CCAR RESPONSA

American Reform Responsa

130. Rabbi’s Prerogative to Officiate at Weddings

(Vol. LXV, 1955, pp. 85-88)

QUESTION: May cantors perform Jewish marriage services without an ordained rabbi presiding over the ceremony?

ANSWER: Basically, a Jewish marriage ceremony may be described as informal. A man, theoretically at least, can marry simply by cohabitation with a woman he wants to be his wife (bi-a). Moreover, even in the more regular type of marriage, if a man lives in a small village in which there is no Minyan of Jews available, he can marry without the recitation of the seven blessings. If, then, the whole procedure is basically so informal, it would stand to reason that anybody can perform the ceremony. In fact, the literature is full of reference to the Mesader Kiddushin, “The performer of the marriage,” who–as is clear from the discussion in the various responsa–is not a rabbi. This point of view (namely, that anybody can perform the ceremony, provided–of course–that he performs it correctly) is stated quite plainly in the famous responsum by Isaac bar Sheshet in Spain in the 14th century. This is in his Responsum #271, in which he is astonished at the new furor over “ordination” in France. The case came to him about a man who claimed to be the duly ordained Chief Rabbi of France, and who declared that the religious ceremonies performed by his rival are invalid. Isaac bar Sheshet is puzzled by this Franco-German emphasis on a so-called ordination, and says that if the ceremony or the documents (in the case of a divorce) are correct, on what ground can anyone dare to declare them invalid? Whenever this “open door policy” is mentioned in the law, reference is always made to this responsum of bar Sheshet (as, for example, in the note of Isserles to Yoreh De-a 242.14).

However, this unlimited permission was long abandoned in the Ashkenazic lands, and Isserles in the note referred to says, “and some say [with Isserles, “some say” usually means a weighty opinion] that he who has not been ordained as a Morenu but nevertheless gives divorces and Chalitsot, the documents are invalid. Some, however, are lenient on the matter [and he again refers to bar Sheshet].”

It is clear that in the Ashkenazic lands the tendency was strong to restrict the permission of officiating in divorces and marriages to ordained rabbis and indeed to the chosen rabbi in the locality. There are two main reasons for it. One might be described as professional privilege and the other as technical ability.

We mention the historically later reason first, namely, the emphasis on professional privilege. There are two opinions of the most important authorities of the 18th century. Ezekiel Landau in Prague (Noda BiYehuda, vol. 2, #83) speaks of a case in which the local rabbi disappointed the family and neglected to come to the marriage and someone else presumed to officiate. He says that from the point of view of the prevailing custom no one else (but the regular rabbi) may officiate at the wedding. Moses Sofer of Pressburg in his responsa (Yoreh De-a, #230), discussing the fees from weddings, etc., finds it necessary to explain an opinion of Israel Isserlein of the 15th century, who, in discussing the dispute between two rabbis, said that he was ashamed that we take fees for such mitzvot. On this Moses Sofer makes a pertinent statement. He says that the situation is now different from what it was in those days. In the days of Isserlein the rabbi was not engaged by the community. He had other means of livelihood, and he settled where he wished. Since he was in this status (we would say an amateur), he could not object if another rabbi settled in the same community or if someone else officiated at weddings, etc. But nowadays, says Moses Sofer, a rabbi is engaged like a workman by the community, and the fees from weddings, etc., are part of his agreed upon income. Therefore, anyone who comes in and takes these away from him commits actual robbery, as one would in taking away the livelihood of any other workman.

However, there is a deeper ground than professional privilege for the strong objection in the Ashkenazic lands against non-rabbis officiating, and that is rooted in the field of technical and legal competence. This goes back to a statement found a number of times in the Talmud (see B. Kiddushin 6a), namely, that “He who does not understand thoroughly the nature of marriages and divorces shall have no dealings (esek) with them.” Rashi there comments that this statement means that he who is not expert shall make no decisions on marital problems when and if consulted. But the later respondents say that Rashi did not mean to restrict his interpretation of the Talmudic statement merely to the making of legal decisions on marital problems. The word esek (dealings) means that the unskilled may not even officiate at marriages, etc. This is the opinion of Jacob Reischer of Metz, 16th-17th century (see his Shevut YaakovIII, 121). So, too, Jacob Weil, a century earlier, said that no one should officiate unless he received special permission from the rabbi. If he did not get such authorization, the divorce, for example, which he gave in the case discussed, is invalid (see his Responsum #85).

The strongest reference is in Keneset Yechezkel (Ezekiel Katzenellenbogen, in Altona, early 18th century), which declares that it is a decision (takana) coming from the old rabbis of France and Rabbenu Tam himself, that no one should officiate except the one who is chosen to be the rabbi of the community. This makes clear the statement by Zvi Hirsch Eisenstaedter in his Pischei Teshuva to Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha-ezer 49.3, in which he says, “therefore not in vain have they become accustomed in these generations not to officiate at weddings without the permission of the rabbi.” See also Shevut Ya-akovIII, 121, cited above, in which Reischer says that the custom is spread in all the regions of Israel to appoint a rabbi and that no marriages and divorces take place without the knowledge of the rabbi, i.e., he must give consent to all marriages.

A very strong opinion on this question is given by Joseph Saul Nathanson, Rabbi of Lemberg, in his Sho-el Ueshiv III, A, 239. He says, addressing the rabbi: “No one has permission to officiate at marriages and divorces other than you, the rabbi, and thus to hurt your income, and [since the community has given you that right to officiate], it is obvious that the marriages performed by someone else are void.” Shalom Mordecai Schwadron (MaharshamI, 160) agrees that such marriages should not be performed, but that if they are performed, they are not void, since the recital of the blessings themselves is essential.

It is clear that the varied experiences of the Jews in Northern Europe, in France, Germany and the Slavic lands, led them–for the reasons given above–to restrict the right to marry to the duly selected rabbi. Isserles, in the note to Yoreh De-a 242.14, speaks indeed of the possibility of giving the title Morenu to someone and enabling him to officiate, even though our ordination is not comparable in strictness to the ancient ordination. But generally it is clear that only the rabbi–or someone else, by his express commission in each specific ceremony–could officiate at marriages and divorces.

This general principle, it seems to me, should apply in our Reform Jewish life likewise. While our Reform rabbis are not as strict as Orthodox rabbis have been on the question of divorce and Chalitsa, yet with regard to marriage, conversion, etc., we have in many ways even stricter standards of instruction, inquiry, etc. We are correct, therefore, in following the tendency of traditional law, and saying that the performing of marriages is professionally, technically, and spiritually the exclusive function of the rabbi. In specific cases it may be possible for the rabbi who approves a certain marriage but cannot himself officiate to give permission to a cantor to officiate for him. But that must never serve as a general commission to officiate at all marriages, but only as a permission for a specifically approved marriage. This is no time in the history of marriage and morals for us to take any steps to lessen the solemnity, dignity, and impressiveness of marriage.

Solomon B. Freehof

See also:

S.B. Freehof, “Marriage Without Rabbi or Hebrew,” Reform Responsa for Our Time, pp. 200ff.

If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.