Presbyterians Disagree on Israel
A Statement from Presbyterians Concerned for Jewish
Christian Relations
August 11, 2004
A large number of Presbyterians were distressed by the actions taken at the
most recent meeting of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
This sentiment is reflected in the close margins by which the relevant actions
were passed. To read these actions without interpreting the votes is to
miss an important part of the story.
The Presbyterian Church does not speak with a monolithic voice. Just as a
variety of opinions about any one issue exists among Jews, this reality is also
true with Presbyterians.
The decision to "examine and strengthen the relationship between Christians
and Jews" and conduct a study of Messianic Judaism, but not at the same
time forbid the funding by General Assembly agencies of any such new
congregations, needs to be understood in the wider context of Presbyterian
polity. Many of the votes cast against the recommendation to forbid
funding for additional "messianic" congregations were about process,
not concept. The Presbyterian Church is a connectional system, not a
hierarchical one. Many Presbyterians think the General Assembly has no right to
tell lower bodies or judicatories what projects they may initiate or support.
Thus, this vote can be understood as an affirmation of local control, rather
than as a mandate for the church to evangelize Jews by developing more
Messianic congregations.
This action must also be understood in the context of past and
still-authoritative statements made by the Presbyterian Church: that God has a
primary, vital and continuing covenant with the Jewish people, and that
Christians have been grafted onto this original covenant. We find it
irresponsible that the reports of the denomination's action did not reference
earlier General Assembly statements. Therefore, it is easy to understand
the public outcry and sense of betrayal within the Jewish community. [Click here
for the 1987 statement: A
Theological Understanding of the Relationship Between Christians and Jews.]
We are distressed that the General Assembly's statement this year on Israel
lacked balance and failed to condemn the terrorism to which the people of
Israel have been subjected. Violence and injustice are not one-sided problems
and should not be portrayed as such: there are victims of war among Israelis as
well as among Palestinians. We encourage a peace process in the Middle East that
holds all parties accountable BOTH for past acts of violence and for work toward
reconciliation and peaceful resolution. We affirm the right of both peoples to
co-exist, and we support a two-state solution to the conflict.
We categorically denounce any equation between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
and apartheid. Israel is a multi-racial state. There are persons from over 100
different ethnicities and cultural backgrounds living in Israel. Over one
millions Arabs are citizens of Israel, and Arabic is one of the state's two
official languages. The barrier is designed to combat terrorism--nothing
more, nothing less. Allegations of Israeli apartheid serve to de-legitimize the
Jewish state and the Zionist movement, which is the national liberation movement
of the Jewish people.
We are deeply distressed by any suggestion that divestment policies of the
church relating to Israel should uniquely target that country in ways that do
not apply to every other country, including Palestine. We must be careful not to
attack the economic life of the Israeli people, or to undermine Jewish survival
in any way. We call upon Presbyterians to be very careful in balancing
consistency in our divestment policies with the economic needs of Israel.
Consideration of selective divestment from corporations reflects policies
that the Presbyterian Church has long applied to American investments, both
domestic and foreign. The PC (USA) has opposed investing church funds, for
example, in the manufacture and purchase of military equipment, and in providing
other direct support for ethically questionable projects of our own or of any
foreign government. We would continue to invest, on the other hand, in a
corporation that built hospitals in Israel or the West Bank.
In these sensitive and difficult times, we must be careful to understand the
Presbyterian Church's criticism of certain policies of the present Israeli
government in light of the denomination's consistent and solid support for the
state of Israel's right to exist within secure and agreed-upon borders.
Rev. Dr. Donald W. Shriver and Rev. Dr. William Harter, Co-Conveners
PCJCR (Presbyterians Concerned For Jewish Christian Relations)
Presbyterians Concerned For Jewish Christian Relations
is an informal group of Presbyterian ministers and laity, committed to a
positive, constructive and respectful relationship with Jews. Our involvement in
this issue reflects deep personal conviction, and is mindful of the 1987
statement of principles approved by the General Assembly of our church:
"A
Theological Understanding of the Relationship Between Christians and Jews,"
which outlined a foundation for positive relationships between Christians and
Jews. Additional information is available at .
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:
The Rev. Dr. Donald W. Shriver
dwshriver@aol.com
The Rev. Dr. William Harter
pcfs@innernet.net