Newspaper Page Text
)
i
Page Foar
THR SOUTHERN I8RARI ITF
Friday, July 9, 1965
THE SOUTHERN ISRAELITE COMMENT
Published weekly by Southern Newspaper Enterprises, 390 Courtland
St., N.E., Atlanta Georgia, 30303, TR. 6-8249, TR. 6-8240. Second claa.s
postage paid at Atlanta, Ga. Yearly subscription five dollars. The Southern
Israelite Invites literary contributions and correspondence but Is not to be
considered as sharing the views expressed by writers. DEADLINE is
i P.M., FRIDAY, but material received earlier will have a much better
chance of publication.
Jewish
Telegraphic
Agency
World Press
Georgia Press Association
NATIONAL EDITORIAL
7 Arts Features
afe.|l* s g ,c 6 Ti & 1
Adolph Rosenberg, Editor and Publisher <£
Kathleen Nease, Jeanne Loeb, Joseph Redlich
Vida Goldgar, Harry Rose, Betty Meyer
Jewish Groups Submit
Proposals on Federal
Aid to Education
(Copyright, 1965, Jewish
Telegraphic Agency, Inc.)
NEW YORK (JTA)—A repres
entative group of Jewish organ
izations asked U. S. Commission
er of Education Francis Keppel
this week to issue regulations to
implement the new federal aid
to education law to assure that
benefits did not go to religiously-
controlled schools or to schools
practicing racial discrimination
or segregation.
A proposed set of guidelines
was offered to Dr. Keppel jointly
by the Synagogue Council of
America, representing the three
wings of Judaism and the Na
tional Community Relations Ad
visory Council, made up of eight
national organizations represent
ed were the American Jewish
Congress, the B’nai B’rith Anti
defamation League, the Central
Conference of American Rabbis,
the Jewish Labor Committee, the
Jewish War Veterans, the Na
tional Council of Jewish Women,
the Union of American Hebrew
Congregations, the Union of
Orthodox Jewish Congregations
and the United Synagogue of
America.
The Jewish groups emphasized
that Congress, in approving the
precedent making law, intended
to “safeguard the separation of
church and state.
Their memorandum noted that
dual enrollment, also called
“shared time” and supplying mo
bile equipment might be unlaw
ful in some states. Where dual
enrollment plans are started with
grants under the new law, the
memorandum stated, the federal
government in effect becomes a
partner, making it responsible
for seeing to it that no segrega
tion of pupils occurs on either a
religion or racial basis. The mem
orandum therefore proposed that
in participation by children from
private schools, there should be
no separation by religious affili
ation.
The effect of this proposal
would be to prevent classes of
parochial school children, for ex
ample, from getting instruction
in separate classes in public
schools. Such children would be
required to toe mixed with reg
ular pupils in integrated classes.
To avoid the possibility of par
ticipation by private school of
ficials in management of public
schools in shared time plans, the
memorandum proposed a regula
tion to put sole responsibility for
control of dual enrollment in the
hands of public education offic
ials. The Jewish groups also ask
ed strict bans on religious teach
ing, proselytization or worship in
educational services or recruit
ment for such purposes; a rule
that premises such special serv
ices be free of sectarian or re
ligious symbols, and absence of
religious content from books used
in such programs.
The Jewish groups said that
the provisions for loans of texts
and library resources to pupils
and teachers in non public schools
required particularly strict hand
ling to avoid conflict with the
constitutional ban on public aid
to religious schools. They prop
osed that the Commissionere re
quire that such materials be pro
vided to teachers and pupils and
not to schools, that they remain
the propeerty of the public auth
ority and be so labeled; that only
materials approved for public
school use be offered, that they
do not supplant available mater
ials and that a central depository
be set up in each school district
or similar area at which children
and teachers could check out the
books.
The Jewish groups also prop
osed regulations to assure that
the law will “not in any way
inure to the enrichment of any
private institution,” that funds
will not be used to pay salaries
of private schools or to pay for
buildings or equipment that will
be “to fhe pecuniary advantage
of any nonpublic institution.”
They also urged that except
where it is possible, only public
school premises be used for the
special services authorized under
the law. The doctrines of some
religions forbid entering into the
churches or religous premises of
other faiths, they pointed out,
citing Orthodox Judaism as an
example.
Ben-Gurion
(Continue from Page One)
of the security charges, but Mr.
Ben-Gurion has insisted on a
new inquiry.”)
Commenting on Mr. Eshkol’s
statement, a spokesman of Ben-
Gurion’s minority group said that
Ben-Gurion’s decision to form a
separate election list is “final.”
Campaign headquarters, he stat
ed, will be established in Tel
Aviv, where the minority group
is renting 35 rooms in a new
building. He also revealed that
beginning next week, Ben-Gurion
will publish a weekly magazine
under the title “Tmurot” (Sub
stitution.)
Meanwhile, a leading member
of the minority faction, former
Agriculture Minister M o s h e
Dayan, said he would not run for
the next Knesset,,presumably on
either the majority or minority
list. However, he stressed that he
would not refrain from express
ing his views on Israel’s prob
lems.
Despite Dayan’s statement, in
formed observers said they be
lieved he would eventually join
the Ben-Gurion list. It was also
reported that Gen. Yaacov Dori,
former Technion president and
Israel’s first Chief of Staff, also
would join the Ben-Gurion list.
1 he minority also reportedly
planned to place Teddy Kollek,
former director-general of the
Premier's office, on the head of
the independent list for the
Jerusalem Municipality elections.
The possibility that the two
Mapai lists might come together
after the forthcoming Israel gen
eral elections in November was
suggested here today by Shimon
Peres, the former Deputy Min
ister of Defense, in an interview
broadcast by Kol Yisrael, the
Israel radio.
Disarray In the Arab World
WHAT THE PRESS IS SAYING
A Digest of Contemporary Opinion
The Algerian coup de’etat and the testy fric
tions of its first 10 days have left the Arab world,
already torn by dissension over the Palestine
policy, in greater disarray than at any other time
since Syria seceded from the United Arab Republic
in September, 1961. “The coup was a blow to
Nasser,” said an Arab diplomat close to the Egyp
tians With the fall of Ahmed Ben Bella, President
Garnel Abdel Nasser lost his close ally in the
Maghreb, or North African Arab state, and is now
left with only Yemen and Iraq—both weak govern
ments—arrayed beside him. The Algerian coup has
stirred fears in Cairo that plotters in the Iraqi
Army may now be tempted to try their hand
against President Abdel Salem Arif. Mr. Nasser,
sensing growing isolation with the Arab world,
has begun to try to patch up his most immediate
differences with the new Algerian regime of Col.
Houari Boumedienne, but frictions have intensified
rapidly in the last week. Indeed, relations between
Algeriers and Cairo have never been as completely
harmonious as both capitals like to pretend official
ly. . . The Arabs’ troubles run far deeper than the
tiff between Mr. Nasser and the new rulers of
Algeriers, which may well be papered over. The
divisions were clearly underlined two months ago
when President Habib Bourguiba of Tunisia made
his startling proposal for conciliation with Israel
and also ridiculed constant Arab talk of war. After
that all pretense of Arab unity collapsed. Every
Arab state but Morocco and Lybia has taken up the
cudgels against Mr. Bourguiba. The United Arab
Republic and Yemen are feuding with Saudi
Arabia, Jordan and Lebanon are resisting military
projects being pushed by Jresident Nasser. Syria
has asked for Egyptian jets for defense against
Israel and Mr. Nasser has replied publicly that he
so mistrusts the Syrians that he dare not send them
planes. . . At their meeting in Cairo last month,
the Arab heads of state were so divided that they
could not agree on one important issue. The results
discouraged Mr. Nasser to the extent that on May
31 he told a Palestinian Congress in Cairo that the
Arabs would have to give up the idea of war
against Israel for the time being. . . In what must
be regarded as one of his most frank foreign policy
speeches, he glumly condeded the collapse of the
policy, undertaken 17 months before, to rally the
Arabs against Israel. Ele said they might have to
postpone their all-important Jordan River diver
sion projects aimed at depriving Israel of water. . .
In language that sounded remarkably like Mr.
Bourguiba’s, Nasser added: ‘‘If the defense of cer
tain Arab countries is not possible, we cannot
speak of attack, and if we talk about it, we are
simply bragging and deceiving. .
Hedrick Smith, The New York Times, from Algiers
“Christ-Killer”: Growing-
Danger To Christianity
Pope Paul ZI preached a sermon in Rome on
Palm Sunday in which he declared that “in the
clash between Jesus and the Jewish people” the
Jews “fought him, slandered him and finally killed
him.” This statement aroused an immediate outcry
Had not the ecumenical council, in a draft declara
tion, forbidden Catholics to attribute the crucifixion
of Jesus corporately to the Jews of his time? Had
it not added that it was all the more unthinkable
that nay guilt attaches to the Jews of Todaq? The
immediate reaction from Rome was . . . that what
the Pope has really said . . . was that the Jews had
“rejected him.” . . . uhat really is the issue?
“Christ-killer” is a phrase that evokes much emo
tion, for it stirs among Jews their deepest fears,
and it reminds Christians of their most shameful
guilts. . . At their very root, Judaism and Christi
anity do not divide over the question of who killed
Jesus. Not “and they killed him” but The more
ironic “and they rejected him” is indeed the essence
of the matter, for Christians and for Jews. ... In
the long run, to end the connection between Chris
tianity and anti-Semitism is, an even more im
portant issue, for Christians than it is for Jews,
The historic victim surely has a right to be sensi
tive to the slightest change in the weather, where
his safety and that of his children may be at stake.
Jews need, therefore, offer no apologies for the
pressures of world opinion that they have mounted
and continue to mount on Christianity. The truth
is, however, that in the age of unbelief in which
we are living, the phrase “Christ-killer” is a
lessening danger to Jews; it is a growing danger to
Christianity.
Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, from the National Catho
lic Reporter, as condensed in The Jewish Digest
Talmudic
Treasures
Collected and translated
By Jacob L. Friend
JEWISH
CALENDAR
* First E>ay of Rosh Hoshanah
Monday, September 27
* Yom Kippur—Oct. 6
* First Day of Succoth, October
11
* Shimini Atzereth, October 18
* Simchas Torah, October 19
* Hanukah, December 19
* Holiday Begins Sundown
Previous Day
The Emperor’s daughter once said to
Rabbi Joshua ben llananya: '‘Ho, Glorious
Wisdom in an ugly vessel' (He was ugly look
ing in appearance).
He replied: “Why does your father keep
wine in an earthen pitcher?
“How else shouUfwb keep it?” asked the
princess. \
“People of your rank,” said the Rabbi,
“should keep their wine in vessels of gold
and silver.”
The Emperor's daughter persuaded hei
father to transfer the wine from earthen to
gold and silver vessels. The wine, naturally,
turned sour. The Emperor summoned the
Rabbi and enquired why he had given such
poor counsel.
Rabbi Joshua answered: “I did so to show
to thy daughter, that wisdom, like wine, is
best kept in a plain vessel.”
'‘But,” continued the princess, are there
not handsome scholars as well?"
“Yes,” answered the Rabbi, “but they
would been greater scholars had they been
unhandsome.”
Moses Mendelssohn, Rabbi, philosopher,
father of the Jewish Enlightenment Move
ment, commentator and author of the famous
Hebrew-German “Beoor”, whom the German
great philosopher Immanuel Kant described
as a genius “destined to create a new epoch in
metaphysics and to establish altogether a
new form of criticism,” known throughout
intellectual Europe by the nickname “The
little hunchback,” was another great brilliant
mind in an earthen vessel. He was the grand
father of Jacob Ludwig Felix Mendelssohn-
Bartholdy, the composer.
Moses Mendelssohn was an intimate
friend of Kaiser Fredrick II, (the Great), king
of Prussia. He was unique and unequalled in
his witty answers, even to kings. Once King
Fredrick, in the way of a joke, wrote on a
sheet of paper the phrase: “Mendelssohn is
the first fool of Germany” and showed it to
M., waiting for his answer. He had not long
to wait. With the king’s permission M. in
scribed the name of the author of the passage
next to it on the same line which then read
“Mendelssohn is the first fool of Germany,
Fredrick the second”. . .
In the Hebrew book “Toledoth Hachmay
Israel” by Kalman Schulman there are a
number of the witty and sarcastic answers
which the Little Hunchback made to many
men of nobility and highest rank, which left
the audiences speechless in admiration and
amazement. . . .
On another occasion at the King's Palace,
during a state banquet, Mendelssohn, being
the Chief Rabbi of Germany, was placed on
a seat next to the Cardinal of Germany. Spec
ial Kosher food was served to him. In the
course of conversation the Cardinal wondered
why such a great philosopher could not eat
the same food as the others were eating, and
in the end asked: “When will you, Mendel
ssohn, eat the same food as I do?” “Perhaps,
at your wedding, your Eminence,” came the
quick reply . . .
In those days Germany was the country
where Anti-Semitism infested the highest
societty. So once during a conversation with
people of German nobility full of barons,
viscounts, counts, etc. Mendelssohn happen
ed to yawn. One of those next to him exclaim
ed in amazement: “Do you want to swallow
me?” Mendelssohn put him to rest by assur
ing him “that Jews are not permitted to eat
swine's meat ...”
With a view to deride him, another noble
man asked him, “Menedelssohn, what is the
difference between you and \a camel?” Men
delssohn gave no response to such an humil-
iiating question, but hifantantagonist offered
the following difference: “The camel has both
his hunchbacks on his hack but you (Mendel
ssohn) have one in front and one on your
hack.” Mendelssohn then asked his opponent:
“And do you know the difference between
you and a donkey?” To ivhich this adversary
immediately answered: “I don’t knoiv” and
was followed by Mendelssohn's rejoinder:
“And neither do I know any difference” . . .
othets ETAOIN SHRDIL UHMRDL Ue ET