HUC, Intermarriage, and High Standards (Menachot 6a)

People may not know this but one may not be ordained by the Hebrew Union College is they are in an interfaith relationship. Over the past few decades this rule has raised a lot of controversy. Why should Reform rabbis be allowed to do interfaith weddings but not be in one themselves? Or perhaps, rabbis should be held to a higher standard?

The JTA has some interesting things to say about this tension.

I thought about this issue as I read today's daf. In it we find the ruling that a person who is uncircumcised is invalidated from performing the wheat offerings of the Temple service. But is this ruling final? While the Jewish tradition provides some leeway, exempting some from circumcision - if one's brother died because of circumcision one is exempt (Shabbat 134a)- there is disagreement among the commentators about whether people affected by these special circumstances can serve in the Temple. Rashi says no. Rabbeinu Tam says yes.

It seems from Rashi, circumcision is a mark of one's connection to God and the covenant. For most people it is fine if they don't get circumcised (assuming they fall into the category of those who are exempt) but a priest is different. We hold him to a higher standard.

Rabbeinu Tam on the other hand, sees flexibility in the system. A good leader is a good leader. Why force him to undergo something that may be painful when he would be just as good of a leader without the pressure.

This isn't a perfect analogy and I hope no one takes my words as comparing an intermarried man to an uncircumcised one. However, both contain this interesting tension and implicit question: to what extent should we hold our leaders to a different standard? Are we better or worse for it?