Todros Grynhaus: The Gateshead Rav testifies against him in court

Jewish Chronicle   A leading rabbi has told a court that a Jewish teacher was “annoyed at being caught” when confronted with allegations of serious sexual abuse in front of his wife as part of a secret meeting.

Rabbi Shraga Feivel Zimmerman was giving evidence on Tuesday in the trial of 50-year-old Todros Grynhaus, a prominent member of the Charedi community in Salford.

Father-of-ten Mr Grynhaus is charged with five counts of indecent assault and two counts of sexual assault against two girls committed when they were aged around 14 and 15.

Rabbi Zimmerman – the Gateshead Rav – and one of the most significant figures in Gateshead’s strictly Orthodox community, was notified of the allegations by Mr Grynhaus’s cousin, Rabbi Gershon Miller, also of Gateshead, in 2010, and it was decided a meeting should be arranged.

Rabbi Miller, Rabbi Zimmerman and psychologist Dr Michael Schauder opted to tell Mr Grynhaus to visit them in Gateshead with his wife without telling him the precise reason.

Once at the classroom location, he was confronted with the sexual abuse allegations said to have been committed against one girl some years earlier.

Rather than protesting or denying the allegations, it is claimed Mr Grynhaus said: “What would you like me to do about it?”

With Mr Grynhaus’s wife Leah beside him looking “speechless and stunned”, Dr Schauder suggested he attend therapy sessions, to which Mr Grynhaus agreed, Manchester Crown Court heard.

Giving evidence, Rabbi Zimmerman said: “Up until a certain point I thought it was insignificant. Up until the point the charge of sexual abuse was made then I realised it was far more serious. I wanted to see what Todros Grynhaus would say about this.

“If he had denied it or expressed some remorse I would have tried to push further to restore peace, but since he didn’t, I realised it was beyond competence and let Dr Schauder handle it. [...]

The Shidduch Crisis: A spiritual explanation

Update  - Rap's Rebuttal

Guest Post Rabbi Yoel Small, M.Ed.

More and more Americans are choosing not to marry. The percentage of never married Americans over the age of 25 has more than doubled to over 20 percent. Forty five percent of these never-married Americans over the age of 25 either do not want to marry or are unsure whether they would eventually like to get married. (See link) Of those that do marry, over fifty percent of marriages end in divorce. To sum up, we reside in a society that is continuously downgrading the value of families. 

Unfortunately, these attitudes have infiltrated our communities as well. The singles scene in the Upper West Side and Washington Heights neighborhoods of Manhattan - which hosts thousands of Jewish singles over the age twenty five - is one of its products. The alarming, ever-rising divorce rate is another one that has its roots the discard of the value of maintaining a wholesome family setting. 

Our community has also unfortunately been affected by a seemingly unrelated marital crises - the shidduch crises. This crises is unique in that it seems to only be affecting women. While several explanations have been suggested as the route cause of the crises, the age-gap theory is the predominant one.

There have been several initiatives that have been advanced to rectify the shidduch crises. One philanthropist, in an effort to ease the shidduch crises, has offered to ensure that, under certain conditions, each matchmaker will relieve $10,000 per match made.

The Rambam rules that when we see a crises befall our community, we have a responsibility to soul-search in order to understand why Hashem has brought this upon us - which will cause the  crises to leave us. The Rambam notes further, that refraining from soul-searching and attributing the crises to natural causes is cruelty. 

WHILE we’ve seen technical explanations as to why there may be a shidduch crises, have we seen spiritual reasons suggested? 

Is it possible that Hashem has allowed this shidduch crises to come about in order to save the Yiddishe family? As we’ve noted, we reside in a society where more than one out of every two marriages end in divorce, and the rate is continuously rising. Unfortunately, in our communities the divorce rate is also, sadly increasing at an alarming rate. 

What is the cause of all these divorces? While I cannot answer this question, the fact is that the vast majority of divorces are initiated and sought by the wife. Several studies have been conducted as to which party chooses to divorce. The studies vary in their results. However according the lowest study, over 66 percent of divorces are initiated by the wife and 20% by the husband (11% were mutually sought). According to one study, over 90% of divorces are initiated by the wife. That’s between a three to one and a 9 to 1 ratio. Many therapists have explained that the woman, even with children, feels that “she could do better” - find a better husband and selfishly abandons her marriage.

It is very possible that maybe, just maybe, Hashem created the shidduch challenge we currently face in order to protect and secure the Jewish family from these societal influences. A person values and appreciates an item that was difficult to obtain much more than an item that was obtained with little effort. A wife will value a marriage that she had to, unfortunately, wait and seek for a very long time, much more than had it come effortlessly. It won’t be easy for her to just pick up one day and say “I can do better”, when she is aware that “it’s a man’s world out there”.

(Rabbi Tzadok Katz once mentioned in the American Yated that NASI has conducted studies that have shown that certain communities have barley been affected by the shidduch crises. Those communities that are less affected are the communities that seem to be less influenced by secular society and are a lot less likely to seek a divorce, unless absolutely necessary. And their definition of absolutely necessary does not include “I could do better”.)  

So in conjunction to these fine initiatives being advanced in order to solve the shidduch crises, wouldn’t it be prudent upon us to internalize the value of marriage, the way Hashem would like us to treat marriage? 

As many segulos are available and suggested, I would like to propose one as well. Can we suggest that a segula for a young woman to overcome her own personal shidduch crises would be to internalize and appreciate the value of marriage. To firmly accept upon herself that as soon as she merits to marry, she will value and appreciate the marriage. Once married, she will feel a responsibility towards her spouse and will never, ever seek to end it to “do better”. Midah kneged midah, may Hashem save her time and anguish, and unite her with her zivug quickly. Omain!

======================Rap's Rebuttal ===================

There is no "spiritual shidduch crisis" – it's all (hu)man made!

Guest post by RaP

Most of society's problems are created for very real reasons that have to do with the people who live in that society. The talk about a "shidduch crisis" in the frum world often leaves one thinking as if it's some sort of disjointed inexplicable surprise "earthquake" or "tsunami" that has risen from the dark beyond or mysterious deep and hit us hard, when that is far from the truth.

Over many decades of observing the rising problems relating to dating, shidduchim, older singles, out of town singles, singles events and all the constant talk about this subject, it becomes quite obvious that for some or other reasons the real factors that are at work are often overlooked or are just too tough to face.

Here are some hard-earned observations and conclusions based on real-life interactions with people seeking shidduchim in the frum world, from modern Orthodox, Yeshivish or Charedi, to strictly Chasidish, in no particular hierarchy of importance:

Young people today are not prepared for the hard realities of married life. The luxurious lifestyle and catering to every last whim of children and teens does not prepare them for either dating or marriage. Years spent in yeshivos, Jewish day schools and bais yaakovs where teachers fear for their salaries and never really talk about the daily sacrifices required to meet and keep one's bashert. Never-ending amusement trips, summer camps, vacations and the many family happy events are not good preparation for practical realities like getting and holding a job, buying groceries, paying bills, and managing a budget, taking out the garbage and doing laundry, and the real pain of having babies, changing diapers and raising children.

In short there is a major disconnect between the chinuch offered up and the requirements of real life at the end of the day. Kids expect to have all their wishes met, all expenses paid, and be taken care of, when to date and get married requires that you take care of that other person you are dating, then your spouse, children and home.

So many people just prefer staying at home and eating Mom's delicious kugels and cakes rather than face the ugly cruel world out there.

Too many people are brainwashed by the need for "perfect looks" as if a nation of narcissists has arisen. Every boy wants a beautiful thin (and rich) girl who looks stunning, and every girl dreams of a handsome prince from some romantic tale. This is a common affliction in America and the frum suffer from it a lot even though they are not as involved in the mainstream culture. Yet hardly anyone cares that beauty is only skin deep and "sheker hachein vehevel hayofi" is a very real bit of practical advice.

How many people put Yiras Shomayim and real Mentsclichkeit before anything else? In short people's values are skewered beyond repair so that it's no surprise that a lot of folks can't hook up because they are lost in dreamland.

In some circles girls are educated to "support" boys in Kollel. This was a very vital and important idea after the Holocaust a "hora'as sha'ah" to boost the status of Limmud HaTorah in a world that had lost the cream of its Torah scholars in the Holocaust and to assimilation. But that was then, and this is now. Today we have hundreds of thousands if not millions of strict Torah-observant Jews, and tens of thousands of Torah learners with yeshivos bursting at the seams.

The reality now is that people cannot count on other's supporting them for long periods.

Even very frum families cannot do it because it is impossible to support ten scholars in every family if every family is "only" pushing for Kollel marriages. The frum educational system is still functioning as if it's in a world of Shtetels when it fact we are in world of wealth with high standards of living. The world of the Chofetz Chaim living in a hut with mud floors is long gone, today people require luxuries as necessities. Among the modern Orthodox they have another social sickness, convinced that every kid has to go to an Ivy League college ignoring that with that comes mixed dorms, and moral destruction. Yet for them it is "college ubber alles" no matter that most of those kids lose their Jewish identity on campus very quickly. Needless to say living on a modern college campus is the worst preparation for dating and marriage, and that should be self-understood but it is ignored for the sake of getting a degree, in anything, at all costs. It is a tragedy!

Tuitions and living expenses related to raising children, even for dating itself, are sky-high, and for the Charedi world what is needed is more income producing men. The Chasidish world is ahead of the game here, especially in America, they push their young men out to work soon after marriage and thus it's more doable for them to marry at a young age, while their modern Orthodox and Yeshivish compatriots flounder for a form of parnossa. Thus, young women often rebel and seek higher employment, which is logical, but then that locks them out of the Kollel-shidduchim. Working guys and higher earning women are a big part of the unmarried population and it's because they are being discriminated against for not being in Kollel.

Another major factor that contributes to girls being single in the Yeshivish community, is that unlike in the Chasidish world where girls do not go overseas to seminaries, it has now become "the divine right" of most Yeshvish girls in America, like the modern Orthodox girls do, to expect a year or two of an all expenses paid year or two of study, touring, and fun and games in Israel. During 12th grade she dreams of being in Israel, then spends a year or two out of circulation in Har Nof, then it takes another year or two for her to land and get down to dating back home in the USA. By that time she is already about 21 and she wonders why she is not getting as many dates. Unlike the Chasidish girls who do not leave home, get a good practical Chinuch in home making and being a good wife and mother who start dating by 18 and by 20 most are married.

It's absurd to read ads in the frum papers urging parents not to send their sons to Israel to help solve the lack of good guys, when the problem is the girls who should not be sent away when they should be dating instead and getting ready for marriage. But no, people must have their good times, nothing to do with preparation for dating, marriage or life, just another entitlement and desire for long vacations, being taken care of by Mommy and Daddy, and the easy life.

Then people wonder why things are not working out. How can they if you spend your life and all your money spoiling your children, giving in to all their whims, and then wondering why they don't know how to have a real relationship with a member of the opposite sex and be ready for marriage, parenthood, home-building and dealing with all the curve balls life throws at you and still be in one good monogamous healthy marriage for life, til death do us part, something that is becoming harder and harder to attain, due to our own very human failings.

Fixing the Problem of Liberal Bias in Social Psychology regarding issues such as gender, race, morality

Scientific American     Does Social Psychology need more political diversity? Here’s one thing on which everyone can agree: social psychology is overwhelmingly composed of liberals (around 85%). The question of why this is the case, and whether it presents a problem for the field, is more controversial. The topic has exploded out of our conference halls and into major news outlets over the past several years, with claims of both overt hostility and subtle bias against conservative students, colleagues, and their publications, being met with reactions ranging from knee-jerk dismissal to sincere self-reflection and measured methodological critique. 

A recent paper led by Jose Duarte of Arizona State University attempts to organize the existing empirical research relevant to this debate.  There are two central questions here. First, is the ideological imbalance the result of some kind of bias against conservatives, or some more benign cause, like self-selection into the field? And second, independent of the cause, would more political diversity actually improve the validity of our science? 

Duarte et al provide evidence suggesting that social psychology is not a welcoming environment for conservatives. Papers are reviewed differently depending on whether they are considered to support liberal vs. conservative positions, and anonymous surveys reveal a considerable percentage of social psychologists willing to explicitly report negative attitudes towards conservatives.  This shouldn’t surprise us. Everything social psychologists know about group behavior tells us that overwhelming homogeneity, especially when defined through an important component of one’s identity like political ideology, will lead to negativity towards an outgroup. We also know a thing or two about confirmation bias and all the ways in which it can affect our decision-making, and it is odd to suggest it might not affect our own. Or to suggest that it might in some domains but not the political. 

What about the consequences of this imbalance? Would more political diversity increase the validity of social psychological findings? First, as the authors note, this concern about diversity only applies to the small subset of research dealing with politically charged issues (e.g. gender, race, morality). They argue that having a range of political opinions in these domains would combat the pernicious effects of confirmation bias and group think by introducing more dissent. The authors identify several examples of research which they believe to be  “tainted” by ideological motivation, and based on their assessment of the state of the research in politically controversial areas, conclude that “the parameters [of the field] are not set properly for the optimum discovery of truth. More political diversity would help the system discover more truth.” Conservative social psychologists would test different hypotheses, better identify methodologies in which liberal values are embedded, and be more critical in general of theories and data that advance liberal narratives.[...]

Community Alert: Allegations that a NY therapist, lecturerer on internet porn and abuse victim advocate - is himself a predator

By Rabbi Yair Hoffman 5 Towns Jewish Times

The following is a grave warning to young women and their parents:

There is an individual loose in our community who presents himself as both a therapist and an activist fighting against the dangers of internet pornography addiction. He gives public lectures and speeches in various venues presenting himself as an expert in the field. He has spoken in shuls, Yeshivos, and Bais Yaakovs. He warns young men and young women to stay clear of potential sites and predators. This speaker is eloquent, articulate, and reassuring. He cites facts and figures authoritatively. Yet he has a pattern of eventually getting involved in Biblically forbidden ways with young ladies that reach out to him. These young ladies may be single or even married.

When he speaks at a shul, school or other event, contact with vulnerable young ladies can begin. The contact between the two begins innocently enough, at times, he presents himself as a type of therapist or counselor and promises confidentiality. At first the confidentially is maintained. When the young lady begins to delineate her problem, he explains that the problem is so severe that it must be either dealt with more directly or in person.

The patterns follow typical grooming techniques which are well-documented, of others who attempt to develop inappropriate relationships with unsuspecting victims. They begin by complimenting them. The relationship quickly becomes inappropriate and professional boundaries are not maintained. This individual has an office where he sees people, or he may meet them on a more casual basis. He tells the individuals that they need to develop normal patterns of relationships, and then he models that “normal” pattern of relationship r”l.

This particular individual makes sure that he does not get involved on a physical level with anyone under the age of eighteen. The individual treats his victims as “special” and may even say that this is the first time he has been so “taken” by a person.

The author of this article has met with a victim, and has examined evidence corroborating the victim’s story. The author has no doubt whatsoever as to the veracity of the story.

The author has also reached out to five separate Gedolei Torah – each Gadol has ruled that the information contained in this article must be disseminated to the public on the internet. It was at the behest of Rav Aharon Feldman Shlita, Rosh Yeshiva of Ner Yisroel  that this community alert be issued.

If you feel that you or a family member has been victimized by this individual please contact jewishcommunityalert@gmail.com. Your identity will be kept private and this will help prevent others from being victimized.

In addition, Rav Harpenes is of the halachic opinion that all situations of a therapeutic nature should be strictly gender separated. Women must see women and men must see men, according to Rav Harpenes. [This is not a widely held opinion "Please see Dr. Joel Rosenshin's testimony about Rav Moshe and others in regards to this matter, in Dr. Nachum Klafter’s book." ]

Other Poskim have said that ideally gender separation should be maintained, but if necessary and under strict observance of the laws of Yichud alternatives can be pursued. They further instructed that the following guidelines be implemented.

1] Anyone who is currently seeing a therapist or counselor should make sure that the therapist is truly licensed and undergoes regular supervision. It goes without saying that this should be verified independently.

2] All yichud situations of a male therapist alone with a woman must be avoided, notwithstanding any assurances of permissions granted by Rabbis etc.

This specific matter is being researched for any possible illegalities involving misrepresentations of a therapeutic nature, and whether there are any illegalities involved in physical involvement with someone in a therapeutic context, even if the therapist is not a licensed New York State therapist. At this point the name of the individual in question is being omitted as research into the matter continues.

The author can be reached at yairhoffman2@gmail.com

Sentencing of Israeli rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto for bribery - postponed by one week

Haaretz    The Tel Aviv District Court on Sunday postponed issuing sentence on Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto until May 12, after a particularly tense sentencing hearing. Pinto was convicted on April 14 on charges of bribery, attempted bribery and obstruction of justice in a plea bargain, after admitted to the bribery of Israel Police Brig. Gen. Ephraim Bracha. 

In making its summation before Judge Oded Mudrick, the prosecution castigated Pinto’s conduct, criticizing his “audacity” and “manipulations” and describing him as “a man who thought himself above the law.” 

“The indictment to which the accused pleaded guilty describes an extensive range of serious and sophisticated acts carried out by a venerable figure, who sole purpose was to seriously and repeatedly disrupt the law enforcement system by cynically exploiting his spiritual status,” said prosecutor Racheli Hazan-Feldman. 

“It’s hard to find a precedent for acts similar to these,” she added. “We’re talking about a case of unprecedented seriousness in terms of the attempt to undermine the activities of law enforcement. This was an attempt to bribe a senior police officer to obtain information about investigations in which the briber was questioned under caution. We’re talking about a very large bribe of $200,000.”[...]

Authorities raid ‘cult’ women’s seminary in Jerusalem, arrest R Aharon Ramati

Haaretz      Jerusalem police and municipality workers raided the Be’er Miriam seminary for women in Jerusalem Sunday, following parents’ claims that the Sephardi institution, headed by Rabbi Aharon Ramati, is a cult. Ramati was not at the school when it was raided, but police located him shortly after in a nearby synagogue and he was taken in for questioning by the Jerusalem fraud squad.

Six women from the seminary were also detained on suspicion of various crimes, including fraud. Two other women were held for allegedly holding a former student against her will.

The police suspect a number of crimes were committed at the school, located in the Sanhedria neighborhood in north Jerusalem, including tax fraud and defrauding government ministries, as well as violating health and educational standards. A preliminary examination found that the gas lines were hooked up illegally, A fire and rescue service team disconnected the lines for safety reasons.[...]

A battle to close the seminary has been going on for years within the ultra-Orthodox community, but the police never found a reason to intervene until now. Ramati has even been accused of being the leader of “a dangerous cult” by leading Haredi rabbis. Still, the seminary continued to operate and drew dozens of young women students, most of whom were either newly religious or in the process of becoming more religious. [...]

Pam Geller: Moslems defend her right to be anti-Moslem

CNN       Garland shooting: What is the American Freedom Defense Initiative?

 ts name paints an image of a group dedicated to protecting American ideals. But critics call it the opposite -- an intolerant hate group opposed to freedom of religion.

Now, with two gunmen killed outside one of its events, the American Freedom Defense Initiative is back in the spotlight -- once again, surrounded by debate. 

Here's what to know about the controversial group:

2 killed after they open fire at Mohammed cartoon event

The AFDI says it has several tenets, including:

-- Freedom of speech, "as opposed to Islamic prohibitions of 'blasphemy' and 'slander,' " which quashes open dialogue of jihad and Islamic supremacism, the group says

-- "The freedom of conscience -- as opposed to the Islamic death penalty for apostasy"

-- Equal rights of all people, "as opposed to ... institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims" in Sharia law, or strict Islamic law.

... but it's also listed as an extremist group

The Southern Poverty Law Center lists the American Freedom Defense Initiative as an active anti-Muslim group in its "Extremist Files" database.[...]

"Who designated the SPLC as a legitimate authority? They are a radical leftist group who targets patriots, vets and even GOP presidential candidates," she told CNN. "They have never named a jihadi group as a hate group."  

==============================

Daily Beast Muslims Defend Pam Geller’s Right To Hate

Both before Pam Geller’s ‘Draw Mohammed’ event and after the attack Sunday night, Muslim American leaders vigorously defended her right to draw whatever she wants.

 

Anti-Muslim advocate Pam Geller has the absolute right to draw any cartoon she wants of the Prophet Mohammed. That was not just the response from Muslim American leaders I spoke to after news broke Sunday night of a shooting outside a Garland, Texas event that Geller had organized —offering $10,000 for people to draw images of Mohammed—but before that event as well.

As of the writing of this article, we know that after the conclusion of Geller’s event, two gunmen drove into the parking lot of the venue and fired shots that wounded one security officer. The two suspects were then reportedly killed by the police officers outside the venue. The identity and motivation of the gunmen is still not known as of press time.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that some Muslims aren’t offended by the idea of Geller offering $10,000 for people to draw despicable cartoons of Mohammed.  But the reality is American Muslims deeply value freedom of expression.

Plus, to be blunt, we are used to Geller, a person who has been denounced by both the Anti-Defamation league and the Southern Poverty Law Center for her anti-Muslim hate. She has been demonizing us Muslims for years. Geller is so over-the-top in her rabid hatred of Muslims that she has become a punchline in our community. [...]

Ethiopians riot again - this time in Tel Aviv: PM says violence is not acceptable - legitimate protests are

Arutz 7    The riots in Tel Aviv Sunday by Ethiopian protesters have prompted politicians to comment on the situation. Speaking with Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said that there was definitely good reason to examine the issues raised by protesters, “but there is no place for violence and violations of the law.” Netanyahu has called a government meeting for Monday to discuss Sunday's riots.

Aharonvitch said that there was “no doubt that the protesters have justified complaints. In Ofer Prison today, 19% of the inmates are Ethiopian, and there have been times where 40% of the inmates have been from that community. But they do not have a permit for this protest, and that makes it illegal.

“We have to understand the root causes of the protests,” Aharonovitch said. “I see what happens in my hometown of Netanya, I see the problems. But you cannot take a single incident – in this case the video of violence by a police officer – and turn it into a reason for a riot. These things happen, with Ethiopians, with Russians, with Arabs, with immigrants from France. The solution is not just with the police. On Monday there will be a government meeting about this,” said Aharonovitch. “I hope we will find some solutions.”[...]

Issues in Divorce: Destroying one's children to spite an ex-spouse- INTERFERENCE WITH PARENTAL RIGHTS OF NONCUSTODIAL PARENT

This is the first in a series of posts dedicated to the hope that a certain father - who is an avid reader of this blog - will wake up to the fact that he is destroying his own children by permanently harming their psychological, intellectual and emotional development - solely to hurt his ex-wife. There is a special place in Hell for such behavior.

http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/pas/borris97.htm

Edward B. Borris, Assistant Editor, Divorce Litigation

 

I. Introduction

Interference by one parent in the relationship of a child and the other parent is almost never in the child's best interests. In fact, in extreme cases, actions by one parent to alienate the affections of the child from the other parent, to interfere win the other parent's visitation rights, or to remove the child to a distant state or country can often lead to liability in tort. See generally E. Borris, "Torts Arising Out of Interference with Custody and Visitation," 7 Divorce Litigation 192 (1995). Tort liability is not always an option, however, as many courts refuse to award damages based upon interference with visitation rights. E.g., Cosner v. Ridinger, 882 P.2d 1243 (Wyo.1994)

A noncustodial parent is not always left without a remedy, however, simply because courts in that parent's jurisdiction refuse to recognize tort actions arising out of interference with his or her parental rights. This article discusses a different type of liability which may result from interference with the noncustodial parent's rights: loss of custody. The article will first discuss whether a party may generally obtain a change of custody based upon such interference. The article will then examine specific acts by a custodial parent which may cause a court to change custody, including denial of visitation rights, alienation of the child's affections away from the noncustodial parent, and removal of the child to a distant jurisdiction. The section on alienation of the child's affections includes a discussion of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and recent cases that have dealt with PAS. The article concludes with a suggestion of possible provisions that practitioners may insert in custody decrees in order to prevent future problems between custodial and noncustodial parents.

II. Interference Amounting to a Substantial Change in Circumstances

Most courts and experts agree that except in unusual cases it is most important for a child to have a strong relationship with both parents. Thus, courts will typically conclude that an award of custody to the parent who is most likely to foster a relationship between the child and the other parent is in the child's best interests. For this reason, if a custodial parent has demonstrated in the past a pattern of interference with the relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent, unless other facts dictate a different holding, courts will frequently conclude that a substantial change in circumstances justifying a change of custody has occurred.

Not surprisingly, there is a long-standing tradition of awarding a change of custody where the custodial parent has interfered with the parental rights of the other parent. The Court of Appeals of Maryland clearly established this point in Berlin v. Berlin, 239 Md. 52, 210 A.2d 380 (1965). In Berlin, the parties entered into a written separation agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, incorporated into the court's order, custody of the children was awarded to the mother, and the father received reasonable visitation rights. In addition, the parties also agreed that the mother would notify the father if the mother moved out of the Washington metropolitan area. Subsequently, the mother began denying the father his right to visitation. For this reason, the father requested a change in custody. The trial court granted the father's request, and the mother appealed. [...]

V. Conclusion

As the authority cited in this memorandum indicates, while obstruction of the noncustodial parent's relationship with the child will often lead to a change in custody, such a change is not guaranteed. Courts appear to recognize that the detriment to a child caused by occasional failures to turn a child over for visitation does not automatically require a change of custody. See Humphrey v. Humphrey, 888 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.Ct.App.1994) (no change of custody was warranted where mother failed to honor father's visitation rights on only one occasion). If, however, a custodial parent has developed a pattern of refusing to allow visitation or otherwise interfering with the noncustodial parent's relationship with the child, the court should award a change in custody. E.g., Sullivan v. Sullivan, 216 A.D.2d 627, 627 N.Y.S.2d 829 (1995) (modification of custody was justified where mother consistently violated court-ordered visitation and telephone contact).

In order to prevent a child's relationship with the noncustodial parent from deteriorating, certain provisions should be standard in every custody decree. First, every decree should require each person with a right to custody or visitation to foster the relationship between the child and other persons who have a right to custody or visitation. Second, every decree should state that persons who have custodial or visitation rights should not speak ill of another person who has custodial or visitation rights. Third, practitioners should consider placing restrictions on a custodial parent's right to relocate without informing the court or the noncustodial parent. Otherwise, similarly to the father in In re Marriage of McDole, supra, the noncustodial parent may surprisingly discover that the custodial parent has left the jurisdiction without a forwarding address.

These three provisions will not guarantee that no problems with custody or visitation will occur. Rather, a custodial parent who desires to destroy the relationship of the child with the noncustodial parent will succeed unless stopped. If, however, the above provisions are inserted into the decree, a violation of a specific provision could lead to a contempt citation. While not a panacea, the above three provisions may give the noncustodial parent the extra edge which he or she may need in a postdissolution custody proceeding. Furthermore, since the provisions encourage a strong relationship between both parents and the child, such provisions are generally in the child's best interests.

Schlesinger Twins:Rabbi Jacobs of Birmingham supports Beth

Baltimore mayor under pressure after 'space to destroy' remark - views the "T" word insulting as the "N" word

The Guardian

Pressure was growing on Tuesday on Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake to lead the city away from violence after she was accused of delaying an emergency response and making statements alternately criticized as inciting riotous protests and dismissing protesters’ concerns.

At a news conference, Rawlings-Blake said she had ordered police to “give those who wished to destroy space to do that”.

On Monday night she made a testy appearance at a news conference in which she referred twice to protesters as “thugs”.

The mayor’s office later said Rawlings-Blake’s comments on Sunday had been misunderstood. “The mayor is not saying that she asked police to give space to people who sought to create violence,” the office said in a statement. “Any suggestion otherwise would be a misinterpretation of her statement.” 

Baltimore was the scene of violent clashes on Monday between protesters and police after a funeral for Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old man who died on 19 April from an unexplained spinal injury sustained while in police custody. At least 27 people were arrested and 15 police officers were injured, according to officials. [...]
=========================================

Baltimore Mayor Apologizes For Calling Protesters 'Thugs'

Huffington Post

Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (D) is walking back critical comments she made about the violent protests in response to the death of Freddie Gray.

During the height of the protests on Monday, Rawlings-Blake referred to the protesters as "thugs" in a press conference.

"What we see tonight ... is very disturbing," she said Monday evening, the same day a funeral was held for the 25-year-old who died in police custody. "It is very clear that there's a difference between what we saw last week between the peaceful protests ... and the thugs, who only want to incite violence and destroy our city. I'm a life-long resident of Baltimore. Too many generations have spent their lives building up this city to have it destroyed by thugs, who in a very senseless way are trying to tear down what so many have fought for."

On Wednesday, she apologized on Twitter.

"I wanted to clarify my comments on 'thugs.' When you speak out of frustration and anger, one can say things in a way that you don't mean," she wrote. "That night we saw misguided young people who need to be held accountable, but who also need support. And my comments then didn't convey that."

Many who took issue with Rawlings-Blake's use of "thugs," including some of her fellow city leaders, argued that the word is racially charged. Baltimore City Councilman Carl Stokes suggested on Tuesday night that instead of calling the protesters "thugs," she may as well have used the n-word. [...]

Rav Sternbuch: Saving others from sin - Paying compensation after breaking a computer used to watch pornography

 Update: Added example of vigilante justice regarding the beating of an elderly woman as the result of mistaken allegations that she was involved in Nachlaot pedophile ring.

This teshuva (volume 6 # 292) is relevant in many situation where a person sees something seriously wrong and acts to prevent sin or harm to others. Is a psak needed? Is compensation required? This gemora (Bava Kama 28a) has been applied to a diverse numbers of situations - a teaching taking away a phone or gadget from a student, wife beating, husband beating for refusing to give a get, attacks on individuals who are viewed as threats to community, destroying a woman's sheitel or clothing viewed as immodest It involves attacking another person or his property because he has a different set of standards which the assailant views as sinful. A related issue is whether the owner of the computer has the right to defend his property against the attack and whether he needs to pay compensation for damaging the righteous assailant and his property.

In short this deals with parameters of vigilante justice

--

==================================

Vigilante justice - a 72 year old woman was severely beaten - because of mistaken belief she was involved in the Nachlaot Pedophile panic - and it was believed that the police would not handle the matter properly. See the video  below. The story is the second one on the news report

I was told that the judge accepted Rav Shapiro's explanation of his words and the charges against him were dropped.

Nana10

הרב משה שפירא אמר לארבעה מחסידיו לתקוף קשישה בת 72. הוא האשים אותה במעורבות בפרשת הפדופיליה שהייתה בשכונת נחלאות בירושלים לפני שנתיים וחצי. "צריך להכות אותה עד לאשפוז, לא יהיה איכפת לי אם לא יהיה את מי לאשפז"
הרב משה שפירא, העומד בראש קהילה גדולה של חוזרים בתשובה בירושלים, אמר לארבעה מחסידיו לתקוף קשישה בת 72. בתיעוד שניתן לחדשות10 נראה הרב אומר: "צריך פשוט להכות אותה עד לאשפוז, וגם לא יהיה איכפת אם לא יהיה את מי לאשפז".

לפני כשנתיים וחצי הסעירה פרשת פדופיליה שהתרחשה בשכונת נחלאות בירושלים את הקהילה החרדית בשכונה. המשטרה עצרה שלושה חשודים במעשה, אך בקהילה נוצר חשד שהמעשים בוצעו בדירתה של ש', הקשישה שהותקפה. "צריך להיכנס אליה הביתה ולהחריב אותו. נכנסים כמה גברתנים רעולי פנים ועושים שם שמות, לוקחים גרזנים והורסים את הכל", הוסיף שפירא
לאחר שהבהיר בפני חסידיו כי אי אפשר לסמוך על המשטרה ועל הראיות שהשיגו, החליטו ארבעה מהם, אבות לילדים שהותקפו מינית לכאורה בפרשה, לתקוף את ש'. הם נכנסו לביתה, היכו אותה בכל חלקי גופה, כפתו אותה באזיקונים, חקרו אותה והמשיכו להלום בה עד שרגלה נשברה<

"

Epstein Torture for Get case: FBI request for search warrant concerning Rabbis Epstein, Wolmark, Ralbag Steinberg, and Belsky

See page 9-10 describing the Targets of this search warrant (September 2013)

   FBI request for Search Warrant Against Rabbis Epstein, Belsky, Ralbag

Telephone Shiur: Beth Din and Coercing a GET - by Rav Dovid Eidensohn

Telephone Conference Shiur #5 Wednesday April 29 9:30 p.m.

Call 605-562-3130 insert code 411161#

Beth Din and Coercing a GET

1. Even Hoezer 77 paragraphs 2 and 3 make it clear that in general it is forbidden to coerce a husband to divorce his wife despite her demands and protests. And yet there are some times when a husband can be forced to divorce his wife, such as when it is forbidden to live with a relative see EH 154.

2. Even Hoezer 1:3 should we force somebody over twenty years old to marry? Shulchan Aruch says yes and Ramo says the custom is not to force people in choosing a mate in marriage even if they are not doing the mitzvah properly. See the Gro there #9,#10 seems to approve of forcing people to fulfill the mitzvah not like the Ramo but like the Shulchan Aruch. Here forcing a mitzvah is permitted by some authorities, but forcing a GET is in general not permitted.

3. See Ramo in Shulchan Aruch EH I:10 a man marries two wives can we force him to divorce one. Two opinions in Ramo. Here two wives is a sinful marriage because of Cherem Rabbeinu Gershon not to marry two wives. And in a sinful marriage a divorce can be forced.

4. When the Shulchan Aruch rarely approves of forcing a husband to give a GET, how does this work? Today there are no mumchim. See gemora Gittin 88b. See also Choshen Mishpot beginning of Simon 1 in Nesivose, Tumim, and Ketsose in Simon 3.

5. Chazon Ish Gittin 99:2 when Beth Din mistakenly tells the husband he must give a GET and that is not the law, the GET is invalid for two reasons min haTorah. Thus a Beth Din has no power to force a GET when the Shulchan Aruch says the husband in that case cannot be forced. And if the Beth Din paskens without forcing the husband and the husband gives the GET the GET is invalid and the children are mamzerim diorayso.

6. What was the power of the Geonim to permit forcing a husband in defiance of the gemoras that clearly indicate that a husband in most cases cannot be forced to divorce? Tosfose Rid Gittin 89a based on gemora Bovo Basra מצוה לשמוע לדברי חכמים. What does this mean?

7. See also Tosfose Kesubose 63b AVOL discussion at length about coercing a GET.

8. Did the Geonim permit always to force a GET when the wife demands it, or was this a temporary ruling that is not applicable today? A machlokess HaRishonim in this see Ramban and Baal HaMoor on the Rif Kesubose 63b.

9. What is the authority of a Rov or a Beth Din to teach people the halacha and to insist that they obey? See Rashbo in Teshuva I:253.

Israeli police attack an IDF soldier for being disrepectful

Times of Israel  update: Two policemen have been suspended after video footage emerged on Monday showing them pummeling an Ethiopian-born IDF soldier, Damas Pakada, who alleged he was the target of a racist attack.

The incident took place in Holon, south of Tel Aviv, on Sunday evening, where police were cordoning off a street due to a suspicious object. 

“I feel terrible, and humiliated. This is a disgrace to the State of Israel,” Pakada told Channel 2 Monday. “It’s because of [my] skin color,” he said.

================================================================  

THIS DESCRIBES  A SECOND INCIDENT -  In another disgusting Israeli show of contempt for the IDF IDF officer attacked in Jerusalem’s Mea Shearim

 Times of Israel  An IDF officer in uniform was assaulted on Friday by an angry mob in Jerusalem’s ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Mea Shearim, an attack condemned by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “outrageous,” and by Shas leader Arye Deri as “an act of terror.”

Following an in-home visit with one of his soldiers, the platoon commander was surrounded by a group of dozens of ultra-Orthodox individuals who began threatening him and pelting him and his car with eggs, stones, bags of water and soiled diapers. His car sustained significant damage.

Netanyahu condemned the assault, calling for the officer’s attackers to be brought to justice.

“This is outrageous. The offenders who raised their hands against an IDF officer must be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. IDF service is a source of pride. The IDF is the people’s army and protects everyone. All population groups in Israeli society serve in its ranks; this is how it has been and how it will continue,” the PM said.

Arye Deri, leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, called the attack “an act of terror” by “Jewish extremists.”  He also called on the police to bring the perpetrators to justice.[...]

Congregants Challenge Sale of Bulwark of Judaism on Lower East Side

NY Times

[....] As the neighborhood shifted from Yiddish to Spanish, artistic to artisanal, the Home of the Sages became home to fewer and fewer sages. With not much need for its four-story religious and nursing home, the board recently decided to sell the 76-year-old institution, which first opened as a synagogue on Henry Street, to a developer for $13 million.

But congregants of the Home of the Sages are charging in court that the deal is motivated not by self-preservation but self-enrichment: that the proceeds would largely flow to the president of the board, Samuel Aschkenazi, along with a Hasidic sect with no affiliation to the organization or the Lower East Side.

 The state attorney general’s office gave the sale its blessing in March but it has since withdrawn its approval and is reviewing the allegations. [...]

Mr. Aschkenazi has been running Home for the Sages for four decades, taking over from his father. With the number of its Orthodox residents declining, the nursing home business was sold in 1996 to an operator from New Jersey. Court filings claim the new operator was a business partner of Mr. Aschkenazi’s son, now deceased. [...]

Only after the sale was before the court did congregants file their challenge. They maintain that in 2014 Mr. Aschkenazi had in 2014 systematically replaced the largely inactive board with several new members coming from the Gur sect who had no connections to the synagogue or the neighborhood. [...]

Mr. Aschkenazi has not answered the allegations that he is using the sale for personal gain, other than to say that they are “without merit.” He has also not addressed why the bulk of the proceeds from the sale would go to the Gur sect. [...]

After services last week, many congregants said they would have no objection to the sale if it benefited Jews on the Lower East Side. “We need all the help we can get,” Nussin Fogel said as he took off his tefillin. [...]

Why Almost Everything Dean Ornish Says about Nutrition Is Wrong

Scientific American   Last month, an op–ed in The New York Times argued that high-protein and high-fat diets are to blame for America’s ever-growing waistline and incidence of chronic disease. The author, Dean Ornish, founder of the nonprofit Preventive Medicine Research Institute, is no newcomer to these nutrition debates. For 37 years he has been touting the benefits of very low-fat, high-carbohydrate, vegetarian diets for preventing and reversing heart disease. But the research he cites to back up his op–ed claims is tenuous at best. Nutrition is complex but there is little evidence our country’s worsening metabolic ills are the fault of protein or fat. If anything, our attempts to eat less fat in recent decades have made things worse.

Ornish begins his piece with a misleading statistic. Despite being told to eat less fat, he says, Americans have been doing the opposite: They have “actually consumed 67 percent more added fat, 39 percent more sugar and 41 percent more meat in 2000 than they had in 1950 and 24.5 percent more calories than they had in 1970.” Yes, Americans have been eating more fat, sugar and meat, but we have also been eating more vegetables and fruits (pdf)—because we have been eating more of everything.

What’s more relevant to the discussion is this fact: During the time in which the prevalence of obesity in the U.S. nearly tripled, the percentage of calories Americans consumed from protein and fat actually dropped whereas the percentage of calories Americans ingested from carbohydrates—one of the nutrient groups Ornish says we should eat more of—increased. Could it be that our attempts to reduce fat have in fact been part of the problem? Some scientists think so. “I believe the low-fat message promoted the obesity epidemic,” says Lyn Steffen, a nutritional epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. That’s in part because when we cut out fat, we began eating foods that were worse for us.[...]

The point here is not that Ornish’s diet—a low-fat, whole food, plant-based approach—is necessarily bad. It’s almost certainly healthier than the highly processed, refined-carbohydrate-rich diet most Americans consume today. But Ornish’s arguments against protein and fat are weak, simplistic and, in a way, irrelevant. A food or nutrient can be healthy without requiring that all other foods or nutrients be unhealthy. And categorizing entire nutrient groups as “good” or “bad” is facile. “It’s hard to move the science forward when there are so many stakeholders who say ‘this is the right diet and no other one could possibly be right,’” Bazzano says. Plus, discouraging the intake of entire macronutrient groups can backfire. When people dutifully cut down on fat in the 1980s and 1990s, they replaced much of it with high-sugar and high-calorie processed foods (think: Snackwell’s). If we start fearing protein, too, what will we fill our plates with instead? History tells us it’s not going to be spinach.

Prof Moshe Koppel: Understanding the difference between Charedim and Modern Orthodox - it is not ideology

Dr. Koppel published an article in Tradition 36:2 in 2002. Yiddishkeit without ideology: a letter to my son. ;The entire article can be downloaded from Tradition Archives. While I cited this article in 2008 - it is obviously still relevant and current as seen by various allegations made recently by Eddie about the topic.

============================================

[...] In order to clarify the problem, let me recap some personal history so that you can appreciate the context in which these problems first arose for me. (For you the context is a bit different but the parallels will be obvious enough.) As a child in New York in the 1960's I attended school in what would now be called a Haredi institution. What distinguished this school from other, non-Haredi, schools was not so much the stricter standard of halakha to which we were held, but rather the pervasive sense of alienation from everything outside our narrow circle.

We were cynical about law and order, about high~sounding ideas, about goyim, about Jews, you name it.

Such an attitude is perhaps easily dismissed as the inevitable consequence of being the children of Holocaust .survivors. But in fact. it was merely a slightly exaggerated form of an attitude of wary subversiveness that serves as the backdrop for everything Jewish. "Avadai hem"- Jews are slaves of Hashem, but, more to the point, of nobody else. In any case that's what all the real Jews I knew were like; if there were any wild-eyed and bushy-tailed ones, they were somewhere else. To this day I think of alienation and its social corollary, subversiveness, as inseparable from Yiddishkeit, This attitude is deep in my bones (and, of course, I regard it with suspicion).

You won't be surprised to hear that my classmates and I quickly applied this same critical point of view to everything that we were taught. This attitude was bolstered by the fact that, although our parents' sense of identity as Jews was utterly beyond question or even reflection, they themselves were quite cynical about the kind of ideology that our rebbes felt compelled to push. Gedolim don't make mistakes? Tsaddikim find jewels in fish? Once upon a time. At some point, we ourselves couldn't help but notice that there were plenty of things that goyim did a lot better than we did. In fact, as we got older we began to suspect that some of our role models might have been a bit more clever than they were wise and that, in a few cases, cynicism about rules and regulations had led to just plain crookedness. Not that I thought then, or I think now, that the rest of the world is any better, but suffice it to say that unpleasant moral dilemmas that pitted loyalty against rectitude arose more frequently than they should have. Beyond all that, for an adolescent kid looking to find himself and develop his own particular interests and talents, the atmosphere was just a bit stifling. Ultimately, we had to decide between buying into the whole system despite misgivings or leaving. I left.

I didn't go far. In the Modern Orthodox institution to which I eventually migrated, the underlying principle was openness. Openness to art and music, to science and literature. Not to mention sports and movies and television. My new friends really were more articulate, more knowledgeable in most areas and often more naturally ethical than many of my friends in the yeshiva world. Of course, I had to get used to the idea of guys with names like Jerry and Stuie who wore jeans and had girlfriends.&

Apparently, I was hopelessly square but at least I had found what I took to be a healthy rebellious spirit that held the promise of a more thoughtful Yiddishkeit and I identified with it.

There were some problems. The version of Yiddishkeit that was upheld there as an ideal was different in disturbing ways from that to which I had been accustomed. The place suffered from a Litvish cold­ness that had adapted neatly to the American technocratic mindset to produce a somewhat formal and not very heimish version of cookbook Yiddishkeit. You asked somebody there if it was okay to daven in your gatkes, they started pulling books off the shelf. Lacking a sense of the heimish and hankering above all for middle-class American respectability, they tended to undervalue the little hard-to-pin-down gestures and manners that give substance to Jewish distinctiveness.

Moreover, the yeshivish rule that "if it's not Jewish, we don't like it" was flipped in the modern Orthodox world to read "if we like it, it's Jewish."These two formulations are equivalent in logic books but not on the ground. It turned out that my casually-clad new friends had few rebellious thoughts after all; they were simply practicing Yiddishkeit ­often with rather quaint earnestness as it had been taught to them. It was the chinyoks in the yeshiva world, who managed to maintain some emotional distance from the trappings of middle-class respectability, who were actually the subversives. I wasn't quite home yet.

Let me be absolutely clear: where the demands of halakha are unambiguous, you must submit to them. But how does one navigate between much less well-defined traditional attitudes and strong personal inclinations? When I was your age I didn't know the answer I still don't but one proposition that seemed self-evident to me at the time was that it was essential to be consistent. In other words, I felt that I had to somehow make sure that the way 1 defined Yiddishkeit and the way I defined my commitments even my own inclinations would be perfectly aligned. [...]

The ideologues who ran the yeshivish institutions I knew tried to inculcate a set of ideological commitments so comprehensive and intense as to suffocate an individual's personality. One result of this was a kind of cynicism that sometimes amounted to the complete annihilation of any moral and aesthetic compass. The good news is that this mostly worked on the feeble; the normal people's cynicism extended also to their own education: Most of us lived rather comfortably with, for instance, the idea that in principle great rabbanim have da’as Torah whatever that might mean, but that in fact some of the rabbanim we actually knew were, how should I put it, not necessarily especially sharp.

Conversely, in some Modern Orthodox institutions that I know: many of the subtle attitudes that form the core of Yiddishkeit have been diluted out of existence. What remains is a bare-bones even if scrupulously observed-halakha that constitutes a kind of obstacle course that needs to be negotiated in the pursuit of self-fulfillment. But what is worse is that this pursuit of self-fulfillment doesn't consist merely of individuals unselfconsciously pulling received attitudes in directions suited to their own personalities; rather its acceptable forms are defined for one and all in accordance with prevailing cultural tradewinds-nationalism feminism, humanism, whatever. This can lead to an eviscerated Torah forever subordinated to passing intellectual fads. The encouraging fact is that, in general, fads pass-or else they're not fads after all.

Overall, institutional Yiddishkeit is superficial and inauthentic-in institutions, homogenized ideology trumps common sense every time. In the absence of checks and balances, of healthy tension, a sense of proportion and limits is lost and Yiddishkeit itself is diminished and distorted. You probably don't fully appreciate this point yet because you are at that stage in life where things are black and white and it seems important to nail them just right. What I cal tension, you cal hypocrisy. Time will broaden your perspective.[...]

You can-and, under current conditions, you must-learn Shas and posekim in an institution. But Jewish attitudes must be learned through immersion in family or community, internalized, and lived instinctively. Internalized values lived instinctively don't ever form a neat consistent package. On the contrary, they are always full of tension between conflicting poles: between loyalty to Jews and loyalty to the values they embody, between the letter of halaka and its spirit, between conformity and individuality, and so on. This tension is a wonderful, healthy thing - it is the source of a person's intellectual vitality and creativity. Living a life of Torah means living with tension: Yiddishkeit is not
meant to consist of instant solutions to personal problems, canned shallow theology, shlock aesthetics or narrow-minded provincialism. It is meant to encourage the kind of depth and tension that-forgive me for this odd example but I know you'll know what I mean- distinguishes Carlebach from Boro Park rock.

It is precisely this creative tension that distinguishes Yiddishkeit from other cultures and which has allowed it to survive under impossible circumstances. What is required is a terrific loyalty to tradition down to the most trivial detail, and humility in the face of the accumulated weight of this tradition. This loyalty and humility must be balanced by a creative restlessness that forever challenges spiritual complacency by testing tradition against the very values with which it imbues those who are truly loyal to it.

The enemy of this creative tension is ideology. Ideologues of the "right" fear the fluidity of Torah Shebe'al Peh (or are deaf and blind to it) and would reduce it all to Torah Shebikhta1J. In doing so, they reduce a living tradition to ideology. Ideologues of the "left" fear an "outdated" halaka and would round its edges to render it palatable. In doing so, they too reduce a living tradition to ideology.

You should recognize the rhetoric of ideology since it is all around you, insidiously trying to pry you from your own tradition. One type is peddled by those people who will tell you that there is only one true derekh. Whatever that derekh turns out to be, it won't be yours. Any claim that the Jews have always had it all wrong is simply incoherent by definition. If your rebbe tells you that a centuries-old minhag is wrong because a contemporary halakhic cookbook says so, he is not only clueless but also dangerous. If he tres to teach you some strange new topic called "emuna" or "hashkafa," he's probably proselytizing to some questionable ideology of recent vintage, usually radical Zionism or radical anti-Zionism. Steer clear. If you feel an urge to learn machshova, take out a Sfas Emes on Friday night. Remember that Gemara wasn't invented in Brisk, Bretz Yisrael wasn't discovered by Rav Kook, and hasidus isn't the private property of Chabad.

Another type of dangerous ideological rhetoric is peddled by those who will remind you that "there are many true paths in Judaism." They are probably not on any of them. Their apparent open-mindedness is usually a cover for the doctrinaire and arrogant conviction that Yiddishkeit as we know it is primitive, unenlightened, and provincial and desperately in need of the civilizing influence of whatever intellectual fashion is sweeping college campuses (which, they will try to persuade you, is what Yiddishkeit really was supposed to be all along). Given the choice between those who understand Yiddishkeit but have drifted, or even bolted, away and those who bastardize Yiddishkeit, always choose the company of the former. Ultimately, it's the location of the anchor that matters. [...]

Finally, continue to be a stubborn and clever critic of received wisdom just as your ancestors were. But always be sure to do so in a way that honors those ancestors and doesn't belittle them. [...]

New book by Dr. Marc Shapiro: Changing the Immutable: How Orthodox Judaism Rewrites Its History

Seforim Blog

Dr. Shapiro writes:

I am happy to announce that my new book is now with the printer and should be at the distributor by May 4. Amazon and book stores will have the book not long after that. Changing the Immutable has taken quite a long time and I hope readers find that it was worth the wait. One of the main reasons it has taken so long is that some of my time in recent years has been devoted to my posts on the Seforim Blog. When I first started posting here I saw it merely as a pleasant diversion. However, I now see my Seforim Blog posts as an important part of my scholarly writing. Throughout Changing the Immutable I reference not only my posts but many others that appeared on the Seforim Blog.

I am making this announcement now rather than after the book appears because Amazon is offering a pre-order discount (link). For those who want to wait, I know that Biegeleisen will be selling it at a very good price.

Mendel Epstein, Goldstein and Stimler convicted of conspiracy/attempted kidnapping to obtain a Get

CBS news  [See also Asbury Park Press   NJ.Com      NY Daily News]

   Three rabbis were convicted in federal court Tuesday of conspiring to kidnap Jewish men in order to force them to grant their wives divorces.

Rabbi Mendel Epstein, 69, of Lakewood, New Jersey; Rabbi Jay Goldstein, 60, of Brooklyn; and Rabbi Binyamin Stimler, 39, also of Brooklyn, were all convicted of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, according to New Jersey U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman. Goldstein and Stimler were also convicted of attempted kidnapping.

Epstein’s son, David, was acquitted at trial.

Jurors deliberated for three days after an eight-week trial before Trenton U.S. District Judge Freda L. Wolfson, prosecutors said.

Epstein and his colleagues were accused of employing a kidnap team to force unwilling Jewish husbands to grant a get, or a religious divorce, to their wives.