Kerux: a portfolio of Calvin Theological Seminary - Volume 44.4 - 24 Feb 2010

Archbishop Elias Chacour

by Micah Schuurman

In the short ammount of time that I have been involved in learning about the Arab/Israeli conflict, I have been blessed with several opportunities to meet Elias Chacour, the author of Blood Brothers and a speaker at the January Series and Worship Symposium this past January. I first met Rev. Chacour in 2006 at the school that he founded in Ibilin. A year later, I met him in Wheaton while he was touring the area, speaking about the conflict. Furthermore, I have had several opportunities to talk with people who have spent significant time learning from Rev. Chacour.

This familiarity with his perspectives enabled me to see a few interesting patterns hidden in the subtext of the talks that he gave last month. I would like to share some of these patterns with you.

One on the patterns most likely to disturb evangelical Christians surfaced in his discussion of his education at the Sorbonne. He said, "I learned many things while in Paris and I forgot them all except for two: God is love and God does not kill." This second principle is a motto of Chacour's and it often shows up next to his name when he signs books. The principle seems quite harmless (though perhaps somewhat naive) until one presses Chacour to explain his perspective on the book of Joshua in the Old Testament. In brief, Chacour believes that Joshua fabricated the entire book in order to give a divine stamp of approval to the genocide that took place in Canaan.

This principle also came out in his lecture at the seminary. Chacour mentioned a story about a pastor friend who spoke at a synagogue about Moses. This friend praised Moses for his journey up Mt. Nebo. According to Chacour's friend, Moses climbed to the top, looked over and saw that the land of Canaan was populated and said, 'I stop here. I want nothing to do with this,' and there he died.

As Evangelical Christians who believe in the authority of scripture, we cannot condone the liberties that Chacour takes with the Old Testament narratives. We believe that all scripture is inspired by God... even the book of Joshua.

However, this shouldn't stop us from trying to understand the reasons for Chacour's strong stance on killing of any kind. He is a resident of a piece of land which has known more than its fair share of holy wars. In the name of the God of Abraham, blood has been spilt by Joshua, the Judges, the Kings of Israel and Judah, the Zealots, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Muslims again, and now, most recently, the Zionists and the Islamic Fundamentalists. Given this long history of holy war, it is hard to blame Rev. Chacour. He is incorrect, but all the same, he speaks out of a profound understanding of terrible ways in which people can use faith to justify great evils.

Another aspect of Chacour's beliefs that lay hidden in the subtext was his perspective of forgiveness and reconciliation. In his books, Chacour talks at great length about reconciliation. Yet, in his lectures, he spent a significant time decrying the injustices visited upon his people. At a dinner, I had the opportunity to ask him to expound upon the issue of anger as it relates to reconciliation. "Should we be angry at the injustices that are happening or is that anger a hindrance to reconciliation?" When I asked this question, Chacour gave me a quizzical look and asked, "Do you want me to be joyful at what is happening?"

Chacour went on to explain that his favorite model for reconciliation comes from the Bedouin people. Among the Bedouin, when a man kills another man, his life is forfeit. The murderer has three options. He can flee for the rest of his life, he can wait until the family of the murdered catch up to him to kill him or he can seek reconciliation. The first step in reconciling is to admit the wrong. The murderer has to repeatedly testify to the fact that nothing can undo the terrible crime and that no amount of money can "pay back" what was taken. The next step is for the murderer to offer a huge sum of money in repayment, all the while admitting that money is a worthless substitute. The final step is for the family of the deceased to reject the blood money and accept the apology of the murderer.

After telling us this, Rev. Chacour explained that the first step in true reconciliation must be recognizing guilt. The Palestinians must admit the wrong that they have done through acts of violence against civilians. The Israelis must admit the wrong that they have done through violence and systematic injustices in the form of oppression and ethnic cleansing. Similarly, Americans must admit the wrong that they have done by taking one side in a way ultimately detrimental to all involved. Until these sides begin to admit their guilt, all talk of reconciliation is relatively empty. That at least is the opinion of Rev. Chacour as he tries to make sense of his two roles as someone working for peace and as someone denouncing the injustices that press in on his people.

Another theme in Chacour's thinking is that he clearly feels deep anxiety for the future of Christians in the Middle East. The church has died out completely in Lybia, the homeland of St. Augustine. Furthermore, Turkey, once at the very center of Christendom, has only a handful of Christians left. The Palestinian church is now in the odd position of having more parishioners living abroad than in living in the Holy Land. When I asked Chacour directly about this phenomenon, his expression became very grave. He admitted that the trend was deeply troubling. But, he went on to insist (without offering any justification for his assertion) that there would always be Christians in the Holy Land.

I have shared three patterns hidden in the subtext of Chacour's writings and lectures. There are dozens of other themes. Naturally, this list is not meant to be comprehensive. But, I do hope that it can prove helpful to anyone wishing to unpack some of the sayings of this wise, controversial, troubling, complex man from Galilee.