The Washington Jewish community has been rocked by allegations against leading Rabbi Barry Freundel of the Kesher Israel Congregation in Georgetown. Freundel is accused of using a secret camera to film Jewish woman engaged in the ritual bath known as a Mikva.
Freundel (shown above from a YouTube clip), is now criminally charged. He is viewed as one of the leading experts on Jewish law and ethics and “an intellectual giant” in the Jewish intellectual circles. Freundel heads the conversion committee of the Rabbinical Council of America and is vice president of the region’s Vaad, overseeing kosher dietary laws at Jewish institutions. He has a law degree and a doctorate and is affiliated with several area universities, including Georgetown University’s law school, the University of Maryland and Towson University, north of the Baltimore.
Ironically, the synagogue is part of Judaism’s modern Orthodox movement that has tried to accommodate the rise of women in leadership. His wife, Sharon Freundel is the leader of Kesher’s monthly women’s study and prayer group as well as the director of Hebrew and Judaic studies at the Jewish Primary Day School. She was in the courtroom with one of their three children for the arraignment.
His congregation includes U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and longtime U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman.
One alleged victim, Emma Shulevitz, 27, said that she was warned by Freundel not to move the digital clock setting on a sink — a curious concern but she said that Freundel was worried that it would be moved in any way. She said that Freundel said that Shulevitz should not hesitate to “take as many practice dunks as I needed.” However, a convert to Judaism, Shulevitz was not concerned until she read that congregants had accused Shulevitz of having a hidden camera in the clock.
The Mikva requires women to be naked and fully submerge under the water while reciting a blessing: “…asher kideshanu bemitzvotav vetzivanu al hatevilah, ….who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us on immersion.” Only one attending woman can be present who by Jewish law is charged with making sure that the woman is totally submerged.
Prosecutors say that a witness contacted police when Freundel was seen plugging in the clock in the shower area of the ritual bath. The witness said that Freundel said it was for ventilation. They identify the clock radio as the “Dream Machine” with a motion activated camera as well as a storage component. It is described as a “self-contained surveillance device.”
Freundel is charged with six counts of voyeurism and faces up to six years in prison. My guess is that we will see a superseding indictment with more charges to try to force a plea deal, which would seem likely. The greatest risk for his defense is that the prosecutors are still looking into whether some of the pictures showed girls. Assistant U.S. Attorney Sharon Marcus Kurn stressed that “He violated the laws up in the heavens and down.”
The synagogue posted the following statement:
This is a painful moment for Kesher Israel Congregation and the entire Jewish community. At this challenging time, we draw strength from our faith, our tradition, and our fellow congregants.
Upon receiving information regarding potentially inappropriate activity, the Board of Directors quickly alerted the appropriate officials.
Throughout the investigation, we cooperated fully with law enforcement and will continue to do so.
After today’s arrest of Rabbi Dr. Barry Freundel, the Board of Directors suspended him without pay. As always, Kesher Israel will remain open as a place of learning, prayer, and community, including throughout the remainder of the Sukkot holiday.
This is a very difficult time for all of us. We respectfully request that our community be granted privacy. Any further questions should be directed to the U.S. Attorney’s office.
Source: Washington Post
Jeez, Darren
Everyone here has to defend their beliefs from morning ’til night.
Maybe Darren, you can answer the same questions posed to David. He seems to avoid directly answering any question I poised, yet dances to a new topic.
I didn’t see anything offensive about mespos statement.
Darren:
” A person’s beliefs in of themselves are not a threat to anyone.”
***********
If you take the 911 hijackers at their word — and there is no reason not to — a person’s beliefs are a threat just like Jim Jones’ were and David Koresh and on and on. Threats aren’t always acted upon but they are still there.
“Beliefs have consequences” should be carved over every school door.
And Squueky, I raised my four children with my value system, my moral code. My children grew up to be focused, successful, kind human beings, not rudderless felons. They are educated professionals, military member, mothers and tradesperson. They have told me that they are appreciative of my skills as a mother and a provider and I’m told that I’m loved by them every time I speak to them. I could tell you that your value system and moral code may have messed up many a child.
Annie and Linda (and mespo)
There is good done of secularism and evil done of religion. Same is true in reverse, but you will NEVER get a person of faith to believe that. More than that, you will never get a person of ONE faith to truly believe a being of another faith.
I was raised in the Old Testament, something else that has both good and evil in it, and not all of the evil is done by the heathens. For all of the “love the lord your God”, there are codes on how to treat your slaves and when to stone your wife or children. There are also laws on stoning those who believe in a different manner. Mixed in with all of that are three mentions of homosexuality. Within the entire text there’s also hundreds of laws on heterosexual marriage, yet no one follows them (or speaks of them, for that matter). In the same testament, you are forbidden from eating shellfish, wearing clothes of two different fabrics, and other arcane tomfoolery.
mespo, as you say, the 911 hijackers, Jim Jones, and David Koresh believed they were acting in the spirit of the Lord. They were not. I don’t pretend to know the will of God, nor even accept that there is or is not one. To pick and choose, however, is the mark of a hypocrite. When I have told “Christians” that, they have informed me that they follow the NEW Testament. Sure they do. Until you, once again, mention gays or the 10 Commandments or Jonah or Adam and Eve (NOT ADAM AND STEVE!!!!)…then they are Old Testament rabbis of yore.
Lewis Black said it best:
I just have a question for Mespo. If David is concerned about secularism, then why is he talking to us charlatans?
Squeeky, hmmm, where to begin. First, yes I’d do have a moral code, it’s no less a code because it was made by me than a code made by a god. Now on to values, I have trouble with values, whose values? Yours? Why must I have your value system? Squeeky, you see things in such black and withe ways. Life is shades of gray. My values are good ones, ones based on the sum of my learning and observing and maybe even from my religious upbringing, at least the one’s I haven’t rejected. I reject your theory about me, my moral code, and my value system. You don’t seem to grasp that there are any other ways of being a decent human being that don’t come strictly from some religion.
Church services begin at 8:00 a.m. Saturday morning. Mandatory attendance.
Oooops. My bad. Everybody welcome.
@Annie
No, Annie, you do NOT have a moral code. You have some moralized feel-good warm and fuzzy mish-mash where everybody is just supposed to sort of know what to do. Codes is just a synonym for rules. Codes are written down to where every body knows what is permitted and what is not permitted. The whole purpose of a code is to set rules down which reflect underlying values . But, you have a problem with values , too, in that you don’t want anybody else telling you what are good values and what are bad values.
Then, you set about advocating or disagreeing with various laws, pretending that those laws have come into existence in a strange and mysterious fashion without any underlying values ever being input. In reality, those laws are usually just more sophisticated versions of prior religious rules, which fact has to be vehemently denied because it might indicate there is an underlying system of values at work which would offend the non-religious among us.
And we wonder why our country seems sooo screwed up and rudderless.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Mespo, wholly, holey, holy.
I apologize if I’ve offended anyone, I just couldn’t resist the word play.
Annie:
Like the untalented kid who wins the talent show judged by his uncle, they get defensive because you just can’t justify it and you look silly trying. Nobody wants that so you react with anger to deflect a glaring hole in your belief system.
chestercat1:
U.S. polls tell us that non-believers have no chance at elected office, are thought of worse than criminals, and aren’t trusted in “high trust” jobs. This in a country with the most subscribers to the Christian faith as any in the world. A faith which preaches: treat others as you would have them treat you.
Either its hypocrisy or masochism. Take your pick.
Chestercat, nope. I’ve been called immoral so many times by believers. They don’t seem to understand that we too have a moral code.
Annie – you may have a moral code, but it may violate the moral code of someone else thus making you immoral.
Mespo, I see that in so many believers. They get very upset and defensive when one questions their belief system. I often question in an attempt to make sense of something that seem so senseless.
It is odd, but on this blog I find myself defending the religious beliefs of many against an array of attacks by atheists and agnostics. I am agnostic myself but I find it horrifying that in this county people would be ignorant as to attack the religious beliefs of others. This is a constant meme on this blog.
Darren:
“David has a right to believe or practice any religious doctrine, teachings, or faith in a manner of his own choosing.”
*****************
Sure he does. He can believe any sublime or damn-fool idea he wants. He just doesn’t have the right to be free from criticism of it. Beliefs have consequences borne out by human actions. Stop criticizing stupid beliefs and you’re a conspirator in the consequences of those human actions.
Mark wrote:
Sure he does. He can believe any sublime or damn-fool idea he wants. He just doesn’t have the right to be free from criticism of it. Beliefs have consequences borne out by human actions. Stop criticizing stupid beliefs and you’re a conspirator in the consequences of those human actions.
~+~
Yet labeling someone’s faith belief as being fool or stupid is a lesser version of the pillory. A person’s beliefs in of themselves are not a threat to anyone. It is often that perception of others being a threat that leads to ridicule, then condemnation. Sure a person should be able to argue their position but having different beliefs is not a reason to automatically put the person into a situation of being forced to defend their beliefs.
Annie and Mespo –
Would they afford non-believers the same courtesy. We doubters are barely considered moral or ethical, and futher should have to bend to a “god” clause in the Constitution.
Annie:
What so many religious folks I know want is not to be free to practice their religion — they know that there are no governmental impediments to that right — but to be free from criticism for practicing their religion. In short they don’t want those beliefs questioned in any way. That’s what makes religion so insidious. The smug assurance that nothing denominated as religious teaching can be examined in the light of reason because it’s “faith based.”
Linda, I too was puzzled about Darren’s ‘defense’ of David’s worship practices. I don’t recall anyone saying David couldn’t or shouldn’t practice his faith as he sees fit.
Chestercat1,
I am beside myself in angst. DavidM put it out there that Mespo (I guess that’s right) was pushing a gay agenda. He still hasn’t answered the question of how he came to that conclusion.
Now someone is defending David religion. I must have missed that posting. I just think people are asking questions based upon unanswered statements, which have turned into more questions.
So government should be like our daddy? Really? Isn’t that a misuse of government and most definitely NOT libertarian.
So government should have policies that warn about the danger of homosexuality? That’s most definitly not a libertarian principle.
Linda L.
Welcome fellow Jew (though I’m non-practicing). You’ll find much here that you’ll find shocking, particularly how the Old Testament has been twisted around by the folks that claim to follow the New one.
Annie –
Hi, friend. A bit off topic, but since Jefferson was mentioned above, I thought a Jeffersonian tidbit would be apropos:
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814”
Hi Max Chestercat, well there you have it, straight from Jefferson’s lips.
Annie –
I imagine old Thomas had it wrong…
maxcat – I do not remember Jefferson studying law. He was a lot of things, lawyer was not one of them. I don’t think he would be my goto source on the Common Law.