|
The Forgotten Christians of Lebanon
Once
free and equal, Lebanon's Christians now struggle against tremendous
odds in a country dominated by Syrian politics and an increasingly
Islamized culture.
Habib C. Malik
Before he was
exiled from the Soviet Union, the great writer and dissident Aleksandr
Solzhenitsyn was outspokenly critical of Patriarch Pimen and the
Russian Orthodox ecclesiastical hierarchy whenever he sensed they were
cozying up to the Communist authorities. After going into forced
exile, however, Solzhenitsyn fell silent on this issue. When reminded
of his earlier criticisms and urged to continue in that vein, he
replied firmly and without hesitation that he no longer felt he
enjoyed the moral right to speak out against the perceived errant
behavior of the Russian Orthodox Church because he was no longer
sharing directly in the daily historical-existential trials and
tribulations of his people and his church living under Soviet rule. In
other words, criticizing from a distance can be a dangerous business
and also risks becoming unethical.
I mention Solzhenitsyn's studied caution only
to suggest that a similar prudence is required when evaluating the
behavior of Christians native to the Middle East, especially those of
Lebanon—an ancient and beleaguered Christian community that proudly
traces its roots in an uninterrupted line all the way back to the time
when Saint Paul set sail from Byblos on his first missionary voyage to
the West.
Middle
Eastern Christianity, which includes the Christian communities of
Lebanon, has had to contend over the past 1,300 years with living in
close proximity to, and often under, Islam, the religion that early on
became dominant in the region. Over the centuries, Western interest
in, and subsequent incursions into, the Middle East have taken on many
forms—a lot of them proving disadvantageous to the Christians of the
region. The eventual defeat of the Crusades, for example, precipitated
a violent Islamic backlash against the indigenous Christians,
particularly those like Lebanon's Maronites, who had cooperated with
and supported the crusading hordes.1
Later Western commercial and imperial expansion into Ottoman domains
seemed at first to resuscitate the sagging fortunes of local Christian
communities, only to have them witness a return of persecutions once
the inevitable Western retreats occurred. Rivalries among the European
powers in the Levant and in Egypt often enlisted the native Christians
on the side of one and against the other. This too had its deleterious
effects, culminating in the 1861 massacres of Christians in Mount
Lebanon and Damascus that left a lasting scar on intercommunal
relations, and aggravating the repeated oppression of Egypt's Copts to
this day.
I am not suggesting that all Western
involvement in the affairs of the Near and Middle East over the
centuries has been detrimental to the region's Christians. Far from
it. However, the fact remains that the West's interaction with the
Middle East was always designed to serve primarily the West's
interests. This includes the Protestant missionary activities of the
nineteenth century, which, after failing to make noticeable headway
among Muslims, turned their energies to converting the local
Christians to the creeds of Europe's great Reformers. Resulting
tensions and mutual misunderstandings between the native churches and
the newly transplanted Protestants linger to the present.
Meanwhile, the reputed tolerance of Islam,
particularly for the "People of the Book," as Jews and Christians are
designated, created in reality the dhimmi system of
second-class servitude, which, under the guise of toleration, was
actually a system of subtle repression and dehumanization leading to
gradual liquidation.
Repeatedly the advice offered to Middle
Eastern Christians by Westerners—the sincere among them as well as the
self-serving—would counsel restraint, circumlocution, and a
self-effacing posture vis-ˆ-vis the dominant Muslim majority; in other
words, a resignation to the perpetuation of dhimmi status in the name
of mere survival and not rocking the boat. The one community in the
region that has persistently resisted traveling down this demeaning
road is the Maronite Christian community of Lebanon, along with
assorted portions of Lebanon's other Christian communities—the
Orthodox, Greek Catholic, and even Protestant. This has earned them a
number of by now familiar adjectives in the specialized as well as the
popular literature, the most benign of which has been "obstinate."
In pretechnological times, the rugged and
inaccessible geography of Lebanon's mountains acted as a natural
refuge for persecuted minority communities fleeing oppression. For
this reason an accurate, if colorful, description of Lebanon's
recurring crises in religious turmoil, including the most recent agony
of the past 20 years, is to refer to them as chapters in the ongoing
drama of freedom under siege. This time around, however, the
devastating technologies of modern warfare, coupled with the array of
hostile neighbors and other foreign meddlers, broke down the natural
protective barriers and rendered the siege far more destructive. The
full brunt of the prolonged assault that commenced in 1975 was borne
by the Christians, who also found they had to contend with a series of
negative stereotypes about them, generated and popularized mainly by a
host of Western journalists. These distorting stereotypes were quickly
internalized by many in the West and did irreparable damage to the
image of a community that was fighting for its life.
The first stereotype would be that of a
ruthless minority out to do everything it can to preserve its
political and economic privileges by keeping the Muslim majority
deprived and in a subordinate state. The truth is that pre-1975
Lebanon, despite its many blemishes and imperfections, enjoyed a
degree of equitable power sharing among its constituent communities
that was unique in the Middle East—a liberal atmosphere that has all
but vanished today following the silencing of the guns and the
lowering of the Syrian curtain of occupation.
A second stereotype holds that Christians in
Lebanon are affluent out of proportion to their numbers, and that they
enjoy prosperity at the expense of the Muslim majority. This simply
ignores the poor rural Christian population. Moreover, regarding
relative poverty, many among Lebanon's poorer Shiite Muslims practice
polygamy—for which the Christians cannot be blamed—thereby increasing
the squalor index by adding large numbers of children to the ranks of
the wretched. Today we see that the Christian middle class has been
hit the hardest, and any significant money in the country is not in
the hands of the impoverished Christians, but the monopoly of a
Muslim-dominated plutocracy led by megabillionaire Prime Minister
Hariri. In other words, the very tangible "trickle down" effect that
characterized Lebanon's economy before 1975 has simply evaporated.
Lebanon's history
offers a unique
example of peaceful and creative coexistence
between Muslims and Christians.
According to a third stereotype, this was a
civil war from day one—the implication being that these savage
Lebanese were just itching to get their hands at each other's throats.
In fact, the conflict began as a Lebanese-Palestinian (specifically
PLO) war that quickly acquired
features of civil strife and internal confessional polarization fueled
by the heavy-handed involvement of outside actors, principally Syria
and Israel (not forgetting Iran and Libya and an assortment of
mercenaries).
As for the horrific sectarian atrocities and
massacres laid cavalierly at the doorstep of Lebanon's Christians,
once again a responsible investigation of the matter—as conducted, for
example, by the German scholar and Lebanon expert Theodor Hanf of
Freiburg—reveals that eight out of ten massacre victims throughout the
entire Lebanon war were Christians, that the targeting of Christians
was in most cases deliberate, and that the main purpose was to
terrorize the community and precipitate massive population
dislocations, particularly from the outlying Christian and mixed
villages in the country.
I am by no means here denying the grave flaws
and chronic shortcomings of Christian leadership, both political and
spiritual, in Lebanon: the ineptitude, the mediocrity, the frequent
bungling, the wasteful and at times bloody squabbles, the many missed
opportunities, the insular parochialism, the clannishness and feudal
vestiges, the absence of a unified stand, the corruption of character,
and the mercantile mentality. All this regretfully is part of the
picture.
To stop there, however, as so many have chosen
to do, is to form a truncated view of the overall reality. The
tremendous odds against which the Christians of Lebanon—the people and
their leaders—have had to labor have been truly mind-boggling: oil
money, Western neglect joined with Western appeasement of Islam and of
Syria and Israel, erroneous and often tendentious media depictions,
the absence of a strong and reliable external ally, the multiplicity
of fierce external foes, and the demographic dragon. Even the finest
leadership in these circumstances would buckle under the combined
weight of such staggering negatives.
Back in the 1970s and '80s it became
disgracefully fashionable in Western policy and media circles to put
down the Lebanese Christians, particularly the Maronites. These
attacks often bordered on outright racism. Similarly today it has
become fashionable to lay all the blame for the Bosnian conflict on
the shoulders of the Serbs. If the priorities of certain Western
governments and their policy planners (Washington included) have
dictated that such one-sided obfuscations serve as the basis for
ethically dubious policies, the priorities of self-aware and morally
critical Christians in these same Western countries ought to be
markedly different.
Forgiveness
and reconciliation are possible among the Christians of Lebanon, and
between them and their brothers in Christ in the West. A stronger
spiritual bond is attainable, and a more solid and all-embracing
ecclesiology is not an imaginary goal. Indeed, there is good news
coming out of Lebanon for a change; important strides have been taken
in the direction of inter-Christian and interchurch reconciliation:
- A milestone gathering of
Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic ecclesiastical officials took
place in North Lebanon a couple of years back, paving the way for
further rapprochement between these two key Christian churches. One
fruit of this has been the recent encouragement by Rome of the Uniat
Greek Catholics or Melchites to return to the fold of the Orthodox
church.2
This is in keeping with parallel developments in Eastern Europe and
Ukraine. Before—one hopes long before—the year 2054 (the
one-thousandth anniversary of the Great Schism), the Catholic and
Orthodox churches will be reunited, and Lebanon will have played a
modest part in this great endeavor.
- Pope Shenouda of the
Coptic Orthodox Church in Egypt, along with a number of
representatives of other Middle Eastern churches, paid a visit to
Lebanon in 1996 that was marked by a spirit of ecumenical openness
and dialogue that heralds a new age. Although the visit was laden
with unnecessary political declarations made by the visitors in line
with Syrian positions on regional disputes, and although it was
marred by an offensive pilgrimage to the site of the Israeli
massacre in the southern Shiite village of Qana (offensive because
the visitors, on their way to Qana, traveled silently past Damour
and Jiyya, two coastal Christian towns that in 1975 were totally
destroyed and their inhabitants massacred or violently evicted from
their homes), the visit of Pope Shenouda was nonetheless a
significant step in the direction of greater understanding and
mutual acceptance among Middle Eastern Christians.
- A crucial special Synod
for Lebanon, called for by Pope John Paul II, was held in the
Vatican in 1995. Under the heading "Christ Is Our Hope: Renewed in
His Spirit, in Solidarity We Bear Witness to His Love," the synod
brought together representatives of Lebanon's multivaried Christian
family, along with Muslim observers, and demonstrated the Vatican's
abiding commitment to Lebanon as the home of free Christianity in
the Middle East. The official statement that was issued following
the synod was nothing less than revolutionary in its bold candor and
its grasp of the situation on the ground in Lebanon. Among other
things, it called for the complete withdrawal of Syrian troops from
Lebanon, and for the first time used the technical terms "cultural
pluralism" and "multiculturalism" to describe Lebanon's divided
society, as well as employed the term "consensual democracy" (i.e.,
democracy by communal consensus) to point the way toward an eventual
political solution for Lebanon based on a federal formula of
communal autonomy and power sharing.
- Lebanon's Maronite
Patriarch, Nasrallah Sfeir, the country's leading spiritual and
ecclesiastical figure, has for some time now been outspoken on
human-rights abuses and the curtailing of freedoms perpetrated by
the Beirut authorities at the behest of their masters in Damascus.
The Patriarch's courage to speak out has restored the respect and
historical-national stature of Bkerke, the patriarchal seat of
Lebanon's Maronite church and the traditional vanguard of defense
for the Christians of the country and the region.
- Perhaps the most
significant development and the source of the greatest joy is the
growing evidence throughout Christian Lebanon of a spiritual revival
among the youth. Prayer groups, catechism groups, and Bible-study
groups are sprouting everywhere, and I was privileged over the past
two years to have taken part in some. The enthusiasm and spiritual
dedication glowing in the eyes of these young men and women after 20
years of war and occupation are for Lebanon tantamount to a
resurrection from the dead!
- Last, the Middle East
Council of Churches appears on the verge of broadening its hitherto
exclusive fixation on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian
problem to include such vital issues on its agenda of priorities as
the welfare of native non-Muslim minority communities (mainly the
Christians), the state of human rights and fundamental freedoms in
the region, women's issues, and Christian unity.
Alongside
this good news, there is, unfortunately, plenty of the bad to grapple
with. Lebanon's Christians face the grave dangers of corrosive
attrition ahead, which can be summarized as follows:
- Syrian occupation. The
longer this lasts the more permanent and the deeper the damage
sustained by the Christians. Already freedoms across the board are
in eclipse, and with the rubber-stamp Parliament in place following
the 1996 elections state-managed by Damascus, the Syrians will be in
a position to run legislation through the Lebanese chamber affecting
such sensitive areas as education, demography, and politics that
will have a negative impact on the Christian community.
- Islamization. Left to
wallow in its present stagnant state, Lebanon is being steadily and
irreversibly Islamized. Whether through the policies of the
Saudi-backed Hariri, who purchases vast real-estate properties from
needy Christians and staffs government and civil-service
appointments exclusively with Muslims, or whether on the other end
of the spectrum through the growing power of the militant
Iran-inspired fundamentalist organization Hezbollah, whose leaders
state openly that they are working for the eventual creation of an
Islamic state in Lebanon—Islamization directly threatens the free
Christian presence in Lebanon.
- Continued delay in the
completion of the Middle East peace process. The longer it takes to
arrive at actual peace treaties between Lebanon and Israel and
between Syria and Israel, the worse it will be for Lebanon's
Christians. Whenever one of Lebanon's two borders is closed, the
country automatically falls a virtual hostage to the other open
border. When the border with Israel opens, unchecked Syrian hegemony
is bound to be diluted.
- The crisis of leadership.
Unless credible and competent leadership emerges soon among the
Christians of Lebanon that will unify them and wisely chart a future
course for them designed to protect and promote freedom, prospects
look quite bleak. This is something only they can do for themselves.
- Western apathy. In the
hard-nosed world of realpolitik, petroleum-free Lebanon does not
amount to much either strategically or economically for a country
like the United States. Injecting other human and value-oriented
parameters and ingredients into the policy calculus of Washington
that would elevate Lebanon on the scale of foreign-policy priorities
is in itself an awesome and daunting undertaking requiring prayer
and patient hard work.
- Demography and
emigration. Perhaps the greatest single danger facing Lebanon's
Christians in the coming years is depletion through emigration and
declining birth rates. It is estimated that throughout the long war
years, close to 900,000 people—the vast majority of them
Christians—left Lebanon. Only a fraction have since returned. To
make matters worse, a dubious decree approved by Parliament in 1994
naturalized some 300,000 people (mostly Syrian Muslims), or the
rough equivalent of 10 percent of Lebanon's population. If
naturalization of the remaining Palestinians in the country—who are
overwhelmingly Muslim—goes through as part of an overall peace
settlement, then the Christians will be in dire straits. Reliable
statistics are infernally hard to come by in a place like Lebanon,
but the best and most optimistic estimates place the Christians
today at around 40 percent of the Lebanese population.
Given
this alarming roster of perils afflicting the Christians of Lebanon,
what can concerned American believers do to make a difference, both
for Lebanon's Christians and for Christians throughout the region? I
submit nine suggestions:
1. Seek out the facts and overcome prejudicial
stereotypes. To rediscover Lebanon's Christians firsthand and
experience their joys along with their fears is a good start. Come to
Lebanon more often and meet and live with Christians there.
Enculturate yourselves with the region's Christians.
2. Speak out candidly and forcefully on
human-rights violations and the squeezing of freedoms to which the
Christians of Lebanon and the region are being subjected. This should
be their response to the oft-heard argument that always reduces the
issue of Lebanese and Middle Eastern Christians to one of sheer
numbers, and offers majority rule and numerical determinism as the
answer. Without guarantees for minority rights, majority
rule—especially in an Islamic context—is a sure recipe for injustice
and oppression.
3. When peace treaties are finally signed,
support full and swift normalization between Lebanon and Israel. I am
convinced that a very special eschatological role awaits the
Christians of Lebanon with respect to the Jewish people. I certainly
don't intend this to imply political support for the State of Israel,
as some fundamentalist Christians in the United States would have it.
I mean it rather in the straightforward sense of Saint Paul in Romans
9, 10, and 11. The fate of free Middle Eastern Christianity
after peace ought to be the top priority for American believers
involved in the affairs of the region.
4. Coordinate efforts with other concerned
Christians in the West. A unified Western Christian effort on behalf
of Middle Eastern Christians is far more effective than a fragmented
one.
5. Promote a bold new mission to Islam through
the continued use of all the latest technologies: Radio, television,
satellites, faxes, computers, the Internet, electronic mail, and so
on. None of these technologies, however, or others that may replace
them in the future, can take the place of an active and direct and
personal life witness in Christ aimed at Muslims. Once a genuine life
witness in Christ is offered to Muslims, the rest is up to the Holy
Spirit.
6. Put pressure on the U.S. government to
establish the principle of reciprocity for Christians living in
Islamic lands. Today, Muslims can freely travel to the West, where
they can choose to reside permanently, build Islamic places of
worship, run their own religious schools, dress in their traditional
apparel, publish religious material, and otherwise take full advantage
of the liberal and open atmosphere prevailing in Western countries to
live their faith and preserve their cultural identities. The same
opportunities of self-fulfillment ought to be made available to
Christians, either indigenous or coming from the outside, who already
live or choose to live in predominantly Islamic domains and states.
7. Criticize the U.S. government's leniency
with the Syrian regime of President Hafez Assad, in particular with
its flagrant excesses in Lebanon.
8. Propose federalism as the only just and
viable political formula for a heterogeneous and divided society like
that of Lebanon, which contains communities embodying widely differing
world-views living side by side. Peaceful coexistence within the
framework of a federal system of government providing plenty of local,
communal, and sociocultural autonomy is the preferred future course
for Lebanon's Christians.
9. Throw the spotlight on the plight of the
Christian inhabitants of South Lebanon and the self-declared Israeli
Security Zone there. These people are very afraid that once Israel
withdraws as part of a final peace deal, they will become targets for
vendettas and reprisals and punitive attacks by Hezbollah and other
extremists. No peace deal should go through that does not offer the
Christians of South Lebanon ironclad international guarantees against
the possibility of such outrages.
Lebanon's history offers a unique example of
peaceful and creative coexistence between Muslims and Christians. At a
time when tensions between Islam and Christianity are increasing at
many points around the world, it is imperative that Lebanon's legacy
not be squandered.
1. The Maronites took their name from
an early Christian hermit, Maron, who died in 410. They moved into the
area of North Lebanon following Maron's death. The Maronites are Uniat
Christians; that is, they are in communion with the Roman Catholic
church (since 1182) yet retain their own liturgy. They constitute the
largest Christian community in Lebanon.
2. The Greek
Catholics have retained many of the trappings of their Orthodox
background. Since 1684 they have had a hierarchy separate from that of
the Melchites, who remained affiliated with the Orthodox communion.
|
