Pope Francis marked the anniversary of the beginning of the war in Israel after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack by calling a day of prayer and fasting for peace.

On October 6, Francis presided over a rosary for peace, without mentioning that the anniversary coincides with another significant event in the history of inter-religious relations.

During the Counter-Reformation, popes gave the rosary a role in explaining the triumph of Christians in the Holy League over the superior Ottoman forces at the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, an event still evoked today by neo-traditionalists opposing Islam.

In 1572, Pius V established the feast of Our Lady of Victories on October 7 to give thanks for the victory, and in 1573, Gregory XIII dedicated the day to the Virgin of the Rosary, merging her iconography with that of the Virgin of Victory.

There was much that Pope Francis could not mention.

And there was something that he should not have mentioned in his "Letter to Catholics in the Middle East," for example, the passage from the Gospel of John 8:44, which some consider the single most antisemitic line in the New Testament.

This is just one example of the disastrous effects of the events of October 7, 2023, and their aftermath on relations between Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Globalisation and the future of Catholicism

The war also impacts church politics. The war in the Middle East since October 2023 has amplified the effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

It has brought to the forefront three Italian cardinals on the international stage: Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican secretary of state; Cardinal Matteo Zuppi of Bologna and Francis' special envoy for peace in Ukraine; and Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Whatever happens between now and the next conclave, there is an Italianisation of the leading figures in the Catholic Church dealing with these major international crises.

Between the end of the Middle Ages and the early modern age, the Italianisation of the papacy and the Roman Curia was a response to the challenges brought to the church by the European powers and their support for schismatic demands.

We will see how the cardinals in the next conclave will respond to the challenges coming from the 21st-century world disorder.

"Having more cardinals from "the peripheries" means a college of cardinals more representative of the global Church, but also means a much higher number of cardinals physically distant from Rome and therefore potentially less able to advise the pope and the Curia."

The second effect is on the institutional responses of the Catholic Church and the Vatican in this age of geopolitical uncertainties. The globalisation of Catholicism means also a de-Europeanisation of the historical and religious narratives on the character and identity of the Church.

There have been previous phases of internationalization of the leadership of the Church in the College of Cardinals, especially since the 19th century, but today's diversification takes place in a situation Church in the Americas, especially in the United States.

This is visible in the list of the 21 new cardinals that Pope Francis will create in his tenth consistory of December 8.

This list sends strong signals to the countries that influence the destinies of the world: for example, creating as a cardinal Belgian missionary Dominique Joseph Mathieu, OFM Cap., archbishop of Tehran-Ispahan in Iran — a clear gesture to the United States and Israel at this time of serious risk of all-out war between Iran and an Israel supported by the United States.

But this internationalisation of the College of Cardinals also means the risk of overstretching the global institutional capacity of Catholicism.

Having more cardinals from "the peripheries" means a college of cardinals more representative of the global church, but also means a much higher number of cardinals physically distant from Rome and, therefore, potentially less able to advise the Pope and the Curia.

The strain on inter-religious relations

The third, most delicate, and disastrous series of effects concerns the future of the relations between the Catholic Church, Judaism and Islam.

This war in the Middle East broke out during the pontificate of Pope Francis, who is trying to do for the relations between the Church and Islam what John Paul II did for the relations with Judaism.

But now Catholicism must face the reality that institutionalised Christianity has been replaced as a source of antisemitism by some radical groups within Islam.

On the other side, there are Israel's political and constitutional trajectories under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In many ways, the State of Israel now faces the challenge of developing a modernity that reconciles religion and politics, a challenge that became more evident after the Holy See and Israel established full diplomatic relations in 1993.

Netanyahu's response to October 7 and his framing of relations between the Jewish state and Judaism are cementing a political theology of enmity between Jews and Muslims.

This challenges the post-Vatican II project of dialogue between the three Abrahamic religions as fundamental for peace-building, not only in the Middle East but as a paradigm for a new world order.

Vatican II set Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the context of European history, but that context is no longer the dominating working frame for interreligious relations, and not even for Jewish-Catholic relations.

The issue is not only that the moral lessons of World War II are now being sidelined or sometimes disregarded in secular post-colonial and de-colonial discourse.

In inter-religious dialogue, Jews and Muslims strongly committed to dialogue with the Catholic Church now feel that there is a growing set of issues that are not being acknowledged and understood in Rome.

This is paradoxically one of the fruits of the de-Europeanisation of the Vatican and global Catholicism. Vatican II set Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the context of European history, but that context is no longer the dominating working frame for inter-religious relations and not even for Jewish-Catholic relations.

On the other hand, the suffering of Palestinians and Christians in Gaza and Lebanon serves as yet another reminder of the challenges to fostering a culture of peace in today's high-tech warfare, where so-called pinpoint precision often accompanies indiscriminate bombings, leading to more innocent victims.

It also casts a dark shadow on the viability of the theology of liberation in the face of 21st-century state power and in the midst of wars and occupations where religion is manipulated into a "clash of civilizations."

The war unleashed by the events of October 7, 2023 risks squandering the journey made since the Second Vatican Council.

These events are happening during a time of the minimisation, in militant Catholic circles, of the theology of inter-religious dialogue within a Catholic Church that is more global but also far removed from Vatican II after 60 years.

After the conciliar declaration Nostra Aetate and especially after John Paul II, it was a common assumption that fighting antisemitism was an entry-level requirement for Catholics.

Sadly, this is no longer always true. It is not only the theology of new Catholic influencers but a broader process of de-theologisation and deculturation that reveals the marginalisation of Vatican II and its key documents on inter-religious relations, including Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae on religious liberty.

Impact of the war on the Catholic Church

One enormous problem is posed by radical traditionalist Catholic groups, but there are also the progressive Catholics who think that Vatican II is passé, the last gasp of a Church not inclusive enough, too Catholic to be modern.

There are some parallels between today's leftist progressivism and the blindness of socialists, communists, and radicals to antisemitism in the 20th century.

In many Western universities, the way administrators have handled the conflict and its aftermath has revealed that the religious diversity of Jews and Muslims and their protected status as minorities often does not align with the prevailing focus framed as sexual diversity and in ethnic-racial terms, particularly in the fight against "white supremacy," which tends to overlook religious considerations.

"One enormous problem is posed by radical traditionalist Catholic groups, but there are also the progressive Catholics who think that Vatican II is passé, the last gasp of a church not inclusive enough, too Catholic to be modern."

There is an irresponsible complacency that takes Vatican II for granted, but at times, there is also a programmatic liquidation of that chapter of our magisterial and theological tradition, becoming particularly problematic when on display in Catholic schools and universities.

Nostra Aetate and Christian-Jewish relations built many bridges in the post-Vatican II period, but many of these bridges now need to be inspected and, in some cases, rebuilt, also within Catholicism.

This war redefines the contours of what Karma Ben-Johanan, a professor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, called in her 2022 book on Christian-Jewish relations after Vatican II "the new covenant between Jews and Christians as the edict of the hour".

The new war in the Middle East represents a critical moment for that new covenant. October 7, 2023, and its aftermath affect the Catholic Church at the most profound institutional, theological and religious levels, with internal, international, and diplomatic dimensions that we have just begun to see.

• First published in La Croix International
• Massimo Faggioli is an Italian academic, Church historian, professor of theology and religious studies at Villanova University, columnist for La Croix

Speaking during a press briefing before the first anniversary of the deadly Hamas attack on Israel, Khairallah stressed that private agendas have overshadowed fundamental values such as human dignity and freedom.

Khairallah voiced frustration at the world's silence in the face of ongoing hostilities between Israel and Lebanon.

He remarked, "The world is quiet, it doesn't say anything… It even gives the green light for this violence because there are too many interests at the political and economic level".

These private interests "have nothing to do with our Christian values" he added.

Two-state solution

Khairallah also spoke of the potential role Pope Francis and Vatican diplomacy could play in fostering peace. He referenced Lebanon's historical significance as a model of religious coexistence.

Since 1948, the Holy See has consistently backed a two-state solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict.

"This resolution has always been rejected up until today by the State of Israel, by Israeli politicians" Khairallah said. He insisted that many Israeli citizens want peace and demonstrate for peace. However, "interests have the upper hand".

The bishop also criticised Western nations, particularly the US, for not supporting those suffering in the Middle East.

"I think that this is a message from the synod that we are participating in this year: that the people who are oppressed should have the possibility, the right to decide concerning their future and their destiny" he said.

Peace through forgiveness

Drawing from personal experience, Khairallah highlighted the importance of forgiveness as a path to peace. He recounted how, at the age of five, his parents were killed in their home.

His aunt, a nun, taught him and his siblings to forgive their parents' killers and to "pray for those who killed [their parents] and to seek to forgive throughout your lives".

Khairallah believes that true peace can come only when individuals across all cultures and confessions work together, rather than being driven by political and economic agenda.

He acknowledged the difficulty of forgiveness but insisted it is not impossible, saying "We are capable of forgiving".

Khairallah called on all parties to set aside hatred, vengeance and war, and urged the Church to lead by example, fostering dialogue and mutual respect.

Sources

Crux Now

CathNews New Zealand

Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin directly urged Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian not to retaliate. Parolin stressed the need to avoid further conflict.

This message was conveyed during a phone call on 12 August, in which Parolin reiterated the Holy See's commitment to dialogue and peace, especially in light of the ongoing violence.

Peaceful resolution more difficult

The situation in the Middle East is increasingly alarming church leaders.

Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, highlighted the growing difficulty in imagining a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

"Let us pray that in this long night that we are living through, the intercession of the most holy Mary will open up a glimmer of hope for us all and for the whole world" said Pizzaballa.

Similarly Bishop Cesar Essayan, the Apostolic Vicar of Beirut, echoed this call to prayer. The bishop emphasised the need for peace and the importance of acting as peacemakers.

Bishop Essayan emphasised that the situation in the Middle East is becoming "ever more difficult and the danger of war ever more serious" as tensions escalate.

Cardinal Louis Raphael Sako, the Patriarch of the Chaldean Church in Baghdad, also urged collective prayer. He stressed that achieving peace is "the responsibility of every person and every country".

Great concern

After last Wednesday's General Audience, Pope Francis said he is following the situation in the Middle East with great concern. Francis reiterated his appeal to all the parties involved that the conflict may not spread.

"May there be an immediate ceasefire on all fronts, starting with Gaza, where the humanitarian situation is very serious and unsustainable" he said, offering his prayers "that the sincere search for peace will extinguish strife, love will overcome hatred and vengeance will be disarmed by forgiveness".

Sources

Vatican News

National Catholic Reporter

Katholisch

Today's rally comes after close to 300 protesters gathered yesterday at the Museum Reserve in Dunedin before marching on the Octagon, chanting and wielding placards and Palestinian and Tino Rangatiratanga flags.

Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) spokesperson Rinad Tamimi, who spent her childhood in Gaza, said yesterday she had seen the numbers attending the Dunedin rallies double each week. Read more

We condemn the graffiti and arson attack against Jewish property in Epsom yesterday.

We also condemn the intimidating rallies throughout New Zealand calling for the elimination of the State of Israel with chants like "From the River to the Sea Palestine will be free!".

We call for immediate apologies from those members of the Green Party and the Te Pati Maori Party who have participated in these antisemitic chants. We call on them to either apologize or resign. Read more

People both in the antagonists and in their normal allies are pressed to make a choice.

To choose Israel is to see its war against Hamas as just in all respects.

It is to weep only for its fallen, to approve of all its actions in war, to minimise and count as collateral damage the harm done to the people of Gaza.

It is to see attempts to make peace or to point out unethical behaviour by Israel, or moral complexities in its cause as anti-Semitic, weak-minded, dishonest moral equivalence, and lacking in necessary strength of commitment.

To choose Hamas would be to adopt the same attitudes in reverse.

In both cases the appeal to allies is strengthened by identifying its cause with the best of their tradition and by asserting that its loss would fatally wound that tradition.

Advocates for Israel portray it as bright light of Western democracy in the storm clouds of totalitarian corruption or as the best of the Judaeo-Christian civilisation in a culturally bereft Islamic world.

To opponents of Israel, Hamas represents best the spirit of Islam in resisting the colonisation of Muslim lands by a corrupt and Godless West and in fighting against the existence of Israel.

Such binary views of responses to the conflict are based on the conflating of terms that are quite different.

They identify Israel with the land, with the people to whom it is home and who put their stamp on it and on its Government and its policies and actions.

Similarly they identify Gaza with the territory, with the people who live there, and with its ruling party Hamas and its policies and actions.

This identification blurs proper distinctions between land, people and ruling powers, and so between combatants and civilians. It also obscures the complexity of the conflict and lead to actions that will lead to further and more bitter conflict.

In Australia most people have a natural sympathy for Israel, and public advocacy for choosing its cause over that of Hamas is stronger.

We should then reflect on the reasons that are given to commend this stance.

The first is that criticism by Australians of actions taken by the Israeli Government is anti-Semitic. Some such criticism may be so described, but much is not.

The test is whether the criticism is driven by prejudice against Israel and its Jewish citizens or by reflection on the actions and policies of its Government.

In fact such criticism is compatible with an adamantine conviction that the State of Israel has a right to exist and to defend itself, with respect for its inhabitants, and with a full recognition of the appalling history of pogrom and extermination that they have suffered, and with abhorrence at the unjustifiable brutality of the Hamas invasion.

Such criticism, too, can be a gift, as it was to Australia when outsiders criticised it for the White Australia policy.

It can encourage citizens to question the actions of its Government for failure to live up to its proclaimed values, and lead to better policy and actions.

The charge of anti-Semitism, too, encourages wider reflection on the phrase itself. In common usage it refers only to Jewish people and to the State of Israel, and calls to mind the Holocaust.

Etymologically, however, it does not refer solely to attitudes to Jews and to Israel.

The Semites as an ethnic group include both Jews and Palestinians and by extension the Jewish and Muslim religions and customs of their people.

Seen from this broader perspective anti-Semitism therefore would strictly include prejudice against and consequent ill-treatment of the inhabitants of both Israel and Gaza.

Second, the attempt to align the State of Israel, its people and its Government and its allies with Judaeo-Christian civilisation and with Western democracy in opposition to Gaza, identified with its Government and people, is weakly founded.

In historical practice Christian societies tried to break the link that is now claimed to connect them with Jewish people.

In societies where Christians were the majority, Jews were periodically persecuted and always had reason to fear discrimination.

In Christian faith, certainly, God's enduring relationship with the Jewish people through Jesus the Jew is central and irreplaceable. That is why the pervasive anti-Jewish prejudice found historically among Christians is so shaming.

If we are to talk coherently about a Judaeo-Christian civilisation, however, we must situate it more broadly within all the actual connections, religious and other, that have formed our contemporary world.

These include Judaism and Christianity, but also other Abrahamic religions, notably Islam with its profound influence on the formation of modern Europe.

As with the charge of anti-Semitism, reflection on the invocation of Judaeo-Christian civilization in the current war leads away from a simple taking of sides to the recognition of complexity.

The association of Israel, its citizens and its Government with the Western tradition of democracy in opposition to the totalitarianism of Gaza, its citizens and Hamas is equally oversimplified.

It is true that, even though Hamas also came to power in Gaza through a democratic election, the democratic institutions of Israel under the rule of law are far stronger than in many states in which Islam is the established religion.

Democracy, however, means more than free elections and winning votes. It demands a respect for the rule of law and an equal respect for all citizens.

Ultimately Western democracy rests on the secular version of the Christian belief that the life of each human being is equally precious, and that this should be reflected in public life and institutions.

Both the rule of law and the equal value of each human being have come under increasing pressure recently in Israel and Gaza, as indeed they have in many of Israel's allies as well as in its enemies.

This is shown in the widespread disapproval by citizens both of Israel and Gaza of their ruling powers.

Third, the imputation that those who criticise the actions of Israel in war and call for peace and protection for the people of Gaza are guilty of moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel is also misplaced.

One can argue that the Hamas incursion and indiscriminate killing in Israel was morally unjustifiable and that the people of Israel have the right to defend itself, while at the same time criticising also the response of the Government of israel as disproportionate, without being guilty of moral equivalence.

This position can be better described as moral universality.

The basis of morality is the equal value and right to life of each human being, Jewish or Muslim, Israeli or Palestinian.

That impartial universality and the consequent obligation to respect equally the life of each human being shape the criteria for judging the actions in war of both sides.

The viciousness of the actions of an enemy military force does not justify a disproportionate killing of its non-combatants.

To praise one Government for actions that would be reprehensible if taken by another Government, and to demand that others adopt this position, is moral partisanship and bullying.

In this war we should resist the attempt to build total and uncritical support for the States of Israel and the territory of Gaza, still less of their ruling powers.

We should focus our attention on the lives of the persons of precious and equal value who compose these states. That alone focuses on the complexities of the relationships on which any enduring peace, justice and equality must be built.

To fail to do so ignores the resentment and hostility which feed discrimination and inequality, which in turn breed violence and revolt.

In the Cretan myth, dragons' teeth sown in the ground rose up as fully armed soldiers.

The response to the present war will come back to haunt or to bless the peoples of both Palestine and Israel in the future.

The proper role of non-combatant nations is to encourage the saving, not the taking of lives. Continue reading

• Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.

Speaking about the conflict in Palestine and Israel after praying the Angelus in St Peter's Square this week, Francis asked the world to "think of the children" who suffer as a result of war.

For "all the children affected by this war, as well as in Ukraine and in other conflicts - this is how their future is being killed" Francis told them.

He reminded them that many children were taken hostage on 7 October during the Hamas attack.

In God's name stop!

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says of the over 200 hostages held in Gaza, 33 are children.

"May they return to their families" the Pope prayed.

"May the hostages be freed immediately."

Francis begged that "avenues will be pursued so that an escalation of the conflict might be absolutely avoided."

This is urgent "so that the wounded can be rescued and help might get to the population of Gaza where the humanitarian situation is extremely serious."

The Gaza Health Ministry estimates over 9,000 people have been killed and 32,000 wounded in Israel's war against Hamas.

"I continue to think about the serious situation in Palestine and in Israel where many, many people have lost their lives" Francis said.

"In God's name, I beg you to stop. Cease fire!"

Widespread suffering

Besides those affected by wars, Francis reminded the St Peter's crowd that other parts of the world are seeing great suffering at present too.

He mentioned particularly the people of Nepal, to whom he expressed his closeness.

They suffered an earthquake that killed 150 people on 3 November.

He also prayed for Afghan refugees in Pakistan who are facing mass deportation.

Source

• Catholic Leader

It comes after reports of disorder at Auckland War Memorial Museum when a small number of Palestinian sympathisers gathering to rally against the building being lit up in Israeli colours met Israeli sympathisers there.

There were also ugly scenes in Sydney last Monday after thousands of pro-Palestinian sympathisers gathered on the steps of the Sydney Opera House, which was illuminated in blue and white in support of Israel.

Video from the event showed protesters also burning Israeli flags, setting off flares and chanting anti-Semitic phrases, including "gas the Jews".

The director-general of security for the Australia Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) and the director of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have since jointly warned of the potential for "spontaneous violence", the Syndey Morning Herald reported. Read more