Resolving the Washington Synagogue Scandals

 

[As mentioned by other blogers on other blogs, I am coming off a series of Jewish holidays.  I have been too preoccupied with other matters to do any posting, and blogging inactivity may well follow this current posting.  Wishing everyone a belated happy and healthy.]

Two major synagogues in Washington DC, each of which, in its own way, is more than a mere name to me.  Each of these synagogues has, within the past few weeks, been the subject of a scandal involving its respective alpha rabbi (though the word "scandal" may be a bit overly strong in the case of the first one discussed below).

The first controversy involved the Adas Israel Congregation.  Given my personal religious biases, I generally do not frequent this particular institution, though I make no efforts to discourage anyone who is so inclined from doing so.  Those congregations that go along with what is called "Conservative" Judaism have, over the years, allowed themselves to become instrumentalities of the leftist political agenda.  Forty years ago I did continue have a tenuous bond with a few specific Conservative congregations, but can no longer do so.  Seventy- and eighty-something years ago, when my mother-in-law was growing up in Washington, Adas Israel was the synagogue her family attended (back when it was at 3rd & G Streets).  My wife has a few cousins in the Washington area who still have connections of one sort or another with Adas Israel.  A number of years ago my wife and I attended a family wedding there.  Other than my personal religious inclinations and proclivities, I hold no ill will towards the congregation and trust that it will emerge honorably and intact from this current controversy.

It seems that Rabbi Gil Steinlauf, the Congregation's main spiritual leader, has revealed to his flock that his marriage is being terminated on account of his homosexual tendencies.

As much as I abhor such abominations, they are, without more, personal relationships into which I have no interest or business in insinuating myself.  In Gil Steinlauf's case, he did give the heterosexual thing an honest try, and it simply didn't work for him.  He is being honest, and, bedroom abominations notwithstanding, he has thus far handled the public aspects of his situation in an honorable manner.  To that extent, I wish him the best of luck.  My only concern is that he may, whether voluntarily or otherwise, allow himself to become a tool in the leftist deconstructionist political agenda that uses homosexuality as a pretext for its agenda of oppression.  This concern is not insignificant.

The second controversy implicates Kesher Israel, the Georgetown Synagogue.  My personal religious orientation is very highly compatible with this particular congregation.  Whenever I visit Washington on business I generally make at least one visit to Kesher Israel for prayer and/or study.

The Rabbi at Kesher Israel, Barry Freundel, has been charged with voyeurism.  He stands accused of placing a video camera in the mikvah at the synagogue, thereby intruding into the personal bodily privacy of the female users.  Aside from the criminal implications, this is a very serious matter because even the yet-unproven accusation can easily discourage women from taking the effort to practice observant Judaism.  To its credit, the Board of Kesher Israel has suspended Rabbi Freundel without pay, pending the outcome of the criminal matter.  Rabbi Freundel is, of course, innocent until proven guilty.

With tongue only partially in cheek, I propose the following resolution to the Washington Synagogue Scandals:  Have Rabbi Steinlauf and Rabbi Freundel switch positions.  The women who use the Kesher Israel mikveh would then be confidently assured that their new congregational rabbi, Gil Steinlauf, is definitely not interested in viewing surreptitious videos of their naked bodies.  And, if the charges against Barry Freundel stick, then Rabbi Steinlauf's wife Batya would finally be sleeping with a man whose hot interest in her female body will have been established beyond reasonable doubt.

Another Embezzler, Another Shul

 

Embezzlement is a serious offense in any instance, and embezzlement from a religious or charitable organization is all the more serious because the people who donate money to such organizations have certain high expectations, both of the organizations themselves and the people who run them.  Thus, not only are the organizations and their intended recipients of their beneficence victimized by the embezzlement.  The donors, who made their donation with no expectations of profit in exchange for the risk (other than a tax deduction, which Obama has significantly reduced), are victims in a way that investors in the securities market can never be.

It is, of course, a sad day for the Jewish people when the organization from which money is embezzled is a synagogue.  And we now have one of those sad days.

Ex-attorney Isaac Zucker, former Treasurer of Congregation Aish Kodesh in Woodmere, New York, has pleaded guilty to embezzling more than $600,000 from the shul.  I say "ex-attorney" because under New York Judiciary Law § 90(4)(a), an attorney who is convicted (and, a fortiori, who pleads guilty) to a felony offense automatically is disbarred upon the event.  He faces a maximum of 7 years in the slammer.

My comments, in no particular order:

1.   I know some people connected with Aish Kodesh, and have, over the past few months, been made privy to a small amount of inside details regarding this matter.

2.  Like so many other social groups, whether ethnicities or junior high athletic teams or anything in between, we Jewish people have a strong tendency to protect our own, and an aversion to involving outsiders in the process of righting wrongs within the group.  In this case, after the theft was discovered, the Aish Kodesh leadership had attempted to work out a deal with Zucker to get the money returned, and only went to the authorities after it became clear that such attempts would be futile. 

            I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, there needs to be a tough stance taken against embezzlers.  On the other hand, the District Attorney's office regularly engages in plea bargaining, which, in many respects, differs little in concept from trying to work out a private deal for restitution.

3.  It will be interesting to see what type of sentence is advocated by the membership and leadership of Aish Kodesh in the sentencing process.  What will their letters to the Judge say?  What will the victim impact statements say?  And what type of consonance or dissonance will there be between such statements, and the statements the same people made with respect to certain notorious cases involving various Jewish criminals convicted of crimes such as bank fraud, child molestation and cop-killing?

4.  In a similar synagogue embezzlement case a few years ago, "U.S. District Judge Anita B. Brody told Barry Wilf, former director of Temple Sinai in Dresher, that the maximum 57-month, no-parole sentence was too light considering that 'minor drug dealers get 60 months.'"

5.  A separate matter will be Mr. Zucker's tax affairs.  Now that Nassau County DA Kathleen Rice has gotten her conviction, the IRS, using the guilty plea, is sure to impute to Zucker some tax consequences from the income he received in the process.  Ditto for the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance.

Yahrzeit Boards

With few exceptions, every synagogue has one or more memorial plaque boards, (or "Yahrzeit Board," to use the Yiddish terminology) where the names of the departed are engrossed. They come in diverse styles, but typically, one donor underwrites the big board, which is then filled in with individual bronze plaques bearing the name and date of death of the deceased. Usually (but not always), there are light bulbs which are illuminated on the anniversary of the death, and also on holidays such as Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur. In America, this information is typically in both English and Hebrew.

They are usually purchased by a family member, anyone with the funds and inclination can provide a plaque; in my own congregation, a few of us chipped in for a plaque for an upstanding community member who had suffered severe business reversals resulting in the loss of his home, and whose widow, we knew, could not afford the memorial recognition befitting her husband.

Even the reprobates among us are given the due respect of a memorial plaque, not so much to honor them as to signify the sanctity of life. I'm sure that the commissioning of the infamous gangster and snitch Benjamin "Bugsy" Siegel 's memorial plaque for the Bialystoker Synagogue's yahrzeit board did not diminish in the least the posthumous punishment no doubt now being inflicted upon Bugsy, which he so rightfully deserves.

A synagogue's yahrzeit board often gives great insight into the character of the congregation. Which is why I often go out of my way to read each and every name on the board when I am in a synagogue that is not my own.

Today, for example, my wife and I were guests at a wedding held at a synagogue. So as not to go bonkers from the din of the dancing and music, I got up and walked around, and when I entered the main sanctuary, I read all of the names on the several yahrzeit boards there. This particular congregation has amongst its membership a large number of people who survived the Holocaust of Nazi Germany (and now, children and grandchildren thereof), and indeed, their founding rabbi himself was a survivor. This is reflected in the memorial plaques. For one thing, there is a whole wall in memory of the Holocaust, not unique but neither is it particularly common. And some of the individual bronze plaques on the yahrzeit board are for Holocaust victims. There is more than one plaque with multiple names, memorializing a family that was killed by the Nazis. One plaque, in fact, has four or five names and, in Hebrew, states that the date of their death and place of burial are unknown, and therefore, Yom Kippur, the holiest date of the year, will be celebrated as their yahrzeit day (my wife's grandfather did similar with his parents, whom he was unable to convince to leave what is now Moldova, and who disappeared during the war).

But the congregation also has a number of immigrants from the former Soviet Union, and this is also reflected on the yahrzeit board. In such regard, I saw a familiar name amongst the brass plaques. I saw a plaque with the name "Eugene Marshalik," who, you will recall, was a New York City Auxiliary Police Officer (and immigrant from the former Soviet Union) who died in the line of duty on 14 March 2007. And so, the demographic shift from Holocaust survivors to immigrants from the former Soviet Union is apparent on the synagogue's yahrzeit board.

How do the Rabbis call this one?

I'm now back in busy mode. I have started teaching again, and so far, the semester has been busy as usual for this time of the year, but no remarkable incidents thus far. This, of course, suits me very well.

I had an appointment in Manhattan this morning, but it was scrubbed on account of the fatal incident at the Kingston Avenue station, which suspended train service from Brooklyn to Manhattan on the 2, 3, 4 & 5 trains. Fortunately, the E train was operational, and I was able to get to school in time to teach my class. One of my colleagues was kind enough to give me a ride home, so I didn't have to take the Long Island Railroad back.

If you are sitting in a courtroom and your cell phone goes off, it will be confiscated by the court officer. As a result of this well publicized and consistently enforced policy, I have heard damn few cellphones ring in courtrooms.

Compare that with the cell phone policies in synagogues! In one of the shuls I have frequent occasion to visit, there is a poster on the wall imploring everyone to respect the sanctity and dignity of the venue by switching off their cellphones during prayer. But 4 of the past 6 times I have davened there, at least one cell phone went off during prayer. They have a rule which is not enforced, so everyone considers it to be a joke.

Exacerbating the travesty is that the cell phone that went off during davening, in all but one instance, had an owner who is a rabbi.

If the rabbis won't abide by the shul's cell phone policy, then how can anyone else be expected to?