Pope Brings His Gentle Touch to the Holy Land
Israel’s unending struggle is written into her very name, Isra-El: “struggles with God.” Since its formation in 1948, the world has watched the tumult of the modern state of Israel and one thing remains unclear: is the “struggle” between Israel herself and God, or between Israel and the world, with God beside her?
Either way, that Israel will always struggle should by now be understood, whether viewed through the lenses of history or scripture.
Pope Benedict XVI has been traveling about the Holy Land as a “pilgrim of peace” and each step — whether in Jerusalem or Bethlehem or Nazareth — has been a necessarily careful one, as though the built-up sludge of incessant struggle may hide a stumbling block. The squabbling children of Abraham who populate this land cry out for just resolutions to their conflicts, then wearily reject them all. Like nesting birds nicking shiny things, they grab at anything that offers a gleam of support for their staked claim and reject what does not shine their way.
Thus, at an “inter-religious dialogue” the pontiff’s call for mutual understanding inspired a Jew-hating diatribe by Sheikh Tayseer Tamimi and the pope’s encouragement at Yad Vashem was taken, by some, for coldness.
Pope John Paul II was a dramatic pipe organ of a man; with a chord he could shake a crowd and bring it to its knees. When he spoke at Yad Vashem in 2000 his remarks were emotional and Israel’s wail, ever-present its heaving bosom of struggle, found some release in them. By comparison, Pope Benedict XVI is a cerebral piano; he builds a thoughtful piece, note by note, and trusts that the listener will follow along:
I have come to stand in silence before this monument, erected to honor the memory of the millions of Jews killed in the horrific tragedy of the Shoah. They lost their lives, but they will never lose their names: these are indelibly etched. … Their names are forever fixed in the memory of Almighty God.
Israel seems to bring out the best and worst in so many people. Benedict is doing some great things, and I just hope more Jews vote for life in the next election, and help unborn Jewish babies.
When I saw your name in the byline to this wonderful post, I felt safe and warm. As you have often written, the press almost always get Pope Benedict XVI wrong. This bit says it all if only our fellow citizens of the world would listen:
“Let everyone reject the destructive power of hatred and prejudice, which kills men’s souls before it kills their bodies!”
More Papal gems from a Metro Catholic report:
“We cannot do whatever we please with the world,” he said, “rather, we are called to conform our choices to the subtle yet nonetheless perceptible laws inscribed by the Creator upon the universe and pattern our actions after the divine goodness that pervades the created realm” . . . “By moulding the hearts of the young, we mould the future of humanity itself. ”
The tragic vs Utopian view of human nature . . . It’s a tragedy that President Obama’s legions of lock-step followers don’t have a clue about “the subtle yet nonetheless perceptible laws” of the universe.
As Victor Davis Hanson wrote the other day, “the cracks … in Obama’s Pentelic statuary … will widen, because in about six areas he has taken on human nature itself age-old logic, and common-sense opponents that even a Harvard Law degree and Chicago organizing are no match for.
And the problem child in all this? islam.
I think Kevin is right…much as I try to like the new Pope, he shows almost the same level of naive silliness re: Islam as you find in some of the most ardent Israel/Jew haters on the Left. I’ll take him at face value that he genuinely feels sympathy for the Israeli people and their plight, but until he gets it through his head that you can’t just join hands and sing hymns (hoping “everything gonna be all right with God’s children”) with people who have dedicated their entire lives and all their energies to wiping you off the face of the earth. More of this same moral equivalence – and as couched in very careful language as it is, that’s what the Pope is offering more of here – just makes it that much harder to move on to the place he claims that he wants the Israelis and Palestinians to get to eventually. And no, before someone starts in, I’m neither Jewish nor an Israel-loving evangelical. I just happen to understand the difference between a legitimate state fighting for it’s survival and the safety of its citizens and a group of terrorist (and certifiably insane) thugs posing as a legitimate state. Wish that I thought the Pope understood the difference, too.
The Palestinians have a homeland. It’s called Jordan. Maybe we should start pressuring Jordan, and other Arab nations, to help the Palestinians, and take them in, rather than expecting Israel to endlessly take care of them—even as the Palestinians send homocide bombers to murder Israeli civilians, and teach their kids that Jews are apes and pigs.
The pope’s a nice guy, but I have serious doubts about the wisdom of creating yet another terrorist state, ruled by shari’a law (i.e., “Palestinian homeland”); I’m also dubious that the god of Islam is the same as the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus, or that the pope’s calls for “mutual understanding” are going to have much influence on the PLO.
The Pope’s “a nice guy,” but apparently his simple pleas for common decency are not worth anything to some.
Since he is a pope and not a politician I don’t know what more he can say except, “grow up. Start now.”
Why hasn’t the Pope come out in support of the Catholics protesting TeleBama’s visit to Notre Dame tomorrow and issued a strong statement about it? It would seem to me that coming out now in support of their plight would say a lot about his willingness to truly take a stand. His silence on this issue is troubling to me.
JBl, common decency is, well, very decent, but niceness, and soft-soap, are not going to solve the Holy Land’s problems—especially when one side is not listening to him.
Also, the world’s problems involve more than just the Israel/Palestine question. For instance, it would be nice if the Pope would visit the Philippines, which contain many Catholics, and where there have been many attacks from Islamic terrorists.
Thinking Person, yes, that bothers me, too; why hasn’t he said anything about that? He’s the pope, he’s supposedly pro-life, isn’t this the sort of thing he’s supposed to support?
I’m also bothered by the fact that he hasn’t offered much help to Middle-Eastern Christians, who are being driven out of the birth place of Christianity.
Does Benedict really believe that “our common belief in one God, the Father of the human family” will bring all people together? How does he see us reconciling the most important element, the intermediaries? Jews are awaiting the messiah, Christians have found their Messiah, and the Muslims have latched on to an ancient army commander to lead the way. These three visions of God’s kingdom on earth are intractably opposed. The answers to Palestine won’t appear until these faith issues are solved and everyone agrees. Until that happens, everyone will be relying on a military solution for peace. So, what is Benedict saying?
#8 ATP:
“Why hasn’t the Pope come out in support of the Catholics protesting TeleBama’s visit to Notre Dame tomorrow and issued a strong statement about it? It would seem to me that coming out now in support of their plight would say a lot about his willingness to truly take a stand. His silence on this issue is troubling to me.”
I think that on this, and other issues, we have to suspect that the Holy Father would rather try conversion than crusading.
That may change.
Betty-Blue, that’s what the trip was essentially about. Popes are everyone’s favorite targets. No matter what they do, it’s “why isn’t he doing THIS OTHER THING?”
Sigh.
How many times does Pope Benedict have to say something before it is enough? Does he have to interject himself into each and every controversy, only to repeat what he has said many times before? Are we such children that we need him to intervene in everything?
Or perhaps he has said what needs to be said already and expects the rest of us to act like adults, remember what he said, and implement it.
*****
As for Islam, Pope Benedict clearly has a larger strategy at play here. Once again, one of his major themes in the inter-religious dialogue was that of reason. Islam, by its very nature, is not a religion of reason; it is a religion of submission (hence the name). As the Pope pointed out in Regensburg, Allah is so all-powerful that he can even act unreasonably. In his talks on reason and God being a God of Reason, Benedict is taking on the heart of Islamic theology. If he can plant a seed of reason into the 1,700-year struggle against Islam, perhaps it could lead to the end of that struggle.
He is well aware of Islamic extremism, including Palestinian terrorism, which he spoke against in this trip. He spoke against the wall, but he also mentioned “the need for such instruments of security and separation.”
He has also spoken frequently and long about nations respecting the religious liberties of Christians, including speaking directly to the matter of Christians in Islamic countries.
Let’s give Pope Benedict a little more credit than is being offered here. Anyone who pays attention to what he actually says and does, rather than accept the MSM’s twisted versions thereof, knows that the Holy Spirit chose wisely in elevating this Rock to the papacy.
That should be 1,400-year struggle against Islam – from the 7th century until the present day.
Well, it might help if he injected himself into a few more controversies—such as the ongoing jihad against Philippine Christians, which, as a Christian leader, one would think he might be at least slightly concerned about. Same thing with the Notre Dame issue; this is, his church, after all, he is supposedly pro-life, and, yet, he can’t give a few words of encouragement to those of his flock who are standing up for life?
It does worry me that he’s ignored these issues, while inserting himself into the politically correct Israel/Palestine one. At this point, it should be pretty clear that all the roadmaps have guided us absolutely nowhere, and that the whole question of a Palestinian homeland is—ahem!—problematical. Also, why is the creation of such a homeland necessarily Israel’s problem? Hint, King of Jordan? Oil rich gulf states, who could certainly do something for their Islamic brothers?
Not being a mind reader, I can’t say that it’s so clear that the Pope has an overall plan or not. It looks to me like he’s sending mixed messages. As for the Spirit choosing wisely, that’s not up for me, or any mortal, to say.
And, historically, conversion of Islam has been an abject failure. Maybe it can be done, but it will require some real work, and missionary training, not just pleasant words, and speeches.
When will the Vatican officially recognize Israel? The pope may be well meaning—but this peculiar position of the Roman Catholic Church has done much to encourage the anti-Semites of the world. Also, Catholicism seems to prefer Jews as victims. The Church appears to get upset once they fight back—especially if they do so successfully. At the end of the day, as a practical matter, Catholic leaders are very pro-Palestinian. Israeli Jews are considered to be aggressors and obstacles to peace in the region.
Despite the standard Islamic response of raging mobs and threats of murder to what Benedict said at Regensburg he stood his ground, he never retracted the statement. Lets give him a little more credit for toughmindedness. He knows what Islam is and he is not going to buckle at critical moments — for Catholics or Jews.
I think Benedict has been very head-on with the Muslims. He didn’t even flinch from baptising one in St. Peter’s. But no matter how much a pope does, he is going to be criticized. Especially by the “squabbling children of Abraham”.
You mean “Pope Brings His Gentile Touch to the Holy Land”, right?
Thank you and don’t forget to tip your veal!
Jews did not loose their lives in the holocaust. Instead they knew where they were until the Nazis stole them. Benedicts words make it sound like the moral equivalent of a natural disaster which it was not. Furthermore Jewish complaints of insensitivity should not be equated with a murderous anti-Jewish rant.
It seems all the Pope did was apologize to muslims.-he even had the Obama-like incompetence to propose a Palestinian state. What a joke.
And no mention of reasons why Christians are fleeing Bethlehem? Or plight of Christians in Iraq, Pakistan, Egypt? “Children of Abraham”? You mean, Your Holiness, that the “hairy bunch of Ishmaelites” who bought Joseph from his brothers were arabs? Sounds like a stretch. I don’t think Benedict is naïve; he is a very learned man, especially about Islam, but his strategy here eludes me, especially when he mentions the two-state solution several times.
Those calling for the Pope to inject himself into the Notre Dame controversy are showing their parochialism. The Catholic church is enormous, and the Vatican has to dealth with the whole sheebang. In that context, the Notre Dame controversy is a tempest in a teapot.
“In that context, the Notre Dame controversy is a tempest in a teapot.”
I have some swampland in Florida to sell you. The Vatican’s silence, fairly or unfairly, is interpreted by most people as tacit acceptance of Barack Obama’s position on abortion. It is supposedly no big deal. The Roman Catholic Church fails to normally discipline its members when they dissent from its more important doctrines. This has resulted in most Catholics supporting Obama and many indifferent toward pro-life position. Indeed, silence is not always golden.
“Yes, Israel has enemies who would push all Jews into the sea”
When and where did the Pope acknowledge this? When has any Catholic leader admitted this? Like so many who try to put a positive spin on the Catholic Church’s abysmal record in the Holy Land you simply put into the Pope’s mouth the thoughts you ASSUME he has.
If the Church/Pope admits that Israel’s enemies would see her destroyed, then the Church would have to admit that Israel has a right to defend herself. What then would we think of all the Catholic denunciations of Israeli military actions, the security fence/wall, checkpoints, and other lethal and non-lethal methods of defense?
You say the Pope is not a politician? Fine. Let him stop pushing for a Palestinian terror-state in Israel’s backyard. It’s Catholics who need to grow up.
Unfortunately, the Pope’s learning has not led to his confronting the Big Lie, concocted by the Soviet Union and Nasser in 1964 when they invented the “Palestine Liberation Organization (P.L.O.),” namely, of calling the Arabs who live in the former Palestine Mandate “Palestinians.” The name “Palestinian” was synonymous with “Jew” from 135 A.D., when the Roman Emperor Hadrian defeated the last Jewish rebellion under Bar Kokba and changed the name of Judea to Palestina, to forever eradicate all memory of these obstreperous people. the Jews.
(See “The Revolt That Shook The Roman Empire,” Biblical Archaeology Review, September/October 2007.)
From that time, “Palestine” was synonymous with “Land of the Jews” or “the Holy Land,” and “Palestinian” was synonymous with “Jew.” Then Soviet propaganda got the meaning changed, as if these Arabs were the ancient denizens of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. They have invented phony history rewrite, e.g., that they are a people, tracing their ancestry to the Philistines (who ceased to exist after the 6th century B.C.) and so on. The Arabs hate Israel because it is a Jewish state – for religious reasons. Those in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, do not deserve a “homeland” or anything else, except decent treatment from their rulers (Hamas the PA). Why shouldn’t Jews lived in these places, where they had lived for thousands of years? And why aren’t there any Jews in Jordan, where they had lived for thousands of years until the British took over the Palestine Mandate (“Palestine” because that meant “Land of the Jews.”)
See also Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial.
Actually, the church can be quite ruthless when enforcing its decrees on those of its members who aren’t rich, Kennedys or presidents of the United States.
I had an aunt, a wonderful woman, who was excommunicated. She was married to my uncle, who’d been married once before, so, technically, her marriage to him was invalid, and she couldn’t go to communion, or be considered a full member of the church, for most of her adult life. They had no problem disciplining her. And the mother of my best friend in school was in the same position; excommunicated, no communion, bad woman, very bad!
Again, no problem laying down the law here. Yet, somehow Obama can support abortion—supposedly something the church is very strongly opposed to, and he gets not only a pass, but even the pope himself won’t come out and criticize him?
Don, yes, good point; if the Pope isn’t political, he should stop pushing for a Palestinian state. If he is political, then he ought to be criticized, just like any other politician.
And I think we’re perfectly justified in questioning the viability of a Palestinian state, even if a nice guy like the pope thinks it’s a good idea. The Anchoress herself links to a post by Bookworm, pointing out that the Palestinians do have a state, and it’s called Jordan; and some posters at her site are pointing out the problems with creating yet another radical Islamic nation.
For those wondering why Pope Benedict hasn’t made a direct statement about Obama/Notre Dame, Damian Thompson explains it in his critique of the recent Time article on the subject:
“[Amy Sullivan] implies that the Vatican is chilled about Notre Dame’s decision, unlike Cardinals George, DiNardo, Stafford and Archbishop Dolan. No, it isn’t. The Pope, for perfectly good reasons, is leaving the protests to the local Church rather than turn Fr John Jenkins’s disastrous invitation into an international diplomatic incident.”
The reason Thompson mentions is the principle of subsidiarity, key to Catholic social teaching, which holds that a higher authority should not do what properly belongs to a lower authority. The first response in a case like this properly belongs to the American bishops, and they have made that response; the Pope evidently does not see a need to do anything else at this time. It doesn’t fit our notions of public relations, but it’s how the Church works.
I can understand a catholic persons defensive posturing when it comes to their pontiff, but this dribble reveals the authors profound naivete & entrenched disdain for Israeli’s (Jews).
What jw said, to which I add for Mrs. Scailia’s benefit;
Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Kommunist.
Als sie die Sozialdemokraten einsperrten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Sozialdemokrat.
Als sie die Gewerkschafter holten,
habe ich nicht protestiert;
ich war ja kein Gewerkschafter.
Als sie die Juden holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Jude.
Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.
In aiding this former Nazi, the Pope, in his most recent anti-semitic endeavor, you are in the position of the hausfrau who when the SS showed up for her Jewish neighbors, pulled the blinds down and went back to polishing the end table.
The “Palestinians” WERE given land in the Balfour declaration, the 1938 White Paper AND the 1947 UN settlement. That land was called Jordan.
Please note that the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians ( hereafter ATCTP) want to return to the 1967 boundaries. That is because they took land from Israel in ’48 that Israel took back in ’67. No, if the ATCTP were serious, they would recognize Israel’s right to exist, stop teaching anti-semitism in their schools, stop their terror campaign and agree to the original UN partition boundaries.
That isn’t going to happen. So one side will be slaughtered. It is not within the power of the west to prevent the slaughter. All we can do is pick the winner.
You and your bud, the Nazi Pope, are picking the Muslims.
The Pope is anything but naive on the Middle East. Lacking imagination, among other things, the MSM lurched between characterizing his trip as piddling ecumenicalism and insidious whitewashing: half acoustic-guitars-and-felt-dove-art, half Tin Drum.
They need to update their templates.
Those genuinely worried about the Pope’s commitments might read _Without Roots_.
typos_r_us calls Benedict XVI a former Nazi. The man was a child when he joined the Hitler Youth, which was compulsory. (That means, typos, that one had to join, otherwise Mom and Dad went to prison. I only explain this because it is apparent that you are dense enough to require an explanation.) He served honorably in the Wehrmacht, (that’s the German army, typos, not Nazi party bodies such as the SS or the SA) which was also compulsory for able-bodied young men, and ended the war as a POW. Neither constitutes being a Nazi, former or otherwise, but are quite consistent with being a young German man in the 1940′s. Buffoons such as yourself, typos, would do better to keep quiet and perhaps their idiocy might then pass unmarked. As it is, thanks for presenting such a target-rich opportunity. And no, I am not Catholic, nor an apologist for the Pope. I do, however, recognize a fool when I see one. Thanks for playing, and make sure you stop on the way out to pick up your lovely parting gifts.
I’m not debating that the Hitler Youth was more or less compulsory for children, those deeds are excusable.
I’m not looking for remorseful gestures either, I don’t care if the pontiff is ashamed, proud or feels absolved from any responsibility.
The Israeli’s rolled out the red carpet, took extreme security measures and welcomed his Holiness with top honors.
Benedict XVI reciprocated with an inciting & commanding declaration to a crowd of Arabs that a 23rd Islamic state be established in the center of Israel.
Exploiting Israel’s safety umbrella to give speeches in support of dismantling the very security barriers that provide Ratzinger his slanderous forum is NAIVE & reveals a lack in evolution from his days of compulsory decision making.
Yeesh. I’ve seen so many insanely crazy muslim leaders that I almost forgot how pleasent and graceful the Pope is. And before anyone says “Hey! Let’s see how’d you act if you were being oppressed by the evil Israeli empire!” Uh, Christians have plenty to be angry over as well. Black Christians in Sudan are being systematically raped, murdered and literally enslaved by arab muslims. Christian villages and churches all across the middle east and several other islamic states around the world are being systematically cleansed through rape, murder and all kinds of other abuses like arresting them for simply carrying Bible’s or congregating privately in a home to worship. And they’re kidnapping and beheading and suicide bombing and gunning down Christians, Jews, Biddhists, Hindus, etc, all around the world every freaking day. Yet Christians still remain calm and peaceful (too much so in my opinion). So don’t give me any crap about Jewish and Christian “oppression”. You islamist apologists make a mockery of the word.
Here’s an interesting article about the vaunted “Two State Solution” (warning: graphic photo, halfway down) http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2009/05/who-needs-palestinian-state.html