In December 1931, George Orwell got himself arrested in the slums of East London in order to find out about conditions "inside," and then he wrote an essay about the people he met while in detention. One of them was a buyer for a kosher butcher who had embezzled some of his boss’s money. To Orwell’s surprise, the man told him that "his employer would probably get into trouble at the synagogue for prosecuting him. It appears that the Jews have arbitration courts of their own, and a Jew is not supposed to prosecute another Jew, at least in a breach-of-trust case like this, without first submitting it to the arbitration court."
You might think that such relics of the medieval ghetto, and of the rabbinical control that was part of ghetto life, had more or less disappeared in England in the 21st century. And you would largely be right. There exists a "Beth Din," or religious court, in the prosperous North London suburb of Finchley to which the ultra-Orthodox submit some of their more arcane disputes. (This little world is very amusingly described by Naomi Alderman in her lovely novel Disobedience.) But to speak in general, Jews in Britain consider themselves, and are considered, to be answerable to the same laws as everybody else. Should I mention any of the numerous reasons why it would be extremely nerve-racking if this were not true?
But now the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has cited the Beth Din as one of his reasons for believing that sharia, or Islamic law, can and should become a part of what he called "plural jurisdiction" in Britain. His reasoning, if one may call it that, is clear: Other faiths already have their own legal authorities, so why not the Muslims, too?
Lewis Fein emails Christopher Hitchens:
I have no idea, despite having slept through (because I slept through?) a semester of Jewish law, whether this story has an ounce of credibility, either from Orwell or the equally ignorant, in Jewish legal matters, ‘Landsman’ who conveyed the tale. The whole thing seems no different than having cited a jailhouse lawyer as an authority on anything having to do with the judicial system.
I would also be remiss if I did not point out that, never mind my own disinterest in embracing Orthodox Jewry (cheeseburgers are my fatal flaw), the community as a whole – one cannot emphasize this enough – is entirely voluntary. Unlike radical Islam, which as you know seeks to impose Sharia law upon all people, Orthodox Jews are, to use the language of Hugh Hewitt, "in but not of": they have no interest in forcibly converting you – or us, my fellow tribesman – to their lifestyle. As I have stated before, people can freely leave this community, many do, without fear of physical reprisal. Will some people face wholesale abandonment from friends or even family? Perhaps. Will they endure death threats, a Jewish ‘fatwa’ against their very being? Please.
The vast majority of Orthodox Jews I know are decent, moral individuals. To repeat: I have zero desire to emulate their religiosity or customs, though the best kugel I had was at an Orthodox rabbi’s house. Now compare this example to the religion of peace. Shalom.
The Orwell story rings true. Jews do have their own laws. We’re G-d’s chosen people. God gave us his Torah. Among other things, it mandates observance of the Sabbath. This is obviously not something commanded by secular law.
