Perhaps a tiny pebble in the ocean of international troubles: The Vatican has announced a treaty to recognize a Palestinian State. Details are sparse. Vatican statement.
If Pope Francis accomplished nothing else this would be a feather in his wings.
It would be even better if the U.S. Catholic bishops got on the case and helped to shift the U.S. position. NYTimes Story
UPDATE: The view from Ramallah and Jerusalem: NYTimes
Margaret Steinfels
He's not doing too shabby in our hemisphere either.
"I [Raul Castro] am very happy. I have come here to thank him for what he has done to begin solving the problems of the United States and Cuba," Castro said. The President said he read all of the Pope's speeches and commentaries. "If he continues in this vein I will start praying again and will return to the Catholic Church. I'm serious," he said. He also pointed out that like Francis he had also attended Jesuit-run schools. "The pontiff is a Jesuit, and I, in some way, am too.”
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 13 May 2015 at 06:24 PM
Francis is one fella who is making me feel uncomfortable of becoming a lapsed catholic and in general an irreligious person. What a breath of fresh air he is.......
Posted by: notlurking | 13 May 2015 at 06:38 PM
Will the US bishops have any choice?
Kudos to the Pope.
Posted by: GulfCoastPirate | 13 May 2015 at 06:52 PM
Pope Frank has simply been remarkable.
Posted by: BabelFish | 13 May 2015 at 06:59 PM
GCP
The bishops will have no choice if he squeezes them hard enough. They are his men and he can remove them if he wishes. The politicians are a different matter. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 13 May 2015 at 07:20 PM
PL,
Aren't all bishops and cardinals essentially politicians under the cloak of religion?
Posted by: Swami Bhut Jolokia | 13 May 2015 at 07:26 PM
turcopolier wrote:
'The politicians are a different matter'
They'll come around like they did on the gay rights issue. It's interesting how quickly the tide seems to be turning against the Israelis worldwide.
Posted by: GulfCoastPirate | 13 May 2015 at 07:55 PM
Notlurking
Pope Francis walks the walk - even this Easter & Christmas only Methodist can see and cheer his Christianity . From a completely selfish perspective it looks like I might be able someday soon to take the SWMBO to Havana . The Missus can go shopping while I try to catch one of those fabled Cuban Big Mouth Bass - supposed to be bigger & more aggressive then the Florida bass that got stocked here in Texas .
I think I saw on the teevee that Jet Blue is flying direct out of NYC to Havana .
Yes Pope Francis is a blessing for us all .
Posted by: alba etie | 13 May 2015 at 08:40 PM
Swami Bhut Jolokia
Not all. Francis was a bishop and a cardinal. He warned the college of cardinals that if they elected him... IMO most priests who "make" bishops (or who wish to be bishops) are church politicians in the fast track. Too many are addicted to Italian silk clerical suits, Gucci shoes, Mercedes and the like. That is the beauty of this situation. Big Frank can squeeze their gonads until they cry and then "retire" them if he chooses. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 13 May 2015 at 08:43 PM
I've enjoyed Charles Pierce's coverage of Frankie the Jesuit at esquire.com. He's observed that the Pope seems to be enjoying messing with folks who have drifted from Jesus's teachings and that people shouldn't try messing with The Society, because they will fk up your sht, in Latin and with incense.
He's doing something, he's read the Good Book and the small men hate him.
Posted by: SAC Brat | 13 May 2015 at 09:44 PM
"It would be even better if the U.S. Catholic bishops got on the case and helped to shift the U.S. position."
While I agree entirely, it would (or should) cost the Catholic church its tax exemption. Some might consider that a good thing but, not being Catholic, I have no opinion on that. I certainly persieve Francis as a bright spot in a poorly illuminated world.
Posted by: Bill H | 14 May 2015 at 12:25 AM
Bill H: Agree. But Bishops and other religious leaders don't need to lobby the Congress or the Dept. of State. All they have to do is begin to point out the situation of the Palestinians. That's where the bully pulpit came from.
At his end, Francis should also nudge the Palestinians to act as if they already have a state.
Posted by: Margaret Steinfels | 14 May 2015 at 06:55 AM
Hopefully the long needed breeze of fresh air will turn into a ferocious storm.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 14 May 2015 at 07:51 AM
"If Pope Francis accomplished nothing else"
in minor ways, if I may, something else: I consider his choice of bishops pretty different from what I have seen so far. ... At least to the extend it caught my attention over here.
Posted by: LeaNder | 14 May 2015 at 08:32 AM
Margaret
The tax exemption is not granted based on the church not lobbying Congress. It is granted based on the church not engaging in political activity at all, and that includes having its officials speaking publicly/officially on political issues. The IRS doesn not enforce this as rigorously as it probably should, but it does enforce it.
Posted by: Bill H | 14 May 2015 at 09:31 AM
Are we into first amendment territory here? The First Amendment to United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion or of impeding the free exercise of religion," etc. The non-profit institutions of religious groups may have IRS exemptions, but do the religious bodies themselves have them?
And second, what is political activity or political speech? Many of our political disagreements are grounded in differences on moral/ethical issues. On these matters religious leaders are seen to be "expert," their stock in trade, sermon fodder, etc.
And third, I don't dispute your underlying point, bishops and others should stay out of politics, per se. But on everything from nuclear deterrence to economic arrangements, to euthanasia, to foreign policy there are things to be said on moral/ethical grounds. And from time to time, religious leaders, including rabbis, pastors, imams, etc. should say what needs to be said.
Posted by: Margaret Steinfels | 14 May 2015 at 09:49 AM
I think Judge Bork had summarized the issues very well in his book - "Slouching towards Gomorrah".
The book ought to be updated with the subtitle: "...& Foisting it on others"
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 14 May 2015 at 10:36 AM
Many powerful people don't want peace because they live off war," the Pontiff said as he met with pupils from Rome’s primary schools in the Nervi Audience Hall.
Talking to children during the audience organized by the Peace Factory Foundation, he explained that every war has the arms industry behind it.
"This is serious. Some powerful people make their living with the production of arms and sell them to one country for them to use against another country,” the Pope was cited by AGI news agency as saying.
The head of the Catholic Church labeled the arms trade “the industry of death, the greed that harms us all, the desire to have more money."
“The economic system orbits around money and not men, women,” he told 7,000 kids present at the audience.
Despite the fact that wars “lose lives, health, education,” they are being waged to defend money and make even more profit, the Pope said.
“The devil enters through greed and this is why they don't want peace," 78-year-old Francis said.
Posted by: Walter | 14 May 2015 at 11:01 AM
As with many of Judge Bork's summaries, I disagree.
Posted by: Margaret Steinfels | 14 May 2015 at 11:02 AM
Along with recognizing Palestne, Francis made the above quote recently... I about shat my pants when I read it.. I love this guy
Posted by: Walter | 14 May 2015 at 11:03 AM
With which part of his book do you disagree?
His fundamental thesis in that book was - as far as I understood it - that the framers of the American constitution were imbued with and assumed the intellectual and moral structures of Christianity as the foundations of that constitution.
Was he wrong, in your view?
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 14 May 2015 at 11:20 AM
Israel provides a unique environment to test arms, no doubt. For whatever reason I never thought about this issue before 911.
Consider Israel's expertise for unruly sections of societies and the idea that her weapons over decades have been tested exactly in this environment. Thus no doubt they have a very, very unique selling proposition. ...
Posted by: LeaNder | 14 May 2015 at 11:40 AM
PL, you're right that Francis has a lot of power and can make life miserable for the old guard. However my point is that in a large organization like the Church (or any other religious body, or military or civilian or corporate organizations) you don't get into senior management without being a politician at some level: building alliances, blocking opponents, pushing an agenda etc.
Francis positioned himself as a 'reform' candidate, and the Cardinals elected him thinking they could control him. Didn't work out too well for them, much to their chagrin.
Posted by: Swami Bhut Jolokia | 14 May 2015 at 11:55 AM
The only thing Israel provides is how to initiate a religious war in modern times.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 14 May 2015 at 12:00 PM
Not the book. His general perspective.
If you are an orignalist, than you don't account for what has happened since the Constitution was written. Bork wrote in 1996. Did he think that by then that the Constitution remained imbued with and assumed the same moral structures as the founders assumed? I disagree with him, if that's what he wrote, and if he's right about the founders.
And what of the founders who were deists and probably did not think that's what they were doing (some of them imbued with the idea of "natural theology"). And as we now understand, some of those moral structures have proven to be in error, as in the worth of a slave compared to a freeman. To say nothing of a freewoman.
Yes, he was wrong in my view, if that's what he really thought.
Posted by: Margaret Steinfels | 14 May 2015 at 12:12 PM