Modern Judaism

Modern Judaism 21.3 (2001) 199-215

Beyond Grégoire:
A Third Discourse on Jews and the French

Lawrence Scott Lerner

While recent scholarship has provided evidence of the enduring solidarity of acculturated French Jews during the nineteenth century, the term "ideology of emancipation" has increasingly found favor. ¹ This umbrella term, however, may obscure more than it illuminates. It is generally invoked to describe how nineteenth-century Jews did not merely accept the terms of their emancipation, but internalized the values underlying them. Yet what were these terms, these values? Because the rights of citizenship were decreed by the Constituent Assembly without conditions, the only terms particular to the Jews came in the form of expectations for reformation and integration. And here, as Jacob Katz observed long ago, the "donor and recipient of Jewish emancipation" were not in agreement; "conflicting hopes . . . augur[ed] ill for a smooth implementation." ² The significance of these differences became a matter of energetic debate during the bicentennial of the French Revolution. Returning to the primary texts, certain scholars found grounds to denounce non-Jewish emancipators, foremost among them Abbé Grégoire, for seeking to eradicate Jewish particularism through the vehicle of emancipation. ³ Whether one accepts such claims or finds the "republican" rebuttal more persuasive, ⁴ it has become more difficult to disregard the imperialistic application of universalist ideals, or the desire of the most prominent emancipator to see the Jews converted.

In nineteenth-century France, conflicting visions for the future of Jewish life persisted even among those favorably inclined toward integration. For this reason, examination of public discourses proves more helpful than attention to a single ideology of emancipation. The discourses on Jews and the nation that dominated the century emerged in conjunction with the Enlightenment and the essentialist opposition that developed in reaction to it. In their most extreme forms, each of these rival forces encouraged the elimination of Jewish particularism, though by opposite means. The first, caught between its own commitment to universal rights and visions of a united national family, conveyed the hope that the Jew within the (French) Man would ultimately be effaced. The second, insisting upon the impossibility of integration, [End Page 199] advocated the physical separation of Jews from society. Grégoire, in particular, launched the first discourse; ⁵ the adversaries of equal rights in the Revolutionary era, ⁶ followed by racial anti-Semites a century later, ⁷ gave voice to the second.

From the beginning of the public discourse on Jews and the nation in the 1780s and 1790s, however, programs for integration aiming to preserve Jewish particularism--including and surpassing the long-term survival of the religion--also emerged. Principal contributors included the Count of Mirabeau and Claude-Antoine Thiéry as well as Zalkind Hourwitz, Berr Isaac Berr, and Isaiah Berr Bing. ⁸ Despite variations in approach and emphasis, their vision constituted a "third discourse" insofar as it advocated equal rights but also sought to ensure the continuation, in an adapted form, of a distinct Jewish life. After 1791, with the exception of the Sanhedrin period, all these discourses were no longer principally directed at influencing legislation. Social attitudes, expectations, pressures, and incentives became most important. In an environment that increasingly invited radical assimilation, the third discourse played a crucial role of resistance and defense while it affirmed many of the values it shared with more mainstream liberalism. If, in the wake of the Dreyfus Affair, writers like Bernard Lazare, André Spire, and Edmond Fleg explicitly promoted a view of Jewish particularism coexistent with French identity, their predecessors advanced this view by more indirect means. ⁹

The question of rights and reforms relative to Jews was unfamiliar and complex when the Royal Society for Arts and Sciences in Metz announced it for the essay contest of 1787. Such concours were an institution in France, and entries came from many quarters and frequently numbered in the hundreds of pages. In publicizing the topic--"Are there means of rendering the Jews more useful and happier in France?"--the Mercure de France hailed it as...