Catholic bishops endorse two-state solution to Mideast conflict - CNN.comRoman Catholic bishops for the Middle East concluded a two-week conference with a call for the international community, especially the United Nations, to work "to put an end to the occupation" of Palestinian territories.
"The Palestinian people will thus have an independent and sovereign homeland where they can live with dignity and security," the group said in a statement Saturday at the end of a meeting headed by Pope Benedict XVI. "The State of Israel will be able to enjoy peace and security within their internationally recognized bordersThe Holy City of Jerusalem will be able to acquire its proper status, which respects its particular character, its holiness and the religious patrimony of the three religions: Jewish, Christian and Muslim. We hope that the two-state-solution might become a reality and not a dream only."
The pope first publicly endorsed a two-state solution to the Middle East crisis during a visit to the region in May 2009. At the time, he assured Palestinians of the Vatican's support of a sovereign Palestinian homeland. It was a concept that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu resisted.
Does anyone believe that the leaders of sex crimes throughout the world have any moral authority to talk to this or any point. Where were they sixty years ago when their flock massacred millions of people in just one Christianities terror campaigns. After they have properly sent to the authorities are off their officials who committed sex crimes throughout the world, then maybe they can spend time worrying about what others should do. Of course many will probably be doing it from jail cells as appropriate.
The use of the word "Flock" here is inappropriate. It's a rather substantial exaggeration.
Expressing renewed support for a negotiated two-state solution would be constructive. Proclaiming support for the Palestinian maximum position, including the Palestinian demand concerning refugees, is not. It only further emboldens Palestinian intransigence. Worse, the synod attempted to inject a religious element into the already complex historic dispute and one of the Archbishops engaged in religious "successionism" (a direct attack on the Jewish faith). In the end, its conclusions are quite inconsistent with the Catholic Church's post-Vatican II doctrine and it only enflames the historic dispute by embracing one of the parties' maximum positions. It is not a contribution to the peace process nor a means of building bridges among the world's faiths.
Expressing renewed support for a negotiated two-state solution would be constructive. Proclaiming support for the Palestinian maximum position, including the Palestinian demand concerning refugees, is not. It only further emboldens Palestinian intransigence. Worse, the synod attempted to inject a religious element into the already complex historic dispute and one of the Archbishops engaged in religious "successionism" (a direct attack on the Jewish faith). In the end, its conclusions are quite inconsistent with the Catholic Church's post-Vatican II doctrine and it only enflames the historic dispute by embracing one of the parties' maximum positions. It is not a contribution to the peace process nor a means of building bridges among the world's faiths.
Here is a copy of the document in question:
ZENIT - Mideast Synod's Concluding Statement
You are completely misrepresenting the contents of it as it nowhere endorses the right of return, it even only mentions "thousands of refugees" as opposed to the millions recognized as such by the UNRWA. It does call for implementing UN resolutions and withdrawing to the 1967 boundaries, but there are many Israeli voices that have argued for much the same thing. The document explicitly references the Second Vatican Council and the position it presented on Judaism.
Does anyone still take this group of old men, some of whom allowed pedophiles to stay in their ranks seriously? Hasn't most of the world long ago felt that they have lost any moral authority then may have had.
Actually a few still have a few Standards and the Moral Authority to state them.
Also some of the "Harshest' Critics of the Church are Glad the Pedophiles exist. It's their psychological makeup.
Does anyone still take this group of old men, some of whom allowed pedophiles to stay in their ranks seriously? Hasn't most of the world long ago felt that they have lost any moral authority then may have had.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?