May 3—During his international webcast on May 1, Democratic Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. responded to a statement from a prominent Roman Catholic official, regarding the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, with a strong warning that the attack on the Bethlehem holy site was aimed at provoking a religious war.
The official's statement referred to the siege as a "Calvary," adding that "The Pope is informed constantly and is most concerned. He called into the church, as you know, to express his solidarity with them and thank them for their "Christian witness." The Pope seeks to affirm, he said, "the initiatives of dis-tension and dialogue in the Land of Christ and in every other place on the planet marked by violence and pain." The official described conditions inside the Basilica, which was placed under siege on April 2, "when Palestinians took sanctuary in this holy place—as churches for centuries have been the places of sanctuary." There are some 200 Palestinians and 40 Franciscan and Greek and Armenian religious, with very little food, water, electricity or medical supplies.
"The Church of the Nativity is one Calvary," the statement concluded. "Ramallah, Jenin, and other places of sorrow are under siege. We pray for cooperation between the Palestinians and Israelis, of course, who must concentrate all efforts to find a peaceful solution—but the Israelis are the ones who must withdraw and end their siege.
"The few Christians who inhabit the Holy Land are wondering where are the other 2 billion Christians in the world, thinking? What are they doing"?
LaRouche's Reply
"First of all," LaRouche responded, "when you look at the Nativity Church, what you're looking at—think in terms of another place: Al Haram al Sharif, the Holy Mountain," he replied. "Remember that when Sharon started his last campaign for Prime Minister, he unleashed an attempted assault on one of the holy places of Islam, on the top of this mountain in Jerusalem. This ... particular location, was the crucial breaking point in the attempt to get a Camp David agreement, where [then Prime Minister Ehud] Barak, under pressure of this crowd—the Likud crowd (remember, he used to work for Sharon; Barak did, in the Israeli military)—that, that was a breaking point.... Al Haram al Sharif, this is on the mind of the butchers, who are going at the Church of the Nativity. Because, remember that one of the conditions for Middle East peace, for avoiding a Clash of Civilizations war, for avoiding a Thirty Years' War scenario, is that the holy sites—those of Islam, various confessions of Christianity, and Judaism—are sacred: They are sanctuaries. That nobody can tamper with them.
"The condition of religious peace is a policy of sanctuary, which means that, in whatever agreement is reach, the sites of the holy places must be assured, of being able to function and be intact. And, whatever governments exist, they must respect that law. Without that, there is no peace. Anyone who attacks this, the Church of the Nativity, in this way—which is not really an issue; it's not a military issue; not a police issue—means that they want religious war."
Why Are America's Christians Silent?
He continued, "Now, the thing to put the pressure on, that's obvious to everybody in the area. It's obvious to people in Rome. What's wrong with the American Catholic Church? Why has the American Catholic Church allowed itself to be shut up, under intimidation of an orchestrated scandal against Cardinal Law in Boston, who would normally be the person speaking out on this issue, on behalf of the American Catholics? Why are the American Protestant churches not speaking out on this thing? Because they're afraid of some of their Protestants of the Bush variety? Of the Attorney General of the United States, perhaps, and his particular religious persuasion? Why is no one speaking out, in the United States? Where's this pack of cowards, called "Christians" in the United States—they call them "the Cowardly Lions," not the "Christians"?
"What are we doing" Have we looked the Catholic Bishop in the eye, and said, 'What are you doing about this?' Have we looked at Christian figures in the eye, and said, "What are you doing about this? Do you believe in religious war? Because that's what you're promoting, if you don't do something about this. At least, if you don't take a stand against it. If you don't put moral condemnation on it. If you don't say, Anybody who says they're for peace, and tolerates this kind of thing, is a hypocrite—or worse.' You know, sometimes, we can't do much. Sometimes, we can only make an appeal to conscience. And, that is particularly true of the religious profession: Often you have no authority; you have no power; you can't do anything, actually—you can't command, you can't write laws, you can't give orders, in that sense. But at least, you can appeal to conscience. And, if you don't appeal to conscience, what are you? You're nothing.
"And, this is where the pressure has to go. It has to go on the American Catholic Bishops, and others, not to submit to a dirty operation, run by the people, who targeted Cardinal Law in Boston at this particular time, when he would have been the normal channel, through which to issue a condemnation of what's being done against the Church of the Nativity. Realizing that what is being condoned, is not merely an insolence against that church: What is being condoned is a denial of the existence of the policy of sanctuary. And, if you deny the issue of policy of sanctuary, if you make holy, religious sites battlegrounds of religious warfare, you are going to have global, religious warfare. And, you won't have much left, standing, in any part of the world, if you start that kind of a war."
