web analytics
August 29, 2014 / 3 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Satmar’

Is Consent for Metzitza B’Peh Really about Banning Circumcision?

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

The welfare of Klal Yisroel will be upheld. This is how I see the new regulation requiring informed consent before performing Metzitza B’Peh (MbP).

For those not up to speed about this ritual procedure – it involves suctioning off the blood by mouth from a circumcision wound. The Gemarah, in its description of the very important Mitzvah of Bris Milah, explains the procedure for that in relative detail.

As has always been the case throughout Jewish history, the rabbis understood that the Torah always put the health of the individual above just about all else. So they mandated what was a safety feature of the bris – the suctioning of the blood (metzitza) off the wound so that it would not become a source of infection. In fact that is clearly how metzitza is stated in the Gemarah. As a safety precaution.

So according to the Gemarah even though it does not invalidate the actual bris if metzizah is not done, it is nonetheless a Halachic requirement to do so.

The Gemarah does not describe the method of suction one must use. It just says “metzitza” – suction. Historically the most efficient method was to simply suction it off quickly by mouth. For thousands of years that is how every bris was done. Until the 19th century. At that time many of the greatest poskim of the era allowed alternative methods of suctioning after there were some deaths attributed to a possibly infected mohel.

But that did not stop the hardcore traditionalists from insisting that doing so by mouth was not only preferable but required! Those who argued saying that there were legitimate poskim who permitted non-oral suction methods were rebuffed with claims that these poskim never intended their kulos (leniencies) to be permanent.

They insist that MbP is an integral part of the bris. Here is the way the Forward put it in the name of one of the most prominent mohalim, Rabbi Avrohom Cohn who heads the American Board of Ritual Circumcision and who is in the forefront of fighting this new regulation:

[T]he ultra-Orthodox minority who do use metzitzah b’peh, including members of Cohn’s group, avow that this technique must be part of the circumcision ritual in order to fulfill divine commandments set out in the Torah and the Talmud. Personally I don’t know how they can make that claim. If there were ever circumcisions done without MbP, they would be invalid by this definition. Which would make those poskim guilty of being machti es haRabim (causing the public to sin). Besides – what would those poskim gain by omitting MbP? Why bother doing it at all?! If MbP is integral then there was no point to doing a bris! Furthermore they are casting aspersions on every circumcision that does not do MbP.

Nonetheless they feel that any interference with that practice violates their right to practice their religion as they see fit. Even New York city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygene (DOHMH) requirement to sign an informed consent form stating they have been made aware of the possible risk of infection to the child.

One may ask, “What is the big deal?” “Let them sign the forms and they can do what they want!” That’s how I feel about it. But they feel they cannot sign a document that would in effect be saying that Halacha as they understand it is dangerous to your health.

They claim is that there is no danger to a child that has MbP. That’s the way it has been done for millennia. And that there is no poof that the few babies that died were because of infections transferred by mouth from the mohel. And that even if it were proven in one or 2 cases – the statistical probability of it happening is negligible considering the tens of thousands of times each year MbP was done without incident.

The Department of Health obviously disagrees and points to studies that have show a strong likelihood of several babies being infected by a mohel with the herpes virus. From the Forward:

More recent DOHMH studies have revealed 12 area infants who have contracted herpes after circumcision. with two of the infants dying soon after.

And since herpes can be asymptomatic, the risks are real, small though they may be. Hence the regulation. Which carries financial penalties if not followed.

Weberman Gets 103 Years

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013

NEW YORK (JTA) — Chasidic counselor Nechemya Weberman was sentenced to 103 years in prison for sexual abuse of a teenage female patient over several years.

Weberman, 54, a member of the Satmar Chasidic community in Brooklyn, did not speak during the Jan. 22 sentencing in New York State Supreme Court. He had been sent to Rikers Island prison without bail immediately after his conviction in December.

He was found guilty on 59 counts of sexual abuse. The encounters started in 2007, when his victim was 12, and lasted until she was 15. She is now 18.

Weberman had faced up to 117 years in prison.

The girl’s parents sent her for sessions to Weberman, an unlicensed therapist, at the recommendation of the child’s school. The girl was referred for not meeting her sect’s strict modesty guidelines regarding women’s dress and asking questions about the existence of God.

The victim reportedly gave a tearful statement in court.

“I clearly remember how I would look in the mirror. I saw a girl who didn’t want to live in her own skin, a girl whose innocence was shattered, a girl who couldn’t sleep at night because of the gruesome invasion that had been done to her body,” she is reported as saying.

The New York Daily News reported Jan. 19 that a new investigation conducted by the paper showed that Weberman had violated at least 10 other female patients.

At Weberman’s trial, prosecutors said they were aware of six additional victims — four married women and two underage girls. The newspaper reported that it identified four additional women, who do not want to come forward out of fear of being ostracized by the community.

Weberman victims, according to the new investigation, include four married women, three of whom he counseled, and six unmarried women, all of whom were Weberman clients.

According to the paper, sources close to the women abused by Weberman said he used patterns of grooming and nurturing to lure them. He showered outcast teenagers with attention, taking them on road trips and buying them lingerie, they said. The unlicensed counselor also cited kabbalah when forcing his victims to have sex with him to convince them his acts were allowed, once telling a victim, “I learned kabbalah and we were a couple in another incarnation.”

“The intimate acts he was performing were intended as a form of repentance for sins committed in their previous lifetimes,” Rabbi Yakov Horowitz from Monsey, N.Y., in whom other victims had confided, told the Daily News.

Five others told the New York daily that they were aware of Weberman’s misconduct with clients years before he was accused of sexual abuse, and sources said the anonymous victim who put him on trial came forward after friends told her Weberman “was a known pervert.”

Whose Judaism is it Anyway?

Thursday, December 27th, 2012

Note from Harry Maryles: Every once in a while I will receive a request from one of my readers to publish an essay they have written. My response usually is to send it and if I like it, I will publish it. These essays do not necessarily have to agree with me lock stock and barrel. They can be opposition pieces to what my stated views are. But they cannot advocate positions that I am diametrically opposed to. More often than not, these submissions are rejected for a variety of reasons – among them: they may not measure up to my publishing standards; or they may not be appropriate subjects for my blog; or are so off the wall that they are embarrassing. But every once in a while a submission not only meets my minimum standards,they supersede them. Usually those submissions are from a professional writers who have either published books or articles before. But not always. Sometimes I receive a submission out of the blue that is quite exceptional in both style and content. Today’s guest post is by one such individual. He is all of 15 years old. Here in part is the bio he submitted:

My name is Michael Weiner, I am 15 years old, and currently live in Lower Merion, Pennsylvania. I go to school at Kohelet Yeshiva High School. I moved here from Northern California just a few months ago, in order to go to a religious high school. I went to a Jewish community school from K-8, where I and my brother were 2 out of 3 religiously observant kids. It was, to say the least, quite an experience! I have gone to a Moshava summer camp for the past 4 years, and am currently involved in Bnei Akiva. I consider myself to be Modern Orthodox, and a Zionist, although I don’t hesitate to criticize Israel if I feel it’s necessary.

I am a huge admirer of the Rav, and his writings. Reading ‘The Lonely Man of Faith’ greatly changed the way I view God, Judaism, and life in general. Today, I am most likely going to go to YU, but secular college is not out of the window, because I believe that a secular collegiate experience has many important positive aspects.

However, regardless of one’s lifestyle choices, they must always remain a Jew above all else. This entails being Kovei’ah Zman Ittim, and infusing all that you do in your daily life with a perspective filtered by halacha and Jewish values (however you define that, be it Tikkun Olam or Talmud Torah).

One word. Wow! He also has his own blog. His post follows unedited in its entirety:

Whose Judaism is Anyways?

The title of this post is a question that has no one answer. The tragedy that we face today is that everyone thinks they are the sole possessors of the answer, and that their way of practicing Judaism is undoubtedly more meaningful, more traditional, and ultimately more authentic. This, in my opinion, is the greatest barrier to achdus in the frum community, and general Jewish community at large.

Simply stated, it’s an inability to recognize that Judaism is multi-faceted, halachah is not monolithic, and that for thousands of years, Jews have looked, ate, talked, and sometimes even behaved differently then each other. This is historical fact. During most of the current galus from Israel, we have been different. These differences however, are not the obstacle to unity. The obstacle to unity is the failure to recognize that these differences are normal, and trivial.

In the early years of the 20th century, Agudas Yisroel was formed. This was one of the very first organizations where Chassidim and Misnagdim worked together to find creative solutions to community problems. The Gedolei Yisrael, and laymen of that generation understood that the powerful Haskalah movement was a force that needed to be reckoned with. It presented dangers that made it necessary for a wide variety of Jews to come together and decide how best to respond to such a threat.

The Chafetz Chaim, the Gerrer Rebbe, the Radzhiner Rebbe, and Rav Chaim Ozer Gradzinski decided that enough was enough. Achdus within the religious community was the only way to stand a chance against the roaring fire of modernity that was quickly consuming all of Europe, eventually reaching even the closeted Pale of Settlement, and other Jewish ghettoes.

Chemicals Thrown in Face of Williamsburg Rabbi Who Supports Sex Abuse Victims

Wednesday, December 12th, 2012

Rabbi Nathan (Nuchem) Rosenberg was walking on Roebling Street in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn when a man came up behind him, according to Rosenberg, tapped him on the shoulder, threw a liquid in his face, and ran away.

Rosenberg claimed that the liquid was bleach, although that is not yet confirmed.  He was treated at a local hospital and released. According to a report in the New York TimesRosenberg had a corneal abrasion and burns around one of his eyes.

Rosenberg is well-known in Williamsburg as an advocate for child sexual abuse victims in the tightly-knit Satmar Hasidic community. He runs a hotline and has a websitethat provide information, in Yiddish, for protecting children from sexual abuse.  The Satmar community has just been through an especially traumatic sexual abuse trial which ended in the conviction of a community member, Nechemya Weberman.  Weberman, 54, was found guilty of 59 counts of sex abuse against a child.

The vast majority of the rabbis of the Williamsburg community backed Weberman from the time of his arrest, and many in the community still support him despite the conviction.  They continue to claim Weberman is innocent. Rosenberg, however, sat through the entire Weberman trial to show support for the victim.

Although some initially believed that the attack on Rosenberg was related to the Weberman conviction, a police department spokesperson said that the chemical attack was unrelated to the verdict. The police department confirmed that Rosenberg had been the victim of chemical burns, but were not yet able to identify the chemical.

There was an eyewitness to the attack who claimed he saw a man throw the liquid in the rabbi’s face and then run away.  “It happened so fast,” Primo Santiago said. “Out of the corner of my eye I saw [Rosenberg] walking down the street, and the other guy ran from the fish store and threw the bleach.”
The Daily News reported that Rosenberg’s attacker was the son of a man whom Rosenberg has accused of abusing boys. This theory was supported by several accounts in various blogs serving the Williamsburg community.

According to the website of the International Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault, headquartered in Skokie, Illinois, Rosenberg’s alleged attacker was Shalom (Solomon) Shnitzler.  Schnitzler’s Famous Fish Market is located on Roebling Street, the site of the attack. On the day of the Weberman verdict, Rosenberg posted on his blog that Rabbi Schnitzler sexually abuses boys.

According to numerous reports, Rabbi Rosenberg has been attacked several times for his work on behalf of sexual abuse victims in the Orthodox community.  Some who criticize Rosenberg claim that he sometimes names as sex perverts people with whom he has business disagreements.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/chemicals-thrown-in-face-of-williamsburg-rabbi-who-supports-sex-abuse-victims/2012/12/12/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: