Last serious posting for a few weeks. I've set up some not-to-serious postings over the holiday period but won't be posting unless something significant happens.
Tomorrow I will be preaching at City Road Methodist Church taking again as my theme "how to begin to pray" . I've given this sermon many times and it always gets a very good response. It is also one of the more popular features on this site. I sometimes wonder if it would be even more popular if I called it "how does a Methodist pray?". I usually hand out copies at the end of the service and these are snapped up.
During most of August I will as usual be working in London. I'm looking forward to a week off down in Devon, though this will be interupted for a trip home to pick up "A" level results. The following week we pick up GCSEs. The last few months have been a little tense at times.
Meanwhile at the church we are having some essential roofing work done.I'm de facto property steward and I must admit I'm a very reluctant conscript to this particular role in God's army. In fact I'm begining to understand why over the years I've heard stories of people hitherto very active in a church just suddenly giving it all up. We often associate burn out with professional jobs but I'm sure it happens in a lot of churches among the lay contributors.
Over recent weeks this blog has - like several others in Methodism - been dominated by the controversy that followed the ill-founded decision by Methodist Conference to accept a malignant report attacking the people of Israel. We won't hear the last of this and I shall be posting later in the year.
Meanwhile I'm delighted to hear that our circuit - the Birmingham West and Oldbury Circuit - is organising a visit to the Holocaust Museum in Nottingham in September. I think this should help put the conference report into perspective for some [if you are in the circuit and want to join the visit contact your stewards who have the details].
Finally I have just got a fabulous book written by Martin Sugarman an old school friend. It is called "Fighting Back - British Jewry's Military Contribution in the Second World War". I've already mentioned Martin's work previously . I've only managed a couple of chapters but what I have read and scanned is absorbing. It really puts into context some of the most scandalous sections of that lousy Methodist Conference report with its poisonous attacks on the military forces of the fledgling Israeli state - many of whom had fought alongside the British just a few years before. In September I will publish a fuller review.
I hear that some very sick people in Florida are going to burn the Koran as some sort of anti-Islamic display. That really won't help us propagate the Gospel of Jesus to our Moslem neighbours. Why create stumbling blocks?
There are others who initiated book burnings. In 1933 the Nazis burnt books, by 1940 they were burning people. Not a happy precendent.
Just to add a new name to the blog roll - and it comes from Berkshire where we used to have the joy of Olive's blogging. The new Methodist blogger though is a little younger than Olive's 80 or so years. His name is Will and he's a local preacher. Pop over and catch up with Methodist Pilgrim
I was absolutely gobsmacked to hear about this item on CBS. I just could not imagine such a piece appearing on Bitish television. Is that because we don't take faith seriously or is it because we are now far more liberal and laid back about this sort of thing? Controversy about mixed faith marriages seems to be something from ancient history, I remember people being very wound up about it in the 1960s in places such as Glasgow and Northern Ireland but have heard nothing in recent years. Which does remind me that I don't think I could have married anyone but an Evangelical Methodist. No one else would understand why I put so much effort into some issues........
I do realise that just occasionally this blog seems as if it has been written by a grumpy old man. So for the next few sentences we are going to be positive.
A few weeks ago I wrote a letter to the Methodist Recorder complaining about the negativity that was creeping into the Pointers for Preachers column, one of the most useful weekly features for those of us planning services. My letter wasn't printed but apparent;ly it was passed on.
In recent weeks I have noticed a discernable improvement - the "pointers" are once again providing helpful advice and guidance and have stopped patronising the reader. So perhaps we are able to have some influence on our connexional newspaper. Let us hope this positive vein continues.
During a turbulent few weeks in British Methodism there has been much talk of how we as Methodists can distance ourselves from the disastorous report to our Methodist Conference attacking the State of Israel.
I'm delighted to be able to report that Methodist Friends of Israel is now in business. My congratulations to those who have got the project off the ground.
I hope that support for the new grouping isn't just confined to those of us in Britain who have had the horrendous experience of recent weeks. My prayer is that Methodist Friends of Israel becomes a recognised, accepted and celebrated part of our Methodist family.
I actually had discussions with various people about setting up such a group and then found that others had exactly the same idea. God does move in mysterious ways and I was as surprised as anyone to hear of this initiative earlier today.
This story is going to run and run. Those who complacently sat and allowed this issue to fester will regret that they did not do more to stop the Methodist Church jumping onto the anti-Israel bandwagon.
There is a lot going on in the background that I am not yet at liberty to mention here. I am confident though that our Methodist movement is going to be changed forever. The days when a tiny clique can hi jack our good name and use it to ride their hobby horses will soon come to an end.
One other lesson from the last few weeks: It is quite clear that we can not longer rely on the Connexional newspaper The Methodist Recorder to faithfully represent what grass roots Methodists feel. They have made their bias clear.I know of at least one letter that was sent but never published. I have sent the Recorder letters in the past on the Connexions shameful role in supporting "responsible gambling" but protecting Racheal Lampard was more important than open discussion.
More and more Methodists are turning to the web to get am accurate picture of what is happening. In recent weeks there has been a discernible increase in direct traffic to this site. I am beginning to wonder if the days of the lone ranger "Methodist Preacher" blogger are drawing to a close. We need an online channel that is more open to ideas and people, able to allow ordinary Methodists the platform that the Recorder and Conference believe should be the preserve of the chosen few.
Once again - a big welcome to Methodist Friends of Israel.
I have just came across this rather depressing item on the Jewish Chronicle blog alledging that John Wesley was anti-Semitic, even referring to Jews as "worms" whilst in America.
As far I can see see the JC correspondent was quoting just one source about which I think we need to know more.
Wesley's ill-fated visit to America was very low key and I don't think that he published much, if anything, during his visit. It was, in any case, before the "warming" of his heart at Aldersgate.
I'm fairly certain that the writer has got it wrong but don't have the full story. It demonstrates again the depths of anger among our Jewish neighbours for the ill concieved attack on Israel and Jews at our recent conference. In the current climate it would be good to nail this one. Any offers?
I was working in London at the time, in the BMA building that had been the centre of the bomb outrage on the 30 on 7 July. By the grace of God on that day I was actually attending a meeting in Leeds and well clear.
Things were different on 22 July. Not only was I back at my desk as they conitinued to clear up the crime scene in front of the BMA but my son was in London on work experience in Bloomsbury. Personally I wanted to scrap the work experience but try persuading a 15 year old that it would be too dangerous.
The atmosphere in London was, to say the least, tense. During lunchtime on 21 July I went to meet my son at the cafe run by the London City Mission in Covent Garden. As I was making my way there I became aware of furious police activity with unmarked cars making their way at high speed across the city. I think everyone knew something was up. Having been in Birmingham the days after the pub bombings I know fear when I see it.
When we got to the cafe the first word came in that there had been another bomb attack. The customers and the staff got chatting and decided that there was only one thing to do: we prayed. There were about 15 of us, all very random, some local, some commuters, some tourists. But we prayed together. One of the prayers was that the attack would be thwarted, that no one would come to any harm. That prayer was answered with interest. No one was hurt, the bombers were caught and are now welcome guests of Her Majesty.
Sadly, the following day, extremely brave policemen, perhaps those who I had seen speeding past me the day before, had caught up with someone they believed to be another suicide bomber. The first I knew of it was when I recieved a text that is still on my mobile "Have you heard about the Asian man with a rucksack - he was shot dead by police". This was, of course a referance to Jean Charles de Menezes, an entirely innocent Brazilian born electrician and reflecting the very first news bulletins after the shooting.
Those days were difficult but I believe the prayers on that occasion helped put a cordon of protection around London. Let us pray that we never have anything like it again.
It has been disturbing to read recent media coverage about the French National Assembly vote to ban the wearing of the burka in public. I rather thought the whole point of the burka was that it was something to be worn in public.
I will admit that I have an irrational negative reaction to the burka. I much prefer to see people's faces. However I have never had a discussion with a woman burka wearer so can speak with no great authority. I wonder how many of the deputies in the French National Assembly have ever spoken with a burka wearing woman?
However I am unhappy that there seems to be across Europe a concerted effort to prevent Muslim women hiding their faces, figures and sexuality in an unflattering material which conceals their identity.
This is so much at odds with modern Western European dress codes. I actually find it refreshing that some are prepared to reject that dress code. Frankly I find much that passes for modern dress offensive. I was chatting the other day with a Muslim man who explained that he rather his daughter was dressed in neqab (a headscarf) than "looking like a prostitute". Strong words, but always interesting to understand how we see one another in a diverse society.
The recent hot weather has underlined just how unpleasant others can look once clothes come off. Displaying tatty underwear and badly produced tattoos brings out the same irrational negative reaction as does the burka, but we can still see the faces.
The Apostle Paul makes it clear that he expects women "to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes". Her real dress it seems should be "with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God" (1 Timothy 2:9-10). The Apostle Peter makes a similar point (1 Peter 3:3,4).
Men's clothing seems to be more functional and less sexualised but we also have a responsibilty to dress in a way that reflects decency and propriety.
I hope in the UK we can take a much more relaxed attitude to the burka. I think the only issues that arise should be practical. For example I can't see that such face covering is appropriate in the class room or in some workplaces where interpersonal interaction is business critical.
As far as I can remember the very first ban on face covering to be imposed in modern times was at the old Daily Mirror building in Holborn. This was introduced after a gang posing as motorcycle couriers in face covering helmets entered the building and killed a security guard during a robbery. I gather some shopping centres place a ban on "hoodies" for the same reason. But they were mainly men. Let us keep a sense of proportion.
I missed last week's Methodist pasting by Julie Birchill in the Jewish Chronicle. Strong staff and a reminder of how much recent events have damaged Methodist Jewish relations. Let us hope we can find a way of putting things right. Hopefully we can start by removing the stain that has emerged since the release of the Guernsey Occupation Archives to which I referred earlier this week.
If ever anyone wanted proof that there is an insipient feeling among some Methodist that the Holocaust was not really that important, once again nearly always a sign of am underlying antagony to Jews, we can find it in our own blogshpere. Just recall that in the last week or a Methodist Minister thought it acceptable to jest that we should not "Not to leap on the Methodists-are-lighting-the-ovens-again bandwagon which some are trying to get rolling and with whom you appear happy to collude". Not sensitive, not respectful to those whose lives did end in the ovens at Aushwitz and not reassuting to our Jewish neighbours.
Much of Methodist behaviour over this period lands just the right side of the bordeline of anti-Semitism. But only just and by a very small margin. I am not a Jew so I am not the best judge. But I was brought up in one of the largest Jewish communities to predate the modern State of Isreal, I was even born next door to a Talmud Torah. I can see just how Methodist behavior in recent weeks has been close to that borderline. I know that many Jews believe that we have crossed that borderline.
Anyway Ms Buchill says:
It is no surprise, alas, that the meek-and-mild Methodists have joined the ranks of the self-righteous Israel bashers
It was Harold Wilson who famously said that British socialism owed more to Methodism than Marx. And on learning that the Methodists have joined the lefty herd in attacking Israel, I really did have to wonder if it was the tail that was wagging the dog or the dog that was wagging the tail this time round.
The dog being, in this case, the rabid, snarling cur of antisemitism, its straining leash held lightly in the heavy hand of its walker, anti-Zionism.
The Methodists! It's like hearing that the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus have been ganging up to graffiti synagogues. Or rather, it would have been before previously moderate - meek and mild, even; progressive, even - organisations starting adding their bleats to the chorus of disapproval which finds Israel uniquely evil in a region where women are stoned to death for having sex and children executed for being gay.
From the Bloomsbury Baptist Church carol service last year, which turned into a full-on Jew-hating freak-fest, to my local Brighton Quaker Friends Meeting House, which frequently plays host to the most virulent anti-Israel speakers, there is a nasty and increasing tendency among allegedly peace-loving Christian groups to suck up to Islamism.
Like a lot of things, you can trace it back to the playground. At school, there was always a wiry, weasly-faced kid who hung around the bully, and though he never put the boot in, he would be there urging on the bulbous half-wit on as he laid into his victim. Well, now we know who the bully's little lapdogs grew up to be. More
Finally....
Some Methodist bloggers have been keen to point to a single letter from a Jewish correspondent to the Methodiist Recorder. If you really want to know what our Jewish neighbours think of the State of Israel read the very latest research published yesterday.
This weeks Jewish Chronicle carries a very outspoken and heartfelt article by a Jew questioning whether there is any point in Jews continuing dialogue with our Christian "sub-denomination. Worth a read.
I've started a new project working 120 miles from home in London. I'm commuting everyday and it won't leave much time for posting.
This morning I spent half an hour stuck at Milton Keynes, apparently the concrete cows has strayed onto the line....no it was more bizarre than that: the driver had overshot the platform and it took about 20 minutes to finally decide to evcuate the passengers from the rear coach.
I managed to get a glimpse of my email. Nearly a week has gone by since I first contacted Church House for a statement about the Methodist Minister involved in the Holocaust which I referred to last week and at long last it arrived.
Clearly this issue isn't being taken seriously even though the Connexion has had 17 years to think about it. They hadn't bothered to do any further research and are still prepared to give the benefit of the doubt.
I was so embarrassed by the statement I will wait until I hear back from the President of Conference. The statement I saw this morning would just bring the Connexion into disrepute and probably confirm fears that the Holocaust was not a matter that Methodists take seriously.
At last month’s Methodist Conference in Portsmouth ministerial delegates applauded a speech that dismissed the Holocaust as a “tool” and an opportunity for financial gain.
The conference went on to pass a resolution that has been welcomed by those who wish the State of Israel ill-will including the government of Iran news agency.
But it was the suggestion of anti-Semitism that really ruffled Methodist feathers.
Graham Carter , the chair of a working party that drew up a report for Conference on Israel and Palestine matters complained “I want to state quite clearly and categorically that there is no hint of anti-Semitism in what we have said or in what we intend. If other people want to do things like that, that is their problem. It is not our problem as a Methodist church.”
Carter was wrong. British Methodists have every reason to be sensitive about both the Holocaust and anti-Semitism. We have a nasty story in our history that we desperately want to world to forget. Anti-Semitism is a problem for the Methodist Church.
Last week I alluded to a story I thought was common knowledge during an exchange on the social media. I was immediately challenged to name names and give facts. One individual spent several hours on the search engines, found nothing and challenged my assertion. However all this information is in the public domain and has been for at least 17 years.
The key dates are of course, pre-internet. They are October 1940 and Wednesday 6 January 1993.
In October 1940 a British Methodist Minister, the Reverend John Leale, who had enthusiastically assumed the role of Attorney General and President of the Controlling Council for the German occupied British island of Guernsey send a list of Jewish residents on the island to the Germans saying “I have the honour to enclose a report from the inspector of police on the subject”.
Leale was not acting in innocence, ignorance or under duress. Another leading islander, Sir Abraham Laine openly and categorically refused to support the legislation requiring Jews to be registered.
A colleague admitted “I feel ashamed that I did not do something by way of protest to the Germans: a vital principle was at stake even if no human being on Guernsey was actually affected”.
Known Jews had been evacuated from the Channel Islands before the German occupation for “racial reasons”. There was no doubt that it was appreciated that being a Jew on Nazi occupied territory was a danger, even if the full implications of the Holocaust had not yet revealed.
One writer says “The detailed correspondence between the police, the Guernsey and Jersey governments and the Germans survives, and makes grim reading. The island officials made no attempt to protest; on the contrary they complied with every German request promptly and courteously with meticulous attention to detail”.
The identified Jews were not immediately deported. Leale even stepped in as a favour to an employer to stop one of his useful employees being deported. Nevertheless by October 1942 the island council that Leale led forwarded a report to the Germans celebrating that there was “no record of Jewish residents on Guernsey”.
Three Jewish women, all alone, had been deported and subsequently killed with Leale’s connivance. They were Therese Steiner, Marianne Grunfeld and Auguste Sptiz. One survivor of the train that took Auguste and Therese to Auschwitz recalls “I can still see in the distance the women who went in a different direction”. It is believed they were gassed an hour or so later.
In the most recent books about the occupation, both that which had been published before January 1993 and after, Leale frankly does not come out as a respected individual. One writer talks of his “cultured tastes” and alleges that he avoided deportation to labour camps in Europe with other English born men because of his good contacts with the Germans. Leale was a Cambridge graduate who had inherited a fortune, he was ordained in 1914
Leale made it quite clear that he opposed any resistance passive or otherwise. On one occasion he handed the Gestapo a list of school children who had been chalking “V” for victory signs around the island. In the 1950s he held fast to his position, opposing the granting of honours to any for resisting German occupation.
Just before the island’s liberation it was reported by a policeman “I came away from the window and later saw Sir John Leale, who was President of the Controlling Committee, which acted somewhat on the same lines as the Cabinet, with his head down looking rather glum”.
Fortunately for Leale the British government wanted at that point to develop a myth of defiant Britons standing up to the German occupier. He was knighted. Guernsey now boasts a
John Leale Avenueand a John Leale House. His reputation survived the occupation intact.
On Wednesday 6 January 1993 the real story began to emerge. Until then no one had known of Leale’s complicity in the identification and transportation of the island’s Jewish people all three of whom were to perish in the death camps.
In any case, up until then, Leale could have been dismissed as a maverick, an aberration for which the BritishMethodistChurch could readily apologise and seek repentance. What happened next tells us much about the priorites of Methodism at the turn of the 20th century.
Leale’s complicity made headline news in most national newspapers, all of which pointed out that he was a Methodist Minister. However the Methodist Recorder refused point blank to take up the story despite a challenge.
A letter to the Connexional offices, then at Westminster Central Hall, was redirected to the Chairman of the Channel Islands District who responded that this was all far to sensitive and best left alone.
British Methodism, both at a Connexional level and in its denominational newspaper, was not prepared to acknowledge that one of its Ministers had been complicit in one of the greatest crimes in history.
The sensitivities of the denomination took precedence over repentance and justice. I felt at the time that this, among other things, amounted to an underlying, institutionalised anti-Semitism. The deaths of three Jewish women counted for nothing compared with the sensitivities of a Christian denomination.
British Methodists recently made grand speeches attacking the Jewish state and demanding “justice”. They heard the Holocaust dismissed as a "tool". Perhaps we should pause and remember Therese Steiner, Marianne Grunfeld and Auguste Sptiz together with the Methodist Minister who sent them to their deaths. They did not die as Zionist "tools".
Earlier this week Methodist Church House was asked for a statement on this issue. Four days later they were unable to provide a comment.
It is time we made a comment.
It is already seventeen years overdue. It certainly should be made before we ever listen to anyone else dismiss the Holocaust as a "tool" or take offence when some assume our motives are anti-Semitic.
Bibliography:
Peter King “The Channel Islands at War 1940-45” Robert Hale, London, 1991
The Guardian “Islanders aided Nazi Jew Hunters” 6 January 1993
Daily Telegraph “Guernsey leaders helped Nazis round up Jews” 6 January 1993
The Time “Guernsey betrayed Jews to the Nazis” 6 January 1993
Daily Mirror “Knighthood for man who sent Jews to die” 6 January 1993
“Policing during the occupation” pdf available online, undated
Madeleine Bunting “ The Model Occupation: The Channel Islands Under German Rule, 1940-45”, HarperCollins (1995) (reprint (2004) Pimlico,
The Guardian “Our part in the Holocaust” 21 January 2004 Minutes of the Methodist Conference 1939, 1940, where Leale is clearly listed as a Methodist Minister under the authourity of the Methodist Conference Methodist Recorder "Cry of the Palestinian Chritians" 1 July 2001 reported here. Connexions the blog of Richard Hall, a Methodist MInister in Wales 5 July 2010 Connexions the blog of Richard Hall, a Methodist Minsiter in Wales 8 July 2010 reported here
Yesterday evening I posted the unsurprising news that the official Iranian government newsagency had welcomed the recent British Methodist Church position on Israel and Palestine.
This prompted a Jewish observer at that same conference, someone who was actually in the room to say how he felt about the proceddings. Let Richard Cooper take up the story:
I attended the Methodist Conference as a local Jewish observer. Though acknowledged as such from the podium, I was not allowed to speak. Your neighbour Rev.Nichola Jones from Erdington Methodist Church made a chilling speech. Here is an extract, transcribed word for word from the conference video http://tinyurl.com/32m45hn
"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. What is it God requires of you, asks Micah today: to do justice, to show mercy, to walk humbly with God....."
Listening to this and others (there were also approving references to Messianic Judaism and disparaging references to Christian Zionism), I felt like the accused in a Nazi show trial. This is pure supersessionist ideology, identical with that espoused by the revanchist Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson.
If this is now to be the official policy of the Methodist church in Britain - that the State of Israel by its 'oppressive actions' has broken the Jews' covenant with God - then I see no purpose in further dialogue between Anglo-Jewry and Methodism.
The official Iranian news agency has highlighted the report that went to the recent Methodist Conference on Israel and Palestine.
With some glee it notes the Methodist stance, demonstrating the ease with which this clumsy report will be used against Israel:
The 54-page report to the conference, which decides Methodist policies, identifies that Israel’s “occupation of Palestinian territory” is the "key hindrance to security and a lasting peace for all in the region.”
When the Iranian government talks of the "occupation of Palestinian territory" they always make it very clear that they mean the entire area of the soverign State of Israel.
However Iran shares with Israel and the area of the Palestinian Authority the dubious distinction of not having one Methodist Church on its soil.
Any volunteers to open a Methodist Church in Tehran?
Why don't we ask the finger waggers on working party that drew up that report to go? They could start by trying to persuade the Iranian government to stop hanging homosexuals .
Once they are flushed with success by that achievement they could approach the Iranian government and ask them to stop funding Hezbollah attacks on Israeli civilians.
I wonder how long this putative Methodist Church would last?
Earlier this week I expressed my concern that the Holocaust had been dismissed by Naim Ateek, a guest at the Methodist Conference as a "tool" of the Zionists.
I have now listened to a recording of that speech and in fact it is far worse and much more extreme than I first thought having read the Methodist Recorder.
According to Ateek, the Holocaust has been used to numb the concious of Christians. The memory of the Holocaust has been "exploited" for financial gain (shades of steriotypical anti-Semitism there). He even refers at one point to "the Holocaust industry".
Ateek claims that the industrial murder of millions of Jews was no worse than what is claimed to have happened to the Palestinians during the period that 5 armies invaded the former Mandate area.
I see from the Jewish Chronicle website that a Methodist Preacher and spouse of a Methodist Minister has written to the Methodist Recorder complaining about the tone of the debate on Israel and Palestine at the recent Methodist Conference. As yet I am not aware that this letter has been published.
Pam Smith writes:
Last week I watched the "debate" at conference re Israel. To have a true debate at least two opinions, sets of accurate facts and information are needed so that those voting can discuss the issue, assess the facts and then make up their minds as to the truth of the matter and their response to it. This was not the case at conference.
It was a totally one sided tirade against Israel with numerous inaccuracies drawn solely (as far as I could see) from individuals, books and organizations who at best are blinkered about, and at worst hate, Israel ..... There has been no mention of the fact that the boycott they want will hurt the very people they say they are concerned for as many of them are employed by those who grow or produce these goods and so stand the risk of losing their jobs if the boycott becomes widespread; nothing about the fact that the Palestinians have repeatedly said that the whole of the land is theirs and that Israel should be destroyed and are teaching their children this, even in TV cartoons... I could go on with the many injustices and inaccuracies of this report as I have only scratched the surface." .... "Anti Semitic attacks in the UK rose from 112 in 2008 to 374 in 2009. Around the world the number of Anti Semitic attacks doubled in the same period. Our Jewish friends are frightened. They can see in people's attitudes today the same that prevailed in the 1930s that led to the Holocaust. At that time the church either closed its eyes and ears to the plight of the Jews, or believed and went along with the lies and propaganda of the time. In this resolution the Methodist Church is guilty of exactly the same attitude.
As a lifelong Methodist, a preacher of 34 years standing and a minister's wife I totally deplore the conference resolution. I do not always agree with what Israel does, it is an unrighteous nation, just as every nation is unrighteous, and so makes mistakes, but it is still the nation chosen by God through which to reveal Himself to the world. Israel is the land He chose for Himself. Abraham, and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob, are the ones He covenanted to live in and look after the land and Jerusalem (Zion) is the city He chose as His dwelling place, the city of the Great King, the place He loves.
Either God keeps His covenants or He doesn't. If He does then His covenants with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and therefore Israel, still stand, if He breaks His covenants then we cannot be sure His covenant with us in Jesus still holds true so our salvation is not assured. You can't have it both ways!" To all her Jewish friends, Pam has a message... "You are not alone!"
During a difficult period for Methodism it appears that Methodist bloggers missed this wonderful little item which appeared in The Guardian last Friday:
In praise of.......Englesea Brook
The chapel and museum in a Cheshire hamlet is celebrating the founding of Primitive Methodism
When visitors arrive at Englesea Brook chapel and museum in a Cheshire hamlet near Crewe, they are offered a smile, a cuppa and maybe a chocolate digestive. Which is more than they will be given at the British Museum or the Tate.
This year (and rather more next year) Englesea Brook is celebrating the bicentenary of the founding of Primitive Methodism by Hugh Bourne, a Staffordshire wheelwright, with the help of William Clowes, who was a potter, an evangelist and an exceptional dancer.
In 1807 both attended, on the hill known as Mow Cop, an open-air meeting that mixed fiery preaching and noisy hymn-singing, and which drew inspiration from the gatherings of the Great Awakening that revived American evangelicalism. Such associations soon saw both men evicted from Wesleyan Methodism. The museum tells the story of the duo and their working-class nonconformity simply and with affection.
The chapel, whose exterior resembles the comfortable home of a farm worker, has been Victorianised downstairs but retains box pews in the gallery. Next door in the Sunday school room are banners, piously inscribed cups used at love feasts, and celebratory tea sets (Stoke's potteries are not far away) featuring portraits of the two preachers.
One case holds Bourne's right boot, which had been cut to ease the pressure on a foot swollen from the hundreds of miles he walked to preach to the faithful. His simple grave is in a peaceful little burial ground across the road from the chapel.
Well I've enjoyed a rare day off today - and got myself into all sorts of trouble.
Over on the Connexions blog Richard is upset that I have had the audacity to point out that some Jews and Israelis consider the actions and words of the Methodist Church in recent weeks to be anti-Semitic. Apparently by reporting this I was "nothing less than shameful" Ouch.
Meanwhile the co-editor of Connexions, Kim came out with the rhetorical line "Methodists have moved beyond Holocaust denial to Holocaust complicit".
Oh dear, Kim was unaware that a British Methodist Minister assisted in the identification and transportation of Jews to the death camps. Nor that the Methodist Connexion as recently as the 1990s refused to investigate the allegation or issue an apology. I've now written to Church House and asked that the issue be cleared up.
Anyway, in the end a busy day blogging.
The tradegy is that all our efforts seem so puny besides the enormity of the situation that has unfolded.
We must continue to pray for the peace of Jerusalem. At least we can all agree on that.....I hope.
The decision of the Methodist Conference to endorse a wholly one sided report purporting to help resolve the conflict in the Holy Land has led to a predictable outcry in the region.
The English language newspaper the Jerusalem Post saw it as a major story. Our Jewish neighbours were quoted:
Jewish community leadership organizations reacted with dismay. In a joint statement, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council said it was, “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,” the statement said.
David Gifford, the chief executive of the Council of Christians and Jews, said he was disappointed that the Israeli narrative was not heard during the debate.
“I was very disappointed at the emotive nature of the debate which again did not hear fairly also the pain and cry of the Israeli,” Gifford said. “It was right to hear the pain of the Palestinian but in the end the vote of the Methodist Conference was to boycott goods and services that originate from the West Bank. We shall have to see how this will affect future relationships of the Methodist Church with other churches, the CCJ [Council of Christians and Jews] and with the British Jewish community.”
"....in watching the discussions at the Methodist Conference which approved the boycott, there was little in the way of the visceral hatred of Israel which we have become so accustomed to seeing in academic settings or in the trade unions. Here was a group of almost stereotypically ordinary, middle-class, English Christians calmly reciting every hackneyed anti-Israeli calumny in the book.
He accurately cites one delegate (you can see the debate here if you want to check it out) describing a picture, which she held up in front of her, of a small boy “with large eyes” and “deep pain” in those eyes. “This little boy lives in Gaza,” she said ominously, adding (without irony) that the conference should “speak and act for those whose voices are not heard."
Former President Graham Carter's statement's on anti-semitism are highlighted "when he comes to the question of anti- Semitism that he meets his undoing. “I want to state quite clearly and categorically that there is no hint of anti-Semitism in what we have said or in what we intend,” he stated boldly. “If other people want to do things like that, that is their problem. It is not our problem as a Methodist church. We need to be honest about where stand and what we feel. And if we are concerned about anti-Semitism, why don’t we talk about the anti-Islam approach?” I leave it to others to judge whether there is a “hint of anti-Semitism” in what they have said or intended.
But, in so far as his comments make any sense at all, one way of summarizing the rest could be as follows: “If this campaign against Israel results in more anti-Semitism, we in the Methodist Church wash our hands of it. We’ll act, and the Jews can take the consequences.
Shepherd managed to speak with a Methodist Press Officer (incidentally, purely on a professional level is it really the role of a press officer to make public statements in their own name? One Methodist press officer even had a by-lined article on the issue on the Guardian website. I issue hundreds of press releases, my name rarely appears in print, in fact I see the publication of my name when speaking on behalf of a client as a professional failure, the decision makers should be the public face of an organisation, not a press officer).
"I did speak to the Methodist Church’s head of media relations, Anna Drew, whose well prepared brief offered a lesson in where things have gone so badly wrong.
“Do you have any boycotts of other countries in the world, Saudi Arabia for example, where Christianity is banned?” I asked.
“Almost certainly not,” she said.
“So why have you singled out the Jewish state?” I asked.
“We have not singled out the Jewish state,” she replied, saying that the boycott was not against Israel, merely against the occupied territories.
And so the conversation went on, going round and round in circles as Drew summoned up every ounce of conceivable pedantry to argue that singling out the policy of a particular country was substantially different from singling out the country itself, even though such a boycott applied to no other country or its policies.
“Don’t you realize that you’re joining a massive global campaign against Israel?” I asked.
“There isn’t a campaign against Israel,” she replied firmly. “It’s not as simple as that.”
“You don’t accept that you’ve just jumped on a fashionable bandwagon?” I asked in amazement.
“We are the first church... to do this... so we are not being fashionable,” she replied.
At which point, what can you really say? Overall, a church that behaves in the manner of the Methodists has buried its credibility under a gigantic dunghill of intransigence, pedantry, lies and distortions.
But Shepherd suggests this response to the Israelis:
But let us not allow this matter to rest with a mere recognition of whom and what they have chosen to become.
If the Methodist Church is to launch a boycott of Israel, let Israel respond in kind: Ban their officials from entering; deport their missionaries; block their funds; close down their offices; and tax their churches.
If it’s war, it’s war. The aggressor must pay a price.
Alas Mr Shepherd doesn't know the sad truth about the British Methodist Church.
Despite speaking with such great authority on the challenges facing the peoples of Israel and Palestine there is no Methodist Church in Israel.. There are no funds to block, no offices to close down, no churches to tax. No wonder our Church is so well informed. We have the luxury of speaking from a position of unrivalled ignorance.
Mr Shepherd would be hard put to find any British Methodist "missionaries" in Israel, Palestine or anywhere else on God's earth. Methodists don't tell people about Jesus any more. We just point fingers and parade our bigotry, that's far easier, especially in a complex situation.
British Methodist Ministers sat in silence as they heard the Holocaust dismissed as a Zionist "tool".
The Methodist Recorder, which is not available online, reported that Anti Israel activist the Reverend Doctor Naim Ateek begun a speech to the ministerial session of the British Conference last week with the astonishing claim that "Our Christian faith is rooted in the land" a theological position which in itself should raise eyebrows.
Warming to his theme the Rev Ateek claimed that "during the last 62 years, Zionism has been succesful in using two powerful and effective tools to win Western audiences to the Zionist cause.
"The first tool to be used was the Holocaust, which provided the strongest and most compelling reason for the establishment of the Zionist state", he said.
"Without the Holocaust, the state (sic) of Israel might not have been so easily created. For the Western powers which helped create the state (sic) of Israel, the rights of the Palestinian Arabs, the indigenous people of the land, seemed in the light of Holocaust to be insignificant.
"In the face of the annihilation of millions of Jews, very few people dared to stand up to the injustice done to Palestians who were ethnically cleansed....", he cynically added.
There is no mention of any members of the Ministerial session protesting or walking out during this near Holocaust denial.
Later in the session, having denounced "Christian Zionists", a species that I personally have yet to meet in British Methodism, he defended the terror group Hamas. Let the Recorder take up the story:
"Dr Ateek said that some things which Hamas does are appreciated by Christians. At the same time there are concerns. Not all people who support Hamas are religious and he would be concerned if Palestine became an Islamic state. 'In Gaza the Hamas regieme has been protecting the Christians there, because we have Muslim fanatics like we have Christian fanatics".
Ateek has form as a fanatical enemy of Israel, supporting the assimilation of Isreal into a single state saying in 2005 he continues to support the notion that IF Israel had a right to exist, it should have been created somewhere else, but not on the Holy Land.
Dr Ateek describes the creation of the State of Isreal in 1948 as a "catastrophe" and believes that that the military occupation of the land of Paletine is a sin. Nowhere does he spell out, certainly not to the gullible Methodist Conference, what he means by "military occupation" - post 1948 (the "catastophe") or post 1967?
These were both occasions when the Jewish people of Palestine, many of whom had lived in the country for as long as the Christian community that Dr Ateek seeks to represent, were told that they would be "swept into the sea" by the surrounding Arab countries. I have personally met Israeli Christians who fought in the 1967 war to defend their homeloand.
Sadly there appears - at least in the Recorder report of Dr Ateek's - speech any serious attempt to challenge the rhetoric of a man who seems hell bent on the destruction of the State of Israel. The great sounding phrases of the Sabeel movement and the promotion of its Karios document are empty words unless they define what is meant by "military occupation" and make an explicit condemnation of the suicide bombs and rocket attacks that have terrorised Isreali civilians for the last decade.
Nowhere does Dr Ateek, Sabeel or Karios make it clear they supported the progress made following the Oslo accords .
I visited both Isreal and Palestine in the aftermath of the Accord. I saw for myself the work of the Palestinian Authority in building and training its police force. I spoke to both Jewish and Arab members of the Knesset. I saw the plans for an economic reconstrustion that would have been the envy of the world. I was in Isreal the day Rabin was murdered. I saw the hope and I saw the despair. This issue is so much more complicated than the reported comments of Dr Ateek would want us to believe.
The Methodist Connexion has now voted to look at the Biblical narrative that many Isrealis use to claim the Holy Land as a home for Jews saying:
It is important for Methodists to refl ect more deeply on the meaning of covenant and differentiate the Israel they read about in their Bibles from the modern State of Israel they see in modern news footage. For some, modern Israelis are the Israelites of old and so the question of who has the right to live in the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean is redundant. The promises of land made to Abram in the book of Genesis are, for some at least, irrefutable and so no further thought is necessary.
Let us hope that those charged with this task look at some of the texts of the Hamas organsiation that Dr Ateek so "appreciates". For example
Article Eleven: The Strategy of Hamas: Palestine is an Islamic Waqf The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organization or the aggregate of all organizations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection. Who can presume to speak for all Islamic Generations to the Day of Resurrection?
Had any Methodist Minister who sat in Dr Ateek's attack on Isreal and appluaded his "appreciation" of Isreal ever read the Hamas Charter? Why was there no reference to this charter in the report that went to conference at least as an equivalence to those who seek to justify the State of Isreal on Biblical grounds?
The Methodist Church has strayed into some very murky waters with a questionable character. We need to tread with extreme care.
Update: for those who have little contact with the Jewish community it may be helpful for them to understand the dismay the conference report has created. Read this, this and this.
Well I've had the sort of day that any good Dad finds difficult. This morning I was down at Heathrow helping my eighteen year old checking in for a study tour in the US.
I will be honest and say that I felt very (well very something or other) about saying goodbye. It is only 12 days and I know it will do her a lot of good but my heart will be in my mouth until I see her walking back through the arrival gates.
Meanwhile my readers in the US have an additional reason to smile....you'll have a member of my family celebrating with you this evening.
We had a happy discussion on the journey to the airport along the lines of "was the American War of Independence actually the second and logical stage of the English Civil War". The years immediately before the declaration of independence was the most significant period of migration from England to the colonies and although the English Civil War had apparently been concluded nearly a century and a half before, many of the political and social issues remained unresolved.
After her trip to Washington, Philadephia and New York at least one member of my family may be in a better position to answer that question. Meanwhile: God Bless America.
Once again there's been a little bit of petty censorship at work in the Methodist Church.
Three weeks ago I sent the Editor of the Methodist Recorder a short letter expressing concern at recent contributions to the useful "Pointers for Preachers" item that appears anonymously week by week. Alas it has NOT* been published, however I have noticed a more positive tone in the most recent "pointers". That may just be co-incidence.
Anyway, just for the record, here is the censored letter in full:
As a busy local preacher in secular employment I find the weekly “pointers for preachers” in the Recorder a very valuable resource and probably the single most important reason I part with £1.60 each week.
Obviously I make my own decision under God how I approach any given lectionary topic but the “pointers” provide a useful starting place. The fact that they are published without a signature gives them an added authority and suggests that they represent the very best scholarship available within the Connexion.
However in recent weeks I find that the current anonymous author of “pointers” is doing a little more than pointing.
Writing of the lectionary readings for June 13 which included the challenging story of David and Bathseba she or he writes:
"..set in the context of polygamous relationships and wives being viewed as the possessions of the husband, the story can be somewhat challenging to modern ears. Then we are told that God struck one of David's children because of his sin.
The author then decides on her or his own behalf, and possibly on behalf of the rest of us: “I shan't be preaching on this passage".
Never mind that many of us will find abundant material which addresses modern concerns, not least of which was Nathan’s courage in confronting King David.
A few lines later we are told of Psalm 32 “The writer’s apparent association of ill health with sin needs treating carefully” I can’t help feeling that someone who has gone through the rigours of local preaching training could work that one out for themselves.
Yesterday’s Recorder brought the pointers for June 20 which includes the difficult passage about Legion. Background to the issues would be helpful but once again the author strays into prescription, this time even speaking in the first person, as in “from my perspective”. Unless I know who she or he is I’m not that interested in their “perspective”, there is plenty of scope in other Recorder features for personality pieces.
Phrases such as “ “that doesn’t mean we have to”, “perhaps we should stress”, “we have to be careful”, “needs careful exposition if we are to go beyond the banal”, “need careful handling”, “we must be careful” again indicate an assumed lack of maturity on the part of the readers.
Once again preachers are encouraged to “steer clear” of a challenging reading, this time from Isaiah.
And once again we are encouraged to “remember there will be those in the congregation whose true suffering is known to God alone” and “we must be careful to avoid any suggestion that lack of healing is due to lack of faith”. These are the sort of lessons a prospective local preacher learns by their second week on note, they don’t need extensive re-iteration here.
My conclusion is that the current “pointers” writer has little confidence in both Scripture and the ability of preachers and ministers to interpret God’s word to a contemporary congregation.
If we are to have “pointers” used to display the hobby horses and “perspective” of a particular individual surely they should be signed? Let us know who is patronising us.
*Apologies, a key word missed out in the original version of this post.
Methodist Preacher has a guest page where non-bloggers can get their ideas amongst the Methodist community.
Your views don't have to coincide with those of Methodist Preacher but the subject matter should be of interest to Methodists and other people of faith.
Posts
