Where should Catholics morally stand on the issue of Israel?

[jmcrae]

What gave the Turks the right to own Palestine for centuries? What gave the Arabs the right before that?
What gave the Romans the right before that?
What gave the Greeks the right before that?
What gave the Jews the right before that?
What gave Europeans the right to occupy Europe?
What gave Europeans and Africans the right to occupy America?
What gave Zulus the right to occupy Natal?
What gave Boers the right to occupy the Transvaal?
What gives Swedes and Finns the right to rule Saami?
What gives Americans the right to rule American Indians?
What gives Africans the right to rule Chicago?
Waht gives Europeans the right to rule Butte?

The answer to most of your questions is either, “Just war in self defense that overtook the land by right of conquest,” or “Because they were born there.”

The modern State of Israel has neither of these claims.

The Jews did not wage a war of self-defense against the Palestinians and win the land. Nor were they born there. They were shipped in from Europe by airplane and were directed with all of their baggage to particular home addresses.

When they found that there were people already living in those houses, they simply evicted them on to the street, using similar methods to those that the Nazis had used on them to evict them from their European homes not many years before.

When the Palestinians called the police to report the home invasion, the police said, “Oh, yeah - we forgot to tell you - the title of your property has been given to this Jewish family by the British government. Good luck in your future travels.”

You’re right that we can’t change the past. But we can acknowledge it, and try to do right by everyone involved in the situation.

 

[scapularkid8]

Ah yes the British. We haven’t covered that delightful topic yet.

Lawrence of Arabia anyone? Balfour Declaration? General Allenby? What a fine mess they’ve helped create…

 

[vern_humphrey]

Catholics should morally stand on the issue of Israel where we always stand morally, on the side of justice.

Despite all the appeals to history, the problems in Israel – like the problems in many another nation – are not due to what happened a generation ago, or a thousand years ago, but due to what happened yesterday, and the day before, and the day before.

Yes, the past does affect the present. But we live in the present, and the present cannot affect the past. The present can only affect the future. And that is the key to solving problems like this – from sectarian violence in Northern Ireland to race relations in the US. Look for solutions today, and in the future – solutions that people living now will see as just.

 

[Verisimilitude]

The answer to most of your questions is either, “Just war in self defense that overtook the land by right of conquest,” or “Because they were born there.”

I’d be curious how you think the Christian Just War criteria applies to most of those examples.

The modern State of Israel has neither of these claims.

What is the difference between the modern state of Israel and the modern state of Jordan?

The Jews did not wage a war of self-defense against the Palestinians and win the land. Nor were they born there. They were shipped in from Europe by airplane and were directed with all of their baggage to particular home addresses.

They did in win self defense wars in 1948, 1967, 1972, 1982, 2000… Many have been born there since 1948. Are you suggesting not one Jew lived in Israel befoer 1948?

When they found that there were people already living in those houses, they simply evicted them on to the street, using similar methods to those that the Nazis had used on them to evict them from their European homes not many years before.

That is not true. Prior to Israel declaring independence in 1948 the outside Arab/Muslims told the inside Arab/Muslims to leave because they knew they would attack and thought they would win and the Arabs would return in victory. They lost.

When the Palestinians called the police to report the home invasion, the police said, “Oh, yeah - we forgot to tell you - the title of your property has been given to this Jewish family by the British government. Good luck in your future travels.”

Sounds like when the British called the police for help in 1776 America.

You’re right that we can’t change the past. But we can acknowledge it, and try to do right by everyone involved in the situation.

We should acknowledge all of the past, not just that which supports one side.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The answer to most of your questions is either, “Just war in self defense that overtook the land by right of conquest,” or “Because they were born there.”

The modern State of Israel has neither of these claims.

The Jews did not wage a war of self-defense against the Palestinians and win the land. Nor were they born there. They were shipped in from Europe by airplane and were directed with all of their baggage to particular home addresses.

When they found that there were people already living in those houses, they simply evicted them on to the street, using similar methods to those that the Nazis had used on them to evict them from their European homes not many years before.

When the Palestinians called the police to report the home invasion, the police said, “Oh, yeah - we forgot to tell you - the title of your property has been given to this Jewish family by the British government. Good luck in your future travels.”

You’re right that we can’t change the past. But we can acknowledge it, and try to do right by everyone involved in the situation.

There were, of course, Jews in Israel before WWII, and had been, continuously, for 2000 years. More than that, really. They didn’t all come from Europe, and certainly not all after WWII.

Some of my Alsatian ancestors were evicted from “Elsass und Lothringen” (Alsace and Lorraine now.). Does that mean the French need to give it “back” to me now? I’ll bet I could find a basis for claiming land in Ireland, too.

It needs to be remembered that “land titles” under the Turks were arbitrary, indistinct and tenuous; not greatly less so under the Brits. Isralis claim, at least, that they compensated those Arabs who left the land at Arab leaders’ urging and who could produce convincing evidence of ownership. I don’t know the truth or falsity of the claims about that, pro or con. I would not discount the possibility of Brit connivance, as they sometimes favored one side and sometimes the other. I am sure many claims based on Turkish “titles” could not be established at all, and still can’t, since they were largely just a matter of sufferance. So if a person claimed this or that house or field, how would anyone know whether the claim was valid or not? That’s why we have governmental land title registration in the U.S. Do you know that even in Britain they don’t? Land titles are registered only with “Building Societies” which are something like Savings and Loan Associations as best a Brit Solicitor could get it through my head. England is not even “gridded” like the U.S. Land descriptions are just addresses. That’s part of the reason they have so many stone walls and impenetrable hedgerows. That’s the only way they have of knowing what land is “mine” versus “my neighbor’s”. Remove the walls, fences and hedgerows and nobody would ever be able to re-establish boundaries. I can imagine what a mess it was in Israel, especially after a war on that very same ground.

 

[jmcrae]

There were, of course, Jews in Israel before WWII, and had been, continuously, for 2000 years.

The State of Israel was not established for them, though - they were displaced, too, along with the Muslims and Christians.

The purpose of the State of Israel was to provide a convenient place to put all of the European Jews who had been made homeless by the Nazis.

 

[Kaninchen]

Do you know that even in Britain they don’t? Land titles are registered only with “Building Societies” which are something like Savings and Loan Associations as best a Brit Solicitor could get it through my head. England is not even “gridded” like the U.S. Land descriptions are just addresses. That’s part of the reason they have so many stone walls and impenetrable hedgerows. That’s the only way they have of knowing what land is “mine” versus “my neighbor’s”. Remove the walls, fences and hedgerows and nobody would ever be able to re-establish boundaries.

The Land Registry

 

[Ridgerunner]

The State of Israel was not established for them, though - they were displaced, too, along with the Muslims and Christians.

The purpose of the State of Israel was to provide a convenient place to put all of the European Jews who had been made homeless by the Nazis.

First point: Are you telling me Israel chased Jews who were already in Israel off their land and replaced them with European Jews? I think I would want to see some proof of that from a reliable source.

Second point: Are you saying the European Jews were not allowed to stay in Europe? Actually, my understanding of history is that back during the Ottoman era, European governments, particularly the British, leaned on the Ottomans to allow Jews to buy land in Israel. But they still had to buy it. After WWII, when the Brits were trying to stay cozy with the Arabs, they actively discouraged Jewish settlement in Israel. That’s the history of it.

Also on second point: Do you truly believe those European Jews did not want to go to Israel by were “exiled” there by Europeans? You don’t say it, but it seems you are suggesting it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The Land Registry

Thank you for this interesting reference. In looking at it, I see nothing that contradicts what the English Solicitor told me some years ago, which is encouraging. I will add, however, that the English land system does not preclude surveying out a new subdivision. The “title plan” shown on the source is not a proper subdivision plat by U.S. standards. Since, however, it would not be beyond the capabilities of surveyors in either England or the U.S. to put together a proper plat and for the sales company (which is what the source is) to simply have a “shorthand” version of the actual plat to display for advertising purposes. That’s very common in the U.S. as well.

What I was talking about, though, is not addressed by the reference, except indirectly. England is not “gridded” as is the U.S. in “sections, townships and ranges” or anything equivalent to that. Most of the U.S. was surveyed and gridded in that manner before it was ever settled, and boundary lines generally follow the grid lines or subdivisions thereof, e.g., "S 1/2, E 1/2, SW 1/4, SW 1/4 of Section 16, Township 25, Range 27, west of the Indian Meridian, Jones County, Oklahoma. (made up description) That (if it was not just made up) would describes a precise, rectangular ten acre tract that can be found without reference to address, physical featues or anything else. If you really know what you’re doing, you can find it without even knowing what county it’s in, though it would help to know.

In England, as I understand it, land was divided up BEFORE surveys were done, not surprisingly. Since physical features like walls, rivers, hedgerows, grain fields, woodlands, buildings, determined lands owned, farmed or built on by individuals, there was really no point in gridding later, when capabilities were equal to it, or so the Brits felt, because almost nothing would “fit the grid” anyway. If you look at most aerial views of English farms and American farms, you can see the difference. English boundaries meander and are not consistent from horizon to horizon. American boundaries are generally arrow straight (except along major barriers like rivers, but sometimes even then) and are consistent from horizon to horizon.

As a consequence, there are only two ways of describing English land; by address, which has been the case for eons (e.g. #4 Cherry Cottage Lane, Hampton, Devonshire…again made up, or even just “Brookhaven Farm, Hampton, Devonshire”) or by a survey description that tries to follow the seeming possessory lines, wherever they may wander. Surveys of irregular tracts are extremely expensive, particularly if something like the center of a thick, impenetrable hedgerow has been the boundary for 500 years. Your resource confirms that very thing in talking about discrepancies between possible survey lines and hedgerows. If surveyors in England charge anything like surveyors in the U.S. do, my guess is that very little land in England, other than city lots that have not had buildings on them for centuries, is actually surveyed.

A new survey plat, like the one in your resource would be carved out of a prior description (just like in the U.S.) But whereas the U.S. description would be imposed on a larger description like the U.S. example above, the English one would be imposed on a larger description like the English example above.

Your resource also seems to confirm that the land descriptions are kept at the Building Societies, as I said, unlike here where they are kept by county governments.

But my real point regarding England was and is that if you removed or changed a lot of the physical features of land in England, you would be very hard put to locate most of it again, unlike in most of the U.S. (there are some exceptions) where you could easily do so, no matter what happened to physical features.

Regarding Israel, then, the following. If, in “pre-Israel” Israel, the ownership of land was “traditional” (as it is in much of Mexico, for example where one perilously “owns” what one is reputed to own based on that alone) and/or if the descriptions were inexact as I believe most in even England are, and particularly if there was no centralized, organized and reliable recordkeeping system, (which was certainly not the case under the Turks, and I question whether the Brits did it during their rule) and if a war was conducted on it which changed many physical features, it would be very difficult to establish who owned what afterward.

 

[miguel]

Catholics should morally stand on the issue of Israel where we always stand morally, on the side of justice.

Despite all the appeals to history, the problems in Israel – like the problems in many another nation – are not due to what happened a generation ago, or a thousand years ago, but due to what happened yesterday, and the day before, and the day before.

Yes, the past does affect the present. But we live in the present, and the present cannot affect the past. The present can only affect the future. And that is the key to solving problems like this – from sectarian violence in Northern Ireland to race relations in the US. Look for solutions today, and in the future – solutions that people living now will see as just.

Wise words sir.

 

[ArdenB]

I’ll admit I’m biased on this issue. I have a very positive perception of the Jewish people. Obviously, Christianity and Judaism are closely linked. I have several Jewish friends. And I empathize with the suffering they’ve endured throughout history. My perception of Muslims comes from seeing images of rioting over some cartoon, reading stories of gays being hung in Muslim nations, and being alive on Sept. 11. I’ve never met a Muslim in my life, so I know I probably haven’t seen the whole picture. I just have trouble believing that the violence in the area is the fault of the Israelis.

On a practical note, I think the Israeli government
has a duty to protect their citizens, and I don’t they should be condemned when they do. The Palestinians have targeted innocent civilians while the Israelis have military targets where some civilians have been harmed. I think this is a huge difference and that alone would be good enough reason to make me take Israel’s side.

 

[Kaninchen]

In England, as I understand it, land was divided up BEFORE surveys were done, not surprisingly. Since physical features like walls, rivers, hedgerows, grain fields, woodlands, buildings, determined lands owned, farmed or built on by individuals, there was really no point in gridding later, when capabilities were equal to it, or so the Brits felt, because almost nothing would “fit the grid” anyway. If you look at most aerial views of English farms and American farms, you can see the difference. English boundaries meander and are not consistent from horizon to horizon. American boundaries are generally arrow straight (except along major barriers like rivers, but sometimes even then) and are consistent from horizon to horizon.

There is another surveying source in the UK, of course, it’s known as the ‘Ordnance Survey’ (its origins were military) one version of which goes to 1:1,250 detail of the entire country (if you want a really detailed map) or 1:500 (if you want a site map).

Having lived in the US and not being unfamiliar with the deserts (and grass deserts), I expect that would have always been rather pointless over most of the country as well as inordinately expensive!

 

[Kaninchen]

There is another surveying source in the UK, of course, it’s known as the ‘Ordnance Survey’ (its origins were military) one version of which goes to 1:1,250 detail of the entire country (if you want a really detailed map) or 1:500 (if you want a site map).

Having lived in the US and not being unfamiliar with the deserts (and grass deserts), I expect that would have always been rather pointless over most of the country as well as inordinately expensive!

 

[Muzhik]

There were, of course, Jews in Israel before WWII, and had been, continuously, for 2000 years. More than that, really. They didn’t all come from Europe, and certainly not all after WWII.

……

It needs to be remembered that “land titles” under the Turks were arbitrary, indistinct and tenuous; not greatly less so under the Brits. Isralis claim, at least, that they compensated those Arabs who left the land at Arab leaders’ urging and who could produce convincing evidence of ownership. I don’t know the truth or falsity of the claims about that, pro or con.

A couple of things make this even more confusing. During the time of the Ottoman Empire, when Zionist agencies were buying land for settlements, it was illegal to sell land to Jews. Some who did were killed by their neighbors for doing so. The majority of land that was sold was sold by Syrian and Arab absentee landlords who wanted the money to invest in citrus orchards in Egypt.

This resulted in several things: First, because it was illegal, the sales were not always registered. If they were registered, the legality of the sale could later be challenged because it was an illegal sale (which may or may not be moot after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the British Mandate.)

Second, the landlords may not have been scrupulous about letting the people farming the land know that it had been sold – if the farmers didn’t know, then they would still be paying rent. Imagine the farmer’s reactions: be angry at the landlord, who lived hundreds of miles away, or at the Jews, who lived just down the road?

Third, the land that the Zionists bought was swamp and desert land. It sold (in modern terms) for between $1000 and $2000 per acre, which is what farmland in Iowa is worth today. The Syrians didn’t want to keep it because it was worthless, and if the Jews are willing to pay such inflated prices, let them pay! The Jews then took this “worthless” land, drained the swamps, watered the deserts, tilled it. planted it, and made the deserts bloom.

This raised the local Arab’s ire in two ways: the Jews, by their own sweat and hard work, made this land productive (something the Arabs couldn’t or wouldn’t do); and when the Jews needed extra help and hired the local Arabs, they paid them reasonable wages! Suddenly, all the workers the local Arabs had been hiring for pennies were now getting dollars (so to speak), which greatly upset the balance of power.

One more item: Anywhere else in the world, a refugee is someone who has been forced off their land away from their homes. NOT SO WITH PALESTINIANS! A Palestinian refugee is someone who left their home, plus all their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren! We have people who, by UN definition, are refugees because their great-grandparents claimed to have lived in what is now Israel. Note I say “claimed”, because at the time the UN was counting Palestinian refugees in 1948-49, there were no standards of proof of residence; and if there were you only had to prove you had been living there for only 2 years to be considered a refugee.

Again, these standards don’t apply to any other refugee group in the world; and no other refugee group in the world has a separate UN organization dedicated to serving just them.

<><

 

[Ridgerunner]

There is another surveying source in the UK, of course, it’s known as the ‘Ordnance Survey’ (its origins were military) one version of which goes to 1:1,250 detail of the entire country (if you want a really detailed map) or 1:500 (if you want a site map).

Having lived in the US and not being unfamiliar with the deserts (and grass deserts), I expect that would have always been rather pointless over most of the country as well as inordinately expensive!

I don’t know anything about the “Ordnance Survey”. The Solicitor did not mention it. My suspicion, however, is that it’s based on scaled aerial photographs. The U.S. Corps of Engineers does the same thing to establish “fee taking lines” around Corps lakes. County Assessors do the same thing in order to know what’s on land for taxation purposes, but they draw the “legal descriptions” on them so they know who owns what. But those “fee taking lines”, which are determined by elevation (high water levels), are still further described in detail by reference to the old government surveys, which were done on the ground, and marked.

But that doesn’t mean England is actually surveyed “on the ground” or that legal descriptions of most property are actual descriptions of the land’s location and boundaries in an engineering sense. I would say the likelihood that individual English properties (particularly in the country) are mostly surveyed is pretty close to zero. Surveys are expensive, even on “gridded” land. Surveys of irregular land are extremely expensive. (Hire a surveyor to survey out a meandering lane or the centerline of a creek for you sometime. The cost will take your breath away because every little twist and turn has to be described geometrically with reference to north, south, east and west.)

Actually, U.S. deserts and grasslands ARE gridded. Every time the U.S. acquired a territory, it sent in the surveyors. Initially they set reference lines. Then, as the country developed, they “gridded out” from those reference lines in “sections” which are one mile square. Other than subdivided land, far and away most of the land in the U.S. is described by reference to 'sections". The “Indian Meridian” I mentioned in my invented description before, is one of the major reference lines. In my part of the country, everything is by reference to the Fifth Principal Meridian. I assure you that if you had the “legal description” of some remote part of Montana grassland or Arizona desert, you could go right to it if you knew how, even if you had no idea at all what it looked like. You would know its shape and size before you even set out. Now, that wouldn’t tell you where the property lines are “on the ground” except approximately. Surveyors go back to old “official government survey markers”, triangulate from three and establish the lines on the ground with precision. But the point is, they’re almost always north-south, east-west boundary lines because of the “gridding” and the fact that people follow them instead of geographical features because they’re easier to survey and easier to describe precisely. Most of the individual tracts in the U.S. are not surveyed, but the whole is, divided, as I said, in “sections” of 640 acres each. Because the world is round and the “gridding” is square, there are “adjustment sections” in the north and west of each Township and Range. Those are irregular in size, but their lines still run north, south, east and west.

Think the Ottomans did that on a land that was already divided up, irregularly, when they got there? No possibility whatever.

 

[KatyElizabeth]

In the past I’ve always supported the state because of what happened in the Second World War. Being Catholic, I have a special place in my heart for the Jewish Nation because they were the first to hear YHWH’s voice in the wilderness and they deserve better than what they’ve been handed out throughout history. However, after coming to college and making friends with Palestinians and Lebanese who honestly fear the State of Israel and it’s actions toward their people I don’t know where I stand anymore. Yes, the Jews have a right to live there, yes, the Palestinians are being terribly wronged, and yes, both sides have been incredibly violent. But at the end of the day, the State of Israel has a right to exist, not only as the center of the Hebrew Nation, but as a spiritual state of Jews, Christians, AND Muslims…no OR.

I don’t know where I, as a Catholic, in respect of the social justice of this situation should stand. My heart goes out to the Palestinians but I can’t ignore the fact that Israel has wondered the Earth for thousands of years and needs a home.

Many Jews are converts to the Jewish faith and are just as Chosen as you are.

 

[KatyElizabeth]

I’ll admit I’m biased on this issue. I have a very positive perception of the Jewish people. Obviously, Christianity and Judaism are closely linked. I have several Jewish friends. And I empathize with the suffering they’ve endured throughout history. My perception of Muslims comes from seeing images of rioting over some cartoon, reading stories of gays being hung in Muslim nations, and being alive on Sept. 11. I’ve never met a Muslim in my life, so I know I probably haven’t seen the whole picture. I just have trouble believing that the violence in the area is the fault of the Israelis.

On a practical note, I think the Israeli government
has a duty to protect their citizens, and I don’t they should be condemned when they do. The Palestinians have targeted innocent civilians while the Israelis have military targets where some civilians have been harmed. I think this is a huge difference and that alone would be good enough reason to make me take Israel’s side.

United States supports Israel as an ally to maintain a presence in the Middle East which will be balanced out by the presence in Iraq.

It would behoove us now to look at the situation from both perspectives. As we are growing near to being at another war in Iran.

There are many Christians being killed in Palestine along with the Muslims. I am not saying that there are no Muslim terrorists.

I think I just committed a faux pas.

 

[Kaninchen]

I don’t know anything about the “Ordnance Survey”. The Solicitor did not mention it. My suspicion, however, is that it’s based on scaled aerial photographs.

In the early days, in the 18th century, they were actually based on satellite photography - then they decided to use human surveyors.

The country was divided into grids, then sub-grids etc - it can be quite annoying when the ‘OS Map’ you want is mainly sea - and surveyed by human surveyors (it was quite a story - I watched a fascinating TV documentary on it - all those old surveyors, slowly but surely moving across the country, establishing their triangulation points etc and going on from there).

It’s periodically updated - more often in urban areas. Everywhere has its address, its post code (which defines individual address), its latitude and longitude - and its OS Grid Reference (which is very precise).

 

[Al_Masetti]

I don’t know if every country has surveyed its land, but I expect by now they have.

In the United States, there are USGS Quadrangle Sheets, for example.

USGS is the United States Geological Survey.

The maps used to be available in map stores. Yes, there are or were map stores.

And they are fascinating to pore over and examine and study.

Cost is minimal.

You can write to the USGS and they will mail you an index sheet and an order form and you can fill in the form and send them the money and they will mail you a tube with your maps rolled up inside.

It’s also available on-line, or course.

There are all kinds of maps available. Aerial navigation charts for both visual and instrument flying. Nautical charts showing water depths, channel locations and prominent navigation aids. To make life even more interesting, various government agencies prepare different types of maps and there are private companies that also prepare maps for sale.

And their accuracy and level of detail depends on the specific purpose.

 

[Kaninchen]

And they are fascinating to pore over and examine and study.

I particularly like the fact that the Ordnance Survey sell their ‘old maps’ as well, so you can see, in stages, how much where you live has changed over the past couple of centuries.