Jerusalem-Based UM Missionary Prefers Politics to Evangelism
Erik Nelson and Mark Tooley
URL:
http://www.ird-renew.org/About/About.cfm?ID=187&c=5August
23, 2001
Sandra Olewine, a United Methodist missionary in Jerusalem,
describes her experience of a recent bombing: "I felt a 'thump',
as if the air compressed around me. My immediate thought was that
there had been an explosion. Not long after I reached the office,
the sirens began."
She was referring to a recent suicide attack by Palestinians
affiliated with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, in which at least 15
civilians were killed at a Jerusalem pizzeria. Olewine laments
this latest act of terror. But unfortunately she exploits it as an
opportunity to repeat her political critique of Israel and her
unabashed political support for the Palestinian cause.
Christian missionaries are called to proclaim Jesus Christ in the
midst of such strife. But United Methodist missionaries like
Olewine, with support from the General Board of Global Ministries
(GBGM) for which they work, prefer to posture as polemicists
against Israeli policies.
After the Palestinian terror attack, Israeli soldiers seized
Orient House and other offices of the Palestinian National
Authority in East Jerusalem. Although distressed about the
Palestinian assault on innocent civilians, Olewine seems to be
more worked up about the Israeli occupation of a Palestinian
office building. In a recent commentary on the GBGM web site, she
writes, "Orient House is the symbol of Palestinian aspirations for
East Jerusalem as their capital. Seizing this building, sealing it
and raising an Israeli flag over it is tantamount to declaring
that Israel has again conquered or occupied Jerusalem." She asks,
"Could there be a more provocative act by the Israelis than this
one?"
Predictably, Olewine exclusively blames the Israelis for provoking
Palestinian acts of terror. She simplistically believes the
violence will end if Israel would simply accede to all Palestinian
demands. That Israel may have understandable reasons for not
wanting to surrender, and that Palestinians resentments may not be
extinguished even if Israel were to surrender, does not occur to
her.
Olewine calls demands for Arafat to arrest members of Hamas and
Islamic Jihad, the groups responsible for the pizzeria terror
attack, "an almost absurd request." She does not explain what
Israel is supposed to do when attacked. To strike against
Palestinian targets is unacceptable to her. But so too is Israel's
request that Yasir Arafat uphold his agreements to police the
territories under his control.
"In such days, we must return to the root cuse of the violence in
order to break the cycle," Olewine opines. "Addressing only the
symptoms ensures our continuing horror at senseless death in this
region." Needless to say, Palestinian behavior seems to play no
role among the "root causes" that Olewine discerns.
"The root cause of the violence of the last 11 months is the
on-going Israeli occupation and control of the West Bank an Gaza,"
Olewine insists. "After 32 years, it must come to a stop." Olewine
has been living in the Holy Land off and on since 1995. Her
recollection of history in that region seems not to go much beyond
that.
Palestinian attacks against Israel preceded Israel's occupation of
the West Bank and Gaza during the 1967 war, during which Israel
successfully repulsed the attack of three neighboring Arab
nations. Last year, Israeli premier Ehud Barak did offer to return
nearly all of the occupied territories, an offer that Arafat
rejected before approving the Palestinian uprising that has ensued
until now.
Olewine portrays the Palestinians only as victims, and Israelis
only as aggressors. She speaks of desperation among the
Palestinians, who despairingly feel they have no choice but to
resort to massacres of civilians. But she does not admit that
desperation may also motivate Israel, which, surrounded by hostile
peoples, of whom the Palestinians are only one, must continually
contend for its survival.
Israel's military strikes against Palestinian targets, such as
police stations and Palestinian Authority office buildings, have
indeed killed hundreds of Palestinians, many of them innocent
civilians. This is of course horrible. But Olewine declines to
acknowledge that Israel has largely reacted against Palestinian
violence. Instead, she declares, "Questions of who is responsible
and who struck first in each individual act became almost
ludicrous as innocent Palestinian and Israeli families continue to
bury their families."
Olewine is also silent about hateful rhetoric by Palestinian
leaders that inflames terror attacks such as the one waged against
the pizzeria. Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, an employee at the Palestinian
Authority, recently commented at a mosque in Gaza, "Blessings to
whoever saved a bullet to stick it in a Jew's head," and "Allah
willing, this unjust state...Israel, will be erased." This kind of
language could be called genocidal.
Madhi further warned, "We will not be satisfied with the mere
establishment of a Palestinian state." Understandably, such a
statement fuels Israeli apprehensions that even a complete
surrender of all occupied territories to Yasir Arafat would only
fuel further Palestinian expectations for a complete Israeli
melt-down.
Not content to let his underlings animate the worst of Israeli
fears, Yasser Arafat has commended a recent Palestinian suicide
bomber who struck an Israeli discotheque, calling the act a
"heroic martyrdom operation." According to Arafat, the bomber was
a "model of manhood and sacrifice for the sake of Allah and the
homeland."
Olewine looks the other way in the face of such verbiage. She
bends deeply backwards to express sensitivity to the historical
plight of the Palestinians. But she is not willing to be sensitive
to the historical plight of the Israelis, whose own history of
sufferings is hardly un-noteworthy. She offers no explanation as
to why Israel should trust the Palestinian leadership. Nor does
she offer any antidote to Palestinian and Arab contempt for the
Jews, which is not likely to be quickly mollified by any political
compromise, however generous.
The animosities in the Holy Land are not superficial. Their rage
is sustained not simply by disputes over territory. Rather, their
roots are fed by the poison of human hatred.
Only the Gospel offers the answer to such hatred. A Christian
missionary should be uniquely equipped to address this most toxic
of human sins, for which Jesus Christ is presumably the required
balm. But this does not appear to be Olewine's focus. Politics has
offered her a more exciting realm in which to operate.
Olewine and the other United Methodist missionaries in the Holy
Land are trapped in the old mindset of liberation theology. That
worldview divided the world neatly between oppressors and the
oppressed, with the West and its allies lumped into the former
category, and everybody else in the latter. Israel bad,
Palestinians good, is liberation theology's summary of a Middle
East situation that is a little more complicated than that.
In their refusal to delve a little deeper than the confines of
liberation theology will allow, Olewine and other missionaries to
avoid reference to the deep hatred that exists for Israel among
Palestinians. Palestinian reluctance to fully admit Israel's right
to exist and to disavow violence are rarely mentioned. The
Palestinian Authority's lack of interest in democratic procedure
and human rights for its own people is also off the table.
The Middle East is filled with dictatorships and autocracies that
are often indifferent to the sufferings and rights of their own
populations. In nearly all Arab nations, religious liberty is
infringed or denied altogether. Christian minorities are oppressed
or eliminated.
Yet when Olewine and the United Methodist missionaries, along with
their parent organization and other mainline church agencies,
examine the region, they find fault exclusively with Israel, the
region's only functioning democracy.
Why is this? And even if Olewine's continuing flow of political
commentary were more balanced and factual, is this her proper
role? Is a Christian missionary called to win persons to Jesus
Christ and to give quiet witness to Him? Or is a missionary
supposed to become the polemical advocate for one side in a brutal
political contest?
No doubt Olewine and her supporters believe she is serving Christ
by serving the Palestinian cause. Other similar missionaries, also
from the United Methodist Church, just as sincerely supported
Nicaragua's Sandinista dictatorship 20 years ago.
When Christ declared His Kingdom was not of this world, he was not
denying the importance of politics. He was warning His church,
especially its leaders, not to confuse the temporal with the
eternal. Olewine and her missionary colleagues should head His
warning.
The Institute on Religion and Democracy
1110 Vermont Avenue, NW
Suite 1180
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-969-8430
FAX: 202-969-8429
Contact Us |