www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News I Am Shocked At This Smear

Dear Friends,

Ultimately, the issue is whether the hierarch in question supported violence in any way.

IF he did, then he acted wrongly and it is no smear to call him up on the carpet for it.

Also, the Christian Copts of Egypt have had their land invaded by Muslim Arabs and are persecuted for their faith. The suggestion, however, would never be made that the Arabs leave Egypt and return it to the Copts.

The land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel, secular or religious Jews.

Alex

Eye for an eye? What had the Arabs -- Christian or Muslim -- done to the European Jews?
Actually, my experience of Palestinians is quite different. I have stayed with Muslim farmers on the West Bank; during Ramadan, Christians deliver food to their Muslim brothers and sisters who live in the nearby refugee camps and have no food to celebrate their holy days. I have stayed with shopkeepers in Nazareth, who remember when Muslims and Christians lived next door to each other, until the Israelis began de facto segregation by selectively claiming Muslim property and forcing the Muslims out of town. I have stayed with Palestinians -- both Muslim and Christian -- whose villages were razed 50 years ago, but who return to the ruined churches and mosques to celebrate their feasts -- their holy days, their baptisms, weddings, and funerals.

I have no answers, but the "truth" cannot be painted with a broad brush.

Shlomo Alex,
As you read from his quotes, there is NO indication that his Beatitude supports violence.

But he does explain that people will always resist occupation and injustice.

As for the Copts, and the Syriac Christians, the blame for the expansion of Islam into Egypt and Syria can be right at the doorstep of the Byzantine Authorities both secular and religious.

Further, the Jews never suffered under Muslims what they suffered under Europeans. As I have said before, it is Europe that should be punished for the Shoal, not the Arab peoples.

Lastly, I vigoriously disagree with you that just because of conquest, the Zionist deserve the land. That is in violation of all international laws.


Causing injustice to serve jusstice is never just.

Pooh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Yuhannon, it's been a while, but 'good work, ya munadil'. Keep it up.

In IC XC
Samer

Yuhannon,

You have to understand that most of the audience of this forum comes from a North American or Western European background.

As such, it is natural that they will have a tendency to favor their military allies, the Zionists, and not the Palestinians.

His Beatitude is himself a Palestinian, as well as most of his flock. He himself has been detained and abused by the Israelis, so it is also quite natural that he will not have very many favorable comments for the state of Israel, and that makes him "not very popular" in the West, including this forum.

In case you have not noticed, in the last few months this forum has taken a decisively anti-islamic posture. And as such, it is not a surprise that someone who is willing to work with islamic leaders in the quest for peace will be looked upon with suspicion and scrutiny, sometimes even at unreasonable levels.

Disappointed, you say you are. Yes, I am too. Surprised? Not at all. But I have my own views of the matter, and I happen to believe those who are far closer to the issue and who call Patriarch Michael "*The* voice of Christianity in the Middle-East".

This forum is fun, but you need to take it at face value.

Shalom,
Memo

Dear Yuhannon,

I am for peace in the Middle East and I think both Israelis and Palestinians can and will achieve it.

Certainly the Byzantines have their share of the fault in terms of the Oriental Christians with respect to Islam.

But the argument can be made and has been made that the Oriental Christians made a bad choice when they chose to be under Islam - and they've paid for it ever since.

In addition, the Arabs would be there today with or without Byzantium.

Islam is no friend to Christians, not now, not ever.

As for the Zionists, not every Israeli who wishes to live in a secure Israel is a Zionist or religious or anti-Arab.

And if the hierarch in question feels, as others in the West also do, that the path that the Palestinians have taken against Israel is the only path they can, then he is wrong.

Alex

Hi,

Well, in Palestine/Israel Islam is much more friendly towards Christians than Judaism.

By definition, you are wrong on that one. A Zionist is a person who wants a State of Israel to exist in place of the State of Palestine that was there before the invasion.

Nobody can wish to live in any kind of Israel without being a Zionist.

True, and sad. even a straight "holy" war would be easier to deal with than the mess we have today.

Well, I do not know any pro-Arab Israeli, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so I cannot refute you. I just need to say that I have no prior experience that inclines me to believe you.

Yes, but was that what His Beatitude say?

If I say that holding a piece of fine crystal 100 feet above the ground and dropping it off would naturally result in the said piece breaking into thousands is by no means an invitation to destroy valuable property or an endorsement of such practice.

Natural is not the same as good. Neither books nor clothing occur in nature, but they are far better than their alternative.

If His Beatitude said that the Palestinian reation to Israel's aggression is natural, then he is absolutely correct.

If you assumed that, in His Beatitude's mind "natural = good", then I think it is your assumption what is wrong.

Shalom,
Memo

Dear Memo,

Your comment on the Zionists is simply mistaken.

The idea that secular, non-religious and often left-wing Jews that wish to have a State of Israel are somehow "Zionist" is just, well, ridiculous.

A Zionist is someone who is Jewish and who identifies with the political ideology of historical Zionism, period.

Under your "definition," I would therefore be a Zionist.

The view you espouse is an extremist view akin to the same people who see in every Westerner a "Crusader" in uniform or not, and who is therefore a legitimate military target.

One would hope that we're beyond this kind of extremism by now.

There are Israelis, many in fact, who are friendly toward the Arabs and work to live with them in peace. I have friends who are Jews, who want a State of Israel and who want a Palestinian State. I am pleased to support them in their endeavour.

As for the hierarch in question, certainly it is up to Rome not to shirk its responsibilities with respect to controversial bishops.

There is the public perception that Rome is slow to react to what its bishops are up to and to punish wayward bishops, especially in the U.S. (whether we agree or not).

Bishops should stay away from politics, that is the Pope's perspective.

If what you are saying, and I hope you are not, is that that bishop is somehow justifying the kind of violence that certain Palestinians are engaged in against Israelis, namely, sending their children (why don't those patriots go themselves?) with bombs tied to them into crowded supermarkets to randomly kill innocent people who are Israelis - THEN that bishop should be defrocked and sent to a monastery for the rest of his life. And if Rome won't do that, then Rome will also have to answer for its shirking of its responsibility before God.

(I really can't believe you would use such disconnected ethical philosophy to arrive at such an erroneous conclusion that flies in the face of the Gospel - something every bishop MUST uphold)

And your accusation about Jewish-Christian relations is tendentious. Jews know what real suffering in Christian countries, historically, is all about.

Persecution of Christians under Islamic empires, including the Turkish Ottoman Empire, is well documented, complete with canonized New Martyrs.

This persecution is going on today in Egypt and other countries, including Iraq where Christians, who have been there for centuries, are persecuted as being "Western dupes."

Alex

Hi,


That might be so, and I apologize. But let me use this to illustrate that His Beatitude, just like myself, can be mistaken without being morally wrong.

Well, bishops should stay away from partisan politics, but no Christian, cleric or layperson can stay away from issues of social justice. The Lord made it very clear that the only way to place ourselves to His left would be to be indifferent towards the suffering of those around us.

Of course not. Explaining a reaction as natural, and stating firm belief that while the agression persists, so will the reaction, does not imply justification of the reaction (or the agression).

Shalom,
Memo

Dear Memo,

O.K., O.K.!

Happy Old Calendar New Year!

Alex

Hi Alex,

Thank you, but Isn't the New Year the perfect opportunity to throw away the old calendar and get the new one?



Shalom,
Memo

What is posted is quite interesting. Throughout history, people and tribes expanded their land and glorified their warrior hero's for doing so. It was self preservation...but on to modern history.

At the end of the First World War, the Balkan Wars, and the Second World War, millions of people were transferred from one place to another. Nations, such as Prussia ceased to exist, and people such as the Bulgarians, left the area's of Northern Greece in order to settle in boundaries that defined their nation.

Genocide was committed on the Armenians in Eastern Turkey as well as the Greeks in the Pontus and Asia Minor. That way the Turks could establish a homeland after the break up of it's empire.

In the 1950's, the Greeks, that had previously been in the majority in Constantinople, were forced to flee for their lives...pennyless. Parts of Northern Greece was taken over by communist Albania, and today the Greeks that live in Albania are leaving for Greece in order to establish a better life.

Nassar in Egypt, kicked out all the foreigners, yet the Greeks were there since its establishment by Alexander the Great.

Basically what I am trying to say, is that what is going on in Israel and Palestine, had been going on in Europe throughout history.The only reason I mention the Greeks, is because they are the ones I am most familiar with.

The problem with Israel, is that the Jews have a history of constant persecution. For that reason they will never give up their homeland.

This does not mean that they have been angelic. Rather the opposite. Shamir and well as Begin were both terrorist. They also want to expand their territory, believing that they are more productive, and that the land could be put to better use.

So we have here an immovable object, such as the Jews, and an uncontrollable force, such as militant Islam.

The problem really is the Muslim leaders. Arafat is a perfect example. He was paid millions, if not billions, in order to keep his people in poverty, knowing that as long as they live in that poverty, they will fight in order to reclaim the Israeli land.

It is not a coincedence that every land throughout the world bordering on an Islamic state, is in constant warfare.

Islam is not merely a religion, it is a political/religious state, content to keep its people living in misery for the betterment of the state. In that sense, I can only compare it with Communism and Fascism.

There can be no peace, unless others gain control of the Arab world, and force democratic regimes on them. These people need their freedom as well as any of us, and shouldn't have to suffer in order to satisfy the religious/political agenda of a militant Islam.

Zenovia

Zenovia:

Thanks for this brief lesson on history!

Amado

Before anyone may think that they differ too widely from someone else on the subject of Zionism�

(maybe too late)

There are three �working� definitions of Zionism and Zionist.

1) As Memo gives it : one who works to the establishment and support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

2) A fanatic who believes that God�s earthly rein will begin when the Jews govern the entire world and - works towards a world governed by a Jewish elite. Usually called the �Illuminati Plot�� Communism and Nazi - believed this definition - or at least used it to consolidate power.

3) a belief that the Jews are THE obstacle to an earthly rein of God - by way killing all the prophets including Jesus. Some Muslims believe this definition to be true. Most do not care much on a day to day basis of real life. This third definition is related to the second definition but pushed Zionism way back into history.

The different working definitions make it difficult to talk about Zionism - at all.

A literal belief in a rein of God to come - here on earth - is the cause of fanatic cults in all three religions. KKK and John Birth are the Christian extreme, Bin Laden is the Muslim extreme, and a fanatic form of Zionism - is the Jewish extreme.

Portions of Europe and South America still hold definition #2 as the definition of Zionism�. for example France has the highest incidents of anti-Semitic crimes - in the entire world - and Russia has not fully left its Communist philosophy (70 years - one generation - is a long time of indoctrination).

Such fanatic cults are a logical result of the logical conclusions of millenarism. Each religion (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) has its millenarism cults - and each have its level headed (attention to conscience) portions. Fear and clutching at conspiracy theories - turned these corrupt things into political movements.

Anyway - I just felt it good to bring up the fact that not everyone uses the same definition for - Zionism.

-ray

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Considering this thread's statements, indeed to Him is all glory and honour. Christ came to set us free from the mess this thread illustrates so clearly.

The Book of Revelations scares many. However, the heavenly Jerusalem will be such a contrast to this earthly one!

Lord have mercy on all of us.

Sincerely,
Christopher