The viral controversy surrounding The Jewish Standard’s printing a same-sex marriage announcement last month — and then deciding, one week later, not to do it again — caught publisher James Janoff off guard.

“I expected that there would be people who agreed and people who didn’t,” he said, “but I was unprepared for the volume, and passion, of the responses.”

“Maybe I was naïve,” said Janoff, who noted that while the paper has weathered many storms throughout its 80-year history, he has never seen one of this intensity.

But exactly what transpired, and what it means for the community, depends on who you ask.

•

Avi Smolen, who grew up in Ridgewood and whose same-sex wedding announcement appeared on Sept. 24, said he, too, was surprised by the barrage of media coverage the issue has received.

“We (Smolen and his partner, Justin Rosen) submitted our announcement to share the simcha with the community and we were happy it was published,” he said. “The follow-up decision not to publish (other announcements) was frustrating, and somehow the greater media picked up on the story and it has been everywhere in the news. We didn’t expect this.”

Smolen, communications and development associate at Keren Or Inc., Greater New York, said he didn’t really think much about submitting the announcement “because it was so accepted in our community; we didn’t think it was a big deal.”

He noted that recent communal meetings to discuss the ongoing controversy are of value, but said that members of the gay community should be invited.

It’s important, he said, “so that they can be part of the conversation and so it’s not ‘them’ and ‘us.’ There needs to be frank and open discussions so people can share their concerns and feelings.” In addition, he said, meetings should be “less about rhetoric and more about problem-solving.”

Smolen suggested that the strength of the uproar was at least partially a matter of timing.

“The previous two weeks, there were a number of suicides by young gay people that got attention, and that was a counterpoint to the announcement about celebrating our union. People really connected those two incidents and thought it was important to speak out.”

He said he can respect the position of those who do not support same-sex wedding announcements, but noted that he “does not agree with tactics to prevent them from being seen. In a way it’s comical,” he said. “The desire to marginalize [the issue] has made it larger than ever.”

“In a sense, I’m glad that this has occurred and I hope people will continue to talk about this,” he said. Being “pushed out of their comfort zone” may prompt diverse groups to deal with the issues and find a solution.

“I hope they will recognize that people with different beliefs and practices exist, and find a way to grow and unite.”

•

Looking back at what has occurred over the past several weeks, Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, religious leader of Cong. Ahavath Torah in Englewood and first vice president of the Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America, said, “The problem emerged when the Standard underestimated the importance and sensitivity of this issue to the Orthodox community.”

Goldin telephoned the Standard following publication of the wedding announcement to “alert [the newspaper] to those sensitivities.” Janoff recalled that the rabbi said he had been in touch with Rabbi Larry Rothwachs, president of the Rabbinical Council of Bergen County.

Following several calls, the Standard printed a statement saying it would not publish such announcements in the future. Rebecca Boroson, the Standard’s editor, characterized the conversations with Goldin — in which the editors, publisher, and associate publisher took part — as “intense.” “He repeatedly told us that the paper had caused pain in the Orthodox community,” she added, “and that we had ‘crossed a red line.’”

The backlash resulting from the Standard’s about-face goes beyond the current controversy, said Goldin.

“The Orthodox community is involved in an ongoing struggle to determine how to live with the tension between two fundamental principles that have to guide our approach to the gay community,” Goldin said.

On one hand, the movement seeks to “respect all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation,” recognizing in particular “the personal struggles of those who belong to the gay community and want to continue identifying as committed Jews.”

On the other hand, the Orthodox movement must maintain “its allegiance to Torah law, which strongly prohibits same-sex unions.”

Goldin spoke of “the overwhelming animosity and resentment displayed toward the Orthodox community and rabbinate of Bergen County in particular” in the aftermath of the announcement.

“Gross misrepresentations have been accepted as fact,” he said. “The fact is that the RCBC had no official response” to the incident. “To say that the group threatened organized activity is an outright lie.”

He suggested as well that the issue of homosexuality “has become the civil rights issue of the era.”

“We have to recognize that each of us has issues and red lines,” he said. “I sometimes feel that because the Orthodox position is not the automatically popular position in the society in which we find ourselves — it’s easier to argue for inclusiveness than for certain limits — in a knee-jerk fashion the Orthodox are judged in a negative way without giving credence to our right to hold our positions.”

•

Susie Charendoff, who belongs to an Orthodox congregation in Englewood and has been a participant in recent discussions, said the most troubling aspect of the recent events was that in declaring that it would cease running same-sex announcements — citing offense to the Orthodox community — the Standard “only recognized the pain of one community on an issue that is sensitive across the board.”

“I think the Orthodox community is more complex than [the way] it is often characterized,” she said, highlighting the “Statement of Principles on the Place of Jews with a Homosexual Orientation in Our Community,” circulated this summer and signed by more than 100 Orthodox leaders.

Written by Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot — who has just become rabbi of Teaneck’s Netivot Shalom and is chair of the Bible and Jewish Thought departments at New York’s Yeshivat Chovevei Torah — the piece was widely hailed as a progressive document within the movement.

“It was really a thoughtful piece on the part of the Orthodox community,” said Charendoff. “It attempted to be as welcoming as possible to same-sex couples despite the fact that [same-sex marriage] is antithetical to the Orthodox position. It reached out as far as it could within that framework.”

Charendoff said the “content and tone of that document is a voice that needs to be heard in the current discussion. While it doesn’t solve the issue, it changes the tenor of what’s going on. I’m disturbed by the assumption that the Orthodox don’t recognize the complexity of this issue.”

•

Describing the communal flap as “a controversy that is testing the boundaries of pluralism and inclusiveness within the Bergen County Jewish community,” Rabbi Adina Lewittes, religious leader of Sha’ar Communities, said the country is seeing a “ruthless physical, political, and social backlash” against the gay and lesbian community.

Lewittes — who describes her organization as “a suburban network of small, inclusive, and accessible Jewish communities connected by a broad vision of Jewish renaissance” — said that, given media reports about gay youths who committed suicide or were physically attacked, the paper “should have had the foresight and courage to respond to the resistance of the Orthodox in a way that sends the message that there is a home for everyone in the Jewish community.”

Still, she added, “the fundamental issue here is a matter of journalistic process and integrity…. Many people do not see this as a complicated issue or something needing conflict resolution.”

Front and center, she said, “is the flip-flopping” by the Standard “and the privileging of one group over another. This is a clear breach of journalistic responsibility, particularly given the self-stated goals of [the paper].”

The best-case scenario, she said, would be for the Standard “to acknowledge that it failed to adhere to its mission and steer itself back on course.”

Noting the mission of her own organization, “to enter Judaism through multiple gateways,” Lewittes said community dialogue will be useful only to the extent that it “acknowledges the many lenses through which different Jewish communities look at both Judaism and the broader world in which they live and what the different relationships between the two look like.”

She decried “tying your own legitimacy and integrity to what someone else might believe or think. We don’t need to achieve consensus,” she said. “Sure, it would be great,” but all parties to a discussion would inevitably want their positions to be adopted.

“To achieve consensus on matters of halachah or politics is not the goal here,” she said. “If anything, we have such a rich heritage because of the diversity” that has characterized the community. “What’s needed is an environment of respect for multiple understandings” of Judaism.

Lewittes added that those who call for pluralism also need to be wary of denying the presence of any particular community.

“We need to be inclusive of all voices,” she said, even those with whom we disagree.

Lewittes said that with respect to community process and lasting lessons, we should heed the words of the late Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, a seminal figure in modern Orthodoxy. “Rav Soloveitchik’s insight on how kedushah/holiness is found not in the neat and tidy resolutions to conflict but in the very paradox of the often conflicting and contradictory elements of our makeup, is most relevant,” she noted. “Our ability to hold together the different and disparate pieces of who we are as a community in a singular, pluralistic embrace is what will transform us into a kehillah kedoshah, a holy community, and is what we might model to other communities facing similar struggles.”

•

Rabbi David J. Fine believes strongly in the power of dialogue.

The religious leader of Temple Israel and Jewish Community Center in Ridgewood — the Smolens’ synagogue and the shul in which the gay couple celebrated one of their two aufrufs — said it would be an “easy out” to conclude that we are not one Jewish community but rather several disparate groups.

“Dialogue is one of the essences of how we do Judaism,” he said. “We learn from rabbinic tradition to honor and respect views we don’t agree with, to have a respectful discourse. We can only be one by listening to each other.”

Acknowledging that “tensions are coming to the boiling point,” Fine said the wedding announcement controversy has simply highlighted fissures in the community, particularly the fault line between the Conservative and modern Orthodox movements.

“We’re much more similar than we pretend to be,” said Fine, adding that both movements “look over their shoulder” when making halachic decisions.

“We’re the only two groups who believe that we have a place in the modern world but [adhere] to a normative halachic tradition,” he said. “It’s so hard to acknowledge sharing that space with the other,” he added. “It’s threatening because we’re so similar.”

Fine said the current flap is about much more than the wedding announcement.

“It’s about our own identities and who we are,” he said. “We’re not just arguing a specific issue but our specific identity.”

The rabbi said that not only is talking to one another “the only way to understand each other, but I determine how I articulate where I’m coming from by talking to someone who doesn’t agree with me.”

This is something every rabbi deals with, he said, noting, “We don’t want to preach to the choir.”

Fine said he doesn’t know why rabbis get so excited about the issue of gay marriage.

“Gay and lesbian Jews are just like everyone else,” he said. “Their private lives are different, but I don’t know why it animates people so much. Part of it may be generational.” He added that the position is likely to change as same-sex couples become more accepted in the wider society.

“The real issue is Jewish identity and questions of authenticity and different forms of Judaism, between liberal and traditional Judaism,” he said, pointing out that this division was apparent in the diaspora uproar over the Rotem bill — which proposed giving the Orthodox rabbinate control of all conversions in Israel.

•

Rabbi Jarah Greenfield has discussed the announcement controversy with people from many different communities “and their responses involve total incredulousness — the inability to grasp how in 2010 a small segment of the Jewish community can exert so much influence over a paper about something that so many people consider a normative thing in Jewish life — the inclusion of the LGBT community.”

Greenfield, religious leader of Reconstructionist Temple Beth Israel in Maywood, pointed out that Monday was National Coming Out Day, created to raise awareness, end discrimination against the LGBT community, and encourage LGBT people to be proud of who they are.

“It’s much wider than a newspaper issue,” she said. “It’s about how Jews and all of the institutions that represent us make decisions about who’s in and who’s out.”

“[Being LGBT] is a non-issue from my community’s perspective,” she said, calling opposition to same-sex wedding announcements “a retrograde perspective on contemporary life. Most of the Jews I work with already live in a context where they have one foot in tradition and one foot in contemporary life.”

“Being a Jew today is about drawing from both [contexts],” she said. “LGBT inclusion is not a problem of ‘religious’ versus ‘secular’ influences, but about integrating religious life with contemporary times.”

Greenfield said the issue of gay equality is not a “hot-button” topic from the perspective of most Jews. She noted also a distinction between Torah laws concerning issues such as kashrut and adultery and those pertaining to “human beings created in the image of God.”

“The distinction is that this issue is about human beings and their inherent nature. At the heart of the matter, it’s not about a behavior, or a sin, or a choice. That’s why it is not as black and white” as issues such as advertising events that take place on Shabbat.

The rabbi said that if there were firm commitments on both sides to have regular meetings “in which to learn about and from each other,” in the long term the different groups would come to better understand one another.

“No one has a strong hold on what constitutes legitimate Jewish identity,” she said. “Jewish identity is continually evolving. [It] has always changed and adapted within the various civilizations where Jews have lived. It’s not a matter of religious purity versus secular deviance.”

Greenfield said people gain respect through human contact rather than through antipathy expressed in the media.

“It’s impossible to overvalue the importance of human interaction,” she said. “We want to welcome Orthodox leaders into the circle.”

The rabbi suggested a possible “trade.”

Ideally, she said, “I would have all non-Orthodox Jewish leaders commit to condemning Orthodox-bashing in exchange for the Orthodox understanding that they are not the sole arbiters of authentic Judaism.”

•

Rabbi Randall Mark, religious leader of Shomrei Torah in Wayne and head of the North Jersey Board of Rabbis, to which no Orthodox rabbis belong, said the community rift is not a secret, nor is it unique to northern New Jersey.

“What we’ve seen over the course of the last decade is that rabbinical groups rarely sit together anymore. There are times and places where the two communities easily coexist, but sometimes they bump up against each other.”

Mark did note that during his first year as president of the NJBR, he has had several conversations with the RCBC’s Rothwachs.

“The two of us were cognizant of the fact that our rabbinic communities are diverse, and we felt it important at least to have the ability to communicate,” he said. “My hope has always been to find places of agreement and ultimately work together.”

The NJBR president said that homosexuality in religious life is one of the most difficult social issues of the day for American religious communities.

“Religious groups have a long history of intolerance” on this issue, he said.

He suggested that strong feelings have resulted from the fact that the matter “deals with people and not just issues and because in issues concerning human sexuality, people will often react on an emotional level.”

He noted as well that the issue transcends the newspaper because “The Jewish Standard strives to be a community newspaper … and we are a very diverse community.”

“Any constituent group has the right to respond” to something with which he or she disagrees, he added, suggesting that appropriate responses include letter-writing and/or requesting meetings with the leadership of the paper.

“I’m pleased that they’re willing to sit down and listen,” he said of the Standard staff, which recently participated in a meeting of rabbis and communal leaders. The gathering, held last Thursday at Temple Emanu-El in Closter, was hosted by the congregation’s Rabbi David-Seth Kirshner and was devoted specifically to the controversy.

“The newspaper, as an independent entity, has the editorial freedom to decide what it will or will not include,” said Mark. “Ultimately, people will decide if they’re happy or unhappy.”

Other Voices

Rabbi Neal Borovitz, religious leader of Temple Avodat Shalom in River Edge and chair of the Jewish Community Relations Council of UJA Federation of Northern New Jersey, wants to use the current conflict as a teachable moment.

“I want to convene a meeting of the Jewish Leadership Forum to continue the discussion about how we, as a diverse Jewish community, can learn to live together and work better together,” said Borovitz following last week’s meeting in Closter.

The rabbi said he believes firmly in the principle of a free press and expects the Standard to decide how it will respond “to all the simchas in our community,” with the hope that the paper will be “sensitive, responsive, and supportive of the diversity that exists in our northern New Jersey Jewish community.”

He noted other instances where the paper had provided equal access to conflicting views.

“When I disagreed with [Standard columnist Rabbi Shmuley] Boteach on the settlement issue, the Standard graciously gave me op-ed space to respond,” he said. “I believe the paper should be a forum for the free and open exchange of ideas, concerns, and information for our broad community.”

Borovitz said he hopes the forum will be a place where opinions “are put on the table,” even if they are not necessarily resolved. “We can agree to be civil in disagreements,” he said.

•

Charles Berkowitz, president and chief executive officer of The Jewish Home Family, affirmed the “right and responsibility of a newspaper to publish news.”

“If you make a decision to put in no simchas,” that’s one thing, he said. “But to decide to put them in for only a certain segment of the community is wrong, regardless of which segment it is.”

Berkowitz said “some of the bright people in the community should sit down and begin to talk about issues we need to deal with, and not put our heads in the sand. No one should impose their will on others.”

He noted, however, that sometimes firm decisions must be made. For example, his organization — which embraces the Jewish Home at Rockleigh, Russ Berrie Home for Jewish Living; the Jewish Home Assisted Living, Kaplen Family Senior Residence; the Jewish Home Foundation of North Jersey Inc.; and the Jewish Home & Rehabilitation Center — does not allow people to bring in food from other than accepted vendors to maintain the level of kashrut.

“Some would prefer not to have that,” he said. “But it’s important for people of all religious beliefs to feel welcome here.”

Berkowitz said the fact that he is a social worker is a big help.

“We deal with the issues head on and face to face,” he said. “You don’t sit down in front of cameras but do it quietly and talk to each other.”

•

Howard Charish, executive vice president of UJA-NNJ, said that since the Standard sees itself as the “paper of record for the Jewish community,” the current controversy should be dealt with by the whole community.

“When we face complicated issues, open exchange and dialogue is very helpful,” he said. “Not all parties will agree with all positions, but [when] active listening is happening and points of view are shared, then mutual respect is possible.”

Charish said that the next step, as he understands it, is that “before any further decisions are made,” there will be a series of discussions involving the JCRC, the Kaplen JCC on the Palisades, rabbis, and other interested parties.

“To me, that is a critical step,” he said.

•

As executive director of the Kaplen JCC, Avi Lewinson is “surprised and not surprised” that the announcement controversy became so heated.

“It wouldn’t have reached that level if there hadn’t been a retraction so soon after,” he said. While he believes that the Standard’s intentions were good, “they acted too quickly and people felt the paper was taking sides. That fueled the fire.”

Lewinson said that while the JCC has faced differences of opinions — for example, over whether to remain open on Shabbat — the facility, which is closed on Saturday, has never experienced “a firestorm of this size.”

The JCC director pointed out that times do change, and cited the racial discrimination rampant in the 1960s.

“I’m appreciative of the gains we’ve made,” he said, adding that, “personally, I think we should sit down with representatives of different viewpoints and start with the premise that everyone is coming with deeply held beliefs based on principle.” Still, he said, “The goal can’t be that, in the end, you’re in or out 100 percent.”

Lewinson said the community needs to strive for shalom bayit (literally, peace in the home), finding a compromise that will allow both sides to feel that their views have been acknlowledged.

“It’s not a perfect solution,” he said, “but maybe one possibility is not to use the word ‘marriage’ in a same-sex announcement but rather to use the term ‘commitment ceremony.’ The question is, ‘What can we do to find a way so we each feel we’re being heard and our principles and values are being considered?’”

Regarding the controversy, Lewinson said there have been “misquotes on both sides.” Still, he said, he is an eternal optimist and is convinced that the issue will be resolved.

“It doesn’t have to be all or nothing,” said Lewinson, who has called the JCRC offering the JCC as a resource for community forums. He noted that Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, president of the New York City-based CLAL, the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, wrote a book called “You Don’t Have To Be Wrong For Me To Be Right.” “We’re all part of the Jewish people,” Lewinson said, “and it is important for us to be able to sit and listen to each other with respect.”

•

For his part, Janoff knows that he has a lot of listening to do. In a statement published on Oct. 8, he wrote that the paper now understands “that we may have acted too quickly in issuing the follow-up statement, responding only to one segment of the community.”

As a result, he said, he is now engaged in meeting with local rabbis and community leaders, understanding that the exchange of views is necessary before the paper issues its final decision.

Wrote Janoff: “We urge everyone to take a step back and reflect on what this series of events has taught us about the community we care so much about, and about the steps we must take to move forward together.”

At last Thursday’s discussion are, from left, Rabbis David Fine, Ronald Roth, Jonathan Woll, Neil Tow, and Baruch Zeilicovich. Richard Michaelson

In what local rabbis hope will be the first of many joint educational ventures, five religious leaders came together to “think outside the matzoh box,” bringing new ideas to the reading of the haggadah.

The program, “Four Questions, Five Rabbis,” held at Fair Lawn’s Temple Beth Sholom on March 24, brought together Rabbis David Fine (Temple Israel and JCC, Ridgewood), Ronald Roth (Fair Lawn Jewish Center/Cong. B’nai Israel), Jonathan Woll (Progressive Havurah of Northern New Jersey), Neil Tow (Glen Rock Jewish Center), and Baruch Zeilicovich (Beth Sholom) in what organizers called “Community Limud: A Synagogue Study Consortium.”

After the event, the five rabbis told The Jewish Standard that they were both thrilled and surprised by the large turnout, demonstrating, said Woll, that “there [is] a thirst for continuing education in the Jewish community. It depends on how it’s packaged and delivered.”

Zeilicovich, whose congregation hosted the event, said that “it is nice to have this sense of togetherness. It’s also very nice that the leadership is showing the way and setting a good example. The more united we are, the better chances there are for education. It sets a great example for our children and youth.”

Richard Michaelson — longtime Beth Sholom member and co-chair of the shul’s adult education committee with Harry Melzer — pointed out that the event drew more than 150 people, attributing its success both to the rabbis and to the “interest of the community in this kind of community-style event,” with multiple rabbinic perspectives.

During the event, the five rabbis tackled different sections of the Hagaddah, suggesting ways attendees could foster discussion at their seders.

In a presentation entitled “Idolatry vs. Slavery: How Do We Start the Story?” Fine told attendees about a debate going back to Talmudic times over “the true nature of degradation. Does one begin the story with our slavery in Egypt or with the idolatry practiced before the time of Abraham?” he asked.

“The Hagaddah, in its wisdom, retains both options,” he said, calling that “a discussion starter, to [ask] What is the true nature of the degradation from which we are redeemed: physical slavery or the spiritual state of idolatry?”

To further this discussion, he said, he would ask seder participants, “Is there any way we experience any type of slavery — ways we are not free,” whether medical or economic.

“There are always things that bind us and constrict us,” he said. As did the Talmud, “We need to explore and acknowledge that to be in a better position to appreciate” our redemption.

In his presentation, Roth proposed that the “ideal Passover seder should be like a jazz composition,” with both a fixed melody, the text of the haggadah, and improvisation, or spontaneous discussion.

One should not ask “Did I read every word?” but rather should try to discern what the text is trying to say, he suggested.

The rabbi showed illustrations from numerous haggadot depicting the four children and pointed out how body language, clothing, props, and facial expressions were used to represent certain characteristics.

Sometimes, he said, the same figure might be labeled “wise” in one haggadah and “simple” in another.

“You should look at the illustrations [in the haggadot] and note carefully how different generations defined wise, evil, etc.,” he said, adding that to prepare for the seder, one might copy and cut out the depictions, which can then be distributed at the meal.

Discussing the concept of a fifth cup of wine, Woll said that while the history of this practice is “somewhat controversial, I look at it as an opportunity to become particularly creative.”

Whether a fifth, or even sixth, cup is identified with Elijah, Miriam, or something else, introducing such a custom can “enhance Jewish spiritual identity and creatively broach the themes of community, family, klal yisrael, and our relationship to the rest of community,” he said.

Woll suggested that it is not enough simply to read the narrative and fulfill the ritual mitzvot, but that to be meaningful, “the seder needs personal consideration and attention,” with the leader taking note of who will be sitting around the table.

“Will there be young children, strangers, family members who may want something more?” he asked, noting that guests should not simply sit patiently at the seder table but should be eager for it.

He suggested that an additional cup of wine might be added in support of peace in the Middle East.

“It’s not enough to say next year in Jerusalem,” he said.

Tow engaged attendees in Torah study, focusing their attention on Hallel. Suggesting that we read Hallel at the seder because it is a celebration — both of going out as a free nation and of becoming the people of the God of Israel — he said, “The piece of Hallel that caught my eye and encouraged me to learn more was Psalm 114, focusing specifically on the experience of the Exodus. I wanted to focus in on that and create an opportunity for people to stop for a minute at the seder — before we sing that wonderful melody — and look at the words to see what kind of message the psalm conveys.”

For example, the verse in which the earth is said to “tremble” uses a Hebrew word that also has the overtone of dancing.

“That led me think that we’re sitting down a lot of the time in seders,” he said. He encourages movement in his own family, leading a “freedom march” around the house. “We need to build more active pieces” in the seder, he said.

Of the popular seder song “Chad Gadya,” Zeilicovich said that the characters portrayed in the song — cat, dog, ox, etc. — symbolize all the different civilizations and empires that dominated the ancient world and sought annihilation of the Jewish people.

“But none of them exist anymore,” he said, adding that we cannot even imagine the resurgence of an Egyptian, Babylonian, or Roman empire as they previously existed, “worshipping the sun and building pyramids. But we are back in our land. We became again a nation with the same God, Torah, and Shabbat. Am Yisrael Chai.”

Zeilicovich said we should learn from this that the covenant between God and the Jewish people “is still alive and working.” When we sing the song at the seder, we should take it both as a “history lesson and as a reminder that Judaism is not only about religion but is also a nationality.” He fears, he said, that the national component of Jewish identity is getting lost among American Jews.

From left, Rabbis Fine, Roth, Woll, Tow, and Zeilicovich participate in a community study session in March. Richard Michaelson

In March, five local rabbis came together in Fair Lawn to teach about Pesach. The session not only drew a large crowd, it heartened those who champion greater cooperation among area religious leaders.

“Programs like this strengthen everyone,” said participant Rabbi Neil Tow of the Glen Rock Jewish Center. “They allow us to get to know each other, sharing, hearing what each of us has to say.”

Rabbi Baruch Zeilicovich—whose synagogue, Beth Sholom in Fair Lawn, hosted the pre-Passover event—noted that it was nice to have “this sense of togetherness. The more united we are, the better chances there are for education. It sets a great example for our children and youth.”

In September, the five rabbis will join forces once again, this time to usher in the High Holy Days. On Sept. 13, Rabbis David Fine (Temple Israel and JCC, Ridgewood), Ronald Roth (Fair Lawn Jewish Center/Cong. B’nai Israel), and Jonathan Woll (Progressive Havurah of Northern New Jersey) will join with Zeilicovich and Tow to reconstitute what Woll called “a wonderful alliance.” The rabbis will discuss “What’s ‘Nu’ in the New Year.”

Rabbi Randall Mark, president of the North Jersey Board of Rabbis (NJBR), pointed out that the idea for localized study sessions was first raised following the success of the board’s “Sweet Taste of Torah” community learning program. The NJBR’s third “Sweet Taste” will be held in February.

Mark noted that while plans have not yet been finalized for a local symposium in the Wayne area, he is working to organize a pre-High Holy Days session at the Gerrard Berman Day School in Oakland. So far, he has enlisted Rabbis David Bockman (Cong. Beth Shalom, Pompton Lakes), David Saltzman (Lakeland Hills Jewish Center, Wanaque), Ellen Bernhardt (Gerrard Berman Day School, Oakland), and Joshua Cohen (Temple Emanuel of North Jersey, Franklin Lakes).

At the Sept. 13 study session, to be held at the Fair Lawn Jewish Center/Cong. B’nai Israel, the five rabbis will tackle different aspects of the High Holy Days.

Exploring “U-n’taneh Tokef—Fate and Freewill,” Zeilicovich will ask questions such as “Do we believe in destiny?” and “Is everything already set and arranged ‘above’ for things to happen ‘below’?” He will also question whether the concepts of free will and fate are mutually exclusive.

In a session entitled “Viddui—Confession: For Whose Good?” Woll will examine the purpose of congregational and personal confession.

“That we do it is in keeping with the scheduled ritual. That we get it is something else,” he said, noting that he hopes to take the audience on a “short journey—about eight minutes—from pietistic confession to making one’s personal contribution to restoring equanimity and harmony in the world.”

Roth, who will speak on “The Binding of Isaac,” a Rosh Hashanah theme, said he will explore the relationship between generations as depicted in the biblical text of the Akedah and rabbinic commentary.

“I will look at a midrash and then bring various depictions of how one generation relates to the next,” he said. “The events of the 20th century have added their own modern midrashim to the question of what it means for a father to be willing to bring his son to a sacrificial altar.”

During the segment, he said, “We will read poetry and look at some examples from the visual arts asking what these texts and interpretations mean for our generation.”

In a presentation exploring the Avodah service, Fine—who calls this service “one of the most difficult sections of the Yom Kippur liturgy” — will ask what connection we can make with the detailed account of the ancient Temple service. For example, he said, “Where is the spirituality for us in the detailed account of the ritual of the High Priest?”

“These often glossed-over latter pages of the machzor can become central to the yearnings of our hearts,” he said.

Looking at the issue of fasting, particularly at the words of Isaiah in the haftarah (the prophetic reading that follows the reading of the Torah) — “Is this the fast I want from you?” — Tow will point out that Isaiah’s prophecy “is a sobering reflection on what it means to fast during the holiday. Isaiah challenges us to extend the meaning of the fast into the realm of social justice. Also, through fasting, we become more aware of the way we speak to one another and the way we approach Shabbat throughout the year.”

In his presentation, he will ask questions such as “How will we think about the fast this year? How can the fast of Yom Kippur affect the way we enter the New Year? How can we use the Yom Kippur fast to open our hearts and minds to social justice issues in the community and world?”

Woll noted that the participants hope to schedule study programs for as many festivals as they can.

“Obviously, Sukkot is going to get short shrift because of time, but we will announce a calendar after the High Holy Days,” he said.

The Sept. 13 study session is free and open to the public. It will begin at 8 p.m. For more information or to make a reservation, call (201) 796-5040 or e-mail .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

From left, Rabbi David J. Fine, of Temple Israel; NNJJA Director Rabbi Sharon J. Litwin; and Rabbi Alberto Zeilicovich of Temple Beth Sholom.

Two area Conservative congregations are merging their Hebrew school programs.

The merged entity, the Northern New Jersey Jewish Academy, will serve students of Temple Beth Sholom of Fair Lawn and Temple Israel and Jewish Community Center of Ridgewood, which are about two miles apart.

Classes will be held at Temple Israel, whose assistant rabbi and educational director, Rabbi Sharon Litwin, will head the new school. Family education and other workshops will be held at Beth Sholom.

“The idea is to work together and pool our resources,” said Rabbi David Fine of Temple Israel.

The joint school is the outgrowth of discussions between area Conservative congregations about creating a joint Hebrew school. The conversations have been facilitated by the Synagogue Leadership Initiative of the Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey.

“We’re hoping other schools will want to join us,” said Litwin.

Fine said that it made sense to start with the two congregations because Beth Sholom’s educational director had left to take a position elsewhere.

The new school will keep Temple Israel’s curriculum, but bring in some of Beth Sholom’s faculty, including its new cantor, Steven Barr, who will be working on the school’s music program, Litwin said.

Beth Sholom has about 20 students, and Temple Israel about 80, said Litwin.

“They’ve had two classrooms for their students, a lower school classroom and an upper school classroom,” she said of Beth Sholom’s school.

The merged school will meet weekly for students in kindergarten through second grade, and twice weekly for third through seventh grade.

Litwin said the goal of the school is “to create literate Jews as best as we possibly can in the five and a half hours we have them each week. We’re also trying to have the children grow up and feel they want to be involved in synagogue life and Jewish life in their homes.”

“We hope this is just the first opportunity for more and more communities to work together to raise Jewish children in Bergen County,” she said.

“If we have a community school, we have the opportunity to combine resources. We can have fuller classrooms and more interesting family programming,” she said.

This is not the first attempt at creating a regionalized Hebrew school for elementary students. For many years, Conservative synagogues in Leonia, Teaneck, and Cliffside Park jointly ran the East Bergen Regional Hebrew School. For high schoolers, there is the Bergen County High School of Jewish Studies. For many years, three Reform synagogues had a joint program for teenagers, the Bergen Academy of Reform Judaism. This fall, the three participating synagogues will be running separate programs.

Rabbi Joel Mosbacher (left) speaks on behalf of same-sex marriage. To his left is Rabbi Mary Zamore of Temple B’nai Or in Morristown; Rabbi David Fine speaks on behalf of the same sex marriage bill as Rabbi David Greenstein (right) waits his turn.

In advance of the votes this week in Trenton to recognize same-sex marriages, rabbis testified both for and against — but the numbers were on the side of what is being referred to as “marriage equality.”

A last-minute effort by Orthodox opponents of gay marriage to rally opposition had no apparent effect, as the New Jersey State Senate passed the measure on Monday by a wider than expected 24-16 margin. A vote in the State Assembly was scheduled for Thursday, after this newspaper went to press. Gov. Chris Christie has promised a veto; the Democrats who sponsored the bill have until the end of the legislative session in 2014 to override that veto.

In the Senate, that would require gaining three more votes.

On Sunday night, before the vote, an Orthodox group calling itself Torah Values Defence placed what it said were 25,000 “robocalls,” urging New Jersey residents to call their state senator in opposition to the bill. Rabbi Nosson Leiter, of Monsey, an organizer of Torah Values Defence and spokesman for the Lakewood-based Garden State Parents for Moral Values, called the bill “very anti-Torah, anti-moral, anti-American.”

Leiter was one of two Orthodox rabbis who testified in opposition to gay marriage in committee hearings last month, along with Rabbi Moshe Bresler of Lakewood. Ten rabbis — from Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist congregations — testified in favor.

The two statewide Orthodox organizations which regularly lobby in Trenton — the Institute of Public Affairs of the Orthodox Union and Agudath Israel — did not testify at last month’s hearings.

Instead, the Orthodox Union worked with the legislation’s lead sponsors, Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg and Senator Ray Lesniak, to include protections for the religious liberties of institutions opposed to same-sex marriage in the bill, which was formally titled the “Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption Act.”

In a statement, the OU repeated its opposition “to the redefinition of marriage” and the legislation, while expressing gratitude for the protection of their religious liberty.

“Disturbingly, in too many states, those acting on their religious beliefs have seen government benefits withheld, government funds, contracts and services denied, and privileges such as tax exemptions revoked. We are hopeful that New Jersey’s bill will be enacted and enforced in a manner that ensures that this will not happen here and that employers, social service providers, and houses of worship will be free to uphold their faith,” said the statement.

Leiter criticized other Orthodox groups for not making the definition of marriage a top priority, rather than “getting funding for their programs and yeshivahs.”

“We will put morality and Torah values over material concerns. We will not be bought off,” he said. “The misperception that Orthodox people are over-focused on getting their material needs addressed has to be destroyed. That’s one reason we made that robocall. We know the grass roots does the right thing, but they’re not told what’s the right thing.”

Leiter said he was appointed to head the battle for “marriage integrity” at a meeting of rabbis in Monsey several years ago. He said he helped arrange the rabbinic p’sak halachah (rabbinic ruling on a matter of law) last fall that urged Orthodox Jews to vote against David Weprin in a hotly contested Queens congressional race. The Democratic assemblyman, who is Orthodox, had supported same-sex marriage.

Among those testifying for gay marriage was Rabbi Joel Mosbacher, of Beth Haverim Shir Shalom in Mahwah. He was part of a delegation of rabbis organized by Garden State Equality.

Mosbacher said he spoke “on behalf of members of my congregation whose love and care for each other can be recognized within the walls of my synagogue, but when they walk the streets and enter the schools of their children, and they enter the hospitals and nursing homes, and all the public places of New Jersey, their relationships aren’t recognized.”

“Government should embrace an inclusive definition of marriage,” he said. “I’m angry that the holdings of any one religion can determine the bounds of government-determined civil marriage.”

Rabbi David Greenstein of Congregation Shomrei Emunah, a Conservative congregation in Montclair, compared opponents of gay marriage to inhabitants of Sodom.

“What was the evil of the inhabitants of Sodom?” he said.

He cited the Talmud as delineating the sin of Sodom as “to be opposed to someone deriving a benefit where their derivation of benefit causes no harm.”

Talmudic explanations of the sin of Sodom often widely digress from the traditional understanding. For opposing giving same-sex couples the benefits of marriage, he said, “those who oppose this bill are in that way the true Sodomites.”

Rabbi David Fine, of Temple Israel of Ridgewood, a Conservative congregation, told the State Senate committee that “the celebration of marriages is a theological dispute, and I would ask the legislature not to establish one religious view over another, and permit me the right to such celebrations and solemnizations.”

Fine was a co-author of a 2006 responsum for the Conservative movement’s Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS), which argued that the traditional prohibition on homosexual activity no longer applied. The responsum was voted down as too radical even to be considered as an acceptable minority opinion. The CJLS instead approved two opposing responsa — one reaffirming its 1992 decision against all homosexual activity; the other permitting most (but not all) homosexual acts, the solemnization of same-sex relationships, and opening the doors of the Jewish Theological Seminary to outwardly gay rabbinical students.

Regardless of which side Conservative Jews come down on the 2006 decisions, Fine told The Jewish Standard, they should support same sex marriage rights.

“The position of the Conservative movement since 1990 is to oppose any civil discrimination against gays and lesbians,” he said. “It seems to me that what we’re talking about is a civil issue. We wouldn’t want anyone to have any less protection under the law, whether or not their marriage is acceptable under Jewish law or Christian canon. It should not be a contested issue.