Church of Scotland rejects dialogue


By SCoJeC
May 23, 2013
Share

The Church of Scotland has deliberately and knowingly burnt the bridges with the Jewish Community in Scotland: the General Assembly was made aware of our concerns, yet voted explicitly to reject a call for continuing dialogue. It will not be easy to rebuild these bridges now that the Church has openly rejected working towards an understanding that will bring our communities together, rather than, as the this report has done, driving us further apart.
http://www.scojec.org/news/2013/13v_cos/cos_4.html

COMMENTS

happygoldfish

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 09:09

Rate this:

0 points
rev david randall said "The way it's worded presents a signal …", and proposed referring the report back, to be rewritten, and re-presented next year, but this was overwhelmingly defeated on a show of hands

(to be precise: he proposed an amendment to delete sections 24 and 25 (about publicising the report together with as-yet-unwritten "resources"), and to "Instruct the Council to engage in further dialogue with the [SCoJeC] with a view to bringing a new report to the General Assembly of 2014": that would still have left all the other resolutions about israel/palestine)

the atmosphere of the meeting was clearly that everything was israel's fault

earlier, rev sally foster-fulton, the convener of the church and society council (which wrote the report), had, in reply to a question, shown her grasp both of the middle east and of christian theology by saying …

"If you're unfortunate enough to be a Palestinian living in the West Bank, you live in a hellish limbo."

later, she (or was it some one else? – i forget ) impressed the meeting by mentioning an interfaith dialogue on the west bank between palestinian christians and "messianic jews"!

church of scotland procedure allows the proposer of a resolution to make a second and final speech (after everyone else) including new material

at the end, the convener, having presented a report that contains no evidence, used this to introduce a previously unpublished and uncheckable story about her visit (months earlier) to a bedouin village with no water supply next to a jewish settlement with swimming pools

(did she actually see these swimming pools, or was it unnecessary because she was able to "judge already" because she was "present in spirit"? see 1 Corinthians 5:3 ! )

it is almost impossible to oppose a report such as this when it contains no evidence that can be criticised, and yet evidence can be introduced at the end when there is no right of reply to it


Rich Armbach

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 09:16

Rate this:

0 points

Such melodrama. I have read it three times and I can't find the bit where they reject dialogue. What I do see is a lot of sulking. As anyone that has brought up children knows, its not easy to talk to someone in the midst of a big sulk.

This is pretty good.

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/18423


happygoldfish

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 10:25

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: Such melodrama. I have read it three times and I can't find the bit where they reject dialogue.

(i agree with you that, although the report was written without dialogue, the report doesn't actually say so! )

the report does not even acknowldege that there is an israeli side (except on theological issues), let alone present it

it presents conclusions against israel, without either supporting evidence or argument

as if its intended audience would regard such conclusions as unarguable

no, SCoJeC is saying that the meeting rejected dialogue: it …

SCoJeC: voted explicitly to reject a call for continuing dialogue


Rich Armbach

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 13:27

Rate this:

0 points

It did NOT reject a call for continuing dialogue. There had been lengthy meetings between the Council and Jewish organisations and in consequence significant amendments were made. The Assembly declined to put its business on hold for A YEAR. Most regular people , ie non Hasbarafiosi would think this a perfectly reasonable attitude. Nowhere did they decline continuing dialogue.

If certain organisations choose to go into an almighty sulk and declare bridges burned then clearly it is not the Church that is declining dialogue.

This will hurt The Church of Scotland how ?


happygoldfish

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 15:03

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: It did NOT reject a call for continuing dialogue. There had been lengthy meetings between the Council and Jewish organisations and in consequence significant amendments were made.

the original report was written without any dialogue with jewish organisations, despite the obvious justice and benefit in doing so

the revised report was written not after "lengthy meetings" with jewish organisations but one meeting by the moderator, the principal clerk, the convener, the vice-convener, and the secretary with the director of SCoJeC, two representatives of the B0D, the president of glasgow jrc, the rabbi of edinburgh hc, and the head of mrj

that was not "lengthy", that single meeting took place "over a kosher lunch" (see here)

it had very little effect: a few basic principles were added (see here), but the objectionable parts remained

Rich Armbach: The Assembly declined to put its business on hold for A YEAR. Most regular people , ie non Hasbarafiosi would think this a perfectly reasonable attitude. Nowhere did they decline continuing dialogue.

there was no possibility of delaying for less than a year … the church of scotland can decide these things only once a year

it is the church of scotland's own fault for wasting a year, not the jewish communities' fault

the church of scotland has even continually refused dialogue on the distinct issue of "better relations between communities in Scotland" …

SCoJeC has, on a number of occasions, drawn the attention of the Church to the findings of our recent Government-funded Being Jewish in Scotland project, during which 4 out of 5 respondents reported, without prompting, that the undisputed increase of anti-zionist activity in Scotland adversely affects their lives as Jews in Scotland, and makes them feel uncomfortable, alienated, and unsafe.
We are therefore saddened that the Church has not seen fit to meet us to discuss how they could contribute to better relations between communities in Scotland, but instead has issued a document that contributes to that climate.

SCoJeC has repeatedly asked for dialogue, and the church of scotland "has not seen fit" to meet them, apart from one perfunctory lunchtime meeting agreed to after great pressure
the message is clear … the church of scotland neither values nor wants dialogue

However, because we value our relationship with the Church, we remain fully committed to continuing dialogue, and look forward to an improved understanding that will enable us to work together on issues that are of concern to both of our communities. We therefore hope that, rather than adopting the report, the General Assembly will refer it back in order to permit a serious and sustained dialogue that will bring our communities together rather than driving us apart.

SCoJeC asked the church of scotland for a long enough delay for a rewrite of a thoroughly damaged report, not for a superficial "patch" repair

the meeting discussed this (on a specific amendment), and overwhelmingly voted against it


zaheerayin

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 15:31

Rate this:

0 points

If the churches responded to every whine about anti-Zionists, with or without cheese, nothing else would get done. Bodies would go unburied, babies would go unbaptised, and everyone would be living in unmarried sin.


happygoldfish

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 16:11

Rate this:

0 points

zaheerayin: If the churches responded to every whine about anti-Zionists …

zaheerayin, like the church of scotland, thinks that "4 out of 5" scottish jews feeling "uncomfortable, alienated, and unsafe", or "the lack of balance in the document's approach to the Middle East conflict", are mere whines that should be ignored

zaheerayin

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 17:18

Rate this:

0 points

I'm sure that many in the Muslim community are offended by much of the output of the Board of Deputies. When was the last time the BoD invited them to a kosher lunch to discuss their resolutions and reports and suspended their business for a year so this dialogue could be completed?


Rich Armbach

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 18:03

Rate this:

0 points

That 4 out of 5 Scottish Jews feel " uncomfortable, alienated and unsafe " is intuitive nonsense, and the Church probably felt that.Firstly, the respondents would hardly be representative of the general population. Secondly, " unprompted" ? And they all came up with the same three words ?

And even if this were so what is the Church supposed to do about it ? Anti Zionism is a perfectly legitimate political perspective and if it is on the increase,and this is what causing these feelings, rather than lobbying the Church SCoJeC would be better employed lobbying the State of Israel into mending its ways.


happygoldfish

Fri, 05/24/2013 - 18:17

Rate this:

0 points

zaheerayin:
I'm sure that many in the Muslim community are offended by much of the output of the Board of Deputies. When was the last time the BoD invited them to a kosher lunch to discuss their resolutions and reports and suspended their business for a year so this dialogue could be completed?

when have the muslim community ever asked for such a meeting?

when have they ever complained about the bod's output?

anyway, dialogue between the jewish and muslim communities, and between the jewish and most christian communities, is regular, and relations are good, on all topics of concern

the church of scotland is almost unique in its rejection of dialogue

Rich Armbach: That 4 out of 5 Scottish Jews feel " uncomfortable, alienated and unsafe " is intuitive nonsense, and the Church probably felt that …

if the church thought the methodology of this government-sponsored study was suspect, they could have asked about it

but they weren't interested … they ignored SCoJeC's request for dialogue completely

anyway, make up your mind!

first you complain that the church of scotland haven't rejected dialogue

now you say they have, but they were quite right to do it!

that's rich!


Rich Armbach

Mon, 05/27/2013 - 15:58

Rate this:

0 points

No mind making up issue. The original topic was the Council report. The report was written, objections were made, there was discussion, amendments were made. It went to the GA, a suggestion that discussion be deferred for a year was declined. Most regular people would find that eminently reasonable. No suggestion of curtailing dialogue on the issue.

Then ScoJeC, in a narcissistic hissy fit announce that bridges are burnt. So be it. This will hurt the Church how ?

You then move on to the Church being presented with the thesis that 4 out of 5 Scottish Jews, on account of in increase in anti Zionism, feel " uncomfortable, alienated and unsafe ". What is the Church supposed to do with a piece of nonsense like that ? And even if it were so what is the Church supposed to do about it it ? Are you saying that the Church should enter into discussions on how this increase might be reversed ? Given that anti Zionism is an entirely legitimate political phenomenon why should they do this? Why go to the Church with this ? Why not the Auchtermuchtie Ferret Fanciers Club ?


happygoldfish

Tue, 05/28/2013 - 11:20

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: Then ScoJeC, in a narcissistic hissy fit announce that bridges are burnt. So be it.

if you mean that SCoJeC has refused dialogue, then that's simply a lie … where did you get it from?

SCoJeC has always wanted, and still wants, dialogue: it is the church of scotland that (by its own admission) "discontinued" it, and still refuses it

as SCoJeC says at http://www.scojec.org/news/2013/update/13v.pdf

The Church acknowledged that it was regrettable that they had discontinued our regular joint meetings …
Even more regrettably, the General Assembly then went on… to reject an amendment calling for continuing dialogue with the Jewish Community in Scotland.
In response SCoJeC issued the following statement:
The Church of Scotland has deliberately and knowingly burned bridges with the Jewish Community in Scotland: the General Assembly was made aware of our concerns yet voted explicitly to reject a call for continuing dialogue. It will not be easy to rebuild these bridges now the church has openly rejected working towards an understanding that will bring our communities together, rather than, as this report has done, driving us further apart.
Our full statements can be seen on the links from http://www.scojec.org/news/news.html

SCoJeC wishes to rebuild those bridges that the church of scotland has burnt

Rich Armbach: … the Church being presented with the thesis that 4 out of 5 Scottish Jews, on account of in increase in anti Zionism, feel " uncomfortable, alienated and unsafe ". … even if it were so what is the Church supposed to do about it it ?

exactly the same as english churches do … engage in dialogue

unfortunately, both you and the church of scotland feel that wide and influential publication of racistly selective criticism of israel, by people who see no need to support it with evidence or argument, is not only perfectly acceptable, but has no connection with stirring up racial hatred against jews


Rich Armbach

Tue, 05/28/2013 - 14:09

Rate this:

0 points

The Church did not reject further dialogue it declined to put its business on ice for a year in lieu of it. There is no record of the Church declaring that bridges are burned, that is ScoJeC's position.

As for the link, that is to a ScoJeC statement, link me to a statement by the Church that it rejects dialogue. This is all just more Hasborafia melodrama.

I am not aware of any Churches being involved in dialogue about an increase in anti - Zionism which is after all a perfectly legitimate political posture. That doesn't mean it isn't happening but I can't find it.Help me out. And even if it is happening that doesn't mean that a particular church is obliged to have its priorities determined by the Hasborafia. And if it is happening where is it supposed to lead? Are you suggesting that the churches should embark on a political campaign against anti - Zionism ? If they want to that is fine. But there is no reason for them to feel obliged to. Even less reason that they they should allow themselves to be blackmailed into doing so.

All criticism is selective. It wouldn't be fair to not criticise me for squeezing the toothpaste tube from the wrong end because you don't criticise my wife for it as well. She doesn't do it.

It is ridiculous to say that we can't criticise Israel for the brutal illegal occupation if we don't criticise Luxembourg for it as well. Luxembourg isn't doing it.

I have never said criticism of Israel is never connected with stirring up hatred of Jews. But it overwhelmingly isn't. I don't know anyone in respect of whom there is such a connection. And I know more Israel critics than you have had hot dinners.

You see the Church is fully aware that for ScoJeC this is not about relations between Christians and Jews IN SCOTLAND. It is about The State of Israel. Are you confirming that Jewish organisations are only interested in good relations with other faith groups if they take on the proscribed " correct " attitude to Israel ?


Rich Armbach

Mon, 06/03/2013 - 17:18

Rate this:

0 points

Well you see the Church's big mistake was not anticipating and preparing for the faux outrage and the black mail. They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it. As you know I am bit preoccupied with another project at the mo. But afterwards....

So much bullshit to deal with so little time.


happygoldfish

Mon, 06/03/2013 - 18:59

Rate this:

0 points
(click here for a copy of the revised report, usefully showing the additions to, and deletions from, the original report)

Rich Armbach: … the Church's big mistake was not anticipating and preparing for the faux outrage and the black mail.

for those who support racism, outrage is always "faux"

and "blackmail" is simply a lie … where was the blackmail?

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .

it works by the church of scotland spending a year refusing dialogue, then producing a report likely to stir up racial hatred, and that is not only one-sided in its criticisms but has the quasimodo innocence that criticisms of israel are so natural they require neither supporting evidence nor supporting argument

Rich Armbach: What is needed is …

no, what is needed is for the church of scotland to return to behaving like other christians

what is needed is for the church of scotland to follow the general principle of "love thy neighbour as thyself""


Rich Armbach

Tue, 06/04/2013 - 09:29

Rate this:

0 points

So I guess you are ok with the Church of Scotland's endorsement of the EAPPI programme " like other christians"


Rich Armbach

Wed, 06/05/2013 - 16:39

Rate this:

0 points

Why would I go to all the trouble of typing something, wear and tear on my keyboard and all if I didn't want it to get attention ? I can envisage a situation in which I regretted typing something or had changed my mind. In such cases I would remove it and if appropriate apologise to anyone affected. If you can still see it you can safely assume I stand by it and happy for it to get as much attention as possible. Thank you for assisting this process.

And according to the Hasborafia all EAPPI returners give totally biased talks on their experience. So C of S. returnees are being " Like other Christians."


Rich Armbach

Wed, 06/05/2013 - 16:46

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it.


Rich Armbach

Wed, 06/05/2013 - 16:56

Rate this:

0 points

Hate to speak well of Harry's Place but every dog, even a racist cess pit dog, has its day. Great comment on a post this morning from " the rest of humanity."

Dear Christians, Muslims and Jews,

We are sick of you all. Please phuk off to another planet and leave us in peace.

Thank you in advance.


happygoldfish

Wed, 06/05/2013 - 18:09

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: So I guess you are ok with the Church of Scotland's endorsement of the EAPPI programme " like other christians"

the question is not whether the church of scotland (like the c of e) sends members to participate in the EAPPI programme, but whether it then sends those participants around the country giving presentations as one-sided as their "inheritance of abraham" report

oh i see … you're trying to draw attention away from your lie about blackmail, and your thinly-veiled attack on the "process" and "treatment" meted out by a little-understood zionist conspiracy …

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it.

that's rich!

Rich Armbach

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 09:27

Rate this:

0 points

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it.


Rich Armbach

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 09:27

Rate this:

0 points

And again

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it.


Rich Armbach

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 09:27

Rate this:

0 points

One more time

Rich Armbach: They didn't understand the process that was going to be put in motion. How it works .What is needed is a resource to help organisations and individuals that get subjected to the treatment to quickly understand what is going on and therefore better able to deal with it.


Ben F

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 10:30

Rate this:

0 points

This gets better

http://wp.me/s3pxXH-10


Harvey

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 12:23

Rate this:

0 points

And here is Sizer guesting on Malaysian TV stating that British Zionists are aligned with the far right in order to attack British Muslims .
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=hPW1s5cNRpg&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhP...

A disgusting lie designed to reinforce a stereotype of Zionists ( read Jews ) in a Muslim state where the Prime Minister has previously dismissed the Holocaust as an invention

Here is Sizer on the virulently antisemitic and thankfully now banned Press TV , on the Church of Scotlands Biblical revisionism in order to suit their perverse political agenda

http://stephensizer.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

Why speak to Press TV Sizer ? Could it be a willing and captive antisemitic audience .

A disgrace to the church and a bigger disgrace to the PSC who have tried hard to distance themselves from the many embedded antisemites within their midst


Rich Armbach

Thu, 06/06/2013 - 16:01

Rate this:

0 points

Are you a Zionist Harv?

Yes?

Case proved.

How's your buddy Roberta?

Wasn't Geoffrey Alderman interviewed by Press TV and didn't he lament it's banning, calling it uncalled for and unfair?

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

SCOJEC ON TWITTER

    LATEST COMMENTS