c. 2006 Religion News Service

(UNDATED) Almost unnoticed amid its clamorous debate over human sexuality, the Episcopal Church has directed an internal committee to address “anti-Jewish prejudice” in Christian Scriptures and liturgical texts.

A majority of lay and ordained delegates to the church’s triennial meeting in June voted to ask a church committee to “collect and develop materials … to address anti-Jewish prejudice expressed in and stirred by portions of Christian Scriptures and liturgical texts.”

Hailed by members of the Jewish community but questioned by conservatives in the 2.2 million-member Episcopal Church, the measure is part of long pattern of mainline churches taking a hard look at Christian texts, said Rabbi A. James Rudin, senior interreligious affairs advisor for the American Jewish Committee.

Since the Roman Catholic Church issued “Nostra Aetate” (“In Our Time”) in 1965 _ a ruling that condemns anti-Semitism and any use of Scripture to support it _ Protestant churches, including the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Presbyterian Church (USA) have followed suit, Rudin said.

Eric Greenberg, associate director of interfaith affairs at the Anti-Defamation League, said “this is a very welcome step for the church to take this action.”

Through sermon tips and bulletin inserts that provide context for Bible passages, the church hopes to “minimize tensions with the Jewish community,” said Bishop Christopher Epting, head of ecumenical and interfaith relations for the Episcopal Church.

Particularly during Holy Week, when biblical texts about Jesus’ death are read in church, there can be “misunderstandings in the pews” about the role of Jews in Jesus’ crucifixion, Epting said.

“The texts without explanation can lead people to an anti-Semitic point of view,” according to Epting. “Commentary and education material will help people understand the context in which these things were said.”

The church’s Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, which is chaired by Atlanta Bishop Neil Alexander, may start gathering materials as soon as this fall. Although the commission is directed to report to the denomination’s next governing convention in 2009, churches may begin to use the commission’s work before then, according to several Episcopal leaders.

Episcopalians could also be changing parts of the Holy Week services by creating alternative versions to the liturgy in the Book of Common Prayer, said Byron Rushing, a state representative in Massachusetts who was also a lay delegate to the church’s triennial assembly in June.

“Nobody’s talking about changing the Bible,” Rushing said. “But we are a liturgical church, and like all liturgical churches we pick and choose the parts of Scripture we use in our services. That’s different from thinking Scripture itself should be revised.”

The debate surrounding Mel Gibson’s 2004 movie “The Passion of the Christ,” created a heightened awareness of how the Episcopal Church uses Scripture and liturgy, said the Rev. Ruth Meyers, a professor of liturgics at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary in Illinois and a member of the committee that helped craft the resolution.

While the resolution “addresses a legitimate concern,” the Rev. Kendall Harmon, an influential conservative theologian from South Carolina, said it indicates what he deems a troubling trend within the Episcopal Church.

“Very unfortunately, it reflects an attitude of the church standing over Scripture and judging it, instead of letting Scripture call us into question,” he said.

The South Carolina theologian has been a vocal critic of the Episcopal Church’s liberal stance on homosexuality, which has threatened its place within the global Anglican Communion, many parts of which consider homosexual behavior sinful.

Harmon unsuccessfully pushed an amendment at the church’s triennial assembly in June that would have limited the committee to addressing anti-Jewish prejudice in liturgy, not the Bible. The problem with the current resolution, Harmon said, is that “it looks like it declares a large portion of Scripture anti-Semitic.”

Meyers said it is incumbent upon Christians to take responsibility for their history, including incidents of anti-Semitism, and to search out the possible roots of that behavior.

“I don’t think it’s so much `judging the Bible’ as it is thinking about how do Christians interpret the Bible in such as way that is sensitive to others around us who are not Christians?” Meyers said.

KRE/JL END BURKE