It is easy to train Reform Rabbis. It is not difficult to train old-fashioned Orthodox Rabbis in Easter Europe. But it is very difficult to train modern Orthodox Rabbis, whether here or in Europe.

It is easy to train Reform Rabbis, because the Reform Congregation in America is more anxious to have a social worker and preacher than a Rabbi. The Reform Rabbi need not be a Hebrew scholar, and need not be a Jewish scholar. He need not be a scholar at all. If he knows a little Hebrew literature, and Jewish history, and if he is a little acquainted with Jewish institutions, he is already prepared for the pulpit. Of course he must have a college education, but so must every physician and lawyer.

The old-fashioned Orthodox Rabbi in Eastern Europe was sent to the Yeshivah while 2a boy of twelve or thirteen, and remained there until he reached the age of maturity. After ten or twelve years of intensive study of the Talmud and its commentaries, he was a Talmudic scholar. But since the Eastern European communities, following the old Rabbinic tradition, wanted first of all a scholar and not a social worker, any mature Talmudic scholar was naturally a Rabbi and could apply for a Rabbinical position. He could do so whether he was for it from a social and psychological point of view or not. It did not make any difference whether he could read and write in the language of the country or not. As long as he was a thorough Talmudic scholar, and as long as he had a fair knowledge of the codes, he could apply for the position of a Rabbi. His training was one-sided and his general education utterly neglected. Of course only those Talmudic scholars would apply for the position of a Rabbi who were really pious, and who considered themselves fit for the Rabbinate. Life itself eliminated all those who were unfit for the position.

But it is quite different with the modern Orthodox Rabbi in America and Europe. To train a modern Orthodox Rabbi a pedagogical synthesis of true Orthodox 3Rabbinic and modern secular education must be brought about. The modern Orthodox Rabbi must not know the Talmud only. He must master the language of the country, he must be able to appeal to the old and the young, and he must be a modern man.

Secular education, based on scientific principles, is nonreligious, while traditional Rabbinical education is based on deep religiousness. Only a pedagogical master mind and only an up-to-date modern pedagogical institution could combine both and turn it into a synthesis.

This is so plain a proposition, and one need not be a scholar to understand it.

There is a group of Jews in the city of Chicago who are persuaded by a few Rabbis to help maintain a Rabbinical College in the city. In principle there is nothing to be said against such a proposition. We think that the more Rabbinical Seminaries the better, because a Rabbinical Seminary is always a center of Jewish learning. It is only questionable whether the community at large has made up its mind to pay the bill--a heavy bill indeed--and whether the community is in a position to organize an institution of which it need not be ashamed.

For the time being, we are not concerned with the financial aspect of the proposition. It is up to those who are interested in a Rabbinical Seminary of Chicago to finance it. And we really believe that if the community could organize an up-to-date instiution, there is not a Jew in Chicago who would not help to maintain it. But we ask the gentlemen who are interested in the establishment of an Orthodox Rabbinical Seminary in Chicago, whether they really believe that we are in possession of the scholarly material needed for an up-to-date institution such as they propose to maintain? Our contention is that there are not even enough qualified Talmudic teachers in Chicago to teach the students Talmud. But there is no one in Chicago who can teach Jewish history, Hebrew literature, Hebrew archaeology, etc. Of course we do not want to say that there are no Jewish scholars in Chicago, but the few Jewish scholars here are not Orthodox and would have nothing to do with the Orthodox Rabbinical Seminary.

Then the question of the secular education of the disciples needs a clear answer. To our mind, the boys cannot and should not be sent to university, 5where they may have to digest mental food not fit for a Rabbi. The boys should receive their secular training in the Rabbinical Seminary proper. In other words, the Rabbinical Seminary to be established should not only have a Jewish faculty, but a general faculty as well. We do not say for a moment that this is an impossible thing. On the contrary, it is very possible. But it requires a whole lot of money. Is the community ready to bear the expenses--an additional fifteen thousand dollars a year?

A small group of men interested, or made to be interested in the proposition of an Orthodox Rabbinical Seminary in Chicago may say that for the time being, all those needs are not necessary. But this is a short-sighted policy. It may not be necessary this term, but it will be necessary next term. And what then?

If we mean to approach the subject serious-mindedly, we cannot possibly embark upon a policy of living from hand to mouth. The plans must be good for the next three or four years, or the Rabbinical Seminary is only an old-fashioned, second class Yeshivah and not deserving of its name.

We wonder whether the men interested in the establishment of a Rabbinical Seminary in Chicago are aware of the gravity of the problem with which they are confronted.