The Jewish monitor. (Fort Worth-Dallas, Tex.) 191?-1921, 1919-10-03

taste of many individuals. But let us not
forget that historically, the rabbis in Israel
were simply the messengers of the congre-
cations, and that always, the mass has de-
termlned the path of Israel-not the in
dividuals, even though rabbis. Even in the
days when the schools were the life of our
religion, it was the mass scholarship-not
the individual scholarship, that kept alive
the flame of Judaism.
In these newer days only, have we en-
trusted the fate of our religion to specialists
--rabbis we call them, and we are free to
confess that so far as the leadership of some
OF them is concerned-our critic is correct.
On the other hand, where are the congrega-
tlons that have permitted themselves to be
thus misled-is their responsibility not as
great as that of the misleading minister, es-
peclally when he who errs errs only on the
side OF Judgment, not of motive or intent?
Existing religious indifferences is as
much the result of conditions over which
rabbis have no control as it is over the lib
erallsm of the teachers themselves and
their congregations. The cry of universal
brotherhood had a powerful appeal for men
nifty years ago, and the reformers who
1lourshed then, and their intellectual des-
cendants of today, still feel that only radi-
cal liberalism can lead to the consummation
OF universal brotherhood. They feel that
as long as the ethical essentials of Judaism
are observed, we are loyal to the Past. They
belleve in an evolution of men through re-
hgous training, and they discard those ele-
ments which are not conducive to the reali-
cation of those ideals which to them, make
for Universasm.
Certainly, they do not want to see Juda-
ISM disappear; and they decry the great in
difference for which they hold themselves
blameless, but which is weaving away from
us, thousands of our best sons and daugh-
tiers. They do not realize that the very ma
ture of their attitude forces them into a
position of compromise with the dominant
faith, and we find them saying things about
other faiths, which in the minds of their au-
dltors eXtol these others at the expense of
their own. If, for instance, the ethics of
Jesus is as fine as those of the prophets; if
Jesus was as great prophet as Isaiah-and
greater-why then not Join the liberal ele-
ment of the dominant faith? And this has
~>>'' ''''S w many d jew, WHOSE llTSJ III
spiration to do this came-not from the
pew, but from the pulpit. We need not, of
course, eXpatiate on the plaudits which
Jewish ministers get, when they extol Jesus
and place him among the prophets.
We agree, with our writer that if, under
the present organization of our religious
forces, lay and clerical, change is to come
about, it must come through the efforts of
the pulpit. And it will come through the
pulpit provided the pew does its duty And
here is the rub. Our pew is very often
wrongly-directed one 1t has the heart
but hasn't the mind. 1t is like the little boy
who wanted to learn how to swim but was
afraid to go into the water.
We want to see pew which will extend
full liberty to its minister. We want to see
pews which will not muzzle their teacher.
We want to see Temples which will stand by
their rabbis when these will expose the sins