Distinguishing support of non-denominational prayer from sectarian prayer; Antisemitic backlash; “freedom of choice” arguments used in Soviet Russia to ban religious instruction.
B.H.
2nd of Kislev, 5723
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Dr. ...
New York 32, N.Y.
Sholom uBrocho,
Thank you for your letter, enclosing page-proofs of your forthcoming article in... I very much appreciate your thoughtfulness in sending me same.
I hasten to reply not only because of the importance of the subject matter, but also in the hope that my observations relating to your article will be of interest to you, and primarily, I confess, in the hope that this communication may serve an immediate practical purpose. What I mean is that if there is any possibility of introducing some revisions in the article before it appears in the publication, and if you agree with my views, then on the basis of the principle “accept the truth from whatever source,” you will incorporate my suggestion in your article.
Before coming to the point, I want to express my gratification with the general position which you espouse in your article. It is also especially gratifying to note that you have the courage to express your convictions publicly, for, sad to say, there are some who, for one reason or another, consider it expedient to pass over the vital issues of the Regents Prayer and Federal Aid in silence, and still others whose fear of an unpopular course drives them into the opposite course, in disregard of the Shulchan Aruch. [For them, apparently, the fear of Heaven does not match the fear of flesh and blood, though it is no more than the fear of the “sound of a torn leaf.”]
Now to the point. I refer to the second part of your article which deals with denominational religious exercises in the public schools. Here, you state, “the matter becomes a bit more complicated” and you continue to expound the view at some length that the religious Jew should not oppose even such religious practices in the public schools, and that it is as well that the non-Jewish children should be more religious, etc.
My objection is that it is not strategically advisable to introduce this aspect of the general problem into a discussion of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Regents Prayer. The objective is, after all, to bring about a reversal of Supreme Court's decision on a non-denominational prayer, for which much public opinion must be won. To declare that there should be no opposition even to denominational exercises, and that they should in fact be viewed with favor, would at once alienate many groups which may still be undecided, or open-minded, on the issue of the Regents Prayer, not to mention those who might be persuaded to reconsider their position.
So much for “strategy.” But the essential thing is that all denominational exercises, such as are connected with Xmas celebrations, nativity, etc., are in the view of the Torah, avodo zoro. Considering the state of the children’s mind in the present generation, on the one hand, and the solemnity and appealing decor with which these exercises are presented, it is certain that many Jewish children will not only be reluctant to forego these displays but would even participate in them. From what I have been told of these exercises it is not merely a case of avizrayhu d’avoda zoro but avodo zoro mamash.
Your suggestion that such exercises might affect those children who are in any case far from religion, but not those who are deeply rooted in the Jewish faith, etc., does not alter the situation, for it is incumbent upon us to safeguard Jewish children against avodo zoro regardless of their background. All the more so, since the non-religious background is not related to avodo zoro, G-d forbid, but to plain ignorance and indifference, and the proportion of such children in the public school, as I pointed out in my letter on this subject, is unfortunately much larger than that of children who come from a religious background.
Thus, according to the Shulchan Aruch it is forbidden for Jewish children not only actually to sing carols but even to participate in them with silent reverence, and the like. Even if such participation were in doubt, it is a sofek avodo zoro, which is d’orayso and in regard to one of the three transgressions of yehoreg v’al yaavor. It is distressing enough to contemplate how many Jewish children are already unwitting victims of the existing situation, and how many more would join their ranks if such denominational exercises were to receive the official sanction of the government and even Jewish circles.
This is why I fervently hope that if there is any possibility whatever to eliminate the paragraph or section dealing with the said aspect it will be done and I would indeed be very happy to be informed that this has been done. I would like to add that I would be prepared to cover all expenses entailed in the resetting, or even the reprinting of the particular form of the Journal, etc., in which case there should be no objection on the part of the Journal, and surely the author should have the final say in such matters.
I realize that it is not a small thing that I am asking, especially as it may be quite a test for a person to change or modify a point of view. But considering that this is a matter that would affect not merely the adult readers of the magazine but also numerous children in the Public Schools, I am confident that you and the editors will prove equal to the challenge.
May G-d grant you success in spreading the light of the Torah and mitzvos to the utmost of your influence, and as Chasidus would have it, with joy and gladness of heart.
With esteem and blessing,
P.S. Enclosed please find a copy of my letter on the Regents Prayer, which apparently was not in your possession at the time when you wrote your article. I trust you will find it of interest.
