An out gay Orthodox rabbi?
No, this is not a self-cancelling phrase, but
a dynamic reality.  Here's a little insight into
his life, faith and ministry to us all.

SK Rabbi Greenberg, are you still the only out gay Orthodox rabbi in America?

RG As far as I know. I don't really know anybody else who has rabbinic ordination from an Orthodox institution who has publicly come forward, though I surely do know a handful of Orthodox rabbis who are still in the closet.

SK But what enabled you to make this move that you think is keeping others from doing it?

RG Well, in these moments of transformation, there is an element of preserving a certain kind of voice and in losing a certain kind of voice over this question. In other words, people who speak out, who come out in a certain context for example, in the Catholic Church, the moment you speak out in a voice that says, I am a Catholic Priest and gay, you end up undermining your voice as a Catholic Priest. In other words, by definition, there are certain things that one can’ t say with the authority of the role in a full way. So you either can t say you re gay or you can t say you're an Orthodox rabbi, but when you say that you re both, you undermine the very authority you re trying to claim. And so people basically don t want and I understand why they don t want to lose their frames of authority and respect that come with the office. They somehow feel that it s self-defeating to come out publicly in this way because what do you gain? You know, you end up not being really trusted or thought of in the community as a real Orthodox Rabbi. And, of course, that’s the cost of crossing a particular line.

SK And you were willing to pay that cost? 

RG Well, I thought there was no choice for me. I couldn’t see another way to do this. It didn’t make any sense for me to not be honest in this, and real. It took me a long time to get there. It was, indeed, something I avoided for, well, I was ordained in 1983 and didn't come out until 1999, so you can add up the years. So my sense is that that s how change works. You have to risk your power to actually get it back.

SK Well how are you treated by your colleagues, congregants and others?

RG Well, I don t have congregants, because I don t have a congregation. I’m an educator. I ve been a leadership educator and adult educator for 20 years, I didn’ t have the problem in a pulpit and, in fact, had I come out publicly as gay in an Orthodox pulpit, I would not have been able to keep the pulpit and hold onto the congregation.

SK Not unlike what happens in Christian churches, as well. How do you sustain yourself and your spiritual life, given the overwhelming opposition of Orthodox Judaism to who you are?

RG Part of the reason I wrote the book, Wrestling with God and Men , was to provide access for people to a position of faithfulness despite the failure of the community of interpreters to get it, to nourish a faithfulness in God and to trust in the Torah despite the misunderstanding, and to locate the failure, not inside the tradition, per se, but inside the difficulty of people to understand a new construction of difference. In other words, every time there is a challenge to really deep-seated assumptions in the world, the transformation takes awhile and it s painful and so, rather than to blame the rabbis or blame the tradition or blame God, instead I decided that and it took me awhile to come to this that, indeed this is the key, God wasn’t behind the exclusion and that, over time, I felt that the tradition and the interpreters would begin to understand this. My resource for this was really an experience that I describe in the book about a young man who had come out to his family and friends and, in the process of coming out, began to ask questions about who am I, why am I here, what am I doing here, what s my life about? And coming out actually has that element asking very deep questions about the purpose of one s life. So, when you have to ask, Well, okay, so what am I going to do now if the ordinary expectations are just not there, then what meaningful life will I have? And that question leads people in all kinds of spiritual directions.

SK I see so many parallels in that with the Christian gay or lesbian, who comes out and goes through a very similar process.

RG Absolutely. The process of coming out really is having to reflect on very spiritual questions. In other words, not only the social limitations, but the real world limitations make it important to think about what I am doing here. What s this life about? And that leads people in very spiritual directions very often. Now what I said to this young man was that there is this text in Ecclesiastes that the rabbis interpret. They gathered together and did their midrashic learning and often non-rabbis weren’t present. One such study of the book of Ecclesiastes, in the fourth Chapter it says, and I saw the oppressed and they had no power and there was none to comfort them. So this is what Daniel the tailor, a fellow who has no rabbinic authority says. I know who that s talking about. That s talking about the children born of adulterous parents who can t marry into the Jewish people. He said, That s about them because, for no guilt of their own, they are deprived of entering into the Jewish community, and who are their oppressors? asks Daniel the tailor. Oh, those are the rabbis who come to exclude them from the community with a verse from the Torah. So fully justified, they come and exclude them from the verse of Torah because it says, You’re not allowed to enter into the congregation. And they have no power, all the power is in the hands of others and no, there s no one to comfort them. And who shall comfort them? Well, since there s no one to comfort them, I will comfort them, says God. Now Daniel the tailor is clearly making a broadside attack against the ability of the rabbis who ostensibly are just fulfilling the word of the tradition and are becoming oppressors. What s fascinating about this text is that the rabbis had every capacity in recording their conversations not to include it. In other words, he s not a rabbi, he doesn’t need to be included in the conversation, nor does he need to be recorded. But both happened. He was included in the conversation and Daniel the tailor s broadside attack against rabbinic power as able to legitimate oppression with a verse appears in the text and is right there front and center. So I say to oppressed gays and lesbians, Look, it ll take time for things to get fixed, but eventually the law will get fixed and the rabbis will understand, but until that happens, know that God loves you very much. Fundamentally, what grounds our self legitimation is that we trust that God made us this way, and that we trust that God s comfort and love are unimpeachable, and that it will be; it s a matter of time, but don t worry. God is saying, Look, in time, I know that most of them are pure, and, in time they will all be purified, meaning that the law will change or will be transformed or whatever.

SK In quite in the same way that Moses would not allow the eunuch or someone whose penis was cut off to be a part of the assembly, Isaiah overturns that in later years by saying they will have a new name that will not be cut off.

RG In the Isaiah 56 piece that you re speaking of, there are two groups that want into the covenant who don t think they can get in and those are people who are gentiles who have no past, and eunuchs who will have no future.

SK I love that.

RG And Isaiah is saying that those that have no past, but will keep my Sabbaths and honor my covenant and those that have no future as well, will have something better than sons and daughters, they will be partakers of the covenant. There is this notion that God will find a place for the dispossessed and for those who don t possess either a past or a future in the ordinary ways and it s a marvelous text just in that way.

SK Rabbi Greenberg, what can you share with GLBT Christians that might help them stay committed to their faith in the face of often virulent opposition?

RG Oh gosh, they’ve got such a great model in the Gospel. I mean, what did Jesus do but stay faithful in the midst of virulent opposition and to hold onto the integrity that comes from recognizing that God s love could hardly be withheld from people who are made in His image and His likeness and seeking love and affection. I don t quite get how that works, how Christians can identify so profoundly with God s overwhelming love for humanity and recognize that humanity comes in all these different ways and then not find a way to do what Jesus did which is to embrace the outcasts. So I think that the most important thing is, as Daniel the Tailor encourages us, just trust that God s love and comfort are there and it s going to take a little time, but you’ve got God on your side I mean, to the extent that anybody does. In other words, I’m cautious because that’s always a dangerous thing to do, too, but it is the only thing that can be done if you re gay, because you can’t yet depend upon the community or its interpreters. You can’t depend on them yet. You can depend on God.

SK You have a section in your book on how synagogues and temples can become welcoming. Do you know of any that are fully welcoming and, if so, how are they functioning as a community of support that really works well?

RG Well, in the liberal communities, they are actually much more supportive than the welcoming synagogues I’ve described are. I mean, liberal Jewish communities are often 100 percent behind the gay members of their synagogue, and

SK But the Orthodox?

RG Orthodox synagogues are not. What I would say is that there are some places where there is de facto acceptance of people, and they are prepared to let people work that problem out with God on their own. They trust that God s judgment will be fair and that they don t need to figure it out because, as far as they can see, it s better for a person to be involved in a religious community and keeping 612 commandments, than doing none at all, and so they

SK The six hundred and thirteenth one is kind of set aside?

RG Well, no, I mean, in their view, these people may be sinning, but they recognize that all sorts of people are not fully observant and that it s not their job to police that. It’s their job to welcome as many Jews of all different kinds. In fact, I’ve been to Orthodox synagogues that are not conformists. They’re Bohemian in structure, meaning everybody is welcomed in at whatever level they’re at and encouraged to fulfill whatever they can. And I know some more liberal congregations that, whatever the rules are, everybody s got to fulfill them in that way or they re kind of not really on the inside.

SK Another form of political correctness. I especially like the section in your book that deals with the question of why . Asking why, though a Jewish midrashic staple, is forbidden of Leviticus 18 and 20 by some rabbis, and the reason stipulated is that once an answer is given it is open to interpretation and critical analysis, both of which are unworthy of these texts that demand only simple and complete obedience. Have you been able to open the door to why , and how far is it open these days?

RG You framed it a bit too narrowly because there are two opinions in the tradition. There s a tradition that says you can t actually implement the law unless the reasons were front and center because you ll implement it improperly, because you’ll only implement the law wisely if you know what it s supposed to accomplish. So you’ve got to know the reason for the law. And there s another notion that no, you’ve got to be able to fulfill the law, period, because God may have a reason you don t know. And while you can t come up with a reason, God knows better.

SK That assumes though that we know what the text means.

RG Well, even if we would assume that we know what the text is obligating, we still have to ask ourselves what s the purpose of this. Let s say we know that the text is prohibiting us to eat milk and meat. If we ask why, let s say we’ve answered the question, and let s say that doesn’t apply anymore, but maybe we got the reason wrong and it still does apply. So part of the nervousness about asking reasons is that it tends to undermine obedience and so, therefore, there s this tension all throughout the tradition about how why works and in what ways. So, my view was that it was important to ask why, because it was the only way to think through the good intent and on this score, I valued some very important texts that say the following, that God gave the Torah to Israel and it was incredible that God s love of Israel was expressed in his giving the Torah, but even greater love he gave them because he let them understand the goodness of the Torah. So when we understand the law working goodness, we then find ourselves enthralled in the love of God more directly and if it s only obedience, then we find ourselves merely as servants. So there s this notion in the rabbinic literature that it s understanding the divine effort toward goodness that makes us lovers of God because we then feel the Torah is God s love. So without rationales, that ceases, which explains why the rabbis are trying to do this double work not to exhaust the reasons, but they re trying to provide them as well. And so it is in that tension that the book is written, because, while I provide reasons, I suggest the possibility of a synagogue holding onto the verse in the prohibition and nonetheless welcoming gay and lesbian people in. That struggle informs the last part of the book.

SK That makes perfect sense.

RG And let me just add one other point which is, I think, important and that is the reason I have these two positions: one, a radical re-reading that is focused on rationales, and the other is a more prosaic frame for accepting gay people despite the law on the books. What I really wanted to achieve is a way for gay people to remain in Orthodox communities rather than to get it right. I wanted gay people to have a rationale of God s love and the tradition s welcome that would be as wide as I can imagine, but I wanted Orthodox congregations not to be forced into becoming welcoming. Other frames of welcoming that are less bombastic, but would work, would be sufficient for Orthodox congregations, for instance, that gay people are under some kind of psychological limitation or whatever, made it absolutely necessary to come up with two different rationales for a single policy.

SK Okay, you’ve raised the question in my mind twice now, so I think I m going to go ahead and ask it.

RG Go ahead.

SK Well, it may sound a little harsh or judgmental, and I don t mean it to be. But it seems like you are willing to settle for being open, but not affirming, whereas liberal Christians are pushing for being open to and affirming of gays in the sense that we would accept them unconditionally and encourage them in the sight of God to be who they are and approve of them as they are.

RG Yes. I m saying, liberal synagogues should probably do that, but Orthodox synagogues shouldn’ t. They shouldn’t because it s just unclear to them. To ask them to do that would be to ask them not to be who they are; to short-circuit a much larger, a longer process.

SK Ah!

RG And I want them to work through the issue rather than simply to jump on this bandwagon. They can t work through the issue, really, unless there are gay people among them who they care about.

SK For sure.

RG You know, gay people are going to need other affirming environments, and surely we re going to need to find ourselves in places were we are totally, totally accepted for exactly who we are. But it s possible to imagine that a religious community need not be that for it. Communities that are willing to say, Let you and God work this out. From my vantage point, I can t see how this could be wholly acceptable, but it s not my job to figure that out. It s your job and, in the interim, please come to my house for Shabbat.

SK Upon reflection, I would wish that the majority of Christian communities and congregations would model this. If we could even get them this far, that would be wonderful.

RG Well, part of the concern of affirming is that I don t think it actually deals actively with the real challenges inside of this because it s really clear to me that once homosexuality is fully embraced, it changes the very nature of all sorts of social realities. Among the most important is the patriarchy. In other words, people really do have to work through the real equality of masculine and feminine voice in order to really get that and that, until they do, then it’ll be a minimalist victory, really.

SK Are you feeling that liberal Christian communities, that have become open and affirming, have skipped a lot of steps?

RG Yes, it s proper to do that. In other words, often what happens is that s exactly what happened in the civil rights movement. There were people who affirmed the equality of black people, but the work that really had to be done to accomplish that in the hearts of individuals, and in the legislatures, and in the details of implementation of the law had not in the least begun, because the work of inclusion is soul work.

SK That s why we re not there even today, racially.

RG That s right. And so if some people should move on ahead formally, while others admit the truth that they re not going to move on formally until they move on more deeply. I m hardly in favor of holding onto oppression for the sake of that; I d rather press it forward. I think that both communities, the one that can be open and not affirming and the one that can be open and affirming, help educate each other.

SK Indeed. As I remember from listening to you speak, you are in favor of civil same-sex marriage, but not in favor of same-sex religious marriage. What keeps you from going there, especially in light of your comments about Genesis 2, that God allowed Adam to freely choose his mate, and we should all be free to choose our own.

RG When it comes to religious marriage, I am in favor of different churches and synagogues making their own way here. Once again, I like the idea that people are going to work it out at different speeds and in different depths and in different ways. I like that idea. However, in addition, I don t think that gay people have yet figured out what God is up to in our love and that s what a wedding is. When people find each other and fall in love and want to have a party that s still not a wedding. What makes it a wedding is when the love of two is brought fully into the context of family community and ultimately the cosmos. It s figuring out what God is going to do with the love of these two people and we celebrate their love in community. If the love of two is only about the love of two, it’s actually quite narcissistic. It’s just two people basically expanding the circle of the self to include one other person. It actually can be a very closed circle. But what a wedding celebrates isn’t that at all. What a wedding celebrates is the love of two woven into the fabric of an ongoing commitment and relatedness to the past, the future, to the present-tense family and community and, ultimately, to the world. The love of two is a resource for the love of all, and that s exactly how it s portrayed. The love of two is about Eden, the love of two is about the rebuilding of the temple in the end of days, it s about the beginning and the end of time.

SK So why would it be any different for same-sex couples than it is for opposite sex couples.

RG Because for a heterosexual couple, underneath the wedding canopy, if the whole world would disappear, they would be Adam and Eve again, and the world could start all over again. And the reason that a man and a woman under a canopy give us hope that the world will come to a better place is that they speak of all future generations. Each one of us, or at least 99.9 percent of us, was born out of a union of a man and a woman very much like these two who are underneath the canopy.

SK But I think you re heading into that area that says if you can t reproduce, you shouldn’t get married, but if

RG No, I m not you re using the word married too quickly. I’m just saying that the service that we do, that Jews do, for heterosexuals is unique to heterosexuals. It articulates what God is up to in the love of a man and a woman. What I want to get at is, and celebrate, is what is God up to in the love of two men and the love of two women. And it’s not identical. And I want to come up with a way to celebrate that that truly celebrates what it is rather than merely takes a ceremony that has been shaped and is constructed around the love of a man and a woman and simply appropriate it. It just seems to me, the reason it feels out of place is because the ceremony isn t celebrating what s marvelous about the love of two men and the love of two women, and it s not identical. Now, would I call it marriage or not? Well, I don t really care. It’s irrelevant to me.

SK I hear you. Well, you certainly have stretched my understanding and raised questions in my mind that I didn’t even think were there before, and helped me appreciate you and Judaism all the more. Thank you for taking the time to talk to me.

RG Thank you very much.

Rabbi Steven Greenberg is a Senior Teaching Fellow at The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership in NYC. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Yeshiva University and his rabbinical ordination from Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary. For millennia, two Torah verses (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) have been understood to condemn sex between men as an act so abhorrent that it is punishable by death. Traditionally Orthodox Jews, believing the Scripture to be the word of God, have rejected homosexuality in accordance with this interpretation. In 1999, Rabbi Steven Greenberg challenged this tradition when he became the first Orthodox rabbi ever to openly declare his homosexuality. His book, Wrestling with God and Men, is the product of Rabbi Greenberg's ten-year struggle to reconcile his two warring identities. (The book is reviewed in this issue.) He is overwhelmed with invitations to speak. I first met him when he was in a dialogue with Bishop Gene Robinson. They were comparing their individual faith stories at a fund raiser for the upcoming documentary, For the Bible Tells Me So.