Political instability + Popular Revolution = Death to Religious Minorities.

Philip Jenkins points the iron rule of sociology that in any face off between a decaying authoritarian regime and a populist insurrection, it's the religious minorities that get it in the neck.  In this case, the Syrian unrest may destroy the last vestiges of ancient Eastern Christian churches:

Ever since the wave of popular movements started sweeping the Middle East, Western media have rarely found much good to say about the authoritarian regimes under attack. Few observers deny that the last generation or so of Arab rulers were indeed greedy despots, and it seems desirable for Western powers to intervene as forcefully as they can on behalf of what are commonly billed as pro-democracy movements. The arguments against intervention are obvious enough, most obviously that it is much easier to begin a military intervention than to end it, while we rarely have much idea about the political character of the supposed democrats we are trying to aid. But in one case above all, namely Syria, debates over intervention have missed one overwhelming argument, which is the likely religious catastrophe that would follow the overthrow of the admittedly dictatorial government. Any Western intervention in Syria would likely supply the death warrant for the ancient Christianity of the Middle East. For anyone concerned about Christians worldwide -- even if you believe firmly in democracy and human rights -- it's hard to avoid this prayer: Lord, bring democracy to Syria, but not in my lifetime.

And:

Christian numbers are still harder to determine. Over the past century century, Syria regularly served as the last refuge for Christian communities who had been largely destroyed elsewhere in the Middle East -- for Christians fleeing massacre in Turkey after 1915, or in Iraq after 2003. A standard figure for the number of Syrian Christians is ten percent, or around two million believers, but that omits an uncertain number of thinly disguised crypto-believers, not to mention the recent arrivals from the wreck of Saddam's Iraq. A fifteen percent Christian minority is quite probable.


It's one thing to catalogue the religious oddities of a particular country, but we also have to know that that diversity is the absolute foundation of Syrian politics. Basically, a large majority of Syria -- officially, some 74 percent -- is Sunni Muslim, and the nation's politics for almost fifty years has been devoted to ensuring that this majority does not gain power. Ever since 1963, Syria has been ruled by variations of the Ba'ath Party, an Arab ultra-nationalist movement originally co-founded by the Syrian Christian intellectual, Michel Aflaq. Because of its devotion to absolute secularism, the Ba'ath cause appeals strongly to religious minorities who fear the overwhelming demographic power of Sunni Islam. Christians, Alawites and others all have a potent vested interest in drawing all Arab peoples, regardless of faith, into a shared passion for secular modernity and pan-Arab patriotism, in sharp contrast to Islamism.

And:

The West might like to see the Ba'ath regime crushed as thoroughly as its counterpart in Iraq, but as on that earlier occasion, the religious consequences of intervention could be horrible. Before planning to intervene in Syria, Western nations had better start printing several million immigration visas to hand out to refugees seeking political asylum, and demanding protection from religious persecution.

There is often a correlation between authoritarian state and survival of religious minorities.  One reason for this is that religious minorities may provide a pool of "safe "talent for the authoritarian ruler.  Members of religious minorities can't hope to supplant the ruler because that wouldn't be acceptable to the vast majority of the population or the regime, and talented religious minority can't hope to find a better outlet for their talent.  This seems to be equivalent to the medieval practice of appointing commoners to high state office because commoners couldn't hope to obtain the allegiance of the nobility, which often felt threatened by such "upstarts."

Of couse, there were the occasions where commoners did pull of a coup.

On the other hand, democracy may not be conducive to the survival of religious minorities. Democracy often imports enthusiasm, and enthusiasm, particularly an enthusiastic chauvinism sparked by a resentment of the majority having been ruled by religious minorities, is a dangerous mix.  During the Middle Ages, a tried and true method for placating a mob was to throw the commoner-advisor "under the bus."

Religion of Peace Update.

Alternative title, "This is absolutely nuts."

Wintery Knight posts an entry on how 500 Muslim clerics have endorsed the murder of the Pakistani Governor who dared to oppose blasphemy laws.

And, in a scene reminiscent of Weimar judges apologizing to Hitler for having to give him a lenient sentence for his failed attempt to overthrow the government, the killer - who was the governor's bodyguard - was showered with roses when he made his court appearance:

The increasing radicalization of Pakistani society was laid bare Wednesday when the nation's mainstream religious organizations applauded the murder of provincial governor Salman Taseer earlier this week, while his killer was showered with rose petals as he appeared in court.


Taseer, 66, the governor of Punjab, the country's most heavily populated province, was assassinated Tuesday by one of his police bodyguards after Taseer had campaigned to ease Pakistan's blasphemy law. Religious groups threatened to kill others who questioned the blasphemy statute, which is designed to protect Islam and the Prophet Muhammad from "insult."

In other news, Iran is rounding up Christian leaders.

New Years Eve Attacks....

...on Christian churches deserve more expressions of outrage.

History and Invention.

Orthocatholic has a very interesting post on the Evangelical blind-spot -i.e., the Eastern Christian churches:

This “blind spot” often becomes real apparent when Evangelicals discuss historical theology and only mention Catholic writers from the West. For example, traditional Evangelical Protestant apologetics countering the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist most likely will focus on medieval Catholic writers and the Catholic council that defined Transubstantiation. Byzantine, Syrian, and Coptic Christian writers from the Early Church on the Real Presence are routinely ignored. The average Evangelical believes that the idea of Real Presence dates from the thirteenth century and was one of those “Catholic inventions.” This same list of “inventions,” popularized by Protestant theologian Loraine Boettner, puts the idea of seven sacraments as late as 1439. The fact that the belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist was a universal belief of the Ancient Church is lost on most Evangelicals, often because many of them don’t even know about the Eastern Christian Churches. Many Evangelicals confuse Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism, let alone Coptic, Syrian or Armenian Orthodoxy.

Then, there is a moment when history comes alive:

Even though I had been visiting Eastern Christian Churches for a few years, I myself didn’t know about the Coptic Church’s history until I visited a parish in Arizona for Liturgy. At the time, I was Eastern Catholic and I would visit various Orthodox parishes with an Eastern Orthodox friend. We both decided to visit a Coptic parish and the priest, noticing two English-speaking visitors, decided to do most of the Liturgy in English for our benefit. At a certain point, a commemoration was made for “St. Dioscorus,” who I remembered was the Patriarch of Alexandria condemned at the Council of Chalcedon. I turned to my Eastern Orthodox friend and asked: “So these people are not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox?” “No,” he replied, “we’re working on it, however.” Neither one of us could receive Communion that day. The realization hit me, from a liturgical perspective, that the Liturgy I was observing was historically quite significant. The separation between the Coptic Orthodox and the Western and Eastern Orthodox Churches was bitter and complete. What the Coptic Orthodox preserved in their liturgical tradition would give evidence of what was a “lowest common denominator” of belief when compared with the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches. What was the shared belief of the Ancient Christian Churches about 450 AD? What did they believe about the Eucharist, the Real Presence, the nature of Baptism, the seven sacraments, etc.?

St. Dioscorus?  Dioscorus is one of the "Bad Guys" in the Western tradition, but in the Coptic Church, he's a saint.

It's like going to a museum and learning that Benedict Arnold was the first President.
Orthocatholic also provides a link to this Coptic liturgy, which has some very catch tunes, and English phrases for some reason.

The Church of the East

According to Philip Jenkins' recent book, The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia--and How It Died, the true historical heartland of Christianity was Iraq. Up until the Middle Ages, more Christians lived east of Constantinople than west.

Unfortunately, since 1900, Christian numbers in the east have plummeted. In 1900, there was a sizeable Christian minority, found in Christian enclaves, throughout the Muslim world. Now, that number is down to a scant percentage of a percentage, so that we are not long from a time when we will be able to identify the last Christian in Iraq. The reason for the decline is longstanding Muslim hostility, coupled with the historic fate of minorities when the majority feels threatened.

This story about Iraq establishing Christmas as an official holiday is a hopeful sign that, perhaps, the many historic wrongs that have been done to the original inhabitants of Iraq may be addressed.