Question: Should congregational ministers like rabbis be regulated by an external agency as teachers are — or can synagogue bodies be trusted to deal with any instances of misconduct?
An orthodox view
Some
might think that religious leaders advocating for external regulation
would be like the proverbial turkey voting for Christmas!
However, it was Shmuel, the great talmudic sage in the third
century, who instituted the halachic concept of dina d’malchuta dina —
the law of the land is law (when it does not conflict with Jewish
religious law).
What makes it even more remarkable is that, unlike the vast
majority of other issues dealt with in the Oral Tradition, this ruling
is universally accepted. This means that Jews, living in the diaspora
are obligated to accept the laws of the country in which they live.
There has never been even a suggestion of a hierarchy in which communal
leaders are somehow above the law.
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, the foremost halachic authority of the
late 20th century, rules that dina d’malchuta dina applies in
democracies, and, for example, obligates us to pay taxes. He writes:
“Besides the prohibitions of theft, there are other terrible sins
involved, including lying, deceiving, creating Chillul Hashem
[desecration of God’s name] and disgracing Torah and those who study
it.”
Synagogue bodies, like all UK charities, are regulated by the
Charity Commission. They are required to report serious incidents to the
commission and to have complaints procedures on their websites. Robust
HR policies, clear line management structures and good governance are
essential to investigate misconduct.
Last October, Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis issued a strong
statement in support of the call by the Independent Inquiry into Child
Sexual Abuse for mandatory reporting of suspected abuse. He said: “We
must do more to ensure child-protection policies and procedures are up
to date, actionable and effective across our communal organisations.”
The United Synagogue told the Inquiry that it would support more
formal regulation of child protection within religious organisations.
The head of the Federation of Synagogues, Rabbi Shraga Feivel
Zimmerman, has also gone on record urging anyone who has knowledge of
misconduct to report it to the police.
Within the United Synagogue, trained professionals are employed
to undertake rigorous checks on all employees (US rabbis require an
enhanced DBS check), safeguarding training is mandatory, and there are
robust structures and policies in place to ensure safeguarding and child
protection.
It is clear that responsible synagogue bodies understand that
there is a definitive halachic imperative to follow normative legal
protocols. Jewish communal professionals can be in no doubt that
misconduct must be investigated and, when necessary, reported to the
relevant authorities so that the full force of the law can protect
everyone.
A Progressive view
The fact that such a question is even being asked is deeply worrying. It reflects the reality that there have been some high-profile cases of rabbis abusing their position.
It is shocking that people who are supposed to be religious and have
been appointed to be leaders of a community have acted in this way.
Whatever happened to Isaiah’s “Keep justice and act with integrity”
(56.1)?
Of course, it should be admitted that this is not unique to
recent times. There have long been instances of rabbinic misbehaviour,
but two factors have changed the way they are handled.
First, is the rise of social media. It means that whereas
beforehand, it was much easier for the establishment to close down bad
news — either because they wanted to protect the perpetrator, or because
they wanted to defend the system at large — now it is much harder to
engineer cover-ups.
This includes the #MeToo movement, which has spread rapidly and
encourages victims to expose all forms of wrongdoing that would
previously have been unreported.
Second, the terrible sexual abuses carried out by Catholic
priests on children, along with the physical and verbal cruelty by nuns
against vulnerable young women, has led to a reassessment of religious
authority and power across all faiths.
We can only hope that the misconduct of rabbis has not been
anywhere near the extraordinary scale of that within the Church, but
even one case is one case too many.
Unregistered Charedi schools in the UK, which are not examined by Ofsted, have hundreds of Jewish pupils attending.
They are dangerously closed from public scrutiny over standards of child protection. Why do we allow them?
There is no doubt that rabbis — be they congregational minister
or teachers at all educational bodies — should definitely be regulated.
Given that they are in regular contact with adults and children, and
sometimes in one-to-one situations, what argument can there possibly be
not to do so?
I am sure that using an external agency would be the best
method, otherwise there is the strong temptation for vested interests
(be it the shul council or school governors) to suppress or pay off
complaints so as to preserve the institution’s reputation. Justice has
to be transparent.
In addition every rabbinic body should have a code of ethics,
which all members have to sign and without which they cannot find
employment.