HOLY PLACES. — I. NOTION
An antonomastic designation, in Christian language, of the places sanctified by the presence of Jesus in Palestine. At the sites where the deeds of the Redeemer, the Virgin, and the Apostles took place, sacred buildings, called sanctuaries, were often erected; consequently, the expression h. p. often amounts to “sanctuaries.” The h. p. may be considered in relation to the importance of the memories they contain, to their historical authenticity, to the sanctuary with which they are adorned, or to the right over them claimed by those who possess and venerate them. From this latter point of view, the so-called “question of the h. p.” developed, and it remains far from resolved even today.
From the religious standpoint, the h. p. that commemorate important events in the life of the Redeemer (Nativity, Agony, Resurrection, etc.) are of greater interest than those that recall only secondary events or events relating to the saints: the Pool of Siloam or Bethesda, or the place of the conversion of s. Paul or of the martyrdom of s. Stephen.
The judgment concerning their “authenticity” is established by two facts: the extent to which a h. p. corresponds to the Gospel accounts, and the extent to which it is attested as such by ancient and constant assertions. Only when these two conditions are met is a h. p. “authentic”; otherwise, a h. p. is commemorative and maintained by the piety of the faithful. Examples of the first are Bethlehem, Gethsemane, the Holy Sepulchre, etc.; of the second, several stations of the Via Crucis in Jerusalem. Naturally, among the great number of h. p., there is a whole gradation; the more fully they satisfy the two requirements, the greater their historical value. In any case, no more than moral certainty can be attained. For most h. p., there is a literary gap extending to the 4th century, but it can easily be filled by considering the uninterrupted succession of bishops, who at the beginning were also relatives of the Lord, and the devotional movements, attested as early as the 2nd century, as well as the scholarly movements, begun already with Origen, despite the tragic events that befell Palestine during the first Christian centuries.
Until the Constantinian peace, with the exception of Sion (v.), there were only venerated h. p.; afterward, sanctuaries were erected. Members of the imperial family distinguished themselves in erecting them: s. Helena and Constantine erected the sanctuaries of the Holy Sepulchre, the Eleona, Bethlehem, and Mamre; Eudocia, the Martyrium of s. Stephen; Justinian rebuilt Bethlehem. The clergy, the monks, and foreigners who came to dwell in the h. p. were no less zealous. The greatest development occurred from the 4th to the 6th centuries, and not only the Gospel texts but also apocryphal texts suggested the erection of sanctuaries. Many sanctuaries were ruined by the Persian invasion (614); others, even though restored shortly afterward, were destined to decay with the Arab occupation of Palestine (634). During the Crusader period, the sanctuaries were erected anew; but after the fall of the Latin kingdom, they were once again condemned to abandonment. Only some could be saved by the Latins of the Custody (v.) of the Holy Land, who repaired them in exchange for substantial sums. A new building movement began in the last century, but today it is beginning to be paralyzed. The style in which the sanctuaries were erected was initially late Roman and Byzantine, then Romanesque, and in modern times Neoclassical, together with a return to the older styles. Noteworthy is the movement promoted by the Custody of the Holy Land and directed by the architect A. Barluozi, aimed at creating sanctuaries suited to disposing the soul toward the mystery—for example, joy at Thabor and sorrow at Gethsemane—in an eclectic style.
Precisely because they were dear to Christians, the h. p. often became the occasion of conflicts among them over possession and the right to conduct services there. The clergy were, and remain, especially involved; the various governments, too, concerned themselves with protecting the rights of their nationals. Thus, struggles originating in religious motives also acquired a political aspect. During the Byzantine period, competitions for possession of the h. p. were driven by theological motives; it is enough to recall the consecration of the Holy Sepulchre (335) and the assault on the Holy City by 10,000 monks (512–18). During the Crusader period, the Latins had the upper hand, without excluding the other rites. After Palestine was reoccupied by the Arabs, when the Church had by then become divided into churches that were more or less national, conflicts of rite and nation arose.
During the Mamluk period, the Franciscans (from 1335) and the Georgians enjoyed greater rights, not without occasional conflict between them, for example, concerning Calvary (512). Under the Turkish period (1517–1919), the true struggle began, leading to nauseating incidents and wars between nations. The Crimean War may be recalled. The motive was the fact that the Greeks, taking advantage of the benefits arising from their subjection to the Turks, intended to exclude the Latins from all the sanctuaries, on the pretext that the Latins were foreigners. The European powers, led by France, generally favored the Latins, while Prussia supported the Greeks. The fiercest struggles occurred from 1620 to 1690, and then, in part, during the 18th and 19th centuries. In an effort to resolve matters, a status quo was also established, but it was so vague that it failed to prevent bitter conflicts.
II. PRESENT LEGAL STATUS OF THE H. P. — The resolution of 29 Nov. 1947 of the U.N. General Assembly, which divided Palestine between the Arabs and the Jews and created a new international city, Jerusalem, provided for the internationalization of the h. p. This resolution, however, for reasons of various kinds, was not fully implemented.
It contained five fundamental provisions: 1) no action shall be taken against existing rights concerning the h. p., religious buildings, or religious sites; 2) with regard to the h. p., freedom of access, visitation, and transit shall be guaranteed, in accordance with existing rights, to all residents or citizens of the other State and of the city of Jerusalem, as well as to all foreigners, without distinction of nationality, except for reasons of national security or relating to the maintenance of public order and peace; 3) the h. p., religious buildings, and religious sites shall be preserved. Any action of a nature liable to compromise their sacred character in any way shall be prohibited. If, in particular circumstances, the government considers that urgent repairs need to be made to a sanctuary, building, or any religious site, it may invite the community concerned to carry out the repairs. If its request is not heeded within a reasonable period of time, it may itself undertake the repairs at the expense of the communities concerned; 4) no tax shall be levied on the h. p., buildings, and religious sites that were exempt from taxation at the time of the establishment of the State. No modification shall be made in the incidence of taxes that would constitute discrimination between the owners or occupants of the h. p., buildings, or religious sites, or that would place the owners or occupants in a less favorable position, in relation to the general incidence of taxation, than that in which they stood at the time of the adoption of the Assembly’s recommendations. 5) the Government of the city of Jerusalem shall have the right to decide whether the provisions of the State Constitution concerning the h. p. are properly observed and applied. It shall likewise have the right to take all decisions relating to disputes among the various communities.
For the O.N.U., religious peace must reign around the holy places, and since this appears to have been established on the basis of the status quo, the latter must be preserved and sanctioned. Such is the wholly pragmatic thinking of the authors of the new international charter concerning the holy places. It matters little that certain painful present situations are due to dispossessions and usurpations of the past; what is essential is that the equilibrium established around the present positions be preserved in the supreme interest of religious peace.
On 9 Dec. 1949 the O.N.U. reaffirmed its intention «to establish in Jerusalem a permanent international regime which provides adequate guarantees for the protection of the holy places both in Jerusalem and outside this city». On 4 Apr. 1950, the text of the new Statute for the city of Jerusalem was approved by the United Nations Trusteeship Council. The State of Israel is opposed to the internationalization of Jerusalem as a body separate from the remainder of Israeli territory for reasons of an economic and moral nature; instead, it proposes the extraterritoriality of the individual sanctuaries, under the protection of a commissioner, the local representative of the O.N.U.
The Arab State of Jordan refuses to accept the project for the internationalization of Jerusalem, since it itself declares that it is the protector of the holy places, without any need for a special Statute or a separate government. On 15 Jan. 1951, 'Abdallâh, king of Jordan, appointed and installed Najeb Naâsibî Pâsâ as «inspector of the Haram es-Serif and high custodian of the holy places». The consuls of England, America, Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, Greece, Holland, Denmark, and Switzerland were present; no consul of the Catholic nations was present.
As regards the individual holy places, the present situation is as follows.
The sanctuaries contested by other, non-Catholic rites are three: the Holy Sepulchre, the Nativity at Bethlehem, and the tomb of the Virgin in the Valley of Jehoshaphat. To these must be added the Holy Cenacle, contested by the Jews.
1. The Holy Sepulchre. a) Places currently possessed by the Franciscans: 1) the southern half of Calvary; 2) the chapel of the Finding of the Cross and the staircase leading to it; 3) the altar of S. Mary Magdalene and the surrounding space; 4) the altar and chapel of the Apparition of the risen Jesus to the Virgin; 5) the small chapel called that of the Agony, and also of the Franks, situated in the southern part of Calvary, together with the external staircase of the basilica of the Holy Sepulchre leading to the said chapel; 6) half of the gallery running around the Rotunda; 7) the gallery above the so-called seven arches of the Virgin; 8) the passage, on the same level as the preceding gallery, leading up to the dome. b) Places claimed by the Franciscans: 1) the entire aedicule of the Holy Sepulchre; 2) the great lead dome and the smaller dome beneath it, which cover the Holy Sepulchre itself; 3) the entire pavement surrounding the Holy Sepulchre, and the circular space between the pillars of the Rotunda and the wall, now occupied by rooms built by the Greeks after the fire of 1808; 4) the great arch separating the Rotunda from the central nave of the basilica, which currently serves as the choir for the Latins when they celebrate their religious services before the Aedicule of the Holy Sepulchre; 5) the Stone of Unction and the pavement surrounding it as far as the basilica’s main door; 6) the room adjoining the Stone of Unction, currently occupied by the Greeks; 7) the four lower arches forming the chapel of Adam, before which, until 1810, stood the tombs of Godfrey of Bouillon and Baldwin, made to disappear by the Greeks; 8) the other five tombs of the Latin kings of Jerusalem, situated at the foot of the wall enclosing the Greek choir; 9) the room situated beside the chapel of Adam; 10) the seven arches called those of the Virgin; 11) the chapel called the Prison of Christ; 12) the entire square in front of the basilica’s door.
2. Sanctuary of the Nativity at Bethlehem. a) Places currently possessed by the Franciscans: 1) the altar of the Manger (not to be confused with the nearby altar of the Nativity); 2) the silver star bearing a Latin inscription, set beneath the altar of the Nativity; 3) the asbestos draperies bearing the coat of arms of the Holy Land, which cover the walls of the Grotto. b) Places claimed by the Franciscans: 1) the entire great Constantinian Basilica, including the high altar, the presbytery, and the apse, with the exception of the baptistery; 2) the entire Grotto of the Manger with the altar of the Nativity; 3) the two staircases leading to the Grotto of the Nativity; 4) the three keys to the three lateral doors of the Grotto; 5) the square in front of the basilica; 6) the adjoining cemetery; 7) the so-called Grotto of the Shepherds and the lands surrounding it, in the locality of Beth Sahûr, a short distance from Bethlehem.
3. The Tomb of the Virgin. This Sanctuary in the Valley of Jehoshaphat is claimed by the Franciscans: 1) in its entirety, with the altars of S. Joseph, S. Joachim, and S. Anne; 2) in exclusive custody, while permitting—as in former times—the liturgical services of the other non-Catholic Eastern rites, at their request.
4. The Holy Cenacle. This Sanctuary was in the peaceful possession of the Franciscans until 1452; they were definitively driven from it in 1551. At the end of the war of 1914–18, the Italian government was on the point of obtaining the restitution of the said Sanctuary, when England intervened arbitrarily and had it included in the so-called «Question of the holy places». Today the Holy Cenacle lies in the Israeli zone, and the Jews contest it with the Catholics.
5. Other sanctuaries exclusively possessed by the Franciscans: 1) Gethsemani; 2) the chapel of the Flagellation; 3) the oratory of the fifth station of the Via Crucis and that of the seventh station; 4) the Grotto of Gethsemani; 5) the «Dominus flivit» on the western slope of Mount Olivet; 6) the place of the Baptism on the bank of the Jordan; 7) Bethphage; 8) at Bethlehem, the Grotto of the Virgin’s Milk, the House of S. Joseph, and the Field of the Shepherds; 9) at 'Ajn Kârim, the sanctuary of S. John in Montana, that of the Visitation, and that of S. John the Baptist in the desert; 10) at Emmaus-Qubejbeh, the house of S. Cleophas; 11) at Ramleh, the sanctuary of S. Nicodemus; 12) at Jaffa, the church of S. Peter the Apostle, near the house of Simon the tanner; 13) at Nazareth, the sanctuary of the Annunciation of the Virgin, the house and workshop of S. Joseph, the Mensa Christi, the sanctuary of the Virgin’s Tremor, the chapel of S. James the Greater on the so-called house of Zebedee, and the Precipice; 14) the sanctuary of Naim; 15) Cana of Galilee; 16) at Sephoria, the sanctuary of S. Anne (in ruins); 17) the sanctuary of the Transfiguration on Mount Thabor; 18) also at Cana of Galilee, the house of S. Bartholomew the Apostle; 19) on the Lake of Tiberias, the church of the Primacy of S. Peter; 20) at Capharnaum, the synagogue in which Jesus taught; 21) at Damascus, the house of Ananias.
6. Other Sanctuaries not entirely possessed by the Franciscans: 1) in Jerusalem, the house of Annas and Caiaphas (Armenian Sisters); 2) at Bethany, the tomb of Lazarus (Muslims); 3) on Mount Olivet, the place of the Ascension (Muslims); 4) S. Anne (PP. Bianchi).
7. Non-Franciscan sanctuaries: 1) The Dormition of the Virgin on Sion (PP. Benedictines); 2) in Jerusalem, the sanctuary of the beheading of S. James the Greater (non-united Armenians), S. Stephen outside the Damascus Gate (PP. Dominicans), the grotto of S. Peter in Galli cantu (PP. Assumptionists), the sanctuary of the Pater Noster (Carmelite Sisters); 3) at 'Ajn Kârim, the Virgin’s fountain; 4) at Jericho, the Mount of the Quarantine (Greeks); 5) at Jaffa, the house of Simon the tanner (mosque); 6) at Damascus, the house of Judas on the vicus rectus (mosque).
Many other s. p. are recalled in the devotion of medieval pilgrims; some are now partly abandoned and others partly forgotten. With regard to these secondary sanctuaries and s. p., the use of the critical spirit would be out of place.