I’m On Board With The Synod Of Bishops On the Middle East

(photo- americamagazine.org)

It looks like the leadership of our Church has scored once again in providing just the right balance of truth with enough political sensitivity, in laying out the parameters for a just peace between Israelis and Palestinians. (hattip to Headline Bistro). May God bless the peacemakers, His children.

http://headlinebistro.typepad.com/  and http://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/sinodo/documents/bollettino_24_speciale-medio-oriente-2010/02_inglese/b25_02.html and http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101024/ap_on_re_eu/eu_vatican_mideast

2 Responses to I’m On Board With The Synod Of Bishops On the Middle East

  1. Art Deco says:

    The Synod fathers listed the occupation of Palestinian lands, Israel’s separation barrier with the West Bank, its military checkpoints, political prisoners, demolition of homes and disturbance of Palestinians’ socio-economic lives as factors that have increasingly infringed upon the rights of Palestinians. The communiqué also called for a two-state solution to the crisis and was critical of efforts to biblically justify the Jewish presence in the occupied territories.

    The Synod also expressed support for cheap air fares, to be achieved by the suspension of gravity.

  2. Tony says:

    I looked around pretty hard, and I could not find the actual text of the recommendations that included such things as this claim: “ The communiqué also called for a two-state solution to the crisis and was critical of efforts to biblically justify the Jewish presence in the occupied territories.

    What I found was nothing of the sort, it was: “Recourse to theological and biblical positions which use the Word of God to wrongly justify injustices is not acceptable. ” It is, of course, a highly debatable proposition as to whether the occupation is one of those injustices. It cannot be debated without attention to at least 100 years of recent political history, which is nothing like a “biblical position” at all.

    I would welcome a communique from the Vatican that BOTH did more than talk pure, unadulterated platitudes, AND avoided the mistake of imposing a single definite policy determination that all sides must obey. But it is hard to see the document descending into details rather than staying at the platitude arena, and failing miserably at that. What is one to make of this comment: “Since the appearance of Islam in the seventh century and to the present, we have lived together and we have collaborated in the creation of our common civilisation. As in the past and still existent today, some imbalances are present in our relations.

    Other than pure babble-speak blather, that is. We have “lived together and we have collaborated in the creation of our common civilization?” Come off it, what does that even mean? Does that refer to dhimmitude from 700 on through 1900 in many caliphates? Or the Spaniards pushing the Moors out during a 300 year period. Or the crusades? “Lived together” can with equal honesty mean “died together, on the same lands, but with no conformity of purpose for centuries at a time.”

    I am no apologist for Isreali injustices. The wall is especially damning. But to speak the way the Vatican does is to pretend that the problems are primarily ones of neighbors disagreeing overly neighborly sorts of disputes, which can be settled – if not amicably – by recourse to reason, forgiveness, and a higher authority speaking with authority to both parties to put down their weapons. But that WON’T WORK. As long as one side has extremists spouting off that Israel must be eradicated, making efforts for that to happen, and its own authorities doing nothing effective to reign in such extremists, Israel cannot achieve security by reason, forgiveness, and obedience to any international authority. Even if they unilaterally give in to all Palestinian demands, they STILL won’t achieve security by such means. Something else is needed, that has not been offered.

    The document only once speaks about terrorism, to condemn it, without proposing a single way of dealing with it that can appeal to both Israelis and to Palestinians. That’s the elephant in the room (at least in this communique): the terrorists are not parties to a state, they are parties to a religious sect. As such, they cannot be brought to heel by a purely political process, and the political parties cannot achieve political progress toward peace without something that speaks to quelling the violence effectively. When the Vatican suggests a solution to terrorist forces, then we can listen and applaud with vigor. This effort did nothing of the sort.

%d bloggers like this: