard at Shiurim and fulfilled whatever requests she made o f them. They soon discovered that they were receiving as well as giving, that they could derive inspiration from a girl not much older than themselves who was in the process o f losing all the physical faculties that make human existence at all tolerable but nevertheless constantly affirmed with the stress on "all"-that "The Lord is Just in all His ways.n It has been difficult to write about Trina. She remains a joy to all o f us who were attached to her, a perpetual source o f wonder and admiration that defy conventional phrases of mourning and comfort.

of the Home's patrons organized. Once a week she was taken to the Jewish Blind Society's center where suitable entertainment for the par tially sighted was available. To infer, however, that she was just a passive beneficiary of a varied and distracting routine would be off the mark. The interest she took in her fellow-patients and her sustained efforts to enliven the more apathetic among them indicated her sense of responsibility towards those whose plight she reckoned worse than her own. They, for their part, were impressed not only by her concern for others but also by her steadfast and scrupulous observance of the Divine Commandments. Nor were her influence and fame con fined to the building. A group of devout girls began paying regular visits. She welcomed their company; and they talked to her of their activities, repeated some of the more memorable words of sacred wis dom they had heard at Shiurim and fulfilled whatever requests she made of them.. They soon discovered that they were receiving as well as giving, that they could derive inspiration from a girl not much older than themselves who was in the process of losing all the physical faculties that make human existence at all tolerable but nevertheless constantly affirmed-with the stress on "all" that "The Lord is Just in all His ways." They came to establish such an intimacy with her that when, in the later stages of her illness, her speech was impaired, they shared with her brothers and sisters the ability to interpret. The sudden glow of her countenance when her father's letters were being read to her and the fervour of her barely intelligible prayers and blessings proved to them that her noble mind was still alert. It has been difficult to write about Trina. She remains a source of joy to all of us who were attached to her, a perpetual source of wonder and admiration that defy conventional phrases of mourning and comfort. Her mirth was no mere by-product of the euphoria which, one is told, mercifully accompanies her grim disease. Her infectious laughter rings in our ears like a paean of victory: its intent is to proclaim her fond submission to the decree of her Father in Heaven; and it calls on us to offer thanks to Him for her heroic life.

kosher Country © S u pervised ^

IttD B#a '^DpHDO Formerly Kosher King 1501 Surf Ave., Coney Island Whitehead Hall. Brooklyn College Bring this ad in for a free Kingburger

orju st a substitute? Take a close look at the next fresh Kosher chicken you buy and look for this red, w hite and blue metal identification wing tag to certify you are getting a genuine Empire Kosher product.

Look for Irving Q. Pullet, your sign of Kosher quality in fresh, frozen or prepared poultry... At Better Quality Kosher Butcher Shops, Food Stores and Dellys

T h e M ost Trusted N am e In K osher Poultry _____________________ _ ____________________ 39

BF-«se °

t i o , * a l

j ew .

M Em0j

I Council O f J 4 Ï

>o io cy

~~—

—

d e r a tlon s

■N. Y.

10010

Saul Bernstein

Is It The Worst of Times? Or— The Best of Times? Quote: Quote:

"If you're Jewish, chances are your grandchildren won't be." "The rate of intermarriage among all American Jews is skyhigh." Quote: "What happened to the Jews in Europe in 1939, the Jews in America are doing to themselves in 1976" Quote: "Current trends indicate that in a matter of time there will be no American Jewry to speak of. Finish, No more." Is all this really so? Is it really true that mixed marriage among the entire American Jewish populace is at any such level as has been proc laimed? Is it really fact that few American Jews still identify themselves with the Judaism of the Jewish ages? Is it really the case that trends among American Jewry as a whole are such that the end is near at hand? It is not. None of the notions is demonstrably true. As will be shown here, they are demonstrably untrue. The quoted assertions, from published pronouncements, are examples of cries of alarm being directed at American Jews from many sides. Diverse means used to spread the messages include, in the case of two of the quoted proclamations, full-page advertisements in prominent daily newspapers and spot radio announcements, ads, as well as paid insertions in Jewish media. The purpose — beyond question well mean ing — is to awaken the American Jewish public to the danger of mixed marriage and assimilation in general, and particularly to induce Jewishly unconcerned or alienated parents to give their children some Jewish education. Whether the scare method employed will accomplish the purpose is open to question. It may actually have the reverse effect. The assimilation-prone and the indifferent are quite likely to feel reinforced in their attitude by such messages; the prospect of the imminent disap pearance of the Jew, thus pronounced as practically assured, by no means disturbs them. Among those of easy and uneasy conscience both, the reaction evoked is apt to be not — as was naively assumed — the determination to fight the menace, but rather a mood of yielding to the inevitable: "Umpteen percent intermarriage — well, that shows the trend is irresistible — nothing you can do to stop it."

Whether the scare method employed will accomplish the purpose is open to question. It may actually have the reverse effect.

Ample Ground for Concern There is of course ample ground for concern as to threats to American Jewish life. Assimilation, alienation, intermarriage — these problems are real enough, all too real. In no way, however, will exaggeration of the toll and distortion of the overall realities help allay the danger. To the contrary, this will spur it. Nor is it likely to be in any way beneficial to disregard the fact that among a great and growing part of American Jewry, 41

Saul Bernstein is Editor Emeritus o f Jewish Life.

the trends are patently the opposite of those which are being trumpeted as governing, and signalling the end, of all American Jewry. That there is a "vanishing Jew" is a fact of American Jewish life. But That there is a "vanishing Jew" is a fact o f American Jewish life. no less a fact of American Jewish life is the "burgeoning Jew ." In the But no less a fact o f American total picture, both must be seen, together with the "static Jew" in Jewish life is the "burgeoning between. Jew ." In the total picture, both The current outburst of hysterical warnings has been prompted by a must be seen, together with the "static Jew" in between. recent survey, one of the kind which appear from time to time with claims to depict trends among American Jews. Usually well publicized, The current outburst of these surveys have been accorded liberal attention by the mass media, hysterical warnings has been prompted by a recent survey, one with manifold echoes from platform and pulpit. Their findings have for o f the kind which appear from the most part borne a common likeness, which is not surprising since time to time with claims to practitioners of surveyology take in each other's washing and all are depict trends among American conditioned by much the same prior assumptions, approach to sample Jews. Usually well publicized, these surveys have been accorded selection, and questionnaire formulation. They also have been marked liberal attention by the mass by a common tendency to draw remarkably sweeping, all-embracing media, with manifold echoes conclusions from the responses of a tiny fraction of American Jewry. from platform and pulpit. Their Each such survey has rivalled the rest in the focus on negative factors findings have for the most part borne a common likeness, which and in projecting upon the entire community the characteristics of the is not surprising since most negative segment. Each survey, sidestepping proportionate sampl practitioners of surveyology take ing of the more positive segments, outdoes preceding ones in computing in each other's washing and all the rate of disintegration. Hard on the heels of one survey's announce are conditioned by much the ment purporting that 32% of all recent marriages of Jews were with same prior assumptions, approach to sample selection, partners of non-Jewish birth, came another proclaiming with like cer and questionnaire formulation. titude that the rate has reached 43 %! It is disconcerting to find that a good many people who should know Each survey, sidestepping better, people in a position to "know what goes on in the world," proportionate sampling of the more positive segments, outdoes should take the publicized conclusions of these pushbutton depictions at preceding ones in computing the face value. It is astonishing that people with responsible positions in rate o f disintegration. community life should echo their purported findings unquestioningly, without as much as a glance at the data from which they are drawn. It is dismaying to witness one community figure after another join the chay v'kayom chorus, pointing with I-told-you-so air to the supposed loss percentage as verified proof of doom for all. Were these communal voices to examine the survey data with any thing like the care they usually apply to ordinary transactions in busi ness, private life, or civic concerns, they could not fail to discover their utter shoddiness. They would unfailingly find that insofar as surveys of this genre represent their data as characterizing the entire American Jewish populace (or, in the case of local studies, the entire local commu nity), they are completely invalid. Their claims to scientific worth are, in this regard at least, untenable. They in fact present a distorted if not outright spurious picture of the American Jewish totality. The Newest Survey By no means exempt from this evaluation is the survey now being so widely and freely cited. This, the most elaborate and most widely pub licized to date, was conducted under the sponsorship of the Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds (CJFWF) by a team of researchers

headed by Dr. Fred Masaryk. In its claim to be a "comprehensive In its claim to be a national study...of the Jewish population of the United States" and that "comprehensive national its findings are "representative of the total U. S. Jewish population," study...of the Jewish population o f the United States" and that this presentation is grossly misleading. Actually, according to a CJFWF its findings are "representative source, the number of completed interviews was under 7,200. However of the total U.S. Jewish "scientifically chosen" a sampling, it is preposterous to assert that this population," this presentation is fraction, less that 4/10 of 1% of the 1,900,000 Jewish housing units grossly misleading. Actually, according to a CJFWF source, (according to the study) in the United States, is a statistical demographic the number of completed portrait of the entire American Jewish populace. interviews was under 7,200. As for the validity of the "scientific" basis of choice of households for inclusion in the sampling, this may be judged by the fact that the main source was: lists of contributors to local Jewish welfare fund federations. As anyone with any degree of knowledge of the American Jewish scene is aware, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that the minority of Jewish families who are welfare fund federation contributors are a rep resentative cross-section of, or demographically typify, American Jews as a whole. An exception was made in the case of Metropolitan New York, for which the federation contributor list as sample source would have been especially absurd. For this area, resort was made to what is designated in the study's methodology report, without definition or explanation, as an "area probability sample." It is further illuminating to find from examination of the CJFWF study methodology report that, despite an elaborate process of "weighting," Despite an elaborate process of New York with 40% of America's Jews occupies no larger dimension in "weighting" New York with 4 0 % o f America's Jews occupies the study's query scope than do locales such as the tabular combination no larger dimension in the of Tucson, Arizona and Las Vegas, Nevada. Similarly with other large study's query scope than do metropolitan areas. All, whether mass centers or remote outposts, are locales such as the tabular neatly evened out. Weaving one's way through the occult technicalities combination o f Tucson, Arizona and Las Vegas, Nevada. of the survey's methodology data, one concludes that in its purview a housing unit is a housing unit is a housing unit and that a dozen or so housing units in Tucson, pinpointed by a welfare fund list, and a dozen to two in New York, produced by that unfathomable area-probability sample, are equally representative for their respective locales in the mosaic of American Jewish totality. As with other surveys of its kind, the CJFWF study simply fails to As with other surveys o f its deal in any meaningful way with the areas of mass Jewish population, kind, the CJFWF study simply fails to deal in any meaningfkb Metropolitan New York and the five other largest metropolitan areas way with the areas o f mass which together contain more than two-thirds of the total American Jewish population, Metropolitan Jewish populace-and wherein are the largest concentrations of Orthodox New York and the five other Jews. The communities in such places as Tucson and Las Vegas are largest metropolitan areas w hich together contain more than small, compact, relatively easy to approach with the conventional two-thirds o f the total American mechanism of the conventional researcher and familiar to him in typol Jewish populace-and wherein are ogy. But confront that researcher with Brooklyn's Boro Park or even the largest concentrations of with Chicago's West Rogers Park or Los Angeles' Beverly-Fairfax, and Orthodox Jews. he is simply lost. So, he bluffs and strains to reduce these to the dimensions and character of Tucson, Las Vegas or Oshkosh. Thus such a projection as a 32% rate of intermarriage, as set forth by the CJFWF study, is a gross exaggeration in being attributed to the entire American Jewish populace. A really sound, comprehensive, authenti cally scientific study would require a much larger number of interviews

from a much more validly representative cross-section of population samples. It would account properly and in due respective proportion with both those segments-geographic and social- markedly exposed to assimilation and intermarriage and those with high degree of religious commitment. If such locales as Flatbush, Boro Park, Williamsburg, Far Rockaway, Forest Hills, Washington Heights, Monsey and many others like them in New York City and in other cities large and not so large were properly embraced in survey, a far different picture would emerge. In these locales, hundreds of thousands of Orthodox Jews have a mixed marriage rate of probably rather less than 1/10 of 1%. The resultant American-Jewish-total computation, with far better claim to accuracy, would surely be but a small fraction of that offered by the CJFWF survey.

If such locales as Flatbush, Boro Parky Williamsburg, Far Rockaway, Forest Hills, Washington Heights, Monsey and many others like them in New York City and in other cities large and not so large were properly embraced in survey, a far different picture would emerge. In these locales, hundreds o f thousands of Orthodox Jews have a mixed marriage rate o f probably rather less than 1110 of

Religious Commitment Misrepresented

Well-based data on the Orthodox synagogue constituency shows that 473,920 families, comprising at least 1,895,000 men, women and children, are regularly enrolled members o f Orthodox Jewish congregations in the United States and Canada. It is well known too that many who worship at Orthodox synagogues never assume formal membership status, and these add hundreds of thousands more to the total o f Orthodox congregants.

Inevitably, in light of the CJWFW study's character, the range of religious commitment among the American Jewish totality is similarly misrepresented. The proportion of the under-7,200 respondents stating that they were religiously Orthodox is reported at 1, and as with the other compilations it is claimed that this is accurately representative of the American Jewish totality. And as with the rest of the study's pur ported finding, this one is discredited both by the capital deficiencies of the study and by available information on the subject. Well-based data on the Orthodox synagogue constituency shows that 473,920 families, comprising at least 1,895,000 men, women and children, are regularly enrolled members of Orthodox Jewish congregations in the United States and Canada. It is well known too that many who worship at Orthodox synagogues never assume formal membership status, and these add hundreds of thousands more to the total of Orthodox con gregants. As with other faiths, some are more observant of religious tenets than others. The number of persons in American Sabbathobservant families is currently estimated at 800,000 to 875,000. But that some are lax does not mean that they relinquish their religious tie: they are still to be accounted within the fold of their birth. The part of the American Jewish populace which is of the Orthodox Jewish faith is not less than half of the total. But the core question is: What is, really, the overall trend? It is on this question, I submit, that surveys of the type under discussion are most dangerously misleading. For, in cueing their samplings and their ques tionnaires to a predominance of those on the outer periphery of Jewish life and then representing their findings as a mirror of the totality, they present a demoralizing falsification of the currents stirring American Jewish life today. That forces of assimilation and disintegration are taking grim toll of a large part of the American Jewish populace-of this there can unfortu nately be no doubt. Lives not grounded in affirmative Jewish belief, devoid of Jewish purpose, content, knowledge, severed from Torah roots-lives governed by the values, outlook and associations of the non-Jewish world-such lives are helplessly exposed to disintegration

and absorption and must inevitably, if not rescued from the pit, fall prey. To the losses from cultural and physical assimilation and intermar riage must be added the decline due to low birth rate. This element does not replenish itself by natural increase; if anything, there is a natural decrease, an excess of deaths over births. Nor, to any substantial extent, are its numbers replenished from those falling away from the traditional ranks, as was once much the case. Such recruits as this segment of Jewry may nowadays gain this way are more than offset by those moving from the assimilationist to the loyalist fold. In short, the non orthodox Jew is the vanishing Jew, in inevitable decline. But-among the believing ranks an opposite process is taking place, as But-among the believing ranks an it has been in mounting tempo through the past quarter-century and opposite process is taking place, as it more. The Orthodox Jew is the burgeoning, growing, multiplying Jew. has been in mounting tempo through the quarter-century and His numbers wax, his strength rises. more. The Orthodox Jew is the The first pillar of the Orthodox Jew's growth is natural increase. The burgeoning, growing, multiplying command P'ru ur'vu, be fruitful and multiply, is to the Torah Jew no less Jew. His numbers wax, his strength binding than any other mitzvah. With a higher birthrate and no higher rises. death rate than among the non-orthodox, this excess of births over deaths assures both a continuous net increase in numbers and a constantly rising proportion of the total Jewish populace. This natural trend is abetted by spiritual and ideological factors. While by no means immune to the social ills that imperil society at large and the forces of alienation that beat upon Jewish society, the Torah com munity's losses on these accounts are on a much smaller scale than is the case among other Jews. The ability of Orthodox Jewry to retain the The ability o f Orthodox Jewry to allegiance of the bulk of its upcoming generation represents in itself the retain the allegiance o f the bulk o f its reversal of the current that had prevailed for a century up to World War upcoming generation represents in itself the reversal of the current that II. From that crucial point on, when Orthodoxy was at its lowest ebb in had prevailed for a century up to numbers, morale and status, the situation had been in process of World War II. From that crucial point on, when Orthodoxy was at dynamic change. Another mark of the change is the revolutionized attitude toward its lowest ebb in numbers, morale and status, the situation had been in Jewishness, positive Jewishness among diverse ranks of American process of dynamic change. Jewry. Among those farthest gone in de-Judaization, the impact of the new current is often inadequate to overcome the pull of the contrary assimilationist current, while others, not so far removed from Jewish foundations, are at least kept from being swept away. Most notable aspect of the inner revolution is the attraction of thousands from beyond the ranks of the observant to the life of Torah and Mitzvos. Congrega tion after congregation in recent years has witnessed the addition to its ranks of Ba'alei Teshuvah; day schools without exception have rejoiced in inspiring families to re-embrace or newly embrace the Torah way; Orthodox youth movements each year win many more hundreds of teenagers and college students from non-religious homes for authentic Judaism. Increasing Numbers of Shomrei Shabbos An index of the trend is the increase in the number of Shomrei Shabbos. While there is no way to establish firm statistics on the subject, my own researches indicate that the present number, well over 800,000,

is at least double that of a generation ago. The increase of nearly half a million, by my careful estimates, is due to both natural increase and "conversion." This development in turn is reflected in the continuous rise not only in the number and enrollments of the elementary and high school-level day schools but of the higher yeshivos and their student bodies. It would have seemed inconceivable, but a few decades ago, that out of the confusions of American Jewish life there could arise some fifty institutions of higher Torah learning with more than 7,000 talmidim on post-high school level. Somehow, the facts to which we have pointed, whose substance is apparent to any observer of the American Jewish scene-provided he looks with open eyes-have made no "trends" imprint on the CJFWF study. Is it because these facts as I have set them forth and the trend they indicate are of a nature to elude survey-makers and their question naires, or is it because the survey was of a nature to elude certain facts? I propose to amend the assertions quoted at the beginning of this article, to the following effect:

Amended quote:

"If you're Jewish, there's a chance that your grand children won't be, but a rather better chance that they will be more intensively Jewish than you are."

Amended quote:

"Current trends indicate that in a matter of time there will be no de-Judaized American Jewry to speak of, there will be only an American Torah Jewry, kein yirbu."

NEW —

Changing your address? Don’t keep it a secret from us! Let us know as soon as you know so we can keep your copies of Jewish Life reaching you promptly.

“A PESACH SAMPLER” Creative Pesach COOKBOOK, taste sparkling recipes from appetizer to afikomen. Plus hints galore to ease the way to Pesach. Price: $2.00 order from: Women’s Branch UOJCA 84 Fifth Ave. New York, NY 10011 Please include addt’l. 250 for postage

The Leader of Kosher Wines turns to Liters W e’re going from gallons to liters, and from the bulky bottle to a slim, more manageable one, one that will surely enhance your Shabbos table. But while our figure is changing the fact remains the same: Kedem has the widest selection of kosher wines, from traditional sweet to extra dry Burgundy and Rhine. And everything in between, in cluding exclusive Concord n a t u r a l s w e e t, no sugar added.

I O

l l

Avoid the Rush, and place your holiday orders early at your local liquor store.

nosh niua Royal Wine Corp. N .Y. N .Y. [212] 583-5800^

Rena Quint

Franklin D. Roosevelt— Protector of the Jews... or Co-conspirator Against Them? During World War II Franklin D. Roosevelt was idolized by American Jewry. They helped elect him three times and they huddled around their radios entranced by his fireside chats in which he championed the destruction of Nazi Germany. Following World War II, the victorious Allies quickly placed in the dock Nazi war criminals and exacted punishment from them. It was to be many years before Americans were to realize that Franklin D. Roosevelt and Breckinridge Long, Assistant Secretary of State under Cordell Hull, should perhaps have been on trial too: not for being less than zealous in fighting the Nazis, but for their failure to rescue Jewish victims of Hitler's lunacy. Now the evidence is in, provided by various writers and scholars who have probed the records. As President of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt could have used his exalted office to aid the victims of Nazi persecution. Instead he shut his ears and eyes to their plight. Breckinridge Long threw every conceivable roadblock in the path of rescue. What roles did they play in the history of the Holocaust? Just a few examples will demonstrate their complicity. Two New World Leaders It is an irony of history that Adolph Hitler and Franklin Delano Roosevelt assumed office within a few days of each other: Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933, and Roosevelt was inaugurated as President of the United States on March 4, 1933. Hitler's ascendancy started the Holocaust. Roosevelt's ascendance could have done much to soften its blows. William L .. Shirer, in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich describes the early days of Hitler's regime: To Hitler, as he had publicly declared a thousand times, the Jews were not Ger mans, and though he did not exterminate them at once (only a relative few-a few thousand, that is-were robbed, beaten or murdered during the first months), he issued laws excluding them from public service, the universities and the profes sions. And on April l, 1933, he proclaimed a national boycott of Jewish shops. The more than four million Jews of the United States were uncertain as to their course of action. Rallies were held in many cities including a mass rally at Madison Square Garden at which former Governor Alfred E. Smith, Senator Robert F. Wagner, Bishop William T. Manning and Bishop Francis J. McConnell had expressed their indignation against Nazi policies. Roosevelt's White House was discreetly silent. Could anything have been done on behalf of the Jews in Germany? Might not a sharp American response have been effective? It is clear 49

Rena Quint is a student of Jewish Affairs. This is her first appearance in these pages.

today that a solemn warning by the United States would have been effective. German nationals living abroad could have been threatened in retalia tion. There had already been instances when retaliation was threatened and the threat brought an end to German brutality. Japan had been accused of using poison gas against the Chinese. When Roosevelt sol emnly warned that the United States would retaliate against the Japanese with gas warfare, Japan stopped using gas. Arthur Morse, in his While Six Million Died writes that: "O n March 30, 1933, George Gordon, charge d'affaires in Berlin, notified Washington that 'reports have come to the Embassy from numberless sources which indicate that the situation is rapidly taking a turn for the worse.' Then Gordon, in spite of the Hull Message revealing his reluctance to intercede in Ger man affairs, proposed exactly that. Gordon reported that a German industrialist had suggested that if the United States indicated to Hitler "in a friendly way the serious concern with which developments in Germany were being viewed in our country...it might have a favorable effect...he had every reason to believe that Hitler would listen to a message from this Embassy more readily than from any other mission here." Hull did not encourage the idea." Robert Goidston, who takes a simplistic approach to history, points out in Thè Life and Death of Nazi Germany, that when in 1944 Roosevelt issued a warning to Hungary not to deport any more Jews or else Hungary would be punished after the war, the deportation of Hunga rian Jews stopped at once, although it resumed a few months later. The Evian Conference By. March 1938 Austrian Jewry had already fallen into Hitler's hand through Germany's Anschluss. In the United States unemployment was at its peak, strengthening the hand of those favoring strict quota en forcement. But the fate of German Jewry and now also Austrian Jewry was constantly in the news. Roosevelt, politician that he was, saw that his coalition might unravel. The Southern restrictionists and the North ern urban liberals might line up on opposite sides of the immigration issue. Pressure was mounting on the Administration to do something about thè refugees. Officials of the State Department advised that rather than resisting this pressure, the Administration ought to guide it, to block efforts for more liberal legislation. Roosevelt accepted a proposal for an international conference. Historian David S. Wyman has specu lated that "a humanitarian motivation on Roosevelt's part may by no means be ruled out." The conference was in fact a hoax. The agenda declared that the United States could not change its immigration laws and called upon other countries to do likewise. The participating gov ernments would not be called upon to finance any movements of refu gees. When Welles suggested to Roosevelt that high-ranking govern ment officials attend the conference at Evian to show the importance attached to it, the President turned down the suggestion and instead selected Myron C. Taylor, a former head of United States Steel Corpora tion to head the delegation. Furthermore, the conference was to do 50

nothing to interfere with the moribund agencies then engaged in the problem. As Henry Feingold has written in The Politics of Rescue, ''the Adminis tration was making a gesture to the image of America as a refuge for the oppressed but it was also carefully reassuring those who no longer held to such a belief." Nora Levin, in The Holocaust, notes that "during the summer of 1938, an international failure further strengthened Hitler's hand. Arthur D. Morse, author of While Six Million Died, makes an even more cynical judgment about the Conference:" It would be months in planning, would silence the critics of apathy, and if all worked well, would divert refugees from the United States to the other co-operating nations." Of all the noble nations assembled at the Conference, the Dominican O f all the noble nations assembled at Republic alone offered some encouragement regarding the resettlement the Conference, the Dominican of refugees. Nation after nation declared they could not resettle any Republic alone offered some refugees. If the United States would take the lead the others might encouragement regarding the resettlement o f refugees. Nation after follow. The United States did not take the lead. nation declared they could not For Jews the conference was a cruel disappointment. America's resettle any refugees. If the United friends and enemies saw through the facade. Edouard Daladier, the States would take the lead the others French Premier told Prime Minister Chamberlain of Britain that might follow. The United States did not take the lead. Roosevelt was simply acting to soothe an aroused public opinion. An Austrian newspaper commented that "w e cannot take seriously Presi dent Roosevelt's appeal to the nations of the world as long as the United States maintains racial quotas for immigrants. I After Evian The Inter-governmental Committee on Political Refugees (IGC) sent George Rublee to negotiate with Germany regarding Jewish refugees. While these negotiations were going on, nothing was being done any where to find place for the Jews. Following the Krystallnacht Roosevelt ordered the Labor Department to grant a six month's extension of visitor's visas. This was the total response to what in effect signalled the beginning of the Holocaust. When a Statement of Agreement was completed on February 2, 1939 between IGC and Germany the situation was almost immediately exacerbated when Hitler moved into Czechoslovakia on March 15, 1939. The humanitarian Administration in Washington reacted by halting the With the outbreak o f World War II, issuance of visitors' visas. With the outbreak of World War II, Roosevelt continued to talk about Roosevelt continued to talk about a mass resettlement program, but a mass resettlement program, but nothing came of any of the proposals. nothing came o f any of the British Guiana, Costa Rica, Lower California, Haiti, Mexico, Carribean proposals. British Guiana, Costa Islands, Brazil, Belgian Congo> Alaska, Virgin Islands, Philippine Is Rica, Lower California, Haiti, lands, the United States of Africa, were all mentioned as possible places Mexico, Carribean Islands, Brazil, Belgian Congo, Alaska, Virgin to resettle Jews. Palestine, the most logical place of all, was never mentioned. Islands, Philippine Islands, The Britain was against it and Roosevelt would not ruffle the British feathers. United States o f Africa, were all The Assistant Secretary of State

mentioned as possible places to resettle Palestine Jews. Palestine,

the most logical place of all, was never mentioned. Britain was Breckinridge Long began his career in the Wilson Administration. He against it and Roosevelt would had made a substantial contribution to the Wilson campaign in Missouri not ruffle the British feathers.

in 1916 and as a result was appointed an Assistant Secretary of'State. In 1920 he ran for the Senate seat from Missouri on the Democratic ticket and lost. The loss was partly due to the party's split on support of the League of Nations. In 1932 he was the floor manager for Roosevelt at the Democratic convention and his reward then was appointment as Am bassador to Italy-he admired the precision of the Fascist regime. In In January 1940 Roosevelt appointed January 1940 Roosevelt appointed Long Assistant Secretary of State for Long Assistant Secretary o f State for Special Problems, and in that position he committed himself to com Special Problems, and in that pletely stopping the flow of refugees to the United States. He was also position he committed himself to in charge of visas-his decisions on refugees matters were crucial. He completely stop the flow o f refugees to the United States. H e was also in believed that refugees were a threat to the security of the United States. charge o f visas-his decisions on With resettlement never a serious proposal, Germany in the beginning refugees matters were crucial. He of 1942 at the Wannsee Conference decided upon the Final Solution. believed that refugees were a threat to the security o f the United States. Now every life to be saved would be an individual rescue effort. The United States threw a dike around the country to keep out refugees. Even a small hole in the dike was closed when Breckinridge Long, with the assent of his superiors, put his red-blooded American finger into the dike and stopped the trickle. Every rescue organization in the country was compiling lists of refu gees to receive special visas. On November 7, 1939, Long was able to write in his diary "so far I have been able to resist the pressure." As the person in charge of the Visa Division he used every ruse available to stifle immigration. Visitors visas would no longer be issued unless the visitor could furnish conclusive evidence that he could return to his country of origin. Transit visas would not be issued unless the traveler could furnish conclusive evidence that he could reach a third country. Visitors visas, even when issued, were valid for only four months. All applicants for visas over fourteen years of age would have to be finger printed. American consuls overseas, in order to please Long, were requiring police "good conduct certificates," which were of course im possible for Jewish refugees to obtain. In July 1941, Long issued a In early 1941 Long had Senator Russell o f Georgia introduce a bill directive to the consuls not to issue any more visitors visas or transit which would exclude all immigrants visas to persons who did not have exit permits. inimical to the public welfare. In early 1941 Long had Senator Russell of Georgia introduce a bill Earlier the State Department issued which would exclude all immigrants inimical to the public welfare. a regulation which denied visas to any person who had close relatives Earlier the State Department issued a regulation which denied visas to any person who had close relatives in occupied Europe. The require in occupied Europe. The requirements for financial affidavits ments for financial affidavits were superimposed on the already impos were superimposed on the already sible procedure. impossible procedure. As one writer As one writer put it: "All one had to do was wait, and refugees put it: "All one had to do was wait, clamoring to come to the United States would be converted into silent and refugees clamoring to come to corpses." the United States would be converted into silent corpses ." When word of the Final Solution started to seep into the West, the govemments-in-exile asked the White House to retaliate by bombing Perhaps Goebbels was right when he German cities. A public warning to Berlin was also demanded. The wrote; "At bottom ...I believe both Administration rejected both requests. Perhaps Goebbels was right the English and the Americans are happy that we are exterminating the when he wrote. "At bottom...I believe both the English and the Ameri Jewish riff-raff." cans are happy that we are exterminating the Jewish riff-raff.' The Bermuda Conference Public pressure was mounting on the Administration. Public pressure 52

was also mounting in Britain. A pressure valve had to be opened: a new refugee conference— but where should it take place? Long wanted it in British territory so that the onus of obstruction might focus on the English. Anthony Eden argued for an American location. It was agreed to hold the conference in Bermuda, a site inaccessible to the press. Long carefully selected the American delegates to the conference. They in cluded Harold W. Dodds, who throughout the conference argued that the war must be won and rescue dare not interfere. There was Robert Borden Reams, one of Long's trusted subordinates at the Visa Division. There was also Sol Bloom, a Jewish Congressman who was Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a very powerful committee. Any proposal brought up at the conference that might really save lives was quickly squelched. The IGC was resurrected. This was the total outcome of the long-awaited conference. No information was released to the press. No report of the conference was to be issued. Israel Goldstein, then president of the Synagogue Council of America, shrewdly observed that "the job of the Bermuda Conference apparently was not to rescue victims of the Nazi terror but to rescue our State Department and the British Foreign Office from possible embarrass ment." When Vichy France requested American assistance in removing Jewish refugees, Washington rejected the offer and one of the reasons given was that if the Germans permitted these Jews to leave they had surely planted spies among them. Restrictionists were always ready to rally around this cry. It was also argued that there was no shipping space available to bring It was also argued that there was no the refugees out of Nazi Europe. When it was pointed out that ships shipping space available to bring the returning from Europe were empty, the Administration expressed the refugees out o f Nazi Europe. When it was pointed out that ships fear that the ships might be sunk. returning from Europe were empty, When the question arose of sending food to the Jews in the concentra the Administration expressed the tion camps and in the ghettos the Administration answered: the respon fear that the ships might be sunk. sibility and manifest duty to supply such relief rests with the occupying authorities— the Nazis! Retaliatory Bombing Proposed Over and over again the retaliatory bombing of German cities and the bombing of the gas chambers and crematoria and rail lines leading to them were proposed, only to be rejected because such bombings "would divert the war effort." Then there was the astounding answer of John J. McCloy, Assistant Secretary of the Army that such bombing might make the Germans more vindictive. There was a statement by the allied government, branding Germany guilty of atrocities against various na tional groups— but the statement failed to mention Jews as the main victims. No wonder Germans believed they could murder Jews with impunity! Conclusion In his While Six Million Died, Arthur D. Morse quotes George Washington urging his countrymen, "humbly and fervently to beseech the kind Author of all blessings...to render this country more and more safe and propitious asylum for the unfortunates of other countries." 53

Perhaps if Washington rather than Roosevelt was in the White House during the Holocausts.but who can say what might have been? Yet one can speculate that a more humanitarian president, and a more con cerned Department of State, might have done much to limit the scope of the Final Solution. It should also be noted that the mood of the Ameri can people was not receptive to rescue and Roosevelt was not about to take political risks in defiance of this mood. To further complicate the situation in the United States, the Jews were anything but united on the question of rescue. Great Britain and other powers must take their share of blame for the Holocaust: the rest of the world by turning a deaf ear; Britain by its actions in what was then Palestine. A handful of Nazi leaders stood trial at Nuremberg. How many Allied Leaders shoud have been in the docks? Warnings to the Nazis was (of course) only a minor response the United States could have resorted to at that time. Of course rescue and resettlement would have been the utmost response. Many other remedies were available to the Americans and the Allies: to bomb the gas chambers and the railroad tracks leading to the concentration camps; to open up Palestine to the Jewish victims of Nazi inhumanity. In July 1933 William E. Dodd was appointed American Ambassador to Germany. Before Dodd left for Berlin, President Roosevelt made it clear to him that the United States would not initiate a formal protest to Germany regarding the mistreatment of the Jews, since the mistreat ment of Jews was not deemed to be a government affair. On September 10, 1933, the American Civil Liberties Union appealed to Roosevelt for a revision of the immigration laws to admit religious and political refugees from Germany. Yet throughout the prewar and war time years Franklin D. Roosevelt insisted on enforcing the immigration law, arguing that restrictionist legislators in Congress would fight any attempts at reform. In fact: Roosevelt could have, by executive fiat, reversed President Hoover's administrative interpretations-which he never did. In the depression years the immigration quotas were underutilized, partially due to the harsh American attitude of American consuls over seas. When Sir Herbert Samuel complained to Roosevelt he received a bland reply. A similar fate befell a letter sent by High Commissioner McDonald. On October 28, 1936, Roosevelt was to speak at the fiftieth anniversary celebration of the Statue of Liberty. The highly respected scholar, John Dewey, urged Roosevelt to use the occasion to announce the cancelization of President Hoover's executive order, and to issue new orders to accept the maximum amount of refugees permitted by law. Instead: Roosevelt made a bland statement justifying curtailment of immigration. Stephen Wise, who always felt close to Roosevelt, later admitted in his autobiography that Roosevelt failed to give any hope to the victims of Nazism. As historian James Burns put it: "At this crucial juncture Roosevelt offered little leadership...Roosevelt only drifted."And as he drifted, Jews were being transported to concentration camps and death in growing numbers.

R E S E R V E T H IS D A TE : NO VEM BER 24-28, 1976 UOJCA BIEN N IA L CONVENTION BOCA RATON, FLO RID A For further information write: UOJCA Convention Committee 116 East 27th Street New York, N.Y. 10016

You can share

with scores of people for only $4.00 per year. . . give a gift subscription to your local library your favorite doctor, your favorite dentist— or wherever it will be seen and read b y . . . scores of people.

Jewish Life/116 East 27th Street/New York, N.Y. 10016 I enclose my check or money order for $ __gift subscriptions. My list is enclosed. [ | Tell them it’s from me.

00 for

name address

city

state

zip number

Photo courtesy of UJA 56

Shirley Horowitz

Caring for the Aged in Israel: How They Make It (Them) Work "For the last time, I'm telling you...stay off the grass. Look where you're walking. You think my work is for nothing. Just watch where you put your big feet, you old geezer!" The second old man, also at least 85 years old, answered back just as sharply: "What's so great about your grass. It's not even your grass to begin with. It's meant for all of us anyway. And watch that rake...you'll kill me yet." "Stop it. Are you both babies? Didn't you learn yet how to get along with people? You ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Stop this non sense right now. I'll have to call Mr. Ben Ami." And the old lady, about 88 years old, did just that. She called Mr. Ben Ami, the director of the Parents' Home in RishonX'zion, in Israel, to come quickly, to arbitrate. He left our group, just gathering together for a guided tour, and pacified the two men, temporarily at least. What were these old people fighting about so strenuously, just short of using their fists? Each person in the Home has his own assigned duties to perform on a regular basis. They aren't left "on the shelf" to wait for death to come. Instead, each has a job to do to help run and maintain the Home. Each is given work according to his capabilities. And that's what they were fighting about—their respective work assignments. This system has the advan tage of cutting down on the amount of help necessary to run the institution, and—far more important—giving the residents a real feeling of being useful and needed in their society. In Neve Avot, one of the Malben Homes for the Aged, in Israel, there were over twenty-five tailors who had spent their lives at this trade and wanted to continue their occupation. They manage to save the Home a substantial sum of money by using their skills to repair and mend linens and garments for their fellow residents. A staff of about twenty elderly men and women assist the Home's full-time staff of gardeners to maintain the grounds. Each morning they tidy their rooms, have their breakfast, and report for work, to prune and trim trees and shrubs. In the shoe repair shop four shoemakers sit over their lasts, making repairs, saving the home money and keeping usefully busy. In this particular home, which is almost a village by itself within the larger village of Pardess Hanna, approximately three quarters of the home's population of 1100 are engaged in real and productive work. "How do you get these old people to work voluntarily? What induce ments do you use?" Questions like these are always put to the Director. The answer is quite simple: a new arrival to the home finds everyone working and fully occupied. People leave early in the morning with a purpose to their steps. They go to their sewing machines, to the ceramics workshop, the weaving looms, for gardening, to the kitchens. Lunchtime, they come back, tired, but satisfied with a day's work. Being busy is in the air and the newcomer can't remain immune to it. The bug bites him and he looks around; what can he do in this place. Don't 57

In typical American style, when we discovered "the problem" o f the aged, the federal government tried to solve it with hard cash. In the swirling controversy over nursing homes, one factor is generally conceded: we are failing our old people. Our author here suggests ihat care o f the aging in Israel offers techniques that might very well be imported to America.

forget, we are discussing people whose ages range from 65 to 90 years. Then, there is a man in a home in Netanya. He celebrated his Bar Mitzvah 68 years ago and his title is one he justifies every day: he is Then there is the "Keeper of the Bees." Then there is the "trouble-shooter." He repairs all " trouble-shooter." He repairs all the machines in the various workshops, and rarely has an idle moment. the machines in the various workshops, and rarely has an idle He came to the home many years ago wearing a neck brace to help him overcome the pains of arthritis. The brace is long gone and he hasn't had moment. He came to the home many years ago wearing a neck any pains for many years now. In 1967 this home had 650 residents, of brace to help him overcome the whom thirty required nursing care; a hundred forty-five were infirm; pains o f arthritis...The brace is long gone and he hasn't had any and everyone else was busy. They were occupied with making things, from carpets, to leather handbags; working in the kitchens, in the pains for many years now. laundy room, and in the gardens. The Director of the Service for the Aged in the Ministry of Social Welfare of the State of Israel, Mrs. H. Kahn, sums it up: "The basic concept in the care for the aged is to retain, as long as possible, the independent and useful functioning of the individual. Involving the aged in the running of the homes and in other work in various fields is included in this concept." Thus, emphasis is placed on the approach which encourages each resident to keep busy at some constructive activity for at least a few hours a day. This is a formal, planned program of work. Each newcomer is offered a choice: he can continue in whatever he did previously for a living, or he can learn a new craft. Everyone will agree with the premise that a person who has nothing to do is more prone to aches and pains, and various ailments, real or imagined in origin. The dean of Swiss gerontologists, Frederic "Old age is not an illness. It is a Verzar has said: "Old age is not an illness. It is a continuation of life continuation of life with with decreasing capacities for adaptation." The concept of the necessity decreasing capacities for of keeping busy may be particularly relevant to our present generation adaptation." of over 65's. The Great Depression of the 1930's hit them at a crucial period of their lives, when they were beginning their careers. It gave them a lesson in the importance (almost holiness) of work, and con versely, the dread of lack of work, of unemployment... a lesson deeply etched into their beings, and one that formed the basis for their whole lives. Mandatory retirement policies have sentenced our citizens over 65 to the scrap heap. At present there are twenty million Americans 65 or over; fully two thirds of these are retired. All indications are that this segment of the population will increase steadily, and the aged will represent over 15% of American citizenry in a few years. Various per sonal and family circumstances make it more practical for a good portion to continue their lives in nursing homes. But must they be condemned to sit in a wheel chair and wait for the end? In a letter quoted in Ralph Nader's Report: "Old-Age: The Last Segregation" an employee of a nursing home writes: "There are 60 patients, all old and suffering, not so much from the cares which afflict their bodies, but from the monotony and loneliness which living in a home implies." In the standards set down by the National Committee on the Aging it is declared to be axiomatic that unrelieved idleness may, in fact, bring about emotional and physical deterioration. The usual response to this problem is recrea tional or entertainment programs based upon the passive participation of the home's residents. The advent of TV has been the biggest boon to programming in American nursing homes. Just turn on the set, put the

old people in front of it, and nothing more is required—not even check ing to see if the set is still in focus. This is the shortest road to the deterioration of mind and body of a healthy (if not young) human being. Speaking to a volunteer worker in a first rate Home in Queens, New York, I came away with the sum of his many years of experience. Lack of stimulation and lack of involvement bring about a rapid decline in health and well-being. Instances where the resident had some degree of responsibility, or a deeper interest in the planned program offered by the home, showed a marked difference. A program of passive participa tion does have its place, combined with a schedule of work activity for a part of the day. We are committing a cardinal sin in this waste of the vast human resources of our well aged. Why,must a person be consi dered useless at an arbitrary age? Are we so wealthy that we can afford to throw away all the knowledge and experience accumulated by our aged? Do we do the wise thing when we put our aged in a situation where they become completely dependent, completely helpless? Are our nursing homes so well run, so well-staffed, that they need no help? The Israeli experience offers a double-edged solution to our nursing home problems: it reduces the cost of running the homes, and at the same time gives added meaning and life to our aged population. Of course, such a plan is not a panacea for all the ills, but it can contribute to a reduction of the human misery causes, where healthy old people become bed-ridden and unnecessarily helpless. Aren't we honor-bound to do everything within our power to improve this most disheartening situation? RECENT PUBLICATIONS BY PHILIPP FELDHEIM TURNABOUT, the Purim story. Megillah Esther in

THE HIRSCH SIDDUR — compact edition. 760

novelette form, based on Malbim’s Commentary. Translated and adapted by Mendel Weinbach, with a biography of the Malbim and Hebrew text of Megillah Esther .................................. $4.00

p a g e s . . ............................................... .$5.00 (This price will be raised in the near future.)

THE BOOK OF RUTH— as reflected in Rabbini cal Literature. Hebrew vocalized text with En glish translation and an extensive commentary by Rabbi Yitzchak I. Broch(London)...............$5.00

A Guide to the Understanding and Observance of the Jewish Family Laws, by Rabbi Zev Schostak. This well received volume is now in its second edition and highly recommended by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein...................................$2.50

SHECHITA: Religious and Historical Research on the Jewish Method Slaughter. Edited by Michael L. and Eli Munk, and Medical Aspects of Shechita by I.M. Levinger. 300 p a g e s ................................ ......................... $7.50 This is part II in English of the previously published Hebrew volume:

nwM imp

ninvNi nv»n\yn pin o i?y o>vn >t?ynnysn no>n\yn tnvmp o>nnn >"y *py3 jwisn .Try

nnrtm mrnpvn nmmw

356 p a g e s ...................................................

A guide to the understanding and obser vance o f the Jew ish fam ily laws by Rabbi Zev Schostak. This wetl-received volum e is now in its second edition and highly recom m ended by Rabbi M oshe Feinstein.

$2.50

.......$7.50

Two most important volumes on the subject of Shechita by these eminent authors who are in the forefront in the fight for the right of Shechita for a long time. Will be of greatest interest for all involved in the Defense of Shechita and its scientific background. Containing Responsa from the greatest Gedolim and authorities in the time before World W ar II.

PHILIPP FELDHEIM, INC. The House of the Jewish Book 96 East Broadway New York, New York 10002

FELDHEIM PUBLISHERS, LTD. 39 Tachkemoni Street Jerusalem, Israel

Book Review Zionism— The most terrible enemy of the Jewish nation? The heading I chose (and tactfully provided with a question mark) is the statement of a great man, who saw Judaism as essentially nationalistic and who sensed in the Balfour declaration the first signs of the approach of Mashiach! It may seem strange, but Dr. Isaak Breuer, one of the most outspoken critics of political Zionism, is also one—perhaps the one—who for mulated most successfully the nature of Jewish nationalism in the language of our day. To him, Torah is no religion: it is essentially the constitution of the Jewish nation. He is aflame with love for Eretz Yisrael—but only because it is a pre-condition for the full realization of the Jewish nation's mission, as embodied in the Torah. To him, those who would propose a Jewish nationalism which has meaning without Torah, to whom Torah is but one of several manifestations of Judaism—these are the would-be destroyers of the Jewish nation. In his booklet The Problem of the Jew, Breuer quickly disposes of the idea that Jeyvry constitutes a race. "R ace" is simply a concept permitting the classification of humans according to hereditary physi cal characteristics. Judaism is a matter of the mind, a feeling of unity with a large group of other people, a concept remote from the notion of race. More attractive, but equally false, is the proposition that the Jews are a religion. The fact that many Jews have rejected their religion, but are still Jews, disproves this. Jews are a nation; a nation for a purpose, a nation with a mission. They became a nation when they accepted this mission which is embodied in their national law.

Isaak Breuer, CONCEPTS OF JUDAISM J.S. Levinger, Editor, Israel University Press Jerusalem, 1974

P. Feldheim, New York, distributor 348pp.

The nation dedicates its later life to this national law, which its will had desired. It is precisely for the realization of this law that it receives its land and founds its state. But it is older than state and land. It has become a nation in the desert because it desired G-d's will. In the desert, too, supported by common historical experience, it has set itself common national-historical goals. For this nation, the state I cannot be an end in itself, nor the land a condition of its existence. The-loss of state and land, which kills other nations in different circumstances has already been overcome in the cradle.. . . The demands of Judaism approach the individual Jew not as "religious rules" but as the rules of valid national law, and they do not require recognition on the basis of subjective conviction but demand to be followed obediently in faithful subjection to the national will that desires G-d's w ill.. T . But Judaism is not religion of law, but law pure and simple. It is the law which the Jewish nation in close unity received from G-d's hands at Mount Sinai and ordains to its members. The primary addressee of the revelation is not the individual but the nation, which becomes a

unity of will with the acceptance of the revealed law. Seen in this light only does the Sinaic revelation find its correct sense. If it were delivered to individuals, how could it bind successive generations? (pp. 3 0 -3 3 ) "Reform " mistook Judaism for a religion and tried to eradicate the nationalistic elements. The original German "Reform ers" wanted to be "German citizens of Mosaic faith." Thus they raged against the very being of Jewishness—the nation. Political Zionism, on the other hand, recognizes the nation, but negates its spirit and mission—its "national will." Hence "Zionism kills the nation and places the corpse on the throne." (p.6). Zionism here is not necessarily anti-religious; it may even be religious; it may even see Torah as an important cultural manifestation of the Jewish people. But it sees it as but one manifesta tion and not as the essence of Jewish nationalism. By denying that, it has earned the appelation we* used as the heading of this review, (p.6) Judaism is nationalism not for its own sake, but in the service of an idea; it is not absolute, but rela tiv e n a tio n a lism . This fact accounts for this historical mystery—the survival of the Jewish people. Pure or absolute nationalism, i.e., the will to national preservation as an end in itself, can endure the loss of the natural conditions of a people's life, above all of national "settledness," as little as the natural will to life can defy the destruction of the body. Relative nationalism, however, which denies the nation any intrinsic value and only recognizes it as an existent entity and merely demands for it national self-preservation because both existence and self-preservation stand in the service of an idea which relies on these two constituent factors for its realization; such relative nationalism may derive life from the idea and particularly from the eternity of the idea.. . f The problem of the indestructibility of Jewish nationalism, from which there results directly the continuous existence of the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine, finds its solution in the relativity of that nationalism. Not Jewish nationalism, but Judaism proved indestructible.. . . Ideas defy any violation from outside and all brute force. You cannot destroy them. They can only be refuted. (P-86) Isaak Breuer did not live to see the establishment of Medinath Yisrael. But to him the Mandate (of the League of Nations) to establish a home for the Jewish people on the soil of Eretz Yisrael, was enough of a call: the people of the Torah must cooperate with the process which seems to presage the coming redemption. This is evident from the following quotes from his "The Great Turning." The people of Israel has been living, now for more than twenty years in the era of the Mandate. This sentence is apparently very simple. And yet it enshrines a complete revolution.. . . These facts have effected a complete change in the whole aspect of the exile of the people of Israel. The people of Israel is still in exile. "There is no longer a prophet, nor is there anyone with us who knows how long it will be." But for the first time in about two thousand 61

years the people of Israel, as a people in the political and international sense, has one possibility and one task: to build for itself a national home in its land.. . . It is not the Mandate that is a revolution but rather Zionism itself, because it has turned the Torah into a mere religion, a matter of private conscience, because it has rebelled against the Torah—against the eternal law of the people of Israel—and because it has raised a banner aloft with the slogan: "Come, let us be like the gentile nations," who also have a room or two for religion in their national hom es.. . . And now indeed it was precisely the Zionist era that brought about the era of the Mandate. Suddenly, with practically no spiritual and mental preparation whatsoever, the people of the Torah was con fronted by a new historical reality, such that had never arisen during all the centuries of its exile. For the Mandate was not granted to Zionism, and there was not the slightest hint of rebellion to be found in its proclamations. The Mandate was given to the people of Israel, and it called upon the people of Israel to build for itself its national home in its own land. What does "the people of the Torah" mean, if not simply the people of Israel?. . . But as a single organism, the people of the Torah, separated from its land for two thousand years, has only one duty in the era of the Mandate: to build for its King His national h om e.. . . However, the people of the Torah which denies a secular national home, without or even with a niche for religion, with all the fervor of its soul that is attached to its King, who is not content to be the King of a niche—this people of the Torah has no other vehicle of expression and of will than Agudat Israel. And behold, the revolution of the people of the Torah has not yet penetrated to Agudat Israel.. . . They do not know, or do not want to know, that the era of the Mandate signifies the greatest turning that has ever occurred in the people of the Torah's life in exile, a revolution that has found them spiritually and mentally unprepared, and has been brought about by that movement which is divided from the people of the Torah by an iron gate, viz., secular Zionism, many sections of the people of the Torah have regarded the Mandate as merely the fruits of Zionism, and have thought that the fruits resemble the movement itself.. . . The potential powers of the people of the Torah are tremendous and this turning will convert the potential into reality. In the era of the Mandate these powers will build for our King His national home, and He (may He be blessed) will erect for us the House of His glory, (pp. 308-314)

Breuer was a deep thinker, a sharp analyst, and a brilliant author. In addition to his momentous work on Jewish nationalism, he wrote a number of articles and books on (1) the problems of science and religion, and (2) the philosophical (epistemological) foundations of the belief in the divine origin of the Torah. In the present volume, one section is devoted to each of these. (Almost half the body of the book is devoted to two chapters from TheNew Kuzari—dia the foundations of our faith.) 62

In "The Concept of Miracle in Judaism," the author attempts to tackle the problem of defining a miracle in Judaism which views nature, too, as consisting of divine acts. In what, then, does the miracle differ? His solution is apparently based on the axiom that : "Without [the concept of causality] we can not possibly perceive existing matter." (p.118) He then proceeds to define the miracle as a phenomenon without apparent cause, the fact that we perceive it constitutes its validation. His approach may be dated; causality plays a far lesser role in modern science and the above axiom may sound strange to today's reader. On the other hand, his distinction between "creation" and "nature" (absolutely obedient to rigid laws) is a concept the reader may find instructive and useful. The fourth and last section of the present volume is a collection of miscellaneous items. One of these seems a bit strange as coming from Breuer's pen. It is a chapter on Theodor Herzl—a song of unmitigated praise tovthe founder of the movement which Breuer calls "the most terrible enemy ever to rise against the Jewish nation"! There surely was much sensitivity, nobility, vision, and integrity in Herzl—but equally surely was he estranged (perhaps through no fault of his own) from that which is the essence of Jewishness, so that such praise, without qualification, seems somewhat surprising. Equally surprising are the concluding sentences of that chapter: "He paced the earth like the King of the Jews. But even today the crown of the King of the Jews is still a crown of thorns." This specific comparison of Herzl with the founder of Christianity—probably the worst enemy of the Jewish people from without—clashes strangely with the eulogy it concludes. Perhaps Breuer is here imitating the German Jewish poet H. Heine, who was wont to write poetry building up lofty imagery—only to destroy it in a concluding phrase of satire and ridicule? The editor of Concepts of Judaism should be congratulated for his ,apt selection from the vast output available to him. However, some remarks in the introduction should not go unchallenged. Thus on the first page he refers to the "excessive loyalty to the practical precepts of religion in the form laid down in the Shulhan Aruch and its commen taries" among the Orthodox Jews in Germany. This appears as a gratuitous insult, with no effort at justification. Also, a reference to Breuer's closeness to religious-Zionism in "his relationship to Palestine" (p.9) reflects a lack of depth on part of the editor. The "old Yishuv"—the inhabitants of the Old City—were the last to surrender Jerusalem to the Arabs onslaught in 5708 (1948) and some of them, to this day, will not leave Jerusalem for any reason. Yet I have never heard them considered close to Zionism "in their relationship to Palestine." To Breuer, just as to them, a sovereign secular Jewish state was unthinkable. It is this that puts him—and them—poles apart from political Zionsim, religious or otherwise. Leo Levi

> B e m w e p tä m im ita to r s !!..

There’s only one

Vienna

livrèe! Recife Gefilte Fish

FORTHE FINEST

GLATT CLATT GLATT

ROKEACH

(3) DELICATESSEN FAVORITES Complete line of vacuum packed and bulk delicatessen, and a full line of portion controlled meats for institutions..

Gefilte Fish

Call: 254-5994 for the store nearest you

SCHECHTER’s

EâRiBBEAM

KO SHER GLATT

ENTIRE O C E A N F R O N T B L O C K 3 7 th to 3 8 th St. M IA M I B E A C H . . . is a GREAT Kosher H o te l- y o u 'll lo v e it!

• D IA L M IA M I BEACH FREE!

For R eservatio n s S p e a k to SAM SCHECHTER •

800- 327-8165 O r C a ll N.Y. Off: PL 7-4238 Evenings & S unday FA 7-1742

FREE PARKING PRIVATE POOL AND SANDY BEACH

V 1-

CAMP NCSY Big Bear Lake, California 'IT ’ A unique experience in religious recreational and educational camping, serving the Western States and Western Canada.

Jan u ad y ,

1976

Pea* Paventò| P o d t h d e e s u m m e d s n ow t h e N a t i o n a l C o n f e d e n c e o f S y n a g o g u e . Y o u t h (NCSY) h a s o p e d a t e d the. m o s t s t i m u l a t i n g an d s u c c e s s f u l c a m p I h a v e eve* h a d t h e . p r i v i l e g e , to s e e . T h i s w as a t t e s t e d t o b y s a t i s f i e d a n d e n t h u s i a s t i c p a t i e n t s f d o m a l l ove* t h e W est C o a s t . Camp NCSY p r o v i d e d my s o n s w i t h a n o p p o d tu n ity to ex p ed ien ce th e d ich n ess o f Ju d a ism in a s e t t i n g o f n a tu d a l b ea u ty an d an a tm o sp h ed e o f jo y o u s p l a y . T hey cam e hom e w it h d e n e w e d d u a c h , im b u e d w it h m ode k n o w le d g e an d l o v e o f T odah Ju d a is m . Look a t t h e p ic t u d e s . Y o u 9l l s e e h a p p y , fu n -fille d fa c es. Youd c h i l d c a n b e i n th a t p ictu d e, to o . A p p l y n ow a n d e n s u d e h im a w o n d e d f u i su m m ed.

DATES June 30 - July 28, 1976

md s . i d v x . n g P adent

M oskow ztz

ELIG IBILITY Campers: Boys & Girls-ages 8-13 Seminar Program: Boys & Girls-9th & 10th grades Work-Study Program: Boys & Girls-11th grade Counselor-In-Training (C IT): 12th grade For further information call (213) 658-5533, or write CAMP NCSY 6505 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 502 Los Angeles, California 90048

premium kosher w ines

O ca 2 O' X O /O o

fr ovnm-r *» c:vn 0102 o mo m æ /O w>m3L rn cnxoa OGO Ch o X Oh j> o & mm, o H H

oo Oo

A t S c h a p iro ’s, w e re fu s e to fo rs a k e tra d itio n a l w in e -m a k in g p ra c tic e s . T h e re a re no m a s s -p ro d u c tio n sh ortcu ts. W e lim it o u r p ro d u c tio n , so th a t w e c an im p ro v e o u r w in es fro m y e a r to y e a r. C lassic c o n c o rd s , full b o d ie d an d rich in fla v o r, an d a w id e v a rie ty of fru it w ines. All ( Q ) K osh er, a n d , all so v e ry d elicio u s.

W atch fo r th e (0) appearing on the label. Schapiro's Wine Company 126 Rivington Street,N.Y.C. 2 1 2 -6 7 4 4 4 04