The Pledge

The top two officers of the national setting of the United Church of Christ recently released a statement on the ongoing violence in Israel/Palestine and the campus protests that have rocked our nation in the past few weeks. Rev. Dr. Karen Georgia Thompson, General Minister, and Rev. Shari Prestemon, Acting Associate General Minister, say a lot of things in their statement that I agree with and believe to be true. Here’s a sampling:

We pray to God that this war will cease and the people in Gaza [will] be relieved of their suffering. We press for a permanent ceasefire, the delivery of abundant medical and humanitarian aid, the immediate release of all hostages and prisoners, and resolution to the core issues so that a lasting and just peace may prevail.

________________

Unfortunately, the discourse and coverage of the campus protests have been particularly reductive. Frequently characterized as hate speech or antisemitism, this framing ignores the fact that a vocal portion of the protesters are Jewish. Among them are students with Jewish Voice for Peace, who have joined with Students for Justice in Palestine and others to call for peace.

________________

We recognize the necessity to keep our focus on the most vulnerable—the Palestinian people of Gaza, including its women and men, its children and its students, who seek justice and a dignified life.

I encourage you to read the full statement here.

All these are legitimate observations or complaints. What I don’t see in the statement, however, is any acknowledgement of Israel’s right to protect itself or the impetus for the current war: Hamas’s deadly and brutal attacks on October 7 that left 1,200 Israelis dead and hundreds more taken hostage. Neither do they mention that Hamas is sworn and determined to completely eliminate the state of Israel. I am afraid that by ignoring these complicating factors Thompson and Prestemon have opened themselves (and the UCC as a whole) to criticism for their (and our) one-sided liberalism. It’s right to demand freedom of speech and protest, but it is unfair and disingenuous to leave out such essential elements from the conversation.

I firmly agree that it is possible to be critical of the state of Israel without being antisemitic. Accusations of antisemitism have proven an effective way to blunt criticism and make reasonable people think twice before stating a reasonable opinion. By no means do I think Thompson and Prestemon are antisemitic. Nor are most of the campus protestors. But this controversy is a symptom of the dysfunction that pervades our national life. We can’t talk to each other honestly and directly without being accused of one thing or another or inviting abuse and calumny from those who disagree.

We have to find ways to disagree with respect and civility, and what better place to learn and model those skills than in the church? That’s why it saddens me so much when I see Christians who hold opposing views on a subject descend from civil discourse to name-calling and mud-slinging with practically no intermediate stages. It’s like a car commercial: we go from zero to character assassination in 6.4 seconds.

I am especially troubled when I catch myself sliding down that slippery slope, so I pledge again to model a better way of disagreeing—one that honors Jesus and doesn’t bring his name into disrepute. I pledge to stay calm, remain on topic, forgo personal attacks and slander, argue face-to-face rather than sniping behind someone’s back, and maintain my identity as a friend and sibling in Christ even when I can’t convince the other person of the perfect rightness of my position. (Oh, and I pledge to stop considering my position perfectly right, but rather acknowledge the flawed and self-serving nature of every human argument and opinion.) And I pledge to seek forgiveness and reconciliation when I forget any of these other pledges.

Who will join me in taking this pledge? In a two-for-one offer from the cliché department, I say, Let us agree to disagree without being disagreeable.

Grace and peace,
bob