dian of Christian culture at Wellesley was the Sh'ma Department of Religion, Bible study was required of every student until 1969. Successive a journal of Jewish responsibility presidents insisted that Jewish scholars were in- herently unqualified to teach the New Testament. 15/281, NOVEMBER 16, 1984 Thus, not until the Bible requirement was drop- ped did the Religion Department (over strenuous internal opposition) hire its first Jewish member, whose term was punctuated by anti-Semitic harassment. Two years ago her successor, a distinguished and prolific young scholar, was not recommended for tenure, largely on the grounds of "personality." He retained legal counsel, who gathered evidence indicating that the negative tenure decision was "significantly influenced by iFighting anti-semitism at wellesley the taint of anti-Semitism." With the threat of litigation and attendant publicity looming, the Jerold S. Auerbach department decision was reversed— and the new- Anti-Semitism is always repugnant, even in an in- ly tenured scholar departed for a more congenial stitution as benign and genteel as Wellesley Col- academic environment. lege. No glaring episode, or ugly incident No sooner had the tenure issue receded than a disrupted the normal serenity of college life. In- series of student complaints provided dismaying • stead, there was abundant evidence of a persistent evidence of persistent insensitivity toward Jews at pattern: a history of discrimination, a legacy of the college. Jewish students reported frequent i insensitivity. academic conflicts scheduled for major Jewish Wellesley College, according to its statutes, was holidays; professorial denials of their requests to founded "for the glory of God and the service of postpone assignments due on Yom Kippur; pro- the Lord Jesus Christ." Wellesley students were fessorial displeasure at class absence due to holi- expected to regard "Christian character" as "the day observances; a threat to eliminate the kosher most radiant crown of womanhood." They were meal plan (which presidental intervention halted); encouraged to spend their lives "in humble imita- and the systematic avoidance by admissions tion of Him who ''came not to be ministered unto, recruiters of predominantly Jewish high schools. but to minister— the phrase that still serves as Even the college president conceded "a disturbing the college motto. Until five years ago every pattern" of insensitivity toward Jews. This is not trustee, faculty member, and officer was required altogether surprising in an institution that retains by college statute (although not in practice) to the Christian cross as the symbol of its spiritual belong to an evangelical church. life, holds its annual convocation ceremony (the first formal event of every academic year) in the , Christian exclusivity was moderated over time in- Christian chapel, and unselfconsciously accepts its to a formal quota system, which restricted Jewish Christian symbolism as a neutral reflection of the students to eight to ten percent of each entering natural order. class. (Jews, according to a college policy state- Wellesley's Anti-Semitism Made Public ment, possessed "identifiable physical features.") So the pattern was set: a series of overt acts of Wellesley retained its Jewish quota until the late discrimination or covert instances of insensitivity, I I940's, when Massachusetts fair practices legisla- invariably followed by presidential affirmations of tion required its abandonment— over the opposi- the virtue of tolerance. Discrimination against tion of Wellesley's president. After a steady rise in Jews was never explicitly condemned, although the admission of Jewish applicants during the Jews were the specific targets of discrimination. 50's, the percentage steadily receded until, cur- The pattern persisted until it was reported in out- rently, it is only slightly higher than during the side media (the college newspaper remained con- i quota years. spicuously silent on the subject). In response to a Jews "Not Qualified" to Teach Bible Commentary article about anti-Semitism at Sarah Lawrence, I provided evidence drawn from For many decades the unofficial academic custo- Wellesley archives that demonstrated the iden- tical pattern of restricted admissions and ad- JEROLD AUERBACH teaches history at ministrative bias. Not long afterward the Jewish Wellesley. 1 k Advocate, perhaps alerted by the Commentary Presidential silence was followed by the explicit letter, published a comprehensive, careful, and refusal of the Board of Trustees to endorse the shocking article with ample documentation of faculty resolution. The Board, with cavalier Wellesley's stunted transition from parochialism disregard of the history of restrictive quotas and to pluralism. hiring discrimination, denied that there was a history of anti-Semitism at Wellesley. Instead, it Once Wellesley's dirty linen was washed in invented a mythical "history of dedication to public, and only then, the shield of institutional diversity"— at a college where only white Chris- decorum that concealed anti-Semitism was shat- tian women once were welcome. The Trustees tered. For the first time in college history it was deplored discrimination but refused to mention possible, indeed urgently necessary, to conduct a Jews by name— as though two months of debate full, open inquiry into anti-Semitism, discrimina- had not concerned Jews. They affirmed "the tion, and insensitivity toward Jews at Wellesley. moral imperative of the Founder," which, of In successive faculty meetings, the primary forum course, was the foundation of Christian exclusivi- for this debate, there were three pivotal issues ty. The Trustees managed to deny what everyone (which surely resonate beyond Wellesley College). else in the college knew to be true. In this First, would discrimination directed specifically Wellesley Wonderland, where words lost all against Jews be specifically identified and con- meaning, the president then proceeded to assert demned? Or would anti-Semitism vanish amid the compatibility of these diametrically opposed sweeping declarations of universal tolerance that resolutions, one acknowledging and condemning were as insensitive to Jews as the original anti-Semitism while the other did neither. Only a discriminatory acts? Second, would the pattern of torrent of criticism— from faculty, Hillel, and discrimination be perceived as institutional, or concerned supporters— finally budged the trustees would it be reduced to the isolated acts of mere to the minimal concession that anti-Semitism had individuals, for which there was no institutional indeed been a problem at Wellesley and that it responsibility or culpability? Finally, would the was deplorable. connections between past and present be acknowledged, and the burden of institutional history accepted, or would the claim of tabula Sh'ma rasa absolve Wellesley for everything prior to a journal of Jewish responsibility yesterday? Editor Eugene B. Borowitz Assistant Editor Margaret Moers Wenig Faculty Condemns the Anti-Semitism Adminstrator Alicia Seeger After a prolonged and excruciating debate, the Production CLM Graphics faculty (amid thunderous administrative silence) Art Abba Spero and Steven Mills finally acknowledged the evidence of anti- Contributing Editors Michael Berenbaum, J. David Bleich, Semitism, condemned its history at Wellesley, Balfour Brickner, Mitchell Cohen, Daniel ]. Elarnr, Blu Greenberg, committed the college to obliterate discrimination Susan Handelman, Paula Hyman, Nora Levin, David Novak, against Jews in recruitment, admission, employ- Harold Schulweis, Steven Schwarzschild, Seymour Siegel, Sharon ment, and promotion, and declared that insen- Strassfeld, Elie Wiesel, Arnold Jacob Wolf, Michael Wyschogrod. sitivity toward the religious obligations of Jews Sli'nm welcomes articles from diverse points of view. was impermissible. To assuage the universalists, Hence, the opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those the faculty also dedicated the college to the of the editors. Donations to Sh'ma Inc. are tax-deductible. eradication of all forms of racial and religious Sh'ma is available in microform from University Microfilms (but not gender) prejudice. Internatl, Ann Arbor, Mi. Send manuscripts to 198 St. James Place, BWyn N Y. 11238. A resolution is not a solution. But it carried Address all other correspondence, subscriptions and change of significance, at least symbolically, in a college address notices to Box 567, Port Washington, N.Y. 11050. whose only official policy toward Jews had Sh'nm (ISSN 0049-0385) is published bi-weekly except June, declared them an unwelcome presence. There July and August, by Sh'ma Inc., 735 Port Washington Blvd., Port Washington, N.Y 11050. Subscriptions $22 for two years followed tangible evidence of heightened atten- in U.S. and Canada; $12 a year overseas. 10 or more to one tiveness to the recruitment of Jewish students, and address,$6 each per year. Retired or handicapped persons of respect for their religious observance. Since the restricted means may subscribe at half price. resolution called upon the president and trustees Copyright ® 1984 by Sh'ma Inc. to affirm its principles, it seemed that Wellesley POSTMASTER: Please forward Form 3579 to Box 567, Port finally had turned an important institutional cor- Washington, N.Y 11050. ner. Second class postage paid at Port Washington, N.Y. and at additional entry Bethpage, N.Y. Regrettably, that happy ending was deferred. 15/281, Novemlier 16, 1984 2 The