After the Hysteria… – Rev. Dr. Jeff DeYoe

This past June the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) did the unthinkable (according to some) and made a decision to divest from its holdings in Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions because these companies continue to profit from the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and have refused to acknowledge their complicity in that or change their business practices. Let it first be said that Presbyterians did not, in any shape or form, vote to divest from Israel. To the contrary, the church remains invested in dozens of companies that do business in Israel and will continue to do so. How do I know that?  Because since 2006 I have been among a number of strategists who have sought to push forward with the original Presbyterian divestment-from-occupation action, first introduced to the PC(USA) General Assembly in 2004.

Throughout that time, and contrary to the propaganda of critics both within our denomination and outside it, there has never been a PC(USA) plan to divest its assets from all companies doing business with Israel. There has also never been a plan to boycott everything Israeli. It has never happened, pure and simple. The rhetoric of those who have opposed the historical Presbyterian conviction that our church should never make money from human rights violations and misery has been in every way possible, to convince the uninformed that the “sky is falling.”

It is important to talk about their last couple of gasps before their loss in Detroit. Clearly the Middle East Issues Committee assigned to the task of considering the divestment proposals wanted to make the clear statement that the PC(USA) will not invest in non-peaceful pursuits wherever that may be and whoever might do it. (There were two proposals: one from the PCUSA Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI) committee, and the other, an overture endorsed by no less that 6 presbyteries—regional church bodies—from across the nation).

The committee was completely in line and in character with our church’s historical stance on peacemaking in the world. The committee was creative (which I have seen again and again in well-run committee processes) in the sense that it took an overture (resolution) that was against divestment and boycott as non-violent tools and made it one that both supported investment in Palestine and divestment from non-peaceful pursuits. Their new proposal to the plenary of the General Assembly passed handily in committee 45-20. A minority report came from the committee, was defeated, and the majority report was passed in plenary by a vote of 310-303. Although it has been said that it was the same 2012 vote in reverse, procedurally that is not true. In 2012, what won the day by only two votes was a minority report that spoke only of investment in Palestine and said nothing about divestment. In that regard, this was the first time in ten years that the plenary of the General Assembly ever had the opportunity to vote up or down on divestment from the occupation in Palestine.

Another interesting action that came out of the Middle East Issues Committee was the consideration of a Commissioner’s Resolution (a proposal that comes from at least 2 voting commissioners submitted after G.A. convenes) to state that the publication, Zionism Unsettled, a study guide published by the Israel Palestine Mission Network (IPMN) of the PC(USA), does not represent church policy, and that it should be “removed from the church web store immediately.” IPMN who published it says that it is a study guide on the subject of political Zionism and that it was never presented as church policy, so there was no real problem on that front.

The second part of the resolution, however, raised concerns and red flags because historically Presbyterians do not burn books on the courthouse steps. That view was upheld by many in committee debate and the committee finally voted 54 to 8 to approve the language about policy but eliminate any language that would bring church censorship. With that vote having reached the 75% threshold, the resolution became part of the consent agenda, unanimously passing in plenary with no debate even though all voting commissioners had access to the original proposal and any one of the 700+ commissioners on the floor had the right to pull it from the consent agenda for discussion.

It is a scandal that a week after the 221^st General Assembly was adjourned in Detroit, even though they were fully aware of the committee debate that clearly rejected the notion of censorship, executive staff at the PC(USA) headquarters in Louisville, Kentucky unilaterally decided to expunge Zionism Unsettled from the church website and bookstore through an executive decision. Following that very un-Presbyterian move, the explanation given to someone who called to order the resource was that “this was not a piece that we produced and is not available through us.”

What was most disingenuous was how those opposed to divestment and Zionism Unsettled interpreted this: “The General Assembly voted that Zionism Unsettled is not in accordance with PC(USA) policy and subsequently it was removed from the denominational bookstore and website.”Never mind that the Presbyterian Distribution Service sells many items that are not PC(USA) policy. Further, what is left out of that explanation is that the will of the General Assembly action was to continue selling it and NOT censor it. The explanation given is as if removing the resource from the PC(USA) bookstore and website was all part of the intent of the GA action in Detroit, when actually the opposite is true. Who says parliamentary procedure cannot be used in dishonest and deceptive ways?

Challenging religious systems that descend into the abyss of playing power politics is always fraught with controversy. I remember well those days in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s when liberals in the church were on the forefront of challenging the Reagan administration on Iran-Contra, South African apartheid and through the Nuclear Freeze movement. As a young preacher I remember days when you simply did not mention William Sloane Coffin’s name (the leader of the Nuclear Freeze movement) from the pulpit if you were interested in keeping your job. As is always the case, it is not easy to stand up for justice and not succumb to outside pressures. *

A review of Zionism Unsettled does not reveal the anti-Semitic screed propagandists have attempted to make it out to be. There is a long list of endorsements by theologians and academics, including Walter Brueggemann and Cliff Kirkpatrick. In fact, it is a collection of essays written by Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scholars, citing additional Jewish and Christian writers. The actual sin, of course, is not so much what is in the resource but the fact that it takes a hard look at political Zionism, a subject that has not been up for discussion. Liberals in the church who have examined and challenged the key principles of American civil religion throughout the decades should recognize what the resource does, as well as understand that the heat that comes is the result of goring someone’s sacred cow. And nothing is as upsetting as having an insider share self-critical thoughts about his own religious system, as put forth by this quote from Rabbi Brant Rosen in Zionism Unsettled:

“To put it plainly, a voice that affirms claims of theological superiority in the name of one people cannot be the voice of God.  A voice that asserts God’s word to humanity was vouchsafed exclusively to the children of Abraham cannot be the voice of God.  A voice that looks to the messianic day in which all nations will ultimately serve the God of Israel cannot be the voice of God.”

Continues tomorrow in part 2 – Did we or didn’t we join the “BDS Movement”?

* Fr. Bruce Shipman, Yale Chaplain, had to resign from his position as Yale Chaplain, the same position that William Sloan Coffin held, for speaking out in the aftermath of Israel’s attack on Gaza. see also: Time Magazine, 9/12/14

The Rev. Jeffrey DeYoe, D.Min., is the pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Fort Myers, Florida. He served as the advocacy chairperson of the Israel Palestine Mission Network of the PC(USA) for eight years and has traveled to Israel/Palestine 3 times. His most recent trip was in February serving as leader of the PC(USA) contingent for the project known as Keep Hope Alive, which is a program of the Joint Advocacy Initiative in Bethlehem. His team of 13 from around the United States joined with an international team of over 50 to plant olive trees for Palestinian farmers on their own land, who would otherwise be prevented from doing so by the Israeli military.