The initiative of Mr. Sameh Fawzy, a young researcher, deserves special appreciation. His initiative attempts to get a feel for the anxieties of Copts, specifically identifying these anxieties and suggesting ways out of them.
The methodology which the researcher chose to make this assessment was a questionnaire which he supplied to a sample of 30 Muslim and Christian intellectuals. Respondents included Mahmoud Mahfouz, Nabil Abd Al-Fataah, Munir Fakhry Abd Al-Nour, ’Adel Hussein, M’amoun Al-Hodheiby, Suliman Niseem, Samir Marqos, Rif’at Al-Sa’id and ’Usama Al-Ghazaly. Each respondent was asked the following questions:
1. Do you think there are problems facing Egyptian Coptic citizens?
2. If yes, what, in order, are these problems?
3. What do you think is the appropriate method to solving these problems?
The researcher then compiled and published a book containing answers of those whom he surveyed, his own commentary on the issued raised, and a report of the Facts Finding Committee which the Maglis Al-Umma (People’s Assembly) formed under the chairmanship of Gamaal Al-’Ateefy following events in Al-Khanka in 1972, [where riots between Muslims and Christians took place]. In addition, the book also contains a piece of conversation by researcher Nagaah Hassan regarding the other/opposing view, as well as an article by Mohammed Hassan Hassanein Heikal in which he objects to the description of Copts as "minorities."
The book, published by the Ibn Al-Khaldoun Center for Development Studies, carries an introduction by Dr. Sa’ad Al-Din Ibrahim. Thus, the book significantly contributes in shedding light on one of the important issues on the agenda of political, social and national work, an issue for which there can no longer be shame, exaggeration or fear for calling it the "Coptic Issue" (on the condition of tackling this issue without exaggeration, ignorance or exploiting it for narrow partisan calculations).
What is interesting is that only three respondents said there are no problems facing Egyptian Copts.
Before talking about the results of the survey, I would like to underline an observation as to the list of names which the researcher chose. It seemed to me that the list, at least some of parts of it, lacked careful selection. This is illustrated by the fact that four of the thirty respondents are researcher’s colleagues in the center with which he works, that is, they are within the circle of his familiar contacts. In spite of this observation, the usefulness and the insights that the book brings in assessing and identifying the nature of anxieties of Copts cannot be denied. Despite differences in presentation and diversity of similarities, there has indeed been consensus on the following issues:
1. Legal obstacles to building of churches.
2. Ignorance of the history and civilization of the Christian era of Egyptian history, its exclusion in educational curricula and in the media.
3. Discrimination on a religious basis in the selection to some leadership positions.
4. Weak Coptic presence in the peoples’ assemblies.
Recognition of the existence of problems, as opposed to blind ignorance and indifference, is an important step in the right direction. However, the most difficult, practical and intellectual task is one of planning to eliminate the obstacles and correct the current situation. This is because each of the above grievances is a result of a long and accumulated inheritance precipitated by lengthy centuries and complicated policies and circumstances. Thus elimination of these discrepancies can not be brought about by mere laws and decisions, although laws are important, especially when they come at the right time and with necessary conviction.
Special credit goes to those who recognized in this and other surveys that solving the complaints of Copts depends largely upon a comprehensive solution of the problems faced by the society, such as backwardness, lack of general awareness, prevalence of values that are inconsistent with the spirit of modern time, and the lack of political reform necessary to create the opportunity for participation of all citizens in the building of the present and future of the country. But that doesn’t mean that we should wait for the "upcoming awareness era" when we will be relieved of our problems and anxieties. What can be done today to address these issues should not be postponed for tomorrow. Accomplishing what could be done today will relieve the burden, prepare for the next step, and contribute to generating a general climate conducive to and embracing values of advancement, confrontation of problems, and dialogue.
For example, discussing and agreeing on a revision of regulations to organize building, restoration and repair of churches is an issue for which there is no rationale for postponing. It is worth mentioning that those whom Mr. Fawzy questioned, who are already well known for their Islamic leanings, were all agreed on the rights of Copts to complain against restrictions imposed on the building of churches. The approach that we choose to revise laws and regulations of the building of churches will have an important role and impact on these issues. The results of such an exercise will be more inspiring and more realistic, especially when revision of current laws and circumstances originates from a broad base of citizens whose every view is welcome, listened to and respected. Included is the view that laws concerning places of worship, whether mosques or churches, need revision and regulation.
Revision of educational curricula is another issue that should not be postponed. Indeed, statements by the Minister of Education point to practical steps in this direction. Experts on educational curricula know that teaching certain concepts is not limited to syllabus content, but rather extends beyond the syllabus to include teaching methods, teacher capabilities, school activities and administrative ability.
Development of a balanced curriculum enriched with a spirit of national unity, tolerance and understanding of others is a big step deserving exertion of considerable effort. It requires participation of various points of view; it is not a job for experts alone.
It is particularly important to adopt practical approaches. And it is equally important to select appropriate and long-lasting solutions, as well as to avoid "top-down" decisions in critical issues affecting people’s perceptions, feelings, consciences and shaping the future.
Kamal Zaakher
The newly established Al-Nida’a Society, founded and headed by Dr. Sa’id Al-Nagaar, invited Mr. Kamal Zaakher Moussa, a successful businessman and active Christian leader, to present a lecture on "The Coptic Issue: A view from within." Public lectures are among the activities of the society which significantly contribute to raising awareness and spread liberal and intellectual values, tolerance and participation in public work.
The Society places special emphasis on publication and distribution of intellectual and theoretical contributions leading to broadening of the base of those it reaches. The importance of these publications is that they give a clear and frank presentation of an aspect hidden to many of us, not only among Muslims, but also among Christians. This relates to internal circumstances of our Orthodox Church and different proposals about methods of its administration in a changing environment. The lecturer, and those who spoke after him, was able to go deep inside the church and succeeded in conveying to the audience issues that represent the core of dialogue and difference of opinion. The issues which these speakers raised may be summarized as follows: method of selection of the Pope; areas of authorities of the Church Supreme Council; financial management; preparation of religious men and deterioration of the Clerical College; and the Church between religion and politics.
The lecture also included an entry by Girgis Helmy about libraries donated to the church by prominent personalities, including, for example, the library of the scholar Murad Kamel. He said that "these libraries have become prisoners in stores and subject to deterioration."
However, whatever our conviction about the importance of dialogue to shed light on aspects of this issue, we must admit that the issue is a sensitive one. Its sensitivity arises from the fact that most of the points raised concern the Church authorities, though generally some of those aspects concern the public. Indeed, the Church authorities are the ones capable of speaking about this issue, especially Pope Shenouda who is known to be the most important and powerful figure in the dialogue related to this area.
As we expose this to the public, we only hope to remind ourselves of the big and decisive role of state with respect to the church, and to arrive through dialogue to realistic results. In short, this is done in consistency with this principle: "what belongs to God is God’s… and what belongs to Caesar is Caesar’s."
I would like here to quote Mr. Girgis Helmy: "What we hope to realize is for the state to play a little more role in Church affairs. It is not logical nor tasteful to arrive at selection of the highest Church position - the Pope - through a regulation issued by the Minister of Internal Affairs. Why isn’t it possible to settle this question through a special law? And why not discuss the issue genuinely between specialists and those concerned with public work?"
There is a special law concerning personal affairs which was unanimously agreed upon by all the church denominations some years ago. The law is still shelved in the office of the Minister of Justice, despite the fact that there are about 44 cases awaiting promulgation of that law. I hope that the People’s Assembly will decide on the law soon and pay attention to the organization of the Church through laws, not through regulations. One wonders why don’t we make use of Christian legal men, despite those with many with high competent capabilities, for instance Nag Isaac, Deputy to the Chairman of the Court of Cassation, and Hanna Nashid, Deputy to the Chairman of the Council of State Cases.
Father Ibrahim Abd Al-Sayyed
"Engagement, marriage and divorce in the Christian community: A realistic view" is a booklet recently authored by Father Ibrahim Abd Al-Sayyed. The booklet contains some issues not yet settled by the Christian Personal Status Law. The book provides an opportunity for us to know and enter into the world of one another.
It is worth mentioning that Father Ibrahim Abd Al-Sayyed is supposed to be the head of Mar Girgis Church in Hadaa’ik Al-Maadi. However, because of his difference with the Pope, his church activity is limited. With his extra time, he has made the opportunity to become well-known among non-governmental organizations where he is frequently seen in his religious robes at public work sites expressing his views on religious and political issues. Steering away from literal adherance to texts, he tends to be more realistic in his views, stressing the need to make a distinction between religious and secular activity. (Secular here refers to Church activists and workers who are not involved in the world of priesthood.) In his book mentioned above, he seems to lean towards relaxation of restrictions and conditions of engagement, marriage and divorce, and calls for more freedom for people to select their own spouses or to divorce. He thinks that the huge restrictions on divorce should be eliminated or minimized, a position he believes does not violate the religion. He is adamantly opposed to some provisions of the Draft Unified Personal Status Law.
It is difficult to elaborate more on this point, not because of limitation of space but because discussing this issue must be carried out in the right place and at the right time. In addition, there is also the need to hear all opinions. It is important that we listen, agree, disagree and define what we might agree on.
Pope Shenouda
In a recent issue of Al-Ahram Weekly, a newspaper known for its seriousness and diversity, Pope Shenouda gave a long statement to three of its senior editors in which he explained his views on three areas of concern: The Personal Status Law for Christians, Church and political activity, and visiting Jerusalem. His answers to the three issues were, as usual, an eloquent defense of the position of the Church against its critics and opponents. He said that the issue of divorce in Christianity has already clearly been defined by the Bible and that there can be no way to argue about it. He affirmed that "divorce cannot occur except for the reason of adultery," adding that other reasons proposed for divorce cannot be justified. He affirmed that temporary separation between marriage partners is enough to arrive at a solution. "The state should not make laws that contradict the views of the church. We should speak about preparing our sons for stable marriages by raising their awareness of the need to carefully select their future partners instead of talking about divorce," said the Pope.
Asked about the belief by some regarding the Church’s involvement with politics, the Pope replied: "The Church has no time to indulge in politics. However, it is important to play a social role in civil activity. One of the consequences of this role is to call on the sons of the church to participate in political activity." He observed that the Muslim majority is responsible for dragging their brothers, the Copts, into the political arena.
The latter point, in fact, is what we don’t see. When in recent elections seventy Copts applied to contest parliamentary elections and none of them won, that means the Muslim electorate had not elected their Coptic brothers. Changing this climate is a responsibility of all, the society and the state.
When reading the lecture "The Coptic Issue: A view from within" or when reading a statement by the Pope, you feel there is a number of unresolved issues in which religion and world intermingle. We who call for a separation between religion and politics will feel that this separation is not a simple job. However, dialogue, expression of views, and listening without rigidity and fanaticism will raise and spread the flags of appeasement and stability.
