I understand that traditionally this is prohibited, but since they are the same faith would they require a ketubah or a modified version?

I read that Rav Feinstein would rather à kohen marry a Goya than a giyoret, so it got me wondering if they could write a ketubah:

Furthermore, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Responsa Iggerot Moshe Even Ha-Ezer vol. 2, #4) disputes Rabbi Hoffman’s assertion that by permitting a non-Jewish woman convert to stay married (civilly) to a kohen would allow for less transgression of the law. Rabbi Feinstein states that if the woman is converted and the couple does not follow the laws of family purity, the punishment is karet (divine excision) and the kohen violates the negative commandment (lav) of living with a zonah. However, leaving the woman unconverted involves only two negative commandments: not marrying a non-Jew and a kohen living with a zonah. Thus, Rabbi Feinstein rules that converting her makes the situation worse and he would advise doing nothing.

  • 2
    I'm having trouble understanding the part about "same religion". One is a Jew and one is a Noachide. Are you saying that those are the same religion? Can you clarify? – Monica Cellio May 14 '19 at 20:16
  • 2
    That’s not what Rav Moshe said. As per the context of your quote, Rav Moshe was addressing a case where they were already civilly married, and the Kohen was threatening to reject Judaism entirely if he couldn’t remain married to her. You can’t generalize from there that a Kohen could go ahead and marry a non-Jewess! And besides, all he said is that it’s better, not that it’s permissible. A Kohen marrying a non-Jewess is still a Biblical prohibition. – DonielF May 14 '19 at 21:46
  • 2
    @Monica the question is using the word "religion" in the literal sense. Technically, the religion of non-Jew who believes in the Torah and Hashem is Judaism, despite his not being a member of the Jewish nation. "Noachide" isn't a religion. – Daniel May 14 '19 at 22:21

It is totally forbidden for a Jew to marry a non-Jew. There are no concessions or exceptions to this rule.

There is, of course, no Kesuvah. The obligation of kesuva is a Rabbinic enactment to protect the wife's rights in the marriage and to ensure that divorce is a last resort. This obligation applies only to a marriage the Torah recognizes, not one which has no halachic legitimacy.

Marriage laws pertain to marriages; the union of a Jewess and Non-Jew is not a marriage.

(This is not the case by all forbidden marriages. Certain forbidden marriages still have תפיסת קידושין, meaning that the marriage has legal effect although it is forbidden. Such marriages are still subject to the Kesuva obligation (Shulchan Aruch E"H 116.1). The above is true by all marriages which have no תפיסת קידושין. They have no status of marriage in any context.)

  • We don't know who you are that we should trust what you find obvious is indeed so. – Double AA May 15 '19 at 11:49
  • Not sure about that last statement, would like to see a source. I would have thought that in any situation where the husband is obligated to issue a divorce (because the initial marriage was sinful), the kesuba obligation would be waived. – Menachem May 15 '19 at 19:05
  • SHU"A E"H 116.1. I've updated the answer to include the source – chortkov2 May 15 '19 at 19:24
  • 1
    @Menachem - I would have said the same misvara. But the Gemara Yevamos 84 says otherwise, as paskened in Shulchan Aruch. – chortkov2 May 15 '19 at 19:26
  • Goes to show that your svara doesn't necessarily reflect the halakha. Why trust your svara about the OPs case? – Double AA May 15 '19 at 19:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .