My Resignation from GACEIR
Dear Friends,
It is with great regret that I must resign my membership in the General Assembly Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Relations. As our Book of Order and Westminster Confession states, “God alone is Lord of the conscience.” I can no longer fulfill my role on this committee and it’s executive committee in good conscience.
It is after much prayer and meditation, as well as, discussions with others who have had to deal with broken structures behind our parliamentary ecclesiology. There are multiple reasons I find myself in this position today, but one statement in particular made my continued participation untenable.
I came into my work of ecumenical ministry and interfaith participation by way of human rights and the civil rights of individual groups in the United States and around the world. In a fight for religious freedom and a fulfillment of each’s right to full religious participation without the hinderance of dominant religious entities we must always enter relationships with humility. I learned this lesson the hard way when I founded a Justice and Peace Center including multiple denominations, Muslim, Jewish, Pagan, and Native American religious groups.
It is my interest that the PCUSA keep its General Assembly commitments to both religious freedom and its vocal commitment to the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights. In those balanced commitments I resign as an act of conscience against what I interpret as antisemitism in our Stated Clerk’s (Rev. J. Herbert Nelson’s) comment on Israel’s human rights violations against Palestinians.
I realize that this is not the only statement our Stated Clerk has made which appears to muddy water on “Jewish community’s” responsibility for state sanctioned violence. Yet, I am no longer willing to be a supporter of this sentiment with my participation. Nor am I willing to be part of a group that must work under his public statement as denominational policy.
Not everything that is said to be antisemitism is recognized as prejudice by scholars of antisemitism. Yet, they often do agree blaming or exhorting Jewish communities as groups responsible for or calling them to action against the state of Israel’s civic responsibilities constitutes antisemitism.
This is a part of the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism’s definition. It is also the position that GACEIR forwarded to the next General Assembly as our denomination’s possible definition. This is neither a novel, nor surprising parameter for Interreligious dialogue for any of our religious neighbors.
I also realize that there is one other General Assembly statement which uses similar language (to which I have always publicly disagreed). GACEIR’s current proposed definition of antisemitism would call that part of the statement into question as well.
Yet, To hold this one resolution alone, without the breadth of our decades of resolutions seems reductive. Going back to resolutions as early as 1948 any works toward justice and peace in the Middle East, Israel is seen by our denomination as a legitimate state and that its destruction is to be defended against. This defense is to be coupled with an unwavering commitment to the full human rights of all individuals in that region (Arabs and Palestinians). Our GA most often couched these human rights as a state’s responsibility, not a diverse religious body’s. To my knowledge these principles have never been changed in our denomination. What also has never changed is the explicit General Assembly charge to fight antisemitism in any and all forms.
With our Jewish neighbors in faith consisting of only 2% of our population, but shouldering 54.9% of religious biased crimes in the United States it is our call to never increasing suffering of any other community finding itself experiencing its rights attacked. To think that during the midst of a religious based crime against a synagogue we put out such an insensitive statement is for us to reflect upon, not dig in our heels.
Rev. J. Herbert Nelson has a right to state his opinion and interpretation of GA resolutions. Interpretation is at the heart of his job, opinions stating new denominational positions are not. I appreciate and affirm others may disagree with my interpretation of antisemitism, which is on their conscience. Still, when my conscience is violated in word or deed as an act of conscience I have a responsibility and right to say, “No!”
Until there are no longer autonomous decisions in relationship to our interpretation of antisemitism or other major Interreligious issues within the denomination with no collegial consultation I would find it impossible to carry out my responsibilities on this committee. Nor can I see this committee faithfully executing a mandate under the General Assembly’s direction (Give guidance to the Stated Clerk and General Assembly agencies on ecclesial… ecumenical relations, helping to carry out the General Assembly’s G-3.0501c responsibilities… GACEIR Mandate).
I have benefited greatly from my time on this committee. I have a deep love for its members and the staff. I know that some things I feel compelled to write may seem out of anger. I know that in my heart they are out of love for my church and the individuals who serve it with no little amount of anguish. This does not diminish my love and respect for the ministry and work of the Stated Clerk or the difficult work this entails. You have my prayers and love.
Respectfully,
Rev. Brian Merritt