LONDON (EJP) --- The Church of Scotland has rejected a motion to divest in companies whose products are used by Israel in the territories.

The Church's General Assembly, its highest court, instead accepted a motion that calls on British foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, to use her influence, both as a representative of the British government and in cooperation with her colleagues within the European Union, to encourage Hamas to issue a statement recognising the State of Israel’s right to exist.

The motion also explicitly recognised Israel’s right to security, rejected boycott initiatives by bodies attempting to make a stand and influence the situation and called for economic engagement and cooperation on both sides.

When you get past the semantics, the labor peace agreement would obligate hotel owner Len Wolman of the Waterford Group to permit union organizing under an unfair process in which the union solicits workers' signatures on cards saying that they would like to join a union. Mr. Wolman would not get to tell the workers his side of the story. If more than half the workers sign the cards, he must immediately negotiate a contract with the union.

Not only is the employer cut out of the process, the request to unionize doesn't even originate with the workers, whose paychecks would be raided for union dues. The union, a group called Unite Here!, wants to organize 220 full-time workers at the hotel and 140 part-time workers at the Connecticut Convention Center, both at Adriaen's Landing.

In a counterattack, Mr. Wolman asked the National Labor Relations Board to hold a traditional secret-ballot election in which the workers are free to vote their consciences - a rare request from an employer that the NLRB's regional director denied but remains under appeal.

The NLRB should reconsider the request, and the "labor peace" stipulation should be repealed.

In the initial communication dated April 28, I commented on the work that was underway to restructure our operations in light of the loss of so many churches during this program year. The basic plan has been completed, and was presented and approved at the meeting of the UCCIB Board of Directors last week. It’s still premature to comment on the specifics of the plan, but I expect to be able to share a detailed plan before the end of June. I can provide a few directional comments regarding what our participants are likely to see in the coming months.

Tony Campolo, Jim Wallis and Brian McLaren are among evangelical leaders who have come up with a new term to describe themselves. They reject the term "Religious left" as an alternative to the the "frightening" religious right. Instead they're calling themselves "red-letter Christians." They take the message of Jesus seriously and try to make that the starting point for all their actions.

Like that "Love God with all your heart and soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself." stuff.

The more evangelical, mainline, catholic -- any followers of Jesus who stay with that message first -- the better.

The United Church of Christ will move its 2007 national convention out of Hartford if the dispute between labor unions and the operators of the Connecticut Convention Center is not resolved by June 6, and the organization has asked the governor to intervene.

In a letter to Gov. M. Jodi Rell Monday, the organization - an umbrella group of Congregational churches - said that it will soon be forced to relocate its 8,000- to 10,000-person event scheduled for June 2007. Organizers say the event would use 18 area hotels for a week and could bring $10 million in economic benefit to the state. If the convention were to move, organizers say, it would be to a venue outside of Connecticut.

"In the event of a just and significant labor dispute, which we currently find this to be, we will not violate boycotts or cross picket lines," the organization said in its letter to Rell. "We are quickly approaching a time when we must make a decision to move our meeting to another city."

"We're not threatening to move; we will move if this issue is not resolved," Edith Guffey, associate general minister of the church, said in an interview. "This is far from convenient for us, but it's an issue of who we are, what we support, and convenience isn't the issue."

By virtue of their history, symbolism and theology, mainline churches
have a unique capacity to whisper quietly (and sometimes shout) into
the ear of the American people. Because these churches typically
interpret the bible and the Christian faith through a lens of
experience and rationality, mainline churches serve as a credible
witness to American society writ large, even to those Americans who
don't share the faith these churches confess. For many Americans –
religious and non-religious – mainline churches represent a badly
needed counterbalance to the fundamentalist community that many
people regard with suspicion.

Consequently, mainline churches in the U.S. can give religious
credibility to a variety of political agendas. And this is exactly
that the divestment campaign is about – enlisting the religious
credibility of historic churches in the U.S. to broadcast and
legitimize a dishonest, unfair and hostile narrative about the Arab-
Israeli conflict to the American people. The end game is to convince
the world that Israel is an apartheid state that is not worthy of
normal relations with the West and ultimately a worthy target of a
boycott. Accompanying Palestinian calls for divestment are calls
for "broad boycotts" and embargoes against Israel. One student at the
University of Michigan described the divestment campaign on college
campuses this way: "What we want is not actual economic divestment
from Israel. Everyone knows that the US will never pull investments
out of Israel like that. Instead, we are looking to shift the
dialogue to whether or not to divest from Israel, without extraneous
discussion of the basics. We hope that in 10, 20 years the public
will just take for granted the premises that Israel is an apartheid
state, and then we can move from there." Clearly, the goals of the
divestment campaign have little to do with changing Israeli policy or
promoting peace, but with the economic and political isolation of
Israel.

For the short term, it's not about the money, it's about the podium.
Divestment resolutions afford pro-Palestinian activists the chance to
speak before large audiences that gather at our church-wide
assemblies and talk about checkpoints, home demolitions, and the
security barrier without having to explain why Israel does what it
does. The story offered is one of innocent Palestinian suffering and
Israeli intransigence and savagery.

On this score, divestment is a McGuffin, or plot device used to
capture our attention before it is directed to Israel's uniquely
sinful behavior. After hearing this story, our church-wide assemblies
pass judgment on the behavior and defense policies of a people who
for the last 58 years, have fended off three attempts to destroy
their homeland.

Most of the people who attend these church-wide assemblies know
little if anything about the conflict. Because Jews do not typically
have a seat at the table at Christian gatherings, the only way
Israel's side of the story can be told is if church leaders deign to
let Jewish leaders speak to the gathered assembly.

• Fourteen proposals call for rescinding the divestment resolution initiated at the last assembly.

• Three explicitly reaffirm divestment: One from San Francisco, which also presses for peaceful investment; one from Boston, which urges the church to develop educational materials about divestment so people “might discover a cogent, faithful Christian argument”; and one from Newark, which calls for Israel to stop “settlement population growth” and for Hamas to end violence and “disavow the goal of expelling Israel from Palestine.”

• Several other presbyteries are more subtle, calling for peaceful investment as the church reconsiders its stock portfolio. These overtures come from Washington; Chicago; Giddings-Lovejoy in St. Louis; New Brunswick, N.J.; and Missouri Union.

• Florida and New York City skirt the issue: the former calls for fairness, noting that the last assembly took actions biased against Israel; the latter mandates funds for peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians while healing damaged relations with Jews. A presbytery from western New York calls for education about the Middle East.

TV commercials and monthly tidings of the Venice United Church of Christ tout an open-door policy that welcomes everyone and declares that no one will ever be kicked out of the church's membership.

But Bill Walker … learned he was the exception.

As a member of the church's auditing committee, a position the church asked Walker to fill, he raised questions about church spending and an $80,000 deficit in its operating fund.

The result: Walker received a letter April 25 stating, "It is with regret that we inform you that a unanimous decision was made this morning by the Church Council on behalf of the Congregation to remove you from membership in the Venice United Church of Christ because of your disruptive behavior to our church."

The TV advertisements aired by UCC headquarters and supported by the Venice church, proclaim, "No matter who you are or where you are on life's journey, you are welcome here."

And the Venice church's monthly bulletin adds, "We do not condone anyone ever being ejected from his or her church."

Walker was labeled in two letters—one the dismissal letter to Walker and a second to church members—as "disruptive" and "the cause of dissension."

But he was never given an explanation why his behavior was considered disruptive.

"Do I know to this day what I have been accused of? No," Walker said.

What he knows is that he pointed out several areas of the church budget. He recommended that the Board of Trustees find ways to reduce, over time, the $194,000 payroll and limit expenditures.

The board ignored his recommendations, Walker said.

On his way to an April 25 meeting of the Board of Trustees, Walker said he was pulled aside, told he was dismissed and handed the letter.

A spokesman for the national office of the UCC in Ohio said the organization does not oversee the policies of the individual UCC churches.

"The UCC is a nonhierarchal church that does not impose any policies. We encourage churches to work through any conflict and seek mediation," said spokesman Ben Guess.

He declined to comment on the specific case because, he said, he was not aware of the particulars. He referred questions to the Florida Conference of UCC in Orlando.

The Florida Conference's interim conference minister, Jack Richards, and regional conference minister for the Gulf Coast, Jean Simpson, did not return phone messages this week.

Once again, a new UCC commercial, which invites all people into the church, has been rejected by the networks, their affiliate cable stations, and Viacom.  Every day, the networks air advertising laced with sexual innuendo, violence, materialism, and the politics of personal destruction, yet the message of openness and welcome stated in the new UCC ad is "too controversial" to be shown.  While some stations are still airing our ad, many communities, particularly those without access to cable, will never see this ad. 

From Viacom-owned MTV Networks: "Our guidelines state we will not accept religious advertisements that may be deemed as disparaging to another religion."

From NBC: "...the subsequent review of the material you sent us for the United Church of Christ "Ejector Pew" spot we continue to feel that the spot violates NBC Universal's Controversial issue policy and therefore remains unacceptable". In context, when the last set of UCC ads were rejected in 2004, the network was clear on what was controversial: "NBC accepted one but rejected the other because it "violated our longstanding policy against accepting ads dealing with issues of public controversy." The controversy, said NBC, stemmed from the ad's suggestion that "other religions are not open to all people."

From CBS (via Scripps Howard News Service, 3/27/2006): Buford said CBS executives had told him the subject would be considered advocacy advertising until the inclusion of gays and lesbians is common at churches in the United States. But Jacobs challenged that statement. "That supposed exchange is simply fictitious," she said.

In April 1984, members of the First Congregational Church of Griswold found themselves at the epicenter of a terrifying episode that was already two years old.

That month, two of the church's youth group members were murdered by a serial killer who would later sit calmly in front of an investigating officer in Lisbon and tick off the names of his victims, six young women who either got into his car or were unable to run away fast enough.

Now this rural congregation of about 200 people is again wracked with grief. The execution of the killer, Michael Ross, scheduled for next Wednesday, has reopened the wounds.

Making it even more painful for many members, the Connecticut Conference of the United Church of Christ, to which the congregation belongs, filed a lawsuit in Hartford Superior Court seeking to postpone Ross' execution until a commutation hearing on his sentence is held.

A judge ruled Wednesday that the Missionary Society of Connecticut, the legal arm of the conference, has no standing to challenge the Board of Pardons and Parole's refusal to grant a commutation hearing. But on Thursday, the state Supreme Court decided it would hear arguments Saturday on the conference's request.

The pastor of the Griswold Church, the Rev. Lou Harper, wrote a statement Thursday saying that the conference leadership does not speak for his church.

“Our church was filled with tears last Sunday when we discussed the actions of our conference minister [Davida Foy Crabtree] and the efforts that our conference was taking without any input from our church,” Harper wrote.