CCAR RESPONSA
New American Reform Responsa
38. Lay or Rabbinic Sermon*
QUESTION: In my congregation it has become customary for lay leaders to speak during the interval between formal services on Yom Kippur. Some individuals have protested and indicated that it is the rabbis prerogative to give sermons and this should not be assigned to lay people. What is our attitude toward the sermon? (Toby Isaacs, Miami FL)ANSWER: The sermon has a long and honored history in Jewish tradition. Leopold Zunz traced the sermon most effectively in one of his first historical studies through which the whole scientific study of the Jewish tradition became established (Die Gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden). This thorough study dealt with the entire range of Jewish history from the Bible to his own time. It demonstrated that the sermon represented a well established tradition which took different forms in various ages. Until the thirteenth or fourteenth century when the rabbinate became a profession, in a limited way, it was not possible to speak of a division between rabbis and laity. The rabbi was the most educated Jewish individual of the community, but often followed some other profession. In eighteenth and nineteenth century Eastern Europe, we find a large number of darshanim engaged in teaching and preaching who were not rabbis. Some, as Baal Shem Tov and his disciples, were vigorously opposed to the rabbinic tradition. This founder of Hassidism taught through the story and parable; he never claimed to be a rabbi and as his stories indicate, felt that learning was not the way to God. At the same time, within the framework of the mitnagid community, the maggid and interpreter who traveled from village to village played an important role. The darshanim of seventeenth century Poland and Germany served the same purpose (L. Zunz Ibid 458 ff). During this period, the formal sermon was limited to a few occasions in the year and primarily outlined the way in which certain holidays were to be observed. This was in keeping with the judicial role of the rabbi. In addition, there was pilpul not expounded at the religious services, but on other occasions in the synagogue. It demonstrated the brilliance of a rabbinic scholar as he intertwined and juxtaposed difficult rabbinic text. This was intellectually stimulating for the elite, but meaningless to others. The Reform movement reestablished the sermon as an important vehicle for education in the synagogue service (L. Zunz Ibid 469). Many of the early Reform leaders who preached were not rabbis, Israel Jacobson among them. There is no reason to restrict the sermon to rabbis. We should avoid professionalizing Judaism as much as possible; intelligent, thoughtful lay persons with a good Jewish background should be encouraged to present their thoughts. In many congregations like my own we have the custom of asking young leaders of the congregation to speak from the pulpit annually. It is wise to discuss such presentations with the speaker so that the factual data is correct. This will keep the speaker from embarrassing lapses into ignorance. We will always insist on a complete freedom of the pulpit, a tradition strongly established within the Reform movement. The rabbi must possess the freedom to preach on whatever she/he chooses and so be able to challenge and change the lives of the members. An invitation to the pulpit may be extended by the rabbi and the individuals asked should also have complete freedom of expression.August 1988
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.