The United Church of Canada attempts to justify its relationship with pro-Israel lobby | Op-ed
Written by: Karen Rodman
The United Church has confirmed it did in fact coordinate its work related to Palestine with the pro-Israel lobby from 1977 onward through the Canadian Christian-Jewish Dialogue.
This clearly impacted the policy on Palestine with archival research showing no United Church Palestine resolutions for the next quarter-century.
Rev. Dr. John Young has written back to the 100+ people who had written urging the United Church to renounce its almost half-century cooperation agreement with B’nai Brith, along with other explicit or implicit agreements it has with the pro-Israel lobby.
Young indicated that since 1977 information on upcoming policy that might be significant for the pro-Israeli lobby was shared, to “ensure opportunity for comment and consultation during the development of policy.”
Young says “Response to conflict in the Middle East and the continuing occupation of the Palestinian territories represented a consistent challenge for the Consultation.”
Young revealed that in fact the agreement that has been referenced over the years, but more recently has been said to have never existed, was in fact a written “set of guidelines for continuing conversations” put in place in 2002.
There is reference in archival documents that there was an earlier agreement with the Canadian Jewish Congress, but no copy can be found. That said, the United Church of Canada archives does not include a copy of the 1973 agreement with B’nai Brith despite the reams of files and media coverage related to the agreement.
In June 1972, the United Church had goaded Rev. Dr. A.C. Forrest, the then editor of the United Church Observer, into apologizing to the pro-Israeli lobby for an article he had published. Since 1967, the pro-Israel lobby had been hounding Forrest, for his writing in the Observer and then for his publishing of The Unholy Land.
Then in August 1972, a very strong resolution in support of Palestine was passed by the church membership at its national general council meeting in Saskatoon.
Young indicates “that Senior leaders of the church engaged in talks with B’nai Brith following the 1972 General Council.” The archives show Forrest was excluded from these months long private deliberations.
In November 1972, Rabbi Gunther Plaut indicated that he had held a series of prolonged private meetings with the new Moderator of the United Church, Bruce McLeod, as well as the new General Secretary George Morrison.
Plaut indicated this included discussion about getting Forrest and the Observer under control, but also equally important included stopping the Saskatchewan General Council Resolutions. Plaut said that if the Saskatoon Resolutions “were to be implemented, all bets were off.” He went on to say that the United Church General Secretary told him he can not abolish a resolution, but that Morrison and McLeod both told him that they can see to it that resolutions are not implemented.
Archives reference that Plaut and others from the pro-Israel lobby were given this assurance a number of times that resolutions would not be implemented.
The result of the backroom discussions was an agreement for B’nai Brith to withdraw its lawsuit against the United Church, the Observer and Forrest. This was a counter suit that B’nai Brith had filed after Forrest had launched a defamation suit against B’nai Brith.
The church pushed Forrest to withdraw his case against B’nai Brith, which he did reluctantly.
The church leadership did not tell Forrest about the actual agreement they had struck with B’nai Brith. At the press conference held in conjunction with signing the agreement, the United Church made it publicly look like Forrest supported the agreement. Forrest’s correspondence from that time show his shock and heart break. He was most concerned about how this set made him look like he had abandoned the Palestine people as well as the Canadian Arab community,
In June 1973, a detailed document ready to be sent to Prime Minister Elliot Trudeau was prepared by the Committee of International Affairs of the United Church of Canada but circulated by the Canadian Council of Churches. This reflected the 1972 Saskatoon resolutions, but had also included reference to Palestine policy from other denominations.
This draft letter was provided by the Canadian Council of Churches to the National Joint Community Relations Committee of the Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith. Indication was that this did not jibe with the assurances the pro-Israeli lobby had received from the United Church leadership that the Saskatoon resolution would not see the light of day.
The archives show the Committee of International Affairs and others trying desperately to figure out why the letter was not being sent by the Canadian Council of Churches to the Prime Minister. Not surprisingly, the letter to the Prime Minister was never sent.
A review of archival material shows this to be just one of many such examples of resolutions not moving forward, and the grassroots church who had secured approval wondering what became of them.
Young’s response fails to reference that the 1973 agreement was indeed a cooperation agreement meant to establish a formal consultation process where agreement was sought prior to implementing policy, including policy already approved by the grassroots church.
This may not have been public, nor explicit, but the fact that resolutions approved by the United Church membership continued to not be implemented, or to be implemented in a minimal, non-sustainable fashion, speaks for itself, speaks for the pro-Israeli influence.
On no other issue, other than Palestine, is there a systemic history of resolutions not moving for implementation. Resolutions come from local congregations, gain approval from Presbyteries and Conferences, and then are approved by the full body of the church that includes hundreds of people representing their own congregations and regions. However, in the case of resolutions regarding Palestine, these then have moved into consultation with the pro-Israeli lobby before implementation.
Young says the United Chuch has offered leadership within the Christian community in Canada and elsewhere in the world in regard to Israel-Palestine.
Christians in Palestine made calls in 2009, and 2017 to Christians world-wide. Young said these calls are listened to.
However, the Palestinian organizations listed as United Church partners, were not asked for feedback on the United Church current taskforce. Perhaps this is because the response of the church actually discredits the Palestinian Christian calls, condemning boycott, divestment and sanctions, and refusing to name apartheid, while insisting on the right of Israel as a Jewish state.
Karen Rodman was ordained by the United Church of Canada in 2015 and is the Executive Director of Just Peace Advocates.
More Articles