UK Methodists Should “Hang Their Heads” in Shame
Previous posts here, here, here and here.
Cross-post Z-Word:
UK Methodists Should “Hang Their Heads” in Shame
Why? Read about it here. As for the response, this powerful statement from the UK Board of Deputies of British Jews says it all:
Statement from Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council: Methodist Conference
30 June 2010 – This is a very sad day, both for Jewish-Methodist relations and for everyone who wants to see positive engagement with the complex issues of Israeli-Palestinian relations. The Methodist Conference has swallowed hook, line and sinker a report full of basic historical inaccuracies, deliberate misrepresentations and distortions of Jewish theology and Israeli policy. The deeply flawed report is symptomatic of a biased process: The working group which wrote the report had already formed its conclusions at the outset. External readers were brought in to give the process a veneer of impartiality, but their criticisms were rejected. The report’s authors have abused the trust of ordinary members of the Methodist Church, who assumed that they were reading and voting on an impartial and comprehensive paper, and they have abused the goodwill of the Jewish community, which tried to engage with this issue, only to find that our efforts were treated as an unwelcome distraction. This outcome is extremely serious and damaging, as we and others have explained repeatedly over recent weeks. Israel is at the root of the identity of Jews and of Judaism, and as an expression of Jewish spiritual, national and emotional aspirations, Zionism cannot simply be ruled as illegitimate in the way that the Methodist Conference has purported to do. This smacks of breathtaking insensitivity, as crass as it is misinformed. That this position should now form the basis of Methodist Church policy should cause the Conference to hang its head in shame, just as surely as it will cause the enemies of peace and reconciliation to cheer from the sidelines.
Methodists Boycott Israel, Citing “New Covenant” With God
So, the Methodists now support a partial boycott of Israel. Israel is, as far as I can tell, the only country which they are boycotting.
The Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council said the Methodists’ annual conference should “hang its head in shame” for passing a policy which calls for a boycott of goods from “illegal” Israeli West Bank settlements and blames Israeli occupation as the “key hindrance” to Middle East peace.
Lord Sacks said the implications of the decision would “reverberate across the hitherto harmonious relationship between the faith communities in the UK”.
He blasted the report as “unbalanced, factually and historically flawed” and offering “no genuine understanding of one of the most complex conflicts in the world today. Many in both communities will be deeply disturbed”.
Delegates at the conference in Portsmouth overwhelmingly passed every recommendation of the report, which also included a call to review whether Zionism was compatible with Methodist beliefs.
The seconder of the “Zionism” motion is Stephen Leah, a Methodist vicar in charge of the York PSG:
I personally would like to have divestment going a little bit further into the full boycott of Israel, but I know how much I can get away with in the churches sometimes. [...] Churches are paranoid about being critical of Israel sometimes, they want to be balanced all the time, we must put pressure on church leaders.
It is absolutely vitally important to understand the theology behind the Methodists’ position. The proposer of the motion is the Rev Nichola Jones of Friends of Sabeel UK. Watch her explanation, couched in a very particular religious logic, here (at 73 mins):
In the Bible we learn of the Chosen People. Who are they and what were they chosen for? Genesis tells us again & again that God chooses Abraham and makes a covenant with Abraham & his heirs: a covenant being a two-sided agreement with obligations on both parties, like marriage……Of course, Israel today is not the same as Israel in the Bible: in the Bible, Israel refers to the people of Abraham’s descendants, who are in covenant with God. Israel today is a modern, secular state, created in 1948…….
For years I cherished the Galatian text…now I read it properly: ‘In Christ there is no longer male or female, slave or free, Jew or Greek (we could say Jew or Arab): we are all one in Christ.’ We are heirs of Abraham, and so inheritors of the promise of Abraham. Jesus, who makes with us a new covenant which transforms us utterly, never speaks of the land or owning it: he speaks of the Kingdom & joining it and invites us to do so. He teaches us God is not a racist God with favourites, but God loves all his children & blesses them
This is an expression of a Christian religious doctrine: Supercessionism. The logic is that Jews were originally in covenant with God. However, Jews breached their Covenant. Therefore, God sent Jesus to earth to create a new Covenant, not with the Jews, but with the Christians.
For good measure, the Rev Nichola Jones implies that for Jews to continue to claim that there is an extant Covenant between them and God is “racist”.
Here’s a question for you. Do you think that religious doctrine makes a good basis for political action? If you heard a ’settler’ type claiming that Jews must retain sovereignty over the whole of the West Bank, because God had promised it to him, would you challenge it? I would.
Now, as an atheist, I have no problem with Supercessionism. I don’t believe that God did make a covenant with Man through Noah or Jesus, or with the Jews through Moses. If Christians want to believe that they’re party to a New Covenant with God, one which renders Judaism obsolete, then they are at liberty to do so. Although that belief has been connected with the oppression and murder of Jews in the past, it is not inevitable that it will do so again.
However, what the Methodists have done is to base a boycott on the theological position that Jewish religious beliefs in their Covenant are racist, and that in any case, Jews have breached their Covenant with God, as a result of which they are no longer the “heirs of Abraham”. This is the mirror image of the position of the religious settler.
The justification for the continued existence of the State of Israel is not theological. Rather, it is a product of a United Nations resolution, and the right in international law to self determination. Moreover, we know perfectly well what would happen to the Jews of Israel were Hamas to take power, because they’ve made that very clear in their own Covenant:
The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.” (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
There is no discussion of Hamas’ genocidal antisemitic theology in the report on the basis of which the Methodists took their decision to boycott.. That is because the only theology that these Methodists were interested in was the version of Christian thinking that explains why the spiritual claims of Judaism are wrong.
We’re used to boycotts being pushed by Communist groups, who base their position on a critique of capitalism (in which Jewish self determination is a particular problem). We’ve also seen then being advanced by Islamist groups, who have their own theology (in which Jewish self determination is also seen as a particular problem).
However, is it not quite remarkable to hear the proposer of a motion, at the Methodist Conference, justify practical political action in terms of Jewish loss of “Choseness”? I really do wonder whether any of those voting for the motion based their decision on a recollection that Jews are said to have procured the death of Jesus, after which they proclaimed “His blood be on us, and on our children”. Am I wrong to do so?
I appreciate that the theological dimension of this affair may not ring alarm bells with other atheists. Atheists, generally speaking, tend to underestimate the extent to which religious justifications matter to believers. That is a fatal mistake. Theology shapes the way that many religious people see the world. It will be natural to people like the Rev Nichola Jones to understand the Middle East conflict, not essentially as a land dispute between two peoples, but rather as a great supernatural struggle between Jews clinging to an old bargain with God, which they have betrayed and rendered void, and those of the New Covenant.
This is what seems to be happening now:
In a blistering joint statement, the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council said the report’s authors had “abused the goodwill of the Jewish community, which tried to engage on this issue, only to find our efforts were treated as an unwelcome distraction”.
The conference “swallowed hook, line and sinker a report full of basic historical inaccuracies, deliberate misrepresentations and distortions of Jewish theology and Israeli policy,” they said.
Calling the outcome “a very sad day” for Methodist-Jewish relations”, they said it would “cause the enemies of peace and reconciliation to cheer from the sidelines”.
I can understand their fury.
I know that there are many Christians who are also sickened by the decision by the Methodists to punish Israelis and nobody but Israelis, on this theological basis.
Quite honestly, I cannot see how Jewish religious institutions can continue to engage with the Methodists.
UPDATE
The Methodists justify their stance on Comment is Free
Further Links today:
CIFWatch – Ben White’s latest anti-Israel “analysis”
CIFWatch – Europe Will Never Forgive Israel For The Holocaust
Tags: Christianity, Church Life, Israel, Politics




July 2nd, 2010 at 1:29 pm
I agree that the paper is partisan, and that the research is clearly (either intentionally or unintentionally) one-sided. But was the only concrete finding that Methodists should boycott Israeli goods from the occupied West Bank? In material terms that will surely make not one iota of difference to Israel.
And apart frm those with a particular specialist interest in such matters, this motion will go completely unnoticed by the media and anybody outside this specific group of Church people. My suggestion is to give it the reception it deserves and just ignore it. That is surely the best way to neutralise any effect it might have. Making a great song and dance about it will only serve to give this more publicity than it warrants or deserves.
July 2nd, 2010 at 2:42 pm
If the Methodists perceive a problem in this matter they should not be boycotting goods. Or, if they do, they need to carry on by boycotting goods from Pakistan (where Christians are persecuted & killed), Somalia (ditto), North Korea (ditto), China (ditto), India (ditto), most Middle Eastern countries (ditto), Mexico (ditto), and on and on and on until there is almost no-one left to buy anything from.
Alternatively they could take the Christ(ian) response to issue around the world, and pray for those involved…
July 2nd, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Amen Dominic, well said….
July 2nd, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I agree with Rev Jones about the interpretation of Galatians (except for the stupid bit about ‘racist God’ which shows a complete ignorance of the holiness of God or salvation’s history), however, I do not agree with the Methodists in UK here, as I have stated previously. They are not hurting those who are causing the problems. Further, they aren’t boycotting the Palestinians who provide suicide bombers to kill children, etc… If the Methodists were concerned more with justice than with politics, then they wouldn’t have boycott Israel , or at least alone, but instead served as a mediator (Oh wait, that is a Christian term, and we would want Christians acting like Christ, would we) or a reconciler (see previous parenthetical).
No, the Methodists are contributing to Hamas and further alienating the situation.
If they want Justice, let them fight for it – for both sides.
July 2nd, 2010 at 10:56 pm
Antisemitism (also spelled anti-semitism or anti-Semitism) is prejudice against or hostility towards Jews, often rooted in hatred of their ethnic background …
July 3rd, 2010 at 12:43 am
I do agree with you all. I too am disappointed that the Methodists appear not to be able to discern poor research when they see it. But I just wonder how much difference it will make to anything unless it is given the oxygen of publicity, even bad publicity.
I do hope they reflect further on this and take the trouble to find out more about the other side of the story. If they don’t then one can only assume that they are wilfully ignorant or have another agenda. What a sad, bad business.
July 4th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
“If Christians want to believe that they’re party to a New Covenant with God, one which renders Judaism obsolete, then they are at liberty to do so.”
I’m not religious but come from a protestant background. I don’t know a single Christian who sees things the way the author is portraying them.
The author needs to get out more.
July 4th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Or perhaps, Francis, you do. From the earliest, Christians have said that Judaism, or better, the Law of Moses, is obsolete. See the book of Hebrews. This is different than saying that the covenant between God and the Jews, which existed before the Law was given, is obsolete, as God Himself said that it would never be. The Law, Judaism, is obsolete because of Grace.
Further, even those who stand against Zionism should not dismiss the validity of the covenant with the Jews out of some boasting on their part – see Romans 11. Instead, see Ephesians, we – both Jew and Gentile – are to grow as one new person, maturely, into Christ through the knowledge of who the Son of God is.
July 4th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
@ Joel
Much as I am against the church getting mixed up in politics (especially on this issue!), it is incorrect of you to say that the Methodists have decided to boycott Israel. This is specifically about the West Bank Settlements. Personally I’m against such a move, but please don’t distort the facts.
And can you explain your reference to “the validity of the covenant with the Jews”?
July 4th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
Francis, language works when both people understand it. In short, the UK Methodists are boycotting Israel, but in length, they are boycotting only Israeli-made products made in certain West Bank settlements, which, in of itself is an imprecise method of boycotting and only serves, in the end, to call for a larger boycott down the road of all of Israel due to the inability to correctly identify which products are which, although labeling will be, of course, required.
This is not about politics, but about Justice, something that we are commanded to fight for; however, what the UK Methodists are doing is attempting to do justly, but only to one side, when in fact, Justice is required from both sides in this conflict. By doing justice to one side, they do injustice to the other side, and an injustice to one, is an injustice to all.
There is a difference between the Law, which is a covenant of Law and the covenant made between God and the Jewish people through Abraham. While this covenant is now expanded to included those people who were not His people once, the covenant, made before the Law, still stands, and is valid. God has promised not to forsake His covenant, and unlike the system of blessings and curses in Deuteronomy, it was not based on Israel’s response as a nation.
July 6th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
More like UK Methodists have a “New Covenant” with Lucifer.
July 6th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
That goes a little far, Goy, just as if we spoke of blood lusts and the Jews of the middle ages. Besides, Lucifer is a bad translation and can be applied to Christ just as easily
July 6th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
@Joel.
Thanks point taken, just do not understand the reasoning of these people.
July 6th, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Goy, while I admire anyone who wants to fight against injustice, we need to be reconcilers, in my opinion, and not take any side but that which is right. They are doing more harm than good and letting Hamas off with what? Not even the slightest slap of the wrist.
If the UK Methodists want to fight for justice, they need to find a better way.
July 7th, 2010 at 8:10 am
@Joel, very true.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
July 16th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
I wouldn’t worry about the views of “Modern Methodists” – nobody takes them seriously – certainly not Christians.
Their faith is a far cry from the Methodism of the Wesley brothers.
As a Christian myself, I believe (as do many, many Christians), that Israel has, and will always be, God’s chosen people. Nichola Jones has conveniently ignored New Testament scriptures that make reference to this.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:13 pm
Elizabeth, you separate modern Methodists from Christians based on what?
Further, there are plenty of Scriptures and Tradition, certainly, even Wesleyan, which would disagree with your interpretation of said Scriptures.