The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-05-04
IN DEFENSE OF ORTHODOXY
A Layman Takes Issue With
the Teacher of Reform
Judaism.
Rabbi Voorsanger Says He Stands
by His Published ASser-
tons.

With fuller discussion and wider COM
prehension of the views of Rabbi J. Voor-
sanger, as stated in his lecture of last Fri
day evening, when he discussed on "Why
am Reform Jew?" the feeling among
those who believe in and practice orthodox
Judaism at home as we'll as in the syna
gogue grows stronger and more resentful
against what they designate the unjust
aspersions cast upon them by the rabbi of
the congregation Emanuel.
This state of affairs was called to the
attention of the now much-criticized ex-
FOUNDER of reform Judaism, as was also
the reply made to his utterances by Rabbi
NJ. S. Levy. The latter, among other
things, said: /" very seriously doubt,
from what 1 know of DR.. Voorsanger,
whether he used the terms published
That the orthodox Jew is dishonest and
inconsistent in the practice of his Juda-
ism
All that Rabbi Voorsanger would say
further with reference to this subject was:
have nothing additional to say for publica-
ton beyond letting the text of my address, as
published in the CALL of Saturday, speak for it
self am willing to stand by the record and
be judged by it. decline to discuss the ques
would, however, like TO have my definition of
reform Judaism, as given in one Of my previous
lectures, published just now. 1t is that reform
Judaism is nothing but Judaism taught by
American methods-the methods that are pecu-
liar 10 our own country. l may take the matter
up again before my congregation previous 10
my departure for Europe. They have taken so
great an interest in this last lecture that have
been asked to have it published In pamphlet
form for general distribution, but l will not
have time to do this before my return, some
time in September next.
Henry Kramer is generally acknowl-
edged among his coreligionists to be the
best qualified layman to defend the cause
of orthodox JUDAISM. He was called upon
and asked to express his views with refer
ence to the letter and spirit of DR.. Voor-
sangers address. He was somewhat diff
dent, he said, being a layman, to set up
his opinions against so eminent and schol-
arly rabbi as DIR. Voorsanger. But after
terday's CALL, with Rabbis Levy and
Nieto; his hesitation gave way 10 the
stronger desire to shield his orthodox
brethren from what he termed the ridicule
to which they were always held up when
ever discussed by the reformers. He said:
1t is strange that nearly all of the reform
rabbis when they discuss the orthodox Jews,
always try to speak of them in the most abusive
terms. The orthodox people much prefer to be
let alone. They never interfere with the do
ings OF any of the other rabbis in the least.
The rabbis of reform Judaism generally refer
to the orthodox Jew as if it were a crime for
them to adhere to their dietary laws or TO OBJ
serve their Sabbath as a holiday, or to other
wise deport themselves as honest citizens,
which, as a rule, they are, with but very few ex-
ceptions.
Furthermore, the reform rabbits lay great
deal of stress upon their loyalty to this Repub-
lie, insinuating at the same time that such 10y
atty is seldom to be found among the orthodox.
This must be stoutly denied, for as q rule
those belonging to the old school are equally
as loyal as any of those belonging to the more
progressive of the reform school. Why, the
Talmud itself, in many instances, urges upon
the Israelites to be loyal to the country in
1i1-a