I have not really commented on this blog about Christ at the Checkpoint (CatC). However, in light of the public Messianic statement and the CatC response, now seems an appropriate time to do so, especially given the nature of this view expressed by CatC about the Messianic statement:
Your statement has undermined all these reconciliation efforts, given the wrong impression concerning our relationship with the Messianic body, and done harm to the unity of the body of Christ in the Holy Land.This seems to be the main point that the CatC organisers seek to make (this sentence is highlighted in bold on the blog of CatC programme director Stephen Sizer, though not on the CatC website which must be a formatting error). It is a serious charge which, together with another point the CatC statement raises, merits some comment.
Whether intended or not, the appeal to Matthew 18 in the CatC statement gives an impression of the organisers seeking to silence those who publicly disagree with them. After all, Matthew 18 is referring to taking a brother to task when he sins against you personally as an individual. It has nothing to do with doctrinal disagreements within the Church (often dealt with publicly in the New Testament). Besides, CatC has publicised far and wide its views, aims and activities, so it cannot reasonably expect fellow believers to remain silent about issues they disagree with so profoundly. Neither can CatC expect their critics not to go public yet actively promote and publicise endorsements of the event. This is a double standard.
Related to this is the serious claim that the Messianic statement has somehow done immense harm to the unity of the body of Christ in the Holy Land. Leaving aside how a lack of Messianic support for the event suggests this statement is somewhat hyperbolised, I struggle to reconcile CatC's claim in its statement to have the right to express itself as it sees fit yet with an expectation that Messianic leaders may only express their concerns in private. Again, it merely reinforces the impression of seeking to silence critics. Moreover, such a statement looks like nothing less than spiritual one-upmanship, an attempt to claim the high moral ground.
Finally, concerning the claim that the Messianic statement has contributed to a wrong impression of CatC's relationship with the wider Messianic community, the lack of Messianic participation in the forthcoming CatC conference strongly suggests very little of a relationship with the Messianic movement in the first place. And here, I believe, is where the heart of the problem lies. The nature of much of what came out of the first conference, inflammatory rhetoric from some individuals involved with CatC since, involvement of strongly anti-Israel speakers, and indeed even some of the comments on the CatC Facebook page, all contribute to an impression of CatC as an Israel-bashing, anti-Zionist fest. Thus, while I believe there are sincere people involved with CatC who seek genuine reconciliation, it is hardly surprising that some of the voices and noises emanating from CatC make the Messianic movement deeply suspicious and involvement by Jewish believers minimal. Neither is the view that Christian Zionists are somehow heretics who follow another gospel the language of reconciliation, nor will it further the involvement of many on the other side of the debate. And that is precisely the point: for some of us in the middle or who lean towards the other side of the debate, the trenchant and inflammatory views of some of those closely involved with CatC leaves us unconvinced of the reconciliation value of the conference.
There is nothing more many of us would long to see than sincere, genuine and longlasting reconciliation between believing Jew and believing Arab in the land. I believe that if and when it happens at the hierarchical level (it already exists between many believing Arabs and Jews at the grassroots level, whatever some would have us believe), some of the genuine and sincere people involved in CatC will play a key role in such reconciliation. And when it comes I cannot help but think it will initially be reached in private, out of reach of the glare of public scrutiny as both parties seek to build trust towards each other. Unfortunately, too much inflammatory rhetoric contributing to an unnecessarily pejorative and divisive debate by some involved with CatC has affected how the whole event is perceived by many, as the Messianic statement demonstrates. Such unchecked rhetoric is either the result of ill-discipline, or else absolutely no desire for any kind of meaningful dialogue or true reconciliation. This was certainly my own personal experience of one of the CatC speakers some time ago who made clear that dialogue was pointless, that he would never permit it to change or modify his views. Clearly he was only interested in dialogue which led to agreement with his own extreme viewpoint.