In all likelihood, Arab followers of the church will not soon be successful in changing the status quo, which has existed since the 16th century, or in bringing an end to actions taken by Greek priests in selling church property in the Holy Land and minimising the numbers of Arabs in the church hierarchy.Image Credit: DWYNN RONALD V. TRAZO/Gulf News

A group of Palestinian Christians, along with some Palestinian Muslims, rose up in May of 2005 to support moves by the Holy Synod of Jerusalem of the Greek Orthodox Church that resulted in the dismissal of Patriarch Irenaios on the basis that he had sold church-owned property in occupied Jerusalem to Jewish developers, according to a Maariv report on March 18, 2005. This was not the first, nor will it be the last battle against what many people dub ‘Greek religious colonialism’.

In all likelihood, Arab followers of the church will not soon be successful in changing the status quo, which has existed since the 16th century, or in bringing an end to actions taken by Greek priests in selling church property in the Holy Land and minimising the numbers of Arabs in the church hierarchy. According to official records, the church owns about 18 per cent of the area of west occupied Jerusalem and 17 per cent of east occupied Jerusalem, together with three per cent in Lydda, Ramla, Jaffa and Haifa; various properties which have not been confiscated by Israeli authorities. Most of the properties are vacant but are located in sensitive areas, adding to their monetary and strategic value.

Various institutions, as well as individual Greek Orthodox Christians from Palestine, Jordan and other Arab countries, accuse the church of failing to safeguard its properties in occupied Jerusalem and other places, and of serving Jewish interests. In their eyes, Patriarch Theophilos III is failing to honour the commitment to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) that he made on the eve of his election to abide by Jordanian law number 24/1958.

As a result, Orthodox Christians in Jordan and Palestine have renewed their demands to participate in the management of church affairs. They say the patriarch has failed to abided by Greek Patriarchal Law, which stipulates the establishment of a joint eight-member council, with an equal number of Arab and Greek members. This council is supposed to oversee the properties of the Orthodox Patriarchate in occupied Jerusalem and appoint Arab bishops — but the church very rarely allows an Arab, no matter how qualified, to become a bishop. The council is also charged with preventing the sale of property.

The sale of 71 dunums of Orthodox Church properties (adjacent to and complementary to Mar Ilias Monastery between east occupied Jerusalem and Bethlehem and Beit Safafa) to Israel has aroused protests. Some believe there is a conspiracy to isolate east occupied Jerusalem from Bethlehem ahead of ‘final status’ negotiations. The plot of land in question is located adjacent to the Israeli colony recently built on Mount Abu-Ghuneim and separates Beit Sahoor and occupied East Jerusalem.

Possibility of an uprising

A systematic plan to relinquish patriarchy properties seems to be unfolding, isolating occupied Jerusalem from neighbouring Palestinian cities. Given demands that the present patriarch must enact his pre-election commitments to the PNA and the Jordanian government — in particular, by safeguarding properties and refraining from selling them to the Jews — there could be an uprising on the part of the congregation, an essential component of Palestinian society.

The church membership can be divided into distinct groups. The first are opportunists who are willing to support whoever assumes the patriarchate. This category, having been bribed by the church, is of no moral or political value. The second are nonchalant and unable to see the realities on the ground. The third are peaceful, honourable, albeit naïve people, whose soft stance dilutes the issue. The fourth are factual, steadfast and reformative. This last group should be supported, as they are educated in the facts, exert their efforts to change the situation and refuse to acquiesce.

The patriarch — according to the reformists — must honour his commitments to the Jordanian government and the PNA. These reformists are convinced that the above-mentioned commercial deals (and other similar ones) do nothing but illegally liquidate the Palestinian people’s property, which makes the patriarch answerable to both Palestinians and Jordanian laws. Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Jordanian law stipulates that ‘All actions by the patriarch … and all issues presented to the patriarch or made in front of him must be the decision of the majority in the holy congregation. In case the votes are equal, the patriarch will cast the deciding vote.’

Paragraph A of Article 27 confirms that the patriarch and his deputy may be removed in the event ‘he shows nonchalance about the principles of the Orthodox faith’. Many now believe this to be the case of the present patriarch. As such, the reformists believe that popular action must be expanded, not only by followers of the Orthodox Church, but also by all Muslim and non-Orthodox Arabs, even non-Arabs, to defend and protect the properties of this church, which are a national heritage and part of the Palestinian identity.

Finally, these reformists call upon the PNA and the Jordanian government to seriously and quickly subject the patriarch to an inquest over the above circumstances.

Professor As’ad Abdul Rahman is the chairman of the Palestinian Encyclopaedia.