Jewish Theology in Feminist Perspective*

Judith Plaskow

Jewish is not an academic field in the same sense that feminist history or literature is. Rather, it is a triple outsider to Jewish studies: first, because the place of theology in the academy is complex and controversial; second, because theology has never had an esteemed role within ; and third, because it is feminist. In this chapter, I explore the implications of each of these aspects of marginality, the first two for the sake of laying to rest shibboleths that might otherwise in the way of discussion, the third as my central concern. What is Jewish feminist theology, and what are its implications for Jewish studies?

Theology and the Academy

The place of theology within Jewish studies is part of a larger debate con- cerning the place of theology in the academy, a debate that emerged with the rapid growth of religious studies in the 1950s and 1960s. The founders of new religious studies programs, especially in state universities, were anxious to locate and justify these programs in the context of a religiously pluralistic culture. Arguing that they held no brief for any particular reli- gion but were simply exploring religion as a human phenomenon accord- ing to accepted norms of university scholarship, many departments named themselves religious studies specifically in contradistinction to theology. The point of the distinction was that religious studies is serious, objective, and scholarly—concerned with a significant dimension of human thought and experience, with a clear impact on many aspects of life—while theol- ogy is particularistic, engaged, and unscholarly. Theology not only comes out of distinct communities of faith and is done from a stance of com- mitment, but it deals with an object—God—that can be discerned only by faith, using warrants—revelation—that are not publicly discernible or

* “Jewish Theology in Feminist Perspective,” in Feminist Perspectives on Jewish Studies, ed. Lynn Davidman & Shelly Tenenbaum (New Haven: Press, 1994), 62–84. 46 Jewish Theology in Feminist Perspective testable.1 Although this dichotomy has been repeatedly questioned, it still shapes many responses to the incorporation of theology into the univer- sity curriculum.2 Since Jewish studies is itself particularistic according to these same cri- teria, it cannot hold that fault specifically against theology. Yet Jewish stud- ies can still object to theology on the ground of its engaged stance or lack of scholarly neutrality. To the extent that Jewish studies is influenced by a Wissenschaft des Judentums (the science of Judaism) approach that sees the history, literature, sociology, and religious life of the Jewish people as data to be studied objectively and critically,3 Jewish studies—like religious studies—must be skeptical about the academic legitimacy of theology. From a science of Judaism perspective, theology can be of interest only insofar as it is studied historically or viewed as so much material on the thought of some important figure, rather than as a living and constructive art. I do not mean to deny that in practice many Jewish studies programs encourage or at least tolerate constructive questions. But given the vulner- ability of Jewish studies in the university, it is tempting to assert its respect- ability by emphasizing its adherence to canons of disinterested scholarship and critical research. When one adds to the committed stance of theology the double commitment of feminist theology, the possible place of such a subject within Jewish studies becomes even more problematic.

Theology and Judaism

The actual or potential tension between the nature of theology and the nature of Jewish studies is just one issue confronting would-be Jewish fem- inist theologians. Often this tension is never articulated because of a dif- ferent and prior claim that theology is not Jewish or that Jewish theology

* “Jewish Theology in Feminist Perspective,” in Feminist Perspectives on Jewish Studies, ed. Lynn Davidman & Shelly Tenenbaum (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), 62–84. 1 Edward Farley, “The Place of Theology in the Study of Religion,” Religious Studies and Theology 5 (Sept. 1985): 10; William F. May, “Why Theology and Religious Studies Need Each Other,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 52 (Dec. 1984): 748. 2 For recent rethinking of the theology–religious studies polarity, see, e.g., the discus- sion “Religious Studies/Theological Studies: The St. Louis Project,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 52 (Dec. 1984): 727–57, which includes papers by Walter Capps, Lau- rence O’Connell, Jacob Neusner, P. Joseph Cahill, and William F. May; Wilfred Cantwell Smith, “Theology and the Academic Study of Religion,” Iliff Review 44 (fall 1987): 9–18; and Farley, “The Place of Theology,” 9–29. 3 Joseph L. Blau, Modern Varieties of Judaism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1964), 34–35.