When Watanī asked me to write an obituary on Otto Meinardus [AWR, week 39, art. 38, 39] the answer was of course an immediate, firm, yes. I knew Dr. Otto F.A. Meinardus for some 22 years and learned a lot from him about the church in Egypt.
But an obituary in any publication is necessarily limited in space and thus I would like to offer readers of AWR a few more reflections.
The first time I met with Otto Meinardus was during one of his visits to Egypt in 1983. I was then working on my research on the milk production of small farmers in Damietta in the Delta but was already highly interested in the local church of Egypt and my enthusiasm was spurred on by Dr. Meinardus. In 1985 I went with him to the Monastery of Makarius, but he then did not want to be recognized by the monks and wrote his name in the guest book as "Mr. Otto” because he had earlier criticized the Monastery for claiming that the relics found during the restoration of the main church were those of Elijah and John the Baptist. Meinardus was explicit in his disbelief and called it, as he later did with so many other Coptic traditions and beliefs ’fiddlesticks’. Meinardus could be very explicit in speaking about what he believed to be fiddlesticks but he would be very careful putting this on paper because he knew that would cost him his relations with the people he sincerely loved, but with whom he disagreed on certain matters of belief and tradition.
Before Meinardus had returned to Germany he had asked H.H. Pope Shenouda, released months earlier from the monastic arrest imposed by the government following tensions between Pope Shenouda and President Sadāt in the 1970s, to provide him with a list of bishops for a new publication. He had not received this and asked me to visit the pope to obtain the list. What an experience this was! I sat for many hours with the Pope, sometimes with him and sometimes waiting in another room because of the very frequent interruptions by visitors, most clergy. Pope Shenouda then did not have a list of bishops and he sat down to write the list himself. Thus I obtained a unique handwritten list of bishops from Pope Shenouda. In between, I listened to unsolicited comments from Pope Shenouda, comparing himself to his predecessor Pope Kyrillos, immensely popular with many Copts. He made comments of Pope Kyrillos being uneducated and having received gifts from the rich and wealthy, while he, Pope Shenouda, was different. It gave me the impression that the frequent Coptic comparisons between himself and Pope Kyrillos, seen as miracle doer, a man of great piety, annoyed him.
I was fascinated by Meinardus’ writings and invited him to give a lecture at the Eirene Foundation in Leiden around 1987. He came by train and stayed a few days with our family in Leiden. What a rich experience this was!
In the early nineties, I started working on a Coptic bibliography for publication by Brill, Leiden with a focus on publications on the Copts since the Arab conquest in 639-641 AD. I had found several bibliographies on the Coptic period but very little on the Copts in the Islamic period and I wanted to bring this information together. I corresponded a lot with Dr. Meinardus for this project that, unfortunately, was never finished because I left for Egypt in 1994. Completing this project in Egypt was impossible. In The Netherlands I had the help of Leiden University library, but in Egypt, there was no library to which to turn.
Otto returned Egypt on a regular basis and always visited us. It was during those years that I got to know him best. We interviewed many church leaders and interesting personalities together and discussed a large number of subjects. Otto frequently wrote letters asking for information for one of his publications.
I’ll never forget our lunch with Bishop Marqus of Shubrā al-Khayma in March 2000. We spoke about the Coptic concept of martyrdom following the murder of Christians in al-Kushh in January that year. Copts had called those Christians ’martyrs’, thus extending the title of martyrdom to Christians who had been killed in mob violence, not explicitly for their Christian belief, but because relations between Christians and Muslims had become strained in the years leading to their violent deaths.
Bishop Marqus then raised the question of St. Bīshouy. He asked Meinardus, why the story of St. Bīshouy carrying Jesus was only known, even to monks at the monastery of St. Bīshouy, through Meinardus’ publication of "Monks and Monasteries of the Egyptian Deserts,” AUC-press, 1961. Meinardus laughed, said it was an oral tradition and did not make any further comments. But after we had left the bishop, he told me that he [Meinardus] had used this story for a sermon in the US, committing, he said, ’pious fraud,’ without elaborating.
Pious fraud, Meinardus, explained later, is what many preachers do. They create a story because it has great moral value, it is made for teaching purposes but that does not make it historically true. This is, Meinardus believed, how Theophilus’ dream about the route of the Holy Family came into being, a story that probably originated in a sermon given after the Monastery of Muharraq had been restored in the Fatimid period [972-1171]. The dream focuses on the monastery, the last station the holy family visited during their flight to Egypt, the place where they stayed six months, in sharp contrast to other locations where they stayed only a few days, escaping the soldiers of Herod. The dream also relates the miraculous flight on a cloud of Jesus, his mother Mary and disciples after the resurrection to the Monastery of Muharraq to consecrate the first altar in the world. With such miraculous events, the Monastery was bound to become an important location for pilgrims, which obviously helped gain finances for the restoration of the monastery. But Meinardus knew very well that this was anathema to the Copts and thus would not expand on these beliefs in his conversations with Coptic clergy, such as Bishop Marqus. [Massimo Capuani’s "Christian Egypt; Coptic Art and Monuments Through Two Millennia,” AUC Press, 2002, to which Dr. Meinardus contributed states that church was rebuilt in the 12th or 13th century and "it was perhaps at that time that the tradition arose according to which the Holy Family sojourned in this place "“ and it probably arose as a consequence of an ambitious project of construction inside the monastery. The particular sacred character of the place would no doubt have encouraged pilgrimages and generated financial support on the part of the Christian communities of Egypt.” [pp 196-197].
I was fascinated. The story of Bīshouy carrying Jesus is now a widely accepted tradition of the Coptic Orthodox Church, and many believers think it historical fact. The Meinardus story made monks at the Monastery of Bīshouy commission famous Coptic iconographer, Dr. Isaac Fanous, to paint an icon of St. Bīshouy carrying Jesus, thus strengthening the belief this was recognized church tradition.
In March/April 2002 I went with US author Paul Perry to locations of the Holy Family in Upper Egypt. I told Perry of the lunch with Bishop Marqus and Dr. Meinardus two years earlier and we decided to call Meinardus. He explained the entire tradition of the Holy Family is based on ’dream incubation.’ Joseph in the New Testament is in many ways similar to Joseph in the Old Testament. Both dream. In the same fashion church leaders or sometimes pious laymen can receive important messages through dreams. That could be a dream about the Holy Family visiting a specific location or a dream revealing that specific relics belong to a certain saint [RNSAW, Week 12, art. 1].
Perry’s draft text mentioned that Meinardus "invented” the story, but this he did not like. "I didn’t fabricate this story,” Meinardus told me, "can’t I have visions too?” But Meinardus agreed that "he [Meinardus] created a story to make truth even truer. The fact that this story is now a proud part of the Coptic culture is a sign of just how true it is.” [See Paul Perry, Jesus in Egypt, New York, 2003, pp 209-210]
Paul Perry wrote in an e-mail "I have a feeling that this was not the academic side of Meinardus that was speaking. The creative preacher in Meinardus came out and this perfectly beautiful little story was the result.” Perry is correct but he unfortunately, did not explain in his book the ingredients needed for the development of a tradition, that is using great heroes of faith from tradition, strengthening a well accepted morale, linking it to existing tradition and preferably presenting this in a sermon [Meinardus did so in Washington Cathedral, October 21, 1962]. Fourth century Saint Bīshouy is well-known and respected in Coptic tradition, he had already encountered Jesus Christ in the foot-washing story and the story of Bīshouy-carrying-Jesus was taken from the Greek St. Christopher [his name means "Christ bearer”] tradition.
[
In other words, he used the same ingredients any monk or bishop would have used for a story. That does not make it an ’invention’ but ’pious fraud.’
An other example of recent pious fraud is Bishop Samuel saying the tree with bent branches near Jabal al-Tayr was in fact the tree that worshipped Jesus when the Holy Family passed by. Bishop Samuel had told Dr. Meinardus that after he had first seen the tree as a monk, he dreamt about it and it was revealed to him that this was the tree that Jesus had worshipped. In fact there is a tradition about a tree in al-Ashmounīn, some 30 km south of Jabal al-Tayr, saying that the tree bowed before Jesus in worship. But that tree had long ago disappeared and the Coptic Orthodox Church is only weakly represented in the village of al-Ashmounīn. Traditions need a living church community and thus the tradition moved northwards to Jabal al-Tayr which is yearly frequented by hundreds of thousands of pilgrims. Bishop Marqus told us how Bishop Samuel had presented his tree to the Holy Family Committee under the chairmanship of H.H. Pope Shenouda but moderated by Bishop Marqus. Bishop Marqus and Minister Mamdouh al-Biltaqui, then Minister of Tourism, told us that committee was founded after the minister had asked the church to prepare a map with a route of the Holy Family. This project resulted in an official map, signed by Pope Shenouda, and the Ministry of Tourism making a booklet about the Holy Family, explicitly mentioning this tree. That scared the squatters living there, who feared this could result in government authorities confiscating the land. The squatters decided to completely remove the tree, including its roots [RNSAW, 2001. week 03A, art. 18].
Another story I discussed with Dr. Meinardus concerned the photos taken by Wajīh Rizk, a professional photographer from Cairo about the apparition of the Holy Virgin in Zaytoun in 1968. The story went that Rizk had allowed all of his film to be examined by the chief photographer at al-Ahrām newspaper who declared that "there was no possibility of photo-montage.” Meinardus then responded "I don’t know Wagih Rizk and this claim that the photo had been examined, but it is absolutely certain there was massive fraud. They have played with light effects and they even took a picture of Maria Imaculata, a 1830s picture from Paris, to Zaytoun and added this to their photos.”
Meinardus had frequently gone to Zaytoun to see the apparition, and he had taken members from the Maadi Community Church to see it. Some believed it had to be a heavenly phenomenon and others didn’t. Meinardus told Paul Perry and me that when his first wife joined him to see this phenomenon she exclaimed "look, Caspar the friendly ghost.” This, however, he found too negative. Meinardus did not believe in the apparition to be factual but explained it as fulfilling a need amongst Copts in those years; a sign of encouragement but also pious fraud.
A story Copts often tell is that President Nasser visited the site incognito and confirmed he had seen the Holy Virgin. This was, however, told by Nasser himself and the story appeared, as so many miraculous stories, for example the stories about the miracles of Pope Kyrillos or Abbot Shenouda, after his death. Meinardus suggested this be checked with Huda Nasser, Nasser’s daughter.
Meinardus was fascinated by the huge increase of relics in the Coptic Orthodox Church in the past fifteen years. Many of those relics, like those of Akhmim, were taken from the vast necropolis in the area and declared to be the relics of martyrs by local clergy, of course through dream incubation. He started documenting the tremendous increase in relics in churches, more then in any other time of the Coptic Orthodox Church and linked it to the end of the church revival through the Sunday school movement. The great spiritual leaders of the fifties and sixties had passed away or had become very old and people started to seek support in relics, the remains of saints of long past years.
Such pious fraud stories have developed through the ages. Though we can trace the development of some stories, the origins of others have disappeared. Those who brought those stories in the world have also no interest in explaining how they developed because their interest is to strengthen the faith of the people.
The phenomenon of pious fraud is found in all traditions, though some more than others. Such stories need a living community, people who believe and spread the story because they have been strengthened, encouraged by it. Through the spread of the story, elements can be added, a story can be beautified and thus different variations of a tradition can develop.
Meinardus attended the last mulid of St. George at the Greek Orthodox Church of St. George in Old Cairo on April 23, 1956. Meinardus told me that a miraculous white horse appeared [St. George is always seated on a white horse] but that was the last miracle and the end of a once flourishing tradition. The Greek community was rapidly diminishing and St. George did not come back.
Meinardus and I discussed the miraculous church of St. Ibscharun in Bayahu near Samalut. The church had been miraculously transferred in the late medieval period from Qallīn near Kafr al-Shaykh to Bayahu, 500 km south, during a wedding ceremony. The miracle is similar to the story of the miraculous transfer of the house of Joseph the Carpenter from Nazareth to Loreto, Italy, now a well-known pilgrimage center
It appears that the Copts had very rapidly built a church in this area in a period church building was difficult. When that was discovered by the local Muslim governor the Christians told him the story of the miraculous transfer. That meant their church had a heavenly building permit and who are then early authorities that no church should be located on that spot?
Interestingly I later asked Bishop Baphnotius about whether he believed the church in Bayahu had indeed miraculously flown from Qallīn to Bayahu. He then said that though he was a bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church, and had to believe the traditions of his church, he was also a medical doctor. The Bishop said nothing more but from the way he responded it was clear for me he did not believe that the transfer had actually taken place, but he accepted the tradition because this was part of his heritage.
Father Basilius responding to Meinardus’ critical approach
Coptic Orthodox clergy often find it difficult to accept the approach of Meinardus and other western scholars. Meinardus, Father Basilius of the Monastery of Makarius wrote, denied and disbelieved "the historicity of the story of the movement of the relics of St. John the Baptist and Elisha the prophet to St. Makarius in the fourth century, because of the lack of documents attesting this. Nevertheless, Meinardus believed the false stories of the monk, Elisha, who had told him that monks from the Monastery of St. Makarius "returned” to the Wādī al-Rayyān [See AWR 2005, 23, art 43]. Father Basilius wrote that "Meinardus believed what the monk Elishaa said, did not verify it with clergy in the Monastery of Saint Makarius, and published this in an article as an historic fact despite the fact that it concerned a statement about monks from this monastery and the monastery could have easily been contacted by telephone or e-mail. Therefore, he didn’t rely on the same method of verifying the two stories. This is not a scholarly method, it is an issue of an arbitrary choice whether or not to verify a story.”
I would conclude that it is ultimately an issue of credibility of sources. Authors tend not to dig further if they believe that the sources they have used were credible. Others have, however, the right to question the credibility of sources used.
Father Basilius believes that scholars should not impose their modern assumptions on early church fathers and authors. He refers to Thomas C. Oden, a leading theologian, chairman of the Institute on Religion and Democracy and general editor of the acclaimed Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series, who wrote "the modern reader has no legitimate right to impose on ancient exegetes lately achieved modern assumptions about the valid reading of scriptures.” ("The Rebirth of Orthodoxy,” Harper, San Francisco, 2003, p.106). This means, Father Basilius concluded, "that the historical criticism method is inappropriate and insufficient in judging the validity of the texts of ancient writers.”
The differences between Meinardus and Father Basilius show a difference between two cultures. Meinardus adhered to an approach that is skeptical about the historicity of traditions in general. For many Coptic Orthodox clergy, it is not the lack of historical sources that counts, but that a tradition has been passed from one trusted authority to another, even if the exact chain of transmission is not known. For them, providing the record comes from a trusted source, it must be true.
It is important not to neglect the differences in the two approaches, but to show readers that such differences exist, explaining and present those different positions in the most honest way possible, doing justice to both views. Then the reader can draw his/her own conclusions.
Meinardus’ relations with Coptic Orthodox Church
Despite Meinardus’ personal skepticism, which was known to leading clergy, in March 2000 he was received by H.H. Pope Shenouda before a crowd of some ten thousand people who had come to listen to Pope Shenouda. Pope Shenouda hugged Prof. Meinardus in public and publicly stated "this is my friend Dr. Meinardus who has written so much about our church." A greater recognition is hardly thinkable.
Pope Shenouda’s recognition was, however, for his published work, not for his more personal views.
Meinardus treasured his relationship with Pope Shenouda and would never publicly challenge him, but in private he could differ in opinion with the Pope. He told me he once pleaded with arguments from the Bible for a Coptic friend of his in Germany who had been excommunicated by the church, for what reason I no longer remember. Pope Shenouda, however, did not give in.
Metropolitan Bīshouy once told me that he did not agree with certain things Meinardus had written and said, but never expanded. When I later told Meinardus about this encounter he chuckled and said "and I don’t agree with certain things of the Metropolitan.” One thing Meinardus explicitly did not like in the metropolitan was his campaign to make it impossible for the small Nestorian church to join the Middle East Council of Churches. Not that Meinardus agreed with the theological principles of the Nestorians, but he felt that the Middle East Council of Churches should be able to reflect differences that church leaders should discuss and speak about.
Dr. John Watson wrote on September 20 that Meinardus was "appreciated by some, abused by others. I know that Otto was personally very critical of people like [Metropolitan] Bīshouy and other Copts. He was always straight with me.” On September 21 Watson wrote to me about my text for Watani International [AWR, 2005, week 39, art. 38,39] "I read it and it is fine. I think that it is about as truthful as you can get.”
Meinardus at AUC
Meinardus was not only abused by some church leaders but also by the AUC administration in around 1967. He arrived at AUC in 1956 and was one of the few faculty members not evacuated during the Suez War. Prior to the six-day war in 1967 he was forced to leave Egypt and though he returned to Egypt, he did not return to AUC, which he much regretted. A few years ago he mentioned the name of someone in the AUC administration he believed didn’t want him back. He guessed it was because he had been too involved in popular religion, something that was seen as too much for a secular minded administrator. Meinardus was, however, very pleased with his relations with AUC Press throughout the years and appreciated the work done on his publications.
After Meinardus’ last visit to Egypt in March 2005, we corresponded about questions he wanted to see answered for his latest book to be published by AUC. I collected much information that was not used for his manuscript and this will later appear in AWR.
Meinardus received a copy of my draft report on Muslim-Christians in Egypt for the German organization Missio and wrote on July 5 "Your manuscript ’The Freedom of Christians in Egypt’ has been extremely well received! I have shown it to the people at the Evangelische Akademie, Kloster Loccum and to some of my Egyptologist-friends. Congratulations! When will it appear? since I refer to it in ’Christians of Egypt’, the manuscript of which I have submitted to AUC Press.”
Meinardus was a critical thinker but was always much more open in personal discussions and correspondence then in his books, because he did not want his publications to appear at the expense of his relations with Orthodox church leaders, knowing very well they would not be open to the Western critical approach that he certainly adhered to.
