J. D. B. News Letter

enough that that is not the case with our Chief Rabbinate. The name is meant to imply a sort of primacy over spiritual leaders in this country and even in the Dominions beyond the seas. But there is a Chief Rabbi in South Africa, another in Ireland, and another in Scotland, while we do not know how many others have set up as Chief Rabbis with indifferent success! Nor does the writ of Dr. Hertz run freely among all the numerous congregations in this country. The Federation of Synagogues does not acknowledge it, and its authority in many other quarters is weak.

“In fact, if we are honest with ourselves, we will admit that the holder of the office is more nearly Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue than anything else—and even here his powers by no means go unchallenged. Every attempt to enlarge these powers provokes a shrill outcry on the part of those who resent what they call the setting up of an episcopacy in the Community, or of those who believe their rights and liberties threatened. In the case of the Slaughter of Animals Bill, the original intention was to make the Chief Rabbi the sole licenser of Shochetim, but it had to be abandoned in face of opposition. In short, the Chief Rabbinate is no ‘chief’, and its powers are fettered.

“Does all this mean,” the ‘Chronicle’ asks, “that the Chief Rabbinate is a useless anachronism, and that English Jewry will have seriously to consider the question of its continuance when the occasion arises? We think not. The office has assuredly served its purpose—many purposes—to a considerable extent, despite its handicaps. It does give religious direction to many who are ready to hearken to it. It is a cohesive and unifying religious force, up to a point, and could be made more so. It does perform many routine functions, such as giving ruling on religious questions, engaging in work on the Beth Din, opening new Synagogues, visiting country congregations, adjusting congregational difficulties, and so forth.

“And it does act as Jewry’s ecclesiastical representative to other communities, enabling us to take our place side by side with others in various departments of national activity. It is convenient that the nation in general should know where to turn for Jewish cooperation.

“The object to be pursued, in short, is not to scrap the office—we cannot afford to sacrifice any important religious agency in these times—but to strengthen it. At present, it is overloaded with a swarm of minor duties, release from which would set it free for what is the major purpose of our time, the preservation of Judaism in these islands. A Chief Rabbi launching us on new roads to this vital end, and doing so with inspiration and vigor, would soon add to the stature of his office, even if he could not always command universal assent. Indeed, our ecclesiastical system should be taken firmly in hand, and reorganized in such a way that the Chief Rabbi should become the apex of a symmetrical and country-wide organization with all the prestige and power that that would confer.”