Tours of historic Touro Synagogue in Newport, R.I. to restart, now led by N.Y. congregation
Congregation Shearith Israel brought the
Get Rhode Map
A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Members of both congregations confirmed earlier this week there is an overlap in membership between the foundation's board and Congregation Jeshuat Israel.
Advertisement
Louis M. Solomon, president of Congregation Shearith Israel, said Tuesday that because Congregation Jeshuat Israel could not commit to returning items it allegedly took from the synagogue, he would not provide the foundation access to the building for the tours.
Instead, Congregation Shearith Israel will now offer tours of the synagogue, a National Historic Site, beginning Friday, according to the
'Shearith Israel is pleased that tours will be continuing,' Solomon wrote in an email. 'It was always our intention to do so – just not with [the foundation] and its controlling entity CJI until the Court decides whether CJI has wrongfully misappropriated religious objects from Touro Synagogue.'
Related
:
Advertisement
Solomon added Monday and Tuesday were Jewish holidays, which 'both precluded tours on those days but set us back a day in getting an excellent replacement.'
According to the website, tours are now scheduled for various times between Friday and June 23, and a handful of times in July, although additional dates are coming soon.
'We will have even greater coverage after the near term,' Solomon wrote.
Registration is required for the approximately 45-minute tours, which are free of charge 'but donations of any amount are appreciated,' the website states.
Built in 1763, the synagogue has long stood as a symbol of religious freedom in the United States, especially after President George Washington visited Newport following Rhode Island's ratification of the US Constitution in 1790, and assured the Jewish congregation in a letter that the newly formed country would give 'to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.'
After the synagogue foundation was barred from the building, the not-for-profit organization said it has been providing presentations of the synagogue's history in the nearby Loeb Visitors Center and in Patriots' Park.
Despite the dispute over tour access, the synagogue has remained open to the public for prayer and worship during services, according to Paul Tobak, president of Congregation Ahavath Israel, the synagogue's new tenant congregation.
Material from previous Globe stories was used in this report.
Christopher Gavin can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
We have learnt nothing from the treatment of Alfred Dreyfus
On a winter morning in 1895, Captain Alfred Dreyfus was brought to the Ecole Militaire in Paris. Convicted of treason, he was sentenced to deportation and life imprisonment; his epaulettes were torn off, his sword broken, and he was paraded before a jeering mob of onlookers. Dreyfus was Jewish, and virulent anti-Semitism within the army and wider society was central to his conviction on flimsy evidence. Despite a campaign by his supporters, including the novelist Emile Zola, Dreyfus was convicted a second time. He was not fully exonerated until 1906. At the end of An Officer and a Spy, his 2013 novel about the Dreyfus Affair, Robert Harris added an epilogue in which the newly exonerated Major Dreyfus meets General Picquart, the minister of war, to ask for promotion to lieutenant-colonel – the rank he should have achieved had it not been for his wrongful conviction. Picquart refuses: 'It is politically impossible.' Last week, the lower house of the French parliament unanimously approved a bill put forward by the former prime minister Gabriel Attal to grant Dreyfus retrospective promotion to the rank of brigadier general. Attal made it clear that the gesture was symbolic. 'The anti-Semitism that targeted Alfred Dreyfus is not in the distant past,' the legislation noted. 'Today's acts of hatred remind us that the fight is still ongoing.' But over this belated promotion there hovers the question that attends all symbolic gestures of political regret. Public acts of contrition are not a new phenomenon. In 1174, King Henry II did penance for the murder of Thomas Becket, entering Canterbury barefoot, where he was beaten by the attendant bishops and monks, and spent the night in prayer at Becket's tomb. Such acts might seem theatrical, but they do at least acknowledge that contrition needs to take some tangible form. Words are not enough. This is something that modern politicians struggle to grasp. Their enthusiasm for making grand, frictionless expressions of regret for historical wrongs (the slave trade; the Amritsar massacre) seems to have grown as their appetite for taking responsibility for injustices that have occurred on their own watch (the Post Office and infected-blood scandals, to name just two) has dwindled. Lord Carrington's resignation as foreign secretary in 1982, over Argentina's invasion of the Falkland Islands, may have been the last recorded example of a politician resigning from a sense of noblesse oblige. Since then, we have become more accustomed to the spectacle of our legislators clinging like bindweed to office, until the glyphosate of public opinion finally withers them. In 2009, the then foreign-office minister Lord Malloch-Brown artlessly admitted that 'British politicians don't know how to say sorry'. But they've upped their game since then, perfecting a virtuoso repertoire of blame-shifting, quasi-apologies ('I'm sorry you feel that way') and rhetorical flourishes that imply change, while retreating into impenetrable thickets of administrative complexity when it comes to reparation. Back in Paris, perhaps Dreyfus's promotion, long after it might have done him any good, may bring some comfort to his descendants. Beyond that, will this gesture deter a single act of anti-Semitic aggression? Or advance in the slightest degree the universal proposition that the systematic tormenting of a particular group of people – in whatever guise it may occur – is profoundly reprehensible. And if not, what on earth is the point? Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
American Military News
5 hours ago
- American Military News
Trump escalates battle with Columbia University, threatens accreditation
The Trump administration has launched a process to try to strip Columbia University of its accreditation over a finding the school had failed to meaningfully protect Jewish students from harassment. On Wednesday, the U.S. Education Department notified the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, Columbia's accreditor, that the school was in violation of federal anti-discrimination laws and accordingly does not meet the commission's standards. The government issued the finding May 22. 'Just as the Department of Education has an obligation to uphold federal anti-discrimination law, university accreditors have an obligation to ensure member institutions abide by their standards,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. A rep for the accreditor confirmed it had received the letter that afternoon but declined to comment further. The threat to Columbia's accreditation is a serious one. Most federal funding, including financial aid, hinges on a school being accredited. While it appears that only accreditors could revoke Columbia's status, the accrediting entities themselves have to be recognized by the Education Department. 'Columbia is aware of the concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights today to our accreditor, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education and we have addressed those concerns directly with Middle States,' said Columbia spokesperson Virginia Lam Abrams. 'Columbia is deeply committed to combating antisemitism on our campus. We take this issue seriously and are continuing to work with the federal government to address it.' The dramatic escalation of the Trump administration's assault on Columbia came as the New York City-based Ivy League school is negotiating with federal agencies over $400 million in canceled grants and contracts, mainly impacting medical research. The university has made various concessions to the government — including more oversight of Middle Eastern studies and ways of cracking down on pro-Palestinian protests — that have so far proved insufficient to restore the funding. McMahon's statement threatened the federal funding that Columbia receives through student financial aid. In a press release, the Education Department said accreditors must take 'appropriate action' against schools such as Columbia to come into compliance within a specified period. 'Accreditors have an enormous public responsibility as gatekeepers of federal student aid. They determine which institutions are eligible for federal student loans and Pell Grants,' McMahon said. 'We look forward to the commission keeping the department fully informed of actions taken to ensure Columbia's compliance with accreditation standards.' Columbia goes through the accreditation process about every 10 years and was recently being evaluated by the president of Johns Hopkins University, according to Stand Columbia Society, a group of faculty and alumni — who as of last month said the undertaking was 'going very smoothly.' 'Accreditation was never designed to be political. In fact, one of the things that has made accreditation so successful was how the apolitical and obscure machinery of quality control hummed in the background,' Stand Columbia wrote in a newsletter last month. 'But now, for the first time in a hundred years, that backstage machinery is being pulled into the political spotlight. Where it goes from here is uncertain. What's clear is that accreditation is no longer something most people can afford to ignore.' Columbia became the epicenter of campus protests against Israel's military campaign in Gaza when students pitched an encampment last spring calling on their administrators to divest from the war. The demonstration came to a head when a smaller group of protesters occupied Hamilton Hall, prompting the university to call in the NYPD and make mass arrests. More recently, dozens of students took over Butler Library to protest the detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia graduate student, and what they see as Columbia's role in his arrest by federal immigration authorities in early March. Pro-Palestinian students and their allies have accused Columbia and the Trump administration of conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. ___ © 2025 New York Daily News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Axios
6 hours ago
- Axios
Tensions erupt in Congress over vote to condemn Boulder attack
What would otherwise be an uncontroversial congressional vote to denounce the Boulder attack is devolving into a contentious partisan feud, Axios has learned. Why it matters: Language praising ICE and labeling "Free Palestine" an "antisemitic slogan" are sparking fury from some Democrats, who see the provisions as a GOP maneuver to force them into a difficult vote. "It's sheer politics," said one senior House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer candid thoughts about a sensitive vote. A second senior House Democrat told Axios: "It's unfortunate that they're using a serious antisemitic terrorist attack as a wedge opportunity to divide Democrats. They knew what they were doing adding something like that in there." "Nice little catch to put Democrats on the board," vented a third House Democrat. State of play: At least 15 people and one dog were injured last week in Boulder, Colo., when a suspect allegedly yelled "Free Palestine" as he threw Molotov cocktails at demonstrators advocating the release of hostages held by Hamas. Rep. Gabe Evans (R-Colo.), along with his fellow Colorado Republicans, have introduced a three-page resolution denouncing the attack, which is scheduled to be voted on next week. The measure labels "Free Palestine" an "antisemitic slogan that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people." "It's more than unfortunate," the second senior House Democrat said of that clause. "It's very f***ed up." Between the lines: A senior House progressive, asked by Axios whether some of the more pro-Palestinian House Democrats will have an issue with the language in the measure, replied, "Yes." Senior aides to several other progressive House Democrats said their bosses were still mulling how to vote on the bill as of Saturday — with some acknowledging that it will be difficult either way. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), asked about the measure on Friday, told Axios: "I haven't seen the resolution yet." "It's being worked," the first senior House Democrat told Axios of party leadership's internal deliberations around the bill. Yes, but: The language is not likely to stop some of the most pro-Israel House Democrats from voting for the legislation. The second House Democrat who spoke on the condition of anonymity told Axios, "If there's a resolution condemning Boulder, I'm going to vote for that." Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) said "Free Palestine" should "mean liberating Palestinians from the oppression of Hamas. Instead, it has come to signify something far more sinister: the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state." "Free Palestine certainly isn't good Shabbos," is how Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), a Jewish progressive, put it. Zoom in: The "Free Palestine" language is not the only wrinkle for Democrats in the measure — it also expresses "gratitude" to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for "protecting the homeland." That's another provision that some Democratic offices have raised objections to in discussions with leadership, multiple sources told Axios. Democrats have faced rising tensions with ICE in recent months as the agency has carried out the Trump administration's deportation campaign. Zoom out: This would be far from the first time House Democrats have been divided on a vote around antisemitism and Israel. The caucus split almost evenly on the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which, to the frustration of Democrats, codified a definition of antisemitism that included some criticisms of Israel. They have also frequently been divided on votes around supporting and providing aid to Israel amid their ongoing war with Hamas. Democrats believe a bipartisan measure condemning the Boulder attack — introduced by Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and co-sponsored by Reps. Jeff Crank (R-Colo.) and Jeff Hurd (R-Colo.) — should be the one going to a vote.
