For four decades Christians investors have used
divestment to end apartheid, combat child labor, protect the environment, and bring
about a host of advances in economic, civil and human rights. In its 2013 General Synod the United Church
of Christ joined the Episcopalians, the Methodists, the Ethical Humanists, and
the Presbyterians and embraced a fossil fuel-free investment policy. In 2014, the Presbyterians divested $21
million from three Israeli companies as a demonstration of their moral
incongruity with investing in companies that profit from the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict. At its 30th General Synod in July 2015,
mirroring the Presbyterian’s rationale, the United Church of Christ (UCC) voted
to divest from companies that profit from Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the
West Bank. We have seen the enemy of a just world, and we have battled it with the
justice of punishment of profit-seeking persons who do bad things (because
after all, corporations are people too!).
I support and applaud the recent divestment decisions
of the UCC, other mainline Christian investors, and those of the broader faith
community. Divestment has been perhaps the most effective strategy in bringing
about corporate social responsibility. But
in the words of the prophet Tina Turner, What’s
Love Got to Do With It?
Ardent supporters of Israel are consistent in marking
any disagreement with Israeli governmental policy as anti-Semitic. Not surprisingly, pro-Israelis quickly
labeled as “anti-Israel” the divestment measures designed to help alleviate Palestinian
suffering. Christians who seek justice
for Palestinians are accused of taking the side of people who seek to destroy
Israel. They are counted among Israel’s
enemy camp; at odds with God’s Chosen People.
The overuse of divestment as a tactic enables such zero-sum
game logic. As effective as it has
been, divestment is essentially reactive, negative and unloving. It is reactive because divestment is a
punitive response to corporate misbehavior.
It is negative because it takes away investment with the intention of causing
economic suffering of the corporation without regard to the effect of jobs
lost, or the economic impact of decreased profitability of a company. Divestment is unloving because even though
its ultimate aim is the greater good of society, it achieves this greater good
by doing harm. Divestment is steeped in
a theology of punishing all financial sin until it is no more.
After 40 years, can we now use our imaginations to
achieve the same objectives through more mission-focused tactics? When the Presbyterians announced the $21
million divestment from three Israeli companies, not a single news outlet
raised the question, “Where are you going
to invest the $21 million?” There was no announcement of a proactive
investment to advance the Presbyterians’ mission and goals. Indeed, the UCC was pleased to announce that
a year after the Synod resolution, the church had invested $20 million in
fossil fuel free investments. Is our
Christian witness so tepid that we are proud to just NOT sin? Imagine if our in-vestment was as bodacious as our di-vestment?
Instead of leading with judgement and punishment,
churches can invest proactively, positioning our investments to demonstrate love
and justice. Churches can deploy their
assets for mission and speak with a bold, public voice about our well-doing. Churches can invest to make an impact for
Christ. God calls us to use our money to
spread love.
