The view from here

Sometimes it takes a very particular vantage point to see - and speak - the truth. We know, for example, an Episcopal priest who was born and raised Jewish, then converted to Christianity as an adult. Not your usual vantage point. And it is from this vantage point that he has seen things we can't.

This Episcopal priest says he has witnessed instances of blatant anti-Semitism within the church that he never would have been privy to had his background been known. He maintains, in fact, that in spite of the Protestant church's strong efforts to eradicate it, there is a stubborn streak of institutional anti-Semitism throughout. And he has observed that the anti-Israel language and positions adopted by some within the church constitute, in actual fact, a kind of socially acceptable anti-Semitism.

With that particular vantage point in mind, let's step back and look at the World Council of Churches' recent decision to promote divestment among its affiliate churches from companies that do business with Israel. As Dexter Van Zile makes clear in his op ed piece on this page, there are far more egregious examples of human rights' violations on the world stage than Israel, and yet Israel is singled out for opprobrium. Why?

Why, instead of focusing on supporting Palestinians through humanitarian efforts, is the WCC placing emphasis on public censure of the Israelis? (As a side note, punishing the Israelis economically has deleterious effects on the Palestinians as well - the two people are inextricably linked, for better or for worse.)

At this moment, the prospects for peace appear brighter than they have been in years. The two sides are moving, tentatively, toward reconciliation and peace. But it's a fragile détente.

How exactly does the WCC expect its call for divestment to strengthen those prospects? And how can the organization contend it is acting in the best interests of those Christians (and Jews and Muslims) who genuinely want peace in the Middle East?

Home