It seems as though this series is no longer available, at least in Canada, via the internet. Still, look for it on CNN or on DVD.
A friend alerted me to this unconventional CNN documentary by Emmy Award winner Anthony Bourdain. He confesses to being "instinctively hostile to any kind of devotion" even though he seems to love food a lot (which is a kind of devotion, I'm sure). For those considering being part of a study tour to Israel and Palestine, this documentary will whet your appetite for good, honest, and difficult conversations, along with good Middle Eastern cuisine. Bourdain is irreverent. The documentary is quirky (meet the Speed Sisters who like to race their Peugot sports car). Watch it here:
This from the CNN website: "In the season premiere of "Anthony Bourdain Parts Unknown," the host and crew make their first trip to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. While the political situation is often tense between the people living in these areas, Bourdain concentrates on their rich history, food and culture, and spends time with local chefs, home cooks, writers and amateur foodies."
Click here to watch the entire 42 minutes.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Beyond Bells and Smells:
The Gap between Eastern and Western Christianity
A short while ago I received an email newsletter from Musalaha, a ministry of reconciliation among Israelis and Palestinians. Salim Munayer, the director, laments the fact that western study tours often do a fine job of teaching about the ancient biblical sites and historical geography of the region, but rarely provide an opportunity for tour participants to learn about Eastern Christianity. Salim is one of the guest speakers on my tour. He has given me permission to repost his article. It can also be found on the Musalaha home page (although in time it may be moved).
By Salim J. Munayer
This
past week, as America commemorated the tragedy of 9/11, much was said
about the gap between the Western world and the Muslim world. One
important aspect that was overlooked in this discussion is the gap
between the Western and Eastern church. I would like to share some of
my experiences and observations in this area.
I
regularly teach American Christian students on short-term study trips
in the Holy Land. I often notice a weakness in their curriculum, as much
time is spent studying biblical history, particularly the first and
second temple periods, and the apostolic period. But when we begin to
discuss the ecumenical councils and their resulting doctrinal schisms, I
find that my students have spent little time studying the historical
and political contexts in which church history took some of its most
significant turns. Instead, their curriculum fast forwards hundreds of
years to the sixteenth century, into the time of Martin Luther and the
Protestant Reformation, and the subsequent politics and history of this
period.
Such
a selective reading of church history tends to focus on the
contribution of the Western Church which is understood as the normative
framework of Christian theology and church tradition. Consequently, the
development of the Eastern Church, in which the Arabic speaking
community plays and has played a large role, is often completely
ignored. Furthermore, a new branch of study in post-holocaust theology
has created willingness and attached importance to understanding
contemporary Jewish faith and practice. This is rarely matched with
inquiry into the Eastern Church. This has led me to believe that there
are far too many passionate evangelical Christians in the West who are
unaware of the history, theology, and contemporary situation of the
Eastern Church.
This
is problematic for several reasons. Firstly, this means that the role
of the Eastern Church in developing and shaping both Western and Eastern
Church doctrine is not properly understood or appreciated. Secondly, a
wealth of theological tradition has been ignored by many in the
evangelical and wider Protestant community to the detriment of their
theological appreciation and understanding. Thirdly, the precarious
positions of the Arabic speaking church around the world, and
particularly in the Middle East, means that we are in great need of
acknowledgement, encouragement and support from our western evangelical
brothers and sisters. This short article will therefore attempt to
explore some of the reasons why the western evangelical church is
unfamiliar with Arabic speaking Christianity as a preliminary attempt to
remove some of these barriers and encourage mutual understanding
between the traditions, as well as to further us along the path of
reconciliation in the Holy Land.
The Early Church Schisms
Contrary
to popular belief, the early church schisms in the fourth and fifth
centuries were not exclusively, or even primarily, a result of doctrinal
differences, but occurred to some extent as a consequence of political
struggles for territory, governance and authority. These political
struggles were then couched in theological language at a time when the
early church was attempting to combat heresy and articulate a basic
statement of core beliefs for the faithful. Imperial and ecclesiastical
agendas became somewhat intertwined.
In
the early fourth century, Christianity had five main centres throughout
the Roman Empire: Rome, Alexandria, Carthage, Constantinople and
Antioch. Each territory was presided over by a Bishop with authority
over the churches in his district and into its hinterland. The Roman
Emperor Constantine wanted to unify these disparate territories as a way
of asserting political control.
Consequently,
he invited Bishops from all over the Empire to attend a council in
Nicaea near Constantinople in 325 AD in order to obtain this theological
and political unification. The ecclesial framework of these churches’
relationship and interaction was established at early councils such as
this one. Subsequent church conflicts were not only theological, but
political.[1]
Linguistic, Cultural and Ethnic Separation
Much
later, the Pope in Rome excommunicated the Patriarch in Constantinople
and the latter responded in kind. It is important for us to view the
doctrinal controversies in this wider political context and not as
exclusively theological issues. Doing so will hopefully remove some of
the religious and theological objections that western evangelical
Christians may have toward the Eastern Church. The primary consequences
of these splits for us today are the ethnic and cultural barriers that
were erected as the churches spread to different parts of the world –
the Western Church into Europe, the Orthodox Church into the Arabic
speaking world, and the non-Chalcedonian churches into Asia and Africa.
Bringing us into the present, it is the cultural and ethnic barriers
resulting from these ancient political decisions which I believe are
currently the main source of estrangement between western evangelicals
and Catholic or Greek Orthodox Arab Christians, not the theological
differences between the churches. As such, these can be overcome through
increased contact between the cultures which will increase
understanding and address mutual alienation and misunderstanding.
There
have of course been far-reaching theological consequences as a result
of the linguistic and cultural barriers which now exist. Arabic and
Syriac are not widely read in the evangelical church in the way that
Greek and Latin are. This has meant that the theology and church
teachings of the Eastern Church have not been available to most Western
Christians. This wealth of theological tradition has therefore played
little role in developing and shaping the theology of the West, to the
detriment of the Western Church.
Perceived Theological Differences and Difference in Church Practice
Although
there are clearly many differences between Eastern and Western
Christianity, these differences do not need to be viewed, as they often
are, as a source of conflict or disagreement, but should instead be
understood as an attempt to contextualize the Christian faith within the
social context of each church community. In the West, more emphasis is
placed on individual autonomy in theology and church practice. For
example, the doctrine of justification is one which deals with
individuals and one’s particular relationship with God.[2]
While worshipping as a collective body, we often simply sing side by
side. In the Eastern Church, the emphasis on liturgy and sacraments is
driven by communal identification. It is understood that these
traditions tie Christians to the global church body, and to the saints
in heaven. All too often the evangelical church criticizes these
historical practices as indicating a stagnant church, in contrast to the
lively worship style of the Western Church, and in so doing,
misunderstands the deep theology and religious commitment behind these
rituals.
Similarly,
the Western Evangelical Church places a strong emphasis on the
immediacy of revelation and understanding through personal experiences
with the Holy Spirit in the charismatic church, and through Scripture in
more conservative evangelical traditions. In contrast, the Eastern
Church places a strong emphasis on the historical nature of revelation.
Revelation is viewed as a more collective endeavour over centuries of
church teaching, study and theology by numerous clergy and laity, and
this revelation is intrinsically tied to church tradition as implemented
in church practice. The Eastern Church emphasizes that Scripture is
never immediately applicable but that the text today has a history which
is intimately related to the history of the church as the church has
sought to relate the revelation of Jesus to contemporary discourse over
the centuries. [3]
While one attains to truth therefore through rigorous engagement with
scripture - and our biblical criticism must always concede to the need
for such an acceptance of the canon - we must nevertheless recognize
that the text we receive is already interpreted for us by church
tradition, and that this interpretation has a measure of authority.
While
it would be naive to disregard these important theological and
ecclesial differences, they do not need to be a source of estrangement.
However there is a tendency in the Western Church to understand itself
as normative, having developed within a majority culture, meaning that
anything which deviates from this normative theological or ecclesial
framework is in some sense heretical. Through embracing our ecclesial
diversity however, we enter a richer faith community.
Political Barriers
The
Arab conquests in the seventh century coupled with the spread of Islam
and the subsequent wars between Christians and Muslim political powers
such as the Arab invasions, the Crusades, the Ottoman invasions of
Europe, World War I, the creation of the State of Israel and now two
Gulf Wars have also disrupted the relationship between the Eastern and
Western Church.
By
the early nineteenth century, western travellers in the Muslim world
became more common and painted a vivid Orientalist picture of this
ill-understood other. This was perhaps an improvement to the very
limited contact between East and West that preceded it, however this
began a rather skewed relationship between those with the power to
narrate and those whose lives were ostensibly narrated in such
discourses. Even our contemporary understanding of Arabic speaking
Christians, and Eastern Christianity more generally, comes largely
through western media which is influenced by geo-political interests
which often ignore the situation of the church. We know little about the
recent history of the Assyrian church in Iraq, or the Armenian Church
in Ottoman Turkey for example, because reporting on these situations of
persecution and genocide would harm international relationships and
alliances.
Conclusion
It
is clear from the brief overview given above that there are many things
which have historically contributed to the current state of
estrangement between the western evangelical church and the wider
Protestant community and the Eastern Churches. Cultural and linguistic
barriers pose the most significant challenges which are often couched in
unnecessary theological language. While there are clearly theological
differences between the two communities, these are often a result of
their interaction with secularism in the West, and Islam in the East as
opposed to significant doctrinal variations. The possibility for
increased mutual understanding and interaction is, therefore,
significant.
It
is incredibly important that these current barriers are explored and
overcome, not only as engagement with the other would enhance the
richness of each side’s respective theological resources, but in a
climate of political instability (particularly in the Middle East),
Arabic speaking Christians are in desperate need of recognition and
support from their western brothers and sisters. Additionally,
understanding the differences between the two ecclesial traditions will
allow us to bridge some of the gaps between the Messianic Jewish
community and the Palestinian Christian community, as the Messianic
community is influenced more by Western theology than Eastern theology,
and the opposite is true of the Palestinian community. Furthermore,
engagement could help lessen the existing prejudices between the Eastern
and Western Church. A global church seeking increased unity and
understanding would surely be a testimony to Jesus’ reconciling activity
in the world today, as well as a source of strength to the universal
church itself.
Further Reading
· Bailey, Kenneth. Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 2008).
· Cragg, Kenneth. The Arab Christian: A History in the Middle East (Kentucky, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991).
· Pacini, Andrea, eds. Christian Communities in the Arab Middle East: The Challenge of the Future (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998).
· Parry, Ken, eds. The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity (West Sussex, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2010).
· Strengholt, Jos. Gospel in the Air (Boekencentrum, Zoetermeer, 2008).
· Tarazi, Paul. ‘An Orthodox Christian Response to the Inclusive Language Lectionary’. Word Magazine (Publication of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, 1984).
[1] For more information, see the section for further reading at the end of the article.
[2] It
should be noted, however, that recent scholarship such as the New
Perspectives on Paul, has challenged the individualism of the doctrine
of justification.
[3]
Tarazi, Paul. 1984. An Orthodox Christian Response to the Inclusive
Language Lectionary, Word Magazine, Publication of the Antiochian
Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, 8-11.
Friday, October 4, 2013
Peace Between Israelis and Palestinians—Really?
Why I refuse to be cynical about the current talks.
by Dale Hanson Bourke
Dale Hanson Bourke has written a new book titled The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Tough Questions, Direct Answers (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2013). I will be ordering it immediately. From what I read in her Christianity Today article (posted online on Sept. 30, 2013), I expect this might be a good book to recommend to my study tour participants as preparatory reading. I'll revise this post as soon as I've had a look at the book and will let you know one way or another.
Here's an excerpt from the beginning of the CT article:
"As the world continues to
debate how to resolve conflicts in Syria, Egypt, and too many other
places, negotiators have quietly, and mostly confidentially, continued
peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. The talks, which began
mid-August, have taken place in Israel and the West Bank behind closed
doors and with little public posturing.
Cynics are quick to criticize these peace talks, which they believe
will prove to be just another in a failed series. Others see them as a
futile exercise that will only raise expectations and create more
bitterness. And then there are those who have written off the entire
Middle East as "a mess" and are simply disengaged from the issues.
But I'm not one of those people. I continue to pray, hope and believe
in peace for the Holy Land. I support the talks and believe that they
can succeed. And I ask other Christians to join me.
My hope does not come from naïve optimism, but from time spent in the
region, researching and writing about the conflict and meeting with
people who live with the effects of it daily. A skeptic at the beginning
of my journey, I was first surprised and then greatly moved by the
people I met there who are working—often sacrificially—for peace."
In the article, Bourke mentions people and groups with whom we will be meeting on the study tour. If you've had a look at the itinerary, you will know that we have many occasions in which we both listen (our main task) and engage in conversation with those who both long for and work for peace in the region. People sometimes ask, why not focus on your own problems at home? I sincerely hope that we do. I find, however, that hearing how others tirelessly work for peace inspires us to do the same. That's one of the reasons I love taking groups to the holy but troubled land.
Here's one of the online reviews of the book on Amazon.com, written by Rev. Angela Zimmann (PhD; pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in the Old City of Jerusalem):
"Do you hear the words "Middle East" and feel overwhelmed and completely
confused? Do you wonder what countries even count as the Middle East? Do
you wonder why people can't just get along? I live and work in
Jerusalem as the pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church, and Assistant to
Bishop Munib Younan. Of course, I have read a multitude of books that
deal with these particular issues, and I reside alongside the conflict -
and, more significantly, alongside the real Palestinians and Israelis
who are affected - each and every day. I am thrilled to recommend,
therefore, this five-star book: it is accessible, engaging, fair, and a
quick and "easy" (in the literary sense, not the philosophical) read
which serves not just as an introduction but as a compelling push into
the heart-rending story of the Middle East, "the center of the
universe." You will finish the book in a weekend, or even in one sitting
- but your heart and mind will never be the same. You will be far from
"finished" with the Middle East - you have entered a holy, broken,
mystical, and humbling land. Welcome."
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
10 Registrations received for the 2014 tour!
I'm pleased to report that ten participants have already registered. That means there are only 21 spots left. I expect these to be filled up by November. Registration forms are available on the tour website.
Because there isn't much more to say about that, I'll pass on a few links to articles that deal with a very lively topic among our conversation partners in Israel and Palestine. As you may know, one of my hopes for tour participants is that they experience firsthand the complexity of the hopes and fears of Israeli Jews and Palestinians (in Israel and in Palestinian Territories). Someone will invariably ask our guest speakers, "What do you think, should there be a one-state or a two-state solution?"
Several recent articles address that question. At least among some, the two-state solution has arrived at a dead end.
Ian Lustick's September 14 New York Times piece, titled "Two-State Illusion," begins this way: "The last three decades are littered with the carcasses of failed negotiating projects billed as the last chance for peace in Israel. All sides have been wedded to the notion that there must be two states, one Palestinian and one Israeli."
Ilan Pappe's article, published the same day, is titled "The Two-State Solution Died Over a Decade Ago." In that article Pappe writes, "Any hope of reviving something out of the original ideas that led the Palestinians to support the Oslo Accords back in 1993 wilted with Ehud Olmet’s government of 2007, when it buried, for all intents and purposes, both the Oslo Accords and the two state solution."
Yesterday Marc H. Ellis, responded to both pieces. Ellis is an author, liberation theologian, and Associate Fellow to the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University for Peace, Costa Rica. He wrote:
"Of the two, I would chose Pappe’s – with a caveat. The Two State solution hasn’t actually been on the table since the 1967 war. That’s going on fifty years.
What’s important is the future. While serving up American-size rhetoric on the dangers facing Israel/Palestine in the years ahead, Lustick is weak on what it would take to reach his goal of expanding justice and security for Jews and Palestinians. Pappe is more direct but he, too, comes up against the disturbing reality that no one from within the Middle East or outside of it has the answer to the urgent question: How can Palestinian freedom be implemented?"
All of these pieces are worth reading. Coming along with me to experience the challenges on the ground would be even better. But read first, and then fill out the registration form.
I'm pleased to report that ten participants have already registered. That means there are only 21 spots left. I expect these to be filled up by November. Registration forms are available on the tour website.
Because there isn't much more to say about that, I'll pass on a few links to articles that deal with a very lively topic among our conversation partners in Israel and Palestine. As you may know, one of my hopes for tour participants is that they experience firsthand the complexity of the hopes and fears of Israeli Jews and Palestinians (in Israel and in Palestinian Territories). Someone will invariably ask our guest speakers, "What do you think, should there be a one-state or a two-state solution?"
Several recent articles address that question. At least among some, the two-state solution has arrived at a dead end.
Ian Lustick's September 14 New York Times piece, titled "Two-State Illusion," begins this way: "The last three decades are littered with the carcasses of failed negotiating projects billed as the last chance for peace in Israel. All sides have been wedded to the notion that there must be two states, one Palestinian and one Israeli."
Ilan Pappe's article, published the same day, is titled "The Two-State Solution Died Over a Decade Ago." In that article Pappe writes, "Any hope of reviving something out of the original ideas that led the Palestinians to support the Oslo Accords back in 1993 wilted with Ehud Olmet’s government of 2007, when it buried, for all intents and purposes, both the Oslo Accords and the two state solution."
Yesterday Marc H. Ellis, responded to both pieces. Ellis is an author, liberation theologian, and Associate Fellow to the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University for Peace, Costa Rica. He wrote:
"Of the two, I would chose Pappe’s – with a caveat. The Two State solution hasn’t actually been on the table since the 1967 war. That’s going on fifty years.
What’s important is the future. While serving up American-size rhetoric on the dangers facing Israel/Palestine in the years ahead, Lustick is weak on what it would take to reach his goal of expanding justice and security for Jews and Palestinians. Pappe is more direct but he, too, comes up against the disturbing reality that no one from within the Middle East or outside of it has the answer to the urgent question: How can Palestinian freedom be implemented?"
All of these pieces are worth reading. Coming along with me to experience the challenges on the ground would be even better. But read first, and then fill out the registration form.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
I'm pleased to announce that all the details about the 2014 tour have now been posted on the tour website. Have a look at the itinerary.
Here's what someone from a previous tour had to say recently: "I went on your Ancient Stones, Living Stones study tour in 2010 and enjoyed it greatly, particularly the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the political situation in Israel & Palestine and to meet with so many people active in the cause of peace. It was a major contributor to my decision to take an MA in International Affairs as preparation either for more work in the region, or for development and peacebuilding work generally." (Katherine)
And someone from 2012 posted this on Facebook today: "I don't always go on study tours, but when I do, I go with Gordon Matties! Went on this tour in 2010 - excellent sites and challenging speakers from a variety of backgrounds. You should go!"
Here's what someone from a previous tour had to say recently: "I went on your Ancient Stones, Living Stones study tour in 2010 and enjoyed it greatly, particularly the opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the political situation in Israel & Palestine and to meet with so many people active in the cause of peace. It was a major contributor to my decision to take an MA in International Affairs as preparation either for more work in the region, or for development and peacebuilding work generally." (Katherine)
And someone from 2012 posted this on Facebook today: "I don't always go on study tours, but when I do, I go with Gordon Matties! Went on this tour in 2010 - excellent sites and challenging speakers from a variety of backgrounds. You should go!"
Friday, May 3, 2013
Announcing the 2014 Tour! April 28 to May 19.
The itinerary for the 2014 tour is almost ready to be posted. We'll be visiting more sites in the West Bank/Palestine, including biblical Shechem (modern Nablus), Sebaste (capital city of ancient kings Omri and Ahab), Jacob's well, among others. Click on the link on the right side of the page to go to the tour website or to view last year's itinerary. Faith Today magazine did an interview with me about the tour. It turns out to be a fine advocacy piece for why people should consider taking an "academic" study tour led by a professor rather than a generic tour. One good reason: someone I know is leaving today for a tour to Israel, and is not visiting the Palestinian territories at all. Not even Bethlehem. I find it odd that a Christian group would not visit Bethlehem or any other sites in Palestine. To read the article click here: Faith Today.
Photo: Gordon Matties. A window in the staircase at the Church of the Annunciation, Nazareth.
Photo: Gordon Matties. A window in the staircase at the Church of the Annunciation, Nazareth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)