American Jewish Archives Journal, Volume 64, Numbers 1 & 2

and excess demands on their labor, Raphall emphatically contended that the
Bible sanctioned slave property. 17
Raphall’s words created a sensation. Two weeks later, he gave his sermon as
a speech before members of the Democratic Party and the pro-South American
Society for Promotion of National Unity. In attendance were advocates of
national reconciliation in harmony with Southern demands, including banker
August Belmont and prominent Jews from Richmond, Montgomery, and New
Orleans. Artist/inventor Samuel B. Morse presided. At the speech’s conclusion,
merchant Hiram Ketcham collected funds to disseminate Raphall’s message.
Southern sympathizers dispersed the discourse throughout the nation. Dr.
Bernard Illowy of Baltimore, highly respected for his biblical expertise, endorsed
Raphall. Three New York newspapers printed the complete text, and the New
York Times published lengthy excerpts. The Richmond Daily Dispatch termed
Raphall’s talk, “the most powerful arguments delivered,” while Rabbi Simon
Tuska of Mobile stated that Raphall’s sermon contained “the most forceful
arguments in justification of the slavery of the African race.” 18
Raphall’s words were not, however, in harmony with most of his Christian
peers. In 1856 a poll of twenty-five “prominent clergy” in New York found
that twenty-three backed Fremont, the Republican candidate for president.
If Raphall’s remarks were exemplary, this was largely among Jewish spiritual
leaders. 19
Jews and Antislavery
Raphall’s sermon did not go unanswered. David Einhorn of Baltimore,
one of the most prominent leaders of the Reform movement, issued a lengthy
rebuttal. Isaac Mayer Wise, while no friend to either Republicans or abolitionists,
found fault with Raphall’s biblical exegesis. Rev. Isaac Leeser of Philadelphia
disagreed with the contention that the black race descended from Ham. Michael
Heilprin of Brooklyn, a Jewish Polish Hungarian revolutionary refugee, penned
the most powerful response. A highly learned figure, well versed in modern
biblical criticism, Helprin originally exposed his political allegiance when he
spoke at an antislavery Democratic rally in Philadelphia. 20
Writing for the abolitionist-leaning Tribune, Heilprin expressed regret that
Raphall’s “sacrilegious” ideas had not vanished among the “scum.” The morals
of slavery’s defenders were “depraved,” and the minds of their “mammonworshiping
followers” were “debauched.” Fearing that Raphall’s speech might
persuade the uninformed that the Hebrew Bible condoned slavery, he ruthlessly
attacked Raphall’s reasoning, citing eminent German Jewish scholars. Heilprin,
in effect, challenged the literalist, ahistorical Orthodox approach to Jewish texts.
He contended that Raphall misconstrued the biblical word for servant. The
word Raphall translated as “slave” also designated “court officers” and “royal
ambassadors.” He ridiculed the fallacious use of the story of Noah and his son:
8 • American Jewish Archives Journal