Article Added On: September 24, 2009 - 10 months ago
Title: United Church defies its members
Original URL: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/United+Church+defies+members/2013058/story.html
Author: Calgary Herald
Publication: Calgary Herald
Publication Date: September 20, 2009 - 10 months ago
Faith Groups: Anglicans
Themes: other

This week's revelation that the United Church of Canada (UCC) helped fund the founding conference of an anti-Israel group is disturbing and is sure to put a damper on interfaith relations, only a month after the church voted against a boycott of Israel. This latest wrinkle in the United Church's sometimes unfortunate attitude toward Israel will hurt not only the church's relations with Jewish-Canadians, but its credibility among its own members as well.

The conference in question was held by the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians (ACJC)and directly led to the foundation of Independent Jewish Voices(IJV), an anti-Zionist successor to the alliance, which supports a sweeping boycott of Israel and is opposed to Israel's right of self-defence along with its right to exist as a Jewish state.

The United Church has defended donating $900 to the March 2008 conference by specifying the funds were not "seed money" to aid the birth of the radical new outfit, but were meant to cover travel costs for conference speakers.

This is a disingenuous distinction. The insalubrious fact remains the United Church opted to contribute money to the conference so activists with extremist views could expound them to drum up further support and attract publicity for their long-term goal of undermining a foreign democratic state.

Alarmingly, the contribution was authorized by the national office without consulting any elected members because the amount "was less than $2,000."

It was not even the result of any sort of sustained pressure from church members. IJV co-chair Diana Ralph simply wrote the church and requested some money. This ought to give members pause. Without so much as a by-your-leave, their resources were channelled by the church to a fringe group promoting an extreme ideology many United Church members evidently do not share, judging by their refusal to initiate a boycott of Israel. The United Church's donation could be construed as a backdoor means for its leaders to express their opinion of Israel, regardless of the consensus among church members. For an organization which prides itself on its commitment to freedom, democracy and human rights, this is a curious way to operate.

The United Church's extension of financial support to an organization dedicated to opposing core tenets of another religion and attacking the majority view of its practitioners is utterly wrong-headed, not to mention absurd. It is akin to a Jewish group donating money to a movement aiming to suppress Trinitarian theology or Christmas, something which would rightfully never be tolerated. The church should have known better.