Christians in the Middle East
April 13, 2011
George Weigel
Dr. Habib Malik of the Lebanese American University has been a friend for many years. Few men have such an informed and humane view of the sad, even desperate, position of Christians in the Middle East. As a Lebanese Maronite with a Harvard doctorate in intellectual history, what Dr. Malik knows comes from experience as well as impeccable scholarship.
The Hoover Institution Press at Stanford University recently published a short booklet by Dr. Malik that should be required reading for anyone concerned with the fate of ancient Christian communities throughout the Levant, including the Holy Land. Islamism and the Future of the Christians of the Middle East can be read in one sitting. Its brevity is an advantage: a concise mind and an accomplished pen distilling a vast amount of knowledge and experience into 68 pages. Let me try, with far greater brevity, to highlight several of the book’s key points.
1) Middle East Christians today have had two distinct historical experiences. One is an experience of freedom. The other is an experience of being a dhimmi, a second-class citizen existing on the sufferance of the Muslim majority in an Islamic state.
2) 90 percent of Christian Arabs live in conditions of dhimmitude today, including the Copts in Egypt, the Chaldeans and Assyrians in Iraq, and the Greek Orthodox and Melkites in Syria, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority. These are the Christians at greatest risk from Islamism and jihadism.
3) Christians who have been subjugated for generations have, over time, “lost all sense of what it meant to experience a life of true liberty.” Thus they have developed a variety of survival strategies which, having been thoroughly internalized, now seem natural: kowtowing to authority; accepting benefactions from dictators like Saddam Hussein in Iraq or the Assad dynasty in Syria; remaining silent in the face of atrocities committed against Christians by Islamists and other Muslims; blaming the current problems of Christians in the Middle East on that great bugbear, the State of Israel.
4) Christian communities in the Middle East are also under tremendous pressure because their numbers are shrinking while Muslim populations are growing. Emigration (to escape persecution or to seek prosperity) has played a considerable role here; so has contraception.
5) Both free Christian communities and dhimmi Christian communities suffer from a paucity of indigenous leadership. (Dr. Malik doesn’t say it, but I expect he means both political leadership and religious leadership.) This has created another comparative disadvantage for Christian communities in the Middle East. For their Muslim neighbors, having rejected various secular ideologies, have increasingly turned to more stringent (and thus more intolerant) forms of Islam in recent decades—and have done so at a time when few Christian leaders, clerical or lay, have been defending Christians’ rights, much less proposing Christianity as an attractive alternative to secular ideologies.
6) Western indifference to the fate of Arab and other Middle Eastern Christians has also contributed to their decline and their present peril. This blindness has also imperiled the West. Vibrant Christian communities can be a check on Islamism and jihadism by promoting Islamic moderation and openness. In Malik’s own words:
“Such moderation is sure to be strengthened when Muslims interact daily with confident fellow-native adherents to a creed that does not condone suicide bombers, respects women, is not out for religious domination, upholds the principle of religious pluralism, is compatible with liberal democracy, defends personal and group rights, emphasizes the centrality of education, and is not uncomfortable with many features of modern secular living. Whenever local Christians have felt relatively unmolested, they have acted as catalysts for positive change and as conduits for some of the West’s finest and most enduring universal values, and this in turn has advanced Islamic tolerance and moderation.”
The defense of religious freedom for persecuted Christians in the Middle East is a moral obligation. It is also a strategic imperative. Middle East Christians who share a historical experience of freedom, or who can shake off the psychological shackles of dhimmitude, are a strategic asset, not the headache the State Department usually imagines them to be.
George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.
Comments:
4.13.2011 | 1:22pm
Assistant Village Idiot says:
Charlie, if there were indeed considerable history of Christians in the Middle East displaying this freedom in Christ, your complaint would have more force. It may indeed be that Weigel ties soul freedom too closely to some ideas of religious freedom. But when you know the tribes, the players, and their history, especially recent, making that connection is nearly automatic. To say that reality should not be that way, because the Gospel says it shouldn't, doesn't help much.
I have a different objection - to Malik's words, quoted with approval by Weigel: "“Such moderation is sure to be strengthened when Muslims interact daily with..." Really? It hasn't worked yet, why should it suddenly start now?
I have a different objection - to Malik's words, quoted with approval by Weigel: "“Such moderation is sure to be strengthened when Muslims interact daily with..." Really? It hasn't worked yet, why should it suddenly start now?
4.13.2011 | 1:23pm
norman ravitch says:
Christians in the Near East are lerarning they are just as hated by Muslims as Jews. Too bad it was they who taught anti-semitism to the Muslims. What goes around comes around.
4.13.2011 | 2:03pm
Charlie Collier says:
Assistant Village Idiot, the truth of the gospel doesn't turn on the quantity of people actually performing it in a given locale at a given time. At the cross, Jesus was abandoned by just about everybody, yet there he was, freely loving us, forgiving us, justifying us, praying for us. And surely you're not suggesting that there are no Christians in the Middle East displaying this freedom in Christ.
Moreover, the performance of this freedom in Christ is not exactly flowering in those places Weigel seems to think of as "free." Saints and martyrs are made in the crucible of conflict—in Weigel's "free" societies, on the other hand, we're being lulled to sleep by consumerism and tempted to forsake the peace of Christ for the false peace of order secured by war (I don't recall Weigel worrying about the consequences for Middle Eastern Christians of the war in Iraq that he so staunchly advocated).
Once upon a time, martyrs marveled at the fact that they could be found worthy of suffering for the sake of the gospel. I doubt very seriously that I have such strength or faith myself; however, I do know that I do not honor the witness of the martyrs if I pity those who are actually doing what Christ calls us all to do—take up our crosses and follow him. I fear Weigel wants a cross-free gospel.
Moreover, the performance of this freedom in Christ is not exactly flowering in those places Weigel seems to think of as "free." Saints and martyrs are made in the crucible of conflict—in Weigel's "free" societies, on the other hand, we're being lulled to sleep by consumerism and tempted to forsake the peace of Christ for the false peace of order secured by war (I don't recall Weigel worrying about the consequences for Middle Eastern Christians of the war in Iraq that he so staunchly advocated).
Once upon a time, martyrs marveled at the fact that they could be found worthy of suffering for the sake of the gospel. I doubt very seriously that I have such strength or faith myself; however, I do know that I do not honor the witness of the martyrs if I pity those who are actually doing what Christ calls us all to do—take up our crosses and follow him. I fear Weigel wants a cross-free gospel.
4.13.2011 | 2:25pm
Ziad Antoun says:
I've half way through reading the book by H. Melik. It's indeed a great book, in spite of its little size. It describes well the Christian presence in the Middle East, and how it developed over time, distinguishing, rightfully btw 2 groups of people: 1) Dhimmi & 2) Freemen.
Native Christian communities of the Middle East are often forgoten minorities. They have been faithful to Christ & to the apostolic faith they inherited from the very apostles, in face of enormous, constant persecution.
I can only ask from other Christians around the world to keep the ancient Churches of the East (Catholic & Orthodox) in their prayers.
Father Ziad Antoun, OMM
Native Christian communities of the Middle East are often forgoten minorities. They have been faithful to Christ & to the apostolic faith they inherited from the very apostles, in face of enormous, constant persecution.
I can only ask from other Christians around the world to keep the ancient Churches of the East (Catholic & Orthodox) in their prayers.
Father Ziad Antoun, OMM
4.13.2011 | 3:54pm
Stephanie Bodene says:
I would be interested in knowing the change in the lives of Middle Eastern Christians since the establishment of the state of Israel. It is my understanding that Christians, both Palestinian and foreign, are being driven out of Israel.
Were Christians in Iraq really badly off before we launched our attack in 2003?
Were Christians in Iraq really badly off before we launched our attack in 2003?
4.13.2011 | 6:25pm
Chris Balducci says:
Stephanie,
Christians were migrating from the Middle East, including the land now known as Israel, long before the modern state of Israel was established.
As to your question about the condition of Iraqi Christians, reread Weigel's third point: They made their peace with Saddam Hussein. In fact, Hussein's Baathist party was founded by a Christian.
Norman, where do you get the idea that Middle East Christians taught anti-Semitism to their Muslim neighbors? Muhammad didn't care much for Jews.
Christians were migrating from the Middle East, including the land now known as Israel, long before the modern state of Israel was established.
As to your question about the condition of Iraqi Christians, reread Weigel's third point: They made their peace with Saddam Hussein. In fact, Hussein's Baathist party was founded by a Christian.
Norman, where do you get the idea that Middle East Christians taught anti-Semitism to their Muslim neighbors? Muhammad didn't care much for Jews.
4.13.2011 | 8:10pm
Don Roberto says:
Mohammed personally ordered 700 jews (inlc women and children) to be executed. We're lucky that most of his adherents are less aggressive.
The West should take heed to the notion put forth by Pope Benedict XVI and order their diplomancy accordingly: We respect their freedom of religion and should insist they respect ours (assuming a significant proportion of western leaders actually still share our Judeo-Christian values).
†
The West should take heed to the notion put forth by Pope Benedict XVI and order their diplomancy accordingly: We respect their freedom of religion and should insist they respect ours (assuming a significant proportion of western leaders actually still share our Judeo-Christian values).
†
4.13.2011 | 10:02pm
Neil Keating says:
One hundred years from now, will we be having this debate? Or will the children of the children of present-day Muslim 'hard-liners' be shaking their heads at what their grandparents got up to? This, while they enjoy the (arguable) benefits of Westernised global culture, with its good and bad. We are personally acquainted with Middle Eastern folks (ex-Muslim and Zoroastrian) who don't care a fig for religion. They visit our church, but I doubt they care much for our theological propositions. They simply judge (assess) us by how we treat them. Meanwhile they want to stay in our country, see their boys educated, run their small business, smell the flowers. And their boys, and grandchildren, thanks to Western culture, airplanes, internet, etc, will be part of the continuing erosion of the downside of Islam.
4.14.2011 | 4:28pm
patricksarsfield says:
The author writes:
"Western indifference to the fate of Arab and other Middle Eastern Christians has also contributed to their decline and their present peril. This blindness has also imperiled the West."
It is at best indifference. There is also an element of political correctness which says we must get all kinds of upset about the French birqa ban, on the one hand, yet we have to let the Christians in Muslim countries be mortally attacked in their churches and homes by arson, bombs, knives and guns without any protest on our part, on the other. Nothing is said when churches are burned down in Indonesia, Pakistan , Iraq or Egypt.
Why is it that an archbishop can be assassinated near Mosul without the occupying Christian country (hint: the USA) doing anything about it? Oh, we are not a Christian country per our President, even though he says we are a Muslim country. Why is it that Christianity is always disfavored by the panjundrums of political correctness?
"Western indifference to the fate of Arab and other Middle Eastern Christians has also contributed to their decline and their present peril. This blindness has also imperiled the West."
It is at best indifference. There is also an element of political correctness which says we must get all kinds of upset about the French birqa ban, on the one hand, yet we have to let the Christians in Muslim countries be mortally attacked in their churches and homes by arson, bombs, knives and guns without any protest on our part, on the other. Nothing is said when churches are burned down in Indonesia, Pakistan , Iraq or Egypt.
Why is it that an archbishop can be assassinated near Mosul without the occupying Christian country (hint: the USA) doing anything about it? Oh, we are not a Christian country per our President, even though he says we are a Muslim country. Why is it that Christianity is always disfavored by the panjundrums of political correctness?
4.14.2011 | 4:47pm
patricksarsfield says:
Mr. Collier makes my point on indifference well here:
"Religious liberty is a genuine good, but Christians must not undermine the faith in the process of advocating for it. What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatry"
IOW, let's not worry about the awful way christians are treated in the Middle East because per Mr. Collier's exegesis of the Bible, the Christians are free even if they are enslaved. And so the bombing of Christian churches will go on with Mr. Collier relishing the freedom of the dead christians even as they die. And as for the assassinated archbishop?
"Religious liberty is a genuine good, but Christians must not undermine the faith in the process of advocating for it. What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatry"
IOW, let's not worry about the awful way christians are treated in the Middle East because per Mr. Collier's exegesis of the Bible, the Christians are free even if they are enslaved. And so the bombing of Christian churches will go on with Mr. Collier relishing the freedom of the dead christians even as they die. And as for the assassinated archbishop?
4.14.2011 | 4:50pm
Assistant Village Idiot says:
Charlie Collier, perhaps we are simply off on the wrong foot, but you seem to be attributing views to me that I never said, but would be easier for you to answer. I am not sure I should be answering at all, unless you can demonstrate some ability to understand me. That you feel obliged to drag in your objection to his war opinions would substantiate my view.
That persecution brings forth great faith is a common idea in the church, and not without foundation. But it only may bring it forth, it does not do so automatically. Nor does religious freedom automatically bring forth spiritual weakness, as you fairly strongly imply has happened in the West. I know a bit of history, and despite the wild rhetoric from many factions, do not note periods of spirituality wildly superior to our own in other times and places.
I expect there to be saints, and great saints, in any place where Christ is named, regardless of external circumstance. I also know that I might do far worse under persecution than those who endure it. But a great deal of energy of Christians in the Middle East goes into petty tribalism and sectarian squabbles. That they are too accommodating to tyrants may be understandable, but that does not make it admirable. Longevity and endurance are good things, but they are not the only thing.
That persecution brings forth great faith is a common idea in the church, and not without foundation. But it only may bring it forth, it does not do so automatically. Nor does religious freedom automatically bring forth spiritual weakness, as you fairly strongly imply has happened in the West. I know a bit of history, and despite the wild rhetoric from many factions, do not note periods of spirituality wildly superior to our own in other times and places.
I expect there to be saints, and great saints, in any place where Christ is named, regardless of external circumstance. I also know that I might do far worse under persecution than those who endure it. But a great deal of energy of Christians in the Middle East goes into petty tribalism and sectarian squabbles. That they are too accommodating to tyrants may be understandable, but that does not make it admirable. Longevity and endurance are good things, but they are not the only thing.
4.14.2011 | 4:54pm
patricksarsfield says:
Norman Ravitch writes:
"Christians in the Near East are lerarning they are just as hated by Muslims as Jews. Too bad it was they who taught anti-semitism to the Muslims. What goes around comes around."
Muslim hatred of christians and jews goes back to the 7th Century AD (or perhaps Mr. Ravich would prefer CE). What is his source for the claim that that 7th Century hatred of jews was taught to the Muslims by the christians? And who taught the 7th Century Muslims to hate the christians per Mr. Ravitch?
"Christians in the Near East are lerarning they are just as hated by Muslims as Jews. Too bad it was they who taught anti-semitism to the Muslims. What goes around comes around."
Muslim hatred of christians and jews goes back to the 7th Century AD (or perhaps Mr. Ravich would prefer CE). What is his source for the claim that that 7th Century hatred of jews was taught to the Muslims by the christians? And who taught the 7th Century Muslims to hate the christians per Mr. Ravitch?
4.14.2011 | 5:57pm
Charlie Collier says:
Assistant Village Idiot, I took you to be alleging that a lack of a substantial history of Middle Eastern Christians actually displaying genuine Christian freedom renders my critique of Weigel less persuasive. You seemed to be suggesting that the history on the ground in the Middle East actually substantiates Weigel's effort to connect what you call, I guess summarizing my views, soul freedom and religious freedom.
I don't think that's an unfair summary of what you've written, your condescension notwithstanding, and it's precisely what I responded to above. Others would surely dispute your understanding of Christianity in the Middle East. I granted your view of the history for argument's sake, and insisted instead that the truth of the gospel claim about freedom in Christ is not nullified because it's hard to live out, or because under situations of great pressure people often abandon it. This is true in general, and it's also true in the particular case of Christianity in the Middle East. It's been true since the very beginnings of the faith. Understanding how and why people find it difficult to keep the faith does not require the creation of a theology that subverts the faith. I think Weigel does the latter with his rival doctrine of genuine freedom. Please let me know where I've gotten the gospel wrong on the question of freedom. The problem with Weigel can be put very simply. Either his view of genuine freedom is true, and Christians are not really fully free in dying and rising with Christ—which is to say, Christ didn't really set us free in his cross and resurrection—or Weigel's version is wrong, and genuine freedom does not consist in what Weigel thinks it consists in.
I "drag in" Weigel's war opinions because they flow from the same non-theological, rival doctrine of freedom. The issues are obviously related for Weigel; in linking them here, I'm just honoring Weigel's own connections. Indeed, I'm guessing Weigel thinks the solution to the problem of violence against Christians in the Middle East might well be more violence, perhaps even another war.
I never said persecution automatically generates faithful witness. Nor did I say there are never great witnesses to the faith in other contexts. I played up a contrast because it is important to remember that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church"—an ancient claim that Weigel doesn't seem to believe or think through.
I don't think that's an unfair summary of what you've written, your condescension notwithstanding, and it's precisely what I responded to above. Others would surely dispute your understanding of Christianity in the Middle East. I granted your view of the history for argument's sake, and insisted instead that the truth of the gospel claim about freedom in Christ is not nullified because it's hard to live out, or because under situations of great pressure people often abandon it. This is true in general, and it's also true in the particular case of Christianity in the Middle East. It's been true since the very beginnings of the faith. Understanding how and why people find it difficult to keep the faith does not require the creation of a theology that subverts the faith. I think Weigel does the latter with his rival doctrine of genuine freedom. Please let me know where I've gotten the gospel wrong on the question of freedom. The problem with Weigel can be put very simply. Either his view of genuine freedom is true, and Christians are not really fully free in dying and rising with Christ—which is to say, Christ didn't really set us free in his cross and resurrection—or Weigel's version is wrong, and genuine freedom does not consist in what Weigel thinks it consists in.
I "drag in" Weigel's war opinions because they flow from the same non-theological, rival doctrine of freedom. The issues are obviously related for Weigel; in linking them here, I'm just honoring Weigel's own connections. Indeed, I'm guessing Weigel thinks the solution to the problem of violence against Christians in the Middle East might well be more violence, perhaps even another war.
I never said persecution automatically generates faithful witness. Nor did I say there are never great witnesses to the faith in other contexts. I played up a contrast because it is important to remember that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church"—an ancient claim that Weigel doesn't seem to believe or think through.
4.14.2011 | 9:05pm
Assistant Village Idiot says:
Fair enough. You believe a non-material version of Christian freedom, unrelated to world events is possible, or at least the dominant meaning of the term. I find that rather dualist and don't think it is possible, even though it is supposed to be, in some mystical realm. Yes, I have exaggerated your view, but that's the difference, isn't it? Greeks and Russians and Moldovans and Syrians and Azheris and Armenians having a dramatic tendency to be unchristian in their worldly affairs doesn't affect them spiritually, then - that's where it is going, with your dramatic split. Their Christian expression must be just as good as that of the West, because theoretically the environment shouldn't matter for the Christian.
4.14.2011 | 11:15pm
John E. Taylor says:
Charlie Collier says:
The idea that some Christians—ransomed by Jesus from slavery to the powers, won over to new life by the blood of Christ, and made citizens of the heavenly kingdom—do not know "a life of true liberty" is theologically odious and should be challenged by conservatives whose goal is to "conserve" the faith that has been handed down through the centuries.
The gospel of life and liberty, the real gospel of Jesus Christ, never promised freedom from oppression, freedom from state tyranny, freedom from political persecution, etc. Indeed, the truly free one, Jesus, experienced all of that as a way of demonstrating what "a life of true liberty" was all about—obedience to God the Father. And Jesus called us to take up our crosses, follow him, and experience the same freedom-in-obedience.
Religious liberty is a genuine good, but Christians must not undermine the faith in the process of advocating for it. What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatry—becoming a god before which Weigel will sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom. I should think the real Christian experience of freedom—and freedom in the midst of Islamism no less—is more like the freedom recounted in the movie "Of Gods and Men," where deeply Christian monks display a freedom from fear, a freedom from hatred, and a freedom to love their enemies unto their own deaths.
Charlie,
Why stop your criticism with JP2’s definitive biographer? Why didn’t you take on JP2 himself?
After all, he bombarded the Polish Communist government with the full diplomatic, political, propaganda, and cultural powers of his papacy. How do those actions absolve him of the potshot you lob at his biographer: "’a historical experience of freedom’ teeter on the brink of idolatry—becoming a god before which Wiegel [and, I should add, JP2] sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom”?
Doesn’t our Western history teach that our political liberties are the direct, albeit imperfect, result of the Gospel’s impacting a society? True, we are not promised them in Scripture (although God reveals himself in Scripture as more favorably disposed towards the just than the unjust, though you're not going to conclude that by observing the rainfall).
But to enjoy our undeserved liberties while failing to exercise our power to secure them for our brothers and sisters languishing in tyranny (all with pious reference to “genuine Christian freedom”) arguably “teeters on” a violation of the Golden Rule.
The idea that some Christians—ransomed by Jesus from slavery to the powers, won over to new life by the blood of Christ, and made citizens of the heavenly kingdom—do not know "a life of true liberty" is theologically odious and should be challenged by conservatives whose goal is to "conserve" the faith that has been handed down through the centuries.
The gospel of life and liberty, the real gospel of Jesus Christ, never promised freedom from oppression, freedom from state tyranny, freedom from political persecution, etc. Indeed, the truly free one, Jesus, experienced all of that as a way of demonstrating what "a life of true liberty" was all about—obedience to God the Father. And Jesus called us to take up our crosses, follow him, and experience the same freedom-in-obedience.
Religious liberty is a genuine good, but Christians must not undermine the faith in the process of advocating for it. What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatry—becoming a god before which Weigel will sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom. I should think the real Christian experience of freedom—and freedom in the midst of Islamism no less—is more like the freedom recounted in the movie "Of Gods and Men," where deeply Christian monks display a freedom from fear, a freedom from hatred, and a freedom to love their enemies unto their own deaths.
Charlie,
Why stop your criticism with JP2’s definitive biographer? Why didn’t you take on JP2 himself?
After all, he bombarded the Polish Communist government with the full diplomatic, political, propaganda, and cultural powers of his papacy. How do those actions absolve him of the potshot you lob at his biographer: "’a historical experience of freedom’ teeter on the brink of idolatry—becoming a god before which Wiegel [and, I should add, JP2] sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom”?
Doesn’t our Western history teach that our political liberties are the direct, albeit imperfect, result of the Gospel’s impacting a society? True, we are not promised them in Scripture (although God reveals himself in Scripture as more favorably disposed towards the just than the unjust, though you're not going to conclude that by observing the rainfall).
But to enjoy our undeserved liberties while failing to exercise our power to secure them for our brothers and sisters languishing in tyranny (all with pious reference to “genuine Christian freedom”) arguably “teeters on” a violation of the Golden Rule.
4.15.2011 | 12:27am
Charlie Collier says:
Assistant Village Idiot, I'm afraid you're wide of the mark when it comes to parsing the implications of what I've said. As I think I've been clear from the beginning, my understanding of genuine Christian liberty flows from the person and work of Christ. The Word that became flesh is most certainly not "non-material." Christ subordinated some genuine goods to others—e.g., his own physical well being to obedience to God, his security to love for his enemies—but then he lived those convictions (freely!) with all of their material consequences. Still, nothing that the authorities did to Jesus took away his freedom to love the world unto its redemption. When we speak of the freedom of the Christian, we must never lose sight of its source, inspiration, and model.
You go on to speak of failures to exemplify fidelity to the freedom of Christ ("Greeks and Russians and Moldovans and Syrians and Azheris and Armenians having a dramatic tendency to be unchristian in their worldly affairs") as if the whole point of my comment stream hasn't been to resist "a dramatic tendency to be unchristian in worldly affairs"!
----------------------
John E. Taylor, Ray Monk was no Ludwig Wittgenstein; Peter Brown, brilliant as he is, is no Augustine; and George Weigel, however interesting his biography might be, is most definitely no JPII. And anyway, the theological heir to JPII is Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under was literally JPII's theological wingman. And we already know how out of step with Benedict Weigel is. Just read his awful, awful piece in response to Caritas in Veritate: "Caritas in Veritate in Gold and Red."
No, Weigel's theological politics are not the theological politics of the magisterium, no matter how much he wants us to believe otherwise. Moreover, I never suggested that our liberties are not genuine goods or that we shouldn't work for the similar liberties for others. Actually, the person who takes Jesus' nonviolent witness seriously has much greater reason to advocate for the freedom from coercion and violence of others than those who think following Jesus sometimes means we probably need to kill some people (I wonder what those people think of Weigel's praise for religious liberty).
What I objected to is Weigel's talking about these liberties in a way that undermines the gospel, from which we learn that the freedom that matters most to us in this life is the freedom that was demonstrated and won for us by Christ Jesus. Whatever power we exercise to gain certain rights for others should not betray the gospel. "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world but lose his soul?"
Are you really prepared to defend the notion that "a life of true liberty" is not what we gain through our participation in Christ, but something secured by secular political power?
You go on to speak of failures to exemplify fidelity to the freedom of Christ ("Greeks and Russians and Moldovans and Syrians and Azheris and Armenians having a dramatic tendency to be unchristian in their worldly affairs") as if the whole point of my comment stream hasn't been to resist "a dramatic tendency to be unchristian in worldly affairs"!
----------------------
John E. Taylor, Ray Monk was no Ludwig Wittgenstein; Peter Brown, brilliant as he is, is no Augustine; and George Weigel, however interesting his biography might be, is most definitely no JPII. And anyway, the theological heir to JPII is Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under was literally JPII's theological wingman. And we already know how out of step with Benedict Weigel is. Just read his awful, awful piece in response to Caritas in Veritate: "Caritas in Veritate in Gold and Red."
No, Weigel's theological politics are not the theological politics of the magisterium, no matter how much he wants us to believe otherwise. Moreover, I never suggested that our liberties are not genuine goods or that we shouldn't work for the similar liberties for others. Actually, the person who takes Jesus' nonviolent witness seriously has much greater reason to advocate for the freedom from coercion and violence of others than those who think following Jesus sometimes means we probably need to kill some people (I wonder what those people think of Weigel's praise for religious liberty).
What I objected to is Weigel's talking about these liberties in a way that undermines the gospel, from which we learn that the freedom that matters most to us in this life is the freedom that was demonstrated and won for us by Christ Jesus. Whatever power we exercise to gain certain rights for others should not betray the gospel. "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world but lose his soul?"
Are you really prepared to defend the notion that "a life of true liberty" is not what we gain through our participation in Christ, but something secured by secular political power?
5.8.2011 | 10:33am
Brigid Callaway says:
Once upon a time, martyrs marveled at the fact that they could be found worthy of suffering for the sake of the gospel. I doubt very seriously that I have such strength or faith myself; however, I do know that I do not honor the witness of the martyrs if I pity those who are actually doing what Christ calls us all to dotake up our crosses and follow him. I fear Weigel wants a cross-free gospel. As to your question about the condition of Iraqi Christians, reread Weigel's third point: They made their peace with Saddam Hussein. In fact, Hussein's Baathist party was founded by a Christian.
5.25.2011 | 12:30am
Maria Piano says:
What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatrybecoming a god before which Weigel will sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom. I should think the real Christian experience of freedomand freedom in the midst of Islamism no lessis more like the freedom recounted in the movie "Of Gods and Men," where deeply Christian monks display a freedom from fear, a freedom from hatred, and a freedom to love their enemies unto their own deaths. I've half way through reading the book by H. Melik. It's indeed a great book, in spite of its little size. It describes well the Christian presence in the Middle East, and how it developed over time, distinguishing, rightfully btw 2 groups of people: 1) Dhimmi & 2) Freemen.
9.21.2011 | 5:30am
Rogeh Raffoul says:
I agree with alot of points in this article being an arab christian originally from Syria and currently living in a Dubai, where the quality of life and freedoms is much better.
Unfortunately it is the fault of the Christians of the middle east for ending up in such position. Many heads of christian communities seek to be-friend dictators for protection and this a problem because:
1. the Christians are under the mercy of the dictator
2. Other sects envy the Christians for such timid action.
This leaves many Christians, unfortunately to immigrate to more 'free' parts of the world which is also problem.
In all cases I believe that Christianity in slowly dying compared to Islam. Judaism thanks to the poor efforts and cowardice of christian communities and leaders.
And I dont understand what is with this absurd talk about Christians teaching anti-antisemitism to Muslims. I dont know if you forgot that most of the middle eastern population are of Semitic origins? So stop using the term "anti-Semitic" to refer to Jews only because its a word that is far boarder than that.
Unfortunately it is the fault of the Christians of the middle east for ending up in such position. Many heads of christian communities seek to be-friend dictators for protection and this a problem because:
1. the Christians are under the mercy of the dictator
2. Other sects envy the Christians for such timid action.
This leaves many Christians, unfortunately to immigrate to more 'free' parts of the world which is also problem.
In all cases I believe that Christianity in slowly dying compared to Islam. Judaism thanks to the poor efforts and cowardice of christian communities and leaders.
And I dont understand what is with this absurd talk about Christians teaching anti-antisemitism to Muslims. I dont know if you forgot that most of the middle eastern population are of Semitic origins? So stop using the term "anti-Semitic" to refer to Jews only because its a word that is far boarder than that.
The gospel of life and liberty, the real gospel of Jesus Christ, never promised freedom from oppression, freedom from state tyranny, freedom from political persecution, etc. Indeed, the truly free one, Jesus, experienced all of that as a way of demonstrating what "a life of true liberty" was all about—obedience to God the Father. And Jesus called us to take up our crosses, follow him, and experience the same freedom-in-obedience.
Religious liberty is a genuine good, but Christians must not undermine the faith in the process of advocating for it. What Weigel here calls "a historical experience of freedom" teeters on the brink of idolatry—becoming a god before which Weigel will sacrifice the higher good of genuine Christian freedom. I should think the real Christian experience of freedom—and freedom in the midst of Islamism no less—is more like the freedom recounted in the movie "Of Gods and Men," where deeply Christian monks display a freedom from fear, a freedom from hatred, and a freedom to love their enemies unto their own deaths.