Page 2 of 2 Benedict's tragedy, and Israel's
By Spengler
opportunity to miss an opportunity. From the Jewish standpoint, the Pro Judaeis
offers an unprecedented opportunity, which the Jews have missed. As the head of
the Vatican commission for relations with the Jews, Walter Cardinal Kasper,
explained, the prayer reflects an eschatological hope for the unity of Israel -
the Israel of the flesh and the Israel of the Spirit - in the End Times, not a
call for the conversion of today's Jews.
The indicated Jewish riposte would be to observe that the inclusion of the
prayer in the Easter liturgy acknowledges that the Jews of today still are the
Israel of the Bible - precisely what the "traditionalist" troglodytes and the
pro-Palestinian left refuse to
acknowledge. Although John Paul II and Benedict XVI hold this position, it
never has been incorporated into the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the
ultimate authority on Catholic doctrine. The Italian rabbis should embrace the
prayer, and embrace every opportunity for dialogue, and nag the Church until it
amends the Catechism - to the eternal discomfiture of the "substitutionist"
theologians of right and left.
Not just obtuseness, but fear prompted the Italian rabbis to step away from
dialogue with the Church, as three of Italy's Jewish leaders explained in a
letter to Italy's leading daily, Corriere della Sera, last December 4, under
the title, "The Dialogue Should Not Be Anti-Islamic." The authors write [my
translation],
The Jewish-Christian dialogue, particularly the dialogue
with the Catholic Church, is certainly a most important thing ... it is unique
and special given and the connection and the long common history of the two
faiths; but this, nonetheless, never has been and should not be used as an
instrument of the West against Islam ... certainly it is necessary to oppose
fanatics, but not just ones of Islamic origin! Such an instrumental concept of
the dialogue is therefore unacceptable, intellectually, morally and
religiously. It should be remembered that relations between Judaism and Islam
generally have been more productive and serene than have been relations between
Judaism and Christianity ... but that's another story."
It is
true that Jewish relations with Islam in 1492 were better than relations with
Christianity, for Spain (and shortly after Portugal) expelled those Jews who
refused to convert, and Muslim countries took many of them in. That was a long
time ago, and Jews well might ask what the Muslims have done for them lately.
One of the three signers of the December 4 letter was Amos Luzzato, a
distinguished physician and Jewish scholar, and the scion of one of the great
rabbinic families.
Amos Luzzato is not remotely stupid; he has published learned translations and
commentaries on The Book of Job and Song of Songs. He is frightened. I wonder
how he would render into Italian, "God of mercy, choose another people!"? Alone
among the leaders of the Western world, Benedict XVI drew a bright line between
Israel - which he understands to be the Catholic Church as well as the physical
descendants of Abraham, in some mystical way - and Islam. His Regensburg speech
in September 2006 frightened the European Jews more than anyone; after all, the
Jews of Europe live in a continent whose Muslim population may become a
majority in a hundred years. The Italian Jews have lived there comfortably for
centuries; the Luzzato family's roots in Venice go back to the first half of
the 16th century. They do not want to stand with Benedict for the West; they
want a deal with the Muslims.
Benedict XVI stands accused of a failure of governance; the leading newsweekly
of his native Germany, Der Spiegel, portrayed him in last week's cover story as
"der Entruckte", literally "the raptured", with the subtitle, "A German Pope
disgraces the Catholic Church." All of this could have been predicted, Der
Spiegel explained, by the Pope's beastly attitude towards the Muslims:
A
conservative lobby has formed around the pope over the years, with considerable
influence and abilities to manipulate policy. It includes the members of groups
like Opus Dei, the Legion of Christ, the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter and
the SSPX.
When it comes to rapprochement with other religions, they not only delay and
debate ad nauseam pending decisions, but they also allow their views to
leak to the outside world. One example was the pope's baptism of a Muslim
during the Easter vigil mass in St Peter's Basilica in 2008. The conservative
lay movement "Comunione e Liberazione", which is highly influential in Italy,
orchestrated the baptism.
The demonstrative conversion of a Muslim to Catholicism became an immediate
source of indignation among Muslims around the world. Arab dailies wrote that
the water that Pope Benedict had poured onto the head of the convert was "like
petrol thrown onto the fire of the clash of cultures". At almost the same time,
terrorist leader Osama bin Laden broadcast on the Internet a message critical
of the pope, accusing him of playing a key role in a new crusade against Islam.
This comes from the Hamburg liberals who consider the State of Israel a
liability, and who now are shocked, shocked to find anti-Semites lurking at the
fringes of the Catholic Church. Hell hath no hypocrisy like Hamburg's.
As Sandro Magister documents, Benedict is more theologian than Rottweiler,
despite his reputation, and had delegated too much to subordinates who failed
to take charge. But his evident failures of governance must be put in context.
The kind of problems that Benedict confronts would tax the social skills of the
Borgia Pope Alexander VI.
Notes
1. To view the article, click
here.
2. To view the article, click
here.
3. To view the article, click
here.
4. To view the article, click
here.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
