126 Selected Reform Responsa

here in the Shulhan Arukh, seemed to reveal a violation of gov­ernment decree. Therefore, in the Shulchan Arukh printed in Vilna, at the word“compel” there is an asterisk pointing to a footnote which reads,“by means of the government.” This, of course, did not mean that the Jewish communities ever called on the Russian government to enforce this religious obligation. The footnote was added either by the censor, or else was added to disarm the censor, and to say that the community would not use the forbidden instrument of the herem.

It is clear, then, that, except for the time when Italian com­munities called for government aid in collecting taxes, the Jewish communities did not call upon secular courts to help them col­lect charitable or religious pledges. Jewish law considered that secular law could not validly deal with charitable pledges. And, in general, resort to gentile courts was held to be a sin.

The action of the congregation referred to, therefore, is con­trary both to the letter and the spirit of Jewish legal tradition.

Synagogue Contribution

from a Criminal Current Reform Responsa(Cincinnati , 1969),#14

Solomon B. Freehof

QUESTION: A man known or reputed to be a gangster wishes to make a contribution to the Temple. Should his gift be accepted? The question may also arise as to whether a plaque be put up in appreciation of his gift as is done with other generous donors. (From M.A.K.)

ANSWER: There is considerable discussion in the legal literature which relates to the question raised here. The chain of halakhic reasoning begins with the verse(in Deuteronomy 23:19):“Thou