The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionThinking straight about Israel, the Jews and the Archbishop
by John L Allen Jr on Oct. 27, 2010
Question: In the “Message,” number eight talks about the dialogue with the Jews. That’s where you talk about the use and abuse of the Word of God and of faith itself. I would like to know why it’s under relations with the Jews, not relations with everybody -- since normally in the West we hear that it’s not the Jews who use the Scriptures to justify their actions.
Editor's Note: All Things Catholic is being posted early this week because of the timeliness of the subject. For background, look to John Allen's full coverage of the the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East, located here.
We in the media have a genius for grabbing a small but sensational piece of a bigger picture and banging it like a cheap drum, which usually produces a fun-house mirror view of reality: Relatively small things seem huge, while bigger and more significant things shrink into near invisibility.
To take the most obvious recent example, whatever the big picture is for Islam in America, it certainly isn’t an epidemic of Qur’an burnings. Yet the mere threat of such an event from a Florida pastor whose entire congregation could fit into a phone booth held the world hostage for a month thanks to saturation “will he or won’t he?” coverage.
In some ways, reaction to the close of the Oct. 10-24 Synod of Bishops for the Middle East is following the same script.
The synod produced 44 propositions for Pope Benedict XVI and a 5,000-word final message, both of which contain a bewildering array of insights and ideas for solidifying the Christian presence in the Middle East and contributing to its great dream -- which is that the tiny Christian minority, hanging on by the skin of its teeth, can somehow catalyze a democratic revolution in the region, building societies based on religious freedom and equality before the law.
Yet the only storyline that’s had any traction in the American press is Israeli and Jewish backlash to a comment by one synod participant in the closing press conference on Saturday.
In a nutshell, Greek Melkite Archbishop Cyrille Bustros, who heads the Eparchy of Newton, Massachusetts, told reporters that Christ “abolished” the notion of a “Promised Land” for Jews, because the Kingdom of God is for all. (Bustros was speaking in French and used the word abolie, while the English translation given over the headphones was “nullified,” which is the term that appeared in many English-language reports.)
While there may have been a few other aspects of the synod which didn’t go down well in Israeli and Jewish circles, this was the shot heard ‘round the world.
Theologically, Bustros’ comments seemed to revive what the late Cardinal Avery Dulles called “crude supersessionism” -- meaning that the coming of Christ rendered Judaism irrelevant. That position has been widely held to have been rejected by the Second Vatican Council and subsequent papal teaching, such as a November 1980 speech by John Paul II to a delegation of Jews in Germany in which the late pope referred to “the Old Covenant, never revoked by God.”
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Politically, many Israelis took Bustros’ remarks to suggest a wholesale rejection of the legitimacy of Israel’s identity as a Jewish state.
Reaction has been swift and severe.
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon complained that the synod had turned into “a forum for political attacks on Israel in the best history of Arab propaganda.” The Anti-Defamation League in the United States claimed that Bustros had essentially said that “Judaism should no longer exist,” and that it’s “the worst kind of anti-Judaism, bordering on anti-Semitism.”
The Jerusalem Post editorially called upon Pope Benedict to repudiate Bustros.
“Pope Benedict XVI still has a chance to distance himself from the synod’s declarations, and make it clear that Bustros’ comments deviate from Church teaching,” the Post editorial said. “That is the right and necessary thing for the pope to do -- not just for Jewish-Catholic relations, but also for the sake of the Middle East’s persecuted Christian minority.”
Without trying to settle the debate over what Bustros said, or whether the pope needs to address it, there are four important bits of context to bear in mind if we’re going to think straight about what’s really at issue.
| John Allen has been in Rome covering the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East for the past 2 weeks. Read all of Allen's reports, and NCR's other coverage of the Synod, here: Index of stories from the Synod. |
Not “the Vatican”
Some reports billed the contretemps as a new chapter in tensions between “the Vatican” and Israel and/or Judaism -- analogous to earlier controversies over Pope Benedict’s speeches at Auschwitz and Yad Vashem, the Latin liturgy and its Good Friday prayer for the conversion of Jews, and the lifting of the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying traditionalist bishop.
Those comparisons are misleading, however, because they involve official papal speeches and policy decisions while this case pivots on a comment from a single Eastern Catholic bishop.
We have been down this road before and should know better: More times than anyone can count, a Vatican official or a bishop who happens to be in Rome says something careless and it gets billed as a “Vatican statement.” Spokespersons for the Vatican are then compelled to disown it, insisting that it was merely a “personal opinion.”
That’s the case again this time, as Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesperson, told reporters that the only official statements of the synod are contained in its final message and in the propositions. Lombardi’s clear implication was that Bustros was speaking only for himself.
I realize that there’s a tendency to leap to Machiavellian assumptions about everything that happens in the Vatican -- that everything is somehow scripted from on high and no official or visiting prelate would dare speak out without explicit papal approval.
In truth, however, things are far more loosey-goosey. There’s no “war room” in the Holy See where spin doctors meet at 8:00 a.m. to work out the day’s message; there’s no script approval when senior officials or bishops meet the press.
In that sense, the real story here may be more about the Vatican’s continuing PR problem than any change in its theology of Judaism.
In any event, if one wants to know the official teaching of the Catholic church vis-à-vis Judaism, there’s a wealth of material to draw upon -- beginning with the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. A one-off comment from a single prelate does not, and by definition cannot, carry anything like the same weight.
Don’t exaggerate Bustros’ importance
Theologically all bishops may be equal, but sociologically and politically some are more equal than others. When the Vatican’s Cardinal Secretary of State says something, he’s presumed to be speaking for the pope; if it’s the Cardinal-Archbishop of Paris, or Milan, or New York, we’re talking about one of the premier movers and shakers in the Catholic world.
Archbishop Bustros, to be honest, is awfully far down that informal food chain. Official Vatican numbers say that his Greek Melkite eparchy counts a grand total of just over 25,000 faithful, scattered across the entire United States.
In reality, there are plenty of individual Catholic parishes in America with larger congregations. Ordinarily, nobody would think that when Fr. Joe at Our Lady of Angels says something outrageous, he’s automatically speaking for the Vatican or the Catholic church writ large. The same sense of perspective ought to apply to Bustros.
Without comparing Bustros to Pastor Terry Jones or his Dove World Outreach Center in Florida, there is nonetheless an apt analogy in terms of media coverage and public perceptions. Just as Jones galvanized far more attention than his actual sociological footprint justifies, there’s a similar danger in overplaying Bustros’ standing.
That’s not to say, of course, that Bustros is alone. It’s undeniably true that many Arab Christians have a tendency to be uncritically supportive of the Palestinians, in an effort to prove their Arab credentials. It’s also true that while “crude supersessionism” may not be official church teaching, it certainly endures in some quarters of Catholic thinking.
Nor is Bustros himself a complete nobody. Observers say he’s theologically well trained, and was among the Eastern bishops tapped to review drafts of the Catechism of the Catholic Church back in the late 1980s and early 90s. Some church-watchers believe he might be in line for an eventual appointment to help lead the Greek Melkite church in his native Lebanon.
Nonetheless, to think that Bustros plays a central role in shaping Catholic teaching or practice over-sells his place in the grand scheme of things.
Trying to be inclusive
Context is usually the first casualty of any controversy and in some ways that’s the case this time around too. Looking at the entirety of what Bustros said last Saturday, the thrust of his remarks was that Christians ought to be concerned with everybody -- in the case of the Middle East, both Israelis and Palestinians.
In other words, Bustros was trying to be inclusive -- even if his language created a very different impression.
Here’s a transcript of the full exchange, as it came through the English language translation provided by the Vatican. The question was asked in Italian and Bustros responded in French.
Bustros: In number eight of the Message, we say that we cannot resort to theological and Biblical assumptions as a tool to justify injustice. We want to say that the promise of God in the Old Testament, relating to the ‘promised land’ … as Christians, we’re saying that this promise was essentially nullified [in French, “abolished”] by the presence of Jesus Christ, who then brought about the Kingdom of God. As Christians, we cannot talk about a ‘promised land’ for the Jews. We talk about a ‘promised land’ which is the Kingdom of God. That’s the promised land, which encompasses the entire earth with a message of peace and justice and equality for all the children of God. There is no preferred or privileged people. All men and women from every country have become the ‘chosen people.’ This is clear for us. We cannot just refer to the ‘promised land’ to justify the return of the Jews in Israel, and [ignore] the Palestinians who were kicked out of their land. Five million Jews kicked out three or four million Palestinians from their land, and this is not justifiable. There’s no ‘chosen people’ any longer for Christians. Everybody is the ‘chosen people.’ What we say is something political. Sacred scripture should not be used to justify the occupation of Palestinian land on the part of the Israelis.
Politically, the payoff is that Christians should not support Israel at the expense of the Palestinians.
No doubt, that point could have been made without using loaded vocabulary about Israel and the “Promised Land.” Still, it seems that what Bustros wanted to voice was not so much a revisionist interpretation of Christian theology, but rather a cri de Coeur about Palestinian suffering. However imbalanced or badly expressed, that’s a different kettle of fish.
Not just the Jews and Israel
Though Bustros failed to make this point explicitly, many observers who followed the two-week long Synod of Bishops for the Middle East, and who are familiar with the rhetoric of the bishops of the region, did not automatically assume that the primary focus of his remarks was Israel or Judaism.
In fact, insiders tended to assume he was talking at least as much about some currents in Evangelical Christianity, which often cite the Old Testament to buttress a strongly pro-Israel political position.
Notably, Bustros does not directly claim that it’s illegitimate for Jews to think in terms of a “Promised Land,” or to assert a divine warrant for their attachment to the land of Israel.
Instead, what he actually said is that Christians shouldn’t read the Old Testament in a one-sided fashion to support Israeli claims. Knowing the way Catholic and Orthodox bishops of the Middle East think, it’s likely that was directed at least in part to Evangelicals -- whose growing visibility and outspokenness has long rubbed many Arab Christians the wrong way.
To put the point crudely, Bustros probably wasn’t only, or even primarily, grinding an axe against Israel or the Jews. The backdrop to his comments probably wasn’t so much Israeli rhetoric (which doesn’t often pivot on the Bible, but on security considerations and Israel’s status as the region’s lone democracy), but rather that of some -- often U.S.-backed -- Evangelicals.
Final point
Arguably, the most compelling Christian drama in the world today is in the Middle East -- where a flock that’s shrunk from 20 percent of the population a century ago to maybe five percent today is desperately trying to punch above its weight.
Christians in the Middle East know that their future is democracy or death, so they’re trying to figure out how to be change agents in their societies -- pressing Israel to better integrate its Arab minority and the Islamic countries of the region to make their peace with modernity.
If the Christians of the Middle East can pull that off, the whole world will be in their debt. If they disappear, the most natural human firebreak against a “clash of civilizations” will be gone.
One hopes, therefore, that when the dust settles over the Bustros episode, the broader discussion fostered by the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East can come into focus. There’s a hugely important story here and it ought not to be permanently waylaid by what amounts to a sideshow.
God's chosen people indeed is
God's chosen people indeed is everyone. The Jewish state of Israel is justified, but not the acts that have demolished so many homes and elimnated Palestinians. It is now time to give Palestinians a state in which to live and rule themselves and have an economy of their own. Settlements in the WestBank must be halted from further expansion. Christians too should be welcome and be able to preserve their historical sites. Christ was a Jew, although not accepted by Judaism. He prayed for and accepted everyone, even those who crucified him.
A lot of truth there. But
A lot of truth there. But the teaching of the Church is not that "everyone" is the chosen people. The teaching of the Church is that THE CHURCH is the chosen people of God, in the fullest, spiritual sense of "Israel". And the Jewish people are still "chosen" in fleshly sense of Israel.
The Church as the people of God:
Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 2: "Christ instituted this new covenant, the new testament, that is to say, in His Blood, calling together a people made up of Jew and gentile, making them one, not according to the flesh but in the Spirit. This was to be the new People of God."
The Jewish people as still dear to and "chosen" by God:
"Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways. There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom: 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance (cf. Rom 11:28-29)." [LG 16]
"Even so, the apostle Paul maintains that the Jews remain [manent] very dear to God, for the sake of the Patriarchs, since God does not take back the gifts he bestowed or the choice he made." [NA 4]
Pope Benedict XVI as then-Cardinal Ratzinger:
"Q: God has not, then, retracted his word that Israel is the Chosen People?"
"A: No, because he is faithful." (God and the World, p. 150)
Archbishop Butros' exact same
Archbishop Butros' exact same comments could have been made by any eastern catholic, eastern orthodox, or oriental orthodox hierarch today, especially those dwelling in the Middle East. The Israeli Government knew something of this sort was going to come out of the pope's synod eventually, and used the opportunity to turn Butros' comments into a stage to bash Palestine's only real defenders in the Christian world. Now, the Israeli government takes further advantage to bash the Vatican by delivered more groundless diatribes against the Holy See for hiding Nazi loot during and after World War II.
Like the Donation of Constantine, the concept of the "chosen people" is a hoax and a fraud which suckered John Paul II and his predecessor. The latter pope made a point of repeating this false claim again in his catechism. Further evidence heresy and falsehood are alive and well in the Roman Church.
The idea that Jesus did not nullify the Jewish covenant and abrogate the Mosaic Law by his atoning sacrifice on the cross is a heresy taught by Paul VI, who was pressured by Jewish fanatics, and John Paul II . It must be exposed and anathematized.
The late Joseph Campbell was right. The covenant and the idea that God chose a particular people as His "chosen ones" is desert-based story telling and manufactured fantasy. Wonderful oral tradition, but nothing more. There never was a "chosen people".
International law doesn't accept it as the basis for Israel's claims to sovereignty and as an acceptable argument for the State of Israel's right to exist. Evangelicals and many Catholics need to denounce the continued use of this myth by Israel as a basis for it's continuing fascist policies in the mideast.
The UN mandate that
The UN mandate that established Israel as a Jewish state also established Jordan as a Palestinian state. Sadly, the other Arab nations nations could care less about the Palestinian people except as a foil for their rabid hatred of the Jewish state. Now the Palestinians have been recast as David to israel's Goliath. The only hope for these people is to set themselves free from their leaders who would rather see them all perish than to enter a negotiation that would result in the legimization of Israel as a nation state.
The way out of the chaos is one nation with one economic goal: to advance all the peoples living there.
This remark is quite
This remark is quite inaccurate and definitely misleading. The UN most certainly did NOT establish Jordan as a Palestinian state. Rather the British mandate of Palestine--between the Mediterranean and the the Jordan river--was divided by vote of the UN General Assembly into two roughly equal parts--one to be a Jewish state, one to be an Arab state, with the area around Jerusalem to be separate from both. Jordan at that time was known as TransJordan--entirely to the east of the Jordan river, and not at all part of the UN deliberations and decisions. Before someone Anonymous-ly doles out advice to others, it would be best to get one's facts straight.
Yes, the Jewish state is
Yes, the Jewish state is justified - by International and moral law given what we now know to be history. I would add, for balance, that the war and terrorism the Arabs started in 1948 and never ended, is also not acts to be justified. Since those attacks are in fact the cause of Israeli response, we really need to answer why ONLY Jews may not defend themselves? Does anyone really think that Israel would attack anyone if rockets did not fall on them daily or suicide bombers did not blow up pizza shops?
Are Christians so nostalgic for the days of Jewish impotence and oppression, that any self-defense is denied them? Is that moral? Would you accept that for yourselves? I wonder.
POints well taken, but a few
POints well taken, but a few corrections are in order. The article claims Israel kicked out 3+ million Arabs. Historically, that is an untruth. Less than 700,000 left due to the conflict 4 Arab nations initiated against Israel upon the UN declaration of the Israeli state. Israel did not even push most of those Arabs out, they were exhorted by documented Arab news and history to leave due to the likely slaughter of Jews to stay out of the way. History of course played out differently.
As to demolishing homes and eliminating Palestinians, it was the Palestinians who continued to wage that failed war of the Arabs from 1948 to the present day. These news articles skip over that as if that should not have caused an appropriate self-defensive reaction on the part of Jews. That of course denies the right of self-defense to Jews. I wonder why?
Finally, Jesus is accepted as a Jew in Judaism...just an apostate Jews or a wayward Jew. Nothing in Judaism has ever claims Jesus was not a Jew. If Christians and Arabs should be able to preserve their historical sites, so too Jews - who predate both Arab and Christian hegemony in Israel by 1,300 years. That means most of Israel, the Temple Mount, etc.
"we say that we cannot resort
"we say that we cannot resort to theological and Biblical assumptions as a tool to justify injustice." -- That part of the comment seems right on. It tis difficult to believe in a God who assigns a particular land or city to any religious group.
Really? Gn 17:8 "I will give
Really?
Gn 17:8
"I will give to you, and to your seed after you, the land where you are traveling, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession. I will be their God.”
Ex 6:4,8
"I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their travels, in which they lived as aliens. I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it to you for a heritage: I am Yahweh.”
Nm 11:12
Have I conceived all this people? Have I brought them forth, that you should tell me, Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a nursing infant, to the land which you swore to their fathers?
Jr 25:5
saying, Return you now everyone from his evil way, and from the evil of your doings, and dwell in the land that Yahweh has given to you and to your fathers, from of old and even forevermore;
Jr 30:3
For, behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that I will turn again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, says Yahweh; and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it.
Humm... seems like an ancient
Humm... seems like an ancient prodical that Spawned the American idea right of "Manifest Destiny" in the Americas... too bad all those native peoples were in the way, but then they never did have souls...
There you go again. Rejoicing
There you go again. Rejoicing with a passion over wrongly percieved genocide - while also how JC saves. This is not Kansas or Abrahamic.
FYI, there are 1000's of bricks standing and Israel has been returned - with no confusion - when Europe's chimneys still fumed and the Arab hordes held swords against Jews fleeing Europe.
Reading only that Jews will be in bondage [for upholding Monotheism], while disregarding the rest of that verse - is a lie-by-omission.
I seem to remember that the
I seem to remember that the Old Testament is filled with conditions for the Jews to meet in order to maintain possession of the promised land. Or did God make idle threats?
Have the Jews lived up to the old Mosaic Law, and do they do so today?
No.
No.
All of these quotes from the
All of these quotes from the Old Testament are made by Jewish writers about Judaism. Like an estranged son forging Dad's will to reward himself with property,gold, and jewels Dad didn't intend for him to have.
It is impossible to
It is impossible to understand the Old Testament, the Pentateuch without seeing it as a drama, a dialogue, and if you like, a love affair between a People and a Land. The Pentateuch is the story of how one nation was promised by the Lord that they would come to have a home in one particular place in the world and the rest of the Penatateuch is about them returning to that Land.
If you find it "difficult to believe in a God who assigns a particular land" to a people, you must find it difficult to understand the whole of the Old Testament.
Since the citations below
Since the citations below show some Catholics are ignorant of Old Testament texts justifying the eternal gift and rights of Israel to Jews, I need not repeat them. However, what I think is going on here is some Catholics reject the tradition that Jews themselves have (since they are Jews and not Christians, nor need to be to be "saved")a biblical tradition that is quite specific, quite literal to live in the land and make law and judgements - something one cannot do without sovereignty.
The Church has wisely taught, though it seems to not get through, that Catholics strive to understand how Jews define themselves. Here is the short lesson: we are a people, a nation and a religion - all at one time. The Enlightenment, the UN and all the modern thinking has not made G-d's teaching irrelevant to us. If that is not clear, let me add that the American Indian considers nimself to belong to a native American nation (actually several nations), yet is also a citizen of the USA - something Congress admits and agrees to as well. Jews are no diffferent, even if some Jews no longer feel that way. Yet 41% of world Jewry have chosen to live in Israel, and the majority of the rest support it.
Submitted by Alan Hoffman on
Submitted by Alan Hoffman on Nov. 01, 2010.
You stated:
"Since the citations below show some Catholics are ignorant of Old Testament texts justifying the eternal gift and rights of Israel to Jews, I need not repeat them. However, what I think is going on here is some Catholics reject the tradition that Jews themselves have (since they are Jews and not Christians, nor need to be to be "saved")a biblical tradition that is quite specific, quite literal to live in the land and make law and judgements - something one cannot do without sovereignty.
The Church has wisely taught, though it seems to not get through, that Catholics strive to understand how Jews define themselves. Here is the short lesson: we are a people, a nation and a religion - all at one time. The Enlightenment, the UN and all the modern thinking has not made G-d's teaching irrelevant to us. If that is not clear, let me add that the American Indian considers nimself to belong to a native American nation (actually several nations), yet is also a citizen of the USA - something Congress admits and agrees to as well. Jews are no diffferent, even if some Jews no longer feel that way. Yet 41% of world Jewry have chosen to live in Israel, and the majority of the rest support it."
--------------------------------------
Thanks, Alan, for your clear and concise summary of the situation. This was how some of my friends in Israel presented the situation to me.
Thanks, John, for your usual
Thanks, John, for your usual valuable insight.
Thank you, John Allen, for
Thank you, John Allen, for this welcome gem of reporting in the scrapheap of opinion pieces and slug-blogs NCR has become.
How sad--if it can't be made
How sad--if it can't be made into a fight, it doesn't make the news...and if it can be misinterpreted to sound like a controversial statement, it will....
Thanks for the article and hte c9ontext you have provided....
The words emanating from the
The words emanating from the "bit player" Bustros not only deserve the attention they're getting but should be even more extensively disseminated. His words should be recognized by the Vatican movers and shakers, i.e. the "non-bit players", as a jumping-off platform to start imitating the Christ, who drove the money changers from the temple, by arming themselves with a zeal for justice and using the tremendous bully pulpit possessed by world-wide Catholicism to wage a full frontal attack on the ubiquitous contempt of Israel for justice, international law and common decency that has materialized as its rape of the Holy Land.
A start might be to threaten to cut off diplomatic relations with Israel if the settlements don't begin to be dismantled by a certain date and to do just that when Israel, as it will, demurs. Also dear Catholic leadership, curtail your damnably paralyzing fear of upsetting the Jewish psyche, a Catholic mental state that has allowed this inhumanity and brutality to inflict itself on the Palestinian People for far too long.
By just about any measure,
By just about any measure, Arabs are better off in Israel than in Syria, Lebanon, etc. Are they allowed to practice their religion? Have better health care? Education?
Be careful what you wish for...................
"By just about any measure,
"By just about any measure, Arabs are better off in Israel than in Syria, Lebanon, etc"
You could count on both hands the number of Palestinians who would share your view. In Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan they would be fully integrated into national life. There can be no peace for Israel until it follows suit.
A statement that proves that
A statement that proves that "'crude supersessionism' ... certainly endures in some quarters of Catholic thinking."
You're certainly passionate,
You're certainly passionate, I'll give you that much. Unfortunately, passion isn't exactly what's in short supply in the Middle East.
Robert Emmet for president -
Robert Emmet for president - It is time to stop apologizing . Bethlehem has been split in two with the Wall - the Catholic response - silence ..
How about some balanace
How about some balanace here.I think the Vatican should threaten to cut off relations with Arab nations that support terrorism and launch rockets into Israel each day. Stop being naive. Settlements are a small issue in reality and more syymbolic than substantive, given that over 1 million Arabs live within Israel proper as well. Rocket fire kills. Maybe its time to consider a population transfer - Arabs in Israel for Jews in Samaria. Allen tries to be balanced and analytical in his article and I give him high marks for some good points. The call for supporting democracy being one of them. It may seem obvious to some, but clearly the ONLY democracy in the region is Israel. Bashing the one democracy which is actually rejected for being both Jewish and democratic is nonsense. Trying to democratize tyrannies in the 22 Arab nations is hard work for mere humans. Good luck - but that is not Israel's job. Israel's job is to protect all of its citizens, its borders and has actually been the only one to give back land after being attacked by Arabs (not the other way around). Even its so called "wall" (90% of which is a fence) protects both Jews and Arabs from explosive laden terrorists. The right of self-defense should not be denied Jews, no matter how much Catholic history has supported that view.
When I saw the title of this
When I saw the title of this piece, I thought it might be about Archbishop Hilarion Capucci, the Melkite Gun-Runner who introduced the now condemned-to-death Tariq Aziz to John Paul II. Nice to see Archbishop Capucci's torch is being carried by suceeding generations!
And just how upsetting is
And just how upsetting is this item from the Jerusalem Post to those same Jews:
Yosef: Gentiles exist only to serve Jews
By JONAH MANDEL
10/18/2010 05:13
According to Rabbi, the lives of non-Jews in Israel are safeguarded by divinity, to prevent losses to Jews.
Talkbacks (89)
The sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews, according to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the head of Shas’s Council of Torah Sages and a senior Sephardi adjudicator.
“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel,” he said in his weekly Saturday night sermon on the laws regarding the actions non-Jews are permitted to perform on Shabbat.
According to Yosef, the lives of non-Jews in Israel are safeguarded by divinity, to prevent losses to Jews.
“In Israel, death has no dominion over them... With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money.
This is his servant... That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” Yosef said.
“Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.
That is why gentiles were created,” he added.
Yosef’s Saturday night sermons have seen many controversial statements from the 90-year-old rabbi. In August, Yosef caused a diplomatic uproar when he wished a plague upon the Palestinian people and their leaders, a curse he retracted a few weeks later, when he blessed them along with all of Israel’s other peace-seeking neighbors.
A lie-by-omission is -
A lie-by-omission is - surprise, surprise - a lie.
The falseified neo Pretend Palestians invented by Europe are openly hellbent on the genocide of Israel. You are blasting Israel for asking Gd to respond to another holocaust.
BORN IN SIN: any Christian whose parents kept silent of the corruption of the Balfour and accepted the term "2-STATE COMPROMISE" when 80% of a tiny kand was carved off - after creating 20 Arab states which never existed before 100 years - secretly and without the UN Motion of all nations voting [as with Israel].
Christians, made as historical witness, are being tested. Eurabia is happening.
MOSES WAS THE FIRST ZIONIST.
It sounds like the Grand
It sounds like the Grand Rabbi has read "Protocols of the Elders of Zion". My experience with members of the Jewish faith has always been extremely friendly and respectful, As a matter of fact, I learned most of my Hebrew in a Sephardic synagogue. Some of my Jewish friends regard me as an honorary Sephardic Jew. The Grand Rabbi should learn thew whole world is watching and listening.
I really can't imagen what
I really can't imagen what Archbishop Cyrille Bustros said, even if it is translated in english or in french, Jesus came to proclaim his Gospel, and only the ones who hear it and obey it became sons of God. Being a Christian is not a registration form in a high social club, or a sort of it, becoming a Christian is living and believing what Jesus came to proclaim and won in the Cross, giving his life for all sinners, we all.
God is paciente as he want all people to repent and convert to His ways. Our ways are further different as His ways.But if you do not repent and convert to His ways, you are on the road that goes straigth to hell.
I wish that all people would open their hearts to listen to how God loved the world that He gave His unbegotten Son. His love is shown in Jesus death who arrose and was accepted by His Father.
As someone who has lived in
As someone who has lived in the Occupied Territories and witnessed the constant oppression by the IDF and by the structure of the occupation itself, Israel gets bent out of shape by any hint of the truth of the occupation. Israel lives and acts with impunity and when will the international community realize enough is enough.
I so admired the words of the participants of the synod.
Dear Mary Wendeln, thank you
Dear Mary Wendeln, thank you for wittnessing about the truth! May people with a heart of meat and not of stone, listen!
Remeber the sacred words of
Remeber the sacred words of Mahmoud Ababs, Presdient of the Palestinan Authority:
"I will never allow a single Israeli to live among us on Palestinian land"
Another lie-by-omission. How
Another lie-by-omission.
How many other Jews were killed by Rome? Which verse in the Gospels is it recorded in?
You are blaming God for the deeds done by Europeans - but mighty Rome is dead. Hello?
There can never be peace unless the Balfour is restored and Christians repent this genocidal deed upon the Jews. This won't change even if Christians invent Muslim Zionists as their false stick against Israel!
"A FALSEHOOD AND THE HOLY ONE CANNOT ABIDE TOGETHER"
As someone once said, any
As someone once said, any statement beginning with "Today the Vatican said..." must be presumed to be false until proven otherwise.
There is chosen via example
There is chosen via example only ['Being a light unto the nations']; and there is the chosen of exclusive kingdom keys which renders all others as allocated to a very hot place for a very long time - and/or - as infidels.
Some modes of chosen mass murdered millions. Guess which ones.
The Hebrew chosen is based on:
EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL - STRANGERS AND THE INHABITANT.
ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINS IT SHALL PAY.
THEREFORE YOU SHALL LOVE THE STRANGER [one from a different belief].
How about your chosen - please state it and see if it compares with the Hebrew?
And why doesn't the
And why doesn't the Archbishop also condemn the intifada?
Kudos Chris Grady! Until the
Kudos Chris Grady!
Until the Eastern Rite Catholic Church, specifically the Melkites, and/or the Secretariat of State, explain to us how a convicted PLO gun-runner, like Archbishop Hilarion (Peter) Capucci, whom Pope Paul VI promised Israel, as a condion of his release that he would spend the rest of his life in a monastery, could show up free and financed to escort that fruitcake Italian priest - the little curly haired UN worker turned priest who caught Sodano's eye - into an anti-USA diatribe with the Pope, I say let the whole Mideast hierarchy just shut up. Or become Muslims.
"I say let the whole Mideast
"I say let the whole Mideast hierarchy just shut up. Or become Muslims."
Better that they and the entire Roman hierarchy become Greek Orthodox.
In effect, what this Catholic
In effect, what this Catholic priest is saying, the chosen of the Hebrew bible ['To be a light unto the nations' - e.g. by exmple only] - is now replaced with:
The chosen of exclusive kingdom keys and all others are doomed.
I say, even if the Jews were from Mars, they still have the right to a tiny barrenless patch of land. This puts all Christians and Muslims, engaged in Heil Hitloer salutes at the UN on the line.
[QUOTE]
A Christian Response to Synod Declaration on the Chosen People
by Pastor Ken Garrison (ret.)
Recently a Catholic synod led by Archbishop Cyril Salim Bustros declared that the promise made by G-d to Abraham and Almost 2000 years after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem... behold, the Jewish people are still with us...and have...become a vibrant nation state.
" his descendants to give them the land of Israel was abolished by Jesus." Specifically, Archbishop Bustros declared that “For Christians, one can no longer talk of the land promised to the Jewish people…. There is no longer a favored people, a chosen people; all men and women of every country have become the chosen people,.” Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, “Catholic Cleric; Jesus Cancelled Biblical ‘Chosen People’, Arutz Sheva, October 24, 2010.
This position affirmed by Archbishop Bustros is a simple restatement of the ancient Catholic Church position of replacement theology which is a faulty interpretation of the Bible and it has been demonstrated to be historically incorrect. When G-d initiated the beginning of redemptive covenants with Abraham, He promised Abraham (i) blessing; (ii) global ministry and (iii) the land of Israel (G-d made Abraham and his descendants special stewards of the land). These promises were eternal.
“I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant to be G-d to you and to your descendants after you.” (Genesis 17:7)
It is difficult to understand how Archbishop Bustros could misinterpret such simple words as "descendants" and "everlasting".
Later the Jewish people had sinned so grievously that G-d was about to allow the Babylonians to drive them out of the land of Israel. Even under such circumstances G-d declared the eternal nature of His relationship with the Jewish people.
“Thus says the L-rd, Who gives the sun for light by day and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The L-rd of hosts is His name; If this fixed order departs from before Me,” declares the L-rd, “Then the offspring of Israel also will cease from being a nation before Me forever.” Thus says the L-rd, “If the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth searched out below, then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel for all that they have done,” declares the L-rd. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)
Beyond these references, we have bold affirmation of the same thing made in the New Testament by none other than the Apostle Paul and, believe it or not, written to the mother church which Archbishop Bustros serves.
“I say than, G-d has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.” (Romans 11:1)
Lest we mistake who Paul is talking about, later in the same dissertation, he identifies his subject as those who are seen as “enemies of the gospel” so we know that he was not speaking of Christians as descendants of Abraham.
“From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of G-d’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of G-d are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:28-29)
Therefore we declare that the position advanced by Archbishop Bustros is Biblically inaccurate.
Historically speaking, the statement is equally absurd. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD/CE, when the doctrine of replacement theology was advanced by the so-called “Church Fathers” like Tertullian and Origen, any observer might think that the descendants of Abraham were being eliminated from the human community, at least, as a national entity. We now live almost 2000 years after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the partial exile of the Jewish people living in the land at that time. Behold, the Jewish people are still with us and even more amazing is the fact that they have, once again, become a national state, indeed a vibrant one. Their continued existence and the ingathering leading to statehood in 1948 is one of the most astounding miracles of our age.
One of the surest signs of a religious system in “rigor mortis” is its inability or unwillingness to recognize error in its system of thought and to make corrections in accordance with obvious Biblical and/or historical reality. The Roman Catholic Church as reflected in the statement of Archbishop Bustros is demonstrating this sad characteristic.
Finally, Archbishop Bustros declared that “all men and women of every country have become the chosen people”. From a Christian perspective, this “state of being chosen” may be considered correct if we think in terms of individuals being reconciled to G-d.
Chritianity, however, focused on the Kingdom of G-d which is G-d’s means of providing reconciliation to the nations of the human community. In this ministry, the nation of Israel stands at the center of the process. G-d’s election of Israel stands. Their right to the Land of Israel stands. Indeed, there is no real hope for peace within the human community until the Kingdom is realized and this will not occur unless and until the Jewish people live in and control Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the surrounding areas. They serve the human community by being the gatekeepers of the Kingdom (Remember G-d’s promise to Abraham that he would become a blessing to all the families of the earth). This is why G-d made Abraham and his descendants stewards of the land in the first place. They have been the “chosen people” since the time of Abraham: they are now the “chosen people” and they will always be the “chosen people”.
I am one Christian who is eternally thankful for their faithfulness in this capacity.
[/QUOTE]
Jesus told Pilate: "My
Jesus told Pilate: "My Kingdom is not of this world." Translation: "My Kingdom cannot be identified with ANY nation in this world, not even Israel."
P.S. And certainly not the U.S.A. (American "exceptionalists", take note!)
Chosen People??? What does
Chosen People??? What does that really mean? Least we forget the words of John the Baptist;
MT 3:4-11
4 And the same John had his garment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins: and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the country about Jordan: 6 And were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. 7 And seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them: You brood of vipers, who has showed you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of penance. 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham for our father. For I tell you that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham. 10 For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not yield good fruit, shall be cut down, and cast into the fire.
So then, does these children of Abraham(Chosen People)are special and get direct access into the Kingdom of heaven?
It is time for Christians to
It is time for Christians to shed the mantle of collective guilt they accepted in atonement for the tragedy of the Holocaust/Shoa. Enough Mea Culpas have been said and it is time to stop Israel from exploiting the Shoa to justify its crimes against the Palestinian people. Christian Palestinians were no less victims of Israeli terror than their fellow Moslem brothers. My Christian grandparents were driven out of their home in Jaffa and died in exile. Israelis have been living in it since 1948. It is time the world took notice and demanded that Israel stop its predatory behavior and give the Palestinians both Christian and Moslem a taste of Justice.
Jaffa? Muhamed Nimer Al
Jaffa?
Muhamed Nimer Al Hawari described the Arab leaders' ruthless incitement of the Arabs in Jaffa in December 1947:
... Jaffa was boiling: every second that passed you heard a new rumour, and after every minute the imaginary tales and lies became bigger, finally, they were accepted as definite truth by the public. When the sun was setting down, many of the Mufti henchmen patrolled the streets in private and lorry cars, calling upon the people: oh! people, oh! men, oh! heros; Help ... Help . . . , stop the Jewish attack! They have attacked your brothers in the Manshiya; they pillaged their properties; burned their holdings and raped their women and girls. They have committed awful acts of horror and brutality against your brothers!! In but a few minutes Jaffa's inhabitants were incited and agitated shouted and fired in the air:--On Them! On Them! On Tel-Aviv, the town of the wicked ... Groups and individuals, they marched on and among them, behind them or in front of them, went the Mufti henchmen belittling the Jewish strength...
The Israeli forces who seized
The Israeli forces who seized Jerusalem in 1967 believed themselves to be the direct descendents of the mythic kingdom of David rather than – God forbid – of Berber warriors or Khazar horsemen
The Jews claimed to constitute a specific ethnic group that had returned to Jerusalem, its capital, from 2,000 years of exile and wandering.
This monolithic, linear edifice is supposed to be supported by biology as well as history.
Since the 1970s supposedly scientific research, carried out in Israel, has desperately striven to demonstrate that Jews throughout the world are closely genetically related.
A dangerous myth?
http://mondediplo.com/2008/09/07israel
Do Roman Catholics go on
Do Roman Catholics go on Israeli or haredi (ultra-orthodox)Jewish websites and blogs to insult and attack the Zionist and AJC positions? Of course not, for their comments, few as they are, are censored and never see the light (or pixels) of day. Yet here I read insulting and argumentative comments by (I assume) an Israeli or Jewish commenter who comes on an RC blog (quoting some right-wing evangelical Protestant "pastor") to lecture the Vatican and Catholics. As my thoroughly secular New York Jewish friends might say: Oy vey, you can't make this stuff up.
"Jewish State?" --- What I
"Jewish State?" --- What I don't understand is why anyone in the 21st Cen. would be talking about a "Jewish State", a "Christan State" or an "Islamic State" --- How does any theocracy fit into our modern understanding of democratic nations? Duuuu
A litte education goes a long
A litte education goes a long way. There are in fact Christian and Islamic states. The Muslims are honest to declare their nations as such. The Vatican itself has called on Europe to honor and recognize its Christian heritage, at least in part to its heroditary Christian past. So scores of nations have crosses on their flags (especially in Europe), Muslims have crescents on their flags. Yet, for some reason only one nation, with a majority of Jews (since they are not wanted anywhere else), has a flag with a Magen David - star of David. That infuriates many people. A Jewish state has the purpose of being a life insurance policy for those who seem ignorant of history. The few Jews today in Islamic countries are oppressed and cannot leave in most cases. Jews today cannot safely walk around in the UK, France, Netherlands or Austria - all democracies! To ignore, disparage or denigrate the need for a Jewish state is to ignore and be blind to what Jewish experience has been. And for those who claim, that is all past, let them explain why these issues persist in Christian Europe and Islamic countries.
Sideshow or not, John, the
Sideshow or not, John, the Bustros affair is relevant. It illustrates that each of us can only speak from her/his own perspective. Your piece is a case in point. The perspective is from journalism, specifically RC journalism with an expertise in Vaticanology, with Vatican connections.
The Israeli/Palestine, Jew/Catholic/Christian/fundamentalist (I don't think it's only Evangelicals) stew only gets more and more confused & confusing. Stir in the USA, UK, other Arab nations (not just the immediate neighbors) and it becomes absolutely confounding. Add the spice of history - from when the land in question was a British Protectorate of Arab lands & then WWII occured. A lot happened before 1967 that flavors today.... Who has all that perspective in a spot-interview or even in an afterward analysis? Nothing is simple. Everything is connected. Patriarch Bustros may pastor only 25,000 people scattered over Canada & the U.S.A. but each of them is six connections away from Kevin Bacon (or however that mantra goes). What he says is relevant, to his "flock", to his immediate audience, to the world, to the Vatican, to Israel, to us also, etc....
The question of the Jews
The question of the Jews today & the Old Covenant is complex & it is true as JPII said that God never revoked the Old Covenant but is God still in a covenential relationship with the Jews as a People after the time of Christ? The answer to that has to be no since it would make Christ as Messias incidental & not central & embodied in that Old Covenant. More than just Messias, he is Savior for Jew & gentile alike.
What can be said is that the whole Jewish tradition pre-Christ is still valid & lives on today in the Catholic Church as its foundation. But to be understood properly it must be seen in terms of Christ. In terms of salvation any Jew who is saved is saved through the action of Christ whether he knows this or not. In terms of non-Christians, Jews are better placed than any other non-Christians in terms of salvation since they are holding onto an essential part of overall Truth as it were.
So, John, the purpose of the
So, John, the purpose of the synod was "solidifying the presence of Christians in the Middle East." Pure parochial ethnocentric politics. The Gospel not even mentioned. I fully expect Christians will continue leaving the area as they have been doing for the last 20 years. Why should they risk the lives of their families so the Vatican (which is what it seems to care about) can be a political player in the region?
To ANONYMOUS, re OCT 28 post
To ANONYMOUS, re OCT 28 post starting "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO"
I would submit that the "love affair" you mention is between the One God and the People who became Hebrew and then Jewish.
Archbishop Bustros
Archbishop Bustros said:
[T]he promise of God in the Old Testament, relating to the ‘promised land’ … as Christians, we’re saying that this promise was essentially nullified [in French, “abolished”] by the presence of Jesus Christ, who then brought about the Kingdom of God. As Christians, we cannot talk about a ‘promised land’ for the Jews.”
But there’s a slight problem with this dis possessing of the Jews – it says that God doesn’t mean what he says and the Bible contains lies.
God made an irrevocable promise to the Jews, granting them possession of the Holy Land, for example:
Genesis 17:8: "I will give to you, and to your seed after you, the land where you are traveling, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession. I will be their God.”
Numerous other Scriptures in the Bible repeat this promise, for example:
Gen 12:7,Gen 13:15-17, Jer 33: 25-26, Jer 31:35-37, Ez 36:22, Ez 36:24.
The New Testament Scriptures are (of course) consistent with the Hebrew Scriptures, for example: Rom 11:29: “God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.”
Jesus never said the Hebrew Scripture promises are revocable:
Matthew 5:17-18 (New International Version):17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
It’s likely that the Catholic Middle East Synod idea of dis possessing the Jews is basically politically motivated. This motivation is to appease Middle East Muslims in order to minimize their persecution of their Christian brothers. On the other hand, there is no fear of Israeli retribution against Catholic churches or Catholics because they correctly understand that this is not the kind of thing that Israel would do. So, Bustros and company believe this is a win-win proposition. But they are wrong-wrong because in this scheming they have not accounted for the Creator of the Universe.
Mike Kaplan
Post new comment