The Diocese of California considered a resolution calling for divestment at its convention in October. Here’s the text:

PROMOTING JUSTICE AND PEACE IN ISRAEL/PALESTINE

Resolved, That the 165th Convention of the Diocese of California expresses its concern over the renewed violence by both sides in Israel/Palestine and, in particular, the loss of so many civilian lives in Gaza, and encourages the two parties to engage in talks to end Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, its blockade of Gaza, and the continued expansion of Israeli settlements;

Resolved, That the Convention expresses its profound love and concern for all the people of the Holy Land, both Israelis and Palestinians, and rejects attempts to equate honest and legitimate criticism of unwise policies of the Government of Israel with anti-Semitism; and

Resolved, That the Convention submits the following resolution to the 78th General Convention of The Episcopal Church:

Resolved, The House of ________ concurring, That the 78th General Convention encourage the Church to divest from any investments it might have in Caterpillar, G4S, Hewlett-Packard, and Motorola Solutions, whose products and/or actions support the infrastructure of the occupation; and be it further

Resolved, That the 78th General Convention encourage Episcopalians to boycott products, such as Soda Stream, that are manufactured in Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

We share some testimony from supporters of the resolution here.

 

From The Reverend Vicki Gray, Deacon, Christ Church Pinole:

This resolution comes after 47 years of occupation; 22 years of a “peace process” that has only provided cover for the occupation; 10 years of the Episcopal Church’s futile policy of constructive engagement; and 2,000 deaths this summer in Gaza, 400 of them children.

The time has come for action.

The Methodists have acted. The Presbyterians have acted. Now it is our turn…our turn to say, “Enough!”

The time has come, as Archbishop Desmond Tutu has said, to apply to Israel the same sort of economic pressure that peacefully forced the powerful in South Africa to the table.

I know that some call this resolution one-sided. It is. For the situation it addresses is one-sided. One people – the Palestinians – are on their knees. The other – the Israelis – have a gun to their heads. And we – we Americans – have paid for the gun.

“But what about Hamas?” some object. Hamas, however, is a creation of the occupation, its feeble homemade rockets no match for Israel’s F-16s. It draws its strength from the hopelessness and frustration of a people that, for years, has been blockaded, starved, and bombed. Want to get rid of Hamas? End the occupation, lift the blockade, treat the people of Gaza with some measure of dignity.

I know too that some in the Bay Area Jewish establishment have threatened to end our interfaith dialogue if we pass this resolution.

You should know, however, that there are also Jews in the Bay Area, including rabbis, who support this resolution. An expression of that support is on your table.

They are mostly young people who find that the “Israel, right or wrong” attitude of the older establishment conflicts with the universal message of the Prophets concerning peace and justice.

Theirs is part of a growing movement of young Jews and Christians who seek synagogues and churches that are relevant. For their part, they are building such synagogues.

The question before us is whether we are up to building such a church.

There is yet another question. If we vote down this resolution, the two establishments – Jewish and Episcopalian – can continue the “dialogue.” The question is: What do we talk about?

In closing, let me just add: Friends don’t ask friends to close their eyes to injustice. Friends don’t ask friends to ignore their conscience as the price for continued dialogue. Friends don’t dictate to friends what they can or cannot talk about. And friends don’t act as enablers of their friends’ bad behavior.

Let us act as our conscience dictates, confront injustice, and hold open our desire for honest, sincere dialogue. That is what friends do.

 

From The Reverend Margaret Trezevant, School for Deacons, Diocese of California

As Christians, we have an obligation to address injustice, even if that means speaking the truth to our friends. We cannot allow ourselves to be silenced by the threat of being accused of anti-Semitism. This is a sham argument, intended to intimidate and silence those who feel compelled to speak out against policies that have left the Palestinian people virtually imprisoned for 47 years and creates an atmosphere where there cannot be peace for either the Palestinians OR the Israeli people. The occupation must stop.

This is not a resolution against the State of Israel. It is not a resolution that condones the bombing and rocket attacks on Israeli cities. I must make that very very clear. It is a resolution that stands up to the terribly unwise policies of the Israeli government that will continue to put its own people in jeopardy in addition to continuing the suffering of the Palestinian people.

We are seeing more and more Jewish people who can no longer be silent about Israel’s actions which do not, in any way, reflect the tenets of their religion. They are more and more discomfited by the brutal and illegal actions of the Israeli government. We must stand with them, to let them know that we will stand with them in the face of the bullying tactics being used to silence them and us.

The Episcopal Church must take a stand that refuses to accept accusations of anti-Semitism in its quest for justice. The voices of opposition to these very unwise policies are growing. We must have the courage to support our Jewish brothers and sisters in their opposition.

We must send our own legislators a message that we are watching, we are voting, we are imploring our Israeli neighbors to come to the table and work for peace.

The Episcopal Diocese of Hawaii held its diocesan convention 24-25 October 2014 at which they considered a resolution one of whose resolves stated:

recognizing our Church’s investments in certain companies may be supporting the infrastructure of the Occupation, we embrace Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s observation that the powerful will only come to the negotiating table if economic pressure is applied, the Convention thereby adopts a policy of selective divestment or a No Buy policy of any holdings in Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard and Motorola Solutions until such time that the conflict is resolved through a just outcome for Palestinians and all Israelis or that these companies take action to disinvest from their involvement in the Occupation.”

The standing committee of the diocese acts as a committee to recommend the action the convention takes on resolutions. It moved to refer the resolution to the Hawaii Deputation to General Convention. Thus when the resolution came to the floor of convention, convention first had to act on the motion to refer. That motion was defeated. Then the convention had to act on the resolution itself. It passed.

 

We offer some fragments of testimony from some of the supporters of the resolution who have graciously given us permission to circulate their testimony or summaries of it.

First on the motion to refer, from EPF PIN steering committee member the Reverend Canon Brian Grieves, canonically resident in the Diocese of Hawaii:

First, thank you, Bishop, for your fairness in handling the many points of view that have come your way on an issue that always raises passions. I hope we will all be as gracious with one another as you have been to all of us.

Bishop Suheil’s message that he prefers we not speak on divestment, as modest as this is, raises an important question: for whom does he speak? Bishop Suheil is a good and kind man, who lives everyday under threat to have his residency permit revoked by the Israeli government. I have a lot of sympathy for Bishop Suheil and why he says what he does.

But we are being watched by many other Palestinians today. I also think of the two Palestinian women with deep roots in the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem who have written to us imploring our support. I hope you saw that letter. They are in the sunset of their lives. What will we say to them? Beneath their words is a deep frustration and anger. Forty-seven years of occupation is a long time.

We are also being watched by many Israeli Jews who work hard to oppose their government’s policies of Occupation, hoping we’ll take action today.

If we refer this resolution will the message be we are saying to the Palestinian people we know you’ve lived this humiliation for 47 years, but that this issue is too controversial, too complicated. We haven’t had time to study it fully yet, even though we said 3 years ago we would?

Or can we find a way to send a message that we have heard the cry of the oppressed, and we will no longer be complicit in their suffering? Let’s vote no on referral so we can talk about this.

 

And some testimony supporting the passage of the resolution:

From The Reverend Professor Gregory Johnson, Rector, St. Mary’s, Honolulu:

During the course of the conversations and correspondence I’ve received as a co-sponsor of Resolution 6, a common concern has emerged: that a vote for the resolution is in some way a vote against the State of Israel.   Please be assured that a vote FOR the resolution is NOT a vote against Israel. The resolution before us is simply asking Israel to live up to its own charter as prescribed in its declaration of independence of May 14th, 1948 [The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel]: “THE STATE OF ISRAEL will” … [and I quote] … “foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace … it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.” 

The only thing anyone needs to add to that is a resounding “AMEN!”

 

From The Reverend Kerith Harding, Priest-in-Charge, St. John’s, Kula:

I sat on the National Executive [Council] of the Episcopal Peace Fellowship when we were asked to support divestment. When it came time to vote, I was the ONLY member who abstained. Quite honestly, I just didn’t have a good grasp of the issues involved. The rest of the Board voted in favor of divestment. [Editor’s note: the final vote was 8 for, 2 against, 1 abstention in Spring 2010.]

Shortly thereafter, I went to Jerusalem and Palestine and my worldview changed. Once you see the injustice of the Occupation, you cannot “un-see” it….

• Once I had seen a Palestinian woman sitting outside her family home after Israeli police had kicked her out in order to move in a Jewish American settler from Brooklyn, I could not un-see her.  
• Once I had walked down Shuhada Street and saw settlers carrying machine guns to make sure no Palestinians walked down it, I could not un-walk that street.  
• Once I had watched Israeli soldiers in Palestine, running exercises in a refugee camp and training their guns on 7 year olds, I could not un-watch them.  
• Once I had looked-up in the marketplace and seen the nets that had been erected to hold the objects settlers had thrown at the Palestinians shopping below, I could not un-see them. Sadly, there is no net that can keep out the feces and acid that the settlers have been known to throw since… 

Now that I’ve seen ALL this, I cannot avert my eyes, no matter how badly I may want to.

In the 2009 Kairos document, our Palestinian Christian brothers and sisters plead with us to “engage in divestment” from everything produced by the occupation.  It is now 2014 and as a church, we have still not answered their call.  If we are invested in companies that are complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights and the violation of international law, then we are – by our investments – complicit in those violations as well.  If we do not choose to divest, then we by default, choose to remain complicit… we choose to “look away,” an action that is distinctively, un-Christ-like. 

Please, do not look away.  We cannot “un-hear” the call from our brothers and sister in Christ.  If you didn’t know about it before, you do now.  Christians of conscience, please support Resolution 6.

 

Brian Grieves provides some context in his statement to convention on efforts to work with the named corporations:

Regarding Bishop Suheil, I say in all sincerity, the vote to divest from three companies is none of his business. I say that literally, not disrespectfully, because it’s not the Bishop’s money that is invested in companies that contribute to the sufferings of the Palestinian people. If we put one dollar in the plate on Sunday, we are involved. This is about how our national Church invests our money. Full stop. These companies are chosen for two reasons. They are directly supporting the infrastructure of the Occupation, thus contributing to the suffering of the Palestinian people, and they have refused to dialogue for a decade with the denominations that have asked them to do so, including ours. We don’t need a Lenten study series to know that being complicit in the suffering of another people is not right. We need to do this, not just for the Palestinian people and the Jewish peace activists that support them, but also for ourselves, lest we be on the wrong side of God’s judgment.

We have a letter from the Rabbinical Council of Jewish Voice for Peace that urges us to adopt this resolution. Courageous Jews who say, and I quote “there is a growing desire to end our silence over Israel’s oppressive occupation of Palestine. Everyday Jewish leaders are stepping forward … to express our outrage over the confiscation of Palestinian land, destruction of farms and groves and homes, the choking of the Palestinian economy and the daily harassment against Palestinians.” These are Jewish voices. We have to answer, where is our voice?

Palestinians, like people everywhere, are a proud people with a wonderful culture. And what pains me most during my visits to the Holy Land is to see them subjected to humiliation every day. Let’s let them know today we will no longer invest in their suffering.

 

From The Very Reverend Walter B.A. Brownridge, Dean of the Cathedral of St. Andrew, Honolulu, primary sponsor of the resolution:

The building of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian Territories have weakened the Palestinian Authority, the legally recognized representative/government, and has strengthened extremist elements such as Hamas. Instead of justice and peace, there is inertia, silence, oppression and violence on both sides. These actions fulfill a deadly and tragic cycle of violence. I invoke Dr. Martin Luther King, Junior, who said, “Peace is not merely the absence of tension. It is the presence of justice.” As in South Africa we need to elevate and intensify the conversation to pressure the parties. Israel as the more powerful party is the more recalcitrant party. Our investment dollars must not be used to support oppression.

 

Another sponsor of the resolution, the Reverend Paul Lillie, Rector, St. Mark’s, Honolulu, spoke without a written text and talked of his three years in Jerusalem as a volunteer in the Young Adult Service Corps, and of his ordination in Jerusalem. He noted the enormous power differential between Israel, the powerful, and the Palestinians, making one the oppressor, and the other the oppressed.

 

The Reverend Dr. Malcolm Chun, Associate Priest, St. John’s By-the-Sea, Kaneohe, speaking passionately and spontaneously, responded to criticism that Palestinians were suspect because of having only Islamic ties. He talked of his meeting Hanan Ashrawi years ago through the World Council of Churches. She is now the first elected female member of the executive leadership of the Palestinian Authority, and an Episcopalian.  He emphasized that they both shared their commonality as indigenous people whose sovereignty, culture and identity have been oppressed and denied. He reminded the delegates that Palestinians are an indigenous people. And that Palestine is also their only homeland. “This is their land!” he exclaimed.

Zionism Unsettled: A Congregational Study Guide: An Invitation to Read and Study

Members of the EPF PJN education work group recently spent five months reviewing the congregational study guide Zionism Unsettled, published by the Presbyterians’ Israel Palestine Mission Network (IPMN). Through biweekly conference calls, the group held lengthy discussions of its content, the controversy surrounding its publication, and its view of its appropriateness as a study guide:

We feel that ‘Zionism Unsettled’ is an important educational tool that is desperately needed now as the discourse in both Israel and the U.S. around the nature of Zionism is changing. There is serious debate around the question of what Zionism is, what it has meant for the Palestinians, what it means for the moral fiber of Jews and Judaism, and what the future of Israel as a specifically Jewish state is likely to be. We believe that its publication continues and expands a dialogue that has already been started by significant numbers of Israelis, Jewish Americans, Palestinians, and Palestinian rights advocates.

To be specific, books like Max Blumenthal’s ‘Goliath’ about Israeli racism and Rabbi Brant Rosen’s ‘Wrestling in the Daylight,’ blogs like Mondoweiss, and other similar commentary on the morality of Zionism’s fundamental principles are changing the discourse. They would not have been possible just a few years ago. In Israel, organizations like Zochrot are increasingly able to tell the Palestinians’ story of dispossession at the hands of Zionism, and critical commentators like Gideon Levy are getting more traction in the mainstream Israeli media. There are other examples of commentators here and in Israel who are arousing debate and causing deep concern among those who fear that Israel will be exposed for what it is.

EPF PJN invites you to read the education work group’s review below, to read and discuss Zionism Unsettled with colleagues, and to take your own decision on the controversy surrounding its publication. As an Israeli Jewish friend once said to this editor when I asked for a definition of Zionism: ‘It depends on who you ask.’

Zionism Unsettled: A Congregational Study Guide is a project of the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (USA).   Order it here.

Zionism Unsettled grew out of a compilation of a series of essays on Jewish and Christian Zionism. That entire collection of essays was recently published as Zionism and the Quest for Justice in the Holy Land. Zionism Unsettled follows the general outline of Zionism and the Quest for Justice in the Holy Land and the two resources may be used together, but they are not duplicative.

Zionism Unsettled has both printed and DVD components. The booklet is organized into nine chapters. Each chapter addresses a particular aspect of the overall subject and includes photos, maps, diagrams, “Focus” features that provide additional related information, and questions for Reflection. The layout is visually attractive and the text is well written and readable. The DVD material approximately follows the subject matter of the text. Each segment consists mainly of a lone figure speaking and its contribution to the overall information is variable. The booklet could be used very effectively without using the DVD; on the other hand, the DVD alone would not be a sufficient exploration of the subject.

Although there are nine chapters in the Study Guide, it would be possible to design a study around only a portion of it in the event of limited time or resources. Indeed, many individual chapters are dense enough to comprise study courses in themselves.

Zionism Unsettled is not an appropriate study course for learners who are new to the topic of Zionism or to the issues in Palestine and Israel. Some background of understanding and previous exposure to the topics is implicit in the approach of the study guide. Moreover, Zionism Unsettled is unflinching in its presentation of the realities and consequences of Zionism, a movement that stirs considerable controversy in many quarters. Course instructors should be aware and approach the material appropriately. Other information in the study guide will challenge some learners as it examines the role of Jewish and Christian forms of Zionism in providing theological and ideological cover for the takeover of Palestinian land and the domination and dispossession of the Palestinian people. These viewpoints are not mainstream in the West, so effective learning will require a mature and open-minded approach to the material.

For these reasons, applying certain guidelines in the use of Zionism Unsettled will produce the best results:

• The instructor(s) should be experienced and/or well-versed in the material to effectively guide the study.
• Before beginning the study, determine the group’s level of understanding or previous exposure to the topics.
• If the majority of the group is new to the topics, an introductory phase of study will be very helpful; for example, reviewing the basic facts about Zionism and some historical review of the issues in Palestine and Israel.
  • The study guide Steadfast Hope or portions of it is an excellent introductory course.
• Zionism Unsettled is best studied over multiple sessions in order to handle the material optimally. It is not suited to a single session or cursory “review” of all the material. This is likely to result in misinformation, misapplication of information, and confusion.
• An ideal schedule would allow separate sessions for each chapter of the Guide, as well as an introductory session and a wrap-up session.
• If multiple sessions are not possible, one portion of the material should be selected for study.
• Each session should be no less than one hour in length and 1 ½ – 2 hours is ideal.
• Because the material is complicated, ideal study will allow time for discussion, exchange of ideas and reflection. A group of no more than 15-20 learners is ideal. If the group is larger, ample time should be allowed for smaller group break-out sessions.

Thanks to members of the education work group and its convener Harry Gunkel for taking the time to read and study and discuss together and to prepare this report.

Kathy Christison, Ann Coburn, Bo Fauth, Harry Gunkel, Constance Hammond, Dick Toll

One of the newest and fastest-growing campaigns within the BDS movement is “Block the Boat,” a campaign targeting the ports across the United States where the Israeli-owned shipping line, ZIM Integrated Shipping Services, docks to unload its goods. As the new EPF Palestine Justice Network LA chapter in Southern California launches, some of its members are participating in Block the Boat-Los Angeles (BtB-LA), holding protests and informational outreach at the Long Beach/Los Angeles port. At the third largest port in the nation, BtB-LA is raising awareness of the Israeli occupation of Palestine among the public and the dockworkers as well.

Block the Boat actions have successfully delayed the off-loading of ZIM ships which can cost thousands of dollars. ZIM began as Israel’s merchant fleet and played an historic role in the colonization of Palestine. It is now the largest private holding company in Israel, connecting Israel and its products–including military and paramilitary hardware–to the world.

BtB-LA works in coordination with similar groups in Vancouver, Seattle/Tacoma, Oakland, Tampa, and New York/New Jersey, sharing ideas and information to enhance one another’s work.

Why does Block the Boat deserve our support? Vicki Tamoush, a member of PJN-LA and BtB-LA, explains her involvement: “If we are called to seek justice and love kindness, we are called to dismantle the apartheid system in Israel. BDS has been an effective force for change in similar situations from the grape fields of California to the bantustans of South Africa. The Gospel as I read it is quite radical. As Christians and as Episcopalians, we are called to stand for justice for every child of God. In this case, that means educating dockworkers about why they may want to refuse to unload ZIM ships. It also means educating the public about the role that ZIM ships play in supporting the illegal and immoral occupation of Palestine.”

The role of clergy in these protests has been key. The presence of priests and deacons at Block the Boat protests is significant to the dockworkers and public alike. BtB-LA has enjoyed the participation of clergy since the inception of the campaign. There is a role for parishes as well: consider supporting Block the Boat through Prayers of the People or by encouraging members to call or write ZIM about their role in supporting the occupation.

If you would like to find out how you or your EPF chapter can support Block the Boat campaigns in your area, contact Vicki Tamoush at VTamoush@gmail.com or (714) 362-7676.

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

The 4 September 2014 PJNontheGo featured ‘Talking Across Faith Lines: Do We Really Hear One Another and Who Sets the Standards for the Conversation?’ It featured David Good’s reflection on being accused of being anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic and raised up Bruce Shipman’s letter to the editor of the NYT responding to an op-ed on the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Europe. There was a strong negative response to that letter which culminated in Shipman resigning his position at Yale. The Episcopal Peace Fellowship’s Palestine Justice Network steering committee speaks to this below:

The Episcopal Peace Fellowship’s Palestine Justice Network steering committee deeply deplores the institutional pressure exerted on the Reverend Bruce Shipman, Episcopal chaplain to Yale University, which has culminated in his resignation. The pressure to resign his post followed Fr. Shipman’s question, in a brief letter to the New York Times, whether certain actions by the State of Israel might partly cause anti-Semitic responses in Europe. In no way did he blame Jews for anti-Semitism, as some have claimed. As a result of this simple act of free speech,  Fr. Shipman is no longer the Episcopal Chaplain at Yale. The whole episode is a disgrace to the cause of academic freedom of thought.

While Bishop Ian Douglas states in the Yale Daily News “It’s not as glamorous a story to hear that Priest-in-Charge Bruce Shipman resigned because of institutional dynamics within the Episcopal Church at Yale and not the debates related to Israel and Palestine – but it’s the truth,” the strong perception amongst many who work on issues around Palestine/Israel is that the letter did indeed play into Shipman’s resignation. We believe that the Bishop, in his role as chair of the board of the Episcopal Church at Yale, and as head of the Diocese of Connecticut, had every opportunity to affirm publicly that Father Shipman had done nothing wrong. If Father Shipman was to be dismissed for other reasons, Bishop Douglas could surely have delayed the action so that the public would not draw the conclusion that the dismissal was related to the letter. This week, Fr. Shipman’s account of the events surrounding his resignation has appeared in the Yale Alumni Magazine: “At a meeting of the Board of Governors of the Episcopal Church at Yale that took place on Tuesday, Sept. 2, the Executive Committee asked me to resign.  They alluded to pressure from a number of people on campus, including the university chaplain, Sharon Kugler.  Without their support, I could not imagine functioning effectively as chaplain, and the following morning I tendered my resignation.”

The EPF PJN leadership stands behind Father Shipman and his long standing support for justice for all people.  We express alarm at the vitriol present on many campuses across the US whenever someone or some group raises questions about Israel’s draconian policies of occupation or advocates for the rights of the Palestinian people.  Debate on the Palestine Israel conflict is already present on our nation’s campuses, and the Episcopal Church’s long witness to see an end to the occupation should be part of the discussion and advocacy and we hope that Episcopalians, clergy and lay, on campuses will give voice to the Church’s witness as the debate intensifies.

For more details check the article in the Yale Alumni Magazine and the 4 September EPF PJN blog.