Thursday, July 10, 2014

Iraqi Christians Take up Arms to Defend Themselves from Muslims


Scolaris Legisperitus said...

For a year and a half in 2012-13, I lived with two Syrian Catholics (in a student residence). I had regular first-hand news about the situation in Syria during this period, particularly about the persecutions the various eastern « Christian » denominations suffered over there. What stroke me was the naive pacifism these folks suscribed to, compared to the other communities in this region.

For a long time during the fighting, perhaps even until now, a whole quarter of cosmopolitan Aleppo remined outside of the grasp of the Islamic militants because the Kurdish men of this quarter seized the weapons of a nearby military base and established a security perimeter around their quarter. If the « Christians » in Syria had done the same, they might have avoided the suffering and mass exodus thay are going trough now.

It's good news some « Christians » in Iraq are more pugnacious.

As a side note, I think that even if the theology of these eastern « Christians » is largely erroneous, we must still give them consideration, for historical reasons. See here :

Steve C. Halbrook said...

Thanks, Scolaris. I have heard it said that in the Middle East, you are automatically considered a Christian if you are not a Jew or a Muslim. In any case, I really don't know much about the theology of those in the Middle East who actually consider themselves followers of Christ. The Iraqis here, however, have obviously not bought into the lie of pacifism.

Scolaris Legisperitus said...

Well, to keep it simple :

--- The Churches of the Two Councils recognize Nicea I (325) and Constantinople I (381) but not Ephesus (431) ; its adherents are called Nestorians and hold that Christ is two persons, one divine and one human.

See here :

The Nestorians include the Assyrians, Chaldeans, "Oriental Syriacs" and some Indian churches.

But apparently the Nestorians don't really believe Christ is two persone, but simply refuse the communion of his two natures. In my view it .

--- The Churches of the Three Councils recognize Nicea, Constantinople and Ephesus, but not Chalcedon ; its adherents are called Monophysites and hold that "Christ is one person who has only one divine nature" because his divinity totally absorbed his humanity (this is what was condemned at Chalcedon).

See here :

The Monophysites include the Egyptian & Ethiopian Copts, Armenians, "Occidental Syriacs" (Jacobites) and some Indian churches.

But apparently the Monophysites are not Monophysites but Miaphysites, and "Monophysites" in just unfair name-calling by the proudish Chalcedonians. The Miaphysites hold that "Christ has two natures which are fusioned into a single nature without separation, confusion or alteration". It appears that the misunderstanding comes from the different meaning of the word "nature" into different languages.

--- The Churches of the Seven Councils recognize the aforesaid councils plus Constantinople II (553) and III (681), in Trullo (692) and Nicea II (787).

See here :

They include the Greeks, Melkites (Greek rite in Arab countries), Bulgarians, Romanians, most Slavs, and Georgians. Their Christology is correct (except the part about eating Jesus), yet they can't stop adoring Mary-Vestal and the myriad of saints.

--- Many oriental groups, over the centuries, recognized the authority of the Pope of Rome and entered into full communion with Roman Catholicism, while retaining their particular liturgy. The most well-known are the Maronites of Lebanon, who were originally Monothelites (they held that "Christ has two natures but only one divine will") in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages.