Rome against the Jews
We
are often reminded by certain Catholics of Luther's
latter-days exasperated rage against a recalcitrant Jewish
population, and of his unholy counsel and of the tragic use of
both against Jews. But which one-sided self-righteous indignation
against Luther's antisemitism (which is more accurately
anti-Judaism) ignores that of Rome while supposing
Luther is like a pope to us (perhaps because they cannot conceive
of convictions that rest upon Scriptural substantiation, vs.
men), yet evangelicals are the strongest supporters of Israel
(not necessarily due to eschatological beliefs), contrary to the
fruit of Catholicism.
Rome
has also resisted, and been slow and weak in its support of the
state of Israel, and American bishops especially seem to favor
Muslims over their enemies.
The
light of history testifies that Luther said what Catholics have
said, both of which provided Hitler with historical pretext for
his wicked actions. While history also testifies to (or at least charges of) iniquity and recalcitrant hardness manifest in much of Jewish
culture against the Christianity they saw, which rendered them
hard
to love
and fostered invectives, this does not excuse all such, much less
sanction the inexcusable actions against them. Even Moses was
once penalized for speaking wrongly, even though he was provoked
to do so by his people. (Ps. 106:33; Num. 20:10,11)
Yet the Lord
sent the apostles with the good news (gospel) to the Jews first,
and both Moses and Paul were willing to be damned if that could
mean the salvation of their people (Ex. 32:32; Rm. 9:3) who overall rejected their Messiah and have suffered due to it,
(1Thes.
2:16) while God yet promises repentance and salvation by faith for all of a future remnant that remains. Glory to God. But the selflessness of Moses and Paul should be the Christian attitude for all, though I
come too short in it.
Any
emphasis
throughout
the below has been added by me.
►Canons of the 4th Lateran
Council (convoked by Pope Innocent III with the papal bull of
April 19, 1213)
CANON 67
Text. The more the Christians are restrained from the practice
of usury, the more are they oppressed in this matter by the
treachery of the Jews, so that in a short time they exhaust
the resources of the Christians. Wishing, therefore, in this
matter to protect the Christians against cruel oppression by the
Jews, we ordain in this decree that if in the future under any
pretext Jews extort from Christians oppressive and immoderate
interest, the partnership of the Christians shall be denied them
till they have made suitable satisfaction for their excesses...
Lastly, we decree that the Jews be compelled by the same
punishment (avoidance of commercial intercourse) to make
satisfaction for the tithes and offerings due to the churches,
which the Christians were accustomed to supply from their houses
and other possessions before these properties, under whatever
title, fell into the hands of the Jews, that thus the
churches may be safeguarded against loss.
CANON 68
Summary. Jews and
Saracens [a generic term for Muslims] of both sexes in
every Christian province must be distinguished from the Christian
by a difference of dress. On Passion Sunday and the
last three days of Holy Week they may not appear in
public.
Text: In some provinces
a difference in dress distinguishes
the Jews or Saracens from the Christians, but in certain
others such a confusion has grown up that
they cannot be
distinguished by any difference. Thus it happens at times
that through error Christians have relations with the women of
Jews or Saracens, and Jews and Saracens with Christian women.
Therefore, that they may not, under pretext of error of this
sort, excuse themselves in the future for the excesses of such
prohibited intercourse, we decree that such Jews and Saracens of
both sexes in every Christian province and at all times shall be
marked off in the eyes of the public from other peoples through
the character of their dress. Particularly, since it may be read
in the writings of Moses [
Numbers 15:37-41], that this very law
has been enjoined upon them.
Moreover, during the last three days before Easter and
especially on Good Friday, they shall not go forth in public at
all, for the reason that some of them on these very days, as
we hear, do not blush to go forth better dressed and are not
afraid to mock the Christians who maintain the memory of the most
holy Passion by wearing signs of mourning.
This, however, we forbid most severely, that any one should
presume at all to break forth in insult to the Redeemer. And
since we ought not to ignore any insult to Him who blotted out
our disgraceful deeds, we command that such impudent fellows be
checked by the secular princes by imposing them proper punishment
so that they shall not at all presume to blaspheme Him who was
crucified for us.
[Note by Schroeder: In 581 the Synod of Macon
enacted in canon 14 that from Thursday in Holy Week until Easter
Sunday, .Jews may not in accordance with a decision of King
Childebert appear in the streets and in public places. Mansi, IX,
934; Hefele-Leclercq, 111, 204. In 1227 the Synod of Narbonne in
canon 3 ruled: "That Jews may be distinguished from others,
we decree and emphatically command that in the center of the
breast (of their garments) they shall wear an oval badge, the
measure of one finger in width and one half a palm in height. We
forbid them moreover, to work publicly on Sundays and on
festivals. And lest they scandalize Christians or be scandalized
by Christians, we wish and ordain that during Holy Week they
shall not leave their houses at all except in case of urgent
necessity, and the prelates shall during that week especially
have them guarded from vexation by the Christians." Mansi,
XXIII, 22; Hefele-Leclercq V 1453. Many decrees similar to these
in content were issued by synods before and after this Lateran
Council. Hefele-Leclercq, V and VI; Grayzel, The Church and the
Jews in the XIlIth Century, Philadelphia, 1933.]
CANON 70
Summary. Jews who have received baptism are to be restrained by
the prelates from returning to their former rite.
Text. Some (Jews), we understand, who voluntarily approached the
waters of holy baptism, do not entirely cast off the old man that
they may more perfectly put on the new one, because, retaining
remnants of the former rite, they obscure by such a mixture the
beauty of the Christian religion. But since it is written:
"Accursed is the man that goeth on the two ways"
(
Ecclus. 2:14), and "a garment that is woven together of
woolen and linen" (Deut. 22: ii) ought not to be put on, we
decree that such persons be in every way restrained b the
prelates from the observance of the former rite, that, having
given themselves of their own free will to the Christian
religion,
salutary coercive action may preserve them in its
observance, since not to know the way of the Lord is a lesser
evil than to retrace one's steps after it is known.
(From H. J.
Schroeder, Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils: Text,
Translation and Commentary, (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1937). pp.
236-296) —
http://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/344latj.html
► Popes
Against the Jews
“the
legislation enacted in the 1930s by the Nazis in their Nuremberg
Laws and by the Italian Fascists with their racial laws—which
stripped the Jews of their rights as citizens—was modeled
on measures that the [Roman Catholic] Church itself had enforced
for as long as it was in a position to do so” (9).
In
1466, in festivities sponsored by Pope Paul II, Jews were made to
race naked through the streets of the city. A
particularly evocative later account describes them: “Races
were run on each of the eight days of the Carnival by horses,
asses and buffaloes, old men, lads, children, and Jews. Before
they were to run, the Jews were richly fed, so as to make the
race more difficult for them, and at the same time, more amusing
for the spectators. They ran from the Arch of Domitian to the
Church of St. Mark at the end of the Corso at full tilt, amid
Rome’s taunting shrieks of encouragement and peals of
laughter, while the Holy Father stood upon a richly ornamented
balcony and laughed heartily. Two centuries later, these
practices, now deemed indecorous and unbefitting the dignity of
the Holy City, were stopped by Clement IX. In their place the
Pope assessed a heavy tax on the Jews to help pay the costs of
the city’s Carnival celebrations.
But various
other Carnival rites continued. For many years the rabbis of
the ghetto were forced to wear clownish outfits and march through
the streets to the jeers of the crow, pelted by a variety of
missiles. Such rites were not peculiar to Rome. In Pisa in
the eighteenth century, for example, it was customary each year,
as part of Carnival, for students to chase after the fattest Jew
in the city, capture him, weigh him, and then make him give them
his weight in sugar-coated almonds.
In 1779,
Pius VI resurrected some of the Carnival rites that had been
neglected in recent years. Most prominent among them was the
feudal rite of homage, in which ghetto officials, made to wear
special clothes, stood before an unruly mob in a crowded piazza,
making an offering to Rome’s governors.
It was
this practice that occasioned the formal plea from the ghetto to
Pope Gregory XVI in 1836. The Jews argued that such rites
should be abandoned, and cited previous popes who had ordered
them halted. They asked that, in his mercy, the Pope now do the
same. On November 5, the Pope met with his secretary of state
to discuss the plea. A note on the secretary of state’s
copy of the petition, along with his signature, records the
Pope’s decision: “It is not opportune to make any
innovation.” The annual rites continued.
“When
all is said and done, the [Roman Catholic] Church’s claim
of lack of responsibility for the kind of anti-Semitism that made
the Holocaust possible comes down to this: The
Roman Catholic Church never called for, or sanctioned, the mass
murder of the Jews. Yes, the Jews should be stripped of their
rights as equal citizens. Yes, they should be kept from contact
with the rest of society. But Christian Charity and Christian
theology forbade good Christians to round them up and murder
them.” See
more
in part 5 of a series
(1
, 2
, 3
, 4
, 5,
6
.
► Pope
Leo XII
As cardinal
vicar of Rome, Della Genga [the new Pope Leo XII] had been
outraged to discover that not all of the Holy City’s Jews
had returned to their ghetto following the restoration of the
papal regime. One of his major projects as cardinal vicar had
been to oversee a modest enlargement of the ghetto, to
undermine the Jews’ complaint that it was impossible for
them all to fit in the densely packed space within the old ghetto
walls. Now, as pope, he redoubled these efforts. In 1823, in
one of his first pontifical acts [which the Church can officially
dismiss as if it were nothing], Leo XII ordered the Jews back
into the ghetto, “to overcome the evil consequences of the
freedom that [they] have enjoyed…
In the first
year of his papacy, he had the Holy Office investigate the extent
to which the old restrictions on the Jews in the Papal States
were still being enforced. The goal as an internal Inquisition
report expressed it, was “to contain the wickedness of
the obstinate Jews so that the danger of perversion of the
Catholic faithful” could be avoided. The report
expressed dismay that some Jews lived outside the ghettoes, some
traveled from place to place without the special permits they
were required to get from the local office of the bishop or the
inquisitor, and some had opened stores and businesses beyond the
ghetto’s walls...
The new
Pope’s efforts to enforce these restrictions on the Jews
relied on the bureaucracy of control provided by the Inquisition
and by various other agencies of the Papal States. —
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/02/popes-against-jews-part-5-you-will.html
Note that
according to the Catechism:
2032 "To
the Church belongs the right always and everywhere to announce
moral principles, including those pertaining to the social order,
and to make judgments on any human affairs to the extent that
they are required by the fundamental rights of the human person
or the salvation of souls." —
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/02/popes-against-jews-part-3-positing-big.html
What follows
falls under judgments on human affairs which is justified as
being necessary for the salvation of souls.
►Cum
nimis absurdum
Cum nimis
absurdum was a
papal bull issued by Pope Paul IV dated 14 July 1555
[after
Luther]. It takes its name from its first words:[1] "Since
it is absurd and utterly inconvenient that the Jews, who through
their own fault were condemned by God to eternal slavery..."
The
bull revoked
all the rights of the Jewish community and placed religious and
economic restrictions on Jews in the Papal States, renewed
anti-Jewish legislation and subjected Jews to various
degradations and restrictions on their personal freedom.
The
bull established the Roman Ghetto and required the Jews of Rome,
which had existed as a community since before Christian times and
numbered about 2,000 at the time, to live in it. The Ghetto was a
walled quarter with three gates that were locked at night. Jews
were also restricted to one synagogue per city. Under
the bull, Jewish males were required to wear a pointed yellow
hat, and Jewish females a yellow kerchief (see yellow badge).
Jews were required to attend compulsory Catholic sermons on the
Jewish shabbat.
The bull
also subjected Jews to various other restrictions such as a
prohibition on property ownership and practising medicine among
Christians. Jews were
allowed to practice only unskilled jobs, as rag men, secondhand
dealers [2] or fish mongers. They could also be pawnbrokers.
Paul IV's
successor, Pope Pius IV, enforced the creation of other ghettos
in most Italian towns, and his successor, Pope Pius V,
recommended them to other bordering states. The Papal States
ceased to exist on 20 September 1870 when they were incorporated
in the Kingdom of Italy, but the
requirement that Jews live in the ghetto was only formally
abolished by the Italian state in 1882. Though
the Roman and other ghettos have now been abolished, the bull has
never been revoked. —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cum_nimis_absurdum
►Cum
nimis absurdum text
Laws and
ordinances to be followed by Jews living in the Holy See [decreed
by the] Bishop [of Rome, the Pope] Paul, servant of the servants
of God, for future recollection.
Since it is
completely senseless and inappropriate to be in a situation where
Christian piety allows the
Jews (whose guilt—all of their own doing—has
condemned them to eternal slavery) access to our society and even
to live among us; indeed,
they are without gratitude to Christians, as, instead of thanks
for gracious treatment, they
return invective, and among themselves, instead of the slavery,
which they deserve, they manage to claim superiority: we,
who recently learned that these very Jews have insolently invaded
Rome from a number of the Papal States, territories and domains,
to the extent that not
only have they mingled with Christians (even when close to their
churches) and wearing no identifying garments, but to dwell in
homes, indeed, even in
the more noble [dwellings] of the states, territories and domains
in which they lingered, conducting business from their houses and
in the streets and dealing in real estate; they even have nurses
and housemaids and other Christians as hired servants. And
they would dare to perpetrate a
wide variety of other dishonorable things, contemptuous of the
[very] name Christian...
1. Desiring
firstly, as much as we can with [the help of] God, to
beneficially provide, by this [our decree] that will forever be
in force, we ordain that for the rest of time, in the City as
well as in other states, territories and domains of the Church of
Rome itself, all Jews are to live in only one [quarter] to which
there is only one entrance and from which there is but one exit,
2.
Furthermore, in each and every state, territory and domain in
which they are living, they
will have only one synagogue,
in its customary location, and they
will construct no other new ones,
nor can they own
buildings. Furthermore,
all of their synagogues, besides the one allowed, are to be
destroyed and demolished.
And the properties,
which they currently own, they must sell to Christians within
a period of time to be determined by the magistrates
themselves...
§ 3. Moreover, concerning the matter
that Jews should be recognizable everywhere: [to this end]
men must wear a hat, women, indeed, some other evident sign,
yellow in color, that must not be concealed or covered by any
means, and must be tightly affixed [sewn]; and furthermore, they
can not be absolved or excused from the obligation to wear the
hat or other emblem of this type to any extent whatever and
under any pretext whatsoever of their rank or prominence or of
their ability to tolerate [this] adversity...
7. And they may not presume in any way
to play, eat or fraternize with Christians...
9. Moreover, these Jews are to be
limited to the trade of rag-picking, or "cencinariae"
(as it is said in the vernacular), and they cannot trade in
grain, barley or any other commodity essential to human welfare.
10. And those among them who are
physicians, even if summoned and inquired after, cannot attend
or take part in the care of Christians.
11.And they are not to be addressed as
superiors [even] by poor Christians...
14. And, should
they, in any manner whatsoever, be deficient in the foregoing, it
would be treated as a crime:..just
as if they were rebels and criminals by the jurisdiction in which
the offense takes place. —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cum_nimis_absurdum
►Inquisition
In some parts of Spain towards the end of
the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism,
encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of
Ecija. In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews
were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The
number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as
Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.[32
One of the consequences of these pogroms
was the mass conversion of thousands of surviving Jews.
Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church,
and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could
legally return to Judaism. However, this was very narrowly
interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically
acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but
confined this to cases where it was literally administered by
physical force. A person who had consented to baptism under
threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a
voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to
Judaism.[33] After the public violence, many of the converted
"felt it safer to remain in their new religion."[34]
Thus, after 1391, a new social group appeared and were referred
to as conversos or New Christians.
King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen
Isabella I of Castile established the Spanish Inquisition in
1478. In contrast to the previous inquisitions, it operated
completely under royal Christian authority, though staffed by
clergy and orders, and independently of the Holy See [but the
prior Fourth Lateran Council did require Christians leaders to
exterminate all the heretics its prelates convicted under
his rule, or else Catholics were not bound to obey him]. It
operated in Spain and in all Spanish colonies and territories,
which included the Canary Islands, the Spanish Netherlands, the
Kingdom of Naples, and all Spanish possessions in North, Central,
and South America. It primarily targeted forced converts from
Islam (Moriscos, Conversos and secret Moors) and from Judaism
(Conversos, Crypto-Jews and Marranos) — both groups still
resided in Spain after the end of the Islamic control of Spain —
who came under suspicion of either continuing to adhere to
their old religion or of having fallen back into it.
In 1492 all Jews who had not converted were
expelled from Spain, and those who remained became subject to the
Inquisition.— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
►The Inquisition
While many people associate the Inquisition
with Spain and Portugal, it was actually instituted by Pope
Innocent III (1198-1216) in Rome. A later pope, Pope Gregory IX
established the Inquisition, in 1233, to combat the heresy of the
Abilgenses, a religious sect in France.
In the beginning, the Inquisition dealt
only with Christian heretics and did not interfere with the
affairs of Jews. However, disputes about Maimonides’ books
(which addressed the synthesis of Judaism and other cultures)
provided a pretext for harassing Jews and, in 1242, the
Inquisition condemned the Talmud and burned thousands of volumes.
In 1288, the first mass burning of Jews on the stake took place
in France.
In 1481 the Inquisition started in Spain
and ultimately surpassed the medieval Inquisition, in both scope
and intensity. Conversos (Secret Jews) and New Christians were
targeted because of their close relations to the Jewish
community, many of whom were Jews in all but their name. Fear of
Jewish influence led Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand to
write a petition to the Pope asking permission to start an
Inquisition in Spain. In 1483 Tomas de Torquemada became the
inquisitor-general for most of Spain, he set tribunals in many
cities. Also heading the Inquisition in Spain were two Dominican
monks, Miguel de Morillo and Juan de San Martin.
First, they arrested Conversos and
notable figures in Seville; in Seville more than 700 Conversos
were burned at the stake and 5,000 repented. Tribunals were
also opened in Aragon, Catalonia and Valencia. An Inquisition
Tribunal was set up in Ciudad Real, where 100 Conversos were
condemned, and it was moved to Toledo in 1485. Between 1486-1492,
25 auto de fes were held in Toledo, 467 people were burned at
the stake and others were imprisoned. The Inquisition finally
made its way to Barcelona, where it was resisted at first because
of the important place of Spanish Conversos in the economy and
society.
More than 13,000 Conversos were put on
trial during the first 12 years of the Spanish Inquisition.
Hoping to eliminate ties between the Jewish community and
Conversos, the Jews of Spain were expelled in 1492...
The next phase of the Inquisition began in
Portugal in 1536: King Manuel I had initially asked Pope Leo X to
begin an inquisition in 1515, but only after Leo's death in 1521
did Pope Paul III agree to Manuel's request. Thousands of Jews
came to Portugal after the 1492 expulsion. A Spanish style
Inquisition was constituted and tribunals were set up in Lisbon
and other cities. Among the Jews who died at the hands of
the Inquisition were well-known figures of the period such as
Isaac de Castro Tartas, Antonio Serrao de Castro and Antonio Jose
da Silva. The Inquisition never stopped in Spain and continued
until the late 18th century.
By the second half of the 18th century, the
Inquisition abated, due to the spread of enlightened ideas and
lack of resources. The last auto de fe in Portugal took place on
October 27, 1765. Not until 1808, during the brief reign of
Joseph Bonaparte, was the Inquisition abolished in Spain. An
estimated 31,912 heretics were burned at the stake, 17,659 were
burned in effigy and 291,450 made reconciliations in the Spanish
Inquisition. In Portugal, about 40,000 cases were tried, although
only 1,800 were burned, the
rest made penance [or else].
The Inquisition was not limited to Europe;
it also spread to Spanish and Portugese colonies in the New World
and Asia. Many Jews and Conversos fled from Portugal and Spain to
the New World seeking greater security and economic
opportunities. Branches of the Portugese Inquisition were set up
in Goa and Brazil. Spanish tribunals and auto de fes were set up
in Mexico, the Philippine Islands, Guatemala, Peru, New Granada
and the Canary Islands. By the late 18th century, most of these
were dissolved. —
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html:
► Goa Inquisition
The Goa Inquisition was the office of the
Portuguese Inquisition acting in Portuguese India, and in the
rest of the Portuguese Empire in Asia. It was established in
1560, briefly suppressed from 1774–1778, and finally
abolished in 1812.[1] Based on the records that survive, H. P.
Salomon and I. S. D. Sassoon state that between the Inquisition's
beginning in 1561 and its temporary abolition in 1774, some
16,202 persons were brought to trial by the Inquisition. Of
this number, it is known that 57 were sentenced to death and
executed; another 64 were burned in effigy. Others were subjected
to lesser punishments or penance, but the fate of many of
those tried by the Inquisition is unknown.[2]
The Inquisition was established to
punish apostate New Christians—Jews and Muslims who
converted to Catholicism, as well as their descendants—who
were now suspected of practising their ancestral religion in
secret.[2] —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition
►Portuguese Inquisition
...was formally established in Portugal in
1536 at the request of the King of Portugal, João III.
Manuel I had asked for the installation of the Inquisition in
1515 to fulfill the commitment of marriage with Maria of Aragon,
but it was only after his death that Pope Paul III acquiesced. In
the period after the Medieval Inquisition, it was one of three
different manifestations of the wider Christian Inquisition along
with the Spanish Inquisition and Roman Inquisition.
The major target of the Portuguese
Inquisition were those who had converted from Judaism to
Catholicism, the Conversos, also known as New Christians or
Marranos, who were suspected of secretly practising Judaism. Many
of these were originally Spanish Jews, who had left Spain for
Portugal. The number of victims is estimated around 40000.[1]
Spanish Inquisition
On November 1, 1478, Pope Sixtus IV
published the Papal bull, Exigit Sinceras Devotionis Affectus,
through which he gave the monarchs exclusive authority to name
the inquisitors in their kingdoms...In 1482 the pope was still
trying to maintain control over the Inquisition and to gain
acceptance for his own attitude towards the New Christians, which
was generally more moderate than that of the Inquisition and the
local rulers.
In 1483, Jews were expelled from all of
Andalusia. Though the pope wanted to crack down on abuses,
Ferdinand pressured him to promulgate a new bull, threatening
that he would otherwise separate the Inquisition from Church
authority.[21][22] Sixtus did so on October 17, 1483, naming
Tomás de Torquemada Inquisidor General of Aragón,
Valencia and Catalonia. ...
Henry Kamen estimates that, of a population
of approximately 80,000 Jews, about one half or 40,000 chose
emigration.[27] —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Inquisition
►Tomás de Torquemada
The Pope went on to appoint a number of
inquisitors for the Spanish Kingdoms in early 1482, including
Torquemada. A year later he was named Grand Inquisitor of Spain,
which he remained until his death in 1498. In the fifteen years
under his direction, the Spanish Inquisition grew from the single
tribunal at Seville to a network of two dozen 'Holy Offices'.[12]
As Grand Inquisitor, Torquemada reorganized the Spanish
Inquisition (originally based in Castile in 1478), establishing
tribunals in Sevilla, Jaén, Córdoba, Ciudad Real
and (later) Saragossa. His quest was to rid Spain of all heresy.
The Spanish chronicler Sebastián de Olmedo called him "the
hammer of heretics, the light of Spain, the savior of his
country, the honor of his order".
Under the edict of March 31, 1492, known
as the Alhambra Decree, approximately 200,000 Jews left Spain.
Following the Alhambra decree of 1492, approximately 50,000
Jews took baptism so as to remain in Spain; however, many of
these—known as "Marranos" from Corinthians II, a
contraction of anathema—were "crypto-jews" and
secretly kept some of their Jewish traditions. —
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1s_de_Torquemada
• In addition is The
Vatican did not even formally recognize Israel until 1993.
A bit late.
► Papal–Israel
relations
Until
1948 the Pope was motivated by the traditional Vatican opposition
to Zionism.
Vatican opposition to a Jewish homeland stemmed largely from
theological doctrines regarding Judaism.[40] In 1904,
the Zionist leader Theodor Herzl obtained an audience with
Pope
Pius X in the hope of persuading the pontiff to support the
establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The pope's
response was: "Non possumus"--"We cannot."
In
1917,
Pius X's successor, Pope
Benedict XV, equally refused to support any concept for a Jewish
state.
Minerbi writes that when a League of Nations mandate were being
proposed for Palestine, the
Vatican
was disturbed by the prospect of a (Protestant) British mandate
over the Holy Land, but a Jewish state was anathema to
it.[27][41]
On 22 June
1943, Amleto Giovanni Cicognani, the Apostolic Delegate to
Washington D.C. wrote to US President Franklin Roosevelt, asking
him to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
...
If the
greater part of Palestine is given to the Jewish people, this
would be a severe blow to the religious attachment of Catholics
to this land. To have the Jewish people in the majority would
be to interfere with the peaceful exercise of these rights in the
Holy Land already vested in Catholics.
It is true
that at one time Palestine was inhabited by the Hebrew Race, but
there is no axiom in history to substantiate the necessity of a
people returning to a country they left nineteen centuries
before.[42]
The
Vatican view of the Near East was dominated by a Cold War
perception that Arab Muslims are conservative but religious,
whereas Israeli Zionists are modernist but atheists. The
Vatican's then Foreign Minister, Domenico Tardini (without being
even a bishop, but a close collaborator of Pius XII) said to the
French ambassador in November 1957, according to an Israeli
diplomatic dispatch from Rome to Jerusalem:
"I have
always been of the opinion that there never was an overriding
reason for this state to be established. It was the fault of the
western states. Its existence is an inherent risk factor for war
in the Middle East. Now,
Israel exists, and there is certainly no way to destroy it, but
every day we pay the price of this error."[45]
by initially
siding with Palestinian claims for compensations on political,
social and financial levels, the Vatican shaped its Middle
Eastern policy since 1948 upon two pillars. One was based on
political and theological reservations against Zionism,... the
Holy See has also maintained reservations of its own. The more
established the Zionist Yishuv became in Mandatory Palestine, the
more political reservations the Vatican added to its initial
theological inhibitions.[51]
On 26 May
1955, when the Israeli Philharmonic Orchestra performed
Beethoven's Seventh Symphony at the Vatican as an act of respect
for Pius XII, the Vatican still refrained from mentioning the
name of the State, preferring instead to describe the orchestra
as a collection of "Jewish musicians of fourteen different
nationalities."[53]
Paul VI was
Pope from 21 June 1963 to 6 August 1978. He strongly defended
inter-religious dialogue in the spirit of Nostra Aetate. He was
also the first Pope to mention the Palestinian people by
name...On 15 January 1973, the Pope met Israeli Prime Minister
Golda Meir at the Vatican, which was the first meeting
between a Pope and an Israeli Prime Minister. At the meeting, the
Pope brought up the issues of peace in the Middle East, refugees
and the status of the holy places, but no agreement was
reached.[58] According to Meir's own account of the meeting,
the Pope criticized the Israeli government for its treatment of
the Palestinians, and she said in reply: Your Holiness, do you
know what my earliest memory is? A pogrom in Kiev. When we were
merciful and when we had no homeland and when we were weak, we
were led to the gas chambers.[59]
Relations
since 1993[edit]
The opening
towards the State of Israel by the Vatican was partially a result
of Israel's effective control over the entire Holy City since
1967. This forced the Vatican to introduce a pragmatic dimension
to its well-known declaratory policy of political denial. Hence,
since 1967, Vatican diplomacy vis-Ã -vis Israel began to
waver between two parameters:
A policy
of strict and consequent non-recognition of Israel's sovereignty
over Jerusalem, far beyond the usual interpretation of
international law, as the Holy See still embraces its own ideas
regarding the special status of Jerusalem.
A pragmatic
policy, through which Catholic interests can best be served by
having a working relationship with the party who exercises
effective authority and control in Jerusalem.
The
establishment of full diplomatic relations in 1993–94, on
the other hand, was a belated political consequence of the
theological change towards Judaism as reflected in Nostra Aetate.
It was also a result of the new political reality, which began
with the Madrid COnference and later continued with the Oslo
peace process, after which the Vatican could not continue to
ignore a State that even the Palestinians had initiated formal
relations with.
Pope
Benedict XVI has declared that he wishes to maintain a positive
Christian-Jewish and Vatican-Israel relationship. Indeed, on the
occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state, Benedict
stated: "The Holy See joins you in giving thanks to the Lord
that the aspirations of the Jewish people for a home in the land
of their fathers have been fulfilled,"[72] which may be seen
as a theological justification of the return of the Jewish People
to Israel – indeed, an acceptance that has placed all
previous Catholic denials of Zionism in the shade. On the
other hand, he has also stressed the political neutrality of the
Holy See in internal Mideast conflicts. Like John Paul II, he was
disappointed by the non-resolution of the 1993 Fundamental
Accord; and like his predecessor, he also expressed support
for a Palestinian state alongside Israel. -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_See%E2%80%93Israel_relations
► Evangelical support for
Jews.
In contrast, 46% of
white evangelical (blacks
only make up 6% of evangelicals) Protestants, versus 33% of Prots
and only 21% of Catholics say that the U.S. is not
providing enough support for Israel.
(2014) —
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/27/strong-support-for-israel-in-u-s-cuts-across-religious-lines/
As for the conflict between Israel
and the Palestinians, asked whether they sympathize with either
side, 72% of white evangelicals sided with Israel, versus 56%
of Prots and 46% of Caths overall. —
http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/3-19-13%20Foreign%20Policy%20Release.pdf
Of course, this is consistent with
the stats which shows 82% of white evangelical Protestants say
that Israel was given to the Jewish people by God, versus 64% of
Prots and just 34% of white Catholics, while 45% of
Catholics outright deny that it was (others do not know). —
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/10/03/more-white-evangelicals-than-american-jews-say-god-gave-israel-to-the-jewish-people/
► Egregious ecumenism
In addition, Rome being
"friendlier"to Israel means not simply affirming Jews
and the right to live in peace but also means affirming that
Muslims worship the same God as Jews and Christians, that
together with us they adore the one,
merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”
(Lumen Gentium 16, November 21, 1964)
Which
is blasphemous. For with Allah, we are not dealing with an
utterly ambiguous "unknown god" as in Acts 17, which
had no express revelation and could said to be the true God they
were looking for. But Allah is much a distinct God, and in the
name of this false deity are the contradictory and skewed
Biblical stories of the Qur'an, besides adding its own, and which
denies the very essence of the gospel, that of the Divine Son of
God procuring salvation with His own sinless shed blood! Yet
again and again popes comfort Muslims by assuring them they have
the true God, while any gospel is largely replaced by platitudes
for peace.
Rome says Muslims the worship
the same God as Catholics, "the one, living and subsistent,
merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth," and
"strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden
decrees of God, just as Abraham submitted himself to God’s
plan." -Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate 3, October 28,
1965
And,
We feel sure
that as representatives
of Islam, you join in our prayers to the Almighty,
that he may grant all African believers the desire for pardon and
reconciliation so often commended in the Gospels and in the
Qur’an... We gladly recall also those confessors of the
Muslim faith who
were the first to suffer death, in
the year 1848, for refusing to transgress the precepts of their
religion.” — Paul VI, address to the Islamic
communities of Uganda, August 1, 1969.
“I
deliberately address you as brothers:
that is certainly what we are, because we are members of the same
human family, whose efforts, whether people realize it or not,
tend toward God and the truth that comes from him. But we
are especially brothers in God, who created us and whom we are
trying to reach, in our own ways, through faith, prayer and
worship, through the keeping of his law and through submission to
his designs...
“Dear
Muslims, my brothers: I
would like to add that we Christians, just like you, seek the
basis and model of mercy in God himself, the
God to whom your Book gives the very beautiful name of al-Rahman,
while the Bible calls him al-Rahum, the Merciful One.” -
John Paul II, address to representatives of Muslims of the
Philippines, February 20, 1981
“As
Christians and Muslims, we
encounter one another in faith in the one God, our
Creator and guide, our just and merciful judge. - John Paul II,
address to representatives of the Muslims of Belgium, May 19,
1985
We
believe in the same God, the one God, the living God, the God
who created the world and brings his creatures to their
perfection...Both of us believe in one God, the only God, - John
Paul II , address to the young Muslims of Morocco, August 19,
1985
Christians
and Muslims, together with the followers of the Jewish religion,
belong to what can be called ‘the tradition of
Abraham.’..Our Creator and our final judge desires that we
live together. Our God is a God of peace, who desires peace among
those who live according to His commandments. Our God is the
holy God who desires that those who call upon Him live in ways
that are holy and upright. -John Paul II, address to Islamic
leaders of Senegal, Dakar, February 22, 1992
-http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreligious/islam/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-on-islam.cfm
