Torah (Shaare Ephraim 1, 17). The commentator, Shaarei Rahamim (Sabbetai Lifschitz) bases an explanation of these selective restrictions upon the Pri Megadim(Joseph Teomim ) to Orah Hayyim 141, end of paragraph 8, in which he indicates that such a man would be bearing false witness to the passage being read. But in spite of these selective restrictions, where there would be a shocking contrast between the reading from Scripture and the character of the man called up, Margolies concludes that, in the spirit of Jacob Emden :“If we call him up and some indignant worshiper scolds him, the embarrassment may lead the sinner to full repentance.” The commentator Shaarei Rahamim to this passage in Margolies adds another leniency as follows: Although it is not permissible to call a blind man to the Torah , nevertheless we do call up blind people and illiterates because they do not read the Torah and we rely upon the reading by the official reader. Thus, he continues, we can call up sinners who should not be permitted to read the Torah themselves because nowadays we count on the reading by the official reader.(See also Jehiel Weinberg in Seridei Esh, II, as to Sabbath violators called to the Torah .)
We may therefore conclude as follows: While it is not clear in the law whether being called up is a duty, a right, or a privilege, the ceremony clearly partakes of each of these. A man of dubious reputation should not be called up for certain specific passages, where his character contradicts the reading. Nor, of course, should a notoriously evil man, such as the one mentioned by Moses Hagiz , be allowed to shame the congregation by being called up to the Torah . But in general, in less heinous offenses, as long as the man has not been excluded or ostracized by the community, we should not“shut the door in his face.” We should always consider the honor of the congregation, yet be lenient and avoid complete exclusion.