Popes vs. Jews

Front Page Magazine ^ | 11/29/'13 | Bruce Bawer

[Zionist Conspirator]

J’accuse, of course, is the title of the most famous open letter ever published, in which Emile Zola, the most celebrated French author of his time, charged the French government, in January 1898, with illegally sentencing Captain Alfred Dreyfus to life in prison. Dreyfus, who was Jewish, had been charged with spying and convicted of treason, and Zola charged that Dreyfus had been framed precisely because he was Jewish. The Italian writer Giulio Meotti’s decision to give his new book the title The Vatican against Israel: J’accuse is no coincidence. His topic, like Zola’s, is institutional anti-Semitism – the institutions, in this case, being Christian churches. He doesn’t ignore the Church of England and the various Protestant and Eastern churches, but his focus is on Roman Catholicism, and especially on the last several Popes. Like Zola, Meotti is unsparing. Citing historian Daniel Goldhagen’s statement that the Catholic Church, after the Shoah, had the moral obligation to defend Israel and Jews, Meotti flatly sums up his thesis: “This book shows that the Vatican tragically failed, and has forsaken the Jews again.”

Meotti’s jeremiad, then, is mostly about the postwar Church – although he does provide a few choice samples of Vatican rhetoric before and during the war. In 1904, Pope Pius X explained his opposition to a Jewish state in this way: “The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.” In 1919, Benedict XIV “called the Jews ‘infidels’ whose coming to power [in the Holy Land] would cause ‘terrible grief for us.’” In 1922, the Jesuit magazine Civiltà Cattolica insisted on the “necessity of hating” Judaism. The first Arabic translation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was published by the Catholic Church in Jerusalem; the book’s first French translator was a writer for the Vatican daily L’Osservatore Romano. When Arabs slaughtered Jews in a 1929 pogrom, that same newspaper absolved the Arabs of guilt, instead blaming “the politics of Zionism.”

As for the wartime church, here are a couple of tidbits courtesy of Meotti. In 1943 Archbishop Angelo Roncalli, who would become Pope John XXIII, pronounced himself “uneasy about the attempts of Jews to reach Palestine, as if they were trying to reconstruct a Jewish kingdom.” Pius XII’s Undersecretary of State also rejected the idea of a Jewish state, saying “Palestine is by now holier for Catholics than for Jews.”

It’s no news, admittedly, that the Roman Catholic Church was anti-Semitic before the Holocaust, and that Pius XII could’ve spoken up more firmly about the Final Solution. But what about the post-Holocaust era? The generally accepted narrative is more or less as follows (I quote from a recent article in the National Catholic Register): “Blessed Pope John XXIII reset Catholic-Jewish relations in the 1960s, seeking to reconcile the grievances of the past, in which Catholics had treated Jews less like beloved brothers and more like strangers – or worse, as enemies. The Church approved that outreach in 1965 at the Second Vatican Council with the document Nostra Aetate, and Popes Paul VI, Blessed John Paul II and Benedict XVI all continued efforts to deepen those relations.”

Meotti begs to differ. He documents the fact that, in the immediate postwar years, the Vatican – hardly penitential about its failure to stand up for Jews under the Nazis – called Israel’s founding “tragic,” the Vatican news agency called Zionism “the new Nazism,” and Civiltà Cattolica called Israel “racist” and “fanatic.”

John Paul II is widely seen as a bridge-builder between Catholics and Jews. Meotti, however, shows that on several occasions he characterized Israel as an aggressor and Palestinians as victims, and at least once compared Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to the Final Solution. Whereas the Holy See waited until 1993 to recognize Israeli statehood, JPII frequently called for a Palestinian homeland. During his papacy, L’Osservatore Romano accused Israel of “extermination,” of “barbaric acts,” of “profan[ing] with fire and iron the land of the Resurrected,” and of deliberately “killing…harmless babies.”

The latter charge prompted a protest by Oriana Fallaci herself, who wrote: “I find it shameful that the newspaper of the Pope…accuses of extermination a people who were exterminated in the millions by Christians. By Europeans. I find it shameful that this newspaper denies to the survivors of that people (survivors who still have numbers tattooed on their arms) the right to react, to defend themselves, to not be exterminated again.” Meotti finds it shameful, too. JPII, he charges, “was morally blind to the nature of the Arab-Israel conflict. By his actions and silence, the Pope condoned and legitimized Arab terrorism.”

That’s not all. Meotti also criticizes JPII for “repeatedly embracing the man who was responsible for introducing terrorism against innocent individuals.” He’s referring, of course, to Yasser Arafat. Over the years, JPII held a total of eleven meetings with Arafat, the first of them well before Arafat’s Peace Prize. When Arafat died, a Vatican statement declared it an “hour of sadness” and a papal spokesman said, “May God welcome in His mercy the soul of the illustrious deceased.”

It was also JPII, Meotti argues, who while still a cardinal in Poland began “to transform the Holocaust into a Catholic event.” Meaning what? Well, for example, at a 1970 ceremony the Pope “distributed ashes from Auschwitz,” apparently either not knowing or caring that by “touching, removing, and distributing…the remains of Jews’ dead bodies” he was doing something that Jews would consider “a desecration of the dead.” It was on JPII’s watch that a convent was built at Auschwitz in 1984; in response to worldwide Jewish outrage at this move, the Mother Superior asked: “Why do the Jews want special treatment in Auschwitz only for themselves? Do they still consider themselves the chosen people?” It was JPII, too, who beatified Catholic convert Edith Stein, who’d been murdered at Auschwitz for having been born Jewish. For JPII, writes Meotti, “Stein demonstrated that the very symbol of Jewish martyrdom, Auschwitz, was not a Jewish event, or the expression of anti-Semitism nurtured by two thousand years of Christian teaching of contempt, but a place of Christian suffering and redemption.”

Things got no better, in Meotti’s view, under JPII’s successor. Benedict XVI. One point of continuity, as he demonstrates, was that during both papacies many high-level churchmen habitually served up Palestinian liberation theology rhetoric – comparing Palestinians to Jesus, while casting the Jews once again in the role of the crucifying villains.

“Did the Church,” asks Meotti toward the close of his book, “learn that the road to Hell is paved with silence?” But as his own indictment makes clear, the Church’s main offense, in the years since World War II, hasn’t been keeping quiet but sounding off in unpalatable ways.

Critical though he is of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, Meotti allows himself to hold out hope for the current Vicar of Christ, who, he notes, has “celebrated Rosh Hashanah and Hanukkah in synagogues, voiced solidarity with Jewish victims of Iranian terrorism and co-written a book with a rabbi, Avraham Skorka.” Just this week, the American Jewish Committee praised Pope Francis’s affirmation of Catholic-Jewish relations in his first Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel). Meotti worries, however, that even under a personally philosemitic pontiff, the Vatican will persist in its tendency “to drive a wedge between the ‘good’ and docile Jews of the Diaspora and the ‘bad’ and arrogant Jews of Israel.”

His concern may be well-founded. And there’s another reason to hold the applause: as one recent commentator approvingly put it, Francis is “more relaxed than his predecessor about the threat that the Muslim faithful represent to Roman Catholicism.” In September, the pontiff sent off a chummy note to the Great Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo expressing his “respect” for Islam. And in his Apostolic Exhortation, he warns against “hateful generalisations” about the Religion of Peace. How genuinely and meaningfully friendly can a Pope be to Jews and Israel, one wonders, when he seems bent on playing “let’s pretend” about Islam and overlooking the virulent Jew-hatred that’s preached and taught at places like Al-Azhar?

[Zionist Conspirator]

Before everyone jumps down my throat, please note that this article illustrates the absurdity of liberal Jewish ecumenicism as well as the Catholic Church's anti-Semitic history. The author invokes the American Jewish Committee and "Catholic/Jewish dialogue" as the "answer" to the problem, as well as Pope Francis' non-Orthodox friend "Rabbi" Skorka.

But the most damning evidence of the ecumenical mindset is the section that condemns liberal ecumenicism with moslems even as it supports liberal ecumenicism with Jews.

The author can't seem to make up his mind. Is liberal ecumenicism a good thing, or a bad thing???

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

Fascinating. I read every word 30 times, discussing it with a homeless guy over wine this morning. He knew it all already and I was just his student there - me, with a PhD.

If only Bill Maher would bring up stuff like this on his show.

[Petrosius]

To say that Jews and Arabs in the Holy Land should enjoy equal rights or that the State of Israel is not impeccable and is, like all nations, capable of injustice is not to be anti-Semitic.

[x]

The Italian writer Giulio Meotti’s decision to give his new book the title The Vatican against Israel: J’accuse is no coincidence.

Given that Giulio is a serial plagiarist it most likely isn't ...

[kenavi]

The Dreyfus trial was the pivotal event that turned Herzl from a Viennese intellectual into the modern Moses.

I don't think it's worthy of Herzl's legacy to equate the post-war Popes' diplomatic balancing act with the millenia of fratricide that preceded it.

[Zionist Conspirator]

To say that Jews and Arabs in the Holy Land should enjoy equal rights or that the State of Israel is not impeccable and is, like all nations, capable of injustice is not to be anti-Semitic.

Why should Jews and Arabs have equal rights in what was intended to be an explicitly Jewish state? And why is there no tender solicitude for the Indians whose land we "stole" and who outside of Oklahoma and a few other areas are a miniscule minority? Perhaps you feel that American citizens and non-American citizens should have equal rights in the United States of America? And perhaps Protestants should have equal rights in historically Catholic nations? Or is that different?

I don't support Israel as a modern, secular, democratic state. I support the Theocracy that still exists (though hidden from most) in Orthodox Jewish communities, in their Halakhic courts. I support an Israel that is governed by a king and sanhedria and which is Theocratic, in which all questions are answered by an appeal to Halakhah and legitimate religious authority. And Halakhah very much regulates who may and may not live in Israel and under what circumstances.

The current State of Israel is most certainly not impeccable, one reason being that it allows non-Jews to live and practice idolatry there.

PS: Are you my old friend of the rocking horse icon?

[Zionist Conspirator]

Given that Giulio is a serial plagiarist it most likely isn't ...

Perhaps he is. I myself have no way of knowing. Since you do, you should consider posting the facts here so that we may all profit.

[Petrosius]

If someone does not support your religious claims for Israel, does that make him anti-Semitic?

[Zionist Conspirator]

If someone does not support your religious claims for Israel, does that make him anti-Semitic?

It does if, like the "palaeos," he supports ethno/religious majoritarianism in every other country in the world and only becomes a hippie when it comes to Israel and the Arabs.

Do you think Protestant churches should have full equality with the Catholic Church in historically Catholic nations? If someone did would that make him anti-Catholic?

[Petrosius]

It does if, like the "palaeos," he supports ethno/religious majoritarianism in every other country in the world and only becomes a hippie when it comes to Israel and the Arabs.

Israel was not founded on the principle of ethno/religious majoritarianism. In 1948 Jews only comprised 30% of the population of the mandate of Palestine. Even within the part designated for the Jewish state they were a minority. Today it is disputed which population is the majority. Even with a majority the Jews of Israel do not have the right to deny equal civil rights to the Arab minority.

Do you think Protestant churches should have full equality with the Catholic Church in historically Catholic nations?

Look around, they do. Here in the United States there is greater majority of Christians than there is that of Jews in Israel. Would you be happy if the U.S. were to be declared a Christian nation and the Jews stripped of their equal rights? Did you support the majoritarian actions in Europe directed against the Jewish minorities?

[x]

Perhaps he is. I myself have no way of knowing. Since you do, you should consider posting the facts here so that we may all profit.

Op-ed on Israeli Gay Rights Lifts Without Credit: Italian columnist Giulio Meotti praises Israel’s record, in others’ words

Italian Journalist Also Plagiarized in U.S. Outlets Ynet, ‘Commentary’ have severed ties with Giulio Meotti

But the most damning evidence of the ecumenical mindset is the section that condemns liberal ecumenicism with moslems even as it supports liberal ecumenicism with Jews.

The author can't seem to make up his mind. Is liberal ecumenicism a good thing, or a bad thing???

Bruce Bawer, liberal ecumenist? He's not concerned with religion here. He's writing from a political point of view.

Most people here would probably agree with him about Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, though one would hope not about his praise for Meotti's cheap shot attack sub-journalism.

BTW, sometimes you can judge a book by its cover:

Pushing a lot of buttons there.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Thank you for posting those links for all to access.

The article appeared at Front Page Magazine, which is allergic to "religious fanaticism" and promotes a staunchly secular anti-Communism. As for Meotti praising Israel's record on "gay rights," that tells us plenty about him. Israel's notoriously lax attitude towards homosexuality (among other sins) is one of the blackest marks against it (though this doesn't keep militant "gays" from bashing Israel and supporting the "palestinians," since the latter are their fellow "oppressed").

BTW, sometimes you can judge a book by its cover:
Pushing a lot of buttons there.

Unfortunately, the picture isn't far wrong. For all the liberal "philo-Semitism" the post-VII church professes, it has been consistently pro-Arab and pro-PLO, just as Middle Eastern chrstians are the most anti-Jewish in the world and support the PLO fanatically.

Listen--it is simply a matter of the historical record that the Catholic Church, whether old or new, prefers the Arabs/moslems to the Jews. The Jewish People and especially the State of Israel are of no significance whatsoever in Catholic theology. Nevertheless Jewish ecumaniacs seem to prefer the Catholic Church to people whose philo-Semitism is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. Perhaps Catholics don't talk so "funny?"

[Zionist Conspirator]

It does if, like the "palaeos," he supports ethno/religious majoritarianism in every other country in the world and only becomes a hippie when it comes to Israel and the Arabs.

Israel was not founded on the principle of ethno/religious majoritarianism. In 1948 Jews only comprised 30% of the population of the mandate of Palestine. Even within the part designated for the Jewish state they were a minority. Today it is disputed which population is the majority. Even with a majority the Jews of Israel do not have the right to deny equal civil rights to the Arab minority.

Just where do you get your concept of "rights?" Rights, like morality, are what G-d says they are . . . nothing more nor less.

I am not concerned with what the secular Zionists wanted in for 'Eretz Yisra'el. The secular state that exists today does not operate according to Torah Law. I advocate Torah Law for both Israel and the rest of the world, with no room for the ideologies of Voltaire, Paine, or Jefferson. And G-d's Laws stipulate who may live in Israel and under what circumstances. No one--not Voltaire, not Paine, not Jefferson, and not you--have any right to sit in judgment on this Divine Law.

Do you think Protestant churches should have full equality with the Catholic Church in historically Catholic nations?

Look around, they do. Here in the United States

First of all, I wasn't referring to the United States but historically Catholic countries, and I didn't ask if they did but if they should in your opinion. Your avoidance of that question is suspicious.

there is greater majority of Christians than there is that of Jews in Israel. Would you be happy if the U.S. were to be declared a Christian nation and the Jews stripped of their equal rights?

No, because Judaism is the True Religion and the Jews are the Chosen People. Secular political ideologies about "rights" have absolutely nothing to do with it. However, I advocate the conversion of the United States and every other country in the world to the Noachide Laws as soon as possible.

Did you support the majoritarian actions in Europe directed against the Jewish minorities?

I begin to wonder if you are indeed my old sparring buddy. I do not advocate simple majoritarianism. I advocate world Judaic Theocracy.

[Petrosius]

No, because Judaism is the True Religion and the Jews are the Chosen People.

Since I am a Christian and believe that the promises of God now flow through the covenant of Jesus Christ you will excuse me if I do not accept your conclusions. As for being your old sparing partner, this is the only name I have ever had on FR. Do not be surprised if there are more than one person who disagree with you.

[Former Fetus]

I advocate world Judaic Theocracy

Are you talking about Mossiach? Now, THAT will be world-wide "Judaic" Theocracy... Maybe a little bit different than what you are thinking, but probably also diffferent from what I am thinking. Just imagine Mossiach, ruling the world from Jerusalem with a rod of iron... That's why I'm trying to learn Hebrew, I want to be there one day, where all the action will be taking place... I just wish I had the means, I would move TODAY!

[Former Fetus]

Well, they are the Chosen People. We are the Lamb’s Bride.

[Petrosius]

Well, they are the Chosen People. We are the Lamb’s Bride.

Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all and in all.
(Col 3:11)

There is now no longer any distinction between Jews and non-Jews.

[Former Fetus]

I may be wrong, but I think it means that we are all equal in God’s eyes: we all are sinners, we all are in need of a Savior, He loves us all equally... That does not mean that He does not deal with us in different ways, for example the Tribulation is aimed mostly at Israel, it is the Time of Jacob’s Trouble, but the Church will already be raptured. Israel is the apple of God’s eye, His Chosen People... The Church is the bride of Christ... God’s plans and promises for Israel will be fulfilled, just as His plans for the Church will be fulfilled also. And, at the end, we’ll all be equally blessed!

[Petrosius]

No, Christianity is equally valid for the Jews and non-Jews. Christianity started from within Judaism and is not alien to it.

[Former Fetus]

I agree, kind of. I was talking about Jews as a group of people. I understand that many are Christians (Messianic Jews) and I agree that Christianity is valid for Jews and Gentiles. However, I do not expect to possess any land between the Nile and the Euphrates, that is a promise to the physical descendants of Abraham. There is a different dispensation of grace for Jews and Gentiles. The important thing is that at the end, when the Church is raptured and the remnant of Israel recognizes Jesus as Messiah, we all will be saved!