GIFTS TO ORGANIZATIONS INIMICAL TO REFORM JUDAISM
Question: Should Reform Jews contribute to organizations that advocate changes in the Law of Return in Israel? (Rabbi D. Taylor, Highland Park, Illinois)
Answer: If we begin by asking the broader question, “Who has the right to expect help from us or any other fellow Jew?”, we must turn to the biblical demands that deal with the maintenance of the sanctuary as well as those that address charity toward the poor. The Temple in Jerusalem and the earlier Tent of Meeting were maintained through a gift of a half-Shekel by every adult male. In addition, a tithe, as well as portions of all the sacrifices, were provided for the priests and the Levites. The other gifts mandated by the Bible and later literature are intended to deal with the poor, the widow, the orphan, etc. (Lev. 19, 27:30ff; Num. 18:26; Deut. 12:17; II Ch. 31:5f; Neh. 13:12; see W. Jacob, “Priorities in Charitable Distributions”).
As Judaism developed, numerous institutions became part of each Jewish community. These included a system of schools for the education of both young and advanced scholars, hospitals, and homes for the aged and destitute (J. Marcus, Communal Sick-care in Medieval Germany, M. Gudemann, Geschichte des Erzieungswessen; L. Low, Die Lebensalter; Israel Abrahams’ Jewish Life in the Middle Ages). These institutions served the entire Jewish community, despite differences of opinion about interpretations of Jewish law.
When major disagreements appeared on the Jewish communal scene in every period of Jewish history, such common ventures ceased. We can see this clearly in the century-long bitter struggle between Chasidim and Mitnagedim. They not only refused to support each other’s institutions but fought with every weapon at their command, including intervention of the hostile Czarist government (S. Dubnow, Geschichte des vol. 2, ס149ff).
We find a similar situation when we look at the vigorous rising Reform movement in Germany and Hungary during the last century. In Germany, for example, the Orthodox community fought hard to withhold financial support and to keep the Liberal community from obtaining government funds to which all religious communities were entitled. These struggles also led to the secular courts in instances of encounters such as the Geiger-Tiktin Affairs, in which a segment of the community sought to keep the great Liberal Jewish scholar, Ludwig Geiger, from the position of Rabbi in Breslau (D. Philipson, The Reform Movement in Judaism, pp. 5Iff). When the battle was lost by the Orthodox, they successfully sought legislation in Prussia that would permit a segment of the community to withdraw from the general community and still receive government support. This effort was led by Samson Raphael Hirsch (Ismar Elbogen, A Century of Jewish Life , pp. 99ff; W. G. Plaut, The Rise of Reform Judaism, vol. 1, pp. 63ff; N. H. Rosenbloom, Tradition in an Age of Reform).
We see similar hostility when we review the history of the Zionist movement in Europe and America. Certainly anti-Zionists strongly opposed all financial support for Zionism. The ultra- Orthodox Natorei Karta, as well as various Chasidic anti-Zionist groups, still deny support and do their best to lobby against it both within the Jewish community and with the United States Congress.
We as Reform Jews should not contribute to organizations that advocate a change in the Law of Return and should do everything within our power to see to it that others do not contribute to them either. This not only represents enlightened self-interest but will also help to maintain some semblance of unity within the broader Jewish community.
We must remember that it is militant Orthodoxy that threatens to divide, and thereby weaken, the modern Jewish community. This threat should not be taken lightly but must be fought with all the vigor and power at our command.