The Reform movement, as the movement for religious emancipation, was the accompaniment of similar emancipatory movements affecting the Jews at the close of the eighteenth century. First there was the linguistic emancipation when under the leadership of Moses Mendelssohn the Jews of Germany discarded the use of the German-Jewish jargon or Yiddish, the language of the Jew's degradation, (for there would have been no such thing as Yiddish had the Jew not been degraded and excluded as he was in the countries of Europe) and began the employment of pure German. Secondly, there was the educational emancipation. The Jews had been educated in chedarim where they received instruction only in Hebrew branches and no so-called secular education whatsoever. This separated the Jew from the culture of the world. At the close of the eighteenth century German Jews began to attend schools and universities. Gradually this took place also in other countries. Thirdly, there was the civil or political emancipation, when after the French Revolution the countries of western Europe, one after the other, accorded the Jews the rights of men. The Reform movement or, in other words, the religious emancipation, is simply the result of great world forces, as embodied in these various aspects of emancipation, and for this reason the Reform movement, far from being simply a matter of creed or theological belief, made the Jew a citizen of the world and fitted him for the modern environment.
The "Body and Soul" of Jewry
NOW there is one other point made by the previous speaker to which I feel that I must refer and that is the matter of "body and soul." This is a favorite phrase of Zionist writers and speakers as emphasizing the difference between Zionists and reformers. We reformers also believe that the body Jewish is necessary, but in a sense different from the Zionistic claim that the Jewish nation must be re-established. I as a reformer and a non-Zionist also use the term "the Jewish people," but in the sense of a "religious people," not a "political people." This involves a vital distinction—the distinction between religionism and nationalism. Yes, I also believe that the body, the religious community, is necessary. The reform rabbinical conference declared against intermarriage for the very reason that it is all important that the Jewish people, the mamleket kohanim, the goy kadosh, be the vessel embodying the religious idea, the spirit. But let it be understood clearly that nationally we are poles apart from the Zionists. Nationally I am an American. I also feel that we ought not to have hyphenated Americans, but Americans pure and simple. In that sense I am nationally an American without a hyphen. Religiously I am a Jew, and religiously I am part and parcel of the Jewish people with whom my religious fortunes are intertwined. Further, I feel very much as Dr. Kallen does in regard to our duty towards the Jews made destitute by the murderous European war. They have none else to look to and we must help them; for whatever may be our differences, we must stand united in this pressing duty of the hour, this work of mercy. But may God speed the day when the Jews in Poland, Russia and Roumania will receive full rights so that nationally they may be considered Poles, Russians or Roumanians as are all others in those lands, as is the case here in free America. To my mind this is the only effective solution to the so-called Jewish problem in those countries.
Freedom is the Messiah that is still to come to the Jews in the lands where they are oppressed, so that everywhere they may be at one in the rights of citizenship with their fellow countrymen, differing from them in their religion alone. This is the great distinction I desired to draw between the Jew nationally and the Jew as a member of a religious people; this "religious people" is the body of which Judaism is the soul.
Prof. Sharfman
I AM constrained to close this meeting with a statement similar to that made by our Chancellor at the conclusion of the public meeting last evening. This was a typical Menorah discussion. We are an open forum for all points of view. We are glad to hear Dr. Kallen's opinions; we are glad to hear Dr. Philipson's opinions. I am sure that out of this clash of views will come a better understanding of the Menorah idea, a truer and deeper realization of the strivings of our Menorah movement.
III. The Business Sessions
First Session
CALLED to order in the Faculty Room, McMicken Hall, at 11 A.M., by President I. Leo Sharfman. N. M. Lyon, of the University of Cincinnati, was appointed Secretary pro tem.