Coptic Church Condemns Attack, Muslims Pelt Funeral Procession With Bricks
(AINA) -- The Coptic Orthodox Church in Egypt issued a statement on October 10, expressing horror at the events of yesterday in Maspero, where 24 Copts were killed and over 200 and wounded. The church stressed that the Christian faith rejects violence. The church blasted the government for failing to find solutions to "problems that occur repeatedly and go unpunished." The Church asked all Copts to fast continuously for three days starting tomorrow "in order to have peace in Egypt."
Some interpreted this demand, which the church has made only three times in its long history, as a way to implore "God's help for the Copts," commented Coptic activist and writer Nader Shoukry.
In Cairo, thousands of Copts marched to attend the funeral of the victims of what they termed the "October 9 Military Massacre." They congregated in front of the Coptic hospital where most of the dead and injured were transported, and which was attacked the night before by Muslims, who hurled bricks and Molotov Cocktails at the victims' families.
Read the rest
here.
God be with His faithful in Egypt. This is very sad.
ReplyDeleteOn a related note, John what is the state of communion with the Oriental/Coptic Orthodox?
Officially we are not in communion with the non-Chalcedonian churches. Unofficially inter-communion does happen, sometimes with the blessing of local bishops. It's a gray area. I think we are inching towards de-facto communion with them, especially the Copts. But I also believe it will be many years before we see a formal end to the schism. Unlike the situation with Rome however, I can envision a restoration of communion with Oriental Orthodox. We are not that far apart. But it will take time.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt may be that such a position is correct. Time will tell. But most of the O/O's are cautiously optimistic as well. Though some of the monastics, both theirs and ours, have drawn a much firmer line in the sand.
ReplyDeleteI guess you read my deleted comment but you can say the same thing about C/O relations as you can about the relation between 0/00s, some of your people remain cautiously optimistic about renewed communion with Rome but others have drawn a firmer line. But I will pray everyday that Benedict will be the Orthodox Pope we all need.
ReplyDeleteJason
ReplyDeleteI think there is a very important difference in the relationship between the EO and OO and that between the EO and Rome. The only significant point of doctrinal difference between the OO's and us is the definition of Chalcedon. Now I am not minimizing that. But none of the later councils made any definitions which the OO's have serious heartburn over.
This is emphatically not the case in our relationship with Rome. Rome has held numerous councils which it claims to be OEcumenical and which added doctrines that we consider foreign to Orthodoxy and in some cases heretical. There are vast areas of difference between Rome and Orthodoxy and the gulf seems to widen every century or so with Rome's constant additions to the Deposit of the Faith.
Lyon, Florence Trent Vatican I and Vatican II all issued decrees that we don't accept. Here is the bottom line. For communion to be restored between the OO and us we need to overcome our different understanding of the formula of Chalcedon. Difficult but not impossible. Neither church would need to cease to be what it is.
For communion to be restored between Rome and us one or the other would have to cease to exist. Either Rome is right in its additions to church doctrine (Filioque, Merits of the Saints, Treasury of Merit, Grace, Original Sin, Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, Papal Infallibility etc.) or they are wrong. If the former than we are heretics for our refusal to accept the defined dogmas of God's Church, and communion aught not to be restored absent our bending the knee to Rome and joining the Unia. If the latter then the Roman Church is a heretical body and communion aught not be restored until she renounces her false additions to the doctrine of the Orthodox Catholic Church.
One or the other of us is flatly wrong. That is not the case with the OO's, where a strong argument can, and has been made that our differences over Chalcedon are a product of poor wording and consequent confusion.
Let's not forget Rome should be wary of communion with the Orthodox when its First Bishop Patriarch Bartholomew supports abortion and other dubious moral positions.
ReplyDeleteThat last comment by Vanesa was actually Jason
ReplyDelete