Theodor Herzl accused Pius X of this utterance:
Noi non possiamo favorire questo movimento. Non potremo impedire agli ebrei di andare a Gerusalemme, ma non possiamo mai favorirlo. La terra di Gerusalemme se non era sempre santa, è stata santificata per la vita di Jesu Cristo (sic). Io come capo della chiesa non posso dirle altra cosa. Gli Ebrei non hanno riconosciuto nostro Signore, perciò non possiamo riconoscere il popolo ebreo.
An excerpt can also be had here. The Vicar of Christ goes on to promise that if Herzl's crew do show up in Palestine, he'll have priests ready to baptise them. But I don't care about that. If a crew of Tamils propose to show up, the pope should have priests ready to baptise them as well - or he's no pope.
Of more concern is that Giuseppe Sarto here assumes that popoli exist for anyone else but, it seems - for Jews. Joseph was born a Venetian / Dalmatian. He might or might not have accepted Venice's ontological separation from Italia. But I am sure that once crowned Bishop in Roma that this man could understand the difference between an Italian and a Frenchman, or either from a Pole. A successor to Pope Saint Martin should understand that nations exist in the flesh but come together under Christ Jesus. Has Jerusalem no bishop in communion with Martin? Pius' defenders might want to look this up.
Denying that a Jewish people exist, and dismissing them as ebreo... seems Pharaonic.
It may be that Herzl misremembered or misrepresented. If not, it may be that Fr. Sarto had slipped off the cathedra and blurted Venetian words as a mortal Venetian might. I suspect, the latter. But that is a debate for Pius' defenders; or for his Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment