I was intrigued by the Pope visiting Israel this week, as Pope Benedict XVI became only the second pope in the history of the Catholic Church to officially visit the State of Israel.
While Catholic-Jewish relations have greatly improved over the last half century, this particular trip had Israeli, Jewish and Vatican leaders expressing high hopes for a smooth visit that would enhance the Catholic-Jewish and Israel-Vatican relationships.
From the minute he got off the plane, Benedict’s actions and words have been severely checked and scrutinized from all sides.
Abe Foxman of the ADL wrote in an op ed article this week that it must be recognized that Benedict is following in the footsteps of his predecessor, the beloved Pope John Paul II, whose groundbreaking pilgrimage in March 2000 hit all the right notes and captured the hearts and minds of Jews and Catholics around the world. John Paul came not only as the pope, but also as Karol Wojtyla, a pro-Jewish Polish survivor of the German occupation in Poland - a truly compassionate personality with close Jewish friends who, in his Western Wall note, asked for forgiveness for his own sins -- and he had never sinned against the Jews. If he had, at that point, become a candidate for Israeli prime minister, he would have been elected by an overwhelming majority
Its unfair to measure the two especially because the world was different 9 years ago, before 9/11, before the latest intifada, where there was much more hope and optimism in the region and the world. Also, the two popes have vastly different personalities and public personas. Where the Polish-born John Paul II was a grand communicator able to project his charm and personal story to a wide audience, Benedict, a native of Germany, is a reserved theologian who conveys a professorial tone. Listening to him talk, he is very quiet, with a strong accent that at times makes it hard to understand his true intentions.
Prominent officials have sharply criticized Benedict’s much-anticipated speech at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial for failing to live up to expectations.
When Pope John Paul II visited Yad Vashem he referenced the Nazis by name, condemned the murder of millions of victims and mourned the loss of his Jewish friends. He met at length with 30 Polish Jewish survivors.
By contrast, Benedict failed to mention Nazis or Germany, as well as his own personal history in Germany during the war. Its been well documented that he was in the Hilter youth, though it was also clear that his family was against the Nazi Regime. In his speech, he did not use the word murder and ignored the issue of Christian responsibility for the Holocaust. A historic opportunity was squandered. But as Jon Stewart said in the daily show, are we being too critical of the specific words he said, are we being “anti-semantic”.
Daniel Gordis (senior vice president, the Shalem Center in Jerusalem) said: "The pope’s mistake was that he assumed the role of diplomat rather than religious leader. There was nothing technically wrong with what he said at Yad Vashem. But in choosing such carefully measured, tepid language, he said nothing that an ordinary diplomat could not have uttered. We heard none of the passion, the fury or the shattered heart that is the hallmark of genuine religious courage and leadership. Atop Mount Scopus, Pope Benedict literally gazed upon the hilltops that Amos walked when he begged that 'justice flow like a mighty river' and that Jesus called home when he demanded a renewed moral order. With anguished self-reflective contrition (he is German, after all), or with a courageous call that Palestinians should have a state but must also publicly proclaim that Jews need a home to call their own, too, the pope could have assumed the mantle of the man of God in the tradition of those who have come here before him."
But a close examination of Benedict’s text and actions shows that he did deliver an appropriate speech focusing on the concepts of remembrance. He also met briefly with Holocaust survivors. It must be noted also that in recent months, Benedict has made strong statements repudiating Holocaust denial.
As John L. Allen Jr. (senior correspondent, The National Catholic Reporter and author of “The Rise of Benedict XVI") said: "Whatever the disappointments from the Yad Vashem visit, they’re not indicative of a pope with a lack of respect for Judaism, or one who’s indifferent to either anti-Semitism or the memory of the Holocaust. I also know that prior to his election as pope, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger bluntly acknowledged Christian complicity in the Holocaust. I know the pope has reflected at length, including in his own autobiography, about his childhood in Nazi Germany, and his shame that his nation produced such a monstrosity. Finally, I know the pope has written a virtually unprecedented letter expressing his anguish over the recent controversy involving the lifting of the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop. It probably would have been helpful to hear some of this at Yad Vashem, and people can be forgiven for seeing the visit as a missed opportunity. In context, however, it seems clear that Benedict meant well."
By coming to Israel at this time, the 82-year-old pontiff is solidifying the Vatican’s formal relationship with the State of Israel, launched when a historic diplomatic agreement was signed in 1993. His trip demonstrates the Church’s commitment to the security and survival of Israel as a Jewish state. This is no small thing, following after the Gaza Strip war still fresh in people’s minds, his trip refocused on building bridges between Jews and Palestinians, instead of only walls.
Benedict is also establishing a track record for future popes. No longer will Pope John Paul’s journey be able to be portrayed as an aberration or a personal mission. Indeed, Benedict’s trip will institutionalize that every pope visit Israel and commit the billion-member Roman Catholic Church to the importance of Israel as the Jewish state. That is a significant achievement.
Benedict’s voyage also demonstrates the continuity of the Church’s commitment to enhance relations with the Jewish people. As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he was Pope John Paul’s chief theologian and, therefore, the many positive improvements in Jewish-Catholic relations over the past three decades were done in consultation with him.
I found it fascinating that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged Pope Benedict XVI to speak out against the anti-Israel rhetoric from Iran's president. I don’t ever remember an Israeli leader asking the Pope to speak out to the world against an agitator who has called for Israel’s destruction. Bib met privately with the pope on Thursday for about 15 minutes in Nazareth and the talks "centered on how the peace process can be advanced."
Afterward Netanyahu said "I asked him, as a moral figure, to make his voice heard loud and continuously against the declarations coming from Iran of their intention to destroy Israel,". "I told him it cannot be that at the beginning of the 21st century there is a state which says it is going to destroy the Jewish state, there is no aggressive voice being heard condemning this."
Netanyahu said that in response, the pope said that "he condemns all instances of anti-Semitism and hate against the State of Israel -- against humanity as a whole -- but in this case against Israel."
On the other hand, this was the day after the pope made an emotional appeal in the West Bank for the establishment of an independent Palestinian homeland -- a concept Netanyahu has not yet publicly endorsed.
According to Abe Foxman, there are a series of outstanding serious issues challenging the Vatican-Jewish dialogue, including the recent troubling regressions in Catholic theology and liturgy about Judaism. Israel and the Vatican also have complicated property and tax issues to resolve.
"the focus on this trip should be in recognizing the positive contributions of the current pope. Benedict has pledged to keep strengthening Catholic-Jewish relations and reaffirmed the Church’s unqualified repudiation of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. He has taught that Christians should gain a new respect for the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament. And he has asserted that God’s Covenant and promises to the people of Israel are alive and irrevocable, further demonstrating his belief that the Jewish people “are beloved brothers and sisters.”
While we believe that Jews must remember and honor the past, we cannot change it. What we can do is create a future where Catholics and Jews deepen and expand our dialogue and work together with mutual respect and understanding in the interests of tikkun olam."
and to these words I heartily agree.
No comments:
Post a Comment