216th GA will consider overtures on Jewish-Presbyterian relations

And they are asking how a congregation such as Avodat Yisrael squares with a statement the General Assembly passed in 1987 on Jewish-Christian relations, which says, in part, that “we must always acknowledge that Jews are already in a covenantal relationship with God.”

In response to Avodat Yisrael, several presbyteries this year have considered overtures regarding how (and whether) Presbyterians should try to evangelize Jews. Some of those were not approved — National Capital Presbytery considered two, for example, but after considerable discussion didn’t approve either one.

But at least one overture involving evangelism of Jews is pending — an overture from Hudson River Presbytery that would direct several PC(USA) offices to reexamine the relationship between Christians and Jews and the implications of that relationship for evangelism and new church development. It also would suspend funding for any more Messianic new church development projects until a future General Assembly had considered the results of that study and adopted a policy for funding Messianic congregations or similar outreach programs.

The Hudson River overture states that “we view the launching of Avodat Yisrael by the Presbytery of Philadelphia, with the endorsement and financial support by the Synod of the Trinity, as calling into question the basic understanding of the relationship between Presbyterians and Jews.”

It’s possible that other overtures on the same subject also will reach the Assembly — some are in the works.

And another overture, which was not brought at all in relation to Avodat Yisrael, is challenging the Assembly to set up a task force to talk about religious pluralism.

Eastern Oklahoma Presbytery is asking the Assembly to set up a task force to draft a policy statement “consistent with the religious pluralism reality” the U.S. is now experiencing. That task force would explore “what neighbor love really means when our neighbors and work colleagues so often are people of another religion,” the overture states.

Gregory Coulter, the general presbyter in Eastern Oklahoma, said this overture isn’t connected at all to what’s happening in Philadelphia. Instead, he said, it’s asking the denomination to explore “what do we have to do to remain faithful as Presbyterians” while at the same time staying committed to ecumenical relations. Coulter said many people don’t want to lose what they consider “Presbyterian distinctives” — the things that set the Reformed tradition apart from other points of view.

At the same time, he said, they recognize the value of having conversations with those of other traditions. “It’s other religions, other denominations and differing points of view within our own denomination,” Coulter said. The idea is to encourage dialogue, not to close it down, he said — “not with the goal of losing what we believe,” but of understanding “what we can learn as opposed to what we have to fear.”

This overture states that the task force would be expected to provide the General Assembly in 2006 with a proposed policy statement on religious pluralism that could be a model for other Christian denominations.

How much attention this Assembly will pay to these issues remains to be seen.

But certainly, what’s happened in Philadelphia has already attracted the attention of the secular media and of Jewish leaders. An opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal on April 16, for example, written by a lawyer from Philadelphia named Jerome Marcus, speaks of the fear Jews have long had about “conversion campaigns” and describes Avodat Yisrael’s approach as a “sleight-of-hand that packages Christian belief as Jewish observance.”

Philadelphia Presbytery has set up an administrative commission to oversee Avodat Yisrael, and the moderator of that commission, Bill Borror, senior pastor at Media church, has spent part of his time in recent months talking to rabbis and Jewish leaders in Philadelphia and elsewhere about their concerns.

And within the PC(USA), there has been lots of conversation as well. Some contend that Presbyterians have a responsibility to share the news of Jesus Christ with everyone, that’s what the Bible commands. Others say Avodat Yisrael doesn’t make it clear enough whether exactly what it is or what it teaches about Jesus.

“This was an incredibly divisive thing in Philadelphia Presbytery … It created a lot of hard feelings,” said Borror, who added in a telephone interview that “I’ve got colleagues and friends on both sides of the aisle on this thing.”

In part, the administrative commission grew out of natural Presbyterian process — with any new church development, there’s a requirement of oversight by the presbytery, often performed by the new church development committee. But in this case, the disagreement over Avodat Yisrael was intense enough that a motion was made at a presbytery meeting last fall to create an administrative commission.

“All the T’s were crossed and all the I’s were dotted” when Avodat Yisrael was created, Borror said. “From a procedural perspective, nothing was done wrong.” But “the larger question is, `Do we want to be doing something like this?’ ” And on that question, both inside and outside the presbytery, there are differing views.

One person who’s made it clear she has significant concerns about Avodat Yisrael is Susan Andrews, moderator of the 215th General Assembly and pastor of Bradley Hills church, Bethesda, Md. Andrews has spoken publicly about this, saying that her concern is rooted in part in the cooperative arrangement that her church has had for more than 40 years now with a Jewish congregation that shares space in the Bradley Hills building.

Earlier this year, Andrews’ church hosted a private conversation between Jewish and Presbyterian leaders to talk about Avodat Yisrael. “We had a very positive meeting of national Jewish leaders and Presbyterian church leaders, including the moderator,” said one pastor who attended, John W. Wimberly Jr., pastor of Western Presbyterian in Washington D.C.

. “It was a very warm gathering with lots of honest expression of how people were feeling about this and a desire to keep being partners.”

And the session of Andrews’ congregation was one of two proposing an overture about Messianic congregations to National Capital Presbytery (Wimberly’s church was the other) — overtures that provoked lots of debate, but ultimately did not pass, with some from National Capital saying they did not want to interfere with the ministry chosen by Philadelphia Presbytery.

Kathy Brady is a psychologist and an elder from Bradley Hills. Part of the reason her congregation proposed an overture — and the session itself debated long and hard what the wording ought to be, she said — was because of its long and fruitful relationship with the Bethesda Jewish congregation. On Friday nights and part of Saturday, the Jewish congregation uses space at Bradley Hills that on Sundays is used by the Presbyterian church. The two congregations have offered a joint adult education class on world religions, run a capital campaign together, gathered as a group for seders and worked as a team to build Habitat for Humanity houses and do other community work.

“We feel very enriched by each other’s presence,” Brady said. “We treasure the relationship,” and view it as a model for what other congregations can do. “And we did hear from them that they had heard about the Philadelphia new church development, and asked, `What is this? What does it mean?” — wondering if Presbyterians were suddenly trying to convert Jews.

That was a concern that some of the Bradley Hills Presbyterians also shared.

“The core issue for us was that the covenant of God with Jewish people is irrevocable, that that was a covenant that predated Christianity and that endures no matter what,” Brady said. By creating Avodat Yisrael, “we were suggesting that this covenant was not valid, that it was not complete, that it was damaged in some way and only we could repair it. That we could improve upon God’s chosen people, the Jews. Not only is this a tremendous affront to the Jewish people, but what does it say about our faithfulness and our faith in God?”

Borror, who leads the administrative commission in Philadelphia Presbytery, said it’s exactly those kinds of theological conversations that the PC(USA) will need to consider now as it moves ahead.

In Philadelphia, “things are really pretty calm now,” said Herb Valentine, who is serving as acting executive presbyter during the illness of Edward Gehres Jr. “But the underlying currents are still here,” Valentine said. “In a way, it is a symbol of the polarization in the presbytery theologically or of world views.”

Cynthia Jarvis, pastor of the Presbyterian Church of Chestnut Hill in Philadelphia, has been one of those most vocal in Philadelphia Presbytery in raising questions about Avodat Yisrael. And she’s helping now to organize a gathering for next fall that would bring Presbyterians and Jews from the Philadelphia area together for theological reflection and for conversation about identity and integrity.

“The Jews have been astonishingly gracious in their conversations with the Philadelphia Presbyterians, Jarvis said. They have voiced disappointment and surprise. But “the gift out of this is there has been a group of us meeting regularly,” Presbyterians and Jews, with the hope of building an ongoing relationship between congregations, she said. They hope to study the Bible together and talk about theology. But they also want to “do stuff together,” Jarvis said — build Habitat for Humanity houses, work in the community, share meals together. Learn each other’s stories.