USA > South Carolina > Charleston County > Charleston > The Jews of South Carolina; a survey of the records at present existing in Charleston > Part 4
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
6
*
The constitution of 1820 to which I have just referred reveals the synagogue as a severely autocratic institution. It con- trolled its members, both within the syna- gogue and without. Of this I have like wise additional and most amusing docu- mentary evidence. The congregation was orthodox in its ritual and observance. Ita members kept the Sabbath and the other sacred days, and attended the services reg- ularly. The discipline of the synagogue compelled allegiance in these respects. The synagogue did not encourage the making of proselytes and visited with severe penalties those who might marry out of the faith. The ritual was that of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews. A portion of the service was conducted in mongrel Spanish, which no one understood. Even Hebrew was not sufficiently understood by the congregation generally to make the service intelligible. The service was long and unattractive, and had to be hurried if the hours of worship were not to be unduly protracted, which they often were. Decorum was bad. There was no discourse or religious instruction of any kind except on special occasions, Such was the state of affairs in the synagogue in Charleston in 1824, when 47 members of Beth Elohim presented a petition to the vestry asking for a revision of the ritual. It was the first step that had been made in the direction of reform among the Jews of America. What the memorialiste sought, is seen from the following extracts from the petition Itself:
"Your memorialists seek no other end than the future welfare and respectability of the nation. As members of the great family of Israel, they cannot consent to place before their children examples which are only calculated to darken the mind. and withhold from the rising generation the more rational means of worshipping the true God.
It is to this, therefore, your memorialists would, in the first place, invite the serious . attention of your honorable body. By caus- Ing the Hazan, or reader, to repeat in Eng- llsh such part of the Hebrew prayers as
7
may be deemed necessary, it is confidently believed that the congregation generally would be more forcibly impressed with the necessity of Divine worship, and the moral obligations which they owe to them- seives and their Creator; while auch a course would lead to more decency and decorum during the time they are engaged in the performance of religious duties. It Is not every one who has the means, and many have not the time, to acquire knowledge of the Hebrew language, and consequently to become enlightened in the principles of Judaism. What then is the course pursued in all religious societies for the purpose of disseminating the peculiar tenets of their faith among the poor and uninformed?
"The principles of their religion are ex- pounded to them from the pulpit in lan- guage that they understand; for instance, , in the Catholic, the German, and the French Protestant churches: by this means the ignorant part of mankind attend their places of worship with some profit to their morals and even improvement to their minds; they return from them with hearts turned to piety, and with feelings elevated by their sacred character. In this consists the beauty of religion-when men are in- voked by its divine spirit to the practice of virtue and morality.
2 -
"'With regard to such parts of the service as it is desired should undergo this change, your memorialists would strenuously re- commend that the most solemn portions be retained, and everything superfluous exclud- ed; and that the principal parts, and if pos- sible all that is read in Hebrew, should also be read in English, (that being the language of the country) so as to enable every member of the congregation fully to understand each part of this service.
"In submitting this article of our memo- rial to the consideration of your honorable body your memorialists are well aware of the difficulties with which they must con- tend before they will be enabled to accom- plish this desirable end; but while they
would respectfully Invite the attention of your honorable body to this part of thelr memorial. they desire to rest the propriety and expediency of such a measure solely upon the reason by which It may be main- talnet.
. * a .
"Your memorialists would next call the particular attention of your honorable body to the absolute necessity of abridging the service generally. They have reflected. se- riously upon its present length, and ars confident that this is one of the principal causes why so much of it is hastily and im- properly hurried over.
.
"According to the present mode of read- ing the Parasa (Pentateuch) it affords to the bearer neither instruction nor enter- tainment, unless he be competent to read as well as comprehend the Hebrew lan- guage. But if, like all other ministers, our reader would make a chapter or verse the subject of an English discourse once a Week at the expiration of the year the peo- ple would, at all events, know something of that religion which at present they so little regard." (See Harby's Anniversary Address, pp 61-2.)
The petition was sensible, moderate and dignified, but the vestry laid it on the table without discussion and thus deprived the petitioners of the right of appeal, a right that was expressly provided for in the con- stitution. (Rule VII.) By so doing it violat- ed in spirit, if not in letter, that constitution which it had sworn to defend. It la absurd to claim that the vestry belleved that the proposed changes struck at the fundamen- tal principles of Judaism. No one who reads the petition can imagine any such thing. The vestry was satisfied with things as they were and that was enough. It was the regime of Bevis Marks still. But that petition was signed by men who represent- ed the intellect of the community and they were not willing that their proposals should be thuy kept even from discussion by any such mean subterfuge.
On November M. 1824. a meeting
9
---
called and the "Reformed Society of Iarsei- Ites" organized. The Society started with about a dozen members. In two months its numbers had increased to 38, And in July, 1826, exceeded. 50. In 1826 Beth Elo- him had 70 subscribing members represent- ing about 300 souls; and the Society 50 members, making with their families over 200 souls. "The Jews born in Carolina," writes Isaac Harby in 1926. "are mostly of our way of thinking on the subject of wor- ship, and act from a tender regard for the opinions and feelings of their parents in not joining the Society." (N. Am. Rev, for July, 1826, p 74.)
Apart from what we know of the almost patriarchial government in the family that cotained among the Jews of South Carolina in the early days, the above figures show how utterly at variance with the facts 18 the statement that this first reform move- ment was either small or insignificant-con- sisting of a mere handful-as ons writer over-confidently puts it. Even the late Na- thaniel Levin could only see in the Society a movement in which "a spirit of innova- tion raised its miscreant front among our people." " * * a Society that "did not in- crease in numbers and which, after a few years of sickly existence became extinct." (Occident, Vol 1, pp 436 and 459.)
As a matter of fact, the best and most in- fuential people in the community were in the Society and a large number of those who were not actually affiliated with it were in sympathy with its aims. No writer till now seems to have deemed it worth his while to ascertain the names of the people who constituted the Society and who direct -... ed it. Beyond the name of Isaac Harby we do not ând in the scant literature which we possess on the subject a single name associated with it. Thus has the history of the past come down to us. But such his- torical writing will no longer pass muster. We must be in possession of facts if we would pass judgment.
I have thus endeavored to trace, in Its proper setting, the origin of the reform movement in America. It was an indige-
10
our movement; "a spontaneous impulse to- wards better things." "not produced either by foreign or internal violence or solicita- tion," as the sympathetic reviewer of Har- by's "Discourse" in the North American Review, above quoted, well puts it (p 67.) The reviewer estimates the move-
ment far more accurately than do
subsequent writers. most of whom are imbued with orthodox bias. Lesser lu- dicrously thinks from his commendation of the "Discourse " that he "no doubt intend- ed by his remarks to foment yet farther the spirit of discord which had exhibited it- self among the Israelites of that place." (Charleston.) (Occident, Vol IX, p #11.)
I now come to the Society itself and re- produce here for its historical value & pub- lighed statement of ity principles. It is to be found in Goldsmith's Directory for 1831, p. 145. The publisher was the secretary of the Society in 1825:
THE REFORMED SOCIETY OF ISRAEL- ITES.
"This Society was formed with a view of making such alterations in the customs and ceremonies of the Jewish religion as would comport with the present enlightened state of the world. It adopted, in its outset, this fundamental principle, that a correct understanding of divine worship is not only essential to our own happiness and a duty we owe to the Almighty Disposer of events. but is well calculated at the same time to enlarge the mind and improve the heart. In their creed, which accompanies their ritual, they subscribe to nothing of rabbinical in- terpretation, or rabbinical doctrines. They are their own teachers drawing their knowledge from the Bible and following only the laws of Moses, and those only as far as they can be adapted to the institu- tions of the society in which they live and enjoy the blessings of liberty. They do nothing against the laws of Moses, but omit everything belonging to the former in- dependent condition of their ancestors. They have simplified the worship of God and brought the great objects of public
II
mesting -- piety, morals and sense-so as to be perfectly comprehenable to the under- standing of the humblest capacity," In the appendix to their constitution, they say they wiak not to overthrow, but rebuild-not to destroy, but to reform and revise the evils of which they complain. Not to abandon the institutions of Moses, but to understand and to observe them; In time they wish to worship God, not as slaves of bigotry and priestcraft, but as the enlightened descend- anca of that chosen race whose blessings have been scattered throughout the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."
I have taken up so much space already, and have so much yet to tell, that I will not go into details about the "Creed" of the Society, or their method of worship. These have been fully described in a series of ar- ucies by Dr Mayer, who was rabbi of Beth Elchim from 1851 to 1850, in Einhorn's "Sinai " (Baltimore, 1856,) in Leeser's "Occi- dent," Vol 1, pp +38-9, and are likewise dis- cussed in an article by Dr Philipson in the London "Jewish Quarterly Review" for Ou- tober, 1897. Sumce it to say, then, that the revised "Creed" consisted of ten articles, which differed materially from the thirteen articles of Maimonides that were then uni- vereally accepted in orthodox communities. The service was short and simple and the prayer book was a compilation of the most beautiful passages in the old ritual. Parts of the service were recited both in Hebrew and English. An English discourse formed part of the morning service. There was in- strumental music and the congregation worshipped with uncovered heads. David Nunez Carvalho was the volunteer "Read- er," and the Society met In Seyle's Masonic Hall, on Meeting street. The Society had as part of its programme the education of a youth er youths "so as to render him or them fully competent to perform divine ser- vice, not only with ability, bearing and dig- nity, but also according to the true spirit of Judaism, for which this institution was formed." This part of the programme seems not to have been realized.
At the firat anniversary meeting of the
×2
Society, held on November 21, 1825, the fol- lowing officers were elected:
Aaron Phillips, president
Michael Lazarus, vice president.
Morris Goldsmith, secretary.
Isaac Mordecai, treasurer.
Abraham Molsa, orator.
Corresponding Committee-Isaac Harby, Abraham Moise, Isaac N. Cardozo, D. N. Carvalho and E. P. Cohen.
The files of the Charleston newspapers from 1525 to 1532, furnish the lists of officers of the Society year by year. I have been unable, however, to find those for the year 1826. The following is the list of new names of those who served as officers at various times: Henry M. Hyams, Philip Benjamin, Philip Phillips, Joseph Phillips, Thomas W. Mordecal, Col Myer Jacoba David C. Levy and Isaac C. Moses. The meetings were held on November 2 of each year, and the last meeting of which I find any record is that of November 21, IS32. It must thus have been In this year or in 1833 that the Society came to an end.
Thus ended the first great struggis for reform among the Jews of America. There were several causes that contributed to the dissolution of the Society. There was, of course, opposition from without, but this had little or nothing to do with it. There was the pressure from those connected with the members by family ties. The removal froz the city of Isaac Harby in 1838, must han been severely felt and several others liker, te left Charleston at that time. The lack o' theological equipment of its leaders, had nothing to do with it. The Society sought edification in its worship and amongst its members were several distin- gulshed oratorg, who were fully equal to the demands of their day. The main reason was the fact that the movement was ahead of Its time, and the masses were afraid to risk the experiment. That the movement lasted as long as it did-at least eight years -shows what a firm hold it had taken upon the people. Success is a relative term after all, Let the critic who would judge it fair- ly compare it. s. g., with two small move-
:3
1695594
marts on similar lines that have taken place in London within the last few years, I refer to the Hampstead Sabbath after- noon services and the present Religious Union services, movements by no means as revolutionary as the one in Charleston in 1824, and he will come to a far truer esti- mate of the first Reformed Society of Is- raelites. The Society failed, but its very failure was success, for it had sowed the seeds of progress, which germinated very soon thereafter, this time successfully.
I shall now proceed with the story in bold outline and not in detail. Fulness of detail was necessary up to this point. What I have especially sought to emphasize is the fact that the Jew of South Carolina was a Tew in the synagogue, but a South Carolin- ian as well, and like the rest of the people of South Carolina, he has never hankeret after "the primrose path of dalliance," but was willing, when conviction demanded, to pay the price of making history. Herein lles the key to the development of Judaism in South Carolina and without the under- standing of which that development is not intelligible.
After the dissolution of the Society for Reformed Israelites most of its members who remained in Charleston reaffiliated with Beth Elohim. They were fined vari- ous amounts at the discretion of the trus- tees, and were then restored to all their former rights and privileges. For a few years the history of the synagogue was uneventful. But there was now a progres- sive party in Beth Elohim and the next chapter in the story is a sad tale of dis- sension and bitterness.
On October 3, 1836, the Rev Gustavus Poz- nanski was elected to the pulpit of Beth Elohim. Born of respectable parentage in Storchhest, Poland, he had been educated in Hamburg, where he became imbued with the spirit of the Hamburg Temple, then the foremost exponent of the reform move- ment in Europe. He was occupying a small position in New York, where he had been living for some years, when he was called . to Charleston. Amongst those who recom.
I4
mended him was Isaac Leeser, who after- wards regretted it. Poznanski was scholar, a good speaker and writer, an able controversialist and a gentleman. At first his ministrations met with signal success. He was acceptable to both parties and his advent was followed by a marked religious revival. Even one of his bitterest oppo- nents testiles that when he came to Charleston "laxity in attending to religious observances gave place to a strict attention to time-honored observances." (Occident, Vol 2 p 1.1.) But there was soon to be a "rift within the lute."
In the great fire of April 27, 1838, the syn- agogue was burned to the ground and steps were soon after taken to rebuild it. The corner-stone of the new building was laid on January 3, 1840. Poznanski had mean- while been elected for life in 1838.
On July 11, 1540, before the new building was completed, the trustees were called on to act upon a petition signed by 38 members, which had been presented to them, praying "that an organ be erected in the synagogue to assist in the vocal parts of the service "
This petition was deemed by the trustees to be an infringement of the first article of the constitution. At a general meeting of the congregation held on July 26 the trus- tees were overruled by a vote of 47 to 40, and the prayer of the petitioners granted. This led to a division in the congregation and nearly 40 members withdrew. I will not recite at length the events of that trou- blous period, the plotting and the counter- plotting that took place. The minute books of Beth Elohim are now available and they contain the story in fullest detail. Suffice it to say, that in 1843 the case was carried to the Courts by the seceders, the most brilliant legal talent of the day being ar- rayed on either side. The dominant party gained the verdict, which was affirmed when the case reached the Court of Errors and Appeals in 1846. The opin- lon was delivered by Judge Butler and is a magnificent document. O'Neale In his "Bench and Bar" calls spe- cial attention to it as a fine specimen of
-
Judge Butler's style of judicial reasoning. How eloquent, forcibleand convincingis this Ganiple of the Judge's ringing opinion and what a leson does it give to the religious bigot in every denomination:
"The granice promontory in the deep may stand Erm ond urchengei aniidst the warss and stoime that beat ipon it, but human institutions cannot withstand the agitaticas of tea active and progressive opinion. Whilst lawy are stationary. things are pro- gressive. Any system of laws that should be made without the principle of expans- bility, that would, in some measure, accom- modate them to the progression of events, would have within it the seeds of mischief and violence. When the great Spartan law. give save his ecucho men laws, with an injunction naver to change them, be was a great violator of law himself. For all lawa. however wise cannot be subjected to Pro. crustean limitations. C-sante ratione cos- eat lex is a profound and philosophical prin- clple of the law "
(For the detailed opinion. see Richard .. son's South Carolina Law Reports, Vol : pp 245-86: The State va Andker. See also my Pamphlet Reprints: "The Organ in cha Synagogue," Charleston. S C., 12.)
The seceders had meanwhile in 1813 formed a new congregation, Shearith Is. rael, (The Remnant of Israel) under the leadership of the Rev J. Rosenfeld. They had now their own place of worship on Wentworth street, though for some time previously, while the case was pending. they had occupied the old synagogue on alternate Sabbaths. So bitter was the fee !- Ing between the parties, that all intercourse between them was practically at an end. The seceders even went so far as to acquire their own cemetery, which adjoined that of Beth Elohim, but which was separated from the latter by a high wall. It was a lamentable condition of affairs. But Zur- ther trouble had been brewing in Beth Elo- him.
Ca the first day of Passover, 18:3, Poz- nanski, who had approved the proposition to erect the organ, preached a sermon in
which he declared the observance of the second days of the festivals to be unneces- gary and recommended their abandonment. The congregation was not prepared for such a radical step and a special meeting of the trustees was called on April 19. 1843, when resolutions were adopted, that the proposition was "a violation of the consti- tution and calculated to create discord and anarchy." Poznanski was further request- ed to inform the trustees "whether he in- tended in his future lectures to propose or advise innovations of the established form of service as observed by us, and all other congregations of Jews throughout the world." In a letter to the trustees Poznan- ski declared that he had been authorized by a former resolution of the trustees "to make such remarks and observations as I might deem proper," and that the majority of those who voted in favor of the resolu- tion of disapproval, had previously well known his opinion on the subject in ques- tion. As lecturing was no part of his duty he declined to lecture any more. This letter was voted unsatisfactory. In a subsequent letter he wrote that "with the sole view of restoring and preserving peace and har- mony in our congregation." he would advise no further Innovations, "until the general desire of the congregation to hear the truth on any religious subject, and to have our holy religion divested of all its errors and abuses. shall be expressed to me through their representatives, your honora- ble hoard." The matter was referred to the congregation and the course of the trustees approved "without any reflection upon the Rev Hasan." At this same meet- ing, a resolution was offered: That the es- tablished service of this congregation em- braces all the Mosaic and Rabbinical laws." It was rejected by a vote of 24 to 27. This caused a further secession, the seceders joining the "Remnants."
Thus was Judaism in Charleston in 1840 and for many years thereafter, a house di- vided against itself. Space forbids my fol- lowing the story, interesting though it be, in detail during the rest of Poznanski's
17
.
leadership, which came to a close in 1850. after thirteen years of continuous and val- lant service. In that rear Poznanski re- tired from the pulpit and became a member of the congregation which he had so faith- fully served. He continued to serve it, hoy- ever, with his counsel and encouragement until he removed to New York some years later. I am strongly tempted to form in estimate here of this remarkable man. but I will not yield to the inclination, as this is not the place for it.
There were two congregations now in Charleston. Each continued its separate ex- istence and in its own way. Both of them were weak, though Shearith Israel, marked by a greater unity of purpose, showed greater strength. This state of affairs could not last. Amongst the cider men were many who remembered "the glory of the former house." and the hope of an ultimate reunion had never quite faded from their breasts. Soon after the war, they saw this long hoped for consummation realized, and in 1866, amidst great rejoicing. the two con- gregations again met, a united body, in "the holy and beautiful house where their fathers had praised God."
Since that time the story has been one of steady progress and development. Minor changes have been made from time to time, family pews and the Union Prayer Book have been introduced and the congregation now worships with uncovered head. But with it all, Beth Elohim is true to its an- cient traditions. The spirit of faith and piety, which has ever characterized the Jew of South Carolina is living yet. May it continue to live and inspire our children with the same noble resolves that actunted their fathers in the brave days of old!
My story is at an end. I began with a picture of the community which gave birth to Beth Elohim; I can find no more fitting words with which to conclude than those of another historian of that same ancient and honorable congregation:
"I have tried to resuscitate the past and to bring it out in as faithful a light as doc- uments and personal interpretation of them
could warrant. It is a remarkable history, Old names have again come to light. * * * Old passions have been exhibited which had long been extinguished. O'd books have been opened, which had been closed for generations, and though the voices are sometimes strange and the sound distant, and though tendencies and aspirations seemn to run in different directions, and individ- ual efforts are checked by insurmountable obstacles, yet there is a constant evolution upwards and downwards. At times, noble ideas prevail and lift the congregation on to a pinnacle of loftiness, of progress, of light and learning; at other, retrogression and narrow views prevail, and the conse- quences make themselves felt in a narrow- ing of interest, in the thinning of the ranks, in the decline of men of character and of men of courage. At times a perfervid en- thusiasm prevailed, at others cool indiffer- ence; but above all the conflicting currents, the great lesson stands out boldly, that good work yields a rich harvest, that great thoughts will succeed, however long and painful the process may be ere they do suc- ceed, that the attachment to the synagogue grants to its followers and adherents some of its own eternity."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.