Cabinet to review patriarch posting

Jerusalem Post ^ | April, 22 2002 | By Herb Keinon and Haim Shapiro

[Phil V.]

Cabinet to review patriarch posting

---

By Herb Keinon and Haim Shapiro

April, 22 2002

---

The cabinet yesterday decided to review the appointment of Irineos as the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem.

No date for the review has been scheduled.

Yesterday's decision by the government was apparently the result of a complaint to the police lodged by MK Uri Ariel (National Union) on Thursday, accusing Irineos of incitement to rebel, incitement to use terrorism, and incitement to murder. According to Ariel, the alleged statements had been made in Ramallah by Atala Hanna, who Ariel said was an official spokesman for the patriarch.

In a reaction last night, Metropo-litan Hessychios, the official spokesman for the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, said there is no truth whatsoever in the complaint.

He said Hanna was not a spokesman for Irineos or for the Patriarchate.

"The only people authorized to speak for the Patriarchate are the patriarch and myself," Hessychios said.

He added that the Patriarchate would issue an official reaction to the government's action today.

Irineos was appointed August 13, 2001 by the Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church.

This position is not without political significance, because the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate is a very wealthy local church, which owns large tracts of land all over the country, and is the largest private landowner in Jerusalem.

To be formally appointed, Irineos needs the approval of Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority.

Jordan and the PA approved the appointment immediately, but Israel delayed amid concern he is too pro-Palestinian.

Last week Sharon paved the way for his approval after speaking with the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Christodoulos, about the situation in the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem.

However, a number of cabinet members yesterday continued to register complaints about the appointment, and Sharon agreed to hold another discussion at the ministerial level on the matter.

---

[LarryLied]

Need any help filling up those sandbags, Phil?

[Phil V.]

Mark this thread for future reference. We shall see what comes of this "review".

[history_matters]

Patriarch Ireneos is a magnificent individual and quite the antidote for what had gone before.

[history_matters]

Thanks for reminding us all why Our President's push for Faith Based Partnerships is a snare for the unwary.

Ditto.

[Phil V.]

American in Israel, do you have an opinion on Irineos?

[crystalk]

Not only am I not insulted, I agree with you. I have long admired the Greek / Eastern faiths, and I think we could learn a great deal from them.

What you suggest is just a much further-going pulpit exchange...I think it is a great idea. Southern Baptists and Greek Orthodox, each could learn a lot from the other.

Seriously.

[Phil V.]

Do either of you have an opinion on Irineos' character or his worthiness to continue as Patriarch?

Or do you believe that the Israeli Cabinet should remove him?

[American in Israel]

do you have an opinion on Irineos?

No, not at all. My only opinion on the subject is that it is strange to me that the PA and Jordan and Israel has any say in the appointment of the head of any Church. I think Americas pattern is far better. This is one thing I think Israel is wrong on. Just because the PA and Jordan insist on the right to veto Church heads does not make it right for Israel to do the same.

I wish they would adopt a more American approach and ban all third party input. After all is it not silly to have to have a 2/3 moslem vote on what Christians do? But it does explain why the Orthodox Churches over here are often quite pro-Palestinian, the Palestinians pick their Church heads by process of elimination. If the Church wants to have a head, it must suck up to the PA and the Jews both. As the Jews will pass any person that has no strong history of Anti-Semitism, It means the best the Church in PA areas can hope for is a mildly anti-Israel Leader. The Moslems will allow only Pro-PA people in office.

[rmlew]

I wrote:

If Jews reclaim some of this, even at gun point, it seems quite fair.

OPH responded:
This was the part of your post that had me sputtering. You are so tied up in the idea of blood guilt that you would take the money and property of someone who didn't do wrong.
The point is that in some cases the land is being taken away from those who did do wrong, or from their inheritors.
Between 1922 and 1948 both {Trans}Jordan and the West Bank were essentually cleared of all Jews. Communities that existed almost uninterupted for 2500 years were displaced.
After 1967, some Jews (including those with orrigional titles) set up new communities on some of these properties. The world lumps these with the other settlements. I disagree.
By taking that attitude, you fulfill every single negative stereotype of Judaism in one fell swoop.
That we will no longer take crap from the rest of the world? That we won't have our land stolen?

In short, if you get over your racism, then maybe, people won't react so negatively to people of your ethnicity. Where is the racism in reclaiming the property of your parents?