60
61
exasperation with the Jewish community and its scornful attitude toward the rabbinate.62 Understanding that most of the community was illiterate in Hebrew and would not read a Hebrew publication, he appears to have felt free to express himself through this vehicle. His piece aimed at rousing his colleagues to establish a rabbinical association which would arbitrate disputes between rabbis and their congregations, set salaries, and handle financial matters for its members.63 As a starting point, he claimed that a huge gulf separated the traditionally observant rabbinate from the religiously ignorant and non-observant laity who unfairly criticized their spiritual leaders. Speaking broadly and without citing examples, he surmised that this criticism stemmed from the lay leadership’s resentment of their rabbis for assuming the role of “G-d’s policemen.”64 Somewhat patronisingly, he suggested that the average congregant knew deep down that their rabbi was correct and that their behaviour did not meet Jewish law standards. In an attempt to ward off their guilty consciences, they opted to defend themselves by pre-empting an attack on those who induced their sense of
culpability. Conceding that at times ministers could use more tact regarding what they said and when they said it, he felt ultimately that this made no difference and whatever they did they would be susceptible to communal attacks.65 Half a year later, in June 1955, the cultural officer of the Board of Deputies, Dr. Harry Abt, followed his colleague’s lead, and, from a slightly different angle, lashed out at the lay leadership’s inconsistent conduct. The latter, he claimed, had strengthened Orthodox Judaism at the organizational level, but on a personal level most did not adhere to a traditional Jewish lifestyle. They “saw to it that others can keep the Jewish dietary laws, others can observe the Sabbath” but they felt “no personal
obligation” to lead an “observant lifestyle.”66 It was not enough, he argued, to celebrate Judaism by “proxy”; growth could only be attained if those who supported the community were also actively engaged therein.67 These candid comments by establishment figures, whom as mentioned belonged to the accommodator camp, demonstrate that they were keenly aware of the community’s failures and were prepared to criticize them.68 Their adoption of lenient positions were then not based on passive submission to communal dictates. Their
62 Jacob Newman, “The Situation of the Rabbis and the Rabbinate in South Africa” (Hebrew), Barkai October 1954, 51-52.
63 Ibid., 52.
64 Newman, “The Situation of the Rabbis” 51. It should be noted that Newman introduced his piece by emphasising it was the exclusive expression of his own opinion and did not represent any other person or organization.
65 Ibid. p 51-52.
66 Harry Abt, “Judaism by Proxy,” Zionist Record, (S.A. Menorah Section), June, 1955, 3.
67 Ibid
68 See above Harry Abt’s permission to play sport on the Sabbath.
62
vocal disappointments went some way to debunk accusations, first uttered by Isaac
Kossowsky, who had since passed away, that these “rabbis” were merely pandering to their flock. 69 Rather they believed Orthodox Judaism could be modern and inclusive without surrendering traditional laws or values.
In his 1956 Yom Kippur sermon, Rabinowitz, basing himself on readings from the Torah and the Prophets, told his congregants that Judaism considered Sabbath observance not only a religious command but also a social and moral duty.70 Understanding the economic burdens that such observance imposed, he directed his pleas to keep the Sabbath specifically at the “women, and those men who filled their Saturdays with leisurely activities”; for those forced to work on the Sabbath he was more understanding, for as he explained “when it comes to financial sacrifice” one “must tread warily.”71 Philosophically, this sermon betrayed his view that Judaism promoted not only religious obedience but also moral refinement.
Pragmatically it reaffirmed his reputation as an accommodator who understood the
challenges of his community and the limits to the sacrifices they would make. Rabinowitz’s attitude was again in full view a few months later at the end of 1956.
Indicative of an “upward mobility” in the socioeconomic status of Johannesburg Jewry, Jews steadily migrated from town to the greener pastures of the northern suburbs.
Following the Second World War, the occupational profile of the community shifted from one dominated by sales and production workers to professionals and administrators.72 This also reflected a post-war boom in the South African economy, and the advantages conferred on white workers by the imposition of Apartheid. In view of this social and geographic mobility among Jews, calls were sounded to relocate the Great Synagogue from its base in the working class suburb of Hillbrow. Responding to the suggestion that moving the
synagogue to the Jewishly populous suburbs would reduce vehicular traffic to shul, the Chief Rabbi commented:
Incredulous though it may sound … walking to synagogue has become a sign of ultra- Orthodoxy…If I were to feel that six Jews who at present proceed to
69 See chapter 2 where Kossowsky distances himself from the modern English speaking “rabbis” while viewing himself as part of the traditional rabbonim.
70 Rabinowitz, “Chief Rabbi Proclaims Sabbath Year”: 1,7.
71 Ibid. 7.
72 See Della Pergola and Allie Dubb, “South African Jewry,” 89-92.
63
the Great Synagogue by car would proceed on foot…I would give favourable consideration to the proposal.73
Rabinowitz admitted that the idea of driving to synagogue on the Sabbath
“immeasurably distressed” him, but this did not preclude him from recognizing the
contemporary realities of his flock.74 His indulgence of individual non-observance did not however extend to public violations of religious standards; here he proved far less
accommodating. An example of this occurred three years later in 1959 when it was
discovered that the Dvinsk Society’s tenth anniversary dinner was not supervised by the Beth Din. Upon hearing of it, and together with Michel Kossowsky, the Chief Rabbi “burst” into the dining room and warned those gathered that they were eating “treife” [non-kosher]
food.”75 This dramatic incident apparently did little to deter the startled diners, but it
unmasked the Chief Rabbi’s zeal for upholding particular public standards.76 Sounding more optimistic a year later, Rabinowitz, in May 1960, suggested there had been some
accomplishments in the religious arena. Not only had the number of Johannesburg’s synagogues “trebled” over the previous fifty years but attendance there showed a marked improvement. Keeping kosher in the public sphere was on the rise and modest improvements could be felt in the private sphere. Acknowledging that observance had not yet become
“fashionable” he suggested there was a “quest …for a more wholesome and complete Jewish way of life which find its expression in observance.”.77 Two years later, barely months after the Chief Rabbi retired, Rabbi Newman put a dampener on his former colleague’s guarded enthusiasm. The public, he felt, was uninterested in the “strict religious path”, and all a rabbi could hope for was “small victories” with respect to “practical observance.”78 He
recommended that spiritual leaders should instead invest in demonstrating how Judaism leads to “personal fulfilment” and ultimate “salvation.”79 As shall be seen, the public’s rejection of the stricter rabbis, who would arrive a few years later, and the latter’s attempt to impose new stringencies, suggests Newman’s assessment of Johannesburg Jewry was more accurate than Rabinowitz’s rosy assessment two years prior. This, and the other examples described above, show that while the Chief Rabbi and his accommodator colleagues had soberly assessed their
73 SAJT, 9 November, 1956, emphasis original.
74 Ibid.
75 “You are eating Treife Food,” 2.
76 Ibid.
77 Rabinowitz, “On the Religious Scene,” 50. His choice of words of “wholesome” and “complete” are indicative of his broad view of observance. Emphasis original.
78 Newman, “The Rabbi and the community,” 21.
79 Ibid.
64
flock’s shortcomings, it did not deter them from seeking ways to boost observance within the community, a task at which they sometimes succeeded.