10 Jun ARE INTERFAITH CHAPELS KOSHER?

Hospitals, airports
and universities
often include
interfaith chapels
which are intended
to accommodate
individuals of
all faiths for
individual or group prayer. This religious
accommodation raises an important
question: May a Jew pray in a room
that also houses non-Jewish worship,
potentially even avodah zarah (foreign
worship, i.e. idolatry or polytheism)?
I. Mushroom Shuls
To answer this, I turn to an episode that
occurred in St. Louis in 1951. The quickly
growing Young Israel rented a social hall
in a local hotel in which to hold their
high holiday prayers. The long-standing
Beth Medrash HaGadol objected to this
larger venue, which would draw many
paying members from the larger and more
established synagogue, and brought the
issue to the attention of Rav Menachem
Eichenstein, the Orthodox Chief Rabbi
of St. Louis. Rav Eichenstein wrote a
responsum forbidding the Young Israel from
holding prayers in the rented hall. He sent

this responsum to leading authorities who
replied with their own responsa, generally
agreeing with his conclusion. Among the
illustrious respondents were Rav Yonasan
Steif, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin and Rav
Moshe Feinstein. The exchange of letters
takes up the first section of the March

1952 issue of the rabbinic journal Ha-
Pardes, and was republished in the 1955

jubilee volume for Rav Eichenstein, titled
Berachah Li-Menachem. Some of the
respondents connected this to the problem
of “mushroom shuls,” in which groups
would rent theaters and ball rooms for high
holiday prayers.
An important consideration is the issue of
praying in a place where frivolities and
even sins take place. Taz (Orach Chaim
154:1) rules that you may not rent a room
for prayer if the room above it is unclean.
Doing so shows disrespect to the prayer.
Rav Eichenstein explains that “unclean”
refers to spiritual, as well as physical,
uncleanliness. Rav Eichenstein quotes
Rav Moshe Schick (Responsa, Orach
Chaim, no. 7), who rules that you may
not turn an animal pen into a synagogue
because it shows disrespect to the mitzvah
of prayer. Disrespect of a mitzvah is

biblically forbidden, as we see
in Shabbos (22a) regarding
the biblical commandment to
cover the blood of a slaughtered
animal. We are not allowed to
push dirt over the blood with
our feet because that would be
disrespectful to the mitzvah.
Rav Moshe Feinstein (in his
responsum, later published
as Iggeros Moshe, Orach
Chaim, vol. 1, no. 31) quotes
the Ba’eir Heitev (151:1) in
the name of Rav Eliyahu Mizrachi (16th
cen., Turkey) as saying that a synagogue
does not lose its holiness if someone sins
in it (Responsa, no. 81). In that case, a
communal functionary had consorted with
a young man in the synagogue. Despite
the desecration, the synagogue’s holiness
remains intact and may continue being
used for prayer. Rav Feinstein offers
suggestions why that is true but points out
that the question assumes that generally
we should not pray in a place where sins
take place. Rav Yonasan Steif adds that the
first verse in Tehillim says: “Blessed is the
man… nor sits in the seat of the scornful.”
Even when the sinful activity has ended,
we may not sit in their seats and certainly
not pray there. Since foreign worship is
sinful behavior, these authorities would
not allow prayer in a room that houses
non-Jewish prayer services.
In the responsum mentioned above, Rav
Eliyahu Mizrachi rules that a house used
for idolatry can also be used for Jewish
prayer (quoted in Magen Avraham
154:17). However, Rav Yechezkel
Landau (18th cen., Czech) and Rav Moshe
Sofer (19th cen., Hungary) disagree and
forbid prayer in a house used for idolatry
(Dagul Me-Revavah and Chasam Sofer,
glosses to Magen Avraham, op cit.). That
refers to idolatrous prayer in the past
forbidding a place today. Our question
is even worse — ongoing foreign prayer.
Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (in the book
mentioned above, republished in Gevuros
Eliyahu 1:24) writes that there is only a
possibility to rehabilitate the place if the
past improper behaviors are completely
ceased and the place no longer is referred
to as a house for foreign prayer. But if it is
still sometimes used for foreign prayer, it
is disrespectful to invoke the divine name
in such a place.
II. Interfaith Chapels
In 1950, Cornell University asked
Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik about the
propriety of human images in stained
glass window in a new interfaith chapel.

Rav Soloveitchik replied in the negative
and ended with his general opposition to
prayer in an interfaith chapel. He writes, “I
strongly object to the use of an interfaith
chapel. The Halachah is unequivocally
opposed to it and this prohibition is even
more strict than that concerning human
images… The idea of a common house
of prayer is absolutely irreconcilable
with the Judaic philosophy of worship”
(Community, Covenant and Commitment:
Selected Letters and Communications, p.
8).
More recently, R. Dr. Jason Weiner, the
Senior Rabbi and Director of the Spiritual
Care Department at Cedars-Sinai Hospital,
published an article about Cedars-Sinai’s
unique interfaith chapel (“Is One Permitted
to Daven in the Chapel at Cedars-Sinai?”
in Nitzachon: Adas Torah Journal of Torah
Ideas, 5:2 Spring 5778). At Cedars-Sinai, a
room is designed and designated primarily
as a synagogue but is also used for
Christian, Muslim and other prayer. The
question is whether a synagogue becomes
disqualified when it is used also for foreign
worship.
R. Weiner received a responsum signed
by Rav Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg,
Rav Nachum Rabinovitch and Rav Yosef
Carmel permitting prayer in such a room
because it is built as a synagogue (later
published as Be-Mareh Ha-Bazak 8:15).
Presumably, they follow Rav Eliyahu
Mizrachi and the Magen Avraham, that a
synagogue is not invalidated by foreign
prayer. R. Weiner showed this responsum
to Rav Asher Weiss, who gave his verbal
agreement. However, Rav Dovid Feinstein
and Rav Hershel Schachter both disagreed
and ruled that you may not pray in such a
room because it is an interfaith chapel.
It is important to note that the disagreement
is only about a room that is primarily a
synagogue. The authorities seem to agree
that a room designated for all religions is
problematic. R. Weiner also quotes Rav
Shammai Kehas Gross who forbids praying

in an airport interfaith chapel (Shevet Ha-
Kehasi 6:83).