By Jonathan Hoffman
July 11, 2012
"A few people said that all the lobbying from the Jewish side led us to vote the other way,” said the Rt. Revd. Nigel McCulloch, who is chair of the Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ), the UK’s oldest Jewish-Christian interfaith group. “There was over-lobbying by some members of the Jewish community. The CCJ actually warned against this, as we know how the Synod works and it’s not a good way to get things done.”
So let's get it straight..............:
First the Synod rides roughshod over the concerns of Jews (though hardly overwhelmingly: 55% of the Bishops approved EAPPI and 58% of the Clergy and the Lay members). Moreover those who voted for EAPPI cannot be called to account because (to the best of my knowledge - I would welcome correction) no breakdown of the voting by name is published.
Did Rowan Williams vote for EAPPI for example? We will never know. He can hide behind anonymity it seems.
Second - just to twist the knife - we are told that some of the Synod members said (anonymously again of course) that they voted for EAPPI just to spite the Jews who wrote to them (incidentally how do they know which of the representations they received were from Jews? Have these clerics been taking lessons from Richard Ingrams?)
"Naughty Jews - you tried too hard..."
Seems to be the same old story:
Jews Can't Win
The Synod members who supported EAPPI should be hanging their heads in shame. But of course they aren't.
And their actions place the Queen (the Head of the Church of England) in an impossible position with regard to the vast majority of her Jewish subjects who find the Synod decision repugnant.
Rowan Williams abstained.
Rowan Williams said “There are some people, in their uncritical assumption that the government of Israel can do no wrong, who are clearly going to be very irritated by information being disseminated of the kind that EAPPI does.”
Shame on him. This is the kind of moronic comment seen on 'Guardian:Comment is Free'. However he is ever silent about the main threat to Christians in the Middle East:
He also said “Half an hour at Yad Vashem will persuade you, if you need persuading, why the state of Israel needs to exist securely. Half an hour at a check-point will persuade you, if you need persuading, that there are forms of security that are indefensible and unsustainable.”
Another appalling comment. Israel has the same right to exist securely as any other country. It does not depend on the Holocaust! And the checkpoints are there to stop suicide bombers - does Williams know nothing? And the juxtaposition of Holocaust and checkpoint references borders on the antisemitic.
Melanie Phillips is spot-on:
Jonathan Arkush's on-the-spot account of just how nasty the Synod debate was:
Ruth Gledhill apoologises to JC readers on behalf of the Church of England: