coptichymns.net - Sharing the Joy of Coptic Hymns Around the World

tonyhabibi

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 02:22 AM

Actually , I find the arguing on this site to be very minimal . Misteka , Kastor , and perhaps me , are doing some arguing , but on the whole , i find it to be a very interesting discussion full of examples , historical facts and the analyzing of leadership of our church and quest to find out the limits of the power of the church .

I for one , agree that this was a descion based on political motivations , as well as having a good reason ( deir el sultan ) . and i feel considering the dynamics of the middle east political situation especailly when concerning israel . I clearly understand and support the popes descion .


Food for thought . Most arab countries will deny entry , if there is an israeli stamp on your passport .That means they dont even want people who happened to visit israel. Not only will you be labled a spy , but a traitor .

also , Arent we to have alittle more faith in our church when it comes to there kinds of issues . I feel the pope Did this to protect his flock , all the signs point me in that direction . given the history of the arab israeli conflict , and the history of the percecution of the copts .

.

Joined: Apr 09, 2004 | Posts: 1216
Location: IN THE back of your mind .navagating through your heart , resting in your soul .

Misteka

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 03:09 AM

Kastor,

Uhm, ok, thanks for sharing your personal info?

Fine. Don't respond. Thank you for your comment about me being arrogant and darkened. And I'm not misguided. But whatever.

Mina,

Great post(s), I agree wholeheartedly. I was going to get to that point, but wanted Bibo to respond first.

The glory of our church and the One Holy Church is a glory unfettered by earthly posessions or buildings. It is the glory of Christ himself.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

catcouta

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 03:17 AM

Has anyone ever asked a bishop about this? I wonder what their answer would be...it helps sometime to go to the source of the issue...

Joined: Mar 13, 2004 | Posts: 300
Location: Virgin Mary COC, Mtl, Canada

kastor999

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 09:35 AM

dear girgis17'
what happened to you was not right by any stretch and i do believe that you have grounds to complain.....however,in your thread you have mentioned controversial figures of our time and the issues concerning them....each one has {right or wrong} many facets to their individual issues, some were amplified by others ,some are false,and like you,some of the issues surrounding these figures were genuinely not their fault...meaning they were right {to a certain extent}
having said that, the issue of the ban on travel to isreal has broader implications that effect not just the coptic church per se, but also has wider implication that effect arab christians and their place in the middle east...but more specifically how the rest of the arab world views christans....which by extension,implies ANOTHER reason for non-christian to marginalize the christian populus and label them as spys or traitors....that would not be good!!!....wouldn't you agree?? and would you not agree that as Our Holy Father and shepherd of Christ's flock HHP Shenouda has a responsibility,yes duty, to realize the issues at hand,have a firm grasp on the pervailing attitudes, and act accordingly??....we may not like the ban or some of the arguments for and against it....but i for one accept and respect His decision....because unlike what happened to you{which may have been a liberal misuse of ecclesastical powers) HHP Shenouda's ban is stern,and some may argue a stretch,it was implemented with the intention of protecting the church from what can happen down the road
think of it this way,if a little child crawls toward the fireplace{unaware of the implications of his actions...}...is it not the duty of the parents to prevent him from reaching the fireplace,and if he tries to do it again,possibly discipline the child with whatever means possible to prevent the little runt from getting to his misguided destination{in this case the hot fireplace or isreal}????
that's it ,that's the whole issue in a nutshell....as for the named individuals in your thread,sometimes i would like to understand everything about them myself...but i might never know ...so i have resolved myself by just taking a neutral attitude because i don't understand any of it.....God Bless

Joined: Apr 21, 2003 | Posts: 51
Location: new jersey

kastor999

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 09:50 AM

dear tonyhabiby...i agree with you wholeheartedly and your arguments make practical sense as i understand them
dear minasoliman...the archbishop in isreal {a personal friend of mine} is fighting his own battles in the thick of it...i can assure you that he is highly educated(he has a phd in nuclear physics)
very eloquent and is quite able to deal with issues with the isreali gov't directly...as for issues with other christian denominations in the area...relations have never been better...the problem arises with the palestinian non-christians and their views toward the coptic church...it is here where His Grace the bishop needs the support of HHP Shenouda and that is another argument for the ban...do you see why the ban makes a difference?

Joined: Apr 21, 2003 | Posts: 51
Location: new jersey

minasoliman

posted on Apr 14, 2007 - 12:43 PM

That's great that he is highly educated. But that doesn't matter when it comes to security. Right now, I don't see how the ban helps the Archbishop (do you mean "metropolitan"?). When HH is promoting peace with President Mubarak back at home to save his own life and the life of his other bishops and flocks, then I don't see the consistency with being hostile with Israel, which shows pretty much hostility between that bishop and his flock and the Israeli government.

So, no, I don't see how the ban makes it better, if that's what you're assuring me.

Xristos anesti!

Joined: May 22, 2003 | Posts: 1741

tonyhabibi

posted on Apr 15, 2007 - 02:33 AM

Actually , i am now against the punishment of the ban . not to be confused about the ban itself .

There is no justification to be denied the body of christ , for this issue . however i feel that copts shoudl still be banned from going to israel .

yet ,. There is no justification to punish me spiritually for going to israel . however , the question now becomes , .... Is excommunication the only punishment that the church has to enforce , due to its severity . and because excommunication is a big deal , did the church use it so to make sure its members would definelty follow the rule ?

What other punishment can the church charge you with for disobeying ...... i cant think of any .

_________________
( insert Cool Signature here , think original )

Joined: Apr 09, 2004 | Posts: 1216
Location: IN THE back of your mind .navagating through your heart , resting in your soul .

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 02:18 AM

It is the Pope's business to excommunicate anyone he knows did a sin in disobedience to the church's law. Just as it is any priests and any bishops business. It's the authority they have given by God, unless you want to difer on that too.


Tony and Biboboy,

I went through and did a reading of all the Ecumenical Council and local council canons on CCEL.org. From this reading, it seemed obvious that the canons of the Church revolve around lapse in morality (sexual misconduct, money etc), lapse in obedience to liturgical worship directives, and lapse in obedience by the ranks of the clergy. The punishment for any one of those canons is either anathema or excommunication.

The case of going to Jerusalem or any place against the Patriarch's or the local church's synod's wishes isn't covered in the canons. But it is clear that just because it isn't covered, it doesn't mean that anyone can still come up with a decision like that.

So yes, I do differ, if anything, the ban on going to Jerusalem has no canonical basis. Perhaps, if Biboboy answers my question on submission to government, there may be some ground for a Scriptural justification. But so far, it stil seems to me and others who don't agree to be a purely political decision, in light of countless other purely political decisions, totally uninformed by Church canon, history, Scripture, and Holy Tradition.

Mina Demian.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

theophilos

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 03:09 AM

A few points:

1. The decision of His Holiness is based on his desire and his charge to safeguard the flock of Christ. Allowing Egyptian Copts to visit the Holy Land puts the flock in Egypt in real, physical danger. Is this worth excommunication? Though the punishment is harsh, the consequences of disobedience are real.

2. This decision applies to *Egyptian* Copts. I am not sure that the ban applies to non-Egyptians. Most people who participate in this forum probably do not have Egyptian nationalities, and thus the ban does not apply to them. Think of someone of Irish or Italian descent who converts to Coptic Orthodoxy. What do they have to do with a ban based on Egyptian politics? Nothing. Coptic Orthodoxy is a flavour of the Orthodox Faith, and we must learn to separate Egypt from Coptic Orthodoxy.

3. Land is important - I address this particularly to Biboboy. Bishoy , you first argued that pilgrimage to the Holy Land is meaningless because land is meaningless. Then you used the exact opposite viewpoint to argue that it would be important to not let go of our sacred sites in Egypt such as St. Anthony's monastery and his cave. I do believe in the concept of holy sites, and so does our church - if not canonically, then in practice. Think of churches built on the hometowns of great martyrs and saints, or on spots where the Holy Family traveled to in Egypt. How much more of a blessing to go to the site, "in the midst of all the Earth" where salvation was complete? It is not required, it is not even necessary, but just nice and uplifting. Nothing wrong with that.

Joined: Mar 06, 2003 | Posts: 489
Location: Silicon Valley

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:29 AM

Theophilos,

That's a pretty major clarification. Could you confirm with a link/the actual text? No one has mentioned this before! Thank you.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Biboboy

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:37 AM

Agape,

Sherif, in the imaginary scenario I created, please note how many times I used the word "assuming." I acknowledge that I didn't make it clear in the scenario, but I don't agree that it is "important to not let go of our sacred sites in Egypt." I'm only using an analogy that applies in the same situation as that of Jerusalem - for people who think Jerusalem is dear, what would they do if something else that's dear to them in a religious sense is to be lost to them for economic support of their country? To me, if St. Antony's cave was lost to history, St. Antony would still be very present in all the churches calling for his blessing.

Misteka, naive obedience to the letter of Scripture is dangerous, and I'm sure you're aware of that. The two texts you mentioned are relevant in their own context (historical, social, spiritual, theological), and apply to us either literally, allegorically, or spiritually within that context, as well as within the context of the rest of Scripture. Both texts presume that the emperor or governers are acting justly: "to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right" (1 Pet. 2:14). What, then, if they act unjustly, if they punish the innocent and praise the evildoers? Surely these tyrants, who do not allow citizens to "live as free people," are not sent from God. As Christians, learning from Christ, we know of Christ's mission that he proclaimed in the Synagogue and that was prophecied by Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free..." (Luke 4:18). Are we, who are anointed by the Spirit, supposed to do what is just, to aid those who are persecuted by those who cause social injustice? That is what the Spirit is teaching us, and this teaching is in harmony with the two texts you brought up.

As for canon law: canon law is set for its historical and social situation. Canon law, like any law, can be created and can be destroyed. There are plenty of laws in the canon that no longer apply today, and probably never even applied in the times before it was created. There's nothing wrong with claiming that H.H. Pope Shenouda could be guided by the Holy Spirit to create a new canon law through the Holy Synod to excommunicate Copts who disobey the travel to Jerusalem ban. We all, I hope, believe that the Church lives through the Spirit.

_________________
"Our hearts are restless until they find rest in You, Lord" (St. Augustine, Confessions, I, 1).

"Pray gently and calmly,
Chant hymns with understanding and rhythm;
Then you will soar like a young eagle
High in the heavens"
+ St. Evagrius the Solitary, On Prayer, 82.

In Christ,
Bishoy
HCOC Member


+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Questions or comments on the copticheritage.org website? E-mail me!

Joined: Sep 28, 2004 | Posts: 722

theophilos

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:39 AM

Hey Mina,

I don't think it's written down, but it is a logical extension of the rule, in a legalistic sense. The rule applies to Egyptians. I technically no longer hold an Egyptian citizenship, and thus this rule does not apply to me. If I go to the Holy Land, I go as a Canadian citizen who holds to the Coptic Orthodox faith.

Sherif

Joined: Mar 06, 2003 | Posts: 489
Location: Silicon Valley

theophilos

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:53 AM

Hey Bishoy,
Got it...now I understand what you meant.

Joined: Mar 06, 2003 | Posts: 489
Location: Silicon Valley

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:54 AM

Biboboy,

Fairly improper assumption there. Naive obedience to Scripture? Fine.

I asked you as a fellow theologian and student of the Church about the understanding of those two texts in light of this discussion. I wasn't out to get you to say something and then for me to pounce on you. Even putting aside you know me beyond these forums, that's about the worst and most foolish presumption I've ever heard about me on here!

That aside, I'm not advocating at any time the lifeless and bland way of applying canon law and/or Scripture. We're logical and rational sheep, we worship in spirit and understanding, our life in the Trinity is holistic!

What I'm advocating is this, that at any time, in any Church member's life, whether clergy or lay, that our lives are guided by God, who speaks in Holy Tradition, Scripture, canons, patristics, and the writings of the Church. Those are the repositories of God's voice and grace. How much more to be used and cherished than in times of great tribulation upon the COC, which as Theophilos showed is part of the Orthodox faith.

Do you contest any of this?

Mina Demian.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 04:58 AM

And also, even if canons don't apply to us now, there's still truth and reasoning behind them that can be recycled and used again for our times.

So, for this hypothethical ban on going to Jerusalem you're proposing to become a true canon, Patriarch Shenouda has to open it up to the scrutiny and process of old.

Canons only become canons if they are passed within a synod, and as you know, only become Church canons when passed by an Ecumenical council. Otherwise, they become, like the other appendices in the Nicene Fathers series, canons attributed to a certain Patriarch and kept for pedagogical and historical reasons. (Canons of Athanasius, Timothy, Dionysius, etc)

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Biboboy

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 05:02 AM

Misteka,

How on earth did you presume that I was presuming that you were naive? I was warning against a naive reading, not against you, personally, being naive.

I truly wonder why people take everything personally here?

_________________
"Our hearts are restless until they find rest in You, Lord" (St. Augustine, Confessions, I, 1).

"Pray gently and calmly,
Chant hymns with understanding and rhythm;
Then you will soar like a young eagle
High in the heavens"
+ St. Evagrius the Solitary, On Prayer, 82.

In Christ,
Bishoy
HCOC Member


+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Questions or comments on the copticheritage.org website? E-mail me!

Joined: Sep 28, 2004 | Posts: 722

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 05:10 AM

OK, I misunderstood. Apologies.

Just to clarify, I wasn't calling for a naive reading of Scripture either.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Biboboy

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 05:15 AM

About the canons, the ones you read that were authored by the fathers you mentioned were appllicable in their times. It just proves that not everything in the canon law endures forever and must apply today - that goes against the aim of your initial search, doesn't it?

Canon laws are local. For example, it is a canon law that we remove our shoes in worship, but that is not a canon law in Greece. And, it is a canon law in Rome since the third century that all priests and bishops were to be celibate, but it is not the canon law in Alexandria that the priests are to be celibate (they coule be married). There will only be an ecumenical decision is there's something major that could not be resolved by a local synod - for e.g. putting all of Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis under the authority of the bishop of Alexandria by the ecumenical council of Nicea. Also, after the schism, all the local canon laws applied during their time by synodial approval.

And just for the info: the ban is not merely by H.H. Pope Shenouda. It was by the Holy Synod, and the Aspect states that the ban applies until the Synod decides to remove it. See the fifth point here: http://www.theholysynod.copticpope.org/aspect07.htm

_________________
"Our hearts are restless until they find rest in You, Lord" (St. Augustine, Confessions, I, 1).

"Pray gently and calmly,
Chant hymns with understanding and rhythm;
Then you will soar like a young eagle
High in the heavens"
+ St. Evagrius the Solitary, On Prayer, 82.

In Christ,
Bishoy
HCOC Member


+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Questions or comments on the copticheritage.org website? E-mail me!

Joined: Sep 28, 2004 | Posts: 722

theophilos

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 05:23 AM

Curiously of course, the reason given in the ruling of the Holy Synod is all about Deir El Sultan, and nothing to do with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Joined: Mar 06, 2003 | Posts: 489
Location: Silicon Valley

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 05:34 AM

No, it proves, as I said a few posts ago, that even if the actual canon doesn't categorically apply, the reasoning behind can be used. My initial search was to look in the phronema of the Fathers what would bring about excommunication and/or anathema.

I wasn't looking for a smoking gun canon that would ultimately close this thread. This is Orthodoxy. I'm not looking to issue a canonical and ecclesiological fatwa.

Theophilos,

No one would admit to that. That would be an official declaration that the Synod, including the Patriarch, have political views and prejudices.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 12:10 PM

From Biboboy:
The two texts you mentioned are relevant in their own context (historical, social, spiritual, theological), and apply to us either literally, allegorically, or spiritually within that context, as well as within the context of the rest of Scripture. Both texts presume that the emperor or governers are acting justly: "to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right" (1 Pet. 2:14). What, then, if they act unjustly, if they punish the innocent and praise the evildoers? Surely these tyrants, who do not allow citizens to "live as free people," are not sent from God. As Christians, learning from Christ, we know of Christ's mission that he proclaimed in the Synagogue and that was prophecied by Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free..." (Luke 4:18). Are we, who are anointed by the Spirit, supposed to do what is just, to aid those who are persecuted by those who cause social injustice? That is what the Spirit is teaching us, and this teaching is in harmony with the two texts you brought up.


I just re-read this paragraph. I agree on the beginning prepositions. However, I don't see how the reference from Isaiah clarifies unjust rule and brings about your conclusion. Please explain.

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

mena12361107

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 12:12 PM

I just want to make a small point. The ban is not only on Egyptian Copts but all Copts that consider themselves under the authority of the Holy Synod and H.H. Pope Shenouda. This is because the reasons for the ban are not limited only to the negative effects trips to the holy land would have on Copts in Egypt as has been explained in the past 5 pages or so of posts.

Joined: Nov 29, 2004 | Posts: 9

Misteka

posted on Apr 16, 2007 - 01:16 PM

What are the other and fuller reasons then, mena12361107?

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Fortunatus

posted on Apr 17, 2007 - 05:45 PM

+Pi`<rictoc aftwnf!

A friend asked me to take a look at this forum.

A father at the monastery in Texas who served in Jerusalem told a group of us that the nature of our dispute with the Ethiopians and Israel regarding our rights over Deir el-Sultan requires that heads of state interfere in the matter. That is, it would necessitate that President Hosni Mubarak speak on behalf of the Copts to the Israeli authorities in order for us to regain our property. This father acknowledged that it is not likely that any Egyptian head of State would interfere on our behalf, since there's no interest in it for them. The only thing that would make it of mutual benefit, is if the Muslims also regained their mega-mosque in Jerusalem. This is where it is thought that by showing solidarity with the Muslims now, we might be able to approach Israel together to pursue common interests. This is the view of a monk-priest that served there and should not be taken as the official position of the Coptic Orthodox Church.

I have been told more than once in Egypt that some Egyptians, Copts and Muslims alike, have been physically injured by Egyptian authorities for going to Israel, since the Government is suspicious of visitors that go there, lest they be showing some kind of support to Israel. The fear is greater for Christians, as they are already often perceived as trying to please Western authorities to gain safety in the motherland. These comments came from people who either don't care or do not support the Church's stance about our visits, so it seems unbiased to me.

Having said that, the only reason for putting out possible explanations at all is to offer the suggestion that it is quite possible that the Pope is doing what he is doing for the sake of his sheep. People are permitted to disagree with how things are done, but we also have the obligation to be obedient as well. The Lord will deal with him and if his intentions are not pure, that's between him and God; he's not asking for us to sin or act in a way contrary to the Gospel. John the Little gained virtue through obedience without question, even though it probably seemed like lunacy to him to water a stick. It is probably wisest both spiritually and intellectually to quietly submit to His Holiness and let God determine what is best for him and us. Just 2 piasters.

Please, pray for me.

_________________
 Agapy,
Vortounatoc
Amyn, Maren a;a!

Administrator for Content, Newsletters, and the Book Exchange
coptichymns.net
- a taste of what is Coptic ...

Questions? Comments? E-mail or PM me!
Need help? - Post here. Comment or criticism? - Use our Feedback Form

Joined: Sep 04, 2003 | Posts: 401
Location: the Coptic Orthodox Church

Misteka

posted on Apr 17, 2007 - 10:37 PM

Fortunatus,

Why have posts been deleted? Do you know anything about this?

Joined: Oct 05, 2005 | Posts: 194
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa