‘No happy endings’ between Eastern Christians and Islam, professor says

todayscatholicnews.org ^ | November 17, 2015 | Corine Erlandson

[Trumpinator]

‘No happy endings’ between Eastern Christians and Islam, professor says

By Corine Erlandson

FORT WAYNE — When it comes to Christians in the Middle East, there are “no happy endings.” This was the blunt assessment of Dr. Adam DeVille in a Nov. 11 talk on “Eastern Christians and Islam” at Brookside Mansion at the University of Saint Francis. This talk was part of a series open to the public offered by the Department of Philosophy and Theology. There were close to 50 people in attendance.

DeVille started his talk by telling his audience about the status of Eastern Christians in countries such as Iraq, Egypt and Syria today. “We have to appreciate the messiness of these issues. It’s not going to be neat and tidy. There are no happy endings with this topic, unfortunately,” DeVille said.

DeVille began by giving some historical background. The Emperor Constantine issued an edict making Christianity legal in the year 313. Constantine moved his imperial residence from Rome to the “New Rome” of Constantinople. From there emerged the division of the Byzantine-Orthodox Christians headquartered in Constantinople, and the Roman-Latin Christians, headquartered in Rome.

DeVille says that the Orthodox Church of the East and the Roman Catholic Church of the West agree on many theological issues such as the Trinity, the Eucharist and Mary the Mother of God. “The two churches are very close on many issues. The one thing that divides them is the question of the papacy, who gets to be the boss,” DeVille said.

DeVille said that Eastern Christians have dealt with Muslims from around the seventh century on. After Muhammad founded Islam in the early 600s in Arabia, Islam rapidly spread into Syria, Egypt, Armenia, Libya and Spain.

Followers of Muhammad established Islam in these territories, and the Islam faith was in the ascendancy, while the Eastern Christians and Jews were in the minority. The Islamists in power gave the Christians and Jews in these territories three options: Convert to Islam, fight to the death, or accept “dhimmi” status.

The Arab-Muslim overlords imposed “dhimmi” laws and restrictions that the Christians and Jews had to abide by, if they wanted to survive and practice their faiths. These restrictions included that the Christians and Jews lived in ghettos; church cupolas and Jewish synagogues could not be taller than Islamic mosques; Christian and Jewish celebrations had to be subdued with no public displays; Christians could not wear headdresses, to distinguish them from the Muslims wearing turbans; Christians and Jews had to step down from the sidewalk to the lower street or ditch in order to let Muslims pass by. The most hated part of the “dhimmi” status was paying a “jizya” poll tax to the Arab Muslim overlords.

While this sort of treatment strikes 21st century American Catholics as overtly unfair and trampling on religious freedom, DeVille said that it did allow Christians and Jews in these lands to survive and to continue practicing their faiths. The Christians and Jews were exempt from military service in the Islamic armies, as long as they continued to pay the “jizya” tax. The “dhimmi” laws and restrictions continued all the way to the 19th century. By 1918, most of the “dhimmi” laws had disappeared.

DeVille then moved to the present day to discuss the state of Eastern Christians. “The Christians in Iraq number half today what they numbered 12 years ago,” DeVille said. This was after the U.S. involvement in the two gulf wars. Iraqi Prime Minister Saddam Hussein was captured, tried and executed by the Iraqi Interim Government in 2006. The Shi’ite Party is in power today in Iraq.

DeVille turned to Egypt. In the wake of the Arab Spring, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt was put on trial and imprisoned. After Mubarak was removed from office, the extremist Muslim Brotherhood came into power, which repressed the rights of women and Christians.

DeVille then considered Syria. “What a mess Syria is today,” DeVille said, with its civil war and the recent exodus of its people escaping to western Europe. DeVille considered these three rulers — Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. “These three rulers were, and are, all thugs. They all did violence against their own people. They were not the ones you wanted to invite home to meet your mother,” DeVille said. Yet these despots were able to maintain some control over the most extremist factions in their countries, and “they all protected the Christians in their regions,” DeVille said.

DeVille asked the hypothetical question: Should the West play a role in deposing Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, who is still in power? “Let’s look to Egypt and Iraq and see how those scenarios turned out. Who comes after Bashar al-Assad could be as bad, if not worse,” DeVille said. “When Western powers intervene in these regions, they often end up making things worse for the Christians there,” DeVille said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has recently begun bombing raids in Syria against ISIS and rebel groups. Putin says he is ordering the bombings to protect Orthodox Christians in Syria, but DeVille believes that Putin senses an opportunity to assert Russian power in the region.

DeVille considered the sharp demographic decline of Christians in Iraq, Egypt and Syria. In the first centuries of Christianity, there were two cities that had vibrant and growing Christian populations — Antioch in or near Syria, and Alexandria in Egypt. DeVille delivered a striking and sobering thought: In these places where Christianity first took root and flourished in the early centuries, “we might see Christianity exterminated in these places in some of our lifetimes.”

Posted on November 17, 2015, to:

[Jim Robinson]

Coming soon to a Judeo-Christian nation near you.

[trisham]

The Arab-Muslim overlords imposed dhimmi laws and restrictions that the Christians and Jews had to abide by, if they wanted to survive and practice their faiths. These restrictions included that the Christians and Jews lived in ghettos; church cupolas and Jewish synagogues could not be taller than Islamic mosques; Christian and Jewish celebrations had to be subdued with no public displays; Christians could not wear headdresses, to distinguish them from the Muslims wearing turbans; Christians and Jews had to step down from the sidewalk to the lower street or ditch in order to let Muslims pass by. The most hated part of the dhimmi status was paying a poll tax to the Arab Muslim overlords.

***************************

And those were the lucky ones.

[trisham]

Excellent article.

[Jim Robinson]

Charley Waite: Well you may not know this, but there’s things that gnaw at a man worse than dying.

[trisham]

Agreed. That’s no way to live.

[af_vet_1981]

Correction: chrstians can be taught to accept the secular state founded in 1948; they will not and cannot by the very nature of things accept the rebirth of the Halakhic Biblical polity (may this happen soon, speedily, and in our days). Even the most pro-Israel American Fundamentalist Protestants could not accept that, which is why they want a Hebrew-speaking duplicate of 1950s America where Jews and chrstians live together and just go to different houses of worship on different days.

Everyone will accept King Messiah when Messiah appears, or returns, as it were.

Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark: But it shall be one day which shall be known to the Lord, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light. And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be. And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.

Zechariah, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verses one to nine,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James,
and remarkably similar to the Mechon Mamre translation,
bold emphasis mine

[ek_hornbeck]

The Turks carried out ethnic cleansing - a component of genocide (at least it was called that when the Serbs did it to the Muslims) on Greeks in 1955 AD and again in the early 1970s AD in Cyprus. So it is not a “thing of the past”.

This is because not all ethnic cleansings are created equal. They have to fit the PC worldview in which westerners are perpetrators and non-westerners are innocent victims. So if the victims of the ethnic cleansing happen to be white and Christian (Turkish/Cypriot Greeks, whites in Zimbabwe), it doesn't even get called "ethic cleansing." When the victims are non-whites or Muslims, it's called "genocide."

[familyop]

"I get the hatred you have for Christians. According to Noahide laws - Muslims ironically are automatic Noahides(guessing you are one by your profile)..."

Trumpinator, all Gentiles are Noahides (or Noachides). Noachide is synonymous with Gentile. All Chrstians, Muslims and other non-Jewish people are Noachides.

There are Noachides who follow the Seven Laws and are more strictly monotheistic than those of other religions. We're Noachides, too, but we're different from the rest.

[Trumpinator]

all Gentiles are Noahides (or Noachides). Noachide is synonymous with Gentile

I am pretty sure that they are not the same things.

[Trumpinator]

It was wrong of me to say “I get the hatred you have for Christians” - poor choice of words on my part to ZC and I apologize.

[familyop]

"I claimed historically speaking Rabbinic Judaism and eastern Christianity are offsprings of the same original religion."

The Essenes were also probably known as the Therapeutae from Egypt and later as the Ascetics to Roman historians. They were not the traditional Sadducees and were quite different from the original Zadok. The Essenes were the 1st Century root of Christianity, although some of their unique beliefs go back to religion in Babylon.

From Roman/Catholic history:

Eusebius (born about 260, CE) was one of those who put the Chrstian New Testament together during the time of the Emperor Constantine, and he wrote more comments than the following about the Essenes.

Eusebius wrote, in his Ecclesiastical History (History of the Chrstian Church),
Book II, CHAPTER XVII of
Philo's Account of the Ascetics of Egypt

"But it is highly probable that the works of the ancients, which he says they [the Essenes] had, were the Gospels and the writings of the apostles, and probably some expositions of the ancient prophets, such as are contained in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in many others of Paul's Epistles."

The Essenes, being strict celibates while following their heretical ways and lacking descendants, died out long before the Roman year 1.

[Trumpinator]

Judaism was way more vast in terms of diversity than it is now. There also seems to be a meeting of minds between Hellenistic philosophy and Judaism as shown by Philo of Alexandria. http://www.iep.utm.edu/philo/

[familyop]

"I am pretty sure that they are not the same things."

A Noachide (or Noahide) is, from the perspective of Judaism, anyone subject to the Laws of Noah's time after the flood--that is, anyone who is not Jewish. All Gentiles are Noachides.

Gentiles who try to follow the laws as given to Noah and his children are said to be pious in that sense (called Noachide Chassid by some Orthodox Jewish people, or children of Noah: B'Nei Noach). But yes, many people simply refer to Noachides who follow the Seven Laws as "Noachides"--convenient but erroneous by omission in the purest sense.

While many Chrstians in the Middle East have participated alongside Muslims in warfare against Jewish people and against Israel, a righteous Noachide follower would not do so. And for the most part, Western Chrstians are much more friendly with Israel than those further to the east.

The following site can answer more questions.

AskNoah.org

[Trumpinator]

While many Chrstians in the Middle East have participated alongside Muslims in warfare against Jewish people and against Israel, a righteous Noachide follower would not do so. And for the most part, Western Chrstians are much more friendly with Israel than those further to the east.

My assertion was that Middle Eastern Christians don't view themselves as "invaders" of land that once belonged to Israel because these Christians for the most part are themselves the Jews who converted to Christianity (along with others in the area) and never left. There were some Arab Christian tribes but they tended to be outside of Israel proper like in what is today Jordan and Syria and Iraq.

Muslims are the invaders - though to be fair to Muslims the Jews were already exiled from the Holy Land when the Muslim invasion arrived.

My contention is that the hostility between Middle Eastern Christians vs Jews who came to settle is more like a Civil War between two of the same people in origin and Muslims are outsiders.

And according to what I have read, rabbinical scholars consider Muslims to be Noachides automatically but deny this term for Christians because of Jesus and the Holy Trinity (among other reasons like icons and saints).

[familyop]

"Judaism was way more vast in terms of diversity than it is now."

Yes, but that was not a good thing from the immediate perspectives of the Prophets. By Philo's time, Israel and Judah had been attacked, massacred, enslaved and mostly forcibly assimilated by several idolatrous empires.

We're living in a different period now, and thus, the more recent change. Many feel more compelled and impulsive against Jewish people and Israel, but that's also part of the change. No one knows when, but things will get much more interesting. There's no reason to fear the recession away from Hellenism and similar diversities in the nations. After fulfillment of the Prophets, the world to come will be much better.

[familyop]

"The reborn Biblical Israel, under Mashiach HaMelekh, will wage war on false 'gxds' and religions and bring the message of the One G-d and His Laws to all mankind."

Yes. Israel belongs to the One G-d (the Only King of Kings), and so does the world. Will we see that confirmed for good and all with our now aging eyes? May be. If so, will we see a suddenly perfect world for good behavior, or has our world had enough of a relative time of peace and sufficient message before vain rebellion itself is finally put down? King David or the spirit of Elijah?