[The following, by Will Spotts, is crossposted from The PC(USA) on Israel and Palestine.]

Items from committees that concern Israelis and Palestinians that are scheduled to come before the 219th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.):

These two papers, "Christians and Jews:  People of God", and, "Toward an Understanding of Christian Muslim Relations", have been submitted by the General Assembly Mission Council.  They were produced jointly by the Office of Theology and Worship, the Office of Interfaith Relations, and the Office of Evangelism.  They are (for the most part) intended to reflect the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s self-understanding of its theology in relationship to Judaism and Islam.  As such, I believe this to be a mostly internal matter to the denomination.  Basically, the PC(USA) has the right to form and articulate its own theology, and it is not really the place of those of us on the outside to do so.  As a former member of a PC(USA) church, I, of course, have a strong personal interest in the topic, but I only want to comment on this insofar as it impacts Presbyterian activism directed at others.

Item 08-04 "Toward an Understanding of Christian-Muslim Relations:

In addition to urging that the 219th General Assembly approve this paper the GAMC provides numerous (eighteen) recommendations. The three that draw immediate attention are:

2 a. "developing and making available updated resources for study and reflection on Islam and Muslim life, including case studies of Muslims and Christian-Muslim relationships in a variety of countries of the world, and especially in the United States;"

This constitutes, of course, a call for denominational educational resources. While the goal may be laudable, I personally question the nature of the resources that will be produced. I say this because of the denominational resources I have seen (and even commented about) in the past.

4 c. "continuing to work with Christian churches in areas of Muslim majority in their efforts to live freely and openly as Christians, and to work for full religious freedom (including the right to change one's religion) and for equal citizenship for all persons in their societies;"

This recommendation surprised me. While this is certainly an issue in a number of countries, this document marks one of the few times I have ever seen the PC(USA) acknowledge that fact. [For what it's worth, I applaud them for including it.]

4 d. "continuing to monitor the use of religion in the service of power, in the undergirding of systems of oppression, and in legitimating extreme political agendas, and to act as peacemakers and peacekeepers;

I'm unsure the exact intent of this recommendation. It seems to me to be overly broad. On the surface, I think many of us would agree with it, but in practice it really depends on one's point of view. What constitutes an extreme political agenda? Who are actually peacemakers? Many who go by that label do, in fact, support extreme political agendas. What is indicated by peacekeepers?

Bottom line: I certainly agree with attempts to foster greater understanding among Christians and adherents of other religions. I would, however, prefer to see no vague, open-ended instructions.

Will Spotts