2. According to survivors, attempts to prioritise women, children and the infirm in boarding the lifeboats were obstructed by able-bodied men insisting on remaining with their families.

3. Those who succeeded in forcing their way into life-boats may never know whether, or to what extent, they were responsible for others’ trauma, injuries or even possibly death.

4. Perhaps they won’t think about it or care; or perhaps they will justify their actions to themselves.

5. And it is, of course, easier for me to hope and imagine that I would have behaved better in the same circumstances, than to be sure of it; as the Ethics of the Fathers (Pirkei Avot) say, don’t judge someone until you stand in his or her place (which is of course impossible).

6. But thinking about all this does remind me of what I believe to be a central purpose of religion; to learn how to control myself in trivial ways and at unimportant moments so that I will be able to display self-control in significant ways and at times of crisis.

7. The Chofetz Chaim said that no choice in life is difficult to make – but it is often very difficult to know when I am making a choice, or what choice I am making.  To analyse my own behaviour, and the options open to me, carefully and critically at a time of crisis requires a habit of self-examination and self-discipline.

8. People who behave like animals at the best of times are unlikely suddenly to discover human decency at the worst of times.

9. People who, through religion or in other ways, aim during “normal” times to rise above the purely animal instincts and to direct their behaviour through self-control and thought for others, have at least a chance of being able to behave decently under pressure.

10. If I push through a bus-queue today, I am more likely to push through a life-boat queue tomorrow; if I think about decency while waiting for the bus, I increase my chances of behaving decently while waiting for a life-boat.

11. That may not affect my success in life – many people who behave like the worst kind of animal appear to achieve the best kind of material success; but I believe that it will affect my chances of nurturing inside me something that is not too closely bound to the purely material world to live on after my physical death.

2. Since my post about the nutters in Beit Shemesh shouting at little girls in the name of religion, I have been watching the media discussing who is really to blame.

3.  Last night my son Yisroel gave an excellent shiur on the week’s parashah, Vayigash, at the end of which he focused on the fact that the word “vayigash” emphasises that Yehudah finally steps forward to accept personal responsibility for his brothers’ welfare and thereby justifies his hereditary position of leadership.

4.  Personal responsibility seems to me to be the key to lots of things.

5.  In one of the Father Brown stories GK Chesterton has the priest comment on the use of early lie-detectors; he says they are as useless as the medieval idea that a murder suspect is made to touch the corpse and if blood flows it is a sign of guilt: “Blood flows, fast or slow, in dead folk or living, for so many more million reasons than we can ever know.  Blood will have to flow very funnily; blood will have to flow up the Matterhorn, before I will take it as a sign that I am to shed it.” This reminded me of an old post of mine entitled “What if God’s a Christian?” (which annoyed a few people), the essential thesis of which was that I should live on the assumption that my religious beliefs might be wrong, and avoid doing anything that, without religion, I would have to be ashamed of.  Father Brown’s refusal to shed blood based on belief in superstition or trust in machinery is an assertion of personal responsibility for his actions – neither religion nor anything else should be used as a cover or excuse for my own action or inaction.

6. So: (1) the “soul” of Europe will be restored when children, and adults, are taught how and why to take personal responsibility for their actions.

7. And so: (2) the real problem of Beit Shemesh is that 30 malicious nutters are being allowed by 10,000 passive chareidi residents to taint the chareidi reputation, because the 10,000 are failing to accept personal responsibility for the need to do anything positive to protect children from being abused in their name.

2.  The Sephardi Chief Rabbi lit the Chanukiah and then spoke, very appropriately and movingly.  And when he had finished we were all ready for a bit of dancing.  But, of course, we had to have another Chief Rabbi first, for the Ashkenazim.  There was nothing in particular for him to add – and the atmosphere was only dampened by his contribution.  Then the Minister for Education felt the need to point out at some length that he wasn’t planning to give the Kotel back to anyone, which presumably nobody in particular had been expecting him to do today anyway.  And then in order to dissipate any remaining fragments of atmosphere, some other random blighter said it all over again.

3.  Then we would have danced, but almost everyone had gone home (including the musician!)

4. Although it wouldn’t have dealt with the Minister and the random blighter, it would have been a much better start to have just the one Chief Rabbi.  And it does ring a little hollow to have them standing there going on about the indissoluble unity of the Jewish people when there are two of them!

5.  The Chief Rabbi is not a position that requires sectarian loyalty; indeed, it should be above it.  Nor is there any good reason I can think of why we couldn’t have just one Chief Rabbi of Israel.  For halachic matters where there are differences between ashkenazi and sephardi attitudes, he could take advice, as they must have to anyway where there are other variant minhagim.   And he could then talk about Jewish unity as if we (as well as he) meant it.

6.  The only possible argument I can think of against having a single Chief Rabbi is that the position is more about politics, influence and control of budgets than it is about religion; and that must be too cynical to be true, mustn’t it?!

7.  Happy Chanukah – and roll on a genuinely united Jewish people.

2.  It strikes me that this is about as inappropriate a moment as one could find for it to be suggested that all that Europe needs to rediscover its soul is co-operation between the Catholic church and institutionalised Judaism.

3.  Organised religion in general seems to be doing as much as any other force in today’s world to sow the seeds of dissension and violence.  While the Catholic church has particularly acute present crises of conscience, all the major religions about which I know anything at all seem to be contributing more to the sum total of human misery than to the sum total of human happiness.

4.  The Chief Rabbi is undoubtedly right that Europe – and not just Europe – is in moral crisis, and to describe that as needing to rediscover the soul is entirely apt.  Hundreds of thousands of people of all ages are desperately in need of moral direction and focus; and the lack of these is leaving a horrendous mark on the development of societies throughout the world.

5.  But what these people need is not a new gang to belong to, or a new dogma to excuse intolerance and thuggery; rather they need help to rediscover the inherent appreciation of moral values that are the image of God in which we are all created.  All religions worthy of the name – and many non-religious philosophies and approaches to life – are capable at a personal level of reigniting a human being’s spark of holiness; but organised religion, as distinct from personal religion, is as in need as anyone else of rediscovering its soul; and until it has healed itself it will not be ready to be part of the solution rather than an exacerbation of the problem.

2.  The text of this full-page advertisement says as follows: “A G-d fearing man of great ability who lives in Israel, can heal people of cancer from one day to the next.  He asks with every lashon of bakashah that women DO NOT contact him but a man should contact him or her behalf.  Please speak only in Hebrew as the man doesn’t understand English at all.  There are 2 things that need to be prepared: 1. To prepare a CT scan where there is a cancerous growth.  2.  To phone the man abopve to arrange a mutual third party who you will agree to deposit an agreed amount of money, either at a Beis Din, Rav, lawyer etc., and to pay the agreed deposit to the third party.  The man will then prepare a tikun and then to get a new CT scan from the hospital. If the illness has gone within 1 WEEK, then he will take the money as agreed from the third party.  IF, HOWEVER, the illness has not gone then the man will not take any money at all!”

3.  Hopefully, this is just a plain and simple fraud, in which case presumably someone will by now have arranged for the police in Israel to do the necessary.

4.  But what was the Advertiser thinking of printing this stuff?  The Advertiser is circulated to houses with mezuzot in orthodox Jewish areas, and is aimed at the orthodox Jewish community.  Presumably, if someone wanted to insert an advert for pornography, the advertisement would be refused.  Is there nobody capable of exercising enough editorial discretion to work out that this advertisement is either (a) a simple fraud, or (b) at the very least, every bit as tasteless as an advert for pornography?

5.  Either this man has special powers or he doesn’t.  If he doesn’t, the advertisement is a crude attempt to extort money from the vulnerable.  If he does, the advertisment is a crude assertion that these powers are to be made available only in return for payment, which is contrary to every notion of orthodox Judaism as I understand it.

6.  What troubles me is that this is by far the first – although certainly the crudest and most tasteless – emergence of attempts to exploit religious credulity within the orthodox community.  The number of glossy brochures for orthodox charities which now openly promise “yeshuos” – salvations – and publicise past miracles received by donors, seems to increase all the time.  And several miracle workers – blatantly advertised as such – have been brought to the country and publicised in straightforward marketing exercises.

7.  So it is time for the Jewish community to reassert that we are a community united by religion, not by superstitution, and that we are not all entirely stupid.

8.  The power of prayer and blessing is an intense and real part of the Jewish religion – but it has never meant miracles to order, and those whose prayers and blessings are genuine, and therefore will sometimes be efficaceous, bestow them in a selfless and altruistic manner, without thought of payment whether on a conditional basis as suggested by this advertisement or otherwise.

9.  An advertisement proclaiming powers to control divine intervention and offering to exercise them in return for payment is such a shameless parody of the concepts of blessing and prayer that the editors of the Advertiser should have seen from a mile off that to include it in their magazine would have been to subject their readers to gross offense.

10.  Hopefully the next issue will carry an unequivocal apology.

2.  Question No. 1: How can these people seriously think that behaving like this is consistent with adherence to anything worth calling a religion?

3.  Question No.2: If these men are meant to be chasidim, where are their Rebbeim, why don’t they know what their followers are up to, and if they do know it why don’t they or can’t they stop it?

4.  New Year’s Resolution: Bli neder, I do not intend to give a single penny to any individual or organisation who asks for charity unless and until they sign the following declaration with which I will present them: “I unequivocally condem the behaviour of those so-called chareidim who bellow bestially at the schoolgirls of Orot, Beit Shemesh on their way to and from school; I acknowledge that this behaviour demonstrates apalling moral delinquency and utter spiritual bankruptcy; and I encourage this declaration, with my signature, to be brought to the attention of those gedolei Torah who are meant to be the leaders of these disgusting animals.”  Those seeking a donation will have to sign the declaration and append their names, addresses and sectarian affiliation.

2.  The Torah-true response to the incident would, of course, have been upon the following lines.

3.  “What a disgrace it is for the Torah world that by the crooked behaviour of a number of so-called yeshivahs in claiming Government grants for non-existent students the Government has entirely reasonably found it necessary to inflict upon us the shame of having our claims verified by inspection of attendances; what a lesson this humiliation should be for us that by purporting to be orthodox and learned Jews our behavour should be beyond reproach or we heap insults on the Torah itself; let us at least try to restore our self-respect as a community, and a perception of decency in the eyes of others, by cooperating with the inspectors in a humble and helpful fashion; and, in particular, let us not waste even more of the public money by keeping the inspectors waiting just because we happen to be in the middle of learning – learning can wait, but reestablishing the honour of the yeshivah community cannot.”

4.  Simples?

2.  He starts every day at the bus-stop just outside one of the non-religious kibbutzim in the North of Israel.  He waits patiently among a crowd of Israeli youths who stand around talking and joking with each other.  Many of them are smoking, none of them is dressed particularly modestly, and the nature of their language is not always of the cleanest.  “But, after all”, thinks Moschiach, “they don’t know any better – they come from a non-religious culture, and if they’re no better than any other group of humans at least they’re no worse.”  He struggles onto the bus trying not to feel too disheartened, and stands because the seats are all taken: then one of the girls notices an elderly man or woman standing and abruptly motions one of her companions to make way.  Moschiach sits down feeling slightly reassured.

3.  Moschiach changes buses at the central bus station in Tel Aviv.  He waits among a crowd of businessmen and businesswomen on their way to Jerusalem for mid-morning meetings; some men wearing kippot and some not, some married women covering their hair and others not.  They ignore each other and jabber into their mobiles or poke away at little keyboards.  When the bus comes they all shove on treating each other with entirely passive hostility.  “But, after all,” thinks Moschiach, “they’re busy, thinking about making money to look after their families, and if they’re no better than any other group of humans at least they’re no worse.”  Then one of the businesswomen happens to glance up and see an elderly woman or man standing, and abruptly motions a businessman she’s never met to make way.  Moschiach sits down feeling distinctly hopeful.

4.  Moschiach changes buses again at the central bus station in Jerusalem.  He waits among a crowd of soldiers going to the Old City.  They stand around smoking and talking morosely.  When the bus comes they use their kit-bags as battering rams to make their way through the crowds and fling themselves down in the seats, eyeing the other passengers struggling on after them with disinterest or mild animosity.  “But, after all,” thinks Moschiach, “they’re nervous and preoccupied, and they’re little more than children with adult responsibilities thrust on them, and if they’re no better than any other crowd of soldiers at least they’re no worse.”  Then one of them sees an elderly man or woman crushed against the mountain of kit-bags and without much grace gets up and motions at his seat.  Moschiach sits down feeling rather excited.

5.  The final change of bus is in Meah Shearim, just outside the Toldos Aharon courtyard.  Moschiach looks around: the placards on the wall proclaim that only the modestly dressed may walk through this holy neighbourhood; everywhere the signs of Torah learning and Torah observance meet the eye; shops piled high with holy books, men and boys on their way to or from learning sessions talking animatedly of their studies, women shepherding their young families along the narrow pavements; walls placarded with pronouncements of the great rabbis of the generation; the air buzzes with the “chareidi” Torah atmosphere.  Moschiach is elated.

6.  Then the bus comes.  The crowd of chareidim charge at it without a thought for who came before or after whom.  Men push women aside with unthinking violence.  The elderly are shoved away unless they show an aggression that ill befits their years.  Children are separated from their parents and dragged or pushed back impatiently.  The rabbi who was preaching kindness and the unity of the Jewish nation just a few minutes ago is squeezing himself into the front of the queue although he only just got there.  Moschiach sighs, and turns away.  As the bus pulls out the rabbi thinks he saw an elderly woman standing on the pavement: he looks back, but he was mistaken – there is nobody there.

2.  With the size of area that has been devastated, there will certainly be hundreds or thousands of people who look around and see their entire world as having been swept away in the floods, and it is only to be expected that they may equate today’s floods with the Biblical flood with which God destroyed the world.

3.  Of course, that episode ends with God’s promise not to destroy the world again by flood, and there may be many people today who regard that promise as having been broken by recent events.  The same would have been true of many victims of the Pakistan floods last year.

4.  There is a simple answer to accusations that God’s promise has been broken: the promise was only not to destroy the whole world, and there was no promise not to destroy part of it.

5.  That answer is as unsatisfactory as it is simple: if my entire village, every town I ever visited and all or most of my family have been destroyed by flood, how impressed am I going to be by being told that God’s promise is kept because Hendon is still okay?

6. It reminds me of Cecilia Jupe’s answer to the schoolmaster in Hard Times, that if one sailor in a hundred is drowned at sea the percentage of losses is 100%, if you happen to be that sailor’s mother.

7.  To put it another way, why should it matter to an Australian or Pakistani flood victim whether or not Hendon is still unaffected by the flood?

8.  And the answer to that, of course, is that it depends on how the inhabitants of Hendon behave towards the flood.

9.  If we simply ignore it, or get a transient thrill out of watching it on the television or computer, then our survivial is irrelevant to the victims, and so far as they are concerned God’s promise not to destroy the world has been broken for all practical purposes.

10.  But if we exert ourselves to reach out to victims of the floods, in all the various ways open to us in today’s shrinking world, then they can suddenly see the point of the promise that natural disasters will always leave some people in a position to help the victims.  God’s promise is meaningful only if we supply the meaning by committing ourselves to exert ourselves.  The rainbow that symbolises God’s promise not to renew the Biblical flood arches through the sky, and I cannot see for certain where it begins and ends – but that doesn’t stop me from setting off in the direction it shows to look for people who might need my help.

11.  We do not understand how or why natural disasters occur.  But we can understand that they are challenges and opportunities to assert universal brotherhood.

2.  I know of no religion (including Judaism) that denies the ability to be a good person without religious belief.

3.  The more important question, however, seems to be whether people, religious or not, can bring themselves to behave decently nowadays, by the exertion of a modicum of commonsense and self-control.

4.  The journalists who managed to catch a photograph of the Pope with his face covered by his own shawl in the wind doubtless thought “what a scoop”; that is a reasonable first thought – but the second thought should have been “come to think of it, though, not very kind to publish such an indiginified picture – let’s just quietly bin it”.

5.  Similarly, whether or not atheists are right, might not sheer good manners lead one to think that a billboard denying God is an impolite welcome to Scotland?

6.  And the Cardinal expressing trenchant views about secularism in Britain may or may not have been airing an important issue, but simple good manners might have suggested that this was not the time, place or manner in which to do it.

7.  Perhaps we are all so busy nowadays being right, and fervent in our protestations of how right we are, that we forget to be well-mannered.

8. I don’t know who first said “manners maketh man”, but it has something to be said for it: manners are more than a superficial social etiquette – they are part of our instinctive knowledge of what is good and bad behaviour that forms part of the Divine image in which some of us believe we were created.

9.  The Pope has plenty of policy and religious issues to address (and so far as I can see he does not seem to be an unhelpfully complacent or self-satisfied personality): but there is a time and a place for everything – he is the head of a religion to which a few million of our fellow human-beings belong, and we owe it to ourselves to give him a welcome that exudes human warmth and a respect for human dignity.