The most striking thing about the response from Charedi rabbis to the Chief Rabbi’s guidance on LGBT+ pupils is what it does not say.

Over the past few weeks, there has been a flurry of activity behind the scenes as rabbis debated what line to take. Some Charedim agreed with last week’s critique from Rabbi Mordechai Rose, an independent Orthodox rabbi, who argued Rabbi Mirvis had been too “permissive”.

But others were reluctant to openly contradict the Chief Rabbi. In the end, compromise prevailed.

The senior Charedi rabbis who signed the statement backed the Chief Rabbi’s stand against bullying. At the same time, without attacking him directly, they made a point of rectifying any “misconception” that might have arisen from his publication about the halachic prohibition of physical same-sex relations. 

If you want to read their public reminder “of the authentic Jewish view” as a kind of veiled rebuke to the Chief Rabbi, it was of the mildest kind.

But was there a risk of anyone — at least, inside the Jewish community — grasping the wrong end of the stick? For nowhere did the Chief Rabbi’s guidelines suggest the laws of Leviticus had been eased. It is true, however, its emphasis was on the sensitivity and compassion that should be shown to LGBT+ pupils rather than the strictures against same-sex practice.

An element of pragmatism might have influenced the statement. Charedi leaders have been involved in delicate discussions with the education authorities over the continuing problems their schools face from Ofsted for avoiding talking about LGBT+ issues. A public spat with the Chief Rabbi would do little to help their cause.

But the rabbinic statement is far less important than what Charedi leaders do about Ofsted. As the latest batch of inspection reports show, inspectors are still pulling up Orthodox schools for refusing to discuss LGBT+ issues.

The position taken by Chinuch UK, the recently formed umbrella group to protect Charedi education, is that these are not suitable issues for the classroom. But Charedi society is not uniform. One parent of a Charedi school pupil recently told me he saw no reason not to talk about LGBT+ , as children ought to be equipped to address wider social issues.

A Charedi school teacher said he was crying out for guidance from the rabbis about what he could and could not teach. 

So will the Charedi rabbinate take a cue from the Chief Rabbi and publish their own advice? They could produce an anti-bullying policy for the purpose of training staff how to handle LGBT+ questions, should they arise in school.

They could also create a “citizenship” curriculum, dealing with how to treat people who do not share a Torah lifestyle — but in a broad way which does not go into sexuality.

So far, Ofsted’s chief inspector Amanda Spielman has shown no sign of budging from her view that schools must refer to alternative family set-ups. But the Education Secretary Damian Hinds may still be open to persuasion — and come up with something that Charedi schools can live with.