Dear Rabbi Lamm: Representatives of the Synagogue Council of America who are serving on an interfaith commission on marriage and family have come up with a proposed statement on sex education, containing guidelines for groups responsible for the development of school and community programs in sex education. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed statement. We would be most grateful if you were to let us have the benefit of your thoughts regarding this statement. A particularly difficult problem is the extent to which religious values, “common” or otherwise, are to be injected into the suggested programs. What are the criteria by which we are to judge a proper and an improper intrusion of religious teachings into the public school curriculum? Your advice regarding this question, as well as other aspects of the statement, will be of great value to our Executive Committee determining policy on this issue. With many thanks and warm personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, Rabbi Henry Siegman Executive Vice President

Dear Henry: I am not normally the type that writes fan letters, but I received today from the R.C.A. a copy of your letter of March 26th to The Village Voice. It was more than a letter; it was a classical essay. I cherished reading every single word. You have my unbounded admiration for having said what you did so forthrightly and so well. Cordially yours, Rabbi Norman Lamm. Voice, Published weekly (Thursday) by The Village Voice, Inc.Dan Wolf, president, Edwin Fancher, secretary-treasurerSHERIDAN SQUARE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10014**March 26, 1970****A Question of Truth**Dear Sir:Simple ignorance might explain why a Michael Zwerin (“Outside: London," March 5 and 12) would not know how Israel voted in the United Nations on the subject of South Africa. To assert, however, as he does, that “Abba Eban always voted against the U.N. resolutions condemning South Africa" when the very reverse is in fact the case (Israel has repeatedly voted in the U.N. to condemn South Africa and in favor of economic sanctions, even though national self-interest would have dictated at least an abstention), is to be guilty not of ignorance, but of a deliberate lie, and reveals Zwerin, or his Israeli anti-Israel friends, or both, as malicious persons intent on defaming Israel and Jews.This maliciousness is a disease that is regrettably as common as it is unsightly—a Jewish self-hatred born of an embarrassment and an inability to come to terms with the “tribalism” of Jewish faith and Israeli nationalism.That this phenomenon is indeed a disease and not a noble universalist impulse is evident from the fact that generally the very same people who find Israeli nationalism “racist,” “tribal,” and “parochial" are entirely uncritical in their support of the nationalisms of Third World Asian and African countries, which are invariably described as “progressive,” “revolutionary,” and strangely compatible with their universalism.One is stunned by the depth and ugliness of the pathology. Zwerin’s London h…

Dear Shmaryahu: I trust that you and your wife are well and have spent a pleasant holiday season. Within the next few weeks I hope to begin working on the paper that was assigned to me for the forthcoming conference in December. However, my method is to begin worrying about a month or two before I begin working. My worry now focuses on exactly what is expected of me. I am writing to you first, in the hope that you can refresh my memory as to the contexts of our conversation in Geneva, and second to find out what you are planning so that we can possibly coordinate our efforts as to style and extent.Now, the first question: were our papers expected to represent a consensus for both groups or just a proposal for the Jewish group? I am almost certain the answer is the latter, but I want to be sure.Second, is this to be a scholarly paper with documentation, etc., or an attempt at phrasing a proposal that, while it may emerge from research, will in itself be rather simple and straightforward?Furthermore, about how long do you expect your paper to be?I have not heard yet from any of our friends, either here or in Geneva, as to where we are expected to meet in December, but wherever it is, I certainly look forward to renewing our friendship when we meet again.Do let me hear from you, and please convey warmest good wishes from my wife and myself to your wife and to you.Cordially,RABBI NORMAN LAMMNL:

Dear Norman: I write now to ask you to hold the dates of February 11–12 for a most important intimate meeting in Washington, D.C. You are one of 10 persons to whom I have written. I have spoken with some of you personally about this. I will be calling each of you. Now, however, I only want to alert you to the date and describe briefly what it is all about. As a result of some long and detailed conversations and plans which I have been having with a few key persons on the executive staff of the United Presbyterian Church of the United States, we have finally agreed to hold an intensive, intimate conversation on Middle East questions in Washington, D.C., beginning 4:00 p.m., Monday, February 11 and going through luncheon the following day. They are inviting 10 of their top people, executive and lay, and I am doing the same from the American Jewish religious community. There will only be 20 persons at the sessions. Included is their list of invitees. Three basic topics will be on the table: The Third World perceptions of Israel as an imperialist nation now creeping into the thinking of some elements of the religious community; The Palestinians; Framing a religious response to the Middle East. Each of these agenda items is now being drawn up in a more detailed fashion and will soon be sent to you for your further consideration. I mention them now, however, so you will see the general areas of our conversations. Some of you have seen their preliminary study document: “Peoples and Conflict in the Middle East.” Some of us were asked to comment on it in its initial draft form. Since then, it has been circulated throughout the church community and is now being evaluated and possibly revised. Moreover, leadership in the Presbyterian church is anxious to meet for in-depth conversations with a few of their counterparts in the Jewish religious community. We are pleased to be able to help bring this meeting about, though unfortunately we have no funds to even defray your expens…

Dear Friend: At the outset I ask your pardon for not personalizing this letter. It is going to each of the participants in the Bellagio Colloquium, and I did not want to hold it up any more than is necessary. I am pleased to send you a copy of the statement that was composed by Rev. Krister Stendahl on the basis of the several workgroup reports and the general discussion. We expect to have this statement available as a printed brochure. If you would like to order quantities of this brochure, or to make it available for larger distribution through institutional channels, please let me know what number you might need and I will inform you what cost, if any, is involved. I have already heard directly from many of you, and would urge everyone to let me have your impressions of the Colloquium, your suggestions for follow up, and information about yourself – particularly about your activities that relate in some way to the concerns that were discussed in Bellagio. On the basis of these communications, we hope to circulate an informal newsletter to the Bellagio “alumni,” so that the sense of living community that was fashioned during these five days on the shores of Lake Como will be kept alive. We also hope to have available before too long the three workgroup reports, and we are discussing with foundations the possibility of publishing the entire proceedings. I will keep you informed of the progress we make. Looking forward to hearing from you, and with warmest good wishes, sincerely, Henry Siegman

Dear Norman: I was delighted, upon my return from vacation, to come back to the wonderful news of your designation as President of Yeshiva University. I congratulate Yeshiva University on the wisdom of its choice; it augurs well for the future of traditional Judaism in America. I do not say these things lightly. Having been deeply concerned about certain trends within the Orthodox community in recent years, and having some sense from where I sit of their potential for divisiveness, I see your appointment as President of Yeshiva University as a source of great hope. I join with your many friends and admirers in expressing to you warmest good wishes for success and satisfaction as you undertake this great and heavy burden. You may be assured not only of my good wishes but also of my readiness to offer whatever help I can. In friendship and with warm regards, Sincerely, Rabbi Henry Siegman Executive Vice President