Trump & Jerusalem: A Moral Move, A Politically Smart & Valuable Move…

Trump & Jerusalem: A Moral Move, A Politically Smart & Valuable Move…

Video originally posted here has been removed by YouTube because the account has been closed.


Well, do you agree that in publicly recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and moving the U.S.A. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem,  President Donald Trump has made a “moral move, a politically smart move and a politically valuable move” – or is he making things worse in the region?   After listening to the potted history on the video, doesn’t it seem odd that the media seem to be united in criticising Trump for this “moral, smart and valuable move”? Or, is it actually the case that no matter what he does, Trump will be criticised… A case of his not being able to do right for doing wrong?

Comments (58)

  • Athanasius

    This is a difficult subject to treat of, but I’ll give my view as I see it.

    Ben Shapiro is correct when he states that the Jews have the first claim on Jerusalem as their capital. This is historically accurate, as it was given to them by God Himself. However, what Mr. Shapiro fails to acknowledge, as also historically relevant, is the destruction of Jerusalem foretold by Our Lord as a punishment on the Jews for rejecting Him, the Messiah.

    Here are Our Lord’s exact words as recorded in Sacred Scripture:

    “And when he drew near, seeing the city, he wept over it, saying: If thou also hadst known, and that in this thy day, the things that are to thy peace; but now they are hidden from thy eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, and thy enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and straiten thee on every side, And beat thee flat to the ground, and thy children who are in thee: and they shall not leave in thee a stone upon a stone: because thou hast not known the time of thy visitation…”(Luke 14: 41-44).

    This prophecy was fulfilled in AD70 when the Roman general Titus, in response to a Jewish uprising in Jerusalem, reduced the city, together with the great temple, to ashes and drove what was left of the population of Israel in exile. Hence the term “the wandering Jew” that describes how the Jews came to take up residence and establish themselves in various countries around the world, called “the diaspora”, or Jews without a homeland.

    It wasn’t until 1948 that the State of Israel was declared by Ben Gurion and ratified by the U.S. under President Trueman. This declaration followed a bitter struggle by the Zionist Jews against the British occupiers of the time to reclaim their homeland. It is not to their credit that they used terrorist means to achieve their aim via the infamous Stern Gang. The Jewish authorities of today should bear this in mind when accusing the Palestinians and others of terrorism!

    This having been said, I think it is in the interests of stability in the Middle East that the Jews remain the dominant force in the region today. Christians have far more to fear from a dominant Islam than a dominant Jewery in Israel and the surrounding area. The holy Christian sites are protected and accessible under Jewish rule. I do not think this would be the case under Islamic rule, as the violent oppression of Christians in Muslim majority countries amply demonstrates. So from that point of view, as well as from the historical viewpoint, the Jews have a greater claim on Jerusalem as their capital than the Palestinians. President Trump’s announcement, then, is basically honest and practical, though I’m sure those blind to the ambitions of Islam in our time will argue to the contrary.

    The great pity is that neither side is Christian, and indeed the world in general now rejects Christ. Hence, there will never be an end to the violence in the Middle East, and no end to Islamic terror elsewhere around the globe. Where Christ is rejected, chaos resides. Thankfully, the prophecies indicate a future recognition of Our Lord by the Jews and a re-establishment of His universal reign and moral order.

    December 11, 2017 at 2:35 am
    • Nicky


      Thanks for that reminder of the New Testament mentions of Jerusalem. Notably, Ben Shapiro didn’t include those on his list!

      I broadly agree with you that Jerusalem is best kept in the hands of the Jews because the Muslims seem to have a very violent disposition when it comes to their religion and its territorial claims. I’m sure the ordinary Muslim in the street isn’t like that, but the activists definitely are.

      I completely agree with you about the world in general now rejecting Christ, not just the Jews and Muslims. Once we get the Consecration of Russia, that should come right, hopefully.

      December 11, 2017 at 10:03 am
    • Lily


      That’s a great comment, very informative and it’s made me think again about the whole issue. I did worry that it would stir up more terrorism but now I realise those are right who point out that we’re getting the terrorism anyway.

      So, good on Trump for doing what his predecessors were too “fearty cat” to do.

      December 11, 2017 at 7:20 pm
    • Margaret USA

      I think the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration was this year too.

      December 12, 2017 at 12:44 am
  • Athanasius

    Sorry about the typos. Two “l”‘s in moral? I’m getting daft in my old age!

    Editor: I’ve now removed that surplus “l” but leaving this correction since we have it now on record – it’s official – that you are “getting daft in [your] old age!”

    December 11, 2017 at 2:39 am
    • Margaret USA

      Your old age? My mom’s big sister is old enough to be your mother!

      Re your first post: It was really interesting.


      December 11, 2017 at 3:22 am
      • Athanasius

        Margaret USA

        What’s your mother’s big sister’s name? Methuselahna? Please have her carbon dated immediately and report back!

        December 11, 2017 at 11:02 am
      • Margaret USA

        That’s my Aunt Margaret (I’m named after her). She’s going to be 95 next year and is smart as a whip. I guarantee you can’t pull a fast one on her. 😉

        Margaret 🇺🇸

        December 12, 2017 at 12:41 am
      • Athanasius

        95 years old and still sharp? I really admire people like that. It is a great tragedy of these times that elderly people like your aunt Margaret get marginalised by the busy world. These people have no idea the wisdom they’re missing out on, not to mention the great anecdotes the elderly possess.

        I remember a great old lady of about the same age as your aunt. She was a former Queens nurse and Matron and a very staunch Traditional Catholic. The stories she used to tell me of her life experiences were absolutely riveting, I used to listen to her for hours.

        Good on your aunt Margaret, may she be granted many more years to add to her already impressive tally.

        December 12, 2017 at 1:47 am
    • Margaret USA

      P.S. Do you always blog in the middle of the night or are you based in the USA. It’s 10:26 pm here in Pennsylvania.


      December 11, 2017 at 3:26 am
      • editor

        Margaret USA,

        Athanasius is a Scot who lives here in Scotland; the reason he blogs “in the middle of the night” is because his day job takes him all over Scotland and he hasn’t had a minute to spare, for weeks now. I told him not to worry about blogging, his health is more important. Indeed, his schedule would leave most of us on the psychiatrist’s couch. Being a thrifty Scot, of course, he opts for the discount option…

        December 11, 2017 at 10:49 am
      • Athanasius


        I would have loved to opt for the discount option, but sadly couldn’t find a shrink outlet offering a buy 12 get 12 free deal!!

        Anyway, thanks for explaining my hectic schedule right now.

        December 11, 2017 at 10:57 am
      • Margaret USA

        That’s hilarious! You had me in tears from laughing so hard!

        I knew he was Scottish but wasn’t sure if he was on your or our side of the pond at the time he posted.

        Margaret 🇺🇸

        December 11, 2017 at 5:39 pm
      • editor

        Thing is, Margaret USA, and I apologise for keeping us off topic, but can’t resist… things really ARE getting on top of Athanasius. Here’s a clip from one of his recent visits to his psychiatrist – as you will see, there’s maybe more than one reason why he’s not devoting quite as much time to blogging on this, or any other, Catholic site…

        December 11, 2017 at 6:10 pm
      • Athanasius


        That’s supposed to be privileged information. How did you get your hands on my file?

        December 11, 2017 at 9:13 pm
      • Margaret USA

        And I’ll bet that you look MUCH better in person than in the cartoon. 😉

        December 12, 2017 at 12:37 am
      • Athanasius

        Margaret USA

        “And I’ll bet that you look MUCH better in person than in the cartoon.”

        I remember as a child my pram being the only one in the street that had shutters on it. Yes, I can still recall being pushed along in that pram with all the children of the district running along behind. They thought the Punch and Judy show come to town.

        Strange the recollections of childhood we have in later years! Looking back, for example, on the time my mother hung a pork chop around my neck just to get the dog to play with me, and that time in my dad’s arms when he threw me up in the air and went outside for a smoke. Do you know I was so ugly that every time I opened the fridge door the fish fingers went for my throat?

        Ok, a bit of fun there. Actually, every time Editor sees me she tells me I’m a handsome devil. I’ve told her a thousand times to get that eyesight seen to, if only to get her to look at me and not the door post when she delivers the compliment.

        December 12, 2017 at 1:39 am
      • Margaret USA

        You’re posting a London Times cartoon on Catholic Truth *Scotland*??? 😉 How magnanimous of you!

        December 12, 2017 at 12:32 am
    • Athanasius


      That was a bit of a cop out on my part. I’ve always been daft! Just wondering now if that should be “daftt” with two t’s.

      December 11, 2017 at 11:00 am
  • Athanasius

    Margaret USA

    I have so much to do throughout the day that I often only have time to blog in the middle of the night. My comment, as you observed, went up at 2.35am. Fear not, though, I often grab a couple of hours catch up sleep in the late afternoon. Actually, it’s more coma than catch up!

    December 11, 2017 at 10:50 am
  • editor

    I tried to find a clip from Tucker Carlson Tonight, to see what he’s been saying about this (Jerusalem) topic, but can’t find anything, so far. I did, however, find this clip – showing him (yet again) nailing the lie of Russian interference in the USA election that saw Trump elected. I’ve seen him quiz senators in the same way, always with the same outcome; the Russian nonsense is precisely that – nonsense, intended to distract, and the only evidence provided so far is that the enemies of Trump (including the majority of the media) will go to any lengths, just about, to discredit Trump. Watch this clip – it’s fun!


    As I’ve said before, there just isn’t anybody, not one single journalist, of this calibre anywhere in the UK.

    If any of our American bloggers ever get to meet Tucker, please tell him that his biggest fan is to be found right here in Scotland. And I do mean “biggest” – I’ve not been to a Scottish Slimmers class for ages 😀

    December 11, 2017 at 2:25 pm
    • Faith of Our Fathers

      Ed it’s not only nonsense it’s a stupid to say that 30 odd Million men and women who Deplorably voted for Donald Trump just didn’t have the sense to vote for Hillary Clinton. I would like to know if it has been verified that even Bill and Chelsea voted for her .

      December 11, 2017 at 7:51 pm
  • Michaela

    I completely agree about the coverage of Trump in the UK – it’s disgraceful.

    Watching the Ben Shapiro video and the Tucker one, it’s obvious that on both Jerusalem and Russia, we are getting highly biased anti-Trump reporting.

    I think he does do silly things and at first I thought the news about Jerusalem was one of them, but what a difference it makes to see it from another perspective, and learn a bit of the background history.

    Also, when I think of it, the fear was that moving the USA embassy to Jerusalem as recognition that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel (which I always thought it was anyway!) would cause the Palestinian Muslims to become violent. So, what, they are terrorising the world already, so this won’t make much difference.

    December 11, 2017 at 4:37 pm
    • editor

      Yes, there’s no doubt that reporting in the UK on anything Trump-related, is biased in the extreme. Last week’s Question Time on BBC, for example, drew the predictable disapproval of the Jerusalem decision from the panel, from all but one member of it – and she is an American! She began with the same solemn statement of dissent from all things Trump, but then timorously admitted that she thought he was right on this… boos, jeers, hisses of disapproval from the audience, always, of course, representative of public opinion in the UK.

      Except those of us who keep an eye on Tucker Carlson Tonight!

      December 11, 2017 at 6:15 pm
      • Faith of Our Fathers

        The biased coverage that President Trump gets is Diabolical. He also has that Idiot Obama who couldn’t get anything done for opening Transgender Toilets and championing The Homosexual Thingy following him around putting the boot in were ever he can . Also regards the Pro Marxist Pro Homosexual Pro Abortion BBC If God spares me those Deviants have had their last License Fee off of me their attacks on Trump are completely embarrassing. As for The Jerusalem question lets face it no matter what Trump had said or done the I Want We Want We should get Muslims would still have been out causing havoc . I understand that the Jews are far from perfect and according to relatives who visited Jerusalem that as Catholics they weren’t welcomed with open arms . Also although it’s a bit off topic my own personal dealings with Jews were far from perfect,although I don’t absolve myself from the actions of what happened. In Honesty President Trump said that he would bring the U.S Embassy to Jerusalem and has done as he said. Other Presidents, Obama and Bush said they would do the same but did not .

        December 11, 2017 at 7:39 pm
  • Lily

    I think it’s worth keeping an eye on Tucker! He’s the real deal!

    December 11, 2017 at 7:17 pm
  • Therese

    I don’t agree with the majority view. I think President Trump is wrong to stick America’s nose even further into the Arab/Israeli conflict. I cannot remain silent about the gross injustice that has been done to the Palestinians; their land, livelihoods and homes have been confiscated, and they have been stuck in what amounts to concentration camps for decades. How would each one of us feel if a foreign force came knocking on the door and told us to decamp, tout suite, and either take all of your possessions or leave them? No coming back folks.

    The very idea that people claiming to be Jews can claim full citizenship in Gentile countries, while at the same time claiming a right to dispossess – if necessary – families who can trace their ownership of the land for centuries, is grotesque.

    America (and Britain) have supported Israel’s injustices for years – the settlements are a disgrace and the Israeli government defies all demands to cease their ever increasing growth. I can’t wonder at the rage and frustration of the Palestinians when it seems that every hand is against them – particularly the most powerful nation in the world. Of course, if they were Christians they would meekly submit and offer up their sufferings, but they aren’t Christian, and I must say that after the example that the Christian world (joke) has shown them, I can’t wonder.

    As far as I am aware (and I’m open to correction, of course), the Christian sites were always open to all, prior to the troubles, when they were in the control of the Palestinians. Our governments have caused this bitter, deadly strife, because they see only one side, and support only one side.

    P.S. There are some extreme orthodox Jews in Israel who regard Zionism as a heresy. As Christians, is it not obvious that all promises under the old Covenant were superseded the Messiah? Just wondering.

    December 11, 2017 at 7:36 pm
    • Athanasius


      I don’t know in any great detail what goes on between the Jews and the Palestinians. I certainly don’t take the fake news line on it. There’s fault on both sides as far as I can see, not just Jews persecuting the poor peaceful Palestinians. Remember, the violence erupting in countries all around the world through terrorism and African revolution isn’t Jewish, it’s Islamic. We need to be careful what we believe from TV reporting.

      America, like Britain, cannot stand back from the tinderbox that is the Middle East. There are all kinds of international interests in that region. If the Americans and British step back the Russians and Chinese will move in, so that’s not an option.

      Interference in Iraq, Syria and Libya were evil actions on the part of Britian and the U.S., actions that gave rise to ISIS and global terrorism. Trump is not interested in continuing that U.S./UK global agenda from the Bush/Blair, Obama/Cameron eras. He knows it was wrong. But he also knows the very real danger of unchecked Islam in the region, especially now in the aftermath of the aforementioned evil interventions and the destabilisation of the region as a result. Israel is a necessary ally in the balancing act of power distribution in the Middle East. The Palestinians historically have no claim on Jerusalem, not even a religious one in the way the Jews have. I think Trump knows what he’s doing.

      December 11, 2017 at 9:10 pm
  • Therese

    We have lit a fire – my purpose in writing was to point out our culpability in lighting it.

    The Palestinians historically have no claim on Jerusalem,

    What, after 2000 years? Who has a right to anything after 2000 years? Especially in this instance after the God Man foretold the Jews’ destruction and dispossession as a result of their rejection of the Messiah. The old Covenant was finished, never to be revived.

    …not even a religious one in the way the Jews have..

    The Jews lost their religious claim when they rejected God; in the Catholic Faith, the whole point of being gifted Jerusalem was to welcome and follow the Messiah (which at first they did). But ultimately they rejected and murdered Him. End of promise.

    I think Trump knows what he’s doing. I fear that in this instance, he doesn’t.

    December 11, 2017 at 9:53 pm
    • editor


      As someone who is manifestly NOT an expert in this subject (or any other, in fact!) I believe that you make some very good and important points.

      I would only say the following, for your consideration and to clarify…

      Although Our Lord wept over Jerusalem, and foretold its destruction, it is a non-sequitur, surely, to link that with the idea that the “old Covenant was finished…” when, in fact, the Old Covenant, rather than being “finished”, was fulfilled in the New Covenant, and, thus, there is hope that, before the end of the world, the Jews WILL, through a special grace, accept Christ as the Messiah?

      I’d also welcome your opinion on this article – not written from a religious point of view, but from a legal perspective; unlike my unworthy self, the author does appear to be something of an expert on the subject, judging by the title of his book, detailed at the foot of the article.

      As I said above, I’m far from being an expert on this subject, so I await enlightenment with much interest…

      December 11, 2017 at 10:32 pm
      • Therese


        Yes, the old Covenant was fulfilled, The claim of the Jews who occupy Israel today is based on the promises of the old Covenant. As the promises of the old Covenant were fulfilled in Christ, which the people called Jews reject, it seems to me, from my perspective as a Catholic, that this claim is impious.

        Re the article, I must bow to the author’s legal expertise. Of course, if the American President wishes to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state he presumably has the legal right under American law to do so.
        I would just say that, as Israel was created by a vote in the “United Nations”, does the same body not have a right to oversee that its original provisions are being met?

        Citizenship of this state is based on a weird conception of “nation” or “race”. Belief in God is not necessary, only the line of nationhood through the female line (although conversions are allowed). It would seem that many of the people who claim to be Jews today are descended from a large group of converts known as Khazars, who were not Semitic.

        I cannot speculate on God’s plans for the end of time. All I believe is that the Chosen People received the fulfilment of the ancient divine promises by the Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of the God-Man. Those who followed Christ were true to their traditions; those who rejected and opposed Christ were then identified as “Jews”.

        December 12, 2017 at 10:24 am
      • editor


        It is, with respect, a mistake to dismiss the Old Testament as done and dusted (so to speak).

        That the promises of a Messiah were fulfilled in Christ, does not mean that the Old Testament or Covenant no longer holds. It has been taken forward in Christ but, as we all know, the Ten Commandments, for example, still apply – only Modernists dismiss them as unnecessary since, they argue, Jesus told us to “love” and all will be well, do what you like, blah blah. As long, that is, as you don’t take up with traditional Catholicism!

        Christ revealed what the thoughtful Jew would have known if he’d read the Scriptures carefully, that it is because God loves us that He has given us the Commandments.

        Introducing the Commandments we read that these are given to us out of love: “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt” – and then the Commandments are listed. So, the thoughtful reader of the ancient scriptures would have seen that it was love, not a desire to instil a nasty fear, which caused God to give us these boundaries, designed for our physical health and spiritual well being. But I am rambling now, sorry: the point I’m trying to make is that the Old Testament revelation of God still applies, now within the context of the fulfilment of the arrival of the Saviour.

        Our Lord Himself referred often to the Scriptures and even said that “not one jot or tittle of the Law will pass away…” He frequently refers to the Old Testament saying things like “Have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying… “[and then quotes the Scriptures).

        So, it is not impious, I suggest, that the original Chosen People still cling to the land given to them by God before the coming of Christ. All that remains is for them to acknowledge the Messiah and, while we cannot “speculate”, as you say, on God’s plans for the end of time, we can believe in prayerful hope, for the conversion of those original Chosen People to the new Israel – Christ’s Church.

        I do agree with Athanasius about the fact that the Holy City is better in the hands of the Jews rather than the Muslims, given the destructive forces at work within Islam – heavens, they have already smashed Muslim shrines in Iraq, so I wouldn’t rate the safety of Christian shrines in Jerusalem, were they to be in the care of Muslims. Allow me that one non-pc statement! Having said that, of course, I do think the Israeli Government should work hard for peace, and find a way to give the Palestinians their own land.

        Finally, for now, I understood that Trump’s recognition of Israel is in keeping not just with American law but with international law, which is why no-one is challenging him on legal grounds, but I am ready and willing to be corrected on that.

        PS – this article from The Catholic Thing has just arrived in my inbox – only skimmed the start of it but it looks interesting.

        December 12, 2017 at 11:39 am
      • Therese


        I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this subject.

        December 12, 2017 at 12:11 pm
      • Athanasius


        Well I did say in my initial comment that this is a very thorny subject, so I’m not surprised that there’s disagreement.

        I went searching for Vatican documents on the subject of Israel and the only one I could find was a letter from Cardinal Cocognani to the Secretary of State for the U.S., dated 1943.

        This was an official letter stating the Vatican’s position on the Jews and the Holy Land, in which the Cardinal endorses a move to evacute 4000 Romanian Jewish children to Palestine while underlining that this endorsement should not be taken as Vatican approval for a re-establishment of a Jewish State in Israel.

        He goes further to suggest that such a move would be very disconcerting to Christians and Arabs, most likely leading to a destabalising of peace in the region. He added that the claim to Israel as their homeland could not be sustained after 1900 years of absence.

        It would seem the Cardinal was quite prophetic in his assessment of what would happen should the Jews re-establish the State of Israel, for there has been nothing but bloodshed in the region ever since, caused by claims and counter-claims to entitlement between factions.

        So yes, it was a mistake to allow the State of Israel to be created in the first place, even if international sympathy for the Jews following the Nazi attrocities was widespread at the time.

        This having been said, we are where we are today. The State of Israel is established and the region is now a hotbed of violence in which it is safer for the holy sites to remain under Jewish control than Islamic control. That’s just being practical in the circumstances. We can’t change the world, we can only do what is best as we see it in the circumstances.

        It would be very nice indeed if the Jews and the Palestinians could sit down and thrash out a peace deal, a lasting agreement to co-exist. But, sadly, neither group follows a religious ethos of forgiveness and peace. That grace comes from Our Lord and is evident only in the Christian religion He established, the new dispensation that both Jews and Muslims reject. So we need not expect peace to reign in the Middle East until that day when Jews and Muslims alike will finally be obliged to open their eyes to the truth about Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God and Saviour of the world.

        Until then, as I say, we’re stuck with practicalities, and the practical solution to keeping a lid on that tinderbox right now is to acknowledge the Jewish presence in Israel as a balancing of power in the Middle East. Otherwise, the Muslims will overrun the entire region and no Christian living there will be safe.

        December 12, 2017 at 1:18 pm
      • Athanasius


        That Cardinal was Cicognani, not “Cocognani”. Slippery fingers again!

        December 12, 2017 at 1:19 pm
      • Therese


        I agree entirely with your post – we are indeed faced with the practicalities and must do the best we can – I doubt that President Trump’s latest initiative will be doing the best we can, but the whole place is just such a mess it is difficult to see any positive way forward unless either side converts. Not a likely scenario.

        P.S. Cardinal Cicognani has gone to my top 10 for prescience and fairness. Thanks for that info!

        December 12, 2017 at 2:20 pm
      • editor


        No. We are going to have to admit to being wrong – and YOU are right. Gulp!

        Today, over coffee with a friend, I raised this topic and she told me something that I hadn’t known before, that Pope Saint Pius X refused to assist the establishment of a Jewish state. I’ve just been Googling and found a very interesting report on the subject. Here’s a key extract, followed by link to the original entire article….

        “Theodor Herzl’s Report on the Meeting with Pope Pius X in 1904

        On the 1st of July 1956 in the journal La Terre Retrovée a text of Theodor Herzl was published about his meeting with Pope Pius X on January 26, 1904:
        Yesterday I was with the Pope. The route was already familiar since I had traversed it with Lippay several times. Past the Swiss lackeys, who looked like clerics, and clerics who looked like lackeys, the Papal officers and chamberlains.

        I arrived 10 minutes ahead of time and didn’t even have to wait. I was conducted through numerous small reception rooms to the Pope. He received me standing and held out his hand, which I did not kiss. Lippay had told me I had to do it, but I didn’t. I believe that I incurred his displeasure by this, for everyone who visits him kneels down and at least kisses his hand.

        This hand kiss had caused me a lot of worry. I was quite glad when it was finally out of the way. He seated himself in an armchair, a throne for minor occasions. Then he invited me to sit down right next to him and smiled in friendly anticipation. 

        I began: “Ringrazio Vostra Santità per il favore di m’aver accordato quest’udienza” [I thank Your Holiness for the favor of according me this audience].” “È un piacere [It is a pleasure],” he said with kindly deprecation. I apologized for my miserable Italian, but he said: “No, parla molto bene, signor Commendatore [No, Commander, you speak very well].” For I had put on for the first time—on Lippay’s advice—my Mejidiye ribbon.

        Consequently the Pope always addressed me as Commendatore. He is a good, coarse-grained village priest, to whom Christianity has remained a living thing even in the Vatican. I briefly placed my request before him. He, however, possibly annoyed by my refusal to kiss his hand, answered sternly and resolutely: “Noi non possiamo favorire questo movimento. Non potremo impedire gli Ebrei di andare a Gerusalemme—ma favorire non possiamo mai. La terra di Gerusalemme se non era sempre santa, è santificata per la vita di Jesu Christo (he did not pronounce it Gesu, but Yesu, in the Venetian fashion). Io come capo della chiesa non posso dirle altra cosa. Gli Ebrei non hanno riconosciuto nostro Signore, perciò non possiamo riconoscere il popolo ebreo [We cannot give approval to this movement. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The soil of Jerusalem, if it was not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot tell you anything different. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people].” 

        Hence the conflict between Rome, represented by him, and Jerusalem, represented by me, was once again opened up. At the outset, to be sure, I tried to be conciliatory. I recited my little piece about extraterritorialization, res sacrae extra commercium [holy places removed from business]. It didn’t make much of an impression. 

        Gerusalemme, he said, must not get into the hands of the Jews. “And its present status, Holy Father?” 

         “I know, it is not pleasant to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with that. But to support the Jews in the acquisition of the Holy Places, that we cannot do.” I said that our point of departure had been solely the distress of the Jews and that we desired to avoid the religious issues. “Yes, but we, and I as the head of the Church, cannot do this. There are two possibilities. Either the Jews will cling to their faith and continue to await the Messiah who, for us, has already appeared. In that case they will be denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot help them. Or else they will go there without any religion, and then we can be even less favorable to them. 

        “The Jewish religion was the foundation of our own; but it was superseded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot concede it any further validity. The Jews, who ought to have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ, have not done so to this day.” It was on the tip of my tongue to say, “That’s what happens in every family. No one believes in his own relatives.” But I said instead: “Terror and persecution may not have been the right means for enlightening the Jews.” 

         But he rejoined, and this time he was magnificent in his simplicity: 

         “Our Lord came without power. Era povero [He was poor]. He came in pace [in peace]. He persecuted no one. He was persecuted. He was abbandonato [forsaken] even by his apostles. Only later did he grow in stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had time to acknowledge his divinity without any pressure. But they haven’t done so to this day.” 

         “But, Holy Father, the Jews are in terrible straits. I don’t know if Your Holiness is acquainted with the full extent of this sad situation. We need a land for these persecuted people.” 

         “Does it have to be Gerusalemme?”

         “We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—only the secular land.” 

         “We cannot be in favor of it.”

        Read the entire article is published on the website of Catholic Family News here

        Thank you Therese, for forcing us to think through the issues more carefully. I knew you’d come in handy eventually 😀

        December 12, 2017 at 6:13 pm
      • Therese


        I am overwhelmed….I feel a little dizzy and wouldn’t you know it, there’s not a drop of brandy in the house……

        December 12, 2017 at 7:12 pm
      • editor

        Brandy? You mean Whisky, surely? Our national (ugh!) drink! Whatever, just don’t over do it…

        Actually, I suppose I should have spoken for myself, and left Athanasius to do his own crawling 😀

        I’m sure he’ll be of the same sound mind as thee and me on this now, though. It would take a brave man (or woman) to contradict the greatest Pope Saint of the 20th century on this matter!

        PS – don’t know why, but your post went into SPAM (not deliberate, honest! I released it the minute I saw it… )

        December 12, 2017 at 9:51 pm
      • Athanasius


        I always said I wasn’t infallible but Editor insisted I was. Now she knows the grand secret!

        I’m pretty near perfect most of the time, yet not quite infallible. I’m getting there, though, now that I’ve rid myself of the conceit!!

        Now, where did I put that bottle of plonk?

        December 13, 2017 at 3:15 pm
      • Therese


        When you find it, pour one for me!

        December 13, 2017 at 3:34 pm
      • editor


        “I always said I wasn’t infallible…”

        That’s come as a shock. A real shock…

        December 14, 2017 at 11:06 am
      • editor


        My friend from our coffee meeting today has just emailed me a link to the Jerusalem Post’s take on Pius X – not pretty! Click here to read it…

        December 12, 2017 at 11:12 pm
      • Therese


        Yes – that’s pretty typical (no pun intended!).

        You might find this link from Catholic Family News interesting:

        December 13, 2017 at 1:33 pm
      • editor


        Thank you for that link. These words jumped out at me:

        “…we should refresh ourselves on the religious reasons why a good Catholic cannot support the Jewish state.” (emphasis in the original)

        WOW! Thank you again for your perseverance in putting me right on this….

        December 13, 2017 at 1:51 pm
    • Athanasius


      I did not mean to suggest that the Jews still have a claim to Jerusalem in the eyes of Christians. My purpose was to point out that Jews have an historical religious claim on Jesrusalem whereas Muslims do not.

      I don’t believe we have lit a fire, that’s the line the fake news outlets are trying very hard to convince us of. Both the Jews and the Muslims in Palestine have been debating Jerusalem for decades and the Palestinians are fully aware that the U.S. Congress voted overwhelmingly back in the 1990s to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. So Trump’s announcement is hardly unexpected.

      The only reason Trump’s predecessors didn’t make the announcement themselves is because they feared Islamic violence, violence that the liberal media are now trying hard to stir up with their scare stories. They’re suggesting that Trump pulled this out of nowhere and proceded on his own initiative without Congressional support. It’s all just so much baloney, and they know it.

      Anyway, as I said before, I would much prefer the Jews to be in charge in Israel than the Islamists. At least we know the Jews protect the holy Christian sites and allow access to them. Islam, on the contrary, does not have a good record in majority Islamic countries when it comes to the toleration of Christians.

      December 12, 2017 at 1:12 am
  • crofterlady

    I’ve always felt that the Palestinians got a raw deal and that the Allies had no right to take their homeland after the second world war and “plant” it with Jews. It reminded me of the Plantation of Ulster when the native population (Catholics) were usurped and thrown off their land by the British and “planted” with Scottish Protestants and there’s never been peace since.

    However, in the light of the recent upsurge of Islamic terrorists and their destruction of all things Christian, I support what Trump has done. Politically, I think that present day Israel is a buffer between islamic terrorists and the rest of us. It’s not a perfect situation by any means but it is a reprieve, albeit a temporary one I fear.

    December 11, 2017 at 11:22 pm
    • editor


      Yes, it would help if countries would stop partitioning land and setting the scene for, literally, years of murderous conflict, so I agree with you there.

      Those defending Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem argue that it will help bring peace more quickly to the region; that the Israelis may now be more motivated to allow Gaza and the West Bank to become the State of Palestine, although this is a possibility only if Hamas accepts Israel’s right to exist.

      Let’s hope and pray.

      December 12, 2017 at 12:25 am
  • RCAVictor

    This topic is not something I understand very well, but I do understand that it was the treachery of Great Britain, through the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that pledged to establish “a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, that was the foundation for this. It was the deliberately designed kindling for future conflict…so, three guesses as to who cooked up this plan. Hint: the Balfour Declaration was a letter delivered to Lord Rothschild, who requested this action…..

    December 12, 2017 at 1:48 pm
    • Therese

      RCA Victor

      Nail hit firmly on the head. The Arabs had been our allies in WW1, and we betrayed them shamefully. We now reap the “rewards”.

      December 12, 2017 at 2:22 pm
      • Athanasius


        I am not aware that the Arabs were anyone’s allies during WWI. I do know that Britain was at War with the Ottoman (Muslim) Empire around the time of the Balfour Declaration. The question is: if faced with a choice, would the Palestinian Arabs have remained loyal to their Christian allies, or would they have sided with their fellow Muslims? Maybe this was the thinking behind the Balfour Declaration.

        December 12, 2017 at 2:48 pm
      • Therese


        Think Lawrence of Arabia.

        December 12, 2017 at 3:25 pm
      • Athanasius


        Yes, I’ll concede Lawrence of Arabia and the Arabs who fought with him against the Ottoman Empire. But I also observe the violent conflict in the region at a time when the Jews were not a factor.

        December 12, 2017 at 7:51 pm
    • Margaret USA

      I didn’t know that re the Balfour Declaration. Thanks for the additional info.

      December 12, 2017 at 6:01 pm
  • Athanasius

    RCA Victor

    Typical Britain, the country that leaves behind religious wars in every territory it invades. Think of Ireland, India/Pakistan, Palestine, the wider Middle East as a few examples.

    I had no idea that Britain was behind the foundation of the Zionist State of Israel, I thought it was the U.S. And the involvement of Lord Rothschild is very telling, as is the year when the move was first made, 1917!

    December 12, 2017 at 2:41 pm
  • RCAVictor

    Here’s a rather tongue-in-cheek commentary on the hypocrisy with which Pres. Trump’s decision has been greeted by the professional liars of the world:


    December 12, 2017 at 4:51 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,


      December 12, 2017 at 7:52 pm
    • Margaret Mary

      RCA Victor,

      Great video – made me LOL!

      December 13, 2017 at 12:58 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: