The Presbyterian Minister tasked with heading the PC(USA) committee that will deal with Middle East issues at the next General Assembly, has responded in an article in The Layman. For background, see: PC(USA) Committee Moderator: '9/11 an act of faith and courage'

In the article, Minister says WSJ quote gave misleading impression, Rev. Gretchen Graf claims that the entire speech she gave that day must be registered in order to understand the context of her highly offensive (my term) opening paragraph. The text of the speech is posted in full here, at Presbyweb: Upon looking in death's face, choose life – for all the world

I'm not sure a reading in full does the Reverend much good, however. She certainly does not continue to laud the bravery of the 9/11 mass-murderers, and that's a plus, but the remainder of the address is well short of confidence-inspiring.

Let us leave aside for the moment the horrible mistake of ascribing any positive characteristics to the deeds or motivations of the 9/11 hijackers and see that Graf is a pacifist who projects a world as she wishes it would be, rather than seeing it and those who live in it for what it and they are. I don't have to belabor the reasons to readers here why pacifism not only tends to be an amoral philosophy but an immoral one as well. Defense of self and family is a basic human right...in fact, it is an obligation. Reverend Graf may make for herself whatever choices she wishes, but she has no right to make such choices for others.

When asked to interject themselves into a situation in which some people send their children to murder the children of others, when placing themselves between the parties a pacifist will necessarily land objectively on the side of privileging the murderers by advocating a dropping of defenses and perhaps even denying to the victims a means of defense. Gandhi's philosophy couldn't account for the Nazis, instead absurdly recommending to the Jews of Germany that they cast themselves off cliffs like lemmings in order to excite the sympathy and human hearts of the world and their tormenters. The inevitable ending point of a philosophy that denies physical force for defense of self and children is to court death and accept that it is preferable to the harming of others. This is as much a life-denying philosophy as that pursued by the Jihadis who proclaim "You love life while we love death."

Life is precious, it deserves protecting, and that often demands more action than simply love of the one who hates you.

I would question, no I would state very firmly that a person who is incapable of accepting this fact is also incapable of accepting the complexities of the task that those in government and the military who are charged with protecting life have. Such a person has no place presiding over a panel faced with Middle East issues -- filled to the brim with some of the most difficult and often heartrendingly zero-sum issues it's possible to face.

Graf says, "I understanding [sic] my role as moderator as helping everyone and encouraging them to make prayerful decisions."

Good luck to those of you travelling to the General Assembly with the goal of achieving some acknowledgement of reality and some sense of fairness. You've got your work cut out for you.