Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE 4 THE SOUTHERN ISRAELITE June 20, 1986 The Southern Israelite The Weekly Newspoper For Southern Jev^fy Since 1925 Vida Goldgar Editor and Publisher Luna Levy Associate Editor Leonard Goldstein Advertising Director Eschol A. Harrell Production Manager Lutz Baum Business Manager Published every Friday by The Southern Israelite, Inc Second Class Postage paid at Atlanta, Ca (ISSN 00388) (UPS 776080) POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Southern Israelite. P O Bos 77388, Atlanta, GA 30357 Mailing Address. P.O Box 77388, Atlanta, Georgia 30357 Location: 188 15th St.. N.W., Atl., Ga. 30318 Phone (404)876-8248 Advertising rates available upon request. Subscriptions: $23.00, I year; $41.00, 2 years Member of Jewish Telegraphic Agency: Religious News Service: American Jewish Press Assn., Georgia Press Assn ; National Newspaper Assn. The Southern Israelite A Prize-Winning Newspaper Better Newspaper Contests More than a shelter It hardly seems any time at all since a group of forward- thinking Jewish Atlantans conceived the plan for a group home for mentally handicapped adults. Such a facility, they believed, would provide much more than shelter. It would provide the opportunity for an enriched lifestyle with others who shared and understood their problems. Out of such a home, the founders believed, would come increased independence and an improved social life, under the supervision of houseparents. It was an ambitious project and it wasn’t easy. There were zoning objections to overcome and funds to be raised. The community, as usual, rallied. Donations, both in cash and in kind, were received. The expectations of the founders as to the positive effect of this kind of group living have been realized. Still, the Atlanta Group Home at 3095 Margaret Mitchell Drive is not one of our community’s most widely known facilities. Sunday, June 22, from 2 to 5 p.m. there will be an open house to celebrate the second anniversary. It's a fine opportunity to stop by (parking is available at the Jewish Home next door) and see what has been achieved. Soviet switch by M.J. Rosenberg t ilnor. Near F.aM Report Perhaps the only good thing to come out of Kurt Waldheim’s elec tion to the Austrian presidency was that it forced the Soviet Union to abandon all pretense of revul sion over the Nazi legacy. There has not been much good to say about the Soviets since they seized power in 1917, but there was one thing. They fought the Nazis val iantly-losing almost 20 million people in the process—and were at the forefront of those dedicated to seeing that Nazi crimes against humanity not be forgotten To a large extent, that has changed in recent years. Moscow’s East German puppet state routinely placed ex-Nazis in high positions. Unlike its democratic neighbor, the Federal Republic of Germany, it neither went through a process of “denazification" nor made any attempt to offer amends to the Jewish people. (West Germany paid Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and the State of Israel several bil lion dollars in so-called reparations and proclaimed its need for a “spe cial relationship” with Israel.) East Germany also followed Moscow's lead in utilizing Nazi- like rhetoric against Zionists, Jews, and Israelis. The Soviets were probably the first to equate Zion ism with fascism and racism, often going so far as to make analogies between Israel and Nazi Germany. At the same time, Moscow tried to rrTCtintain its historic anti-Nazi cre dentials. Its anti-Jewish, anti-Israel rhetoric was obscene but Moscow attempted to balance it with blasts of anti-Nazi oratory second to none. It had little choice. There was hardly a Russian family which had been left untouched by the German onslaught of the 1940s. The aver age Russian was in no mood to forgive and forget. That all appeared to end on the day that Kurt Waldheim won the Austrian election. One might have expected the Soviets to oppose Waldheim even without the allega tions about his war criminal past. Waldheim was the candidate of a right-wing party while his oppo nent was a socialist. Of course, Moscow tends to despise social democrats even more than it does conservatives. Beyond party lab els, however, was (or should have been) Waldheim’s record during World War II. Throughout the Austriancampaign, the Soviet press ignored reports that Waldheim may ha\e committed war crimes. It ignored them even though some of Waldheim’s alleged victims were pro-Soviet. anti-Nazi fighters in southern Europe. (At this point, one hardly expects Moscow to expend any concern over the Nazis’s Jewish victims.) Moscow only broke its silence after the election. Tass (June 8) dismissed evidence of Waldheim’s Nazi past as concocted by the “U.S. Administration and Zionist circles” to discredit Waldheim because of his anti-Israel record while at the United Nations. It called the revelations about him “personal hostile attacks" which were “unjust and slanderous" and “in no way confirmed by the doc umentary evidence.” Instead of examining that evi dence, Tass praised the Austrian for his “active role” in securing the passage of U.N. resolutions adopted “after Israel’s aggression against Arab countries in 1967.” Accord ing to the New York Times (June 9), Tass “placed Moscow unambi- valently behind the new president.” It is an interesting development. The Soviets, who often remind Americans of the anti-Nazi alliance between our countries between 1941 and 1945, are now so anti-American and anti-Semitic that they would rather embrace alleged Nazis than stand on the same side with the United States and Israel. T his, in a sense, represents the real end of the post-war era. Moscow has applied its famous revisionism to World War II and, in this instance, switched sides. It’s not terrible sad. Gorbachev and Waldheim deserve each other. But it is evidence of the lengths to which “anti-Zionism” can push people and nations. Mos cow (like the voters of Austria) should be ashamed. You can be certain that they are not. Orthodox Judaism Stanley M. Lefco In his book, “Profiles in Ameri can Judaism,” Marc Lee Raphael reviews the history and develop ment of the four major branches or movements of Judaism. In his study of the Orthodox movement, Raphael notes that prior to the emergence of a Reform Jew ish organization, a number of syn agogues existed with varied ex pressions of Judaism. “Uncomfort able” with a liberal philosophy, they were committed to replicating in some fashion much of the old European Judaism in its Dutch, English, German and Polish forms. The earliest synagogues tended to be Sephardic in ritual. Philadel phia was the first city to have an Ashkenazic congregation. A group ol recent immigrants left Philadel phia’s Sephardic Mikve Israel around 1795 to establish the Ger man Hebrew Society or Rodeph Shalom. It was not uncommon around that time for lay leaders to establish guidelines tor their congregants. I hose at Rodeph Shalom, forex- ample, made it obligatory to attend Fridas and Saturday service or pay a tine. Baltimore’s Hebrew Con gregation imposed a tine if one sang louder than the “hazzan." At Ness York's B’nai Jeshurun, a member could not attend services if he opened his business on Shab- bat. In July 1935 the Rabbinical C ouncil of America was formed by approximately 40 English-speak ing rabbis. 1 he Orthodox move ment was divided into numerous synagogues, rabbinical, seminary and educational organizations. According to Raphael, they were frequently at odds with oneanother. Ioday, dozens of academies of advanced J almudic studies exist in the United States. Among these, as well as in other institutions and the rabbinate, there exist major ideo logical differences. Rabbi Emanuel Rack man, president of Bar Ban University, noted that Orthodoxy is “no more monolithic than the non-Orthodox movements.” One school of thought claims that Torah is “totally self-sufficient for a Jew’s intellectual needs." Raphael cites the position ot Beth Jacob’s Rabbi Emanuel Feldman, who asserts that secular know ledge “increases our appreciation ot God's unfolding will in nature and his tory and can be instrumental in the understanding of Divine truths ” Orthodox thinkers do agree that the text of the Torah was given to Moses bv God. At the first meeting of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America in 1898. belief in the Divine revelation ol the Bible was declared. 1 his belie!. Raphael claims, is “the single most striking and important distinction between Orthodox and non-Ortho dox." The essence of Orthodoxy rests on “acceptance of a spiritual-his torical event during which God conveyed to Moses the Torah (w rit- ten down by Moses) and the Oral Law (taught by Moses to the disci ples).” The latter evolved into the Talmud. It is believed that this orui tradition or law as well as the Torah had its origins at Mount Sinai. Orthodoxy stresses that Jewish law (halacha) has its origins in thi divine and must be the guide to a Jewish way of life. Judaism is con sidered more than just a faith, it is also a people. & ”'.rr i