20
THE CHRONICLE
Daniel Breslauer
adds, “The
academic setting provides the
only arena in which Jews can
speak to one another and learn
from one another without the
institutional baggage and preju-
dices that have divided the
Jewish community. This value-
neutral arena allows Jews to
interact with texts and tradi-
tions that come from several
different sources without fear of
authoritarianism or ideology.”
Kraus
goes further in saying
“
Jewish Studies in secular insti-
tutions seeks to explain
Judaism, not promote Judaism.
However, as academics, we
must communicate a love for
our field and the material we
study. Moreover, encouraging
people to critically examine the
Jewish experience will ultimate-
ly enhance the quality and
quantity of Jewish life.”
Langer
values the academy’s
greater emphasis on research; at
the same time she notes,
“
engaged study of religion
allows for a different set of
questions than those encouraged
by the scientific methodologies of
the academy. This is reflected in
the dearth of study of Judaism
as a religion and the traditions
of emphasis on either historical
or critical text studies. There
are actually significant numbers
of academic positions where
departments are looking for this
more engaged and religious ori-
ented approach – and the
academy itself is not producing
this sort of scholar.”
Samuelson
cautions that those
who go into Jewish studies now
and get their training from aca-
demic programs in Judaic
studies may have a more
peripheral connection to the
Jewish community. “In fact,
more and more people studying
Jewish studies are non-Jews, so
the Jewish identity of the field
is becoming increasingly less
connected with anything Jewish.
Most academic study has nothing
really to do with commitment in
any form. The reason it looked
different in Jewish studies in aca-
demia was because the first
generations of those who went
into Jewish studies did it through
the seminary setting and came
out connected to a Jewish com-
munity. The goal of the academy
is research, studying, and teach-
ing. It has no vested commitment
to anything else. It certainly has
no vested commitment to reli-
gion (an outgrowth of its
rebellion against its Christian ori-
gins, resulting in indifference or
hostility, depending upon the
university) and it certainly has no
vested commitment to the Jewish
people. An academic who is
actively Jewish and in the field of
Jewish studies, in fact, compro-
mises his or her status within the
academy as an ‘objective’ scholar.
The seminary is no less commit-
ted to Jewish learning – it is an
inherent Jewish value, but the
function of study is knowledge in
the service of God and commit-
ment to the Jewish people. So for
a person who wants to do studies
from a faith commitment, there’s
no comparison between the semi-
nary and the academy.”
Saperstein
sees a symbiotic
relationship, whereby “rabbini-
cal seminaries provide the best
general graduate level exposure
to the classical texts of Judaism
for students who may decide to
continue in a specific discipline
much more narrowly construed,
and career academics provide
continuing education opportu-
nities for rabbis.”
Seltzer
acknowledges that while “the
new generation of scholars in
Jewish studies have a solid
grounding in their academic
discipline and perhaps more
flexible career opportunities,
studying in a liberal rabbinical
seminary provides a broad-rang-
ing and deep acquaintance with
Judaica that is very difficult for
a graduate student in a secular
university to obtain.”
Kraus
warns that Jewish semi-
naries and the academy may
have a proclivity to become iso-
lated from each other, which
should be proactively avoided;
his hope is to see secular aca-
demics teaching occasionally at
the seminary and seminary fac-
ulty having stints at secular
institutions. “The rabbi is the
chief mediator between esoteric
Jewish learning and the intellec-
tual and spiritual needs of
his/her community,” says
Ruderman
. “
But in order to
perform this role, rabbis need
to have more contact with the
most significant Jewish learning
of the academy, and so do rab-
binical students. I would like
to see more connections made
between these separate sites of
Jewish learning.”
Samuelson
points to a major
study on seminaries in the
United States of about twenty
years ago, which suggested that
seminaries be located next to
major universities – an impetus
that situated HUC-JIR’s newer
stateside campuses adjacent to
USC in Los Angeles and NYU
in New York. He and others
suggest faculty exchanges and
seminars as well as sabbatical vis-
iting lectureships at HUC-JIR
with greater regularity.
Morgan
believes that more of such sys-
tematic ties “would encourage
academics to give more thought
professionally, in terms of their
own work, to the life of liberal
Judaism in America and the world.
For historians teaching modern
Judaism, for example, if they had
closer ties with the life of liberal,
Reform Judaism, they might pay
more attention to it in their own
thinking and teach with a differ-
ent outlook in their classes.”
Signer
concludes, “There
should be a synergy between
the academy and Jewish semi-
naries, which correctly concern
themselves with both
Wissenschaft
(
knowledge) and
Bildung
(
character formation).
Most of the younger scholars in
the academy are seeking to find
profound meaning in their
Jewish scholarship. I hope that
rabbis would become their con-
tinuing students.”
Daniel Breslauer, N ‘69
F
ROM THE
S
EMINARY TO
THE
A
CADEMY
:
R
ABBINICAL
A
LUMNI
T
EACHING AT
U
NIVERSITIES
(
continued from page 19)