Well, where to begin?
I don't want to waste time stating what is generally known, viz, that if child abuse exists in the world, it exists within our own 4 walls also. We are not, after all, a different species of humanity.
But we do boast a way of life that is designed to maintain holiness in the camp. If something unholy happens, it highlights a tension between our aspirations and our humanity. If we are all asked to live in a way that we cannot all live up to, the result is abuse.
Why should we be mind-blown by the fact that some charedim are gay? The Torah might forbid homosexuality, like it forbids a variaty of sexual associations, but the reality is that some people are gay. Hashem understands human weakness, hence for example the law of the woman captured in battle. How does that square with the law against intermarriage? Rather than have the battle-weary men sin with non-Israelite women, the law made it possible for them to have their cake and eat it.
So what if homosexuality is an "abomination"? Is abuse more acceptable to man or to Hashem? We need to make it possible for those in the community who are sexually challenged in this respect to find an outlet for the very human aspect of their lives without fear of shame and scandal. This will go a very long way to protecting children from unwanted attention.
Is this to condone sin? Yes. I personally feel that Hashem would rather people sinned as consenting adults than sinned against young children, (although I may be wrong).
So I would invite the Union to open a gay minyan, open to anyone who needs to catch a mincha, with a decorus mikva that gay/straight men can avail themselves of, and where everyone can shake hands and wish eachother gut shabbes with respect and maturity.
I dare say this blog will now be closed down by the frumkeit police. Another edict, another Gilui Daas. "Joe Blogs is unfit to serve as a blogger in any capacity, and whoever logs on to Speakerscornernw11 is not to be given an aliya".
Like I am very afraid. (I fear Hashem ever so much more).
Sunday 27 January 2013
Thursday 24 January 2013
This blog: the key-board of anglo-jewish orthodoxy
I've not yet seen this week's JT, nor have I spoken to anyone about its likely contents and omissions. But I can guess what I'm missing. There's the yiddish section (which anglo-jewish orthodoxy is fully up to speed with?); the "Here & There" sniff (as in "Perek Beis, sniff aleph") that has a tendency to knock things like the United Synagogue (but which might be rethinking its position this week); there are the pin-up pages (I refer you to the first post on this blog); and then there's Dina Rosell's version of the news (as it affects over-defensive and 'above-criticism' arrogant charedim, who push their luck and then feel got at when they get what's coming to them). Not all charedim can identify with this version of the news, and I am in this latter category. Basically then, what am I missing?
The adverts. The "lost & found". The kashrus public information bulletin. The riddle of the week. All things to do with "the" (ha!)
If I want a piece of real news, of the kind that might be of interest to anglo-jewish orthodoxy, I only need to log on, and suddenly everything that hasn't been reported in the press becomes clear.
Worryingly, some people actually write in commending the T. on its wonderful coverage and lack of schmutz. The only paper that can be left lying around for even the kids to read, without fear of the treifa velt coming into the house. Might as-well just leave the pages blank then. At least that way no-one can be accused of biased reporting, reporting 'losh' or hood-winking the readership. (Although I am quite partial to the odd wink). People like this don't need a newspaper, they need their own street leaflet (with a Notice about worms on one side). The rest of us are straining at the leash to let off steam, to have our voices heard. No outlet only means more frustration and more tension, and the end of it will be forced conversion to Satmar chassidus.
But what should the Tribune be reporting, and how?? Surely everything newsworthy or debatable is halachically problematic? Nu, didn't I say they should leave the pages blank?
The adverts. The "lost & found". The kashrus public information bulletin. The riddle of the week. All things to do with "the" (ha!)
If I want a piece of real news, of the kind that might be of interest to anglo-jewish orthodoxy, I only need to log on, and suddenly everything that hasn't been reported in the press becomes clear.
Worryingly, some people actually write in commending the T. on its wonderful coverage and lack of schmutz. The only paper that can be left lying around for even the kids to read, without fear of the treifa velt coming into the house. Might as-well just leave the pages blank then. At least that way no-one can be accused of biased reporting, reporting 'losh' or hood-winking the readership. (Although I am quite partial to the odd wink). People like this don't need a newspaper, they need their own street leaflet (with a Notice about worms on one side). The rest of us are straining at the leash to let off steam, to have our voices heard. No outlet only means more frustration and more tension, and the end of it will be forced conversion to Satmar chassidus.
But what should the Tribune be reporting, and how?? Surely everything newsworthy or debatable is halachically problematic? Nu, didn't I say they should leave the pages blank?
Tuesday 22 January 2013
STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
I take this opportunity to point out that the Joe Bloggs from "If you tickle us" is not me. My name is really Ms. Joe Blogs. Moving on, if you have been sitting quietly in a corner down at the Slap and Tickle recently, trying to make sense of what you over-hear (as distinct from over here), let me explain:-
The RCH problem seems to have opened a can of worms. Various individuals and communities aligned to the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations (UHOC), felt strongly (as in extra-strong chrayne) that the Union had failed to take swift and appropriate action regarding RCH's marriage guidance for married women. Anger turned to the Union, and suddenly RCH was buried in the snow, replaced by Union politics on a grand scale. Kedassia, the kashrus arm of that body, was first up for the slaughter; followed swiftly by burials, schools, mikvos, and lack of education for boys. Every aspect of life in Stamford Bridge went under the microscope, and boy were there worms!
Here at The Kashrus Arms the clientele are just beginning to wake up to the fact that Belz is not for drinking neat. Modified with a large dose of Satmargarine greased into the palms, and sprinkled with some chasidus from the Grand Rebbes to produce a single malt-like drink, these two spirits blend together like blood and sandpaper. It is basically just a power struggle, but why should we bring these noble chasidim down to our level ? It is far more than just an ordinary un-holy power struggle. It is a fight for who controls the funds of the Union and thereby the levels of blood pressure and religious excess for 21st century yidden all over the velt. So you can see why all this is so important. And fraught with kedusha.
But the best part of it all is that these 2 great branches of chasidus, warring for turf like nobody's business, are related by marriage to eachother and to other dynasties to boot. Does the wife of the Grand Rebbe of Belz speak to her counter-parts from Satmar or Vishnitz? Do any of them speak to that other chasidic rov, the one from Golders Green with the Well & Good Arms that poses as a mikva in his back garden? Or are they all on skype and text?
As a lady who does occasionally drive past the odd mikva (its on my way to Sainsbury's), I dare to suggest that the JT starts producing some news about the Anglo-Jewish orthodoxy of which that paper claims to be the 'voice'. So far this whole saga has only been gleaned off the internet! Loshon hora is one thing; public interest debate is quite another. (Although it is just dawning on me that the Tribune might well be an arm of the Union rather than a news paper, but we'll save that for another stream).
The RCH problem seems to have opened a can of worms. Various individuals and communities aligned to the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations (UHOC), felt strongly (as in extra-strong chrayne) that the Union had failed to take swift and appropriate action regarding RCH's marriage guidance for married women. Anger turned to the Union, and suddenly RCH was buried in the snow, replaced by Union politics on a grand scale. Kedassia, the kashrus arm of that body, was first up for the slaughter; followed swiftly by burials, schools, mikvos, and lack of education for boys. Every aspect of life in Stamford Bridge went under the microscope, and boy were there worms!
Here at The Kashrus Arms the clientele are just beginning to wake up to the fact that Belz is not for drinking neat. Modified with a large dose of Satmargarine greased into the palms, and sprinkled with some chasidus from the Grand Rebbes to produce a single malt-like drink, these two spirits blend together like blood and sandpaper. It is basically just a power struggle, but why should we bring these noble chasidim down to our level ? It is far more than just an ordinary un-holy power struggle. It is a fight for who controls the funds of the Union and thereby the levels of blood pressure and religious excess for 21st century yidden all over the velt. So you can see why all this is so important. And fraught with kedusha.
But the best part of it all is that these 2 great branches of chasidus, warring for turf like nobody's business, are related by marriage to eachother and to other dynasties to boot. Does the wife of the Grand Rebbe of Belz speak to her counter-parts from Satmar or Vishnitz? Do any of them speak to that other chasidic rov, the one from Golders Green with the Well & Good Arms that poses as a mikva in his back garden? Or are they all on skype and text?
As a lady who does occasionally drive past the odd mikva (its on my way to Sainsbury's), I dare to suggest that the JT starts producing some news about the Anglo-Jewish orthodoxy of which that paper claims to be the 'voice'. So far this whole saga has only been gleaned off the internet! Loshon hora is one thing; public interest debate is quite another. (Although it is just dawning on me that the Tribune might well be an arm of the Union rather than a news paper, but we'll save that for another stream).
Monday 21 January 2013
L'Chaim !
It was suggested to me that I allow shame-less (ie anonymous) comments on the blog so that no-one need be afraid of expressing his/her views (although HAshem knows who you are!) - and I have decided to give this a go for a LIMITED PERIOD ONLY!!!!! So if you have anything to say, feel free to say it now! I am drinking a l'chaim to this experiment and I hope you will comment "ad b'li die" (on ANY of my posts), and may we all merit to laugh together in the rebuilt city of Sholom speedily in our days, omain.
Now can someone kindly put me in the picture as to what a certain chap whose name rhymes with "brand" has done wrong and explain why "he has to go". Keep it simple because I am a woman. The subject has come up for discussion down at the Slap & Tickle brewery but I don't drink there unless I can keep up. Thanks in advance for the facts (the what???)
Now can someone kindly put me in the picture as to what a certain chap whose name rhymes with "brand" has done wrong and explain why "he has to go". Keep it simple because I am a woman. The subject has come up for discussion down at the Slap & Tickle brewery but I don't drink there unless I can keep up. Thanks in advance for the facts (the what???)
Sunday 20 January 2013
Twerski gets my goatie again; and For Whom The Belz Toll
I know we all want to stay tuned in to the gossip and we can't all fit in at the same time down at the Well & Good Arms (some of us just don't fit in anywhere, never mind at RC's mikvah), but there is another matter I need to off-load about: once again the "Seeking Solutions" bloke in Hamodia has offended my sensibilities. A guy explains how he was sometimes rude to his (late) overpowering father in the course of their working relationship, and he is advised to do teshuvah for this aveiroh (Hamodia, issue parshas Bo). Don't we all know that parents can sometimes drive us to distraction?? Does the commandment require us to submit to all their personality quirks at the expense of our own sanity - or does Hashem allow us some mercy and grace to be just human occasionally??? Not every human reaction is either an aveiroh, ocd, or the yetzer horror story, Rabbi Twerski ! Sometimes you can tell your questioners that all is well; they have done nothing wrong and they are perfectly normal. In other words, THEY DON'T NEED TO FEEL GUILTY ABOUT EVERYTHING!! Mind you, I am sure one or two of them could be guilty of something, possibly.
Anyway, coming back to the general topic of conversation around the world, does anyone think the Belzer Rebbe's son was in Manchester recently for a hachnosas Sefer Torah?? I think a few respected beards needed a conduit to bring and buy I mean to import and export various kvittelech between the UK and Eretz Yisroel with regard to a certain case in the offing, and this good-looking guy from Belz doesn't arouse suspician because he looks completely unJapanese and his father sent him, so obviously Kibud Ov brought him from Israel to Manchester (via Stockport) for a hachnosas sefer torah . . . yeah right.
Anyway, coming back to the general topic of conversation around the world, does anyone think the Belzer Rebbe's son was in Manchester recently for a hachnosas Sefer Torah?? I think a few respected beards needed a conduit to bring and buy I mean to import and export various kvittelech between the UK and Eretz Yisroel with regard to a certain case in the offing, and this good-looking guy from Belz doesn't arouse suspician because he looks completely unJapanese and his father sent him, so obviously Kibud Ov brought him from Israel to Manchester (via Stockport) for a hachnosas sefer torah . . . yeah right.
Friday 18 January 2013
Snow brings the white-wash
If you have been reading some of the recent comments on this site, you will by now be aware that certain things are not open to question. They are given and immutable.
A few weeks ago in the "Seeking Solutions" in HaModia, a yeshiva bochur wrote in seeking advice for on-going problems with emunah, and he described how guilt-ridden he felt having so many inappropriate thoughts. In reply R.Twersky said that either the bochur was just not fighting the yetzer hora strongly enough, or he was suffering from a form of OCD.
That a youth of 19 should be given these options is surely emotional blackmail of a most heinous variaty. Sadly the rabbis we entrust with our very souls are sometimes so afraid themselves, they are simply incapable of being true guides and mentors. But we go on calling them rabbis because convention says we must and it is not open to question.
I venture to suggest that there are many rabbonim who, for various reasons (ranging from women to emunah, finance, children, arms-dealing and drugs) could all be described as "unfit" to serve. (It is probably either their yetzer, or their OCD). But most of them, (unless they are extremely unlucky), will still be titled and respected rabbis for years to come, since the only thing the community condemns is sexual impropriaty. This alone can cost a rabbi his position, it seems.
A few weeks ago in the "Seeking Solutions" in HaModia, a yeshiva bochur wrote in seeking advice for on-going problems with emunah, and he described how guilt-ridden he felt having so many inappropriate thoughts. In reply R.Twersky said that either the bochur was just not fighting the yetzer hora strongly enough, or he was suffering from a form of OCD.
That a youth of 19 should be given these options is surely emotional blackmail of a most heinous variaty. Sadly the rabbis we entrust with our very souls are sometimes so afraid themselves, they are simply incapable of being true guides and mentors. But we go on calling them rabbis because convention says we must and it is not open to question.
I venture to suggest that there are many rabbonim who, for various reasons (ranging from women to emunah, finance, children, arms-dealing and drugs) could all be described as "unfit" to serve. (It is probably either their yetzer, or their OCD). But most of them, (unless they are extremely unlucky), will still be titled and respected rabbis for years to come, since the only thing the community condemns is sexual impropriaty. This alone can cost a rabbi his position, it seems.
Thursday 17 January 2013
Daughters of Tzelofchod Untie
I have been away from my blog and Tickle for a day and look what the naughty boys have been up to. If RCH could have forseen that it would all end with kedassia going up in smoke, the Disunion going down the pan and misnagdim vs. chassidim hissing and nagging at eachother, I think he would probably have chosen to go and live in Leyton. But who could have forseen??? Anyway, I haven't been able to read everything that has appeared in the last day or so, but I am getting the vibe that something is not right. I mean, things seem so very wrong that I can't even get my letters out in the right order.
I have long been thinking that the charedi world has gone mad in all sorts of ways. The rabbonim seem to say what they like in the noble aim of upholding kedushah in different ways (or of keeping the goyishe velt at bay - hope my yiddish impresses you), and nobody says "that's not for me" or "he thinks we all live in Mea Shearim". No, all of a sudden the whole character of orthodoxy has to change - or kids won't find shidduchim, people won't get aliyos, businesses will fail and moshiach won't come. I thought the rabbonim were not allowed to impose anything on the kehilla that the kehilla would find too difficult to live with. Well I can't live with Playboy coming through the letterbox every Friday; and I know thousands of frum ladies (not that I'm such a lady myself) who can't live with the Jewish Tribune. If ever you wanted a contradiction in terms it is "organ of ANGLO-JEWISH ORTHODOXY".
Since when was Anglo-Jewry so orthodox that it needed anything other than the Chronicle? Only when it wasn't anglo at all, but German and generally European and "Agudah". Anglo-Jewish????!!!!!!!!!! Go and wash your mouth out. That is for people who use the eiruv, have modern buggies, eat Beth (who?) Din meat and listen to a sermon. The agudah is for people who can't live without chrayne, daf yomi (betting pages), computers, rabbinic edicts and dictats, and collecting. And for such values we need to keep our hair covered and our toe nails invisible? Do me a favour! I don't flatter myself that I'm such a turn-on (I could be wrong), that I need to walk around like a ghost or in burkah. If freedom is to be curtailed by such nonsense, it should my old man who is kept indoors. If he can't go out without thinking "nice bit of skirt, that" or "I could fancy that (her)", then HE shouldn't be allowed out. Why do I need to cover up so that he can make a brocha?? What rabbinic blackmail is that to keep women under wraps?
The point I'm getting to is that all this blogging has revealed the deep problems with the kehilla about almost every aspect of charedi life. It is turning out to be too much of a strain. Most of it is as unnatural as being gay. In fact being gay is at least a choice, not a dictat. So blog away and we'll see if anything changes as a result of our new orthodox organs.
I have long been thinking that the charedi world has gone mad in all sorts of ways. The rabbonim seem to say what they like in the noble aim of upholding kedushah in different ways (or of keeping the goyishe velt at bay - hope my yiddish impresses you), and nobody says "that's not for me" or "he thinks we all live in Mea Shearim". No, all of a sudden the whole character of orthodoxy has to change - or kids won't find shidduchim, people won't get aliyos, businesses will fail and moshiach won't come. I thought the rabbonim were not allowed to impose anything on the kehilla that the kehilla would find too difficult to live with. Well I can't live with Playboy coming through the letterbox every Friday; and I know thousands of frum ladies (not that I'm such a lady myself) who can't live with the Jewish Tribune. If ever you wanted a contradiction in terms it is "organ of ANGLO-JEWISH ORTHODOXY".
Since when was Anglo-Jewry so orthodox that it needed anything other than the Chronicle? Only when it wasn't anglo at all, but German and generally European and "Agudah". Anglo-Jewish????!!!!!!!!!! Go and wash your mouth out. That is for people who use the eiruv, have modern buggies, eat Beth (who?) Din meat and listen to a sermon. The agudah is for people who can't live without chrayne, daf yomi (betting pages), computers, rabbinic edicts and dictats, and collecting. And for such values we need to keep our hair covered and our toe nails invisible? Do me a favour! I don't flatter myself that I'm such a turn-on (I could be wrong), that I need to walk around like a ghost or in burkah. If freedom is to be curtailed by such nonsense, it should my old man who is kept indoors. If he can't go out without thinking "nice bit of skirt, that" or "I could fancy that (her)", then HE shouldn't be allowed out. Why do I need to cover up so that he can make a brocha?? What rabbinic blackmail is that to keep women under wraps?
The point I'm getting to is that all this blogging has revealed the deep problems with the kehilla about almost every aspect of charedi life. It is turning out to be too much of a strain. Most of it is as unnatural as being gay. In fact being gay is at least a choice, not a dictat. So blog away and we'll see if anything changes as a result of our new orthodox organs.
Tuesday 15 January 2013
A woman's place is in de heim
If I have learnt anything today, it is that I am a real idiot. I have lived for [ ] number of years in some kind of bubble, in which great rabbis are men of high character. Today that bubble went bang: it turns out that the great rabbis are in fact women, and that I could have been one of them if I hadn't listened to my parents all those years ago and gone to Sem. What was the point of that? All I can do from where I am now is sit on the sidelines and fume, and because I am allowed even less access to the internet than my husband (who only uses it for his work), I have no outlet for all the interesting things I need to get off my chest. I have less of a public voice than the woman who reads the shipping forcast. Where is it written that a woman has to live like a cholent, simmering away until she's fit to burst, while the men come out with all the tripe the next day? Enough! From now on, I'm the one coming out with all the tripe . . .
Sunday 13 January 2013
Voice of reason (kol isha)
Its 11pm on shabbos night. Everyone is either in bed, going to bed or blogging. I am flicking through the new glossy section of Hamodia, which this week is all about affairs. Not affairs of the heart, or affairs as in "it was a sordid affair", but affairs as in "the chupah is in London, and the Do is in Luzcerne". Not so long ago we were being cajoled by the rabbonim to make our get-togethers a little less lavish and a little more modest. Now this!
In its own defence, Hamodia takes the trouble of putting Rabbeinu Hakadosh on a pedastol for making a lavish affair. The difference of course, is that he invited "all the tanna'im and talmidei chachamim of his time"; we invite all our wealthy friends and business associates, so bringing the occasion down to one of pure dosh. (Do I even know any poor people?)
Perhaps our rabbonim are not as learned as Hamodia's editorial board, and so don't know just how lavish a do Reb Shimon's chasunah was. Hence they tell us to tone down our simchas. More likely though, the big shots at Hamodia sussed that the way to a woman's heart is through a glossy mag with pictures of dressed tables and fancy halls, and some male singers just for added interest, and that business will fall once they do a supplement on fast cars, medical insurance and DIY. Once again, its the women who hold the key to success.
The Tribune, it must be said, hasn't yet sunk so low as to produce a glossy mag to pander to anyone's material senses. It has higher values. (Was I knocking it the other day? Can't believe it). I'm not saying it is a newspapaer, but whatever it is, it has standards. Hamodia even advertises in the secular Jewish papers, (not that I read those) and I guess it must have learnt from them about glossy mags.
Well if the editorial board is reading this, please can you do a feature about smart hats for weddings and for yom-tov parading in NW11, thank-you. And another one on shoes. And baby formula. And one on property in Israel for my husband (to keep him quiet while I'm in Amshinov).
In its own defence, Hamodia takes the trouble of putting Rabbeinu Hakadosh on a pedastol for making a lavish affair. The difference of course, is that he invited "all the tanna'im and talmidei chachamim of his time"; we invite all our wealthy friends and business associates, so bringing the occasion down to one of pure dosh. (Do I even know any poor people?)
Perhaps our rabbonim are not as learned as Hamodia's editorial board, and so don't know just how lavish a do Reb Shimon's chasunah was. Hence they tell us to tone down our simchas. More likely though, the big shots at Hamodia sussed that the way to a woman's heart is through a glossy mag with pictures of dressed tables and fancy halls, and some male singers just for added interest, and that business will fall once they do a supplement on fast cars, medical insurance and DIY. Once again, its the women who hold the key to success.
The Tribune, it must be said, hasn't yet sunk so low as to produce a glossy mag to pander to anyone's material senses. It has higher values. (Was I knocking it the other day? Can't believe it). I'm not saying it is a newspapaer, but whatever it is, it has standards. Hamodia even advertises in the secular Jewish papers, (not that I read those) and I guess it must have learnt from them about glossy mags.
Well if the editorial board is reading this, please can you do a feature about smart hats for weddings and for yom-tov parading in NW11, thank-you. And another one on shoes. And baby formula. And one on property in Israel for my husband (to keep him quiet while I'm in Amshinov).
BRIDGING THE GAP
I'm starting my own blog trying to make some sense out of the Chaim Halpern debacle. The current facts seem to be as follows: This world-renowned chassidic rov and religious Judge in the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregatiions appears to have been giving marriage guidance counselling for many years. At some point in recent years, various complaints were made by some women, to other rabbis, that the counselling they were being given was somewhat inappropriate for a rabbi. R.Halpern was advised to stop his counselling sessions, and chose not to follow this advice. He maintained that he was healing these broken women and rebuilding their family life, which of course is highly commendable - if done properly.
All of a sudden last autumn, things took a drastic turn and another senior rabbi of the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations insisted that R.Halpern "leave town" asap. What had happened?? No sensible answers have been given, but it appears that as many as 30 or so women complained (suddenly?) that they had been touched and spoken to inappropriately and they were going to the police. The next thing anybody knew, which transpired several weeks later, was that R.Halpern had been obliged to stand down from all his public duties in the Union, including his position as Principal of the Beth Jacob Senior Girls School, whilst maintaining his innocence. So the Union were washing their hands of him, if only because they strongly disapproved of his actions; but most likely because they had no choice once the external authorities were being called in!
However, R.Halpern had a privately-run synagogue located within his own home, and this could not be touched. So when the other rabbis realised that they could not stop him being the rabbi of his own community, they went further to try and stop his followers attending services there. They issued a proclamation declaring that R.Halpern was "unfit to serve as a rabbi in any capacity". Still nothing much happened ! A few people stopped their allegience but the little synagogue (shteible) continues to operate and have support. R.Halpern continues to give his talks and classes (shiurim) on different aspects of Jewish life, and if it wasn't for the internet one could be forgiven for thinking all was now quiet. Of course the question remains, if he is innocent why did the rabbis issue such an edict? The panel of rabbis that investigated the complaints was by no means an amateur kangaroo court. But we shall return to this question. We might also like to ask why it wasn't enough for them that he resigned his public offices? Why did they seek to finish him off completely, and so publically and humiliatingly? We might return to this matter too !
Something close to an on-going riot then followed. Differenct factions went head-to-head with their support for either R.Halpern or as anti-Halpernists. People stopped buying kosher meat under the supervision of the Union Rabbinate in protest at the Union's failure to oust R.Halpern effectively years earlier. This economic pressure could not be underestimated and the Union had to take further action: so it eventually appointed another team of international rabbinic judges to try the case again and urged the public to hold fire until such time as this court issued a ruling. After that the Union would take swift action (if necessary). But this posed the problem of what about the rabbinic proclamation that had already been issued??? Didn't that carry any weight? What respect could the people have for those rabbis and judges if it could be set aside so lightly? Why did the Union need a second court of judges to hear the evidence?
More importantly, what penalty could any religious court impose, if no criminal activity had taken place?
Unless the police and criminal justice system could be deployed, the Halpern followers are free to attend the synagogue of their choice however many edicts are issued against the man. So what stands to be gained by having even 50 different hearings? Why is there such a drive to get R.Halpern to leave town instead of talk to make him pay compensation to the victims he is supposed to have abused? The whole emphasis is on saving the community from outside policing, not on any actual victims (if they exist), a strange angle to take in the face of such a crime against the person/s.
So when I look at this state of affairs, I cannot be certain that any kind of abuse has taken place. The rabbi might have acted foolishly but this is not a crime. The police have not impounded R.Halpern or his synagogoue, and he remains free to travel and counsel and live his life without going on the run from the authorities. The second rabbinic trial is due to take place at some point in the forseeable future, but it will have no power of enforcement or sanction other than to issue another edict and hope that everyone will then abandon R.Halpern and that will be the end of him. How will that help the victims?
It will save the community from outside policing. The victims will have been silenced. All will be quiet once more.
Now take a look at the "ifyoutickleus" blog and see how wrong I am !!
All of a sudden last autumn, things took a drastic turn and another senior rabbi of the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations insisted that R.Halpern "leave town" asap. What had happened?? No sensible answers have been given, but it appears that as many as 30 or so women complained (suddenly?) that they had been touched and spoken to inappropriately and they were going to the police. The next thing anybody knew, which transpired several weeks later, was that R.Halpern had been obliged to stand down from all his public duties in the Union, including his position as Principal of the Beth Jacob Senior Girls School, whilst maintaining his innocence. So the Union were washing their hands of him, if only because they strongly disapproved of his actions; but most likely because they had no choice once the external authorities were being called in!
However, R.Halpern had a privately-run synagogue located within his own home, and this could not be touched. So when the other rabbis realised that they could not stop him being the rabbi of his own community, they went further to try and stop his followers attending services there. They issued a proclamation declaring that R.Halpern was "unfit to serve as a rabbi in any capacity". Still nothing much happened ! A few people stopped their allegience but the little synagogue (shteible) continues to operate and have support. R.Halpern continues to give his talks and classes (shiurim) on different aspects of Jewish life, and if it wasn't for the internet one could be forgiven for thinking all was now quiet. Of course the question remains, if he is innocent why did the rabbis issue such an edict? The panel of rabbis that investigated the complaints was by no means an amateur kangaroo court. But we shall return to this question. We might also like to ask why it wasn't enough for them that he resigned his public offices? Why did they seek to finish him off completely, and so publically and humiliatingly? We might return to this matter too !
Something close to an on-going riot then followed. Differenct factions went head-to-head with their support for either R.Halpern or as anti-Halpernists. People stopped buying kosher meat under the supervision of the Union Rabbinate in protest at the Union's failure to oust R.Halpern effectively years earlier. This economic pressure could not be underestimated and the Union had to take further action: so it eventually appointed another team of international rabbinic judges to try the case again and urged the public to hold fire until such time as this court issued a ruling. After that the Union would take swift action (if necessary). But this posed the problem of what about the rabbinic proclamation that had already been issued??? Didn't that carry any weight? What respect could the people have for those rabbis and judges if it could be set aside so lightly? Why did the Union need a second court of judges to hear the evidence?
More importantly, what penalty could any religious court impose, if no criminal activity had taken place?
Unless the police and criminal justice system could be deployed, the Halpern followers are free to attend the synagogue of their choice however many edicts are issued against the man. So what stands to be gained by having even 50 different hearings? Why is there such a drive to get R.Halpern to leave town instead of talk to make him pay compensation to the victims he is supposed to have abused? The whole emphasis is on saving the community from outside policing, not on any actual victims (if they exist), a strange angle to take in the face of such a crime against the person/s.
So when I look at this state of affairs, I cannot be certain that any kind of abuse has taken place. The rabbi might have acted foolishly but this is not a crime. The police have not impounded R.Halpern or his synagogoue, and he remains free to travel and counsel and live his life without going on the run from the authorities. The second rabbinic trial is due to take place at some point in the forseeable future, but it will have no power of enforcement or sanction other than to issue another edict and hope that everyone will then abandon R.Halpern and that will be the end of him. How will that help the victims?
It will save the community from outside policing. The victims will have been silenced. All will be quiet once more.
Now take a look at the "ifyoutickleus" blog and see how wrong I am !!
Saturday 12 January 2013
Amshinov a bitch
I wish the JT would stop publishing pictures of men, when they could so easily pencil them out. Did anyone see the Amshinover Rebbe in this week's pics? He's not bad looking, is he? And rumour has it that he is a purveyor of exquisite sexual therapy to boot. From the moment I saw his picture in the centre pages on Thursday, until half an hour before shabbos - when my hubby came home and shrieked "Chani! Have you set the eiruv like a good Jewish wife?" (doesn't he know my name is Joe, not Chani??) - I sat drooling over this picture, sucking on my pen until I lost a filling. Don't quite know how I got shabbos done, but G-d knows alright! On Friday night I said to my husband, "what are we doing after shabbos?" and he said he was going to learn with a friend and maybe do a bit of business. I said "fine, because I'll be going to Amshinov - the new shopping centre - for a couple of hours and some therapy". Easy as that. And the charedi press think they are doing mankind a favour deleting Hilary Clinton et al femmes fatale from their pages! My husband simply requested that I don't spend too much, but what the heck - I don't go to Amshinov every day. And the best bit is that while this "scandal" is going on about rabbis giving marriage guidance to (married) women, when they should be giving shiurim, the men just don't see that sticking pictures of men with beards in the yiddishe press every week is driving some women crazy. No wonder marriage guidance is all the rage. Once again the press has done untold damage. They think only men get turned on by pictures! Not so mate. In these days of equality, women are just as vulnerable to feelings of lust and sin. That's why we have advertising. But its time to stop blogging now and go to Amshinov.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)