On March 17, the New Hampshire House of Representatives approved HCR7, a resolution proclaiming that Jerusalem should always be Israel’s capitol. It passed with 175 votes.
The status of Jerusalem has extreme significance for Christianity, Islam and Judaism. No religion’s adherents want to be under the administrative control of another. It is a sensitive, fraught foreign policy issue.
Why did the House feel the need to advocate for control of Jerusalem by Israel? There are real concerns. In the Times of Israel, a story reports “13 Christian leaders warn of the ‘hatred, conflict, violence and suffering’ and ‘irreparable harm’ that a change in U.S. policy on Jerusalem could create.” Father Francesco Patton, the Catholic Church’s Custos of the Holy Land and guardian of the Christian holy places in the Holy Land, wrote “our presence is precarious and our future is at risk.” He went on that in recent years, the lives of many Christians have been made “unbearable by radical local groups with extremist ideologies.” “It seems that their aim is to free the Old City of Jerusalem from its Christian presence, even the Christian quarter.”
In 2018 a bipartisan group of Congressmen slammed Israel over a bill to seize church land. “We are concerned that this bill threatens the sustainability of the historic Christian presence in Jerusalem,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Why would the House take such a position, potentially compromising the Christian community in Jerusalem? I suggest you ask our local reps who voted yes: Jim Kofalt, Lisa Post, Jim Creighton and Paul Somero. Matthew Santonastaso, Peter Leishman and Diane Kelley apparently refused to take a position. Hopefully, the state Senate will vote this ill-advised House resolution down.
Tricia Saenger
Temple