MEDITERRANEAN, JEWISH AND CHRISTIANS. LAPORTA RESPONDS TO READERS.
7 Giugno 2020
Dear Stilumcuriali, this is a message that General Piero Laporta addresses to you directly, and of which I am only the intermediary, in this sparkling dialogue that has been created between some of you and our General. So, as a good postman, delivered the message, I withdraw…
I realize that the article about the Mediterranean role of the Church is very long, as lamented by a kind reader, to whom I address my thanks, as to the other patient readers, kindly asking to evaluate how difficult it is to summarize the events spread in 3 thousand years of history and correlating them.
I really appreciate the criticisms raised by the theological and doctrinal sides, from which I learn a lot and on which I do not object, having the minimum requirement of theology and doctrine, as I had already underlined many times. On the other hand, my thesis: “political collaboration between Catholics and Jews is possible and necessary”, it is proposed only on the basis of the respective historical, cultural, Catholic and Jewish roots as well as the bonds that these roots have intertwined, in spite of mutual bad will, both on the Catholic and Jewish side. This bad will seems to be witnessed by the Catholic side – allow me a pinch of malice – by most of the censures I received. There is therefore no need to be surprised for the symmetrical difficulties on the Jewish side. Much less is it surprising that the common enemies find these separations profitable. Just to avoid the difficult theological and doctrinal terrain, I have omitted to mention the teachings, well recalled by more than one reader, of Saint John Paul II, H.H. Benedict XVI and the cardinal Lustiger.
I recalled that the first diplomatic act of Saint John Paul II, after his inauguration, was to move towards mutual recognition between the Holy See and Israel, completed on December 30, 1993 by the historic Fundamental Agreement, signed in Jerusalem – mind you – in Jerusalem, which entered into force in 1994 with the exchange of the respective ambassadors. In other words, the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel came first of all from the Holy See, which today seems to go back.
The many who disagree with my thesis are therefore requested to say clearly whether Saint Pius X did better than Saint John Paul II, stating that those lands were holy thanks to the sacrifice of the Messiah, consequently “the Jews did not recognize our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people”. When the partisans of St. Pius X express themselves in favor of his theses, they will be asked to give them current political substance, closely linked to the events taking place, to the people in flesh and blood today; not yesterday or tomorrow, but today. Religious ideology is no less harmful than political one. I mean that no people and no believers (of any faith or political belief) have the right to call on History with bills to be collected or claiming successor rights. Muslims, Christians, Catholics, Jews, southerners or northerners, Africans, Indians, whites, blacks, Europeans and others, whatever their current condition is, are obliged to look forward, protecting their history, their traditions, their own culture. Using the errors of history – that is, the errors of our grandparents and our ancestors – as a currency of exchange means perpetuating and magnifying the same errors, without hope of going to anything positive. Just the current condition of the so-called “Palestinians” is a demonstration of what I have just affirmed.
We therefore need powerful doses of realism, mixed with realism and multiplied with realism. The same realism led Vatican diplomacy, under the masterful guidance of those secretaries of state – cardinals Jean Villot , Agostino Casaroli and Angelo Sodano – to seize the opportunity for mutual recognition between the Holy See and the United States, in 1984. The Department of State promoted Ronald Reagan’s personal representative in Rome, William Wilson, to ambassador to the Holy See, who, in turn, changed the role of the apostolic delegate of the Holy See in Washington, Cardinal Pio Laghi, to apostolic nuncio in the United States of America.
Those who think that mutual recognition with Washington has been easier than with Israel, urgently need to refresh their historical knowledge. The political collaboration, fulfilled after 208 years from the United States’ Declaration of Independence, was an excellent starting point both for reaching recognition, ten years later, with Israel, and for placing the Holy See in a providential median position between East and West while the Soviet Union was collapsing.
The current international irrelevance of the Holy See derives from wrong political choices, which began in June 2014, with the meeting in the Vatican gardens (why in the gardens?) with Shimon Peres and Abu Mazen. It was a banality without any political realism, supposing Israel and so-called Palestine on the same level, only because three politicians of the three parties agreed to meet in the Vatican gardens. The subsequent complacent genuflections to Nazi Lutheranism, to the Chinese dictatorship and to the bloody administrations Clinton and Obama, concluded the irrelevance itinerary, from which the refusal, even of the old accomplices, of the continuation of this pontificate, precisely because irrelevant, could soon derive. In fact, accomplices are never fair supportive but rather pursue their concrete interests.
In my piece, in conclusion, I looked for the historical and cultural roots of the affinities between Catholics and Jews, therefore the need for their close political collaboration. I clearly understand the coexistence of these affinities with the profound differences. If not, we would be trivially the same, come on.
I therefore kindly ask my patient readers to criticize me – with factual data – on the existence of those roots and on the convenience – strenuously supported by me – to feed them, albeit separately, without ever hindering their development. In the face of the apodictic affirmations of Saint Pius X, I ask everyone to keep in mind that Judaism is a religion, a culture, a history and a project; going at the same speed, Israel is a state, with citizens of different religions, with laws that apply to everyone. For this reason, Israel is the only full democracy in the region, therefore a bastion to defend. This is an indispensable firm point to tie the objections down. I therefore trust that there will be no carelessness in the oppositions to my thesis, so favoring on principle the design of those who are canceling the magisterium of St. John Paul II, the theological one, as well as the political one, no less important. Thanks.
STILUM CURIAE HA UN CANALE SU TELEGRAM
(su TELEGRAM c’è anche un gruppo Stilum Curiae…)
E ANCHE SU VK.COM
SU FACEBOOK C’È LA PAGINA
SE PENSATE CHE
STILUM CURIAE SIA UTILE
SE PENSATE CHE
SENZA STILUM CURIAE
L’INFORMAZIONE NON SAREBBE LA STESSA
AIUTATE STILUM CURIAE!
ANDATE ALLA HOME PAGE
SOTTO LA BIOGRAFIA
Questo blog è il seguito naturale di San Pietro e Dintorni, presente su “La Stampa” fino a quando non fu troppo molesto. Per chi fosse interessato al lavoro già svolto, ecco il link a San Pietro e Dintorni.
Se volete ricevere i nuovi articoli del blog, scrivete la vostra mail nella finestra a fianco.
L’articolo vi ha interessato? Condividetelo, se volete, sui social network, usando gli strumenti qui sotto.
Se invece volete aiutare sacerdoti “scomodi” in difficoltà, qui trovate il sito della Società di San Martino di Tours e di San Pio di Pietrelcina
LIBRI DI MARCO TOSATTI
Se siete interessati a un libro, cliccate sul titolo….
Condividi i miei articoli: