CCAR RESPONSA
Blessing the Fleet
5751.3
She’elah
I serve a New England community and have received a request to participate in the annual ceremony of “blessing the fleet.” Those involved, including Protestant and Catholic clergy, are taken on board a Coast Guard vessel into the Sound, where boats (predominantly pleasure craft) would pass by and be blessed. Is it appropriate to accept this invitation? (R. Elias J. Lieberman, Falmouth, MA)
Teshuvah
The question may be subdivided as follows:
1. What provisions and cautions in Jewish tradition and sensibility might be violated by participating in this kind of interfaith ceremony? Would it fall in the category of a gentile ritual, which the Torah forbids as chukkat ha-goyim(Leviticus 20:23)?
2. Is there a precedent for blessing a thing or things, as in this case, the fleet?
1. Chukkat ha-goyim.
At first glance the ceremony to which the rabbi has been asked would seem to be merely another civic occasion which he would share with other clergy, such as dedications, invocations, or benedictions which accompany secular functions. Reform rabbis (and not they alone) do this regularly, in part to affirm that they and their fellow Jews fully share in the life of the community. We generally take part in ceremonies which are religiously neutral these ceremonies are neutral and non-Christological.1
We have therefore come to accept certain sancta of “civil religion.” Examples are prayers for the government during the service, the national flag on the beemah, national anthems printed in our prayer books and Haggadahs, liturgies for a communal Thanksgiving and Memorial Day service, and the like.2
All of this is well founded in tradition, which bases itself on Jeremiah 29:7: “Seek the well-being of the city to which I have exiled you, and pray to the Eternal on its behalf, for your well-being depends on it.” Further, there is a relevant passage in Ezra 6:10 and the oft-quoted advice of the Mishnah: “Pray for the well-being of the government, for without the fear of it we would swallow each other alive.”3 These sentiments entered the Ashkenazic liturgy by adding prayers for the government,4 and they have become part of Diaspora ritual. This was true even when Jews did not fare well in particular countries; thus, an Orthodox Russian siddur of the early twentieth century contained a prayer for Czar Nicholas II. How much more so has this custom entrenched itself in lands where Jews enjoy all civic rights.
However, despite all these precedents, the questioner clearly wonders whether there is something “un-Jewish” about blessing the fleet, which consists primarily of pleasure craft, plus some fishing vessels that contribute to the local economy. To use traditional language, does this kind of ceremony deserve the stricture of chukkat ha-goyim, of imitating Gentile practice.
It is well to remember that most of the ritual innovations which the Reform movement proposed in the course of its history were attacked by its opponents as chukkat ha-goyim, such as prayer in the vernacular, instrumental music, or gender equality. Still, the present threat of assimilation and the narrowing of Jewish religious distinctiveness and lifestyle lead us to increasing concern about melding our practices with those of the community in which we live. Therefore the question of chukkat ha-goyim deserves another brief look.
The biblical phrase, “you shall no walk in their ways”(u-vechukkoteihem lo telekhu)5 was understood as one of the negative commandments and was seen to reinforce the distinctiveness and separateness of the Jews, who are set apart from the nations (Lev. 20:26).6 While the principle of the prohibition was never in doubt, it was understood that it had limits, but just what these were was a subject of frequent debate.
Thus, the Midrash argues that the prohibition cannot be taken to its extreme. Does this mean, it asked, that we should not build buildings or plant vineyards as Gentiles do? Rather, Scripture says, u-vechukkoteihem…, meaning laws and customs which are indigenous to them.7 This led one authority to state that only idolatry and special practices enumerated by the Rabbis fall under the prohibition.8
According to R. Menachem ha-Me’iri the law of the Torah itself was meant as a specific caution against idolatry, and was later expanded to cover other practices as a fence against assimilation.9 This explains the far-reaching ruling of Rambam:
The law] forbids us to walk in the ways of idolatry and from adopting their customs, even their means of dress and their social gatherings.10
Still, popular practice did not always abide by these prohibitions, and the earlier discussions of Talmud and Midrash were continued. Thus, R. Isaac b. Sheshet (14th century) wrote that Jews need not do away with funeral customs which reflect secular practices among Muslims.
If you say otherwise, we might as well forbid eulogies, on the ground that Gentiles also eulogize their dead.11
Similarly, R. Joseph Kolon (15th century) permitted Jewish physicians to don distinctive medical robes worn by Gentile doctors. His wide-ranging analysis set forth these guidelines by which one could recognize what fell under the prohibition of chukkat ha-goy:
customs which Jews adopt for no other apparent reason than to imitate the Gentiles;
customs which offend the rules of modest behavior.
But practices which reflect legitimate purposes or are meant as tokens of respect are not covered by the prohibition of lo’ telekhu.12 While this view was criticized by some,13 it was endorsed by R. Moses Isserles and codified in his addenda to the Shulchan Arukh.14 This in turn has become the basis for contemporary rulings.
Thus, R. Haim David Halevy permits the use of funeral flowers and the wearing of black clothing by mourners. Such practices are prohibited “only when we adopt their custom out of the desire to imitate their religious rites.”15 For this reason too he defends the Israeli custom, borrowed from Western culture, of standing for a minute of silence on Yom Ha-Zikaron and Yom Ha-Sho’ah (Remembrance Day [for the fallen in Israel’s wars] and Holocaust Remembrance Day).16 The rabbi who participates in a civic ceremony does not do this in order to imitate Gentile religious practices, but rather in order to signal Jewish support for the civic well-being of the the kind of legitimate and purposeful motivation required by Kolon and endorsed by the Halakhah. His participation would be an aspect of “civic religion.”
This conclusion is fortified by another halakhic consideration, found in the Talmud. There we read that even normally forbidden Gentile practices are allowed to those who are kerovim le- malkhut, who are close to the government and must constantly deal with it.17
To be sure, this permission was meant for special people, like communal representatives(shtadlanim), and not for all members of the Jewish community, but in a democratic society all Jews may be considered kerovim lemalkhut. Their participation in the rites of “civic religion” is therefore a proper expression of their full participation in the life of the general community.
Of course, this participation has its limits.A necessary condition would be that the ceremony be truly non-denominational and not sectarian in nature, one in which all religious believers could share.
But this should not lead us to make light of the caution against adopting chukkat ha- goyim. We are still under the obligation to preserve our religious separateness, and thus the caution of lo telekhu… in Lev. 18:3 remains a constant and forceful warning to us.18
2. Blessing the Fleet.
It is important to consider the terminology of the event; if it refers to an actual blessing of ships it is one thing; if it is meant as a blessing of the seafarers it is another.
We do not bless things. The blessing is, rather, an invocation of God who is the One that is barukh, blessed. Thus we praise God “who brings bread forth from the earth”; we do not bless the Kiddush wine but the borei pri ha-gefen, and the act is referred to as lekaddesh al ha-yayin, to make a blessing over the wine, and not leqaddesh et ha- yayin; a blessing of the wine. and we do not bless the Shabbat lights but rather God asher kiddeshanu … vetsivvanu lehadeek ner shel shabbat.19
The rabbi would therefore offend Jewish tradition if his invocation aimed at sanctifying the ships themselves. While the participating Christian clergy may interpret the ceremony in accordance with their own theology, the rabbi has the same freedom and view “blessing the fleet” as referring to those “that go down to the sea in ships” (Psalm 107) and invoke upon them a wayfarer’s prayer, tefillat ha- derekh.20 The view of sailing the waters as an especially dangerous enterprise has a long tradition, and though this danger has today become less pronounced, especially in comparison with other forms of locomotion, it has not disappeared. A wayfarer’s prayer retains its propriety, whether the journey is for pleasure of for earning a livelihood.
We note that the rabbi’s congregation worships in a meeting house built at the end of the 18th century, which betokens a pride in the history of the community. In addition to all else, therefore, the Jewish as well as the larger community would expect the rabbi to be part of this history, which invokes the additional permission of acting for the sake of [communal] peace (mipney darkhey shalom),to preserve a sense of amity and well-being among all the town’s people.
We would therefore encourage the rabbi to participate in “blessing the fleet” by delivering a Wayfarer’s Prayer21 and/or read from Psalm 107, and suggest that he explain the strictures of Jewish tradition to his Christian colleagues, and do so before the date of the actual ceremonies.
Notes
See Rabbi Walter Jacob, Contemporary American Reform Responsa (1987), no. 167. See Rabbi Israel Bettan’s 1954 responsum on the question of whether a national flag should be placed on the pulpit; American Reform Responsa, ed. Walter Jacob, no. 21. We today might not phrase our reasoning as Bettan did (“…our national flag speaks to us with the voice of religion”), but we would not likely come to a different conclusion. Avot 3:2. On the prayer Ha-noten teshu’ah, see Baer, Avodat Yisrael (Rvdelheim 1868), p.231; Kol Bo, ch. 20, p.10c; Aburdaham (Warsaw 1878), p.47c. Lev. 18:3; see also Lev. 20:23. See Rambam, Yad, Avodat Kokhavim 11:1. A free translation of chukkim ha-chakukim lahem; Sifra, ed. Weiss, Acharei Mot, perishta 9, p. 85a. See also the differing interpretations of chok in Lev. 19:19 by Rashi and Ramban, and the talmudic discussion in BT Avodah Zarah 11a and Sanhedrin 52b which deal with the Gentile custom of lighting funeral pyres. The former passage permits it because it is not undertaken for religious purposes, the latter because it was already mentioned by Jeremiah 34:5. Sefer Yere’im, ch. 313. The author reads the verse according to its peshat and notes that only the religious practices of Egypt and Canaan are meant. This contradicts the talmudic expansion of the prohibition to imitate the “seven nations” (Exod. 20:23) to all nations (see Sanhedrin 52b and Avodah Zarah 11a), including those who were not idolatrous (see R. Isaac b. Sheshet, Resp. Rivash , no. 158). Rabbi David Zvi Hoffmann, Resp. Melammed Leho’il, I no. 18, therefore translates the words avodah zarah as Fremder Kultus rather than Gvtzendienst. Beit Ha-Bechirah, Sanhedrin 52b. Sefer Ha-Mitzvot, Neg. Com. no. 30; see also Sefer Mitzvot Ha-Gadol, neg. com. no. 50, and Sefer Ha-Chinnukh, no .262. Resp. Rivash, no. 158, and see note 5 above. Resp. Maharik, no. 88. See Minchat Chinnukh, comm. 262.; cf. also Bi’ur Ha-Gera (R. Elijah of Vilna), Yoreh De’ah 178, no. 7. Yoreh De’ah 178:1. Aseh Lekha Rav, I, no. 44. Ibid., IV. no. 4; similarly R. Zvi Yehudah Kook, Techumim, v. 3 (1982), p.388; R. Yehudah Henkin, ibid., v. 4,(1983), pp. 125 ff. B.K. 83a, and see Rambam, Yad, Avodat Kochavim, 11:3. R. Joseph Karo suggested that the scholars of a community should delineate the extent of the law; Beit Yosef, Yoreh De’ah 178. To be sure, there are certain objects which because of their nature and function are considered keley kodesh and are to be treated in a special fashion because they contain the Divine Name, for instance Torah scrolls, mezuzot and siddurim. Such a prayer is mentioned in BT Berakhot 29b-30a: “What is a prayer for wayfarers? … shetolikheni leshalom ve-tatz’ideni [better, ve-tacharizeni] leshalom … Barukh attah Adonai, shome’a tefillah. See also Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayyim, 110:4; Siddur Otzar Tefillah, under “Seder Tefillat Ha-Derekh,” which lists a variety of quotations and prayers; also Jacob Emden’s Siddur Beit Ya’akov, p. 111. The C.CA.AR.’s Gates of the House (1977), p.23, brings such a newly composed prayer
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.