Three Englewood rabbis were named last week among “The 50 Most Influential Rabbis in America” by Newsweek magazine, a list topped by Yehuda Krinsky, head of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. Using what they describe as “unscientific” criteria to award points to contenders, two friends in the entertainment business, Sony Pictures chair and CEO Michael Lynton and Gary Ginsberg, an executive vice president of Time Warner Inc., have published this annual compilation since 2007.

While many of the “winners” have appeared before and are virtually household names in the pantheon of Jewish spiritual and communal leadership, including Englewood’s Shmuley Boteach (#6 and a Jewish Standard columnist), Mark Charendorff (#4), and Menachem Genack (#16), one of this year’s picks may come as a surprise to some.

As Newsweek described it, Sara Hurwitz (#36) “rose to national prominence when Rabbi Avi Weiss (#18) bestowed [on] her … the title of ‘rabba.’ She is considered the first Orthodox woman rabbi ordained in the United States, and in this role she has had an impact on the roles considered acceptable for modern Orthodox women.”

That decision by Weiss earlier this year stirred controversy in Orthodox circles, as the movement has yet to officially sanction the ordination of women. He changed her title from maharat, a term that was little understood when Weiss invented it to mark Hurwitz’s completion of a five-year course of study for rabbinic training under his tutelage. Hurwitz was also a student at the Drisha Institute for Jewish Education, a center of advanced Judaic study for women.

Hurwitz, however, does not consider her selection by Newsweek inappropriate.

Reached at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, the rabbinical seminary founded by Weiss and whose office is located at the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale where Weiss is senior rabbi and Hurwitz is a member of the clergy, Hurwitz noted that she holds smicha — she was ordained by three Orthodox rabbis, Weiss and Rabbis Daniel Sperber and Joshua Maroof.

“In my case, I see the word ‘rabba’ as a description of my duties and roles: teaching and being a presence for congregants on a pastoral level, answering questions, speaking from the pulpit,” she said.

Declining to label herself “rabbi,” she nonetheless sees herself as a beacon of change for women in Orthodoxy and for the modern Orthodox community. “It’s a semantics game,” Hurwitz asserted. “I see myself performing rabbinic duties, but it has a new title to describe and explain the role of women in spiritual and halachic leadership. It’s new language, a new concept, which I know is very confusing.

“I think my most important contribution is helping other women see that it’s possible to become a spiritual leader in the Orthodox community,” she added.

Asked if her having being designated one of America’s 50 most influential rabbis by a mainstream, secular publication would help advance the cause of women’s ordination by the Orthodox movement, Hurwitz replied, “I hope so. I hope this whole conversation has helped put women’s spiritual leadership on the map in a serious way and will only continue to inspire women to pursue a career in spiritual leadership.”

Workers in Invercargill, New Zealand, handle kosher chickens in 2009. The country’s agriculture minister reversed a ban last week, prior to a court case, on the kosher slaughter of poultry. Rabbi Mendel Goldstein

SYDNEY, Australia – A controversial ban on kosher slaughter by New Zealand’s agriculture minister has been partially reversed amid allegations that his decision was taken to appease Muslim countries that have lucrative trade relations with New Zealand.

The reversal marked only a partial victory for the Jewish community: While the ban on kosher slaughter of poultry was suspended and a deal on kosher lamb is still being negotiated, the ban on beef is expected to remain in place. That means kosher beef will have to be imported from Australia.

New Zealand Jewish Council President Stephen Goodman, who had described the ban as “a direct threat to our existence,” said the partial reversal was a “small victory confirming our rights to practice as Jews in New Zealand.

“The whole process has been extremely stressful to the New Zealand Jewish community,” he said, noting that it has cost more than $223,000 to fight the ban. That money, Goodman said, “could and should have been applied to reinforcing the community rather than arguing with our government about our right to live here.”

Last Friday, lawyers acting for Agriculture Minister David Carter agreed to permit the kosher slaughter, or shechitah, of poultry. The decision came just three days before the trial over shechitah was due to begin in the High Court in Wellington.

The change comes six months after Carter’s May 27 amendment of the Commercial Slaughter Code mandating that all animals for commercial slaughter must first be stunned. That action rendered kosher slaughter unlawful and enraged the 7,000-member Jewish community, which took the matter to the High Court when negotiations with Carter broke down in August.

Ever since the ban was declared, the case has been closely monitored by Jewish officials the world over — from the Orthodox Union in New York to the Office of the Chief Rabbinate in London.

“We felt right away it was a significant case,” Menachem Genack, the rabbinic administrator of the OU’s kashrut division, told JTA. “The OU was extremely concerned about it. Whenever shechitah is challenged, we consider it significant because of its history.” He noted that the Nazis prohibited shechitah.

“We were also concerned because of the ramifications in Europe,” Genack said, alluding to the Dec. 7 vote by all 27 European Union states on a proposal to label kosher meat as “slaughtered without stunning.”

Genack, who is religious leader of Cong. Shomrei Emunah in Englewood, said that in a meeting this week with New Zealand Consul General Paul Gestro, he impressed upon Gestro that the U.S. Humane Slaughter Act deems shechitah humane.

Even after Carter backed down last week, he told Radio New Zealand on Monday that killing animals without pre-stunning was “frankly cruel.”

His comments came a day after the Herald newspaper published allegations that Carter was advised that Muslim countries might be irked if they believed New Zealand was giving preferential treatment to the Jews while animals must be pre-stunned for halal.

The paper also revealed that Carter owns shares in Alliance Group Ltd., which exports meat to Muslim countries, and in Silver Fern Farms Ltd.

Carter denied the allegations.

“Claims that business interests determined my decision on the Commercial Slaughter Code of Welfare are totally baseless,” he said in a statement. “Animal welfare was the primary consideration in making the decision.”

New Zealand Prime Minister John Key, whose mother was a Jewish refugee who escaped Europe on the eve of the Holocaust, said he had “no concerns” with the way Carter handled the issue.

Rabbi Mendel Goldstein, the Chabad emissary to New Zealand, said he was delighted by Carter’s reversal.

“The ban on shechitah would have been devastating to the Jewish community, which has a hard enough time observing Jewish traditions,” he said. “We regret that we needed to go to the courts simply to uphold the New Zealand Bill of Rights.”

Animal welfare groups expressed their outrage. Robyn Kippenberger of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals told the Herald that “[k]osher killing does cause suffering. Pressure from a small community is allowing animals to suffer — we believe that is unacceptable.”

But David Zwartz, a representative of the Jewish Council, defended shechitah, which has been practiced here since 1843. Noting that hunting and home kills on farms are legal in New Zealand, he said, “There are double standards here in what is being required of the Jewish community and what is being required of New Zealand society as a whole.”

Although the case was not heard in court, Sydney-based Jeremy Lawrence, a former rabbi at the Auckland Hebrew Congregation, said the process was beneficial.

“As a test case, the bringing together of the local community with Shechita UK, with scientific experts in America, and with the Executive Council of Australian Jewry means that we are much better equipped to respond to these attacks than we were a year ago,” he said. “We are on alert.”

Rabbi Moshe Gutnick, who travels from Australia to New Zealand to supervise shechitah, told JTA, “Victory will only he complete when lamb and beef are approved.”

He said, “What we were more concerned about was that people could say, ‘If shechitah was banned in New Zealand it could be banned elsewhere.’ Thankfully that precedent was not set.”

JTA Wire Service

The news last week that a Hebrew-immersion charter school for Englewood and Teaneck has met with state approval has given rise to speculation about the new school’s impact on both public and Jewish day schools.

Also, because the new school will offer Hebrew-language and Jewish cultural curricula, another concern is whether these can be taught while steering clear of religion, as mandated by the constitutional separation of church and state.

Called the Shalom Academy and based in Englewood, it will join Hatikvah International Academy in East Brunswick as the second Hebrew-immersion charter school in New Jersey. The school, for up to 240 students in grades kindergarten to eighth, is set to open in September.

Shalom Academy is the brainchild of Englewood resident Raphael Bachrach, who conceived it as an alternative to day schools for tuition-burdened parents. The academy had been rejected three times by the state board of education because of concerns related to budgetary allotment and the potential issue of segregation.

Rabbi Tomer Ronen doesn’t see the charter as detracting from day schools. FILE PHOTO

Due to Gov. Christie’s massive push for charter schools in low-performing districts, the school was one of 23 new charters approved last Tuesday. Advocates for the school had worked hard to refine the school’s proposal, between its previously rejected applications, to meet New Jersey Department of Education standards.

Rabbi Yitzchak Rosenbaum, a Teaneck resident who is executive director of the National Jewish Outreach Program, thinks the news is both good and bad.

“As far as Limudei Kodesh [Jewish studies], this presents a conflict,” he said, adding that the Hebrew-immersion charter in Florida offers engaging after-school programs focused on religion. That way, he explained, students can learn about religion in a fun environment, while avoiding the mixing of church and state in school.

“Students will not receive the same type of Jewish education that they would in Jewish day schools,” he continued. On the other hand, he said, “The benefits are that children will be proficient in Hebrew language and culture, which should not be discounted as important facets of Jewish education. Shalom presents an alternative to public school, where students run the risk of losing Jewish knowledge altogether, and consequently losing their faith.”

Rosenbaum envisions most applicants to be parents seeking a more Jewish option to public school for their children, perhaps Israelis looking to keep up Hebrew-language studies and a Jewish cultural connection.

Daniel Barenholtz, a Teaneck resident and father of four, said, “I want to know who the teachers are. Will math be constructive or instructive? Will they teach whole language or phonics? Will there be heavy homework or light? Also, any parent who is focused on their children’s religious education will have to make their own arrangements for that outside of the normal school day. I’m sure it will be challenging.”

Rabbi Shmuel Goldin of Cong. Ahavath Torah in Englewood, who spearheaded efforts for the Northern New Jersey Kehillot Investing in Day Schools fund in 2009, feels that parents may consider sending students to the charter for special educational needs or for financial reasons. But, he cautioned, “this option needs to be carefully examined. There is no real substitute for a full day-school education.”

A different view was expressed by one follower of 200k Chump (http://www.200kchump.blogspot.com), a blog devoted to the tuition crisis: “I went to public school my entire life. I’ve always been religious. It comes from the heart and home. This could be a fantastic opportunity for families who want to live within their means.”

Rabbi Menachem Genack of Englewood’s Cong. Shomrei Emunah is “concerned that the Shalom charter school will draw students away from the yeshiva day schools and Solomon Schechter schools, thus destabilizing them, while offering an inferior Jewish education. This kind of charter school is valuable in areas where there are no day schools, but not here in Bergen County.”

On the other hand Rabbi Tomer Ronen, principal of Ben Porat Yosef, doesn’t “see there being an issue of the charter ‘taking away’ from the Jewish day schools. Aside from a very strong focus on Hebrew language and culture, our major focus is to create Torah scholars.”

Similarly, Ruth Gafni, head of school at the Solomon Schechter Day School of Bergen County in New Milford, said that although it’s good if any school promotes Hebrew, that language is only a foundation, the building block for academic success in the areas of Tanach, Talmud, Torah, derech eretz, the Jewish holidays, and how God is central to it all.

Richard Segall, Englewood’s superintendent of public schools, says his concern is the budget. “Englewood will be losing over $700,000 in funding in the first year but receiving less than $3,000 in operational savings,” he told The Jewish Standard, “It costs taxpayers far less to incorporate a Hebrew immersion program inside our existing schools than creating a new school with all of the associated overhead and operational costs. Integrating students into the total school can be done in a way that tackles the problem of group isolation, so the delivery of services does not become a case of ‘separate but equal.’”

Segall explained that, in the past, Englewood received about 15 affirmative responses to the proposal of a Hebrew charter school, spanning five grades. “This suggests that a Hebrew-immersion program would have a small pool of students within the district who would be candidates for this charter school. To get to the number of projected enrollees, students would be coming from elsewhere, and our records show that the vast majority who fit the profile are currently enrolled in Jewish day schools.”

In an e-mail to the Standard, Barbara Pinsak, interim superintendent of schools for Teaneck, wrote, “It’s done and we are going to move on. I had an opportunity to respond to the charter proposal and my concerns were based on curriculum and the adherence of the charter proposal to the guidelines of the New Jersey Department of Education for charter schools. Evidently, our concerns and questions were either not considered compelling enough or were otherwise deemed not important.”

Bachrach did not respond to requests for comment.

When the Civil War started, in 1861, Jews were not allowed to serve as chaplains in the army or in military hospitals. Yet they fought on both sides during the war.

The House of Representatives had adopted a bill permitting each regiment’s commander to appoint a chaplain — so long as he was “a regularly ordained minister of some Christian denomination.”

Rep. Clement L. Vallandigham

Only Rep. Clement L. Vallandigham of Ohio protested that the bill discriminated against Jewish soldiers. Vallandigham argued that the Jewish population of the United States, “whose adherents are … good citizens and as true patriots as any in this country,” deserved to have rabbis minister to their soldiers. Vallandigham was not Jewish.

A few months later, a YMCA worker visiting a field camp in Pennsylvania learned that the officers had elected a Jew, Michael Allen, as regimental chaplain. Allen was knowledgeable about Judaism, but not a rabbi — and not an ordained Christian minister. The YMCA representative filed a complaint; the Army forced Allen to resign.

Then Col. Max Friedman and the other officers of the regiment, called Cameron’s Dragoons, elected an ordained rabbi, Arnold Fischel of New York’s Cong. Shearith Israel, to serve as chaplain. But when Fischel applied for certification, the secretary of war, Simon Cameron, rejected Fischel’s application. (The regiment had been named for Cameron.)

On Dec. 11, 1861, Fischel met with President Lincoln to argue the case for Jewish chaplains. Lincoln did not need much persuading. He promised that he would submit a new law to Congress “broad enough to cover what is desired by you in behalf of the Israelites.”

Seven months later, on July 17, 1862, Congress adopted Lincoln’s changes to the chaplaincy law to allow the appointment of chaplains “of the Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish religions.”

The Jewish Virtual Library writes that the new law was “a major step in the Americanization of the Jewish religion.”

During the Civil War, Maj.-Gen. U.S. Grant, on Dec. 17, 1862, issued an order — Order No. 11 — calling for the expulsion of all Jews in his military district (parts of Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee).

At the time, there was a black market in southern cotton, and Grant believed that this illegal market was being conducted “mostly by Jews and other unprincipled traders.”

President Lincoln revoked the order a few weeks later after protests from not only Jewish leaders, but from Congress and the press. The New York Times described the order as “humiliating” and a “revival of the spirit of the medieval ages.”

Maj.-Gen. Ulysses S. Grant

Grant himself later claimed that Order No. 11 had been drafted by a subordinate, and that he had signed it without reading it.

Order No. 11 began being carried out immediately, and — although Grant may not have intended it — the expulsion applied to all Jews, not just to illegal Jewish cotton peddlers. The Jewish Virtual Library writes:

“In Paducah, Kentucky, military officials gave the town’s 30 Jewish families — all long-term residents, none of them speculators, and at least two of them Union army veterans — 24 hours to leave.”

A delegation visited Lincoln, who quickly had the order revoked — via the following succinct message to Grant: “A paper purporting to be General Orders, No. 11, issued by you December 17, has been presented here. By its terms, it expells [sic] all Jews from your department. If such an order has been issued, it will be immediately revoked.”

The Jewish Virtual Library writes: “A handful of the illegal traders were Jews, although the great majority were not. In the emotional climate of the war zone, ancient prejudices flourished. The terms ‘Jew,’ ‘profiteer,’ ‘speculator,’ and ‘trader’ were employed interchangeably. Union commanding General Henry W. Halleck linked ‘traitors and Jew peddlers.’ Grant shared Halleck’s mentality, describing ‘the Israelites’ as ‘an intolerable nuisance.’”

Twelve years later, as president, Grant and his cabinet attended the dedication of Adas Israel Congregation in Washington, D.C., in 1874, Grant thus becoming the first president to attend a synagogue service.

“After the war,” writes the Jewish Virtual Library, “Grant transcended his anti-Semitic reputation. He carried the Jewish vote in the presidential election of 1868 and named several Jews to high office. But General Order No. 11 remains a blight on the military career of the general who saved the Union.”

One of the last photographs of Abraham Lincoln, taken in 1865, five days before his assassination.

Abraham Lincoln, our 16th president, holds a special place in the hearts of many Jews. It was he who canceled General Grant’s infamous order, Number 11, expelling Jewish traders from several states. And it was Lincoln who first enabled rabbis to serve as chaplains in the Union army.

Beyond that, Lincoln himself — whose birthday Americans celebrate on Saturday, Feb. 12 — is perceived as a true humanitarian, helping to free the United States of the scourge of slavery, just as the Jews in ancient Israel had been freed from slavery by Moses.

According to The Jewish Virtual Library, “American Jews have felt especially attracted to Lincoln as the emancipator of the black slave, as a victim of violence, as a dreamer of peace, and as the spokesman of a way of life ‘with malice towards none, with charity for all,’ which matches the idealism of the prophets.”

Rabbi Menachem Genack of Englewood, religious leader of Cong. Shomrei Emunah there, and rabbinic administrator of the Orthodox Union’s Kashrut Division, acknowledges that he is “obsessed” with Lincoln. He observes that Lincoln was subject to melancholia, and that strikes a chord with Jews. Melancholia, Genack believes, is a Jewish trait — so-called Jewish music tends to be in a minor key — and Jews are impressed that Lincoln, despite his tendency toward depression, managed to achieve great things.

One way some Jewish Americans express their high regard for our 16th president is by collecting memorabilia about him — his writings, his autographs, letters he wrote, portraits painted of him, and the like.

Rabbi Menachem Genack owns a portrait of Lincoln done by Freeman Woodcock Thorp, who saw Lincoln up close. Lincoln’s son called it the best likeness he had ever seen. The rabbi also owns a letter from a soldier dismissed for disobedience; Lincoln wrote in the letter’s upper right corner that he wanted the secretary of war to give him details about the case.

Genack is among such collectors. While his collection is modest — there’s no Gettysburg Address, no Second Inaugural Address — it’s impressive. Especially impressive is his recent acquisition of one of four existing portraits of Lincoln by Freeman Woodcock Thorp (1844-1922), who had seen Lincoln up close on several occasions. (Lincoln’s son, Robert Todd Lincoln, said the portrait was “more like father than any other likeness I have ever seen.”)

A recent visitor, after gazing at an authentic Lincoln signature that the rabbi owns, said she felt goosebumps.

Genack also owns non-Lincoln memorabilia, including the handwriting of George Washington on a commercial document. And he possesses many letters from a friend of his, Bill Clinton, usually on the subject of the Bible.

In one letter Genack owns, a soldier dismissed for disobedience asks Lincoln for help, and in a corner of the letter Lincoln writes a note asking for a full report on the case.

Genack also has a photograph of various Civil War personalities, including George Meade, the general who defeated Gen. Robert E. Lee at the battle of Gettysburg. (Lincoln, the rabbi notes, wrote a letter castigating Meade for not pursuing Lee’s soldiers — but never mailed it.)

How does he find items for sale? He’s on mailing lists of notices about auctions.

Why Lincoln especially?

“He had an extraordinary character — wedded to political genius,” responds Genack. “He was true to his vision, and was careful to implement it.” Lincoln was determined, first and foremost, to preserve the union, which is why he didn’t attempt to abolish slavery in the border states. “But he always abhorred slavery, feeling that it was morally wrong.”

Among other virtues, he didn’t hold a grudge, Genack points out. Although William Stanton had once humiliated him by declining to sit with him at a public ceremony, as president Lincoln named him secretary of war — and later they became good friends.

The rabbi adds that Lincoln had a neat sense of humor. Someone called Lincoln two-faced; his response, acknowledging his homeliness, was: “If I had another face, would I be wearing this one?”

Genack not only collects Lincoln keepsakes; he is a Lincoln scholar. He knows that Lincoln is the only president who owns a patent (on May 22, 1849, Lincoln received Patent No. 6469 for a device to lift boats over shoals — but it was never manufactured).

He knows that Lincoln’s law partner, William Herndon, conveyed some smutty jokes Lincoln supposedly told. And that Lincoln was planning to visit Europe when he was assassinated (he never left the United States).

Carl Epstein of Teaneck has what he calls a shrine for Lincoln in his basement. It features a Lincoln bust as well as items of the period, like a top hat, bonnet, and candlesticks. Behind Epstein: a variety of Lincoln portraits and an old flag. Jerry Szubin

And he knows that Lincoln could be tough. When Southern officers announced that they would summarily execute any black soldier they captured fighting for the North, Lincoln announced that if the South carried out its threat, the North would summarily execute any Southern officer it captured. That ended that.

The rabbi talks softly and thoughtfully, and he has strong opinions on a variety of subjects. For example, he is convinced that Lincoln was religious.

Lincoln was possibly both our least and our most religious president, he has written. He did not attend any church, and as a young man was probably an agnostic. Still, Genack argues, “he was still a man who in his own way communed with God.”

Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, Genack believes, with its line “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right” — is “a profoundly religious document.” In fact, he calls it “the greatest speech in U.S. history.”

Just why was Lincoln so sympathetic toward Jews? Genack points out that he was friends with Jews throughout his life — and “he just had an enormous sense of empathy.” Example: His manservant, William Johnson, was so faithful to Lincoln, nursing him back to health when he was ill, that when Johnson died, of smallpox, Lincoln saw to it that he was buried in Arlington National Cemetery — with the headstone, William Johnson, Citizen.

Genack defends Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd, against her detractors (some of whom accused her of being sympathetic to the South). Actually, he says, she gave strong support for her husband; she even visited soldiers in hospitals.

If the South had been permitted to secede, wouldn’t slavery have eventually been ended? “It would have taken a long time,” he answers. “Maybe 50 years. Who knows?” And if the United States had been two countries, and not a powerful single country, he points out, we might not have been able to defeat Nazi Germany in World War II.

Did Lincoln make any mistakes? Yes, Genack replies. He didn’t fire Gen. George McClellan soon enough — McClellan vacillated when he should have attacked — and substitute U.S. Grant.

One more thing the rabbi says about Lincoln: “There should be more teaching about him in our schools. He represents the best in American civilization.”

Shalom Academy, the Hebrew charter school planned for Englewood/Teaneck, is being hailed by some and criticized by others. For some — especially parents of children selected in the opening admissions lottery — it represents a chance to immerse children in Hebrew culture while saving on day-school tuition. But some local religious leaders fear that the academy may drain resources from existing Jewish schools.

While founder Raphael Bachrach did not return telephone calls, the Shalom Academy website listed this week, by number rather than name, students accepted for the first classes: 40 students for both kindergarten and first grade and 20 each for third and fourth grades. Each grade has a substantial waiting list. All applicants have been accepted for fifth grade, though the number of students was not listed.

The mother of a 5-year-old boy in Teaneck who will enter the academy told The Jewish Standard that her oldest child attends a day school “we are very happy with. She’s excelling, and we don’t have a desire for her to leave the school.”

She applied to the academy for her younger son and his twin brother — who was not selected in the lottery — because “now there are more options, and this is a wonderful educational experience that won’t cost so much.”

She is not sure, however, that she will send her son to the school. That will depend on whether his twin, who is wait-listed, is accepted as well.

Also, said the Teaneck parent, she is “not so clear” on what will be offered. “I only know what was on the website,” she said, “but it says they will follow New Jersey state standards.” She is hopeful, however, “that the academy will have a great arts program…. An ideal situation would be a fabulous general studies program and a great arts program, with music, drama, arts, and computers.”

She will also investigate after-school Judaic programs. She said that existing offerings don’t have what she is seeking, “but maybe because of this school, it will be created.”

Another parent, also from Teaneck, will send her 6-year-old daughter to Shalom Academy in the fall. Right now, the girl attends a Solomon Schechter school and “loves everything about it.” But while it’s “warm and nurturing, it’s extremely expensive, even more so than even two or three years ago.”

“Of primary importance is a very strong and secure academic foundation,” said the mother. “Next is Hebrew language. These are tools you need in order to learn over a lifetime. Everything else you can supplement.”

She pointed out that she grew up in public schools and believes in them. But, she said, “the schools [here] are not great and I don’t feel they will provide my daughter with the education she needs.” And since she will save on tuition, she can “now afford to supplement what my daughter is missing in terms of a Judaic education” as well as such extras as drama and ballet.

She and her husband realize that the new venture may require a lot of parental involvement, but they are not daunted, since “we both feel we are invested enough in getting a quality education.” They may also have more children, something they had put off because of the high cost of education.

“Is it better to have more Jewish children or fewer children with more Jewish literacy?” she asked. “I’m not convinced we always make the right choice.”

Rabbi Menachem Genack, CEO of the Orthodox Union Kosher Division and head of Cong. Shomrei Emunah in Englewood, said the school is “both promising and problematic, depending on the context. Across the country, these kinds of programs are often opportunities for kids who would otherwise have no Jewish education. But if the result of this particular school is to siphon kids away from Solomon Schechter or [other] day schools, it would be unfortunate. It could destabilize the schools or hurt them because they would have less resources.”

On the other hand, said Genack, “If the result is [that] kids who are not getting any Hebrew or day-school education or kids who have special needs go, that would be good.”

Similarly, Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, first vice president of the Rabbinical Council of America and leader of Cong. Ahavath Torah in Englewood, said that “[In reaching out] to Jewish families who would not be sending their children otherwise to local day schools, or as a resource to those families whose children cannot be accommodated in the day schools because of exceptional needs, the charter school could be seen as a welcome addition to the fabric of the community.”

However, he added, “it is absolutely no substitute for a day-school education, and I would consider it most unfortunate were … parents to choose to take their children out of the day-school setting in favor of this charter school. Our children are our most precious commodity,” he said. “We should not gamble with their education.”

Goldin said there’s no question, from the standpoint of a Judaic education, that the charter school would be “vastly inferior” to a full day-school education.

“I understand the financial pressures on day school parents, and we are making efforts ... to try and address these concerns, but they are long-term solutions and they are not going to solve this overnight,” he said. “I would hate to see an exodus from the day schools because of a financial crisis.”

Englewood resident Rabbi Shmuley Boteach thinks Shalom Academy is “a very positive development. I of course support the separation of church and state, but in education it is taken to a draconian extreme where parochial schools cannot even get funding for their secular subjects. Parents are squeezed between exorbitant property taxes and high tuition. The situation is untenable.”

Boteach, a columnist for this newspaper, said he hopes we can “slowly loosen the stranglehold” absolute separation has over education in the United States. It is a “bizarre situation,” he added, “when hardworking parents’ tax dollars cannot go toward their children’s study of history and math in a parochial school..., a monstrous injustice against religious parents everywhere.”

The “ultimate fix is vouchers, where parents have a choice,” he said. But the next best thing is a charter school, “where a semblance of tradition can be imparted, whether in the form of language or culture.” Boteach said it is also positive that a Hebrew charter school will bring together Christian, Jewish, and Muslim students, “all part of the covenant of Abraham.”

Heather Robinson contributed to this report.