CCAR RESPONSA
American Reform Responsa
11. An Unmarried Couple Joining the Synagogue
(Vol. XC, 1980, pp. 83-84)
QUESTION: A young couple that is living together has applied for synagogue membership as a family. Should they be permitted to join as a family and be recognized as such, or should they be asked to join as individuals? The local rabbi has recognized the couple as married. (S.K., Trenton, New Jersey)
ANSWER: It is the task of the Responsa Committee to provide guidance. The authority of the local rabbi, of course, remains supreme within his community. He knows both the Halacha and the specific circumstances which may lead him to a decision. In this instance, the local rabbi has decided to consider the couple as married by stating that this was demonstrated through their public and private conduct (Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha-ezer 2633). Although marriage through intercourse (bi-a) alone was frowned upon, it has always been considered valid bedi-avad (Shulchan Aruch,Even Ha-ezer 42.1). We do not quarrel with the decision made in that specific case, but must now turn to the general question of our reaction to such young couples.
The tenor of halachic literature from the Talmud to the present is against casual sexual relationships and, is opposed to individuals living together without being married. The restrictions, which were rather puritanical in nature, actually went considerably further than that (A.Z. 20a,b; Lev. Rabba, 23; Yad, Hil. Yom Tov, 6.21; Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha-ezer 21). A young man was not to converse with women alone, should not shake hands (Sede Chemed, Chatan Vechala 26a). Generally, intercourse with an unmarried girl fell under the concept of zenut, which was prohibited. If an act of intercourse was intended as a mode of lawful betrothal, the betrothal was indeed lawful (Mishna, Kid. 1.1). Children born of such liaisons, conducted without contemplation of marriage, were completely free of any blemish and there was no question about their legitimacy (Kid. 4.1,2; Yev. 100b). Such alliances have been reported in the Talmud, in the Golden Age of Spain, and in Renaissance Italy, as well as during modern times. They appeared less frequently in other periods.
There is also considerable discussion in the halachic literature about those who are engaged and might live together for some time. During a portion of the Talmudic period, this was not considered objectionable in Judea (Ket. 7b), but was rejected in Galilee (Ket. 12a). Finally, a stricter view prevailed, although such relationships were fairly common (Otzar Hage-onim, Kiddushin 18ff, etc.), and that strict prohibition has been recorded in Shulchan Aruch (Even Ha-ezer, 55.1, etc.). The halachic literature does make it clear that very often little could be done about such arrangements, and no public action was taken except during the more puritanical periods (L. Epstein, Sex Laws and Customs in Judaism,pp. 128ff).
We now have a problem between the rather strict tradition and its ideals and modern circumstances. We must also ask about the difference between quietly condoning a certain style of life and publicly accepting it, as would be the case through congregational membership. On the other hand, we do not want to discourage young people from joining congregations. We would suggest that this couple that is living together has demonstrated their intent to give public recognition to their union and have expressed this by their desire to join a congregation. While we would continue to encourage the couple to get married and accept the full responsibility of the status whose privileges they seek, we in the meantime willingly accept both parties as single members in all respects. Those who consider them as sinners would not be justified in withholding synagogue membership from them, for sinners remain Jews with normal rights (San. 44a; Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De-a 334.2, Orach Chayim 150.1, etc.). We would, therefore, recommend that this couple be admitted to membership as single individuals.
Walter Jacob, Chairman
Leonard S. Kravitz
W. Gunther Plaut
Harry A. Roth
Rav A. Soloff
Bernard Zlotowitz
See also:
S.B. Freehof, “Unmarried Couple and Temple Membership,” Reform Responsa for Our Time, pp. 238ff.
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.