自慰视频

Statement of the Rt. Rev. C. Christopher Epting, deputy for Ecumenical And Interfaith Relations, and the Rev. Canon Brian Grieves, director, Peace And Justice Ministries

Friday, October 1, 2004

As there has been much speculation in the press about the position of the Episcopal Church regarding investments in Israel, we are providing these facts in the interest of clarity about this important and complex issue. In doing so, we want first to reiterate our long-standing support for the peace process in Israel and Palestine, and for a two-state solution that guarantees recognition and secure borders for both. We value our ongoing relationship with the Jewish community both on interfaith and public policy issues. We continue to believe that it is important to distinguish between what we consider to be legitimate criticism of Israeli governmental policy and action and the impropriety of anti-Jewish prejudice which we deplore.
   
Specifically, on the issue of investment in companies that operate in Israel:
   
The Anglican Peace and Justice Network, representing the full 77 million member Anglican Communion, issued a statement September 22 in Jerusalem following an eight day visit to Palestine and Israel. While that statement did not refer to the issue of divestment, the Network will make a report in June 2005 to the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) that may include a recommendation about social responsibility in investments. The ACC would consider that report and in turn recommend policy to the individual Anglican provinces. It would then be up to those provinces, including the Episcopal Church, USA, and their governing bodies to reach their own policy decisions. In the case of the Episcopal Church, that would mean the Executive Council and/or General Convention.
   
The Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) committee of the Episcopal Church met for a regularly scheduled meeting September 24 and 25 in New York City. The committee considered the statement of the Anglican Peace and Justice Network and studied the Church's social policies related to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It also reviewed perspectives on the Presbyterian action for a selected divestment strategy from Israel in response to its ongoing Occupation of the Palestinian people in the West Bank (which includes East Jerusalem) and Gaza. At the request of the Episcopal Church, the Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism wrote to the committee regarding the recent action of the Presbyterian Church, USA, which formed part of the committee's review.
   
In response to existing Church policy, SRI decided to:

• recommend to the Executive Council –- the Church's governing board –- in November that SRI spend the next 12 months investigating what corporate actions might be appropriate with companies that contribute to the ongoing Occupation, especially in the areas of home demolitions, settlement building and the separation wall. SRI will also spend this period seeking dioceses and congregations that may be interested in being partners in this effort.

• continue to better educate itself on the subject of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in partnership with the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East. It will also welcome input from the wider Church, ecumenical and interfaith partners and others, including the American Jewish community. The committee recognizes its primary responsibility to implement existing policies of the Church adopted previously by its General Convention and the Executive Council.
     
  

TOP

October 5, 2004

The Revd John T Pawlikowski

International Council of Christians and Jews

Martin Buber House

Werléstr.2

D64629 Heppenheim

PO Box 1129

GERMANY

Dear Fr. Pawlikowski,

Thank you for your letter dated 28 September 2004 regarding the recent statement by the Anglican Justice and Peace Network following its visit to the Holy Land, 14-23 September 2004.

You raised particular concerns about the possibility of disinvestment from Israel.  In fact the AJPN statement made no mention of such a possibility, which, I understand, is based on media misinterpretation of remarks at a news conference in Jerusalem.  A copy of the statement is attached for ease of reference.

I should also make clear that the APJN does not make policy for the Anglican Communion.  The Network is expected to report to the Anglican Consultative Council next June.  It is impossible for me to know at this stage what approach, if any, the APJN will take to the whole issue of socially responsible investments.  However, as with other Network reports, the ACC will consider that report and in turn recommend policy to the individual Anglican provinces (of which the Church of England is one).  It would then be up to those provinces and governing bodies, including the Church of England’s Archbishops’ Council, to reach their own decision on this policy.

I am not in a position to comment on the scope of the Network’s contacts and meetings during its visit, though I am told that its possibilities were somewhat constrained by the coincidence of the visit with the start of the Jewish New Year.  The published statement clearly reflects the encounters that did take place, which may be supplemented by others in the course of the Network’s continuing engagement.  I am grateful, in passing, for your recognition that Israeli government policy should not be beyond constructive criticism.  

I am sure that in reflecting on the APJN report next year the ACC will wish also to be aware of other perspectives and areas of the Communion’s work and involvement (including interfaith relations, the Alexandria Process, and a range of initiatives based in this office and elsewhere).

I should also emphasise that, as set out in previous Lambeth Conference resolutions, the Anglican Communion remains committed to the Middle East Process and to securing a two-state solution that guarantees peace and justice for both Palestinians and Israelis.

/s/ The Most Rev. Rowan Williams

Archbishop of Canterbury

TOP

The ongoing dialogue between representatives of the Vatican and the Israeli Rabbinate has concluded its semi-annual meeting in Rome. The dialogue issued the following brief statement about interreligious respect in Jerusalem: