1. The ambivalent feelings of liberal Jews toward their liberal Christian counterparts find a striking parallel, even though set in an altogether different social and political context, in nineteenth century Germany. SeeTal, Uriel, Christians and Jews in Germany: Religion, Politics, and Ideology in the Second Reich, 1870–1914(Ithaca, 1975), pp. 160–222. For a broad discussion of Reform ambivalence to Unitarianism in America, see Benny Kraut, “Unitarianism on the Reform Jewish Mind,” Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem, 1981).Google Scholar

2. For an analysis of both the extent of rapprochement and its limitations from the point of view of a radical non-Jewish religious liberal, see Kraut, Benny, “Francis E. Abbot: Perceptions of a Nineteenth Century Religious Radical on Jews and Judaism,” Studies in the American Jewish Experience(Cincinnati, 1981), pp. 90–113.Google Scholar

3. Letter of Isaac M. Wise to Isaac Leeser, Aug. 17, 1852, Isaac Leeser Papers, American Jewish Historical Society. See Wise's description of Leeser coming to Albany to enlist his aid in refuting a Christian missionary, M. R. Miller, in the Occident, in Wise, Isaac M., Reminiscences, 2d ed. (Cincinnati, [1901]; reprint ed., New York, 1945), pp. 79–80.Google Scholar

4. For representative reactions of Wise to missionaries, refer to his Reminiscences, pp. 60–68, 119–23; also see the Israelite (Isr.)April 9, 1858, p. 316; Isr., Feb. 10, 1860, p. 252; American Israelite (AI), March 14, 1889, p. 4; AI, July 13, 1893, p. 4; see too Isaac M. Wise, A Defense of Judaism versus Proselytizing Christianity (Cincinnati, 1889), p. 3, and his “The World of My Books,” American Jewish Archives 6 (1954): 136–37. For some of his reactions to the triumphalist claims of Christian ministers, refer to Isr, Jan. 8, 1869, p. 4; Isr., July 29, 1870, p. 8; AI, May 31, 1878, p. 4;AI, Aug. 28, 1885, p. 4;AI, Nov. 13, 1885, p. 5. For some samples of his reaction to the Christian press and reviews of Christian literature, see Isr., Aug. 28, 1857, p. 58; Isr, May 31, 1861, pp. 380–81; Isr, July 12, 1861, p. 12; Isr, May 8, 1863, p. 348; Isr., Feb. 26, 1869, p. 4;AI, Aug. 27, 1875, p. 4. For a discussion of Wise's views on Christianity, refer to James G. Heller, Isaac M. Wise: His Life. Work and Thought (New York, 1965), pp. 623–57; Walter Jacob, “Isaac Mayer Wise: An American Approach,” Christianity Through Jewish Eyes (Cincinnati, 1974), pp. 67–82; Samuel Sandmel, “Isaac Mayer Wise's ‘Jesus Himself,’” Essays in American Jewish History (Cincinnati, 1958), pp. 325–58. A good general biography of Wise is Sefton D. Temkin, “Isaac Mayer Wise: A Biographical Sketch,” A Guide to the Writings of Isaac Mayer Wise (Cincinnati, 1981), pp. 5–53.Google Scholar

5. Refer to Kraut, , “Francis E. Abbot…,” p. 111, n. 59, for references to Wise's attitudes on these issues.Google Scholar

6. See Isr., Sept. 2, 1870, p. 8, for an illuminating editorial self-analysis of why he felt it essential to attack Christianity rather than “write about Judaism and its merits and let Christianity alone.” Much of the same reasoning reappears in Wise's later autobiographical ruminations in Die Deborah (1896–97) translated into English and collected in the “The World of My Books,” pp. 136–37.

7. In essence, all his books on Christianity, explicitly or implicitly, argued that same point. Over the years, Wise's understanding of the dynamics of the development of Christianity changed, as did his attitude to the historicity of Jesus and the identity of Paul. But his central claim for Christianity's untenability remained constant. See the following books by Wise: The Origin of Christianity and a Commentary to the Acts of the Apostles (Cincinnati, 1868); The Martyrdom of Jesus of Nazareth (Cincinnati, 1874); Three Lectures on the Origin of Christianity (Cincinnati, 1883); Judaism and Christianity, Their Agreements and Disagreements (Cincinnati, 1883); A Defense of Judaism versus Proselytizing Christianity (Cincinnati, 1889).

8. Isr., April 26, 1867, p. 4; Judaism and Christianity, pp. 43, 46;AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4 and July 23, 1886, p. 4; A Defense of Judaism, pp. 31, 39.

9. On the centrality of the Decalogue, see Isr., May, 21, 1869, p. 4 and AI, Nov. 5, 1875, p.4. See too his Judaism and Christianity, pp. 20–27.

10. Israel, Knox, Rabbi in America: The Story of Isaac M. Wise(Boston, 1957), p. 124.Google Scholar

11. For examples, consult: Isr., Oct. 24, 1862, p. 124; Isr., Oct. 31, 1862, p. 132; a lecture on “The Future of Judaism,” serialized in the Isr., Nov. 29, 1867 through Jan. 3, 1868 inclusive, all found on p. 4 of the respective issues; “The Religion of Humanity: The True Universal Religion,” Isr, Jan. 17, 1873, p. 5; Isr, Nov. 28 and Dec. 5, 1873, both on p. 4;AI, June 14, 1878, p. 4;AI.Oct. 24, 1879, p. 4;AI.Dec. 10, 1880, p. 188;AI, May 4, 1883, p. 364;AI.Jan. 7, 1887, pp. 4–5;AI, July 1, 1887, p. 4;AI, Dec. 2, 1887, p. 4;AI, Oct. 17, 1889, p. 4;AI, Nov. 12, 1891, p. 4. Refer as well to Isaac M. Wise, Judaism: Its Doctrines and Duties (Cincinnati, 1872), p. 5; Judaism and Christianity, pp. 77–80, 103; A Defense of Judaism, p. 129.

12. See, for example, Isr., Nov. 29, 1867, p. 4; Isr., Jan. 17, 1873, p. 5;AI.Dec. 10, 1880, p. 188; June 10, 1881, p. 388. On his desire to instill pride in the Jew and to judaize him, see Reminiscences, pp. 330–31.

13. Wise's attitude to liberal Christianity has been almost uniformly neglected in the secondary literature. The only substantive treatment of this can be found in Knox, chap. 8, “Wise and Liberal Protestantism in Nineteenth Century America,” pp. 147–58. Unfortunately, the chapter title is a bit of a misnomer, since Knox restricted his subject to a comparative analysis of Wise, Theodore Parker, Ralph W. Emerson, and William E. Channing and placed Wise in the Unitarian milieu of about 1850. Wise's relationship to Unitarianism during the rest of the century is not touched.

14. For a superb analytic and descriptive account of the Unitarian attempt to reach a religious consensus and the difficulties involved, refer to Conrad Wright, “Salute the Arriving Moment,” A Stream of Light (Boston, 1975), pp. 62–94. See too Robert B. Tapp, Religion Among the Unitarian Vniversalists (New York, 1973), p. 39, which concludes that fifty-nine percent of Unitarian Universalist members today do not define their own local church as Christian. In the nineteenth century, most Unitarians and Unitarian churches did.

15. Wise, , Reminiscences, pp. 66–67.Google Scholar

16. Ibid., pp. 187–88. Judah P. Benjamin and Lieutenant Matthew F. Maury were also present.

17. Ibid., p. 184. The “we” in the citation refers as well to Benjamin and Maury who were also present in the morning meeting.

18. See Korn, Bertram, “Judah P. Benjamin as a Jew,” in his Eventful Years and Experiences (Cincinnati, 1954), pp. 83–86. Korn doubts that Wise could have met Benjamin at this time, thereby casting doubt on the entire episode. For a rejoinder, see Heller, pp. 723–24, n. 15.Google Scholar

19. The Reminiscenceswere first published in Die Deborahin early 1875.

20. Letter of I. M. Wise to Isaac Leeser, Aug. 17, 1852, Isaac Leeser Papers, American Jewish Historical Society.

21. Ibid.

22. jr., Aug. 13, 1869, p. 6.

23. For an example of the type of sermon Wise delivered at a church, see “The Humanitarian Standpoint,” Isr., Oct. 7, 1870, p. 9, delivered at the Unitarian church of Rev. Thomas F. Vickers in Cincinnati. Basing himself on the prophets Isaiah 2:1–5 and Micah 4, Wise, in majestic language, limned the era of universal peace predicted by the prophets for which all humanity hoped and awaited. What is interesting is that he characterized his futuristic vision as “humanitarian” rather than “Jewish” which he so often did in polemics with conservative Christians.

24. His account of his trip to the Western United States records the churches in which he spoke and notes too the presence of Christians attending his guest lectures in synagogues. These accounts published in the AI, summer of 1877, were collected in a small book edited by William M. Kramer, The Western Journal of Isaac Mayer Wise, 1877 (Berkeley, 1974). See pp. 22, 40-^42, 52, 56–57. Refer to Jewish Times, Jan. 7, 1870, p. 7 and Jan. 14, 1870, p. 5, in which Max Lilienthal expressed satisfaction that Wise's lectures attracted Christians. Wise was among the numerous Reform rabbis pleased that liberal Christians would come to hear them preach; it represented a mark of personal acceptance for them as well as being a source of social gratification. Thus Solomon Schindler of Boston's Temple Israel, for instance, established his reputation as a liberal religious preacher by regularly drawing large crowds of Christians in the 1870s and 1880s.

25. Isr., Oct. 5, 1866, pp. 4–5. Wise undoubtedly had this reputation. His Israelitewas known to many Christians as were his indefatigable battles against Orthodox Christianity. Because of his reputation, Wise was solicited, along with Lilienthal, to join the Free Religious Association (see text below). See Die Deborah, April 7, 1898, p. 4, for a self-analysis of the reasons for his popularity.

26. See Isr., Sept. 2, 1870, p. 8 for his editorial “An Explanation.” See Isr., June 21, 1867, p. 4; see also “World of My Books,” p. 138. See tooRubinstein, Aryeh, “Isaac Mayer Wise: A New Approach”, Jewish Social Studies 39 (1977): 74–75.Google Scholar

27. Conway, Moncure D., Autobiography of Moncure Daniel Conway, 2 vols. (Boston, 1904), 1: 275–76. Conway concluded his description of Wise with a casual but noteworthy observation of B'nai Yeshurun synagogue members. The “majority of Rabbi Wise's synagogue were not believers in supernaturalism, but simple deists.” See p. 275.Google Scholar

28. Lilienthal often preached in Vicker's church. See Jewish Times, Oct. 21, 1870, p. 533 and Nov. 25, 1870, p. 613. Indeed, Lilienthal is reputed to have been the first American rabbi to exchange pulpits with a Christian minister–Vickers–in March, 1867. See Allan Tarshish, “Jew and Christian in a New Society: Some Aspects of Jewish-Christian Relationships in the United States, 1848–1881,” A Bicentennial Festschrift for Jacob Rader Marcus (Cincinnati, 1976), p. 579 and p. 586, n. 52. The full text of LilienthaPs speech may be found in The Radical2(1867): 503–7.

29. Thomas F. Vickers, “The Church and Free Thought,” Address at the Laying of the Cornerstone of St. John's German Protestant Church of Cincinnati, Sept. 29, 1867, pp. 10–11. See Lilienthal's report on this speech which incited Archbishop Purcell who saw it as an attack on Catholicism, Jewish Times, Jan. 22, 1870, p. 5. On Vickers, consult A. Thayer, The First Congregational Church of Cincinnati: A History (Cincinnati, 1917), pp. 34–38; also, Reginald McGrane, The University of Cincinnati (Cincinnati, 1963), pp. 80–108. On the controversy with Purcell, see The Roman Catholic Church and Freethought: A Controversy Between Archbishop Purcell and Thomas Vickers (Cincinnati, 1868), and Wise's pleasure at this pamphlet's publication, Isr, Feb. 7, 1868, p. 4.

30. Isr.Feb.12, 1869, p. 4.

31. On Lilienthal and the University of Cincinnati, see McGrane, pp. 65, 76, and The Academial (1882): 7–8.

32. The speech in its entirety was published in the Jewish Tribune, May 6, 1881, p. 6.

33. Isr., Oct. 15, 1869, p. 8. Indicative of the attachment of some Jews to Vickers were their contributions to the building of his church. SeeAI, May 22, 1885, p. 4. One wonders what happened to the friendship of Wise and Vickers from late 1881 on, as Vickers became embroiled in a major controversy with some University of Cincinnati students who had published a blistering nineteen point attack on him in the July issue of their literary society newspaper, The Academia2 (1881): 40–43, and who appealed to the Board of Directors to have him fired. Among those involved as editors of this journal during the life of this controversy were some of Wise's best Hebrew Union College students who took B.A. degrees at the University of Cincinnati: Joseph Krauskopf, Henry Berkowitz, and David Philipson. The controversy lasted over a year. See The Academia2 (1881): 78; 2(1882): 88–89, 109; 3 (1882): 18. See too, the “Report of the Committee to Investigate Charges Against Thomas Vickers, Rector of the University of Cincinnati, 1882,” and “Report of the Minority of the Committee Appointed Oct. 17, 1881 to Investigate the Charges Against Thomas Vickers, Rector of the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, April 17, 1882,” both in the Archives of the University of Cincinnati. The controversy is discussed by McGrane, pp. 96–108.

34. Heller, pp. 620–21; Thayer, pp. 34–35. For a fine account of American Protestant concern to maintain a Christian America, refer to Robert T. Handy, A Christian America: Protestant Hopes and Historical Realities (New York, 1971).Google Scholar

35. Isr, March 10, 1865, p. 292.

36. Kraut, “Francis E. Abbot…,” p. 100, and p. 111, n. 66.

37. Ibid., pp. 19–20.

38. Letter of Jacob Ezekiel to the American Unitarian Association, May 8, 1879, Archives of the American Unitarian Association, Boston.

39. Isr, Feb. 24, 1860, pp. 268–69. By “deism,” Wise no doubt intended a rational theism with which he identified both Judaism and Unitarianism.

40. Isr.June 21, 1867, p. 4.

41. AI.May 16, 1879, p. 4.

42. The significance of Unitarianism for Wise's teleological expectations paralleled the significance of Reform Judaism for Unitarian Christians and other religious radicals who saw in Reform's evolution signs of the dissolution of all positive religions. See Kraut, “Francis E. Abbot, ” passim.

43. In his Origins of Christianity (1868), Wise argued that Paul, whom he identified with the talmudic figure of Acher, was a “Unitarian Jew,” and “Orthodox Pharisee” and a reformer who wanted to save the heathens. He found, however, that he could only get the heathens to the Father by a symbol of resurrection through the son and so introduced that idea. Paul himself did not believe it, but it was a ploy for the spiritual redemption of the pagan world. Only subsequent to Paul's age did the ideas of trinity, universal depravity, and grace enter into Christianity. See pp. 364–415. But Wise concluded that “Christianity's solid basis is an abstract from Moses and the prophets” (p. 533). In Judaism and Christianity (1883), Wise noted that the fundamentals of all religion came from the only authentic revelation, the revelation at Sinai, which was intended for all nations. Whatever, therefore, was true in Christianity was taken from Judaism. See pp. 43,46,48. See too A Defense of Judaism (1889), p. 49.

44. See Judaism and Christianity, p. 48: “The world Judaizes and has Judaized for the last two thousand years.” The notion of liberal Christians as agents of Judaizing was held by other Jewish Reformers as well. See Jewish Times, March 5, 1869, p. 10, for Rabbi Bernhard Felsenthal's views on Unitarians and Freethinkers as missionaries of Judaism; see Jewish Times.Nov. 14, 1873, pp. 600–1, in which Ellinger, editor of the paper, called Unitarians, Universalists, and Free Religionists “Missionaries of the idea of Judaism”; see too the Jewish Times, Nov. 4, 1870, p. 569 and Jewish Times, April 9, 1869, p. 4. From a vertical perspective, and in a broad general sense, Wise's perception that Unitarianism was helping to judaize the world seems reminiscent of the theological approach to Christianity of Judah Halevi and Maimonides. Both men regarded Christianity as a whole as a means by which to spread the truth taught by Judaism to the world.

45. AI, Dec. 7, 1888, p. 4; AI, Feb. 3, 1898, p. 4.

46. See Wise, Isaac M., The End of Popes, Nobles and Kings; or The Progress of Civilization (New York, 1852), p. 20; refer also to Dena Wilansky, Sinai to Cincinnati (New York, 1937), which cites an August, 1858 Israeliteeditorial in which Wise wrote that he “entertains not the least doubt that, before this century will close, the essence of Judaism will be THE religion of the great majority of all intelligent men in this country.” See too AI, May 14, 1875, p. 4. Also, Kaufmann Kohler, in “The Mission of Israel and its Application to Modern Times,” Yearbook of the Central Conference of American Rabbis 29 (1919): 280, noted that “Dr. Wise is reported to have said in his intimate circle… that within fifty years Judaism's teachings will have become the common property of the American people.”Google Scholar

47. On the Free Religious Association, consult William J. Potter, The Free Religious Association: Its Twenty-Five Years and Their Meaning (Boston, 1892); Stow Persons, Free Religion: An American Faith (Boston, 1947); Sidney Warren, American Freethought 1860–1914 (New York, 1943), pp. 96–116; J. Wade Carruthers, Octavius Brooks Frothingham: Gentle Radical (University, Al., 1977), pp. 98–122; Sidney E. Ahlstrom, “Francis Ellingwood Abbot and the Free Religious Association,” Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical Society 17 (1973–75): 1–21; Wright, pp. 80–81.

48. Wright, , p. 88.Google Scholar

49. The events leading to the founding of the F.R.A. are recorded in Potter, The Free Religious Association: Its Twenty-Five Years and Their Meaning

50. See, for instance, Octavius B. Frothingham's address in the Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the Free Religious Association, May 26, 27, 1870, pp. 10–11. Henceforth to be referred to as Proceedings.

51. Not all members wanted the Association opened to non-Christians, nor were they friendly to Jews. See the views of Rev. Henry Blanchard of Brooklyn, for example, in Free Religion: Report of Addresses at a Meeting Held in Boston, May 30,1867, to Consider the Conditions, Wants, and Prospects of Free Religion In America (Boston, 1867), pp. 7–8. Both Lydia M. Child and William L. Garrison had, in the past, expressed vigorous anti-Jewish conversionist sentiments.

52. See Proceedings 7 (1874): 10–11, for Potter's pointing to Jewish membership to refute the charge that the F.R.A. is Jewish; see Proceedings 10 (1877): 51 for O. B. Frothingham's assertion that the F.R.A. always tried hard to get Jews to join; also, p. 86, for Thomas W. Higginson's suggestion that the F.R.A. was the only place where a Jew could stand as an equal to the Christian.

53. See Free Religion: Report of Addresses, p. 3. Other Jews who served as officers or members of the F.R.A. included Max Lilienthal, Moritz Ellinger, Aaron Guinzburg, Raphael Lasker, S. H. Sonneschein, I. S. Nathans, Henry Gersoni, Judah Wechsler, Felix Adler, Bernhard Felsenthal, Edward Lauterbach, Solomon Schindler, Emil G. Hirsch, William Filene, Edward Filene, Charles Fleischer, and Stephen S. Wise.

54. Wright, , pp. 62–77.Google Scholar

55. Cited in Isr., July 12, 1867, p. 4.

56. Jewish Times, June 4, 1869, p. 9; Jewish Times, Dec. 22, 1871, p. 704; Jewish Times, Nov. 14, 1873, pp. 600–1.

57. Isr., July 12, 1867, p. 4; see too Isr., April 19, 1870, p. 9.

58. Ibid. By “Cincinnati co-religionists,” Wise meant himself and Max Lilienthal, Lilienthal's speech in Vickers' church in 1867 also had aroused the ire of the Jewish Messenger.

59. Isr., June 21, 1867, p. 4, editorial on “Lessons of the Anniversary Month.”

60. Ibid., April 17, 1868, p. 4. Emphasis added.

61. Die Deborah, Nov. 8, 1867, p. 70.

62. Letter of Isaac M. Wise to Adolph Huebsch, Nov. 28, 1866, American Jewish Archives.

63. Proceedings 2 (1869): 116–17. This lecture was published as an Appendix to the Proceedings because Wise, who was expected at the convention, was forced to cancel his appearance due to a schedule conflict.

64. Proceedings3 (1870): 83–89. Wise's claim is reminiscent of other instances in Jewish history in which Jews appropriated as theirs what they defined as the best and most valued ideals of society. Hellenistic literature, such as the Letter of Aristeas, comes to mind; so too does French Jewry's appropriation of the ideals of liberty, equality, fraternity which they found rooted in the prophets. With such claims, Jews sought to justify and solidify their position in society.

65. Wise's numerous activities prevented him from attending any national conventions save for the Third Annual Meeting in May 1870, at which time he delivered his “Permanent and Progressive Elements of Judaism.” In 1869, he sent his paper “The Outlines of Judaism.” He could not attend the First Annual Meeting in 1868, but sent a letter to explain his absence and confirmed that “I am with the free Religious Association.” See Proceedings 1 (1868): 119–20. The dates of the Fourth Annual Meeting in 1871 conflicted with his Cincinnati Conference of American Rabbis, so O.B. Frothingham gave a synopsis of the lecture Wise would have presented. See Proceedings 4 (1871): 67–68.

66. See The Index, Nov. 18, 1870 and Dec. 2, 1871; Wise's speech in Toledo, “Reason and Religion,” was published in the Isr., Nov. 18, 1870, p. 4. He labeled the doctrines of Christianity as useless.

67. See Isr., July 29, 1870, p. 9, and its account of the Cincinnati convention, Nov. 4, 1870, p. 4.

68. See Jewish Times, June 30, 1871, pp. 274–75 for a full reprint of both Wise's rejoinder and the Herald'sresponse.

69. Proceedings1 (1868): 119–20.

70. Ibid.

71. Ibid. A brief synopsis of the book appears in n. 42. See too, Jacob, pp. 77–81.

72. Proceedings3 (1870): 83–89.

73. Die Deborah, Nov. 8, 1867, p. 70.

74. Isr., Jan. 17, 1873, p. 5; Al, June 7, 1878, p. 4.

75. Al, May 4, 1883, p. 364; Al, July 1, 1887, p. 4.

76. Proceedings 3 (1810):18.

77. Frothingham, O.B., The Religion of Humanity (New York, [1873]: reprint ed., Hicksville, 1975), pp. 24–25. See too, other similar statements of Frothingham in The Index, Oct. 23, 1873, and Nov. 23, 1876; also, cf. Proceedings 7 (1874): 26–27 and Proceedings9 (1876): 28. For Abbot's views on the subject, see Kraut, “Francis E. Abbot…,” pp. 93–94; for Potter's views, see The Index, Jan. 8, 1870; March 30, 1872; Jan. 22, 1874; Nov. 26, 1874; and Sept. 28, 1876.Google Scholar

78. Proceedings 10 (1877): 65, and Proceedings 12 (1878): 72–73.

79. Proceedings 1 (MlA): 35.

80. See Wise's comments on Bellows, Isr., Jan. 12, 1872, p. 9.

81. See Clarke's Ten Great Religions, first published in 1871. Clarke, in fact, adopted rather negative stereotypes of Judaism as narrow, stifling, and oppressive in his work of religious fiction, Legend of Thomas Didynus, the Jewish Sceptic.See Michael N. Dobkowski, The Tarnished Dream (Westport, 1979), pp. 16–17.

82. The Index, Oct. 23, 1873, p. 430. Abbot's evaluation of modern Reform Judaism is discussed in Kraut, “France E. Abbot…,” pp. 93–97.

83. The Index, April 5, 1873. See Rabbi M. Schlesinger's reply that Judaism is pure theism and that it really is a free religious association. Jewish Times, April 11, 1873

84. Isr, Nov. 14, 1873, p. 4.

85. Wright, p. 94.

86. Cincinnati Commercial, Dec. 22, 1877, p. 11. See too, Wright, p. 74, who cites Joseph Henry Allen, in 1882: “The name Christian does not rest on any theory whatever about the nature or office or person or doctrine of Christ. It rests simply on the fact that we are Christian by habit or inheritance, unless we deliberately choose to renounce that name in favor of some other.”

87. One need but read The Indexedited by Francis E. Abbot (1870–1880) and later by William Potter to get a sampling of the debate over who was a Christian and how Christianity was to be defined. Cf. May 4, 1872 for an article by William Spencer, “What's in a Name?”; March 17, 1881–John Chadwick, “Are We Still Christians?” These kinds of articles number in the dozens.

88. Isr., Nov. 18, 1870, p. 8. In February of 1871, Frothingham introduced Wise to a New York F.R.A. audience and referred to New York as this “Christian city,” for which he was criticized by the press. See Jewish Messenger, Feb. 24, 1871.

89. This “christological tincture” may have been with Frothingham all his life. It certainly was the subject of a great dispute among his Unitarian friends and the press in 1881 as to whether or not he recanted of free-religion. See Carruthers, p. 190–207.

90. Frothingham, Octavius B., Recollections and Impressions 1822–1890 (New York, 1891), p. 280.Google Scholar

91. Ahlstrom, Sidney E., A Religious History of the American People (New Haven, 1972), p. 778.Google Scholar

92. Hopkins, pt. 2, p. 55.

93. See especially Wise, The Martyrdom of Jesus of Nazareth, which argued that Jesus died not for any idea but to save the lives of his fellow Jewish nationalists fighting against the Romans. See too Isr., May 1, 1868, p. 4; Isr., April 2, 1869, p. 4; Jacob, pp. 71–75; Sandmel, passim.

94. .sr., Jan. 12, 1872, p. 9.

95. AI, Dec. 21, 1877, p. 4. Wendte replied to the published attack in the Cincinnati Commercial,. Dec. 22, 1877, p. 11.

96. AI, March 26, 1880, p. 4.

97. AI, August 27, 1880, p. 68. Other essayists included S. R. Calthrop, Charles C. Everett, John W. Chadwick, Ezra Abbot, Francis Tiffany, J. B. Harrison, and George Batchelor. Bellows wrote the introduction.

98. AI, May 24, 1878, p. 4.

99. See, for example, Minot Savage, The Religion of Evolution (Boston, 1876), pp. 190,215; also see pp. 184–86 for a theory of biblical inspiration without biblical infallibility very reminiscent of that of Abraham Geiger.

100. Andrew White, A History of the Warfare of Science and Theology in Christendom (New York, 1896), p. xii.

101. Letter of Felix Adler to William C. Russel, April 22, 1885. Archives of Cornell University. On White's problematic establishing of a nonsectarian Christian university, refer to Benny Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture: The Religious Evolution of Felix Adler (Cincinnati, 1979), pp. 96–107. For Frothingham's universalization of the term “Christian” to designate all those who act justly and morally, refer to his “What is it to be a Christian,” 1868, pp. 18–20.

102. This attitude underlay the great movement of the Protestant Social Gospel which attempted to apply Jesus' moral teachings to contemporary society. See Charles H. Hopkins, The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism, 1865–1915 (New Haven, 1940).

103. See the dismay of Rabbi Max Lilienthal at being called a “Christian Jew” because of his virtuous deeds. Jewish Times, Jan. 7, 1870, pp. 3–4; see too, Moritz Eilinger's editorial, Jewish Times, Dec. 30, 1870, p. 696 on the same subject. Clearly, not all Jews were pleased to be called “good Christians” or to have their moral behavior labeled “Christian.” Contrast this observation with Jonathan D. Sarna, “The Freethinker, The Jews, and the Missionaries: George Houston and the Mystery of Israel Vindicated,” AJS review 5 (1980): 107 and n. 16.

104. Al, July 30, 1886, p. 4.

105. See Wise's analysis of Allen's arguments in Al, August 8, 1889, p. 4.

106. See, for instance, Isr, April 26, 1867, p. 4.

107. Cited by Wise inAI.May 16, 1879, p. 4.

108. Ibid. Abbot, militant anti-Christian, heartily concurred with Wise that Savage had too much Jesus in his system. See The Index, Sept. 9, 1880, for Abbot's review of Savage's Talks About Jesus.

109. Al, June 14, 1878, p. 4.

110. On Adler's emergence out of Judaism, see Benny Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture, passim.

111. The Indexis replete with numerous favorable comments by many people on Adler and his activities from the spring of 1877 on through 1885. For Potter on Adler, see Sept. 11, 1879, and June 11, 1885. Ednah Dow Cheney lauded Adler, June 19, 1879. O. B. Frothingham on Adler: Sept. 9, 1880; May 28, 1885. Abbot on Adler: Feb. 8, 1877; June 27, 1878; May 22, 1879. For a complete discussion of Abbot on Adler, see Kraut, “Francis E. Abbot…,” pp. 101–5.

112. See the address of George C. Barret in “Memorial Exercises in Honor of O. B. Frothingham,” Ethical Addresses, series 2, no. 10, Dec. 1895, p. 185.

113. AI, Jan. 10, 1879, p. 4.

114. Disgracing Jews and Judaism was especially anathema to Wise. SeeAI, Jan. 11, 1884, p. 4.

115. For Wise's opinions of Adler, seeAI, Nov. 3, 1876, p. 5; Dec. 22, 1876, p. 4; Jan 5, 1877, pp. 4–5; March 2, 1877, p. 4; Jan. 10, 1879, p. 4; Feb. 7, 1879, p. 4; Jan. 7, 1881, p. 4; Feb. 3, 1882, p. 252; March 3, 1882, p. 284; Oct. 7, 1882, p. 146; Jan. 11, 1884, p. 4; Dec. 4, 1885, p. 4; Jan. 1, 1886, p. 4; June 11, 1886, p. 4; May 6, 1887, p. 4; Dec. 3, 1887, p. 4; Feb. 3, 1888, p. 4; Oct. 29, 1891, p. 4.

116. AI, Nov. 3, 1876, p. 5;AI, Jan. 10, 1869, p. 41. Interestingly, the Christian Registermade the same identification of Ethical Culture with Unitarianism. See The Index, April 1, 1886.

117. AI, Jan. 10, 1879, p. 4.

118. The Index, Feb. 20, 1879. Wise had not yet formally requested that his name be deleted when Adler became President. Without a formal request, the F.R.A. tended to carry over its Board members.

119. On this friendship, see Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture, pp. 161–65.

120. Cited by Heller, p. 434.

121. AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4.

122. AI, March 24, 1882, p. 308.

123. AI, June 7, 1878, p. 4.

124. jr.Nov. 14, 1873, p. 4.

125. AI, June 7, 1878, p. 4. Emphasis added.

126. Ibid.

127. Although liberal Christians, and New England Brahmins especially, were not free from social prejudice against the Jews. See Michael N. Dobkowski, “American Anti-Semitism: A Reinterpretation,” American Quarterly 19 (1977): 166–81, and his larger work, The Tarnished Dream, passim.

128. AI, June 14, 1878, p. 4. Emphasis added.

129. Jewish Times, Oct. 21, 1870, p. 533.

130. Jewish Times, March 19, 1869, pp. 6–7.

131. The Index, May 19, 1881.

132. See Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture, p. 219; also, the American Hebrew, Dec. 4, 1885 which published Adler's call, and the same paper, Jan. 15, 1886 through Feb. 26, 1886 for Rabbi Gustav Gottheil's reply. Nathan Glazer has suggested that such a merger was not so far-fetched, but Glazer has overstated the case. See Nathan Glazer, American Judaism, 8th ed. (Chicago, [1957]; reprint ed., Chicago, 1968), p. 53.

133. AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4, and July 23, 1886, p. 4.

134. Given his friendship with Sonneschein, Wise treated the episode gingerly. SeeAI, July 2, 1886, p. 4; July 9, 1886, p. 4, and Sept. 17, 1886, p. 4.

135. See Wright, pp. 84–89.

136. AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4, andAI, July 23, 1886, p. 4.

137. AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4.

138. .4/, July 23, 1886, p. 4.

139. Ibid Wise should have been more precise. Even though he was located in Boston–the East, home of “Christian” Unitarianism according to Wise–Minot Savage, whom Sonneschein went to see, was one of the most radical Unitarians in the country, Westerners included.

140. AI, July 16, 1886, p. 4.

141. AI, July 23, 1886, p. 4.

142. Wright, p. 87.

143. Cited in Wright, p. 89.

144. Al, Oct.2, 1890, p. 4.

145. AI.March 3, 1898, p. 4.

146. See Andrew F. Key, The Theology of Isaac Mayer Wise (Cincinnati, 1962), p. 59; also, see Heller, pp. 625, 657 in which the author stresses Wise's belief in a universal religion but fails to appreciate his triumphalism.

147. For examples of his triumphalist attitudes, refer to Isr., March 7, 1873, p. 4; Al, June, 14, 1878, p. 4;AI, June 13, 1879, p. 4; Al, Oct. 24, 1879, p. 4. Note that this sense of triumphalism pervaded both the general tone and style of his writing and went beyond his selection of specific words and phrases. On his view that the only real religious alternative to atheism was Judaism, see Isr., March 28, 1873, p. 4, and Al, Oct. 17, 1889, p. 4.

148. See Rubinstein, especially pp. 53–56, 74, and passim. Such characterizations of Wise are often unhelpful and misleading because they fail to appreciate the significance of his religious triumphalism to explain the motivations or reasons behind his inconsistencies. For example, some of his apparent intellectual inconsistencies can be explained as a result of his devout loyalty to Judaism and his triumphalist religious orientation. Thus, he accepted biblical criticism when applied to the New Testament, but rejected it as invalid with regard to the Hebrew Bible. This inconsistency reflected not so much the lack of sophistication or intellectual blindness on his part as it did a legitimate, tangible fear that his entire system of religious authority, based on the revelation at Sinai and the Decalogue, would be undermined. For Wise, a totally humanized Bible was simply untenable. It would be interesting to discover why Wise could not accept a reinterpretation of revelation, such as Geiger's, to avoid this problem, but he clearly did not. See Wise, “World of My Books,” p. 143. On Geiger, see Kraut, From Reform Judaism To Ethical Culture, pp. 62–63; also, Nahum M. Sarna, “Abraham Geiger and Biblical Scholarship,” and Michael A. Meyer, “Abraham Geiger's Historical Judaism,” in Jakob J. Petuchowski, ed., New Perspectives on Abraham Geiger (Cincinnati, 1975). See too, Michael A. Meyer, “Universalism and Jewish Unity in the Thought of Abraham Geiger,” in Jacob Katz, ed., The Role of Religion in Modern Jewish History (Cambridge, Mass., 1975). Similarly, Wise embraced science and reason, but when others used scientific conclusions to cast doubt on his religious beliefs such as revelation, immortality and the like, he opposed the evidences of science with the evidence of a three thousand year historical Jewish experience which he judged the stronger on such matters as he felt were beyond the ken of science. And by resorting to the tradition of six hundred thousand adult male Jews having stood at Mt. Sinai to demonstrate the event's historical facticity, Wise sometimes gave the appearance of a nineteenth century Judah Halevi defending his faith against Judaism's detractors in both the rationalist and Christian camp. See Al, Dec. 1, 1876, p. 4; Heller, pp. 519, 526–27; Knox, pp. 155–56; Wise, A Defense of Judaism, pp. 20–22. It was the attempt to harmonize his commitment to the religious triumphalism of Judaism with the intellectual demands of the modern age which made it impossible for Wise to work out a coherent religious ritual practice.

149. Wise, A Defense of Judaism, pp. 31–49, and Judaism and Christianity, p. 43.

150. Wise staunchly opposed the attitude expressed by Felsenthal, citing Abraham Geiger, that the one reform for which the world and Judaism remains indebted to Christianity was the “deliverance from the yoke of the ceremonies. This reform, and solely this one, Judaism of our days has to imitate.” To Wise, Judaism was not indebted to Christianity for anything. See the Jewish Times, March 12, 1869, p. 11. For David Einhorn's attitude, similar to that of Felsenthal, see Jewish Times, June 18, 1869, p. 2.

151. Compare Moritz Ellinger's diatribe against Wise for the “shameful manner” and utter disrespect in which “he assails a sister religion,” Jewish Times, Aug. 26, 1870, p. 409, with Wise's own assertion of respect for Christians, but not for Christianity, Isr., Sept. 2, 1870, p. 8. Wise later consistently affirmed respect for Christianity as well as for Christians. See his Judaism and Christianity, p. 43 and A Defense of Judaism, p. 3. He also claimed that he lost no Christian friends because of the tone and nature of his attacks on Christianity; see his “World of My Books,” p. 138. This latter claim is simply inconceivable, and must be viewed with considerable skepticism as must his claim to have “induced all of liberal Christianity to adopt a friendly and brotherly attitude towards Judaism.” Ibid.

152. AI, May 9, 1895, p. 4;!, Sept. 30, 1897, p. 4;AI, Feb. 3, 1898, p. 4; Feb. 9, 1899, p. 4.

153. See Feldman, Abraham J., Judaism and Unitarianism (Hartford, 1930). Parallels to Wise's changing attitude to American liberal Christians appear in Europe as well. For example, Abraham Geiger, for a time, held high hopes for the emergence of a religion of humanity from within Liberal Protestantism. When he realized that this would not be forthcoming, he came to believe that only Judaism could reshape itself as the religion of the future. Cf. Michael A. Meyer, “Universalism and Jewish Unity in the Thought of Abraham Geiger,” especially pp. 100–1.Google Scholar

154. Jewish Times, March 19, 1869, p. 6.

155. See Rabbi Ferdinand Isserman's statement in 1928 introducing a Christian clergyman's sermon at his temple: “You teach Christian ethics–I teach Jewish ethics. There is no difference between the two. What you call Christian character, I call Jewish character.” Pamphlet, An Account of a Historic Exchange of Pulpits Between Rabbi and Minister, p. 6, in Ferdinand M. Isserman, Nearprint Box, Biographies, American Jewish Archives.

156. An excellent example of Jewish triumphal expression can be found in Rabbi Leo M. Franklin's response to a paper by Julian Morgenstern, “Were Isaac M. Wise Alive Today,” Yearbook of the Central Conference of American Rabbis29 (1919): 251. Franklin's comments in this series of Wise Centenary Addresses actually exemplified Wise's own attitudes: “We are 'Judaizing' the Christianity of today… for the modern movement of the religious world… means simply that those ideals for which the Jew through all the ages has been struggling, have become the common property of all humanity–and that instead of fighting single handedly for Justice and Truth and Brotherhood… the Jew will henceforth call to his standard to fight for his ideals, the brain and brawn of the Christian world. It is the token of Judaism triumphant.” Franklin argued that this type of “assimilation” was welcome.