tradition was to create rituals and advocate a way of life that could compete
with the allures of reformist movements. The original advocate of this point of
view was Samson Raphael Hirsch, who created a form of Orthodoxy called
Neo-Orthodoxy. In some sense, Hirsch’s Neo-Orthodoxy was a more proactive
version of Mendelssohn’s Haskalah. Like Mendelssohn, Hirsch advocated
changes in Jewish life while leaving the observance of Jewish law intact.
Moreover, while defining religious obligations as eternal and immutable,
Hirsch, like Mendelssohn, believed that the “externals” of Judaism – lan-
guage, dress, education – were subject to the spirit of the age. To combat
reform, Hirsch advocated a service with greater decorum, and a rabbi who was
well versed in rabbinic scholarship but also had a strong secular education and
could deliver a sermon in the vernacular on a topic of contemporary interest.
Hirsch’s Neo-Orthodoxy had an aim that was similar to that of Reform
and Positive-Historical Judaism: to maintain a commitment to Judaism
while allowing Jews to prove themselves worthy of emancipation and admis-
sion to the ranks of the German nation. Like Reform and Positive-Historical
Judaism, Neo-Orthodoxy regarded the balance between tradition and inno-
vation as an either/or proposition. Unlike Geiger and other Reform Jews,
Hirsch simply believed that religious observance did not preclude emancipa-
tion, and that an acceptable level of acculturation did not preclude complete
observance of Jewish law. Like Geiger and Frankel, Hirsch drew a sharp line
between the essential and non-essential dimensions of Judaism, regarding
the former as immutable and the latter as entirely malleable. Thus, for
example, Hirsch regarded changes in language and dress, and a taboo on sec-
ular education, as non-essential, and advocated them as wholeheartedly as
Geiger and Frankel.
The triumph of Reform Judaism in Germany during the nineteenth cen-
tury presented Neo-Orthodox Jews with a quandary. Until 1873, Prussia and
most other German states allowed only one officially recognized Jewish com-
munity in each city or town. This meant that in towns where the majority of
Jews embraced Reform, Orthodox Jews found themselves forced to live in a
situation where communal institutions such as the synagogue and school
operated according to Reform Judaism – which they deemed unacceptable.
Two responses appeared among German Orthodox Jews. Some, led by
Hirsch, attempted to secede from the main Jewish community and form a
separate Orthodox Jewish community. In 1876, when a new law of secession
allowed Jews to form multiple communities, Hirsch and his congregation
Adath Jeshurun seceded from the Jewish community of Frankfurt. Some of
his Orthodox colleagues, notably Selig Bamberger, rejected this course of
action, noting that secession, while ensuring perhaps a more wholesome reli-
gious life, threatened Jewish unity – which they regarded as more important.
For Bamberger, the proper course of action was to secure the ability to observe
properly within a Reform community.
The age of enlightenment and emancipation, 1750–1880 161