Posted on 05/13/2002 10:12:58 AM PDT by gubamyster
Raymond J. de Souza National Post
ROME - Christians have forgotten how to take offence.
For several weeks now, the European political class has worked itself into a lather about the spectre of anti-Muslim persecution, fanned by the anti-immigration policies of the recently trounced Jean-Marie Le Pen in France and the recently assassinated Pim Fortuyn of the Netherlands. All this while armed terrorists were occupying Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity.
And so continues the surreal post-Sept. 11 world, in which anti-Islamic rhetoric brings forth an overwhelming political response, while outraged reaction to the violation of Christian faith, represented by the occupation of the Church of the Nativity, is almost completely absent.
It needs to be said. The occupation of the Church of the Nativity by armed Palestinian terrorists was a gravely anti-Christian act. Much has been made of how the basilica was filthy but not seriously damaged. To speak only of what happens to a church physically is to miss the point. One of Christianity's holiest shrines was profaned by armed terrorists. It is blasphemy to use the house of God as a military refuge. For more than a month, the faithful were denied access to the basilica to pray while the gunmen used its status as a house of prayer as a tactical advantage.
That the key men inside were not refugees but terrorists was confirmed by the reluctance of any country to grant them exile. Italy grudgingly agreed to take one or two, but reports in the Italian press yesterday indicate they will be kept confined, perhaps on an island somewhere. Too dangerous for the Italian mainland, apparently, but Europeans appeared to be fine with the fact such men would have the run of the Church of the Nativity.
Of course, all the usual caveats apply. Islam is not to be equated with violence. "Palestinian" and "terrorist" are not synonyms. Israel is not without sins.
And yes, the Israeli army did lay siege to the Church of the Nativity. But the "occupation-siege," as the Vatican always referred to it, was first an occupation. The Israelis did not lay siege before the gunmen stormed in, and they left when the gunmen were escorted out. No occupation, no siege. It should be noted that in the early days of the "occupation-siege" Israeli President Moshe Katsav promised Pope John Paul II that Israel would not attack the church, a promise that was kept. Bethlehem is a Palestinian town, but to date there has been no statement from the Palestinian authorities condemning the use of the church as an armed refuge.
Christian pusillanimity reached absurd lows last Saturday night when Italian mayors, gathered in Rome, took to the Colosseum to sing John Lennon's Imagine. Italy, which is very proud of itself for being selected as the likely site of the next international peace conference on the Middle East, wanted to show its commitment to peace. The Christian martyrs of the Colosseum would have wept to see it.
The enemies of Christianity are justified in their laughter. The birthplace of Jesus Christ is overrun by terrorists, and in response, dozens of at least nominally Catholic politicians sing pop music's most nihilistic anthem --imagine there's no Heaven ... no countries ... no religion. Imagine no Christian resistance. It isn't hard to do.
The Vatican itself was better, though its diplomats hedged their words, as one would do when your friars and nuns are in possible mortal danger from armed terrorists. The word of men who do not respect sacred places counts for little when it comes to the safety of the consecrated persons who administer them.
Yesterday, Pope John Paul said that he felt "great relief that the Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem has been returned to God and to the faithful." The implication was clear: the occupation had taken the basilica away from those to whom it belongs -- God and those who would pray to Him there. The Pope sent a special envoy to celebrate Mass at the shrine, which was officially described as an act of "thanksgiving, atonement and reconciliation." The key word there is "atonement" -- an acknowledgment that grave sins against the holiness of the basilica were committed and that God's forgiveness needs to be asked.
The enormity of what happened needs to be underscored. Speaking of the "long and anguished history of the Church" in the Holy Land, the Franciscan priest responsible for the shrines, Father Giovanni Battistelli, called the "occupation-siege of the Shrine of the Nativity a chapter utterly without precedent." Never before in the centuries of wars and sackings that have drenched the Holy Land in blood has the basilica of the Nativity been occupied. And for good reason -- potential occupiers knew that a ferocious response would certainly have followed. Today, the only penalty seems to be having to listen to John Lennon's puerile philosophy set to music.
The Church of the Nativity was desecrated. The Christian response was a disgrace.
Raymond J. de Souza is Rome correspondent for the National Catholic Register. He is to be ordained a Catholic priest in July.
The Hagia Sophia wasn't merely desecrated, it was converted to a Mosque.
This is preposterous to call people who defend their turf and Christian jurisdiction as idolaters. At least those christians do not take your self-idolating and self-granted prosecutorial jurisdiction. Since when defending the concept of jurisdiction, and, let alone, the concept of supreme juridical authority in general, equivalent to worshiping Christ amongst Christians, was idolatry???
I can not find this unfamiliar idea in my bible, could you please give the book and verse to which you are referring.
First I never mentioned anger, let alone the worshiping of anger. And what is destruction of the world but loss of jurisdiction? If we cannot protect a child from a pedophile or a church from terrorists, how can we pretend to wish well for the world and Christ's jurisdiction?
Anger is hardly the problem, but people who think they own jurisdictions they do not. When someone accuses others' anger as being the cause for destruction, they are way out of their jurisdictional limits in depicting people or the world.
Again, whoever studies or protects the sight of the heavens is not to be relegated to the idolators some make them out to be. They could simply do these things with the Lord in mind, just as a man may grant temporary jurisdiction to the grass he grows for his sheep in order to fulfill domination over the Earth's creatures as commanded by God.
Where is the outrage!
The 18 month reign of terror was brought by the PLO under the pretext of Sharon visiting the Temple Mount. He did not set foot in the Al Asqa Mosque!
He had prior permission from Jibril Rajoub, the head of the Palestinian Authority's Preventive Security services. He authorized in advance the Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount.
Rajoub even stated there would be no reaction.
Sharon did not seize the Al Asqa Mosque.
He did not bring machine guns into the Al Asqa Mosque.
He did not plant bombs in the Al Asqa Mosque.
He did not urinate on the floor of the the Al Asqa Mosque.
Will Israel now be in her first month of an 18 month reign of nonstop terror? Major point:
One of the paramount issues in considering a future nation which the Arabs will call Palestine is the guarantee of Holy sites in the areas they would control. Given that we just witnessed the "Al Asqa Seize & Pee Brigade” desecrate one of the most Holy Christian sites, we can never allow a Palestinian state to have any control over Jerusalem or any of the Holy Sites which are not Muslim. PERIOD.
[6] When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilaean.
[7] And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time.
[8] And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.
Matt.22
[17] Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
[21] They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Jurisdiction Not a christian concept?????
I shudder to think what God has in store for them after having used it as a urinal
Those of us who maintain the ancient Christian belief in the Eucharistic Presence will vehemently disagree with you there. I hope the Blessed Sacrament was preserved from desecration.
Render onto God is not God's jurisdiction? Creating man in His image to dominate the Earth's creatures not a representation of jurisdiction? The Bible using the word jurisdiction, even in contexts of man means jurisdiction is not a christian thing? Yourself as a christian taking over jurisdiction on this thread not a christian thing? Give us a break.
Wow, it really sounds like you are into Christian religion and the traditions of men. Try reading the Bible, you may find it to be very refeshing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.