Life in the Middle Ages; Zangwill's "They That Walk in Darkness," and "Dreamers of the Ghetto," his masterpiece; Iliowizi's "In the Pale"; Schechter's "Studies in Judaism;" and last, that beautiful series of sketches, "Idylls of the Gass" by Miss Wolfenstein, and others too. And for the young: Gordon's "Sons of the Covenant"; Miller's "Under the Eagle's Wing"; Pendleton's, "Lost Prince Almon"; Cooper's "Think and Thank"; Goldsmith's "Rabbi and Priest."
For the adult mind, seriously inclined, Grætz's "History of the Jews" in 6 volumes, is first: then the two volumes of Lazarus's "Ethics of Judaism," ably translated by Miss Henrietta Szold; following these, of almost equal importance, are Dembitz's "Jewish Services in Synagogue and Home"; Karpeles's "Jewish Literature and other Essays"; Deutsch's "The Talmud," etc.
It will be seen that such a list of books shows a faithful accomplishment of the purpose of the Society. Often enough the judgment of the Directors has been questioned and for good cause; but on the whole, the managers of the organization have done their work conscientiously and with good sense.
II.
MRS. RUSKAY'S BOOK.
All this is introductory. Notice is to be taken of Mrs. Ruskay's, "Hearth and Home Essays." Our appreciation must be expressed of the purpose the Publication Committee of the Society had in mind when it issued these essays. Unquestionably a little more emotional regard for the religion of our fathers is needed. The Oriental attitude toward Judaism, which many of our brethren still retain, is thoroughly emotional in one sense. Its expression is appealing prayers, swaying of the body under the excitement, complete absorption in devotion to religious duty. But we have come under newer influence, representing a civilization which runs more to intellectuality than to emotion. Our aesthetic sense has been influenced by this civilization, and it is useless and a trifle maudlin to lament the departure of the Oriental feeling toward religion. Orientalism is not the only true emotion.
Mrs. Ruskay mistakes the Oriental attitude for the only emotion. Her essays lament the loss of the Sabbath in its "pristine purity" (a phrase much in vogue in Eastern circles) and we are at a loss to understand whether she deplores the loss of regard for the essentials represented by the Sabbath or the mere non-observance of the
day of rest. She has much to say of the customs and traditions of our fathers, which were certainly full of mean ng, and she seems to demand conformity to these customs. She does not distinguish between the holidays that are clearly ethical, those that are religious and those that are essentially national. With a voracity which is not commendable, she lauds the observance of Passover and Yom Kippur, of Chanuka and Purim, as if every tradition were worthy or possible of continued life.
- No quarrel need be had with those who see good in every thing but it is not fair to insist that those whose environment and inclination have made the customs of no meaning to them shall be branded as—lax Jews, Jews who are fit subjects for sarcasm and mockery. Mrs. Ruskay fails to see the conflict of environments, which makes a renewal of old traditions impossible, which changes our taste for certain ceremonies, which erects opposing notions of life; and which makes an adherence to the customs of our fathers impossible for us. We should not presume to continue within an Occidental civilization methods of life unmodified by the new tendency. Rightly are such as Mrs. Ruskay termed reactionary. For it is one thing to venerate and hold in dear affection those traditions which our parents carry with them, and it is a far different thing to insist that those traditions shall be ours in every sense of the word.
There is the mistake. Our lives are broader and more fruitful if we succeed in assimilating the very best in the heritage of our fathers, and then send out our aspiring feelers for the very best in the experiences of our own time. There are many blemishes in the past. There are many things we have outgrown, and it is folly to persist in appealing to our sentiment to resurrect them. We say one is sentimental in its objectionable meaning, when one formulates sentiments about conditions that are no more, that have no meaning to life itself. Mrs. Ruskay is sentimental. She persists in railing at disregard for the dietary laws, the traditions that have grown about ancient institutions that have no meaning to us; and she cannot see the absurdity of classing as a reprobate Jew one who partakes of forbidden food. The Religion of the Jews is no more based on the authority of law unconditional, and Mrs. Ruskay shows much unfamiliarity with the spirit of the law when she cannot see that in the legal enactment of the Law as to the Day of Atonement, for instance, there is little significance; that what she praises so unquali-