Jack, I’m not pivoting; I’m saying that mima-nafshach; you can’t tell me that it’s untenable to criticize those rabbis and maintain YU’s validity, because that’s a contradiction.
Anyone teaching in a school which condones Bible criticism, has “roshei yeshiva” who openly question krias yam suf, teaches apikorsus in their humanities department, embraces feminism, has many leaders who equate torah and science (norman lamm), and has a LGBT club….yes, they do need to farenfer zich why they are there if they are opposed to such things, which the three i mentioned are on the record as opposing. That has nothing to do with the machlokes about secular studies (now who’s pivoting…) Or the additional machlokes about whether or not high schools should have English. In those matters, gedolim had different opinions and respected one another.
Rav aharon didn’t hold that you can’t be a rebbe in torah vodaas or chaim berlin; he held the rosh yeshivos in those places in extremely high esteem. Not so with YU. He held that even then, they were off the derech in their ideology (he definitely held of, say the meitchiter iluy). Rav shimon was visiting and held it was kedai to teach there. Would he have taught there in our time? Definitely not!
Those issues aren’t just *well, it’s not my opinion, but i respect those who believe it” – and if that is their mentality, then they’re part of the problem (i know for a fact that rav aharon kahn does not think that way, i do not know for sure about the other two, and i do not mean to cast doubt and accuse them of something with absolutely no proof; again, i am not accusing them)
There were orthodox jews who taught at JTS for parnosa. Some rabbis (not many, actually only one that i know of, the lubavitcher rebbe) said it was allowed but forbade it after saul lieberman died. This idea isn’t revolutionary.
As for rav gorelick, i heard it from his son in law. He said that he originally came because of what ujm said, but stayed because he needed parnosa.