Tuesday, July 3, 2007
There's been some interesting stuff going on in the continuing saga of the various mainline Protestant denominations and their anti-Israel divestment initiatives. I've covered this phenomenon regularly in the past, but things have been relatively quiet lately, with most of these initiatives either defanged or overturned entirely. That doesn't mean all is quiet, however.
Remember that the professional class of most of these denominations is generally hostile to Israel and the American Jewish establishment, while this feeling shrinks rapidly the lower down the hierarchy one goes until it's often reversed entirely once one gets to the people in the pews who are often embarrassed by some of the obsessions of the folks who try to speak in their names.
So let's take a look around, starting with the Methodists, touching the Presbyterian Church(USA) [PCUSA] and finishing with the United Church of Christ [UCC].
New England Conference of the United Methodist Church
First, the ADL say a new call by the New England Conference of the United Methodist Church "borders on anti-Semitism."
"This call for divestment by the New England Conference of the United Methodist Church borders on anti-Semitism," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "The authors of the report must be living in a bubble to ignore ongoing attacks on Israel and Hamas' violent takeover of Gaza to issue such an outrageous, biased report that focuses only on Israel."
Mr. Foxman added, "While this Methodist task force has busied itself researching divestment, the Iran-backed terrorist group Hezbollah perpetrated war against Israel, and rocket attacks targeted Israeli cities and towns in the north and the south. Yet the Methodists seem to believe that they need to teach Israel a lesson."...
The ADL press release goes on to laud a "shift" in the UCC's position, but that may be premature, as we will see shortly. There is a detailed page about divestment at the NEUMC (New England United Methodist Church) web site here that shows an adoption of boilerplate Arab propaganda -- "This month marks 40 years of Israel’s brutal and illegal occupation. Three generations of Palestinians have been denied their freedom." for instance.
A perceptive reader who looks at the lengthy report (90 page PDF) may note cooperation and mutual sourcing between the UMC, the Episcopal Church and the PCUSA, demonstrating once again how these efforts are all of a piece. The site also contains a list and statements by "Jewish" organizations and individuals in support of divestment [PDF]. Readers who recognize many of the names (Jewish Voice for Peace, Ilan Pappe, ICAHD, Norman Finkelstein...) will be forgiven for thinking this attempt at self-justification falls flat.
Their list of Organizations Deserving Support [Word Doc] will also strike as uninspiring, including, for instance, ICAHD, the World Council of Churches [As an aside, note also: ADL Calls World Council Of Churches Anti-Israel Global Initiative "A Biased Action"], Jewish Voice for Peace, and Sabeel.
Presbyterian Church (USA)
Presbyterian Outlook reports that PCUSA officials are spinning hard not to let go, even though the very idea of divestment was defeated by a vote of 94% of the delegates at last year's General Assembly and everyone knows what the intent of that vote was: MRTI facing "legitimate issues" after 2006 GA divestment action. The article requires free registration, but here's the operative part:
“Basically, the Assembly acknowledged there are legitimate issues here,†said Bill Somplatsky-Jarman, who staffs MRTI’s work, referring to actions taken by the 2006 Assembly that modified language in the original action, calling for investment in “peaceful pursuits†and specifically expanded its mandate to study corporate involvement in Gaza, historically Palestinian [I don't believe the resolution said "historically Palestinian." -S] East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Israel.
The original language called for a process of phased, selective divestment of companies who profit from Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.
At the time, MRTI said that analyzing corporate support — including financial backing — of Palestinian or Israeli violence against innocent civilians was also within its mandate since the 2004 action also affirmed other denominational statements condemning such attacks by suicide bombers and by the Israeli military.
“The (2006) Assembly said it wants to be sure its stock is invested only in peaceful pursuits. We’re trying to make sure that’s what happens,†Somplatsky-Jarman said.
The denomination is focused on Caterpillar, Inc., a corporation at the center of several campaigns directed against the use of its equipment to demolish Palestinian homes, as well as building Israeli-only roads, the separation barrier and clearing Palestinian agricultural land...
Note the attempt to move straight from 2004 (divestment) to 2006 (no divestment) while pretending nothing changed. In fact, Somplatsky-Jarman is trying to claim that his committee's power was actually expanded.
PCUSA member Will Spotts quotes a letter he sent to the Outlook, here. A snip:
James Berkley has comment on the operations of this committee, here: Presbyterian Divestment from Israel Unlikely to Happen Soon:
In partial fulfillment of this mandate, MRTI at this recent meeting was busily at work on the task of corporate engagement, not divestment per se. And it was also casting about for ways to possibly invest in peaceful pursuits. However, contrary to the General Assembly's explicit directives, MRTI relentlessly sought only one party's welfare—only the Palestinians'. Not a positive word was said about Israel, nor kindly motive ever imputed to the Jewish state. There was no talk of investing in Israel, only Palestine. Israel, to hear MRTI speak, was considered unremittingly evil in intent and criminal in its actions...
Also by Berkley on this issue, and well worth a shufty: MRTI Trash-Talks Israel and MRTI - Two Presbyteries Passing in the Night.
What emerges is the same story we've discussed before. We have a group of party apparatchiks who are almost unremittingly hostile to Israel, and very often Jews generally, who are unlikely to accomplish anything at all of consequence, but who end up providing ammunition to outsiders who would very much like to dismantle the Jewish State. Bromides about dedication to a "secure Israel" are as effective as their divestment efforts. The bottom line is that the dismantle Israel crowd has all they need.
United Church of Christ
There seems to have been some confusion over the past few days about the UCC...or at least we have a situation where different spins are coming together. First I reported United Church of Christ Moderates Its Anti-Israel Positions when a more balanced position made it through the UCC's General Synod last week. The resolution even referred to incitement in Arab textbooks and media.
Not just this blog, but a number of the alphabet soup Jewish groups (ADL, AJC, etc...), and others, issued congratulations and thanks to the UCC for the step they had taken.
That, however, may have been too much for UCC "general minister and president" John Thomas, who was quick to insist that nothing had changed: Thomas: Synod policy on Israel-Palestine 'remains today what it was before'. Thomas was pissed:
What we have following that is a whole lot of legal parsing. For instance:
For their part, several of the groups Thomas accused of making misleading statements stuck by them. Christians for Fair Witness, for instance, reaffirmed their take, and the Wiesenthal Center said that Thomas was out of touch with the people in the pews.
UCCTruths comments here, and reminds us that it was the midnight machinations of Thomas himself that got the divestment language inserted into UCC policy in the first place. James Berkley reacted with outrage here: How DARE you say the UCC was fair!
James Hutchins of UCCTruths was moved to collect a series of quotes from Jewish leaders commenting on the UCC of the past couple of years: UCC interfaith relationship with Jewish community destroyed. Here's a taste:
So why couldn't John Thomas just "take a compliment" and leave it at that? On the UCCTruths message board, James Hutchins reminds us of a quote from Thomas that illuminates. Thomas is explaining why he re-inserted divestment language in that midnight session at the last Synod:
Thomas and the others didn't want to disappoint their Arab "dismantle Israel" groups like Sabeel, with whom they have personal and working relationships, and they didn't want to "send the wrong message" -- otherwise known as speaking truth to power in their view -- to their Jewish "partners." Pander to your Arab partners, keep the Jews in their place.
Fast forward to today and there's no mystery as to why Thomas flipped when all those groups started issuing congratulatory press releases. He immediately started getting calls from his Palestinian buddies begging him to "say it ain't so" and felt the need to reassure them by chastising the alphabet soup for jeopardizing all those hard won relationships.
He's chosen his friends.
Israel Is not perfect but who Is ? not me thats for sure , but at least we try to do the right thing.
I wonder If protestants/methodists, ect..think about Israels medical research and contributions, I wonder how many methodist lives have been saved by Israeli medicine?
or when they talk on the cell phone.
While the the jordanians calling themselves palestinians have contributed
suicide vests and unguided missile systems....