SEPARATING THE ADULT FROM ADULTERY
divorce. Subsequently, the adulterous party has asked the rabbi to officiate at the marriage to“the other person.” Should the rabbi comply with the request?**
The inquiry implies that the“acrimonious divorce” was a result of the adulterous relationship and this is thus a clear case of classic adultery. But it implies even more. It also conveys the sense that a legitimate conundrum exists, and that, indeed, there might be compelling reasons why the rabbi ought to comply with the request. No branch of Judaism had, up until this point, gone on record as relinquishing the traditional halakhic prohibition of marriage to the paramour. As a result, the question itself demonstrates that the attitude of later twentieth-century progressive Jews toward adultery had so relaxed that the“adulterous party” saw no need to“test the waters” by first asking if such a relationship—entered into civilly—would b’diavad be acceptable. The questioner evinces no hesitation in directly requesting a rabbinic blessing of this relationship begun in adultery. In any prior period of Jewish history, the notion of parading one’s adultery before a rabbi and asking such a question not only would have been the cause of profound embarrassment, but also would have been unthinkable. In 1986, contemporary attitudes combined with the reality that the couple could easily step outside the community and marry under non-Jewish auspices required the rabbis to furnish an answer.