Mammas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Pastors!

We're taking a break to have some Christian fun. The following has NOTHING to do with antisemitism. I know that some pastors out there subscribe to me. Watch this, because it's sheer excellence from start to finish:

Kudos to Florida Hospital Church in Orlando. "Mammas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Pastors!" deserves a "Blue Letter Bible Ribbon." Anyone disagree?

Hamas MP: More Suicide Attacks!

Kind of makes you wonder if minister of Hamas' parliament, Ahmed Abu Helbiya, who urged the above, would step up to be the first volunteer. I ... doubt it.

News stories reporting Helbiya's provocative call to Palestinians protesting on International Al-Quds Day hardly surfaced in the mainstream American media. (The Zionists who control the media have been slacking on the job.) The outrageous Al-Quds Day protests in Iran also failed to register on the American consciousness, despite the attention garnered by Pres. Ahmadinejad's United Nations/NYC visit last week. It's all a pity because an appreciation for the enormity of the threat posed by the fire-breathing rhetoric of said president has to go hand-in-hand with hearing about the citizenry of Iran. From "Iranians mock Holocaust on annual Jerusalem Day":

TEHRAN (AFP) — Iranians chanted "Death to Israel" on Friday as Islamist students unveiled a book mocking the Holocaust in an Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day annual parade to show solidarity with the Palestinians.

And in Gaza City, the Islamist Hamas movement that has ruled the impoverished Palestinian territory since June 2007 marked the day by calling for more suicide attacks on Israel.

The book "Holocaust," published by members of Iran's Islamist Basij militia, features dozens of cartoons and sarcastic commentary.

Education Minister Alireza Ali-Ahmadi attended the official launch of the book in Tehran's Palestine Square.

The cover shows a Jew with a crooked nose and dressed in traditional garb drawing outlines of dead bodies on the ground.

Inside, bearded Jews are shown leaving and re-entering a gas chamber with a counter that reads the number 5,999,999.

Another illustration depicts Jewish prisoners entering a furnace in a Nazi extermination camp and leaving from the other side as gun-wielding "terrorists."

Yet another shows a patient draped in an Israeli flag and on life support breathing Zyklon-B, the poisonous gas used in the extermination chambers.

Iran does not recognise the Jewish state, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attracted international condemnation by repeatedly predicting Israel is doomed to disappear and branding the Holocaust a "myth."

The commentary inside the book includes anti-Semitic stereotypes and revisionist arguments, casting doubt that the massacre of Jews took place and mocking Holocaust survivors who claimed reparations after World War II.

One comment, in a question-and-answer format, reads: "How did the Germans emit gas into chambers while there were no holes on the ceiling?" Answer: "Shut up, you criminal anti-Semite. How dare you ask this question?"

In 2006, the Islamic republic hosted a conference of Holocaust deniers and revisionists and a mass-circulation Iranian newspaper held a cartoon competition on the subject.

... In Gaza, a Hamas parliamentarian called for more suicide attacks against Israel as thousands of Palestinians marched to mark Al-Quds Day.

"We call on all the factions to undertake efforts to contain the enemy and halt its aggression by planning martyrdom operations," Ahmed Abu Helbiya told a crowd of more than 2,000 protesters.

... Quds Day was started by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Islamic republic, who called on the world's Muslims to show solidarity with Palestinians on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan.

The demonstration was held under an official slogan: "The Islamic world will not recognise the fake Zionist regime under any circumstances and believes that this cancerous tumour will one day be wiped off the face of the earth."

The Pig Soars for UCC's John H. Thomas

I never expected to present my first unqualified Flying Pig award to the United Church of Christ, and, least of all, due to a decision by its general minister and president, John H. Thomas. Despite the membership of the UCC in the World Council of Churches and Religions for Peace, two of five entities which co-sponsored this evening's dinner in New York City with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Thomas issued a statement today in which he explained his reasons for declining.

Before I quote from the UCC.org article, I wish to extend a tip o' the hat to UCCTruths, which I take to have been instrumental in pushing along the process by which Thomas can today declare that "the Emperor has no clothes" to his religious cohorts about the Iranian leader who shows no remorse. Says Thomas:

I was invited to the dinner but have declined. In previous public statements I have objected strongly to the rhetoric of President Ahmadinejad, rhetoric regarding the State of Israel and the historicity of the Holocaust that is deeply disturbing to all who believe in Israel's right to exist and who acknowledge the on-going pain that the Holocaust and its memory still evokes. While the organizers of this event certainly hope to raise their concern over this rhetoric with President Ahmadinejad, I am not convinced this will be effective.

The money quote:

To the contrary, I fear the occasion can and will be used by President Ahmadinejad to claim legitimacy and support for himself by an association with respected United States religious leaders.

And an uncommon consideration from Thomas for the people Ahmadinejad prefers to term "Zionist murderers" and "a small but deceitful number of people called Zionists ... dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers":

I respect the sponsoring organizations' intent for dialogue, but fear that the more likely outcome is sowing confusion and disappointment among our own members and, in particular, the American Jewish community.

The pig is soaring.

SO, You Want to Boycott Israel

Apparently, someone is able to exercise a little bit of levity over a pathetic situation, that being the all-consuming effort by many individuals and groups to make Israel the world's paramount aggressor nation worthy of boycott, divestment, and sanction. True, "So You Want to Boycott Israel?" is a little glib for my tastes, but its point is one that needs airing. Guess, and then watch to find out which Protestant denomination gets a nod for being an ally in the push toward "putting an end to the Israeli success story." (Hint: It's not the Southern Baptists.)


The video urges the viewer to say,"no," to Israeli medical care, but Canadian Lutheran World Relief ("Responding to God's love in service to others...") does one better. It altogether ignores the existence of said care to Palestinians. In a press release describing a donation of more than half a million dollars to Augusta Victoria Hospital in East Jerusalem, CLWF declares the hospital "is the [cough, cough] only institution offering specialized medical services like cancer treatment and dialysis to Palestinians."

... a tidy claim which must come as a surprise to a facility like Hadassah ("Medical excellence beyond boundaries") which professes on its website:

Hadassah brings first class medical attention to the Palestinian population. We do not let politics into our premises when we save lives of Palestinian babies with severe heart defects. We ignore political aspects when we conduct dozens of collaborative research and clinical projects with Palestinian physicians in a variety of medical and health areas.

Moreover, who's helping Augusta Victoria get its cancer program off the ground? Right again. Hadassah. Back to the webpage:

The Augusta Victoria Hospital is in the process of developing a Cancer Center to serve patients from the West Bank and Gaza. This Centre will initially include basic Radiation and Chemotherapy services. The Hadassah Hospital has committed itself to train staff and provide physicist expertise to assure appropriate quality oncology services at the Augusta Victoria Hospital. Furthermore, Hadassah will provide treatment of complex patients that exceed the capabilities of the Augusta Victoria Hospital cancer program at Hadassah. With this cooperation, both medical institutions saw in it an opportunity to create mutual understanding while developing a much needed Cancer Program that will serve the Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza.

At the PC(USA) General Assembly, when overtures calling for Presbyterian moderation and balance were debated, there were arguments against, accompanied by the insistence that "injustice cannot be condoned," as if only the Palestinian side faces injustice. Yet, if I depended solely upon denominational reports like the one above for a picture of the Israeli-Palestinian situation (as I fear many church members do), I too would think that only the Palestinians are the sufferers in this long conflict.

The Mustang Spirit

Did you know that in 1971 our Congress declared that mustangs are “living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West, which continue to contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people”?

I like that.

Presbyterians: Earnest, But "Easy Prey"

lazy today. am linking to roberta seid, standwithus, who has oodles and oodles to say 'bout pcusa general assembly. only personal observation i'll make is, jewish organizations have come a long way since the grit hit the van after the 216th four years ago. seid grasps the nuanced dynamics at work in the presbyterian church's formation of its israel-palestine policy, from the top to the bottom. of the committee process, she says:

The almost 1,000 Presbyterian Commissioners and advisory delegates and the other 3,000 Presbyterians who came to San Jose were polite, informally dressed, and very congenial, warmly greeting old friends and newcomers alike. They seem to be a cross-section of Middle America. They don’t raise their voices. When one speaker was too emphatic and loud at the Peace and Justice Committee, he was reprimanded. They scrupulously follow Robert’s Rules of Order [mvm: er, maybe in committee they do, but it's to hell in a handbasket on the general assembly floor]. They earnestly want to do what is right according to their religious precepts, especially helping the disadvantaged and the powerless, and take their deliberations very seriously. They also seem to be tending toward a pacifism that reverberates with the comfort and safety of Middle America and with the Presbyterians’ secure place in the world even as they make moral judgments about what the Jewish state, populated by Jews who are in a war zone and who have rarely had a secure place in the world, should or should not do.

... Many of the committee members, who are all chosen randomly just months before the Assembly starts, and many of the delegates-at-large simply don’t know much about the conflict and its history. Yet, they are asked to make judgments on it that will represent the voice of the 2.2 million-member Presbyterian Church.

They are easy prey for the Church’s anti-Israel bureaucracy. They rely on them as experts, and see no reason to distrust their input. When points of information or clarification were requested as the Committee delegates debated the Israel-related Overtures, ACSWP supplied the answers.

acswp, advisory committee on social witness policy, the same agency that, in commentary on a recent israel/palestinian overture, revived a henry ford codeword, "powerful interests," uttering it on the heels of a link to an article that speaks of ... oil money? you kidding? rather, it is "pro-israel advocacy groups" and individuals with jewish-sounding names.

read seid. she even gives a quick tour through the history of pcusa's policy on israel and palestinians. warning: it ain't purty.

PC(USA)'s Parliamentary Procedure: Flubs, Flaws, ... Flagrant Disregard???

JULY 5 UPDATE: Shortly after I published the following post, Moderator Bruce Reyes-Chow responded to Naming His Grace's criticism of the way parliamentary procedure was applied to the debate surrounding "On Calling for Tolerance and Peaceful Relations Between the Christian and Muslim Communities." At first, Viola of Naming His Grace was dissatisfied with Reyes-Chow's explanation. However, it appears that Viola was sufficiently moved to subsequently inquire of "a friend who was in a much closer range than I of the podium" and then, in a posting called "Yes, I can change my mind!" to conclude "the Moderator simply made several bad judgment calls and corrected one privately, never committing the others again." Yet, all that has transpired since I posted the entry below still leaves intact the question I raised on June 30th in "Calling All Robert's Rules of Order Freaks!" in which I queried my more knowledgeable readers as to whether they thought, on the basis of my verbatim transcript, that debate on 11-01, a controversial Israel-Palestine overture referencing the Amman Call, was improperly closed.

After posing my own questions about the way the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s Vice-Moderator applied parliamentary procedure to General Assembly debate over a controversial overture on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (see "Calling All Robert's Rules of Order Freaks"), I came across Naming His Grace's discussion of similar complaints, this time in regard to plenary debate over a measure defining certain Christian-Muslim commonalities (emphasis mine):

As some on the floor of the Assembly attempted, by amendments, to make sure the church did not enter into apostasy by saying that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, the Moderator of the Church and others attempted to keep them from their witness.

In particular, the moderator of committee 7 and the new Moderator of the General Assembly, unfairly, paid little attention to parliamentary rules.

As one commissioner gave a strong defense of not using the term a “common God” on the basis of neither offending her Saudi relatives nor her own faith, the committee moderator interrupted her and was not ruled out of order. (Although the commissioner did finish)

The committee moderator was allowed to ask to have a Muslim clergy person who was on the platform speak to the commissioners. This was permitted without the vote of the commissioners and then, although there was someone waiting to speak for the motion, the Assembly Moderator called on a commissioner who was asking to call the question. That meant that after the Muslim speaker, no one was allowed to refute anything he said.

Needless to say this means that in both the committee and the General Assembly a member of the Islamic faith actually was allowed to be the largest influence on the voting Christians. When one lists all of the broken parliamentary rules it is breath-taking.

... It is troubling when the congenial moderator becomes the congenial dictator. Perhaps it is simply a lack of experience.

Perhaps.

I guess all of this raises more questions ... because we're not speaking of presiding over a session in some small backwater where a novice is stepping up to the plate for the first time. We're talking about the highest level of moderation in mainline Presbyterianism, where church polity has a long, venerable history in America. I would think whoever is chosen moderator and vice-moderator would give the impression that they've done this before?

(Is it my imagination or was past Moderator Joan Gray as terrific as I remember her to have been?)

Second question--again, I'm showing my ignorance about Robert's Rules and the like (which is why I need to buy the book pictured), but when it comes to an assembly as auspicious as the GA, isn't there anyone charged with double-checking the moderator's application of procedure? I mean ... when I've watched these webcasts, there are a lot of bodies up there on the dais. Like, give me a break--what are they all doing? The Stated Clerk's up there. Can't "monitor the moderator" be added to his job description to ensure there aren't--as Toby Brown charitably put it--flubs? Just how much do these guys make?

And a related question is, why aren't webcasts of General Assembly action archived for later public viewing? Some of the other mainlines make these available. This is again one of those things that doesn't inspire confidence.

Oy.

WWJD at the PC(USA) General Assembly? (Part 2)

"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matt. 18:6)

At the very end of my first WWJD post, in an update, I questioned if Jesus was to be found at the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s General Assembly. At the very same time, I was discovering the identity of a commissioner I had seen come up to the mic at least a couple of times. Going by comments entered in that posting and comments appearing on the internet, it is evident that I'm not the only person whose attention was drawn to this earnest floor speaker. With some of us, it was his striking resemblance to the Christ of traditional European art that caught our attention. But many others were impressed by the speaker's Christ-like ability to, in a matter of a few well-put words, bring to light the inherent hypocrisy of the proceedings taking place at the Assembly. The Reformed Pastor explains:

...shortly before the discussion of whether to shell out $2 million for lawyers to defend PCUSA’s property claims on departing congregations, there was a vote on a overture entitled “On Creating a Presbyterian Office for the Prevention and Healing of Minister of Word and Sacrament Mis-conduct and Abuse.” The overture as it originally appeared would have required the spending of a bit over $100,000 to establish such an office. In committee, the Office of the General Assembly, the General Assembly Council, and the Advocacy Committee for Women’s Concerns recommended disapproving the overture because of the cost. The result was a compromise between the presbyteries that presented the overture and the Louisville agencies that, by my reading, amounts to, “we’ll try harder to do a better job of dealing with this.”

Could PC(USA) do better by those who've been sexually abused? Commissioner Daniel Moore thought so. According to The Layman came "the quote of the day":

We were just told that we can't spare $100,000 to help the healing of dozens of sexually molested victims. I will not vote in favor of spending $2 million to take my brothers and sisters to court or to give them threat.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I revise my earlier assessment. Jesus was most definitely at the General Assembly.

UPDATE: Rev. Daniel Moore of Guinston Presbyterian Church has sent the Mustang a frabjuous email about the observations many of us made in regard to his presence at the GA:

Thank you so much for taking the time to write to me. Your blog and the response to it has been an encouragment for me in a time when I needed it most. I was just sitting here preparing to give my report to the congregation on Sunday and thinking about all the excitement my church expressed at having me be called at the last minute to replace the primary delegate. They knew "God had called me there for a reason." And I believed it too. But upon reflection all I could see was one failure after another. While it is true that Ken was nearly voted in, he was not after all voted in. And in each of the important issues I felt like I was on the "losing side." It seemed as though I sat there helpless to stop the moral decay as it ate away at our denomination. And I began to question if God really had used me in ANY way while I was there except to perhaps humble me.

But when I received your email and read the comments on your blog by both you and the others, I could feel the sting in my eyes of joyful understanding. Perhaps God didn't have me there to "win" for him, but to show others that God was there and watching everything that happened. And that though people who believe in the inerrancy of God's word may be in the minority, they are not alone. Christ is there, and so are a remnant of his followers.

Thank you, for being a bright spot to me in a dark time.

In my life, I have found that the Lord bestows moments of grace when they've been most yearned for. God is good.

Calling All Robert's Rules of Order Freaks!

It's been a full three days since the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) voted upon overtures recommended by the Peacemaking and International Issues Committee ... and I'm still weighing the outcome.

As I ponder, I want to hear from readers, Presbyterian or otherwise, who have a handle on parliamentary procedure as contained in Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, which PC(USA) relies upon. It seems to me that debate on Overture 11-01, "On Peace and Justice in Palestine and Israel," was improperly closed. Of all the overtures that were coming into plenary with Committee 11's recommendation, Overture 11-01 was the one considered most contrary to the viability of a two-state solution by Jewish community leaders. (I covered its many problems in "Go Beyond the Fine Print, Fellahs.")

However, not being a GA junkie, mainlining denomination procedures and motions till my eyeballs go yellow and my teeth fall out, I'm depending on others to call it. Here's how 11-01 went down:

• The recommendation for 11-01 was introduced with favorable words by Nancy Kahaian, Moderator of Com. 11.
• Commissioner Jim Patton, Seattle Presbytery and on Com. 11, spoke in FAVOR of the main motion.
• Commissioner Bob Henley, Kendall Presbytery, moved to amend the motion, asking to delete Item 2. Seconded. Henley spoke to the amendment, explaining that the Amman Call pushed the PC(USA) toward imbalance because of its provisions for a Palestinian right of return and a shared Jerusalem.
• Com. 11 Mod. Kahaian introduced Victor Makari, coordinator for the Office of the Middle East and Europe, to explain why the church should be seeking to endorse the Amman Call.
• Advisory Delegate Ryan White, Seattle, spoke AGAINST the amendment.
• Commissioner Bruce Bush, Stockton, spoke in FAVOR of the amendment.
• Commissioner Jeffrey Vamos, New Brunswick, spoke AGAINST the amendment.
• Commissioner Bill Plitt, National Presbytery, had a question about the amendment being out of order, but the moderators, after a brief discussion, assured him it was not.

Shifting to a verbatim transciption as debate on the amendment is closed:

• Vice-moderator Byron Wade: "Recognize the commissioner, microphone #4."
• Mansell: “Frank Mansell, minister commissioner from Whitewater Valley Presbytery. I move the previous question.”
• V-mod. Wade: "Is there a second to that motion? [2nd.] We are voting now to close debate on this issue. All those in favor of closing debate, please say 'Aye'? [Aye.] All those opposed? Motion passes."

Then, a verbal slip and recovery by V-mod. Wade when it was time to vote on the amendment:

• V-mod. Wade: "Then we will go straight to the vote on 11-01. I'm sorry, I’m sorry, ooh, I’m sorry, on the amendment, excuse me, excuse me, Lord Jesus, excuse me. (Laughing.) I'm sorry about that. On the amendment--The amendment is before you that we are voting on. Once again, let us go back—let us, let us listen to the Word first. Sisters and Brothers, here in our common faith in Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, and walking humbly with our God, let us proceed to vote on the question before us. We will vote by keypad once again. I’ll ask that to come up. Advisory delegates, please vote now. Commissioners, you have been duly advised. Let us prepare to vote. Commissioners, please, vote now. The amendment fails."

With virtually no pause to catch his breath, V-mod. Wade immediately moved to a vote on the main motion:

• V-mod. Wade: "Now we are back, NOW we are back to the main motion of 11-01. Let us prepare to vote once again on the machines, with the keypad rather. Advisory delegates, please vote now. Commissioners, you have been duly advised. Let us vote. Commissioners, please, vote now. It is approved."

What do you think? In watching a parallel situation later on in the day (debate closed on an amendment, amendment vote taken and failed), it seemed to me that a vote was taken to close debate on the main motion before voting on the main motion took place. The way procedure was applied to the main motion above, there was actually no argument (not counting the introduction of the amendment) heard on the floor against the main motion. Since this was the Committee-recommended overture with the greatest opposition among supporters of Israel, I find it hard to believe that no one would've attempted to speak against 11-01.

Comments are open. Stay on target. I'd especially like to hear from YAADs (don't do drugs).

UPDATE: I received an informed reply from The Reformed Pastor. His response in its entirety is to be found in the comments to this posting, but I want to highlight the main points:

... In my experience, the motion for the previous question ... is among the most misunderstood in parliamentary procedure. The 1915 version of Robert's Rules ... says:

if unqualified it applies only to the immediately pending motion.

Unless one specifically states, "I move the previous question on all that is before us," one is moving to end debate only on the immediate issue (in this case, the amendment to 11-01). Given the way the commissioner phrased his motion ("I move the previous question"), debate should have resumed on the main motion, item 11-01.

You are absolutely correct that if procedure had been properly followed, there would have been opposition to it. ... I don't think this particular breach of procedure, however, was meant to choke off debate--if my experience is any guide, it was simply a matter of no one knowing what the proper procedure is.

I'm not so sure about that last point of yours, Pastor David. When it came to the passage of the minority report on 11-26, "On Middle East Peacemaking," the Israel/Palestinian overture receiving the second-most heated debate on the GA floor, Vice-moderator Wade seemed unable to contain his glee when the minority report, to answer 11-26 with the same 11-01 he cut debate short on, passed. He kept bowing his head as if to hide his broad smile.

But thank you for informing us on the protocol.

PC(USA) General Assembly: Go Beyond the Fine Print, Fellahs

Have you ever been presented with a contract that invokes the enforcement of some ordinance by name but doesn't provide details? You ask, "What's 'State Code x.x?'" but the one whose goal is to get you to sign on the dotted line just sort of mumbles something about indemnification in reply.

Such is the case with Overture 11-01, "On Peace and Justice in Palestine and Israel," being considered at the current Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly. Please, look at the measure carefully and read the fine print. And even after sorting through the fine details, look up the "Amman Call" referenced in Point no. 2. See the bit in no. 2 about "human rights of refugees"? What is that exactly? An examination of the Amman Call reveals:

That Palestinians have the right of self-determination and the right of return.

I won't belabor here the fine points of the issue. The broad message is this: any effort toward peace will go nowhere on the Israeli side if Palestinian right of return is on the table. Any move that threatens the demographic composition of Israel as a Jewish state is dead in the water. End of discussion.

Keep reading through the Amman Call. Jerusalem, settlements, the security barrier--there's a lot said in this document that bears an innocuous-sounding title. Anything mentioned in the Amman Call about "Palestinian obstacles to peace"? Didn't think so.

Back to the overture. Why does Point no. 3 go into such effort to specify that church resources use "existing materials whenever possible, including back issues of Church & Society as suggested, to interpret such matters as Mission Responsibility Through Investment, the status of Jerusalem, the impact of the security barrier (or 'wall'), etc."? Could it be that the PC(USA) wishes to safeguard its well-honed anti-Israel bias, resisting any calls for an infusion of balance? Ya think?

WWJD at the PC(USA) General Assembly? He'd Stump for Ken Working

I saw Jesus at the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s General Assembly today. Votes were being cast for positions on the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, and up came Jesus (above, painting and photo) to the mic to urge the delegates to vote for Ken Working. He spoke much as I imagined he would--kindly, with a sincere demeanor. However, the Assembly didn't listen. Some members did, but not quite enough to topple Bradley Copeland.

I kept waiting for Jesus to start overturning tables in respect to other actions taken this week at the gathering in San Jose (named in honor of his step-father). Consider, for instance, the hypocrisy contained in the Peacemaking and International Issues Committee's recommendation to approve Overture 11-33 called, "On Peace with Iran":

That the 218th General Assembly (2008) resolves:

1. That the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) supports a peaceful, diplomatic means to resolve the tensions developing as a result of Iran’s pursuit of its nuclear program, between the United States and Iran.

2. That the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) calls for direct, unconditional negotiations between the United States and Iran with the goal of finding and implementing a peaceful resolution.

3. That the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is opposed to preemptive military action by any nation against Iran.

4. That the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) calls for a renewed effort at all levels—people-to-people, interfaith groups, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and government—to help the United States and Iran eliminate the tensions that have existed between our two nations and to unite the American and Iranian people in a common effort to solve the problems of poverty, illness, and climate change.

Lest there be assumption that "any nation" in no. 3 doesn't include Israel, that sliver of a country down south of Iran and west a little, the one that is regularly pelted with rockets funded by IRAN, the one that gets its existence verbally threatened by the leader of same said country on the order of, oh, every other month, know that the overture's rationale specifies, "United States or Israeli military action against Iran would likely cause increased terrorism throughout the world, including here in the United States."

Er, where did Point no. 5 go?--the one that would prove PC(USA) to be a fair broker for peace:

5. That the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is opposed to any nation threatening to wipe Israel off the map.

Jesus, we've got some tables for you!

UPDATE: Many thanks to Beau Weston of the Gruntled Center for letting me know that the fellow in the photo above is, alas, NOT Jesus! I mean, it may be Jesus in the fellow's heart that allows him to be an earnest, truth-seeking speaker, but it's not Jesus in the flesh. Beau tells me that the fellow is Ralph Reed. No, not the Christian Coalition scoundrel, but just a true Christian doing the best that he can in service of the church.
SECOND UPDATE: Thank you, Beau, for the levity. No, the fellow up above is not someone by the common name of Ralph Reed. And as I compose this, I see on my webcast screen the same fellow, Rev. Daniel Moore of Donegal Presbytery. Ladies and Gentlemen, Jesus is not at the General Assembly ... or is he?

The Pig Went "SPLAT!" Presbyterian Church to Blame

Nope, I haven't fallen off the face of the earth. I've been hibernating, but the Presbyterian Church (USA) has yanked me out of my slumber.

For a month there, it was a flying pig moment. I'll let Presbyterian Jon Haber explain:

In May of 2008, a remarkable document appeared on the PCUSA Web site entitled "Vigilance Against Anti-Jewish Ideas and Bias." While church members had already spoken on this topic with their votes in 2006, this document was the first response from the leadership of PCUSA to concerns (expressed by both Jews and significant numbers of Presbyterians) that church language and action regarding the Middle East was tarnished by incorrect or biased information, one-sided accusations, and even anti-Semitic theology.

This was a remarkable work in many ways. Rather than talk in bland generalities, the church document stated outright that "we are aware and do confess that anti-Jewish attitudes can be found among us" and that "anti-Jewish theology can unfortunately be found in connection with PC(USA) General Assembly overtures."

The document also noted that in some materials created or circulated by the church "one finds characterizations of Zionism that distort that movement." It also noted that "The problems and suffering of the Palestinian people are attributed solely - and inaccurately - to Zionism alone."

Most significantly, the statement asked church members to reflect carefully on analysis of the Middle East delivered through the prism of "liberation theology," a reference to the work of those such as the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, a Palestinian Christian group which has been the driver behind church divestment programs over the last decade. The PCUSA paper did not call for a rejection, or even a distancing of the church from Sabeel, but it did caution that intemperate language and anti-Jewish theology could not be excused....

The reaction from Jewish community leaders was sheer bliss. Finally, there was genuine recognition and understanding from a mainline denomination of the connection between the way a policy of Palestinian advocacy is pursued and antisemitism. That the Jewish community hailed the statement even though criticism of Israel in and of itself was not rejected demonstrated that Jewish community leaders had all along been sincere in labeling earlier church actions as "functional antisemitism."

But the pig went "Splat!" before you could say "218th General Assembly." Continuing with Haber:

And then, with no fanfare, no announcement, without even an explanation, this document was quietly replaced by an "updated" version, one which stripped the work of any acknowledgement that the church continues, as it does, to traffic in retrograde theology and stances. Gone was direct acknowledgement of problems with the stands that the church is currently taking, and gone was the reference to Israel's sole responsibility for Palestinian suffering as being "inaccurate," replaced by broad generalizations and hints that criticism of PCUSA had more to do with misinterpretation of good intentions than with actual error.

What a mess. The American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, the Anti-Defamation League, B'nai B'rith International, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, Hadassah, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, the Rabbinical Assembly, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Union for Reform Judaism, the Women's League for Conservative Judaism, and the Women of Reform Judaism--all of these took back their initial praise, declaiming "Vigilance Against Anti-Jewish Bias," the substitute statement, for being "infused with the very bias that the original statement condemned." Ouch. The Simon Wiesenthal Center chimed in with an op-ed in Christianity Today. Double ouch.

But it doesn't end there. After the pig fell from the sky, it was run over ... by a PC(USA) truck:

Jerry Van Marter, coordinator of the Presbyterian News Service, suggested Jewish critics were overreacting. “The Jewish groups go nuts every time we make any statement they interpret as favorable to Palestine or the Palestinians,” Van Marter told NJJN.

Jewish groups. Go nuts. Every time.

As a Christian, I am so embarrassed.

File this under "Hope"

From Haaretz, a story of Arab Muslims in Israel:

Galilee Arabs paint mosque blue and white for Israel's 60th

In an unusual gesture of solidarity for Israel's 60th anniversary, villagers in one Arab-Israeli town have have painted the dome of their mosque in the national colors, blue and white.

... "We are residents of Israel. Our religion encourages love and closeness among nations. Jews, Muslims, we are all cousins, right?" A-Taibeh Mayor Hisham Zuabi was quoted as telling Maariv newspaper. "We decided to paint the mosque's dome, the most important, dear, and holy site for us, in the national colors. We are all citizens of the state of Israel. As far as we are concerned, there is no difference here between Jews, Muslims, and Christians."

"We decided to paint the mosque's dome, the most important, dear, and holy site for us, in the national colors. We are all citizens of the state of Israel. As far as we are concerned, there is no difference here between Jews, Muslims, and Christians."

A-Taibeh, which sits adjacent to the moshav Moledet, has a population of about 2,000. Its newly decorated mosque has been in existence for decades. Zuabi was quoted as saying that village residents don't fear criticism or threats because of their decision. Instead, they hope it will serve to unite Arabs and Jews. ...

Summary of UMC Petitions-Divestment, etc.

For easy access, here's a listing of entries I've written on various petitions of Jewish or Israeli/Palestinian concern that were debated before the recent Methodist General Conference:

• On "Socially Responsible Investment Task Force" (passed);
• On "Withdraw from Campaign" (rejected, sob!);
• On various divestment petitions (every last one rejected);
• On "Oppose Divestment from Israel" (rejected);
  
• On "Holy Land Tours" (passed);
• On "Israel-Palestine Conflict" (passed) vs. "Way Forward for Israel and Palestinians" (rejected);
• On "Israel and Apartheid" (rejected):
• On "Antisemitism" (rejected).

To be fair, when I judged the Conference harshly on the last measure, I failed to take into account passage three days before of "Holocaust Memorial Day." The latter encompasses much of what is called for in "Antisemitism." It acknowledges the "Christian Church has a profound obligation to correct historical and theological teachings that have led to false and pejorative perceptions of Judaism and contributed to persecution and hatred of Jews," and expressly calls upon "The United Methodist Church to contrition and repentance of its complicity in 'the long history of persecution of the Jewish people.'"

Yet, the recommendation to reject "Antisemitism" would have been easier to swallow had the Church and Society Committee Chair pointed out that "Antisemitism" was redundant in light of earlier legislation. Rather, Church and Society maintained that "Antisemitism" placed "the United Methodist Church on one side of a very complex issue without recognition of the intricacies and implications of adopting this petition." I suspect the seeming discrepancy in policy stems from the two petitions having been reviewed by two different committees, one more friendly to interreligious concerns than the other.

I don't think I've even written on half of all the submitted petitions that in some way addressed the Jewish community or the Israeli-Palestinian situation. To name some more, there was "Middle East Conflict" (passed), "Global Migration and the Quest for Justice" (passed), "Peace in Palestine and Israel" (rejected), "Statement on Hamas" (rejected), "Support for Israel" (rejected), "Two-State Solution" (rejected). No wonder the General Conference had Jewish visitors. Much hung in the balance for communities outside of the Methodist fold!

General Conference Anti-Israel Playbook vs. the Methodist Quest for Balance

Step 1--Wait until the Jewish Sabbath has begun.

The anti-Israel/anti-Jewish playbook as defined by committee leaders within the United Methodist Church's General Conference is one that requires committee recommendations that are not Jewish-friendly be brought before plenary after the sun has gone down and Jewish observers have left to celebrate their Sabbath. Don't believe me? Then how is it that all four plenary petitions that bore committee recommendations that ran counter to Jewish preservation in this world were brought forward during the Friday evening session?

I've already addressed the one petition called "Antisemitism." There was another that rejected rhetoric equating Israel with South Africa, but the committee pronouncement to nix it sent it down in flames. Yet, despite the hostile committee recommendations, there was a glimmer, a shred of hope, evident that Methodists desire to pursue a course of moderation and balance.

There were two Global Ministries' petitions that made reference to UN resolutions as they apply to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Global Ministries first submitted for a vote the petition that made Israel the sole bad guy in this conflict. Forget Hamas' daily rockets, forget suicide bombers, forget martial indoctrination of children, forget Iranian and Syrian funding, forget the dispossession of Jews in Arab lands, forget Palestinian leadership corruption--it's all just Israel's fault. It's the settlements and the "Wall" and the ... oh, just read it for yourself. Two-thirds of the delegates bought the committee recommendation to adopt.

Just a little later in the evening, Global Ministries returned to the podium with the second petition called "Way Forward for Israel and Palestinians." The first time I read this petition I was struck by how informed about the conflict its author, whom I knew nothing about at the time, seemed. Now the argument by Global was simply this: vote against this to be consistent with the previous UN one just adopted. One delegate demurred, explaining that this second one harbored true balance. Obviously, some were listening, even though the hour was late and everyone was exhausted in this 10th day of conference. If only 20 more delegates of the 785 voting could've seen their way to change their vote after reading both measures, the committee's recommendation would've been overturned. Only 52 per cent bought the committee's recommendation this time.

The abiding impression I've been left with now that the General Conference is over and divestment is buried is that United Methodists seek the middle path. They instinctively shun the extremes. It's just that their leaders sometimes steer them toward radical edges.

Note: Thank you again to His Royal Highness (and former United Methodist), the Emperor Misha of nicedoggie.net for sending folks my way. You are scandalously funny!