Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Zionists Blackmail Church of England

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Anglicans Vote to Divest From Concerns in Israel-Occupied Areas By NEELA BANERJEE The New York Times WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 — The governing body of the Church of
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Anglicans Vote to Divest From Concerns in Israel-Occupied Areas
      By NEELA BANERJEE
      The New York Times


      WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 — The governing body of the Church of England voted
      Monday evening to divest from any corporations that it contends
      support Israel's activities in Gaza and the West Bank, a move sharply
      criticized by Jewish groups in Britain and the United States.

      The resolution is to "heed the call from our sister church, the
      Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East, for morally
      responsible investment in the Palestinian occupied territories and, in
      particular, to disinvest from companies profiting from the illegal
      occupation, such as Caterpillar Inc., until they change their policies."

      The Most Rev. Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury and leader of
      the 77 million Anglicans, sided with the synod in its vote, which came
      as a surprise to many.

      The idea of divestiture was ushered in almost two years ago by the
      Presbyterian Church U.S.A. at its annual meeting, straining relations
      between Presbyterians and Jews.

      But the Presbyterian Church has yet to divest from any company, and
      the idea has largely failed to gain support elsewhere, including with
      the Episcopal Church U.S.A., the American branch of the worldwide
      Anglican communion. The Church of England's own Ethical Investment
      Advisory Group recommended against divestiture last fall.

      While the vote is not binding on the church, it would probably compel
      the influential advisory group to review its decision when it meets in
      May, said Lou Henderson, a spokesman for the Church of England.

      The vote carried symbolic weight with many Jews and Anglicans,
      although to varying degrees and in disparate ways.

      Rabbi Jonathan Romain, a spokesman for the Movement for Reform Judaism
      in the United Kingdom, said the Church of England's vote was "puzzling
      and annoying, but it's not a Christians-against-Jews issue."

      "It's the wrong signal at the wrong time, because of the massive
      changes going on in Israel right now," Rabbi Romain said, alluding to
      the Palestinian vote for Hamas and the coming Israeli general elections.

      Michael Whine, defense director for the Board of Deputies of British
      Jews, a representative organization, said, "The vote was simplistic
      and unbalanced, and fails to take into account the realities of the
      Middle East and the threat that Israel continues to face from
      terrorists."

      Some Jewish groups in the United States and Europe welcomed the
      church's decision. "I think it is a powerful message," said Dan
      Judelson, secretary of European Jews for a Just Peace, which has
      called for Israel's immediate withdrawal from the occupied
      territories. "It shows that people are not prepared to lie down and
      let the issue rest."

      American Jewish leaders, who thought they had managed through
      discussions with Protestant denominations to dispose of the idea of
      divestment, were alarmed to see it revived by the Church of England.

      "You could say that it was naïveté on the part of the Presbyterians
      when they voted like this two years ago," said Rabbi David Elcott,
      director of United States interreligious affairs at the American
      Jewish Committee. "But you can't say that now, with the election of
      Hamas and the other changes. The Anglican decision pulls them out of
      the coalition for peace and puts them on the side of violence."

      Some well-known Anglicans dissented sharply from the decision. In an
      interview with The Jerusalem Post earlier this week, the former
      archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. George Carey, called the
      resolution "a most regrettable and one-sided statement" that ignored
      "the trauma of ordinary Jewish people" in Israel faced with terrorist
      attacks.

      ===

      Church of England does not accept Zionist pressures


      Canon attacks Zionist moral blackmail'
      By Rachel Harden
      http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/80256FA1003E05C1/httpPublicPages/C02DC412EE7ECA3E8025711E0052E588?opendocument


      THE General Synod's decision to consider disinvestment from certain
      companies associated with Israel was not tantamount to anti-Semitism,
      Canon Paul Oestreicher, former director of Coventry Cathedral's Centre
      for International Reconciliation, said this week.

      Canon Oestreicher commented after the Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks,
      called the Synod's decision "ill-judged" and said that it would "hurt
      Israel without helping the Palestinians".

      The Chief Rabbi wrote in The Jewish Chronicle last Friday: "The Church
      has chosen to take a stand on the politics of the Middle East over
      which it has no influence, knowing that it will have the most adverse
      repercussions on a situation over which it has enormous influence,
      namely Jewish-Christian relations in Britain."

      The Synod voted to "heed" a call from the diocese in Jerusalem to stop
      investing in companies profiting from Israel's presence in the
      Palestinian territories. Its main target is £2.2 million of church
      investment in Caterpillar Inc., supplier of the D9 bulldozers used to
      demolish Palestinian houses ( News, 10 February).

      Dr Sacks wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury about his concerns. Dr
      Williams replied last week, regretting the distress the Synod's
      decision had caused. He said that it did not mean the Church was
      actually going to disinvest.

      Canon Oestreicher, who lost his Jewish grandmother in the Holocaust,
      and was a refugee from Nazi Germany, said in The Guardian on Monday
      that it was an "act of moral blackmail" to raise the issue of
      anti-Semitism against critics of the Israeli government.

      "The main objective of my writing today is to nail the lie that to
      reject Zionism as it is practised today is in effect to be
      anti-Semitic. That argument . . . condemns many to silence who fear to
      be thought anti-Semitic," the Canon wrote.

      *********************************************************************

      WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE

      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
      wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
      http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.