By Rachel Pomerance
2008 Religion News Service
(UNDATED) The United Methodist Church is poised to become the next U.S. church to consider divesting from Israel, a topic so controversial that it prompted the Presbyterian Church (USA) to backpedal on its own divestment program two years ago.
At its quadrennial General Conference this April in Fort Worth, Texas, the Methodists, with more than 8 million U.S. members, will debate whether to pull church holdings in Caterpillar, which provides the Israel Defense Forces with bulldozers.
The proposal from the Methodists’ General Board of Church and Society comes as the church’s women’s division offers a 224-page study guide on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has been slammed as “inflammatory, inaccurate and polemical” by Jewish groups.
Citing references that compare Israelis to Nazis and characterizing the creation of Israel as “original sin,” four U.S. Jewish women’s groups told Methodist leaders the guide “would simply take anyone who turns to it … on the wrong path.”
The guide is “anti-Israel and anti-Jewish from cover to cover,” said Ethan Felson, assistant executive director for the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.
The author of the report, the Rev. Stephen Goldstein, who works for the church’s General Board of Global Ministries, was unable to be reached for comment.
James Winkler, general secretary of the General Board of Church and Society, said he had just received the study report and not yet read the “troubling quotes.” However, he explained the rationale for divestment.
“The board felt that after 40 years of statements and resolutions from our denomination, as well as from many other churches and other organizations urging Israel’s withdrawal from occupied lands in the West Bank, that something more needed to be done,” he said.
“The feeling was that economic pressure was needed.” Winkler said. Caterpillar was chosen because Israel uses its products to “destroy Palestinian homes, build bypass roads and build the wall of separation.”
Some $5 million of the United Methodist Church’s $17 billion portfolio is currently invested in Caterpillar.
In a statement, Caterpillar says it complies with foreign and domestic laws, stating that “for the past four years, activists have wrongly included Caterpillar in a publicity campaign aimed at advancing their much larger political agenda” and that protests “neither change the facts nor our position.”
Whether the Methodist church’s divestment proposal will meet the same fate as its counterparts in other churches remains to be seen.
In June 2006, the Presbyterians replaced a 2004 call for a “phased, selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel” with a plan for more peace-minded investment in the region.
The United Church of Christ, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Episcopal Church have all stymied or reversed course on earlier attempts at divestment.
For its part, the United Methodist Church is not of one mind on divestment.
“It seems grossly unfair that the church exclusively target Israel for divestment,” said Mark Tooley, director of the Methodist program at the Institute on Religion & Democracy, which takes a conservative approach to public policy.
The church’s social policy arm “has always been very, very critical of Israel like other mainline Protestant agencies have been, and will fault Israel almost exclusively for the lack of peace,” Tooley said.
The Rev. Timothy Bias, pastor of First United Methodist Church in Peoria, Ill., where Caterpillar CEO James Owens is a member, said the divestment proposal helps “raise the consciousness of the conflict.”
However, he regrets that the church did not first broach the issue with Caterpillar.
“If we’re going to make resolutions, we need to have conversations with all parties involved,” Bias said.
For the last several years, Jewish organizations have made that argument to mainline Protestant churches considering divestment.
“The state of interfaith relations between the Jewish community and the mainline Protestant churches is very much a work in progress,” said Rabbi Gary Greenebaum, U.S. director of interreligious affairs for American Jewish Committee, who spoke against divestment on behalf of mainstream Jewish groups at the Methodist church’s pre-conference meeting on Jan. 25 in Fort Worth. “We certainly are much more engaged with each other. We certainly are much more aware of each other’s issues.”
Copyright 2008 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted February 12, 2008 at 4:33 pm
A very complex situation.
May the Methodists follow God’s guidance in their discernment.
Peace!
posted February 12, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Well, clearly they have the right to divest, if they choose, based on both law and the Bible (Genesis 12:3 comes to mind). God bless them in their decision, then.
posted February 12, 2008 at 8:34 pm
As a former Methodist, it should be interesting to see what happens in this situation.
The churche’s women’s division comes across as very anti-Jewish with the wording in their study guide, comparing Israelis to Nazies, and the creation of Israel as “original sin.” There is no reason for that, and would make me ashamed to be a Methodist woman, if I had had anything to do with that guide. Great way to get along with other religions!
posted February 12, 2008 at 9:17 pm
I, at least, haven’t read the study guide and am not ready to judge it. But Israel has a great deal to atone for in the Middle East and I’m at least glad the Methodists are bringing it up.
posted February 12, 2008 at 9:40 pm
nnmns:
Was going by the article concerning the study guide, as my reason for the comment. I’d like to find out that those comments weren’t made in the guide, as mentioned above.
posted February 13, 2008 at 8:04 am
There’s a pertinent article in the NYT about the ongoing tragedy and about the difference in ability of the two sides to treat the victims.
But notice also how the story excuses the Israeli strike at an already ruined building next to a wedding party and gives no one an opportunity to explain the motivation for the rocket strikes. I don’t excuse either but I point out the PR is, as usual, all on one side.
To the extent Israeli hospitals treat Palestinians, it’s a good thing. To the extent they don’t or the patients can’t get to them it’s not.
posted February 13, 2008 at 9:19 am
Under the Geneva Conventions and customary laws of warfare, the Palestinians have no complaint.
Until they wear uniforms, separate from the “civilian” populace, cease terrorism, and stop using ambulances for carrying munitions, not to mention stop using children as fighters and wearing concealed explosives — none have any right NOT to be targeted and NO right to be taken prisoner unless they are naked.
Anyone else find it odd that the two people named as pushing this have historicaly Jewish names? Some of historys worst anti-semites had Jewish ancestory themselves.
posted February 13, 2008 at 10:35 am
“Until they wear uniforms, separate from the “civilian” populace, cease terrorism, and stop using ambulances for carrying munitions, not to mention stop using children as fighters and wearing concealed explosives — none have any right NOT to be targeted and NO right to be taken prisoner unless they are naked.”
Uh, almost all Palestinians are NOT terrorists/homeland defenders so they have all sorts of rights. And of course Palestinians have no army and if they did it would be miniscule compared to the one the US has equipped for Israel. Those who feel they are defending their homeland are probably doing it the most effective way they think they can. They may be wrong but they wouldn’t be the first or last in that.
Defenders of Israeli policy would have the Palestinians lie prostrate before Israel while even more of their lands are taken and their people are imprisoned or killed and maybe, eventually, Israel would get around to talking peace. Pardon me for suspecting that would be after there wasn’t any land left worth grabbing.
“Anyone else find it odd that the two people named as pushing this have historicaly Jewish names? Some of historys worst anti-semites had Jewish ancestory themselves.”
There are Jews who are sick about Israel’s policies, too. And claiming any who oppose Israeli policies are anti-semites is an all-too-often-successful lie.
posted February 13, 2008 at 11:33 am
The UMC is notoriously passionate about social justice and the well- being of each and every human being. Unfortunately, it is still a church made up of people. And sometimes the conservative wing of the church has a very loud voice as is the case at General Conference. What is also true is that the UMC ‘committee’ issues to death… I have faith they won’t act rashly and pray for clarity.
posted February 13, 2008 at 12:44 pm
This issue may be the herald for larger issues to come. First, it must be said clearly and without qualification, Israel and Judaism are actually separate entities. Israel is a state, a nation, with all the stresses and complexities that come with that identifiaction. Judaism is a religion with its own stresses and complexities. That Israel was forged as a home for the displaced Jews only adds to the complexity. However, one can dispute some of the stances of the Israeli government and still be supportive and caring for Jews. I believe that divestment in companies whose products are directly involved in some of the questionable “projects” initiated by the Israeli government is simply a sensible response. However, are we as willing to divest in companies whose products are part of our own governments questionable”projects”, Do we keep stock in General Motors, maker of Hummers (as environmentally as they are politically disastrous)? Who produces the tanks, the missles, and the other weapons of particular or mass destruction? In that larger corporations own and operate these companies do we divest there?
What makes it all the more curious is that I have seen several pieces of evidence that the peaceful investments have a greater earnings ration and prove to be more profitable thatn any of the war or oppression investments. Peace is proftiable, we simply need t know how and where to invest.
posted February 13, 2008 at 3:57 pm
“First, it must be said clearly and without qualification, Israel and Judaism are actually separate entities. Israel is a state, a nation, with all the stresses and complexities that come with that identification. Judaism is a religion with its own stresses and complexities”
That may be true but Israel identifies itself as a Jewish state just as many middle east countries identify themselves as Muslim states making it nearly impossible to separate the two.
While I agree more needs to be done by more than just politicians, getting out of Caterpillar seems to be a bad way to do it because:
Caterpillar equipment is used to build many more homes than it destroys (I’m sure even a few UMC buildings).
If Israel is a good customer, Caterpillar will continue to sell to them and whatever investment the UMC pulls out someone will put back in.
This is a blatant move to symbolically clear their conscious rather than do something of substance and go over their to convince the people of the vicious circle that both Israel and Palestine have gotten themselves into.
posted February 13, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I wonder how the Methodists are reacting to other countries that are supporting violence? We purchase oil from countries that are committing similar acts, we support usa in its role as democracy deliverers. i think it is wrong to pick one gov’t. and not others.
posted February 13, 2008 at 4:01 pm
I supported the Presbyterian divestment from Israel because as a Presbyterian I could not support the activity not only on the West Bank by Israel but also its treatment of people of color within its borders.
Israel always makes the claim it uses its horror tactics for survival. I hate to see what Israel would do if the world turned a blind eye for a second.
It does take two sides to make this situation and the side that would show honor would definitely get my support but in this age old struggle I have seen many innocents hurt, robbed of land and bullied. Both Palestine and Israel have bloody hands, and Israel turn those bloody hands to U.S. and the world to financially support further blood letting. I just couldn’t support them any more and I would love to see others divest.
posted February 14, 2008 at 12:21 am
Be it noted for the record that on Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2008 cknuck and I agreed. This is not normal. But his above statement is much the same as things I say. So, ck, let’s shake hands, go out for coffee (or whatever is your drink of choice) and recognize that here we are together. For that, if nothing else, I am glad today.
posted February 14, 2008 at 1:13 pm
lol thanks jest we would probably have a great time.
posted April 4, 2008 at 6:20 pm
I am a Methodist, but I do not support this divestment business. The Israelis are not perfect, but the Arab world is totally to blame for the palestinian situation. The Israelis have tried time and again to make peace, have been bullied and badgered by UN and USA, have constantly placed themselves in jeopardy by honoring things like the Oslo agreement, when the Arab side does not.
If my church implements this divestment foolishness, I plan to reduce my pledges, and actively seek to invest in companys that do business with Israel, or Israeli companies themselves if possible.
Many other Methodists will do the same.