Fr. Georges Massouh: No to Tolerance, Yes to Citizenship

The Arabic original can be found here.

No to Tolerance, Yes to Citizenship

Most religious discourse about the other is dominated by the concept of “tolerance.” Religious jurists and thinkers never tire from repeating and popularizing the story about Islamic tolerance over the ages for those belonging to the “People of the Book.” We may concede, for the sake of the argument, the textual and theoretical truth of this story, even though its truth is weakened if we look at some periods of Islamic history when religious extremism dominated and the other was rejected to the point of total annihilation.

In our critique of the concept of tolerance, we cannot ignore a basic question that is connected to tolerance being imposed under certain unjust conditions concerning the right and freedom of groups. At the head of these conditions come things related to the building of churches and the role of worship, the exclusion from certain positions in the state, mixed marriage, and everything resulting from it. If we look back at times when extremism grew strong, we can mention poor treatment of dhimmis who were required to wear specific types of clothing and to carry weights around their necks, and were not allowed to ride horses as a form of humiliation and insult.

Then they never tire of talking about tolerance! Their evident proof is that non-Muslims were permitted to practice their rituals and worship and to have their personal status regulated by according to the rules and customs of their religious communities on the condition that they paid the jizya in exchange for not entering the army for the protection with Muslims of their homes. Any person who strives for full citizenship will reject this tolerance. It is not acceptable to any person who rejects conditions that fall short of complete equality for individuals within a single society, without any distinction on the basis of religion, creed, ethnicity, or sex.

Even if this tolerance was useful in bygone days, it is still something that belongs to bygone days. Our societies cannot remain backward relative to a modernity whose most important components include respect for the individual as a basic social value for human society, without which no society can stand. In our countries, the individual still has no value. He is incorporated, whether he likes it or not, into his religious, sectarian, or ethnic group. No weight is given to this individual unless he is included within his group and his weight comes from its weight. Whatever he may create or express within his field, he will remain relegated and marginalized within the boundaries of his group.

A healthy society is based on mutual rights and responsibilities among all its individuals, without dismissing any of them. In our age, it has become harmful to use an expression like “religious or ethnic minorities” and to negotiate over their rights and responsibilities and over tolerance for their existence and their religious practices and worship. Those who belong to these “religious minorities” long for a state in which they can live as individual citizens on the basis of equality with their partners in the nation, without pleading for tolerance or terms resembling it.

Islamic thinkers continue to approach the topic of the state and society through the lens of relations between religious and sectarian groups and not through the lens of the individual citizen and they still approach it through the lens of the majority’s toleration of the minority. This will return us to the era before the modern state, to the age of tribes and clans and ignorance.

Citizenship is what we desire and it requires universal respect and total equality without legislative or judicial reservations. In his book “Islam is Freedom and Dialogue” (Dar an-Nahar, 1999, p. 95), the Tunisian thinker Muhammad el-Talebi says, “Religious freedom is not a gift of charitable or benevolent tolerance that we grant to people who are in error.” We hope that we will arrive at a day when no citizen grants another citizen tolerance as an act of charity on account of the predominance of his religious or sectarian group.

Met. Ephrem on the Rich Young Man

The Arabic original can be found here. This sermon was originally given on September 4, 2011 in Rashayya el-Wadi.

As you can sense, I am very happy to be with you and I hope I will be even more so. We have a secret key through which we connect to the whole world, especially to those we love, and this key is prayer. This prayer that gathers us together today, it is not only human prayer and this joy is not human joy. It is heavenly joy. We in the Orthodox Church celebrate—especially on every Sunday—what we call “the Mystical Wedding.” This is because of our faith that this liturgical gathering transcends time and space and that a Christian person ascends in his thought and his heart toward what is beyond this world. This is part of God’s bounteous grace.

To return to the passage from the Gospel and to connect it to this prologue, the Gospel talks about this rich young man, who comes to the Lord Jesus through the crowd. He is a young person like the young people of today. Earnest, intelligent young people today search for truth, for sincerity, because in this world we see a lot of artificial, untruthful things. The new generation today searches for something true and sincere. This young man comes and asks Jesus, “What must I do in order to inherit eternal life?” This young man was Jewish, and the Jews, according to their law, searched for eternal life and said that it could be acquired through good deeds. But what is the meaning of eternal life? Eternal life is life that transcends death and transcends this earthly life.

You know how attached we are to this life. All of us are attached to this life. Why? Psychologists say that it is because of the fear of death that we cling to it and enjoy it. We cling to our wealth as if it will last forever. We cling to our pleasures as if they were true joy. But at root man strives for eternal life, and this is deep in the conscience of everyone. Man feels as though he will live forever, but illness comes and death comes and they strike him.

This young man comes with this spontaneous question and the Lord says to him, “Do you know the commandments? Do not kill. Do not commit adultery. Do not bear false witness. Honor your father and your mother…” And the young man responds, “I have done all these things.” And perhaps most of us do them. But the young man is not satisfied with the law, with these commandments. It is not enough for him. He wants something more that will satisfy his thirst and give him a better life. So the Lord Jesus says to him, “If you want to become perfect—if you are searching for this life that lasts forever-- sell everything, distribute it to the poor, and come follow me.”

But how can a person strip himself of all his wealth? How can a person strip himself of all his lusts? This is something that is difficult for every one of us. Man is attached to this material life and this is what is destroying the world today. They have wars and fight for material goods, but we Christians are not satisfied with this worldly life. We want more. This is why the Lord Jesus came, but this more costs us much…

“If you want to be perfect, sell everything, distribute it to the poor, and come follow me.” This does not mean that we no longer work, that we no longer earn money, that we no longer get married, that we no longer acquire a home, etc. It means that every Christian, every person who looks beyond, must constantly try to not be attached to his possessions, to not be a prisoner of his possessions. At that point he becomes free and tastes this divine grace. We believe that if we want to rise up and rejoice, we must empty ourselves. The person who does not strip himself of his selfishness will not taste eternal life. This is why we ask the Lord to give us this Orthodox point of view, so that we can have unending life. Amen.

Met. Ephrem's Sermon for the Feast of St. Moses the Ethiopian

The Arabic original can be found here. This sermon was given on Sunday, August 28, 2011 in Qalhat el-Koura.

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, amen.

Beloved, in this first part of the Divine Liturgy we always hear the word of the Gospel. The Gospel does not only speak of events that actually, historically happened. It speaks for the sake of each one of us. This requires us to listen attentively- for this reason we publish our newsletter “The Vineyard” as a companion to your reading of the Epistle and the Gospel. Today you heard this parable that says that the Kingdom of Heaven resembles a king who goes to call his servants into account. Naturally, the king is a symbol for God who will call us into account on the last day, each one of us according to our works. The first servant comes and he has a great debt. What is this debt? According to the interpretation of some of the Fathers, the debt is the sins that we have committed against God through our actions in this life. His debt is great, and so he casts himself at the feet of the king and asks for forgiveness. He pleads so much that the king, that is God, has pity on him—the Bible says that he has pity on him, that his heart was touched and so he forgave him all his debt. Then this first servant goes to his fellow servant who owed him a small debt. That is, he had committed some small sin against his comrade and he asks his forgiveness. But the first servant does not forgive him but rather compels him to pay his debt. The king hears, God hears, of how the servant upon whom he had had mercy and forgiven did not forgive his comrade a small debt. The king came to him on the day of reckoning and said to him, “You wicked servant, were you not obligated to forgive your comrade a small debt just as I forgave you all your debt?” This is what God does with those who do not forgive each other. Peter went and asked the Lord, “How many times must we forgive our brother for sinning against us?” The Lord replied, “Seven times, nay seventy times seven times.” That is, we must always forgive our brothers. The big question that many people ask is, “How will the Lord call us into account on the last day?” We say, and the other religions say as well, that He is merciful, that is forgiving, and that He is just, that is He calls us into account. So how does God harmonize mercy, calling into account, and judgment? This is God’s wisdom. Those who read “The Vineyard” can find there an attempt to explain this divine wisdom, this divine forgiveness, that the Lord forgives us our sins but at the very same time He will call us into account for everything we do in this life.

At the end of the Gospel passage, the Lord punishes this wicked servant and the wicked servant goes off to torment.

Does God punish, does God torment a person who sins? This is a question to which our holy Fathers say that a person through his sin torments himself. On the last day, God will appear to him face to face. His face will be light to those who did good deeds and at the same time it will be a fire burning those who sinned and did not repent of their sin. Beloved, this is the parable from the Gospel on this day when we celebrate this righteous and great one of the Church, so that we will have an example in Saint Moses the Ethiopian, who sinned and had a great debt before God but who despite this repented and became one of the holiest saints. Also, the Holy Fathers explain to us that this divine forgiveness, God’s mercy, is connected to our prayer. This saint spent his life in prayer. One who prays from the heart is easily forgiven, not because he is good but because he draws divine goodness and forgiveness from the Lord. When one prays, God’s mercy comes down upon him and he begins to forgive others easily and have mercy on them. Amen.

The Independent on Christian Fears for Syria's Future

Life after Assad looks ominous for Syria's Christian minority

Not everyone is supporting the uprising against the country's brutal regime. Khalid Ali reports from Damascus

Monday, 5 September 2011

In the gift shop of Damascus' Chapel of Ananias, a middle-aged Christian man called Sari explained who he thought was to blame for the stories of government brutality emerging from his country.

"All the international media are liars," he said. "Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN – they are all lying. There is no trouble here in Damascus."

Syria's more than 2 million Christians account for around 10 per cent of the total population and are just one minority in patchwork of different creeds. But in interviews this week, some of them said many in their community were uneasy about the anti-government protests convulsing their country.

Read the rest here.

Fr. Georges Massouh on Antiochian Witness in the Contemporary Middle East

The Arabic original can be found here.



Between Existing and Witnessing to the Truth



"Antioch" is not merely a city. It has become a civilizational, religious, and historical symbol. "The City of God, Antioch the Great" is the city in which was born the name by which the followers of Jesus of Nazareth came to be known: "And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians" (Acts of the Apostles 11:26). One cannot speak of Christianity in the Arab East without talking about the great influence left by Antiochian theology and figures of the Antiochian Church on the entire Christian world.

The role of the city of Antioch declined, but it remained a symbol affirming the unity of Christians living in the Eastern Arab nations that constituted, according to ancient administrative divisions, the geographical unit of one local church whose affairs were governed by a Holy Synod composed of her sons. Modern states were established after the dissolution of the Ottoman state, but the church remained Antiochian and was not divided according to the newborn states. Rather, she insisted that she transcended borders and nations. The unity of her Arab Christian children, Lebanese, Syrian, Iraqi, Palestinian..., is too strong for its bonds to be broken by political or administrative boundaries.

These words do not come from partisan motives or from current political considerations. They are rooted in the Antiochian Church's consciousness of her identity and witness. No one can doubt the loyalty of the children of the Church of Antioch toward their nations. However, the majority of them believe that their national loyalty in no way negates their commitment to the causes of the rest of the children of their church who belong to the entire territory of Antioch. Thus, we see the importance of the role that the Antiochian Church can play in the events that the nations of the Arab East are witnessing.

During what is called the era of the Arab renaissance in the 19th century until the middle of the 20th century, Antiochians adopted ideas produced by the European Enlightenment. In civil society, secularism, socialism, Arab and Syrian nationalism, they saw common linguistic, civilizational, cultural, national, geographical, social, or human bonds with their fellow-citizens and partners from among the Muslims and other people of the region in a single destiny. They saw in these ideas a way to liberation from the domination of a state clothed in religion that forbids them from their natural right to enjoy full citizenship without any disability. They were the point of the spear against ignorance, colonialism, and narrow sectarian affiliations and against the domination of backward religious thinking and the confusion of religion and politics.

Today we notice a regression on the level of the role entrusted to the Antiochian Church and to Antiochians, especially in matters connected to her witness and mission based on the living Antiochian heritage, from the Gospels to the writings of the fathers and teachers of the Church. In the context of events that will change the face of the region and the disappearing-- or almost disappearing-- stability of the future for its residents, the voice of the Church comes out with the truth.

For various reasons, the number of Middle Eastern Christians has continuously declined for four centuries. The Church's silence or at times her collusion, resulting from her fear for the fate of the Christian presence, will inevitably lead to the death of her witness and mission in today's world and at the same time it will in no way preserve the Christian presence. Fear over continued existence will lead to the loss of that existence and that witness at the same time. If only the Knower of the Unknown knows the future of existence, then "Antiochians" must not fear anything except losing their witness. Between existing and witnessing remains the hope that they will be able to carry out their witness without fearing for their existence.

Press Release from Patriarch Ignatius IV's Meeting with Orthodox Politicians in Lebanon

Arab original here.

Press Release from the Patriarchal Residence

On the Occasion of the Meeting of His Beatitude Patriarch Ignatius IV

With Orthodox Deputies in Lebanon

Balamand Monastery, August 12 2011

His Beatitude Ignatius IV (Hazim), Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and All the East, held a meeting with his children, ministers from the Orthodox community, on Thursday, August 11 at the Greek Orthodox metropolitan’s residence in Beirut. He held a meeting with his children, deputies from the community on Friday, August 12 at the patriarchal residence at the Monastery of Our Lady of Balamand. During the two meetings, there was an extensive dialogue about the Orthodox role in Lebanon in particular and more generally in the Arab East and the emigration.

This is the first time that such meetings have been held in the presence of the patriarch and they will be repeated on account of the delicate historical stage through which the countries of the Arab East are passing and on account of the leading role of the Orthodox, not only because they are the largest and most widespread Christian community in the region, but also because they are distinguished by their openness to Muslims and Christians of other Middle Eastern Churches.

It is natural for the leader of the Orthodox community to meet with those who represent the community to Lebanon, who bear the concerns of their community and who seek the good of those whom they represent. Each one of them has his place and his role in the community and in Lebanon.

His Beatitude expressed his love for those present and his respect for the responsibilities put on their shoulders, stressing the role that the Orthodox in Lebanon, in the Arab East, and in the emigration must play in the mother countries. This should be on the basis of their faith, their moral principles, their belonging to their nation, and their role in directing overall policy. His Beatitude likewise affirmed the special place that Lebanon and the Lebanese, Christians and Muslims, occupy in his heart and mind and their permanent presence in his prayers and supplications.

The patriarch, the ministers, and the deputies who were present agreed that the Church respects political diversity and complete freedom for all her children in choosing their political orientation, though they are all called to a single common denominator that is loyalty to the nation, striving to develop it on the basis of freedom, justice, and equality, and working with their brothers in citizenship for the good of the nation and of humanity.

With regard to the Orthodox role in directing general policy and offering administrative services, His Beatitude, the ministers, and the deputies who were present agreed to work so that the Orthodox community receives its rights in terms of recognized political and administrative positions. This is not in order to serve narrow self-interest, but in order to secure what is soundest and most effective in politics and administration, knowing that the Orthodox community has many members who are competent and capable of assuming positions in all fiends. They likewise stressed that securing opportunities for service in general departments in Lebanon for citizens from the Orthodox community should not come through quotas but through making them available to the community so that it can have the honor of serving the nation in the best way.

In closing, those present again affirmed the efforts of the Orthodox in Lebanon since its founding toward building a nation and establishing a state for all, without division or discrimination.

Fr. Touma Bitar on the Episcopacy and Love of Authority

The Arabic original can be found here.

The Episcopacy and Love of Authority

No one should take the words in this essay personally. Our words here are about a rampant sate of illness that most of us suffer from!

The love of authority is a passion, and there is none closer to man’s heart. The reason for this is that it is closest to what the serpent—Satan-- falsely promised him in the Book of Genesis (Genesis 3:5), that if he, that is man, disregarded God’s word and rejected His commandment, his eyes would open and he would become like God, knowing good and evil. For this reason, every other passion besides the love of authority in practice is born from it and leads to it!

It has been said that “the love of money is the root of all evils,” and the love of authority is behind the love of money and thus it is what gives all the evils a purpose and a definite direction on the way to sin.

The opposite of love of authority is obedience to God in the person of one who is marked with God’s will for us, in an act of complete emptying from our own personal will. It is not necessarily the holiness of the other person that shows us God’s will with certainty in the person of another. Rather, it is our complete emptying of our personal will in God’s name, through the other person.

Every person who does not obey God in the way outlined above cannot help but be governed by the love of authority, either openly or in a disguised way. In contrast to this, for every person who obeys God there is nothing easier than to obey others. Obedience to God, obedience to God alone, obedience in its deep sense, in Spirit and in truth, is behind eagerness to obey guides or authorities (Hebrews 13:17) and likewise our submission to each other (Ephesians 5:21). This is not exclusive submission and so it is not degrading. Rather, it is a submission obedient to God, in love, in others and so it is blessed! Here is hidden the ultimate power of the soul in a human, not the ultimate weakness and humiliation, as it appears to those who do not know!

Within this perspective fall the relationships between a man, wife, and children within a single household or between a worker and his supervisor or between an employee and his boss or between people, all people, in the world, regardless of the situations they are in.

Just as in the world, so too in the Church. Within the Church, all the faithful without exception are subject to this existential struggle between the love of authority and obedience to God. Within the episcopate, is seems that this matter is even more clear with regard to its position within the life of the Church. What are the signs of desire for the office of bishop within the framework of this perspective?

It has been said that “If one desires the office of bishop, then he desires a good work (1 Timothy 3:1)” and so the basis of this desire, scripturally and historically, is obedience to God and its basic framework is keeping the commandment. If keeping the commandment is not the basic framework and obedience to God the basis for a believer’s desire for this, then his wanting the office of bishop is not blessed and is not at all counted as a good work, but rather an act of showing off and intrusion! In this case, a man is seeking the office of bishop for himself, motivated by love of authority and he is not seeking it out of love for God. In its true meaning, the office of bishop is not in the titles, not in the consecration, not in the robes, and not even in the administrative function and social position. The office of bishop, at its base, is in service to the Lord Jesus and his Church with all one’s heart and all one’s soul and all one’s strength! This is exactly what has guided the Church, generation after generation, toward care, great care, in choosing bishops, so that the Church does not inadvertently choose for Christ’s flock a wolf instead of a shepherd, an exploiter instead of a servant, a corrupter instead of a pious teacher, and thus an agent of Satan rather than a witness for the Lord’s Christ. This is why, in his letter to Timothy the Apostle Paul followed the words above about desire for the office of bishop with words about the attributes, or rather the prerequisites, for a worthy bishop. “Blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, clear-minded, forbearing, not given to anger, not a lover of money, ordering his household well, whose children are obedient to him in all honor, not new to the faith, with a good testimony from those on the outside” (1 Timothy 3:2-7). These qualities would not be enumerated if the purpose was not to make a careful consideration of the characteristics of a candidate for the office of bishop, in order to make sure that they are found abundantly in his person. Up-close knowledge, especially with regard to his spirit, is an absolutely necessary condition for choosing a bishop. Thus it is unacceptable to be negligent in making a serious examination of a candidate for the office of bishop. Nor is it acceptable to be satisfied with generalities, passing impressions, or someone or another’s superficial testimony about him before including him in the list of eligible candidates! This is to not even speak of the influence of centers of power, from within the Holy Synod or from without, on deliberations that are not always of a churchly nature or with pure intent! Once, one of the metropolitans commented in front of me about choosing new bishops, saying, “We always come to the sessions of the Holy Synod like schoolboys who haven’t memorized their lessons like they should! Decisions are made arbitrarily and hurriedly. Elections are held and some don’t know who they are electing and what sort of person they are voting for!”

It is likewise unacceptable for a bishop to be accountable in his private affairs to God only and not to the Church of Christ, synod and laity. One who makes a review of the canons of the Church notices that the Church follows and takes an interest in minute details of the life of a bishop, so that the bishop will remain truly without blame, as the Apostle taught, and so that he will not be a cause of scandal for the faithful. An example of this is canon 25 of the Canons of the Holy Apostles: “Any bishop found to have committed fornication or a false oath or theft, let him be deposed of his office.” In canon 70 of the Council of Carthage: “Bishops, priests, and deacons must not approach their wives during their period. If they disobey this, let them be removed from their rank in the Church.” There are canons that affect bishops if they consume intoxicants, practice usury, strike someone, or take up worldly employment. Even if a bishop, a priest, or a deacon is a habitual backgammon player, he should stop this or be deposed (Canon 12 of the 7^th Council…). Likewise, if he prays with heretics he should be cut off (Canon 45 of the Apostolic Canons), and likewise a priest!

Thus it is essential to be sure of the spiritual identity of a candidate for the office of bishop before anything else. Then a continued examination of the bishop is necessary after he becomes a bishop so that he will remain blameless under penalty of being deposed. Otherwise, we treat the matter in the same way that the people of this fallen world deal with it in backward countries, and the way they treat employees in public and private offices. What can result from this in the Church is dangerous, whether on the level of the health of the flock, the level of the soundness of the Orthodox faith, or on the level of the soundness of canonical practice. Neglecting to choose a bishop carefully and also examining his behavior after choosing him are both unacceptable and should be strongly protested because ignoring corruption is negligence toward Christ’s Church! Its consequences are dire, not only for the Church’s present but even for her future and her continued existence!

Here is a very painful point in the Church, the subject of bishops’ celibacy. During the past forty years I have noticed, indeed I have personally experienced, that the Apostle’s statement to Timothy about the bishop being the husband of one wife is far removed from the idea that this was the ancient practice and that with time it was replaced by a celibate episcopate. It is my conviction that this is chronologically imprecise. Bishops’ being married and likewise bishops’ being celibate were, other than in exceptional circumstances, both within the framework of piety and Orthodox faith and worship. Thus, love of God and zeal for His house were the context. Bishops’ celibacy had an evangelical, monastic, spiritual content. Celibacy in itself was never the value. For this reason the unmarried bishop was looked upon as free for divine knowledge, worship, prayer, and fasting and likewise for the service of teaching and pastoring in Christ’s sheepfold. One did not exist without the other. Being satisfied with the conditions of celibacy, performing the services well, and with a little bit of superficial personal fasting and prayer, combined with a university diploma here or there, is a disfigurement of the unmarried episcopacy! This, in the context of today, is a worldly episcopate with absolutely no connection to authentic episcopacy! Before the celibate bishop are basically two paths: either to actively strive to be filled with the fear of God and obedience to Him, and thus with His Spirit, and to undertake service for the flock entrusted to him within this personal framework, or to be a person motivated by love of authority in what he thinks and does, in his opinion, and thus the flock becomes his plantation and grist for his whims! One who does not direct his vital energies upward must live on the level of the lusts of his soul and body. This could be exemplified in secret, illicit relationships with women, in deviant relationships, in a passion for accumulating wealth, in easily slipping into selling divorces and sacraments, and in preferring the wealthy. Or the celibate could be afflicted with feelings of haughtiness and pride, have a deviant personality in one way or another, or be afflicted by mental illness! It is impossible for a celibate bishop to have chastity of heart and to be spiritually healthy outside the framework of monasticism or quasi-monasticism in the Church. Indeed, the celibate episcopate, as it is practiced today, more than not counts people obsessed with love of authority and displays of pride, expensive robes, crowns, places of honor in the Church, and that people call them “my lord, my lord!” Corrupt practice encourages corruption! Naturally, exceptions exist, but they are very rare. I was shocked when I repeatedly met people who prepared their robes for the episcopate and the priesthood in advance, sometimes at a very high price, even as I have seen in how they stand in the church, in their tone of voice, in how they treat and talk to people, their lack of suitability for the episcopacy that they think is inevitably coming to them, like actors on the stage! There are even those who think that they were born to be a bishop! I know a bishop who was made bishop as a consolation prize because he expressed before the powers that be his feelings of hurt that all his companions besides himself had become bishop, as though the Church had wronged him! Likewise, I have no doubt that if one submits to the passion of love of authority, even if he is outwardly imbued with praiseworthy qualities, the passion of love of authority will corrupt all the good within him and make his purportedly praiseworthy qualities into material for deception and play-acting. If this is the situation to which the celibate episcopacy has to a large degree led, then I do not hesitate to say that in our Church’s current climate, that if someone desires the office of bishop, seeks it, or strives for it, then his desire is suspicious and he should be completely kept away from the episcopacy. As long as this is the current climate for the episcopate, then it is a thousand times better for us to choose blameless bishops from among pious married men who are firm in the Orthodox faith, good managers of their households and capable of ministering to the faithful, than for us to choose celibate bishops who are useless, who treat divine and spiritual things lightly, and who have, sometimes secretly and sometimes openly, and sometimes barefacedly, a way of life that causes scandal to the faithful, alienates them, frustrates them, and makes them wag their tongues, causing blasphemy against God’s Church!

There is no doubt that, faced with this tragic reality, we are suffering from a situation that is not only aberrant but also an illness, a spreading epidemic because we see that there is an insensitivity and an acceptance of things as natural that are turning into corrupt thinking and practice in this matter! Do we depart from the group when the signs of the times say that there is no hope for its uprightness?! By no means! Rather, we always witness the truth to the Church and work for the truth, strive for the truth, until the truth is revived! The Church remains the Church of those who walk in the way of the truth, not of those who strangle the truth with falsehood.

The word remains so that the Lord God will open the ears of the deaf!

Archimandrite Touma (Bitar)

Abbot of the Monastery of St. Silouan- Douma

August 14, 2011