Maybe it’s not so bad.

Questions:

1. How would you describe the current Holy See-Israel relations? When are the most problem points in the relationship and why?

2. As Vatican is the theocracy and the society of Israel is heavily influenced by the religion rules it is even possible to talk about “ordinary” policy in the relations. How much do you think is everything affected by the fact these are also relations between two Abrahamic religions with turbulent history of relationships?

3. If we compare the current Pope Benedict XVI with the late Pope John Paul II is it possible to identify some changes in the policy towards Israel and what kind of changes? And what about the changes on the side of Israel?

Answers.

John Allen, Senior Correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, Vatican analyst of CNN, Author of the book Opus Dei: An Objective Look Behind the Myths and Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church

1. Relations between the Holy See and Israel go up and down. On the one hand, Israel badly craves Western support, and the Vatican regards the relationship with Judaism as its primordial inter-faith partnership, which gives both sides powerful reasons for keeping lines of communication open. On the other hand, there are serious differences. The Vatican tends to be sympathetic to the Palestinians in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, in part because most of the Christians in the Holy Land are Arabs and see their future as bound up with a Palestinian state. The Holy See certainly doesn’t follow the line of the United States when it comes to defending Israel on the global stage. The recent U.N. Conference on Racism, when the U.S. and other Western powers walked out but the Vatican stayed, makes the point. Further, there are also chronic disputes between Israel and the Holy See over the tax and legal status of church properties in Israel. In essence, Israel is allergic to giving up its sovereignty over anything, while the church wants centuries-old arrangements that date from the Ottoman era, or before, to be honored. You might say that Israel is one of the Holy See’s most important, but also most difficult, relationships.

2. The Middle East is the realm of “theo-politics,” where religious convictions always shape policy choices. That means that relations between Israel (or the Palestinian Territories) and the Vatican always carry centuries of theological and historical baggage. On the other hand, it also means that the Vatican is perhaps the lone Western institution that can engage all parties in the Middle East on their own terms, because it speaks the language of theopolitics. In other words, religion divides, but it also unites, creating a shared psychology and set of assumptions about the world. For precisely that reason, Benedict XVI may be better positioned to act as a peace-maker than any other Western leader.

3. I don‘t see any changes in content, but in terms of perception the two popes certainly have different profiles. Jews saw John Paul II as a friend, while some aren’t so sure about Benedict XVI. One small example: When John Paul came to the Holy Land in 2000, Israeli security called it “Operation Old Friend”; for Benedict XVI, it’s “Operation White Robe.” Because of the well-known controversies under Benedict XVI, he has more work to do during this trip to convince Jews and Israelis that he’s sympathetic. Ultimately, however, the policies of the two popes are the same. They both support dialogue with Judaism at the theological and cultural levels, and both support the “two-state solution” to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, with an “internationally guaranteed special status” for the holy sites.

Raymond Cohen, Professor of international relations who is researching the relationship between Israel and the Vatican, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

1. Current relations are better than they have ever been because of a decades-long effort at reconciliation. There are several channels of communication and problems, such as the Williamson affair, are fairly quickly resolved. The exchange of ambassadors in 1994 was supposed to inaugurate full normalization but a full flowering of relations has been held back by two things: first, the long delay in implementing provisions of the 1993 fundamental agreement on Church tax exemptions and property rights; second, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has a grave impact on Palestinian Christians.

2. The two religions are in each other's DNA, descendants of the common tradition of Temple Judaism, who have been estranged for many centuries. Of course, the history of conflict between Church and Synagogue, and particularly anti-semitism and the persecution of the Jews, cannot fail to loom large in the relationship. At the same time since Vatican II the two religions have been engaged in a productive dialogue based on respect and common values. This has resulted in much better mutual understanding.

3. Pope Benedict XVI was a key official under Pope John Paul II, hence there is much continuity in their policy towards the Jewish people--rejection of anti-semitism, abandonment of a "theology of contempt", rejection of missionary activity, and, most important, recognition of Judaism as a valid religion in itself leading to salvation because "God does not revoke his covenants." Because of his German background, Benedict is just as eager as his Polish predecessor to strengthen ties with the Jewish people. Some Jews continue to be suspicious of Church intentions, and there is widespread ignorance of Christianity in Israel, but there is a steady improvement overall in popular attitudes. The visit will surely promote even better mutual understanding and appreciation of the historic change in the Church's attitude to the Jewish people.