What does ‘increased seminary enrollment’ really mean?
In what must be an apocryphal story, a scientist trained grasshoppers to jump on command. Then, he continued the experiment, tearing off their legs, one by one. He found that without legs the grasshoppers did not jump on command. The conclusion? If you tear off their legs, grasshoppers become deaf.
A recent story in The Forward reports increased or steady enrollment in the liberal movement seminaries (Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist). In itself, it is cause for positive comment – but not celebration. It is not as some are touting, a reversal of a decades-long trend.
This conclusion is reminiscent of New York City’s Mayor Rudy Giulani and his “broken windows” approach to the law: which was heralded as the reason for a dramatic decrease in serious crime. And yet, upon further investigation it became clear that a number of factors contributed to this new dynamic: a significant increase in the police force, a national trend of lower crime rates, better economic conditions in the city and perhaps most of all – the legalization of abortion 20 years before.
While this did not stop Mayor Giuliani from taking credit – he was after all part of the solution – but only part. Changes are not easily quantifiable. It takes a ”perfect storm” of factors to coalesce into cultural shifts.
After more than a decade of decline, we have one year of increased enrollments at the only remaining seminary in each movement. But, are the increases due to movement efforts, or is it more likely that a combination of factors conspires to give us a “false positive?
- This after movement seminaries have been closed for lack of students. There are now only single options for aspiring rabbinical students to be ordained within a movement.
- Standards for admission have been changed – and it is now far easier to be accepted into a movement seminary program.
- The political and religious attitudes of the incoming students are far less “traditional” than earlier enrollments, connoting that each movement is moving to a much more flexible and liberal dynamic towards observance and commitment.
- And, perhaps most revealing – traditionally, the increase of antisemitism and overt antisemitic acts has historically prompted a rise in affiliation and attendance in our institutions.
Of greater concern is the implication that the condition of American Judaism is improving – and the increase in seminary enrollment proves this. Whether our condition is improving is unknown. Our condition is changing – and this is neither good nor bad, it just “is.”
Indeed, if the previous decade has proven anything, it is that movement seminaries wield exponentially less influence and control than they once did. There are now alternatives to traditional ordination: non-denominational institutions and internet programs have increased the number of clergy (and in some cases, created clergy who are more knowledgeable than graduates of movement institutions.)
What will determine whether these “changes” are positive? How we as a community adapt and integrate them into our community. Are established Jewish institutions flexible enough to incorporate what is, with what is coming? Or have we become “deaf” because we choose to be?
