This week I was fortunate enough to take part in a Seder meal with a scholars program I’m affiliated with on campus. Present at the dinner was a Jewish rabbi who detailed its overall historical importance as well as explained the purpose of individual foods and ingredients involved in the dinner. Overall, it was a fantastic experience. As a Christian, it was neat to not only see the religious importance of the dinner but also the historical significance to the Jewish people. While Judaism and Christianity are two different religions, their history is greatly intertwined. The fulfillment of God’s promise to the Jews to deliver them from Egypt is as significant to the Christian faith as it is the Jewish faith. While I may not experience the same emotional or cultural attachment to the history of Passover that the Jewish people do, I still find the fulfillment of God’s promises to be worthy of praise. Learning and understanding the intermingling of the two religions is certainly an area of history worthy of academic research.
However, upon finishing the dinner, the rabbi opened up the table to questions concerning not only the dinner but also Judaism in general. After some discussion, one student finally asked, “Why do the Jewish people not believe in Jesus as the Messiah?” At this point, other students around the table made noises that were akin to those made when witnessing a horrible injury or an insult gone too far. Certainly he wasn’t going to ask a religious professional invited to an academic function to explain himself, was he? Certainly a student wasn’t looking to take away knowledge from this event!
It is at this point that I would like to turn this column out of the field of religion and into academia. This horrified response from the crowd was a product of the never-ending quest of higher education to promote “academic freedom.” I put academic freedom in quotations, because it is anything but free and open. The world of academia no longer believes in exploring the extreme, the offensive or the traditional. We have a set list of “inclusive” subjects that we are allowed to discuss in public so that we can promote a singular viewpoint and ensure that no one’s feelings get hurt. What is disappointing is that we often learn the most about ourselves, the way we think and the reasoning behind our beliefs when we discuss items that are offensive or out of the norm.
For example, there is definite educational gain and benefit from knowing why the Jewish culture rejected Jesus as the Messiah. That rejection spawned two separate religions that influenced world history for years to come. By receiving an answer to that question, I not only gain valuable insight to the reasoning of one of the world’s oldest cultures, but I am also challenged to examine my own beliefs in Christianity. Hearing the Rabbi’s response would increase our basic knowledge base, promote critical reasoning to see how it influenced the world and force us to reconsider what we already know and believe. Are these not a few of the basic functions of higher education? This isn’t an experience that could only be had by Christians. Someone of any background can undergo this same process. Yet we are afraid to talk about why Jews rejected Jesus because someone might feel judged, offended or hurt.
The simple truth of the matter is that people aren’t always out to offend you. If you hear about a different perspective you should not meet it with disgust and shame. If this is the case, then you are practicing ignorance, not wisdom. If you are an administrator or professor who practices this, then you really do not believe in spreading knowledge. You believe in spreading your perspective. This is OK to an extent if you are willing to openly acknowledge that fact. But please, let’s drop the moniker of “academic freedom.” It’s not freedom if you limit yourself and others to a certain spectrum of ideas.
— Hunter Tipton is a senior in microbiology. He can be reached at [email protected].
