Rabbi Marc D. Rudolph

A Rabbi for the Rest of Us

Dirty Money

Rabbi Barukh Halevi Epstein (1860-1941) teaches that the Torah places the portion of Mishpatim, dealing with issues of justice, before the reading of Terumah, the giving of contributions to the Tabernacle, to teach that contributions that come from money acquired through just and righteous means are desired by God whereas contributions acquired through theft and other criminal behavior are unfit to be donated for sacred purposes.

What do you think? Should churches and synagogues reject contributions that are tainted?

Rabbi Jack Riemer tells the story about a time when a well‑known gangster walked into the synagogue office where he was a young assistant rabbi. Despite his violent and corrupt life, this man had a deep, private loyalty to his mother’s memory. He handed the senior rabbi a generous check and asked that Kaddish be said for her. The senior rabbi accepted the check and assured him that the appropriate prayers would be said in her memory and her name would be read from the bima at services. Then the gangster turned and left.

Rabbi Riemer was horrified. He turned to his mentor and said,
“How can we accept money from him? It’s dirty money. It comes from crime, from hurting people. We can’t let the synagogue be associated with this.”

The senior rabbi replied calmly:
“Money doesn’t become clean or unclean by itself. The question is what we do with it. If this man wants to honor his mother, and if we can turn this money toward something good — toward Torah, toward helping people — then why should we refuse it? Let the synagogue take the money and put it to holy use.”

Rabbi Riemer wasn’t convinced. “But the association……”

His older colleague raised a gentle hand.

“Jack,” he said quietly, “if we slam this door in his face, we may be closing the only door he still walks through to reach anything holy.”

Photo by John Guccione http://www.advergroup.com on Pexels.com

Rabbi Marc Rudolph

7 responses to “Dirty Money”

  1. Stephen L Newman Avatar
    Stephen L Newman

    The rabbi was wrong. You don’t collaborate with evil. You don’t whitewash evil acts by accepting the proceeds of crime. Would the rabbi have taken money from a Nazi who acquired his wealth from Jews murdered in the Holocaust? Shame on the rabbi. That’s my two cents. –Steve

    Stephen L. Newman
    Professor Emeritus
    Department of Politics
    York University
    Toronto, ON
    Canada M3J 1P3

    Like

    Reply
    1. Rabbi Marc Rudolph Avatar
      Rabbi Marc Rudolph

      Hi Steve, Thank you for your strong response. It gives me an idea for a discussion to have at the synagogue tomorrow where I will be leading services. Hope you are doing well. Marc

      Like

      Reply
    2. Rabbi Marc Rudolph Avatar
      Rabbi Marc Rudolph

      Hi Steve: I received this response to your response from my friend and former congregant Dr. David Loiterman. He tried to post it but was unable to do so. I am sharing it here:

      Refreshing to hear an unequivocal response, but somewhat surprised to see
      your background in theoretical and academic political discourse.
      I say this because politics (at least in my opinion) is the very essence of
      engaging in the broad array of human psychology and behaviors. The end goal,
      I suspect most would agree, is elevating the civic tide for those governed under
      the constituency of the particular politician.
      I am gratified to have reached the age of 74.
      During that time, I practiced medicine for 32 years. Roughly half of that time
      involved in leadership in organized medicine at the local, state and national
      levels. During my years of practice and involvement in organized medicine I was
      privileged to have had encounters with tens of thousands of patients and their
      families as well as thousands of politicians.
      While I can say that i found the overwhelming majority of patients and families to
      be highly ethical, honest and sincere. I have never encountered a politician who
      told the truth 100% of the time and nearly every politician was, to use a phrase,
      “calculating”.
      It is self-evident that my experience is simply my perception and unique to me as
      an individual and certainly others may have experienced different interaction.
      You and I are of similar view in that we both believe it is one of the roles of
      leaders of faith to help their congregations continually raise to ever higher moral
      values.
      Certainly, there are those who hope that even the most corrupt, immoral and
      unethical of human beings given the right circumstances will suddenly “see the
      light” or understand the moral will of the higher power in the universe and
      radically change their ways.
      It happens.
      I may be wrong, but I believe it is a rare occurrence. As the aphorism goes: “A
      Leopard does not change its spots”

      Of course, that does not mean that faith leaders and those in all of our
      communities shouldn’t try and help those who have somehow determined that a
      life of crime and dishonesty is an appropriate way to live.
      In the end, as is the case with politicians, I believe it is about the marginal benefit
      for the social order.
      Does the overriding benefit outweigh the moral decision?
      The “slippery slope “is that not infrequently human beings “convince” oneself that
      the choice of a particular social benefit that ultimately inures to oneself ALSO
      raises the civic tide.
      History is replete with tales of despicable or arguably immoral leaders in the
      organized crime sector who have donated considerable sums for the “social
      benefit” of the community.
      For example: The 15th Century tales of Robin Hood. The stories of such
      individuals in the early 20th Century “Cosa Nostra” as depicted in Francis
      Coppola’s movies about the “Godfather” or Pablo Escobar and other Narco-
      terrorists of the late 20th Century. The mid 20th Century Jewish organized crime
      figures who contributed substantial sums as well as well as logistics in
      furtherance of the formation of the State of Israel.
      The question is always about a sincere and objective determination of the social
      “marginal benefit”.
      There are many who have very clear and well considered moral views with
      regard to “redlines” which should never ever be crossed. There are others who
      are open to weighing each circumstance as it arises while also cognizant of self-
      delusion.
      Those are my thoughts.
      Thank you for the stimulating response to a timely important social and ethical
      question.
      ロ

      Like

      Reply
      1. Stephen L Newman Avatar
        Stephen L Newman

        Hi Marc,

        Thanks for forwarding Dr. Loiterman’s response. If we were in conversation I would tell him that there is a difference between a bad person having a change of heart and a bad person seeking to whitewash his deserved reputation for evil by making a contribution to charity. I agree that we ought to encourage repentance and applaud efforts by wrongdoers to make restitution for harm done. A criminal who admits his crimes and accepts the punishment that is his due is not to be forever shunned by his community. But the unrepentant wrongdoer who denies his guilt and makes no apology for his crimes should not be allowed to use the proceeds of his crimes to purchase our approbation. Hence, the gangster who offers to make a contribution to the synagogue should be turned away. His gesture is self-serving and in no way admirable.

        Steve

        Stephen L. Newman
        Professor Emeritus
        Department of Politics
        York University
        Toronto, ON
        Canada M3J 1P3

        Like

  2. fantastictimetravel194afacc2f Avatar
    fantastictimetravel194afacc2f

    The synagogue should have also brought up the concepts of teshuvah and tefilah. If the gangster sincerely repented then his money would not be tainted.

    Shabbat shalom! Ben Engel

    Like

    Reply
    1. Rabbi Marc Rudolph Avatar
      Rabbi Marc Rudolph

      Fair point!

      Like

      Reply
  3. joyceflescher Avatar
    joyceflescher

    Sage decision.   Th

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to joyceflescher Cancel reply