Dawn Eden Notes a Vital Point about Magisterial Guidance When It Comes to Thinking About Israel\u2019s Right to Exist<\/a><\/p>\n *Remembering the Vatican\u2019s \u2018total rejection\u2019 of anti-Zionism*<\/p>\n As a Jewish convert to Catholicism who desires ardently that everyone, especially my loved ones, should find the salvation granted through Jesus Christ, I am distressed to see, following Israel\u2019s attempt to stop Hamas\u2019s violence against its citizens, some Catholics claim the true villain in the conflict is Zionism itself.<\/p>\n It is true that the Catholic Church, unlike some Protestant churches (particularly Evangelical ones), does not hold that political Israel fulfills a biblical mandate. But, while not endorsing Zionism, the Church totally rejects anti-Zionism, maintains that the Jews and Palestinians each have a right to a homeland, and insists that Israel itself has a right to exist.<\/p>\n Those who proclaim or hold otherwise are acting contrary to Magisterial statements. More than that, I believe very strongly from my own experience that they are doing a great disservice to Catholicism by projecting a distorted image of the Church, reeking of Feeneyism<\/a>, that risks alienating Jews who might otherwise be receptive to the Faith.<\/p>\n In July 2004, the Commission of the Holy See for Religious Relations with the Jews issued a total rejection of anti-Zionism in the Joint Declaration of the 18th International Catholic-Jewish Liason Committee Meeting in Buenos Aires<\/a>:<\/p>\n *As we approach the 40th anniversary of Nostra Aetate<\/a> \u2013 the ground-breaking declaration of the Second Vatican Council which repudiated the deicide charge against Jews, reaffirmed the Jewish roots of Christianity and rejected anti-Semitism \u2013 we take note of the many positive changes within the Catholic Church with respect to her relationship with the Jewish People. These past forty years of our fraternal dialogue stand in stark contrast to almost two millennia of a \u201cteaching of contempt\u201d and all its painful consequences. We draw encouragement from the fruits of our collective strivings which include the recognition of the unique and unbroken covenantal relationship between God and the Jewish People and the total rejection of anti-Semitism in all its forms, including anti-Zionism as a more recent manifestation of anti-Semitism.*<\/p>\n Pope John Paul II himself spoke repeatedly of Israel\u2019s right to exist in peace and security, as in a 1987 address to U.S. Jewish leaders<\/a> in which he quoted an earlier Apostolic Letter of his [emphasis in the original]:<\/p>\n *After the tragic extermination of the *Shoah*, the Jewish people began a new period in their history. They have *a right to a homeland* as does any civil nation, according to international law. \u201cFor the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel and who preserve in that land such precious testimonies to their history and their faith, we must ask for the desired security and the due tranquillity that is the prerogative of every nation and condition of life and of progress for every society\u201d (Ioannis Pauli PP. II *Redemptionis Anno*, die 20 apr. 1984: *Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II *, VII, 1 (1984) 1072).*<\/p>\n People of good will may disagree on political solutions to Holy Land strife, but all should condemn anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism as being clearly outside the mind of the Church.<\/p>\n *RELATED:*<\/p>\n \u2013 *Ha\u2019aretz<\/a>* covered reaction from Jews to the 2004 Joint Declaration condemning anti-Zionism. This all looks pretty sound to me (albeit with the minor qualification that what the document \u201ctotally rejects\u201d is anti-semitism. It then goes on to reject anti-Zionism as \u201ca more recent manifestation of anti-semitism\u201d. It does not say that anti-Zionism is always and everywhere identical with anti-semitism (nor could it without implicating some Jews as anti-semites since not all Jews sign off on Zionism). But the broad point is well-taken: anti-Zionism is often just a mask for Jew hatred.<\/p>\n Within Catholic circles, the only people I\u2019ve seen quarrelling with this sort of thing are the sort of Jew-hating kooks <\/a>one finds in the fever swamps of sedevacantism and other outposts of lunacy. In circles beyond the Church, of course, the situation is much more volatile, with various Muslims and secular enthusiasts for fashionable violence (both on the skinhead right and Che-worshipping Left) chanting \u201cJews go back to the ovens<\/a>.\u201d) The irony of all this, of course, is that the people who most need to hear what the Church says are the people least likely to listen to her for a second. <\/p>\n For myself, both as a Catholic and a Chestertonian, I think John Paul\u2019s statement that \u201cThey have *a right to a homeland* as does any civil nation, according to international law.\u201d is common sense. The phrase \u201ccivil nation\u201d is key, because it sum up Dawn\u2019s point that, \u201cthe Catholic Church, unlike some Protestant churches (particularly Evangelical ones), does not hold that political Israel fulfills a biblical mandate.\u201d We are talking about a secular nation-state like Australia or Canada, not \u201cGod\u2019s Chosen Country\u201d. Just as I think Canadians and Australians have a right to a home, so I think Jews do. It\u2019s a human right and they are human.<\/p>\n Similarly, I think the humans called \u201cPalestinians\u201d likewise have the right to a home. I make no excuses for the Hamas thugs who have been lobbing rockets at Israel. I simply say that launching a reprisal in which you train tank fire on a school full of civilians (and in which nearly half the reported 700 dead so far are civilians, including huge numbers of women and children), is not thereby justified. As Deal Hudson <\/a>remarks:<\/p>\n The issue isn\u2019t whether Israel has a right to defend its citizens against Hamas missiles \u2014 of course it does<\/em>. The question is whether Israel recognizes the long-term consequences of its actions, which may well strengthen the presence of Hamas on the West Bank \u2014 just as its 2002 operation likely contributed to the Hamas victory in the 2006 elections.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In short, support for Israel does not necessitate support for all she does. Likewise, revulsion at Hamas does not mean abandonment of the wretched people of Palestine to slaughter. And, indeed, many of those of us who wish Israel to survive <\/a>think that this current \u201cI implore the end of this violence, which is to be condemned in every way in all its manifestations. I implore the re-establishment of the ceasefire in the Gaza strip. I ask for a strong sign of humanity and wisdom from all those who have responsibilities at all levels in that situation. I ask the international community to try every possible way to help Israelis and Palestinians to come out from the dead-end street and to not give up.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\u2013 A rabbi writing in the *Forward<\/a>* explains what is meant by the Church\u2019s former \u201cteaching of contempt\u201d mentioned in the Joint Statement above, and details how the Vatican II document \u201cNostra Aetate\u201d definitively rejected such teaching.
\u2013 A 1975 <\/a>Vatican document<\/a>, \u201cNotes on the correct way to present the Jews and Judaism in preaching and catechesis in the Roman Catholic Church,\u201d further elucidates how the Church\u2019s relationship with Israel and the Jewish people is to be understood by Catholics.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\naction is just about guaranteed to strengthen the hand of her enemies<\/a>. It\u2019s not only wrong, it\u2019s stupid. And it is not anti-semitic to say so. That\u2019s why I continue to maintain that the sanest approach to this entire tragedy is Benedict\u2019s:<\/p>\n