"Messianic Jew" FAQ

Index



"Introduction.

The following questions and answers have been compiled from correspondence I have received over the years. Many of these questions concern the "International Messianic Jewish Alliance" (IMJA), but they could equally apply to the "Messianic Jewish Association of Great Britian" (MJAGB).
Back to top of page 

"I approve of the IMJA's mission aims, so why should I oppose it?"

It does not matter whether or not you approve of the IMJA's stated aims for you to oppose its racism. For example, a representative of "KeyChange" (formerly the "Christian Alliance") told me in a recent letter that he approved of the IMJA because he felt that, what he called, "exclusive" associations like it have a role to play in proselytising Jews. In other words he placed a higher value on proselytising Jews than on combating racism. I feel that such views are symptomatic of moral bankruptcy. Racial discrimination is without exception a sin according to both Judaism and Christianity.
Back to top of page 

"Jews are like any other immigrant group. Do they not have the right to their own associations?"

It is unrealistic to imagine that the full members of the IMJA or the MJAGB are comparable to recent immigrants to the UK. As Mr. Maurice Bowler (ordained minister, Chiswick Baptist Church) commented in a 1992 letter,

"... I am not happy about the 'separate development' of Jewish Christians who are usually homogeneous with their society linguistically & culturally, unlike immigrants."

Mr. Bowler should know because he is a well known missionary to the Jews who has written widely on this subject.

In addition, some members of both the IMJA and the MJAGB are not even Jews according to any known Jewish standard. In other words, even if they were not Christians, many could not join a regular Jewish association, like, say, a real Jewish synagogue! In this respect, a book well worth reading is, "Under the Shadow of the Swastika" by Lore Meredith (Avon Books, 1995). It gives a clear and candid account of a lady who lived in Nazi Germany classified as a "non-Aryan" and regarded as a "mischling" ("mongrel"). Yet neither she nor her parents were Jews. She even acknowledges in her book that she is not a Jew. Even so because she is a mainstream Protestant Christian able to satisfy the IMJA's racial standards she would undoubtedly qualify for full membership. Generally, the IMJA's full members appear to be otherwise well integrated British Christians and although I hate to say it, playing the "race" card in order to give their association "Jewish credibility" in support of their mission to the Jews.

In any case regular Jews have their own associations in the UK without needing to resort to racial discrimination. In principle, anyone can convert to Judaism and join any authentic Jewish association without prejudice as to "race" or ethnicity. This is not true of racist Christian associations like the IMJA and the MJAGB. No "non-Jewish Christian" could ever become a full IMJA or MJAGB member in his or her own right for the simple fact that one cannot change one's "race".
Back to top of page 

"What of the IMJA's counselling role?"

The IMJA argues that it has a role in counselling recent Christian converts to Judaism. However, in many respects the IMJA and similar associations probably make life more difficult for the majority of such converts for a number of reasons.

The practice of racial discrimination raises the spectre of what many Christians (and others) clearly see as "Jewish racism". How is this supposed to help our fellow citizens who still harbour antisemitic feelings to reform? Is it not a classic example of special pleading if the IMJA campaigns against antisemitism whilst at the same time practising racial discrimination against "non-Jewish Christians" on precisely the same sort of grounds as Nazi Germany once persecuted Jews?

There is in fact a Jewish association with similar aims to those of the IMJA only in reverse. It is called the "Association of Righteous Converts" and it is particularly active in Israel. It does everything possible to integrate converts to Judaism within the Jewish community both religiously and culturally. It certainly does not have full membership restricted to "religious Jews not of the Jewish race" or some other barbarism. What would be the point? How does segregating people in a special racial category help them integrate? Surely, it must have the reverse effect? One big difference, of course, between the IMJA and the ARC is that the latter does not have "a burden" for converting non-Jews to Judaism. Thus it has no motivation to hold up its trophies in the hope that this will inspire others to likewise convert.
Back to top of page 

"Minorities cannot by definition practise racial discrimination. Isn't it all to do with the power of the majority?"

Racial discrimination is still racial discrimination whether it is practised by a minority or the majority in a population. No one, for example, would claim that apartheid was not racial discrimination just because "whites" were a minority in South Africa. In reality, of course, the IMJA is first and foremost a mainstream Protestant Christian association. It thus really represents the dominant culture in the UK anyway.
Back to top of page 

"Don't the IMJA and the MJAGB represent affirmative action for Jews?"

Neither the IMJA or the MJAGB represents affirmative action for Jews. Setting aside for one moment the chauvinistic and somewhat superior idea that Christianity is good for one come what may, what possible good does the IMJA or the MJAGB do for real Jews in the UK? I personally can think of nothing positive to say about either. The benefits are mostly enjoyed by the Church in its effort to proselytise Jews.
Back to top of page 

"IMJA full and associate members worship together. The same is true of MJAGB full and associate members. So how can either association thus be said to be segregated?"

In racially segregated societies it is more often the case that people mix freely in public than not. For example, in the Southern States of the USA "blacks" and "whites" met daily on the streets and through employment, in the home. Yet they were strictly segregated. The same is true of South Africa. What is important is that at some stage in their common experience an imposed separation takes place in accordance with law, custom or both. "Non-Jewish Christian" members of the IMJA do not ask to be placed in a separate racial category, it is imposed upon them as a condition of membership.

Whether one is talking about segregated park benches in South Africa or the segregation of both the IMJA and the MJAGB into full and associate membership, it is only a matter of degree and not essence. The fact that "blacks" and "whites" interacted socially in South Africa or full members of the IMJA or the MJAGB worship alongside "non-Jewish Christians" does not alter the fact that South African society was formerly segregated and that the IMJA and the MJAGB still is. Their segregation effectively extends beyond their confines to the rest of the Church. Because they are segregated, but at the same time a part of the wider Church, both they and the Church are "united in Christ" but divided by "race".

In his book, "The Racial Problem in Christian Perspective" (Lutterworth Press, 1960), Kyle Haselden (an American Baptist minister) writes (p.121),

"The intruder and the stranger are shut from the intimate circle of marriage and family because they are not integral parts of marriage and family; they do not belong. This indicates that segregation has to do with the right to belong. Union is the relationship of those who belong to each other or who have oneness because they are mutually related to that to which they both belong; segregation is the denial of the right to belong on the basis of irrelevant considerations".

Replying to Canon Roy Clements in 1995 Mr. Lewis (IMJA's Executive Secretary and a retired ordained minister of the United Reformed Church) wrote on behalf of the IMJA,

"We are a fellowship of Jewish believers in Jesus (i.e. 'Christian Jews' - Macabi). We offer associate membership to non-Jewish Christians. ... Otherwise we would have the possibility of the organisation being run by non-Jewish Christians and would lose credibility."

What sort of "Jewish" credibility is it that has to be bought at the cost of defaming both Judaism and Christianity?

Back to:

This page (including its HTML source) is copyright of the author.