Those are pretty harsh words for a man whose only crime is arguing that people whose ancestors have dwelt in a place for thousands of years deserve a homeland with political autonomy.
A successor of the apostles, reasoning from moral principles, observes that the dispossessed too are entitled to justice, notwithstanding the inconvenience it may pose to those who mean to dispossess them even further. He has my support.
History does not agree with many of those statements, but he would have my support if the so-called palis were all Christian or at least peaceful people. As long as he sides with anti-Christian, anti-Jewish terrorists heLl-bent on killing more and more innocent people, his sympathies are way, way off base, and especially for a Christian cleric. (Remember history, the Muslims rejected that old deal and tried a half-dozen times to “drive the Jews into the sea”. History has its consequences, as they say, and the Islamicist already control tons of land (including 2/3 of mandatory “palestine” anyway). But without rehashing all the facts over and over, just because someone uses appealing or deceptive words to attract sympathy of good-hearted people does not mean they’re being honest or genuine with us. By their deeds ye shall know them