The Jews did it
A look at the Coptic Church's long history of anti-semitism
February 20, 2008
Zaki Rateb
Some people might think that ongoing anti-semitism in Egypt is a phenomena that is restricted to Muslims. That is not really the case. Statements by Muslim religious leaders have been widely covered by the press, but little attention has been given to the Coptic Church, which has had its share of anti-semitism.
Coptic Christian books are filled with anti-semitic remarks and stories, especially the “Sineksar,” the official Church book of Saints, in which you can find stories that include Blood Libel.
Pope Shenouda III, the leader of the Coptic Church, has made statements in the past including many anti-semitic views. In an interview on Egyptian Television on April 8, 2007 he said, “The Western Churches were wrong to exonerate Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ,” and criticized recent statements apologizing for Christian anti-semitism.
Asked whether Jews were “Christ-killers,” responsible for the crucifixion, Shenouda stated, “The New Testament says that they are,” and asked rhetorically if the Vatican was “against the teachings of the New Testament?”
He further added a statement on why he had banned Christians from going to pilgrimage to Jerusalem by saying, “They will be influenced by the Israeli media, and we will not be able to prevent this. Who knows what ideas they will return with?”
Pope Shenouda is not the only Coptic Church leader that holds anti-semitic views. In a recent article in Nahdet Masr Newspaper, Father Morcos Aziz Khalil said, “The Jews saw that the Church is their number one Enemy and that without Priesthood, the Church loses its most important component, thus the Masonic Movement was the secret Zionist hand to create revolution against the clergy. The Zionist Ideology has kept its conspiracies a secret buried in silence.”
He then added that the Zionist Movement has tried to work in Egypt through Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists and that those organizations are merely a cover that has American Zionists behind it.
A new element was added to this ongoing smear and hatred campaign after the decision by the Catholic Church to change a prayer that was insulting to Jews. While Bishop Morcos dismissed the matter as an internal issue inside the Catholic Church and that the Catholic Church is free to change its internal rituals, Father Salib Matta Sawires was quick to express his disapproval. He said: “For us the fact remains that the Jews will be responsible for Christ’s blood as they themselves said in the Bible unless they convert to Christianity.”
It is, of course, a waste of time to argue with minds like these who believe that the Jews living 2000 years after the crucifixion are responsible for the act itself. What is more sad is the reason the Pope gave for banning pilgrimage: fear of Israeli media influence!
While an explanation can be found in the Church’s attempt to position itself as patriotic, it is sad that these Christians -facing an ongoing hate campaign and discrimination themselves- would show the same to others.
Now you go...
One Response to “The Jews did it”
Got something to say?
On a sidenote, I’ve never understood why people engage in such altercation over a Jewish mob’s consent to the literal killing of Christ. Didn’t they tell ya - it’s all part of the metastory, guys, and by the way, it’s been forgiven too! I thought it was Christian ‘general knowledge’ that Christ’s sacrifice is what allowed for our direct communion with God, and that Scripture foretold that Jesus would be rejected by the citizens of his homeland. It extends this foretelling to imply that this scenario would replicate itself wherever and whenever the Saviour would have come.
I must be mistaken, this must stem out of deeper contentions, or have people simply not learned their Sunday school lessons about properly loving and forgiving?
That is, when Shenouda asks rhetorically if the Vatican is “against the teachings of the New Testament”, he seems to miss another key teaching of the New Testament, which is “if you do not forgive, why should the Father forgive you?”
I think there’s a fine line between ‘holding an ethnic group historically responsible’ and dogmatically finding grounds to express personal distastes.