Update: Prof. Samuel Feiner (New Perspectives on the Haskala) Secularization only reached its peak in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, then becoming a mass phenomenon of such proportions that the various churches, including the rabbin ical elite, were, in many parts of Europe, pushed to the sidelines, and the state and modern culture provided services, institutions, and values that replaced religion. But in the eighteenth century, the roots of secularization first emerged among both Christians and Jews. Religion still maintained its hold on many people, but rationalist criticism of religions grew, the deist worldview took shape, anticlerical trends were strengthened, and amid conflicts and struggles, the authority of priests and rabbis was weakened. In the eighteenth century, the culture of the modern city offered a secular substitute for the experience of religious ritual in the form of entertainment, the consumption of luxuries, and fashions that changed with dizzying frequency. Ambitious individuals, seeking to live as free men, unrestrained by religious discipline, became more self-confident. The birth of the "new world" was attended by the repressed voices of the freethinking Jews and the angry voices of the "congregation of believers." A penetrating look into the life of European Jewry, with the help of several perceptive individuals who left behind fascinating testimonies, reveals dramatic changes that occurred in that century. It discerns not only the various channels through which religion was weakened but also identifies religiously lax and skeptical Jews whose existence was not previously known to us.
The Torah u-Madda Journal
The Hatam Sofer’s Nuanced Attitude Towards Secular Learning, Maskilim, and Reformers 2002-2003 Footnote 110. R. Hirsch felt that had Mendelssohn completed his work, the Reform movement might never have come into being. R. Hirsch termed Mendelssohn, “one of the noblest sons of Israel” and “a strictly religious Jew, and yet . . . brilliant and highly esteemed as the German Plato.” R. Azriel Hildesheimer, founder of the Rabbinical Seminary and head of the Adat Israel community in Berlin, termed Mendelssohn “the great worldly sage.” He claimed that Mendelssohn was a loyal adherent of the Jewish religion, but that his disciples and children crudely distorted the essence of his philosophy. Mendelssohn, therefore, could not be held responsible for their actions. S. R. Hirsch, Iggerot Zafon (Jerusalem, 1952) Letter 18; Jeschurun (Frankfort, 1885), 833-834; Mordechai Breuer, Modernity Within Tradition (New York, 1992), 58-59, 61, 71; Meir Hildesheimer, “Moses Mendelssohn,” note 105 above: 111-112.
The Torah u-Madda Journal
The Hatam Sofer’s Nuanced Attitude Towards Secular Learning, Maskilim, and Reformers 2002-2003 Footnote 110. R. Hirsch felt that had Mendelssohn completed his work, the Reform movement might never have come into being. R. Hirsch termed Mendelssohn, “one of the noblest sons of Israel” and “a strictly religious Jew, and yet . . . brilliant and highly esteemed as the German Plato.” R. Azriel Hildesheimer, founder of the Rabbinical Seminary and head of the Adat Israel community in Berlin, termed Mendelssohn “the great worldly sage.” He claimed that Mendelssohn was a loyal adherent of the Jewish religion, but that his disciples and children crudely distorted the essence of his philosophy. Mendelssohn, therefore, could not be held responsible for their actions. S. R. Hirsch, Iggerot Zafon (Jerusalem, 1952) Letter 18; Jeschurun (Frankfort, 1885), 833-834; Mordechai Breuer, Modernity Within Tradition (New York, 1992), 58-59, 61, 71; Meir Hildesheimer, “Moses Mendelssohn,” note 105 above: 111-112.
0 comments:
Post a Comment