The God Squad column, Presbyterian Church’s Choices Stir Outrage (Newsday 8/7/04), is a cheap shot at the oldest protestant faith community on Long Island, a tiny minority dwarfed by the faith communities represented by Msgr. Hartman and Rabbi Gellman. The attack is crafted to leave the impression, despite disclaimers, that the Presbyterian Church (USA) is anti-Semitic. It is an orchestrated, knee jerk reaction to the actions of the highest governing body of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
Because Hartman and Gellman say Presbyterians “hate Israel” does not make it so. The 216th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church(USA) authorized exploration of selective divestment of church funds from those companies whose business in Israel is found to be directly or indirectly causing harm or suffering to innocent people, Palestinian or Israeli. It did not approve a blanket divestment from companies that do business in Israel. The action comes as an effort to motivate real change in Israeli policies and a movement toward peace.
The Presbyterian Church (USA) exercised selective divestment of its investment funds as a moral act against apartheid South Africa. Such actions contributed to change in South Africa. To use this strategy again in the case of companies doing business with Israel does not equate the two situations. Hartman and Gellman are correct in pointing out that the situation in Israel and in South Africa are quite different. But to say Presbyterians equate the two does not make it so. Presbyterians are aware of the difference, and count on diversity in Israeli democracy to support negotiated peace efforts. Criteria to determine selective divestment from companies doing investment in Israel would be different than those criteria used to determine selective divestment in apartheid South Africa.
Because Hartman and Gellman say Presbyterians want to “kill Israel” does not make it so. The General Assembly called for an end to Israel’s construction of the “separation barrier.” It did so fully aware of Presbyterian commitment to Israel’s security and with a deep concern for the economic, social and religious life of Palestinians. In calling for an end to the barrier, the Assembly stated that the best hope for security for both Israelis and Palestinians may be found in laying down all forms of aggression on both sides, ending the Israeli occupation, and finding ways to build bridges of peace rather than walls of separation.
Because Hartman and Gellman say Presbyterians are proselytizers seeking to bring Jews into the Christian faith, an obscene act in light of the Holocaust, does not make it so. This God Squad conclusion comes from the General Assembly’s failure to stop funding for a new church development in Philadelphia which claims to reach out to Jews as a “Messianic congregation.” Representatives from the Presbytery of Long Island to the General Assembly opposed such congregations and sought to stop funding.
Presbyterians are Christians who profoundly know God’s love in and through Jesus Christ. For witness to this faith, Presbyterians make no apology. That others might know and experience this love, and claim it as God’s gift for their lives, is an opportunity for all. Proselytizing is quite another matter. Its practice raises profound theological questions for Presbyterians living in a religiously pluralistic world. That is why the General Assembly directed a review of so called “Messianic congregations” to determine whether these are in keeping with Presbyterian belief and practice. This writer believes that when the study is complete, such congregations will not be in accord with Presbyterian heritage.
In 1987, the General Assembly approved a study paper, A Theological Understanding of the Relationship Between Christians and Jews, which said: “We affirm that the reign of God is attested both by the continuing existence of the Jewish people and by the church’s proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Hence, when speaking with Jews about matters of faith, we must always acknowledge that Jews are already in a covenantal relationship with God.” That action affirms the commitment of the Presbyterian Church (USA) “never again to participate in, to contribute to, or (insofar as we are able) to allow the persecution or denigration of Jews.”
Because Hartman and Gellman say Presbyterians do not honor each others faith tradition does not make it so. On Long Island, Presbyterian and Jewish congregations share facilities in Cutchogue, Shelter Island and Sag Harbor. The Presbytery of Long Island strongly supports the Interfaith Forum, related to the Long Island Council of Churches, which was launched by a Presbyterian seminary. Many pastors and congregations of the Presbyterian Church (USA) enjoy interfaith learning, fellowship and service on a regular basis. Presbyterian presence in social service and justice, working across faith lines, dates back hundreds of years and continues today. Following 9/11, the Presbyterian Church (USA) directed its relief funds for Long Island through a Jewish agency, something the agency reported to the White House as an example of interfaith cooperation. One hopes the sting of the God Squad attack does not damage these honest and holy relationships.
Tom M. Castlen
Executive Presbyter
Presbytery of Long Island
Presbyterian Church (USA)
Dear Rabbi Gellman and Msgr. Hartman,
Your column is usually an asset for interfaith relations, yet it recently presented an inaccurate impression of actions by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA). It implied that they were antisemitic and aimed at harming Israel, charges that run counter to our long record of interfaith dialogue and cooperation.
Since the American Revolution, Presbyterians have been patriots, yet not unquestioning ones. Ours is a uniquely American, representational form of church government that fosters diversity of thought and conscience. We view dissent and discussion as tools for discerning the way in a complex, changing world. We are also our own greatest critics. Significantly, our constitution includes the Declaration of Barmen, created by the German reformed churches in opposition to Nazi control.
There is not now, nor has there been, an effort to proselytize or target Jews. On the basis of our long-standing position, delegates to the General Assembly actually had intended to do the opposite: remove funding from a unique congregation. However, local jurisdiction issues have more weight for us than in “top-down” churches. By analogy, when can the US congress remove funding from a town project? In Presbyterian fashion, the GA voted on a renewed study of the issues.
The GA did not reject Zionism, but rather a specific, distorted, Christian form of it that willfully places the lives of Israelis at risk in anticipation of the end of the world. We abhor terrorism and are quite sensitive to the plight of terrorist victims in Israel; after 9/11, any accusation to the contrary doesn’t ring true. On another point, the GA did not vote to boycott Israel. The issue under study is selective divestment from multinational companies that profit from harming Israelis, Palestinians, or both. Whether I may agree or disagree with the GA vote, it was based on concern for all of the victims. The action is no more based in hatred than is an employee's decision to place his retirement money in a “Social Choice” fund.
I join your prayer for repentance of sins against our neighbors, that we may reach out to the hearts of those we don’t understand, be they friends, family or strangers living here, in Israel, or elsewhere in the world. Let us pray together, listen to each other respectfully, and learn from each other.