DY: I agree with CTLawyer, but either way, a menahel has a brief interview with candidates, not the years of study which a talmid chacham would have in the beis midrash of his rosh yeshiva.
ubiq: Sorry, I wasn’t clear. “Pulpit” didn’t mean a standard pulpit rabbi. More of a “lectern, shtender, table in front of the crowd” type. You know, anyone who may speak at an event.
Why does the qualification of rabbi come AFTER getting an actual shul position? Don’t you try to get rabbis who are already rabbis on their own merits?
I understand where you’re going with much of what you’re saying- that because these positions are positions of power and respect, they need to be given titles which the people under them will respect. But it works the other way around as well- people who are given the title will be given more respect, whether they deserve it or not. (While certain recent events may come to mind, I’ve been making this argument since long before that particular story popped up.) The title gives the person more respect in EVERY sphere, whether the bearer deserves it or not. A person should have the title which befits his/her stature, not which will simply AID his/her stature. Nobody will call a nurse or PA “Doctor” in order to accord them more respect.
As far as “rebbetzin”- it simply does not have the same significance. That is a fact. I understand that you disagree, but it’s true. While their two speeches may- MAY- be viewed in the same way, if someone were to hear “Rebbetzin X said that we should do Y,” there would not be the same reaction as if it were “Rabbi X said…” This is because, even if the word “rabbi” apparently no longer means anything, it still has the CONNOTATION of meaning something, which is why this is such a big deal. “Rebbetzin” has always been simply the wife of a rabbi, and therefore does not have the same significance. I see here that we disagree, though, so perhaps we should just agree to let it rest.