Should Catholics support Israel, Palestine, or take a neutral stance?

[GEddie]

Well, personally I like how they did it in the Middle Ages with the church and state in close relations - the state doing things in favor of the church. But that’s just me. Freedom of religion is good too.

Joey.

In this case, don’t you mean synagogue and state???

 

[ciero]

But the Palestinian entity treats ITS Christians much worse. They get killed and have their livelihoods destroyed. Conditions for the Palestinian Christians are almost as bad there as in Saudi Arabia.

Christians and western governments ideally should strive for a negotiated peace with fairness to both sides.

But Catholics, specifically, should keep in the back of their minds that numerous privately-received prophecies (received by Catholics) approved by the Magisterium hint that the struggle over the Holy Land will play a key role in provoking the upheavals that lead first to the Millennium and second to the physical return of Christ.

This should be leavening to the unbridled optimism of some political types who think this can all be inevitably solved.

Spoken like a good Protestant!, maybe you should learn a bit of what the church teaches be fire spouting off this nonsense! The milennium…what a bunch if rot!

 

[Swiss_Guy]

In this case, don’t you mean synagogue and state???

Well, I posted earlier saying that we should come in and make Palestine a Christian state (specifically Roman Catholic ). So no, I don’t mean that. There’s a reason I said Church and state .

 

[GEddie]

Well, I posted earlier saying that we should come in and make Palestine a Christian state (specifically Roman Catholic ). So no, I don’t mean that. There’s a reason I said Church and state .

Ok, I get it. Last Crusade, take 2.

 

[cmforte]

I make a distinction between the Jewish*** religion and the nation ***of Israel. The two are not synonamous with each other. When a person criticizes a certain policy of the Israeli ***government, ***like the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, that does not mean that person is anti-Semitic or a Jew-hater.

-Chris

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Spoken like a good Protestant!, maybe you should learn a bit of what the church teaches be fire spouting off this nonsense! The milennium…what a bunch if rot!

Au contraire, Protestants tend to blanche and turn tail at mention of this. In any case, I am Catholic, pretty well-read in this area, and know that it is not nonsense. I think YOU are the one showing ignorance here.

There IS such a thing as the millennium. I can point you toward some good CATHOLIC sources on this matter. But first…read the best source of all. Revelation, Chapter 20.

 

[cmforte]

Au contraire, Protestants tend to blanche and turn tail at mention of this. In any case, I am Catholic, pretty well-read in this area, and know that it is not nonsense. I think YOU are the one showing ignorance here.

There IS such a thing as the millennium. I can point you toward some good CATHOLIC sources on this matter. But first…read the best source of all. Revelation, Chapter 20.

You don’t mean the literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth, do you? Because the Catholic Church out right repudiates that teaching, it even says so in the Catechism. But maybe I am reading you wrong. You certainly don’t mean that.

-Chris

 

[GEddie]

Au contraire, Protestants tend to blanche and turn tail at mention of this. In any case, I am Catholic, pretty well-read in this area, and know that it is not nonsense. I think YOU are the one showing ignorance here.

There IS such a thing as the millennium. I can point you toward some good CATHOLIC sources on this matter. But first…read the best source of all. Revelation, Chapter 20.

Some Protestants do, some don’t. I’ve been a Protestant; I know what the permutations of prophecy are like. I’ve known people who hope our LORD does not return while they are alive (!!!) and guys who spent Gulf War I waiting for the Rapture.

However, Catholic teaching as a whole has been amillennial.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.

 

[cmforte]

Some Protestants do, some don’t. I’ve been a Protestant; I know what the permutations of prophecy are like. I’ve known people who hope our LORD does not return while they are alive (!!!) and guys who spent Gulf War I waiting for the Rapture.

However, Catholic teaching as a whole has been amillennial.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.

Exactly. But not just “as a whole,” but in the Catechism.

-Chris

 

[colmywaykurtz]

You don’t mean the literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth, do you? Because the Catholic Church out right repudiates that teaching, it even says so in the Catechism. But maybe I am reading you wrong. You certainly don’t mean that.

-Chris

If by “literal,” you mean a “first return” of Christ (as in the first of a plural number), no, I don’t mean that at all. That’s an assertion of Protestant dispensationalist doctrine, the one that holds with the idea of a “rapture,” based on a misinterpretation of 1st Thess 4:17.

The millennium, according to the interpretation of theologians such as Fr. Hermann Kramer (The Book of Destiny), is the dominion of Christ OVER the earth, not ON earth—His spiritual presence in the Eucharist in a greatly-expanded and revivified Catholic church.

And this period of world peace and plenty, together with its end and the revival of widespread sinfulness, is what PRECEDES the physical return of Christ.

THAT is what I am talking about here.

 

[Crusading_Canuk]

The theology of “Christian Zionism” was developed by Evangelical and Baptist Protestants, and frankly is a heresy (political support of Israel being rooted in secular issues being a different matter). The Covenant regarding Israel and the land around the Levnant was part of the Old Testament and the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses passed away when Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophesies and brought the New Covenant and the Catholic Church. To say that there is theological justification for the Israeli state, would be to say that the Law of Moses is still in effect and that the Old Covenant has not been fullfilled; you are calling Jesus a liard.

As for politics, I honestly think the creation of Israel was a very bad mistake (and the cause of so much tension between East and West) and that in the aftermath of the Holocaust in the long run, it probably would have been best if the Allies helped the Jews rebuild their lives in Europe. Instead they evicted the Arabs (who are also are a Christian people!) who have been living there for well over 2000 years. Given the many injustices inflicted upon the Palestinian people their anger is understandable. Ultimately the best hope for peace now would be the two state solution, and that actually requires two states; Israel and Palestine. So I support the Palestinians in their bid to be recgonised as a state, but on the whole issue I’m neutral.

 

[George_Stegmeir]

My question to you is this…why is Israel there in the first place? Palestine was a peaceful country prior to 1948 when the Zionist Jews came marching in. They took over peoples homes and lands expelling them and claimed the land for themselves. What obligation does Syria, Jordan or Egypt have for the Palestinians? If the US was taken over by the Russians and expelled Americans would Mexico and Canada have an obligation to take us in? My big problem is Israel has NO business there in the first place. It was all Palestine prior to 1948 and should be returned to the Palestinans!

The Jews were offered land elsewhere…North Africa to be exact…but they demanded Palestine…they deserve no sympathy or aid from the US…none whatsoever!

Free Palestine!!!

Ciero, you have no idea of the history of the Jewish people in the 19th and 20th century or of Middle Eastern History.
The modern state of Israel exists as a result of rampant anti-semitism in Europe and the United States during the early years of the 20th century until the end of WWII. This anti-semitism enabled Hitler and the Nazis to commit the Holocost. After the war, there were several million displaced persons living in camps throughout Western Europe. Stalin (a notorious anti-semite) refused to allow them to return to Eastern Europe, and the Western European countries as well as the US and Canada could not, and would not allow them to settle in their countries. Finally, the UN, which was new at the time allowed the State of Israel to form, despite rabid British opposition.
At the same time, the surrounding Arab countries, who actually sided with the Nazis during WWII (The Grand Mufti, as well as several important Mullahs were feted by Hitler in Berlin during the late 1930’s and there was an Islamic Division of the SS to accomodate Arabs and Iranis during WWII) The British had to exert considerable effort to contain the Arab World during the War.
Modern Israel is a democracy with political parties and systems similar to that of the European Nations (Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. Some of the correspondants have expressed sympathy for the Palistinian Christians. The fact is, that Palestinian Christians have been all but erased in Moslem areas of the Mid East(- just ask any Lebanese Christian-) but they thrive in Israel.
The plight of the Palistine Arabs is not the fault of the Israelis. It is the fault of the Arab nations, who not only refused to allow Palistinians settle in their countries, but worked them up with anti-Israeli and anti-semitic propaganda. Until the demise of the USSR, this was largely financed by the Soviets as a weapon against the West in the Cold War. Since the demise of the USSR, Russia has been replaced by Iran in this.
What I don’t understand is why the Moslem Arab Countries have not been called to task for their blatent anti-semitism? If any Western politician made speeches about the Jews like Moslem politicians do, they would be crucified in the press…but not them.
I cannot see how any Christian, who indeed follows the teachings of Christ can possibly not support Israel.
Do any of you think that if Palistine were under the control of the Moslems, that any of our Holy Places would be preserved?

 

[cmforte]

If by “literal,” you mean a “first return” of Christ (as in the first of a plural number), no, I don’t mean that at all. That’s an assertion of Protestant dispensationalist doctrine, the one that holds with the idea of a “rapture,” based on a misinterpretation of 1st Thess 4:17.

The millennium, according to the interpretation of theologians such as Fr. Hermann Kramer (The Book of Destiny), is the dominion of Christ OVER the earth, not ON earth—His spiritual presence in the Eucharist in a greatly-expanded and revivified Catholic church.

And this period of world peace and plenty, together with its end and the revival of widespread sinfulness, is what PRECEDES the physical return of Christ.

THAT is what I am talking about here.

I think the Church teaches that is indeed happening, right now, that Christ is reigning over the earth through The Catholic Church, minus the world peace, though.

-Chris

 

[Swiss_Guy]

I think the Church teaches that is indeed happening, right now, that Christ is reigning over the earth through The Catholic Church, minus the world peace, though.

-Chris

But the world IS more peaceful because of the Church.

 

[kitkatty]

I make a distinction between the Jewish*** religion and the nation ***of Israel. The two are not synonamous with each other. When a person criticizes a certain policy of the Israeli ***government, ***like the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, that does not mean that person is anti-Semitic or a Jew-hater.

-Chris

:thumbsup:i think that`s a great point you brought up, itseems like many people do think like the Jewish religion and the state of iIsrael are synonamous with each other.

 

[colmywaykurtz]

I think the Church teaches that is indeed happening, right now, that Christ is reigning over the earth through The Catholic Church, minus the world peace, though.

-Chris

I have strong doubts that the Church teaches that, and would appreciate documentation.

Given the way Ch. 19 segues sequentially into Ch. 20 of Revelation, I think that asserting that we’re in the millennium now would be the same as saying the Beast and False Prophet have already come and gone. I think we’d have noticed something like that. I don’t think something like that could slip by unnoticed.

In any case, I think we should stand by Israel even as we lend our negotiating efforts to obtaining peace between Israel and the Palestinian nation (which is no longer a fiction, in my opinion).

 

[cmforte]

I have strong doubts that the Church teaches that, and would appreciate documentation.

Given the way Ch. 19 segues sequentially into Ch. 20 of Revelation, I think that asserting that we’re in the millennium now would be the same as saying the Beast and False Prophet have already come and gone. I think we’d have noticed something like that. I don’t think something like that could slip by unnoticed.

In any case, I think we should stand by Israel even as we lend our negotiating efforts to obtaining peace between Israel and the Palestinian nation (which is no longer a fiction, in my opinion).

Here is one, from Catholic Answers at catholic.com/library/Rapture.asp:

Amillennialism

The amillennial view interprets Revelation 20 symbolically and sees the millennium not as an earthly golden age in which the world will be totally Christianized**, but as the present period of Christ’s rule in heaven and on the earth through his Church.**

Amillennialists also believe in the coexistence of good and evil on earth until the end. The tension that exists on earth between the righteous and the wicked will be resolved only by Christ’s return at the end of time. **The golden age of the millennium is instead the heavenly reign of Christ with the saints, in which the Church on earth participates to some degree, though not in the glorious way it will at the Second Coming. **

**Amillennialists point out that the thrones of the saints who reign with Christ during the millennium appear to be set in heaven (Rev. 20:4; cf. 4:4, 11:16) and that the text nowhere states that Christ is on earth during this reign with the saints. **

What’s the Catholic Position?

As far as the millennium goes, we tend to agree with Augustine and, derivatively, with the amillennialists. The Catholic position has thus historically been “amillennial” (as has been the majority Christian position in general, including that of the Protestant Reformers), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the premillennial position, sometimes called “millenarianism” (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church 676). In the 1940s the Holy Office judged that premillennialism “cannot safely be taught,” though the Church has not dogmatically defined this issue. "

---

Its late and I 'll need some time, but I’ll get you some more sources in a bit.

-Chris

 

[cmforte]

I have strong doubts that the Church teaches that, and would appreciate documentation.

Given the way Ch. 19 segues sequentially into Ch. 20 of Revelation, I think that asserting that we’re in the millennium now would be the same as saying the Beast and False Prophet have already come and gone. I think we’d have noticed something like that. I don’t think something like that could slip by unnoticed.

Some interpret that as the pre-Christian pagan Roman Empire, and the Antichrist as Nero.

In any case, I think we should stand by Israel even as we lend our negotiating efforts to obtaining peace between Israel and the Palestinian nation (which is no longer a fiction, in my opinion).

I believe we must do what is in the best interest of*** both ***Israel and Palestine, and ***not favor one over the other. ***So maybe, to an extent, we agree?

-Chris

 

[Ridgerunner]

I believe we must do what is in the best interest of*** both ***Israel and Palestine, and ***not favor one over the other. ***So maybe, to an extent, we agree?

-Chris

For the present, probably the best interests of the West Bank are served by being under strong Israeli influence. For one thing, “Palestine” consists in four separate pieces; Israel, Gaza, West Bank and Jordan. Each is ruled by groups at odds with each other (though Hamas is certainly trying to take over the West Bank, and might). If Hamas takes over in the West Bank, where is Jordan going to be in it, understanding that Jordan IS a Palestinian state in all but name, and Jordanian Palestinians far outnumber Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza? (Yes, the King of Jordan is Bedouin, but the next one, if there is a next one, will have one foot in both tribes.) Jordan has at least as good a claim to the West Bank as does the PA or Hamas. Can anyone really be sure that there are not irridentest notions going through many a Jordanian head? After all, Palestinian terrorist groups do their dirty deeds in Jordan as well as in the West Bank and israel.

As we watch the developing outcomes of the varous “Arab springs”, it is by no means certain that any of it is headed in a good direction, and a fair amount of reason to think it isn’t. There is no reason at all to expect an outcome to be better in an “independent Palestine” than it will be in Egypt, Libya or Tunisia.

 

[exnihilo]

Modern Israel was born out of terror. If a person does just a minimal amount of research they can learn of how settlers engaged in deadly terrorism against the British in order to get them to give up control of the land of Palestine. The King David Hotel Bombing is one of the worst examples. In this incident the Jewish settlers dressed as Arabs in an attempt to pin the blame for the deadly terrorist act on Arabs.

Modern Israel is hostile to Christianity. The cross is a much hated symbol. It was removed from official cityscape pictures of Jerusalem where they rose above the buildings. The plus symbol is avoided in math because it is a type of cross. There are many stories of Orthodox and Catholic priests suffering terrible treatment in modern Israel including being assaulted and spat upon.

I can think of no good reason to support Israel as a nation as a Christian. Many folks do, particularly Christian Zionists, who believe that modern Israel will bring about the end times. This is particularly terrible and wrong idea that came from dispensationalism.