Monday, December 19, 2005
Earlier, I noted that some members of the Chicago City Council were expressing extreme displeasure with the fact that a local group of Presbyterians [PC(USA)] had met, once again, with Hizballah. See: Chicago City Council Blasts Local Presbyterian Leader.
According to this article in The Layman: Chicago Presbytery's visit with Hezbollah threatens condominium tower project, and this article in the Chicago Tribune (reposted at Coalition for Responsible Peace in the Middle East): Mideast meeting upsets 2 aldermen - Support for church rezoning questioned, there may be a real blow-back of consequences for the local Presbytery. From The Layman:
The Chicago Tribune reported today that "two influential Chicago aldermen say they may oppose rezoning for the proposed tower" because of their anger over the delegation's meeting with Hezbollah.
The newspaper quoted Alderman Edward Burke as saying, "I don't know how willing I will be to vote in favor of the zoning change ... at the same their leader is out meeting with Hezbollah. I think we ought to reevaluate the whole relationship."
Burke was referring to the Rev. Bob Reynolds, the presbytery executive, who led the Presbyterian Church (USA) delegation on its trip to the Middle East. Since returning, Reynolds has expressed his regret over the trip and said Hezbollah used it for political purposes.
Another City Council member was also irate over the presbytery's role in damaging relationships with Jews in the city. The Tribune quoted Alderman Bernard Stone, one of the council's three Jewish members, as saying Reynolds "is not going to get any favors from me. I'll be damned if I'll [support] anything that would benefit someone who meets with terrorists opposed to peace in the Middle East." Stone is a member of the city's zoning committee...
It may be of interest to note that the gentleman with the appeasing quotes in the articles, Pastor John Buchanan, who actually heads the Chicago Presbytery, is editor of The Christian Century, a publication with a strong anti-Israel tilt. See: The Christian Century calls Hamas and Hezbollah 'Nongovernmental Groups' and: James M. Wall on the Stump.
According to the Trib article, as well as an article in my recent Presbyterian roundup, Presbyterian Divestment Roundup (Updated), the Chicago Presbytery is "split" on divestment. I'm still not sure if that means they've rejected it outright or not. As The Layman puts it:
When there are actually consequences, people tend to think a bit more deeply about some of their more narcissistic activism.
Emphasizing "actual consequences" is spot on. (Try imagining legal structures without enforcement mechanisms.)
There's much weariness under the sun, but it's heartening to see consequences of some moment being effected in cases like this. What has prospects of being accomplished (e.g., assessing and effectively confronting the PC/USA) vs. what is impractical (e.g., utopian schemes) is, and will ever be, a debateable and reasonably contested set of themes. But at some level, however gauged or assessed, if people refrain from thoughtfully and responsibly acting on the social/political stage, then eventually it will need to be concluded that a pronounced moral apathy and negligence is at work. To imagine otherwise is to be willing to be deluded.
I chose to frame this in broad, highly generalized terms because, not only do we need to distinguish between what can reasonably be hoped to be accomplished vs. that which is impractical and vain, such as utopian imaginings and schemes, but we also need to distinguish between what can be accomplished in the short term vs. what can only be accomplished within a longer, more strategically conceived view, a broader and more distant horizon, but practical nonetheless.
Repetition. Repetition can serve both malignant as well as benign and beneficial propaganda purposes. Repetition can serve, can help to emphasize important, indeed critical and pivotal, themes. With that in mind, once again, I'll take the liberty to cite some of Matthias Kuntzel's critical and well documented work (and especially so since an adjacent post references the theme of Arab/Muslim holocaust denial). More specific examples:
European Roots of Antisemitism in Current Islamic Thinking
Islamic Antisemitism And Its Nazi Roots
National Socialism and Anti-Semitism in the Arab World
Abbas and Hamas
This is no mere and no common obsessiveness. Without recognizing the problem, responsibly assessing and articulating it, framing it within a broadly conceived horizon and then, finally, beginning to execute it, however haltingly and imperfectly at times, without all that the problem will never be overcome. Some problems (and I strongly suspect this is one such, similar to the Cold War, though on a different scale and involving different parameters) are inter-generational problems and will not be surmounted within a truncated span of time or within a narrowly conceived framework. In the end this problem will either be recognized for what it is, elemental and pivotal, or we will fail in that recognition and continue to delude ourselves with Oslo-like imaginings and mellifluous, Clintonian styled maunderings and Orwellian news-speak. Choices will be made, and each choice made will have its own set of ramifications. Oslo-like delusions, however rationalized, are no longer a viable option. This too is why Left and Left/Dem initiatives and imaginings and corrosives have the very real potential to undermine some long-term prospects which are critical, not merely peripheral.
After John Buchanan had a letter in the NY Times defending the church's actions, I e-mailed him and asked if he could point me to any statements or actions the Presbyterian Church has taken with respect to oppression of its co-religionists in Egypt and all over the Middle East.
I'll let you all know the instant I get any response.
I won't be holding my breath. Heh.