Catholic Organ Publishes ‘jewish’ Issue; Defends Free Stand on Prayer

The right of the American Jew to resort to Supreme Court action in support of objections against official prayers in public schools, without being labeled “secularist” or atheistic, was forcefully upheld here today by Commonweal, a Catholic weekly edited by laymen. In a special, 16-page issue, devoted entirely to “The Jew in American Society,” Commonweal pointed up its rejection of viewpoints previously expressed by “America,” a Jesuit weekly.

The latter periodical, in an editorial in its September 1 issue, had taken sharp issue with the board endorsement voiced by the American Jewish community after the Supreme Court ruled, last June, that officially prescribed religious prayers in the public schools are unconstitutional. Equating such Jews with “secularists” and atheists, “America” had warned that Jews taking sides with the 6 to 1 opinion of the Supreme Court were possibly encouraging an increase in anti-Semitism. In its September 15 issue, “America” denied it had intended to raise the bugaboo of anti-Semitism, but maintained its previous position on the entire controversy.

Today, Commonweal, releasing the contents of its special edition, dated September 28, explained that the issue was motivated by “unfortunate or muddled” thinking about the role of the Jews in American society. To help clarify matters, Commonweal declared, it obtained contributions from four prominent Jews and one Catholic scholar whose articles are included in the special issue.

The contributors are: Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, chairman of the Social Action Commission of the Synagogue Council of America, which represents rabbinical and congregational organizations of the Reform, Conservative and Orthodox movements in the United states; Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, leader of the Lubavitcher Hassidic movement; David Danzig, program director of the American Jewish Committee; Michael D. Zeik, professor of history at Marymount College, a Catholic institution; and Arthur A. Cohen, author and director of the religious department of the publishing firm of Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

The Commonweal symposium concludes with a statement entitled “A Word to Catholics,” by the weekly’s managing editor, James O’Gara, who asserted: “The Jew has to be perfectly free to argue for this or that constitutional or political position to his heart’s content, whether we agree or not. For the sake of discussion, say that every Jew in the country wants prayer eliminated from the public school. It is their right to argue for their convictions, and I can see no justification for suggesting that the Jews will thereby ‘paint themselves into a corner of social and cultural alienation,’ as ‘America’ thought might be the case.”

LUBAVITCHER REBBE BACKS FEDERAL AID FOR PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS

Rabbi Hertzberg, referring to the 22-word New York Regents prayer which was banned by the Supreme Court ruling of last June, questioned whether the “present anger in some Catholic quarters about the Supreme Court decision is really occasioned by a short prayer of little, if any, religious significance.” “What stands behind the concern,” he stated, “is the great problem of the future financing of the parochial schools, in which Federal money seems more remote.”

The Lubavitcher Rebbe’s article, entitled “An Orthodox Rabbi’s Plea for Parochial School Aid,” was reprinted by Commonweal from “The Jewish Forum.” It did not allude at all to the controversy revolving around the Supreme Court’s prayer ruling, nor around the opposing views of Commonweal and “America,” but constituted a plea for Federal aid to parochial schools.

Contending that such aid would not violate the principles of separation of church and state, the Hassidic leader noted that precedents already exist in Federal and state aid for free transportation to parochial school pupils, the provision of food surpluses to such schools, and other assistance. He declared that Released Time programs have been successful, have demonstrated no governmental interference with religious education, and have resulted in returning thousands of Jewish children “to their fold.” Schools that fear governmental interference need not accept such aid, he held.

Mr. Danzig stated that the entire controversy regarding the Supreme Court’s decision on official prayer in public schools has caused American Jews to ask themselves “whether they will be permitted to participate in the cooperations and competitions of American pluralism on the same basis and with the same rights as Protestants and Catholics.” He asked further: “Granted that prudence is a virtue and that all groups should be prudent, must Jews alone be guided exclusively by considerations of prudence?”

Mr. Danzig alluded to the fact that, this summer, pressure by Catholics in Massachusetts had resulted in that State Legislature’s reversal on adoption of an amendment to the Sunday Blue Laws, which would have permitted Sabbatarians to keep their businesses open on Sundays if they close Saturdays. The Catholics, in this instance, he noted, used legislative pressure instead of the juridical process.

Mr. Cohen asserted that “the Jew cannot be effectively ‘political’ if to be politically realistic means accommodating to a politics which is Christian or to a society whose ethos, principles and conduct are Christian. If, then, the Jew must choose between a society which is Christian and one which is religiously neutral, he will obviously prefer the latter. The Jewish community–in all its sinfulness, trust and devotion–wishes only to insure that, if American society becomes religious, it shall still have access to it.”

The other article by Professor Zeik is a review of writings by Catholic scholars who hold that Christian-Jewish relations must be based on principles bridging the theological gulf between the two religions.