CIRCUMCISION OF CHILD OF UNMARRIED MOTHER

What has tradition said about the circumcision of the child born out of wedlock, where no father can be present and there is no relative of the father’s family available? (From Judge J.W.P., New York City.)

IN general the Jewish law is that the duty to have a child circumcised is encumbent upon the father of the child. But suppose for some reason the father of the child neglects this duty, or suppose he is in another country. The duty, then, devolves upon the Beth Din to have the child circumcised. If the Beth Din for some reason neglects this, then the sin of neglect falls upon the person himself when he grows up. When he grows up, he is in duty bound then to arrange for his circumcision (see Shulchan Aruch, Yore Deah 261).

Of course, if the father is not Jewish, the duty of having his son circumcised cannot devolve upon him. A Gentile is not obligated to obey Jewish law (except, of course, the seven commandments of the “Sons of Noah”). Hence, clearly, a child must be circumcised at the order of the Beth Din. If the mother, however, is Gentile and the father Jewish, the child, as in all mixed relationships, follows the status of the mother and is a Gentile child and does not need to be circumcised at all.

It is to be noted that a mother has no obligation at all to arrange for the circumcision of the child (see Isserles to Yore Deah 261). Therefore if the mother does nothing at all about it, there can be no complaint against her. She is not obligated at all.

As for the question whether a child born out of wedlock must be circumcised, that, too, is clear. The Shulchan Aruch, Yore Deah 265:4, speaks of the duty of circumcis-ing an illegitimate child (mamzer) and the normal blessings are all recited over him, except the final prayer of well wishing. The commentator Shach says that this is because we have no desire that such should increase among us. Also it is required that it shall be announced that such a child is illegitimate. (These restrictions date back to Jacob Moellin [Maharil], in Mainz, fourteenth century). They must have had many such problems in those riotous days of persecution in the Rhineland.

However, it must be understood that the term “illegitimate child” (mamzer) does not apply to the average child born out of wedlock. Such a child is not a mamzer, unless the mother is married to some other man, or unless the father and the mother are of forbidden degrees of consanguinity. So there is no question that the child born out of wedlock must be circumcised and that if the father cannot do so, it is the duty of the Bes Din.

Most of the children with whom you deal are not children of married women by some man other than their husband, and generally not of people of forbidden degrees of consanguinity. They are certainly not mamzerim and even if they were, they would have to be circumcised if the mother is Jewish.

If the Bes Din has the duty of circumcising the child of a Jewish mother, who, then, is the Bes Din under present circumstances? It would be the rabbinate or the community; in other words, your organization would be deemed to have the obligation to see that the child is circumcised. If, therefore, the child is circumcised in the hospital, or if later the adoptive parents have the child circumcised, your organization has done its duty.