Through controversy and calm, the First Congregational Church has weathered nearly every storm that has hammered its stone exterior and breezed through its fragile glass windows.

Since its creation in 1705, the church has comforted families of soldiers from the Revolutionary to the Iraqi wars. Parishioners have grieved with families who have lost loved ones and celebrated the baptisms and marriages of many others. It has silently protested against issues it did not support and advocated for initiatives in which it believed.

All the churches have left because of state and national convention votes that endorse same-sex marriage, ordination of actively gay homosexuals and other liberal views. Recently the United Church of Christ ran a nationwide series of television advertisements depicting two bouncers who blocked minorities, including homosexuals, from worship at other unspecified churches.

By Robert Everett and Dexter Van Zile

For the past few years, liberal Protestant theologians have warned Israelis and American Jews of the alleged anti-Semitism inherent in the end-time scenarios offered by evangelical Christians in the US.

Evangelical love for Israel, we are told, is not rooted in regard for the Jews, but is merely a byproduct of their desire to witness the Second Coming of Christ, an event some Christians believe was hastened by the establishment of the State of Israel.

While the end-time scenarios offered by some evangelicals, are indeed disturbing for Jews – and many Christians – the hostility toward Israel encouraged by liberal Protestants poses a much greater near-term threat to Jews than anything the evangelicals espouse.

Despite repeated assertions that they have removed all traces of anti-Semitism from their theology, the leadership of mainline Protestant denominations in the US have helped breathe new life into the teachings of contempt for Jews in their indiscriminate support for Palestinian theologians such as Naim Ateek, a former Anglican canon who serves as president of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center. Ateek is regarded as a "peacemaker" in the US even as he recycles the deicide charge against the Jews and directs the hostility it arouses against the Jewish state.

****

(Robert Everett is an ordained pastor in the United Church of Christ and author of Christianity Without Antisemitism: James Parkes and the Jewish-Christian Encounter. Dexter Van Zile is founding director of the Judeo-Christian Alliance, an initiative of the David Project, a Boston-based Israel advocacy group. He is a member of the United Church of Christ.)

Two prominent Episcopalian bishops are warning their church not to support the anti-Israel divestment campaign that is splitting Protestant churches in the U.S. Divestment, they warn, places exclusive blame for the Arab/Israeli conflict on Israel, promoting an understanding that "is entirely inconsistent with the actual history of this long and tragic conflict."

Their warning comes in the form of an anti-divestment petition released in conjunction with the Judeo-Christian Alliance, an initiative of the David Project, a Boston-based group that promotes a fair and honest discussion of conflict in the Middle East.

The two bishops, Rev. Geralyn Wolfe of Rhode Island and Rev. Edward S. Little of Northern Indiana warn fellow Episcopalians that divestment "seems to justify the tactics of terrorists. This would only encourage the violence the church hopes to end, and the continued suffering of Arabs and Israelis for years to come."

JCA President Dennis Hale, Ph.D., an Episcopalian himself, says the willingness of the bishops to oppose divestment publicly indicates just how divisive the campaign has been for churches.

"For a long time, Protestant leaders have been forging close ties with those who are pledged to the destruction of Israel, falsely claiming to be pursuing 'peace and justice'," Hale says. "They are in fact prolonging this terrible conflict. Divestment is just another way of saying that Israel has no right to defend itself and therefore no right to exist."

The bishops' announcement comes days before the United Church of Christ's General Synod addresses two divestment proposals and another calling on Israel to dismantle the separation barrier that has saved hundreds of Arab and Israeli lives since 2003.

Dexter Van Zile, a member of the UCC and director of the JCA says the resolutions are a consequence of the propaganda spread by the denomination's leadership.

"UCC leaders have shamelessly fronted for Sabeel, an anti-Israel group that has dusted off the deicide charge against Jews and has directed its energy against the Israel," he says. In the next few days, Van Zile will release a report about Sabeel's teachings of contempt.

James Hutchins founder of http://UCCtruths.com, a Web site that confronts the political activism of the denomination's leadership, expressed concern about the UCC's connection to Sabeel.

"Sabeel's political rhetoric doesn't build bridges, it builds animosity and contempt," Hutchins says.

The petition can be seen at: http://www.judeo-christianalliance.org/EpiscopalPetition.htm.

Reject The Divestment Resolutions!

First, let me say that divestment, as a tactic to encourage or force changes in corporate practices, is plainly ineffective. But let's just ignore this reality for the sake of exploring why divestment from Israel is wrong.

Please remember there are two sides to every story. Sadly, our denominational leadership (our UCC national office) has embraced a one-sided narrative that focuses mainly on Palestinian suffering. This is evidenced in the Resource Report, prepared by our UCC Common Global Ministries Board, given to us presumably as a primer on the issues surrounding divestment. The report, after providing the obligatory lip service of "This document does not purport to advocate one position over another, but rather to aid in conversation" goes on to assert that "the first step toward achieving the so-called two-state solution is the end of the occupation - a major step that many believe would eliminate the continued violence against innocent civilians on both sides".

To be fair, Palestinian suffering is a true and heartbreaking reality. But the resource report, the proposed divestment resolutions, as well as statements by our national leadership are all written as if the occupation was the cause of Palestinian violence against Israel. Let us consider, just for a moment, that just maybe Palestinian violence against Israel is the cause of the occupation. Doesn't Israel have a legitimate security need to protect itself from constant and repeated terrorist acts targeted specifically it its innocent Israeli civilians?

While all people of conscience want to see an end to the violence in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, it is intellectually dishonest to equate those who initiate terrorism with those who take defensive actions against it. There is clearly a moral difference between those who attack innocent civilians and those who, in attacking terrorists who purposely hide in civilian areas, harm innocents. And even if you somehow could conclude these were equivalent, divestment of Israel would be using an economic weapon to unilaterally hold Israel to a different standard than the Palestinians. To put it bluntly - why punish only Israel?

My most charitable assessment of those advocating divestment is that they are well meaning but ill advised. These resolutions may find support in altruistic individuals who think they would be contributing to peace, but instead would only further isolate Israel, giving encouragement to extremists on both sides (yes, there are extremists on both sides).

As I said at the onset, divestment for its intended purpose is ineffective. The unintended consequence, however, would be real and tragic. Divestment would surely hurt our Jewish brothers and sisters both here and around the world. For them, any policy that seems (however unintentionally) to discriminate against Jews is sure to bring up inescapable and painful associations.

To my fellow UCC members: Get educated. Ignorance is inexcusable as the information is out there and readily available. You've likely heard one side of the story presented by our church leadership; now please take the time to hear the other side. A few good places to start:
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME_62/4704_62.htm (please click through to the pdf letter on divestment)
http://www.judeo-christianalliance.org/PressReleases/042105.htm
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050329/nytu137.html?.v=3
http://www.ucctruths.com/
Then contact your conference and national leadership to voice your opposition to these resolutions.

To our voting delegates to General Synod: Vote these resolutions down! Don't amend them. Don't improve them. Don't fix them. Don't water them down. No matter how nuanced the plan, one-sided divestment (or "selective divestment" or "progressive engagement" or "shareholder activism") will bring no good to our denomination nor to the Middle-East peace process. Please just flat out reject them.

To our denominational leadership: I expect you will now distance yourselves from these resolutions to let the "democratic process of discernment" at General Synod take its course. But it is clear to many that YOU have laid the foundation for divestment and YOU have shaped the debate to pave way for passage of these resolutions. Like so many other troubling actions our denomination has taken to the embarrassment and disappointment of many of its moderate members - divestment will surely hurt the UCC... and YOU should be held accountable.

To the conferences and local churches who authored/proposed these resolutions: I choose to believe you are sincere in your desire to help the peace process. I theorize that your misguided plan for divestment came out of our church's culture of emphasizing Palestinian rights and Israel's violation of those rights. But saying you condemn violence on both sides while only taking action against one side is unfair. And simply saying the proposal is not anti-Semitic does not make it so.

The following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian historian Professor Zaynab Abd Al-Aziz, which aired on Saudi Iqra TV on May 26, 2005.

Host: "Why is America hostile to Islam, although we never had and never will have the same conflict with them we had with Europe?"

Abd Al-Aziz: "Well, do you remember what we just said about the Second Vatican Council in 1965 and about Christianizing the world? It was agreed upon and pre-arranged. John Paul II prepared a five-year plan, on the eve of the third millennium, Christianize the world. His address in 1995 was based on the assumption that by the year 2000, the entire world would be Christianized. Since the plan was not accomplished, the World Council of Churches assigned this mission to the US in January 2001, since the US is the world's unrivaled military power. They named the decade between 2001-2010 "the age of eradicating evil" – "evil" referring to Islam and Muslims.

"The Crusader war is ongoing, because it has been a religious war since the dawn of Islam. Later, colonialism, missionaries, and Christianization were introduced. The Crusader war is ongoing. The Inquisition courts exist to this day. As I told you, the pope who was appointed a few days ago, headed the Inquisition Court, which is now called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

"When in January 2001, the World Council of Churches delegated this mission to the US - what did the US do? It fabricated the show of… is it September 9 or 11?"

Host: "11. Please explain this to me."

Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes, of course…"

Host: "You mean to say that the World Council of Churches delegated the mission of Christianizing of the world to the US."

Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes. And how could the US win legitimacy for this without anyone saying that they are perpetrating massacres and waging a Crusader war? It fabricated the 9/11 show. I call it a fabrication because much has been written on this. We are also to blame. Why do we accept a single perspective? Countless books were written, some of which were even translated into Arabic, like Thierry Meyssan's 9/11 – The Appalling Fraud [2] and Pentagate. "Pentagate" like Watergate… He brings documents to prove that the method used in destroying the three (sic) towers was "controlled demolition.

"This is an architectural engineering theory, which was invented by the Americans. They teach it in their universities. They make movies and documentaries about it. They incorporated it in movie scenarios and then carried it out in real life. Why do we accept this?"

Two dozen public-interest organizations joined the Bush administration in urging the Supreme Court not to hear the case. The group included the Consumer Federation of America, the United Church of Christ and several organizations representing racial minorities.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center applauded Lord Carey of Clifton, the former Archbishop of Canterbury for forcefully condemning a campaign being considered by the Consultative Council of the Anglican Church that would disinvest from companies that do business in Israel. Lord Carey believes that a divestment plan, similar to plans proposed by other mainline U.S. Protestant Churches as the Presbyterian and United Church of Christ, would be a "grave mistake" that would seriously harm the peace–building efforts in the Middle East. "Israelis are already traumatized and feel that the world is against them. This proposal, if it is agreed, would be another knife in the back," Lord Carey said.

Bryan Sirchio, a Madison minister and songwriter, barely escaped being kidnapped in Haiti at the end of last month. Two friends who were his escorts during a one-week stay there were kidnapped, beaten and released.

Now, rumors are circulating that a priest with whom Sirchio has worked for years in Haiti has been targeted for assassination.

The Rev. Gerard Jean-Juste, a vocal advocate for nonviolence and democracy and for the poor in his country, was scheduled to fly back from Florida to Haiti today despite the reported threats on his life. Jean-Juste's parish runs a meal program for children that is supported in part by donations from people in Madison churches.

The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey of Clifton, condemned plans by Anglican church leaders to disinvest from companies that do business in Israel yesterday.

Lord Carey was speaking at the launch of an organisation to promote religion as an aid to tolerance and peace in Middle Eastern countries such as Iraq and Israel.

He said that the Anglican Consultative Council would be making a grave mistake if it approved an Israel divestment proposal at its meeting in Nottingham this month.

Such a step would seriously harm the peace-building work of organisations such as the Foundation for Reconciliation in the Middle East, which was established yesterday at the House of Lords.

Yesterday, June 2, the Eden Board of Directors passed a budget for fiscal year 2005-2006. Through a combination of increased revenue and cost reductions, this budget eliminates the $1.2 million operating deficit--a deficit that could not continue without causing significant harm to the financial security of the Seminary. Because of the actions of the board, the Seminary can now begin to move ahead with a more sustainable fiscal plan.

As you are aware, the board increased revenue by such steps as raising tuition and rent. But as you also know, such steps alone cannot address the budget shortfall. So beginning today, we are implementing a reorganization of Seminary staff.