The Vatican's Agenda
relations between the State of Israel and the Vatican were
established on June 15 of this year. This momentous event brought—at
best—mixed emotions to most Jews. Since it's renewed statehood
in this century, Israel has sought the recognition of the Vatican.
This desire is understandable since the Roman Catholic Church has
1.5 billion adherents and over the centuries anti-Semitism
flourished and Jewish blood flowed where Catholics were either a
majority or large minority. The holocaust was no exception. With
the ending of World War II, the Jew proved a double dilemma to the
The First Dilemma
First, how could the Vatican
dispel the dark cloud of suspicion of Papal implication in the
holocaust? Since the Vatican signed a concordat of cooperation
with Hitler, many concluded that the very fact the Papacy never
publicly denounced the holocaust implied silent consent. Hitler in
a friendly session with Bishop Bering and Monsignor Steinman
observed that his policy for the Jews, after all, was "what
the church had done for 1,500 years."
But the Vatican was intent on
changing its public image. The Vatican II Council (1965) declared
that all Jews are no longer responsible for the crucifixion of
Christ. Then the Vatican followed with phrases, such as, "God
holds the Jews most dear" and "the Jew is our elder
brother." From the mouths of their newly found younger
brother, these were encouraging statements to a people who have
suffered bitter persecution and anti-Semitism for centuries. Yet
these expressions fall short of acknowledging that the Jewish
people have a glorious covenant destiny with God that is separate
and distinct from the Christian church.
The Israeli government was
satisfied with the Vatican's change of image. But did anything
more than the image really change? The fact that the Vatican did
not recognize Israel until after the PLO did speaks volumes. The
Vatican was in an embarrassing situation. If the Vatican continued
to refuse recognition of Israel after so many others (including
the PLO) have, suspicions that the Vatican was anti-Semitic would
be confirmed. But before such recognition, the Vatican wrung out
of Israel the promise to be included in negotiating the final
status of East Jerusalem.
Israel's leaders were elated
that the Vatican gave up its demand for the
"internationalization" of Jerusalem. But exactly why did
the Vatican give up this demand?
The Vatican's Second Dilemma
The Vatican's second dilemma is
related to the theological problem posed by Israel possessing East
Jerusalem, the Old City.
Why did the Vatican demand
Jerusalem's internationalization during the UN debate of the
Partition Plan in 1947? New York's Cardinal Spellman committed all
energy to keep Jerusalem out of Israeli control. He telegraphed
the Papal nuncios (ambassadors) in South American countries with
the demand that they urge their home governments to take an
uncompromising stand at the UN for the internationalization of
Jerusalem. The Vatican's ostensible reason for this policy was
that thus all three major faiths would be guaranteed free access
to their holy places. However, from 1948 to 1967 when Jordanian
forces occupied Jerusalem, Jewish holy places were shamefully
desecrated and synagogues destroyed. Furthermore, Jews were denied
access to East Jerusalem and the Western Wall. During this time,
the Vatican never once raised a cry for internationalization.
In fact, since acquiring Old
Jerusalem in 1967, Israel has guaranteed all (Christians and
Moslems in addition to Jews) free access to their holy places.
With Israeli control, the Vatican renewed insistence that
Jerusalem be internationalized to provide free access—a
privilege the Israelis already assured the three faiths!
Obviously, a deeper reason exists for Vatican opposition to
Israel's possession of Old Jerusalem.
The Roman Catholic Church
believes Israel's right to be the Kingdom of God ended forever
with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Roman
Legion in 70 CE. When the Roman Catholic Church grew to world
prominence, it claimed to be the rightful heir of the Kingdom of
God. Rome—Vatican City—became the "New Jerusalem."
The rebirth of Israel challenged Catholicism's "Kingdom of
God" theory. But the claim of Rome to be "the eternal
city" was completely deflated when Jerusalem, "The
Eternal," became the capital of Israel in 1967.
Some Christian theology
designated many Old Testament places and events as pictures or
"shadows" (also termed "types") of realities
that would replace the historic place or event itself. In
type-and-shadow theology—if the type or shadow reappears—then
the supposed reality is not valid. Thus, the re-emergence of Old
Jerusalem as Israel's capital destroys the Vatican's claim to be
the "New Jerusalem"—the capital of the actual Kingdom
Yes, the Jewish community must
recognize the real issue of Jerusalem. Jewish leaders feel that if
they can convince the Vatican that Israel will always provide free
and equal rights to all three faiths, certainly then, the Vatican
will recognize Israel's control over Jerusalem.
If only the issue were that
simple. Why does the Vatican act like a world political power,
exchanging ambassadors with other nations? No other Christian
church claims this prestigious status. The only excuse that the
Vatican has to act as a world power is the claim that it is both
the spiritual and the temporal Kingdom of God, the New Jerusalem.
In the coming months and years, Catholic prelates in every nation
will both covertly and overtly try to influence public opinion
against Israel's controlling East Jerusalem. As already shown,
Israel's possession of the capital of its ancient kingdom is a
challenge to Rome—a challenge which Rome is compelled to remove!
The Vatican's Hidden Agenda
Why then did the Vatican
recently drop its demand for internationalization if it doesn't
want Israel to have Jerusalem? The answer is plain and simple. The
Vatican caved in to PLO pressure, not Israeli, on the
internationalization issue. The PLO is vigorously opposed to
internationalizing Jerusalem because it wants East Jerusalem to be
the capital of a Palestinian state. The Vatican's main concern was
that Jerusalem not be in the hands of the reborn Jewish State.
None should be surprised if the
Vatican throws its negotiating weight fully behind Arafat when
East Jerusalem's status is deliberated. The Vatican—be it
remembered—opposed Israeli control of Jerusalem in 1947. In
September 1982 (as well as several other occasions), the Vatican
received Yasser Arafat, an international terrorist, with all the
honor and dignity accorded a head of state. The prestige of
administering the holy sites of a Palestinian—ruled Jerusalem
would greatly enhance the Vatican's larger agenda as the "New
Jerusalem," the Kingdom of God.
That the Vatican is determined
to terminate Israel's exclusive sovereignty over East Jerusalem is
reflected in the statement of the Vatican's Foreign Minister,
Jean-Louis Tauran (Amman, Jordan, July 9, 1994):
problems are resolved, we have to find international guarantees to
safeguard the uniqueness of the city. . .and assurances that never
again one party should claim Jerusalem as its possession [emphasis
"It [Jerusalem] should be a
crossroads of peace, a bridge between Earth and Heaven."
Of course, the Vatican wants a
major part in the administration of that "bridge."
Evidently, Israel has its counter ploy. The September 2nd, 1994
JEWISH PRESS stated that Foreign Minister Peres has offered
"the Vatican a sizable amount of control over
The Vatican's Greater Agenda
All heads of state are eager to
meet with Pope John Paul II (TIME, August 23, 1993). Why? He is
not just the head of a church, but the head of the Papal State.
The Vatican is the capital of this church-state government.
Through his priesthood he has an intelligence gathering network
that is the envy of every government. This network reaches down
into almost every town and villa over much of the globe. John Paul
II plays power politics with a skill that awes world leaders.
Nations are anxious to exchange ambassadors with the Vatican. Pope
John Paul and former President Reagan successfully plotted the
downfall of the Communist Empire (TIME, February 24, 1992). During
this clandestine campaign Archbishop Pio Lashi said to the
diplomat, Vernon Walters, "It is a very complex situation
listen to the Holy Father [Pope]. We have 2,000 years experience
at this." It was further observed, "Step by reluctant
step, the Soviets and the Communist government of Poland bowed to
the pressure imposed by the Pope and the President."
The Pope's ultimate agenda is
revealed in the following statement he made on April 21, 1990:
"A united Europe is no longer a dream. It is not a
utopian memory from the Middle Ages [emphasis added]. The
events that we are witnessing show that this goal can be
reached." The Pope wants to revive the Holy Roman Empire of
the Middle (Dark) Ages.
Can Rabin and his administration
outmatch the Vatican on Jerusalem? In the final analysis, neither
Vatican prelates—nor secular presidents nor military might—are
any match for the Almighty. The warning of the Almighty in
Zechariah 12:3 stands:
"And in that day will I
make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden
themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people
of the earth be gathered together against it."
Jerusalem, indeed, will be
internationalized! But Jerusalem will belong to the Jew forever.
People from all over the world will come to Jerusalem to worship,
but it will be to learn about the God of the Jews and to praise
His Holy Name.
"Yea, many people and
strong nations shall come to seek the Lord of hosts in Jerusalem,
and to pray before the Lord. Thus saith the Lord of hosts; In
those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold of
the skirt of him that is a Jew saying, We will go with you: for we
have heard that God is with you." Zechariah 8:22, 23 (also
Isaiah 2:2, 3; 60:10-12; 66:18-22).