Newspaper Page Text
Friday, July 11, 1919. THE JEW'SH MONITOR Chips From a Rabbinical Workshop By RABBI DA VID ROSENBA UM, Austin, Texas IV. Chronic Complaints Against the Rabbi Before constitutional government was established in Europe, and mon arches were invested with absolute power, the crowned heads labored un der the conceit that they could do no wrong. And when matters of state did not go right, the members of the cab met were usually blamed for the mis deeds of their sovereign, but the ru ler himself never; for, uiler thb theory of the divine right of kings, "the king can do no wrong." This old formula referring to tin ruler, is apparently reversed nowa days when applied to the Jewish min ister. It looks as thought the rabbi can do no right. And here we leave out of consideration the so-called misfit rabbi who is in the ministry by the sufferance of the synagog, or by a mistaken choice of profession. For, even the very capable rabbi is hari put to it. No matter how earnest and sincere he may be in his efforts, no matter how conscientious in the per formance of his various duties, he la always the butt of criticism. Rarely will one find a congregation but when some dissatisfaction is shown with their minister. The fault finders are everywhere. Complaints are heard wherever we turn. The rabbi is not this, or he is not that. Even the sue cessful minister labors under the same disadvantage. Obviously, the rabbi car do no right. In analyzing this aspect of Jewish life, we must realize that we are deal ing almost entirely with a modern phenomenon. Respect for authority and religion made for reverence In days gone by. The rabbi of old was, therefore, ordinarily honored as an or nament to the community. As the scholar who led a saintly life, he wan removed from the petty trivialities ot the day. The struggles, the strlv.nga and the limitations of the age did not' enter into his environment. Not that he held himself entirely aloof, but rather as one of and yet above his people, who by virtue of his position as the inspirer of lofty examples, as the exemplar of the life of unsclifsh ncss, he was ever regarded with es teem and respect, so that faultfind ing could not be freely indulged in against him. Now that he is also the pastor, the social worker, and what not, in a word, acting the part of the general utility man of the congrega tion, he is almost wholly one of the people, and thus exposes himself to captious criticism and daily gossip icism and comments of daily gossip Moreover, formerly he was maintained out of the revenue of the community, and not by membership dues, thus bar ring the querulous from the claim thai they are the ones who "pay the piper." And as a matter of fact, he "piped" on very rare occasions. Now, however, he is directly or indirectly the bene ficiary of the individual members of the congregation who claim they have a right to voice their opinion. More over, we live in a democratic age, with more emphasis on rights thais on duties. And our environment ot freedom undermines respect and an thority. We consider ourselves at lib erty to challenge anything and any body . Therefore,, the prevailing phe nomenon of . chronic complaints against the rabbi. We may dismiss with a moment's notice those captious critics whose whimsicalities make them dissatisfied withwhatever condition may confront them. Apparently .they must vent their spleen at the rabbi. We have in every community such constitutional "kickers" who' are censorious under all circumstances. Thus, when thy rabbi is single, they prefer a married man; and if he be married ,they de sire a single man. If he is the pustot and makes periodic visits on his con gregants they express their preference for the student and scholarly rabbi; and if he is studiously inclined, they argue in favor of the pastor. If he speaks straight from the heart and delivers plain sermons and adresses, he is blamed with considering his con gregation as ignorant. And if his ad dresses are couched in scholarly, terms he is accused of instructing the con gregation as if they were his school children. In a word, they are hyper critical, and at no time pleased. Whatever the rabbi is, he is wrong. Fortunately, there are not very many of this type in a congregation. More of the criticisms, however, probably spring from temperamental differences. Psychologists tell us thai we are all atypical. No two or us are exactly alike. We vary in dispositions, tastes, likes and dislikes, becuusc we are each the product of peculiar fac tors entering into our being. The many subtle forces making up our lives are not identical in the case of two per sons. We are each the result of a dif ferent heredity, and of an environ ment and education which hardly two experience alike. And the outcome is that we are strikingly dissimilar In our natures. The stimuli responding in the one, may be absent in the oth er. Two people frequenUy see the same thing in a different light. In word, we are singularly unlike in oux outlooks, in our methods, and manner of behavior. And the rabbi is dealing entirely with the human element. He works with and labors for his congregants. He ministers directly to men and women; he speaks and appeals to his fellow-men. Whatever he says is sub. ject to scrutiny, whatever he does must pass the discerning eye. The policies he pursues are therefore ap proved by some, but not necessarily by others, because all are not consti tuted alike to feel and see the same. The trouble then issues from the fact that we are lacking in broad minedness to realize that there U more than one roy al road. There may be more than one way of doing a giv en thing. And because a certain meth ed appeals to us .does by no means imply it is the only way, or even the best way. But we at once become cap tious in our comments and cavil at everything. Our criticism then leads to mere faultfinding. It Is no more just criticism than gossip is discus sion. From such circumstance- arlst many of the judgments and opinions we form of the actions of the man in public life. They are largely sub jective the reflection of our peculiar tastes. We are impatient with the methods of others, when in reality they may just as good as, if not bet ter than, our own. Therefore, the chronic complaints against the minister due to tempera mental differences need not discour age us. The fair-minded man or worn an will readily perceive that the pub lie official serves many men with as many different minds .Each one feels his own way about the rabbi's doings. Each one would like to see the min ister follow a certain peculiar method. And as the rabbi can only be honest with himself and do as his conscience and reason dictate, it is inevitable that he will antagnonize many in the congregation anil nrouse criclslm. Furthermore, in no other profession does the laity consider itself so com petent to judge as in the case of thw ministry. The rabbi's efforts are more open to public scrutiny than that of any other professional man. The law yer, for instance, can easily Too ana bamboozle his clients, who know nothing of the law, and willingly lis ten to his counsel. Similarly, the phy. sician can tell his patients almost any thing about his treatment of their cases, who will eagerly carry out in structions. The technical knowledge of the lawyer or the doctor being for eign to the outsider, no one of the profession will dare question the way they go about their work. But it is fai different with the rabbi. The hard pre requisites for the ministry, the serious and arduous studies the Jewish min ister must pursue in preparation Tor his calling, are not even vaguely sur. mised by the laity. They are utterly ignorant of the vast literature and the checkered career of the Jewish people which the rabbi must be familiar with, at least in a measure, not to mentloi. his secular studies. Nor do they real ize the multiplicity of duties he per. forms. Each one is usuolly egotlstio enough to imagine that the rabbi mu.n minister to him alone, forgetting that thereare other egoists in the congre gation. And yet, the fact remains that we judge the rabbi mainly by the man ner of his address, and secondarily by his general personality, leaving out ot consideration almost entirely his lone professional preparation and the va riety of duties he performs in the community in one form or another. Ac cordingly, ench one feels justified in giving an opinion and estimate of the rabbi's worth; each one assumes the role of self-appointed critic;; with the result that wherever we turn he is be ing judged, criticised nnd underrated. The real source of the trouble, how ever, lies in the circumstance that con ditions are radically wrong with prca ent day methods of religious minis tration. The difficulty lies in the fact that the rabbi is obliged to act the pr.rt of factotum of the congregation. He must be all things in one. He mln isters as preacher, teacher, pastor, social worker, scholar, spokesman, and what not, to the community. Each on phase of his various duties requires special excellence and experience. Specialization by means of division ot labor which we have gradually learn el to appreciate, as for instance, in the rase of the sciences, and in thu medical and legal professions, we do not as yet begin to realize the need of in the ministration of religion. The rabbi expected to be all thtngs to all men, must, in the nature of tht case, fr.ll short in one set of duties or another, unless he possesses extra ordinary power and by far more than average ability. If he stresses the pulpit work and emphasizes his position as representative of his peo pie, he is bound to curtail his pastor al duties and weaken his hold on the philanthropic agencies in the com munity. And if he makes periodic calls and is in close touch with his congre gants, his interest in pulpit work and in Sunday school is certain to suffer The rabbi's work is simply too many sided. And yet, we expect him to look P1v after all the activities of the congre gation. Could tho lawyer give satisfactory counsel on all ports of law? Certain ly not. We are sensible enough to ex pect him to render service only in that restricted branch of the law in which he practices. Similarly we do not ask of the physician to master the entire field of medicine and treat ail possible physical ailments. We go to the spec ialist in case of serious illness. Why, then, should we expect of the rabbi to be the effective preacher in the pulpit; the experienced pedagog in the relig ious school; tho ever-ready pastor In the congregation; the ubiquitous so cial worker in the community; tho versatile student in Jewish and secu lar learning; the respected spoksman on every occasion; and a variety ol other things, all in one? We are sim ply asking the impossible. Until wo learn the need of depart mcntalizing the rabbinical profession, and engage the services of several specialist rabbis, as we have seen In our former essay, we shall continue to hear all sorts of complaints against the rabbi .It is beyond the power of one man in tho larger congregations to do all that is expected of the Jewish minister. And even if he could, by su perhuman efforts, find the needed time and strength (which is barely possi ble) to cover the round of duties in volved in his profession, he could not do all of them successfully, because each phase of his activity require special aptitude and talent. One could only do one thing with expertness. And even in the case of the smaller congregation, where one rabbi could cover the ground, he is handicapped by the diversity of excellence called for the variety of duties imposed upon him. After all, one cannot do differ ent things with equal celerity and sat isfaction. Perhaps the layman who, because he does not understand the prercquis ites of the rabbinical profession, thinks he realizes what the rabbi could do, would make a success of the Jew. is hministry, and perform all the rab binical duties expected of the rabbi o! today. But the poor rabbi who is inly human must fall short in the estima tion of his congregants, so long as present day conditions continue to prevail. Only a layman could find the time and possess the gift for all sorts of duties, and do them well; but the rabbi never. Justifiable, sane criticism, it teems, would be ever welcomed by the rabbi, who is ordinarily a gentleman, awarv of human limitations and imperfec tions. But if the truth were told, ho many are sympathetic enough to state their criticism in a constructive man ner? How many of the querulous an intelligent ennough to offer helpful suggestions? And how many have the courage of their conviction to speaW out openly above board? In tne las. analysis, their grumblings are but meally mouthings and frothy words. At any rate, whether the faultfind ings be due to "constitutional" fail ings, to temperamental differences ov to the character of the rabbi's worV exposing it to the public gaze; or, again, whether it be due to the faulty undepartmentalized nature of religious ministration of today, the outstanding seamy side of the profession is tbe everlasting carping criticism, the chronic complaints, which to the sen sitive nature of the minister it gall ing beyond measure, and at times be comes so unbearable as to reach th limit of human endurance. Is it not strange that the rabbi, of all mortals, can do no right?