Can we do our scholarship with our backs to Auschwitz? Gregory Baum, evil and the public role of the religious studies scholar

In his 1987 book Compassion and Solidarity, Gregory Baum recounts a story told by the German Roman Catholic theologian and priest Johann Baptist Metz, who, in response to the Holocaust, developed a guiding principle: 'You cannot do theology with your back turned to Auschwitz'. Baum challenges scholarsto ask the same of question. What is the cost of doing scholarship with one's back turned to Auschwitz and other forms of radical evil? Does not business-as-usual scholarship risk conforming to the dominant culture and practices of our time, no matter what? Does it not risk pushing scholars to acquiesce to the neo-liberal model of the depoliticized, neutralized scholar? Baum's refusal to 'do scholarship' with his back to evil highlights the necessity and urgency of using scholarly expertise to participate in public debates. First, society needs the unique expertise of scholars of religion to address its many interconnected crises. Second, participation in public debates affords scholars the opportunity to develop a self-critical spirit and to look for signs of ideological taint and distorting messages in their work. Participating in public debates results in better scholarship, Baum argues, but only if one adopts a critical-humanistic approach rooted in an emancipatory commitment, a hermeneutics of suspicion, and the perspective of the victims, the marginalized and the excluded. In other words, socially engaged scholarship is only valid when it is critical - as well as self-critical - scholarship. Baum's approach promotes a scholarly humility about truth claims that avoids inauthentic universalisms. David Seljak explores the necessity and urgency of participation in public debates by the religious studies scholar by examining Baum's biography, public role and its impact on his scholarship. Dans son livre Compassion and Solidarity publie en 1987, Gregory Baum rapporte une histoire racontee par le theologien et pretre catholique allemand Johann Baptist Metz qui, en reponse a l'Holocauste, a developpe un principe directeur : On ne peut pas faire de la theologie en tournant le dos a Auschwitz. Baum invite les chercheurs a se poser la meme question. Quel est le prix a payer pour faire de la recherche en tournant le dos a Auschwitz et a d'autres formes de mal radical ? La recherche habituelle ne risque-t-elle pas de se conformer a la culture et aux pratiques dominantes de notre epoque, quoi qu'il arrive ? Ne risque-t-elle pas de pousser les chercheurs a accepter le modele neoliberal du chercheur depolitise et neutralise ? Le refus de Baum de faire de l'erudition en tournant le dos au mal met en evidence la necessite et l'urgence d'utiliser l'expertise des chercheurs pour participer aux debats publics. Tout d'abord, la societe a besoin de l'expertise unique des specialistes de la religion pour faire face a ses nombreuses crises interconnectees. Puis, la participation aux debats publics donne aux chercheurs l'occasion de developper un esprit autocritique et de rechercher les signes d'alteration ideologique et les messages deformants dans leur travail. Selon Baum, la participation aux debats publics permet d'ameliorer la qualite des recherches, mais seulement si l'on adopte une approche critique et humaniste ancree dans un engagement emancipateur, une hermeneutique du soupcon et la perspective des victimes, des marginaux et des exclus. En d'autres termes, la recherche socialement engagee n'est valable que si elle est critique et autocritique. L'approche de Baum promeut une humilite scientifique a l'egard des revendications de verite qui evite les universalismes inauthentiques. David Seljak explore la necessite et l'urgence d'une participation du chercheur en sciences religieuses aux debats publics en examinant la biographie de Baum, son role public et l'impact de celui-ci sur son travail d'erudition.

Automated summary

Baum emphasizes the importance of scholars not turning their backs on evil in their academic research. He believes that society needs the expertise of scholars to address various crises and that participating in public debates can lead to better scholarship, but only if scholars adopt a critical approach and consider the perspectives of marginalized groups.