Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-8mjnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T22:23:59.856Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Rabbinical Status and Religious Authority in Imperial Germany: The German Rabbinical Association

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2009

Stephen M. Poppel
Affiliation:
New York, N.Y.
Get access

Extract

The old political adage that every people gets the leaders it deserves may be recast in a broader, more positive, and ultimately truer sense to state that every society seeks (though it does not necessarily find) the kind of leadership that best embodies its values and aspirations. Thus much can be learned about a society by examining the relative standing of competing claimants for its leadership. This is particularly so in the wake of great transitions, when such standing may be expected to reflect specific intention, rather than the social inertia that predominates in calmer times.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Jewish Studies 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Poppel, Stephen, 'State Building and Jewish Community Organization in Germany, Contemporary Jewry 5, no. 2 (Fall/Winter 1980): 13–26; and Kurt Wilhelm, “The Jewish Community in the PostEmancipation Period”, Leo Baeck Institute Year Book (hereafter, LBIYB) 2 (1957): 47–75.Google Scholar

2. The attempt to democratize Jewish community governance in Imperial Germany is one subject of a recent study by Jack L. Wertheimer, German Policy and Jewish Politics: The Absorption of East European Jews in Germany (1868–1914) (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1978), particularly chapter 9, published in part in Wertheimer, “The Duisburg Affair: A Test Case in the Struggle for Conquest of the Communities'”, AJS Review 6 (1981): 185–206.

3. One perhaps extreme example is provided by the case of Samuel Israel, who in 1855 refused nomination to the Hamburg community board for reasons of political principle: he regarded the continued existence of the Gemeinde as a political anachronism, and condemned the procedures for selecting the board as undemocratic. It may have been because of Israels principled and, from the boards viewpoint, dangerous stance that the board pursued him with special vigor. In the face of Israels obdurate refusal to serve, the board imposed a fine of 3,000 marks, to be paid to the communitys poor chest. This sum was later reduced by the Hamburg Senate to 1,000 marks. In most of the other Hamburg cases that I examined, where a nominee attempted to decline serving for claimed reasons of health, the board generally accepted the excuse without demurrer, or sometimes successfully insisted that the nominee serve anyway. However, at least one serious stalemate developed in 1832 and 1833 in the case of Lipmann Raphael Beit, a member of a prominent Hamburg family. Citing reasons of health, Beit declined to serve, but the board pursued him for over a year, despite Beits securing a physicians attestation of his supposed inability to withstand the strains of board membership. In the end Beit was forced to appeal to the Hamburg Senate and finally secured his release, evidently without having to pay any fine. The records of these cases may be found in the Central Archives for the History of the Jewish People (hereafter, CAHJP) in the Hamburg board minutes, AHU 273a/Bd. 5 and 11, and the associated documents in AHU 274/a–c.

4. This is the classic plight of leadership, as was once aptly captured, though in admittedly wholly different circumstances, by Mahatma Gandhi, who is reported to have said, “There go my people. I must hurry to catch them, for I am their leader.”

5. For details see Poppel, Stephen, “The Politics of Religious Leadership: The Rabbinate in NineteenthCentury Hamburg,” LBIYB 28 (1983): 439–70.Google Scholar

6. Lowenstein, Steven M., “The 1840s and the Creation of the GermanJewish Religious Reform Movement”, in Revolution and Evolution: 1848 in German-Jewish History, ed. Mosse, Werner E. et al. (Tubingen: Mohr, 1981), pp. 255297, esp. p. 265.Google Scholar

7. lsmar Schorsch, “Emancipation and the Crisis of Religious Authority: The Emergence of the Modern Rabbinate”, in Mosse, Revolution and Evolution, pp. 205–247.

8. Altmann, Alexander, “The New Style of Preaching in NineteenthCentury German Jewry”, in Studies in NineteenthCentury Jewish Intellectual History, ed. Alexander, Altmann (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964), pp. 65116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums hereafter, AZJ 59, no. 47 (Nov. 22, 1895): 553. Karpeles founded the Verband der Vereine für jüdische Geschichte und Literatur in 1893. At its preWorld War I peak the Verband included almost 230 local associations. It published the important Jahrbuch fur judische Geschichte und Literatur. See Schochow, Werner, Deutschjudische Geschichtswissenschaft (Berlin: Colloquium Verlag, 1969), pp. 23–24.Google Scholar

10. The astonishing remark was made by the liberal rabbi Heinemann Vogelstein in one of the opening speeches at a convention of representatives of the Verband in 1897. AZJ 61, no. 53 (Dec. 31, 1897): 628–630.

11. Rabbiner-Verband in Deutschland. After its reorganization in 1896 the organization was also known as the Allgemeiner Rabbiner-Verband.

12. Information on the early history and activities of the Association is drawn from [Rabbiner-Verband in Deutschland], Verhandlungen und Beschlüsse der Rabbiner Versammlung zu Berlin am 4. und 5. Juni 1884 (Berlin: Walther Apolant, 1885); Presidium der RabbinerVersammlung, Vorldufiger Bericht tiber die am 4. und5. Juni 1884 in Berlin stattgefundene Versammlung deutscher Rabbiner (Berlin, 1884).Google Scholar

13. Statut, sec. 1. Printed in …Verhandlungen 1884, pp. 101–102.

14. The Statut elaborated the rules of the organization with truly Prussian thoroughness, providing, for example, that membership lapsed with the death of the member (sec. 7.1).

15. AZJ 48, no. 20 (May 13, 1884): 321.Google Scholar

16. [Rabbiner-Verband] in Deutschland, Geschäftsführender Vorstand, Erster Bericht des Rabbiner Verbandes in Deutschland (Juni 1884-Dezember 1886). (Königsberg, 1887), pp.Google Scholar

17. Verhandlungen and Beschlusse der Generalversammlung des RabbinerVerbandes in Deutschland zu Frankfurt a.M. am 7. und8. Juli 1902 (Frankfurt a.M.: Kauffman, 1903), p. vi; and Verhandlungen und Beschlusse der General-versammlung des Rabbiner Verbandes in Deutschland zu Berlin am 2. und S. January 1907 (Berlin: Poppelauer, 1907), pp. vii, 7.Google Scholar

18. CAHJP. M4/3. Rabbiner-Verband in Deutschland. Protokoll, Sitzung des Zentralausschusses vom 20.12.1913, p. 5.

19. Section 10 of the 1884 Statut, and section 9 of the revised 1896 Satzungen.

20. Erster Bericht des RabbinerVerbandes, pp. 4, 1011.

21. Ibid., pp. 89.

22. An account of the Breslau meeting is given in Benefit über die Thätigkeit des Rabbiner-Verbandes in Deulschland [1887–1890].

23. AZJ 48, no. 21 (May 20, 1884): 327.

24. Bericht uber die Thätigkeit des RabbinerVerbandes, pp. 14–16, and Bericht des RabbinerVerbandes in Deutschland (April 1891December 1891.) (Königsberg, 1892), p. 6.

25. CAHJP: M4/1.

26. Section 16: “In den Sitzungen des Vorstandes und Ausschusses, sowie in den General-versammlungen des Verbandes dürfen nur solche religiöse Fragen erortert werden, die keinen Verstoss gegen die religionsgesetzlichen Bestimmungen der massgebenden Decisoren in sich schliessen”. Satzungen des RabbinerVerbandes in Deutschland (rev. 1896). The coalition was fostered by the fact that matters of more specifically partisan interest could be handled by separate organizations that were founded shortly thereafter: the Vereinigung traditionellgesetzestreuer Rabbiner, in 1897, and the Vereiningung der liberalen Rabbiner Deutschlands, in 1898. In 1906 a separatist orthodox group (Verband der orthodoxen Rabbiner) was established, whose members did not join the general Rabbinical Association.

27. Verhandlungen und Beschlusse der General-versammlung des Rabbiner-Verbandes in Deutschland zu Berlin am I. und 2. Juni 1898 (Berlin: Poppelauer, 1898), pp. 6870. (i) “Bei Verhandlungen liber religiose Angelegenheiten ist der Rabbiner zuzuziehen. Bestehende Kultuseinrichtungen kdnnen nur mit Zustimmung der Gemeindebehorde und des Rabbinats geandert werden”. (ii) “Die Anstellung der Rabbiner soil derart geregelt werden, dass dieselbe nach einem hochstens 3 Jahre dauernden Provisorum eine definitive wird.” (iii) “Zur Wahrung der religiosen Angelegenheiten und zur Hebung des Religionsunterrichtes sollen Bezirksrabbinate gebildet werden.” (iv) “(1) An die fur den Rabbinerberuf vorbereitenden Anstalten ist die Bitte zu richten, in Ausnahmefallen auch solche Kandidaten zuzulassen, welche sich anderweitig die erforderlichen Kenntnisse erworben haben und als wurdig fur den Beruf befunden werden. (2) Der RabbinerVerband erwahlt Prufungskommissionen, welche zur Ausstellung von Rabbinatsdiplomen ermachtigt werden.” (3) Der RabbinerVerband erklart es als unstatthaft, dass ausser den fur den Rabbinatsberuf vorbereitenden Lehranstalten und den in Nr. 2 [i.e., 4(2)] in Aussicht genommenen Kommissionen seitens einzelner Rabbiner Autorisationen erteilt werden.

27. Verhandlungen und Beschlusse der Generalversammlung des RabbinerVerbandes in Deutschland zu Berlin am I. und 2. Juni 1898 (Berlin: Poppelauer, 1898), pp. 68–70. (i) “Bei Verhandlungen liber religiose Angelegenheiten ist der Rabbiner zuzuziehen. Bestehende Kultuseinrichtungen kdnnen nur mit Zustimmung der Gemeindebehorde und des Rabbinats geandert werden.” (ii) “Die Anstellung der Rabbiner soil derart geregelt werden, dass dieselbe nach einem hochstens 3 Jahre dauernden Provisorum eine definitive wird.” (iii) “Zur Wahrung der religiosen Angelegenheiten und zur Hebung des Religionsunterrichtes sollen Bezirksrabbinate gebildet werden.” (iv) “(1) An die fur den Rabbinerberuf vorbereitenden Anstalten ist die Bitte zu richten, in Ausnahmefallen auch solche Kandidaten zuzulassen, welche sich anderweitig die erforderlichen Kenntnisse erworben haben und als wurdig fur den Beruf befunden werden. (2) Der RabbinerVerband erwahlt Prufungskommissionen, welche zur Ausstellung von Rabbinatsdiplomen ermachtigt werden. (3) Der RabbinerVerband erklart es als unstatthaft, dass ausser den fur den Rabbinatsberuf vorbereitenden Lehranstalten und den in Nr. 2 [i.e., 4(2)] in Aussicht genommenen Kommissionen seitens einzelner Rabbiner Autorisationen erteilt werden.”

28. For samples of clashes over specific issues see AZJ 48, no. 4 (Jan. 22, 1884): 54–55; DeutschIsraelitischer Gemeindebund (hereafter: DIGB), Mitteilungen 58 (May 1902): 12–13, 18; and 74 (September 1909): 30, 7072.

29. Philippson, Ludwig in AZJ 48, no. 4 (Jan. 22, 1884): 54–55.Google Scholar

30. Verhandlungen und Beschlusse der Generalversammlung des Rabbiner-Verbandes, pp. 3536, 44.

31. Ibid., pp. 34, 41.

32. Ibid., pp. 5051.

33. Leopold Stein, Mein Dienst-Verhdltniss zum Israelitischen Gemeinde-Vorstande zu Frankfurt a.M. (Frankfurt: Auffarth, 1861); idem, Die Vorbereitung zum Abschied. Predigt gehalten in der neuen Hauptsynagoge zu Frankfurt a.M. von Dr. Leopold Stein bisherigen Rabbiner der israelitischen Gemeinde daselbst (Frankfurt: Auffarth, 1862); idem, Vorstand und Geiger: Ein Beitrag zur Charakterisirung der israel. Gemeindezustande in Frankfurt a. M. (Frankfurt: 1863); Ludwig Geiger et al., Abraham Geiger: Leben und Lebenswerk (Berlin: Reimer, 1910), pp. 168–174.

34. Lowenstein, Steven M., The Rural Community and Urbanization of German Jewry, Central European History 13, no. 3 (September 1980): 219236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35. For a further discussion of the institution of the district rabbinate, its importance, and possible administrative mechanisms, see DIGB, Mitteilungen 50 (January 1899): 50–57, and also the post-1902 debate described in part IV below. Regarding the financial implications of permanent tenure, see Ibid., 74 (September 1909): 70–72.

36. Mirsky, Samuel K., Jewish Institutions of Higher Learning in Europe: Their Development and Destruction (in Hebrew) (New York: Ogen/Histadruth Ivrith, 1956); Bernard D. Perlow, “Institutions for the Education of the Modern Rabbi in Germany during the Nineteenth Century” (Ph.D. diss., Dropsie College, 1954); Marcus Brann, Geschichte des judischtheologischen Seminars (Fraenckelsche Stiftung) in Breslau (Breslau: Schatzky, 1904); Guido Kisch, ed., Das Breslauer Seminar: Judisch-Theologisches Seminar… 1854–1938; Geddchtnis-schrift (Tübingen: Mohr, 1963); and Ismar Elbogen and J. Höniger, Lehranstalt fur die Wissenschaft des Judenlums: Festschrift… (Berlin: Hermann, 1907).Google Scholar

37. AZJ 59, no. 25 (June 21, 1895): 294295. For another expression of concern about this issue, see also Verhandlungen undBeschlussederGeneralversammlung desRabbinerVerbandes in Deutschland zu Berlin a.M. 7 und 8. Juni 1911, p. 31.

38. For example, see DIGB, Mitteilungen 59 (December 1902): 11–13

39. Wertheimer, “German Policy and Jewish Politics”, p. 289; also pp. 56–59, 72, 161, 167–169, 269–276, 394–395, 508–511, 544; and Breslauer, Walter, Der Verband der deutschen Juden (1904–1922), Leo Baeck Institute Bulletin 7, no. 28 (1964): 371372.Google Scholar

40. The responses from the seminaries are filed in CAHJP: M4/1, in the material from 1899. Further discussion of this proposal at the 1902 assembly pointed to the additional problem that forming the associations own projected board of examiners would be difficult because of sectarian differences. The matter of special certification was referred to the separate liberal and traditionalist rabbinical associations that had meanwhile been established.

41. The account of these deliberations appears in DIGB, Mitteilungen 56 (December 1901): 4–5; 58 (May 1902): 6–27.

42. The Rabbinical Association's representative found a telling sign of this attitude in the fact that the lay speakers at the meeting went on at great length, while the association was given little opportunity to present its position. RabbinerVerband in Deutschland, Verhandlungen …1902, pp. 18–19.

43. DIGB, Mitleilungen 58 (May 1902): 11.Google Scholar

44. AZJ 61, no. 7 (Feb. 12, 1897): 73–74.Google Scholar

45. AZJ 61, no. 50 (Dec. 10, 1897): 592593. Makower expressed similar views in connection with the events described in section V, below. Ibid. 75, no. 6 (Feb. 10, 1911): 67–69. Also see Altmann, Alexander, “The German Rabbi: 1910–1939”, LB1YB 9 (1974): 42.Google Scholar

46. D1GB, Mitteilmgen 58 (May 1902): 2022.Google Scholar

47. Ibid., 59 (December 1902): 11–13.

48. Information on the size and composition of the Rabbinical Association's membership is presented in the reports of the organizations meetings (Verhandlungen und Beschlusse…), particularly in the treasurer's reports. Unfortunately, after the reorganization of the association in 1896 the Verhandlungen give only the attendance lists, but not full membership lists, making an independent analysis of the geographical distribution of the membership impossible. Verhandlungen… 1902, pp. vi, 22, 22; 1907, p. 13; 1911, p. 18. Regarding the geographical distribution and variations in the legal status of the German rabbinate, see Altmann, “The German Rabbi”, pp. 34–36, 40–43.

49. See Leopold Auerbach, Das Judentum und seine Bekemer in Preussen und in den anderen deutschen Bundesslaaten (Berlin: Mehring, 1890); Makower, Hermann, Ueber die Gemeinde Verhaltnisse der Juden in Preussen (Berlin: Guttentag, 1873); and Alfred Michaelis, Die Rechtsverhaltnisse der Juden in Preussen seit dent Beginne des 19. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Lamm, 1910).Google Scholar

50. CAHJP: Ml/9, Anon., “Zum 50 jahrigen Jubilaum des…Gemeindebundes”, pp. 43–56; Breslauer, “Der Verband der deutschen Juden”; and Jacob Toury, “Organizational Problems of German Jewry: Steps towards the Establishment of a Central Organization (1893–1920)”, LB1YB 13 (1968): 77–78.

51. D1GB, Mitteilungen 65 (October 1905): 618.

52. Heinrich Rosin, Entwurf eines Gesetzes uber die Organisation der israelitischen Religionsgemeinschafl in Preussen, nebst Einleitung, Begrundung und Schluss. (Im Auftrage des Ausschusses des Deutschhraelitischen Gemeindebundes) (Berlin, [1906]). Rosin is identified on the title page as Geheimer Hofrat and professor of law at the University of Freiburg i.B.

53. Heinrich Machol, Gesetzentwurf für das judische Gemeindewesen in Preussen [1906Google Scholar

54. DIGB, Mitteilungen 67 (December 1906): 1–3. The draft is printed in 72 (April 1909): 29–60.Google Scholar

55. The Rabbinical Association registered its dissatisfaction with the draft in correspondence with the DIGB. CAHJP:M4/2(1): Eschelbacher letter, Dec. 22, 1909, and “Resolution”. In this resolution, which was apparently drafted after the 1909 DIGB debate, the association added to its basic threepart program a demand for extended control over the appointment of other community officials, and over community religious education. The relevant sections read: Alle beim Kultus und im Religionsunterricht tatigen Beamten konnen nur nach ubereinstimmender Entschliessung der Gemeindevertretung (Vorstand und Reprasentanten) und des Rabbinats angestellt werden; and Die Religionsschule untersteht in schultechnischer Beziehung dem Vorstande, in Bezug auf Lehrstoff und die zu verwendenden Lehrbücher dem Rabbinat.

56. Reported in DIGB, Mitteilungen 74 (September 1909): 283.Google Scholar

57. Ibid., pp. 48–49.

58. Benno Jacob, Die Stellung des Rabbiners in dem Entwurf eines Gesetzes betreffend die Verfassung der judischen ReligionsGemeinschaft in Preussen. Referat gehalten auf der Rheinischen Rabbinerkonferenz zu Koln a. Rh. am 31. Juli 1910. (Hamburg, 1910). “Nach ihm [i.e., the draft] kann man den predigenden und lehrenden Rabbiner als diejenigen Mann in der Gemeinde definieren, der am meisten zu reden und am wenigsten zu sagen hat” (pp. 14–15). Regarding Jacob himself, see Wilhelm, Kurt, “Benno Jacob, a Millitant Rabbi”, LBIYB 7 (1962): 7594.Google Scholar

59. Seligmann, Rabbi, “Frankfurt, DIGB”, Mitteilungen 74 (September 1909): 78–79.Google Scholar

60. Ibid., pp. 4950.

61. Sigmund Maybaum, in Ibid., 58 (May 1902): 6; Benno Jacob, in Stellung des Rabbiners, p. 17; and Ferdinand Rosenthal, in RabbinerVerband in Deutschland, Verhandlungen… 1911, p. 31, reprinted as Ferdinand Rosenthal, Was war, was ist und was soil der Rabbiner sein? (Breslau, 1911), p. 14.

62. AZJ 61, no. 17 (April 23, 1897): 196–197.Google Scholar

63. DIGB, Mitteilungen 58 (May 1902): 14; 74 (September 1909): 61; and Machol, Gesetzentwurf, p. 25, which identifies the source as Jeschurun, vol. 4, p. 255.