We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Monday, October 25. 2010
Is Palestinian-killer the new Christ-killer?
That dramatic � even inflammatory -- title, �Is �Palestinian-killer� the new �Christ-killer�?�, is the first question that occurred to me as I read news reports that a meeting of Catholic Bishops from the Middle East condemned Israel, called for withdrawal to 1967 borders, and that Jews have no Biblical right to Israel.
I just read the actual statement of the gathering. The initial impression I had was wrong, largely due to the poor news reporting and due to the press conference by the archbishop president of the gathering that went beyond the meeting�s report and beyond Catholic Church doctrine. Further, the report itself is not the official position of the Catholic Church. The Pope will consider it before issuing his final statement.
That impression given the world, that the Jews of Israel are, in effect, �Palestinian-killers�, consonant with the catechism of the Left in trying to delegitimize Israel�s very existence, was conveyed by the president of the gathering at a Vatican press conference:
The Israeli reply was sharp:
Bustros went beyond what the Bishops� statement actually said, as the The New York Times report clarified:
The communiqu� did not say the outcome of peace would be a return to 1967 borders but to internationally recognized borders. The communiqu� did not say that �migr� Palestinians should return to within Israel. The communiqu� did not say that the Biblical covenant with Jews was defunct.
Further, Bustros� press conference comment went beyond the official position of the Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II strongly affirmed St. Paul in Romans 11:28-29: �On account of their fathers, this people [the Jews] remains most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues.� In Mainz, Pope John Paul II said of the Jews, �the people of God of the Old Covenant, which has never been revoked by God.� Seems that Bustros has some explaining to do to the present Pope for not understanding the Church�s position since Pope John Paul II.
The news reporting adds its own fault to this, apparently not having bothered to read the actual communiqu�. The news reporting omitted the communiqu��s larger discussion of the parlous condition of Christians throughout the Middle East, their emigration in search of security of life and observance to escape the common repression and persecution in their homelands. Indeed, one of the primary requests for the assembly to occur came from Christians in Iraq. It could have come from Saudi Arabia, as well, if Christians were even permitted open worship there.
The Bishops, coming from the Middle East, were very careful, circumspect, and euphemistic in the language of the communiqu�, reflecting both their dangerous status as well as many�s sympathies with their Muslim societies� anti-Western populism and their own flocks� fears of frequent Islamist attacks.
Still, a few did speak more forthrightly. Two Syrian Catholic Bishops �differed significantly from most of the other synod members' speeches on dialogue with Muslims in the Middle East; the majority of synod members -- and the two Muslims Pope Benedict XVI invited to address the assembly -- focused instead on progress in understanding and cooperation.�
Aside from evangelical Christians in the West who do speak out for oppressed Christians in Muslim countries, the establishment Western Churches � Catholic, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist � come closer and closer to adopting the �Palestinian-killer� apostasy from truth, and risk or participate in effect in a new �Christ-killer� calumny. Leftist reporting, which
is most of it, ignores this.
Posted by Bruce Kesler in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects, Our Essays at 02:05 | Comments (8) | Trackbacks (0)
Trackback specific URI for this entry
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
How benevolent of the Catholic bishops. How understanding of history and of human nature they appear, ahem, to be. I bet, with just a little elbow grease, we can shove all those pesky Juice back to Poland, where they came from. But certainly not back to France, Scandinavia or Germany. Those are Muslim countries, now. Having a Jewish neighbor would never do. Just ask the Arabs of greater Palestan.
"Catholic Bishops from the Middle East condemned Israel, called for withdrawal to 1967 borders, and that Jews have no Biblical right to Israel.".
And Arabs do? The Philistines are gone. The Arabs killed them.
Thank you for the post on the Catholic bishops. When I read the news, elsewhere, my heart sank. My present parish has a Rev. Wright priest whose sermons I find unbearable, so I have stopped attending Mass.
Then, when I read about this attack on Israel.....I was just shocked and disheartened. It seemed so contrary to what I believe the Church stands for.
You cannot believe how grateful I am for your posting and including the body of the agreement.
The same Catholic Church and brave Europeans that so aggressively resisted Muslim pirates and slavers in the Mediterranean 200 years ago? Wait, that was Thomas Jefferson, the USN and USMC. Some things never change.
Middle-Eastern Christians tend to have more antipathy to Jews than to Muslims. That is a large generalisation, with many exceptions...
...but it's the way to bet in any discussion
There already is Palestinian homeland with internationally recognized borders.
It's called Jordan.
Bustros needs a spanking.
Christianity bills itself as superseding Judaism. The Jews denied Christ, and were doomed to eternal perdition. Christians were the new Israel, the old covenant no longer mattered.
The return of the Jews to Israel - without accepting Christ - is a major challenge to traditional Christian theology and eschatology.
So popes, bishops, and others who care about Christian theology are generally anti-Israel.
The only major exception to this was John Paul.
It is now clear that his "Nostre Aetate" - which reaffirmed the Jews' covenant with G-d - was just a blip of Holocaust-era guilt. The current pope has reinstated prayers for the Jews to abandon their error and accept Christ.
The protestant denominations have not even addressed the issue - although some Lutherans are upholding Luther's legacy of virulent antisemitism with their Israel divestment activities.
And we Israelis get a kick out of our evangelical supporters, some of whom believe the Jews will either accept Jesus en masse, or be destroyed in the end of days.
It's really nice that mainstream, secular Christians support Israel. But Christianity - the religion - has yet to come to terms with what this ingathering means.